September 2012
EPA/600/R-12/679
Environmental Technology
Verification Report
Releasable Asbestos Field Sampler
Prepared by
Baiteiie
Tim Business of Innovation
Under a cooperative agreement with
^CJf CrTr\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ET1/ET1/ET1/
-------
September 2012
EPA/600/R-12/679
Environmental Technology Verification
Report
ETV Advanced Monitoring Systems Center
Releasable Asbestos Field Sampler
by
Ramona Darlington and Amy Dindal, Battelle
John McKernan, U.S. EPA
-------
Notice
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, through its Office of Research and Development,
funded and managed, or partially funded and collaborated in, the research described herein. It
has been subjected to the Agency 'speer and administrative review. Any opinions expressed in
this report are those of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency,
therefore, no official endorsement should be inferred. Any mention of trade names or
commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
11
-------
Foreword
The EPA is charged by Congress with protecting the nation's air, water, and land resources.
Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to formulate and implement
actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability of natural
systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, the EPA's Office of Research and
Development provides data and science support that can be used to solve environmental
problems and to build the scientific knowledge base needed to manage our ecological resources
wisely, to understand how pollutants affect our health, and to prevent or reduce environmental
risks.
The Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program has been established by the EPA to
verify the performance characteristics of innovative environmental technology across all media
and to report this objective information to permit issuers, buyers, and users of the technology,
thus substantially accelerating the entrance of new environmental technologies into the
marketplace. Verification organizations oversee and report verification activities based on testing
and quality assurance protocols developed with input from major stakeholders and customer
groups associated with the technology area. ETV consists of six environmental technology
centers. Information about each of these centers can be found on the Internet at
http ://www. epa.gov/etv/.
Effective verifications of monitoring technologies are needed to assess environmental quality
and to supply cost and performance data to select the most appropriate technology for that
assessment. Under a cooperative agreement, Battelle has received EPA funding to plan,
coordinate, and conduct such verification tests for "Advanced Monitoring Systems for Air,
Water, and Soil" and report the results to the community at large. Information concerning this
specific environmental technology area can be found on the Internet at
http ://www. epa.gov/etv/centers/centerl .html.
in
-------
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the contribution of the many individuals, without whom, this
verification testing would not have been possible. Quality assurance (QA) oversight was
provided by Michelle Henderson, U.S. EPA and Rosanna Buhl and Betsy Cutie, Battelle. We
gratefully acknowledge Dr. Mark Follansbee and Ms. Patricia Billig of SRC, Inc., Dr. Jonathan
Thornburg, of the Research Triangle Institute and Mr. Dave Ferguson, Dr. Bill Barrett, and Mr.
Jim Konz of EPA for being stakeholders and providing review of the test/QA plan and this
verification report.
IV
-------
Contents
Chapter 1 Background 1
Chapter 2 Technology Description 2
Chapter 3 Test Design and Procedures 4
3.1 Test Overview 4
3.2 Test Site Descriptions 4
3.2.1 Libby, Montana 4
3.2.2 Laboratory Test 5
3.3 Experimental Design -Field Test 6
3.3.1 Prepare Instrument for Sample Collection 6
3.3.2 Sample Collection 7
3.3.3 Additional Measurements 10
3.3.4 Experimental Design Specific to Location 10
3.3.5 Activity Based Sampling (ABS) 12
3.4 Experimental Design-Laboratory Test 13
3.4.1 Wooden Frame and Soil Preparation 14
3.4.2 Asbestos Preparation 15
3.4.3 Accuracy Test 16
3.4.3.1 Varying Moisture Content 16
3.4.3.2 Measuring the Releasability in Soil Known to Contain Asbestos 16
3.4.4 Variability/Consistency 16
3.5 Laboratory Methods 17
3.5.1 Soil Method 17
3.5.2 Filter Analysis Method 17
3.5.2.1 Direct Analysis 17
3.5.3.2 Indirect Analysis 18
Chapter 4 20
Quality Assurance/Quality Control 20
4.1 Quality Control Samples 20
4.2 Audits 21
4.2.1 Performance Evaluation Audit 21
4.2.2 Technical Systems Audit 21
4.2.3 Data Quality Audit 21
Chapters Test Results 23
5.1 Soil Results 23
5.2 Comparability 26
5.3 Reproducibility 26
5.4 Variability/Consistency and Accuracy 26
5.5 Operational Factors 29
Chapter 6 Performance Summary 30
-------
Chapter 7 References 32
Appendix ARAFS Field and Laboratory Data Sheets 33
VI
-------
Tables
Table 1. Addresses in Libby, Montana 5
Table 2. Rotameter and anemometer measured blower speed during collection of equipment
blank and samples 9
Table 3. RAFS sampling times used for each location and test parameter 13
Table 4. Summary of performance parameters and testing frequency 19
Table 5. Blank sample results 20
Table 6. Soil moisture readings at Libby, Montana sampling locations 23
Table 7. Soil moisture at each sampling point in laboratory study 24
Table 8. Field test soil asbestos results 25
Table 9. Laboratory study soil results 26
Table 10. Comparability test results from each of the locations and sampling points 27
Table 11. Results of reproducibility testing in the field 28
vn
-------
Figures
Figure 1. Releasable asbestos field sampler a) Instrument during sample collection b)
Instrument rakes agitating the top soil 3
Figure 2. Tent for asbestos laboratory test showing, a) Working and decontamination area,
and b) HEPA filter vacuum pump in wall of tent 6
Figure 3. RAFS preparation, a) RAFS being sanitized, and b) Equipment blank being
taken at a new location 7
Figure 4. Air flow meter calibration curve 8
Figure 5. Collection of soil moisture readings 10
Figure 6. ABS sampling 12
Figure 7. Locations of wooden frames and RAFS within tent (Rl and R2 = RAFS 1 and
RAFS 2 and LI, L2 and L3 refers to the three sampling points at which the
RAFS was applied) 14
Figure 8. Soil and wooden frame preparation, a) Soil, sand and water being mixed, b)
Wooden frame being packed and leveled, c) RAFS footprint impressions 15
Figure 9. Asbestos fibers distributed in water and sonicated 15
Figure 10. RAFS being transported from sampling point to sampling point by one
individual 29
Vlll
-------
List of Abbreviations
ABS Activity based sampling
ADQ Audit of data quality
AMS Advanced monitoring systems
ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
cc Cubic centimeter
COC Chain-of-custody
DQI Data quality indicators
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EQM Environmental Quality Management, Inc.
ETV Environmental technology verification
HAZWOPER Hazardous waste operations and emergency response
ISO International Organization for Standardization
LA Libby amphibole asbestos
1pm Liters per minute
LRB Laboratory record book
MCE Mixed cellulose ester
NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
NVLAP National voluntary laboratory accreditation program
NYDOH New York Department of Health
OU Operable unit
PE Performance evaluation
PLM Polarized light microscopy
QA Quality assurance
QC Quality control
QAO Quality assurance officer
QMP Quality management plan
RAFS Releasable asbestos field sampler
RMO Records management office
RPD Relative percent difference
RSD Relative percent standard deviation
SOP Standard operating procedure
TEM Transmission electron microscopy
IX
-------
TQAP Test/quality assurance plan
TSA Technical systems audit
VTC Verification test coordinator
-------
Chapter 1
Background
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) supports the Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV) Program to facilitate the deployment of innovative environmental
technologies through performance verification and dissemination of information. The goal of the
ETV Program is to further environmental protection by accelerating the acceptance and use of
improved and cost-effective technologies. ETV seeks to achieve this goal by providing high-
quality, peer-reviewed data on technology performance to those involved in the design,
distribution, financing, permitting, purchase, and use of environmental technologies.
ETV works in partnership with recognized testing organizations, with stakeholder groups
consisting of buyers, vendor organizations, and permit issuers, and with the full participation of
individual technology developers. The program evaluates the performance of innovative
technologies by developing test plans that are responsive to the needs of stakeholders,
conducting field or laboratory tests (as appropriate), collecting and analyzing data, and preparing
peer-reviewed reports. All evaluations are conducted in accordance with rigorous quality
assurance (QA) protocols to ensure that data of known and adequate quality are generated and
that the results are defensible. The definition of ETV verification is to establish or prove the truth
of the performance of a technology under specific, pre-determined criteria or protocols and a
strong quality management system. The highest-quality data are assured through implementation
of the ETV Quality Management Plan. ETV does not endorse, certify, or approve technologies.
The EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) and its verification
organization partner, Battelle, operate the Advanced Monitoring Systems (AMS) Center under
ETV. The AMS Center recently evaluated the performance of the Releasable Asbestos Field
Sampler for field sampling of asbestos.
-------
Chapter 2
Technology Description
This report provides results for the verification testing of the Releasable Asbestos Field Sampler
(RAFS). The following is a description of the RAFS based on information provided by the
vendor. The information provided below was not verified in this test.
The RAFS, owned by EQM (U.S. Patent No. 7,758,813), is a small, field portable system for
determining the potential for exposure to asbestos fibers released from soils. The RAFS was
designed to measure the emission rate of asbestos from soil (asbestos structures/sec) and
concentration of asbestos in air when released (asbestos structures per cc of air). The RAFS
operates in situ under actual soil conditions with representative moisture content and grain size.
Thus, the possibility that soil conditions may change during handling, transport, and storage is
eliminated.
The RAFS is a field instrument that provides an in situ measurement of asbestos releasability
using mechanical agitation of the source material soil (Figure la). The RAFS consists of a
variable speed, high efficiency particulate arrestor-filtered fan attached to a tunnel (6 inches by 6
inches by 24 inches) with an open bottom for exposure to the test matrix soil. The fan discharges
air at the tunnel inlet through diffusers to evenly distribute the airflow. A variable speed
motorized rake mechanism inside the tunnel provides consistent and reproducible agitation of the
top l/2 inch of soil. The rake mechanism has 10 tines that oscillate slightly as it traverses the
tunnel back and forth to agitate the soil to aerosolize the asbestos fibers (Figure Ib). An
attachment at the tunnel exit can support up to three 25-mm diameter mixed cellulose ester
membrane filter cassettes with 50-mm extension cowls for asbestos collection and analysis using
direct transfer TEM. This aspect of the RAFS design permits collection of concurrent samples
for different sampling periods with resultant varied air volumes to obtain an acceptable
particulate loading for analysis using direct transfer TEM. A typical sampling period ranges
from 10 to 60 minutes, depending on the filter particulate loading. These filters are then tested
for asbestos. Based on the amount of asbestos present on the filters, the likely exposure of
individuals performing activities on the asbestos contaminated soil can be estimated. The person
collecting the sample using the RAFS typically does not need to wear protective equipment such
as a respirator.
Each filter assembly is attached with flexible tubing to an electric powered (110-volt alternating
current) 1/10-horsepower vacuum pump operating at an airflow rate of approximately 13.5 liters
per minute (1pm). Each pump is equipped with a flow control regulator and individually
calibrated rotameter that maintains the initial flow rate of approximately 13.5 1pm.
The RAFS collects anisokinetic samples where the free stream velocity is greater than the sample
velocity. Under these conditions, inertia effects are negligible and the free stream to sample
concentration ratio is unity.
-------
Figure 1. Releasable asbestos field sampler a) Instrument during sample collection b)
Instrument rakes agitating the top soil
(U.S. Patent Number 7,758,813)
-------
Chapter 3
Test Design and Procedures
3.1 Test Overview
This verification test was conducted according to procedures specified in the Test/QA Plan for
Verification ofReleasable Asbestos Field Sampler (TQAP) and adhered to the quality system
defined in the ETV AMS Center Quality Management Plan (QMP). Battelle conducted this
verification test with funding support from the EPA's National Risk Management Research
Laboratory. As indicated in the QAPP, the testing conducted satisfied EPA QA Category III
requirements. The QAPP and verification report were reviewed by the following stakeholders:
• Mark Follansbee, SRC, Inc.
• Patricia Billig, SRC, Inc.
• Dave Ferguson, EPA
This verification test evaluated the performance of the RAFS while conducting asbestos samples
at field sites. The main objective of the verification was to test the ability of the RAFS to
measure the emission rate from soil (asbestos structures/sec) and the asbestos concentration
released from soil (asbestos structures per cubic centimeter [cc] of air). To accomplish the goal
of this verification test, the experimental design included generating data for performance
parameters to assess the ability of the asbestos sampler through laboratory testing with asbestos
fortified soil samples and field testing for direct comparison with activity based sampling (ABS).
Testing of the RAFS was done in two phases.
Phase 1 of this verification test was conducted in Libby, Montana from August 2 to 6, 2010 to
evaluate the sampling performance of the RAFS. The resulting concentration data was used to
assess the comparability of the RAFS to site specific ABS events (i.e. ABS during raking) and
the reproducibility of the samples collected by the RAFS. Operational factors were also assessed
in the field.
The ability of the RAFS to detect asbestos in soil samples where asbestos was added was
evaluated during Phase 2 of this verification test, which was conducted at Battelle's Laboratory
in Columbus, OH. The RAFS was tested in soil with low and high moisture content amended
with chrysotile asbestos. The accuracy and variability/consistency was verified in the laboratory.
