-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
{Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing}
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/4-84-053
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
EPA METHOD STUDY 30, METHOD 625BASE/NEUTRALS,
ACIDS AND PESTICIDES
5. PERFORMING ORG ANIZAT'ON CODE
. AUTHOR(S)
Radian Corp.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZA1 ION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Radian Corporation
P.O. Box 9948
Austin, Texas 787C6
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
3. RECIP
S ACCESSION NO.
' 206572
5. REPORT DAT.E
June 1984
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
CBLIA
11. CONTR/O CT/GTANT NO.
68-03-3102
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Proj
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
1-ft?/fi-B3
EPA 600/06
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
The work which is described in this report was performed for the purpose of
validating, through an inter!abcratory study, Method 625 for the analysis of
the base/neutral, acid, and pesticide priority pollutants- This method is
based on the extraction and concentration of the various analytes followed by
their determination 'through gas chromatography using a low resolution mass
spectrometer as the measuring device.
Participating laboratories were selected based upon technical evaluation of proposals
and upon the analyses results of prestudy samples. The laboratories were supplied
with ampuls containing various concentrations of the pollutant compounds.
These solutions were aliquoted into four different water types which were subsequently
analyzed according to the appronrUtte method. In addition to the sample concentrates,
each laboratory was supplied with an industrial effluent which was used to help
determine false positive and false negative data.
The data obtained from the inter!aboratory study were analyzed employing a series of
computer programs known as the Inter!aboratory Method Validation Study (IMVS) system
which was designed to implement ASTM procedure D2777.,-
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
COSATI Field/Group
18. DISTRI3UTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report/
Unclassified
21. NO OF PAGES
473
20. SF'JURITY CLASS (This pagel
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Perm 2220-1 (R»». 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION i« OBSOLETE
-------
-------
-------
DISCLAIMER
The information in this document has been funded wholly or in
part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under
contract 68-03-3102 to Radian Corporation. Radian prepared this
report using EPA's procedures for data analysis and reporting of
data. The conclusions and recommendations follow EPA review
comments. It has been subject to the agency's peer and adminis-
trative review,.and it has been approved for publication as an
EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
Environmental measurements are required to determine the quality
of ambient waters and the character of waste effluents. The En-
vironmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory (EMSL)-Cincinnati
conducts research to.
Develop and evaluate techniques to measure the
presence and concentration of physical, chemical,
radiological pollutants in water, wastewater,
bottom sediments, and solid waste.
Investigate methods for the concentrate'M, re-
covery, and identification of viruses, bacteria,
and other microorganisms in water.
Conduct studies to determine the responses of
aquatic organisms to water quality.
Conduct an Agency-wide quality assurance program
to assure standardization and quality control of
systems for monitoring water and wastewater.
This publication reports the results of EPA's interlaboratory
method study for the base/neutral and the acid compounds.
Federal agencies, states, municipalities, universities, private
laboratories, and industry should find this interlaboiatory study
useful in monitoring and controlling pollution in the environment:,
Robert L. Booth, Acting Director
iii
-------
ABSTRACT
The work which is described in the report was performed for the
purpose of validating, through an interlaboratory study, proposed
Method 625 for the analysis of the base/neutral (B/N), acid, and
pesticide priority pollutants. This method is based on the
extraction and concentration of the various analytes followed by
their determination through gas chromatography using a low reso-
lution mass spectrometer as the measuring device.
Participating laboratories were selected based upon technical
evaluation of proposals and upon the analytical results of pre-
study samples. The laboratories were supplied with ampules
containing various concentrations of the pollutant compounds.
These solutions were aliquoted into four different water types
which were subsequently analyzed according to the appropriate
methods. In addition to the sample concentrates, each labora-
tory was supplied with an industrial effluent which was known to
contain various pollutants. The purpose of this sample was to
determine the method's propensity to false positives and false
negatives.
The data obtained from the interlaboratory study were analyzed
employing a series of computer programs known as che Inter-
laboiatory Method Validation Study (IMVS) system which was
designed to implement ASTM procedure D2777. The IMVS analyses
included tests for the rejection of outliers (both laboratory
and individual), estimation of mean recovery (accuracy), estima-
tion of single-analyst and overall precision, and tests for the
effects of water type on accuracy and precision.
iv
-------
This report was; submitted in partial fulfillment of contract
number 68-03-3102 by Radian Corporation under the sponsorship of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The report covers a
period from January, 1982 to June, 1983.
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword iii
Abstract iv
Figures vii
Tables viii
1. Introduction 1
2. Conclusion 3
3. Recommendations 28
4. Description of Study 30
Test Design 31
Selection of Participating Laboratories.... 33
Preparation of Youden Pair Concentrates.... 33
Verity, Homogeneity, and Stability of
Prepared Ampules 35
Proof of Feasibility 36
5 . Statistical Treatment of Data 41
Rejection of Outliers 42
Statistical Summaries 44
Regression Analysis of Basic Statistics.... 47
Comparison of Accuracy and Precision
Across Water Types 115
6. Results and Discussion 184
Accuracy 191
Precision 192
Effects of Water Types 195
Comparison of Published Method Performance
Data to Validation Data 198
Revised Equations 203
Response to Questionnaire 204
7. Evaluation of Surrogate Compounds 216
References 227
Appendices
A. Study of One Sample for False Positives and
False Negatives , 229
B. Results of GC/MS Feasibility Study 233
C. Method 625 B/N Compounds (Laboratory Data) 243
D. Test Method B/N & Acids - Method 625 444
vi
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Spike Recoveries Vs. Surrogate Recoveries -
Benzo (a) Pyrene 221
2 Spika Recoveries Vs. Surrogate Recoveries -
Dibenzo (a , h) Anthracene 222
3 Spike Recoveries Vs. Surrogate Recoveries -
Hexachlorobenzene 223
4 Spike Recoveries Vs. Surrogate Recoveries -
2 ,4-Dimethylphenol 224
5 Spike Recoveries vs. Surrogate "Recoveries -
Acid Fraction 225
vii
-------
TABLES
Number
Page
1-1 through Regression Equations for Accuracy and Pre-
1-17 c^'sion for Compounds 1 - 25 4
2-1 Accuracy and Precision Estimates (Computed
From the Regression Equations) for a Prepared
Concentration of 100 pg/L - B/N Compounds 21
2-2 Accuracy and Precision Estimates (Computed
From the Regression Equations) for a Pre-
pared Concentration of 100 yg/L- Acid Com-
pounds 23
3 Fifteen Laboratories Selected for Participa-
tion in the Method 625 Interlaboratory Study.. 34
4 Spiked Test Sample Concentration of B/N
Standard 1 37
5 Spiked Test Sample Concentration of B/N
Standard 2 33
6 Spiked Test Sample Concentration of Acid
Standard 39
7 Spiking Concentration of Surrogate Compounds.. 40
8-1 through Statistical Summary for Each Compound Analyses
8-64 by Water Type 48
9-1 through Effect of Water Type on Each Compound
9-63 Analysis 121
10-1 Accuracy and Precision Estimates for Low- and
High-level Prepared Concentration - B/N Com-
pounds 185
10-2
Accuracy and Precision Estimates for Low- and
High-level Concentrations - Acid Compounds.... 190
Vlll
-------
TABLES (Continued)
Number Page
11-1 Summary of the Tests for Differences Acto?s
Water Types - B/N Compounds 196
11-2 Summary of the Tests for Differences Across
Water Types - Acid Compounds 199
12-1 Comparison of Accuracy and Precision of
Interlaboratory Study Data (For a Prepared
Concentration of 100 ug/L) and Published
Method Performance Data - B/N Compounds 199
12-2 Comparison of Accuracy and Precision of
Interlaboratory Study Data (For a Prepared
Concentration of 100 yg/I.) and Published
Method Performance Data - Acid Compounds 2U2
13 Revised Regression Equations for Accuracy
and Precision 205
14 Revised Accuracy and Precise Estimates 206
15-1 Summary of Ir.,~. .'rument and Calibration Para-
meters - B/N Analyses 207
15-2 Summary of Instrument and Calibration Para-
meters - Acid Analyses 208
16 Summary of QA/QC Procedures 211
17-1 Correlation Coefficients of Surrogate Re-
coveries and Spike Recoveries - B/N (1)
Fraction 217
17-2 Correlation Coefficients of Surrogate Re-
coveries and Spike Recoveries - Acid Fraction.. 219
IX
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The various analytical laboratories of the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (EPA) gather water quality data to provide informa-
tion on water resourcer,, to assist research activities, and to
evaluate pollution abatement activities. The success of these
pollution control activities depends upon the reliability of the
data provided by the laboratories, particularly when legal action
is involved.
The Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory-Cincinnati
(EMSL-Cincinnati), of the US EPA develops analytical methods and
conducts a quality assurance program for water and waste labora-
tories. The EMSL quality assurance program is designed to maxi-
mize the reliability and legal defensibility of all water quality
information collected by EPA laboratories. The responsibility
for EMSL's activities is assigneu to the Quality Assurance Branch
(QAB), which conducts interlaboratory tests of the methods. This
study reports the results of the validation effort on Method 625
for the B/N, pesticide and acid compounds.
The interlaboratory study of Method 625 consisted of three
distinct phases. ^'hase I involved the preparation of concen-
trates . ampuling of the concentrates and analytical verification
of the concentrates using GC methods.
The second phase involved the selection of participating labora-
tories. Solicitation were made for paid participants and volun-
teer participants. Selection of laboratories was based on
experience, facilities, quality control procedures, and cost
Preceding page btaik
-------
estimates received from laboratories. Final selection of 15
laboratories was made after the successful analysis of a per-
formance sample. No laboratories chose to participate in the
study as volunteers.
The third phase involved conducting the study. The prepared
ampules were distributed to each laboratory. Individual labora-
tories supplied the required four water types into which the
ampules were to be spiked. As a separate study, a single water
sample was supplied by Radian to evaluate the analysis of a very
difficult sample (including tendencies for false-positives and
false-negatives). After analysis, results were reported on
standard data sheets. Data were keypunched and validated by
Radian. The final step in the study was to conduct an analysis
of all data obtained using tl 2 IMVS computer program [1].
-------
SECTION 2
CONCLUSIONS
The objective of this interlaboratory study was to characterize
the performance of Method 625 in terms of accuracy, overall
precision, single-analyst precision, and the effect of water
type on accuracy and precision. Through statistical analyses
of 22,555 reported values, estimates of accuracy and precision
were made and expressed in regression equations, shown in Table 1
for each compound. The equations were based on the 17,998 data
values remaining after eliminating outliers in the IMVS program.
The development and interpretation of these regression equations
are discussed in Section 5. To facilitate the interpretation of
these equations, Table 2 was prepared, in which accuracy (percent
recovery), overall precision (percent standard deviation), and
single-analyst precision (percent standard deviation) were com-
puted (using the regression equations) at a prepared concentra-
tion of 100 ug/L.
The accuracy is obtained by comparing the mean recovery to the
prepared values of the concentrations and computing the percent
recovery. The mean recovery statistics (at 100 yg/L) for the
B/N compounds range from 21% for dimethyl phthalate to 113% for
isophorone. The average recovery is 74%. Both of these extremes
are for the distilled water matrix. The mean recovery for 3,3'-
dichlorobenzidine in the industrial effluent matrix is also 113%.
One-half of the mean recoveries for the B/N compounds are between
61% and 87%, with one-fourth of the mean recoveries above and
below these values. Recoveries for dimethyl phthalate are con-
sistently low, ranging from 21% to 34%, for all water matrices.
-------
TABLE 1-1
ENVIRONMENTAL HON1TOIING »*D SbPPOBT LABORATORI
OFMCE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
tNVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEUCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/M (1)
REGRESSION E8UATIONS FOR ACCURACY AND PRECISION (OR COMPOUNDS 1
MATER TYPE
APPLICABLE CONC. RANGE
DISTILLED MATER
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
TAP MATER
S.'NGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
SURFACE WATER
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
1 c MEAN RECOVERY
C * TRUE VALUE FOi TNE COI
ACENAPHTHE
17.0 - 400
SR - 0.151
S 0.211
I * 0.96C
SI 0.091
S « 0.171
I « 0.95C
SR « 0.211
S « 0.271
1 0.9U
SI « 0.151
S > 0.181
1 * 0.85C
ICENTRATION
NE
.0)
- 0.12
~ 0.67
« 0.19
0.56
0.10
« 0.08
- 0.60
- 0.0?
- 0 02
- 0.07
» 0.38
» 0.46
AC
18
SR
S
1
SR
S
I
SR
S
I
SR
S
I
ENAPHTHY
.0 - 450
- 0.241
0.261
0.89C
0.161
0.231
* 0.87C
0.141
0.211
0.97C
* 0.131
« 0.251
* 0.88C
LENE
.01
- 1.06
- 0.54
> 0.74
* 0.37
- 0.25
* C.4B
- 0.01
* 0.67
* 0.24
- 0.35
- 0.44
- 0.03
ALD
ill
SR
S -
I *
SR
S «
I '
SR
S '
I
SR
S *
1 >
R1N
.C - 600
0.271
0.431
0.78C
' O.ZBI
0.471 -
0.66C
« 0.361
O.S2I -
0.55C «
* 0.381
0.591 «
0.52C *
.0)
- 1.28
1.13
1.66
- 0.48
0.92
0.88
- 1.64
1.01
1.00
* 0.17
0.08
0.80
AN
<5
SR
S
11
SR
S
I
SR
S
I
SR
S
1
THRACCNE
.0 - 600
- 0.211
' 0.271
O.SOC
* 0.151
- 0.191
O.B2C
> 0.1S«
> U.24I
* 0.8U
> 0.1?»
' 0.291
- 0.74C
.0)
- 0.32
- 0.64
0.68
- 0.17
- 0.07
0.42
« 0.02
- 0.11
« 0.55
: - C.03
t 0.13
» 0.88
-------
TABLE 1-2
INVIRONHENIAL BOHIlOVINt AND SUPPORT LAHORA10O
Ollltl 01 RiliARCH ANI tEVELOPXENI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENC*
IPA HETMOO 62) VALIDATION STUOt - B/H (1)
RECRESSION EDUATIONS ;OR ACCURACY AND PRECISION JOS COMPOUNDS 5
WATER TYPt
APPLICABLE CONC. RANCf
DISTILLED HATER
SINtLE-ANALYlT PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
TAP HATER
SINbLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVEDALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
SURfACE HATER
SINtLE-ANALVSI PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
INDUSTRIAL (IELUENT
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ALCURACY
-BNC
(14.0 - 7)0.0)
SR
S
I
SR
S
I
S*
s
1
SR
S
I
- 0.201
- 0.101
- 0.87C
- 0.161
- 0.221
- 0.11C
- o.m
0.2V4
> 0.80C
- 0.171
- 0.251
O.B4C
- 0.58
- 1.94
- O.V4
- 0.14
- 0.77
- 0.41
- 0.72
- 0.19
- 0.44
- 0.16
- 0.21
- 0.89
BENIOIAtANIHRACENC
BENIOIAIPYRENE
(Id.O - 400.0) <5
SR
S
I
SR
S
I
SR
S
1
SR
S
1
- 0.111
0.261
o.aac
- 0.191
- 0.261
- o.aoc
P. 121
o.m
0.71C
- 0.411
- 0.511
- 0.61C
0.91
- 0.28
- 0.60
4.78
« 2.49
« 1.14
- 1.44
- 0.61
- 0.22
- 1.81
- 0.46
- 0.79
SR
S
1
SR
S
1
SR
S
I
SR
S
I
.0 - 600
0.221
- 0.121
0.901
0.1)1
- 0,401
- 0.79C
- 0.191
0.451
- 0.68C
0.411
- 0.651
- 0.56C
.0)
0.48
1.15
- 0.11
0.18
0.15
- 0.«5
0.75
0.71
- 0.04
- 0.12
« 0.09
- 0.26
8ENIO
-------
TABLE 1-3
ENVIDONNfN1AL MONITORING AN« SUPPORT LA8URAIORI
OfflCC Of RESEARCH AN6 »EVELOPHENI
ENVIRObNENIAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(PA MEINOt 625 VALlOAllOh STUDY - B/N U>
REGRESSION EQUATIONS IOR ACCURAC" AN» PRECISION fOR COMPOUNDS 9
HATER TYPE
APPLICABLE CONC. RANGE
ISTILLEK MATER
SINGLE-ANALYST PRfClSlON
OVCiALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
TAf WATER
SINGLE-ANALYST PRCCISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
SURFACE MATE*
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
INDUSTRIAL EMLUENT
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
IS«2-CHLOROETNYLI ETHER DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE
114
SR
S *
1
SR
S
2
SR
S
I *
SR
S
I
.0 - 750.
0.351 -
0.351 *
0.86C -
0.251 «
0.271
0.87C -
0.261 -
0.321 «
0.«9C -
0.211
0.141 «
0.91C -
0)
0.99
0.10
1.54
1.49
1.79
2.52
1.07
0.58
1.02
3.15
0.69
0.72
(6
SB
s
1
SR
S
I
SR
S
1
SR
S
X
.0 - 700
0.131
0.391
O.J9C
0.241
0.341
0.59C
0.271
0.141
« O.cOC
0.231
0.471
0.58C
.01
1.16
« 0.60
> 0.71
0.19
- 0.12
« 0.40
- 0.69
« 0.84
1.83
* 0.32
- 0.18
0.42
DIBENIOU,
C9
SR
S
X
'R
S
V
SR
S
X
SR
S
I
.0 - 400
- 0.301
* 0.591
r.88C
- 0.381
« 0.551
- 0.85C
- 0.371
0.501
- 0.64C
- 0.451
> 0.861
- 0.63C
M)ANTHRACENE DIITHIL PHTHALATE
.0)
8.51
« 0.25
i 4.72
« 0.17
- 0.26
- 4.72
- 0.02
« 0.13
- 1.44
- 0.76
- 0.49
- 2.51
<£
SR
S
a
SR
S
1
SR
S
I
SR
S
X
.0 - 700.0
0.28X
- 0.521 »
- 0.43C *
* 0.341 «
0.451 -
0.43C «
- 0.401 «
- 0.501 «
0.51C «
>
1.44
0.22
1.00
O.S1
0.20
0.37
0.77
0.44
1.29
0.331 - 0.05
- 0.451 »
0.57C -
0.20
0.19
I * BEAN RECOVERY
C TRUE ₯ALUE (OR THE CONCENTRATION
-------
TABLE 1-4
f NVIIONMdlTAL NOIIIIONIN6 AN» SUPPOIT lABOftAIOK
OfllCC Of ICSttlCH AND «(VELOP»INI
[NVllOk.4EN1At PIOTECT10N A6ENO
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - 0/N HI
itSdlSSKW EtUATICnS FO* UCUIAC* AND PIECISION lot COMPOUNDS II
MATE! TYPE
APPHCASIE CONC. lANtE
1S.1LLE* VATEI
SINCLE-ANALTST PIECISION
OVEIALL PStilSFOII
ACCUIACT
TAP UATEI
SINCLE-ANALTST PIECISION
OVEIALL PICISION
ACCUIACT
SUIIACE MATEI
SINtLI-ANALYST PIECISION
OVEIALL PIECISION
tCCUIACT
INIUSTIIAL EMLUENT
SlNtLE-AKALYST PIECISION
OVEIALL PIECIS1CN
A«i!SMI
ENIOSULIAN SULIAIE
114.0 - 750.
SI * 0.121
& C.63I -
I 0.39C
SI - 0.201 «
S 0.661 -
1 0.6IC -
SI « 0.221 -
S 0.671 -
1 1.63C -
SI 0.401 -
S 0.701 -
I 0.6JC -
0)
2.47
1.03
0.41
1.71
0.60
4.12
0.86
2.55
t.«i
0.24
0.34
4.67
ILUOIAN1HENE
(6
SI
S
1
SI
s
1
SI
s
1
SI
s
1
.0 - 700.
0.221
- 0.211 -
0.11C
0.121
0.221 «
» 0.76C «
0.231
0.291 -
0.71C «
» 0.19X
0. 361
0.68C
0)
- 0.73
0.60
1.10
« 0.93
0.12
0.14
- 0.70
0.44
1.15
0.73
0.17
1.53
HEPTACStOI
(11.
SI
s .
I »
SI '
s »
I «
11
s -
s *
SI -
s »
1
2-600.
3.241 -
0.501 -
O.J7C -
0.371 -
0.441 -
0.7JC -
0.381 -
0.501 -
0.73C -
0.391 -
0.49>
0.68C -
0>
0.56
0.23
2.97
0.61
0.17
2.31
1.70
1.20
2.07
0.95
0.09
1.44
HIKCHLOIDIEN/fNE
(6.
SI
S -
I
SI
s
I
SI
s
I -
s*
s
I >
0 - 53J
0.111
0.431
O.ti'
- 0.2S1
0.301
0.?2C
0.231
0.521
0.69C
0.17i
C. J8l
o.Sic
.0)
- 0.10
- 0.52
« 0.66
» 0.15
« 0.19
» 0.20
.- 0.52
- 0.22
» 0.65
5 Q = '4
- 0.52
* 0.22
1 MEAN DECOVEIT
C TIUE VALUE rOI
COMvEMTRATlOM
-------
TABLE 1-5
ENVIIONNENKL MONIKKINt *U* SUPPOI1 l«BO«AIOII
OllICi Of IESEAICN >Nt IEVElOPflikl
CNVIIOkHENIAL PIO'ECIIOk AtEkCV
IH MEIHOt 625 VALUATION STUM - B/tt I1>
E6IESSION EIUA1IONS 101 ACCUIACf AN« PRECISION fOB COHPOUNIS 17
MATEI IIPE
APPLICABLE CONC. IANCE
ISTILLE* UATEI
SIMCLE-AMALfSI PIEC1SIOH
OVEIALL PRECISION
ACCUIACI
1AP KAMI
SINGLE-ANALfST PIECISIOH
OVEIALL PIECISIO*
ACCUIACf
SUiriCC HATE!
SSIfcLE-ANALf SI PIECISIOk
OVEIALL PIEC1S:ON
AccuiAcr
INKUSTI1AL EMLUENf
SllltLE-ANALfSI PIECISIOH
OVEIALL PIECISION
ACCUIACf
ISOPMOICkE
15.0 - 600
SI 0.271
S * 0.331
I * 1.12C
SI 0.301
S ' 0.321
I * 1.1CC
SI 0.201
S 0.351
1 - 1-05C
SI 0.421
S 0.571
1 1.00C
kAPNTMALENE
.0)
« 0.77
0.26
« 1.41
- 0.22
0.34
« 2-07
« 1.36
0.94
0.65
- J.27
« 0.64
* 9.41
16
SI
S
1
SI
s
I
SI
s
1
SI
s
I
.0 - 700
» 0.211
0.301
0.76C
0.1BI
0.241
0.7/c
0.241
(1.271
0.78C
0.201
0.331
- 0.70C
.01
- 0.41
- 0.68
1.58
- 0.36
- 0.34
« 1.21
- 0,»l
- 0.09
* 1.39
- 0.18
- 0.51
1.12
PCB-1260
136.
SI
S
1 -
SI *
s
1
SI
s
I
SI
s
I
0-66
0.351
0.431
0.8U
0.501
O.S11
0.68C
0.721
0.651
0.5U
0.431
0.571
0.46C
/.O)
3.61
1.82
-10.86
- 2.60
« 4.39
-17.11
- 4.51
- 1.11
-11.95
« 2.02
- 0.49
-12.36
1.3-IICHLOIOSEHIEME
(5
SI
S
1
SI
S
II
SI
s
>
SI
s
1
.0 - 600
0.231
0.411
0.16C
0.241
0.421
' O.I9C
0.321
« 0.341
0.92C
.01
0.61
« 0.11
- 0.70
« 0.90
- 0.03
- 1.10
« 0.14
- OdS
- 0.14
0.3)1 « 0.49
* 0.411
0.79C
* 0.73
- 0.27
I * MEAN ItCOVEIt
C » HUE VALUE »OI THE CONCEkllAT I ON
-------
TABLE 1-6
ENVllONHENm MONIIOHINt AMI SUPPOII tABOIAIOIf
Oiritl Cf liSEAICN AMI lEVElOPHENI
ENVIIONHEII1AI. I'lOIECIION AtEHCV
EPA ME1HOI 623 VALltAllOM 5UI»I - B/N (1)
IECIESSION EIUA110NS fOI ACCUIACV ADI PIECISION »0« COHPOUNtS 21
UATEI TYPE
APPLICABLE CONC. IANCE
IIST1LLEI UATEI
S1N6LE-ANALTS1 PIECISION
OVEIALL PIECISION
ACCUIACT
TAP UATEI
SINClE-AHAtfS! PIECISION
AVEIALI. PIECISION
ACCUIACT
SUKACE UATEI
SIMtk.E-ANAk.TST PIECISION
OVEIALL PIECISION
ACCUIACT
INDUSTIIAL fMLUENT
OlCilt PIECISlOrt
ACCUIACT
2.6-IINITIOTOlUEkE
(11
SI
I
1
SI
S «
I «
SI
S «
I
't
1
.0 - 600.
0.141
0.191 «
1.06C -
0.181
0.2K -
1.021 -
0.201 *
0.261 «
1.C6C -
0.311 «
1.03C -
0>
1.26
0.33
3.60
0.20
0.01
2.81
0.75
2.23
3.32
0.33
1.78
3.
(3
SI
S
I
SI
J
I
SI
S
I
S
I
3 -»ICMIOIOBENII»INE 4-CHLOIOPHlNTl PHENTL
6.0 - 667.01
' 0.281 « 7.33
0.471 « 3.43
* 1.23C -12.63
> 0.231 4.38
0.441 » 3.46
1.1U -12.36
0.631 -11.31
0.701 - 9.34
< 1.22C -20.68
U.421 « 0.78
1.33C -20.41
(9
SI
j
I
SI
S
1
SI
S
I
S
1
.0 - 300
0.201
» 0.301
- 0.9U
' 0.151
» 0.231
« 0.93C
0.131
0.251
0.97C
- 0.331
O.SU
.0)
- 0.94
- 0.4A
> 0.33
- 0.28
- 0.26
0.04
- 0.43
- 0.48
* 0.63
- 1.34
0.42
ETN 4.
17
SI
S
1
SI
S
I
SI
S
1
S
I
4 -»»
.0 - 400.
0.291
« 0.661 -
0.56C -
0.311
> 0.331 -
- 0.34C -
0.431
0.681 -
- 0.49C
= 0.581 -
» 0.44C -
0)
- 0.32
0.96
0.40
« 0.64
0.33
0.16
- 1.47
1.33
0.31
- 0 3$
0.79
0.38
I HEA« IECOVEI*
c > HUE ?ALUE ro^ THE coMCENTiATion
-------
TABLE 1-7
ENVIRONMENTAL BOM 1011 hi AND SUPPORT LABORATORT
orriCE of RESEARCH tot »IV(IOPMENI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACENC?
IP* MIHOB 425 VALIDATION STUM - 8/N (1)
IftRESSIOH EQUATIONS FOR ACCURACt AN* PRECISION FOR COMPOUND 2} - 2)
MATE! TIPE 4.4 -»»i
APPLICABLE CONC. lANCf 114.0 - 750.0)
IST1LU* WATER
SIN(LE-A*AL*SI PRECISION SR 0.261 - 1.17
0»f'AL'. P8(iiil09> S 0.191 - 1.04
ACCURACY I 0.70C - 0.5*
TAP «IATtR
SIMCLE-ANAITSI PAEllSION S* O.J5« 0.)(
OVERALL PRECISION f O.JlI - 0.14
ICCURACt I O.SU - 0.21
SURI1CE WATER
S1NCLC-ANALVST PRECISION SI « -J.21I - 0.44
OKERALL PRECISION 1 » O.J»I - 1.0*
ACCURACY I 0.47C * 0.10
INDUSTRIAL EFflUENT
SINGLE-ANALTST PRECISION SI 0.191 « O.S7
OVERALL PRECISION S - 0.4*1 - 0.47
ACCURACT I * 0.47C 0.05
1 » HEAD IECOKCRT
C TRUE VALUE 101 THE CONCENTRATION
PRINTS
-------
TABLE 1-8
ENVIfcONMNIAL HONIIOBING AhO SUPPOBi l»K)»Alul>l
OIIICl 01 HtSOMCH AhO 01VSiOPHldl
EHViaONMENIAl. PROTECTION ASENCI
Iff BClHOO 425 VALIDATION STUH - B/S (?)
RE6AISSION tOUAMONS IDS ACCURACY Afcft PRECISION tdt COMPOUNDS 1
MATER TfPl
APPLICABLE CONC. RANCE
BISTILLE* UA1IR
SINtLE-ANAltSt PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
IAP HATER
SINtlE -ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCJBACI
SURFACE WATER
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISIOII
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
INDUSTRIAL EflLUrNT
SINCLE-ANALf SI PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
BENIOIC.N.DPEAUEnE
«7.4 - 292
SI ' 0.291
S * 0.511
SR 0.431
> * 0.5*1
i o./cc
SR 0.4c2
S 0.641
I 0.6SC
SR 0.351
S C.68I
I 0.60C
.0)
2.40
- 0.44
- 1.02
- 0.85
- 1.79
0.39
- 0.53
- 2.98
- 0.02
- 0.12
- 1.71
BINIOUXLUOBAN'HfNE
(7
SR
S
SB
S
I
SR
S
I
SR
S
I
.2 - 4*8
0.191
0.351
0.20>
0.261
- U.65C
- 0.391
0.551
0.63C
« O.J7«
0.6*1
0.5U
.0)
1.03
< 0.40
- 0.17
« 0.39
- L.t.4
« 0.69
0.48
- 0.44
« 0.89
0.22
0.56
BIN/U bUHL PMTHALATE 8 1 S « 2-CHlOROi IN'JI DUE THAN
<7.
Si
S
SB
£ *
*
SR
S
« '
SR
S '
I <
2 - 5*8
' 0.18«
U.5SI
' 0.171
U.52I
L.61C
* 0.511
0.611
b.52C
0.511
U.S7I
L.62C
.0
c.v*
0.92
« 2.17
« 1.34
- 0.26
- 0.33
0.29
- C.65
- 0.39
0.75
< 0.21
(11
SR
S
SI
S »
I *
SR
S
I
SR
S »
I
.0 - 64t
0.16<
0.261
0.151
0.261
1.05C -
0.321
0.331 «
0.95C -
' 0.231
C.JOl
1.01C »
.0)
* 5.3*
2.01
2. (5
2.75
4.58
- 0.34
1.28
2.98
2.70
1.76
0.12
1 HfAN RECOV RY
C » TBUE VALUl f*R 1NE CONCENTRATION
-------
TABLE 1-9
Itl flChMOblhG «NO SUFPOMT I MtU* » I U» 1
OMICE 01 BtU««CN mo 01 VI lot-nidi
ENVIRON> AND PRECISION (OB COHPOUNOS S
WATER TfPf
APPLICABLE CONC. RANtE
MtlULER WATER
SINCLE-ANAITST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACI
TAP UATEB
SINGLE-ANAIIST PRECIS. ON
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACT
SMRtACE HATER
SINttE-AUAlfST PRECISION
OVERAll PRECISION
AC CUR At*
INRUSTIIAL EMIUENT
SINSLE-ANALTST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACT
BIS<2-CNLOROf SOPROPUIEIH B 1 $< 2-( IHTLHE III 1PM1HALA 1 CHRtSESE
(1
SR
S
1
SR
S
I
S*
s
I
SR
S
I
4.0 - 508
0.241
- 0.251
« 1.03C -
» 0.151
» 0.2(1
» 0.91C -
* 0.331
» 0.3C.1 «
0.85C «
« 0.121
0.211
0.95C
.01
0.28
1.04
2.31
1.23
0.7C
1.93
- 1.59
1.21
0.17
« 0.88
0.09
0.13
(7
SR
S
1
SR
S
I
Sfl
s
1
SR
S
1
.2 - 548
* 0.2(1
0.361
O.S4C
0.27J
0.481
> 0.631
0.391
' 0.491
* O.jtC
' 0.321
0.641
0.52C
.0)
0.73
< 0.67
- 1.18
0.50
0.44
- 2.33
- 0.45
- 0.17
- 1.81
« 0.69
0.13
- 0.94
(5
SR
s
i
SR
S
1
SR
S
1
SR
S
I
.4 - 411
0.281
u.:s»
- 0.93C
0.171
* 0.2SS
0.80C
' 0.351
' 0.441
* U.62C
0.331
> U.52I
0.66C
.01
« 0.13
- 0.09
- 1.00
O.hO
0.62
- 0.55
- 0.14
- C.21
0.16
0.28
0.14
0.27
K-BMC
(7.2
SR
S
1
SR *
S
» '
SR =
S =
SR
S «
* *
- 547
0.341
0.931
0.29C
O.?01
0.911
0.33C
0.62X
0.90X
0 33C
> 0.321
0.7(1
0.42C
.01
0.86
- 0. 7
- 1.09
0.75
- C.14
- 0.75
-2.52
- 0.67
- 0 91
« 0.95
- 0.35
0.23
RECOVER!
C * TRUE VALUE fOR THE CONCENTRATION
-------
TABLE 1-10
ENVIRONMENTAL MONIiOKlNG AND SUCPOR1
OMJCl Of USEARCN ANt »l V( LOP1C k 1
ENVIKONKCMIAL fDOUCIION AbEN(f
EPA HETHOC 625 VALIDATION STUOf - U /t. I?)
RECRiSSION EBUATIONS 'Ok ACCURACY AMD PRECISION fOR COHPOUhDS 9
MATCR TIPl
APPLICABLE CONC. RANtE
MULLED HATER
SINGLE-ANALfST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURAC*
IAP HATE*
S.INGLC-ANALISI PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURAO
SURFACE HATER
SINGLE-ANAlfST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
11CURACT
INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
SINGLE ANAK4T PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCUCtCT
tl-N-OCIUPNINALATE
17.2 - 5*8
S* » 0.211
S 0.371
1 * 0.76C
SR 0.261
S « 0.531
I > 0.55C
SR * 0.451
S 0.571
I 0.51C
SR 0.321
S > 0.751
1 * 0.*9C
.0)
1.19
1.19
- 0.79
0.52
0.10
- 2.26
- 0.59
- 0.26
- 1.69
0.65
0.09
- 1.30
DIELDR1N
<7
SR
S
1
SR
S
1
SR
S
I
st
S
1
.2 - 5*8
> 0.201
0.261
* 0.82C
0.201
t.291
0.71C
0.261
0.321
0.69C
- 0.261
« 0.331
* 0.67C
.C)
- 0.16
- 0.07
- 0.16
- 0.46
- 0.8*
« 0.47
- c.aa
- 0.92
0.8*
- 0.18
- 0.23
1.29
BIME |H»l PHTHALA1E
(*
SR
S
I
SR
S
«
SR
i
I
SR
S
1
.5 - 3*3
* 0.541
* 1.U51
- i,.20C
0.271
* l.lill
' J.3CC
C.751
1.071
0.29C
« C.701
* 0.891
0.35C
.01
0.19
- 0.92
« 1.03
0.08
- 0.26
- 0.13
- O.V8
- 0.68
0.50
- 0.35
- 0,39
- 0.63
ENDRIN ALDEHYDE
C2i
1«
S *
I *
SR
S
1 *
SR
S «
I
SR
S -
" "
.0 - 658
0.181
0.731 -
0.76C -
C.301
0.651
0.59C -
« 0.151
0.661 -
0.60C «
' 0.461
0.7*1 «
0.57C -
0)
« 3.91
0.62
3.86
- 0.02
0.32
4.02
2.12
1.32
0.78
- 2.89
0.92
1.58
MEAN RECOVIRr
TRUE VALUE fOR THE CONCENTRATION
-------
TABLE 1-11
CNVJkOtiH£NlAL KOI. 11 OK I KG »M> SUfPOI.1 LAbORAKikl
OFFICE or BESMDCH AND OEvfLOfun
ENVIRONMENTAL PSOTECIIOK
EPA METHOD *25 VALIDATION SIUDI - UlH (2)
RfGRESSION E6UATIONS JOB ACCURAO AND PRECISION (OK COMPOUNDS 13
«AT£R UPE
APPLICABLE CONC. RANGE
DISTILLED yATEB
SIN6LE-ANALVST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACI
TAP WATER
SIN6LE-ANAL* ST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACI
SURFACE WATER
SINGLE-ANALVST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACI
INDUSIR1AL EFFLUENT
SINGLE-ANALTST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
ILUORENE
5.4 - (11
SR « 0.121
S 0.131
1 - 0.9CC
SR * 0.1CI
S « 0.131
i > o.aac
SR » 0.2SK
S 0.21*
t * o.m
SR » O.Uf
S = 0.251
X * 0.771
HEPTACHLOR
.01
* 0.?A
« 0.6T1
- o.co
« 0.51
0.54
0.30
- 0.47
- 0.20
0.30
« 1.20
0.»2
t 1 .26
17
SR
S
»
SR
S
>
s«
S
I
SR
S
I
.2 - 548
* 0.33X
° 0.2&I
- 0.92C
' 0.161
> 0.261
c c.aec
> o.m
= 0.351
> 0.8SC
> Ci.«2>
' 0.42<
» 0.69C
(POIIAE
.0)
- 0.46
« 0.64
- 1.87
» r.5s
- 0.15
- 1.80
- 0.08
- a. is
- C.69
« 0.15
» 0.05
- 1.03
HEUACHLCoOtUTAOIENE
19
SO
S
1
SR
S
I
SR
S
>
SR
S
>
.r - «as
- 0.191
* U.261
* &.7U
= 0. 16>
- C.16I
= C.63C
> 0.1V»
= U.21«
= 0.6iC
= 0.231
' 0.28>
« 0.59C
.0)
« 0.92
« 0.49
- 1.G1
0.85
1.22
- 0.7*
« 0.09
» 0.87
- 0.10
> 0.86
« 1.06
» 0.11
ME«ACMLORO(TMANE
(6.3
SR *
S *
1 *
SR *
S -
> »
SR
S -
\ «
SR '
S «
> *
* 480
0.171
0.179
0.73C
0.21B
0.2U
0.68C
0.29«
0.261
0.69C
.01
« 0.67
« 0.80
- 0.83
« 0.60
0.56
- 0.23
- 0.54
0.44
- 0.70
C.20I 4 0.39
0.231
0.6* C
« 1.02
- 0.2*
I = MEAN RECOVEWT
C = TRUE VALUE FOR THE CONCENTRATION
-------
TABLE 1-12
f NVlkChPENKL KOMIOHING AfcD SUPPORT I AI.-OR A Ion I
OlMCt 01 «ESEARCH AND ftivELOFMENI
L PROTECTION AGlNfY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION SlUDf - B/N (?)
REGRESSION EOUAT10NS IOR ACCURACY AND PRECISION 10* COMPOUNDS 17
HATE* TYPE
APPLICABLE CONC. RANGE
DISTILLER HATER
SINtlf -ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
TAP HATER
SINGLE-. NALtST PRECISION
OVERALI "RECISION
ACCURAC'*
INOENO<1.2
17
SR
S
I
SR
S
I
.4 - 292
0.291
> 0.501
» 0.7CC
' G.24I
* 0.50
0.58C
I3-CI»)PYRENE N-NITROSODl-N-PSOP»LA«lNi N i TPOfU NJ E NE
.0)
« 1.4*
0.4*
- 3.10
» 0.18
« 0.57
- 2.55
(18.
SR *
S
I *
SR «
S «
1
0 - 527.
0.271 «
0.441
1.12C -
0.301 «
0.441 *
1.09C -
0)
0.68
0.47
6.22
3.39
2.69
a. 18
(9
SR
S
I
SR
S
1
.0 - 68i
t.!V«
« J.l7>
= 1.39C
* C.14«
* 0.261
* 1.01C
.0)
« C.92
« C.21
- 1.05
« C.92
0.81
- 3.19
PHENANTMCENE
(V
SR
S
»
SR
S
<
.0 - 685
* 0.121
0.151
- 0.87C
0.091
* 0.101
- 0.78C
.C)
* 0.57
0.25
- 0.04
- 0.04
« 0.23
« 0.7J
SURMCf HATER
SINGLE-ANALIST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
INDUSTRIAL EMIUENT
JIN&LE-ANALT5T PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
SR * 0.531 - 0.20
S - 0.571 * 0.21
I « 0.49C - 1.73
SR ' 0.361 « ti.«9
S 0.6CI O.C8
I 0.54C - 1.91
SR C..43I - 3.07
S » 0.551 - 3.33
I 1.03C - 3.35
SR * 0.361 « 1.77
S - 0.*/« 1.52
I * 0.88C * 0.6*
SR - C.34I - t.25
S > 0.}4I 0.84
I * 0.97C - 1.13
SR - 0.1BI 1.58
s = o.m - c.11
I - 1.01C - 2.70
ii * 0.161 - 0.24
S * 0.191 - 0.35
I * 0.75C « 1.40
SR * 0.121 « 0.9*
S * 0.29i - 0.06
I * C.61C « 1.08
I KCAN RECOVERY
C TRUE VALUE fOR THE CONCENTRATION
-------
TABLE 1-13
(NVlfcOhnENlAL HOhlTOUING AND SUPPOkl
OIMCE Of RESEAKCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENUlROKMtNTfL PROTEC1ION AGENCT
Eft METHOD £25 VALIDATION SIUDT - B/N C>
REGRESSION EQUATIONS FOR ACCURACY AND PBEC1SION FOR COMFOUhDS 21
WATER TYPE
APPLICABLE CONC. RANGE
DISTILLED HATER
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
TAP WATER
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
SURFACE HATER
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
SINGLE-AftALVST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
PYRENE
(4.5 - 343
SR 0.161
S = 0.151
1 * 0.84C
SR * 0.101
S * 0.131
1 * 0.76C
SR ' 0.161
S < 0.181
I * 0.73C
SR 0.171
S ' 0.361
.0)
* 0.06
0.31
- 0.16
« 0.22
« 0.50
- O.C6
- 0.17
« 0.26
« 0.39
« 0.16
« 0.51
1.
15
Si
S
»
SR
S
I
SR
S
I
SR
S
2-DICHLOfcObENZENE
.4 - 411
0.201
0.241
* 0.60C
0.171
- 0.251
« 0.78C
* 0.281
- 0.251
' 0.75C
0.251
« 0.351
.C)
0.47
« 0.39
0.28
« 1.00
« 0.93
0.54
- 0.36
1.46
1.18
- 0.05
» 0.26
1.2,
(13,
SR '
S »
I <
SR
S '
I *
SR
S '
1 *
SR
S «
,4-ISJCHLOROBlNZINE
.0 - 622.
= 0.1S1 «
u.21i «
0.94C -
' 0.161 «
0.231
O.bOC -
0)
0.85
O.J9
0.79
0.11
0.67
0.04
" 0.191 « 0.27
0.201 «
0.78C «
1.60
0.44
« 0.131 * 1.04
0.241 «
0.48
1.4-
(11.
SR *
S *
1 *
SR
S *
I >
SR '
S *
I *
SR
S «
DICHLOR08EN2ENE
0 - 646.
0.241
0.291
0.73C -
0.181 <
0.321 -
0.75C -
0.301
0.311 -
0.68C -
0)
0.2;
0.36
1.47
1.03
0.00
1.90
1.14
0.19
1.37
* 0.221 > 0.21
0.301
0.15
1 ' MEAN RECOVERY
C TRUE VALUE FOR THE CONCENTRATION
-------
TABLE 1-14
ENVIRONMENTAL ftOI.MORING AND SUPPORT LAHORAIORY
OIMCE OF EESCARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENO
[PA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (?)
REGRESSION EQUATIONS (OS ACCURACY AND PRECISION fOfc COMPOUNDS 25
HATE* UPC
APPLICABLE CONC. RANCE
1STILIED W.m*
SIN6LE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
TAP VATER
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCUBACI
2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE
14. S - 342.0)
SR - O.C7I « 0.52
S 0.1)1 0.14
I « O.S9C « 0.01
SR 0.101 0.12
S ' 0.1*1 0.49
i o.asc o.ei
2,-i-
111.
SR -
S
I
SR
S «
I '
D1NI1ROTOLUENI
0 - 646.
0.121 «
0.211
0.92C -
C.ier
0.2?> «
O.B3C -
01
1.06
1.50
4.81
O.B9
2.C8
2.i?
«-UROHOPHEN>L
(7
SR
S
I
SR
S
X
.2 - 5<.J.C>
« C.11I «
b.161 C
- O.VH - 1
- 0.1SI «
' 0.171 C
- a.asc - i
PHENTL ETME
0.66
.66
.34
C.21
.88
.21
*.
(7
SR
S
I
SR
S
>
4 -DDT
.0 - 5*8
0.421
- 0.651
' 0.79C
' 0.511
* 0.68X
* C.66C
.0)
0
- 0.
- J.
- 0
- 0.
- 2.
.19
SB
28
.64
S4
71
SURFACE HATER
SINCLC-ANALfST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACI
INDUSTRIAL EMLUCNT
SINGLE-ANALYST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
SR » 0.241 « 0.28
S 0.241 « 0.42
I * 0.79C < 0.36
SR C.15I 0.24
S 0.231 - 0.05
I 0.82C * 0.63
SR * 0.211 * 0.46
S 0.311 « 1.03
1 > 0.83C - 2.91
SR > 0.111 « 2.28
S « 0.111 « 2.41
I * 0.93C - 0.64
SR - 0.161 « 0.22
S « 0.141 < '.26
I * U.33C - 0.58
SR 0.211 « 0.50
S > Q.JCl « b.02
I 0.72C - C.19
SR > 0.601 - 1.16
S * 0.641 - 0.01
I * 0.56C - 2.13
SR - 0.461 - 0.30
S * 0.711 - 0.42
I < 0.53C - 2.12
BEAN RECOVERY
TRUE VALUi FOR TNE CONCENTRATION
PRINT*
-------
c»
TABLE 1-15
IHVIICDHINMl HONIIOIINC *>.» SUPPOC1 l»PO»»TO»»
OIMCI Of RtSE>RCH *N» ICVELOF'ENI
CNVIHON1EMIHL PROTfCIICN ICEMfT
EP< MflHOI 62! «*IIO*1ION S1U»t - tCIOS
KCRESSION EQUXIOHS 101 *CCUR«(f (NO PDCCISION 10* COnPOUNAS 1
WATER TIPE
APPLICABLE CCNC. IANCE
ISTILLED WATER
SINGLE-ANAL FSI PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCUIACI
TAP HATER
S1N6LE-ANALTST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCUJACf
SURFACE WATER
SINGLE-ANALIST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
INOUSTtlAL EMLUENT
SINCLE-ANALfSI PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCMRACT
PENTACHLOROPHENCL
11)
SR
S »
I
SI
s
1
SI
s *
SI
s
* *
.C - 48C.OI
Q.24I !.03
0.3CI 4.3«
C.9JC 1.99
* 0.3(1 - r.69
0.3(1 3.79
0.*2C 3.6*
« C.191 « 0.33
C.JCl 2.19
C.18« « 1.C9
0.261 4.11
0.73C « 3.3(
PHENOL
«
SI
S
1
sr
s
i
SR
S
SI
S
I
.0 - 447
".261
0.551
o.4n
0.241
' 0.4)11
* C-.44C
<).23i
' 0.211
C.271
C.3SI
C.44C
.?
C.7)
0.58
« 1.26
« 1.50
0.64
1.14
P. 47
« 0.63
- 0.19
- O.C3
1.37
2-CHLOROPHf NOL
(7
SR
S
I
SR
S
1
SR
S
£R
S
1
.C - 11)
c.ie«
> 0.2BI
- 0.7*C
0.2)1
- t.32i
0.75C
' 0.171
0.241
0.141
* J.21«
0.72C
.01
1.46
0.97
0.29
« 0.77
0.27
« 0.16
« 0.16
- C.16
- 0.3J
» C.48
C.63
2-HE
IHfL-4
,6-BINITIOPMENO*
72.0 - 1067. T>
SR *
S «
I >
SR
S »
I
SR
S
C.2ZI
G.3CI
1.C5C
0.261
0.361
C.99C
C.24I
U.4CX
SR C.23L
s >
I >
0.411
1.C1C
« 9. (6
«11.31
-33.M
9.3»
«11.44
-28.14
- 2.7J
6.33
. - S.»9
. ).52
-14.2?
I > »EAN IECOVIIT
C * TRUE V*LUE (01 THE CONCENII*TION
Revised regression equations and estimates of accuracy and precision are Qiven in Tables 14 and 15.
-------
LAPORATORI
TABLE 1-16
EIVIICKKCNMI rOHMOIIVC Akp
OrilCE OF REJE» - ACIRS
REtRESSION ECUAT10KS FOR AttURAtf AN» PRECISION FOR COPPOUNRS 5
WATER TTPE
APPLICABLE C01C. IANCE
»ISTILLE» WATER
SINGIE-ANALTST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACT
TAP WATER
SINGLE-ANALTSI PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACT
SURFACE WATER
SINGLE-ANAITST PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACT
INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACT
2-NMROFMENOL
(14
SR
S
I >
SR
S '
« '
SR
S »
1 *
S
I
.0 - 520.
C.16I
0.271
I.CTC -
C.19I
0.241 »
C.95C -
« 0.171 «
0.261
0.97C -
0.331
0.9CC »
01
1.94
2.60
1,15
1.93
2.32
0.4«
0.24
2.27
0.7C
1.66
0.78
2,
I*
j>
S
I
SR
S
I
s»
s
I
»
I
4-IICHLOROPHENOL
.C - 600
f.15«
> 0.211
c.m
7.191
0.241
* U.t2C
0.141
' C.22I
O.B9C
' C.23I
c.eu
.0)
1.25
1.2B
0.13
» 0.67
« 1.G"
C.57
0.33
O.E2
O.C1
0.46
0.61
2.
(9
SR
S
I
SR
s
i
SR
S
I
S
I
4-RINEIKTLPHENOL
.0 - 667.
C.16I
« C.22I
0.71C «
0.241
U.3H
« 0.58C
' 0.3UI
' 0.411 -
* L.62C «
0.591 -
0.49C
01
1.21
1.31
4.41
C.71
1.71
1.13
- 0.51
0.41
2.10
0.15
1.91
2,4-RINITROPHENOl *
C90.
SR -
S -
X -
SR *
S «
I «
SR *
S «
1
S
I
0 - 1333. C/l
0.38X + 2.39
0.42X + 26.26
1.55C - 100.90
P. 331 6.19
0.4«I «M.Oi
1.48C -9*. 47
0.21* « 1.15
0.3CI <26.»2
1.5CC -t5.il>
o.jo *?;.os
I.24C -«' .41
I MEAN RECOVEM
C ' TRUE VALUE FOR THE (OMCEHTRAT I Of
* Revised regression equations and estimates of accuracy and precision are given in Tables 14 and IS.
-------
TABLE 1-17
lNVIIGM-[lll> POUI10RIM6 >ND SUrPOII IA?0*»1U».'
OMICl Of RtSMRlH I.Ht t>t»f lOP-iN!
tlVIROiriNIAL PROTtCllON HMCI
IP» »f THO» 62' V»LI*MION <1U»» - «CIDS
RffRESSION EIUITIOMJ 101 ACCURACY '* PRCC1SION ro* COKPOUNtt 9
VAIER If >!
APPLICABLE CONC. RANtE
»ISIILIE» WA1ER
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
1AP UA1ER
S1M&LE-ANALYS1 PRECISION
ACCURACY
SURfACE UAH*
SINCLE-ANALVSI PRECISION
OVERALL PRiCISION
ACCURACY
INBUSIR1AL EMLUENI
SIN6LE-ANALYS1 PRECISION
OVERALL PRECISION
ACCURACY
2.4
(11
S
1 »
SR
1
SR
S «
1
SR
S
I
,6-IR|CNLORO»HINCl
.9 - 440
0.221
0.91C -
0.171
0.88C
C.16I
C.28I
0.88C -
O.C8I
0.2!I
C.82C
.01
1.
0.
» 2
1.
rj
0.
0.
3
1.
''
'
81
If
.35
26
.41
92
34
.09
35
36
4-CHlORO-!-M1mi»>MINOL 4-M1 1 RCPMINOl
«9
S
1
SB
1
SR
S
1
SR
S
I
.0
£
c
IT
' 0
0
' 0
c
0
- 667
,i<>*
.!4C
C.18>
.77C
C.1BI
.2«I
.an
F.14I
.271
.76C
.0)
« 1.31
0.35
< 1.49
(,.67
C.30
1.28
- 0.03
« 1.31
1 .46
0.95
121.
S »
1
SR
1
$
S
1
6 - BOO.
(j.611 -
C.28I «
u.StC -
' O.M1
0.431 *
0.38C
SR 0.431
S
I '
O.?«s »
C.52C
P»
1.22
2.16
0.33
?.90
0.74
2.96
5,09
7.CJ
I MEAN RfCOVCRT
C IRUI VALUE 'Of 1HE CONCEN1RATION
»BRKP1
PRIttlt
-------
TABLE 2-1.
ACCURACY AND PRECISION ESTIMATES (COMPUTED FROM TH£ REGRESSION
EQUATIONS) FOR A PRF.PARED CONCENTRATION OF 100 ug/L - B/N
COMPOUNDS
I iLLfcU WATER
TAP WATER
bURFALt WAltH
1NO. EFFLUENT
K>
COMPOUND
ACENAPHTHENE
ACENAPHTHYLENE
ALORIN
ANTHRACENE
B-BHC
BENZOlA)ANTHRACENE
BENZOtA)PYRENE
BENZO(B)FLIIORANlHENt
81S(2-CHLCROETHYL)ETHt«
Dl-N-BUTYLPHTHULATE
D1BENZOIA,H)ANTHRACtNE
DIETHYL PbTHALATE
ENOOSULFAN 3ULFATE
FLUORANIHENE
HEPTACHI OR
HEXACHLORCBENZtNE
1SOPHORONE
NAPMTMAL ENE
PCB-I260
I ,3 -GICHLCHObtlN/tNE
2.6-DINIThOTCHUfcNt
3,3'-OICHLOROBfcNZIDINt
4 CHLOROP^ENYL PMLNYL ETHtR
4.4--ODD
4.4-DDE
B£NZO(G.H.IJPERVLENE
BENZO(K)FLUORANTHENE
BENZYL BUTYL PMTHAlAlL
BIS(2-CHLCROETHOXY(METnANt
BIS(2-CMLOHO!SOPROPYL)ETHtK
BlS(2-E IHYLHEXVL IPhllMALArt
CHRVSENE
D BHC
XREC 1
96
90
80
81
86
87
90
91
84
60
93
44
39
82
64
75
1 13
78
70
65
102
1 10
92
56
69
97
85
t>4
107
101
83
92
28
1
IRSD
20
25
44
26
26
26
34
30
35
40
59
52
60
27
50
42
33
29
46
41
19
50
29
64
36
51
35
54
28
26
37
33
92
IRSD
-SA
15
23
29
2 1
19
16
23
22
34
15
o9
31
18
21
23
16
28
20
40
26
15
35
19
28
24
31
20
19
17
24
27
28
37
%REC 1
95
87
67
62
61
61
78
68
64
59
ao
43
63
77
7 1
72
1 12
78
51
88
99
98
95
54
57
68
64
61
100
91
61
79
34
1
IRSD
17
23
46
19
21
29
40
47
29
34
55
65
65
22
44
30
52
24
60
42
21
'50
25
54
38
53
37
54
29
29
49
26
91
IRSD
-SA
10
16
27
15
16
25
33
35
27
24
38
34
22
13
36
25
30
18
45
25
18
27
15
32
36
42
20
21
18
16
26
18
?2
%REC :
91
97
56
82
80
7!
68
65
88
62
63
52
61
72
71
70
106
79
39
91
102
101
98
49
47
62
63
51
92
66
49
62
32
1
;RSO
77
22
50
24
23
35
4C
43
33
35
50
51
63
28
48
32
36
27
62
34
28
61
24
65
3"'
6J
56
62
34
31
49
44
88
i-RSD
-SA
20
14
33
IB
14
30
40
34
25
26
37
41
21
22
36
22
21
23
60
32
21
54
15
42
20
46
40
50
32
31
36
35
54
XREC 1
85
88
53
75
83
62
56
56
9C
58
60
57
60
70
67
58
109
72
33
79
103
1 13
81
46
47
58
55
62
101
95
5 1
66
42
1
tRSD
18
24
59
29
25
52
65
62
35
47
85
45
69
36
49
37
58
32
56
42
32
43
33
56
43
08
64
56
32
21
64
52
77
tfiSD
-SA
15
13
36
1 7
1 T
40
4 1
40
24
24
44
33
40
20
38
1 7
39
20
49
34
25
30
19
44
40
J5
29
50
26
1 3
33
33
J4
-------
TABLE 2-1. (Continued)
U! bf II L El) WA ftK
TAP MATER
SUPFACE WATER
IND. EFFLUENT
COMPOUND
DI-N-OCTVLPH.HALATE
OIELORIN
DIMETHYL PHTHALATE
ENDP1N ALDEHVOE
FLUGRENE
HEPTftCHLOR EPOXIDE
HEX4LHLOROBUTAOIENE
MEXBLHLOBCETHANE
INDENOt!,2.3-C DlPYKENt
N-NIT^OSOri-N-pROPYLAMlNt
NITRUBcNZENE
FHENANTHRENE
PVRENE
1.^-DILHLLKObtNZENE
' .2.4-TRICHLOftOBENZtNE
1,4-D!CHLOROQfcNZENE
^-LHLORONAPHTHAL ENE
2 . 4-DINITtEN£
4-BRGMOHHtNYL PHENYl tllltH
4.4 DOT
%RSD
%REC %RSO -SA
/5
82
21
72
90
9U
70
72
75
106
106
«7
84
80
93
72
89
87
90
76
3a
26
101
72
14
29
^'7
18
51
44
27
15
15
24
2 1
30
1 3
23
1 7
b4
2J
20
55
23
1 2
32
*' P
IB
31
28
20
13
Ifa
21
16
24
8
13
14
42
»RSO
%REC XRSO -SA
53
71
30
55
33
86
62
68
55
101
98
79
/n
79
80
73
85
BO
84
63
53
28
100
66
14
36
18
22
5 1
47
29
10
14
26
24
32
15
30
18
67
27
19
27
38
1 1
1 7
17
21
26
33
15
9
10
18
16
18
10
19
15
50
XRSD
%REC XRSO -S«
49
70
30
61
78
84
62
68
47
ion
96
76
73
76
78
67
79
80
82
64
56
31
104
64
27
35
22
27
^^
52
35
19
18
27
22
31
25
32
16
64
44
25
72
18
22
24
19
28
53
40
32
16
16
28
'9
28
24
22
16
58
XRSD
%REC XHSD -SA
48
68
34
55
73
68
59
69
52
89
98
82
7 1
74
8 1
69
83
92
72
5 1
75
33
83
76
26
42
30
24
60
49
34
29
37
35
25
30
23
1 4
:*j
70
33
26
69
41
16
42
24
2 1
37
38
20
13
1 7
25
14
22
15
13
22
45
-------
TABLE 2-2. ACCURACY AND PRECISION ESTIMATES (COMPUTED FROM THE REGRESSION
EQUATIONS) FOR A PREPARED CONCENTRATION OF 100 Mg/L - ACID
COMPOUNDS
DIbTlLLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER
IND. EFFLUENT
N>
co
COMPOUND
PENTAfMLOROPHENOl.
FHENOI.
2-CHL JROPl-iENOL
2-METHVL-4,6-DlNlTROPHENOL
2-Nr ROPHENOL
2,4-JICMLCROPHENOL
2 . 4-DIMETt-.VLPHENOL
2,4-DINITRGPHENOL
2,4.6-TRICHLGwOPrtENOL
4-Ov-CRO-j-METHYLPHENOl
4-NlfROPHENOL
XREC 1
95
44
7B
7)
IO6
B7
75
54
91
64
bl)
1
IRbD
35
3ti
1!9
46
29
22
24
91
24
3 1
49
IHSD
-SA
27
2H
20
36
IB
16
18
42
IB
24
42
XREC 1
B6
45
75
71
95
B3
59
50
89
78
54
1
IRSD
42
44
32
52
26
25
41
74
21
29
4B
IN SO
-SA
37
27
24
39
2 1
20
25
45
;o
20
33
*REC 1
SB
4B
75
87
96
89
64
71
88
81
59
1
I.RSD
32
29
24
47
28
23
40
68
29
30
48
IRSD
-SA
19
24
1 7
21
1 7
14
29
30
16
18
30
*KEC 1
76
45
73
87
91
82
5 1
70
83
77
59
1
IRSD
32
35
22
45
35
-'4
59
68
25
29
48
IRSD
-SA
19
27
14
16
16
1 7
29
34
1 2
16
3B
-------
The mean recovery statistics (at 100 pg/L) for the acid compounds
range from 447, for phenol to 106% for 2-nitrophenol with an aver-
age value of 74%. These extremes are for the distilled water
matrix. One-half of the mean recoveries for the acid compounds
are between 59% and 87%, with one-fourth cf the mean recoveries
above and belcw these values. Recoveries for 2-nitrophenol are
very good for all water matrices with mean recoveries ranging
from 91% to 106%. Mean recoveries for phenol and 4-nitrophenol
are consistently low (probably due to loss of these compounds
into the B/N fraction) with recoveries ranging from 44% to 48%
and 54% to 60%, respectively. The phthalates, particularly
dimethyl and diethyl phthalate, may have hydrolyzed when the
water samples were made basic for the B/N extraction, thus con-
tributing to low recovery. In general, one would expect the
lower molecular weight phthalate esters to hydrolyze more rapidly
than the higher molecular weight esters. The data in Table 2-1
tend to show this trend. The high overall recoveries for iso-
phorone could be partially due to the poor chroma to graphy of this
compound on the packed GC column, contributing to nonlinear
response in the mass spectrometer.
The overall standard deviation of the analytical results is an
indication of the precision associated with the measurement gen-
erated by a group of laboratories. The percent relative standard
deviation (RSD) at. 100 ug/L for the B/N compounds range from 107.
for phenanthrene in the tap water matrix to 1047. for dimethyl
phthalate in the surface water matrix with a median value of 357..
Precision for dimethyl phthalate is poor for all water matrices
with RSDs ranging from 887. to 104%. One-half of the RSDs for the
B/N compounds are between 267. and 527.. In 957. of the cases, the
RSDs are less than 767..
24
-------
The RSDs (at 100 ug/L) for the acid compounds range from 2170 for
2,4,6-trichlorophcnol in the tap water matrix to 917. for 2,4-
dinitrophenol in the distilled water matrix with a median RSD of
32%. Precision for 2,4-dinitrophenol is poor for all water
matrices with RSDs ranging from 68% to 91%. One-half of the
RSDs for the acid compounds are between 27% and 47%. In 95% of
the cases the RSDs are less than 73%.
The percent relative standarc deviation for a single analyst
(RSD-SA) indicates the precision associated with a single labora-
tory. The RSD-SA for B/N samples at 100 yg/L ranges from 8% for
2-chloronaphthalene in the distilled water matrix to 727, for
dimethyl phthalate in the surface water matrix, with a median
RSD-SA of 24%. With the exception of the tap water matrix,
single-analyst precision for dimethyl phthalate is poor with
RSD-SAs ranging from 55% to 72%. One-half of the RSD-SAs for
the B/N compounds at 100 Mg/L are between 18% and 34%. In 95%
of the cases, the RSD-SAs are less than 51%.
The RSD-SAs (at 100 ug/L) for the acid compounds range from 12%
for 2,4,6-trichlorophenol in. the industrial effluent matrix to
45% for 2,4-dinitrophenol in the tap water matrix with a median
RSD-SA of 21%. One-half of the RSD-SAs for the acid compounds
are between 17% and 30%. In 95% of the cases, the RSD-SAs are
less than 43%.
The effect of water type was different for the various B/N and
acid compounds. For most compounds, the water matrix does not
have a great effect on either the accuracy or precision. Over
all, recoveries for the B/N compounds averaged 81% in distilled
vrater, 747. in tap water, 717. in surface water, and 697. in the
industrial effluent matrix. Recoveries for the acid compounds
averaged 777. in distilled water, 717. in tap water, 777. in
surface water, and 727. in the industrial effluent. Precision
25
-------
(RSD and RSD-SA) for the B/N compounds tended to be worse for
the surface water and industrial effluent (median RSD = 387. and
median RSD-SA = 28%) than the distilled and tap water (median
RSD = 32% and median RSD-SA = 22%). Precision for the acid
compounds tended to be worse for the tap water (median RSD = 41%
and median RSD-SA = 25%) than for the distilled water, surface
water and industrial effluent (median RSD = 32% and median
RSD-SA = 19%).
In order to examine the relationship between surrogate and spike
recoveries, surrogate recoveries were correlated with the recov-
eries for each priority pollutant in the appropri. te fraction.
Potential outliers were not discarded from the recovery data.
Approximately 350 data pairs were used to calculate each of the
coefficients.
The analysis of the surrogate recovery data from the interlabora-
tory study do not indicate strong relationships between the
recoveries of the surrogates and the recoveries of the compounds
of interest. A surrogate was identified for only three B/N
compounds (benzo(a)pyrene, dibenzo(a,h) anthracene, and hexa-
chlorobenzene) and one acid compound (2,4-dimethyl phenol) which
could explain greater than 50% of the variation in the recoveries
of the compounds. These results do not imply that surrogate/
compound relationships do not exist. The variation of the test
methods (coefficienc of variations generally greater than 20%)
make it difficult to observe surrogate relationships within a
"narrow" range of recoveries.
For B/N compounds eluting up to 20.1 minutes (hexachlorobenzene),
2-fiuorobiphenyl and 1-fluoronaphthalene tend to have the highest
correlation coefficient. For compounds eluting after 20.1
minutes, benzo(g,h,i)perylene-13Ci2 and 4,4'-dibromooctafIuorobi-
phenyl generally have the highest correlation coefficients.
26
-------
For the acid compounds, 2,4-dimethylphenol has the highest
correlation coefficient for six of the compounds and phenol-d6
has the highest coefficient for four of the compounds.
2-Fluorophenol has positive correlation coefficients (ranging
from 0.07 to 0.38) with all of the acid compounds.
Further investigations of various statistical approaches will be
implemented and will be reported in a separate report at a later
t ime.
The major problem encountered by the participating laboratories
was poor resolution of compounds including 1,3- and 1,4-
dichlorobenzene, fluorene and 2,4-dinitrotoluene, acenaphthene
and acenaphthylene, the benzofluoranthene isomers, chrysene and
benzoanthracene, and phenanthrene and anthracene. This, along
with poor chromatography for acidic compounds, led to problems
in peak identification. Some difficulties in obtaining linear
calibration curves and consistent RF values were also encountered
for compounds such as nitrophenols and the benzidines.
27
-------
SECTION 3
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is highly recommended that the column be checked for resolu-
tion of compounds, peak geometry (tailing), and total response
of the compound. An improperly performing column can lead to
problems of misidentificaticn and poor accuracy and precision of
the reported values. Suggested compounds for checking the column
include: 1,3-dichlorobenzene (7.4 min) and 1,4-dichlorobenzene
(7.8 min) for the early eluters, acenaphthylene (17.4 min) and
acenaphthene (17.8 min.) for the middle eluters; and chrysene
(31.5 min) and di-n-octylphthalate (32.5 min) for the late
eluting compounds. For the acids, 2,4-dinitrophenol (15.9 min)
and 2-methyl-4,6-d:Lnitrophenol (16.2 min) are suggested.
Excessive tailing may be minimized by coating all contact sur-
faces with phosphoric acid or a weak organic acid.
Some laboratories reported problems with nonlinearity and poor
response with the following compounds: nitrophenols , penta-
clilorophenol, aldrin, DDT, ODD, DDE and BHC isomers. It is
recommended that the analyst have one of the standards used for
the standard curve be close in response to the sample response.
It is recommended that the retention times be checked, especially
for the highly polar compounds, by frequent use of standards.
Multiple internal st&uclards, such as deuterated naphthalene,
phenanthene, and chrysene, were recommended by several of the
participating laboratories.
28
-------
It is recommended that a pure DDT standard be used to detect
possible degradation of DDT to ODD or DDE.
It is suspected that the low molecular weight phthalate esters
may hydrolyze under basic conditions used in the extraction
procedure. It is recommended that this step be performed as
quickly as possible.
29
-------
SECTION 4
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY
The design of the interlaboratory study of Method 625 was based
on the technique described by W. J. Youden [2]. According to
this technique, samples are prepared in pairs at several levels
of concentration where the concentration of each analyte in a
sample pair is slightly different. The analyst is directed to
perform a single analysis and report one value for each analyte
in the sample.
Sample pairs for each method were prepared at low, medium and
high levels within the linear range of the mass spectrometer and
constituted three Youden pairs. However, because of the number
of analytes present, the B/N containing ampules were divided
into two groups of three pairs for a total of 12 separate B/N
ampules.
The samples were prepared as concentrates in sealed ampules ami
shipped to the participating laboratories. Each laboratory was
responsible for supplying laboratory pure water, finished drink-
ing water, a surface water, and an industrial or municipal ef-
fluent water for use in the study. The analyst was required to
add an aliquot of each concentrate to a volume of water from each
of the four water types and subsequently to analyze the spiked
water samples.
In addition to the sample ampules, an industrial effluent water
selected by Radian was furnished to each participating laboratory
for analysis. This sample was known to contain a number of the
30
-------
priority pollutants and was judged to be difficult to analyze.
The purpose of the industrial effluent sample was to evaluate
Method 625 on false positive and false negative results.
After all analyses were completed, the results wer3 subjected to
statistical analysis using EPA's IMVS computer programs to
determine the precision and accuracy of Method 625.
TEST DESIGN
The following is a summary of the test design used based on
Youden's nonreplicate technique for samples.
1. Three Youden pairs of samples were analyzed for
each analyte with the deviation from the mean of
each pair being at least 5% but not more than
207,. The three pairs were spread over a usable
and realistic range such that the lowest pair
was somewhat above the minimum detection limit
and all concentrations were within the linear
range of the method.
2. The spiking samples were supplied as liquid con-
centrates in organic solvents sealad in glass
ampules. Sufficient sample was provided to allow
withdrawal of the appropriate amount of solution
to spike one water sample from each ampule.
3. Forty-eight B/N ampules were provided to each of
the 15 laboratories. The B/N and pesticide
extractable analytes were divided into two sets
of three pairs each for the four types of water
analyzed. Twenty-four acid ampules were provided,
each containing the 11 acid compounds.
31
-------
4. The participants spiked the concentrates into
reagent water, drinking water, surface water,
and effluent waste water. Also, Radian supplied
an industrial effluent which was used solely for
the determination of false positive and false
negative results. This sample was analyzed
without addition of analyte concentrates.
5. Each of the 15 participating laboratories was
furnished with the following materials:
Four Youden pair ampules of each of three
concentration levels for the acids, B/N
group 1, and B/N group 2. (A total of 72
spiking sample ampules.)
Sufficient surrogate standard solution to
incorporate into analyses of all samples
and blanks as described in Method 625.
A 1 liter sample of an industrial effluent
to be analyzed without addition of spiking
sample.
A set of instructions detailing the method
for spiking the samples and the orJcr in
which samples were to be run.
Copies of Method 625.
A questionnaire covering difficulties
encountered with the method and suggestions
for improvement.
32
-------
Data report forms to be completed and
returned to Radian.
SELECTION OF PARTICIPATING LABORATORIES
Laboratories were invited to submit bids to participate in the
study through announcements placed ir. Commerce Business Daily,
Analytical Chemistry, and Environmental Science and Technology.
Approximately 80 responses were received. Of these respondents,
34 cost bids were obtained from which 15 laboratories were
selected. Selection was based on the experience, qualifications,
facilities, quality control plans, and cost estimates received
from the laboratories. Final selection was also dependent on
the laboratories successfully analyzing the performance evalua-
tion samples prepared by Radian.
The laboratories selected for participation are given in Table 3.
The laboratories numoers used in the reports do not reflect this
order.
PREPARATION OF YOUDEN PAIR CONCENTRATES
The Youden pair solutions for the B/Ns and acids were prepared
by accurately weighing the pure standard compounds into volu-
metric flasks and dissolving in acetone. The pure materials
were obtained from EPA's Repository for Toxic and Hazardous
Materials which was maintained by Radian at that time.
Several stock solutions were prepared for each class of compounds
Each compound was weighed only once. A portion of each stock
solution was then diluted by addition of fresh solvent. The
diluted and undiluted stock solutions were aliquoted and further
diluted to give various concentrations of the individual analytes
in each Youden pair.
33
-------
TABLE 3. FIFTEEN LABORATORIES SELECTED FOR PARTICIPATION
IN THE METHOD 625 INTERLABORATORY STUDY
Laboratory
Acurex Corporation
California Analytical Laboratories, Inc.
Envirodyne
Environmental Research Group, Inc.
Environmental Science and Engineering^ Inc.
Foremos t-McKesson
GCA Corporation
Mead CompuChem
Pedco
Rockwell International
Rocky Mountain Analytical
Spectrix
Stewart Labs
The University of Utah Research Institute
West Coast Technical Service, Inc.
34
-------
The surrogate standards and prestudy test sample solutions were
prepared by dissolving weighed standards into volumetric flasks
and diluting to volume with acetone.
