Data Verification Report
for Package 32368
Data Verifiers: Michelle Wolfe and Tammy Chang
Parsons ES
The following data verification summary report covers environmental soil samples and associated field quality control (QC) samples collected from the Camp Stanley (under RL83) on April 5, 2000. The 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:
| 32368 |
|
|
Field quality control samples collected were trip blanks; 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 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 seventeen (17) samples, including twelve (12) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 5, 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB14 (15-16�)
| Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| Benzoic acid Hexachlorocyclopentadiene | 14.1 10 | 17.6 - | 25-172 31-135 |
- The %R result was compliant.
The benzoic acid and hexachlorobutadiene results in the samples from the same site 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�). Sample B4-SB14 (8-10�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB14 (8-10�).
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB14 (15-16�)
| Analyte | RPD | QC |
| 1,3-DCB 1,4-DCB 2,4-dinitrophenol 2-nitroaniline 2-nitrophenol 3-nitroaniline 4,6-dinitro-2-methylphenol 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether Anthracene Benzo(a)anthracene Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Butylbenzylphthalate Chrysene Di-n-butylphthalate Di-n-octylphthalate Fluoroanthene Hexachlorobutadiene Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Hexachloroethane Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Phenanthrene Pyrene | 31.1 31.1 31.3 33.3 30.8 33.3 36.6 31.1 31.1 35.3 38.3 37.3 37.3 35.3 31.1 42.4 38.3 33.2 102.9 33.2 32.1 31.1 32.1 | 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 |
The results for the non-compliant analytes in the samples from the same site 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 100.0% 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 sample 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 with 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 two 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 nineteen (19) samples, including twelve (12) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples, one equipment blank sample and two trip blank samples. The samples were collected on April 5, 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB14 (15-16�)
| Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| 1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane 1,1,1-TCA 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 1,1,2-TCA 1,1-DCA 1,1-DCE 1,1-dichloropropene 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene 1,2,3-trichloropropane 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 1,2-DCA 1,2-DCB | 33.9 49.2 25.4 40.7 57.6 57.6 44.1 8.5 32.2 10.2 25.4 55.9 18.6 | - - 1.7 - - - - 47.5 - 54.2 - - 64.4 | 62-108 65-135 64-135 65-135 62-135 65-135 65-135 65-147 65-135 65-145 65-135 58-137 65-135 |
| 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-dichloropropane 1,2-EDB 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene 1,3-DCB 1,3-dichloropropane 1,4-DCB 1-chlorohexane 2,2-dichloropropane 2-chlorotoluene 4-chlorotoluene Benzene Bromobenzene Bromochloromethane Bromodichloromethane Bromoform Bromomethane Carbon tetrachloride Chlorobenzene Chloroform Cis-1,2-DCE Cis-1,3-dichloropropene Dibromochloromethane Dibromomethane Ethylbenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Isopropylbenzene M&p-xylene n-butylbenzene | 20.3 45.8 37.3 27.1 20.3 42.4 18.6 32.2 54.2 25.4 23.7 51.9 23.7 59.3 42.4 25.4 57.6 45.8 30.5 52.5 54.2 40.7 33.9 45.8 32.2 18.6 32.2 30.8 23.7 | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 64.4 - - - - - - 64.4 - - - | 49-135 60-135 65-135 62-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 63-135 64-135 65-135 65-135 63-135 65-135 65-135 62-135 52-135 65-135 64-135 65-135 64-135 63-135 59-137 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 |
| n-propylbenzene Naphthalene o-xylene p-isopropyltoluene sec-butylbenzene Styrene TCE tert-butylbenzene Tetrachloroethane Toluene Trans-1.2-DCE Trans-1.3-dichloropropene Trichlorofluoromethane | 30.5 10.2 30.5 25.4 27.1 25.4 42.4 27.1 33.9 39.3 54.2 40.7 57.6 | - 47.5 - - - - - - - - - - - | 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 65-135 61-135 65-135 61-135 64-135 65-135 56-135 57-135 |
- The %R result was compliant.
The results for the non-compliant analytes in the samples from the same site 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�). Sample B4-SB14 (8-10�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB14 (8-10�).
