[Home]  [Master Table of Contents]

[DVR Index]

 

RL 53 DATA VerificaTION SUMMARY REPORT
for samples collected from

camp stanley storage activitY

Boerne, TEXAS

Data Verifiers: Michelle Wolfe and Tammy Chang

Parsons

INTRODUCTION

The following data verification summary report covers environmental soil samples and associated field quality control (QC) samples collected from the Camp Stanley Site (under RL53) on March 1, 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:

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 32119

General

This SDG consisted of twelve (12) samples, including eight (8) 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 1, 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 respective method.

Accuracy

Accuracy was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples; LCS sample; and surrogate spikes.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.

All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:

Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�)

The 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene, 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene and naphthalene results in the associated samples from site I1 with similar matrix as the MS/MSD sample 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 I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample I1-SB02 (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 method blanks were free of VOCs above the RL.� The trip blank contained the following:

Positive chloroform result for all samples are flagged with �B� except those already flagged with �F�.

METALS SDG 32119

General

This SDG consisted of eleven (11) samples, including eight (8) 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 1, 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 time required by the method.

Accuracy

Accuracy was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS samples.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.

The MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:

Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�)

( ) The %R was compliant.

The barium and nickel results in samples from I1 site with similar matrix as the MS/MSD sample were flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect was present.

The LCS %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 I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�).

All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria.

All field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:

Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�)

The barium result in the associated samples collected on the same day as the field duplicate pair was considered estimated and flagged �J�.

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.

�� All interference check criteria were met.

�� All dilution test criteria were met except for as follows:

Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�)

The barium result in the associated samples was considered estimated and flagged �J�.� The copper, nickel and zinc diluted results were less than the RL, therefore, the dilution test was not required for these analytes. The chromium sample result for sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was less then the reporting limit. The dilution test for chromium was not necessary.

�� All post digestion spike addition criteria were met except for as follows:

Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�)

The nickel result in the associated samples was considered estimated and flagged �J�.

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 32119

General

This SDG consisted of eleven (11) samples, including eight (8) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate sample and one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples.� The samples were collected on March 1, 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 sample.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) 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 I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample I1-SB02 (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 with the holding times required for the respective 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 32119

General

This SDG consisted of eleven (11) samples, including eight (8) 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 1, 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 sample.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.

The MSD %Rs were not within acceptance criteria:

Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�)

��������� ( ) The %R was compliant.

The arsenic results in the samples from the I1 site 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

Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�).

The MS/MSD RPD was not within acceptance criteria:

Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�)

The arsenic result in the associated samples from the site I1 with similar matrix as the MS/MSD sample was flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect was present.

The field duplicate RPD (182%) was outside acceptance criteria. Arsenic result for samples collected in the same day was flagged �J�.

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 within the holding time 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 I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�)

The arsenic result in the associated samples was considered estimated and flagged �J�.

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 32119

General

This SDG consisted of eleven (11) samples, including eight (8) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate sample and one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples.� The samples were collected March 1, 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 time required by the method.

Accuracy

Accuracy was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and the LCS sample.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) 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 I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�).

The RPD for MS/MSD was within acceptance criteria. Cadmium was undetected in the parent sample of the field duplicate pair. RPD could not be calculated.

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 within the holding times required for the analysis.

�� All initial and continuing calibration criteria were met.

�� All second source calibration criteria were met.

�� 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 32119

General

This SDG consisted of eleven (11) samples, including eight (8) 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 1, 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 samples.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.

The MS/MSD %Rs were not within acceptance criteria:

Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�)

The lead result in samples from the I1 site 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

Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) was used as the MS/MSD sample for this SDG.� Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�).

The MS/MSD RPD was within acceptance criteria.

The field duplicate RPD was outside acceptance criteria for lead (45.8% RPD).� The lead result for the sample collected on the same day as the field duplicate pair was considered estimated and flagged �J�.

 

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 time required for the analysis.

�� All initial and continuing calibration criteria were met.

�� All second source calibration criteria were met.

�� The lead result for the sample chosen for the dilution test was less than 25 times the MDL.� Therefore, the dilution test was not required.

�� The recovery test criteria were not met:

Sample I1-SB02 (0.5-1.0�)

The lead result in the associated samples was considered estimated and flagged �J�.

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.