Laserfiche WebLink
EPA Comments on the <br /> Draft Final <br /> "Comprehensive Field Work Plan <br /> Version 3.0 <br /> Volume 1 Field Procedures <br /> Volume 2 Quality Assurance Project Plan" <br /> dated February, 2001 <br /> VOLUME 1 FIELD PROCEDURES <br /> 1. The responses appear to have adequately addressed all of our comments. <br /> VOLUME 2 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP) <br /> 1. Specific Comment 1: Even though Table 4-1 was updated, it still does not include all <br /> seven steps of the DQO process. Now it is missing step 7 "Optimize the Design for <br /> Obtaining Data." Please revise the table to include the entire seven step DQO process. <br /> 2. Specific Comment 4: The response states that"... if contamination is within 5 times (10 <br /> times for common laboratory contaminants) of the amount reported in the blank,the <br /> sample results are "U" flagged and are considered non-detect." The response and Table <br /> 8-1 in Section 8.0 do not indicate the corrective action that will be taken if gross <br /> contamination is found in the trip blank. According to the National Functional <br /> Guidelines (NFG's), "If gross contamination exists (i.e. saturated peaks by GC/MS), all <br /> affected compounds in the associated samples should be qualified as unusable (R) due to <br /> interference." Please indicate in the text the corrective action that will be taken if gross <br /> contamination is present in all associated blanks. In addition,revise Table 8-1 to include <br /> this corrective action. <br /> 3. Specific Comment 5: The response states that review of the primary and secondary <br /> column results will be done during data validation and during data quality audits. <br /> However, the tables were not revised. Please revise the "Acceptance Criteria" section of <br /> Table 8 to state that both columns will be quantitative (i.e. calibration standards are run <br /> on both columns) and that the percent difference in identified compounds concentrations <br /> between the columns will be calculated, in order to be consistent with NFG's and specific <br /> method such as Method 8081A Section 7.5.5. and Method 8000. Also,please revise the <br /> "Corrective Action" section of the table to provide corrective action that will be taken if <br /> the percent difference(%D)between the two columns is greater than 40%, in order to be <br /> consistent with Method 8081A Section 7.5.5. <br /> 1 <br />