Comparison of EPA Methods 300.1, 317, 326 and 302 for Bromate Analysis
Thursday, March 29, 2012
USA 11:00 a.m. EDT / 10:00 a.m. CDT / 8:00 a.m. PDT / 16:00 GMT
Who should attend?
• Scientists who use IC and RFIC for bromate analysis
• Analysts in contract labs, water utilities, and bottled water companies
• Lab managers who are considering new IC instrumentation for these applications
Richard F. Jack
Global Market Development, Chromatography Marketing, Thermo Fisher Scientific
Analytical Chemist, The Shaw Group Inc., Environmental Division
Susan R. Morrissey, Ph.D.
Assistant Managing Editor, Government & Policy
There are several approved EPA methods for bromate analysis, EPA 300.1, 317, 326, and 302. Initially EPA 300.1, which uses ion chromatography (IC) with conductivity detection, was sufficient to meet the regulatory detection limit requirements for bromate. As more information concerning bromate toxicity became available, lower regulatory limits were imposed, resulting in demands for lower detection limits. This led to development of postcolumn derivatization and visible detection methods EPA 317 and 326. Though lower reporting limits can be achieved with these methods, they sacrifice robustness and ease of use. Simultaneously, improvements in column chemistry improved the minimum detection limits (MDLs) possible with EPA 300.1. With certain drinking water samples, it is still impossible to overcome matrix effects. Therefore, a 2-D IC method, EPA 302, was recently approved for compliance monitoring to maintain testing ease of use and robustness.
In this webinar, the methods for bromate analysis will be reviewed in detail along with the necessary steps for validation.
What Participants Will Learn:
• Advantages of various EPA methods for bromate analysis
• Which methods are approved for compliance monitoring and reduced monitoring programs
• How methods are validated and approved by the EPA Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water