United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

National Exposure

Research Laboratory

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Research and Development

EPA/600/SR-97/037

June 1997

4vEPA Project Summary

Field Evaluation at an
Agricultural Chemical
Manufacturing Facility of
VOST and SemiVOST Methods
for Selected CAAA Organic
Compounds

Joan T. Bursey, James F. McGaughey, and Raymond G. Merrill

Laboratory testing and one field evalu-
ation study had previously been per-
formed to assess the performance of
nonhalogenated volatile and semivolatile
organic analytes from Title III of the Clean
Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 in
the Volatile Organic Sampling Train
(VOST) and Semivolatile Organic Sam-
pling Traing (SemiVOST) methods. For
this work assignment, a second field
evaluation study was performed at a
different source to demonstrate that
the methodology is not source-specific.
At an agricultural chemical manufac-
turing facility, an incinerator that
burned chemical waste was selected
for the second field method evaluation
test site. The field test was designed
according to the guidelines of the En-
vironmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Method 301, using gaseous and liquid
dynamic spiking with three spiking
schemes. Volatile organic compounds
were spiked into two of four quadruple
VOST trains as a gaseous spike;
semivolatile organic compounds were
spiked as a liquid spike into two of
four quadruple SemiVOST trains either
as a solution of Acid/Neutral com-
pounds or Base/Neutral compounds.
These two solutions were spiked in
separate sampling runs to avoid
compound losses due to known
acid/base chemical reactions. A
minimum of ten quadruple sampling
runs each were performed for VOST,
Acid/Neutral SemiVOST and Base/Neu-

tral SemiVOST. Each quadruple run
used four collocated sampling probes
into four similar sampling trains, with
two spiked trains and two unspiked
trains. Statistical analysis of the results
was performed according to the guide-
lines of EPA Method 301, as well as
EPA's Handbook of Quality Assurance/
Quality Control (QA/QC) Procedures for
Hazardous Waste Incineration. Bias and
precision were good for the Neutrals,
poor for the Acidic and Basic com-
pounds. The field test and statistical
analysis of the results are discussed in
this report.

Using the EPA Method 301 criteria
for acceptable performance (correction
factor between 0.70 and 1.30, with rela-
tive standard deviation of 50% or less),
the VOST methodology showed accept-
able performance in a chemical waste
incinerator emissions matrix for the fol-
lowing compounds: benzene, n-hexane,
2,2,4-trimethylpentane, and toluene.
These VOST results are consistent with
the first field test, where the carbon
disulfide correction factor was also un-
acceptable. Using the EPA Method 301
criteria for acceptable performance (cor-
rection factor between 0.70 and 1.30.
with relative standard deviation of 50%
or less), the SemiVOST methodology
showed acceptable performance in a
chemical waste incinerator for the fol-
lowing compounds: Acids: di-n-butyl
phthalate, dimethyl phthalate; Bases:
carbaryl, N-nitrosodimethylamine, N-

-------
nitrosomorpholine; Neutrals: 1,4-diox-
ane, 2,4-dinitrotoluene, 4-nitrobiphenyl,
acetophenone, biphenyl, chlordane,
cumene, DDE, dibenzofuran, ethylbenzene,
isophorone, lindane, mVp-xylene, methyl
isobutyl ketone, naphthalene, nitrobenzene,
o-xylene, and toluene. In the first field test,
the following compounds showed ac-
ceptable performance: Acids: 2,4-dini-
trophenol, 4-nitrophenol, 4,6-dinitro-o-
cresol, o-cresol, phenol; Bases:
3,3'-dimethylbenzidine, 4,4'-methylene bis
(o-chloroaniline), 4,4'-methylenedianiline,
caprolactam, carbaryl, ethyl carbamate,
N,N-diethylaniline, N-nitrosodimethylamine,
N-nitrosomorpholine, propoxur, quinoline;
Neutrals: 1,4-dioxane, 2,4-dinitrotoluene, 4-
nitro-biphenyl, acetophenone, biphenyl,
chlordane, cumene, DDE, dibenzofuran,
dichlorvos, ethylbenzene, heptachlor,
isophorone, lindane, m-/R-xylene, me-
thyl isobutyl ketone, naphthalene, ni-
trobenzene, o-xylene, parathion, and
styrene. In general, far fewer of the
polar semivolatile compounds (Acids
and Bases) showed acceptable correc-
tion factor and precision in the second
field test than in the first field test be-
cause of the challenging source condi-
tions. Chemical interactions of polar
compounds with a high moisture and
chemically reactive background source
matrix would be expected to be signifi-
cant.

