[Home]
Data Verification by: Michelle Wolfe and Katherine LaPierre
Parsons ES
The following data verification summary report covers environmental soil samples and field quality control (QC) samples collected from the Camp Stanley Storage Activity (CSSA) under ITS rework during the period of March 13 through March 15, 2000. The samples in the following Sample Delivery Groups (SDGs) were analyzed for metals:
| 4975 | 5012 |
|
Field quality control samples collected were equipment blanks, matrix spike/matrix spike duplicates (MS/MSD), and field duplicates. No ambient blanks were collected for this project. 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. All field quality control samples were analyzed for the same parameters as their associated samples.
All samples were collected by Parsons Engineering Science (Parsons ES) and analyzed by O'Brien & Gere Laboratories, Inc. (OBG) following the 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 narratives; raw data; and chain-of-custody forms. The analyses and findings presented in this report are based on the reviewed information and whether the guidelines in the AFCEE QAPP were met.
The SDGs consisted of forty-five (45) samples, including thirty-one (31) environmental soil samples, five field duplicates, three sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicates (MS/MSD) and three equipment blanks. The samples were collected on March 13 and 15, 2000 and were analyzed for a reduced list of ICP metals, which included barium, chromium, copper, nickel and zinc.
The ICP metals analyses were performed using United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) SW846 Method 6010B. Except as indicated in this report, all samples were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP.
It should be noted that all the soil samples in this SDG were analyzed at a 5X dilution due to the high concentration of calcium present.
Accuracy was evaluated using the percent recovery (%R) obtained from the MS/MSD and LCS samples. Samples RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5), RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) and RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) were analyzed as MS/MSD samples for the SDGs.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
Sample ID | Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC Criteria |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) | Zinc | 58 | 71 | 75-125% |
The zinc results for the samples from B12 taken at a similar depth as the MS/MSD were flagged �M� to indicate the presence of a matrix effect (low bias).
All LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) obtained from the MS/MSD concentrations and the field duplicate analyte values. The following samples were collected and analyzed as field duplicates:
Parent Sample ID | Field Duplicate ID |
RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B30-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B30-SS02 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.5) | RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.5) FD |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) | RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) FD |
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
All field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
Parent Sample / Duplicate | Collected | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
| RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.0) / FD | 3/15/00 | Barium | 27.2% | � 25% |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) / FD | 3/15/00 | Zinc | 82.0% | � 25% |
The barium and zinc results for all samples collected on the same date as the non-compliant field duplicate pairs were considered estimated and flagged �J� if detected above the RL. The �J� flag was not applied if the result was below the RL (flagged �F�) or if the result was previously flagged �M� due to the failing MS/MSD since both the �F� flag and the �M� flag supercede the �J� flag in the AFCEE QAPP flag hierarchy.
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 and analysis.
All samples in this SDG were analyzed following the chain-of-custody (COC) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples were prepared and analyzed within the holding time required by the method.
� All initial calibration criteria were met.
� All initial and continuing calibration verification criteria were met.
� All second source verification criteria were met.
� All serial dilution criteria were met.
� All post digestion spike criteria were met.
There were six method blanks, three equipment blanks and numerous calibration blanks associated with the ICP metals analyses in the SDGs. All blanks were free of any metals above the RL except for the following:
| Sample ID | Collected | Analyte | Conc. (mg/L) | RL (mg/L) |
RW-RL17-EB05 | 3/13/00 | Zinc | 0.016 | 0.01 |
The zinc results for the samples collected the same day as the equipment blank were flagged �B� if they exceeded the RL due to the contamination present. The �B� flag was not applied to results that were previously flagged �M� (due to the failing MS/MSD recoveries), �J� (due to the failing field duplicate RPD) or �F� (below the RL) because the �M� flag, �J� flag, and �F� flag supercede the �B� flag in the AFCEE flag hierarchy.
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
All ICP metals results for the samples in these SDGs were considered usable. The completeness for the ICP metals portion of these SDGs is 100%, which meets the minimum acceptance criteria of 90%.
The SDGs consisted of forty-five (45) samples, including thirty-one (31) environmental soil samples, five field duplicate soil samples, three sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and three equipment blank samples. The samples were collected on March 13 and 15, 2000 and analyzed for arsenic.
The arsenic analyses were performed using USEPA SW846 Method 7060A. Except as indicated in this report, all samples were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP.