Testing for Phase 2 was conducted from September 13 through September 15, 2010.
3.2 Test Site Descriptions
3.2.1 Libby, Montana
Phase 1 of the verification test was field testing at the_Libby, Montana OU4 Site. Details of the
Libby Montana testing are provided in the TQAP. The TQAP states that testing will be done in
three phases with Phase 1 and Phase 3 being field testing and Phase 2 being laboratory testing.
However field testing was only done at one location, therefore field testing was done in just one
-------
phase. This was a deviation from the TQAP. A deviation was prepared stating that the second
field site was changed from Weedsport, NY to BoRit in Ambler, PA however a second field test
was not conducted due to financial constraints on the project. Testing at only one site reduced the
amount of data available for comparison of the RAFS to the ABS but it was deemed that testing
at numerous locations at one site would provide sufficient information for the comparison.
Libby is a community in northwestern Montana, located seven miles southwest of an open pit
vermiculite mine that operated from the 1920s until 1990. At Libby, vermiculite containing
asbestos was mined for several years. Studies at the site later revealed that the vermiculite from
the mine contains Libby amphibole type asbestos (LA) including tremolite and winchite. As a
result of mining activities, asbestos was inadvertently utilized in building materials etc. and also
was deposited after transport through the air. At Libby, Montana, field testing was conducted at
four homes (Table 1). Throughout the report the locations would be referred to by their location
code. EPA collected initial data beginning in 1999 to evaluate human exposure to LA and the
efficacy of cleanup activities. Although the data varied widely, a discernible correlation between
elevated LA levels in soil (by the polarized light microscopy [PLM] visual area estimation
method) and elevated levels of asbestos in air were determined. The level of PPE suggested by
EPA was C or D based on the asbestos levels detected in the soil.
Table 1. Addresses in Libby, Montana
Location
California Avenue, Libby, Montana
Dakota Ave., Libby, Montana
Conifer Ave., Libby, Montana
Flower Creek Road, Libby, Montana
Location Code
A31
A3 2
A34
A3 5
At each location, the RAFS was applied at five randomly chosen sampling points around each
home. One sampling point was utilized for comparability testing, and the additional four
sampling points were utilized for reproducibility testing. At each test site ABS was conducted by
a different contractor. ABS was conducted by raking for 20 minutes around each home using low
flow sampling at 4.86 L/min in the same area as the RAFS application. The ABS data was used
for comparability testing.
3.2.2 Laboratory Test
Details of the laboratory test are provided in the TQAP. ^ The laboratory test was conducted in
a temperature and humidity controlled basement laboratory at Battelle in Columbus, Ohio. In the
laboratory, a tent (Figure 2) was constructed with a vacuum pump with HEPA filter installed for
air flow, a decontamination area, and transparent window for viewing. The tent was large
enough to allow two 4 ft by 4 ft wooden frames to be placed in the working area. The tent was
constructed such that all asbestos was contained within the tent for decontamination purposes.
Once the experiment was completed the tent was sprayed with an encapsulant to seal the
asbestos for tent disposal.
-------
Figure 2. Tent for asbestos laboratory test showing, a) Working and decontamination area,
and b) HEPA filter vacuum pump in wall of tent
3.3 Experimental Design - Field Test
Before field analysis, the verification test coordinator (VTC) was trained on the use of the
instrument by the vendor. The training included cleaning the instrument, turning on the
instrument sample pumps, blowers, and rakes, taking blank samples, and measuring air speeds.
Two RAFS instruments were made available for the field test although only one was utilized.
For each of the four locations, the same general procedures were followed once on site. The
procedures are described below.
3.3.1 Prepare Instrument for Sample Collection
1) Sanitize equipment - Once onsite the instrument was sanitized using 409 All Purpose
cleaner and lint free towels (Figure 3a).
2) Equipment Blank - An equipment blank sample was taken first for 10 minutes (Figure
3b). In order to take the equipment blank, the instrument was placed on a clean sheet of
aluminum and an open filter placed in Position 2 (middle position) on the RAFS. The
blower and sample pump at Position 2 remained on for the 10 minute duration. After 10
minutes, the filter was collected, covered, and stored.
3) Record Air Speed within RAFS - A Davis rotating wave anemometer was used to collect
the wind speed in the tunnel of the RAFS after processing the equipment blank. In order
to take the wind speed, the blower was left on for 1 minute while the anemometer
recorded the air speed (Table 2). The rake was left off during this measurement. The
target setting was between 280 and 380 ft/min.
-------
Figure 3. RAFS preparation, a) RAFS being sanitized, and b) Equipment blank being
taken at a new location
3.3.2 Sample Collection
The general sample collection procedures are outlined in this section however the specific
sampling conducted at each location is described later in the document.
1) Measure flow at sampling pumps - The RAFS holds three filters and can therefore collect
triplicate samples during one application. Three individual sampling pumps are attached
to each sampling point. Before samples are taken, the flow rate at each of the filter points
is measured with a DryCal DC-Lite primary air flow meter and recorded. The target flow
rate is 13 - 14 L/min. The flow meters on the sampling pumps can be adjusted to obtain
an acceptable flow rate. The Dry Cal DC-Lite flow meter or rotameter calibration curve
is provided in Figure 4. The duplicate rotameter readings were identical and therefore
within the 5% RSD acceptance criteria of the test (Table 2).
2) Load instrument and determine sampling time - Three clean filters are loaded onto the
RAFS, and the particle count flowing through the RAFS is determined using a Met One
particle counter. The Met One particle counter reading is one of the variables used to
determine the sampling time in addition to visible observation of the loading of the filter
samples after a sample has been collected for the selected sampling time (Table 3).
3) Blanks - Open and closed field blanks were taken at each location (home). Open field
blanks were taken by waving an open filter gently for 30 sec then closing and storing.
Closed field blanks were taken by randomly choosing a filter from the filter lot and then
labeling it as closed field blank.
4) Rake Speed- The rake speed was obtained by the counts of rake counter and the length
of the sampling period. However the rake counter was not functional during the duration
of the laboratory and field tests. This prevented the rake speed from being verified
-------
however the actual rake speed setting remained the same for all test locations. The target
rake setting is 1 cycle/20-30 sec.
1.00
Rotameter Calibration Curve 110775-3
6-14-10
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00 6.00
Flow Rate (L/min)
7.00
8.00
-actual data
-Corrected Data
9.00
10.00
Figure 4. Air flow meter calibration curve
-------
Table 2. Rotameter and anemometer measured blower speed during collection of
equipment blank and samples
Sample
Equipment blank
RAFS1-LOW-L1-1
RAFS1-LOW-L1-2
RAFS1-LOW-L1-3
RAFS1-LOW-L2-1
RAFS1-LOW-L2-2
RAFS1-LOW-L2-3
RAFS1-LOW-L3-1
RAFS1-LOW-L3-2
RAFS1-LOW-L3-3
RAFS2-LOW-L1-1
RAFS2-LOW-L1-2
RAFS2-LOW-L1-3
RAFS2-LOW- L2-1
RAFS2-LOW- L2-2
RAFS2-LOW- L2-3
RAFS2-LOW-L3-1
RAFS2-LOW-L3-2
RAFS2-LOW-L3-3
RAFS1 -HIGH- L 1-1
RAFS1-HIGH-L1-2
RAFS1-HIGH-L1-3
RAFS1-HIGH-L2-1
RAFS1-HIGH-L2-2
RAFS1-HIGH-L2-3
RAFS1-HIGH-L3-1
RAFS1-HIGH-L3-2
RAFS1-HIGH-L3-3
Rotameter reading
(L/min)
13.61
13.56
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.68
13.56
13.34
13.68
13.56
13.34
13.68
13.56
13.34
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.61
13.56
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.68
13.56
13.34
13.68
13.56
13.34
13.68
13.56
13.34
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.98
13.61
13.40
13.98
13.61
13.40
Sampling
time (min)
10
10
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
23
23
8
23
23
Anemometer
measured fan
speed ft/min
281
250
323
355
316
346
322
321
345
324
317
Rotameter Test Design Criteria 13-14 L/m
Anemometer Test Design Criteria 280 - 380 ft/min
-------
3.3.3 Additional Measurements
1) Weather Measurements - At each location, wind speed, barometric pressure, and
humidity were measured.
2) Measure Soil Moisture - Soil moisture readings were taken at five specific spots around
each sampling point (Figure 5). The five spots were co-located at the four sides of the
RAFS and the middle of the RAFS tunnel.
Figure 5. Collection of soil moisture readings
3.3.4 Experimental Design Specific to Location
Four locations in Libby Montana were selected for asbestos sampling.
Site A31
The first location where sampling was conducted was Site A31. The instrument was
prepared for sampling as outlined in section 3.3.1. At the first sampling point (back yard), three
clean filters were loaded onto the RAFS. The blower and rake were set to the highest setting with
all sampling pumps on, and a sample was taken for 5 minutes. The Met One particle counter
reading was > 10,000 indicating that the particle count through the RAFS chamber was very
high. Upon visually observing the three filters, this was confirmed as they were found to be
overloaded i.e. the filter was completely covered with a very dark layer of soil, so that sampling
point was voided. A second sampling point was selected (other side of back yard), and samples
were collected for the same period of time with the rake at half speed. Filters were again found to
be overloaded, and the samples were voided. The third sampling point was selected at the front
10
-------
left of the home. The dryness of the top soil indicated that the filters would again be overloaded.
The soil moisture ranged from 2.2 to 2.8% at one of the sampling locations. Conversations with
the EPA personnel, led to a deviation in the TQAP allowing for overloaded samples to be
collected and analyzed by the indirect method vs. the direct method as stated in the TQAP. The
laboratory analysis of overloaded samples is discussed in section 3.5.3.2. As a result three
additional sampling points were selected with the first filter being removed after one minute of
operating the instrument, and the remaining two filters removed after 10 minutes of operating the
instrument (Table 3). The sampling times were determined by visually observing the filter after
each sampling time and by checking the particle reading on the Met One particle counter. This
sample collection time was conducted at four sampling points around the home for
reproducibility testing while one additional sampling point was selected for the reproducibility
parameter testing where the instrument sample collection time was 5 minutes for each of the
three filters.
Additional measurements were collected as described in section 3.3.3. Soil samples
collected in 1 L plastic bottles were taken from each sampling point. The soil samples were taken
from the footprint of the RAFS at the sampling point about lin to 2in depth. In summary, five
soil samples were collected, and 18 RAFS filters were collected, the first three of which were
voided.
Site A3 2
At the first sampling point, in the front yard of the residence, soil moisture content was very low
ranging from 2.2% to 4.1% as experienced at the previous sampling location. The sampling time
used was therefore the same with the first filter being removed after one minute and the two
additional filters being pulled after the instrument had been run for 10 minutes. The
reproducibility samples were again collected for a sampling time of 5 minutes (Table 3). Sample
collection was attempted at 6 sampling points around the residence. One sampling point was
voided because the particle count was too low (<10) leading to filters that were not well loaded.
Five soil samples were collected at the five sampling points where the RAFS was successfully
applied. A total of 18 filters was collected, three of which were voided due to low particle count.
Additional field measurements were taken as outlined in section 3.3.3.
Site A34
At this location the yard of the residence was covered in grass so for each sampling point a 12"
by 30" area was trimmed with shears, and a rake was used to loosen the soil before the RAFS
was applied. While preparing the sampling points, visible vermiculite was observed in the top
soil. Due to the high moisture content of the yard, once the sampling points were prepared the
top layer was allowed to dry out before the RAFS was applied. The sampling points were located
at the back, right side, and front of the house because the soil at the left of the house was water
soaked and muddy. Soil moisture content at the sampling points ranged from 3.5% to 8.5% at
one point and as high as 33.1% to 36% at another sampling point. When determining the sample
time, the first filter was removed after 5 minutes of operating the RAFS, the second filter was
removed after 10 minutes, and the third filter after 20 minutes. This was determined to be ideal
sample collection time for this location due to the variable moisture content of the soil. The
RAFS was applied at seven sampling points at this location, four of which were utilized for
11
-------
comparability testing and one additional sampling point for reproducibility testing. The
reproducibility samples were collected for five minutes as was done at the previous location. Soil
samples were collected from each of the sampling points. Additional field measurements were
taken as outlined in section 3.3.3.
Site A3 5
At the fourth location, the instrument was prepared for sample collection as outlined in section
3.3.1. The first sampling point was located in a horse shoe pit at the right side of the house where
vermiculite was visible. Due to the low soil moisture content and the particle count, the sampling
times selected were one minute for the first filter and 10 minutes sampling time for the two
additional filters. The RAFS was applied at 5 locations around the house. At four of the locations
comparability samples were collected, and in the additional location reproducibility samples
were collected for a five minute sampling period. Additional field measurements were taken as
outlined in section 3.3.3.
