NR 149.25 Note
Note:
Preparatory steps include digestions, distillations, extractions, concentrations, and dilutions.
NR 149.25(2)
(2) A laboratory may report multiple results for a single PT sample when the laboratory maintains accreditations for multiple technologies for any analyte or analyte group in aqueous and non-aqueous matrices.
NR 149.25(3)
(3) A laboratory may report multiple results of a single PT sample when the laboratory maintains certifications for multiple methods for any analyte or analyte group in the drinking water matrix.
NR 149.25(4)
(4) Prior to submitting PT sample results to a PT sample provider, all the following apply:
NR 149.25(4)(a)
(a) A laboratory may not send a PT sample, or portion of a PT sample, to another laboratory for analysis.
NR 149.25(4)(b)
(b) A laboratory may not knowingly analyze a PT sample, or a portion of a PT sample, from another laboratory.
NR 149.25(4)(c)
(c) Until a PT sample study has been closed, a laboratory may not share results of a PT sample from that study to any party other than the PT sample provider or regulatory agency.
NR 149.25 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21. NR 149.26
NR 149.26
Reporting proficiency testing sample results. NR 149.26(1)(1)
A laboratory shall submit PT sample results to PT sample providers in accordance with the dates specified by the PT sample providers.
NR 149.26(2)
(2) PT sample reports may be submitted to the department directly from the PT sample provider or by the laboratory, but it is the laboratory's responsibility to ensure the department receives the necessary reports for initial and revised applications. The laboratory shall submit PT sample reports in their entirety, without modification, to the department.
NR 149.26(3)
(3) Results from all PT sample reports issued to the department by PT sample providers shall be used to determine a laboratory's accreditation status.
NR 149.26(4)
(4) The department may only accept amended and reissued PT sample reports if the reissue is due to an error made by the PT sample provider and revised reports are all the following:
NR 149.26(4)(b)
(b) Directly submitted to the department by the PT sample provider.
NR 149.26(4)(c)
(c) Accompanied by an explanation of the PT sample provider's error.
NR 149.26 Note
Note:
Re-issued reports are acceptable in cases when the laboratory neglected to instruct the PT sample provider to report results to the department.
NR 149.26 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21. NR 149.27
NR 149.27
Proficiency testing sample acceptance limits and grading. NR 149.27(1)(1)
Acceptance limits. A laboratory's result for any analyte or analyte group is considered unacceptable if it meets any of the following conditions:
NR 149.27(1)(b)
(b) The laboratory reports a result for an analyte not present in the PT sample.
NR 149.27(1)(c)
(c) The laboratory does not report a result for an analyte present in the PT sample.
NR 149.27(1)(d)
(d) The laboratory fails to submit its results to the PT sample provider on or before the deadline for the PT sample study.
NR 149.27(1)(e)
(e) The laboratory reports a method code for either an unapproved method or the method code reported is not appropriate for the technology-analyte or method-analyte combination.
NR 149.27(1)(f)
(f) The laboratory fails to meet department specified grading criteria for multi-analyte PT samples.
NR 149.27 Note
Note:
Department grading criteria can be found on the Wisconsin department of natural resources laboratory accreditation program website.
NR 149.27(2)(a)(a) PT samples for analytes in aqueous and non-aqueous matrices shall be graded in accordance with acceptance limits established by the department considering criteria developed by the EPA.
NR 149.27(2)(b)
(b) When the EPA has not developed acceptance limits for required PT sample analytes, the department may develop acceptance limits based on its experience or information supplied by approved PT sample providers.
NR 149.27(2)(c)
(c) When an insufficient number of laboratories participate in a study to generate peer-based acceptance limits in a PT sample with analytes for which the EPA has not established acceptance limits, the department may grade results using fixed acceptance limits.
NR 149.27 Note
Note:
Links to
40 CFR Part 141 can be found on the Wisconsin department of natural resources laboratory accreditation program website.
NR 149.27(2)(e)
(e) When accreditation in an analyte group is based on passing a representative PT sample containing more than one analyte, the laboratory shall report acceptable results on at least 80% of the analytes to achieve acceptable results for that sample. The department may investigate repeated failures for specific analytes and direct enforcement action in the event of two consecutive failures in the drinking water matrix or three consecutive failures in the aqueous matrix.
NR 149.27(2)(f)
(f) The department shall establish procedures for evaluating false positives and false negatives reported in analyzed PT samples.
