What Does the EPA Method Round Robin Data Really Tell Us?

Similar documents
The Role of the Carbon Cartridge in the One-Pass System

METHOD 8100 POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS

Determination of 24 PAHs in Drinking Water

Optimizing GC Parameters for Faster Separations with Conventional Instrumentation

Determination of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Seafood Using GC/MS

Supporting Information

APPENDIX D Laboratory Analytical Reports

Meeting Challenging Laboratory Requirements for USEPA Method 8270 Using a Highly Sensitive, Robust, and Easy-to-Use GC/MS

Method 8270C PAH. FD- Field Duplicate Samples

Non-Potable Water A2LA Certificate

POTENTIAL VAPOR INTRUSION ENVIRONMENTAL

Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc BIG SHANTY ROAD, NW, SUITE 100 KENNESAW, GEORGIA (770)

Environmental Forensic Principals for Sources Allocation of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

The Design of High Temperature Capillary Gas Chromatography Columns Based on Polydimethylsiloxane

Sensitive and rapid determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in tap water

Semivolatile Organics Analysis Using an Agilent J&W HP-5ms Ultra Inert Capillary GC Column

Application Note. Abstract. Introduction. Determination of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Seafood by an Automated QuEChERS Solution

Sample Prep Solutions for Environmental Contaminants

Analysis of Semivolatile Organic Compounds Using the Agilent Intuvo 9000 Gas Chromatograph

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Water by GC/MS PBM

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

The direct effect of the harbour. micropollutant concentration. Workshop Characterization of atmospheric pollution in harbour areas 26 June 2013

Table 1 Soil and Groundwater Sampling Summary Table

Drying Solvent Extracts using a Membrane

TETRA TECH, INC. December 8, Lynn Nakashima Berkeley Regional Office 700 Heinz Avenue, Suite 200C Berkeley, California 94710

Analysis of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Soil with Agilent Bond Elut HPLC-FLD

ANALYTICAL RESULTS. Project: Mayflower, AR Pipeline Incident

2. September 2015 Sub-Concrete Slab Soil Investigation

ANALYTICAL RESULTS. Project: Mayflower, AR Pipeline Incident

DUAL CARTRIDGE SYSTEM FOR THE EXTRACTION OF ACIDS, BASES, AND NEUTRALS IN WATER

18/05/2010 Soil. 18/05/2010 Soil

ANALYTICAL RESULTS. Project: Mayflower, AR Pipeline Incident

UCT ENVIRO-CLEAN HL DVB

APPENDIX G. Data Management Rules. Dioxin Data Report Appendix G. Lower Duwamish Waterway Superfund Site: T-117 Early Action Area

LOWER DUWAMISH WATERWAY CLAM COLLECTION FINAL AND CHEMICAL ANALYSES QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN ADDENDUM. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group

Appendix 2 Data Distributions for Contaminants in Water and Sediment Samples in Response to the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, 2010

SPE. Simply Efficient! Watchers bond Solid Phase Extraction by ISU. Ver

October 26, Dear Mr. White:

APPENDIX A TO PART 136 METHODS FOR ORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER METHOD 610 POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS

Application Note. Agilent Application Solution Analysis of PAHs in soil according to EPA 8310 method with UV and fluorescence detection.

AppNote 2/2000. Stir Bar Sorptive Extraction (SBSE) applied to Environmental Aqueous Samples

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES SOP: 1821 PAGE: 1 of 33 REV: 0.0 DATE: 11/25/94

Developing Large Volume Injection (LVI) in Split / Splitless Inlets. Philip J. Koerner Phenomenex Inc. NEMC 2014

Fast USEPA 8270 Semivolatiles Analysis Using the 6890/5973 inert GC/MSD with Performance Electronics Application

Certificate of Analysis

Accelerated Solvent Extraction GC-MS Analysis and Detection of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Soil

Certificate of Accreditation

Facility: Mansfield Revision 3. Title: PAHs by SPME Page 1 of 11

Faster Semivolatiles Analysis with a Scaled- Down Method and GC Accelerator Kit

Andrei Medvedovici, Florina Micăle, Florentin Tache

MEASUREMENT OF DRY DEPOSITION AMOUNT OF PAHS IN ZONGULDAK REGION

METHOD July J.W. Hodgeson. W.J. Bashe (Technology Applications Inc.) T.V. Baker (Technology Applications Inc.)

