United States
                 Environmental Protection
                 Agency
National Exposure
Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                 Research and Development
EPA/600/SR-97/076     August 1997
vxEPA     Project Summary

                 Field  Evaluation  (First) of VOST
                 and  SemiVOST Methods  for
                 Selected  CAAA Organic
                 Compounds  at a  Coal-Fired
                 Power  Plant

                 Joan Bursey, James F. McGaughey, Raymond G. Merrill
                 Abstract
                   Laboratory and field studies for vola-
                 tile organic sampling trains (VOST) and
                 semivolatile  organic sampling  trains
                 (SemiVOST)  have been performed  to
                 evaluate the performance of halogenated
                 volatile and semivolatile organic analytes
                 from Title III of the Clean Air Act Amend-
                 ments (CAAA) of 1990. Laboratory tests
                 were  conducted to determine if candi-
                 date nonhalogenated CAAA analytes and
                 pesticides could be analyzed by gas
                 chromatography/mass spectrometry
                 (GC/MS). Organic compounds that could
                 not be analyzed successfully were elimi-
                 nated from further study. Gaseous and
                 liquid dynamic spiking experiments were
                 performed in the laboratory  using the
                 candidate sampling trains and the re-
                 maining analytes. A method evaluation
                 study was subsequently conducted  in
                 the field.  Three spiking schemes were
                 employed in the field evaluation  study:
                 Volatile organic compounds were spiked
                 into VOST trains as a gaseous spike,
                 and semivolatile organic compounds
                 were spiked into SemiVOST trains as a
                 mixture of either Acid/Neutral com-
                 pounds or  Base/Neutral  compounds.
                 These two mixtures were evaluated  in
                 separate sampling runs to avoid  losses
                 due to known acid/base chemical reac-
                 tions. This field evaluation study was
                 performed at a  clean source with low
                 moisture levels and minimal background
                 levels of organic compounds. Ten qua-
                 druple sampling (each) runs were
                 performed  for VOST, Acid/Neutral
                 SemiVOST, and Base/Neutral SemiVOST.
                 Each quadruple run used four col located
                 sampling  probes into four similar sam-
 pling trains, with two spiked trains and
 two unspiked trains. Statistical analysis
 of the results was performed according
 to the guidelines of EPA Method 301.
  This Project Summary was developed
 by  the National Exposure Research
 Laboratory's  Air Measurements Re-
 search Division, Research Triangle Park,
 NC, to  announce key findings of the
 research project that is fully documented
 in a separate report of the same title
 (see Project Report ordering informa-
 tion at back).

 Introduction
  After  laboratory and field studies were
 performed to evaluate the performance of
 halogenated volatile and semivolatile or-
 ganic analytes from Title III of the Clean Air
 Act Amendments (CAAA)  of 1990 in
 VOST  and SemiVOST methodology,
 nonhalogenated CAAA organic analytes and
 pesticides were similarly evaluated.  Labo-
 ratory studies were performed to deter-
 mine if candidate analytes could be ana-
 lyzed by GC/MS because both VOST and
 SemiVOST require GC/MS analysis. The
 analytical methodology used for the VOST
 was SW-846 Method 5041; SW-846 Method
 8270 was used for the SemiVOST.
  When the 19 nonhalogenated candidate
 VOST analytes from the CAAA list were
 spiked onto VOST tubes and analyzed by
 thermal  desorption/purge and trap/GC/MS,
 candidate VOST analytes with poor analyti-
 cal response were eliminated from further
 testing. The five remaining candidate VOST
 analytes were supplied in a certified gas
 cylinder by a commercial vendor for use in
 laboratory and field dynamic  spiking ex-
 periments.

-------
  The semivolatile nonhalogenated organic
compounds  and pesticides selected from
the CAAA list were combined into  multi-
component solutions and the solutions were
analyzed by GC/MS according to the pro-
cedures of EPA Method 8270. Several dif-
ferent combinations  of analytes were ana-
lyzed, and several analytes were eliminated
from further testing  because  of chemical
incompatibilities in solution and lack of solu-
bility in  methylene chloride at the  levels
desired for a spiking solution.  Semivolatile
organic analytes were ultimately combined
into three individual  solutions: Acid,  Base,
and Neutral.  Methylene chloride solutions
of combined Acid and  Neutral compounds
or Base and Neutral compounds were pre-
pared for use in SemiVOST evaluation pro-
cedures.
  Laboratory dynamic spiking  studies
were  performed to evaluate VOST and
SemiVOST  method precision and  bias
under controlled conditions. Laboratory
sampling conditions  included clean labora-
tory  air  sampled  with  dual VOST or
SemiVOST trains. The  results of the labo-
ratory dynamic  spiking  studies were used
to predict the behavior of the volatile and
semivolatile organic compounds under field
test conditions,  with results from the pre-
liminary laboratory study used to direct the
spiking strategy for the first field test.

