Comments for National Testing Laboratories, Ltd. http://www.ntllabs.com/blog Bringing Water Quality Awareness Through Expert Water Testing Thu, 12 Apr 2012 17:00:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Is your Laboratory EPA Certified? by mmetzger http://www.ntllabs.com/blog/?p=24#comment-19 mmetzger Thu, 12 Apr 2012 17:00:21 +0000 http://www.ntllabs.com/blog/?p=24#comment-19 MK Randall: This is interesting, I know some radiological tests can be inaccurate due to holding time and short half lives. I would love to see the information you have so I can advise people correctly. You can email the information to : mmetzger@ntllabs.com. Thanks for your comment! MK Randall:
This is interesting, I know some radiological tests can be inaccurate due to holding time and short half lives. I would love to see the information you have so I can advise people correctly. You can email the information to : mmetzger@ntllabs.com.

Thanks for your comment!

]]> Comment on Is your Laboratory EPA Certified? by MK Randall http://www.ntllabs.com/blog/?p=24#comment-18 MK Randall Thu, 12 Apr 2012 16:46:21 +0000 http://www.ntllabs.com/blog/?p=24#comment-18 This is interesting information that I learned the hard way as a Water District President. Fortunately the average operator doesn't need to know this, because the operator just takes the samples to the local lab that is state certified or in some cases knows which certified labs to sub to. e.g. radionuclides. When our district failed a gross alpha test we retested for over a year with the same results and were facing having to install a treatment system. The state, nor the lab had any other recommendations. Based on a suggestion from our engineer and lawyer, I began a search into the use of other EPA approve radionuclide testing methods. The bottom line is that recent research demonstrates that commonly used radionuclide testing methods are highly subject to error. In some cases the problems are with the methods and in other cases the lab procedures contribute to errors. Given the high cost of treatment, it is very important that users become knowledgeable about what radionuclide tests to use. Neither the EPA, nor the states I know of are informing water users of this issue, nor are they taking action to update the methods or published material. I had to track down the information, working with the researchers, getting a new lab certified with my state before we could use what are more accurate radionuclide tests. So far, 4-5 districts in our part of NW Montana have found that we were using the wrong radionuclide test for our water conditions. This has resulted in over $250,000 of cost savings, since unneeded treatment systems were avoided. Contact me should anyone desire more information. I have developed presentation material and handouts to assist in understanding the issues and how to consider what testing to perform. This is interesting information that I learned the hard way as a Water District President. Fortunately the average operator doesn’t need to know this, because the operator just takes the samples to the local lab that is state certified or in some cases knows which certified labs to sub to. e.g. radionuclides.

When our district failed a gross alpha test we retested for over a year with the same results and were facing having to install a treatment system. The state, nor the lab had any other recommendations. Based on a suggestion from our engineer and lawyer, I began a search into the use of other EPA approve radionuclide testing methods. The bottom line is that recent research demonstrates that commonly used radionuclide testing methods are highly subject to error. In some cases the problems are with the methods and in other cases the lab procedures contribute to errors. Given the high cost of treatment, it is very important that users become knowledgeable about what radionuclide tests to use.

Neither the EPA, nor the states I know of are informing water users of this issue, nor are they taking action to update the methods or published material. I had to track down the information, working with the researchers, getting a new lab certified with my state before we could use what are more accurate radionuclide tests. So far, 4-5 districts in our part of NW Montana have found that we were using the wrong radionuclide test for our water conditions. This has resulted in over $250,000 of cost savings, since unneeded treatment systems were avoided.

Contact me should anyone desire more information. I have developed presentation material and handouts to assist in understanding the issues and how to consider what testing to perform.

]]>