APPENDIX II QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARY TABLES

Similar documents
KESTREL. April 26, Mr. Stephen Evans Maine Yankee 321 Old Ferry Road Wiscasset, Maine 04578

Method 8270C PAH. FD- Field Duplicate Samples

OBJECTIVE DATA PACKAGE DELIVERABLES

Copyright ENCO Laboratories, Inc. II. Quality Control. A. Introduction

Maine DEP DRO. MY05TP220A(0-0.5) MY05TP222A(0-0.5) FD MY05TP223A(0-0.5) FD MY05TP220A (EB) EB-Equipment Rinsate Blank FD- Field Duplicate Samples

CCME Reference Method for the Canada-Wide Standard for Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHC) in Soil - Tier 1 Method

EPA Office of Water Method Update Rule Final August 28, 2017 William Lipps October 2017

QA/QC in the Wastewater Laboratory. Steve Roberts Ohio EPA Division of Environmental Services 05/11/2016

alscience nvironmental aboratories, Inc.

LOUISVILLE CHEMISTRY GUIDELINE (LCG)

Is the laboratory s pledge or declaration of the quality of the results produced. to produce data compliant with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Perfluorinated Alkyl Acids (PFAA) in Water by LC/MS/MS - PBM

Hach Method Spectrophotometric Measurement of Free Chlorine (Cl 2 ) in Finished Drinking Water

Schedule. Draft Section of Lab Report Monday 6pm (Jan 27) Summary of Paper 2 Monday 2pm (Feb 3)

Verification and Review of Data for Chlorinated Dioxins, Furans and PCB Congeners by Isotope Dilution HRGC/ HRMS

Qualification Code Reference Table Cont.

Hach Method Total Organic Carbon in Finished Drinking Water by Catalyzed Ozone Hydroxyl Radical Oxidation Infrared Analysis

EDD FIELD DESCRIPTIONS

Review and Reporting of Chemical of Concern (COC) Concentration Data Under the TRRP Rule (30 TAC 350)

ANALYTICAL REPORT. Attn: Richard Boelter

ANALYTICAL REPORT. Attn: Richard Boelter

Appendix B RFI Sampling Program Summary (appears on CD only)

Hydra-C Application Note: 1076

TCEQ Regulatory Guidance Remediation Division RG-366/TRRP-13 December 2002

ANALYTICAL REPORT. Attn: Richard Boelter

LAMBTON SCIENTIFIC (A Division of Technical Chemical Services Inc.)

Laboratory Techniques 100: Back To Basics. Carol Injasoulian Lab Manager City of Bay City April 29,2015

Laboratory 101: A Guide to Understanding your Testing Laboratory

ANALYTICAL REPORT. Attn: Richard Boelter

Laboratory Analytical Data

ANALYTICAL REPORT. Attn: Richard Boelter

CSO/SWO Data Validation Reports June 20, 2014

Understanding the Uncertainty Associated with Analytical Results: Sources, Control and Interpretation of Results. Marc Paquet, Chemist M.Sc.

LOWER DUWAMISH WATERWAY CLAM COLLECTION FINAL AND CHEMICAL ANALYSES QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN ADDENDUM. Lower Duwamish Waterway Group

Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (GCMS)

December 30, Laboratory Report This Page is to be Stamped Introduction: This report package contains total of 5 pages divided into 3 sections:

ANALYTICAL REPORT. Job Number: Job Description: Old Douglas Harbor. For: PND Engineers, Inc West 36th Ave. Anchorage, AK 99503

ANALYTICAL REPORT. Job Number: Job Description: Old Douglas Harbor. For: PND Engineers, Inc West 36th Ave. Anchorage, AK 99503

ALLOWAY METHOD OUTLINE

American Environmental Testing Laboratory Inc.

Results of the EPA Method 1631 Validation Study

Putting the Pieces of the Puzzle Together. By Kim Kirkland, Methods Team Leader EPA s Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES SOP: 1826 PAGE: 1 of 18 REV: 0.0 DATE: 03/30/95 ANALYSIS OF METHYL PARATHION IN WIPE SAMPLES BY GC/MS

appendix C QUALITY ASSURANCE/ QUALITY CONTROL

APPENDIX B QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

QUALITY CONTROL CRITERIA FOR CHEMISTRY EXCEPT RADIOCHEMISTRY.

ANALYTICAL RESULTS. Project: Mayflower, AR Pipeline Incident

Laboratory ID. Laboratory Name. Analyst(s) Auditor. Date(s) of Audit. Type of Audit Initial Biennial Special ELCP TNI/NELAP.