Procedure
  A coal-fired power plant that does  not
routinely  emit high levels of the hazardous
air pollutants (HAPs) was selected as a
test site for a field evaluation of the VOST
and  SemiVOST methods  applied to
nonhalogenated volatile and  semivolatile
organic compounds. The  absence of high
levels of volatile and semivolatile  organic
compounds in the background matrix of the
stationary source was established during a
pretest survey. Field testing was conducted
to assess the effect of sampling a combus-
tion matrix (stack gas).
  Field   evaluation  of both  VOST and
SemiVOST was accomplished by sampling
and analysis following  the  EPA methods
(VOST: sampling, EPA Method 0030; analy-
sis, EPA Method 5041; SemiVOST: sam-
pling,  EPA Method 0010;  sample  prepara-
tion,  EPA Proposed Method 3542;  analy-
sis, EPA Method 8270) except for the use
of four collocated sampling probes  (Quad
probe). This  modification  of the sampling
trains  was  necessary to  conform  to  the
requirements of EPA Method 301 for deter-
mining the bias  and precision of test meth-
ods. EPA methods were applied exactly as
written, with  no deviation  from the  written
methodology.
  Generation of data for  the validation of
test  methodology  according to EPA
Method 301 allows the bias (systematic er-
ror) and precision (reproducibility of mea-
surement) to  be determined in a statisti-
cally valid manner.
  To determine bias and precision in the
field, ten quad sampling runs (40 sampling
trains) were  performed for  each  of the
VOST, Acid/Neutral SemiVOST, and Base/
Neutral SemiVOST.  The additional qua-
druple runs were  performed in  the field  to
allow for possible loss of samples or invali-
dation of a run for any reason.

Analytical Results
  Laboratory  studies using GC/MS dem-
onstrated that 5 of 19 volatile organic com-
pounds could  be used for field testing. The
volatile organic compounds that were not
tested included acetonitrile, acrylonitrile, 1,1-
dimethylhydrazine, 1,4-dioxane, ethyl aery-
late, ethylene  imine,  methyl  ethyl ketone,
methyl isobutyl ketone,  methyl methacry-
late, methyl fe/t-butyl ether, propylene ox-
ide, 1,2-propylene imine, triethylamine, and
vinyl acetate. The semivolatile organic com-
pounds that were not tested in  the field
included  hydroquinone,  1,4-phenylenedi-
amine, captan, 1,3-propane sultone, eth-
ylene  thiourea,  hexamethylene-1,6-
diisocyanate,  maleic anhydride, quinone,
catechol, and 2,4-toluenediamine.
  Analytical field data were evaluated ac-
cording to the statistical procedures of EPA
Method 301, and  according to  the  criteria
of the  EPA Handbook for Quality  Assur-
ance/Quality Control  (QA/QC) Procedures
for  Hazardous  Waste  Incineration  (EPA/
625/6-89/023,  January,  1990).  The com-
pounds tested in the field study are listed in
Table 1. Their recoveries and whether they
meet the criteria of the two statistical pro-
cedures are also shown in Table 1.

