Data Verification Report
for Packages 5017 and 5122
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 on March 23 and 24, 2000. Samples in the following laboratory Sample Delivery Groups (SDGs) were analyzed for metals:
| 5017 | 5122 |
|
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 (COC) 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.
These SDGs consisted of thirty-four (34) samples, including twenty-four (24) environmental soil samples, four field duplicates, two sets of MS/MSD samples and two equipment blanks. The samples were collected on March 23 and 24, 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 many of the soil samples in these SDGs 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-B25-SS03(0-0.5) and RW-B8-SB02(0.5-1) were analyzed as MS/MSD samples for these SDGs.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC Criteria |
| RW-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) | Zinc | 68 | 64 | 75-125% |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | Barium Copper Zinc | -108 754 -79.3 | -134 -297 -141 | 75-125% |
The barium, copper and zinc results for the samples from site B25 and B8, collected at a similar depth as the MS/MSDs, were flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect (low bias) was present.
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-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) | RW-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) FD |
| RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) | RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) FD |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) FD |
| RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) | RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) FD |
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | Copper Zinc | 131 51 | Less than or equal to 20% |
The copper and zinc results in the associated samples were previously flagged �M� due to the failing MS/MSD recoveries, so no additional corrective action was necessary.
All field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample / Duplicate | Collected | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
| RW-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) / FD | 3/23/00 | Barium | 23.2 | Less than or equal to 20% |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) / FD | 3/23/00 | Barium Copper Nickel Zinc | 35.6 131 162 126 | Less than or equal to 20% |
| RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) / FD | 3/24/00 | Barium | 60.5 | Less than or equal to 20% |
The barium, copper, nickel and zinc 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 COC 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 these SDGs were analyzed following the COC and the 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 except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Collected | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) / FD | 3/23/00 | Nickel | 11.7 | Less than or equal to 10% |
All associated nickel results were previously flagged �J� due to the failing field duplicate RPD, so no additional corrective action was necessary.
All recovery test criteria were met.
There were three method blanks, two equipment blanks and numerous calibration blanks associated with the ICP metals analyses in these SDGs. All blanks were free of any metals 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 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%.
These SDGs consisted of thirty-four (34) samples, including twenty-four (24) environmental soil samples, four field duplicates, two sets of MS/MSD samples and two equipment blanks. The samples were collected on March 23 and 24, 2000 and were 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-B25-SS03(0-0.5) and RW-B8-SB02(0.5-1) were analyzed as MS/MSD samples for these SDGs.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC Criteria |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | Arsenic | 122 | 187 | 74-120% |
The arsenic results for the samples from site B8 collected at a similar depth as the MS/MSD were flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect (high bias) was present.
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-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) | RW-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) FD |
| RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) | RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) FD |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) FD |
| RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) | RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) FD |
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
All filed duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Collected | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
| RW-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) / FD | 3/23/00 | Arsenic | 20.3 | Less than or equal to 15% |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) / FD | 3/23/00 | Arsenic | 22.3 | Less than or equal to 15% |
| RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) / FD | 3/24/00 | Arsenic | 40.0 | Less than or equal to 15% |
The arsenic 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 COC 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 these SDGs were analyzed following the COC and the 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 three method blanks, two equipment blanks and numerous calibration blanks associated with the arsenic analyses in these 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%.
These SDGs consisted of thirty-four (34) samples, including twenty-four (24) environmental soil samples, four field duplicates, two sets of MS/MSD samples and two equipment blanks. The samples were collected on March 23 and 24, 2000 and were analyzed for cadmium.
The cadmium analyses were performed using USEPA SW846 Method 7131A. 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-B25-SS03(0-0.5) and RW-B8-SB02(0.5-1) were analyzed as MS/MSD samples for these SDGs.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC Criteria |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | Cadmium | (100) | 38 | 80-122% |
( ) indicates the %R met QC criteria.
The cadmium results for the samples from site B8 collected at a similar depth as the MS/MSD were flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect (high bias) was present.
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-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) | RW-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) FD |
| RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) | RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) FD |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) FD |
| RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) | RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) FD |
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria.
All field duplicate RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Collected | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
| RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) / FD | 3/23/00 | Cadmium | 136 | Less than or equal to 15% |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) / FD | 3/23/00 | Cadmium | 43.9 | Less than or equal to 15% |
The cadmium 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. The results were flagged �R� in the associated samples if non-detect.
Representativeness expresses the degree to which sample data accurately and precisely represents actual site conditions. Representativeness has been evaluated by:
Comparing the COC 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 these SDGs were analyzed following the COC and the 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 three method blanks, two equipment blanks and numerous calibration blanks associated with the cadmium analyses in these 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.
Four of the thirty cadmium results for the samples in these SDGs were considered unusable. The completeness for the cadmium portion of these SDGs is 86.7%, which does not meet the minimum acceptance criteria of 90%.
These SDGs consisted of thirty-four (34) samples, including twenty-four (24) environmental soil samples, four field duplicate soil samples, two sets of matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples and two equipment blank samples. The samples were collected on March 23 and 24, 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 results for the MS/MSD samples and LCS sample. Samples RW-B25-SS03 (0-0.5�) and RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1�) were used as the MS/MSD samples for these SDGs.
The MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC Criteria |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | Lead | -23800 | 25460 | 74-124% |
The lead results for the samples from site B8 collected at a similar depth as the MS/MSD were flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect (high bias) was present.
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-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) | RW-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) FD |
| RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) | RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) FD |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) FD |
| RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) | RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) FD |
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | Lead | 68 | Less than or equal to 25% |
The lead results in the associated samples were previously flagged �M� due to the failing MS/MSD recoveries, so no additional corrective action was necessary.
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 COC 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 these SDGs were analyzed following the COC and the 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 three method blanks, two equipment blanks and numerous calibration blanks associated with the lead analyses in these 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%.
These SDGs consisted of thirty-four (34) samples, including twenty-four (24) environmental soil samples, four field duplicates, two sets of MS/MSD samples and two equipment blanks. The samples were collected on March 23 and 24, 2000 and were analyzed for mercury.
The mercury analyses were performed using USEPA SW846 Method 7471A for soils and 7470A for waters. 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-B25-SS03(0-0.5) and RW-B8-SB02(0.5-1) were analyzed as MS/MSD samples for these SDGs.
All MS/MSD %Rs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Analyte | MS %R | MSD %R | QC Criteria |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | Mercury | 74 | 124 | 77-120% |
The mercury results for the samples from site B8 collected at a similar depth as the MS/MSD were flagged �M� to indicate a matrix effect was present.
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-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) | RW-B25-SS03 (0-0.5) FD |
| RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) | RW-B26-SB02 (0.5-1) FD |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) FD |
| RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) | RW-B8-SB03 (8-8.5) FD |
All MS/MSD RPDs were within acceptance criteria except for the following:
| Parent Sample ID | Analyte | RPD | QC Criteria |
| RW-B8-SB02 (0.5-1) | Mercury | 51 | Less than or equal to 25% |
The mercury results in the associated samples were previously flagged �M� due to the failing MS/MSD recoveries, so no additional corrective action was necessary.
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 COC 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 these SDGs were analyzed following the COC and the 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 three method blanks, two equipment blanks and numerous calibration blanks associated with the mercury analyses in these 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%.