13.01.2013 Views

Dames & Moore, 1999 - USDA Forest Service

Dames & Moore, 1999 - USDA Forest Service

Dames & Moore, 1999 - USDA Forest Service

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

June 25, 1998<br />

Ventilator Portal, June 1998, Holden Mine<br />

Page 2<br />

concentration in the blank.are qualified as not detected and flagged "U" accordingly. Results between 5X<br />

and 10X the concentrations detected in the method blank are qualified as estimated and flagged "J" ,<br />

accordingly. Results reported as not detected or greater than 10X the concentration detected in the<br />

method blank do not require qualification.<br />

6. Internal Standards (ICP MS analysis only) - Acceptable<br />

7. ICP Interference Check (ICP analysis only) -Acceptable<br />

8. Laboratory Control Sample - Acceptable<br />

9. Laboratory Duplicate Sample - Not Applicable<br />

A laboratory duplicate was not performed due to the limited number of samples.<br />

10. Field Duplicate - Not Applicable<br />

1 1. Matrix Spike - Not Applicable<br />

A matrix spike was not performed due to the limited number of samples.<br />

12. . ICP Serial Dilution (ICP analysis only) - Acceptable<br />

13. Detection Liniits - Acceptable<br />

14. Type of Review - Summary<br />

15. Overall Assessment of Data<br />

The usefulness of the data is based on EPA guidance documents listed above. Upon<br />

consideration of the information presented above, the data are acceptable except where flagged with data<br />

qualifiers that modify the usefulness of the individual values.<br />

The result for dissolved zinc is reported as 41 1 ugIL; however, the zinc concentration reported for<br />

the total fraction is 4 ug1L. The ICP raw data was reviewed for calculations and no errors were identified.<br />

The laboratory analyzed a serial dilution on the dissolved fraction, reanalyzed dissolved fraction directly<br />

from the original sample container, and reviewed calculations. No errors were identified and the<br />

reanalyses of the dilutions and additional sample resulted in concentrations similar to 411 ugIL. This<br />

result appears to be an anomaly and should be considered as such during data evaluation and use.<br />

Data Qualifiers<br />

. U The analyte was analyzed for, but was not detected above the reported sample quantitation limit.<br />

J The analyte. was positively identified; the associated numerical value is the approximate<br />

concentration of the analyte in the sample. '<br />

UJ The analyte was not detected above the reported sample quantitation limit. However, the<br />

reported quantitation limit is approximate and may or may not represent the actual limit of<br />

quantitation necessary to accurately and precisely measure the analyte in the sample.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!