The methodology is therefore not
source-specific. If the methodology
were source-specific, no compounds
would have met acceptance criteria at
the second source. However, some Ac-
ids, some Bases, and most Neutrals
met acceptance criteria at the second
source, so the methodology is not
source-specific. However, the perfor-
mance of individual compounds is in-
fluenced by conditions at a particular
source.

This Project Summary was developed
by National Exposure Research
Laboratory's Air Measurements Re-
search Division, Research Triangle
Park, NC, to announce key findings of
the research project that is fully docu-
mented in a separate report of the same
title (see Project Report ordering infor-
mation at back).

Introduction

A field method evaluation test at an
incinerator burning chemical wastes was
performed for the VOST and the
SemiVOST. The EPA methods were ap-
plied exactly as written, with no deviation
from the written methodology allowed. The
objective of the field test was to establish
the bias and precision of the VOST and

SemiVOST specific analytes using Method
3011 criteria. Method 301, a method vali-
dation protocol, served as the basis for
the design and execution of this method
validation study. The specific analytes were
pesticides and nonhalogenated organic com-
pounds listed in Title III of the CAAA of
1990, which had previously been tested
at a coal-fired power plant. The chemical
waste incinerator test site was chosen to
demonstrate that the test methodology is
not source-specific.

The VOST methodology (sampling and
analytical) consists of a combination of
the following EPA methods:

•	For sampling, SW-846 Method 00302

Volatile Organic Sampling Train

•	For analysis, SW-846 Method 50413

Protocol for Analysis of Sorbent
Cartridges from Volatile Organic
Sampling Train: Wide-bore Cap-
illary Column Technique.

Method 0030 describes the collection of
volatile principal organic hazardous con-
stituents (POHCs) from the stack gas ef-
fluents of hazardous waste incinerators.
The method defines volatile POHCs as
having boiling points less than 100°C
(212°F). Method 0030 states that many
compounds that boil above 100°C (212°F)
may also be efficiently collected and ana-
lyzed.

The SemiVOST methodology consists
of a combination of the following EPA
methods:

•	For sampling, SW-846 Method 0010":

Modified Method 5 Sampling Train

•	For sample preparation, SW-846 Pro-
posed Method 3542s:

Extraction of Semivolatile Analytes
Collected Using Modified Method
5 (Method 0010) Sampling Train

•	For analysis, SW-846 Method 82 706:

Gas Chromatography/Mass Spec
trometry for Semivolatile Organics:
Capillary Column Technique

The SemiVOST methodology defines
semivolatile organic compounds as com-
pounds with boilinq points above 100°C
(212°F).

To be a candidate for the SemiVOST or
VOST methodologies, an analyte must be
able to be analyzed by gas chromatogra-
phy/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). Labora-
tory studies7 identified volatile and
semivolatile organic compounds and pes-
ticides listed in Title III of the CAAA of
1990 that could be analyzed by GC/MS.
The candidate analytes identified for the
VOST methodology were benzene, car-
bon disulfide, n-hexane, 2,2,4-trimethylpen-

tane, and toluene. Since the boiling point of
toluene is 111 °C, toluene was also tested
using SemiVOST. After laboratory confir-
mation of the composition and concentra-
tion of certified cylinders, the cylinders
were used to perform dynamic spiking in
the field method evaluation study. The
candidate analytes identified for the
SemiVOST methodology included 10 Ac-
ids, 20 Bases, and 24 Neutral semivolatile
organic compounds from Title III of the
CAAA. These analytes were dynamically
spiked in the field as an Acid/Neutral solu-
tion or as a Base/Neutral solution.

EPA Method 301 guidelines were fol-
lowed for experimental design, number of
samples collected, and statistical evalua-
tion. A methodology (sampling and ana-
lytical) is determined to be valid when it
meets the acceptance criteria for bias and
precision outlined in Method 301. Method
301 provides guidance on the experimen-
tal design, the number of samples to be
collected, and the calculations to deter-
mine bias and precision. The bias and
precision of an analyte must fall within a
specified range (correction factor between
0.70 and 1.30, with relative standard de-
viation of 50% or less). Method 301 re-
quires either testing the candidate method
side-by-side with a validated method, or
introducing a known amount of the target
analyte(s) into the sampling train without
interrupting normal sampling procedures.
For this field evaluation, the analytes were
dynamically spiked in the field because
comparable validated reference methods
do not exist. Dynamic spiking is the ac-
cepted means of introducing a known
analyte. During dynamic spiking, analytes
are introduced into the sampling train, as
close as possible to the end of the probe,
for the duration of the sampling run.

