[Home]
Introduction
The following data verification summary report covers environmental soil samples and associated field quality control (QC) samples collected from the Camp Stanley CSSA Site (under RL53) on March 3, 2000. The samples in the following laboratory Sample Delivery Group (SDG) were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and metals including barium, chromium, copper, nickel, zinc, mercury, arsenic, cadmium, and lead:
|
32134 |
|
|
Field quality control samples collected were trip blank; matrix spike/matrix spike duplicates (MS/MSD); and field duplicates. During the initiation of this project, it was determined that ambient blanks were not necessary due to the absence of a source at the site. The trip blank was analyzed for volatile organics only. All other field quality control samples were analyzed for the same parameters as their associated samples.
All samples were collected by Parsons Engineering Science (Parsons ES). All analyses were performed by APPL, Inc. following procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP, version 3.0.
Evaluation Criteria
The data submitted by the laboratory has been reviewed and verified following the guidelines outlined in the AFCEE QAPP, version 3.0. Information reviewed in the data packages include sample results; the summary of laboratory quality control results; case narrative; raw data; and chain-of-custody forms. The analyses and findings presented in this report are based on the reviewed information, and whether guidelines in the AFCEE QAPP were met.
VOC SDG 32134
General
This SDG consisted of seven (7) samples, including three (3) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one trip blank sample. The samples were collected on March 3, 2000 and analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
VOC analyses were performed using United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) SW846 Method 8260B. All samples for this SDG were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples collected were prepared and analyzed within the holding times required by the method.
Accuracy
Accuracy was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples; LCS samples; and surrogate spikes. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’)
|
Analyte |
MS %R |
MSD %R |
QC (%) |
|
1,1-DCE 1,1-dichloropropene 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 1,2-DCB 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene 1,3-DCB 1,4-DCB 1-chlorohexane 2-chlorotoluene 4-chlorotoluene |
60.8 58.8 52.9 47.1 58.8 58.8 58.8 54.9 52.9 54.9 58.8 56.9 |
(70.6) (68.6) 58.8 52.9 (64.7) (64.7) (66.7) 60.8 58.8 62.7 (66.7) (64.7) |
65-135 65-135 65-147 65-145 65-135 65-135 62-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 63-135 64-135 |
Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’)
|
Analyte |
MS %R |
MSD %R |
QC |
|
Bromobenzene Bromomethane Chlorobenzene Chloromethane Dichlorodifluoromethane Ethylbenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Isopropylbenzene m&p-xylene n-butylbenzene n-propylbenzene o-xylene p-isopropyltoluene sec-butylbenzene tert-butylbenzene Tetrachloroethene Toluene Trans-1,2-DCE |
60.8 60.8 62.7 54.9 -15.3 62.7 33.3 62.7 59.2 47.1 56.9 62.7 52.9 54.9 60.8 52.9 62.7 58.8 |
(70.6) (66.7) (70.6) 58.8 -9.4 (70.6) 43.1 (70.6) (66.0) 54.9 (64.7) (70.6) 60.8 62.7 (68.6) (60.8) (72.5) (66.7) |
65-135 62-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 61-135 64-135 65-135 |
( ) The %R was compliant.
The results for the non-compliant analytes in samples from site B9 with similar matrix as the MS/MSD were flagged “M” to indicate a matrix effect was present.
All LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
The surrogate %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’) FD was the field duplicate of sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’).
All MS/MSD and field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
Completeness
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
All results were considered usable. The completeness for this SDG is 100.0% compared to the minimum acceptance limit of 90%.
Representativeness
Representativeness expresses the degree to which sample data accurately and precisely represents actual site conditions. Representativeness has been evaluated by:
|
Comparing the chain-of-custody procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Comparing actual analytical procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Evaluating holding times; and |
|
|
Examining field and laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during collection or analysis. |
All samples in this SDG were analyzed following chain-of-custody forms (COCs) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE. All samples were prepared and analyzed within the holding times required for the analysis.
|
All instrument performance check criteria were met. |
|
|
All initial calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
All continuing calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
All second source verification criteria were met. |
|
|
All internal standard criteria were met. |
There were four method blanks and one trip blank associated with the VOC analyses in this SDG. The blanks were free of VOCs above the RL.