When diluted to volume with test water according to instructions
by each participating laboratory, the calculated concentrations
of the various analytes in the diluted samples in yg/L aru given
in Tables 4 through 7. These values are ba^ed on the weighed
amounts of the individual analytes.
As shown in Table 5, corrections in sample concentrations were
made for 4,4'-DDT to compensate for impurities. The lot of
4,4'-DDT used for ampule preparation was determined to be 80%
pure by purity assay using gas chromatography with flame ioniza-
tion detection.
VERITY, HOMOGENEITY, AND STABILITY OF PREPARED AMPULES
For the verity study and homogeneity study, Radian analyzed
three ampules in duplicate for each of the six concentrates.
These ampules were collected early, middle, and late during the
filling and sealing operation. For the stability study, oily
one concentration of the middle Youden pair was analyzed by
Radian at both 45 and 90 days. Examination of the data indicated
a few compounds which were outride of ±10% of the true value.
At this time the Quality Assurance Branch, EMSL-Cincinnati,
analyzed the samples. In general, according to EMSL-Cincinnati,
the studies indicated that the true values were correct and that
the ampules were homogeneous and stable. Two exceptions in the
acid fraction occurred. For details see page 200 - Revised
Equations.
35
-------
OF FEASIBILITY OF THE STUDY PLAN
To prove the feasibility of the mixture of analytes in the
ampules. Radian analyzed the Youden pairs by spiking them into
laboratory pure water and performing the analyses according to
the instructions provided to the participants. Chromatograms for
Radian's analyses for the B/N and acid compounds are shown in
Appendix B.
In general, the results were good with a few exceptions. Dieth;*!
and dimethyl phthalate showed low recovery, probably due to
hydrolysis during sample extraction. The low recoveries for
delta-BHC and dibenzo(a,h)anthracene were also probably related
to losses during sample handling. The low recoveries for 2,4-
dimethylphenoi are probably due to some of this compound being
lost into the B/N fraction.
-------
TABLE 4. SPIKED TEST SAMPLE CONCENTRATION
OF B/N STANDARD 1
Youden Pair
Compound
Endosulfan sulfate
PCS 1260
8-BHC
4, 4 '-DDE
3,3' -Dichlorobenzidine
2 ,6-Dinitrotoluene
Heptachlor
bis (2-Chloroethyl) ether
Aldrin
Benzo (a) anthracene
4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Benzo (b) fluoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
1 , 3-Dichlorobenzene
Diethyl phthalate
Hexachlorobenzene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
4, 4 '-ODD
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
D ibenzo (a ,h) anthracene
Di-rv-butyl phthalace
Fluoranthene
High
1
750
667
750
750
667
600
600
750
600
400
500
600
540
540
630
510
540
630
400
400
450
540
400
630
630
(Pair 1)
2
675
600
675
675
600
540
540
675
540
360
450
540
600
600
700
535
600
700
360
360
405
600
360
700
700
Middle (Pair 2)
1
101
100
101
101
100
81
81
101
81
59
63
31
90
90
105
30
90
105
54
54
61
90
55
105
105
2
112
90
11:
112
90
90
90
112
90
55
75
90
31
81
94
76
81
94
60
60
68
31
59
94
94
Low (Pair 3)
1
14
40
14
14
40
11
11
14
11
20
9
11
5
5
6
6
5
6
7
7
8
5
9
6
o
2
15
36
15
15
36
12
12
15
i **
A
13
10
12
6
6
7
7
6
7
8
3
9
6
10
7
7
37
-------
TABLE 5. SPIKED TEST SAMPLE CONCENTRATION
OF B/N STANDARD 2
Compound
N-NUrosodi-n-propyl arnin*
b is (2-Chloroj.»opropyl) ether
2 ,4-Dinitrotoluen«
i-BHC
Endrin aldehyde
4-Brooor;henyl phenyl ether
Chryse'w
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene
Hex.'ichlorobutadlene
Hexachloroechane
Benzol g,h.i)perylene
Nitrobenzene
bis (2-Chloroethoxy) methane
Indeoo( 1,2, 3-c ,d) pyrrne
1,2 , 4-Trichlorobenzene
4, 4 '-DDT (sea below!
Dleldrin
Heptachlor epoxide
Phcnanthrene
Benzo(k) fluoranthene
Butyl benzyl phthajate
£is(2-£thylheJtyl) phthalate
2-Chlorooaphctial*n*
Dlacchyl phclulac*
01-n-octyl phchalat*
Fluorcn*
?yren«
i'-DDT*
aiah iP«ir :,
1
527
508
618
511
658
512
3S4
1("4
617
640
443
278
639
617
278
591
6AO
512
512
640
512
512
512
320
320
512
384
320
si:«
2
irf9
499
646
547
611
543
411
411
646
685
480
292
685
646
292
622
635
548
548
685
548
548
548
342
343
548
411
343
;-8«
Youdcn
Pair
MlddJL* (Pair 2)
1
95
79
79
60
119
60
-5
45
79
75
52
74
75
79
74
74
75
60
oO
75
60
60
60
38
38
60
45
38
60*
2
100
31
77
57
125
57
-3
43
77
71
49
56
71
77
56
72
71
5T
w
71
57
57
57
36
36
57
43
36
57*
Low (Pair 3)
1
18
14
12
a
22
8
6
6
12
10
7
7.4
10
12
7.4
11
10
3
a
10
3
a
3
5
5
8
6
5
8*
2
20
15
11
7.2
25
7.2
5.4
5.4
11
9
6.3
11
9
11
11
10
9
7.2
7.2
9
7.2
7.2
7.2
4.5
4.5
7.2
5.4
4.5
7*
Actual concencration atter correction r'or 301 purity of sclutt.
33
-------
TABLE 6. SPIKED TEST SAMPLE CONCENTRATION OF ACID STANDARD
High (Pair 1)
Compound
2, 4-Binitrophenol
4, 6-Dinitro-o-cresol
4-Nitrophenol
2-Nitrophenol
2,4, 6-Trichlorophenol
Pentachloi opheno L
2-Chlorophenoi
Phenol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
? . 4-Dimethy.1 nber-cl
p-Chloro-m-cresol
1
1333
106V
800
520
440
480
480
420
540
600
600
2
1200
960
720
468
396
432
533
467
600
667
667
Youden
Pair
Middle (Pair 2)
1
200
160
108
70
59
65
8d
70
90
100
100
2
180
144
120
78
66
72
72
63
81
90
90
Low (Pair 3)
1
100
80
21.6
14
11.9
13
7
6
8
9
9
2
90
72
24
15.6
13.2
14.4
8
7
9
10
10
39
-------
TABLE 7. SPIKING CONCENTRATION OF SURROGATE COMPOUNDS
Prepared
Compound Concentration -
Dimethylphthalate-d6 100
2-Fluorobiphenyl 100
1-Fluoronaphthalene 100
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene-'3Ci2 100
4,4'-Dibromooctafluorobiphenyl 100
Phenol-de 100
2,4-Dimethylphenol-3,4,6-d3 100
Pentachlorophenol-'3Ce 100
2-Fluorophenol
-------
SECTION 5
STATISTICAL TEUATMENT OF DATA
Data obtained from the interlaboratory method validation study
were subjected to statistical analyses employing US EPA's IMVS
system of computer programs. This system of programs was
designed to implement ASTM procedure D2777, "Standard Practice
for Determination of Precision and Bias of Methods of Committee
D-19 on Water" [3]. The analyses conducted using the IMVS
system included tests for the rejection of outliers (both whole
laboratories for a water-type and individual data points),
estimation of mean recovery (accuracy), estimation of single-
analyst and overall precision, and tests for the effects of
water test on accuracy and precision.
Prior to employing the IMVS system, the Interlaboratory method
study data were reduced to a standard form and validated. Tables
C-l through C-192 in Appendix C present the standardized data
from the 15 participating laboratories. All values shown in the
tables have been corrected for the blank values presented in
Tables C-193 through C-200. Corrected values less than zero and
values reported as "not detected" or "detected, but the concen-
tration could not be quantitated" are shown as zero. Values
marked with an asterisk were rejected as outliers in the IMVS
software tests presented in the next section.
Prior to formal analysis by the IMVS software, data were screened
for incorrectly transcribed data values through the use of
descriptive statistics (e.g., mean, standard deviation, coeffi-
cient of variation, extreme values), graphical aids (e.g.,
41
-------
(e.g., scatter diagrams, frequency histograms) and visual
scanning of the data base.
REJECTION OF OUTLIERS
An outlying observation, or "outlier," is a data point that ap-
pears to deviate markedly from other members of the group of
values with which it is associated. Outlying data points are
often encountered during interlaboratory test programs; if they
are not removed, they can result in a distortion of the accuracy
and precision statistics which characterize the analytical method.
These outlying points should not be removed indiscriminantly, how-
ever, because they may represent an extreme manifestation of the
random variability inherent in the method.
ASTM procedure E178-80, "Standard Practice for Dealing with Out-
lying Observations" [4] and ASTM procedure D2777-77 [31 present
explicit statistical rules and methods for identification of out-
liers. The IMVS software was used to screen the B/N and acid
data for outliers in accordance with ASTM D2777.
Data from outlying laboratories for a particular type were re-
jected employing Youden's laboratory ranking test procedure [2, 5]
at the 5% level of significance. Data remaining after the labo-
ratory ranking procedure were subjected to individual outlier
tests. After all zero, missing, "detected, but could not be
quantitated" and "nondetect" data were rejected as outliers, the
remaining data were examined using the two-sided outlier rejection
T-test constructed by Thompson [6], All data rejected as outliers
for this study are identified by an asterisk in the tables of data
(Table C-l to C-192, Appendix C). Of the 22,555 reported B/N
and acid concentrations. 4,557 were deleted as outliers
(approximately 20%).
42
-------
Youden's Laboratory Ranking Procedure
Using the data for each water type, Youden's laboratory ranking
test was performed at the 5% le el of significance. The Youden
laboratory ranking procedure requires a complete set of data
from each laboratory within each water type, so that missing
data had to be replaced. For each laboratory with nissing data
for a particular water and analyte, the natural logarithms of
the available recovery data for that laboratory water and ana-
lyte were regressed against the natural logarithms of the
related spiked ampule concentrations to find the line of best
fit. Predicted log-recovery measurements were computed from
the least-square regression equations by plugging in the known
concentration for the missing value and the missing values were
estimated by taking the exponential of these predicted values.
(For complete details of this procedure, see reference 1.)
With a complete set of data, the laboratory ranking test was
used to identify laboratories (for a particular water type) that
were so consistently high or low that their results are unrepre-
sentative of the method's capabilities (systematic bias).
Data from outlying laboratories were rejected at the 57» level of
significance. When a laboratory was rejected, all the labora-
tory's data for that water type and analyte were flagged as out-
liers for further analyses. After ranking was complete, all
estimated "missing values" were deleted from any further analyses
Tests for Individual Outliers
The data remaining, after rejection of zero, missing, "detected,
but could not be quantitated" and "nondetect" data, were sub-
jected to an individual outlier test based on calculation of the
T-value [3, 6].
43
-------
In these calculations the mean recovery, X, is given by
and the standard deviation, s, is given by
rx.-xV (2)
where X. = individual, analyses
n = number of retained analyses values in the
ampul set
The outliers may be rejected if the value of T^ defined by
X -X
Ti = -" ^
exceeds the critical value of the Thompson's T (two-sided at 5%
significance level) . In the equation, X represents the value
farthest away from the mean X of this set of retained data. If
the extreme value is rejected as an outlier, the test is repeated
until the value being tested passes the test.
STATISTICAL SUMMARIES
After the outlier rejection tests were performed, the following
summary statistics were calculated employing the remaining data
for each ampule (single analyte, single concentration, single
water matrix) :
Number of retained data points, n
Mean recovery of retained data, 1?
44
-------
Accuracy as a percent of relative error, 7> R.E.
Overall absolute standard deviation, S
Percent relative overall standard deviation,
% RSD
Absolute single-analyst standard deviation, S
Percent relative standard deviation for a single
analyst, 70 RSD-SA
All of these statistics, except the single-analyst absolute and
relative standard deviations, were calculated using the retained
data for each ampule. The basic statistical formulas used for
these calculations are given below, where Xi, X2, . . , ^ de-
note the values for the n retained data points for a given ampule
Mean Recovery (X):
Accuracy as % Relative Error:
Overall Standard Deviation:
(X£ - X)2 (6)
i=l
45
-------
and
Percent Relative Overall Standard Deviation:
o
70 RSD = - x 100
X
The overall standard deviation, S, indicates the precision asso-
ciated with measurements generated by a group of laboratories.
This represents the broad variation in the data collected in a
collaborative study. A measure of how well an individual labora-
tory can expect to perform in his own laboratory is another im-
portant measure of precision. This "single-analyst" precision,
denoted by S , is measured by
where m = number of retained Youden-paired observations
D. = difference between observations in the i pair
D = average of D. values
The Youden-pair design employed in this study permits the calcu-
lation of this single-analyst precision without making duplicate
measurements on the same sample. This helps to avoid the well-
intentioned manipulation of data that can occur when laboratories
make duplicate analyses.
The percent relative standard deviation for the single-analyst
precision is calculated by
g
% RSD-SA = -£ x 100 (9)
X*
46
-------
where X* is the average of the two mean recoveries corresponding
to the two ampuls defining the particular Youden pair. These
summary statistics are presented in Tables 8-1 through 8-64 for
each of the 64 Method 625 compounds in the four water matrices.
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF BASIC STATISTICS
These summary statistics provide detailed information on the
accuracy and precision of the lata obtained for each concentra-
tion level. One objective of the statistical analysis of the
data is to summarize the information about accuracy and preci-
sion which is contained in the statistics.
It is often the case that a systematic relationship exists
between the mean recovery (X) and the true concentration level
(C) of the analyta in the sample. In addition, there are often
systematic relationships between the precision statistics (S and
SR) and the mean recovery (X~) . Usually these systematic rela-
tionships can be adequately approximated by a linear relation-
ship (i.e. by a straight line). Once these straight lines are
established, they can be used to conveniently summarize the
behavior of the method within a water type, and they can aid in
comparing the behavior of the method across water types. In
addition they can be used to obtain estimates of the accuracy
and precision at any concentration level within the applicable
range studied. They can also be used to predict the behavior of
the method when used under similar conditions. These important
relationships are discussed below.
Statements of Method Accuracy
The accuracy of the method is characterized by the relationship
of the mean recovery (X) to the true concentration (C) of the
analyte in the water sample. In order to obtain a mathematical
expression for this relationship, a regression line of the form
47
-------
.p-
CO
TABLE 8-1
(NVIIONHENIAl RUkl lOilUt AM» SUPPOI1 LABOCA10M
orrici or AISEADCH AN» CEVELOPHENI
ENVIIONNIN1AL PROTECTION ACENO
EPA NETHOft 625 VALItAMON STUIT - 8/N ")
STATISTICAL SUHNAI1 rOI ACENAPHTHINE ANALTSES BT UA1EI TYPE
UATEI 1 HATEI 2 HATEI 1 UATEI 4
LOW route* PAII
NUMBEI Or BATA POINTS
TIUE tON( 1C) UC/L
MEAN IECOVEI* «)
ACCUIACTUIEL EIIOI)
OVEI«LL ST» REV
OVEIALL IEL ITS BEV, X
SiNCLE Sl» BEV. ISI>
ANALYST IEL »E«, I
itEBIU* VOUBEN PAII
NUMBEI or BATA POINTS
TIUE COIIC UC/L
BMW lECOVEIf fl)
ACCUIACV IZIEL EIIOI)
OVEIALL ST» BEV
ANALYST 111 BEV. I
MICH YOUBEN PAII
NUMB El Of »AIA POINTS
TIUE tONC 1C) UC/L
MEAN IECOVEIY (I)
ACCUIACYIXIEL CHOI)
OVEIALL ST* »EV
OVEIALL IEL STI »EV, I
SINCLE ST» »EV. lil>
ANALYST IEL »fv, x
UATEt LECEN»
1
10
7.0
7.3
5.71
1.1
14.61
1
10
S4.0
i*.7
1.10
7.7
14.01
S
12
400.0
16S.1
-1.72
94.7
2S.94
2
12
1.0
7.4
-7.76
o.a
10.71
1.0
14.17
4
11
60.0
60. S
0.76
11.6
19.11
7.2
12. 56
6
12
160.0
119.8
-5.42
77. a
22.90
62.1
17. SI
1
10
7.0
6.7
-4.29
1.1
19.11
1
11
S4.0
Sl.l
-1.2J
§.5
15.19
S
11
400.0
167.1
-a. is
61. 5
17.28
2
11
a.o
7.7
-4.26
1.1
17.52
1.2
17.10
4
11
60. 0
57.9
-1.49
9.4
16.27
4.9
8.85
6
10
160.0
117.5
-6.26
62.1
18.40
18.2
10.85
1
11
7.0
6.4
-9.01
1.7
26.64
1
14
54.0
54.8
1.47
11.8
25.17
%
14
400.0
124.1
-18.97
118.1
42.61
I
14
8.0
7.1
-10.61
2.0
27.51
0.9
12.70
4
14
60,0
3*,.J
-%.46
6.8
12.48
10.1
18.81
6
11
160.0
111.2
-7.45
81.1
24.14
.'4.2
22.58
1
11
7.0
6.4
-8.90
1.1
20.05
1
1
11
S4.0
4S.1
-10.91
;'.7
16.02
5
11
400.0
320.7
-19.82
21.4
7.10
2
11
8.0
7.1
-8.17
2.0
27.02
1.0
14.4]
4
11
60.0
52.2
-11.04
12.2
21.18
4.9
9.81
6
14
160.0
115.5
-12.17
81. t
25.92
60.9
19. '5
1 - »ISTILLE8 HATEI
2 - TAP UATEI
I - SUMA(E HATE!
4 - INtUSTIIAL
-------
vo
TABLE 8-2
ENVIIONNENIAL HUNMOIING ANt SUPPOIT L»BO«»IO»\
OMICE 01 IEUAICH ANI BEVELOPHCNI
ENVIRONMENTAL PIOTECT10N A«ENO
EPA NETHOI 625 VALUATION STUM - B/N (1)
STATISTICAL SUNHAIT FO* ACENAPMTHTLENE ANALYSES B» UATEI TfPE
HA1EI 1 HA1EI 2 UATEI S MATEI 4
LOU IOU»CN f»li
UMBER OF MIA POINTS
tlUi tONt (C> Ut/L
MEAN RECOVER* (I)
ACCUIACXXIEL EIIOI)
OVERALL ST» »EV (S)
OVERALL IEL ST» »E₯. 1
SINtLE STI »EV, (SO
ANALYST Hll »EV, S
NEMUH fOUIEN PAH
NUMBER Of »A1A POINTS
HUE CONC
ACCUIACVUREL EIIOI)
OVEIALL ST» REV (S>
OVCIA'.L IEL SI» »EV, S
SINtLE STI »E«. (SI)
ANALYST IEL »EV. I
HUH VOUIEN PAII
NUMBER Of (ATA POINTS
HUE CONt U) UC/L
MEAN RECOVilY <«)
ACCURACYISREL EIIOI)
OVEIALL ST» IEV IS)
OVEIALL IEL Sit »EV. I
SINGLE STI »EV. (SI)
ANALYST III »EV, S
HATEI LECEN*
1
1
1.0
7.7
-J.4*
1.5
1V.74
S
11
61.0
51.6
-IS. 42
20. S
3«.I2
S
1'
410.0
379.1
-is. to
104.1
27.41
2
11
9.0
9.0
-O.JS
1.6
17.92
0.9
10.24
4
10
»a.o
46. 1
-1.80
11.0
16.51
11.2
10.74
6
11
40S.O
174.6
-7. SI
74.0
19.77
41.0
16.16
1
10
a.o
7.6
-4. as
1.4
17.79
1
10
61.0
S9.6
-2.21
7.S
12.60
S
12
4SO.O
378.4
-15.90
99.2
26.20
2
11
9.0
7.9
-11.92
1.9
24.01
1.6
21.16
4
11
68.0
63.6
-6.50
11.7
ia.4a
7.2
11.61
6
11
403.0
111.0
-23.22
101.7
33. 35
70.4
20.44
1
11
a.o
a.o
-0.34
2.1
2S.99
1
10
61.0
S9.6
-2.21
6.S
13.87
S
12
4SO.O
437.1
-2.86
169.9
38.87
7
12
9.0
a. 9
-0.93
1.1
35.30
1.2
14.72
4
10
68.0
68. S
0.76
6.0
a. 69
4.1
6.47
6
50
405.0
175.4
-7.32
92.2
24. SS
84.1
20.71
1
11
a.o
7.2
-9.5S
1.4
19.66
J
11
61.0
56. 0
-a. 14
17.2
10.64
5
10
450.0
404.9
-10.01
81.1
?0.09
2
9
9.0
7.S
-16.10
1.1
17.01
0.6
8.61
4
11
68.0
56.8
-16.44
11.7
12.97
S.2
9.19
6
10
405.0
147.4
-14. J2
58.1
16.72
59.1
15.71
1 - IISTILLEI NATE!
2 - TAP MATE!
1 - SUBfACE HATE*
4 - INDUSTRIAL {MLUCNI
-------
HATER
TABLE 8-3
ENVIRONMENTAL AOhl IU«mi »NO SUPPOM LA80RATORI
OIHCE 01 RESEARCH ANO BE VC LOPHI HI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCf
EPA MEIHOB 625 VALUATION STUCV - B/N «1)
STATISTICAL SUHHAR? (OB AltRIN ANALfSES > MAUR TIP{
VAIEI 2 WATER 3 MATiR 4
LOU VOUtEN PAIR
NUMBER 01 iATA POINTS
TIUC COHC (O UCSL
"EAN RECOVER* CD
ACCURACJIIREL ERROR)
OVERALL ST» »IV ISI
OVEIALL lit S1» »E«. I
SINCLE 116 »E«, (St>
AHALISI *EL £», 1
HE»IUN VOU»E* PAH
NURSE* Of »AlM POINIS
TIUE CONC (C) Ut/L
MEAN *E(OWEiT (I)
ACCUilACf «I«EL E«IOr»
OVEIAIL SI» »EV IS)
0₯EIALL ML ST» Of»f 1
SIN6LE STC «E«. I1R)
ANALYST (EL »f», I
MICH VOUtEN PAI*
NUABEI Of »ATA POINTS
TIUE CONC tC) UC/L
HEAN »tCO»EI» (I)
ACCUItCf OIEL ERIOI)
OVEP.ALL ST» »E« (S)
OVERALL *EL ST» »EV, I
SINCLE Sti D(«, IS*)
ANALYST IEL »£» I
UATEI LECEN*
1
10
11.0
10.2
-?.S»
5.J
49.10
3
11
11.0
»i. S
-19.55
JJ. I
SI. 73
S
1Z
AOO.O
4«4.t
-25.92
205. 5
46.22
2
12
12.0
10.9
-9.41
4.1
57.40
1.4
13.54
4
It
0.0
77.5
-1J.94
26.7
37. (.2
2o.«
57.5*
«
12
5*0.0
405.2
-24. 96
162.*
40.17
68.3
16.06
1
11
11.0
7.2
-34. SS
2.0
27.96
i
11
11.0
St. 2
-30.63
27.4
48.83
S
11
600.0
439.0
-26. (3
184.2
41. 9S
2
10
12.0
10.0
-17.04
4.4
44.16
1.9
22.08
4
11
90.0
54.0
-3--. 95
27.0
49.91
17. S
31.79
6
11
S40.0
334.9
-37.99
137.4
41.03
94.1
24.31
1
9
11.0
6.7
-38.69
2.7
39.34
3
12
81.0
41.7
-48.46
18.6
44.49
S
12
600.0
295.8
-50.70
147.6
49.90
2
11
12. a
7.9
-33. .6
2.8
34.98
1.0
13.95
4
12
90.0
SI. 6
-42.63
30.3
58.61
IS. 6
33.31
6
12
S40.0
338.3
-37.36
165.9
49.06
112.4
3S.46
1
11
11. C
5.7
-41.18
3.0
53.14
3
13
81.0
42.3
-47.72
27.1
63. 9«
3
12
600.0
39S.1
-34.14
211.4
53.51
2
9
12.0
8.2
-31.37
5.6
68.80
2.8
39.88
4
12
90.0
39.6
-55.98
25.5
64.40
16.6
40.48
>
13
540.0
253.3
-53.09
134. «
53.25
116.7
36.00
1 - »1ST1LLE» HATE!
2 - TAP UATEI
3 - SUIfACf HATE*
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-4
ENVIRONNCNIAL BOKHOSING ANR SUPPORT LAOORATORI
orrict or MSEARCH ANR RCVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCf
EPA NETHOR 625 VALIDATION STURT - B/N (1>
STATISTICAL SUHHARf fO« ANTHRACENE ANALYSES Bt HATER TYPE
HATER 1 HATER 2 HATER 1 HATER 4
toy IOUREN rut
Hunan or RATA POINTS
TRUE COIIC (C) Ut/L
NEAN RECOVER! (I)
ACCURACVIXREL ERROR)
OV(I«LL STR REV IS)
OVERALL REL Sit RE«, I
SINCLE ST» REV,
ANALlST «Ct »(V, I
MERIUN TOUREN PAIR
NUNBER OC RATA POIHIS
TRUE CONC
ACCU*ACV
OVERALL IEL SIB REV. (
S1N6LE ST» »E«. (Sl>
ANALlST (EL »E«t X
HUH fOU»EN PAIR
NUBBEA Or RATA POINTS
TIUE CONC 1C) Ut/L
NEAN RECOVER* (I)
ACCURACVIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL ST» REV (SI
OVEDALL REL SIB REV, I
SINCLE SIR REV. CSR)
ANALYST REL REV. (
HATER LECENR
1
0
5.0
4.9
-1.00
o.»
11.74
3
12
90.0
70.4
-11. J5
2t.4
40.17
5
12
S40.0
410.9
-21.91
1J4.7
J2.77
2
tl
«.o
1.1
-1S.15
0.5
9.5i
0.7
14.11
4
10
1.0
72.1
-10.14
5.5
7.51
14.1
22.45
«
12
600.0
47«.5
-20.53
117.2
24.40
l.«
ia.ii
i
11
5.0
4.6
-7.51
1.0
21.71
3
12
90.0
1C. 4
-^0.»5
V.1
11.25
5
11
540.0
411. S
-21.38
11.0
20.04
2
12
4.0
5.1
-15.19
0.7
14.71
0.6
12.15
4
12
11.0
72.4
-10.57
10.0
11.17
6.4
1.11
6
11
600.0
440.1
-26.61
141.2
12. OS
91.9
21.52
1
12
5.0
4.7
-5.50
1.1
27.42
1
12
90.0
11.5
-9.41
11.1
16.11
5
12
540.0
176. 8
-10.22
154.2
40.91
2
12
6.0
5.2
-12.78
0.9
16.66
0.9
ia.29
4
f2
(1.0
70.9
-12.42
a.o
11.12
9.0
11.11
6
12
600.0
414.1
-19.2S
110.0
26.84
99.1
21.18
1
12
5.0
4.7
-6.11
1.4
29.95
0
16.
1
12
90.0
75.4
-16.20
9.1
12.09
8
11.
5
12
540.0
420.7
-22.09
149.7
X5.5*
85
20.
2
12
6.0
5.2
-11.11
1.1
11.88
.1
16
4
11
11.0
62.4
-22.95
11.1
21.15
.1
11
6
1J
600.0
172.9
-17.85
161.6
4!. 88
.2
96
1 - RIST1LLER HATER
2 - TAP HATER
1 - SUirACE HATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EMLUENT
-------
Ui
N>
TABLE 8-5
ENVIRONMENTAL HOD IIOB>«t ANt SUPPOIT LABOIA10II
OFFICE OF RESiARCN ANR lEVILQPMiNI
EKVIRONMEtTIAL PROTECTION ACEMCY
EPA METMOe 425 VALItATION SIUBI - S/N (II
STiMSTKA'. SUMMARY FOR I-BHC ANALYSES BY MATER TYPE
CATER 1 HATER 2 HATER 3 HA1ER 4
tow tauniM PAIR
HUH*!! OF RAT A POINTS
TRUE fOIIC 1C) Ut/L
HO* RECOVERY ID
ACCURACTIIREL ERROR)
OVERALL Sit tfV
OVERALL REl Sl» HI, I
S1IKI.C ST» REV.
ANALYST ill (IV. S
NERIUN TOUREN Pill
NUMBER Of BATA POUIS
TRUE COMC U) Ut/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACVCXREL ERROR)
OVERALL Sit REV <$>
OVERALL REL Sit REV. I
SINCI.E Sit »EV. «$R>
ANALYST fEL »EV, S
MICH YOUREN PAIR
NUMBER OF »ATA POINTS
TRUE COMC (Cl Ut/L
NEAN RECOVER* (I)
ACCURACY IXREL ERRORI
OVERALL Sit REV
-------
CO
TABLF 8-6
ENVIIOMNENIAl HONITOIIIM6 AkO SUPPOIT IABOIATOM
ofuci or IISEAKH AN* »EVELOPNENI
EMVIIONMENIAL PROTECTION AtENCV
EPA HE1MO* 623 VALUATION HUM - B/N <1i
STATISTICAL SUMNAII 101 BENIOIA)AN1HIACENE ANALYSES B» UATEI IfPE
MATH 1
MATE* 2
HATER
HATd
LOH TOU»IN PAIR
NUMBER Or »ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) UC/L
NEAR. RECOVER! ID
ACCURACtllREL ERROR)
OVERALL IT* ICV IS)
OVERALL REL SI* CEV, I
SINCLE SI* IEV, ISI)
ANALTST «EL »EV, I
ml nun IOUIEN PAII
NUP.BEI Or »AT* POINTS
TBUE CONC 1C) UC/L
HEAN IECOVEIT ID
ACCU^ACTIXIEL ERROR*
OVERALL ST» »EV IS)
OVEIALL REL ST» »IV, X
SINCLE SI* ICV, ISI)
ANALTST IEL ȣV, X
MICH TOUCEN PAII
UKBEI Or IATA POUTS
TIUE CONC 1C) UC/L
MEAN IECOVERV ID
ACCURACTIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL SI* *EV IS)
OVERALL RIL SI* IfV, X
SINCLE STI »EV. ISI)
ANALTST IEL *EV, X
MATE! LECED*
1
20
17
-11.
4,
22.
1
39
48
-17.
11
31.
1
400
324
-IS.
40
18.
1
0
.0
.7
35
.0
33
j
1
.0
.7
41
.7
30
S
0
.0
.9
78
.7
49
2
10
18.0
14.1
-19.00
3.4
21. 22
3.2
19.71
4
10
53.0
31.2
-4.82
10.3
20.12
10.2
20.41
6
11
36C.O
333.7
-6.76
91.9
27.31
42.1
12.74
1
12
20.0
18.4
-7.79
9.0
48.92
3
11
39.0
42.1
-28.58
1C. 6
25.19
5
12
400.0
373.4
-6.64
71.5
21.01
2
12
11.0
13.2
-13.4*
5.4
35.71
8.4
50.17
4
12
35.0
41.4
-2t.73
14.0
33.70
10.2
24.33
6
11
360.0
280.1
-22.20
93.9
33.53
81.4
24.91
1
12
20.0
14.7
-24.67
4.7
31.92
3
11
59.0
41.1
-30.42
9.4
22.93
5
12
400.0
263.4
-34.10
92.7
35.1*
2
12
11.0
12.6
-30.23
3.7
29.11
2.9
21.41
4
12
53.0
34.3
-37.29
16.4
47.43
10.3
27.27
6
12
360.0
297.9
-17.24
105.0
33.24
89.4
31.83
1
20
12
-31.
5
40.
1
59
32
-45.
16
51.
1
400
109
-22.
147
47.
1
2
.0
.4
11
.0
25
3
26.
3
3
.0
.3
19
.6
27
11
39.
3
2
.0
.*
54
.0
45
109
40.
1
11
11
-37.
6
53.
.2
63
1
35
26
-52.
14
55.
.5
21
t
360
221
-J6.
131
57.
.4
64
2
3
.0
.3
31
.3
17
4
3
.0
.3
22
.5
14
6
3
.5
.4
55
.0
36
1 - »ISTULE» WAIEP
2 - 1AP WATER
3 - SUirACE WATII
4 - INtUSTIIAL EHLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-7
CXVKOHIIEftKl MONIIO«mt »NO SUPPOIT LtHOIAIOII
OMICt 01 lESEkXM «» tiVELOrHEMT
EkVKOIHIENKL riOTECMOM ItCMCT
EP* n:iHO» 625 V«Llt«110k SlUlf - I/N <1>
STAIISTICkl SUAM«IT 101 BE N10 <» IPttl NE «M«LfSES BI U*1fl 11H
M41Ci 1 HATE* 2 WATEI 3 U«Tt> 4
low IOUMN P»I*
MUHtfl 01 »AI4 POINTS
TfUi COIIC Ul/L
HEAM tECOvEtf (a)
ACtUIACKSIEL EKIOI)
OVEIALi ST1 »IV IS)
OVEIALI BEL SIO SEV, I
SINttE Sl» UK. (SO
ANAKST IEL »E«, I
NEMUM fOUOE* P»H'
MU18CI Of 1AT» P01N1S
TtUE COHC (C» US/l
ftEAM lECOVItf (I)
ACCUIACXSIEl IIIOI)
OV£IALL ST» t(V IS>
OVEI1LL «El $11 »(₯ I
SlMCtf SI» IE*, (SI)
ANALYST »EL »E*. »
H16H YOUIEM f»l«
NUH8EI Of »»« fOIIili
ItUE COIIC (C) Ut/L
H«M (ECOVflT (I)
ICCUIACKIIEL EIIOI)
0«EI*Ll ST» »E₯ HI
0»EI«LL *EL STt »E», I
SiNttE STt »E*t
-------
TABLE 8-8
[HVIIONNI NUl PONMOAINt «N» SUPPOIT LABORATORf
OHICl 01 RESEARCH AMR »IVH.OPH(NI
INUIIONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENd
EPA KETMOO 625 VALIDATION SiU»» - i/N <1>
STATISTICAL SUKHAtT rOR BEN1ILUOBA"ITHEE CONC (Cl
MCAI RECOVER!
ACCUIAOUIEL
POUTS
U«./L
<»
EIIOR)
OVE.ALL Sit »EV JS)
1
12
11.0
9.2
-14.74
1.9
OVERALL REl S1» 01V. I 42.41
5I041C ST»
ANALfST IEL
HEtlUH IOUIEN
NUMBEI Or RATA
TRUE CONC U>
MEAN RECOVERY
ACCURACXSREL
REV. ($11
REV, X
PAIR
POINTS
Ut/L
ID
ERROR!
OVERALL ST» REV
OVERALL IEL ST» »EV, I
SINtLE STR
ANAltST IEL
REV, (SI)
REV. I
MICH 1 0ut lH PAlt
NUMBER or BAT<
T«Uf CONC
Xltn BECOVffit
*:cu»»c»
-------
Ln
TABLE 8-9
ENVIRONMENTAL HONIIOKINb AND SUPPORT LABORATOtl
OMICC 01 RESEARCH ANt BlVILOFMtNT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENO
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUB* - B/U (II *
STATISTICAL SUMMARY IOR 8 IS<7-CHLOROETM»l>ETMER ANALISES B> MA1ER TtPE
CATER 1 bATER 2 WATER 3 UA'ER 4
LOU ITOUOfN PAIR
NUMBER OF »4TA POINTS
TRUE COKC «C) Ui/L
MEAN RECOVER*
ACCURACVCtREL CHOI)
OVERALL STB BEV IS)
OVERALL IEL Sit BEV, I
SINGLE STB BEV.
OVERALL R(L SIB BEV. I
SINGLE STB BEV. ISR*
ANALIST REL HIM, I
MICH TOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Of BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC ICI UG/L
MEAN RECOVER* (I)
ACCURACTUREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV IS)
OVERALL REL STB BEV. I
SINGLE STB BEV, ISI)
ANALYST REL DEW, X
WATER L!tENB
1
«
14.0
11.5
-17.95
2.1
19.72
5
11
101.0
tD. 7
-20. U
34.]
42.54
5
15
750.0
674.4
-10.09
292.0
43.30
2
9
13.0
10.1
-32.47
5.2
31.26
2.9
26.89
4
12
112.0
107.9
-3.66
15.4
14.24
25.5
27.00
t
1J
675.0
510.4
-24.39
214.6
42.04
247.7
41. (1
1
9
14.0
9.6
-31.27
4.9
51.02
3
12
101.0
91.5
-9.39
14.1
15.43
5
12
750.0
662.9
-11.62
172.2
25.98
2
9
15.0
1C. 6
-29. 14
4.0
37. aa
4.0
39.42
4
12
112.0
94.6
-15.52
34.0
35.93
24.7
26.64
6
12
673.0
548.0
-18.82
184.8
S3. 72
140. 2
23.15
1
11
14.0
12.2
-13.12
5.9
48.69
3
14
101.0
95.7
-5.23
24.0
23.11
5
13
750.0
598.1
-20. 2>
300. 1
30.16
2
9
13.0
11.4
-24.22
3.1
26.87
2.1
ta.oa
4
14
112.0
102.6
-8 ,37
76.1
23.45
14.1
U./4
6
13
673.0
607.0
-10.08
154.2
25.43
214.5
35.60
1
1?
14.0
11.6
-17.14
3.3
28.23
3
13
101.0
»!.2
-7.70
19.9
21.34
5
13
750.0
702.3
-6.37
198.6
28.29
2
11
15.0
13.4
-10. »1
7.3
54.27
5.6
44.81
4
15
112.0
95.9
-14.33
41.6
43.37
30.2
31.90
6
14
675.0
602.9
-10.68
263.7
43.74
V0.6
13.89
1 - B1STILLEB WATER
2 - TAP MATE*
3 - SURFACE WATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
CO
TABLE 8-10
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
STATISTICAL SUMMARY FOR DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE ANALYSES BY WATER TYPE
WATEf 1 WATER 2 1ATER 3 WATER 4
toy YOUSIN PAIR
NLMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC UG/L
MEAN AECOVEFY (1)
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV (S>
OVERALL REL SID DEV, S
SINGLE Sli DEV, (SR)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Or DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) UG/L
MEAN RECOVER* ID
ACCURACVtXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV (S)
OVERALL REL STD DEV, X
SINGLE STD DEV,
ANALYST REL DEV, X
MATER LEGEND
1
11
6.0
3.8
-36.67
1.8
46.21
3
U
105.0
it. 8
-45.^:9
27.3
41.0$
S
U
630.0
377.1
-40. U
133.0
35.27
2
13
7.0
5.5
-21. 96
3.3
61.00
1.7
37.76
*
12
94.0
60.6
-35.54
23.7
39.10
8.«
15.11
6
14
700.0
40S.5
-42.07
129.9
32.05
49.7
12.70
1
11
6.0
4.0
-32.73
1.2
30.79
3
12
105.0
62,3
-40.68
22.1
35.49
5
12
630.0
374.4
-40.57
117.0
31.24
2
11
7.0
4.3
-38.05
1.4
32.17
1.2
28.69
4
12
94.0
63.3
-32.62
24.0
37.87
16.7
26.59
6
12
700.0
356.2
-49.11
117.4
32.96
81.7
22.36
1
6
5
-10.
3
55.
1
105
65
-38.
21
33.
1
630
326
-48.
146
44.
1
3
.0
.4
64
.0
84
3
3
.0
.0
05
.5
12
5
3
.0
.9
11
.6
84
1
7
6
-12.
2
41.
0.9
14.94
1
94
61
-34.
15
25.
12.8
20.19
1
700
450
-35.
.160
35.
121.3
31.20
i
3
.0
.1
97
.6
95
4
3
.0
.5
55
.8
62
6
3
.0
.7
62
.2
54
1
11
6.0
3.6
-40.45
1.4
39.35
1
30.
3
13
105.0
63.7
-39.36
27.7
43.49
16
28.
5
13
630.0
416.3
-33.92
206.3
49.56
72
19.
1
7
4
-29.
2
47.
.3
46
1
94
54
-42.
21
39.
.5
01
1
700
335
-52.
175
52.
.0
15
2
1
.0
.9
61
.3
20
4
1
.0
.3
24
.4
38
6
4
.0
.7
04
.6
32
1 - DISTILLED WATER
2 - TAP WATER
3 - SURFACE WATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-11
ENVIRONMENTAL HONIlOfcI No AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OfllCl or RESEARCH ANtP DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A6ENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
STATISTICAL SUMMARY FOR PIGCNIOU .HUNTHRACENE ANALYSES BY WATER TYPE
HATER 1 HATER 2 WATER 3 HATER *
00
LOU YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) UC/L
MEAN RECOVERY <«)
ACCURACVIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV (S)
OVERALL REL STO DEV, X
SINGLE STD DEV. -
ANALYST REL DEV, X
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) UC/L
MEAN RECOVERY (1)
ACCURACYUREL ERROR)
OVERALL ST9 »EV (S)
OVERALL REL STD DEV. X
SINGLE STD DEV. (SR)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY «x>
ACCURACKXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV (S)
OVERALL REL S»» DEV. X
SINGLE STD DEV. (SR)
ANALYST REL DEV. X
HATER LEGEND
1 2
8 10
9.0 10.0
18.0 7.1
99. SB -29.45
1B.O 3.4
100.04 48.35
12.4
98.85
3 4
11 11
SS.O S9.0
45.4 SB.O
-17.45 -1.61
30.0 22.9
66.13 39.38
22. S
43.58
S 6
12 11
400.0 360.0
427.5 113.2
6.87 -13.01
201.9 181.6
47.22 57.98
129.1
34.86
1
6
9.0
3.0
-66.67
2.0
67.20
3
12
SS.O
29. S
-46.41
16.3
SS.42
5
14
400. C
463.0
15.74
21S.8
46.62
2
6
10.0
4.4
-56.42
0.7
15.36
1.5
40.75
4
13
59.0
31.1
-47.22
24.5
78.57
17. S
S7.72
6
13
360.0
326.4
-9.35
164.6
50.42
84.3
21. Jo
1
S
9.0
5.6
-37.33
2.8
49.84
3
11
SS.O
19.4
-64.68
10.4
53.32
5
10
403.0
274.8
-31.29
110.9
40.36
2
7
10.0
3.8
-61.57
2.1
54.64
1.7
36.25
4
10
59.0
27.8
-52.86
15.0
53.81
9.1
38.58
6
11
360.0
334.4
-7.11
188.3
S6.32
108,5
3S.63
1
6
9.0
3.6
-59.81
2.9
79.01
3
13
55.0
22.0
-60.04
21.0
95.47
5
13
400.0
351.7
-12.08
250.0
71.09
2
6
10.0
4.0
-60.17
2.4
59.99
0.9
13.63
4
14
59.0
21.0
-64.33
22.4
106.24
11.4
33.01
6
13
360.0
267.5
-25.69
193.9
72.47
111.4
35.99
1 - DISTILLED HATER
2 - TAP HATER
3 - SURFACE HATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-12
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING ANB SUPPORT LABORATORY
orriCE or RESEARCH ANB BEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCf
EPA METHOB 62S VALIDATION STUBT - B/N <1>
STATISTICAL SUMMARY rOR B1ETHIL PHTNALATE ANALYSES BY HATER TYPE
WATER 1 WATER 2 WATER 1 WATER 4
LOW YOUBEN PAIR
NUMB it Of BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C> U6/L
MEAN RECOVtRY (I)
ACCURACYUREL ERROR)
OVERALL ST» BEV (Si
OVERALL REL STB 1EV, S
SINtlE SI» »EV. (Sl>
ANALYST REL 61V. I
NEBIUN YOUBEN PAIR
DUMBER Of »ATA POINTS
TIUE CONC (C) U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY <«»
ACCURACY4XREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV CS>
OVERALL REL STB BEV, S
SIMILE STt BEV, (SRI
ANALYST REL BEV. X
MICH YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Or BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) Ut/L
HEAN RECOVER! CD
AlCURACYUREL ERRORI
OVERAiL STB BEV IS)
OVERALL REL SIB BEV, X
SINCLE 516 BEV. ISR)
ANALYST REL BEV. X
VATER LEGEND
1
7
4.0
3.1
-44.52
1.8
5*. 51
2
44.
5
M
105.0
17.7
-64.11
21.7
62.11
15
16.
S
11
610.0
2(0.2
-SS.S1
119.6
49.14
70
22.
2
11
7.0
4.S
-16.10
2.7
60.21
.S
4S
4
12
94.0
41.0
-S4.24
21.8
SS.17
.1
01
6
11
700.0
141.9
-SI. IS
116. 1
19.97
.4
62
1
11
6.0
1.2
-47.12
2.2
68.46
1
18.
1
14
10S.O
44.2
-J7.91
29.2
66.17
12
27.
S
14
610.0
292.4
-J1.S9
151.9
S1.9S
112
41.
2
11
7.0
1.1
-55.45
1.S
48.91
.2
17
4
14
94.0
47.6
-49.17
29.1
61.06
.S
IS
6
14
700.0
254.6
-61.63
200.7
78.82
.2
02
1
6
4
-21.
1
17.
1
10S
S2
-SO.
29
ss.
1
610
242
-61.
1S1
61.
1
0
.0
/
^7
.2
09
1
1
.0
.1
19
.0
18
S
1
.0
.a
47
.9
18
1
7
4
-18.
2
SI.
2.6
S7.41
1
94
51
-45.
24
47.
20.4
19.19
1
700
448
-15.
161
16.
147.4
42.65
2
2
.0
.1
81
.1
18
4
1
.0
.1
61
.1
52
6
1
.0
.6
91
.8
06
1
11
6.0
1.1
-47. S8
1.7
S2.61
1
12
105.0
63.8
-39.21
26.2
41.10
5
11
630.0
408.9
-IS. 09
166.9
40.81
7
1
-44.
1
48.
1.1
11.62
1
94
50
-46.
24
47.
19.7
14.51
1
700
132
-52.
170
51.
117.2
11.62
2
9
.0
.9
60
.9
72
4
1
.0
.1
72
.0
86
6
2
.0
.1
55
.5
34
1 - BISTP.LEB WATER
2 - TAP WATER
1 - SURrACE WATER
4 - 1NBUSTRIAL ErFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-13
ENVIRONMENTAL HONIIOB1NG AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OII1CI Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCY
EPA METHOD 6Z5 VALUATION STUDY - S/N (1>
STATISTICAL SUMMARY FOR ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ANALYSES BY HATER TYPE
WATER 1 HATER 2 WATER ! UAUR *
LOW VOUDEN PAH
NUMBER Of »ATA POINTS
TRUE CO«C (C> UC/L
MEAN RECOVER*
ACCURACYfXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB DEV
OVERALL REl STB DEV, X
SINGLE ST» DEV, I$R>
ANALYST REL DEV, X
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Of (ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC CO Ut/L
MEAN RECOVERY (1)
ACCURACYfXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV (S)
OVERALL REL STD DEV, I
SINGLE STD DEV, ISR)
ANALYST REL DEV, 1
Hl6H VOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Of DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) Ut/L
MEAN RECOVERY II)
ACCURACTIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD »EV IS)
OVERALt. REL STD DEV, X
SINGLE STD DEV.
-70.
119
5*.
1
1
.0
.1
48
.9
«S
1
7
.0
.1
21
.1
29
S
7
.0
.1
92
,3
69
IS
a
-**.
7
6*.
3.3
5J.C*
112
48
-5*.
23
49.
2.2
S.33
67S
329
-SI.
133
SS.
3.S
23. 18
2
t
.0
.3
89
.0
20
4
6
.0
.2
96
.»
07
6
7
.0
.6
18
.3
62
1
9
14.0
3.8
-72.94
2.3
99.60
3
10
101.0
70.3
-30.43
S1.1
72.79
S
10
7SO.O
S27.1
-29.71
3S6.0
67. S3
15
6
2
r
.n
L
-58.6?
2
39.
2.3
4S.98
112
67
-39.
39
sa.
13.4
19.43
67S
403
-40.
.S
SS
1
6
14.0
6.8
-51.31
0.8
11.49
2
a
15.0
7.4
-50.83
3.8
52.10
0.8
10.62
4
9
.0
.4
83
.4
S4
6
9
.0
.6
20
27S.6
68.
107.4
23.07
29
3
9
101.0
64.2
-36.44
38.9
60. 59
S
10
7SO.O
421.7
-43.77
27S.7
6S.37
4
10
112.0
73.0
-33.00
46.7
62.19
8.7
12.46
6
9
67S.O
415.8
-38.40
.286.8
68.98
123.4
29.48
1
6
14. a
4.3
-68.93
2.9
65.74
2
7
15.0
5.1
-66.10
3.0
59.43
1.6
34.30
3
10
101.0
61.9
-38.73
36.2
S8.S8
4
10
112.0
69.8
-37.6*
55.0
78.73
28.1
42.63
S
10
750.0
473.1
-36.89
374.3
79.08
6
10
675.0
425.2
-37.01
266.1
62.58
163.3
36.35
WATER LEGEND
1 - DISTILLED WATER
2 - TAP HATER
3 - SURFACE HATE!
* - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-14
ENVIRONMENTAL HON) HIKING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
Of mi or RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUD* - B/N <1>
STATISTICAL SUMMAR> IOR FLUORANTHENE ANALYSES B> MATE* TYPE
VATER 1 UATEI 2 WATER 3 UATER 4
LOU YOUDEN PAIR
UMBER OF »ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC It) Ok/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACVUREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV IS)
OVERALL REL STD DEV. X
SINGLE STD DEV. tSR)
ANALYST IEL DEV, I
MEDIUM VOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TftUE CONC 1C) U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I>
ACCURACYIXREL Ek«6«>
OVERALL STD DEV (S>
OVERALL REL STD DEV, S
SINGLE STD DEV,
ANALYST REL DEV, I
NIGH YOUDEN PAID
NUMBER Of DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY ID
ACCURACtKXREL ERROR)
OVERALL SID DEV IS)
OVERALL REL STD DEV, X
SINGLE STD DEV, ISR)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
UATER LEGEND
1
11
6.0
6.1
2.27
1.1
21. 56
1
13
105.0
as. 9
-14.18
11.6
39.04
5
11
610.0
462.4
-26.60
119.4
10. IS
2
11
7.0
i.:
-7.11
1.0
16.04
0.7
10.65
4
11
94.0
17.1
-7.11
9.7
11.07
20.7
21.94
6
11
700.0
S60.0
-20.00
172. 8
10. SS
101.6
19.88
1
12
6.0
5.5
-8.11
1.1
20.64
1
12
10S.O
89.0
-IS. 24
8.1
9.10
5
11
610.0
4S1.6
-28.11
117.4
25.99
2
11
7.0
5.9
-li.ib
1.7
28.11
1.7
28.86
4
12
94.0
84.8
-9.71
10. S
12.1?
6.6
7.58
6
11
700.0
425.7
-19.19
160.4
17.68
79.1
18.08
1
6
5
-S.
1
18.
1
105
89
-14.
17
19.
1
630
164
-42.
125
14.
1
1
.0
.6
14
^0
51
3
2
.0
.6
64
.4
40
5
2
.0
.9
08
.4
18
1
7
5
-17.
1
17.
0.6
10.87
1
94
76
-18.
V
12.
10.1
12.11
1
700
-I- 6
-34.
'198
44.
128.2
31.61
2
2
.0
.7
86
.0
13
4
2
.0
.7
40
. «
61
6
2
.0
.3
24
.1
19
1
11
6.0
5.1
-15.76
1 .5
29.98
I
12
105.0
79.5
-24.32
19.9
25.00
5
11
630.0
410.3
-31.70
175.8
40.87
1
7
6
-1.
;
53.
1.9
31.76
1
94
69
-26.
20
29.
14.3
19.22
1
700
364
-45.
175
45.
84.8
20.82
2
2
.0
.9
07
.7
35
4
2
.0
.5
02
3
18
6
2
.0
.0
14
.0
57
1 - DISTILLED UATER
2 - TAP UATER
1 - SURMCE UATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
T^BLE b-lj
ENVIRONM;:ilAL MOMTOBINt AMD SUPPOBI LAbOBATORY
».MICE 01 BtUHCM ANB BEVELOPrZNT
ENVIROMHE4TAL FROTEC1ION AGENCY
« IP* HETHOB 625 VALUATION STUBY - B/N <1)
"ATIiTICAL SUMMARY (OR HEPTACHLOR ANALYSES Bt HATtK TYPE
HATER
MATER
HATER
LOH YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER OF BAT*
TRUE CONC 1C)
MEAN AECOVEPf
ACCURACYIXeCl
POINTS
U6/L
Ul
f k " V >
OVERALL Sid BtV (S '
OVERALL REL ST» ltVt I
SINGLE STB
ANALYST REL
NCBIUM YOUBEN
NUMBER OF BATA
TRUE CONC
NEAN RECOUE*.
ACCURACYd"L
S£V, ISO
BEV. *
<*!«
fOlt\S
UGl'.
to
HRri* i
OVERALl SI." CIV (S)
OVERALL REL SIB BCV. X
SINGLE STB
ANALYST CEL
tv. is*)
BEV, X
1
0
'.I
f
-35.
4
56.
.
.
1
.
0
1
1
0
26
3
11
1
57
-28.
32
55.
HIGH VOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER OF BATA
TRUE CONC 1C)
MEAN RECOVERY
ACCURACYIXREL
POINTS
UG/L
11)
ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV (S)
OVERALL REL STB BEV, X
SINGLE SIB
ANALYST REL
BEV. t--l
-20.19
27.5
31.25
17.7
27.31
6
12
540.0
509.7
-5.60
241.4
47.36
101.5
20.39
1
It
11.0
6.1
-44.13
1.1
29.24
3
13
11.0
$9.9
-26.04
29.4
49.14
S
12
600.0
492.1
-17.16
215.9
43.10
2
12
12.0
6.1
-49.03
3.1
31.50
1.5
24.14
4
13
90.0
$1.1
-43.20
It. 9
36.11
23.1
41.39
6
12
540.0
392.4
-27.33
171.0
45.36
136.5
30.15
1
9
11.0
6.6
-39.90
1.9
21.02
2
10
12.0
6.1
-49.51
2.1
34.21
0.7
11.27
3
12
1.0
36.9
-29.72
25.1
45.37
5
11
600.0
$20.9
-13.11
161.6
70.76
4
11
90.0
51.7
-42.51
20.7
3V.99
20.2
37.2$
6
12
$40.3
311.4
-29.31
141.4
37.01
162.0
15.90
1
It
11.0
5.7
-41.43
2.1
41,57
2
11
12.0
7.4
-38.71
3.9
5:1.12
1.6
24.35
3
12
81.0
50.1
-31.13
19.3
31.92
4
13
90.0
50.1
-44.31
26.5
52.91
16.1
33.64
5
13
600.0
498.6
-16.90
254,1
50.97
6
13
540.0
351,0
-35=00
179.1
51.21
174.2
41.00
HATE* LlttNB
1 - &ISTULEB HATE*
2 - TAP HATE*
3 - SURFACE HATE*
4 - 1NBUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-16
ENVIRONMENTAL MOkllORINC AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
WATER TYPE
HATER 1 MATE* 2 HATER 3 WATER 4
OJ
LOH YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC UG/L
»EAN RECOVERY ID
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL SID DEV CM
OVERALL REL SID DEV, X
SINGLE STD DEV, ISR>
ANALYST REL DEV, I
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) UC/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACVI2REL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV «S)
OVERALL Af STD DEV, X
SINGLE STD DEV, ISR)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
NICN YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) UG/L
,.fAN RECOVERY ID
l.CURACYIXREl. ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV IS)
OVERALL REL ST» DEV, x
SINGLE STD DEV, ISR)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
HATER LEGEND
1
11
6.0
5.5
-8.64
2.1
38.39
3
14
80.0
57.9
-27.57
30.3
54.37
5
14
510.0
369.?
-27.61
150.2
40.68
1
7
5
-23.
1
28.
0.9
16.27
1
76
41
-18.
22
36.
11.8
19.80
1
535
395
-26.
161
40.
63.5
16.60
2
3
.0
.3
90
.5
23
4
3
.0
.7
88
.7
84
6
«
.0
.6
06
.5
82
1
10
6.0
4.5
-25.00
1.8
39.86
3
11
80.0
63.2
-20.97
15.6
?4.66
5
11
510.0
371.1
-27.24
99.9
26.91
2
11
7.0
5.2
-26.23
1.4
27.89
1.4
28.37
4
11
76.0
56.7
-25.43
13.5
27.41
12.1
20.12
f,
11
535.0
329.7
-38.37
140.1
42.49
103.8
29.64
1
10
6.0
4.7
-22.17
1.4
29.76
3
11
80.0
62.2
-22.23
13.2
21.22
5
12
510.0
311.7
-30.87
124.8
40.04
2
12
7.0
5.6
-20.36
1.4
25.37
0.'
13.55
4
12
76.0
58.9
-22.49
14.9
25.28
7.8
12.85
6
12
535.0
336.0
-37.20
129.4
38.32
102.3
31.5V
6
4
-32.
0
18.
1
80
48
-39.
17
35.
1
510
321
-37.
117
36.
1
9
.0
.0
78
.8
88
3
1
.0
.4
47
.3
72
5
0
.0
.0
06
.2
52
1
7
3
-45,
1
31.
0.8
20.53
1
76
43
-43.
12
28.
10.1
22.02
1
535
288
-46.
139
48.
40.0
13.12
2
0
.0
.8
14
.2
28
4
0
.0
.2
12
.5
95
6
1
.0
.1
15
-1
28
1 - DISTILLED HATER
2 - TAP HATER
3 - SURFACE HATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-17
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N 11)
STATISTICAL SUMMARY FOR 1SOPMORONE ANALYSES 8T WATLR TYPE
1 «ATE» 2 WATER ] VA1EI 4
CT«
LOU IOUIEN PAIR
NUMBER Of »ATA POINTS
TRUE cone US/L
MEAN RECOVERY <»
ACCUIACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL ST» »EV «S)
OVERALL IEL STt DEV, I
SINGLE STI »V, (SI)
ANALTST REL »EV, 1
MEDIUM YOUOEN PAIR
NUK6ER Of IATA POINTS
TRUt CONt U) US/I
MEAN RECOVEK
ACCURACY4XREL ERROR)
OVERALL STt tEW (S)
OVERALL REl STt tEVi I
S1NCLC STt »EV,
-------
CT\
TABLE 8-18
ENVIRONMENTAL HONJTON.'KG «hO SUPPORT IADORA10M
OfFICE Of RESEARCH ANB BEVElOPHENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A6ENCT
EPA RiTMOB 625 VALIBATION STUB* - B/N (1)
STATISTICAL SUMHART TOR NAPHTHALENE ANALYSES BT HATER TtPE
WATER 1 WATER 2 HATER 1 WATER 4
LOU »OUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Of BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY ilfc/L
MEAN RECOVER* <1)
ACCURACTCXREL ERROR)
OVERALL ST» BEV IS)
OVERALL «EL STD BE*, J
SIMILE STt BEV, (SO
ANALfST REL BEV. X
HATE* LEtENt
1
11
*.o
6.5
1.31
1.4
21. 55
Jl
1J
105. 0
78.*
-25.29
36.1
46.05
S
11
tJO.O
411.1
-71.61
56.5
12. SI
2
12
7.0
6.*
-«.7$
1.1
17.60
0.9
H.14
4
12
94.0
12.1
-12.41
11.9
19.J7
18.4
22.92
6
12
700.0
495.0
-29.29
109.0
22.02
88.3
11,08
4
12
6.0
6.0
0.42
1.0
16.63
1
12
105-S
o.«
-11.69
15,4
?7.19
S
11
610.0
462.1
-26.62
116.7
21.24
2
11
7.0
6.S
-7.64
1.4
21. S?
0.7
11.87
4
1!
94.0
«2.0
-12.76
15.8
19.27
12.1
1*.99
6
11
700.0
462.7
-11.90
(53.3
13.12
94.2
20. 57
1
11
6.0
6.3
4.24
1.7
27.65
1
12
.05.0
17.0
-17.11
10.7
12.25
5
11
610.0
411.6
-10,17
IIS. 4
42.26
2
11
7.0
6.6
-5.27
1.7
25.14
0.1
11.74
4
11
94.0
77.6
-17.41
11.4
14.61
4.6
5.57
6
11
700.0
571.0
-17.43
211.6
17.12
200.2
19.19
1
14
6.0
6.1
2.26
1.6
25.17
3
14
105.0
71.8
-24.99
22.1
21.26
5
11
630.0
470.2
-25.36
?61.9
15.91
2
13
7.0
6.5
-7.47
1.6
25.31
t.1
17.5e
4
1*
9t.O
61.4
-27.11
21.3
31.19
11.9
11.13
6
14
700.0
425.7
-39.11
151.1
35.49
94.0
20.97
1 - BISTULE» WATER
2 - TAP UATE9
1 - SURFACE WATER
4 - INBUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
CT>
WATER
TABLE 8-19
ENVIRONMENTAL HONIIOB1N& AND SU.-POUT LABORATOI1
orriCE or RESEARCH AN* »EVELOPHCNI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCT
EPA METHOB 625 VALIDATION STUD* - B/N I1>
STATISTICAL SUMMARY 101 PCB-1260 ANALYSES B» HATER TVPE
1 HATER 2 HAIER 1 WA1EM 4
LOW YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Or BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C> UC/L
MEAN RECOVERY <»>
ACCURACVfXREL ERTCRI
OVERALL STB »E« >S>
OVERALL REL STB BEV. X
SINCLE STB BEV. .
ANALtST REL BEV, X
HEBiUM YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Or BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC U> UC/L
MEAN RECOVERY J«>
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV «$)
OVERALL REL STB BEV. X
SINCLE STB BEV, (SB)
ANALYST REL BEV, X
NICN YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Or IATA POINTS
TRUE CONC UC/L
MEAN RECOVERY ii>
ACCURACTUREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV (S>
OVERALI REL SIS BEV. X
SINCLE ST> BfV.
ANALYST REL B£₯,
NATia LEfiENB
1 2
S 10
40.0 16.0
21.7 17.1
-4S.81 -52.58
9.9 10.6
4S.80 62.10
11.3
S8.11
3 4
11 11
100.0 90.0
7S.2 68. *
-24.78 -23.91
30.0 22.7
39.84 33.19
14.4
20.04
$ 6
12 11
667.0 600.0
478.9 481.6
-28.20 -19.74
224.8 269.2
46.93 SS.89
242.7
SO. S3
1 2
6 1
40.0 16.0
8.0 11. t
-80.00 -67.18
8.6 9.3
107.40 79.01
1.8
18.07
3 4
9 9
100.0 90.0
45.4 29.2
-S4.64 -67.57
33. S 22.0
73.86 75.25
23.8
61.74
S 6
11 11
667.0 600.0
529.7 394.4
-20.56 -34.27
184.4 214.1
34.81 54.29
153.2
33. IS
1 2
5 5
40.0 36.0
9.7 6.3
-75.65 -82.44
2.8 4.2
28.96 66.34
1.2
15.02
3 4
7 8
130.0 90.0
11.9 30.7
-68.11 -65.15
13.8 19.9
41.28 64. SI
18.6
59.55
S 6
11 10
66'. 0 600.0
102.6 350.6
-54.64 -41.57
282.1 203.3
73.30 57.99
224.4
68.70
1 2
4 6
40.0 36.0
4.2 6.1
-89.18 -81.57
1.2 5.7
28.01 86.51
4.3
78.90
1 4
S 6
10C.O 90.0
3t.7 :r.9
-65.30 -76.74
21.6 5.1
62.30 2'. 23
16.1
57.75
r 6
11 10
667.0 600.0
360.3 242.)
-46.00 -59.62
194.3 1*2.!
5). 95 66.92
11). b
57.76
1 - MSTILLEft HATEN
2 - TAP WATER
1 - SURMCE MATER
4 - |N»USTRIAL ElrLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-20
ENVIIONMfH1*L NOMIIOIIlliG »NO SUPPORT L4BOIAIOK
OlllCt Olf IESEAICM ANB tEVELOPHENI
ENVIIONHEN1AL PI01ECIION H6INCI
EPA MINOS 625 VALUATION STDtl - B/N (1)
STATISTICAL SUMHAIf fOI 1,3-»ICHLOI03ENIENE ANALYSES ST MATEI TTPE
WATEI 1 yATEl 2 UA1EI 3 WAIEI 4
LOU VOUkEN PAI*
NUMB El OF »ATA POINTS
TIUE COMt CCI US/L
«-«K IECOVEIT II>
ACCUIACVdIEL ENIOI)
OVEIALL Sit »EV <$>
OVEIALL ItL Sl» IE₯, S
SlNClf SI» »EV. IS!)
ANALYST »EL HIV, S
NEIItm VOUl.N PAIR
NUH8CI Of kATA POINIS
TIUE (OHC (C> US/L
NEAN IECOVEIT (I)
ACCUIACKSIEL EIIOI)
OVEIALL ST» REV
OVEIALL IEL S1» »EV. S
SINtLE SI* »E«i (SO
ANALYST ML »EV. S
MICH TOUDEN »AII
NUMBEI Of tUt POldlS
tBUE CONC IC> I't/L
HE** IECOVEM II)
ACCURACY IIBEL EIIOII
OVEIALL SI* »EV <»>
OVEIALL IEL SI» »EV. t
SINtLt SI» »EV. (Sk>
ANALYST III »E«. 1
H*1EI LEtEM»
1
10
5.0
i.a
-2J.40
1.7
4S.31
}
1Z
vo.o
74.3
-17.41
44.)
S9.S7
S
1)
540.0
475.4
-11.93
161. S
33.96
2
12
4.0
4.1
-31.47
1.7
40.36
1.4
41.44
4
13
S1.0
69.7
-14.00
26.0
37.26
26.1
37.21
6
13
600.0
S13.1
-14.48
166.7
32.48
70.7
14.30
1
13
5.0
J.9
-21.85
2.1
54.44
3
13
90.0
66. S
-26.16
«4.6
22.04
S
14
S40.0
J35.9
-0.76
268.0
SO. 01
1
6
3
-42.
1
2«.
1.*
48.62
1
81
74
-8.
22
30.
16.7
23.64
1
600
534
-10.
322
60.
137.}
25. 6«
2
1
.0
.4
58
.0
75
4
4
.0
.4
10
.7
31
6
4
.0
.6
90
.8
38
1
3
4
-11.
2
50.
1
90
81
-9.
21
26.
1
540
496
-8.
216
43.
1
1
.0
.4
64
.2
01
3
2
.0
.7
18
.9
79
5
3
.0
.0
15
.0
55
2
9
6.0
3.8
-36.11
0.5
14.05
1.3
34.27
4
13
81.0
67.3
-16.94
12.1
18.02
18.1
24.34
6
13
600.0
623.0
3.84
267.7
42.96
224.9
40.20
1
1<
3.0
3.5
-20.83
1.8
32.05
3
13
90.0
70.7
-21.40
19.2
27.11
5
11
540.0
425.2
-21.26
66.5
15.65
1
6
4
-20.
3
71.
1.8
44.78
1
81
66
-18.
37
57.
22.4
32.69
1
600
449
-25.
290
64.
147.4
33.71
2
3
.0
.7
90
.4
36
4
4
.0
.2
32
.8
oe
6
3
.0
.?
05
.1
52
1 - »IST1LLE» MATE*
2 - TAP HATEI
3 - SUlf'.CE MATE*
4 - IN»US1IIAL EFrLUEMT
-------
TABLE 3-21
EH«i*OI>ll(H1«L HCnllOBINt ANB SUPPOI1 lABODAIOK
OlllCt 01 IESIAICM AK» »EVILCPNEHT
ENVIIONMfN1AL PROItCIION ACCNCt
IP* HtTMOft 625 VALUATION SIUOI - B/N <1>
STATISTICAL SbHNAIT (01 216-t INMIOTOLUf HC ANALYSES 81 WATER MPt
HATEI 1 MATE! 2 HATE* 1 KAUK 4
LOW (OUtEli PA1I
nuneEi or »ATA POINTS
TlUf CONf US/L
EAN IfCOVEIf (I)
AccuiACvtxiEL tiio*)
OVEIALL $T» IfV 1S>
OVEIALL If I SI» »(«. I
SINtii STI tEtft (SI)
ANALYST til »tV. I
NEtlUH «OU*E« PA1I
NUMBER Of IAT4, POINTS
nut cone to ue/t
MEAN IECOVEI* (It
ACCUIACKXIEL EIIOI)
OVEIALL Sti »tV (SI
OVEIALl IEL Sit *EV, I
S1N6LE SI* IEV. (SI)
ANJLLTST BEL *EV. X
N1CH fOUIEN PAII
NUABEI OF tATA POINTS
TIUE COIlC (C> US/I
MEAN «ICCVE«t CD
*CCU*»CT(XIEL EIIOI)
OVEIDLt S1I »E* IS)
OVEIALL IEL Sit Of». I
smut STI IEV, (&i>
ANAI.VST Ml *E«i t
HtTEl LE6ENI '
1
10
11.0
a. 2
-21.*}
?.7
11.41
1
11
11.0
7). i
-«.S2
i«.r
21.70
»
11
400.0
tO«. 6
1.10
11S.4
19.11
!
12
U.O
«.o
-25.11
1.1
12.22
2.4
21.17
4
12
«0.0
95.7
».J«
19.1
20.14
12.5
14.71
«
11
540.0
415. 7
14.02
107.5
I/. 46
16.5
14.16
1
12
11.0
1.1
-26.06
2.2
21.01
1
11
11.0
71.6
-2.9S
JO. S
11.17
5
11
600.0
622.9
I.I?
108. i
17.11
2
11
12.0
9.7
-11.94
1.5
15.10
1.9
21.15
4
11
90.0
15.1
-5.42
11.6
21.11
11.4
11.11
6
11
540.0
551.1
2.46
111.1
11.11
114.5
22.17
1
14
11.0
1.4
-21.64
4.1
49.40
1
15
1.0
15.4
5.47
21.9
27.92
5
15
600.0
606.4
1.06
229.1
17.79
2
14
12.0
1.1
-26.90
4.9
55.11
2.5
29.01
4
15
90.0
17.6
-2.70
12.0
11.65
11.2
21.00
6
14
540.0
590.0
9.25
164.9
27.94
121.5
20.65
1
11
11.0
9.4
-14.46
1.5
16.71
1
11
61 ,0
76.7
-5.J«
If .5
2t.l>
5
11
600.0
7U.1
19.72
214. S
29,90
2
12
12.0
11.5
-4,17
4.1
17.15
1.1
12.52
4
12
90.0
19.1
-0.10
27.5
10.62
11.9
16.75
6
14
54C.O
344.2
0.7>
224.7
41.29
22J.5
14.91
1 - tlSTILKI HATtl
2 - TAP MATE!
) - SUirACE MATFI
4 - IHIUSTIIAL EMLUEHT
-------
TABLE 8-22
IMWIIOkHENIAL HONIIOIIN6 AN» SUCPOI1 IABOIA10M
OfflCE Of *tSEA*CH AN* »EVELOPHEN1
ENVIIOhHEHTAL PROTECTION AtEMCT
SPA METNOt 625 VALUATION HUH - B/H (It
STATISTICAL tUHHAAl 101 S.I -ICHLOtOBENlIIINE ANALYSES BT MATE! TfPE
UAIEI f HATE* 2 WATE* 1 HATE* 4
LOH VOUMN PAI*
NUM0E* Of »ATA POINTS
TIUE CONC IC> t)*/t_
NEAN lEccvEit ID
ACCUIAOIIIEL E**0«»
OVCIALL ST» »(V IS)
OV**ALl *EL ST» »EV, X
SINtLE ST» IEV, IS*)
ANALIST *EL »E₯. X
NEI1UM 10U»EN PAH
NUflBE* Of IATA POINTS
TIUE CONC 1C) UC/L
DEAN IECOVEIV (I)
ACCUIACVIXCEL EIIOI)
OVEIALL ST» »EV IS)
OVEIALL IEL ST» CEV, X
SINtLE S'» »EV. ISO
ANALTST III »EV. X
t!Ca TOUlEa PAII
NUH6EI Of IATA POINTS
TtuE CONC 1C) Ut/L
EA1 IECOVEI* ID
ACCUIACTIIIEL EIIOI)
OVEIALL ST» »EV IS)
OVEIALL IEi ST» »IV, X
SINtLE ST* »EV, (SI)
ANA, TST IEL *EVf X
HATE* LEtENt
1
11
40.0
11.1
-4.11
29.7
77. SS
S
1]
100.0
106. S
4.54
56. 7
SI. 26
5
11
6«7.0
7Si.V
9.19
540.9
46.51
2
11
16.0
11.6
-12.09
14.2
44.72
11.1
S1.46
4
12
90.0
90.2
0.27
11.1
17.41
25.6
25.91
6
11
600.0
115.9
19,11
440.2
52.66
271.1
14.15
1
12
40.0
12.1
-19.11
11.6
si. in
I
12
100.0
92.7
-7.2S
49.9
SI. 77
S
12
667.0
772. S
15.11
171.1
41.06
1
16
21
-21.
19
61.
10.7
15.59
1
90
14
-6.
11
17.
11.1
15.11
1
600
644
7.