3.3.5 Activity Based Sampling (ABS)
ABS sampling was conducted by CDM, the contractor hired to conduct ABS throughout the
Libby, Montana area. For each sampling location, a low flow personal sampling pump with a
filter was attached to the individual conducting the ABS sampling. At each of the four locations
ABS was done by raking for a total of 20 minutes at a specific sampling point around the home
(Figure 6). When possible, the sampling point corresponded to a RAFS sampling point. There
was a deviation from the TQAP in the ABS analysis. The TQAP stated that ABS should be
conducted within 24 hours of the RAFS being applied at the home. However at one of the
locations due to the rainy weather and subsequent high moisture content of the soil, ABS could
not be conducted within 24 hrs of the RAFS. At this location, ABS was conducted nine days
after the RAFS was applied. The effect of this is expected to be minimal.
Figure 6. ABS sampling
12
-------
Table 3. RAFS sampling times used for each location and test parameter
Field Site
Site A3 1
Site A32
Site A34
Site A35
Sampling Objective
Comparability
Reproducibility
Comparability
Reproducibility
Comparability
Reproducibility
Comparability
Reproducibility
Sample collection
time
Filter 01 -5 min
Filter 02 -5 min
Filter 03 -5 min
Filter 01- 1 min
Filter 02 -5 min
Filter 03 -5 min
Filter 01 -5 min
Filter 02 -5 min
Filter 03 -5 min
Filter 01- 1 min
Filter 02- 10 min
Filter 03 -10 min
Filter 01 -5 min
Filter 02 -5 min
Filter 03 -5 min
Filter 01 -5 min
Filter 02- 10 min
Filter 03 -20 min
Filter 01 -5 min
Filter 02 -5 min
Filter 03 -5 min
Filter 01- 1 min
Filter 02- 10 min
Filter 03 - 10 min
3.4 Experimental Design - Laboratory Test
The purpose of the laboratory test was to measure the accuracy as well as variability/consistency of the
RAFS. This was accomplished by assessing the RAFS ability to release asbestos from soil as a function
of environmental conditions, specifically asbestos concentration in soil and soil moisture content. Two
different soil moisture levels were used: low and high. For the laboratory test, two RAFS were used. A
few minor deviations from the TQAP were implemented during the laboratory testing. The TQAP stated
that Chrysotile "A" Rhodesian Asbestos (0.1 g) would be used to amend the soil but due to the
unavailability of Chrysotile "A", a Chrysotile "B" laboratory standard was used (Appendix A). The
TQAP suggested that the moisture content for the low moisture content soil would be 5% and for the high
13
-------
moisture content soil would be 15%. However during testing, the low moisture content soil was found to
be between 9% and 12% and the high moisture content soil was found to be between 14% and 18%.
3.4.1 Wooden Frame and Soil Preparation
Initially the experiment was designed to be conducted in two, 4 ft by 4 ft wooden frames but due
to the limited availability of soil and sand and the realization that one 4 ft by 4 ft wooden frame
could incorporate the RAFS footprint 6 times, the size of the additional wooden frame was
reduced to 4 ft by 32 in. The reduction in size of the second wooden frame was a minor deviation
from the TQAP. Figure 7 shows the footprint of the RAFS in each wooden box.
R1-L3
R2-L3
R1-L2
R2-L2
Low Moisture Wooden Frame
R1-L1
R1-L2
R1-L3
High Moisture Wooden Frame
Figure 7. Locations of wooden frames and RAFS within tent (Rl and R2 = RAFS 1 and
RAFS 2 and LI, L2 and L3 refers to the three sampling points at which the RAFS was
applied)
Sand and soil in one part sand to two parts soil ratio was mixed in a cement mixer for 15 minutes
until homogenized (Figure 8a). After mixing the soil and sand, the soil moisture of the mixture
was measured at 8.1%. Three liters of water was added to the soil/sand mixture, and this was
mixed for an additional 15 minutes resulting in a moisture content of 13.5%. An additional 3 L
was added to the soil and sand mixture, and this was mixed for an additional 15 minutes resulting
in a soil moisture reading of approximately 21.5 %. Each wooden frame was lined with a poly
vinyl material for easy disposal of the asbestos containing soil after the experiment was complete
and to prevent the wooden frames from becoming contaminated. The wooden frames were filled
with the soil, and the soil was gently compressed until the surface was level (Figure 8b). Several
impressions of the footprint of the RAFS were made in each wooden frame to indicate where the
RAFS would be placed for each test. Figure 8c shows the soil being mixed, and the wooden
frames being packed.
14
-------
Figure 8. Soil and wooden frame preparation, a) Soil, sand and water being mixed, b)
Wooden frame being packed and leveled, c) RAFS footprint impressions
3.4.2 Asbestos Preparation
Approximately 0.1 g of Chrysotile "A" Rhodesian Asbestos standard obtained from Forensic
Analytical (Appendix A) was mixed into 200 mL of water in a volumetric flask and sonicated for
4 hours to separate and distribute the asbestos fibers throughout the water. Initially the asbestos
fibers were lumped together in the flask but after sonicating, the mixture was milky white
indicating that the asbestos fibers were distributed throughout the water. Figure 9 shows the
asbestos fibers being sonicated. The 200 ml was divided into two 100 ml volumetric flasks to
allow faster separation of the asbestos fibers. After sonicating, the asbestos fibers in water were
transferred to a typical 0.5 um nozzle spray bottle for application to the soil. This was a deviation
from the TQAP as the TQAP states the asbestos would be mixed with the soil. Spraying the
surface of the soil allowed better distribution and increased the chances of the asbestos being
detected in the soil. The asbestos solution was first sprayed onto a black surface to ensure that
the nozzle would not become clogged.
Figure 9. Asbestos fibers distributed in water and sonicated
15
-------
3.4.3 Accuracy Test
The accuracy of the sampler was verified by two methods
1) Measuring the asbestos releasability from soil using the RAFS in soil known to
contain asbestos.
2) Measuring the ability of the RAFS to release asbestos from soil at two different
moisture contents.
3.4.3.1 Varying Moisture Content
Two different moisture conditions were used for this test, low (5%) and high (15%). One
wooden frame contained soil of low moisture content, and the second and smaller wooden frame
contained soil of high moisture content. Where the RAFS was to be applied for this test, 25 mL
of the asbestos in water mixture was sprayed on to the surface of the footprint and allowed to dry
for approximately 30 minutes for the high moisture test and one hour for the low moisture test.
After the drying time, the moisture content of the soil at each of the RAFS footprint was
measured. The RAFS was prepared for collecting samples then loaded with three clean filters
and applied for measurement. The fan speed, rake power, and air sample volume was recorded.
3.4.3.2 Measuring the Releasability in Soil Known to Contain Asbestos
For the measurement of accuracy, additional RAFS application was not taken because for each
of the RAFS footprints and moisture contents, asbestos was added to the soil. Therefore the
RAFS ability to sample asbestos from soil containing asbestos could be assessed from any of its
applications.
3.4.4 Variability/Consistency
In the laboratory, two RAFS were used to measure the releasability of asbestos from soil known
to contain asbestos in order to assess whether RAFS sampling ability was the same between
instruments. Each sampler was applied three times within the 4 ft by 4 ft wooden frame
containing soil known to contain asbestos. The low moisture content soil was utilized for this
test. There were therefore six footprints on which the RAFS was applied for the
variability/consistency test: three for one of the RAFS labeled RAFS 1 and three for the
additional RAFS labeled RAFS 2. The RAFS was prepared for collecting samples as indicated in
Section 3.3.1. The fan speed, rake power, and sample volume collected were recorded and
remained constant for both samplers. Eight minutes was determined to be an ideal sampling time
for the low moisture samples and 23 minutes for the high moisture samples.
The first two samples taken were RAFS1-LOW-L1 and RAFS2-LOW-L2 (Figure 7). RAFS1
and RAFS 2 represent the two different RAFS. LOW and HIGH represent the moisture level in
the soil. The sampling point was labeled by LI, L2, or L3 since each RAFS was applied at three
sampling points. For the first application, the two RAFS were applied on the two side footprints
in the wooden frame containing the low moisture soil. These samples were used to determine the
length of sampling time for samples taken from the low moisture wooden frames. After five
minutes the filter at location 1 was removed and visually inspected. Due to low loading of the
16
-------
filter, sampling was continued for an additional three minutes at which point the filter was
sufficiently loaded. All additional low moisture samples were taken for 8 minutes.
3.5 Laboratory Methods
3.5.1 Soil Method
All field soil samples were analyzed by PLM 1000 method and the SRC Libby Method. This is a
deviation from the TQAP. The TQAP stated that the asbestos in the soil would be determined by
the PLM 1000 method. In addition to the PLM methods, the soil was also analyzed by the SRC
Libby Method. This method has been modified from the EPA Test Method "Method for the
Determination of Asbestos in Bulk Building Materials" (EPA/600/R-93/116) specifically for
Libby asbestos. This was necessary because the PLM method yielded no detects for all soil
samples. The soil samples from SiteA32 were analyzed at a second laboratory by the SRC
Libby method due to the lack of detection of asbestos by the first laboratory.
At Reservoir Analytical, samples were analyzed by EPA/600/R-93/116 with additional
preparation and methodology for soil samples according to SRCLIBBY- 03, Revision 2,
"Analysis of Asbestos Fibers in Soil by Polarized Light Microscopy and SRC-LIBBY-01,
Revision 2, "Qualitative Estimation of Asbestos in Coarse Soil by Visual Examination Using
Stereomicroscopy and Polarized Light Microscopy." Samples were sieved to separate coarse and
fine fractions. None of these samples contained a coarse fraction. The fine fraction was quartered
and ground before PLM examination.
3.5.2 Filter Analysis Method
3.5.2.1 Direct A nalysis
For direct analysis, quarter sections were excised from the sample filters collapsed in a solution
of dimethylformamide (DMF), glacial acetic acid, and deionized water (35:15:50) on a slide
warmer, etched in a low temperature plasma etcher for seven minutes, and evaporatively coated
with carbon. Subsections of the coated filters were mounted on 200-mesh copper TEM grids in
pure DMF in a modified Jaffe-wick apparatus for at least one hour followed by a brief acetone
rinse. The prepared grids were stored in a number of grid boxes. A laboratory filter blank was
prepared alongside the samples.
Analyses were conducted on a Philips CM12 TEM at 75-100 keV accelerating voltage and
~19,000x magnification. Ten grid openings were analyzed on each sample, leaving open the
option for analyses of additions openings at a later date. Raw data were recorded on National
Asbestos Data Entry Spreadsheets (NADES). The six regulated asbestos minerals are recorded
including Libby Amphiboles, other amphiboles, and non-asbestos mineral fibers.
All filters generated in the field were analyzed for asbestos by TEM direct transfer technique
using ISO Method 10312:1995. The target analytical sensitivity is 0.005 structure/cm3. The
aspect ratio for analysis is 3:1. All structures 0.5 jim or longer in length were quantified with the
following breakdown according to ranges by length: from 0.5 to 5.0 jim, between 5 jim and 10.0
|im, and longer than 10 jim. Ten grid openings were analyzed.
17
-------
3.5.3.2 Indirect Analysis
Analyzing samples by indirect analysis was a deviation from the TQAP. The TQAP stated that
samples would be analyzed by direct TEM analysis. However due to the low moisture content of
the soil at several homes during the field test, the filters were overloaded after only a short
sample collection time. The indirect analysis method allowed these overloaded samples to be
analyzed.
Each sample was prepared using the gravimetric technique. A representative subsample was
weighed, ashed for eight hours, and reweighed to determine the proportion of the organic
component. The ashed residue was ground in concentrated hydrochloric acid, dried, and
reweighed to determine the acid soluble component weight percentage. The residual material
was analyzed for asbestos using polarized light microscopy. Asbestos quantitation was
performed using the semi quantitative Point Count method following the general guidelines in
EPA Method 600/R-93/116. The analytical sensitivity for the method is calculated as the
asbestos concentration that results from one point counted in the analysis adjusted using the
residual weight of the sample. The limit of detection for this method was not determined.
18
-------
Table 4. Summary of performance parameters and testing frequency
Location
Field
Laboratory
Laboratory
(Continued)
Phase
1&3
1&3
2
2
Performance
Parameter
Reproducibility
Comparability
Accuracy
Variability and
Consistency
Objective
Determine the
reproducibility within the
RAFS during application at a
sampling point
Determine the ability of the
RAFS to measure the
releasability of asbestos from
soil at the same accuracy as
the EPA accepted method,
ABS.
Determine the ability of the
RAFS to measure the
releasability of asbestos from
soil that is known to contain
asbestos fibers.
Determine the consistency in
data obtained between two
different instruments
Variable
Asbestos
concentration on three
filters within the
RAFS
Asbestos
concentration obtained
by the average of the
concentration on three
filters within the
RAFS.
ABS filter asbestos
concentration
Average asbestos
concentration obtained
from the three filters
within the RAFS at
different soil moisture
contents
Average concentration
of asbestos from three
filters within the
RAFS of two RAFS
instruments.
Comparison Based On
Asbestos concentration on
the three filters produced at
each sampling point.
Soil samples, ABS and the
RAFS were applied at the
same sampling point and the
asbestos concentration
obtained from each will be
compared.
