AOAC SPSFAM PAC ERP

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. method performs within the SMPR Method Performance REquirements table specifications for all analytes in the SMPR applicability statement? If not, please specify what is missing and whether or not the method's applicability should be modified. 3. Is there information demonstrating that the

Yes

Calibrants and matrix based materials were mixed and extracted to allow for a chemometric deconvolution of the data. Listed reference materials were not used, however, for the work done, the reference materials were not a necessity (yet)

This is a more qualitative SMPR with selectivity requirements for a POI. The authors included information typically found in a quantitative SMPR but not in this one. The method performance requirement is 90% probability of identification with 95% confidence (33 correct identifications out of 33 samples know to contain A- type PAC). The results of the 21 samples were not presented as POI, so that calculation should be performed

IV. General Submission Package

IV. General Submission Package 1. Based on the supporting information, were there any additional steps in the evaluation of the method that indicated the need for any additional precautionary statements in the method?

No