EL608. Deodorants [EL /1/ ]

HICHROM. Chromatography Columns and Supplies. LC COLUMNS Vydac. Catalogue 9. Hichrom Limited

Reviewing Material Safety Data Sheets to Verify Significant Drinking Water Threats

High Throughput Multi-Residue Screening of Drinking Water using the SPE-DEX~ and Pegasus GC-TOF-MS

Test Report. Report No. ECL01H Page 1 of 5

Update on ASTM and Standard Methods method development activities

Agilent s New Weak Anion Exchange (WAX) Solid Phase Extraction Cartridges: SampliQ WAX

Appendix C. Validation Standard Operating Procedures

MULTIRESIDUE ANALYSIS OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS IN SURFACE WATERS USING EXACT MASS GC-TOF MS

Analysis. Priority LC GC. Zebron PAH Accurately quantitate EU and EPA PAHs in less than 28 minutes

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES SOP: 1810 PAGE: 1 of 31 REV: 0.0 DATE:03/14/05 ANALYSIS OF POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS (PAHs) IN DUST BY GC/MS-SIM

Certificate of Accreditation

So Many Columns! How Do I Choose? Daron Decker Chromatography Technical Specialist

Test Report No. SH / CHEM Date: Apr. 28, 2008 Page 1 of 6

A Single-Method Approach for the Analysis of Volatile and Semivolatile Organic Compounds in Air Using Thermal Desorption Coupled with GC MS

*

The Suite for Environmental GC Analysis

Semivolatile Organic Compounds By Gas Chromatography / Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)

HICHROM. Chromatography Columns and Supplies. LC COLUMNS Thermo Scientific Acclaim. Catalogue 9. Hichrom Limited

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission

Analytische Qualitätssicherung Baden-Württemberg

Revision: 11 (MBAS) ALLOWAY METHOD OUTLINE. Standard Laboratory Method:

Forebay Confirmatory Sediment Sampling Results

Analytical Method for the Determination of Selected PACs in Ambient Air Samples

Certificate of Accreditation

Quantitative Analysis of EtG and EtS in Urine Using FASt ETG and LC-MS/MS

Quantitative Analysis of EtG and EtS in Urine Using FASt ETG and LC-MS/MS

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

Diquat 1,1 -ethylene-2,2 -bipyridium dibromide salt Paraquat 1,1 -dimethyl-4,4 -bipyridium dichloride salt Initial Preparation

Results of a Sediment Survey in the Near Offshore Waters of the Proposed Quarry Site in the Vicinity of Whites Cove, Digby Neck, Nova Scotia

Certificate of Accreditation

ALLOWAY STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR METHOD 525.2

APPENDIX II QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARY TABLES

Presentation Title. Isotope Dilution: Where it doesn t work Where we should expand its use. August 10, David I. Thal Principal Chemist

Sample Pre-Treatment : Introduction to Commonly Used Techniques for Gas

Pursuant to Chapter 4 of the Code of Ethics, ETAD members may not manufacture or sell dyes referred to in Annexes A and B. Annex A

Appendix 1: Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds: Nomenclature and Analysis

ILLA SpA VIA GHISOLFI GUARESCHI, NOCETO (PR)

481756/900/901/02/028i 100 Wellington Square T9.07 Brantford, ON, N3T 2M3

Schedule of Accreditation issued by United Kingdom Accreditation Service 2 Pine Trees, Chertsey Lane, Staines-upon-Thames, TW18 3HR, UK

