TRC TRC Environmental Corporation Boott Mills South, Lowell, MA 0185. •s- (508) 970-5600 SDMS DocID 3915 April 17, 1995 Ms. Christine Clark Regional Sample Control Coordinator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Services Division 60 Westview Street Lexington, MA 02173-3185 V 7 1 Reference: Subject: Contract No. 68-W9-0033, ARCS Work Assignment No. 22-1LB7 Gallups Quarry Superfund Site CT WASTE I ... ,..,, CT SuPiiRKii^li-i Deliverable: Data Validation Report Case #23127 SDG: MACZ49 CLP Lab: Skinner & Sherman Metals: 5/aqueous/MACZ49, MACZ50, MAEP14 - MAEP16 Cyanide: 5/aqueous/MACZ49, MACZ50, MAEP14 - MAEP16 Dear Ms. Clark: In accordance with the reporting requirements of the subject work assignment, enclosed is a Data Validation Report for case 23127 which was generated by Quality Specialists & Environmental Analysts, Inc., TRCC's Data Validation Subcontractor for this work assignment. The Tier HI validation was performed on analytical data of samples collected by TRCC at the Gallups Quarry Superfund Site during the sampling event conducted on January 11, 1995. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (508) 656-3553. Sincerely yours, Edward, MacKinnon Lead Chemist Enclosures cc: Leslie McVickar/EPARPM Cathy Lielausis/TRCC Project Manager Paul HughesATRCC Program Manager (letter only) Offices in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, Utah and Wyoming A TRC Company Printed on Recycled fsper An Equal Opportunity Employer
Transcript
TRCTRC Environmental Corporation
Boott Mills South,
Lowell, MA 0185.•s- (508) 970-5600
SDMS DocID 3915
April 17, 1995
Ms. Christine ClarkRegional Sample Control CoordinatorU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyEnvironmental Services Division60 Westview StreetLexington, MA 02173-3185
V 7 1
Reference:
Subject:
Contract No. 68-W9-0033, ARCSWork Assignment No. 22-1LB7Gallups Quarry Superfund Site CT WASTE I ... ,..,,
In accordance with the reporting requirements of the subject work assignment, enclosed is aData Validation Report for case 23127 which was generated by Quality Specialists &Environmental Analysts, Inc., TRCC's Data Validation Subcontractor for this workassignment. The Tier HI validation was performed on analytical data of samples collected byTRCC at the Gallups Quarry Superfund Site during the sampling event conducted on January11, 1995.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (508) 656-3553.
Offices in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico,
New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, Utah and Wyoming A TRC Company
Printed on Recycled fsper An Equal Opportunity Employer
ORGANICS COMPLETE SDG FILE (CSF) INVENTORY SHEET
LABORATORY NAME CEIMIC CORPORATIONCITY/STATE NARRAGANSETT, RICASE NO. ^ /^~7 SDG NO. A T f f K ? SDG NOS. TO FOLLOW
SAS NO.CONTRACT NO. btfly^Aj /sow NO. fiLium r?
v
All documents delivered in the complete SDG file must be original documentswhere possible. (REFERENCE EXHIBIT B, SECTION II and SECTION III.)
