FACT WILEY-Interscience
A New All-Season Passive Sampling System for
Monitoring NO2 in Air
Hongmao Tang, Thomas Lau, and Bernie Brassard
Maxxam Analytics, Inc., 9331 48 Street, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6B 2R4
Walter Cool
Alberta Research Council, 250 Karl Clark Road, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6H 5X2
Received 11 March 1999; revised 22 August 1999; accepted 1 September 1999
Abstract: A new all-season passive sampling system for
monitoring NO2 in air has been developed. This passive
sampling system employs the same approach as the all-
season sampling system for monitoring SO2 reported in
FACT [Vol. 1(5), 1997] before, but a new collection me-
dium (CHEMIX姠) for sampling NO2 has been developed
and is used. Compared to the existing collection media
used for NO2 passive samplers, such as a triethanol-
amine (TEA)-coated cellulose fiber filter, CHEMIX姠 is
less affected by temperature and relative humidity, and
has a higher sampling rate. This system has been exten-
sively tested in the lab (temperature from ⴚ27 to 20 ⴗC,
relative humidity from 4 to 80%, and wind speed from 0.5
to 150 cm/s) and validated in the field in all climates.
Comparing measurements obtained with the use of the
new passive sampling system with equivalent measure-
ments with the use of a continuous NO2 analyzer yielded
an accuracy of greater than 85%. The new NO2 passive
sampling system can be used to measure ambient NO2
concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 50 ppb based on a 1-
month exposure period. 䊚 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Field Analyt Chem Technol 3: 338– 345, 1999
Keywords: passive sampler; nitrogen dioxide; air pollu-
tion; field study
Introduction
NO2 is a criteria air pollutant. It is one of the major acid
rain sources and is the only gaseous air pollutant that con-
tributes to visibility reduction. Therefore, NO2 is required
by regulation to be monitored in many countries.
Over the past few decades, many sampling methods for
monitoring NO2 in ambient air have been developed and
Correspondence to: H. Tang
䉷 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
FIELD ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY 3(6):338– 345, 1999
LEFT INTERACTIVE
subsequently improved. These methods can generally be
classified as active methods1 – 5 and passive methods.6 – 12 Ac-
tive methods directly pump air through collection devices to
collect air pollutants. A passive (or diffusive) sampler is a
device that is capable of taking samples of gas or vapor
pollutants from the atmosphere at a rate controlled by a phys-
ical process such as diffusion through a static air layer or
permeation through a membrane, but which does not involve
the active movement of the air through the samples. The
passive samplers rely upon a concentration gradient across
a diffusion barrier to produce a mass transfer of gaseous
molecules. Passive samplers are generally simple in structure
and easily used. Compared to many active samplers, passive
samplers do not request electricity; therefore, they are cost-
effective.
The major difference between active samplers and pas-
sive samplers is that the active sampler has a known sam-
pling rate, which is the pump’s flow rate; but the passive
sampler’s sampling rate depends on many factors, such as
temperature, relative humidity (RH), wind direction, wind
speed, sampler’s structure, collection media, and so on. If a
passive sampler is to be used in all climate conditions, there
must be a reasonable way to calculate the sampling rate.
Therefore, a key factor for using passive samplers is how to
determine their sampling rates. It would be highly unreason-
able to expect that a passive sampler has the same sampling
rates at ⫺30 ⬚C and 30 ⬚C, and at 90% of RH and 15%
of RH.
Different NO2 passive samplers have been developed.6–12
Triethanolamine (TEA) is commonly used because it cap-
tures NO2 very efficiently and ion chromatography (IC) can
be used to conduct analysis with a low detection limit.8,12
However, many serious problems associated with the TEA
have been reported. short
Sickles and Mitchle13 investigated the performance of standard
long
CCC1086-900X/99/060338-08
FACT WILEY-Interscience RIGHT INTERACTIVE

FIG. 1. CSPSS validation results at EIMU from 1996 through 1997.