Metals SDG 32134
General
This SDG consisted of six (6) samples, including three (3) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample and one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples. The samples were collected on March 3, 2000 and analyzed for metals; barium, chromium, copper, nickel, and zinc.
The barium, chromium, copper, nickel, and zinc analyses were performed using United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) SW846 Method 6010B. All samples for this SDG were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples collected were prepared and analyzed within the holding times required by the method.
Accuracy
Accuracy was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS samples. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.
The LCS and MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the laboratory and field duplicate analyte values. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG. Sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’) FD was the field duplicate of sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’).
All MS/MSD and field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
Completeness
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
All results were considered usable. The completeness for this SDG is 100% compared to the minimum acceptance limit of 90%.
Representativeness
Representativeness expresses the degree to which sample data accurately and precisely represents actual site conditions. Representativeness has been evaluated by:
|
Comparing the chain-of-custody procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Comparing actual analytical procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Evaluating holding times; and |
|
|
Examining laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during the analysis. |
All samples in this SDG were analyzed following the chain-of-custody forms (COCs) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE. All samples were prepared and analyzed with the holding times required for the respective analysis.
|
All initial and continuing calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
All second source calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
All interference check criteria were met. |
|
|
Dilution tests were not applicable due to the diluted concentration of all five metals were less than the reporting limits. |
|
|
All post digestion spike criteria were met. |
There was one method blank and several calibration blanks associated with the metal analyses in this SDG. All blanks were free of any metals above the RL.
Mercury SDG 32134
General
This SDG consisted of six (6) samples, including three (3) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate sample and one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples. The samples were collected on March 3, 2000 and analyzed for mercury.
The mercury analyses were performed using USEPA SW846 Method 7470A. All samples for this SDG were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples collected were prepared and analyzed within the holding times required by the method.
Accuracy
Accuracy was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS samples. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.
All MS/MSD and LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG. Sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’) FD was the field duplicate of sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’).
Both MS/MSD and field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
Completeness
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
All results were considered usable. The completeness for this SDG is 100% compared to the minimum acceptance limit of 90%.
Representativeness
Representativeness expresses the degree to which sample data accurately and precisely represents actual site conditions. Representativeness has been evaluated by:
|
Comparing the chain-of-custody procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Comparing actual analytical procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Evaluating holding times; and |
|
|
Examining laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during the analysis. |
All samples in this SDG were analyzed following the chain-of-custody forms (COCs) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE. All samples were prepared and analyzed within the holding times required for the analysis.
|
All initial and continuing calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
All second source calibration criteria were met. |
There was one method blank and several calibration blanks associated with the mercury analyses in this SDG. All blanks were free of any mercury above the RL.
Arsenic SDG 32134
General
This SDG consisted of six (6) samples, including three (3) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample and one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples. The samples were collected on March 3, 2000 and analyzed for arsenic.
The arsenic analyses were performed using United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) SW846 Method 7060A. All samples for this SDG were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples collected were prepared and analyzed within the holding times required by the method.
Accuracy
Accuracy was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS samples. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.
The MS/MSD %Rs were not within acceptance criteria:
Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’)
|
Analyte |
MS%R |
MSD %R |
QC (%) |
|
arsenic |
54.4 |
53.1 |
74-120 |
The arsenic result in the samples from the site B9 with similar matrix as the MS/MSD sample was flagged “M” to indicate a matrix effect was present.
The LCS %R was within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG. Sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’) FD was the field duplicate of sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’).
Both MS/MSD and field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
All results were considered usable. The completeness for this SDG is 100% compared to the minimum acceptance limit of 90%.
