From: <Myers.Ron@epamail.epa.gov>

To: Ray.Merrill@erg.com

CC: Ray.Merrill@erg.com; Joe.Fanjoy@erg.com; Danny.Greene@erg.com; 

ahansen@hoeflernet.com

Date: 6/22/2009 2:29 PM

Subject: Re: Fw: OTM-028 questions

Thanks Ray,

Angela, if Rays explanation of the nomenclature, purpose and use for the

various field blank and reagent blank samples needs additional

clarification e-mail or call me.

_________________________________

Ron Myers

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Sector Policy and Programs Division

Monitoring Policy Group, D243-05

RTP NC 27711

Tel. 919.541.5407

Fax 919.541.1039

E-mail myers.ron@epa.gov

|------------>

| From: |

|------------>

 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

 |"Ray Merrill" <Ray.Merrill@erg.com> 

|

 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

|------------>

| To: |

|------------>

 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

 |Ron Myers/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, <ahansen@hoeflernet.com> 

|

 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

|------------>

| Cc: |

|------------>

 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

 |"Danny Greene" <Danny.Greene@erg.com>, "Joe Fanjoy" <Joe.Fanjoy@erg.com>, "Ray Merrill" 

<Ray.Merrill@erg.com> |

 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

|------------>

| Date: |

|------------>

 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|
 |06/22/2009 02:03 PM |

 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

|------------>

| Subject: |

|------------>

 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

 |Re: Fw: OTM-028 questions |

 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

Hi Ron and Angela;

I thought I'd chime in here with some thoughts on the application of

proposed Method 202 (OTM 28) that come from the laboratory and field

evaluation of the method that we did for EPA.

The Rinse Blanks discussed in Sample Recovery Section 8.5.4.7-9 are the

field solvents used when sampling trains are recovered. These are the

same samples referred to in the Analytical Procedures Section 11.2.5-7.

I recommend to Ron that the terms used to describe these samples should

be identical to alleviate confusion. However, the samples containers

are named consistently in the Method so the confusion should be

minimal.

The volume of rinse reagent blanks from the field is ~150 mL in the

method. This volume is intentionally greater than the 100 mL used for

blank analysis on the premise that there would be at least 100 mL

available for the blank analysis once the samples got back to the

laboratory. This approach should make it easier for the field samplers

to quickly generate sufficient rinse reagent blank samples and ensure

adequate volume for the blank analysis.

The rinse blanks are one of the three major QC components of proposed

Method 202. The rinse blanks are not used to correct any sample data

but rather they are intended to be used by the sampling and the

analytical firms to track the origin of blank contamination in the field

samples.

The laboratory reagent blank is another of the QC components of the

method. The method includes analysis of laboratory reagent blanks so

that the sampling and analytical firms can determine if field blank

values originate from the laboratory reagents rather than the field.

Laboratory reagent blanks are not used to correct any of the field

data.

The field train blanks are a third major QC component and intended to

represent the total contribution of blank contamination during a field

sampling and laboratory analytical effort. That being said, the method

allows subtracting the field train blank value from the sample results

up to but not to exceed 2 mg/sampling train.
Let me know is this helps clarify the method or if you have additional

questions I may be able to field...

Ray

Raymond G. Merrill Ph.D.

Eastern Research Group

Principal Scientist

Senior Program Manager

601 Keystone Park Dr Ste 700

Morrisville, NC 27560

Phone 919 468 7887

FAX 919 468 7803

The information contained in this communication and its attachment(s)

is intended only for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed

and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt

from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended

recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,

or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have

received this communication in error, please notify ray.merrill@erg.com

and delete the communication without retaining any copies.

>>> <Myers.Ron@epamail.epa.gov> 6/17/2009 8:01 AM >>>

_________________________________

Ron Myers

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Sector Policy and Programs Division

Monitoring Policy Group, D243-05

RTP NC 27711

Tel. 919.541.5407

Fax 919.541.1039

E-mail myers.ron@epa.gov

----- Forwarded by Ron Myers/RTP/USEPA/US on 06/17/2009 08:00 AM -----

From:

"Angela Hansen" <ahansen@hoeflernet.com>

To:

"Kris Hansen" <khansen@hoeflernet.com>, Ron Myers/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc:

"Steve Fryberger" <sfryberger@hoeflernet.com>

Date:

06/16/2009 09:21 PM

Subject:

OTM-028 questions

Ron - I'm helping Kris review OTM-028 and I am getting confused. Are

the

"Rinse Blanks" discussed in Section 8.5.4.7-9 (labeled Containers 6, 7,
and 8) different from the "Field Rinse Blanks" in Section 11.2.5-7

