SportsTurf provides current, practical and technical content on issues relevant to sports turf managers, including facilities managers. Most readers are athletic field managers from the professional level through parks and recreation, universities.
Issue link: https://read.dmtmag.com/i/506886
so they are available to anyone who wishes to purchase them. It is important to understand, however, that not all labs are equal even though they may be performing the same tests. In the 1990's the USGA developed new guidelines for greens construction and the test procedures supporting the guidelines. These ASTM procedures are still used today for the evaluation of sand-based rootzone mixes. The USGA also felt that there was a need to involve a 3rd party accreditation organization to rec- ognize soil physical testing laboratories that meet international standards for testing laboratories. Since 1995, the American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA) has be accred- iting labs performing soil physical testing of greens and sports field mixes. To this day the USGA will not recommend a lab unless they achieve A2LA Accreditation. Accreditation by A2LA is a rigorous program that requires laboratories to follow strict quality control protocols. The checklist of required items is more than 40 pages long and includes traceability of every single measurement in the lab to a national calibration standard (National Institute of Standards and Technology standards). Labs are required to have assess- ments done every 2 years by outside A2LA assessors who examine among other things, equipment, calibration records, training records, and the test procedures being performed by lab technicians. In addition, all accredited labs are required to participate in proficiency testing (PT) programs for all of the test procedures they are accredited for. A PT program is one whereby rootzone mixes or other samples are sent by a PT provider to all par- ticipating labs for testing. There is a PT program specifically for sand-based mixes; that program originated at Colorado State University. The test data is sent back to the PT provider, analyzed, and compared to that of all of the participating labs. If any of the 69 test values submitted by a lab deviate from the median of all participating labs by some set amount, that lab is issued a warning for that test. The lab is then required to perform an investigation on that deviation and to correct the problem, if one exists. Minimally, any lab that performs physical testing on sand- based rootzone mixes should be participating in a PT program. If not, there is absolutely no way they can validate the accuracy of their test data. Their data could be way out in left field without the lab or their clients even knowing it. Lab accreditation is very expensive for those labs that partici- pate in the program. As the owner of a lab that was accredited for 18 years, I often looked at the cost/benefit of the program. Strictly from a business standpoint, it made little sense to maintain accreditation since it is unlikely that it resulted in any significant increase in business. Where I saw the most benefit in accreditation, however, was in my confidence that our data was good data. I also felt that the data from an accredited lab would be more defensible than a non-accredited lab should the data ever be called into question in a legal dispute. I can envision a good attorney easily discrediting the data from a non-accredited lab, especially if that lab does not perform the tests regularly or if theirs is a part-time test lab in the basement or garage of their home. Accreditation not only offers some protection to the lab, but also to the contractors or suppliers that use a lab, and cer- tainly the designers that specify an accredited lab. An oft-misunderstood requirement for accreditation is a minimum educational/experience level for staff. I stress the term "minimum." While all accredited labs perform the tests the same way, the level of agronomic expertise within the lab to interpret test results and make recommendations will vary among labs. Most labs are adequately staffed in this regards to compare test results to a construction specification. It will be in cases where the project is more complicated that differences in agronomic expertise will separate out the accredited labs. No professional sports team would bring an unqualified wan- nabe off the streets onto their team to save a few bucks. Selecting a soil physical testing lab that is accredited provides you with some assurance that your team mate is a pro and qualified to properly carry out the testing you need. ■ ST Dr. Norm Hummel owned and operated Hummel & Co. Inc laboratory for 20 years and now works as an independent soils con- sultant. The former Hummel & Co. lab now operates as Turf and Soil Diagnostics with labs in Linwood, KS and Trumansburg, NY. www.stma.org May 2015 | SportsTurf 23