105
47.
114.6
11.91
2
2
.0
.2
62
.1
26
4
2
.0
.5
10
.6
17
6
2
.0
.4
74
.5
26
1
40
1C
-25.
14
41.
1
100
19
-10.
64
71.
1
667
191
14.
461
51.
1
2
.0
.0
00
.6
61
7
25.
1
1
.0
.4
64
.1
71
17
44.
S
2
.0
.1
65
.2
57
546
67.
2
9
16.0
24.9
-10.91
T.O
27.91
.0
55
4
12
90.0
77. 0
-14.46
26.1
11.91
.2
61
0
12
600.0
711.2
11.17
651.1
91. ISO
.9
11
,
11
40.0
15.0
-12.61
17.5
50.00
16
52.
1
11
100.0
110.1
10.10
42.2
71.09
t4
14.
5
11
667.0
189.5
11.16
195.2
44.42
299
16,
1
16
26
-26.
10
41.
.0
17
1
30
99
10.
41
42.
.7
00
1
600
74»
21.
121
41.
.1
14
2
1
.0
.1
17
.9
46
4
1
.0
.2
22
.7
04
6
1
.0
.5
25
.9
IS
t - »ISTILLE» HATf*
2 - TAP HATE*
1 - SUSfACE HATE*
4 - INtUSTtlAl Ef'LUENT
-------
TABLE 8-23
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITCBlNt AMD SUPPOtl LABO*A10«f
OH1CI 0( RESEARCH AN» BEVELOPNENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACENCT
EPA flITHOB 625 VALIBAT10N STUM - 8/M «1>
STATISTICAL SUMMART fOR 4-CHLOROPHENTL PHENVL ETHER ANALT&ES BT HATER I»Pl
HAMR 1 HATE* 2 HATER } HATER 4
LOU TOUbEN PA1H
NUMBER Of »ATA POINTS
TRUE COMC (C> Ut/L
Kltlt RECOVER* (1)
ACCURACTdRFL ERROR*
OVERALL STB »EV IS)
OVERALL RIL ST« REV. X
SINtLE ST» BEV. «SR)
ANALTST REL »£». 1
Ml (I KM fOUIEM PAIR
MUK8CR Of RAT* POINTS
TRUE COKC 1C) U6/L
MEAN RECCVERT (II
ACCURACTIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STR »E» (S)
OVERALL IEL ST» ifV, X
S1NCLC STk »EV, (SR)
ANALTST REL »f«. X
NI6H TOUtEN PAIR
NUH8EI Of »ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C> Ue/L
NEAN RECOVE»T <>
ACCURACf (XREL ERROR!
OVERALL ST» tt*
OVERALL REL STR »E₯. X
SINtLI SIR tEV, (SR)
ANALTST REL BEV. X
MATE* LECEM*
1
«
».o
9.0
0.12
2.4
2*. 72
0
«.
3
12
ta.o
58.1
-14,62
24.4
42.00
12
IV.
S
12
soo.o
450.9
-9.82
132.0
29.21
7*
18.
2
12
10.0
9.1
-7.2$
2.0
22.10
.a
is
4
11
7S.O
75 = 7
0.94
12.0
IS. 82
.9
21
6
12
4SO.O
40S.9
-9.ai
124.7
10.7}
.4
36
1
10
9.0
«.«
-2.22
2.2
2S.OS
3
11
*8.0
CS.8
-3.21
11.1
16. tS
S
11
SOO.O
417.2
-2.57
131.2
26.92
2
11
10.0
9.?
-1.00
1.9
20.43
1.2
12.82
4
11
7S.O
76.1
1.48
14.4
11.91
6.4
9.07
6
11
4SO.O
317.1
-13.98
135. S
35.01
19.4
20.45
1
10
9.0
9.5
5.44
1.8
11.98
3
11
48.0
69.8
2.71
13.9
19.85
S
11
500.0
462.9
-7.42
138.8
30.00
2
11
10.0
10.1
0.82
1.1
17.94
1.1
11.40
4
11
75.0
74.2
-1.01
15.5
20.16
0.6
11.11
6
10
4SO.O
431.0
-4.22
113.4
26.30
80.4
17.99
1
9
V.O
7.4
-17.63
0.9
11.54
3
12
68.0
54.2
-20.23
14.5
26.67
5
11
500.0
453.7
-9.25
161.4
35.57
2
10
1C.O
8.9
- 11.40
2.3
26,49
1.4
17-08
4
11
75.0
58.3
-22.29
17.9
30.69
7.0
12.49
6
12
450.0
315.9
-25.35
127.8
38.04
94.2
23.85
1 - tISTILLf* HATER
2 - TAP HATE*
3 - SURMCi HATER
' - IN»USTRIAL EMLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-24
ENVIRONMENTAL HON110HING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE 01 RESEARCH ANO DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUD* - B/N 41>
STATISTICAL SUMMARY FOR 4,4 -D0D ANALYSES BY WATER TYPE
HATER 1 WATER 2 WATER ' U1TIR *
LOU YOUDfN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC C) U6/L
MEAN RECOVER) <«>
ACCURACY (XDEL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DtV (S)
OVERALL REL STD DEVi X
SINGLE STD D£V, (SR)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY <»>
ACCURACYUREL E*ROR)
OVERALL STD DEV
OVERALL REL STD DEV, 1
SINGLE STD PEV. (SR>
ANALYST REL DEV, X
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACYfXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV (S)
OVERALL REL STD DEV, X
SINGLE STD 9EV,
ANALYST REL DEV, X
MATE* LEGEND
1
7
7.0
3.9
-44.90
1.1
29.55
1
11
54.0
28.9
-46.45
21.4
80.91
S
11
400. U
231.8
-41.55
148.1
61.42
2
10
8.0
1.8
-S3. 00
1.9
51.04
0.8
20.11
4
10
60.0
10.2
-49.il
14.1
47. IE
10.1
14.75
e
10
160.0
220.5
-38.76
141.4
65.05
52.7
21.19
1
7
1
49.
1
43.
1
54
27
-48.
16
57.
1
400
255
-36.
125
49.
1
1
.0
.5
15
.5
06
3
2
.0
.9
35
.0
22
5
1
.0
.0
24
.1
C4
2
9
8.0
4.4
-44.79
2.1
48.16
1.8
46.46
4
11
60.0
25.0
-58.29
14.8
59.32
11.2
42.45
6
11
360.0
205.0
-43.05
103.9
50.69
56.0
24.35
1
9
7.0
3.9
-43.97
1.5
38.64
1
11
54.0
23.4
-56.60
11.1
56.72
5
11
400.0
200.5
49.88
133.7
66.70
2
9
8.0
4.0
-49.58
1.3
12.47
0.4
9.97
4
11
o.o
24.1
-59.44
11.6
55.87
5.4
22.69
6
11
160.0
216.0
-40.01
170.3
78.86
119.2
57.24
7
2
-60.
0
21.
1
54
21
-56.
14
59.
1
400
219
-45.
128
58.
1
8
.0
.7
89
.6
91
1
1
.0
.8
01
.1
30
5
1
.0
.8
06
.8
62
8
1
-55.
1
46.
0.9
27.38
1
60
20
-66.
9
46.
9.3
42.50
1
160
174
-51.
100
57.
87.1
44.21
2
8
.0
.6
47
,7
7J
4
1
.0
.2
41
.4
61
6
1
.0
.2
62
.8
89
1 - DISTILLED WATER
2 - TAP HATER
1 - SURFACE HATE*
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 3-25
ENVIRONMENTAL HOMTOKING AMD SUPPORT LABORATORY
Of(IC( OF RESEARCH ANB DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRJNMEN1AL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA NETH06 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
STATISTICAL SUMMARY (OR 4,4 -DBS ANALYSES BY MUTER TYPE
MATER 1 UAIER 2 UATIR 3 UATER *
LOW YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Of »ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) US/L
MEAN RECOVERY (11
ACCURACY(XREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB »EW
OVERALL REL STD »EV, S
SINGLE SIB BEV, ISR1
ANALYST REL SEV, I
MEDIUM YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Of (ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) US/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACYIIREL ERROR)
OVERALL ST» DEV (S>
OVERALL REL STB BEV, I
SINGLE STB BEV, (SI)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
HUH YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY (1)
ACCURACYtXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STO DEV (S)
OVERALL RLl STD DEV, »
SINGLE tlf DEV, (SR>
ANALtST REL 3EV, »
1
10
14
9
-J4.
2
28.
.0
.2
14
.6
19
I
12
101
69
-31.
12
46.
.0
.3
42
.3
58
S
12
7JO
500
-3J.
206
41.
.0
.3
29
.0
17
2
12
IS
9
-33.
2
29.
1.2
12. as
.0
.9
94
.9
47
4
11
112
79
-29.
.0
.2
28
16. S
20.
22. S
30.28
82
6
12
675
48S
-28.
217
44.
99.6
20.20
.0
.6
OS
.6
80
1
12
14
7
-46.
2
38.
.0
.6
01
.9
5»
3
12
101
ss
-45-
22
40.
.0
.4
12
.4
36
S
12
7SO.O
506
-32.
208
M.
.1
S2
.0
09
2
12
1S.O
8.S
-43.28
2.9
34.16
3.1
39.09
4
12
112.0
52.6
-53. OS
18.5
35.22
19.9
36.85
6
12
675.0
373.1
-44.73
133.0
35.65
146.3
33.28
1
11
14.0
6.4
-54.35
1.4
22.44
3
11
101.0
44.1
-56.32
15.6
35.31
5
11
730.0
379.4
-49.il
168.2
44.34
2
11
15.0
6.8
-54.61
1.7
24.81
0.9
13.65
4
11
112.0
43.6
-61.09
14.1
32.30
12.3
28.13
6
11
675.0
356.6
-47.16
138.8
39.93
53.6
14.58
1
10
14.0
7.1
-49.07
3.4
47.16
2
11
15.0
6.7
-55.58
2.4
36.09
3.0
43.51
3
13
101.0
38.9
-61.48
19.3
49.69
5
12
750.0
460.2
-38.63
203.2
44.15
4
12
112.0
40.3
-64.00
20.1
49.93
18.0
45.51
6
13
675.0
325.6
-51.76
158. 1
48.56
135.3
34.42
HATER LEGEND
1 - DISTILLED MATER
2 - TAP UATER
3 - SURFACE WAUR
4 - INDUSTRIAL IffLUfNT
-------
10
TABLE 8-26
INVIRON'UNTAl SONITOklSb IND SUPPORT !APORATOh>
orriCE or MSEAMCH AND bEvlLOPHEM
tNVItOKHENTAL PR01EC1ION AGEtiCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - D/N (2)
STATISTICAL SUMMARY roR BENZOCG.H.IIPERYLENE ANALYSES BY UATER TYPE
HATER 1 VATER 2 WATIR 3 UATER 4
LOU VOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Or DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY <»
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV
OVERALL REL STO OEV, X
SINGLE STD OEV, (SR)
ANALYST REL DEV. X
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Or DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY <«)
ACCURACYIXRSL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV IS)
OVERALL REL STO DLV, X
SINGLE STD DEV. «SR>
ANALYST REL DEV, X
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Or DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY <«)
ACCURACY'IREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV
OVERALL REL STD DEV, X
SiNGLE STD OEV, (SR)
ANALYST REL OEV, J
UATER LEGEND
1
8
7.4
6.4
-11.85
2.6
40.02
1
12
74.0
67.6
-8.62
35. i,
52.71
5
12
278.0
115.1
11.41
118.0
43.78
2
11
11.0
10.1
-8.26
5.3
52.24
4.V
59.32
4
12
56.0
52.1
-7.04
27.2
52.28
14.0
21.17
6
12
292.0
261.8
-10.31
131.9
51.14
111.2
78.55
7
4
-18.
1
28.
1
74
32
-56.
16
49.
1
27?
140
22.
221
65.
1
6
.4
.5
96
.1
9)
1
0
.3
.2
51
.0
81
5
2
0
.^
44
.5
C9
2
8
11.0
4.2
-62. U
1.6
18.05
1.0
22.25
4
12
56.0
19.4
-65.28
11.2
57.16
5.2
20.11
6
9
292,0
203.1
-28.75
79.5
18.21
159.2
58.07
7
2
-63.
38.
1
74
27
-62.
14
51.
1
278
2r. 6
-7.
176
68.
1
7
.4
.7
71
.0
06
3
1
.0
.5
80
.3
88
5
4
.0
.4
78
.6
89
2
7
11.0
3.1
-71.69
1.7
55.54
1.8
61.57
4
13
56.0
18.4
-67.21
12.3
67.09
9.7
42.19
t,
14
292.0
250.1
-14.28
158.7
63.41
115.8
53.59
1
8
7.4
3.5
-52.03
2.4
68.19
1
34.
3
13
74.0
28. 2
-61.89
15.1
53.67
8
10.
5
15
278.0
163.8
-41.09
124.7
70.15
81
18.
11
3
-69.
2
61.
.2
99
1
56
27
-50.
18
67.
.7
94
1
292
256
-12.
181
70.
.1
61
2
7
.0
.1
7*
.0
5*
4
1
.0
.7
47
.7
42
6
4
.0
.4
20
.9
97
1 - DISTILLED UATER
2 - TAP UATER
3 - SURFACE UATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL IMLUEM
-------
TABLE 8-27
ENVlROhME N1»L HUSIIOklNC *hO SUPPORT
OfflCE OF RiSEAUCH AND DtVCLOPNENl
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUtY - B/N (?) *
STATISTICAL SUMMARY fOR BEN20 (K > f LUORANTHENE ANALYSES BY UATER IYPE
HATER 1 VATER 2 WATER 3 HAltR 4
LOU VOUOIN PAID
NUMBER OF BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C> UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR!
OVERALL STB OEV
OVERALL REL STO »EV, I
SINGLE STO BEV. (SR)
ANALYST REL BEV. t
MEDIUM YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Of DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACYIXRCL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV
OVERALL REL STB OEV, X
SINGLE STB OEV, ISR)
ANALYST REL BEV, X
HIGH TOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Of OATA POINTS
TRUE CONC UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY U)
ACCURACY(XREL ERROR)
OVERALL STO OEV (S)
OVERALL REL STB BEV, X
SINGLE STB BEV, (SR>
ANALYST REL BEV, X
HATER LEGENB
T
12
e.o
5.3
-33.33
2.1
39.21
3
14
60.0
45.2
-24.71
22.0
48.61
S
12
51?. 0
491.3
-3.26
115. S
23.32
2
12
7.2
4.8
-32.87
2.2
44.78
2.0
38.90
1
1o
57. 0
44.3
-22.31
17.0
38.31
10.6
23. 66
6
14
5*8.0
' 491.1
-10.38
164.8
33.56
79.7
16.16
1
10
8.C
4.S
-39.38
2.2
44. e:
3
11
60.0
28.8
-52.00
11. S
39.89
S
M
312.0
42V.9
-16. 4S
101.3
23.68
2
9
7.2
4.1
-43.0(i
1.7
42.10
0.7
15.44
4
11
57.0
24.4
-57.16
11.5
47.29
5.9
22.17
6
11
54S.O
431.1
-21.34
158.8
36.84
72.9
16.97
1
11
e.o
3.9
-50.80
2.6
66.40
1
3
14
60.0
33.5
-44.23
21.4
63.82
5
13
512.0
385.2
-?4.76
206.8
53.67
1
11
7.2
4.8
-33.59
3.1
64.91
2.4
54.04
4
14
57.0
24.7
-56.60
13.1
53.04
13.0
44.61
6
14
548.0
396.2
-27.69
' 206.5
52.12
140.4
35.93
1
11
e.o
6.1
-23.66
3.3
54.31
«
3
14
60.0
27.4
-54.40
18.5
67.80
5
15
312.0
309.4
-39.58
203.7
65.83
2
12
7.2
3.7
-48. *6
2.8
76.86
2.2
,5.06
4
13
57.0
24.2
-57.61
17.9
73.94
7.4
28.76
6
14
548.0
364.3
-33.52
212.3
58.28
94.2
27.95
1 - 01ST1LLEB HATER
2 ' TAP HATER
1 - SURFACE HATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EffLUtNT
-------
TABLE 8-28
EKVIkONIENTAL MOhllOHlNC *I,B SUPPORT LAbORAlOSI
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVILOPPEM
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
IP* METHOD 625 VALIDATION S7UBY - BiH lit
STATISTICAL SUHFARY (08 6E.1IYL BUT" PHTHALATE ANALYSES b» HATER TYPE
HATE! 1
UATER 2
WATER
UATER
LOU rouDEN PAIN
NUMBER Of DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC IC> U6/L
HI AN RECOVERS (I)
ACCURACVUREL ERROR)
OVERALL ST» DEV CS>
OVERALL REL STD OfV, K
S1NCLE ST» DEV, (SR)
ANALYST REL DEV. X
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER I* DATA POINTS
TRUC CONC ICI UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACY (XREL ERROR)
OVfiALL STD DEV
OVERALL REL STD DEV, X
SINtlE ST5 »EV, (SR)
ANALYST REL ftEV. S
NI6N TOUOtN PAIR
NUdBES OF ftATA POINTS
TRUE CONC U) U6/L
NEAK EECOVERV (I)
AC^URACYCXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV (S)
OVERALL REL STD DEV, X
SINGLE ST» DEV, (SI)
ANALYST REL DEV. «
MATER LEGEND
1
8
1
-Si.
3
82.
1
60
31
-47.
20
6).
1
5U
383
-25.
U«
37.
1
3
.0
.7
33
.0
29
3
4
.0
.6
26
.1
42
5
3
.0
.8
04
.3
59
2
13
7.2
3.2
-55.4$
2.4
73.98
1.6
45.26
4
14
57.0
28.7
-49.56
23.1
80.33
6.5
21. <0
6
13
548.0
419.7
-23.42
167.2
38.66
71.4
17.77
1
12
e.o
5.5
-31.35
5.2
93.99
3
12
60. 0
29.6
-5C.64
23.8
»C.23
5
13
512.0
358.8
-29.92
131.7
36.72
2
10
1.2
3.7
-49.17
2.7
73.03
2.9
64.10
t.
13
57.0
26.2
-53.95
17.9
68.30
7.7
27.56
6
13
548.0
407.8
-25. Si
129.0
31.62
59.4
15.50
1
10
s.r
4.0
-49.75
2.2
55.37
3
13
60.0
22.4
-62.67
18.8
83.74
5
13
512.0
312.9
-38.90
162.7
52.01
2
9
7.2
2.9
-60.19
2.2
76.47
1.4
41.30
4
13
57.0
22.6
-60.42
15.7
69.44
11.7
52.16
6
13
548.0
349.1
-36.30
167.9
48.11
162.1
48.96
1
8
5
-3*.
4
83.
1
60
2E
-52.
17
62.
1
512
339
-33.
182
53.
1
1
.0
.2
43
.4
83
3
2
.0
.3
90
.6
43
5
2
.0
.0
79
.1
71
1
7
4
-35.
2
58.
2.1
41.58
1
57
34
-39.
23
6V.
18.7
59.93
1
548
409
-25.
191
46.
156.9
41.95
2
2
.2
.8
«5
.8
80
4
2
.0
.2
93
.9
87
6
2
.0
.0
36
.7
87
1 - DISTILLED UATER
2 - TAP HATE*
3 - SURFACE UATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 3-29
ENVIRONMENTAL MOfcllORlNA AND il°PO«T LABOR ATU.S »
OMICE Of RESEARCH AND 01: VE LOPME NT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEC 11011 A6ENCI
(PA METHOD 625 VALIDATION S'JUOY - 01* <2> -
STATISTICAL SUMMARY 108 BI SI 2-CKLOROE THOU >HETMANE ANALYSES BY HATER TYPE
HATER 1 MATER 2 HATER 3 HATER 4
LOH VOUDEN PAIR
NUHBEI Of DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I>
ACCURACVCXREL ERROR)
OVERALL SID DEV
OVERALL REL STD ȣV, X
SINGLE SID DEV, (SO
ANALYST REL DEV, 1
MEDIUM I9UGEN PAIR
NUMBER Of DATA POINTS
TiUE CONC (C> U6?L
MEAN RECOVER* (I)
ACCURACYIXREl ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV IS)
OVERALL REL STD DE", X
SINGLE STD DEV,
ANALYST REL DEV. X
HIE.H IOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Of DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY
ArcuRACKXREL ERRCR)
OVERALL STD DEV (S>
OVERALL REL STb DEV. X
S1N6LE STD DEV. (SR)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
UATEI LEGEND
t 2
12 ,2
12.0 11. Q
t.4 7.2
-30.28 -J*.70
4.2 J.9
4V.V8 SJ. 64
2.4
33.42
3 4
14 14
79.0 77.0
85.1 81.3
7.78 8.14
30.2 17.7
JS.46 21.28
16. S
19,65
S 6
14 13
617.0 646.0
688.3 683.1
11. SS 5.7S
149.2 204.6
21.68 29.96
i01.9
14.86
1
11
12.0
7.9
-34.32
S.I
64.23
3
12
79.0
76.9
-2.64
13.7
17.76
S
13
617.0
652.2
5.70
172.8
26. SO
2
12
11.0
7.1
-35.00
4.4
62.09
3.9
52.08
4
14
77.0
72.1
-6.30
25.1
34.86
18.0
24.17
6
14
6*4.0
702.0
8.67
227.6
32.42
67.3
9.94
2
TO 9
12.0 11.0
7.4 8.1
-37-92 -26.67
3.2 4.6
42.70 57.11
2.2
27.91
3 4
13 13
79.0 77.0
81.6 70.8
3.30 -8.05
26.9 26.9
32.93 37.9.
24.5
31.92
5 6
13 13
617.0 646.0
541.3 582.5
-12.26 -9.84
205.1 '157.3
37.89 27.00
180.4
32.10
1
12
12.0
10.7
-10.83
4.3
39.98
4
3
U
71.0
"0.6
14.67
35.7
39.38
5
14
617.0
585.2
-5.16
228.6
39.07
2
11
11.0
12.5
13.47
6.;
52.24
5.4
,6.29
4
13
77.0
73.7
-4.32
22. S
30.59
22.3
27.17
6
12
646.0
660.4
2.23
113.1
17.12
142.5
22.88
1 - DISTILLED HATER
2 - TAP HATE*
3 - SURMCE HATE*
4 - INDUSTRIAL EfFLt'ENT
-------
TABLE 8-30
ENVHtOMNf MAL HOMIOS1MC AND SUPrOKT L'huRAIOBI
OMKE 01 RESEARCH AkD DiVCLOPMthT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION SfUDY - B/N 12)
STATISTICAL SUMMARY rOR BIS(2-CHLOROISOPROPYLIETHER ANALYSES BY UATER TYfE
WATER 1 MATER 2 UATiR 3 UATE* 4
LOU YOUDEN PAIR
UMBER Of DATA POINIS
HUE CONt tO U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY («)
ACCURACVUREL ERROR)
OVERALL STi DEV
OVERALL REL SID OEV, X
SIN6LE STD DEV,
ANAL"ST REL DEV, I
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINIS
HUE CONC «C) U6/L
MEAN RECOVERI (I)
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV IS)
OtERA'.L REL STD DEV, X
SINGLE STD DEV. ISi>
ANALYST REL DEV. X
NltH YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Or DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY
OVERALL REL STD DEV. X
SINGLE STD DEV, ISR>
ANALYST REL DEV, X
WATER LEtEND
1
11
14.0
10.7
-23.25
1.9
34.12
3
1]
79.0
86.5
9. SI
17.1
19.71
5
11
508.0
5*9. 5
8. IS
163.0
29.67
2
12
15.0
14.5
-3.39
4.6
31.91
3.5
28. C2
4
12
81.0
78.1
-3.56
U.Q
17.88
11. a
14.31
6
13
499.0
452.2
-9.37
149.9
33.16
167.9
13.51
1
11
14.0
U.2
-5.58
3.4
24. 6«
3
12
79.0
70.2
-11. 14
17.3
24.59
5
13
508.0
501.5
-1.28
147.9
29.49
2
12
15.0
V.B
-34.72
4.0
4*. .24
2.9
25.09
4
13
81.0
69.2
-14.52
19.8
28.66
17.0
24.41
6
12
499.0
470.1
-5.75
154.1
32.76
46.1
9.49
1
12
14.0
13.2
-5,42
5.7
43.36
3
13
79.0
70.1
-11.22
24.9
35.57
5
11
508.0
434.6
-14.44
169.5
39.00
2
11
15.0
13.1
-12.91
4.9
37.62
2.8
20.91
/
13
81.0
72.2
-10.88
12.8
17.72
21.2
29.74
6
12
499.0
406.3
-18.58
128.1
11.63
119.6
11.21
1
10
14.0
IB. 9
-0.36
1.8
12.74
2
19.
3
9
79.0
78.8
-0.24
9.5
12.04
7
9.
5
11
508.0
447,0
-12.01
128.0
28.64
74
15.
2
12
15.0
13.8
-7.72
4.4
31.49
.7
25
4
12
81. 3
73.2
-9.61
15.6
21.29
.5
92
6
13
499.0
51*. 4
3.09
10o.2
20.64
.7
53
1 - DISTILLED UATER
2 - TAP WATER
1 - SUREACE UAIEI
4 - INDUSTRIAL EMLUENT
-------
00
TABLE 8-31
ENVIROkMtNTAL MONIIOhlNb AhD SuPPOUT LAbORATODY
OFIICE or RESEARCH »NB CEVE LOPMC.-IT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METMOB 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N 12)
STATISTICAL SUMMARY (OS Bl S (2-E THYLME «»L
ANALYST REL BEV, X
NIGH YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER OF BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) Ut/L
MEAN RECOVER? <>>
ACCURACVfXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV
OVERALL REL STB BEV, X
SINGLE STB BEV, «SR>
ANALYST REL BEV, X
1
12
a
6
-22.
2
35.
.0
.2
71
.2
55
3
2
14
7
4
.2
.5
-38.00
2
57.
2.1
39.56
.6
64
1
11
I
2
.0
.t
-67.95
1
46.
.2
46
2
11
7.2
2.6
-63.64
2.1
78.90
1.2
45.63
4
14 14
60
42
-30.
22
52.
.0
.0
01
.0
38
S
14
512
458
-10.
148
32.
.0
..1
52
.9
50
57
44
-21.
18
42.
13.6
31.29
.0
.6
69
.9
25
6
14
548
498
-9.
131
26.
111.3
23.27
.0
.4
05
.7
42
3
12
60
23
-61.
18
78.
.0
.3
10
.4
75
5
14
512
448
-12.
93
20.
.0
.4
41
.1
76
4
14
57.0
23.6
-58.53
15.7
66.21
8.8
37.53
6
14
548.0
389.8
-28.86
133.8
34.32
84.6
20.10
1
6
8.C
2.5
-68.75
0.7
29.72
2
6
7.2
2.0
-72.45
0.9
47.66
0.4
H.70
3
12
60.0
17.4
-71.01
10.6
60.82
5
13
512.0
360.3
-29.62
14?. 4
40. VI
4
12
57.0
14.1
-75.20
9.0
63.84
5.1
32.49
6
13
548.0
368.1
-32.83
131.5
35.73
155.9
42.79
1
11
8.0
3.3
-58.41
2.2
65.60
2
10
7.2
1.0
-58.89
1.9
63.43
1.7
53.87
3
13
60.0
17.9
-70.17
15.8
88.40
5
14
512.0
300.1
-41.39
169. o
56.51
4
12
57.0
17.7
-68.99
14.1
79.55
6.5
36.44
6
13
548.0
430.1
-21.52
165.1
38.38
115.4
31.61
MATS* LECENB
1 - BIST1LLEB MATE*
2 - TAP HATE*
3 - SURFACE MATE*
4 - INBUSTIIAL EFFLUENT
-------
vO
TABLE 8-32
ENVIRONMENTAL MONIIOHINb AND SUPPOftt l»OOt»iOM
orricc or RESEARCH AN» DFVELOPMENI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A6ENCT
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUO» - 8/N (2)
STATISTICAL SUMMARY IOR CHOYSENE ANALYSES Bl UATCfi TYPE
WAKR 1 HATER 2 UATER 3 VATER 4
IOW YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Of DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) Ut/L
MEAN RECOVERY (1)
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV IS)
OVERAil REL STD DEV, X
SINGLE STD DfV. ISR)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
MEDIUB YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Or DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) Ut/L
NEAN 3ECOVERY ID
AtCURACYlXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV IS)
OVC.1ALL REL STD DEV, X
SINGLE STD DEV, (SR)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
HiSH YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV (S)
OVERALL REL STD DEV. I
SINGLE STD DEV, (SR)
ANALYST REL DEV, X
WATER LEGEND
1
13
6.0
4.5
-24.87
1.2
26.89
j
13
45.0
38.6
-14.14
16.4
42.39
5
13
384.0
373.2
-2.80
140.9
37.75
2
12
5.4
4.1
-24.69
1.4
35.03
1.3
30.13
4
13
43.0
38.3
-10.95
8.6
22.53
12.2
31.69
6
13
411.0
379.5
-7.66
113.9
30.02
90.7
24.10
1
13
6.0
4.3
-28.21
1.2
28.82
3
12
45.0
32.4
-27.91
10.8
33.36
5
12
384.0
35C.9
-8.62
72.9
2C.79
2
13
3.4
3.8
-29.06
1.8
48.02
1.3
35.68
4
13
43.0
29.0
-32.47
9.8
33.63
9.6
31.32
6
11
411.0
346.3
-IS. 7$
61.2
17.68
26.9
7.72
1
6
3
-35.
1
40.
1
45
29
-35.
13
45.
1
384
248
-35.
1i7
47.
1
1
.0
.9
45
.6
86
3
2
.0
.2
17
.4
86
5
2
.0
.7
23
.0
04
1
5
3
-33.
1
35.
1.2
31.96
1
43
22
-48.
8
39.
8.0
31.36
1
411
277
-32.
112
40.
99.7
37.93
2
0
.4
.6
52
.3
11
4
2
.0
.1
55
.8
71
6
2
.0
.1
58
.6
6J
1
1
6.0
4.7
-21.21
2.6
54.89
3
it
45.0
31.1
-30.87
13.2
42.51
5
13
384.0
244.0
-36.47
163.5
67.01
1
5
3
-35.
2
57.
1.6
39.57
1
43
23
-45.
10
46.
8.8
32.50
1
411
317
-22.
15*
50.
94.9
33.81
2
2
.4
.5
03
.0
16
4
1
.0
.3
79
.7
06
6
1
.0
.5
74
.3
17
1 - DISTILLED WATER
2 - TAP WATER
1 - SURFACE WATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
oo
o
TABLE 8-33
ENVIROIINlNltl. BONITORIN6 »hD SU'POKl KbODAIUtl
OlflCt OF atit»KCH AND HEVELOPfttNl
INV1RONHEN1AI PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA KElHOf 625 VALIDATION S1UBY - B/N (21
STATISTICAL SUMMARY FOR 0-BHC ANALYSES BY U*TER iltl
N«'ER 1 WATER 2 UATIR 3 WATER 4
LOU YOUOEN P»1B
NUMBER OF DAT* POINTS
TRUE CONC It) UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY «>
ACCURACYISRE' ERROR)
OVERALL ST» OEV «S>
OVERALL REL ST» OEV. X
SINGLE STD CEV, ISR)
ANALYST REL OEV, X
MEDIUM YOUOEN PAIR
NUMBER Of DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) U6/L
ME iK RECOVERY <«>
ACCURACf CSREL ERROR)
OVERALL STO 1EV (S)
OVERALL REL STD OEV. I
SINGLE STB »EV, (SR)
ANALYST RCL »EV. X
HIGH YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER OF »ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) !!6/L
MEAN RECOVERY («>
ACCURACYCXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DtV (S)
OVERALL REL SIB OEV, X
S1N«LE STt OEV, (SR)
ANALYST REL OEV, X
VATiR LEGEN*
1
4
e.o
0.6
-92.50
0.4
59.32
1
115.
3
8
60. 0
12.?
-78. fO
11.7
92.51
7
52.
5
11
511.0
173.6
-64.03
152.7
87.93
36
22.
2
5
7.2
1.5
-79.17
1.4
92. 66
.2
67
4
7
57.0
16.7
-70. 6S
15.6
93.60
.8
91
6
11
547.0
148,0
-72.94
129.3
87.33
.8
90
1
6
8.0
2.3
-71.46
1.5
67.47
3
11
60.0
18.2
-69.67
19.3
104.33
5
12
511.0
180.6
-64.65
140.8
77.96
2
7
7.2
1.6
-77.58
1.5
91.84
1.1
58.76
4
11
57,0
14.7
-74.29
16.5
112.67
S.O
18.31
6
It
547.0
233.4
-57.34
179.7
77.00
53.1
25,63
1
4
8.0
4.0
-50.00
1.7
42.57
3
9
60.0
17.2
-71.40
17.9
104.54
5
12
511.0
165.5
-67.61
148.9
89.97
1
2
5
7.2
1.2
-62. 7B
0.5
38.08
0.0
2.62
4
11
57.0
17.2
-69.84
16.5
95.89
0.0
17.18
6
13
547.0
211.7
-61.il
182.9
86.40
0.0
88.59
1
7
S.O
3.1
-60.71
2.4
75.56
<
3
10
60,0
25.8
-56.98
15.9
61.47
5
12
511.0
207.6
-59.37
189.5
91.28
2
6
7.2
3.6
-50.23
2.1
58.20
2.0
iC.34.
4
11
57.0
21.5
-£.2.28
S7.4
81.08
7.3
30.86
6
12
547.0
251.2
-54.08
183.9
73.19
82.9
36.14
1 - (ISTILLE* UAIER
2 - 1AP WATER
1 - SURFACE WMER
* - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-34
INVIDONMEN1AL MON110UM. AND SUPHOai LAbOHATOUt
orritE or RESEARCH AND BEVELOPHENI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCf
IP* METHOD 625 VAI.IBA1ION STUB! - B/N It) "
STATISTICAL SUMMARY rOR BI-N-OCIVLPHTHALATE ANAL7SES BT MATER T»IE
MATER 1
MATER 2
MATER
WATtR
oo
LOM YOUBEN PAI*
NUMBER Or DATA POINTS
HUE CONC (O UE/L
BEAN ICOVERY (II
AtCU*ACY(XREL ERRORI
OVERALL STB DEV (SI
OVERALL REL SID DEV. X
SINGLE STB DEV, (SRI
ANALYST REL DEV. X
MEB1UM YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Or DATA POINTS
TRUE CONf (Ct U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY (II
ACCURACY(XREL ERRORI
OVERALL STB BEV (S)
OVERALL REL SIB BEV. x
SINGLE STB OE'J, (SI)
ANALYST REL BEV, X
HIGH VOUBtM PAIR
NUMBER Or DATA PC1NTS
TRUE CONC (C) U6/L
MEAN (ECOVERY (11
ACCURACY(XREL ERIOK)
OVERALL STB BEV (S)
OVERALL REL STB BEV. X
SINGLE STD SLV. (S*I
ANALYST REL BEV, {
HATER LEGEND
1
14
1.0
3.0
-37.32
3.?
65.83
3
14
60.0
40.6
-32.29
23.2
57.01
5
14
512.0
418.9
-18.19
140.4
33.52
2
11
7.2
5.0
-30.81
2.6
52.84
2.2
4\.72
4
14
57.0
42.6
-25.23
18.1
42.52
9.4
22.49
t
It
548.0
422.7
-22.87
94.7
22.40
92.5
21.98
1
12
8.0
2.1
-74.27
0.9
44.74
3
13
60.0
21.8
-63. AO
14. S
66.50
5
13
512.0
JdC.1
-29.66
188.7
52.40
2
10
7.2
2.0
-72.36
1.4
68.47
1.1
52.21
4
14
57.0
18.2
-68.15
12. «
70.94
4.9
24.72
6
13
348.0
373.1
-31.92
"05.5
28.27
109.9
29.97
1
10
8.0
2.4
-69.88
0.9
37.03
3
13
60.0
"".2
-71.26
11.0
64 OS
5
13
512 0
388. >
-24.09
231.6
59.58
7
2
-68.
1
51.
0.5
21.85
1
57
14
-75.
9
67.
4.0
;;.11
1
548
339
-38.
1 131
38.
212.8
58.47
2
8
.2
.3
58
.2
86
4
1
.0
.2
02
.6
32
6
3
.0
.2
11
.1
66
1
8
3
-56.
2
81.
1
60
20
-65.
20
98.
1
512
300
-41.
183
61.
1
3
.0
.5
63
.8
99
1
57.
3
4
.0
.8
25
.5
38
5
28.
5
4
.0
.7
il
.8
14
121
57.
1
7
1
-75.
1
73.
.5
27
1
57
16
-71.
14
88.
.3
19
1
548
347
-36.
179
51.
.6
54
2
2
.2
.7
69
.3
84
4
4
.0
.4
1',
.6
66
j
4
.0
.2
64
.5
69
1 - PISMLLE* MATER
2 - TAP HATER
1 - SURFACE MATER
4 - INBUSTIIAL ErrLUENT
-------
WA1EI
TABLE 8-35
ENVIBCNPINIAI ("OmlCtlM, AND illKPOkl l*tOi.IO«I
OMICE Or RiSiABCH AND OEVELOPfENI
ENVIRONMENTAL P6011C1IOH ACENCT
EPA HEtMOfi 625 VAIIDAIU.. i'ui.-. . I?)
STAIISIICAL SUHHARf I OB D1ELDBIN hNALTSES Bl «M£6 ITPE
1 VA1EI 2 VA1ER 3 U»It« 4
OD
LOU TOUDEN PAI*
KUtB El OF DATA fOlKlS
HUE cone u> UC/L
«'. *M IECOVEIY
ACCUIACXXIEL E««0t)
evetAii. si» »[« N«LTST «EL »EV. X
REtlUK TCUREK P«lt
NUH8EI OF DATA POIDT*
I*UE COIIC (C> U6/L
II «£CO*.'iT (I)
Al£U*ACr(XBEl El»0«)
OVEIALL SIC »C« IS)
OVEIALl «El STD tit, X
JIN6LE SIS tEV. (Sll
tUAlfST f(L »E«. X
HICK tOUBEN FAia
MUMBI1 Or »A'A POIN1S
HUE COMC 1C) UG/L
«£* lECOVCOT (<)
ICCUIACTIICfcl EIIOII
OVEIALl 516 »EV
OVEIALL IEL SI» ftEV. X
SIN6LE SID »EV,
-------
TABLE 8-36
INVIDOhMNIAL HOI. I I Ok 1 S(. AND SUPtOUT lABOHAIUH
OIMCI 0« HSM8CM AMD KVflOPBINl
EN»IROMUh1«L PR01EC110N AGENCt
IPA HilHOD 625 VALIftATlOh ilUOl - B/ti <<)
StATISIIOL SURHAm I OK OIHE1H<1 FHTHALATE - «Lt5fl el yAKR T»PE
MAUR
MA'kR
MAUR
CO
tOM »OUtEN PAIR
NUBJCR Q» »«1A POINTS
TRUE CONt (C) Jt/L
NEAK RECOVER* (1)
ACCURACMXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STO tCV (S>
OVERALL REL SI* tEV. I
SIH6LE SIB »EVt (SR>
ANALTST All »EV. I
HEMUN VOUREN PAIR
NUKBEI Of »AIA POINTS
TRUf COI1C (C) U6/L
MEAN RECOVER* (I)
ACCURACf (XREl ERROR)
OVEIALL Sit tEV <$>
OVEIALL REL Sit IEV. I
SINSLE ST» tCV, (SI)
ANALYST RIL REV. I
NI6M TOUREN PAIR
NUMBER Or tATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) Ut/L
MEAN RECOVER? (IS
ACCURACf (XREL EAAOR)
OVcRALL STt »EV (S»
OVERALL REl STt tEV. I
UHtlt Sit DiV. (SR>
ANALTST REl BE*, 1
MATER LEtEN*
5
2
-6C.
1
64.
38
6
-2.
5
3.
1
320
93
-70.
103
111.
1
5
.0
.0
00
.3
"
3
9
.0
.6
59
.5
»
3
£
.0
.3
Si
.7
20
"'
4
4.3
1.9
-56.67
1.1
54.03
1.3
64.14
4
10
36.0
8.4
-7*. 72
1.7
103.74
4.2
55. P*
I
13
343.0
51.3
-85. C*
49.2
9J.90
19.9
55.19
5
1
-44.
1
77.
1
38
9
-75.
9
ICC.
320
87
-72.
1C1
'15.
1
8
.0
.»
CO
.4
66
3
1
.0
.2
72
.2
03
5
4
.0
.3
71
.0
62
2
6
G.9
-80.74
0.6
74.30
0.4
33.34
4
It
36.0
12.9
-64.15
11. a
1C1.09
2.9
25.19
6
14
341.0
106. S
-61.94
91.2
15.57
21.1
21.95
1
5
5.0
2.1
-58.00
«. J
61.62
J
11
38 ..'
13.1
-63.44
14.4
109. 9i
3
14
320.0
81.4
-74.57
88.3
108.33
2
5
4.5
1.7
-62.72
1.0
J7.3J
0.3
24.78
4
11
36,0
10.5
-70,78
C.i
84. HA
7-2
60. ft
6
15
3*5,0
106.4
-6s. 99
1 T 14.9
106.01
74.5
75.41
1
5
5.0
O.t
-84.no
0.1
42.21
1
10
18.0
11.2
-6i.24
11. 0
81.42
5
10
120.0
77.3
-7i. 79
75.9
97.97
4
1
-74.
C
46.
0.1
13.44
1
16
15
-57.
13
86.
9.6
67.74
1
141
121
-«4.
102
84.
69.2
69.65
2
7
.5
.1
60
.5
81
4
0
.0
.2
72
.1
11
6
0
.0
. ;
62
.1
3*
1 - elS1ILLE» UAIEI
2 - TAP MATE*
3 - SURiACC WITER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EfFLUENT
-------
cx>
TABLE 8-37
EHVI RONHEMAL MUhllOKIXG IhO SUH-Okl I ATiO*« IOM f
OIMCE or «[St»«CH AKD OEVCIOFMISI
ENVIRONMEN1AL PROTECTION A&ENC1
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION SIUSI - B/N (2)
STATISTICAL SUHNAM fOR ENDFIN ALttHVOE ANALYSES BY HATER TYPE
WATER 1 VATER 2 MATER 3 UATtR 4
LOU YOUREN PAIR
NURBiR Or BATA POK'IS
TRUE CONC 1C) U6/L
HEAN RECOVERY
tCCURACYCIREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB DEV «S)
OVERALL REL STB BEV, I
SJN61E STB BCV. CR)
ANALYST REL BEV, S
NEBIL'M YCUBEN PAIR
NUMBEt Or BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC CO U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY II-
ACCUOCIIlBEt ERROR)
OVERALL SIB BEV (S>
OVERALL REL SIB BEV, f
SINGLE SIB BEV. tSI)
ANALYST REL BEV, X
NISM YOUBEN PAIR
NUK8ER Or BATA POINTS
TRUE CONt CO Ut/L
MEAN RECOVERY II)
ACCUiACYClRIL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV
OVERALL PEL STB BEV, X
S1N6LE STB BEV, CSR)
ANALYST REL BEV, I
HATER LEtENi'
1
10
22.0
12.6
-42.64
1.9
70.19
3
10
119.0
72.1
-39.39
55.2
76.58
5
10
658.0
513.3
-21.99
215.0
55.53
2
10
25.0
15.8
-36.96
10.0
63.57
6.5
45.67
4
12
125.0
90.4
-27.67
69.6
76.99
15.4
11.91
6
17
611.0
498.8
-11.36
406.9
81.59
107.7
21.29
1
10
22.0
9.3
-57.59
6.3
67.92
3
12
119.0
64.4
-29,04
67.8
80.27
5
11
658.0
389. i
-40.83
239.9
61.61
2
10
25.0
10.2
-59.28
6.1
66.59
3.7
37.51
4
It
125. 0
56.9
-54.41
39.1
68.67
31.1
44.23
6
11
611.0
334.4
-45.27
173. 1
51.91
120.0
33.17
t
6
22.0
14.5
-33.86
6.5
44.45
3
9
119.0
67.6
-43.23
39.8
58.17
5
'0
658.0
380.7
-42.14
277.0
71.75
2
9
25.0
14.9
-40.49
10.7
71.73
4.3
20.50
4
10
125.0
82.4
-34.10
49.2
59.73
11.4
15. M.
6
10
611.0
372.5
-39.04
848.2
66.63
64.9
17.23
1
8
22.0
11.5
-47.78
9.4
81.93
3
9
119.0
55.4
-53.41
43.7
71.85
5
11
651 ,0
3»7.1
-39.65
326.5
152.21
2
8
25.0
'2.2
-51.00
9.8
80.18
2.6
21.6'
4
10
125.0
72.7
-41.83
54.5
74. »J
27.2
42.41
6
11
611.0
358.8
-41.27
224.6
62.59
168.7
44.64
I - tliTILLED UtTcl
2 - TAP HATER
3 - SU9MCE HATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EriLUENI
-------
co
TABLE 8-38
ENVIRONMENTAL HOI. I ION 1 Mb AND SljPFOHT LAEiURAIORT
orricc or RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCI
EPA METHOD 625 VALIbATION STUDT - B/N (2)
STATISTICAL SUMMARY TOR TLUORENE ANALTttS 67 WATER T«PE
HATER 1 HATER 2 HATER 1 HATER 4
LON TOUOfH PAIR
NUMBER Of BATA POINTS
TIUE COMC (C) U6/L
NEAN RECOVER* (11
ACCURACKXREL ERROR)
OVERALL $10 BEV (S»
OVERALL REL STB DEV, I
SINGLE STD »IV. (SI)
ANALYST REL BEV, I
MEDIUM YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Of »ATA POIN1S
TRUi CONC (C) UG/L
HEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACY (XREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB »EV (S)
OVERALL REL STO OEV. S
SINGLE 510 »EV, (SR>
ANALTST REL BEV, I
HUH YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Or BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C> UtU
«E«N RECOVERY (Hi
ACCURACYUREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV (S>
OVERALL ct' STB OEV, I
SINGLE STB BEV, (SR>
ANALTST REL »EV, X
HATER LECENB
1
12
«.o
5.4
-10.69
1.0
19.16
3
11
45.0
40.9
-9.04
5.0
12.20
5
11
38*. 0
355.8
-T.I*
SO. 9
22.73
2
12
!.«
4.9
-8. 64
1.5
10.70
0.9
IT. 72
4
11
43.0
18.9
-9.48
1.8
9.72
1.9
4.14
6
1J
411.0
160.8
-12.20
16.2
10.01
67.0
18.68
1
10
6.0
S.I
-12.11
0.8
14.92
1
11
45.0
18.1
-15.11
4.1
10.46
5
10
314.0
117.9
-11.99
13.1
9.85
2
11
3.4
4.8
-11.95
1.5
11.90
1.1
21.20
4
11
41.0
14.5
-19.79
5.7
16.66
1.7
10.11
6
11
411.0
121.2
-21.17
55.1
17.12
19.5
11.95
1
11
6.0
4.7
-20.90
1.0
21.01
1
11
45.0
16.5
-)8.97
9.1
24.89
5
11
184.0
278.6
-27.45
101.9
16.59
2
12
5.4
4.7
-11.12
1.2
25.97
0.7
11.98
4
12
41.0
14.9
-18.86
6. 1
17.47
5.4
15.17
6
11
411.0
129.8
-IV. 76
88.0
26.68
87.4
28,74
1
11
6.0
5.0
-16.36
1.1
25.60
1
11
45.0
15.7
-20.61
5.4
1i.11
5
11
184.0
256.9
-31.09
102.7
39.98
2
13
5.4
5.6
3.13
1.5
63.65
2.C
17.85
4
11
41.0
13.1
-21.02
6.7
20.18
1.6
10.39
6
12
411.0
100.7
-26.81
76.8
25.55
58.6
21.00
1 - BISTULEB HATER
2 - TAP HATER
1 - SUREACE HATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL ETFLUiNT
-------
CD
TABLE 8-39
ENVIRONMENTAL POMTCB1N6 «NO SUPPOKT lAbURATOM
office OF RESEADCH ANB oEvtLCprtHi
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCf
EPA HETHOB 625 VALIDATION STUB* - 8/N (2>
STATISTICAL SUMHARV FOR HEPIACHLOR EPOHIBE ANALYSES 6* UATER TYPE
WATER 1 HATER 2 «»T(; 1 UATtfi 4
LOW YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF »A!A POINTS
T*Uf CONC CO UC/L
MEAN RECOVERY (1)
ACCURACYtlREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BtV IS)
OVERALL REl 510 OEV, 1
SINGLE STB DEV, ISII
ANALYST REL OCV, X
MEDIUM TOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Of »AtA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) UG/L
MEAN RECOVERT ««>
ACCURACYUREL ERROR)
OVERALL SIB »EV (S>
OVERALL REL STO *cv, x
SINSLE ST» DtV, (SR>
ANALYST REL BEX, X
MICH tOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Of BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC
OVERALL REL SIB BEV, X
SINGLE STD »EV, «SR>
ANALYST REL OEV, X
WATER LEGEND
1
11
8.0
4. 9
-J8.J7
2.0
41. 11
1
IS
60.0
55.9
-6.13
21.8
39.08
5
1J
S12.0
J12.5
0.11
174.*
34.42
2
12
7.2
5.1
-28.5V
2.1
41.22
1.2
24.12
4
1*
57.0
51.4
-9.81
9.1
18.01
17.2
31. 99
6
1J
548.0
431.3
-21.29
106 0
24.58
157.5
13.38
1
13
8.0
5.6
-30.00
1.3
21.24
1
11
60.0
55.6
-7.15
15.5
27.85
5
11
S12.0
440.1
-14.04
152.0
34.51
2
13
7.2
4.3
-40.71
1.7
40.68
1.4
27.50
4
12
57.0
46.2
-19.03
14.7
39.78
8.2
16.13
6
11
548.0
475.4
-13.25
238.4
50.16
80.2
17.51
1
11
8.0
s.s
-27.98
1.9
32.69
1
14
60.0
53.8
-10.29
13.2
24.56
5
14
512.0
401.5
-21.58
194.8
48.51
?
13
7.2
5.6
-22.44
1.8
32, EJ
1.3
22.82
4
14
57.0
50.3
-11.69
9.0
17.81
9.3
1T.76
6
14
548.0
445.3
-IB. 74
197.2
44.29
122.3
28.88
1
12
8.0
4.9
-3».17
1.9
39.71
t
3
11
60.0
39.9
-35.15
16.6
42.62
5
12
5U.O
320.5
-37.40
167.6
52.28
2
«0
7.2
3.6
-49.86
1.7
47.11
2.0
t6.03
4
12
57.0
39.5
-30.75
1-..7
29.72
15.6
39.01
6
12
548.0
405.6
-25.98
178.1
43.92
162.4
44.71
t - IISTILLEB WATER
2 - TAP WATER
3 - SURFACE WATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-40
f NVieONMCNTAL HOI, I 106 I NO AND SUPtOKT I ABO*AT ORf
oirici or RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION «&fNC»
IP* METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/h (2)
STATISTICAL SUMMARY (OR HE>ACHLOROBUTA»I(NE ANALYSES BY WATER TYPE
HATER
HATER
HATER
HATER
oo
LOH YOURIN PAIR
NUMBER Of »ATA POINT!
TRUE CONC IC> U6/L
(AN RECOVERY (I>
ACCURACTttREL ERROP)
OVERALL ST» »(V «i>
OVERALL REL si» DEW. I
tINtLE ST» 9EV, (SR>
ANALYST REL »EV. I
fDlUN »OU»EN PAIR
NUMBER Of DATA POINTS
TRUE CONt 1C) Ut/L
MEAN RECOVERY <»>
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVi*ALL SIR REV (SI
OVERALL REL S1» REV, I
UNtLf SIR REV, IS*)
ANALYST REL »EV. I
NICH VOU»EN PAIR
NUMBER Or »ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC Id Ut/L
NEAN RECOVtRT (1)
ACCURACTIXNEL E9RORI
OVERALL ST9 »EV (S)
OVERALL REL ST» DEV, X
S1NKLE STR DEV, ISR>
ANALrST REL DEV, I
WATER LtCEND
1
10
5
-43.
I
*5.
1
7$
SI
-J1.
13
25.
1
440
490
-23.
lit
23.
1
;
.0
.7
27
.6
24
2
35.
3
5
.0
.3
6'
.1
47
a
17.
J
4
.0
.«
35
.«
77
103
21.
2
13
9.0
S.7
-36.50
1.3
23.40
.0
31
4
14
71.0
49.7
-29.93
11.6
23.29
.9
54
6
15
685.0
453.3
-33.82
142.2
31.36
.2
86
1
14
1C.O
5.6
-44.14
1.8
31.43
3
14
75.0
48.7
-35.12
10.3
21.27
5
14
640.0
.11.0
-35.79
60.1
14.61
1
«
4
-45.
2
46.
1.7
31.66
1
71
46
-33.
11
23.
10.7
22.20
1
685
390
-42.
53
13.
47.4
11.87
2
3
.0
.9
30
.3
70
4
4
.0
.»
8V
.0
49
6
3
.0
.6
98
.7
74
1
14
10.0
6.0
-40.43
2.0
33.16
3
13
75.0
47.3
-36. bd
11.4
24.02
5
13
640.0
196.6
-38.03
84.4
21.29
2
13
9.0
5.5
-39. C6
2.1
38.22
1.2
20. 9C
4
14
71.0
46.1
-35. Oi
11.6
25.12
9.0
19.25
6
13
685.0
390.8
-42.95
67.6
17.30
77.4
19.67
1
13
10.0
6.0
-4&.2J
2.3
38.78
)
12
75.0
54.4
-27.46
19.9
36.49
5
13
640. C
349.7
-45.36
122.4
34. «»
1
9
5
-40.
2
55.
2.1
17.66
1
71
4t
-42.
8
21.
13.4
28.08
1
685
359
-47.
«4
26.
68.8
19.41
2
2
.0
.3
83
.9
37
4
3
.0
.0
25
.7
20
6
2
M
.i
53
.7
34
1 - OTJTILLIR HATER
2 - TAP HATER
I - SURfACE HATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EMLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-41
(NVIROKNlhTHI. HODITORIhb tttO SUPPOHT LAROiATOO
OFI1CI Of RESEAHCH AND 0(VILOFNChl
ENVIBONNtNTAt PROTECTION A6ENO
EPA METHOD 62! VALIDATION STUD! - G/N 12)
STATISTICAL SUNMARI FOR HEIACHIOBOEIHANE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
WATER 1 WATER 2 WATER ) WATER *
CD
CO
LOU YOUtEN PAIR
DUMBER Of »AT» POINTS
TRUE COUt CO US/I.
NEAN RECOVCRT II)
JUCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB »EV (S)
OVERALL «El SIB feEV, X
SINGLE ST» BEV, ISR)
ANALYST ICL »EV. X
MEDIUM TOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER Of 6ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC
-------
TABLE 8-42
KOMlOUNi »NO SUPPOM IAK)«»IO«»
OMICI 01 UStAKCM AN* tfVdOPHCMI
ENVItONHENIAL PKOTCC110N »CfNC»
EPA METHOD 625 VALUATION SlUBt - B/N <2>
SIAI'STICAi 1UHIKCV 10* 1*01*0(1.2.3-C.O>PT«UN{ ANALYSIS B» MATE* l«Pt
MATE* 1 MATtl 2 MATE* > UATil *
09
toy IOU»EN PAI*
until or *ATA POINTS
IBUl tout 1C) Ut/L
BEAN lEcovttv ti>
ACCUIACimfl IliOP)
OVCIALL Sl» »EV
0»{**Lt IEL $! »£», I
SINCLE SI» »E₯. <5i)
*N*LfST IEI »£», S
HEIIUM VOUtEM P»ll
HUKBE* Of 6»T» POINTS
TIUC COUt «C> Ufc/L
NE*N IfCOVdt (I)
*ccu**ctii*fi Etioa>
O»:S»LI ST» »fv
OVEIAL^ ill SI* Bt«. S
* 1*6 IE *T» «t«. «!)
AlUtTSI III »l«, S
MICH tOUMII P»I5
UH8H Of »AI» POINTS
nut cone
AKALTST IEI »f*. I
HAKI lf«f«»
1
10
T.«
2.1
-42. »0
1.7
59. «3
1
12
74. C
.48.6
-J*.J*
2«.l
»5.27
S
12
271.0
241.6
-10. SI
114.1
41. »»
2
il
11.0
S.7
-47.77
4.1
70.17
2.7
6J. 13
4
11
54.0
10.7
-43.11
11.1
i«.ro
11. t
14. »2
«
12
2*2.0
255.4
-12.52
140. S
S5.00
70. C
27.79
1
5
7.4
2.5
-64.2?
2.0
7b.5»
1
11
74.0
2i.l
-65-77
M.4
5J.55
5
11
27«.C
i;2.7
-i2.ro
122.2
50.16
2
1
11.0
(.9
-73.91
1.7
60.77
0.9
31-90
4
12
56.0
16.2
-71.04
9.9
61.01
4.0
19.16
6
11
292.0
207.2
-29.04
1«.6
41.71
74.1
11.01
1
6
7.4
2.6
-65.12
2.3
19.72
1
11
74.0
22.1
-69.12
10.6
47.57
5
12
271.0
177.5
-16.16
1J.O
47.92
2
6
11.0
2.7
-75.41
1.0
17.74
1.2
46.45
4
11
56.0
11.4
-76.01
9.1
)3.?5
1.3
46.42
6
12
292.0
201.1
10.1*
111.1
65.55
110.1
57,91
!
6
7.4
2.9
-60.81
1.2
42.18
1
12
74.0
25.6
-65.3*
11. »
54.21
5
12
278.0
167.2
-39.65
102.5
61.27
2
''
11.0
2.6
-76.10
2.1
11.14
l.i
55. 1C
4
11
56.0
22.7
-59.49
15.4
67.76
6.6
:7.n
6
12
292.0
220.6
-24.45
130.'
59.20
19.6
46.21
1 - MSTlLLEt MATH
2 - TAP MME*
1 - SUIIACE MATE*
4 - IK»US1IIAL EI/iUENt
-------
TABLE 8-43
ii HONI lomxc >(> SUFFJDI i«cu«no«»
CftICi Or IIUtlCN OMB «f kf LOPMtMl
IKVlaOMfllNlt! PIOUCTION AtiMCf
I ft KCTKOO «2S VALUATION SlUtT - (I IX <2) >
SIATISIICAl SUMfART ffli N-kl TRO&Ot 1 -N-f>«OP(LAN |N{ ANALTSCS 6« UATE1
WATfl t «»H« 2 yATCt 5 UAli« 4
lia vcut>3 m»
NUh»lN «f »ATA ,-llNIS
nut (ONt JO Ut/L
«E«» MCOVttT
OVERALL IEL STO tEV, t
SlNfcLE ST» f>EV| «S«I
ANAL'ST *El »(», 1
HE 01 UN >OUB(N fAI*
Unit* Of »ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC «C> US/I
MEAN MCOVEIT U)
A£CU*AC Y (I*iL E**0*l
OVflAtl Sit *(«
ANALYST ML »IV, S
NttN TOUtEN r».|l
MIIMBEI Of »»TA POINTS
T*UE CONC «t> U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY (1>
CCUlACIfllEL EICOI)
OtffftALL STt VEV CS)
OVE*AI.L »iL Jit BE», 1
SlNCLE ST» IEV. IS*)
ANALYST *EL tEV. S
MATE* lECfNt
18
t«
-16.
6
40.
1
95
104
9.
21
22.
1
S2>
479
28.
14)
SO.
1
7
.0
,1
IS
.1
.
e
s
0
9
1
6
4
0
1
S
4
4
0
0
2
1
S
\
6
18.3
10.1
-42.64
-4
8ti.87
1
11
91.0
92.0
-1.18
26.8
29.10
5
14
527.0
690.0
10. 92
168.0
51.11
2
«
20.0
15.0
-24.88
7.6
>3.?S
7.4
58.65
4
11
100.0
97.1
-2.70
18.4
19.44
20.8
21.95
6
11
489.0
426.9
-12.69
271.1
61.51
211.8
41.86
1
9
18.0
IS. 6
-11. IS
5.4
14.72
1
14
95.0
8B.5
-«.B6
59.2
66.89
S
11
527.0
592.5
12.41
264.6
44.66
2
S
20.0
17.2
-11.75
6.0
14.70
1.8
22.98
4
14
ino.o
9J.S
-6.54
14.6
17.00
42.1
46.71
6
14
489.0
507.1
1.71
175.8
61.?!
178.1
16.06
1
»
18.0
17.0
-S.68
9.1
51.62
«
}
11
95.0
72.4
-21.74
16.8
50.80
1
S
11
$27.0
429.7
-18.45
174.0
40.50
2
6
20.0
17 .9
-10.67
9.9
55.41
7.4
2.49
4
11
100.0
101.5
1.47
5«.a
S/.98
51. 5
11.57
6
11
489.0
471.1
-1.67
205.4
41.60
77.*
17.29
1 - (ISTILLE* MATE!
2 . 1Af MATE!
1 - (URIACi MATE*
4 - IN»U&T«IAt EffLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-44
v£>
IN»lkOli»IK1«L *ONI lOklHil Afcd SUHPOfcl IADO«A10«»
OKICE 01 RESEARCH AN» »C VI IOPCENI
EhVIIOkNENIAl PSOTEC1IO* A6EhCt
IP* HIIMOC 625 VAll»«TION JIUOT - B/N C2»
SIATIS1ICAI SUNMARI TO* NITROBENIINf ANALfSES 81 KA1ER T»Pl
UATfl 1
WATER 2
MATIR
HATE..
LOW TOUtf* P*I«
UNI it o* »ATA POIMIS
I1UI COIC CO OS/I.
MAN RECOVER? <«)
ACCURACKIREl CIIOCI
OVERALL I1» »(«
OVfltlL til JI» »(», I
SINfiLt ST» »E»,
OVEIALL IEL ST» »E», 1
UNSlf Sl» (IV. ISII
AKALTST IEI tf», t
MICH IOU*E* PAI1
'JUSEI Of (A1A POINTS
IlUi CONC 1C) U6/L
MEAN liCO₯IIT ID
ACCUtACT «S*tt [HOD
C.VEIALL ST» »E«
0«(*ALL III ST» »E₯, S
I mill ST» »E», CS*1
ANAlfST |(t »(», I
WATfl tfCf«»
<
12
10. 0
».i
-14.47
i.9
]«.*«
}
1*
75.0
ao.i
7.29
12. *
IS. 45
$
11
*J«.0
7«i.S
19. SO
22). «
29. IS
i
11
9.0
«.]
-10.40
1.8
28.29
2.1
11.57
4
14
71.0
70.1
-I.Ji
19.1
27.49
12.4
U.42
«
14
6S5.0
686. '»
0.2(
249. S
14.29
1«1.1
22.21
1
10.0
8.0
-19. SB
2.1
11. 1»
3
12
7<.0
;>.j
-10. to
16.4
24.11
S
1*
4*4.0
'03.4
10.09
; 4 4 . i
J4.72
2
10
9.Q
5.2
-42.22
2.S
4S.92
1.8
27. 8«
4
11
71.0
62.8
-11. J*
14.1
22.81
10.9
16.76
6
11
685.0
712. S
4,02
245.9
14.51
92.4
11.06
1
7
1C.O
7.0
-29.57
1.7
24.56
1
14
75.0
71.5
-4.71
'1.8
10.51
5
14
«19.0
651.7
1.98
758.5
59.46
7
12
9.0
8.8
-2.04
6.2
69. e*
0.4
4.87
4
1)
71.0
61.8
-10.14
22.5
15.10
22.8
11.64
'<,
14
685.0
661.7
-3.1*
170.1
25.63
199. S
S0.14
1
9
VO.P
7.9
-21.22
1.9
24.16
i
40.
1
12
75.0
7C.8
5.09
31.4
42.14
u
IV.
5
12
619.0
566.1
-11.41
197. i
1«.84
120
18.
2
8
9.0
5.9
-14.66
2.2
38.02
.8
94
4
12
71.0
69.8
-1.62
25.4
16.31
.2
10
6
11
685.0
706.6
1.16
181.8
25.71
.6
96
1 - ISTIILI* UlTfl
2 - TAP UATfl
1 - SUXACE DATE I
4 - IHtUSTIIAl
-------
TABLE 8-45
1 N« I 101.11 N 1*1 BOh I IGBI'lt AND iUIKOBl I M- (..« « I C B T
oiflCE or REStAnCH AND
PROTECTION
IP* HEIHOD 625 VALIDATION STUD* - U/N <
STATISTICAL SUPHAil (OB Pit NANlKKf NE ANAIISES U I HA1ER MPt
WAIH
HATE*
UATEI
UATIR
v£>
IOH fOUDEN Pill
NUKBER li »ATA POINTS
I«UI CONC
ACCURACKItEL (1*01)
OVERALL STB DEV IS)
OVERALL REL ST» DtV. I
SIN41E ST» tEV. ESI)
iNALtSI REI DE*. X
NiDIUM VOU*t* PAI*
NU»8E* Of DATA POINTS
HUE CONC 1C) US/L
"EAN IfCOVCIf (!)
*CCU*ACT
OVERALL RtL SIS DEV, I
JIN4LE STD DE*. <«t>
ANALTST ML DEW. 1
HKN »OUDEN PAIR
Hunan or DATA POINTS
tlUt CONC «C» Ut/L
Et» RECOVER!
ACCURACKtREL ERROR)
OVERALL IT* DEV IS)
OViRALL REL SID DE», 1
SIN4LE STD DEV, IS*)
Lfit Ml *£*, J
1
13
1C.O
(.4
-15.54
1.7
20. C3
3
12
7L.O
68.4
-1.12
6.2
9.03
3
13
640.0
571.9
-10.66
135.0
2? 62
2
13
9.0
7.9
-12.7*
1.3
11.97
1.6
19.6*
4
12
71.0
63.6
-10.40
3.2
3.01
3.2
7.81
6
13
615.0
337.6
-21.52
122.0
22.70
93.3
16.12
1
11
10.0
8.6
-13.67
0.9
10.3*
3
9
73.0
63.5
-13.32
2.7
4.23
3
11
6*0.0
417.6
-23. »1
61.1
12.51
2
11
9.0
»-6
-15.19
1.2
16.19
U.7
9.10
4
11
71,0
60.0
-15.55
6.5
10.77
5.1
1.32
6
11
613.0
491.4
-21.26
C/.6
13.76
50.7
10.36
1
11
10. C
1.4
-15. A*
1.1
12.50
3
11
75.0
64.5
-13.93
5.6
1.60
5
12
6.0.0
409.1
-35.96
136.5
31.11
2
11
9.C
8.3
-7.91
1.6
19.42
1.2
14.37
4
11
71.0
60.1
-14.41
6.»
10.54
2.4
3.12
6
10
615. a
471.0
-3.0.21
77.1
16.12
116.3
26.20
1
12
10.0
10.0
-0.08
2.4
2<..b7
3
13
/5.0
72.3
-3.61
21.3
29.44
5
13
640.0
4t5.5
-27.27
173.2
37.20
2
12
9.0
7.6
-15.83
2.5
33.57
i.O
22.27
4
11
71,0
62.?
-11.38
7.2
11.46
10.1
15.01
e
12
685.0
493.7
-27.92
144.6
37.40
49.2
10.25
«*?! LtCiM
1 - DISTILLED HATE*
2 - t»P will*
3 - SURFACE BATE*
* - INDUSTRIAL (MLUiNI
-------
TABLE 8-46
OM1CI 01 aflttlCM A NO 01 HOJ-XEM
PHOtCCMON AOfNCT
IPA ntlMOR 425 VALIB4TION SVUOV - 8/» 121
SIATIS1IOL SUHHAM 10* PfiJNI «.«l»StS 91 UAUI Ifl
Aid 1 UAUR 2 VAIf'l 1 VAItft 4
LOW 10U»lk PA|i
HUNCH » »A1A POIkIS
IIUC COkC ttt U«/L
IAk IfCOVfK (It
4CCU*ACI(t*iL OCOI)
OVEIAll. SI* »(« 4S>
OVIIALl 1(1 SI* »(*, I
Siktli si* »(«. (SI)
AUM.TST MI *(V. i
CtlttM fOU*lk PAI*
sunaci OF »A1A P01NIS
TIUC COkC (Ct Ut/t
MS itcoviiv (it
ACCUIACf UlCl. fIROIt
«*fl*ll SI* »f« IS)
OVtlAll *
-------
TABLE 8-l HOhllOkltb AMD Vu
oiiict of *iSiAi(H AN
ixvi»OH»ii
OVMALL tit. Jl» tfV. 1
SI»«LC si» »{«, mi
AltltST ICL »t». I
ttlttfl IOU4CM FAI*
U*BM Of »A1A POIMIS
TIUE COHC (C> UC/L
[AN IfCOVMf (l>
»CCU*ACI(tlfL M«0»l
OVfiALL STI tfV (S>
CfitAll lil ST» »iV, I
SIH6LS ST» »tV.
AUtLTST lit »[«. I
KICK 10I/61H PAIf!
iiui cenc (c> ui'i
(A» ticovfir fi>
AClUIACfCtlfl fllOl)
OVflALL STt 0CV (S>
MAIL ill S1» ilV, .
SlklCLI SI* »I*i
ALISI tfL »{». s
1
11
4.0
1.1
-12. :i
2.1
4C.OO
1
11
41.0
12.1
-27.14
10.1
11.24
1
11
114.0
J41.9
-1C. 91
10.1
21.11
2
11
1.4
4.4
-17.11
1.1
21.41
1.1
J1.ll
4
11
41.0
l/.l
-11.11
4.4
17.14
4.0
17.29
t
14
O1. 0
2«1.7
-21.04
71.1
24.94
74.1
21o91
1
11
6.0
1.1
-11.10
1.1
11.91
1
12
4S.O
13.2
-21.72
7.9
22.11
1
11
114.0
291.7
-22.99
44.2
14.94
j
12
1.4
4.1
-10.19
2.4
13.19
1.1
17.22
4
12
41.0
IS. 4
-10.14
1J.C
11.62
1.1
22.91
6
12
411.0
291.1
-27.47
99.4
11.42
4S.7
11.40
1
12
4.0
1.9
-1.11
1.1
11.10
1
12
41.0
17.2
-17.14
12.4
11.10
1
11
114.0
2«0.1
-24.19
11. 1
11.14
2
12
1.4
1.1
-6.17
2.4
41.21
1.1
20.17
4
14
41.0
11.1
-27.54
1.4
27.74
11.4
14.04
4
11
411.0
112.0
.-24.09
17.9
21.11
44.1
22.17
,
12
6.0
1.5
-12. 16
1.6
11.11
1
11
45.0
41.1
-1.17
14.1
11.11
1
11
m.o
266.6
-10.51
110.9
41.61
2
1)
1.4
1.4
-0.00
2.7
49.21
1.)
fl.il
4
14
41.0
21.9
-12.16
1.6
29.76
9.1
26.64
6
14
411.0
29J.9
-28.49
96.6
12.16
64.2
22.92
HATIk LtttHt
1 - tISIILLi* MAIM
I - 1A? MAIM
1 - SUtlACf MAIM
4 - IIUUSKIAL
-------
TABLE 8-48
l Xl»l Mbtil 10k 1Mb »««» SUPFOfcl l»HU«»IOH
OMICi 01 HSMICH iMC 01
PKOUC1ION *4fNtI
|P» NE1HOI 421 r*lll*T10M ttUlt - b/M <2»
tllllttlCAl tUKPAM I0» 1.2|4-IIICMlO*OetNiENi «*«HS(1 Uf Utlll
WAItl 1 Htlll 2 Uklll 5 y»IM 4
vO
IOU IOUIII Ptll
UHWII Of 141* POINTS
IlUt
OKI It LI Id S9I l(₯. 1
Until til »f₯, ISII
AVALTST Id »{«. S
KEI1U* (OUliN PAII
u*eu oi IAIA POIHIS
HUE COUC Ut/L
MEAN ICCOVIK
0₯EIALl til IIV IS>
OVEIALL Id tit IE₯. 1
SmttE III 41V.
AMALTtl Id I(V. »
UN fOUtEH PAII
UK8II Of IAIA POIHIt
>IUI COIIC Itl Ut/L
EAM IECOUIII ID
ACCUIACIUIEL IIIOII
OVIIALL til »EV Itl
OVEIALl IEI til IE₯. I
Slltlf til IIV. ISII
AliAlfST Id IEV. I
MAIII tl(EM»
t - IISIILLII Mild
2 - I»P UAIfl
1 - lUllktl HAKI
4 - IklUStllAl IffLUEHI
1 2
t; i>
11.0 10.0
1.7 «.1
-20.41 -9.41
2.1 2.2
24.20 21.7:
2.2
24.44
1 4
12 11
74.0 72.0
71.! 71.4
2.40 0 .19
11.1 11.4
24.11 14.27
9.1
12.41
1 4
11 12
191.0 422.0
141.1 110. a
-(.04 -17. II
109.4 111.0
20.14 22.11
91. (
17.41
1
13
11.0
(, J
-24.2?