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB14 (15-16�)
| Analyte | RPD | QC |
| 1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane 1,1,1-TCA 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 1,1,2-TCA 1,1-DCE 1,1-dichloropropene 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene 1,2,3-trichloropropane 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 1,2-DCA 1,2-DCB 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-dichloropropane 1,2-EDB 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene 1,3-DCB 1,3-dichloropropane 1,4-DCB 1-chlorohexane 2,2-dichloropropane 2-chlorotoluene 4-chlorotoluene benzene Bromobenzene Bromochloromethane Bromodichloromethane Bromoform | 68.9 49.4 175.0 56.7 36.1 57.5 139.4 75.4 136.8 100.0 30.8 110.2 97.9 41.2 58.1 95.1 107.7 57.1 115.4 81.3 45.8 96.6 101.8 43.0 98.2 37.2 57.1 88.9 | 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 |
| Carbon tetrachloride Chlorobenzene Cis-1,2-DCE Cis-1,3-dichloropropene Dibromochloromethane Dibromomethane Ethylbenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Isopropylbenzene M&p-xylene n-butylbenzene n-propylbenzene Naphthalene o-xylene p-isopropyltoluene sec-butylbenzene Styrene TCE Tert-butylbenzene Tetrachloroethene Toluene Trans-1,2-DCE Trans-1,3-dichloropropene Trichlorofluoromethane | 57.9 71.4 38.0 60.9 66.7 45.7 81.3 110.2 81.3 89.2 101.8 90.9 129.4 82.0 96.6 95.1 96.6 59.2 95.1 78.8 62.9 33.8 60.9 45.5 | 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 |
The results for the non-compliant analytes in the samples from the same site 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 100.0% 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 sample 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 with 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 five 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-TB11 contained 1.20 mg/L of methylene chloride. The equipment blank, RL83-EB06 contained 23.00 mg/L of methylene chloride. The methylene chloride result in samples B4-SB13 (0-0.5�), B4-SB14-SB14 (0-0.5�) and B4-SB14 (15-16�) was flagged �B� to indicate a matrix effect was present. No action was needed for the remaining samples since either the methylene chloride result in the samples was non-detect or less than the reporting limit.
This SDG consisted of seventeen (17) samples, including twelve (12) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 5, 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.
All 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�). Sample B4-SB14 (8-10�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB14 (8-10�).
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-SB14 (8-10�) and B4-SB14 (8-10�) FD | copper zinc | 20.6 29.9 | 20 20 |
The copper and zinc results 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 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 verification criteria were met.
� All interference check criteria were met.
� All dilution test criteria were met except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB12 (0-0.5�)
| Analyte | %D | QC |
| barium nickel | 12.5 18.7 | 10 10 |
The barium and nickel 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.
� All post digestion spike addition criteria were met.
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 seventeen (17) samples, including twelve (12) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 5, 2000 and analyzed for mercury.
The mercury analyses were performed using USEPA SW846 Method 7470A/7471A. 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-SB14 (15-16�) 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�). Sample B4-SB14 (8-10�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB14 (8-10�).
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-SB12 (0-0.5�) and B4-SB12 (0-0.5�) FD | mercury | 26.1 | 20 |
The positive mercury results in the associated samples 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.
Four mercury results were considered unusable and flagged �R� due to non-compliant field duplicate RPDs. The completeness for this SDG is 76.5% 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 verification criteria were met.
There were two method blanks and one equipment blank and several calibration blanks associated with the mercury analyses in this SDG. Two of the three method blanks were free of any mercury above the RL. The other method blank, 000413A-7470A-BLK contained 0.00172247 mg/L of mercury. The equipment blank, RL83-EB05, contained 0.1177 mg/L of mercury. No action was needed since the positive mercury results were already estimated due to non-compliant field duplicate RPDs.
This SDG consisted of seventeen (17) samples, including twelve (12) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 5, 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG.
The MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
Sample B4-SB14 (15-16�) - 1/5 dilution
| Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC |
| arsenic | 68.1 | 56.0 | 74-120 |
The arsenic result in samples from the same site 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�). Sample B4-SB14 (8-10�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB14 (8-10�).
The MS/MSD and field duplicate RPDs was 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 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 verification criteria were met.
� The diluted arsenic result was less than the reporting limit. Therefore, the dilution test results were not applicable.
� The recovery test criteria was not met:
Sample B4-SB14 (15-16�)
| Analyte | %R | QC |
| arsenic | 66.3 | 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 seventeen (17) samples, including twelve (12) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 5, 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-SB14 (15-16�) 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�). Sample B4-SB14 (8-10�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB14 (8-10�).
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 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 verification criteria were met.
� The diluted cadmium result was less than the reporting limit. Therefore, the dilution test results were not applicable.
� 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 seventeen (17) samples, including twelve (12) confirmation environmental soil samples, two field duplicate soil samples, one set of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and one equipment blank sample. The samples were collected on April 5, 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-SB14 (15-16�) 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-SB14 (15-16�) was used as the MS/MSD sample in this SDG. Sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB12 (0.0-0.5�). Sample B4-SB14 (8-10�) FD was the field duplicate of sample B4-SB14 (8-10�).
The MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
The field duplicate RPD was within acceptance criteria except for as follows:
| Field Duplicate Pair | Analyte | %RPD | QC |
| B4-SB12 (0-0.5�) and B4-SB12 (0-0.5�) FD | lead | 28.5 | 25 |
The lead result in the associated 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 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 verification criteria were met.
� All dilution test criteria were not met:
Sample B4-SB14 (15-16�)
| Analyte | %D | QC |
| lead | 15.3 | 10 |
The lead result in the associated samples was considered estimated and flagged �J�.
� 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. The method and calibration blanks were free of any lead above the RL. The equipment blank, RL83-EB06, contained 0.0116 mg/L of lead. No action was needed since the lead results were already estimated due to non-compliant field duplicate RPDs and dilution test RPDs.