Tobacco Documents Online

Michael W. Ogden, Ph.D. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. Research & Development P.O. Box 1236 Winston-Salem, NC 27102-1236 Telephone: 336-741-5787 Facsimile: 336-741-5019 E-mail: ogdenm@rjrtcom June 22, 1999 MINUTES OF CORESTA'S ETS SUB-GROUP MEETING Budapest, Hungary March 23, 1999 Attendees: Jan Arnarp, Takuya Asai, Hoy Bohanon, Jiirgen Hollweg, Michael Intorp, Dieter Kannengiesser, Michael Ogden, Derek Mariner, Tatsuya Ono, Jean-Jacques Piad6, Stephen Purkis, Yves Saint-Jalm, Joaquin Sarabia, Gerhard Scherer, Matthias Schorp, Helen Taylor Introduction Mike OGDEN welcomed participants to the meeting. The 16 Sub-Group members present signed the attendance list and received the agenda. Sub-Group Business Review/Update of ETS Sub-Group Mandate The current objectives of the Sub-Group were reviewed. Specific activities, as mandated by the Scientific Commission, include: 1. Develop methods for the following ETS constituents: RSP, UVPM, FPM, solanesol, 3- ethenylpyridine and update nicotine method. 2. Study effectiveness of ventilation and design of various smoking locations. 3. Provide recommendations for conducting representative sampling and guidance on interpretation of ETS measurements in the context of overall air quality. • Overview of CORESTA Publication Policy Prior to the meeting, the Restaurant Survey working group had asked the convenor to provide guidance in areas of COILESTA's publication policy as it concerned work undertaken within the Sub-Group. Following consultation with the Scientific Commission (SC), and subsequent consultation with the Board, the essence of CORESTA's policy was explained. In general, results of Task Force and Sub-Group work are confidential to CORESTA until a work item (generally a method or a protocol) is approved by the SC and the Board. However, if the work is not of this nature (i.e., not a method or protocol, such as is the case in the Restaurant Survey), it may be published without approval of the SC and the Board provided it is done in the names of 322220848

the individual participants and not in the name of CORESTA. Specifically, the Board approved/agreed that the Restaurant Survey can be published in part by any group of interested persons who participated in the work. -- Restaurant Study Progress For the restaurant indoor air quality survey, the participants discussed the next steps in completing their final report on the survey of 34 restaurants, which has been conducted in 6 countries. In essence, the work of this group has been completed and a final draft report is available. Some discussion ensued over how much of the teelmieal detail would constitute the final report. In essence, the final report is a 16 page (+/-) document entitled "Survey of Indoor Air Quality, Ventilation, and Smoking Activity in Restaurants." In addition, there are four appendices to this report which itemize--in detail the data-which were. gathered~--~o.make a complete record, it is envisioned that these appendices will be transferred to CORESTA as part of the final report; however, these mostly consist of data tabulations which are most likely of little value to anyone other than one of the participants in the study. The official acceptance of the report will not occur until the next meeting of the Sub-Group (which is envisioned as being during the meeting of the Smoke & Technology Groups in Irmsbmek in early September). Therefore, any ETS Sub-Group member who wishes to see this report in advance of the next meeting is advised to make a request of the eonvenor (Mike OGDEN) or one of the study's principal authors (Hoy BOHANON, Jean-Jacques PIADI~, Matthias SCHORP, Yves SAINT- JALM) prior to August 1, 1999. Collaborative Study Progress Mike OGDEN presented a summary of progress on the collaborative study. The collaborative study had been completed among the 11 participating laboratories. Dra_R statistical evaluations (in accordance with ISO 5725) were presented. In essence, all the study statistics looked acceptable. However, one issue (with the number of labs reporting valid data for the FPM procedure) generated considerable discussion. The essence of the situation was as follows. Eleven (11) laboratories received samples for FPM determination; however, data from 5 labs were rejected as "invalid" (i.e., not "outliers") because they failed to follow the method and did not dilute/re-analyze samples that exceeded the calibration range. In 3 of the remaining 6 labs, 1 or 2 levels were rejected as "invalid" for the same reason. This could not be deemed a fault of the method since the method protocol specifically addressed this point. Thus, the statistical evaluation for FPM began with 6 labs at 4 levels, 5 labs at 1 level, and 3 labs at 1 level. "Outlier" treatment resulted in rejection of 1 lab at each of 5 levels. Thus, the final statistics were computed from 5 labs at 4 levels, 4 labs at 1 level, and 3 labs at 1 level. The question that arose was whether or not the statistics generated from this number of labs would be acceptable. ISO "recommends" 8 as the minimum number of laboratories (in ISO 5725) but they have no absolute minimum. After considerable discussion, the matter was relegated to the collaborative study expert panel (consisting of Mike OGDEN, Jeart-Jaeqlles PIADI~, and Derek MARINER [who was nominated and elected as a replacement for Barrie FROST, who has retired]) for 322220849

