Literature cited




старонка2/17
Дата канвертавання27.04.2016
Памер2.52 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   17

APPENDIX A - 1998 DEP DWM NASHUA RIVER BASIN QA/QC REPORT



INTRODUCTION
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) activities were conducted as part of the DEP DWM Nashua River Basin Monitoring Survey in 1998 (Kimball 1998 sections I, II, and IV). The QA/QC review was conducted to ensure that the collection and analysis of the monitoring data followed approved standard operating procedures (SOPs) and that data collected met data quality objectives (DQO’s). The 1998 monitoring data subjected to this QA/QC review includes the following: discrete water samples, in-situ water quality measurements and fish tissue samples. All discrete water sample and fish tissue monitoring data were reviewed independently by the Wall Experiment Station’s (WES) Quality Assurance Program, the Division of Watershed Management’s (DWM) Quality Assurance Officer, Assessment Coordinator, and the DWM database manager. All in-situ water quality measurements were reviewed independently by DWM’s Hydrolab® Instrument Coordinator and Database Manager. Data that fell outside established QA/QC acceptance criteria were investigated and may have been subject to censoring. The Quality Assurance/Quality Control appendix is divided into three sections: A.1 field and laboratory data objectives; A.2 QA/QC data; A.3 analytical methods.
A.1 Field and Laboratory QA/QC Objectives
Data collected by DWM in the 1998 Nashua River Basin Survey was subject to field and laboratory data quality objectives. Section A.1.1 outlines the field collection objectives and laboratory quality control for discrete water samples. Section A.1.2 includes fish tissue laboratory quality control methods and Section A.1.3 includes Hydrolab QA/QC procedures.
A.1.1 Discrete Water Sample Data
FIELD
A detailed QA/QC assessment of the four data quality objectives and additional DWM quality assurance observations for the 1998 Nashua River Basin data can be found in the 1998 QA/QC Assessment Report (MA DEP 2000).
The collection of discrete water sample analytes followed DWM Standard Operating Procedures (MA DEP 1999b). Four field collection quality control criteria were applied to the Nashua River Basin 1998 discrete water sample data:
1.0 Sampling/Analysis Holding Time: Each analyte has a standard holding time that has been established to ensure sample/analysis integrity. Refer to DWM Standard Operating Procedure Table 1.0 CN# 1.0 (MA DEP 1999b) for a complete listing. If the standard holding time was exceeded, this objective is violated and data are censored.
2.0 Quality Control Sample Frequency: At a minimum, one field blank and one replicate must be collected for every ten samples by any given sampling crew on any given date. If less than one quality control sample per 10 field samples was collected, this objective is violated.


  1. Field Blank: Field blanks were prepared at the DWM Worcester Laboratory. Reagent grade water was transported into the field in a sample container where it was transferred into a different sample container and fixed where necessary using the same method as its corresponding field sample. All blanks were submitted to the WES laboratory “blind”. If the field blanks were significantly different (>2 standard deviations (Clesceri et al. 1998)) from the detection limit, this data quality objective is violated.


4.0 Field Replicate: Two independent samples were collected from the same location and as close as possible to the same time in the field. Both samples were submitted to WES laboratory “blind”. In order for this data quality objective to be met, the results must be:

<20% Relative Percent Difference (RPD) for method detection limits >1mg/L

<30% RPD for method detection limits <1mg/L

LABORATORY

Discrete water sample analysis followed EPA-approved laboratory QA/QC methodologies in accordance with WES Standard Operating Procedures (MA DEP 1995). The quality of data generated at WES was determined by analyzing the results of a variety of quality control procedures including but not limited to:


