 GLP10-01-02, Interim Report 35: Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater 

Samples; Decatur Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) Pump Test – June 2012

Study Title

Analysis of Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS), Perfluorohexane Sulfonate (PFHS) and 

Perfluorobutane Sulfonate (PFBS) 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 Last Signature

Performing Laboratory

3M Environmental Health and Safety Operations

Environmental Laboratory

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

St. Paul, MN 55144

Project Identification

GLP10-01-02-35 

 

Total Number of Pages

74

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. 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 2 of 74
GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur VWVTP Pump Test - June 2012 

GLP COMPLIANCE STATEMENT 

Report Title: GLP10-01-02, Interim Report 35: Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater 

Samples; Decatur Waste Water Treatment Plant (VVWTP) Pump Test - June 2012. 

Study: Analysis of Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS), Perfluorohexane Sulfonate (PFHS) and 

Perfluorobutane Sulfonate (PFBS) 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. 

Gary Mohensteii/ Sponsor Representative Date 

Jaisimha r^ari, P.E., DEE, Study Director 

Page 3 of 74 
GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur VWVTP Pump Test - June 2012 

QUALITY ASSURANCE STATEMENT 

Report Title: GLP10-01-02, Interim Report 35: Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater 

Samples; Decatur Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) Pump Test - June 2012. 

Study: Analysis of Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS), Perfluorohexane Sulfonate (PFHS) and 

Perfluorobutane Sulfonate (PFBS) in Groundwater, Soil and Sediment for the 3M Decatur Phase 3 

Site-Related Monitoring Program. 

This analytical phase was audited by the 3M Environmental Laboratory Quality Assurance Unit (QAU), 

as indicated in the following table. The findings were reported to the principal investigator (P.I.), 

laboratory management and study director. 

Inspection Dates Phase 

Date Reported to 

Inspection Dates Phase Testing Facility 

Management 

Study Director 

08/09/12 Data and Report 08/20/12 08/20/12 

QAU Representativ^j?^ Date 

Page 4 of 74 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

GLP Compliance Statement...................................................................................................................... 3

Quality Assurance Statement.................................................................................................................... 4

Table of Contents....................................................................................................................................... 5

List of Tables .............................................................................................................................................. 6

1 Study Information................................................................................................................................ 7

2 Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 8

3 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... 8

4 Test & Control Substances ................................................................................................................ 9

5 Reference Substances .....................................................................................................................10

6 Test System ......................................................................................................................................11

7 Method Summary .............................................................................................................................11

7.1 Method ..............................................................................................................................11

7.2 Sample Collection.............................................................................................................11

7.3 Sample Preparation..........................................................................................................11

7.4 Analysis.............................................................................................................................11

8 Analytical Results..............................................................................................................................13

8.1 Calibration .........................................................................................................................13

8.2 System Suitability .............................................................................................................13

8.3 Limit of Quantitation (LOQ)..............................................................................................13

8.4 Continuing Calibration ......................................................................................................14

8.5 Blanks................................................................................................................................14

8.6 Lab Control Spikes (LCSs) ..............................................................................................14

8.7 Analytical Method Uncertainty .........................................................................................16

8.8 Field Matrix Spikes (FMS)................................................................................................16

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 5 of 74
8.9 Lab Matrix Spikes (LMS)..................................................................................................17

9 Data Summary and Discussion .......................................................................................................17

10 Conclusion.........................................................................................................................................22

11 Data/Sample Retention ....................................................................................................................22

12 Attachments ......................................................................................................................................22

13 Signatures .........................................................................................................................................23

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Summarized PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS Results (WWTP Pump Test – June 2012).... 8

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

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

Table 4. Liquid Chromatography Conditions. ............................................................................. 12

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

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

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

Table 8. Analytical Uncertainty. ................................................................................................... 16

Table 9. Field Matrix Spike. ......................................................................................................... 17

Table 10. Laboraotry Matrix Spike .............................................................................................. 17

Table 11. DAL GW WW8R 120627-1000 ................................................................................... 18

Table 12. DAL GW WW8R 120627-2130 ................................................................................... 18

Table 13. DAL GW WW8R 120628 ............................................................................................. 19

Table 14. DAL GW WW9R 120625 ............................................................................................. 19

Table 15. DAL GW WW9R 120625-2400 .................................................................................. 20

Table 16. DAL GW WW9R 120626............................................................................................ 20

Table 17. DAL GW TRIP01 120625 ............................................................................................ 21

 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 6 of 74
1 Study 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

St. Paul, MN 55144

Study Personnel

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

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

Susan Wolf, 3M Analyst

Kevin Eich, Analyst

Kelly Ukes, Analyst

Study Dates

Study Initiation: March 8, 2010

Interim 35 Experimental Termination: August 3, 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

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 7 of 74
2 Summary

The 3M Environmental Laboratory received groundwater samples from a pump test conducted at two 

monitoring wells at the 3M Decatur facility in Decatur, AL. A total of twenty sample bottles were 

received at the 3M Environmental Laboratory for perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorohexane 

sulfonate (PFHS) and perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS), and included duplicate groundwater samples 

and a field matrix spike (FMS) sample from each sampling location. Samples also included one trip 

blank containing Milli-QTM water and a trip blank spike. All samples were logged into the laboratory 

information management system (LIMS) under project GLP10-01-02-35. The groundwater samples 

and trip blanks were received from Weston personnel on June 29, 2012. All of the samples were 

prepared and analyzed for PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS 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”. 

The average and relative percent difference (RPD) for the PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS concentrations 

detected in the primary and field duplicate ground water samples are summarized in Table 1. The trip 

blank sample was below the lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) for all analytes, indicating adequate 

control of sample contamination during shipping and sample collections. The analytical method 

uncertainties associated with the reported results are: PFBS + 19%, PFHS + 17% and PFOS + 22%.

Table 1. Summarized PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS Results (WWTP Pump Test – June 2012). 

PFBS PFHS PFOS

Sampling Location Avg. Conc. 

(ng/mL) ± RPD

Avg. Conc. 

(ng/mL) ± RPD

Avg. Conc. 

