EPA-600/2-76-122
April 1976
Environmental Protection Technology Series
       TECHNICAL MANUAL  FOR PROCESS SAMPLING
                 STRATEGIES FOR  ORGANIC  MATERIALS

                                   Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
                                         Office of Research and Development
                                        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                  Research Triangle Park, North Carolina  27711

-------
               RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection  Agency, have been grouped into five series. These five  broad
categories  were established to facilitate further development and application of
environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to  foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The five series are:
     1.    Environmental Health Effects Research
     2.    Environmental Protection Technology
     3.    Ecological Research
     4.    Environmental Monitoring
     5.    Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

This report has been assigned  to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
TECHNOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and
demonstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent
environmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This
work provides the new or improved technology required for the control and
treatment of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
                    EPA REVIEW NOTICE

This report has been reviewed by  the U.S.  Environmental
Protection Agency, and approved for publication.  Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policy of the Agency, nor does mention of trade
names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
                                               EPA-600/2-76-122

                                               April 1976
              TECHNICAL MANUAL

    FOR  PROCESS SAMPLING  STRATEGIES

           FOR ORGANIC  MATERIALS
                          by

W. Feairheller, P. J. Marn, D.H. Harris, and D. L. Harris

             Monsanto Research Corporation
                 P. O. Box 8 (Station B)
                  Dayton, Ohio 45407
            Contract No.  68-02-1411, Task 11
                 ROAPNo. 21ACX-094
              Program Element No. 1AB015
           EPA Project Officer:  L.D. Johnson

      Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
        Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry
           Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                     Prepared for

     U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
           Office of Research and Development
                 Washington, DC 20460

-------
                        TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                           Page
 I.   Introduction                                            1


II.   Preliminary Methods - Level I                           9

     2.1  Gas Matrix Sampling                               10

          2.1.1  Proposed Level I Sampling System           12

                 2.1.1.1  Probe Tips and Probe Systems      16

                 2.1.1.2  Particulate Collection            17
                          System

                 2.1.1.3  Organic Collection System         20

                 2.1.1.4  Impinger System                   26

                 2.1.1.5  Umbilical Cord, Control Unit      27
                          and Pump

                 2.1.1.6  Pressure Drop Evaluation of       27
                          Level I Sampling System

          2.1.2  Gas Matrix Sampling - Fugitive Emis-       31
                 sions

                 2.1.2.1  Particulate Emissions             32

                 2.1.2.2  Vapor Emissions                   34

     2.2  Liquid Stream Sampling                            36

          2.2.1  Level I Sampling Schemes                   39

                 2.2.1.1  Grab Sampling Techniques          40

                 2.2.1.2  Field Concentrated Sample         42
                          Collection

          2.2.2  Level I Liquid Flow Measurements           47

     2.3  Solid Sampling Strategies                         48

          2.3.1  Level I Sampling of Bulk Material          52
                               ill

-------
                   TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued

                                                            Page
           2.3-2  Level I Sampling of Moving Solid           53
                  Materials

           2.3.3  Material Collected by Control Devices      55


III.   Level II and Level III Sampling Strategies             57

      3.1  Gas Matrix Sampling Strategies                    58

           3.1.1  Stationary Source Methods                  59

                  3.1.1.1  Solvent Scrubbing                 62

                  3.1.1.2  Condensation Techniques           63

                  3.1.1.3  Use of Porous Polymer Adsor-      65
                           bents in Sampling Gas Streams

                  3.1.1.4  Adsorption on Chemical Sub-       76
                           strates and Silica Gel

                  3.1.1.5  Sampling in Particulate Laden     77
                           Streams

                  3.1.1.6  Procedures for Low Molecular      80
                           Weight Materials

           3.1.2  Fugitive Emission Methods                  83

                  3.1.2.1  Particulate Emissions             85

                  3.1.2.2  Organic Vapor Emissions           87

      3.2  Liquid Sampling Schemes                           88

           3.2.1  Sampling Systems                           89

           3.2.2  Flow Measurement Techniques                99

                  3.2.2.1  Procedures for closed, filled    101
                           systems

                  3.2.2.2  Flow Measurements in Open        103
                           Pipes
                                iv

-------
                   TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued

                                                            Page

                 3.2.2.3  Control of Plow Proportional       107
                          Sampling

          3.2.3  Preservation of Samples                    113

     3.3  Solid Sampling Procedures                         116

          3-3.1  Sampling of Bulk Material                  11?

          3.3.2  Sampling from Moving Streams               118


IV.   References                                             121


 V.   Appendix                                               127

-------
                       LIST OF FIGURES

Figure                                                    Page

   1    Schematic of Level I Gas Matric Sampler            13

   2    Separator cyclone                                  19

   3    Prototype high volume porous polymer adsorber      22

   4    Possible design for production high volume         23
        adsorber

   5    Possible design for thermostated high volume       24
        adsorber

   6    Pressure drop data for various sampling            29
        systems

   7    Integrated gas sampling train,                     60
        (Solid lines showing normal arrangement,
        Dotted Lines - alternate arrangement,
        evacuating chamber around bag.)

   8    Sampling train for aldehydes                       64

   9    Porous polymer vapor sampling method               66

  10    Alternate porous polymer system for organic        68
        vapors

  11    Diagrams of the sampling systems used in the       79
        Battelle train evaluation study

  12    Porous polymer and thermal gradient sampling       82
        train

  13    Kaiser tube configuration                          84

  14    Sampler positions; S0 - background;                86
        Sj, S2, S3, S4 - sample collectors

  15    Schematic of the CVE Sampler                       95


                              vii

-------
                  LIST OP FIGURES - Continued



Figure                                                    Page




  16    Schematic of the Manning S^IOOO Sampler             98




  17    Open pipe flow measurement method9                104




  18    California pipe flow method9                      106




  19    Typical V-notch and Rectangular Weirs11           108




  20    Design of Parshall Flume                          109
                              viii

-------
                        LIST OF TABLES

Table                                                     Page

  1    Components of Level I Sampling System               14


  2    Detector-Column Options for the GLC Separation      6l
       of Various Classes of Organic Materials27


  3    Organic Substances Detected from Paint and          69
       Polymer Curing Ovens by Porous Polymer Ad-
       sorption and GC Mass Spectrometric Analysis


  4    Physical Properties of Porous Polymers              71


  5    Volume of Sample Required for Determination of      90
       the Various Constituents of Industrial Water10

  6    Samplers for Wastewater Collection                  9^

  1    Methods of Flow Measurement and Their Applica-     100
       tion^5


  8    Methods of Measurement of Flow in Closed Pipes     102


  9    Sample Preservation and Maximum Holding Periods9   115
                              ix

-------
                          SECTION I

                        INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this technical manual is to describe the sam-
pling approaches for conducting an environmental assessment
survey and control technology studies on the feed, product
and waste streams associated with the production of organic
materials.  The intent is to provide selected "state-of-the-
art" sampling techniques that can be employed to obtain sam-
ples of materials for both chemical analysis and biological
testing.  The methods presented can be used by all groups in-
volved in this type of sampling, although modifications may
be required for particular sites.  These methods are presented
as extensions of current art and should be viewed as reason-
able approaches that will be subject to refinement as further
advances are made.

The following description taken in part from the two guide-
line documents on environmental assessment sampling and analy-
sis programs defines a portion of our area of interest.1*2

"An environmental source assessment contains (1) a systematic
evaluation of the physical, chemical, and biological charac-
teristics of the streams associated with a process; (2) pre-
dictions of the probable effects of the streams on the environ-
ment; (3) the prioritization of the streams; and (4) identifi-
cation of any necessary control technology program.  An en-
vironmental source assessment program addresses, to the

-------
maximum extent possible, the identification of potential prob-
lems with pollutants for which specific standards have been
set and materials that are suspected to have deleterious
effects on the environment.  The ultimate goal of an environ-
mental source assessment, then, is to insure that the waste
streams from a given process scheme are "environmentally
acceptable" or that adequate technology exists for control.

The overall strategy incorporates three "levels" (phases) of
information development.  In general, the intent of each
phase is the measurement of the mass flow rates of primary
pollutant classes either out of the envelope containing the
process or out of the plant of which the process is one part.
The strategy which has been developed includes characteriza-
tion of feed streams to provide a rough material balance, and
to determine if an effective control approach may be through
feedstock modification.  The characterization also extends
to the product streams whenever they may directly affect the
environment at the next step of usage.

Level I is structured to produce a cost effective information
base for prioritization of streams and for planning of any
subsequent programs.  It seeks to provide input data to sup-
port evaluation of the following questions:

     a.  Do streams leaving the process have a finite
         probability of exceeding existing air, water,
         or solid waste standards or criteria?

     b.  Do any of the streams leaving the process con-
         tain any classes of substances that are known
         or suspected to have adverse environmental
         effects?

     c.  Into what general categories (classes) do these
         adverse substances fall?
                             2

-------
     d.  What are the most probable sources of these
         substances?

     e.  Based on the adverse effects and mass out-
         put rates, what is the priority ranking of
         streams?

     f.  For streams exhibiting potential environ-
         mental effects, what is the basic direction
         that control strategies are likely to follow?

The Level I measurement program provides information on physi-
cal and chemical composition of process streams.  It provides
information on the in vitro cytotoxicity and mutagenicity of
the streams and stream components as well.  In the chemical
analysis program information concerning the elemental composi-
tion and the distribution of chemical substances according to
conventionally, but broadly, defined classes is sought.

This program provides data that permit both the identification
of existing broad problems and the evaluation of the possible
adverse environmental effects of the streams.  The measurement
techniques employed in Level I do not attempt the quantitative
determination of compliance with existing standards, but in-
stead provide results that can be used both for semiquantita-
tive evaluation of process compliance and for planning subse-
quent sampling and analysis programs.

Such subsequent programs are effected through Level II and
Level III sampling and analytical studies.  Briefly, the
Level II measurement program is an extensive qualitative,
semiquantitative approach that seeks to identify specific
substances that exist in any streams having a significant
environmental problem.  At the conclusion of Level II, the
physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the

-------
stream should be well understood in a qualitative, semiquanti-
tative sense under the normal operating conditions of the
process.  Level III is a quantitative study of the effect of
process variables on the emission rates of specific substances
that have been identified in Level II as appropriate "indica-
tors" of the environmental impact of streams.  Both Level II
and Level III provide the information necessary for the devel-
opment of control technology - an area of equal importance to
the emission assessment of the source.

It is desirable to provide measurement methods that will in-
sure comparability of information from a wide range of proc-
esses.  At Levels II and III, much of the work will be very
process- and stream-specific.  Present indications are that a
reasonably specific set of procedures can be defined for
Level I studies."

Based on these definitions, the current state of the sampling
art would usually provide sufficient samples for the sensi-
tivity of the available analytical techniques.  However, the
additional requirement to provide samples not only for chemi-
cal analysis but also for biological effect studies indicates
that a larger quantity of samples (approximately 500 mg) is
necessary.  For health studies, fractionation of particulate
matter in size ranges of 3 to 10 ym and less than 3 ym (based
on the inhalable size ranges of particulates) is desirable and
sufficient samples should be collected in each size range for
chemical analysis and toxic effect evaluation.  However, the
collection of these samples in a short time period implies
that assessment programs will involve sampling with higher
volume equipment (mass flow) than the currently popular 1 cfm
commercial sampling trains.

-------
This manual presents approaches that can be used by persons
who are basically knowledgeable in sampling.  This means that
experience in the techniques is required.

There will, of course, be occasions in which changes in de-
sign and operating conditions may be indicated and in such
situations experience will be helpful.  The methods presented
are advances in the "state-of-the-art", not the ultimate solu-
tion to all situations.  These techniques provide a high
probability of success if used with understanding and respon-
sibility.

In an organic sampling effort, problems can be anticipated
due to the labile nature of the compounds.  Vapor pressure
effects can be very serious, and as a result, pressure and
temperature control of the sampling system must be considered
carefully.  Many organic process streams will contain a wide
range of chemical compounds, and any one stream may contain
all three physical states; solids, liquids, and gaseous.  Or-
ganic process reactions seldom give 1005? yield of the desired
product, and the many side reactions that occur can produce a
wide range of chemical compounds.

The adsorption of organic compounds on inorganic substances
is very common, and adsorption-desorption processes can occur
within the sampling system.  Reactions can occur during sam-
pling, and as a result, the compounds that are subsequently
identified in analysis may not be the compounds actually
present in the original process stream.

For the most part, moisture sensitive materials will not be
found in exhaust stacks from processes as the materials will
react before they can be sampled.  However, if the actual
process streams are sampled, sufficient moisture may not be

-------
present and, if these are to be collected unchanged, precau-
tions must be taken.

As for example, anhydrides and acid chlorides would form acids
upon hydrolysis.  In sampling these materials, it is essential
that moisture laden air be excluded from the apparatus.

Compounds such as aldehydes can undergo air oxidization to the
corresponding alcohol.  Formaldehyde is difficult to sample
due to polymer formation and the fact that such low molecular
weight species may not be collected in total in the adsorber
approach.

Examples of unstable compounds are peroxides, dienes, and
some polycyclic aromatic compounds.  Peroxides can decompose
spontaneously and under the proper conditions with violence.
The conditions within the sampling train could easily pro-
mote this decomposition - the peroxide would be collected and
held on the filter and other surfaces and exposed to the
source gas at elevated temperatures during the run.  Dienes
and other similar unsaturated materials can easily decompose
into smaller molecules if the temperature of the train is
high enough.

Many compounds including polycyclic aromatic compounds are
sensitive to UV light and if exposed, can change chemical
composition before analysis.  It is essential that all com-
pounds be protected from light during all phases of sampling
and analysis.

There are many classes of compounds that can easily polymer-
ize and these polymers could be formed during sampling and/
or analysis.  Examples of such materials are vinyl chloride,
vinylidene chloride, styrene and acrylate esters.  If this

-------
polymerization occurred in the sampling system, the material
most likely could not be recovered during the cleanup and
analysis steps.

The comments and problems outlined briefly here are mentioned
to alert those planning to sample organic process streams
that it is extremely important to understand the process being
sampled and to the necessity of being fully aware of what can
happen during a sampling and analysis program.  Valid results
can be obtained, but not without thought as to what is in-
volved.  In general, this manual is directed to those who are
experienced in emission sampling.  However, included in Ap-
pendix I, is a description of some of the considerations re-
quired for a successful sampling program and material that
has been helpful on past projects.

-------
                         SECTION II

                PRELIMINARY METHODS - LEVEL I
The objective of a Level I sampling effort is to obtain large
quantities of sample from a process source in a relatively
short period of time with a minimum of manpower.  The sample
that is obtained can be used to determine the classes or
groups of organic compounds that are present and to establish
the in vitro cytotoxicity and mutagenicity of the stream and
stream components.  In order to accomplish this objective,
methods are defined in this manual for sampling gaseous, liq-
uid and solid phase systems.  The methods are intended to ap-
ply to many different process feedstock, waste and product
streams without major modification.  Based on the results of
the Level I preliminary survey sampling and analysis program,
the requirements for a Level II or Level III program can be
defined, and for these studies, the most useful of several
optional techniques can be selected.

During the Level I sample acquisition program, process data
must be acquired in order to relate the analytical data ob-
tained to the emission rate of the processes.  At the minimum,
the flow rates and temperatures of each sampled stream must
be established.  Beyond this, data on the feed rates of raw
materials and production rates of the products should be ob-
tained from operation logs and if possible by measurement in
order to define emission factors, and to aid in the evalua-
tion of the sampling program with respect to later Level II

                              9

-------
and Level III efforts.  Regardless of the level of the sam-
pling program, the accuracy and precision of the flow rates
and production parameters should be consistent with the ac-
curacy and precision of the sampling technique.

In the following pages of this Section, the sampling methods
are defined for Level I surveys of the organic processes in
which the sample is contained in a gaseous matrix, an aqueous
or non-aqueous liquid matrix, or as a bulk solid.  The pro-
cedures described are "state-of-the-art" or logical exten-
sions of the "state-of-the-art" and as a result should be
highly reliable for meeting the Level I sampling objectives.
2.1   GAS MATRIX SAMPLING

The nature of the organic components in a gas stream depends
on the physical properties of both the compounds of interest
and the gas stream.  The organic components can exist in the
solid, liquid, or vapor phase at the condition of the gas
stream.  As the component is removed from the source, the
sampling system temperature and pressure can change the physi-
cal state of the component.  As a result, one is confronted
with the problem of sampling condensed, condensible and vapor
forms with the possibility of phase changes occurring through-
out the system.  Existing sampling techniques provide a means
of collecting condensed and condensible species (filter cy-
clone or impinger collection), but the collection of vapor
species presents a particular challenge to the design of ef-
ficient sampling systems.

The detection and quantitative measurement of organic compo-
nents generally requires a concentration step to attain the
required analytical detection limits.  This is accomplished
                              10

-------
with existing systems by sampling for long periods of time and
concentrating the condensed or condensible material for this
time period on the filters or in the impingers of the sampling
system.  Some type of concentration step will be required for
those materials which exist in the vapor state.  This concen-
tration step should collect the material without chemical
change and in a form that can be conveniently delivered to the
remote analysis location.

The proposed system should collect sufficient material for bi-
ological effect studies  (a minimum of 50 mg) in a time period
of three to five hours with a field team of two to three per-
sons.  This requirement eliminates low flow rate sampling sys-
tems (0.02 mVm, 0.75 cfm) and suggests that sampling flow
rates of 0.08-0.14 m3/m  (3-5 cfm) would be desirable.

In addition to the ability to collect large quantities of mate-
rial, the Level I sampling system for organic materials should
provide the capability of also collecting inorganic materials
for a complete evaluation of the source, and provide for size
fractionation of particulate matter corresponding to respira-
ble and non-respirable size intervals.  These provisions add
a great deal of complexity to the sampling system.

Based on this approach, the Level I system ideally should have
a sampling flow rate of  0.1-0.15 m3/m (3-5 cfm), provide size
fractionation, combine organic and inorganic sampling proce-
dures and yet be of suitable size and weight to be handled eas-
ily by several men.  A system to accomplish all of these re-
quirements is nearing completion.  In order to provide the ra-
tionale for such a system, it is necessary to rely on the cur-
rent state-of-the-art of organic sampling, based primarily on
experience with 0.02 m3/m (0.75 cfm) flow rate systems and de-
velopments in inorganic  sampling with 0.14 m3/m (5 cfm) units.
                               11

-------
Under EPA contract 68-02-1393, a technical manual has been
prepared for the process measurements of trace inorganic ma-
terials.3  The sampling method for Level I described in this
referenced manual is based on a high volume stack sampler4
and some of the design features of that sampler can be applied
to the organic process stream sampler.

In addition, a sampling system has been designed and con-
structed which has three cyclones in series prior to the fil-
ter.5  This study provides the necessary background for the
proposed size fractionation system for organic sampling.
2.1.1   Proposed Level I Sampling System

In order to provide the entire range of capability desired of
a Level I sampling system, it is necessary to combine the
triple cyclone approach for size fractionation of particulate,
the organic adsorber and the inorganic trace element impinger
system.  This combined system has not been field tested, but
based on laboratory and field pressure drop studies, it is
reasonable to assume that such a combined system can be made
operational for field use.  At present a design and prototype
construction study is underway under an EPA contract.6

A schematic diagram of the proposed Level I sampling system
is shown in Figure 1, and the major component specifications
shown in Table 1.  The various components and available op-
tions that require further description are discussed in the
following sections.
                              12

-------
                                                                    FILTER
             STACK T. C.
 GAS CONDITIONER &
'MOISTURE COLLECTOR
<
k__
X
. /
V,

1
1 . 1
HHr ™x
         HEATED PROBE
    PITOTAP
MAGNEHELIC GAUGES
    POROUS POLYMER
    ADSORBER
           TYPE SPITOTTU&E
                                1	
                                                               OVEN T. C. / SAMPLE T. C.   130V TEMP
                                      SENSOR UMBILICAL
                                                                                 AUTO CONTROL VALVE
                                                                 EM I AUTOMATIC
                                                                   CONTROL
                                                                   MODULE
                                                                     VACUUM GAUGE
                    GAS METER ING
                      SYSTEM
                                                        10 cfm VACUUM PUMP
                     Figure  1.    Schematic  of  Level  I  Gas Matrix Sampler

-------
                                                   Table 1.  COMPONENTS OP LEVEL I SAMPLING SYSTEM
     Component
     Subcomponent
                                                      Material of Construction
                                                                                                               Specifications
Probe
(stack temp, below
1000°P)
3, 5 or 10' lengths
Particulate Removal
      System
Organic Adsorber
Impingers
Probe Tips


Probe Liner
Probe Heater
Temperature Monitor
Sheath

Pltot Tube (optional)
Stack Temperature Monitor

Cyclones - 3

Filter Holder

Filter


Oven System

Temperature Monitor


Holder for Adsorber

Adsorber Material

Impinger #1
Impinger *2 and #3

Impingers IU and #5
316 Stainless


316 Stainless
Resistance Heater
Type K Thermocouple
316 Stainless or Inconel
316 Stainless
Type K Thermocouple

316 Stainless

316 Stainless

Quartz (A. D. Little Co.)
Type A Fiber glass (optional)
Teflon (optional)
As required
                                                      Type K Thermocouple or bi-
                                                        metallic contactor
                                                      316 Stainless Steel
                                                      TENAX OC (Enka N.V.,
                                                        Holland)
Olass or Lexan

Glass or Lexan

Glass or Lexan
Size Range 1/8-3A" Join to Probe liner - Swagelok Connector


3/il" I.D. Suggested, 1/2" I.D. Optional
Capability of heating liner to 500°F
Compatible to Readout Device or Controller
Sized to contain liner, thermocouple, heater, insulation, and
  possible stack thermocouple and pltot tube
Type S, with coefficient between .80 and .85
Compatible with Readout Device
Aerotherffl "stub" cyclones - nominal cut points of 10, 3, and
  1 yra.
To hold 1*2 am. filters, 1/2 or 3/4" Connectors, no teflon
  coating.  Stainless support screen, "0" ring seal if not In
  contact with gas stream.
                                                                                        Sized to holder, retain particles greater than 0.3
Sized to contain cyclones, and filter, capable of 260°C, insu-
  lated electrically and thermally.
Compatible to Readout Device, and/or Temp. Controller,
                                  Size approximately 90 mm I.D., 90 mm bed depth, Stainless
                                    retainer screens, 1/2 or 3/&" Inlet and outlet connections
                                  60-80 mesh size, preconditioned at 200°C for 2>t hours under
                                    He flow.
Multltip tube of Aerotherm design or enlarged impinger of modi-
  fied Smith Greenbei'g design - contains 3M H202 or kK NHi,OH
Modified Smith Greenberg of enlarged design, contains 0.2M H202,
  0.2M HN03 and 0.02M AgNOj or 0.2M (NH,,)2 S20S and 0.02M AgN03
Contains silica gel if dry test meter is used,  these implngers
  connected in parallel.                  	

-------
                                              Table 1 (cont'd).  COMPONENTS OF LEVEL I SAMPLING SYSTEM
     Component
                             Subcomponent
                                                      Material of Construction
                                                                                                              Specifications
Meter Section and
  Pump
Umbilical Cord
Temperature Display



Temperature Control


Timer


Manometers




Dry Test Meter (optional)



Orifice




Pump


Vacuum Gauge

Valves
                        Pitot Lines
                        Sample Lines
                        Power leads
                        Thermocouple
                                                      Optional
                                                      Optional
                                                      Stainless Steel
                                                      Oilless Carbon Vane Type
                                                      Brass, TPE
                              Polyethylene or Teflon
                              Polyethylene or Teflon
                              3 wire grounded
                              Type K
Digital Thermometer, thermocouple switch, Readout of Stack,
  probe, oven, adsorber, exit gas, dry test meter inlet and out-
  let temperatures.