EPA Method 301 provides guidelines
for design of the sampling scheme to en-
sure that a sufficient number of valid
samples are collected to statistically evalu-
ate precision and bias. For dynamic spik-
ing in the field, four similar sampling trains
are operated from four collocated probes.
Two of the trains are dynamically spiked;
two trains are unspiked. Method 301 re-
quires at least six complete sampling runs
(twelve paired spiked trains, twelve paired
unspiked trains) in order to statistically
assess the data. For this field test, eleven
complete quad VOST sampling runs were
made; eight complete Acid/Neutral sam-
pling runs were made; and eleven com-
plete Base/Neutral sampling runs were
made. Data collected for each sampling
run were statistically analyzed according
to Method 301 and the QA/QC Handbook
for Hazardous Waste Incineration.6

2

-------
Experimental Approach

A chemical waste incinerator was se-
lected as the test site for this field method
evaluation study. A site presurvey estab-
lished that no high levels of the com-
pounds of interest were present in the
background, and that the moisture level of
source was high (approximately 55%). The
dynamic spiking level projected for the
VOST methodology was 250 ng per
analyte; for the SemiVOST methodoloy,
500 |ig per analyte.

To collect samples, stack gas was drawn
from a single port in the stack through a
quad probe. The stack gas was then di-
rected to four similar VOST sampling trains
or to four similar SemiVOST sampling
trains. The quad probe contains four simi-
lar heated sampling probes that can be
inserted into the stack as one unit. The
front end of the quad probe was posi-
tioned in the center of the stack and re-
mained in that location during each day of
testing. The true concentration of the com-
ponents of the stack gas was of no inter-
est to this program, so traversing the stack
was not required. For both VOST and
SemiVOST methodologies, two of the qua-
druple sampling trains were spiked and
two were unspiked, according to the guide-
lines of EPA Method 301.

VOST dynamic spiking was performed
by introduction of the compounds of inter-
est from a certified gas cylinder at a flow
rate of approximately 3 mL/min for the
duration of the 20-min VOST sampling
run. Method 0030 sampling procedures
were followed. SemiVOST dynamic spik-
ing was performed by introduction of the
compounds of interest from a methylene
chloride solution (either Acid/Neutrals or
Base/Neutrals) through a heated glass el-
bow equipped with a spiking injection port
positioned between the end of the probe
and prior to the heated filter. Approxi-
mately 20 ml_ of the solution was intro-
duced into the spiking injection port using
a syringe pump, which operated at a rate
appropriate for maintaining a hanging drop
of the spiking solution throughout the one-
hour sampling run. Method 0010 sam-
pling procedures were followed.

VOST field samples were analyzed ac-
cording to the analytical procedures de-
scribed in Method 5041. The VOST tubes
were analyzed individually, with the back
tube first, in order to determine the distri-
bution of the analytes on the VOST tubes
and to demonstrate that breakthrough had
not occurred. SemiVOST field samples
were prepared according to the proce-
dures of Proposed Method 3542 and ana-
lyzed according to the procedures of EPA
Method 8270. Three samples were ana-
lyzed for each SemiVOST train: the filter/

front half rinse, the XAD-2® and condenser
rinse, and the condensate/condensate
rinse. For both VOST and SemiVOST,
field blanks, reagent blanks, method
blanks, and method spikes were prepared
and analyzed.

Results and Discussion

The SemiVOST method is most effec-
tive for the Neutral compounds at the
source tested. Because of the high mois-
ture levels of the source, the polar and
water-soluble Acidic and Basic compounds
were washed through the sorbent into the
condensate of the sampling train, where
the pH-adjusted extraction required by the
SemiVOST method did not result in quan-
titative recoveries.

The results of the statistical calculations
are summarized below:

•	Four of five VOST analytes met EPA
Method 301 acceptance criteria for
bias and precision;

•	Nineteen of 24 Neutral compounds
met EPA Method 301 acceptance cri-
teria for bias and precision;

•	Two of 10 Acidic compounds met EPA
Method 301 acceptance criteria for
bias and precision;

•	Three of 20 Basic compounds met
EPA Method 301 acceptance criteria
for bias and precision.

Comparable results are obtained when
the statistical calculations are performed
according to the guidelines of the EPA
QA/QC Handbook.