(ng/mL) ± RPD

DAL-GW-WW8R-120627-1000 575 ± 1.2% 2610 ± 0.0% 5280 ± 0.38% 

DAL-GW-WW8R-120627-2130 489 ± 3.3% 2280 ± 1.3% 4550 ± 0.44%

DAL-GW-WW8R-120628 453 ± 4.6% 2070 ± 1.5% 4170 ± 0.48%

DAL-GW-WW9R-120625-1250 233 ± 5.2% 1290 ± 3.1% 2620 ± 3.8%

DAL-GW-WW9R-120625-2400 248 ± 1.6% 1340 ± 0.75% 2610 ± 0.38%

DAL-GW-WW9R-120626 254 ± 3.1% 1330 ± 3.8% 2550 ± 9.8%

DAL-GW-TRIP01 Blank <0.100 <0.100 <0.0928

(1) The analytical method uncertainties associated with the reported results are: PFBS ± 19%, PFHS ± 17%, 

and PFOS ± 22%.

3 Introduction 

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 perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorohexane sulfonate 

(PFHS) and perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS), 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 groundwater samples collected from a pump test conducted at two on-site 

monitoring wells at the 3M Decatur facility in Decatur, AL for PFOS, PFHS and PFBS in an effort to 

characterize regional groundwater conditions. 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 8 of 74
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 a field spike sample. 

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 PFBS (linear isomer), PFHS (linear isomer), and PFOS 

(linear and branched isomers) prior to being sent to the field for sample collection. All sample bottles 

included the addition of 18O2-PFBS, 13C3-PFHS, and 13C8-PFOS (internal standard) at a nominal 

concentration of 1 ng/mL and 13C4-PFOS (surrogate recovery standard) at a nominal concentration of 

0.1 ng/mL. 

Due to the level of PFBS, PFHS and PFOS detected in samples, and the need to dilute the samples 

100-fold and 200-fold, the internal standards 18O2-PFBS, 13C3-PFHS, and 13C8-PFOS were not used for 

quantitation, nor could the surrogate recovery standard 13C4-PFOS be quantitated. In addition, the field 

matrix spike sample at 1000 ng/mL was not appropriate for all analytes at each sampling location. 

Where necessary, a laboratory matrix spike was prepared. See section 8.8 of the report for field matrix 

spike levels. See section 8.9 of the report for laboratory matrix spike levels.

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 and relative percent difference (RPD) for the PFBS, PFHS, and 

PFOS concentrations detected in the primary and field duplicate ground water samples and the trip 

blank sample. Tables 10-15 summarize the individual sample results and the associated field matrix 

spike recoveries. All results for the quality control samples prepared and analyzed with the samples 

are reported and discussed elsewhere in this report.

4 Test & 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.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 9 of 74
5 Reference Substances

Reference 

Substance

PFBS 

(Linear)

PFHS 

(Linear)

PFOS

(Linear + Branched)

Chemical Name Potassium Perfluorobutane 

sulfonate

Sodium Perfluorohexane 

sulfonate

Potassium 

Perfluorooctane sulfonate

Chemical Formula C4F9SO3

-

K+ C6F13SO3

-

Na+ C8F17SO3

-

K+

Identifier NA L-PFHXS Br-PFOSK

Use Target Analyte Reference 

Standard

Target Analyte Reference 

Standard

Target Analyte Reference 

Standard

Source 3M Wellington Wellington

Expiration Date 01/10/2017 03/25/2018 12/01/2014

Storage Conditions Frozen Frozen Frozen

Chemical Lot 

Number 41-2600-8442-5 LPFHxSAM08 brPFOSK1111

TCR Number TCR-121 TCR08-0018 TCR11-0041

Physical Description White Powder Crystalline Liquid

Purity 96.7% 100% 99.9%

Reference 

Substance

PFOS (1)

(Linear + Branched)

Chemical Name Potassium Perfluorooctane 

sulfonate

Chemical Formula C8F17SO3

-

K+

Identifier CAS # 2795-39-3 

Use FMS Reference Standard

Source Sigma-Aldrich

Expiration Date 02/04/2014

Storage Conditions Ambient

Chemical Lot 

Number 1424328V

TCR Number TCR11-0028

Physical Description White Powder

Purity 99.7%

(1) Due to the level of PFOS detected in the samples, the FMS reference standard for PFOS was not 

utilized in this analysis.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 10 of 74
6 Test System

The test systems for this study are groundwater samples collected from wells located in Decatur, AL by 

Weston Solutions, Inc. personnel. Samples for this study are “real world” samples, not dosed with a 

specific lot of test substance.

Table 2. Sample Description Key Code.

String Number String Descriptor Example

Example DAL-GW-WW9R-DB-120625-2400

1 Sample Location DAL= Decatur, Alabama

2 Sample Type GW = Ground Water

3 Well ID Example: WW9R

4 Sample Type 0=primary sample 

DB=duplicate sample

FMS = field matrix spike

5 Sampling Date 120635 = June 25, 2012

6 Sampling Time 2400 = 24:00 or 12:00 am

Not all sampling locations included a 

sampling time in the sample description

7 Method Summary

7.1 Method

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 High Performance 

Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry Direct Injection Analysis”. 

7.2 Sample Collection

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

Environmental Laboratory. Sample bottles associated with GLP10-01-02-35 were returned to the 

laboratory at ambient conditions on June 29, 2012. Samples were stored refrigerated at the laboratory 

after receipt. A set of laboratory prepared Trip Blank and a Trip Blank field matrix spike were sent with 

the set of sample collection bottles.

7.3 Sample Preparation

Due to the level of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS detected in all sampling locations, the primary and field 

duplicate samples were diluted 1:100 or 1:200. The 1:100 dilution was preapred by diluting 0.10 mL of 

a well mixed sample with 9.9 mL of Milli Q water. The 1:200 dilution was preapred by diluting 0.050 mL 

of a well mixed sample with 9.9 mL of Milli Q water (dilution factor of 199).

The Trip Blank FMS sample was diluted 1:100 by diluting 0.10 mL of a well mixed sample with 9.9 mL of 

Milli Q water. The Trip Blank sample was aliquoted and analyzed with out sample dilution.

7.4 Analysis

All study samples and quality control samples were analyzed for PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS 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 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 11 of 74
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. 

Due to the nature of the sample, the wide range of concentrations found in the sample, and the 

environmental occurrence of multiple isomers of the laboratory’s analytes of interest, the software used 

for processing the analytical results is not able to consistently integrate the analytical peak, manual 

integration of the analytical peak is necessary. All manual integrations are performed following the 

procedures outlined in method ETS-12-010. The consistency of the laboratory’s integration is ensured 

through the training of laboratory personnel, the peer review process required for all manual integrations, 

the review of manual integrations by the QAU, and where necessary the review of manual integrations 

by laboratory management.

