Waste Management System; Testing and Monitoring Activities; Update V of SW-846, 63185-63193 [2013-24852]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Notices
63. Because Virginia incorporated 40 CFR
Part 63 by reference, Virginia should also no
longer allow sources to use the former SSM
exemption from the General Provisions of 40
CFR Part 63 due to the Court’s ruling in
Sierra Club vs. EPA.
EPA appreciates Virginia’s continuing
NESHAP and NSPS enforcement efforts, and
also Virginia’s decision to take automatic
delegation of additional and more recent
NESHAP and NSPS by adopting them by
reference.
Sincerely,
Diana Esher,
Director, Air Protection Division.
This notice acknowledges the update
of Virginia’s delegation of authority to
implement and enforce NESHAP and
NSPS.
Dated: September 18, 2013.
Diana Esher,
Director, Air Protection Division, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013–24880 Filed 10–22–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–9901–74–Region 5]
Public Hearing and Request for
Comments on Proposed Revisions to
Michigan’s Clean Water Act (CWA)
Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed revisions to
Michigan’s CWA Section 404 program,
public hearing and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
EPA requests comments on
proposed revisions to Michigan’s CWA
Section 404 permitting program
resulting from the recent enactment of
Michigan Public Act 98 (PA 98). EPA
will hold a public hearing in Lansing,
Michigan, on December 11, 2013, to take
comments on the proposed program
revisions. Under Section 404 of the
CWA, permits are required for activities
involving discharges of dredged or fill
material to waters of the United States,
including wetlands, lakes and streams.
In 1984, Michigan assumed Section 404
permitting authority for its inland
waters and wetlands. PA 98 amended
the wetlands and the inland lakes and
streams provisions of the Michigan’s
Natural Resources and Environmental
Protection Act to address areas, as
identified by EPA in a 2008 program
review, where the state’s Section 404
program did not comply with CWA
requirements. In addition to changes to
address issues identified in EPA’s
program review, PA 98 included: (1)
Changes to the definition of contiguous
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:13 Oct 22, 2013
Jkt 232001
wetlands regulated by Michigan’s
Section 404 program; (2) the addition of
new exemptions from permitting; and
(3) changes to the requirements for
mitigating the effects of filling wetlands
and other waters of the United States.
Under federal regulations, substantial
changes to state CWA Section 404
programs do not become effective until
program revisions are approved by EPA.
Information about PA 98, the resulting
proposed revisions to Michigan’s
Section 404 program, the public
hearing, and procedures for submitting
comments is available at:
www.regulations.gov/ (insert: EPA–HQ–
OW–2013–0710 in the search field).
On December 11,
2013, at 7:00 p.m. EST, EPA will hold
a public hearing to take oral and written
comments at the Crowne Plaza Lansing
West (formerly known as the Lexington
Lansing Hotel), 925 South Creyts Road,
Lansing, Michigan 48917. The formal
hearing will be preceded by an
informational session at 6:00 p.m. EST.
Written comments will also be accepted
until December 18, 2013.
DATES AND LOCATION:
Submit comments,
referencing Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OW–2013–0710, online using
www.regulations.gov (the preferred
method); by email to owdocket@epa.gov; or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. All comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes profanity, threats,
information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information, or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
ADDRESSES:
For
further information, call toll-free, 800–
621–8431, weekdays, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., central time, or contact Sue Elston,
at the EPA Docket Center address noted
above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dated: September 27, 2013.
Timothy C. Henry,
Acting Director, Water Division, EPA
Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2013–24841 Filed 10–22–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63185
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–RCRA–2012–0072; FRL–9901–86–
OSWER]
Waste Management System; Testing
and Monitoring Activities; Update V of
SW–846
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA or the Agency) is
providing notice of the availability of
‘‘Update V’’ to the Third Edition of EPA
publication SW–846, ‘‘Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods.’’ Update V contains
23 new and revised analytical methods
that the Agency has evaluated, and
determined to be appropriate and which
may be used for monitoring or
complying with the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
hazardous and non-hazardous waste
regulations. Because the analytical
methods contained in Update V are not
required by the RCRA hazardous waste
regulations, EPA is issuing this update
as guidance. In addition, the Agency is
also taking comment on revisions to
Chapters One through Five of EPA
publication SW–846, an ORCR Policy
Statement, and other guidance. The
Agency is seeking public comment on
Update V, and after consideration of the
public comments, will place these new
and revised methods, guidance, and
chapters in the SW–846 methods
compendium.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received on
or before January 21, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
RCRA–2012–0072, by one of the
following methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: RCRA-docket@epa.gov,
Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
RCRA–2012–0072.
• Fax: Fax comments to: 202–566–
9744, Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–RCRA–2012–0072.
• Mail: Send comments to: OSWER
Docket, EPA Docket Center, Mail Code
28221T, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–RCRA–2012–
0072. Please include two copies of your
comments.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver two copies
of your comments to: Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center,
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
63186
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Notices
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington DC, Attention Docket
ID No. EPA–HQ–RCRA–2012–0072.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the docket’s normal hours of
operation and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
EPA–HQ–RCRA–2012–0072. EPA’s
policy is that all comments received
will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made
available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the OSWER Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:13 Oct 22, 2013
Jkt 232001
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the OSWER Docket is (202)
566–0270.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim
Kirkland, Materials Recovery and Waste
Management Division, Office of
Resource Conservation and Recovery,
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (5304P), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: 703–308–8855; fax
number: 703–308–0522; email address:
kirkland.kim@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
This notice is directed to the public
in general. It may, however, be of
particular interest to you if you conduct
waste sampling and analysis for RCRArelated activities. This might include
any entity that generates, treats, stores,
or disposes of hazardous or
nonhazardous solid waste and is subject
to RCRA subtitle C or D sampling and
analysis requirements, and might also
include any laboratory that conducts
waste sampling and analyses for such
entities.
B. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information
that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information on a disk or CD ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD ROM the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with the procedures set
forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
• Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
• Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
• Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
• If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
• Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
• Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
• Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
C. How can I get copies of Update V and
the Third Edition of SW–846 as
amended by its Final Updates?
Update V is available in the RCRA
docket and the final version will be
available on-line after all comments
have been addressed. The Third Edition
of SW–846, as amended by Final
Updates I, II, IIA, IIB, III, IIIA, IIIB, IVA,
and IVB, is available in portable
document format (PDF) on EPA’s Office
of Resource Conservation and Recovery
(ORCR) Web page at: https://
www.epa.gov/SW-846.
D. How is the rest of this notice
organized?
The rest of this Notice includes the
following sections:
II. What is the subject and purpose of
this notice?
III. Why is the Agency releasing
Update V to SW–846?
IV. What does Update V contain?
A. OSWER/ORCR Policy Statement
B. Changes to QA/QC Guidance
V. Summary
II. What is the subject and purpose of
this notice?
The Agency is announcing the
availability of and inviting public
comment on Update V to ‘‘Test Methods
for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods’’, EPA Publication
SW–846. Update V of SW–846 contains
analytical methods that the Agency has
evaluated, and/or revised and
determined to be appropriate and may
be used for monitoring or complying
with the RCRA hazardous waste
regulations. Because the analytical
methods contained in Update V are not
required by the RCRA hazardous waste
regulations, EPA is issuing this update
as guidance. This guidance does not add
or change the RCRA regulations, and
does not have any impact on existing
rulemakings associated with the RCRA
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Notices
program. To date, the Agency has
finalized Updates I, II, IIA, IIB, III, IIIA,
IIIB, IVA, and IVB to the SW–846
manual, which can be found on the
EPA’s ORCR Web page at: https://
www.epa.gov/SW-846.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
III. Why is the Agency releasing Update
V to SW–846?
The Agency revises the content of
SW–846 over time as new information
and data become available. We
continually review advances in
analytical instrumentation and
techniques and periodically incorporate
such advances into SW–846 as method
updates by adding new methods to the
manual, and replacing existing methods
with revised versions of the same
method. These updates improve
analytical method performance and cost
effectiveness. Since the publication of
the Methods Innovation Rule (MIR) (70
FR 34537, June 14, 2005), the Agency no
longer needs to use a rulemaking
process for publication of an update to
SW–846, as long as the update does not
contain a method required by the RCRA
regulations (e.g., Method-Defined
Parameter (MDP), such as the Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure
(TCLP) (Method 1311)), see 40 CFR
260.11. The Agency instead can make
an
SW–846 update available to the public
more efficiently through a Federal
Register notice announcing its
availability and inviting public
comment on the update.
In addition, the MIR allows flexibility
in method selection and use for meeting
the analytical needs of the RCRA
program, with the exception of those
methods specifically required by the
RCRA regulations. This approach is
consistent with the Agency’s
commitment to fully implement a
performance-based measurement system
(PBMS), whereby the analytical focus is
on measurement objectives and
performance rather than specific
measurement technologies.
Furthermore, the Agency’s PBMS
approach has evolved resulting in the
Agency adopting the new ‘‘Flexible
Approaches to Environmental
Measurement—The Evolution of the
Performance Approach’’ as developed
by the Forum on Environmental
Measurements (FEM) at the direction of
EPA’s Science Policy Council (i.e., now
the Science and Technology Policy
Council (STPC)). One of the main goals
of the Performance Approach is to
increase flexibility in choosing sampling
and analytical approaches to meet
regulatory requirements for
measurements. For more information on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:13 Oct 22, 2013
Jkt 232001
the Performance Approach, see: https://
www.epa.gov/fem/approach.htm.
In using the SW–846 methods, the
regulated entity need only demonstrate
that an analytical method generates data
that meet the project-specific data
quality objectives (DQOs) and
performance acceptance criteria. The
Agency finds this flexible approach to
be particularly useful, and sufficient in
most cases, during the characterization
of the complex matrices of RCRArelated wastes. Thus, a method user can
modify an SW–846 method (provided it
is not one specifically required by
regulation, e.g., 40 CFR 260.11), in order
to best meet a waste matrix-specific
analytical need, as long as the
modifications meet the project-specific
DQOs and performance acceptance
criteria. The public should note that in
some cases the method established
certain requirements (e.g., conducting a
calibration curve, using specific
reagents, analyzing a Quality Control
(QC) check sample to demonstrate
precision and accuracy). While these
standard principles are not regulatory
requirements, they are necessary to
yield data of acceptable quality as
intended and are called for by sound
science. (The public can obtain more
information about the MIR and PBMS at
the Agency’s Web site dedicated to SW–
846 and the testing of RCRA-regulated
wastes: https://www.epa.gov/SW-846.)
The subject of today’s notice, Update
V to SW–846, contains 23 new and
revised analytical methods and revises
Chapters One through Five of SW–846.
After the comment period, and based on
the Agency’s evaluation of the
comments received, the new and
revised methods and revised chapters
will be formally included in the SW–
846 methods compendium. Most of the
Update V methods previously resided
under the heading ‘‘New Methods’’ at
EPA’s SW–846 Web site as either
revised versions of existing SW–846
methods or as new methods that the
Agency planned to add to SW–846.