both sulphation and nitration plates with the use of con- developed an all-season passive sampling system (CSPSS)
trolled test atmospheres. TEA was coated onto cellulose or for sampling SO2 from the atmosphere.14 – 16 The unique fea-
glass fiber filters. Their studies found that a temperature re- tures of the CSPSS include: (a) a newly designed passive
duction from 27 to 6 ⬚C had a strong effect on NO2 calibra- sampler and a rain shelter, which allows the passive sampler
tion factors (sampling rates). NO2 calibration factors were to be installed in the field face downwards (thus, dust and
found to increase by up to 460% over this temperature range. wind direction problems can be minimized); and (b) a con-
Reductions in RH from 79 to 10% were found to increase figuration that enables calculation of correction coefficients
the NO2 calibration factors by about 50%. The calibration for variations in sampling rates due to meteorological fac-
factor for NO2 was found to increase by 250% when the tors.
NO2 concentration was increased from 20 to 200 ppb. Gair, The CSPSS has been validated in Alberta for a whole
Penkett, and Ovola8 reported that in wintertime, their passive year. During the validation period, the temperature ranged
samplers using TEA always generated higher NO2 concen- from ⫺40 to 35 ⬚C, the relative humidity ranged from 30 to
trations compared to active sampling methods. Ferm and 100%; and the wind speed varied by more than 5 km/h. The
Rodhe7 found that TEA could not be used for long-time relative error between CSPSS measurement and those ob-
sampling (several weeks). Successive samplers gave a tained from an SO2 continuous analyzer was within 15% (see
higher average concentration than samplers covering the Figure 1). The CSPSS passed an independent validation con-
whole period All the problems just described indicate that ducted by the Alberta Research Council (ARC).17 Excellent
TEA-coated filters or screens are not good collection media agreement was obtained for all four tests (as shown in Ta-
for sampling NO2 in the atmosphere in all seasons, that is, ble 1).
under strongly varying temperature and/or RH conditions.
TEA is a compound with a melting point of 18 ⬚C. This
means that TEA is a liquid when the temperature is above
18 ⬚C and becomes a solid when the temperature is below TABLE 1. Independent PASS SO2 passive sampler validation results.
18 ⬚C. When a compound’s phase changes, it is expected
Passive Analyzer Error
that the rate of chemical or physical surface reaction rates Site Exposure date ppb ppb (%)
will change. Also, when TEA is mixed with certain chemi-
cals, for example, glycerol, the mixture’s melting point is TMK* July 31– August 28** 1.3 1.4 7
slightly lower. TMK November 1– December 3 1.6 1.6 0
With the support of Alberta Environmental Protection EIMU April 30– May 30 1.8 2.0 10
EIMU November 1– December 3 3.0 3.2 6
(AEP), the Alberta Research Council (ARC), the Clean Air
Strategic Alliance of Alberta (CASA), and the National Re- * Station ID. short
search Council of Canada (NRC), Maxxam (Chemex) has ** All the studies were conducted in 1997. standard
long