Table 3. Instrument Parameters.

Instrument Name ETS McCoy

Analytical Method Followed ETS-8-044.1

Analysis Date 7/20/2012 and 8/3/2012

Liquid Chromatograph Agilent 1290

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

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

Injection Volume 5 μL

Mass Spectrometer Applied Biosystems API 5500

Ion Source Turbo Spray

Electrode Turbo ion electrode

Polarity Negative

Software Analyst 1.6.1

Table 4. Liquid Chromatography Conditions.

Step 

Number

Total Time 

(min)

Flow Rate 

(μL/min)

Percent A

(5 mM ammonium 

acetate:0.01% Acetic Acid)

Percent B

(Acetonitrile) 

0 0.00 750 90.0 10.0

1 0.50 750 90.0 10.0

2 4.00 750 70.0 30.0

3 6.00 750 70.0 30.0

4 11.0 750 20.0 80.0

5 13.0 750 20.0 80.0

6 13.5 750 10.0 90.0

7 16.0 750 10.0 90.0

8 16.5 750 90.0 10.0

9 19.0 750 90.0 10.0

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 12 of 74
Table 5. Mass Transitions. 

Analyte

Mass Transition

Q1/Q3

Reference Material 

Structure

PFBS

299/80

Linear

299/99

PFHS

399/80

Linear

399/99

PFOS

499/80

499/99 Linear + Branched

499/130

Dwell time was 30 msec for each transition. The individual transitions were 

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

quantitation.

8 Analytical Results

8.1 Calibration

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

prepared by spiking known amounts of the stock solutions containing PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS 

(reference standard containing both linear and branched isomers) into Milli Q water. Standards ranging 

from 0.10 ng/mL to 75 ng/mL (nominal) were analyzed (0.10 mg/mL to 25 ng/mL for PFBS analysis on 

8/3/120) . 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 PFBS, PFHS, 

and PFOS. The correlation coefficient (r) was greater than 0.995 for PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS.

8.2 System Suitability

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

demonstrate overall system suitability. 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 was 

met for PFBS, PFHS and PFOS for each analysis.

8.3 Limit 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 or area ratio are at least twice those of the 

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

Table 6. Limit of Quantitation (LOQ).

Analysis Date Dilution 

Factor

PFBS

LOQ, ng/mL

PFHS

LOQ, ng/mL

PFOS

LOQ, ng/mL

7/20/12 1 0.100 0.100 0.0928

7/20/12 100 10.0 10.0 9.28

7/20/12 199 19.9 19.9 18.5

8/3/12 100 10.0 NA NA

NA = Not Applicable

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 13 of 74
8.4 Continuing 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 

CCVs met method criteria of 100% ± 25% for PFBS, PFHS and PFOS for each analysis. 

8.5 Blanks

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

blank. Method procedural blank results were reviewed and used to evaluate method performance and 

to determine the LOQ for PFBS, PFHS,and PFOS. The trip blank reflects the shipping and sample 

collection conditions the sample bottles and samples experience. 

8.6 Lab Control Spikes (LCSs) 

Low, mid, and high lab control spikes were prepared and analyzed in triplicate. LCSs were prepared by 

spiking known amounts of the analytes into 10 mL of Milli Q water to produce the desired concentration. 

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

were met for PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS with the following exception. 

7/20/12 Analysis: The low set of LCS samples for PFOS had an average recovery of 79.3%. A method 

deviation is included with the raw data.

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 =

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 14 of 74
Table 7. Laboratory Control Spike Recovery. 

ETS-8-044.1 

Analyzed 7/20/12 PFBS PFHS

Lab ID

Spiked 

Concentration 

(ng/mL)

Calculated 

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Spiked 

Concentration 

(ng/mL)

Calculated 

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

LCS-120720-1 0.200 0.199 99.6 0.200 0.189 94.6

LCS-120729-2 0.200 0.196 97.9 0.200 0.162 81.2

LCS-120729-3 0.200 0.210 105 0.200 0.188 94.0

Average ± %RSD 101% ± 3.7% 89.9% ± 8.4%

LCS-120729-4 2.00 1.89 94.3 2.00 1.95 97.6

LCS-120729-5 2.00 1.85 92.4 2.00 1.96 98.2

LCS-120720-6 2.00 1.94 97.2 2.00 1.90 94.9

Average ± %RSD 94.6% ± 2.6% 96.9% ± 1.8%

LCS-120720-7 20.0 18.4 92.1 20.0 18.8 94.2

LCS-120720-8 20.0 19.5 97.4 20.0 20.3 101

LCS-120720-9 20.0 19.7 98.3 20.0 19.8 99.0

Average ± %RSD 95.9 ± 3.5% 98.1% ± 3.6%

ETS-8-044.1 

Analyzed 7/20/12 PFOS (Linear and Branched)

Lab ID

Spiked 

Concentration 

(ng/mL)

Calculated 

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

LCS-120720-1 0.186 0.168 90.5

LCS-120729-2 0.186 0.135 72.5

LCS-120729-3 0.186 0.140 75.0

Average ± %RSD 79.3% (1) ± 12%

LCS-120729-4 1.86 1.74 93.3

LCS-120729-5 1.86 1.66 89.4

LCS-120720-6 1.86 1.60 86.0

Average ± %RSD 89.7% ± 4.1%

LCS-120720-7 18.6 17.4 93.4

LCS-120720-8 18.6 18.6 99.7

LCS-120720-9 18.6 17.4 93.6

Average ± %RSD 95.6% ± 3.7%

(1) LCS did not meet acceptance criteria of 100 ± 20%. 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 15 of 74
Table 7 continued. Laboratory Control Spike Recovery. 

ETS-8-044.1 

Analyzed 8/03/12 PFBS

Lab ID

Spiked 

Concentration 

(ng/mL)

Calculated 

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

LCS-120803-1 0.200 0.225 112

LCS-120803-2 0.200 0.217 108

LCS-120803-3 0.200 0.220 110

Average ± %RSD 110% ± 1.8%

LCS-120803-4 2.00 2.10 105

LCS-120803-5 2.00 2.00 100

LCS-120803-6 2.00 2.10 105

Average ± %RSD 103% ± 2.8%

LCS-120803-7 20.0 21.0 105

LCS-120803-8 20.0 22.4 112

LCS-120803-9 20.0 22.6 113

Average ± %RSD 110% ± 4.0%

(1) LCS did not meet acceptance criteria of 100 ± 20%.