Although these methods were not yet
part of an official update to any edition
of the SW–846 manual at the time of
their posting on the Web site, the
Agency wanted to make these Agencyevaluated methods available for use and
comment as soon as possible. The
Agency believed that public access to
these new and revised methods, for
guidance purposes, would assure that
reliable and innovative methods are
provided to the regulated community in
a timely and cost-effective manner.
Therefore, these methods could be used
for any RCRA applications, other than
one specifically required by regulation,
for which their performance could be
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63187
demonstrated to be appropriate and
meet project-specific DQOs, and thus be
consistent with implementation and
promotion of a flexible and
performance-based approach to RCRArelated analyses.
The Agency is also responding to
concerns expressed by the
Environmental Laboratory Advisory
Board (ELAB), a Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) committee that
advises the Agency on measurement,
monitoring, and laboratory science
issues, who contacted EPA’s FEM with
several issues regarding the use of SW–
846. The ELAB specifically contacted
EPA regarding which version of a
revised method is recommended.
Historically, as noted above, the Agency
has posted new and revised methods on
the SW–846 Web site under the ‘‘New
Test Methods Online’’ (at: https://
www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/
testmethods/sw846/new_meth.htm), for
use by the laboratory community, the
States, and the regulated community
pending publication of these methods in
the Federal Register. The Agency was
subsequently contacted by the ELAB,
who identified several concerns
regarding the process for updating and
posting updates on the ‘‘New Test
Methods Online’’ link on the SW–846
Web site.
ELAB requested that EPA clarify those
issues that caused some confusion with
some entities of the user community.
Specifically, confusion existed when a
method had multiple versions available
on the web. For example, Method
8000C, on the ’’New Test Methods
Online’’ link has quality control (QC)
guidelines that differ from Method
8000B (the official version) in the
SW–846 compendium. The public was
confused by the difference in QC
guidelines in the two available versions
of the method. The Agency
subsequently decided that the revisions
to Method 8000C were more significant
than those previously posted, and has
decided to replace Method 8000C with
Method 8000D, and is issuing Method
8000D as part of Update V.
In response to ELAB’s concerns,
ORCR prepared a Policy Statement that
identifies the status of methods (e.g.,
validated methods, final methods, etc.),
and provides the rationale for
identifying when changes to methods
are significant, through a letter
designation and by noting the date the
method was revised by ORCR. For more
information on the ORCR Policy
Statement, see section IV of this Notice.
Finally, the Agency is requesting
public comment on the Update V
methods and the other relevant updated
materials presented in this Notice for
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
63188
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
inclusion in the SW–846 manual (i.e.,
Table of Contents and Chapters One
through Five). See the ADDRESSES
section of this notice for the procedure
for submitting comments. The Agency
will consider public comments
submitted on or before the comment
period deadline and subsequently
finalize Update V as an official part of
SW–846. In addition, the EPA SW–846
Web site contains an updated version of
the ‘‘Method Status Table for SW–846,’’
which identifies the update history for
each document in SW–846.
The Agency strongly recommends the
use of the latest version of an SW–846
method, especially for new analyte
monitoring situations. The Agency,
however, is not imposing restrictions on
the use of earlier versions of nonrequired SW–846 methods or
precluding the use of previous
guidance, if such use is appropriate. For
example, earlier versions of an SW–846
method may be more appropriate for
regulatory purposes (e.g., for
compliance with an existing permit or
consent decree), or when new method
versions may be more costly than
necessary for meeting project-specific
objectives. In the future, the Agency
plans to make electronic copies of
earlier versions of SW–846 methods
available through a separate hyperlink
from the SW–846 Web site.
The Agency hopes that the posting of
this information on the Web site for
immediate public access will mitigate
any remaining confusion regarding the
use of SW–846 methods. In addition,
the public can also access the Methods
Information Communication Exchange
(MICE) for answers to their questions or
concerns regarding SW–846 methods.
MICE can be accessed by phone at (703)
818–3238, by fax at (703) 818–8813, or
by email at mice@techlawinc.com.
IV. What does Update V contain?
Update V contains 23 new and
revised analytical methods, revised
versions of Chapters One through Five
of EPA publication SW–846, the ORCR
Policy Statement, and other guidance
(e.g., quality assurance/quality control
(QA/QC) guidance on lower limit of
quantitation (LLOQ), relative standard
error (RSE), initial demonstration of
proficiency (IDP), etc.), each dated
October 2012 and identified as ‘‘Update
V’’ in the document footer. For the
convenience of the reader, EPA has
identified key areas of interest in the
sections below, but all the methods and
other information for which the Agency
is seeking comments are contained in
the docket for this Notice. Table 1
(included at the end of this Notice)
provides a listing of the five revised
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:13 Oct 22, 2013
Jkt 232001
chapters and twenty-three methods
(eight new and fifteen revised methods)
in Update V. After consideration of
comments received from publication of
this Notice, Update V, including the
revised versions of Chapters One
through Five, will be incorporated into
the SW–846 methods compendium.
A. OSWER/ORCR Policy Statement
In 2008, ELAB requested that ORCR
describe their plan for releasing Updates
to SW–846, as well as clarify the status
of deleted, obsolete, previous versions
or revised methods, and a statement
regarding the status of previous versions
of methods. In addition, ELAB raised
the following additional concerns and
suggestions:
• Clarification is needed regarding
which method is the final version in
SW–846.
• Many states are not adopting the
final version of new methods.
• States may not have the resources to
certify multiple versions of final
methods.
• Some of the regulated community
doesn’t know how the method revision
varied.
EPA has engaged in several face-toface meetings with the ELAB at national
conferences to address their requests
and resolve their concerns and
suggestions. As a result of those
meetings, ORCR developed a policy
statement intended to clarify the basic
terminology used in SW–846 regarding
the status of methods and how the SW–
846 Methods program develops and
releases methods to the public. That
policy statement, entitled ‘‘USEPA
Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery Policy on the Use of Test
Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,
Physical/Chemical Methods (SW–846)’’
provides background on SW–846,
general guidance on the procedures for
adopting methods into SW–846, and
defines key terms used to identify the
status of methods in SW–846. Below is
the ORCR Policy Statement, a copy of
which has also been placed in the
docket associated with this Federal
Register Notice:
USEPA Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response/Office of Resource
Conservation and Recovery Policy on
the Use of ‘‘Test Methods for Evaluating
Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical
Methods’’ (SW–846)
The United States Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of
Resource Conservation and Recovery
(ORCR) provides analytical and
sampling methods to assist the regulated
and regulatory community and others in
implementing the Resource
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
These methods are published in the Test
Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,
Physical/Chemical Methods (SW–846)
and are available on the ORCR Web site
(www.epa.gov./epawaste/hazard/
testmethods/index.htm). With the
exception of those particular methods
which are promulgated in the
regulations to implement RCRA (see 40
CFR 260.11), the remaining methods are
considered guidance, and users may
select any scientifically appropriate
method when conducting analyses to
comply with the RCRA regulatory
program.
The Methods Innovation Rule (MIR)
published on June 14, 2005 (70 FR
34538), reemphasized the flexible
approach in method selection, when
appropriate, when testing for
compliance, under RCRA. Since the
publication of this rule, ORCR no longer
uses a formal rulemaking process for
publication of method updates to SW–
846. EPA informs the regulated and
regulatory community of new methods
and updates to SW–846 and solicits
comments on them through a Notice of
Availability published in the Federal
Register. This approach is consistent
with ORCR’s commitment to fully
implement the Agency’s performancebased measurement system (PBMS)
approach to regulation.
A new effort was developed and
approved to reinvigorate the goals of
PBMS with the versatility of each of our
program’s needs. It is called the Flexible
Approaches to Environmental
Measurements—The Evolution of the
Performance Approach which the
Science and Technology Policy Council
(STPC) approved on February 15, 2008.
In 2009, ORCR subsequently adopted
the new ‘‘Performance Approach’’ as
defined by the Forum on Environmental
Measurements (FEM). The FEM is a
standing committee of senior EPA
Environmental Protection managers
established to develop policies to guide
the Agency’s measurement community
in: validating and disseminating
methods for sample collection and
analysis; for ensuring that monitoring
studies are scientifically rigorous,
statistically sound, and yield
representative measurements; and for
employing a quality systems approach
that ensures that the data gathered and
used by the Agency are of known and
documented quality.
After shortening the name of the
PBMS effort to the ‘‘Performance
Approach,’’ the FEM’s Performance
Approach Action Team took a look at
the issues surrounding the lack of the
program’s progress with the ultimate
conclusion that the ‘‘one size fits all’’
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Notices
approach does not work for the
diversely different programs and
authorities each of our major program
offices (i.e., air, pesticides, waste, and
water) has in carrying out their work. To
avoid the proliferation of terminology,
ORCR has adopted the ‘‘Flexible
Approach’’ which is consistent with
ORCR’s approach to environmental
management, based on the goals and
statutes of EPA program offices.
Under the PBMS approach for RCRA,
when labs conducted regulatory
required monitoring, the regulated
community had to either employ a
scientifically appropriate method
published in SW–846 or use any other
scientifically appropriate method from
another reliable source. This is still true
under the Flexible Approach. However,
when choosing a reliable alternative
source, the focus should be on
measurement objectives, rather than on
measurement technologies. In all cases,
the user must demonstrate the method
selected generates data that are
appropriate for the intended use.
Although both approaches are
applicable for RCRA, ORCR had
dropped the term PBMS, and strongly
supports the use of the new Flexible
Approach to be consistent with the
Agency’s new guidance that allows each
program to determine program specific
flexibility when addressing waste
analysis issues.
ORCR strongly recommends that
persons use the latest version of a
SW–846 method whenever possible,
especially in new monitoring situations,
since updated versions of the methods
EPA publishes generally are in the
Agency’s view less subject to
misinterpretation, yield improved
precision and/or bias, or provide for the
use of newer and, often, more costeffective technologies. In situations
where it may not be appropriate to use
the latest method in SW–846, earlier
versions may be used. These situations
may include, but are not limited to,
those where an earlier version of a
method is required for existing permits,
consent decrees, waste analysis plans or
sampling analysis plans. In addition,
laboratories, especially small
laboratories, may find a previous
version of a SW–846 method
appropriate if it is more cost-effective in
meeting the project-specific objectives.
The Agency is not imposing restrictions
on the use of earlier versions of nonrequired methods contained in SW–846
or precluding the use of previous
guidance. Nonetheless, the adoption of
the latest method version is
recommended and should be
accomplished as soon as possible, as
appropriate. When methods are
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:13 Oct 22, 2013
Jkt 232001
employed, it is the responsibility of the
user to ensure that the method yields
data of a quality appropriate for the
particular application for which it is
being used.
EPA views the methods in the
SW–846 compendium as tools for the
user to employ in developing individual
standard operating procedures to meet
the goals and objectives of specific
projects. This approach enables the user
to optimize and modify methods for
effective performance on unique
projects. The SW–846 methods are for
most applications considered as
guidance with the exception of those
methods required by the RCRA
regulations (i.e., Method-Defined
Parameters (MDPs), see 40 CFR 260.11).