NR 149.27 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21. NR 149.28
NR 149.28
Procedure for correcting unacceptable proficiency testing sample results. NR 149.28(1)(a)
(a) If a laboratory does not meet the acceptance limits for an analyte or analyte group and the laboratory does not have acceptable results on a previous sample analyzed during the same accreditation period, the laboratory shall analyze a second PT sample for that analyte or analyte group.
NR 149.28(1)(b)
(b) If the results of a second PT sample do not meet the acceptance limits, the department may initiate an assessment of the laboratory's quality control records if this action is necessary to validate data generated by the laboratory. If two consecutive PT samples do not meet acceptance limits, the laboratory shall do all the following:
NR 149.28(1)(b)1.
1. Prepare a corrective action report and initiate an action plan to correct the problems within 30 days of the date of notification of the second failure. This action plan shall include a timetable for correcting the problems and obtaining a third PT sample.
NR 149.28(1)(b)2.
2. Analyze a third PT sample within 60 days of the date of notification of the second failure. If the results of the third PT sample do not meet the acceptance limits, the laboratory shall analyze two subsequent and consecutive acceptable PT samples.
NR 149.28(1)(c)
(c) The department may not renew accreditation of those analytes or analyte groups for which a laboratory has failed three consecutive PT samples and has not successfully analyzed two subsequent and consecutive PT samples for those analytes or analyte groups prior to September 1.
NR 149.28(1)(d)
(d) When applying to have an analyte or analyte group reinstated after non-renewal for failing three consecutive PT samples, the laboratory shall provide acceptable results on two subsequent and consecutive PT sample studies for that analyte or analyte group. The consecutive PT samples shall be two unique studies received by the laboratory at least ten business days apart. The laboratory may not prepare or analyze the two PT samples in the same batch.
NR 149.28(2)
(2)
Drinking water. If a certified laboratory does not meet the acceptance limits that have been established by the department, the department shall require the laboratory to analyze a second PT sample and may require the laboratory to submit a corrective action report. If the results of the second sample do not meet the acceptance limits, the department may not renew the laboratory's certification and may revoke the laboratory's certification as specified in s.
NR 149.10. To reinstate the certification for the affected method-analyte or analyte group, the laboratory shall submit a revised application, pay the revised application fee, and provide acceptable results on two subsequent and consecutive PT sample studies for that method-analyte or analyte group. The consecutive PT samples shall be two unique studies received by the laboratory at least ten business days apart. The laboratory may not prepare or analyze the two PT samples in the same batch.
NR 149.28 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21. NR 149.29
NR 149.29
Purpose, type, and frequency. NR 149.29(1)(1)
The department shall perform on-site evaluations to determine a laboratory's potential, actual, or continued ability to comply with the provisions of this chapter.
NR 149.29(2)
(2) The department shall conduct announced on-site evaluations of laboratories once every three years and when any of the following occurs:
NR 149.29(2)(a)
(a) A laboratory applies to become certified or registered in any field of accreditation unless the department waives the requirement to perform an on-site evaluation. When the department does not waive an evaluation, the evaluation shall be performed within 90 days after the department determines that a received application is complete.
NR 149.29(2)(b)
(b) A laboratory changes its location, ownership or key personnel, unless the department waives the requirement to perform an on-site evaluation. When the department does not waive an evaluation, the evaluation shall be performed within 90 days after the department receives notification of these changes.
NR 149.29(2)(c)
(c) The department determines that an on-site evaluation is necessary to verify corrective action implemented by a laboratory to address deficiencies identified in a previous on-site evaluation.
NR 149.29(2)(d)
(d) The department has reason to believe that a laboratory is not in compliance with this chapter.
NR 149.29(3)
(3) The department may conduct unannounced on-site evaluations of a laboratory to verify compliance with this chapter after a notice of violation has been issued to a laboratory.
NR 149.29 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21; correction in (title) made under s. 13.92 (4) (b) 2., Stats., Register February 2021 No. 782. NR 149.30
NR 149.30
Evaluation procedures and appraisal. NR 149.30(1)(1)
The department shall perform on-site evaluations of laboratories to evaluate systems, practices, procedures, and documentation in a laboratory and to identify deficiencies according to documented procedures that promote consistency in determining a laboratory's potential, actual, or continued ability to comply with this chapter.
NR 149.30(2)
(2) If, in performing an on-site evaluation, the department finds that the laboratory is implementing a procedure that is neither allowed nor disallowed by method or this chapter, the department will assess the scientific validity of the procedure. The department may seek the advice of the council in making determinations under this subsection.