8.7 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 the 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 Uncertainty.

Analyte Standard Deviation Method Uncertainty

PFBS 9.39 ±19%

PFHS 8.77 ±17%

PFOS 10.8 ±22%

8.8 Field Matrix Spikes (FMS)

A field matrix spike was 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 PFBS (linear), PFHS (linear), and PFOS (linear and 

branched) prior 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. 

The field matrix spike sample was not appropriate for all analytes at each sampling location. Where 

necessary, a laboratory matrix spike was prepared. See section 8.9 of the report for laboratory matrix 

spike levels. Field matrix spike recoveries are presented in section 9 of this report. 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 16 of 74
Table 9. Field Matrix Spike. 

Sampling Location

PFBS, 

ng/mL

PFHS, 

ng/mL

PFOS, 

ng/mL

All locations and Trip Blank 1002 994 1012

*100%

 Spike Concentraton

 ( Sample Concentration of FMS Average Concentration Field: Sample Field & Sample Dup.) FMS Recovery − =

8.9 Lab Matrix Spikes (LMS)

Due to the high level of PFHS and PFOS detected in several sampling locations, a laboratory matrix 

spike (LMS) sample was prepared to verify that the analytical method is applicable to the collected 

matrix. Laboratory matrix spikes were generated by adding a measured volume of the target analytes to 

an aliquot of the primary sample. The laboratory matrix spike added was based on the on-column 

instrument concentration.

All sampling locations: the primary sample was diluted 1:200, to which a nominal concentration of 30

ng/mL was added for a LMS concentration of approximately 6000 ng/mL.

Table 10. Laboraotry Matrix Spike

Sampling Location

PFBS, 

ng/mL

PFHS, 

ng/mL

PFOS, 

ng/mL

All locations 6012 6006 5579

Lab 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. Lab matrix spike concentrations must be 50% of the sample concentration to be 

considered an appropriate field spike. Lab matrix spikes are presented in section 9 of this report. 

The following calculation was used to calculate the lab matrix spike recovery in Section 9 of the report:

*100%

 Spike Concentraton

 ( Sample Concentration of LMS Average Concentration Field: Sample Field & Sample Dup.) LMS Recovery − =

9 Data Summary and Discussion

The tables below summarize the sample results and field and/or laboratory matrix spike recoveries for 

the sampling locations as well as the Trip 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 and lab 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. 

All QC elements of the method; field matrix spikes (FMSs) and laboratory matrix spikes (LMSs) met 

method acceptance criteria.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 17 of 74
Table 11. DAL GW WW8R 120627-1000

PFBS PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-02-35-001 DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-1000 578 NA 2610 NA 5270 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-002 DAL-GW-WW8R-DB-120627-1000 571 NA 2610 NA 5290 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-003 DAL-GW-WW8R-FMS-120627-1000 1560 98.4 3600 NC 5940 NC

GLP10-01-02-35-001; LMS DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-1000 6760 103 8800 103 11300 108

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 575 ng/mL ± 1.2% 2610 ng/mL ± 0.0% 5280 ng/mL ± 0.38%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; Spike level was less than 0.5x the endogenous sample concentration.

Samples analyzed using a 1:199 dilution factor

Table 12. DAL GW WW8R 120627-2130

PFBS PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-02-35-004 DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-2130 497 NA 2290 NA 4540 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-005 DAL-GW-WW8R-DB-120627-2130 481 NA 2260 NA 4560 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-006 DAL-GW-WW8R-FMS-120627-2130 1400 90.9 3170 NC 5660 NC

GLP10-01-02-35-004; LMS DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-2130 6500 100 8010 95.5 10400 105

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 489 ng/mL ± 3.3% 2280 ng/mL ± 1.3% 4550 ng/mL ± 0.44%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; Spike level was less than 0.5x the endogenous sample concentration.

Samples analyzed using a 1:199 dilution factor

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 18 of 74
Table 13. DAL GW WW8R 120628

PFBS PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-02-35-007 DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120628 463 NA 2050 NA 4160 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-008 DAL-GW-WW8R-DB-120628 442 NA 2080 NA 4180 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-009 DAL-GW-WW8R-FMS-120628 1400 94.6 3070 NC 4490 NC

GLP10-01-02-35-007; LMS DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120628 6780 105 8010 99.0 10400 112

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 453 ng/mL ± 4.6% 2070 ng/mL ± 1.5% 4170 ng/mL ± 0.48%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; Spike level was less than 0.5x the endogenous sample concentration.

Samples analyzed using a 1:199 dilution factor

Table 14. DAL GW WW9R 120625

PFBS PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-02-35-010 DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-1250 239 NA 1310 NA 2570 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-011 DAL-GW-WW9R-DB-120625-1250 227 NA 1270 NA 2670 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-012 DAL-GW-WW9R-FMS-120625-1250 1170 93.5 2170 88.5 3290 NC

GLP10-01-02-35-010; LMS DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-1250 6320 101 7150 97.6 8970 114

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 233ng/mL ± 5.2% 1290 ng/mL ± 3.1% 2620 ng/mL ± 3.8%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; Spike level was less than 0.5x the endogenous sample concentration.

Samples analyzed using a 1:199 dilution factor

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 19 of 74
Table 15. DAL GW WW9R 120625-2400

PFBS PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-02-35-013 DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-2400 250 NA 1330 NA 2600 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-014 DAL-GW-WW9R-DB-120625-2400 246 NA 1340 NA 2610 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-015 DAL-GW-WW9R-FMS-120625-2400 1210 96.0 2590 126 3710 NC

GLP10-01-02-35-013; LMS DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-2400 NA (1) NA (1) 7110 96.2 7970 96.2

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 248 ng/mL ± 1.6% 1340 ng/mL ± 0.75% 2610 ng/mL ± 0.38%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; Spike level was less than 0.5x the endogenous sample concentration.

PFHS and PFOS diluted 1:199 and reported from 7/20/12 analysis. PFBS diluted 1:100 and reported from 8/3/12 analysis.

(1) Sample was not analyzed.