Low Calibration Standards – Checks the stability of the instrument’s calibration curve. Analyzes the accuracy of an instrument’s calibration within a 5% range.
Reference Standards – Generally, a second source standard (a standard different from the calibration stock standard) that analyzes the accuracy of an instrument’s calibration within a 5% range.
Laboratory Reagent Blank/Method Blank (LRB) – Reagent grade water (de-ionized) extracted with every sample set to ensure that the system is free of target analytes (< MDL).
Duplicate Sample – Measures the precision (% Relative Percent Difference) of the extraction and analytical process. The acceptable laboratory %RPD range is typically  25%.
Spike Sample (Laboratory Fortified Blank - LFB, Laboratory Fortified Matrix - LFM)– Measures the accuracy (% Recovery) of an analytical method. The acceptable laboratory % recovery range is typically between 80 – 120% for LFB samples and 70 –130% for LFM discrete water samples.
The WES Laboratory is solely responsible for the administration of its Quality Assurance Program and Standard Operating Procedures. The frequency of the laboratory’s quality control procedure was at times inconsistent with their Quality Assurance Plan (MA DEP 1995). In these circumstances additional quality assurance procedures were used. Refer to WES’s Quality Assurance Plan (MA DEP 1995) for specific laboratory analytical QA/QC criteria. WES laboratory releases discrete water sample data when their established QA/QC criteria are met or the data are labeled as outside of these criteria.
A.1.2 Fish Tissue Data
Fish were collected and processed according to DWM’s Quality Assurance Project Plan (MA DEP 1999a). Tissue preparation and analysis strictly adhered to EPA-approved laboratory QA/QC methodologies in accordance with WES Standard Operating Procedures (MA DEP 1995). The quality of tissue data generated at WES was determined by incorporating a variety of quality control samples:
Laboratory Reagent Blank/Method Blank (LRB) – Clean clam tissue matrix extracted with every sample set to ensure that the system is free of target analytes (< MDL).
Laboratory Fortified Blank (LFB) – Clean clam tissue matrix spiked with a low concentration of target compounds. LFB results are used to establish accuracy of system’s performance. The acceptable laboratory % recovery range is typically 80 – 120%.
Laboratory Fortified Matrix (LFM) – Tissue matrix spiked with a low concentration of a target compound. LFM results are used to establish accuracy of the extraction and analytical process. The acceptable laboratory % recovery range is typically between 70 – 130% for metal analysis and 60 –140% for PCB/Organochlorine Pesticide analysis
Quality Control Standard (QCS) – A pre-spiked secondary tissue sample. QCS results are used to establish accuracy in the extraction and test methods. The acceptable laboratory % recovery range is typically between 80–120%.
The WES Laboratory is solely responsible for the administration of its Quality Assurance Program and Standard Operating Procedures. The frequency of the laboratory’s quality control procedure was at times inconsistent with their Quality Assurance Plan (MA DEP 1995). In these circumstances additional quality assurance procedures were used. Refer to WES’s Quality Assurance Plan (MA DEP 1995) for specific laboratory analytical QA/QC criteria. WES laboratory releases tissue data when their established QA/QC criteria are met or the data are labeled as outside of these criteria.

A.1.3 In-situ Water Quality Analysis
Trained DWM staff members conducted in-situ measurements using a Hydrolab® Multiprobe Series 3 analyzer. The Hydrolab® Multiprobe Series 3 analyzer measures dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, conductivity, depth and turbidity and calculates total dissolved solids and % saturation of oxygen. To ensure the quality of the in-situ data, the following QA/QC steps were taken:
1.0 Pre-Calibration: After each analytical probe on the Hydrolab® analyzer was calibrated, a pre-calibration check was conducted. A low ionic standard was first analyzed to check the accuracy of the instrument. Then an instrument check consisting of filtered de-ionized water was analyzed to check the instrument for contamination. The instrument check criteria is based on de-ionized water that that had been stored and vented to the air for at least three days. If the pre-calibration check achieved the criteria in Table A.1-1 then the instrument was ready for field analysis but if the pre-calibration check failed to achieve the low ionic standard criteria than the instrument was re-calibrated and a second low ionic and instrument check was analyzed. If the instrument failed to meet the established low ionic standard criteria a second time the Hydrolab® instrument could not be used to collect data and maintenance was scheduled. Refer to the DWM Hydrolab® Standard Operating Procedure (MA DEP 1999c).
2.0 Post Survey Check: Once the Hydrolab® was returned from field sampling, a post survey check was performed to ensure that no malfunction or damage had occurred to any of the Hydrolab® probes. The low ionic standard and the instrument check were re-analyzed. If the post survey check achieved the established criteria in Table A.1-1, the data was deemed acceptable and was ready for the data reduction QA/QC step. If, however, the post calibration failed to meet the criteria, the Hydrolab® Coordinator investigated the cause and recommended censoring of affected data to the Database Manager.
3.0 Data Reduction: The Hydrolab® Coordinator and Database Manager reviewed the Hydrolab® data for instability, instrument malfunction, operator technique and aberrant trends. If any of these conditions were detected, the data was investigated and may have been recommended for censoring. The Database Manager electronically tagged all data recommended for censoring in the database.
Table A.1-1. Hydrolab® Multiprobe Series 3 analyzer pre and post calibration specifications.