The probe and oven can be controlled with temperature controller
  {to 260°C).  A number of such units are available.

Elapsed time Indicator - record to .01 minutes and up to 999
  minutes.

Inclined manometers or magnehelic gauges for readout of pitot
  tube iP and orifice meter AH.  Read Intervals 0.01 inches of
  water up to 1" water and 0.1 inch above 1 inch of water,
  Range - 0-6 or 0-10" water, or metric equivalent.

Dry Test Meter (Rockwell) of 7 cfm capacity.  This unit may be
  eliminated if calibrated orifice meter and differential pres-
  sure readout are employed for total volume determination.

Design depends on desired AH reading at various flow rates.
  Should provide AH of 6-10" of water at 7.5 cfm.  Several
  ranges could be provided for different flow rate ranges as
  found in Aerotherm unit.

Capable of 10 cfm at 0" Hg  Oast 1022, equivalent - requires 3/1)
  H.P  1725 RPM motor such as Doerr D272X.

0-760 mm of Hg vacuum.

Shut off valve and control valve.  Shut off valve - Whltey B-3F8
  or equivalent.   Temperature limitations -20 to 70°C.  Control
  valve - Whitey B-7RF6 (0.312" orifice) needle valve or equiva-
  lent.
Umbilical cord should be 25-50' lengths with quick connects on
  lines, grounded plugs and sockets on power lines and Type K
  thermocouple connectors.
     Optional Components - Air Cooled Probes
                           Water Cooled Probes
                           Cooling Coil
                         - Stainless liners with stainless or Inconel Jacket
                           Stainless liners with stainless or Inconel Jacket
                           Stainless coil and traps to be employed prior to Tenax adsorber.
                           Thermostated Adsorber   Tenax adsorber enclosed in water cooled Jacket - include ice bath
                                                     and circulation pump to maintain temperature of adsorber.  Sug-
                                                     gested temperature 50°C.

-------
2.1.1.1   Probe Tips and Probe Systems

The probe tips and probe for the high volume sampling system
are essentially identical to those units used in 0.75 cfm sam-
pling systems.  All probe tips should be constructed of 316
stainless steel with round cross sections and knife edges.
The probe tip should connect to the probe liner with a Swage-
lok type connector to provide a leakfree seal.  For the most
part, the tubing in the sampling system is 1/2" O.D.; there-
fore, this size is acceptable, however, the use of 3/4" O.D.
probe liner and tip connector could be considered to reduced
system pressure drop.

The probe liner should be well insulated not only to retain
heat from the heating element, but also to provide for safe
handling of the probe sheath and eliminate the possibility
of electrical shock.  The probe liner, heater, probe thermo-
couple, stack thermocouple, and pitot tube if used, can be
enclosed in a single sheath to provide protection for the
units and to ease the task of closing the space between the
sampling port and the probe.

Ideally, the sampling gas temperature leaving the probe should
be a few degrees above stack temperature to prevent condensa-
tion of water and condensible organic materials.  At the min-
imum, the temperature should be above the dew point tempera-
ture of the gas and, if no water is present, it should be
maintained at 50°C (122°P).

For high temperature sources, where glass or quartz are in-
adequate, stainless steel probe liners must be used.  For
high temperature sources (above 320°C, or 600°F), air-cooled
or water-cooled probes are necessary.  As the temperature of
various sources reach the 500-600°C range, the thermal
                              16

-------
decomposition of organic molecules occurs and much of the
emitted organic species may be gaseous and of relatively low
molecular weight.  Condensation in the probe becomes less of
a problem, but collection of gaseous species must be empha-
sized.

The TRW manual on inorganic sampling suggests that a liner
made from a thermally stable polyimide (e.g., Kapton, Trade-
mark of Du Pont Co.) be placed inside the stainless or glass
probe liner.  This liner is not recommended for the combined
organic-inorganic Level I system.  If at a later time, it
can be shown that the liner is inert in organic sampling, and
does not have an effect on the results of biological testing,
it may be useful.  Stainless steel (3l6), pyrex or quartz
seem the best materials at present for both inorganic and or-
ganic sampling and are also suitable for biological testing.
2.1.1.2   Particulate Collection System

This portion of the sampling train consists of the cyclones,
filter, and oven components.  The original cyclones as dis-
cussed in the triple cyclone sampling manual5 have been re-
designed to fit in an enlarged heated oven.  These "stub"
cyclones were expected to provide the basic particle size
cuts of the original larger units.  Based on the data pre-
sented in the triple cyclone sampling at ambient temperature
(21°C), the D50 values of the cyclones were closer to the
desired 10, 3 and 1 ym cut points at 3 scfm than they were
at 5 scfm.

The "stub" cyclones were evaluated using 12, 10, 8, 5, 3,
1.75, 0.27 and 0.5 pro mono-dispersed aerosol of ammonium
fluorescein.7  At 4 aefrn, the D50 values for the nominal 10,
                              17

-------
3 and 1 urn cyclones were found to be 12 vm, 5 vm and 0.45 urn,
respectively.  Thus, at the original design flow rate of 5
acfm, the D5o values would be approximately 10.5, 4.5 and
0.4 urn.  The design of the 3 vim (middle) cyclone, which is
typical of all three units, is shown in Figure 2.

At the present time, the experimental "stub" cyclones are
constructed of 304 stainless steel, and it is understood that
units made from 316 stainless steel will be available within
a few months.  Blueprints of the cyclone design for those who
desire to construct their own will be available from the EPA.
Any such units constructed should be made of 316 stainless
steel as this material has been evaluated from a toxicologi-
cal viewpoint whereas the 304 variety has not been studied
as yet.

A filter holder for 142 mm diameter filters would be accepta-
ble for the system, however, it might be preferable to elimi-
nate any coatings such as Teflon, applied to provide a non-
stick surface for particulate.  It is possible that abrasion
of this coating surface could occur and thus add to the or-
ganic composition of the collected material.  The rate of
abrasion would depend on the nature of the particulate mate-
rial.

Quartz filters would be the most desirable, as these materi-
als have the low metals content needed for inorganic analysis.
Experimental quartz filter that were at one time available
from A. D. Little Co. were excellent, however, commercial
quartz filters, in general, have poor mechanical properties.
Fiber glass filters may be useful, although it has been found
that some commercial lots have varied metals content.  This
variation is apparently not a problem in the spectrograde
fiber glass filters (Gelman Instrument Co.), however, we do
                              18

-------
Figure 2.  Separator cyclone
               19

-------
not know how this material effects the biological testing re-
sults.  Teflon filters are also a possibility, but the in-
creased pressure drop experienced with this filter material
may create problems with the completely assembled sampling
train.
2.1.1.3   Organic Collection System

The main component of the organic collection section of the
train is the Tenax GC adsorber.  Several options must be con-
sidered here, based on the temperature and moisture content
of the effluent gases.  For relatively low temperature stacks,
approximately ambient to 50°C (122°F), it is not necessary to
provide a gas cooler, and a very simple adsorber trap can be
used.  For mid-range temperatures, 50°C (122°F) to about 150°C
(300°F), a water-cooled adsorber is suggested.  .For higher
temperatures, a cooling coil-water condenser followed by a
thermostated adsorber is required.  At this point these tem-
peratures are somewhat arbitrary and may be modified with ex-
perience.  In each case, it is assumed that probe and oven
temperatures are above stack temperature, or at least high
enough to prevent condensation in the probes and cyclones or
on the filter.

The cooling coil can be a coil of stainless steel (316) with
a water collection bottle, arranged so that there is minimal
contact between the liquid and the cooled gas.  It is sug-
gested that the coil be made of 3/4" I.D. stainless tubing.
The water collector should be designed to cause a minimal
pressure drop.  The Aerotherm gas precooling coil (HVSS-470)
is not recommended in the complete sampling system as it has
been reported to have a pressure drop of 100 to 152 mm. of
mercury.

                              20

-------
It would appear that the major contribution to the pressure
drop is from the cyclone-type water collector, however, the
1/2" I.D. tubing may also be a factor.  By employing 3/4" I.D.
tubing and a Tee connection at the lower end connected to a
receiver, the pressure drop could be reduced somewhat.

Aerotherm has recently designed a multi-dip tube type of im-
pinger with a water-cooled inner jacket, that may be very
useful as a precooler assembly between the heated filter and
the organic adsorber.  This device will add complexity to the
sampling system in that it requires a pump and cooling water
reservoir.  The multi-dip tube design will aid considerably
in the reduction of system pressure drop, but the fact that
the device is glass and the sampled gases come in contact
with the condensed liquid, may create problems.

The organic adsorber for the system is a scaled up version of
the unit used successfully in 0.02 m3/m sampling systems.   The
adsorber used in lower flow rate systems had a bed depth of
^90 mm with a 30 mm I.D., containing about 5 grams of Tenax GC,
In order to operate at higher flow rates, the area of the ad-
sorber is increased corresponding to the increase in flow
rate.   Thus, to operate at 0.1-0.15 m3/m, the I.D. should be
about 90 mm, and with the 90 mm bed depth, approximately 40
grams of Tenax GC is required.  A prototype of the adsorber
constructed of acrylic plastic as shown in Figure 3 has been
used to evaluate bed settling and pressure drop effects.  For
routine use, 316 stainless steel is the material of choice.
A proposed design is shown in Figure 4.  This unit is suita-
ble for low temperature sources.  For mid-temperature opera-
tion,  a water jacket is required to control the temperature
at 50-60°C.  A possible design is shown in Figure 5.
                              21

-------
Figure 3.
Prototype high volume porous
polymer adsorber
                  22

-------
                        90 MM
           -90 MM
Figure 4.  Possible design for production
           high volume adsorber
                        23

-------
                                                          OUTLET
                                           THERMOSTATIC
                                            CONTROLLED
                                               BATH
                                   90mm
                       -90mm-
                                                         INLET
Figure 5.   Possible design for thermostated high volume
            adsorber

-------
The Tenax GC used in the organic adsorber is a material typ-
ically used as a gas chromatographic substrate.  In the sam-
pling train application, the material is maintained at a
fairly low temperature in an effort to enhance the adsorption
characteristics of the material.  In the chromatographic ap-
plication, the material is packed into a column.  The packed
column is operated at higher temperature and with helium flow,
the Tenax acts as a selected adsorption-desorption material
to separate various organic compounds.  This same type of ad-
sorption-desorption phenomenon could occur in the sampling
train if the temperature of the Tenax was not maintained at
50-60°C.  Further desorption could occur quite readily if the
sampling system were operated under high vacuum conditions.
The organic absorption characteristics of the Tenax adsorber
is, therefore, dependent on maintaining the suggested temper-
ature and system pressures between 0 and 380 mm. of mercury
vacuum, and even at this condition some volatile materials
will be desorbed from the material.  For this reason, it is
necessary to employ a supplemental method, which will be dis-
cussed in a later section, for the detection of low molecular
weight materials.

The current practice on organic sampling is to extract Tenax
with pentane in a Soxhlet extractor to remove the organic ma-
terial.  With proper extraction and conditioning the Tenax can
be reused.  In the combined organic-inorganic sampling system,
the porous polymer most likely would trap some of the As, Sb,
Se, Cd, Hg, Cl, F, and Pb compounds that would pass through
the filter and would be collected in the impingers of an in-
organic-only system.  This not only means that an additional
component must be analyzed, but also that there is a reasonably
good chance that the Tenax would be destroyed during the analy-
sis.  Even if this were necessary, for a Level I evaluation,

-------
the cost of the Tenax is rather small compared to the cost  of
sampling and analysis when one considers the information gath-
ered.
2.1.1.4   Impinger System

The impinger section of the sampling train is designed for
the collection of inorganic components that can pass through
the cyclones, filters and Tenax adsorber.   Reference should
be made to the inorganic sampling and analysis manual for
specific details.3  However, in order to design a Level I
system for both organics and inorganics some modification of
the system is necessary.  As stated in the last section, some
inorganic components will most likely be found in the adsorber.
Although this will complicate the analysis procedures, it will
permit a change in the impinger system to reduce the pressure
drop problems.

All impingers used in the system should be of the straight
tube design rather than of the Smith-Greenberg type.  As a
result, the pressure drop in each impinger will be dependent
on the liquid level above the inlet tube and will be in the
order of inches of water.  The nozzle approach of the Smith-
Greenberg type impinger is restrictive and adds considerably
to the pressure drop.

As will be shown in Section 2.1.1.6, where pressure drop informa-
tion is discussed, the silica gel impinger, required if a dry
test meter is used, adds considerable pressure drop to the
system.  Two silica gel impingers in parallel can reduce the
pressure drop by splitting the flow between the two units.
This can be done by providing a Tee in the line ahead of the
impingers and then combining the flow after the impingers and
before the umbilical cord to the control unit.
                              26

-------
2.1.1.5   Umbilical Cord., Control Unit and Pump

The umbilical cord, control unit, and pump from the Aerotherm
high volume sampler can be used, or similar units can be con-
structed.  For Level I sampling, a simplified control unit
can be built that will provide the minimum requirements.  In
brief, this can consist of an inclined manometer to monitor
the pressure differential across the final cyclone, digital
readout thermometer and thermocouple switch, proportional
types of probe and oven controllers, and a timer.  A dry test
meter can be eliminated if a calibrated orifice meter and
elapsed time are used/to provide volume data.  A manometer or
magnihelic gauge for pitot tube pressure differential is not
required.  For the most part, sampling would not be done iso-
kinetically, but rather at a specific rate to maintain the
desired flow rate and hence particulate size cut points
through the cyclones.  If isokinetic sampling were attempted
in a system with a wide variation of flow rate profile, the
cut points of each cyclone would be varied each time the sam-
pling rate was adjusted.  A simplified control unit, there-
fore, would provide the essentials for Level I sampling at a
saving of weight and cost, but it could not be used for com-
pliance or similar testing studies.
2.1.1.6   Pressure Drop Evaluation of Level I Sampling System

During the process of developing the Level I sampling system
concept, a major concern was the pressure drop of the various
components and complete system.  Since the proposed system
has not been field tested, there is no assurance that the
system will perform as expected.  However, Aerotherm has been
assembling a sampling train for use on a coal gasification
system which included a water-cooled probe, triple cyclones,

                              27

-------
filter, and an inorganic-type irapinger system.  This provided
the opportunity to evaluate the pressure drop of this system
and, in addition, to add a proposed prototype of the Tenax GC
adsorber and measure its contribution to the pressure drop of
the system.  As a result of this study, it is felt that the
system will operate as expected although it could potentially
cause some problems in very dirty sampling situations.

The results of the pressure drop studies on both the high vol-
ume system and the 0.02 m3/m system are shown in Figure 6.  The
data plotted in this figure represent the pressure drop in mm
of Hg of various components on the complete system against the
flow rate in scfm.  Curves D and E represent the complete 0,02
mVm system with and without the adsorber but with Type A fil-
ters and charged impingers.  With the adsorber in place, flow
rates in the 0.008-0.017 m3/m range are possible, and at these
flow rates the initial pressure drops are low enough to permit
collection of particulate before exceeding the leak check
pressure drop of 15" or 380 mm of Hg vacuum.

Curves A, B and C taken from the data in the TRW report on the
Series Cyclone Sampling Train show the pressure drop of this
system.5  Curve B provides the data on the standard Aerotherm
impinger system, charged with liquid as required in the in-
organic system.  These impingers would create too great of a
pressure drop for reasonable operation.  Curve C represents
data on the cyclone system fabricated by TRW, while Curve A
is for the complete TRW-cooler system.  Because of the high
pressure drop of the impingers, TRW employed the cooler system
and substantially reduced the pressure drop across the entire
train.   Based on these data the system could operate in the
0.04 to 0.14 mVm (1.5 to 5 cfm) region.
                              28

-------
  600
  500
  400

  300


  200
•s  100
°-  90
<  80
   70
   60
   50
   40

   30
   20
'  LEAK CHECK PRESSURE
   10
    .1   .1.5  .2.2.5.3  .4 .5.6.7.8.91.0  1.5   2  2.5 3   456 78910
                            FLOW RATE (SCFM)
      A. TRW TRAIN WITH COOLER          F. INORGANIC SYSTEM-AEROTHERM
      B. AEROTHERM IMPINGER ONLY         ( STUB CYCLONES, LARGE IMPINGERS )
      C. TRW TRIPLE CYCLONES ONLY       G. INORGANIC SYSTEM WITH ORGANIC
      D. 0.75 CFM SYSTEM (NO ADSORBER)     ADSORBER.
      E. 0.75 CFM SYSTEM WITH ADSORBER   H. AEROTHERM -TRIPLE CYCLONES AND GLASS
                                       GLASSWARE - EMPTY, NO FILTER
 Figure 6.   Pressure drop  data for various  sampling systems
                                      29

-------
The Aerotherm system designed for the study of particulate
emission from the coal gasification facility was employed to
determine pressure drop data as a complete system.  Various
portions of this system were evaluated.  The results of sev-
eral of the measurements are shown in Curves F, G and H.
Curve P represents the pressure drop of the complete Aero-
therm system, with a 1/2" probe tip, the triple stub Type A
fiber glass filter, and the charged enlarged impinger systems.
Curve G represents the same system with the prototype Tenax
GC adsorber (enlarged unit) in place.  These data indicate
that a flow rate of 0.085 m3/m (3 cfm) is feasible, but 0,11
m3/m (4 cfm) would exceed the nominal leak check vacuum.

The data show that a major source of pressure drop across the
sampling train is the impinger system.  A straight tube im-
pinger (modified Smith-Greenberg) containing water can show a
pressure drop equivalent to the height of the water above the
dip tube and thus would cause a small pressure differential.
At a flow rate of 0.031* m3/m (1.2 cfm) the pressure drop
would be in the order of 7 mm of Hg for a 10 cm water height.
The 0.02 mVm Smith-Greenberg impinger without liquid indi-
cated a 25 mm Hg pressure differential.  When filled with
liquid the differential was 33 mm Hg.  Thus, if at all possi-
ble, straight tube impingers are desirable from a pressure
viewpoint.  Normal impinger operation employs a final silica
gel impinger to reduce the moisture content ahead of the dry
test meter.  If one silica gel impinger is used, this adds
109 mm Hg to the pressure drop.  However, by using two silica
gel impingers in parallel, this can be reduced to 4l mm Hg.

Thus, for the combined cyclone-organic-inorganic system, it
is suggested that all impingers be of the straight-tube der-
sign and the silica gel, if used, should be in two parallel
impingers.  The use of straight-tube impingers will reduce
                              30

-------
the collection efficiency for inorganic materials in the im-
pingers, however, it can be assumed that the inclusion of the
Tenax GC adsorber in the system should trap these materials
with reasonable efficiency, and the impingers would trap the
material not collected in the Tenax.

The data indicate that the proposed Level I sampling system
could be used successfully in the field to collect both inor-
ganic and organic materials and provide for size fractionation
of particulate matter.  An 0.085 mVm (3 cfm) flow rate is
quite possible and 0.11 m3/m (4 cfm), feasible.  This latter
flow rate will provide approximately the desired size fractiona-
tion of particulate.
2.1.2   Gas Matrix Sampling - Fugitive Emissions

The material that is blown from bulk storage and conveyors
by the wind is of much lower concentration than generally
observed in sampling of stationary or confined sources.  Am-
bient air particulate concentrations are sampled by high vol-
ume samplers, and this type of device can be used to collect
fugitive dust emission for organic analysis.

Another source of organic fugitive emissions is from various
plant operations where volatile organic vapors can be released
into the air.  Sources of these vapors can include transfer
operations, leaking valves and fittings, and open areas such
as settling ponds.  Such materials will not be collected by
high volume samplers and are generally present at such low
concentrations that sampling is quite difficult.
                              31

-------
2.1.2.1   Particulate Emissions

The accepted procedure for either ambient air particulate or
fugitive dust sampling is to establish a network of high vol-
ume air samplers around the parameter of the area, which, for
fugitive emissions, would be the plant property lines.  With
the network of samplers, the dust can be collected by one or
more of the samplers, regardless of changes in the wind di-
rection and velocity.  By relating the wind direction to the
sampler location, it can be determined which samplers received
emissions from the source and which were receiving "background"
dust.

A much simpler system can be used for a Level I sampling pro-
gram, provided several assumptions are made regarding the
meteorological conditions during sampling.  In general, if
there is no frontal activity in the area of the plant to be
sampled, fairly stable weather conditions can be found in the
periods from 9-11 am and 1-3 pm.  Before 9 am, there is often
an inversion; between 11 am and 1 pm, the winds may shift;
and between 3 pm and dark, another inversion may take place.
For the most part, winds are typically in the 3-15 mph range
(90% of the time) which is quite suitable for sampling.  Still
air (0-3 mph) is typically encountered 5% of the time and is
too slow for sampling.  Winds higher than 15 mph occur about
IQ% of the time and also present sampling problems.  Winds
generally increase during the day and are highest in the af-
ternoon, falling again near dark.

The fugitive emission method for Level I sampling consists of
two or three high volume sampling units, one for the background
sample and one or two for the collection of the emissions.
Sampling should be done only during stable conditions (9-11 am
and 1-3 pm).  The background sampler is located upwind from

                              32

-------
the source and the emission samplers downwind from the source.
Sampling duration should be as long as possible and is depen-
dent on the concentration of dust, wind velocity,  type of ma-
terial, etc.  If a major wind shift is noted during the inter-
val, the emission sampler should be moved to maintain the
downwind location with respect to the source.

A major problem with this procedure is that it is  unlikely
that sufficient sample will be collected for biological test-
ing, however, the filter can be analyzed chemically and a
portion of the material generating the dust source can be col-
lected for both analytical and biological programs.

The type of material collected by this procedure is expected
to have a high concentration of inorganic material and a low
concentration of organic matter.  Volatile organic material
will be lost due to the high flow of air across the collected
particulate.  High molecular weight organic material (such as
polycyclic organic materials) would be collected by the fil-
ter and the detection of these materials would be  an impor-
tant part of a Level I effort.

A method for measuring the wind velocity and direction will
be required for this method.  These data, along with the flow
rates of the samplers should be recorded routinely during the
sampling period.  Simple meteorology stations are  available
from a number of commercial sources or such devices can be
constructed that will fit the requirements of the  program.

In addition to the ambient air type of fugitive emission dis-
cussed above, TRC (The Research Corporation) under EPA Con-
tract 68-02-1815» in their technical manual on fugitive emis-
sions have identified two other types of fugitive  sources -
those from roof monitors, and those from quasi-stack sources -
                              33

-------
which differ mainly in the methods required to obtain samples.
Emission from any part of a building, such as windows, doors,
open roof sections, vents, fans, etc. into the air is con-
sidered in the roof monitor sampling approach.  The quasi-
stack sampling approach can be employed at any location where
a stack-like structure can be built to contain the source.

The roof monitor approach for a Level I study employs high
volume particulate sampling systems located within the build-
ing adjacent to the openings so as to collect the emission
just prior to its entrance into the atmosphere.  In addition
to the sampler, a flow measurement device (such as a hot wire
or rotating vane anemometer) is required at each opening sam-
pled to determine the gas velocity exiting through the open-
ing.  The sampler is positioned within the emission "cloud"
and the sample collected.  The flow device, positioned so it
is not influenced by the sampler, and the area of the opening
provide a measurement of the emission rate.

The quasi-stack approach is suitable for sources that can be
isolated by use of temporary ducting or enclosures.  Such
sources could include material transfer operations, leaking
system components, and open evaporation or fabrication areas.
This method generally requires the enclosure, a fan and an
exhaust stack or duct.  Sampling can be done with any of the
typical stack type gas matrix methods and flow measurement
devices.  For our purpose, the high volume sampling train de-
scribed earlier should be employed to collect both particu-
late and gaseous organic materials.
2.1.2.2   Vapor Emissions

The organic vapor emission in the vicinity of a process, even
though readily detectable by odor, is generally quite low in
                              34

-------
concentration.  The ambient air methods for detecting such
fugitive emissions are not suitable for a Level I program
where both chemical analysis and biological testing is to be
done.