In situations where the user is not
certain whether the selected method or
method modification is appropriate,
EPA recommends regulated entities
contact and seek approval as needed
from the appropriate regulatory agency
(e.g., Federal or State/local government)
before applying any method on a
specific project, including situations
where the method is used verbatim.
EPA may publish new methods,
revise existing methods, or withdraw
methods from the SW–846 compendium
whenever it deems it appropriate. For
example, methods may be updated in
order to reflect new advancements in
technology, to reflect the addition of
new performance data, or to clarify
areas of the procedure that experience
indicates may be misunderstood.
Methods may also be revised to reflect
new EPA policy regarding the use of
certain chemicals and reagents. In other
cases, methods are removed if the
technology is no longer available or
applicable. ORCR has developed
specific procedures for releasing
updates, revisions, or withdrawing
methods, which are designed to
minimize disruption to regulatory
processes. Specific definitions for the
terms associated with a method’s status,
which support the change procedures,
have been developed and provided
below.
The Agency will only post the most
recent version of a final SW–846
method on the ORCR Web page as part
of the SW–846 methods compendium
(www.epa.gov./epawaste/hazard/
testmethods/index.htm). Prior versions
of methods formerly contained in
SW–846 and still considered
appropriate for use will be available
through a separate hyperlink in the
future. EPA’s objective is to identify and
make available on the Agency’s SW–846
Web site the latest information
regarding the methodologies that
generate effective data at minimum
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63189
costs in response to new technological
or scientific advancements, while, at the
same time, making available earlier
versions for those situations where such
methods may be needed or appropriate
(e.g., to determine how a particular
analysis had been performed, to
determine how to comply with a
specific permit requirement, etc.).
SW–846 Methods Status Definitions
Analytical methods are officially
made a part of the SW–846 manual
through a rigorous process of technical
evaluation both within the Agency and
through external review. Methods are
also revised as needed after a formal
evaluation process by analytical experts
(e.g., SW–846 work and focus groups)
and an announcement of method
availability and request for public
comment in the Federal Register as a
Notice of Availability. During the
method development/evaluation
process, the methods go through various
stages of review and revision. The
methods are officially included as part
of an update to the most current edition
of SW–846 at the conclusion of this
process.
ORCR employs a specific naming
convention (i.e., method number and
letter suffix) when publishing methods.
The naming convention is intended to
minimize confusion within the user
community regarding a method’s
developmental status. The method
number designates the underlying
technology (e.g., 8000 series methods
designate determinative procedures for
organic compounds). A revision to a
method where the underlying
technology does not change is indicated
by continued use of the same method
number and letter, but with a new
issuance date. If the revision retains the
underlying technology, but does not
affect the precision and/or accuracy of
the data, the revision is considered to be
minor or nonsignificant and the method
number and letter is not changed or
sequenced.
If, on the other hand, the revision
retains the underlying technology, but
changes the precision and/or accuracy
of the data, the change is considered to
be significant and is indicated by a
subsequent letter suffix (e.g., changes
from 8270C to 8270D) and a new
issuance date. For example, if the
quality control recommendations are
changed in a manner that improves the
bias or precision of the method, but
does not change the underlying
technology (e.g., a tightening of the
calibration acceptance criteria), the
method number stays the same, but the
letter suffix is sequenced to the next
letter. The differences between the
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
63190
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Notices
earlier and later versions of a method
are detailed in the method summary
section of the revised version regardless
of the type of change.
Examples of changes that may be
considered minor or nonsignificant
include, but are not limited to: Language
added to a method to provide increased
clarity or guidance; expansion of lists of
acceptable instrumentation,
applicability of the method to a matrix
not previously referenced, adding new
compounds to the list of applicable
compounds, or changes to instrument
specifications which do not result in an
existing acceptable instrument being
rendered unacceptable; or formatting
and editorial changes that are designed
to improve readability or correct
spelling or grammatical errors.
ORCR has defined a ‘‘significant
change’’ as a change that results in
improved analytical results (e.g.,
changes that result in reducing
analytical bias or improving data
precision). Examples of significant
changes may include, but are not
limited to: a change in the operating
parameter which reduces analytical
flexibility; a change in instrumentation
specification which minimizes
interference and/or optimizes
instrument performance (if the use of
such interference reduction technique
or performance enhancement is
required); a change in calibration
guidance which results in more
restrictive recommendations; a change
that institutes tighter QC
recommendations; or a change in the
reagents that are required by the
method.
ORCR understands revisions are
sometimes necessary to either enhance
the performance of the method or to
allow flexibilities due to the complexity
of sample matrices. In situations where
the user is not certain whether the
selected method, method modification
or modification to their plan is
appropriate, EPA recommends the
regulated community seek approval
from the appropriate regulatory agency
(e.g., Federal or State/local government,
client) before their use of a revised
method; amend their plan (e.g., Project
Plan, Quality Assurance Project Plan
(QAPP), Sampling and Analysis Plan
(SAP), Standard Operating Procedure
(SOP)); and properly document the
change when reporting analytical
results.
The following method status
definitions reflect the current method
development process and have been
developed to add clarity for the method
users. ORCR uses these definitions and
the terms may vary for other program
offices.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:13 Oct 22, 2013
Jkt 232001
Final Method—A method that has
been formally adopted into the most
recent version of the SW–846
compendium. Before a method becomes
final, the validated version would have
been made available for public review
and comment in a Notice of Availability
(NOA) or a proposed rulemaking, as
appropriate.
Validated Method—A method that
has undergone development and
technical review by EPA, but has not
been formally adopted into the SW–846
method compendium and published
through a Federal Register Notice. Since
this review includes technical work
group approval and/or inter-laboratory
validation, validated methods are
included on the Agency Web site for
evaluation and use by the public and as
a means of soliciting comment from the
broader scientific community. The
public may use a validated method prior
to its inclusion in the SW–846
compendium, provided that the users
demonstrate that it generates data that
are appropriate for the intended use.
Revised Method—A method included
in SW–846 that has been updated to
reflect changes that may be editorial in
nature and do not impact data or
performance comparability, that
broaden the method to introduce new
technologies that may increase
productivity, but do not change the
fundamental technology, or that change
the quality control requirements to
increase bias or precision.
The number of a method that has been
revised does not change, but the method
may receive a subsequent letter suffix. If
the revision is a significant one (as
defined above) then both the letter
suffix and the issuance date are
updated. If, on the other hand, the
revision is editorial in nature, or
consists of the addition of new
performance data, then only the
issuance date is changed. Previous
versions are not precluded from being
used provided that the users
demonstrate that it generates data that
are appropriate for the intended use.
Draft Method—A new method that is
being evaluated for possible inclusion
into SW–846. It represents the latest
innovative technological advancements
in scientific methodology, but has not
completed technical review by EPA nor
been subject to notice and comment in
the Federal Register.
Superseded Method—A superseded
method is an earlier version of an SW–
846 method or other guidance that is no
longer included in the SW–846
compendium and has been replaced by
a newer version. Revised versions of
Superseded methods should be viewed
as the preferred method. Methods in
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
this category are removed from the
compendium, but remain available on
line and are not precluded for use where
required for existing projects or where
an adequate justification for use exists.
The term ‘‘Superseded’’ is documented
in the method title as listed on the EPA
Web site for prior versions of final
methods followed by the date it was
superseded.
Withdrawn Method—A method or
other guidance that EPA strongly
recommends not be used, (e.g., cyanide
and sulfide reactivity guidance
withdrawn, June 14, 2005). EPA has
determined that such procedures or
methods, for the use or technical
objectives for which they were
originally published, are technically
inadequate and/or no longer meet such
use or technical objectives. This does
not mean, however, that there would be
no situations under which the
procedures or methods may be
appropriate. In any situation in which a
person may believe that the withdrawn
method is appropriate, we strongly
encourage consultation with applicable
regulatory agencies at the state or
federal level. The prospective user of
the method will need to demonstrate the
old method is, indeed, appropriate. Any
use of these methods, without any such
consultation and demonstration, will be
done at the user’s risk.
The Agency understands that earlier
versions of the SW–846 methods that
aren’t required may still be in use to
meet project specific criteria (e.g.,
permits, sampling plans, Consent
Decrees, etc.). Permits and other plans
formally approved by regulatory
authorities that specify the use of
particular methods for required analysis
continue in effect unless they are
changed. However, the Agency
encourages the regulated community to
use the latest version of SW–846, when
applicable. EPA will continue to update
the Methods Status Table to inform the
public as to the status of methods in
SW–846 and the Policy Statement will
be added to the SW–846 methods
compendium when the Update V
package is finalized.
[end of policy statement]
B. Changes to Chapters One Through
Five and QA/QC Guidance (Chapter
One and Individual Methods) in
SW–846
In general, EPA’s revisions to
Chapters One through Five to EPA
publication SW–846 reflects the new
method style guide format and added all
the Update V methods and new letters/
version to the appropriate related
method sections. Specifically:
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Notices
• Chapter One of SW–846 was
revised to make it more user friendly
and to be more consistent with the
Agency’s official guidance on QA/QC
implementation and procedures (e.g.,
Quality Assurance Project Plans
(QAPPS), Data Quality Objectives
(DQOs), and the Flexible Approach to
Environmental Measurement).
• Chapter Two now includes a Table
of Contents to make finding the
information easier. In addition, a
typographical error was found for bis(2chloroisopropyl) ether and was
corrected to bis(2-chloro-1-methylethyl)
ether in Tables 2–1, 2–4, 2–15, 2–22,
and 2–34. Furthermore, Table 2–40(A)
was revised to reflect the current sample
preservation guidance for styrene and
vinyl chloride in aqueous samples (i.e.,
deletion of previously recommended
practice of collecting a second set of
samples without acid preservatives and
analyze immediately, if styrene and
vinyl chloride are analytes of interest)
and Table 2–40(B) was revised to
include Mercury Speciation hold times
in addition to totals.
• Chapter Three was revised so that
the definition for instrument detection
limit (IDL) is consistent with the revised
methods 6010D and 6020B. In addition,
the term ‘‘accuracy’’ was replaced by
‘‘bias’’ where appropriate; the definition
for linear range was revised to be
consistent with methods 6010D and
6020B; the definition of interference
check sample (ICS) was replaced with
the spectral interference check (SIC)
solution to be consistent with methods
6010D and 6020B; and the definition of
‘‘laboratory control sample’’ was revised
to recommend the use of a spiking
solution from the same source as the
calibration standards. Also, the
collision/reaction cell technology was
added to Sections 3.6 and 3.7 as an
effective method for removing isobaric
interferences when analyzing by ICP–
MS and a minimum collection mass of
100 g was added to Table 3–2 for solid
samples collected for sulfide analysis.
• Chapter Four (see Table 4–1) was
reformatted and updated by removing
the recommendation to collect a second
set of samples without adding an acid
preservative and analyze in a shorter
time frame if vinyl chloride and styrene
are analytes of concern for aqueous
samples.
• Chapter 5 had no significant
changes outside of general ones
specified above (e.g., updated format
changes and method reference to
chapters).
