 UGLP10-01-01, Interim Report 28: Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater Samples 

Collected at Decatur, AL for 1st Quarter 2012

Study Title

Analysis of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) in Groundwater, Soil and Sediment for the 3M Decatur 

Phase 3 Site-Related Monitoring Program 

Data Requirement 

EPA TSCA Good Laboratory Practice Standards 40 CFR Part 792

Study Director

Jaisimha Kesari P.E., DEE

Weston Solutions, Inc.

1400 Weston Way

West Chester, PA 19380

Phone: 610-701-3761

Author

Susan Wolf

3M Environmental Laboratory

Interim Report Completion Date 

Date of signing

Performing Laboratory

3M Environmental Health and Safety Operations

Environmental Laboratory

3M Center, Bldg 260-05-N-17

Maplewood, MN 55144

Project Identification

GLP10-01-01-28 

 

Total Number of Pages

66

Testing Cert #2052.01

The testing reported herein meet the requirements of ANSI/ISO/IEC 17025:2005 “General Requirements 

for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories”, in accordance with the A2LA Testing 

Certificate # 2052.01. Testing that complies with this International Standard also meets principles of ISO 

9001:2000. 
This page has been reserved for specific country requirements. 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 2 of 66
GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling 

GLP COMPLIANCE STATEMENT 

Report Title: GLP10-01-01, Interim Report 28. Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater Samples Colle<::ted 

at Decatur, AL for 1" Quarter 2012 

Study: Analysis of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) in Groundwater, Soil and Sediment for the 3M 

Decatur Phase 3 Site-Related Monitoring Program. 

This analytical phase was conducted in compliance with Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Good 

Laboratory Practice (GLP) Standards, 40 CFR 792, with the exceptions listed below: 

• These are environmental samples where there is no specific test substance, no specific test 

system and no dosing of a test system. 

• The reference substances have not been characterized under the GLPs and the stability under 

storage conditions at the test site have not been determined under GLPs. 

Gaiy Hohenstein, Sponsor Representative Date 

Jaisimha^Ke^ri, P.E., DEE, Study Director ' Date 

72^ 

Page 3 of 66 
GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA In Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling 

QUALITY ASSURANCE STATEMENT 

Report Title: GLP10-01-01, Interim Report 28. Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater Samples Collected 

at Decatur, AL for 1" Quarter 2012 

Study: Analysis of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) in Groundwater, Soil and Sediment for the 3M 

Decatur Phase 3 Site-Related Monitoring Program. 

This report and the accompanying data were audited by the 3M Environmental Laboratory Quality 

Assurance Unit (QAU), as indicated below. The findings were reported to the principal investigator 

(P.I.), laboratory management and study director. 

Inspection Dates Phase 

Date Rei jorted to 

Inspection Dates Phase Testing Facility 

lUanagement 

Study Director 

4/16/12 Interim Report 28 

Data and Report 4/26/12 4/26/12 

QAU Represe/lfetive Date 

Page 4 of 66 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

UGLP Compliance StatementU...................................................................................................................... 3

UQuality Assurance StatementU.................................................................................................................... 4

UTable of ContentsU....................................................................................................................................... 5

UList of TablesU .............................................................................................................................................. 6

U1U UStudy InformationU................................................................................................................................ 8

U2U USummaryU ............................................................................................................................................. 9

U3U UIntroductionU........................................................................................................................................10

U4U UTest & Control SubstancesU ..............................................................................................................10

U5U UReference SubstancesU .....................................................................................................................11

U6U UTest SystemU ......................................................................................................................................11

U7U UMethod SummaryU .............................................................................................................................12

U7.1U UMethodsU ............................................................................................................................12

U7.2U USample CollectionU.............................................................................................................12

U7.3U USample PreparationU..........................................................................................................12

U7.4U UAnalysisU.............................................................................................................................12

U8U UAnalytical ResultsU..............................................................................................................................13

U8.1U UCalibrationU .........................................................................................................................13

U8.2U USystem SuitabilityU .............................................................................................................13

U8.3U ULimit of Quantitation (LOQ)U ..............................................................................................13

U8.4U UContinuing CalibrationU ......................................................................................................14

U8.5U UBlanksU................................................................................................................................14

U8.6U ULab Control Spikes (LCSs)U ..............................................................................................14

U8.7U UAnalytical Method UncertaintyU .........................................................................................15

U8.8U UField Matrix Spikes (FMS)U................................................................................................15

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 5 of 66
U9U UData Summary and DiscussionU .......................................................................................................16

U10U UConclusionU.........................................................................................................................................23

U11U UData/Sample RetentionU ....................................................................................................................23

U12U UAttachmentsU ......................................................................................................................................23

U13U USignaturesU .........................................................................................................................................24

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Summarized PFOA Results (Decatur Groundwater, 1st Quarter 2012) ................................... 9

Table 2. Sample Description Key Code................................................................................................11

Table 3. Instrument Parameters.............................................................................................................12

Table 4. Liquid Chromatography Conditions. ........................................................................................13

Table 5. Mass Transitions.......................................................................................................................13

Table 6. Limit of Quantitation (LOQ).......................................................................................................14

Table 7. Laboratory Control Spike Recovery.........................................................................................15

Table 8. Analytical Method Uncertainty...................................................................................................15

Table 9. Field Matrix Spike Concentrations ...........................................................................................16

Table 10. DAL GW 203L 120327...........................................................................................................17

Table 11. DAL GW 220R 120323 ..........................................................................................................17

Table 12. DAL GW 220L 120323...........................................................................................................17

Table 13. DAL GW 222R 120327 ..........................................................................................................18

Table 14. DAL GW 227R 120316 ..........................................................................................................18

Table 15. DAL GW 227L 120316...........................................................................................................18

Table 16. DAL GW 310R 120320 ..........................................................................................................19

Table 17. DAL GW RW312R 120328....................................................................................................19

Table 18. DAL GW 317L 120320...........................................................................................................19

Table 19. DAL GW 324L 120314...........................................................................................................20

Table 20. DAL GW RW327R 120323....................................................................................................20

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 6 of 66
Table 21. DAL GW 328R 120314 ..........................................................................................................20

Table 22. DAL GW 328L 120314...........................................................................................................21

Table 23. DAL GW 330R 120314 ..........................................................................................................21

Table 24. DAL GW 330L 120314...........................................................................................................21

Table 25. DAL GW RW331S 120328 ....................................................................................................22

Table 26. DAL GW 335R 120322 ..........................................................................................................22

Table 27. DAL GW GRS04 120328.......................................................................................................22

Table 28. Trip Blank 1.............................................................................................................................23

Table 29. Rinseate Blank........................................................................................................................23

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 7 of 66
1 0BStudy Information

Sponsor

3M Company

Sponsor Representative

Gary Hohenstein

3M EHS Operations

3M Building 224-5W-03

Saint Paul, MN 55144-1000

Phone: (651) 737-3570

Study Director

Jaisimha Kesari, P.E., DEE

Weston Solutions, Inc.

West Chester, PA 19380

Phone: (610) 701-3761

Fax: (610) 701-7401

j.kesari@westonsolutions.com

Study Location

Testing Facility

3M EHS Operations

3M Environmental Laboratory

Building 260-5N-17

Maplewood, MN 55106

Study Personnel

William K. Reagen, Ph.D., 3M Laboratory Manager

Cleston Lange, Ph.D., Principal Analytical Investigator. (HUclange@mmm.comUH); phone (651)-733-9860

Susan Wolf, 3M Analyst

Chelsie Grochow; Analyst

Kelly Ukes; Analyst

Study Dates

Study Initiation: March 8, 2010

Interim 28 Experimental Termination Date: April 10, 2012

Interim Report Completion: Date of Interim Report Signing

Location of Archives

All original raw data and the analytical report have been archived at the 3M Environmental 

Laboratory according to 40 CFR Part 792. The test substance and analytical reference standard 

reserve samples are archived at the 3M Environmental Laboratory according to 40 CFR Part 792

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 8 of 66
2 1BSummary

The 3M Environmental Laboratory received groundwater samples from wells located in Decatur, AL, 

representing eighteen (18) different sampling locations collected March 14-28, 2012. A total of 

seventy-seven sample bottles were received at the 3M Environmental Laboratory for 

perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) analysis, and included duplicate groundwater samples from each sampling 

location. Samples also included field matrix spike (FMS) samples for each location, one trip blank

containing Milli-QTM water and appropriate trip blank spikes, and one equipment rinseate blank. The 

equipment rinseate blank did not have a FMS sample prepared for the determination of PFOA 

recovery. All of the samples were prepared and analyzed for PFOA following 3M Environmental 

Laboratory Method ETS-8-044.1 and conducted under 3M project GLP10-01-01-28. 

 

The groundwater samples, trip blanks and equipment rinseate blanks for GLP10-01-01-28 were 

received from Weston personnel on April 4, 2012. All of the samples were prepared and analyzed for

PFOA following 3M Environmental Laboratory Method ETS-8-044.1. Many of the groundwater 

samples required dilution to attain PFOA concentrations within the range of the curve, in some 

instances up to 100-fold dilution were required. The average measured PFOA concentrations are

summarized in Table 1. The equipment rinseate and the trip blanks associated with GLP10-01-01-28

were below the lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) of 0.0240 ng/mL. Concentration results for all 

groundwater samples ranged from 0.262 ng/mL to 3890 ng/mL. The analytical uncertainty for PFOA is

+U 23%. 

Table 1. Summarized PFOA Results (Decatur Groundwater, 1st Quarter 2012) 

Sample ID Avg. PFOA 

Concentration (ng/mL)

Relative Percent 

Difference (RPD)

DAL GW 203L 120327 179 0.56%

DAL GW 220R 120323 37.3 7.0%

DAL GW 220L 120323 48.1 0.21%

DAL GW 222R 120327 330 1.5%

DAL GW 227R 120316 339 0.30%

DAL GW 227L 120316 82.1 1.7%

DAL GW 310R 120320 929 8.1%

DAL GW RW312R 120328 934 1.6%

DAL GW 317L 120320 0.262 0.76%

DAL GW 324L 120314 270 0.37%

DAL GW RW327R 120323 700 0.43%

DAL GW 328R 120314 334 0.60%

DAL GW 328L 120314 96.3 2.6%

DAL GW 330R 120314 335 2.4%

DAL GW 330L 120314 297 0.34%

DAL GW RW331S 120328 940 (1) 4.7%

DAL GW 335R 120322 3890 2.3%

DAL GW GRS04 120328 3860 3.9%

Trip Blank (Milli-QTM Water) < 0.0240 N/A

Equipment Blank < 0.0240 N/A

N/A; not applicable

The analytical method uncertainty for PFOA is +U23%. 

(1) The method uncertainty for sample location RW331S has been adjusted to +U32% due 

to FMS recovery. See section 9 of the report for additional information.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 9 of 66
3 2BIntroduction 

This analytical study was conducted as part of the Phase 3 Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 

Program for the 3M facility located in Decatur, Alabama. The objective of the overall program is to gain 

information regarding concentrations of perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) in various environmental media 

such as groundwater, soils and sediments that are associated with and near the Decatur facility. This 

analytical study was conducted to analyze ground water samples collected from various wells located 

in Decatur, AL for PFOA in an effort to characterize on-site groundwater conditions. 

The 3M Environmental Laboratory prepared sample bottles (250 mL high-density polyethylene) which 

were shipped to Decatur, AL Weston personnel prior to field sampling. Sample bottle sets for each 

groundwater sampling location included a field sample, field sample duplicate, and field spike samples. 

Each empty container for groundwater samplings was marked with a “fill to here” line to produce a final 

sample volume of 200 mL. Containers designated for field matrix samples were fortified with an 

appropriate matrix spike solution containing PFOA prior to being sent to the field for sample collection. 

See section 8.8 of the report for field matrix spike levels. The aqueous equipment rinseate sample was

collected in a plain bottle without fortification.

Samples were prepared and analyzed according to the procedure defined in 3M Environmental 

Laboratory method ETS-8-044.1 “Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated 

Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection Analysis”. 

Table 1 summarizes the average PFOA concentrations for the duplicate groundwater samples

collected, and for the trip blank and aqueous rinseate samples. Tables 10-29 summarize the individual 

sample results and the associated FMS recoveries. All results for the quality control samples prepared 

and analyzed with the samples are reported and discussed elsewhere in this report. 

4 3BTest & Control Substances 

There was not a test substance or control substances in the classic sense of a GLP study. This study 

was purely analytical in nature. 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 10 of 66
5 4BReference Substances

The analytical reference substances used for this study are listed below.

Reference Substance PFOA (Linear + Branched) PFOA (Linear + Branched)

Chemical Name Perfluorooctanoate Perfluorooctanoate

Chemical Formula C7F15COO- C7F15COOIdentifier CAS # 335-67-1 CAS # 95328-99-7 

Use FMS Reference Standard Target Analyte and LCS 

Reference Standard

Source Sigma Aldrich Wellington

Expiration Date 07/27/2016 03/17/2014

Storage Conditions Ambient Frozen

Chemical Lot Number MKBD4574V TPFOA0311

TCR Number TCR11-0029 TCR11-0009, TCR11-0042

Physical Description Powder Liquid

Purity 96.8% 98.3% 

6 5BTest System

There was not a test system for this study in the classic sense of a GLP study. This study was 

conducted for analysis of ground water samples collected from wells located in Decatur, AL by Weston 

Solutions, Inc. personnel. Samples for this study are “real world” environmental samples.

Table 2. Sample Description Key Code.

Example DALGW 203L DB 120327

String Number String Descriptor Example

1 Sampling Location DAL = Decatur, Alabama

2 Sample Type GW= Ground water

3 Well Identifier Example: 203L

4 Well Level R = Residuum shallow water-bearing zone 

L = Bedrock water-bearing zone

S = Epikarst middle water-bearing zone

5 Sample Type 0=primary sample 

DB=duplicate sample

LS = low spike

HS = high spike

6 Sampling Date 120327 = March 27, 2012

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 11 of 66
7 6BMethod Summary

7.1 12BMethods

Analysis for all analytes was completed following 3M Environmental Laboratory method ETS-8-044.1

“Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; 

Direct Injection Analysis”. 