2.1
27.19
1
11
74.0
-9 .38
14.1
21.14
1
11
191.0
411.1
-21.31
122.1
27.01
2
12
10.0
k.1
-19.11
2.9
11.77
1.1
17.74
4
11
72.0
19.2
-1 7 . 7ft
U.O
21.44
10.2
14.14
4
12
422.0
iU.(
-21.98
ill. 2
21.82
71.0
14.76
1
11
M.O
II. 7
-20.91
2.8
11.94
1
11
74.0
41.1
11.9
22.71
1
11
191.0
414.4
-21.12
99.1
21.41
2
tl
10.0
1.1
-14.92
J.*
44.22
l.t
22.14
4
12
72.0
19.2
12.7
21.42
10.8
17.99
4
11
6?2.0
442.1
-21.44
11.1
14.41
94.9
20.71
1
12
11. C
9.1
-17.42
2.0
21.83
1
12
74.0
9.1
U.11
1
11
191.0
419.8
-21.18
174.4
40.11
2
11
10.0
7.9
-20.91
1.0
17.72
2.2
21.11
4
11
72.0
-20.04
10.1
18.71
4.7
10.30
4
12
422.0
104.4
-13.90
111.7
22.14
77.1
14.32
-------
TABLE 8-49
ENVIiON*ENtAl KONI ICklXt Ant) SufPONI l«Ho
OMICi 01 USttSCM AND DEVELOPMENT
PROTECTION »tt«C»
(ft HC1HOD 625 VALIDATION STUB? - B/N (2)
STATISTICAL SUHMART 103 1 , 4-0 ICNLOROBEN1 i NE ANALISES cf MATIR T»PE
MATER 1 WATER 2 WATER ) WATER 4
IOW TCUBfN PAIR
NUHBER Of 6A1A POINTS
TlUi COUC (Cl US /I
DEAN RFCOVt«» (It
ACCURACTISREL (l*0lt
OVCIALL S1» »E« C$)
OVERALL »EL STB BE₯. 1
ill»6lE STB BEV, U6/L
»£.» (ECOVEtT
»CCU»-CI(l«£l EIROk)
OVEIALL STB BEV «SJ
OVEIALL (EL STB BEV. X
SINtLE STB BEV.
ANALYST LEL BEV, »
HI&H TOUtEH PAH
U»9Ei Of DATA POINTS
TIDE CONC (C) U6/L
EAN (ECOVEST (I)
ACCURACTlXBEL ERIORI
OVEIALL STB BEV (S)
OVEIALL REL STB BEV, I
SINtLE STB BEV. «$R)
ANALYST REl »EV, X
bATEl LEtENB
1
U
12.0
6.4
-*».*7
2.!
15.45
3
1}
79.0
S5.J
-32.56
18.6
J4.«8
S
IS
617.0
S24.2
-15.04
145.5
35. J»
2
12
11.0
7.3
-33.33
2.4
32.30
1.«
28.17
4
14
77.0
57.7
-25.03
12.2
71.20
8.8
15.84
6
13
646.0
399. S
-38.16
97.1
24.31
14S.6
3U52
1
13
12.0
7.1
-41.22
2.3
28.39
3
15
79.0
59.1
-24.33
1C. 2
3C.50
S
15
617.0
481.5
-21.97
162.4
33.73
2
<1
11.0
6.3
-42.38
2.2
34.96
1.2
17. v2
4
15
77.0
53.9
-29.99
15.3
28.46
14.0
24.60
6
15
646.0
453.6
-29.79
153.5
33.84
57.8
12.36
1
10
12.0
6.2
-48.23
1.7
27.93
3
13
79.0
31.9
-14.29
11.0
21.16
5
14
617.0
400.8
-35.04
163.9
41.40
2
11
11.0
6.6
-40.41
2.0
30.92
0.9
13.43
4
12
77.0
30.9
-33.95
8.8
17.58
9.5
18.35
6
34
646.0
457.6
-29.16
187.2
40.91
164.7
38.37
1
12
12.0
7.5
-37.50
2.3
31.07
3
11
79.0
39.6
-24.57
1J.9
21.71
5
14
617,0
406.8
-34. 07
162.9
4C.04
i
12
11.0
7.2
-34.77
2.5
35.22
1.8
14.98
4
13
77.0
49.5
-35.69
12.9
it.. 05
9.5
17.44
6
14
6<,6.0
462.9
-28.34
151.1
32.65
111.5
23.64
I - BISJ1LLE* HATE*
2 - TAP HATER
3 - SURFACE HATER
^ - INBUSIRIAl ElfLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-50
ENV|fcON<«tKT«L HOMlOBINb AMI Surf-OKI lAHOB«tt«»
OfflCt OF RESEARCH AMB 111 V C L 0 P" E NI
ENVI«OM«ENTAL PROTECTION »GiNCT
EPA flEIHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N <2> -
STATISTICAL SUMARY FOR 2-CMLOrONAPHTMAiENE ANALYSES b» WATER T»PE
WATER 1 WATER 2 WATER 3 MATER <
VO
LOW YOUBEN PMJi
NUMBER Or BATA POIKTS
TRUE CONC CO UC./L
MEAN RECOVERY (t :
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR!
OVERALL SIB BEV IS!
OVERALL REL STB BEV, I
!iN6LE STB DEW, ISR)
ANALYST REL BEV, X
MEDIUM YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Or BATA POINTS
T8UE CONC (C> UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY (I)
ACCURACY (IREL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV
OVERALL «C! STB BEV, X
SIN6LE STB BEV, (SR>
ANALYST REL BEV, X
MICH YOUBEN PAIR
NUMBER Or BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC U6/L
MEAN RECOVERY
OVERALL REL STB BEV, x
SINGLE STB BEY, (SR>
ANALYST REL BEV, X
WATER LECENB
1
5
1
-18.
1
27.
1
38
34
-10.
5
16.
1
320
285
-10.
16
12.
1
2
.0
.1
33
.1
37
3
2
.0
.0
58
.7
82
5
0
.0
.9
66
.2
65
2
10
4.5
4.3
-3.78
0.6
13.25
0.8
19.67
4
12
36.0
33.3
-7.55
4.1
12.43
3.5
10.55
6
11
342 0
297.4
-13.04
34.3
11.53
18.0
6.17
1
11
5.0
4.4
-11.64
C.9
21.03
3
11
38.0
32.6
-14.19
4.9
15.11
5
11
320.0
2V7.2
-13.38
51.1
18.44
2
11
4.5
3.7
-17.37
1.2
31.01
0.7
18.11
4
11
36.0
29.7
-17.61
3.6
12.27
3,0
9.64
6
11
142.0
286.0
-16.39
39.6
13.85
32.2
11. ;5
1
12
5,0
4.0
-19.67
1.2
28.87
3
13
38.0
31.1
-18.27
6.3
20.29
5
13
320.0
244.2
-23.68
93.7
38.36
1
4
4
-8.
1
40.
1.3
31.62
1
36
30
-15.
5
17.
5.5
IV. 90
1
342
263
-22.
52
20.
71.6
30.17
2
2
.5
.1
52
.7
91
4
3
.0
.4
59
.3
43
6
3
.0
.4
98
.7
00
1
11
5.0
5.2
4.18
1.0
18.52
1
21.
3
10
38.0
32.9
-13.34
6.0
18.29
3
11.
5
11
320.0
231.8
-21. 3J
1 .16 . 7
42, 37
51
19.
4
3
-13.
1
26.
.0
22
1
36
29
-17.
3
1C.
.6
61
1
342
27S
-18.
5'
20.
.7
47
2
9
.5
.9
58
.0
71
4
1
.0
b
30
.2
80
6
1
.0
.5
27
.3
50
1 - BIST1LLCB WATER
2 - TAP WATER
3 - SUB FACE WATER
4 - INBUSTR1AL EFFLUfNI
-------
TABLE 8-51
ENVIRONMENTAL MONIIOH1NG AND SUPPORT lARORATORI
Office 01 "[SEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA PIETMOD £25 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N «2>
STATISTICAL SUMMARY (OR 2,4-OINITROTOLUENE ANALYSES Bl HATER TYPE
WATER 1 HATER 2 HATER 1 HATER 4
oo
LOW YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC CO UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY ID
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD OEV
OVERALL REL STD DEV. X
SINGLE STD DEV, (SR>
ANALYST REL DEV. X
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY <«)
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD OEV IS)
OVERALL REL STD DEV. X
SINGLE STD DEV. ISR)
ANALYST REL DEV. X
HIGH .OUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC U) UG/L
MEAN RECOVERY (K)
ACCURACYIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV IS)
OVERALL REL STD DEV. X
SIIIGLE STD DEV, ISRl
ANALYST REL DEV. X
WATER LEGEND
1
12
12.0
6.6
-45.28
3.0
44.93
3
13
79.0
62.8
-20.47
10.3
16.45
S
12
618.0
578.9
-6.32
129. S
22.38
2
10
11.0
5.0
-54.45
2.6
51.21
1.8
30.10
4
13
77.0
65.3
-15.16
14.3
21.82
S.I
7.94
6
14
646.0
601.1
-6.9S
173.1
28.79
98.0
16.62
1
12
12.0
6.6
-45.07
3.1
47.35
3
14
79.0
60.5
-23.35
16.8
27.81
5
IS
618.0
552.1
-10.67
227.1
41.14
2
10
' 11.0
7.3
-33.27
5.1
69.01
2.1
30.57
4
14
77.0
54.4
-29.36
14.1
25.92
11.4
19.91
6
12
646.0
S56.3
-13.88
109.1
19.62
96.9
17.48
1
12
12.0
6.6
-44.96
2.7
40.47
3
14
79.0
61.1
-22.65
15.5
25.36
5
13
618.0
504.6
-18.35
212.8
42.17
2
11
11.0
6.6
-40.17
3.5
52.67
1.9
28.41
4
13
77.0
63.6
-17.34
20.2
Jt ,71
10.9
17.45
6
14
646.0
534.2
-17.31
141. C
26.31
129.7
24.96
1
9
.12.0
10.0
-16.48
2.4
23. «9
3
3
8
79.0
71.5
-9.54
4.8
6.72
S
9
618.0
620.0
0.32
53.9
8.70
2
9
11.0
10.1
-8.18
4.8
47.28
3.6
15.36
4
11
77.0
63.1
-18.11
7.9
12.59
3.2
4.78
6
9
646.0
615.0
-4.80
139.1
22.61
125.2
20.28
1 - DISTILLED WATER
2 - TAP WATER
3 - SURFACE KATES
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-52
ENVIRONNt NTAl HOM10HIM, «NO SUPPORT LA60R»TO«»
Office Of IUSIARCH AND OfVELOPKENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A6ENCI
fPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STL'DT - B/N (2)
STATISTICAL SUMHARt I OK 4-BROHOPHENTL PHENU ETHCR ANALYSES BT WATER UPE
MATER 1 MATER 2 MATER ) WATER I
ION IOUDEN PAIR
UMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (CI Ut/L
MIAN RECOVER* (I)
ACCURACXXREL ERROR)
OVERALL SID DEV
OVERALL REL STD >EV, X
SINGLE STD DEV. (SRI
AKALfST REL DJV, X
MEDIUM VOUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CCNC UG/l
MEAN RECOVERY (1)
ACCURAC*(XREL- JR10RI
OVERALL STD D U6/L
MEAN RECOVER* (I)
ACCURACVIXREL ERROR)
OVERALL STD DEV (SI
OVERALL REL STD DEV. X
SINGLE STD DEV, «SR>
ANALliT REl DEV, X
WATER LEGEND
1
14
8.0
5.8
-27.86
1.9
32.81
1
25.
3
12
60.0
52. 8
-12.04
8.4
IS. 97
^
a.
5
11
512.0
485,1
-5.21
39.0
8.04
85
17.
2
13
7.2
5.3
-25.75
1.2
22.89
.4
09
t
13
57.0
50.8
-10.81
7.4
14.61
.5
64
6
14
548.0
477.1
-12.94
123.8
25.95
.3
73
1
12
8.0
5.R
-27.40
1.7
29.22
3
12
60.0
31.3
-14.47
5.4
10.44
5
12
512.0
451.7
-11.78
52.4
11.61
1
7
4
-35.
1
39.
1.1
20.07
1
57
48
-14.
5
10.
2.6
5.21
1
548
417
-?3.
161
38.
104.3
23.99
2
1
.2
>7
13
.8
40
4
1
.0
.6
81
.0
20
6
2
.0
.4
83
.6
71
1
13
8.0
5.7
-28.17
2.2
36.94
1
20.
3
12
60.0
49.7
-17.13
7.4
14.97
9
18.
5
10
512.0
428.8
-16.25
44.6
10.39
61
14.
1
7
5
-22.
1
34.
.1
00
1
57
48
-14.
9
18.
.2
71
1
548
423
-22.
80
18.
.9
52
2
2
.2
.6
69
.9
34
4
3
.0
.6
68
.0
60
6
3
.0
.7
67
.1
91
1
12
8.0
6.0
-24.79
1.6
26.63
3
12
60.0
46.9
-21. 7S
12,7
26.98
5
15
312.0
333.9
-34.78
127.5
38.17
1
7
4
-35.
1
34.
1.6
30.24
1
57
39
-30.
13
32.
10.4
23.89
1
548
415
-24.
103
24.
73.7
19.69
2
1
.2
.7
23
.6
02
4
2
.0
.8
12
.0
58
6
2
.0
.1
26
.5
94
1 - DISTILLED WRIER
r - TAP UA1E*
3 - SURFACE WATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
o
o
TABLE 8-53
NOKIIGfclNb >hD SUHPOUT IAUOB»IO»»
OM1CI Of ((SEARCH »ND «(VE LOPNEtil
ENKItOkPIEkTAL PROTECTION AGENC1
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUiJf - B/k ( )
STATISTICAL SUHMART fOB 4,4 -OKI ANALYSES PT WATER IfPE
HA3ER 1 UATFR 2 HATER 1 UATE.1 4
LOW YOUtEN PAIil
NUMBER Or MTA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) Ut/L
NCAN RECOVERY ID
ACCURACYIXKEL ERROR)
OVERALL ST» »EV IS)
OVERALL REL STR >EV, X
SINGLC ST» DEV,
.0
.9
19
.0
»0
4
0
.0
.9
79
.0
14
e
9
.0
.8
62
.6
26
1 - MS1IILE* MATER
2 - TAP HATE*
1 - SUMACE MATER
4 - INIUSTRIAL EfFLUENI
-------
TABIE 8-54
ENVIRONMENTAL PONIIOCING AND SUPPORT LAI'ORATORT
OFFICE Of KESEARCN AND DEVfLrf-lSI
f NV1RCN«CNTAL PROTfCTIfl IGfKCT
IP* HEIHOO 625 VALIDATION STUOT - JCIDS
STAT;SMCAL surwARi io* P( moc^ioflOFHtsoi. ANAI»SIS p» K»
T»PI
WATER
WATE*
WATER
k»IE«
LOW TOU3EN PAIR 1 j
NUfPIR 01 DAT* POINTS 10 11
TRUE CONC (C) U6/L 1?.C It. «
PEA1 RECOVERY (I) 14.7 15.5
ACtURACT CIKL ERROR) 9.69 7.32
OVERALL STB BEV (S) f.t 9.7
PVERALL «EL STD DEV, x 6i.«5 59. f5
SINGLE SID DEV, (SRI 7.1
ANALTST (EL DFV, X 47.66
<»EDIU" TCUDEN PAIR 3 4
MUMPER OF DATA POINTS 12 1?
TRUE CONC CO UG/L 65. T 72.?
It AN RECCVERT (I) 5C.5 «4.1
CCURACt (XREL ERROR) -1C. 2! -1".94
OVERALL sir DEV (S) 11.4 2C.2
OVERALL REl STD DEV, X 28.06 31. '7
SINGLE STB DEV, ISR) 7.2
ANALTST FEL DEV, X 11.73
HIGH TOUffk PAIR 5 ',
lUPBER OF CATA POINTS 14 12
TRUE CONC CO UG/L 4>il.O 432.0
«EA* RCCrvC»T II) 545.1 359.8
ACCURACTCXtEl ERROR) 13.6? -16.71
OVERALL SID DEV CS) 292.3 6V."
CVERALL REl STB DEV, X 51.60 19. tC
SIN6LI Ml- ItV, (SR> 169.3
AtALTST FEL DEV, X 3T. 41
WATER LEtENB
1
13.3
13. b
4.S7
9.1
66.73
3
14
(5.1
59.8
-7.95
26.3
43. ?7
,
14
48C.1
4Tt.'
-15.35
1H. 6
44.71
2
1!
14.4
16.5
14.48
1C. 8
65.32
5.1
33.77
4
15
72.0
54.7
-21.23
12.0
21. 17
19.1
32. 30
6
It
432.0
3f4.1
-15.71
1?3.5
5:.4(.
154.5
4D.T9
1
10
13. C
15.1)
15. CS
! .1
33.78
2!
3
12
65.0
5«.6
-9 .«1
14.1
23. 9d
9
5
12
48'. 0
'? 2. 7
-2C.27
11'. 0
29.52
11
:7
2
14.4
14.3
-'.7
f .2
57. '6
3.;
.92
4
12
>}.<.
54 .1
-2.' .99
1C. 9
34. 6C
'.6
.4
6
12
4^2.0
447.9
3.67
IF'. 4
4 n . ?fl
2.7
.13
1
U
13. u
13.5
3.V9
7.7
56. t?
3
24.
3
13
65.:
51.1
-il.41
15.9
1.u3
U
27.
5
12
48C.C
34". 2
-27. tc
R5.T
24.1.C
'9
11.
1-
14.4
13.1
-f .f 9
f.i
63. 2(
.2
ce
4
* '
72.0
55.8
-22.46
22. U
!9.t1
.7
55
6
H
432. J
3 J 7 . 2
-2» .?6
96.8
i«.6C
.7
77
1 - DISTILLED WATtR
2 - TAP UAIER
3 - SURFACE WATIR
4 - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-55
tiNIlL ^ONIIORING AND turron l»l-U««!0»f
Ofllft 01 ItSftRCM tut CFVFlOP'iNI
IK1Al PDCT(C110N »C,fNCT
EPA HtlHOD «25 VA|.ID*1ION «1IIO» - ACIDS
ST;IIS1IC«I SUf-fiHT FOR PMCNOl »K«lTSfS « »
«*Tl» 1 ««1K 2 UATEE 3
lt"k
LOU TOUBFN PAID
1U«BIR OF BATA POINT?
TRUE CONC
OVERALL STB BEV iS>
OVERALL PEL STB BEV, t
SI Nil I ST» BEV, (SR>
LT5T *EL BEV, X
NEBlUt fOUBE* PAIR
MJ'ftH OF »ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC
ANALYST Ml BEV, X
HIGH TOUBEN FAIR
NUPbER OF BATA POINTS
TRUE COXC U6/L
MAN RCCnVERf ID
ACCURACTlXRtv ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV IS)
OVERALL Ptl STB BEV, X
S1NCIC STB BEV, (SI)
ANALYST REL B[V. X
KATE* LCCENB
1 7
13 13
I." 7.3
4.1 3.9
-31.92 -44i,'A
2.2 1.3
53.47 45.49
1.6
44.19
3 4
14 14
7C.C 63.0
11.4 31.*
-55. 2f -49.59
12.5 C.9
39.g:< 27.95
9.3
29.52
5 «
14 14
*2C.: 467. C
172. 188. 6
-5f.*5 -59. f2
?<:. 52.2
46.1" 27.69
46.1
25.51
1
11
i.?
'.5
-45.3?
1.T
31.77
3
11
7C.T
5.6
-49.21
19.1
»3.7«
5
13
42C.C
176.4
-57. «9
tl .5
«4.27
2
1?
r.c
4.f
-29. (9
5.1
i c ; . 7 i
2.i
59.14
4
11
6!.0
26.4
-5' .11
i j.e
41. c:
11.1
3S.19
6
13
4r 7.0
2T5.2
-5«.C6
<4.7
M.'-i
?0.1
15.71
1 2
M 11
6.c 7.;
4.1 4.C
-'1.16 -42.99
1.7 l.f
41. *1 45. ?4
1.1
34. 5t
3 4
12 12
7 - . p * ! . ;
37.5 !1.2
-46.4? -5C.'3
7.? 11.0
19.99 35.14
8.L
23. !£
5 ^
12 1?
42r.C 4<7.3
169. R 222.4
-59.56 -5?.M
46.: 73.2
27.10 32.9!
46. ?
21.^
1 2
12 11
6.0 7.0
4.! 4.1
-?ST*IAl
-------
TABLE 8-56
ENVIRONMENTAL ONIIOKING AMD SuPPOd LAIORATO'T
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IUNCI
IPA PETNOD 6<5 VALIDATION STUDT - »CIDS
STATISTICAL SUW'RV FOR <-C HLCROPHE NOL «H«ltS'S IIT WATER TIPE
MATER 1 WATER 2 WATER 5 WATER *
LOW TbJDEN PAIR
NUBBEA Of DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (C) UG/L
"CAN RECOVER! U)
ACCURACTIXRf L ERROR)
OVERALL SIR REV IS)
OVERALL REL STD DEV, X
SINGLE STD DEV, (SR)
ANALfST K(L DEV, X
tDIUP TCUDE* 'AIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC >C> UG/L
"EAN RECCVERT (I)
ACCURACTIX>EI EKROR)
OVERALL Sir tEV
OVERALL REL STD tEV, X
SINCLC STD DEV, ISR)
ANALTST REt DiV, X
HIGH IOIOEK PAIC
-lU'BtR OF OATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) UC/l
"fid RECOYCRT (I?
ACCURACT4XREL ERCOR)
OVERALL STD DEV is)
OVERALL REL SID SEV, X
SINGLE STD »EV, ISO
ANALTST REL DEV, X
*«TE» LEGEND
1 «
14 11
7.t R.l,
6.1 :.9
-12.7* -25.77
2.9 2.4
4t.S6 41.14
2.6
42.3!
3 *
1* 14
30. C 72.0
69.3 63.2
-13.39 -12.17
19.1 12.9
27.52 2r.37
1C. 3
15.55
5 6
14 14
4PC.f 5'!.0
!!C.4 3M.3
-31.17 -28. '9
11*. 5 K«.4
36.17 2R.55
CC.1
22.44
1
13
1.7
?t.52
i
14
C.O
61.5
-2!. 15
19.0
?C.f5
5
13
40T.C1
?47.?
-27 .fi
1C?. 7
3C.42
2
11
3.4
-32. "4
2.4
44. C3
2.C
36. 3<
t
14
72.0
56.6
-21. T7
19.7
34.71
13. t
23,04
6
14
573 0
3f 5 . 2
-27. 7i
1J7.7
33.15
(6.1
2!.«2
1 2
U 11
7.r' t.o
5.1 5.?
-?t.59 -2*. 71
1.1 1.1
22.30 19. #J
1.1
iC.r*
3 »
12 11
80.0 72. C
6I-.6 54. 8
-16.70 -2!.?5
1< ,f 7.4
25.1? 1 « . i .'
9.6
15.75
5 . <
1? 1'
.83.0 >:!.C
31 '.ft .^C. 7
-'4. 81! -?4.«2
ff.4 1'4.7
2'.2t i«.13
65.4
If .T4
t 2
1£ 10
7 . 'J t . Q
t.C 5.«
-13.69 -<5.!'
2.1 l.j
34.11 22.71
u V
8.1')
3 4
1< 12
0 3 . C 7 1 . C
t?.9 53. t
-21.15 -i5.cn
13 . 7 It . 6
2 1 . ,' 7 J 1 . ' 2
>...
16.17
i i
12 i:
4(j 0.1 555.;
'3L,.l 5 f T . i
-'1.23 -: .e 5
:< .n (3.5
1 u.4; 2 1 .'5
41 .S
11. 7f
1 - DISTILLED UAUR
2 - TAP ufltR
3 - SilJfACl WATER
t - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
-------
TABLE 8-57
EftVIOPIIMNIAL "OMItHIdC «,» 'u"0«1 l»PO«A10l>l
CMICE 01 >ISEAACM Hit 61 »( IOP-INI
EKVIROhrifttll PROTECTION »CfNCT
EPA "ETHOB tJ5 VALIBATION STUB? - ACI6S
STATISTICAL SUftRAM »OR 2-M THTL-4.A-01NITAOri
-------
TABLE 8-58
tNVIICNClNTIL rONITOMNG »NB SU'POUt ttPOD*10*l
oirict o* ESciKtH »«»e erviiop"[»t
PVOTECTIOK
IP» P(tMOD 625 V«1!0*1ICN S1UOT - »CI»S
STATISTICAL Stinr»»l (OS .'-Ml TlOfHlHOl »M«l»?.S B» y«lf« TfPI
u«U» i w«Tft ; wtTt* 1 fc»U» 4
IOW VOUBIN P»IS
»U«Bf« Or B*T« POINTS
1IUC CONC 1C) Ut/t
E«l RECOVtIT II)
*CCUR*CTISPEl ERROR)
OVERILl SIB BE* IS)
OVEI1LL PCI STB BCV, t
SIN6LE STB tEV. ISP.)
1NHLTST PEl («. X
*lalU* tOUBEN Pill
NU"8ER Or BAIA POINTS
TRUE CONt 1C) 1)6/1
"Eft* tCCOVEtl II)
ACCURACYIiPEl f»Ij«)
OVER-LL STB BEV IS)
OVERALL R£l STB BEV, T
5116!. t SIB fit, ISI)
ANAITST PEl BE₯, I
NIGH (CUBE* PA!»
NureER or BATA POINTS
TRUE COkC 1C) U6/L
"EM RECOVEIf II)
ACCURACf l»»Et EIIO*)
9VEIALL STB BEV IS)
OVERALL til MB BEV, I
SINCLE STB B£V, ISI)
*N*LTST PEL CtV, »
1
13
14.0
14. C
C.22
6.2
44.52
3
1 1
70. D
71.6
2.27
19.2
76.97
5
13
52C,0
527.8
1.50
157.6
29.85
7
14
15.6
15.2
-2.43
7.2
47.36
4.1
:» .11
t
1!
78.0
7.5
12.16
16.9
19. !4
17.9
72.56
6
14
468. C
511.6
9.? J
"9.3
37. TO
*3.0
12.12
1
15
14.3
12.2
-1 ! .C?
4.6
37.99
3
15
71.0
1.2
1.74
17.5
17.5?
5
14
52C.O
4«7.7
-6.22
159.1
32.62
2
15
15. t
15. C
-S.K
7 .'
41.92
4.5
32.95
4
14
/f .C
69.1
-11.59
15.2
21.98
15.6
27. It
t
13
468.3
437.3
-6.5J
122.6
2P.C2
f7.2
18.85
1
1?
14. f
12.
-8.J5
5.9
46. C"
2
19.
3
14
70. 0
6«.0
-1.36
18.4
26.71
11
16.
.
13
520.0
465.4
-10.47
13'.'
29.9?
t 5
IP.
2
11
15.6
14.3
-J.M
5.1
4C.52
.6
-.4
4
14
71.0
74.;
-4.76
'. .1
26.7:
.F
49
t
1'
468.0
t cr . 9
2.7!
134.2
27.91
.9
15
1
14
14.0
13.4
-4.C5
6.'
«0.72
2
20.
1
14
70. C
6^ .9
-4.40
21. f
!2.t5
11
)f .
5
14
5JC.C
480.1
-7.6'
14f . 1
33.65
1C
15 .
7
14
15.6
14.8
-5 .04
5.6
37. 95
.9
5-5
4
14
78.0
68.6
-12. 17
27.4
39.9?
.5
9C,
6
14
4«8 .0
417.2
-11 .S2
144.8
35.13
.4
4
.*TEI
1 - BiSTlLLfV K*irB
2 - T«P M»T:«
t - Jni'JSTlUI
-------
TABLE 8-59
-CN|IO«|N(, *KO S
OtfICi 01 LTSES b» NATE* T1PE
1 W T ( ; HI { « ? M 11 ( ft 4
LOU 10UBEN PAI« 1 J
IUXBEI Of B»TA points 15 13
TSUI CO'' (C) UG/L H.1 9.C
IAN «ECOVE*T (I) 6.P 8.2
ACCUIACTUML EI*O«> -it. M -«.«;
OVEIALL SIB BEV IS) 2.6 3.2
"»F«»Ll »El SIB BfV, t 38.69 !«.6t
SINGLE STB BEV, ISI> 2,«
KILTS' 'tl BEV. X 31. tt
"!EBIU- YOUOIN PAI* 3 t
NU'BEI 01 BATA POINTS It It
HUE COHC U> UG/L 9C.O M.O
"f.N I(COVEEL STB BIV. S 24.59 It. 11
SINGLE STB BEV. 13.3
t1»LVS1 *EL BEV. S 14.77
HIGH fOUBEN rail 3 t
lu-ati or »»i» POINTS it it
T«UE f>N( CC) UG/L 3t0.n 600. C
11'* RI^OVEII (It 45'." 470. C
CCU«k£KlP{l l««0«) -16.1? -21. t«
OVERALL STB BEV ISI 1
-------
TABLE 8-60
Offltl tl »ISI«KCH «SO OIVSK'P'INI
INVIHONPt h1«l M01ECIION X-INtl
IT*
625 V«IID»II01
- ItlDS
unlit
M<1(»
w«I»f
LOU TouoiM PAI»
HJ*et« 0' »! '01115
TlUt CONC
0»l8«lt sit tlV l$>
OVMAll HI Sit M», «
SlWSli Sit ttV. ISI>
«1AL»St Id ttV, 1
^Ctltm TCUtfN FAII
HUK8C* 01 »AIA POINTS
TIUC CO«C 1C) Utfl
MceviiT :.i
*CCU*AlTCt»f I ICKOD
o»t»«it tie ti« is>
0»'««4l.l [(. Sift t(», t
511411 Sit *tV, (Sl>
ANALTS1 t(L tCV, S
HUM fOUPCt. PAIH
XUPCE* 11 DATA FOIKT5
T»Uf COOC «C> UG/l
PEAK «(CO«C*« (I)
ACCUIACTltltL (110*)
OV(i
0*f"ll !£l ST. tC*. 1
SllCli STt t(«. IS*)
AKAITJ1 DCL tfV, I
, "
11 9
9.r ic.3
ir.6 n.6
IS. 21 16. CJ
2.F 5.2
26.67 44.59
J.3
27. «6
3 «
9 1?
lij.n 90. c
72.4 79.3
-27.59 -11.90
«.7 16.4
9.24 2T.70
11.7
15.47
5 <
11 11
-------
TABLt 8-61
o
CD
K'lNlll 'CMIC'IINC ttt iVff
OMICI Of ICSEIICM «NO ff «
f l.» I I0ir( il«l PIOMCIUN
iGf -S»T
er»
i r? »«IIO» It)
o»tmn *(>. ST) »tv. x
S|N«LC 5I» !». «5«>
HKLTS1 tEL »f», X
1
9
1CC.O
63.2
- e . 4
52.«
»2.95
;1
41.
J
14
2cc.:
129.4
-55.52
J5.1
tS.6«
52
41.
5
V5
1335. T
2151. 0
61.4?
»2t .«
*3.C*
7P7
37.
?
11
T7.C
59. S
-3? .93
52.6
ff .4;
.j
17
4
14
If 0.0
121.9
-!2 .29
71.3
5«.47
.5
7<
(
15
1210. C
2C.74.1
72. f*
914.6
45. T6
.F
^
1
1C
ur.:
4P.5
-51.52
3C.5
75.57
?)
49.
3
11
2CC.C
U7.2
-t .42
1 1f .C
M.jr
44
If.
i
11
1 * ? 3 . 1.1
>92(>1
44.10
1C 19.9
2.95
75t
*r<
;
9
91.0
46.2
-4f .69
»i.9
71.14
i
C3
4
r:
lf.C.0
12*. C
-2f .89
r '..t
65.44
.5
*'
f
11
12CC.O
1fl' 5. i
5". 43
394.1
32.91
.4
?<
1
9
1CO.C
7«.«
-23.19
4' .4
'4.75
5
c
2c n . o
16'. 9
-15.56
4f .2
27.31
5
12
1!33.C
P?77.5
75.44
1121.0
49.55
2
1C
9C..C
57.5
-56.11
45.1
7*. 70
If. 3
;7.*5
,
11
I'C.O
2 H . t
17.64
124.7
!* .91
67.5
35.4!
t
9
120C.S
U5P.6
5^.22
2 C .' . i
12.25
4»3.7
I3.59
1
11
1uT .f
72.5
-27.45
30.6
4.57
3
12
roc.r
169.9
-15. C6
9C.5
53. ;«
5
It
n 3 ! . o
1527.4
14. 5»
4tC .0
3^.12
,
11
90.0
»!.6
-29.34
5C.?
(O.C2
21. «
32. P5
4
If
vc.o
146.9
-It .16
7C.6
4f.T2
57.4
!6 .24
6
12
12nC .0
1** 9. 3
J 7 . 4 4
724.2
44.21
344 .2
21. tT
«*1t* lEHft*
1 - HJ'HLtt !!(
2 - Tl>> ridl*
3 - SU«MCt MUM*
* - 1«»US>*I<1 irilUEII
-------
TABLE 8-62
»0">|irntNf. *»
OlflCI 01 flS!««(« *M> »1»IIOP*»«I1
I NVI «C>«^f «I»L P*01ICIION «GF«fi
»2S «»IIO»IION JIUCT - ICIBS
10* 4-CNLO»0-S-
HI U«t|* ITPI
klU* 1
Mtllc 3
o
v£>
ion touom p«i» i j
NU»BE* 01 Bill POI4TI 15 15
IRUE com 10 us/i »ls 13.0
"f»» RECOVCRT III ».D p. 5
CtURUCKIKl 1*10*1 -10. 8* -14.97
OVEKLl SI* BE* fl BE*, « 31. (t
*ltlU* TOUt>{« '»!» I 4
1U-8M Or »«! POI»IS 14 14
TIUE CONt 35.6 17. 5
OVERALL lEt SI* »E«. I 42.68 21.88
S1KLE SIB BEV. (Sll 24.9
N«LTSt *E1 »CV, t 3C.51
HUH TOUBEN P«IR 5 6
U-BfR Of **T» P01MIS 14 14
TRUE COHC Ut/l 6CC.D 667.0
« RECOVERT «i 472^5 5AC.2
CCU»«CI«l«tL ERRO*I -21,25 -14. 6«
OVERALL STB CEV ISI 125.2 168.1
OVfRiLL R1L SI* *E*. t 26. 5r 29.53
SltlGlE SIB BEV, ISRI «1.2
«»*LT5T *EL BE*. X 17.50
UI1ER LECENB
1 ?
IS 11
9.0 1C. 6
7.8 8.2
-13.53 -18. !6
3.1 !.8
4(,.l> 46.85
3.C
37. C»
3 4
13 12
ItC.O 9C.C
8P.1 62.8
-19. M -33.2C
22.3 26.1
27. t9 41.52
12.7
17.77
3 6
u i:
600.0 667. 0
45i.« 553.3
-24.19 -S7.05
1C'. 9 11 1.2
23.94 21.18
1-4. C
:i.e3
i
13
9.r
6.1-
-24.70
'.4
5C.52
3
13
100. C
85.2
-14.77
?4.2
28.38
3
13
600.0
425.4
-P9.11
14A.8
54. 50
2
1'
11. Lr
8.6
-14.58
! . 3
38. *9
1.7
22.19
4
1'
9C.O
73.9
- .7.14
19.8
26. »C
14.7
18. 5C
t
15
6*7. C
565.5
-15. ?2
150.5
26. <1
91 1
IS. 38
1
1;
«.n
1, »
-8.24
4.3
51. »7
3
12
U C . '
81.2
-18.78
t7.7
21.79
5
12
60?. 0
444.!
-25. 95
1 14 .9
2i.S5
2
12
10, C
8.0
-2C.42
' .1
38.86
2.4
JO.C2
4
12
9C.O
69.5
-22.77
19.1
27.52
«.0
11.98
6
12
66 7.0
5n2 . 1
-2* . 72
17b.7
3^.58
79.9
U.86
1 - B1STIIK* U*1EI
? - J«P w«t(B
J - 3UBKCI M»»et
-------
TABLE 8-63
l N
or»ic« or
*D 5urroei i»ro»«io»T
two DIVCIOP-INI
PBOIKIICN »6tl't*
EPA flHOO <25 V»L(DA1!0« STUO* - »CIOS
S1A1ISTICAL SU»SAB» ICB 4-h 11 ROCHtNOL »KA!.»US 6* «
UAT(B 1 UATE> 2 WATER ]
1*PE
LOW TOUDFN PAI*
»U«BER or DATA POINTS
TRUE C01C 1C) U6/1
tON RCCOVfRT (I)
ACCU«ACV
N*ITSI REL Df«, 1
"011)1 TTUDEN P*ll
NUMBER Of e*1» FOIHIS
TRU( COMt 1C) UG/L
f>l»t RECOVER* «)
«ccu««t»(im c*ton>
OVEidli SIP »EV (S)
OVERALL ML Sift ftEV. S
SINCLE SIR »EV, (SR)
N»ITSI REL DtV, I
MICH TOUHCN PAIR
lUnBER Or BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) Ut/l
1E»N RECOVER* <»>
ACCURACT(t»EL l«»0['>
OVERALL SI» OEV (S>
OVERALL REl ST6 ftCV, S
SINGLE SIS 6£V, (SR)
AI»AL*ST BEL 64*t X
UAIER LECEMO
1
I
il.ft
1?.?
-?«.71
6.7
51.4?
3
u'
ICf-.O
t2.4
-«i.21
51,5
iC.*3
5
14
fOC.C
523.1
-J4.61
if:. 9
*9. 50
2
1?
24.0
12.4
-4J.24
n.9
8».5i
7.1
57. !4
4
U
120.0
71.2
-40. «7
?4.7
*«.77
?1.2
4«.7C
6
1?
72C.C
433.9
-39. 7J
175.9
40.55
164.9
34.45
1
(
21.6
9.1
-57.99
5.7
C2.t2
i
M
1C!.0
55.2
-4(.I5
2!. 3
42.25
5
12
ecc.o
4if .2
-47.47
zjr.i
?4.75
7
f
?4.;
17. t
-47. 5C
§.7
«9.2J
«.5
50.99
4
10
1?0.0
67.0
-44.14
?C.6
45. 6C
17.5
28.66
6
13
7 2 C . 0
4 3 . <
-19.54
171.3
39.35
133. f
31.29
1
9
21.6
14.1
-31.41
9.4
*3.47
1
12
i:^.c
«9.n
-36. Ct
12.3
46.7!
5
12
OC.P
42«.4
-46.51
161 .9
42.17
2
9
?4.C
1C. 7
-47.15
f .4
66. !
4.0
29.17
4
i:
12C.O
f*.0
-46. t9
25.5
39. »4
18.6
2».2t
f
12
T7C.P
456.6
-IC.59
2?5.8
51.6-
146.1.
33.^4
1
9
21.'
21.4
-1.03
16. f
71. 44
3
11
ion. r
6*. 3
-'6.7P
3C.1
44.52
5
1.'
r oc.c
515.4
-'5.S»
2*1.5
«0. 74
2
8
24.0
15.1
-36.20
9.7
6'. 50
5.5
10.11
4
12
12C.P
64.1
-46. C2
25.0
39, Ci
17.5
26.21
6
11
??c.o
?«?.;
-;e .73
"5.1
32.07
211.2
51.59
1 - HSIIlLft WATFR
2 - IAP KATE*
3 - SU« MCE UM(R
- 1N6US1R1AL EfrLUENI
-------
TABLE 8-64
AC».IIGI.INt AND SUPPOfcT lAltORATOKI
CMICl 01 RfUAfcCh tHt, BfVELCPHENT
ENVlhOMKLNIAL PROTECTION »GENC»
* IPt PETHOD t25 VALIDATION S1UO» - ACIDS
STATISTICAL SUPfARt (OS 2,4 .t-TaiCHLOIlOI-HENr'L ANAKStS BI WATER TTPi
WATER 1 WATE* 2 WAT:R ] LATCH 4
tOW fOUDEN PA|t
NUPBER Of 6ATA POINTS
TRUE CONC (Cl UG/L
MIAN RECOVER) («)
ACCURACTdRll ERROR)
OVERALL STB BCV «S>
OVERALL DEL 510 DEV, X
SINGLE SIB DEV, (SR>
«N*Lf,T REL BEV. I
NEB1UM fCUDEN PAIR
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS
TRUE CONC 1C) U6/L
1C»N RECOVfRI («)
ACCURACY OREL IRROR)
OVERALL STB BCV (S>
OVERALL REL STB B(V, I
SINCLE STB CEV, (SB)
ANALIST REL BEV. X
H|6H TOUCiN PAIR
NUMBER Of BATA POINTS
TRUE CONC UG/L
MEAN RECOVER* ««>
ACCURACY «XRIL ERROR)
OVERALL STB BEV IS)
OVERALL REL STB BEV. X
SINGLE SIB BEV. (SR)
ANALIST REL BEV. I
WATER LE6ENB
1
1}
11.9
1C.1
-15.13
5.2
51. (.9
3
12
59. C
6C.O
1.7f
18.*
30.72
5
12
44P.C
390. J
-11.29
123.7
31.69
?
13
13.2
12.3
-7.17
6.0
49.25
4.0
35.75
4
12
66.0
«2.v
-*.71
8.1
K.91
11.1
U.11
6
12
396.0
322.5
-1B.55
59.1
1^.33
(1.9
17. !t
1
12
11.9
1C.O
-15.63
3.3
12.91
3
13
19.C
55. f
-5.5C
8.3
U.C7
5
12
4*0.9
378.8
-13.91
83. f
21. 9C
->
1*
1!.i
15. C
11.51
6.Z
*i.*e
*.t
it.9i
4
12
66.0
55. 6
-15. *C
9.2
16.45
7.6
11.65
£
13
396.0
J53.6
-10.70
fit .2
24. 95
8*. 7
2!.)i
1
13
11.9
t.6
-17.78
4.6
U.20
3
13
59.0
52.7
-It. 65
15.4
i5.37
5
13
440. C
349.7
-2C.51
109,4
J1.29
2
13
13.2
11.6
-12. Ct
3.1
26.5*
2.1
19.62
4
13
66.0
60. e
-7.*3
u.o
26.34
10.6
16.75
6
15
396.0
3<4..3
-a. oi;
126.2
34.65
51.6
14.45
1
13
11.9
11. <
0.32
5.4
45.14
J
13
59.0
51. e
-1i.15
10.5
2U.34
5
13
440. C
364.1
-17.24
85.6
21.50
2
13
1 1.2
11.1
-»5.6b
3.0
27.01
0.1
35.63
4
12
66. C
54.5
-17.41
13.2
24.16
6.3
11.91
6
:i
396.0
321.7
-18.75
t*.3
29.31
38.2
11.13
1 - DISTILLED yAIffi
2 - TAP 4AIER
3 - SURIACE WATER
4 - INDUSTRIAL EMLUENT
-------
X - a + b C (10)
was fitted to the data by regression techniques.
It is often the case that the true concentration values vary
over a wide r >.nge. In such cases, the mean recovery statistics
associated with the larger concentration values tend to dominate
the fitted regression line producing relatively larger errors in
the estimates of mean recovery at the lower concentration values.
In order to eliminate this problem, a weighted least squares
technique was used to fit the mean recovery data to the true
concenttation values. The weighted least squares technique was
performed by dividing both sides of Equation 10 by C resulting
in Equation 11.
X = a + b . (11)
Vhs (X/C) values were regressed against the (1/C) values using
ordinary least squares to obtain estimates for the values of a
and b. (This is equivalent to performing a weighted least
squares with weights w = 1/C2; see Reference [5], page 108 for
details). Equation 11 can easily be converted to the desired
relationship ^iven by Equation 10. The intercept (b) from
Equation 11 becomes the slope (b) for Equation 10 and the
slope (a) from Equation 11 becomes the intercept (a) for
Equation 10. Equation 10 can be used to calculate the percent
recovery over the applicable range of concentrations used in
the study.
The percent recovery is given by
Percent Recovery = [a * b ' c] x 10Q = [§ + b] x 100 (12)
112
-------
If the absolute value of the ratio (a/C; is small relative to
the slope (b) for concentrations in the low end of the range of
concentration levels used in the study, then the percent recovery
can be approximated by b x 100. For example, suppose the true
concentration values range from 25 yg/L to 515 yg/L, the fitted
line is given by X = -0.20 + 0.85 C. The percent recovery
would be approximated by (0.85) x 100 = 85% over the specified
range of 25 ug/L to 515 yg/L.
If the ratio (a/C) is not small relative to the slope (b), then
the percent recovery depends upon the true concentration (C),
and ix. must be evaluated at each concentration value within the
specified range.
Statement of Method Precision
The precision of the method is characterized by the relation-
ships between precision statistics (S and SR) and mean recovery
(X~) . In order to obtain a mathematical expression for these
relationships, regression lines of the form
S = d + e X (13)
and
SR - f + g X* (14)
were fitted to the data.
As discussed previously with respect to accuracy, the values of
X and X* often vary over a wide range. In such cases the
standard deviation statistics associated with the larger mean
recovery values will dominate the regression lines. This will
produce relatively larger errors in the estimates of S and SR at
113
-------
the lower mean recovery values. Therefore, a weighted least
squares technique was also used to establish the values of the
parameters d, e, f, and g in Equations 13 and 14. The weighted
least squares technique was performed by dividing both sides of
Equation 13 by X resulting in Equation 15
_§_ , d . _L_ + e (15)
X X
and by dividing both sides of Equation 14 by X~* resulting in
Equation 16
|K = f . JL + g . (16)
The (S/X") values were regressed against the (1/X~) values and the
(SR/X*) values were regressed against the (1/X*) values using
ordinary least squares to obtain estimates for the parameters d,
e, f, and g.
Equations 13 and 14 were obtained from Equations 15 and 16 in a
manner similar to that discussed for mean recovery. The slope
(d) for Equation 15 is the intercept (d) for Equation 13.
Similarly, the slope (f) for Equation 16 is the intercept (f)
for Equation 14, and the intercept (g) for Equation 16 is the
slope (g) for Equation 14.
Given Equations 13 and 14, the percent relative overall stan-
dard deviation and the percent relative single-analyst standard
deviation are
7.RSD - US- + e x 100 (17)
114
-------
and
7.RSD-SA = [£- + gl x 100 (18)
LX* J
respectively. If the absolute value of the ratio (d/X~) is small
relative to the slope (e), then the percent relative overall
standard deviation can be approximated by (e x 100) over the
applicable range of mean recovery values. Similarly if the
ratio (f/X*) is small relative to the slope (g), then the per-
cent relative single-analyst standard deviation can be approxi-
mated by (g x 100) over the applicable ~ange of mean recovery
values.
If the ratios (d/X) and (f/X*) are not small relative to the
slopes (e) and ff), then the percent relative standard devia-
tions depend upon the values of the mean recovery statistics X
and X*, and they should be evaluated separately for each value
of X and X*.
COMPARISON OF ACCURACY AND PRECISION ACROSS WATER TYPES
It is possible that the accuracy and precision values of Method
625 depend upon the type of water being analyzed. The summary
statistics X", S, and Sr are calculated separately for each con-
centration level within each water type. They can be compared
across water types in order to obtain information about the ef-
fects of water type on accuracy and precision. However, the use
of these summary statistics in this manner has several disadvan-
tages. First, it is cumbersome because there are 24 mean recov-
ery statistics (X) (6 ampuls x 4 waters), 24 precision statistics
(S), and 12 precision statistics (S ) calculated for each compound
Comparison of these statistics across concentration levels and
across water types becomes unwieldy. Second, the statistical
115
-------
properties of this type of comparison procedure are difficult to
determine. Finally, due to variation associated with %, S, and
S . comparisons based on thes*> statistics can lead to inconsis-
tent conclusions about the effect of water type. For example,
distilled water may produce a significantly lower value than
drinking water for the precision statistic S a.r. a high concen-
tration, but a significantly higher value for f' at a low concen-
tration.
An alternative approach, described in detail in Reference 2, has
been developed to test for the effects of water type. This al-
ternative approach is based on the concept of summarizing the
average effect of water type across concentration levels rather
than studying the local effects at: each concentration level. If
significant differences are established by this alternative tech-
nique, then the summary statistics can be used for further local
analysis.
To check for the effect of water type on the analytical results,
a global F-test of the accuracy and precision is calculated. If
the global F-test shows no water type effects, no further calcu-
lations are required. If the F-test shows significance of water
type, calculations are performed to determine if the individual
differences are statistically significant by calculating a con-
fidence interval for the difference between water type. A
statistical significance is established if at least one of the
confidence intervals for the differences does not include zero.
The global F-test for the effect of water type is calculated
using the following statistical model. If X... denotes the
Ij K-
measurement reported by laboratory i, for water type j, and
ampul k, then
Xijk - ej ' CkYJ ' Li ' eijk
116
-------
where i - 1,2 15
j - 1,2
k - 1,2 6
Model components g. and y- are fixed parameters that determine
the effect of water type j on the behavior of the observed mea-
surements (X. ., ) . The parameter C, is the prepared concentration
level associated with ampule k. The model component L is a ran-
dom factor which accounts for the i-ystematic error associated
with laboratory i. The model component c... is the random factor
LJ K
that accounts for the within-laboratory error.
The model is designed to approximate the global behavior of the
data. The multiplicative structure was chosen because of two
important properties. First, it allows for a possible curvilinear
relationship between the data (X.., ) and the true concentration
ij K
level (C, ) through the use of the exponent Y- on C, . This makes
the model more flexible in the data and the concentration level
C, in this model. This property is important because it is typi-
cal of interlaboratory data collected under conditions where the
true concentration levels vary widely.
Accuracy is related directly to the mean recovery or expected
value of the measurements (X..,). The expected value for the
IjK
data modeled by Equation 19 is
E = 6j ' <** ' E(Li ' ei.jk> <20>
Precision is related to the variability in the measurements (X.., )
1J K
The variance of the data modeled by Equation 19 is
Var(X.jk) = Bj - C* VarCL, c. jh) . (21)
117
-------
which is an increasing function of CR (See Reference 2 for a
complete discussion of this model.)
The accuracy and precision of Method 625 depend upon water type
through Equations 20 and 21 and the parameters ^ and YJ . If the
0. and Y. vary with j (i.e., vary across water type), then the
accuracyJand precision of the rrethod also vary across water type.
To determine if these parameters do vary across water type and to
compare their values, they must be estimated from the laboratory
data using regression techniques. Equation 19 represents the basic
model. However, taking natural logarithms of both sides of Equa-
tion 19, the following straight line regression model is obtained.
*n Xijk - in B. 4- Y. en Ck + «n L. + In e..k (22)
The parameter in 0 . is the intercept, and y. is the slope of the
regression line associated with water type j , It is assumed that
X,n L, is normally distributed with mean 0 and variance a, 2 , that
X Li
In e--k is normally distributed with mean 0 and variance o 2, and
that the in L. and Jin e..v terms ars independent.
1. 1 j .K
Based on Equation 22, the comparison of water types reduces to the
comparison of straight lines. Distilled water is viewed as a con-
trol, and each of the remaining lines is compared directly to the
line for distilled water.
Using the data on the log-log scale and regression techniques, the
parameter In 0, (and hence 6.) and y, can be estimated. These es-
timates are then used to formally test the null (no water-type ef-
fect) versus alternative (water-type effect) hypotheses
HQ: in 8 - in Sj_ - 0 and y. - y = 0 for j - 2 (23)
118
-------
"ersus
HA: in 0, - £n 01 ^ 0 and/or y. - Yi 5* 0 for some i - 2 (24)
A J 1 J 1
The null hypothesis (HQ) is tested against the alternative hy-
pothesis (H.) using an F-statistic. The probability of obtaining
the value of an F-statistic as large as the value which was ac-
tually observed, Prob(F > F DBS) is calculated under the assump-
tion that HO is true. HQ is rejected in favor of HA if Prob(F > F
OBS) is less than 0.05. showing a possible effect due to water
type.
If HQ is not rejected, then there is no evidence in che data that
the 0. vary with j or that the y. vary with j. Therefore, there
is no evidence of an effect due to water type on the accuracy or
precision of the method. If H~ is rejected, then some linear
combination of the differences (in 0. - In 3) and (y. - y,) is
statistically different from zero. However, this does not
guarantee there will be a statistically significant direct
effect attributable to any specific water type since the overall
F test can be overly sensitive to minor systematic effect common
to several water types. The effect lue to water type is judged
to be statistically significnat only if one of the differences
(Jin 0. - In 0^) and/or (y. - y^) , is statistically different
from zero. This is determined by checking the simultaneous 957.
confidence intervals which are constructed for each of these
differences. Each true difference can be stated to lie within
its respective confidence interval with 957. confidence. If zero
is contained within the confidence interval, then there is no
evidence that the corresponding difference is significantly
different from zero and no further calculations are required.
If at least one of the confidence intervals for the differences
(in e>. - in 0^) or (y, - y^) fails to include zero, then the
119
-------
statistical significance of the effect due to water type has
been established. Even if a statistically significant effect
due to water type were to be established, that would not neces-
sarily mean that the effect would be of practical importance.
Practical importance is related to the size and interpretation
of the differences. The computer generated data for the point
estimates, analysis of variance, dnd confidence intervals are
shown in Tables 9-1 through 9-63 for each compound, with the
exception of delta-BHC. Because of insufficient ampule data for
delta-BHC in surface water, the multiplicative model analysis was
not performed.
The comparison of accuracy and precision a :ro^s water t>pes jujt
discussed is based on the assumption that Equation (19) approxi-
mately models the data. It is clear that in practical monitor-
ing programs of this type such models cannot model tie data
completely in every case. This analysis, therefore, is viewed
as a screening procedure which identifies those cases where
differences in water types are likely to be present. A more
detailed, local analysis can then be pursued using the basic
summary statistics for precision and accuracy.
120
-------
TABLE 9-1
. noii it 01 tut AN* SUPPOIT i»aot»io«i
Of I ICE Of liStAICM AN» 3IVCL6PIUNT
INVIIONNEMTAI. MOTECTION AtCNCT
If* UMNO* *2} VALUATION STUM - «/N ">
IflfCt Of MAUI T»« OH ACENAPNTNfNE ANALdlS
POINT ESTIMATES
MSTILtE* MATE* SlOPEitAAMAIIt .91941
M*I(I IMTilt|TT(M«TF«-(MTUlf»> StOfi
lfC«U£TEI/»IS1ILLI»)
(1*01
nil
»f
1
*
2*1
s Of IUIIANCS
SUM Of StUAIES
721.1421}
.10144
11.7965*
DEAN S4UAIE
721.14231
.01474
.04402
PlOa
1.»J .0770
TOT»l
27}
7JJ.447JJ
i*tii or fit toiri»i«ct
foi INI »crrt«f>cxs ITHIIM i«Tiicrf7t >«t
l«IIICfPT(HtICt-»llTUlt»>
MHIfl (S"|M«Ti HITt>«
1 -.0*44 < -.3112 , .11741
(, -.1070 C -.3171 . ,1*JO»
SLOPftW«TCI-IISTIil.t»>
ISIINAII IHKIKAL
.3070 I -.053* . .0«74)
-.0070 < -.0*37 , .Ct«7>
.OG2) < -.0*50 , .OiOO
Tit
If IHO IS CO«T*I»I» HI1NI« t (!₯( CONfl»[llCI I«T «V«L TM[« TNIII IS NO SUTISIUai SI41I f I CAHf ( «(1Wil«
isittif* NAtti «» i*c coitf sroMtmc H*STI ««m rot ixt A£SOIK«( .
T»i SlOPf »» llTIItfPT (SIIHATfS flOM 1NII A»ill»I« All NOT Til SAM AS 1H01I OBIAINft ftON TMI PIICISION
AN* ACCUIAO IfdfSSlONS PflfOIMIt fAILIf*.
-------
TABLE 9-2
IM*MO*MII1*1 HO«IIC»lh( «* JU'POIt ItBOKIOIf
OIIICI Of MSMICN «* »l*f lOPHIKI
pioiictiOH «ti*Cf
IP* M1HO* 42i «*ll»*110ll STUt* - / 111
IfflCT Of lit If I MPI OH «CtktPH1MtltMt
tsiiiuiis
»ltl|Lt:> HITfl SLOP! iCDHHXO » .«/ti7
(Mil* IMIIICIFIIWalil-dSTILLiei SIOPI (U*U *~» I SI I ILI»>
I .02(1 -.0071
I -.0)0} .0195
4 -.1222 .0214
*k«iiiii or
touict »> IUH or »«U»KJ nttii $«o»«t f ?ios
ltt<»H1ULC»> 1 *24.S4221 424.C4221
Ki«N 4 ,?«OT2 ,04«7« .61 .7222
FIICI 21) 17.17004 .07670
240 442.V92V*
* TAttf Of »J- COiritfUtf l*lfl**L( 16* IHf »ll»SH«tl» IlKI'H lKTIIC;>it «< |H( tlfrflCNCtS BITWCtH
|*1f BCiPHUtlf l-tltTll4.lt) UuPi'f IVItlVAi
2 .02(1 I -.11*2 , ,1»47> -.0071 I -.Ql«t . .0747)
1 -.OJ01 ( -.)V2I , .1111) .01«t I -,U4M , .Q4«4t
4 -.1222 I -.4942 . .{«*«> .0214 I -.0611 , .10«41
Ot|: II !( IS C0*1»l*f» MITMI« * «l«i* COIIIkfllCI INtf*y*L 1HCN IHilf It MO 1 1 « I ! i I I C »l S Unit I (*H(f BdUfiM
ISTItLf* HAKI »» IMC tOIKIPeHHIIC «*S1f ««UI Its IHf «J»Otl»Tl»
inf HOP! * imnciPi ftiiHtiit rirn THIS intiiiit «n not IHI S*KI AS iHOJit oeitHKt lion l»i
* ttcbmct
-------
TABLE 9-3
Hani ICCtlli *K»
OfMCI 61 IfiMOCH AM »(vriOrnt*1
PftOTICIlON
IP* MIH<>»:«2) VtllXflON JTUB» - 0/N (1)
IfllCt Of MtTII TTPI ON .'l»IIN »«Ul!JI'
POUT
klitULI* Httil II.OPI :i«HI«(1> .«)I41
KITCI i*liiCfrTly*T(i-»ittit.tiil
1 -.ZJ71 .011)
J -.?7U -.010*
4 -.»U» .0)14
AIILTSIS Of VtlltBCf
SOOICf If SUN Of SOUAMS MttN JOUHil f ''OB
(('.Mltlllltt 1 tH*.0«2IO 419.06210
[',IW«T:I;»ISTIILI»I « «.«9I7) i.»66*t 9.)0 .0000
I»IOC 2)0 44.7(74) .1791)
JOI»L 2)7 471.14900
l«»ti Of «}I COHrildltl |MT(IV41S fOI IH( .IfflBfNCIS OfTHIf* INtllCCfll *» TNI »Ilf[|[IIC[S BllUCf* SLOPIS
M*Tft ISIIHtTC INTflVtL ISIIB4II miteV«L
2 -.2)71 ( -.11)* , .)41«> .011) I -.1101 . .1)3?)
) -.271* I -.«5J7 , .3105) -.0106 < -.1!?0 . .1109)
4 -.47*1 I -1.2)50 , -.0916) .0114 I -.03V2 . .1)201
noil: if ic 10 it ce*TMftft KITIIIB * ci«m conntiNCf imnvti THE* TNIIC is no $t»iiJiu»i sioir ic«»ci
ISTJltf* HATfl »» 1»l (Ollf SFftHtlkt MtSff W45II fO* IHf tltOtltTI* PAItflf r t« i IMlf IClfl/St 0«>f ) .
INI lion » iMiiicffT (timaTis >ion THIS mmu in MOT fni »»M »s Tiost o-iiinit nan mi PKCISIOK
4K» 4CCUI1CT tfCtfSSIBUS ftlfOIDi*
-------
TABLE 9-4
f hvliouM KUi. noniioiNG AN* SUPPOM
flffid or ifsi«*(H AN*
ENVKONHEN1AI PROTECTION AbENO
EPA HETHOi 62S VALUATION StU»» - 6/N (1)
klflCT 0* HATE* TTPE ON ANTHRACENE UNAITS1S
POINT fSMMICS
WATCI llldtf PT IC&UItmif »> 1 917.14202 «17.162Q2
N) l£fi « t.OOif) ,U?*9 1.11 .3563
.p- EIIIOI 261 39. 35394 .15078
101(1 268 9S7.S2Q19
i»»il of 9S« coMfitENCt mit««*LS rot IMC tirrfiENCts iciyicn INTEICCPTS >*» IHE tiifistoin eciweti SLOPES
INTEI(EPT(MA'/EI-»1 STILLED) SLOPt(MAKI-HJ'llLl»>
H«TE* ISTINtlt 1NUIVAI ES1IHATI
2 .058* < -.3710 , .49011 -.0023 ( -.C/954 , .0«0»>
I .0711 « -..'S2« . .S02I) -.0096 I -.1011 , .OS19)
4 .0914 I -.1280 , .S2*8) -.042S I -.1336 , .04861
off: if IEIO is ce*i*lNE» HI TMIII * «IVEN (ONrii'icE !N'««VAL TMEN TMIIC is NO SIAJI.TICAL sitNirictNCE
»ISTILLE» MATCI «» TNf COIIC SPON»IN« W«S1t WtTff fO* 1ME AI^OCUTE* P..« A1H I < IH H « C I PI / SI OPt ) .
IMS SLOPE AN* INTIICEPT EUIBATlS ftOH THIS ANriMIS All NOT TNf SAME AS THOSE OBlAINEft HO* THE PRECISION
AN* ACCUIAtV IECIESSIOHS PEIfOtKEt EAtLKi.
-------
TABLE 9-5
ENVITONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OlllCt or RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEUCY
EPA METHOD 623 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
ErMCT Of WATER TYPE ON B-BMC ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
»limi(» WATER SLOPE:CAMMA(1> .9197V
WA1ER INTERCEPT(WATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE (WMER-D I STILLiD)
2 .0000 0089
3 -.OJJ9 -.00*7
4 -.1711 .02)7
ANALYSIS Of VARIANCE
SOURCE »r SUM or SQUARES MEAN sau»«E r PROB
., REtdlSTILLED) 1 717.11790 717.31790
jO R{C(WATER/DISTILIED> « .29152 .04819 .8* .5077
(_n E1KOR 265 14.57914 .05)02
TOTAL 272 732.20851
TABLE Of 9SI COMItENCE INTERVALS rOR THE DUnifWCEJ BETWEEN INTEkCEPTS AND THE DIME1ENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPT (WATtt-tlJSTILLED) SLOPE (WATER-DI ST I LLEDt
WATFR ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 .0000 I -.3196 . .31,5) -.0089 I -.0736 , .0558)
3 -.0339 ( -.3567 . .2889) -.0047 ( -.0701 , .0)071
4 -.1713 I -.4966 . .1539) .0217 ( -.0437 , .0872)
NOItl ir 1ERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A tlVEN CONHDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SICNIflCANCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED WATER AND THE CORRESPONDING WASTE WATER »0» THE ASSOCIATED PARAMETER IINTERCEPT/SLOPE>.
THE SLOPE AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES MOM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED »»OM THE PRfCISIOl
AND ACCURACY RECRESSIONS PCREORHED EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-6
ENVIRONMENTAL BONITOd'HG AND 5UPPOH1 LABORA10II
OfUCt OF RCSEABCH AN» DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL P10TECTION «6tNCV
EPA METHOD 629 VALIDATION STUDT - B/N (1)
EFFECT OF WATER TYPE ON BENIO(A)ANTHRACENE ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
»ISTILLEO MATE! SLOPE:6AMNA<1> « 1.013*3
HATE* INTERCEPT(WATER-Dl~riLLED) SLOPECWATER-DISTILIED)
2 -.0916 .0020
3 -.2601 .0014
4 -.6356 .0556
ANALIS1S OF VAT. 1A*C; 'f
SOURCE OF SUH OF SQUARES MEAN SttUADE F PROS
., RE6«»ISTILLE»» 1 447.69092 447.69092
|S) RE6(UATER/DISTILL<»> 6 B.93646 1.48941 9.00 .0000
Ot ERROR 258 42.63441 .16544
TOTAL 265 499.31179
TABLE OF 951 CONFltENCi INTERVALS FOR THE pIFFtgENCES BETWEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEP7 SLOPE IWATER-D 1STILLE»)
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.0916 ( -.7719 , .5887) .0020 I -.1494 , .15JO
} -.2601 I -.9388 , .4186) .0014 I -.1492 . .1520)
4 -.6354 I -1.3079 . .0366) .0556 ( -.1136 . .1848)
NOTfl IF ZERO IS CONTAINER H1TNIN * CIVEN CONFI6ENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
IST1LLER WATER AN» THE CORiESPOKftiNC WASTE WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATE* PARAMETERIINTERCEPT/SLOPE>.
THE SLOPE AN» INTERCEPT ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED FROM THE PRECISION
AN* ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PERFORMER EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-7
ENVIROMMtNTAL NOMIlOllkt A*» 1UPPOIT lABOtAIOIT
Or»ICC 01 RESEARCH AN» OfVELOPMiNT
ENVIRONHE NTAL PROTECTION A*ENC₯
EPA NETHO* «2S VALUATION STU»* - B/N (1)
EfflCT OF WATCH TIPf ON BENlOtA IPVRENE ANAIISIS
POINT fSTINATfl
ISTIILE* W/tlll SLOPt:C*HH»(1> 1.052*5
HUE! IN1EICEPTIUMEI-elSTItl.fi> SLOPE (W*TEI-»I STllLEt)
2 -.2957 .0407
I -.165* -.0022
4 -.*10A -.0112
*N«LTS1S Of VARIANCE
SOUICI »f SUN Of S«UA*ES NEAN StUKE f P*OB
IEC«»ISTULE») 1 1051.701B8 1051.70188
ItC(UATEI/»ISTlLLE»> » S.11SV9 1.J5266 4.5* .0002
EIIOI 2S2 75.15815 .2«I23
TOTAL 25» 11J4.»7i»7
TABLf Of *SS CONfl»ENCE INTERVALS fOR TNE tlffERENCES BETWEEN INTERCEPTS ANt TNE BlffERENCES IETHEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPTIWATE(-» I STILLED SLOPE (UATER-»IST ILLE»>
WATER ESTINATE INTE8WAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.2*17 « -,«172 , .325S) .0*»7 I -.0837 . .1(11)
1 -.1454 « -.781^ , .4507) -.0022 < -.1340 , .1291)
4 -.*10« I -1.0*01 . .21«») -.0112 ( -.1*72 . .1209)
NOTEl If IERO IS CONTAINER WITHIN A (IVEN CONfl»ENCE INTCAVSL THfN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SlEMIflCANCE HEIWEEN
RISTILLER WATER AN* 1NE CORRESPONRINt HASTE WATER fOR IHt ASSOCIATE* PARAKfTER*INTERCEPT/SLOT;>.
TNE SLOPE AN* INTERCEPT ESTIMATES (ROM THIS *NAL«Sli ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAlkE* fROM THE PtlCUjCS
AN* ACCURACY RE6RESSIONS PERfORME* EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-8
ENVIRONMENTS HONITGtlMC »*» SUPPOI1 LABORATORI
OfflCt 01 RESEARCH AN* DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCV
EPA DEIHOt 62} VALUATION STUR* - / 11) -
IfflCI Of HATER TtPE ON BENlOtamilORANTHENE ANALTSIS
POINt ESTIMATES *
RISTILLE* KITE* SLOPErtAMMAd) » I.OSUt
HUE* IIIIEICtPTIWlTEI-tlSTILLEtl SLOPE (U»1E l-» ISTI LtE»>
2 -.56J5 .05J5
1 -.6*27 .0581
4 -.5014 -.0048
ANtLTSIS Of VtHlAUCE
SOURCE »f SUM Of SSi.«IEi MEAN Sau»»« f P«OB
«E«(»ISTIILE»> 1 873.00&0. S7J.00602
_i RE«(W«1ER'l)ISIIllE*> 6 11.80274 1.«6?12 6.«2 .0000
rO EltOI 281 79.VJ575 .28447
00
TOTAL 288 944.74450
* TMLt Of MI COMMENCE IMTEIVAIS fOU TNE »irf(tlM(CS eCTWECN INTERCEPTS AN* THE »IMEICMCES METMEEN SLOPES
I«TIICfPT
NOTE! If IERO IS CONTAINS* WITHIN t GIVEN CONflftENCE INTERVAL THEM THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SI6NIfllJUCi BETWEEN
»IS1ILLE» MATE* AN* THE CORRESPONtINC HASTE HATER fO» THE ASSOCIATE* PARAMETER!INTERCEPT/SLOPE).
TNE SLOPE AN* INTERCEPT ESTIMATES MOM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT TNE SAME AS THOSE OHTAINE* fROM IfcE PRECISION
A3* ACCURACY RECRESSIONS TER*ORME» EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-9
ENVIRONHENTAL NONITORINC AMI SUPPORT LABORATOAI
OKltt 0* RESEARCH *N» DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ASCNC»
IP* METHOD 621 VALIDATION STUD* - 0/M 111
EHECT Of WATER TJPE ON BISI2-CI»LOROETHfL)ETNER ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISULLED WATER SLOPE :CAMMA 1 1 ) 1.01)80
VATER INTERCEPKWATER-D1STILLED) SIOPE (WAIER-B ISTILLE* >
2 -.0250 .0197
) .3*51 -.0698
* .2012 -.016*
ANALYSIS Of VARIANCE
SOURCE tr SUM or SOUARES MEAN $au««E r PROS
Rlt(oil1!Lli») 1 A78.099V9 678.09999
REC(MATER/»ISTIi.L(»> « 1.32751 .2212} .72 .6)10
ERROR 264 80.7)566 .30582
TOTAL 271 760.16317
TABLE Or VII CONMRENCE INTERVALS »OR THE RUrERENCES BETWEEN' INTERCEPTS AN! THE »IMEtfl>CES BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPTCWATER-»ISTILLER) SLOPECWA1CR-»!J1ILLER)
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INfEIVAL
2 -.0210 I -.8690 , .8189) .0197 I -.US7 , .1851)
3 .1651 I -.«S77 , 1.1879) -.0698 < -.2117 , .0921)
4 .2012 « -.S996 . 1.0020) -.0164 I -.1746 . .1417)
NOTE: If 1ERO it CONTAINED WITHIN A tlVIN CONMRENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SltNIMCANCE BETWEEN
RIST1LI.ER WATEB AN» IMi CORRESPONRINt WASTE WATER »0» THE ASSOCIATE* PARAMETEM (INTERCEPT/SLOPE).
THE SLOPE ANR INTERCEPT ESTIMATES MOM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED MOM 'Ml PRECISION
AN* ACCURACY 1ECRESSIONS PEirORME* EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-10
ENVIRONMENtAL BON 11 0« IMC A NO SUPPOtT lABORAIORt
OMICE or RESEARCH ANR BEVELOPRENI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCI
IP* RETHOO 6JS VAlltAMON STUtl - 8/N II)
IfMCl Of MATER TYPE ON M-N-BUTVIPHTHAIATE ANAtTSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
MST1LLE* H*TCI SLOPE:««HM<(1) » .91011
W«lfl IMTt*CErT(HtT[l-»lSIILLE»> S10PE I S 1 1 LLE 0 >
.06U
.36«9
.0*9*
-.0111
-.061*
-.0201
ANnLTSlS Of VAIKNCE
JOUICE
lEtlMSTIllEO
*CC(H*iril/»lST|llE»)
ERBOI
»f
1
6
277
SUM Of JOUAREi
972.04279
1.11101
41.27602
1 MEAN SSUARE f P»08
972.0*279
.17428
1.26 .2751
tOTlt
214 :02'- 43684
I»8LI Of »S«
INUIVAtl »0i TMI BIMEKNCES
MA1EI
|NTEiCEPI(W«TE*-CI SMILE »>
ESTIMATE INTEHVAI.
KTEdClPIS *N« 1ME
SLOPE
ESII1AIE l»ll«VAl
BETWEEN SLOPES
.04U I -.40*4 , .12771
.1699 I -.0771 , .1177)
.0494 ( -.416S . .5154)
-.0111 < -.1075 , .01S4)
-.0614 I -.156? , .0299)
-.0201 I -.IIS) , .0751)
OTE: If lEiO IS COMTtlHE* HITNIIi * «I»EN COMfieiHCE IHTEiVAL TMEN THtif IS «0 STAIIS1ICAI S UK IFIC AkC E BETWEEN
IST1LU* ttATEi *N» THE CO*IESPON»1N« WASTE KAlEt fOI THE ASSOCIATE* PAIAKETE*! INlEICEPT/SLOPE I.
THE SLO^E AM» INIE»CIPT ESTIMATES flOH THIS AHALTSIS A«E NOT THE SANE AS THOSE OB1A1NE* MOH THE PRECISION
AN* ACCU4ACI IEC.IESS1CNS PflfOIKE* EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-11
ENVIRONMENTAL MONIIOflNC AN* SUPPORT LAPORAlORt
OfflCE Of RESEARCH AN* RfVELOPNCNT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtfNCV
EPA METHOt 62} VALUATION SIUSI - 6/N I1>
EFFECT OF WATER TIP! ON »IBENIOANTHRACENE ANALYSIS
' POINT ESTIMATES '
ISTILLE* W«1EI StOPf :6«HM«C1I 1.0012?