In addition, EPA is incorporating
three new and revised QC features in
Chapter One and the Update V methods,
where appropriate, for RCRA
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:13 Oct 22, 2013
Jkt 232001
compliance monitoring which warrant
further discussion here. A summary of
changes to chapters in SW–846 are
provided in Appendix A of each
chapter.
The new and revised features that
have been added to Chapter One
(Quality Control) and individual
methods (where appropriate) are:
• Lower Limit of Quantitation
(LLOQ)—References to the Method
Detection Limit (MDL) have been
replaced with the LLOQ. It is
recommended to establish the LLOQ as
the lowest point of quantitation, which,
in most cases, is the concentration of the
lowest calibration standard in the
calibration curve that has been adjusted
for the preparation mass and/or volume.
The LLOQ value is a function of both
the analytical method and the sample
being evaluated.
Why is MDL removed and replaced by
LLOQ for SW–846?
ORCR has removed references to the
MDL procedure (i.e., 40 CFR 136,
Appendix B) beginning with Update IV
and from the revised and new Update V
methods and has recommended
establishing the LLOQ. We continue to
refine the procedure for establishing the
LLOQ. The refined procedure considers
sample matrix effects; provides a
provision to verify the reasonableness of
the reported quantitation limit (QL); and
recommends a frequency of LLOQ
verification (found in Chapter One and
each method) to be balanced between
rigor and practicality. (Note: The agency
understands that previous versions of
methods published in SW–846 may
contain the MDL reference. However, as
methods are updated, EPA will remove
the reference to the MDL, and will
remove the reference in older methods
that have not yet been updated, as time
and resources allow. Therefore, ORCR
recommends that LLOQ be used, as
appropriate, for the methods that have
not yet been updated. See the Section
9.8 in Method 6020B for inorganic
analytes and Section 9.7 in Method
8000 for organic analytes on LLOQ for
further information on implementation.)
ORCR understands that other EPA
programs may continue to use MDLs to
meet their program use and needs (e.g.,
the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit
program). However, ORCR has found
that the procedure in 40 CFR 136,
Appendix B, for the determination of
MDLs, developed for the Clean Water
Act (CWA) program uses a clean matrix
(e.g., reagent water for preparing
‘‘spiked’’ samples, or samples with
known constituent concentrations).
Analytical laboratories often have
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63191
difficulty demonstrating they can meet
the MDL established using Part 136
when evaluating complex matrices,
such as wastes. The procedure outlined
in Part 136 is generally not suitable for
RCRA wastes or materials because the
MDL approach generally yields
unrealistic and/or unachievable method
detection limits for the complex
matrices (e.g., soils, sludges, wipes, and
spent materials) encountered under the
RCRA program. The MDLs are normally
calculated from analysis of a sample
that does not cause matrix interferences
(typically determined using spiked
reagent water). However, most wastes
evaluated for compliance with RCRA
consist of complex matrices. The LLOQ
considers the effect of sample matrix
(e.g., components of a sample other than
the analyte) by taking the sample
through the entire analytical process,
including sample preparation, clean up
(to remove sample interferences), and
determinative procedures. Also, if
method users choose, the LLOQ sample
can be included at the end of the run to
see if it meets the established
acceptance criteria. Lastly, results above
the LLOQ are quantifiable within an
acceptable precision and bias. Thus, the
LLOQ approach better suits the needs of
the RCRA program, because it provides
reliable and defensible results,
especially at the lower level of
quantitation, and can be reported with
a known level of confidence for the
complex matrices being evaluated.
SW–846 methods are being used by
various programs in implementing
various statutes, including RCRA, the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA), the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA), and Homeland
Security Presidential Directives, for
waste and materials characterization,
compliance testing, site/incident
characterization and risk assessment for
protection of human health and the
environment, and better management
and use of wastes and materials, for a
wide range of difficult matrices. ORCR
believes that the LLOQ approach is an
important improvement, and supports
the essential need to provide data that
are verified to meet the precision and
accuracy requirements of the Agency’s
program needs.
Establishing LLOQ for Inorganic
analytes: When performing methods for
inorganic analyses, the LLOQ should be
verified by the analysis of at least seven
replicate samples (prepared in a clean
matrix or control material) and spiked at
the LLOQ and processed through all
preparation and analysis steps of the
method. The mean recovery and relative
standard deviation (RSD) of these
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
63192
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Notices
samples provide an initial statement of
precision and bias at the LLOQ. In most
cases, the mean recovery should be
±35% of the true value and the RSD
should be ≤20%. Ongoing LLOQ
verification, at a minimum, is on a
quarterly basis to validate quantitation
capability at low analyte concentration
levels. This verification may be
accomplished either with clean control
material (e.g., reagent water, method
blanks, Ottawa sand, diatomaceous
earth, etc.) or a representative sample
matrix free of target compounds.
Optimally, the LLOQ should be less
than the desired regulatory action levels
based on the stated project-specific
requirements. For more information,
please see the individual methods (e.g.,
Methods 6010 and 6020) and Chapter
One of SW–846.
Establishing LLOQ for organic
analytes: When performing methods for
organic analyses, the LLOQ should be
verified using either a clean control
material (e.g., reagent water, method
blanks, Ottawa sand, diatomaceous
earth, etc.) or a representative sample
matrix free of target compounds.
Optimally, the LLOQ should be less
than the desired regulatory action levels
based on the stated project-specific
requirements.
For organic analyses, the acceptable
recovery ranges of target analytes will
vary more than for other types of
analyses, such as inorganics. The
recovery of target analytes in the LLOQ
check sample should be within
established limits, or other such projectrequired acceptance limits, for precision
and bias to verify the data reporting
limits. Until the laboratory has
sufficient data to determine acceptance
limits statistically, a limit of 20% +/¥
the Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
criteria may be used for the LLOQ
acceptance criteria. This approach
acknowledges the poorer overall
response at the low end of the
calibration curve. Historically based
LLOQ acceptance criteria should be
determined as soon as practical once
sufficient data points have been
acquired.
In-house limits for bias (e.g., %
Recovery) and precision (e.g., Relative
Percent Difference, %RPD) of the LLOQ
for a particular sample matrix may be
calculated when sufficient data points
exist. The laboratory should have a
documented procedure for establishing
its in-house acceptance ranges.
Sometimes the laboratory instrument
and/or analyst performance vary or test
samples cause problems with the
detector (e.g., samples may have
interferences; may clog the instruments
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:13 Oct 22, 2013
Jkt 232001
cells, wall or tube; may cause
contamination; etc.). Therefore, the
limits of acceptance (for precision and
bias) are established by a lab with
sufficient data to demonstrate that they
can report down to the LLOQ with a
certain level of confidence. The
acceptance limits (for precision and
bias) for LLOQ may be established by
the laboratory or at the project level
through the data quality objectives in a
quality assurance project plan. The
frequency of the LLOQ check is not
specified for organic analytes.
Note: The LLOQ check sample should be
spiked with the analytes of interest at the
predicted LLOQ concentration levels and
carried through the same preparation and
analysis procedures as environmental
samples and other QC samples. For more
information, please see individual methods
(e.g., Method 8000) and Chapter One of SW–
846.
How is LLOQ used?
The RCRA program deals with
complex wastes and materials that are
managed or used in many different ways
(e.g., landfilling, land application,
incineration, recycling). The thresholds
(e.g., action or remediation levels) for
data users (e.g., engineers or risk
assessors) to make their decisions,
therefore, vary. Method users will need
to properly plan their analytical strategy
to ensure the LLOQs for targeted
analytes are lower than the thresholds
needed to generate data used to
determine how waste or materials can
be properly managed or used.
• Initial Demonstration of
Performance (IDP)—The laboratory
must make an initial demonstration of
ability to generate results with
acceptable accuracy and precision for
each preparation and determinative
method they perform. This
demonstration should be performed
prior to independently analyzing real
sample matrices by each analytical
method and should be repeated if other
changes occur (e.g., significant change
in procedure, new staff are trained, etc.).
Documentation of the IDP should be
maintained by the Quality Assurance
Manager. Each laboratory should have a
training program documenting that a
new analyst is capable of performing the
method or portion of the method for
which the analyst is responsible. This
demonstration should document that
the new analyst is capable of
successfully following the standard
operating procedure (SOP) based on the
laboratory’s IDP policy.
For Update V, changes to the IDP have
been specified in the individual Update
V methods where appropriate (e.g.,
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
screening method where there is not a
quantitative reporting limit such as a
bioassay method). The IDP changes
allow laboratories to use their time and
resources effectively, especially for the
organic analyses.
Key Changes in the IDP for the
Determination of Organic Analytes:
The IDP section was expanded to
describe two situations:
When a significant change to
instrumentation or procedure occurs:
Reliable performance of the methods is
dependent on careful adherence to the
instructions in the written method, and
aspects of the method are mandatory to
ensure that the method performs as
intended. Therefore, if a major change to
the sample preparation procedure is
made (e.g., a change of solvent), the IDP
must be repeated for that preparation
procedure to demonstrate the laboratory
technician’s continued ability to reliably
perform the method. EPA considers
conducting IDPs as part of good
laboratory practice procedures and has
already included these procedures in
EPA’s laboratories practices.
Alterations in instrumental
procedures only (e.g., changing Gas
Chromatograph (GC) temperature
programs or High Performance Liquid
Chromatography (HPLC) mobile phases
or the detector interface), require a new
calibration, but not a new IDP because
the preparation procedure is unchanged.
When new staff members are trained:
A new analyst needs to be capable of
performing the method, or portion of the
method, for which the analyst is
responsible. For example, when analysts
are trained for a subset of analytes for
an 8000 series method, the new sample
preparation analyst should prepare
reference samples for a representative
set of analytes (e.g., the primary analyte
mix for Method 8270, or a mix of
Aroclor 1016 and 1260 for Method
8082) for each preparation method the
analyst will be performing. The
instrument analyst being trained will
need to analyze prepared samples (e.g.,
semi-volatile extracts).
• Relative Standard Error (RSE)—
ORCR evaluated and included, as the
analytical community recommended,
RSE as an option (in addition to
calculation of the % error) in SW–846
for the determination of the
acceptability for a linear or non-linear
calibration curve. RSE refits the
calibration data back to the calibration
model and evaluates the difference
between the measured and the true
amounts or concentrations used to
create the model.
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Notices
Where:
xi = True amount of analyte in calibration
level i, in mass or concentration units.
x´i = Measured amount of analyte in
calibration level i, in mass or
concentration units.
p = Number of terms in the fitting equation
(average = 1, linear = 2, quadratic = 3,
cubic = 4).
n = Number of calibration points.
The RSE acceptance limit criterion for
the calibration model is the same as the
RSD limit in the determinative method.
If the RSD limit is not defined in the
determinative method, the RSE limit
should be set at ≤20% for good
performing compounds and ≤30% for
poor performing compounds.
V. Summary
EPA believes that these changes in
Update V will assist the method users
to demonstrate method competency and
generate better quality data. For the
convenience of the analytical
community, the Agency will revise the
OSWER Methods’ Team homepage on
63193
EPA’s Web site with updated
information to better communicate new
policy and analytical procedures, and
will include Update V and selected
documents at that Web site after Update
V is finalized.
