1

Green, David A.

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) doe s 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 d o 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 soak2 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 c ondensation 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 t he PCBs/PAHs.

So the fractions would be

FH - acetone
FH- toluene
FH - filter

XAD BH - impingers

BH - acetone
BH - toluene3 Rereading the original email, I realized Scott only mentioned soaking the connecting glassware. The tester shoul d 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 S mith with the first impinger being a knock out impinger, second c ontaining 100 ml DI H2O, third empty and fourth silica gel.

429 calls for 4 impingers, all modified Greenberg S mith with the first two impingers each containing 100 ml of 3mM N aHCO3 / 2.4 mM Na2CO3, third empty and fourth silica gel.

I have been planning on combining these by using fo ur impin gers: knockout, modified, modified, modified with impinge rs 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 t he best quality data. Even though CARB 428/429 don't require it, those me thods also use different solvents so it makes sense for the pr ocedures 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 rinsi ng all components of the train three times with the recove ry solvents but do not require a 5 minute soak (in triplicate) of the connecting glassware with the final rinse solvent a s Method 23
does.

Since we are using CARB 428 / 429 per the ICR shoul d 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 acceptab le. 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

--

--