United States Region 2 EPA/902/R-93-001e
Environmental Protection 902 January 1993
Agency
\vEPA Staten Island/New Jersey
Urban Air Toxics
Assessment Project
Report
Volume IV
Indoor Air
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report is a collaborative effort of the staffs of the
Region II Office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and
Energy, the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation, the New York State Department of Health, the
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and the
College of Staten Island. The project was undertaken at the
request of elected officials and other representatives of Staten
Island concerned that emissions from neighboring industrial
sources might be responsible for suspected excess cancer
incidences in the area.
Other EPA offices that provided assistance included the
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, which provided
contract support and advice; and particularly the Atmospheric
Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory, which provided
contract support, quality assurance materials, and sampling and
analysis guidance, and participated in the quality assurance
testing that provided a common basis of comparison for the
volatile organic compound analyses. The Region II Office of
Policy and Management and its counterparts in the States of New
York and New Jersey processed the many grants and procurements,
and assisted in routing funding to the project where it was
needed.
The project was conceived and directed by Conrad Simon,
Director of the Air and Waste Management Division, who organized
and obtained the necessary federal funding.
Oversight of the overall project was provided by a
Management Steering Committee and oversight of specific
activities, by a Project Work Group. The members of these groups
are listed in Volume II of the report. The Project Coordinators
for EPA, Robert Kelly, Rudolph K. Kapichak, and Carol Bellizzi,
were responsible for the final preparation of this document and
for editing the materials provided by the project subcommittee
chairs. William Baker facilitated the coordinators' work.
Drs. Edward Ferrand and, later, Dr. Theo. J. Kneip, working
under contract for EPA, wrote several sections, coordinated
others, and provided a technical review of the work.
The project was made possible by the strong commitment it
received from its inception by'Christopher Daggett as Regional
Administrator (RA) for EPA Region II, and by the continuing
support it received from William Muszynski as Acting RA and as
Deputy RA, and from Constantine Sidamon-Eristoff, the current RA.
The project has received considerable support from the other
-------
project organizations via the Management Steering Committee,
whose members are listed in Volume II.
11
-------
PREFACE - DESCRIPTION OF THE STATEN ISLAND/NEW JERSEY URBAN AIR
TOXICS ASSESSMENT PROJECT REPORT
This report describes a project undertaken by the States of
New York and New Jersey and the United States Environmental
Protection Agency with the assistance of the College of Staten
Island, the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey
and, as a contractor, the New Jersey Institute of Technology.
Volume I contains the historical basis for the project and a
summary of Volumes II, III, IV, and V of the project report.
Volume II of the report lists the objectives necessary for
achieving the overall purpose of the project, the organizational
structure of the project, and the tasks and responsibilities
assigned to the participants.
Volume III of the report presents the results and discussion
of each portion of the project for ambient air. It includes
monitoring data, the emission inventory, the results of the
source identification analyses, and comparisons of the monitoring
results with the results of other studies. Volume III is divided
into Part A for volatile organic compounds, and Part B for
metals, benzo[a]pyrene (BaP), and formaldehyde. Part B includes
the quality assurance (QA) reports for the metals, BaP, and
formaldehyde.
Volume IV presents the results and discussion for the indoor
air study performed in this project. It contains the QA reports
for the indoor air study, and a paper on the method for sampling
formaldehyde.
Volume V presents the results of the detailed statistical
analysis of the VOCs data, and the exposure and health risk
analyses for the project.
Volume VI, in two parts, consists of information on air
quality in the project area prior to the SI/NJ UATAP; quality
assurance (QA) reports that supplement the QA information in
Volume III, Parts A and B; the detailed workplans and QA plans of
each of the technical subcommittees; the QA reports prepared by
the organizations that analyzed the VOC samples; descriptions of
the sampling sites; assessment of the meteorological sites; and a
paper on emissions inventory development for publicly-owned
treatment works.
The AIRS database is the resource for recovery of the daily
data for the project. The quarterly summary reports from the
sampling organizations are available on a computer diskette from
the National Technical Information Service.
111
-------
STATEN ISLAND/NEW JERSEY
URBAN AIR TOXICS ASSESSMENT PROJECT
Volume IV. INDOOR AIR EPA/902/R-93-001e
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables, Figures, and Appendices v
1. Background 1
2. Purpose 1
3. Methods 2
4. Results and Analysis for VOCs 4
4.1 Frequently-detected VOCs 6
4.1.1 Aromatic compounds 6
4.1.2 Halogenated compounds 8
4.1.3 Other compounds 9
4.2 VOCs Detected Less Frequently 9
4.3 Data Outliers 11
4.4 Comparison to the Results of Other Studies 11
5. Results for Formaldehyde 12
6. Results, Analysis, and Risk Assessment for Radon 13
6.1 Radon Data Analysis 13
6.2 Radon Data Risk Assessment 14
7. Summary 16
8. Acknowledgements 17
9. References 17
Tables and Figures 18
Quarterly Summaries of the Data 41
Appendices 56
IV
-------
LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES, AND APPENDICES
Tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11A
Detection Limits
Formaldehyde Sampling Schedule
Radon Sampling Schedule
Frequencies of Detection, %
Results of Indoor Air Analyses for Residence 7097-2A,
Staten Island
Results of Indoor Air Analyses for Residence 7097-2B,
Staten Island
Results of Ambient Air Analyses for Monitoring Site
7097-2C, Staten Island
Results of Indoor Air Analyses for Residence 0030-B1,
New Jersey
Results of Indoor Air Analyses for Residence 0030-B2,
New Jersey
Results of Ambient Air Analyses for Monitoring Site
0030-B3, New Jersey
Indoor/Outdoor Ratios and Correlation Coefficients
Between Indoor Air and Corresponding Outdoor Air
Concentrations (New Jersey)
Table 11B Indoor/Outdoor Ratios and Correlation Coefficients
Between Indoor Air and Corresponding Outdoor Air
Concentrations (Staten Island)
Table 12
Table 13A
Table 13B
Table 14
Table 15
List of Data Outliers
Comparison of Ambient Data (Staten Island)
Comparison of Ambient Data (New Jersey)
Comparison of Indoor -Data to Other Studies
Radon Distribution and Risk, data from the NYSDOH
basement readings only
-------
Figures
Figure 1 Mean Indoor vs Mean Outdoor Concentrations (7097-2A,SI)
Figure 2 Mean Indoor vs Mean Outdoor Concentrations (7097-2B,SI)
Figure 3 Mean Indoor vs Mean Outdoor Concentrations (0030-B1,NJ)
Figure 4 Mean Indoor vs Mean Outdoor Concentrations (0030-B2,NJ)
Figure 5 Radon Concentration, data from the NYSDOH basement
readings only
Appendices
Appendix A Indoor Air Workplan
Appendix B Floor Plans
Appendix C Formaldehyde
Appendix D Weather Data
Appendix E Quality Assurance of the VOCs Data
Appendix F Radon
Appendix G Field Data Forms
Appendix H Key to Contaminants by Number
Appendix I Quality Assurance Status of the VOCs, Formaldehyde,
and Radon Data
VI
-------
1. BACKGROUND
The New Jersey/Staten Island area which lies on either side
of the Arthur Kill represents a highly industrialized and
urbanized section of the United States. Many petrochemical
industry facilities are located along the Arthur Kill. To
address public concern about air quality and possible effects on
public health, the U.S. EPA, the states of NY and NJ, and local
universities collaborated in the Staten Island/New Jersey Urban
Air Toxics Assessment Project (SI/NJ UATAP). Two objectives of
the project are to characterize the concentration of organic
compounds in the ambient air and to evaluate the risk from
inhalation exposure to these compounds. Ambient air sampling has
been conducted at sites in New York and New Jersey from October
1987 through September 1989 to characterize exposure to air
contaminants in this area.
Many hours of a person's day are spent inside the home. The
ambient air can be the most important source of contaminants in
indoor air. However, indoor sources can predominate in some
circumstances. The indoor air portion of the SI/NJ UATAP project
is designed to provide information on the relative importance of
indoor air contaminant sources. Indoor air contaminant levels
were determined in four homes, concurrently with sampling of
contaminant levels at nearby ambient monitoring stations. The
residences were selected as not atypical in terms of construction
and observable sources of indoor air contaminants. Because there
were only a small number of sample locations, the data collected
are not representative in the sense of permitting extrapolation '
to the entire study area. However, the data obtained from this
investigation will aid in characterizing the relative risks of
indoor and outdoor exposure for those homes tested in the New
Jersey/Staten Island area.
PURPOSE
The purpose of the indoor air study, as stated in the
workplan, was to determine how nearly indoor air contaminant
levels in houses near two of the project ambient air monitoring
sites correspond to ambient levels at the monitoring stations.
If a significant difference between indoor and ambient levels is
found, a further purpose was to characterize the difference in
terms of exposure for hypothetical residents of these houses.
The indoor air workplan is Appendix A of this report.
Frequent reference is made in the report to the individual tasks
delineated in the workplan.
-------
METHODS
Four homes were selected for indoor air testing according to
selection criteria detailed in Task A.2 of the indoor air
workplan. Two of the homes are located in Travis, Staten Island,
New York (7097-2A and 7097-2B). The other two homes are located
in Carteret, New Jersey (0030-B1 and 0030-B2). In addition,
outdoor air sampling (ambient air) was conducted at monitoring
stations located within a half mile of the selected study homes.
The Staten Island outdoor monitor (7097-2C) and the New Jersey
outdoor monitor (0030-B3) are monitoring stations previously used
in the ambient air monitoring part of this study, sample
collection was conducted in accordance with the procedures
specified in Tasks B.3 and B.4.
Three indoor air sampling sites were single family houses.
One indoor site was a two-family house. All houses are located
in residential neighborhoods in Travis, Staten Island, and
Carteret, New Jersey. One home in Travis is approximately 400
feet southeast of the ambient sampling site which is on the roof
of PS 26. The other home in Travis is approximately one quarter
mile northeast of PS 26. Both homes are two story wood frame
structures with full basements. The homes were constructed in
1925 and circa 1900. Air samples were collected in first floor
living areas in the locations noted on the floor plans in
Appendix B. The ambient air site in Carteret was relocated from
the original ambient monitoring site (roof of the police station)
to the roof of Carteret High School because subcommittee staff
were unable to secure participation by occupants of homes meeting
the workplan selection criteria for indoor air sampling sites
within one half mile of the police station. One Carteret home is
about one half mile south of the high school. The other home is
approximately one half mile west of the high school. One home is
a two-story wood frame structure with a full basement. The other
home is a two story split level wood frame structure. The lower
level is a finished living space. Air sampling equipment was
located in first floor living spaces; see Appendix B for the
floor plans. One resident in a Staten Island home was a smoker
who agreed not to smoke 12 hours before and during sampling. All
other site selection criteria listed in task A.2 of the indoor
air workplan were met.
Indoor air and ambient air volatile organic compound (VOC)
samples consisted of two consecutive canister samples collected
every 12 days for eight months beginning July 10, 1990, and
ending March 19, 1991. Collecting two 12-hour samples was
consistent with U.S. EPA's Total Exposure Assessment Methodology
(TEAM) study design and provided more data than one 24-hour
sample. Air samples for VOCs were collected using SUMMA-
passivated canisters according to Compendium Method TO-14 (US
Environmental Protection Agency, 1988). The canister samplers
-------
were designed and assembled by the NYS Department of Health's
Wadsworth Center for Laboratories and Research. The samplers
consisted of a stainless steel inlet line, a 7-micron sintered
filter for particulate removal, a 0-30 cc/min mass flow
controller, digital flow meter readout/power supply, latching
solenoid valve, programmable timer, elapsed time meter, vacuum
gauge and dual 6-liter canister enclosure. All internal tubing
was made from 1/8-inch chromatographic grade stainless steel
tubing. All fittings were 316 stainless steel Swagelock
fittings.
The outdoor air VOC samplers were located indoors and nylon
intake tubes (10 to 20 feet long) were run to the outdoor
sampling locations. To avoid sampling dead air space in the
nylon tube, a pump operated by a timer drew ambient air through
the nylon tube starting one hour before operation of the canister
sampler and continued throughout the 24-hour period.
Analyses were conducted at the Wadsworth Center for
Laboratories and Research for 13 VOCs. The VOCs were selected
based on the results of ambient air monitoring conducted by other
agencies in the SI/NJ UATAP. With the exception of ethylbenzene,
all of the 13 VOCs had been detected at PS 26 or Carteret during
the second year of ambient monitoring. Detection limits for each
of the VOCs are displayed in Table 1. Statistical analysis of
the data was conducted using Systat software (Wilkinson, 1990).
Collection of air samples for formaldehyde at the two
ambient air sites and two of the indoor sites (one in NY and one
in NJ) was planned for the same days that VOC samples were
collected. Sampling equipment was received in November 1990;
sample collection began December 1, 1990, at the ambient sites
and January 6, 1991, at the indoor sites. Ten sampling days were
planned for the ambient sites and seven sampling days were
planned for the indoor sites. The sampling schedule is given in
Table 2. The sampling cartridge contained 2,4-
dinitrophenylhydrazine-coated silica. A potassium iodide-coated
denuder section preceded the cartridge to preclude a negative
bias caused by ozone interference. Three cartridges were used
for each 24-hour sampling period: one 24-hour and two consecutive
12-hour cartridges (with switching for the latter two controlled
by a timer). Sampling and analysis methodology are described in
Appendix C.
Radon air samples were collected at the four indoor and two
ambient monitoring sites. The radon sampler was an ion chamber
containing a permanently charged electret (an electrostatically
charged disk of Teflon). The electret collects ions formed in
the chamber by radiation emitted from radon decay products. Long
term E-Perm monitors were installed at the ambient sites for a
three month sampling period beginning on August 14, 1990. Short-
term E-Perm monitors were installed at each of the four indoor
-------
air sites beginning on August 14, 1990; two monitors were
installed in each house, with the two monitors in different
rooms. Short-term radon monitors were changed whenever an air
canister was changed at an indoor sampling site. Sampling
periods were planned for 7 to 14 days depending on the schedule
for VOC sampling trips. A total of 128 samples was planned (8
samples for each of 16 sampling periods). Radon measurement
ended March 6, 1991. Table 3 shows the indoor radon sampling
schedule.
Weather data were collected in Staten Island with a
Climatronic Electronic Weather Station mounted on the roof of PS
26. Wind speed, wind direction and temperature data were
collected for the entire sampling period. Weather data are
listed in Appendix D.
4. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS FOR VOCS
Indoor air contaminant concentrations were determined at the
four study homes and the two ambient monitoring stations
according to the sampling scheme described in objectives B and C
of the workplan. Due to occasional equipment failure, laboratory
difficulties, and/or technical interferences, the number of
analyses conducted for a particular VOC at a specific site varied
from 26 to 44. The frequency of detection of a compound above
the quantifiable limit (detection limit) for each of the VOCs at
the six sites is shown in Table 4. The frequency of detection
gives an indication of the prevalence of the VOC at a location
over the sampling period. Analytical results for each location
are provided in a separate report (NYSDOH, 1991). The Quality
Assurance data and discussion are provided in Appendix E.
The VOCs which were frequently detected (75% or more
samples) in the indoor air of NY and NJ homes were chloromethane,
dichloromethane, hexane, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, m,p-
xylene and o-xylene. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane was frequently
detected in NJ homes (92 to 95%) but less frequently detected in
NY homes (70 to 73%). Less often detected were chloroform (53 to
61%), trichloroethylene (3 to 76%) and tetrachloroethylene (20 to
45%). Carbon tetrachloride was never detected indoors.
Many of the VOCs, including chloromethane, dichloromethane,
benzene, toluene, m,p-xylenes and o-xylene, were detected
frequently in ambient air, also, in both NY and NJ. Hexane and
ethylbenzene were frequently detected at the NY monitor and
1,1,1-trichloroethane was frequently detected at the NJ monitor.
Notably lower frequencies of detection in ambient air were found
for chloroform (0 to 5%), trichloroethylene (3 to 31%) and
tetrachloroethylene (11 to 16%). Carbon tetrachloride was never
-------
detected outdoors. These frequency differences are examined
quantitatively on a compound-specific basis in the statistical
analysis which follows. For values less than the limit of
detection, a concentration equal to one-half the detection limit
is used for the calculation of means and other statistics. This
method is consistent with the statistical procedures used in the
ambient air portion of the SI/NJ UATAP. To assess if the change
in detection limits during the project affected the calculated
means for each analyte, the means were calculated with the non-
detects equal to zero, one-half the detection limit, the
detection limit, and with the non-detects removed from the sample
set. Since all these methods produced similar results for the
means, the method used by other study participants is used in
this report. The data are presented in Tables 5 through 10.
Comparisons of mean indoor and outdoor concentrations for each
VOC at a particular location are shown in the bar graph format in
Figures 1 through 4.
The ratio of the mean indoor and mean outdoor level of each
compound was also calculated for each home. The results are
listed in Tables 11A and 11B. The relationships between daily
indoor compound concentrations and the corresponding outdoor
concentrations were evaluated by the Pearson and Spearman
correlation coefficients. The correlation coefficients give an
indication of the relationship between two variables. The
Pearson correlation coefficient uses the actual values to assess
the association between the variables. The Spearman correlation
coefficient is a non-parametric test which assigns a rank order
to the values and then assesses the relationship between the rank
variables. In both procedures, the strength of the association
is summarized by the correlation coefficient. The closer the
absolute value of the correlation coefficient is to one (unity),
the more closely associated are the two variables. The indoor-
to-outdoor correlation coefficients for each compound at each
home and their respective mean ambient concentrations are shown
in Tables 11A and 11B.
In this report, each 12-hour sample was considered to be a
separate data point in calculating sample statistics and making
tests of significance. An alternative approach would be to
average the day and night samples collected on the same date and
in the same location and use the average as a single data point.
When indoor/outdoor ratios are calculated, both methods produce
the same results. Paired t-tests were used to compare the mean
indoor and corresponding mean outdoor concentrations with each
12-hour sample as a separate data point. Out of 48 comparisons
(12 contaminants at 4 homes), 36 indoor means were significantly
different from the corresponding outdoor means at p < 0.05. The
results are shown in Tables 11A and 11B. Using the averages of
corresponding day and night samples as single data points, fewer
indoor means (29 out of 48) were significantly different from the
corresponding outdoor means at p < 0.05. Because both methods
-------
produce the same indoor/outdoor ratios and similar statistically
significant differences between indoor and outdoor means, the
same conclusions could be drawn using either method.
4.1 Freguentlv~detected VOCs
4.1.1 Aromatic compounds
The aromatic compounds studied in this project include
benzene, toluene, xylenes, and ethylbenzene. All were detected
frequently both indoors and outdoors. Toluene was ubiquitous in
indoor and ambient air samples in this study. The mean indoor
toluene concentrations were 12.3 and 10.1 ppb for Staten Island
residences and 9.3 and 11.9 ppb for the New Jersey residences.
Mean ambient air concentrations for Staten Island and New Jersey
were 6.1 and 6.0 ppb, respectively. A comparison of indoor
toluene concentrations to the corresponding outdoor toluene
concentrations indicates that the indoor concentrations were
consistently higher (I/O ratios of mean concentrations range from
1.6 to 2.0). The mean indoor toluene concentrations are
significantly different from the corresponding mean outdoor
concentrations for all four residences as evaluated by the paired
t-test at p < 0.05.
In the case of toluene, the Pearson and Spearman correlation
coefficients for comparison of the indoor and outdoor values at
the four individual homes are all less than 0.5, indicating that
there is little association between the outdoor and indoor values
(See Tables 11A and 11B). Since the indoor concentrations were
consistently higher than outdoor concentrations and the
correlations between indoor and outdoor toluene concentrations
are low, indoor sources of toluene appear to be present in the
residences.
Benzene was detected in most samples for both Staten Island
and New Jersey sites in this study. The mean indoor
concentrations were 3.0 and 2.5 ppb for the Staten Island
residences and 1.3 and 2.2 ppb for the New Jersey residences.
Mean ambient air concentrations for Staten Island and New Jersey
were 1.7 and 1.4 ppb, respectively. A comparison of indoor
benzene concentrations to the corresponding outdoor benzene
concentrations indicates that the indoor concentrations were
generally higher (I/O ratio of mean concentrations range from 0.9
to 1.7). The mean indoor and outdoor benzene concentrations are
significantly different for three of the four residences studied
(indoor benzene in NJ residence 0030-B1 was not significantly
different than ambient air monitoring station 0030-B3), as
evaluated by the paired t-test at p < 0.05.
-------
Evaluation of the relationship between indoor and
corresponding outdoor values for benzene reveals Pearson and
Spearman correlation coefficients ranging from 0.36 to 0.67.
This indicates a weak and variable association between indoor and
outdoor benzene concentrations for individual study homes.
In addition to toluene and benzene, the xylenes were also
frequently detected. Meta- and para-xylenes (m,p-xylenes) were
measured and reported separately from ortho-xylene (o-xylene),
although they are related compounds. The mean indoor m,p-xylene
concentrations were 6.5 and 3.2 ppb for the Staten Island
residences and 4.9 and 2.7 ppb for the New Jersey residences.
The ambient air m,p-xylene concentrations for Staten Island and
New Jersey monitoring sites were 3.1 and 2.3 ppb, respectively.
The I/O ratios ranged from 1.1 to 2.0, indicating consistently
higher levels indoors. The differences between indoor and
outdoor means were statistically significant (with the exception
of NJ residence 0030-B1). The correlation coefficients for the
association between indoor and outdoor concentrations ranged from
0.36 to 0.84, indicating a weak-to-moderate association between
these variables.
The mean indoor air concentrations of o-xylene were 2.3 and
1.5 ppb for the Staten Island residences and 1.2 and 2.4 ppb for
the New Jersey residences. The mean outdoor o-xylene
concentrations for Staten Island and New Jersey were 1.4 and 1.1
ppb, respectively. The I/O ratios ranged from 0.95 to 1.5,
indicating usually higher o-xylene concentrations indoors. The
differences in indoor and outdoor means were significant for o-
xylene concentrations for NJ residence 0030-B2 and Staten Island
residence 7097-2A. The indoor-outdoor correlation coefficients
ranged from 0.05 to 0.83, indicating a very wide range among the
four residences. The strongest correlation coefficients (0.55
and 0.83, Pearson and Spearman, respectively) were found for the
Staten Island residence 7097-2B, for which the mean indoor
concentration was less than the mean outdoor concentration.
Ethylbenzene was detected in most of the air samples
collected in this study. The mean indoor concentrations for the
Staten Island residences were 1.6 and 1.0 ppb, and for the New
Jersey residences were 0.8 and 1.3 ppb. The mean ambient air
ethylbenzene concentrations for Staten Island and New Jersey were
0.9 and 0.6 ppb, respectively. The indoor-outdoor ratios ranged
from 1.1 to 2.1, indicating consistently higher indoor
ethylbenzene concentrations compared to the corresponding outdoor
values (all significant differences, p < 0.05). The correlation
coefficients ranged from 0.22 to 0.74, indicating a wide range
but sometimes moderate correlation of indoor and outdoor values.
-------
4.1.2 Halogenated compounds
Among the frequently-detected halogenated compounds,
chloromethane and dichloromethane were reported most often. The
mean chloromethane concentrations in indoor air were 1.3 and 1.4
ppb in the Staten Island residences, and 0.7 and 0.8 ppb in the
New Jersey residences. The mean outdoor concentrations in Staten
Island and New Jersey were 0.6 and 0.7 ppb, respectively. The
I/O ratios for chloromethane ranged from 1.1 to 2.5, indicating
that indoor concentrations were consistently higher than
outdoors.
Mean ambient chloromethane concentrations at the Staten
Island and New Jersey monitors were nearly equal. The
differences between the mean indoor and outdoor concentrations
were statistically significant for the Staten Island residences
but not for the New Jersey residences. The correlation
coefficients ranged widely from 0.05 to 0.51, with the Staten
Island houses generally having a weaker association between
indoor and outdoor chloromethane concentrations.
Mean dichloromethane concentrations in the Staten Island
residences were 0.9 and 3.6 ppb, and for the New Jersey
residences were 0.9 and 1.0 ppb. The outdoor dichloromethane
concentrations for Staten Island and New Jersey were 1.2 and 2.2
ppb, respectively. For three residential locations, the I/O
ratios for dichloromethane levels range from 0.4 to 0.8,
indicating lower indoor mean concentrations compared to outdoor
mean concentrations. The differences are statistically
significant (all p < 0.05). Staten Island residence 7097-2B,
however, had an I/O ratio of 3.0; the indoor mean was
significantly different from the outdoor mean (p < 0.05),
indicating the likelihood of a strong indoor source. The
correlation coefficients for the three residences with low I/O
ratios ranged from 0.30 to 0.77, indicating a weak-to-moderate
association between indoor and outdoor dichloromethane
concentrations. Residence 7097-2B, with an I/O ratio of 3.0, had
very low correlation coefficients (0.20 and 0.11, Pearson and
Spearman, respectively) further pointing toward the existence of
an indoor source of dichloromethane.
1,1,1-Trichloroethane was frequently detected (70% or
greater) at all of the indoor and outdoor sampling locations.
The mean indoor concentrations for the Staten Island residences
were 0.6 and 0.7 ppb and for the New Jersey residences were 2.3
and 1.2 ppb. The mean ambient air concentrations of 1,1,1-
trichloroethane for the Staten Island and New Jersey monitors
were 0.7 and 2.6 ppb, respectively. The I/O ratios range from
0.5 to 1.0, indicating that mean outdoor air concentrations were
consistently equal to or higher than mean indoor air
concentrations. The difference between the indoor and outdoor
8
-------
means was statistically significant for only the New Jersey
residence 0030-B2 (I/O ratio of 0.5).
The correlation coefficients for the association between
indoor and outdoor 1,1,1-trichloroethane concentrations ranged
from 0.07 to 0.79, indicating a broad and inconsistent
correlation. The correlation coefficients for New Jersey
residence 0030-B2 were extremely low (both 0.07), indicating no
association of indoor and outdoor concentrations of 1,1,1-
trichloroethane. since the mean outdoor concentration was twice
the mean indoor concentration for this one location and there was
no correlation between the indoor and outdoor concentrations, a
strong local outdoor source of 1,1,1-trichloroethane may be
present.
4.1.3 Other compounds
Hexane was detected frequently (from 66 to 100% of samples)
in the air samples collected for this study. The mean indoor air
concentrations for the Staten Island residences were 2.0 and 2.5
ppb, and for the New Jersey residences were 0.7 and 1.6 ppb. The
mean ambient air concentrations for Staten Island and New Jersey
were 1.2 and 0.8 ppb, respectively. Indoor/outdoor ratios ranged
from 0.9 to 2.1, indicating generally higher levels indoors. The
differences in mean indoor and outdoor concentrations were
statistically significant (p < 0.05) for all but New Jersey
residence 0030-B1 which had the only I/O ratio less than one.
Examination of the correlation coefficients reveals relatively
high values (0.48 to 0.76), indicating a moderate degree of
association between indoor and outdoor hexane concentrations.
4.2 VOCs Detected Less Freouentlv
Chloroform, trichloroethylene, and tetrachloroethylene were
detected indoors and outdoors considerably less often than the
other compounds analyzed. Carbon tetrachloride was never
detected in any indoor or outdoor air sample in this study.
The mean indoor air concentrations of chloroform for the
Staten Island residences were 0.3 and 0.7 ppb, and for the New
jersey residences were 0.3 and 0.6 ppb. It was detected in five
percent of ambient samples at the Statin Island monitor
(detection limit 0.2 ppb for most samples) and never detected at
the New Jersey monitoring site. The highest level was 0.3 ppb.
Substituting one-half the detection limit for non-detect values
in calculating means, the indoor/outdoor ratios for the four
homes ranged from 1.7 to 3.4, indicating consistently higher mean
concentrations indoors; the difference in means was significant
for every home (all p < 0.05). The correlation between indoor
-------
and corresponding outdoor air concentrations for chloroform
ranged from 0.22 to 0.51, indicating little correlation between
the variables. This is consistent with chlorinated water or some
other source of chloroform indoors. Chloroform and other
trihalomethanes are present in chlorinated surface water supplies
as a result of chlorination and may volatilize when the water is
used for showering and other household uses.
Trichloroethylene was detected indoors frequently in the New
Jersey residences (52-76%) but infrequently in the Staten Island
residences (3-19%). Interestingly, the reverse was found
outdoors where the frequency of detecting ambient
trichloroethylene was much higher in Staten Island (31%) than in
New Jersey (3%). The mean indoor air concentrations of
trichloroethylene for the Staten Island residences were 0.2 and
0.2 ppb, and for the New Jersey residences were 0.5 and 1.0 ppb.
The mean ambient air concentrations for Staten Island and New
Jersey were 0.3 and 0.2 ppb, respectively.
Because the frequencies of detection for trichloroethylene
are much lower than the other VOCs investigated, the non-
detectable values have greater impact on the calculation of the
mean concentrations. The maximum values were similar for three
of the homes (about 0.5 to 1.2 ppb); the exception was NJ
residence 0030-B1, where a maximum concentration of 4.3 ppb was
reached. This is much higher than the highest measured ambient
level, which suggests the presence of an indoor source of
trichloroethylene in this residence.
Indoor/outdoor ratios for mean trichloroethylene levels
ranged widely among the homes. In the Staten Island homes, I/O
ratios of 0.56 and 0.74 were found, indicating higher outdoor
mean concentrations. The difference in means was significant for
one of the homes (p < 0.05 for residence 7097-2A). In the New
Jersey hones, I/O ratios of 2.3 and 5.1 were found, indicating
higher indoor mean concentrations. The differences in the indoor
and outdoor means were significant (p < 0.05) for both
residences. The correlation coefficients were generally weak
(0.33 to 0.55) for comparisons of indoor and outdoor
trichloroethylene levels for both Staten Island and New Jersey
residences.
Tetrachloroethylene was detected more often indoors (20-42%)
than outdoors (11-16%) in this study. Mean indoor
tetrachloroethylene concentrations for the Staten Island
residences were 0.3 and 0.4 ppb, and for the New Jersey
residences were 0.5 and 0.5 ppb. The ambient tetrachloroethylene
concentrations for Staten Island and New Jersey were 0.4 and 0.3
ppb, respectively. Indoor/Outdoor ratios of mean concentrations
ranged from 0.83 to 1.9, indicating a general tendency for higher
indoor concentrations. The differences in mean concentrations
were statistically significant (p < 0.05) except for Staten
10
-------
Island residence 7097-2A, which had an I/O ratio of 0.83 (the
others were greater than 1). The correlation coefficients ranged
from 0.09 to 0.88, indicating an extremely wide variability. The
higher correlation coefficients (0.78 to 0.88) occurred in the
Staten Island homes.
4.3 Data Outliers
In four indoor air samples, the concentration of from one to
three compounds were clearly elevated. These "outliers" were
omitted from the data set in calculating means and correlation
coefficients, since they appeared to be a result of an unusual
activity in the home. In two instances, the homeowner reported
using a spot remover several days before sampling. In the other
two cases, use of a pine cleaner was reported. The locations,
dates and concentrations of the outlier data are shown in Table
12.
4.4. Comparison to the Results of Other Studies
Tables 13A and 13B compare ambient data collected at PS 26
in Staten Island and Carteret High School in NJ by the NYS
Department of Health from 7/90 to 3/91 to data collected at PS 26
and the Carteret fire station during the same months of the
second year (10/88 to 9/89) of the SI/NJ UATAP. The SI/NJ UATAP
data collected during the quarter beginning 4/89 are not included
so data collected during the same seasons can be compared.
NYSDOH detection limits for chloroform, carbon tetrachloride,
trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene were higher than the
detection limits reported by SI/NJ UATAP. These four compounds
were not detected in enough NYSDOH samples to make valid
comparisons. For all of the other chemicals, the mean of the
1990-1991 NYSDOH results at PS 26 were higher than the 1988-1989
mean values reported by the SI/NJ UATAP. Ratios of NYSDOH means
to SI/NJ UATAP means ranged from 1.3 to 3.1. Mean values for
hexane and benzene at Carteret High School were lower than the
mean values reported by the SI/NJ UATAP. Mean NYSdbH values for
all other chemicals at Carteret High School were higher than the
mean values reported by SI/NJ UATAP. Ratios of NYSDOH means to
SI/NJ UATAP means ranged from 0.7 to 4.5.
Table 14 compares the data-from the four indoor sites to
indoor air data collected in the Total Exposure Assessment
Methodology (TEAM) Study conducted by the U.S. EPA (1987). The
TEAM study data presented in Table 14 were collected in Elizabeth
and Bayonne, NJ, with personal monitors used to collect twelve-
hour overnight samples. Carbon tetrachloride and
tetrachloroethylene in all homes and trichloroethylene in the two
11
-------
Staten Island homes were not detected in enough samples to make
valid comparisons. The mean values for trichloroethylene in one
home and o-xylene in two homes were above the range of means
reported in the TEAM study. Mean values for all other compounds
were within or below the range of means reported in the TEAM
study.
Table 14 also shows data from the EPA's National Ambient
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Database Update (Shah and
Heyerdahl, 1988). The VOCs database combines data from many
different indoor air studies in the U.S. and includes data on
residential, office, and personal air. Since these data were
assembled from studies with different locations, sampling times,
sampling methods and analytical techniques, the VOCs database is
best used as a screening tool. The mean values of chloroform,
1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, ethylbenzene, m,p-
xylenes, and o-xylene for all homes in this study were less than
the mean concentrations in the VOCs database. The mean values
for hexane and toluene for all homes in this study were higher
than the mean concentrations in the VOCs database.
The sampling methods, locations, analytical methods,
laboratories and objectives were different for this study, the
TEAM study and the studies in the VOCs database. Despite these
differences, the data show fairly similar concentrations.
5. RESULTS FOR FORMALDEHYDE
There were several problems with the formaldehyde sampling
equipment which interfered with the planned sampling. Residents
at two indoor air sites refused sample collection because the
samplers were too loud. The sampler overheated at one of the
indoor sites, causing it to turn off before the end of a 24-hour
sampling period. The resident in the indoor site reported that
she did not hear the sampler run during a sampling period. On
three occasions, the timer turned the sampler on one week after
the sample collection, causing additional air to be sampled. The
samplers had no elapsed time indicator to show that the sample
had actually been collected for the appropriate length of time.
Because of the combination of problems, the samplers were removed
from the indoor sites after three sampling dates. The schedule
in Table 2 shows the dates and locations of formaldehyde sample
collection.
The collocated samples for formaldehyde showed an
unacceptable variability. Comparison of the 24-hour samples to
an average of the two 12-hour samples showed an average
difference of 46%, with differences ranging from 2.3% to 215%.
The variability was attributed to out-of-control sampling
12
-------
equipment. Therefore, the formaldehyde data are not included in
the project database.
6. RESULTS, ANALYSIS, AND RISK ASSESSMENT FOR RADON
Four long-term radon samples were collected at the two
ambient sites (2 at each site during the same 3-month period). A
total of 96 short-term radon samples were collected at the indoor
sites according to the schedule in Table 3; 92 of the samples
were valid. Indoor radon samples were not collected during three
of the planned sampling periods because the monitors were not
received from EPA before the sampling trip. The sampling period
was extended beyond the planned period for some monitors because
the resident was not home on the scheduled day so the monitor
could not be picked up until the next sampling trip. Thus, the
sampling periods for indoor radon samples varied from 9 to 28
days. Radon measurement results are listed in Appendix F of this
volume.
6.1 Radon Data Analysis
The extrapolation of these data to characterize the
surrounding community is limited by the small number of houses in
the sample. The data include radon measurements in only four
houses, two houses in each of two towns. Residential radon
levels vary geographically in a non-random fashion. The sample
size is therefore, not large enough to establish parameters of
radon exposure beyond these four houses. In addition, the houses
were not chosen at random, potentially further biasing this
sample.
The interpretation of these data is further complicated by
the unconventional protocol used during data collection. The
measurement protocols used in these tests depart from traditional
protocols in several ways. To begin, radon screening protocols
usually suggest that at least one measurement be performed in the
basement of the structure. If the purpose of the study is to
characterize exposure, conventional protocol suggests exposing
detectors in areas where residents spend most of their time.
Additionally, radon measurement protocols specifically suggest
avoiding exposing detectors in-bathrooms and kitchens. Though
electret detectors such as the type used here are less sensitive
to moisture than other types, testing in these rooms may increase
the complexity of comparing data to other studies. Furthermore,
radon characteristically varies from floor to floor (floor bias).
Therefore, in characterizing the radon exposure in an area, most
protocols would suggest that measurements in different residences
13
-------
be made on the same floor so as to be comparable. None of these
guidelines was followed consistently in collecting the data in
the present study.
The departure from conventional radon collection protocols
presents several problems in assuring the validity of the data.
For instance, outdoor measurements are made on a roof, not at a
height where most people would be exposed, as traditional risk
characterization protocols would suggest. Moreover, the source
of radon is radium in the ground. As the radium decays, the
radon gas is released from the soil, then becomes diluted as it
disperses into the atmosphere. Thus, concentrations are expected
to be highest nearest the ground and much lower and more variable
on a rooftop. Therefore, these readings offer very little
information regarding human exposure.