During the dynamic spiking experiments
for the SemiVOST in the field, the Base/
Neutral spiking solution changed color from
yellow to a dark green k proximately
one9Qalf hour after the solution was
poured into the syringe for spiking. Three
aliquots of the spiking solution were ana-
lyzed in the laboratory: an aliquot of the
solution that was not sent to the field, an
aliquot of unused solution that had been
taken to the field but not opened, and
remaining spiking solution from an aliquot
of the solution that had changed color.
The color change was due to photochemi-
cal reaction of benzidine, 4,4'-methylene-
dianiline, 3,3'-dimethylbenzidine, and
3,3'-dimethoxybenzidine, photoreactive dyes.
The natural ultraviolet light in the field was
sufficient to cause the photoreactive com-
pounds to react and change the color of
the solution. The aliquot of the solution
remaining in the laboratory did not change
color under the artificial ultraviolet light in
the laboratory.

Upon analysis of both VOST and
SemiVOST, the presence of molecular io-
dine (l2) in the background matrix was
established by a major l2 chromatographic

peak. The reactivity of the l2 was demon-
strated by the disappearance of
acenaphthene-d10 (a Method 8270 inter-
nal standard added immediately before
analysis) from several of the XAD-2® ex-
tracts and by the appearance of iodinated
compounds in the chromatograms. The
XAD-2® extracts were quantified by using
an alternative internal standard (Method
8270 uses six internal standards so an
alternative is available). However, the
chemical reactivity of the background
source matrix did affect compound recov-
eries, especially for the Acids and Bases.
Reaction could occur in the sampling train,
on the sorbent or in the condensate, dur-
ing the extraction/concentration process,
or in the heated injection port of the gas
chromatograph.

When the analyte distribution of the
VOST samples was determined, all of the
VOST analytes showed >90% recovery of
spiked analyte from the front (Tenax®) tube.
When the analyte distribution of the
SemiVOST samples was determined, the
Neutral compounds, as expected, showed
primary recovery from the XAD-2® sor-
bent. The major exception was 1,4-diox-
ane, a polar water-soluble Neutral com-
pound recovered mostly from the conden-
sate. Polar water-soluble compounds
washed through the sorbent. The Acid
and Basic analytes showed primary re-
covery from the condensate, with the least
volatile analytes recovered from the filter.
Low recoveries for the Acidic and Basic
compounds can be attributed to the high
moisture level of the source: the com-
pounds washed through the XAD-2® and
into the condensate, where they were ex-
tracted with poor recoveries. Laboratory
experience has demonstrated that polar
water-soluble analytes present in an aque-
ous solution (the condensate) are recov-
ered poorly (30-60% recovery) using the
pH-adjusted extraction technique specified
by the SemiVOST method.

Three factors in this field method evalu-
ation study acted to reduce the recoveries
of polar semivolatile analytes from the
SemiVOST train:

•	A high level of moisture in the source
washed the polar (Acidic and Basic)
analytes through the SemiVOST train
to be retained in the condensate.
Recovery of polar water-soluble
semivolatile organic analytes from
aqueous media tends to be poor un-
der standard conditions of pH-adjusted
extraction.

•	The high level of molecular l2 present
in the source reacted more readily
with functionalized molecules (Acids
and Bases) than with Neutral com-

3

-------
pounds. Chemical reaction with the
background stationary source matrix
reduced recoveries of Acidic and Ba-
sic compounds.

•	Photochemical reactivity reduced the
recovery of photochemically active
compounds such as dyes or dye in-
termediates.

Conclusions and
Recommendations

The following conclusions may be drawn
from the results of the second VOST and
SemiVOST method evaluation field test
for selected Clean Air Act analytes:

•	The method is not source-specific. If
the method were source-specific, the
methodology would succeed or fail
completely, depending upon the
source. There would be only one
source or only one type of source
where any compounds meet accep-
tance criteria. At all other sources or
source types, the methods would fail
completely and no compounds would
meet acceptance criteria. Since both
VOST/SemiVOST field tests demon-
strate some compounds that perform
acceptably at both source types, the
method is not specific to the source.
However, factors characteristic of a
specific source affect the performance
of specific compounds, and an over-
all evaluation of the performance of
the methodology at the two sources
says that both the VOST and
SemiVOST methods perform better
and more consistently with Neutral
(i.e., non-polar) compounds.