7.2 13BSample Collection

Samples were collected in 250 mL NalgeneTM (high-density polyethylene) bottles prepared at the 3M 

Environmental Laboratory. Sample bottles were returned to the laboratory at ambient conditions on April 

4, 2012. Samples were stored refrigerated at the laboratory after receipt. One set of laboratory 

prepared Trip Blank and Trip Blank field matrix spikes were sent with the sample collection bottles.

7.3 14BSample Preparation

Samples were prepared by removing an aliquot of the well mixed sample and placing it in an autovial for 

analysis. 

Samples that required dilution were prepared as follows:

1:10 dilutions were prepared by diluting 1mL sample with 9 mL of Milli Q water, and 

1:100 dilutions were prepared by diluting 0.1mL sample with 9.9 mL of Milli Q water.

7.4 15BAnalysis

All study samples and quality control samples were analyzed for PFOA using high performance liquid 

chromatography/ tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC/MS/MS). Detailed instrument parameters, the 

liquid chromatography gradient program, and the specific mass transitions analyzed are described in the 

raw data hard copies placed in the final data packet, and are briefly described below in Table 3, Table 4

and Table 5. 

Table 3. Instrument Parameters. 

Instrument Name ETS Buster

Analytical Method Followed ETS-8-044.1

Analysis Dates 4/5/2012

Project GLP10-01-01-28

Liquid Chromatograph Agilent 1100

Guard column Betasil C18 (4.6 mm X 100 mm), 5μ

Analytical column Betasil C18 (4.6 mm X 100 mm), 5μ

Injection Volume 2 or 10 μL

Mass Spectrometer Applied Biosystems API 4000

Ion Source Turbo Spray

Electrode Turbo ion electrode

Polarity Negative

Software Analyst 1.4.2

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 12 of 66
Table 4. Liquid Chromatography Conditions. 

Step 

Number

Total Time 

(min)

Flow Rate 

(μL/min)

Percent A

(2 mM ammonium acetate)

Percent B

(Methanol)

ETS-8-044.1

0 0 750 97.0 3.0

1 2.0 750 97.0 3.0

2 14.5 750 5.0 95.0

3 15.5 750 5.0 95.0

4 16.5 750 97.0 3.0

5 20.0 750 97.0 3.0

Table 5. Mass Transitions. 

Analyte

Mass Transition

Q1/Q3

Reference Material 

Structure

PFOA

413/369

413/219 Linear + Branched

413/169

Dwell time was 100 msec for each transition. The individual transitions 

were summed to produce a “total ion chromatogram” (TIC), which was 

used for quantitation.

8 7BAnalytical Results

8.1 16BCalibration

Samples were analyzed against an external standard calibration curve. Calibration standards were 

prepared by spiking known amounts of the stock solution containing PFOA (reference standard 

containing both linear and branched isomers) into Milli Q water. Standards ranging from 0.0250 ng/mL 

to 100 ng/mL (nominal) were analyzed. A quadratic, 1/x weighted, calibration curve of the peak area 

counts was used to fit the data for each analyte. The data were not forced through zero during the fitting 

process. Calculating the standard concentrations using the peak area confirmed accuracy of each curve 

point. Each curve point was quantitated using the overall calibration curve and reviewed for accuracy. 

Method calibration accuracy requirements of 100±25% (100±30% for the lowest curve point) were met 

for all analytes. The correlation coefficient (r) was greater than 0.995 for PFOA. 

8.2 17BSystem Suitability

A calibration standard was analyzed four times at the beginning of each analytical sequence to 

demonstrate overall system suitability. Analysis runs met the acceptance criteria of less than or equal to 

5% relative standard deviation (RSD) for peak area and retention time criteria of less than or equal to 

2% RSD for PFOA. 

8.3 18BLimit of Quantitation (LOQ)

The LOQ for this analysis is the lowest non-zero calibration standard in the curve that meets linearity 

and accuracy requirements and for which the area counts are at least twice those of the appropriate 

blanks. The nominal LOQ for all analytes can be found in Table 6. 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 13 of 66
Table 6. Limit of Quantitation (LOQ). 

Analysis Date PFOA

LOQ, ng/mL (1)

4/5/12 0.0240

(1) Analytical LOQ without sample dilution factors applied.

8.4 19BContinuing Calibration 

During the course of each analytical sequence, continuing calibration verification samples (CCVs) were 

analyzed to confirm that the instrument response and the initial calibration curve were still in control. All 

reported samples were bracketed by CCVs that met method criteria of 100% ± 25%. 

 

8.5 20BBlanks

Three types of blanks were prepared and analyzed with the samples: method procedural blanks, a trip

blank, and an equipment rinseate blank. Method procedural blank results were reviewed and used to 

evaluate method performance and to determine the LOQ for PFOA. The trip blank reflects the shipping 

and sample collection conditions the sample bottles and samples experience. The equipment rinseate 

blank is an aqueous sample that reflect the efficiency of equipment cleaning in the field between different 

sample collections and are proof of no cross contamination of samples from the equipment.

8.6 21BLab Control Spikes (LCSs) 

Lab control spikes were prepared and analyzed in triplicate with each preparation set. LCSs were 

prepared by spiking known amounts of the analyte into laboratory reagent water, to produce the desired 

concentration. The spiked water samples were then analyzed in the same manner as the samples. The 

method acceptance criteria, average of LCS at each level should be within 100% ± 20% with an RSD 

≤20%, was met for all LCSs. 

The following calculations were used to generate data in Table 7 for laboratory control spikes: 

* 100%

Spike Concentration

Calculated Concentration LCSPercent Recovery =

* 100%

average LCS recovery

standard deviation LCS replicates LCS% RSD =

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 14 of 66
Table 7. Laboratory Control Spike Recovery. 

ETS-8-044.1

Analyzed 4/5/12 PFOA (Linear + Branched)

Lab ID

Spiked 

Concentration 

(ng/mL)

Calculated 

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

LCS-120405-1 0.477 0.433 90.7

LCS-120405-2 0.477 0.428 89.7

LCS-120405-3 0.477 0.431 90.3

Average ± %RSD 90.2% ± 0.56% 

LCS-120405-4 4.77 4.53 94.9

LCS-120405-5 4.77 4.60 96.4

LCS-120405-6 4.77 4.58 96.0

Average ± %RSD 95.8% ± 0.81%

LCS-120405-7 28.7 25.0 87.1

LCS-120405-8 28.7 24.6 85.8

LCS-120405-9 28.7 25.1 87.5

Average ± %RSD 86.8% ± 1.0%

8.7 2B Analytical Method Uncertainty

Analytical uncertainty is based on historical QC data that is control charted and used to evaluate 

method accuracy and precision. The method uncertainty is calculated following ETS-12-012.2. The 

standard deviation is calculated for the set of accuracy results (in %) obtained for most recent fifty QC 

samples. The expanded uncertainty is calculated by multiplying the standard deviation by a factor of 2, 

which corresponds to a confidence level of 95%. 

Table 8. Analytical Method Uncertainty

Analyte Method

Standard 

Deviation

Method 

Uncertainty

PFOA ETS-8-044.1 11.7 ± 23%

8.8 23BField Matrix Spikes (FMS)

Field matrix spikes were collected at each sampling point to verify that the analytical method is 

applicable to the collected matrix. Field matrix spikes were generated by adding a measured volume of 

field sample to a container spiked by the laboratory with PFOA (reference standard containing both 

linear and branched isomers) to shipping sample containers for sample collection. Field matrix spike 

recoveries within method acceptance criteria of 100±30% confirm that “unknown” components in the 

sample matrix do not significantly interfere with the extraction and analysis of the analytes of interest. 

Field matrix spike concentrations must be 50% of the sample concentration to be considered an 

appropriate field spike. Field matrix spikes are presented in section 9 of this report. 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 15 of 66
Table 9. Field Matrix Spike Concentrations

Location (Well ID) Spike Level

PFOA Spike 

Concentration 

(ng/mL)

317L Low Spike 1

High Spike 10

220R, 220L, and 328L Low Spike 10

High Spike 100

203L, 222R, 227L, 227R, 324L, 

330L, RW327R

Low Spike 100

High Spike 500

310R, 330R, RW331S Low Spike 500

High Spike 1000

GRS04, RW312R, 335R Low Spike 1000

High Spike 5000

Trip Blank 1 Low Spike 10

Mid Spike 100

High Spike 1000

100%*

Concentrat Spike on

Concentrat (Sample ofion FMS Concentrat Average Dup.) Sample Field & Sample Field:ion FMSRecovery − =

9 Data Summary and Discussion

The tables below summarize the sample results and field matrix spike recoveries for the sampling 

locations as well as the Trip Blanks and rinseate blank. Results and average values are rounded to 

three significant figures according to EPA rounding rules. Because of rounding, values may vary slightly 

from those listed in the raw data. Field matrix spike recoveries meeting the method acceptance criteria 

of ± 30%, demonstrate that the method was appropriate for the given matrix and their respective 

quantitative ranges. 

DAL GW RW331S (Table 25) – The high field matrix spike had a recovery of 68.0%, while the low field 

matrix spike met method acceptance criteria. Since both spike levels were appropriate as compared to 

the sample location, the method uncertainty has been adjusted to ± 32%.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 16 of 66
Table 10. DAL GW 203L 120327

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-001 DAL-GW-203L-0-120327 178 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-002 DAL-GW-203L-DB-120327 179 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-003 DAL-GW-203L-LS-120327 269 90.5

GLP10-01-01-28-004 DAL-GW-203L-HS-120327 597 83.7

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 179 ng/mL ± 0.56%

NA = Not Applicable

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

Table 11. DAL GW 220R 120323

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-005 DAL-GW-220R-0-120323 38.6 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-006 DAL-GW-220R-DB-120323 36.0 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-007 DAL-GW-220R-LS-120323 48.3 NC

GLP10-01-01-28-008 DAL-GW-220R-HS-120323 123 85.7

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 37.3 ng/mL ± 7.0%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Samples analyzed using a 1:10 dilution factor.

Table 12. DAL GW 220L 120323

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-009 DAL-GW-220L-0-120323 48.1 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-010 DAL-GW-220L-DB-120323 48.0 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-011 DAL-GW-220L-LS-120323 57.8 NC

GLP10-01-01-28-012 DAL-GW-220L-HS-120323 134 86.0

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 48.1 ng/mL ± 0.21%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level.

Samples analyzed using a 1:10 dilution factor.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 17 of 66
Table 13. DAL GW 222R 120327

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-013 DAL-GW-222R-0-120327 332 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-014 DAL-GW-222R-DB-120327 327 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-015 DAL-GW-222R-LS-120327 427 NC

GLP10-01-01-28-016 DAL-GW-222R-HS-120327 763 86.7

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 330 ng/mL ± 1.5%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level.

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

Table 14. DAL GW 227R 120316

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-017 DAL-GW-227R-0-120316 339 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-018 DAL-GW-227R-DB-120316 338 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-019 DAL-GW-227R-LS-120316 417 NC

GLP10-01-01-28-020 DAL-GW-227R-HS-120316 764 85.1

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 339 ng/mL ± 0.30%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level.

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

Table 15. DAL GW 227L 120316

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-021 DAL-GW-227L-0-120316 82.8 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-022 DAL-GW-227L-DB-120316 81.4 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-023 DAL-GW-227L-LS-120316 175 92.9

GLP10-01-01-28-024 DAL-GW-227L-HS-120316 535 90.6

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 82.1 ng/mL ± 1.7%

NA = Not Applicable

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 18 of 66
Table 16. DAL GW 310R 120320

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-025 DAL-GW-310R-0-120320 966 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-026 DAL-GW-310R-DB-120320 891 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-027 DAL-GW-310R-LS-120320 1290 72.3

GLP10-01-01-28-028 DAL-GW-310R-HS-120320 1660 73.2

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 929 ng/mL ± 8.1%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

Table 17. DAL GW RW312R 120328

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-029 DAL-GW-RW312R-0-120328 941 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-030 DAL-GW-RW312R-DB-120328 926 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-031 DAL-GW-RW312R-LS-120328 1670 73.7

GLP10-01-01-28-032 DAL-GW-RW312R-HS-120328 5040 82.1

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 934 ng/mL ± 1.6%

NA = Not Applicable

Sample, sample duplicate, and LS were analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor. The HS was analyzed using a 1:500 dilution factor.

Table 18. DAL GW 317L 120320

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-033 DAL-GW-317L-0-120320 0.261 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-034 DAL-GW-317L-DB-120320 0.263 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-035 DAL-GW-317L-LS-120320 1.15 88.8

GLP10-01-01-28-036 DAL-GW-317L-HS-120320 8.25 79.9

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 0.262 ng/mL ± 0.76%

NA = Not Applicable

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 19 of 66
Table 19. DAL GW 324L 120314

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-037 DAL-GW-324L-0-120314 270 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-038 DAL-GW-324L-DB-120314 269 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-039 DAL-GW-324L-LS-120314 364 NC

GLP10-01-01-28-040 DAL-GW-324L-HS-120314 682 82.5

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 270 ng/mL ± 0.37%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

Table 20. DAL GW RW327R 120323

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-041 DAL-GW-RW327R-0-120323 698 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-042 DAL-GW-RW327R-DB-120323 701 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-043 DAL-GW-RW327R-LS-120323 779 NC

GLP10-01-01-28-044 DAL-GW-RW327R-HS-120323 1130 86.1

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 700 ng/mL ± 0.43%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

Table 21. DAL GW 328R 120314

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-045 DAL-GW-328R-0-120314 335 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-046 DAL-GW-328R-DB-120314 333 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-047 DAL-GW-328R-LS-120314 424 NC

GLP10-01-01-28-048 DAL-GW-328R-HS-120314 772 87.6

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 334 ng/mL ± 0.60%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 20 of 66
Table 22. DAL GW 328L 120314

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-049 DAL-GW-328L-0-120314 95.0 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-050 DAL-GW-328L-DB-120314 97.5 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-051 DAL-GW-328L-LS-120314 103 NC

GLP10-01-01-28-052 DAL-GW-328L-HS-120314 172 75.8

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 96.3 ng/mL ± 2.6%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Samples analyzed using a 1:10 dilution factor.