FIELD ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY— 1999 339

FACT WILEY-Interscience
FIG. 2. Schematic of NO2 passive sampler.
In this article, a new Maxxam (Chemex) NO2 all-season
passive sampling system (CNPSS) is reported. The CNPSS
employs the same approach as the CSPSS, but a new col-
lection medium, CHEMIX娃, has been developed. CHE-
MIX娃 is a chemically pretreated solid material. The advan-
tages of this new medium are threefold.
First of all, the sampling rate for NO2 is slightly decreased
when the temperature is reduced from 20 to ⫺27 ⬚C at 4%
RH. The sampling rate reduction is only about 10% com-
pared to more than 80% for the TEA coated cellulose filter.
Second, the sampling rate is higher compared to TEA coated
filters. In the third place, CHEMIX娃 is stable when used in
the field. There is no measurable difference between suc-
cessive samplers and samplers covering the whole sampling
period.
The CNPSS’ sampling rate was first studied in the cham-
ber designed for the CSPSS at different temperatures, RH
values, and wind speeds (WSP). An equation associated with
temperature, RH, and WSP, based on laboratory studies, has
been derived. The CNPSS has been validated for several
months in many Canadian locations since 1998. The equa-
tion from laboratory studies was used to calculate sampling
rates in each location. The passive sampler results were com-
pared to a co-located continuous NO2 analyzer. Very en-
couraging results have been obtained. Based on 1-month ex-
posure, the CNPSS can be used to measure ambient NO2
concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 50 ppb. Compared to
continuous NO2 analyzers, the accuracy is 85% higher.
340 FIELD ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY— 1999
LEFT INTERACTIVE
Experiment
NO2 Passive Sampling System
A schematic of the CNPSS passive sampler is shown in
Figure 2. It contains a Teflon film as a diffusion barrier, the
CHEMIX娃 as a collection medium, and an air gap between
the diffusion barrier and the collection medium as a diffusion
zone. Above the medium, two polyester containment screens
(110 and 20 mesh, Northwest Graphic Products Ltd., Al-
berta, Canada) are used. The sampler body, support ring, and
cover are made from polycarbonate. An edge at the bottom
of the passive sampler (see Figure 2) makes it suitable for
downward-facing installation in the CNPSS rain shelter.
A schematic of the CNPSS rain shelter is shown in Figure
3. It was made from a PVC end cap for a 6-in.-diameter
pipe. A slotted plate with three holes was fixed inside the
PVC cap. Another plate was installed just above the slotted
plate. Triplicate passive samplers can be installed in the plate
facing downwards. An outside bracket was used to mount
the shelter to a proper support.
Laboratory Study
The CNPSS was first tested in our laboratory. A labora-
tory system was constructed to measure sampling rates at
different temperatures, humidities, and wind speeds. The
temperatures studied in the chamber ranged from ⫺27 to 20
⬚C; the RH ranged from 4 to 80%; and the wind speed ranged short
standard
long
FACT WILEY-Interscience
FIG. 3. Schematic of NO2 passive sampler rain shelter.
from 0.5 to 150 cm/s. The major components of the system
were as follows:
1. A dilution system (CSI-1800, Columbia Scientific Indus-
tries, Austin Texas) to dilute NO2 gas standard (Matheson
Gas Products, Edmonton AB).
2. A humidity-control system to maintain the specified rel-
ative humidity. This device was made from a 4-l Erlen-
meyer flask.
3. A NOx analyzer to continuously monitor NO2 concentra-
tions during the course of the experiment (TECO Model
42, Thermo Environmental Instruments, Inc., Franklin,
MA).
4. Temperature (Fluke Model 80TK and 80T-150U, John
Fluke Mfg Co. Inc., Everett, WA) and humidity (Vaisula
Probe CS500, Vaisala, Inc., Woburn, MA) probes to con-
tinuously monitor these variables.
5. An exposure chamber in which the passive samplers
could be mounted.
6. A large industrial freezer (Kelvinator 2, Frigidaire Can-
ada, Cambridge, Ontario) in which the exposure chamber
was mounted. The freezer temperature controller was
modified to minimize large fluctuations in temperature.
Field Study
The CNPSS passive samplers were installed in three lo-
cations in Alberta. Triplicate passive samplers and duplicate
field blanks were used. One location was the AEP industrial
monitoring site in Edmonton (EIMU), which is equipped
with a NOx continuous analyzer (TECO Model 42, Thermo
Environmental Instruments Inc., Franklin, MA) and a wind-
FIELD ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY— 1999
RIGHT INTERACTIVE
speed monitoring device (Wind Flo 540, Athabasca Re-
search Ltd., Edmonton, AB). The other two locations were
at the Alberta Wood Buffalo Zone (WBZ) monitoring site
near Patricia McInness (PM) and Ft. McKay (FM) of Al-
berta. PM is equipped with a NO2 continuous analyzer
(TECO 42, Thermo Environmental Instruments Inc., Frank-
lin, MA), FM is equipped with a NO2 analyzer made by
Combustion Scientific Industries (CSI 6000, Boston, TX).
The rain shelters were fastened with the use of an outside
bracket so that the passive samplers were at the same ele-
vation as the inlet for the NOx continuous analyzers.
Analysis
After exposure, the exposed CHEMIX娃 medium in the
passive sampler was transferred to a 60-ml glass vial, then
20 ml of deionized water was added. The sample was ex-
tracted for 30 min at room temperature with frequent shaking
of the vial. The extract was filtered through a 25-mm Nylon
syringe filter (Allscience, Ft. Sask., Alberta) and analyzed
for nitrite by the spectrophotometric method (SP) or the con-
tinuous flow analysis method (CFA). Ion chromatography is
not recommended for the analysis at present, because con-
tamination has been discovered in the IC system after in-
jecting several hundred samples. A cleaning procedure is
under development.
In the SP method, nitrite is determined through formation
of a reddish purple azo-dye produced at pH 2.0 to 2.5 by
coupling diazotized sulfanilamide with N-(l-naphthyl)-eth-
lyene-diamine dihydrochloride. The color system obeys short
standard
long
341
FACT WILEY-Interscience LEFT INTERACTIVE