Whether or not asbestos is
detected by the RAFS in
soil known to contain
asbestos. Asbestos
concentration determined in
soil known to contain
asbestos at different soil
moisture contents
Average asbestos
concentration detected on
the three filters produced at
each sampling point from
two independent samplers at
the same location
Testing Frequency
Triplicate filters from at
least 4 sites, at Libby, MT
The RAFS was applied
five sampling points at
each home and ABS was
applied at one of the
sampling points
corresponding to a RAFS
sampling point at each
home
The RAFS was applied at
several locations within the
4ft by 4ft wooden frame
with soil
The RAFS was applied at
three different sampling
locations in soil known to
contain asbestos. A second
independent sampler was
also being applied in the
soil known to contain
asbestos.
19
-------
Chapter 4
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
QA/quality control (QC) procedures were performed in accordance with the QMP for the AMS
Center and the TQAP for this verification test. During testing there were five deviations from
the RAFS. The first deviation is discussed in section 3.6.3.2 and allowed overloaded filters to be
analyzed by the indirect methods instead of being voided. The second deviation is discussed in
section 3.3.5 and stated why ABS was not always conducted within 24 hrs of the RFAS being
applied at the sampling location. Deviation 3 in section 3.2.1 discussed the change in location of
the second field site; however a second field site was not tested during this ETV verification.
Deviation 4 discussed in sections 3.5 and 3.5.1 was a collection of minor deviations conducted
during the laboratory testing phase. The last deviation, outlined in section 3.5.1, discusses the
additional analysis of the soil samples. The soil samples were analyzed by both the PLM 1000
method and the SRC Libby Method by one laboratory and five of the soil samples were analyzed
by a different lab, Reservoir Analytical, with more experience in the SRC Libby Method.
4.1 Quality Control Samples
As part of the QC requirements for equipment blanks, open, or field blanks, and closed, or lot
blanks (LB), were taken at each of the location (homes) and analyzed by the same method as the
sample filters. Table 11 presents the analytical results of the blank samples showing that counts
were always below the analytical sensitivity of the method.
Table 5. Blank sample results
Site A31
Sample ID
LBMT-A31-L1-EB
LBMT-A31-L4-FB
LBMT-A31-L6-LB
RAFS Port
2
-
-
Flow (Lpm)
13.3
-
-
Time (min)
10
30 sec
-
Vol(L)
133
-
-
Type
EB
FB
LB
Total
Str/mm2
<3.8
<3.8
<3.8
Site A32
Sample ID
LBMT-A32-L1-EB
LBMT-A32-L4-FB
RAFS Port
2
-
Flow (Lpm)
13.4
-
Time (min)
10
-
Vol(L)
134
-
Type
EB
FB
TOTAL
<7.7
<7.7
LBMT-A32-L5-LB | - | - | - | | LB | <7.7
Site A34 Category IV (visible vermiculite)
Sample ID || RAFS Port
Flow (Lpm)
Time (min) || Vol (L)
Type
TOTAL
LBMT-A34-L1-EB || 2 || 13.3 || 10 || 133 || EB || <3.8
LBMT-A34-L4-FB II - II - II 30 sec || - || FB || <3.8
LBMT-A34-L6-LB II - II - II NA || - || LB || <3.8
Site A35 Category IV (visible vermiculite)
Sample ID
LBMT-A35-L1-EB
LBMT-A35-L2-FB
LBMT-A35-L5-LB
RAFS Port
2
-
-
Flow (Lpm)
13.3
-
-
Time (min)
10
30 sec
-
Vol(L)
133
-
-
Type
EB
FB
LB
TOTAL
<3.8
<3.8
<3.8
20
-------
4.2 Audits
4.2.1 Performance Evaluation Audit
Battelle did not conduct a performance evaluation audit because the laboratory was accredited by
the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) National Voluntary Laboratory
Accreditation Program (NVLAP) for the performance of Airborne Asbestos Analysis by
Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM).
4.2.2 Technical Systems Audit
A Technical Systems Audit (TSA) was conducted on September 15 and 30, 2010. The purpose
of the audit was to:
• Evaluate activities related to the verification testing of the asbestos sampler
• Review equipment calibration, materials, test setup, documentation and records
associated with the verification testing
• Verify that laboratory operations and sampler operation at Battelle Columbus were
compliant with TQAP requirements and that the required documentation was being
completed in real time to ensure data traceability.
There were five findings and one observation determined through the TSA audit.
All finding were found to have documented responses in the deviation reports and the RAFS
Manual.
4.2.3 Data Quality Audit
An Audit of Data Quality (ADQ) was conducted on September 20 and 21, 2011 for all
phases of testing. The ADQ was conducted by Mr. Zachary Willenberg, Battelle AMS Center
Quality Assurance Officer. A generic ADQ audit checklist was used to review the project
requirements defined in the Test/QA Plan (TQAP), Version 1.0, for Verification of TSA for
Verification of Releasable Asbestos Field Sampler dated August 2, 2010. The purpose of the
audit was to:
• Evaluate activities related to the verification testing of the asbestos sampler
• Review documentation and records associated with the verification testing
• Verify that laboratory operations and sampler operation were compliant with TQAP
requirements and that the required documentation was completed
• Verify that reported data for both laboratory and sampler operations were compliant with
the TQAP requirements.
The data were submitted on September 20, 2011, and the ADQ was conducted on
September 20-21, 2011, approximately one year after the data were collected. The audit
consisted of a review of the TQAP to identify data quality requirements and review of raw and
processed data. Raw data consisted of field data collection forms used to document testing
21
-------
events and one spreadsheet (Tables for report.xlsx). Processed data consisted of worksheets,
covering site information, soil moisture, field soil results, comparability, reproducibility, lab
results and field blanks. The audit reviewed the following data quality elements: collection of
reference method samples, quality control sample results, sample results, and documentation.
One hundred percent (100%) of the sample collection and quality control (QC) data were
reviewed; at least 10% of the data calculations were verified vs. the raw data.
22
-------
Chapter 5
Test Results
The RAFS TQAP described several statistical methods including standard deviation, ANOVA
and t-test that could be used to evaluate the reproducibility, comparability, variability and
consistency of the RAFS. However, due to the lack of detection of asbestos in both the soil and
filter samples statistical analysis of the data could not be completed.
5.1 Soil Results
At each of the sampling points in both the field (Table 6) and laboratory test (Table 7), soil
moisture readings were taken. Soil moisture content is critical when utilizing the RAFS that tests
the releasability of asbestos from soil within an acceptable range of < 35%. For all of the
sampling points the soil moisture content was less than 35%. Although in most cases more than 5
moisture content readings were taken, the relative standard deviation was not within the 5%
acceptance criteria set for the test. This was likely due to the heterogeneity of the soil causing
soil moisture content to vary in samples within the footprint of the RAFS.
Table 6. Soil moisture readings at Libby, Montana sampling locations
Field Site
Site A31
Site A32
Site A34
Site A35
Sampling
Point
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
LI
L2
L3
L5
L6
LI
L2
L3
L4
L5
LI
L2
L3
L4
L5
Soil Moisture Readings
1
5.1
2.7
2.2
3.6
4.6
2.7
4.6
7.6
7.6
3.3
7.1
20
21
31
33
4.6
7.1
8.5
7.1
9.0
2
5.6
1.7
2.2
6.1
3.6
2.7
5.1
8.1
9.6
2.6
7.1
21
13
32
31
12
6.6
19
8.5
9.0
3
6.6
1.7
2.7
5.1
4.6
2.2
6.6
9.0
8.9
2.7
3.5
18
14
24
26
16
4.6
22
13
11
4
3.6
4.6
2.2
2.7
3.6
4.1
6.6
11
7.6
3.3
8.1
22
16
31
32
15
5.6
9.0
6.6
10
5
3.6
2.2
2.8
1.7
3.6
2.7
7.1
11
8.2
4.3
5.6
19
18
31
31
6.1
7.6
10
7.6
9.0
Avg
4.9
2.6
2.4
3.8
4.0
2.9
6.0
9.1
8.4
3.2
6.3
20
16
30
31
11
6.3
14
8.6
9.5
StDev
1.3
1.2
0.30
1.8
0.55
0.72
1.1
1.3
0.87
0.68
1.8
1.5
3.2
3.4
2.7
5.2
1.2
6.3
2.6
0.71
RSD
27%
46%
13%
47%
14%
25%
18%
15%
10%
21%
28%
7.4%
20%
11%
8.7%
48%
19%
46%
30%
7.4%
23
-------
In the laboratory study the low moisture content soil ranged in moisture from 9.5% to 13% and
the high moisture content ranged from 13.5 % to 20.8% (Table 6). Variability in soil moisture
content occurred due to uneven drying of the soil after spraying with the asbestos fibers because
of the natural heterogeneity of the soil. Although the laboratory test was conducted in a control
setting with a soil created from a mixture of soil, sand and water the relative standard deviation
of the moisture content at one RAFS footprint was greater than the acceptance criteria of 5%.
However soil moisture content was always below the 35% threshold required for the RAFS.
Table 7. Soil moisture at each sampling point in laboratory study
Sample
Location
RAFS1-LOW- LI
RAFS1-LOW- L2
RAFS1-LOW- L3
RAFS2-LOW-L1
RAFS2-LOW- L2
RAFS2-LOW- L3
RAFS1-HIGH- LI
RAFS1-HIGH- L2
RAFS1-HIGH- L3
Soil Moisture
1
11
13
12
11
13
8.1
15
21
17
2
9.0
12
8.5
12
12
11
14
18
14
3
9.5
13
11
13
12
9.5
14
19
21
4
9.0
11
9.5
10
11
9.0
15
18
18
5
11
12
10
11
12
12
15
17
17
Average
9.8
12
10
11
12
9.8
15
19
18
StDev
0.91
0.61
1.1
1.3
0.74
1.5
0.88
1.5
2.3
RSD
9.3%
5.1%
11%
11%
6.2%
15%
6.0%
8.2%
13%
Before measuring the asbestos count on the filters the asbestos count was determined in the soil
samples from the field (Table 8) and laboratory samples (Table 9). If asbestos was detected in
the soil then the filters were analyzed. If the asbestos count in the soil was not detectable (ND) or
trace counts, the filters from the field samples were not analyzed.
24
-------
Table 8. Field test soil asbestos results
Sample ID
Sample
Description
Forensic Analysis
Method PLM
1000
Asbestos
Type Detected
Analytical
Sensitivity
Method
SRCLIBBY- 03
Method SRCLIBBY- 03
(LA) (OA) (Ch)
Site A31
LBIVrr-A31-L2-01-Soil
LBIVrr-A31-L3-01-Soil
LBIVrr-A31-L4-01-Soil
LBIVrr-A31-L5-01-Soil
LBIVrr-A31-L6-01-Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
<0.07%
ND
ND
ND
<0.08%
Actinolite
ND
ND
ND
Actinolite
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.06
0.08
ND
ND
ND
ND
Trace actinolite
Not analyzed
Site A32
LBIVrT-A32-L1-01-Soil
LBIVrT-A32-L2-01-Soil
LBIVrr-A32-L3-01-Soil
LBIVrT-A32-L5-01-Soil
LBIVTT-A32-L6-01-Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.06
0.07
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND ND ND
ND ND ND
ND ND ND
"remoliti ND ND
"remoliti ND ND
Site A34 - Category IV (visible vermiculite)
LBIVrr-A34-L1-01-Soil
LBIVrr-A34-L3-01-Soil
LBIVrT-A34-L4-01-Soil
LBIVrT-A34-L5-01-Soil
LBIVTT-A34-L6-01-Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
ND
ND
ND
ND
<0.07%
ND
ND
ND
ND
Actinolite
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.08
0.07
ND
ND
ND
Trace actinolite
Trace actinolite
Not analyzed
Site A35- Category IV (visible vermiculite)
LBIVrr-A35-L1-01-Soil
LBIVrr-A35-L2-01-Soil
LBIVrT-A35-L3-01-Soil
LBIVTT-A35-L4-01-Soil
LBIVrr-A35-L5-01-Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
Composite Soil
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.09
0.07
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Not analyzed
Notes
LA = Libby Amphibole OA = Other Amphibole Ch = Chysolite ND = None Detected
SRCLIBBY-03=EPA/600/R-93/116 modified for Libby asbestos
The laboratory soil samples were analyzed by both the PLM and Libby Method (Table 9) the
results of which were all non detect or at the analytical sensitivity of the instrument. Due to the
lack of detection of asbestos in the soil samples the filters were not analyzed for asbestos.
Although the RAFS may provide a more sensitive method for detecting asbestos in soil, due to
financial constraints on the project the corresponding filters were not analyzed.
25
-------
Table 9. Laboratory study soil results
Location
RAFS1-HIGH-L1
RAFS1-HIGH-L2
RAFS1-HIGH-L3
RAFS1-LOW-L1
RAFS1-LOW-L2
RAFS1-LOW-L3
RAFS2-LOW-L1
RAFS2-LOW-L2
RAFS2-LOW-L3
LAB-BLK-HIGH-SOIL
LAB-BLK-LOW-SOIL
PLM1000
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SRCLIBBY- 03
<0.06%crysotile
<0.06%crysotile
<0.06%crysotile
<0.05%crysotile
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analytical
Sensitivity
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.07
0.06
SRCLIBBY- 03 = EPA/600/R-93/116 modified for Libby asbestos
5.2 Comparability
The purpose of the comparability test was to compare the ability of the RAFS to detect asbestos
in soil relative to the reference method of ABS. Although analysis of soil indicated only trace
levels of asbestos, in a few samples the corresponding RAFS filters were analyzed for asbestos.
