Determination of Lead in Dust Wipes utilizing Field Analytical Technology .


107 views
Uploaded on:
Description
Determination of Lead in Dust Wipes utilizing Field Scientific Innovation. Displayed by U.S. Ecological Insurance Organization's (EPA) Office of Superfund Remediation and Innovation Advancement (OSRTI) and Office of Innovative work (ORD)
Transcripts
Slide 1

Assurance of Lead in Dust Wipes utilizing Field Analytical Technology Presented by U.S. Natural Protection Agency\'s (EPA) Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI) and Office of Research and Development (ORD) and the Department of Energy\'s (DOE) Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)

Slide 2

Background Environmental Technology Verification Program Early 1990s - Need for ecological innovation confirmation distinguished Slow rate of advancement; poor U.S. markets Lack of validity of new advances Inertia of framework, hazard avoidance of buyers and permitters Burgeoning worldwide market EPA starts ETV in October, 1995

Slide 3

ETV Objectives Provide sound execution information for business ecological advances to help merchants in offering imaginative advances, buyers in settling on choices to buy creative innovations, and controllers in settling on allowing choices with respect to natural advances.

Slide 4

ETV Successes 240 Verifications, 78 conventions to date Vendor request proceeds – more than 100 innovations in testing/assessment, more than 100 applications pending Increasing financing from merchants and others 805 Stakeholders in 21 bunches Commendations from EPA science and strategy admonitory sheets Supports administrative and intentional Agency, other Federal and state programs Growing global intrigue New part in country security confirmations

Slide 5

ETV Verifies just Definition: Verify is to decide execution under test arrange characterized conditions No champs or failures No endorsements No accreditation No pass or bomb No ensures Responsibility rests with the innovation client to accurately pick and apply advances

Slide 6

Stakeholder Roles Help set check needs Review conventions and working methodology Review other essential records Assist in planning and directing effort exercises Serve as data channels to their electorates

Slide 7

ETV Centers ETV Air Pollution Control Technology Center Research Triangle Institute ETV Drinking Water Systems Center NSF International ETV Greenhouse Gas Technology Center Southern Research Institute ETV Advanced Monitoring Systems Center Battelle ETV Water Quality Protection Center NSF International ETV-Building Decontamination Center Battelle ETV P2 Coatings and Coating Equipment Pilot Concurrent Technologies Corporation

Slide 8

46 Verifications in 2003 AMS: 5 Arsenic Detection; 5 Mercury CEMs; 1 Onboard Mobile Emission Monitor; 1 Portable Multi-Gas Emission Monitor; 2 Multi-Parameter Water Probes; 6 Cyanide Detection Kits SCMT: 1 Lead in Dust; 2 Groundwater Sampling Devices APCT: 3 Mobile Source Devices GHG: 1 Fuel Cell; 2 Micro-turbine CHP; 1 Vehicle Axle Lubricant; 1 Natural Gas Dehydration DWS: 2 Filtration Technologies WQP: 5 Residential Nutrient Reduction Systems; 1 Animal Waste Treatment (Solids Separator); 3 UV Disinfection CCEP: 1 Liquid Paint; 1 UV Curable Coating; 1 High Transfer Efficiency Paint Spray Gun P2-MF: 1 Sludge Reduction

Slide 9

Projections for 2004 Over 80 checks half in base ETV half in country security advances

Slide 10

ETV is joining forces with .. US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Multi-parameter water tests US Coast Guard Ballast water treatment US Dept of Energy, State of Massachusetts Continuous emanation mercury screens US Dept of Defense Monitors for explosives; PCBs in soils; clean suppressants States of Alaska, Pennsylvania Drinking water arsenic treatment States/areas in Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan Storm water treatment States of New York, Colorado Waste to vitality USDA Ambient smelling salts screens

Slide 11

Note: There were 76,588 aggregate hits and 7,075 universal hits in September 2003. Add up to Hits International Hits www.epa.gov/etv Hits/Quarter (1998) (1999) (2000) (2001) (2002) (2003)

Slide 12

Getting to ETV Outcomes Measuring yields to results Outputs Outcomes Number of conventions and confirmations Value set on ETV by merchants in offering and advancing innovation Value to potential buyers; impact of ETV on buy choices Use of better advances; diminished emanations in view of ETV Reduced presentation; decreased hazard on account of ETV Improved wellbeing/ecological quality in light of ETV

Slide 13

Overview of Environmental Technology Verification Process Statisticians Project Officers Developers Technology designers investigate randomized specimens under field conditions. Tests are gathered, homogenized, named, and amassed for appropriation. Physicists Stakeholders Experimental Plan Product is report and confirmation articulation.