TABLE 2. Nitrite concentrations collected at different temperatures. TABLE 4. Comparison of sampler results in cooler and in chamber.

Nitrite concentration (␮g/ml) Sampler storing condition Nitrite concentration (␮g/ml)

at different temperatures
Cooler (⫺20 ⬚C) 0.14
Collection media ⫺27 ⬚C 20 ⬚C Chamber purged with NO2 free 0.14
air (20 ⬚C)
CHEMIX TM 0.97 1.10
TEA filter 0.19 0.96

than the TEA-coated filter at ⫺27 ⬚C. At room temperature

Beer’s law up to 180 ␮g(nitrogen)/l with a 1-cm light path
at 545 nm.18
Flow-injection analysis (FIA) is based on injection of a
liquid sample into a moving nonsegmented carrier stream of
a reagent. The injected sample forms a zone that disperses
on its way to a detector. The CFA method, which is similar
to the FIA, has been practiced for many years. After
Skeggs19 introduced segmented continuous flow in 1957, the
CFA method became the most successful tool for the auto-
mation of serial assays. An automated diazotization colori-
metric method20 was developed for measuring nitrite in nat-
ural waters with the use of the CFA method.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Laboratory Study
Comparison of TEA and CHEMIX娃 at Different
Temperatures. Cellulose filters (Millipore, Bedford, MA)
coated with 10% TEA and 1% glycerol in a deionized wa-
ter – methanol (1:1) solution and dried in a vacuum were
used to compare with the CHEMIX娃. Table 2 lists the com-
parison results of nitrite concentrations collected at different
temperatures by both types of filters. The comparison was
conducted at ⫺27 ⬚C and 20 ⬚C, the relative humidity was
about 4%, the CDBS velocity was 0.5 cm/s, and the NO2
concentration was 150 ppb. Because the nitrite concentration
is proportional to the sampling rate, Table 2 clearly shows
that the sampling rate of CHEMIX娃 was slightly changed
when the temperature was decreased from 20 to ⫺27 ⬚C at
4% RH, but the TEA-coated-filter sampling rate was de-
creased about 80%.
Sampling Rate Comparison. Table 2 also indicates
that the CHEMIX娃 collected about five times more NO2
TABLE 3. Nitrite concentrations collected at different temperatures
and different relative humidities.
the ratio was about 1.1.
Relative Humidity Study. Table 3 lists the nitrite con-
centration comparison collected by the CHEMIX娃 and the
TEA-coated filter. The studies were conducted at 17 ⬚C, 150
ppb NO2 concentration, 0.5 cm/s CDBS velocity. The RHs
ranged from 4 to 50%. It can be observed that the change of
the relative humidity had little effect on the CHEMIX娃
sampling rate, but noticeably affected the TEA coated filter’s
sampling rate at ⫺27 ⬚C.
Stability Study. After exposing the NO2 passive sam-
pler to 150 ppb NO2 concentration for 24 h, half of the pas-
sive samplers were taken out of the chamber and sealed in
a resealable plastic bag that was stored at ⫺20 ⬚C. The rest
of the passive samplers in the chamber were purged with
NO2-free air at room temperature for 5 days. A summary of
the test results is shown in Table 4. The results show no
significant difference between the samplers in a cooler and
in the chamber, which indicates that the CHEMIX娃-NO2
complex is stable. One set of CNPSS was also installed in
EIMU from December 2 to December 29 of 1997. Two other
sets of CNPSS were installed in EIMU from December 2 to
December 19 and from December 19 to December 29 of
1997 separately. The test results are shown in Table 5. It can
be observed that there is no significant difference between
the sum of the successive samplers and the samplers cov-
ering the whole month period.
Capacity Study. The NO2 passive samples were ex-
posed at 160 ppb NO2 concentration, 3% RH, and 20 ⬚C for
1 day, 7 days, and 9 days separately. The CFA results are
shown in Table 6. It was found that the CNPSS still was not
saturated after 9 days’ exposure. It is concluded that the
CNPSS can at least be used to monitor 50 ppb NO2 concen-
tration in the atmosphere for a 1-month exposure period.
Practical Quantitative Detection Limit. From field
blank results, it was found that the pooled standard deviation
was 0.1 ␮g of nitrite per blank. Thus, the practical quanti-