For all filter samples except one, asbestos was not detected above the analytical sensitivity. The
sample where asbestos was detected was as an ABS sample at the Site A32 at 0.32 f/cc.
5.3 Reproducibility
Reproducibility was evaluated by comparing the asbestos counts detected in each of the three
filters obtained at each sampling point. For the reproducibility test only two filters were analyzed
to reduce cost of the analysis. The results of the two filters were compared to determine if the
RAFS sample ports were reproducible. Due to the fact that most of the data received were at or
below the analytical sensitivity statistics could not be conducted on the data.
5.4 Variability/Consistency and Accuracy
These parameters were to be evaluated during the laboratory study. However since the filters
were not analyzed these parameters could not be evaluated. The laboratory filter samples were
not analyzed because soil sample analysis was not able to detect the Chrysotile A asbestos fibers.
Although it may be possible for the RAFS to trap fibers on the filters that were not detected in
26
-------
the soil, financial constraints on the project prevented the filters from being analyzed.
Table 10. Comparability test results from each of the locations and sampling points
Site A31
Sample ID
LBMT-A31-L2-01
LBMT-A31-L2-02
LBMT-A31-L2-03
ABS
RAFS
Port
1
2
3
_
Flow
(Lpm)
13.8
13.3
13.5
4.95
Time
(min)
5
5
5
20
Vol (L)
68.9
66.7
67.4
99.0
TOTAL
(structures/cc)
0.022
0.022
0.022
<0.015
>5 jim
0.022
0.022
0.022
O.015
Analytical
Sensitivity
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.015
Site A32
LBMT-A32-L3-01
LBMT-A32-L3-02
LBMT-A32-L3-03
ABS
1
2
3
_
13.5
13.4
13.6
4.54
5
5
5
19
67.5
67.1
67.8
86.3
<0.058
0.058
<0.058
0.316
0.058
O.058
O.058
0.136
0.058
0.058
0.058
0.045
Site A34 - Category IV (visible vermiculite)
LBMT-A34-L3-01
LBMT-A34-L3-02
LBMT-A34-L3-03
ABS
1
2
3
_
13.6
13.3
13.4
4.04
5
5
5
20
68.0
66.6
67.1
80.8
<0.022
<0.022
O.022
0.018
0.022
0.022
O.022
0.018
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.018
Site A35- Category IV (visible vermiculite)
LBMT-A35-L5-01
LBMT-A35-L5-02
LBMT-A35-L5-03
ABS
1
2
3
-
13.6
13.3
13.8
4.86
5
5
5
20
68.2
66.5
69.1
97.2
0.022
O.022
O.021
O.015
0.022
O.022
O.021
O.015
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.015
RPD
-138%
27
-------
Table 11. Results of reproducibility testing in the field
Site A31
Sample ID
LBMT-A31-L3-01
LBMT-A31-L3-02
LBMT-A31-L4-01
LBMT-A31-L4-02
LBMT-A31-L5-01
LBMT-A31-L5-02
LBMT-A31-L6-01
LBMT-A31-L6-02
RAFS
Port
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Flow
(Lpm)
13.8
13.3
13.8
13.3
13.8
13.3
13.8
13.3
Time
(min)
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
Vol (L)
13.8
133
13.8
133
13.8
133
13.8
133
Type
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
TOTAL
<0.1075
<0.0111
<0.1075
<0.0111
<0.1075
<0.0111
<0.1075
0.1330
>5u.m
<0.1075
<0.0111
<0.1075
<0.0111
<0.1075
<0.0111
<0.1075
0.1000
Analytical
Sensitivity
0.1075
0.0111
0.1075
0.0111
0.1075
0.0111
0.1075
0.0111
Site A32
Sample ID
LBMT-A32-L1-01
LBMT-A32-L1-02
LBMT-A32-L1-03
LBMT-A32-L2-01
LBMT-A32-L2-02
LBMT-A32-L2-03
LBMT-A32-L5-01
LBMT-A32-L5-02
LBMT-A32-L5-03
LBMT-A32-L6-01
LBMT-A32-L6-02
LBMT-A32-L6-03
RAFS
Port
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Flow
(Lpm)
13.5
13.4
13.6
13.5
13.4
13.6
13.5
13.4
13.6
13.5
13.4
13.6
Time
(min)
1
10
10
1
10
10
1
10
10
1
10
10
Vol (L)
13.5
161
163
13.5
161
163
13.5
148
149
13.5
161
163
Type
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
TOTAL
<0.2193
<0.0908
-
<0.2193
<0.0242
-
<0.2193
<0.0264
0.2193
0.0968
>5u.m
<0.2193
<0.0908
-
<0.2193
<0.0242
-
<0.2193
<0.0264
0.2193
0.0242
Analytical
Sensitivity
0.2193
0.0908
-
0.2193
0.0242
-
0.2193
0.0264
0.2193
0.0240
Site A34 - Category IV (visible vermiculite)
Sample ID
LBMT-A34-L1-01
LBMT-A34-L1-03
LBMT-A34-L4-01
LBMT-A34-L4-03
LBMT-A34-L5-01
LBMT-A34-L5-03
LBMT-A34-L6-01
LBMT-A34-L6-03
RAFS
Port
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
Flow
(Lpm)
13.6
13.4
13.6
13.4
13.6
13.4
13.6
13.4
Time
(min)
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
Vol (L)
68.0
268
68.0
268
68.0
268
68.0
268
Type
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
TOTAL
0.0220
0.0055
<0.0220
0.0170
<0.0220
<0.0055
<0.0220
<0.0055
>5u.m
0.0220
0.0055
<0.0220
0.0055
<0.0220
<0.0055
<0.0220
<0.0055
Analytical
Sensitivity
0.0220
0.0055
0.0220
0.0055
0.0220
0.0055
0.0220
0.0055
Site A35- Category IV (visible vermiculite)
Sample ID
LBMT-A35-L1-01
LBMT-A35-L1-02
LBMT-A35-L2-01
LBMT-A35-L2-02
LBMT-A35-L3-01
LBMT-A35-L3-02
LBMT-A35-L4-01
LBMT-A35-L4-02
RAFS
Port
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Flow
(Lpm)
13.6
13.3
13.6
13.3
13.6
13.3
13.6
13.3
Time
(min)
1
10
1
10
2
10
1
10
Vol (L)
13.6
133
13.6
133
27.3
133
13.6
133
Type
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
TOTAL
<0.110
<0.011
<0.110
<0.110
<0.054
<0.022
<0.110
<0.011
>5u.m
<0.110
<0.011
<0.110
<0.011
<0.054
<0.022
<0.110
<0.011
Analytical
Sensitivity
0.110
0.011
0.110
0.011
0.054
0.011
0.109
0.011
28
-------
5.5 Operational Factors
The operational factors analyzed were ease of use, training, and sustainability (sampling time,
waste produced, and the amount of protective equipment required by the individual operating the
instrument). The VTC found that the RAFS was easy to use. The VTC was trained in the field by
John Kominsky of EQM to clean and use the RAFS. The RAFS was assembled in the field and
powered on. To operate the RAFS a source of electricity was required. For this verification test a
generator was taken to the field. The controls used to operate the RAFS were easy to use and
read. Following a 30 minute training, the VTC was comfortable operating the RAFS. The RAFS
was 4 feet long by 2 feet wide and 30 inches tall and could be carried by one person (Figure 10).
Minimal waste was produced by using the RAFS. The main waste material was lint free paper
towels used to clean the RAFS before use. Although PPE was not required when using the RAFS
because of the EPA level of protection required, PPE was used at several of the locations due to
the EPA requirements post EPA testing of the asbestos counts at the locations.
Figure 10. RAFS being transported from sampling point to sampling point by one
individual
29
-------
Chapter 6
Performance Summary
The performance of the RAFS was evaluated for its reproducibility, comparability, accuracy and
variability/consistency. Verification tests were conducted in two phases, field and laboratory
tests. During the field tests the performance parameters of reproducibility and comparability
were tested. The field tests were conducted at one field site in Libby, Montana. The verification
parameters accuracy and variability/consistency were tested during the second phase of testing in
the laboratory. The reference method for this verification test was ABS.
Comparability
The comparability tests for the RAFS were conducted at four locations which corresponded to
the yards of four homes in Libby Montana. The RAFS was applied at five sampling points
around the home. At each sampling point three filters were used to obtain samples. The reference
method ABS involved an individual raking for 20 minutes while wearing a personal sampling
pump. The asbestos counts on the filters of the RAFS were compared to the asbestos counts in
the filter from the ABS sampling. In most cases, the asbestos counts obtained from both the ABS
and RAFS were below or at the analytical sensitivity of the method making it impossible to make
a statistical comparison between the RAFS and ABS data. Since asbestos fibers were detected at
0.32 structures/cc from the ABS sample at Site A32 during a sampling time of 20 minutes while
the RAFS filters reported non detects this may indicate that the ABS sampling had a higher
sensitivity, However it must be taken into consideration that the ABS sampling was conducted
over a much wider area than the footprint of the RAFS and involved raking which generated a
large amount of dust particles to pass through the filter.
Reproducibility
A RAFS sampler is able to take triplicate samples. The reproducibility parameter was used to
compare the results of the three filter samples taken during one application of the RAFS. Similar
to the comparability test, the asbestos counts on the filters were below or at the analytical
sensitivity of the method making it impossible to make a statistical comparison between the
RAFS and ABS data.
Accuracy and Variability and Consistency
Laboratory tests were conducted to determine the accuracy and variability and consistency of the
RAFS sampler. However due to the lack of detection of asbestos in the soil and financial
constraints on the project the filters were not analyzed.
Operational Factors
The VTC found the RAFS easy to use and transport. The waste products generated while using
the RAFS was minimal. Although PPE was not required to operate the RAFS, due to the EPA
level of protection required for the sites being sampled PPE was used.
There are several improvements that could be made to the field and laboratory experimental
design that would yield better results. These include:
1) Typically ABS is conducted for 60 to 120 minutes as recommended in the EPA SOP for
ABS, however during this verification testing ABS was conducted for 20 minutes. At a
30
-------
20 minute sampling adequate air may not have flowed through the filter to provide
analytical sensitivity. A longer ABS sampling time may have yielded fewer none detects
and results that could be statistically interpreted.
2) Preparation of the asbestos laboratory standard for soil application in the laboratory test
involved sonication for 4 hours to suspend the asbestos fibers in the water. This agitation
of the asbestos fibers may have broken the fibers into fragments that were too small to be
detected by the TEM and PLM method. Although spraying asbestos suspended in water
is a method used to apply asbestos to soil. The quantity did not result in high enough
counts of asbestos to be detected in soil Asbestos at O.lg was dissolved in 200 ml water
and 25 ml sprayed onto the RAFS footprint 150 in2. The sensitivity of the analysis
method was 0.005 structures/cm3. The amount of asbestos solution sprayed onto the
RAFS footprint would not have provided the necessary asbestos structures to meet the
analytical sensitivity.
3) The indirect TEM method (ISO 13794) instead of the indirect PLM method should have
been used to analyze the overloaded samples for greater comparability with the direct
TEM analysis of filters.
4) Counting more than 10 grids would provide a higher sensitivity but due to financial
constraints on the project only 10 grids were sampled.
31
-------
Chapter 7
References
U.S. EPA, Environmental Technology Verification Program Quality Management Plan, EPA
Report No: 600/R-08/009 EPA/600/R-03/021, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Cincinnati, Ohio, January 2008.
Battelle, Quality Management Plan for the ETV Advanced Monitoring Systems Center, Version
7.0, U.S. EPA Environmental Technology Verification Program, prepared by Battelle,
Columbus, Ohio, November 2008.
Battelle, Test/QA Plan for Verification of Releasable Asbestos Field Sampler U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, August 2010.
32
-------
Appendix A
RAFS Field and Laboratory Data Sheets
33
-------
Area: Location: M RH: Ml-M %
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts): 'Sun'w-f
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency): "!TM
/O
/a 54
(ta
6T S21
Stirt
Flow
Cemmente
Vane Anemometer
feet/minute
Reading 1 Reading 2 Reading 3 Reading 4 Reading 5 >'•',
sW
Split #
Sample ID
Comments
-------
_j _, .
IV 1 1
^
Date:
Tech:
GPS:
Altitude:
w /is
feef
•t mles/hr Bar Press: I"7 ¥8
Dew Pt: r? • o
Test Qualifier:
Area: ^A, Location: £ RH: ;
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts): ^w»nv) ^
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency):
Temp:
-------
Area: "£*< Location; £. (,, RH;
Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency):
Temp:
i »\ ni(IB^^W>^^^
eading 1 Reading 2 Reading 3 ;Reading 4 Reading 5']: ,* ;,•-;;';''" f\,vV '•;•'';, , V v,• ,1 Split* 1 "" Sample ID
~ "~'' '•''''"'''' ' —c c-
U.