It should be noted that several samples in these SDGs were analyzed at a dilution based on the ICP screening results. This is an approved variance for the OBG laboratory.
Accuracy was evaluated using the %R obtained from the MS/MSD and LCS samples. Samples RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5), RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) and RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) were analyzed as MS/MSD samples for the SDGs.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
Sample ID | Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC Criteria |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) | Arsenic | 59 | 66 | 74-120% |
The arsenic results for the samples from site B12 collected at a similar depth as the MS/MSD were flagged �M� to indicate the presence of a matrix effect (low bias).
All LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the RPD obtained from the MS/MSD concentrations and the field duplicate analyte values. The following samples were collected and analyzed as field duplicates:
Parent Sample ID | Field Duplicate ID |
RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B30-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B30-SS02 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.5) | RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.5) FD |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) | RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) FD |
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
All field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
Parent Sample / Duplicate | Collected | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) / FD | 3/13/00 | Arsenic | 23.3% | �15% |
RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.0) / FD | 3/15/01 | Arsenic | 33.0% | �15% |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) / FD | 3/15/01 | Arsenic | 29.7% | �15% |
The arsenic results for all samples collected on the same sampling date as the non-compliant field duplicate pairs were considered estimated and flagged �J� if detected above the RL. The �J� flag was not applied if the result was below the RL (flagged �F�) or if the result was previously flagged �M� due to the failing MS/MSD since both the �F� flag and the �M� flag supercede the �J� flag in the AFCEE QAPP flag hierarchy.
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 and analysis.
All samples in the SDGs were analyzed following the chain-of-custody (COC) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples were prepared and analyzed within the holding time required by the method.
� All initial calibration criteria were met.
� All initial and continuing calibration verification criteria were met.
� All second source verification criteria were met.
� All serial dilution criteria were met except.
� All post spike digestion criteria were met.
There were four method blanks, three equipment blanks and numerous calibration blanks associated with the arsenic analyses in the SDGs. All blanks were free of any arsenic above the RL.
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
All arsenic results for the samples in these SDGs were considered usable. The completeness for the arsenic portion of these SDGs is 100%, which meets the minimum acceptance criteria of 90%.
The SDGs consisted of forty-five (45) samples, including thirty-one (31) environmental soil samples, five field duplicate soil samples, three sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and three equipment blank samples. The samples were collected on March 13 and 15, 2000 and analyzed for cadmium.
The cadmium analyses were performed using USEPA SW846 Method 7131. Except as indicated in this report, all samples were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP.
It should be noted that several samples in these SDGs were analyzed at a dilution based on the ICP screening results. This is an approved variance for the OBG laboratory.
Accuracy was evaluated using the %R obtained from the MS/MSD and LCS samples. Samples RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5), RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) and RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) were analyzed as the MS/MSD samples for the SDGs.
All MS/MSD and LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the RPD obtained from the MS/MSD concentrations and the field duplicate analyte values. The following samples were collected and analyzed as field duplicates:
Parent Sample ID | Field Duplicate ID |
RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B30-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B30-SS02 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.5) | RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.5) FD |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) | RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) FD |
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
All field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
Parent Sample / Duplicate | Collected | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) / FD | 3/13/00 | Cadmium | 27.3% | �15% |
The cadmium results for all samples collected on the same sampling date as the non-compliant field duplicate pair were considered estimated and flagged �J� if detected above the RL or considered unusable and flagged �R� if non-detect. The �J� flag was not applied if the result was below the RL (flagged �F�) or if the result was previously flagged �M� due to the failing MS/MSD since both the �F� flag and the �M� flag supercede the �J� flag in the AFCEE QAPP flag hierarchy.
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 and analysis.
All samples in the SDGs were analyzed following the chain-of-custody (COC) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples were prepared and analyzed within the holding time required for the analysis.
� All initial calibration criteria were met.
� All initial and continuing calibration verification criteria were met.
� All second source calibration criteria were met.
� All dilution test criteria were met.
� All recovery test criteria were met.
There were five method blanks, three equipment blanks and numerous calibration blanks associated with the cadmium analyses in the SDGs. All blanks were free of any cadmium above the RL.
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
Three cadmium results in these SDGs were determined to be unusable. The total number of cadmium results reported was 45. The completeness for this SDG is 93.3%, which meets the minimum acceptance criteria of 90%.
The SDGs consisted of forty-five (45) samples, including thirty-one (31) environmental soil samples, five field duplicate soil samples, three sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and three equipment blank samples. The samples were collected on March 13 and 15, 2000 and analyzed for lead.