The procedures typically employed for ambient air hydrocarbon
determination can be used (1) to obtain a total hydrocarbon-
less-methane value, and (2) if concentrations are high enough,
to provide levels of individual components.  These procedures
employ a Plame lonlzation Detector (FID) chromatograph.  This
detector combination is very sensitive to hydrocarbons but
the materials are destroyed in the flame during analysis and
as a result are not retained for other analytical or biologi-
cal procedures.  As this method is more applicable to Level
II or III procedures, it will be discussed in more detail
later in this manual.

The other possible procedures for organic vapor analysis in-
clude the use of charcoal tubes and porous polymer collection.
At present, the charcoal tube method is being used extensively
for NIOSH sampling programs even though there are some defi-
nite problems with the removal of vapors from the charcoal.
The NIOSH sampling procedures use a small charcoal tube and
a battery powered air pump to draw ambient air through the
sample tube.  This procedure is generally used for quantita-
tive analysis of specific materials using sensitive instru-
mental analysis methods.  The method is not employed for gen-
eral identification schemes as required by Level I studies.

For the Level I program, the procedure suggested for ambient
vapors is an extension of the Level I stationary source sam-
pling system.  In the Level I stationary source system there
is a filter and organic vapor adsorber that can be used in-
tact for ambient air samples.  By removing the probe and
                              35

-------
cyclone assembly (although this could be left intact for size
fractionation of air-borne particulate) the sampling train can
be operated at 0.11 ra3/m near the fugitive emission source
to collect the organic vapor materials.  This flow rate is an
order of magnitude lower than the typical flow rate of high
volume ambient air samplers and, therefore, longer sampling
periods will be required to provide the required sample.  The
benefits of this approach are that the sampler is available
already for the Level I program and that the methods for han-
dling the sample and completing the analysis are established.
Scaling up the organic vapor adsorber to a larger size does
not appear practical as long as Tenax or a similar porous
polymer is used.  This method, at present, is only a concept
and has not been tested.  There is a reasonable chance that
it can provide a sample, at the very minimum for chemical anal-
ysis, and hopefully for biological testing as well.
2.2   LIQUID STREAM SAMPLING

The sampling strategies required for the determination of the
organic content of liquid streams appear initially to be rath-
er simple, however, there are a number of problems that must
be understood if a truly representative sample is to be ob-
tained.  As in gas matrix sampling, a sample is extracted from
a flowing system, and the determination of an emission rate
requires measurement of the mass flow rate of the liquid ma-
trix.  In contrast to gas matrix sampling, the liquid may
fill only a portion of the duct or pipe.  The choice of sam-
pling locations in a liquid sampling situation can be depend-
ent on existing facilities such as manholes or sewer lines,
although these locations may not be ideal.  Again, in contrast
to gas matrix streams, the optimum location for liquid sam-
pling is at a point of turbulent flow.  At such locations,
                              36

-------
suspended or floating material should be more uniformly mixed
and less stratified.  Liquid streams at plant locations can
consist of either water-based (aqueous) or organic-based (non-
aqueous) streams.  Nonaqueous systems such as in in-plant
ducts and transfer lines are often single phase systems and
thus will be the easiest to sample.  The organic content of
aqueous streams can consist of dissolved, suspended, settled,
or floating materials.  This type of situation makes the col-
lection of a representative sample a more difficult task.

In this manual, we will restrict our discussion to the sam-
pling of well-defined liquid streams as contained in pipes,
ducts or similar systems.  No discussion is presented dealing
with sampling large bodies of water such as lakes or rivers
that would receive outflow from plant sites.  This latter
type of sampling is much too broad in scope and varied in de-
tail to be covered adequately here.

A Level I program should provide large quantities of material
in a relatively short period of time for both chemical and
biological testing.  The time period must be determined, how-
ever, by an analysis of the plant operation and how this af-
fects the acquisition of a representative sample.  If the
operation is relatively uniform, then a suitable sample can
be collected at any time, but if the operation is varied,
sampling over a longer period (eg., 24 hours) may be required
in order to obtain an "average" sample.  Sample preservation
is an important consideration.  Different materials will re-
quire different treatment.  This is especially true if both
inorganic and organic constituents are to be determined.  For
Level I, one general preservation procedure is desirable.

The detection and quantitative measurement of organic mate-
rials in a water stream can require a field-implemented
                              37

-------
preconcentration procedure.  This is especially true for
aqueous systems where the concentration levels are expected
to be low since shipment of large quantities of water is not
practical.  This type of approach can be employed for dis-
solved and suspended materials providing that a suitable ad-
sorbing medium and removal solvent is used that does not in-
terfere with the biological and chemical analysis.

Organic matter in aqueous streams can consist of,both soluble
and insoluble (floating or particulate) compounds.  Typically,
soluble compounds fall into three categories.  The first is
materials which are energy sources for microbiota and are
considered biodegradable.  The second type includes those
materials which are toxic to aquatic biota (and humans) and
are of major interest in the sampling strategies.   The third
type are those materials which are neither toxic nor utilized
by aquatic biota.  The insoluble matter in aqueous streams
includes inorganic materials such as process materials, sand,
silt or clay, and organic materials such as process material
and living or previously living matter.  Such materials are
in the form of a suspension in turbulent flowing streams, but
tend to settle in slow moving streams or pools, and the re-
sulting two-phase system complicates the sampling program.

As part of the Level I sampling scheme, it must be assumed
that little information is available on the concentration
levels of the organics materials and a strategy is used which
will provide suitable samples over a wide concentration range.
In addition, the potentially low concentration of organic ma-
terial in aqueous streams requires that extreme care be exer-
cised to prevent contamination from any source.

The sample size requirement for typical wastewater analysis
indicates that volumes up to 1 liter usually are sufficient

                              38

-------
for anlon and cation analysis, physical tests, and dissolved
gases.  However, the determination of oily material can re-
quire volumes up to 5 liters just to obtain a weighable quan-
tity of extracted material.  This quantity could be suffi-
cient for chemical analysis but not for additional biological
testing.
2.2.1   Level I Sampling Schemes

At the present time, the procedures that have been published
in the Federal Register are concerned with the analytical
methods to be employed in water sampling programs.  Such pro-
cedures are given in the October 16, 1973 Federal Register.3
Sampling methods are outlined in various ASTM procedures in-
cluding D510-68 "Standard Methods of. Sampling Industrial Wa-
ter," D1192-70 "Equipment for Sampling Water and Steam,"
D860-J4 (1972) "Sampling Water From Boilers" and D1496-67
(1972) "Sampling Homogeneous Industrial Waste Water."  Sever-
al other sources of sampling methods include "Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and Wastewater"9 and the EPA pub-
lication "Handbook for Monitoring Industrial Wastewater".10
A review article by Rabosky and Koraido that covers both sam-
pling and flow measurement can be found in Chemical Engineer-
ing. 11  All of the above references and most of the informa-
tion that is readily available from other sources are con-
cerned mainly with aqueous streams.

The wide variation in organic component concentrations in
liquid streams suggests that two methods are required for a
Level I Sampling Program.  The grab sampling approach will
be appropriate for process streams and effluent streams where
the concentration of the organic material is known or, based
on the presurvey, expected to be high.  It is difficult to
                              39

-------
define exactly what is meant by a high concentration, however,
as a general rule, if the components present can be easily de-
tected by the analytical procedures in 1-5 liters of liquid,
then this procedure should be used.  However, if the concen-
tration is expected to be low and trace organic compounds are
of interest, than a concentration procedure is required.   Grab
sampling does require the transportation of large quantities
of liquid, maintained at a low temperature (for preservation
of the sample), and this presents some logistics problems.
As the concentration levels are unknown at the beginning of
Level I program, it would be logical to collect both grab and
field-concentrated samples.
2.2.1.1   Grab Sampling Techniques

For a Level I study, a grab-type liquid sample rather than a
composite sample should be suitable.  It must be understood
that a grab sample can only represent the conditions present
when the sample was taken, but if the process is relatively
constant, or if a time is chosen that would indicate possible
worse case conditions, the sample would be acceptable.  For
a Level I grab sample, mechanical collection would be an un-
necessary complication, and therefore, manual collection of
the grab sample will suffice.

The following list provides some of the more important cri-
teria for collection of grab samples from aqueous streams:

     (1)  Sample containers should be of Teflon with
          Teflon-lined screw caps.  Alternatively, if
          Teflon is too expensive, glass bottles (wide-
          mouth) may be used.  Polyethylene or poly-
          propylene bottles should not be used for

-------
          organic sampling due to possible contamina-
          tion.  One- to two-liter bottles are con-
          venient.

     (2)  All glass bottles and caps should be cleaned
          with chromic acid cleaning solution, concen-
          trated HC1, tap water, and 3 rinses of dis-
          tilled water.  Caps and Teflon bottles should
          be cleaned with detergent instead of the
          cleaning solution, followed by tap water and
          distilled water.

     (3)  A site for sampling should be located where
          turbulent flow exists so that solid matter
          is well suspended in the medium.

     (4)  While one- or two-liter bottles are indicated
          for handling convenience, it is suggested
          that at least 2 liters and preferably 5 liters
          be collected.

     (5)  Immediately after sampling, bottles should be
          cooled to about 4°C, placed in the dark and
          shipped to maintain this condition.  Analy-
          sis should be done as soon as possible, and
          the time between sampling and analysis noted.

The mechanics of the grab sample collection will vary with the
physical layout of the site.  If the liquid stream is readily
accessible, the sample bottles could be filled with the liq-
uid directly.  This type of approach could also be used for
nonaqueous sampling of process streams by employing sampling
taps if such taps are available for plant quality control
analysis.  In this case, it must be determined if the temper-
ature and other conditions of the stream are compatible with
the sampling vessel.

-------
If the physical layout of the site is such that direct sam-
pling is not feasible, then other methods of withdrawing the
sample will be required.  One such device is a long-handled
stainless steel dipper that can be lowered into the stream to
extract the sample.  Another device is the Sirco Uniscoop
Liquid Sampler which is similar to the dipper but has a manu-
ally operated ball valve which can be opened to admit a sam-
ple after the device is in the liquid stream.  Other possible
schemes would require a hand- or motor-operated pump to with-
draw a sample.  The choice of hand operation or one of the
various motor-driven units would depend on the distance from
the operator to the stream and hence the hydrostatic head of
liquid required to reach the sample container.  While a num-
ber of automatic samplers are available, the use of such de-
vices generally would be more appropriate in Level II or III
sampling programs.
2.2.1.2   Field Concentrated Sample Collection

Based on the current state of the sampling art, the Carbon
Adsorption Method (CAM) provides a procedure that can be used
for the identification of classes of organic compounds present
in an aqueous stream.  Although this method has been employed
for a number of years, there are a number of problems that
must be considered.

Two carbon adsorption methods have been employed depending on
the nature of the stream to be sampled.  The high flow method,
used for clean drinking water systems, collects the organic
components in 19,000 liters of water at a flow rate of 1 1/m
over a 14-day period.  This method is not suitable for streams
with a high suspended solids content.  The low flow CAM em-
ploys a flow rate of 120 ml/min for typically a one-week

                              42

-------
sampling period to collect organic components from a total
of 1200 liters of water.   Because of the high flow rate,  the
collection efficiency of the high flow system is not as good
as in the low flow system.  Both methods suffer from the  lack
of complete recovery of the organic components by solvent ex-
traction of the carbon.

The carbon from the CAM procedures are extracted with chloro-
form and the carbon chloroform extract (CCE) is evaporated
and weighed to determine the total organic contamination in
the water.  In the Dec. 24, 1975 Federal Register12, some of
the problems of the CCE as an indicator of the health effect
of organic chemicals are discussed.  First, the CCE accounts
for only a fraction of the organic components.  Second, there
is a serious question as to the reliability of the method in
identifying toxic materials.  Third, there are no data avail-
able for establishing a specific level for the CCE on a ra-
tional basis.  Finally, chloroform is suspected of possessing
carcinogenic properties.

The CAM sample can also be subjected to an ethanol extraction
procedure.  This is termed the carbon alcohol extract (CAE).
It would be expected that additional compounds that have lit-
tle or no chloroform solubility could be removed from the car-
bon, with this solvent.  Typically, both extracts are reduced
to dryness and the weights used to obtain the organic content.
As a possible variation,  both the CAE and CCE could be em-
ployed for chemical analysis without complete solvent evapo-
ration to provide some information on the nature of compounds
present in the water.

The many problems associated with carbon adsorption and sub-
sequent incomplete removal of the adsorbed species has prompted
investigation into other substrates.  Polyurethane foam13^

                              43

-------
XAD-2 resin14, and porous polymers15 have been tried on a
limited basis.  For the most part, the applications of these
materials have been restricted to concentration steps of
existing water samples prior to analysis and not to field
use as a sampling substitute for the CAM technique.

The application of porous polymer materials for the collection
of organic species of air samples has developed to the point
where it is used routinely and good separation techniques for
removing the materials from the polymer are available.  The
technique of employing porous polymer to remove organic mate-
rials from water samples in the laboratory prior to analysis
appears to be very successful.  A very desirable Level I tech-
nique, therefore, would be to develop an on-site sampling de-
vice that employs this approach.  At present, this is beyond
the state-of-the-art, however, it is conceivable that the
porous polymer could be used in place of the carbon in a mod^
ified CAM sampling system.  The basic system would consist
of a probe to reach into the liquid stream, a porous polymer
filled adsorber and a pumping system.  There are a number of
unanswered questions and additional research is required to
determine:  (1) the diameter and length of the adsorber,
(2) the flow rate for efficient collection, (3) length of
time required to collect sufficient sample without break-
through of the compounds of interest, (4) the pumping require-
ments of the system, and (5) the collection efficiency of the
porous polymer for the organic compounds of interest in a
water matrix.   The existing evidence clearly indicates that
the method has a great deal of promise, but at the present
time the uncertainties tend to preclude the recommendation
of this technique as the prescribed Level I approach.  As a
result, it is suggested that the established CAM technique,
with its inherent problems, be employed, but that the

-------
feasibility of the porous polymer method should be investi-
gated and hopefully, in time, it could replace the older pro-
cedure .

By employing the CCE from a CAM sample as a measure of the
approximate organic content, it is possible to calculate the
time requirement for sampling.  Typically, clean ground waters
have CCE values of about 25-50 yg/liter, and drinking water
with a CCE value above 200 yg/liter has objectional odor and
taste.16  For nonpolluted water, the CAE value may be less
than 100 yg/liter, and in polluted water the value could be
200-300  yg/liter.  For fresh industrial pollution, the CCE
typically exceeds the CAE, however, for other types of water,
the CAE  may be several times higher than the CCE.  If we as-
sume that the CCE for a typical plant effluent ranges from
100 yg to 1000 yg/liter, at the typical flow rates of 0.25
gal/min  (^1.0 liter/minute) approximately 0.7 to 7 days would
be required to adsorb 1.0 gram of chloroform-extractable mate-
rial. Further, if it is assumed that the CAE value is the
same as  the CCE value, 0.35 to 3-5 days would be required to
obtain 1.0 gram of total extractable organics.  This would
indicate that a high flow technique would definitely be re-
quired for Level I sampling.

The suggested approach for the field concentration sample
collection would, therefore, be to employ the high flow pro-
cedure,  using flow rates of 1 liter/min and sampling for
periods  of four to twenty-four hours.  As this period is
shorter  than the typical 14 days and less than 19,000 1. are
sampled, there is less likelihood that clogging of the fil-
ter with suspended material will occur during this shorter
time period.  The procedure will depend, however, on much
more complete removal of the adsorbed organic species from
the charcoal in the analytical phase of Level I sampling.

-------
Details of the method can be found in the "Standard Methods
for Water and Waste Water"9 under Procedure 139, "Organic
Contaminants".  A review of the technique and some of the
modifications that have been attempted can be found in Chap-
ter 11 of the "Water and Water Pollution Handbook".16  In
brief, the carbon adsorber is a 3" I.D. pyrex tube 18 inches
long with end caps to fit 3/4" stainless steel pipe.  The end
caps are also provided with 40 mesh stainless steel screen to
contain the carbon adsorber.  Two mesh sizes of carbon, 4 x
10 mesh and 30 mesh, are required for the adsorber.  The 4 x
10 mesh is added to the tube to a depth of 4.5 inches and 30
mesh to a depth of 9 inches.  The remainder of the tube is
filled with 4 x 10 mesh.  The carbon adsorber is compacted by
gentle tapping.  All pipe joints in the connections to the
source should be made with stainless steel pipe (rather than
the galvanized pipe specified in the methods) and Teflon-type
tape, avoiding other types of pipe joint compound.  To col-
lect the sample, the water flow is started, slowly at first,
then up to the 1 liter/min flow rate after several minutes.
This flow rate is then continued for the specified time inter-
vals.  It would not be essential to monitor the total volume
for a Level I screening study, but if possible a meter would
be useful in determining the concentration of organic mate-
rials.  After the specified time interval, the carbon adsorb-
ing unit should be sealed with stainless end caps and the
unit held at about 4°C for shipment to the laboratory.  Prom
this point on, the procedure for analysis would be similar to
the extraction procedures employed for the porous polymer
from air sampling, presented in the Analytical Methods manual
prepared by Battelle Laboratories17 rather than by the pro-
cedures for the CCE and CAE in "Standard Methods"9.
                              46

-------
The carbon adsorber and other sampling components can be
easily constructed, however, they are also available from
commercial sources such as General Metal Works, Cleves, Ohio.

The affinity of carbon for organic materials requires that a
great deal of care be exercised in the use of the CAM tech-
nique to prevent contamination of the samples.  The carbon
must be of high purity and must not be exposed to any organic
vapor during manufacture, shipping, or laboratory handling.
Ideally, the laboratory where the adsorbers are handled should
have ventilating systems that are isolated from any organic
sources and all other laboratories.  It is essential that car-
bon blank samples be carried through any operations and analy-
sis in an identical fashion as the samples.
2.2.2   Level I Liquid Flow Measurements

Accurate measurements of the flow rate of streams in pipes
and ducts are rather complicated and generally not required
for a Level I study.  As quantitative data are limited in a
Level I study, only approximate emission rates would be pos-
sible even if reliable flow data were obtained.  It is sug-
gested, therefore, that an approximate flow be determined if
this can be done in a simple manner.

Since the requirement for the examination of waste streams
by the plant personnel for internal or state agency use is be-
coming more common, it is likely that flow measurement devices
will be found at many plant sites.  Whenever possible, exist-
ing facilities should be used.

In the event that flow measurements must be made on a Level I
study, methods should be chosen that are low in cost and that
will not require the installation of complex hardware.
                              47

-------
Simple procedures that can be employed include:  (1) reading
of inlet water flow meters, if such a meter is directly re-
lated to the effluent stream of interest, (2) capacity of
pumps in the system, (3) a bucket and stopwatch, to time the
interval required to fill a bucket of known capacity. (4) the
use of floating objects or dyes, by timing the interval re-
quired for the object or dye to travel the known distance
from one point to another.  The accuracy of these methods
varies from fair to good and no one procedure is appropriate
to all systems.  Other procedures that are described later
under the Level II and III approaches can also be employed.
2.3   SOLID SAMPLING STRATEGIES

Defining a Level I sampling scheme for solid materials is not
a simple task.  The sampling of bulk materials is concerned
with (1) the raw materials and fuels that are used in the
process, (2) the materials that are transferred or produced
in the process, and (3) material that may be collected as
solids in control devices such as baghouses, electrostatic
precipitators and cyclones.  Each of these situations pre-
sents a different problem in the acquisition of a representa-
tive sample.

Raw materials and product solids can be found in large piles,
as in open storage, or contained in hoppers, silos, or rail
and highway vehicles,  or in flowing streams including pneu-
matic transfer lines,  process conveyor systems and bucket
type elevators.  The choice of the sampling approach is de-
pendent on many factors such as accessibility, the physical
layout of the system,  the physical properties of the stream
and the degree of accuracy and precision required in the sam-
pling, flow estimation, and subsequent analysis.  Fortunately

                              48

-------
for the purposes of Level I programs, many facilities main-
tain some type of quality control program on both raw mate-
rials and products and thus suitable Level I sampling sites
may be available.

In general, the collection of material from control devices
is often ignored, unless a material balance type of program
is being conducted, or the material represents a useful prod-
uct.  Most often the material is simply removed and disposed
of, either to another plant or as waste.  As a result, the
material in a baghouse or ESP or from a cyclone may not be
accessible.  Special arrangements with plant personnel must
be made to obtain such samples.

The basic procedures for sampling solid materials can be ob-
tained from various ASTM procedures.  These techniques are
usually specific for certain types of non-organic materials,
however, the procedures can be applied to almost any type of
bulk or solid sampling situation.  "Standard Method of Sam-
pling Coke for Analysis" ASTM D346-35,18 while designed, for
gross samples, provides the techniques for the alternate
shovel and coning and quartering methods and defines the loca-
tion of sampling points from the exposed surface of transpor-
tation vehicles.

ASTM D1799-65 "Sampling Packaged Shipments of Carbon Black,"19
provides a procedure for sampling bagged or cartoned materials,
Method C183-71 "Sampling Hydraulic Cement,"20 provides a meth-
od for obtaining samples from bulk storage at a point of dis-
charge and also provides the design of a slotted tube sampler
for hopper sampling.  A similar slotted tube sampler is de-
scribed in D2617-72 "Sampling Particulate Ion-Exchange Mate-
rials".21  Several mechanical sample dividers and riffles

-------
which can be used to collect or reduce the size of a sample
are shown in D2013-72 "Preparing Coal Samples for Analysis".22

Three other ASTM reports of interest in sampling are E105-58
"Probability Sampling of Materials"23,*El4l-69 "Acceptance of
Evidence Based on the Results of Probability Sampling"24, and
E122-72 "Choice of Sample Size to Estimate the Average Quality
of a Lot or Process"25.

The methods required for sampling of solid organic materials
can be, for the most part, adaptations of these procedures.
The equipment and methods, however, must be tailored to the
vessel or site to be sampled as well as the material.

The problems associated with this type of sampling is more
dependent on the physical nature of the material rather than
the chemical composition.  Materials in powder forms exhibit
many unique properties.  If such powder is compacted by vi-
bration and pressure, it can exhibit some of the character-
istics of a solid body.  If the powder contains well-rounded
particles that are graded in size, it can flow like a liquid.
If the powder is very fine, it can aerosolize to form a gas-
like system.  Solid material in a moving system tends to seg-
regate by particle size.  Thus the job of obtaining a repre-
sentative sample is complicated.  Segregation will occur when-
ever one part of the powder moves relative to other parts.
The large particles generally will be found throughout the
samples, but the finely divided material will tend to be col-
lected at the bottom of the conveyor belt or other moving
stream.   In any sampling situation where the material is
moved, the sample must include the full cross-section of the
material in order to obtain both coarse and fine material.
                              50

-------
When solid material is poured into a heap, the larger parti-
cles tend to be found at the rim of the heap.  The center of
the heap may be completely devoid of large particles.  This
effect can also occur in a hopper or bin.  When the bin is
opened, the initial flow may consist of only fine material.
In practice, this effect is minimized by employing steeply
angled hopper designs.

Another effect that can be observed with powdered materials
is termed "bridging", and this effect is readily noted in
vertical pipes.  The particles can "bridge" across an opening
that may be as large as ten times the particle diameter.
When this occurs, flow will cease.  This effect is well-known
in plant design engineering.  However, it is an effect that
also can occur during sampling if the sampling equipment is
designed with openings that are too small.

Another interesting property of a powder is that the flow
rate of a powder through an orifice is independent of the
head of solid above the orifice.  This is in contrast to
liquids where the flow rate is directly dependent on the hy-
drostatic head.