PAGE NOs. CHECKFROM TO LAB EPA
0. Sample Data Summary Package(Sent to SMO Only)1. Inventory sheet (Form DC-2) (Do not number)2. Cover Sheet3 . SDG Case Narrative4. SDG Cover Sheet/Traffic Report5. Volatiles Data
a. QC SummarySystem Monitoring Compound Summary(Form II VOA)
Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike DuplicateSummary (Form III VOA)
Method Blank Summary (Form IV VOA)GC/MS Instrument Performance Check(Form V VOA)
Internal Standard Area and RT Summary(Form VIII VOA)
b. Sample DataTCL Result - (Form I VOA)Tentatively Identified Compounds(Form I VOA-TIC)
Reconstructed total ion chromatograms(RIC) for each sample
For each sample:Raw spectra and background-subtractedmass spectra of target compoundsidentified
Quantitation reportsMass spectra of all reported TICs withthree best library matches
c. Standards Data (All Instruments) f—L 4±L?Initial Calibration Data (Form VI VOA)RICs and Quan Reports for all StandardsContinuing Calibration Data (Form VII VOA)RICs and Quantitation Reports for allStandards
d. Raw QC DataBFBBlank DataMatrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Data
Chromatograms (Primary Column)Chromatograms from second GC columnconfirmation
GC Integration report or data systemprintout
Manual work sheetsFor pesticides/Aroclors confirmed byGC/MS, copies of raw spectra andcopies of background-subtracted massspectra of target compounds (samples& standards)
Standards DataInitial Calibration of Single ComponentAnalytes (Form VI PEST-1 and PEST-2)
Initial Calibration of MulticomponentAnalytes (Form VI PEST-3)
Analyte Resolution Summary (Form VIPEST-4)
Calibration Verification Summary (FormVII PEST-1)
Calibration Verification Summary (FormVII PEST-2)
Analytical Sequence (Form VIII PEST)Florisil Cartridge Check (Form IXPEST-1)
Chromatograms and data system printoutsA printout of retention times andcorresponding peak areas or peak heightsPesticide GPC calibration data - UVdetector traces
Raw QC DataBlank DataMatrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Data
A Tier III validation was performed on the inorganic analytical data from Case 23127, five aqueous samplescollected by TRC Environmental Corporation at the Gallups Quarry Superfund site. The data was evaluatedbased on the following parameters:
* data completeness* holding times* calibration
laboratory and field blank analysesmatrix spike recoverieslaboratory and field duplicates
* laboratory control sample results* furnace atomic absorption results* serial dilution results* detection limit results* sample results
* All criteria were met for this parameter
P.O. Box 670
QSEADunbar, West Virginia 25064 Phone/Fax:l
304-776-0400/0403
Table 1 summarizes the validation recommendations which were based on the following information:
- Laboratory and Field Blank Analyses:
Blank detections are summarized below:
Maximum Concentration Action LevelElements (ug/L) (ug/L)Barium
CadmiumCalciumCopper
IronLead
ManganeseNickel
Potassium
SodiumZinc
1.51.8
246.78.214.02.1
1.6
3.1
(82.3)
153.014.8
7.5
9.01 ,233.5
41.070.010.58.0
15.5(411.5)
765.074.0
Value > IDL and < Action Level = Report value uValue > IDL and > Action Level = Report value unqualified
Batch results have been modified in accordance with the criteria above.
- Laboratory and Field Duplicates:
Iron results were greater than 5x CRDL for both MAEP16 and MAEP16D, and precision was outsidethe +/- CRDL range. Positive results for this batch (samples MACZ50, MAEP14 and MAEP16) areflagged T.
- Matrix Spike Recoveries:
Matrix Spike %R result was outside the criteria for cyanide. All samples were flagged as estimated.
Analytical Method:F* FurnaceP«rCP/FlameAACV * CoM VaporC a Colorimetric
QSEA File: MA49M Page 2 of 2
JjF
CASE NO.LABORATORY
SDG#SOW#DPO: ACTION
INORGANIC REGIONAL DATA ASSESSMENTRegion
23127Skinner and Sherman
MACZ49ILM03.0
FYI
SITENO. OF SAMPLES/MATRIXREVIEWERREVIEWER'S NAMECOMPLETION DATE
Gallups Quarry Superfund
6 waterQSEAJnc.
Steven J. Lasky04/03/96
OATA ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
: ;' . - ' - — • « *
1. HOLDING TIMES
2. CALIBRATIONS
3. BLANKS
4.ICS
6. LCS
6. DUPLICATE ANALYSIS
7. MATRIX SPIKE
8. MSA
9. SERIAL DILUTION
10. SAMPLE VERIFICATION
11. OTHER QC
12. OVERALL ASSESSMENT
0
O
X
O
0
0
O
N/A
O
O
0
O
AA HB CYAIflOE
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
O
0
O
N/A
O
O
O
N/A
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
N/A
O
O
M
N/A
O
O
O
0
O = Data had no problems/or qualified due to minor problems.M = Data qualified due to major problems.Z * Data unacceptable.X= Problems, but do not affect data.
