Laserfiche WebLink
QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL <br />• California Army National Guard, Stockton FMS #24 — Phase 2 Sampling (October 2007) <br />Groundwater, soil and soil gas samples were collected at the Stockton Field Maintenance Shop (FMS) <br />#24 on 3 to 5 October 2007. Samples were collected to evaluate potential contamination at the FMS. Soil, <br />soil gas, and groundwater samples were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), total petroleum <br />hydrocarbons as diesel (TPHD), and TPH as gasoline (TPHG) by the on-site laboratory, Field Portable <br />Analytical (FPAO) from Orangevale, California. All metals analyses were performed by Alpha Analytical <br />Laboratories located in Ukiah. In addition, confirmation samples were submitted to Alpha Analytical <br />Laboratories and Air Toxics, Ltd., from Folsom, California. The following summarizes the samples <br />collected: <br />• VOCs by MI8MS (soil gas) — Six samples, including one field duplicate. <br />• TPHG by M18MS (soil gas) — Six samples, including one field duplicate. <br />• TPHD by M18MS (soil gas) — Six samples, including one field duplicate. <br />• VOCs by SW8260B (for soil and groundwater) —Twenty-two samples, including three field <br />duplicates and one equipment blank. <br />• TPHG by SW 8260-G (for soil and groundwater) — Twenty-two samples, including three field <br />duplicates and one equipment blank. <br />• • TPHD by SW8260-D (for soil and groundwater) —Twenty-two samples, including three field <br />duplicates and one equipment blank. <br />• Metals by SW6010, arsenic by SW7060, selenium by SW7740, mercury SW7470/7471 (for soil and <br />groundwater) — Twenty-two samples, including three field duplicates and one equipment blank. <br />The field data results were evaluated for external contamination, precision, and accuracy using laboratory <br />and field quality control samples. Overall, the data results are valid and can be used for site characteri- <br />zation. There were no rejected data; however, several results for all three matrices were qualified as <br />estimated concentrations based on the validation process. Any qualified (flagged) data should be used <br />with caution during data interpretation. Soil results were reported on a wet weight basis; therefore all <br />detections are qualified for potential low bias (J). Table I provides a list of all qualified data for normal <br />samples. The following bullets summarize the qualified data results for the normal field samples. <br />• For field laboratory (FPAO) soil gas samples, twenty-three results were qualified as estimated <br />concentrations because the reported value was greater than the method detection limit (MDL) but less <br />than the practical quantitation limit (PQL). <br />• For fixed laboratory (Air Toxics, Limited [ATL]) soil gas samples, three results were qualified as <br />estimated concentrations because the reported values exceeded the calibration range. Six results were <br />qualified for potential high bias due to high continuing calibration verification (CCV) sample <br />recoveries. One result was qualified for poor field duplicate precision. <br />• For field laboratory VOC samples (groundwater and soil), two results were qualified as estimated <br />0 concentrations because the reported value was greater than the MDL but less than the PQL and <br />K:\WpmcessM251\CA ARNOStockton FMS 24 SI\Appx D\QA FMS 24.doc "-' <br />