Final Checklist July 9, 2010

Steam Study Data Review Checklist

Dissolved Hexavalent Chromium EPA Method 218.6 (1994)

Ion chromatography

SECTION A-1. Sample Identifiers

Laboratory Name:

Sampling Episode:

Sample Numbers or 

Range:

Data Reviewer 

signature:

Date:

Instructions: Complete this checklist electronically or using a ballpoint pen.

Record reviewer comments in the Reviewer Comment section.

Record detailed information in the Comments in the “Overall Assessment” 

section for each criterion not (“N”) met.

Note: Requirements with a * are project requirements not specific to 

EPA Method 218.6.

Note: Requirements with a ** are requirements specific to 200.8 and 

were added to this checklist because Frontier desires to use an 

ICP-MS detector rather than a UV detector after ion 

chromatography.

Note: Requirements with a *** are changes to method 218.6 the 

laboratory had to make because they are using an ICP-MS 

detector rather than a UV detector.

SECTION A-2. OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY OF THE DATA

General Comment Checklist

Deliverable Requirement

Review 

Level

Required Present Comments

Copies of Shipping Documents (Fed-Ex 

Airbills)

1, 2, 3

Case Narrative 1, 2, 3

Table of Contents 3

Cross reference of Field Sample No., Lab 

Sample No., and Analytical Batch

1, 2, 3

Traffic Report Form (including Sample 

Receipt Checklist)

1, 2, 3

Sample Calculation (usually just a page 

copied from SOW)

3

Results Summary for Each Sample and 

Blank 

1, 2, 3
Steam Study Data Review Checklist

Dissolved Hexavalent Chromium EPA Method 218.6 (1994) 

Page 2 of 6

Final Checklist July 9, 2010

SECTION A-2. OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY OF THE DATA

General Comment Checklist

Deliverable Requirement

Review 

Level

Required Present Comments

Quality Control Sample Results 2, 3

Calibration Curve Results 3

Initial Calibration Verification Results 3

Continuing Calibration Verification 

Results

3

Laboratory Reagent Blank Results 2, 3

Laboratory Fortified Blank Results 2, 3

Laboratory Fortified Sample 

Matrix/Laboratory Fortified Sample 

Matrix Duplicate Results

2, 3

Data for All Masses Monitored (if 

reported)

3

Field Duplicate Results 2, 3

Quantitation List 3

Copies of Sample Preparation Work 

Sheets

3

Copies of Run Logs 3

Level 1: Review of traffic reports, sample handling, and proper sample preparation

Level 2: Level 1 review plus review of QA/QC results

Level 3: Level 2 review plus review of instrument performance

Level 4: Level 3 review plus analysis of raw data such as chromatograms or primary instrument 

output
Steam Study Data Review Checklist

Dissolved Hexavalent Chromium EPA Method 218.6 (1994) 

Page 3 of 6

Final Checklist July 9, 2010

EPA METHOD 218.6 REQUIREMENT Reviewer Comment

Criterion

met

Y N

SECTION B. SAMPLE RECEIPT

1. Reviewed Sample Collection Record: 

• Signatures?

• Completed?

• Sample ID numbers checked?

• Preservations? pH? Volume?

• Any anomalies reported?

2. Reviewed Lab Sample Receipt Record:

• Date received?

• Lab ID number checked?

• Lab ID number referenced to Sample ID 

numbers?

• Preservation checked by lab? pH? Temp? 

Volume?

• Sample conditions?

• Sample hold time?

• Any anomalies reported by lab?

SECTION C. SAMPLE PREPARATION/EXTRACT HANDLING 

INFORMATION

1. Reviewed Standard Pre logs: 

• Standard expiration date:

• Concentrations prepared?

2. Reviewed Sample Prep Logs:

• Sample extraction date:

• Sample process or run date:

Note: Sample Analysis: Were samples analyzed as 

soon as possible after sample collection? 

How much time had elapsed between sample 

collection and analysis? 

Note: It is recommended that samples be analyzed 

within 24 hours of collection although it is only 

required for samples to be analyzed within 28 days. 

(218.6/8.3) (40 CFR 136 Table II)

3. *Field Duplicates: Was a field duplicate collected 

and analyzed as part of the sampling episode? 

