Laserfiche WebLink
tV2- INF <br /> (Date/Initials) <br /> EDT C�p ked <br /> "agged <br /> x. <br /> Data Evaluation Checklist--GCMMS Analyses <br /> Project ID: All M* Method: TO-115 <br /> Reviewer's Initials and Date Reviewed: 1�3�Ob SDG: 051 ZZ 42t" <br /> Review guestions Yes No NA Sample (Anal tes) Affected/Comments Fla <br /> 1. Were holding times met? I lei b <br /> 2. Were sample preservation requirements met? <br /> 3. Was cooler receipt form completed? ✓ <br /> 4. Was method blank analyzed with each batch?Did the blank <br /> meet QC criteria? ✓ <br /> 5. Were target analytes reported in field blank or rinsate <br /> samples above the MDL? ✓ <br /> G. Was a field duplicate analyzed?Were RPDs within project <br /> specifications? ✓ <br /> 7. Was an LCS analyzed with each batch?Did recoveries meet <br /> QC criteria? <br /> 8. Was an MS/MSD pair analyzed with each batch?Were V/recoveries and RPDs within project specifications? <br /> 9. If an MS/MSD was not analyzed, was an LCS/LCSD <br /> analyzed?Were recoveries and RPDs within project limits? <br /> 10. Were surrogate recoveries within project specifications? ✓ <br /> Initial Calibration: <br /> 1 la. Were tune criteria met? NQ <br /> 1 lb. Were SPCC and CCC criteria met? <br /> 1 le, Did all calibration analytes meet criteria? <br /> 1 1d. Did the second source initial calibration verification meet <br /> project criteria? <br /> Continuing Calibration: <br /> 12a. Were tune criteria met? <br /> 12b. Were SPCC and CCC criteria met? <br /> 12c. Did all calibration analytes meet criteria? V/ <br /> 13. Did internal standards meet criteria? I.1Q <br /> 14. Was the case narrative complete? \/ <br />