1.1 本指南涵盖废物处理设施的地下水监测背景。法规要求使用统计方法作为调查垃圾处理设施运行可能产生的环境影响的基础。所有者/经营者通常必须每季度或每半年进行一次统计分析。对多个油井（5到100个或更多）中的每一个进行统计测试（例如，10到50个或更多）。结果可能是数百个，在某些情况下，对每个监测事件进行1000或更多的统计比较。即使单个测试的假阳性率很小（例如，1 %), 几乎可以保证在任何监测事件中至少有一次测试失败。 这首先假设您正确执行了统计。 1.2 本指南旨在帮助监管机构和行业为废物处理设施制定统计上强大的地下水监测计划。本指南的目的是尽早检测设施对地下水的潜在影响，同时最大限度地降低错误推断设施未影响地下水的可能性。 1.3 如果应用不当，有关地下水监测统计方法的现有法规和指南通常缺乏统计清晰性，并且通常实施的方法要么在出现污染时无法检测到污染（假阴性结果），要么在没有污染时得出设施已影响地下水的结论（假阳性）。 解决这个问题的历史方法经常牺牲一种错误来保持对另一种错误的控制。例如，一些监管方法偏向保守主义，使假阴性率接近零，而假阳性率接近100 %. 1.4 本指南的目的是说明一种统计地下水监测策略，该策略在不牺牲一个为另一个的情况下最大限度地降低假阴性率和假阳性率。 1.5 本指南适用于危险和城市固体废物处理设施地下水检测监测的统计方面。 1.6 至关重要的是要认识到，仅凭统计分析永远无法得出废物处理设施影响地下水的结论。 对背景水平的统计显著超标表明，特定成分的特定监测井中的新测量值与基于可用背景测量样本的机会预期不一致。 1.7 同样，统计方法永远无法克服地下水监测网络的局限性，这些局限性可能是由于不良的场地特征、油井安装和位置、采样或分析而产生的。 1.8 值得注意的是，在合理的情况下，井内比较通常优于井间比较，因为它们完全消除了可变性的空间成分。由于没有空间变异性，测量浓度的不确定性降低，使得内部- 完全消除了对真实释放（即假阴性）更敏感的比较和由于空间变异而产生的假阳性结果。 1.9 最后，应注意的是，此处描述的统计方法并不是分析地下水监测数据的唯一有效方法。然而，从在标称水平上平衡站点范围内的假阳性率和假阴性率的角度来看，它们目前是最有用的。Gibbons对该主题和相关文献进行了更完整的综述 ( 1. ). 2. 1.10 以国际单位制表示的数值应视为标准值。本标准不包括其他计量单位。 1.11 本标准并非旨在解决与其使用相关的所有安全问题（如有）。 本标准的用户有责任在使用前制定适当的安全和健康实践，并确定监管限制的适用性。 1.12 本指南提供了有组织的信息收集或一系列选项，并不推荐具体的行动方案。本文件不能取代教育或经验，应与专业判断一起使用。并非本指南的所有方面都适用于所有情况。本ASTM标准不代表或取代必须根据其判断给定专业服务的充分性的谨慎标准，也不应在不考虑项目的许多独特方面的情况下应用本文件。 本文件标题中的“标准”一词仅表示该文件已通过ASTM共识程序获得批准。 ====意义和用途====== 5.1 本指南主要用于危险和城市固体废物处理设施的地下水检测监测。现有法规和指南的解释和实施方式存在很大差异。通常，当前的许多实践导致统计决策规则，导致过多的假阳性率或假阴性率，或两者兼而有之。该拟议指南的意义在于，它将标称水平上的假阳性率和假阴性率联合降至最低，而不牺牲一个错误为另一个错误（同时保持可接受的统计能力，以检测对地下水质量的实际影响） ( 4. ) ). 5.2 使用本指南，所有者/经营者或监管机构应能够制定统计检测监控程序，该程序不会在没有污染时错误检测到污染，也不会在污染存在时无法检测到污染。

1.1 This guide covers the context of groundwater monitoring at waste disposal facilities. Regulations have required statistical methods as the basis for investigating potential environmental impact due to waste disposal facility operation. Owner/operators must typically perform a statistical analysis on a quarterly or semiannual basis. A statistical test is performed on each of many constituents (for example, 10 to 50 or more) for each of many wells (5 to 100 or more). The result is potentially hundreds, and in some cases, a thousand or more statistical comparisons performed on each monitoring event. Even if the false positive rate for a single test is small (for example, 1 %), the possibility of failing at least one test on any monitoring event is virtually guaranteed. This assumes you have performed the statistics correctly in the first place. 1.2 This guide is intended to assist regulators and industry in developing statistically powerful groundwater monitoring programs for waste disposal facilities. The purpose of this guide is to detect a potential groundwater impact from the facility at the earliest possible time while simultaneously minimizing the probability of falsely concluding that the facility has impacted groundwater when it has not. 1.3 When applied inappropriately, existing regulation and guidance on statistical approaches to groundwater monitoring often suffer from a lack of statistical clarity and often implement methods that will either fail to detect contamination when it is present (a false negative result) or conclude that the facility has impacted groundwater when it has not (a false positive). Historical approaches to this problem have often sacrificed one type of error to maintain control over the other. For example, some regulatory approaches err on the side of conservatism, keeping false negative rates near zero while false positive rates approach 100 %. 1.4 The purpose of this guide is to illustrate a statistical groundwater monitoring strategy that minimizes both false negative and false positive rates without sacrificing one for the other. 1.5 This guide is applicable to statistical aspects of groundwater detection monitoring for hazardous and municipal solid waste disposal facilities. 1.6 It is of critical importance to realize that on the basis of a statistical analysis alone, it can never be concluded that a waste disposal facility has impacted groundwater. A statistically significant exceedance over background levels indicates that the new measurement in a particular monitoring well for a particular constituent is inconsistent with chance expectations based on the available sample of background measurements. 1.7 Similarly, statistical methods can never overcome limitations of a groundwater monitoring network that might arise due to poor site characterization, well installation and location, sampling, or analysis. 1.8 It is noted that when justified, intra-well comparisons are generally preferable to their inter-well counterparts because they completely eliminate the spatial component of variability. Due to the absence of spatial variability, the uncertainty in measured concentrations is decreased, making intra-well comparisons more sensitive to real releases (that is, false negatives) and false positive results due to spatial variability are completely eliminated. 1.9 Finally, it should be noted that the statistical methods described here are not the only valid methods for analysis of groundwater monitoring data. They are, however, currently the most useful from the perspective of balancing site-wide false positive and false negative rates at nominal levels. A more complete review of this topic and the associated literature is presented by Gibbons ( 1 ). 2 1.10 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. 1.11 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 1.12 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process. ====== Significance And Use ====== 5.1 The principal use of this guide is in groundwater detection monitoring of hazardous and municipal solid waste disposal facilities. There is considerable variability in the way in which existing regulation and guidance are interpreted and practiced. Often, much of current practice leads to statistical decision rules that lead to excessive false positive or false negative rates, or both. The significance of this proposed guide is that it jointly minimizes false positive and false negative rates at nominal levels without sacrificing one error for another (while maintaining acceptable statistical power to detect actual impacts to groundwater quality ( 4 ) ). 5.2 Using this guide, an owner/operator or regulatory agency should be able to develop a statistical detection monitoring program that will not falsely detect contamination when it is absent and will not fail to detect contamination when it is present.