A Comparison of the Results Generated From the Use of Two New EPA Draft Methods

Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in the Environment
Oral Presentation

Prepared by C. Neslund
Eurofins Lancaster Laboratories Environment Testing, 2425 New Holland Pike, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 17601, United States

Contact Information: [email protected]; 717-556-7231


Within the last year plus, EPA has released draft methods 1633 and 1621 intended to be used for monitoring PFAS in waste water. During the time that each of the draft methods were progressing through Multi-Lab Validations (MLV), the EPA starting applying each to select industry waste water effluents.
So as these draft methods have been applied to real world samples, it begs the question as to the comparability and usable of the data between the two methods. How well do the 40 PFAS compounds in Draft 1633 represent the PFAS content of a waste water sample? Is the AOF procedure used in the Draft 1621 a useful "screen" of the total PFAS? Is there a correlation between the results generated on a given sample that could be useful to regulatory monitoring.

This presentation will evaluate the results generated from a study undertaken by Eurofins for the purpose of understanding the relationship, if there is one, between the two draft methods.