Appendix C to Part 425 - Definition and Procedure for the Determination of the Method Detection Limit 1
40:32.0.1.1.1.9.2.8.3 : Appendix C
Appendix C to Part 425 - Definition and Procedure for the
Determination of the Method Detection Limit 1
The method detection limit (MDL) is defined at the minimum
concentration of a substance that can be identified, measured and
reported with 99 percent confidence that the analyte concentration
is greater than zero and determined from analysis of a sample in a
given matrix containing analyte.
1 Source: “Methods for Chemical Analysis of Municipal and
Industrial Wastewater,” EPA-600/4-82-057, July 1982, EMSL,
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Scope and Application
This procedure is designed for applicability to a wide variety
of sample types ranging from reagent (blank) water containing
analyte to wastewater containing analyte. The MDL for an analytical
procedure may vary as a function of sample type. The procedure
requires a complete, specific and well defined analytical method.
It is essential that all sample processing steps of the analytical
method be included in the determination of the method detection
limit.
The MDL obtained by this procedure is used to judge the
significance of a single measurement of a future sample.
The MDL procedure was designed for applicability to a broad
variety of physical and chemical methods. To accomplish this, the
procedure was made device- or instrument-independent.
Procedure
1. Make an estimate of the detection limit using one of the
following:
(a) The concentration value that corresponds to an instrument
signal/noise ratio in the range of 2.5 to 5. If the criteria for
qualitative identification of the analyte is based upon pattern
recognition techniques, the least abundant signal necessary to
achieve identification must be considered in making the
estimate.
(b) The concentration value that corresponds to three times the
standard deviation of replicate instrumental measurements for the
analyte in reagent water.
(c) The concentration value that corresponds to the region of
the standard curve where there is a significant change in
sensitivity at low analyte concentrations, i.e., a break in
the slope of the standard curve.
(d) The concentration value that corresponds to known
instrumental limitations.
It is recognized that the experience of the analyst is important
to this process. However, the analyst must include the above
considerations in the estimate of the detection limit.
2. Prepare reagent (blank) water that is as free of analyte as
possible. Reagent or interference free water is defined as a water
sample in which analyte and interferent concentrations are not
detected at the method detection limit of each analyte of interest.
Interferences are defined as systematic errors in the measured
analytical signal of an established procedure caused by the
presence of interfering species (interferent). The interferent
concentration is presupposed to be normally distributed in
representative samples of a given matrix.
3. (a) If the MDL is to be determined in reagent water (blank),
prepare a laboratory standard (analyte in reagent water) at a
concentration which is at least equal to or in the same
concentration range as the estimated MDL. (Recommended between 1
and 5 times the estimated MDL.) Proceed to Step 4.
(b) If the MDL is to be determined in another sample matrix,
analyze the sample. If the measured level of the analyte is in the
recommended range of one to five times the estimated MDL, proceed
to Step 4.
If the measured concentration of analyte is less than the
estimated MDL, add a known amount of analyte to bring the
concentration of analyte to between one and five times the MDL. In
the case where an interference is coanalyzed with the analyte:
If the measured level of analyte is greater than five times the
estimated MDL, there are two options:
(1) Obtain another sample of lower level of analyte in same
matrix if possible.
(2) The sample may be used as is for determining the MDL if the
analyte level does not exceed 10 times the MDL of the analyte in
reagent water. The variance of the analytical method changes as the
analyte concentration increases from the MDL, hence the MDL
determined under these circumstances may not truly reflect method
variance at lower analyte concentrations.
4. (a) Take a minimum of seven aliquots of the sample to be used
to calculate the MDL and process each through the entire anlaytical
method. Make all computations according to the defined method with
final results in the method reporting units. If blank measurements
are required to calculate the measured level of analyte, obtain
separate blank measurements for each sample aliquot anlayzed. The
average blank measurement is subtracted from the respective sample
measurements.
(b) It may be economically and technically desirable to evaluate
the estimated MDL before proceeding with 4a. This will: (1) Prevent
repeating this entire procedure when the costs of analyses are high
and (2) insure that the procedure is being conducted at the correct
concentration. It is quite possible that an incorrect MDL can be
calculated from data obtained at many times the real MDL even
though the background concentration of analyte is less than five
times the calculated MDL. To insure that the estimate of the MDL is
a good estimate, it is necessary to determine that a lower
concentration of analyte will not result in a significantly lower
MDL. Take two aliquots of the sample to be used to calculate the
MDL and process each through the entire method, including blank
measurements as described above in 4a. Evaluate these data:
(1) If these measurements indicate the sample is in the
desirable range for determining the MDL, take five additional
aliquots and proceed. Use all seven measurements to calculate the
MDL.