Additionally, the two Travis outdoor measurements are not
within acceptable error variability; since one of the two must be
assumed to be incorrect, these data offer minimal information.
One possible explanation for this result presents itself.
Electret detectors such as the type used here must be
sufficiently charged to sustain a long-term test of more than 90
days. If the detectors used in these measurements were intended
for short-term testing, the electret may not have been
sufficiently charged and this factor may have introduced an
unpredictable error into the analysis. Secondly, reports from
the analytical laboratory suggest poor handling of the detectors
during either the sampling or shipping phase. If mishandled,
electrets will deliver erroneous readings. Poor handling of the
electret detectors, therefore, remains a potential source of this
variability between the two readings.
Lastly, the wide variations in detector exposure periods
initially presented some concern about the relative accuracy of
the various measurements. However, expected error for detectors
exposed for this period of time to the radon concentrations seen
here is approximately ±25%, which is not outside the expected
error range for these detectors. Therefore, the difference in
exposure period of the electrets is not expected to have affected
the accuracy of the readings.
6.2 Radon Data Risk Assessment
The data from the present study are insufficient to
characterize risk beyond the four houses in which the data were
collected. In an attempt to make maximal use of the information
offered by the data, the results of this study have been compared
to a more extensive data set of the county collected by the New
York State Department of Health (NYSDOH, 1990). A total of 166
basement radon measurements was collected in Richmond County, the
14
-------
site of the present study; these data are summarized in Table 15.
The additional risk of death from lung cancer has been calculated
for each radon concentration according to the radon risk
assessment of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (u.S. EPA,
1992). Figure 5 further illustrates the distribution of radon
concentrations in this sample.
Table 15 demonstrates that 94% of the homes in the sample
have radon concentrations below 4.0 pCi/11. Figure 5 further
illustrates this point. However, the table also shows that over
80% of the homes in the sample have radon concentrations which
represent excess risk levels of greater than I in 1000 or 10"3
and approximately 9% correspond to excess risk levels of greater
than 10'2.
The radon measurements in the four houses in the present
study are consistent with the concentrations seen in the New York
State data set; they fall roughly within the 50th to 60th
percentile of that sample. In view of this larger data set,
there is nothing unexpected about the radon measurements in the
four houses in the present study.
7. SUMMARY
The VOCs which were frequently detected (75% or more of
samples) in NY and NJ indoor air were chloromethane,
dichloromethane, hexane, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, m,p-
xylenes and o-xylene. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane was frequently
detected in NJ homes only.
The VOCs which were less often detected in NY and NJ indoor
air were chloroform, trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene.
1,1,1-Trichloroethane was less often detected in NY homes.
Carbon tetrachloride was never detected indoors.
The VOCs which were frequently detected in NY and NJ ambient
air were chloromethane, dichloromethane, benzene, toluene, m,p-
xylenes and o-xylene. Hexane and ethylbenzene were frequently
detected in NY ambient air only. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane was
frequently detected in NJ ambient air only.
The VOCs which were less often detected in NY and NJ ambient
air were chloroform, trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene.
1,1,1-Trichloroethane was detected less often in NY ambient air.
PicoCuries per liter of air,
15
-------
Hexane and ethylbenzene were less often detected in NJ ambient
air. Carbon tetrachloride was never detected outdoors.
Toluene, benzene, m,p-xylenes, o-xylene, ethylbenzene,
chloromethane, hexane, chloroform and tetrachloroethylene were
usually or always found at higher concentrations indoors than
outdoors.
The results of these analyses are generally in good
agreement with the indoor sampling results of the TEAM study and
the VOCs database, and the two-year ambient air sampling portion
of the SI/NJ UATAP.
Elevated concentrations of toluene, benzene, m,p-xylenes, o--
xylene, ethylbenzene, chloromethane, hexane, chloroform and
tetrachloroethylene in indoor air should be evaluated in overall
health risk assessments.
The radon concentrations in the four houses in this study
are consistent with the concentrations seen in a larger data set
for a New York State study of Staten Island; they fall roughly
within the 50th to 60th percentile of that sample.
8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document is the result of efforts by many people within
the New York State Department of Health. Stan House and Bettsy
Prohonic conducted the air sampling. Kenneth Aldous and Robert
Parillo analyzed the VOCs samples. Judith Schreiber, Carol
Meyer, and Greg Smead prepared the report. Charles Hudson and
Mark Knudsen coordinated the project. For the radon portion of
the study, Larainne Koehler of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region II provided oversight of sampling and data
reporting; Michael Buccigrossi and Angela Short analyzed the data
and prepared the results and discussion of the radon data.
9. REFERENCES
New York State Department of Health. (1990) Indoor radon in New
York State: distribution, sources, and controls. Albany, NY.
New York State Department of Health. (1991) Staten Island/New
Jersey urban air toxics assessment project: air quality data
report. Albany, NY: Wadsworth Center for Laboratories and
Research.
16
-------
Shah, J.J.; Heyerdahl, E.K. (1988) National Ambient Volatile
Organic Compounds (VOCs) data base update. Research Triangle
Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, Atmospheric Sciences Research
Laboratory, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Division; EPA
report no. EPA/600/3-38/010a. NTIS no. PB88-195631.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1987) Total exposure
assessment methodology (TEAM) study: Elizabeth and Bayonne, NJ,
Devils Lake, ND and Greensboro, NC: Volume II, parts 1 and 2.
Research Triangle Park, NC: Office of Acid Deposition,
Environmental Monitoring and Quality Assurance. Available from
NTIS, Springfield, VA: PB88-100078.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1988) Compendium method
TO-14. Research Triangle Park, NC: Environmental Monitoring
Systems Laboratory.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1992) Technical support
document for the 1992 citizen's guide to radon. Washington, DC:
Office of Radiation Programs.
Wilkinson, L. (1990) SYSTAT: The system for statistics. SYSTAT,
Inc. Evanston, IL.
17
-------
Tables and Figures
18
-------
TABLE 1
Detection Limits
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1,1,1-trichloroethane
carbon tetrachloride
benzene
trichloroethylene
toluene
tetrachloroethylene
ethyl benzene
m,p-xylene
o-xylene
7/10/90-10/2/90
10/14/90-3/19/91
g/m3
2
2.8
3.5
3.8
4.7
5.4
2.4
5.3
NA
6.2
4.3
7.9
3.5
i ~~i ~
ppb
1.0
0.8
1.0
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.8
1.0
NA
0.9
1.0
1.8
0.8
r i
mcg/m
0.4
0.7
0.7
1
1.1
1.2
0.6
1.1
NA
1.5
0.9
1.8
1
ppb
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
NA
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.2
NA - Not Available
mcg/m - micrograms per cubic meter
ppb » parts per billion
19
-------
TABLE 2
DATE
12/ 1/90
12/13/90
12/25/90
I/ 6/91
1/18/91
1/30/91
2/11/91
2/23/91
3/7/91
3/19/91
SI/NJ UATAP
Formaldehyde Sampling Schedule
LOCATION COMMENT
0030-B3
7097-2C
0030-B3
7097-2C
0030-B3
7097-2C
0030-B3
0030-B1
7097-2C
7097-2B
0030-B3
0030-B1
7097-2C
0030-B3
0030-B1
7097-2C
7097-2B
0030-B3
7097-2C
0030-B3
7097-2C
0030-B3
7097-2C
0030-B3
7097-2C
Sampler also ran on 12/20/90
Sampler also ran on 12 20/90
Sampler also ran on 1/13/91
Sampler overheated and shut off
Resident did not hear sampler run
20
-------
TABLE 3
SI/NJ UATAP
Indoor Radon Sampling Schedule
Length of Sampling
Dates Time (Days)
8/14/90 -
8/23/90 -
9/06/90 -
9/27/90 -
10/10/90 -
10/23/90 -
10/23/90 -
11/01/90 -
11/01/90 -
11/15/90 -
11/29/90 -
12/11/90 -
12/20/90 -
12/20/90 -
1/03/91 -
1/17/91 -
1/24/91 -
2/07/91 -
2/21/91 -
2/21/91 -
8/23/90
9/06/90
9/27/90
10/10/90
10/23/90
11/01/90
11/15/90
11/15/90
11/29/90
11/29/90
12/11/90
12/20/90
1/03/91
1/17/91
1/17/91
1/24/91
2/07/91
2/21/91
3/06/91
3/21/91
9
14
13
13
13
9
23
14
28
14
12
9
14
28
14
7
14
14
13
28
Number of
Samples
Collected
8
8
0
6
8
6
2
4
2
6
8
8
6
2
6
0
8
0
6
2
96
Number of
Samples
Planned
8
8
8
8
8
8
0
8
0
8
8
8
8
0
8
8
8
8
8
0
128
21
-------
TABLE 4
Frequencies of Detection, %
New Jersey
Compound
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1 , 1, 1-trichloroethane
carbon tetrachloride
benzene
trichloroethylene
toluene
tetrachloroethylene
ethyl benzene
m,p-xylene
o-xylene
Ind
0030-B1
79
85
76
58
95
0
90
76
100
45
82
91
87
?or
0030-B2
81
84
94
61
92
0
95
52
100
42
84
90
89
Ambient
0030-B3
81
84
66
0
84
0
89
3
100
11
72
87
79
New York
Indc
7097-2A
91
85
94
53
70
0
100
3
100
20
97
100
97
>or
7097-2B
82
94
100
60
73
0
100
19
100
30
79
87
86
Ambient
7097-2C
83
93
89
5
73
0
95
31
100
16
78
86
89
frequency of detection - # of samples with detectable concentration
total # of samples for that location
22
-------
TABLE 5
Results of Indoor Air Analyses for
Residence 7097-2A, Staten Island
Compound No.
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1 , 1 , 1 -tri chl oroethane
carbon tetrachloride
benzene
trichloroethylene
toluene
tetrachl oroethyl ene
ethyl benzene
m,p-xylene
o-xylene
of Samples % Pos. Range, ppb
32
40
32
40
40
40
40
32
40
40
32
32
40
91
85
94
53
70
0
100
3
100
20
97
100
97
ND - 2.9
ND - 2.9
ND - 7.7
ND - 0.9
ND - 2.0
ND
0.5 - 7.8
ND - 0.5
3.9 -41.8
ND - 1.2
ND - 4.4
2.3 -17.2
ND - 5.8
Mean, ppb
1.3
0.9
2.5
0.3
0.6
-
3.0
0.2
12.3
0.3
1.6
6.5
2.3
SD, ppb
0.6
0.7
1.8
0.2
0.4
-
1.5
0.2
7.6
0.2
1.0
3.8
1.4
SD - standard deviation
ND * not detected
Mean calculated using one half the detection level for values below the limit
of detection.
23
-------
TABLE 6
Results of Indoor Air Analyses for
Residence 7097-2B, Staten Island
Compound No.
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1 , 1 , 1-trichloroethane
carbon tetrachloride
benzene
trichloroethylene
toluene
tetrachl oroethyl ene
ethyl benzene*
m,p-xylene+
o-xylene+
of Samples % Pos. Range, ppb
26
30
26
30
30
30
30
26
30
30
24
24
28
82
94
100
60
73
0
100
19
100
30
79
87
86
ND - 3.5
NO -12.9
0.7 - 8.6
ND - 4.0
ND - 1.9
-
0.7 - 7.2
ND - 0.5
3.2 - 34.2
ND - 1.6
ND - 2.3
ND - 9.5
ND - 4.7
Mean, ppb
1.4
3.6
2.0
0.7
0.7
-
2.5
0.2
10.1
0.4
1.0
3.2
1.5
SD, ppb
0.8
2.6
1.9
0.7
0.4
-
1.6
0.2
8.0
0.4
0.7
2.6
1.2
SD - standard deviation
ND « not detected
Mean calculated using one half the detection level for values below the limit
of detection
+ = excludes two samples considered outliers
24
-------
TABLE 7
Results of Ambient Air Analyses for
Monitoring Site 7097-2C, Staten Island
Compound No.
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1 , 1 , 1-trichl oroethane
carbon tetrachloride
benzene
trichloroethylene
toluene
tetrachl oroethyl ene
ethyl benzene
m,p-xylene
o-xylene
of Samples % Pos. Range, ppb
36
44
36
44
44
44
44
36
44
44
36
36
44
83
93
89
5
73
0
95
31
100
16
78
86
89
ND - 1.2
ND - 3.2
ND - 3.4
ND - 0.3
ND - 2.8
ND
ND - 5.0
ND - 1.2
1.3 - 31.6
ND - 2.8
ND - 5.3
ND -21.6
ND - 9.5
Mean, ppb
0.6
1.2
1.2
0.2
0.7
-
1.7
0.3
6.1
0.4
0.9
3.1
1.4
SD, ppb
0.2
0.8
0.8
0.1
0.6
-
1.1
0.3
5.4
0.5
1.1
4,3
1.7
SD - standard deviation
ND * not detected
Mean calculated using one half the detection level for values below the limit
of detection.
25
-------
TABLE 8
Results of Indoor Air Analyses for
Residence 0030-B1, New Jersey
Compound No.
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1 , 1 , 1 -tri chl oroethane+
carbon tetrachloride
benzene
trichloroethylene
toluene
tetrachloroethylene
ethyl benzene
m,p-xylene
o-xylene
of Samples % Pos. Range, ppb
34
40
34
40
39
40
40
34
40
40
34
34
40
79
85
76
58
95
0
90
76
100
45
82
91
87
ND - 1.4
NO - 7.6
ND - 2.8
ND - 0.9
ND -15.0
ND
ND - 6.9
ND - 4.3
2.9 - 24.2
ND - 2.2
ND - 1.9
ND - 7.4
ND - 2.8
Mean, ppb
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.3
2.3
-
1.3
1.0
9.3
0.5
0.8
2.7
1.2
SD,ppb
0.2
1.1
0.6
0.2
2.6
-
1.1
0.9
4.3
0.5
0.5
1.8
0.7
SD = standard deviation
ND - not detected
Mean calculated using one half the detection level for values below the limit
of detection.
+ = excludes one value considered an outlier
26
-------
TABLE 9
Results of Indoor Air Analyses for
Residence 0030-B2, New Jersey
Compound No.
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1 , 1 , l-trichloroethane+
carbon tetrachl oriole
benzene
trichloroethylene
toluene
tetrachl oroethyl ene
ethyl benzene
m,p-xylene
o-xylene
of Samples % Pos. Range, ppb
31
38
31
38
37
38
38
31
38
38
31
31
38
81
84
94
61
92
0
95
52
100
42
84
90
89
ND - 3.2
ND - 7.4
ND - 7.1
ND - 4.2
ND - 3.5
ND
ND -10.6
ND - 1.2
2.3 -60.5
ND - 1.9
ND - 7.0
ND -19.8
ND -12.8
Mean, ppb
0.8
1.0
1.6
0.6
1.2
-
2.2
0.5
11.9
0.5
1.3
4.9
2.4
SD,ppb
0.5
1.1
1.5
0.7
0.8
-
2.0
0.3
11.9
0.4
1.5
4.8
2.7
SD - standard deviation
ND - not detected
Mean calculated using one half the detection level for values below the limit
of detection.
+ = excludes one value considered an outlier
27
-------
TABLE 10
Results of Ambient Air Analyses for
Monitoring Site 0030-B3, New Jersey
Compound No.
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1,1,1-trichloroethane
carbon tetrachloride
benzene
trichloroethylene
toluene
tetrachl oroethyl ene
ethyl benzene
m,p-xy1ene
o-xylene
of Samples % Pos. Range, ppb
36
42
36
42
42
42
42
36
42
42
36
36
42
81
84
66
0
84
0
89
3
100
11
72
87
79
ND - 1.1
ND -13.5
ND - 3.7
ND
ND -14.1
ND
ND - 4.1
ND - 0.5
0.6 -21.8
ND - 0.7
ND - 2.0
ND - 7.9
ND - 4.2
Mean, ppb
0.7
2.2
0.8
-
2.6
-
1.4
0.2
6.0
0.3
0.6
2.3
1.1
SD, ppb
0.2
2.8
0.8
-
2.5
-
1.0
0.2
4.2
0.2
0.4
1.7
1.0
SD - standard deviation
ND - not detected
Mean calculated using one half the detection level for values below the limit
of detection.
28
-------
15
Figure 1
7097-2A (SI)
MEAN INDOOR VS MEAN OUTDOOR
10
ca
CL.
&.
678
COMPOUND
10 11 12 13
OUTDOOR
INDOOR
Compound
6
7
Chloromethane
nchloromethane
Chloroform
1,1,1 Trichloroethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
Benzene
8
9
10
11
12
13
Trichloroethylene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethyl benzene
m/p-Xylene
o-Xylene
29
-------
Figure 2
Compounds
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Chloromethane
Dichloromethane
Hexane
Chloroform
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
Benzene
8
9
10
11
12
13
Trlchloroethylene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
m/p-Xylene
o-Xylene
12
7097-2B (SI)
MEAN INDOOR VS MEAN OUTDOOR
10
67 8
COMPOUND
10 11 12 13
OUTDOOR
INDOOR
30
-------
Figure 3
Compounds
1 Chloromethane
2 Dichloromethane
3 Hexane
4 Chloroform
5 1,1,1-THchloroethane
6 Carbon Tetrachloride
7 Benzene
9
9
10
11
12
13
Trichloroethylene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
m/p-Xylene
o-Xylene
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0030-B1 (NJ)
MEAN INDOOR VS MEAN OUTDOOR
CO
6 7
COMPOUND
10 11 12 13
OUTDOOR
INDOOR
31
-------
Figure 4
14
12
10
6
6
0030-B2(NJ)
MEAN INDOOR VS MEAN OUTDOOR
a
EX
r-.
2
0
678
COMPOUND
10 11 12 13
OUTDOOR
INDOOR
Compounds
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Chloromethane
Dichloromethane
Hexane
Chloroform
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
Benzene
3
9
10
11
12
13
Trichloroethylene
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
Ethyl benzene
m/p-Xylene
o-Xylene
32
-------
TABLE 11A
Indoor/Outdoor Ratios and Correlation
Coefficients between Indoor Air and Corresponding
Outdoor Air Concentrations
Compound
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1,1,1-trichloro-
ethane
benzene
trichloro-
ethylene
toluene
tetrachloro-
ethylene
ethyl benzene
m,p-xylene
o-xylene
New Jersey
0030-B1
I/O
1.1
0.4*
0.9
1.8*
0.9
0.9
5.1*
1.6*
1.9*
1.4*
1.2
1.1
P
0.34
0.33
0.47
0.50
0.11
0.65
0.33
0.12
0.09
0.54
0.47
0.37
S
0.51
0.53
0.63
0.51
0.67
0.65
0.37
0.00
0.37
0.45
0.49
0.45
0030-B2
I/O
1.2
0.5*
1.9*
2.9*
0.5*
1.6*
2.3*
2.0*
1.7*
2.1*
2.0*
2.0*
P
0.05
0.30
0.54
0.33
0.07
0.36
0.38
0.04
0.61
0.22
0.36
0.05
S
0.43
0.45
0.57
0.43
0.07
0.60
0.46
0.30
0.63
0.50
0.74
0.53
* - p< 0.05
I/O - mean indoor air concentration divided by the corresponding
mean outdoor air concentration.
P - Pearson correlation coefficient
S - Spearman correlation coefficient
33
-------
TABLE 11B
Indoor/Outdoor Ratios and Correlation
Coefficients between Indoor Air and Corresponding
Outdoor Air Concentrations
Compound
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1,1,1-trichloro-
ethane
benzene
trichloro-
ethylene
toluene
tetrachloro-
ethylene
ethyl benzene
m,p-xylene
o-xylene
Staten Island
7097-2A
I/O
2.2*
0.8*
2.1*
1.7*
0.85
1.7*
0.56*
2.0*
0.83
1.7*
2.0*
1.5*
P
0.26
0.77
0.76
0.19
0.73
0.67
0.28
0.09
0.88
0.64
0.51
0.37
S
0.18
0.73
0.73
0.34
0.64
0.66
0.48
0.21
0.86
0.68
0.51
0.40
7097-2B
I/O
2.5*
3.0*
1.7*
3.4*
1.0
1.4*
0.74
1.7*
1.1*
1.1*
1.1*
0.95
P
0.28
0.20
0.48
0.22
0.43
0.58
0.43
0.20
0.86
0.74
0.76
0.55
S
0.23
0.11
0.63
0.28
0.11
0.35
0.55
0.43
0.78
0.51
0.84
0.83
* - p< 0.05
I/O = mean indoor air concentration divided by the corresponding
mean outdoor air concentration.
P - Pearson correlation coefficient
S « Spearman correlation coefficient
34
-------
TABLE 12
List of Data Outliers
Location
7097-2B(SI)1
0030-B1(NJ)2
0030-B2(NJ)3
Date of
Sample
3/19/91D
3/19/91N
9/8/90N
12/1/90N
VOC
ethyl benzene
ra,p-xylene
o-xylene
ethyl benzene
m,p-xylene
o-xylene
1,1 , 1-trichloroethane
1,1,1-trichloroethane
Outlier
Concentration
ppb
24.8
59.8
37.7
24.4
60.0
38.2
119
642
Usual Range at
Location
(mean) ppb
ND- 2. 3, (1.0)
ND- 9. 5, (3. 2)
ND- 4. 7, (1.5)
ND- 2. 3, (1.0)
ND- 9. 5, (3. 2)
ND- 4. 7, (1.5)
ND-15.0,(2.3)
ND- 3. 5, (1.2)
1
- daytime sample
- night time sample
Pine cleaner product was used in home.
'Airwick spot remover may have been used in home.
Airwick spot remover was used in home.
35
-------
TABLE 13A
Comparison of Ambient Data
PS 26 (7097-2C) Staten Island
NYSDOH (7/90-3/91) to SI/NO UATAP (10/88-3/89 and 7/89-9/89)
SI/NJ UATAP NYSDOH
b
n mean
chloromethane NA NA
dichloromethane 41 0.93
hexane NA NA
chloroform 41 0.11
1,1,1-trichloroethane 41 0.49
carbon tetrachloride 41 0.11
benzene 41 1.29
trichloroethylene 26 0.08
toluene 41 4.04
tetrachloroethylene 41 0.18
ethyl benzene NA NA
m/p-xylene 41 1.47
o-xylene 41 0.45
NA - not available
a - low frequency of detection
b - one 24-hour sample was col
c
(ppb) n
36
44
36
44
44
44
44.
36
44
44
36
36
44
prevents
lected on
d
mean (ppb) ratio
0.6
1.2 1.3
1.2
a
0.7 1.4
a
1.7 1.3
a
6.1 1.5
a
0.9
3.1 2.1
1.4 3.1
comparison
each sampling day
e
difference
-
+0.3
-
-
+0.2
-
+0.4
-
+2.1
-
-
+ 1.6
+ 1.0
c - two 12-hour samples were collected on each sampling day
d - ratio equals NYSDOH divided by SI/NJ
e - difference equals NYSDOH minus SI/NJ
UATAP
UATAP
36
-------
TABLE 13B
Comparison of Ambient Data
Carteret HS (0030-B3) New Jersey
NYSDOH (7/90-3/91) to SI/NO UATAP (10/88-3/89 and 7/89-9/89)
SI/NJ UATAP NYSDOH
b
n mean
chloromethane 34 0.28
dichloromethane NA NA
hexane 25 1.09
chloroform 40 0.01
1,1,1-trichloroethane 40 0.58
carbon tetrachloride 40 0.11
benzene 40 1.54
trichloroethylene 40 0.04
toluene 40 4.11
tetrachloroethylene 40 0.14
ethyl benzene NA NA
m/p-xylene 40 1.29
o-xylene 40 0.43
NA - not available
a - low frequency of detection
c
(ppb) n
36
42
36
42
42
42
42
36
42
42
36
36
42
prevents
b - one 24-hour sample was collected on
d
mean (ppb) ratio
0.7 2.5
2.2
0.8 0.7
a
2.6 4.5
a
1.4 0.9
a
6.0 1.5
a
0.6
2.3 1.8
1.1 2.6
comparison
each sampling day
e
difference
+0.4
-
-0.3
-
+2.0
-
-0.1
-
+1.9
-
-
+1.0
+0.7
c - two 12-hour samples were collected on each sampling day
d - ratio equals NYSDOH divided
by SI/NJ
e - difference equals NYSDOH minus SI/NJ
UATAP
UATAP
37
-------
TABLE 14
Comparison of Indoor Data
NYSDOH (7/90-3/91) to other Studies
Arithmetic Means (ppb)
a b
NYSDOH EPA Team Study
0030-81 0030-B2 7097-2A 7097-2B Database Range of Means
chloromethane
dichloromethane
hexane
chloroform
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
carbon tetrachloride
benzene
trichloroethylene
toluene
tetrachloroethylene
ethyl benzene
m/p-xylene
o-xylene
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.3
2.3
c
1.3
1.0
9.3
c
0.8
2.7
1.2
0.8
1.0
1.6
0.6
1.2
c
2.2
0.5
11.9
c
1.3
4.9
2.4
1.3
0.9
2.5
0.3
0.6
c
3.0
c
12.3
c
1.6
6.5
2.3
1.4
3.6
2.0
0.7
0.7
c
2.5
c
10.1
c
1.0
3.2
1.5
NA
NA
0.57
0.83
48.9
0.40
5.16
1.35
0.70
3.06
2.89
17.5
2.84
NA
NA
NA
0.64 - 0.95
2.7 - 5.7
0.20 - 0.21
5.8
0.33 - 0.90
NA
1.3 - 2.0
1.1 - 2.6
2.1 - 6.7
0.77 - 2.3
a) Shah and Heyerdahl, 1988
b) U.S. EPA, 1987. Overnight personal air (n - 545 to 553).
c) Low frequency of detection prevents comparisons.
NA - not available.
38
-------
TABLE 15
RADOM DISTRIBUTION AND RISK*
ita from
tbe New York State
Department
Basement Readings Only
Radon
(pCi/1)
.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
.6
.7
.8
.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.4
2.5
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.3
3.4
3.9
4.1
4.5
4.7
5.0
6.0
3. 5
9.5
9.8
11,0
Total
Frequency
13
18
15
14
12
9
7
7
6
1
6
7
3
3
1
1
5
2
3
2
3
1
2
2
1
5
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
166
Percent
7.8
10.8
9.0
8.4
7.2
5.4
4.2
4.2
3.6
.6
3.6
4.2
1.8
1.8
.6
.6
3.0
1.2
1.8
1.2
1.8
.6
1.2
1.2
.6
3.0
1.2
.6
.6
.6
1.2
.6
.6
.6
.6
.6
1.2
.6
.6
.6
100.0
Cum
Percent
7.8
18.7
27.7
36.1
43.4
48.8
53.0
57.2
60.8
61.4
65.1
69.3
71.1
72.9
73.5
74.1
77.1
78.3
80.1
81.3
83.1
83.7
84.9
86.1
86.7
89.8
91.0
91.6
92.2
92.8
94.0
94.6
95.2
95.8
96.4
97.0
98.2
98.8
99.4
100.0
Risk
.3
.6
1.0
1.3
1.6
1.9
2.2
2.6
2.9
3.2
3.5
3.8
4.2
4.5
5.1
5.4
5.8
6.1
6.4
6.7
7.0
7.7
8.0
8.6
9.0
9.3
9.6
9.9
10.6
10.9
12.5
13.1
14.4
15.0
16.0
19.2
27.2
30.4
31.4
35.2
* Risk is expressed in terns of
number of excess lung cancer deaths
per 1000 people.
39
-------
FIGURE 5
RADON CONCENTRATION
Data from the New Yorfc State Department of Health
Basement Readings Only
Count
0
81
37
17
9
10
3
3
0
1
0
0
2
1
1
1
0
+ -J.
Radon
(pCi/1)
-.50
. 25
1
1
2
3
4
4
5
6
7
7
8
9
10
10
11
+
. 00
. 75
.50
.25
.00
.75
.50
.25
.00
.75
.50
.25
.00
.75
. 50
mmgm
^mmmt
^m
mm
m
m
u
m
m
...I. ...+.. ..I. ...+.. ..I. ...+.. . . I
0 20 40 60 80
100
Histogram frequency
40
-------
Quarterly Summaries of the Data
-------
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
Pollutant: Methyl Chloride
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): July,
MOL: 1.0 PPB
1990
(Quarterly Report)
CAS *: 74-87-3
Till: September, 1990
Units: PPB
Location Sampling
Code Site Code
7097- 2A
7097-2B
7097- 2C
0030-B1
0030- B2
0030- B3
Travis, SI
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
6
6
6
6
6
6
Arith
Mean
1.2
1.1
0.7
0.7
1.2
0.7
Std.
Dev.
0.77
0.67
0.30
0.25
0.96
0.27
1st 2nd
Max Max
2.6
2.0
1.2
1.1
3.2
1.1
.5
.9
.1
.0
.3
.0
Min
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
* >
MDL FC
3
3
2
2
3
2
NJ
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Dichloromethane
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
HDL: 0.8 PPB
Location Sampling
Code
7C97-2A
7097- 2B
7097-2C
0030- B1
0030- B2
0030-B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis. SI
Travis. SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
July, 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
CAS *: 75-09-2
Till: September, 1990
Units: PPB
* of Arith Std. 1st 2nd
Samples Mean
14
10
14
12
13
.3
.7
.9
.5
.6
12 2.1
. Dev.
0.72
1.04
0.88
1.93
1.79
2.10
Max
2.4
3.5
3.2
7.6
7.4
7.9
Max
2.3
2.9
3.2
2.1
2.6
3.5
Min
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
* >
MDL FC
10
8
12
7
8
7
Reduced Data from Canister Syste
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Chloroform
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
HOL: 0.8 PPB
Location
Code
7097-2A
7097-28
7097- 2C
0030- B1
0030- B2
0030- B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
July. 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
14
10
14
12
13
12
CAS «: 67-66-3
Till: September, 1990
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.9
0.4
Std.
Dev.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.16
0.99
0.00
1st
Max
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.9
4.2
0.4
2nd
Max
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.7
1.4
0.4
Min
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
# >
MDL FC
0
0
0
3
6
0
-------
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
Pollutant: Carbon Tetrachloride
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year}: July, 1990
MDl: O.a PPB
(Quarterly Report)
CAS *: 56-23-5
Till: September, 1990
Units: PPB
Location Sampling
Code Site Code
7097- 2A
7097-2B
7097- 2C
0030-81
0030-82
0030-63
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret. NJ
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
j
J
j
J
J
j
# of
Samples
14
10
14
12
13
12
Arith
Hean
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
Std.
Dev.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1st
Max
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
2nd
Max
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
Nin
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
* >
HDL FC
0
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced Data from Canister Systc
Agency: MYSOOH
(Quarterly Report)
U)
Pollutant: Trichloroettiylene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
HDL: 1.0 PPB
Location Sampling
Code
7097-2A
7097- 2B
7097-2C
0030-81
0030-82
0030-B3
Reduced
Agency:
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret,
Carteret,
Carteret,
NJ
NJ
NJ
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
July, 1990
Analytical
Coda
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
6
6
6
6
6
6
Arith
Mean
0,5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.7
0.5
Data from Canister System
MYSOOH
Pollutant: 1,1,1 -
Quarter
HDL: 0
Trichloroethane
Beginning (Month, Year):
.8 PPB
Location
Code
7097- 2*
7097- 2B
7097- 2C
0030-81
0030-82
0030- B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis. SI
Carteret,
Carteret,
Carteret,
NJ
NJ
NJ
Sampling
Cede
B
B
3
B
B
B
July, 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Sanples
14
10
14
12
13
12
Arith
Mean
0.7
0.6
0.8
13.8
1.8
1.2
CAS *:
Till:
Units:
Std.
Oev.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.25
0.00
79-01-6
September
PPB
1st
Max
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.1
0.5
, 1990
2nd
Max
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.0
0.5
Nin
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
* >
HDL FC
0
0
0
0
2
0
(Quarterly Report)
CAS *:
Till:
Units:
Std.
Dev.
0.53
0.57
0.61
32.39
0.95
0.72
71-55-6
September
PPB
1st
Max
2.0
1.6
2.2
120.4
3.5
2.6
, 1990
2nd
Max
1.9
1.0
1.9
15.2
3.0
2.0
Min
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
« >
HDL FC
3
2
5
10
11
7
-------
Reduced Data from Canister
Agency: NYSDOH
Systc
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Perch loroethylene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Tear):
July, 1990
CAS *: 127-18-4
Till: Sept enter, 1990
HDL: 1.0 PPB
Location
Code
7097-2*
7097- 2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030-B2
0030- B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
8
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
14
10
14
12
13
12
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.7
0.5
Std.
Dev.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.48
0.00
1st
Max
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.9
0.5
2nd
Max
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.6
0.5
Nin
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
* >
HOL FC
0
0
0
0
3
0
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Hexane
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
HOL: 1.0 PPB
Location
Code
7097-2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030- B2
0030-83
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
July, 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
6
6
6
6
6
6
CAS #: 110-54-3
Till: September, 1990
Units: PPB
Arith
Hean
4.1
4.3
1.8
0.7
2.1
o.e
Std.
Dev.
2.68
2.42
1.16
0.25
2.27
0.3o
1st
Kax
7.7
5.6
3.4
1.1
7.1
1.3
2nd
Max
5.4
6.3
3.1
1.0
1.3
1.3
Hin
0.5
1.9
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
# >
HDL FC
4
6
4
2
5
2
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Benzene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
HOL: 0.8 PPB
Location
Code
7097- 2A
7097- 2B
7097- 2C
0030-81
0030-82
0030- B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
8
July, 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
# of
Samples
14
10
14
12
13
12
CAS *: 71-43-2
Till: September, 1990
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
3.2
2.7
2.0
1.1
2.9
1.4
Std.
Dev.
1.88
1.88
0.97
0.57
2.77
0.85
1st
Max
7.8
7.2
3.4
2.3
10.6
3.0
2nd
Max
5.0
5.0
3.4
1.8
7.5
2.8
Min
0.5
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
* >
HDL FC
14
10
13
9
12
10
-------
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
Pollutant: Toluene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): July. 1990
MDL: 0.8 PPB
(Quarterly Report)
CAS *: 108-88-3
Till: September, 1990
Units: PPB
Location Sampling
Code Site Code
7097- 2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030-B2
0030-B3
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
U
10
14
12
13
12
Arith
Mean
11.6
10.3
8.2
10.0
13.6
7.7
Std.
Oev.
6.62
8.34
3.38
5.09
15.46
5.83
1st
Max
31.6
34.2
15.8
24.2
60.5
21.8
2nd
Max
16.3
10.5
13.2
13.7
31.6
14.7
Min
3.9
3.2
3.4
2.9
2.3
2.6
* >
MOL FC
14
10
14
12
13
12
*•
Ul
Reduced Data from Canister
Agency: NYSOOH
Syste
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: o-Xylene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): July, 1990
HDL: 0.8 PPB
Location Sampling Analytical
Code Site Code Code
7097-2A
7097-28
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030-B2
0030-B3
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret,
Carteret,
Carteret,
NJ
NJ
NJ
J
J
J
J
J
J
« of
Samples
14
10
14
12
13
12
CAS #: 95-47-6
Till: September, 1990
Units: PPB
Arith Std. 1st 2nd
Mean Dev. Max Max Min
2.8
1.3
1.9
1.1
3.3
1.2
1.55
1.00
1.29
0.68
3.88
1.29
5.8
3.7
4.4
2.8
12.8
4.2
4.7
2.2
3.7
1.6
9.8
3.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
* >
MOL FC
13
6
10
8
10
6
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
Pollutant: p-Xylene, *-Xylene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): July,
HDL: 1.8 PPB
1990
(Quarterly Report)
CAS #: 106-42-3, 108-38-3
Till: September. 1990
Units: PPB
Location Sampling
Code
7097- 2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030-B2
0030-B3
Site
Travis. SI
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
6
6
6
6
6
6
Arith
Mean
10.1
2.0
2.5
2.2
5.3
2.1
Std.
Dev.
4.09
1.22
2.21
1.31
6.65
1.48
1st
Max
17.2
4.0
6.0
4.4
19.8
5.1
2nd
Max
12.6
3.3
5.1
3.3
4.7
2.6
Min
4.7
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
« >
MOL FC
~~6
3
2
4
4
4
-------
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Ethylbenzene
Quarter Beginning (Month. Year):
MDL: 1.0 PPB
Location
Code
7097-2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030-B2
0030-B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis. SI
Travis. SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
July, 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
6
6
6
6
6
6
CAS *: 100-41-4
Till: September, 1990
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
2.2
0.7
0.9
0.8
1.7
0.5
Std.
Dev.
1.17
0.36
0.62
0.34
2.38
0.00
1st
Max
4.4
1.5
2.1
1.3
7.0
0.5
2nd
Max
2.3
0.5
1.3
1.2
1.0
0.5
Min
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
K >
MDL FC
5
1
2
3
2
0
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Methyl Chloride
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
MDL: 1.0 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
Location
Code
7097-2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030-B2
0030- B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret. NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
October, 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
14
10
16
14
16
16
CAS #: 74-87-3
Till: December
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
1.3
1.7
0.5
0.8
0.6
0.6
Std.
Dev.