Discussion
  Based on the work performed in the labo-
ratory and the field evaluation of the VOST
and SemiVOST method for nonhalogenated
analytes and pesticides listed in Title III  of
the Clean Air Act Amendments  of 1990,
the following observations may  be made:
  • Where the test  atmosphere is clean
    dry laboratory air, performance in labo-
    ratory testing  is a reasonably reliable
    indicator  of field  performance.  How-
    ever, there are a few examples where
    marginal  performance in the labora-
    tory precedes acceptable field  perfor-
    mance as well  as several instances
    where  good  laboratory  performance
    precedes  unacceptable field  perfor-
    mance.
  • The two  modes  of statistical calcula-
    tion (EPA Method 301  and EPA QA
    Handbook) generally  produce  com-
    parable  results.  An  analyte  which
meets  one set of acceptance criteria
usually meets the other set of accep-
tance criteria as well, or the analyte
will fail to meet both sets of criteria. An
exception to this observation occurs
when the Method 301 correction factor
is  in the  range  of  1.30  to approxi-
mately 2.00: Analytes with  a Method
301 correction factor in this range meet
QA Handbook acceptance criteria al-
though the Method 301 correction fac-
tor is not acceptable. An analyte with a
Method 301 correction factor lower than
0.70 can  also meet EPA Handbook
acceptance criteria.
Several of the nonhalogenated organic
analytes demonstrated solubility  prob-
lems in the course of preparation of a
stock solution  in  methylene chloride.
These  analytes are not appropriate for
the SemiVOST methodology because
quantitative  extraction by methylene
chloride cannot be ensured. The utility
of SemiVOST even  as a  screening
method for the   presence of these
analytes is questionable.
Reactive nonhalogenated  semivolatile
organic analytes  which demonstrated
reaction with other components of the
stock or spiking solution are question-
able as appropriate for the SemiVOST
method because  the extent of reaction
cannot be determined; therefore, the
accuracy of the quantitative values is
suspect. The utility of SemiVOST even
as a screening  method for the  pres-
ence  of  these analytes is question-
able.
The  VOST is appropriate  as a  sam-
pling/analytical method only for those
CAAA  volatile organic analytes which
can be analyzed by GC/MS. The VOST
is not appropriate even as a screening
method for those volatile organic com-
pounds which cannot  be  analyzed at
all by the methodology.
Quantitative analysis of very  polar
semivolatile compounds is difficult with
the SemiVOST method.
The  presence of particulate matter in
the SemiVOST method causes reten-
tion  of significant amounts of  polar
semivolatile  organic analytes on the
filter.  Even  relatively volatile  polar
analytes  such as aniline are retained
on the heated filter of the sampling
train. Significant  retention  of relatively
volatile polar analytes  on the filter ap-
pears to  occur for nitrogen-containing
analytes  such as aniline or quinoline;
relatively volatile  oxygenated analytes
such as phenol  do not appear to be
retained on the filter.

-------
Table 1. Experimental Results Summary

Analyte Percent Recovery ± RSD

Meets Method 301
Criteria in Field?1

Meets QA Handbook
Criteria in Field?2
VOST Analytes
benzene
carbon disulfide
n-hexane
toluene
2,2,4-trimethylpentane
106 ±25.6
63.1 ±18.3
79.2 ±22.6
77.9 ±17.5
63.1 ±18.3
Yes
No; correction factor 1 .47
Yes
Yes
No; correction factor 1 .48
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
SemiVOST Analytes
acetophenone
4-aminobiphenyl
aniline
o-anisidine
benzidine
biphenyl
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
cumene
dibenzofuran
di-n-butyl phthalate
N,N-diethylaniline
N,N-dimethylaniline
dimethylaminoazobenzene
3, 3'-dimethoxy benzidine
dimethyl phthalate
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
2,4-dinitrophenol
2,4-dinitrotoluene
3,3'-dimethylbenzidine
isophorone
4,4'-methylene
4,4'-methylene bis(chloroaniline)
4,4'-methylenedianiline
o-cresol
m-/jj-cresol3
96±12
50 ±41
70 ±24
39 ±39
65 ± 1 1 9
103±12
48 ±23
88±11
100±12
46 ±54
95 ±19
67 ±24
31 ±51
37 ±38
82±17
122±14
111 ±31
109±12
92 ±44
93 ±12
89 ±36
89 ±36
6 ±73
90±15
69±14
Yes
Yes
No; correction factor 1 .37
No; correction factor 2.53
No
Yes
No; correction factor 2.16
Yes
Yes
No; correction factor 2.44
Yes
No; correction factor 1 .42
No; correction factor 3.26
No
No; correction factor 1 .31
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No; correction factor 1 .51
Yes
Yes
Yes
No; recovery 39.4%
No
Yes
No; recovery 48%
Yes
Yes
No; recovery 46%
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
'Acceptance criteria: correction factor between 0.70 and 1.30, precision <50% relative standard deviation.
Acceptance criteria: recovery between 50% and 150%, precision <50% relative standard deviation.
3These compounds are listed together in the table because the coelute and are not separated in analysis.
(continued)