Table 16. DAL GW WW9R 120626 

PFBS PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-02-35-016 DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120626 258 NA 1350 NA 2670 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-017 DAL-GW-WW9R-DB-120626 250 NA 1300 NA 2420 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-018 DAL-GW-WW9R-FMS-120626 1140 88.4 2180 86.0 3180 NC

GLP10-01-01-36-016; LMS DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120626 6050 96.4 7130 96.7 8460 106

Average Concentration (ng/mL) ± %RPD 254 ng/mL ± 3.1% 1330 ng/mL ± 3.8% 2550 ng/mL ± 9.8%

NA = Not Applicable

NC = Not Calculated; Spike level was less than 0.5x the endogenous sample concentration.

Samples analyzed using a 1:199 dilution factor

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 20 of 74
Table 17. DAL GW TRIP01 120625

PFBS PFHS PFOS

3M LIMS ID Description

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

Concentration 

(ng/mL) %Recovery

GLP10-01-02-35-019 DAL-GW-TRIP01-0-120625 <0.100 NA <0.100 NA <0.0928 NA

GLP10-01-02-35-020 DAL-GW-TRIP01-FMS-120625 947 94.5 939 94.5 785 77.6

NA = Not Applicable

FMS Sample analyzed using a 1:100 dilution factor

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 21 of 74
10 Conclusion

Laboratory control spikes, field matrix spikes, and lab matrix spikes were used to determine the 

analytical method accuracy and precision for PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS. Analysis was successfully 

completed following 3M Environmental Laboratory method ETS-8-044.1 described herein. 

11 Data/Sample Retention

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

to 3M Environmental Laboratory standard operating procedures. 

12 Attachments

Attachment A: Protocol Amendment 35 (General Project Outline)

Attachment B: Representative Chromatograms and Calibration Curves

Attachment C: Analytical Method-ETS-8-044.1 

Attachmetn D: Protocl Amendment GLP10-01-02-35 Deviation

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 22 of 74
GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur VVWTP Pump Test - June 2012 

13 Signatures 

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

William K. Reagen, Ph.D., 3M Environmental Laboratory Technical Director Date 

Gary Hdhensljbin, SAonsor Representative Date 

Jaisimha Kesari; Sfildy Director 

Page 23 of 74 
ATTACHMENT A: PROTOCOL AMENDMENT

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 24 of 74
GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 25 of 74
GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 26 of 74
GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 27 of 74
GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 28 of 74
GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 29 of 74
GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 30 of 74
ATTACHMENT B: REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE CHROMATOGRAMS AND 

CALIBRATION CURVE(S) 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 31 of 74
mc120720a.rdb (PFOS): "Quadratic" Regression ("1 / x" weighting): y = -51.6 x^2 + 4.98e+004 x + -649 (r = 0.9999)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 

Concentration, ng/mL

0.0

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

Area, counts

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:38:39 AM

Page 1 of 1

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
mc120720a.rdb (PFHS): "Quadratic" Regression ("1 / x" weighting): y = -24.9 x^2 + 3.46e+004 x + 859 (r = 0.9996)

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

Concentration, ng/mL

0.0

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

Area, counts

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:28:09 AM

Page 1 of 1

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
mc120720a.rdb (PFBS): "Quadratic" Regression ("1 / x" weighting): y = -65.9 x^2 + 7.56e+004 x + -478 (r = 0.9996)

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

Concentration, ng/mL

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

Area, counts

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:28:32 AM

Page 1 of 1

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a014" Sample ID: "11 012-74-10" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "5.0 ng/mL FC mix in Milli Q water" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 15 Sample Type: Standard Concentration: 5.00 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 4.90 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 3:23:14 PM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 10.0 minArea: 368723 countsHeight: 1.89e+005 cpsStart Time: 9.94 minEnd Time: 10.1 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5

Time, min

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

10.01

Sample Name: "mc120720a021" Sample ID: "Method Blank" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "Milli Q water TN12-0228" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 22 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 0.0108 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 5:39:53 PM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 10.0 minArea: 335 countsHeight: 2.76e+002 cpsStart Time: 9.96 minEnd Time: 10.0 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 

0

20406080

100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380400420

Intensity, cps

9

8.56 9.30 

7.70 

7.99 

8.42 8.77 9.07

8.41

Sample Name: "mc120720a022" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-001" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-1000 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 23 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 578. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 5:59:24 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.0 minArea: 218612 countsHeight: 1.06e+005 cpsStart Time: 9.73 minEnd Time: 10.1 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5

Time, min

0.00

5000.00

1.00e41.50e42.00e42.50e43.00e43.50e44.00e44.50e45.00e45.50e46.00e46.50e47.00e47.50e48.00e48.50e49.00e49.50e41.00e51.05e5

Intensity, cps

10.00

Sample Name: "mc120720a025" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-001; LMS" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-1000 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 26 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 6760. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 6:57:57 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 9.99 minArea: 2479263 countsHeight: 1.12e+006 cpsStart Time: 9.73 minEnd Time: 10.1 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 

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

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:56 AM

Page 1 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a027" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-004" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-2130 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 28 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 497. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 7:36:59 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 9.99 minArea: 188092 countsHeight: 9.80e+004 cpsStart Time: 9.72 minEnd Time: 10.1 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5

Time, min

0.0

5000.0

1.0e41.5e42.0e42.5e43.0e43.5e44.0e44.5e45.0e45.5e46.0e46.5e47.0e47.5e48.0e48.5e49.0e49.5e4

Intensity, cps

9.99

Sample Name: "mc120720a030" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-004; LMS" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-2130 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 31 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 6500. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 8:35:32 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 9.98 minArea: 2389338 countsHeight: 1.09e+006 cpsStart Time: 9.71 minEnd Time: 10.1 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 

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

Sample Name: "mc120720a036" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-007" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120628 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 37 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 463. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 10:32:41 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 9.98 minArea: 175234 countsHeight: 8.39e+004 cpsStart Time: 9.72 minEnd Time: 10.1 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5

Time, min

0.0

5000.0

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

Intensity, cps

9.98

Sample Name: "mc120720a041" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-010" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-1250 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 42 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 239. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 12:10:17 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 9.98 minArea: 90171 countsHeight: 3.93e+004 cpsStart Time: 9.72 minEnd Time: 10.1 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 