0.47
0.48
0.12
0.27
0.21
0.17
1st
Max
2.1
2.4
0.8
1.4
1.0
1.1
, 1990
2nd
Max
2.0
2.3
0.7
1.1
0.9
0.8
Min
0.6
0.7
0.3
0.5
0.1
0.4
0 >
MDL FC
14
10
14
12
13
14
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Dichloromethane
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
MDL: 0.8 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
Location
Code
7097-2A
7097- 2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030 -B2
0030-83
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret. NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
October. 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
14
10
16
14
16
16
CAS #: 75-09-2
Till: December. 1990
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
0.8
3.3
0.9
0.7
0.7
2.9
Std.
Dev.
0.68
0.88
0.56
0.32
0.38
3.96
1st
Max
2.9
5.0
2.0
1.6
1.9
13.5
2nd
Max
1.6
4.4
1.8
1.0
1.3
12.6
Min
0.1
2.1
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
# >
MDL FC
13
10
15
13
15
15
-------
Reduced Data fro* Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
Pollutant: Chloroform
Quarter Beginning (Month. Year): October, 1990
HDL: 0.8 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
(Quarterly Report)
CAS *: 67-66-3
Till: December. 1990
Units: PPB
Location Sampling
Code Site Code
7097-2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030-B2
0030-B3
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Car t ere t, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
f of
Samples
14
10
16
14
16
16
Arith
Mean
0.3
0.7
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.1
Std.
Dev.
0.16
0.42
0.10
0.12
0.46
0.10
1st
Max
0.6
1.6
0.4
0.5
2.1
0.4
2nd
Max
0.5
1.1
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.4
* >
Nin HDL FC
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.1
10
8
1
9
9
0
Reduced Data from Canister Syste
Agency: NYSOOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Carbon Tetrachloride
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
MDL: 0.8 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
Location Sampling
Code Site Code
7097- 2A Travis, SI B
7097-2B Travis, SI B
7097-2C Travis. SI B
0030-B1 Carteret, NJ B
0030-B2 Carteret. NJ B
0030-B3 Carteret, NJ B
October,
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
1990
* of
Samples
14
10
16
14
16
16
Arith
Mean
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.1
CAS *:
Till:
Units:
Std
Dev
0.00
0.00
0.11
0.12
0.11
0.11
56-23-5
December,
PPB
. 1st
Max
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
1990
2nd
Max
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
Mil
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
* >
l HDL FC
0
0
0
0
0
0
Reduced Data frow Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Trichloroethylene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
MDL: 1.0 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
Location
Code
7097-2A
7097- 2B
7097- 2C
0030- B1
0030-82
0030-83
Site
Travis, SI
Travis. SI
Travis. SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, HJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
October, 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
14
10
16
14
16
16
CAS #: 79-01-6
Till: December, 1990
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.8
0.5
0.2
Std.
Dev.
0.05
0.08
0.22
0.38
0.29
0.13
1st
Max
0.3
0.3
0.9
1.3
1.2
0.5
2nd
Max
0.1
0.3
0.5
1.2
0.9
0.5
Min
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
* >
MDL FC
13
2
8
12
11
1
-------
Reduced Data frow Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
Pollutant: 1,1,1 - Trichloroethaoe
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): October, 1990
HDL: 0.8 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
Location Sanpling Analytical * of
Cede
7097-2A
7097-28
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030- B2
0030-B3
Site
Travis,
Travis,
Travis,
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
SI
SI
SI
, NJ
, MJ
, NJ
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
Samples
14
10
16
14
16
16
Arith
Mean
0.5
0.6
0.7
1,6
41.4
2.5
(Quarterly Report)
CAS #: 71-55-6
Till: December, 1990
Units: PPB
Std. 1st 2nd
Oev.
0.26
0.18
0.62
1.08
156.67
3.12
Nan
1.2
1.0
2.8
5.2
648.1
14.1
Max
0.8
0.9
1.5
2.2
1.8
3.3
Mfn
O.t
0.5
0.2
0.6
0.4
0.3
# >
MOL FC
13
10
15
14
15
15
00
Reduced Data frcn Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Perchloroethylene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
HDL: 1.0 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
Location Sampling
Code
7097-2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030 -B2
0030 -S3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, MJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Code
B
B
B
&
B
B
October, 1990
Analytical * of
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
Samples
14
10
16
U
16
16
CAS #: 127-18-4
Till: Decenfcer, 1990
Units: PPB
Arith Std. 1st 2nd
Mean
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.3
0.2
Dev.
0.15
0.37
0.67
0.78
0.26
0.18
Max
0.6
1.1
2.8
2.2
1.1
0.7
Max
0.4
1.1
0.9
2.1
0.7
0.5
* >
Hin HDL FC
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
9
5
4
8
8
2
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Hexane
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
HDL: 1.0 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
Location
Code
7097-2A
7097-2B
7097- 2C
0030- B1
0030-B2
0030- B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sanpling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
October, 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
14
10
16
14
16
16
CAS «: 110-54-3
Till: December, 1990
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
2.6
1.4
1.1
1.0
1.7
O.B
Std.
Dev.
1.08
0.45
0.52
0.69
1.20
0.58
1st
Max
4.6
2.1
2.2
2.8
5.1
2.4
2nd
Max
4.3
2.0
1.8
1.9
3.4
1.9
Hin
1.3
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.2
* >
KOL FC
14
10
14
13
15
14
-------
Reduced Data fro* Canister System
Agency: NTSDOH
Pol lutant : Benzene
Quarter Beg inning (Month, Tear): October. 1990
HDL: 0.8 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
Location Sampling Analytical * of
Code
7097-2*
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-81
0030-82
0030-B3
Site
Travis, 51
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
Samples
14
10
16
14
16
16
(Quarterly Report)
CAS «: 71-43-2
Till: December, 1990
units: PPB
Arith Std. 1st 2nd
Hean
3.2
2.1
1.6
1.3
1.9
1.3
Dev.
1.16
0.87
0.86
0.83
1.12
0.98
Hax
5.6
3.8
3.4
3.8
4.1
4.1
Nax
4.4
3.4
3.4
2.1
4.1
2.7
Min
1.4
1.0
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.1
f >
HDL FC
14
10
15
13
15
14
*•
vo
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NTSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Toluene
Quarter Beginning (Month, rear):
HDL: 0.8 PPB
October, 1990
CAS *: 108-88-3
Till: December, 1990
Units: PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2. 1990
Locat i on
Code
7097-2*
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030-B2
0030 -83
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, ifJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
8
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
14
10
16
14
16
16
Arith
Hean
10.6
7.9
5.9
10.2
U.6
4.4
Std.
Dev.
4.23
1.87
6.92
3.62
10.51
2.33
1st
Nax
20.3
10.3
31.6
18.4
34.2
10.8
2nd
Hax
17.1
10.3
10.0
15.3
31.6
7.4
Hin
4.2
5.0
1.3
3.9
2.9
0.6
# >
HDL FC
14
10
16
14
16
16
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: KTSDOH
Pollutant: o-Xytene
Quarter Beginning (Month, rear): October, 1990
MOL: 0,8 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2. 1990
(Quarterly Report)
CAS *: 95-47-6
Till: Decenber, 1990
Units: PPB
Location Sampling
Code Site Code
7097- 2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-81
0030-S2
0030-83
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, HJ
Carteret, NJ
B
B
e
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
14
ID
16
14
16
16
Arith
Hean
2.7
1.7
1.5
1.4
2.1
1.0
Std.
Dev.
1.47
1.43
2.15
0.87
1.B9
0.87
1st
Hax
5.8
4.7
9.5
2.8
6.5
4.0
2nd
Hax
S.B
4.4
2.8
2.8
5.6
1.6
Nin
1.0
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.1
# >
HDL FC
K
10
15
13
15
14
-------
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
Pollutant: p-Xylene, m-Xylene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): October, 1990
HDL: 1.8 PPB
0.4 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
(Quarterly Report)
CAS *: 106-42-3, 108-38-3
Till: December, 1990
Units: PPB
Location Sampling
Code Site Code
7097-2A
7097-28
7097-2C
0030- B1
0030-82
0030-B3
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carter* t, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
K
10
16
14
16
16
Arith
Mean
6.8
3.9
3.3
3.3
5.0
2.2
Std.
Dev.
3.65
2.78
5.00
2.12
4.90
1.74
1st
Max
15.8
9.5
21.6
7.4
17.2
7.9
2nd
Max
12.6
9.1
8.1
6.3
14.9
4.2
Min
2.3
1.4
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.2
* >
HDL FC
14
10
15
13
15
14
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Ethylbenzene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
MOL: 1.0 PPB
0.2 PPB after Oct. 2, 1990
Location
Code
7097-2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030 -B2
0030 -83
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
October, 1990
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
# of
Samples
14
10
16
14
16
16
CAS #: 100-41-4
Till: December, 1990'
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
1.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.3
0.6
Std.
Dev.
0.97
0.65
1.23
0.54
1.30
0.37
1st
Max
4.0
2.3
5.3
1.9
4.4
1.6
2nd
Max
3.5
2.2
2.2
1.9
4.2
0.9
Hin
0.5
0.5
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.1
* >
HDL FC
14
10
14
13
15
13
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Methyl Chloride
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
HDL: 0.2 PPB
Location
Code
7097 -2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030 -B1
0030-B2
0030 -B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
fi
B
B
January, 1991
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
12
to
14
14
9
14
CAS #: 74-87-3
Till: March, 1991
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
1.6
1.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
Std.
Dev.
0.58
0.82
0.09
0.21
0.11
0.08
1st
Max
2.9
3.5
0.8
1.1
0.9
0.9
2nd
Max
2.3
2.4
o.a
0.9
0.9
0.8
Min
0.7
0.3
0.6
0.1
0.7
0.6
* >
MOL FC
12
10
14
13
9
14
-------
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: MYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Dtchloraaethane
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
MDL: 0.2 PPB
Location
Code
7097- 2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030-B2
0030-63
Site
Travis. SI
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Car t ere t, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Car t ere t, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
January, 1991
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
*of
Samples
12
10
U
H
9
U
CAS »: 75-09-2
Till: March. 1991
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
0.7
6.0
0.9
0.6
0.8
1.9
Std.
Dev.
0.49
3.02
0.54
0.25
0.24
1.13
1st
Max
1.9
12.9
1.9
1.1
1.1
4.4
2nd
Max
1.3
10.0
1.9
0.9
1.1
4.4
Min
0.1
2.9
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.5
* >
MDL FC
11
10
14
14
9
14
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSDOH
Pollutant: Chloroform
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): January,
MDL: 0.2 PPB
1991
(Quarterly Report)
CAS «: 67-66-3
Till: March, 1991
Units: PPB
Location
Code
7097-2A
7097-2B
7097- 2C
0030-B1
0030- B2
0030- 83
Sampling
Site Code
Travis, SI
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Sanples
12
10
14
14
9
14
Arith
Mean
0.4
1.2
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.1
Std.
Dev.
0.20
1.04
0.05
0.15
• 0.22
0.00
1st
Max
0.9
4.0
0.3
0.6
0.9
0.1
2nd
Max
0.7
1.8
0.1
0.6
0.6
0.1
Min
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
* >
MDL FC
11
10
1
11
8
0
Reduced Data from Canister Syst
Agency: NYSDOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Carbon
Tetrachloride
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
MDL: 0.2 PPB
Location
Code Site
7097-2A Travis, SI
7097- 2B Travis, SI
7097- 2C Travis. SI
0030-61 Carteret,
0030-B2 Carteret,
0030-83 Carteret,
NJ
NJ
NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
January,
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
1991
* of
Samples
12
10
14
14
9
14
CAS *:
Till:
Units:
Arith Std.
Mean Dev.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
56-23-5
March,
PPB
1st
Max
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
1991
2nd
Max Min
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
1
1
1
1
1
* >
MDL FC
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
Pollutant: Trichloroethylene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): January,
HDL: 0.2 PPB
1991
(Quarterly Report)
CAS #: 79-01-6
Till: March, 1991
Units: PPB
Location
Code
7097- 2A
7097-28
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030-B2
0030-B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
12
10
U
14
9
U
Arith
Mean
0.1
0.2
0.3
1.5
0.2
0.1
Std.
Dev.
0.00
0.14
0.35
1.08
0.22
0.05
1st
Max
0.1
0.5
1.2
4.3
0.8
0.3
2nd
Max
0.1
0.4
0.9
4.0
0.4
0.1
Mil
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
* >
l HDL
0
3
4
J 14
3
13
FC
in
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
Pollutant: 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): January, 1991
HDL: 0.2 PPB
(Quarterly Report)
CAS #: 71-55-6
Till: March, 1991
Units: PPB
Location Sampling
Code Site Code
7097- 2A
7097-28
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030 -B2
0030-B3
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret. NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
12
10
14
14
9
14
Arith
Mean
0.6
0.9
0.5
1.8
0.9
3.9
Std.
Dev.
0.40
0.50
0.42
0.78
0.38
1.85
1st
Max
1.4
1.9
1.5
3.5
1.8
7.6
2nd
Max
1.2
1.8
1.3
3.1
1.8
6.3
Him
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.7
0.5
1.9
* >
HDL FC
12
10
12
14
9
14
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
Pollutant: Perchloroethylene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): January.
HDL: 0.2 PPB
1991
(Quarterly Report)
CAS «: 127-18-4
Till: March. 1991
Units: PPB
Location
Code
7097- 2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-81
0030-82
0030 -B3
S
Site
Travis, SI
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret. NJ
amp ling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
12
10
14
14
9
14
Arith
Mean
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.2
Std.
Dev.
0.33
0.55
0.41
0.19
0.30
0.19
1st
Max
1.2
1.6
1.3
0.7
1.0
0.7
2nd
Max
0.8
1.4
1.3
0.6
0.6
0.6
Mil
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
l HDL FC
3
4
3
10
5
11
-------
Reduced Data fro* Canister Systea
Agency: NYSOOH
PoI1utant: Hexane
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
NDL: 0.2 PPB
January, 1991
(Quarterly Report)
CAS f: 110-54-3
Till: March. 1991
Units: PPB
Location Sampling
Code Site Code
7097- 2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-81
0030-B2
0030-83
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret. NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret. NJ
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
12
10
14
14
9
14
Arith
Mean
1.5
1.4
1.0
0.6
1.2
0.9
Std.
Dev.
1.13
1.05
0.81
0.55
1.12
1.06
1st
Max
4.6
4.0
2.8
2.0
4.3
3.7
2nd
Max
3.1
2.9
2.7
1.6
1.1
2.5
Min
0.6
0.7
0.3
0.1
0.4
0.1
* >
MOL FC
12
10
14
11
9
9
Ul
w
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Benzene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
January. 1991
HDL: 0.2 PPB
Location
Code
7097- 2A
7097- 2B
7097-2C
0030-81
0030-B2
0030-B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampl ing
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
# of
Samples
12
10
14
14
9
14
CAS #: 71-43-2
Till: March, 1991
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
2.7
2.7
1.7
1.5
1.7
1.5
Std.
Dev.
1.25
1.68
1.36
1.59
1.41
1.09
1st
Max
5.6
5.9
5.0
6.9
5.6
4.1
2nd
Max
5.3
5.6
4.7
2.3
1.6
3.4
Min
1
1
0
0
0
0
.7
.2
.6
.6
.9
.5
* >
MOL FC
12
10
14
14
9
14
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
Pollutant: Toluene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): January, 1991
MDL: 0.2 PPB
(Quarterly Report)
CAS *: 108-88-3
Till: March, 1991
Units: PPB
Location Sampling
Code Site Code
7097-2A
7097-2B
7097- 2C
0030 -B1
0030 -B2
0030-83
Travis. SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret. NJ
B
B
8
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
* of
Samples
12
10
14
14
9
14
Arith
Mean
15.2
12.5
4.4
7.7
8.0
5.9
Std.
Dev.
9.97
10.17
3.73
3.33
3.35
3.01
1st
Max
41.8
33.9
13.4
14.7
15.8
11.3
2nd
Max
22.6
28.9
12.9
11.8
10.8
10.8
Min
5.5
4.5
1.4
3.2
4.5
1.7
# >
MDL FC
12
10
U
14
9
14
-------
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
Pollutant: o-Xylene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): January,
HDL: 0.2 PPB
1991
(Quarterly Report)
CAS *: 95-47-6
Till: March. 1991
Units: PPB
Location
Code
7097- 2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030-81
0030-B2
0030-B3
Reduced
Agency:
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
Analytical
Code
J
« of
Samples
12
10
14
14
9
14
Arith
Mean
1.7
8.9
1.4
1.2
1.7
1.3
Data from Canister System
NYSOOH
Pollutant: p-Xylene,
Quarter
HDL: 0
m-Xylene
Beginning (Month, Year):
.4 PPB
Location
Code
7097- 2A
7097-2B
7097-2C
0030- B1
0030- B2
0030 -B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
January,
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
1991
# of
Samples
12
10
14
14
9
14
Arith
Mean
4.5
15.3
3.4
2.9
4.8
3.0
Std
Dev
0.73
14.75
1.38
0.55
0.78
0.78
. 1st
Max
3.3
38.6
4.4
2.3
3.5
3.0
2nd
Max
3.0
38.1
4.0
1.9
1.9
2.8
Min
0.8
0.9
0.2
0.5
0.7
0.4
* >
HDL FC
12
10
14
14
9
14
(Quarterly Report)
CAS *:
Till:
Units:
Std
Dev
1.83
22.76
3.94
1.38
2.41
1.72
106-42-3, 108-38-3
March,
PPB
. 1st
. Max
8.4
60.7
12.8
5.8
8.8
7.0
1991
2nd
Hax
8.1
60.5
11.2
5.1
8.4
5.6
Min
2.3
1.8
0.6
1.0
1.9
1.0
# >
HDL FC
12
10
14
14
9
14
Reduced Data from Canister System
Agency: NYSOOH
(Quarterly Report)
Pollutant: Ethylbenzene
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year):
HDL: 0.2 PPB
Location
Code
7097- 2A
7097- 2B
7097-2C
0030-B1
0030- B2
0030- B3
Site
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Travis, SI
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Carteret, NJ
Sampling
Code
B
B
B
B
B
B
January, 1991
Analytical
Code
J
J
J
J
J
J
0 of
Samples
12
10
14
14
9
14
CAS #: 100-41-4
Till: March, 1991
Units: PPB
Arith
Mean
1.1
6.0
1.0
0.8
1.2
0.8
Std.
Dev.
0.56
9.45
1.12
0.48
0.54
0.53
1st
Max
2.3
25.1
3.5
2.0
2.3
2.0
2nd
Max
2.3
24.7
3.0
1.7
1.7
1.8
Min
0.5
0.5
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.2
* >
MDL FC
12
10
12
14
9
14
-------
Reduced Radon Data
Quarterly Report
Sampling Agency:
Pollutant:
Analytical Laboratory:
MDL:
NYSDOH
Radon
EPA Las Vegas
0.19 pCi/l*
CAS #:
Units: pCi/l
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): July 1990
Location
Code
12
15
25
26
37
41
43
53
54
67
Site
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
Travis
Travis
Travis
Travis
Travis
* of valid
samples
3
3
3
3
1
2
2
3
3
2
Arith
mean
0.70
0.59
0.40
0.49
0.30
0.33
1.12
0.34
0.49
0.92
Std.
dev.
0.03
0.04
0.06
0.21
.
0.04
1.04
0.09
0.20
0.64
1st
Max
0.73
0.63
0.47
0.73
0.35
1.86
0.44
0.72
1.37
2nd
Max
Ending: September 1990
Min MOL
0.71
0.58
0.36
0.43
0.29
0.39
0.67
0.55
0.36
0.32
0.30
0.39
0.28
0.35
0.42
3
3
3
3
1
2
2
3
3
2
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): October 1990
Location
Code
12
15
25
26
41
43
53
54
Site
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
Travis
Travis
Travis
Travis
* of valid
samples
5
5
6
6
5
6
6
6
Arith
mean
0.76
0.60
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.45
0.60
0.48
Std.
dev.
0.07
0.12
0.12
0.14
0.17
0.03
0.23
0.07
1st
Max
0.85
0.75
0.60
0.59
0.71
0.49
0.93
0.60
2nd
Max
0.79
0.66
0.53
0.52
0.43
0.48
0.77
0.53
Ending: December 1990
Min
0.73
0.46
0.30
0.19
0.25
0.41
0.33
0.38
* >
MOL
5
5
6
6
5
6
6
6
Quarter Beginning (Month, Year): January 1991
Location
Code
12
15
25
26
41
43
53
54
Site
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
Carteret
Travis
Travis
Travis
Travis
* of valid
samples
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
Arith
mean
0.78
0.61
0.36
0.33
0.33
0.90
0.51
0.54
Std.
dev.
0.05
0.12
0.06
0.11
0.06
0.66
0.05-
0.18
1st
Max
0.82
0.75
0.43
0.46
0.37
1.36
0.56
0.74
2nd
Max
0.79
0.55
0.34
0.28
0.49
0.47
Ending: March 1991
Min MOL
0.72
0.52
0.31
0.25
0.29
0.43
0.47
0.40
•Mot corrected for background outdoor sample concentration. 0.19 pCi/l is the minimum detectible amount
(MOA) in the report, "National Ambient Radon Study*1 (1991 report). The MOA for that study was defined as
1.645 standard deviations above the limit of detection (LOO); and the LOO, 0.054 pCi/l, was defined as three
standard deviations above the average measurement on a field blank.
Key to location codes:
12 Carteret 0030-81, 1st fir. rec. room 41
15 Carteret 0030-B1, 2nd fir. kitchen 43
25 Carteret 0030-B2, 2nd fir. kitchen 53
26 Carteret 0030-B2, 2nd fir. bathroom 54
37 Carteret 0030-B3, outdoors on school roof 67
Travis 7097-2A, 1st fir.
Travis 7097-2A, 1st fir.
Travis 7097-2B, 1st fir.
Travis 7097-28, 1st fir.
playroom
living room
living room
kitchen
Travis 7097-2C, outdoors on school roof
55
-------
Appendices
56
-------
APPENDIX A
STATEN ISLAND/NEW JERSEY URBAN AIR TOXICS ASSESSMENT PROJECT
INDOOR AIR WORKPLAN
I. Background
The New Jersey/Staten Island area represents a highly
industrialized and urbanized section of the United States. Many
petrochemical industry facilities are located along the Arthur
Kill. To address public concern about air quality and adverse
health risks, the SI/NJ UATAP project is being conducted. The
overall purpose of the project is to characterize the
concentrations of several organic and inorganic compounds found
in the ambient air and to evaluate the relative risk from
inhalation exposure to these compounds. Ambient air sampling has
been conducted at several sites in New York and New Jersey since
1988 to characterize exposure to air contaminants in this area.
Many hours of a person's day are spent inside the home. The
ambient air is often the most important source of contaminants in
indoor air. However, indoor sources can predominate in some
circumstances. The indoor air portion of the SI/NJ UATAP project
is designed to provide information on the relative importance of
indoor air contaminant sources. Indoor air contaminant levels
will be determined in four homes, concurrently with sampling of
contaminant levels at nearby ambient monitoring stations.
Tentative sampling locations are residences close to PS 26 in
Travis on Staten Island and close to the police station in
Carteret, New Jersey, and at the ambient monitoring sites in
those locations. The residences will be selected as not atypical
in terms of construction and observable sources of indoor air
contaminants. Because there will be only a small number of
sample locations, the data collected will not be representative
in the sense of permitting extrapolation to the entire study
area. Data obtained from this investigation will aid in
characterizing the relative risks of indoor and outdoor exposure
for those homes tested in the New Jersey/Staten Island area.
II. Purpose
Determine how nearly indoor air contaminant levels in houses
near two of the project ambient air monitoring sites correspond
to ambient levels at the monitoring stations. If there is a
significant difference between indoor and ambient levels at
either site, characterize the difference in terms of exposure for
hypothetical residents of these houses.
A-l
-------
III. Objective A
Select homes to be used in this study.
Task A.I NYSDOH will canvas the areas door-to-door to seek
volunteer homeowners. At least two homes in Staten
Island and two homes in New Jersey will be identified
for sampling.
Task A.2 Criteria for selection will be based on the following:
a) Criteria for ideal sampling location:
(i) residence is located within 1/2 mile of an
outdoor air monitoring station presently used
in this study.
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
(ix)
(x)
(xi)
At least half of the organic chemicals of
interest (See Objective C) have been
regularly detected at the outdoor air
monitoring station.
residence has had no major heating oil spill
occurrence and all minor leaks to oil storage
tank have been repaired.
residence should not contain woodstove,
kerosene space heater/ or kerosene lamps.
residence does not contain large amounts of
paints, solvents, adhesives, etc. that may
contribute to concentrations of the specified
organic compounds.
residence should not be a mobile home.
residence should not contain
urea-formaldehyde foam insulation.
residence is not located within l/8th mile of
a gasoline station, oil storage facility,
propane storage and/or dispenser facility,
dry cleaning business or any other business
known to emit any of the organic chemicals
selected for analysis in this project.
residence should be greater than I/8th mile
from a large parking facility, bus garage,
airport or train station.
occupants of residence do not smoke.
residence has a detached garage or no garage
structure.
A-2
-------
b)
(xii) residence has not been remodeled in previous
12 months.
(xiii) residence should not have pressed wood
furniture, upholstered furniture, carpeting
or draperies purchased in the last 12 months
(xiv) draperies and furniture coverings in the
residence should not have been dry cleaned
within the past six months; carpets should
not have been professionally cleaned within
past six months.
If a location cannot be found to meet all of the above
criteria, the following criteria will apply:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
criteria i-vii must be met.
residents must agree not to smoke indoors 12
hours prior to sampling and during sampling.
in a residence with an attached garage, the
garage should not be used to store chemicals,
oil or gasoline.
if residence has been recently remodelled or
new furniture, carpeting or draperies have
been added in the past 12 months, the sample
should be taken in a room away from the new
installations/furnishings.
If any draperies or furniture coverings have
been dry cleaned or carpets commercially
cleaned in the past 6 months, the sample
should be taken in rooms where this had not
been done.
IV. Objective B
Collect indoor air samples in selected homes.
Task B.I . Prepare and distribute brief factsheet on the project
and permission forms for homeowners. Obtain written
permission from homeowner and provide to homeowner a
list of conditions for sampling which they must agree
to for the duration of the study.
Task B.2 Complete "Indoor Air Quality Residential Questionnaire"
for each home. Complete "Daily Activity/Product Use
Questionnaire" each day the home is sampled.
Task B.3 Place evacuated canisters in homes (first floor living
space) with flow controller and timer set for a 12 hour
sampling interval. Two consecutive 12-hour samples
will be collected at a pre-determined hour every 12
A-3
-------
days for eight months. Start and stop times will
coincide with the outdoor air monitoring. Filled
canisters will be transported to the New York State
Department of Health Wadsworth Center for Laboratories
and Research for analysis.
Task B.4 Conduct formaldehyde sampling simultaneously with
canister sampling. Cartridges for formaldehyde will be
obtained from and analyzed by EPA contract laboratory.
V. Objective C
Collect ambient air samples and meteorological data
concurrently with indoor air samples.
TASK C.I Conduct ambient air sampling utilizing the same methods
(tasks B.3 and B.4) every 12 days at two ambient
monitoring stations for eight months. This represents
18 days of sampling, each day composed of two 12-hour
samples at two ambient air monitoring stations.
Task C.2 Install recording meteorological instruments at each
ambient air monitoring station. Collect meteorological
data for an eight month sampling period.
VI. Objective D
Analyses - See attached methodology, [in project files]
Task D.l Canisters: Analyze indoor and ambient air samples for
the specified twelve volatile organic compounds. These
compounds are:
chloromethane tetrachloroethylene
methylene chloride benzene
chloroform toluene
1,1,1-trichloroethane hexane
carbon tetrachloride o-xylene, m,p-xylenes
trichloroethylene ethylbenzene
Task D.2 Cartridges: Analyze cartridges for formaldehyde.
Cartridges will be obtained from and analyzed by EPA
consultant. Collection and analysis procedures
obtained from EPA.
A-4
-------
VII. Objective E
Implement a quality control procedure to insure
comparability and quality of the monitoring data.
Task E.I Wadsworth Center for Laboratories and Research will
undergo a "Shoot Out" with EPA's Edison Laboratory.
Task E.2 One canister will be treated as a field blank for every
ten sample canisters, as the standard quality control
practice. The house where the canister will be
"exposed" will be changed on different sampling
occasions.
Task E.3 On every third sampling day (36 calendar days)
duplicate canisters will be collected and sent to EPA's
Contract Laboratory for analysis.
VIII. Objective F
Prepare report summarizing data and drawing conclusions
regarding indoor/outdoor contaminant levels.
Task F.I Every three months, a status report will be issued by
the Indoor Air Sub-group based on data collected over
the previous quarter. Report will be distributed
within 45 days of end of quarter. Status report will
include a summary of analytical data regarding indoor
and outdoor contaminant levels.
Task F.2 Within 45 days of the last sampling event, a final
report will be prepared and distributed by the Indoor
Air Sub-group that will present the data compiled over
the period of the study and provide conclusions
regarding that data.
A-5
-------
APPENDIX B : Floor Plans
•-H-H r
j , i
~i'
il
~
=mr:=J.
w
i
e
Bed Roc
rBrr:
r
KrrfenaD
miTT
£i
r*ni_ru t»oR_-zsjv-eT
•DgAcaT-Ngl nerf—fo-i
scafg.-
^P«x.-:- H-
srr "LLsd^k'"d~ _N Ji.
--H-^-^-H-1-
B-l
-------
B-2
-------
B-3
-------
EtofttoniQ
B-4
-------
APPEilblX C - Formaldehyde
Operating Procedure for DeUaiaiag Plov Rites in
Three Channela of tne Indoor air Project FoCBAldeayde Soapier*
1. Take three formaldehyde sample tubes to the sampling location.
These are for the 1st 12 hour, 2nd 12 hour, and 24 hour samples.
2. Choose a tube for the 1st 12 hour sample and record the tube $
on the sampling sheet.
3. Install tube on the appropriate channel as indicated by the
color coded guide located on the inside cover of the sampler.
4. Repeat steps 2 and 3, for the 2nd 12 hour and 24 hour samples.
5. Attach rotaaeter and tubing to the 24 hour channel.
6. Set up 12 hour channel so that the first 12 hour sample is
activated. (With the unit facing front, the clock controlling the
12 hour channel is on the left hand side. Activating the first 12
hour sample is achieved by manipulating the on/off knob of the
tiner so that the bottom tooth of the trigger is perpendicular to
the clock wheel.)
7. Measure and record the flow rate on the sample sheet in the 24
hour tube/1st 12 hour period box.
8. Switch the 12 hour channel so that the second 12 hour sample
is activated. This is done by turning the timer oo the 12 hour
channel clock (the clock on the left hand side) until the timing
trigger is set off by the red lug on the clock.
9. Record the flev rate observed with the rotameter on the
campling sheet in the 24 hour/2nd 12 hour sample box.
10. Disconnect the rotameter from the 24 hour channel and attach
it to the twelv* hour channel.
11. Record the flow rate on the sample sheet in the 2nd 12 hour
sample/2nd 12 hour period box.
12. Switch the 12 hour channel so that the first 12 hour sample
is being taken. Follow the steps for this procedure as indicated
in step $6.
13. Record the flow rate on the sample sheet in the 1st 12 hour
sample/lst U2 hour sample period box.
14. Disconnect the rotameter.
15. Hake sure that the 12 hour channel is set so that the first
twelve hour sample tube is activated. This is done by examining
the bottom tooth of the timing trigger and verifying that it is
perpindicular to the the timing wheel. Hake sure that the timer
is set for 12 so that a full revolution of the clock (12 hours)
will pass before the second 12 hour sample is taken.
16. Make sure that the timer on the right of the unit is on.
c-l
-------
ForaloWtyde tvpl« tnforatton
T(»t
locations.
Pr* Saa^Ung Pton Nca
a/Kin)
1st 12 hour 3ni 12 hour
Tut* I saapUne period sjcptlng perfod
1«t 12 hour ti±» I/X
2nd 12 hour ni» «/A
24 hour n*»
Tf
Prior to tttcpline Aft
7 dky tfMr rttdtno:
24 hour e*um*l t?«tr rudtno:
(taejt«d on th« right)
12 hour dumet tfner retdfngt
(touted on the Uft)
Post Satplfng Flow
(UKfn)
let 12 hour 2nd 12 tour
Tube t saaptfng puffed »cplfna period
1st 12 hour tub* As Above KM •
2nd 12 hour tube As Abov* K/A-—-
24 hour nf« As Abov*
C-2
-------
D:iPH-Coated Silica Cartridges for Sampling Carbonyl Conpounds in
Air and Analysis by High Performance Liquid Chromatography
by
Silvestre B. Tejada
Mobile Source Emissions Research Branch
Atmospheric Sciences Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
INTRODUCTION
This report describes procedural details for coating silica
in pre-packed plastic cartridges with 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine
(DNPH) and for sampling carbonyl compounds in air with these
devices. Experimental results of the comparison of the cartridge
ar.d the DNPH/ACN impinger techniques for sampling carbonyl
compounds in dilute automotive exhaust emissions and in ambient
air are presented.
Qualitative and quantitative data show that the cartridge
and the DNPH/ACN impinger sampling methods are equivalent. " The
data also support the tentative' identification of an unknown
degradation product of acrolein-DNPH derivative.
The method is based on the specific reaction of organic
carbonyl compounds (aldehydes and, ketones) with DNPH in the
presence of an acid to form stable derivatives according to the
following equation:
M~ . K' . _ ifi.
.RX •*•*>«•£>»«» 4 ]JV0
R and R can be any organic radical or hydrogen.
Carbonyl compounds in ambient air or in diluted automotive
exhaust are collected by passing the sample through a pre-packed
cartridge (Waters Associates Sep-PAK) containing chromatographic
grade silica gel that has been coated in situ with acidified
DMPH. The DNPH derivatives are analyzed by high performance
liquid Chromatography (HPLC) using spectrophotometric detection
C-3
-------
at 360 nn. DNPH-coated cartridges are not commercially available
at present.
The method as described here is applicable to a variety of
sampling situations and can be applied to the determination of
carbonyl compounds in automotive emissions as well as in
residential indoor and ambient outdoor atmospheres.
Aldehydes and ketones as DNPH derivatives can be detected at
0.5 ng level (S/N >2) on column (25-uL sample injection) with our
present instrumentation and chromatographic conditions (see
Figure 1). Past experiences with standard synthetic mixtures
have shown that a relative standard deviation (RSD) of about 10%
in peak area measurements can be achieved, under favorable
conditions, when the concentration of of the DNPH derivative in
solution is about 0.1 ug/mL ( equivalent to 2.5 ng on column).
At 0.2 ug/mL and at 0.4 ug/mL and higher, RSD of about 5% and 3%,
respectively, can be achieved. With peak height guantitation,
under similar conditions, RSD of about 10% can be achieved at
0.025 ug/mL and about 5% at 0.05 ug/mL. At 0.1 ug/mL and higher,
RSD of about 2% can be achieved. Retention times of synthetic
standards have been reproduced to about 1% RSD for a multiple
injections of a solution of six standards that spanned over two
months.
EXPERIMENTAL
Instrumentation; A gradient HPLC (Varian Model 5000) system
equipped with a UV(360 nm) detector (ISCO Model 1840 variable
wavelength detector), an automatic sampler with a 25-uL loop
injector and two DuPont Zorbax CDS columns (4.6-mm by 25-cm), a
recorder and an electronic integrator.
Apparatus and Equipments;
1. Hot plates, beakers, flasks, measuring and disposable
pipets, volumetric flasks, etc.
2. Impingers
3. Rotameters, metal bellows or diaphragm pumps
4. Calibrated syringes as required
'5. Special glass apparatus for rinsing, storage and
dispensing of saturated DNPH stock reagent (Figure 2).
C-4
-------
6. Mass flow meter and mass flow controllers
7. Melting point apparatus
8. Positive displacement, repetitive dispensing pipets
(Lab-Industries or equivalent), 0 to 10 mL range.
9. Three-way solenoid valves
10. Programmable timers
11. Cartridge drying manifold with multiple standard male
Luer connectors (at least 6). The manifold is connected to a
cylinder of nitrogen.
12. Liquid syringes, 10 mL (Polypropylene syringes are
adequate) .
13. Syringe rack. The unit is made of an aluminum plate
(1/16 x 14 x 21 in.) with adjustable legs on four corners. A
r.2trix (5 x 9) of circular holes with diameter slightly larger
than the diameter of the 10-raL syringes were symetrically drilled
from the center of the plate. This permits batch processi-ng of
45 cartridges for cleaning, coating and/or sample elution.
14. Teflon FEP tubing (1/4" O.D. x 1" long). Both ends of
the tubing were flared using a heated glass rod. This tubing is
used for coupling cartridges.
15. Cartridge sampling manifold. This is all glass
construction and consists of 4 cartridge ports and a male ball
joint for connection to existing aldehyde dilution tunnel
sarr.plir.g probe. Short pieces of Teflon FEP tubing (1/4M 0,D. x
1.5" lor.g) were heat shrunk around the outside diameter and about
3/4" deep of the cartridge ports. The free ends of the FEP
tubing vrere flared as in 13. The manifold is wrapped with
siliccr.e rubber insulated heating tape.