Indicate the relative percent difference.
Steam Study Data Review Checklist

Dissolved Hexavalent Chromium EPA Method 218.6 (1994) 

Page 4 of 6

Final Checklist July 9, 2010

EPA METHOD 218.6 REQUIREMENT Reviewer Comment

Criterion

met

Y N

SECTION D-1. QC INFORMATION – Instrument Calibration 

1. Review Lab’s Instrument Run Log Report: Were 

calibrations, QC samples and samples included in a 

batch of 20 samples? 

2. ***Calibration curve: Were at least three

calibration standards used to create a calibration 

curve with a coefficient of correlation (r) ≥ 0.995? 

(218.6/11.4)

What were the concentrations of the 3 calibration 

standards used by lab? 

3. **Initial Calibration Verification: Was an 

Instrument Performance Check (IPC) solution 

(midpoint calibration standard) and an initial 

calibration blank (ICB) analyzed immediately after 

calibration? 

Did the IPC solution differ from the true value by 

more than ± 10%? 

What was the true IPC solution concentration and 

reported result?

Was the concentration of Cr(VI) in the initial

calibration blank less than the MDL? (218.6/9.3.4)

Was any contamination noted in the ICB?

SECTION D-2. QC INFORMATION –Blanks

1. Laboratory Reagent Blank: Was at least one 

laboratory reagent blank prepared and analyzed with 

each set of samples?

Did the laboratory reagent blank contain Cr(VI) at a 

concentration less than the MDL? (218.6/9.3.1)

Note any contamination reported.

2. Laboratory Fortified Blank (LFB): Was at least 

one LFB prepared and analyzed with each set of 

samples?

***Was the percent recovery of the laboratory 

reagent blank within 80-120%? (218.6/9.3.3)

What were the concentrations of all analytes in the

LFB reported by the lab? 

What were the % recoveries of all the analytes?
Steam Study Data Review Checklist

Dissolved Hexavalent Chromium EPA Method 218.6 (1994) 

Page 5 of 6

Final Checklist July 9, 2010

EPA METHOD 218.6 REQUIREMENT Reviewer Comment

Criterion

met

Y N

Section D-3. QC INFORMATION – Instrument Performance

1. Quality Control Sample (QCS) data enclosed?: 

Was a secondary source QCS analyzed and was the 

concentration within ±10% of the QCS value? 

(218.6/9.3.5)

Indicate the true and reported value of the QCS, and

the percent recovery.

2. Continuing Calibration Verification: Was an 

Instrument Performance Check (IPC) solution 

(midpoint calibration standard) and a continuing 

calibration blank (CCB) analyzed after every 10 

samples? 

***Did the values differ from the true value by more 

than ± 10%? 

What were results reported for CCV?

Was the concentration of Cr(VI) in the continuing 

calibration blank less than the MDL? (218.6/9.3.4)

Note any contamination reported.

3. ***Laboratory Fortified Sample Matrix (LFM): 

Was a known amount of analyte added to at least 

10% of samples and was the percent recovery within 

80-120%? (218.6/9.4)

What were the % recoveries for all analytes? 

4. **Laboratory Fortified Sample Matrix Duplicate 

(LFMD): Was an LFMD analyzed at a frequency of 

10% of samples? 

Was the percent recovery within 80-120%? 

What was the percent recovery?

Was the RPD less than 25%? (200.8/9.4.2-9.4.4)

What was the RPD for all analytes?

5. **Interferences: Was the mass to charge ratio of 48 

(32S160+), 81Br-, and 35Cl- monitored to identify 

possible spectral or chromatographic interferences?

To avoid spectral interferences was the appropriate 

reaction gas utilized in the dynamic reaction cell?

SECTION E. DATA REVIEW – Sample Results

1. Dilution: If the concentration of Cr(VI) in a sample 

was above the range of the calibration curve, was the 

sample diluted and reanalyzed? (218.6/11.5) 

Were samples with concentrations above or equal to 

90% of the upper limit of the LDR diluted and 

reanalyzed? (218.6/9.2.3)
Steam Study Data Review Checklist

Dissolved Hexavalent Chromium EPA Method 218.6 (1994) 

Page 6 of 6

Final Checklist July 9, 2010

EPA METHOD 218.6 REQUIREMENT Reviewer Comment

Criterion

met

Y N

2. Sample Reporting: Was the sample concentration 

calculated from the calibration curve and reported in 

μg/L?