0.0

2000.04000.06000.08000.0

1.0e41.2e41.4e41.6e41.8e42.0e42.2e42.4e42.6e42.8e43.0e43.2e43.4e43.6e43.8e4

Intensity, cps

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:56 AM

Page 2 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a050" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-013" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-2400 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 51 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 237. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 3:06:02 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 9.98 minArea: 89552 countsHeight: 4.00e+004 cpsStart Time: 9.70 minEnd Time: 10.0 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5

Time, min

0.0

2000.04000.06000.08000.0

1.0e41.2e41.4e41.6e41.8e42.0e42.2e42.4e42.6e42.8e43.0e43.2e43.4e43.6e43.8e4

Intensity, cps

9.98

Sample Name: "mc120720a055" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-016" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120626 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 56 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 258. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 4:43:41 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 9.97 minArea: 97575 countsHeight: 4.37e+004 cpsStart Time: 9.70 minEnd Time: 10.0 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 

0.0

2000.04000.06000.08000.0

1.0e41.2e41.4e41.6e41.8e42.0e42.2e42.4e42.6e42.8e43.0e43.2e43.4e43.6e43.8e44.0e44.2e4

Intensity, cps

Sample Name: "mc120720a057" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-018" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-FMS-120626 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 58 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 1140. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 5:22:44 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 9.97 minArea: 431768 countsHeight: 2.15e+005 cpsStart Time: 9.69 minEnd Time: 10.1 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5

Time, min

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

9.97

Sample Name: "mc120720a058" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-36-016; LMS" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120626 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 59 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 6050. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 5:42:16 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 9.97 minArea: 2228465 countsHeight: 1.05e+006 cpsStart Time: 9.68 minEnd Time: 10.1 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 

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

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:56 AM

Page 3 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a066" Sample ID: "LCS-120719-7" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "20ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 67 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 20.0 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 18.4 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 8:18:31 AM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 9.96 minArea: 1370575 countsHeight: 6.49e+005 cpsStart Time: 9.89 minEnd Time: 10.1 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5

Time, min

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

9.96

Sample Name: "mc120720a069" Sample ID: "LCS-120719-4" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "2ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 70 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 2.00 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 1.89 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 9:17:07 AM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 9.96 minArea: 141944 countsHeight: 6.51e+004 cpsStart Time: 9.90 minEnd Time: 10.0 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 

0.0

5000.0

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

Intensity, cps

Sample Name: "mc120720a072" Sample ID: "LCS-120719-1" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "0.2ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 73 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 0.200 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 0.199 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 10:15:44 AM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 10.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 9.96 minArea: 14585 countsHeight: 6.86e+003 cpsStart Time: 9.92 minEnd Time: 10.0 min

8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5

Time, min

0

500

100015002000250030003500400045005000550060006500

Intensity, cps

9.96

10.44 8.82 11.92 7.88

Sample Name: "mc120720a014" Sample ID: "11 012-74-10" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "5.0 ng/mL FC mix in Milli Q water" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 15 Sample Type: Standard Concentration: 5.00 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 4.96 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 3:23:14 PM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Valley Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 171950 countsHeight: 7.79e+004 cpsStart Time: 10.9 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 

0.0

5000.0

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

Intensity, cps

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:56 AM

Page 4 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a021" Sample ID: "Method Blank" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "Milli Q water TN12-0228" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 22 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: < 0 Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 5:39:53 PM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 303 countsHeight: 2.40e+002 cpsStart Time: 10.9 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0

Time, min

0

200400600800

100012001400160018002000220024002600

Intensity, cps

13.05

11.44

10.92 13.31

9.15 12.42 11.64 12.11 10.55

Sample Name: "mc120720a022" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-001" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-1000 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 23 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 2610. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 5:59:24 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 449550 countsHeight: 1.88e+005 cpsStart Time: 10.6 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

Sample Name: "mc120720a025" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-001; LMS" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-1000 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 26 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 8800. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 6:57:57 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 1474424 countsHeight: 6.81e+005 cpsStart Time: 10.6 minEnd Time: 11.1 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0

Time, min

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

10.91

Sample Name: "mc120720a027" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-004" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-2130 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 28 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 2290. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 7:36:59 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 395133 countsHeight: 1.54e+005 cpsStart Time: 10.6 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 

0.0

1.0e42.0e43.0e44.0e45.0e46.0e47.0e48.0e49.0e41.0e51.1e51.2e51.3e51.4e51.5e5

Intensity, cps

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:56 AM

Page 5 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a030" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-004; LMS" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-2130 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 31 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 8010. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 8:35:32 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 1346882 countsHeight: 6.31e+005 cpsStart Time: 10.6 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0

Time, min

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

10.91

Sample Name: "mc120720a036" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-007" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120628 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 37 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 2050. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 10:32:41 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 353858 countsHeight: 1.36e+005 cpsStart Time: 10.6 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 

0.0

1.0e42.0e43.0e44.0e45.0e46.0e47.0e48.0e49.0e41.0e51.1e51.2e51.3e5

Intensity, cps

Sample Name: "mc120720a041" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-010" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-1250 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 42 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 1310. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 12:10:17 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 227444 countsHeight: 9.35e+004 cpsStart Time: 10.6 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0

Time, min

0.0

5000.0

1.0e41.5e42.0e42.5e43.0e43.5e44.0e44.5e45.0e45.5e46.0e46.5e47.0e47.5e48.0e48.5e49.0e4

Intensity, cps

10.90

10.80

Sample Name: "mc120720a050" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-013" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-2400 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 51 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 1330. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 3:06:02 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 231736 countsHeight: 9.36e+004 cpsStart Time: 10.6 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 

0.0

5000.0

1.0e41.5e42.0e42.5e43.0e43.5e44.0e44.5e45.0e45.5e46.0e46.5e47.0e47.5e48.0e48.5e49.0e4

Intensity, cps

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:57 AM

Page 6 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a055" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-016" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120626 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 56 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 1350. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 4:43:41 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 233560 countsHeight: 9.62e+004 cpsStart Time: 10.6 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0

Time, min

0.0

5000.0

1.0e41.5e42.0e42.5e43.0e43.5e44.0e44.5e45.0e45.5e46.0e46.5e47.0e47.5e48.0e48.5e49.0e49.5e4

Intensity, cps

10.89

10.79

Sample Name: "mc120720a057" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-018" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-FMS-120626 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 58 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 2180. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 5:22:44 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 376341 countsHeight: 1.69e+005 cpsStart Time: 10.6 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