16. Ambient air sampling probe. This is all glass
construction with ball joint fitting for connection to the
cartridge sampling manifold or to an impinger. The unit is
coated with an "Instatherm" heating' element and is equipped with
an all glass check valve. This unit was originally designed to
minimize possible interference of ACN vapors diffusing from the
impingers via the sampling probe during simultaneous collection
of hydrocarbon and aldehyde samples.- Cartridge sampling does not
require the air sampling probe when the temperature is a few
degrees above freezing. The heated probe is absolutely necessary
when the temperature approaches 0°C.
Reagents;
1. 2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine - Aldrich chemical or J.T.
Baker, reagent grade or equivalent.
C-5
-------
2. Acetonitrile - UV grade,-Burdick and Jackson
"distilled-in-glass" or equivalent.
3. Water - charcoal filtered deionized water
4. Perchloric acid - analytical grade, best source
5. Hydrochloric acid - analytical grade, best source
6. Aldehydes and ketones for preparation of DNPH derivative
standards - best available grade
7. Carbonyl standards - as 2,4-DNPH derivatives prepared as
described later.
8. Ethar.ol or nethanol - best source
9. Sep-PAX silica gel cartridge (Waters Associates,
Milfcrd, Massachusetts)
Purification of 2.4-DNPH Reagent; Prepare a supersaturated
solution of DK?H by boiling excess DNPH in 200 mL of ACN.
Transfer the supernatant to a beaker, put a cover glass and allow
to cool gradually to 40-60°C by putting the beaker on a hot
place. This maximizes crystal size and purity. Allow 95$ of the
solvent to evaporate slowly at this temperature range.
Additional supersaturated solution maybe added if more materials
are needed. Decant the last remaining saturated solution to
waste and rinse the crystals twice with about three times, their
apparent volume with ACN. . .Transfex the crystals to" another clean
beaker, add 200 mL of ACN, heat to boiling, and again allow the
crystals to grow slowly at 40-60°C until 95% of the solvent has
evaporated. Repeat the rinsing process. Take an aliquot of the
second rinse, dilute 10 times with ACN, acidify (1 mL of 3.8M
perchloric acid per 100 mL of DNPH solution), and analyze by
HPLC. The impurity level should be comparable to that shown in
Figure 1. Repeat the crystallization process if"the impurity
level is unsatisfactory.
Trace impurities can be conveniently removed after the
second recrystallization by using -the special apparatus shown in
Figure 2. Transfer the crystals to the apparatus, add 20 mL of
ACN, agitate gently, allow to equilibrate for 10 minutes and
drain the solution by properly positioning the three-way
stopcock. Check that the special stopper with the DNPH-coated
silica cartridge is used during liquid transfer. The purified
crystals should not be allowed to contact laboratory air except
for a brief monent when additional solvent is being added to the
crystal reservoir. After draining turn the stopcock so that the
drain tube is connected to the side or measuring reservoir.
Immediately rinse the stopcock and drain tube. Introduce the
through the measuring reservoir. The rinse solution from the
purified crystal reservoir should be checked for impurity level
C-6
-------
by K?LC as previously described. Rinsings should be repeated
with 20 mL portions of ACN until satisfactory impurity level is
attained. The large crystals obtained in the purification
orocess not only enhance the removal of surface impurities but
also minimize material loss during rinsing (dua to decreased
solubility rate of the crystals) as a direct consequence of
significant decrease in specific surface area of the crystals.
Preparation of Stock DNPH Reagent; Once the crystals have been
satisfactorily cleaned in the special glass apparatus, add about
40 mL of ACN to the crystal reservoir. Agitate the mixture
gently and allow to equilibrate overnight. The saturated
solution above the large excess of purified crystals is used as
stock reagent in the preparation of the absorbing solution. The
stock solution contains about 11 mg DNPH per mL at room
temperature.
If the special glass apparatus is not available, transfer
-he purified crystals to an all glass reagent bottle, add about
2CO nL ACI1, stopper, shake gently and allow to stand overnight.
Use "clean" pipets and rubber bulbs when taking aliquots of the
saturated solution. Do not pour from the reagent bottle.
The use of the special glass apparatus minimizes
ccnzanination from laboratory air.
preparation of Carbonyl-DNPH Derivative; Titrate a saturated
solution of DNPH in 2N HC1 with the individual aldehyde or
ketor.e. Filter the colored precipitate, wash with 2N HC1 and
vater and allow to air dry. Check the purity of the derivative
by melting point determination. Recrystallize from absolute •
echar.ol or methanol if necessary. Check chronatographic purity
by H?LC analysis of a dilute solution of the derivative in ACN.
Standards; Prepare standard stock solutions of the individual
r:;?H derivatives by dissolving accurately weighed amounts in ACN.
Prepare a working calibration standard mix from the individual
standard stock solutions. If possible, the concentrations of the
individual carbonyl compounds in the standard mix should be
adjusted to reflect their relative distribution in real samples.
It is sometimes desirable to dissolve r small piece of DNPH
single crystal in the standard mix to provide a reference peak in
calibration chromatograms. Store 'all standard solutions in the
refrigerator. They should be stable for several months.
Standard solutions of the aldehydes can'also be prepared in
ACN and mixed with acidified DNPH as needed. We feel this is a
less convenient method than the method described in the previous
paragraph especially for daily routine analysis of a large number
of samples and where an automated sampler is available.
preparation of DNPH-Coated Sep-PAK Cartridge
This procedure must be performed in a very low aldehyde
background atmosphere. All glasswares and plasticwares must be
C-7
-------
scrupulously cleaned and rinsed with deionized" water and
aldehyde-free ACM. Contact of reagents with laboratory air must
be minimized. Wear polyethylene gloves when handling the
cartridges.
DNPH Coating Solution; Dilute 25 mL of saturated DNPH stock
solution to 1000 mL with ACN in a reagent bottle equipped with a
positive displacement repetitive dispenser. Acidify with 1.0 mL
of concentrated HC1. The atmosphere above the acidified solution
should preferably be filtered through DNPH-coated silica
cartridge to minimize contamination from laboratory air. Prime
the dispenser and slowly dispense 10 to 20 mL to waste. Dispense
an aliquot to a sample vial and check the impurity level of the
acidified solution by HPLC analysis using gradient program
similar to those given in Optimization of Chromatographic
Coditions section. The impurity level should be similar to that
shown in Figure 1.
Coating Procedure; Open the Sep-PAK packet and connect the short
end of the cartridge to a 10-mL syringe and place in the syringe
rack. Prepare as many cartridges and syringes as the syringe
rack can hold. For lot consistency, it^ is important that a large
batch is coated in assembly line fashion. Using a positive
displacement repetitive pipet, add 10 mL of ACN to each of the
syringes and allow the liquid to drain by gravity to a waste
reservoir. Remove any air bubbles which may be trapped between
the syringe and the silica cartridge by displacing it with ACN in
the syringe. A long tipped diposable Pasteur pipet equipped with
a aedicine dropper rubber bulb is convenient for this purpose.
Set the repetitive dispenser containing the acidified DNPH
coating solution to dispense 7 mL.- Once the ACN rinse solution
is completely drained into the cartridge and the effluent flow at
the outlet of the cartridge has stopped, dispense 7 mL of the
coating reagent into each of the syringes. Air is usually
trapped between the cartridge and syringe and should be displaced
with the coating reagent in the same manner mentioned above.
Allow the coating reagent to drain by gravity until flow at the
other end of the cartridge stops. Wick the excess liquid at the
outlet of each of the cartridges with clean tissue paper. The
cartridges should be coated with about 1.9 mg of acidified DNPH.
Remove a batch of cartridges from the syringes and connect
the short ends of the cartridges to the Luer ports of the drying
manifold. Pass nitrogen through each of the cartridges at about
300-400 mL/min for 15 minutes. Within 10 minutes of the drying
process, rinse the exterior surfaces and outlet ends of the
cartridges with ACN using a Pasteur pipet. After 15 minutes,
stop the nitrogen flow and connect clean Teflon FEP cartridge
connectors to the long end of the dry cartridges. This first
batch of cartridges will serve as scrubbers for any carbonyl
present in nitrogen and can be reused for subsequent cartridge
drying operation.
With the scrubbers in place, connect the short ends of the
C-8
-------
next batch of cartridges to be dried and pass nitrogen at about
300-400 raL/min for 15 minutes. Rinse the exterior surfaces and
outlets of the cartridges as described above. After drying, put
the cartridges in an all glass stoppered reagent bottle and store
in the refrigerator. Randomly select 2-3 cartridges from the lot
and determine background inpurity levels according to procedures
detailed in the Analysis section.
(Note: It is recommmended to plug both ends
of the coated cartridge before storing.
Plastic male Luer plugs are ideal for this
purpose and are available commercially).
Sampling;
1. Dilute Exhaust Emissions; The sampling train using the
cartridges is shown schematically in Figure 3. The coated
cartridges should be allowed to warm to room temperature in a
capped reagent bottle prior to connection to the sampling train.
The cartridge should be connected to the sampling train so that
its short end becomes the sample inlet. Maximum flow obtained
with a single DNPH-coated sep-PAX cartridge is about 1.7 L/min
and about 0.8 L/min with two cartridges in series. Sampling rate
for the cartridges should be about 200 mL/roin to give comparable
sensitivity with our standard impinger technique (25 mL final
absorbing solution volume, sampling rate at 1 L/nin), Higher
sampling rate should be vised if higher analytical sensitivity is
desired.
Inpinger samples are collected at nominal flow rate of 1
L/nin using one impinger containing 20 mL of acidified Di.'PH
solution. The DNPH absorbing solution is prepared.by diluting 10
TIL of the saturated DKPH stocJc solution to 100 mL with ACM and
adding 1.0 mL of 3.8 M perchloric acid.
Individual mass flow controller for each cartridge sampler
in conjunction with a calibrated mass flow meter is recoamended
especially at low sample flow and short sampling time. The mass
flow meter and mass flow controllers should be periodically
checked against a soap bubble flow meter.
2. Ambient Air; The pumping system for ambient air
sampling is similar to that used in diluted exhaust emissions
sampling. The sensing units and associated electronics of the
mass flow meter and mass flow controllers should be housed in an
environmental chamber. The coated cartridges can be used as
direct probes and traps for sampling ambient air when the
temperature is above freezing. A heated probe and manifold
similar to those described in the Apparatus and Equipment Section
is recommended when sampling ambient air near or below 0 °C.
The rationale for this is discussed in the Results and Discussion,
Section.
Typical flow rate through one cartridge is about 1.5 L/min
C-9
-------
and about 0.8 L/min for two cartridges in series. Impinger
samples are collected, depending on sampling duration, at 0.5-2.0
L/min through the heated glass probe equipped with a checfc -valve.
Generally, two irapingers in series, each containing 20 »L of
acidified DNPH solution are used when-sampling for-longer than .an
hour or at flow rates greater than 1 L/min.
When parallel impinger and cartridge samples are collected,
the outputs of each of the sampling pumps are sequentially
directed to a calibrated mass flow meter for 7 minutes followed
by no-flow condition through the mass flow meter for 3 min. The
no-flow condition establishes detector zero. The mass flow meter
output is continuously monitored with an analogue recorder. The
recorder trace provides a record of the performance of major
components of the sampling system.
Optimization of Chromatographic Conditions: Chromatographic
condition was optimize to separate acrolein, acetone and
prcpionaldehyde and the higher molecular weight aldehydes and
ketones within an analysis time constraint of about one hour.
With two Zorbax ODS columns in series and at one mL per minute
flow, the following gradient program was found adequate: On
sample injection, linear gradient from 60% to 75% ACN in 30
minutes, linear gradient from 75% to 100% ACN in 20 minutes, hold
at 100% ACN for 5 minutes, reverse gradient to 60% in 1 minute
and isocratic at 60% for 15 minutes. Figure 5, shows the
separation of a 15 standard calibration mix using this program.
This gradient program is a recent modification to effect better
resolution of the C-3 ,C-4 and benzaldehyde regions. -With this
modification, the degradation product of acrolein DNPH derivative
is cleanly resolved from the propionaldehyde derivative peak.
What appeared to be a single benzaldehyde derivative peak in a
sample of diesel exhaust with our previous elution program (see
Figure 4 caption) was found to be actually two peaks with
benzaldehyde being the minor component.
(Note: The Chromatographic conditions
described here has been optimized for our
particular laboratory instrumentation.
Analysts are advised to experiment with their
HPLC systems to optimized Chromatographic
conditions for their particular analytical
needs. Highest Chromatographic resolution and
sensitivity are desirable but may not be
achieved. The separation of acrolein, acetone
and propionaldehyde should be a mininum goal
of the optimization.)
Analysis; Connect the sample or blank cartridge (outlet end
during sanpling) to a clean syringe, dispense about 6 mL ACN and
place the syringe in the syringe rack to drain. Collect the
eluate in a graduated test tube or 5 mL volumetric flask. Fill up
(Note: A dry cartridge has an ACN hold up
C-10
-------
volume slightly greater than 1 mL. Tne eluate
flow nay stop before the ACN in the syringe is
completely drained into the cartridge. This
is usually due to air trapped between the
cartridge filter and the syringe Luer tip. If
this happens, displace the trapped air with
the ACN in the syringe using a long tip
disposable Pasteur pipet.)
to the 5-mL mark with ACN. Pipet aliquots into sample vials and
load on the tray of automatic sampler. Fill two sample vials
with standard calibration mix and place at the start and end of
the sample series. Alternatively samples may be injected
manually. Cartridge samples should not be eluted if they cannot
be analyzed within 24 hours. They should be stored , preferably
plugged at both ends, in capped all polypropylene or all glass
reagent bottle in the refrigerator.
Transfer an impinger sample quantitatively to a 25-mL
volumetric flask and make up to volume with ACN. Pipet aliquots
into sample vials and load on the tray of automatic sampler for
K?LC analysis.
Stability; Standard solutions of DNPH derivatives in ACN are
stable when stored in the refrigerator for several weeks.
Reproducibility of formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, acetone,
propionaldehyde, benzaldehyde and hexanaldehyde standards as
derivatives at 4 ug/mL level at about 5% RSD (31 runs over 3.5
months) has been achieved in the past. Reprcducibility of a 15-
carbonyl calibration mix was about 2% RSD at 0.5- 1 ug/nL level
(24 runs over 56 days) has likewise been achieved.
With the exception of acrolein, most aldehydes observed in
automotive emissions have stable DNPH derivative in DNPH
absorbing solution. Acrolein-DNPH was observed to degrade with
tine, as much as 20* in 10 hours and up to 50 % in 34 hours
(Figure 6).
Compound Identification; The carbonyl compounds in the samples
were identified by comparison of their retention times with those
of standard samples. Formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone,
propionaldehyde, crotonaldehyde, benzaldehyde and o-,m-,p-
tolualdehydes were identified with high degree of confidence.
The identity of butyraldehyde is less certain because it coelutes
with iso-butyraldehyde and methyl-ethyl ketone under our
chromatographic conditions. In order to get a reasonable
estimate of the total carbonyl content, unkown peaks between
propionaldehyde and crotonaldehyde are assigned the response
factor and carbon number of propionaldehyde and collectively
called u-propionaldehyde. An important exception is an unknown
peak in this region which we observed recently to be
quantitatively correlated with the disappearance of acrolein.
This peak is tentatively identified as x-acrolein and is assigned
the response factor and carbon number of acrolein. Unknown peaks
between crotonaldehyde and benzaldehyde are assigned the response
C-ll
-------
factor and carbon number of butyraldehyde. Unknown peaks between
benzaldehyde and o-tolualdehyde are assigned-the response factor
and carbon number of valeraldehyde-and unknown peaks adjacent to
2,5-diraethylbenzaldehyde are assigned the response factor and
carbon number of 2,5-dimethylbenzaldehyde. Other minor
components have been observed to elute much later than 2,5-
dimethylbenzaldehyde but have not been identified nor assigned
carbon numbers for lack.of appropriate standards.
Calculations:
1. Exhaust Emissions Samples
The concentration A^ in parts per million carbon (ppmC, v/v)
and mass emission rate B^ in mg/mile of the ith aldehyde are
calculated according to the following equations:
A! = (Ci*Vs*RT*Ni)/(t*f*Mi*P) (1)
BI - ((Ci*Vs*Qi*VJnix)/(t*f*D))*28317. (2)
where C^ » concentration in ug/mL of the DNPH derivative of
the ith aldehyde in the sample solution
Vs « volume of sample solution in mL
R » gas constant in L-atm-deg~1-mole~1
T » temperature in degree K
number of carbon-atoms in a molecule of the ith
aldehyde
t = sampling time or test cycle time in minutes
f » flow rate in liters per minute
molecular weight of the DNPH derivative of the ith
aldehyde
P - total pressure in atmospheres
vmix " total volume of diluted exhaust in cubic feet
Qt • ratio of molecular weights of the ith aldehyde to
its DNPH derivative
D » total mileage for the test cycle
28317 » conversion factor from cubic foot to mL
2. Ambient Air or Diluted Exhaust Samples
C-12
-------
The concentration A»j in parts per Billion (ppia,_v/v) or
concentration Ab^ in parts per billion (ppb, v/v) of the ith
aldehyde is calculated according to the following equations:
- (Ci*Vs*RT*)/(t*f*Mi*P) (3)
= Ami*1000 (4)
where C^ = concentration in ug/raL of the DNPH derivative of
the ith aldehyde in the sample solution
Vs « volume of sample solution in mL
R = gas constant in L-atn-deg"1-mole~1
T = temperature in degree K
t = sampling time in minutes
f = flow rate in liters per minute
K^ = molecular weight of the DNPH derivative of the ith
aldehyde
P = total pressure in atmospheres
These calculations are conveniently done using an electronic
spreadsheet. Tables 1 and 2 are examples of a coripleted data ar.d
a'reporc form generated with a Perfect Calc spreadsheet program.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The cartridge and the impinger techniques were compared for
sampling carbonyls in diluted automotive exhaust emissions and in
ambient air, both indoors and outdoors. Samples were collected
with one impinger and one to three parallel cartridges. Some
samples were collected with two cartridges in series.
The automotive exhausts were sampled from a CVS (constant
volume sampler) dilution tunnel at 0.25 - 1.0 L/min with the
cartridges and nominally at 1.0 L/min with the impingers. The
vehicles were operated using prescribed driving schedules (FTP
and HHFET) on a chassis dynamometer. Three vehicles, each
operating with a different fuel (a 90% methanol, 10% gasoline
blend; gasoline; and diesel) were used.
Ambient atmospheres were sampled at about 1.0-1.5 L/min with
one cartridge or about 0.8 L/min with two cartridges in series.
Flow rates with the impingers were 2 L/min for a one-hour and
about 0.5 L/min for a 12-hour sampling time. Ambient air samples
C-13
-------
were collected at three different sites : an analytical
laboratory, a parking lot, and a residential_ area where there was
high concentration of wood-burning fireplaces.
All samples were processed according to procedures detailed
in the Experimental Section.
For the same volume- of air sampled, the final analytical
solution from the cartridge for HPLC analysis is five times as
concentrated as the analytical solution from the impinger under
our present procedures.
Since the DNPH/ACN method has already been validated by
several investigators for sampling carbonyl compounds in dilute
automotive exhaust emissions and in ambient air, it is taken to
be the reference method in the evaluation of the cartridge
technique. The evaluation preceded in two steps: (1) a
qualitative comparison was made of the HPLC carbonyl profiles of
air samples simultaneously collected with the cartridge and
inpinger devices and (2) a quantitative comparison of the
individual carbonyl species in both samples was determined.
Carbonyl Profiles of Some Air Samples.
Figures 7 and 8 show HPLC chromatograms of diluted exhaust
emissions from a methanol powered vehicle. The sampling rates
through the cartridge and through the impinger were adjusted to
give roughly the same concentrations of the analytes in the HPLC
analytical solutions. The carbonyl profiles of the cartridge
and impinger samples collected in parallel are very similar.
Formaldehyde is the most abundant carbonyl present in the
exhaust. The identity of the prominent peak between DNPH and
formaldehyde is not known at present. The cartridge sample show
slightly more peaks than the impinger as a consequence of higher
degree of preconcentration.
The standby cartridge was a blank cartridge connected in
parallel with the sampling cartridges during sampling. The
output end of the standby cartridge was plugged with a glass rod
while the input end was exposed to the diluted exhaust. The
purpose of the standby cartridge was to determine background
correction due to possible carbonyl permeation through the
plastic wall and diffusion into the input end of the cartridge.
As can be seen, the impurity level in the standby cartridge is
about the same as in the back-up cartridge. About the same level
of impurity was also observed in an unexposed cartridge blank.
This implies efficient collection of the carbonyl compounds by
the first cartridge. No breakthoughs of carbonyls compound into
the second cartridge were observed in subsequent samplings with
double cartridges at maximum sampling rate. Note also that the
concentration of DNPH in both the cartridge and impinger
analytical solutions are about the same.
Figure 9 shows carbonyl profiles of exhaust emissions from &
gasoline-powered vehicle. With the exception of the C3 and C4
C-14
-------
regions, the general features of the cartridge and impinger
samples are similar. The ratio of acrolein to acetone in the
impinger sample is much higher-than the corresponding ratio in
the cartridge sample. Moreover, a relatively abundant peak
(labelled x-acrolein) eluting after propionaldehyde, is observed
in the cartridge, but not in fresh impinger samples. When the
impinger sample was allowed to stand at room temperature "for
several hours (see Figure 10), the acrolein peak decreased and
another peak appeared in about the sane retention time as x-
acrolein in the cartridge sample. In fact, the peak distribution
of the impinger sample after 28 hours is looking similar to that
of the cartridge sample. The disappearance of acrolein peak is
accompanied by the growth of x-acrolein peak. If acrolein and x-
acrolein are kinetically and or thejnaodynamically related, the
sum of the concentrations of-of both species may be invariant with
time. Given enough time, the C3 profiles of the impinger and
cartridge sample should look the same; This is indeed the case
as shown in the profiles of a parallel set of analytical
solutions of cartridge and impinger samples that were stored in
the refrigerator for eight months (Figure 13).--Quantitative data
supporting the apparent invariance of the sum of concentrations
of acrolein and x-acrolein will be given later.
Figure 11 shows carbonyl profiles of diluted exhaust
emissions from a diesel vehicle. The similarity of the impinger
and cartridge profiles is apparent. Note the relative
distribution of acrolein and x-acrolein in both samples. Under
our original chromatographic conditions (see Figure 1 caption),
x-acrolein was not resolved from propionaldehyde, nor was
benzaldehyde from its neighbor. With the impinger, the relative
distribution of the C3-carbonyls were acrolein > acetone >
propionaldehyde. A reversed distribution was observed with the
cartridge sample. However, the shape of the propionaldehyde peak
strongly suggested the presence of a second peak. The gradient
program was subsequently modified to separate this component.
Conparison of the profiles indicated that the peak ratios of
acetone to propionaldehyde in both samples were about equal.
Furthermore, although the peak heights of acrolein and the
unknown peak were different in the inpinger and cartridge
samples, their sums appeared to vary in direct proportion to the
volume of sample passed through the corresponding sampling
device. These observations strongly suggest that x-acrolein must
be a transformation product of acrolein-DNPH. Supporting
quantitative data will be presented later in summary tables.
Figure 12 shows carbonyl profiles of air samples in an
analytical chemistry laboratory collected with DNPH-coated silica
cartridges. .The upper sample was collected for 12 hours; the
middle, for 2 hours. Volumes of samples collected were 1274 and
205 liters respectively. The concentration of formaldehyde is
about 2.5 ppb.
Figure 13 shows profiles of parallel impinger and cartridge
samples of dilute exhaust emissions from a gasoline vehicle after
storage in the refrigerator for eight months. The peak
C-15
-------
distributions from formaldehyde to the end of the chromatogram
are almost identical in the two samples, except in the C4
carbonyl region. The intensities of the two unknown peaks
between the DNPH and the formaldehyde peaks are greater in the
impinger than in the cartridge sample.
Figure 14 shows profiles of an ambient air sample from a
residential site in Raleigh with high concentration of
woodburning fireplaces. Both the inpinger and the cartridge
samples were collected for twelve hours. Sampling rate through
the impinger was limited to about 0.5 JL/min. due.to .solvent
evaporation. Although the distribution of the major carbonyls in
both samples are about the same, the profiles clearly show that a
much higher degree of analytical sensitivity can.be achieved with
cartridge than with impinger sampling. The high sensitivity was
achieved because a larger volume of air was sampled by the
cartridge and in addition the trapped carbonyls were dissolved in
a sr.aller volume of ACN. As a consequence, the analytes in the
cartridge sample can be measured much more precisely than in the
corresponding parallel impinger sample.
Figure 15 shows carbonyl profiles.of different ambient air
samples collected with DNPH-coated silica cartridges. The same
volunes of a residential indoor and outdoor air were sampled.
The profiles clearly show that indoor air contains significantly
higher levels of major carbonyl pollutants relative to the
immediate outdoor ambient air. The peak adjacent to acetaldehyde
in the outdoor air profile has also been observed in samples of
laboratory air (Figure 12, 16), of air outside of a research
laboratory building (Figure 18), and more recently, in air
samples taken with an aircraft (Figure 17). The relative
concentration of this species with respect to formaldehyde,
acetone or acetaldehyde for the aircraft sample is much higher
than at ground level. Note also the relative abundance of the
specie eluting at about the same time as butyraldehyde. For
reference, the concentration of formaldehyde in these samples is
about 0.3 ppb. Time and location of the air mass sampled by the
aircraft were selected to be representative of the previous day
sunlight irradiation. It would be very informative to identify
this specie and determine whether it plays a role in atmospheric
photochemical reaction.
Figure 16 shows background impurities observed in two
randomly selected cartridges from a recent lot of DNPH-coated
silica cartridges. The identity of the main impurity peak is not
known at present. It elutes in a clear window and is easily
identified in the profile of an ambient laboratory air sample.
It does not interfer with the quantitation of the known carbonyl
compounds.
Figure 18 shows comparative profiles of an ambient air
sample outside of a research laboratory building (ERC, EPA-RTP)
collected on August 14, 1985, and an air sample in an analytical
laboratory inside the same building collected on August 1, 1985.
Note in particular the relative abundance of formaldehyde,
C-16
-------
acetaldehyde, butyraldehyde, acetone and the unknown specie
eluting just before acetaldehyde. The carbonyldistribution of
the outside air shows strong resemblance to that of the samples
taken at high altitude (see Figure 17).
Quantitative Comparison of Cartridge and Impinger for Sampling
Carbonyls in Air:
Tables 3a-3c summarize results from sampling diluted exhaust
emissions fron a gasoline-powered vehicle that was operated under
FTP and HWFET test schedules. For DNPH derivatives known to be
stable (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone, propionaldehyde,
benzaldehyde and the tolualdehydes) very good agreement between
the cartridge and impinger values is obtained. Agreement in the
C4 region (crotonaldehyde and butyraldehyde, especially the
latter) is not as good. Peak area integration in this region is
not as precise as the other regions due to low concentrations of
t)-.e species. Complication is further introduced by the presence
of unidentified components in this region (see Figures 9 and 10).
The major disagreement between the cartridge and the
ir.pinger results is in the case of acrolein. The irapinger values
are much higher than the cartridge values. Duplicate cartridge
samples do not even agree (see Table 3c). However, when the
concentration of acrolein is added to that of the unknown peak,
previously identified as x-acrolein, the agreement of the sum is
excellent between the cartridge and impinger. The same is true
in the case of duplicate cartridges.
The quantitative relationship between acrolein and x-
acrolein in an impinger sample is shown Table 3d. The
disappearance of acrolein is.accompanied by the formation of x-
acrolein, almost on a mole for mole basis, and the sum of both
specie appears to be invariant with time. Although this data is
very limited, it lends support to our initial conclusions that x-
acrolein must be a degradation product of acrolein and that the
sun of acrolein and x-acrolein at any one time can possibly be
used to estimate an accurate integrated concentration of
acrolein.
Comparing normalized concentrations of the individual
carbonyl compounds relative to formaldehyde in the cartridge and
iropinger samples is another way of comparing both sampling
techniques. This factors out sample size in the comparison and
most of the experimental errors resulting from small variations
in flow. Moreover, it is also helpful in flagging carbonyl
species that may degrade in the sample matrix or maybe formed as
sampling artifacts. For stable species, the normalized
concentrations should be about equal for samples collected by
both techniques. This is basically true across the board for
formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone, propionaldehyde,
benzaldehyde and the tolualdehydes. Acrolein, is readily spotted
as an oddball, and so is x-acrolein. Their corresponding sums,
however, reasonably agree within experimental uncertainty.
C-17
-------
Basically, similar observations can be made of the data
from the diesel-powered and methanol-powered vehicles (Tables 4a-
4c, Tables 5a-5c). The invariance of the sum of acrolein and x-
acrolein is measured in these tables in terms of the sun of
acrolein and propionaldehyde. As noted, the HPLC conditions used
did not resolve x-acrolein from propionaldehyde.
Table 6 summarizes the results of comparison of cartridge
and impinger techniques for sampling diluted exhaust emissions
from three types of vehicles. Stable carbonyls (formaldehyde,
acetaldehyde, acetone, propionaldehyde, benzaldehyde and the
tolualdehydes) have mean cartridge to impinger ratios of about
1.00 and RSD range of about 4-30% for the gasoline vehicle. The
high scatter is associated with carbonyls present at low ppb
levels. Acrolein has the lowest (0.38) and x-acrolein, the
highest (3.47) mean ratio. Scatter for these two species, at 48
ar.d 63% RSD respectively, is also high. The mean ratio (0.92) of
the sun is more in line with those of the stable species and the
scatter, 14.7% RSD, falls within range as well. Crotonaldehyde
is the only other carbonyl compound in the gasoline exhaust
emissions that shows a significant difference in the ratio of the
two appraoaches. Like acrolein, crotonaldehyde is an olefinic
aldehyde. Its DNPH derivative can conceivably undergo the same
chemical transformations as that of acrolein derivative. Its
concentration level is approximately one fifth to one seventh
that of acrolein.
Acrolein again has the lowest mean cartridge to inpinger
ratio (0.35) and the highest scatter (53.3*. RSD) among the major
carbonyls in diesel exhaust emissions. These values are
practically the same as those in the gasoline exhaust emissions.
The propionaldehyde mean ratio {3.52) appears to be abnormally
high. As noted in Tables 4a-4c, however, there is significant
contribution from x-acrolein as this specie was not resolved from
prcpionaldehyde under the chromatographic conditions used. An
excellent correlation is obtained when the corresponding sums of
acrolein and propionaldehyde are compared.
Very good correlations were obtained between cartridge and
impinger mean ratios for formaldehyde (1.04) and acetaldehyde
(1.03) in exhaust emissions from a methanol vehicle. Percent RSO
is within 10% for both species. Data for the other carbonyls
show high scatter principally due to low concentrations of the
species (see Figures 7-8, Tables 5a-5c).
Table 7a illustrates cartridge reproducibility for extended
(12 hr) sampling of carbonyls in an analytical laboratory ambient
air. Table 7b compares impinger and cartridge for short term
sampling (1 hr) of an analytical laboratory ambient air.
Agreement between the two sampling methods is good considering
the-low concentrations of the species involved. Table 7c
compares the impinger and cartridge for long term (12 hr)
sampling of an outdoor ambient air at winter time. Excellent
correlation between Cart 1 and Cart 2 indicates a single
C-18
-------
cartridge is adequate for sampling carbonyls in ambient air at
these concentration levels. The correlation between the impinger
and the parallel cartridges is good.
Table 7d gives data obtained for two consecutive 12-hr
sampling of an outdoor ambient air. The carbo'nyl concentrations
during the day were consistently low. A significant increase in
carbonyl levels was observed for the night samples with the peak
levels occurring between 8:00 P.M. and 2:00 A.M. This time frame
corresponded to heavy usage of woodburning fireplaces in this
residential site. The night time data also illustrates the
internal consistency of cartridge sampling, i.e. the whole is the
sum of its parts. The integrated 12-hr concentration of the
carbonyls calculated from data obtained for two consecutive 6-hr
sampling episodes agree very well with the experimental values
for a continuous 12-hr sample.
Table 8 presents some of the early data that were obtained
in the initial application of the cartridge technique for
sanpling carbonyls in ambient air at winter time. In Runs 1-3,
the cartridges were used as direct probes and traps. The
collection efficiency of the cartridge, especially for
formaldehyde, significantly decreased when the collection
temperature was near or below 0°C. Cartridge samplings were
thereafter performed with a heated probe. A significant
improvement in collection efficiency was observed (see Run 4).
Table 9 presents some data on stability-of ambient air
samples on transit by mail fron EPA/RTP to the west coast and
back and on storage in the refrigerator. The data set is very
limited. However, it appears that a sample when properly
packaged, can be sent from the field to a central laboratory for
analysis within about two weeks without compromise of sample
integrity. The sample can be likewise stored in a refrigerator
for over a month (Table 9b) without apparent deleterious effects.
Florisil, coated with DNPH, in cartridge sampling devices,
was reported to be a good trap for collecting formaldehyde in
air. Three new Florisil Sep-PAK cartridges and about a dozen
used ones, were coated with acidified DNPH according to
procedures describe in this report. About 50 silica cartridges
were also coated at the same time. • Parallel samples of
laboratory air were collected with DNPH coated Florisil and
silica cartridges and analyzed by HPLC. Carbonyl profiles of the
samples are shown in Figures J.9 and 20. ..Quantitative, results are
summarized in Table 10. The following observations were noted:
1. Both the silica and the Florisil Sep-PAKs were charged
with the same amounts of acidified DNPH. However, on elution
with ACN, more DNPH was eluted from the silica than from the
Florisil Sep-PAK (see the profiles of the blanks in Figures 19
and 20). That DNPH was retained in the Florisil cartridge was
apparent from a persistent yellow coloration on the particles
after the elution. This residual coloration could not be eluted
with either methanol or methylene chloride nor with ACN acidified
C-19
-------
with perchloric acid (1 mL of 3.8 M HC1O4 per 100 mL ACN). The
silica Sep-PAK were colorless after elution with ACN.
2. More DNPH was eluted from a reclaimed (previously coated
and used) Florisil cartridge than from a new cartridge (unused
and coated for the first tine). See profiles of blank Florisil
cartridges in Figures 19 and 20.
3. The DNPH-coated Florisil exhibits high specificity for
trapping formaldehyde. Formaldehyde values compare favorably
with those from silica samples (see Table 10). It is not clear
from the limited data whether the other carbonyls are not
efficiently trapped, or are efficiently trapped but irreversibly
bound in the sorbent matrix.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Qualitative and quantitative experimental data show
that the DNPH-coated silica cartridge and DNPH/ACN impinger
methods for sampling carbonyl compounds in air are equivalent.
2. Significantly higher analytical sensitivity is
attainable with the cartridge method due to high degree of
preconcentration of the analytes in the KPLC analytical samples.
3. A quantitative correlation has been shown between the
disappearance of acrolein in a sample matrix and the growth of an
unknown component, x-acrolein. The sum of the concentration of
acrolein and x-acrolein appears to be invariant with time and
could possibly be used to measure the true concentration of
acrolein.
4. A heated probe is absolutely necessary when sampling
cartonyl compounds in air with DNPH-coated silica cartridges when
the ambient temperature is below or near freezing.
5. The cartridge is more convenient than the impinger for
field applications especially when the samples have to to shipped
to a central laboratory for analysis.
6. Cartridge samples, when properly packed, can be shipped
from the field to a central laboratory within two weeks without
sacrifice of sample integrity. Samples can be stored in a
refrigerator for a month without significant deterioration.
7. Mass flow controllers are highly recommended for
cartridge sampling.
8. Florisil when coated with acidified DNPH according to
procedures developed for the silica cartridge show high
specificity for formaldehyde. There appears to be problems with
the collection and/or elution of the other carbonyls.
C-20
-------
REFERENCES
1. Bufalini, J.J. and Brubaker, K.L. "The photooxidation of
formaldehyde at low pressures" in Chemical Reaction in Urban
Atmospheres, Tuesday, C.S., cd., American Elsevi«r-Publishing
Co., New York, 1971 pp. 225-240.
2. Altshuller, A.P» and Cohen, I.R. "Photooxidation of
Hydrocarbons in the Presence of Aliphatic Aldehydes", Science
(1963), 7, 1043-1049.
3. Committee on Aldehydes, Board of Toxicology and
Environmental Hazards, National Research Council, "Formaldehyde
and Other Aldehydes", National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
1981.
4. Kuwata, K; Uebori, M.; and YamasaJci, Y., "Determination
of Aliphatic and Aromatic Aldehydes in Polluted Airs as their
2.4-Dinitrophenylhydrazones by High Performance Liquid
Chromatography'j J. Chromat. (1979), 47, 264-268.
5. Andersson, G.; Andersson, K. ? Nilsson C-A.; Levin, J-o.
"Chemisorption of Formaldehyde on Amber-lite XAD-2 Coated with
2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine" Chemosphere (1979), 8, 823-827.