Fugitive emissions can be encountered when solid materials
are stored in the open or during transfer of solid materials
from one vessel to another in such a manner that air currents
blow across the material.  This situation has been discussed
under the gas matrix sampling strategies.

The concentration of the organic components in a solid sample
can vary from trace concentrations to 100$.  As a result, the
sampling procedures must include a consideration of the con-
centration levels expected, the sensitivity of the analytical
procedures, and mass requirements for biological testing
                              51

-------
programs.  This complicates the specification of a sampling
method, and some judgment will be required on the part of the
team members to collect sufficient sample for all required
procedures.

The wide variation in possible sources to be sampled requires
that a description of many possible methods be considered and
that the choice of which method is to be used depends on the
situation.  In the Level I approach, these samples are mainly
of the "grab" type.  As a result, the restrictions inherent
to this type of sampling must be considered.
2.3-1   Level I Sampling of Bulk Material

For this type of situation, equal portions of material at
random locations should be removed from the pile.   These por-
tions can then be composited to obtain a single sample.   If
at all possible, each portion should represent the full depth
of the material so that the effect of powder segregation can
be eliminated.  Suitable sampling devices include  a pipe
borer, slotted tube (thief), or auger, the choice  depending
on the physical condition (such as moisture content, particle
size, degree of agglomeration, and hardness) of the material.
If the resulting composited sample is larger than  necessary,
the sample for analysis can be reduced in quantity by the al-
ternate shovel, and coning and quartering methods.    The
sample should be packaged in clean glass or polypropylene
bottles for shipment.   For this type of sample, plastic bot-
tles should be satisfactory unless there is some reason to
believe that the material can be contaminated by plasticizer
or other components present in the plastic.

-------
The slotted tube type sampler can also be used to obtain sam-
ples from packaged materials.  In this case the sampler should
be inserted diagonally through the bag of material.   A similar
approach is suitable for sampling from bulk shipments con-
tained in cars and trucks.  The usual approach is to take
three samples from well-distributed points in the bulk of ma-
terial.  Devices for sampling packaged materials and from
bulk shipment vehicles are given in the ASTM procedure for
"Sampling Hydraulic Cement".20
2.3-2   Level I Sampling of Moving Solid Materials

The sampling procedure specified for a moving solid stream
is dependent on the nature of the design of the transport
system.  The simplest system is an open conveyor belt where
material such as coal, aggregate, or simpler material is
transported from a pile to another vessel.  A critical point
to remember is that segregation is going to occur, therefore,
a sample must include a complete cut from the surface of the
solid through to the conveyor belt.  The initial approach is
to employ the "stop belt" procedure, which involves stopping
the conveyor and removing a sample of the full cross-section
of the solid.  This method is practical only if it will not
disrupt the production schedule of the plant.  The important
criteria for this sample are:  (1) the full cross-section cut
with parallel sides is removed from the stream, and (2) the
distance between the parallel faces should not be less than
three times the diameter of the largest piece of material.

If the "stop belt" procedure cannot be used, it is not recom-
mended that a grab sample be removed from a moving belt.  Not
only would this method yield an unrepresentative sample due
                              53

-------
to the segregation effect, but also this method is an unsafe
procedure, and safety must be a prime consideration around
moving machinery.

The best procedure for removing a sample from a moving belt
is moving a cutter device entirely across the stream at a
uniform speed.  The speed of this cutter should be designed
to minimize disturbance of the material and thus reduce the
amount of segregation.  The major problem with this approach
is that it requires a cutter device that is designed for the
specific velocity of the stream of interest, and the cutter
is often built into the system to be sampled.  Thus, this
degree of complexity is not usually appropriate for a Level
I study.  If such a device is available for quality control
purposes, it should be used.  The criteria for this device
are given in ASTM D223^-72 "Collection of a Gross Sample of
Coal".26

The collection of a sample from the discharge point of a bin
or hopper can be accomplished for a Level I program if access
is available.  The procedure involves moving a pan across the
discharge so as to accept the entire cross-section of the ma-
terial, without overflowing the container.  It is desirable
to collect three random samples from each hopper, avoiding
the initial discharge.  Less segregation will be apparent in
nearly full bins.  At times this procedure will require the
construction of the sampling system and in this case is not
appropriate for a Level I program.

There are also a number of reciprocating cutters, rotating
cutters, and riffle type devices that are employed for sam-
pling.  These devices must be installed in the system and
thus are not appropriate for Level I sampling programs.   If
they are available, however, they should be used.

-------
2.3.3   Material Collected by Control Devices

For certain types of environmental and process studies,  the
material collected by the baghouse, ESP units, or cyclones
are of significance in order to completely characterize  a
process.  The material deposited in the baghouse or ESP  can
be sampled by grab techniques during a shutdown.  It is  sug-
gested that material be collected from a number of areas in
order to obtain an "average" sample.  Cyclone devices provide
two sources of solid material, both of which are entrained
in a moving air stream.  The fine material emitted from  the
outlet can be sampled by typical gas matrix sampling methods,
while the heavier material from the bottom of the unit is
more typically sampled by moving stream solid samples or gas
matrix procedures, depending on the air/solid ratio.
                              55

-------
                         SECTION III

         LEVEL II AND LEVEL III SAMPLING STRATEGIES
At the completion of the Level I sampling and analysis pro-
gram, it is expected that basic information on the physical
composition of the process stream will have been obtained,
the classes of chemical compounds present will have been
identified, and the material collected will have been evalu-
ated to determine its cytotoxicity and mutogenicity proper-
ties.  At this point, an evaluation of the data would indi-
cate if sufficient data to assess the source is available.
Based on this evaluation, a decision can be made to terminate
the study of this source or to continue to the more complex
Level II or Level III programs.

This chapter discusses methods that can be employed if Level
II or Level III studies are indicated.  To review, a Level II
program is an extensive qualitative, semiquantitative approach
to identify specific substances that exist in streams having
a significant environmental impact.  At the conclusion of
Level II, the physical, chemical and biological characteris-
tics of the stream should be well understood under "normal"
operating conditions.  Level III is a quantitative study of
the effect of process variables on the emission rates of
specific substances that have been identified as appropriate
indicators of the environmental impact of the process streams.
The indicators to be chosen are identified in a Level II
study.  As a result, a Level II evaluation must be done before

                              57

-------
a Level III study or, if potential indicators can be identi-
fied before sampling. Level II and Level III sampling pro-
grams can be done concurrently.

In the previous chapter of this manual, Level I sampling
methods were specified for each of the various sampling situ-
ations.  It is expected that these methods will be used with-
out major deviations in an effort to standardize the proce-
dures over a wide variety of source types.  In the Level II
and Level III approach, more flexibility is required in the
methods; the methods should be specific for the material to
be analyzed and for the site to be sampled.  As a result,
there is considerably more judgment required in the selection
of sampling methods.  Therefore, a number of potential pro-
cedures are presented in this manual that have been or may be
used.  The choice of methods will depend on the objectives of
the sampling program, the nature of the chemical compounds,
the physical layout of the sampling site, and the accuracy
and precision desired in the data.

In the Level III program, detailed information on the process
and process variables must be obtained during the sampling
effort.  This requires complete cooperation between the plant
personnel and the sampling teams, and in addition, the abili-
ty of the sampling group not only to sample the emissions but
also to measure the process conditions as they vary during
the program.
3-1   GAS MATRIX SAMPLING STRATEGIES

Organic air emissions occur in the condensed, readily condens-
ible, and vapor forms.  Of these, only the vapor form presents
a serious challenge to the design of efficient sampling and

-------
concentration approaches.   In general, the condensed organic
species can be removed by filtration of an integrated sample
over a period of time sufficient to satisfy the detection
limit of the analytical procedure.  Similarly, readily con-
densed species can be sampled employing trapping procedures
at ice or dry-ice temperatures with care taken to avoid loss
of material by microfog (submicron aerosol) formation.  Trace
organic vapor species generally require a concentration step
to attain the required detection limits.  The most frequently
employed concentration techniques are solvent scrubbing, con-
densation (cryogenic trapping), adsorption on activated car-
bon, chromatographic equilibration, chemical reactions, and
chromatographic column trapping.
3.1.1   Stationary Source Methods

By far the simplest technique to obtain organic emission sam-
ples is grab sampling or some similar approach in which the
sample is collected slowly over a time period.  The sample is
drawn from the  source with a glass  sampling bulb or into an
inert bag (such as Tedlar or Teflon) as shown in Figure 7 and
the entire contents are analyzed for organic materials.  Typ-
ically, a particulate filter is used prior to the sample ves-
sel; this will  also remove condensed species.  As the vapor
at duct temperature is usually cooled in  the collection device,
material will condense on the walls of the container and thus
may not be removable  for the analytical device.  The quantity
of collected material is small and  not sufficient for deter-
mination of low levels of materials or for biological testing.
Reactions can occur within the sample and the results of the
analysis may  indicate materials that were not in the gas
stream.  Leakage is a major problem with  these devices.  This
approach might  find utilization as  a secondary collection
                              59

-------
  AIR-COOLED  11
   CONDENSER  '
PROBE
                     RIGID
                  CONTAINER
  Figure 7-
Integrated  gas sampling train,
(Solid lines  showing normal arrangement,
Dotted Lines  - alternate arrangement,
evacuating  chamber around bag.)

-------
procedure for low molecular weight gases that could easily
pass through other collection devices, but generally the pro-
cedure Is not recommended.

One other application for this type of sampling is in the
use of an on-site chromatograph with a flame ionization de-
tector.  Suitable units are commercially available that are
truly "stack portable" and thus provide for the analysis of
methane and total hydrocarbon measurements on-site or with
the proper columns and detectors for specific classes of
volatile compounds.

Such on-site chromatographs can provide semiquantitative
analysis of specific compounds provided that calibration data
are obtained using the proper columns and detectors.  Com-
pound identification is accomplished by the use of retention
times.  This technique, while not providing absolute identi-
fication, is usually reliable.  Examples of compound classes
that can be sampled and analyzed by this technique along with
the detector and typical  column are given in Table 2.

 Table 2.  DETECTOR-COLUMN OPTIONS FOR THE GLC SEPARATION OP
           VARIOUS CLASSES OF ORGANIC MATERIALS27
        Class
     Detector
     Column
Aliphatic Hydrocarbons
Sulfur containing

Alcohols

Acetates

Chlorinated  Compounds

CO, C02, N2,  CH^
Flame Ionization
Flame Photometric

Flame Ionization

Flame Ionization

Flame Ionization

Thermal Conductivity
     61
Chromosorb 102
    UCON-50 on
  Chromosorb T
5$ Carbonwax on
  Chromosorb WHP
5$ Carbonwax on
  Chromosorb WHP
10% DC200 on
  Chromosorb WHP
Molecular Sieve

-------
This list is not all-inclusive; many other useful columns and
detector combinations can be found in the literature.
3.1.1.1   Solvent Scrubbing

Solvent scrubbing for organics is achieved using an impinger
train containing a solvent system or combination of solvents
which will trap the desired emissions.  The train is often
held at ice temperature to enhance collection efficiency and
minimize loss of the desired components.  Depending on the
concentration of the emission, the flow rate and the sampling
time, the solvent must be reduced in volume to concentrate
the pollutants before analysis.  Evaporation of the solvent
runs the risk of significant losses in the more volatile com-
ponents of interest.

This type of approach was employed in the earliest studies
for organic materials.  Typical particulate systems were em-
ployed to collect the inorganic particulate and condensed
organic materials on the filters.  Those materials that were
in the vapor phase at the filter temperature passed on through
the filter.  Those organic materials that could condense at
the impinger temperature were collected in the impingers of
the train.  The actual gas temperature would depend on cool-
ing efficiency within the impingers and could be as high as
21°C (70°F) and still meet the method criteria.  Materials
that condense in the 21-100°C (70-212°P) temperature range
may be collected, but low boiling point materials and those
with high vapor pressures would most certainly be lost.  The
procedures require that the impingers be filled with water.
The organic materials will be found in the water, the acetone
rinsings of the impingers and later during laboratory work
in the water or chloroform-ether extract of the water phase.
                              62

-------
Results with this procedure were very disappointing.   Often
a major portion of the collected material was found to be
silicone grease used to vacuum seal the impinger glass-to-
glass joints.

Another approach was to employ different collection media in
the impingers, such as toluene, xylene, methylene chloride,
etc.  Silicone grease could be eliminated in favor of water
seals, Teflon seals, Spectrovac grease, or ground ball joint
seals.  The approach may be quite useful for specific organic
materials if the collection efficiency of the impinger solu-
tion is known for the compounds of interest.  It may be the
best approach for some materials, such as aldehydes,  which
present difficulty in the more generalized sampling schemes.
The sampling train for aldehydes shown in Figure 8 is typi-
cal of impinger collection systems.
3.1.1.2   Condensation Techniques

Use of condensation techniques is one of the least desirable
approaches since (a) collection efficiencies are poor and
vary significantly with physical and chemical properties of
the substances being collected; (b) condensation of water
with attendant trap plugging and hydrolysis of collected or-
ganics can occur; and (c) aerosols (microfog) can form and
not be trapped unless electrostatic precipitators are used.
If significant amounts of moisture are present, as is often
the case with combustion processes, incineration, or absorber
vent gases, the trap will contain a two-phase system which
will require special handling before analysis.  Cryogenic
trapping at temperatures sufficient to condense oxygen or
nitrogen requires the use of special equipment to carry out
analyses.28

                              63

-------
ON
         GLASS WOOL
          STACK
                               THERMOCOUPLE
                                 READ OUT
                         VARIABLE
                        TRANSFORMER
                                                                                   FLOWMETER
                                  Figure  8.   Sampling train  for aldehydes

-------
3.1.1.3   Use of Porous Polymer Adsorbents in Sampling Gas
          Streams
Potentially, the most attractive method for collecting and
concentrating organic substances from fugitive or stationary
emission sources employs the adsorption and/or partitioning
properties of materials normally used in gas chromatographic
analysis to retain organic substances selectively while re-
moving the major diluent gases, such as air, nitrogen and
water vapor.  By proper selection of materials which retain
little water, separation of organic substances from water
vapor can be accomplished even in samples taken in humid at-
mospheres.  Various types of chromatographic materials have
been used.  They include charcoal, molecular sieves, liquid
phases on solid supports (e.g., Dexil 300 GO on Chromosorb
AW HMDS and Silicone oil DC 200 on Chromosorb), and porous
polymers.

The retentive characteristics, varied polarity, high-thermal
stability, and low affinity for water of porous polymers,
suggest that these materials might be the best media for ef-
ficiently collecting and enriching organic substances,  How-
ever, the varied nature of the emission sources requires an
evaluation of the limiting properties before specific appli-
cations can be defined.

A very simple sampling system using the porous polymer ap-
proach is shown in Figure 9.  This system is suitable for
higher molecular weight hydrocarbon components (C7 and above)
The sampling time can be short — 5 to 15 minutes at flow
rates of 0.075 cfm to collect sufficient material for analy-
sis by GLC/MS using thermal desorption.  Typical dry test
meters are not very accurate for yielding the total gas vol-
ume at such low flow rates.
                              65

-------
                                         ROTOMETER
           STAINLESS STEEL PROBE
SOURCE
n
                           POLYMER
                           PACKED
                            TUBE
                       D
                                                      VALVE
                                         GAS METER
                 FLEXHOSE
                 Figure  9-  Porous polymer vapor sampling method

-------
The sampling system as shown In this illustration consists
of a 1/4 in, or 3/8 in. stainless steel tube 6 in, long
packed with porous polymer bead material.  This sampling
tube is attached to a pump (Model MP^-155 Metal Bellows Corp.),
a rotameter with valve (Dwyer 0*-5 SCPH), and a gas meter
(Type AI-,-110 American Meter Co.).  The pump is required be-
cause there is an appreciable pressure drop due to the packr-
ing in the tube.

A similar train, shown in Figure 10 would replace the pump
with an evacuated cylinder to eliminate pump fluctuations in
the sample lines,  The cylinder used for Preon refrigerant
of about 0.023 m3 volume is convenient and should be equipped
with a thermocouple or other temperature readout and a vacuum
guage.  A glass sampling bulb is used to back-up the polyr
mer packed tube to permit at least qualitative identifica-
tion of low molecular weight gaseous species.  Typical flow
rates of 100^200 cc/min for twenty minutes will provide 2
to 4 liters of sampled gas.  The temperature and pressure
differential in the cylinder before and after collection pro-
vides the necessary volume of gas sampled.  A partial list
of some of the organic materials detected by this procedure
from point system and polymer curing ovens is given in Table
3.

Recently. Tenax GC, a new, more polar, and more thermally
stable porous polymer, has become commercially available.
This system is based on 2,6~diphenyl*-p-phenylene oxide,  Other
polymers that have been used in laboratory tests but that are
not widely used or are not commercially available, are polyr-
imides, polyamides, polyacrylates, and phosphonated or hal-
ogenated resins,

-------
                   V,
                    STACK WALL
        STAINLESS STEEL PROBE
CO
                            POLYMER PACKED TUBE
                                 250 ML
                              DOUBLE ENDED
                                 FLASK
                                                                        TEMPERATURE GAUGE
                                                       II
                                                   FLOWMETER
0
                                                            EVACUATED CYLINDER       VACUUM PUMF
                Figure 10.   Alternate  porous pplymei? systern £
-------
                    Table 3.  ORGANIC SUBSTANCES DETECTED PROM  PAINT AND
                              POLYMER CURING OVENS BY  POROUS  POLYMER AD-
                              SORPTION AND GC MASS SPECTROMETRIC  ANALYSIS
cr\
Methanol
Ethanol
Isopropanol
2-Ethoxyethanol
Isobutanol
n-Butanol
C5 Alcohols
n^Propanol
2-Methylbutanol
Ethyleneglycol monoethyl ether
2^ (2r-ethoxyethoxy) ethanol
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Acetone
MethylethyIketone
Diethylether
Butylacetate
Saturated Hydrocarbons
2-Ethoxyethylacetate
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
Cyclohexane
DimethyIcyclohexane
Benzene
Toluene
Xylenes
Styrene
Methylstyrene
Dimethylstyrene
C3 Alkylbenzenes
Ck Alkylbenzenes
Cit Substituted Styrene
Trichloroethane
Dichloroethylene
Carbon disulfide
Isopropylbenzene
Phenol
Benzaldehyde

-------
Five groups of porous polymers are potentially usable as sor-
bents for collecting and concentrating organic compounds from
stack emissions.  These are:

     (1)  Porapak series (Waters Assoc., Inc.)

     (2)  Chromosorb Century series (Johns-Manville
          Products Corp.)

     (3)  XAD Resins (Rohm and Haas Co.)

     (4)  Tenax GC (Enka, N.V., the Netherlands)

     (5)  Polyimides

     Note:  Some XAD-type resins are marketed by Johns-
            Manville Products Corp. as the Chromosorb
            Century series; e.g., Chromosorb 102 is XAD-2.

A limited amount of information is available which directly
compares the chromatographic properties of these materials.
Retention indices obtained under similar operating conditions
are reported for two groups, namely, the Porapak, and the
Chromosorb Century series.

In general, the retention characteristics of the porous poly-
mers are influenced by both gas-solid and gas-liquid mechan-
isms.  The pore size distribution and micropore volume, the
nature of the polymer, and the surface activity all influence
the adsorption, diffusion, and partitioning processes.  Al-
though specific retention indices are not available for all
porous polymers, certain physical property data and a rela-
tive ranking of polarity can describe the relative retention
characteristics.  These data are shown in Table 4.
                             70

-------
              Table 4.   PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF POROUS POLYMERS
Type
Porapak P
Porapak Q
Porapak R
Porapak S
Porapak N
Porapak T
Chromosorb 101
Chromosorb 102
Chromosorb 103
Chromosorb 104
Chromosorb 105
Chromosorb 106
Chromosorb 107
Chromosorb 108
XAD-1
XAD-2
XAD-4
XAD-7
XAD-8
XAD-11
Tenax GC
Surface Area
(mVg)
110
840
780
670
437
450
30-40
300-400
15-25
100-200
600-700
-
—
-
100
300
784
450
140
69
(UNK)
Ave. Pore Diam.
fA)
150
75
76
76
-
91
3000-4000
85
3000-4000
600-800
400-600 '
-
-
-
200
90
50
90
235
352

Temp. Limit
(°C)
250
250
250
250
190
190
275
(325)*
250
(300)*
275
(300)*
250
(275)*
250
(275)*
250
(275)*
250
(275)*
250
(275)*
200-250
200-250
200-250
200-250
200-250
200-250

Monomer
Composition
STY-DVB
EVB-DVB
Vinyl pyrollidone
Vinyl pyridine
Vinyl pyrollidone
Ethyleneglyco-
dimethylacrylate
STY-DVB
STY-DVB
Cross-linked
PS
ACN-DVB
Polyaromatic
Cross-linked
PS
Cross-linked
acrylic ester
Cross-linked
acrylic ester
STY-DVB
STY-DVB
STY-DVB
Acrylic
Ester
Acrylic
Ester
Amide
Diphenylphenylene
                                                               oxide
STY-styrene; DVB-divinylbenzene; PS-polystyrene; ACN-acrylonitrile
                *Maximum temperature for short duration
                                         71

-------
The major problems related to the use of porous polymers as
sorbents for collecting organic compounds from industrial
emission sources are:

     (1)  Displacement of Volatile Compounds - The dis-
          persement of volatile organic species by less
          volatile organic substances is a major problem
          when using porous polymers.  High molecular
          weight compounds are more readily retained
          than low molecular weight substances.

     (2)  Irreversible Adsorption or Poor Desorption Ef-
          ficiencies ^ As derived from the information
          sources and general commercial literature, the
          most pertinent data to use for porous polymers
          as adsorbents relate to the chemical classes
          that cannot be desorbed from the resins.  Gen-
          erally, the adsorption characteristics of most
          resins are adequate.  However, some chemical
          classes are irreversibly adsorbed or are de-
          sorbed slowly over a relatively long period.
          In this respect, we are referring to the re-
          moval of material from the polymer by appli-
          cation of heat and a carrier gas flow.

          The resins and associated chemical classes
          that will provide potentially poor thermal
          desorption efficiencies are as follows:

               Glycols          - Complete adsorption
                                  on Chromosorb 103
                                  Some tailing on Pora-
                                  pak Z, R, and S.  Se-
                                  vere tailing on Pora-
                                  pak QS
                             72

-------
     Nitriles         - Severe tailing on Chromo-
                        sorb 103

     Nitroparaffins   - Severe tailing on Chromo-
                        sorb 103

     Amines and       - Severe tailing on Chromo-
     diamines           sorb 101 and 102 Porapak N,
                        P, Q, R, S, T.  Some tail-
                        ing on Porapak QS

     Anilines         - Severe tailing on Porapak
                        N, Q, S, T, QS
                        Some tailing on Porapak R

     Carboxylic acids - Complete adsorption on
                        Chromosorb 103
                        Severe tailing on Porapak S.
                        Some tailing on Chromosorb
                        102 and Porapak Q

     Alcohols         - Some tailing on Porapak N.
                        Branch-chain broadening on
                        Chromosorb 101, 102, 103
                        and Porapak T

Many of these problems can be eliminated by solvent
extraction, and this procedure is generally pre-
ferred.  The solvent must not react with the porous
polymer but must still have sufficient solvent
power to remove the materials of interest quanti-
tatively.  In addition, the solvent should not inter-
fere with the analysis scheme.  For the most part
aliphatic hydrocarbons such as pentane or hexane
will not react with the Chromosorb or Tenax mate-
rials and are easily removed to concentrate the
                    73

-------
     sample prior to analysis.   These materials  are
     generally poor solvents,  but continuous  extraction
     procedures (Soxhlet  extraction,  etc.)  minimizes
     this problem.