Sample Name: "mc120720a058" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-36-016; LMS" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120626 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 59 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 7130. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 5:42:16 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 1201801 countsHeight: 5.90e+005 cpsStart Time: 10.6 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0

Time, min

0.0

5.0e41.0e51.5e52.0e52.5e53.0e53.5e54.0e54.5e55.0e55.5e5

Intensity, cps

10.89

Sample Name: "mc120720a066" Sample ID: "LCS-120719-7" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "20ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 67 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 20.0 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 18.8 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 8:18:31 AM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 643954 countsHeight: 3.09e+005 cpsStart Time: 10.8 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:57 AM

Page 7 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a069" Sample ID: "LCS-120719-4" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "2ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 70 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 2.00 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 1.95 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 9:17:07 AM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 68284 countsHeight: 3.18e+004 cpsStart Time: 10.8 minEnd Time: 11.0 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0

Time, min

0.0

2000.04000.06000.08000.0

1.0e41.2e41.4e41.6e41.8e42.0e42.2e42.4e42.6e42.8e43.0e4

Intensity, cps

10.88

12.96

Sample Name: "mc120720a072" Sample ID: "LCS-120719-1" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFHS" Mass(es): "399.000/80.000 Da,399.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "0.2ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 73 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 0.200 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 0.189 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 10:15:44 AM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.0 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 10.9 minArea: 7403 countsHeight: 4.04e+003 cpsStart Time: 10.8 minEnd Time: 10.9 min

8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 

0

200400600800

1000120014001600180020002200240026002800300032003400360038004000

Intensity, cps

Sample Name: "mc120720a014" Sample ID: "11 012-74-10" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "5.0 ng/mL FC mix in Milli Q water" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 15 Sample Type: Standard Concentration: 4.64 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 4.50 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 3:23:14 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.7 minArea: 222193 countsHeight: 7.37e+004 cpsStart Time: 11.4 minEnd Time: 11.8 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0

Time, min

0.0

5000.0

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

Intensity, cps

11.70

11.56

12.33

Sample Name: "mc120720a021" Sample ID: "Method Blank" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "Milli Q water TN12-0228" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 22 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 0.0204 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 5:39:53 PM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Base To Base Retention Time: 11.7 minArea: 368 countsHeight: 3.34e+002 cpsStart Time: 11.7 minEnd Time: 11.7 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 

0

200400600800

1000120014001600180020002200240026002800300032003400360038004000420044004600

Intensity, cps

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:57 AM

Page 8 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a022" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-001" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-1000 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 23 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 5270. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 5:59:24 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.7 minArea: 1282070 countsHeight: 2.64e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.8 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0

Time, min

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

11.68

11.54

11.42

Sample Name: "mc120720a025" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-001; LMS" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-1000 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 26 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 11300. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 6:57:57 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.7 minArea: 2648963 countsHeight: 7.33e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.8 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

Sample Name: "mc120720a027" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-004" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-2130 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 28 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 4540. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 7:36:59 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.7 minArea: 1108850 countsHeight: 2.25e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.8 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0

Time, min

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

11.67

11.52

11.40

Sample Name: "mc120720a030" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-004; LMS" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120627-2130 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 31 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 10400. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 8:35:32 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.7 minArea: 2456945 countsHeight: 6.99e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.8 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:57 AM

Page 9 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a036" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-007" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW8R-0-120628 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 37 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 4160. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/20/2012 Acq. Time: 10:32:41 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.7 minArea: 1018661 countsHeight: 2.22e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.7 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0

Time, min

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

11.65

11.51

Sample Name: "mc120720a041" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-010" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-1250 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 42 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 2570. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 12:10:17 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.7 minArea: 633565 countsHeight: 1.16e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.8 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 

0.00

5000.00

1.00e41.50e42.00e42.50e43.00e43.50e44.00e44.50e45.00e45.50e46.00e46.50e47.00e47.50e48.00e48.50e49.00e49.50e41.00e51.05e51.10e51.15e5

Intensity, cps

11

Sample Name: "mc120720a050" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-013" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-2400 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 51 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 2600. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 3:06:02 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.6 minArea: 642210 countsHeight: 1.19e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.7 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0

Time, min

0.00

5000.00

1.00e41.50e42.00e42.50e43.00e43.50e44.00e44.50e45.00e45.50e46.00e46.50e47.00e47.50e48.00e48.50e49.00e49.50e41.00e51.05e51.10e51.15e5

Intensity, cps

11.64

11.49

11.37

Sample Name: "mc120720a055" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-016" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120626 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 56 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 2670. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 4:43:41 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.6 minArea: 658491 countsHeight: 1.31e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.7 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 

0.00

5000.00

1.00e41.50e42.00e42.50e43.00e43.50e44.00e44.50e45.00e45.50e46.00e46.50e47.00e47.50e48.00e48.50e49.00e49.50e41.00e51.05e51.10e51.15e51.20e51.25e5

Intensity, cps

11

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:57 AM

Page 10 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a057" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-018" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-FMS-120626 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 58 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 3180. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 5:22:44 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.6 minArea: 782368 countsHeight: 1.72e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.7 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0

Time, min

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

11.63

11.49

11.38

Sample Name: "mc120720a058" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-01-36-016; LMS" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120626 (1:200 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 59 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 8460. ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 5:42:16 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.6 minArea: 2012804 countsHeight: 5.45e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.7 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 

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

Sample Name: "mc120720a066" Sample ID: "LCS-120719-7" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "20ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 67 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 18.6 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 17.4 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 8:18:31 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.6 minArea: 849171 countsHeight: 2.69e+005 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.7 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0

Time, min

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

11.63

11.52

Sample Name: "mc120720a069" Sample ID: "LCS-120719-4" File: "mc120720a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "2ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 70 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 1.86 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 1.74 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 9:17:07 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.6 minArea: 85622 countsHeight: 2.94e+004 cpsStart Time: 11.3 minEnd Time: 11.7 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 