6. Kim, M.S.? Geraci, C.L., Jr.; and Kupel, R.E. "Solid
sorbent Tube Sampling and Ion Chromatographic Analysis of
Formaldehyde" J. An. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. (1980}, 41, 334-339.
7. Beasley, R.K.; Hoffmann, C.E.; Rueppel, M.L.; and
Worley, J.M. "Sajnpling of Formaldehyde in Air with Coated Solid
sorbent and Determination by High Performance Liquid
Chromatography" Anal. Chen. (1980), 52ft. 1110-1114.
8. Kuntz, R.; Lonneman, W.; Namie, G.; and Hall, L. Anal.
Letter (1980) A16, 1409-
9. Fung, K. and Grosjean, D. "Determination of Nanogram
Amounts of Carbonyls as 2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazones by High-
performance Liquid Chromatography" Anal. Chen. (1981), 53, 168-
171.
10. Fung, K.; Swanson, R.D.; and Grosjean, D. "Measurements
Of Aldehydes in Ambient Air" presented at 74th annual meeting of
the Air Pollution Control Association, Philadelphia, Pa., June
21-26, 1981.
11. Nebel, J.G. "Determination of Total Aliphatic Aldehydes
in Auto Exhaust by a Modified 3-Methyl-2-benzothiazolinone
Hydrazone Method" Anal. Chera. (1981), 53, 1708-1709.
12. Andersson, K.; Hallgren, C.; Levin, J-O.; and Nilsson,
C-A. "Solid Chenosorbent for Sampling Sub-ppm Levels of Acrolein
and Glutaraldehyde in Air" Cheraosphere (1981) 10, 275-280.
C-21
-------
13. Grosjean, D. and Fung, K. "Collection Efficiencies of
Cartridges and Microiapingers for Sampling of Aldehydes in Air as
2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazones" Anal. Chem. (1982), 54, 1221-1224.
14. Grosjean, D. "Formaldehyde and Other Carbonyls in Los
Angeles Ambient Air" Environ. Sci. Technol. (1982), 16, 254-262.
15. Lipari, P.; and Swarin, S.J. "Determination of
Formaldehyde and Other Aldehydes in Automobile Exhaust with an
Improved 2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine Method" J. Chromat. (1982),
247, 297-306.
16. Matthews, T.G.; and Howell, T.C. "Solid Sorbent for
Formaldehyde Monitoring" Anal. Chem. (1982), 54, 1495-1498.
17. Kennedy, E.R.; and Hill, R.E., Jr. "Determination of
Fcrr.aldehyde in Air as an Oxazolidine Derivative by Capillary Gas
Chronatography" Anal. Chem. (1982), 54, 1739-1742.
18. Kring, E.V.; Thornley, G.D.; Dessenberger, C.;
lautenberger, W.J.; and Anzul, G.R. "A New Passive Coloriroetric
Air Monitoring Badge for Sampling Formaldehyde in Air" J. Am.
Ind. Hyg. Assoc. (1982), 43, 786-795.
19. Dumas, T. "Determination of Formaldehyde in Air by Gas
Chrorr.atography" J. Chromat. (1982), 247, 289-295.
20. Matthews, T.G. "Evaluation of a Modified CEA
Instruments, Inc. Model 555 Analyzer for the Monitoring of
Formaldehyde Vapor in Domestic Environments" J. An. Ind. Hyg.
Assoc. (1982), 43, 547-552.
21. Xuwata, K.; Uebori, M.; Yamasaki, H.; and Kuge, Y.
"Determination of Aliphatic Aldehydes in Air by Liquid
Chromatography" Anal. Chera. (1983), 55, 2013-2016.
22. Meadows, G.W. and Rusch, G.M. "The Measuring and
Monitoring of Formaldehyde in Inhalation Test Atmospheres" J. Am.
Ind. Hyg. Assoc. (1983), 44, 71-77.
23. Guenier, J.P.; Simon, P.; Didierjean, M.F.; Lefevre,
C.; and Muller, J. "Air-Sampling of Aldehydes - Application to
Chromatographic Determination of Formaldehyde and Acetaldehyde"
Chrmotographia (1984), 18, 137-144.
24. Ahonen, I.; Priha, E.; Aijala, M-L. "Specificity of
Analytical Methods Used to Determine the Concentration of
Formaldehyde in Workroom Air" Chemosphere (1984), 13, 521-525.
25. Tanner, R.L. and Meng, 2. "Seasonal Variation in
Ambient Atmospheric Levels of Formaldehyde and Acetaldehyde"
Environ. Sci. Technol. (1984), 18, 723-726.
26. Lipari, F.; Dasch, J.M.; and Scruggs, W.F. "Aldehyde
Emissions from Wood-Burning Fireplaces" Environ. Sci. Technol.
C-22
-------
(1984), 18, 326-330.
27. Perez, J.M.; Lipari, F.; and Seizinger7 D.E.
"Cooperative Development of Analytical Methods for Diesel
Emissions and Particulates - Solvent .Extractions ~, Aldehydes and
Sulfate Methods", paper 840413 presented at the Society of
Automotive Engineer International Congress and Exposition,
February 27 - March 2, 1984.
28. Kring, E.V.; Ansul, G.R.; Basilio, A.M., Jr.; McGibney,
P.O.; Stephens, J.S.; and O'Dell, H.L. "Sampling for Formaldehyde
in workplace and Ambient Air Environments - Additional Laboratory
Validation and Field Verification of a Passive Air Monitoring
Device Compared with Conventional Sampling Methods" J. Am, Ind.
Hyg. Assoc. (1984), 45, 318-324.
29. Lipari, F. and Swarin, S.J. "2,4-
Dinitrophenylhydrazine-Coated Florisil Sanpling Cartridges for
the Determination of Formaldehyde in Air" Environ. Sci. Technol.
(1985), 19, 70-74.
30. Levin, J-o.; Andersson, K.; Lindahl, R.; and Nilsson,
C-A. "Determination of Sub-Part-per-Million Levels of
Formaldehyde in Air Using Active of Passive Sampling on 2,4-
Dinitrophenylhydrazine-Coated Glass Fiber Filters and High
Performance Liquid Chromatography" Anal. Chen. (1985), 57, 1032-
1035.
31. Sigsby, J.E., Jr.; Tejada, S.B.; Ray, W.D.; Lang, J.H.;
and Duncan, J.W. "Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from 46 In-
Use Passenger Cars" paper submitted for publication.
32. Zweidinger, R.B.; Sigsby, J.E., Jr.; Tejada, S.B.;
stump, F.D.; Dropkin, D.L.; Ray, W.D.; and Duncan, J.D. "Detailed
Hydrocarbon and Aldehyde Mobile Source Emissions from Roadway
Studies" g?aper submitted for publication.
33. Tejada, S.B. and Ray, W.D. "Aldehyde Concentrations in
Indoor Atmospheres of Some Residential Homes" unpublished
results.
C-23
-------
FIGURE CAPTIONS
Figure 1. HPLC profile of absorbing solution prepared fron
"purified" DNPH crystals. Conditions: Column, two duPont Zorbax
CDS (4.6x250 an) columns in series; detection at 360 na; sample
volume, 25 mL; flow rate, 1 mL/min; gradient program, on
injection, linear gradient from 60% to 100* acetonitrile in water
in 40 min, linear gradient from 100% to 60% in 5 min, isocratic
at 60% for 15 min.
Figure 2. Apparatus for rinsing purified DNPH crystals and
for preparing, storing, and dispensing of saturated DNPH stock
solution for routine carbonyl analysis.
Figure 3. Configuration for carbonyl sampling of automotive
exhaust emissions.
Figure 4. Chrcoatographic separation of DNPH derivatives cf
15 carbonyl standards. Conditions as in Figure 1. Peak
identities (concentration, ppm) of the derivatives are: 1 -
formaldehyde (1.14); 2 - acetaldehyde (1.00); 3 - acrolein
(1.00); 4 - acetone (1.00); 5 - propionaldehyde (1.00); 6 -
crotonaldehyde (1.00); 7 - butyraldehyde (0.905); 8 -
benzaldehyde (1.00); 9 - isovaleraldehyde (0.450); 10 -
valeraldehyde (0.485); 11 - ortho-tolualdehyde (0.515); 12 -
neta-tolualdehyde (0.505); 13 - para-tolualdehyde (0.510); 14 -
hexanaldehyde (1.00); 15 - 2,5-diraethylbenzaldehyde (0.510).
Bottom trace is that of the same standard mix diluted 50 times.
Figure 5. Chronatographic separation of a 15 carbonyl
standard using conditions described in "Optimization of
Chromatographic Conditions" section. (See text.)
Figure 6. Degradation of acrolein DNPH derivative in
absorbing solution acidified with 3.8M perchloric acid.
Figure 7. Chronatographic profiles of FTP Bag 1 diluted
exhaust from a methanol fueled car collected using two cartridges
in series. Chronatographic conditions as in Figure 4.
Figure 8. Comparison of impinger and cartridge collection
techniques for FTP Bag 1 diluted exhaust from a methanol car.
Chromatographic conditions as in Figure 4.
Figure 9. Comparison of impinger and cartridge collection
techniques for FTP Bag 1 diluted exhaust from a gasoline fueled
car. Conditions as in Figure 5.
Figure 10. Chromatographic profiles of an impinger sample
of an FTP Bag 1 diluted exhaust showing the appearance of
degradation product of acrolein. Conditions as in Figure 5.
Figure 11. Comparison of impinger and cartridge collection
techniques for sampling HWFET diluted exhaust from a light duty
diesel car.
C-24
-------
Figure 12. Carbonyl profiles of laboratory air sampled for
1.2 hours (1274 liters total volume) and 2 hours (205 liters total
volume) using the cartridge technique. Formaldehyde
concentration is about 2.5 ppb (v/v).
Figure 13. Profiles of analytical solutions, after storage
in a refrigerator for eight months, of a parallel cartridge and
inpinger samples of an exhaust emissions from a gasoline-powered
vehicle.
Figure 14. Profiles of parallel cartridge and impinger
ambient air samples at a wood smoke impacted residential site
demonstrating the analytical sensitivity advantage of the
cartridge collection technique.
Figure 15. Profiles of different ambient air samples
collected with DNPH-coated cartridge. The second and third trace
the top were taken from a residential house.
Figure 16. Profiles of two blank DNPH-coated cartridges
fron the same lot, illustrating reproducibility of coating
procedure. The uppermost trace is a laboratory air sample
collected with a cartridge from the same lot.
Figure 17. Profiles of ambient air samples collected at
high altitudes (AUG7A3 and AUG7A2). Trace AUG7A5 is that of
blank cartridge. Ambient formaldehyde level is about 0.3 ppb.
Figure 18. Profiles of ambient air samples from a parking
lot collected on 8/1 and 8/14.
Figure 19. Comparative profiles of samples collected with
recycled Florisil Sep-PAK and silica Sep-PAK cartridges. Both
types of cartridges were coated with the same amount of acidified
DIIFH.
Figure 20. Same as Figure 19, except the Florisil
cartridges were new, i.e. coated with acidified OHPH for the
first time.
C-25
-------
Table 1. An Example of a Completed Aldehyde Data Entry Fora
Q120-S1 Run 1
Run/Sample No.
Test Cycle
Ambient 0
FTP Bagl 1
FTP Bag2 2
FTP Bag3 3
HWFET 4
NYCC 5
CUE 6
SS 7
ALDEHYDE DATA
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Fropionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Isovaleraldehyde
valeraldehyde
o-Tolualdehyde
m-Tolualdehyde
p-Tolualdehyde
Kexanaldehyde
2,5-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
x-Propionaldehyde
x-Butyraldehyde
x-Valeraldehyde
x-Dimethylbenzaldehyde
x-Acrolein
x-Hexanaldehyde
1.000 Sampling Date: 850801
0 Sampled by: SBT
Analysis Date: 850801
Analyzed by: SBT
Sampling Method: 1
Imp ing er - 0
Cartridge -
Sampling Rate, L/min
Sampling Time, jnin
Solution .Volume, mL
Pressure, mm Hg
Temperature, deg. C
Sample Volume, L
Calibration Data
DNPH-Ald. P. Height
ppm,soln or Area
6.860 823-369
2.030 318598
0.892 170419
0.485 76251
0.409 64964
0.440 82663
0.756 88704
0.442 75679
0.339 47000
0.391 49535
0.429 60712
0.389 58408
0.284 75611
0.336 53868
0.378 57732
0.409 64964
0.756 88704
0.391 49535
0.378 57732
0.892 170419
0.336 53868
Sample
P. Height
Sample
187304
61881
5462
157213
8973
3932
36880
1652
0
294
0
0
0
3555
0
0
14925
1597
0
0
0
1
1.20
90.00
5.00
760.00
25.00
108.00
Data
or Area
Blank
3496.00
4692.00
0
2240.00
1037.00
0
7460.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
C-26
-------
Table 2. An Example of a Completed Aldehyde flhalytical Result.Form
Generated Using an Electronic Spreadsheet
Q120-S1 Run 1
Run/Sample No.
Test cycle
Ambient - 0
FTP Bagl - 1
FTP Bag2 - 2
FTP Bag3 = 3
HWFET = 4
KYCC = 5
CUE , 6
SS « 7
ALDEHYDE REPORT
*c«taldehyde
£r°Pionaldehyd
^otonaldehyde
!utvr aldehyde
isovaleraldehyde
^leraldehyde
°~Tolualdehyde
*-
Sampling Fate,-L/min
Sampling Tine, nin
Solution Volume, nL
Pressure, mm Hg
Temperature, deg. C
Sample'Volume, L
Sampling Date:
Sampled by:
Analysis Date:
Analyzed by:
Sampling Method:
Impinger = 0
Cartridge = 1
1.20
90.00
5.00
760.00
25.00
108.00
8508C
SET
850801
SET
1
*' S-DiRethylbenzaldehyd
J'Propionaldehyde
enzaldehyde
+ x-Acrolein)
+ x-Acrolein
Experimental Data
Peak Height or Area
Sample Blank
187304 3496
61881 4692
5462 0
157213 2240
8973 1037
3932 0
36860 7460
1652 0
0 0
294 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3555 0
» 0 0
0 0
14925 0
1597 0
0 0
o o
o o
h Propionaldehyde)
Calculated
Concentration
Sample Blank
8.42 0.16
1.99 0,15
0.14 0
4.76 0.07
0.27 0.03
0.09 0
1.41 0.29
0.04 0
0 0
0.01 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0.09 0
0 0
0 0
0.57 0
0.05 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Data
in ppb
Final
8.26
1.84
0.14
4.69
0.24
0.09
1.13
0.04
0
0.01
0
0
0
0.09
0
0
0.57
0.05
0
0
0
0.14
0.37
C-27
-------
Table 3a. Comparison of Cartridge and Impinge* for Sampling
Diluted Exhaust Emissions from a Gasoline-Powered Vehicle
Concentration in ppb
**
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr aldehyde
Benzaldehyde
o-Tolualdehyde
n-Tolualdehyde
p-Tolualdehyde
x-Butyraldehyde
x-Acrolein
Acrolein + x-Acrolein
Acr + x-Acr + Prop
Sampling flow, L/roin
Sampling time, min
FTP, Bag |1
- Impinger
1255.98
175.67
69.71
87.07
13.53
14.03
60.51
12.35
31.39
8.23
23.98
69.71
83.24
0.96
8.42
** ** p
Cartridge
1224.94
178.08
14.26
94.46
25.17
7.27
18.35
64.48
10.80
24.89
6.99
36.51
57.65
71.91
'97.08
0.28
8.42
** FTP, Bag 12 **
Impinger Cartridge
257.46
32.85
3.36
39.93
4.35
3.36
3.36
0.96
14.53
247.08
29.77
36.96
1.48
2,
2,
34
34
3.82
0.27
14.53
Cone. Relative to Formaldehyde
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
o-Tolualdehyde
m-Tolualdehyde
p-Tolualdehyde
x-Butyraldehyde
x-Acrolein
Acrolein + x-Acrolein
Acr + x-Acr + Prop
**
** FTP, Bag
Impinger Cartridge
** FTP, Bag #2 **
Impinger Cartridge
1.0000
0.1399
0.0555
0.0693
0.0108
0.0112
0
0.0482
0.0098
0.0250
0.0066
0.0191
0
0.0555
0.0663
1.0000
0.1454
0.0116
0.0771
0.0205
0.0059
0.0150
0.0526
0.0088
0.0203
0.0057
0.0298
0.0471
0.0587
0.0793
1.0000
0.1276
0.0131
0.1551
0
0
0
0.0169
0
0
0
0
0
0.0131
0.0131
1.0000
0.1205
0
0.1496
0.0060
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0095
0.0095
0.0155
C-28
-------
Table 3b. Comparison of Cartridge and Impinger for Sampling
Diluted Exhaust Emissions froa'a Gasoline-Powered Vehicle
Concentration in ppb
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyr aldehyde
Benzaldehyde
0-Tolualdehyde
p_Tolualdehyde
p-Tolualdehyde .
x-Butyraldehyde
x-Acrolein
in + x-Acrolein
x-Acr + Prop
sanplir.g flow, L/min
Sampling tine, nin
** FTP, Bag |3 ** ** HWFET, Run 11 **
Inpinger Cartridge Inpinger Cartridge
733.00 736.93 1109.05 1092.31
99.28
25,58
58.27
7.77
31.45
9.50
9.92
3.90
29.43
37.25
0.96
8.53
105.09
6.96
66.30
9.97
13.66
30.54
4.40
14.23
4.35
15.65
24.70
31. €6
41.63
0.28
8.53
144.33
39.96
82,32
6.70
3.43
32.33
4.83
15.71
4.31
19.21
6.12
46.08
52.78
0.96
12.75
130.96
19.18
73.40
7,75
2.56
8.06
28.65
5.23
12.46
3.48
24.70
24.03
43.21
50.96
0.28
12.75
Concentration Relative to Formaldehyde
formaldehyde
propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
gutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
pi-Tolualdehyde
p-Toiualdehyde
S-Butyraldehyde
+• x-Acrolein
+ x-Acr + Prop
** FTP,
Impinger
1.0000
0.1354
0.0349
0.0795
0.0106
0
0
0.0429
0
0.0130
0
0.0135
0.0053
0.0402
0.0508
Bag S3 **
** HWFET,
Cartridge Impinger
1.0000
0.1426
0.0094
0.0900
0.0135
0
0.0185
0.0414
0.0060
0.0193
0.0059
0.0215
0.0335
0.0430
0.0565
1.0000
0.1301
0.0360
0.0742
0.0060
0.0031
0
0.0292
0.0044
0.0142
0.0039
0.0173
0.0055
0.0415
0.0476
Run 11 **
Cartridge
1.0000
0.1199
0.0176
0.0672
0.0071
0.0023
0.0074
0.0262
0.0048
0.0114
0.0032
0.0226
0.0220
0.0396
0.0467
C-29
-------
Table 3c. Comparison of Cartridge and Impinger for Sampling
Diluted Exhaust Emissions from a Gasoline-Powered Vehicle
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
o-Tolualdehyde
m-Tolualdehyde
p-Tolualdehyde
x-Butyraldehyde
x-Acrolein
Acrolein + x-Acrolein
Acr + x-Acr + Prop
Sampling flow, L/min
Sampling time, min
Concentration in ppb
***** HWFET, Run 12 *****
Pump fl Pump |2
Impinger Cartridge Cartridge
1065.68 1082.88 1135.30
137.07 126.77 136.63
30.68 19.62 8.60
76.43 72.23 76.45
10.23 8.52 9.77
4.73 1.50 1.85
9.51 10.39
27.65 26.13 29.16
4.89 6.26
12.13 13.52 14.81
3.06 3.50 3.52
27.03 24.94 27.75
14.12 18.45 32.58
44.80 38.07 41.18
55.03 46.59 50.95
0.28
12.75
0.28
12.75
Cone. Relative to Formaldehyde
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
o-Tolualdehyde
n-Tolualdehyde
p-Tolualdehyde
x-Butyraldehyde
x-Acrolein
Acrolein + x-Acrolein
Acr + x-Acr + Prop
***** HWFET, Run
Pump II
Impinger Cartridge
,0000
0.1286
0.0288
0.0717
0.0096
0.0044
0
0.0259
0
0.0114
0.0029
0.0254
0.0132
0.0420
0.0516
0000
0.1171
0.0181
0.0667
0.0079
0.0014
0.0088
0.0241
0.0045
0.0125
0.0032
0.0230
0.0170
0.0352
0.0430
|2 *****
Pump #2
Cartridge
1.0000
0.1203
0.0076
0.0673
0.0086
0.0016
0.0092
0.0257
0.0055
0.0130
0.0031
0.0244
0.0287
0.0363
0.0449
C-30
-------
Table 3d. Invariance of the Sura of Concentrations of Acrolein
and x-Acrolein Observed in an Impinger Sar.ple of Exhaust
Emissions from a Gasoline Fueled Vehicle.
Concentration in ppb
Time (hr) Acrolein x-Acrolein Sua
0 58.5 0 58.5
25 46.6 11.7 58.3
35 42.2 12.9 55.1
C-31
-------
Table 4a. Comparison of Cartridge and InpingBr for Sampling
Diluted Exhaust Emissions from.a Diesel-Powered Vehicle
Concentration in ppb
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Eenzaldehyde
Acrcl + Propion
Sampling flow, L/min
Sampling time, min
** FTP, Bag II **
Pump |3
Impinger Cartridge
594.01
139.41
77.35
41.99
24.30
23.92
16.96
15.30
101.65
0.96
8.42
619.52
143.46
45.43
97.80
22.78
22.41
25.81
97.80
0.28
8.42
** FTP,
Impinger
389.32
101.46
52.52
31.03
15.41
15.78
9.86
15.09
67.93
0.96
14.53
Bag 12 **
Pump f2
Cartridge
426.20
99.45
26.08
28.90
38.75
18.27
14.60
20.16
64.83
0.54
14.53
Concentration Relative to Formaldehyde
** FTP, Bag #1 **
Pump 13
Inpinger Cartridge
** FTP, Bag 12 **
Pump 12
Impinger Cartridge
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Acrol + Propion
1.0000
0.2347
0.1302
0.0707
0.0409
0.0403
0.0286
0.0266
0.1711
1.0000
0.2316
0
0.0733
0.1579
0.0368
0.0362
0.0417
0.1579
1.0000
0.2606
0.1349
0.0797
0.0396
0.0405
0.0253
0.0388
0.1745
1.0000
0.2333
0.0612
0.0678
0.0909
0.0429
0.0343
0.0473
0.1521
Note: Data were obtained under HPLC conditions that did not
resolve x-acrolein from propionaldehyde.
C-32
-------
Table 4b. Comparison of Cartridge and Impinger for Sar.rling
Diluted Exhaust Emissions from a Diesel-Powered Vehicle
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Eenzaldehyde
Acrol + Propion
Sar.pling flow, L/min
Sar.pling time, rain
Concentration in ppb
** FTP, Bag 13 ** ** HWFET,
Pump |3
Impinger Cartridge
487.02
115.05
64.17
34.70
17.10
21.02
9.50
19.55
81.27
0.96
8.53
484.61
108.21
9.37
28.71
75.21
19.29
14.30
22.14
84.58
0.28
8.53
Impinger
528.18
109.17
60.22
32.65
13.30
16.20
10.58
22.39
73.52
0.96
12.75
•Run II **
Pump #3
Cartridge
477.90
96.14
8.97
25.04
64.04
15.77
14.43
24.96
73.01
0.28
12.75
Concentration Relative .to Formaldehyde
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Acrol + Propion
** FTP Bag #3 **
Pump I 3
Inpinger Cartridge
1.0000 1.0000
0.2362 0.2233
0.1318 0.0193
0.0712 0.0592
0.0351 0.1552
0.0432 0.0398
0.0195 0.0295
0.0401 0.0457
0.1669 0.1745
** HWFET, Run 11 **
Pump 113
Impinger Cartridge
1.0000 1.0000
--0.2067 0.2012
0.1140 0.0188
0.0618 0.0524
0.0252 0.1340
0.0307 0.0330
0.0200 0.0302
0.0424 0.0522
0.1392 0.1528
Note: Data were obtained under HPLC conditions that did not
resolve x-acrolein from propionaldehyde.
C-33
-------
Table 4c. Comparison of Cartridge and Inpinger for Sampling
Diluted Exhaust Emissions from a Diesel-Powered Vehicle
Concentration in ppb
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Acrol + Propion
Sampling flow, L/min
Sampling time, rain
** HWFET,
Impinger
498.28
102.03
58.93
33.22
18.00
18.06
10.62
19.91
76.93
0.96
12.75
Run 12 **
Pump II
Cartridge
545.29
118.84
28.30
32.93
50.79
18.48
14.83
28.35
79.09
0.58
12.75
** HWFET,
Inpinger
499.32
102.84
57.78
36.05
18.44
13.75
8.98
23.60
76.22
0.96
12.75
Run 13 **
Pump II
Cartridge
524.24
114.28
28.88
32.67
47.21
17.44
16.36
25.04
76.09
0.60
12.75
Concentration Relative to Formaldehyde
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Acrol + Propion
** HWFET,
Impinger
1.0000
0.2048
0.1183
0.0667
0.0361
0.0362
0.0213
0.0400
0.1544
Run 12 **
Pump 11
Cartidge
1.0000
0.2179
0.0519
0.0604
0.0931
0.0339
0.0272
0.0520
0.1450
** HWFET, Run #3 **
Pump 11
Impinger Cartridge
1.0000 1.0000
0.2060 0.2180
0.1157 0.0551
0.0722 0.0623
0.0369 0.0901
0.0275 0.0333
0.0180 0.0312
0.0473 0.0478
0.1526 0.1451
Note: Data were obtained with HPLC conditions that did not
resolve x-acrolein from propionaldehyde.
C-34
-------
Table 5a. Comparison of Cartridge and Impingerr for Sampling
Diluted Exhaust Emissions from a Methanol-Powered Vehicle
Concentration in ppb
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
x-Acrolein
Acrdein + x-Acrolein
*• x-Acr + Prop
Sampling Flow, L/min
tine, win
***** FTP, Bag #1 *****
Pump fl Pump 13
Irapinger Cartridge Cartridge
** FTP, Bag ?2 **
Inpinger Cartridge
2382.99
19.58
6.02
10.96
2284.71
19.84
3.39
6.67
1.19
2454.63
21.54 -
5.23
8.88
2.18
1.42
3.82
113.39
90.92
3.37
6.35
88.50
2.57
2.65
6. 02
6.02
0.96
8.42
3.17
3.39
4.58
0.58
8.47
3.96
5.23
7.41
1.14
3.42
3.37
3.37
0.96
14.53
n
w
0
0.5-4
14.53
Concentration Relative to Formaldehyde
r~rr.aldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
prcoionaldehyde
C-oronaldehyde
Sutvraldehyde
Benz aldehyde
x_Acrolein
Ac^olein X-Acrolein
Acr + x-Acr + Prop
*****
Impinger
1.0000
0.0082
0.0025
0.0046
0
0
0
0
0
0.0025
0.0025
FTP, Bag
PUTIlp jf 1
Cartridge
1.0000
0.0087
0.0015
0.0029
0.0005
0
0
0.0014
0
0.0015
0.0020
5fl *****
PUTT.p =3
Cartridge
1.0000
0.0088
0.0021
0.0036
0.0009
0.0006
0.0016
0.0016
0
0.0021
0.0030
** FTP,
I;r,pir-3er
i.c:oo
0. £018
0.0297
0.0560
0
0
0
0
0
0.0297
0.0297
Bag if 2 **
Punp =2
Cartridge
l.OCCO
0.0250
0
0.0299
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
Note 1. FTP Bag $2 data for cartridge sample are not reliable due to
timer malfunction.
Mote 2. Data were obtained under HPLC conditions that did not resolve
x-acrolein from propionaldehyde.
.C-35
-------
Table 5b. Comparison of Cartridge and Impinger for Sampling
. Diluted Exhaust Emissions from -a Methanol-Powered Vehicle
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
x-Acrolein
Acrolein + x-Acrolein
Acr + x-Acr + Prop
Sampling Flow, L/min
Sampling tine, min
Concentration in ppb
****** FTP, Bag |3 ****** ** HWFET, Run |2
Pump II Pump |3 Pump 41 Pump 13
Impinger Cartridge Cartridge Cartridge Cartridge
1522.88
23.13
10.77
0
0
0.96
8.53
1566.91
24.13
2.41
8.34
1.71
2.45
2.41
4.12
0.59
8.53
1853.58
28.93
4.63
10.68
4.57
4.63
9.20
1.03
8.53
303.68
4.56
2.73
0
0
0.58
12.75
360.48
4.08
0.02
0
0
1.08
12.75
Concentration Relative to Formaldehyde
Forr.aldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotcnaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
x-Acrolein
Acrolein + x-Acrolein
Acr + x-Acr + Prop
******
Impinger
1.0000
0.0152
0
0.0071
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
FTP, Bag
Pump #1
Cartridge
1.0000
0.0154
0.0015
0.0053
0.0011
0
0
0.0016
0
0.0015
0.0026
#3 ******
Pump #3
Cartridge
1.0000
0.0156
0.0025
0.0058
0.0025
0
0
0
0
0.0025
0.0050
** HWFET,
Punp #1
Cartridge
.1.0000
0.0150
0
0.0090
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Run #2 **
Pump * 3
Cartridge
1.0000
0.0113
0
0.0001
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Note 1. Corresponding impinger data for HWFET Run |2 are in Table 5c.
Note 2. Data were obtained under HPLC conditions that did not resolve
x-acrolein from propionaldehyde.
C-36
-------
Table 5c. Comparison of Cartridge and Impinger for Sampling
Diluted Exhaust Emissions from -a Methanol-Powered Vehicle
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
gutyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
x-Acrolein
Concentration in ppb
********** HWFET, Run 11 **********
Pump |1 Pump 12 Pump |3
Impinger Cartridge Cartridge Cartridge
+ x-Acrolein
+ x-Acr + Prop
Flow, L/min
time, min
996,
11,
0,
3,
3
48
10
82
88
54
0.82
4.36
0.96
12.75
951.82
11.26
1.26
4
0
88
96
0.86
1.26
2.22
0.56
12.75
1056.65
12.86
1.52
5
1
1,
1,
63
07
93
37
1.52
2.59
0.54
12.75
1073.31
11.25
1.32
2.04
0.96
1.32
2.28
1.05
12.75
* HWFET
Run 12
Impinger
322.16
1.41
0
0
O.S6
12.75
Concentration Relative to Formaldehyde
********** HWFET,
-,~»-r.aldehyde
' c»caldehyde
.££-0lein
^ etone
Q o i onaldehyde
E^cccnaldehyde
sutyraldehyde
lenzaldehyde
ir-tolein
^" oiein •*• x-Acrolein
*S* + x-Acr + Prop
/»c-
Inpinger
1.0000
0.0111
0.0008
0.0039
0.0036
0
0
0
0
0.0008
0.0044
Pur.p Hi
Cartridge
1.0000
0.0118
0.0013
0.0051
0.0010
0
0
0.0009
0
0.0013
0.0023
Run 11 **********
Punp =2
Cartridge
1.0000
0.0122
0.0014
0.0053
0.0010
0
0.0018
0.0013
0
0.0014
0.0025
Tump s3
Cartridge
1.0000
0.0105
0.0012
0.0019
0.0009
0
0
0
0
0.0012
0.0021
* HWFET *
Run ?2
lapinger
l.OCOO
0.0044
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
w
0
0
te 1. corresponding cartridge data for HWFET Run |2 are in Table 5b.
te 2. Data were obtained under HPLC conditions that did not"resolve
F° x-acrolein from propionaldehyde.
C-37
-------
Table 6. Sumaary comparison of Cartridge anoT Inpinger for Sampling
Carbonyl Compounds in Diluted Automotive Exhaust 'Emissions
Gasoline Vehicle
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Benzaldehyde
o-Tolualdehyde
m-Tolualdehyde
p-Tolualdehyde
x-Sutyraldehyde
x-Acrolein
Acr + x-Acr
Acr + x-Acr + Prop
Sample volumes: Impinger
Diesel Vehicle
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Acr •*• Prop
Sample volumes: Impinger - 8-14 L; Cartridge = 2.4-7.6 L
Cart/ Imp
Ratio
1.00
-0.97
0.38
1.00
1.02
0.49
0.98
0.98
1.08
0.99
1.27
3.47
0.92
1.03
iger = 8-14
Cart/ Imp
Ratio
1.03
1.02
0.35
0.91
3.52
1.05
1.49
1.28
1.00
Sigma
0.04
0.06
0.18
0.10
0.20
0.19
0.08
0.15
0.30
0.19
0.30
2.19
0.14
0.13
Cone. Range {ppb)
n Low High
6 247 1256
6
5
6
5
4
5
2
5
4
5
4
6
6
L; Cartridge
Sigma
0.07
0.11
0.19
0.11
1.01
0.14
0.18
0.22
0.03
30
7
37
7
2
26
4
9
3
9
4
2
4
= 2
178
69
87
25
14
65
12
31
8
36
32
44
97
.4-3.9 L
Cone. Range (ppb)
n Low High
6 389 619
6
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
96
9
25
15
14
9
15
67
139
77
45
97
23
17
26
101
RSD
3.7
6.7
48.0
9.7
19.2
38.2
7.7
15.1
27.7
18.9
23.3
63.3
14.7
12.8
RSD
7.0
10,
53,
12.
28.
13.0
11.8
17.3
3.5
,5
,3
,4
.7
Methanol Vehicle
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Acr + x-Acr
Acr + x-Acr + Prop
Sample volumes: Irapinger = 8-14 L; Cartridge = 4.8-13.4 L
Cart/ Imp
Ratio
1.04
1.08
1.29
0.76
0.28
1.20
0.73
Sigma
0.09
0.08
0.54
0.41
0.02
0.51
0.30
Cone. Range (ppb)
n Low High
9 303 2454
7
5
7
3
5
5
11
1
2
1
1
2
21
6
10
3
6
7
RSD
8.5
4.4
42.3
54.4
6.4
43.0
41.4
C-38
-------
Table 7. Concentrations of Carbonyls in Ambient Air Sampled in
Parallel with Cartridges and/or-laptngers
Table 7a. Laboratory Air, sampled for 12 hours
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
propionaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Hexanaldehyde
>t-Butyraldehyde
x-Acrolein
Sample volume, L
Concentration in ppb
Cart 1
2-r67
1.14
0.11
3.27
0.16
0.51
0.04
0.07
0.31
0.11
Cart 2
2.71
1.15
0.11
3.28
0.16
0.51
0.04
0.11
0.27
0
Cart 3
2.57
1.13
0.11
3.32
0.16
0.59
0.05
0.07
0.24
0.01
Mean
2.65
1.14
0.11
3.29
0.16
0.54
0.04
0.08
0.27
0.04
Sigma
0.07
0.01
0.11
0.03
0
0.05
0.01
0.02
0.04
0.06
1274
1548
1416
Table 7b. Laboratory Air, sar.pled for one hour
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Fropionaldehyde
Eutyraldehyde
Sample volume, L
Concentration in ppb
Run 1
Imp
2.75
1,17
1.80
171.00
Cart
2.52
1.59
0.07
2.43
0.21
1.00
81.00
Run 2
Imp
4.11
2.16
0.12
2.52
0.16
165.00
Cart
3.75
2.26
0.13
2.65
O.OS
0.12
74.70
Table 7c. Ambient Air, IACP Raleigh primary site, sar.pled for
12 hours with heated probes for impinger and cartridges,
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
x-Acrolein
Sample volume, L
Heated probe?
No. of Carts.
Imp
6.29
3.20
1.01
3.06
0.36
0.14
0.07
Concentration in ppb
Cart 1
7
4,
.30
,08
1.14
3.67
0.65
0.32
Cart 2
7.23
4.05
1.14
3.63
0.61
0.60
0.27
Cart 3
7.38
4.15
1.10
3.72
0.60
0.44
0.32
275
Yes
Double
€40
Yes
Double
907
Yes
Single
698
No
Double
C-39
-------
Table 7d. Effects of Fireplace Usage on Carbonyl Concentrations
in Ambient Air at the Raleigh IACP Primary Site
Night Samples
Concentration in ppb
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Benzaldehyde
x-Butyraldehyde
x-Valeraldehyde
x-Acrolein
Acr + x-Acr
Sar.ple volume, L
No. of Cartridges:
Sampling Date: 2/16/85
Start time:
End time:
Temperature High =34
Cartl
18.73
9.98
2.98
5.62
0.97
0.77
1.50
0.41
1.60
1.93
1.14
4.12
353
Double
:00 PM
:00 AM
Observed Calculated Cal/Obs
Cart2 Cart3 Cart (1+2) Ratio
8.59 14.17 14.27 1.01
5.65
1.66
4.51
0.78
0.53
1.24
0.16
1.12
0.50
0.66
2.32
277
Double
2:00 AM-
8:00 AM
7.88
2.86
4.20
0.99
1.30
1.20
0.19
0.33
0.84
0.54
3.40
1087
Single
8:00 PM
8:00 AM
8.07
2.40
5.13
0.89
0.66
1.39
0.30
1.39
1.30
0.93
3.33
630
8:00 PM
8:00 AM
1.02
0.84
1.22
0.90
0.51
1.15
1.58
4.21
1.55
1.72
0.98
Low - 31
Mean =32.7
Day Samples
Concentration in ppb
Cartl
Fcmaldehyde 2 . 14
Acetaldehyde 1.19
Acrolein 0.06
Acetone 1.17
Propionaldehyde 0.17
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde 1.22
Benzaldehyde 0.01
x- Butyraldehyde 0 . 07
x-Valeraldehyde 0.09
x-Acrolein 0.08
Acr + x-Acr 0.14
Sample voluae, L 640.00
No. of Cartridges: Double
Sampling Date: 2/16/85
Start time: 7:30 AM
End time: 7:30 PM
Temperature High •» 45
Cart2
1.94
1.14
0.05
NAa
0.10
1.03
0.07
0.08
0.05
424.00
Single
7:30 AM 7
1:30 PM 7
Low a 16
Cart3
2.20
1.29
0.07
1.26
0.19
1.05
0.01
0.09
0.07
0.07
0.14
583.20
Double
:30 AM
:30 PM
Mean =35.4
a HA = not available due to air bubble interference
Note: All samples were collected with a common heated probe.