Revision: 11 (MBAS) ALLOWAY METHOD OUTLINE. Standard Laboratory Method:

INTRODUCTION. Scope and Applicability

TNI Standard; EL-V1M4 Sections and (Detection and Quantitation) page1 of 8. TNI Standard VOLUME 1 MODULE 4

CEDEN. California Environmental Data Exchange Network

Method Update Rule of 2015: New Method Detection Limit MDL Determination. David Caldwell OK DEQ Laboratory Accreditation Program

Shaker Table Extraction

ANALYTICAL REPORT. Attn: Thomas W Hensel

Central Valley Regional Data Center

Total Petroleum and Saturated Hydrocarbons by Gas Chromatography/Flame Ionization Detector

USEPA CONTRACT LABORATORY PROGRAM NATIONAL FUNCTIONAL GUIDELINES FOR ORGANIC DATA REVIEW

PCB Congener Analysis of XAD-2 Resins and GFF Filters Using GC/ECD

TNI V1M Standard Update Guidance on Detection and Quantitation

Chain of Custody and Supporting Documentation

Revisions to Text Based on Completion of Tier III Validation. Section 1. Section 4.2

Update on ASTM and Standard Methods method development activities

VOTING DRAFT STANDARD

The following revisions are being implemented for the PCDD/F Supplemental QAPP:

EPAs New MDL Procedure What it Means, Why it Works, and How to Comply

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

Measurement Uncertainty: A practical guide to understanding what your results really mean.

September 28, Review of Guidance on Data Quality Indicators (EPA QA/G-5i) Nancy Wentworth, Director /s/ Nancy Wentworth Quality Staff (2811R)

6 PREPARING THE SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN (SAP)

TETRA TECH, INC. December 8, Lynn Nakashima Berkeley Regional Office 700 Heinz Avenue, Suite 200C Berkeley, California 94710

KSA Environmental Laboratory Inc.

Table of Contents I. PURPOSE AND SCOPE:... 3 II. AUTHORITY:... 3 III. REFERENCE:... 3 IV. RESPONSIBILITY:... 3 V. POLICY:... 3 VI. PROCEDURE:...

Timberline Ammonia-001. Determination of Inorganic Ammonia by Continuous Flow Gas Diffusion and Conductivity Cell Analysis

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES SOP: 1828 PAGE: 1 of 14 REV: 0.0 DATE: 05/12/95 ANALYSIS OF METHYL PARATHION IN CARPET SAMPLES BY GC/MS

If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS

A Laboratory Guide to Method Validation, (Eurachem).

~~LABORATORY DATA CONSULTANTS, INC.

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

Standard Operating Procedure for Performing a QA Review of an Aldehyde Data Batch

ANALYTICAL RESULTS. Project: Mayflower, AR Pipeline Incident

SWAMP DATA MANAGEMENT PLAN

ACZ Laboratories, Inc Downhill Drive Steamboat Springs, CO (800)

Proposed Procedures for Determining the Method Detection Limit and Minimum Level

Hach Company TNTplus 835/836 Nitrate Method Spectrophotometric Measurement of Nitrate in Water and Wastewater

USEPA CONTRACT LABORATORY PROGRAM NATIONAL FUNCTIONAL GUIDELINES FOR LOW CONCENTRATION ORGANIC DATA REVIEW

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES SOP: 1824 PAGE: 1 of 22 REV: 0.0 DATE: 04/21/95 ANALYSIS OF METHYL PARATHION IN SOIL SAMPLES BY GC/MS

DRAFT QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Water by GC/MS PBM

If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS

Certificate of Analysis FINAL REPORT

Method 0060 or Method 29. Method for Determining Metals and Mercury Emissions in Stack Gas

METHOD 8100 POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS

The Role of Proficiency Tests in the Estimation of Measurement Uncertainty of PCDD/PCDF and PCB Determination by Isotope Dilution Methods

Analysis of SVOCs in Indoor Air Using Thermal Desorption GC/MS

How s that *new* LOD Coming? Rick Mealy WWOA Board of Directors DNR LabCert

CHAPTER VI ANALYTICAL METHODS & QUALITY CONTROL

Laboratory Quality Control Report: Why is it Important?

