The Method Update Rule-- 2017 Does this affect me? HOW?

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Radiochemical Methods and Data Evaluation
Advertisements

Quality is a Lousy Idea-
EPA Methods 3A, 6C, 7E, 10 & 20 Corrections to May 15, 2006 Final Rule That Updated the Methods That Updated the Methods Foston Curtis US EPA.
UNDERSTANDING ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY/QC REPORTS Maya Murshak – Merit Laboratories, Inc.
1 Method Selection and Development l Initial Considerations n What does the method need to do? 3 What analyte/s need to be assayed? 3 What range or concentration.
Module 6 Effluent Monitoring and Receiving Water Monitoring.
Mentoring Session Technical Assistance Committee Method Modifications.
Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs)
Copyright © 2015, TestAmerica Laboratories, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 EPAs New MDL Procedure What it Means, Why it Works, and How to Comply Richard Burrows.
DOW Laboratory Certification Program Update – 2015 Presentation to: KWWOA April 15, 2015 Department for Environmental Protection Energy & Environment Cabinet.
...Green Technology through Innovation Ensuring Data Accuracy at the Lowest Limit Possible Presented by: Judy Morgan, MS, REM VP, Chief Regulatory Officer.
Microorganisms (The Coliform Group Bacteria) S. D. Spence.
Detect Limits as Representation for a Standard VAP Rule Discussion Dawn Busalacchi Risk Assessor, DERR, Central Office VAP Rule Discussion Dawn Busalacchi.
Field Analysis Quality Control
WWLC Standard Operating Procedures Presented by Frank Hall, Laboratory Certification Coordinator.
Variances seen in Bacterial Analysis for Water and Waste Water Sampling Gretchen Hathaway Whatman Sales Representative July 19, 2007.
Wastewater Treatment Plants & Bacteria Strategies for Compliance Best Practices for Effluent Sampling TANNY BUSBY & LAURA BONJONIA ENVIRODYNE LABORATORIES,
Laboratory Technical Issues Presentation to: KWWOA April 9, 2014 Department for Environmental Protection Environmental & Public Protection Cabinet To Protect.
Quality WHAT IS QUALITY
How to Select a Test Method Marlene Moore Advanced Systems, Inc. June 15, 2010.
| Philadelphia | Atlanta | Houston | Washington DC Boiler MACT Compliance Plans: Failure to Develop Plans Is Planning to Fail Susie Bowden|
1 / 9 ASTM D19 Method Validation Procedures William Lipps Analytical & Measuring Instrument Division July, 2015.
Understanding Your QC Presentation to: KWWOA April 15, 2015 Department for Environmental Protection Energy & Environment Cabinet To Protect and Enhance.
Wastewater Laboratory Certification Presented at: KWWOA April17,
Quality Assurance How do you know your results are correct? How confident are you?
Laboratory Certification Update Part 2 Common Findings KWWOA Louisville April 15, 2015 Presented by Frank Hall, Laboratory Certification Coordinator.
Forum FM308: Policy Changes Tuesday June 5 10:00 a.m. AIHA Laboratory Accreditation Policy Changes—ISO “How Do Changes Affect My Laboratory?” “What.
William Telliard U.S. EPA Office of Science and Technology
Control Charts and Trend Analysis for ISO 17025
LECTURE 13 QUALITY ASSURANCE METHOD VALIDATION
 Routine viral diagnostics: indirect and direct detection of viruses. ◦ Indirect detection: serological tests; ◦ Direct detection:  Viral antigens;
Copyright © 2015, TestAmerica Laboratories, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 EPAs New MDL Procedure What it Means, Why it Works, and How to Comply Richard Burrows.
George E. Detsis Manager, Analytical Services Program United States Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety and Security Office of Sustainability.
Microorganisms (The Coliform Group Bacteria)
Overview CWA Methods Update Rule Method 608.3
On behalf of Jerry Parr, Executive Director, TNI
Brian Cornwell NASA GSFC Wallops Flight Facility, Wallops Island, VA
Determination of TKN by Subtraction using ASTM D and ASTM D
Quality is a Lousy Idea-
Clean Water Act Methods Overview of EPA’s CWA Method Activities
An Update to the 40 CFR Part 136 Method Detection Limit
The 2015/2016 TNI Standard and the EPA MDL Update
Method Modifications & ATP 40 CFR part and 136.5
Status of EPA Method 1631 for the Determination of Low-Level Mercury
Overview of EPA Method 1631, Revision E By Roy W
EPA Method Equivalency
Recent FDA Announcements – Agricultural Water
The 201x Method Update Rule
Department of Environmental Quality
The Analysis of Soils and Waters in Accordance with U. S
Have Instrument, make method; How new methods are made and validated
Quality is a Lousy Idea-
Update on ASTM and Standard Methods method development activities
Clean Water Act Methods Overview of EPA’s CWA Method Activities
Observations from California’s On-Site Assessment Unit
EPA Method Equivalency
EPA Region 10 Alternate Test Procedures and Method Update Rule
What it Means, Why it Works, and How to Comply
Composition of Domestic Wastewater
Why Use Them? By: Marcy Bolek – Alloway
RPA and the DEQ Drive for Lower Detection Limits
Lab 6: Most Probable Number Method (MPN)
Environmental Laboratory Certification Program (ELCP)
SDWA Collaborative Efforts Overview
National Environmental Monitoring Conference
TCEQ Environmental Trade Fair Water Quality Division
Activities of The NELAC Institute (TNI) to Improve Data Quality
Andy Eaton, PhD, BCES Technical Director Joint Editorial Board-Chair
2019 AWOP National Meeting Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
Lab 6: Most Probable Number Method (MPN)
Presentation transcript:

The Method Update Rule-- 2017 Does this affect me? HOW?

Method Updates Standard Methods updated to reflect those published in the 22nd Edition Method number with the year of publication The method for BOD/CBOD is SM 5210 B-2011

Standard Methods Updated methods refer to quality control sections 1020—Chemical and Radiochemical analyses 2020—2000 Methods (Turbidity, Acidity, Hardness, Solids, etc.) 3020— 3000 (Metals) and 4000 (Inorganic Nonmetallic Methods 9020—Microbiology

Micro Methods Some changes to SM 9222B (Standard Total Coliforms) Allows use of humidified incubator Added a note in Procedure section 4.5f that at least 5 typical and atypical colonies must be verified per membrane The calculation of coliform density (Section 5b “Water of other than drinking water quality”) has been modified to be more like the EPA Microbiological counting rules

Micro Methods... SM 9222D-2006 “Thermotolerant (Fecal) coliform Membrane Filter Procedure” Footnote 30 was added to Table IA, requiring on a monthly basis, at least ten blue colonies from the medium must be verified using Lauryl Tryptose Broth and EC both

Updated EPA Methods Pesticides and PCBs: 608 is now 608.3 Includes additional analytes Allows for alternate detector; Requires confirmation of identification Added reporting limits Allows for SPE Allows for method modifications

VOA and SVOA Organics Volatiles--624 is now 624.1 Expanded scope to include additional analytes Allows for method modifications Allows for flexibility Semivolatiles—625 is now 625.1 Changes are very similar to those in 624.1

ASTM and USGS Methods Approval of new versions of currently approved ASTM Methods New USGS Methods for the “Colorimetric Determination of Nitrate Plus Nitrite in Water by Enzymatic Reduction, Automated Discrete Analyzer Method”

Approved ATPs IDEXX Laboratories, Inc., Colilert 18 for Fecal Coliforms in Wastewater—addition of increased incubation temperature for fecal coliforms, which requires the use of a water bath HACH 10242: “Simplified Spectrophotometric Measurement of TKN in Water and Wastewater” HACH 10206: “Spectrophotometric Measurement of Nitrate in Water and Wastewater” Remember IDOPs!