C-40
-------
Table 8. Effects of Low Temperatures on Collection Efficiency
of DNPH-Coated Silica Cartridges for Carbonyl Compounds,
Assuming that the Inpinger is 100* Efficient.
formaldehyde
^cetaldehyde
Acetone
Buteraldehyde
Te»perature:
High:
Low:
Mean:
Sampling Date:
Run 1
Run 2
Run 3
Imp
4.77 -
0.98
1.16
0.19
Cart
1.03
0.60
1.26
0.37
Imp
5.76
2.38
1.85
0.17
Cart
4.42
2.40
1.72
0.45
lap
5.16
1.97
1.43
0.15
Cart
3.30
1.61
0.90
0.19
42.0
19.0
27.5
36.0
22.0
29.0
Night 2/7/85 Night 2/9/85
50.0
21.0
41.0
Day 2/9/85
j-ornaldehyde
-^cetaldehyde
Acetone
guteraldehyde
•j-enperature:
High:
Low:
Mean:
Run 4
Imp Cart
2.89 2.48
1.31 1.21
1.61 1.50
0.73 0.35
46.00
23.00
33.10
Sampling Date: Night 2/14/85
,;ote: Sar.pling duration was 12 hours. Cartridge samples in Run 1
'L0 pun 3 were collected without a heated probe; sarcple in Run 4,
heated probe. All impinger samples were collected with a
probe.
C-41
-------
Table 9. Effects of Storage and Transport; -tteproducibility
of Cartridge Sampling
Table 9a. Transport:
Concentration in ppb
III-3 III-2 III-4 III-l
5/31/85 5/31/85 5/31/85 5/31/85
5/31/85 6/11/85 6/11/85 6/12/85
Statistics
Sample Number
Date sampled
Date Analyzed
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
x-Butyraldehyde
x-Valeraldehyde
Note: Samples III-2 and III-4 were sent to and returned from the west
csasr by nail. Cartridges were put inside polypropylene bottle.
Mailing container was unused paint can. Sample III-l was kept in a
capped polypropylene bottle in a refrigerator.
4.35
2.10
3.76
0.20
0.91
1.05
0.32
4.79
2.28
3.30
0.25
0.84
2.82
0.31
3.58
2.02
3.41
0.22
0.80
1.33
0.28
3.90
2.38
3.78
0.32
2.65
1.06
0.21
Mean
4.16
2.20
3.56
0.24
1.30
1.56
0.28
Sigma
0.52
0.16
0.24
0.05
0.90
0.84
0.05
Table 9b. Storage:
Sample Number IV-1
Date sampled 6/14/85
Date Analyzed 6/17/85
Formaldehyde 4.64
Acetaldehyde 2.66
Acetone 2.95
Prcpionaldehyde 0.31
Butyraldehyde 4.92
x-Butyraldehyde 0.62
x-Valeraldehyde 0.10
IV-3
6/14/85
6/20/85
3
2.
,82
,14
2.57
0.22
2.80
0.62
IV-4
6/14/85
7/25/85
4.27
2.63
2.84
0.36
1.67
0.41
0.27
Note: Samples IV-1 to IV-4, stored in refrigerator
Table 9c. Reproducibility:
Sample Number
Date sampled
Date Analyzed
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
x-Butyraldehyde
x-Valeraldehyde
III-l III-2 III-3 III-4
6/14/85 6/14/85 6/14/85 6/14/85
6/20/85 6/20/85 6/20/85 6/20/85
Mean
4.24
2.48
2.79
0.30
3.13
0.55
0.18
Sigma
0.41
0.29
0.20
O.C7
1.65
0.12
0.12
3.90
2.42
2.63
0.26
2.56
0.85
0.24
3.99
2.77
2.54
0.35
2.62
0.90
0.11
3.87
2.25
2.50
0.27
2.33
0.79
0.21
4.33
2.58
2.72
0.31
2.55
0.92
0.24
Mean
4.02
2.50
2.60
0.30
2.52
0.86
0.20
Sigma
0.21
0.22
0.10
0.04
0.13
O.C6
0.06
Volume of ambient air sampled -60-75 L.
C-42
-------
Table 10. Comparison of DNPH-Coated Silica and Florisil Cartridges
for Collecting Carbonyl Compounds in Ambient Air
Concentration in ppb
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Eenzaldehyde
Valeraldehyde
Hexanaldehyde
x-Propionaldehyde
x-Butyraldehyde
x-Valeraldehyde
x-Acrolein
Sample volume = 108 L
Run I
silica Florisil
8.26
1.84
0.14
4.69
0.24
0.09
1.13
0.04
0.01
0.09
0.57
0.05
7.63
0.14
Run II
Silica Florisil
8.68
2.05
0.15
8.42
0.26
0.08
1.58
0.04
0.07
0.11
1.71
0.12
0.09
9.06
0.26
0.05
0. 10
0.12
:e: The silica and Florisil cartridges (both Waters Sep-PAX)
were ccated with the sane amount of acidified DNPH per
procedures described in this report. Florisil cartridge
in Run 2 was new (never used) before it was coated. In
Run 1, the Florisil cartridge was reclaimed (previously
coated and used for carbonyl sampling). The silica
cartridges were likewise reclaimed.
C-43
-------
f Ifiure 1
10
30
40
TIME, mill
-------
Hqur
DNPH-COATED SiOj
DSPH
CRYSTALS
HIGH/ORDSITY-^
. fRIT
THREE-WAY STOPCOCK
C-45
-------
Figure 3
I
Mass Flow
Meter
3-Hay Solenoid
Valve
Teflon FEP Coupler
J
Mass Flow
Controller
Cartridge
0 Sample
Heated g1as4 manifold
-------
Figure
DNPH
2
10
20 30
1IME.mii
40
-------
01
•o oi
X T3
J=- X
O) JC
— -D O)
S E 1o
•2 S
: < c
— *• * i . *•
« ** ^ »' r»
• »'*'-» m *• •
•^jr :'^::.
1 ' » i'i"i i . i ii i
» ' i
Sr
o
u
CalIbratlon Standard
C-48
-------
figure 6
STABILITY OF ACROLEIN DMPH DERIVATIVE IN ADSORBING SOLUTION
108
P
E
R
C
R
E
n
A
I
N
I
N
G
-------
0)
•o
FTP Bag ^ t KeU.ano't Car
Ficure
Primary CartMdae
2
C
r • T *•" i r r *- ~, * „, _:«
^ » i •"•,; ^ „• ^ s. s ~« -' - •
- - ~ r. «• .* *
t - r. uj : - : s s - =. = - * * 5:- ^ ^
•1 j - i • - : - ^ K -ri = = • ^ s - • = • '-'
A k^ " "— -IX. ' _ j.i ""
< ^ I •« * « ^"^ /! ,, ' '" V ' • I > I I ' H«'tl
Back-up Cartridae
C-50
-------
FTP Baa 1. Kethanol Car
figure 8
Impinger
£^r:r.-;;Tv r. ._ Sr = s« « v *:.':-ri^ f;* h? !" ^ '-r
TI Ti,"-,.—,,.,,", i •?.:.•.•* •!•" ^'". • •• . ,\
Cartrldce
.
Standby Cartridge
= zz
r::^ ; z
liLiL5' ^
-.-• i -i
xs ' a 5
"as 77 : • ; = j
:;sS2r- :sv-^:- -: r. r-
«uaattstf5:s:v'-'ss rr^
' M
C-51
-------
Inplnger
FTP Bag 1, Gasoline Car
Figure 9
n
StandbyCartridge
C-52
-------
i i i. i * 111 T*
Bag 1, GasoMne
Fioure 1
Implnger Sample , within 4 hr
s
T ns a
Impinger Sample, after 28 hr
o
t_ -
u ~
. ri ••
^ » 5;' : v
TT^"*II''"™VT^
DNPH Reagent Blank
C-53
-------
O)
1
•g
t r
Hwrrr, vw Rabbit
Fiaure 11
Impinger
Cartridge
t
• I
C-54
-------
Q-120 Lab A
-------
I
HHFET CRRTRIDGE_J2/'iexB4,
-------
UME - Q22.B LITLHS
PRIMflRY - IMP1NGOL 020905 VOLUME - 368 LITERS
£
STHNDflRD
-------
RRLEIGH SITE OZ
S VOL
JME -
zz.e LITER:
I
T-
1
OUTDOOR RIfi 0214H5 VOLU
E - 720 LITE
I
I
I
oo
INDOOR RIR OZHaS. VOLUME, - 7218 LITERS.
A
r
BLRNK CRRTRIDGC „
BTflNQRRD
A
-------
Q-iza RIH. toe LITERS
~T
SILICR CflRTRZOGC
Ul
5ZLICR CRRTRIDGC-fiLflNK
T
-------
nUG7R3I.705 Aa Wild, METHOD
flUG7fl2i.70SJB HIJJbL METHOD
LJ
ftUC7R3t.705.8 HIItL METHOD
JL.
flUG7fl11.705.0 WITH METHOD-
-------
RUGMRZ -70S. I MIIH METHOD
RUGIRSI.203 . I WIIbL METHO
RUGIHZj.705.B WIIU. METHOD
nuGianit.7es.i HITH METHOD
T
-------
I 0-120 F
o
tsj
16L. 108 L-_ FLORISIL RUN!
BLHNK FLORXSIL USED. LOT 7X3IXBS
0-120 RIR. IQB L-_SILIC« RUNI
BLRNK SILICR LOTJL/3U85
-------
Q-U8 R1R. 10B L.-FLORISI1. RUNZ
BLRNK FLORISIL NEW. LOT 7/31/83
Q-120 RIR.
BLHNK SXLICR LOT^2/31/85
-------
SENSITIVITY (PPB, V/V) OF DNPH/HPLC METHOD
FDR CARBONYLS IN AIR
VOLUME OF SflMPLE, LITERS 1O 20 30 40 5O
Fcrrnal dehyde
Acet a 1dehyde
flcrolei n
fleetone
Propionaldehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
Bengaldehyde
Isova1era 1dehyde
Valeraldehyde
o-Tolualdehyde
m-Tci 1 u a 1 dehyde
p-Tolua 1dehyde
Hex.ari.al dehyde
c, S'-Dimethylbenzalciehyde
60
1. AS
1.36
1.29
1.2B
1.28
1.22
1.21
1. 07
1. 15
1. 13
1. O2
1.0£
1.02
1. 03
0.3?
0.73
0.68
0.63
0. 64
0.64
0.61
0.61
0.53
0.57
0.57
O. 51
0.51
0.51
0. 55
0, 43
O. 48
0. 45
0.42
0,43
0.43
0.41
0. 40
O. 26
O. 38
0.38
0.34
O. 24
0.24
0. 36
0.22
0. 26
0. 34
0.32
0.32
0. 3£
0.31
0.30
0.27
0.29
0.23
0.25
O. £5
0.25
0. 27
0.24
0. 23
0.27
0.£6
O. £6
0. 26
0.24
0.24
0.21
O. 22
0. £3
0.20
0. 20
0.20
0. 22
0. 13
0.24
0.23
0.22
0.21
0. 21
0.20
0.20
0. 38
0. 13
0. 19
0. 17
0. 17
0. 17
0. 18
0. 16
VOLUME OF SAMPLE, LITERS 1OO
Formaldehyde
fleet sidehyde
Qcroletn
fleet one
P>-opional dehyde
Crotonaldehyde
Butyra1dehyde
Eensa1dehyde
I sovaleraldehyde
Valeraldehyde
o-To 1 «.ia 1 dehyde
in—To 1 LI aldehyde
p-Tolualdehyde
Hexanaldehyde
£,S-Diwethylbenraldehydi
200
. 300
400
500
1000
O. 15
O. 14
0. 13
0. 13
O. 13
0. 12
0. 12
0. 1 1
O. 1 1
0. 11
0. 10
0. 10
0. 10
O. 11
0. 10
0.07
0. 07
O.06
O. 06
0. 06
0.06
O. 06
0. 05
0.06
0. 06
0.05
0. 05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0. 05
0. 04
0. 04
0. 04
0. 04
0. 04
O. 04
O. 04
0.04
0. 03
O. O3
0. 02
0. O4
0.03
O.04
0. O3
0.02
0. O3
0.02
0. O2
0. O2
0. O2
0. O2
0. 03
0.03
0.03
0.02
O. 03
0.02
O. 03
0. 03
0.02
0. O3
0. 02
0. 02
0. 02
0. O2
O. 02
0. 02
0. 02
0. 02
0. 02
0. 02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0. 0 1
0. 01
O. 01
O. 01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
NOTE: PPB VflLUES MEASURED PT 1 RTM. flND 25 DEGREES CELSIUS
SflMPLE CARTRIDGE IS ELUTED WITH 5 ML fiCETDNITRILE
25 MICROLITERS INJECTED ONTO HPLC COLUMN
MftXIMUM SflMPLING FLOW THROUGH R DNPH-COflTED SEP-PflK
IS OBOUT 1.5 LITERS PER MINUTE
C-64
-------
APPENDIX D
WEATHER DATA
P.S 26 - STATEN ISLAND
Wind Direction-Frequency (%)
"^~Date
Sampled
7/10/90
7/22/50"
8/3/9^"
-£r&w~
B'/V^~
g/87^~~~
3/20/90"
To/2/^~
jO/H/90"
jO/2^°"
01/7/9°"
yi7ii/9o"
02/^°
r2/T579T
jZ/2^
-i/e/gT"
-j/Ts/gT
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
.AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
N
17
17
50
8
33
25
8
100
17
33
42
9
67
NE
50
11
17
34
8
E
17
8
25
8
8
SE
50
83
8
42
8
S
33
8
8
50
33
8
75
SW
33
33
8
33
8
17
25
8
67
100
50
25
.50
33
33
17
W
67
83
8
42
42
42
8
25
25
8
17
42
67
100
42
17
33
67
75
NW
17
58
25
33
42
17
58
59
42
34
84
83
33
25
67
83
8
25
25
8
AVE
WIND SPEED
(MPH)
7.3
6.5
2.6
3.6
-
5.0
1.7
4.2
1.7
8.8
2.3
—
9.9
3.7
• 4.5
2.1
17.4
14.2
3.7
5.3
9.5
7.2
6.5
4.3
6.7
13.0
4.6
5.4
2.7
4.0
13.0
10.7
AVE
TEMP( F)
81.1
82.2
76.3
74.8
_
77.0
74.0
81.0
76.0
61.8
59.8
_
61.6
^6.2
73.1
68.7
48.6
42.2
45.6
46.9
37.0
38.9
40.7
43.7
48.0
45.1
27.4
27.7
39.0
38.4
36.7
37.3
D-l
-------
Wind Direction-Frequency (%)
Date
Sarrpled
1/30/9]
2/11/91
2/23/91
3/7/91
3/19/91
TOTALS
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
24 Hour
N
67
33
13
11
17
NE
25
6
2
3
E
25
8
17
2
4
3
SE
17
33
8
4
8
6
S
8
18
17
4
5
3
SW
42
8
33
20
12
15
W
25
25
8
67
58
17
22
22
22
NW
8
8
75
92
33
42
83
100
29
36
31
AVE
WIND SPEED
(MPH)
1.1
2.9
8.5
12.1
12.1
0.6
13.5
14.7
14,0
13.5
-
-
-
AVE
TEMP( F)
38.6
46.5
32.6
27.9
27.2
28.5
48.5
34.7 •
46. 1
47.8
-
-
-
Note: Weather data unavailable for sample date
8/3/90.
#11720615
D-2
-------
APPUDIX D
^ Climatronic Calibration Procedure
ainwnonic/
CALIBRATION PROCEDURE
ENGLISH
D-3
140 WILBUR PLACE / Al RPORT INTERNATIONAL PLAZA / BOHEMIA. N.Y. 11716 / PHONE: (516) 567-7300
-------
Wind Direction
a. Place SI In "Zerc" position.
Place S2 In "Zero/Cal" position.
b. Adjust R26 for 0° indication.
Adjust the recoraer mech-
ancial zero for a 0°
.reading.
Place SI in "Cal." position.
Place 52 in "Zerc/Cal."
position.
Adjust ?.c, fcr 350° reading.
Place SI in "Zerc" position
Place S2 in "Cc/5^0"
position.
Adjust F.6 for 360° reading.
Place SI In "Cp" position.
Place 52 in "Op/5^0"
position.
Rctate vane sli^'^tly tc
check fcr r.eter deflec-
• cion.
NOTE: Make sure the WS/WD sensor Is properly
connected before attempting to calibrate
the board.
D-4
-------
t
I • i >'* r>
(5) Wind Direction Signal Conditioner
-«^JS-V=sJ U U
ZCRO/CfiL,
a. Set switch SI in "ZERO" and S2 in "ZERO
b. Adjust R26 for zero (0.00 volts) at TP 3.
c. Adjust the recorder mechanical zero for a
proper zero indication on the chart.
d. Set switch SI in "CAL", S2 in "ZERO CAL".
e. Adjust RS for 0.648 volts at TP 3, t read-
ing of 350° on the chart.
f. Set switch SI in "ZERO", S2 in "OP/540°".
g. Adjust R1S for 0.667 volts at TP 3, a read-
ing of 360° on the chart.
-------
LI/
';„,/ SftttJ
-> .1
/* •-*** -»»— (Ti*i
•T7rrr^"T f ^ri-J^J /•
^i'-^—^-N®! ?. '^-^fr^
v
OP
ZERO
a. Set the front panel range switch to 0-50 mph
(0-2S met/sec)
b. Place the Cal. Switch, SI, in "zero".
c. Adjust R14 for zero (0.00) volts at TP 2.
d. Adjust the recorder mechanical tero for a
proper zero indication on the chart.
e. Place SI in the "Cal" position, 35 mph
(IS.6 met/sec).
£. Adjust R6 for .7V (55 nph),
at TP 2. Having adjusted R14 and K6 for the
proper voltage levels, the recorder pen should
now indicate the expected reading. If the
recorder pen does not indicate properly, the
"left" aetcT drive (R51) on the Power Supply and
Mux Board should be adjusted to produce the
proper deflection. (This is factory set and
normally does not require adjustment.)
g. Place the front panel range switch to 0-100 mph
(0-50 met/sec.) and verify the expected reading.
D-6
-------
m T»I
WOTE1
(a) Place SI in the 20°F (OOC) position.
(b) Place the front panel range switch in the
20° to 120°F (00 to SO°C) position.
(c) Adjust R17 for a Ot reading on the chart
relative humidity scale (20°F or 0°C).
(0.00V at TP 20
(d) Place SI in the 60°F (20°C) position.
(e) Adjust Rll for a 401 reading on the chart
relative humidity scale (60°F or 20°C).
CO.40V at TP 2.)
(f) Change the front panel range switch to the
-40° to 60°F (-30° to 20°C) position.
(g) Adjust R14 for a 1001 reading on the chart
relative humidity scale (60°F or 20°C).
(1.00V at TP 2.)
D-7
-------
APPENDIX E
QUALITY ASSURANCE DISCUSSION FOR THE VOCS
E-l
-------
INTRODUCTION
The New York State Department of Health (DOH) participated In
the Staten Island/New Jersey Urban Air Toxics Assessment Project
(SZ/NJ UATAP) to characterize the concentration of several organic
compounds found In ambient and Indoor air. Indoor air contaminant
levels were determined In four homes, concurrently with sampling
of contaminant levels at nearby ambient monitoring stations. The
Indoor locations selected were two residences In Staten Island, New
York, and two residences In Carteret, New Jersey. The outdoor air
sampling was conducted at monitoring stations/ one In New York and
one In New Jersey, located within a half mile of the selected study
homes.
Indoor and ambient monitoring program samples for analysis of
target compounds were collected at each site utilizing the DOH's
Wadsworth Center for Laboratories and Research canister samplers.
Samples were collected at 12-hour intervals every 12 days for nine
months from July 10, 1990 through March 19, 1991. Samples were
analyzed within 14 days of receipt by the laboratory. The canister
analysis procedures used during the project were developed by the
Wadsworth Center and are described in the Quality Assurance Project
Plan (1). The method Is based on Summa* treated sampler equipment
for sample collection, with subsequent analysis by gas
chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). The GC/MS method Is
based on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Compendium
Method TO-14. Data obtained from this investigation will aid in
characterizing the relative risk of Indoor and outdoor exposure for
these homes tested in the Staten Island/New Jersey area.
Target contaminants analyzed In ambient and Indoor air were:
Chloromethane Trlchloroethylene
Dichloromethane Toluene
Hexane Tetrachloroethylene
Chloroform Ethylbenzene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane m,p-Xylenes
Carbon Tetrachloride o-Xylene
Benzene
GC/MS Calibration
A multipoint calibration was performed for all analytes prior
to the project and as necessary during the course of the analyses.
This calibration consists of the analysis of calibration standards
In the order of increasing concentration. The lowest concentration
target compound present in the certified gas mixture is 1 ppbv or
less in the calibration mixture. Concentrations for that compound
will be ten times greater at the upper end of the calibration
curve. After all the standards have been analyzed, linear
regression is performed using compound concentrations and peak
areas. To be acceptable as a calibration point, the observed
E-2
-------
SUMMARY OF PROJECT
Analytical Results
The results for the 22 sampling dates, which include 250 field
samples, have been presented in both a quarterly summary report as
veil as in a supplementary report which lists the results for each
sampling date (2). Results are reported in ppbv. The minimum
detection limit (MDL), as defined by the EPA, is one-half of the
calculated detection limit. Since the average detection limit of
the analyte was used for the first eight sampling dates, July 10
through October 2, 1990, one-half of this value was inserted in the
data table as the MDL for results which were below the detection
limit. For all subsequent sampling dates, October 14 through March
19, 1991, results which were less than the detection limit have
been reported as half of the calculated detection limit value.
Samples collected during the first four collection dates were
not analyzed for five of the target compounds. During this time
the calibration mixture in use comprised- eight of the fourteen
standards. Two of the fourteen standards in the mixture
subsequently used for calibration, m- and p-xylene, coeluted on
our chromatography system.
Completeness
All of the samples received by the laboratory were analyzed.
Quality Control
Quality control Involved the following procedures and
analyses:
15 calibration runs
60 calibration check standards
44 laboratory blanks
19 trip blanks
4 performance audits
1 blind audit
20 duplicate analyses
7 field triplicates
The chronology for the calibration runs, check standards,
laboratory blanks, and trip blanks is listed in Table 1. No target
compounds were found in concentrations above the detection limits
in either the laboratory blanks or the trip blanks. The analysis
results and curves for the five-point calibrations are included in
the Appendix of the SI/NJUATAP Air Quality Data Report (2).
E-3
-------
value of any target compound calibration point must differ by less
than 30 percent from the regression curve.
A single-point check of the multipoint calibration is
performed using a mid-point in the calibration curve. Quantitatlon
of the check sample is performed using the regression equation for
the most recent multipoint calibration. The measured concentration
oust be within 30 percent of the true concentration to be
considered acceptable.
A humidified ultra high purity air blank is analyzed to
certify the cleanliness of the sample concentrations interface and
the GC. The blank is considered acceptable if the concentrations
of the target analytes are less than 0.2 parts-per-billion by
volume (ppbv).
Canister Cleaning Criteria
On completion of an analysis, each canister is filled to 10
psi with humidified ultra high purity air in a 150°C oven,
evacuated to less than 200 mTorr, and held-at this temperature for
30 minutes. This procedure is performed eight times. Each
canister is certified as clean prior to each use based on the
criterion of not more than 0.2 ppbv for each target analyte using
Gas Chromatography/Flame lonization Detection (GC/FID).
Internal Quality Control
Quality control samples include the analysis of calibration
check samples, laboratory blanks, audit samples, and trip blanks.
*
Calibration standards are used to determine the response range
for the initial Instrument calibration. Response factor checks are
performed with standards containing the analytes of interest at a
concentration in the mid-calibration range. These standards are
compared to the roost recent multipoint response factor in order to
validate the calibration curve both prior to sample analysis and
after the last sample.
Laboratory blanks are made in cleaned canisters by adding the
appropriate amounts of humidified ultra-high purity air.
Laboratory blanks are used to ensure that all reagents and
laboratory instruments are interference free, and that background
contamination remains less than 0.2 ppbv for each target analyte.
Performance audits are conducted to evaluate analytical
accuracy. Canisters are spiked with target analytes by an outside
laboratory.
Trip blank canisters are collected to help identify any
sources of contamination related to shipping and handling the
samples.
E-4
-------
Representative analytical data, Including a calibration check
standard, system blank, Cleaned canister, field sample, and trip
blank are also contained in the Appendix.
SYSTEM EVALUATION
performance Audits
Quality control samples of known concentrations were used in
evaluating the system for indoor air analysis before beginning the
SI/NJUATP. Four clean canisters were sent to NSI for spiking. The
pOH analysis results may be compared with the NSI nominal
concentration values in Table 2. All the results meet the data
quality objectives for accuracy stated in Table 3.1 of the Quality
Assurance Project Plan (1), having a relative error of +/- 50
percent.
Blind Audit
Blind performance audits are a means of evaluating analytical
accuracy. Canisters are spiked by an outside laboratory with
concentrations unknown to the analytical laboratory. Two canisters
were spiked by NSI, however one leaked during return shipment to
DOH. The results are given for the useable canister and compared
to the concentrations added by NSI.
Accuracy
As presented in Table 3, the percent relative error calculated
for the DOH analysis is less than 50 percent for 12 of the 13
analytes. The exception, vinyl chloride, which is not a target
analyte for the SI/NJUATAP, had a relative error of 54 percent.
The percent relative error for NSI results meets the data quality
objective for 7 of the 13 compounds for which data is reported.
Precision
The DOH result for each analyte is the mean of a series of
five replicate analyses of canister 32375. The precision of these
analyses is presented in Table 4. The smallest range of these
analyses is 0.1 and the largest is 0.4 ppbv. The percent
relative standard deviation ranges from 6 to 18 percent, which
meets the data quality objective of <30 percent for analytical
precision.
DUPLICATE ANALYSIS
DOH/PEI
Five canisters were sent to PEI for duplicate analysis. The
results may be compared with those of DOH in Table 5.
E-5
-------
The relative percent difference IB calculated as a measure of
analytical precision. One-half of the minimum detectable level IB
substituted for the concentration when the results fell below the
detection limit. Since there were many nondetectable results,
these substituted values introduce many artificial data points.
The detection limit of PEI is lower than that of DOH. In
samples where neither laboratory detects an analyte, the relative
percent difference is only a measure of the difference between the
two detection limits. For the five samples, 65 duplicate
determinations for analytes are expected. Both laboratories
report results above the detection limit in 37 of these duplicate
determinations. The relative percent difference for 18 of these
37 is less than 30 percent, the data quality objective for
analytical precision.
The standard deviations and percent coefficients of variation
are calculated for the target analytes to compare the laboratory
to laboratory variation in the duplicate analyses. The result is
listed in Table 6. The percent coefficients of variation do not
reflect the true variability between PEI and DOH because of the
many substituted values for data points. "Of the target analytes
which were detected by both laboratories in all five samples,
dichloromethane, benzene, toluene, and m,p-xylene, only the m,p-
xylene coefficient of variation was less than 30 percent.
DOH/Radlan
Six Samples Collected on 12/13/90
Results of these duplicate analyses are reported in Table 7.
It can be seen that the DOH detection limit is much lower than that
of Radian. Substitution of one-half of the minimum detection limit
for nondetectable results introduces artificial data points. When
neither laboratory detected an analyte, the relative percent
difference is a comparison of the two detection limits. Both
laboratories report results above the detection limit for 45 of the
78 data points. The relative percent difference for 18 of these
is less than 30 percent, the data quality objective for analytical
precision.
The standard deviations and percent coefficients of variation
for the two laboratories are shown in Table 8. The difference in
detection limits and difficulties of analysis at low levels of
concentration are reflected in the interlaboratory variations which
range from 180 to -90 percent. There were four target analytes
which were detected by both laboratories In all six samples:
benzene, toluene, m,p-xylene, and o-xylene. The coefficient of
variation was less than 30 percent only for o-xylene*
The interlaboratory standard deviation is less than 1.0 for
all analytes except toluene, which is almost 15. The relative
percent differences for toluene, from Table 7, range from 13
percent for 904464 to 154 percent for 904463. In 904463, Radian
E-6
-------
detected over 8 times the concentration that was detected by the
DOH, 84 ppbv compared to 11 ppbv.
Nine Samples Collected on 3/19/91
The results of these nine duplicate analyses are reported in
Table 9. Many analytes were not detected in the samples. DOH
detected more analytes per sample than Radian. The relative
percent differences are calculated where data is available. Both
laboratories report results above the detection limit for 51 of
the 117 duplicate determinations of analytes. The relative percent
difference for 9 of these is less than 30 percent, the data quality
objective for analytical precision.
Only two analytes, toluene and n,p-xylene, were detected by
jjoth laboratories in all nine samples. The standard deviations
and percent coefficients of variation are presented in Table 10.
The concentrations detected by Radian tend to be higher and deviate
farther from the DOH results (see. results for 911014 in Table 9).
Hence the resulting large negative percent coefficients of
variation. In 911014, Radian detected over three times the
concentration level of toluene (100 ppbv compared to 29 ppbv) and
over five times the concentration level of m,p-xylene (310 ppbv
compared to 61 ppbv) detected by DOH. The resulting large relative
percent differences for the two analytes, 110 and 134 percent,
contributed to the large Intel-laboratory percent coefficients of
variation.
FIELD TRIPLICATES
One sampling box was co-located with an existing sampling box
at an existing site to permit field triplicate samples to be taken.
Each box contained two canisters. Two canisters In one box and one
from the other were filled simultaneously through a tee connector
during one 12-hour sampling period. The remaining canister in the
second box was filled in the 12-hour sampling period following the
triplicate sample collection. This provided the "night" sample
collected for that sampling date.
The results and statistical summaries for the field triplicate
analyses are shown in Table 11. The first two canisters listed in
each set were enclosed in a separate sampling box. The third
canister of the triplicate was enclosed in a sampling box with the
canister in which a sample was collected during the succeeding 12-
hour period.
The analytical results show close agreement between the two
samples housed within the same sampling box. In Table 11B the
replicate in the third canister, 910848, (canister housed in
separate sampling box) had 1,1,1-trichloroethane results over two
times as high as that found in the paired samples, 910642 and
910845, and a trichloroethylene result over three times that of
E-7
-------
the paired samples. The GC trace of of the cleaned canister
(canister 02297) showed no detectable levels of any target
compounds before sampling. However, it is noted that canister
02297 was last used on 12/1/90 for field sample 904310. In that
sample, 648 ppbv of 1,1,1-trichloroethane was detected.
The percent relative standard deviations meet the data quality
objective (<60%) for all analytes of all samples with the following
exceptions:
trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene in Table 11B
tetrachloroethylene in Table 11D
hexane in Table 11F
In these triplicates results are identical for canisters in
the same sampling box but the concentration detected in the third
sample differs from the first two and causes the wider deviation
from the mean.
hexane in Table 11G
All three samples for hexane in Table 11G have the same
dispersion around the mean, 0.2. Since the mean concentration
detected is 0.3, this indicates wide variation. However the
concentration detected is close to the minimum detection limit
where measurement precision is poor.
Pooled Coefficients of Variation
The coefficients . of variation are combined to obtain an
overall measure of precision among the seven triplicate sampling
events. As presented in Table 12, the pooled coefficients of
variation for all analytes meet the acceptance criteria with a
variability less than 50 percent.
CONCLUSIONS
The statistical results of the performance audits and blind
audit (Tables 2 and 3) demonstrate good analytical accuracy. The
precision of the replicate analyses of the audit sample (Table 4)
meets the data quality objective.
Duplicate laboratory analysis results (Tables 5 through 10)
show difficulty in achieving data quality objectives for
interlaboratory precision. Samples were first analyzed by DOH and
then shipped to the second laboratory (PEI or Radian). The fact
that the second analysis was performed at a different time and
place after shipping and handling may have added to
Interlaboratory variation. Many of the data points fell below the
limits of detection for the laboratories. Good precision becomes
more difficult to achieve when measuring analytes at concentration
levels close to the detection limit.
E-8
-------
The determination of indoor air contaminants often involves
analysis of components at or below the part-per-billion level.
Although the analytical technology IB capable of detection limits
in this range, the result of this Increased sensitivity Is an
increased variability in the resulting data. Difficulty is
encountered in the Interpretation of the significance and
variability in the ensuing data.
Statistical results for the co-located samples (Tables 11 and
12) show overall sampling and analytical precision which meets the
data quality objective.
REFERENCES
1. Quality Assurance Project Plan - Staten Island/New Jersey
Indoor Air Study, Wadsworth Laboratories and Center for
Environmental Health, New York State Department of Health,
March 9,1990.
2. Staten Island/New Jersey Urban Air Toxics Assessment Project
- Air Quality Data Report, Wadsworth Center for Laboratories
and Research, New York State Department of Health, June 1991,
Revised December 1991.
E-9
-------
XABLS 1
AIR OWISTO ANALYSIS QUALITY COmCL
gpuiDAiua*
Data of Calibration
•••pi* Analyila Data*
7/22,23/90
6/7,9/90
i/21/90
9/6,7/90
1/20,22,24/90
10/1/90
10/10/90
11/2.5,4/90
1/2,3/91
1/9/91
1/11/91
1/16,17/91
2/19.20/91
3/14/91
4/2/91
7/23,24/90
•/ll,12,14/90
i/22,23,24,25,27,21,29,30/90
9/3/90
9/10,12,14,IS,1»/90
9/24,25,26,27,30/90
10/2,3/90
10/17,11/90
11/7/90 - 1/4/91
1/4.9/91
1/9/91
1/14,15/91
1/11,19,21,22,23,21,29/91
2/20,21,25,26/91
3/19,20.23,25.26,27/91
4/3,4,5/91
Tte calibration alrtur* ua*d through 9/3/90 contained vlgbt
conpounda. Aftar thla data) • taurtuuo-eotfeoaA «dru»r« wa»
obtalo*d for it**.
E-10
-------
i (Cootinu«j)
CHIC*
tat*
Xun I
ConontMtlor (ppbv)
•/11/90
•/24/90
•/27/90
•/2I/90
•/30/90
9/3/90
9/12/90
9/13/90
9/26/90
9/21/90
10/17/90
11/7/90
11/12/90
11/12/90
11/12/90
11/11/90
11/14/90
11/15/90
11/19/90
11/20/90
11/37/90
11/30/90
12/2/90
13/4/90
12/11/90
U/12/90
12/13/90
12/14/90
1/3/91
1/1/91
1/1/91
1/5/91
1/10/91
1/10/91
OB11A
012 U
0827*
Oi2«A
OC30A
090 3A
0912»
091 3D
0926A
092 K
1017*
11071
1112*
1112B
1112C
1113*
1114C
1115C
1119A
1120*
11371
1UOC
1202A
130U
12111
131ZB
1213C
1214C
01011
0103C
01010
010S1
0110*
01 IOC
0.33
2
3
3
2
2
i
)
1
5
5
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
2
2
2
3
2
0.5
0.5
0.9
0.5
12
0.5
0.5
5
10
10
0.5
0.5
1
E-ll
-------
XMLI 1 (COBtlBMd)
carat KAHDUBB
Mtc
Hun I
Concentration {ppbv)
1/14/91
1/15/91
i/ll/91
i/i»m
1/19/91
1/21/91
1/22/91
1/23/91
1/26/91
l/M/91
2/13/91
S/21/B1
2/J2/91
J/21/91
2/26/91
a/is/si
3/19/91
J/JO/91
1/22/91
3/33/91
3/2S/91
3/26/91
3/27/91
4/1/91
4/4/91
4/S/91
OlltA
011U
01189
011K
0119*
0121A
OU2A
0121A
012U
ouu
021»
022 U
0222A
OJZiA
022U
031SI
0319A-
03] U
032 2A
0321S
037U
032U
0327X
0403A
0401A
040SA
o.s
2
2
5
1
1
1
1
O.S
1
5
2
2
2
2
i
a
a
3
a
2
2
a
• a
3
a
E-12
-------
XMU 1 (CoaUmMd)
lABOMTOXT I1AMU
RUB I
•/9/90
•/13/90
1/21/90
9/1/90
9/10/90
9/12/90
9/13/90
9/11/90
9/22/90
9/24/90
9/25/90
10/2/90
10/11/90
11/7/90
ll/t/90
11/1/90
11/9/90
11/14/90
11/14/90
ll/li/90
11/17/90
11/21/90
11/29/90
11/30/90
12/3/90
12/4/90
12/12/90
12/13/90
12/14/90
1/2/91
1/J/tl
1/4/91
1/5/91
1/9/91
1/9/91
1/11/91
1/1S/91
1/1W91
1/19/91
1/21791
2/20/91
3/1V91
3/22/91
3/21/91
0»09C
M13A
Ot2U
090aA
M10B
0912A
M13C
OSltA
0922A
0924C
092SA
1002C
1011C
1107A
noaA
noei
1109A
1114A
11141
1116A
1117A
1121A
112IA
1130A
1203A
1204C
1212A
U13I
12141
0102C
eioiA
0104A
010SA
0104A
01096
0111A
0115C
01 ISA
01191
01291
0220F
03 ISC
03221
0323A
E-13
-------
TA1LI 1 (Continued)
Trip Blank*
Cupl« Ctnlatv location Collection Data Analyila Data
902805
902961
901071
901251
901344
901543
901691
903980
901985
904115
904307
904461
910070
910332
910404
910574
910693
910843
911001
02755
02528
02531
02379
02535
022S8
02535
02530
02032
02761
02756
02379
03374
02375
02115
02032
02378
02112
02751
7097-2C
7097-a
0030-11
0030-12
7097-2A
7097-21
0030-11
7097-3
0030- 12
7097-a
0030-11
7097-a.