(also

called Containers 6, 7, and 8)? In Section 8 they say take 150 mL

samples

and in Section 11 they say take 100 mL samples. There is also

discussion

of pre-test Reagent Blanks in Section 9.8. I assume those are not

containers 6, 7, and 8, but a separate set of blanks done in the lab

before the field testing. Are "Rinse Blanks" the same thing as

"Reagent

Blanks?" Is the water, acetone, and DCM blank mass subtracted from

anything? Is there any quality assurance criterion for the pre and

post

blanks; for example in method 5 the maximum blank is 0.079 mg/ml. We

understand the 2.0 mg field blank mass criterion .It looks like you

just

run the blanks to make sure you have clean reagents, but all you

subtract

from your samples is the total Field Blank mass mfb. We are developing

the attached lab data sheets and had these questions. Does the way

that

we are labeling the blank lab datasheets make sense?

Thanks,

Angela

Angela Hansen, QSTI

Principal Scientist

AmTest Air Quality, a Division of Hoefler Consulting Group

ahansen@hoeflernet.com

CELL: (208) 891-4550

-----Original Message-----

From: Kris Hansen

Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 8:30 AM

To: Myers.Ron@epamail.epa.gov

Cc: Angela Hansen; Steve Fryberger

Subject: RE: Section 114 Electronic Reporting

Ron - thanks for the clarification. Angie says hi back!

Kris

Kris Hansen, QEP

Sr. Consultant

AmTest Air Quality,

a Division of Hoefler Consulting Group

PO Box 525

Preston, WA 98050

425-222-7746

425-222-7849 (fax)

khansen@hoeflernet.com

www.amtestairquality.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Myers.Ron@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Myers.Ron@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 6:04 AM

To: Kris Hansen

Cc: Parker.Barrett@epa.gov;

Gary_McAlister/RTP/USEPA/US@mintra01.rtp.epa.gov;

Grimley.William@epamail.epa.gov; Segall.Robin@epamail.epa.gov;

Westlin.Peter@epamail.epa.gov; Eddinger.Jim@epamail.epa.gov;

Maxwell.Bill@epamail.epa.gov; Shrager.Brian@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: Re: Section 114 Electronic Reporting

The ICR requires the collection of filterable PM2.5 and condensable PM

data. Even though the ICR separates these two components of PM2.5,

you

are correct in thinking that PM2.5 includes the condensable fraction.

The ICR specifies the use of OTM 27 for the filterable PM2.5 sampling

and OTM 28 for the condensable PM testing. There are no alternatives

for these two methods. These two methods are exactly like the

proposed

revisions of Method 201A and 202. In the spreadsheet that you are

preparing, you will note that the next tab to the right is PM

(condensable).

 In the use of the ERT, you would select CTM 40 for the filterable

PM2.5

(OTM 27 replaced CTM 40) and you would select Method 202 for OTM 28

(you

would indicate in the continuation page for the test methods that you

are using these updated test methods).

Say Hello to Angela.

_________________________________

Ron Myers

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Sector Policy and Programs Division

Monitoring Policy Group, D243-05

RTP NC 27711

Tel. 919.541.5407

Fax 919.541.1039

E-mail myers.ron@epa.gov

|------------>

| From: |

|------------>

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

 |"Kris Hansen"

<khansen@hoeflernet.com>

|

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|
|------------>

| To: |

|------------>

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

 |Ron Myers/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

 |

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

|------------>

| Date: |

|------------>

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

 |06/15/2009 06:58 PM

 |

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

|------------>

| Subject: |

|------------>

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

 |Section 114 Electronic

Reporting

 |

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|

Ron – I am getting my workbooks set up for the upcoming Section 114

testing that we will be performing over the next few months. I am

reviewing the link found on the ERG “Test Plan for Boilers, Process

Heaters, and Commercial Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators” webpage.

 I

have a question concerning the PM2.5 reporting workbook. On the tab

PM

(filter) worksheet: cells C51,D51, & E51 - is this the PM2.5 w/o
condensables or should it also include the condensables? I normally

think of PM2.5 as including condensables. The next tab is PM

(condensable) which obviously has just the condensables which are all

PM

2.5.

One other thing is that the sample date can’t be enterer if after

12/31/08.

Thanks,

Kris

Kris Hansen, QEP

Sr. Consultant

AmTest Air Quality,

a Division of Hoefler Consulting Group

PO Box 525

Preston, WA 98050

425-222-7746

425-222-7849 (fax)

khansen@hoeflernet.com

www.amtestairquality.com

 [attachment "OTM-28 - Lab Datasheets.pdf" deleted by Ron

Myers/RTP/USEPA/US]