Representativeness expresses the degree to which sample data accurately and precisely represents actual site conditions. Representativeness has been evaluated by:
|
Comparing the chain-of-custody procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Comparing actual analytical procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Evaluating holding times; and |
|
|
Examining laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during the analysis. |
All samples in this SDG were analyzed following chain-of-custody forms (COCs) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE. All samples were prepared and analyzed within the holding times required for the analysis.
|
All initial and continuing calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
All second source calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
The arsenic result for the diluted sample chosen for the dilution test was less than the reporting limit. The dilution test was not required. |
|
|
The recovery test criteria was not met: |
Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’)
|
Analyte |
%R |
QC (%) |
|
arsenic |
63.3 |
75-125 |
Arsenic result for all samples in this analytical batch was flagged “J” except for those already flagged “M” due to MS/MSD outliers.
There was one method blank and several calibration blanks associated with the arsenic analyses in this SDG. All blanks were free of any arsenic above the RL.
Cadmium SDG 32134
General
This SDG consisted of six (6) samples, including three (3) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate sample and one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples. The samples were collected March 3, 2000 and analyzed for cadmium.
The cadmium analyses were performed using United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) SW846 Method 7131A. All samples for this SDG were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples collected were prepared and analyzed within the holding times required by the method.
Accuracy
Accuracy was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS samples. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.
The MS/MSD and LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG. Sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’) FD was the field duplicate of sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’).
Both MS/MSD and field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
Completeness
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
All results were considered usable. The completeness for this SDG is 100% compared to the minimum acceptance limit of 90%.
Representativeness
Representativeness expresses the degree to which sample data accurately and precisely represents actual site conditions. Representativeness has been evaluated by:
|
Comparing the chain-of-custody procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Comparing actual analytical procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Evaluating holding times; and |
|
|
Examining laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during the analysis. |
All samples in this SDG were analyzed following chain-of-custody forms (COCs) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE. All samples were prepared and analyzed with the holding times required for the analysis.
|
All initial and continuing calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
All second source calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
The result for the sample chosen for the dilution test was non-detect. Therefore, the dilution test was not required. |
|
|
All recovery test criteria were met. |
There was one method blank and several calibration blanks associated with the cadmium analyses in this SDG. All blanks were free of any cadmium above the RL.
Lead SDG 32134
General
This SDG consisted of six (6) samples, including three (3) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample and one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples. The samples were collected on March 3, 2000 and analyzed for lead.
The lead analyses were performed using United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) SW846 Method 7421. All samples for this SDG were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples collected were prepared and analyzed within the holding times required by the method.
Accuracy
Accuracy was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS sample. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.
The MS/MSD %Rs were not within acceptance criteria:
Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’)
|
Analyte |
MS %R |
MSD %R |
QC (%) |
|
lead |
69.9 |
69.9 |
74-124 |
The lead result in samples from site B9 with similar matrix as the MS/MSD sample was flagged “M” to indicate a matrix effect was present.
The LCS %R was within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Sample B9-SB03 (2.5-3.0’) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG. Sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’) FD was the field duplicate of sample B9-SB03 (0.5-1.0’).
The MS/MSD RPD was within acceptance criteria.
The field duplicate RPD was outside acceptance criteria for lead (22.0% RPD). All lead results of samples collected on the same date were flagged with “J” except for those were already flagged “M” due to MS/MSD outliers.
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
All results were considered usable. The completeness for this SDG is 100% compared to the minimum acceptance limit of 90%.
Representativeness expresses the degree to which sample data accurately and precisely represents actual site conditions. Representativeness has been evaluated by:
|
Comparing the chain-of-custody procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Comparing actual analytical procedures to those described in the AFCEE QAPP; |
|
|
Evaluating holding times; and |
|
|
Examining laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during the analysis. |
All samples in this SDG were analyzed following the chain-of-custody forms (COCs) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE. All samples were prepared and analyzed within the holding times required for the analysis.
|
All initial and continuing calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
All second source calibration criteria were met. |
|
|
The diluted result for the sample chosen for the dilution test analysis was less than the RL. Therefore, the dilution test was not applicable. |
|
|
All recovery test criteria were met. |
There was one method blank and several calibration blanks associated with the lead analyses in this SDG. All blanks were free of any lead above the RL.