Golder Associates Inc. , Golder Associates - TO: Coakley Landfill Site Project QA Record FR: Jeffrey R. Hendel, Golder Associates Inc. Cq RE: Data Validation Summary November 1997

Download Golder Associates Inc. , Golder Associates -   TO: Coakley Landfill Site Project QA Record FR: Jeffrey R. Hendel, Golder Associates Inc. Cq RE: Data Validation Summary November 1997

Post on 10-Feb-2018

215 views

Category:

Documents

3 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

<ul><li><p>Golder Associates Inc.</p><p>400 Commercial StreetManchester. NH USA 03101 -1113Telephone (603) 668-0880Fax (603) 668-1199</p><p>, GolderAssociates</p><p>TRANSMITTAL LETTER</p><p>To: Mr. Roger Duwart, HBORemedial Project ManagerNH/RI Superfund SectionU.S. EPA New EnglandJ.F.K. Federal BuildingBoston, MA 02203-2211</p><p>Date: December 11,1997Project No.: 963-6813</p><p>Copies to: Tal Hubbard - NHDES, Dan MacRitchie - City of Portsmouth,Pat Steerman - BFI, David S. Allen - City of Portsmouth,Tom Roy - Aries Engineering, Bea Hebert - PSNH</p><p>Sent by:</p><p>X Mail</p><p>Courier</p><p>Hand Carried</p><p>Under Separate Cover</p><p>Federal Express</p><p>X Enclosed</p><p>Qty</p><p>1</p><p>Item</p><p>Copy</p><p>Description</p><p>Validated Groundwater Quality Sampling Results,Third Quarter 1997, Coakley Landfill</p><p>Remarks:</p><p>Per: Michael Zarenski/lil</p><p>OFFICES IN AUSTRALIA, CANADA, GERMANY, HUNGARY, ITALY, SWEDEN, UNITED KINGDOM, UNITED STATES</p></li><li><p>WELL I.D. - SAMPLE ID CROSS REFERENCE FORM</p><p>COAKLEY LANDFILL</p><p>WELL I.D./QC I.D.</p><p>MW-5S</p><p>MW-5D</p><p>MW-2</p><p>MW-11</p><p>MW-8</p><p>MW-8 Field Dup</p><p>MW-9</p><p>MW-10</p><p>BP-4</p><p>OP-5</p><p>RP-1</p><p>GZ-105</p><p>FPC-5A</p><p>OP-2</p><p>SAMPLE I.D.</p><p>M5S997</p><p>M5D997</p><p>MW2997</p><p>W11997</p><p>MW8997</p><p>MW8FD1</p><p>MW9997</p><p>W10997</p><p>BP4997</p><p>OPS 997</p><p>RP1997</p><p>105997</p><p>C5A997</p><p>OP2997</p><p>LL\project\963-6813\wellid.doc Colder Associates</p></li><li><p>MEMORANDUM</p><p>TO: Coakley Landfill Site Project QA Record</p><p>FR: Jeffrey R. Hendel, Golder Associates Inc. Cq</p><p>RE: Data Validation Summary</p><p>November 1997</p><p>963-6813</p><p>1.0 INTRODUCTION</p><p>This memo presents the results of the data validation for the Coakley landfill Site Remedial Design Project. Thelaboratory submitted five separate reports, divided by sample collection date (SDGs). The packages containingthe monitoring well data consist of thirteen (13) primary groundwater samples, one field duplicate, one matrixspike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD), one rinsate blank, and five trip blanks. All samples were analyzed forvolatile organics compounds (VOCs) utilizing SW-846 8260 and TAL Metals by USEPA 200 Seriesmethodologies. The trip blanks were analyzed for VOCs only. Accutest, of Marlborough, Maine analyzed allsamples. Following this memo includes data qualification summary and tables, copies of the validated laboratoryreports and data supporting documentation.</p><p>The following table provides the sampling information for the samples that were validated in accordance with theUSEPA Region I Functional Guidelines:</p><p>MONITORING WELLS</p><p>Sample IDW5S997W5D997MW2997W11997MW8997</p><p>MW8FD1*MW9997W10997BP4997OP5997RP1997105997</p><p>C5A997OP2397</p><p>Notes:</p><p>Sample Date9/4/979/4/979/4/979/4/979/4/979/4/979/5/979/5/979/5/979/5/979/8/979/9/979/9/979/23/97</p><p>* - Sample collected is a field duplicate ofMW8997.</p><p>MatrixWaterWaterWaterWaterWaterWaterWaterWaterWaterWaterWaterWaterWaterWater</p><p>VolatilesXXXXXXXXXXXXXX</p><p>MetalsXXXXXXXXXXXXXX</p><p>Data validation was conducted in accordance with the Region I Functional Guidelines and the Quality AssuranceProject Plan (QAPjP) dated February 1992. All sample results (Volatiles and Metals) were verified andvalidated.</p></li><li><p>November 1997 2 963-6813</p><p>2.0 VOLATILE ORGANICS</p><p>Data Quality Objectives</p><p>Precision: Goals for precision were met.</p><p>Accuracy: Goals for accuracy were met.</p><p>Sample Results Verification: All sample results were verified.