ACTION ITEMS
AREAS OF CONCERN: x-DETECTioN LIMITS WERE RAISED DUE TO BLANK CONTAMINATION.M»%R WAS OUTSIDE CRITERIA FOR CYANIDE: ALL DATA ESTIMATED.LAB DUPLICATE RESULTS FOR IRON CAUSED ESTIMATION OF POSITIVE RESULTS FOR MACZ60, MAEP14.MAEP16
NOTABLE PERFORMANCE:
FormlNT3-1t
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 26
Inc.*•REGION I Site Name Gallups Quarry SuperfundData Review Worksheets
REGION I REVIEW OF INORGANICCONTRACT LABORATORY DATA PACKAGE
TIER III VALIDATION LEVEL
The hardcopied skinner and Sherman Labs data package received at QSEA, Inc. has been reviewed and the qualityassurance and performance data summarized. The data review included:
Case No. _ 23127 _ SAS No. _ N/A _ Sampling Date(s) _ 01/11/95 _SDG. No. _ MACZ49 _ Matrix Water _ Shipping Date(s) _ 01/12/95 _No. of Samples 5 Metals. 6 cyanide Date Rec'd by Lab _ 01/13/95 _
Traffic Report Nos.: -999909 nMCz^/? fllACz.'fr mAEfi'-l -r>M b
SOW # ILM03.0 requires that specific analytical work be done and that associated reportsbe provided by the laboratory to the Regions, EMSL-LV, and SMO. The general criteria used to determine theperformance were based on an examination of:
» Data Completeness * Field Duplicates• Holding Times • Lab Control Sample Results* Calibrations * ICP Serial Dilution Results* Blanks * Detection Limit Results• ICP Interference Check Results « Sample Quantitation* Matrix Spike Recoveries• Laboratory Duplicates
Overall Comments DATA WAS ESTIMATED DUE TO POOR MATRIX SPIKE RECOVERY FOR CYANIDE AND LACK OF PRECISION FORIRON LAB DUPLICATES. BLANK CONTAMINATION WAS FOUND FOR 10 ANALYTES, CAUSING MODIFICATION OF RESULTS.
Definitions and Qualifiers:
A - Acceptable Data.J - Approximate data due to quality control criteria.R - Reject data due to quality control criteria.U - Analyte not detected
Reviewer Steven J. Lasky Date: 04/03/96
Form INT3-1
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 1
Q,siREC
'Dab
\.
7 A J*f /~i/l; JA/C.~'~~~< ~~~<^~ ~~~~^^^,^,^~^^,^^,~^^^, / ^^<^,^,,
jlONI3 Review Worksheets
DATA COMPLETENESS
MISSING INFORMATION DATE LAB CONTACTED DATA RECEIVED
None
FormlNn-3
******
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 2
QsiREC
. DaU
II.
?A Jmr ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~u<£ JL* Jl w v\*' »
SIONI3 Review Worksheets
HOLDING TIMES
Complete table for all samples and enter an 'X' beside the analysis date for samples not within criteria
hg CYANIDE OTHERSSAMPLE » DATE DATE DATE DATE pH ACTION
CCA Jvi/~ ~ ~ ~ ~OJJtti., .I/t-C'. ~~~.— ~~~^^,^,,
REGION IData Review Worksheets
III. B. INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION (Section 2)
2. Analytical Sequence Mark One
a. Did the laboratory use the proper number of standardsfor calibration as described in the SOW? Yes X No
b. Were calibrations performed at the beginning of eachanalysis? Yes X No
c. Were calibration standards analyzed at the beginningof sample analysis and at a minimum frequency of tenpercent or every two hours during analysis, whicheveris more frequent? Yes X No
d. Were the correlation coefficients for the calibrationcurves for AA, Hg, and CN >/= 0.995? Yes X No
e. Was the standard at 2xCRDL analyzed for all ICPanalyses? Yes X No
If NO,
The data may be affected. Use professional judgement to determine the severity of the effect andqualify the data accordingly. Discuss any actions below and list the samples affected.
FocmMTS-C
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 5
INORGANIC INITIAL CALIBRATION VERIFICATION
File Name ICV Date of Initial Calibration 01/27/95
ICP Analyte ALUMINUM
1949.2 \ 1878.0 100
Lab Value 103.8
103.8 %R
File Name N/A Date of Initial Calibration
Furnace Analyte Lab Value
File Name
Analyte
%R
ICV Date of Initial Calibration 01/23/95
Mercury Lab Value 100.4
5.0 \ 5.0 100 100.4 %R
File Name
Analyte
%R
ICV Date of Initial Calibration 01/18/95
Cyanide Lab Value 106.7
100.3 / 94.0 100 106.7 %R
FormtNTO-M
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 6
SEA, Inc.