Comments
-------
Area; v Location:
Weathsr Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency):
F WindVel
Direction
S"»-\\ r
m/es//7r Bar Press:
Dew Pt:
l&iiii1!^^ j.i^^p!|g!i:cfe^n§:(';>'^:!:-S'::x' •••:• !::''";-p'" :^::fe;W
Reading 2 Readings Reading 4 Reading 5 |,C!' ':'A^' '' .•;;;''-v-;Sy|;i?.'---.-v; '?•• j Split* I Sample ID " ^* |
—',;•';:'",: •:- ;/','!;.v'v'''',;'"•*I'1'w" •••'/ ' c
ASM
,,a
U/w^r ^4 <»acrL
Comments
\Mck^ Vc^»V^^^
SU\
' ' a
-------
^y _,
1 X 1.
llli^^
Date:
Tech;
GPS: N
W llf.
Altitude: 7
fee/
Area; ^ Location: Lf RH; H*H %
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts): ^unftl
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soli consistency): LtoSt.»
Temp:
WindVel:
Direction:
m/es^r
Bar Press:
DewPt:
inches of Hg
°F
Test Qualifier:
Sample
• ID
RAFS
Unit'Nt
Rofometer,
Pump ft
Rotometftr Reading
Start
(Urn)-
stop :
'(Urn)-
..Start;
Count-.
Agitator Uala
Stop..
Court
Cycle
:Tfme-{sV
Depth
(inches)
Time
Start
Stop
Comments
RTI
Filter
ID
f
b'i.
o
o
o
Ya
0
2.0
10
if S21
Sttrt
Stop
Flow
RatefUro)
Commtnt*
Vane Anemometer
1 :to
feet/minute
As 5 Li-
»-olX,
Reading
Hi,
Reading 2
\1.O
iading 3 Reading4 Reading 5 '..•'''^'X• '3 ;;;>^C'V" %'i;>^^:'l
15-H
Split #
Sample ID
Comments
-------
:Area: ^LC) Location: f.lL
Weather Phenomena (e g. rain, wind
toca|on Description ie,g. vegetation, soil consistency):
WindVel:C*!*K
Direction: —
Bar Press:
DewPt:
inchesofHg
°F
u t \flfr\OMJ- ...
Test Qualifier:
Sample
10
MAPS
UnttNi
Rotometer,
Pump te
Rotomeier Reading
Start
(Urn)
Stop
(Urn)
Start
Court
^Agitator Data
Stop,
Count' ,
Cycle
Time (s)
Depth
(inches)
Time
Start
Stop
Comments
RTI
Filter
ID
UNO-
U-
MetOne 61521 Filename
'Start
l®
.\00fe
Stop
lo'.^t
t-o«.
Comments
Vane Anemometer
-------
HRTI
Area: /*$f Location: l£ RH-
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency):
inches of Hg
°F
Test Qualifier:
Reading 1
Reading 2
/•';>>••/ 'X-•.•>;•;.-<,>*.,,YV,\.".I-V, ;•'. '.v v, \r<- '.•,.•,•'.',••.•>'•?•••!.'•.
Mi..'.?:X!...•'•.••••;; •-.••.'.'•'- •>"' ;^'":;- ..v,;-;.:',-..^'^,.;; ''UJsllSa
2 Readings Reading4 Readings •;,'''„'>;(',., ';• ^i';;';'v':'"^'',•':'i'A^''• Split*
#MiQ^^ '"" "'r,'.'••'? :;'"'-i/ "
Sample ID
Comments
-------
—^ jj ^_ , ,;;^^pyffe;0
• Bfl I/V 1 1. ;:/'^eM4i;tiApls
;^j^'|^pt|^j^Wfi^lr^:,};; *J{. £$•!,;.<
Area: A 35 Location: \^^ RH: L
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts): ^uwvA
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency):
Sample •
IB
Lfe**T A3 5 LH-OV
IfruAT ^35-i.H-fll
L8.MT ASS tH 03
. ,.- ST $21
UA* t JT, ^T^ ^^
N ^3?33fc
W US. S40^«
7.t^€ feef
," >\' s /'V^.;;';^;;;:^-^^,/-:^^-;' ^^••.-V':;v;-'; :^'-i>i:rfri;;;:\;AV;^'.;;.,5;:r.{;.-.v;^
',' .:.:^,!-V; .;?,#• •tf^-'&^rt--:: •''^^^•^••'•';''-'^:^:'':-:;-v^ \?;<:«^'-l\:;-::i\".-':'.*'!>-
!^C| 9^v Temp: ^^ / °F WindVe!:^?,D m/es//7r Bar Press: 3*Je££ inches of Hg
Direction: p DewPt: °F
P^ , C«f^^V^ j t fcck.v 5o A Test Qualifier:
Rotorneter,
Pumpte
\
^
s
- 'Step-
if-«5
Rotorneter Reading
' Start
.(Urn)
ij.41
,t1°
. flow
_3-o,t.
SdrtioJsit^Ryfeti <::•'•'?*: ,-':•., ''V'- .
Reading 1 Reading 2 Reading 3
"7.1 $.£ 13.0
Reading 4
U i O
Reading 5
7-6
^Sl^fSifepie'fAloi/^rttta^t?^1 .-'.- -•'.'•.,V\:-'.^!' ;;'•
'^4,:l'^:';;;'-''
(kis 'Pltww c/tcov.. Q^^^H
- f° *
Ti\V/ 01 A|K. ^ 6fc r,«^i.
Stop
.(Urn)
\5.s?
\S.S1
Rk11
Agitator Data
• ''Start
Count
G
O
€>
• Step
Count
3L.
If
\«\
• •' Cycle.
Time (s)
Depth •
(inches)
f/j
I/
%
Time
• Start
moo
IfvOC?
fl 00
Stop
II *of
UU
im
' ' • -.Comments ^ '.
$3S?if5i
','-'" '•".'' ' .,
Split#
1
2
3
4
5
Sample ID
t^r AX^ bH «OA ^
tlAcr A^J M ^^ <;
RTI
Comments Filter
ID
^ **v^ -^
— J p. ,
f i ~
VaneAntmomiter
y>PT feet/minute
ft;S<;;S;liv;MS^^^
^;A••y:.••r^^.&.>;^;r;;;v^i•>^•w••rl«:•>T>v,^c^;/
*Sii^^j;^|^;^^^S^Ji?ferE^
^?^i'p.!€i®4;aSS®^p^s^^H;-
Comments
4
>*»\
vda
-------
RTI
AiRSAtlNG A
' Libby Operable iw-; ?;•»,
Area; fVS? Location; i5 RH;
Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soj^c^j^l-^r
Sample
ID
oi
RAFS
UnitNs
~r-
I* I
MetOne GT 521 filename
Start Stot-
Soii'Moistlire R«wiing$
Readma 2
. (?
Reading 3
I0£
H
7 5".<
Wind Vei: /
Direction: £T
lilK'K>/lll fa i I'lt'f'v
_©_JJL?
^_L(i
i
*^^^- j
3/6
HI^'"
-------
jya 3 AMPEJNC /,?, D ftSTKUMfc-NT DATA COLLECTION FORM
; Date:
[
I Tech:
i
i GPS:
Altitude:
Area:
| Location: L~\ fi'H f £ '7 '/e
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wid gusts). S***j#»if-
Location Description (e.g. vecj in » i - « •• i i
Sample.
ID
it \
Puil.tl.S
MetOne GT 521 Fllenami,-
U-QK.
„
i '! t 3 0,)
SofrMQlsturg-Readings
Reading 1 Reading 2
Additional Sample Period ComtrKJM:.
0*1-
i*»
Tem!»:
WirdVel:
Direction;
Ai^J5orDa;,r~"
) Mles/hr Bar Press: 27'
Dew Pt:
inches of Hg
T
Test Qualifier
rv=t
TiltJ jol I IC'K»>'
ime
Start ( Stop
-•h:
ii»fC' »'! ,'itii
Comments
UU.Y
Comments
A, if
Alii **
RTI
Filter
ID
Vane Anemometer
^9l§f'!]S!e,lr?cy!3JI.
r"i5f)i?i 4 T"~ "" "&mpie~0
Comments
-------
B RT !
Sampling Condition Bararr
Area: *2>G Location
Weather Phenomena (e ij rair
Location Description (e g « .ji1
Sample
ID
LfjHT 4^4 -I/I-*
LfcAVT
L$M
• Ait -L-v-o
t fcJ(.-
'i , V ' i,
Reading 2 Reacii irj
*5.\ H-l
:
Additional Sample Period Comn
s(.-m
t\ \f n
\AV H \«»\j
1 2f i.
Temp, ^(. <"
k j*-*^ ^ IJw****
1 Ri.JOilHj !
Hup nd't
1 i1 - C uiit
Q.. .
o
T
WindVei:
D.rcdicn
,
' •
,
1
Z ' 5" mles/hr
Ai|ii«iic»r Data
^
r-r
it.r
„,.„*„„„, 1 ™
I
l/1, Of
T, re 13)
-*>
Commute
Deotf-
t/¥
''i. ,
V«f
~
Date:
Tech:
GPS:
Altitude:
^/sAo
i&^nv^t.^
N V^ZVTOO
w ^(s. s^sr
7^1 *f ' feef
,
Bar Press: Z-?'S<^ inches of Hg
Dew Pt: CF
Te&t Qualifier:
Time1
Start
'!fZ5
—.
Stop
uH5|o
—
^,v«t-
RTI
Comments Filter
ID
( i»^«i/l ^"^'"'HflA
t O ** i^* \ ^«*
u ^r^; ^
CfuM B/*n4
Vane Anemometer
"&T"* __^f *£_ fwt/minulK
"jsr ^»r •
God Sample Tracking .
f "'," l"| B "
'; 1
I }
j__
J.smple !D
L^Av.-T A^fo L.I
L^-r
-*s^-
L-0\ Sg
^^
1 5 T
SKr\
_ Comme "its
^J
-------
g— , r_^ A;«ri s^pLlNg, AND IMS'?
' Kl rV i 1 Ktl-rAaABlfc ASt«T£T03 FP
Sampling Condition 'Param*? *) t-
Area; "S<4
Weather Phenomena
Location Description
Sample
ID
Lfew-r- **.-»"
l^M.T
,tS<^
'-AU-
r-A\L»-
Location; *£, RH ^.f
(eg mi ." ' - <^A«\U
(e_ c) » ( u l)i! , ^ Tp-v'V
L5^
1
1 a
JSr ^ |
iNl ' ^7
, C
1
1
MetOne GT 521 Filename
LtT AFV0-U
RilMrINT DATA OOlLI;Cf,'C
•f Temjj; ^|. f
N
or
liUtOUltetol fi'J idlft) | MI,ftk.H
S ', t
i, Mi 1
1*1 ^\f.
-
1 . "
^6 : iiap ; ftoh^m
' i
C>^
Soil, Moisture- Readings
Reading 1
K
Reading 1
7-1
Reauno ,J.
(r\
'ii
-------
hf)i'';:' I '-"I'il^1 -8 i't
c A^;Fi;NC AND INSTRUMENT DATA COtU
Aia eni»
^mpling-Conjd[tjonPanj)y>'aj.i|i:
Area: ^>^> Location:
Weather Phenomena (e ,j ra.i ,i<,
Location Description (»-g <_i\ \
Sample
10
MetOne 6T 521 Filename
So|,MQlsturelReadlrigS'
Reading 1 Reading 2
Addltional:Safnple Period Comtn-.tnb.
Date:
1 Tech:
i GPS:
.1 Altitude:
Temp,
Wind Vel:
D retuort
mies/hr Bar Press:
Dew Pt;
inchosofHg
°F
Test
.._
™
L
I.
Q?
f " ' " " KutumoM K ^(Lily f '
,-,.«a , ,H :-THla ,;-
1 , i '"•• • riifiiw us
9^}. i ^
i
141 ' 5
i
fe ;tr
i% .\i
\\ *!*..
• j
•"• ; -•' ;;
AT-
i
( - - -. lij-.m =- . . — ,.. ". f •.. ,,, -, <«,««.,«,, a, "•".
e ' p i 5 ait
1 i"' i ',. UK;
i"
[0.5.
; 0,5
!*.*
i
i
\
i . . . . L . .
' "^ -• '
;\i,j,4iiii)i' Data
Slop
COL, t
L
C'f:.e hc'ol't
TdT.e «l
^, ™~
ComnKnfS'
IflC^ff'j'
«««...», ~- ~
Time
•start St
"^kji|
_^S
i
,
1
— . « :
omments
Kli
Filter
ID
Vane Anemometer
feet/minute
_l
^te%r
-ox
Comments
-------
Area:^f Location: j RH:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency):
Bar Press: ^-7-74 inches of Hg
Dew R: °F
Test Qualifier:
Sample
ID.