resolution. It was agreed by the Sub-Group that the decision of this panel would be accepted as the decision of the Sub-Group. Further, it was agreed that the Minutes of the meeting would be delayed until a decision was reached and that the decision would be transmitted to all Sub-Group members as part of the Minutes. The resolution reached is as follows. {NOTE: The following activities and resolution occurred after the close of the ETS Sub- Group Meeting in Budapest on March 23, 1999. These activities are reported here with the Minutes of the meeting as agreed upon at the meeting. The collaborative study expert panel could not reach consensus on this matter and were split 2-1 with 2 in favor of accepting the FPM data and 1 in favor of conducting further collaborative tests. In their deliberations, the panel also conferred with Peter Adams, Chairman oflSO TC 126 for his advice on the matter. His opinion was that we were in a good position to proceed within ISO. Since the decision of the panel was not unanimous, it was decided by the convenor to present this matter to the Scientific Commission and to seek their advice. This was done during their recent meeting on May 19-20. The matter was discussed in detail at the Smoke Study Group Executive meeting and then, in abbreviated form, for the full SC. Quoting from the Minutes of the SC meeting: "The Sub- Group requests the advice of the SC on a difficulty which has arisen in the collaborative study: for FPM, only 3 to 5 labs, following the criteria used, provided valid results. ISO 5725:1994 recommends a higher number of labs but does not set a ftred minimum. After discussion on the details of the study, the Scientific Commission decided that the results obtained were sufficient and that there was no need to conduct a new collaborative study. " Therefore, the final resolution is that the results of the ETS collaborative study are deemed acceptable to the Sub- Group and the Scientific Commission. Next steps will be taken to prepare a full technical report on the collaborative study for discussion at a future Sub-Group meeting.} General Technical Presentations Yves SAINT-JALM made a presentation on "Determination of Solanesol by LC/MS". Using a single quadrupole LC/MS, limit of detection was approximately 15 times better than with LC/UV. Also, the Atmospheric Pressure Chemical Ionization (APCI) interface provided better results than the Turbo Ion Spray interface. Helen TAYLOR gave an update of the presentation she made in Brighton on "Sampling and Analysis Techniques for Odorous VOCs from ETS". In this work, sidestrcam smoke from smoldering cigarettes in a small chamber was used as a surrogate for ETS. Smoke deposited on cloth strips was analyzed and attempts are being made to correlate these results with perceived odor. Derek MARINER presented "Design and Construction of a Smoker Friendly Building", describing the new Rothmans R&D Center in Milton Keynes. Designed around the concept of displacement ventilation (a concept apparently not used previously for large-scale construction in the UK), this building is more comfortable and has potentially lowered maintenance costs compared to typical construction. 322220850

New Business As two of the three objectives of the Sub-Group are nearing completion, a significant amount of time was devoted to discussing new business (as also done during the previous meeting in Brussels). Several recurring themes were discussed, including: impact of sampling location on results; apportionment; and possible misinterpretation of UVPM and/or FPM results. In an attempt to retain sight of all these potential issues, it was suggested that the SubGroup consider preparing a Guide for sampling ETS. In such a Guide, the Sub-Group could entertain emerging issues and undertake appropriate studies on an on-going, as needed basis. Matthias SCHORP agreed to check within ISO for information (format, scope, etc.) on preparing such a Guide. Mike OGDEN agreed to do the same within ASTM. Next Meeting _. It is anticipated that the Sub-Group wJll hold a short (2-3 hours) meeting during the week of September 5-10, 1999 in Irmsbruck (during the Smoke & Technology Group meetings). Additional details will be sent to members in advance of any meeting. -~)~,~spectfully submitted, Michael W. Ogden, Convenor 322220851