(3)   Chemical Reaction of Sorbates with Sorbents and
     Production of Artifact Species - Porapak Q  and
     Chromosorb 102 were  found to react with  N0229
     oxygen.30   The reaction with N02 yields  NO, water
     and nitrated aromatic rings of the polymer  plus  the
     possible increased olefinic unsaturation and/or
     oxidation of the polymer.   Oxygen reacts with the
     resin above 100°C to depolymerize part of it, pro-
     ducing carbonyl compounds.   As a result, the use of
     this type of polymer for  adsorption of organics
     should be restricted to temperatures of  about 60°C
     or lower.

     In general, polystyrene-type materials suffer from
     oxidation and thermal fragmentation at temperatures
     above 250°C.

     Change in Sorption Properties of Porous  Polymers -
     The reactions discussed above in (3) undoubtedly
     influence the sorption properties of porous polymers.
     The displacement phenomena indicated above  in (1)
     also point out potential  problems related to physi-
     cal adsorption changes at collection temperatures
     below l4o°C, where the physical adsorption  mechanism
     for compound retention predominates with the styrene
     or divinyl benzene systems.

     Also, problems may be experienced when using porous
     polymers under high-humidity, high-temperature con-
     ditions.   Although Chromosorb 101, 102,  and 103,
     and Porapaks N,  P, Q, QS,  R, S,  and T  are hydrophobic,

-------
     and  Tenax  GC  has  little  affinity  for water,  some
     water  can  be  adsorbed  on the  resins.   It has been
     reported that Porapak  Q  retains up  to  3-^  ug H20/g
     of polymer at 110°C.31

     At present it is  generally  assumed, in a qualita-
     tive sense, that  the interaction  mechanism for  ad-
     sorbates on porous  polymers is a  combination of
     both adsorption and partitioning, especially at
     higher temperatures.   Below the glass  transition
     temperature (T ), absorption of organic vapors  by
                   &
     porous polymers occurs through very complex proc-
     esses.  Amorphous polymers  would  be expected to ad-
     sorb organic  vapors to a much greater  extent if
     they were  in  a rubbery state rather than a glass
     state.  Data  suggest that surface adsorption mech-
     anisms should predominate for organic  molecules at
     temperatures  below 1^0°C.

(5)   Retention  Capacity of  Porous Polymers  - Pore size
     determinations for Porapak P and  Q  indicate that a
     large proportion  of very small pores  exist in  these
     resins, particularly Porapak Q.   As a  result,  a
     large portion of  the "N2" surface area reported by
     the  manufacturers may  not be available to  the  more
     bulky organic molecules.  Chromosorb  101 has rela-
     tively large  pores compared to Porapak P and Q.

     Estimates  of  "available" surface  area  to organic
     molecules  were made by Gearhart  and Burke32 for
     Chromosorb 102, Porapak  P,  and Porapak Q.   The basis
     for  their  estimates was  the measurement of free
     energy changes for molecular probe-adsorbent inter-
     actions.  By  relating  these measurements for ben-
     zene, cyclohexane,  cyclohexene,  hexane, hexene,
                         75

-------
          raethylene chloride, and chloroform, estimates of
          "available" surface area were computed.  Chromo-
          sorb 101 was used as a norm for comparison since
          it probably has the greatest available surface
          area.  The reported apparent surface areas for
          Chromosorb 102, Porapak P, and Porapak Q are 95,
          37, and 133 m2/g, respectively.  These estimates
          represent 33-1%» 27.1%, and 20.2$ of the manufac-
          turer's reported surface areas.

     (6)  Thermal Stability of Sorbent - Thermal stability
          of the porous polymer sorbent is critical princi-
          pally from the standpoint of the optimum tempera-
          ture for desorption.  If relatively high molecular
          weight materials (e.g. MW 1^0) are to be measured,
          desorption temperatures as high as 290-300°C may
          be required.  Obviously, lower molecular weight
          materials will be desorbed at lower temperatures.
          The choice of sorbent for a particular sorbate
          will depend in large part on the temperature needed
          if the organic materials are removed by gas flow
          and thermal desorption.
3.1.1.4   Adsorption on Chemical Substrates and Silica Gel

Sample collecting and concentration techniques based on ad-
sorption on activated carbon have been used extensively.
Activated charcoal has been shown to quantitatively remove
an extremely broad range of organic contaminants from air.
The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) has promulgated a general procedure for sampling and
analysis of organics in work place atmosphere.33'31*  This pro-
cedure is based on adsorption of the organics on activated
                              76

-------
charcoal and desorption with carbon disulfide followed by
subsequent analysis by gas chromatograph.   The current NIOSH
procedure for vinyl chloride in in-plant atmospheres employs
this method.  While the adsorption process is quantitative,
the recovery of the collected components is usually incom-
plete and variable.35  The charcoal may also serve as a
catalyst to promote alteration of the sample,36'37 and it is
extremely subject to adsorption of water vapor, which limits
the adsorption capacity and can displace the desired organic
components.  Desorption by heating requires high temperature
(up to 400°C) and is accompanied by chemical changes due to
pyrolysis of the organic species and thermally enhanced re-
actions between the components.

Silica gel has been used for collecting three-carbon and
higher molecular weight hydrocarbons.  The collection ef-
ficiency for lower hydrocarbons^ such as ethylene, from air,
has been demonstrated to be poor even when trapping at dry
ice acetone temperatures.38
3.1.1-5   Sampling in Particulate Laden Streams

The porous polymer materials have also been used in particu-
late-laden streams as a supplemental collection medium fol-
lowing a filter or cyclone collection device.  As mentioned
earlier, low flow rate particulate systems have been used
for collection of the particulate in the probe and filters
and the volatile organics in the impinger liquid.  A more
efficient procedure is to employ the porous polymer in place
of or in addition to the impinger collection and thus elimi-
nate some of the differences mentioned earlier.
                              77

-------
One of the early attempts at this approach consisted of a
probe, heated filter, ice cooled impinger and a porous poly-
mer trap containing Tenax GC.  In general, the results indi-
cated that more organic material was collected by the ad-
sorber than by the impinger collectors.

A modification of this technique uses organic liquids in the
impingers that precede the porous polymer adsorber.   This
procedure is generally unsatisfactory because the organic
liquid vapors are trapped in the adsorber.  The analysis of
the collected species is then complicated by the presence of
a large quantity of impinger solvent and a small quantity of
other collected organic material.

A more appropriate position for the adsorber would be between
the filter used to collect particulate and the impingers.
The collected particulate could be both inorganic and organic,
depending on the filter temperature and nature of the emis-
sion source.  The porous polymer adsorber will collect or-
ganic vapors, but temperature becomes an important factor.
In streams with high water content, water can condense if the
temperature of the adsorber is below the dew point tempera-
ture of the gas.  If the temperature of adsorber is too high,
organic material will not be collected or can be driven off.
As new stack gas reaches the adsorber, an equilibrium will
result and the adsorption of the organic materials could be
less than quantitative.

Peter Jones et al of Battelle39 reported the results of an
organic sampling study that compared these various systems.
Block diagrams of the systems are shown in Figure 11.  System
4 collected the most material, even more than system 3 if
all impinger, filter, and organic absorber contents were
added together.  Systems 1 and 2, based on the analysis of
                              78

-------
PROBE
( 1) EPA TRAIN
PROBE
< 2 ) HIGH-VOLUME SAMPLER
PROBE
(3)MODIFIEDEPATRAIN
                        STANDARD
                        IMPING ERS
OVERSIZE
IMPINGERS
                                                 LINEAR MASS
                                                 FLOW METER
STANDARD
IMPINGERS


ADSORBENT
SAMPLER
I
1
PROBE
ADSORBENT
SAMPLER


IMPINGERS
|
!
( 4) ADSORBENT SAMPLING SYSTEM
    Figure  11.  Diagrams of  the. sampling systems  used  in  the
                 Battelle train evaluation study

-------
organic material collected, were not as efficient as systems
3 and 4.  The differences between systems 2 and 4, were ap-
parently caused by the S02 content of stack gases.  With low
S02 content, ,the results were in closer agreement, indicating
that "aqueous S02" may chemically alter some of the collected
materials.

Based on this work and other recent work, it appears that
reasonable results could be obtained using a modified particu-
late sampling system by placing the porous polymer adsorbent
after the filter and before the impinger train.

It should be stressed that this system has been used for mate-
rials of relatively high molecular weight and lower volatility
than many of the compounds that would be of interest in gen-
eral organic sampling schemes.  At this time, little is known
about the accuracy of the techniques since the "true" con-
centration is not known.  It is known, however, which system
collects the greater portion of material and it can be as-
sumed that the true value is being approached.  In other words
there is good knowledge of the precision of particulate sam-
pling, but very little data on the accuracy.
3.1.1.6   Procedures for Low Molecular Weight Materials

The preceding sections of this chapter have dealt with the
collection of organic materials using procedures applicable
to materials with molecular weight above Cy, and several pro-
cedures have been mentioned for collecting low molecular
weight materials.  One such procedure was use of a gas sam-
pling bulb after a porous polymer adsorber.  Another sug-
gested the use of a Tedlar or Teflon collection bag for an
integrated gas sample.

                              80

-------
At present, there are many unanswered questions as to the
collection efficiency of porous polymers for low molecular
weight materials.  If water can pass through a Porapac or
Tenax adsorber, then there is reason to suspect that methanol,
ethanol, and other low molecular weight alcohols may not be
collected quantitatively.  Fortunately, these materials are
not considered highly toxic, and some loss may not be signif-
icant.

One possible approach for the collection of low molecular
weight materials is to employ a cryogenically-cooled thermal
gradient tube patterned after that described by R. E. Kaiser.^
The thermal gradient tube will isolate organic emissions that
slip through the primary porous polymer sampling tubes.

The sampling train utilizing the porous polymer and Kaiser
tubes is shown schematically in Figure 12.  An evacuated tank
is used as a sampling gas driving force when a positive pres-
sure flow stream is not available.  The valve and calibrated
flowmeter upstream of the tank adjusts the flow rate in the
general region of 100 to 200 cc/minute.  Sampling conducted
over a 20-minute period provides a total sampled volume of
2 to 4 liters of effluent gas.  The cryogenic thermal gradient
tubes are fitted with thermocouples, and the porous polymer
adsorption tubes are constructed of stainless steel and stan-
dard Swagelok fittings.  A condensation trap (0°C) is posi-
tioned before the polymer tube to trap aerosolized water and
water vapor.

Some details of the sampling system includes the following:

     - The evacuated cylinder is an 0.02 m3 (0.83 ft3)
       Freon tank fitted with a thermocouple and a 3-in.
       vacuum gauge to permit calculation of total vol-
       ume sampled.

                              81

-------
oo
ro
                                                                                           TEMPERATURE GAUGE
                                                                                             PRESSURE GAUGE
                      .THERMOCOUPLES
                HEATED SECTION
           POLYMER PACKED TUBE
                                                                                                VACUUM PUMP
      STAINLESS STEEL PROBE  CONDENSER
EVACUATED CYCLINDER
                                                      LIQUID NITROGEN DEWAR
                                                                                   COMPRESSED NITROGEN
                   Figure  12.   Porous polymer  and thermal  gradient  sampling train

-------
     - The  liquid nitrogen dewar is a four-liter Nalgene
       dewar  flask  (Cat.  #4150) constructed of a double
       wall of highly  crosslinked polyethylene.

     - The  condensation trap  in a midget impinger cooled
       by an  ice-salt  mixture to about -10°C,

     - A photograph of the Kaiser tube is shown in Figure
       13.  The  inner  tube of the concentric heat ex-
       changer is a 20-cm length of 3/16 in. stainless
       steel  tubing and the outer tube is a 9-cm length
       of 5/16 in. stainless  steel tubing.

     - The  porous polymer tube is a 7 inch length of
       1/4  in. stainless  steel tube fitted with Swage-
       lok  fitting and plugs.

The flow of nitrogen through the jacketed thermogradient tube
is adjusted so that the entering nitrogen flow is near liquid
nitrogen temperature (-l60°C).  Under normal operating con-
ditions, the  thermocouple designated TC 2 will register
about -100°C.

This technique is considerably more complex than desired for
field sampling work.   However, the method does collect the
volatile compounds that may not be collected by the ambient
temperature porous polymer sampling system.
3.1.2   Fugitive Emission Methods

In Section 2.1.2 of this manual, procedures were specified
for the sampling of particulate and vapor fugitive emissions,
which are consistent with the Level I criterian of obtaining
large quantities of material in short periods of time.  In
                              83

-------
Figure 13.  Kaiser tube configuration

-------
a Level II or Level III sampling program, it can tie assumed
that more effort will be required to obtain the required sam-
ple.  In the case of particulate sampling for organic mate-
rials, the additional time does not change the basic sampling
concept of using high volume samplers.  However, a more re-
liable sampling network can be employed.  For fugitive vapor
sampling, a wide variety of techniques can be employed that
are more dependent on the chemical and physical properties
of the material to be sampled.
3.1.2.1   Particulate Emissions

For Level I sampling for particulate-emissions it was sug-
gested that a one or two high volume samplers collect the
emission sample and another sampler collect a background sam-
ple.  This procedure is suitable if there is little change
in the wind direction.  In contrast, a network of high volume
samplers completely around a source is relatively unaffected
by wind direction, but such a network is too complex for even
Level II or Level III studies.

In a number of fugitive emission projects, MRC has employed
a diffusion model and a five-sampler network that can be used
with a Level II or Level III sampling program.  Details of
this diffusion model are presented in Appendix B.

However, a compromise system of five samplers provides a
very satisfactory Level II or III sampling procedure.  If
four samplers are deployed downwind from a fugitive source
as shown in Figure 14, small changes in wind direction dur-
ing the course of sampling will have little effect on the
collection of sample and thus the potential of repositioning
the samplers as might be required in the Level I approach is

-------
        Angle of Wind
       B
                     E
                                     Source
                                           Resultant
                                             Wind
                                           Direction
                                                       D
Figure
Sampler positions; S0 - background;
Sj, S2, S3, Sij - sample collectors
                          86

-------
avoided.  The two samplers that are directly downwind from
the source provide some indication of how quickly particulate
matter is falling out of air.  This provides a simpler system
than placing samplers on a tower in order to obtain informa-
tion on the dispersion of the fugitive emission plume.

The five sampler system requires little more effort than does
the Level I system, but does provide for a great deal more
flexibility in operation and variation in wind conditions -
both direction and velocity.

The roof monitor and quasi-stack procedures described in
Level I are equally applicable to Level II or III programs.
3.1-2.2   Organic Vapor Emissions

In the preceding sections several methods are described that
can be employed for Level II and Level III fugitive organic
vapor emissions.  The flame ionization detector chromatograph
with suitable separation columns described for stationary
source emission is suitable for ambient vapor concentration
levels.  This sensitivity can be increased by using precon-
centration procedures, such as porous polymer tubes, prior
to injection into the chromatograph.  Organic sulfur com-
pounds should be analyzed on-site with a flame photometric
gas chromatograph.

Other techniques such as grab sampling (glass or Tedlar bag)
impinger or trapping procedures can be used.  A number of
procedures have been developed for the in-plant atmosphere
study for organic solvents and many of these procedures can
be used directly for the sampling of low level fugitive emis-
sions.  One source of such methods is the series of procedures

                              87

-------
available from the National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va.41  At present, there are ten sets with 6 to
16 sampling and analytical procedures in each set.  While
these methods are generally specific for an individual com-
pound, there is the possibility that a given procedure can
be used for many other compounds in the same homologous series,

The other stationary source methods, porous polymer and Kaiser
tube collection, can be used in ambient atmospheres by in-
creasing the sampling time.

The high volume sampling systems have also been adapted for
vapor sampling.  For this purpose the usual 20 x 25 cm filter
mat is replaced by a two-stage sampling head.  This sampling
head contains a 10 cm circular fiber glass filter, followed
by a 5 cm x 10 cm vapor trap containing polyurethane foam or
coated glass beads.  The polyurethane foam has been used suc-
cessfully for polychlorinated biphenyls42, and glass beads
coated with cottonseed oil have been used for air-borne pesti-
cide sampling.43  Very recently, it has been observed that
many high volume samplers contain a capacitor to reduce spark-
ing, and contamination of samples has been traced to a poly-
chlorinated naphthalene from this electrolytic capacitor.
Apparent concentrations of this material were found as high
as 1 ng/m3; high enough to prevent determination of pesti-
cides, PCB's and other trace organic materials.
3.2   LIQUID SAMPLING SCHEMES

In aqueous stream sampling, it is imperative that a Level I
study be conducted before either a Level II or Level III pro-
gram is begun.  The Level I effort would identify what
classes of compounds are of major importance and also provide
                              88

-------
approximate levels of this material.  It is not the intent of
the Level I effort to provide quantitative data, however,  from
the Level I samples one can determine how much sample will be
required for the more specific individual compound identifica-
tion and quantification.  As the analytical procedures to  be
employed in Level II and Level III studies will generally  be
rather sensitive, it will not be necessary to collect the
large quantities of sample specified in Level I unless ad-
ditional bio-testing is required.  Regardless, sufficient  sam-
ple must be available to satisfy the analytical separation
and detection limits.  The volume requirements for the stan-
dard analysis of wastewater are presented in Table 5.

In general, Level II and Level III sampling program? will  pro-
vide more sampling time than a Level I study.  As a result,
mechanical means of collecting samples are preferred, and  a
considerable number of suitable commercial samplers are avail-
able.
3.2.1   Sampling Systems

A major requirement of a sampling system is that it collect
a representative sample.  Grab samples provide neither average
concentrations nor variations in concentration.  The average
concentration is best determined by a composite sample col-
lected over periods ranging from hours to weeks.  Variations
in the composition are determined by individual samples taken
at specified intervals.  The intervals between the samples
must be small enough to show these variations.  Another prob-
lem with processes that show a wide variation is that the
flow rate through the source may also vary.  The question
that must be answered is whether sampling should be done in
relation to time or in proportion to the flow.

                              89

-------
      Table 5.   VOLUME OF  SAMPLE REQUIRED FOR DETERMINATION OF
                    THE  VARIOUS CONSTITUENTS  OF INDUSTRIAL  WATER10
                                Volume of
                               Sample,3 ml
                               Volume of
                              Sample,3 ml
            PHYSICAL TESTS
*Color and Odor	100 to 500
Torrosivity	  ... flowing sample
*Electrical conductivity	100
*pH,electrometric	100
Radioactivity	100 to 1000
'Specific gravity  	100
*Temperature	 flowing sample
*Toxicity	1000 to 20 000
Turbidity	100 to 1000

             CHEMICAL TESTS

Dissolved Gases:

  tAmmonia, NH3	500
  tCarbon dioxide, free
     C02	  200
  tChlorine, free C12	200
  fHydrogen, H-,	1000
  fHydrogen suffide, H^S	500
  tOxygen,02	"•	500 to 1000
  tSulfur dioxide, free SO2	100

Miscellaneous:
  Acidity and alkalinity	100
  Bacteria, iron  	500
  Bacteria, sulfate-reducing 	100
  Biochemical oxygen demand	100 to 500
  Carbon dioxide, total CO2
     fincludingC03"JiCO3',
     and free)	200
  Chemical oxygen demand
     (dichromate) 	50 to 100
  Chlorine requirement 	2000 to 4000
  Chlorine, total residual C12
     (including OC1', HOC1,
     NH2C1, NHC12, and free)	200
  Chloroform - extractable
     matter	1000
  Detergents	100 to 200
                                              Miscellaneous:
  Hardness	50 to 100
  Hydrazine	50 to 100
  Microorganisms	100 to 200
  Volatile and filming amines	500 to 1000
  Oily matter	3000 to 5000
  Organic nitrogen	500 to 1000
  Phenolic compounds	800 to 4000
  pH, colorimetric 	10 to 20
  Polyphosphates	100 to 200
  Silica	50 to 1000
  Solids, dissolved 	100 to 20 000
  Solids, suspended  	50 to 1000
  Tannin and lignin  	100 to 200
Cations:

  Aluminum, A1+++	100
  f Ammonium,NH^	
  Antimony, Sb+++ to Sb+++++ • • • 10°
  Arsenic, As+++ to AS+++++	100
  Barium, Ba"1"1" 	100
  Cadmium, Cd++  	100
  Calcium, Ca++	100
  Chromium ,Cr+++ to Cr+-|"l"f++ .
  Copper, Cu++	
  flron, Fe++ and Fe+++	
  Lead, Pb++	
  Magnesium, Mg++
  Manganese, Mn^to Mn+++~H"H"
  Mercury, Hg+ and Hg++ 	100
  Potassium, K+	100
  Nickel, NH+	100
  Silver, Ag+ 	100
  Sodium, Na+	100
  Strontium, Sr++  	100
  Tin, Sn++ and Sn++++  	100
  Zinc,Zn++ 	100
100
200
100
100
100
100
to 1000
	500
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 4000
to 1000
to 4000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
to 1000
                                               90

-------
Table  5  (cont'd.).   VOLUME  OF SAMPLE  REQUIRED FOR DETERMINATION  OF
                            THE  VARIOUS  CONSTITUENTS OF INDUSTRIAL  WATER10
                                  Volume of
                                Sam pie ,a ml
 Anions:

    Bicarbonate, HC03	100 to 200
    Bromide, Br"   	100
    Carbonate. CO3"   		100 to 200
    Chloride, CK   	25 to 100
    Cyanide, Cn"	25 to 100
    Fluoride, FT  	200
    Hydroxide, OH"  	50 to 100
    Iodide, I' 	100
    Nitrate, N03"	10 to 100
    Nitrite, N02	150 to 100
    Phosphate, ortho, PO4~",
      HP04",H2P04-    	50 to 100
    Sulfate, SO4", HS04"  • •'.	100 to 1000
    Sulfide, S", HS"	100 to 500
    Sulfite, SO3~, HSO3'	50 to 100

       a Volumes specified in this table should be considered as a guide for the approximate quantity of
 sample necessary for the particular analysis. The exact quantity used should be consistent with the volume
 prescribed in the standard method of analysis, whenever the volume is specified.
       * Aliquot may be used for other determinations.
       t Samples for unstable constituents must be obtained in separate containers, preserved as prescribed,
 completely filled and sealed against all exposure.
                                               91

-------
Since the concentrations of organic materials that may be
toxic is relatively low, it is suggested that the best approach
is to obtain a composite type of sample of at least 24 hours
duration.  Several such composites may be required if the con-
centration of materials is expected to be low.  Compositing
in the basis of flow would be the most desirable, particularly
if higher flow rate can be related to increased production
activity.

The choice of an appropriate sampling system for this type of
program is not a simple one.  In contrast to most of the waste-
water sampling, a sampler is required that can be used in a
wide variety of conditions and not designed for a particular
source.  Some of the requirements for a system are as follows:

     (1)  The sampler must be portable.

     (2)  The sampler should be able to take individual
          samples, with the option of a composite sample.

     (3)  Plow-proportional sampling with time-proportional
          option.

     (4)  The sampler should be refrigerated so that col-
          lected samples can be maintained at 4°C.

     (5)  The sampler should be designed to prevent con-
          tamination of samples either from the sampler
          or from previously collected samples (sampling
          lines).

     (6)  The unit should be self-contained and operate
          without connection to an external power source
          for at least 24 hours.  Operation on 115 volt
          lines should also be possible.
                              92

-------
      (7)   It  is  imperative  that  the  sampler can function
           over a 24  hour  period  with only intermittent
           attention  after the  initial set up.

      (8)   The sampler  should be  versatile enough and
           provide  enough  options to  make it useful for
           both organic  and  other types of sampling pro-
           grams .

      (9)   Sample containers should be of glass or Teflon
           to  prevent contamination of the samples.

     (10)   The sampler  should be  weather-proof to the ex-
           tent that  it  could operate under all types of
           conditions and  should  be explosion-proof for
           safety in  operation.

     (11)   The sampler  should be  equipped with pumps
           capable  of extracting  samples from streams
           that are up to  20 feet below the sampler lo-
           cation.

