[Home]
[Data Verification Report Index]
Data Verifiers: Michelle Wolfe and Tammy Chang
The following data verification summary report covers environmental soil samples and associated field quality control (QC) samples collected from the Camp Stanley Site (under RL83) on March 8, 2000. Samples in the following laboratory Sample Delivery Group (SDG) were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and metals including barium, chromium, copper, nickel, zinc, arsenic, cadmium, lead and mercury:
| 32175 |
|
|
Field quality control samples collected were trip blank, equipment 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. All analyses were performed by APPL, Inc. following procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP, version 3.0.
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.
This SDG consisted of fourteen (14) samples, including six (6) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, two sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples, one equipment blank sample and one trip blank sample. The samples were collected on March 8, 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 was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples; LCS samples; and surrogate spikes. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples in this SDG.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�)
Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 1,2-DCB 1,3-DCB 1,4-DCB bromoform cis-1,3-dichloropropene hexachlorobutadiene naphthalene trans-1,3-dichloropropene | 27.4 32.3 50.0 56.5 51.6 59.7 54.8 - 25.8 54.8 | 30.6 33.9 56.5 58.1 56.5 - - 58.1 30.6 - | 65-147 65-145 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 64-135 65-135 65-135 56-135 |
Sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�)
Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene cis-1,3-dichloropropene hexachlorobutadiene naphthalene | 31.7 38.1 57.1 60.3 29.7 | 44.4 52.4 - - 43.8 | 65-147 65-145 64-135 65-135 65-135 |
- The %Rs were compliant.
The results for the non-compliant analytes in the associated samples from site B15/16 with similar matrix as the MS/MSD sample were flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect was present.
All LCS and surrogate %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples in this SDG. Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�). Sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�).
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�)
Analyte | RPD | QC |
| 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 1,4-DCB cis-1,3-dichloropropene naphthalene trans-1,3-dichloropropene | 33.3 31.6 30.9 34.5 38.3 34.5 | 30 30 30 30 30 30 |
The results for the non-compliant analytes in samples from site B15/16 with similar matrix as the MS/MSD sample were flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect was present.
All 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 100.0% 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 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 three method blanks, one equipment blank and one trip blank associated with the VOC analyses in this SDG. The method blanks and trip blank were free of VOCs above the RL. The equipment blank, RL83-EB04, contained 1.20 mg/l of methylene chloride. �B� flag was applied to samples in this SDG with detected methylene chloride.
This SDG consisted of thirteen (13) samples, including six (6) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, two sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank. The samples were collected on March 7, 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 was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS samples. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for this SDG.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
The LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for this SDG. Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�). Sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�).
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
All field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except barium (22.8% RPD) and nickel (139% RPD) in the field duplicate pair, B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�). The barium and nickel result in the associated samples collected on the same day as the field duplicate pair were considered estimated and flagged �J".
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 field and laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during sample collection or 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 B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�)
Analyte | %D | QC (%) | |
| Barium Copper Nickel Zinc | 10.9 14.5 24.8 21.6 | 10 10 10 10 | |
Sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�)
Analyte | %D | QC (%) |
| Nickel Zinc | 14.9 36.3 | 10 10 |
The barium, copper, nickel and zinc results in the associated samples were considered estimated and flagged �J�. The chromium results were less than the reporting limit for both samples. Therefore, the dilution test was not required for the chromium.
All post digestion spike addition criteria were met for B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0') and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0').
There were two method blanks, one equipment blank and several calibration blanks associated with the metal analyses in this SDG. All blanks were free of any metals above the RL.
This SDG consisted of thirteen (13) samples, including six (6) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, two sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on March 8, 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 was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS samples. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for this SDG.
The MS/MSD and LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results, and the field duplicate analyte values. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for this SDG. Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�). Sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�).
All 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 field and laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during sample collection and analysis.
All samples in this SDG were analyzed following the chain-of-custody forms (COCs) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE QAPP. 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.
There were two method blanks and one equipment blank and several calibration blanks associated with the mercury analyses in this SDG. All blanks were free of any mercury above the RL.
This SDG consisted of thirteen (13) samples, including six (6) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, two sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank. The samples were collected on March 8, 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 was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS samples. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for this SDG.
The MS/MSD %Rs did not meet the acceptance criteria:
Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�)
Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| arsenic | 39.4 | 44.9 | 74-120 |
The arsenic result in the associated samples from site B15/16 with similar matrix as the MS/MSD sample was flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect was present.
The LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for this SDG. Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5�-1.0�). Sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�).
The MS/MSD RPDs was within acceptance criteria.
The field duplicate RPDs did not meet acceptance criteria:
Field Duplicate Pair | Analyte | %RPD | QC |
| B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) |
Arsenic
Arsenic |
27.2
48.5 |
15
15 |
The positive arsenic result in the associated samples that were collected on the same day as the field duplicate pair were considered estimated and flagged �J� and the non-detect result was considered unusable and flagged �R�.
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
Four arsenic results were considered unusable and flagged �R� due to field duplicate outliers. The completeness for this SDG is 69.2% 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 field and laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during sample collection and analysis.
All samples in this SDG were analyzed following chain-of-custody forms (COCs) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE QAPP. 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 diluted result for the sample used for the dilution test was less than the reporting limit. Therefore, the dilution test was not required.
� The recovery test criteria was met except:
Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�)
Analyte | %R | QC |
| arsenic | 83.3 | 85-115 |
The arsenic results in the associated samples were considered to be estimated and flagged �J�.
There were two method blanks, one equipment blank and several calibration blanks associated with the arsenic analyses in this SDG. All blanks were free of any arsenic above the RL.
This SDG consisted of thirteen (13) samples, including six (6) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, two sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on March 8, 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 was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS samples. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for this SDG.
The MS/MSD and LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 90.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for this SDG. Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�). Sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�).
All 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 field and laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during sample collection and 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 diluted result for the sample chosen for the dilution test was less than the reporting limit. The dilution test was not required.
� All recovery test criteria were met.
There were two method blanks, one equipment blank and several calibration blanks associated with the cadmium analyses in this SDG. All blanks were free of any cadmium above the RL.
This SDG consisted of thirteen (13) samples, including six (6) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, two sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on March 8, 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 was evaluated using the %R results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS samples. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for this SDG.
The MS/MSD %Rs were not within acceptance criteria:
Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) - 1/5
Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| lead | 140.6 | 160.2 | 74-124 |
Sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) - 1/5
Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| lead | -194.4 | -122.0 | 74-124 |
The lead result in samples from site B15/16 with similar matrix as the MS/MSD sample was flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect was present.
The LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Samples B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) and B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for this SDG. Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�). Sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B15/16-SB04 (0.5-1.0�).
The 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 field and laboratory blanks for cross contamination of samples during sample collection and analysis.
All samples in this SDG were analyzed following the chain-of-custody forms (COCs) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE QAPP. 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 dilution test criteria were not met:
Sample B15/16-SB06 (0.5-1.0�)
Analyte | %D | QC (%) |
| lead | 18.8 | 10 |
The lead result in all associated samples of this SDG was flagged �J� according to AFCEE QAPP.
� All recovery test criteria were met.
There were two method blanks, one equipment blank and several calibration blanks associated with the lead analyses in this SDG. All blanks were free of any lead above the RL.