INTf*C[PTCW«If i-B|.IIl.Lt») SLOrt«««TII-»IStIlLiO)
-1.8185 .MSB
-1.7JJJ .2«26
-2.2084 .1026
souici
ANdfSIS Of «*RI*IICi
»r SUN or s«u**(t
*C6(»ltT|lif») 1 * D.3S4S*
EIIOI 224 114.2A439
iau»si f pica
>.)19?C
].SS9«] 10.71 .0000
.51904
TOIAt
2)1
I29.9407S
1AILE Of 9il CONFItfNCI IHTEIVALS fOS TNE tlffCIEXCES ETHEIM 1NTEICEP1S *N» INf »IfFEtiNtES BETWEEN SLOPES
UATE9
2
3
4
!MTE*CEPT(W«TEI-»ISTILLE»}
ESTIMATE INTEWAL
SLOPE IM(TEI-»ISTUL£»>
ESTINME INTESVAL
-1.JU5 1 -2.9121 , -.7?*9> .315* I .0712 , .5533>
-1.7)3! I -2.8616 , -.6054) .2626 ( .0161 , .)092>
-2.2086 I -3.3149 , -1.10241 .3026 I .0630 . .5423)
NOTE: IF IliO IS CONTAINE* M1THI>> A CIViN CONFIDENCE INTftVAL THEN THE*E IS NO STATISTICAL SIGN1MCAMCE BCTUIEN
tISTILLE* UATEI AN! THE COHESION* INt WASTE UATEI fO* THE ASSOCIATE* PAiAKET II t INUiCt PT/5LOPE ) .
THE SLOPE AN* INTERCEPT EJT!SATES FIOH THIS ANAL«SIS AIE WOT THE SANE AS THOSE OBTMMFft f«OB THE PRECISION
AN* ACCURACY REtlESSlONS PEIFOME* EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-12
ENVIRONMENTAL ONIIOHInb tttt SUPPOIT LIBOIA1ORT
Omit Of MSEAICN *N» BIVELOPMMI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtlNCT
IP* win oo 425 VALIAATION STU»« - B'N ti)
llllll Or MATER If Pi ON tlCTMVL PNTMALATE ANALTSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
RISTllLEk MATE* StOPEltANHAm .97574
WAIft IMTIICIPIIUtTfl-tlSIILlI*) SLOPI 1 «08. 10561 »0», 10541
lt((WAttl/»UTULf D> » ». 47407 I.IUtl 1.76 .0011
fllUI 2<« 71.0476* .24S61
TOIAL 271 »»3.i2»12
tABit or *sx coNri»(NC( IHTEHVALS rot INI eir'CKNcit ecihtci INTE>C(PTS AN» IHI HHIKUIIS, envii* SLOPIS
!IITE8CfPT(WAIfl-»ISTllLfl> SLOPt IUAIEA-»1$11IItt >
MAIft ISTIHAK INIiUVAL ESTIHAIE INTEI₯AL
2 -.0«»1 I -.7411 , .5*28) -.0027 I -.132« . .1271)
1 .35*9 ( -.1120 , .9119) -.0250 < -.15*2 . .1063)
4 .1571 ( -.5047 , .61«J> .0241 I -.1104 , .15(7)
NOTCt ir IflO If COMTAINfl WITHIN « CltEN COHritfNCf INTI«»»L TiitN THUS IS NO STA1ISTICAL SI«NlflC>NCE BtTMtfH
kltTULE* MATf* AM* THE COM(!PON»IN( MASTE HATE* I0« THE ASJOCIAll* PARAK( TEK INTEIC(PT/SI OPE) .
THE SLOPE ANt INTEICEPT EITIHA1ES 1*011 THIS ANALISIS ACE NOT TNE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED MO* TNI PRECISION
AN* ACCUKACI IECIESS10NS PERrOtflC* EACL1E*.
-------
TABLE 9-13
KONIT01INS AkB SUPPOM LABODATOI1
oirici or KSIAICM AN* DEVELOPMENT
ENVltONNENTAL PROTECTION A«ENC»
IP* BIIMOB «2J VALKAT10II STU»V - B/N <1) *
IMECT Of W«TII »IPE ON EN»OSULMN SVLFATE ANALfSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
tlSTULE* Mtlit tlOP(:t«HH*t1> .92*22
M*lil INICICfPIU'tllt-tlSTILLII) SLOPf (H*Ti -» lil 1LLC»>
-1.1117
-.4811
-1.2S20
.23*2
.15J2
.2J28
toutct
IEC<»!S1lltf*I
K«(W*l[l/«l(TlLLI»)
LVSI
»l
1
6
17t
S Or VARIANCE «
SUN or I«UA«IS
543.62216
4.41389
(it. 73233
MEAN S4UAIE
143.42216
.73565
.37490
r«oe
.0714
IOTAL
Hi
«|4.76»3B
T»«II or ',(
H1TEI
2
3
4
rot INI
ISHH*1[
-»isviii[»>
INI[n««t
-1.1117 I -2.2662 . .042«>
-.6811 I -1.6687 . .5065)
-1.2)30 ( -2.4430 , -.0631)
ESIlNMf
IM{ »!tff nc-cjs
tioptj
IMIKVIL
.2342 i .0079 , .4605)
.1512 ( -.£77« , .3841)
.2328 < .0023 . .4«J2>
NOIil H IB»0 IS (ONIAINE* HIIHIN t CIVEN CONfltENCE 1MTEIVAL (HfN THC«C IS NO STATISTICAL S ICN 1 1 I CAMtE OETUEEN
»IS?ULE» yATI* AMI THE COKE SPON»INC HASTE WATEI (OR THE ASSOCIATE* PAtAKETtl < INTEICEPT /SLOPS ) .
TNE S10PE AN» INfEICEPT {STINATfS »»0« TNIS AkALTSIS All NOT THE SAKE AS THOSE OBTAINtt fROH 7ME P1ECISIOII
AN* ACCUIACf ICCIE1SIONS PflrOHME* EAItlEI.
-------
TABLE 9-14
iK. <>,» SUPPORT
OMICI Of itSttlCH A*l »[«ELOf>n(Nf
m»l>OkHIH1«l PHOIECTION AtEMCf
IP* METHOD 625 VAIIM1IQII STUOT - 8/H ID
EFFECT Or Will* 1TPE ON FIUOIAM1HCNE ANALYSIS
ESTIMATES
SIOPI :
Utlfl mlll(f^T«H*1
I .0*0« -.0101
1 .1641 -.0600
* .0217 -.01)7
*N*L7SII Of
SOUICf IF SUH 01 SbUAIfS Df t 1.34716 .22*56 1.1) .5*2*
f<«OI 2*8 »J. 046(1 .1979*
IOTAI 275 957.2S7J9
TABLE Of 951 CONFIDENCE INTEIVAlf FOI TMI tIFFEIEMCES fTWIIM INTEtCEPTS AN> THE tlFFEIENCES BIIWII*
INIEICEMCUAItl-pllTUKt) SlOPl
-------
TABLE 9-!.5
ENVIIOMHENTAI. NONiiomiit AN* SUPPORT I«BO*ATO*I
OMICE or BiSfAiCN *N»
EN.IIOhflENIAl PROTECTION
EPA METHO* 625 VAUOAT10M J'Udt - 0/N II)
IMECT 01 HITCH TTPI ON NEPTACHIO* ANAIVSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
IISTIHE* MAIEI SlOPEEtAMNAd) 1.09*31
MATM IN1(ICIPT(«*Ti*-»ISTILI.f»> 1LOPI 1
*[«(MATE*/»ISTILIE*I 4
E»tOt 244
115.24407
1.te«»0
81S.26«07
.2«14t
PIOB
1.10 .2)'}
ioi»i
a r*. 109*4
l*tH «f *il (ONIUCNtf INTfl««lI fO* TNt »Ifff*fNCfI MWfIN INTCIICIP1S
l«TtlC(r|(HAIIIt1SrillCt>
UATEI CSISHAII IKTECVAL
2 -.Ol«« < -.7015 , .JJ23)
1 .0001 ( -.6)76 , .4!95)
4 .OJ1J « -,i«65 , ,64»0>
IMI tlfMIEIICtl ITUffN SLOPCS
ISilMATI
.001* « -.1277 , .1)141
-.01«S < -.1511 , .t1?«>
-.05U t -.179» , .JT/7J
0»t: If IMO IS COCTAim* UI1NIN * CIVCN COHIItiNCI 1KU*VAL IMiN TMIKk IS MO SIMISTHAL SUNIMCANCf
ISTILll* Mlffl Am TME CO*IE SPOHMNt HASIi. UA1EI fO* TKt ASSOCIATE* f AH A«l T EK 1*1 1 «t» f I / SLCPf > .
IN( HOPE AN* INTERCEPT ESTIMATES MOB THIS AN Alt SIS AIE NOT IMI SAHt AS THOSE OBlAIbl* I OK T 41 Of.'lSlOfl
AN* ACCUIACT IEOEISIONS PEIfOIHE* EAlliSt.
-------
TABLE 9-16
t««IIOmit » I tl Hum I OB I «4 »»9 SUfPO t l»BO»«IO«>
O'fICi or MSMICN *« HVILOPKtKI
f NVItONHlNIAI. rlOTICllON XENCf
t»A miHOO 62} »«IIO»I|OH ITU» - B/N <1>
Of »-tIH 11PI OX KlltiHLOIOICMItNt «*AL*SIS
»ISTIUE»
Utfll
2
5
*
» POINT C:tlMAUS
-IIIlLttll 1LOP1
-.001S
.12*9
-.Jill
-.OH5
-.OOJI
lOUtCf
ICCIU«III/*ltlItlf».
t*IOI
»
252
or
«f SUM «f $«U»IES »!«» SOU»«I
2.11617
11.61611
IJ7.)7S24
.)i270
.1*161
rlOB
2,19 .02))
?OI»t
2S«
8*J. 17622
i»8ti or fjx count met IHTII««L( i»* IME
IHIfKEf TlkllO'tl JTIILII.)
-.0011 I -.4)5* ,
.1?** t -.30)4 .
-.2111 I -.656) .
.4JJOI
,i»)»
.21121
t*» TNI »ni{ccii«s Bii»(t« ti.su s
-.00)5 ( -.0974 , .0*0*1
-.Oi*i I -.1213 , .055*1
-.0021 I -.0«79 . .09)6)
Oils
If III* It (b«T«l«f» M1TK1* * tIV<*
ISIItlf* B»1t» *« IM( COItflrON»l*C
IMTII«*L IHfH INIII IS HO S1»IIS1IC«l tKtlMCtktf IlWilH
Mill* 101 IHf ASSOCIATE* f»»»«l 1 ( 1 1 III »l id f I /Jl *H I .
t« siorf t«ii mittciPi inin4TiS lion THIS »»»iuu ««i NOT TN( i»»t AS THOSE OHTAINII MOH THE
A*» ACCUIACT »f*afSS!0»S rillOIKI* EAULIIt.
-------
TABLE 9-17
M04lTOIIIIt >MO JUPrOIT ItBOIAIOII
orrict or tsi««t« »*»
r»omiio«
If* HtiMO» »2S V4LIMTIOM STUM - »/» «'>
tfflCI Or MlTII lift OH ISOfHO»0»l
IStltLI*
H*tll
t
flCPI :
istiMTis
.»«OJ4
-.our
soutii
i$iitii
lt«(H*T(t/»ltl|LLI*)
)
4
22»
Of «*>>>*Ct
sun or t«u*ifS SUB seutu
4.21661
.70271
not
1.14 .041)
IOI1L
21*
«2I. 7*2*7
IA»II e» tj» co«'i»[ncf i*T(i»»it rot THI tiirttfMCis
lklt.(Ifl
ltl|H*l(
.0212 I -.742* , .TtJ4>
-.247* « -1.0)4) . .}}«OI
.4212 I -.1441 , t.4011)
stern
UOM :
11 HI If
.0)37
.0)44
.141*
ilii-llll JILCH)
IMIC«*Ai.
( -.17)* . .1421)
< -.1280 , .2012)
< -.1054 . .0217)
out if rett is coiiiiHt* HITHII * civtii comitivd IHUIIVIL itn» 5»s«f is no SI*IIITIC*I sitmritnnci *(ivtt«
»ISIKlfl K»llt i.»» THf COIIf Sf4>«»IIC M1SIC MtlU fOC IMC »SSOC:»lf» P »t »« 1 1 « t « 1 III I » Cl P I / SI OPi ) .
1DI SlOfl «» IIKICIPI IS1IIUIIS »« THIS *Mtl»SIS <(t KOI IHi »»! *S THOU OB1/UIU* IIOM INI PltCISIO*
* k(tu*>CT tfiiiisiOHS rtiromtt
-------
TABLE 9-18
f NtflRONHENIAL HO* IIO«: US AMI SuPPOlt LABOIIAIOX
Ollttl Of iSEUCH «Nt MViLOVNENI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AiENlI
IPA HfTHOO 424 VALIDATION STUB* - »/« <1> '
imci Of WATER IIP! OH NAPHTHALENE ANAKSIS
POINT ESTIKATES
»ISTILLf» MATH SLOPS:tAMMAM> .93327
HATE* INTERCEPTCUAIER-RISTILLEBI Si.OPf !U ATE I -» 1 STI1L(» I
2 .0102 -.0079
J .0*59 .002)
4 .0)2« -.0273
ANALYSIS Of VAUIANCE
soutcc »f $')« rr sauAiES DEAN S«UA»I r
*EC«»IST11LE»I 1 9J3.95099 935.95099
I-1 Et 6 1.10266 .11381 1.99 .0674
U> CKOI 284 26.2»194 .09247
00
IOTAI 291 9«3.31!79
T**tc or 95« coNri»ENCc iNiEivAts rot THE »miitNCft BfiwEri UIERCIPTS AN» THE »irrEiENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
IIITCICEPI(H*TE«-*ISTILLEt> SlOP((uAIEI-«ISTULEt>
MATCI f'.TIMATE INTfUVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 .0802 I -.252* , .4126) -.0079 ( -.077} . .0617)
I .0*59 ( -.2900 , .31111 .0023 ( -.0678 . .0723)
4 .0329 ( -.2936 , .3593) -.02>3 ( -.09)1 , .0413)
NOTE. IF IEIO IS CONTAIN* WITHIN * CIVEN CONMftiHCt INTEIVAi THEM TNIIE IS NO STATISTICAL SI6NMICANCE BETUfEN
ISTILLf* MtTEl AN» THE COIIf SPONdNS HASTE HAIfl »CB THE ASSOCIATE* PAHANU {R( |NTE«CEPT/SLOPE).
THE SLOPE AN* INTEtCtP? ESTINATES FIOA THIS ANAKSIS Ai£ NOT THS SAME AS THOSE OaTAINE* MOH THE PRECISION
AN* .tCCUIACT (ECIESSIONS PEIfOCMEt EAIL1EI.
-------
TABLE 9-19
ENVIRONMENTAL MOhllODING AhD £UPPOBT LABORATORY
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A6ENCT
EPA METHOD 62! VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
EFFtCT Of WATER lift ON PCB-1260 ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED WATER SLOPErGAMNA(1) ' 1.12678
WATEI INTERCEPT(WATER-DISTILLEO) SLOPEIWATER-DI STILLED)
2 -2.0*7* .2B6D
) -1.7625 .1)20
4 -2.0985 .2*47
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE DF SUM OF SQUARES MEAN SQUARE F PROB
ECIDISTILLED) 1 410.1751* 4J0.17S16
I-1 »E6 6 33.14161 5.52560 8.78 .0000
^ ERROR 186 116.97304 ,6288V
VO
TOTAL 19] 5(0.21911
TABLE OF 951 CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPT(WATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE(WATER-DISTILLED)
WATEI ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -2.0474 « -3.7469 , -.3479) .2860 ( -.0436 . .6156)
3 -1.762S < -3.5932 , .0682) .1520 I -.1955 . .4996)
4 -2.0985 ( -3.9637 , -.2334) .2447 ( -.1067 , .5»o1>
NTH: IF 1ERO IS CONT1INED WITHIN A CIVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED WATER AND THE CORRESPOUiin* WASTE WATER FOR 1 Ml ASSOCIATED PARAMETER
-------
TABLE 9-20
ENVIRONMENTAL MONIION1NG ANB sort-Out LABO>ATOB«
OHllt Of RESEARCH AN* BEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCT
EPA METHOB 625 VAL1BATION STUDY - B/H (1)
EFHCT OF WATER TTPE ON 1 ,3-BICHLOROBENlENE ANALIS1S
POINT ESTIMATES
BISTULEB HATER SLOPE i.GAMNA< 1 > > 1.05436
VATE* INTERCEP'fWATEtf-OISTILLEB) SLOPE (WATER-B 1ST1LLEO)
2 .0773 -.0038
3 .0991 -.0035
4 ,071fl -.0*85
ANALfSIS OF VABIAHCE
SOURCE Of SUM Of SSUARES MEAN S9UARE f P«OB
RE«(OIST tlEB) 1 1134.13125 1134.13125
«Et(M'TtJ/01STILL£B) 6 2.43178 .40530 1.6! .1401
ERROSI 277 69.08159 .24939
TOTAL 284 1205.64*62
«« TABLE Of 951 CONH»ENCE INTERVALS rOR THE tirrERENCES BETWEEN IHTEtCEPTS AND THE »IMERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES *
INTERCEPT (HATEI-» I STULEdl SLOPE (HATER-01ST I LLE« >
HATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 .0773 ( -.*60S , .<1150> -.0018 ( -.1182 , .1106)
3 ,0991 « -.4614 , .6596) -.0035 I -.1216 , .11*6)
« .0718 < -.4608 . .60*1) -.0*85 ( -.1638 , .0668)
NOTE: If IERO IS CONTAINE* WITHIN A 6IVEN CONMCENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
1STILLEB WATER ANft THE CORRESPONOlNfi HASTE WATER fO« THE ASSOCIATE6 PARAMETER!1NTERCEPT/SLOPE).
THE SLOPE AN» INTERCEPT ESTIMATES TROH THIS ANAHS1S ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINEft r*OM THE PRECISION
AN» ACCURACY RECRESSIOMS PERrORHEB EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-21
ENVIRONMENTAL HONMOIINt AND SUPPORT LABOIIATOA?
OrilCE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCV
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUOT - 0/N 111
truci or HATER MPE OH ^.A-DINITRCIOIUENE ANALTSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
ISTIllt* trAIEI SIOPE:CAHHA(1> 1.0979V
UATEI INT[«CIPT(UATE*-«1STULE»> SLOPE I UATER-» I STILLEt I
2 .12BS -.0322
3 -.1153 .Ot07
< .1889 -.0480
» ANALYSIS Of VARIANCE
SOUICE or sun or SAUAICS H.AM SQUARE f PROB
E6«»IST1LIE»> t 8»9.87251 S99.972S1
(EeCUAUR/»ISTILLE» « .65031 .10839 1.05 .3951
ERROR 216 29.61141 .10)54
TOTAL 293 930.11424
TACLE or 9S1 COMllENCt INTERVALS I OR THE IIIFCRENCES eEIHEEH INTERCEPTS AMU THE tiriERENCES BETWEEN SLOPff
lNTERfEPT(U«TER-»ISTILLE»> SLOPE
t .1889 < -.2351 , .6129) -.0480 ( -.1363 , .0403)
NOTtt ir ZERO IS CONTAINER UITNIN A CIVEN CONMRENCE INTERVAL THEK THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SICNIMCANCE SkTUEIH
»ISTILLE» HATER AN» THE CORRESPONDINC HASTE HATE* K>« THE ASSOCIATED PARAMETER!INTERCEPT/SLOPE>.
THf SLOPE AN* INTERCEPT ESTIMATES rlOM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SANE AS THOSE OBTAINED FIOB THE PRECISION
AN» ACCURACY REfiREiSIONS P£BfO«Bt» EARLIER.
-------
r-o
TABLE 9-22
ENVIRONMENTAL noNMoamt *«t lurron
t/fici or RESEARCH AN» i»norn>i
EMVUOkHENTAL PROTECTION *&Ektl
1C* HETHO* 625 VALUATION STUftT - B/M (1)
EFFECT Of MATER TIPE ON 1,1 -CKMLOROBEN<1»INE ANAHSIS
POINT EtTIHATES
ISTILLIt MATE* SLOPE:t«flM* J4.0PE (W«II«-»I STILLOI
2 -.4*60 .0704
3 -,J77» ,0»J«
* -,«*18
*HAlYS!i OF ₯**I«NCE
sou*Cf u sun or S«U»*ES HE*N sou»ii » ptoe
(ECdllllLLEP) 1 *««.62*74 ««6.«!67«
IEC(U»TE«/»I$T1LL<»> 6 J.0995J .1«««2 .«i
EIIOI 262 107.30)62 .40936
101«l 269 606.02«t«
Or »5» CONM»ENCf lNTEIV«tt fO* THE IMEtEHCEJ BE1UEEN INTEICCrlS .V«C THE tlffEIEHCES BETUEE* JtOCfi
1NTEICEPT SLOPE «U«T(«-»IS1 ILLEft)
U»TEI ESTIMATE INTEDVAt ESTIMATE IHTERVAL
2 -.4460 ( -1.6291 , .7373) .0706 ( -.1641 , .3061)
3 -.3779 < -1.3873 , .6313) .03)9 < -.1832 . .2931)
4 -.4418 I -1.6526 , .7691) .1063 < -.1347 , .3473)
NOTE: If IflO IS COMTAIHE* WITHII A CIV(N CfldfUEMCE INTECVAt THEN THEIE IS NO STATISTICAL S 16*1 F1CANCE BETWEEN
ISTILLE* MATH AM* THE CO«IESPON»IN( WASTE MATE* I Of THE ASSOCIATE* PARANETEI(INTERCEPT/SLOPE).
THE SLOPE *» INTE1CEPT ESTIMATES MOM THIS ANAlfSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINE» flOM THE PRECISION
Aft* ACCURACY SECRCSSIONS PERIORME* EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-23
ENVIRONMENTAL HONlTOtilNO AND SUPrORI LABOAAIORT
OIMCE Or RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCV
1ft METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUD! - 8/N <1>
IMICI Of MATER T»PE ON 4-CMlOROPHENTL PMENIL ETHER AtlALTSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED H«1i« SLOPE :tAMMA(11 » .98506
HAIEI IN1EICfP1tUA1E*-»ISTlLLf»> UOPE «KAIE«-H StllLEO)
2 .0270 .0001
J .U3« -.012*
4 -.1017 -.1)056
AMLftlS OF MMANCC '
SOUIti tf SUM Of SOUAlIt MEAN SttUARE I PBOB
(ECC»ISTULf») 1 427.42172 427.62172
IECIVA1EI/»ISTII.IE»> 4 1.5740$ .2626* *.J1 .0004
E*IO« 242 14.74484 .04101
IOIAL 24« «43.*42»1
TABLE Of 951 CON(I((HCE IMTEIVALS fOl THE »imiENCfS BE1UEEN IN1EICEPIS AND THE OiriEIENCES BETWEEN iLOFtl
INTEICEPTCWATEI-llSTILLf*) SLOPE (HATE I-»I ST I LLE» >
MATEI ESTIMAif IMTE'VAt fS'iIMAlE IMIEtVAl
2 .0270 < -.3004 , .31441 .OOCJ < -.0710 . .0716)
3 .U'* i -.1853 , .47161 -.0124 I -.0(42 . .0593>
4 -..017 t -.4353 , .231») -.0036 ( -.0775 ,
NOTE: ir IE »0 IS CONTAINED MITN1N A CIVEN CONritENCE INTERVAL THEN THESE IS NO STATISTICAL S I tNI f 1 C AkCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED HATE! AND THE COftlESPONDINt HASTE MATE* »OI THE ASSOCIATED PA*ANETE»f INTEICEPI/SLOrE > .
THE SLOPE AND INTEICEPT ESTIMATES (ION THIS ANAL ISIS ARE NOT THE SAKE AS THOSE OBTAINED >IOH THE PRECISION
AMU ACCUIACf RECRESSIONS PERrORMEt EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-24
EHVIIONMENTIIL MONIIO«INb AND >urru«T LAaOIAlbMI
OlllCf 01 MStAICH ANft tl Vf ICPMNI
PBOUtllO* A((k(«
EPA METHOt 625 ««lllltlOII JT'.'t? - B/N 41>
SHECT Of y»HI I»P OK 4,4 -»» AHALTSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
tlilllK* W*1fl SLOPi:6tMNk(1) 1.0516*
Wtlf* imilCCPT
2 -.0227 .QOef
1 .1096 -.Oi«»
t -.0124 -.0)46
ANALYSIS 01 VtlltkCE
iouici tr SUM or soutus rin sautie » r»o*
Kt<»ISTllLi»l 634.1»813 *J
tSOHiH/OIillllf ») « 1.771K .23^22 1.0$ .3«6S
EKtOI 22S 44.17042 .282))
T01»t 23$ 702.53919
TABLE Of *$I COHfUEHCE 1HTEIVALS fo« THE »IffE*EH(E( Bf-TMEEH IHTEICEPTS AH* THE MFFCRENCES BETWEEH SLOPES
INTEICEFt SLOPE
WAICI ESTIMATE INTEIVAL ESTIMATE IkTKVil
2 -.0227 I -.730$ , .61$tl .0069 ( -.1$31 , .1676)
3 .1096 ( -.612$ . .tllll -.0599 ( -.2216 , .1019)
4 -.012* ( -.7547 , .7320) -.CJ*"> < -.2002 , .1SOJ)
NOTE: It 11*0 IS (OHTAIHf* WITHIN A CIVEH CONFIDENCE INT{9««L THEN 1NETE IS HO STtTISilCAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEH
BISTULf* WAUS *N» THE COIIESPONtlHC HASTE HATEI fO« *HE ASSOCIATE* PAIAMET E* < INTEICEPT/SLOPE >.
TNI SlOPf AH* INTEICCPT fSTIHATES MOM THIS AMALIS IS A*f HOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTA1NEA I»ON THE PIECISIOH
AH* ACCUIACr lEtlESSIOHS PE«fOIME» IAILIEI.
-------
TABLE 9-25
ENVIROMIIENTtl MOhllOKlUC AND SUPPORT 1*801*10*1
OfflCE Of RESEARCH IN» OEVELOPflENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCf
if* REINOD 625 V*LI»*T|ON STUD» - B/N (1)
IfllCI OF MATER lift ON 4.4 -*8E ANALISIS
POINT ESTIMATES
»IST|LLE» MATER SLOPE :««HH*(1) ,«»«66
U«1lt HI1ItCEfT(W*1ia-»liTILlf»> SLOPf (H*T(l-»ISTItLi»>
2 -.J2J7 .0/7J
1 -.4242 .0160
4 -.631J .0313
*H*LIS1S Of
SOUICi 0» SUH Or ItUtlEI Mi«H S«U»H > flOB
' 714. »«««<» 714.«66»»
tCC«H*I[l/»IS*ILLI»> « b.0>.8« 1,H'(,B 1.22 .0000
217 41.a3112 .16277
IOIAL 2i« 744.I22S9
TABLE Or 9SI CONFIDENCE INTERVALS »OR TNE BIFrERENCtS lEIVEtN INTERCEPTS AN» THE REFERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
lH1EICEri
HATEI ESTIH*If INTERVAl fSTINtlE IHIE9VAL
2 -.3237 { -,l«?9 , .2355) .0273 I -.0837 , .1403)
1 -.42(2 I -.»<«; . .143CI .0160 I -.0994 , .1J15)
4 -.6313 I -1.2053 . -.0372) .0333 I -.0112 . .1*78)
Off: ir IEIO If COKItlKEk HITMIH « CI»(N CONritENCE INTflVfL (Ht» TNE»E IS NO STATISTIC*! S 16»1 1 1 C»Ht E BITMEEN
ISTILLEt KtTEl AMI THE COIIESPOHtINC «*STE UATEB »0« IHE ASSOCIATE! PAtAHETER < INTEI CEPT /SLOPE >.
IDE SLOPE AN* INTCICEPT ESTIHATES »«0» THIS ANALISIS Alf HOT THE S*ME *S TMOSE OBT»INE» IIOH THE PRECISION
*H» tCCURAO lECKSSIOMS PERrORHE* EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-26
»NVIIlOK*£>.Hl. nOm lOMlir, « M) SUl-HOU t Adult A Tu b 1
OlftCi Of RISIAI1CH AhD DEVILOPMtNl
itlVIBOMHEXTAl PIIOUCTION A6ENC1
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDI - 8/N (?) *
EMEC1 Of HATER T»P£ ON BENIO<6,n,l >Pf«TL(NI OKI IS IS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLER MA1CI StOPl :6»HP1»<1 > » 1. 06011
MITfl imilCiPTIM*Tf S-OISIIlllO) SLOPE lS1lll(C»
2 -1.U1J
) -l.t;«2
* -1.335*
< «N»ITS1S Of V*I1*NC[
SOURCE »f sun or sou««is nn> sou«»t r PIOB
ECltlSTtllf 0) 1 «C«,67iS? 604.6718?
«f titjlTf I/DISTILLKH 6 27.10179 4.516V7 1i.i6 .0000
ERIOI 23S 93.01311 .390b1
TOTAL ?«i 72*. 78672
TABlt Of «SX CONfltENCE INTERVALS I0« THE CirFEKMCES BET-WEEM 1NTEICEPIS ANB THf »irrE«tNlt> ot.«tm 1LOPES
INTEICEPUWATEI-EIISTIlLEll) SI OPE ( M AT £ B-0 I S T I L H 0 )
KATES E3TIHATE I»TE«VAL ES1IKAIE IMlEiVAL
2 -1.111] ( -2.0979 , -.12171 .16*6 I -.0512 . .3673)
1 -1.6292 < -2.5906 , -.667(1 .2065 < -.0081 , .«212>
* -1.335* ( -2.2791 , -.3910) .1*26 I -.0696 . .35*9)
DOTE: ir 1EIO IS CONTAINED UITHIN A 6IWEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN THEFE IS NO S1A1IS1KAL SIGNH1CANCC BETWEEN
DISTILLED HklEI AMD IHf COIIE SPONDINt HASTE MATE* F0(t THE ASSOCIATED PAH AHE TERI INlE DCE PI / SLOPE >.
THE SIOPE AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES r*OH THIS ANAL-JIS ARE WOT THE SAME AS 1«OS£ SST«IHtD IIOM THE PRECISION
AN* ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PERFORMED EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-27
ENVIRONNt hIAL flOhl lOKIhk *t>0 SuTPOM
OfflCI 01 RESKBCH AND
tSVISO»iB£Hl*l PROTECTIOh AGENCT
IP* HETH30 62! VALIDATION STUM - B/N «2>
IfJFCT Of WATER IlPf ON BENIOttDfLUORANTHENE ANALtSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
»ISTILLE» WATER SlOPl.-iAKHAM) 1.10278
UATEI INTEICEP?(WATEI-«lSTULC»i SIOPE CMA1 E H-B I 4T 1 II E 0 »
2 -.1170 -.0111
J -.2850 -.0186
« -.1811 -.07*1
ANALTSIS Of VARIANCE
SOURCE CF SUM Of SAUAIES MEAN SQUARE f
EtlllSTllLEtl 1 97*.V««77 «7«.9t677
REfclMATEI/ttSTULEB) 6 11.58140 1.9)02) 4.71 .0001
ERROR 27S 112.760)4 .410C4
TOIAl 282 1099.S0850
IABLE Of *5J CONfl»ENCE INTERVALS . 0« THE tlf'ERENCES BE.THEfN IKlIRCEPIS AND 1HE »lffERENCES etTVEtN SltKS
IN1ERCErTIVATER-»MTILLE»> SLOPE (UAT(R-DMTIllEB>
y«IIR ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.1170 f -.882) , .648)1 -.0111 C -.1790 . .1569)
) -.2850 « -1.0170 , .4469) -.OUo < -.179) , .1*20)
4 -.1811 f -.90)2 . .5411) -.0741 ( -.2)21 , .08)8)
Off: If ZERO IS CONTAINED UITHU A CIVEN CQNMtEKCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STAlnTKAL SIGNIflCANCE BETMECN
IISULLE* HATER ANB THE CORflCSPONtlNt MASTt yATER fOR IHE ASSOCIATEt P ARABl) i R ( IN1E RCE PT/ SLOPE ) .
THE SLOPE AN» INTERCEPT ESTIMATES fROD THIS ANALtSIS ARC NOT THE SAKE AS THOSE OUIAIN(» fROM THE PRECISION
AN» ACCURACY RECtESSIONS PERfORHEB EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-28
IMVItCkNI HIM HOKI lOblNb »kO iUPPOIT I AHl'B A 10* I
OMICl 01 HfSl'.ttH «N> DEvflOFKCNT
INVl*OkjiMM1A|. PD01IC1ICN At!kCT
IPA HITHOft 625 VA11BATION STUB! - B/N 121
Efl'ltl 01 WA1E* lift ON PlNitl Bl'l'l PMTMAIAH AHALISIS
F01WI [STJHATIS
ISMllft HA1II SlO'i :6AHM«(U 1.140*4
WAUI I1|IIIICEP1<«AT(»-OIS11LL[B> SlOPt (BA Tl 8-B I S T 1 LlfO >
2
3
.3*51
soutct
<««ITS1S OF VttltKCC
»( sun or SQUAXS MIAN SOUAX
CO
ccedl JTIllf*) 1 107J. 53828
lftlW*I(l/»ISIUL(K> 6 «.)«377
(1*0* 273 1U.39SSC
lOIAt 280 11»<. 52054
10T2.Si«2B
.76)96
p«oe
1.82 .C«t«
T»eii ji »5i c«Hfi»fNCi IHKIVAI.S »o« TMI »irr(«(KCES
INU«CI^IIVt1(«-«lSTILLEft>
W«l(l
.2664
.5451
.8495
I -.4686 , I.C01S)
( -.4116 , 1.1018)
( .1187 . 1.580i>
S1.3PI
-------
TABLE 9-29
(NVIIONNIKTAL nOhllOHINti ANU lU'rODI I AOOB A I J« I
OlflCI 01 fMUAkCN AMD OlVHOf-tN!
INVII)ONM(N1>1 PBCKCIIOX K.IHC1
IP* BllMOO 625 VAl IDAT10N STU07 - D/M (?)
[fltCI Of fcAUB UPI ON BISI?- CHlOROI THOI»Hf IMAIU ANAlfSIS
ISTIlllO
PCINT f!iTI»ATfS
SLOft :G»«H»(1) > 1.
.0*61
-.0714
-.1404
soutci
* AMIVSIS Of VtDltllCI
ti su* oi t«u»fs
v£>
*k«l»ISIlLLfD) 1
«(4(W«IEI/t ISI ILLID) 6
l»ifl» 280
101H.
10.43600
1C30. 54577
sautot I P«oa
J.17 .{050
.74799
lAeit or »5i conri»fNCi muivAit ro* IMC »irr[i(«((i BIIHIIK INKBCIPM A no INI
MAIM
fSIIRAK
IDIOVAL
I -.»/02 . .3(18)
.2787 < -.4247 , .^8211
.7?3B ( .0459 . 1.4i'18)
tSIIHATC
.C44I
-.0/74
-.1404
IDUiWAl.
-.0910
-.2228
« -.2823 ,
eiiwtm SLOPO
.18711
.0474)
.00111
Ott: ir H«0 IS CONT«IM[» UlTHIk * tlvtd COklltlNCf IKliRVAL INCH TNIIi II fcD tIAIISIICIl J ICh I M C A* t (
ISIILLI* MAC! » IMl COIKSPONimi. WASH MAIfl IOB IMt AJSOCIATtD f»«AHl T I > « INllKt M / SLOPI ) .
IMt SlOPC *N» IM1(IC(PI (SIIHAUS MOM 1MI1 AN At. Till A«l NOT TH( JAK4 AS THO>( 08?Alk[9 I HOC In5 PttCISIO*
Ak» ACCUIACf
-------
TABLE 9-30
kill Alklintlkt
CflfCI Of UATtt HP! Ok BISti-CMlOSOISOPSOm U1MB AktLVS.S
POIkl fStlRAUS
tISTULf* k«IH llOP(:4tHH«t) 1.0*515
y*lt« lkii«ctPH««it »-
.2108
.U41
-.0710
-.05*1
lOUKi
*N«lTSIt O
«r SUM Of sautifs
Cn
O
If t(»ISTIlLI() 1
lti 6
[ItOI ?67
TOTAL 274
I.6SB29
o6*.J65»7
i psoa
1.»7 .0706
T«Si( Of "51 CQHflKMCf IHUIVALS fOI TMf »Ifrf«(NC(S SIIUftM UTOCEPTS Ant IHt tliriKlltiS
SlOPfi
HATH
INT(i* At.
-.7458 , .5041)
.2108 I -.5228 , .7444)
.1441 I -.4015 . .48971
ISIlMAti
(
IklEIVAl
-.08)8 ,
-.0750 I -.1865
-.1492 . .0(10
.
-.034S (
.14)5)
040?)
Oil: II Hit IS fO«1MNI» MI1MIN A H»lk COkflMNCf IHTIIVAL IHfM TNfaC IS DO JUIIStKAl 11 tU I f 11AKC [ BflKtfk
»MTULf» Htlfl AN* (HI tflittlPOkUKi MASti MAIII fOI TNI ASSOCIATtt P AIASI11II 1*11 «t f f I/ SI OPt ) .
TMf SlOPt AN* l«l!>Clrf EiTIMAKi IIOM 1HIS AkAiTilS Alt NOT TMf lAMf AS IHOSI OBIAIk£* MOD TMt PSfvlilJI
AH* ACCUIACf »(C.>(SSIOIS ftllOIKC* fARLIil.
-------
TABLE 9-31
INVIICMRIMAL Hi ' I lOulhO AND iuiroll IAHG»«10M
Ollltl O1 BlilAHCM AND 01 veiOPHIHI
IMVIBO «L»IAL OOIKIION AblNCI
(Ft HMHOO 425 VALIDATION i!U»f - B/N «2>
CffiCI Of VA1IR H 'I ON eiS<2-lIM»LHf HD^HIMAIAII »*»llil'
> POINI IS1IOAUS
lillllft WAIII SlOPIIlAHIIAMt » 1.09M1
HAIIt INItaCf PTlMAKD-OISIILLCftl SI Of I < W A I ( > -» I S 1 1 1 1 I
2 -1.J01*
1 -1.OU .K.82
4 -.»J»V .U163
ANAITSIS 0> VAIIANCI
soutcf »» sun oi sauAift ntAii ioutil r»oo
ll«
1 -1.4S1* ( -2.57C7 , -.52*2) .U(2 I -.0*7* , .J*39)
* -.95*9 I -1.7142 . -,1136» .056J < -.1227 , .255J)
»OT|: |f 1(10 IS COMItlNfP ylTMIH 4 fclVIN COMIIIIINCt IXTCIVAl 1H(M iHtlt IS NO SI«I!iIU»L SlfcNllltANCI BilUtCN
ISTIllf* Mtll* At* IMI COItlSFOMDIKt MASIC MA1II 101 TH( ASSOCIAlIt f »«AI>1 1 t < IN II : i PI / Si OPI ) .
IMI SlOFf A,» IRUICEP1 [S1IHAUS flOH IHIS ANAITSIS Ail KOI IMI JABI AS THOil OUlAlNit MOD INI PdClilPM
*«» ACCUIACT IKIISS10HS H*IOt*l» IAILII*.
-------
TABLE 9-32
ENVIICmtlNKl HUM IOK INI, ANO SUPPOKI
OlllCf Cl B1SKBCH >k» CVtlOPPENI
ENVieOH'UNML PBOTECTION
IP» NETMOO 625 VALIDATION STi)«» - B/N 12)
IMtCI 01 VHTFI MFt ON CHBTiFHJ ANALVSIS
»» POINT ESTIKATIS «
»!SI1LLE» HATES SiOPC :fc»»XM 1 > I.05C61
HATE* INTERCEPT(HA1B»-»ISTIlLE»> SLOPE
2
)
4
-.2001
.0390
-.0655
-.0770
-.0787
Cn
SOUICf
«H«ITSIS 01 V»Bl«NCS
n SUM or $«u*ifs xt*N sau*oc
Iftl»ltTILLt»> 1 e»».51861 «S«.538«]
lft(V*TC*/6ISMLl(»> 6 4.90725 1.15121
11*0* 269 «1.20«lt .2275i
5.06 .0001
10'm
957.65521
iteit
95«
miii»*is roi TN(
BCIWCCN
LATER
2
1
I
l)IIEICEPT(MAT[l-»ISTIltEO)
ES,|K»TS INTERVAL
-.2001
.03)0
-.0655
4 -.6981
I -.4873
« -.5752
.298P>
.5?i6)
.*442)
«Ci.PIS ANO THE
SLOPElHATED-blSTIlLED^
E INIEXVAL
.0141 ( -.(349 , .1)30)
-.0770 ( -.]vfl6 , .0446)
-.0787 ( -.1986 , .0412)
Oil: If 1CIO IS tONTAlNE* UITMIH * C1VEM tOMI»ENCE INTEiVAL THEN THEIE IS MO STATISTICAL S16* I f ICAKCE BEIHtiK
»IST1LLE» kllCI AN* THE COIIESPONtINt WASTE WATEk (0» TH< ASSOCIATE! PANAHEIE«(INTEOCEPT/SLOPE).
THE SLOPE AN» 1NTEICEPI ESTI»>TES IION THIS AMALISIS «IE NOT THE SANE AS TMASE OBTAINED I80H THE PREC1SIO*
AN» ACCUtACT ttCICSSIONS PEJ»Oi«t§ EAILIEB.
-------
TABLE 9-33
ENWUOhltNTHL MONirOHING AND SUPPORT LAIIURATORI
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENO
EPA METHOD 625 VAIIOAT10N STUD* - 6/H (2)
EFFECT 01 WATER TYPE ON D1-N-OCT»LPHTHALATfc ANAL1SIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED WATER SLOPE:GAMHA(1> » 1.11232
Whlta INTERCtPI(WATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE(WATER-0 IST!LIED)
2 -1.21*2 .1360
.1 -1.0317 .OC72
* -1.1576 .0*67
SOURCE
« ANALYSIS OF VARlANti
DF SUM OF SAUAHCS MEAN SQUARE
U1
REC(DISTILLED) 1 1242.868*1 1242.868*1
REG(WATER/DIST1LLED> 6 30.10*75 S.017*6
ERROR 283 158.2*779 .55916
PROe
8.97 .0000
TOTAL
2«0 1*31.22095
TABLE Of 9SX CONFI6CNCE INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCES BUWEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
MATER
2
1
*
INTERCEPT(HATER-DISTILLED)
ESTIMATE INTERVAL
SLOPE(WATER-DISTILLED)
ESTIMATE INTERVAL
-1.2U2 < -2.0624 , -,J«58) .1360 ( -.0501 , .3221)
-1.0317 ( -1.-J2C9 , -.1*26) .0072 ( -.10*2 . .2787)
-1.157* I -1.9810 , -.33*3) .0967 ( -.08*4 , .2778)
NOTE: If ZERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A GIVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED WATER AND THE CORRESPONDING WASTE WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATED PARAMETER(1KTERCEPT/SLOPE).
THE SLOPE AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED FROM THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PERFORMED EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-34
MOKITOIIN6 ANU iurroKl I AfcOR »Ti c
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOP1ENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUBT - B/N «2>
EFFECT OF bATER TYPE ON DIELDRIN ANAL*S!S
POINT ESTIMATES "
DISTILLED WATER SLOPE:GAMMA<1) < .9957*
WATER INTERCEPHHATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE
2 .0*15 -.0533
3 .1871 -.0718
4 .1352 -.0686
* ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF SUM OF SQUARES MEAN SQUARE F PROB
«ES(D1ST1LLED> 1 764.01095 764.01095
)-> REG(WATEt/DISTlLLEO) 6 1.56607 .26101 2.71 .0143
Ul ERROR 263 25.31850 .09627
-fS
TOTAL 270 790.69552
TABLE OF 9SI CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPT!WATER-DISTILLED) SLOP£(WATER-DISTILLED>
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 .0615 C -.1038 i .4269) -.033] ( -.1135 , .0468)
1 .1871 ( -.1664 . .5407) -.0713 ( -.1493 , .OC58)
4 .1352 ( -.2269 , .4972) -.0686 ( -.1480 , .0108)
NOTE: IF IERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A OVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SI6N1F1CAXCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED WATER AND THE CORRESPONDING WASTE WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATED PARAMETER!INTERCEPT*SLCPE).
THE SLOPE AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED FROM THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PERFORMED EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-35
ENVIRONMENTAL rOMTOUNG AND iurrOHT LAPGRATOfct
OIIICl Of RESCAftCH AND OlVllOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ff>A METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - U/N <2>
EIFECT Or VATIR TYPE ON DIMETHYL PHTNALATt *N»L»SiS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED WATER SLOPE :GAMMA(1) .81299
HATER INTE«CEPT(UATER-DISTILL£D) SLOPE(UAIER-DISTILLED)
-.0«59
.0579
.022?
-.0070
,1106
SOURCE
ANALYSIS OF V*B"NCt
BF SUN Of SQUARES PUAN SOUABE
01
01
REC(»1STILIED> 1 402.97410 402.97«10
RECIUATER/DISTILLED) 6 8.26568 1.17761
ERROR 211 227.55742 1.07752
PROS
1.28 .268*
TOTAL
218
658.59920
TABLE Of 951 CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE DIFtERENTES BtfVEE* SLOPES
WATER
INTE'KEPUWATER-DISTIl'.ED)
ESTIMATE INTERVAL
-.0659
.0579
.C227
SLOPE(WATER-DISTULEi»
ESTIMATE INTERVAL
< -1.5011 , 1.1692) .0584 ( -.2571 . .1719)
( -1.460* , 1.5761) -.0070 < -.3142 . .1202)
( -1.4811 , 1.5287) .1106 ( -.2241 . .4455)
NOTE: IF IERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A GIVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED WATER AND THE CORRESPONDING WASTE WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATED PARAMETER(INTERCEPT/SLOPE).
THE SLOPE AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT Th' SAME AS TNO&E OBTAINED FROM THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACY ICGRESS10NS PERrORMED tARIIER.
-------
TABLE 9-36
MOM10S1HG AND SUHCOHI LAUOSA[0»»
OFFICE of BISOBCH AND ocvEtopntm
ENV1DONNIN1AL PROTECTION AGENCY
tPA NE1HOD 625 VALIDATION SIUDT - B/N (2)
EFFECT Of *ATf« ITPE ON ENDBIN AIDIHY1E ANALYSIS
POINT tSJlCATH
DISTILLED WATER SLOPE:GAMMA(1> - 1.04*91
WATER INTERCEPT(VATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE(WATER-»13T1LLED>
2 -.645* .0641
3 .248J -.0799
4 -.310* -.0092
ANALYSIS Of VARIAhCE
SOURCE Of SUM Of SOUARES MEAN :9UARE f P«OB
RE6(VISTIllEBi f 45«.94500 4S4.94500
«Ce«UA1ER/»ISTILLE»> 6 6.3676S 1.0612B 3.6J .0019
ERROR 222 64.8/507 .29223
TOTAL 22V 526.18775
TABLE OF 9SS CONFIOENCE INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCES SCTUEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE MFFERENCCS BflWfEH SLOPES
1NTCRCCPT (HATER-6ISTILLED I SLOPE (WAIEd-01 St I LLf. B )
WATER ESTIHATt INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.645* ( -1.5994 , .300?) .0641 ( -.1255 . .2536)
3 .2483 « -.723* , 1.2601) -.0799 ( -.2760 . .1162)
4 -.3104 ( -1.5106 , .6898) -.0092 ( -.2050 , .1866)
NOTE: IF 2ERO 1$ CONTAIN!* WITHIN » tlVEN CONFIOENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
ISIILLEO WATER AN6 THE CORRESPONDING KAJ1E WATER FOR IHt ASSOCIATED PARAMETER ( INTiRCEP'./SLCPE).
THE SLOPE AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OUTAINtD FROM THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACY RECRESSIONS PERFORMED EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-37
ENVIRONMENTAL KONllOblhb AdO SUPPORT HBORATO»»
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCT
EPA METHOD 62! VALIDATION STU01 - B/N 12)
EFFECT OF WATER TTPE ON fLUORENE ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED WATER SLOPE:6AMMA(1) * 1.00387
WATER INTERCEPKWATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE(WATER-DISTILLED)
2 -.cooe
4 .0919
-.0151
-.0552
SOURCE
' ANALTSIS OF VARIANCE «
»F SUM Of SeuAREJ MEAN SOUABE
tEKSISTIf lie) 1 822.02529 822.02529
*E6(WA1fR/«ISTlLLE») 6 1.54722 .25787
EIIOR 266 23.05125 .08666
PROB
.C079
TOTAL
27J
8*6.62376
TAfclE OF 95* CONriBENCE INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTERCEPTS «l>* THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPTIWATER-DISTILLED)
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.C.Q38 ( -.3261. , .32*9)
1 .0094 ( -.1020 , .32C8)
* .0919 I -.223! i .4070)
SLOPE(WATER-D1ST It LED)
ESTIMATE INTERVAL
-.0151 I -.0918 . .0615)
-.0352 ( -.1081 , .0377)
-.0647 < -.1383 , .0088)
NOTE: IF JERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A GIVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL tHEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED WATER AND THE CORRESPONDING WASTE WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATED PARAMETER
-------
TABLE 9-38
ENVIRONMENTAL MUNllO^lhG AND SUPPOBT lABOBATORY
office or BiSEttiCN AND ct vf LOfntNi
ENV1RONHENTA' PROTECTION \GEhCt
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (?)
EFFECT or HATER TYPE ON HEPTACHLOR EPonot ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES <>
DISTILLED WATER SLOPE :CA.i*A 1.08556
VA1EN INT(*CEP1(UATER-MS11I.LEol SlOf t (y »1 f B -D 1 S T 11 If. «)
Z .0260 -.01*7
J .li*» -.09S9
4 -.14oO -.0407
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE Or SUM OF SOUARES MEAN SOUARE F
RE6 SLOPE(MATER-D1ST 1LLER)
WATER ESTIRA7: INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
I .0760 ( -.5095 , .5614) -.0197 < -.1582 , .0987?
1 .3849 ( -.1467 , .9164> -.0959 I -.2112 . .0214)
4 -.1460 < -.7007 , ,4C3«) -.0407 ( -.1631 , .0817)
OH: IF ZERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A tlVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS MO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED WATER AND Trft {(^RESPONDING WASTE WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATED PARAKETER«INTERCIPT/SLCPE).
THE SLOPE AN* INTERCEPT tSTIBATES FROH THIS ANALTJIS ARE NOT THE SANE AS THOSE OBTAINED FROM THE PRECISION
AHI ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PERFORMER EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-39
ENVIROhAENIAL HON MOOING *MD SurPOST lAHORAlOM
OFFICE of j)($[A>CN A«a ofVEiopHEni
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AtENCT
(PA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - fi /M (2)
EFFECT 01 WAU* IIP! ON HEKACHLOROBUTAD1ENE ANALISIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED MATER SLOP £ :CAHNA<1 1 - 1.01021
MATER INTERCEPT
I -.0311 -.0160
1 .1215 -.0*05
4 .14)8 -.0621
ANALISIS Of ₯A«IAHCE
SOUtCt Of SUM Of SBUAtEI MEAN SBUAIC f PBOB
«!t(»ISTIlLE»> 1 1004.51569 1004.11569
*EC 6 1.16531 .14422 l.t] .0927
EkIOR 101 11.92101 .10605
TOTAL 108 1017.40204
TABLE Of 9iX CONflkfhtt INTERVALS fOI THE elFfERENCE* BEJWtEN INTERCEPTS AhD THE OlffERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPT*MATER-R1STILLED> SLOPE
MATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.0011 < -.1611 , .3608) -.0160 I -.0950 , .0610)
1 .1215 ( -.2411 , .4842) -.0405 ( -.1176 , .0169)
4 .1418 ( -.2256 , .5112) -.0621 I -.14C6 . .0165)
NOTE: If JERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A GIVEN COMfltENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS MO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
»1ST1LLE» MATER AN» THE CORRE 3POMD1N6 MASTE WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATE*. PARAMET ED I I NTERtEPT/ StOPE).
THE SLOPE AN* INTERCEPT ESTIMATE' fXOM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED FROM THE riECISION
AM* ACCURACY RECRESSIONS PEnFORI*:o EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-40
ENVlkOhMENIAL MIMICKING AND SUPPORT lAPORAlOMI
orrui or RESEARCH AND u VCLOPMENI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCT
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDI - B /N (?)
EFFECT or WATER ITPE ON HEIACHLOROETHANE ANALTSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLtP MATER SLOPE:6AHNA<1> 1.05!>}2
WA1EI INItBCEPKUAlei-ilSIULCD) SlOPi (WA TE R-B I STILLED)
I .1787 -.0351
j .oic: -.0011
4 .1J11 -.OJ54
AMULTSIS Of VARIANCE
SOURCE »f SUM Or SQUARES HiAN SOUARE I PROB
Rf 6(DISTIILE») 1 9M.I9422 951.89622
RECtUAIEI/tlSTILLED) I .267S1 .(K»S« .46 .S]54
ERtOR 280 24.9S732 .09628
TOTtL 287 979.12104
TABU Of 911 (ONriOENCE INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCES MTMEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE DIFFERENCES 8ETUEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPT (kATM-DISTULED) SLOPE UMER-DI SI I LLED I
MATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL tSTIHATE INTERVAL
2 .1787 I -.1658 , ,52J?» -.0551 ( -.1128 , .042i>
J .0102 J -.3322 , .J52») -.0011 < -.0791 , .0769)
» .12J1 < -.2191 , ,*15J> -.02J* < -.10J2 , .0553*
NOTE: M IERO IS CON1AINEK WITHIN A GIVEN tONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN TMERc IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETUEtN
MSTILLtD MATER AND THE CORRfSPONI1N6 UASTC WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATE* PARAMETER(INIERCEPT/SLOPE).
THE SLOPf AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALTS3S ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAIN!" FROM THE PRIClSIOf4
AND ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PERFORMER EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-41
ENVIRONMENTAL ROKITOailtG AhD SUPPORT t AP03 »10«»
OfflCE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* IP* METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N » 1.2*5*0
HATE! INTERCff>T(UATER-llSTilLE»l StOPt «KA IE R-P I ST 1 LIE V >
I -1.1826 .1897
3 -.9625 .0^4
4 -.6214 .038)
ANALYSIS Of VARIANCE
somcf ei SUH or SSUACCS MEAN SAUARE r PROS
Et(»ISTULE»> 1 707.655«» 70/.655S9
RE((UATER/OiSrilLE») 6 16.50916 2.7515) *.80 .0001
CRROR 227 130.022S7 .57279
TOTAL 2)* 854.18762
TABLl Of *5I CONFIDENCE INTERVALS fOR THE DIFrERENCES BETWEEU 1NCERUPIS AND THE DirfCRENCtS BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPT (HATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INIERVAL
2 -1.1826 ( -2.)7)2 , .OOE1I .189?X1 -.078* , ,*578I
S -.96t5 I -2.1519 . ,2269> .0726 PS-.1935 , ,))88)
* -.621* ( -1.?95* , .55251 .0381 I -s.^260 , .3025)
OTf: IF 7ERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A tlVEN CONflDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SjtH1»!>->CE BETkEEN
DISTILLED WAIE* AND TUE CORRESPONDINC WASTE WATER fO« THE ASSOCIATED PARAMETERCINTERCEPT/SLOPE).
TNE SLOPE AHD INTERCEPT fSIIMATES I«OM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAHf AS THOSE OBTAINED FROM THE PRECISION
ARC ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PEREORMfD EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-42
(MVIRONHEMIL nONlTQMMG AkC SbH-Ofll IAHO»AIO»»
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND CEVELOPMENk
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A£EkC«
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUPI - a/N (2)
EffECV Of kAIER T(PE OM N-NITROSCB1-N-PROPTLAM1NE ANALISIS
POINT ISIIXATIS
»ISMILE» HATER SLOPE:GAHMA(1> « 1.10)6*
HATER 1MTERCEPTIUATE8-OISTILIEB) SLOPE(UAT[«-DISTILLE6)
i -.4J19 .0726
J .3319 -.0772
» .3*14 -.0918
ANAL1SIS OF VARIANCE
SOUSCE »F SUR OF SAUARES WEAK SQUARE F PROB
._, afCtllSTULf »> 1 t»2.t«B32 492.44832
O\ RECCWATfl/iiiiTUlf» 6 2.4)208 .4033! 1.0V .3685
N> ERROR iH 94.41258 .17170
TOTAL 761 589.49299
TABLE c* 951 CONFIIENCE INTERVALS rot THE »IFFERENCES BE-TUEEN INTERCEPTS ABC THE BIFFERENCIS BELEHI SLOPES
INTERCEPT SLOPE(WATER-*ISTILLfB>
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.4)19 I -1.5279 , .6639) .0726 < -.U56 , .2907i'
) ,J)19 ( -.7508 , 1.4U6) -,-:77<: I -.2»)5 , .13*0>
4 .3414 ( -.7724 , 1.4)52) -.0938 < -.1147 , .12711
MOTE: If JERO IS CONTAINS* UITH1N A S1VEN CONFIDENCE !NT(RVAl THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL S16HIFICANCE BEU'EEN
»IS1ILLE» WATER AN* THE COME SPON*1N6 HASTE HATER MR THE ASSOCIATED PARAME TE R ( 1 NTE RCtPI I SLOPE ).
IHE SLOPE AN* INTfRCEPI ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALTSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE 08TAINEB FROM THE PRECISION
AN* ACCURACf KECRESSIONS PERfORHE* EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-43
ENVIROfclUkTIL MONI10HIMG AhB SUPFOBT l»RG«»10«»
OfflCE Of RESEARCH AN» CfXILOPrtNl
EkVIIOk*ENT*l. PROTECTION ACINCT
Ift HETHOB 625 VAL10AT10N S1UCI - B/tl I?)
EflCtl Of UAItR TTPE ON H1TROBENIENE AHAL»ilS
POINT CSTIHATES «
*ISt.i4.t» M.I TIB SlOPt :6»HB»(1 ) 1.07930
W*1C* IHTEICEPT(H*TCII-»ISTIllE») StOPI <«« II «-6 1 $T lilt* »
2 -.Z»«» .0*14
J .1389 -.0389
* .1182 -.0101
AkAlVSIS Of ₯««l»N(l
SOUDCf D» SUM Of i8U»ICS MEAN SOU«Ui
1 923.22708 923.22708
*~" *e«MAir*/»ISTILLt*) 6 1.15021 .19170 1.38 .2219
~V [110* 265 36.75280 .11869
TOTAL 272 961.13009
TAilE Or 951 CONMtENCf |NT(««ALS »0* THE tirrCRCNCCS BffWIEN INTERCEPTS AN» THE tIMEtENCES BCTUCEN HOPES
INTflCEPKWATfl-tlSTILLEB) SLOPI(MAT[R-B1ST3LLE»>
MATfl ESTlNATt INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERNAL
2 -.2899 < -.7556 , .17511 .0414 ( -.0548 . .1374)
3 .1389 I -.3204 , .5981) -.0389 ( -.11)7 , .0558)
* .1182 I -.3589 ., .5954) -.0301 « -.1279 . .0678)
NOTE: ir MAO iS CONTAIN!* H1THIN A (IVEN COkUCENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS kO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE 6CTHE.N
ISTILLl* HATfl AUD THE COI*CSPON»1N6 WfiSIE HATER IDS IHt ASSOCIATE* P ARAPIl I ER < IMI E« CEP I /SI OPE ) .
TNI SLOPC AN* INTtCfEPT ESTIMATES MOM THIS ANALVSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED f«OM THE PBiClSlON
AN* ACCtlRACT RE(R(SS10tiS PCRFORMC* EAILItR.
-------
TABLE 9-44
ENVIHON1ENIAL «0». ' Hi* ING AhC SUPPOBI lArO»ATO»I
OIMCE oi «ESEA«CH ANC t>£ vr :cpr . > i
ISH SON'f hl«L PHOTECTION AGE»..»
[P« HETHOo 625 VALIDATION STUD" - fa/I. (?)
KUCI Of WAl( IlfPf OH PHENANT ,MNE ANALYSIS
POINT (STlKATfS «
ISTllLf* WATER JlOPf :6*Mn*l1> ./V179
UA1EI l«1t>C[PT.
fHf JLOri AMI IHTilCEPT fSTIHATCS flOH THIS AKALTSIS All M6T TNI SAMf AS THOSE OBTAIN* 6 I»QH THt
AM* ACCUIAO flCXSSlODS fflfOBHI* IAILI1I.
-------
TABLE 9-45
tNVlkONHINIAt MONIIOIIHt HOC SU'IOUT I Af'O* A 1 0 * »
oifici oi ntstAicM Aht »i »iiot "INI
[NVltOkXlNIHL PBOUCTION AGIkCV
EPA niTHOt 6?) "AlltATlON STUB* - U/N <2>
liricT 01 yATEi TTPE oil pt»im »NAtisis
POINT ESTIMATES
BI1IILIE* MATH SLOPE :tAHflA1S Of »»»IA»CI
tf tun Of sou«*fi "t-N seutai
1 «69. 1J!97
6 2.»iO^
?81 24.979AA
.'0671
I0f«l
i. 55588
i*8LE or 95» cok'/lBmri IMTEIVAIS roi im tinnint.it
WATEI
2
IN1i(C(PT(WA1C»-»IiTllL[»I
ISIIMATE INTOVAL
-.0050 «
.o«)9 i
.1177 (
.02t7
.29CO
.si>«a>
,i108)
ADD THC 01 1 it «t «Ct i Bei«itn SLOPES
ES1IMME
-.ouo
-,0!«1
-. i; 71
INTIIVAL
-.086) .
-.110* .
-.1887
.05«J)
.CU2)
-.006)
OtEl II 11*0 IS CCHTAIkll WIIMIN * t!VCM CONIIBENCE INTEIVAl IMf. IHIBI IS NO SI»lliII(«l SIGNI I ICANCE BC1HEEN
UIILLEt KAIIi A'4I TME COIRE SfONB IN« MASTE WAIEI IOC INE ASSOCIATEI PAIABt 1 I * t IN It «C { P I /SI OPE ) .
THE SLOP< AN» IKIECCEfl EiTIHAIft HOB THIS AMAlTilS Al< NOT THE SAKE At THOiC 06IAI«(B HOD THE
AM* AiCUIACT ICddlJOHS PEMOIKEt EAIIIE*.
-------
TABLE 9-46
tl HOkl lOHINC ANO SuPPOOT I A b £>« A I OB 1
OMICt 01 BESEABCH AND Of VllOP««lkT
H.VISO«I?UNTAL PBOTEC1ION A6iNC»
IP* PITHOt 62% VAllOATlOk STUOY - B/N ill
Ulill Of yAIti UPE Oh 1,2-BICHlOROBENZim ANAL1SIS
POINT ESTIMATES
SIOP{ :S»KH»<1 > .««121
lklflC(PTrS71LLf tl
[1101
itSI
6f
1
2(4
S 0> VARIANCE <
SUH Of SQUARE!
45.07280
.8167*
10.1116*
"
l HE«» sauABE
845. 07280
.11613
.10603
PIOB
1.28 .26*5
101*1
2ft
876.00123
!ABl Of 9SI COMfltEMCE INKIdf.S fOB 1HE »ir>E*E*CES MTUEfN 1NTERCEPIS >1NO IHE OlfrOENCtS BETWEEN SLOPES
lk1CIC(i>1(UA!EI-CIS11tLEO)
UAlfl ISTIHiTf INHBVAL
2 .0852 ( -.2656 , .«35»J -.0119 ( -.C .0616)
* .134i I -.2070 , .4747) -.05*1 < -.13."* , .02S2S
ESI,H»If
|NltSV»L
OTt: II U«0 IS COHIAINE* MI1HIN A tlVEM (ONflB(N:i IMTflVAl IHEM THERE IS HO STATISTICAL SIGNIMCAMCt BtT^EEK
ISTlllt* WAIE» A OB IHE COI«ESPOX»l»t WASTE WATEI IOB THE ASiOCIATED P ARAt i 1 E« ( 1*1 E t I PI/SIOPE » .
INC siot>f *» mrticiPT ESIIHAIES >*ON THIS AHAKSIS ADE MOT THE SAKE AS THOSE ObTAiNio is on THE DECISION
AM( ACCUIACf ({(.IESS10IIS PEB«OIHE( IAIIIE*.
-------
TABLE 9-47
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE or RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUD» - B/N (?) *
EFFECT Of WATER TYPE ON 1 . 2 , 4-TR I CHLOROBENIENE ANALYSIS
« POINF ESTIMATES
DISTILLE9 WATER SLOPE :GANNA ( 1 > « 1.00705
WATER INTERCEPT(WATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE (HATE R-D I ST1 LLCD)
2 -.009* -.0162
3 -.0*56 -.0138
^ -.0154 -.0189
ANALYSIS Of VARIANCE
SOURCE DF SUB Of S8UARES BEAN SQUARE F PROB
REt(DlSTILLED) 1 796.01907 796.01907
REe(UATER/Dl$TILLEI» 6 .5160* .08601 1.26 .2770
ERROR 273 18.66)97 .06836
TOTAL 280 815. 19707
> TABLE 01 9M CONFIDENCE INTERVALS fOR THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES «
INTERCEPT(WATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE(WATER-DISTILLED)
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.0074 ( -.3353 , .3166) -.0:62 ( -.0858 , .0533)
3 -.0*56 ( -.3668 , .2755) -.0138 ( -.0826 , .0551)
4 -.015* ( -.3*5* . .3146) -.0189 ( -.0893 , .05U)
NOTE: IF ZERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A GIVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED WATER .iND THE CORRESPONDING WASTE WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATED PARAMETER ( INTE RCEPT/SLOPE).
THE SLOPE AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED FROM THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PERFORMED EARLI1R.
-------
TABLE 9-48
ENVIRONMENTAL PONITbMNG AND Sill'"- ' LABORATORY
C/'1CC OF RESEARCH AND SEVt ufXENI
ENVIROf HENIAL PROUUION AGENCY
IPX METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N I?)
EFFECT 01 HATER lift ON 1,4-DICHLOROBtNrtNE ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED WATER SLOPE:CAMMA(1> 1.05106
WATER INTFRCEPT(WATCR-DISTILLED) SLOPE
2 .0114 -.0013
1 .0495 -.0286
<> .1«<0 -.0402
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE Df SUM Or SOUASES MEAN SUUA«E F PROB
RE61DISTIILEB) 1 683.17498 883.17698
h-> RE6(U«TER/DISTILLEO> 6 .6?0et .1j]47 .88 .5122
CT\ ERROI 296 34.93225 ,11801
CO
T01»l TJJ 91E.7JOO/
TABLE OF 9SX CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCES BE1UEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE DIFFERENCES BE1UEEN SLOPES
!NIEI)CEPT4UATER-ftI STILLED) SLOPE (KATE R-D 1 St I LLEO)
HATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL EST2HATE INTERVAL
2 .0134 ( -.402! , .4293) -.0012 ( -.0881 , .0858)
3 .049} < -.3857 . .48*8) -.0286 ( -.1186 , .0614)
4 .1640 I -.2612 , .5892) -.0402 ( -.1288 , .0484)
NOIE: ir ZERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A 6IVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGWIFICA*CE BETWEEN
DISTILLED WATER AND THE CORRESPONDING WASTE WATER FOfc THE ASSOCIATED PARAMETER(INTERCEPT/S1OPE>.
THE SLOPE AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SANE AS THOSE OBTAINED FROM THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PERFORMED EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-49
ENVIRONMENTAL MOhllOKltiG AhO lUChOKl L AHOft AIOR I
Office Of RESEARCH Ahli DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
IP* METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - 8/N (2>
EflfCI Of WATER UPC ON 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
PI STILLED WATER SLOPE :GAMNA ( 1 > * 1.00*51
WATER INTERCEPT(WATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE CWATE R-D I ST1LLE D >
2 -.0581 .u005
* .017* -.0159
4 .1*86 -.Oii6
ANALYSIS Of VARIANCE
SOURCE Df SUM Of SOUARES MEAN SOUARE I PROB
REtlDISTlLLEb) 1 773.96820 771.96820
REdWATER/OISTILLEO) 6 .91598 .15266 2.00 .0665
ERROR 251 19.17506 .07639
TOTAL 258 79*. 0592*
TABLE OF 951 CONMIEMCE INTERVALS fOR THE BlfflBENCES BE.TUEEN INTERCEPTS ANO THE ClffEiENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPT(WATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE(WATER-B1STIlLCO)
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.0381 < -.3361 , .2600) .0005 ( -.0733 , .07*3)
J .017* ( -.27*6 , .309*) -.0?5» « -.1075 , .0358)
* .1*86 I -.1562 , .*53*> -.05*6 ( -.131* , .0181)
NOTE: If 7ERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A GIVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SlGNIflCANCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED WATER AND THE CORRESPONDING WASTE WATER frOR THE ASSOCIATED PARAMETER
-------
TABLE 9-50
ENVlftOhNENKL KGMIOkING AhO SUPPORT LAPOBAlOU
orrut u; HISEAUCH AMI otvfiOprtNT
ENVlSi)NHE»'»L PROTECTION GlN1r
(PA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUB* - S/N «2>
EFFICI Of MATED TYPE ON 2 , 4 -0 ] N I FRO TOLUE Kl ANALYSIS
POIMT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED kAIED SLOPE :GAMMA < 1 ) » 1.16535
HATER mTEBCEPTCWAJER-DI STILLED > 5LOPE (H«1f S-0 I S T ULE6 »
2 .?4?9 -.0646
3 .Z7«i -.073«
t .6451 -.1U1
«N»L»SIS OF VARIANCE
SOUBCt OF SUM OF 58U»BES MEAN S9UAHE f PROB
REG<6ISTILLCD> 1 885.89076 865.89076
»e£(UATER/ftlSTULEft) 6 2.510S9 .«1843 '1.68 ,12o1
ERROR 2«1 65.00253 .24905
TOTAL 268 953.40387
TABLE OF 9SX CONMOENCE INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCES 8EIWE5X INTERCEPTS ANB THE DIFFERENCES 6ETUEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPT(WATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE IWATER-DISTILLED)
y«TER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 .2429 ( -.4016 , .StUl -.0648 ( -.1989 . .0693)
3 .27*2 ( -.3678 , .9162) -.0739 ( -.2075 , .0598)
^ .6451 C -.0489 , 1.3792) -.1141 ( -.2596 , .0314)
NOTE: IF ZERO is CONTAINED WITHIN A GIVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL TH^N TNERE is NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED VATER AND THE CORRESPONDING WASTE WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATED PAPAMETER(INTERC£PT/SLOPE).
THE SLOPE 'ND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALIS2S ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED (ROM THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PEafORHED EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-51
ENVIkOkNEMIAL BOMIOHNO »ht SUPPORT IVBOR»TOI1»
Office Of RESEARCH AhD 6EVELOPPtkT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCV
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDt - B/N <2> *
EffECT Or MATER MPi ON *-BROMOPHENTl PHENIL ETHE8 ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
»ISTlLLt* WATER SLOPE:6AMH»11) « 1.0520*
HATER INTERCEPT(WATE«-aiSIILLED> SLOPE
I -.01*5 -.0175
1 .01*5 -.d1«6
* .0*15 -.0596
ANAK&IS Of VARIANCE
SOURCE 61 SUM Of SAUARES HEAN SBUARE f PRCB
RE«(»ISTILLC»> t ?2S.2856« 925.28566
RE£(VAT{R/BISTlllE»> A 1.VT259 .12877 2.90 .009*
ERROR 270 10.6**6t .11150
TOTAL 277 «?7.90287
TABLE Of 95» (ONfltENCE INTERVALS fOR THE ftlfftdENCES BETHEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE DlffCRENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPT (UATER-61 STILLEO SLOPE «H ATER-0 I ST I LLEft >
WATER EST1KAYE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.01*5 ( -.*16« . .1*79) -.0175 < -.1020 . .0669)
3 .01*5 f -.3615 , .190*> -.0196 I -.1016 , .06*5)
< .0*15 ( -.1197 , .*227> -.0596 ( .1*17 , .02**)
NOTE: If IERO IS CONTAINEt WITHIN A CIVEN CONflDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SltNIflCANCE BETWEEN
ISTILLI* WATER AN* THE CORRESPONBIN6 WASTE WATER fOS THE ASSOCIATE* PARABtTER(INIERCEPT/SI OPE).
