Low Vol Samplers

[croyce]

I am trying to find out some best practices for folks doing environmental air sampling on Low Vol samplers.

I am out doing some environmental sampling on a site to corroborate the site owners analysis results. The sight owner and myself are using Low Vols. We have different brand low vols HiQs vs F&Js but both are being run for the same flowrate (2 CFM) over the same period of time(7 Days). I'm running a 2" glass fiber filter while the site is running a 47 mm glass fiber (not a big difference there). The site does use an older rotormeter for it's flow rate adjustment while I use a digital system. Also the site field calibrates flow rate upon every change out but doesn't not get an annual calibration. I do not do field verifications but calibrate annually with verifications on a quarterly basis. In the past it has been my practice to verify the sampler is still running on a daily or every other day basis during a long run such as a 7 day period. The facility does not have this practice. They will only touch the sampler upon initiating the sample and when pulling it 7 days later.

What do you do? Do you touch the sampler daily to verify that it hasn't shutdown or do you let it run for 7 days?

Do you operate a digital module that logs power outages or do you have an analog system?

How often do you calibrate or do verifications of flowrate?

Thank you for any help.

[SloGlo]

did knot check environmental a/s pumps after turning on.

used old school flow gauge witch lacked any outage monitoring.

calibrations were done annually. flow verification consisted of recording flow rate at start/stop.

[GLW]

I am trying to find out some best practices for folks doing environmental air sampling on Low Vol samplers.

I am out doing some environmental sampling on a site to corroborate the site owners analysis results......

start with the sites controlling documents, regs, licenses, charters, MOUs, etc.,...

the standards you are required to implement may already be spelled out but not understood by or familiar to those personnel implementing the monitoring program,...

nothing you learn here can abrogate your accountability to those documents and commitments,...

if, after reviewing those documents, you are not familiar with how to implement any specified requirements, come on back and ask for help with that implementation,...

PMs work well too,...

[mars88]

It does not sound like he is obligated to follow any of their procedures, rather he is doing an independent investigation of their procedures.

[GLW]

It does not sound like he is obligated to follow any of their procedures, rather he is doing an independent investigation of their procedures.

It takes more than all my fingers and toes combined to count off the number of HP types I know of who were fired because they did not know they were, or think they were, obligated to follow something written somewhere,...

YMMV,...

[croyce]

Thanks Slo Glo. That's the kind of info I'm looking for.

To GLW mars88 is correct. I am doing an independent investigation of their procedures. I have their procedures- sampling, QA and PMs and have reviewed them. Just trying to see what everyone else is doing as well. There is no hard fast regulatory rule to sampling so long as you can prove the quality of the data you have at the end of the day.

The group I am looking at has older analog equipment which provides no indication of failure other than time recorded. It's been my practice to check on my lo vols daily even though I'm not pulling a sample but weekly or longer. But all of my experience deploying lo vols has been in responses and not a long term standing program. I have some end date in mind that I will be securing the lo vol. In places that I have long standing or permanent systems we have installed communicaitons to a central control to verify the system is running. In addition my samplers record total volume collected, so if I loose failure I still have a sample that I can characterize activity concentrations with some known quality. I can see how it can get difficult, costly and time consuming to check a lo vol every day for a long standing system.

Thanks for the comments. If anyone does it differently please let me know.

[GLW]

...To GLW mars88 is correct. I am doing an independent investigation of their procedures. I have their procedures- sampling, QA and PMs and have reviewed them. Just trying to see what everyone else is doing as well. There is no hard fast regulatory rule to sampling so long as you can prove the quality of the data you have at the end of the day....

Well in that case utilize the historically contemporary to analog equipment EPA ISC atmospheric dispersion model to determine your atmospheric transport and diffusion of radioactive materials with subsequent appropriate sampler locations. Follow that with one or two remote locations not affected by releases from  the facilities operations. Under previous EPA expectations analog equipment should ensure a constant flow rate via flow controllers. The sample rate and volume are continuously measured throughout the sampling interval using a mass flow meter/flow totalizer. Typical flow variances should not exceed 30% across the sampling period. Validation is implemented by acquiring duplicate samples utilizing high-volume samplers operated at a minimum of one sampling site per day. These high volume duplicate  samplers are collocated with the sampling sites of record and will be completely independent of the operation of the permanent  sampling system. The duplicate sampling trains are periodically relocated  among the sampling sites and operated on a schedule consistent with the operating sampling systems. This old but still defensible protocol should give you enough defensible basis to independently endorse the sites' protocols or suggest improvements.

You should have no trouble gaining access to these older EPA codes.

[GLW]

Well in that case....

or not,...

[croyce]

Thanks for your help.

[SCMasterchef]

No disrespect made to the comments, all are good.  Since you are doing an independent verification of the clients data and analysis processes, would it not be that to validate the results of your study versus their sample results that the same conditions and standards would apply.  With this in mind I think that the frequency of which you crosscheck your sample operation is irrelevent.  If power outages do occur and you are aware of these outages, the question would be, is the client adjusting results to account for the outage or are they simply ignoring the time differences and using the flow data based on actual sampling time?  If the client's air samplers automatically restart when the power supply is reactivated then the volume is still correct but the run time would differ.  I would think that you, if the same power outage affected your samplers would be forced to do the same to keep data acquisition dynamics the same thus providing the same operating parameters.