develop consensus standards for use by TNI's programs. This group has a support role in assisting other programs with activities such as guidance and standards interpretation.
fosters the generation of data of known and documented quality is through the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program, or NELAP. The purpose of this program is to establish and implement a program for the accreditation of environmental laboratories.
is to establish and maintain a national PT program to support TNI’s National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program, and other activities.
Field Activities Program (NEFAP) Executive Committee is to establish and implement an accreditation program for field sampling and measurement organizations (FSMOs).
Audit Sample Program is to develop consensus standards for the manufacture and analysis of audit samples for source emission testing.
on a variety of topics of interest to the environmental measurement community. TNI also hosts two regularly scheduled meetings per year, typically in January and August. Both are a week long and involve open meetings of TNI committees as well as training courses and other special sessions.Standard Interpretation
Standard: 2009 TNI
Section: V1M1, Section 4.2.1
REQUEST:
I am having difficult interpreting the requirements outlined in 4.0. The main concern is with our metals department where we run methods 200.7, 6010B, 200.8, 6020. If we are analyzing a PT by all four methods and reporting all methods individually, are 200.7/6010B and 200.8/6020 being treated the same? For example, is a failure for Cobalt by 200.8 equivalent to a failure for Cobalt by 6020, even if our PT demonstrates that we passed Co by 6020? These methods have different digestions and different method requirement at the instrument level. For the 200 series we utilize a hot block digestion and the 6000 series utilizes a microwave digestion. At the instrument level, the control limits for MS/MSDs and blank spikes are different. The requirements for same-source and second-source checks are different. These are different methods.
Is each metals failure for ICP a failure for all ICP methods and each ICP-MS failure a failure for all ICP-MS methods? If this is the case, are we able to only run by one method and hold the accreditation for both.
The standard references FoPT, with is defined by matrix, technology/METHOD, analyte. Not just based on matrix, technology, analyte.
Any clarification would be appreciated. Thank you.
TNI FINAL RESPONSE:
The use of the term "method" within the definition of Field of Proficiency Testing (FoPT) (2009 V1M1, 3.6) is only included to accommodate EPA's drinking water program where PTs are required per method for the drinking water analytes referenced in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), specifically 40 CFR 141.
The use of the term "technology" within the definition of FoPT (2009 V1M1, 3.6) only refers to the determinative analytical technology; preparative techniques/methods are not part of this definition.
In addition, the Note in Section 5.1.1 of V1M1, states the following:
"...If the laboratory is accredited for multiple test methods that use the same technology within a field of accreditation, the laboratory is not required to analyze a PT sample for each test method, except for fields of accreditation for the drinking water accreditation matrix for which a PT sample per test method is required..."
Therefore, using the example provided, for each analyte in the same matrix, the TNI standard only requires PTs for one ICP method (200.7 or 6010B) to maintain accreditation for both ICP methods and one ICP-MS method (200.8 or 6020) to maintain accreditation for both ICP-MS methods
If the laboratory chooses to analyze and report PT results for both methods within a technology (i.e. 200.7 and 6010B for ICP), then an unacceptable score for either of those methods will result in an unacceptable score for both methods due to their shared technology.
See the Note in V1M1, Section 5.1.1, which states the following "...When the laboratory reports an analytical result for an accreditation FoPT within the same field of accreditation and accreditation matrix by more than one test method using the same technology, an unacceptable score for either test method will result in an unacceptable score for all test methods for that accreditation FoPT."