THE SLOPE AN* INTERCEPT ESTIMATES MOM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SANE AS THOSE OUTAINEB fROM THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACY RECRESJIONS PERfORME* EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-52
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING «ND SUPPORT I Ab OB All,* »
OfflCt or RESEARCH AMD DEVELOPMENT
ENVIROKMEN1AL PROTECTION AGENC7
EPA HET.OD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N C2»
EFIECT Of WATER ITPE ON 4,4 -DDT ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED HATER SLOPE .-GAMMA « I ) ' 1.19153
WATER INTERCEPKHATER-DISTILLED) SLOPE (MATE R-B I it 1 LLED)
2 -.ZS8? .UJ'J
J -.5779 .05!,*
^ -.4515 .OP8^
«NAL«S1S OF VARIANCE
SOURCE of SUM or SQUARES MEAN &OUARE r PROB
«E6(D1STILLEI» 1 947.9737* 947.97)7*
RE6(WATEe/filSTILLE»> 6 6.5988* 1.09431 ?.*5 .0262
ERROR 216 97.1527J .**978
s
TOTAL 223 1051.72531
TABLE OF 95» CONritENCE INTERVALS FOB TMt »IFFEREN£E£ .BETWEtU INTERCEPTS AND THt DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPTIUATCR-91 STILLED) SLOPE(UATER-DI STILLED)
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 -.25S2 ( -1.14*1 , ,«1U> .0283 ( -.1621 i .2118)
3 -.5779 I -1.*52/ . .?9t«» .0506 « -.1359 , .2371)
4 -.4515 ( -1.3495 , .4465) .OQS5 ( -.1861 , .2031)
NOTE: IF IERO IS CONTAINED WI1HIN A tlVEN CONFIDENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
DISTILLED HATER AND THE CORRESPONDING WASTE HATER fO« IMt ASSOCIATED PARAHtTEf'. INTERCEPT /SLOPE).
THE SLOPE AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES FROM THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED FROM THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PERFORMED EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-53
I NVIRONNENTAL HONI10RIN6 Hit SUPPORT LABORATORY
OlflCE Of RESEARCH ANB DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGtkCT
IPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION SiUDT - ACIDS
EfffCl Of UA1E* MPC ON PENTACHLOROPHENOl ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES «
B1ST1LLEB WATER SLOPE zGAHMAl 1 » .99894
WATER IMTtRCCPTtMATEI-OISMLLEBi SLOPE 1 559.49090 559.49090
REC(HATEI)/«ISTII.LE»I 6 2.80277 .46713 2.03 .0625
ERROR 275 63.42749 .23065
TOTAL 2S2 625.72115
* TABLE Of 95S CONFIDENCE INTERVALS fO« THE ftlMERENCES BETUEEf INTERCEPTS ANft THE tlffERENCES faETUEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPTlMATER-ftlSTILLED) SLOPE<«»!£«-ft IST1LLES>
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 .0706 ( -.5996 , .74071 -.0534 t -.2004 , .C8«5>
3 .0124 I -.6873 . .7121) -.0179 « -.1692 , .13JO
4 -.1218 I -.8223 , .5787) -.0297 ( -.1803 , .1208)
NOTE: II IERO IS CONTAINED WITHIN A GIVEN CONflftENCE INTERVAL THEN TNERE IS NO SfiJtiTICAL SIGNIIICANCE BETWEEN
»1STILLE» HATER ANC THE CORRESPONB1NC WASTE WATER fOS THE ASSOCIATED PADAHETEK(1NTERCEP1/SLOPE).
THE SLOPE ANI INTERCEPT ESTIMATES MOM THIS ANoLISIS f.Sl NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINEt FROM THC PRECISION
ANO ACCURACY REGRESSIONS PERfORMEft EARLIER,
-------
TABLE 9-')'}
ENVIRONMENTAL MONIIOEINt ANft SUPPORT LABORATORI
OFFICE 01 AESEARCH ANC DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCI
EPA METHOD 425 VALIDATION STUOt - ACIDS
" EFFECT Of WATER T»PE ON PHENOL ANALIS1S
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED WATER SLOPE :SANMA < 1 ) * .91620
WAIER IfcTEKCEPKyAtf S-eiSTIlLf 0) SLOPE (UATED-B I SI IlLEB*
2 -.2262 .04*0
) .00*5 .011?
4 .1U7 -.0120
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOUKCI BI SUM or sauAKS MEAN SQUARE f fooa
ltef»lSTILLI»> 1 716.62215 7S6.6221J
ltC(HATER/»ISTILI.E»> 6 .9SV12 .15852 .98
ERROR 2BC «5.U3(|9 .16123
TOTAL 287 802.71656
TABLE Of 951 CONMtENCE INTERVALS FOB THE tlfFERCNCES BETMCE*' INTERCEPTS ANO THE OIFfEBENCCS BETWEEN SLOPES
l«TERCfPT(yATE»-DIS'rUL<»> SLOPE IMATE R-» I SI 1 LLE» )
UATER ESTIKA1E i.:"«VAL ES1IIUIE INTERVAL
2 -.2262 < -.6651 i .2129) .04«0 ( -.05*7 , .1426)
) .00(5 ( -.*450 , .1540) .0115 < -.0893 , .1123)
4 .1147 ( -.3290 , .5584) -.0120 ( -.1116 , .0876)
NOTE: If JERO IS CONTAINIO WI1MIN * GIVEN COkflOENCE INTERVAL THEN THERC I' NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
»1S11LLEC WATER ANO THE CORRE SfONUNt bASTC MA1ER (OR THE ASSOCIATE* PARAME TED ( INTERCEPT/SLOPE ).
THE SLOPE ANi INTERCEPT (SIIKATES IROM THIS ANALISIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE 06T-IN{0 FROM THE PRECISION
ANO ACCURACI Rf£RESSIONS PERfORMEO EARLIER.
-------
TABLE 9-55
(NVIROhNEhlAl MbkllOfllNt AND SUPPORT LABORATOM
Olllll Or BESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEfcCI
[PA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUD! - ACIDS
EFFECT 01 HAMS TYPE ON 2-CHLOROPHENOL ANAHSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DISTILLED WATER SS.G?t:tAnMA(l> .97717
UATCI 1NT(RCEPT(WATER-»I3TILLC«> SLOPE lyATf«-» I SI 1LLEO I
i -.1031 .0169
J -.OJBJ .00*4
* -.0141 -.00*5
AkAKSIS 91 VARIANCE
SOU«CE or sun of sauAici DEAN sou»s( r pROt
^~| R(tf»I$TULE»> 1 «)*. 11797 834.15797
rr REC(WATEI/»ISTULEft> 6 .1171] .019S« .17 .9851
ERRO* i79 J
TOTAL itt 866.86897
TABU Of 951 CONriVENC( INTERVALS FOR THE tirrERENCES bETWEEN INTERCEPTS AND THE »IfrCRENCE& SEIUEEN SLOPES
IMTERCEPI
-------
TABLE 9-56
ikVllONKCMIAl RONMOfllNG AN* SUPPObT LABOIAlOil
OMICI Of lEUAftCH ANB OCVCLOPKEN1
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENO
EPA METHOB 62i VALIBATION STUB* - AlIOJ
tlliCI 01 MATfA T»PE ON 2-P-lTll»L-4,t-61NIT«OPHEI>OL AN4L1SIS
POINT ESTIMATE!
ISTIILE* tl*TEI SLOPt:t*MH*(1) 1.?t?20
.1121
1.CU9J
-.010*
-.1312
-.1771
SOUBCf
«N«L*S1S Of VARKNCE
(I SUM Of J«U»B(S HE All S«U»8E
EC(»IS1llLf»> 5 461.08116 «61.C8t16
lEtlUtTEI/DISTULED) 6 3.0C117 .50019
E»IOI 265 61.46240 .21191
2.16 .C476
27?
525.55175
TASLf Of
CONMCCMCE INTdVtLS rOA THE tltfEICMCES BS'fUEEM INIOCfPIS ANft THE Dirf'RENCES BETUECN SLOPES
UA1EI
2
1
4
INIEICEPKUAIEB-elSIlL'.EB)
INTERVAL
.05U
.1121
1.0491
SLOPE (VA1 El ->!STU Lit)
[SIIMA1E 1NIE8VAI
< -1.01 56 . 1.1192! -.C109 I -.2D44 . .1826)
I -.2612 t 1.eS7J) -.1212 < -.114* . .07231
« -.0144 . 2.1110) -.1771 I -.1720 . .0174)
NOTE: ir IE«0 IS CONIA1NE* U11N1M A SIVIN CONIItENCt 1NIOVAL 1HEK IMFBE IS NO S1A1IS11CAL SI6NI11 L«NCI BETUifN
»ISTILLf» MATIi AMB IHE COfiif SPONftlNE. HASIE kiAlEi I0« IMf ASSOCIATf* PA»AH£TE«( INTflCCPT /SLOP! >.
INI SLOP! AND INTERCEPT ES1INATES f*OK THiS ANALISli All NOT IMf SAK[ AS IHOSf 6BTAI*:* I80H IHE PRECISION
ANB ACCUNAO IECRESS10NS PE»»OSHEB (AllUi.
-------
TABLE 9-57
ENVIRONMENTAL HONiTORlNt AND SUPPORT LABOPATORT
orriCE or RESCARTH AND eiVEIOMCNT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A&ENO
IF* METNOt 625 VALltATION STU»> - AtltS
eintl or MATER TIPE OH I-NITROPMEMOL ANALISIS
POINT ESTIMATES
tISTILLE* Utlft SlOPE:6*n^«(1> 1.03U7
WAIEI IklllCEPTIWATill-DISIILlltl JLOPI («»ti «-» I SI ILL£» 1
I .01/3 -.0159
J -.00*1 -.00»J
4 .COCO -.0349
ANALYSIS Or VARIANCE
SOUICE er sun or SAUADES MEAN $ou»»t r r»oa
IE«(»IS1llt(» I 495.57316 605.SHU
i[ilUATE*/»ISIULf»> 6 .5*5t1 .0909) .74 .615)
EDIOI IDS 37.69266 .12218
TOTAL 31! 713.61U2
TABLE Or 951 fONMBCNCE INItiVAlS rON TME tllHHNCU BETWEEN INTERCEPTS AMO THE DIMfSffcCtS BETuCfN SLOPES
INTEtCEPIfhATER-blSTULEB) &LOPE
-------
TABLE 9-58
EkVllOkflEkfAl HOkllOEINt AkO SUPPOkl lABOCATOIf
OFFICE 01 «ESEA«CH Ak« »E«f IDPIEkl
Ikt'ltOkHEklAL FiOTECIlOk AtEkCT
(PA llHOC »J< VAllDAIIOk SIUBT - ACIDS
(IflCI OF UAlEfi lift ON 2,4-tlCHI.OROPHEUOl. AkAtlSIS
* POIkl ISTIMtTiJ
SlOPi :t«
-.OJ«1
-.C64S
-.Ctit
-OISTUIIP>
--C055
.01*1
-.01(2
00
SOUICI
ict
Bf G>y<
CtNOI
«K»L»$li Of »»»1»NC(
01 SUM Of SautKS M«M S«liA
CONfl»£«« l»ll«»»l$ FOB IH| HfXKMCIS BdMEfM IN1ERCEP7I AND IHE 6MMVENCES BElUli).
UAIil
2
1
4
IKTflC{PI«tl«TII-«ISIUlf*)
fTIHAIf IXT{«V«l
-.05»J
-.OPH
-.CI58
-.J831
-.»)^6
-.3«Ci
.J040I
.26i1l
.3216)
SlOFt (y«Tf B-0
fSIIIAfi INIMVAl
-.0055
.OKI
-.0122
I -.C/»«
( -.OtC?
< -.08(2
.CtB?»
.C«89>
.0619)
MOTf: IF 7(10 IS COHIAINi* UI1MIM A tlVfk COMMENCE IkfEIVAL IM£k IHfit 1$ MO SIA1MIICAL SUklfKAkCl BlIUEEk
WAICI AD* IMC IOIU trOKt 1*1 hASli MAIt* FOB INf ASSOCIATlt PA1»«E1 [I I ikH BCE Pt/SlSCt ) .
IHf SLOfi Ak» IHiCXCri [StlMAlet MOM IHII Ad Al IS IS Alf NOT 1M( JAfE AI THOU OttTAIkEK 'COM IHt CKECISION
Akt ACCUIACI KCIESSiCiiS PIDFOIHE* fAlllfl.
-------
TABLE 9-59
Komtoiiiit tut iucpofci i»eo««iom
OMICI Of ItSrOCK AkB »f Vf LOPKEH1
P80HCI10M A6ENCI
[FA HClHOt <2S VALIDA1ICN SIUB« - ACIlS
Ufsci or y»ii« nri on 2 .^-
tismtf*
POINl ISIIRATIS
MOPE :4*a*«
.21141
.240SI
*OU: If IERO . CemalHf* H11HIM A «l₯f« COkfI»l1CC IKTMVAt THEM TMEII IS *! SIA1IS1ICAI SUNIflCtNIt BEIUEtk
»IS1fLLi» HAIEI AM* THI COIIE SPONt I N( b.«ST( MA1E1 IOS IHE ASSOdATt* f A«»ri Tl« ( lull it E Pi /$l OPt ) .
IKE StOPi A«» IklEtCCPI ESIIMAKS f«0» TMIS AHALISIS All HOT T*c SA*f AS THOSE OHUINia flO* THE PIECISIO*
AN» ACCUIACf ftlf.SSIO** PEifOIMi* tAILIE*.
-------
TABLE 9-60
IilK NT>t HOMIIOIIIkt Akt SUPPOM lAbOIAlOtf
OMICt 0* HtStAICH A HO MVtlOPfltkt
ik«iaONP.tkUl. FIOIICTIOk AlikCI
fPA KltHOCt tii VtllBttlOk S1UDI - ACIBi
IMICI LI VAUfc UPl 0* 2,»-Hkl HOPMINOI AkALISIi
POIkt (S1IHAUS
BISIIllf* HtTfl JlOPI :UH«i( 1 ) 1.60Z41
Mllil IKICICirKktlt -») SI IlKC J IlOPE
2 .«e«i '.1521
J 1.3«»* -.?075
t 2.UV6 -.524*
*H«LfSIS Of VtlKNCI
souici »r sun or sau»«ts MON t«u*«f < rtoa
(-
OO RfC<»ISTIiLC»> 1 617.73*52 4'7.7U<2
O II£IM*I(I/»ISTI11I»I 6 7.65921 1.27«S4 2.1« .02««
CHOI 241 12«.»»UI .'3516
IOI«L 2*8 753.«S5U
1»Blt Of »5I COMf2tt«Ct l»Ut«*LS 101 IMf 1 1 1 1 lit Hit '. OIIWEie INTdCCPTS tNO IN! eirKRIkClS BlIUitM SLOr-fS
MtKI IST1H«1( IKtSWAL tS!IP*U IN1EIV
] 1.5«»4 I -.!a!.' , 5.1(20) -.2075 ( -.ill) . ,0 it)
4 2.1496 I .4049 , 5.6?42> -.52«4 < -.627* , -.025il
OTC: I* >C*0 If COklAlNEt M1IHIM * tlVfN CCN»«fkCf lHTi»>/«L TMfH iHlll IS kO SI»TISTIC«L 5 1 G). ! - I £ »« t S biluifN
ISIIll(» »»lf« «»» 1HE COittSPCNSim K$l{ Wtlfl fOB I»( ASiOClAlfft P »«« f 1 1 « ( I U H « C f P I / U 0 PI ) .
IME SlOPC «» 1M7ICCEPI f,1|H»l«i »<0« 1MIS *»«l»SIS ««l kOT IMF StHi AS IKOSE ObUIkElt (SOP THi
C«ILKI.
-------
CD
TABLE 9-61
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORINC ANB SUPPORT LABORATORf
OFFICE o» RESEARCH AND BEVELOPMENI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A£ENCf
EPA METHOB 62S VALIDATION STUB! - AC1BS
EFFECT Of MATED T»PE ON 2,4,6-TRlCHLOROPHENOL ANALtSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
B1STILLEB WATER SLOPE:£AMMA<1> .9966S
WATER INTfRCEPT(WATER-BISTILLEB) SLOPE IWATER-BISTILLEB)
2 .0996 -.0211
3 -.2030 .0281
4 .020 -.0226
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE Of SUH OF SQUARES MEAN I.lUBt F PROB
REC(»1STILLE»> 1 614.«2319 614.42359
RECIUATER/BISTILLE»> 6 .71660 .11113 1.19 .3112
ERROR 281 31.26626 .11048
TOTAL 290 646.4764*.
TABLE OF 9SI CONFltENCE INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTERCEPTS AN» TNE BIFrERENCES BETWEEN SLOPES
IMTEICEPTIUATER-BISTILLEB) SLOPE(WAIER-BISTILLEB)
WATER ESTIMATE INTERVAL ESTIMATE INTERVAL
2 .0996 ( -.1441 . .5434) -.0211 ( -.1208 , .0786)
1 -.2010 ( -.6454 , .2394) .0283 ( -.0710 , .1276)
4 .0243 I -.4192 , .4678) -.0226 < -.1219 , .0768)
NOTE: IF 1ERO IS CONTAINEB WITHIN A 6IVEN CONF1BENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN
B.STILLEB WATER ANB THE CORRESPONBINt WASTE WATER FOR THE ASSOCIATES PARAMETIB
-------
TABLE 9-62
ENVIRONMENTAL "Of. HOI ING ANB SUPPORT LABORATOX
OffltE Of RESEARCH AND BtVflOPNENI
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION »6f*CY
« ff>A METHOB 425 VULIPMION STU»» - ACIBS
EfffCT Of WATER lift ON 4-CHLORO-3-M(TH«LPHENOL ANALfSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
BISTILLEB MATE! SLOPCltAHHAd) - 1.0C5BJ
HATE* INTERCEPTIWATER-B1ST1LLEB) .HOPE S«ATE*-» ISTIll ED >
-.1163
-.C466
.CC7i
.6057
.0040
-.017?
CO
ro
SOUItf
RECItlSTULEt)
REe(UATER/BlST.
ERROR
ANALTSIS Of VARIANCE
Of SUH Of SQUARES MEAN SAUA8E
1 «12.62«7«
» .0010
287 «
«12.62979
.07^02
.15180
psoe
TOTAL
291
«56.44553
IABLE Of »5I CONriBCNCE INTERVALS fOi THE DlffEREMCES BETWEEN INTERCEPTS AMft THE tlfftBtHttS BETWEEN SLOPES
INTERCEPT* WATER-DISULLE01
UAIER ESTlHATt INTERVAL
2 -.1163 I -.5677 , .3351)
3 -.0486 < -.<9C6 t .393*)
* .0075 ( -.***« . .45981
SLOPE 4wATER-BiSTILLED)
ESTIMATE INTERVAL
.CG57 I -.0898 , .1011)
.0040 ( -.0891 , .0974)
-.0172 C -.1127 , .T782)
NOTE: ir 2ERO IS CONTAINER WITHIN A 6IVIN CONMOENCE INTERVAL THEN THERE IS NO STATISTICAL SI«NiriCANCE BC1WEEN
»IS1UIE» UATEN AN» THE CO»BE SPON»IN£ WASTE WATER fOil IMS ASSOCIATES PARAMETER (INTERCEPT/SLOPE >.
THE SLOPE ANB INTERCEPT ESTIMATES IHO* THIS ANALYSIS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINEt f«OM THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACf REKDESSIONS PERfOiHEB EAILIER.
-------
TABLE 9-63
EMV1ROKMENTIL MONITORING AN* SUPPORT LABORATOR*
OfflCI 01 RESEARCH AMD DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEhCf
EP». METHD* 625 VALIDATION SIUDT - ACIDS
EMECT or k'ATER TYPE ON «-NI TROPHENOL ANALYSIS
POINT ESTIMATES
DKSTILLED MATER SLOPE:6AHHA(1> 1.0659*
WMfl lhURCEPT(UATER-*lSTILLC«> SLOPE(HATER-DISTILLED>
2 -.0180 .0064
1 .^117 -.0316
4 .5913 -.1099
tltALTSIS Of VARIANCE
souRCf Dr SUM or SODAKJ MEAN SQUARE r PROB
., REt,(»ISTILLED> 1 536.81265 536.6136!
00 REC.
THE SLOPE AND INTERCEPT ESTIMATES liOM THIS ANALIS1S ARE NOT IHE SAME AS THOSE OBTAINED rROH THE PRECISION
AND ACCURACf REGRESSIONS PERfORMEA EARLIER.
-------
SECTION 6
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The objective of this study was to characterize the performance
of Method 625 in terms of accuracy, overall precision, single-
analyst precision, and the effect of water type on accuracy and
precision for each of the B/N and acid compounds. Accuracy and
precision estimates, expressed as regression equations, were
presented in Table 1 of Section 2 for each compound. Table 10
was prepared to facilitate the interpretation of these equations.
In Ta'.-;le 10, accuracy (percent recovery) , overall precision
(percent standard deviation, % RSD), and single-analyst preci-
sion (percent standard deviation for a single analyst, 7, RSD-SA)
were computed using the regression equations in Table 1. Esti-
mates of accuracy and precision were computed for lev and high
prepared concentrations of 10, 15, 25, 40 or 100 and 100 or 500
Pg./L, respectively. These concentrations are approximately
equil to the lowest and highest spike levels used in the study -
Values of the mean recovery, X, computed as less than zero were
set to 1 yg/L to compute the precision estimates. Accurac-" and
precision estimates computed as less than zero were set to zero.
One measure of the performance of the method is that 2070 of the
22,555 data points were rejected as outliers, which is equivalent
to rejecting data from 3 of the 15 laboratories. The discussion
which follows is based on the data set after removing these
4,557 values.
184
-------
TABLE 10-1.
ACCURACY AND PRECISION ESTIMATES FOR LOW- AND HIGH-LEVEL
PREPARED CONCENTRATIONS - B/N COMPOUNDS
DISTILLED MATER
TAP MATER
SURFACE MATER
INO. EFFLUENT
COMPOUND
ACENAPHTHENE
ACENAPHiHVLENE
ALORIN
ANTHRACENE
B-BHC
BENZOC A) ANTHRACENE
B£NZO( A)PYRENt
HtNZO(B)FLUORANTHbNE
Blb(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER
01 -N-BUTYLPHThALATE
OIBENZO(A,H)ANTHRACENE
01ETHYL PHTHAl.ATE
CONC.
(UG/L)
10
100
10
100
10
100
IU
100
15
100
25
100
10
100
10
iuo
15
100
10
too
10
IUU
10
100
XREC 1
98
96
96
90
95
80
87
81
81
86
86
87
89
90
75
91
76
84
66
60
1 J5
93
53
44
1
CRSO
1 4
20
20
25
55
44
20
26
14
28
25
26
47
34
42
30
36
35
48
40
61
59
56
52
IRSD
-SA
14
15
13
23
41
29
17
21
15
19
19
16
27
23
28
22
26
34
31
15
93
39
55
31
XREC 1
96
95
92
87
75
67
86
82
78
81
85
81
70
78
53
68
70
84
63
59
38
SO
47
43
1
IRSD
18
17
20
23
35
46
18
19
15
21
38
29
45
40
65
47
44
29
32
34
48
55
61
65
IRSD
-SA
15
10
20
16
22
27
13
15
15
16
42
25
38
33
68
35
39
27
27
24
42
38
36
34
XREC 1
91
91
99
97
65
56
86
77
80
70
71
68
68
52
65
82
88
78
62
50
63
64
52
1
IRSD
27
27
28
22
36
SO
23
24
20
23
32
35
56
46
58
43
37
33
45
35
53
50
57
51
&RSD
-SA
14
20
14
14
1 1
33
18
18
9
14
24
30
50
40
27
34
1 7
25
18
26
37
37
52
41
XREC 1
90
dS
88
88
60
53
83
75
78
83
60
62
53
56
51
56
86
90
62
58
38
60
55
57
1
IRSD
22
18
20
24
60
59
31
29
23
25
50
52
67
65
60
62
39
35
44
47
73
85
49
45
UN SO
-SA
14
15
9
13
41
38
17
17
16
17
31
40
39
41
33
40
45
24
28
24
25
44
32
33
-------
TABLE 10-1. (Continued)
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER IND. EFFLUENT
<_ONL .
COMPOUND (UG/L)
ENOOSULFAN SULFATE 15
100
FLUORANTMENE 10
too
HEPTACHLOR 10
100
HEXAChLor;oeEN<£NE to
100
1SOPHORONE 10
ICO
*J NAPHTHALENE 10
» ,00
PCS- 1 260 40
100
1 ,3-DICHLOROBENZENE 10
iuo
2.6-DINITROTOLUENE 1O
100
3.3'-DICHLOROBENZIOINE 40
100
4-CHLOROPHENVL PHENVL ETHER 10
100
%REl_ XRbO
42
39
92
82
57
84
HI
75
126
1 13
92
78
54
70
79
BS
70
102
91
1 10
96
92
47
60
21
27
46
50
37
42
35
33
23
29
51
46
42
4 1
24
19
56
50
25
29
iRSD
-SA
51
18
14
21
14
23
17
18
33
28
1 7
20
52
40
34
?6
32
15
48
35
10
19
%RSD
%REC XHSD -SA
36
63
84
77
50
71
74
72
1 Jl
1 1?
90
78
25
51
78
88
74'
99
BO
98
95
95
55
65
23
22
41
44
33
30
49
52
20
24
95
60
42
42
21
21
61
50
22
25
44
22.
23
13
23
36
27
25
28
30
14
ia
24
45
36
25
21
18
37
27
12
15
%RSD
XHEC *RSO -S*
50
61
32
72
52
71
75
70
1 1 1
106
92
79
21
39
84
91
71
102
70
101
103
98
33
63
2!
2»J
27
48
29
32
43
36
26
27
52
62
32
34
5B
28
37
61
18
24
1 1
21
15
22
5
36
16
22
32
21
15
23
19
60
34
32
31
21
25
54
1 1
15
%RSD
XREC XRSD -SA
34
60
83
70
54
«7
60
S8
19-
109
B6
72
15
33
76
79
67
103
82
1 13
85
81
63
69
38
36
51
49
29
37
60
58
27
32
49
56
51
42
37
32
44
43
19
33
35
40
28
20
21
38
19
17
25
39
Ib
20
78
49
39
34
a
25
46
30
1 7
19
-------
TABLE 10-1. (Continued)
IJliULLEO WATER
TAP WATCH
SURFACE WATER
INO. EFFLUENT
oo
COMPOUND 1
4.4' -ODD
4,4' -DDE
BENZOCG.H. J )PERYLENE
BENZOIK) FLUOR AN THENE
BENZYL BUTYL PHTHALATE
BIM 2-LHLOROfc"lHOAY (METHANE
BI M 2-CHLOROI SOPROPYL )ETHER
HI S< 2 -ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
CHRYSENE
D-BHL
DI -N-OCTYLPHThALATE
CONL .
(UG/L)
10
100
15
1UO
10
100
10
100
10
100
to
100
15
100
1U
100
10
100
10
100
10
!00
%REC ;
52
56
66
69
89
97
71
85
49
64
62
107
88
101
72
63
83
92
18
28
68
75
IRSD
48
64
29
38
46
51
41
35
72
54
59
28
33
26
45
37
J2
33
84
92
54
39
IRSD
-SA
23
28
14
24
56
31
33
20
37
19
38
17
26
24
36
27
30
28
82
37
38
23
HREC 1
52
54
55
57
52
68
59
64
58
61
59
100
80
91
40
61
75
79
28
34
32
53
*
IRSD
49
54
36
38
38
53
43
37
75
54
72
29
34
29
59
49
33
26
86
91
56
53
IRSD
-SA
43
32.
40
36
23
42
17
20
54
21
63
IB
25
16
40
28
28
18
47
22
42
27
HREC 1
52
49
45
47
35
62
59
63
46
51
65
92
91
86
33
49
64
62
24
32
34
49
IRSD
42
65
23
37
49
63
63
56
67
62
53
34
39
j I
44
49
41
44
62
88
49
56
IRSD
-SA
17
42
14
20
58
48
51
40
44
50
27
32
21
31
25
38
33
35
0
54
28
44
%REC 1
42
46
47
47
43
58
60
5S
64
62
102
101
96
95
43
51
69
66
44
42
36
48
tRSD
39
56
42
48
65
68
68
64
69
58
47
32
22
21
67
64
54
52
70
77
77
75
fcRSD
-SA
32
44
44
40
35
35
42
29
4b
50
49
26
18
-, 3
48
33
37
33
53
34
50
33
-------
TABLE 10-1. (Continued)
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE MATER
IND. EFFLUENT
CONf. .
COMPOUND (UG/L)
DIELORIN 10
.00
DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 1U
100
ENDRIN ALDEHYDE 25
100
FLUORENE 10
1UO
MEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE 1O
IUO
Q^ MEXACHLOROBUTAD!ENE 10
OO 10°
HEXACHLOROETHANE 10
100
INDCNOl 1 . 2,3-C .D)PYRENE 10
!00
N-NITROSODI-N-PROPYLAMINE 25
100
NITROBENZENE 10
100
PHENANTHRENE 10
100
XRSD
%REC XRSD -SA
80
82
30
21
bl
72
90
90
73
90
61
70
65
72
47
75
ci?
106
79
106
86
87
25
26
7?
101
69
72
20
14
37
29
34
27
29
18
59
5 1
46
44
30
27
18
15
18
20
60
55
44
23
15
12
27
32
34
20
21
18
faO
31
30
23
3 1
20
19
13
XRiD
%REC XRSD -SA
76
71
29
30
43
55
86
83
70
86
56
62
66
68
33
55
76
101
69
98
85
79
18
28
92
100
68
66
20
14
34
36
38
16
30
22
68
51
58
47
40
29
13
10
14
19
30
27
38
38
16
1 1
24
17
31
17
30
22
32
26
48
33
27
15
9
9
XRSD
XREC XRSD -SA
77
70
34
30
63
61
81
78
78
84
61
62
62
68
32
47
90
100
86
96
89
76
20
31
81
104
58
64
25
27
33
35
35
22
33
27
£7
40
52
44
35
15
19
15
25
46
72
28
18
1 7
22
23
24
20
19
20
28
47
53
29
40
8
32
13
16
XRSD
%REC XRSD -SA
80
68
29
34
51
55
85
73
59
68
60
59
67
69
35
52
91
69
74
98
92
82
30
33
75
88
81
76
36
26
43
42
46
30
38
24
62
60
54
49
33
34
28
29
24
26
58
69
23
41
28
16
45
42
38
24
26
21
50
37
44
38
39
20
22
13
-------
TABLE 10-1. (Continued)
i>l bl 1 -LED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE MATER
IND. EFFLUENT
03
COMPOUND
PVRENE
) ,2-DICHLOROBENZENE
1 . 2.4-TR1CHLOROBENZENE
1 ,4-DlCHLOROBENZENE
2-CHLORONAPHVhALENE
2,4-DlNITROTOl UENE
4-BROMOPHENYL PHtNVl ETHER
4 , 4 ' DDT
LONL .
(UG/L )
IU
100
IU
iuo
10
100
10
100
10
too
IU
100
10
100
10
100
%REC 1
82
84
63
BO
86
93
58
72
89
89
44
87
78
90
46
76
*
*.RSD
19
15
29
24
26
21
J5
30
1 7
13
55
23
25
17
52
64
IRSD
-SA
17
16
26
21
25
16
28
24
13
8
36
13
22
14
46
42
XREC 1
75
76
83
79
60
BO
56
73
85
85
57
80
73
84
39
63
IRSD
20
14
36
26
31
24
32
32
20
15
63
30
29
1C
54
67
IRSD
-SA
13
10
29
18
17
16
19
18
14
10
34
19
18
15
35
50
XREC 1
77
73
87
76
62
78
54
67
83
79
54
80
77
82
35
54
1
4RSD
21
IB
42
27
39
22
26
31
29
25
50
32
30
16
64
64
IRSD
-SA
14
16
24
28
22
19
9
28
27
24
30
22
19
16
:-. 7
58
%REC '
64
71
85
-4
61
81
64
£9
88
63
87
92
70
72
32
51
1
ftRoD
42
37
38
35
30
25
32
30
22
23
39
14
30
30
58
70
IRSD
-SA
19
17
24
25
26
14
25
22
18
15
~7
13
28
22
37
45
-------
TABLE 10-2.
ACCURACY AND PRECISION ESTIMATES FOR LOW- AND HIGH-LEVEL
CONCENTRATIONS - ACID COMPOUNDS
OlbTI I LtO WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER
INO. EFFLUENT
COMPOUND
PENTACHLOROPHENOL
PHENOL
2-CHLOROPMENOL
2 -MfcTHVL-4 ,6-DINI THOHHtNOL
^ NITROPHENOL
2 . 4- UICHLOROPhENOL
2 . 4-DIMETHVLPhENOL
2.4-DINITRO..-NOL
2 .4 ,6-TRlLHLOhOPHtNOL
4 CHlORO-3-MEIHYLPHENOL
4 -NITROPHENOL
CONL .
(UG/L )
15
100
10
100
10
100
100
500
15
100
10
100
10
100
100
500
15
IUO
HI
100
100
XRSD
XHfcC XRiD -SA
106
56
44
bl
78
71
98
99
106
88
87
1 15
75
5<
135
90
y i
H7
84
56
to
57
35
45
36
40
29
46
32
44
29
35
22
33
24
91
46
35
24
44
3 1
67
49
43
27
39
28
36
20
36
24
29
18
29
16
27
18
42
38
32
18
32
24
56
42
XRSD
XREC XRSD -SA
107
86
55
45
77
75
71
93
92
95
83
69
59
50
128
96
89
84
78
47
54
62
42
55
44
36
32
52
36
41
26
35
25
63
41
74
50
J2
21
43
29
62
48
34
37
51
27
33
24
39
28
33
21
27
20
34
25
45
34
33
20
36
20
49
33
XRSD
XREC XRSD -SA
104
88
58
48
74
75
87
105
92
96
89
89
83
64
71
139
86
88
81
61
61
59
43
32
39
29
22
24
47
41
42
28
3 1
23
36
40
68
34
35
29
44
30
62
48
21
19
31
24
19
17
21
23
19
17
18
14
23
29
30
28
19
16
22
18
29
30
XRSD
XREC XRSD -SA
96
76
58
45
78
73
87
98
95
91
87
82
68
a 1
70
1 13
91
83
85
77
80
59
57
32
34
35
27
22
45
42
45
35
28
24
57
59
68
40
33
25
44
29
64
48
26
19
24
27
10
14
16
22
20
16
14
1 7
30
29
34
26
31
1 2
2'J
!6
28
38
-------
ACCURACY
The accuracy of Method 625 is obtained by comparing the mean re-
covery, X, to the prepared values of concentration in yg/L. In
the statistical summary Tables 8-1 through 8-64. individual values
of accuracy as percent relative error are listed for each analyte,
in each water matrix, and at each of the six concentration levels
in that water matrix (three Youden pairs). This results in 24
separate values for each compound for accuracy. The weighted
linear regression of mean recovery, X, versus the prepared con-
centration level, C, provides values representing the percent re-
covery over all of the concentration levels. This reduces the
evaluation of accuracy to one statement for each of the 64 com-
pounds in each of four waters as presented in Tables 1-1 through
1-17.
As seen in Table 10-1, the mean recovery (at 100 yg/L) for the
B/N compounds ranges from 21% for dimethyl phthalate to 11370
for isophorone with an average value of 74%. Both of these ex-
tremes were for the distilled water matrix. A mean recovery (at
100 pg/L) of 1137,, is also seen for 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine in the
industrial effluent matrix. The mean recovery for low-level
prepared concentrations ranges from 157o for PC3-1260 in the
industrial effluent matrix to 1947e for isophorone, also in the
industrial effluent matrix, with an average value of 69%. The
differences observed between percent recoveries at the low and
high levels are directly related to the absolute magnitude of
the intercept term in the regression equations. Some of the
greatest percent recovery differences for the B/N compounds are
seen for dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, endosulfan sulfate, isophorone,
PCB-1260, 2,6-dinitrotoluene, 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine, bis(2-
chloroethoxy)methane, nitrobenzine and 2,4-dinitrotoluene.
Recoveries for dimethyl phthalate are extremely low, ranging
from 21% to 34%, for all water matrices at both concentration
levels.
191
-------
The mean recovery (at 100 or 500 ug/L) for the acid compounds,
as presented in Table 1Q-2, range from 44% for phenol in
distilled water to 139% for 2,4-dinitrophenol in the surface
water matrix with an average value of 82%. The mean recoveries
for low-level prepared acid concentrations range from 47% for
4-nitrophenol in tap water to 115% for 2,4-dimethylphenol in
distilled water, with an average value of 80%. Some of the
greatest differences observed between percent recoveries at the
low and high levels for the acid compounds are seen for penta-
chlorophenol, 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol, 2,4-dimethylphenol,
2,4-dinitrophenol and 4-nitrophenol. Mean recoveries for phenol
and 4-nitrophenol at the 100 ug/L concentration level are con-
sistently low with recoveries ranging from 447<> to 48% and 54% to
607=, respectively.
No clear trends of greater accuracy for higher- or lower-
concentration Youden pairs are indicated. Compounds with rela-
tively high recoveries did not have corresponding high blank
values. The highest blank values in the distilled water were
observed for di-n-butylphthalate (seven labs - 1 ug/L) and
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (8 labs ^ 1 ug/L). However,
recoveries for these compounds were below 80% for the low
Youden pair.
PRECISION
The overall and single-analyst precisions of Method 625 were
determined as % RSDs for each analyte, water type, and concen-
tration level. The statistical summary Tables 8-1 through 8-64
present 24 individual values of overall percent relative stan-
dard deviation, and 12 individual values of % RSD-SA, for each
compound. The weighted linear regression of standard deviation,
S, versus mean recovery, X, provides values of percent, relative
standard deviation over all of the concentration ranges. This
192
-------
reduces the evaluation of precision to 256 statements - one for
each of the 64 analytes in each of the four water types. These
precision statements are presenced in Tables 1-1 through 1-17
of Section 2.
The overall standard deviation of the analytical results indi-
cate the dispersion expected among measurements generated from a
group of laboratories. This represents the broad variation
(reflecting the combined effect of systematic and random errors)
in the data collected in the interlaboratory study. As seen in
Table 10-1, the % RSD it 100 vg/L for the B/N compounds ranged
from 10 percent for ^henanthrene for the tap water matrix to
104% for dimethyl phthalate for the surface water matrix with a
median value of 357,. The 7. RSD for low-level prepared concentra-
tions ranged from 137. for phenanthrene to 957, for PCB-1260 with
a median value of 397.. These extremes are for the tap water
matrix. As seen for the percent recovery estimates, differences
observed between precision estimates at low- and high-level
prepared concentrations are directly related to the absolute
magnitude of the intercept term in the regression equations.
Some of the greatest differences between 70 RSD estimates at the
two levels are seen for bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane and 2,4-
dinitrotoluene. Precision for dimethyl phthalate is poor at
both concentration levels fcr all water matrices with 7. RSDs
ranging from 757, to 1047..
As seen in Table lQ-2, the 70 RSDs at high-level concentrations
for the acid compounds range from 217. for 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
in the tap water matrix to 597. for 2,4-dimethylphenol in the
industrial effluent with a median RSD of 327,. The 7. RSD for
low-level prepared acid concentrations ranged from 227. for
2-chlorophenol in the surface water matrix to 917. for 2,4-
dinitrophenol in distilled water with a median value of 447..
193
-------
Precision for 2,4-dinitrophenol is poor for all water matrices
at the high-level concentration level with % RSDs ranging from
68% to 91%.
The single-analyst standard deviation indicates the precision
associated within a single laboratory. As seen in Table 11-1,
the % RSD-SA at a prepared concentration of 100 yg/L for the
B/N compounds ranges from 870 for 2-chloronaphthalene in the
distilled water matrix to 72% for dimethyl phthalate in the
surface water matrix with a median value of 24%. The % RSD-SA
for low-level prepared concentrations ranges from 0% for delta-
BHC in the surface water matrix to 93% for dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
in distilled water with a median % RSD-SA of 27%. The wide
range of values for 7» RSD-SA is a result of the sign and magni-
tudes of the intercept term in the regression equations. Some
of the greatest % RSD-SA differences at the low- and high-level
concentrations are observed for dibenzo(a,h)anthrr.cene, PCB-
1260, 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine and bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane.
With the exception of the tap water matrix, single-analyst pre-
cision for dimethyl phthalate was poor at bcth concentration
levels with % RSD-SAs ranging from 46% to 72%.
The % RSD-SAs at high-level concentrations for the acid com-
pounds, as presented in Table 10-2, range from 12% for 2,4,6-
trichlorophenol in the industrial effluent to 42% for 4-nitro-
phenol in distilled water with i median value of 23%. The
% RSD-SA for prepared acid'crncentrations at low levels range
from 10% for 2-chlorophenol in the industrial effluent matrix
to 56% for 4-nitropheuol in distilled water with a median
% RSD-SA of 30%.
In general, precision values appear to be higher for lower-
concentration Youden pairs, indicating relatively poorer
194
-------
precision. This is the expected trend for precision in sample
analysis.
EFFECTS OF WATER TYPES
The comparison of accuracy and precision across water types was
presented in Table 9-1 through 9-63 and is summarized in Table
11. The observed F values are entered for each of the 63 B/N
and acid analytes. The multiplicative model analysis was not
perfomied for delta-BHC because of insufficient ampule data.
The F-test suggests a possible effect due to water type in 28 of
the 63 cases. Although statistical significance is indicated by
the F-test, the null hypothesis test for 15 of the 28 compounds
indicated that no significant effect due to water type has been
established because zero is contained within the confidence
intervals for both the differences between intercepts and the
differences between slopes.
Practical significance was based on an examination of several
factors in addition to the results of the statistical tests.
These factors include the regression equations for accuracy and
precision, the statistical summaries of the data, and the point
estimates of accuracy and precision at two differenc levels of
prepared concentration. A practical effect due to water is
indicated from the analysis and examination of these factors for
eight of the compounds. The slope, and intercept estimates for
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene in all three waters and 2,4-dimethyl-
phenol in the tap water matrix are significantly different from
the corresponding estimates for the distilled water. For all
other compounds listed in Table 11 as having a practical sig-
nificance, the intercept estimates for the water matrices given
were significantly different from the distilled water intercept
term. A review of the point estimates, statistical summaries
and regression equations for accuracy and precision indicate the
following:
195
-------
TABLE 11-1.
SUMMARY OF THE TESTS FOR DIFFERENCES ACROSS WATER TYPES
BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS
Compound
Acenaphthene
AcenaphthyleDsi
Aldrln
Anthracene
0-BHC
Benzo(a)anthracene
9enzo(a)pyreae
Benzo(b)fluor«nthene
Ble(2-chloroethyl)etner
Dl-n-butylphthalate
Dibenzo(a,h)aathraceaa
Dlethyl Phthalate
Eodosulfan Sulfate
Fluoranthene
Heptachlor
Heiachlorobenzene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
PCB-1260
1 , 3~Dichlorobenxenr
2,6~Dlnitrctoluene
3 , j ' -Dlchlorobenzidine
4-Chlorophenyl Pheayl Ether
4. 4 '-ODD
4, 4 '-DDE
Benzo(a || Dperylene
Benxo(K)f luorenthene
Benzyl Butyl Phthalate
Bl a (2~chloro«£hoxy) Methane
Ble(2-chloroiaoprop]rl) ether
Bla(2-ethylhexyl)p'Lthalat*
Chryacn*
Dl-n-octylphthalata
Dieldrln
Dimethyl Fhthalate
Endtln Aldehyde
Fluorene
Heptachlor Epoxlde
Heuchlorobutad lene
Hexachloroethane
IndeDo(l,2,3-c,d)pyi-ene
N*oltroeodl-rr>propylaBliie
Nitrobenzene
Phenanthrene
Pyrrne
1 ,2-Oichlorobenzene
1 1 2 t4-Trlchloroboazene
2-Chloronaphthalene
2 ^-Dlnltrotoluene
4 .Broaopheayl Phenyl Ether
4.4-DDT
Observed
F-Value
1.13
0.61
9.30
1.11
0.88
9.00
4.54
6.92
0.72
1.26
10.71
3.76
1.96
1.13
i.30
2.49
1.84
1.99
8.78
1.63
l.OS
0.85
4.J1
1.05
8.22
11. 56
4.71
1.82
3.17
1.97
10.72
5.06
8.97
2.71
1.28
3.63
2.98
3.98
1.83
0.46
4.63
1.09
1.38
2.09
4.64
1.28
1.2f
0.88
2.00
1.68
2.90
2.4S
P-Teat
Significant
at the 51
Level?
Ho
Hr
tea
No
No
Tea
Tea
Tea
No
No
Tea
Tea
No
No
Ho
Tea
No
No
Tea
No
No
No
Tea
No
Tea
Tea
Tea
No
Tea
No
Tea
Tea
Tea
Tea
No
Tea
Tea
Tea
No
No
Tea
No
No
Tea
Tea
No
No
No
Ho
Ho
Tea
Yea
Statiatlcal
Significance
Eetabllehed
by the 9JZ
Confidence
Llaita? Significant Water Type
_
Tea Industrial Effluent
-
-
No
No
Yea Surface
-
Tea Tap. Surface. Ind. Effluent
No
-
-
-
No
-
-
Yea Tap, Industrial Effluei t
_
-
-
No
_
Tea Industrial Effluent
No
-
Tea Industrial Effluent
-
Yea Tap, Surface, Ind. Effluent
No
Yea Tap, Surface, Ind. Effluent
No
-
No
No
No
-
-
No
-
-
.-a Surface
Yes Industrial Effluent
-
-
-
-
No
No
Practical
Significance
Tea
No
Tea
Tea
No
Tea
Tea
Tea
Tea
No
No
-------
TABLE 11-2 SUMMARY OF THE TESTS FOR DIFFERENCES ACROSS WATER TYPES -
ACID COMPOUNDS
Coapouod
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
2-Chlorophenol
2-Methyl-4,6-dlnltrophenol
2-Nltrophenol
2 ,4-Dlchlorophenol
2 ,4-Dlaethylphenol
2,4-Dlnltrophenol
2,4, 6-Tr Ichlorophenol
4-Chloro-3-aethyl phenol
4-Nltrophenoi
Observed
f- Value
2.03
0.98
0.17
2.16
0.74
0.59
4.85
2.39
1.19
0.49
0.83
F-Test
Sljnlflcant
at the 51
Level?
No
No
Ho
Yea
No
No
Yea
Yes
No
No
No
Statistical
Significance
Established
by t»>9 95Z
Confidence Significant
Llalta? Water Type
-
-
-
No
\ea Tap, Ind. Effluent
Yea Industrial Effluent
-
-
-
Practical
Significance
To
No
-------
the recovery at all concentration levels is low
for aldrin in the industrial effluent, 2,4-
diiaethylpbenol and PCB-1260 in the tap water and
industrial effluent, and for dibenzo(a,h)anthracene,
benzo(g,h,i)perylene, bis (2-etliylhexyl)phthalate
and di-n-octylphthalate in all three water matrices;
recoveries are extremely low at low level concen-
trations for dibenzo(a,h)anthracene;
e the recovery at low level concentrations is high
for bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane for the industrial
effluent relative to the low recovery for the
distilled water;
the % RSD-SA for dibenzo(a,h)anthracene in the
distilled water is high at low level concentra-
tions ; and
the % RSD-SA for 2,4-dimethylphenol in the tap
water and industrial effluent is high at all
concentration levels.
COMPARISON OF PUBLISHED METHOD PERFORMANCE DATA TO
INTERLABORATORY DATA
Table 12 compares the accuracy and single analyst precision
results from this interlaboratory study to the method performance
results for Method 625 [8]. The accuracy and precision values
listed for the method performance data represent the results
from two to four laboratories. The values listed for the inter-
laboratory study were computed at a prepared concentration of
100 yg/L. These values are those which remained after the
initial removal of approximately 207<> of the reported values due
to their identification as outliers by the IMVS program.
198
-------
TABLE 12-1.
COMPARISON OF ACCURACY AND PRECISION OF INTER-
LABORATORY STUDY DATA (FOR A PREPARED CONCENTRA-
TION OF 100 ug/L) AND PUBLISHED METHOD PERFOR-
MANCE DATA - B/N COMPOUNDS
Reagent Hater*
Compound
Acena;l)thene
Acenaphthylen*
Anthracene
Benzo (i) anthracene
&euio(a)pyTene
Benro(b) f iuorantheje
Bli ( 2-chloroethy 1) ether
Dl-n-butyl phthalate
Dlbenso (a ,h) anthracene
Dlethyl phthalate
Fluoranthene
Hexachlorobcnzena
laophorona
Naphthalene
1 1 3-Dlchlorobenzene
Data Source
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
later. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method P»rf.
luter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
I Recovery
77
96, 95
78
90, 87
84
81, 82
83
87, 6*.
90
90, 78
96
91, 68
56
84, 84
70
60, 59
82
93, 80
42
44, 43
89
82, 77
79
75, 72
75
113, 112
6
78, 78
55
35, 88
Z RSD-SA
23
15, 10
22
23, 16
14
21, 15
19
16, 25
22
23, J3
68
22, 35
36
34, 27
25
15, 24
39
39, 38
28
31, 34
19
21, 13
20
18, 25
33
28, 30
J2
20. 13
28
26, 25
V«et*veter**
Z Recovery
83
91. 05
82
97, 88
76
82, 75
75
71. 62
43
68, 56
41
65, 56
72
38, 90
93
62. 58
70
63, 60
48
52. 57
80
72. 70
71
70. 58
77
106, 109
75
79, 72
54
91. 79
Z RSD-SA
29
20, 15
23
14, 13
22
18, 17
28
30, 40
21
40, 41
21
34. 40
37
25, 24
51
26, 24
40
37, 44
28
41. 33
26
22, 20
22
22, 17
42
21, 39
35
23. 20
24
32, 34
(Continued)
199
-------
TABLE 12-1. (Continued)
Reagent Water*
Compound
2,6 Dln^.tro toluene
3,3' -Dlchlorobenrldlne
Benzo (k) f luoranthene
Benzyl butyl phttialate
Bl»(2-chloroiaopropyl) ether
Bl»(2-ethylh*xyl) phehalate
Chrycena
Dl-n-octylphthalata
Dimethyl phthalate
Fluorene
Hexachlorobutadleoa
Hexac hloroe Chan*
Indeno ( 1 , 2 , 3-cd ) pyrene
M-oitroaodl-n-propylanlna
Nitrobenzene
Data Source
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Ferf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Het hod Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter . S fudy
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Pnrf.
Inter. Study
Method Psrf.
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Port.
Inter. Study
Method Peri.
luter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
' R«c ovary
79
102, 99
184
110, 98
96
83, 64
47
64, 61
71
101, 91
129
83, 61
83
92, 79
97
75, 53
25
21, 30
77
98, 83
46
70. 62
46
72, 68
65
75, 35
68
106, 101
72
106, 98
1 RSD-SA
18
15, 18
174
35, 27
68
20, 20
32
19, 21
33
24, 16
50
27, 28
19
28, 18
37
23, 27
33
55, 27
16
12, 11
25
20, 17
21
18, 22
37
31, 26
39
28, 33
31
20, 15
Waatavater**
Z Recovery
79
102, 103
143
101, 113
47
63, 55
74
51. 62
71
36, 95
82
49, 51
75
62, 66
89
49, 48
35
30, 34
80
78, 73
'.8
62, 59
52
68, 69
31
47, 52
76
100, 89
82
96, 98
I RSD-SA
25
21, 25
145
54, 30
27
40, 29
43
50, 50
39
31, 13
(.--
38, 33
28
35, 33
62
44, 33
36
72, 69
20
22, 16
28
19, 24
26
28. 21
43
53, 37
45
40, 38
54
32, 20
(Continued)
200
-------
TABLE 12-1. (Ccntinued)
Retgent Water*
Compound
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1 , 2-Dlchlorobenx»ne
1,2, 4-Ir Ichlorobensene
1,4-Dlchlorobenzene
'.-Chloronaphthalene
2 , 4-Dlnitrotoluen*
4-Broaopbenyl phenvl ether
Date Source
Method Pert.
later. Study
Method Pert.
Inter. Study
Method Parf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
later. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Stud 7
Method Perf.
later. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
I Recovery
84
87, 79
86
84, 76
59
80, 79
64
93. 80
61
72, 73
73
89, 85
83
87, 80
80
90, 34
Z RSD-SA
14
13, 9
15
16, 10
27
21. 18
16
16, 16
31
24, 18
24
8. 10
32
13, 19
17
14, 15
Waataweter**
Z Recovery
76
76, 82
80
73, 71
62
76, 74
69
78. 81
63
67, 69
79
79, S3
79
80, 92
75
82, 72
Z RSD-SA
22
16. 13
23
16, 17
28
28. 25
26
19, 14
35
28, 22
27
24, 15
34
22. 13
20
16, 22
* The two value* given for the reagent water Interlaboracory data In each colim
represent the di*tilled and tap water*, reepectively.
** The tvo value* given for th« waatewater Intel-laboratory in each colusn rapreaent
the aurface water and industrial effluent, reapectively.
201
-------
TABLE 12-2.
COMPARISON OF ACCJRACY AND PRECISION OF
TNTERLABORATORY STUDY DATA (For a prepared
concentration of 100 yg/L) AND PUBLISHED
METHOD PERFORMANCE DATA - ACID COMPOUNDS
Compound
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
2-Chlorophenol
2-Methyl-4 , 6-dlnitrophenol
2-Nitrophenol
2 , 4-Dlchlorophenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
2,4-Dlnitrophenol
2,4, 6-Trlchlorophenol
t,Chloro-3-raethylphenol
4-Sitrophenol
Data
Source
Method Perf.
Inter. Stud;.
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Method Perf.
Inter. Study
Reagent Water*
1 Recovery
86
95, 86
36
44, 45
70
78, 75
83
71, 71
lufi. 95
74
87, 83
64
75, 59
78
54, 50
91, 89
79
34, 78
41
60, 54
I RSD-SA
20
27, 37
14
28, 27
23
20, 24
18
36, 39
25
18, 21
24
16, 20
25
18, 25
21
42. 45
20
18, 20
18
24. 20
20
42, 33
Wastewater**
2 Recovery
66
88, 76
36
48, 45
71
75, 73
90
f>7, 87
75
96, 91
80
8';, 82
58
64, 51
108
71, 70
81
88, 83
75
81, 77
43
59, 59
Z RSD-SA
36
19, 19
21
24, 27
25
17, 14
35
21, 16
27
17, 16
21
14, 17
26
29, 29
56
30, 34
20
16, 12
21
18, 16
16
30. 38
*The two values given for the reagent w-ter interlaboratory data In each column
represent the distilled and tap waters, respectively.
"The two values given tor the wastewater Interlaboratory data in each column represent
the su-face water an- industrial effluent, respectively.
202
-------
In general, compound recoveries were higher and 7, RSD-SA values
were lower (better precision) for tap. interlaboratory study than
the published values. Recoveries for 38 B/N compounds in the
interlaboratory study showed ?i relative increase of at least
207. to published recoveries for 16, 15, 11 and 9 compounds for
distilled water, tap water, surface water and the industrial
effluent, respectively, while 2070 or greater decreases were
observed for 3, 5, 7 and c, compounds, respectively. 7. RSD-SA
values were at least 207. lower for 18, 22, 18 and 20 compounds
for the four water types, respectively, while 2070 or greater
increases were observed for only 3, 4, 8 and 5 compounds,
respectively.
Recoveries of acidic compounds in the interlaboratory study
showed a 207<> or greater relative increase .for 3, 3, 4 and 3
compounds for the distilled, tap and surface waters and the
industrial effluent, respectively, while 207» or greater
decreases were observed for only one compound for each water
type. Improved precision was not as clearly defined for acidic
compounds with decreases in precision of at least 207» for three,
two, seven and seven compounds for the four water types,
respectively, while increases of at least 20% were observed
for six, four, one and two compounds.
REVISED EQUATIONS
A review of the acid data remaining after the IMVS outlier
screening indicated some potential problens with the data for
two of the compounds, 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol and 2,4-dinitro-
phenol (see statistical summaries on p. 102 and p. IOC,
respectively). For 2-methyl-4,6-dinltrophenol, results for the
two lowest Youden pairs appeared to be out-of-line with the
remaining data. The data for these low-lnvel ampules were
eliminated, and the equations revised using four points instead
203
-------
of six. V-.ry high results were found for 2,4-dinitrophenol on
the two highest concentrates which indicated a dilution error
by a factor of 2. The true values were changed and new regres-
sion equations were generated. Table 13 presents the revised
equations and Table 14 presents the revised accuracy and pre-
cision estimates.
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONNAIRE
A questionnaire for Method 625 was provided for all participating
laboratories. Each of the 15 laboratories responded to the
questionnaire. Results for both the B/N and acid compounds are
presented, in this section.
Summaries of instrument and calibration parameters are given in
Tables 15-1 and 15-2 for B/N compounds and acids, respectively.
Of the 15 participating laboratories, 4 used Hewlett-Packard
instruments while the remaining 11 used Finnigan instruments.
Three laboratories used two different Finnigan instruments for
the two analyses.
Fourteen laboratories used SP-1240-DA for acid analyses. Of
these, 11 specified 100/120 mesh and 9 specified 6 foot or 1.8
meter glass columns. One laboratory did not specify the packing
or column used.
The packing used by 14 laboratories for B/N analyses was 37.
SP-2250 on Supelcoport. A mesh size of 100/120 was specified by
eight laboratories while one specified 80/100 mesh. One labora-
tory used an equivalent packing, 3% OV-17 on 80/100 mesh Supelco-
port. Glass columns of 6 feet, 1.8 meters or 2 meters were
specified by 10 laboratories.
204
-------
TABLE 13. REVISED REGRESSION EQUATIONS FOR ACCURACY AND PRECISIDN
Water Type
2-Methyl-4,6-Dinitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrophenol
O
en
Applicable Cone. Range - ug/L
Distilled Water
Single-Analyst Precision
Overall Precision
Accuracy
Tap Water
Single-Analyst Precision
Overall Precision
Accuracy
Surface Water
Single-Analyst Precision
Overall Precision
Accuracy
Industrial Effluent
Single-Analyst Precision
Overall Precision
Accuracy
(144 - 1067)
SR = 0.05X + 42.29
S = 0.26X + 23.10
X = 1.04C - 28.04
SR = 0.15X + 0.38
S = 0.31X + 23.39
X = 1.-OC - 29.72
SR = 0.11X + 0.66
S = 0.35X + 21.03
X = 1.07C - 13.19
SR = 0.15X - 26.29
S = 0.42X - 2.86
X = 0.96C + 0.41
(90 - 2666)
SR = 0.38X + 2.36
S - 0.42X + 26.29
X = 0.81C - 18.04
SR = 0.33X + 6.20
S = 0.48X + 13.02
X = 0.82C - 24.25
SR = 0.28X +1.15
S = 0.29X + 26.97
X = -0.34C + 212.78
SR = 0.25X + 6.43
S = 0.36X + 22.11
X = 0.68C + 7.82
X = mean recovery
C = prepared concentration
-------
TABLE 14- REVISED ACCURACY AND PRECISE ESTIMATES
Compound
Distilled Water Tap Water
Surface Water Ind. Effluent
%RSD %RSD %RSD %RSD
%REC %RSD -SA %REC %RSD -SA %REC %RSD -SA %REC %RSD -SA
2-Me thy1-4,6-Dinitrophenol
76 56 61 70 64 16 94 57 12 96 39
2,4-Dinitrophenol
63 84 42 58 71 44 179 44 29 76 65 33
-------
TABLE 15-1. SUMMARY OF INSTRUMENT AND
PARAMETERS - B/N ANALYSES
CALIBRATION
Lab
Code
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
N3
0 6.
vj
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
1?.
14.
15.
Instrument Make
Flnnlgan 4023
Flnnigan OUA-1020
Flnnlgan 3200
Hewlett-Packard 5985A
Hevlet. -Packard 5993B
Option 95
Flnnlgan 3200
Flnnlgan OUA-30B
Flnnlgan 3200
Hewlett-Packard 5985A
FJnnlgao 2100
Flnnlgan 4021
Hewlett-Packard 5985
Flnnlgan 4023
Finnigan OUA-1020
Flnulgan 4021
Age
(yr)
4
1
5
4.5
1
9
2
5
6
4
2
6
5
1
5
Column
6'; 31 SP-2250 on 100/120
Supelcoport
6' x 2ma ID; 31 SP-2250 DB
on 100/120
6' x 2an ID; SP-2250
2m x 2m ID, glasa; 31 SP-
2250 on 100/120 Supelcoport
31 SP-2250
6' glasa; 31 SP-2250
1.8m x 2 BB ID glass; 31 SP-
2250 DB on 100/120 Supelco-
port
31 SP-2250 on 60/100 Supelco-
port
6' x 2m ID glass; 3X S>?-225"
il SP-2250
31 CN-n on 100/120 Supelco-
port
31 SP-2250 on 100/120 Supel-
coport
1.8a x 2m ID. Glaaa; 31 SP-
2250
6' glass; 31 bP-2250 on ICO/
120 Supelcoport
6'; 3X SP-2250 on 100/120
Column Conditions
50*C for 4 Bin; 8*C/mln to
270*C; hold at 270*C
50*C for 4 Bin, 8*C/mln to
270*C
40*C for 2 Bin; 12"c/min to
300*C
50*C for 4 min; 8*C/mln to
270*C; 270*C for 30 Bin
60*C for 4 min; 10*C/min to
270*C; 270*C for 30 min
50*C for 4 Bin; 8*C/mln to
285*C
rO*C for 4 min; 8*C/min to
270*C; 270"C for 55 nlo
50*C; 8'C/aln to 310*C
50*0 for 4 Bin; 8*C/mln to
290*C
50*C for 4 Bin; 8*C/mln to
290*C
35'C; 8'C/ain to 280*C; 280*
C for iA.3 Bin
50*C Idf 4 kin; 8*C/Bln to
270*C; 270*C lor 30 Bin
50* C for 4 Bin; 8*CA?ln to
270*C; hold at 270*C
50"C for 4 Bin; 8*C/aln to
270*C
50*C for 4 Bin; 8*C/aln to
Primary Source
of Standards
Supelco; pesticides
Prepared Inhouse
Prepared Inhouse
EPA (Radian)
Supelco
Supelco; pesticides
Prepared inhoust
Not specified
Supelco; pesticide?
Prepared Inhouse
EPA (Radian)
EPA
Supelco
Prepared Inhouse
Prepared Inhouse
Prepared Inhouse
Prepared Inbcuse
EPA (Radian) '
Calibration Points
**LO, ^20, ^70, ^
20, 50, 100 (50
for pesticides)
25. 50, 200
10, 50, 100
15, 24, 33, k\
10, 20, 30
25, 100, 200 (25
for pesticides)
50, 100, 200
10, 50, 200
10, 50, 100
Not specified
.180
only
. 50
10, 50, 100, 200
20-40, 100-200,
Hot specified
B points (1-200
tlon limits)
20, 50, 100
200-400
x detec-
Supelcoport
270 C
-------
TABLE 15-2. SUMMARY OF INSTRUMENT AND CALIBRATION
PARAMETERS - ACID ANALYSES
Lab
Code
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
0 6.
00
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Instrument Hake
Flnnlgan OUA-20
Flnnlgan CM 1020
Flnnlgan 3200
Hewlett-Packard 5985A
Hewlett-Packard 5993B
Option 95
Flnnlgan 4021
Flnnlgan OUA-3013
Flnnlgan 3200
Hewlett-Packard 5985A
Flnnlgan 2100
Flnnlgan 4021
Hewlett-Packard 5985
Flnnlgan 3200
Flnnlgan OWA-1020
Flnnlgan 4021
Age
(yr)
2.5
1
5
4.5
1
5
2
5
6
4
2
6
7
1
5
Column
6'; IX SP-1240 DA on 100/120
Supelcrport
6' x 2m ID 11 SP-1240 DA on
100/120
Not specified
6' x 2BB ID. glass; IX SP-
1240 DA on 100/120 Supelco-
port
IX SP-1240 DA
6' glass; IX SP-1240 DA
I.OB x 2 BO ID glass; IX SP-
1240 DA on 1 00/120 Supelco-
port
IX SP-1240 DA
6' x 2m ID glaaa; IX SP-
1240 DA
IX SP-1240 DA
IX SP-1240 DA on 100/120
Supelcoport
IX SP-1240 DA on 100/120
Sjpelcoport
1.8a x 2m ID, glass; IX SP-
1240 DA
6' glass; IX SP-1240 DA on
100/120 Supelcoport
6'; IX SP-1240 DA on 100/120
Column Conditions
70*C for 2 aln; 8'c/aln to
180*C; hold at 180*C
70*C for 2 Bin; 8*C/i .« to
180*C
Not specified
70*C for 2 Bin; 8'c/ain to
200*C; 200*C for 3 Bin
85*C for 2 aln; 8*C/aln to
200*C
70*C; lO'c/nin to 200*C
73*C for 2 ain; 6'c/aln to
180*C; 180°C for 30 mln
60*C; 10"c/mln to 190*C
70*C; 10*C/mln to 2uO*C
70*C for 2 mln; 8*C/uln to
185*C
70*C; 8 C/aln to 225*C;
225*C for 0.8 aln
70*C for 2 aln; 8*C/mln to
200*C
70*C for 2 aln; S'C/Bin to
200*C
70*C for 2 aln; 8*C/aln to
200*C
70*C for 2 aln; 8*C/aln to
Primary Source
of Standards
Supelco
Prepared Inhouse
EPA (Radian)
Supelco
Supelco
Not specified
Supelco
Supelco
EPA
Supelco
Prepared Inhouse
Prepared Inhouse
Prepared Inhouse
Prepared Inhouse
EPA (Radian)
Calibration Points
(pg/D
'v-lO. 1.20. -v90, V180
40. 100, 200
25, 50. 2CO
20-100, 50-250,
25-125, 50-250,
25, 10U, 200
50, 100, 200
10, 50, 200
50, 100, 200
Not specified
100-500
250-1250
10, 30, 100, 300. 1000
20-40, 100-200,
Not specified
7 points (1-250
tlon limits)
20, 50, 100
200-400
x detec-
Supelcoport
-------
Nine laboratories used prepared standards obtained from Supelco
or Radian-EPA. Two of these laboratories listed additional
suppliers including Research Triangle Park and Aldrich. Four
laboratories prepared stock solutions from neat compounds
obtained primarily from Chem Service with secondary sources in-
cluding EPA, Aldrich, Analabs, PCR and Supelco. Two laboratories
did not specify sources. A minimum of three points for calibra-
tion, typically in the range of 10 ug/L - 200 yg/L, were used by
12 laboratories with the number of points ranging up to eight.
In some cases, the acid calibration curves were extended to as
much as 1250 pg/L. Three laboratories did not specify 'jhe number
of calibration points used.
Six laboratories reported no problems with the calibration pro-
cedures. Problems encountered by the remaining laboratories in-
cluded:
poor resolution of 1,3- and 1,4-dichlorobenzene,
fluorene and 2,4-dinitrotoluene, acenaphthene and
acenaphthylene, the benzofluoranthene isomers,
chrysene and benzoanthracene, and phenanthrene and
anthracene (this also led to problems in peak
identification);
the absorption of highly polar compounds resulting
in nonlinear calibration curves;
the absence of high concentration surrogate solu-
tions for performing calibrations simultaneously
with the nonsurrogate standards resulting in fail-
ure to reflect possible synergistic effects;
difficulty in meeting B/N linearity criteria;
209
-------
poor response for nitrophenols, pentachlorophenol,
and aldrin resulting in nonlinear curves;
inconsistency in RF values, especially for the
benzidines; and
failure to detect all pesticides, especially DDT,
ODD, DDE and BHC isomers.
Quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) measures are sum-
marized in Table 16. They included surrogate control charts,
system blanks, duplicate analyses, replicate injections and
check standards.
Additional QA/QC measures included statistical evaluations,
background analyses, analyzing spiked samples, analyzing dilu-
tions of Youden pairs, and spiking all samples with DFTPP.
No QA/QC problems were reported by 12 laboratories. One labora-
tory complained of an insufficient volume of spikrlng solution for
duplicate analyses. Other problems noted included the quantitative
contribution to the pentachlorophenol surrogate by the nonsurrogate
analog, poor extraction efficiency of the dimethyIphthalate surro-
gate, and minor problems with obtaining accurate standards.
Eight laboratories reported problems with sample extraction.
These included formation of emulsions in various samples, for-
mation of a yellow precipitate upon the addition of the 1-1, 1-2,
2-1, 1-1, and 3-2 Youden pairs to samples, difficulty in extract-
ing tn^. industrial effluent due to high oil concentration, and
the detection of B/N compounds in the acid fraction indicating
poor separation.
210
-------
TABLE 16. SUMMARY OF QA/QC PROCEDURES
Code
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1J
14
15
Surrogate
Control
Chart*
HP
Each (ample
Each .hift
Each .hift
HP
HP
Each Maple
HP
Dally
HV
Ongoing
Each sample
HP
Dally
NP
System Blanks
With each sample lot
1
At least I/water type
Each 12 samples
6 for B/Na; 6 for acid a
Each dally
15Z of saaiplea
Dally
Dally
Dally
Dally
Each 3-8 samples
NP
I/water type
I/sample set
Duplicate
Analyses
10Z of samples
HP
HP
Background and
check Maples
7 (or B/««
HP
151 of aaatples
HP
HP
Dally
NP
20Z of samples
NP
NP
10Z of samples
Replicate
Injections
HP
As required
All 1-1, 1-2 pairs;
Industrial effluent
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
10Z of samples
Dally
NP
Dally
HP
Dally
HP
Check Standards
HP
Dally
Each shift
2/watar type
4 for B/Ne; 4 for acids
Dally
Quarterly
Each sample set
Dally
Weekly
NP
Dally
Dally
Dally
Each shift
NP
Not Performed
-------
Five laboratories reported problems in sample concentration in-
cluding difficulty in concentrating the industrial effluent due
to high oil concentration (2), and sample bumping with microSnyder
column concentrators (3).
Seven laboratories reported no instrumental problems. Problems
reported by the remaining laboratories included difficulty in
meeting tuning criteria (4), and minor instrument malfunctions
(4) without significant analytical impact.
Problems with interferences were reported by 11 laboratories.
These included:
coelution and poor resolution of many compounds;
high concentration -; of 2 , 4-dinitrophenol causing
a large shoulder on the m/e 184 peak;
» high hydrocarbon and/or background interferences
in the industrial effluent sample (four
laboratories);
pentachlorophenol contribution to pentachloro-
phenol surrogate ions;
the contribution of surrogates to analogs and vice
versa, in general; and
suspected impurities in spiking solutions.
Nine laboratories reported problems in peak identification. In
addition to previously discussed problems of coelution, these
included:
212
-------
poor peak shape and the presence of only one or
two major ions for compounds at low concentrations;
variability of the retention times of highly polar
compounds of up to 184 seconds depending on con-
centration and associated compounds;
poor chromatography resulting in difficulty in de-
tection of 2,4-dinitrophenol and 2-methy1-4,6-
dinitrophenol and shared ions between these con-
pounds and d3-dimethylphthalate causing difficul-
ties in quantitation; and
difficulties in identification due to tailing at
low concentrations.
Miscellaneous problems encountered included:
degredation of endosulfan sulfate below concen-
trations of 1000 ppm in both samples and standards;
degredation of DDT to ODD and DDE (two laboratories);
response of compounds out of the linear range of
the instrument;
high recovery of surrogates dre to difficulties in
calibration caused by the inability to calibrate
for surrogates and nonsurrogates simultaneously;
difficulty in meeting the tailing factor criterion
for ar
213
-------
possible inaccuracies due to the unknown effects
of surrogates as carriers for nonsurrogates; and
0 poor recoveries of the dimethyl phthalate and
pentachlorophenol surrogates.
Recommendations for improving Method 625 were made by 11 labora-
tories. These included:
using fused silica capillary columns, especially
for pesticide analysis to avoid degredation (seven
laboratories);
e using multiple internal standards for B/N analysis,
specifically deuterated naphthalene, phenanthrene
and chrysene to improve RF values over time;
using m/e 360 instead of m/e 330 for Aroclor 1260
because of the former's abundance;
using rn/e 70 for n-nitrosodipropylamine to provide
more consistent quantitation;
dropping the pentachlorophenol surrogate because
of interference with its analog and the dimethyl-
phthalate surrogate because of poor chromatography;
performing a study using surrogates for each
analyte to establish complete recovery data;
using IN NaOH or a weaker base instead of ION
NaOH for lowering sample pH to avoid saponifica-
tion and subsequent poor recovery of phthalates;
214
-------
coating contacted surfaces with phosphoric acid
or a weak organic acid to reduce tailing;
performing acid and base/neutral extractions
on separate sample aliquots to avoid loss of
low concentration components in the alternate
fraction;
developing an alternative packing for acids to
reduce tailing;
performing pesticide analyses by Method 608 with
GC-MS confirmation of only those compounds above
1 ppb; and
providing provisions within the method to handle
saturated peaks and peaks outside of the calibra-
tion range.
215
-------
SECTION 7
EVALUATION OF SURROGATE COMPOUNDS
In order to examine the relationship between surrogate and spike
recoveries, surrogate recoveries were correlated with the recov-
eries for each priority pollutant in the appropriate fraction.