-------
Table 1. Continued
Analyte
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
4-nitrobiphenyl
4-nitrophenol
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosomorpholine
phenol
g-toluidine
trifluralin
ethylbenzene
styrene
g-xylene
m-/j>xylene3
2-acetylaminofluorene
caprolactam
carbaryl
chlordane
DDE
dichlorvos
heptachlor
hexamethylphosphoramide
lindane
methoxychlor
parathion
propoxur
quinoline
styrene oxide
1 ,4-dioxane
ethyl carbamate
methyl isobutyl ketone
phthalic anhydride
Percent Recovery ± RSD
96±11
109±12
102±14
114 ±31
117± 13
116±12
89 ±8
56 ±30
27 ±41
89±12
84 ±10
85 ±11
79±12
1 47 ± 23
114±12
99 ±14
142±16
102±15
101 ±18
103±12
14±118
104±12
73 ±19
89 ±28
123±12
80 ±19
0.5 ±1481
87 ±11
103±14
112±11
5.3 ±144
Meets Method 301
Criteria in Field?1
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No; correction factor 1 .77
No; correction factor 3.81
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No; correction factor 0.68
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No; correction factor 6.93
Yes
No; correction factor 1 .40
No; correction factor 1 .31
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Meets QA Handbook
Criteria in Field?2
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
'Acceptance criteria: correction factor between 0.70 and 1.30, precision <50% relative standard deviation.
Acceptance criteria: recovery between 50% and 150%, precision <50% relative standard deviation.
3These compounds are listed together in the table because they coelute and are not separated in analysis.

-------
  • The least volatile semivolatile organic
    analytes are distributed mostly on the
    heated filter of the sampling train. For
    some types of particulate matter, it may
    not be  possible to recover organic
    analytes quantitatively  using methyl-
    ene chloride extraction techniques.
  • Analytes tested using both VOST and
    SemiVOST include  1,4-dioxane and
    methyl isobutyl ketone.  For these two
    polar volatile organic analytes, VOST
    was  unsuccessful;  SemiVOST was
    successful.

Conclusions and
Recommendations
  Successful operation  of the SemiVOST
methodology, including validation, depends
on several considerations which can  be
evaluated only by testing the operation of
the entire methodology:
  • The chemical nature  of the compounds
    of interest must be  considered.  EPA
    Method 0010 states that the range of
    applicability is  all organic compounds
    with a boiling point above 100°C. This
    statement  provides only a  general
    guideline that excludes organic  com-
    pounds  with  a boiling  point below
    100°C. The statement does  not guar-
    antee that any organic compound in
    the appropriate boiling point range will
    function successfully in the SemiVOST
    methodology.  Polar compounds are
    more reactive, more  difficult to extract,
    and more difficult to analyze than non-
    polar compounds. Any of these factors
    may  make  it impossible to sample or
    analyze the  compound using the
    SemiVOST methodology.
  • The nature  of the background station-
    ary source matrix is  an important con-
    sideration in determining the success-
    ful function of the SemiVOST method.
    Highly acidic stationary source matri-
    ces affect compound recoveries. Ex-
    tremely wet source matrices introduce
    difficulties in sample extraction.  High
    levels of particulate material can retain
    organic compounds. All of these fac-
    tors of the  stationary source demon-
    strate why  successful  laboratory per-
    formance of a given compound cannot
    guarantee that the compound will per-
    form successfully  in the field. How-
    ever, inability to analyze the compound
    by GC/MS in the laboratory does guar-
    antee that  performance of the  sam-
    pling and analytical methodology can-
    not even be evaluated.
  • Neutral, non-polar  compounds  as  a
    class tend to demonstrate the best per-
    formance in the SemiVOST methodol-
    ogy.  Acidic or basic  compounds are
    reactive. These compounds tend to re-
    act with each other or with constitu-
    ents  of the source matrix, thus limiting
    or eliminating their recovery using the
    SemiVOST method.
  The successful performance of the VOST
method also  demands evaluation of the
entire sampling and analytical method:
  •  The chemical nature of the compounds
    of interest must be considered.  EPA
    Method 0030 states that the range of
    applicability is all organic compounds
    with  a boiling point below 100°C. This
    statement provides  only  a  general
    guideline that excludes organic com-
    pounds with a boiling point above
    100°C, although  in practical  applica-
    tion  of the method this boiling  point
    limitation is frequently extended to
    132°C. The statement does not guar-
    antee that any organic compound in
    the appropriate boiling point range will
    function  successfully in  the VOST
    methodology. Polar  compounds  are
    more reactive, more difficult to desorb
    and  purge,  and more difficult to  ana-
    lyze  than non-polar compounds. Any
    of these factors may make it impos-
    sible  to sample or analyze the com-
    pound using the VOST methodology.
  •  The  nature of the  background station-
    ary source matrix is an important con-
    sideration in  determining the success-
    ful function of the VOST method. Highly
    acidic stationary  source matrices af-
    fect  compound recoveries.  Extremely
    wet source matrices introduce difficul-
    ties in sample desorption. Reactive con-
    stituents of the source matrix can react
    with  the sorbent  or the sorbed com-
    pounds. All of these factors of the sta-
    tionary source demonstrate why suc-
    cessful laboratory performance  of a
    given compound cannot guarantee that
    the compound will perform success-
    fully  in the field. However,  inability to
    analyze the  compound by  GC/MS in
    the laboratory does guarantee that per-
    formance of the sampling and  analyti-
    cal methodology cannot even be evalu-
    ated.
  •  Neutral, non-polar compounds as a
    class tend to demonstrate the best per-
    formance in  the VOST methodology.
    Acidic or basic compounds are reac-
    tive.  These compounds tend to react
    with  each other or with constituents of
    the source matrix, thus limiting or elimi-
    nating their recovery  using  the VOST
    method.
  On the basis of the  laboratory and field
effort conducted thus far for the  nonha-
logenated volatile and semivolatile organic
analytes listed in Title  III of the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990, the following
recommendations are made:
  • Faced with a candidate analyte for ei-
    ther VOST or SemiVOST for which no
    method validation  information is avail-
    able, laboratory experimentation  can
    aid in establishing  the validity  of as-
    signing the analyte to a particular meth-
    odology.
  • Careful consideration of the chemical
    properties (acid, base, reactivity, etc.)
    of candidate analytes is essential in
    predicting success or failure in the ap-
    plication of VOST or SemiVOST sam-
    pling and analytical methodology.
  • A  complete and accurate formulation
    of the complete SemiVOST methodol-
    ogy as it is presently used should be
    written. Method 0010 is applicable for
    sampling  procedures but sample prepa-
    ration  procedures   contained  in
    Method 0010 have been superseded
    by Proposed Method  3542. The com-
    plete Method 8270 is not applicable as
    the analytical methodology; only  cer-
    tain  sections  are  applicable.  Also,
    Method 8270 surrogate compounds are
    usually used with SemiVOST samples.
  • Further study of the VOST analytical
    methodology (Method 5041) should be
    performed.  Internal  standards and
    surrogate  compounds  used  in
    Method   8240 have  been  used in
    Method   5041  for the sake  of con-
    sistency  between the methods. How-
    ever,  £-bromofluorobenzene is not
    an appropriate surrogate compound
    for the VOST  methodology since the
    boiling point for  this compound is
    150°C, well  above the upper limit of
    100°C. A better choice  of surrogate
    compound should be made. Also, no
    criteria are available in the method for
    acceptability of surrogate recoveries in
    the VOST beyond the general guide-
    lines of the QA Handbook of  recovery
    between  50 and 150%, with precision
    of 50% relative standard deviation.

