(D

USZZ, UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYREGION III

CENTRAL REGIONAL LABORATORY839 BESTGATE ROAD

ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND 21401

September 26, 1988

Mr. Dave StewartVIAR and CompanySample Management Office209 Madison Street, Suite 200Alexandria, Virginia 22314

Re: C & D Recycling (SAS 3932C)

Dear Mr. Stewart:

Our review of SAS 3932C data clearly shows that it isunquestionably non-compliant and essentially useless.The list of non-compliances and documentation of theclaims are detailed in the enclosed report. The detailsin our report are intended to facilitate rejection andnon-payment for the data.

Please call me after you have reviewed our report.

Sincerely,

Chuck SandsRegion III CLP DPO

Enclosure

cc: Donna McCartney (3HW12)Pat Krantz (3ES23) w/o endMike Carter (OS230)Terry Shaughnessy, SMO

Date: September 21, 1988 Page 1 of 2SAS: 3932CSite Name: C&D RecyclingContract Lab: Environmental Protection ServicesLab DPO: Lou BevilacquaReviewer: Milagros Javellana

ESAT Region III, (301) 266-9887Sample Nos.: 3932C-1-3

DPO ISSUES

1. The laboratory did not follow the TOG procedure forsediment samples as specified in the SAS request. Thelab's SOP for soil samples was not appropriate.There was a good chance that the volatile organics mayhave been lost during sample preparation. Theintroduction of a very small amount (40 ul) of slurryto the instrument may not be representative. See page 3-5, Attachment C.

2. The lab did not provide the raw data which was specifiedin the contract. The raw data was later submitted butthe duplicate (run as MS/MSD, according to the lab'sdata sheet) was not included. See page 6-7,Attachment C.

3. The method blank was not reported on the data sheet.The SAS contract specified that all QC results will betabulated in the report. The lab resubmitted thedata sheet with the method blank reported. See page 1& 8, Attachment C.

4. The laboratory work sheet has g/Kg units for allresults, but the data sheet has mg/Kg. The labresubmitted the corrected worksheet. See page 9,Attachment C.

5. There are several issues concerning the calculation ofTOC values and these are :

a) In the laboratory's SOP for TOC in soils, itspecified that about 50 mg is weighed out.However, the sample weight written on the rawdata indicated approximately 5, (units were notwritten). See page 3 and 6, Attachment C.

b) The raw data provided has remarks "SUSPECTDATA" on each reading.

AR3029U

Date: September 21, 1988 Page 2 of 2SAS: 3932CSite Name: C&D RecyclingContract Lab: Environmental Protection ServicesLab DPO: Lou BevilacquaReviewer: Milagros Javellana

ESAT Region III (301) 266-9887Sample Nos.: 3932C-1-3

c) The equation for calculating TOC provided bythe laboratory is not clear. The reviewercould not arrive at the values obtained bythe lab. This issue was discussed with thelab twice but there was no satisfactoryresponse from the lab. See page l and 2,Attachment C.

d) The portion of the raw data submitted for themethod blank indicates that the instrumentreading is a direct TOC concentration since thesame figure was reported on the data sheet.This is not consistent with the other valuesreported on the data sheet. See page 7 & 10,Attachment C.

Hi3029 IS

ATTACHMENT C

SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION

AB3029I6

OL

In Reference to Case No(s):

Contract Laboratory ProgramREGIONAL/LABORATORY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

Telephone Record Log

Date of Call:

Laboratory Name:Lab Contact: f)G V /

Region: \J> ,Regional Contact: //Iy

Call Initiated By: __ Laboratory tr Region

In reference to data for the following sample number(s):/?//

Summary of Questions/Issues Discussed:A

M&.________/• • ' x/

JL

Summary of Resolution: ^ V fl

A

^ ig ^ yv >. J LAf> C>rift r *Ja*ruS./&, 6 . fJ&**#+***»*i*T\ JLft j[)pJ * ^

0. TLi. A/ < vl kc3/ /) £\ r\** * \ t / /_ ^A * */ """ """ ' — T-TT_I.' M_r "~-y*- -t' ^ v/ / ^^

W*. LASignature// / x Date/

Distribution: (1) Lab Copy, (2) Region Copy, (3) SMO'Copy"- "" "" "•""•"

v " W - —•

/ zgt A- fIn Reference to Case No(s):

Contract Laboratory ProgramREGIONAL/LABORATORY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

Telephone Record Log

Date of Call: 9/f/** J~ ?/?/&)

Laboratory Name: Af4rA/(LO____________Lab Contact: GN&sV'~d JB/fe /5* n, 7er

Region: J[£ __________________Regional Contact: tti/G.Gr&f fiICall Initiated By: __ Laboratory iX"Region

In reference to data for the following sample number(s):off

Summary of Questions/Issues Discussed:3 -

9/S/fl 4.

