Forum Update on Performance Based Methods System (PBMS) InDecember 1991 theUnited States’ OYce ofManagement and Budget (OMB) issued a statement requiring the review and evaluation of national water quality monitoring activities and the development of recommendations for improvements. Later that year the Intergovernmental Task Force onMonitoringWater Quality (ITFM) was formed to respond to this challenge. ITFM’s charge was to develop a voluntary integrated nationwide monitoring strategy. In May 1997 the NationalWater QualityMonitoring Council (NWQMC) and theMethods and Data Comparability Board (MDCB) were chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) succeeding ITFM.TheCouncil’s charge is to implement a nationwide strategy to improve water quality monitoring assessment and reporting and oversee the activities of theMDCB.The MDCB is co-chaired by Herb Brass (EPA Cincinnati OH) and Merle Shockey (USGS Arvada CO). Its challenge is to identify examine and recommend monitoring approaches that facilitate collaboration and yield comparable data and assessment results. It is a partnership of water quality experts from Federal agencies States Tribes municipalities industry and private organizations. MDCB will provide the framework and the forum for comparing evaluating and promoting monitoring approaches that can be implemented in all appropriate water quality monitoring programs. ITFM championed the use of PBMS and the MDCB also continues to support PBMS. To this end a Performance Based Methods System Work Group composed of over 20 individuals representing diverse perspectives and chaired by Andy Eaton (Joint Editorial Board Standard Methods and Montgomery Watson Laboratories Pasadena CA) is preparing a position paper on PBMS as one of MDCB’s initial activities.Various distinctions have been made between a performance-based methods system and a performance-based measurement system. The former generally implies the use of reference methods and their associated performance criteria as the standard of comparison to othermethods while the latter requires only stated performance criteria as the comparison standard. It is important to point out that theMDCB endorses the need for reference methods as well as statedperformance criteria which have been shown to be achievable. Thus PBMS as used by MDCB refers to a Performance Based Methods Systemrather than a Performance BasedMeasurement System.It’s important to keep a distinction between these two concepts which unfortunately use the same acronym. Key aspects ofMDCB’s endorsement of PBMSinclude (a) the need to establish measurement quality objectives (MQOs) or data quality objectives (DQOs) for each parameter reported; (b) the need for referencemethods to demonstrate the ability tomeet theseMQOs or DQOs; (c) the need for adequate reference materials to assist labs in demonstrating the appropriateness of a givenmethod (prescriptive or PBMS); and (d) the need for labs to adequately document method performance. PBMS definitions have in common that the concept is a framework that permits the use of any appropriate sampling and analytical technology that demonstrates the ability to meet established performance criteria and complies with specified DQOs and MQOs of the project in which the sampling and analytic technology is employed.To establish and preserve the credibility of performance-based systems performance criteria such as precision bias sensitivity specificity detection level and rates of false positives and false negatives must be designated and a sample collection or sample-analysis method-validation process must be documented. Whether PBMS is called a methods system or a measurement system the basic goals are the same—to provide information of known quality that will satisfy user needs. It is generally agreed by the MDCB that the implementation of a PBMS with corresponding required data qualifiers entered into a multi-user database will allow divergent data from numerous environmental programs to be used for many purposes.Additional information will be available when the work group completes the position paper. In the future you may obtain copies of this position paper from the public Web site of MDCB which is currently under development. Information on progress on the publicWeb site the PBMS position paper and other activities of MDCB is coordinated by Charlie Peters MDCB’s executive secretary. Charlie is best reached by E-mail at capeters@usgs.gov if you desire additional information. Lawrence H. Keith Vice President and Senior Corporate Fellow Waste Policy Institute VA USA Larry_Keith@upi.org J. Environ. Monit. 1999 1 15N NEMI—A National Environmental Methods Index Another priority of the Methods and Data Comparability Board (MDCB— see Update on PBMS above) is the development of a ‘compendium’ of method summaries that can be used to allow rapid communication and comparison of critical parameters of methods for use with method selection modifications and data comparability.A Database/Compendium work group is developing criteria for the information that will be needed for various categories of methods. NEMI will be especially useful for PBMSrelated applications. When ready in pilot form next summer NEMI will contain three categories of methods (sample preparation field methods and laboratory methods) two major types of analytes (1 Chemicals which will have subgroups of typical organic and inorganic analytes nutrients and radionuclides and 2 biologicals which will have subgroups of microbiological and biological ‘analytes’).It will be