•	Using the EPA Method 301 criteria for
acceptable performance (correction fac-
tor between 0.70 and 1.30, with relative
standard deviation of 50% or less), the
VOST methodology showed acceptable
performance in a chemical waste incin-
erator emissions matrix for the following
compounds: benzene,n-hexane, 2,2,4-tri-
methylpentane, and toluene.

•	Using the EPA Method 301 criteria
for acceptable performance (correc-
tion factor between 0.70 and 1.30,
with relative standard deviation of 50%
or less), the SemiVOST methodology
showed acceptable performance in a
chemical waste incinerator for the fol-
lowing compounds. Acids: di-n-butyl
phthalate, dimethyl phthalate; Bases:
carbaryl, N-nitrosodimethylamine, N-
nitrosomorpholine; Neutrals: 1,4-diox-
ane, 2,4-dinitrotoluene, 4-nitrobiphenyl,
acetophenone, biphenyl, chlordane,
cumene, DDE, dibenzofuran, ethylben-
zene, isophorone, lindane, mYp-xylene,

methyl isobutyl ketone, naphthalene, ni-
trobenzene, o-xylene, and toluene.

•	The following compounds did not meet
Method 301 acceptance criteria: Ac-
ids: 2,4-dinitrophenol, 4-nitrophenol,
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, 4,6-dinitro-
o-cresol, m-/p-cresol, o-cresol, phe-
nol; Bases: 2-acetylaminofluorene,
3,3'-dimethoxybenzidine, 3,3'-di-
methylbenzidine, 4,4'-methylene bis
(o-chloroaniline), 4,4'-methylene-
dianiline, 4-aminobiphenyl, aniline,
benzidine, caprolactam, dimethyl-
aminoazobenzene, ethyl carbamate,
N,N-diethylaniline, N,N-dimethyl-
aniline, o-anisidine, o-toluidine,
propoxur; Neutrals: dichlorvos, hep-
tachlor, methoxychlor, parathion, sty-
rene.

•	The chemical composition of the back-
ground source matrix is a significant
factor in the success or failure of the
sampling and analytical methodology.

•	In a reactive background emissions
matrix, reactive organic compounds
(such as acids and bases) show the
effects of interaction with the back-
ground matrix far more strongly than
less reactive compounds such as hy-
drocarbons.

•	Interaction of the spiking solution with
natural ultraviolet light can be a sig-
nificant factor in determining the re-
coveries of spiked compounds. The
Base/Neutral spiking solution con-
tained photoreactive dyes (members
of the benzidine family), which re-
acted with the natural ultraviolet ra-
diation at the test site as the Base/
Neutral solution was being poured into
the syringe for spiking.

•	Application of the SemiVOST to polar
reactive semivolatile compounds pro-
duces widely variable results at dif-
ferent sources, depending upon the
reactivity of the background matrix.
Laboratory tests will demonstrate that
the methodology can in general be
applied to a particular analyte and
can predict certain failure of the meth-
odology under field conditions. That
is, if an analyte cannot be quantita-
tively extracted from the XAD-2® and
analyzed reproducibly, failure under
field conditions is highly probable.
However, successful performance un-
der laboratory conditions does not
guarantee that field testing at a given
source will be successful. The char-
acteristics of the particular source
must be considered.

•	When a source such as the chemical
waste incinerator has a high moisture

content, it is essential to monitor the
desorption temperature of the VOST
tubes to ensure that the tubes be-
come sufficiently hot for quantitative
desorption of the collected analytes.
The high level of moisture collected
on the tubes during sampling (up to
several mL of collected water) slowed
the heating of the tubes being des-
orbed for analysis. If the temperature
does not reach the desorption tem-
perature specified by Method 5041
for the period of time required by the
method, analyte recoveries will not
be quantitative.

On the basis of the results of this field
method evaluation study, the following
recommendations can be made:

•	When polar water-soluble semivolatile
organic compounds are sampled by
the SemiVOST at a source with high
moisture, the polar compounds tend
to wash through the sampling train to
be collected in the condensate. When
polar water-soluble semivolatile com-
pounds are dissolved in the conden-
sate, these compounds are recovered
poorly by the pH-adjusted extraction
techniques required by the SemiVOST.
Two possible solutions to this prob-
lem should be explored:

-	Investigate the use of sorbents
which retain polar water-soluble
semivolatile organic compounds
better than XAD-2® does to pre
vent the compounds from wash-
ing through the SemiVOST train
to the condensate.

