WEF Discussions — Now on LinkedIn!

WEF is pleased to announce the creation of free LinkedIn groups associated with its technical discussion forum topics. Through these LinkedIn groups, members will be able to view and participate in discussions, as well as communicate with one another via direct messages. Share your experiences and knowledge, ask questions and respond to other discussions as frequently as you like!

You must have a LinkedIn profile to join a LinkedIn group; you can create your profile here. If you already have a LinkedIn profile, all you need to do is submit a request to join one or all of the following groups:

Water Environment Federation (Main) | Biosolids | Collection Systems | Nutrients | Stormwater 
Utility Management | Water Reuse | Water for Jobs | Watershed Management | Laboratory Practices 

RSS Feed Print
EPA To Approve Hg By ICP/MS???
Charles Lytle
Posted: Friday, September 10, 2010 2:13 PM
Joined: 10/5/2009
Posts: 49


Hello,

 

In another string started by Keith Chapman, an astute forum reader (Hi, Ron!) noticed that the EPA is proposing a Standard Methods procedure for total mercury by ICP/MS.  This attracted my attention because we've been doing total mercury for our NPDES permits by microwave digestion-ICP/MS via an ATP for some years.

 

Because the EPA referenced the method date as 2009, I actually ponied up the money and got a single-user license for SM online.  Couldn't find the specific method.

 

I finally called SM in Denver and talked to Steven Posavec, who told me that the EPA goofed:  the SM ICP/MS method is NOT approved for total mercury.

 

*sigh*  I actually thought the Office of Water was going to finally catch up with the analytical people at Office Of Solid Waste.  Not to be.  sad

 

Chuck Lytle


Keith Chapman
Posted: Friday, September 10, 2010 2:34 PM
Joined: 10/2/2009
Posts: 35


don't give up so easily.  If EPA leaves this in their MUR proposal when it hits the Federal Register you can send them comments in support of its approval!  It might get approved!  What's the worst thing they can say?  NO?  I say go for it!  At the least they'll have to respond to the voice crying in the desert....so to speak.


Charles Lytle
Posted: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 8:13 AM
Joined: 10/5/2009
Posts: 49


Keith,

 

Now that would be an interesting problem:  the EPA promulgates a method that doesn't exist.  I guess it shouldn't be surprising, they have no problem with promulgating methods that don't work.

 

What could be next?  Promulgating a method for an element that doesn't exist?  Requiring zero for MDLs?  The possibilities are endless.

 

Chuck Lytle


Charles Lytle
Posted: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 10:53 AM
Joined: 10/5/2009
Posts: 49


Just a note that this "bogus" method made it into the formal proposed update on September 23rd.  Hopefully, Standard Methods will point this out during the comment period.

 

Chuck Lytle


Anonymous
Posted: Sunday, June 26, 2011 8:07 PM
Wow! That's a relaly neat answer!
Anonymous
Posted: Monday, June 27, 2011 1:38 AM
That’s really sewhrd! Good to see the logic set out so well.
Anonymous
Posted: Monday, June 27, 2011 1:58 AM
Now that’s sbtule! Great to hear from you.
Anonymous
Posted: Monday, June 27, 2011 8:11 AM
Kewl you should come up with that. Execllent!
Anonymous
Posted: Monday, June 27, 2011 12:54 PM
Articles like this are an example of quick, helpful asnewrs.
Anonymous
Posted: Monday, June 27, 2011 1:14 PM
It's spooky how celevr some ppl are. Thanks!