freely available on the internet and you’ll be able to search it multiple ways in order to meet your specific needs. Searches may be focused with any of the categories or types of analytes using any of the parameters below $ Search by single analyte to find all applicable methods in the database; $ Search for all methods that are applicable to a selected group of analytes using a ‘market basket’ approach to select analytes; $ Search by method to find all the analytes covered by that method; $ Search by keywords using Boolean functions of ‘and’ ‘or’ ‘not’ and ‘near’; $ Search by meta data (selected QC data such as MDL accuracy and precision); $ Search by method source (EPA USGS DOE ASTM AOAC Standard Methods etc.); $ Search by user preference (e.g.AFCEE-approved methods California preferred methods; etc.). Another useful feature is hyperlinks to the full methods when these are available on the Internet. Currently this includes EPA’s SW-846 methods. At some time in the future EPA’s OYce of Water methods also will be on the Internet. Method summaries that you find from your searches of NEMI will be able to be printed or downloaded as files for your personal use. The pilot database being used to develop NEMI is the On-line Environmental Methods Summary Database. This database funded by the Waste Policy Institute currently contains about 1300 analyte/method summaries from 40 EPA methods. It is available for use at http://www.wpi.org/ wpi/prodser. The meta data contained in the method summaries can also be used as input into DQO-PRO (free software linked from this same site) in order to calculate estimated confidence levels for your analytical data based on numbers of samples analyzed.Future enhancements may include simple front-end interfaces to NEMI that will help people use the Data Quality Objective (DQO) Process to design goal-oriented monitoring programs. By querying users for their requirements of analytes and selected meta data their replies could serve as automatic search criteria for NEMI and facilitate PBMS method selections. Information on NEMI and other activities of MDCB is coordinated by Charlie Peters MDCB’s executive secretary. Charlie is best reached by E-mail at capeters@usgs.gov if you require additional information. Lawrence H. Keith Vice President and Senior Corporate Fellow Waste Policy Institute VA USA Larry_Keith@upi.org 16N J.Environ. Monit. 1999 1 Thematic Programmes Quality of life and User-friendly Competitive and Preserving the living resources information society sustainable growth ecosystem Programme 1 Programme 2 Programme 3 Programme 4 Key Actions+Generic Technologies+Research Infrastructure Horizontal Programmes International Role of Innovation and Human Potential & Community Research Participation of SMEs Socio-Economic Research Coordination and Specific Actions Forum Towards the Fifth EC-Framework Programme The European Commission will soon launch the Fifth Framework Programme for Research and Development (1998–2002) (FP5) which has been conceived as a break with the past in comparison with the Fourth Framework Programme (1994–1998).The new general policy guidelines which put research at the service of the people will be best achieved by improving the bases of European competitiveness within a perspective of sustainable development. The Fifth Framework Programme is merely designed to support and enhance scientific and technological excellence while being relevant to main EU policies and of European added value. The objectives are defined according to socioeconomic and competitive needs placing more emphasis on the results and focusing on a limited number of topics. A simplified structure is proposed consisting of four Thematic Programmes and three Horizontal Programmes. Thematic programmes The four Thematic Programmes are aiming respectively to (1) improve the quality of life and management of living resources (2) create a userfriendly information society (3) promote competitive and sustainable growth and (4) preserve the ecosystem.Each Thematic Programme is organised in the form of Key Actions Generic Technologies and Research Infrastructures (see below) Each Key Action will be problemoriented and targeted to the objectives of the respective Programme. The aim is to link them to major and social objectives with relevant national and international initiatives and to integrate activities and disciplines (from basic research to development and demonstration) in close consultation with the scientific community industry and users. Generic Technologies will aim to develop the European technological capacity and to stimulate flow of ideas and knowledge to complement the Key Actions. They will focus on a limited number of areas not covered by the Key Actions and on potential multisectoral applications.The Research Infrastructure will promote an optimal use and wide access to existing research infrastructures and develop transnational cooperation in a rational and cost eVective context. This Community added value will be complementary to national and multinational initiatives (e.g. networking). Horizontal programmes These programmes will deal with (1) International Role of Community Research (2) Innovation and Participation of SMEs and (3) Human Potential and Socio-Economic Research. These activities will be based on coordination support and accompanying measures of Thematic Programmes and support to other Community policies. Complete information on the diVerent programmes can be obtained through the Internet ( http://www.cordis.lu/).Implementation Improved management