Data Verification Report
for Package 32360
Data Verifiers: Michelle Wolfe and Tammy Chang
Parsons ES
The following data verification summary report covers environmental aqueous samples and associated field quality control (QC) samples collected from the Camp Stanley (under RL83) on April 4, 2000. Samples in the following laboratory Sample Delivery Group (SDG) were analyzed for semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and metals including barium, chromium, copper, nickel, zinc, arsenic, cadmium, lead and mercury:
| 32360 |
|
|
Field quality control samples collected were trip blanks, matrix spike/matrix spike duplicates (MS/MSD), field duplicates (FD), and equipment blank. 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 blanks were 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.
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 eighteen (18) samples, including fourteen (14) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 4, 2000 and analyzed for semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs).
SVOC analyses were performed using United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) SW846 Method 8270C. 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�)
| Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| benzoic acid bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate | 17.6 304 | - 586 | 25-172 25-139 |
- The %R result was compliant.
The benzoic acid and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate results in samples from B4 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�).
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�)
| Analyte | RPD | QC |
| 2,4-dinitrophenol benzoic acid bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate | 30.8 35.6 63.2 | 30 30 30 |
The results for the non-compliant analytes in samples from B4 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.
The results for samples in this SDG 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 collection or 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 within the holding times required for the analysis.
� All instrument performance check criteria were met.
� All initial calibration criteria were met.
� All initial calibration verification and continuing calibration verification criteria were met.
� All second source verification criteria were met.
� All internal standard criteria were met.
There were three method blanks and one equipment blank associated with the SVOC analyses in this SDG. The blanks were free of SVOCs above the RL.
This SDG consisted of twenty (20) samples, including fourteen (14) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples, one equipment blank sample and two trip blank samples. The samples were collected on April 4, 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�)
| Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| 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 dichlorodifluoromethane hexachlorobutadiene isopropylbenzene | 50.0 46.3 61.1 61.1 61.1 55.6 55.6 55.6 61.1 59.3 53.7 42.6 63.0 | 59.3 55.6 - - - - - 63.0 - - 63.0 50.0 - | 65-147 65-145 65-135 65-135 62-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 63-135 64-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 |
| n-butylbenzene n-propylbenzene p-isopropyltoluene sec-butylbenzene tert-butylbenzene tetrachloroethane | 50.0 59.3 55.6 55.6 61.1 59.3 | 59.3 - - - - - | 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 61-135 |
- The %R result was compliant.
The results for the non-compliant analytes in samples from B4 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�).
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.
The results for samples in this SDG 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 collection or 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 within the holding times required for the analysis.
� All instrument performance check criteria were met.
� All initial calibration criteria were met.
� All initial calibration verification and continuing calibration verification criteria were met.
� All second source verification criteria were met.
� All internal standard criteria were met.
There were six method blanks, two trip blanks and one equipment blank associated with the VOC analyses in this SDG. The method blanks were free of VOCs above the RL. One of the trip blanks, RL83-TB09 contained 1.10 mg/l of methylene chloride. All positive methylene chloride results for samples in the same cooler with RL83-TB09 were flagged with �B�. The equipment blank, RL83-EB05 contained 26.00 mg/l of methylene chloride and this result was flagged with �B� due to the contamination showed in the trip blank. No action was needed since all methylene chloride results in samples collected on the same day as the RL83-EB05 were non-detect or less than the reporting limit.
This SDG consisted of eighteen (18) samples, including fourteen (14) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 4, 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�)
| Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| Chromium | 70.9 | 68.6 | 75-125 |
The results for the chromium in samples from the B4 and 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 was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) results obtained from MS/MSD results; and the field duplicate analyte values. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�).
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
All field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
| Field Duplicate Pair | Analyte | %RPD | QC |
| B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) and B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) FD | Barium | 23.0 | 20 |
The barium positive result in the associated samples collected on the same day as the field duplicate pair was 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 collection or 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 interference check criteria were met.