Timothy E. Lewis, Ph.D. Chief Aquatic Ecology and Invasive Species Branch USACE, Engineer Research and Dev. Center Vicksburg, MS

Transcription:

APPENDIX II QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARY TABLES

Table II-1: Completeness Checklist Quality Assurance/Quality Control Questions? Comments? 1. Was the report signed by the responsible applicant approved representative? 2. Were the methods for sampling, chemical and biological testing described in the Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) and the Laboratory QA Plan (LQAP) followed? 3. If not, were deviations documented? 4. Was the SAP approved by the New England District? 5. Did the applicant use a laboratory with a LQAP on file at the New England District? 6. Did the samples adequately represent the physical/chemical variability in the dredging area? 7. Were the correct stations sampled (include the precision of the navigation method used)? 8. Were the preservation and storage requirements in Chapter 8 of the EPA/Corps QA/QC Manual (EPA/USACE 1995) and EPA (2001d) followed? 9. Were the samples properly labeled? 10. Were all the requested data included? 11. Were the reporting limits met? 12. Were the chain-of-custody forms properly processed? 13. Were the method blanks run and were the concentration below the acceptance criteria? 14. Was the MDL study performed on each matrix (with this data submission) or within the last 12 months? 15. Were the SRM/CRM analyses within acceptance criteria? 1

Table II-1 (continued): Completeness Checklist Quality Assurance/Quality Control Questions? Comments? 16. Were the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicates run at the required frequency and was the percent recovery/rpd within the acceptance criteria? 17. Were the duplicate samples analyzed and were the RPDs within the required acceptance criteria? 18. For each analytical fraction of organic compounds, were recoveries for the internal standard within the acceptance criteria? 19. Were surrogate recoveries within the required acceptance criteria? 20. Were corrective action forms provided for all non-conforming data? 21. Were all the species-specific test conditions in Appendix V met? 22. Were the test-specific age requirements met for each test species? 23. Was the bulk physical/chemical testing performed on the sediments/composites that were biologically tested? 24. Were the mortality acceptance criteria met for the water column and sediment toxicity tests? 25. Were the test performance requirements in Table 11.3 of EPA (1994a) met? 2

Table II-2: Quality Control Summary for Analyses of Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) and other base-neutrals in Sediment and Tissue Matrices Method Reference Number: 8270C ( Initial Calibration Calculation of Method Detection Limits (MDLs) Calibration Verification (Second Source) Continuing Calibration Must be performed prior to the analysis of any QC sample or field sample (<20 % RSD for each compound) For each matrix, analyzed once per 12 month period (see Section 5.2 for MDL procedure) Once, after initial calibration (80 to 120% recovery of each compound) At the beginning of every 12 hour shift (± 15 % D) Standard Reference Materials Within the limits provided by vendor Method Blank No target analytes > RL Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD) One set (MS/MSD) per group of field samples. Must contain all target analytes. (Recovery Limits 50 to 120%; RPD <30%) 3

Table II-2 (continued): Quality Control Summary for Analyses of Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) and other baseneutrals in Sediment and Tissue Matrices Method Reference Number: 8270C List results outside criteria ( Analytical Replicates Analyze one sample in duplicate for each group of field samples (RPD < 30%) Surrogate Recoveries Calculate % recovery (30 to 150% recovery) Internal Standard Areas Within 50 to 200% of internal standards in continuing calibration check * The Quality Control Acceptance are general guidelines. If alternate criteria are used, they must be documented in this table. 4

Table II-3: Quality Control Summary for Analyses of Pesticides in Sediment, Tissue and Water Matrices Method Reference Number: 8081B ( Initial Calibration Calculation of Method Detection Limits (MDLs) Calibration Verification (Second Source) Must be performed prior to the analysis of any QC sample or field sample (< 20 % RSD for each compound) For each matrix, analyzed once per 12 month period (see Section 5.2 for MDL procedure) Once, after initial calibration (80 to 120% recovery of each compound) Continuing Calibration Every 20 injections (± 15 % D) Standard Reference Materials Within the limits provided by vendor Method Blank No target analytes > RL Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD) One set (MS/MSD) per group of field samples. Must contain all target analytes. (Recovery Limits 50 to 120%; RPD <30%) 5

Table II-3 (continued): Quality Control Summary for Analyses of Pesticides in Sediment, Tissue and Water Matrices Method Reference Number: 8081B ( Analytical Replicates Analyze one sample in duplicate for each group of field samples (RPD < 30%) Surrogate Recoveries Calculate % recovery (30 to 150% recovery) * The Quality Control Acceptance are general guidelines. If alternate criteria are used, they must be documented in this table. 6

Table II-4: Quality Control Summary for Analyses of Polychorinated Biphenyls (PCB congeners) in Sediment, Tissue and Water Matrices Method Reference Number: 8082A List results outside criteria ( Initial Calibration Calculation of Method Detection Limits (MDLs) Calibration Verification (Second Source) Must be performed prior to the analysis of any QC sample or field sample (<20 % RSD for each compound) For each matrix, analyzed once per 12 month period (see Section 5.2 for MDL procedure) Once, after initial calibration. (80 to 120% recovery of each compound) Continuing Calibration Every 20 injections (± 15 % D) Standard Reference Materials Within the limits provided by vendor Method Blank No target analytes > RL Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD) One set (MS/MSD) per group of field samples. Must contain all target analytes. (Recovery Limits 50 to 120%; RPD <30%) 7