Hydrolab® Analyte

Low-Ionic Standard

Instrument Check *

Dissolved Oxygen

Saturation Chart (dependant on temperature & barometric pressure )

pH

6.90 ± 0.2 units**

5.6 ±0.2 units

Specific Conductance

74 ±1.5**

1.0 ±1.5

Turbidity

0.0 ±5.0

0.0 ±5.0

Temperature***

Ambient ±0.15°C

Ambient ±0.15°C

Depth

Field Calibrated ±0.45m

Field Calibrated ±0.45m

Salinity

Not Applicable

0.0 ±0.2ppt

Redox

Not Applicable

0.0±20mV

* based on Division of Watershed Management’s filtered de-ionized water

** will vary with age: pH rising, specific conductance dropping

*** compared to the DWM laboratory’s wall thermometer


A.2 QA/QC Data
Field blank and field replicate sampling results for the discrete water quality sampling (physico/chemical and bacteriological) are provided in Tables A.2-1 through A.2-4. DEP DWM QA/QC water quality data is managed and maintained in the Water Quality Data Access Database.
Laboratory QA/QC data for metals in fish tissue are provided in Table A.2-5. Laboratory QA/QC data for organics in fish tissue are provided in Tables A.2-6 through A.2-10.

Table A.2-1. 1998 DEP DWM Nashua River Basin instream physico-chemical QA/QC field blank data. (All units expressed in mg/L unless otherwise specified.)
Time Alkalinity Hardness Chloride Suspended Turbidity Ammonia Nitrate Total Dissolved BOD5

(24hr) Solids (NTU) Phosphorus Phosphorus

Field Blank Sample

81-0008 BLANK 05/27/98 ** 2.0 <0.66 <1.0 <1.0 <0.1 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- --

81-0015 BLANK 05/27/98 ** 4.0 <0.66 <1.0 <1.0 <0.1 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- --

81-0027 BLANK 06/17/98 ** 3.0 <0.70 <1.0 <1.0 -- <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- --

81-0023 BLANK 06/17/98 12:30 3.0 <0.70 <1.0 <1.0 -- <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- --

81-0042 BLANK 07/21/98 ** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- <0.01 -- --

81-0054 BLANK 07/22/98 ** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- <0.01 <0.01 --

81-0068 BLANK 07/22/98 ** 3.0 <0.66 -- <1.0 <0.1 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- <6

81-0063 BLANK 07/22/98 12:20 3.0 <0.66 -- <1.0 <0.1 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- <6

81-0073 BLANK 08/11/98 10:00 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- <0.01 <0.01 --

81-0079 BLANK 08/12/98 ** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- <0.01 <0.01 --

81-0095 BLANK 08/12/98 11:25 2.0 <0.66 -- <1.0 <1.0 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- <6

81-0090 BLANK 08/12/98 12:00 2.0 <0.66 -- <1.0 <1.0 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- <6

81-0105 BLANK 09/09/98 ** <1.0 <0.66 <1.0 <1.0 <0.1 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- --

81-0110 BLANK 09/09/98 11:30 <1.0 <0.66 <1.0 <1.0 <0.1 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- --

81-0120 BLANK 10/07/98 ** 1.5 <0.66 <1.0 <1.0 <0.1 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 -- --

81-0125 BLANK 10/07/98 11:40 1.5 <0.66 <1.0 <1.0 <0.1 0.03 <0.02 <0.01 -- --


** = missing/censored data -- = no data


Table A.2-2. 1998 DEP DWM Nashua River Basin instream physico-chemical QA/QC field replicate data. (All units expressed in mg/L unless otherwise specified.)
Time Alkalinity Hardness Chloride Suspended Turbidity Ammonia Nitrate Total Dissolved BOD5

(24hr) Solids (NTU) Phosphorus Phosphorus

NASHUA RIVER, Station: NM21

81-0088 81-0089 08/12/98 11:50 31 54 -- 4.6 1.6 0.04 2.9 ** -- <6

81-0089 81-0088 08/12/98 11:50 31 54 -- 3.9 1.8 0.05 2.6 ** -- <6

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 0.0% 0.0% 16.5% 11.8% 22.2% 10.9% 0.0%