INORGANIC CONTINUING CALIBRATION VERIFICATION
File Name CCV2 Date of Continuing Calibration 01/27/95
ICP Analyte BARIUM
2455.6 \ 2500.0
Lab Value 98.2
100 98.2 %R
File Name
Furnace Analyte
Date of Continuing Calibration
N/A Lab Value
File Name
Analyte
%R
CCV1 Date of Continuing Calibration 01/23/95
Mercury Lab Value 100.5
2.01 \ 2.0 100 100.5 %R
File Name
Analyte
%R
CCV3 Date of Continuing Calibration 01/18/95
Cyanide Lab Value 98.4
196.9 \ 200.0 100 98.5 %R
Form INT3-5B
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 7
Q SEA, Im
REGION 1• Data Review V\
IV. A. BLANh
List thewater t
1. Lat
2. Eq
3. Fre
a.
b.
If NO,Th€
and qu
• •
Worksheets
(ANALYSIS RESULTS (Sections 1-3)
5 blank contamination in Sections 1 & 2 below. A separate worksheet should be used for soil and)lanks.
moratory Blanks
DATE
01/27/95
01/27/95
01/27/95
01/27/95
01/27/95
ICB/CCB*
ICB1/CCB2
ICB1
ICB1/CCB1/CCB3
ICB1/CCB1
ICB1/CCB1/CCB3
PREP BLANK ANALYTE CONC^ug/U
Barium
Cadmium
Calcium
PBW Copper
PBW Iron
1.5/1.4
1.8
246.7/113.9/73.8
8.2/7.0/6.65
7.9/12.9/5.9/10.57
jipment/Trip Blanks
DATE
01/27/95
01/27/95
01/27/95
01/31/95
01/27/95
EQUIP BLANK *
MAEP15
MAEP15
MAEP15
MAEP15
MAEP15
quency Requirements
Was a preparation blank analyzed for eacfor every 20 samples and for each digestk
Was a calibration blank run every 10 samevery 2 hours whichever is more frequent'
j data may be affected. Use professional jalify the data accordingly. Discuss any ad
ANALYTE CONC.(u0/L)
Calcium 181
Copper 3.1
Iron 14
Lead 2.1
Manganese 0.95
h matrix,an batch? Yes X No
pies or? Yes X No
udgement to determine the severity of the effectlions below, and list the samples affected.
FormMn4
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 6
Q SEA, Im
REGION 1' Data Review V\
IV. A. BLANK
List thewater t
1. Lat
2. Eqi
^ .
Worksheets
C ANALYSIS RESULTS (Sections 1-3)
! blank contamination in Sections 1 & 2 below. A>lanks,
moratory Blanks
DATE
01/27/95
01/27/95
01/27/95
01/27/95
separate worksheet should be used for soil and
ICB/CCB* PREP BLANK ANALVTE CONC4V/U
ICB1/CCB1
ICB1
CCB2
ICB1/CCB1/CCB2/CCB3 PE
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
IW Zinc
1.6/0.8
3.1
-82.3
14.8/5.9/4.9/3.7/4.94
jipment/Trip Blanks
DATE
01/27/95
01/27/95
EQUIP BLANK * ANALYTE CONC.(ug/L)
MAEP15 Sod
MAEP15 Zi
ium 153
nc 7.4
3. Frequency Requirements
a. Was a preparation blank analyzed for each matrix,for every 20 samples and for each digestion batch? Yes X
b. Was a calibration blank run every 10 samples orevery 2 hours whichever is more frequent?
No
Yes X No
If NO.The data may be affected. Use professional judgement to determine the severity of the effect
and qualify the data accordingly. Discuss any actions below, and list the samples affected.