Table 23. DAL GW 330R 120314

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-053 DAL-GW-330R-0-120314 331 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-054 DAL-GW-330R-DB-120314 339 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-055 DAL-GW-330R-LS-120314 763 85.6

GLP10-01-01-28-056 DAL-GW-330R-HS-120314 1200 86.5

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 335 ng/mL ± 2.4%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

Table 24. DAL GW 330L 120314

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-057 DAL-GW-330L-0-120314 296 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-058 DAL-GW-330L-DB-120314 297 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-059 DAL-GW-330L-LS-120314 378 NC

GLP10-01-01-28-060 DAL-GW-330L-HS-120314 707 82.1

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 297 ng/mL ± 0.34%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 21 of 66
Table 25. DAL GW RW331S 120328

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-061 DAL-GW-RW331S-0-120328 962 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-062 DAL-GW-RW331S-DB-120328 918 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-063 DAL-GW-RW331S-LS-120328 1300 72.0

GLP10-01-01-28-064 DAL-GW-RW331S-HS-120328 1620 68.0 (1)

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 940 ng/mL ± 4.7% (2)

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Samples analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

(1) FMS did not meet acceptance criteria.

(2) The method uncertainty has been adjusted to ± 32%.

Table 26. DAL GW 335R 120322

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-065 DAL-GW-335R-0-120322 3840 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-066 DAL-GW-335R-DB-120322 3930 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-067 DAL-GW-335R-LS-120322 NR (1) NC

GLP10-01-01-28-068 DAL-GW-335R-HS-120322 7760 77.5

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 3890 ng/mL ± 2.3%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Sample, sample duplicate, and LS were analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor. The HS was analyzed using a 1:500 dilution factor.

(1) NR = not reportable; Sample concentration exceeded the calibration range.

Table 27. DAL GW GRS04 120328

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-069 DAL-GW-GRS04-0-120328 3930 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-070 DAL-GW-GRS04-DB-120328 3780 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-071 DAL-GW-GRS04-LS-120328 4460 NC

GLP10-01-01-28-072 DAL-GW-GRS04-HS-120328 7380 70.5

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 3860 ng/mL ± 3.9%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; the sample concentration is greater than 2x the spike level. 

Sample, sample duplicate, and LS were analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor. The HS was analyzed using a 1:500 dilution factor.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 22 of 66
Table 28. Trip Blank 1

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-01-28-074 DAL-GW-TRIP01-0- <0.0240 NA

GLP10-01-01-28-075 DAL-GW-TRIP01-LS- 9.40 94.0

GLP10-01-01-28-076 DAL-GW-TRIP01-MS- 91.5 91.5

GLP10-01-01-28-077 DAL-GW-TRIP01-HS- 952 95.2

NA = Not Applicable

The MS was analyzed using a 1:10 dilution factor. The HS was analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor.

Table 29. Rinseate Blank

PFOA

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL)

GLP10-01-01-28-073 DAL-GW-203L-RB-120327 <0.0240

10 8BConclusion

Laboratory control spikes and field matrix spikes were used to determine the analytical method 

accuracy and precision for PFOA. Analysis was successfully completed following 3M Environmental 

Laboratory method ETS-8-044.1 described herein. 

11 9BData/Sample Retention

All remaining samples and associated project data (hardcopy and electronic) will be archived according 

to 3M Environmental Laboratory standard operating procedures. 

12 10BAttachments

Attachment A: Protocol Amendment 28 (General Project Outline)

Attachment B: Representative Chromatograms and Calibration Curves

Attachment C: Analytical Method ETS-8-044.1

Attachment D: Method Deviation

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 23 of 66
GLPI 0-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling 

13 Signatures 

S'j2 /zo/: 

Cleston Lange, Ph.D., 3M Principal Analytical Investigator Date 

4" y^y^ VQ-o7^ 

William K. Reagen, Ph.D., 3M Environmental Laboratory Department Manager Date 

Gary Hohensfein ,^ponsor Representative Date 

Jaisimha Kesari, Study Director Date 

Page 24 of 66 
ATTACHMENT A: PROTOCOL AMENDMENT

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 25 of 66
GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 26 of 66
GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 27 of 66
GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 28 of 66
GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 29 of 66
GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 30 of 66
GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 31 of 66
ATTACHMENT B: REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE CHROMATOGRAMS AND 

CALIBRATION CURVE(S) 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 32 of 66
b120405a.rdb (PFOA): "Quadratic" Regression ("1 / x" weighting): y = -9.27e+003 x^2 + 1.24e+006 x + 1.74e+004 (r = 0.9989)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 

Concentration, ng/mL

0.0

5.0e61.0e71.5e72.0e72.5e73.0e73.5e74.0e74.5e75.0e75.5e76.0e76.5e7

Area, counts

Workstation: ETSGINGER Batch Name: b120405a.dab*Data worked up by KJU Page 1 of 1Printing Time: 2:26:16 PMPrinting Date: Tuesday, April 10, 2012

G

Ana

Decatur, A
Sample Name: "b120405a018" Sample ID: "11012-10-9" File: "b120405a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "2.5 ng/mL FC std in Milli Q Water" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 18 Sample Type: Standard Concentration: 2.40 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 2.62 ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/5/2012 Acq. Time: 10:13:24 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.7 minArea: 3211528 countsHeight: 8.32e+005 cpsStart Time: 15.3 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

5.0e41.0e51.5e52.0e52.5e53.0e53.5e54.0e54.5e55.0e55.5e56.0e56.5e57.0e57.5e58.0e5

Intensity, cps

15.66

16.15

15.52

16.64

Sample Name: "b120405a028" Sample ID: "Solvent Blank" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "Milli Q Water TN12-0125" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 28 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: < 0 Acq. Date: 4/6/2012 Acq. Time: 1:43:47 AM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: IntelliQuan - MQII Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 4 Report Largest Peak: No Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 3 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 2180 countsHeight: 9.04e+002 cpsStart Time: 15.6 minEnd Time: 15.7 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.

T

0.0

1.0e42.0e43.0e44.0e45.0e46.0e47.0e48.0e49.0e41.0e51.1e51.2e51.3e51.4e51.5e51.6e51.7e51.8e51.9e52.0e52.1e52.2e52.3e5

Intensity, cps

Sample Name: "b120405a029" Sample ID: "LCS-120405-1" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "0.5ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 29 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 0.477 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 0.433 ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/6/2012 Acq. Time: 2:04:48 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.7 minArea: 553522 countsHeight: 1.52e+005 cpsStart Time: 15.4 minEnd Time: 15.7 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

1.0e42.0e43.0e44.0e45.0e46.0e47.0e48.0e49.0e41.0e51.1e51.2e51.3e51.4e51.5e51.6e51.7e51.8e51.9e52.0e52.1e52.2e52.3e5

Intensity, cps

16.13

15.66

15.51

Sample Name: "b120405a032" Sample ID: "LCS-120405-4" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "5ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 32 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 4.77 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 4.53 ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/6/2012 Acq. Time: 3:08:03 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.7 minArea: 5455248 countsHeight: 1.38e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.3 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.0

5.0e41.0e51.5e52.0e52.5e53.0e53.5e54.0e54.5e55.0e55.5e56.0e56.5e57.0e57.5e58.0e58.5e59.0e59.5e51.0e61.1e61.1e61.2e61.2e61.3e61.3e61.4e6

Intensity, cps

1

15.51 

*** Buster J2930203 Batch Name: b120405a.dabData printed by STWPrinting Time: 1:53:31 PMPrinting Date: Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Page 1 of 8

G

Ana

Decatur, A
Sample Name: "b120405a035" Sample ID: "LCS-120405-7" File: "b120405a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "30ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 35 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 28.7 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 25.0 ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/6/2012 Acq. Time: 4:11:14 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.7 minArea: 25307984 countsHeight: 5.53e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.3 minEnd Time: 15.9 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

2.0e54.0e56.0e58.0e51.0e61.2e61.4e61.6e61.8e62.0e62.2e62.4e62.6e62.8e63.0e63.2e63.4e63.6e63.8e64.0e64.2e64.4e64.6e64.8e65.0e65.2e65.4e6

Intensity, cps

15.65

15.51

16.13

Sample Name: "b120405a044" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-073" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-203L-RB-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 44 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: < 0 Acq. Date: 4/6/2012 Acq. Time: 7:20:58 AM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: IntelliQuan - MQII Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 4 Report Largest Peak: No Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 3 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 15.7 minArea: 4736 countsHeight: 1.35e+003 cpsStart Time: 15.6 minEnd Time: 15.7 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.

T

0.0

5000.0

1.0e41.5e42.0e42.5e43.0e43.5e44.0e44.5e45.0e45.5e46.0e46.5e47.0e47.5e48.0e48.5e4

Intensity, cps

Sample Name: "b120405a053" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-074" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-TRIP01-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 53 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: < 0 Acq. Date: 4/6/2012 Acq. Time: 10:30:37 AM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: IntelliQuan - MQII Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 4 Report Largest Peak: No Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 3 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 15.7 minArea: 3210 countsHeight: 1.27e+003 cpsStart Time: 15.6 minEnd Time: 15.7 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

5000.0

1.0e41.5e42.0e42.5e43.0e43.5e44.0e44.5e45.0e45.5e46.0e46.5e47.0e47.5e48.0e4

Intensity, cps

16.13

17.32 17.85 18.09 15.97 16.65 17.08

Sample Name: "b120405a055" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-076" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-TRIP01-MS-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 55 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 91.5 ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/6/2012 Acq. Time: 11:12:48 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.7 minArea: 10615474 countsHeight: 3.09e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.4 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.0

2.0e54.0e56.0e58.0e51.0e61.2e61.4e61.6e61.8e62.0e62.2e62.4e62.6e62.8e63.0e6

Intensity, cps

1

15.51

*** Buster J2930203 Batch Name: b120405a.dabData printed by STWPrinting Time: 1:53:31 PMPrinting Date: Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Page 2 of 8

G

Ana

Decatur, A
Sample Name: "b120405a138" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-001" File: "b120405a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-203L-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 138 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 178. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/7/2012 Acq. Time: 4:22:47 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 2203766 countsHeight: 5.34e+005 cpsStart Time: 15.3 minEnd Time: 15.7 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

2.0e44.0e46.0e48.0e41.0e51.2e51.4e51.6e51.8e52.0e52.2e52.4e52.6e52.8e53.0e53.2e53.4e53.6e53.8e54.0e54.2e54.4e54.6e54.8e55.0e55.2e5

Intensity, cps

15.61

Sample Name: "b120405a142" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-005" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-220R-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 142 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 38.6 ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/7/2012 Acq. Time: 5:47:04 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 4675118 countsHeight: 1.11e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.00

5.00e41.00e51.50e52.00e52.50e53.00e53.50e54.00e54.50e55.00e55.50e56.00e56.50e57.00e57.50e58.00e58.50e59.00e59.50e51.00e61.05e61.10e6

Intensity, cps

15

15.47

Sample Name: "b120405a149" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-009" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-220L-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 149 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 48.1 ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/7/2012 Acq. Time: 8:14:43 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 5787691 countsHeight: 1.35e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.3 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

5.0e41.0e51.5e52.0e52.5e53.0e53.5e54.0e54.5e55.0e55.5e56.0e56.5e57.0e57.5e58.0e58.5e59.0e59.5e51.0e61.1e61.1e61.2e61.2e61.3e61.3e61.4e6

Intensity, cps

15.61

15.46

16.07

Sample Name: "b120405a153" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-013" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-222R-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 153 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 332. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/7/2012 Acq. Time: 9:39:11 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 4046752 countsHeight: 9.11e+005 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.0

5.0e41.0e51.5e52.0e52.5e53.0e53.5e54.0e54.5e55.0e55.5e56.0e56.5e57.0e57.5e58.0e58.5e59.0e5

Intensity, cps

15

15.46

*** Buster J2930203 Batch Name: b120405a.dabData printed by STWPrinting Time: 1:53:31 PMPrinting Date: Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Page 3 of 8

G

Ana

Decatur, A
Sample Name: "b120405a160" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-017" File: "b120405a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-227R-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 160 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 339. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/8/2012 Acq. Time: 12:06:55 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 4125014 countsHeight: 1.04e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.00

5.00e41.00e51.50e52.00e52.50e53.00e53.50e54.00e54.50e55.00e55.50e56.00e56.50e57.00e57.50e58.00e58.50e59.00e59.50e51.00e6

Intensity, cps

15.61

15.46

16.06

Sample Name: "b120405a163" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-020" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-227R-HS-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 163 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 764. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/8/2012 Acq. Time: 1:10:21 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 8978196 countsHeight: 2.43e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.3 minEnd Time: 15.9 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.0

1.0e52.0e53.0e54.0e55.0e56.0e57.0e58.0e59.0e51.0e61.1e61.2e61.3e61.4e61.5e61.6e61.7e61.8e61.9e62.0e62.1e62.2e62.3e62.4e6

Intensity, cps

15

15.47

Sample Name: "b120405a164" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-021" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-227L-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 164 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 82.8 ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/8/2012 Acq. Time: 1:31:26 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 1040156 countsHeight: 2.42e+005 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.7 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

1.0e42.0e43.0e44.0e45.0e46.0e47.0e48.0e49.0e41.0e51.1e51.2e51.3e51.4e51.5e51.6e51.7e51.8e51.9e52.0e52.1e52.2e52.3e52.4e5

Intensity, cps

15.61

Sample Name: "b120405b171" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-025" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-310R-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 184 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 966. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/9/2012 Acq. Time: 12:37:43 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 11162173 countsHeight: 2.73e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.3 minEnd Time: 15.9 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.0

1.0e52.0e53.0e54.0e55.0e56.0e57.0e58.0e59.0e51.0e61.1e61.2e61.3e61.4e61.5e61.6e61.7e61.8e61.9e62.0e62.1e62.2e62.3e62.4e62.5e62.6e62.7e6

Intensity, cps

1

15.50

15.34

*** Buster J2930203 Batch Name: b120405a.dabData printed by STWPrinting Time: 1:53:31 PMPrinting Date: Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Page 4 of 8

G

Ana

Decatur, A
Sample Name: "b120405b175" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-029" File: "b120405a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-RW312R-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 188 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 941. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/9/2012 Acq. Time: 2:02:08 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 10902692 countsHeight: 2.61e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.9 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

1.0e52.0e53.0e54.0e55.0e56.0e57.0e58.0e59.0e51.0e61.1e61.2e61.3e61.4e61.5e61.6e61.7e61.8e61.9e62.0e62.1e62.2e62.3e62.4e62.5e62.6e6

