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@hoeflerne t.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 th at 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/ocondensables 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 ju st 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]