1

From: Garwood, Gerri <Garwood.Gerri@epa.gov>

Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 3:50 PM

To: Scott Brown; Putney, David

Cc: Green, David A.

Subject: RE: Method 428/429 glassware soak

Scott, 

The back half (everything after the resin trap) does not need to 

be analyzed for D/Fs. 

Gerri G. Garwood, P.E. 

-------------------------------------------------------- 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

OAR/OAQPS/SPPD 

Measurement Policy Group 

Ph: 919-541-2406 Fax: 919-541-3207 

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

From: Scott Brown [mailto:sbrown@cleanair.com] 

Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 12:32 PM 

To: Putney, David 

Cc: Green, David A.; Garwood, Gerri 

Subject: RE: Method 428/429 glassware soak 

Sorry but I have one more request, 

Please verify that the impingers and their rinses do not get 

analyzed for PCDD/PCDF as they do in CARB 428. 

Scott Brown 

Project Manager 

CleanAir 

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

From: Putney, David [mailto:putney.david@epa.gov] 

Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 11:01 AM 

To: Scott Brown 

Cc: Green, David A.; Garwood, Gerri 

Subject: FW: Method 428/429 glassware soak 
2

Mr. Brown, 

Please see below for the response to your questions regarding 

Methods 428 and 429. 

Thanks, and have a great weekend. 

David Putney, Environmental Engineer 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Sector Policies and 

Programs Division 

109 T.W. Alexander Drive, RTP, NC 27711 

Mail Drop D243-02 

Ph: (919) 541-2016 Fax: (919) 541-3207 

Email: putney.david@epa.gov 

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

From: Garwood, Gerri 

Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 10:16 AM 

To: Putney, David 

Subject: RE: Method 428/429 glassware soak 

David, 

This is the response I got from MTG: 

This plan is acceptable, though the tester may want to add a 

knock out in front of the first impinger if water condensation 

might be an issue. 

Furthermore, the tester should verify this approach with the 

lab. In the field, they should keep the fractions separate 

(front half/back half with the XAD sorbent trap as the dividing 

line). The back half should only be analyzed for the PCBs/PAHs.

So the fractions would be 

FH - acetone 

FH- toluene 

FH - filter 

XAD 

BH - impingers 

BH - acetone 

BH - toluene 
3

Rereading the original email, I realized Scott only mentioned 

soaking the connecting glassware. The tester should also soak 

the condenser. 

Gerri 

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

From: Putney, David 

Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 4:37 PM 

To: Garwood, Gerri 

Subject: FW: Method 428/429 glassware soak 

Gerri, 

Sorry, but I'm coming back to the well again. Would you please 

take a look at the request below and let me know if the tester's 

plan is acceptable? 

Thanks, 

David Putney, Environmental Engineer 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Sector Policies and 

Programs Division 

109 T.W. Alexander Drive, RTP, NC 27711 

Mail Drop D243-02 

Ph: (919) 541-2016 Fax: (919) 541-3207 

Email: putney.david@epa.gov 

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

From: Scott Brown [mailto:sbrown@cleanair.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 1:07 PM 

To: Green, David A. 

Cc: Putney, David 

Subject: RE: Method 428/429 glassware soak 

Mr. Green, 

One more question regarding the combination of CARB 428 and 429 

and the designated impinger trains. 
4

428 calls for 4 impingers, all modified Greenberg Smith with the 

first impinger being a knock out impinger, second containing 100 

ml DI H2O, third empty and fourth silica gel. 

429 calls for 4 impingers, all modified Greenberg Smith with the 

first two impingers each containing 100 ml of 3mM NaHCO3 / 2.4 

mM Na2CO3, third empty and fourth silica gel. 

I have been planning on combining these by using four impingers: 

knockout, modified, modified, modified with impingers 1 and 2 

continaing the NaHCO3 / Na2CO3 solution, the third empty and the 

fourth silica gel. 

Is this acceptable? 

Scott Brown 

CleanAir 

847-654-4544 

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

From: Green, David A. [mailto:green@rti.org] 

Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 7:03 AM 

To: sbrown@cleanair.com 

Cc: putney.david@epa.gov 

Subject: Method 428/429 glassware soak 

Mr. Brown: 

We recommend doing the five minute soak to ensure the best 

quality data. 

Even though CARB 428/429 don't require it, those methods also 

use different solvents so it makes sense for the procedures to 

be somewhat different. 

David Green 

RTI International 

919.316.3412 

www.rti.org 

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

From: Scott Brown [mailto:sbrown@cleanair.com] 
5

Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 1:51 PM 

To: Green, David A. 

Subject: RE: solvents for M428/429 

Thank you for your quick response. 

To verify. CARB Methods 428 and 429 call for rinsing all 

components of the train three times with the recovery solvents 

but do not require a 5 minute soak (in triplicate) of the 

connecting glassware with the final rinse solvent as Method 23 

does. 

Since we are using CARB 428 / 429 per the ICR should we follow 

the 

method(s) and not soak, just rinse? 

Scott Brown 

Project Manager 

CleanAir 

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

From: Green, David A. [mailto:green@rti.org] 

Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 12:43 PM 

To: Scott Brown 

Subject: RE: solvents for M428/429 

Mr. Brown: 

The use of acetone/toluene for recovery is acceptable. 

Basically, you should follow Method 23 recovery but may skip the 

methylene chloride step. 

Please let me know if any other questions arise. 

David Green 

RTI International 

919.316.3412 

www.rti.org 

-- 

--