Exposure Assessment Planning

Ask the Expert Webinar Series
September 15, 2011
1:30 P.M. EST

Exposure assessments are conducted for a variety of reasons. The design of the strategy should be consistent with the underlying purpose of the assessment and how the resulting data will be used. Collecting samples without fully understanding how the results will be utilized and communicated can result in obtaining information that maybe misinterpreted or misleading. Prior to collecting field samples, it is necessary to clearly understand the purpose and objectives of sampling projects.

The purpose of the data collection, in conjunction with the availability and cost of field and laboratory analytic techniques, as well as the time sensitivity of the results, will determine the overall sampling strategy. This presentation provides a basic overview of the planning elements that are important to conducting a productive, cost effective and successful exposure assessment.

Register Now for the presentation



Visit TestAmerica at the 2011 SAME Missouri River/ TEXOMA Regional Conference

August 23-25, 2011

Downtown Marriott

Kansas City, MO

TestAmerica has more than 20 years of technical and industry experience with the analysis of trace explosives and compounds unique to the military, supporting hundreds of special projects under various programs domestically and internationally.

TestAmerica provides analytical testing to assist with clean-up activities for a variety of clients, regulatory officials, and stakeholders from every segment of the Department of Defense, and is the nation’s:

• Only network with 13 DoD QSM Compliant laboratories
• First laboratory to receive USACE approval for Method 8330B in support of MRP
• First laboratory to be DoD ELAP accredited
• Leader in developing applications of Incremental Sampling Methodology (ISM) to an expanding range of chemicals of interest to the DoD.

Stop by Booth # 105 to learn more about TestAmerica’s:

• DoD ELAP accredited laboratories
• ISM expertise and capabilities - 8330B and beyond
• Methods for conventional explosives and the new insensitive munitions constituents

Sign up now for our free webinar on Insensitive Munitions Constituents on Thursday, August 25th at 1:30 P.M. EST.

Pharmaceutical and Personal Care Products Challenges in Non-Conventional Matrices

Ask the Expert Webinar Series
August 18, 2011
1:30 P.M. EST


Pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) represent a large subset of contaminants of emerging concern labeled as endocrine disruptors. The endocrine system is a balanced network of glands and hormones that regulates developmental activities such as growth, behavior, metabolism, intelligence, sexual development, and the ability to reproduce as well as many other functions. To date, many studies have characterized the PPCP contamination in rivers and lakes across the country, and as the effects of these contaminates are unfolding, researchers are looking beyond water ways for these chemicals.

TestAmerica continues to partner with public and private researchers looking for PPCPs as they pass from non-point sources into sensitive ecosystems. Our method development has expanded our PPCP testing capabilities into sediment and tissue samples to find these contaminants where endocrine disruption is occurring. Making the leap from testing water to more complex matrices requires solutions for increased matrix related interferences and extraction enhancements that effectively remove the target compounds from the sample. Our success with complex matrices is helping answer difficult questions where PPCP contamination may be lurking.

Register Now for the presentation

NORM Issues in Oil and Gas Exploration

Ask the Experts Webinar Series
August 4th, 2011
1:30pm EST

With radiation in space and beneath the surface of the earth, we live our lives in peace and harmony with our environment while surrounded by radiation. However, what risks do we take when we drill into the earth's surface for precious natural resources such as shale oil and gas?

Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM) as well as a variety of radioactive elements are present within the earth's crust at a relatively shallow depth. When drilling and mining exploration activities take place, these radioactive elements enter our waste streams and present challenges for the operators and regulators alike.

Register Now for the presentation

Calculation of a Metals Oxide Compound using a Metals Analysis

Ask the Expert Question:
Can an Oxide of a metal (i.e. Barium Oxide) be determined by running a metals analysis for barium and then using a calculation to get barium oxide?

Experts Response:
The calculation is pretty straightforward, but it does involve some assumptions.

We will start with the example you cited with barium. Barium has an atomic weight of 137.34, and it normally has an oxidation state of +2. It is one of the alkaline earth metals in the second column of the periodic table, and all of these metals tend to have an oxidation state of +2. In minerals oxygen always has an oxidation state of -2. As a result, one barium atom will combine with one oxygen atom to create barium oxide, BaO. Barium oxide has a molecular weight of 137.34 + 16 (for the oxygen) which equals 153.34. If we assume that all the barium is in the oxide form, then the barium oxide concentration is as follows.