81-0104 81-0103 09/09/98 ** 37 59 60 2.6 2.9 <0.02 2.5 0.22 -- --

81-0103 81-0104 09/09/98 11:56 37 59 61 2.6 2.8 <0.02 2.4 0.22 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 0.0% 0.0% 1.7% 0.0% 3.5% 0.0% 4.1% 0.0%

81-0118 81-0119 10/07/98 10:45 36 62 67 1.8 2.2 0.11 3.9 0.25 -- --

81-0119 81-0118 10/07/98 10:45 37 62 67 2.2 2.1 0.11 4.0 0.24 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 20.0% 4.7% 0.0% 2.5% 4.1%

NASHUA RIVER, Station: NM21A

81-0030 81-0029 06/17/98 ** 11 17 21 8.8 -- <0.02 0.26 0.08 -- --

81-0029 81-0030 06/17/98 13:02 11 17 20 6.8 -- 0.02 0.26 0.09 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 0.0% 0.0% 4.9% 25.6% 0.0% 0.0% 11.8%

NASHUA RIVER, Station: GROTSCH

81-0036 81-0038 07/21/98 10:20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.12 -- --

81-0038 81-0036 07/21/98 10:20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.11 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 8.7%

81-0048 81-0050 07/22/98 ** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.09 0.07 --

81-0050 81-0048 07/22/98 ** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.09 0.07 --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 0.0% 0.0%

NASHUA RIVER/Pepperell Pond, Station: OUTPEPPD

81-0071 81-0072 08/11/98 10:00 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.09 -- --

81-0072 81-0071 08/11/98 10:00 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.10 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 10.5%

81-0077 81-0078 08/12/98 ** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.09 0.03 --

81-0078 81-0077 08/12/98 ** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.09 0.04 --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 0.0% 28.6%

** = missing/censored data -- = no data



Table A.2-2. Continued. 1998 DEP DWM Nashua River Basin instream physico-chemical QA/QC field replicate data. (All units expressed in mg/L unless otherwise specified.)

Time Alkalinity Hardness Chloride Suspended Turbidity Ammonia Nitrate Total Dissolved BOD5

(24hr) Solids (NTU) Phosphorus Phosphorus

NISSITISSIT RIVER, Station: NT68

81-0066 81-0065 07/22/98 ** 20 26 -- 1.6 1.0 <0.02 0.10 <0.01 -- <6

81-0065 81-0066 07/22/98 10:16 20 26 -- 1.8 1.2 <0.02 0.10 <0.01 -- <6

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 0.0% 0.0% 11.8% 18.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

SQUANNACOOK RIVER, Station: NT60A

81-0012 81-0011 05/27/98 ** 10 14 25 <1.0 1.4 0.02 0.36 0.02 -- --

81-0011 81-0012 05/27/98 11:08 9.0 14 26 <1.0 1.4 <0.02 0.36 0.02 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 10.5% 0.0% 3.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

81-0093 81-0094 08/12/98 11:18 12 20 -- <1.0 <1.0 <0.02 0.48 0.02 -- <6

81-0094 81-0093 08/12/98 11:18 12 20 -- <1.0 <1.0 <0.02 0.48 0.02 -- <6

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

81-0108 81-0109 09/09/98 11:25 14 20 33 1.0 1.2 <0.02 0.40 0.02 -- --

81-0109 81-0108 09/09/98 11:25 13 20 33 <1.0 1.1 <0.02 0.47 0.02 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 7.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.7% 0.0% 16.1% 0.0%

81-0123 81-0124 10/07/98 11:30 14 23 34 <1.0 1.1 <0.02 0.51 0.02 -- --

81-0124 81-0123 10/07/98 11:30 13 23 34 1.0 1.2 <0.02 0.45 0.02 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 7.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.7% 0.0% 12.5% 0.0%

NORTH NASHUA RIVER, Station: NN12

81-0004 81-0003 05/27/98 ** 20 35 57 1.6 1.7 0.22 1.3 0.07 -- --

81-0003 81-0004 05/27/98 10:34 21 35 56 1.2 1.3 0.20 1.3 0.07 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 4.9% 0.0% 1.8% 28.6% 26.7% 9.5% 0.0% 0.0%