</p><p>Completeness: The laboratory submitted five data packages containing VOC results. Fourteen (14) watersamples were validated in this data set. A total of 1036 results were reported in which 1006 weredeemed valid. This results in a completeness of 97% for the monitoring wells. The completenessobjective of 90% specified in the QAPjP was achieved.</p><p>Major Deficiencies</p><p>Identified below are the major deficiencies that required rejection of data. Refer to Table 1 for the specificsamples affected by each deficiency.</p><p>All SDGs (M2204. M2182. M2183, M2362. M2216)The initial and/or continuing calibrations had response factors (RRF) which were less than the minimum of 0.05for Acetone and 2-Butanone. In the case where a calibration had an RRF below 0.05, the associated samplesrequired qualification as estimated value (J) for positive results and rejected (R) for non-detected results.</p><p>During the data validation process, the qualitative identification of compounds is evaluated. The evaluations arebased on mass spectra, retention time, peak shape and intensity. The laboratories typically report a compound aspresent even if all spectral criteria are not met. For the compound Chloroethane in various samples, the massspectra did not meet the required criteria identified in the functional guidelines. There is no indication to thepresence of the compound based on mass spectra in these samples. Since the compound cannot be presumed tobe present in these samples, the results for this compound in the specified sample was qualified unusable (R ).</p><p>MINOR DEFICIENCIES</p><p>Identified below are the minor deficiencies that required qualification of the data. Refer to Table 1 for the specificsamples affected by each deficiency.</p><p>AM SDGs (M2204. M2182. M2183. M2362. M2216)Laboratory preparation blanks, rinsate blanks and trip blanks are evaluated for target compound contamination.Methylene chloride and Carbon disulfide were found as contaminants in various blanks for these SDGs. Samplesassociated with these blanks required qualification. For the compound Methylene chloride, an action limit of 10times the concentration found in the associated blank was calculated. For the compound Carbon disulfide, anaction limit of 5 times the concentration found in the associated blank was calculated. For samples where any ofthese compounds were detected as a positive result between the reporting limit (RL) and the action limit, the resultwas flagged as undetected (U). For samples where any of these compounds were detected below the RL, the</p></li><li><p>November 1997 3 963-6813</p><p>result was changed to the RL and qualified as undetected (U). There were no positive detects for either of thesecompounds above the action level.</p><p>During the data validation process, the qualitative identification of compounds is evaluated. The evaluations arebased on mass spectra, retention time, peak shape and intensity. For various compounds in various samples, themass spectra indicate that there is presumptive evidence of the presence of the compound, however, all criteria arenot met. Since the compounds are only presumed to be present in the samples, the results for those compounds inthe specific samples were qualified with the "N" flag.</p><p>The functional guidelines require the percent differences (%D) for the response factors between the initialand continuing daily calibration be less than + 25%. This criterion was not achieved for the compoundMethylene chloride in the continuing calibration analyzed on September 16, 1997. The functional guidelinesrequire compounds that have %Ds greater than 25% be qualified as estimated value (J). The functionalguidelines also require compounds that have %Ds greater than 50% be qualified as estimated reporting limit (UJ).Since non-of the continuing calibrations had compounds with %Ds greater than 50%, no qualification for non-detects was necessary.</p></li><li><p>November 1997 4 963-6813</p><p>3.0 TARGET ANALYTE LIST INORGANIC PARAMETERS</p><p>DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES</p><p>Precision: Goals for laboratory and field precision were generally met, except where noted below.</p><p>Accuracy: Goals for accuracy were generally met, except where noted below.</p><p>Sample Result Verification: All sample results were supported in the raw data.</p><p>Detection Limits: The detection limit goals were achieved for all analyses.