Table 17 presents the correlation matrices for the B/N and acid
fractions. Potential outliers were not discarded from the re-
covery data in performing the correlation analysis. The influence
of outliers in the data were minimized by using Spearman's co-
efficient of rank correlations [9], which are correlations of the
ranks of the variables. Approximately 350 data pairs were -ised
to calculate each of the coefficients.
The correlation coefficient is a measure of the strength of the
linear relationship between two variables. A correlation of one
indicates that the two variables are perfectly linearly related
and that one increases as the other increases. A correlation of
minus one indicates that a perfect linear relationship exists,
but that one variable decreases as the other increases. A corre-
lation of zero indicates that there is no linear relationship at
all between the two variables. The square of the correlation co-
efficient is interpretable as the fraction of the variability in
one variable that can be explained in terms of the other.
Statistical significance is important because even if two vari-
ables have no true or repeatable relationship, a correlation
coefficient computed from a finite sample would not be expected
216
-------
TABLE 17-1.
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS OF SURROGATE RECOVERIES AND SPIKE
RECOVERIES - B/N(1) FRACTION
SURROGATE
COMPOUND
1 ,3-DICHLOROBENZENE
1 ,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER
1 .2-OICHLOROBENZENE
HEX ACHLOROE THANE
BIS(2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHER
NITROBENZENE
HEXACNLOROBUTADI ENE
1 . 2.4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
ISOPHOROh'E
NAPHTHALENE
Blb( 2-CHLORO£THOXY)METHANE
2 -CHLORONAPHTHALENE
ACENAPHTHYLESE
ACENAPHTHENE
OlWETHVi. PHTl-ALATb
2 .b-DINITROTOLUENE
4-CHLGROPHENVL PHENYL ETHER
FLUORENE
2 ,4-DINITROTOLUENE
OIETHVL PHTriALAT£
HEXACHLOROBE.'.Zt^E
4-BROMOPHe,'m prlCNYL ETHER
ANTHRACENE
PHENANTHRENE
B-BHC
HEPTACHLOR
D-8HC
ALORIN
DI -N-BUTVLPHTHALATE
HEPTACHLOR Ef-OXIDE
FLUGRANTHENE
4.4' -DOE
DIELDRIN
PYRENE
4.4J -ODD
RETENT ION
TIME
(MINUTES)
7
7
8
o
8
9
1
1
1
1
2
2
15
17
17
18
18
19
IS
19
20
2 1
2 1
2
22
23
23
2 j
24
24
25
26
27
27
27
28
4
8
4
4
4
3
1
4
6
9
1
2
9
4
8
3
7
5
5
8
1
0
2
8
8
4
4
7
0
0*
6
5
2
2
3
6
I-FLUORO-
NAPHTHALENE
(RT=12. 2» )
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-0
0
o
0
u
-c
0
0
0
0
0
0
-0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
-0
370
254
261
797
442
33*
274
434
473
206
5T*
2 j?
46!
456
612
OB/
413
143
346
216
142
357
21 i
2f)
208
?4 1
220
1 15
218
083
151
261
080
157
772
1 19
2-FLUORO-
BIPHENYL
(RT=I5.5»)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-0
0
0
0
0
-0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
317
327
277
369
31 1
j23
2^7
3bO
371
372
464
270
44 1
364
533
093
343
0/3
387
265
C84
441
319
398
327
138
265
090
281
221
152
368
224
1 18
215
022
DIMETHVL-
PHTHALATE-D6
(Rf-18.3)
-0
-0
0
-0
-0
-?
0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-3
-0
-0
o
0
0
o
-0
0
-0
-0
-0
-0
u
-0
0
-0
0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
0
162
To6
001
332
184
038
009
197
397
072
194
064
232
142
1 76
65'.
02 1
228
021
1BO
606
149
149
154
1 10
1 1 7
1 42
554
273
60
f)T 4
i 33
Oi7
013
08u
i3 1
4 ,4'DIBROMOOCTA-
FLUOHOBIPHENYL
(RT*19.3»)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
C
0
-0
0
0
0
-c
0
0
0
0
-0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-0
o
(.
0
0
0
0
0
0
068
086
199
1 13
173
145
032
350
232
04,'
320
065
176
122
397
I 14
i36
354
160
1 7 1
076
7 26*
418
274
151
201
367
088
490
255
380
4 ! 6
503
246
385
1 1 7
BENZOCG.H. I )-
PEHYLENE-13/C12
(RT-45. 1 )
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-0
0
-0
0
0
0
0
-0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
035
018
267
059
081
155
060
160
1 12
177
1? 1
106
044
070
156
071
200
i ?e
094
161
017
478
293
29 1
068
048
533
008
484
1 78
314
347
647
21 1
296
315
-------
TABLE 17-1
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS OF SURROGATE RECOVERIES AND SPIKE
RECOVERIES - D/N(l) FRACTION, Continued
SURROGATE
ro
t '
CO
LOMPOl NO
4,4 -DOT
ENOOSULFAN SUl«=ATE
BENZYL BUTYL f-,
.514
.489
. 352
.550
. 702
.544
.708'*
.515
. 7 1 !
.E42
.600
.060
. 184
ND = NOT DEfcSMINED
RT = RETENTION TIME
RETENTION TIME FOH THIS LOMf'OurtO WAS NOT AVAILABLE IN THE EPA METHOD 625 WRITEUP
TIME OIvES «AS ESTIMATED ^HUM THfc 1NTERLABORATORY STUDV DATA.
THE RETENTION
AT LEAST 50 PtHLtNT of
RECOVERIES.
VARlAllON OF Tl-lE SPIKE RECOVERIES CAN BE EXPLAINED IN TERMS OF THE SURROGATE
-------
TABLE 17-2.
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS OF
RECOVERIES - ACID FRACTION
SURROGATE RECOVERIES AND SPIKE
SURROGATF
N>
2
2
COMPOUND
-CHLOROPHENOL
-Nl TROPHENOL
PHENOL
2
2
It
4
2
2
,4-DIMETHVLPhEhOL
. 4-OICHLOROPHcNOl.
. 4 . fc-TR I CHLOROPHE.lOL
-I. HI OHO-3-MtlHVLkHENOl
. 4-D1NI TROPHtNOL
-MElH/L-4,*)-DINl 1HOHHENOL
PENT A CHLOROPHENOL
4
-HI 1ROPHENOL
Rt 1 tNl 1 ON
TIML
(MINUTES)
5 .(,
6.5
8.0
y . 4
9.8
11.8
1 J. I
15.9
lfc.2
17.5
iO 3
PHENOL-D6
(RT=8.0)
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0 .
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0 .
161
135
513
179
IbS
044
197
231
259
177
325
2.4-DIMfcTHYL-
PrlENOL-3 ,5 .6-D3
(RT=9. 4)
0
0
0
0 .
0
0.
0.
-o.
0.
0.
-o.
394
. 364
231
733-
409
289
607
038
089
107
.002
PENTACHLORO-
PHENOL- i 3/C6
(RT=1 7.5)
-0
o
-0.
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0.
-0.
0.
0
, 104
230
.228
013
014
.101
.029
06b
OJ7
288
013
2-FLUORO-
PHENOL
(RT=5. 2-)
0
0
0
0
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
.377
.325
.36'
.327
. 33f>
. 251
356
07 i
1 79
196
. 140
NO - NOT DETERMINED
RT - RETENTION TIME
RETENTION TIME f-Uk THli, COMPOUND WAi NOT AVAILABLE iN 1HC EPA METHOD 620 WRITEUP
TIME GIVEN WAS ESTIMATED FPOM THE I NTERLA80RATQRV STUDY DATA.
THE RETENTION
» AT LEAST 50 PERCENT OF VARIATION U(- THE SPIKE RECOVERIES CAN BE EXPLAINED IN TERMS OF THE SURROGATE
RECOVERIES.
-------
to be exactly zero. For the data presented in the tables, a
correlation coefficient is statistically significant at the 0.01
level if the coefficient is greater than 0.14 (or less than -0.14).
A significant correlation indicates a real relationship between
the compound and the surrogate. There is less than one chance
in 100 that a particular one of the significant correlations
could have occurred by random change if the Variables did not
have an actual relationship.
With the exception of the surrogate compound, dimethylphthalace-ds,
correlation coefficients were gcn^ j.lJ.y positive. Figures 1
chrough 4 present selected plots of spiked recoveries versus sur-
rogate recoveries for those relationships which explained at least
50% of variation of the recoveries for the compound in terms of
the surrogate recoveries. Figure 5 shows a typical set of data
for a nonsignificant relationship.
The analysis of the surrogate recovery data from the interlabora-
tory study do not indicate strong relationships between the recov-
eries of the surrogates and the recoveries of the compounds of
interest. A surrogate was identified for only three B/N compounds
(benzo(a)pyrene, dibenzo(a.h) anthracene, and n-=xachlorobenzene)
and one acid compound (2,4-dimethyl phenol) which could explain
greater than 5070 of the variation in the recoveries of the com-
pounds .
These results do not imply that surrogate/compound relationships
do not exist. As long as the recoveries of a compound remain in
a state of statistical control, then the variations in recoveries
are expected to be random. The variation of the test methods
(coefficient of variations generally greater than 2070) make it
difficult to observe surrogate relationships within a "narrow"
220
-------
to
to
SPIKE RECOVERIES VS SURROGATE RECOVERIES (7.)
B/N (1) FRACTION
r = 0.708
Figure 1.
-------
N)
4KB-
SPIKE RECOVERIES VS SURROGATE RECOVERIES (/.)
B/N (1) FRACTION
r = 0.711
a -4a oa ma loa iza i-«a
eaa eza
Figure 2.
-------
N>
fO
co
A 1BO-
H
O
O
? 101
N
M
SPIKE RECOVERIES VS SURROGATE RECOVERIES (*,
B/N (1) FRACTION
r = 0.
K
K
K>MK
r.a
eco
Figure 3.
-------
SPIKE RECOVERIES V5 SURROGATE RECOVERIES (%)
ACID FRACTION
r = 0.733
to
Figure 4.
-------
10
N)
-------
range of recoveries. In order to establish and quantify surro-
gate relationships, it is necessary to purposely decrease and
increase the compound recoveries. This, of course, was contrary
to the objectives of this interlaboratory study.
For B/N compounds eluting up to 20.1 minutes (hexachlorobenzene),
2-fluorobiphenyl and 1-fluoronaphthalene tend to have the highest
correlation coefficient. For compounds eluting after 20.1 minutes
benzo(g,h,i)perylene-13C12 generally has the highest correlation
coefficients with 4,4'-dibromooctafluorobiphenyl the second choice,
For the acid compounds, 2,4-dimethylphenol has the highest cor-
relation coefficient for six of the compounds, and phenol-d5 has
the highest coefficient for four of the compounds. 2-Fluorophenol
has positive correlation coefficients (ranging from 0.07 to 0.38)
with all of the acid compounds.
Further investigations of statistical approaches will be imple-
mented and will be reported in a separate report at a later time.
226
-------
REFERENCES
1- Outler, E. C. and McCreary, J. H., Interlaboratory Method
Validation Study: Program Documentation, Battelle Columbus
Laboratories, 1982.
2- Youden, W. J. Statistical Techniques for Collaborative Tests.
Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Inc., Washing-
ton, D.C., 1969. 64 pp.
3. ASTM D2777-77, 1980 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Part 31,
pp. 16-28. American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, Pa.
4. ASTM #178-80. 1980 Annual Book of ASTM Standards Part 41,
pp. 206-231, American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, Pa.
5. Youden, W. J. "Statistical Manual of the AOAC," The Associa-
tion of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, B.C., 1975.
6. Thompson, W. R. "On a Criterion for the Rejection of Observa-
tions and the Distribution of the Patio of the Deviation jo
the Sample Standard Deviations." The Annals of Mathematical
Statistics, AASTA 6 (1935) pp 214-219.
7. Britton, P. W., "Statistical Basis for Laboratory Performance
Evaluation Limits." Presented at the 142nd Joint Statistical
Meeting, Cincinnati, Ohio, August 17, 1982.
227
-------
8. "Methods for Organic Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes
by GC, HPLC, and GC/MS." U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
9. Johnson, N. L. and Leone, F. C., "Statistics and Experimen-
tal Design," Volume I, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
New York, 1977.
228
-------
APPENDIX A
STUDY OF ONE SAMPLE FOR FALSE
POSITIVES AND FALSE NEGATIVES
A small study was conducted on a very challenging sample to
determine the extent of false positives and false negatives.
The sample was supplied by Radian Corp. and contained a number
of both priority pollutants and non-priority pollutants (not
spiked). Table A-l presents the results for the B/N and acid
fractions. Although Full Method 625 analyses were conducted
for the study, only compounds which were detected are presented.
Table A-2 presents the summary statistics.
The statistical procedures used to summarize the data focused on
simple summary statistics. The averages, standard deviations
and coefficients of variation were computed using the detected
values. Of the 24 compounds for which concentrations greater
than 10 yg/L were reported, only bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate,
di-n-butylphthalate, diethyl phthalate, dimethyl phthalate,
phenol, 2-nitrophenol, 2,4-dinitrophenol and 4-nitrophenol were
detected by at least half of the labs.
The results for the sample can be used to evaluate the potential
for "false positives" and "false negatives" using Method 625.
Table 13 shows the number of false positives and false negatives
using the following definitions:
229
-------
1) A compound is considered present in the
sample if one-half or more of the labora-
tories (seven or more) quantified the com-
pound at greater than 10 yg/L. (For these
compounds there is potential for false nega-
tives .)
2) A compound is considered not present in the
sample if less than one-half of the labora-
tories reported the compound at greater tuan
10 yg/L. (For those compounds, there is
potential for false positives.)
3) A reported value is only considered a
false positive if it was reported at
greater than 10 yg/L.
Using these definitions, only four B/N compounds and four acid
compounds are present in the sample. For the four B/N compounds
there are a total of five false negatives (970 of the possible
results). There were 13 B/N compounds which were reported by
less than half of the laboratories (but reported at >10 yg/L
by at least one laboratory). For these 13 compounds, there
were 23 false positives (1370 of the possible results) .
For the four acid compounds present in the sample, there are a
total of six false negatives (117o of the possible results) .
Three of the acid compounds were reported by less than half of
the laboratories (but reported at 10 yg/L by at least on lab-
oratory) . For these three compounds, there were three false
positives (77» of the possible results) .
230
-------
TABLE A-l. FALSE POSITIVE AND FALSE NEGATIVE
STUDY SAMPLE RESULTS
LABORATORY
COMPOUND
10
12
13
15
ANTHRACENE
BKNZYL BUTVL PhTMALATE
BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE
61S(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER
HIS(2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHfcR
II! S12-ETHVLHEXYL IPHTHALAT?
Ol-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE
01-N-OCTYLPHTHALATE
DIETHVL PHTHALATE
CO DIMETHYL PHTHALATE
<-° HEXACHLOhOETHANE
*"" ISOPHURONE
N-NITROSODI NPROPVLAMINE
NAPHTHAl ENt
NlTKOBENZtNt
PHENANTHRENE
i.6-DINITHOTULLENE
PENT ACHLOROPHENOL
PMENOL
2-METHVL-4.6-OINITROPHENOL
2-N1TSOPHENOL
2.4-O/MErHVLPHENOL
2.4-DINITROPHENOL
4-NlTROPHENOL
-------
TABLE A-2. STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF THE FALSE POSITIVE AND
FALSE NEGATIVE STUDY FOR THF. B/N FRACTION
CO
COMPOUND
ANTHRACENF.
BENZYL BUTVL PHTHALA1E
BIS(2-CHlOROETHOXV)M£THANt
BI S( 2-CHLOROETHYL (ETHER
BIS12-CHLOROISOPROPYI JfclME
8IS(2-ETHYLHEXYL )PHTHALAT£
DI-N-BUTYLFHTHALATE
DI -N-OCTYLPHTHALATE
DlhTHYL PHTHALATE
OIMETHVL Pl-THALATt
HE * A CHI OROfc THANt
,' SOPHORONF
N-NI TR J' OO! -N PHOPrLAMINF
NAf-lfHAl ENE
Ni TROBENZESE
PHENANTHRENE
2 . 0-D1NI TRCTOl UtNE
PENIACHLORUPHENOL
PHENOL
2-METHYL-4.6-D1NITROPHENOL
2-Nl-TROPHENOL
2 . 4-DIMETHYLPHENOl
2. 4 -DINITRCPMENOL
A NI TROPHENOL
NO. OF VALUES
DETECTED
1
1
1
5
H 1
1 1
i .1
1
1 )
1 J
1
4
1
1
4
1
1
1
15
1
15
1
13
10
CjUAl 1 I AT 1 VE
PERFORMANCE*
NO. OF VALUES
NOT DETECTED FALSE FALSE
POSITIVES NEGATIVI."
13 1
13 1
13 1
9 5
13 1
3 3
1 1
13 1
0 0
1 1
13 1
10 4
13
1 3 1
1 0 4
13 1
13 1
14 I
0 0
14 |
0 0
14 1
1 1
5 5
IF MORE THAN HALF Of THE L ADOR A TUf- I F S UHAN1 1 T A T ED THE COMPOUND AT '10 U'1/L THEN THE COMPOUND
IS CONSIDERED PHESENT IN THE SAMPLE ( PL) TE.4T I Al. FOR FALSE NEGATIVES). OTHERWISE THE COMPOUND
IS NOT CCNSIDtRED PRESENT IN THE SAMPLE (PultNMAL FOR FALSE POSITIVES).
-------
APPENDIX B
RESULTS OF GC/MS FEASIBILITY STUDY
To prove the feasibility of the study, Radian analyzed the Youden
pair ampules spiked into water using the procedures used by the
participating laboratories. Figures B-1 and B-2 present the tot-
al ion scan for the 1-1 Youden pair B/N samples. Figure B-3 pre-
sents the total ion scan for the 1-1 Youden pair acid sample.
Retention times for the sample scans and the masses used for both
qualitative and quantitative analyses are given in Tables B-l
through B-3. As shown, the total ion scans provide little diffi-
culty in interpretation with the exception of a number of pairs
of polyaromatic hydrocarbon which coelute and have the same char-
acteristic masses.
233
-------
835S84.
CiC
NJ
CO
-P-
1CJ
5:0
J SCATJ
^0 TIHE
Figure B-l. Total Ion Scan of the 1-1 Youden Fair for the
B/N Standard 1 Feasibility Sample
1
-------
BiC
20;
lOiCJ
Figure B-2. Total Ion Scan of th& 1-1 Youde-an Pair for the
B/N Standard 2 Feasibility Sample
1030 HO.
1 3 SCAN
3 )9 TIHE
-------
ItIC
to
CJ
977928.
1C9
5:63
:3
15:C3
2L.
SCAN
TlttE
Figure B-3.
Total Ion Scan of the 1-1 Youden Pair for the
Acid Standard Feasibility Sample
-------
TABLE B-l. RETENTION TIMES AND ANALYTICAL MASSES FOR
B/N COMPOUNDS (1-1 YOUDIN PAIR B/U STANDARD
1 FEASIBILITY SAMPLE)
Compound
1 , 3-Dichlorobenzene
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Isophoione
Naphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
2 , 6-Dinitrotoluene
Phenanthr ene /Anthracene
Chrysene/Benzo ( a) anthracene
Fluoranthene
Di-n-hutylphthalate
Retention
Time
7:09
7:45
10:45
11:45
16:45
17:12
17:51
22:00
30:15
25:39
23:42
m/e
146
113
148
93
63
95
82
95
138
128
127
129
152
151
153
154
152
153
165
63
121
178
176
179
228
226
229
202
100
101
149
104
150
237
-------
TABLE B-l. RETENTION TIMES AND ANALYTICAL MASSES FOR
B/N COMPOUNDS (1-1 YOUDIN PAIR B/N STANDARD
1 FEASIBILITY SAMPLE),Continued
Compound
Hexachlorobenzene
Diethyl phthalate
4-Chlorophenylphenyl ether
3 , 3-Dichlorobenzidine
3 ,4-Benzof luoranthene/Benzo(k)
f luoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Dibenzo (a , h) anthracene
g-BHC
Heptachlor
Aldrin
Endosulfan sulfate
4. 4 '-ODD
4, 4 '-DDE
Retention
Time
20.15
19:12
18:42
31:06
35:48
38:39
52:57
22:18
22:30
23:18
28:48
27:39
26:15
m/e
284
142
249
149
150
177
204
141
206
252
126
254
252
126
254
252
125
253
278
139
279
181
100
66
272
235
246
238
-------
TABLE B-2. RETENTION TIMES AND ANALYTICAL MASSES FOR
B/N COMPOUNDS (1-1 YOUPEN PAIR B/N STANDARD
2 FEASIBILITY SAMPLE)
Compound
1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
Hexachloroe thane
bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) ether
n-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Nitrobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
bis (2-Cb] oropf bnvy)mprhpnp
2-Chloronaphthalene
Dimethyl phthalate
Retention
Time
7:12
7:54
8:03
8:21
9:30
10:21
11:03
11:09
11 3D
15:18
17:30
m/e
146
113
148
146
113
148
117
199
201
121
45
77
130
42
101
77
65
123
225
223
227
180
109
182
-------
TABLE 3-2. RETENTION TIMES AND ANALYTICAL MASSES FOR
B/N COMPOUNDS (1-1 YOUDEN PAIR B/N STANDARD
2 FEASIBILITY SAMPLE), Continued
Compound
2 , 4-Dinitrotoluene
Fluorene
4-Bromophenylphenyl ether
Phenanthrene/ Anthracene
Pyrene
Butylbenzyl phthalate
Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Chrysene/Benzo (a) anthracene
Di-n-octyl phthalate
3 , 4-Benzof luoranthene/ Benzo (k)
fluoranthene
Indeno (1 , 2 , 3-c , d)pryene
Retention
Time
18:51
18:51
20:24
22:00
26:30
28:51
29:30
30:33
31:48
36:06
52:18
m/e
89
165
63
182
166
165
167
248
141
250
178
176
179
202
100
101
149
91
149
167
279
228
226
229
149
167
252
126
254
276
138
277
240
-------
TABLE B-2. RETENTION TIMES AND ANALYTICAL MASSES FOR
B/N COMPOUNDS (1-1 YOUDEN PAIR B/N STANDARD
2 FEASIBILITY SAMPLE), Continued
Retention
Compound Time m/e
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 57:21 276
138
277
6-BHC 22:57 181
Endrin aldehyde 28:33 67
4,4' DDT 28:24 235
Dieldrin 26:27 79
Heptachlor epoxide 24:51 81
241
-------
TABLE B-3. RETENTION TIMES AND ANALYTICAL MASSES FOR
ACIDIC COMPOUNDS (1-1 YOUDEN PAIR FEASIBIL-
ITY SAMPLE)
COMPOUND
2-Chlorophenol
2-Nitrophenol
Phenol
2 , 4-Dimethylphenol
2 , 4-Dichlorophenol
2,4, 6-Trichlorophenol
p-Chloro-m-cresol
2 , 4-Dinitrophenol
4, 6-Dinitro-o-cresol
Pentachlorophenol
4-Nitrophenol
Retention
Time
6:12
6:45
8:15
9:36
10:06
12:09
13:36
16:42
16:45
18.09
21:09
m/e
128
64
130
139
65
109
94
65
66
122
107
121
162
98
164
196
198
200
142
107
144
184
63
154
198
77
182
266
264
268
139
65
109
242
4
-------
APPENDIX C
METHOD 625 BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS
NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
1
7.C
2
8.C
TABLE C-l
FNVIRCNPFKTAL PCMTCRING AND SUPPORT LAF-ORATCRf
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - H/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR ACENAPHThfNE ANALYSIS EY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDE'J PAiR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATEP
1
7.C
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
1
7.0
8.C
1
7.0
t.
8.C
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
5
fc
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5.8
7.4
6.7
8.7*
41.5*
6.1
7.4
7.7
9.4
7.2
3.6*
8.3
3.0*
6.6
0.0*
S.6
7.C
8.3
E.9*
6.5
8.1
7.4
7.1
7.2
7.8
4.4*
7C7
5.8
7.1
3.5*
4.2
5C.C*
6.1
6.7
4,4*
7.2
7.2
9.3
12.6*
6.3
4.7*
7.2
6 . *
6.C
5.1*
7.6
e.2
6.3
1C.O
5.2*
6.9
£.5
£.1
1C.Q*
8.6
5.1*
8.2
5.C
6.P
2.1*
5.1
7.1
4.3
P. 2
5.4
4,5
7.1
3.8
5.1
7.5
4.4*
8.4
5.8
6.5
1S.5*
7.2
9.3
5.7
9.6
5.4
3.4
7.7
6.4
1C.P
8.4
S . 1 «
7.6
5.1
6.9
6.6
5.4
7.0
.2
a."1
o.r*
6.7
6 . f
P.?
7.e
5.9
4.4
7.3
<
4.9
5.3
4.?
7.6
5.7
9.2
*
f .1
7.8
9.6
1C. 7
7. J
5.0
P.C
r.c*
9.0
4.9
-------
TABLE C-2
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT tAPORATGRt
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
T^ PROTECTION JCENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N <1>
NJ
4--
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
DISTILLED WATER
3
54.0
4
60.C
C*TA FOR A C E N AF"H THE NE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
MEDIUM YOUCEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNT
3
54.0
4
60.3
3
54.C
t
60.0
54. C
*.
6C.C
47.6
56.9
57.2
65.2*
5.7*
53.5
49.6
63.4
69.0
53.2
21.7*
54.5
0.0*
42.1
24.8*
53. r
63.2
£6.8
65.7*
44. C
58.1
62.2
61.0
62.7
66.9
28.5*
64.2
3.0*
44.9
20.6*
53.9
52.7
52.4
71.9
43.5*
51.7
55.3
61. P
65.9*
54.9
39.9-
4°. 3
42.8
4C.9
45.7*
53
58
61
77
36
53
66
61
1C3
45
43
54
6C
44
17
.?
>
w.
.5
.7
.6*
.4
.5
.7
.3*
.9
.7*
.4
.5
.1
.9*
44
5C
48
dt
36
55
51
45
7fc
4c
3'8
57
60
42
87
.9
-
.6
.8
.4
.4
.6
r
r w
. *
.4
.6*
.5
.1
.7
.1
56
55
5°
54
38
62
5B
50
52
56
41
63
59
45
48
.3
.3
1
-
.1
.8
.8
. 2
.5
.4
->
. C
.6*
.b
.7
.9
.2
49
49
42
5 1
78
4°
54
62
53
45
38
5?
n
32
42
C
-
.6
e
. j
.P
.7.
t
-
.4
.2
.1
.2
C
.'
.5
.5*
.8
.9
5 C . fc
54.7
56.9
64.0
55 .5
55.3
63 .8
o<5.4
43. S
41.2
5d . 1
t 0 . 9
22.2
44.9
-------
TABLE C-3
DISTILLED WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
5
4CO.C
6
360.G
ENVIRONMENTAL PONITOPING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFMCE OF RESEARCH AND DFVFLOPPENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
RAW DATA FOR ACFNAPHTHENE ANALYSIS PY WATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
5
43C.O
t
360.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNT
6
5
4CC.O
6
'6C.O
5
4CO.O
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1?
13
14
15
377
345
447
424
240
444
299
369
556
205
232
390
386
320
67
.3
.7
.0
.0*
.0
.2
.0
.6
.0
.0
.G*
.0
.6
.9
.7*
346.1
293.6
426.0
456.0*
231.0
341.7
3 2 1 . C
473.9
393.0
324.0
146.0*
425.0
232.7
269.1
146.2*
395.5
363.9
322.7
399.0
252. C*
353.1
335.0
468.6
73C.C*
2 5 5 . 0
231.3*
446.0
35?. R
'28.5
T63.3*
3C1
296
29C
30'1
uc
3V 5
336
473
458
331
235
39-J
93
271
83
.0
.4
.0
.0
.0*
.3
J
.6
.C*
.C
.:*
.1
.0*
.6
.8*
93. f
77. C
273. 2
41E.C
254.0
418.5
321.0
365.8
599.0
264. C
2 2 7 . n .
455. C
3V9.2
30C.8
251 .2
363.2
225.7
299.6
397.0
189. C
392.?
32?. C
327.;
455. j
266.0
222. C*
419. ?
40? .6
267.8
707.0*
756.0
353.7
711.7
310.'
422.7*
^44.6
323. C
333.3
5 6 7 . rj -
287.0
294.0
477. n*
4
1 r L O
-> c * . '
309 ,?
72e
373
349
444
293
266
2?f
4cC
3C2
292
219
345
2fc
212
191
. C
.9
.?
r
^
.7
.1
.0
.7
. 0
r
. w
.0
.c
. 3
.9
.7
-------
TABLE C-4
ro
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAPORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH ANC- DEVELOPMENT
E^VlRONMfcNTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
RAU DATA FOR ACENAPHTHYLENE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATE R
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EfFLUtNT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
LAB NUMBE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
: 8
R
6
8
20
6
52
6
7
28
23
7
4
<,
0
10
c
1
.0
.5
.2
.7*
.4
.3*
.0
.7
.6*
.9*
.3
.5*
. 1
:*
.4
.0*
2
9.0
8.9
7.7
26.2*
7.6
11.9
7.6
9.6
30.7*
18.9*
7.6
5.5*
8.2
7.9
11.6
10.0
8
6
5e
17
5
7
7
8
36
23
6
6
7
7
9
9
1
.0
.2
.?
.9*
.7
.5
.9
.9
.3*
.6*
T
. .
.0*
.2
.4
.4
.6
t
9.0
7.9
ir.i
18.6*
9.;
6.3
6.2
9.7
31.2*
23.7*
8.0
6.4*
8.4
5.8
10.8
5.0
'
t
£
10
5
3
4
f
15
20
8
5
9
6
10
46
1
. 1
.6
.9
. f>
.7
1
.t
.5*
. ?*
. 1
.4*
»
. -*
.9
.6
7 *
9
7
11
15
6
8
3
7
27
26
P
6
7
6
11
11
2
.0
.7
.7
.1
. «
.5
.0
.6
«4*
.6
.7
. <.*
.9
.8
1
_>
.9
1
8.
5.
8 .
19.
S .
n
^
6.
7.
33.
16 .
6.
5.
7.
7 .
7.
10.
0
c
4
7*
c
P«
7
7
P *
fi *
7
4
5
A
6
5
-------
TABLE C-5
ho
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
KIUNBE R
F.NVIRONMF NTAL KOMTOSING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVFLOPHENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - b/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR ACEN APHTHYLENE ANALYSIS BY WATfcfc TYPE
MtD'i'JM YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE UATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
3
61.
4
68.0
3
61.0
4
68.?
61.C
4
6ft.0
3
61.C1
4
68.0
50
64
179
5G
6
C 1
1
-
6?
69
.8
.1
.0*
.8
.9
.4
.5
.1*
.0*
o
^ .
. ?
.6
.7
56.8
71.2
271.2*
65.3
85.7
56.7
64.6
231.5*
155. D*
74. &
35. C*
75. C
0.0*
7C.9
47.5
58
6C
161
71
55
52
66
244
158
63
46
54
46
66
93
.1
.P
.3*
.9
.4
.8
.1
.8*
.n*
.6
.3*
.9
.7
.1
.8*
57.4
65.2
182.6*
8?. 2
64.5
53.6
75.5
246.3*
20C.O*
51 .7
52.6*
61.7
74.7
71.-?
42.8
48.7
t3.4
146.9*
64. e
63 . 1
57.2
51.2
174.:*
197. C*
54.7
46. 3*
67.?
62. T
66.3
2C2.r*
61. C
O fl J
182.0*
61 .7
79.3
66.1
6* .8
2 C 1 . * *
121.0*
64.8
:c.c*
75.!-
67.9
73.7
104.7*
51
6?
91
64
9
50
63
231
121
51
46
61
20
52
9?
.7
T
,
.?
.1
.2*
C
,'
.6
.P*
.3*
.5
.0
.1
.6
.6
.4
54
69
195
70
5c
6 7.
230
162
51
<.9
63
^ r
33
9C
.1
. 2
.5 *
. h
*
. 7
. fc
.1*
.C*
.5
»
r
f
. t
.6
.4
-------
TABLE C-6
N)
*^
co
DISTILLED WATER
AMPUl NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
U
15
NUMBER
5
450.0
396.4
396.4
1C74.C*
489.3
iOO.O
454.2
3 2 V . 1
1336.2*
136G.O*
228.0
253. D*
462.0
448.4
484.1
190.1
6
4C5.G
367.7
344.8
1056. C*
512. C
289.0
32C.8
303. G
1402. 6*
11CO.C*
349.0
190.0*
5C3.0
374.8
411.5
347.7
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPf'OKT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
RAW DATA FOR AC ENAPHTHYLENF ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH VOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
5
450. C
402.4
446.6
812.0*
436.0
206.0
318.9
345. C
161.8
4 7 Z . C *
300.0
276.0*
526.0
394.6
495.5
402.5
6
4 C 5 . 0
325. C
350.2
930. 7*
3C2.0
2C1.C
375.6,
326.0
1572.5*
1110. C*
3 4 9 . D
281 .0*
46*. 0
115.7
415.6
192.5
5
450. 0
1 C 5 . 0
479.9
829.2
504.0
367.0
436.7
337.0
1278.1
1690.:
308.C
274.0
554.C
459.7
458.3
4L4.9
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNT
4 G 5 . C
^ 5 3.:
453.:
91 6 . C *
3 9 9 . C
2*6.6*
313 .0
1511 .7.
?,j 7 . C *
3 5 4 . C
25?.:
7 9 6 . C
47.9*
3*6.1
281 .5
1
1
405
366
2f!0
98C
',61
252
399
?81
982
180
3G9
265
501
493
408
810
6
*
0
t
8
4 *
0
r
8
C
5*
r *
C
0*
C
9
8
3*
45C
'81
439
9C3
392
448
3C7
332
1061
1?90
734
347
553
461
TC1
5
C
.0
.7
.0
,
.c
.3
.0
.£
f,
-
. n
.C
.r
.4
. 1
*
*
*
*
*
-------
TABLE C-7
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED UATER
1
11.0
2
12.r
ENVIRONMENTAL KONITORJNG AND SUPPORT LAPORATOPV
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - D/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR ALDRIN ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOy YOUDEN PAIRt UMTS - UG/L
TAP UATER
1
11.C
2
12.3
SURFACE UATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
1
11.0
12.0
1
11.C
12.C
-P"
VD
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
P
9
10
11
12
13
U
15
NUMBER
8.0
12.0
4.5
8.7
98.1*
7.4
5.4
181.9*
17.7
8.3
&.0*
2C.1
C.O*
9.8
0.9*
P. 3
10.0
4.6
9.1
24.0
8.8
5.5
259.0*
13.3
6.6
0.0*
22.4
6.5
11.3
3.3*
5
9
2
5
8
8
4
236
9
7
6
11
4
6
6
.1
.0
.6*
.5
.8
.1
.7
.1*
.«*
.1
.5
.5
.5*
.8
.1
£.3
13.0
?.8*
6.6
14.2
11.5
6.8
142.0*
14.2*
7.8
C.O*
18.4
3.0*
9.6
3.3
5.8
10.0
3.2*
5.3
10.9
5.2
3 .8
fcO.6*
16.5*
7.0
0.1*
18.2*
3.7
9.C
0 . C *
6
12
2
6
9
8
4
ur
12
7
0
13
4
P
6
.4
.r
.7*
.7
.2
.5
.9
.4.
.9*
.9
.0*
.2
.2
.3
.0
6
10
0
3
5
C
6
14
7
4
n
C
11
T
3
.6
.0
.0*
.1
.9
.7
. 2
.5*
.4
.5
.C*
.0
*
.7
.?
7
9
C
4
j
2
214
14
7
n
1P
4
3
.4
r
w
.c*
t!
*
. 1*
.4
.6*
.5
.9
. C*
.8
4
. 0
. v
-------
TABLE C-8
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAPORATORI
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AMD DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/M (1) **
RAW DATA FOR ALDRIN ANALYSIS BY NATEP TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - L'G/L
TAP WATER
i
./
81.C
4
90. 0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
3
81.C
4
9C.O
3
81 .0
90.1
ro
0 LAB NUMBER
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
72
74
10
54
13
104
45
1436
111
54
11
99
0
78
24
.3
.0
.6
.5
.6
.9
.1
.8*
.0
.5
.6*
.2
.0*
.9
.8*
58.3
82. C
41.1
49.6
129. C
91.6
56.6
2021.2*
86. D
57.8
G.C*
122. Q
0.0*
78.0
33.3*
37.4
to?.n
7.3*
14.5
86.8
84.7
36.6
65.2*
97.9*
45.7
32.1
61 .1
21.6*
57.9
54.3
42.7
64.D
P. 9*
I?. 7
!i 0 . 7
1CS.4
58. 3
751.2*
66.1*
49.4
35.7
90.8
26.1*
54.9
21.9
48.5
62. C
8.5*
U.5
48.4
33.6
44.2
51.4*
78.6*
42.2
37.9
76.4
23.6
55.2
12.3
45.9
66.~
12. V*
14.2
7C.9
97.8
23.7
53.4*
84.0*
50.2
40.1
111. C
24.9
51.1
23.8
53. f
59. C
7.9*
11.2
81.2
1? .C
48.5
58.1*
22.6
40.5
35.1
103. C
27.2
38. P
11.7
65
56
8
13
1 3
2 C
371
6 1
33
<«6
79
24
13
27
.6
U
.5*
.5
*
.9
.1
.3*
. 2
.2
.c;
.6
.6
.1
.7
-------
TABLE C-9
DISTILLED WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRCNPENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - D/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR ALD«1N ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
SJ
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
600. 0
549.7
432.0
272.5
197.0
AOC.O
656.0
599.0
13497.0*
576.0
214.0
187.0*
395.0
232.0
510.6
106.8*
6
540.0
449.9
374.0
176.4
293.0
567. C
719.7
385. C
10*>81:.0*
613.0
279.0
89. C*
381. C
206.7
42C.9
167.3*
5
630.0
563.4
36?. 0
79.2*
117.0
668.0
751.0
373. C
11C56.C*
804.0*
266. C
324. C
371.?
244.4*
524.3
509.2
6
540. 0
437.0
373.0
58.7*
75.6
331.0
575.0
365.0
6546.1*
655.3*
248.0
335. 0
35C.O
71.1*
439.2
154.7
5
6CC.O
114^0
360. C
71.9*
89.4
572. C
326.0
3ZA.C
8376.9*
827.0*
236. C
230.0
434.0
243.3
47C.3
148.7
6
540.0
504.8
266. C
72.3*
112. C
498.0
673.3
331. C
7C30.3*
739.0*
25F.O
269.0
346.0
P39.9
443.8
117.3
5
600.0
570.0
408. C
175.9*
35.9
625. fi
2tO.O
?7Q.n
7160.0*
8 C 5 . 0
?75.0
529. C
334.0
*
43C.5
190.2
6
540. C
377.0
368.0
99.2*
64.4
466. C
18C.4
313. C
7519.4*
294. C
2 6 4 . C
33 5. C
3 5 4 . C
40. d
1 J 6 . "
1u8.5
-------
TABLE C-10
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
1
5.0
2
6.C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR ANTHRACENE ANALYSIS BY WATtR TYPE
LOW YOUCEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
5.0
2
6.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
1
2
6.0
1
5.0
tL
6.;
to
LAB NUMBE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
R
4.4
5.7
3.4
4.3
69.8*
4.3
4.6
5.C
6.3
5.3
3.2*
6.2
0.0*
22.0*
0.4*
5.fc
5.1
5.5
4.6
5.3
4.6
5.0
4.5
5.0
4.7
4.2*
5.9
7.7*
24.fi*
2.2*
2.6
226.C*
2.9*
3.9
3.7
5.0
4.2
5.3
5.5
5.2
4.1
5.4
6.C1
27.1*
3.4*
5.0
6.1
r.c*
4.2
3.5
5.2
5.1
5.1
5.5
5.9
4.5
5.9
5.1
39.fi*
1.9*
4.2
4.7
O.C*
3.9
Cl.C*
3.1
4.7
2.P
5.8
5.6
4.4
6.?
4.r
47.7*
7.2
4.7
6.8
3.3*
5.r
4 . ?«
4.5
5.2
3.9
6.4
6.:
5.1
5.7
5.3
56.2*
4,2
4.5
5.5
1 .5*
5.5
3.9
1 .5
5.6
6.7
5.2
5.8
4.1
5.5
95.7*
31 .3*
2.8
6. *,
t .4
C.C
4.5
16.1
1 .7
4.2
4.5
6.?
6.4
4.6
5.2
F.<>
5 £ . ?
3.2
-------
TABLE C-ll
ENVIRONMENTAL MOMTOfcING AND SUPPORT LADORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEKCY
* * EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N <1 ) «*
RAW DATA FOR ANTHPACENf ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
MEDIU" YCUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATEO INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
to
to
LAD NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
3
90.0
80.3
88.0
62.9
77.3
4.1
82.2
76.5
81.4
96.1
94.0
35.7*
82.2
22.5
636.7*
37.2*
4
81.0
71.1
78.8
72.9
73.1
64.4
66.0
73.3
68.8
76.5
98. C*
37.8*
8C.8
O.C*
678.3*
37.7*
3
90. C
87.4
82. P
50. 7*
84.8
67.4
79.4
76.0
83.1
95.5
96.7
71.9
75.4
70.7
736.7*
74.4*
4
81.0
70.1
73.4
51.2*
84.5
55.4
7?,?
74.6
72.5
94.4
66.4
64.7
64.3
7.: .8
6 3 C . 7 *
2 P . 9 *
3
9G.C
75.1
7Q. 3
53.6*
7C.5
61.'*
77. C
77.1
6^.9
112.:
96.6
69.5
89.6
78.9
8C3.7*
88.9
4
81 .0
73.6
6<3 .9
48.2*
66. 0
53.9-
83.0
66.1
57.6
of . 2
S1.G
61.3
7P.1
78.9
704.2*
67,4
3
90. Q
75.9
87.2
25.7*
80.
-------
TABLE C-12
i 1 S11L L E b WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL POMTOhING AND SUPPORT LAPOSATOKY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** cPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR ANTHRACENE ANALYSIS E> Y WATER TVPfc
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtKT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
to
l_n
-P-
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
s
5 ' : . o
515,1
423.5
252.9
438.0
200.0
528. 8
3*4.0
374,7
681.0
278.0
222.0*
440.0
474.5
3781.0*
71.8*
6
600. 0
569.9
449.1
291.0
636,0
375.0
461.4
355.3
445.4
63 5. C
560. C.
142.0*
558. C
362.3
61fi£.7*
110.8*
5
54C.P
514.5
471.7
153,2*
343.0
318.0
418.3
313. P
466.1
749. C*
43P.C
288.0
481 .0
499.7
6C39.2*
245.1*
6
6C.C.O
47C.C
455.0
154. C*
?92.C
c.o*
523.8
337.3'
458.9
658.0
632,3
34?. D
486.0
191.0
4461.7*
114.0*
5
54C.C
131.0
426.6
129.7*
336.0
C.C*
347.2
314. C
364.9
7C5.C
4C4.0
255.3
513. C
521.7
5427.6*
2C4.6
6
600.0
557.8
356.6
166.9*
425.3
3or .?*
56°. 5
342. C
341.6
7 C 3 . C
602.3
3C9.0
536.0
617.5
5986.6*
456.8
5
54C.T
511 .0
473.7
219.7*
252. C
609.?
2S3 .6
302.D
286.6
495.C
524.C
*
5484.1-
235.4
6
600.C
532.T
5*0.2
2u^.4 *
'27.C
444.:
2V4.5
442.3
578 .3
314. r
4 6 1 . G
5.6
4C5C.7*
1 4 H . 3
-------
Cn
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
TABLE C-i:
ENV1 RONMENTAL MQMTORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR P-BHC ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED UATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
1
14.0
2
15.0
1
14.C
2
15.C
1
14. D
2
13.0
1
14.0
t
15.0
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
'
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
9
14
11
12
110
0
11
12
16
10
8
12
0
11
3
.5
.0
.4
.0
.0*
.0*
.5
.0
.1*
.6
.2
.8
.0*
.6
.5*
12.6
12.0
1606
9.4
12.1
1C. 9
13.2
11.4
14.5*
9.3
11.9
13.5
0.0*
12.8
11.5
6.5
10.0
9.*
9.3
9.5
18.1*
1C. 4
12. C
16.9*
9.3
10.6
10. 5
0.0*
s.e
14.4
12
12
Q
11
15
12
13
11
17
11
11
1 r
0
12
13
.7
.C
.5
.7
.6 .
.6*
.8
.5
.0*
.5
.6
.2
.0*
.4
.5
9.3
12.0
6.2
11.?
11 .n
11.4
12.9
6.1
15.6*
10.5
13.5
13. G
0.0*
11. K
38.9*
10.6
14.C
7.6
11.4
0.0*
9.4
13.2
9.6
19. 1«
11.4
14.4
11.9
0.0*
12.9
15.5*
10.9
9.0
5.7
10. *
f .6
16.6
3C.7*
12. C
14.1*
8.7.
in. 7
10. F
*
10.0
11.1
8
12
6
11
12
1 5
13
18
1C
13
12
14
11
.7
.0
. 6
.5
*
I
-
. *
.5
.C*
.2*
.?
.6
*
.2
.7
-------
TABLE C-14
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAy DATA FOR B-BHC ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
UM YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
1PUL NO: 3
VRUE CONC: 101.0
Ni
U1
4 3
112. C 1C1.0
LAB NUMBER
2
3
1?
14
15
TAP WATER
112.
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL tfFLUtNT
3
1C1.C
4
112.0
3
101 . 0
it
112.C
95.1
88.?
93.7
78.1
16.3*
89.9
97.5
96.7
109.0*
78.1
56.0
86.1
0.0*
96.6
73.8
109. 7
97. C
132.1
85.4
79.6
85.9
1J9.C
93.9
108.0*
79.8
6C.9
'03. G
o.c*
10J.6
149.4
1C1.C
84 .P
78.3
81. C
127.0
104.0*
90.9
79.8
116.0*
65.7
£8 .4
72. R
I.e.*
97.2
106.5
95.7
89.0
93.1
85.7
71.7
160.5*
115.3
?2.8
151. C*
67.6
97.6
84.9
c.n*
It?. 5
104.6
94.3
76. C
feG.7
85.7
63.9
119.2
95.4
7C.9
132.0*
64.9
98.9
84.4
C.C*
97. P
412.7*
109.0
89. f
37.3
88.7
71.7
162.8*
104. C
79.5
96.5*
73.5
114.0
106. C
C.C*
1C4.2
1 16.6*
93.5
86.0
66. P
62.4
52.5
109. C
123."
96.1
94.6*
58.6*
95.0
84.1
C.C*
73.9
9'.?
1C.4.C
92. C
d2 o 1
6C .4
34. V
1 <: 2 . G
1J9.C
68,4
134. C «
62.8*
111 .C
86.3
*
5C.1
114.3
-------
TABLE C-15
DISTILLED WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAPORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR B-DriC ANALYSIS PY WATER TYPb
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
U1
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
750.0
741.1
508.3
1056.8
748. C
670.0
695.0
595.0
642.1
872.0*
257.0
44F.O
597.0
0.0*
732.9
350.6
6
675.0
7C2.b
453. C
1C01.&
499. C
633. r
1292.9
560. C
831.5
690.0*
4C8.C
312. C
624.0
0.0*
609.8
5Ci5.5
5
75?. C
749.4
482.0
631.6
341. T
747. r
1465.4*
544. C
569.5
11GO.C*
354 .0
423, L
6 26 . C
C .C*
744.?
754. e
6
675.0
531.0
44C.3
652.9
27C.O
369.0
791. G*
566.0
5 Z 7 . C
72P.O*
350.0
45C.:
475. T
c.c*
611.0
732.1
5
750.0
1S8.C
496.0
5C9.G
46C.C,
630. C
92£ .2
621. P
6C7.C
1C30.0*
313.0
4&2.C
712.0
c.o*
692.1
76P .5*
6
675. C
678.4
330.0
664. "S
52B.C
52C.G
1621.3*
563.0
531.5
8C2.C*
330. C
4S8.0
606.:
C.O*
611.5
3171.7*
5
750.0
721. r
576.0
P04.9
?89.C
6 1 8 . C
430.4
9uC.r>
35P.O*
6CP .0
605 .0
*
7G3.3
6
675.0
654.0
506.0
704 .6
425.C
4tP.O
71? .8
5b9.G
796.6
c u 6. n *
3&3.0*
405.C
-------
TABLE C-16
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
PAU DATA FOR BENZO
en
00 LAB NUMBER
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
5
C
1
?
3
4
15
17
23
10
22
49
17
1 2
18
17
19
10
19
1C
30
4
1
.0
.7
.0
.1*
.1
.3*
.8
,5
.2
.0
.7
.2*
.3
.0
.3*
,2*
18. C
0.9*
17.0
7.8*
12.6
14.2
15.4
10.4
22.1
12.3
12.0
8.8*
1ft. 7
13.1
3G.8*
7.3*
1
2C.C
17.7
37.0
5.1*
9.4*
11.2
13.9
9.7
1C'. 3
Id. 9
11.4
16.0
18.1
25.7
25.8*
33.4
2
1S.C
15.7
18.4
c.:*
8.7*
11.2
23.6
1C, 5
21.8
13.8
21.3
12.8
16.3
12.4
27.8*
4.8
1
2C.C
1E . 5
5.7
5.5*
9.7.
13.7
13.9
9.9
8.3
18.2
14.9
18.3
18.?
15.2
3Z.5*
21.2
2
14.6
5.6
5.2*
3.1*
11.6
16.6
8.9
1C.1
14.2
12.7
12.0
15.9
16.6
27.7*
9.9
1
2C.G
14.7
17. «
1 .6*
I .7
*
4 .9
14 .6
12.5
13. r
16.9
13.0
17.9*
6.3
20. P
7.2
1s
2 C
14
C
C
J
4
1
2
11
14
16
15
15
<;
2C
&
>_
. &
.7
. C*
.7
.5
.7
W
.5
.1
.6
. c
> t*
. "!
J
.
-*
. C
-------
TABLE C-17
AKPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
DISTILLED WATER
3
59.0
55. 0
ENV1RCNMfcNTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR 6EN70(A)ANTHRACENE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIP, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
4
55.3
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
3
59.C
55.0
55.:
o
.1
o
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
55.1
57. P
7.6*
74.0
16.2
65.8
31.3
55.3
46.2
59.6
9.4*
56.1
19.4
101.8*
18.5*
5C.6
56. C
2C.1*
45.2
4'J.9
52.9
36.7
6E.C
-2.5
65. £
1C. 6*
53.9
G.O*
90.9*
25.9*
36.7
53."
6.r*
15.5*
4C.5
48.9
26.?
2°. 7
45.8
57.7
28.8
49.9
46.7
82.0*
9C.C1*
* 1 '.
5^,9
5 '<
1 5 . .S «
25.'
61.2
35.7
64.4
45.3
47.6
33.2
41.9
34.9
64.5*
15.5
52. C
37.?
7 . 1 *
7.0*
C.i*
26.8
34.3
32.1
37.8
56.4
4T.3
45.C
53 .C:
76. 8*
36.7
49.9
32.7
«.1 *
11.3*
3.7
62.2
17.6
26.8
35.9
i-P.4
34.7
46.4
38.2
66.3*
17.4
43.1
44.9
6. ft*
12.3
21.°
12.4
42.2
3P .f
19. E
48. r
37.8
32.2-
24.8
64.2
10.5
52.?
3£ .e
7.6*
9.5
14.1
1Z.C
1 1 .8
26.fr
41.5
..4.5
33.1
J C . - *
11.9
24.1
21.3
-------
TABLE C-18
ENVIRONMENTAL COMTOR1NG AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
CFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A&ENCT
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - d/n (1) **
RAH DATA FOR BENZOANTHRACENE ANALYSIS BY WATF. S TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE UATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUcM
AMPUL NO: 5
TRUE CONC: 4QO.O
j
3 LAB NUK6ER
1
1
1
1
1
t
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
7
4
5
336.8
116.3*
375.0
250,0
407.0
274.^
635.1*
346. 3
232.0
163.0*
321.0
304.4
665.8*
91.0*
6
360.0
374.2
3C4.fi
89.1*
2fe8.C
229.0
42E.6
292. C
548.5
280. C
344. C
64.5*
361.0
242.3
569.2*
89. fc*
5
400.0
371 .3
360.5
48.**
175.0*
242.0
473.8
286.0
340.4
51C .0
7 8 1 . C
293.0
365. f1
426.?
664.0*
431.9
6
360.0
338.0
281.0
36.7*
131.0*
161.0
344.0
257.0
674.9*
3C1.0
438.0
310.0
737.0
212.3
536.0*
101.4
4:0
114
303
35
78
250
174
?t1
29?
394
274
195
774
766
597
133
5
.0
.0
.4
.7*
.2*
'
, C
0
.7
r
L.
.C
.0
. C
.2
.3*
.7
360
321
227
47
45
211
447
249
264
323
4
-------
TABLE C-L9
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
1
5.3
2
6.G
ENVIRONMENTAL fOMTORING AND SUPPORT LAFCRATOfct
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - fa/N (1)
RAU DATA FOR 0EN70PYR£ NE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIRt UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFL0ENf
1 ^
1
5.C
2
6.C
d.C
ro
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
4.2
11.6
r.o*
14.5*
60.7*
0.0*
1.2
1 . c
6.4
5.6
C.C*
6.9
C.O*
3.9
C.3
4.3
fc.6
C.C*
9.2*
5.9
O.C*
1.4
5.1
5.1
5.0
C.C*
t.5
2.6
7.3
Z.3
2
51
3
4
i
C
1
?
4
2
C
c
3
1
12
.1
.C*
.r*
.?
.7
.C*
.1
.C*
.1
.fi
.C*
. c
,c
.9
.7.
4
6
C
3
3
26
C
1
4
f
C
6
1
2
c
.6
.1
.0*
.1
.3
.0*'
.7
.3
.6
.1
.C*
.4
.9
.6
.2
:,
(
'2
2
4
C
1
1
6
5
1
c
1
f,
1C
.9
.1
.r»
.4«
.4
.C*
^
.1
.t *
^
7
. 2
j
o
.t
3.5
5.4
C.C*
r.c*
* .6
C.O*
1.2
1 .C
4.3*
6.1
1 .6
5.9
4.4
3.C
2.0
2
6
0
1
C
1
0
4
7
1
5
1
r
.4
r
r*
.Jt
*
.r*
, 7
.9
* L
.?*
.2
c
*
. ?
.7
3.4
6 .Q
c.;*
4.C
f . ' *
r.c*
1 .:
4.5
3 .6
f- . 5 *
2 . 1
4. 1
.
1 .5
C.v
-------
TABLE C-20
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
DISTILLED WATER
3
90.0
4
81.0
ENVIRONMENTAL KONITOKING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - E
.5
.0
.ft
. G
.?*
.8
.7
.3
.7
66.1
95.9
26.2*
ICfc.O*
60.3
74.9
53.9
74.8
9H.3
132.0
4.1*
85.6
0.0*
78.8
14.3
36
95
2
7
62
59
4C
22
131
79
12
83
4C
67
155
.7
.8
.9*
.C
f\
*->
.8
1
^
.7
.C
.5
.9*
.8
.3
.1
.7
33.8
74. <
2.3*
IP. 9
39. 7
93.6
65.0
?P.C
P1.6
99. C
15.9*
6
-------
TABLE C-21
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
DISTILLED WATER
5 6
540.0 600.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE 0» RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - D/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR BENZOPYRENF ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH VOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
> 6
t 0 r u C »
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
5
540.C
6
600.0
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
618
488
171
626
282
55C
594
595
654
423
119
496
429
5C5
42
.3
.4
.1*
.0*
.0
.0
.C
.5
.0
.0
.n*
.0
.7
.0
.9*
664.4
533.3
160.2*
610.0*
440.0
705.0
594. C
723.2
645.0
37P.C
50.1*
674. C
419. fc
527.5
158.9
551.9
549.7
52.1*
434.0
377.0
48P.2
5C9.0
342.2
1 C 1 0 . C *
695. C
2C6 .0
5E5.0
402.1
511 .7
593.1
495
452
5?
259
3
6U2 .4
161.5*
139.:
4 <, 2 . T; *
1i5 .7
623.0
3-C.4
545. C
1C1C..3*
25^ .C
5 6 6 . C
7C.O
142.4
51.1
-------
TABLE C-22
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC;
DISTILLED WATER
1
11.0
2
12.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAhORATOPY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N <1) **
RAW DATA FOR 8 ENZO (6)FLUORANTHENE ANALYSIS JV WATER TYPE
LCW YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UC/L
TAP WATER
1
11.C
2
12.C
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
1
11.0
2
12.0
1
11.C
N3
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
9.4
16.4
2.6*
13.6
61.9*
9.4
4.4
2.9
10.9
7.2
2.4*
10.9
4.7
10.5
9.4
8.5
11.4
2.6*
8.9
12.1
7. A
6.3
4.1
9.0
7.3
3.1*
G.O*
8.8
13.5
3.5
5.1
65.0*
C.8*
4.1
7.9
0.0*
3.7
1.5
5.6
9.2*
3.9
10.6
1C.O
2.2
21.7*
9.7
13.0
c.c*
2.4
7.5
27.4*
5.6
2.4
8.0
15.5*
2.8
1C. 7
7.1
18.5
2.9
S.
-------
TABLE C-23
fo
cr>
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
U
15
NUMBER
DISTILLED WATER
3
61.0
4
90.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAbGRATOSY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION: AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 6t5 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR BENZ0(B)FLUORANTHENE ANALYSIS PY WATER TYPE
MEDIUM YCUCEN PAJR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
3
81.0
4
9P.C
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
81.0 90.0
i
81.C
4
90.0
75.4
86.9
5.8-
115.0
8.7
97.3
58.3
31.2
81.3
95.7
7.6*
8C.O
56.4
109. 6
18.4
67.6
105. 6
31.7*
122. C
83.5
76.6
63.1
42.5
£1.9
125. C
7.9*
87.4
C.O*
91.4
299.1*
33
87
4
c
55
55
4C
16
69
9?
1S
6*
54
132
98
.6
.4
.C*
,7
.f
.6
.6
.1
.0
.r*
.8.
.3
.6
.1
.7
38
64
4
11
43
9C
te
26
63
1G9
28
64
47
28
19
.1
.Q
.2*
iL
.7
.8
.9
.5
.3
.0*
.3
.2
.4
.4
.8
6C.
53.
5.
4.
52.
22.
54.
15.
55.
81 .
35.
37.
77.
3C.
31.
6
e
7*
1*
5
1
9
T
6
1
1
9
e
2
1
62
51
7
10
76
92
23
21
68
65
36
66
57
27
12
.3
.«
.8*
.9*
.8
.9
.7
.0
n
v_
.5
.4
.9
.3
.2
.8
46.6
62.2
9.P
9.8
67.5
r.c*
65.2
11 .;
21.3
63.4
2S.6
75.2
21.5
49.Q
5.C
62. P
61.6
11.5
5.3
V6.C
1 r . .". *
19.8
13.2
63.3
60. 4
28. C
89.4
55.4
P. 5
23.7
-------
TABLE C-24
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED LATER
5 6
600.0 543.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA fETHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR BENZ0
LAB NUMBER
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
630.9
516.5
203.6*
69C.O
284.0
578.0
594.0
327.9
704.0
397.0
179. C*
448.0
593.1
826.4
702.7
525.6
465.9
158.2*
579.0
374.0
605.2
510.0
416.0
456.0
536. C
65.6*
509.0
507. 9
4oc. r
87.0*
562.5
581.9
68.9*
3U.O
3P9.C
652.2
567.0
276.7
755. H
681,0*
290. 0
5D4.0
639.7
1421.0*
410.5
439.0
405.6
6C.2*
188.0
242. C
487.0
509.3
347.3
516.3
683.0*
331. C
465.0
542.?
269,2
130.8
17C.C
470.4
fc7. 2*
133.O
454.0
253.3
510.0
272.2
660.0
375.C
188. C
5 1 2 . C
598.4
303.9
142.6
494.8
349.3
84.9*
28.2*
3C3.3
643.8
523.0
244.0
578.0
69C.O
253.3
477. G
614.1
293.9
2L1.7
585.0
565.1
190. P
73. C
69?. 0
224."*
399.0
144.4
653.0
561 .!>
442.0
260.0
*
439.'
276.3
355. C
499.5
1 6 2 . P
119. C
3o4 .C
166.3*
539.0
194.*,
360. C
696.0
295.0
432. C
102.9
71.5
38.3
-------
TABLE C-25
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
DISTILLFD WATER
1
U.C
2
15.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR B I S ( 2-CHLOROE TH YL) ETHE R ANALYSIS BY tuATEk TVP
LOW YOUDfcN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAF WATER
1
U.C
2
15.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
2
15.C
1
u.r
a
15.C
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBi
6.8
0 ., 0 *
10,3
14.2
st 5 . 7 *
0. D*
1C. 2
S.9
14.6
12.6
0.0*
17.4*
0.0*
12.3
0.0*
11.4
C.C*
C.Ci*
35.2*
1H.9
12.1
9.3
ID.:
10.2
4.5
r.o*
' 13.7*
0.0*
13.7
0.6
7.5
189.0*
7.0
19. C
14.7
r.c*
2.7
O.P*
13.7*
5.3
c.o*
10.5
C.O*
9.7
10.2
11.6
18. C*
C.O*
14.3
10.7
C.O*
11.4
7.6
19.9*
8.4
r.o*
15.7
C.O*
12.5
2.5
7.C
C.3*
C.C*
13.5
16.8
11.3
8.C
3.H
1?.*
1C. 2
25.3
17.1
O.C*
e.7
67.7*
9.6
O.C*
3.1*
9.5
16.2
3.0*
10.3
h.6
15.1
6.0
0.0*
14.5
C.C*
10.5
24.5*
6.2
O.C*
17. C
8.0
16 .4
14.2
12. P
12. p
10.C
8.2
0.0*
10.9
«
11.2
12.3
6.5
C.C*
9.7
19.6
*
C.C*
10.0
p.g
23.6
11 .6
24.1
19.9
*
1C. 9
2.3
-------
TABLE G-26
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DiSTILLED WATER
3
101.0
4
112.C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAPORATQFY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCt
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR BIS<2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHFP ANALYSIS BY UATER TYP
MEDIUM YOUDEN PA1P, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
3
131.
112.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
4
11?.C
3
101.C
4
112.0
N)
OA LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
I
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
57.0
117.5
76.1
92.9
11.7
71.5
101.0
86.2
112.0
1CO.O
101.0
107.0*
c.o*
106.6
15.0
81.7
119.8
1C7.3
117.0
136.0
104.1
100.0
93.2
96.7
119.0
123.0
126. C*
C.O*
96.5
33.8*
79.8
121. S*
64.6
9P.3
105.0
83.5
97.8
111.0
129.0*
106.0
79.6
80. 5
47.6*
13C.4
131.7
1C3.C
134.6*
72.3
164.0
112.3
69.1 .
121.:
75.5
129.0*
95.9
96. R
1L8.0
r . j*
94.8
t3.D
75.9
90. C
49.4*
6 c . ;
1 27, C
92 .9
80.6
61 .6
127.0
110. C
120. r
1G7.C
72.2
89.5
126.3
87.5
94. C
74. e*
67.8
1 2 2 . C
60.2
1C4.0
80.0
95. t
99.4
140.0
134.0
98. C
104.8
149.5
64.5
114.1
76.6
83.5
316.0*
114.0
101 .:
102.?
72.0
121. C
1C3.0
107.T
*
65.6
84.8
b7.fc
141 .4
U6.C
94. G
dt.7
109. C
101. C
80.7
177. C
a5.5
137.0
95.3
33.5
54.8
29.3
-------
TABLE C-27
vD
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
DISTILLED WATER
5
750.0
452.6
0.0*
634.3
929.0
390.C
806.0
711.C
711.5
894.0
546.0
533.0
851.0*
127C.8
771.2
67.2
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESFARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) *
PAU DATA FOR B1S(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER ANALYSIS BY WATER TYP
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLULNT
6
675.0
5U4.4
L.O*
56C.C
715.0
461.0
702.8
555.0
545.6
639.0
764. C
426. C
699.0*
34.5
596.2
131.4
5
75C.O
511.5
1C38.6*
4G7.5
826.0
731. C
601 .4
687.0
776.3
993.0*
695. P
398 .C
1:00. c
593.5*
766.3
6C4.5
6
675. j
614.:
1588. D*
365.4
441.0
339,0
557.3 .
696.0
667.6
949.0*
759.0
572.0
767.0
34.1*
607.?
166.3
5
750. C
118. C
391. C
355.8*
787.0
496.0
9 1 C . C
717.0
524."?
92C.C
584. C
662. C
102G.O
1794.2*
643.7
1.1
6
675.0
446.1
581.3
363. C*
539. C
401. C
5 2 7 . C
531.0
472.2
fc 3 3 . C
692.0
592. G
888.0
1343.7*
574.3
813.6
5
750.0
481.0
1124.1
577.0
721.0
869. T
648.0
664. C
459.?
1470.0*
637.*
8Z6.0
864.?
*
629.5
429.0
6
675. C
399. C
1218.7
635.0
775. u
733.:
C.G
671 .0
655.9
448.:
6<.3.C
568 . C
761.?
43.4
498.3
371.4
-------
TABLE C-28
ASPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
DISTILLED WATER
1
6.0
2
7.r
ENVIRONMENTAL f'OM", ORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - D/U (1) **
RAW DATA FOR D I-N-B UT Y«, PH T H AL ATE ANALYSIS EY *ATFR TYPE
LOW YCUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
6.:
2
7.2
SURFACE UATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
1
6.C
2
7.C
1
6.n
7.0
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
2
1
5
2
68
C
6
2
4
5
4
5
0
2
C
.3
.2
.2
.6
.2*
.0*
.9
.2
.3
.0
.4
.3
.0*
.4
.5*
3.C
2.4
11.8
2.5
7.5
1.6
8.5
3.2
4.2
4.7
1C. 4
G.O*
7. 7
3.5
1.5*
5
84
T
1
4
2
4
4
5
2
5
2
6
3
3
.4
.C*
.6
.3*
.7
.7
.7
. ~
.P*
.1
.1
.9
.0
.?
.3*
3.9
4.1
4.0
1.8*
2.6
0.3*
7.5
3.2
5.7*
4 . j
5.2
5.4
5.rJ
?.?
1.0*
4.
10.
2.
1.
3.
1.
5.
2.
6.
5.
11.
4.
t .
c
_. .
0.
5
2
4
P.*
4
7
8
4
7
1
8
6
5
C
C*
5.4
11.C
4.5
2.2*
5.9
».£
7.2
2.8
5.5
4.4
11.5
6.0
6.3
4.9
2.6*
4.4
5.8
2.0
0.6*
^ .r*
1 .9
4.7
2.S
4.5
4.9
9.3*
4 .1
*
1 .9
2.4
6.1
6.2
C.O*
1. 5*
c.;*
1 .7
i.r
4.3
4.9
7.G
8.7
6.3
14.3*
3.9
3.6
-------
TABLE C-29
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
3
105.0
4
94.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LARCRATCRY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
*« CPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOH DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE ANALYSIS BY WATEK TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
105.0
94.C
SURFACE UATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
U5.C
4
V..O
3
105.0
94.C
N3
LAG NUMBER
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
95.1
64.7
73.6
32.1
3.6
31.1
90.4
40.7
66.7
73.1
40.6
75.3
27.7
8C.8
17.8*
1'6
M
87
32
79P
26
99
4*
55
80
39
43
0
66
8
.1
.6
.9
.6
.9*
.?
» 3
,3
. C
. L
.2
.3
.0*
.7
.4*
93
69
67
19
56
18
9C
55
90
61
74
2
r
9»
9
4
r
8
I
7
2
9
o
4
0*
86.4
73.2
55.5
22.4*
42.3
62.3
8«..1
35.2
67.9
5C.6
72.2
43.?
63.6
63.3
33.8*
-;e
65
27
16
17
1 C6
7!
5<5
7?
87
76
51
61
24
*
-
.£
.0
."*
*
.6
.0
.0
.?
.7
.9
.1
-'
.f
.9
fc7.j
61.1
2f .8
13.7*
r . c*
r .:*
51 .C
47.3
34.5
5 5 . C
76.2
<.2.3
*
24.2
37.8
-------
TABLE C-30
DISTILLED WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
5
63C.C
6
70G.C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROT'CTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N. (1) **
RAW DATA FOR DI-N-BUTYLPHTHA LATE ANALYSIS PY WATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
5
630.0
6
7CC.?
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
63C.O
6
7CO.O
5
630.C
t
7CC.C
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
597.0
284.7
423.6
151.0
358.9
318.3
363.0
305.6
625.7
271,8
251.0
48C.O
366. P
482.8
45. T*
612.9
354.2
416. C
189. C
479.9
414.9
431.0
243.4
541.7
420.6
19'J.C
533. C
356.0
483.9
62.6*
639.6
378.9
259.8
219. C*
2t2.8
357.5
325.0
314.1
765.1*
23S.3
333.0
537. C
37E.C
449. C
129.?*
563.1
324.4
233.7
131. C*
304.8
454.0
363.3
2CP.C
679.1*
421.3
4C3.C
352. *
163.6
482.1
6C.2*
148.6
3C3.5
2C3.6
145. C*
365.1
152. C
360.0
197.4
662. C
286.1
?75.C
418. ^
41C.4
448.3
114.2*
712.5
355.4
312.7
2G5.0*
391 .1
581.1
3 3 5 . C
218.2
756.0
351.1
345. C
531.0
478.4
491. C
237.4*
606.1
425.6
266.0
122. ^*
729.8
150.?
313.0
203.4
7M .6
369.0
4 4 C . 0
535.0
*
45T.3
141 .8
5v5 . 1
3 1 C . 3
239. C
195. C
674.°
1 3 0 . [
34C.O
282.3
475.6
3&6.C
364. C
467. C
12 5 . /.
2 1 9 . 3
71.2
-------
TABLE C-31
ENVIRONMENTAL KOMTORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR D I BENZ0(A , H>ANTHRACENE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW VOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AttPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
9.9
15.4*
17.3
O.C*
51 .6
39.7
C.O*
o.a*
C.D*
9.4
8.3
C.C*
*.3
C.G*
e.s
C>.3
2
1C.C
16.5*
12.8
C.C*
1C. 8
O i.
'-' O
6.4
C.C*
4.6
5.9
4.t>
C.C*
C.C*
1.9
1C. 2
4.7
1
9.C
C.C*
3?.C*
r.c*
c.c*
2.9
C.C*
T'.C*
0 . -C *
C.5
1 .P
n.c*
6.4
2.5
C.C*
3.9
10
1 ?
t,
C
r
4
32
C
r
4
F
C
5
C
4
7
2
r>
w-
. 1*
O 4.
. C*
.0*
.3
.6*
.C*
. C *
.4
.8*
.3*
.6
.0*
.0
.6
9
9
1
0
C
7
0
0
0
5
5
0
5
r>
<~j
0
1
.0
.2
.6
.3*
.?*
.1
.n*
.C*
.C*
.2
.7*
.0-
. 1
. I1*
.:*
. r *
1C
T
1
0
c
4
7
0
0
1
5
0
A
4
0
0
2
.0
. [
.2
.0*
.0*
.4
T
. ^
.0*
.0*
.6
.2*
.0*
.7
.7
.0*
.C*
1
9.0
2.5
3.4
?tc*
O.Q*
*
c.r*
0.1*
;?.r*
1 .1
5.2
C.O*
5.5
1 .0
c.c>*
C.r*
2
10.C
C.9
2.4
5.3
C.C'*
1 1 .9*
C.C*
G . C *
C.O*
2.7
5.2
C.C*
7.4
i
?. 0*
c.c*
-------
TABLE C-32
ENVI KONfr \ i ?L POMTORIN& AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OifiCe i- P(SE*RCK AN'O DEVELOPMENT
PC\re;s'(^L PROTECTION AGFNCY
** EPA PETHOD 6Z5 VALIDATION STUDY - D/N (1) *
RAU DATA FOR D 1 F E N ZO < A , H ) AN T H R A C E NE ANALYSIS BY UATtR TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED tATCR
TAP WATER
SURFACE taATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUfcNT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
3
55.0
122.0*
72.1
0.0*
25.8
7.8
104.9
51.7
C.O*
57.5
54. C
:.o-
51.9
14.8
54.1
4.8
59
9P
8C
36
1C3
49
69
34
5C
55
76
G
54
C
43
21
4
.0
.8*
.6
.6*
.0
.7
.2
.8
.C
.4
. C
.0*
.9
.C*
.6
.3
3
55. 3
26.8
93.8*
o . r> *
1.5
34.2
31. C
2P.4
? .6
49.4
44.6
C.O*
43.1
11.1
33.7
46.3
4
59.
12.
52.
r.
w
4 .
17.
67.
77.
11.
38.
51,
9,
34.
', «
15 .