Nitrite concentration (␮g/ml) at different TABLE 5. Comparison of monthly and successive exposure results.
temperatures and different relative humdities
Nitrite collected (␮g)
⫺27 ⬚C 17 ⬚C
Collection Exposure December December December
media 4% 20% 40% 4% 50% time 2– 19 19– 29 2– 29 Sum

CHEMIX TM 0.95 0.96 0.99 1.08 1.12 Successive 4.24 2.11 6.35
short
TEA filter 0.17 0.35 0.40 0.86 0.96 Monthly 6.29 6.29
standard
long

342 FIELD ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY— 1999

FACT WILEY-Interscience RIGHT INTERACTIVE

TABLE 6. Capacity study.
Sampling time (h)
25.5 170.5
Total nitrite collected (␮g) 25.9 164.5
Ratio nitrite ␮g/h 0.98 1.04
tative detection limit can be taken as 1 ␮g per blank (10
times the standard deviation). This is equivalent to exposure
of the passive sampler to 0.1 ppb for 1 month.
Analytical Recovery Study. The standard nitrite so-
lutions were spiked into the CHEMIX娃. After drying in the
vacuum oven, the spiked filters were extracted following the
procedure described above. The recovery was found to be
close to 100%.
Precision Study. The precision study is based on trip-
licate NO2 passive sampler exposure. The pooled relative
standard deviation was calculated to be of the order of 5%.
Equation for the Calculation of the Sampling Rate
From the laboratory chamber and field study, an empirical
equation has been devised for calculating the CNPSS passive
sampler rates. The equation compensates for variations in
temperature, RH, and wind speed. It is as follows:
Rs ⫽ 25.960T1/2 ⫺ 0.175 RH ⫹ 0.180 WSP-388,
where Rs ⫽ sampling rate (ml/min), T ⫽ temperature (K),
RH ⫽ relative humidity (%), ranged from 20 to 100%,
WSP ⫽ wind speed (cm/s). If WSP ⬎ 130, then WSP ⫽
130.
Equation (1) indicates that the CNPSS passive sampler
performance was proportional to 25.96T1/2, ⫺0.175RH, and
0.180 WSP. Increases of ambient temperature and wind
speed (when WSP ⬍ 130) will increase Rs , but increases of
relative humidity will result in the decrease of the Rs . Lab
studies found that when the RH ranged from 4 to 20%, an
203 increase of the RH gives an increase in the sampling rate.
Fortunately, ambient RHs are almost always higher then
203.7 20% in most places. Therefore, Equation (1) is suitable for
1.00 most ambient NO2 studies.
Sensitivity of Sampling Rate to Meteorological Con-
ditions. The meteorological parameters used in Eq. (1) can
be obtained from local weather stations. Actually, even a 5
⬚C decrease of temperature can only reduce the sampling
rate from 68 to 64 ml/min (Field Study No. 3), a difference
of 4 ml/min. This change is not significant; it can only cause
a relative deviation of around 6%. But, for different seasons
(such as summer and winter in Alberta) or at different lo-
cations in the world (such as Florida and Alberta in winter),
the temperature difference might be as high as 50 ⬚C. The
change is more significant. Assuming RH ⫽ 52 percent,
WSP ⫽ 11 km/h, a high temperature of 30 ⬚C, and a low
temperature of ⫺10 ⬚C, the sampling rates will change from
79 to 48 ml/min, a difference of 31 ml/min. The relative
deviation is quite substantial.
A change in RH of 5% does not seriously affect the sam-
pling rate. With Field Study No. 3 as an example, if RH
changes from 52% to 57%, the Rs changes from 68 to 67
ml/min. This is a change of 1 ml/min or about 2%.
The CNPSS passive sampler is designed for weekly or
monthly sampling periods. When meteorological conditions
are averaged over such sampling periods, they do not vary
greatly within a specific geographical area.
(1)
Field Study
Field-study results are listed in Tables 7 and 8. Table 7
shows the locations, sampling periods, meteorological con-
ditions, calculated sampling rates, NO2 concentrations mea-
sured by the passive samplers and monitored by the contin-
uous NO2 analyzer, and the relative differences between the
continuous analyzer and the passive sampler. Table 8 lists