Please see the Web site: https://
www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/
testmethods/index.htm for more
information. Table 1 provides a listing
of the five chapters and twenty-three
methods (eight new and fifteen revised
methods) in Update V.
TABLE 1—UPDATE V (METHODS, CHAPTERS AND GUIDANCE)
Analytical
method No.
1030 ............
3200 * ..........
3511 * ..........
3572 * ..........
3620C ..........
4025 * ..........
4430 * ..........
4435 * ..........
5021A ..........
6010D ..........
6020B ..........
6800 ............
8000D ..........
8021B ..........
8111 ............
8270D ..........
8276 * ..........
8410 ............
8430 ............
9013A ..........
9014 ............
9015 * ..........
9320 ............
Method or chapter title
Table of Contents.
Chapter One—Quality Control.
Chapter Two—Choosing the Correct Procedure.
Chapter Three—Inorganic Analytes.
Chapter Four—Organic Analytes.
Chapter Five—Miscellaneous Test Methods.
Methods Status Table.
Ignitability of Solids.
Mercury Species Fractionation and Quantification by Microwave-Assisted Extraction, Selective Solvent Extraction and/or Solid
Phase Extraction.
Organic Compounds in Water by Microextraction.
Extraction of Wipe Samples for Chemical Agents.
Florisil Cleanup.
Screening for Polychlorinated Dibenzodioxins and Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs) by Immunoassay.
Screening for Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins and Furans (PCDD/Fs) by Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor PCR Assay.
Method for Toxic Equivalent (TEQS) Determination for Dioxin-Like Chemical Activity With the CALUX® Bioassay.
Volatile Organic Compounds in Various Sample Matrices Using Equilibrium Headspace Analysis.
Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometry.
Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry.
Elemental and Speciated Isotope Dilution Mass Spectrometry.
Determinative Chromatographic Separations.
Aromatic and Halogenated Volatiles by Gas Chromatography Using Photoionization and/or Electrolytic Conductivity Detectors.
Haloethers by Gas Chromatography.
Semivolatile Organic Compounds by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry.
Toxaphene and Toxaphene Congeners by Gas Chromatography/Negative Ion Chemical Ionization Mass Spectrometry (GC–NICI/
MS).
Gas Chromatography/Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometry for Semivolatile Organics: Capillary Column.
Analysis of Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ester and Hydrolysis Products by Direct Aqueous Injection.
Cyanide Extraction Procedure for Solids and Oils.
Titrimetric and Manual Spectrophotometric Determinative Methods for Cyanide.
Metal Cyanide Complexes by Anion Exchange Chromatography and UV Detection.
Radium 228.
Dated: September 27, 2013.
Barnes Johnson,
Acting Director, Office of Resource
Conservation and Recovery.
FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION
[FR Doc. 2013–24852 Filed 10–22–13; 8:45 am]
AGENCY:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:13 Oct 22, 2013
Jkt 232001
Farm Credit Administration Board;
Sunshine Act; Regular Meeting
Farm Credit Administration.
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given,
pursuant to the Government in the
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Sunshine Act, of the regular meeting of
the Farm Credit Administration Board
(Board).
The regular meeting of
the Board will be held at the offices of
the Farm Credit Administration in
McLean, Virginia, on October 10, 2013,
DATE AND TIME:
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
EN23OC13.003
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
* New Methods.
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 23, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63185-63193]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24852]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-0072; FRL-9901-86-OSWER]
Waste Management System; Testing and Monitoring Activities;
Update V of SW-846
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is
providing notice of the availability of ``Update V'' to the Third
Edition of EPA publication SW-846, ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods.'' Update V contains 23 new and
revised analytical methods that the Agency has evaluated, and
determined to be appropriate and which may be used for monitoring or
complying with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
hazardous and non-hazardous waste regulations. Because the analytical
methods contained in Update V are not required by the RCRA hazardous
waste regulations, EPA is issuing this update as guidance. In addition,
the Agency is also taking comment on revisions to Chapters One through
Five of EPA publication SW-846, an ORCR Policy Statement, and other
guidance. The Agency is seeking public comment on Update V, and after
consideration of the public comments, will place these new and revised
methods, guidance, and chapters in the SW-846 methods compendium.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 21, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
RCRA-2012-0072, by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: RCRA-docket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-RCRA-2012-0072.
Fax: Fax comments to: 202-566-9744, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-0072.
Mail: Send comments to: OSWER Docket, EPA Docket Center,
Mail Code 28221T, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-
2012-0072. Please include two copies of your comments.
Hand Delivery: Deliver two copies of your comments to:
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center,
[[Page 63186]]
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington DC, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-0072. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the docket's normal hours of operation and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-0072. EPA's
policy is that all comments received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OSWER Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OSWER
Docket is (202) 566-0270.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Kirkland, Materials Recovery and
Waste Management Division, Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (5304P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 703-308-8855; fax number: 703-
308-0522; email address: kirkland.kim@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
This notice is directed to the public in general. It may, however,
be of particular interest to you if you conduct waste sampling and
analysis for RCRA-related activities. This might include any entity
that generates, treats, stores, or disposes of hazardous or
nonhazardous solid waste and is subject to RCRA subtitle C or D
sampling and analysis requirements, and might also include any
laboratory that conducts waste sampling and analyses for such entities.
B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
the procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
C. How can I get copies of Update V and the Third Edition of SW-846 as
amended by its Final Updates?
Update V is available in the RCRA docket and the final version will
be available on-line after all comments have been addressed. The Third
Edition of SW-846, as amended by Final Updates I, II, IIA, IIB, III,
IIIA, IIIB, IVA, and IVB, is available in portable document format
(PDF) on EPA's Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR) Web
page at: https://www.epa.gov/SW-846.
D. How is the rest of this notice organized?
The rest of this Notice includes the following sections:
II. What is the subject and purpose of this notice?
III. Why is the Agency releasing Update V to SW-846?
IV. What does Update V contain?
A. OSWER/ORCR Policy Statement
B. Changes to QA/QC Guidance
V. Summary
II. What is the subject and purpose of this notice?
The Agency is announcing the availability of and inviting public
comment on Update V to ``Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,
Physical/Chemical Methods'', EPA Publication SW-846. Update V of SW-846
contains analytical methods that the Agency has evaluated, and/or
revised and determined to be appropriate and may be used for monitoring
or complying with the RCRA hazardous waste regulations. Because the
analytical methods contained in Update V are not required by the RCRA
hazardous waste regulations, EPA is issuing this update as guidance.
This guidance does not add or change the RCRA regulations, and does not
have any impact on existing rulemakings associated with the RCRA
[[Page 63187]]
program. To date, the Agency has finalized Updates I, II, IIA, IIB,
III, IIIA, IIIB, IVA, and IVB to the SW-846 manual, which can be found
on the EPA's ORCR Web page at: https://www.epa.gov/SW-846.
III. Why is the Agency releasing Update V to SW-846?
The Agency revises the content of SW-846 over time as new
information and data become available. We continually review advances
in analytical instrumentation and techniques and periodically
incorporate such advances into SW-846 as method updates by adding new
methods to the manual, and replacing existing methods with revised
versions of the same method. These updates improve analytical method
performance and cost effectiveness. Since the publication of the
Methods Innovation Rule (MIR) (70 FR 34537, June 14, 2005), the Agency
no longer needs to use a rulemaking process for publication of an
update to SW-846, as long as the update does not contain a method
required by the RCRA regulations (e.g., Method-Defined Parameter (MDP),
such as the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) (Method
1311)), see 40 CFR 260.11. The Agency instead can make an SW-846 update
available to the public more efficiently through a Federal Register
notice announcing its availability and inviting public comment on the
update.
In addition, the MIR allows flexibility in method selection and use
for meeting the analytical needs of the RCRA program, with the
exception of those methods specifically required by the RCRA
regulations. This approach is consistent with the Agency's commitment
to fully implement a performance-based measurement system (PBMS),
whereby the analytical focus is on measurement objectives and
performance rather than specific measurement technologies. Furthermore,
the Agency's PBMS approach has evolved resulting in the Agency adopting
the new ``Flexible Approaches to Environmental Measurement--The
Evolution of the Performance Approach'' as developed by the Forum on
Environmental Measurements (FEM) at the direction of EPA's Science
Policy Council (i.e., now the Science and Technology Policy Council
(STPC)). One of the main goals of the Performance Approach is to
increase flexibility in choosing sampling and analytical approaches to
meet regulatory requirements for measurements. For more information on
the Performance Approach, see: https://www.epa.gov/fem/approach.htm.
In using the SW-846 methods, the regulated entity need only
demonstrate that an analytical method generates data that meet the
project-specific data quality objectives (DQOs) and performance
acceptance criteria. The Agency finds this flexible approach to be
particularly useful, and sufficient in most cases, during the
characterization of the complex matrices of RCRA-related wastes. Thus,
a method user can modify an SW-846 method (provided it is not one
specifically required by regulation, e.g., 40 CFR 260.11), in order to
best meet a waste matrix-specific analytical need, as long as the
modifications meet the project-specific DQOs and performance acceptance
criteria. The public should note that in some cases the method
established certain requirements (e.g., conducting a calibration curve,
using specific reagents, analyzing a Quality Control (QC) check sample
to demonstrate precision and accuracy). While these standard principles
are not regulatory requirements, they are necessary to yield data of
acceptable quality as intended and are called for by sound science.
(The public can obtain more information about the MIR and PBMS at the
Agency's Web site dedicated to SW-846 and the testing of RCRA-regulated
wastes: https://www.epa.gov/SW-846.)
The subject of today's notice, Update V to SW-846, contains 23 new
and revised analytical methods and revises Chapters One through Five of
SW-846. After the comment period, and based on the Agency's evaluation
of the comments received, the new and revised methods and revised
chapters will be formally included in the SW-846 methods compendium.
Most of the Update V methods previously resided under the heading ``New
Methods'' at EPA's SW-846 Web site as either revised versions of
existing SW-846 methods or as new methods that the Agency planned to
add to SW-846. Although these methods were not yet part of an official
update to any edition of the SW-846 manual at the time of their posting
on the Web site, the Agency wanted to make these Agency-evaluated
methods available for use and comment as soon as possible. The Agency
believed that public access to these new and revised methods, for
guidance purposes, would assure that reliable and innovative methods
are provided to the regulated community in a timely and cost-effective
manner. Therefore, these methods could be used for any RCRA
applications, other than one specifically required by regulation, for
which their performance could be demonstrated to be appropriate and
meet project-specific DQOs, and thus be consistent with implementation
and promotion of a flexible and performance-based approach to RCRA-
related analyses.
The Agency is also responding to concerns expressed by the
Environmental Laboratory Advisory Board (ELAB), a Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) committee that advises the Agency on measurement,
monitoring, and laboratory science issues, who contacted EPA's FEM with
several issues regarding the use of SW-846. The ELAB specifically
contacted EPA regarding which version of a revised method is
recommended. Historically, as noted above, the Agency has posted new
and revised methods on the SW-846 Web site under the ``New Test Methods
Online'' (at: https://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/testmethods/sw846/new_meth.htm), for use by the laboratory community, the States, and
the regulated community pending publication of these methods in the
Federal Register. The Agency was subsequently contacted by the ELAB,
who identified several concerns regarding the process for updating and
posting updates on the ``New Test Methods Online'' link on the SW-846
Web site.