Corrections made to the 40CFR Typographical errors, technology updates, etc. Whole Effluent Toxicity Acute and Chronic Methods Manuals—clarifications in the definition of terms, consistency corrections among all three manuals. Table II, Required Containers, Preservation Techniques, and Holding Times Sodium thiosulfate concentrations for bacterial tests have been changed from 0.0008% to 0.008% sodium thiosulfate

Corrections/Clarifications Alternative Test Procedures Section: error in 2012 Method Update Rule appeared to give State permitting authorities the authority to approve ATPs for limited use. This was never the intent Only the Regional ATP Coordinator can approve the limited use of ATPs

Why a New MDL Determination Procedure? Addresses problems with the current procedure Blank contamination Long-term variance Actual detectability Reduces false positives due to background contamination An option to have MDLs that represent multiple instruments

MDL Determination Basics remain the same: MDL – the lowest result that reliably indicates the analyte is in the sample Calculation is unchanged The entire analytical process is incorporated—extraction, digestion

How is it different? Definition has changed slightly... OLD--“99% confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero...” NEW—”99% confidence that the measured concentration is distinguishable from method blank results...”

Inclusion of Method Blanks Low Level Spikes AND method blanks are analyzed over multiple days (at least 3) and multiple instruments An MDL calculated using the mean and standard deviation of MB results is compared with the MDL calculated from spiked samples The greater MDL is used as the “Reported MDL”

Initial Determination of MDL Blanks: Analyze at least 7 method blanks over a minimum of 3 days. Existing data is preferred; Calculate the MDLB using the formula: MDLB = mean +(SD)(Student’s t value) MB results must be numerical; may be POSITIVE or NEGATIVE Use “Zero” for the mean if it is negative If all MB results are Non-detect (no peak on a chromatogram) the MDLB does not apply

Spiked Samples... Prepared and analyzed over at least 3 calendar days Calculate the MDLS as per usual: MDLS = SD(Student’s t value)

Compare results The reported MDL will be the greater value– MDLB or MDLS

Ongoing Data Collection Only use data associated with valid calibrations and batch QC Analyze at least two spikes (in separate batches) on each instrument per quarter for a total of at least 7 per year. Spike at the same concentration as the initial MDL spikes IF > 5% of the spikes are not positive numerical results that meet method identification criteria, increase spiking level and re-determine initial MDL

Collection of MB Data Analyze at least 7 blanks per year Use routine MB that are part of batch QC from the last 24 months If the number of MB>100, may use the 50 most recent results or those generated within the most recent 6 months—whichever is greater

Annual Verification of MDL Every 13 months using the collected data from the past 24 months MB from the past 24 months Spiked samples at the same concentration as initial MDL spikes Include the initial MDL spikes if generated during the 24 month time frame

Re-calculate the MDLB & MDLS The verified MDL is the greater of the two values If the verified MDL is within 0.5 to 2.0 times the existing MDL, and fewer than 3% of the MB results have numerical results above the existing MDL, then the existing MDL may optionally be left unchanged. Otherwise, adjust the MDL to the new, verification MDL

MDL Procedure Implementation Issues Different process, new mind-set! Remembering to analyze quarterly spikes Keeping up with the data Possibly hundreds of method blank results to consider Multi-analyte tests such as volatiles, semivolatiles a bit cumbersome Learn the calculation rules

When will the MUR be approved? The MUR goes into effect 30 days after publishing date in Federal Register No estimated publication date!

How long will I have to implement the changes? Begin addressing the changes immediately New methods such as 624.1, 625.1, and 608.3 take time to learn and implement To implement MDL guidelines will not be instantaneous

The MUR of ???? Approval of updated methods Some “old” methods are going away—608, 624, 625→608.1, 624.1, 625.1 Approval of ATP methods: IDEXX for fecal; HACH 10242 for TKN; HACH 10206 for Nitrate Need to perform an IDOC for any new methods The new procedure for MDL determination

Questions? semberskip@adeq.state.ar.us For your attention!