There are  a number of samplers that  are commercially avail-
able that  can meet most of  these criteria.  A number of such
samplers and  their capabilities  are  listed in Table 6.   The
information shown  is from sales  literature and data presented
in an EPA  report by Harris  and Keffer44 and as a result may
not completely cover all of the  available models and manu-
facturers .

It is of interest to note that Harris  and Keffer indicated
that in their opinion they  have  had  the best success with
the Quality Control CVE unit and a schematic of the sampler
is shown in Figure 15.   They did not have any of the Manning
units or the newer ISCO units.   Laboratory examination of
                              93

-------
Table 6.  SAMPLERS FOR WASTEWATER COLLECTION
Name
Sirco Automatic

Quality Control
Quality Control

Isco

Isco
Isco
Manning

Manning

Sigmamotor

Sigmamotor

Brailsford
Brailsford

Brailsford

Hants

Sirco
N-Con
N-Con
Model No.
NW3-8

CVE
CVE-II

1680

1580
1580R
S3000

SitOOO

WA-2

WD-2

EV-1
DU-1

EP-1

3B

MKU57
Scout
Surveyor
Composite or
Sequential
sequential

composite
composite

sequential

composite
composite
composite

sequential

composite

composite

composite
composite

composite

composite

composite
composite
composite
Sample proportional to:
_. Time Flow
yes

external
yes

yes

yes
yes
yes

yes

yes

yes

yes
yes

yes

yes

yes
yes
yes
no

external
external

external

external
external
external

external

no


no
yes
VP S
y c o

no
no

yes
no
yes
Purge
Refrigerated Peature_
add ice separate
lines
no yes
no yes

no yes

no yes
(ice)
yes yes
no yes

no yes


no no

	 no
	 no

— no

	 no

--- no
T— T- yes
	 yes
	 gravity

Self-contained
no

yes
yes
(4 days)
yes
(1 day)
yes
(18 hra.)
no
yes
(120 samples)
yes
(120 samples)

no

yes
yes

yes

yes

manual
yes
yes
no
Sample Bottles
glass

glass
glass

P.P. or glass

glass or PE
glass or PE
glass or P.P.

P.P.


glass or PE

glass or PE
glass

glass

glass

glass or PE
glass
glass or PE
glass or PE

-------
                           VACUUM SYSTEM
                                      BLOW DOWN
                                    SOLENOID VALVE
                       BLEED & DRAIN VALVE
115V INPUT
              Figure  15.   Schematic of  the CVE  Sampler

-------
the ISCO 1580 and Manning S3000 and S4000 units indicates
that these instruments should perform well.

Harris and Keffer1*1* state that the flow compositing of waste-
water with appreciable solids content is not justified and
further flow-proportional sampling should be restricted to
well treated effluents with no visible solids.  In this work,
the long-term dependability of the sampler is of the utmost
importance, and they had the option of choosing a particular
sampler for a particular site.  For the type of sampling dis-
cussed in this manual, a sampler is needed that can be used
for short periods over a wide variety of conditions and sites,
Therefore, while dependability is important, a sampler should
be chosen that has many options and modes of operation and
that can be operated to collect many types of samples under
a variety of conditions.

The ISCO 1680 or Manning S4000 should provide the necessary
capabilities, but these units have not been tested in the
field nor have all other possibilities been examined.  These
two units are sequential samplers.  Manual compositing would
provide a composite sample if desired.  The Manning unit can
also be programmed to collect partial bottles.  In this way,
small composites of a number of individually collected sam-
ples can be obtained.  For example, samples equivalent to
1/4 of a bottle could be collected each 15 minutes.  Each
full bottle would represent a one-hour composite and in 24
hours, 24 one-hour composites would have been collected.
Both units can receive sampling signals from an external de-
vice and so could be programmed on flow proportion or any
other porameter.  The Manning sampler employs a vacuum pump,
a decided advantage over the peristaltic pump in the ISCO
for streams containing high levels of suspended matter.  It
would appear that glass bottles are not an option to the

                              96

-------
standard polypropylene bottles for the Manning unit, a decided
disadvantage for organic samples, but they are available for
the ISCO sampler.  The Manning unit can be ice-cooled, while
ISCO has an optional refrigerator available for this sampler.
A schematic of the Manning sampler is shown in Figure 16.

It is thus quite clear that each sampler is better suited for
certain applications, and the proper selection of a unit must
be based on the nature of the sampling program.

Under certain sampling conditions, it would be desirable to
employ a concentration-type device In the field.  For this
approach the CAM in either the high-flow-rate or low-flow-rate
versions may be useful.  In a Level II or III type of study,
some of the disadvantages of the low-flow system would be
eliminated since considerably more sampling time would be
available.

One possible approach that may be useful is to employ a porous
polymer such as Tenax GC In place of the carbon as the organic
adsorber.  The Tenax has a low affinity for water and if the
passage of large quantities of water through the material does
not reduce its ability to absorb organic material, it may be
possible to directly substitute the Tenax for carbon in the
CAM-type adsorber.  This type of approach has been employed
in laboratory separations of organics from water, so there is
evidence that the technique has promise in field sampling.
The use of Tenax is an advantage in that generally organics
can be removed from this material more readily than from car-
bon.   Also, the technique that will be employed in the han-
dling of the Tenax in gas matrix sampling can be employed on
the water-collected samples once the water is removed.  The
Tenax technique as a field concentrator will require further
                              97

-------
                              FILL SENSOR
COMPRESSOR
     CONTROLS
                                            INLET HOSE
VALVE
SAMPLE SIZE
ADJUSTMENT

 MEASURING
  CHAMBER
  r
         STEPPING
           MOTOR
           SPOUT  ROTARY UN I ON
                       DISCRETE
              SAMPLE BOTTLES
                                         J
                                     ] VALVE
                             '"I
                                           COMPOSITE
                                            INTAKE
    Figure 16.   Schematic of the Manning S^OOO Sampler
                               98

-------
development, and possible loss of low molecular weight vola-
tile organics must be investigated.
3.2.2   Flow Measurement Techniques

The analysis of samples collected in any sampling program at
Level II or Level III will provide quantitative data in terms
of the concentration in a unit volume.  However, in order to
assess the seriousness of the emission of a toxic material
and relate this to process variables, it is necessary to de-
termine the total flow of a system in a given time.  The se-
lection of the proper measurement method will depend on a
variety of factors such as cost, accessibility of the source,
distances involved, and the characteristics of the stream.
In a monitoring program, it is much more feasible to set up
a permanent system for measurement of flow rate, but in the
assessment type of program, it is necessary to evaluate a
trade-off of cost against the reliability of the data.

In an organic sampling program, there are several types of
flow that must be considered; flow in open partial-filled
channels as in waste streams and flow in completely filled
ducts as in process lines or incoming water supplies.  In
the partially filled stream, the flow can be fairly constant
with respect to velocity and depth, or it can be quite varied
over a time period.  In the closed, completely filled streams,
it is usually possible to employ methods that will relate
some easily measured parameter such as pressure to the flow
rate.  Rabosky and Koraido45 summarized the methods of flow
measurement as listed in Table ?•
                              99

-------
                       Table  7.   METHODS OF  FLOW  MEASUREMENT AND  THEIR APPLICATION1*5
H
O
o
Pump capacity and operation

Floating objects
Dyes
Salt dilution
Orifice meter
Weirs and flow recorders
Parshal Flume
Venturi meter
Magnetic flow meter
Flow nozzles
Pltot tube
Rotameter
Plow Range
Measurement
Small to large
Small to large
Small
Small to large
Small to medium
Small to medium
Small to medium
Small to large
Small to large
Small to large
Small to large
Small to large
Small to large
Small to medium
Small to medium
Cost
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Ease of
Installation*
N/A
Fair
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Fair
Difficult
Difficult
Pair
Pair
Fair
Fair
Fair
Accuracy of Data
.Fair
Excellent
Good
Good
Fair
Fair to average
Fair
Excellent
Good to excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Excellent
  where Joints can be dis-
  connected
Lines where water is being
  pumped
Open channels
Pipe flow and open channels
Pipe flow and open channels
Pipe flow
Open channels
Open channels
Pipe flow
Pipe flow
Pipe flow
Pipe flow
Pipe flow
        *N/A - Not Applicable

-------
 3.2.2.1   Procedures for Closed, Filled Systems

 A number of standard methods are available for the measure-
 ment of parameters that can be related to flow rate in this
 type of stream.  A summary of these methods and the situations
 where they can be employed are given in Table 8.  Of the
 methods listed, the water meter and rotameter are restricted
 to certain types of materials.  The venturi meter, flow noz-
 zle, orifice meter, pitot tube and magnetic flow meters are
 more generally useful, but all require special pipe, pipe
 sections, or specific pipe designs.  As a result, all such
 devices will require installation during a process inter-
 ruption.  The pressure-sensing devices, with the exception of
 the pitot tube, will restrict the flow to varying degrees.
 A high solids content creates problems with all pressure de-
 vices.  The magnetic flow meter eliminates the flow restric-
 tion and solids problems but requires that the liquid be a
 conductor.  Thus it is not appropriate for nonaqueous streams.

 Fortunately, the flow rate in many closed-type filled ducts
 is part of the information required in the control of chemi-
 cal processes.  The required flow rate information can often
 be obtained from the process logs and instrument data, how-
 ever, it is essential that the instruments and/or flow de-
 vices be recalibrated on or about the time a sampling program
 is initiated.   Arrangements for such recalibration should be
made as part of the pretest site survey at the plant location,
 since scheduling of such recalibration may be a problem and
may only be possible during a plant shut-down.
                             101

-------
                   Table  8.   METHODS  OF  MEASUREMENT  OF FLOW IN  CLOSED  PIPES
   Method
o
IV)
Water Meter

Venturi Meter


Plow Nozzle


Orifice Meter
Magnetic flow
    Meter
Pitot tube
Rotometers
 Parameter
 Measured

Total flow

 Pressure


 Pressure


 Pressure


 Induced
 Voltage


 Pressure



Flow Rate
  Application

fresh water

most materials
  Waste with
moderate solids

  low solids
   content

 high solids
   content
                                       straight pipe
                                         sections,
                                        low solids

                                       clean liquid
                                                           Relationship to flow rate

                                                                  direct

                                                           Q -  0.98AK/H (a)


                                                           Q -  CAK/H    (b)


                                                           Q -  CAK/H    (b)
                    Voltage is proportional
                         to to flow
                    depends on configuration
                           direct
              Remarks
not suitable  of  other materials

accurate,  free of  solid accumulation,
expensive

between venturi  meter and orifice cost
and effect of solids

low cost,  high pressure loss, not
suitable for  high  solids waste streams

can be used in pipes down to 0.1 Inch.
Accuracy increases with Increased flow.
No pressure loss.

economical in large pipej sollda cause
plugging,  requires straight pipe 15 to
50 times the  diameter.

suitable for  only  clean liquids, such
as process lines,  simple inexpensive,
relatively accurate, must be kept clean.
(a)  Q = flow rate (ftVsec),  0.98  coefficient, A = throat area (ft2),  K  •*   i-^'/d )**  where dz = throat  diameter  (ft),

         d: = dia. of inlet  pipe  (ft), H » differential head (ft of water)
 (b)  Q,A,K,H as above,  C • coefficient, value depends on design of device

-------
 3.2.2.2   Flow Measurements^ in Open Pipes

 The  methods that  are employed for measurement  of  flow  in open,
 partially filled  pipes  range from relatively simple  calcula-
 tions  to  fairly sophisticated flow sensing  procedures  that
 can  signal a sampling device.   While the first type  is suit-
 able for  estimating flow for Level I studies,  the  latter type
 is required when  one is sampling in proportion to  the  flow
 rate.

 In the  simple case  of a horizontal or sloped pipe  in which
 the  discharge falls into the air,  it is possible to  calculate
 the  flow  rate by  the determination of the vertical and hori-
 zontal  displacement of  the  liquid  after it  leaves  the  pipe
 (Figure 17).   In  this case  the flow is determined  by the re-
 lation:

                          Q  = 1800AX
                                /Y
where
     Q = the flow rate  (gallons/min)

     A = wet cross-section area of the liquid in the pipe (ft2)

     X = distance between the end of the pipe and a vertical
         guage point (ft)

     Y = vertical distance from the water surface in the pipe
         to the intersection of the water surface with the
         vertical guage (ft)

Another method is called the California pipe method.  For this
procedure it is necessary to have a horizontal pipe of diameter
                             103

-------
                            ADJUSTABLE NUT SO THAT
                            X AXIS IS PARALLEL TO SEWER
                            ANDY AXIS IS VERTICAL'
                                  X
\\
          Vv

         B = (DI STANCE FROM BOTTOM OF PI PE TO.
                SURFACE OF FALLING LIQUID)
          FOR SLOPED
          SEWERS OR PIPES:
                                                     CO
                                                     +
                                                     o
                                                     tl
OPEN-PIPE FLOW MEASUREMENT -THIS DEVICE, ADJUSTED TO THE
SLOPE OF A SEWER AND CALIBRATED, CAN THEN BE CLAMPED TO
THE SEWER OUTFALL.
    Figure 17.   Open pipe flow  measurement method9
                             104

-------
 d at  least 6 diameters long with free discharge  at  the  open
 end (Figure 18).   The information required  is  the diameter
 of the pipe "d"  and the distance between the top of the pipe
 and the level of the liquid "a".   The calculation of the
 flow  rate is given by the  equation:

                            Q =  TW

 where:

      Q = flow rate (gal/min)

      T = 3900 (l-a/a)1.88

  and  W = d2'**8

      with both a  and d expressed  in  feet

 With  this type of measurement,  it  is  possible  to employ water
 level  devices to  continuously determine  the value of "a".  In
 this  way changes  in  the  flow rate  can be  recorded,  or the
 water  level  device can be  employed to operate, through the
 proper  electrical  circuits, a flow proportional  sampler.

 It  is also possible  to measure  flow from  the wet cross sec-
 tion area and the  average  velocity of the liquid because the
 flow is  equal to  the  area  times the average velocity.  The
 average  velocity  can  be measured by pitot tubes and  other
 types of  velocity meters.  Floating objects can be employed
 for measuring the  surface  velocity and by assuming the aver-
 age velocity  of the waste  stream is 85% of the surface veloc-
 ity.

For the most  accurate measurements of flow,  some type of re-
 stricting device such  as a weir is constructed across the
                             105

-------
H
O
ON
                OPEN END
                   HOSE
                                                     MEASUREMENTS NEEDED FOR
                                                   CALIFORNIA PIPE FLOW METHOD
           INCLINED PIPES SHOULD BE CONNECTED TO
           A HORIZONTAL LENGTH OF PIPE BY HOSE.
                            Figure 18.   California pipe flow method9

-------
pipe so that the liquid flows through a specific size opening
and the flow is proportional to the depth of liquid at a
given distance upstream from the weir.  Most of the devices
used for controlling flow-proportional sample require a weir
or other such device to be installed in order to maintain a
range of depths behind the weir.  One major problem with a
weir is that solid in the waste stream tends to accumulate
behind the weir and can influence the measurements.  The de-
vice is constructed with a pipe section and thus is considered
as a permanent installation.  Plastic weirs which can be in-
stalled as a temporary device in a half-open pipe have re-
cently become commercially available.  Typical weirs are of
the 60- or 90-day V-notch or rectangular design, as shown in
Figure 19, and the data required for their use in flow measure-
ment is available in most hydraulics handbooks.

One of the most widely used devices for flow measurement is
the Parshall flume, a specially shaped channel consisting of
a converging section, a throat, and a diverging section, as
shown in Figure 20.  As with the weir, data are available to
relate the head of water above the floor in the converging
section to the flow rate.  Plastic flumes are available that
can be installed in existing pipes.  A major advantage of
the flume is that it is self-cleaning, and suspended materi-
als do not tend to accumulate behind the flume.
3.2.2.3   Control of Flow Proportional Sampling

Many of the samplers discussed in the sampling section can
accept a signal from an external device to permit the col-
lection of flow proportional samples.  The signal can be ob-
tained from continuous flow measuring devices that typically
are used in conjunction with a weir or flume.  Since the
                             107

-------
      A.
                      ^90°
                    Z>2.5H
                                   '2.5H
                                       - WATER LEVEL
y//////////////////////////////////////////////^
Figure  19.
  Typical  V-notch  and Rectangular Weirs1}
                  2 . «4 8                  5/2
  (A.   Q = 2.*\Q H   ,  ;  B.  Q  = 1.^3 H    ;
                    3/2
   C.   Q = 3.33 LH    )
                           108

-------
                      STILLING-^
                       WELLS
           SCONVERGING-
            F SECTION:
         THROAT
         SECTION
DIVERGING
"SECTION"
/  WATER SURFACE  \

STANDING
                       WAVE   X  ir^rn
                                         \

                                           \
V  ASLOPE 1/4
           Figure 20.  Design of Parshall Flume

-------
water level varies just upstream of the weir or flume, a sen-
sor such as a float or pressure-sensitive device can provide
an electrical signal for continuous recording of the liquid
depth.  Most of these devices have built-in capability for
converting the flow depth data into a flow rate, and, in ad-
dition, can be set to trigger the sampling device at some
preset liquid level.

There are a large number of recording devices commercially
available and they employ a number of different methods to
determine the liquid level.  Details of a number of such de-
vices, using three different approaches, are outlined below,
and they represent the types of equipment available.

     ISCO Model 1*170 - This flow meter senses water
     levels with a float upstream from a weir .or flume
     which has known flow vs head characteristics, and
     then integrates the water level with time to mea-
     sure the passing volume.  The float, of the type
     typically used in a water closet, is available to
     cover either a six-inch or twelve-inch height
     range.  The Model 1^70 employs a specially de-
     signed calibration disc for each specific flume
     or weir shape and this disc must be replaced if
     the flow meter is used with a different type of
     weir.  If required, the manufacturer will supply
     special discs for non-standard weirs or flumes
     or open pipes.  The flow meter can be obtained
     with the required interface to trigger the sam-
     pler at a set liquid level.

     Fisher and Porter Model 10F1275 - This unit em-
     ploys a boat-shaped plastic float to sense
     liquid level.  The basic unit is available in

                             110

-------
many options and provides only depth informa-
tion.  Conversion to flow is accomplished from
tables relating depth to the type of weir or
flume.

ISCO Model 1700W - ISCO will soon release this
flow meter.  It employs a different principle
for operation than the Model 1*170.  In the new
model, a tube is placed in the liquid upstream
from the flume or weir and air is bubbled slow-
ly through the tube.  The flow meter senses the
pressure required to maintain the bubbling and
relates this pressure to the liquid depth.  In
contrast to the machined disc used with the
Model 1470, the Model 1700W employs a trans-
parent plastic disc with darkened areas and a
photocell arrangement to convert the depth to
flow rate.  A separate plastic disc is required
for each type of weir or flume, however, the
discs are easily changed for a new flow situ-
ation.  Although this device has not been field
tested as yet, the prototype demonstrated seemed
to operate reliably.  This device can be employed
to trigger a sampler at a preset liquid level.

Manning F-3000 Series - The Manning Dipper Plow-
meter has many features that indicate it would
be very useful in a source assessment type of
program.  The unit is relatively small and can
be set up by one man in about 10 minutes.  The
flow meter works on a dipper principle and, with
an internal switch, can be used for obtaining
flow in round pipes, flumes or weirs (and other
types of channels on request).  The dipper
                        111

-------
     measures the liquid level by sensing the sur-
     face of the liquid and does not enter the
     liquid.  A thin non-corrosive probe is lowered
     on a wire controlled by a motor.  When the
     probe makes contact with the surface, a micro-
     ampere circuit is completed through a con-
     ductive liquid to a ground return.  The signal
     reverses the motor, raising the probe above
     the surface.  After 5 seconds, the probe is
     lowered, contacts the surface and reacts again.
     The changes in the cable length during this
     dipping action are translated into rotation of
     a measuring wheel and hence to an electronic
     servo system.

     The flow-proportional output from the servo
     system can be used to record flow on a chart
     and provides an input to a totalizing circuit.
     In order to obtain the actual flow rate, it
     is necessary to multiply the reading over a
     time period from the totalizing circuit by
     the maximum flow/minute of the system.  While
     the system does not give the total flow di-
     rectly, it is a simple matter to obtain this
     data.  The unit is battery powered and can
     supply flow data for a period up to 7 days on
     a chart powered by a spring-driven 8-day
     clock.  The flow meter includes capability
     of controlling an automatic sampler on a flow
     proportional basis.

As indicated earlier, sequential or composite sampling can be
done on either a time basis or flow proportional basis.   Time-
based samples can give a distorted picture, overemphasizing
                             112

-------
the nighttime readings when low flow and processing activity
occurs and underemphasizing the higher flow and processing
of the daylight hours.  This is not critical in around-the-
clock processing situations, however, most industries show
considerable variation in daily activity.  The flow-measuring
devices described have a sensor that can activate a sampler
when the effluent stream reaches a predetermined level.

In general, there are two methods that are employed for taking
the sample, the time constant-volume variable method (TcVv),
and the time variable-volume constant method (TvVc).  Many
samplers can operate on either principle, however, the TvVc
method provides the same quantity of liquid each time and
thus eliminates the possibility of collected samples that are
too small for analysis during low flow periods.  This is es-
pecially important in sequential sampling.  In operation, the
TvVc method provides for shorter intervals between samples
during periods of high flow  (and possible high process activ-
ity) and thus may detect occasional non-periodic discharge of
materials that may not be detected on a TcVv basis.
3.2.3   Preservation of Samples

Once the sample is collected, it is essential that it be
maintained for storage and shipment in such a way that it is
representative of the stream to be investigated.  Complete
and unequivocal preservation of samples is a practical im-
possibility because complete stability of each and every com-
pound can never be achieved.  The preservation techniques
are intended to retard chemical and biological changes prior
to analysis.
                              113

-------
Some of the potential pitfalls in handling the samples in-
clude:

     (1)  Breaking of glass containers during han-
          dling and shipment

     (2)  Improper cleaning of glass containers

     (3)  Use of cap liners other than Teflon (this
          material eliminates plasticizer or ad-
          hesive contamination)

     (4)  Biological degradation

     (5)  Loss of metals and other materials to the
          container walls

     (6)  Possibility of expansion if frozen and
          breakage of the container

     (7)  Potential loss of low molecular compounds
          if head space in container is not mini-
          mized

     (8)  Chemical changes in components due to time
          delays between sampling and analysis

For this program, our major interest is the organic constitu-
ents in the sample.  However, as has been noted many times,
it would be desirable to obtain a sample for other analyses
as well.  In order to provide an understanding of the com-
plexity of the problem, recommended sample preservation and
maximum holding period data are given in Table 9 for a
variety of measured parameters.46  This list includes many
of the parameters that are typically measured to characterize
waste water samples.  It is obvious that a wide variety of
preservation methods are employed.

-------
     Table  9.    SAMPLE PRESERVATION  AND MAXIMUM HOLDING PERIODS9
        Parameter
           Preservative
Acidity-Alkalinity
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Calcium
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Color
Cyanide
Dissolved Oxygen
Fluoride
Hardness
Metals, Total
Metals, Dissolved
Nitrogen, Ammonia
Nitrogen, Kjedahl
Nitrogen, Nitrate-Nitrite
Oil and Grease
Organic Carbon
PH
Phenolics
Phosphorous
Solids
Specific Conductance
Sulfate
Sulfide
Threshold Odor
Turbidity
Refrigeration at
Refrigeration at
None required
2 ml H2SOi, per liter
None required
Refrigeration at  4°C
NaOH to pH 10
Determine on-site
None required
None required
5 ml HN03 per liter
Filtrate:  3 ml 1:1 HN03 per liter
40 mg HgCl2 per liter - 4°C
1)0 mg HgCl2 per liter - 4°C
40 mg HgCl2 per liter - 4°C
2 ml H2SOk per liter - 4°C
2 ml H2SOi, per liter (pH 2)
Determine on-site
1.0 g CuSO.,/1 + H3POi» to pH 4.0 - 4°C
i(0 mg HgCl2 per liter - 4°C
None available
None required
Refrigeration at  4°C
2 ml Zn acetate per liter
Refrigeration at  4°C
None available
    Maximum
Holding Period
   24 hours
    6 hours
    7 days
    7 days
    7 days
   24 hours
   24 hours
  No holding
    7 days
    7 days
    6 months
    6 months
    7 days
    Unstable
    7 days
   24 days
    7 days
  No holding
   24 hours
    7 days
    7 days
    7 days
    7 days
    7 days
    7 days
    7 days
                                             115

-------
In general, the preservation methods can be summarized into
four types:  (1) use of HgCl2 to prevent bacterial action;
(2) use of acid (either HN03 or H2S04) to prevent bacterial
action, form soluble salts, or to form complexes; (3) use of
alkali to form salts of volatile compound; and (4) refrigera-
tion to prevent bacterial action, to retard chemical reactions,
and to reduce loss of volatile compounds.

