EMW Initial Phase Report 



Herein lies a problem that can occur in any international program; even one with central 

 coordination. Each of these laboratories was funded by various funding sources related to other 

 monitoring programs to undertake analyses according to certain specifications which were different 

 for the respective laboratories. Because analytical chemistry contracts were not controlled by the 

 EMW Secretariat and funds were provided directly to each laboratory, the contracts did not specify 

 which method for detection limits to invoke and apply. Neither did they specify analytical 

 methodologies, Standard Reference Materials used, analytes to be measured or reporting 

 standards. Furthermore, funding for the QA/QC was delayed until the same time as the sample 

 analyses funding and the delayed schedule resulted in a decision by the IMW Secretariat and EMW 

 Committee to proceed with all QA/QC and field sample analyses expeditiously. This decision 

 permitted the detection limit misunderstanding to occur and this misunderstanding had to be 

 addressed over a period of several months after the principle analyses were completed, causing 

 confusion as well as a delay in issuing this report. The power of having good QA/QC was clearly 

 demonstrated and did not adversely affect the utility of the combined dataset for the primary 

 purposes of the program. There is no blame to be assigned to either Analytical Center for this 

 misunderstanding; in fact the excellent cooperation of all parties in this complex project have 

 resulted in overall success. Rather, the unfortunate consequence of having to fund the program 

 from various sources, with various contracts, and on a fragmented basis caused delay and 

 confusion that could have been avoided. The lesson learned is to have funding and analytical 

 contract specification more closely coordinated with the central coordinating group responsible for 

 QA/QC and for overall direction of the program. 



Overall, MEL's limit of detection (LOD) and GERG's Estimated Detection Limit (MDL) are 

 equivalent in the 10 to 250 pg/g dry weight range (See Table 2 and table footnotes). For this report 

 we have adopted a reporting limit of 250pg/g for each analyte reported in the IMW combined 

 dataset (Appendix A) and have indicated in the data tables any reported concentration below that as 

 "trace" (Tr) unless it was reported by the Analytical Center as below detection limits (N.D.). 

 However, we have retained the original data base reported by the Analytical Centers in order not to 

 discard useful information. These data can be supplied upon request to the IMW Secretariat for the 

 duration of the existence of the Secretariat and thereafter from the Secretary, IOC- Paris. Adoption 

 of the 250pg/g dry weight detection limit does not compromise the important interpretations and 

 conclusions of the MEL and GERG combined dataset for the EMW Initial Implementation Phase. 



SPECIFIC QA/QC RESULTS 

 A) Deer Island. 



Representative data for the Deer Island QA/QC samples are presented in Tables 3 and 4, 

 and Figure 3. The within-laboratory precision is good at +/- 5 to 20 % relative standard deviation 



17 