FormMT34
QSEA Fit* MA49F326.WB2 - 9
SEA,REGION IData Review Worksheets
IV. B. BLANK ANALYSIS RESULTS (Section 4)
4. Blank Actions
The Action Levels for any analyte is equal to five times the highest concentration of that element'scontamination in any blank. The action level for samples which have been concentrated or dilutedshould multiplied by the concentration/dilution factor. No positive sample result should be reportedunless the concentration of the analyte in the sample exceeds the Action Level (AL). Specific actionsare as follows:
a. When the concentration is greater than the IDL, but less than the Action Level, report the sampleconcentration detected with a U.
b. When the sample concentration is greater than the Action Level, report the sample concentrationunqualified.
Were Interference QC samples run at the beginning and endof each sample analysis run or a minimum of twice per 8-hourworking shift, whichever is more frequent? Yes X No
If NO,
The data may be affected. Use professional judgement to determine the severity of the effect andqualify the data accordingly. Discuss any actions below and list the samples affected.
FonnlNTS-8
QSEA Filo: MA49F326.WB2 - 11
SEA, Inc.REGION IData Review Worksheets
V. B. ICP INTERFERENCE CHECK SAMPLE (Section 3)
3. Report the concentration of any elements detected in the ICS A solution > 2xlDL that shouldnot be present.
Element
Sodium
CONO Detected m the ICS
927
Cone, of hitefNuwitftta<he ICS
AL CA FE MO
514927 529351 190348 543610
Estimate the concentration produced by the interfering element in all affected samples. See guidelinesfor examples. List the samples affected by interferences below:
SampleAffected
None
ElementAffected Sample Cone. (ug/L)
Sampte InterferantCone.
AL CA FE MO
EstimatedMM*.<ug/U
ACTIONS:
1. In general, the sample data can be accepted without qualification if the sample concentrations of Al, Ca,Fe, and Mg are less than 50% of their respective levels in the ICS solution.
2. Estimate (J) positive results for affected elements for samples with levels of interferents 50% or more of thatin the ICS solution.
3. Reject (R) positive results if the reported concentration is due entirely to the interfering element.
4. Estimate (UJ) non-detected results for which false negatives are suspect.
Give explanations for any actions taken below:
FonnlNT3-8
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 12
Q SEA, Inc.
ICP INTERFERENCE CHECK SAMPLE VERIFICATION
Lab File Name
Analyte
ICS%R
ICSAB-lnitial
ZINC Lab Value 102.4
1025.2 1001.0 x 100 102.4
Lab File Name
Analyte
ICS%R
ICSAB-Final
Magnesium Lab Value 103.3
551330.0 533685.0 x 100 103.3
Form INT3-9A
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 13
SEA, Inc.*REGION IData Review Worksheets
VI. MATRIX SPIKE
TR # MAEP16S * MATRIX: Water
1. Recovery Criteria
List the percent recoveries for analytes which did not meet the required criteria.
S - amount of spike addedSSR - spikes sample resultSR - sample result
Amrfytt SSR SR S %R Action
Cyanide 225.57 0 500 45.1 Apply "UJ"
Matrix Spike Actions apply to all samples of the same matrix.
ACTIONS:
1. If the sample concentration exceeds the spike concentration by a factor of 4 or more,no action is taken.
2. If any analyte does not meet the %R criteria, follow the actions stated below:
PERCENT RECOVERY00% 30%-74% >12fi%
Positive Sample ResultsNon-detected Results
JR
JUJ
JA
2 Frequency Criteria
a. Was a matrix spike prepared at the requiredfrequency? Yes
b. Was a post digestion spike analyzed for elementsthat did not meet required criteria for matrix spikerecovery? Yes
* A separate worksheet should be used for each matrix spike pair.
he concentrations of any analyte not meeting the criteria for duplicate precision. For soil duplicates,late the CRDL in mg/kg using the sample weight, volume, and percent solids data for the sample.3te what criteria was used to evaluate precision by marking an 'X' beside the RPD or CRDL for eachent.
atory Duplicate Actions should be applied to all other samples of the same matrix type.
ONS:
Estimate (J) positive results for elements which have an RPD >20% for waters and > 35% for soils.
If sample results are less than 5x the CRDL, estimate (J) positive results for elements whose absolutedifference is >CRDL, (2xCRDL for soils). If both samples are non-detected, the RPD is not calculated(NC).
FonnlNT»-11
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 16
Q SEA, Inc.