Unit*;
Rotometeiv
Pump Nfi ;
Mometer Reading
«nm».i.irtin.i» niinm wi mil »J, iJgm.i
.Start '
Count
AgitaforData
Stop
Count
'Cycle'
Tbefs)
Depth
Tim«
.Start ;'
V Stop •
Comments
RTI
Filter
ID
l~et
\
.'o 8
is/ F
IS-At
MetOne GT 521 Filename
Start
Stop
Flow
Rate(L/m)
Comments
'..f»i |jc-og |tg'(j t-T-o ^1 ^-^>:.;$;^:*-:V:
Sollfeyii'^ai^''^-'''^^
Reao-ng 1 |Read-pg 2 jReading 3 iReadipg 4 |Readl^^: ;'^-f^i%^'^ ^'^^5ampleE|V'" ^ * " T ''' '^ ''*'' '''" "' ''''""comments ' ''''''' '"'' '' " '"''
*t i a f A i *» K '"?. •'•-'**'"• *lii-s5i'*-u>-1--.*i''f5>ki"'i'^'" . I ! fl
•7-t ^-^ A. I S-^> 7.,
Ik
•^
i ov v.^\^e*-K«4X
*• s
JL ail
Ale <^t\ w^l-fti^A ^iVon *
-------
.
^^y^.'^r^i'; ;^>v\*"B::^\^:;o^ r:5:;\">>
^^^::'"v;''';;:'^::----^^r^ '"^v^^;^;;-.^.-:-:"T:::«'
Altitude:
feef
Area: ' « Location1 ... RH;
Weather Phenomena (eg rain, wind gusts)' \ • ' ''•'•' ''
Location Description (e g. vegetation, soi! consistency):
Temp: '/,,, , t: °F
WindVel:
Direction:
mles/hr Bar Press: '" ' *•' inches of Hg
Dew Pt: °F
Test Qualifier: Yr^ «"%<£*i* C.
Sample
ID
RAFS
UnitNt
Rptometer,
Pump life
RptometerJReading
. Start •
' (Urn)
Stop
• Start
Count
' Count
, Cycle
Time (s)
(inches)
Tims
Start
Stop
Comments
RTI
Filter
ID
ll-iM
MetOne GT 521 Fi
Start
stop
Flow
Rate f Urn)
Comment*
Vane Anemometer
feet/minute
f .Hf; :f f< ";v^v^:^^^^^^
Readirg3 Readmit Readies \::;V'V'^'^;/-r:\'^ Sample ID'"' [' '" '" "' Comments'
..y ..fe'** ..J. ?>Cj . ',ii7?vSvV-"i*''t
-------
Area; ArSI Location. 3, RH:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description (e.g vegetation, soi' ^onsistercy)
CfV*/
v
WindVe!:
Direction;
m/es//?r Bar Press:
DewPt;
inches of Hg
°F
Test Qualifier:
Sgunple /•'•.•/ ,••'••''
•.MD"v:;'; '.'
' Unit Ni";
pptpmrty Reading:
'Start',:
•:,:-' Start
• 'Count'
Agitator D A ,
'Stop,/
Count'
'(inches) -
/•.'/••"Comments
'' Rfl
. Fitter'
.'ID'-
Ife
14
"
2X.cc*>
LiM.
JMl
tf
/Q Xk.»t
^1
05
15
-------
• i^-'''T*v,:"'•,:;• .*-5 V":-^'.'""'j
** '•*'<$,•, '* V" v;C^Y-;;^«V' ^'^^^^^'^^/"^rJl^^;r!^:!
1 N ' i '? r- -\ i i u N \ t .rtCU';
Date:
Tech:
GPS:
Temp:
Area: t^«i Location: ^tJ RH; UJ.L %
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts): ^^,U*f 0{m*4^
Location Description (e g vegetation, sci- consistency): >*-f ^ o
-------
K3RTI
; \ i H '\ \ i i • i N \ i
i -•>,?*' »*•"**?? 'U .'J' VifC« CSI'T'" «•»,'•*• , »?.< V"" -.<,. • "
*•'•' 'V•'"'"'lv.".' * '"?'- '' lTv,r"^""*'":";'-''-**1 C;*i:iz''ir^""rVV'1''.X''l*vVl1v.\'^.*""1"1' *'""'
",', "; ",':"--,'?i-;*Ct~'.-_>"'*,,ft1"" i :•>'•: vt" -,r' S^'^jf^^t/;'''''? ftV 1",\~-l\'^^"4<* - "'^\' '"
;Tv7:>>'S^^t^S&#M5^^^^
Date: 8/Z/fQ
GPS: N
w
Altitude:
feet
Ares: £^\ Location: L5 RH:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts): £*«•**•
jLocation Description ^e.jyegeia'ion.soH'.xipsistency).
WindVel:
Direction:
\%V
m/es/hr Bar Press: Z^3M inches of Hg
^ DewPt: °F
Test Qualifier:
Sample-', '',' .. : '
• ID '. •''•.-.:i •:.
- (Mn)""
':;,stop
'. Start'»,
Courtt-
'• 'Agitator pate.
.Stop'",'
Count':
.Cycle;
'
/, 'Time-' ' /
'Start',
. Stop
Comments
RT!
Filter
ID
ol
MetOne QT 521 Filename '•'.;
"..Start^.
".'Stop'"
'.Comments .'•'•.••„''.-'•''.:
Varie Anwometer
ijj
>^
t«*^O
I ^«^. s^». v^ ^^
£*«
feet/minute
-------
Area: ^V Location:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts): S*1****
Location Description ie g vegetat'oti. so;; ivo'isistency):
Temp:
°F Wind Vel:
Direction:
mles/hr Bar Press: Z.*-"?f inches of Hg
Dew R: °F
Test Qualifier:
Sample', :,! '."
'.' ID . -'
' RAPS'
Rotom8ter,;'
Rotometer Rsadfrig
:,/Start
•' 'Count
'Stop . •
'Count
Cycle
Time (s)
• (inches)
. • Start -
'.' Stop
Comments
•'..KIT.
Filter
ID
U,
u.
tt
MetOne 61 §21 Filename
t \
>•«/•*
-------
£rea: U 2- Location: { RH:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts)
Location Description (6,13. vegetation soli '''insistency):
Temp:
Xr
Wind Veh J. Q
Direction: it
mtes//ir
Bar Press:
Dew Pt:
inches of Hg
°F
Test Qualifier:
Sample ' ,.
RAFS':
UnltNt
Rotoifteter Reading
Start,
'•"{Urn)
• stop
Start .
Court
Agitator Drta
Stop
Count
Timefs)
P^plh •
(inches)
Time •
Start--
stop
Comments
RTI'
Filter
ID
fy | «-f
c;
O
M-»"'.
41
£.
2.
vfe
T. 3.2
A/ •
to.
'•"
-------
K 'V \ ' ! t J N \
.'.""V " .">"7;"r;.p ...i...;;,,.,^,..^..,, .,.,,,„.,;,,; . .!.,,.,.,,» ;.)...,,...„,,.„,,.„„,,,.. y..,;,...,—.,„.,,..,...„.,,;.„,,,„ ,,.
"' ' '•''''*', ,tj| :>"'V #>'>*& -X. ?--;-;,v-i,":"•', ^%^-;; ^l^i??''-,-.1,!-,!';-5,1^
^W'JMll^lJ^^.^ S':'-5 ;?;l|:"l;C
%;r';^ ;''^^;,,' ^°v*c^yS^t|%|S^i ;^.",, ^^i^^:
^"rC^'vf'^.- ;i;)•• '••' '{,^ ^'£*(>?y'*i^$;.^^^^ '-- j Altitude: Z|p ^- feel
Tech: fJg/a\C/ JT
GPS: N »./.
Area; ^7 Location:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description ;e.ci. vegefat-rin 5^ii c;
RH:
Temp:
Direction: Kl
Bar Press: 2-7'
DewR:
Test Qualifier:
inches of Hg
°F
Sample
.'ID •
f?AFS
Pump Ma
Rotometef Reading
Start -'
(Urn)
. (Urn)
'• Start
Courft
Agitator Data
Stop
Count
•Cycte,
Time {$'
(inches);.
Time
'•start'
;;; 'Stop
Comments
RTI
Fijtfr
ID
U. e\
fo m
MetOns GT 521 Filename •
Start
-Stop
,. • FiOW ";
_• :; Bats (Um)';
Comments
Van* Anemometer
feet/minute
•Rt'301'ra 1
Read n ^ 2
Reading 3
uiJi^ 4 [Rpading sl ;;k;|""','."{f'*'* *£'*?:'$.& Split #
AajfHWw$||^j^jr^g||.G^to(^l^,\V^ ",'V '* "•''"'""" •!'-.\H'
• —- """'' '"•"* ••"" '••>>""> M\ „,"," '•',,
Sample ID
~ L2. - 02, C »^
Comments
-
-------
Area:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts): 5»***wiT-
j Location Description (o g. vegetation, so:! consistency);
WindVel: /, [ mles/hr Bar Press: £-*7« 8"^ inches of Hg
Direction: Dew Pt: °F
Test Qualifier: Refcr, ((aiff ^(.
MetOne GT. 521 Filename '
Vane Anerttdmeter
Readim 1
^giari|n«;'\-;',.; •_-• '/,{-^'}j'f^j-V:. 1'y" Vv"""^"1 £;:''';^|>>'^|^g!)gEii^
Rr,..jir32 Road'nj3 R^ia!!i:j4 £adTg5];:l'.''!;; ;.,{'^J'XV'L^^-v^'^y Split# I
Sample ID
Comments
-
--O
-------
HRTI
Area: |r\fl. Location: Ll RH:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description (ey. vegetation, soii consistency
WindVel:
mles/hr Bar Press: Z/^'*"* inches of Hg
Dew Pt: °F
Test Qualifier:
MetOne GT 521 Filename
Read'ng2
Readings
Roain\i4
Readipg 5 p/??-' ,^^'v'iy:? VVif Split #
^jti^^a^tt^b^^»t^:^v ?&$£*£;&* >f? '•^'/^^y/v
Sample ID
L&MTT ^^ LH
Comments
lf\
-------
f
HRTI
IN ! 1 << .' > \ 1 M ) t\ \ I
WindVel: J%0 m/es//?r Bar Press
Area: ^52- Location:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, w:"ii gusts):
Location Description (e.g. vegetation soil consistency)*
inches of Hg
op
Test Qualifier;
Sample
ID :
•':RAFS
'Rotonv^«r, •'•'.'.;
•.PUmpN»'.-:'.:
Rgtometer leading
Start
.Stop
1 (Urn)
.Count
^gitator:Data - .;.• ^-j,-:
Count
tirrt$'($)
' Depth,
(inches)'
.'' Tim?
-Start'/,
': ,'Stop
Comments
RT1
Filter
ID
II
MetOne GT 521 Filename-
'•'Start
Stop
Flow
Vane Anemometer
feet/minute
Mii'llisfiwa :lgadi;iB$
Rogdino1 Rea-mg 2 Redding 3
,...'.:t...4.-;.'.;/'; SH ^.v, T;
- Pr>x<4
Split #
Sample ID
Comments
-------
SArea: L. Location:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description te.g vegetatio-! soi! iwsistercy): QO-r*. (
°F Wind Vel
Direction
mles/hr Bar Press:
Dew Pt:
•RAFS
UhitNs
Rptotneter,
•PumpNa .;
, Flow
'...'Rate (Urn)
MetOne 6T 521 Fitename
Vane Anemometer
'laJrr; 1 Rra.i ng 2 Rr-ading 3
ij 4
(;,\^'-i, ;• ;-f ;.;K^-cp-nf^; ;v^^^;;;v*11%v^1^^^
Readirg 5 f,,|"|! '\f'\f ^I'^^r*1-;{1;X*;-? Split # Sample ID Z^II^IIZlIIlZZ
Ui
Comments
-------
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts): x^p^f
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soi: consistency)
Sample,
1 .. : ID, ,
RoiorneterReading
' -Start .'.;•
• (Urn)'
r;Stop' •
'
Count-'
:','Agitator Daft:
• 'Stop...
! Count;
,'' Cycle-
•Start,-
'Stop
Comments
RT1
Filter
ID
13-SI
-Q-
13,6*1
o
i/l
13. be
O
H
MetO'ne GT 521' Pilenaine"' '.-
Vine Anepom^ter
lirtojsttrii^l^lnflf-y;;- l.'7^^.^l- /^'^ '•'<- ^
r\eadiii 1 RM'J'no 2 Reading 3 Readi-:i4 Reading
-------
--""••'•• -*^ - -^.
Area: ^-33 Location: Is*ff4 RH:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusls^
location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil • onsistency):
inches of Hg
°F
Test Qualifier:
' Sample
/ID- •
' RAfS •
llnltNa
Rotbrheter Reading
Start".'
'Stop'''
.Agitator Data
Stop •
Count
Cycle-;',
Time (s) •
(inches),
Ttoe
Start -
stop-
Commer»t$
RTI
Filter
10
1.1
MetOne 9T 521 Filename - •.'
Vane Anemometer'",
-------
^•^R I Jf I 1
KBI v. 1 1
GPS: N 1S
Area; v5 Location:LS
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description !o.g. veget3t:on so:: uonsistency).
/Depth
(inches)
. .."Start
•V(L/m)
:Cycte"
Timefs);
Comments
Metune OT 521 Filehamt,
Rojijjr:1 Rgad.ng 2 Reaping 3 ffea'lnci 4 Reading 5 ''•-*:.