Intensity, cps

15.63

15.49

Sample Name: "b120405b177" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-031" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-RW312R-LS-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 190 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 1670. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/9/2012 Acq. Time: 2:44:22 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 18236621 countsHeight: 4.49e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.3 minEnd Time: 15.9 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.0

2.0e54.0e56.0e58.0e51.0e61.2e61.4e61.6e61.8e62.0e62.2e62.4e62.6e62.8e63.0e63.2e63.4e63.6e63.8e64.0e64.2e64.4e6

Intensity, cps

15

15.49

Sample Name: "b120405b182" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-033" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-317L-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 195 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 0.261 ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/9/2012 Acq. Time: 4:29:56 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 341532 countsHeight: 9.56e+004 cpsStart Time: 15.4 minEnd Time: 15.7 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

1.0e42.0e43.0e44.0e45.0e46.0e47.0e48.0e49.0e41.0e51.1e51.2e51.3e51.4e51.5e51.6e51.7e51.8e51.9e52.0e5

Intensity, cps

Sample Name: "b120405b186" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-037" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-324L-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 199 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 270. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/9/2012 Acq. Time: 5:54:23 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 3311225 countsHeight: 8.27e+005 cpsStart Time: 15.3 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.0

5.0e41.0e51.5e52.0e52.5e53.0e53.5e54.0e54.5e55.0e55.5e56.0e56.5e57.0e57.5e58.0e5

Intensity, cps

15

15.48

*** Buster J2930203 Batch Name: b120405a.dabData printed by STWPrinting Time: 1:53:31 PMPrinting Date: Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Page 5 of 8

G

Ana

Decatur, A
Sample Name: "b120405b193" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-041" File: "b120405a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-RW327R-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 206 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 698. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/9/2012 Acq. Time: 8:22:15 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 8244882 countsHeight: 1.92e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

1.0e52.0e53.0e54.0e55.0e56.0e57.0e58.0e59.0e51.0e61.1e61.2e61.3e61.4e61.5e61.6e61.7e61.8e61.9e6

Intensity, cps

15.60

15.46

16.06

Sample Name: "b120405b197" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-045" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-328R-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 210 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 335. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/9/2012 Acq. Time: 9:46:45 PM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 4075406 countsHeight: 1.05e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.3 minEnd Time: 15.7 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.00

5.00e41.00e51.50e52.00e52.50e53.00e53.50e54.00e54.50e55.00e55.50e56.00e56.50e57.00e57.50e58.00e58.50e59.00e59.50e51.00e61.05e6

Intensity, cps

15

15.47

Sample Name: "b120405b204" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-049" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-328L-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 217 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 95.0 ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/10/2012 Acq. Time: 12:14:29 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 10998487 countsHeight: 2.29e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.9 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

1.0e52.0e53.0e54.0e55.0e56.0e57.0e58.0e59.0e51.0e61.1e61.2e61.3e61.4e61.5e61.6e61.7e61.8e61.9e62.0e62.1e62.2e6

Intensity, cps

15.61

15.46

16.06

Sample Name: "b120405b207" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-052" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-328L-HS-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 220 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 172. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/10/2012 Acq. Time: 1:17:55 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 18646982 countsHeight: 4.42e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.9 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.0

2.0e54.0e56.0e58.0e51.0e61.2e61.4e61.6e61.8e62.0e62.2e62.4e62.6e62.8e63.0e63.2e63.4e63.6e63.8e64.0e64.2e64.4e6

Intensity, cps

15

15.46

*** Buster J2930203 Batch Name: b120405a.dabData printed by STWPrinting Time: 1:53:31 PMPrinting Date: Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Page 6 of 8

G

Ana

Decatur, A
Sample Name: "b120405b208" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-053" File: "b120405a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-330R-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 221 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 331. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/10/2012 Acq. Time: 1:39:01 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 4035184 countsHeight: 1.03e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.00

5.00e41.00e51.50e52.00e52.50e53.00e53.50e54.00e54.50e55.00e55.50e56.00e56.50e57.00e57.50e58.00e58.50e59.00e59.50e51.00e6

Intensity, cps

15.61

Sample Name: "b120405b215" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-057" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-330L-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 228 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 296. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/10/2012 Acq. Time: 4:07:07 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 3622901 countsHeight: 9.25e+005 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.0

5.0e41.0e51.5e52.0e52.5e53.0e53.5e54.0e54.5e55.0e55.5e56.0e56.5e57.0e57.5e58.0e58.5e59.0e5

Intensity, cps

15

15.46

Sample Name: "b120405b219" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-061" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-RW331S-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 232 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 962. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/10/2012 Acq. Time: 5:31:32 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 11127866 countsHeight: 2.63e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.9 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

1.0e52.0e53.0e54.0e55.0e56.0e57.0e58.0e59.0e51.0e61.1e61.2e61.3e61.4e61.5e61.6e61.7e61.8e61.9e62.0e62.1e62.2e62.3e62.4e62.5e62.6e6

Intensity, cps

15.61

15.46

16.05

Sample Name: "b120405b226" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-065" File: "b120405a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-335R-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 239 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 3840. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/10/2012 Acq. Time: 7:59:20 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 34116185 countsHeight: 6.67e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 

Tim

0.0

5.0e51.0e61.5e62.0e62.5e63.0e63.5e64.0e64.5e65.0e65.5e66.0e66.5e6

Intensity, cps

15.

15.43

*** Buster J2930203 Batch Name: b120405a.dabData printed by STWPrinting Time: 1:53:31 PMPrinting Date: Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Page 7 of 8

G

Ana

Decatur, A
Sample Name: "b120405b230" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-28-069" File: "b120405a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOA" Mass(es): "413.0/369.0 amu,413.0/219.0 amu,413.0/169.0 amu"Comment: "DAL-GW-GRS04-0-" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 243 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 3930. ng/mL Acq. Date: 4/10/2012 Acq. Time: 9:23:46 AM Modified: Yes RT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 15.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 15.6 minArea: 34595866 countsHeight: 6.16e+006 cpsStart Time: 15.2 minEnd Time: 15.8 min

13.5 14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0

Time, min

0.0

5.0e51.0e61.5e62.0e62.5e63.0e63.5e64.0e64.5e65.0e65.5e66.0e6

Intensity, cps

15.58

15.44

*** Buster J2930203 Batch Name: b120405a.dabData printed by STWPrinting Time: 1:53:31 PMPrinting Date: Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Page 8 of 8

G

Ana

Decatur, A
ATTACHMENT C: ANALYTICAL METHOD(S) 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 42 of 66
Page 43 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 2 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; 

Direct Injection Analysis

1 Scope and Application

This method describes the direct injection analysis of perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) from 

water matrices using high-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry 

(HPLC/MS/MS). The method is generally applicable but not limited to the measurement of 

perfluoroalkyl sulfonamides and perfluorinated alkyl acids (PFAAs) such as perfluorosulfonic 

acids (PFSAs) and perfluorocarboxylic acids (PFCAs) (Table 1). Water samples containing 

heavy particulate may require preparation by an alternate method such as ETS-8-154 

“Determination of Perfluorinated Acids, Alcohols, Amides, and Sulfonates In Water By Solid 

Phase Extraction and High Performance Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry”. The 

method is applicable to both external standard and internal standard calibration1

. 

Table 1. Representative Target Analytes

Acronym Analyte

Chemical Abstract Services 

Registry Number (CASRN)

PFBA (C4 Acid) Perfluorobutanoic acid 375-22-4

PFPeA (C5 Acid) Perfluoropentanoic acid 2706-90-3

PFHxA (C6 Acid) Perfluorohexanoic acid 307-24-4

PFHpA (C7 Acid) Perfluoroheptanoic acid 375-85-9

PFOA (C8 Acid) Perfluorooctanoic acid 335-67-1

PFNA (C9 Acid) Perfluorononanoic acid 375-95-1

PFDA (C10 Acid) Perfluorodecanoic acid 335-76-2

PFUnA (C11 Acid) Perfluoroundecanoic acid 2058-94-8

PFDoA (C12 Acid) Perfluorododecanoic acid 307-55-1

PFTrDA (C13 Acid) Perfluorotridecanoic acid 72629-94-8

PFBS (C4 Sulfonate) Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid 375-73-5

PFHS (C6 Sulfonate) Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid 355-46-4

PFOS (C8 Sulfonate) Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid 1763-23-1

FBSA (C4 Sulfonamide Perfluorobutanesulfonamide 30334-69-1

FOSA (C8 Sulfonamide) Pefluorooctanesulfonamide 754-91-6

The Minimum Reporting Level (MRL) is the Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) that meets Data 

Quality Objectives (DQOs) that are developed based on the intended use of this method. 

Method Flexibility – This is a performance-based method and may be generally applied to the 

determination of perfluorinated compounds in water matrices when analysis batch quality 

control (QC) criteria are met2

. Each set of samples are prepared in an analysis batch with 

calibration standards, LCSs, blanks, and continuing calibration check standards analyzed on 

the same instrument during a time period that begins and ends with the analysis of the 

appropriate continuing calibration check standards. The laboratory is permitted to modify the 

LC column, mobile phase composition, LC conditions, and MS/MS conditions. Method 

modifications should be considered to improve method performance or to meet data quality 

objectives for the study. In all cases where method modifications are implemented, the batch 

 

1 The method is supported by validation with internal standard calibration for C4-C13 PFCAs, C4, C6, and C8 PFSAs, 

and C8 perfluoroalkane sulfonamide in laboratory control samples under 3M method validation E11-0667.

2 Guidance for establishing method QC Criteria based on a.) FDA May 2001, “Guidance for Industry, Bioanalytical 

Method Validation”, b.) EPA Method 537, and c.) European Commission: Guidance for Generating and Reporting 

Methods of Analysis in Support of Pre-registration Data Requirements for Annex II (Part A, section 4) and Annex III 

(Part A,section 5) of Directive 91/414, SANCO/3029/99 rev. 4 (11/07/00).

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 44 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 3 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; 

Direct Injection Analysis

analytical QCs (section 9) must be completed and pass QC acceptance criteria (section 13) if 

the data from the analytical batch are to be reported. 

2 Method Summary

Water samples are analyzed as neat aqueous sample or as solvent diluted aqueous samples 

by direct injection using LC/MS/MS. Samples containing heavy particulate may not be 

suitable for analysis by this method. Samples containing suspended particulate should be 

centrifuged or filtered prior to removing a sample aliquot or diluting with solvent. The water 

sample is mixed well prior to removing an aliquot or diluting, if necessary, with ASTM Type I 

water, HPLC water, other suitable water, or solvent (methanol). 

Quantitation is by stable isotope internal standard calibration in laboratory reagent water. All 

perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) target analyte concentrations of perfluorosulfonic acids 

(PFSAs) and perfluorocarboxylic acids (PFCAs) are reported as anions and corrected for 

their salt or free acid forms. Alternatively, quantitation may be performed by external 

standard calibration. 

This is a performance-based method. Method uncertainty for each target analyte is 

determined for each analytical batch using multiple laboratory control spikes at multiple 

concentrations. This method also requires that the precision and accuracy for each sample 

be determined using field matrix spikes to verify that the method is applicable to each sample 

matrix. 

Calibration standards for PFUnA, PFDoA, PFTrDA, and FOSA have been found to be 

unstable for more than 2 days in 100% water. Samples requiring analysis for these 

compounds by this method should be diluted 1:1 with methanol and analyzed against a 

calibration curve prepared in 1:1 synthetic groundwater:MeOH.

3 Definitions 

3.1 Analysis Batch 

A set of study samples that are prepared with calibration standards, laboratory control 

samples, and procedural blanks, and analyzed on the same instrument during a time period 

that begins and ends with the analysis of the appropriate continuing calibration check 

standards.

3.2 Analytical Sample 

A portion of a laboratory sample prepared for analysis.

3.3 Calibration Standard

A solution prepared by spiking a known volume of the Working Standard (WS) into a 

predetermined amount of ASTM Type I, HPLC grade water, or other suitable water (i.e. 

matrix water), and analyzed according to this method. Calibration standards are used to 

calibrate the instrument response with respect to analyte concentration.

3.4 Laboratory Duplicate Sample (LDS, or Lab Dup)

A laboratory duplicate sample is a separate aliquot of a sample taken in the analytical 

laboratory that is analyzed separately with identical procedures. Analysis of LDSs compared 

to that of the first aliquot give a measure of the precision associated with laboratory 

procedures, but not with sample collection, preservation, or storage procedures.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 45 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 4 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; 

Direct Injection Analysis

3.5 Field Blank (FB)/Trip Blank (TB)

ASTM Type I, HPLC grade water, or other suitable water, placed in a sample container in the 

laboratory and treated as a sample in all respects, including exposure to sampling site 

conditions, storage, preservation and all analytical procedures. The purpose of the TB is to 

determine if test substances or other interferences are present in the field environment. This 

sample is also referred to as a Trip Blank. 

3.6 Field Duplicate Sample (FDS, Field Dup)

A sample collected in duplicate at the same time from the same location as the sample. The 

FDS is handled under identical circumstances and treated exactly the same throughout field 

and laboratory procedures. Analysis of the FDS compared to that of the first sample gives a 

measure of the precision associated with sample collection, preservation and storage, as well 

as with laboratory procedures.

3.7 Field Matrix Spike (FMS)

A sample to which known quantities of the target analytes, ISs and SRSs are added to the 

sample bottle in the laboratory before the bottles are sent to the field for collection of aqueous 

samples. A known, specific volume of sample must be added to the sample container 

without rinsing. This may be accomplished by making a “fill to this level” line on the outside of 

the sample container. The FMS is analyzed to ascertain if any matrix effects, interferences, 

or stability issues may complicate the interpretation of the sample analysis.

3.8 Trip Blank Matrix Spike (TBMS) 

An aliquot of ASTM Type I, HPLC grade water, or other suitable water, to which known 

quantities of the target analytes, ISs and SRSs are added in the laboratory prior to the 

shipment of the collection bottles. The TBMS is analyzed exactly like a study sample to help 

determine if the method is in control and whether a loss of analyte or analytical bias could be 

attributed to sample holding time, sample storage and/or shipment issues. A low and high 

TBMS are appropriate when expected sample concentrations are not known or may vary.