ELAB requested that EPA clarify those issues that caused some
confusion with some entities of the user community. Specifically,
confusion existed when a method had multiple versions available on the
web. For example, Method 8000C, on the ''New Test Methods Online'' link
has quality control (QC) guidelines that differ from Method 8000B (the
official version) in the SW-846 compendium. The public was confused by
the difference in QC guidelines in the two available versions of the
method. The Agency subsequently decided that the revisions to Method
8000C were more significant than those previously posted, and has
decided to replace Method 8000C with Method 8000D, and is issuing
Method 8000D as part of Update V.
In response to ELAB's concerns, ORCR prepared a Policy Statement
that identifies the status of methods (e.g., validated methods, final
methods, etc.), and provides the rationale for identifying when changes
to methods are significant, through a letter designation and by noting
the date the method was revised by ORCR. For more information on the
ORCR Policy Statement, see section IV of this Notice.
Finally, the Agency is requesting public comment on the Update V
methods and the other relevant updated materials presented in this
Notice for
[[Page 63188]]
inclusion in the SW-846 manual (i.e., Table of Contents and Chapters
One through Five). See the ADDRESSES section of this notice for the
procedure for submitting comments. The Agency will consider public
comments submitted on or before the comment period deadline and
subsequently finalize Update V as an official part of SW-846. In
addition, the EPA SW-846 Web site contains an updated version of the
``Method Status Table for SW-846,'' which identifies the update history
for each document in SW-846.
The Agency strongly recommends the use of the latest version of an
SW-846 method, especially for new analyte monitoring situations. The
Agency, however, is not imposing restrictions on the use of earlier
versions of non-required SW-846 methods or precluding the use of
previous guidance, if such use is appropriate. For example, earlier
versions of an SW-846 method may be more appropriate for regulatory
purposes (e.g., for compliance with an existing permit or consent
decree), or when new method versions may be more costly than necessary
for meeting project-specific objectives. In the future, the Agency
plans to make electronic copies of earlier versions of SW-846 methods
available through a separate hyperlink from the SW-846 Web site.
The Agency hopes that the posting of this information on the Web
site for immediate public access will mitigate any remaining confusion
regarding the use of SW-846 methods. In addition, the public can also
access the Methods Information Communication Exchange (MICE) for
answers to their questions or concerns regarding SW-846 methods. MICE
can be accessed by phone at (703) 818-3238, by fax at (703) 818-8813,
or by email at mice@techlawinc.com.
IV. What does Update V contain?
Update V contains 23 new and revised analytical methods, revised
versions of Chapters One through Five of EPA publication SW-846, the
ORCR Policy Statement, and other guidance (e.g., quality assurance/
quality control (QA/QC) guidance on lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ),
relative standard error (RSE), initial demonstration of proficiency
(IDP), etc.), each dated October 2012 and identified as ``Update V'' in
the document footer. For the convenience of the reader, EPA has
identified key areas of interest in the sections below, but all the
methods and other information for which the Agency is seeking comments
are contained in the docket for this Notice. Table 1 (included at the
end of this Notice) provides a listing of the five revised chapters and
twenty-three methods (eight new and fifteen revised methods) in Update
V. After consideration of comments received from publication of this
Notice, Update V, including the revised versions of Chapters One
through Five, will be incorporated into the SW-846 methods compendium.
A. OSWER/ORCR Policy Statement
In 2008, ELAB requested that ORCR describe their plan for releasing
Updates to SW-846, as well as clarify the status of deleted, obsolete,
previous versions or revised methods, and a statement regarding the
status of previous versions of methods. In addition, ELAB raised the
following additional concerns and suggestions:
Clarification is needed regarding which method is the
final version in SW-846.
Many states are not adopting the final version of new
methods.
States may not have the resources to certify multiple
versions of final methods.
Some of the regulated community doesn't know how the
method revision varied.
EPA has engaged in several face-to-face meetings with the ELAB at
national conferences to address their requests and resolve their
concerns and suggestions. As a result of those meetings, ORCR developed
a policy statement intended to clarify the basic terminology used in
SW-846 regarding the status of methods and how the SW-846 Methods
program develops and releases methods to the public. That policy
statement, entitled ``USEPA Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery Policy on the Use of Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,
Physical/Chemical Methods (SW-846)'' provides background on SW-846,
general guidance on the procedures for adopting methods into SW-846,
and defines key terms used to identify the status of methods in SW-846.
Below is the ORCR Policy Statement, a copy of which has also been
placed in the docket associated with this Federal Register Notice:
USEPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response/Office of Resource
Conservation and Recovery Policy on the Use of ``Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods'' (SW-846)
The United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of
Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR) provides analytical and
sampling methods to assist the regulated and regulatory community and
others in implementing the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA). These methods are published in the Test Methods for Evaluating
Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods (SW-846) and are available on
the ORCR Web site (www.epa.gov./epawaste/hazard/testmethods/index.htm).
With the exception of those particular methods which are promulgated in
the regulations to implement RCRA (see 40 CFR 260.11), the remaining
methods are considered guidance, and users may select any
scientifically appropriate method when conducting analyses to comply
with the RCRA regulatory program.
The Methods Innovation Rule (MIR) published on June 14, 2005 (70 FR
34538), reemphasized the flexible approach in method selection, when
appropriate, when testing for compliance, under RCRA. Since the
publication of this rule, ORCR no longer uses a formal rulemaking
process for publication of method updates to SW-846. EPA informs the
regulated and regulatory community of new methods and updates to SW-846
and solicits comments on them through a Notice of Availability
published in the Federal Register. This approach is consistent with
ORCR's commitment to fully implement the Agency's performance-based
measurement system (PBMS) approach to regulation.
A new effort was developed and approved to reinvigorate the goals
of PBMS with the versatility of each of our program's needs. It is
called the Flexible Approaches to Environmental Measurements--The
Evolution of the Performance Approach which the Science and Technology
Policy Council (STPC) approved on February 15, 2008. In 2009, ORCR
subsequently adopted the new ``Performance Approach'' as defined by the
Forum on Environmental Measurements (FEM). The FEM is a standing
committee of senior EPA Environmental Protection managers established
to develop policies to guide the Agency's measurement community in:
validating and disseminating methods for sample collection and
analysis; for ensuring that monitoring studies are scientifically
rigorous, statistically sound, and yield representative measurements;
and for employing a quality systems approach that ensures that the data
gathered and used by the Agency are of known and documented quality.
After shortening the name of the PBMS effort to the ``Performance
Approach,'' the FEM's Performance Approach Action Team took a look at
the issues surrounding the lack of the program's progress with the
ultimate conclusion that the ``one size fits all''
[[Page 63189]]
approach does not work for the diversely different programs and
authorities each of our major program offices (i.e., air, pesticides,
waste, and water) has in carrying out their work. To avoid the
proliferation of terminology, ORCR has adopted the ``Flexible
Approach'' which is consistent with ORCR's approach to environmental
management, based on the goals and statutes of EPA program offices.
Under the PBMS approach for RCRA, when labs conducted regulatory
required monitoring, the regulated community had to either employ a
scientifically appropriate method published in SW-846 or use any other
scientifically appropriate method from another reliable source. This is
still true under the Flexible Approach. However, when choosing a
reliable alternative source, the focus should be on measurement
objectives, rather than on measurement technologies. In all cases, the
user must demonstrate the method selected generates data that are
appropriate for the intended use. Although both approaches are
applicable for RCRA, ORCR had dropped the term PBMS, and strongly
supports the use of the new Flexible Approach to be consistent with the
Agency's new guidance that allows each program to determine program
specific flexibility when addressing waste analysis issues.
ORCR strongly recommends that persons use the latest version of a
SW-846 method whenever possible, especially in new monitoring
situations, since updated versions of the methods EPA publishes
generally are in the Agency's view less subject to misinterpretation,
yield improved precision and/or bias, or provide for the use of newer
and, often, more cost-effective technologies. In situations where it
may not be appropriate to use the latest method in SW-846, earlier
versions may be used. These situations may include, but are not limited
to, those where an earlier version of a method is required for existing
permits, consent decrees, waste analysis plans or sampling analysis
plans. In addition, laboratories, especially small laboratories, may
find a previous version of a SW-846 method appropriate if it is more
cost-effective in meeting the project-specific objectives. The Agency
is not imposing restrictions on the use of earlier versions of non-
required methods contained in SW-846 or precluding the use of previous
guidance. Nonetheless, the adoption of the latest method version is
recommended and should be accomplished as soon as possible, as
appropriate. When methods are employed, it is the responsibility of the
user to ensure that the method yields data of a quality appropriate for
the particular application for which it is being used.
EPA views the methods in the SW-846 compendium as tools for the
user to employ in developing individual standard operating procedures
to meet the goals and objectives of specific projects. This approach
enables the user to optimize and modify methods for effective
performance on unique projects. The SW-846 methods are for most
applications considered as guidance with the exception of those methods
required by the RCRA regulations (i.e., Method-Defined Parameters
(MDPs), see 40 CFR 260.11).
In situations where the user is not certain whether the selected
method or method modification is appropriate, EPA recommends regulated
entities contact and seek approval as needed from the appropriate
regulatory agency (e.g., Federal or State/local government) before
applying any method on a specific project, including situations where
the method is used verbatim.
EPA may publish new methods, revise existing methods, or withdraw
methods from the SW-846 compendium whenever it deems it appropriate.
For example, methods may be updated in order to reflect new
advancements in technology, to reflect the addition of new performance
data, or to clarify areas of the procedure that experience indicates
may be misunderstood. Methods may also be revised to reflect new EPA
policy regarding the use of certain chemicals and reagents. In other
cases, methods are removed if the technology is no longer available or
applicable. ORCR has developed specific procedures for releasing
updates, revisions, or withdrawing methods, which are designed to
minimize disruption to regulatory processes. Specific definitions for
the terms associated with a method's status, which support the change
procedures, have been developed and provided below.
The Agency will only post the most recent version of a final SW-846
method on the ORCR Web page as part of the SW-846 methods compendium
(www.epa.gov./epawaste/hazard/testmethods/index.htm). Prior versions of
methods formerly contained in SW-846 and still considered appropriate
for use will be available through a separate hyperlink in the future.
EPA's objective is to identify and make available on the Agency's SW-
846 Web site the latest information regarding the methodologies that
generate effective data at minimum costs in response to new
technological or scientific advancements, while, at the same time,
making available earlier versions for those situations where such
methods may be needed or appropriate (e.g., to determine how a
particular analysis had been performed, to determine how to comply with
a specific permit requirement, etc.).
