Drinking Water Analysis Conditions for USEPA Method 524.3 and the Newly Proposed Method 524.4

Significance of Topic

Accurate determination of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in drinking water is critical for public health monitoring and regulatory compliance. EPA Method 524.3 set a benchmark for purge-and-trap GC–MS analysis, but reliance on high-purity helium has presented supply and cost challenges. Investigation into replacing helium with nitrogen—a more accessible and cost-effective gas—promises to maintain analytical performance while enhancing operational flexibility.

Objectives and Study Overview

This study evaluates the feasibility of using high-purity nitrogen as the purge gas under the proposed EPA Method 524.4 compared to helium under Method 524.3. Two purge volumes (440 mL and 390 mL) were tested for each gas to assess linearity, precision, accuracy, and overall compound response across a concentration range of 0.5 to 40 ppb.

Instrumentation

EST Analytical Encon Evolution purge-and-trap concentrator equipped with a Vocarb 3000 trap and an integrated Moisture Reduction Trap (MoRT).
EST Centurion WS autosampler with chiller unit (< 10 °C).
Agilent 7890/5975 GC–MS with split/splitless inlet and Rtx-VMS column (30 m × 0.25 mm I.D., 1.4 µm film).

Methodology

Purge parameters: two purge times (11.0 min and 6.5 min) at flows of 40 mL/min and 60 mL/min, followed by a 1 min dry purge. Desorption at 260 °C under 5 psi for 1 min. Moisture control via MoRT bypass and foam sensor.
GC oven program: initial 45 °C hold, ramp to 230 °C, total run time ~15.6 min. MS scanned m/z 47–265 after 1 min solvent delay.
Calibration: seven-point quadratic regression (0.5–40 ppb) with 5 ppb internal standards. Performance evaluated at 0.5 ppb and 20 ppb levels.

Main Results and Discussion

Linearity for all 60+ target compounds was excellent (R² ≥ 0.995) under both gases and purge volumes. Precision (%RSD) at low (0.5 ppb) and mid (20 ppb) levels met EPA criteria (<15% for most analytes). Accuracy ranged from 70% to 130% across conditions. Average response factors were slightly lower with nitrogen (≈0.56) than helium (≈0.70) but remained consistent. Both purge volumes yielded comparable results, demonstrating flexibility in cycle time optimization. EST features effectively controlled moisture and foaming, ensuring reliable operation.

Benefits and Practical Applications

• Reduced operating costs by substituting helium with nitrogen.
• Shorter cycle times and flexible purge parameters improve throughput.
• Robust moisture management and foam detection minimize sample failures.
• Automation capabilities of the Centurion WS improve reproducibility and productivity.

Future Trends and Potential Applications

Broader adoption of nitrogen purge gas in regulated methods will reduce dependency on helium. Further research may explore lower detection limits, extended analyte lists, and integration with high-throughput platforms. Advanced moisture control and real-time monitoring features are likely to enhance system robustness in complex matrices.

Conclusion

This evaluation demonstrates that nitrogen can replace helium in purge-and-trap GC–MS analysis of drinking water without compromising method performance. Both EPA Method 524.3 and the proposed 524.4 criteria are satisfied across two purge volumes. Nitrogen offers cost savings and comparable analytical quality, making it a viable alternative for routine water monitoring.

References

• US EPA Method 524.3. Measurement of Purgeable Organic Compounds in Water by Capillary Column Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry, Version 1.0, June 2009.
• US EPA Method 524.4 (Draft). Measurement of Purgeable Organic Compounds in Water by Capillary Column Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (Using Nitrogen Purge Gas), Version 1.0, September 2011.