For the purpose of this study and the possibility that other
analyses will be done on the collected sample, it is sug-
gested that preservation at 4°C is the best compromise.  It
should be noted, however, that this is not the preferred
method for samples to be analyzed for trace metal content.
In addition, filtering the sampling presents an additional
problem.  It is generally recommended that samples for or-
ganic analysis not be filtered because the organics are fre-
quently adsorbed on the surface of the suspended particles.
Instead, filtering on-site followed by stabilization of the
filtrate with HNOs is suggested for trace metal analysis.
This will present a major problem if analysis for both types
of materials is desired, especially for Level II or Level III
programs.  At this time there is no obvious solution to the
problem.  However, since the major interest in this manual
is organic materials, the refrigeration method is suggested
and the loss of some metal compounds must be accepted.
3.3   SOLID SAMPLING PROCEDURES

In the Level I approach to solid sampling, the specified
techniques were basically "grab" samples taken from conven-
ient locations or employed existing sampling devices if they
were available from the plant quality assurance programs.
There was no attempt to install sampling devices since these
                             116

-------
installations would not fall within the Level I cost and man-
power structure.

For the Level II and Level III program there is increased
emphasis on the acquisition of a representative sample in
order to identify specific organic compounds and to relate
these compounds to the process conditions.  In this context,
some of the available types of mechanical samplers can be
employed to obtain the samples.  If the analysis information
is essential to the program, the installation of these de-
vices can be justified.

As indicated in the Section 2.3 on Level I sampling, many of
the procedures are available from the ASTM methods.  All of
the references listed in the Level I section are appropriate
for the higher level studies.
3.3.1   Sampling of Bulk Material

The methodology for Level II and III sampling is basically
identical to that employed at Level I.  The only difference
is that more sampling locations within the source are es-
sential to establish a pattern of variation and trends in
the composition of the material.  Along with the larger sam-
ple, mechanical methods of compositing and reducing sampling
size would be employed instead of alternate shovel and cone
and quartering techniques.  ASTM procedure D2013-72 "Pre-
paring Coal Sampling for Analysis"22 describes a sample di-
vider (riffle) and several rotating devices to permit sample
reduction.  Diagrams of these devices, indicating the princi-
ples of operation, are shown in that procedure.   These types
of devices generally eliminate the bias in sample size experi-
enced in the alternate shovel and cone and quartering tech-
niques.
                             117

-------
The objective of a Level III study is to evaluate the effect
of process variables on the emissions and composition of ma-
terial.  This will require that sampling must be performed
on the process material to establish the degree of variabil-
ity to be expected under "normal" operating conditions.  Un-
less the degree of variability is known, it would be impossi-
ble to establish if the process variables were causing a
change in the material composition.  There is no question as
to the ability of the analytical methods to measure small
variations in composition.  Therefore, it is essential that
the sampling should be done in a manner that such variations
represent process changes rather than sampling anomalies.  A
number of individual samples should be obtained and analyzed
separately to provide both an average value and the variabil-
ity of the composition instead of trying to obtain an "average"
sample.
3.3.2   Sampling From Moving Streams

The Level I approach for moving streams was based on the
"stop belt" grab sampling procedure.  This procedure could
equally apply to Level II and III studies within the restric-
tions of grab sampling techniques.  As in bulk sampling, ad-
ditional individual samples would be desirable and these sam-
ples should be subdivided by riffles or other devices to ob-
tain a single sample for analysis.

Level II and Level III programs also present the possibility
of installing mechanical devices such as a ram, rotating cut-
ter or slip streams to provide periodic samples.  These de-
vices must be designed for the specific site.  As a result,
the device and its design must be discussed in detail with
plant management personnel.
                              118

-------
The ram or straight line sampler will provide the most accu-
rate sample.  The design is such that entire cross-sections
of the material in the stream is removed each time the sampler
operates and an equal time is spent in each portion of the
stream.  In general, the sampler operates at right angles to
the stream, although some of these devices operate at an
angle to minimize disturbing the sample and thus reduce the
amount of segregation that can take place.
                              119

-------
                          SECTION IV

                          REFERENCES
1.  Dorsey, J. A., C. H. Lockmiiller, L. D. Johnson, and R. M.
    Statnick.  "Guidelines for Environmental Assessment Sampling
    and Analysis Programs Level I."  Environmental Protection
    Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C.  9 March 1976.

2.  Idem.  "Guidelines for Environmental Assessment Sampling
    and Analysis Programs - Historical Development and Strategy
    of a Phased Approach."  Environmental Protection Agency,
    Research Triangle Park, N.C.  9 March 1976.

3.  TRW Systems Group.  "Technical Manual for Process Measure-
    ments of Trace Inorganic Materials,"  (Draft Copy)  Environ-
    mental Protection Agency.  Contract 68-02-1393.  February
    1975-

4.  High Volume Stack Sampler.  Aerotherm Division of Acurex
    Corporation, Mountain View, California, 9^042.

5.  TRW Systems Group.  "Fabrication and Calibration of Series
    Cyclone Sampling Train."  Environmental Protection Agency.
    Contract 68-02-1412.  Task Order No. 7.  April 1975.

6.  Aerotherm Division of Acurex Corporation.  "Development of
    a Source Assessment Sampling System."  Environmental Pro-
    tection Agency.  Contract 68-02-2151*.

                              121

-------
 7.   Gushing, K. M. ,  W. B. Smith, and H. B. Nicholas.  Southern
     Research Institute.  Correspondence to D. B. Harris (EPA).
     24 September 1975.

 8.   Federal Register 3^, No. 199, p. 28758-28760 (1973).

 9-   "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste-
     water."  American Public Health Association, New York, N.Y.,
     10019-  Thirteenth Edition (1971).

10.   "Handbook for Monitoring Industrial Wastewater."  Environ-
     mental Protection Agency.  Technology Transfer Series.

11.   Rabosky, J. G.,  and D. L. Koraido.  Chem. Eng.  January 8,
     1973-  P- 111-120.

12.   Federal Register ^0, No. 248.  p. 59566-59588. (Dec. 24,
     1975).

13.   Gesser, H. D.,  A. B. Sparling, A. Chow, and C. W. Turner.
     J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 6j>, p. 220-1 (1973).

14.   Burnham, A. K.,  G. V. Culder, J. S. Fritz, G. A. Junk,
     H. J. Svec, and R. Virk.  J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 65.
     p. 722-5 (1973).

15.   Mieure, J. P.,  and M. W. Dietrich.  J. Chromatogr. Sci. 11.
     p. 559-70 (1973).

16.   Andelman, J. B., and S. C. Caruso.  Water and Water Pollu-
     tion Handbook.   Vol. 2.  Ed. by Craccio, L. L., Marcel
     Dekker, Inc, New York.  (1971).
                               122

-------
17.  Jones, P. W., A. P. Graffeo, R. Detrich, P. A. Clarke, and
     R. J. Jakobsen.  Technical Manual for Analysis of Organic
     Materials In Process Streams.  EPA 600/2-76-072.  U. S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C.  March,
     1976.

18.  Standard Method of Sampling Coke for Analysis.  ASTM Desig-
     nation:  D 3^6-35.  In:  1973 Annual Book of ASTM Standards.
     Philadelphia, American Society for Testing and Materials,
     1973.

19-  Standard Method for Sampling Packaged Shipments of Carbon
     Black.  ASTM Designation:  D 1799-65.  In:  1973 Annual
     Book of ASTM Standards.  Philadelphia, American Society
     for Testing and Materials, 1973.

20.  Standard Methods of Sampling Hydraulic Cement.  ASTM Desig-
     nation:  C 183-71.  In:  1973 Annual Book of ASTM Standards.
     Philadelphia, American Society for Testing and Materials,
     1973-

21.  Sampling Particulate Ion-Exchange Materials.  ASTM Desig-
     nation:  D 2617-72.  In:  1973 Annual Book of ASTM Standards
     Philadelphia, American Society for Testing and Materials,
     1973.

22.  Standard Method of Preparing Coal Samples for Analysis.
     ASTM Designation:  D 2013-72.  In:  1973 Annual Book of
     ASTM Standards.   Philadelphia, American Society for Test-
     ing and Materials, 1973-

23.  Probability Sampling of Materials.  ASTM Designation:
     E 105-58.  In:   1973 Annual Book of ASTM Standards.  Phil-
     adelphia, American Society for Testing and Materials, 1973-
                               123

-------
24.  Acceptance of Evidence Based on the Results of Probability
     Sampling.  ASTM Designation:  E 141-69.  In:  1973 Annual
     Book of ASTM Standards.  Philadelphia, American Society
     for Testing and Materials, 1973.

25.  Standard Recommended Practice for Choice of Sample Size to
     Estimate the Average Quality of a Lot or Process.  ASTM
     Designation:  E 122-72.  In:  1973 Annual Book of ASTM
     Standards.  Philadelphia, American Society for Testing
     and Materials, 1973-

26.  Standard Method for Collection of a Gross Sample of Coal.
     ASTM Designation:  D 223^-72.  In:  1973 Annual Book of
     ASTM Standards.  Philadelphia, American Society for Test-
     ing and Materials, 1973.

27.  Application Information Data.  Analytical Instrument Devel-
     opment, Inc.  Avondale, Pa.

28.  Rasmussen, R. A.  Amer. Lab.  December 1972.  p. 55.

29.  Trowell, J. M.  J. Chromatogr. Sci. £.  p. 253 (1971).

30.  Neumann, M. G., and S. Morales.  J. Chromatogr. 7£.
     P- 332 (1972).

31.  Gough, T. A., and C. F. Sampson.  J. Chromatogr. 68.
     p. 31 (1973)-

32.  Gearhart, H. L., and M. F. Burke.  J. Chromatogr. Sci. 11.
     p. 411 (1973).

33.  National Institute of Safety and Health.  PfCM #127.

-------
34.  Mueller, P.  X., and  J. A. Miller.  Amer. Lab.  May 1974.

35-  Jennings, ¥. G., and H. E. Nursten.   Anal. Chem. 39.
     p. 521  (1967).

36.  Altshuller,  A. P.  Advan. Chromatogr.  5_.  p. 229 (1968).

37.  Adams, D. P., R. K.  Kappe, and D. M.  Jungrath.  Tappl 43.
     p. 602  (I960).

38.  Altshuller,  A. P., T. A. Bellar, and  C. A. Clemens.  Am.
     Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J.  23.  p. 164  (1962).

39.  Jones, P. W., R. D.  Glammar, P.  E. Strup, and T. B. Stan-
     ford.  Presented at  the 68th Annual Meeting of the Air
     Pollution Control Association, Boston, Mass.  June 15,
     1975.

40.  Kaiser, R. E.  Anal. Chem. 45.   p. 965 (1973).

41.  Stanford Research Institute.  NIOSH Analytical Methods
     for Standards Completion Program.  Prepared for National
     Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.  PB-245-850,
     851, 852.  PB-245-935.  PB-246-148, 149, 150, 151, 152,
     153.

42.  Bidleman, T. P., and C. E. Olney.  "High Volume Collection
     of Atmospheric Polychlorinated Biphenyls."  Bulletin of
     Environmental Contamination and  Toxicology, Vol. 11, No.
     5.  1974.  pp.  442-447-

43.  Compton, B., P.  P.  Bazyalo, and  G. Zweig.  Field Evaluation
     of Methods of Collection and Analysis of Air-borne Pesti-
     cides.  EPA Contract CPA 70-145.  Environmental Protection
     Agency, Research Triangle Park,  N.C.  May 1972
                               125

-------
44.  Harris, D. J., and W. J. Keffer.  "Wastewater Sampling
     Methodologies and Flow Measuring Techniques."  Environmental
     Protection Agency, Region VII.  EPA 907/9-74-005 (1974).

45.  Rabosky, J. G., and D. L. Koraido.  Chem. Eng.  January 8,
     1973.  P. 111-120.

46.  "Handbook for Monitoring Industrial Wastewater."  Environ-
     mental Protection Agency.  Technology Transfer Series.
                               126

-------
                TABLE OF CONTENTS - APPENDIX



                                                          Page



A.  General Information                                   129



    A-l.  Preliminary Considerations                      129



          A.1.1  Preliminary Background Search            133



          A. 1.2  Preliminary Survey                       132



    A-2.  Planning The Sampling Program                   134



          A.2.1  Objectives                               135



          A.2.2  Equipment Requirements                   136



          A.2.3  Manpower Requirements                    136



          A.2.4  Job Scheduling                           137



          A.2.5  Pretest Briefing                         138



          A. 2.6  Equipment Checkout                       139



          A.2.7  Logistics                                139



     Appendix A References                                150





 B.  Fugitive Source Diffusion Model                      151



     Appendix B References                                l6l
                              127

-------
                         APPENDIX A

                     GENERAL INFORMATION
The purpose of the manual is to present sampling procedures
that can be employed in the collection of samples of organic
material in gas, liquid or solid process streams and emis-
sion sources.
A.I   PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

The success of any sampling mission depends upon the effort
spent in obtaining in-depth background information on the
processes involved and in a comprehensive preliminary survey.
Table 1 lists some of the industrial processes which could
serve as point sources of organic emissions.1  The emission
characteristics are presented in terms of composition, humid-
ity, acid content, temperature, pressure, and flow rate.
While this table presents only a cursory view of the emission
sources, it can serve as a frame of reference for identifica-
tion of potential problem areas prior to the preliminary sur-
vey.  Sources that have reactive emissions (NO , S02, acids,
                                              .A.
oxidizing atmospheres), elevated temperatures, and high water
loadings would have to be approached with caution to assure
that the final analysis were truly indicative of the emission
composition.
                             129

-------
                                                         Table A-l.  CHARACTERISTICS OP POTENTIAL ORGANIC EMISSION SOURCES
U)
o
Potential Organic Composition
Emission Sources Part.
Storage Tanks
Unloading Facilities
Chemical Reactors
Non-Catalytic
Catalytic
"luldlzed Ded X
Fixed Bed X
Moving Bed X
Distillation Column
Flash Separator
Filters
Pressure Leaf Y
filters *
Rotary Vacuum _
Filters A
Nutsohe Filters X
Horizontal Plate _
Filters
Tubular Filters X
Bag Filters X
Mixers
Grinders X
Crushers X
Scrubbers
Dryers
Counter-Current ..
Dryer
Rotary Drum ~
Dryer
Vacuum Rotary Dryer X
Spray Dryers
Screeners X
Vacuum Jets
NO,, SOfc CO VC I
X
X

X X

X X
X X
X X
X X
x x

X
X
X
X
X
X X X X
X
X
X
X X X X

x x x x
X X X X
x x x x
X
X
XX X
lumldlty (I RH)
0-20
0-20

0-20

0.20
0-20
0-20
0-98
0-98

0-98
0-98
0-98
0-98
0-98
0-98
0-20
0-20
0-20
80-95

0-95
0-95
0-95
0-95
0-20
95-99
Temperature,
Add Content °F
X
X

X

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
x
x



X

X
x
x
X

x
-51
-51

-20

0
0
0
80
-18

70
70
70
70
70
70
32
32
32
60

100
100
100
100
32
270
- 300
- 200

- 1000

- 300
- 300
- 300
- 250
- 300

- 150
- 150
- 150
- 150
- 150
- 150
- 90
- 90
- 90
- 150

- 300
- 300
- 300
- 300
- 100
- 390
Pressure ,
0-2
0-2

0-1500

0-50
0-50
0-50
0-50
0-50

0-10
0-80
0-10
0-10
0-10
0-10
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-10

0-20
0-20
0-35
0-20
0-2
25-200
Plow Rate,
scfm
<100
<100

100-10,000

100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000

100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
>10,000

100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000 .
100-10,000
>10,000

-------
Table A-l (Cont'd).  CHARACTERISTICS OF POTENTIAL ORGANIC EMISSION SOURCES
potential organic
Emission Sources
Waste Incinerators
Utility Boilers
Pneumatic Conveyors
Conveyor Belts
Extruders
Pellitizers
Paint Spray Booths
Ovens
Blenders
Cyclones
H
^ Extraction Towers
H
Flares
Baggers
Loading Facilities
Cooling Towers
Settling Ponds
Evaporators
Leaching Vat
Cookers
Refrigeration
Machines
Composition

Part. NOX SQx 66 HC Humidity (% RH)
X X X X X
X X X X X
X X
X X
X X X X
X
X X
X X X X X
X X
X X
X
X X X X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X X X X

10-95
10-95
10-30
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-20
0-50
0-20
0-20
0-90
10-95
0-20
0-20
10-95
10-95
0-95
0-95
0-95
0-10
Temperature,
Acid Content °F
x 500 -
500 -
X 10 -
32 -
100 -
100 -
60 -
500 -
32 -
70 -
X 70 -
1500 -
100 -
x -51 -
32 -
x 32 -
X 100 -
X 100 -
X 100 -
-50 -
1500
1500
90
90
350
200
100
1500
90
150
300
3000
200
300
100
80
200
200
300
32
Pressure,
psig
0-5
0-5
0-20
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-5
0-2
. 0-2
0-20
0-50
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-50
0-2
0-2
50-300
Flow Rate,
scfm
>10,000
>10,000
>10,000
<100
<100
<100
>10,000
>10,000
100-10,000
10,000
100-10,000
>10,000
<100
<100
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
100-10,000
<100

-------
A.1.1    Preliminary  Background Search

The  first phase  of a sampling mission consists of an in-depth
gathering of  information relevant to the industry to be sam-
pled.   Information is sought which describes the processes
in operation  in  the  industry, the nature of the chemical re-
actions  occurring, whether or not the process has been pre-
viously  determined as a source of vapor, particulate solid,
or liquid emissions,  and the likely emission characteristics
(i.e.,  information analogous to that presented in Table 1).
Any  sampling  history of similar industries is important and
can  shed light upon  troublesome emission sources.  Only after
such a  literature search should the sampling group elect to
conduct  a preliminary survey; in addition, it is strongly
recommended that individuals thoroughly familiar with the
background material  and sampling requirements conduct the
survey.
A.1.2   Preliminary  Survey

Included in the end  of Appendix A is a preliminary survey
form which shows  the type of information to be gathered on
the survey.2  In  the majority of cases it is expected that a
visit to the location will be necessary.  While this form has
been used mainly  for stationary source sampling, it includes
much of the information required for multi-media sampling
program, and so data suitable for water and solid sampling
have been added.  The type of information required can be
summarized as follows:

I.  General Data	basic information on the source, in-
cluding the nature of expected pollutants and the process
from which they are  emitted.
                             132

-------
II.  Detailed Description	concerning the process,  in-
cluding the raw materials and fuels.   Effects of external
conditions such as weather and operating schedules are also
noted.

III.  Sampling Site	detailed description of the location
of the site and the geometries which will concern the  sam-
pling crew.*  Different data are required if the emphasis is
on stack sampling (vapor and particulate),  as opposed  to
liquid sampling or solid sampling.  Note that some prelimi-
nary measurements may be necessary if they are not already
available from the source, particularly on the water content
of gas streams and the flow parameters of gas and liquid
streams.  The recommended methods of sampling are to be in-
cluded as are the listings of specific raw materials and
products which may have to be collected to complete the eval-
uation of the source.

IV.  Safety Checklist	an itemization of needed equipment
and where it is to be obtained.  This includes specific
equipment needed to set up the test site for sampling.  Of
equal importance is the determination of the needs of per-
sonnel safety equipment so that the sampling team can conduct
the program without exposure to toxic chemicals or undue
physical risk.

V.  Plant Entry	details specific instructions for accom-
plishing the sampling tasks with minimum friction between
sampling and plant personnel.  Plant requirements may include
needs for special insurance coverage, special clothing and
shoes, or instructions in safety rules at that location.  The
*The choice of the sampling site will depend on the nature
of the study to be conducted and the end use of the data
generated by the study.

                             133

-------
 inter-corporate  agreement  section  should detail any confi-
 dentiality or special clauses  that have been negotiated with
 regard to testing schedules  or data control.  It has been
 our  experience that  considerable time is often required to
 obtain the cooperation of  the  plant management in source
 evaluation programs.   Since  many of the compounds of potential
 interest  are  very toxic, some  management officials feel that
 they have nothing to gain  and  much to lose if the evaluation
 study is  conducted.   It should be  stressed to management that
 the  plant being  studied has  the opportunity to obtain valuable
 information long before it is  required by compliance programs
 and  thus  time can be gained  for the development of control
 strategies.

 VI.   Sample Handling	itemizes  the methods and the loca-
 tion of facilities in which  the samples can be processed be-
 fore shipping or other transfer.

 VII.   Level of Effort	presents the costs to management
 regarding the sampling mission.

 VIII.   Field  Test Schedule	largely self-explanatory, but
 care  should be taken to refer  to Section II regarding length
 of operating  day,  weather  effects, operating week, and the
 time  requirements for cleanup.
A. 2   PLANNING THE  SAMPLING PROGRAM

The background data gathering and the presurvey visit provide
the information required on the industry such as process or
processes of interest, location of sources of samples whether
gaseous, liquid or  solid, process conditions that will effect
sampling, and safety considerations.  The next step is to

                             134

-------
plan the sampling program.   To do this it is necessary to
define clearly the objectives of the program.
A.2.1   Objectives

To establish the objectives of the sampling program it is
necessary to define why the testing is to be done and what
specific information is required.   For the purpose at hand,
it is assumed that a major reason for the sampling and analy-
sis scheme is to determine if the industry represents a seri-
ous toxic emission source for which control strategies may
be required in the future.  This implies that samples must be
collected for chemical analysis and often for health effect
                                 /
studies.  This objective puts different constraints on the
sampling program than if the objective were standard setting
or compliance sampling.

