Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> 1 4p <br /> ARCADIS GERAGHTY&MILLER <br /> The duplicate water sample taken (sample number NP-2-DUP1) was a blind duplicate <br />' of sample number NP-2-118 For all compounds, the concentration reported for the sample <br /> compares favorably with the concentration reported for the duplicate Concentrations of the <br />' compounds detected at the laboratory in the duplicate samples are shown in Table 54 below <br /> The bottom row in the table shows the difference in the sample concentrations expressed as a <br />' percent of the NP-2-118 sample concentration <br />' Table 5-4. Comparison of blind duplicate sample results(ug/L),NP-2 <br /> Sample No TPHg MTBE benzene toluene ethylbenzene xylenes <br /> NP-2-118 350 ND<0 5 110 9 3 14 18 <br /> NP-2- 420 44 85 12 16 11 <br /> DUP1* <br /> % dniF from 20 --** 227 29 142 38 9 <br /> NP-2-DUP 1 <br /> Notes * NP-2-DUPI is ablmd duplicate of NP-l-!60 <br /> **Detection in NP-2-DUPl is attributed to interference from other petroleum hydrocarbons <br /> Method blanks for soil samples taken with the Simulprobe were nondetect for TPHg, <br /> MTBE, and BTEX compounds Method blanks for water samples taken with the Sunulprobe <br /> were also nondetect for TPHg, MTBE,BTEX compounds <br />' Laboratory QC procedures performed on soul samples NP-1-100 and NP-2-100 were <br />' all within acceptable ranges for matrix spike recovery, matrix spike duplicate recovery, and <br /> relative percent difference Laboratory QC procedures performed on the laboratory water <br />' sample duplicate (NP-2-DUP1), the laboratory control sample, and the laboratory control <br /> sample duplicate were also within acceptable ranges for matrix spike recovery, matrix spike <br /> duplicate recovery, and relative percent difference <br /> Detailed laboratory QC reporting and the results of the QA/QC sample analyses are <br /> included in Appendix F <br />' 27 <br />