</p><p>Completeness: The data packages were complete for all requested analyses. Fourteen (14) samples werevalidated in this data set. A total of 336 results were reported in which 336 were deemed valid. This results in acompleteness of 100%. which meet the work plan objective of 90%.</p><p>MAJOR DEFICIENCIES</p><p>There were no major deficiencies identified with this data set.</p><p>MINOR DEFICIENCIES</p><p>Identified below are the minor deficiencies that required qualification of the data. Refer to Table 2 for the specificsamples affected by each deficiency.</p><p>All SDGs (M2204. M2182. M2183. M2362. M2216)The matrix spike recoveries for Aluminum, Calcium, Magnesium and Manganese were greater than thecriteria (75% - 125%) specified by the functional guidelines. For the affected samples, positive results</p><p>were qualified as estimated values (J).</p><p>The relative percent difference between the primary sample and the laboratory duplicate was greaterthan 20% when both the sample and the duplicate results for Aluminum, Arsenic, Calcium, Chromium,Iron, Magnesium, Manganese and Sodium were greater than 5 times the CRDL. Failure to meet this</p><p>criterion required qualification of these elements in these SDGs. For the affected samples, the resultswere qualified as estimated values (J) for positive detects.</p><p>SPG M2182The laboratory is required by the analytical method and the functional guidelines to analyze Mercury within 28days of sample collection. The laboratory failed to meet this requirement for the samples reported in this SDG.As a result, the results for Mercury were qualified as estimated values (J) for positive results and estimatedreporting limit (UJ) for nondetects.</p></li><li><p>November 1997 5 963-6813</p><p>4.0 SUMMARY</p><p>Validation of the data collected for the Remedial Design Program from the Coakley Landfill Site was performedin accordance with USEPA Region I data validation guidelines, as applicable, and the criteria specified by thespecific methods and the QAPjP.</p><p>Overall, the data required qualification due to some quality control criteria that were not achieved, but themajority of the data may be deemed usable in terms of objectives of the Remedial Design Work Plan. Although apositive result was qualified as estimated, the analyte should be considered present. Similarly, a non-detectedresult, which was qualified as an estimated quantitation/reporting limit, should be considered not present for thepurposes of this study, although the limit itself may not be precise. Rejected (unusable) data that are assigned the"R" qualifier should not be used.</p><p>REFERENCES</p><p>Golder, 1993, Quality Assurance Project Plan, Coakley Landfill She, North Hampton, New Hampshire,February 1992.</p><p>USEPA Region I, 1988, Region I Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating OrganicsAnalyses, EPA Region I, November 1988.</p><p>USEPA Region I, 1988, Region I Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganicsanalyses, EPA Region I, November 1988.</p><p>G:\963-6813\3rdq97\3ql97.doc</p></li><li><p>TABLE 1</p><p>DATE: November, 1997PROJECT NAME: Coakley LandfillANALYSIS: Volatile Organic Compounds by SW-846 Method 8260SAMPLE DELIVERY GROUP NUMBER: ALLREVIEWER: Jeffrey Hendel</p><p>PROJECT NO.: 963-6813</p><p>DEFICIENCY COMPOUND(S) QUALIFIER SAMPLES AFFECTED</p><p>Blank contamination</p><p>RRF less than 0 05 forinitial calibration</p><p>RRF less than 0 05 for thecontinuing calibrations</p><p>% difference between the mrtaland continuing RRFs exceeds25%</p><p>Methytene Chlonde U RP1997. W5S997,W5D997. MW2997,MW8997, MW8FD1 ,MW9997, BP4997,OP2397, 105997,C5A997, W10997,</p><p>OP5997Carbon disulfide U W5S997. W50997,</p><p>MW2997, MW8FD1,MW9997, W10997,BP4997, OP5997,OP2397, 105997,</p><p>C5A997</p><p>Acetone R All samples except sampleIDW11907</p><p>Acetone, R All samples except sample2-Butanone ID W1 1907</p><p>Methylene chlonde J for positive W5S997, W5D997,results MW8997, MW8FD1,</p><p>W11997, MW2997,MW9997, W10997,OP5997, BP4997</p><p>G \projects\963-6813\3rdq97\Table1 xls Colder Associates 1 of 2</p></li><li><p>TABLE 1</p><p>DATE: November, 1997PROJECT NAME: Coakley LandfillANALYSIS: Volatile Organic Compounds by SW-846 Method 8260SAMPLE DELIVERY GROUP NUMBER: ALLREVIEWER: Jeffrey Hendel</p><p>PROJECT NO.: 963-6813</p><p>DEFICIENCY COMPOUND(S)</p><p>Presumptive evidence of thepresence of a compound</p><p>1,1-Dichloroethane,Toluene</p><p>Chloroethane</p><p>Chloroethane</p><p>Ethyl benzene,m+p-Xylenes,o-Xylene</p><p>Toluene</p><p>QUALIFIER SAMPLES AFFECTED</p><p>N RP1997</p><p>N MW8FD1, 105997,</p><p>C5A997</p><p>R W5S997, W5D997,</p><p>MW2997, MW8997.MW9997, OP2397</p><p>N W11997</p><p>N MW8FD1 . MW9997,BP4997</p><p>Notes</p><p>RL = Reporting Limit.