3.9 Internal Standard (IS)

A compound added to each study sample, calibration standard, laboratory control samples, 

and procedural blanks at a consistent level (typically around 1 ng/mL). The internal 

standard(s) are stable isotope labeled versions of the target analytes. The area count ratio of 

the target analyte to the internal standard is used for calibration. Surrogate ISs are applied 

when stable isotope ISs of target analytes are unavailable. A surrogate IS is not necessarily 

a stable isotope labeled version of the target analyte, but is treated as an internal standard for 

quantitation.

3.10 Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)

An aliquot of control matrix to which known quantities of the target analytes, ISs and SRSs

(when applicable) are added in the laboratory at the time when samples are aliquotted. At 

least three levels (two levels for SRSs) in triplicate are included, one generally at the low end 

of the calibration curve and one near the mid range and the upper end of the curve. The 

LCSs are analyzed exactly like a laboratory sample to determine whether the stability of the 

standards. LCSs should be prepared each day samples are aliquoted. 

3.11 Laboratory Matrix Spike (LMS)

A laboratory matrix spike is an aliquot of a sample to which known quantities of target 

analytes, ISs and SRSs (when applicable) are added in the laboratory. The LMS is analyzed 

exactly like a laboratory sample to determine whether the sample matrix contributes bias to 

the analytical results. The endogenous concentrations of the analytes in the sample matrix 

must be determined in a separate aliquot and the measured values in the LMS corrected for 

these concentrations. LMSs are optional for analysis of aqueous samples.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 46 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 5 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; 

Direct Injection Analysis

3.12 Laboratory Sample

A portion or aliquot of a sample received from the field for testing.

3.13 Limit of Quantitation (LOQ)

The lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) for an analytical batch is the lowest concentration that 

can be reliably quantitated within the specified limits of precision and accuracy. The LLOQ is 

generally selected as the lowest non-zero standard in the calibration curve that meets method 

acceptance criteria. The LLOQ for each target analyte is established for each analysis batch 

as the lowest calibration standard with area counts at least twice that of the average area 

counts of the procedural blanks.

The upper limit of quantitation (ULOQ) for an analytical batch is the highest concentration that 

can be reliably quantitated within the specified limits of precision and accuracy. The highest 

standard in the calibration curve that meets method acceptance criteria is defined as the 

ULOQ.

3.14 Method/Procedural Blank

An aliquot of control matrix that is treated exactly like a laboratory sample including exposure 

to all glassware, equipment, solvents, and reagents that are used with other laboratory 

samples. The method blank is used to determine if test substances or other interferences are 

present in the laboratory environment, the reagents, or the apparatus.

3.15 Sample

A sample is an aliquot removed from a larger quantity of material intended to represent the 

original source material.

3.16 Stock Standard Solution (SSS)

A concentrated solution of a single-analyte prepared in the laboratory with an assayed 

reference compound.

3.17 Surrogate Internal Standard

An IS that is not necessarily a stable isotopically labeled target analyte, but is treated as an 

internal standard for quantitation. Surrogate ISs are used when isotopically labeled 

counterparts of the target analyte are not commercially or readily available.

3.18 Surrogate Recovery Standard (SRS)

An isotopically labeled standard, not used as an internal standard, that is added to each 

sample and appropriate QC sample as a means to evaluate the method performance for a 

chemical class of compounds (e.g., PFSAs, PFCAs). 

3.19 Working Standard (WS)

A solution of several analytes prepared in the laboratory from SSSs and diluted as needed to 

prepare calibration standards and other required analyte solutions.

4 Warnings and Cautions

4.1 Health and Safety

The acute and chronic toxicity of the standards for this method have not been precisely 

determined; however, each should be treated as a potential health hazard. The analyst 

should wear gloves, a lab coat, and safety glasses to prevent exposure to chemicals that 

might be present.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 47 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 6 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; 

Direct Injection Analysis

The laboratory is responsible for maintaining a safe work environment and a current 

awareness of local regulations regarding the handling of the chemicals used in this method. 

A reference file of material safety data sheets (MSDS) should be available to all personnel 

involved in these analyses.

4.2 Cautions

The analyst must be familiar with the laboratory equipment and potential hazards including, 

but not limited to, the use of solvents, pressurized gas and solvent lines, high voltage, and 

vacuum systems. Refer to the appropriate equipment procedure or operator manual for 

additional information and cautions.

5 Interferences

During sample preparation and analysis, major potential contaminant sources are reagents 

and glassware. All materials used in the analyses shall be demonstrated to be free from 

interferences under conditions of analysis by running method blanks.

Parts and supplies that contain Teflon® should be avoided or minimized due to the possibility 

of interference and/or contamination. These may include, but are not limited to: wash bottles, 

Teflon® lined caps, autovial caps, HPLC parts, etc.

The use of disposable micropipettes or pipettes to aliquot standard solutions is recommended 

to make calibration standards and matrix spikes.

6 Instrumentation, Supplies, and Materials

6.1 Instrumentation

Analytical balance capable of reading to 0.0001g 

HPLC/MS/MS or HPLC/MS system, as described in Section 10. 

6.2 Supplies and Materials

Sample collection bottles—HDPE (e.g., NalgeneTM) wide-mouth bottles with screw cap. 

Note: Do not use fluorinated or Teflon® bottles or lined caps.

Coolers or boxes for sample shipment.

15-mL and 50-mL disposable polypropylene centrifuge tubes.

Class A pipettes and volumetric flasks, various.

2 mL HPLC autovials 

Disposable pipettes, polypropylene or glass as appropriate

Centrifuge capable of spinning 15-mL and 50-mL polypropylene tubes at 3000 rpm.

7 Reagents and Standards

Note: Suppliers and catalog numbers are for illustrative purposes only. Equivalent 

performance may be achieved using chemicals obtained from other suppliers. Do not use a 

lesser grade of chemical than those listed. 

7.1 Chemicals

Water – Milli-Q, HPLC grade, or other suitably appropriate sources

Calcium Acetate - A.C.S. Reagent Grade

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 48 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 7 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; 

Direct Injection Analysis

Magnesium Acetate - A.C.S. Reagent Grade

Methanol – HPLC grade

Ammonium Acetate – A.C.S. Reagent Grade

7.2 Representative Target Analytes, ISs, and SRSs

PFBA, Heptafluorobutyric Acid, (C4 Perfluorinated Acid)

PFPeA, Nonafluoropentanoic Acid (C5 Perfluorinated Acid)

PFHxA, Perfluorohexanoic Acid (C6 Perfluorinated Acid)

PFHpA, Tridecafluoroheptanoic Acid, (C7 Perfluorinated Acid)

PFOA, Ammonium perfluorooctanoate, (C8 Perfluorinated Acid)

PFNA, Heptadecafluorononanoic Acid, (C9 Perfluorinated Acid)

PFDA, Nonadecafluorodecanoic Acid (C10 Perfluorinated Acid)

PFUnA, Perfluoroundecanoic Acid, (C11 Perfluorinated Acid)

PFDoA, Perfluorododecanoic Acid, (C12 Perfluorinated Acid)

PFTrDA, Perfluorotridecanoic Acid, (C13 Perfluorinated Acid)

FBSA, Perfluorobutanesulfonamide

FOSA, Perfluorooctanesulfonylamide 

PFBS, Potassium Perfluorobutanesulfonate

PFHS, Perfluorohexanesulfonate

PFOS, Potassium perfluorooctanesulfonate

PFOA [1,2, 3, 4-

13C], 13C4-isotopically labeled perfluorooctanoic acid (SRS)

PFOS [1,2, 3, 4-

13C], 13C4-isotopically labeled Perfluorooctanesulfonate (SRS)

PFUnA [1,2-

13C], 13C2-isotopically labeled Perfluoroundecanoic acid (SRS)

A custom mix of ISs in a methanolic solution containing ([1,2,3,4-

13C4]PFBA, [1,2 - 13C2]PFHxA, [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-

13C8]PFOA, [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9-13C9]PFNA, [1,2 -13C2]PFDA, 

[1,2,3,4,5,6,7 -13C7]PFUnA, [1,2 -

13C2]PFDoA, [1,2,3 -13C3]PFHS, [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-13C8]PFOS, 

and [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-

13C8]PFOSA (Wellington Laboratories, Guelph, ON) in combination with 

added ([1,2,3,4,5-

13C5]PFPeA, ([1,2,3,4-13C4]PFHpA, and [18O2]PFBS can be used to prepare 

a stock IS solution. Alternatively, individual stable isotope ISs can be used to prepare a stock 

IS mixture.

Other ISs can be applied.

7.3 Reagent Preparation

2 mM Ammonium acetate solution (Analysis)—Weigh 0.3 g of Ammonium acetate and 

dissolve in 2.0 L of reagent water. 

Synthetic Groundwater (containing 25 ppm Ca and Mg) – Weigh 0.61 g of Calcium Acetate 

and 0.92 g of Magnesium Acetate and dissolve in 6.0 L of reagent water.

Note: Alternative volumes may be prepared as long as the ratios of the solvent to solute ratios 

are maintained.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 49 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 8 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; 

Direct Injection Analysis

7.4 Stock Standard Solution (SSS) and Working Standard Solution 

Preparation

The following standard preparation procedure serves as an example. Weighed amounts and 

final volumes may be changed to suit the needs of a particular study. For example, μL 

volumes may be spiked into volumetric flasks when diluting stock solutions to appropriate 

levels.

100 μg/mL target analyte SSSs—Weigh out 10 mg of analytical standard (corrected for 

percent salt, acid [ETS-4-031] and purity) and dilute to 100 mL with methanol or other 

suitable solvent, in a 100 mL volumetric flask. Transfer to a 125 mL LDPE bottle or other 

suitable container. Prepare a separate solution for each analyte. Expiration dates and 

storage conditions of stock solutions should be assigned in accordance with laboratory 

standard operating procedure. An example of purity and salt correction is given below for 

PFOS.

moclecular salt of weight

molecular anion of weight factor correction salt =

9275.0

538

499 PFOS (K factor correction )salt == +

10 mg C8F17S03

-

K+ with purity 90% = 8.35 mg C8F17S03

– (10 mg*0.90*0.9275=8.35 mg)

10 μg/mL (10,000 ng/mL) mixed working standard—Add 5.0 mL each of the 100 μg/mL 

SSSs to a 50 mL volumetric flask and bring up to volume with solvent. 

1 μg/mL (1,000 ng/mL) mixed working standard—Add 0.5 mL of the 100 μg/mL SSSs to a 

50 mL volumetric flask and bring up to volume with solvent. 

0.1 μg/mL (100 ng/mL) mixed standard—Add 0.05 mL of the 100 μg/mL SSSs to a 50 mL 

volumetric flask and bring up to volume with solvent. 

Storage Conditions—Store all SSSs and working standards in accordance with laboratory 

standard operating procedure or in a refrigerator at 4°±2°C for a maximum period of 6 months 

from the date of preparation.

7.5 Calibration Standards

Calibration can be performed by IS or external calibration. Using the working standards 

described above, prepare calibration solutions in ASTM Type I water, HPLC water, other 

suitable water, or a mixture of solvent and water using the information in Table 2 as a 

guideline. Note: Volumes of water or water/solvent mixtures and working standards may be 

adjusted to meet the data quality objectives addressed in the general project outline. 

Calibration levels other than those listed below can be prepared as needed.

For the quantitation of PFOA and PFOS, reference materials of certified mixed linear and 

branched isomer are preferred. Alternately, reference materials of primarily linear isomers of 

PFOA and/or PFOS may be used, however, when quantitating with predominantly linear 

reference standards, additional LCS samples containing both linear and branched isomers of 

PFOA and PFOS are required3

. 

7.5.1 Internal Standard (IS) and Surrogate Recovery Standard (SRS) 

For IS calibration, stable isotope internal standards of each target analyte or appropriate 

surrogate ISs should be spiked at the same level in all calibration standards. Once the 

calibration standards have been prepared as stated above in Section 7.5, all calibration 

standards are spiked with a separate internal standard spiking solution. Typically the 

 

3 A report summarizing an assessment of the use of reference standards containing certified linear and branched isomers of 

PFOA/PFOS can be found in 3M report E11-0560.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 50 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 9 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; 

Direct Injection Analysis

concentration of the internal standard is consistent with the internal standard concentration 

expected in the samples being prepared, usually 1 ng/mL. The concentration of the internal 

standard spiking solution is typically 2 μg/mL. A separate zero point or method blank is 

typically prepared at the same time as the calibration standards, using the same solution 

used to prepare the standards (ASTM Type I water, HPLC water, other suitable water, or a 

solvent/water mixture), and is spiked with the internal standard at the same concentration as 

the calibration curve, typically at 1 ng/mL. 

If the samples being analzyed were pre-spiked with SRSs, the calibration curve prepared in 

Section 7.5 is spiked with a separate SRS spiking solution. Typically, the sample bottles are 

spiked with a SRS at 0.1 ng/mL. The final calibration curve must consist of at least six 

calibration points after analysis. The following table provides an example of spike 

concentrations and volumes used to achieve a multi-point extracted calibration curve with 

internal standard and surrogate standard.

Table 1 lists recommended stable isotope internal standards for several PFSA and PFCA 

target compounds. A custom mix of isotopically labeled target analytes in a methanolic 

solution containing ([1,2,3,4-

13C4]PFBA, [1,2 -13C2]PFHxA, [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-13C8]PFOA, 

[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9-

13C9]PFNA, [1,2,3,4,5,6 -13C6]PFDA, [1,2,3,4,5,6,7 -13C7]PFUnA, [1,2 - 13C2]PFDoA, [1,2,3-

13C3]PFHS, [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-13C8]PFOS, and [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-13C8]FOSA 

(Wellington Laboratories, Guelph, ON) in combination with added ([1,2,3,4,5-

13C5]PFPeA, 

([1,2,3,4-

13C4]PFHpA, and [18O2]PFBS can be used to prepare a stock IS solution. 

Alternative sources of certified stable isotope labeled target analytes are applicable. 

Alternatively, individual stable isotope ISs can be used to prepare a stock IS mixture. The 

table below lists the recommended stable isotope ISs and SRSs applied in the method. 