Ba concentration x (153.34/137.34) = BaO concentration

This case is pretty straightforward. With iron, however, you also end up making an assumption about the oxidation state of the metal. You could have Fe in either the +2 or +3 state. The resulting oxides would either be FeO (is Fe is in the +2 state) or Fe2O3 (if Fe is in the +3 state.). If you are calculating these as oxides, I think it is reasonable to assume that the metals are fully oxidized, so we will use the +3 state.

For iron, we will calculate the ratio of the molecular weight of Fe2O3 over the amount of iron in each molecule (2 atoms). Iron has an atomic weight of 55.847.

Molecular weight of Fe2O3 = (2 x 55.847) + (3 x 16) = 150.694

Weight of iron = 2 x 55.847 = 111.694

So, like the barium example above, here is the calculation to determine the amount of Fe2O3 based on the measured Fe concentration.

Fe concentration x (150.694 / 111.694) = Fe2O3 concentration

NOTE: These calculations would present the maximum possible concentration of barium oxide – for example if the sample contained barium sulfate or barium carbonate (or any other form of barium) then the concentration of barium oxide would be overstated.

View Dr. Charlie Carter's expert profile
View Dr. Richard Burrow's expert profile

Analysis of Flue Gas Desulfurization wastewaters b y Agilent 7700x ICP-MS

Application Note

Authors:
Richard Burrows – TestAmerica Laboratories Inc. USA
Steve Wilbur – Agilent Technologies Inc. USA

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is in the process of revising effluent guidelines for the steam electric power generating industry, due to increases in wastewater discharges as a result of Phase 2 of the Clean Air Act amendments. These regulations require SO2 scrubbing for most coal-fired plants resulting in “Flue Gas Desulfurization” (FGD) wastewaters. The revised effluent guidelines will apply to plants “primarily engaged in the generation of electricity for distribution and sale which results primarily from a process utilizing fossil-type fuel (coal, oil or gas) or nuclear fuel in conjunction with a thermal cycle employing the steam water system as a thermodynamic medium. “ [1]. This includes most large scale power plants in the United States. Effluents from these plants, especially coal-fired plants, can contain several hundred to several thousand ppm of calcium, magnesium, manganese, sodium, boron, chloride, nitrate and sulfate. Measurement of low ppb levels of toxic metals (including As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb Se, Tl, V and Zn) in this matrix presents a challenge for ICP-MS, due to the very high dissolved solids levels and potential interferences from matrix-based polyatomic ions. Furthermore, FGD wastewater can vary significantly from plant to plant depending on the type and capacity of the boiler and scrubber, the type of FGD process used, and the composition of the coal, limestone and make-up water used. As a result, FGD wastewater represents the most challenging of samples for ICP-MS; it is very high in elements known to cause matrix interferences, and also highly variable. To address this difficult analytical challenge, in 2009 the EPA commissioned the development of a new ICP-MS method specifically for FGD wastewaters. This method was developed and validated at TestAmerica Laboratories Inc. using an Agilent 7700x ICP-MS equipped with an Agilent ISIS-DS discrete sampling system.

Review the White Paper on this new method here >>>>

Petroleum Biomarker Analysis to Support Forensic and Risk Investigations

Ask the Expert Webinar Series
July 21, 2011
1:30pm EST

This presentation provides an introduction into the analytical methodologies used to detect petroleum biomarkers and a review of their utilization in supporting petroleum release forensics.

Nothing sparks concerns about contaminates in the environment quite like a petroleum release. Unfortunately, the events of 2010 served to heighten the awareness and need to have the capability to monitor and characterize the extent and breadth of the impact of these events.

Using Petroleum Biomarker analysis it is possible to accurately identify the source of contaminates back to the specific origin, as well as determining the absolute concentrations of priority pollutant PAHs. Both of these capabilities are important in assessing the human health risk and potential liability.

TestAmerica Laboratories has developed a suite of analytical methods to support petroleum release evaluations and the experience to analyze for petroleum biomarkers in all applicable matrices (water, soil/sediment, and bulk oils/waste).

Register Now for the presentation