Response to EPA Comments: RCRA Facility Investigation Phase I ...
Response to EPA Comments: RCRA Facility Investigation Phase I ...
Response to EPA Comments: RCRA Facility Investigation Phase I ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Dr. Brian Abcabam<br />
TaigetEaviroamcntal Servioes. Inc.<br />
April 2.1997<br />
|Migeof2<br />
I also request documentation that can be used <strong>to</strong> resolve the situations and questions described below.<br />
• Some numerical values in Target's analytical summary report are not quahfied, even though<br />
they are less than the practical quantitation hmit (PQL). Can Target provide documentati(xi<br />
explaining why a "j " flag is not specified in such instances?<br />
• There are instances where quantitation reports for different samples indicate the presence of a<br />
compound at a concentration exceeding the PQL (e.g. 1,2,3-trichloropropane), but die<br />
summary rqxirt indicates "ND" for the conqxxmd. Why is this so?<br />
• The qiiantifafioo reports show that, for numerous field samples, the ctxnpounds 1,2,3trichloropropane<br />
and m&p xylene are detected at fiiirly consistent concentrations. Also, both<br />
conqxxmds exceed the PQL, but dieir values are not stated in the summary rqx>rt. Please<br />
explain.<br />
• The Spike Recovery and RPD Summary Report indicates that equipment blank sample<br />
EQB2MS.D was spiked. The sample was not spiked with the two primary analytes of<br />
concern, namely tetrachloroethylene and vinyl chloride. Is it not good labora<strong>to</strong>ry practice <strong>to</strong><br />
spike a sample with the target compounds, especially when there are only two such targets?<br />
• The Continuing Cahbration Report indicates a value of zero for target parameter<br />
_ tetrachloroethylene. Are there any data indicating that ccnitinuing cahbration verification for<br />
this compound was performed?<br />
• Do you have any data indicating that soil gas samples were spiked? Do lab procedures or<br />
physical fiic<strong>to</strong>rs preclude such a practice? Please explain.<br />
• The chroma<strong>to</strong>grams for samples I7-42DUP, 17-42 and Method Blank 1 show an unidentified<br />
peak next <strong>to</strong> peak 14S. Please provide data that identify this peak, or explain why this<br />
questi(» is irrelevant.<br />
I tr\ist that this letter clarifies the type of raw data that I need. I look forward <strong>to</strong> speaking <strong>to</strong> you before<br />
week's end <strong>to</strong> determine tbe availabiUty of data and/or responses <strong>to</strong> my questions.<br />
Thank you for your attaxtioa in this matter.<br />
Very truly yours,<br />
Wilham R. McTigue, Jr<br />
Direc<strong>to</strong>r, Environmental AfEairs<br />
cc: T. Niblett, G. Lawrence, A. Kao
Change language