AOAC SPDS ERP DECEMBER 15, 2017

2. Does the analytical technique(s) used in the method meet the SMPR? If not, please specify how it differs from what is stated in the SMPR. 3. Are the definitions specified in the SMPR used and applied appropriately in the method? If no, please indicate how the terms are used. 4. Does the method, as written, contain all appropriate precautions and warnings related to the method's reagents, components, instrumentation, or method steps that may be hazardous? If no, please suggest wording or option(s). III. Review of Supporting Information 1. Are the definitions specified in the SMPR used and applied appropriately in the supporting documentation (manuscripts, method studies, etc...)? If not, please explain the differences and if the method is impacted by the difference. 2. Is there information demonstrating that the method meets the SMPR Method Performance Requirements using the Reference Materials stated in the SMPR? If not, then specify what is missing and how this impacts demonstration of performance of the method.

The analytical technique meets the SMPR.

The method does not include the definition of "Quantitative Method" The method utilizes "Precision" in place of "Repeatability" The method does not include the definition of "Reproducibility" The method defines "Recovery" as "Trueness". Neither definition describes the SMPR definition of "Recovery"

General reference to AOAC Appendix B:Lab Safety is included. No additional precautions are specified.

III. Review of Information in Support of the Method

The methods determination of "Recovery (Trueness)" is not consistent with the SMPR definition. The method does not provide for a spiked sample due to the lack of adequate 'clean' sample matrix. The methods review of "Recovery" is closer to a check on extraction efficiency.

Reference materials acquired from Cerilliant. Two compounds were not available (CBCA & THCVA).