Slide 14

Lead in Dust: Rationale for Performance Verification " Childhood lead harming remains a noteworthy preventable natural medical issue in the United States." - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention "Kids are most as often as possible lead harmed by family unit lead paint clean." - Massachusetts Dept of Public Health

Slide 15

Selection of the Most Appropriate Material to Test Technical board organized momentum industry requirements for assessment of field advancements for recognition of lead as: DUST PAINT SOIL Greatest need

Slide 16

Fundamental Issue: Can Field Analytical Technology be Used to Facilitate Home Reuse Following Remediation?

Slide 17

Why "tidy wipes" versus "mass clean"? Wipe examining gauges surface lead stacking g of lead per unit zone Risk-based tidy lead stacking benchmarks built up in light of tidy wipe inspecting Testing under the NLLAP is confined to tidy wipes. Promptly accessible ELPAT tests with confirmed fixations "Certifiable" examples of known substance

Slide 18

What were the administrative drivers for this tidy wipe testing? ETV tests give data on potential pertinence of field advances for leeway testing. Significance to leeway levels † 40  g/ft 2 stories 250  g/ft 2 window ledges 400  g/ft 2 window troughs Applications Clearance testing Risk appraisal † Identification of unsafe levels of lead, Final Rule, 1/5/01, 40 CFR 745.65

Slide 19

How did we land at this trial outline? EPA AIHA HUD NIST NIOSH Technical Panel RTI Massachusetts ORNL VENDORS

Slide 20

How did we land at 160 specimens? Taken a gander at all of the documented ELPAT tests; determinations in view of fixation and number of tests accessible Requested recently arranged specimens to concentrate on specific clearances levels (40, 250, 400 g) Implemented factually adjusted plan of four imitates

Slide 21

Determining the Number of Blank Samples to Evaluate False Positive Error Rate Confidence in the gauge of the false positive mistake rate increments as more clear examples are assessed.

Slide 22

Attention to Clearance Levels Clearance levels Four recreate tests broke down for each test level.

Slide 23

Testing Venues Focused on Where the Interest Lies

Slide 24

Two Very Different Analytical Techniques Verified Portable X-beam fluorescence Portable anodic stripping voltammetry

Slide 25

Vendors That Participated in the Lead in Dust ETV Tests Niton Corporation (3 XRF frameworks) Monitoring Technologies International (ASV) Palintest (ASV) Key Master Technologies/EDAX (XRF)

Slide 26

Anodic Stripping Voltammetry for Determination of Lead Pb(II) is decreased to Pb(0) by holding potential at cathodic incentive for brief period; Pb evaluated with anodic potential scope, measuring current for oxidizing Pb(0) to Pb(II) and stripping it from strong terminal. Anodic stripping voltammograms for the example and two standard increases of 50 ppb Pb(II). Statement potential = - 600 mV; testimony time = 1 min.; calm time = 10 sec. S.W. recurrence = 15 Hz; step potential = 4 mV; S.W. adequacy = 25 mV Electrochemical cell utilizes a working (W), reference (R), and auxillary (A) terminals in tube shaped tube with teflon top.

Slide 27

Anodic Stripping Voltammetry Advantages Low capital cost Disposable material Very high example throughput Disadvantages Generates little measures of compound waste

Slide 28

X-Ray Fluorescence Exposing metallic materials to high vitality x-beams invigorates discharge of electrons the energies of which give data concerning the character of the metal being referred to.

Slide 29

X-Ray Fluorescence Advantages Non-dangerous investigation Produces no substance squander Good specimen throughput Disadvantages High capital cost May require radiation source permit

Slide 30

NITON XL300 Accuracy Precision Ideal Less is better

Slide 31

NITON XL300 Reported Concentrations at Clearance Levels Probabilities of False Negatives

Slide 32

NITON XL300 Comparability : R = 0.999 (ELPAT tests); R = 0.999 (UC tests) False positive outcomes (in respect to freedom levels) : 0% (0 of 12 ELPAT Samples); 0% (0 of 30 UC tests) False negative outcomes (in respect to leeway levels): 54% (15 of 38 ELPAT); 70% (21 of 30 UC tests) [25% and 77% for Reference Laboratory] Reporting limit : 15 µg/wipe Throughput (1 investigators): 40 tests/12 hr day Statistically noteworthy negative inclination ("punishment" for high exactness) yet inside satisfactory predisposition go.

Slide 33

NITON XL700 Accuracy Precision Ideal Less is better

Slide 34

NITON XL700 Reported Concentrations at Clearance Levels Probabilities of False Negatives

Slide 35

NITON XL700 Comparability : R = 0.999 (ELPAT tests); R = 0.999 (UC tests) False positive outcomes (in respect to freedom levels) : half (6 of 12 ELPAT Samples); 62% (21 of 34 UC tests) False negative outcomes (in respect to leeway levels): 7 % ( 2 of 28 ELPAT); 8% (2 of 26 UC tests) [25% and 77% for Reference Laboratory] Reporting limit : 15 µg/wipe Throughput (1 investigator): 30 - 60 tests/12 hr day Statistically huge positive predisposition ("punishment" for high exactness) yet inside satisfactory bi

Recommended
View more...