New Product Release (Future Video/CD)
Summarizes all the following data into a 2-page review. Concise, direct, and to-the-point, this release addresses the items necessary to maintain a compliant and defensible sampling program. We are currently developing a product video that shall encompass all the elements below in a CD and Video formats, and offers to be an excellent training and quality awareness tool. Reserve your copy today.

Method Comparability (pdf)
 Washington State University, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering. This comprehensive review documents the ability of COLIWASA’s, Drum Thief’s, and the Liquid Sampler to collect representative data (precise and accurate samples). The research was broken into two phases: Phase I used seven known ratios of oil and water placed into acrylic columns and repetitively sampled by the same operator. In total, ~400 sampling points were collected and graphed (device vs. ratio vs. error). Phase II recorded operator-to-operator variability for inexperienced and experienced (>5 yrs exp.) operators. A blind test panel was set using 55-gallon drums. After orientation and the donning of Level C gear, the subjects sampled each drum using each device. Fifty-two subjects representing 260 data points were collected and graphed to demonstrate data quality (known vs. observed), spillage, ease-of-use, and productivity. The results of this landmark review represent the first of its kind and gives light to the magnitude of error associated with COLIWASA and Drum Thief practices. The research concludes by noting that the Liquid Samplers significantly improves all indices measured and can impact tremendous quality, compliance, and safety gains. This review is well referenced

 

Technology Review and Bulletin
DOE/Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). The Laboratory conducted preliminary research of the Liquid Sampler’s product claims and looked at the intent of RCRA methods (40CFR260) and SW-846 to determine if PARRC (Precision, Accuracy, Representativeness, Repeatability, Completeness) parameters were met. The staff examined relative legislation and present methodologies, as well as conducting limited data gathering. The Liquid Sampler was compared to the COLIWASA and Drum Thief and found to be superior in all categories tested. Of special significance was the enhanced OSHA, ALARA and technology improvement of the Liquid Sampler.

 Field and Cost Demonstration
DoD/Norfolk Naval Shipyard, N-45 Environmental Compliance. This RCRA field demonstration was conducted at the request of Ms. Sherri Goodman, DUSD/Environmental Security. The study was conducted to explore the usability and utility of the Liquid Sampler in the trenches. A questionnaire was prepared that rated the Liquid Sampler against an equivalent COLIWASA. The results indicated that the Liquid Sampler out-performed the COLIWASA in all testing criteria. Additionally, an annual cost comparability assessment the Liquid Sampler will have saved an estimated 60% in hardware costs alone, and countless savings in improved data quality.

Safety (CSP) and Industrial Hygiene (CIH) Review
Quiltek Services, Inc. This independent assessment was conducted to assist safety and health professionals recognize the pure value-added potential of this engineering control. Without question, chemical/RCRA sampling is a hazardous and represents an exposure rich environment. OSHA and ACGIH control hierarchy recommends that engineering controls are implemented far ahead of administrative and personal protective means. It is noted that the Liquid Sampler should be able to reduce workplace controls, since sample collection is is-situ and not subject to operator contact. Various OSHA citations are referenced.

Legal Assessment of RCRA Sampling
Paine, Hamblen, & Associates, LLP. This review was conducted to wrestle with the often-voiced option that "If I adhere to EPA and CFR referenced methods, then I must be fulfilling my legal obligations." Not exactly! The EPA never intended their sampling methods to be prescriptive, and simply the use of these referenced methods does not warrant compliance. Rather they (EPA and State Programs) left the onus and liability with the generator to collect accurate and defensible data. This review raises serious, long reaching questions regarding the generator: contractor liabilities, materials accountability and decisions based on past sampling practices. Numerous citations are available.

Quality and Compliance Assessment
DoD/ProAct Assessment. This requested was submitted by CEV and BEE personnel at Fairchild AFB, WA. The reply from this evaluation is pending.

Methods Acceptance
American Society for Testing and Materials - Accepted
Environmental Protection Agency, SW-846, Chapter 10 - Accepted
Washington State Department of Ecology, RCRA Programs - Accepted
Various organizations have incorporated our Liquid Sampler method into their respective manuals, largely based on the independent technical and scientific assessments. We are pleased to announce that various rulemaking processes are started to draw greater awareness onto sampling issues.

Reprints
EPA/ACS, Waste Testing and Quality Assurance Symposium, July 1998

Testimonials
Non-solicited straight talk from people that have switch and integrated the Liquid Sampler into their waste management, environmental surveillance and quality control cycles.