practices will be developed ensuring a co-ordination between diVerent programmes research programmes and other EU activities (e.g. technical and economic assistance education and training structural funds and other EU policies) and European and national activities while keeping a flexibility by regularly adapting the work programmes. Indicative timetable The first reading by the European Parliament took place on 18 December 1997. A common position was adopted by the Council on 23 March 1998. The Fifth Framework Programme has been oYcially adopted by the Council and European Paliament of the EU on the 22nd December 1998. The overall budget is 14,960 million Euros. Research in support of environmental monitoring Projects dealing with environmental monitoring will find their way in various places.The Thematic Programmes 1 and 4 (see above) will cover topics related to environmental studies development of new methods and instrumentation for environmental monitoring and research in support of standardisation for environment-related analyses. Programme 1 will focus on living resources whereas Programme 4 will cover all types of environmental research projects. The Thematic Programme 3 will include Generic Technologies on Measurements and Testing which will pursue the activities of the present Standards Measurements and Testing Programme. With respect to environmental matters however only projects related to research on new Certified Reference Materials will be consided in these Generic Technologies; the Research Infrastructure of Programme 3 (see above) will cover projects aiming to produce new CRMs (as a result of feasibility studies undertaken in the Generic Technologies) and to organise interlaboratory studies.It should be stressed that all projects will need to be linked either to EU policies or have an industrial impact. Horizontal Programmes will also include research areas related to environmental monitoring e.g. projects developed in partnership between EU and non-EU organisations (International Role of Community Research) projects involving SMEs (Innovation and Participation of SMEs) and projects with a socio-economic impact and stimulating the mobility and training of researchers (Human Potential & Socio-Economic Research).Potential proposers willing to submit research projects within the FP5 are strongly encouraged to carefully read the work programmes of the diVerent specific programmes as soon as they are available. In many instances projects are considered to be out-ofscope simply because the problem does not focus on the respective specific programmes. A good practice is to read the relevant programme in detail and to seek advice (if necessary) on specific projects by contacting the responsible EC helpdesk prior to the submission of the proposal. Updated information on the calls for proposals expected to be published in 1999 on environmentrelated topics will be given in the second issue of JEM. Additional information on FP5 can be obtained through Michel Claessens Communication Unit Fax +32 22958220; E-mail michel.claessens@dg12.cec.be Ph.Quevauviller Brussels Belgium J. Environ. Monit. 1999 1 17N † This article is based on R. H. Brown ‘New European legislation and its relation to methods performance criteria and standardisation’ ACGIH 1998 Applied Workshop Chapel Hill NC February 1998. Forum CEN Air Quality Standards† Two new European Directives on Air Quality have been promulgated recently namely a Chemical Agents Directive (98/24/EC)1 and an Ambient Air Directive (96/62/EC).2 The first concerns the workplace and the second outdoor air but both require an assessment of air quality and both imply a requirement for actual measurement. If measurement results are to be comparable across Europe there is also a requirement for standardisation of such measurements either as defined reference methods or as method performance requirements.The Technical Committee TC137. This Committee took the view that air quality assessment standards should take the form of performance requirements rather than prescribed methods. This approach has the advantage of allowing any method to be used which meets these requirements without stifling innovation and development. The actual writing of standard measurement procedures was taken to be the role of ISO or member state regulatory bodies such as HSE the Health and Safety Executive (for example the MDHS series). The approach taken by WG2 has been to develop a hierarchy of standards with a general performance requirements document at the top and a series of specialised standards under this umbrella. task of standardisation in the field of measurement is ultimately the responsibility of the European Commission but it usually devolves this responsibility to Scientific Expert Groups reporting to the Commission or to Technical Committees of CEN the Comite� Europe�en de Normalisation.The development of standard measurement procedures ideally meeting the Cerformance criteria is also the responsibility of ISO the International Organisation for Standardisation. Workplace Standards The task of developing appropriate standards for workplace air quality measurements within the European Community has been carried forward by working groups (WGs) of CEN 18N J. Environ. Monit. 