TABLE 7. Field study results.

Avg. NO2 NO2

Avg. Avg. WSP Rs (ppb) (ppb) Error
No. Locat. Day Period RH (%) T (⬚C) km/h (ml/min) Pass. Anal. %

1 EIMU 7 18– 25 March 70 3 11 54 19 20 5

2 EIMU 14 18 March– 1 April 70 4 12 55 22 22 0
3 EIMU 25 1– 26 May 52 16 11 68 11 12 8
4 EIMU 22 26 May– 17 June 57 13 12 65 11 13 15
5 PM 11 6– 17 March 62 ⫺14 10 47 6.2 6.4 5
6 PM 18 17 March– 3 April 61 1 12 54 6.4 5.9 8
7 PM 14 1– 15 May 58 11 11 63 3.3 2.9 14
8 PM 31 1 May– 1 June 59 12 11 63 3.0 3.2 6
9 FM 28 6 March– 3 April 61 ⫺5 9 50 4.8 4.6 4
10 FM 28 3 April– 1 May 55 6 10 59 2.3 2.7 13

Note. Locat. ⫽ station; Avg. ⫽ average; Pass. ⫽ passive sampler; Anal. ⫽ NO2 analyzer. short
standard
long

FIELD ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY— 1999 343

FACT WILEY-Interscience LEFT INTERACTIVE

TABLE 8. Field triplication results.

Concentration of NO2 (ppb)

Test Average STD
no. No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 (ppb) (%)

1 7.0 7.0 6.6 6.8 3

2 5.9 6.0 6.6 6.2 6
3 6.6 6.4 6.1 6.4 3
4 4.4 5.1 3.9 4.5 13
5 3.6 3.3 3.3 3.4 6
6 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.6 0
7 4.6 5.2 4.7 4.8 6
8 2.7 2.8 2.6 2.7 4
9 3.1 3.2 2.8 3.0 7
10 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.4 7