SW-846 Methods Status Definitions
Analytical methods are officially made a part of the SW-846 manual
through a rigorous process of technical evaluation both within the
Agency and through external review. Methods are also revised as needed
after a formal evaluation process by analytical experts (e.g., SW-846
work and focus groups) and an announcement of method availability and
request for public comment in the Federal Register as a Notice of
Availability. During the method development/evaluation process, the
methods go through various stages of review and revision. The methods
are officially included as part of an update to the most current
edition of SW-846 at the conclusion of this process.
ORCR employs a specific naming convention (i.e., method number and
letter suffix) when publishing methods. The naming convention is
intended to minimize confusion within the user community regarding a
method's developmental status. The method number designates the
underlying technology (e.g., 8000 series methods designate
determinative procedures for organic compounds). A revision to a method
where the underlying technology does not change is indicated by
continued use of the same method number and letter, but with a new
issuance date. If the revision retains the underlying technology, but
does not affect the precision and/or accuracy of the data, the revision
is considered to be minor or nonsignificant and the method number and
letter is not changed or sequenced.
If, on the other hand, the revision retains the underlying
technology, but changes the precision and/or accuracy of the data, the
change is considered to be significant and is indicated by a subsequent
letter suffix (e.g., changes from 8270C to 8270D) and a new issuance
date. For example, if the quality control recommendations are changed
in a manner that improves the bias or precision of the method, but does
not change the underlying technology (e.g., a tightening of the
calibration acceptance criteria), the method number stays the same, but
the letter suffix is sequenced to the next letter. The differences
between the
[[Page 63190]]
earlier and later versions of a method are detailed in the method
summary section of the revised version regardless of the type of
change.
Examples of changes that may be considered minor or nonsignificant
include, but are not limited to: Language added to a method to provide
increased clarity or guidance; expansion of lists of acceptable
instrumentation, applicability of the method to a matrix not previously
referenced, adding new compounds to the list of applicable compounds,
or changes to instrument specifications which do not result in an
existing acceptable instrument being rendered unacceptable; or
formatting and editorial changes that are designed to improve
readability or correct spelling or grammatical errors.
ORCR has defined a ``significant change'' as a change that results
in improved analytical results (e.g., changes that result in reducing
analytical bias or improving data precision). Examples of significant
changes may include, but are not limited to: a change in the operating
parameter which reduces analytical flexibility; a change in
instrumentation specification which minimizes interference and/or
optimizes instrument performance (if the use of such interference
reduction technique or performance enhancement is required); a change
in calibration guidance which results in more restrictive
recommendations; a change that institutes tighter QC recommendations;
or a change in the reagents that are required by the method.
ORCR understands revisions are sometimes necessary to either
enhance the performance of the method or to allow flexibilities due to
the complexity of sample matrices. In situations where the user is not
certain whether the selected method, method modification or
modification to their plan is appropriate, EPA recommends the regulated
community seek approval from the appropriate regulatory agency (e.g.,
Federal or State/local government, client) before their use of a
revised method; amend their plan (e.g., Project Plan, Quality Assurance
Project Plan (QAPP), Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP), Standard
Operating Procedure (SOP)); and properly document the change when
reporting analytical results.
The following method status definitions reflect the current method
development process and have been developed to add clarity for the
method users. ORCR uses these definitions and the terms may vary for
other program offices.
Final Method--A method that has been formally adopted into the most
recent version of the SW-846 compendium. Before a method becomes final,
the validated version would have been made available for public review
and comment in a Notice of Availability (NOA) or a proposed rulemaking,
as appropriate.
Validated Method--A method that has undergone development and
technical review by EPA, but has not been formally adopted into the SW-
846 method compendium and published through a Federal Register Notice.
Since this review includes technical work group approval and/or inter-
laboratory validation, validated methods are included on the Agency Web
site for evaluation and use by the public and as a means of soliciting
comment from the broader scientific community. The public may use a
validated method prior to its inclusion in the SW-846 compendium,
provided that the users demonstrate that it generates data that are
appropriate for the intended use.
Revised Method--A method included in SW-846 that has been updated
to reflect changes that may be editorial in nature and do not impact
data or performance comparability, that broaden the method to introduce
new technologies that may increase productivity, but do not change the
fundamental technology, or that change the quality control requirements
to increase bias or precision.
The number of a method that has been revised does not change, but
the method may receive a subsequent letter suffix. If the revision is a
significant one (as defined above) then both the letter suffix and the
issuance date are updated. If, on the other hand, the revision is
editorial in nature, or consists of the addition of new performance
data, then only the issuance date is changed. Previous versions are not
precluded from being used provided that the users demonstrate that it
generates data that are appropriate for the intended use.
Draft Method--A new method that is being evaluated for possible
inclusion into SW-846. It represents the latest innovative
technological advancements in scientific methodology, but has not
completed technical review by EPA nor been subject to notice and
comment in the Federal Register.
Superseded Method--A superseded method is an earlier version of an
SW-846 method or other guidance that is no longer included in the SW-
846 compendium and has been replaced by a newer version. Revised
versions of Superseded methods should be viewed as the preferred
method. Methods in this category are removed from the compendium, but
remain available on line and are not precluded for use where required
for existing projects or where an adequate justification for use
exists. The term ``Superseded'' is documented in the method title as
listed on the EPA Web site for prior versions of final methods followed
by the date it was superseded.
Withdrawn Method--A method or other guidance that EPA strongly
recommends not be used, (e.g., cyanide and sulfide reactivity guidance
withdrawn, June 14, 2005). EPA has determined that such procedures or
methods, for the use or technical objectives for which they were
originally published, are technically inadequate and/or no longer meet
such use or technical objectives. This does not mean, however, that
there would be no situations under which the procedures or methods may
be appropriate. In any situation in which a person may believe that the
withdrawn method is appropriate, we strongly encourage consultation
with applicable regulatory agencies at the state or federal level. The
prospective user of the method will need to demonstrate the old method
is, indeed, appropriate. Any use of these methods, without any such
consultation and demonstration, will be done at the user's risk.
The Agency understands that earlier versions of the SW-846 methods
that aren't required may still be in use to meet project specific
criteria (e.g., permits, sampling plans, Consent Decrees, etc.).
Permits and other plans formally approved by regulatory authorities
that specify the use of particular methods for required analysis
continue in effect unless they are changed. However, the Agency
encourages the regulated community to use the latest version of SW-846,
when applicable. EPA will continue to update the Methods Status Table
to inform the public as to the status of methods in SW-846 and the
Policy Statement will be added to the SW-846 methods compendium when
the Update V package is finalized.
[end of policy statement]
B. Changes to Chapters One Through Five and QA/QC Guidance (Chapter One
and Individual Methods) in SW-846
In general, EPA's revisions to Chapters One through Five to EPA
publication SW-846 reflects the new method style guide format and added
all the Update V methods and new letters/version to the appropriate
related method sections. Specifically:
[[Page 63191]]
Chapter One of SW-846 was revised to make it more user
friendly and to be more consistent with the Agency's official guidance
on QA/QC implementation and procedures (e.g., Quality Assurance Project
Plans (QAPPS), Data Quality Objectives (DQOs), and the Flexible
Approach to Environmental Measurement).
Chapter Two now includes a Table of Contents to make
finding the information easier. In addition, a typographical error was
found for bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether and was corrected to bis(2-
chloro-1-methylethyl) ether in Tables 2-1, 2-4, 2-15, 2-22, and 2-34.
Furthermore, Table 2-40(A) was revised to reflect the current sample
preservation guidance for styrene and vinyl chloride in aqueous samples
(i.e., deletion of previously recommended practice of collecting a
second set of samples without acid preservatives and analyze
immediately, if styrene and vinyl chloride are analytes of interest)
and Table 2-40(B) was revised to include Mercury Speciation hold times
in addition to totals.
Chapter Three was revised so that the definition for
instrument detection limit (IDL) is consistent with the revised methods
6010D and 6020B. In addition, the term ``accuracy'' was replaced by
``bias'' where appropriate; the definition for linear range was revised
to be consistent with methods 6010D and 6020B; the definition of
interference check sample (ICS) was replaced with the spectral
interference check (SIC) solution to be consistent with methods 6010D
and 6020B; and the definition of ``laboratory control sample'' was
revised to recommend the use of a spiking solution from the same source
as the calibration standards. Also, the collision/reaction cell
technology was added to Sections 3.6 and 3.7 as an effective method for
removing isobaric interferences when analyzing by ICP-MS and a minimum
collection mass of 100 g was added to Table 3-2 for solid samples
collected for sulfide analysis.
Chapter Four (see Table 4-1) was reformatted and updated
by removing the recommendation to collect a second set of samples
without adding an acid preservative and analyze in a shorter time frame
if vinyl chloride and styrene are analytes of concern for aqueous
samples.
Chapter 5 had no significant changes outside of general
ones specified above (e.g., updated format changes and method reference
to chapters).
In addition, EPA is incorporating three new and revised QC features
in Chapter One and the Update V methods, where appropriate, for RCRA
compliance monitoring which warrant further discussion here. A summary
of changes to chapters in SW-846 are provided in Appendix A of each
chapter.
The new and revised features that have been added to Chapter One
(Quality Control) and individual methods (where appropriate) are:
Lower Limit of Quantitation (LLOQ)--References to the
Method Detection Limit (MDL) have been replaced with the LLOQ. It is
recommended to establish the LLOQ as the lowest point of quantitation,
which, in most cases, is the concentration of the lowest calibration
standard in the calibration curve that has been adjusted for the
preparation mass and/or volume. The LLOQ value is a function of both
the analytical method and the sample being evaluated.
Why is MDL removed and replaced by LLOQ for SW-846?
ORCR has removed references to the MDL procedure (i.e., 40 CFR 136,
Appendix B) beginning with Update IV and from the revised and new
Update V methods and has recommended establishing the LLOQ. We continue
to refine the procedure for establishing the LLOQ. The refined
procedure considers sample matrix effects; provides a provision to
verify the reasonableness of the reported quantitation limit (QL); and
recommends a frequency of LLOQ verification (found in Chapter One and
each method) to be balanced between rigor and practicality. (Note: The
agency understands that previous versions of methods published in SW-
846 may contain the MDL reference. However, as methods are updated, EPA
will remove the reference to the MDL, and will remove the reference in
older methods that have not yet been updated, as time and resources
allow. Therefore, ORCR recommends that LLOQ be used, as appropriate,
for the methods that have not yet been updated. See the Section 9.8 in
Method 6020B for inorganic analytes and Section 9.7 in Method 8000 for
organic analytes on LLOQ for further information on implementation.)