0030-B1
7097-JC
0030-13
7097-a
7097-a
7097-2C
7097-3
6/3/90
6/15/90
8/27/90
9/8/90
9/20/90
10/2/90
10/14/90
11/7/90
11/7/90
11/19/90
12/1/90
U/13/90
12/25/90
1/6/91
1/16/91
1/30/91
2/11/91
2/23/91
3/19/91
6/25/90
9/3/90
9/15/90
9/24/90
9/27/90
10/17/90
11/7/90
11/19/90
11/20/90
12/1/90
1/4/91
1/4/91
1/16/91
1/21/91
1/28/91
2/13/91
2/25/91
3/15/91
4/3/91
E-14
-------
02531
DOB MSI
TABU I
PBVOmMICI AUDITS (>,b,C)
02! 29
MB JTSI
KB MI
02530
DOB IGI
% n
3.1
1.5
3.4
2.T
l,«
4,4
2.1
2.3
1.5
3.1
3.S
l.S
3
1.4
J4.76
0.00
9.68
-3.S7
t.67
*6.67
50.00
4.B
2.4
5.2
4.1
2.5
6.9
3.1
1.1
2.5
3.1
4.T
2.S
S.I
2.4
26. 32 1
-4.00 ;
-1.89
-12.77
0.00
35.29
29.17
1.7
1.7
.8
.*
»7
.1
.8
S.I
3.3
7
8.3
3.3
(.•
3.3
31.37
-18.18
-2.86
•11.11
13.13
36. 7S
18.75
9.6
3.9
10.4
8.1
4.2
14.3
5.3
7.«
S.I
10.7
9.6
5.1
10.4
4.8
33.06
-23.53
-2. BO
-15.63
-17.65
37.50
10.43
KSI !• •" D>A °ontr«et laboratory.
E-15
-------
ZULI ]
ELITO MIDI! («,b,c)
CJUHSTER 3237S
Compound
Vinyl Chlorld.
:,3-But«dl«n»
Fran-11
H«Uiyl«ne Chlorite
ChlorOfOrB
1, l,l-Triehloro»Ui«n«
Carbon Tatrcchlorld*
1,2-Dlchloro«tluuM
Banian*
Toluon*
T»tr«chloro«th«n«
1.2-Dlbroncwthmna
Chlorobanzwi*
0-XylMM
Tb*or
Cone
1.3
1.4
0.7
1.1
l.S
0.7
l.S
l.S
1.3
0.7
l.t
0.7
0.7
0.7
DCS
WMH
2
1.3
0.7
1.1
l.S
0.9
1.7
2.2
1.6
o.«
l.S
0.9
O.S
0.7
MSI
Cone
1.4
1.4
4.2
1.1
3.2
O.I
-
3
1.1
l.S
2.1
1.2
O.I
1
DOB
% XE
S4
-7
0
0
0
29
13
47
23
14
7
29
-29
0
•SI
% XI
1
0
SCO
0
113
14
-
100
31
114
SO
71
14
43
•. tasulti «r« glvra la ppbv.
b. XSI li »n EPA contract laboratory.
e. HE • r«l*tlv« axrar
E-16
-------
TMLI 4
MULYTICJU. PRECISION («,b)
CMIST0 3237$
COB pound
Vinyl Chlorld*
rnoa-11
M«thyl«M CUorid*
Chloroform
1,1, l-Trlehloro*thuM
Carbon T»tr«chlorlil«
1 , 2 -Dicbloroathui*
••nun*
Toluan*
1 , 2 -DibzxnocthaiMi
ChlorobttlMM
o-Xyl*n*
1
1Q
• 9
1.2
0.6
1
1.4
O.I
l.S
2.1
1.4
0.7
1.3
O.I
0.5
0.6
2
1.2
0.6
1
1.4
1
1.7
2.2
1.6
O.I
1.4
0.9
0.5
0.7
Run f
3
1A
• V
1.1
0.6
0.9
1.6
0.9
1.5
2.1
1.6
0.7
1.4
O.I
0.5
0.6
4
1.4
0.7
1.2
l.S
0.9
1.7
2.3
1.6
0.9
1.4
0.9
0.5
0.7
5
l.S
O.I
1.3
1.7
1
1.9
2.4
1.7
O.I
1.9
1.2
0.6
0.9
HMC
1.3
0.7
1.1
l.S
0.9
1.7
2.2
1.6
O.I
l.S
0.9
0.5
0.7
6tdDtv '
0.16
0.09
0.16
0.13
0.01
0.17
0.13
0.11
0.01
0.24
0.16
0.04
0.12
IRSD
g
13
14
IS
9
9
10
6
7
11
16
11
9
17
Xaagi
•HB^MH
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.6
0.4
0.1
0.3
• . F««uit» «r» glvan in ppbv.
b. MO • ralatlv* •twidard deviation
E-17
-------
tULX 5
DOB/PEI DUPLICAH MU.Y5IE RESULTED.b,c,d,»)
ACCESSIOH 1:
CAKISTER 1:
LOCATION:
COLLECT! CM DATE:
TIKE OF QAY:
AKALYST:
.CQKPCCMD
Ch.lcroB«th«n«
DlcJilor
DOB
DL
1M
. 0
If:
.fl
Ifl
.0
1*.
. u
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
2.1
1.0
PEI
DL
Of
.6
0+4
0*
-• B
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
903067
2293
OOJO-B1
08/27/90
D
DOB PEI
RPD
1.0
1.3
«• u
.3 M
O.S H
1.3
O.S N
1.4
0.5 H
t.l
0.6 M
1.0
1.0
1.2
X.D
1.0
0*
• 7
0.2 M
1. 4
0.2 M
o.e
0.2 M
11.0
0.2 N
o.»
2.6
1.0
•6
•6
55
86
22
93
11
»
1C
DOS
DL
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
2.1
1.0
PEI
DL
4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
9CJD6B
2294
1097-28
08/27/90
W
DOB PZI
O.S
O.S
2.3
O.S
7.4
O.t
O.S
3.2
1.1
H o.: H
M 0.2 M
1.4
N O.i M
• .1
M 0.2 M
H O.t
2.0
O.I
•PD
•6
•6
49
•6
19
93
It
46
32
DOB
DL
ifl
• W
1ft
• u
1.0
1H
• u
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
2.1
1.0
PEI
DL
OA
• 4
07
• f
0.4
04
• •
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
903070
2S34
7097-2B
OB/27/90
D
DOB PEI
2Q
• »
6\
• J
0.5
OK
• 9
0.3
s.o
O.S
10.6
O.t
1.5
1.9
l.S
1 J
J. • F
1C
• O
H 0.2 M
K O.T
M 0.2 H
2.9
M 0.3 M
*.i
M 0.2 M
1.0
2.9
1.0
XFD
•&
H
S3
•6
22
93
40
29
40
E-18
-------
tABLI S (Continued)
ACCESS JOB I:
CAJHSTEX 1:
1OCATIOW:
COLLECTION DATE:
-nut or DAY:
AJULYST:
CCKPOUJID
djloroBatJiaiie
Dlcbloroae thane
Bax»«
C&ioroform
1, i, 1-Trlchloroethane
Carbon Tetrachlorld*
B«ni«n»
Tricnloroettiylene
*olu«n»
fetrachloroethylene
jthyl**"**8*
,.p-Xyl«ne
o-xyi*"*
DOH
DL
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1,0
2.1
1.0
PSI
DL
0.4
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
903071
2538
0030-B2
08/27/90
0
DOB PEI
KPD
1.5
1.3
1.4
1.3
0.5 H
2.1
1.1
7.4
0.6 M
1.0
4.6
1.3
1.0
1.3
1.2
1.4
0.2 M
1.3
0.8
7.S
0.2 M
0.9
3.0
1.2
50
40
0
15
7
86
47
32
1
93
11
42
•
DOB
DL
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
2.1
1.0
PEI
DL
0.6
0.4
0.8
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
901074
2111
0030-B3
08/27/90
D
DOB PII
KPD
1.1
3.2
O.S
O.S
O.S
O.S
1.7
O.S
4.5
0.6
0.5
2.1
0.}
M
M
M
M
H
N
N
H
1.0
1.5
0.4 N
0.2 N
0.7
0.2 M
0.9
0.2 N
2.7
0.2 N
0.2 M
1.1
0.2 N
10
72
22
•6
33
86
62
86
SO
93
•6
63
86
4. PXI la an EPA contract laboratory.
£. Itosult* «r« given la ppbv.
e. Dl •
-------
TABLl 6
OOB/PEI ANALYTICAL PRECISICB
COMPOUND
ChlorcMthan*
DlchlorcMthAO*
Bcxtn*
Chloroform
1,1, 1-Tr Ichloroathuw
CArbon ntxacniorld*
Trlchloro«thyl«n«
Tolu«n«
T*tr«chloro«tIiyl«D«
Ithylbancana
»,p-Xyl«n«
Std D«v
0.28
0.62
1.12
0.05
0.05
0.00
0.61
0.01
O.S8
0.00
0.16
0.29
O.li
* Coefficient
of Vulatlon
•a
60
163
18
33
0
59
3
sa
o
Ti
22
46
E-20
-------
TABLI 7
DOB/RADIAN DUPLICATE ANALYSIS RESULTS(«,b)
ACCESSION It
CANISTER 1:
LOCATION:
COLLECTION DATE:
TIME OF DAY:
904455
027S5
0030-11
12/13/90
•
904459
02112
0030-B1
12/13/90
D
904460
02763
0030-B2
12/13/90
D
ANALYST:
DOH RAD DOB
RAO
DOB
HAD
DOB
RAD
CCKPOUJID
DL
RFC
RPD
RPD
ChlorcMthAM
B4f*hl or f^BMt_hA ft4B
V 1 C» A Of QBBBJ bBADV
••xana
Chlorofora
1,1, l-Triehloro*thaa«
Carbon T*tr*chlorid«
Bwmn*
TtlchlerocthylcM
Toluene
T«tz
o-Xylan«
0.2
09
• *
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
Om
• 7
1.0
0.4
0.4
0.4
O.S
0.5
O.B
0.6
0.6
0.3
0.4
O.B
Of
.5
O.S
0.2
1.3
0.1 M
O.B
1.2
B.7
0.3
1.0
3.5
1.9
0.4
0. 3 M
0.5 M
0.2 M
1.7
0.2 N
1.1
1.0
14. B
0.3 M
0.7
3.2
1.2
60
«•
J9
0
B
2B
69
90
IS
52
5
31
10
42
0.9
OM
• V
1.3
0.3
1.2
0.1 N
1.6
1.3
10.3
O.B
1.6
6.3
2.6
0.2 M
01 M
• J H
O.S N
0.2 N
1.6
0.2 N
2.6
0.9
12. B
0.3 M
O.B
3.S
1.4
127
B9
47
29
69
46
39
22
95
63
57
63
1.0
5.1
O.S
1.6
0.1
4.1
O.B
31.6
1.1
3.3
12.1
5.3
0.2 N
6.5
0.2 N
0.2 M
M 0.2 M
2.9
0.2 M
93. B
0.7
2.1
B.6
3.5
133
24
92
153
69
3S
109
99
42
45
34
42
E-21
-------
7 (Continued)
ACCZSSIC* ft
CAIUST5B |i
LOCATION!
CQLLECTIOH BATE:
TIME OF DAY:
ANALYST:
ccwouro
ctuorooeUvine
DlcbloroBcthane
Bexane
fit 1 nrr^t M^m
cm oroz orv
1,1, 1-Trlch loroethane
Carbon Tvtrachlorlde •
Benzene
Tr 1 ch 1 oroethy Ian*
Toluene
Tetr • eh 1 oroethy lane
Bthylbanzene
m.p-Xylene
o-Xyl*a«
DOB
CL
0.2
0.2
0.2
OM
.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
RAD
DL
0.4
0.7
1.0
OM
• 4
0.4
0.4
0.9
0.5
O.I
0.6
0.6
0.3
0.4
•04463
02754
0030-B3
12/13/90
0
DOB HAD
904464
02113
0030-13
12/13/90
II
008 BAD
KPD
1.1
12.6
1.9
0|
• 1
2.i
0.1
4.1
0.2
10. a
0.7
1.1
7.9
4.0
1.0
11.2
2. a
Mn 9 M
U*« fl
2.1
M 0.2 N
2.9
0.2 M
13.1
0.3 N
1.6
6.7
2.1
11
12
39
30
•9
34
16
154
•4
9
16
34
o.a
13 .-!
0.4
1.6
0.1 N
0.9
0.1 M
4.2
0.1 M
0.7
2.3
1.3
904466
02027
0030-B2
12/13/90
•
DOB BAD
RPD
0.2 M
13.2
0.5 M
1.5
0.2 M
0.6
0.2 M
4. 6
0.3 M
0.3 N
2.0
0.7
120
t
22
9
69
43
•1
13
96
•6
14
57
0.7
0.6
i.a
1.3
0.1
1.3
0.9
26.3
0.7
1.2
4.4
3.3
RPD
0.2 M
0.3 M
2.5
1.6
M 0.2 N
1.0
0.6
70.7
0.3 M
0.9
3.7
1.5
111
S3
33
47
• /
23
69
23
47
92
64
25
16
41
a. Rtdian li an IFA contract laboratory.
b. Rmulta «r» givao la ppbv.
Abbreviation*
D - day (6:00 to lllOO)
• • night (18:00 to 6>00)
OL • dataetloa limit.
RTO • relative percent difference
M • Hot detected at tie detection limit. One-half of the minimum detectable level la
entered aa the concentration.
E-22
-------
TABU •
DOB/RADIAN ANALYTICAL PRECISION TOR
SAMPLES COLUCTD OH 12/13/90
% Coefficient
Compound Bid D«v of Variation
ChlorcmthAn* 0.11 22
DlchloroMtbaM 0.21 39
Bnccna 0.3S -90
Chloroform 0.07 104
l,l,l-Trlehloro»th*n« 0,31 ISO
carbon T»tr«chloria» 0.00 0
BwiMlt* 0.38 128
TrichlorortbylBM 0.12 55
Tolu*M 14.52 -46
T«trachloro»tbyl«n« 0.12 <•
IUiylb*ns«a« 0.18 35
»,p-Xyl«n» 0.61 41
o-Xylm> 0.21 20
E-23
-------
TABLX 9
DOB/RADIAN DUPLICATE ANALYSIS RESULTS!a. b)
ACCESSION I:
CANISTER I:
LOCATION:
COLLECTION DATE:
TIKE OF DAY:
911003
02530
7097-2C
3/19/91
0
911004
03289
7097-2C
3/19/91
•
911005
02757
7097- 2C
3/19/91
D
ANALYST:
DOB RADIAN
DOB RADIAN
DOB RADLM
DOB
MCLAN
COMPOUND
DL
DL
RPD
MFD
Chloromthjn*
Dl chl or Qoettuui*
Buxtnu
Chlorofor»
1 , 1 , 1 -Trlchloro«th*n«
Carton Tetrachlorld*
Ben ran*
Trichloro«thyl«M
ToliMM
T»tr»chloro«thyl«n»
EUiyltanzcn*
•(p-Xyl«n«
o-Xyl«n*
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
•A
KA
NA
•A
KA
. NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HA
NA
NA
0.*
0.9
•D
NO
0.4
ND
1.1
ND
2.5
0.2
0.3
1.4
0.7
_
0.6
-
-
-
-
0.6
-
2.9
-
-
2.7
-
.
43
-
-
-
-
65
-
IS
-
-
64
-
0.6
0.7
0.3
ND
0.3
ND
1.0
ND
1.1
ND
ND
0.7
0.5
.
-
-
-
-
-
o.s
-
2.2
-
-
1.6
0.2
_•
-
-
-
-
-
76
-
22
-
-
76
•6
0.90
0.90
ND
ND
0.40
ND
1.10
ND
2.50
ID
0.30
1.40
0.70
.
0.45
-
-
-
-
0.56
-
3.91
-
.
2.56
0.31
.
67
-
-
-
-
65
-
44
-
-
59
59
E-24
-------
TMLI 9 (Continued)
ACCESSION f:
CANISTER I:
LOCATION:
COLLECTION DATE:
TIME OF DAY:
911D06
02761
0030-B3
3/19/91
D
911007
02377
0030-B2
2/23/91
D
911010
02382
7097-2A
3/19/91
•
AKAJ.YST:
DOB XAC1AK
DOB RACIAK
DOB FACIA*
DOB
KADIAK
COMPOUND
DL
DL
KPD
RPO
KPD
Chlorooethan*
Dlchlorcmthan*
Chlorofora
1 , 1 , l-Trlchloro«thana
Carbon T»tr«chlorld»
Bent«n»
Trlchloro«thyl»n«
Tolucn*
Tetr*chloro«thyl«ne
Et_hylbeni«n»
«,p-Xyl«n»
o-Xyl«n«
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
NA
MA
•A
•A
HA
RA
RA
MA
MA
RA
MA
RA
MA
O.S -
1.1 1.1
MD
•D
1.9 1.5
RD
O.I
MD
S.O 9.6
RD -
0.3 -
1.1 3.7
O.t 0.7
49
26
-
-
-
63
-
-
70
11
o.a
0.6
O.S
0.4
0.9
RD
0.9
RD
6.6
0.4
1.7
• .4
1.9
2.3
0.4
-
0.4
-
S.5
-
-
4.2
0.6
129
5
-
83
-
19
-
-
67
110
1.1
0.9
0.6
0.5
0.5
•D
2.0
MD
41.1
RD
1.1
4.7
2.0
1
1
14
1
2
0
.0
-
.0
-
.7
-
.1
.9
.6
63
-
63
-
9*
-
1
47
103
E-25
-------
TAHLJ 9 (Continued)
ACCESSION It
CANISTER 1:
LOCATION:
COLLECTION DATE:
TIME OF DAY:
AKA1YST:
COKPOUXB
Chlorontthane
DlchloraMthaiie
Hex Vie
Chlorofor*
1,1, 1-TrlchloroethAne
Carbon Tetrachlorlde
Bentene
Trlchloroethylene
Toluene
Tetraeh loroetny 1 ene
rthylbenzene
•,p-Xylen«
o-Xylene
DOB
DL
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
RADIAN
DL
DA
RA
•A
RA
•A
RA
RA
•A
RA
RA
RA
RA
RA
911012
02526
0030-B3
3/19/91
R
DOB RADIAN
RPD
0.8 -
1.0 0.4 90
RD -
RD -
1.9 1.8 7
TO -
0.5 0.2 74
RD -
2.1 2.6 22
RD -
0.2
1.4 2.4 S3
0.7 0.3 63
911014
02538
7097-2B
3/19/91
R
DOB DAOLAI
2.0 -
10.0 7.3
0.9 -
1.0 0.2
0.5
RD
2.1 1.0
0.2 •
26.9 99.6
RD
24.7 64.9
60.7 309.8
38.6 79.1
RPD
.
31
-
123
-
-
60
-
110
-
90
134
69
911016
02525
0030-B2
2/23/91
DOB
RAD1AH
1.7
0.8
0.7
1.0 2.1
0.3
1.2 0.3
RD
1.6 0.8
RD -
6.8 S.O
0.6 0.3
1.3 -
5.3 3.3
1.8 0.7
RPD
62
72
120
69
31
82
48
83
«. Radlin !• u> XPA contract laboratory.
b. R««ulU an glv«n in ppbv.
Abbreviation*
0 - day (6:00 to 18:00)
R • night (18:00 to 6iOO)
DL - detection limit.
RPD • relative pczcant diff«r«nc«
RA - not available.
RD • Rot d«t«ct*d at th« detection Halt.
E-26
-------
TABLE 10
DOH/RADIAR ANALYTICAL PRECISIOH
FOR SAMPLES COLLECTED OR 3/19/91
% Coefficient
Coapouod std D«v of Variation
Tolu«n» 26.27 -491
13.13 -302
E-27
-------
TAIL! 11A
TJUPL1CAJI JJULTSES (»,b.C)
•••pi*
tiott?
11 DMT
*10»M
CM
032ft
C2SJ*
03JJ5
Location
0010-11
OOJC-11
0030-il
Co D«U
02/11/91
02/11/91
02/H/«1
ID
p
p
D
Jin CUU
02/25/91
02/2S/91
OJ/JJ/11
1 2
) 4
S • 1
• t 10
11
0^
07
o.s
i: l
, --
2.2
2.3
Compound
1
2
J
4
i
*
T
I
t
10
11
12
U
DICfclot
Chlorofor*
1.1,1-
Cuboa
htM
Trlcltloro«trrylan«
Tolu«rn
0.73
0.«
»-*o
0.1&
l.U
>•»
»-"
0.10
*•*>
0.06
o.U
O.M
O.M
o.ao
o.M
0. IS
O.JS
O.M
o.OO
0.1J
0.21
0.17
•
It
13
It
13
0
11
J7
13
0
H
10
It
E-28
-------
TMU 11*
nunicui Muunxa (cs»ttou»si
910
11 11
1 O.i
1 0.}
Compound
10
11
1J
1J
Chloroform
1,1,1 -Tr ieb loro*U»»n«
Carbon T*U«cblarlda
ItfaylbwuMi
An 1*9*
O.IJ
O.SJ
0.20
O.JJ
a.oj
0.10
o.»
J.1J
1.4J
O.IT
O.JO
i.u
C.ST
0.0*
0.0*
0.10
O.M
0.97
0.00
o.o*
I-"
O.IJ
o.u
0-M
o.o*
0-0*
U
»0
»
«
0
•
T*
E-29
-------
IASU 11C
FIELD TRIPLICATE MALTSES (Continued)
Sample Can
location Co Oat* TB An Date
10
11
12
13
910844 02536 7097-2C 02/23/91 D 03/19/91 0.8 0.5 0.4
910847 02114 7097-2C 02/23/91 0 03/19/91 0.8 0.4 0.3
910639 027S4 7097-2C 02/23/91 D 03/19/91 0.8 O.S 0.3
0.1 M 0.2 0.1 M 0.6 0.1 M 1.5
0.1 M 0.2 0.1 M 0.6 0.1 K 1.4
0.1 M 0.1 M 0.1 M 0.7 0.1 M 1.4
0.1 M 0.1 M 0.6 0.1
0.1 H 0.1 M 0.6 0.3
0.1 M 0.1 It 0.6 0.2
Coo pound
1 Chloronettiane
2 Dichlaraaethaae
3 Baxane
4 Chiorofom
5 1,1,1-Trlchloroethane
6 Carbon retractUarlOe
7 Ban Una
9 Toluene
10 Tetrcciilonwttiylene
11 ELhylt>enr«n«
12 B/p-XyJene
13 o-Xyl*ne
Averaya Standard Deviation USD
0.80 0.00 0
0.47 0.06 13
0.33 0.06 18
0.10 0.00 0
0.17 0.06 36
0.10 0.00 0
0.63 0.06 9
0.10 0.00 0
1.43 0.06 4
0.10 0.00 0
0.10 0.00 0
0.60 0.00 0
0.27 0.06 23
E-30
-------
TUU 110
rme TRIPLICATE MUO.YBBS (Continued)
Saaplf Can Location Co Date TO An Date 1234
5 6 7 • * 10 11 12 13
Compound
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e
9
10
11
12
13
ChloroBethaiM
DlchlozoBethana
Haxane
Cblorofon
1,1,1-Trlchloroethan*
Carbon TetrachJorld*
Benzana
Tiicbloroethylana
Toluaoe
TetiachlDroeUiylen*
Ethylbenzan*
H/p-Xylane
o-Xylena
Average standard Devlatioo \RSD
0.90 0.00 0
0.60 0.10 17
0.47 0.21 45
0.57 0.06 VI
1.63 0.21 13
0.10 0.00 0
0.97 0.23 24
1.37 0.40 29
11.37 2.89 25
0.43 0.29 67
0.77 0.1S 20
3.23 0.61 25
1.33 0.21 16
E-31
-------
TABLB 111
FIELD TRIPLICATE NULTSBS (Continued)
910919
02027
7097-2C
03/07/91
D
03/23/91
1
o.s
Coir pound
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
10
11
12
13
ChloroMthaoc
D 1 c hi or caethaM
B«x«n«
Chloroform
1,1, :-Trlchlorc*thane
Carbon Tetxachlorida
BAHMM
Trlehloroatbylana
TOllMD*
Tetrachlorovthylan*
Ethylbanzma
•/p-Xylaoa
o-Xylan«
Av«r«g« Standard Deviation %MSO
O.tO 0.00 0
0.60 0.10 17
0.30 0.00 0
0.10 0.00 0
1.17 0.12 10
0.10 0.00 0
0.67 0.06 9
0.10 0.00 0
4.13 0.40 10
0.10 0.00 0
0.37 0.06 16
1.20 0.17 14"
0.63 0.12 19
E-32
-------
TMLI 117
PIEU) TUPLICATI ARALT8U (Continued)
. — •
»**?>
»ll<»
yll&
_« lO
1, Can
02 02261
7097-JC
7097-2C
7097-2C
03/19/91
03/19/91
03/19/91
D
p
D
12 13
CcBpound
CtUaraavtbaiM
CtUorofon
1.1, l-Tiichlorovthana
Carton TvtraclUarida
10
11
12
1}
TrichloiwUiylca*
Toluan*
T*trach 1 oroaUry laa*
o-Xylm
Avaraga Standard DaviaUoo \RSD
0.10 0.10 12
0.90 0.00 0
0.17 0.12 72
0.10 0.00 0
0.30 0.17 57
0.10 0.00 0
1.13 0.06 S
0.10 0.00 0
2.S3 0.06 2
0.13 0.06 4S
0.30 0.00 0
1.31 0.12 9
0.70 0.00 0
E-33
-------
TABLI 110
FIXLD TR1PLJCAT1 MUITSCS (Continued)
31 9
COBpound
1 ChloroMthane
2 DlchlorcMthana
3 Hoxan*
4 Chloroforr.
5 1,1,1-Tiichloroethane
6 Carbon Tetrachlorlde
7 Banzana
• Trlchloroatbylena
9 Toluene
10 Tatrachloroethylaoe
11 Bthylbenzene
12 B/p-Xylane
13 o-Xylan*
Avaraga Standard Deviation
0.47 0.06
0.60 0.00
0.30 0.20
0.53 0.06
1.63 0.25
0.10 0.00
1.10 0.17
1.50 0.26
9.37 0.85
0.30 0.10
0.70 0.10
2.67 0.23
1.20 0.10
7
0
67
11
U
0
IS
17
9
33
14
•
•
a. Xeeult* are given in ppbv.
b. On*-half of UM alnlaua dctactabla l«val 1* «nt«r«d •• th« concantzctlon found In •aaplM in which tb«
conc«ntx
triplicat* was •nelosed in • aaapling box with th« caniitar in which • aanpl* was collected during tn« •ucca^ing
12-bour period.
Abbravlatlons
Can » cani«t«r
Co Date • collection date
TD - tlJM of day
D - day (6:00 to 18:00)
• • night (11:00 to 6:00)
An Date • analytii date
MD • ralatlve itandard deviation.
M • elnlBue detectable level
1 - CUoroaethane
2 • DlcnloroMthane
3 -.Bexane
4 • Chloroform
S • 1,1,1-Trlchloroethane
6 • Carbon TetracKlorlde
7 - Benz
• " TrlcblaroaUiyleoe
9 • Toluene
10 • Tetracnloroetbyli
11 - Ithylbensene
12 - B/p-Xylene
13 - o-Xyleoe
E-34
-------
TKBLZ 12
ANALYTICAL PRECISION OF FIELD TRIPLICATE ANALYSIS
EXPRESSED BY POOLED COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION
Pooled % Coefficient
Coapound of Variation
1 ChloroMthaiM 7
2 DichloroMthAM 13
3 Bnan> 46
4 Chloroform 13
5 1,1,1-TrlchlorocthaiM 32
6 Carbon T«trac(iiorld» 0
7 B«ni«n« 13
8 Trlchloro«thyl*D« 33
9 Toluan* 12
10 Tatrachloro*thyl«oa 43
11 Ethylbanzwi* 13
12 B/p-Xylma 13
13 o-Xyl«n» IS
E-35
-------
APPENDIX F
RADON
Section 2.3 of EPA document no. EPA 520-1 89-009,
"Indoor Radon and Radon Decay Product Measurement Protocols"
F-l
-------
2.3 INTERIM PROTOCOL FOR USING ELECTRET ION CHAMBER RADON
DETECTORS (EICs) TO MEASURE INDOOR RADON CONCENTRATIONS
2.3.1 Purpose
This protocol provides guidance for using electret ion chamber
radon detectors (EICs) to obtain accurate and reproducible
measurements of indoor radon concentrations. Following the
protocol will help ensure uniformity among measurement programs
and allow valid intercomparision of results. Measurements made
in accordance with this protocol will produce screening measure-
ments of radon concentration representative of closed-house
conditions. Such screening measurements of closed-house con-
centrations have a smaller variability and are more reproducible
than measurements made when the house conditions are not con-
trolled.
If measurements with EICs are for a purpose other than a
screening measurement, the investigator should follow guidance
provided by EPA in "Interim Protocols for Screening and Follow-up
Radon and Radon Decay Product Measurements" (EPA 520/1-86-014-1,
1987) .
2.3.2 Scope
This protocol covers, in general terms, the equipment,
procedures, and quality control objectives to be used in perform-
ing the measurements. It is not meant to replace an instrument
manual, but rather provides guidelines to be adopted into
standard operating procedures. Questions about these guidelines
should be addressed to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Radiation Programs, Radon Division, Problem Assessment
Branch (ANR-464), 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C., 20460.
2.3.3 Method
Electret ion chamber radon detectors (EICs) have been described
by Kotrappa et. al. (Kotrappa 1988). They require no power and
function as true integrating detectors, measuring the average
concentration during the measurement period.
EICs contain a permanently charged electret(1> which collects ions
formed in the chamber by radiation emitted from radon decay
products. When the device is exposed, radon diffuses into the
chamber through filtered openings. Ions which are generated
continuously by the decay of radon and radon decay products are
drawn to the surface of the electret and reduce its surface
voltage. The amount of voltage reduction is directly related to
An electrostatically charged disk of Teflon".
F-2
-------
the average radon concentration present during the exposure
period. There are both short-term (2 to 7 day) and long-term (1
to 12 month) EICS that are currently marketed. The thickness of
the electret affects the usable measurement period.
The electret must be removed from the canister and the electret
voltage must be measured with a special surface voltmeter both
before and after exposure. The difference betveen the initial
and final voltage is divided first by a calibration factor and
then by the number of exposure days to determine the average
radon concentration during the exposure period. Electret voltage
measurements can be made in a laboratory or in the field.
2.3.4 Equipment
The following equipment is required to measure radon using an
EIC:
• A short-term or long-term EIC;
• An instruction sheet for the user and a shipping
container with a label for returning the EIC(s) to
the laboratory;
• A specially built surface voltmeter for measuring
electret voltages before and after exposure;
• A data collection log.
2.3.5 Predeplovment Considerations
The measurement should not be made if the occupant is planning
remodeling, changes in the heating, ventilating and air
conditioning system, or other modifications that may influence
the radon concentration during the measurement period.
The EIC should not be deployed if the occupant's schedule
prohibits terminating the measurement at the appropriate time.
2.3.6 Measurement Criteria
The following conditions should exist prior to and during a
measurement to ensure that the conditions are as standardized as
possible.
• The measurement should be made under closed-house
conditions. To the extent reasonable, windows and
external doors should be closed (except for normal
entrance and exit) for 12 hours prior to and during
the measurement period. Normal entrance and exit
includes opening and closing of a door, but an
external door should not be left open for more than
F-3
-------
a few minutes. These conditions are expected to
exist as normal living conditions during the winter
in northern climates. For this reason and others
discussed in Section 1.3.1, measurements should be
made during.winter periods whenever possible.
• Internal-external air exchange systems (other than
a furnace) such as high-volume attic and window
fans should not be operated during the measurement
and for at least 12 hours before the measurement is
initiated. Air conditioning systems that recycle
interior air may be operated.
• In southern climates, or when the measurements must be
made during a warm season, the standardized closed-house
conditions are satisfied by meeting the criteria just
listed. The closed house conditions must be verified
and maintained more rigorously, however, when they are
not the normal living conditions.
* Short-term measurements should not be conducted if
severe storms with.high winds or rapidly changing
barometric pressures are predicted during the
measurement period. Weather predictions available
on local news stations may provide sufficient
information to determine if this condition is
satisfied.
A 12-month EIC measurement provides information about radon
.concentrations in a house during an entire year, so the closed-
house conditions do not have to be satisfied to measure the
annual average concentration over 12 months.
2.3.7 Deployment
The EIC should be inspected prior to deployment to see
that it has not been damaged during handling and shipping.
2.3.7.1 Timely Deployment. Both long and short-term EICs should
be deployed as soon as possible after their initial voltage is
measured. Until an EIC is deployed, an electret cover should
remain in. place over the electret to minimize background loss of
voltage.
2.3.7.2 Location Selection. The following criteria should be
applied to select the location of an EIC within a room.
• A position should be selected where the detector
will not be disturbed during the measurement
period.
F-4
-------
• The detector should not be placed near drafts caused by
HVAC vents, windows, and doors.
• The detector should be placed at least 75
centimeters (30 inches) above the floor level and
at least 10 centimeters (4 inches) from other
objects.
• The detector should not be placed close to the
exterior walls of the house.
• In general, detectors should not be placed in
kitchens or bathrooms.
2.3.8 Retrieval of Detectors
Short-term EICs may be deployed for a two to seven day
measurement period, and long-term EICs for one to twelve months.
If the occupant is terminating the sampling, the instructions
given to the occupant should tell the occupant when and how to
terminate the sampling period. A deviation from the schedule by
up to few days is acceptable for short-term EICs and'up to three
weeks for long-term EICs, if the time of termination is
documented on the EIC information form. In addition, the
occupant also should be instructed to send the EIC to the
laboratory as soon as possible, preferably within a few days
following exposure termination.
At the end of the monitoring period, the EIC should be inspected
for any deviation from the conditions described in the log book
at the time of deployment. Any changes should be noted. The EIC
electret should be covered again using the mechanism provided.
2.3.9 Documentation
It is important that enough information about the measurement be
recorded in a permanent log so that data interpretations and
comparisons can be made. The information includes the following:
• The dates and start and stop tiroes of the measurement;
• Whether standardized conditions, as previously
specified, are satisfied;
• Exact location of the detector, on a diagram of the
room and .house, if possible;
• Other easily gathered information that may be
useful, such as the type of house, type of heating
system, and the existence of a crawl space;
F-5
-------
• Serial numbf.r and supplier of detector along with a
code number or description which uniquely iden-
tifies customer, building, room, and sampling
position.
2.3.10 Analysis Requirements
In general, all EICs should be analyzed in the field or in the
laboratory as soon as possible following removal from houses. A
background correction must be made to the radon concentration
value obtained because EICs have a small response to background
gamma radiation.
2.3.10.1 Sensitivity. For a 7-day exposure period using a
short-term EIC the lower level of detection (LLD) (Altshuler and
Pasternak 1963) is about 0.3 pCi/L. For a long-term EIC, the LLD
is also about 0.3 pCi/L.
2.3.10.2 Precision. The coefficient of variation should not
exceed 10 percent (1 sigma) at radon concentrations of 4 pCi/L or
greater. This precision should be monitored by using the results
of duplicate detector analyses described in Section 2.3.11.3 of
this protocol.
