QA/QC Considerations for Sampling and Analysis Associated with EPA Method 1631 Chuck Wibby Wibby Environmental Seminar on Low Level Mercury Data and Analyses.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Radiochemical Methods and Data Evaluation
Advertisements

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.
Office of Water PittCon 2001 Status of EPA Method 1631 for the Determination of Low-Level Mercury Maria Gomez-Taylor Analytical Methods Staff U.S.
Mentoring Session Technical Assistance Committee Method Modifications.
Mercury Collection and Analysis in Ambient and Effluent Waters using EPA Method 1631 Overview of Sampling and Analysis William Telliard U.S. EPA Office.
LABORATORY MANAGEMENT and QUALITY ASSURANCE. Introduction “The analytical laboratory provides qualitative and quantitative data for use in decision-making.
Result validation. Exercise 1 You’ve done an analysis to the best of your ability using the correct procedure. Is your answer correct? possibly, hopefully.
Mercury Monitoring The FDEP Laboratory Perspective Timothy W. Fitzpatrick (850)
PRESENTATION ON CLEANING VALIDATION INDEX  INTRODUCTION SIGNIFICANCE SELECTION OF SAMPLING TECHNIQUES ESTIMATION OF ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA RE-VALIDATION.
Interpreting Your Lab Report & Quality Control Results
World Health Organization
Lecture 8. Quality Assurance/Quality Control The Islamic University of Gaza- Environmental Engineering Department Environmental Measurements (EENV 4244)
Quality Assurance/Quality Control Policy
QA/QC FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENT Unit 4: Module 13, Lecture 2.
Laboratory requirements Dioxin Workshop, Leon Mexico Richard Turle Analysis and Air Quality Division Environmental Science and Technology Centre Environment.
A L B I O N E N V I R O N M E N T A L U.S. EPA REGION SIX & OKLAHOMA & ARKANSAS DEPARTMENTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 24 th ANNUAL PRETREATMENT ASSOCIATION.
Quality Control In Measurements Tom Colella CLAS Goldwater Environmental Lab.
Field Analysis Quality Control
Debra Waller NJDEP-Office of Quality Assurance
Understanding and Implementing SWAMP Comparability: Quality Assurance SWAMP Quality Assurance Help Desk Quality Assurance Research.
WWLC Standard Operating Procedures Presented by Frank Hall, Laboratory Certification Coordinator.
Tom Fieldsend DynCorp, Science and Engineering Group
Perchlorate Analysis by Ion Chromatography The CA DHS Protocol H.S. Okamoto, D.K. Rishi and S.K. Perera.
Quality assurance of sampling and analytical instruments
Decontamination of filed equipment used in environmental site characterization and ground-water monitoring projects University of Arkansas 11/13/2006 By.
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.
Bias and Errors. Some Terms Used to Describe Analytical Methods Accuracy Precision LOD RDL LOQ Selectivity Sensitivity Linearity Ruggedness.
QA/QC and QUALIFIERS LOU ANN FISHER CITY OF STILLWATER, OK
Understanding Your QC Presentation to: KWWOA April 15, 2015 Department for Environmental Protection Energy & Environment Cabinet To Protect and Enhance.
Er. J.S. Kamyotra Central Pollution Control Board Ministry of Environment & Forests New Delhi Website: MALE’ DECLARATION ON CONTROL.
Less Manganese lost over C Manganese in Sea Water Excessive Background signal from NaCL Large loss of analyte.
Wastewater Laboratory Certification Presented at: KWWOA April17,
Representative Sampling. Samples vs. Populations The population is the total or all of the possible answers we might get by sampling. All of the individuals.
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.
Challenges of Conducting Analytical Chemistry in Environmental Matrices May 8 th 2006 Meg Sedlak and Don Yee San Francisco Estuary Institute Oakland, California.
William Telliard U.S. EPA Office of Science and Technology
Is Your Analytical Result Accurate? Presented By: James S. Smith, Ph.D. Trillium, Inc. GSA North-Central Section 39 th Annual Meeting Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Concentration Units Molarity Molarity Formality: Formality: Normality Normality What is the molarity of a 6N H 2 SO 4 solution? What is the molarity of.
Data Quality Assurance/ Quality Control. QA/QC Requirements for RECAP Submittals Data generated using rigorous analytical methods Data must be analyte.
CHM 410/1410 Lecture 2 Environmental Sampling. Environmental sampling Two things to consider: 1.Size of the samples required 2.Number of samples required.
Control Charts and Trend Analysis for ISO 17025
LECTURE 13 QUALITY ASSURANCE METHOD VALIDATION
SEMINAR ON PRESENTED BY BRAHMABHATT BANSARI K. M. PHARM PART DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACEUTICS AND PHARMACEUTICAL TECHNOLGY L. M. COLLEGE OF PHARMACY.
Method Validation of VINDTA 3C (TA/DIC) Marine Scotland Science (MSS) Experience and Concerns Pamela Walsham.
Quality is a Lousy Idea-
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
Technical Sales & Support Chemist
Janice L. Willey Senior Chemist
The Analysis of Soils and Waters in Accordance with U. S
Quality is a Lousy Idea-
Update on ASTM and Standard Methods method development activities
Observations from California’s On-Site Assessment Unit
EPA Method Equivalency
Director of Quality Assurance
Topics in Microbiology Quality Assurance Project Plan Essentials
Chapter 5 Quality Assurance and Calibration Methods
Why Use Them? By: Marcy Bolek – Alloway
Increasing TKN Sample Determinations Through Automation
Quality Control Lecture 3
NJ DWQI Testing Subcommittee
American Council of Independent Labs
Presentation transcript:

QA/QC Considerations for Sampling and Analysis Associated with EPA Method 1631 Chuck Wibby Wibby Environmental Seminar on Low Level Mercury Data and Analyses Boulder, Colorado September 23, 2004

Presentation Overview  General overview of lab QA/QC  Sampling considerations  Facility considerations  Method 1631 QA/QC requirements  PT requirments  Summary

Hardcopy of presentation

Basic QA/QC Approach  Ref: John Taylor, “Quality Assurance of Chemical Measurements” Lewis Publishers, 1987  Artisan  Based on expertise of person completing the task  Academic research  Chef  Good approach in a non-regulatory situation  Small one, two person laboratories

Basic QA/QC Approach  Systematic  Dependent on Quality System  Independent of person performing task  Cook book approach  Documentation – lots of it  Results can be reviewed  Usually required in regulatory situation

Sampling considerations  EPA Method 1669  Can’t be emphasized enough  “The ease of contaminating ambient water samples…cannot be overemphasized.” – Section 1.4  Sample bottles from commercial vendor or produced per Section 6.1.2

Sample bottle considerations  Example: ESS  Glass (Hg only) or Teflon containers washed per the method with detergent, trace grade nitric acid and Milli Q DI rinsing with drying in a “Low Particle” oven.  Bottles available with preservation; HCl or Bromine monochloride.  Analyze these containers by lot by method 1631 to <0.15 ng/L. The analytical report is provided with the containers.  Bottles double bagged.

Containers

Lab considerations  Ref: Hampton Roads Sanitation District – Virginia Beach, Virginia  Use a dedicated room  Doesn’t have to be a clean room  Simply dedicated to low level Hg  Use a Class 100 clean bench to produce reagents, standards and samples  Bake KBrO 3 for 8 hours at 250 o C prior to using it to produce bromine monochloride solution

Lab considerations  Disposable tubes on autosampler  Rinsed with high purity water  Glassware washing  Soak in 1:1 nitric for at least 24 hours  Rinse with high purity water  Use immediately  Bubble argon though stannous chloride for 30 minutes prior to starting  Continue to bubble argon through stannous chloride during analysis

Method 1631 QA/QC  Contamination Control  Section 4.3  Interferences  Section 4.4  Reagents and Standards  Section 7.0  Sample Collection, Preservation and Storage  Section 8.0

Section 9.0 QC  Changes to method – Section “ In recognition of advances…the analyst is permitted certain options to improve results or lower the cost of measurements. These options include automation of the dual-amalgamation system, single-trap amalgamation (Reference 14), direct electronic data acquisition, calibration using gas-phase elemental Hg standards, changes in the bubbler design (including substitution of a flow-injection system) to maximize throughput, or changes in the detector (i.e., CVAAS), where less sensitivity is acceptable or desired. Changes in the principle of the determinative technique, such as the use of colorimetry, are not allowed. If an analytical technique other than the CVAFS technique specified in this method is used, that technique must have a specificity for mercury equal to or better than the specificity of the technique in this method.”

Method 1631  QC by batch  1 – 20 samples  Same 12 hour shift

Method 1631  Batch – Section  Three blanks  Five calibration standards  Ongoing precision and recovery (OPR)  Quality control sample  Method blank  Seven samples

Method 1631  Batch (continued)  Method blank  Three samples  Matrix spike/Matrix spike duplicate  Four samples  Method blank  Six samples  Matrix spike/Matrix spike duplicate  Ongoing Precision and Recovery

Method 1631  Initial Demonstration of Capability - Section 9.2  Method Detection Limit – equal to or less than 0.5 ng/L (Section 9.2.1)  Initial precision and recovery (Section 9.2.2)  79 – 121% (Accuracy)  21% RSD (Precision)  Four replicates

Method 1631  Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate – Section 9.3  Spike at 1-5 times the sample concentration  71 – 125 % (accuracy)  24% RSD (precision)

Method 1631  Blanks – Section 9.4  Bubbler blanks  System blanks  Reagent blanks  Method blanks  Field blanks  Equipment blanks  Bottle blanks

Method 1631  Ongoing precision and recovery (Section 9.5)  77 – 123% (Accuracy)  Same source as that used for calibration  ICV/CCV

Method 1631  Quality control sample (Section 9.6)  No limits specified in method  Suggestion is to use OPR limits  Different source than that used for calibration, external to lab or made internally from second source  Wibby Environmental  QC-UTM-WP, $95  QC-UHG-WP, $65

Method 1631  Field duplicates (Section 9.7)  May be required to meet project specific requirements

Method 1631  Calibration (Section 10)  Very specific requirements that must be met  Should review and be familiar with requirements

PT Requirements  Necessary for accreditation  Once a year or twice a year  Levels much higher than trace levels  0.5 – 30 ug/L (WP)  0.5 – 10 ug/L (WS)  Method – ug/L  Acceptance criteria different  Approximately + 24% (WP)  + 30% (WS)

Thank You! Chuck Wibby Wibby Environmental 6390 Joyce Drive, #100 Golden, CO