81-0018 81-0019 06/17/98 10:40 11 17 25 7.8 -- 0.04 0.27 0.08 -- --

81-0019 81-0018 06/17/98 10:40 11 17 26 7.8 -- 0.03 0.28 0.08 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 0.0% 0.0% 3.9% 0.0% 28.6% 3.6% 0.0%

81-0058 81-0059 07/22/98 10:20 28 53 -- 3.1 1.5 0.08 2.2 0.12 -- <6

81-0059 81-0058 07/22/98 10:20 26 40 -- 3.0 1.6 0.07 2.4 0.12 -- <6

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 7.4% 28.0% 3.3% 6.5% 13.3% 8.7% 0.0% 0.0%

** = missing/censored data -- = no data


Table A.2-3. 1998 DEP DWM Nashua River Basin instream bacteriological QA/QC field blank data. (cfu/100mLs.)

Time FECAL E-COLI ENTEROCOCCUS

(24hr)



Field Blank Sample


81-0008 BLANK 05/27/98 ** <20 <20 20

81-0015 BLANK 05/27/98 ** <20 <20 <20

81-0027 BLANK 06/17/98 ** <20 -- --

81-0023 BLANK 06/17/98 12:30 <20 -- --

81-0068 BLANK 07/22/98 ** <16 -- --

81-0063 BLANK 07/22/98 12:20 <16 -- --

81-0105 BLANK 09/09/98 ** <16 -- --

81-0110 BLANK 09/09/98 11:30 <16 -- --

81-0120 BLANK 10/07/98 ** <16 -- --

81-0125 BLANK 10/07/98 11:40 <16 -- --

** = missing/censored data -- = no data


Table A.2-4. 1998 DEP DWM Nashua River Basin instream bacteriological QA/QC field replicate data. (cfu/100mLs, log10 transformed.)

Time FECAL E-COLI ENTEROCOCCUS

(24hr)




NASHUA RIVER, Station: NM21

81-0088 81-0089 08/12/98 11:50 ** -- --

81-0089 81-0088 08/12/98 11:50 ** -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD):

81-0104 81-0103 09/09/98 ** 1.991 -- --

81-0103 81-0104 09/09/98 11:56 2.301 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 14.4%

81-0118 81-0119 10/07/98 10:45 2.041 -- --

81-0119 81-0118 10/07/98 10:45 1.991 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 2.5%

NASHUA RIVER, Station: NM21A

81-0030 81-0029 06/17/98 ** 3.544 -- --

81-0029 81-0030 06/17/98 13:02 3.477 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 1.9%

NASHUA RIVER, Station: GROTSCH

81-0036 81-0038 07/21/98 10:20 -- -- --

81-0038 81-0036 07/21/98 10:20 -- -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD):

81-0048 81-0050 07/22/98 ** -- -- --

81-0050 81-0048 07/22/98 ** -- -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD):

** = missing/censored data -- = no data



Table A.2-4. Continued. 1998 DEP DWM Nashua River Basin instream bacteriological QA/QC field replicate data. (cfu/100mLs, log10 transformed.)
Time FECAL E-COLI ENTEROCOCCUS

(24hr)

NASHUA RIVER/Pepperell Pond, Station: OUTPEPPD

81-0071 81-0072 08/11/98 10:00 -- -- --

81-0072 81-0071 08/11/98 10:00 -- -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD):

81-0077 81-0078 08/12/98 ** -- -- --

81-0078 81-0077 08/12/98 ** -- -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD):

NISSITISSIT RIVER, Station: NT68

81-0066 81-0065 07/22/98 ** 1.820 -- --

81-0065 81-0066 07/22/98 10:16 1.914 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 5.1%

SQUANNACOOK RIVER, Station: NT60A

81-0012 81-0011 05/27/98 ** <1.301 <1.301 2.447

81-0011 81-0012 05/27/98 11:08 1.903 <1.301 2.204

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 37.6% 0.0% 10.5%

81-0093 81-0094 08/12/98 11:18 ** -- --

81-0094 81-0093 08/12/98 11:18 ** -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD):

81-0108 81-0109 09/09/98 11:25 1.519 -- --

81-0109 81-0108 09/09/98 11:25 1.204 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 23.1%

81-0123 81-0124 10/07/98 11:30 1.580 -- --

81-0124 81-0123 10/07/98 11:30 <1.204 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 27.0%