The objectives of any sampling program must be clearly defined
and understood for a number of reasons.  First, the overall
purpose of the test must be known so that the methods to be
used can be determined.  Second, the number and kind of sam-
ples required must be identified.   Each specific sampling
point must be determined and the kind and number of samples
to be obtained from each identified.  Special conditions of
the process that are required for sampling at each point and
the time requirement for sampling must be specified.  Third,
the methods to be used to collect samples and data must be
specified and any modification or alterations to these meth-
ods must be pointed out.  Finally, the methods for sample
handling and analysis must be given and any deviation from
normal procedures indicated.
                             135

-------
 Once  the  objectives of the  program are outlined, the equip-
 ment  and  manpower needs can be  determined.  The information
 taken at  the presurvey can  be used, along with the knowledge
 of the objectives and requirements of the job, to set the re-
 quirements for equipment and manpower.
 A.2.2    Equipment Requirements

 The  task of making up an equipment  list  should be assigned
 to one  of the  most experienced  sampling  personnel.  He needs
 to have a knowledge of the  equipment  inventory of the sam-
 pling organization and must be  able to mentally visualize
 each sampling  action.   Equipment  lists of an entire inventory
 are quite often made up in  advance  so that necessary items
 can be  checked as needed for the  specific job at hand.  The
 entire  job then must be thought through, taking each sample
 at each location into consideration and  checking necessary
 equipment on the list.   At  this point, some idea of manpower
 and manhours needed will already  have been formed and the se-
 quence  of sampling is being established.  Some equipment can
 be reused at a different location by  scheduling the sampling
 at that location later in the program rather than having two
 pieces  of duplicate equipment in  the  field.  One of the prime
 considerations is to reduce as  much as possible the equipment
 load, while  providing sufficient  spares  so that equipment that
 is prone  to  breakage or malfunction can  be quickly replaced
without destroying the continuity of  the sampling program.
A.2.3   Manpower Requirements

The list of required manpower  is obviously dictated by the
requirements of the sampling program and the scope of the
                              136

-------
job.  Amplifying factors, however, may cause a change in ac-
tual manpower requirement.  For instance, a stack or process
duct sampling procedure may require only two men if it is
close to the ground, but additional men are required if the
site is over one hundred feet above the ground.   If liquid
samples are to be collected at widely separated locations,
this also may add team members.  The two man crew could easily
escalate to four or more due to physical or logistics problems
of the job.  Conversely, manpower requirements could be less
than the typical due to the reverse of the adverse factors.
An example is a situation where one man could operate two
simultaneous flow control meter stations by alternating read-
ing times.  In any event, each job will have to be evaluated
on its own merits or disadvantages, and a great deal of judg-
ment is required.

The educational level of required personnel is based, obvi-
ously, on an individual's experience, however, general guide-
lines provide for an Engineer as crew chief, an Engineer or
high level technician as Team Leader, and lower level techni-
cians as team members.  This personnel mix is, of course,
flexible and can be altered to fit the situation.
A.2.4   Job Scheduling

The job must be scheduled, at least in theory, down to the
last detail.  This requires contact with everyone involved
in the sampling program as well as internal sampling and'ana-
lytical personnel.  The plants under study must be contacted
to confirm their state of preparedness and to ensure that a
shutdown will not conflict with the program.  Officials of
the government, when they are involved, must be notified of
the program dates.  Contractors, such as scaffolding erectors
                             137

-------
 or  port  welders,  must  be  arranged  for, if necessary, and must
 be  contacted in sufficient  time prior to the job to do their
 work.   Internally,  analytical  departments must be cognizant
 of  impending sample arrival, and travel and living arrange-
 ments  must  be made  for the  sampling team members.
 A.2.5    Pretest  Briefing

 An effective  means  of relaying information to the sampling
 crew is  a pretest briefing.   This  is a meeting of all sam-
 pling  and analytical personnel involved in the program.  Dur-
 ing the  meeting  all personnel are  given the objectives and
 the schedule  of  the Job,  and  specific Job assignments are
 made.  Quite  often  process data are discussed along with sam-
 pling  methods, sampling locations, number and kinds of sam-
 ples,  and sample handling procedures.  The equipment list is
 discussed and suggestions of  the crew are reviewed.  This lat-
 ter point,  the suggestions of the  crew, is an important step
 and can  serve two purposes.   First, it can remind the Job
 organizer of  any forgotten items.  Second, it promotes under-
 standing of the  objectives of the  program by the crew.  Fi-
 nally, the  pretest  briefing brings all personnel together so
 that essential information can be  exchanged.  For instance,
 both analytical  and sampling  personnel become more familiar
 with what  the organizer requires,  analytical personnel become
 more acquainted  with the  scope of  the program and the required
 analysis  load, and  sampling personnel become aware of special
 problems  in areas such as process  requirements and sample
 handling.

After the field  portion of the project is completed, it is
often beneficial to  have  a post-test debriefing with the same
personnel to  discuss  problems  that occurred.  This meeting
                             138

-------
Is especially beneficial when, during the course of the  job,
the objectives were altered or for some reason certain sam-
ples could not be obtained.
A.2.6   Equipment Checkout

A thorough equipment checkout should be made just before the
crew leaves for the job.   During the check, each piece of
equipment should be tested for functionality and calibrated
if required.  This procedure should be followed unless a pro-
gram of check, repair, and calibration on all equipment re-
turned from each job has  been established.  If this latter
procedure is used, all equipment in the storage area will
have been checked prior to storage\
A.2.7   Logistics

One person, usually the crew chief, should be made responsi-
ble for logistics.  In this capacity, he will be in complete
control of the movement of all supplies, equipment, and per-
sonnel to and from the job site.   His responsibility is to
see that all materials that need to be packed and shipped
will arrive at the job site at the proper time.  He makes
sure that the proper equipment to do the job is transported
to or acquired at the job site in time for use according to
the schedule.  He is also responsible for the movement of
field personnel to the job site.   When the job is completed,
he becomes responsible for moving supplies, samples, equip-
ment, and personnel to the next job location.
                             139

-------
                 PRELIMINARY SURVEY  DATA SHEETS



I.  Name of Company	 Date of Survey



    Address                                 Phone
    Name of Contacts
    EPA Personnel
    Purpose of Test
Phone
    Pollutants to be Measured
    Process Type
    Portion of Process  to be  Sampled
    Description  of  Control Equipment

-------
II.  Process Description
     Raw Materials



     Fuel Burned _



     Products
     Operations Performed
     Operating Cycle



        Check:  Batch	  Continuous	  Cyclic_



        Timing of Batch, or Cycle	



        Best time to test
     Abnormal Conditions Affecting Testing



        Weather
        Shutdowns
        Length of Operating Day
        Length of Operating Week_



        Other

-------
III.  Sampling Site
      A.  Site Description^
          1.  Stack
              Shape	
              Diameter
inches  Rectangular
              Stack length_
              Distance before ports
        Equlv.  Diameters
       ft
          ft
_Diameters
Diameters
              Distance after ports
        Device_
          ft
Diameters
              Wall Thickness	
              Material	
          2.  Ports
              Already Installed^
              Obstructions
        Device_
       inches
              Size
              Distance to Platforms_
              Supports Required	
              Working Environment	
          3.  Stack Conditions
              No. of Traverse Point s_
              Stack Velocity	
               Ambient  Temp
                 Stack Temp_
                 Stack Temp
              Static Pressure _
              Moisture Content
              Materials Present
           inches of water
                                    142

-------
        Hazards	



        Modifications:  Extensions
                        Straightening Vanes_



                        Scaffolding	



                        Platforms	



                        Other
    4.  Access to Site



        Height above ground	ft  Distance to Van 	ft



        Stairs?	 Elevators?	 Ladder?	



        Problems	







B.  Methods to be Employed (circle appropriate method)



    EPA  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13A  13B



         14  15  Asbestos   Be  Hg.



    Other  ASTM  PTC27  HC  Instrumental (specify)	



    Shell



    Others not specified	
    Raw Materials and Products to be Collected and Frequency



    Fuel	



    Input Materials	
    Products
                               143

-------
ESP Dust
Water Samples
Other

-------
IV.  Safety Checklist
     A.  Personnel Protection Equipment (check if required)
Item
Safety glasses
Goggles
Side shields
Face shields
Hard hats
Ear plugs
Safety shoes
Life belt
Ladder climbing
device
Ground fault
interrupt
Grounding clamp.

Plant











MRC
/



/

J




     B.  Test Site
         1.  Ladders
             General condition_
             Cage	
             Comments
         2.  Scaffold-platforms
             General condition	
             Toebcards	
             Comments
                                   Item
                                   Dust masks
                                   Vapor masks
                                   Air purifying
                                   Air supply
                                   Air packs
                                   Chem. res't clothes
                                   Heat res't clothes
                                   Chem. res't gloves
                                   Heat res't gloves
                                   First aid
                                   Fire extinguisher
                 Plant
MRC
   Rest stops
Special belts_
   Guardrails_
   Screening
         3.  Smoking restrictions
         4.  Vehicle traffic rules

-------
5.  Evacuation procedures_
6.  Alarms
7-  Hospital location



    Phone
8.  Emergency numbers

-------
 V.  Plant Entry

     A.  Plant Requirements_
     B.  MRC Agreement
     C.  Potential Problems
VI.  Sampling Handling
     Method
Cleanup
Location
Analysis
Location
                                     Shipment
Where to   How
Comments*
     * Comments to include need for special bottles (Weaton, etc.)
       and other special handling required.
                                   147

-------
VII.   Level of Effort

                 Cost Item                 Estimated Manhours

      1. Planning and Administration

      2. Travel

      3. Setup and Cleanup

      4. Field Testing

      5. Laboratory Analysis

      6. Report Preparation

    7/8. Subcontracting

      9- Presurvey

     10. Sub-total Manhours

     11. Cost per Manhour

     12. Cost of Labor (line 10 times
         line 11)

     13. Other Direct Costs (Itemized)
         Total  Cost  (line 12  plus  line  13)
                                    148

-------
VIII.  Field Test Schedule
>. Time
Day^X^
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
AM







PM







                                   149

-------
                          APPENDIX A

                          REFERENCES
1.  Anon.  "Prioritization of Sources of Air Pollution."  Mon-
    santo Research Corporation.  EPA Contract 68-02-1320.  31
    July 197*1.

2.  Anon.  "Preliminary Survey Form."  Developed by Monsanto
    Research Corporation for use on EPA Contract 68-02-1404.
                              150

-------
                         APPENDIX B

               FUGITIVE SOURCE DIFFUSION MODEL
The most frequently used model to describe the behavior of
pollutants emitted from a source point is the Gaussian dif-
fusion model, or Pasquill-Gifford equation.  This model can
estimate the concentration of a pollutant at a chosen point
at a given distance downwind from the source for a given at-
mospheric stability and pollutant emission rate.  A series
of calculations using various combinations of atmospheric
stabilities, locations, and sampling times will indicate the
range of air quality changes expected to occur around a plant
for each pollutant.

Open source sampling efforts must utilize the diffusion model
in reverse.  Normal use is to predict (estimate) concentra-
tions surrounding a point source of known strength.  To calcu-
late a non-point (open) source strength, several concentra-
tion readings are taken and the source strength is then de-
termined.

For a number of years estimates of concentrations were calcu-
lated either from the equations of Sutton1 with the atmo-
spheric dispersion parameters C , C , and n, or from the
equations of Bosanquet2 with the dispersion parameters p
and q.
                             151

-------
 The  general  form of  the  equation  of  Pickian diffusion, allow-
 ing  for any  spatial  variations  in the  eddy diffusivities, is:
 ix. +  ulx + vlx  + wlx  =  _a                          _
 3t    8X    3y     9Z    9X    x  8X /    3y \ y  3y     3z \ Z 3z

 where x  is the  concentration,  K  ,  K  , and K  are eddy dif-
                               x   y      z
 fusivities in x, y, and z  directions, respectively, and u, v,
 and w are wind  components  in the  x,  y, and z directions.  Al-
 though a concentration  distribution  is given by the solution
 of Equation (1)  with  certain initial and boundary conditions,
 it is difficult  to obtain  any  meaningful solution directly
 from  Equation (1).  The reasons are  that the eddy diffusiv-
 ities change greatly  with  stability  of the atmosphere, and
 that  the boundary conditions vary  with meteorological con-
 ditions  and surface conditions of  the ground.

 A  solution which was  more  useful  than the solution of the
 Pickian  diffusion equation was obtained by Sutton1  by intro-
 ducing the statistical  theory  of  turbulent diffusion which
 had been suggested by Taylor. 3  In his dispersion formulas
 the eddy diffusivities  K ,  K , and K are replaced by the
                         x    y        z
 empirical parameters  C  , C , C ,  and n.  For the two-dimen-
                      x.   y   z
 sional case of Equation (1), Bosanquet obtained a meaningful
 solution.   This  is called  K-theory and a further development
 of this  theory has been carried out  by many meteorologists.
 The latter type  of solution is predominant in most particular
 urban air  pollution computer models  being developed and used.

 Hay and  Pasquill1* presented  experimental evidence that the
vertical distribution of spreading particles from an elevated
point was  related to the standard  deviation of the wind ele-
vation angle, 
-------
incorporating standard deviations of Gaussian distributions:
a  for the distribution of material in a plume across wind in
 «y
the horizontal direction, and a  for the vertical distribu-
tion of material in the plume.  These statistics were related
to the standard deviation of wind azimuth angle, a., and wind
elevation angle, OE, calculated from wind measurements made
with a bi-directional wind vane (bivane).  Values for these
diffusion parameters, a  and a , based on field diffusion
tests were suggested by Cramer, et al.9  Hay and Pasquill
also presented a method for deriving the spread of pollutants
from records of wind fluctuation.  Pasquill further proposed
a method for estimating diffusion when such detailed wind data
were not available.  This method expressed the height and
angular spread of a diffusing plume in terms of more commonly
observed weather parameters.  Suggested curves of height and
angular spread as a function of distance downwind were given
for several "stability" classes.  Gifford10 converted Pas-
quill's values of angular spread and height into standard
deviations of plume concentration distribution, a  and a .
Pasquill's method, with Gifford's conversion incorporated, is
the commonly accepted calculation method in use today.

Advantages of this system are that (1) only two dispersion
parameters are required, and (2) results of most diffusion
experiments are now being reported in terms of the standard
deviations of plume spread.

In the coordinate system considered here the origin is de-
fined at ground level at or beneath the point of emission,
with the x-axis extending horizontally in the direction of
the mean wind.  The y-axis is in the horizontal plane per-
pendicular to the x-axis, and z-axis extends vertically.
The plume travels along or parallel to the x-axis.  Figure B-l
illustrates the coordinate system.
                             153

-------
Ul
4=-
                                                                           x,-y,Z)
                                                                           x,-y,0)
                 Figure B-l.   Coordinate system  showning  Gaussian distributions in
                              the horizontal and vertical directions.11

-------
The concentration, x> of gas or particles at point x, y, z
from a cjjnt inuous poinjt source with an effective height, H,
is given by Equation (2).
             exp
The notation used to depict the concentration is x(x,y,z;H).
H is the height of the plume centerline when it becomes es-
sentially level, and is the sum of the physical stack height h
and the plume rise AH.  The following assumptions are made:
the plume spread has a Gaussian distribution in both the hori-
zontal and vertical planes, with standard deviations of plume
concentration distribution in the horizontal and vertical of
a  and a , respectively; the mean wind speed affecting the
plume is u; the uniform emission rate of pollutants is Q; and
total reflection of the plume takes place at the earth's sur-
face, i.e., there is no deposition or reaction at the surface.
Any consistent set of units may be used.  The most common is
X in g/m3, Q in g/sec, u in m/sec, and a , a , H, x, y, and
z in meters.  The concentration x is a- mean over the same time
interval as the time interval for which the o's and u are
representative.  The values of both a  and a  are evaluated
in terms of the downwind distance x, conventionally by graphi-
cal methods.  Curves have been fitted to these graphs which
give excellent agreement.

For concentrations calculated for a source of ground level
with no plume rise (H=0), Equation (2) simplifies to:
                     Q    exp I - =• I *-
                  ire a u
                    y z
                             155

-------
Where  ground level concentrations  (z=0) are to be calculated
further  simplification results:
      X(x,y,0;0) =
And, when  the  concentration is to be calculated along the
centerline of  the plume  (y=0), the equation reduces to:

     x(x,0,0;0) = irq  Q u                                (5)

For sampling open sources  (those which are not emitted through
a  stack  or vent), whether  it is a single operation or several
located  in one defineable  area, MRC uses a downwind array of
samplers to determine source strengths or emission rates.
Such an  array  is shown in  Figure B-2.  It is felt, and borne
out by experience, that  this technique will give at least
three "good" concentration measurements and allows for minor
shifts in  wind direction.  Ideally, the mean wind direction
will lie along the path  to samplers S, and S3, but any shift
will be detected by either S2 or S4.  Concentration values
at sampler S0  are subtracted from the others to determine the
effect of  the  source  on  downwind concentrations.

For the arrangement shown  in Figure B-2, let the origin be de-
fined at the source and  all remaining points in the usual
Cartesian  coordinate  system.  Let 6 be the angle of the mean
wind speed.  Then to  find  the value of any point Y. perpen-
dicular to the wind direction centerline, the following compu-
tation is made.

                     mi   =  tan 6
                             156

-------
               WIND AZIMUTH
                    METEOROLOGICAL STATION
Figure  B-2.  Sampling arrangement
                  157

-------
For point S. with  coordinates  (x., y.)
                           m
                           m2 - —
                                Xi
The angle  a  is found  from
                      a  = arc tan
The  lateral  distance  Y.  is
                    Y,  =  (sin  a)  /x,*  +  y,*                (6)
and  the  downwind  distance  X.  is
                    X±  =  (cos  a)  /x±*  +  y±*                (7)
With an  open  source  of  some magnitude, the use of the con-
tinuous  point  source diffusion  equation  is often insufficient
to describe the emission rate,  and  other variations on the
Gaussian diffusion model must be utilized.  If an open source
has a large width to it, a line source model may better de-
scribe the emission  rate.

Concentrations downwind of a continuously emitting infinite
line source, when the wind direction is  normal to the line,
can be expressed by  rewriting an equation of Sutton.1

                          2Q
            X(x,y,0;H) = —±— exp I -  ± ( S_ }' I         (8)
where QT is the source strength per unit distance in g/sec-m.
       LI
Note that the horizontal dispersion parameter a  does not ap-
                                               «7
pear in this equation, since it is assumed that lateral

                             158

-------
dispersion from one segment of the line is compensated by
dispersion in the opposite direction from adjacent segments.
Also, y does not appear, since concentration at a given x is
the same for any value of y.

Concentrations from infinite line sources when the wind is
not perpendicular to the line can be approximated.  If the
angle between wind direction and line source is <}>, Equation
(8) is modified to:
                      2Q
     x(x,y,0;H) = —	=	  exp
(9)
for 0 <.  <. 45°C.

In dealing with diffusion of pollutants in an area having a
number of sources, there may be too many sources to consider
each source individually.  An approximation can be made by
combining all the emissions in a given area and treating this
area as a source having an initial horizontal standard devia-
tion of plume spread, cr  .   A virtual distance x  can then be
found that will give this standard deviation.  Values of x
                                                          J
will vary with stability.  Then equations for point sources
may be used, determining a  as a function of x + x .
                          «y                       j

This procedure treats the area source as a cross-wind line
source with an initial normal distribution, a fairly good ap-
proximation for the distribution across an area source.  The
initial standard deviation for a square area source can be
approximated by a  = S/4.3, where S is the length of a side
                 c/
of the area.  The vertical dispersion coefficient az is
treated in the regular fashion as having originated from the
source rather than a virtual point.
                             159

-------
The choice of model for source strength calculation depends
on several factors.  Sampler locations, personal observations
and engineering judgment predominate.  MRC routinely calcu-
lates emission rates by all three models - point, line, and
area source - for open sources since the calculation process
is computerized.  This enables the data to be checked for
agreement between samplers, realistic orders of magnitude for
the emission rates, and experiential judgments.  Meteorologi-
cal and plant operating conditions may cause an open source
to behave in a different mode on different days.

While the procedure described requires considerable computa-
tion, it does provide a method for collecting particulate
samples for organic analysis with a reasonable field effort.
The equipment requirements of five samplers and a meteorology
station is practical and a team of several persons sampling
for periods up to a week can obtain the required samples.
                             160

-------
                          APPENDIX B

                          REFERENCES
1.  Sutton, 0. G.  A Theory of Eddy Diffusion in the Atmosphere,
    Proc. Roy. Soc., A, 135.  p. 1^3-65 (1932).

2.  Bosanquet, C. H. and J. L. Pearson.  The Spread of Smoke
    and Gases from Chimneys.  Trans. Faraday Soc., 32.  p. 12*49-
    1263 (1936).

3.  Taylor, G. I.  Diffusion by Continuous Movement.  Proc.
    London Math Soc., 20.  p. 196 (1921).

4.  Hay, J. S., and F. Pasquill.  Diffusion from a Fixed Source
    at a Height of a Few Hundred Feet in the Atmosphere.  J.
    Fluid Mech., 2.  p. 299-310 (1957).

5.  Cramer, H. E.  A Practical Method for Estimating the Dis-
    persion of Atmospheric Contaminants.  Proc. First Natl.
    Conf. on Appl. Meteorol. Amer. Meterol. Soc.  (1957).

6.  Cramer, H. E., F. A. Record, and H. C. Vaughan.  The Study
    of the Diffusion of Gases or Aerosols in the Lower Atmo-
    sphere.  Final Report Contract AF 19(604)-1058 Mass. Inst.
    of Tech., Dept. of Meteorol.  (1958).
                              161

-------
 7.  Cramer, H. E.  A Brief Survey of the Meteorological Aspects
     of Atmospheric Pollution.  Bull. Amer. Meteorol. Soc., 40,
     H.  p. 165-T1 (1959a).

 8.  Cramer, H. E.  Engineering Estimates of Atmospheric Dis-
     persal Capacity.  Amer. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J., 20, 3-  p. 183-
     9 (1959b).

 9.  Hay, J. S., and P. Pasquill.  Diffusion from a Continuous
     Source in Relation to the Spectrum and Scale of Turbulence.
     pp. 3*45-65 in Atmospheric Diffusion and Air Pollution.
     Edited by F. N. Frenkiel and P. A. Sheppard.  Advances in
     Geophysics, 6, New York, Academic Press.  471 pp.  (1959).

10.  Gifford, F. A.  Uses of Routine Meteorological Observation
     for Estimating Atmospheric Dispersion.  Nuclear Safety, 2,
     4.  p. 47-51  (1961).

11.  Turner, D. B.  "Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Esti-
     mates."  U. S. Dept. of Health, Education & Welfare, Natl.
     Air Pollution Control Administration, Cincinnati,  p. 5
     (1969).
                               162

-------
                                TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                         (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
  EPA-600/2-76-122
                           2.
                                                      3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION>NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Technical Manual for Process Sampling Strategies
for Organic Materials
                                                      5. REPORT DATE
                                                      April 1976
                                                      6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
W. Feairheller,  P.J.Marn, D.H.Harris, and
D. L. Harris
                                                      8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.

                                                       MRC-DA-512
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Monsanto Research Corporation
P. O.  Box 8 (Station B)
Dayton, Ohio  45407
                                                      10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                                                      1AB015; ROAP 21ACX-094
                                                      11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                                                      68-02-1411, Task 11
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 EPA, Office of Research and Development
 Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
 Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                                                      13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIO
                                                      Task Final; 7/75-1/76
                                                                          IOD COVERED
                                                      14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                                       EPA-ORD
is.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTESproject officer for this manual is L.D. Johnson, Mail Drop 62,
Ext 2557.                                                                  V   '
16. ABSTRACT,
         The manual describes sampling approaches for conducting Level I, n, and
in environmental source assessment surveys of the feed, product, and waste streams
associated with the production of organic materials.  Level I provides large quanti-
ties of sample in a short time period for both analysis  of the chemical classes  of com-
pounds present and biological testing programs.  Level II is a more detailed qualita-
tive  and quantitative chemical analysis  of the organic components.  Level HI is a
quantitative study of the effect of process variables on  the emission rates of specific
organic materials.  The manual: provides specific methods to be used in Level I to
obtain samples from stationary sources, fugitive emission sources, and process
and waste streams (including gas, liquid, and solid phases); and provides the current
state-of-the-art, an extension of the state-of-the-art sampling metjods that are
available for application to Level n and  m studies.   The manual is directed to  those
who are basically experienced in sampling techniques and will be required to apply
these methods in source assessment programs.
17.
                             KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                DESCRIPTORS
                                          b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  C. COSATI Field/Group
 ir Pollution
Sampling
Organic Compounds
Qualitative Analysis
Quantitative Analysis
 dustrial Processes
,
ia.
Air Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Environmental Assess-
  ment
Fugitive Emissions
Process Streams
                        13B
                        14B
                        07C
                        07D

                        13H
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

 Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
                         21. NO. OF PAGES
                             172
                                          2O. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
                                           Unclassified
                                                                   22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (3-73)
                                            163

-------