DUPLICATE SAMPLE ANALYSIS
Sample ID
ICP Analyte
25927
MAEP16S
CALCIUM Lab Value 0.1
25899 / 25927 25899 / 2 100 = 0.11
Sample ID
Furnace Analyte
Sample -
File Name
N/A Lab Value
Duplicate / Sample Duplicate I 2 100 ERR
Sample ID
Analyte
NO DETECTIONS
MAEP16D
Mercury Lab Value N/A
Sample ID
Analyte
NO DETECTIONS
MAEP16D
Cyanide Lab Value N/A
PormMT3-11A
QSEA Hie: MA49F326.WB2 - 17
REGION IData Review Worksheets
VIM. FIELD DUPLICATES "NONE IDENTIFIED
List the concentrations of ail analytes in the field duplicate pair. For soil duplicates, calculate the CRDLin mg/kg using the sample weight, volume, and percent solids data for the sample. Indicate what criteriawas used to evaluate precision by marking an 'X' beside the RPD or CRDL for each element.
Field Duplicate Actions should be applied to all other samples of the same matrix type.
ACTIONS:
1. Estimate (J) positive results for elements which have an RPD >30% for waters and > 50% for soils.
2. If sample results are less than 5x the CRDL, estimate (J) positive results for elements whose absolutedifference is >2xCRDL, (4xCRDL for soils). If both samples are non-detected, the RPD is not calculated(NC).
t any LCS recoveries not within the 80-120% criteria and the samples affected.
DATE ELEMENT i : %R ACTION SAMPLES Af ECTED
None
id LCS
any analytes that were not within the control windows set by the EPA for the solid LCS sample.; 80-120% criteria is not used to evaluate solid LCS results.
ELEMENT LCS CONG, : CONTROL WINDOWS ACTION SAMPLES AFFECTED
ACTIONS:
PERCENT RECOVERYAqueous LCS <SO% 51-7*% >128%
Positive Sample Results R J JNon-detected Sample Results R UJ A
SottdLCS ^AfcsnfrolWtodOTW >t*»A Control WindowsPositive Sample Results J J
Non-detected Sample Results UJ A
quency Criteria
Was an LCS analyzed for every matrix, everydigestion batch, and every 20 samples?
_X Instrument Detection Limit results were present and found to be less than the ContractRequired Detection Limits.
IDLs were not included in the data package on Form XI.
IDLs were present, but the criteria was not met for the following elements:
2. Reporting Requirements
Were sample results on Form I reported down to the IDL notthe CRDL for all analytes? Yes X No
N/A Were sample results that were analyzed by ICP for Se, Tl,As, or Pb at least 5x IDL? Yes No
Were sample weights, volumes, and dilutions taken intoaccount when reporting detection limits on Form I? Yes X No
If NO,The reported results may be inaccurate. Make the necessary changes on the datasummary tables and request that the laboratory resubmit the corrected data.
FormWTJ.1*
QSEA File: MA49F326.WB2 - 24
\^f
„ REGION IData Review Worksheets
XIII. SAMPLE QUANTITATION
_X Sample results fall within the linear range for ICP and within the calibrated range for all otherparameters.
Sample results were beyond the linear range/calibration range of the instrument for the following"samples/elements:
In the space below, please show a minimum of one sample calculation per method:
ICP
100.00 / 100.00 X33196.00 (mg/L) X 1.00 33196
Sample ID = MACZ50, Calcium Lab Value = 33200 ug/L
FURNACE
N/A
MERCURY
-0.09 (mg/L) x 100.00 / 100.00 1.00 -0.0890
SamplelD = MAEP15 Lab Value = 0.2U
CYANIDE
-0.50 (mg/L) x 50.00 / 50.00 1.00 -0.5000
SamplelD = MAEPl5 Lab Value = 10.0U
For coil samples, the following equation may be necessary to convert raw data values (usually reported in ug/L)to actual sample concentrations (mg/kg):
The lab is required to use 1 gram sample (wet weight) to 200 ml.
Wet weight concentration =
digest cone, in (ug / L) x (200ml /1 gm) x (1L / 1000ml) x (1000gm / 1kg) x (1mg / 1000ug) = mg / kg
In addition, the sample results are converted to dry weight using the percent solids calculations:
(Wet weight cone / %solids) x 100 = final concentration, dry weight (mg / kg)
