Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2013C00288:reg:2:p3
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2013C00288
Segment Type: reg
Provision Reference: reg 2 (pt 3/5)
Character Range: 710036–713114

and determinative methods may be at least as efficient, accurate and precise (as well as possibly faster and less expensive) than those recommended here, including specially designed commercial systems, for example, digestion units, distillation units and auto analysers. However, it is beyond the scope of this guideline to evaluate all possible alternatives.

Where such alternative methods are used, (that is, any methods apart from those specified in this guideline), the user should ensure that the alternative method is at least as rigorous and reliable as the reference method, and either that:
    * it has been validated against an appropriate certified reference material (CRM) on the range of soil types and concentrations most likely to be analysed. This requires adequate recovery of analytes using CRMs during method validation, as well as regular participation in national proficiency trials by bodies such as the National Measurement Institute (NMI) or Proficiency Testing Australia (PTA) or other accredited provider
and/or
    * it has been verified against quantitative data generated by a laboratory that is accredited for the reference method to ISO 17025 by NATA or one of its mutual recognition agreement partners.
The laboratory should document the method performance verification and make the data available for independent audit.

See Section 3.2 for more guidance on method validation.

2.5              Screening tests
Some screening tests in common usage—including laboratory screening tests and field tests, (for example, field chemical test kits and field analysers)—may be fast and cheap but, by their nature, are less rigorous and reliable than the analytical methods described here. They may be suitable for less exact tasks such as preliminary assessments, mapping contaminant distribution at known contaminated sites or monitoring the progress of site clean-up or remediation programs (refer Schedule B2, Section 7.4).

Data from screening tests is not suitable for detailed assessment of contaminated sites or for validating clean-up. These tasks require a high degree of accuracy and reliability and data should be based upon results from one of the validated analytical tests referenced here, or other methods that have been shown to be at least as rigorous and reliable for the soil matrix in question.

The accuracy and precision of any analysis should be sufficient for the intended purpose. Therefore screening methods should be evaluated for appropriate analyte specificity, repeatability and reproducibility prior to use.

2.6              Confirmation of organic compounds (for non-specific techniques)
Where non-specific analytical techniques are used, (e.g. gas chromatography (GC) or high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)), the identity of organic compounds should be confirmed by one of the methods detailed in the NATA Field Application Document ISO/IEC 17025 (NATA 2011). These include mass spectrometric detection, variation of the test procedure (e.g. different column stationary phase), another test procedure (e.g.