</p><p>G\pro|ects\963-6813\3rdq97\Table1 xls Colder Associates 2 of 2</p></li><li><p>TABLE 2</p><p>DATE: November, 1997PROJECT NAME: Coakley LandfillANALYSIS: TAL Metals - 200 Series MethodologiesSAMPLE DELIVERY GROUP NUMBER: ALLREVIEWER: Jeffrey R. Hendel</p><p>PROJECT NO.: 963-6813</p><p>DEFICIENCY ANALYTE(S)</p><p>Matrix spike recovery outside control limits</p><p>RPD between pnmary and lab</p><p>duplicate out of control</p><p>Aluminum,</p><p>Calcium,</p><p>Magnesium,</p><p>Manganese</p><p>Aluminum,</p><p>Arsenic,</p><p>Calcium,</p><p>Chromium,</p><p>Iron,</p><p>Magnesium,</p><p>Manganese,</p><p>Sodium</p><p>QUALIFIER SAMPLES AFFECTED</p><p>J for positive results ALL</p><p>J for positive results ALL</p><p>DATE: November, 1997SAMPLE DELIVERY GROUP NUMBER: M2182REVIEWER: Jeffrey R. Hendel</p><p>DEFICIENCY ANALYTE(S) QUALIFIER</p><p>Missed holding times ALL J for positive results</p><p>UJ for non-</p><p>detected results</p><p>SAMPLES AFFECTED</p><p>W5S997, W5D997,</p><p>MW2997, W11997.</p><p>MW8997, MW8FD1</p><p>Metals xls Colder Associates 1 of 1</p></li><li><p>November 1997 963-6813</p><p>Data Qualifiers</p><p>A - The data is acceptable; identification is confirmed.</p><p>U - The analyte was tested for but was not detected. The associated numerical value iseither the sample quantitation limit (organics) or the sample detection limit (inorganics).</p><p>R - Reject data due to quality control criteria. The data are unusable (analyte may or maynot be present in the sample).</p><p>N - Tentative identification; consider analyte present.</p><p>J - The analyte is present. The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity andmay not be accurate or precise.</p><p>UJ - The analyte was tested for but not detected. The sample quantitation limit or thesample detection limit is estimated and may be inaccurate or imprecise.</p><p>ziqual.def Page 1 of 1</p></li><li><p>SACCUTESTReport of Analysis Page 1 of 2</p><p>Client Sample DD:Lab Sample ID:Matrix:Method:Project:</p><p>Run#lRun #2</p><p>File IDD0597.</p><p>RP1997M2204-1AQ - GroundSWS46 8260Coakley Env.</p><p>DFD 2</p><p>Water</p><p>Monitoring, 480</p><p>Analyzed09/17/97</p><p>Breakfast Hill</p><p>ByDRY</p><p>Date Sampled: 09/08/97Date Received: 09/09/97Percent Solids: n/a</p><p>Rd., Greenland, NH</p><p>Prep Date Prep Batch Analytical Batchn/a n/a MSD23</p><p>VGA 8260 List</p><p>CAS No. Compound Result RDL Units Q</p><p>67-64-171-43-2108-86-174-97-575-27-475-25-2104-51-8135-98-898-06-6108-90-775-00-367-66-395-49-8106-43-475-15-056-23-575-34-375-35-4563-58-696-12-8106-93-4107-06-278-87-5142-28-9594-20-7124^8-175-71-8156-69-410061-01-5541-73-195-50-1106-46-7156-60-510061-02-6100-41-4591-78-6</p><p>AcetoneBenzeneBromobenzeneBromochloromethaneBromodichloromethaneBromoformn-Butylbenzenesec-Buty [benzenetert-ButylbenzeneChlorobenzeneChloroethaneChloroformo-Chlorotoluenep-ChlorotolueneCarbon disulfideCarbon tetrachlonde1,1-Dichloroe thane1 , 1-Dichloroethylene1 , 1 -D ichlo rop ropene1 ,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane1 ,2-Dibromoethane1 ,2-Dichloroethane1 ,2-Dichloropropane1 ,3-Dichloropropane2,2-DichloropropaneDibromochloromethaneDichlorodifluoromethanecis-1 ,2-Dichloroethylenecis- 1 ,3-Dichloropropenem-Dichlorobenzeneo-Dichlorobenzenep-D ichlorobenzenetrans- 1 ,2-D ichloroe thy lenetrans- 1 , 3-DichIoropropeneEthylbenzene2-Hexanone</p><p>ND K 2.015.1 ft 0.80ND Lf 2.0NDNDNDNDND</p><p>2.00.800.802.02.0</p><p>ND " 2.024.4 ^ 0.8090.2 * 2.0ND U 0.80ND 1 2.0ND 2.0ND 1 2.0ND * 0.801.2 ^ 0.80ND C' 0.40NDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDND*</p><p>2.02.00.800.800.802.02.00.800.800.800.20</p><p>' 0.80^ 0.80</p><p>9.6 A 0.80ND o 0.80ND </p></li><li><p>S...</p></li></ul>

Recommended

View more >