-------
Area. /IS^- Location; £_ } RH; 50.S~ % Temp:
(e.g. rain,
jption_ (e.§. vegetation^sdi oorsi-
WindVel: r(
Direction:
Bar Press: 2.*^. q> inches of Hg
DewPt: °F
Test Qualifier;
-------
,•',:"• ''•l:'^^^ljl^^l' ,:••''''''•.••'••f,\ C'.;''-y.:.-" '..'
RT|,,^^.,^^
' ' '' .IJty/Qjfci^
. v^'^;-r^''^'Kvi;:^
.ngl^^itigfiiPli^^itaii^'vl 4 '
Date;
Tech:
W/5K/JWP
GPS: N fg. ȣ>|A1
W J>5-9g-7»1
Altitude: Z-Cgg"^
Area:
Location;
RB;
Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind
location Description (e.g. vegetation, soii consistency
Sample
JO
RAFS
Urtit I*
Rotottieter,
•Punip'Nt-
Temp:
Rotomelgr-ReadlRg
'Start
. Stop-
.(l/m)
: Start.:
Gowit
°F Wind Vel:
Direction:
r**5
Agitator Patf
mles/hr Bar Press: £7
DewPt:
Test Qualifier:
inches of Hg
op
Stop-:
Count'-.-
. Qycfe
'.Timej-s)
'Depth
••(inches}
Time
Start.
Stop-
Comments
Rf I
Filter
ID
44. V»
M-.2A-
fo
MetOne GT S21 Filename
Start
Stop
RatejUm)
Comments
Vane Anemometer
a:
PI
Peadiftc 1
jfea
Reading 2 Reading 3
E»;rl ;g-4
Reading 4
<2i-3
Readinq 5
11 ;>
Split #
Sample ID
Comments
-------
Location: t-S RH:
(Weather Phenomena (e,g rain, wind gusts)
Location Description je.^_vegegon. soa egpsistency}__^
TemP:
"Z- °F
Sample
ID
RAFS
Unit*
Rototneter,
Pumpl*
WindVel:
Direction:
*^*$
Bar Press;
Dew Pt:
inches of'Hg
Test Qualifier:
Rotomater Reading
Start
(L/mi
Stop
fl/rru
Start
Count
Agitator Data
Stop
Count
Cycle
Time is)
Depth
(inches)
Time
Start
Stop
kpmfr**Ujgy
Comments
RTI
Filter
ID
XL
/rs/
. tA-al fjl [
\i--ir
^L
._!_
i
«k
BatOne GT 521 Filename
Start Stop
flow
.
S TJ\
feet/minute
I*
,/.;''••'••;•''.(^..;;'''s"''t:.:;>r:,':'''yv':*;,;v;;;/:>vv
|o|MftM|f|:ip^s;,.<:'':'J:'H^:^'^V?:;';^f::'^i^j^*> \:^'&.j!^&'».%'f>:/.•'•• ;fegljMi^.?fef^
BsM^dJ^'sjJtf^T BfMSEJL "SrSiL Bis^!!li-§_v''••'.•''••'i-;''•'•'..'I•^•;:'i'''''^'":•T'\:^'.'v."";__Split#
i^_ JJ^TI^J ii-O^^^Pi !^@_j_ ^^^
Comments
-------
KRT
AR stf ,V;K ING AMI; INSTSUMUNT DATA COUECTiGN FORM
.'.ILiiX:,MM V ASKJSTOS 113,0 SAttPLI-ft ,'RAFS)
', i! '•/, I"!;',-, ii/t. I,-1 i ?4' L,.b« >y, Mc'iiana
* Date:
j
} Tech:
Area: Location: RH-
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description (e.g. yarn/I \ \ • •.
Temp:
Sample
ID
'.iS [ U • m Jli.i
. ''' f IS il>} i,U
MetOne GT 521 Filename-
Soj[MQJ8tureReadlrigs
Reading1 Reading 2 Rean q
Addlttenal Sample Period Comm vu
I GPS: JY_
i .1.
" Altitude:
feet
WindVe!:
Direction:
Bar Press: indmsofHg
Dew Pt: CF
Test Qualifisi
,iin«i«
t I
i i
f ^
:
V
KiiHt'.rnj '
1 ' > ' 0 urn
j
i.
1
, „,
.... _ 1
'*i{ft«>lr
r"sioir"
•r Data
™ "^ " - - - -
u /: (
T IT ' 'Cl
-Ic't
n
Stdrl
»»„», w ^
•no
Stop
Comments
RTI
Filler
ID
f ; 5^)1 ' '*0'J'"'
' ; '. '
"• r 1
1
Cocnrne
• — •-•- •--..:-. -."-- .--
Vane Anemometer
feet/minute
Soil Sa
"
i-
Comments
-------
g^lT*)'-f-M»f AS^SAWP'JNC^W INSTRUMENT DATA COU.ECTON' FORM ''' •
L V. 1 1 !u:L,',.-.?/AtJ!.?;-^3KJ;!lir63't:taDS.»ViilPLl:R('RAF$r ," . . . '
Sampling1 Condition Param-atory
Area:
Weather Phenomena
Location Description
Sample
ID
Location: RH
(e.g. rain, wind gusts):
"[>•.$' u '^1,*'" "
', i i it ' Pu.ilp f.S
. J I
_ „
MetOne GT 521 Filename
!': ,.„ C':-
v ! -' -
.: L •-: ...
1 I
:'i> Temp:
Roioirwter R.5«it4|,fiej [
ii,,' t
ill:'',
f*t**
. 5^-
$,*i
i '"^ i'rDdla
Oyo'o
TlUri (SI
Depl'i
Date;
Tech:
GPS:
Altitude:
f, t •.»«.( 0,.,.S
Soil Sampl
) '•! M S
i.,,'.rl „._
| ^
s Tracking
Sample ID
i •-
! •)
)
L _
i - 4
f ,-' " '
RTI
Commecits Filter
ID
Vane Anemometer
feet/minute
Comments
-------
=^|-l-^'-Tp| W-? SAfv-PLiNO ANti IMSTRUME.NT DATA COLLECPON'FORM '
HP^^dSB JL. ^fcw.. JR Jit i * -, , • *• ^
i """- * ' H ''« N ! : ^ ' " . , , -,, ,< t v . iv t ?K
~ ~
; '• " 1
MetOne GT 521 Filename
! |
vUv,v«,%-
slai* u iw"» : J
?^'.. , j
% Temp: °F WindVel: m/esAr
Direction:
Ko1oiri«t^ R Jjdinp [ A^tliilfir Ddla
'u I
f( H )
•; 4/
il:./,tt|
>:-.« >. i I
Soil Moisture Readings
Reading 1 Reading 2
ReaciTj 3
u !
Additional Sample Period Com irmna
-
{• fp ; Mait slop ry:k' Cepth
1 r i 1 Ci unt Count T'ITIHJSI 'iiic'ws1
" r """ r ~" "~ ~ "~" ~
1 u v I c^ *^ J?,L .. * „ '"•**' "^
r r ~ ~
r L ^ - .
j. p
___L i . ,.
Date:
Tech:
GPS:
Altitude:
3Zi?^~~
^^ T"^ * — "*~~
iaf^t
w —
fee/
-
Bar Press: inches of Hg
DewPt: °F
Test Qualifier,
Time
Start
F>
.-,}
"i
Stop
\n n
L^l^
Comments
[ \^ ^^ * C^GtfcUx- li^ I i^i
\*\ -, ^^a*s»Jjisjix ^'^ : BsUn
^ -
SoilSatngleTrackinjL • •
[ lifihi fr ! Sample ID
L_L_L
1 2 '
' 3
T
4
r "™ "*" '""*" "*"i™'« """«-""' «"«"n~™«"™ ™-™..™,™_
5
Rll j
Comments Filter
ID
jaJL_£*' ^
?
Vane Anemometer
feet/minute
Comments
-------
w-^ «.-,
1 J' t
iX. J
ASiv SAMPliNC AKD INSTRUMENT DATA COLLECTION
.';£t.f^',4iifAP ASBUSTOS f ICIO SAUf»U£fi iSAFS)
i"
<; Date:
,,
Tech:
Sampling Condition Paramole^
Area: Location:
Weather Phenomena (e g wn ,\ , i •- • <
Location Description (P g v( i.^l.'i >i . i s ••
Sample
ID
Vi'^*\ "• tft^* '^
- i
MetOne GT 521 Filename
SoH^Molsttijfe'Reiadings
Reading 1 Reading'! [Rea^fQ 3
ample -Period voi
GPS: N
• ' i Altitude:
feef
Temp: T
\,1 4 ,.\^,
WinclVel:
DirKion
mtes/hr Bar Press: inches of Hg
DewPt: °F
Test Qualifier:
O.ii.1
top
Ij
'
Comments
^. tx
)epl1''
iC"e')i
Time
1 1
Sfart ( Stop
'__S,***a
_D- ' ^ «-f
i
"T~
. . JL . . - _ .
™j£li=3flL_J3. ° %i^
^
— ™______,___ — _„___
Comments
^^^K\
^u^ ^-wi.
RT1
Filter
ID
Vane Anemometer
_£>3 -iu_^MLjf£^Z™^i__
.• •
_J
Soil Samgli* Tracking ^ ' __
L_5iif!l . _. _ J3m!* 'P _ _. "L.
Comments
-------
Phenomena ;$ .5
.5
'* : 0
?V ' «
\- ! <>
, *"
'.''»)?'" rt1 ,'w !" ;•*?
,
>"
_j
\) -
-------
• s
o
Ci
—I
-------
iAres
O
O
&
0
*
O
-------
BRTI
INMRi\\JrON\l
)ling Condition Parameters , *
.•j.-.-,^-.BBKt.,...L....... fl. ,L........r... n n,nmltmijflnm,,—., i,l.-fYAmaiuuh-J-..--T-- ---|-nn,MHn.fll.t«i
Area: Location; RH:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency):
Temp:
°F Wind Vel:
Direction:
mles/hr Bar Press:
Dew Pt:
inches of Hg
°F
Test Qualifier:
Sample : •';.-:,
. ID' '•:••• 'V'
,;Unlt;flS,
Pump I
RotorHeter Reading
'Start ••
V Stop'
• (L/m)'
Count'
Count:
Time (s}'
,. Depth
'(inches)
Time
'Start
' Stop',
Comments
RT!
Fitter
ID
.s-
^ta—
O
C A,
MetOne 6T 521 Filename
Start
Plow
Rate (Urn)
Comment*
Vane Anemometer
feet/minute
^r^Wt^t^^
tr"—: •."'•"•i"'""" ',"•"••"'»i'ir v " •"•'" i1''.'" •-•!' <""«—'"••'""'*—i., i'1.! 3*&Aif •&':.;!*i \
Reading 1
Reading 2
Reading:
Reading 4
Reading 5
r-x^\ \
•j
Sample ID
Comments
-------
BRTT
Area; Location:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts):
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency):
Temp:
°F Wind Vel:
Direction:
mles/hr Bar Press:
DewPt:
inches ofHg
Test Qualifier:
Sample
' • ID' '' '•'
,';RAFS'-;
Unit Ns
Rotometer,
Pump Mt
Rotometsr Reading
(Urn)
Stop
: Sterf '•"
Count
Agitator O^ia
.Stop
Count
1 Cycle,
Time {$)
Depth
(inches)
Time
'Start
Comments
RTi
Filter:
ID
Vi -
MetOne Of 521 Filename,
Start '•
Stop
Flow
Rate(L/m|
Comments
Vane Anemometer
feet/minute
Read-ng 1
iV. :VA;-;% -i
v •" 'v,-">'c > • •:;--,' -.. • '- :•", -v-7:v>isv
djttortft^ap^f^yl o^ipertt\'',.;..'. > ':i^^Vl^&^
-------
Area: Location: RH:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts);
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency):
%
Temp:
F WindVel:
Direction:
m/es/??r Bar Press:
DewR:
inches ofHg
°F
Test Qualifier:
Sample •.,'•
ID
Unitf*
Rotoftieter,
PumpNi
Rotometer Reading
. Start-'
•'{LA
Count
Agitator Data
, stop
Count
Cyde
time fs|:
• (inches);
Time
Start'
stop
Comrnentis
RII
Filter
ID
ji»
f*f
" ' ! *
>AJ;
MetOne 6T S21 Pitename
-------
HRTI
Area: Location:
Weather Phenomena (e.g. rain, wind gusts)"
Location Description (e.g. vegetation, soil consistency):
INI(KN\IION\l
Temp:
Wind Vel:
Direction:
mles/hr Bar Press: inches of Hg
Dew Pt: °F
Test Qualifier:
Sample
ID
~:. Rotom&dr/.
Rotometer Reading
Start
(Urn)
• Stop
(Urn)
r Start,.
'Count
Agitator Data
'Stdp
.Count
•Time'(s)
Tims
•Start
Stop
Comments
Rf I
Fitter,
ID
o
^«.^.
13-
"L
3
MetOne Gt 521 Filename
------- |