Summary of Resolu<non:

/I

Signature J jj y Date7

Distribution: (1) Lab Copy, (2) Region Copy, (3) SMO Copy

cv-»

p\v cPrVC

To c.

D.•> m>e.vgK oO-V- ScnO (oN=oOV So

5}

So,

CH

Coofturtion Do-*8Microbel-nc* •

Hd vitn 900

10 percent

Copper oxide fines

. ^ - . ^ r * 1 * - .

'AR302.920

3-73

gSf ,3f™j- -'_ _ y

'i:*T '"Psy .Calculations

•• The car ten content of the sample can be calculated as:<c « weight of tube (after-before) „ 37 29

sample veight

Derivation of factor:

__ „ 12.011 (aoleeular veight carbon) loot27'zy U.011 (molecular veight carbon dioxide) " 1TO>

« When the total sample results are used, the result ispercent carbon in the sample. When acid-treated samples are used, theresult is percent organic carbon. Inorganic carbon is calculated astotal carbon minus organic carbon.

Method 2: Differential Combustion**54 • *

ApparatusSargent programmed aicrocombustion apparatus or equivalentMicrobe! ance•Procedure

~ - Air dry the sediment sample. Using a mortar and pestle,grind the sample to pass a 100-aesh screen.

Combust a known veight of sediment at a programmed heatingrate of 300° to 950°C in 10 ain and then aaintain 950°C for 20 ain.Trap the CO: in ascarite and record the veight as total carbon. Asample size should be selected that vill produce 25 to 50 ag CO:.

Weigh a second portion of the dried sediment. Combust thisv sample at a programmed rate of 300° to 650°C in 10 ain and aaintain:• J1~650®c" for'20 ain. Trap the CO: in ascarite and record the veight as

organic carbon.Calculations *

The total carbon concentration, ct» of the sample (in ag/g)is calculated as follows:

* ct « <**>. g

where*t - veight of C0» erolred at 950°C, ag IB30292 I

3-7U

-\

i Tec vc-'-T:--A-NCRMr

£ TOCSTD-

3 TOC 16?.;ABNORMAL LOW SSUSPE2T DATA

4_ 730 39C.&

SUSPECT'DATATDC

LOW STDSUSPECT DATA •

TOC 1678PECT DATA

~ TCr 1445

5 TOC 117.1 triSMOF.KAL LOW ST

DATA

JL LOW STD i-

SUSPECT DATA

22 TOO 1844KSNORfiAL LOW ST9:--J:--?E:.T DATA

SUSPECT DATA

1? TC'CABNORMAL HIGH STD

AR302922'- • - , •; . • jf.

" SATURATED

%*• .?-&:>.•£ -~'.

/u

*?3

rocT'e o'JV*cT '

ftR302923

•> : v , »' '''• i f

e 3/QIOOOOD2 'U.S. EPA - CLP

TOC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

K-e: HANCO LABORATORY, INC Contr»ct:

tab Co*. HAH* Case Ho.: ' SAS Ho.: 3932C SOG Ho.: 3932C-1

SOW Ho.: . . . . . .

HO. • ' ResultKG/KG

3932C-1 0.73

•3932C-2 '•-'••:.-'-$ •••' -- I-"..-.- -20.6 ,

3932C-3 30.1

QC S«ple NO. ResultMG/KG

3S64J-33-194MS *°-6 102'°MSO *2-3 106'°

SEP 03 '68 11:13 NfiNCO *-/ «Ae^ /

**********************************NANCO LABS, INC.

*********************************

Reporting Data:

Results of analysis on sample received:

CUSTOMER SAMPLE iDt Q

NANCO SAMPLE ID ''S^^C——3 ~<

PARAMETERS RESULTS • UNITS

ToiL"' ' 30i I

QC SAMPLE NO. I 3 SWj*— 53 '/ RESULT ' %RECOVERY

MSMSD

ALL RESULTS ARE EXPRESSED IN U6/L UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED

ND - NOT DETECTED MRL »' MINIMUM REPORTING LEVEL

MRL « 5 MG/KGMRL - 5 UG/L

Afi 3829 2-5

or

U.S. EPA • CU>

TOC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

Lab Kant: MANCO LABORATORY, IHC Contract:

Lab Code: MANCO Ca»« Mo.: SAS Mo.: 3932C SOG Mo.: 3932C-1

SOU Mo.:

Saeplt MO. ResultMG/KG

3932C-1 °'73

3932C-2 20-6

3932C-3 30-1

QC Sanpte KO. Result X RecoveryKG/KG

3S64J-33-194*0-6 102'°

HSO *2.3 106.0

Hethod Blank ResultKG/KG

Blank 7-12-88 0.92

AR302926