|
|
Analytical Reports
>> Study to document
SoilCore discrete sampling device as an equivalent and an alternative to
En Core in EPA method 5035.
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to document the
performance of the SoilCore Sampler as a discrete soil sampling and
storage device verses methanol extraction on Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
impacted sites, based on EPA method 5035. The study will present acceptable
accuracy and precision data for use of the SoilCore Sampler. It will be
also compared verses En Core to show that it is an equivalent and an
alternative as described in EPA SW-846 method 5035, section 4.5.2.
Procedure
Sampling devices were filled with soil and spiked
with 2 ml of solution that contains 55 compounds at 40 mg/L ( Table1). This
will bring the concentration in the device about 3.2 mg/kg (assuming 25 gram
soil). Devices were then stored at 4 degree C for 65 hours. Devices were opened
at 65 hours and the soil was placed in the methanol. EPA Method 5035 was
followed for extraction and all samples were analyzed within three days of
extraction. EPA method 8260B a GC/MS procedure was used for the analyses. The
same procedure was used for the control samples which were spiked in soil and
extracted in methanol at 0-hour along with sampling devices.
100 ul of methanol extract were introduced into 10
ml of purge and trap water and analyzed per stated methods. Five control
samples, five SoilCore Sampler and three En Core samples were
analyzed. Controls were all analyzed once, SoilCore Samplers were
analyzed three times each, and two En Cores were analyzed three times and
one twice. The numerous replicate analyses were performed to reduce any
possibility of method 8260B inaccuracy. In total, there are 15, 8, and 5 data
points for SoilCore ,En Core , and immediate methanol extracts
respectively. All analyses were done by Synergic Analytics, Inc., Grand Rapids,
MI an A2LA (American Association for Laboratory Accreditation) accredited, and
Drinking water certified laboratory.
Results
Based on data generated (table 1), SoilCore
and En core have shown similar accuracy and precision for soil samples
stored at 4° Celsius for 65 hours.
SoilCore recoveries range from 72%
24 for
Bromoethane to 121%
39 for
Vinylchloride, with total average recovery at 90% + 8. En core recoveries
range from 21%
103 for
Dichlorodiflouromethane to 115%
20 for
1112-Tetrachloroethane, with total average recovery at 87%
18.
Surrogates are VOC's that EPA method 8260B/5035
requires Labs to add to methanol extract at the time of soil and methanol
extraction before sonication to monitor the stated methods performance.
Surrogate recoveries of SoilCore and En Core were both within
method requirements.
Discussion
The SoilCore Sampler has shown that it can
be used as a discrete soil sampling and storage device based on its performance
in this study. According to results presented in Table1 and Graph1, both
SoilCore and En Core perform with in a similar level of accuracy
and precision
Both SoilCore and En Core showed 91%
recovery for compounds other than gases (Comp 7 to 55). However for gases (Comp
1 to 6) SoilCore had 83%
23 and En
Core 58%
66. Gases
are difficult compounds to collect and store due to their physical nature.
Conclusion
Accuracy and precision with in control limits are
considered the cornerstone of any quality system. The accuracy and precision
presented in this study is with in the EPA SW-846 guidelines. This device meets
EPA method 5035 Section 4.5.2 requirement for SoilCore to be considered
equivalent to En Core. Therefore, it is the conclusion of this study,
that based on the above data SoilCore Sampler could be used for
collection and storage of soil samples up to 65 hours at 4° C.
References (General)
1) Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources,
Validation Study for Sampling Devices Used to Collect Volatile Organic
Compounds and Gasoline Range Organics in Soil. Bureau of Integrated Science
Services, 1998.
2) U.S. EPA, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste, SW846-Method 5035, Third Edition Update III, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, Washington D.C.
3) U.S. EPA, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste, SW846-Method 8260B, Third Edition Update III, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, Washington D.C.
4) Hewitt, Allen ., Studies with SoilCore
sampler and sample holders. US Army Corps of Engineers Cold Regions Research
and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH, 12/98.
5) SoilCore, Inc. Standard Operating Procedure
SI0005A, "Detailing the proper use of the SoilCore Sampler",
12/98
6) SoilCore, Inc. Standard Operating Procedure
SI0010C, " Detailing the proper use of the SoilCore Sampler and
methanol preservation".12/98
7) Hewitt, Alan. D., "Storage and
Preservation of Soil Samples for Volatile Organic Compound Analysis"
Draft, US Army Corps of Engineers Cold Regions Research and Engineering
Laboratory, Hanover, NH, 11/98.
Table 1a
SoilCore and En Core Accuracy and Precision comparison

Table 1b
SoilCore and En Core Accuracy and
Precision comparison
|