0.0

2000.04000.06000.08000.0

1.0e41.2e41.4e41.6e41.8e42.0e42.2e42.4e42.6e42.8e4

Intensity, cps

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:57 AM

Page 11 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120720a072" Sample ID: "LCS-120719-1" File: "mc120720a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFOS" Mass(es): "499.000/80.000 Da,499.000/99.000 Da,499.000/130.000 Da"Comment: "0.2ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 73 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 0.186 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 0.168 ng/mL Acq. Date: 7/21/2012 Acq. Time: 10:15:44 AM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: Specify Parameters - MQ III Noise Percentage: 50 Base. Sub. Window: 1.00 minPeak-Split. Factor: 2 Report Largest Peak: Yes Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 0 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 11.7 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 11.6 minArea: 7735 countsHeight: 3.00e+003 cpsStart Time: 11.4 minEnd Time: 11.7 min

9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0

Time, min

0

200400600800

10001200140016001800200022002400260028003000320034003600380040004200

Intensity, cps

12.22

11.63

13.23

12.13

12.82 13.31

11.51 13.90

13.61

*ETS-McCoy Results Name: mc120720a.rPrinting Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STWPrinting Time: 8:43:57 AM

Page 12 of 12

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
mc120803a.rdb (PFBS): "Quadratic" Regression ("1 / x" weighting): y = -87.3 x^2 + 8.59e+004 x + -511 (r = 0.9998)

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 20.0 

Concentration, ng/mL

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

Area, counts

*ETS McCoy Results Name: mc120803a.rPrinting Time: 9:10:14 AMPrinting Date: Monday, August 06, 2012

*Data printed by KJU Page 1 of 1

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120803a015" Sample ID: "11 012-74-9" File: "mc120803a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "2.5 ng/mL FC mix in Milli Q water" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 15 Sample Type: Standard Concentration: 2.50 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 2.58 ng/mL Acq. Date: 8/3/2012 Acq. Time: 2:39:11 PM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: IntelliQuan - IQA II Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 5 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 9.84 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Valley Retention Time: 9.84 minArea: 220928 countsHeight: 8.31e+004 cpsStart Time: 9.73 minEnd Time: 9.95 min

7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0

Time, min

0.0

5000.0

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

Intensity, cps

9.84

9.80

Sample Name: "mc120803a021" Sample ID: "Method Blank" File: "mc120803a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "Milli Q water TN12-0248" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 21 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 0.00767 ng/mL Acq. Date: 8/3/2012 Acq. Time: 4:36:22 PM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: IntelliQuan - IQA II Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 5 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 9.84 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Valley Retention Time: 9.82 minArea: 147 countsHeight: 3.56e+002 cpsStart Time: 9.82 minEnd Time: 9.83 min

7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 

0

100200300400500600700800900

10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000210022002300

Intensity, cps

7.65 8.60 

8.89 8.22 9.59 7.44 7.92 9.38

Sample Name: "mc120803a022" Sample ID: "GLP10-01-02-35-013 " File: "mc120803a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "DAL-GW-WW9R-0-120625-2400 (1:100 dil)" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 22 Sample Type: Unknown Concentration: N/A Calculated Conc: 250. ng/mL Acq. Date: 8/3/2012 Acq. Time: 4:55:55 PM Modified: Yes Proc. Algorithm: IntelliQuan - IQA II Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 5 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 9.84 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Manual Retention Time: 9.83 minArea: 213565 countsHeight: 7.64e+004 cpsStart Time: 9.41 minEnd Time: 9.92 min

7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0

Time, min

0.0

5000.0

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

Intensity, cps

9.83

Sample Name: "mc120803a028" Sample ID: "LCS-120803-1" File: "mc120803a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "0.2ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 28 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 0.200 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 0.225 ng/mL Acq. Date: 8/3/2012 Acq. Time: 6:53:08 PM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: IntelliQuan - IQA II Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 5 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 9.84 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Valley Retention Time: 9.83 minArea: 18799 countsHeight: 7.05e+003 cpsStart Time: 9.75 minEnd Time: 9.90 min

7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 

0

500

1000150020002500300035004000450050005500600065007000

Intensity, cps

9.7

7.49 7.747.79 8.85 8.66 9.17

Printing Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STW

Page 1 of 2

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
Sample Name: "mc120803a031" Sample ID: "LCS-120803-4" File: "mc120803a.wiff"

Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "2.0ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 31 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 2.00 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 2.10 ng/mL Acq. Date: 8/3/2012 Acq. Time: 7:51:46 PM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: IntelliQuan - IQA II Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 5 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 9.84 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Valley Retention Time: 9.83 minArea: 179608 countsHeight: 6.90e+004 cpsStart Time: 9.75 minEnd Time: 9.90 min

7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0

Time, min

0.0

5000.0

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

Intensity, cps

9.83

Sample Name: "mc120803a034" Sample ID: "LCS-120803-7" File: "mc120803a.wiff"Peak Name: "PFBS" Mass(es): "299.000/80.000 Da,299.000/99.000 Da"Comment: "20ppb LCS" Annotation: ""

Sample Index: 34 Sample Type: QC Concentration: 20.0 ng/mL Calculated Conc: 21.0 ng/mL Acq. Date: 8/3/2012 Acq. Time: 8:50:24 PM Modified: No Proc. Algorithm: IntelliQuan - IQA II Min. Peak Height: 0.00 cpsMin. Peak Width: 0.00 secSmoothing Width: 5 pointsRT Window: 30.0 secExpected RT: 9.84 minUse Relative RT: No Int. Type: Valley Retention Time: 9.83 minArea: 1765631 countsHeight: 6.48e+005 cpsStart Time: 9.72 minEnd Time: 9.95 min

7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 

0.0

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

Intensity, cps

Printing Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2012Data printed by STW

Page 2 of 2

G

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and P

Decatur W
ATTACHMENT C: ANALYTICAL METHOD(S) 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 50 of 74
Page 51 of 74
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).

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 52 of 74
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.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 53 of 74
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.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 54 of 74
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.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 55 of 74
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

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 56 of 74
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.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 57 of 74
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.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 58 of 74
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. 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 59 of 74
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 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 60 of 74
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.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 61 of 74
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

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 62 of 74
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. 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 63 of 74
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. 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 64 of 74
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.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 65 of 74
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.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 66 of 74
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 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 67 of 74
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. 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 68 of 74
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 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 69 of 74
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 & 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 70 of 74
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.

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 71 of 74
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. 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 72 of 74
ATTACHMENT D: DEVIATION(S) 

GLP10-01-02; Interim Report 35 

Analysis of PFBS, PFHS, and PFOS in Groundwater Samples 

Decatur WWTP Pump Test - June 2012

Page 73 of 74