Laserfiche WebLink
Review of the SWMU 8 Data Quality Validation Documentation <br /> Supplemental Appendix E of the Draft Explanation of Significant Differences <br /> to the Site-Wide Comprehensive Record of Decision <br /> Defense Distribution Depot San Joaquin (DDJC) Tracy Site, <br /> Tracy, California <br /> November 2003 <br /> GENERAL COMMENTS <br /> 1. It appears that the data quality assessment(DQA) does not discuss all of the samples <br /> analyzed for this project. For example, although Table 5-2, Summary of Samples <br /> Collected, lists samples as being tested for metals, the DQA does not discuss the metals <br /> results or the qualifiers listed in the metals data validation reports (DVRs). Also, not all <br /> samples listed on Table 5-2 appear in Table 5-1,Final Confirmation Sample Results, <br /> even though they were analyzed and underwent data verification/validation (e.g., SS- <br /> 0098, SS-0099, etc). Please revise the DQA to provide a discussion on all samples <br /> involved in this project. Also, include all of the samples analyzed in Table 5-1, or <br /> explain why certain samples are missing from this table. <br /> 2. Section 5.4.1 of the DQA appears to indicate that sample compounds that exceed QC <br /> criteria were qualified as estimated (UJ). However, it is unclear if positive results were <br /> also qualified as "UT' or if no positive results were reported. Please revise Appendix E to <br /> clarify how both positive and non-detected sample results will be qualified due to QC <br /> exceedances. <br /> 3. Not all of the sample qualifiers listed in the DVRs appear in Table 5-5, Qualified Sample <br /> Results, and the Sharpe/Tracy Qualified Results tables included with the DVRs. For <br /> example, the DVR on Method SW8081A for sample delivery group (SDG) 02-5623 <br /> indicates samples should be qualified as J/UJ for toxaphene due to a continuing <br /> calibration verification (CCV) % difference (%D) exceeding quality control criteria. <br /> However, samples SS0095, SS0096, SS0097, SS0100 and SS0101 are not listed as being <br /> qualified for toxaphene on Table 5-5 or the Sharpe/Tracy Qualified Results table. Please <br /> revise the tables to include all sample compounds that need qualification. <br /> 4. It appears that the DVRs indicate that sample SS0146-SO-323 was not analyzed despite <br /> being listed on the chain of custodies and being requested for validation. According to <br /> Table 5-2, this sample was collected. Please clarify why this sample was not tested for <br /> the all of the analytes listed on the chain of custody. <br /> 5. The DVRs indicate no surrogate was analyzed for Method SW-846 (SW) 8321. <br /> However, it appears that a surrogate is required by the method and the Comprehensive <br /> Field Work Plan, Quality Assurance Project Plan, Volume 2 of 2, Version 3.0 (QAPP). <br /> Please revise the appropriate DVRs to include how the data is affected by this apparent <br /> discrepancy and explain why a surrogate was not used. <br /> 1 <br />