NR 149.30(3)
(3) The department shall provide laboratories with a survey to allow them to appraise the evaluation process.
NR 149.30 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21; correction in (2) made under s. 13.92 (4) (b) 7., Stats., Register February 2021 No. 782. NR 149.31(1)(1)
The department shall document the deficiencies identified during an on-site evaluation under s.
NR 149.30 in reports issued to the evaluated laboratory.
NR 149.31(2)
(2) The report of an on-site evaluation shall be issued to a laboratory within 30 days of the conclusion of the on-site visit. When the department finds it necessary to issue an evaluation report at a date later than 30 days after the conclusion of an on-site visit, the department shall notify the laboratory about the delay. The notice shall include an expected delivery date for the report.
NR 149.31 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21. NR 149.32
NR 149.32
Evaluation corrective action. NR 149.32(1)(1)
A laboratory shall take corrective action to address all deficiencies discovered during an on-site evaluation under s.
NR 149.30 and contained in an evaluation report under s.
NR 149.31.
NR 149.32(2)
(2) A laboratory shall submit to the department, within 30 days from the evaluation report's date, a plan of corrective action to address all the deficiencies noted in the report. When a laboratory finds it necessary to submit a corrective action plan at a date later than 30 days after the evaluation report's date, the laboratory shall notify the department about the delay and provide an expected delivery date in consultation with the department.
NR 149.32(3)
(3) The department shall review the corrective action plan submitted by a laboratory under sub.
(2) and inform the laboratory whether the submitted plan addresses satisfactorily all noted deficiencies, or whether additional action or documentation is necessary to determine the laboratory's ability to comply with this chapter, subject to all the following:
NR 149.32(3)(a)
(a) When the department determines that the submitted corrective action plan addresses all noted deficiencies satisfactorily, the department shall inform the laboratory in writing within 30 days that the plan is acceptable.
NR 149.32(3)(b)
(b) When the department determines that additional action or documentation is needed to evaluate compliance with this chapter, the department, in consultation with the laboratory, shall set a date for the laboratory to submit a second corrective action plan.
NR 149.32(3)(b)1.
1. If the department determines that the second corrective action plan submitted under sub.
(3) (b) addresses all noted deficiencies satisfactorily, the department shall inform the laboratory in writing that the evaluation process has concluded.
NR 149.32(3)(b)2.
2. If the department determines that the second corrective action plan submitted under sub.
(3) (b) does not address all the noted deficiencies satisfactorily, the department may schedule another on-site evaluation to determine the laboratory's compliance with this chapter, terminate any outstanding application that led to the original on-site evaluation, or direct enforcement to the laboratory.
NR 149.32(3)(b)3.
3. If a second on-site evaluation is scheduled as a follow-up to a second corrective action plan submitted under sub.
(3) (b), the department shall establish deadlines that resolve any remaining unresolved deficiencies expeditiously, but no later than 90 days after the conclusion of the follow-up visit.
NR 149.32 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21. NR 149.33(1)(1)
The department shall establish procedures to ensure and document that laboratory evaluators under its employment are free of any conflicts that would render the laboratory evaluator incapable of performing an objective and unbiased evaluation of a laboratory.
NR 149.33(2)
(2) A laboratory may request information and documents used by the department to establish that any evaluator assigned to perform the laboratory's evaluation is free of any conflicts of interest.
NR 149.33 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21. NR 149.34
NR 149.34
Evaluator qualifications. NR 149.34(1)(1)
The department shall develop procedures to establish and evaluate the education, experience, and credentials of the laboratory evaluators under its employment.
NR 149.34(2)
(2) A laboratory may request information and documents used by the department to establish that any evaluator assigned to perform the laboratory's evaluation has the necessary education, experience, or credentials to perform evaluations competently.
NR 149.34 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21. NR 149.35(1)(1)
Scope. This subchapter establishes personnel, quality assurance, quality control, method selection, sample handling, and documentation requirements for laboratories.
NR 149.35(2)
(2)
Responsibility for quality system. A laboratory shall conduct analytical activities under a quality system that incorporates the provisions of this subchapter. At least one individual within a laboratory's organization or under the laboratory's employment shall be identified to the department as responsible for establishing, implementing, assessing, and revising, as needed, a laboratory's quality system.
NR 149.35 History
History: CR 17-046: cr. Register February 2021 No. 782, eff. 6-29-21.