Appendix B. Sediment Sampling Memo Winnetka Pond East

Multi-residue Analysis for PAHs, PCBs and OCPs on Agilent J&W FactorFour VF-Xms

Application Note # Performance of Method 8270 Using Hydrogen Carrier Gas on SCION Bruker SCION GC-MS

anthracene Figure 1: Structures of Selected Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

Tar measurement by the Solid Phase Adsorption (SPA) method

Selection of a Capillary

Selection of a Capillary GC Column

Methods and Analytes Requiring Laboratory Certification Attachment 3

Transcription:

What Does the EPA Method 625.1 Round Robin Data Really Tell Us? National Environmental Monitoring Conference 2018, New Orleans, LA August 9, 2018 Polly S. Newbold, ddms, inc.

OUTLINE General Overview Some data Concluding Remarks What s Next Q&A

When Did It Start? First reference in literature to the use of SPE So the people grumbled at Moses, saying, "What shall we drink? Then he cried out to the LORD, and the LORD showed him a tree; and he threw it into the waters, and the waters became sweet. Exodus 15: 24 and 25

Method 625.1 Acceptance Limits Table 6 Acceptance criteria are based upon method performance data in Table 7 and from EPA Method 1625. Where necessary, limits for recovery have been broadened to assure applicability to concentrations below those used to develop Table 7.

Method 625.1 Acceptance Limits (con t.) Table 7 Precision and recovery as a function of concentration w/ footnote that says Regressions based on data from Reference 2 EPA Method Study 30, Method 625, Base/Neutrals, Acids, and Pesticides, EPA 600/4 84 053, National Technical Information Service, PB84 206572, Springfield, Virginia 22161, June 1984.

Method 625.1 Acceptance Limits (con t.) Method 625 Two different columns 1 for acids/ 1 for base neutrals Two separate calibrations Packed columns Separatory funnel extraction

Method 625.1 Acceptance Criteria based on 625 Only 6 compounds with lower limit > 50% Best lower acceptance limit 60% 2 chloronaphthalene

Labs from Method 625 Acurex Corporation California Analytical Laboratories, Inc. Envirodyne Environmental Research Group, Inc. Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc. Foremost McKesson GCA Corporation Mead CompuChem

Labs from Method 625 Pedco Rockwell International Rocky Mountain Analytical Spectrix Stewart Labs The University of Utah Research Institute West Coast Technical Service, Inc.

The Studies 6 or 7 Suppliers Acceptance criteria Method 625 TNI Each SPE product was tested in at least three laboratories

Phase 1 The Studies Spiked DI water (LCS) ASTM Synthetic Wastewater Flat light beer Flour Sea salts Kaolin Triton X 100 DI water

Phase 2 The Studies LCS TCLP acetate buffer solution Glacial acetic acid 1N NaOH DI water Limited ASTM WW

The Studies - Data Phase 1 Data from 17 labs, but no correlation between supplier and lab was provided

The Studies Phase 2 24 labs Supplier 1 Labs 1 3 Supplier 2 Labs 4 6 Supplier 3 Labs 7 9 Supplier 4 Labs 10 15 Supplier 5 Labs 16 18 Supplier 6 Labs 19 21 Supplier 7 Labs 22 24

The Studies - Assumptions The samples prior to extraction were all prepared the same from lab to lab. Each supplier provided the same SPE product(s) to each of their laboratories. Each laboratory for a supplier implemented that specific SPE system in the same manner.