Other stable isotope ISs and SRSs of target analytes not listed in the table may be used if 

supported by validation and/or analysis batch QCs meeting method acceptance criteria (e.g., 

[

13C2]-PFOA). The same internal standard should be used for a given analyte throughout the 

entire project/study. Note: some of the compounds listed below are appropriate to use as 

surrogate ISs when a stable isotope IS of a target analyte is not available. Generally, 

surrogate isotopically labeled PFCAs are used for PFCAs, and surrogate isotopically labeled 

PFSAs are used for PFSAs.

Table 2 provides examples of spike concentrations and volumes used to achieve a multi-point 

calibration curve with ISs and SRSs. 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 51 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 10 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; 

Direct Injection Analysis

Table 1. Stable Isotope PFCAs and PFSAs used for ISs and SRSs

Compound Name Synonym or Acronym Analytical Purpose Reference Standard 

Source

13C4-Perfluorobutanoic acid [1,2,3,4-13C4]PFBA IS for PFBA Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual)

13C4-Perfluoropentanoic acid [1,2,3,4,5-13C5]PFPeA IS for PFPeA Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual)

13C2-Perfluorohexanoic acid [1,2 -13C2]PFHxA IS for PFHxA Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual) 

13C4-Perfluoroheptanoic acid [1,2,3,4-13C4]PFHpA IS for PFHpA Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual)

13C8-Perfluorooctanoic acid [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-13C8]PFOA IS for PFOA and [1,2,3,4 13C4]PFOA

Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual)

13C9-Perfluorononanoic acid [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9-13C9]PFNA IS for PFNA Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual)

13C6-Perfluorodecanoic acid [1,2,3,4,5,6 -13C6]PFDA IS for PFDA Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual)

13C7-Perfluoroundecanoic acid [1,2,3,4,5,6,7 -13C7]PFUnA IS for PFUnA Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual)

13C2-Perfluorododecanoic acid [1,2 -13C2]PFDoA IS for PFDoA, *PFTA Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual)

18O2-Ammonium Perfluorobutane sulfonate [18O2]PFBS IS for PFBS RTI International 

(Individual)

13C3-Ammonium Perfluorohexane sulfonate [1,2,3-13C3]PFHS IS for PFHS Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual)

13C8-Sodium Perfluorooctane sulfonate [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-13C8]PFOS IS for PFOS and 

PFOS[1,2,3,4 13C4], 

Wellington Labs 

(Mix or Individual)

13C8-Perfluorooctanesulfonamide [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-13C8]FOSA IS for FOSA

Wellington Labs (mix)

RTI International 

(Individual)

13C4-Perfluorooctanoic acid [1,2,3,4-13C4]PFOA SRS for all PFCAs: C4-C8 Wellington

13C2-Perfluoroundecanoic acid [1,2 -13C2]PFUnA SRS for all PFCAs C9-C13 Wellington

13C8-Perfluorooctane sulfonate [1,2,3,4-13C4]PFOS SRS for all PFSAs: C4, 

C6, and C8 Wellington 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 52 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 11 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection Analysis

Table 2. Example Preparation of Calibration Curve with ISs and SRSs

Sample Description Concentration 

of WS, μg/mL

Volume of 

WS, μL 

Volume of IS 

(2 μg/mL), μL 

Concentration of 

Surrogate, μg/mL

Volume of 

Surrogate, μL 

Volume of ASTM Type I Water, or 

other suitable solvent (1), mL

0.025 ng/mL curve point 0.10 25 50 0.20 12.5 100

0.030 ng/mL curve point 0.10 30 50 0.20 15 100

0.04 ng/mL curve point 0.10 40 50 0.20 20 100

0.05 ng/mL curve point 0.10 50 50 0.20 25 100

0.1 ng/mL curve point 0.10 100 50 0.20 50 100

0.25 ng/mL curve point 0.10 250 50 0.20 125 100

0.5 ng/mL curve point 1.0 50 50 0.20 250 100

1 ng/mL curve point 1.0 100 50 0.20 500 100

2.5 ng/mL curve point 10.0 25 50 10.0 25 100

5.0 ng/mL curve point 10.0 50 50 10.0 50 100

10.0 ng/mL curve point 10.0 100 50 10.0 100 100

25.0 ng/mL curve point 10.0 250 50 10.0 NA 100

50.0 ng/mL curve point 10.0 500 50 10.0 NA 100

75.0 ng/mL curve point 10.0 750 50 10.0 NA 100

100 ng/mL curve point 10.0 1000 50 10.0 NA 100

 

N/A - Not Applicable

(1) Samples requiring analysis for PFUnA, PFDoA, PFTrDA, and FOSA should be analyzed against a calibration curve prepared in 1:1 synthetic groundwater:MeOH.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 53 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 12 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

8 Sample Collection and Bottle Preparation

Sample collection bottles are prepared by 3M Environmental Laboratory (or subcontract supplier) personnel for 

shipment at ambient temperature to the collection site. Typically, four separate collection bottles are 

associated with a single collection site: sample, field duplicate sample, low field matrix spike, and high field 

matrix spike. Alternatively, the sample and field duplicate sample may contain SRSs in lieu of additional target 

analyte low field matrix spike and target analyte high field matrix spike samples. Depending on the scope of 

the project, additional replicates of the field sample and field matrix spikes may be added. Also, it is not 

uncommon for additional mid-level field matrix spikes to be collected if the expected sample concentrations are 

truly unknown or could span a large concentration range. 

High-density polyethylene (HDPE) wide-mouth Nalgene bottles are used for the sample collection containers. 

(Volumes of the bottles may vary depending on how much sample is required to meet data quality objectives.) 

Sample collection volumes are project specific and based on data quality objectives. The Nalgene bottles do 

not require any pretreatment prior to use. Typically, placement of a sample bottle volumetric “fill to here” line is 

done by using a sample bottle marker template. Alternatively, bottles may be weighed prior to bottle 

preparation and weighed again after samples have been collected.

All bottles should be clearly labeled to indicate its intended use as a sample, field sample duplicate, low field 

matrix spike, high field matrix spike, sample/SRS field matrix spike, field duplicate sample/SRS field matrix 

spike, trip blank, or trip blank matrix spike. If each location has different designated spike levels, the label 

should also clearly indicate the sample location designation. Generally, a set of bottles for a given collection 

site are prepared then grouped together in plastic bags for organizational purposes. For each sample 

collection event, at least one set of trip blank and trip blank matrix spikes are prepared. 

Bottle preparation should be documented in a Note to File or on a sample preparation worksheet and should 

include the following information: date prepared, total number of bottles prepared, number of sample sites, the 

standard identification numbers and spike volumes used to prepare spiked bottles, the “fill to here” volume, and 

any other pertinent information needed for reconstructibility of the data. The Note to File will be included in the 

final data package for the project. 

Samples are collected in the field and shipped to the laboratory at ambient temperature.

8.1 Field Matrix Spike Sample (FMS)

Field matrix spike samples are a requirement of the method. A FMS sample is defined as a QC sample to 

which known quantities of appropriate target analytes are added to the sample bottle in the field or in the 

laboratory before the bottles are sent to the field. The sample and field duplicate sample may contain 

appropriate SRSs in lieu of target analyte FMS samples. Sample quantities are determined volumetrically or 

gravimetrically. A known, specific volume or weight of sample is added to the sample container without

rinsing. Volumetric sample measurements may be acquired by a laboratory applied “fill to this level” line on the 

outside of the sample container. Target analyte FMS samples should be spiked at approximately 0.5-10 times 

the expected analyte concentration in the sample. If the expected range of analyte concentrations is unknown, 

multiple spikes at varying levels may be prepared to increase the likelihood that a spike at an appropriate level 

is made. Typically a low and a high target analyte spike are prepared for each sampling location. In those 

instances where SRSs are to be used in lieu of target analyte FMS samples, the sample and field duplicate 

sample are spiked at approximately 2-5 times the target LOQ. The FMS is analyzed to ascertain if matrix 

effects or sample holding time contributes bias to the analytical results. For the sample bottles designated for 

matrix spikes, an appropriate volume of matrix spiking solution is added to the empty bottle prior to sampling. 

The volume of spike solution added should produce the desired final concentration of target analytes once the 

bottle is filled with sample to the “fill to here line”. The matrix spiking solution(s) should be prepared in a 

suitable solvent and contain all of the appropriate target analytes, ISs, and SRSs. The target analyte matrix 

spiking solution is often the same as the working standards used to create the calibration standards. An 

example of a bottle spike is given below.

“Fill to here” volume = 200 mL (A 250 mL Nalgene bottle is used)

Desired Field Spike Concentration = 0.25 ng/mL

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 54 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 13 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

500 μL of a 0.1 μg/mL spiking solution (containing the target analytes) is added to the bottle and the bottle cap 

promptly sealed.

8.2 Internal Standard and Surrogate Recovery Standard 

If analysis of a surrogate recovery standard (SRS) is included in the project objectives, an appropriate volume 

of a surrogate standard solution is added to all the bottles prior to sampling and SPE. Typically sample bottles 

are spiked with surrogate recovery standards at a final desired spike concentration of 0.1 ng/mL.

If quantitation by internal standard (IS) is included in the project objective, an appropriate volume of internal 

standard solution is added to all the bottles prior to sampling and SPE. Typically sample bottles are spiked 

with internal standard at a final desired spike concentration of 1 ng/mL.

For the trip blank, the SRS spike and IS spike is added to the bottle and then ASTM Type I water (HPLC grade 

reagent water or other suitable water may used) is added to the “fill to here” line. The bottle is capped and 

sealing tape may be placed around the outer edge of the cap. Trip blank matrix spikes are prepared by adding 

the appropriate volume of target analyte spiking solution, IS, and SRS spiking solutions and filling the bottle to 

the desired volume with the appropriate water and capping and sealing the cap.

9 Quality Control and Data Quality Objectives

9.1 Data Quality Objectives

This method and required quality control samples is designed to generate data accurate to ±30% with a 

targeted LOQ of 0.025 ng/mL. Any deviations from the quality control measures spelled out below will be 

documented in the raw data and footnoted in the final report.

9.2 Method/Procedural Blanks

The method/procedural blank is zero point calibration standard (which includes ISs) analyzed in a regular basis 

with each analysis batch. At a minimum, method blanks are analyzed prior to instrument calibration, prior to 

the analysis of CCV samples, after every 10 sample injections, and at the end of the analytical run.

The mean area count or area ratios when using internal standard calibration, for each analyte in the method 

blanks must be less than 50% of the area count counts or area ratios when using internal standard calibration, 

of the LOQ standard. The standard deviation of the area counts, or area ratios when using internal standard 

calibration, of these method blanks should be calculated. A specific %RSD acceptance criteria is not specified 

but is assessed on an analytical batch basis. If the mean area counts or area ratios when using internal 

standard calibration, of the method blanks exceed 50% of the LOQ standard, then the LOQ must be raised to 

the first standard level in the curve that meets criteria. Method blanks may be eliminated if technical 

justification can be provided (e.g. the procedural blank was analyzed after an unexpectedly high level sample). 

If any procedural blanks are removed from the LOQ determination, document in the raw data and report as 

appropriate. Laboratory Sample Replicates / Field Duplicate Sample 

Typically, samples are collected in duplicates in the field. The relative percent difference (RPD) of duplicate 

samples should be ≤20% for the precision of sample preparation and analysis to be considered in control. 

Replicate samples not meeting the ≤20% RPD criteria are flagged and reported as outside of QC acceptance 

criteria.

9.3 Laboratory Matrix Spikes (LMSs)

LMSs may be performed in lieu of FMSs if FMSs have previously been performed for the sample matrix. 

Additionally, LMSs may be performed in lieu of FMSs for a sample matrix if the FMS levels were not 

appropriate for determining spike recoveries relative to endogenous levels of target analytes and appropriate 

SRSs. Generally, each sample location represents a different sample and sample matrix. LMSs are prepared 

for each sample and analyzed to determine the matrix effect on spike recovery efficiency of each target analyte 

and appropriate SRSs. LMSs should be prepared at a minimum of one level and in duplicate. LMS 

concentrations should be prepared at approximately 0.5-10 times the endogenous concentration or 

approximately 4-10 times the LOQ concentration of each target analyte. 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 55 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 14 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

Lab matrix spike recoveries should fall within ± 30% of expected values. Sample data with LMS recovery 

outside of ±30% but within ±50% of the expected value are flagged and reported as outside of QC acceptance 

criteria. Data with LMS recovery outside of ±50% of the expected value are reported as NR, where NR is 

defined as “Not Reportable” data outside of QC acceptance criteria.

9.4 Lab Control Sample

Lab control spikes are prepared for each analysis batch to determine method accuracy and precision. LCSs 

should be prepared at three levels in triplicate for each target analyte and at a minimum of two levels in 

triplicate for appropriate SRSs. Low lab control spikes should be prepared at a concentration in the range of 

approximately four to ten times higher than the targeted lower LOQ, the mid lab control spikes should be 

prepared at a concentration near the mid-point of the calibration curve and the high lab control spikes at 

approximately 80% of the upper LOQ. For each target analyte and SRSs, the percent relative standard 

deviation (method precision) for each control spike level must be less than or equal to 20% and the average 

recovery (method accuracy) for each control spike level must be 80-120%. Sample data for target analytes 

outside of the laboratory control spike acceptance criteria will be handled as follows:

If the average recovery of a spiking level falls outside method acceptance, but at least 67% (6 out of 9) of LCS 

samples are within 20% of their respective nominal value (33% of the QC samples, not all replicates at the 

same concentration, may be outside 20% of nominal value), the average recovery will be flagged as outside 

method acceptance criteria. All LCS samples will be control charted as per ETS-4-026. If the average 

recovery of one of the spiking levels exceeded the analytical method uncertainty as determined by ETS-12-

012, that analytical batch uncertainty will be expanded for that particular study.

If more than 67% of the LCS samples fail to meet method acceptance criteria, the data will not be reported. 

Calibration standards consisting of mixed branched and linear isomer PFOS/PFOA are preferred. However, 

for PFOS/PFOA target analytes, if the calibration standards are comprised of predominantly linear isomers 

only, at least one level of triplicate LCSs should be prepared using PFOS/PFOA which contains a mix of linear 

and branched isomers. These LCSs will be used to demonstrate quantitative equivalency (or quantitative bias) 

of the isomeric mix when using a predominantly linear standard for calibration. The mixed linear and branched 

isomer PFOS/PFOA LCSs recoveries should fall within ± 30% of expected values. Alternatively, in lieu of 

mixed branched and linear isomer PFOS/PFOA LCSs, mixed branched and linear isomer PFOS/PFOA 

TBMSs may be applied to demonstrate method accuracy and precision.