NORTH NASHUA RIVER, Station: NN12

81-0004 81-0003 05/27/98 ** 2.415 1.301 1.301

81-0003 81-0004 05/27/98 10:34 2.556 <1.301 1.903

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 5.7% 0.0% 37.6%

81-0018 81-0019 06/17/98 10:40 3.602 -- --

81-0019 81-0018 06/17/98 10:40 3.602 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 0.0%

81-0058 81-0059 07/22/98 10:20 2.663 -- --

81-0059 81-0058 07/22/98 10:20 2.491 -- --

Relative Percent Difference (RPD): 6.7%

** = missing/censored data -- = no data


Table A.2-5. 1998 DEP DWM Nashua River Basin laboratory QA/QC data for metals in fish tissue. (Data expressed in mg/kg wet weight unless otherwise noted.)


TableA.2-6. AOAC Method 983.21 target analytes. (Data expressed in µg/g wet weight.)

ANALYTE

MINIMUM DETECTION LIMIT

PCB A1242




0.26

PCB A1254




0.37

PCB A1260




0.11

Chlordane




0.044

Toxaphene




0.11

a-BHC




0.017

b-BHC




0.014

Lindane




0.012

d-BHC




0.029

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene




0.0077

Trifluralin




0.0062

Hexachlorobenzene




0.0091

Heptachlor




0.013

Heptachlor Epoxide




0.013

Methoxychlor




1.07

DDD




0.010

DDE




0.014

DDT




0.013

Aldrin




0.0092



Table A.2-7. 1998 DEP DWM laboratory QA/QC blank data for organics in fish tissue.

DATE ANALYZED

LABORATORY

SAMPLE NUMBER

ANALYTE

% Lipid

12/22/98

BLANK - 1

0.15

12/30/98

BLANK - 2

0.16

1/7/99

BLANK - 3

0.08

2/3/99

BLANK - 4

0.11

2/4/99

BLANK - 5

0.08

2/5/99

BLANK - 6

0.16

2/9/99

BLANK - 7

0.18

2/10/99

BLANK - 8

0.14

2/11/99

BLANK - 9

0.20

2/12/99

BLANK - 10

0.12

NOTE: Analytes in Table A.2-6 not appearing in the above table were included in the analysis and were not detected.

Table A.2-8. 1998 DEP DWM laboratory QA/QC duplicate data for organics in fish tissue. The analytes were extracted and analyzed according to modified AOAC 983.21 procedure for the analysis of PCBs and Organochlorine Pesticides. (Data expressed in µg/g wet weight unless otherwise noted.)

DATE ANALYZED

LABORATORY

SAMPLE NUMBER

ANALYTE

DDE

MDL 0.014



% Lipid

12/29/98

L980381-3


0.23

L980381-3 duplicate


0.67

relative percent difference

NA

97.8%

2/3/99

L980445-1

0.021

0.17

L980445-1 duplicate

0.018

0.11

relative percent difference

15.4%

42.8%

2/5/99

L980538-2


0.38

L980538-2 duplicate


0.32

relative percent difference

NA

17.1%

2/12/99

L980610-3


0.17

L980610-3 duplicate


0.20

relative percent difference

NA

16.2%

NOTE: Analytes in Table A.2-6 not appearing in the above table were included in the analysis and were not detected.

MDL - minimum detection limit

NA - not applicable

Table A.2-9. 1998 DEP DWM laboratory QA/QC lab fortified matrix and matrix spike duplicate data for organics in fish tissue. The analytes were extracted and analyzed according to modified AOAC 983.21 procedure for the analysis of PCBs and Organochlorine Pesticides. (Data expressed in µg/g wet weight unless otherwise noted.)


DATE ANALYZED

12/29/98

2/4/99

2/11/99

2/11/99

LABORATORY SAMPLE NUMBER

Matrix Spike

L980381-1



Matrix Spike

L980522-3



Matrix Spike

L980609-1



Matrix Spike Duplicate

L980609-1



%LIPIDS

0.07

0.06

0.07

0.07

ANALYTE

PCB A1260

MDL 0.11


TOXAPHENE

MDL 0.11


PCB A1260

MDL 0.11


PCB A1260

MDL 0.11


Expected

0.92

0.96

0.99

0.95

LFM

0.78

0.84

1.13

0.97

Recovery (%)

85

88

114

102

NOTE: Analytes in Table A.2-6 not appearing in the above table were included in the analysis and were not detected.

