centration estimate, we can never expect excel-
Gilbert, R.O. (1987) Statistical Methods for Envi-
lent quantitative agreement.
Each screening method has certain advantages.
Nostrand Reinhold.
The hot plate field test requires minimal training
Racine, C.H., M.E. Walsh, C.M. Collins, D.J.
and equipment, but detection capability is limit-
Calkins, B.D. Roebuck and L. Reitsma (1992)
ed to samples containing millimeter-size parti-
Waterfowl mortality in Eagle River Flats, Alaska:
cles of white phosphorus. Also, for some sites
The role of munitions residues. USA Cold Re-
where the identity of contaminants is unknown,
gions Research and Engineering Laboratory,
heating a sample might not be prudent in terms
CRREL Report 92-5.
of safety. The SPME approach provides much
Racine, C.H., M.E. Walsh, C.M. Collins, L. Reits-
greater sensitivity than the hotplate method, but
ma and B. Steele (1993a) Sampling and site as-
requires a gas chromatograph and an analyst
sessment of white phosphorus sediment contami-
trained in GC operation and maintenance.
nation in ponds of an Alaskan salt marsh. Society
of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 14th
Annual Meeting, 1418 November, Houston, Texas.
CONCLUSIONS
Racine, C.H., M.E. Walsh, C.M. Collins, S.T.
Taylor, B.D. Roebuck, L. Reitsma and B. Steele
A simple field-screening method to detect white
(1993b) Remedial investigation report for white
phosphorus particles is described. The method is
phosphorus contamination in an Alaskan salt
based on the visual detection of the inflammation
marsh. USA Cold Regions Research and Engi-
of white phosphorus particles at relatively low
neering Laboratory, CRREL Report 93-17.
temperatures (less than 40C) once a protective
Simmers, J.W ., R.A. Price and S. Stokke (1994)
layer of water is removed. The field screening
Assessment of white phosphorus storage in wet-
method consistently gave positive results for sam-
lands within the artillery impact area of Ft. Mc-
ples where the laboratory method indicated WP
Coy. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Army Envi-
concentrations above 1 g/g. It also gives some
ronmental Technology Symposium, 2830 June 1994,
idea of the size and number of particles. The num-
Williamsburg, Virginia. Sponsored by the U.S. Army
ber of false positives were few if the criteria for a
Environmental Center.
test to be considered positive are the observations
Walsh, M.E. (1995) Analytical method for white
of 1) a localized area of intense smoke and/or
phosphorus in water. Bulletin of Environmental Con-
flame and 2) the formation of orange residue.
tamination and Toxicology, 54: 432439.
A more sophisticated technique, based on solid-
Walsh, M.E. and C.M. Collins (1993) Distribu-
phase microextraction and GC determination,
tion of white phosphorus residues from the deto-
was tested and found to be comparable in detec-
nation of 81-mm mortar WP smoke rounds at an
tion capability to the laboratory method.
upland site. USA Cold Regions Research and En-
gineering Laboratory, Special Report 93-18.
Walsh, M.E. and S.T. Taylor (1993) Analytical
method for white phosphorus in munitions-con-
LITERATURE CITED
taminated sediments. Analytica Chimica Acta, 282:
5561.
Daasch, L.W ., J.N. Weber, M.A. Ebner and G.
Sparrow (1969) Mass spectra of phosphorus and
Zhang, Z. and J. Pawliszyn (1993) Headspace
phosphorus oxides. Journal of Mass Spectrometry
solid-phase microextraction. Analytical Chemistry,
and Ion Physics, 2: 503505.
65: 18431852.
8
Previous Page