The lead analyses were performed using USEPA SW846 Method 7421. Except as indicated in this report, all samples were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP.
It should be noted that several samples in these SDGs were analyzed at a dilution based on the ICP screening results. This is an approved variance for the OBG laboratory.
Accuracy was evaluated using the %R obtained from the MS/MSD and LCS samples. Samples RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5), RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) and RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) were analyzed as MS/MSD samples for the SDGs.
All MS/MSD %Rs failed to meet acceptance criteria as follows:
Sample ID | Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC Criteria |
RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) | Lead | 34 | 63 | 74-124% |
RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | Lead | 318 | 24 | 74-124% |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) | Lead | 54 | 56 | 74-124% |
The lead results for the samples collected from the same sites and at similar depths as the MS/MSD samples were flagged �M� to indicate the presence of a matrix effect.
All LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the RPD obtained from the MS/MSD concentrations and the field duplicate analyte values. The following samples were collected and analyzed as field duplicates:
Parent Sample ID | Field Duplicate ID |
RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B30-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B30-SS02 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.5) | RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.5) FD |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) | RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) FD |
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
All field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
Parent Sample / Duplicate | Collected | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) / FD | 3/13/00 | Lead | 44.7% | �15% |
RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.0) / FD | 3/15/01 | Lead | 32.5% | �15% |
The lead results for all samples collected on the same sampling date as the non-compliant field duplicate pairs were considered estimated and flagged �J� if detected above the RL. The �J� flag was not applied if the result was below the RL (flagged �F�) or if the result was previously flagged �M� due to the failing MS/MSD since both the �F� flag and the �M� flag supercede the �J� flag in the AFCEE QAPP flag hierarchy.
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 and analysis.
All samples in the SDGs were analyzed following the chain-of-custody (COC) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples were prepared and analyzed within the holding time required by the method.
� All initial calibration criteria were met.
� All initial and continuing calibration verification criteria were met.
� All second source verification criteria were met.
� All dilution test criteria were met.
� All recovery test criteria were met.
There were five method blanks, three equipment blanks and numerous calibration blanks associated with the lead analyses in the SDGs. All blanks were free of any lead above the RL.
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
All lead results for the samples in these SDGs were considered usable. The completeness for the lead portion of these SDGs is 100%, which meets the minimum acceptance criteria of 90%.
The SDGs consisted of forty-five (45) samples, including thirty-one (31) environmental soil samples, five field duplicates, three sets of MS/MSD samples and three equipment blanks. The samples were collected on March 13 and 15, 2000 and were analyzed for mercury.
The mercury analyses were performed using USEPA SW846 Method 7470A for waters and 7471A for soils. Except as indicated in this report, all samples were analyzed following the procedures outlined in the AFCEE QAPP.
Accuracy was evaluated using the %R obtained from the MS/MSD and LCS samples. Samples RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5), RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) and RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) were analyzed as MS/MSD samples for the SDGs.
All MS/MSD and LCS %Rs were within acceptance criteria.
Precision was evaluated using the RPD obtained from the MS/MSD concentrations and the field duplicate analyte values. The following samples were collected and analyzed as field duplicates:
Parent Sample ID | Field Duplicate ID |
RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B30-SS01 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B30-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B30-SS02 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) | RW-B31-SS02 (0.0-0.5) FD |
RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.5) | RW-B12-SB01 (3.5-4.5) FD |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) | RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) FD |
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
Sample ID | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
RW-B12-SB04 (4.5-5.0) | Mercury | 29% | �25% |
The mercury results in the samples from site B12 collected from a similar depth as the MS/MSD were flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect was present.
All field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
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 and analysis.
All samples in the SDGs were collected and analyzed following the chain-of-custody (COC) and analytical procedures described in the AFCEE QAPP. All samples were prepared and analyzed within the holding time required by the method.
� All initial calibration criteria were met.
� All initial and continuing calibration verification criteria were met.
� All second source verification criteria were met.
There were four method blanks, three equipment blanks and numerous calibration blanks associated with the mercury analyses in the SDGs. All blanks were free of any mercury above the RL.
Completeness has been evaluated by comparing the total number of samples collected with the total number of samples with valid analytical data.
All mercury results for the samples in these SDGs were considered usable. The completeness for the mercury portion of these SDGs is 100%, which meets the minimum acceptance criteria of 90%.