9.5 Field Matrix Spikes (FMSs) / Surrogate Recovery Standards (SRSs)

FMSs are prepared for each sampling location and analyzed to determine the matrix effect and sample holding 

time on the spike recovery of each target analyte and/or appropriate SRS. Generally, each sample location 

represents a different sample and sample matrix. 

FMSs are QC samples to which known quantities of appropriate target analytes are added to the sample bottle 

in the laboratory before the bottles are sent to the field. Typically a low and a high target analyte FMS are 

prepared for each sampling location. The sample and field duplicate sample may contain appropriate SRSs in 

lieu of target analyte low field matrix spike and target analyte high field matrix spike samples. 

Field matrix spike method acceptance criteria are recoveries within ±30% of the expected value. If FMS 

recovery (target analyte or SRS spike) is outside of ±30% of the expected value or could not be assessed 

because the FMS (target analyte) was spiked at an inappropriate level, the sample result is reported as follows: 

1.) If target analyte FMS recovery could not be assessed because the FMS's were at an inappropriate level, 

then Laboratory Matrix Spikes (LMS) may be substituted. If LMS recoveries are within ±30% the data are 

reportable and flagged to indicate that the FMS spikes levels were inappropriate.

2.) If multiple target analyte FMS's were prepared on a sample and the closest FMS level to the reported 

sample meets the ±30% acceptance criteria but additional FMS's are outside the ±30% acceptance range, the 

data are reportable and flagged to indicate that while there were failing FMS’s, the uncertainty will not be 

expanded since the most appropriate spike level passed. 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 56 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 15 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

3.) If the target analyte FMS recoveries are outside of the ±30% acceptance range but at least 30 acceptable 

historical reportable FMS sample results are available, the data may be reported but flagged with an expanded 

uncertainty and as not meeting FMS criteria.

4.) Sample data with FMS recovery outside of ±30% but within ±50% of the expected value are flagged and 

reported as outside of QC acceptance criteria with an expanded uncertainty.

5.) If FMS recovery is outside of ±50%, the sample result is reported as NR, where NR is defined as “Not 

Reportable” due to noncompliant QC results. 

The targeted fortification levels should be at least 50% of the endogenous level and less than 10 times the 

endogenous level to be used without justification to determine the statement of accuracy for analytical results.

Note: It is possible for bottles utilized for Field Matrix Spike samples to be under-filled or over-filled during 

sample collection. Since this scenario will effect the actual concentration of the FMS sample (surrogate and 

internal standard concentrations will also be effected, if used), it is important that any obvious under-filling or 

over-filling of sample bottles be documented in the data package and taken into account in the FMS, ISs, or 

SRSs recovery calculations. Samples over-filled or under-filled by more than 10% will be require recalculation 

of the FMS, ISs, and SRS true values.

The average of the sample and the field duplicate should be used to calculate the recovery.

10 Procedures

10.1 Water Sample Preparation

This method is applicable to water samples. Samples containing heavy particulate may not be suitable for 

analysis by this method. Samples containing suspended particulate should be centrifuge prior to removing a 

sample aliquot, or filtered. 

• Thoroughly mix sample before removing an aliquot and placing in a labeled autovial. 

• Dilute sample, if necessary, with ASTM Type I water, HPLC water, other suitable water, or solvent 

(methanol). 

• Lab control spikes are prepared for each analysis batch to determine method accuracy and precision. 

LCSs should be prepared at three levels in triplicate for each target analyte and at a minimum of two 

levels in triplicate for appropriate SRSs. Low lab control spikes should be prepared at a concentration 

in the range of approximately four to ten times higher than the targeted lower LOQ, the mid lab control 

spikes should be prepared at a concentration near the mid-point of the calibration curve and the high

lab control spikes at approximately 80% of the upper LOQ. For IS quantitation, stable isotope internal 

standards of each target analyte or appropriate surrogate ISs should be spiked at the same level as the 

samples being analyzed, in all LCSs. 

• If LCSs are being prepared using synthetic groundwater, allow the LCSs samples to equilibrate for a 

minimum of 4 hours before aliquoting for analysis or diluting with solvent (methanol).

11 Sample Analysis - LC/MS/MS

11.1 Instrument Setup

Note: In this example, an Applied Biosystems Sciex API 4000 (API 5000 or API 5500) Tandem Mass 

Spectrometer (LC/MS/MS) is used. Other brands/models of LC/MS/MS instruments as well as single 

quadrupole mass spectrometers (LC/MS) may be used as long as the method acceptance criteria are met. 

Brand names, suppliers, part numbers, and models are for illustrative purposes only. Equivalent performance 

may be achieved using apparatus and materials other than those specified here, but demonstration of 

equivalent performance that meets the requirements of this method is the responsibility of the laboratory. The 

operator must optimize and document the equipment and settings used.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 57 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 16 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

Establish the LC/MS/MS system and operating conditions equivalent to the following:

Mass Spec: Applied Biosystems API 4000, API 5000, or API 5500

Ion Source: Turbo Ion Spray (ABS)

Mode: Electrospray Negative

Scan Type: MRM (Multiple Reaction Monitoring) 

Computer: Dell DHM

Software: Windows 2000 or Windows XP, Analyst 1.4.2 or higher versions

HPLC: Agilent Series 1100,1200, or 1290

Agilent Quaternary Pump

Agilent Vacuum Degasser

Agilent Autosampler

Agilent Column Oven

Note: One or more C18 HPLC analytical columns (2.1 mm x 100 mm, 5μm or 2.1 mm x 50 mm, 5μm) may be 

attached on-line after the purge valve and before the sample injection port to retard and separate any residue 

contaminants that may be in the mobile phase and/or HPLC system.

HPLC Column: Betasil C18, 4.6mm x 100mm, 5μm (ThermoElectron Corporation)

Column Temperature: 35°C 

Injection Volume: 5μL

Mobile Phase (A): 2mM Ammonium Acetate in ASTM Type I water (See 7.3)

Mobile Phase (B): Methanol

Table 3. Liquid Chromatography Gradient Program. 

Step 

Number

Total Time 

(min)

Flow Rate 

(μL/min)

Percent A

(2 mM ammonium 

acetate)

Percent B

(Methanol)

0 0 750 97.0 3.0

1 2.0 750 97.0 3.0

2 14.5 750 5.0 95.0

3 15.5 750 5.0 95.0

4 16.5 750 97.0 3.0

5 20.0 750 97.0 3.0

Note: Other HPLC gradients may be used as long as the method criteria and project data quality objectives are 

met.

It may be necessary to adjust the HPLC gradient in order to optimize instrument performance. Columns with 

different dimensions (e.g. 2.1mm x 30mm) and columns from different manufacturers (Keystone Betasil C18 

etc.) may be used.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 58 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 17 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

Table 4 Suggested MRM Transitions for Target Analytes, Surrogates, and Internal Standards

Analyte Analyte Description Mass Transition

Q1 (amu)

Mass Transition

Q3 (amu)

PFBA (C4 Acid) Target 213 169

PFPeA (C5 Acid) Target 263 219

PFHxA (C6 Acid) Target 313 269, 119

PFHpA (C7 Acid) Target 363 319, 169

PFOA (C8 Acid) Target 413 369, 219, 169

PFNA (C9 Acid) Target

463 419, 169, 219

PFDA (C10 Acid) Target 513 469, 269, 219

PFUnA (C11 Acid) Target 563 519, 269, 219

PFDoA (C12 Acid) Target 613 569, 169, 319

PFTA (C13 Acid) Target 663 619, 369, 319

FBSA (C4 Sulfonamide) Target 298 78

FOSA (C8 Sulfonamide) Target 498 78

PFBS (C4 Sulfonate) Target 299 99, 80

PFHS (C6 Sulfonate) Target 399 99, 80

PFOS (C8 Sulfonate) Target 499 80, 99, 130

[1,2,3,4 -

13C4]PFBA IS for PFBA 217 172

[1,2,3,4,5 -

13C5]PFPeA IS for PFPeA 268 223

[1,2 -

13C2]PFHxA IS for PFHxA 315 270

[1,2,3,4- 13C4]PFHpA IS for PFHpA 367 322

[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-

13C8]PFOA IS for PFOA 421 376

[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9-

13C9]PFNA IS for PFNA 472 427

[1,2,3,4,5,6 -

13C6]PFDA IS for PFDA 519 474

[1,2,3,4,5,6,7 -

13C7]PFUnA IS for PFUnA 570 525

[1,2 -

13C2]PFDoA IS for PFDoA and PFTA 615 570

[

18O2]PFBS IS for PFBS 303 84

[1,2,3-

13C3]PFHS IS for PFHS 402 80

[1,2,3,4- 13C4]PFOS IS for PFOS 503 80

[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-

13C8]FOSA IS for FOSA 507 80

[1,2,3,4-

13C4]PFOA Surrogate (C4-C8 Acids) 417 372

[1,2,3,4- 13C4]PFOS Surrogate(Sulfonates, FOSA) 503 80

[1,2 -

13C2]PFUnA Surrogate (C9-C13 Acids) 565 520

Multiple transitions for monitoring the analytes is an option. The use of one daughter ion is acceptable if data 

sensitivity and selectivity is achieved and provided that retention time criteria are met to assure adequate 

specificity. While the daughter ions may be chosen at the discretion of the analyst, mass transition 99 is 

suggested for PFOS. Quantitation may be performed using the total ion chromatogram (TIC, or summed 

MRMs) for a given analyte. For example, the PFOA TIC would sum all three of the monitored transitions. Use 

of the suggested primary ion is recommended. Retention times may vary slightly, on a day-to-day basis, 

depending on the batch of mobile phase and the gradient, column, guard column(s) used etc. Drift in retention 

times is acceptable within an analytical run, as long as the drift continues through the entire analysis and the 

standards are interspersed throughout the analytical run.

11.2 Calibration Curve

Quantitation is by internal standard or external standard calibration. Calibration standards may be prepared in 

ASTM Type I, HPLC water, other suitable water, or a solvent/water mixture. If internal standard calibration 

does not meet calibration acceptance criteria, external calibration can be applied. See Table 1 for 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 59 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 18 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

recommended application of available internal standards. Quantitation of PFOA and PFOS is by summed 

analyte-specific mass transitions. 

Analyze the standard curve prior to each set of samples. If internal standards were added to the calibration 

standards area ratios are used to generate the calibration curve. The standard curve may be plotted using a 

linear regression (y = mx + b), weighted 1/x or unweighted, or by quadratic fit (y = ax2 + bx + c), weighted 1/x or 

unweighted, using suitable software. The mathematical method used to calculate the calibration curve should 

be applied consistently throughout a study. Any change should be thoroughly documented in the raw data.

High and/or low points may be excluded from the calibration curves to provide a better fit over the range 

appropriate to the data or because they did not meet the pre-determined acceptance criteria. Low-level curve 

points should also be excluded if their area counts (or area ratio if quantitating by IS) are not at least twice that 

of the average area counts (or area ratio if quantitating by IS) of method and/or solvent blanks. The coefficient 

of determination (r2

) value for the calibration curve must be greater than or equal to 0.990 (or a correlation 

coefficient (r) of 0.995). Each point in the curve must be within ±25% of the theoretical concentration with the 

exception of the LLOQ, which may be within ±30%. Justification for exclusion of calibration curve points will be 

noted in the raw data. A minimum of 6 points will be used to construct the calibration curve. 

If the calibration curve does not meet acceptance criteria, perform routine maintenance or prepare a new 

standard curve (if necessary) and reanalyze. 

11.3 Continuing Calibration Verification (CCV)

Continuing calibration verifications (CCV) are analyzed to verify the accuracy of the calibration curve. Analyze 

a mid-range calibration standard, one of the same standards used to construct the calibration curve, at a 

minimum after every tenth sample, not including solvent blanks, with a minimum of one per sample set. 

Calibration verification injections must be within ±25% to be considered acceptable. The calibration curve and 

the last passing CCV will then bracket acceptable samples. Multiple CCV levels may be used. Samples must 

be bracketed by passing CCVs or the calibration curve and a passing CCV to be reportable.

11.4 System Suitability

A minimum of three system suitability samples should be injected at the beginning of each analytical run, prior 

to the analysis of the calibration curve. Typically these samples are at a concentration near the mid-level of the 

calibration curve and are repeated injections from one autosampler vial. It is suggested that the system 

suitability injections have area counts or area ratios when using internal standard calibration, with a target RSD 

of ≤5% and a target retention time RSD of ≤2%. There is no defined acceptability limit on these results as the 

%RSD value is dependent on the number of MRM transitions being monitored in the LC/MS/MS run or time 

period. Ultimately, any effects on these parameters for the System Suitability samples will also be evident on 

all standards and QC samples analyzed as part of the analysis batch. Any effect of system suitability is 

incorporated within QC acceptance criteria.4

11.5 Sample Analysis and QCs

For each analysis batch, the instrument analysis run sequence should include an initial calibration curve, 

samples, FDSs, interspersed blanks, interspersed CCVs, appropriate QCs (i.e., LCSs, LMSs, FMSs, TBMSs, 

and TBs), and a final CCV or calibration curve bracketing samples and appropriate QCs

Inject the same volume (between 5 - 100μL) of each standard, analytical sample and blank into the instrument 

(unless an on-instrument sample dilution is desired).

Samples containing analytes that are quantitated above the concentration of the highest standard in the curve 

should be further diluted and reanalyzed. 

 

4 3M Environmental Laboratory study E08-0096 evaluated the effect on these results as a function of the number of MRMs being monitored. 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 60 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 19 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

12 Data Analysis and Calculations

The chromatography analysis software will typically calculate the amount of target analyte in the sample 

extracts using the established calibration curve.

Calculate the percent recovery of the LCS using the following equation:

100%*

) mL

ng Concentrat Spike (ion 

) mL

ng LCSConcentrat (ion 

LCS% recovery =

 

Calculate the percent recovery of the LMS using the following equation:

100%*

) mL

ng Spike Concentrat ( ion

) mL

ng -) Concentrat ( Sample of ion mLng LMS Concentrat ( ion

LMS recovery % =

For samples fortified with known amounts of analyte prior to extraction, use the following equation to calculate 

the percent recovery.