field triplicate passive sampler results. Excellent accuracy
was observed.
The field-study results further established the validity of
Eq. (1). For example, on comparing Field Study No. 3 and
Field Study No. 5, conducted during different seasons, the
calculated sampling rates with the use of Eq. (1) were 68
ml/s and 47 ml/s, respectively. If the sampling rate obtained
in Field Study No. 3 (May) was used to calculate the NO2
concentration for Field Study No. 5 (March), the result
would be 4.3 ppb, instead of 6.4 ppb. The relative error
compared to 6.4 ppb would be 33%, not 5%. When consid-
ering the operation of CNPSS in different seasons and at
different geographical areas in the world, the difference in
effective sampling rate might be larger if a fixed set value
for the sampling rate were to be used.
Conclusion
The new Maxxam (Chemex) all season NO2 passive sam-
pling system described in this report is suitable for monitor-
ing NO2 concentrations in the atmosphere for field studies,
especially for networks. CHEMIX娃 is shown to be a highly
efficient collection medium for sampling NO2 concentra-
tions in air. The unique design of CNPSS can avoid the
effect of suspended particles in the atmosphere on the sam-
pling rates. The equation determined from the laboratory and
field studies can provide reasonable sampling rates for field
measurement. Based on laboratory studies, the CNPSS can
be used to measure ambient NO2 concentrations ranging
from 0.1 to 50 ppb for month-long exposure periods.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the National Research Coun-
cil of Canada. Many thanks to Mr. Ray Brassard of Alberta
Environmental Protection and James Sandaluk of Maxxam
Analytics Inc. for technical help. The authors also want to
express their appreciation to Dr. Graham R. Bruce of Okan-
agan University College for his constructive review.
References
1. Blacker JH. Triethanolamine for Collecting NO2 in the TLV range. Am
Ind Hyg Assoc J 1973;34:390– 396.
2. Ellis EC, Margeson JH. Evaluation of TEA procedure for determina-
tion of nitrogen dioxide in ambient air. EPA Report No. 650/4.74-031,
July 1974.
3. Sodium arsenate method for the determination of nitrogen dioxide in
the atmosphere. Federal Register 1977;42:62971.
4. TGS-ANSA Method for the Determination of Nitrogen Dioxide in the
Atmosphere. Federal Register 1977;42:62971.
5. Lipari L. New solid-sorbent method for ambient nitrogen dioxide mon-
itoring. Anal Chem 1984;56:1820– 1826.
6. Ferm M. Further development of a diffusion sampler for NO2. Swedish
Environmental Research Institute Report No. IVL-L86/180, 1986.
7. Ferm M, Rodhe H. Measurement of air concentration of SO2, NO2 and
NH3 at Rural and Remote Sites in Asia. J Atmos Chem 1997;27:17–
29.
8. Gair AJ, Penkett SA, Ovola P. Development of a simple passive tech-
nology for the determination of nitrogen dioxide in remote continental
locations. Atmos Environ 1991;25:1927– 1939.
9. HIOSH Method 6700, 1984.
10. Mulik JD, Williams D. Passive sampling devices for NO2. In: Pro-
ceedings of the 1986 EPA/APCA symposium of measurement of Toxic
Air Pollutants, Raleigh, NC, April 1986. p 61– 79.
11. Ogawa & Company USA, Inc. NO– NO2 simultaneous sampling pro-
tocol. June 1994.
12. Palmes ED, Gunnison AF, DiMattio J, Tomczyk C. Personal sampler
for nitrogen dioxide. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1976;37:570– 577.
13. Sickles JE, Mitchle RM. Investigation of the performance of sulphation
and nitration plates. Environment Service Research Laboratory, Re-
search Triangle Park. NTIS Report No. PB84-211184, 1984.
14. Tang H, Brassard B. Development and validation of an all-season SO2
passive samplers. In: Proceedings, Clean Air ’96, the Second North
American Conference and Exhibition, Orlando, FL, November 19– 22,
1996.
15. Tang H, Brassard B, Brassard R, Peake E. A new passive sampling
system for monitoring SO2 in the atmosphere. Field Anal Chem Tech-
nol 1997;1:307– 314.
16. Tang H, Lau T, Brassard B. New all-season passive sampling system short
standard
long

344 FIELD ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY— 1999

FACT WILEY-Interscience RIGHT INTERACTIVE

for monitoring SO2 and NO2 in the atmosphere. In: Proceedings, En-
ergizing Air Issue for the 21st Century: The Need for Multidisciplinary
Management, Calgary, Canada, September 20– 24, 1997.
17. Alberta Research Council. Independent validation of Chemex (Max-
xam Analytics, Inc.) all season passive sampling system (CSPSS),
March 1998.
18. APHA. Standard method to the examination of water and wastewater
(18th ed.) 1992. p 4– 85.
19. Skeggs LT. An automatic method for colorimetric analysis. Am J Clin
Pathol 1957;28:311– 322.
20. Alberta Environmental Centre (AEC). Method manual for chemical
analysis of water and wastes. NAQUADAT No. 07205, March 1985.

short
standard
long

FIELD ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY— 1999 345