ORCR understands that other EPA programs may continue to use MDLs
to meet their program use and needs (e.g., the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program). However, ORCR has
found that the procedure in 40 CFR 136, Appendix B, for the
determination of MDLs, developed for the Clean Water Act (CWA) program
uses a clean matrix (e.g., reagent water for preparing ``spiked''
samples, or samples with known constituent concentrations). Analytical
laboratories often have difficulty demonstrating they can meet the MDL
established using Part 136 when evaluating complex matrices, such as
wastes. The procedure outlined in Part 136 is generally not suitable
for RCRA wastes or materials because the MDL approach generally yields
unrealistic and/or unachievable method detection limits for the complex
matrices (e.g., soils, sludges, wipes, and spent materials) encountered
under the RCRA program. The MDLs are normally calculated from analysis
of a sample that does not cause matrix interferences (typically
determined using spiked reagent water). However, most wastes evaluated
for compliance with RCRA consist of complex matrices. The LLOQ
considers the effect of sample matrix (e.g., components of a sample
other than the analyte) by taking the sample through the entire
analytical process, including sample preparation, clean up (to remove
sample interferences), and determinative procedures. Also, if method
users choose, the LLOQ sample can be included at the end of the run to
see if it meets the established acceptance criteria. Lastly, results
above the LLOQ are quantifiable within an acceptable precision and
bias. Thus, the LLOQ approach better suits the needs of the RCRA
program, because it provides reliable and defensible results,
especially at the lower level of quantitation, and can be reported with
a known level of confidence for the complex matrices being evaluated.
SW-846 methods are being used by various programs in implementing
various statutes, including RCRA, the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA), and Homeland Security Presidential Directives, for
waste and materials characterization, compliance testing, site/incident
characterization and risk assessment for protection of human health and
the environment, and better management and use of wastes and materials,
for a wide range of difficult matrices. ORCR believes that the LLOQ
approach is an important improvement, and supports the essential need
to provide data that are verified to meet the precision and accuracy
requirements of the Agency's program needs.
Establishing LLOQ for Inorganic analytes: When performing methods
for inorganic analyses, the LLOQ should be verified by the analysis of
at least seven replicate samples (prepared in a clean matrix or control
material) and spiked at the LLOQ and processed through all preparation
and analysis steps of the method. The mean recovery and relative
standard deviation (RSD) of these
[[Page 63192]]
samples provide an initial statement of precision and bias at the LLOQ.
In most cases, the mean recovery should be 35% of the true
value and the RSD should be <=20%. Ongoing LLOQ verification, at a
minimum, is on a quarterly basis to validate quantitation capability at
low analyte concentration levels. This verification may be accomplished
either with clean control material (e.g., reagent water, method blanks,
Ottawa sand, diatomaceous earth, etc.) or a representative sample
matrix free of target compounds. Optimally, the LLOQ should be less
than the desired regulatory action levels based on the stated project-
specific requirements. For more information, please see the individual
methods (e.g., Methods 6010 and 6020) and Chapter One of SW-846.
Establishing LLOQ for organic analytes: When performing methods for
organic analyses, the LLOQ should be verified using either a clean
control material (e.g., reagent water, method blanks, Ottawa sand,
diatomaceous earth, etc.) or a representative sample matrix free of
target compounds. Optimally, the LLOQ should be less than the desired
regulatory action levels based on the stated project-specific
requirements.
For organic analyses, the acceptable recovery ranges of target
analytes will vary more than for other types of analyses, such as
inorganics. The recovery of target analytes in the LLOQ check sample
should be within established limits, or other such project-required
acceptance limits, for precision and bias to verify the data reporting
limits. Until the laboratory has sufficient data to determine
acceptance limits statistically, a limit of 20% +/- the Laboratory
Control Sample (LCS) criteria may be used for the LLOQ acceptance
criteria. This approach acknowledges the poorer overall response at the
low end of the calibration curve. Historically based LLOQ acceptance
criteria should be determined as soon as practical once sufficient data
points have been acquired.
In-house limits for bias (e.g., % Recovery) and precision (e.g.,
Relative Percent Difference, %RPD) of the LLOQ for a particular sample
matrix may be calculated when sufficient data points exist. The
laboratory should have a documented procedure for establishing its in-
house acceptance ranges. Sometimes the laboratory instrument and/or
analyst performance vary or test samples cause problems with the
detector (e.g., samples may have interferences; may clog the
instruments cells, wall or tube; may cause contamination; etc.).
Therefore, the limits of acceptance (for precision and bias) are
established by a lab with sufficient data to demonstrate that they can
report down to the LLOQ with a certain level of confidence. The
acceptance limits (for precision and bias) for LLOQ may be established
by the laboratory or at the project level through the data quality
objectives in a quality assurance project plan. The frequency of the
LLOQ check is not specified for organic analytes.
Note: The LLOQ check sample should be spiked with the analytes
of interest at the predicted LLOQ concentration levels and carried
through the same preparation and analysis procedures as
environmental samples and other QC samples. For more information,
please see individual methods (e.g., Method 8000) and Chapter One of
SW-846.
How is LLOQ used?
The RCRA program deals with complex wastes and materials that are
managed or used in many different ways (e.g., landfilling, land
application, incineration, recycling). The thresholds (e.g., action or
remediation levels) for data users (e.g., engineers or risk assessors)
to make their decisions, therefore, vary. Method users will need to
properly plan their analytical strategy to ensure the LLOQs for
targeted analytes are lower than the thresholds needed to generate data
used to determine how waste or materials can be properly managed or
used.
Initial Demonstration of Performance (IDP)--The laboratory
must make an initial demonstration of ability to generate results with
acceptable accuracy and precision for each preparation and
determinative method they perform. This demonstration should be
performed prior to independently analyzing real sample matrices by each
analytical method and should be repeated if other changes occur (e.g.,
significant change in procedure, new staff are trained, etc.).
Documentation of the IDP should be maintained by the Quality Assurance
Manager. Each laboratory should have a training program documenting
that a new analyst is capable of performing the method or portion of
the method for which the analyst is responsible. This demonstration
should document that the new analyst is capable of successfully
following the standard operating procedure (SOP) based on the
laboratory's IDP policy.
For Update V, changes to the IDP have been specified in the
individual Update V methods where appropriate (e.g., screening method
where there is not a quantitative reporting limit such as a bioassay
method). The IDP changes allow laboratories to use their time and
resources effectively, especially for the organic analyses.
Key Changes in the IDP for the Determination of Organic Analytes:
The IDP section was expanded to describe two situations:
When a significant change to instrumentation or procedure occurs:
Reliable performance of the methods is dependent on careful adherence
to the instructions in the written method, and aspects of the method
are mandatory to ensure that the method performs as intended.
Therefore, if a major change to the sample preparation procedure is
made (e.g., a change of solvent), the IDP must be repeated for that
preparation procedure to demonstrate the laboratory technician's
continued ability to reliably perform the method. EPA considers
conducting IDPs as part of good laboratory practice procedures and has
already included these procedures in EPA's laboratories practices.
Alterations in instrumental procedures only (e.g., changing Gas
Chromatograph (GC) temperature programs or High Performance Liquid
Chromatography (HPLC) mobile phases or the detector interface), require
a new calibration, but not a new IDP because the preparation procedure
is unchanged.
When new staff members are trained: A new analyst needs to be
capable of performing the method, or portion of the method, for which
the analyst is responsible. For example, when analysts are trained for
a subset of analytes for an 8000 series method, the new sample
preparation analyst should prepare reference samples for a
representative set of analytes (e.g., the primary analyte mix for
Method 8270, or a mix of Aroclor 1016 and 1260 for Method 8082) for
each preparation method the analyst will be performing. The instrument
analyst being trained will need to analyze prepared samples (e.g.,
semi-volatile extracts).
Relative Standard Error (RSE)--ORCR evaluated and
included, as the analytical community recommended, RSE as an option (in
addition to calculation of the % error) in SW-846 for the determination
of the acceptability for a linear or non-linear calibration curve. RSE
refits the calibration data back to the calibration model and evaluates
the difference between the measured and the true amounts or
concentrations used to create the model.
[[Page 63193]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN23OC13.003
Where:
xi = True amount of analyte in calibration level i, in
mass or concentration units.
x[acute]i = Measured amount of analyte in calibration
level i, in mass or concentration units.
p = Number of terms in the fitting equation (average = 1, linear =
2, quadratic = 3, cubic = 4).
n = Number of calibration points.
The RSE acceptance limit criterion for the calibration model is the
same as the RSD limit in the determinative method. If the RSD limit is
not defined in the determinative method, the RSE limit should be set at
<=20% for good performing compounds and <=30% for poor performing
compounds.
V. Summary
EPA believes that these changes in Update V will assist the method
users to demonstrate method competency and generate better quality
data. For the convenience of the analytical community, the Agency will
revise the OSWER Methods' Team homepage on EPA's Web site with updated
information to better communicate new policy and analytical procedures,
and will include Update V and selected documents at that Web site after
Update V is finalized.
Please see the Web site: https://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/testmethods/index.htm for more information. Table 1 provides a listing
of the five chapters and twenty-three methods (eight new and fifteen
revised methods) in Update V.
Table 1--Update V (Methods, Chapters and Guidance)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analytical method No. Method or chapter title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of Contents.
Chapter One--Quality Control.
Chapter Two--Choosing the Correct
Procedure.
Chapter Three--Inorganic Analytes.
Chapter Four--Organic Analytes.
Chapter Five--Miscellaneous Test Methods.
Methods Status Table.
1030......................... Ignitability of Solids.
3200 *....................... Mercury Species Fractionation and
Quantification by Microwave-Assisted
Extraction, Selective Solvent Extraction
and/or Solid Phase Extraction.
3511 *....................... Organic Compounds in Water by
Microextraction.
3572 *....................... Extraction of Wipe Samples for Chemical
Agents.
3620C........................ Florisil Cleanup.
4025 *....................... Screening for Polychlorinated
Dibenzodioxins and Polychlorinated
Dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs) by Immunoassay.
4430 *....................... Screening for Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-
Dioxins and Furans (PCDD/Fs) by Aryl
Hydrocarbon Receptor PCR Assay.
4435 *....................... Method for Toxic Equivalent (TEQS)
Determination for Dioxin-Like Chemical
Activity With the CALUX[supreg]
Bioassay.
5021A........................ Volatile Organic Compounds in Various
Sample Matrices Using Equilibrium
Headspace Analysis.
6010D........................ Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic
Emission Spectrometry.
6020B........................ Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass
Spectrometry.
6800......................... Elemental and Speciated Isotope Dilution
Mass Spectrometry.
8000D........................ Determinative Chromatographic
Separations.
8021B........................ Aromatic and Halogenated Volatiles by Gas
Chromatography Using Photoionization and/
or Electrolytic Conductivity Detectors.
8111......................... Haloethers by Gas Chromatography.
8270D........................ Semivolatile Organic Compounds by Gas
Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry.
8276 *....................... Toxaphene and Toxaphene Congeners by Gas
Chromatography/Negative Ion Chemical
Ionization Mass Spectrometry (GC-NICI/
MS).
8410......................... Gas Chromatography/Fourier Transform
Infrared Spectrometry for Semivolatile
Organics: Capillary Column.
8430......................... Analysis of Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ester and
Hydrolysis Products by Direct Aqueous
Injection.
9013A........................ Cyanide Extraction Procedure for Solids
and Oils.
9014......................... Titrimetric and Manual Spectrophotometric
Determinative Methods for Cyanide.
9015 *....................... Metal Cyanide Complexes by Anion Exchange
Chromatography and UV Detection.
9320......................... Radium 228.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* New Methods.
Dated: September 27, 2013.
Barnes Johnson,
Acting Director, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.
[FR Doc. 2013-24852 Filed 10-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P