Data - Phase 1 LCS (%R) 120 SVOCs Compound Class 100 80 60 40 SPE Results Mean Recovery (%) CCLE Results Mean Recovery (%) 20 0

Data - Phase 1 ASTM (%R) 140 SVOCs C0ompound Group 120 100 80 60 40 SPE Results Mean Recovery (%) CCLE Results Mean Recovery (%) 20 0

Data - Phase 2 LCS Acids 200.00% %R Delta Unlabeled vs. Labeled 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 200.00% 300.00% 400.00% 500.00% 600.00% 700.00% 726 % 800.00%

Data - Phase 2 LCS Acids 40.00% %R Delta Unlabeled vs. Labeled 20.00% 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% 108 %

Data - Phase 2 TCLP Acids %R Delta Unlabeled vs. Labeled 100.00% 50.00% 0.00% 50.00% 100.00% 150.00% 200.00% 250.00% 300.00% 350.00% 360 % 400.00%

Data - Phase 2 TCLP Acids %R Delta Unlabeled vs. Labeled 60.00% 42% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% 140.00% 125%

The Data Phase 2 LCS PAHs 100.00% %R Delta Unlabeled vs. Labeled 75 % 50.00% 0.00% Acenaphthylene Anthracene Benzo(a)pyrene Fluorene Pyrene 50.00% 100.00% 113 % 150.00%

Data Phase 2 TCLP PAHs 60.00% %R Delta Unlabeled vs. Labeled 46% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Acenaphthylene Anthracene Benzo(a)pyrene Fluorene Pyrene 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 61% 80.00%

Acids Phase 2 Compound LCS Average LCS SD LCS Min LCS Max TCLP Average TCLP SD TCLP Min TCLP Max ASTM WW Average ASTM WW SD ASTM WW ASTM WW Min Max 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 83.37% 37.87% 16.63% 162.77% 89.75% 51.25% 17.06% 249.36% 61.52% 28.20% 16.93% 97.44% 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 90.04% 45.59% 15.75% 206.64% 101.75% 62.94% 26.73% 279.65% 58.88% 24.61% 23.73% 89.68% 2,4-Dichlorophenol 78.19% 45.64% 14.68% 200.63% 78.81% 40.97% 19.92% 212.11% 47.53% 18.30% 19.69% 67.08% 2,6-Dichlorophenol 77.35% 50.52% 0.00% 152.61% 77.09% 49.47% 0.00% 163.82% 44.16% 34.73% 0.00% 89.87% 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 86.04% 46.23% 13.90% 194.38% 85.41% 41.20% 20.90% 208.76% 63.02% 26.64% 18.91% 92.96% 2-Chlorophenol 75.70% 46.21% 14.65% 191.35% 73.51% 37.83% 21.56% 177.07% 44.70% 17.73% 20.66% 64.10% 2,4-Dimethylphenol 86.09% 46.13% 20.97% 196.44% 82.44% 36.55% 20.55% 186.67% 51.81% 20.38% 23.63% 71.01% 2-Nitrophenol 82.82% 51.78% 20.43% 207.99% 89.04% 65.14% 23.23% 347.21% 41.66% 15.13% 21.70% 57.99% 2-Methyl-4,6-Dinitrophenol 151.62% 252.20% 10.75% 1108.16% 96.68% 109.58% 0.00% 544.56% 46.57% 16.78% 13.64% 62.37% Pentachlorophenol 127.72% 187.44% 12.60% 836.86% 93.66% 81.80% 0.00% 362.53% 46.43% 25.43% 12.58% 89.77% 2-Methylphenol 65.37% 27.98% 22.10% 138.40% 63.98% 28.87% 0.00% 117.49% 49.48% 21.03% 19.31% 78.35% 4-Methylphenol (and/or 3-Methylphenol) 67.73% 28.26% 18.06% 134.60% 60.56% 27.85% 0.00% 115.58% 46.82% 17.20% 24.10% 64.54% 2,4-Dinitrophenol 65.98% 62.41% 0.00% 239.71% 66.12% 86.24% 0.00% 430.33% 29.07% 17.36% 0.00% 50.32% 4-Nitrophenol 67.42% 28.79% 16.66% 118.42% 64.50% 33.87% 0.00% 132.73% 46.51% 19.73% 17.49% 72.89% Phenol 54.34% 38.92% 6.28% 158.33% No data 36.80% 15.65% 14.67% 53.66% Average 83.99% 57.02% 16.62% 272.87% 80.23% 48.66% 19.33% 240.79% 47.66% 17.00% 18.71% 61.37%