100 

(ng/mL) added Analyte

(ng/mL) sample in found analyte Average- (ng/mL) found analyte Total Recovery = ×

13 Analysis Batch Method Performance Criteria

Any method performance parameters that are not achieved must be considered in the evaluation of the data. 

Nonconformance to any specified parameters must be described and discussed in the final report if the 

Technical Manager (non-GLP study) or Study Director (GLP study) chooses to report the data.

If criteria listed in this method performance section are not met, maintenance may be performed on the system 

and samples reanalyzed, or other actions taken as appropriate. Document all actions in the raw data.

If data are to be reported when performance criteria have not been met, the data must be footnoted on tables 

and discussed in the text of the report.

13.1 System Suitability – Analysis Batch

A minimum of three system suitability samples should be injected at the beginning of each analytical run. 

These samples are run prior to the calibration curve. It is suggested that the system suitability injections have 

area counts with a target RSD of ≤5% and a target retention time RSD of ≤2%. There is no defined 

acceptability limit on these results as the %RSDs are dependent on the number of MRM transitions being 

monitored in the LC/MS/MS run or time period. Any effect of system suitability is incorporated in the QC 

acceptance criteria.

13.2 Calibration and Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) – Analysis Batch

Calibration Curve: The coefficient of determination (r2) value for the calibration curve must be greater than or 

equal to 0.990 corresponding to a correlation coefficient (r) = 0.995. Each point in the curve must be within 

±25% of the theoretical concentration with the exception of the LLOQ, which may be within ±30%. 

CCV Performance: The calibration standards that are interspersed throughout the analytical sequence are 

evaluated as continuing calibration verifications in addition to being part of the calibration curve. The accuracy 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 61 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 20 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

of each curve point must be within 25% of the theoretical value (within 30% for lowest curve point). Samples 

that are bracketed by CCVs not meeting these criteria must be reanalyzed.

Limits of Quantitation (LOQ): The lower LOQ (LLOQ) is the lowest non-zero active standard in the 

calibration curve; the peak area of the LLOQ must be at least 2X that of the average area counts for all 

prepared procedural blank(s). By definition, the measured value of the LLOQ must be within 30% of the 

theoretical value.

Demonstration of Specificity: Specificity is demonstrated by chromatographic retention time (within 4% of 

standard) and the mass spectral response of unique ions.

13.3 Blanks – Method/Procedural Blanks and Trip

Method/Procedural Blanks: Multiple procedural blanks should be interspersed throughout the analysis batch 

and the analytical sequence. At a minimum, method blanks are analyzed prior to instrument calibration, prior 

to the analysis of CCV samples, after every 10 sample injections, and at the end of the analytical run. 

The mean area counts (or area ratios when using IS calibration) for each analyte must be less than 50% of the 

area count of the LOQ standard. If the area counts of the procedural blanks exceed 50% of the LOQ standard, 

then the LOQ must be raised to the first standard level that meets criteria.

Trip Blank: A trip blank of ASTM Type I water (or lab equivalent) is prepared in a sample container in the 

laboratory and treated as a sample, including exposure to shipping, sampling site conditions, storage, 

preservation and all analytical procedures. The trip blanks results for each analyte are included with the 

reported sample results. 

13.4 Data Accuracy and Precision – Analysis Batch

Lab Control Spikes: The average recovery at each LCS level for each target analyte and appropriate SRS 

should be within 80-120% and the percent relative standard deviation of the recoveries must be less than or 

equal to 20%. If the average recovery of a spiking level falls outside method acceptance, but at least 67% (6

out of 9) of LCS samples are within 20% of their respective nominal value (33% of the QC samples, not all 

replicates at the same concentration, may be outside 20% of nominal value), the average recovery will be 

flagged as outside method acceptance criteria. All LCS samples will be control charted as per ETS-12-012. If 

the average recovery of one of the spiking levels exceeded the analytical method uncertainty as determined by 

ETS-12-012, that analytical batch uncertainty will be expanded for that particular study. The average recovery 

at each LCS level for mixed branched/linear isomer PFOA and PFOS should be within 70-130% and the 

percent relative standard deviation of the recoveries must be less than or equal to 20%. 

Field Duplicates: The relative percent difference (RPD) of duplicate samples should be less than 20% for the 

precision of sample preparation and analysis to be considered in control. Replicate samples not meeting the 

20% RPD criteria are flagged and reported as outside of QC acceptance criteria.

Field Matrix Spikes: FMS acceptance criteria are recoveries within ±30% of the expected value for each 

target analyte and appropriate SRS. Sample data with FMS recovery outside of ±30% but within ±50% of the 

expected value are flagged and reported as outside of QC acceptance criteria. Data with FMS recovery 

outside of ±50% of the expected value are reported as NR, where NR is defined as “Not Reportable” data 

outside of QC acceptance criteria. If FMS recovery could not be assessed because FMSs were at an 

inappropriate level, then Laboratory Matrix Spikes (LMSs) may be substituted. If LMS recoveries are within 

±30% for each target analyte and SRSs the data are reportable but flagged as not meeting the FMS method 

acceptance criteria.

13.5 Analytical Method Uncertainty

Analytical method uncertainty for each target analyte and SRS is determined with control charted historical 

analysis batch LCS data for the method and reported with each analysis batch.5

 Uncertainty determinations 

 

5 Method uncertainty based on INTERNATIONAL ANS/ISO/IED STANDARD 17025 reference (GUM, Guide to the Expression of 

Uncertainty in Measurement). Method application demonstrated in ETS-12-012, citing references: a.) EURACHEM/CITAC Guide, 

“Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement,” Second Edition; Editors: S.L.R. Ellison, M. Rosslein, and A. Williams. 

b.)Georgian, Thomas, “Estimation of Laboratory Analytical Uncertainty Using Laboratory Control Samples,” Environmental Testing & 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 62 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 21 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

are based on INTERNATIONAL ANS/ISO/IED STANDARD 17025 reference (GUM, Guide to the Expression 

of Uncertainty in Measurement) and described in ETS-12-012. At least thirty data points are required for 

determining analytical method uncertainty. The method uncertainty is defined as 2x the standard deviation of 

the percent recoveries of the pooled lab control spikes. While all LCS data points are control charted, only the 

most recent fifty data points are used for determining the method uncertainty.

When less than thirty LCS data points have been generated for a given analyte, the analysis batch LCSs are 

used to determine the data uncertainty. If FMSs meet the ±30% recovery criteria at a level appropriate to the 

endogenous level, and the LCS meet the ±20% recovery criteria, then the uncertainty of the data is determined 

as within 100±20%. 

Analysis batch sample data with FMS recovery outside of ±30% but within ±50% of the expected value are 

flagged and reported as outside of QC acceptance criteria with expanded uncertainties. Data with FMS 

recovery outside of ±50% of the expected value are reported as NR, where NR is defined as “Not Reportable” 

data outside of QC acceptance criteria. If FMS recovery could not be assessed because FMSs were at an 

inappropriate level, then Laboratory Matrix Spikes (LMSs) may be substituted. If LMS recoveries are within 

±30% for each target analyte and appropriate SRSs the data are reportable but flagged as not meeting the 

FMS method acceptance criteria with uncertainties of ±30%. If FMS do not meet the ±30% recovery criteria, 

and historical FMS data does not exist, the analytical uncertainty is evaluated on a sample-by-sample basis, 

the data may be reported with expanded uncertainty and are flagged. 

13.6 Quantitation of PFOA/PFOS – Analysis Batch

Calibration standards consisting of mixed branched and linear isomer PFOS/PFOA are preferred. 

Quantitation is performed by integrating the linear and branched isomers together. Alternately, the linear and 

branched isomers can be integrated separately, applying the appropriate true value to each calibration curve 

point for each isomer. The LCS and samples are then quantitated by integrating the linear and branched 

isomers separately (requires separate analytical results files) and quantitating the resulting peak against the 

linear or branched calibration curve. The results from both integrations are then summed to produce the final 

result. Integrating the linear and branched isomers separately may be helpful for those samples where the 

linear/branched ratios do not closely match those of the reference standards.

However, for PFOS/PFOA target analytes, if the calibration standards are comprised of predominantly linear 

isomers only the method requires the addition of LCSs of mixed branched/linear isomer PFOS/PFOA. The 

purpose of including these LCSs is to demonstrate quantitative equivalency (or quantitative bias) of the 

isomeric mix when using a predominantly linear PFOS or PFOA standard for calibration. Alternatively, in lieu 

of mixed branched and linear isomer PFOS/PFOA LCSs, mixed branched and linear isomer PFOS/PFOA 

TBMSs may be applied to demonstrate method accuracy and precision.

An alternate method of quantitation can be performed whereby only the linear isomer of PFOS/PFOA is 

integrated and used for generating the calibration curve. The LCS and samples are then quantitated by 

integrating the linear and branched isomers separately (requires separate analytical results files) and 

quantitating the resulting peak against the linear calibration curve. The results from both integrations are then 

summed to produce the final result. Integrating the linear and branched isomers separately reduces the oncolumn concentration for those samples that contain both linear and branched isomers of PFOA/PFOS. This 

ensures that the concentration detected is within the a range of the calibration curve that is comparable 

regardless of whether the calibration curve was generated using predominantly linear isomers of PFOS/PFOA 

or linear plus branched isomers of PFOS/PFOA.

14 Pollution Prevention and Waste Management

Waste generated when performing this method will be disposed of appropriately. The original samples will be 

archived at the 3M Environmental Laboratory in accordance with internal procedures.

 

Analysis, November/December 2000. c.)Taylor, B.N. and CE. Kuyatt, NIST Technical Note 1297, 1994 Edition: “Guidelines for 

Evaluating and Expressing the Uncertainty of NIST Measurement Results.”d.)Adams, T.M., “A2LA Guide for the Estimation of 

Measurement Uncertainty in Testing”, July 2002.

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 63 of 66
ETS-8-044.1 Page 22 of 22

Method of Analysis for the Determination of Perfluorinated Compounds in Water by LC/MS/MS; Direct Injection 

Analysis

15 Records

Each data package generated for a study must include all supporting information for reconstruction of the data. 

Information for the data package must include, but is not limited to the following items: study or project 

number, sample and standard prep sheets/records, instrument run log (instrument batch records, instrument 

acquisition method, summary pages), instrument results files, chromatograms, calibration curves, and data 

calculations.

16 Affected Documents

None.

17 Revisions

Revision 

Number Summary of Changes 

1 Section 1. Included the use of internal standard calibration by this method. 

Section 2. Included the use of internal standard calibration by this method. Included the 

use of a solvent/water mixture when analyzing for PFUnA, PFDoA, PFTrDA, and FOSA.

Section 3. Added definitions for internal standard, surrogate internal standard, and 

surrogate recovery standard.

Section 6.Removed the details regarding the instrument parameters to section 10 of the 

method. 

Section 7. Updated reference standards to include internal standards and surrogates. 

Changed concentration levels for working standards and included the use of internal 

standards and surrogates.

Section 8. Inserted a new section on sample bottle preparation.

Section 9 Quality Control. This section was previously section 10 in ETS-8-044.0. Updated 

QC criteria to be consistent with method ETS-8-154.4.

Section 10 Procedures. This section was previously section 8 (Sample Handling) in ETS-8-

044.0. Added detail regarding the preparation of LCSs. Included the use of methanol as a 

dilution solvent. 

Section 11 Sample Analysis. This section was previously section 10 in ETS-8-044.0. 

Included the details regarding the instrument parameters. 

Section 12 Data Analysis and Calculations. This section was previously section 11 in ETS8-044.0. Removed the equation for calculating the analytes concentration, indicating that 

this is done by the instrument software.

Section 13 Method Performance. This section was previously section 12 in ETS-8-044.0. 

Updated QC criteria to be consistent with ETS-8-154.4. Added information on the 

determination of analytical method uncertainty and quantitation of PFOA/PFOS.

Section 14 Pollution Prevention. This section was previously section 13 in ETS-8-044.0.

Section 15 Records. This section was previously section 14 in ETS-8-044.0. 

Section 16 Affected Documents. This section was previously section 15 in ETS-8-044.0.

Section 17 Revisions. This section was previously section 16 in ETS-8-044.0. 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 64 of 66
ATTACHMENT D: DEVIATION(S) 

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 65 of 66
RECORD OF DEVIATION/NONCONFORMANCE

ETS-4-008.7

Documentation of Deviations and Control of Nonconforming Testing

Page 1 of 1

I. Identification

Study / Project No.

GLP10-01-01-28

Date(s) of Occurrence:

Sequence b120405a

Document Number:

ETS-8-044.1 

Deviation type  SOP  Equipment Procedure  Method

(Check one)  Protocol  GPO  Other:

II. Description (attach extra pages as needed)

Method Requirements:

1. FMS (ETS-8-044.1 section 13.4): recoveries within 100% ± 30%.

Actual procedure/process:

1. The high FMS for sample location RW331S had a recovery of 68.0% for PFOA.

III. Actions Taken (such as amendment issued, SOP revision, etc.)

Corrective Action ( Yes  No) Reference:

Acceptability of the nonconforming work:

1. The non-compliant FMS will be flagged in the final report. Since both spike levels were appropriate as 

compared to the sample location, the method uncertainty for sample location RW331S will be adjusted 

accordingly to ± 32%.

Actions:  Halting of Work  Client Notification  Work Recall  Withholding of Report

 Other: Deviations will be noted in final report.

Project Lead/PAI Approval: Susan Wolf Date:

Study Director (if GLP): Date:

Sponsor Approval (for GLP protocol deviations): NA Date: NA

Technical Reviewer (optional): NA Date: NA

Laboratory Department Manager Approval: Date:

IV. Authorization to Resume Work

Where halting of work occurred, resumption of work must first be approved by Laboratory Management

Laboratory Department Manager Approval: NA Date: NA

Deviation No. ______________

(assigned by Study Director or Team Leader at the end of study or project)

GLP10-01-01; Interim Report 28 

Analysis of PFOA in Groundwater 

Decatur, AL - 1st Quarter 2012 Sampling

Page 66 of 66