2.3.11 Quality Assurance
The quality assurance (QA) program for measurements with EIC
detectors includes four parts: (1) calibration detectors, (2)
known exposure (spiked) detectors, (3) duplicate detectors as a
test of the precision and (4) control (blank) detectors to check
for exposure during shipment or storage. The purpose of a QA
program is to identify the accuracy and precision of the
measurements and to assure that the measurements are not in-
fluenced by exposure from sources outside the environment to be
measured.
The EPA has established the National Radon Measurement
Proficiency (RMP) Program. This quality assurance program
enables participants to demonstrate their proficiency at
measuring radon and radon decay product concentrations. For
further information please write to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency; Radon Division; Mitigation, Prevention, and
Quality Assurance Branch; National RMP Program; 401 M Street, SW;
Washington, D.C., 20460.
2.3.11.1 Calibration Factors. Determination of calibration
factors for EIC detectors requires exposure of detectors to known
concentrations of radon-222 in a radon exposure chamber. Since
EICs are also sensitive to exposure to gamma radiation (see
Section 2.3.11.4), a gamma background measurement is also
required.
F-6
-------
The following guidance is provided to manufacturers and suppliers
of EIC services as minimum requirements in determining the
calibration factor.
• Detectors should be exposed in a radon chamber at
several different radon concentrations or exposure
levels similar to those found in the tested houses fa
minimum of three different concentrations).
• A minimum of ten detectors should be exposed at
each level.
• The period of exposure should be sufficient to
allow the detector to achieve equilibrium with the
chamber atmosphere.
2.3.11.2 Known Exposure Detectors. Both suppliers of EIC
detector services and large users of these services should submit
detectors with known radon exposures (spiked samples) for
analysis on a regular schedule. Blind calibration detectors
should be labeled in the same manner as the field detectors to
ensure identical processing. The number of devices submitted for
analysis should be a few percent of the total number of detectors
analyzed. The results of the spiked detector analysis should be
monitored and recorded and any significant deviation from the
known concentration to which they were exposed should be
investigated.
2.3.11.3 Duplicate fCoIocated) Detectors. Duplicate EICs should
be placed in enough houses to monitor the precision of the
measurement. This will usually be approximately 10 percent of
the houses to be tested each month or 50, whichever is smaller.
The duplicate devices should be shipped, stored, exposed, and
analyzed under the same conditions, and not identified as
duplicates to the processing laboratory. The samples selected
for duplication should be systematically distributed throughout
the entire population of samples. Groups selling measurements to
homeowners can do this by providing two detectors instead of one
to a random selection of purchasers, with instructions to place
the detectors side-by-side. Consideration should be given to
providing some means to ensure that the duplicate devices are not
separated during the measurement period. The analysis of
duplicate data should follow the methodology described by Goldin
in section 5.3 of his report (Goldin 1984). The method should
achieve a coefficient of variation of 10 percent (1 sigma) or
less at radon concentrations of 4 pCi/L or greater. Consistent
failure in duplicate agreement indicates an error in the
measurement process that should be investigated.
2.3.11.4 Control EICs for Background Gamma Exposure and Electret
Stability Monitoring. Electrets should exhibit very little drift
in surface voltage due to internal electrical instabilities.
F-7
-------
Neither the short-term or the long-term electrets should show
voltage reductions of more than that which they exhibit when
exposed to 0.3 pCi/L. A minimum of 5 percent of the electrets,
or 10, whichever is smaller, should be set aside from each
shipment and evaluated for voltage drift. They should be kept
covered with protective caps in a low radon environment and
analyzed for voltage drift over a time period similar to the tine
period used for those deployed in homes. Any voltage drift found
in the control electrets of more than 2 volts per week for short-
term electrets or 1 volt per month for long-term electrets should
be investigated.
EICs also are sensitive to background gamma radiation. The
electret voltage drop due to the background gamma radiation needs
to be assessed so that an appropriate correction can be made to
the measured concentration value. This background voltage drop
should be subtracted from the total voltage drop exhibited by the
electret, to produce a net voltage difference due only to the
exposure to the ions produced by the decay of radon in the EIC
chamber. A background correction of 0.8 pCi/L is routinely
subtracted from both long and short-term EIC readings to correct
for an average background value of 10 uR/hr. This background
correction is made by the analysis laboratory or by the user if
the detector is read in the field. In cases where higher than
normal background radiation is suspected or known to exist, a
gamma background measurement should be made (preferably with an
energy-compensated scintil.lometer) , and an additional correction
of 0.08 pCi/L for each additional uR/hr should be made.
F-8
-------
New York State Study
OUTDOOR MEASUREMENT
Enclosed are the radiation monitors and metal shelter
necessary to monitor outdoor radon-222 concentrations. Please
place the boxes marked "transit TLD's" into the mail as soon as you
receive them. The present study requires deployment of the two
long-term E-PERM's and a set of TLD-15's at two houses.
The shelters are designed to be attached to a chain link fence
or suitable post, located at least three feet from permanent
buildings, masonry walls, or electrical transformers. Inside each
box is an adjustable post clamp bracket for attaching the shelter
to a standard chain link fence post of 1 1/2 - 2 inches in
diameter. The bracket connects to the back of the shelter by using
the two center bolts. The shelter must be mounted approximately
39 inches (1 meter) above the ground level. If you have any
questions in mounting the shelter, please call Roger Shura at (702)
798-2450.
Place the long-term E-PERM's into the shelter, along with the
background TLD's and the TLD data card. Fill in the start dates
and times on the data cards. Unscrew the tops of the E-PERM's and
shut the lid of the shelter.
A measurement time period of 3 months has been selected for
the outdoor E-PERM's and TLD's.
INDOOR MEASUREMENTS
Eight short-term E-PERM's are enclosed for the indoor
measurements to be conducted (two apiece) in four homes.
instructions for deployment of the indoor E-PERM's are enclosed.
A time period of. twelve days has been selected for the indoor
detector measurements.
If you have any questions, please call Dick Hopper or Rhonda
Rankin at (702) 798-2469.
F-9
-------
Instructions for using the E-PERM detector
Pro-test Information
Do not conduct test if you are planning extensive remodeling or changes in your
heating or air-conditioning system that may drastically alter the normal air flow in your
home while using this device.
Do n°tj»t9rttest ^ vour schedule prohibits ending the measurement after the
maximum SfflSfro1a~yT"or if you cannot return or mail the E-PERM to the laboratory at
the end of the test period.
Do not operate high volume attic or window fans or air exchange systems (other
than normal furnace/air conditioner) for 12 hours prior to or during the test period.
Do not conduct the test if severe winds or thunderstorms are predicted for the
test period.
Set-up Instructions
A suitable test site must be chosen for the E-PERM canister. Choose a room
that is regularly occupied on the LOWEST LEVEL of your home. Do not choose a
location near drafty areas such as windows, doors or under heating/air conditioning
vents, near excessive heat such as fireplaces or radiators or in the direct sunlight. Do
not choose a location near the outside walls of your home.
Remove the E-PERM from the box. Save this box for returning the device to the
laboratory.
Record the ROOM LOCATION and FLOOR of the home you have chosen on the
attached sample collection card.
Place the canister at your selected location. It must be placed where it will
remain undisturbed throughout the measurement period. Place it on a flat table or
shelf at least 2 feet above the floor and with the detector at least 4 inches away from
all other objects so nothing will limit air-flow around canister.
To start the test, unscrew the plastic lid on top. The fid will pop up about 2
inches above the canister. Your E-PERM is now. ON and the measurement period has
begun.
Record the START TIME and DATE on the attached sample collection card.
FIELD ENTRY
PlArt a 3fc
-------
Removal Instructions
At the end of your test period, to stop the exposure, screw the lid on top of the
canister back into place. The E-PERM is now off and the measurement period if over.
Record the STOP TIME and DATE on the sample collection card. In the
pEMARKS section of the data card, record any unusual weather conditions or if the
g-PERM was dropped or knocked over.
Send the E-PERM to the laboratory in a shipping box with the return address
label provided.
If you have any questions, please contact Rhonda Rankin at the Office of
padiation Programs in Us Vegas at (702) 798-2469.
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE 1300
PRIORITY
BUSINESS REPLY LABEL
FIRST CLASS PERMIT NO 11663 LAS VEGAS NV
POSTAGE WILL BE PAID »1 U S EM
NO POSTAGE
NECESSARY
IF MAILED
IN THE
UNITED STATES
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RADIATION PROGRAMS _ _ , .
P.O. 80X98517 Attn: R. Rankui
LAS VEGAS. NV 89193-998? EAX-3
een
F-ll
-------
APPENDIX G
Field Data Forms
A1302
SI/NJ UATAP INDOOR AIR MONITORING SITES
SUMMARY SHEET
PAGE
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
B. DAILY ACTIVITY LOG FOR THE 24-HOUR
PERIOD PRIOR TO SAMPLING
C. HUMAN ACTIVITY FACTORS
1. General Information for Occupants
2. Occupancy Profile
3. Cooking Porfile
4. Smoking Profile
5. Activity Profile
D. DESCRIPTION OF HOME SURROUNDINGS
g. WATER SUPPLY
f. WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTEM
G. HEAT, VENTILATION, AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEMS (HVA.C)
1. Heating System
2. Cooling System
3. Ventilation and Indoor Air Treatment
B. INDOOR-OUTDOOR ENERGY AND AIR FLOW
I. BUILDING DESIGN AND MATERIALS
1. Exterior of Residence
2. Garage
3. Interior of Residence
J. CLIMATOLOGY AND METEOROLOGY
G-l
-------
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
BUREAU OF TOXIC SUBSTANCE ASSESSMENT
INDOOR AIR QUALITY RESIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE
Data Prepared:
Prepared By:
Title:
Complete the following questionnaire for each household sanpled:
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
(1)«. Head of Household: Nave:
Address:
City:
County:
Home Phone No.:
Business Phone No.:
b. How many years have you resided at this address?
(2) Owner (If different than above)
Nane:
Address:
City:
Phone No.:
G-2
-------
0. DAILY ACTIVITY LOC FOR THE 24-HOUR PERIOD PRIOR TO SAMPLING
Answer the following for the 24-hour period just prior to
Campling:
Date:
1. Did you cooK breakfast?
Tiae?
2. Did you cook lunch?
Tiae?
3. Did you cook dinner?
Tiae?
4. Did you cook or bake anything special which add cooking
tiae?
Tiae?
5. Did you turn on the kitchen ventilation fan while
cooking? How long?
6. Did you use any cheaical cleaning agents? If yes(
which roon(s) did you clean? State date, tiae and
type(s) of cleaning materials used in each rooa.
7. Do you smoke? Did you have any guests that sacked?
What type of smoking (cigarette, cigar, pipe, etc.)*
Date, tine and rooa in which they sacked?
8. Was a spray or solid air freshener used in the house?
What brand? Date, tiae and rooa in which it was used?
9. Did you open any windows? In which rooms did you open
the windows? Between what hours were the windows open?
G-3
-------
'
10. Did you vacuum? What brand of vacuua cleaner did you
use? Date, tine and tine spent vacuuming each room?
11. Did you use a fireplace? When?
12. If you have an attached garage, was a car in the
garage? Was it running (driven in or out) during the
day?
13. What personal toiletries were used in your hone?
14. Did you use the washing machine or dishwasher?
15. How many individuals took showers and what the
approximate length of each.
16. Did you participate in any hobbies that require
solvents?
17. Was anything in the house painted during the last 24
hours? In what room?
18. Was your general heating system used? How many hours?
19. Was a kerosene heater operated? For how long?
20. Has any construction or handy work been done in the
home that required vallboarding, installing carpets,
etc.? If yes, please explain.
G-4
-------
C. HUMAN ACTIVITY FACTORS
Answer each question for each occupant presently living at this
residence.
Occupant 12 3 456789 10
1. General Information!
a. Nane:
b. Age:
c. Sex
d. Occupation (including
students)
e. How many years at this
occupation?
f. If a student, at which school?
g. Does the person live somewhere
else for any part of the year
(•x. college student)?
i. If yes, what percentage of the year
do they live at this residence?
2. Occupancy Profile. Pleas* state the average aaount of ti»e
(in hours) each person spends:
a. in the hone (weekday)
b. in the ho»e (weekend)
c. just outside the hone (weekday)
d. just outside the home (weekend)
•• at the workplace or school
t. in transit
g. in other people's hones
h. in places of business
i* in restaurants or bars
j. in all other locations
3. Presence 4m hone during use of stove,;
a. Weekdays: breakfast
lunch
dinner
b. Weekends: breakfast
lunch
dinner
G-5
-------
Smoking Profile;
a. Does the person moke?
b. Cigarettes, pipe, cigar, other?
c. What hour* during the day does he or she smoke in this
residence?
d. In which rooms?
Activity Profile;
What hours is the person hone?
(example 6:00 pa to 8:00 aa)
a. Weekdays
b. Weekend days
G-6
-------
V
DESCRIPTION OF HOME SUERQWDINCS
1. Residence location: 2. If suburb or rural,
urban industrial specify distance and
urban residential direction of nearest
suburban city?
rural
3. (i) What size is the lot? (sq. ft. or acres)
Lot type? Corner Lot?
Interior lot (lot bounded by street on one side)?
Double-fronted lot (interior lot bounded by a street on
front and back)?
4. (ii) Draw a sketch of the lot and approximate location of
the residence. Include north/south orientation. Label
streets, surrounding buildings, etc. Include location of
well, pool, garden and any other important landmarks.
5. a. What is the distance from residence to the road?
b. Is the nearst road:
heavily travelled
moderately travelled
rarely travelled
Is the nearest road:
paved
unpaved
other
d. what is the approximate percentage of trucks compared
to total vehicles on this road?
6. What is the nearest major roadway? Describe direction and
distance from roadway?
7a. Describe the land surrounding the house.
clay (b) Is the land surrounding
bedrock your home:
shale dry
•oil average
sand ____________ damp
gravel _
other Explain:
8. Are there any construction, demolition, or earthnoving
activities in the vicinity of this residence?
G-7
-------
9a.
b.
lOa,
Relative to the surrounding terrain of one square block; it
this residence:
hilltop
hillside
valley
.plain
Relative to th« surrounding terrain of one square mile, is
this residence:
hilltop
hillside
valley
.plain
Density of trees surrounding residence?
Dense ______ Moderate __________ Spars*
b. Types of trees:
lla.
b.
c.
d.
e.
alder
ash
oak
birch
cedar
•!•
fir
hickory _
maple _
pin* _
popular _
syacamore
walnut _
other _
Is this residence on a shoreline?
Type of body of water?
Distance from body of water?
Shoreline flora or fauna?
Are there stagnant backwaters?
12a. Is there a swimming pool on the property?
b. Where is it located in relation to the house?
c. What chemicals are used to Maintain the pool (Brand type)?
d. Where are these chemicals stored?
13a. Has the house ever been fumigated?
b. What was the problem (termite, ants, etc.)?
c. Who did the work?
d. Where was the pesticide applied?
e. What pesticides were used?
f. What was the method of application?
g. To the best of your knowledge, was the pesticide properly
applied?
h. If Improperly applied, indicate conditions:
introduction to ducts on forced air systems
failure to properly grout sub-slab applications
direct to soils in crawl space areas
seepage through wall* and/or floors
direct to interior surfaces
floor spillage
failure to properly seal borings through
concrete floor or wall
other
G-8
-------
14a. Do you have a garden?
b. What it grown?
c. Dittanca and diractlon from house?
d. What chemicals (fertilizer, pesticide, harbicidat) ara
used?
a. How ara they appliad (diractly to ground, sprayed)?
f. Whara ara tha chemicals atorad?
15a. What products do you uaa to maintain your lawn (fertilizer,
crab grass killer, ate.)?
b. Hov ara thasa chemicals appliad?
c. Whara ara thasa chemical stored?
16a. Is this residence located en or naar a farm?
b. If naar, dascriba distance) and diraction?
c. Method of pasticida, herbicide application?
17a. Are the trees in your location sprayed with any chemicals?
b. What ara they spray ad for?
18a. Ara there vacant lots or bodies of stagnant water naar this
residence?
b. Describe type, distance, and direction?
c. Does anyone spray for mosquitos, veeds, etc.?
d. What is sprayed?
19. Describe type, location and distance of nearest industry
(industries) (if applicable).
20. Describe type, location and distance of the nearest
commercial establishment (if applicable).
21. Describe type, location and distance of nearest landfill or
dumpsite (if applicable).
22. Describe location and distance of power lines and power
stations.
23. Describe location and distance of transmission lines,
broadcast towers, or microwave relay stations (if
applicable).
24. Describe location and distance to the nearest gas stations,
oil storage tanks, propane storage and dispenser
facilities.
25. Describe location and distance to a professional cleaning
establishment (if applicable).
26. Describe location and distance of nearest airport (if
applicable).
27. Describe location and distance to any large parking lots,
bus stations, train stations (if applicable).
G-9
-------
28. It there Anything else about your outdoor environment that
you f««l aay contribute to chemicals in the air?
29. In your opinion, it the air seriously polluted in your
community? Why do you think »o?
30. In your opinion, is the water seriously polluted in your
community? Why do you think so?
31. In your opinion, is the soil seriously polluted in your
community? Why do you think so?
32. To the best of your knowledge, what was located on this
land prior to this building?
G-10
-------
WATER SUPPLY
la. Source of water:
Personal
Public Well
Public Lake or River
Other
b. If public water supply, when was system built?
What type of pipes ware used?
c. Is the water chlorinated?
d. If private well:
Wall diameter
well depth
Depth to bedrock
Peet of casing ._
Well capacity
Type of pump
Well yield
Type of storage tank
Condition of storage tank
Site of storage tank
Type of treatment
Do you use any water treatment systems (water softener,
filters}? Describe.
General water quality:
(a) Are there any taste and/or odor problems?
Describe
How long has the taste and/or odor been present?
(b) Are thera any color or cloudiness problems?
Describe
(c) How long has this been a problem?
Are there any scaling or staining problems? Describe.
Type of water heater:
Gas, oil, Electric
Make, Model 4 Year
Location in House
G-ll
-------
F. WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTEM
1. Public Sever
Septic Tank
Other
2. Distance of vast* disposal system from veil?
3. If you have a septic tank, have you had any problems with
it? Has it ever been replaced?
G-12
-------
HEAT. VEHTI1ATION. AIR CONDITIQNTNG SYSTEMS fHVACl
1. Heating System
a. (i) Primary Heating System:
Hot air circulation
Hot vatar circulation ;
Steam radiators
Electric Central Radiant
Heat Pump
Solar What type of heat storage bed is
us«4?
Other
(ii) Puel Type:
Natural Gas
Puel Oil
Electric
Wood
Coal
Sun
Secondary Heating System
Fireplace Insert
Woodbuming Stove
Space Heaters:
Electric
Kerosene
c.(i) Heat distribution is accomplished by:
Ducts
Radiators __________________
Other
(ii) Are the ducts lined or covered with an insulating
material?
If yes, what type of insulation?
d.(i) Where is the primary heat source located?
Basement
Living Area Specify Where
Other
(ii) If the fuel type is oil, where is the oil tank
located?
Is there any leakage?
what is the condition of the tank?
G-13
-------
(ill) Furnace: Make .
Model
Year .
Insulation: Type
Condition of door gaskets:
e. !• this heating system tons controlled?
f. Is there a system to recover heat from exhaust air?
g. Fireplaces and voodbuming stoves:
(i) Does this residence have fireplaces?
Row many? Where are they located?
(ii) Does this reisdence have voodburning stoves?
Row many? Where are they located?
(iii) Were the fireplaces and woodburning stoves
professionally installed?
(iv) Do the stovepipes on the voodburning stoves have
cracks, leaks, or seem to badly fitted?
(v) Are there frequent down drafts?
(vi) Are there glass enclosures in front of
fireplaces?
(vii) When was flue or stove pipe last cleaned? _
(viii) is a flue damper installed? Motorized?
(ix) Is there a recovery system for flue gas, heat?
differential pressure
h. Other combustion sources:
Do you frequently burn:
candles
insence
oil lamps
kerosene lamps
other
2. Cooling System
a. Type of cooling system:
Electric
Individual Units
Ventilation Fans
Other
b. Specify location of cooling system or location of
individual units?
What is the capacity?
Make, Model, Year?
G-1A
-------
3a. Ventilation and Indoor Air Treatment - Specify all
types:
Humidifiers: Location
Model and Year:
DehuBidifieri: Location
Model and Year: '
Air filtration: Location:
Model:
Year:
Sorption Devices: Location
Models
Year:
Electrostatic Percipitator: Location:
Model:
Year:
Ozonator: Location:
Model:
Year:
Controlled Ventilation Systea:
Type: _
Location:
Model: •
Year:
Air Diffusion Equipment:
Type: Grilles
Slot Diffusers
Ceiling Diffusers
Perforated Ceiling
Location
Model
Year
Furnace Filters: Model Year
G-15
-------
H. INDOOR-OUTDOOR ENERGY AND AIR FLOW
1. Would you consider this residence to be:
very drafty
somewhat drafty .
fairly air tight
vary air tight
2a. Insulation
(i) Type: (check all that ara present in this rasidanca)
Fiberglass
Urea-formaldehyde foam
Cellulose
Polyurathana
Asbestos
Rock Wool
Veniculite
Othar
(ii) For each typa of insulation usad, spacify location
and thickness:
Typa Thickness (in.l Visibly Exposed
Outsida vails
Roof raftars
Attic floors
Crawl spaca
If concrata-alab,
construction undar
bottom floor
Othar
3. Othar conservation measures (chack all used):
Stom windows
Operable insulating shutters
Store doors
Caulking and waatherstripping .
Pointing and Filling (remove gaps in
aged brick or stone)
Decrease window area
Elimination of fireplace
Recirculation of kitchen fan
Vestibule doors replacing single doors
Automatic door closers
Outdoor landscaping (windbreak)
Shading devises for windows
Reduce internal electrical loads
Use fluorescent lighting '
Automatic pilot lights in gas appliances
G-16
-------
Proper ventilation of heat-producing
appliance!
Timert on light twitches in infrequently
used areae
Installation of high «ffici«ncy appliances
Reduca ratio of building «nv«lop«/floor
araa
Vantilata attic spaces
Low«r cailing haight
Nighttiv* taaparatur* setback
G-17
-------
I. BUILDINGS DESIGN AND MATERIALS
1. Exterior of Residence
a. Arc blueprints or other building records available,
should they be needed?
b. is this a:
single family residence
multi-family residence
apartment complex
town house
condominium
other
c. Rouse foundation:
Concrete-slab type
Basement type
Pier and Post type
d. (i) If multi-family, apartment, tovnhouse, or
condominium, how many units are in your building?
(ii) What is the location of your unit? )Floor,
Corner, etc.) Describe.
(Hi) What is the location of the elevator in
relation to your unit?
(iv) What is the location of the stairwells in
relation to your unit?
(v) What is the location of the laundry in relation
to your unit?
(vi) What is the location of the incinerator in
relation to your unit?
For home in multi-unit building skip to question f.
e. If single family dwelling:
One story
Raised ranch or bi-level
Split level
Story and a half
Two story
Three story
f. (i) Height of building (ft)
(ii) height of one-story (ft)
G-18
-------
g. (i) When vas this residence built?
(ii) What major renovations have been made since this
residence was building (ex., additional rooms, replace
roof, etc.)?
h. (i) Rat there every been a fire in the house?
(ii) If yes, in what section?
(iii) What was the extent of the damages and what was
done to repair these damages?
i. (i) What are the exterior dimensions of the building?
ft. x ft.
(ii) What is the external color of the building walls?
(iii) What is the material covering the external
building walls?
brick
stone
aluminum siding
wood shingles or siding
underlaying material
j. (i) Number of external doors (excluding sliding
glass)?
What material are they made from:
Solid Wood
Wood Veneer
Metal doors
Other
Number of sliding glass doors
Orientation of doors N SE W NW NE SW SE
Area per door (ft2)
fc. Windows
(i) frame material:
wood
Aluminum
Other
(ii) glazing:
Single
Double
Triple
(iii) storm windows _Yes
(iv) glass area as percentage of floor area
(excluding glass doors) %
G-19
-------
(v) I« the structure oriented §o that the glass area
it distributed in a particular direction?
If yes, what !• the approximate distribution of
area by sides of structure?
North % South % East % Wast
NW % SW _% HE % SE %
Roof
(i) Typ«: Peak or Gable (height -
Plat Built-Up
Other
(ii) Roofing material
slate
roofing shingle
metal
clay tile
tar paper
mylar sheets
wood shakes
asbestos sheets
asbestos shingles
Garage
a. Is there a garage?
b. Garage Type: Attached
Detached
Built-in
Other
c. If attached or built-in, what room* are adjacent to or
above the garage? Where are doors that lead fro* the
garage to the house?
d. If attached or built-in, how «any vehicles are
generally parked in garage?
Types of vehicles?
Do you warn-up the car in the garage?
How long on the average?
e. If attached or built-in, do you have lavnnoers,
snowbloers or other power machinery stored in the
garage?
Is this machinery started or used in the garage?
f. what chemicals are stored in the garage (lawn and
garden chemicals, pool chemicals, gas containers,
paints, etc.)? List, all brands.
G-20
-------
3. Interior of Residence
a. Sketch a floor plan of the residence. Include
North/South orientation, location of heating, cooling
water, vantilation systems. U»a ona paga for aach
floor - includa baseaent and attic if applicable.
Includa approximata locations of saaple
collection*(a).
b. Total floor area in structure or unit? (ftj)
Total floor araa that is below grada? (ft*)
c. Attic
Does this residence hava an attic?
Is tha attic finished as living accovodations, or
used as storage?
Entranca to attic:
Stairway or pull down laddar?
Where is entrance located?
What is stored in attic? (List all consumer products,
paints, etc.).
d. Basement
Doas this residence hava:
full basement
half basenent
cravl apaca
no basaiant
other
Is tha basement heated:
full
half
crawl space
not heated
If fully or partially unheated, is there insulation
under floor?
If yes, type and amount?
Is the basement finished Unfinished _____
Is there seepage or flooding of water in
the baseaent?
G-21
-------
What is the basement used for:
living space work space
storage recreational
What chemicals arc stored in the basement?
It any power machinery stored and/or used in basement?
Where do doors from basement lead? Are they usually
open or closed?
Is there an outdoor entrance to the basement?
Is there a drainage, system in the basement? Specify
types. Is it gravity or pump?
What material is the floor?
Concrete _____ Other
Earthen
Floor Covering Tile
Wood
Carpet SyntheticNatural Fiber
Padding under rug type
Other
a. What material is the vail?
Cement block Concrete Other
b. Wall covering: Ceramic tile
Wood panelling
Wallpaper
Stucco
Painted
Stone
Brick
Other Describe.
Are there any furnishings? Specify all typ«s.
Metallic Softwood Plastic upholster _
Wrought iron v/baked enamel finish Hardwood
Synthetic upholstered Leather
Natural fabric upholstered Sponge rubber
If crawl space:
Is it vented? Yes . No
G-22
-------
Access to rest of house is by:
By Door _____ Always open _____ Ho accass
Approximate area sq. ft.
How far below ground is the floor?
What material art the vails:
concrete
ceaent block
other
What material is the floor?
•oil
gravel
gravel on plastic film
concrete
other
Is there a workshop, hobby or craft area in the
residence?
Bow often is it used?
Where is it located?
Type of craft or hobby?
Photography Stained glass
Dark room fabrication
Pottery Jewelry making
Ceramics _____ Etching
Sculpting Lithography
Painting Silk screening
Electronic Work Woodworking
General repair Furniture
Other Refinishing
Plastics molding
What types of materials are used and/or stored here
(brand names and type of products)?
Kitchen
Type Model, General
Applianef foas or electric) Make t Year Condition
Refrigerator
Range
Oven
Freezer
Microwave Oven
G-23
-------
It the oven and rang* vented to the outside?
Is ventilation working?
Is tht system vented to the outsid* or recirculated
back into the kitchen?
Is tht ov«n s«lf-cleaning?
If not, vhat brand of oven cleaner do you use; how
of tan is it used, and where is it stored?
What saall appliances are thara in tha kitchen (make,
•odal, yaar)?
g. Bathrooms (ansvar for aach bathroom if mora than ona)?
Is thara a vantilation systaa?
Is room freshener usad frequently?
Brand?
Plaasa list tha item* in your medicine cabinets?
What material is the tub, shower stall and sink?
Fiberglass
Ceramic
Porcelain
Other
h. Rooms 1 2 3 <
Kitchen
1. Size or room:
2. Number of windows:
3. Draperies or curtains:
Cotton
Linen
Silk
Synthetic
Fiberglass
Are they lined? Yes No
Venetian Blinds
Other
G-24
-------
Cabinttt and Counters:
Solid wood
Wood Veneer
Ponica
Other
5. Floor Coverings:
Tile
Hood
Carpet
Synthetic
Watural fiber
Wall to Wall, or area padding (type)
Have floors recently been refinished or
replaced? Explain.
6. Wall Coverings:
Ceraaic tile
Brick
Stone
Wood Panelling
Wallpaper
Paint
Stucco
Other
7. Ceiling
Painted
Stucco
Dropped
Other
If drop, what is above panels?
Lighting
Fluofescent
Incandescent
NuBber of lights
How are they counted?
Surface
Suspended
Recessed
Are there skylights?
G-25
-------
9. Type of furnishings (check all that apply)?
Softwood
Hardwood
Feather Stuffad
Sponge Rubbar
Plastic Upholstered
Synthatic Upholstered
Natural Fiber Upholstered
Leather
Katallic with enamel finish
Wrought iron
Nav furnichingi? Explain
Televisions
Brand Modal Year
10. Plants in room?
Chemicals used to maintain
Method of application
11. Consumer products used to clean?
12. Consumer products stored here?
1). Have any draperies, furniture coverings or carpets
bean dry cleanad recently?
14. Zs there any additional information in this room that
might be Important?
i. Additional Information
1. Is there any noticeable, regularly occurring odors
in this residence?
Describe where and with what frequency odors
occur.
Describe type of odor as best as you can?
2. Is there any noticable water vapor, condensation
in this residence? When? Where?
3. Do you have a washing maching and/or dryer?
Where?
Is the dryer vented to the outside?
4. Any hone office equipment?
Typewriters, home copiers, home computer?
G-26
-------
CLIMATOLOGY AND METEOROLOGY
1. Average temperature of area:
Summer
Fall __
Winter
Spring
2. Average annual rainfall
3. Average annual snowfall
4. Average Daylight:
5.
6.
(a)
(b)
Summer
Fall
Winter
Spring
Predominant
Predominant
wind direction
wind speed
Inversion Frequency
G-27
-------
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
CANISTER AIR COLLECTION
FIELD DATA FORM
SITE INFORMATION
Location
Sampler I
Sampler's Initials
CANISTER INFORMATION
SIDE 1 SIDE 2
Canister f Canister I
Canister Install Date Canister Install Date
Collection Date Collection Date
Initial Vacuum Initial Vacuum
Final Vacuum Final Vacuum
Valve Open O Valve Open
TIMER PROGRAM INFORMATION
Program Start Program Start
Program Stop Program Stop
Program Verification O Program Verification 0
Elapsed Time: START STOP
FLOW CONTROLLER INFORMATION
Initial Zero Reading
Flow Dial Reading %
TEMPERATURE INFORMATION
Max. Temperature Min. Temperature
SAMPLE TYPE
Field Sample O Field Duplicate 0 Trip Blank
COMMENTS
G-28
-------
MEV YORK STATE DEPAJlTMIHT OF HEALTH
fcUREAU OP TOXIC SU&STAXCE XSSESSKTHT
INDOOR AIR QUALITY RESIDENTIAL
D«tt Frtptrtdi
Pt»p»r»d By:
TltUi
Compl»t« th« followirxj qu*»tlorvn»lr« for «§ch houMhold
IN FORMAT TO*
{!)•. Htad of Household: Ktm«t
Addr«»«(
City*
County:
HOM Phon* Ko.t
Bu»ln««> Phon* Ko.t
b. Row »any y«»r§ havt you r«tld«d »t this tddrtss?
(2) Ovntr (If dlfftrtnt than
City i
Phon« Wo.t
G-29
-------
I. DAILY XCTIVm LOG fQK THE 34-HOU* yEMQB PRIOR TO
Aniver the following for the 24-hour period Just prior to
Date:
1. Did you cook breakfast?
TlMt
2. Did you cook lunch?
TiM?
3. Did you cook dinner?
TiM>
4. Did YOU cook or bake anything special vhich add
Time?
5. Did you turn on the kitchen ventilation fan vhile
cooking? How long?
6. Did you use any chesical cleaning agents? If yes,
vhich roo»(s) did you clean? State date, tise and
typx(e) of cleaning materials used in each rooa.
?. Oo you fioXt? Did you htv* %ny gu««U that nok*d?
Vhat typ« of smoking (cigar%tt*f cigar, Blp«4 «te.}»
Date, tii« and rooa in vhich thay *»ok*d?
Vas a spray or solid air freshener used in the house?
Vhat brand? Date, time and room in vhich it vas
Did you open any window*? In vhich too** did you op*n
the windows? Between what hours were the windows open?
G-30
-------
10. Did you vacuum? Vhtt brand of vacuum claaner did you
uae? data, tlse and tilt spant vacuuming each rocs?
11. Did you utt a flraplaca? When?
12. If you have an attached 9»r»<3«, v»« t c*r In th«
9*r«9«? *%• it ruru^lrxj (driven in or out) during
day?
13. What personal toil«tri«s vtrt us»d in your ho»«?
14. Did you utt th« vathinq machine or dithvafhtr?
IS. Row iany individutls took ihovtri and vhat th«
approxiaata Itngth of aach.
1C. Did you participate in any hobbias that ra
-------
#11710079
APPENDIX H
Key to Contaminants by Number
1 chloromethane
2 dichloromethane
3 hexane
4 chloroform
5 1,1,1-trichloroethane
6 carbon tetrachloride
7 benzene
8 trichloroethylene
9 toluene
10 tetrachloroethylene
11 ethyl benzene
12 m,p-xylene
13 o-xylene
H-l
-------
APPENDIX I
Quality Assurance of Indoor Air Data
1. VOCs
The NYSDOH indoor air and outdoor air VOC data meet the QA
objectives for the project; they are included in the project data
base
2. Formaldehyde
Formaldehyde sampling conducted as part of the indoor air
portion of the study utilized a new samplers. Inaccurate timers,
lack of an effective flow regulation mechanism, and reported
problems with heat generation resulted in QA problems. Although
steps were taken to work with the inherent design flaws of the
system, they could not correct completely the problems
encountered. Thus, mistiming, changing flow rates, and thermal
shutoff or shutoff by individuals living in the sampled homes who
were concerned about the heat buildup in these units, were
possible.
QA information for the indoor air portion of the project was
obtained by comparing the two consecutive 12-hour samples that
were taken, with a collocated 24-hour sample. Since formaldehyde
concentration is computed based on total sampling flow rate, the
formaldehyde concentration of the average of the two 12-hour
samples should be equal to the 24-hour sample concentration.
Results of this analysis for all 21 sample sets taken in the
study, with the exclusion of one outlier, showed an average
percent difference of 46% between the formaldehyde concentration
of the average of the two 12-hour samples and the formaldehyde
concentration of the collocated 24 hour sample. The range of
percent differences was between 2.3% to 215%.
EPA/AREAL provided a review of EPA's national formaldehyde
field sampling programs. EPA/AREAL has shown that variability in
collocated sampling data is most often attributed to out-of-
control sampling equipment. As a result of the technical
problems associated with the formaldehyde samplers, the
collocated sampling information obtained in the indoor air
portion of the study, and EPA/AREAL's data on NSI's capabilities,
the data obtained with the samplers developed for the indoor air
monitoring portion of the study were excluded from the project
data base.
1-1
-------
3. Radon
Radon sampling was conducted by NYSDOH for the indoor air
monitoring portion of the project. Analysis of samples was
conducted under the auspices of EPA-Las Vegas.
The EPA-Las Vegas QA data for the National Ambient Radon
Study were accepted as a surrogate for QA data for the SI/NJ
UATAP radon samples, since EPA-Las Vegas (1) provided the same
sampling equipment for both projects; (2) analyzed the radon
samples for both projects utilizing the same procedures, methods,
and personnel; and (3) performed the services outlined in #1 and
#2 over the same time periods. Because of these circumstances,
the SI/NJ UATAP radon samples could be considered a subset of the
radon samples provided and analyzed by EPA-Las Vegas for the
National Ambient Radon Study.
The QA data provided for the National Radon Study show that,
in quarterly comparisons over the period of one year, the radon
devices of the type used in the SI/NJ UATAP were within ±25% of a
certified continuous radon gas monitor operated at the Las Vegas
Outdoor Radon Monitoring Station. Radon concentrations at this
site were typically slightly above or just below the minimum
detectable amount, defined as three.standard deviations above the
average measurement of a field blank.
Seven-day tests were conducted at the EPA-Las Vegas
Underground Radon Chamber on a quarterly basis for a year. The
results showed that the radon devices of the type used in the
SI/NJ UATAP were within +12% of the actual radon concentration.
Although duplicate samples were not taken for the SI/NJ
UATAP radon data, the results for the National Ambient Radon
Study show that the annual average ratio for duplicate samples
was 0.97.
In view of these QA data as well as other information
contained in the report, the radon data were included in the
project data base.
1-2
------- |