� All dilution test criteria were met except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB08 (0-0.5�)
| Analyte | %D | QC |
| Barium Nickel Zinc | 16.3 14.7 10.9 | 10 10 10 |
The barium, nickel and zinc results in the associated samples were considered estimated and flagged �J�. The chromium results were less than the reporting limit. Therefore, the dilution test was not applicable for the chromium.
Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�)
| Analyte | %D | QC |
| Barium | 15.3 | 10 |
The barium results in the associated samples were considered estimated and flagged �J�. The five-fold diluted concentration of chromium, copper, nickel, and zinc results were less than the reporting limit. Therefore, the dilution test was not applicable for these metals.
� All post digestion spike addition test criteria were met except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB08 (0-0.5�)
| Analyte | %R | QC |
| Nickel | 74.4 | 75-125 |
The nickel results in the associated samples were considered estimated and flagged �J�.
Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�)
| Analyte | %R | QC |
| Chromium | 72.2 | 75-125 |
The chromium results in the associated samples were considered estimated and flagged �J�.
There were three 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 eighteen (18) samples, including fourteen (14) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 4, 2000 and analyzed for mercury.
The mercury analyses were performed using USEPA SW846 Method 7470A/7471. 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�).
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 100.0% 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 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 respective analysis.
� All initial and continuing calibration criteria were met.
� All second source calibration criteria were met.
There were three method blanks and one equipment blank and several calibration blanks associated with the mercury analyses in this SDG. All three method blanks were free of any mercury above the RL. The equipment blank, RL83-EB05, contained 0.0994 mg/Lof mercury. The positive mercury results for samples collected on the same day were flagged �B� to indicate a blank contamination was present.
This SDG consisted of eighteen (18) samples, including fourteen (14) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 4, 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.
The MS/MSD %Rs were not within acceptance criteria:
Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�)
| Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| arsenic | 50.9 | 42.6 | 74-120 |
The arsenic result in samples from B4 and 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�).
The MS/MSD RPDs was within acceptance criteria.
The field duplicate RPD was within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
| Field Duplicate Pair | Analyte | %RPD | QC |
| B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) and B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) FD | Arsenic | 47.4 | 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 results were 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.
Two arsenic results were considered unusable due to non-compliant field duplicate RPDs. The completeness for this SDG is 82.4% compared to the minimum acceptance limit of 90% as one of the data quality objectives for soil sample required by AFCEE QAPP 3.0.
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 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.
� The dilution test criteria were not met:
Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�)
| Analyte | %D | QC |
| arsenic | 89.0 | 10 |
Sample B4-SB08 (0-0.5�)
| Analyte | %D | QC |
| arsenic | 16.3 | 10 |
The arsenic results in the associated samples were considered to be estimated and flagged �J�.
� The recovery test criteria was met except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�)
| Analyte | %R | QC |
| arsenic | 126 | 85-115 |
Sample B4-SB08 (0-0.5�)
| Analyte | %R | QC |
| arsenic | 134 | 85-115 |
The arsenic results in the associated samples were considered to be estimated and flagged �J�.
There were four 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 eighteen (18) samples, including fourteen (14) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 4, 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�).
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 collection or 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 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 criteria were met.
� All recovery test criteria were met.
There were four 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 eighteen (18) samples, including fourteen (14) confirmation environmental soil samples, one field duplicate soil sample, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 4, 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.
The MS/MSD %Rs were not within acceptance criteria:
Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�)
| Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| lead | 30.9 | 23.7 | 74-124 |
The lead result in the associated samples from site B4 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. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB09 (14.5-15�).
The MS/MSD RPD was within acceptance criteria.
The field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
| Field Duplicate Pair | Analyte | %RPD | QC |
| B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) and B4-SB09 (14.5-15�) FD | Lead | 112 | 25 |
The positive lead result in samples that were 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 collection or 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 met.
There were four 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.