1999 1 Forum Umbrella Standard The umbrella standard3 provides among other things definitions and minimum requirements for unambiguity (the uniqueness of the result) selectivity (which depends on whether detailed knowledge of the air composition is known in advance) and overall uncertainty (a combination of precision and bias).Second Tier Standards These standards contain specific (minimum) performance requirements for measuring devices together with the appropriate test methods. So far the standards for diVusive samplers,4 pumped sorbent tubes,5 detector tubes6 and low volume sampling pumps7 have been published. Standards are being prepared for high volume pumps sampling and analysis of metal species (or more generally of chemical agents in airborne particles) samplers for mixed aerosols and vapours and jointly with a CENELEC working group for direct-reading electrical apparatus. Guidance is also being prepared for chemically impregnated systems and for the selection of procedures and devices.Ambient Air Standards The task of developing appropriate standards for ambient air quality measurements within the European Community has been carried forward by working groups (WGs) of CEN Technical Committee TC264. In addition to the ‘framework’ Directive on Ambient Air Quality Assessment and Management,2 several associated Daughter Directives have been promulgated or are under development. These Directives prescribe performance requirements as Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) including accuracy and precision minimum data capture and minimum time coverage. DQOs are set at diVerent levels for diVerent pollutants and also for diVerent assessment methods; mandatory measurment indicative measurement modelling or objective estimation.Usually a ‘reference’ method is prescribed but other methods meeting the DQOs may be used. The primary task of CEN TC264 is to evaluate and recommend reference methods where these are not already prescribed in Directives. However in the specific case of diVusive samplers which are likely to be used for indicative measurement performance requirements standards have been developed by CEN/TC 164/WG 11 analogous to EN 4823 and EN 8384 of CEN/TC137/WG 2. References 1 Council Directive 98/24/EC on the protection of the health and safety of workers from the risks related to chemical agents at work 1998. 2 Council Directive 96/62/EC on ambient air quality assessment and management 1996. 3 Workplace atmospheres—General requirements for the performance of procedures for the measurement of chemical agents (EN 482 1994).4 Workplace atmospheres—Requirements and test methods for diVusive samplers for the determination of gases and vapours (EN 838 1995). 5 Workplace atmospheres—Requirements and test methods for pumped sorbent tubes for the determination of gases and vapours (EN 1076 1997). 6 Workplace atmospheres—Requirements and test methods for short term detector tube systems (EN 1231 1996). 7 Workplace atmospheres—Requirements and test methods for pumps for personal sampling of chemical agents (EN 1232 1997). Richard Brown Health and Safety Executive UK Progress with the ambient air directive and its implications On the basis of the experience gained from earlier air quality directives the European Union adopted in 1996 a new Directive on Ambient Air Assessment and Management which established a more integrated and coherent approach to air quality.This directive constitutes the framework for the development of specific Daughter Directives for a series of pollutants. The first Daughter Directive for SO2 NO2 PM10 and Pb has recently been submitted by the European Commission to the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament and is expected to be adopted in 1999. Further Daughter Directive proposals for Benzene and CO as well as the revised O3 directive are currently being finalized by the Commission and will be presented to the Council and the Parliament at the beginning of 1999. The preparation of the Daughter Directive proposal for Heavy Metals (Cd As Ni Hg) and for PAHs will start in 1999 and is foreseen to be submitted to the Council and the Parliament at the end of the year.For each pollutant the daughter directives will establish air quality standards for the protection of human health and vegetation criteria for the location and the minimum number of mandatory measurement sites reference measurement techniques and related data quality objectives criteria for the use of indicative assessment methods. As a general trend in the management of air quality the new regulation will require integrated approaches based on intelligent assessment. Besides the mandatory monitoring activity needed to control the compliance of limit values other tasks have become an absolute priority such as the proper design and optimization of the monitoring networks the classification of a territory in zones of homogeneous air quality the use of alternative assessment techniques to produce maps of the air quality in a given area the use of modelling tools to simulate and forecast air quality levels the information provided to the public the implementation of eYcient abatement measures.The forthcoming benzene directive oVers researchers working with thermal desorption methods new and interesting opportunities active sampling on a sorbent cartridge is proposed as one of the reference measurement methods. In addition the diVusive sampling technique constitutes a powerful tool for the classification of zones preliminary assessments of ambient air quality the design/optimization of monitoring networks monitoring in areas at no risk of exceeding limit values classification in zones of homogeneous air quality validation and mathematical models and measurement campaigns to evaluate the eYciency of abatement measures. Emile De Saeger JRC Environment Institute Italy