Disclaimer
  The U.S.  Environmental  Protection
Agency through its Office of Research and
Development  funded and managed the re-
search described here under 68-Do-0022
to Eastern  Research  Group,  Inc.  It  has
been subjected to the Agency's peer and
administrative review  and has been ap-
proved for publication as  an  EPA docu-
ment.  Mention  of trade names  or com-
mercial products does  not constitute en-
dorsement or recommendation  for use.

-------
Acknowledgments
  Under  EPA Contract No. 68-Do-0022,
Eastern Research Group,  Inc.  prepared
this  report.  The Project Manager was
Raymond G. Merrill;  the Principal Investi-
gator was Joan T.  Bursey. We wish to
acknowledge the contributions of the fol-
lowing individuals to the success of this
program: Amy Bederka, Mike Bryant, Tom
Buedel, Kelly Dowler, Sam Foster, Danny
Harrison,  Judi  McCartney,  Linh Nguyen,
Phyllis O'Hara,  Mark Owens, Tiffany
Sorrell, Jim Southerland, Julie Swift, and
Donna Tedder. Helpful discussions on sta-
tistical calculations and  interpretation  of
statistics  with Dr.  Joseph Knoll and Mr.
Merrill Jackson are  gratefully acknowl-
edged.

-------
   Joan Bursey, James F. McGaughey, and Raymond G. Merrill are with Eastern
     Research Group, Inc., Morrisville, NC 27560
   Merrill D. Jackson is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
   The complete report, entitled "Field Evaluation (First) of VOST and SemiVOST
     Methods for Selected CAAA Organic Compounds at a Coal-Fired Power Plant,"
     (Order No. PB97-196117; Cost: $67.00, subject to change) will be available only
     from:
          National Technical Information Service
          5285 Port Royal Road
          Springfield, VA 22161
           Telephone: 703-487-4650
   The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
          Air Measurements Research Division
          National Exposure Research Laboratory
          U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
          Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Center for Environmental Research Information (G-72)
Cincinnati, OH 45268

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
      BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
         EPA
   PERMIT No. G-35
EPA/600/SR-97/076

-------