NJ DWQI Testing Subcommittee

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations

Advertisements

Radiochemical Methods and Data Evaluation
DETECTION LIMITS, PQLs AND NJQLs
Why Lab. Certification? Laboratory certification tries to insure that the laboratory is qualified and capable of analyzing the sample and obtaining quality.
Quality is a Lousy Idea-
LABORATORY CERTIFICATION & DATA QUALITY MICHAEL W. MILLER, Ph.D. NJ-DEP Office of Quality Assurance
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.
Florida Pilot Initiative for the Performance Approach to Measurement Systems Stephen Arms Florida Department of Health.
Measurement of Dissolved Oxygen with a Luminescence-based Oxygen Quenching Sensor By Cary B. Jackson, Ph.D. Hach Company.
Interpreting Your Lab Report & Quality Control Results
QA/QC Considerations for Sampling and Analysis Associated with EPA Method 1631 Chuck Wibby Wibby Environmental Seminar on Low Level Mercury Data and Analyses.
World Health Organization
Detect Limits as Representation for a Standard VAP Rule Discussion Dawn Busalacchi Risk Assessor, DERR, Central Office VAP Rule Discussion Dawn Busalacchi.
Quality Assessment 2 Quality Control.
The following minimum specified ranges should be considered: Drug substance or a finished (drug) product 80 to 120 % of the test concentration Content.
QUALITY ASSURANCE Reference Intervals Lecture 4. Normal range or Reference interval The term ‘normal range’ is commonly used when referring to the range.
Rapid and Accurate Analysis of Microcystins Using UPLC/MS/MS Yongtao (Bruce) Li, Ph.D. Joshua S. Whitaker Eurofins Eaton Analytical,
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.
1 / 9 ASTM D19 Method Validation Procedures William Lipps Analytical & Measuring Instrument Division July, 2015.
Quality Control Lecture 5
Quality Assurance How do you know your results are correct? How confident are you?
1 Analytical Methods for Perchlorate: Current Technology and Possibilities for the Future David J. Munch Daniel P. Hautman Office of Ground Water and Drinking.
1 Exercise 7: Accuracy and precision. 2 Origin of the error : Accuracy and precision Systematic (not random) –bias –impossible to be corrected  accuracy.
Validation Defination Establishing documentary evidence which provides a high degree of assurance that specification process will consistently produce.
SRRTTF Interpretation of Low Level PCB Data Project Objectives and Impact on +Blank Correction Procedures.
Industrial Technology Institute Test Method Validation & Verification H.P.P.S.Somasiri Principal Research Scientist / SDD-QAD /QM Industrial 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.
TTB M (04/2010) Methods Criteria and Performance Patricia Nedialkova, Ph.D., TTB International Wine Technical Forum May 7, 2015 Prepared for the.
SEMINAR ON PRESENTED BY BRAHMABHATT BANSARI K. M. PHARM PART DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACEUTICS AND PHARMACEUTICAL TECHNOLGY L. M. COLLEGE OF PHARMACY.
means to “TO CHECK OR PROVE THE VALIDITY OF” According to FDA – “ The goal of validation is to establish a documented evidence which provides a high degree.
Determination of TKN by Subtraction using ASTM D and ASTM D
Quality is a Lousy Idea-
Pending EPA Health Advisory for PFOA and PFOS
An Update to the 40 CFR Part 136 Method Detection Limit
The 2015/2016 TNI Standard and the EPA MDL Update
Pesticides in Groundwater
EPA Method Equivalency
Added Monrovia and South Bend to the slide.
Practical clinical chemistry
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
A Short Update on Perfluorinated Alkyl Substances (PFAS)
EPA Method Equivalency
EPA Region 10 Alternate Test Procedures and Method Update Rule
What it Means, Why it Works, and How to Comply
Director of Quality Assurance
DuPont Barksdale Site Sampling and Analytical Presentation
Chapter 5 Quality Assurance and Calibration Methods
Why Use Them? By: Marcy Bolek – Alloway
USGS NJ Water Science Center 3450 Princeton Pike, Suite 110
Quality Assurance Reference Intervals.
New Jersey Drinking Water Quality Institute Treatment Subcommittee
Environmental Laboratory Certification Program (ELCP)
Remediation & Restoration
You and your lab partner independently determine the concentration of Ca2+ in a water sample. The results are: You Lab partner 350 ppm
SDWA Collaborative Efforts Overview
Introduction To Medical Technology
Quality Control Lecture 3
▪Internal quality control:
Quality Assessment The goal of laboratory analysis is to provide the accurate, reliable and timeliness result Quality assurance The overall program that.
TCEQ Environmental Trade Fair Water Quality Division
Andy Eaton, PhD, BCES Technical Director Joint Editorial Board-Chair
Presentation transcript:

NJ DWQI Testing Subcommittee Report on the Development of a Practical Quantitation Level (PQL) for Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in Drinking Water

PQL Report on Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) Testing Subcommittee Members Bahman Parsa, Ph.D., Chair Sandra Krietzman Sheng-Lu Soong, Ph.D. Daniel Salvito, Ph.D.   Technical Support Linda Bonnette Tina Fan, Ph.D. Robert Lee Lippincott, Ph.D. Collin D. Riker

Definitions Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) is the minimum concentration for which an analyte can be reliably quantitated within an acceptable limit of uncertainty. Reporting Limit (RL) is the minimum concentration by which an analyte is reliably quantitated by an individual laboratory. Method Detection Limit (MDL) is a measurement used by a laboratory to determine specific minimum detection capabilities for a particular method. Minimum Reporting Level (MRL) is the minimum concentration that can be reported as a quantitated value for a method analyte in a sample following analysis. Lowest Concentration MRL (LCMRL) is the lowest spiking concentration at which recovery of between 50 and 150% is expected 99% of the time by a single analyst. Bootstrap Estimate of a Confidence Interval of the Mean is an statistical technique that has been used most recently by the USEPA and is applied to generate a normal distribution and associated 95 % upper and lower confidence intervals from the skewed mean (not median) values for the inter-laboratory MDLs and RLs.