Table A.2-10. 1998 DEP DWM laboratory QA/QC lab fortified blank data for organics in fish tissue. The analytes were extracted and analyzed according to modified AOAC 983.21 procedure for the analysis of PCBs and Organochlorine Pesticides. (Data expressed in µg/g wet weight unless otherwise noted.)

DATE ANALYZED

12/30/98

1/7/99

LABORATORY SAMPLE NUMBER

Laboratory fortified blank #1

Laboratory fortified blank #2

%LIPIDS

0.09

0.25

ANALYTE

CHLORDANE

MDL 0.044



PCB A1242

MDL 0.26


Expected

1.85

2.0

LFM

1.69

2.2

Recovery (%)

91

110

NOTE: Analytes in Table A.2-6 not appearing in the above table were included in the analysis and were not detected.
A.3 Analytical Methods
Discrete Water Sample Analytes EPA Method* SM Methods** Other Methods
Fecal Coliform SM 9222D

E. Coli MTEC SM 9213D

Enterococcus SM 9230C

Alkalinity SM 2320B

Chloride (4500) SM 4500CL-B

Hardness EPA 200.7 SM 2340B

Turbidity EPA 180.1

Ammonia-N EPA 350.1

Nitrate/Nitrite-N EPA 353.1

Phosphorus-P (MAN) SM 4500P-E

Suspended Solids SM 2540D

BOD 5 SM5210 B


Fish Tissue Analytes
PCB Arochlor 1242 AOAC 983.21***

PCB Arochlor 1254 “

PCB Arochlor 1260 “

Chlordane “

Toxaphene “

a-BHC “


b-BHC “

Lindane “

d-BHC “

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene “



Trifluralin “

Hexachlorobenzene “

Heptachlor “

Heptachlor Epoxide “

Methoxychlor “

DDD “


DDE “

DDT “


Aldrin “

% Lipids “ (modified)

Arsenic EPA 200.9 SM 3113

Lead EPA 200.7 SM 3120B

Selenium EPA 200.9 SM 3113

Cadmium EPA 200.7 SM 3120B

Mercury EPA 245.6 SM 3112B
In-Situ Water Quality Analytes
Hydrolab® Multiprobe Series 3 analyzer (MA DEP 1999c)

* = “Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes”, Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory – Cincinnati (EMSL-CI), EPA-600/4-79-020, Revised March 1983 and 1979 where applicable.

** = Standard Methods, Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th edition

***= PCBs and Organochlorine Pesticides in Biological Tissue, AOAC Official Methods of Analysis, 1990



REFERENCES

Clesceri, L.S., A.E. Greenberg, and A.D. Eaton, (editors). 1998. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater 20th Edition. American Public Heath Association, Washington, D.C.


Kimball, W. 1998, Draft. Nashua River Monitoring Plan. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Central Regional Office. Worcester, MA
MA DEP. 1995, January Draft. Laboratory Quality Assurance Plan and Standard Operating Procedures. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Environmental Analysis, Senator William X. Wall Experiment Station. Lawrence, MA.
*MA DEP. 1999a. CN 13.0 Fish Contaminant Monitoring Program, Quality Assurance Project Plan, 1999. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Watershed Management. Worcester, MA.
*MA DEP. 1999b. CN 1.0 Grab Collection Techniques for DWM Water Quality Sampling, Standard Operating Procedure. October 25, 1999. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Watershed Management. Worcester, MA.
*MA DEP. 1999c. CN 4.0 Hydrolab® Series 3 Multiprobe, Standard Operating Procedure. September 23, 1999. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Watershed Management. Worcester, MA.
MA DEP. 2000. CN 11.0 1998 QA/QC Assessment Report . 2000. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Watershed Management. Worcester, MA.

* Note: The Fish Contaminant Monitoring Program, Quality Assurance Project Plan, the Grab Collection Techniques for DWM Water Quality Sampling, Standard Operating Procedure and Hydrolab® Series 3 Multiprobe, Standard Operating Procedure were in preparation at the time of sampling in 1998. Final documents were published by DWM in 1999 as CN 13.0, 1.0, and 4.0, respectively.



1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   17


База данных защищена авторским правом ©shkola.of.by 2016
звярнуцца да адміністрацыі

    Галоўная старонка