-	Because the semivolatile organic
compounds dissolved in the con-
densate are typically present at
low concentrations in a large vol-
ume of condensate, direct analysis
of the condensate (direct aqueous
injection into GC/MS or High Per-
formance Liquid Chromatograph
[HPLC]) will probably not be sen-
sitive enough. Some technique such
as solid phase extraction for con-
centrating the organic compounds
for analysis will be needed in order
to perform successful analysis within
the detection limits of the instrumen-
tation.

•	Faced with a candidate analyte for
either VOST or SemiVOST for which
no method validation information is
available, laboratory experimentation
can aid in establishing the validity of
assigning the analyte to a particular
methodology:

-	Determine whether the compound
can be analyzed by either liquid in-

4

-------
jection (GC/MS) or purge and trap
• GC/MS. This information is frequently
available from the literature. If the
compound cannot be analyzed by
GC/MS, neither VOST nor SemiVOST
can be applied.

Determine whether the compound
can be recovered quantitatively from
the sorbent. If the compound can-
not survive thermal desorption or
extraction/concentration, neither
VOST nor SemiVOST can be ap-
plied. If the compound is recovered
poorly or erratically, an informed
decision regarding the applicability
of the methods as screening meth-
ods can be made.

Determine whether the compound
can be recovered quantitatively from
a dynamically-spiked sampling train.
If the compound cannot be recov-
ered after passage through a heated
sampling train, the sampling meth-
odology will not collect the com-
pound quantitatively and is not ap-
propriate. Use of some basic labo-
ratory experimentation can prevent
.the erroneous assumption that be-
cause an analyte was not observed
when VOST or SemiVOST was ap-
plied in the field, the analyte is not
present at the test site. If neither
method is appropriate for the analyte,
the organic compound could not
possibly be observed, even if present.

Careful consideration of the chemical
properties of candidate analytes is essen-
tial in predicting success or failure in the
application of VOST or SemiVOST sam-
pling and analytical methodology.

For compounds with marginal or unac-
ceptable performance in the VOST or
SemiVOST methods, a detailed study of
the chemical properties of these com-
pounds may provide guidance for the modi-
fication of existing methods to optimize
the methodology for these compounds.

References

1.	Appendix A to Part 63 — Test Meth-
ods. Method 301— Field Validation of
Pollutant Measurement Methods from
Various Waste Media, Federal Regis-
ter Vol. 57, No. 250, December 29,
1992, pp 61998-62002.

2.	U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Method 0030, in Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods, SW-846 Manual,
3rd Ed. Document No. 955-001-
0000001. Available from Superinten-
dent of Documents. U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC, No-
vember 1986.

3.	U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Method 5041, in SW-846 Manual, Third
Update to 3rd Ed. U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC, May
1995.

4.	U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Method 0010, in Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods, SW-846 Manual,
3rd Ed. Document No. 955-001-
0000001. Available from Superinten-
dent of Documents. U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC, No-
vember 1986.

5.	U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Proposed Method 3542. Proposed for
Inclusion in Test Methods for Evaluat-
ing Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical
Methods, SW-846 Manual, 3rd Ed. U.
S. Government Printing Office, Wash-
ington, DC, January 1995.

6.	U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Method 8270, in Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods, SW-846 Manual,
3rd Ed. Document No. 955-001-
0000001. Available from Superinten-
dent of Documents. U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC, No-
vember 1986.

7.	U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Contract No. 68-D1-0010, Work As-
signment 74 to Radian Corporation,
Laboratory Evaluation of VOST and
SemiVOST for Selected CAAA Organic
Compounds. September 30. 1994.

8.	Handbook. Quality Assurance/Quality
Control (QA/QC). Procedures for Haz-
ardous Waste Incineration, EPA-625/
6-89-023, Cincinnati, OH. 1990.

5

-------
Joan T. Bursey, James F. McGaughey, and Raymond G. Merrill are with Eastern

Research Group, In., Morrisville, NC 27560.

Merrill D. Jackson is the EPA Project Officer (see below).

The complete report, entitled "Field Evaluation at an Agricultural Chemical Manu-
facturing Facility of VOST and SemiVOST Methods for Selected CAAA Organic
Compounds, "(Order No. PB97-174585; Cost: $85.00, subject to change) will be
available only from:

National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:

Air Measurements Research Division
National Exposure Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268

United States

Environmental Protection Agency

National Risk Management Research Laboratory (G-72)

Cincinnati, OH 45268

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA

PERMIT No. G-35

EPA/600/SR-97/037

-------