Laserfiche WebLink
1f��t„ &y � .1,..•. � x'a^I'�`'.�"'� -�z��`�SS^ ,- rit„"'�6�F`I` ..�`'!" ;n3f'""° -t-t" '.c'.,�� � �«-s.`V.J k�`''`.'_",s�, f-� � ` `'-�"rt ��_-�5 ��i a-.,,�� r 1x., <br /> 5'�y�t .1-'�. __ - r1�• yr e` �r:L�,�P �?_ � r�i34�.�"�f'ir,« 5x <br /> kFAL <br /> w <br /> [d } <br /> 5yyttF V; <br /> tHy <br />�FD cit <br /> is r <br /> d1• <br /> r.., <br /> iw ....: <br /> i W' r <br /> Project Number- SFS-175-0264.)12 <br /> �' COnaultent Prgbct Number. 2W-1753291 <br /> Corltrad rVumbar: N46CWM244-9-X <br /> Faririty Humber: 9*559 <br /> wbrlr Aller Number, EW4 739 <br /> r7aport 1ss„a Gate: Ap111 19W <br /> CA Conformance Summary <br /> PCBs In Soil <br /> EPA Method 8080 <br /> 1.0 plank <br /> Zero of 7 target compounds found In Reagent blank as shown in Table 2- <br /> 2.0 fnd�nerxt nt ht k m f <br /> The Contra fimfts were met for 1 of 1 QC check compound In the aqueous CC check sample <br /> as Shown In Table 3, <br /> 3.0 <br /> V I R <br /> Recovery limits were met for the surrogale cornpourld for all samples as shown in Table 4- <br /> 4.O fk <br /> Racovery limits were met for 1 of 1 con--pound in the MS as shown In Table 5. <br /> 5.0 <br /> Relative Percent Difference (RPD) criteria were: met for 7 of 7 compounds In the sample <br /> duplicate as shown In Table 6. <br /> 6.0 <br /> 6.1 Sample hand"ng and holding time criteria were met for all samples- <br /> &2 There were no exceptior-il conditions requiring dilution of samples. <br /> t <br /> GTEL Concord,CA <br /> tXl N 139.DQC Papa 2 nl 7 <br /> MGTELI <br /> LAIOOAIOP411-INC. <br />