Acids Phase 2 LCS Compound LCS Average LCS SD LCS Min LCS Max LCS Delta Min/Max 2-Methyl-4,6- Dinitrophenol 151.62% 252.20% 10.75% 1108.16% 1097.41% 4-Nitrophenol 67.42% 28.79% 16.66% 118.42% 101.76%

Acids Phase 2 TCLP Compound TCLP Average TCLP SD TCLP Min TCLP Max TCLP Delta Min/Max 2-Methyl-4,6- Dinitrophenol 96.68% 109.58% 0.00% 544.56% 544.56% 4- Methylphenol 60.56% 27.85% 0.00% 115.58% 115.58%

Acids Phase 2 ASTM WW Compound ASTM WW Average ASTM WW SD ASTM WW Min ASTM WW Max ASTM WW Delta Min/Max 2,6-Dichlorophenol 44.16% 34.73% 0.00% 89.87% 89.87% 2- Nitrophenol 41.66% 15.13% 21.70% 57.99% 36.29%

PAHs Phase 2 LCS Compound LCS Average LCS SD LCS Min LCS Max LCS Delta Min/Max Phenanthrene 76.12% 48.81% 12.63% 242.68% 230.05% Fluorene 65.95% 24.39% 12.54% 94.17% 81.62%

PAHs Phase 2 TCLP Compound TCLP Average TCLP SD TCLP Min TCLP Max TCLP Delta Min/Max Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 71.72% 41.04% 5.88% 222.05% 216.17% Acenaphthene 71.60% 24.62% 17.33% 103.02% 85.69%

PAHs Phase 2 ASTM WW Compound ASTM WW Average ASTM WW SD ASTM WW Min ASTM WW Max ASTM WW Delta Min/Max Pyrene 61.04% 38.11% 11.98% 117.00% 105.02% Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 36.72% 14.67% 10.89% 52.37% 41.48%

Acids - Potential Environmental Impact Phenol 2 Nitrophenol (2 NP) 2,4 Dichlorophenol (2,4 DCP) 2,4,6 Trichlorophenol (2,4,6 TCP) Pentachlorophenol (PCP)

Acids Phase 1 LCS 350.00% 300.00% 250.00% 200.00% 150.00% 2,4 Dichlorophenol 2 Nitrophenol Phenol Pentachlorophenol 2,4,6 Trichlorophenol 100.00% 50.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Acids Phase 2 LCS 900.00% 800.00% 700.00% 600.00% 500.00% 400.00% 300.00% 2,4,6 Trichlorophenol 2,4 Dichlorophenol 2 Nitrophenol Pentachlorophenol Phenol 200.00% 100.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Acids Phase 2 LCS 250.00% 200.00% 150.00% 100.00% 2,4,6 Trichlorophenol 2,4 Dichlorophenol 2 Nitrophenol Phenol 50.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

450.00% Acids Phase 1 ASTM WW 400.00% 350.00% 300.00% 250.00% 200.00% 2,4 DCP 2 NP Phenol PCP 2,4,6 TCP 150.00% 100.00% 50.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Acids Phase 2 ASTM WW 100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 2,4,6 TCP 2,4 DCP PCP Phenol 2 NP 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6

Acids Phase 2 TCLP 400.00% 350.00% 300.00% 250.00% 2,4,6 TCP 200.00% 150.00% 2,4 DCP 2 NP PCP Phenol 100.00% 50.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

PAHs with TEF Benzo(a)pyrene [BaP] Benzo(a)anthracene [BaA] Benzo(b)fluoranthene [BbF] Benzo(k)fluoranthene [BkF] Chrysene [Chry] Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene [DahA] Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene [I(123cd)P]

PAHs Phase 1 LCS 120.00% 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% BkF BaP DahA i(123cd)p 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