Table II-4 (continued): Quality Control Summary for Analyses of Polychorinated Biphenyls (PCB congeners) in Sediment, Tissue and Water Matrices Method Reference Number: 8082A List results outside criteria ( Analytical Replicates Analyze one sample in duplicate for each group of field samples (RPD < 30%) Surrogate Recoveries Calculate % recovery (30 to 150% recovery) * The Quality Control Acceptance are general guidelines. If alternate criteria are used, they must be documented in this table. 8

Table II-5: Quality Control Summary for Analyses of Metals in Sediments, Tissue and Water Matrices Method Reference Numbers: Various Reference Numbers Criteri a ( Linear Range Determination for ICP Initial Calibration for AA, Hg Calculation of Method Detection Limits (MDLs) Initial Calibration Verification/ Continuing Calibration Verification Initial Calibration Blank/ Continuing Calibration Blank Performed Quarterly Performed Daily (Correlation Coefficient $0.995) For each matrix, analyzed once per 12 month period (see Section 5.2 for MDL procedure) Hg: 80 to 120% recovery Other metals: 90 to 110% recovery No target analytes > Instrument Detection Limit (IDL) Standard Reference Materials Within the limits provided by vendor Method Blank No target analytes > RL 9

Sample Spike/ Sample Duplicate One set per group of field samples. Must contain all target analytes. Recovery Limits (75 to 125%; RPD < 20% or < 35%) Table II-5 (continued): Quality Control Summary for Analyses of Metals in Sediments, Tissue and Water Matrices Method Reference Numbers: Various Reference Numbers Criteri a ( Analytical Replicates Analyze one sample in duplicate for each group of field samples (RPD < 30%) * The Quality Control Acceptance are general guidelines. If alternate criteria are used, they must be documented in this table. 10

Table II-6: Quality Control Summary for Analyses of other Organic Chemicals not listed in Sediment, Tissue and Water Matrices Method Reference Numbers: ( Initial Calibration Must be performed prior to the analysis of any QC sample or field sample.(<20 % RSD for each compound) Calculation of Method Detection Limits (MDLs) For each matrix, analyzed once per 12 month period (see Section 5.2 for MDL procedure) Calibration Verification (Second Source) Once, after initial calibration (80 to 120% recovery of each compound) Continuing Calibration At the beginning of every 12 hour shift (± 15 % D) Standard Reference Materials Within the limits provided by vendor Method Blank No target analytes > RL Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD) One set (MS/MSD) per group of field samples. Must contain all target analytes. (Recovery Limits 50 to 120%; RPD <30%) 11

Table II-6 (continued): Quality Control Summary for Analyses of other Organic Chemicals not listed in Sediment, Tissue and Water Matrices Method Reference Numbers: ( Analytical Replicates Analyze one sample in duplicate for each group of field samples (RPD < 30%) Surrogate Recoveries Calculate % recovery (30 to 150% recovery) Internal Standard Areas (if applicable) Within 50 to 200% of internal standards in continuing calibration check * The Quality Control Acceptance are general guidelines. If alternate criteria are used, they must be documented in this table. 12

Table II-7: Quality Control Summary for Analyses of Sediment Grain Size and Total Organic Carbon Method Reference Numbers: ( Grain Size: Analytical Replicates Analyze one sample in duplicate for each group of field samples ( RPD < 25%) Total Organic Carbon: Standard Reference Materials Within the limits provided by vendor Total Organic Carbon: Analytical Replicates Analyze one sample in duplicate for each group of field samples (RPD < 30%) * The Quality Control Acceptance are general guidelines. If alternate criteria are used, they must be documented in this table. 13

Table II-8: Quality Control Summary for Biological Toxicity Testing only Method Reference Numbers: (Retained at Lab Test condition requirements for each species: Temperature, Salinity, ph, D.O., Ammonia (Total, Un-ionized) Test conditions within the requirements specified for each species Test species age Age/health within guidelines for each species (Appendix V) Bulk physical/chemical analyses (If required by the Sampling plan) Required? If so, performed? Yes or No Water column toxicity test: Control mortality Control abnormality < 10% mean < 30% mussel/oyster; < 40% clam larvae, < 30% sea urchin larvae Sediment toxicity test: Control mortality < 10% mean (no chamber > 20%) Compliance with applicable test acceptability requirements in Table 11.3 (EPA 1994a) See EPA (1994a) Section 9; Table 11.3 * The Quality Control Acceptance are general guidelines. If alternate criteria are used, they must be documented in this table. 14