(2) If these measurements indicate the sample is not in the
correct range, reestimate the MDL, obtain new sample as in 3 and
repeat either 4a or 4b.
5. Calculate the variance (S 2) and standard deviation (S) of
the replicate measurements, as follows:
where: the xi, i = 1 to n are the analytical
results in the final method reporting units obtained from the n
sample aliquots and
refers to the sum of the X
values from i = 1 to n.
6. (a) Compute the MDL as follows:
MDL = t(n−1,1−a = .99) (S) where: MDL = the method detection t
(n-1, 1-a = .99) = the students' t value appropriate for a 99
percent confidence level and a standard deviation estimate with n-1
degrees of freedom. See Table. S = standard deviation of the
replicate analyses.
(b) The 95 percent confidence limits for the MDL derived in 6a
are computed according to the following equations derived from
percentiles of the chi square over degrees of freedom distribution
(X2/df) and calculated as follows:
MDLLCL = 0.69 MDL MDLUCL = 1.92 MDL where MDLLCL and MDLUCL are the
lower and upper 95 percent confidence limits respectively based on
seven aliquots.
7. Optional iterative procedure to verify the reasonableness of
the estimated MDL and calculated MDL of subsequent MDL
determinations.
(a) If this is the initial attempt to compute MDL based on the
estimated MDL in Step 1, take the MDL as calculated in Step 6,
spike in the matrix at the calculated MDL and proceed through the
procedure starting with Step 4.
(b) If the current MDL determination is an iteration of the MDL
procedure for which the spiking level does not permit qualitative
identification, report the MDL as that concentration between the
current spike level and the previous spike level which allows
qualitative identification.
(c) If the current MDL determination is an iteration of the MDL
procedure and the spiking level allows qualitative identification,
use S 2 from the current MDL calculation and S 2 from the previous
MDL calculation to compute the F ratio.
then compute the pooled standard deviation by
the following equation:
respike at the last calculated MDL and process the samples through
the procedure starting with Step 4.
(d) Use the Spooled as calculated in 7b to compute the final MDL
according to the following equation:
MDL = 2.681 (Spooled) where 2.681 is equal to t (12, 1 −a = .99)
(e) The 95 percent confidence limits for MDL derived in 7c are
computed according to the following equations derived from
percentiles of the chi squared over degrees of freedom
distribution.
MDLLCL = 0.72 MDL
MDLUCL = 1.65 MDL
where LCL and UCL are the lower and upper 95 percent confidence
limits respectively based on 14 aliquots. Reporting
The analytical method used must be specifically identified by
number or title and the MDL for each analyte expressed in the
appropriate method reporting units. If the analytical method
permits options which affect the method detection limit, these
conditions must be specified with the MDL value. The sample matrix
used to determine the MDL must also be identified with the MDL
value. Report the mean analyte level with the MDL. If a laboratory
standard or a sample that contained a known amount analyte was used
for this determination, report the mean recovery, and indicate if
the MDL determination was iterated.
If the level of the analyte in the sample matrix exceeds 10
times the MDL of the analyte in reagent water, do not report a
value for the MDL.
Reference
Glaser, J.A., Foerst, D.L., McKee, G.D., Quave, S.A., and Budde,
W.L., “Trace Analysis for Wastewaters,” Environmental Science and
Technology, 15, 1426 (1981).
Table of Students' t Values at the 99
Percent Confidence Level
Number of replicates |
Degrees of freedom (n−1) |
t (n−1, 1−a =
.99) |
7 |
6 |
3.143 |
8 |
7 |
2.998 |
9 |
8 |
2.896 |
10 |
9 |
2.821 |
11 |
10 |
2.764 |
16 |
15 |
2.602 |
21 |
20 |
2.528 |
26 |
25 |
2.485 |
31 |
30 |
2.457 |
61 |
60 |
2.390 |
|
|
2.326 |
[53 FR 9186, Mar. 21, 1988]