PAHs Phase 2 LCS 160.00% 140.00% 120.00% 100.00% BaP 80.00% 60.00% BkF Chry DahA I(123cd)P 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

PAHs Phase 2 TCLP 250.00% 200.00% 150.00% 100.00% BaP BkF Chry DahA I(123cd)P 50.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

PAHs Phase 1 ASTM WW 120.00% 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% BkF BaP DahA i(123cd)p 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

PAHs Phase 2 ASTM WW 100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% BaP BkF Chry DahA I(123cd)P 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6

Acids Phase 2 Avg %R 160.00% 140.00% 120.00% 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% LCS Average TCLP Average ASTM WW Average 0.00%

PAHs Phase 2 Avg. %R 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% LCS Average TCLP Average ASTM WW Average 10.00% 0.00%

Finally Averaging Data variability Large SDs Orders of magnitude Min vs. Max Method 625.1 or TNI acceptance criteria Waste water

What s Next? Inconsistent compounds reported from Phase 1 to Phase 2. Verify SPE products for both phases Spin bars Disks Cartridges Pair up labs from Phase 1 to Phase 2 Data gaps

What s Next? Issues with matrices Extractions Conventional liquid liquid extraction Other lab QC Lab specific excursions Labeled vs. unlabeled %Rs

What s Next? Extract clean ups Apply tighter limits to the existing data Compare recoveries of classes of compounds

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. Aldous Huxley author of Brave New World

We are scientists! We can all figure this out, right?

References EPA Method Study 30, Method 625, Base/Neutrals, Acids, and Pesticides, EPA 600/4 84 053, National Technical Information Service, PB84 206572, Springfield, Virginia 22161, June 1984. Phase 1 Data Phase 2 Data QA/QC Solutions, LLC

Acknowledgements NEMC and TNI You, the audience for your patience and attention Colleagues, past and present QA/QC Solutions, LLC

DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed in this presentation are those solely of the presenters and do not reflect the opinions, official policy, or position of any client or regulatory agency. QA/QC Solutions, LLC

The Studies SPE Products and Vendors Agilent Technologies, Inc. 2850 Centerville Road Wilmington, DE 19808 Fluid Management Systems 580 Pleasant Street Watertown, MA 02472 Gerstel Corp. 701 Digital Drive; Suite J Lithicum, MD 21090 Horizon Technology Inc. 16 Northwestern Drive Salem, NH 03079 Bond Elut C18, 6ml, 1 gm, P/N 12256001 and Bond Elut ENV, 6ml, 500 mg, P/N 12255011 Mixed mode cartridge with a coconut charcoal 2nd cartridge, automated system GERSTEL Twister, PDMS Phase, 10mm x 0.5mm, P/N 011222 001 00 SPE DEX 4790 Automated Extractor with One Pass kit and Envision Controller 47 mm disk holder (Part number 50 0807 01) for 100 ml volume samples and EZ flow holder for 1 L samples (Part number 50 2767) Atlantic One pass disk (Part number 47 2346 11) Max Detect Carbon cartridge (Part number 9 2620 01) DryDisk (Part number 40 705 HT) used with either the manual drying glassware (Part number SDS 101 19/22) or the DryVap in line drying and evaporation system

The Studies SPE Products and Vendors Phenomenex Corp. 411 Madrid Avenue Torrence, CA 90501 Strata XL C 2g/20mL Giga tube (P/N 8B S044 KEG), Polymer Based Mixed Mode Strong Cation Exchange & Reverse Phase,100µm particle size, 300Å pore size UCT, Inc. 2731 Bartram Road Bristol, PA 19007 6893 UCT Enviro Clean 8270 (p/n: EC8270 KIT or EC8270 KIT1L)

Thank you! Any Questions? Contact Information Polly S. Newbold, Sr. Environmental Chemist ddms, inc. Tel: (908) 619-9132 email: pnewbold@ddmsinc.com