Due to the limited number of laboratories performing analyses for PFOA in the NJDEP PFC database, the Testing Subcommittee reviewed analytical information from other laboratories performing PFC analyses. In considering other sources of PFOA data, the following criteria were established by the Testing Subcommittee: Laboratories that analyzed water samples for PFOA for NJDEP PFC studies (2006 and 2009) and as requested by water systems; Laboratories that are certified for the analysis of PFOA in drinking water by the NJDEP Office of Quality Assurance (OQA); and National laboratories that have obtained US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approval to analyze six PFCs under the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 3 (UCMR3) program using EPA Method 537 and that have demonstrated that they are capable of reporting PFOA lower than the required UCMR3 minimum reporting level (MRL) of 20 ng/L.

Proprietary WS-LC-0025 Rev 1.2 Laboratories Used for PQL Calculation in order of Increasing MDL Values Laboratory Analytical Method MDL (ng/L) Eurofins Eaton Analytical CA EPA 537 0.23 Columbia Analytical Services Modified EPA 537 0.27 American Water Central Laboratory 0.382 Proprietary MWH PFC EXTRA 0.550 Pace Analytical Services, Inc. S-FL-O-045 Rev.00 0.67 Test America-Sacramento Proprietary WS-LC-0025 Rev 1.2 0.748 Eurofins Lancaster Laboratories Environmental 1 Test America-Denver DV-LC-0012 Rev 8 1.1 Weck Laboratories 1.81 DV-LC-0012 Rev 4 2 Underwriters Laboratory L400 2.9 SGS Accutest – Orlando 8 DV-LC-0012 Rev 12 9.79 Median of the MDLs   PQL = Median of MDLs x 5 5

PQL for PFOA Developed by Using Mean of Reporting Limits Laboratory State Method Reporting Limit (ng/L) Lowest Calibration Standard (ng/L) Eurofins Eaton Analytical IN EPA 537 20 SGS Accutest- Orlando FL Test America-Sacramento CA American Water Central Laboratory IL 10 NA Orange County Water District Advanced Water Quality Assurance Lab State Hygienic Laboratory Coralville IO 15 6 MWH-PFC 5 Weck Laboratories Modified EPA 537 Underwriters Laboratory L400 Test America-Denver CO DV-LC-0012 REV 12 4 DV-LC-0012 REV 8 DV-LC-0012 REV 4 2.5 Columbia Analytical Services   WA 2 Eurofins Lancaster Laboratories Environmental PA Pace Analytical Services S-FL-O-045 Rev.00 WS-LC-0025 Rev 1.2 1 Mean of underlined values 7.2 Median of underlined values . [1] The underlined values are the lower of the reporting limit or MRL and the lowest calibration standard that was used in the 17 lab-method combinations to determine the mean and the median.

Bootstrap Estimate of a Confidence Interval of a Mean generated using the inter-laboratory MDLs : Lower Confidence Limit (ng/L) Mean Upper Confidence Limit Confidence Level Range Number of Randomly Selected Values 0.5 0.9 1.3 95% 2000 The upper confidence limit of the mean MDL x 5 = 1.3 ng/L x 5 = 6.5 ng/L

Bootstrap Estimate of a Confidence Interval of a Mean generated using the inter-laboratory Reporting Limits : Lower Confidence Limit (ng/L) Mean Upper Confidence Limit Confidence Level Range Number of Randomly Selected Values 3.4 4.6 6.0 95% 2000

Summary of approaches for Calculating a PQL for PFOA Value (ng/L) Median MDL x 5 5 Mean of RLs/Lowest Calibration Standards 7.2 Median of RLs/Lowest Calibration Standards 5.0 Bootstrap Upper Confidence Limit MDL x 5 6.5 Bootstrap RL Upper Confidence Limit 6.0 The mean of the above values is 5.9 ng/L.

Calculating a PQL for PFOA Using Only the RLs or Lowest Calibration Standards Data Approach Value (ng/L) Mean of RLs/Lowest Calibration Standards 7.2 Median of RLs/Lowest Calibration Standards 5.0 Bootstrap RL Upper Confidence Limit 6.0 The mean of the above values is 6.1 ng/L.

The Testing Subcommittee decided to use the method for deriving the PFOA PQL that takes into consideration both the precision and accuracy of the analytical method. Therefore the Testing Subcommittee relied on the actual reporting limits from laboratories currently performing PFOA analyses for determining its recommendation. Therefore, the Testing Subcommittee recommends a PQL of 6 ng/L for PFOA to the DWQI.