1C .
r
8
7
C*
1
S
5
3
g
9
C
t
7
~ *
55
?<,
*_ ^
3
C
25
1C
69
1
28
45
18
31
29
13
A
7
* :
.7
.5
.c *
. I *
c
.3
.7*
^
*
. £ *
.C
.7
.1
.6
.7
A
59.0
51.2
29.7
C.C*
2.7*
A3. 2
9A.C*
12.5
18.1
AA.2
67. C*
15.3
36.5
13.3
14.1
C.G*
3
55. C
54.1
33.6
4.C
1.7
94. F*
£ .1
52. *
1 .^
9.4
44. P
9.9
49.5
6.7
12.9
C.C*
A
59.0
65.9
25. A
4.5
5.0
1:5.:
9.1
5.1
P. 3
3 C.C
53.5
6.6
59.2
5.3
6.4
10.3
-------
TABLE C-33
NJ
-vl
Cn
DISTILLED WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
5
403.0
1T40.8*
443. T
105. :«
707.0
220.0
660.0
757.0
432.1
465.3
266.0
13?. 0*
372.?
239.0
453.4
115.4
6
36C.C
67E.3*
106 .fc
7C.O*
365.0
29f .0
612.9
222C.O*
258,4
294.0
56C.C
41.6*
445. T
146.2
312. C
24.7
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PPOTECTUN AGENCY
** EPA KETHOC t> I * VALIDATION STUDY - B/N <1) *
RAW DATA FOR D I BEN?0(A , H)ANTHRACENE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
787.3
413.7
33.3'
279.0
713.3
719.3
£69.C
269.5
567.D
dC5.3
266.C
458.C
2U.9
456.C
278. f
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtST
5
40C.O
t
3 6 f . 0
543.0.
323.7
33. ?
154.0
171.0
446.0
1C6C.O*
281.0
379.0
6C5.0
315.0
540. C
171.4
172.7
141.7
5
4LC.O
272.0
?<.4 . ?
37.1*
112.0
341.0
0.0*
1190.0*
179. C
436.0
1585. C*
149.0
4Z6 .0
273.4
2C3.4
124.5
6
3 6 C . 0
684.5
Z37.C
4n.4
O.C
238.C
62T.7
1180.0
27P.C
389. C
74C.C
2U.C
429.0
359.4
152.9
7 1 .-«
960.0
'89.4
;u3.5
58.2
59? .°
228.^
449.0
169.1
46f .1
56C.T
344.C
538.0
178.3
49P.C
3Gi.7
77.6
117.0
T rj 9 . C
139.7
661.:
179. fe
259.0
66 . 5
17. C
-------
TABLE C-34
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
1
6.0
2
7.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAPORATORY
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N 11) **
ki DATA FOR DIETHYL PHTHALATE ANALYSIS 3Y UAT£R TYPE
LOU VCUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
2
7.C
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
1
6.0
2
7.C
1
6.C
c
7.C
LAB NUMBE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
i 3
14
15
R
4
C
3
1
70
0
5
0
?
0
2
1
C
6
C
.2*
.0*
.1
.8
.5*
.0*
.4
.0*
.6
.0*
.9
.3
.0*
.2
.8*
6.1*
1.4
6.3
o.r*
4.2
O.C*
5.2
1.3
2.5
2.2
10.2
7.C
3.9
4.?
0.7*
4
15
7
6
T
C
3
Pi
t
4
C
3
0
4
8
t
.4*
.0*
.7
.r*
c
-/
.0*
.9
.9
.2
.9
.6
.6
j
. ^
.0
7
->
6 5*
C.O*
3.3
C.O*
2.2
C . G.*
5.5
2.1
<; n
> -j t-
1.3
3.9
2.7
3.5
4.1
C.2
4.1
3.9
0.0*
11.3
1.2
0. ?*
3.9
1.3*
5.1
3.6
1C. 6*
1.1
4.1
9.r
3.C*
5.t
8.:
2.1
2,9
3.9
0.0*
6.4
2.3*
1.9
2.3
11.6*
3.2
4.7
P. 2
2.2
5.2
1 .2
4.2
0.9*
2.5
1 .3*
5.2
1.9
i.2
3.6
9 .'' *
1.4
*
5.?
1 ,U
4
T
3
0
1
6
2
3
7
B
i
13
1
. 3
.3
.C
.0*
4
.1*
.5
.7
L
.1
.£*
.C
*
.5*
.1
-------
TABLE C-35
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
3
105.0
4
94.C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR DIETHYL PHTHALATE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATEP
105. C
4
94.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
105.0
4
94.0
3
1C5.0
A
94.C
LAB NUMBER
2
3
A
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1A
15
84.7*
27.3
65.3
33.5
4.3
0.0*
74.4
17.1
27.7
13.4
51.4
55.9
17,2
64.8
6.0*
80.3*
24.2
80.8
28.0
49.1
30. C
85.5
23.6
33.2
34.5
46.2
11.8
O.G*
69.3
1.9*
1C2.C*
31.3
63.5
6.2
57.7
4.7
82.8
19.5
69.0
28. P
87.2
5.7
6C.O
7C.5
31 .6
85.2*
18.0
52.2
2C.O
54.6
46.5 '
87.2
22.4
76.3
15.4
78.9
29.3
67.9
9C.4
7.1
91.8
14.4
52.2
35.9
62.0
17.4
102.0
16.5*
27.1
47.8
101 .r*
49.8
67.2
88.6
23.7
82.3
60.6
52. C
28.3
24.6
69.0
75.3
16.9*
51.9
28.8
92.9*
11.6
80.6
71.7
27.9
96.6
26.1
5C.C
2.7*
92.8
15.2*
94.4
61 .3
48.5
88.8
98.5*
61.2
39.6
8C.1
26.6
75.(S
41 .2
61.0
5.1*
*
14.4*
93.C
39.C
74.3
48.5
48.9
23.9
31.7
-------
TABLE C-36
DISTILLED WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
5
630.0
6
700.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OIF1CE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - Bin (1) * *
RAW DATA FOR D1ETHYL PHTHALATE ANALYSIS EY WATER TYPE
HIGH VOODEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
5
63C.O
6
7CT.O
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
5
630.C
6
700.C
5
630.C
6
7CC.9
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
519.6*
56.9
441.0
204.0
340.0
228.0
388.0
205.9
245.0
84.0
434.0
152.0
391.5
471.9
37.8*
636.3*
245.5
498. C
144.0
434. C
334.9
454.0
159. C
265.0
178.0
379.0
424.0
351.5
578. C
76.2*
607.4*
134.3
347.0
1P1.?
171.0
367.6
359.0
123.5
537.0
3P.Q
455. C
421.0
427.2
387.2
164.8
581.0*
68.7
346.0
52.9
269. C
2C4.0 '
427.0
35.4
487.0
184.9
545.0
66.3
169.7
631.6
78.0
153. C
199.7
228.3
145. C
182. C
101.0
351.0
58. G*
301.0
130. C
469.0*
115. r
565.6
532.5
151.7
704.5
384.2
386.1
213.0
379. C
675.3
442.0
114.2*
594.0
257.0
532.0*
416.0
320.7
672. C
388.4
563. 0
386.0
36*. 0
122.0*
696. C
U8.C*
451. C
245.3
562. C
470.0
589. C*
159.0
*
416.4
181.2
667. C
93.5
369.C
16P.C*
460.C
1U.7*
391. D
173.0
332.0
414. C
5GE.C*
459. C
125.1
364.0
138.2
-------
TABLE C-37
ENVIRONMENTAL POMTGPING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - R/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIRf UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
^ LAB NUMBE
vO
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
1
: 14.0
R
4.5*
*
0.0*
3.1
73.3*
0.0*
4.6
C.O*
8.5*
4.7
0.0*
r.o*
C.O*
7.3*
C.O*
2
15. 0
7.5*
*
3.2
11.8
20.9
C.C*
5.C
3.1
5.5*
S.6
C.G*
O.T*
C.C*
1C. 4*
O.C*
14
3
2
T
6
r-
4
1
10
3
4
F
n
7
20
1
r
.4
*
.4
.4
.9
.C*
"7
* >
.4
.7*
.£
r
. V
.n*
.0*
.1
.7*
2
15. 0
9.6
*
C.C*
7.6
5.5
O.C*
6.0
1 .6
1^.6*
6.3
0.0*
C.O*
c.:*
7.1
0.0*
14
5
C
"i
7
0
6
n
12
6
g
r
j
7
f
1
V
.9
*
.C*
.C*
. c
.0*
.6
.r*
.5*
.1
. C
.C*
.c*
. ?
. ?
15
6
C
C
8
0
5
1
17
£
7
C
n
6
15
2
.0
.6
*
.:*
.c*
.7
.0*
. ^
i
.8*
.4
.5
.0*
.C*
.2
.C
1
14. P
i.r>
*
c.:*
C.4
*
C.C*
6.2
C.O*
13.5*
5.5
C.n*
C .0*
? .c*
6.7
6.3
2
15. C
4.2
*
r . c.*
C .7
*
C.C*
4.1
3.1
17.2*
6.7
6.6
C.O*
c. ;*
i:.i
c 1 .6*
-------
TABLE C-3C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAFOPATGf-Y
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ANALYSIS RY WATE9 TYPfc
KED1UI" YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
; AMPUL NO:
~ TRUE CONC:
I 1*°
CD
0 LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
3
101. C
91.0*
*
26.5
19.1
8.3
C.O*
82.0
22.4
94.0*
54.4
31.3
C.O*
0.0*
O2.5*
n.o*
4
112. r
147. C*
*
4C . t
24. C
C.C*
C.O*
f-6.9
3D. 9
119.0*
65.7
4C.9
o.:*
C.O*
107.5*
C.C*
3
101. r
1Ci2.C
*
24.3
5.9
98.4
C.C*
66.
-------
TABLE C-39
ENVIRONMENTAL KCMTCRING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGFNCV
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - P/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPf
H~GH YOUTEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNT
AMPUL NO: 5
TRUE CONC: 75C.O
N>
6
675.0
750
r
d
675. C
5
75C.O
6
675. G
75C
5
.C
6
67! .0
£2 LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
1
1
1
1
1
?
3
4
5
V19.9*
*
234.9
113.0
350.0
O.C*
804.0*
273.0
S63.0*
218.0
325.0
0.0*
0.0*
794.8*
12.7
955.2*
*
21C. 5
133. C
453.0
O.C*
6te.C
331.4
860.0*
319. C
192.0
P.C*
r .C'*
69t.C'*
C.C*
£95
141
155
535
r.
619
2C6
147C
256
44fi
0
n
829
1186
.P
*
. r,
w
.r
.c*-
0
7
. ^
.C*
.c
.r
.0*
.c*
.r
.4
653.0
*
151.9
73.7
285.0
c.o*
856.0
187.5
9 3 5 . 0 *
287.0
474.0
C.-O*
C.C*
684.6
C.O*
28?. p
*
118. C
1?4.C
47f .0
C.C*
762. C'
196.7
1 5 1 C . C
272.C
379.C
C.C*
C.C*
745.9
853.3
769.7
4
139.6
72. C
374.0
C.O*
£39. C
159.4
1 0 8 C . C *
280.0
422. C
O.C*
c.:*
686.5
C.C*
931
18°
7°.
1C 7 3
0
533
163
16C.C
32?
644
n
787
19
r
i.
*
.6
.7
.n
.0*
.C
. »
.n'*
.0
r\
^
.c*
*
.3
7
~<
775. C
A
143.9
8P.5
73 6. C
C.C*
8 1 5 . C
19c . 7
1C.T.C*
3C5. C
42C. ?
C.C*
C.C*
424.7
342. E
-------
TABLE C-40
oo
ENV1 RONNENTAL MCM10RING AND SUPPORT LAhORATORY
OFFICE OF RfSEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR FLUCfiAN'THENE ANALYSIS PV WATER TYPE
LOW YCUDEN PMRf UMTS - UG/L
D1S~> ,LLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CCNC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
£
7
3
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
6.0
5.2
7.1
4.1
7.6
80.3*
4.6
4.9
6.4
7.5
7.6
3.9*
7.0
C.3*
5.6
1.0*
7
c
V
6
5
8
7
5
6
5
t
8
4
7
6
6
2
2
.r
.7
r
t_
.4
. 2
i
.6
.1
.4
7
.6
.3*
.2
.5
.C
.3*
1
c-.r
3.5
73.0*
3.5 *
6.6
5.4
5.3
4.5
6.:
8.1*
4.2
5.1
7.3
6.3
5 .?
6.8
7
C
v
6
7
6
4
p
c
5
7
6
c
7
c
6
2
2
-
.9
.5
.R*
.4
.7
.3
.6
.4
.5*
.6
.4
1
» -'
.1
n
.
n
u
1
6.
5.
6.
2 .
5.
t .
5.
5.
3.
7.
6.
5.
11.
4 ,
5.
r
t. .
«
X.
7
7
7*
6
*,
>
9
2
6*
7
£
9*
f>
6
C*
2
7.C
5.3
7.2
3.4*
4.6
6.1
5.3
6.0
4.1
P. 9*
6.9
5.4
7.7*
7.0
6.2
4.9
1
6.C
4.1
7.?
1 .n*
4.8
:.c*
3.2
4.0
4 .8
6.1
5.7*
4.6
7.5
27.2*
4.C
3.2
i
7.C
1 2 . <
6 .-4
1.1*
5. a
r .:*
2.2
3.3
6.2
8.1
6.S>*
5.7
7.7
15.2
6.4
3.7
-------
TABLE C-41
NJ
OO
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
f
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAbCfiATOM
OFFICE Qf RESEARCH AN& DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
«* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUD* - fi/K (1) **
RAk DATA FOR FLUORANTHENE ANALYSIS BY UAlEP TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATEP
SURFACE HATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
3
105.
4
94. i
3
105.0
4
94.C
1C5.C
4
94.C
3
105.0
-------
TABLE C-42
DISTILLED WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
5
63C.O
6
70C.C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AMD SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR FLUOfiAN THENE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH VOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
5 6
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EfFLL'LNT
5
63C.C
6
7&C.O
5
630.0
6
7'JC.O
CXI
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
612.6
419.1
241.1
434. 0
38C.O
31P.O
398. G
511.3
801.0
375.0
2»9.0*
471.0
498.5
5C1.9
42.4*
651
454
244
95 C
417
5C8
4C5
6C4
71P
655
149
592
571
5C7
61
.6
.8
.3
.0
.0
.2
. 0
.5
.C
.0
.C*
.C
.5
.8
.2*
612.5
49C ,8
123.3*
3U.C
4C2.C
457.2
3 ' i . 0
- . * . 4
916.0*
565. C
312.0
516. C
566.4
5 32. 8
230.2
523
466
130
313
315
546
38C
461
76 C
720
379
5C2
26?
497
91
r*
wl
.9
.3*
n
*.
.C
.0
.3
.9
.' *
.0
.0
.3
.2
.5
.5
16C
4 32
1C 3
2dfi
45S
334
369
461
£38
4!2
254
542
531
470
167
. 0
.f
.6*
.C
w
.C
.C
7
-f
.C*
. r
r
. v
» °*
.7
.5
.9
662
389
151
326
'44
513
403
481
822
7:0
323
551
704
511
1
.8
.5
.5*
v_<
.0
.C
n
. ^
.5
.C*
.C
.C
.C*
.9
.1
.4
622.0
502.1
16?. 4*
224.0
r.r*
257.7
332. C
353.2
73P.O
515.°*
444. "
594.C
*
472.2
193. P
607. C
545 .2
179. 3*
294. C
C.C*
?Z5.£
3 1 9 . CJ
57^.2
5SO.C
77C.C*
3 4 1 . C
514. C
164.6
267.1
102.2
-------
TABLE C-43
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
1
11.
2
12.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAE-ORATO&Y
OFFICE OF RESEARCH ASD DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA "IETHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - H/N (1)
RAh DATA FOR HEPTACHLOR ANALYSIS BY WATER 1 IF£
LOW YOUDtN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
11.n
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EfFLUEf.T
1
11.0
2
12.0
1
11. C
2
12.C
ro
g> LAB NUMBER
*
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
A
5
6
7
8
9
C
1
2
3
A
5
5
t
A
8
115
u
2
3
1A
f
3
12
r.
P
r
.1
.Q
.5
.5
.1*
.?*
.9
.9
. R
. j
.2
.A
.:
.7.
.Q*
6.6
8.0
6.2
7.4
8 .£
6.6
A. A
3. A
11.3
6.9
3.6
12.7
5.6
12.2*
0.0*
A
7
3
6
7
r
u
4
C
11
7
4
9
4
6
5
.7
n
. i
.0 »
.6
.9
.P«
. j
.C«
,P*
.?
.6
.6
.1
.fl
.C
7
6
T
P
7
c
!
2
U
f
t.
1 ?
2
8
r
.2
1
-
.6*
.A
.3
. ?
.8
.0
.4*
.c
.5
.4
.9
.7
.3
»
6
2
t
F
9
?
C
14
7
r
t
o
7
I
.9
.0
.6*
. 1
. 4
.1
. 9
. '
.1"
.7
. 1 *
.7
.C«
. &
.°*
4.5
6 .0
r .:
6.7
:.?*
^.c*
4,2
2.7
14. C*
P. 4
c.o
9.6
5.6
7.7
5.4
4.5
B.r
o . :
4.1
*
O.r«
5.G
C
10.9
5^1
4.<5
i:.:
*
3.5
'.7
5 .4
7.C
r .c
c -
-J i-
i C -» L
r
V. \-
P. 5
6 . 5
15.7
7.9
7.5
1 7 . ?
t .:
4.1
-------
TABLE C-44
DISTILLED WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL KOMTORING AND SUPPORT L Af-OR A TO **
RAW DATA FOR HEPTACHLOR ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
KED1U* YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
10
cx>
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
U
15
3
81.0
65.0
74.0
23.3
56.3
9.4
r . 3-*
49.6
105.1
99.8
59.2
14.8
78.
0.0*
107.2*
16.8*
4
90. C
64.7
62.0
46.:
56.1
78.0
127.0
61.8
74.1
87.6
62. r
19.6
1 C 3 . 0
c.c*
97.5*
24.2*
81
44
6S
U
3T
10*
1 ?7
41
?4
93
t f
37
64
2£
77
70
3
.C
.8
r*
«.
.7*
.1
. -J
.0
.6
.5
.7*
e -
.7
.3
.4
.1
.C
4
9C.O
51.1
7!.G
22.?*
21.9
66.8-
32.3
55.1
46.4
83.9*
5C.7
44.6
85.5
36.5
66. 4
2C.3
81
49
6P
15
2<.
56
112
51
3&
65
46
44
K3
36
6f
C
3
.C
.C
,c
.3*
. 7
g
.C
.5
.1
.r*
.4
.3
o
,
.8
.5
."*
4
9C.C
56.5
62. C
2C.!*
25. C
e4.1
26.6
30. 6
58.5
78.2*
55.2
46.5
90.2
34.4
o3 . 1
39.1
81
55
57
^
12
13?
67
67
39
41
46
45
9?
4!
20
2
.0
.?
.n
.:
.5
.C*
.?
.6
.5
.8
.1
.?
.6
*
.3
.3
vc
62
S?
<;
23
95
(_ 5
3f
te
2V
5?
12
19
2C
41
<,
. u
.7
.0
. c
.5
.1
. }
.t
.C
.1
.5
.S
.4
n
. .,
..1
-------
TABLE C-45
co
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAbORATu"T
OFFICE CF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - P/N M) *
PAW DATA FOR HEPTACHLOR ANALYSIS 8Y WATER TTI-E
HIGH VOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED MATER
TAP WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
fcOG
538
618
2b9
193
620
133G
540
960
794
219
231
560
341
647
2J9
5
*
.
0
1
0
4
c
0
0
c
5
0
n
c
r
!_
1
1*
3
54 'J
5C2
536
218
4C9
563
107°
629
15C5
589
332
1C.3
596
57C
597
3C9
6
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
r
5
r
1
0
0
1
0
3*
C
c
0
c
2
C*
1*
6 CO
5t1
554
116
135
593
1C34
461
J 92
P17
294
T71
6:7
399
27C
775
5
.0
.4
.C
.9*
.c
.C
.8*
.C
.4
.C*
. i
. V
. J
.7
.4
.3
54C
41C
5GC
92
11C
455
137C
5C6
665
616
287
38C
446
49
* C 7
333
6
-
f
. c'
. J
.9*
* '-
.0
.0*
r
.1
.?
r
.C.
r;
.5
.0
.4
icr,
127
493
81
1C3
5 74
13EC
4£3
939
til
265
285
645
362
599
215
5
.C
* C
. J
. 1
. r
. :
.c
. c
. ^
.c*
r
.c
. c
.7
. }
.9
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
6 5 t
54C.C 6 0 C > C ^Au.O
5*
536.6
369.C
115,
136.:
43C.C
1 575.2*
5 C C . C
463.9
691.C*
271.C
317.G
'28.0
351.4
523.0
15C.3
57? .C
604.f
"52!?
31s.0
418.9
79C.C
3C?.'
587. C'
572.C
1
56C.1
262.9
771 .:
4 7 r . C
15 r.:
r. c'
5 2 5 . C
47.2
176. '
147.C
-------
TABLE C-46
ENVIRONMENTAL *OMTOMNG AND SUPPOHT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
t*VIRONMEMAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD <25 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N CD
RAW DATA FOR HE X AChLOROBENZENE ANALYSIS BY WATER TT"E
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EfFLUtM
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
KJ
g LAB NUMBER
1
2
I
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
6.t»
..,
6.0
2.9
7.5
62.7*
6.1
5.2
5.4
7.C
5.7
2.3*
6.9
3.0*
0.0*
0.3
2
7.G
6.6
6.C
4.0
7.2
5.6
6.3
5.6
5.0
5.0
5.7
2.7*
7.1
2.6
C.C*
2.4
1
6.0
2.1
59 ,C*
5)5
3.9
?. 2*
5.3
1.4
7.3*
5.0
3.6
7.4
5.9
f .C*
4*9
2
7.C
6.3
6.6
2.3*
4.4
4.9
6.6-*
6 n
3.6
7.7a
7.0
3.9
6.4
5.2
C,3*
2.5
1
6.
5.
5.
w
6.
i, .
6.
5.
2.
7.
5.
2 .
0.
t .
r.
c >
c
1
1
c*
1
7
r>
1
r
u
9*
7
6
c*
1
c*
r»
2
7.0
5.7
6.4
2.5*
6.9
4.5
6.3
5.0
3.4
7.5*
6.6
? s?
6.6
7.?
r.o*
5,4
6
4
4
r
4
3
4
»
6
4
1
7
c
t
1
. L
.4
.9
.4*
.*
+
. ?
.4
.1
.3*
.7
.r
.5*
*
ri*
.7
L.
7 .
1
-
C
--
7
,
4.
2 .
2 .
2 .
i. .
7 .
5.
T
7 .
r .
4.
U
r
5
1
o
(J
£
t
g
1
5
i.
^
^,
1
-------
TABLE C-47
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING ANr SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AN3 DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR HEXACHLORCBENZEKE ANALYSIS BY W A T t R TYPE
MEDIUM YCUDEN PAIR, UMTS -
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
ro
00
: 80
3
.0
4
76.0
3
80. C
76
.0
X
8C.C
4
76.0
3
fcO.C
4
76.C
"° LAB NUMBER
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
74
82
23
90
5
82
62
74
90
70
16
81
15
3?
25
.5
.3
.3
.3
.1
.2
fi
.9
.0
.6
.2*
.2
.5
.6
.4
66.9
E0.5
31.3
91.3
55.6
69.3
63.4
67.7
75.6
74.8
17.2*
80.6
C.C*
17.7
26.8
6P.9
79.2
15.6*
52.6
67.9
76.4*
62.6
29.3
86.7*
74.9
46. S
f*7 . 1
7C.1
34.9*
60.1
65
72
19
53
45
74
7C
53
81
55
47
69
69
17
2C:
.9
.5
.8*
.2
.4
.2*
.6
.8
.9*
.8
.4
.0
.6
.8*
.2
69.4
65.6
17.9*
50. G
C.C*
63.4
61.!
39.5
? J.4*
62.2
44.2
83.9
74.7
2 5 . C*
7C.C
76.5
63.3
19.7*
41.1
52.9
S1.7
51.5
44.9
63.4*
65.9
3P.4
75.6
6P.4
12.3*
46.7
64.0
64 .0
12.9*
44. C
37.4
34.5
65."
67. n
63.7*
CO ",
49.7
77.2*
15. P
20.3*
30. 6
61.4
5-; .f
13. f*
26.3
*
32.7
32.7
50.1
7e.i*
46. f
49.5
& C . 6 *
29.2
C .0*
43.?
-------
TABLE C-43
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
DISTILLED WATER
5
510.0
6
535.0
ENVIRONMENTAL "OMTORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR HE XACHLOROBEN2ENE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH VOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
5
5 10. C
6
535.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
5
5 1 C. 0
6
533.C
5
51C.O
6
5 3 5 . C
0 LAB NUMBI
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1?
14
15
IK
502.8
409.0
134.3
417.0
320.0
494.0
425.0
461.7
611.0
220.0
47.0*
415.0
435. L
262.9
70.9
466.6
411.0
143.1
517.0
329. C
547.9
436.0
636.8
563.0
358.0
83.3*
522. C
281.4
1E6.4
139.6
474.7
423.7
70.3*
236.^
329.0
489.4*
416.0
345.9
725.0*
273.0
240.0
475.C
529.0
284.3*
339.3
448.0
415.1
7C.6*
173.0
249.0
528.0*
445.3
463.1
6CP.C*
39 5. 0
263. C
482.0
156.4
178.7*
117.2
143.0
423. C
53.2*
159. C
4C3.0
2E1.0
387. C
34C.2
616.0*
282.0
1 8 C! . C'
472.0
487.7
17C.9*
1fc3.1
47P.5
322.1
77.7*
PG6.C
262. C
556.5
369.0
242.9
632.0*
297.0
21C.C
499. C
426.3
182.1*
161.2
470. C
424.6
15P.9*
112. C
472.C
233. C
331.0
354. E
615.0*
3C1,?
312. C
556.0*
*
162.9-
199.3
461 .C
496 .1
116. fc«
1 J 0 L
f & C W
192.4
3*4.0
350.3
436. G*
3 1 9 . C
247. C
436. L*
79.5
76. f *
135.5
-------
TABLE C--49
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
1
5.0
2
6.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPrdfif LABORATORY
OFFICE CF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR ISOPHCRONE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
5.C
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL Et^FLUENT
1
5.0
2
6.0
1
5.C
LAB NUMBER
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
5.6
C.O*
6.1
6.3
83.5*
0.0*
8.3*
8.8
10.8
11.0
0.0*
9.6
0.3*
30.2*
0.0*
1C. 5
C.3*
3.7
3.3
6.3
r.c*
1C.S*
7.6
7.1
3.1
C.D*
8.7
O.U*
15.3*
0.0*
2
146
3
6
6
0
9
2C
0
8
.1
6
f
25
0
.8
.0*
.9
.2
.0
.C*
.1
.1*
.0*
7
-^
.C*
.3
.9
.3*
.0*
9
25
C
8
4
C
11
5
9
9
0
8
C
22
21
.3
.3
.4
.5
. «,
.C*
.8
.3
.9
.9
.C*
.3
.:*
.8*
.5
5.
6.
C.
t.
5.
0.
13.
4.
C.
9.
C.
9.
1 .
33.
w
2
6
C*
3
7
C*
fe*
7
7
4
0*
5
4
1*
C*
6.8
41. C*
4.5*
9.2
6.C
C.C*
13.1*
7.5
11.1
1C. 6
0.0*
8,3
C.O*
21 .6*
0.8
5
11
77
5
14
9
19
Q
6
6
0
3
61
33
C
.F
.4
T
. _
.4
.7
.1
.1*
T
-
.9
.4
.C*
.4
C
-s
.1*
.3*
3.1
6.3
9C.4*
7.S
*
11.2
2C.9*
9.5
12. C
11 .2
c-.r*
7.3
*
79,1*
0.5*
-------
TABLE C-50
10
AHPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAL-GfiATO&Y
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR ISOPHORONE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPt
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
3
90.0
4
61. 0
3
9C.O
4
81.2
3
90. C
4
81.0
3
90. C
4
31 .C
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
86
124
p
113
5
135
182
146
134
183
57
1C7
C
126
15
.0
.5
.0*
.0
. u
.2
.3*
.0
.3
.0
.0
.0
.3*
.C*
.3*
62.5
85.2
122. C
88.2
78.8
77.5
146. C*
96. C
85.1
147. C
0.0*
105. C
0.0*
329.2*
8.2*
1G4.0
67.6
74.7
88.6
87.2
7?. 4
213.0
136.5
1 ? 5 . 0
163. C
35.0
76.9
69.?
169.C'*
32.3
74.7
142.2
71.8
89.3
77.1
38.0
237. C1*
42. C
1C9.C
98.6
61.1
89.3
0.0*
248. u*
38.5
9n
2C1
55
114
89
£8
253
113
137
125
9fc
109
1C2
322
53
.6
.5*
.«*
.n
.?
.7
.0*
.C
.r
.C
,7
.0
.3
.3*
.3
62.1
18.8
7R.3*
8C.8
78. S
4t.3
233.0*
97,0
£5.8
1 5 4 . D
105.0
115.0
269.?*
108.6*
25.9
80.2
13B.2
175.0
78.6
1 1 9 . C
P. 2
?4S.O*
115.0
85.1
157. r
98.3
92.2
52. C
342.6*
0.7*
oSC
1^1
17C
73
2fj
9?
267
86
13?
9C
85
47
191
16
.9
.6
r
. U
.6
.1
.1
.C*
L>
.C
.6
.5
.4
*
.6*
.8*
-------
TABLE C-51
DISTILLED WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAE-ORATOM
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) *
PAW DATA .uR 1SGPHORCNE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH VOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
NJ
v£>
CO
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1?
13
14
15
5
540.0
431.8
0.0*
438.0
514.0
360.0
583.0
122C.O*
744.0
89C.O
469.0
379.0
671.0
632.0
1018.5*
66.9*
6
600.0
642.6
911.0
530.0
669. C
448. C
490.4
1320.0*
98C. 0
699.0
1120.0
312. f
853.0
0.0*
2967.4*
159. C*
54P
495
1 25?
271
423
462
n
93?
9?5
801
669
398
783
C>
1C29
226
5
.0
.0
.1
.7
.0
.0
.r*
.c
.?
.c
.0
r*
v.
.0
.C*
.3*
.6
600
535
171 C
3C5
337
293
535
136C
637
671
1?1C
439
til
211
24fc9
491
6
i
t w
.0
O
-
.3
.0
.0
.'0
r*
-
.2
. u
1
. ^
. J
.0
.^
.9*
.7
54C
117
816
C
5CC
391
fi
12-.C
794
8C,9
799
391
619
0
656
245
5
.0
. G
r
c
.0*
L.
.0
.c*
.r*
.G
.0
.P
.2
.0
. r*
.c*
.4
600
569
374
307
575
361
53i
132C
572
861
672
468
82T
r
.j
238,8
518
6
.0
.2
.6
.6*
.0
.0
.9
.:*
.c
r
» w
1
*.
.0
.c
.0*
.5*
.0
54?
456
1375
624
344
209
r
137?
* 04
V"CO
368
1111
392
2649
'o1
5
.r
.r
.8
.1
.1
.P
.0*
.C*
.f
V
.P
.0
.n
*
.7*
.3*
6CC
4
-------
TABLE C-52
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
1
6.0
2
7.C
ENVIRONMENTAL HOMTOhlKG AND SUPPORT LAPORATOM
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/S <1i **
RAW DATA FOR NAPHTHALENE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOU YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
6.C
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
1
6.C
2
7.0
1
6.r
c
7.C
ro
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
!2
13
14
15
5
7
t
6
79
6
7
5
fc
6
3
e
c
8
b
.5
.3
.1
.6
.2*
. 3
.5
.3
.4
.9
.5
.3*
.0*
.1
.0*
6.3
6.6
7.7
20.4*
6.3
5.C
7.3
5.8
5.5
6.5
4.4
8.C*
6.8
t.4
2.4*
5.4
76. C*
5.5
6.6
4.6
6.6
7.7
6.9
8.2*
5.6
4.6
6.9
5.2
6.7
3.9*
6.6
E.3
5.7
7.9
5.3
4.?
7.6
6.3
E.3*
7.6
4.7
7.5
4.5
7.6
1.8*
4
7
*
8
6
L
6
2
7
6
4
E
4
fc
54
.9
.6
. 8
.6*
^
L
.C*
.6
.?
.5
.7
.1
.4
.5
.7
.5*
6
9
5
E
5
5
6
5
9
7
5
7
4
8
5
.6
.3
.3
.2*
.2
, S
.6
.0*
.A
.e
.c
.5
.2
.4
.4
4.0
6.2
4,9
7 6
0 -
1C .
5.3
6.5
6.C
5.6
4.2
7.1
7.4
5.2
5.9
5 . 2
6.9
3.6
7 . >
C .0
7.6
6.6
6.5
9.4
6.3
4.5
7.t
7.t>
4.5
-------
TADLC C-53
N>
cn
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
2
3
4
5
6
e
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
DISTILLED WATER
3
1D5.0
4
94.0
ENVIROkMENTAL KOMTORlNG AND SUPPORT LAf-UBATOhT
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVFLOP*EHT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTION AGENCY
* * EPA KETHOO 625 VALIDATION STUDY - C/N 11 ) * *
RAW DATA FOP NAPHTHA ENE ANALYSIS PY WATER TYPE
MEDIUM VOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WAT:R
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNT
105.:
4
94.0
3
1C5.C
4
94.C
3
1G5.G
94.C
8C.2
136.4
85.4
113. C
5.9
88.8
75.2
88.7
125.0
94.2
43.5
105.0*
14.5
98.9
2 C . C *
67.?
9t.2
1C1.5
1C1.0
70.9
f 3.5
87.5
74.8
62.3
93.6
' 46.2
101.0*
0.0*
64.5
25.2*
95.9
96.9
75. C
124 ,C
P1.1
86.1
122. 0
?0.6
120.0*
1:1 .c
70.3
C.?*
6?. 6
04.0
66.3*
7?. 7
ee.7
69.7
115.0
66.3
72.1
91.2
72.3
116,0*
67.3
65.6
87.6
1G7.8
83.3
23.0*
82.?
99.2
?f .1
1 1 r . o
72.5
9K . 2
84.5
(6.2*
13F . >
e*.2
75.4
K5.0
£9.0
95.2
P3.9
76.4
PS. 4
65.9
97 = 2*
66.5
SO. 4
73. 0
63.7*
73.8
86.4
67.7
1 C n . 0
79.?
89.3
59.9
74.3
£«.?
59.?
1 14 s C
c.c*
99.7
87.4
40.7
?3 .7
84.4
74.4
111 ,0
39.4
76.4
69. «
67.7
£ (. . f:
t>r .2
t 7 m 0
r.c
of .8
cl .^
71 .0
10C.C
63.6
63.9
87. C
:t .9
AC. 2
35.4
-------
TABLE C-54
vo
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING *ND SUPPORT
OFFiCE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/U (1) *
RAW DATA FOR NAPHTHALENE ANALYSIS BY W « T E fc TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED MATER
TAP WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
5
63C.C
6
7CC.C
5
6 3 G . C
6
7GS.O
SUHFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
6 5 c
5
63C.C
L'
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
487.6
522.7
497.0
58C.O
33C.O
577.7
312.0
35C.Q
848. C
29C.O
345.0
709.0*
593.2
523.1
82.6*
54C.4
54fc.8
617.0
956. C*
457.:
395.4
419.0
353.:
636. C
* 1 6 . C
3C5.C'
757. C*
620.9
531.2
1U6.3*
546.5
556.1
410. C
507.C
393.0
331 .0
392.0
393.1
852.:-*
377. C
754.0
745. C
458. 6
526. T
189.8*
519.0
563.8
414.?
3 1 C . 0
31C.C
579.5
415.0
328.7
838.:*
5 5 C . 0
415.3
792.0
UP. 5
539.7
52.3*
125
458
3 4P
69C
437
5 2
-------
TABLE C-55
ENVIRONMENTflL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAHORATORT
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGFNCY
** EPA METHOD 62^ VALIDATION STUDY - b/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR FCP-1260 ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPF
LOU VOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATE*
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO: 1
TRUE CONC: 40. D
N>
vO
2
36.0
4C
1
.C
2
36.0
1
42 . C
i
36. C
4"
1
n
c
36. C
-* LAB NUMBER
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
I
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
13.1
*
C.C*
26.4
134.0*
C.C*
10.4
c.o*
32.0
26.2
C.D*
27.9
C.O*
3G.6
6.8
8.8
*
0.0*
18.2
29.2
18.9
6.5
:.c*
1.9
7.?
D.C*
19.5
0.0*
2J.C
32.4
3
£
2
24
C
3
C
r
11
r.
32
n
2
48
.5
.3*
.6
.0
.C*
.4
.C*
.0*
.8
.C*
.e*
.r*
.7
.7*
9.9
C.C*
2.9
31.6
19.5
8.8
c.;-*
5.7
16.6
c.:*
11.7*
C.C*
P. 8
2.6
7.C
*
c.r*
C.C*
26. 3»
O.C*
7.C
u . C *
13.6
10. C
o.c*
16.4*
C.C*
11.1
C.C*
7.4
*
C.C*
C.C*
'9.1*
10.4
4.1
C.C*
C.C*
9.5
C.O*
16.2*
r.o*
C.D*
C.2
5
"»
r\
I.1
C
17
.1
.2
4
0
43
2
4
.4
*
.r*
.r*
*
.c*
.F*
.0*
,r *
. ?
.C*
.3*
.6
.7
3.c
*
C.C*
C.C*
A
C.C*
r . ?
14.:
1 .4
1 _ . S
C . J *
<1 .7*
A
r. C *
4.7
-------
TABLE C-56
ENVIRONMENTAL MOMTORING AND SUPPORT LAE-ORATu&Y
OFFICt OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOP"ENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
« EPA PETHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR PCP-1260 ANALYSIS BV WATER TYPE
MEDIUK YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE HATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
TO LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
1?
13
14
15
3
10C.O
53.0
0.0*
100.0
54.6
77.3
44.3
40.0
68 .4
63.0
O.C*
'34.0
0.0*
77.8
115.1
4
90. G
25.4
C.C*
tl.f
69. £
75.1
53.4
t7.C
54. C
69.C
O.C*
1U.O
O.C*
74 . :
65.7
3
1DO.C
7.3
*
O.C*
1.7
83.?
84.1
24.9
C.C*
39.?
25.2
C.C*
115."*
C.C.*
55.?
F6.P
9C
4
C
r
314
5P
4P
31
16
51
r
o9
C
41
A
4
.3
.1
*
.0*
.2
.0*
.7
.5
.7
.4
.5
.0*
. 5 *
.?*
.4
.9
3
1CC.O
34. C
*
O.C*
o.c*
4 E . 1 *
15. P
43.7
11 .1
o.:*
39.4
51 .4
68.5*
O.C*
47.7
C.O*
4
9C.O
14.5
*
C.C*
C.C*
99.»:*
51 .4
12.3
3^.4
51 .5
5C.1
o.n.
71 .9*
O.C*
3?. 5
G.2
KO
22
n
3
155
0
57
r
*>
i.
45
125
44
r>
3
.C
.9
*
.:*
. c
.r*
.0*
.1
.r*
. r *
. r
.c*
.c*
.7
.0*
9C
"> 7
C -s
C
c
171
C
1?
^ u
> c
2 5
C
141
*
It
t.
. J
c t
*
.c*
.c*
.c*
.c*
t>
. 2
. r
.A
.C*
. c *
,n.
. "
-------
TABLE C-57
sO
ENVIRONMENTAL PCH1TOMNG AND SUPPORT LAFORATO&Y
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND tEVELOPPENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA PE7HOC 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAy DATA FOR PCP-1260 ANALYSIS PY WATER TYPE
HIGH VOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB
1
2
*
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1i
15
NUMBER
5
667.0
379.2
230.0
336. C
67C.C
926.0
5^9.0
476.4
64S.O
261.0
222.0*
152. -!
O.G*
652.4
433.1
6
60C.C
241.3
*
181.0
3G2.C
621. C
712.5
571. C
4C9.9
23C.O
387.0
fc 1 . C
1 1 c : . c
O.G*
541.5
0.0*
5
667.0
323.4
*
73. C*
155. C
733.0
71S.8
464.C
681 .8
543.0
39£.0
496.0
1140. C*
0.0*
633.3
682.3
6
AGC.O
251.:
28. C*
91.1
417.3
841.0
529.0
352.2
434.0
442.0
461.0
1160.3*
r.o*
461.8
57.9
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL
5
667.0
53.C
96.?
686. 0'
352.0
5 7:."
9C3."
32.1
3t7.0
c.r*
it.3
2.7
6
60C.O
276.8
*
69.8
PP. 5
495.0*
725.8
471 .T
172.5
472.0
4C7."
353.0
1070.0*
« < . C
469.7
G.C*
5
667.0
370,^
172.C
37.5
982.0*
284.0
427.0
220.3
635 ,:
437.0
594 .0
1'eo.n*
579.5
205.5
6
6LC.C
212.C
*
1 : 6.r
45.:
6 5 1 . C
2 3 4 . C
I 1 V C.. C «
3 1 <> . J
44i.e
'62.3*
79.8
-------
TABLE C-58
ENVIRONMENTAL KOMTOKING AND SUPPORT LAPORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
RAW DATA FOR 1 , 3-DICHLOROBEN?£M ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UC/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
Al»PUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
OJ LAB NUMBER
0 ,
0 '
2
3
4
5
t
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
5.C
2.3
2.6
3.6
4.7
7fi.4*
C.D-
3.9
5.1*
7.7
2.3
1.9
4.8
C.O*
4.5
0 . 0
2
6.C
4.2
3.3
6.9
i 7 .4*
6.6
3.:
2.8
9.3-
2.6
2.3
2.5
5.8
C.O
5.0
4.5
5
1
100
t
f>
<
j
j
»
£
?
1
2
4
2
i
2
1
r
wl
.7
.C-
.7
. 2
.1
.4
.4
.«
.P
.7
.3
.2
.e
.2
.9
2
6.C
4.4
3.5
4.2
f .1*
i r
C.O*
4.1
2.1
8 .C
14. 6«
2.2
4.1
1.8
4.3
4.7
1
^
1 .
3 .
2.
fc.
6 .
3.
2.
3.
e .
fc
2.
4.
C.
t
C.
0
4
P
9
x
7
4
5«
5
C
3
7
7
" *
6
fi*
6
3
f
4
3
5^
C
'
2
0
11
?
4
4
4
4
2
.C
.5
.r«
n
.
. j;
. 2
.C*
. ? .
.9
. 3 *
.1«
. '
r
. *'
t
. ~>
. '_
.7
5
L
1
6
4
3
2
9
5
5
2
4
3
1
1
.C
.7
.9
,e
C
. .
*
.»
T
~
. ?*
.3
.e
. i
.2
*
,|"
.9
i
(. .C
1 .<-
7
4 . 7
u- . s
C' . 7
4 . r
7 /
_ . t
f . 5
1C . 7
d .4
2.5
4. 1
4.:
3.7
-------
TABLE C-59
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
» EPA METHOD f25 VALIDATION STUDT - B/N (t)
RAW DATA FOR 1 , ?-DICHLOROB£N7ENE ANALYSIS MY yATEh TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN P«l», UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AHPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
B
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
«, p
13
14
15
3
90.0
58.3
C.3*
104. B
153.0
4.8
72.8
49.2
135.7.
140.0
10c.O
33.5
65.9
0.0*
8C .n
27.9
4
81.0
43.5
76. C
122.9
72.7
63.!
73.6
6T.1
169. C*
86.7
93.1
35.5
6< .2
O.C
66.1
22.4
90
79
81
96
95
65
76
75
166
4t
46
55
66
57
62
53
3
.C
.1
.9
.2
.6*
.8
.1
.3
.4*
.4
.5
.1
,5
.2
,r
.8
4
f 1.0
69.9
76.6
81.4
125. C*
71.1
63.6
67.3
U4.7
92.4
1C4.Q
51.5
61.3
80.6
64.6
31.C
3
9C. C
73.3
63. C
65.1
122.0
93.7
64 . ?
6i. :*
116.1
94.4
17C.C*
71 .4
64.2
5C.2
63. f
265 . T*
4
81. C
53.6
fc 8 u
84.4
73.1
61.2
61.9
53.3*
53.9
86.1
145.0*
65.6
65.1
81.3
7r.5
47.9
90
58
1CO
91
75
89
85
57
154
59
8P
6?
62
5f
3i
r
.0
.5
.7
,?
.3
.F
.«
.1
.5*
.4
.4
.f
.1
*
.1
.?
cl
4 t
1C1
14?
1 1 4
4f
I 7
5.fc
1 : <
11 7
6?
57
5T
1 f
25
£ 5
4
*v
. £
C
J
\
-r
C,
.9
.f
"."r
. 7
v
A
*~
.3
.7
. f,
.5
. t
-------
TABLE C-60
LJ
O
ENVI KCNNENTAL WON1TOR1NG AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
DAW DATA FOR 1 , 3-D ICHLCROBEN7£N£ ANALYSIS bY yATEK TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
it
5
6
7
e
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
54C.Q
364. t>
0.3*
446. D
666.0
27C.O
518.0
262.0
9L1.2*
781.0
622.0
396.0
439. C
645.9
435.7
334.0
6
6CC.C
388.8
0.0*
546.0
790.0
455.0
5C8.3
399.0
1C55.3*
640.0
745. C
274.0
474. C
7C2.2
473.4
273.1
5
540. C
443.4
67?.?
543.9
751.0*
321. C
33*?. 4
390.^
1199.8
1C20.C
649. C
?56.T
477. P
416.6
415.9
276.5
6
6CC.3
486.0
947. C
576. 0
665.3*
283.0
474.0
4C7.0
1274.7
936.0
131.0
4U.O
601. C
121.2
479.3
352.6
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
5
540. C
83.6
74?. 2
39Z.7
7C7.C
40?. C
5C9.C
33C.C*
395.6
£34.0
6 66.C*
4 1 1 . C
519. C
76S.6
393. ?
283.6
6
6CC.C
445. C
493.2
577.2
934.0
"57.0
442.4
355.0*
929. C
8 8 9 * '
91*. C*
410. C
522.0
534.6
377.6
1238.7
540
343
718
502
529
425
433
342
575
9erl
47C
426
48*
381
344
5
.C
.0
.3-
.9
.0
.C
.0
.c
.1*
. "*
n
.
r>
. L
.0
*
.7
.5
6uC
3t>C
936
' jC
1Q2C
423
C
355
1217
557
5*9
Z61
366
36
338
3
c
.0
.0
.1
. c
.c
.c
.c*
.c
.7*
~
.0
r
. w
.0
.5
.9
.4
-------
TADLE C-61
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
DISTILLED WATER
1
11.0
2
12.C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDV - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR 2 ,6-DIN1TROTOLUENf ANALYSIS RV WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDfN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
11.0
2
12.C
SURFACE >j/ATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
1
11.C
2
12.0
1
11.0
12.C
co
o
LAB NUMBER
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
3.5
8.7
5.6
12.4
77.8*
0.0*
8.3
6.2
14.8*
fi.S
8.6
12.1
0.0*
7.3
2.4*
8.1
8.5
10.0
9.4
10.1
9.6
9.1
10.6
11.7*
7.5
13.2*
7.2
7.9
9.5
2.1*
5
9C
5
10
9
9
7
1C
15
C
9
10
9
6
4
.2
.C*
.3*
.2
. C
r
. w
.9
.1
.8*
.9
.3
.6
.9
.4
.1
1
1
1
1
1
9.2
1.4
5.8*
1.8
C.O*
c.o*
9.1
0.4
6.6*
9.9
1.2
8.7
6.6
9.5
9.2
2
11
3
11
P
3
8
3
13
9
14
12
6
6
87
.C
.4
.5
. 2
.8
.1
.9
C
j
.9
.4
.P
.1
.5
.5
.2*
5.
13.
3.
11.
4.
0.
9.
5.
17.
9.
17.
3.
7.
9.
4.
7
6
n
(.
f
r*
4
3
6
8
7
C
6
-,
o
7
4.5
11 .6
4.P
11,7
*
51.3*
9.2
15.6
7.9
12. P
10. ^
*
6.1
2.5*
4.9
13.3
6.9
16.7
6.5
1C. 7
10.6
16.7
9.5
18.4
12.3
11.5
n.g
-------
TABLE C-62
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
3
81.0
4
90.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAPORATORt
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHO! 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR 2 ,6-DIN1TROTOLUFNE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPfc
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIP, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
81.0
4
90.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNT
3
81.0
4
90.C
81 .C
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
68.0
86.6
76.4
84.6
7.2*
38.6
79.3
68.6
113.0*
92.4
48.2
84.6
C.C*
80.6
30.5*
96.8
94.2
12C.5
1C9.C
128.0
95. C
96.1
76.2
1C2.C*
10C.O
55.7
97.5
0.0*
79.9
15.9*
69.7
85.0
63.8*
93.9
87.3
76.4
83.7
80.0
112. C*
92.4
76.5
77.1
63.5
7E.7
57.7
83.6
91.8
70. 0*
114.3
1 Z 2 . 0
62.7
97.5
79.0
149.0*
69.2
83.9
85.4
54.5
79.3
83.3
6C.5
?6.5
57.8
98.7
49.3
9C.6
79.2
62.3
136.C
82.4
92.8
91.4
1C8.1
6E.3
117.6
76.9
92.8
64.5
103. C
89. r
8D.9
92.4
69.9
88.2
95.9
111.0
95.3
85.7
83.6
64.5
66.6
9P.1
73.5
83.5
26G.O*
83.7
85.3
72.7
112.0
75.5
82.3
82.9
41.3
51. n
34.6*
66.0
100. 5
b2.0
76.0
*
14 2 . G
1 0 1 . C
73.1
116.0
76.2
111.0
91.1
*
36.5
69.9*
-------
TABLE C-63
DISTILLED WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
5
600.0
6
540.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - C/N (1) **
RAW DATA FOR 2 , 6-DINITROTOLUFNE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIRt UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
5
6GO.O
6
54C.C
SURFACE WATE9 INDUSTRIAL EFFLUbNT
5
6CO.O
6
54C.O
o
01 LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IP
11
12
13
14
15
609.0
663.5
635.1
749.1
410.0
81G.O
616.0
664.6
923. G*
368.3
579.0
638.0
573.1
573.8
252.9*
644.8
556.6
62?. 2
778.0
445.0
625.8
631.0
655.7
628. C*
620.0
391. C
716.0
738.1
579.7
3C3.4*
£51.2
744.5
36«.4*
703. H
492. C
771.6
629.1
7C3.5
«78. r*
482.1
529. C
764.0
562.4
579.3
486.2
451.0
566.8
331.6*
613.0
289.0
6C5.0
624.0
675.1
778.0*
623.0
544.0
687.:
105.5
587.7
821.7
15C.C
745.7
329.!
8 3 ? . 0
284..-
848.6
6 5 H . C
59C.7
996.0
506.:
625.0
760.0
698.0
543.1
5C9.1
57P.5
429.6
'33.6
846.0
? 5 3 . C
P84.4
607. C
553.1
717.0
549. C
633.0
737. C
532.7
505.5
1439.2*
567. C
744.2
4C8.3
68E.C
1200.:
737.0
646.0
487.5
992. C
571. C
F54.?
797. C
*
603.3
60<5.7«
461.C
7c3.4
405.7
953. C
23S.C
575.0
59G.O
7^7.7
671 .0
585. G
543. C
576.0
61.3
40^.1
231 .9
-------
TABLE C-64
fcNVIRONHENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIOAflON STUDY - B/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR 3,3 -D 1 CHLCRQBEN21DINE ANALYSIS UY WATER TYPE
LOW YO'JDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC: 40
OJ
o
1
.0
2
36.0
1
4:.o
2
36.0
1
40.0
2
36.0
1
40.0
36
A
\J
LAB NUMBER
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
40
27
9
36
96
12
13
17
35
24
18
87
77
120
9
.7
.5
.6*
.7
.1
.1
.5
.6
.3
.6
.4
.9
.2
.3*
.9
31.1
23.2
7.8*
34.8
35.6
19.7
21.2
13.8
23.8
25.7
20.9
49.0
54.5
1C8.0*
58.1
25.4
62.0
C.O*
31.5
30. 6
31.1
16.3
5.9
3C.O
16.2
20.0
66.0
47.9
71.4*
123. 7«
10.8
29.8
C.O*
20.4
10.4
47.3
11.5
15.2
17.8
36.0
18.2
71. G
50.2
49.3*
31.3*
36.7
17.6
7.7*
31.5
28.5
3F . 9
32. r,
8.1
44.2
32.:
35.1
86.0*
53.5
1.9
85.6*
25.7
33.9
7.6*
?.C*
19.5
31.7
27.7
11. f
28.2
1P.8
26.5
75.9*
55.4*
142.8*
44.7*
26.0
45.7
21 .3*
21.*
*
50.7
36.2
11.9
25.6
45.2
23.0
73.'
8.5*
47. 7*
25.4
35
42
1 1
21
C
36
^ 7
15
29
24
26
2
114
28
.6
.2
.7*
.6
. C*
.9
. c
.5
.2
.1
.5
.2
*
.5*
.8
-------
TABLE C-65
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
3
100.0
4
90.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MOM10R1NG AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/M (1) **
RAW DATA FOR 3,3 -D 1 CHLOROBENZ I DINE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
MEDIUM YOUC-EN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
3
100.0
4
9C.2
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL
3
100.0
4
90.0
3
100.0
4
vc.o
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
120.8
77.6
19.4*
161.0
33.9
110.5
92.2
48.0
85.0
73.0
41.4
203.0
206.0
247.8*
132.6
61.8
86.6
47.3*
124. C
79.1
86.6
67.6
5C.7
76.5
12C.C
34.2
124.0
O.C*
4)8.3*
151.8
73.5
102.8
0.0*
114.0
56.0
112.0
58.1
21.5
6&.4
115.0
45.3
206.0
143.4
173.9*
39!. 6*
7E.3
81.2
Cc.3*
151.0
63.3
112.4
49.7
46.7
103. D
83.9
51.6
75.4
11P.O
392.2*
107. 1*
92.8
52.3
25.7*
19.8
798. C*
116.C
83,9
34.7
64. n
227. C
101 .C
232.0*
163.2
8.3
237.8*
104. C
59.6
30.2*
68.9
78.5
97.9
67.0
35.5
59.0
77.3
89.5
192.?*
132.9
53.7
103.2*
93.1
111.7
43.1*
114.0
o.r*
13^. C
156.0
50.7
67.3
112. C
81 .9
201 .3
21 .1*
353.6*
94.1
101 .0
103. C
5f.C*
91.4
44C.C*
122. C
104.0
35. 9
64 .4
123.0
45.3
188.0
118.6*
176.0*
113.2
-------
TABLE C-66
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
CrriCE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - E/N (1) **
RAU DATA FOR 3,3 -D1CHLOROBENZIDINE ANALYSIS B* WATLR TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/t.
DISTILLED WATER
TfP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
u>
o
CO
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
U
15
5
6A7.0
£76.3
5:5.5
463.2*
129C.O
57C.O
823.0
911.0
?35.3
65C.o
395.0
499.0
916.0
1200.4
1570.8*
6.8
6
600.0
579.5
463.3
237.5*
1390.0
381. C
972.4
793.0
716.1
480.0
578.0
324.0
145C.O
1661.0
2196.5*
1078.2
5
667. C
339.1
623.6
C.O*
1100.0
404.0
12S4.5
65C.C
4C1.7
725. C
9C3.0
372.0
nso.o
1C89.8
1188.5*
2647.2*
6
6 G 0 . 0
414.0
488.9
C.C*
735. C
34C.C
1010.0
522.0
401.2
526.3
1C5C.O
413.0
1280. C
577.1
2588.4*
1269.4*
5
667.0
194.0
675.5
230.9*
1230.0
1841.0
1C7C.C
1130.0
447.0
720. C
573.0
502.0
U£(?.C*
1C32.C
1363.1
1561.4*
6
6CO.O
591.9
385.9
246.2*
212.0
381.0
986.4
615.0
304.4
526.0
1790.0
549.0
1340.0*
6.1
2Z09.0
2C67.0*
5
667.0
598.0
742.9
384.2*
1090. C
0.0*
8 8 4 . C
929. M
322.7
594.0
978.0
543.0
1540. r
*
1353.9*
1567.1
6
6 u 0 . 0
537. C
fc77.G
407.4*
826. G
C.O*
966. F
1190.0
512.8
453. C
1250. C
376.0
1040.0
1S8.5*
1648.2*
335.9
-------
TABLE C-67
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPOkT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AKD DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PPOTECTICN AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) *
RAW DATA FOR 4 -CHLO ROPHE N Y L PHFNYL ETHER ANALYSIS HY yA
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - JG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO; 1
TRUE CONC: 9.0
u>
o
VO
2
1C.O
1
9.0
2
10.0
1
9.0
2
10.0
1
9.0
2
1C.C
LAD NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
30.6*
9.4
5.1
1u.7
56.5*
0.0*
9.4
7.7
10.3
6.1
139. n*
13.0
0.0*
'.' .4
0.0*
36.6*
8.7
6.7
1C.1
11. C
11.1
9.4
7.8
8.1
6.3
167.0*
13.1
7.9
11.1
3.1*
1?.7*
67. D*
5.0*
7.C
7.5
10.5
? .7
6.7
11.6
5.3
187.0*
11.7
10.5
? .5
6,P*
37.6*
10.0
4.5*
10.2
6.5
1C. 4
9.8
7.4
10.9
6.6
2C6.C*
12.2
/ .6
9.6
2.5*
3C.4*
8.2
?.£*
10.7
8.9
9.9
9.1
3.6*
11.0
7.7
178.0*
13.3
7.2
9.0
18.2*
36.1*
1C. 9
3.9.
1?. 1
9.C
f .3
Q.4
6.2*
13.4
fc.1
199.O
11.9
10.2
9.7
7.9
26.4*
p.r
1.7*
8.0
&
7.9
7. A
7.5
8.5
6..'
173. C*
12.7*
7.0
5.0
19.6*
3.2
1.6*
8 . 1
*
6.9
7.6
8 . 7
11 .9
7.C
212. C*
12.1
*
12.2
5.9
TYPE
-------
TABLE C-68
LO
t->
O
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1Z
13
14
15
ENVIRONMENTAL KOMTORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND CEVELOPPENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1)
RAW DATA FOR 4-CHLOROPHENYL PHENYL ETHEH ANALYSIS HY wATE« TYPt
MEDIUM YCUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATtR INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
3
68.0
244.1*
71.3
44.6
72.8
8.1
71.8
64.5
61.0
77.0
58.2
788.0*
87.6
14.0
65.5
22.8*
4
75. C
258.6*
81.6
64.1
86.7
72.6
76.1
79.5
61.5
74.8
65.2
1C67.0*
103.0
0.0*
67.8
23. C*
68
102
69
39
70
54
71
69
44
73
52
U45
S2
71
62
51
\
.0
.0*
.6
.0*
.9
.e
.8
.9
.4
.5
.7
.C*
.7
T
-
.4
.6*
4
75.0
2C2.0*
74.5
45.5*
82.0
63.5
76. Z
77.9
63.9
97.5
51.9
1842. C*
£6.0
57. 5
6<.D
1B.8«
3
6P.O
2iS.r«
^3.*
34.6*
76.7
59.5
7C.1
63.0
40.6*
87.3
49.7
1596.0*
93.2
£4.6
63.7
56.7
75
2fc6
71
42
73
64
9C
73
4f
62
62
161H
101
95
71
50
4
.0
.c«
.3
.5*
.4
.1
.4
.1
.2*
.5
.9
.:.*
.0
.8
.1
.5
68
233
61
2"i
5<5
50
51
6?
60
61
45
1683
82
22
4Q
41
3
.C
.9*
.7
.n*
.4
.8
7
-
.4
.1
.7
.7
.0*
.4
.".
.P
.7
4
75.
245.
6F.
25.
58.
57.
5)= .
!>7.
= 2.
46.
1647.
V^2.
35.
3'.'.
50.
C
j*
t.
4 *
9
A
I
5
7
J
9
,1«
5
1
0
3
-------
TABLE C-69
u>
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAFORATORV
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - D/N (1)
RAW DATA FOR 4-CHLOROPHENYL PHENYL ETHER ANALYSIS DV fcATEK TYPE
HIGH YOUPEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB
1
2
3
I
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
5
500. C
1931.5*
434.0
253.2
540.0
350.0
578.0
448.0
396.8
591. C
220.0
6937.0*
619.0
564.0
-< 1 6 . ?
92.1*
6
450.0
1629.5*
368.7
235.8
542. C
268.0
472.9
444.0
452.7
448. C
354.0
4629. C*
666.C
263.2
355.0
14C.3*
5
50C.O
1909.2*
489.7
179.5*
413.0
323.0
502.1
4t?.r
4 3 2 . 7
7:7.0
3 1 ? . C
969C.O*
699.C
524.9
422.4
334. P*
6
450.0
147C.O*
3?1,6
157.9*
334.0
223.0
516. S
42?. D
392.5
5 C ? . 0
73:
664
375
356
391
6
.
m
.
C
0*
0
1*
0
0*
p
"
9*
0
0
G*
0
?
4
9
500
18CO
478
189
337
6<5
322
386
369
655
723
9990
763
793
»ie
5
C
C
r«
^
1*
0
0
r*
r
4
n
n
r
.*>
*
9
4
45
163
5o
15
4L
36
25
33
3a
33
73
92fe
54
6
24
19
6
0.
»
_,
3.
5.
6.
0.
7
_.
C
v
6.
5.
n
^ .
I .
4 ,
7 .
9.
5.
C
C*
5
6*
C
C
C
^
i,
0
T
0*
r
5
1
7
-------
TABLE C-70
tsj
* VI RON 'ENTAL PONITCKING AND SllPPONT
OFFICt Of RESEAkCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - R/\
(1) »
RAW DATA FOR <. , 4 -ODD ANALYSIS BY WATEH TYPE
LOU YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UC/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAT WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLL'tKT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
LAB NUMBE
1
2
3
4
5
t
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
7.0
R
3.6
0.0*
7.1
4.4
69.3*
0.0*
3.6
5.1
ft. 2*
5.2
2.G
0.0*
0.0*
6.3*
O.C*
1
4.
6.G
3.9
0.0*
3.5
6.4
5.9
1.7
5.1
4.5
6.4*
4.1
2.3
C.O*
r>.c*
7.7*
C.2
1
7.C
2.9
C.G«
2.c
2.5
4.9
c .:*
?.1
7.7
6.9*
4.6
3.9
r>.8
C .0*
4.2
6.4
2
4.2
C . >
r .?*
2.9
7.7
c.:*
5.0
7.S
7.5*
5.6
7.9
C.D*
d.D*
6.3
0.3
7
3
r.
0
2
e
C
A
1
q
4
4
4
C
t
0
1
.r
m -i
. "*
. <~ *
. 3
.1
.C*
-i
ft L.
.9
.2*
.7
.1
.7
'"J*
n
. >~
.C*
P
7
6
r
i
5
0
4
2
7
4
?
r
j
6
4
2
.C
<
!c*
.c*
.8
,2
.C*
I
^
.7
.s-
.9
.4
.r*
.r*
. 0
.5
7
c
7
^
?
0
13
c
f
1
3
r
»
2
1
n
.9
,r'
."*
.2
*
.P»
.1'
.7
,r «
. *
.4
.C*
*
.c
.1
2
n
V
r .
» *
w/
i m
- a
7.
5 .
4.
C -
4.
2.
-
C *
"
^ *
C
*
' i *
6
?
1 .
7
7
G *
3
4
-------
TABLE C-71
LO
ENVI fiONMENTAL !"GNITOR!NG AND SUPPORT LAt-ORATGKY
OFFKE OF ttSEARCH AMD tEVFLOPfENT
AL PBOTLCTIOK AGENCY
* EPA f F T H 0 0 t 2 ' VALIDATION £ T U ft Y - B/N (1) * *
RAW DATA FOR 4 , 4 -ODD ANALYSIS BY U*TFR TYPE
*EDIUP YOUUEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/l
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER ISDUSTRIAL EfFLUtNT
AKPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
3
54.0
38.6
C-.3*
7.6
74.4
8.5
4i.5
3P.6
46.5
4fc.6*
40.0
6.6
6.3
C .0*
61. ?
/ r
t v
6G
36
o
23
36
106
42
40
44
54
43
P
b
C
66
Ifi
4
.0
.1
.0*
.3
.7
.C*
,3
.7
.4
.7*
f
v
.8
.5
.C*
.3*
.1
54
19
4
6
11
57
40
23
22
51
75
19
1D
n
47
39
3
.C
.8
.0*
.4
.6
.6
.P
.8
.3
.5*
.6
.9
. r
.n*
.c
.?
4
60.3
27.1
6.0*
7.5
13.?
32.3
ioe.4*
48 ,,6
29.5
53.3*
35.7
14. 3
6.5
C . ~i*
47.1
4.9
54
31
r
6
6
31
18
i »
2i
42
2^
27
3
r
41
C
3
.C
.7
.r.
.?
.6
.9
. ^
.F
s r
.6*
. 1
.2
.C
.C*
.9
» r. :
4
6C.C
32.4
c.c*
9.1
* .7
46.5
147.3*
22.1
24.6
47.1*
34.3
27.3
4.2
r.c-
V . 4
1P.1
3
54. C
2P .'"*
14. ?
6.P*
« ,P
31 .7
? « r*
53 .°
2^.9
21 . ?
2? .9
24.4
3 . 5
*
35.1
7.T
4
t:.:
34.1
^ i -i
* - ^,
C '
_
t , 4
35.:
4 ./
1 Q . 6
: 1.1
<. t . ;
26.1
: 3 .9
K .^
12.2
1 7 . 5
-------
TABLE C-72
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT I AI
f,AU DATA FOR 4,4 -ODD ANALYSTS PY UATTR TYPE
HIGH YOUCEN P A I H , UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATIR
SURFACE UATIH INDUS! MAL EFFLUfcM
A1PUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAO NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
40C.O
311.1
41.0*
104.4
23J.O
330.0
493.0
363.0
308.1
4 7 ! . 0
149.0
126.0
52.3
r.o*
46? .1 *
4P.1
6
360. C
255.1
45. r*
65. r
314.0
342. C
2920.7*
315.0
471.4
341.0*
217.:
52.2
f 9.5
s.r*
396.7*
63.4
'OC
2^6
5t
5"
137
434
5 * iiJ
295
J69
5M
234
232
1C1
C
453
251
5
.0
. *
.O
.A
.0
.0
.2*
. '
» r
. ~ *
.C
.2
.C
.0*
.5
.2
6
3tC.C
236.3
1 C f . ?
42.0
1C7.0
232.0
t9e. :
340. C
2!7.7
372. T*
2 2 : . C'
235.0
1 3f .0
c.o*
373.5
85.2
4 uC,
£4
1 M
3*
< 4
4! 1
270
34t
279
47°
175
15fi
75
3
4L3
9?
5
.C
.c
. r.
.?
.4
. c
r
. ~
. "
.2
.O
r
w
.C
.4
.r*
.5
.1
«6G
589
53
5P
281
5501
3C3
250
434
192
184
77
C
373
1*
6
.C
.1
.C-
.(
.3
r
.1*
r
v.
.2
.C*
. C
.(.;
.4
.C*
.5
.3
400
296
2°
1 0°
36
?7P
156
257
1 6C
450
? 19
314
163
423
134
5
J
.0
.'"
.5*
.4
* -
,r
*
.4
.r-
n
* -
.<-,
*
.#.
.9
A.
1 t. '
2 : : . c
*i u ^ . C
o 4 . 2 «
37.4
2 3 * . C
7^ .7.
"*6 T . C
261 .t
2 7 5 . C
2 u » :
222.."
t 7. 1
*
1^4.^
*. V .t
-------
TABLE C-73
ENVIRONMENTAL PON1TOMNG AND SUPPORT LA[-GRATOPY
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOF-ENT
ENV'RONKENTAL PROTECTION AGFNCY
EPA METHOD
^ VALIDATION STUDY - P/H (1) *
DISTILLED WATER
KfV DATA fO» 4,4 -DDE ANALYSIS BY WATEk TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER S U » f A C E WATER INDUSTRIAL FffLUfcNT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
U)
Cn
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
14.
1C.
1C.
2.
11 .
153.
7.
ft.
11.
16.
1C.
0.
9 .
C .
11 .
4 .
C
0
0
4*
9
0
4
D
7
0*
3
0«
3
0*
5
1
2
15. i.
9.6
9.0
3.5*
11.5
15. e
9.9
6.1
1C.H
12.8*
7.2
C.O*
9.6
9.2
11.7
4.5
1
U.O
5.9
7.0
1.6*
3.E*
ir.7
7.4
4.4
4.0
£ .6
P .6
6.7
7.9
12.5
4.6
11.9
i
15.3
1C. 2
8.0
C.D-
4.6-
14.4
11. C
C r
~ I'
7.3
12. 1«
9.9
5.9
f .2
6.7
8.9
2.6
14
7
c
r
4
14
7
5
4
U
7
6
7
£
7
6
1
. C
.6
.4
. r.
. 1 »
.4«
.9
. f
.2
.f *
.8
.2
.6
, 7
-i
,L
.(-
2
15.0
9.7
'.4
1.4*
3.8-
1C. 4.
# .1
6.2
C '_
1P.9*
7.P
5.5
7.
ft . 8
7.:
7.1
U
6
1 ',
n
2
0
1 n
4
9
4
5
p
3
3
1
.0
. 9
.0
.0
.1
*
,°*
.4
c
.n
w
* -
.9
.6
.
.6
.7
L
15..;
7.:
f1 . L
1 .4*
*. * > °
4 . }
C .r*
7 . 1
P. 6
<>.I
9. 7
7 . 2
9. 1
.
4 . °
3 . 7
-------
TABLE C-74
DISTILLED WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL PCMTORING AND SUPPORT LAUGRATC/RY
OFflCE CF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - D/N (1)
RAW DATA FOR 4,4 -DDE ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL E F F L U b r* T
A^PUL NO:
TRUE CONC: 101
U)
(-
Oi
3
.0
4
1 1 2 . C
3
101.0
4
112.0
7
1C1.0
4
112. C
3
101 .C
112
i.
.0
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
90
67
8
129
21
73
69
97
115
70
10
61
24
96
29
.0
.0
.0*
.0
.8
.3
.6
.7
.0*
»
* -*
.2*
.2
.6
.8
.9
67.9
77. C
31.1*
75.9
1 C 3 . 0
79.8
78.1
97.2
1C5.d«
75.9
13.0*
70.9
C.O
1C 0.3
45.2
3C.1
4P .C
4.5*
f .6*
109.0
63.4
43.8
33.8
100.0*
55.5
30.5
40.1
58.9
65.1
77.9
34. P
54. C
5.9*
11.3*
57.5
76.3
£6.9
5C.2
66. P*
62.2
35.2
47.1
5C.3
58. *
17.7
64. g
43.4
5.1*
6 . 7-»
62.4*
22.9
65.:
29,. 8
77.4*
49.9
45.6
4*. 2
45.5
57.4
17.?
51.5
2C.4
7.5*
9.C*
1C 2.0*
53.2
32. L
37.2
£7.5*
59.4
45.4
51.7
55.3
53.4
19.9
53.5
49. r
* .F*
P.I*
33.?
13.1
73.1
29,5
30."
49. «(
33.2
5P.1
23.4
49.6
7.5
6d
i.4
11
6
i:
2*
If
59
-:;
34
05
65
1^
26
-.
.0
J
* f-
.(
.2
'
.3
-)
,L
.1
f\
' .
.3
.6
7
. j
.5
-------
TABLE C-75
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
5 6
750.0 675.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING ANC SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPKENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (1) **
h A W DATA FOP 4,4 -DDE ANALYSIS BY WATER TV P E
HIGH YOU DEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
6
675.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
75C.C
6
675.C
5
750.0
6
6 7 5 . C
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
713.0
380.0
16C.4*
316.0
810.0
541.0
604.0
588.2
939.0*
246.0
212.0*
292. n
607.7
710.8
195.3
519.7
336. C
131. C*
28C.O
785.0
433. C
535.0
951.1
659. G*
346.0
100. C*
314.0
549. !i
578.8
199.9
678
343
80
176
394
444
524
299
1C9C
329
329
3C4
834
669
454
.5
.0
.5*
.n*
.0
.4
.0
.0
.C*
n
_
.0
.0
.4
.7
.6
487
3ir
62
121
4t2
442
576
385
747
315
74F
252
239
534
126
.0
.0
,1*
.0*
ri
J
.0
V
.0
.0*
.0
1
^'
.0
.2
.7
.2
19*";
395
62
119
S4D
254
552
525
957
287
258
330
636
562
162
.r
.4
.4*
.">*
. C*
.0
.C
.4
C*
.0
.C
.C.
.5
.7
.7
256
323
74
139
598
376
50?
469
785
320
286
28C
502
534
7C
.5
.4
.4*
.0-
.0*
.8
.0
^
J
.C*
.C
.0
.9
.8
.6
663
371
166
53
741
195
444
276
8 jC
340
476
734
634
245
.P
,P
.8*
."<*
."
.0
.0
.4
.r
.0
.0
.0
*
.7
J
,0
7*
9*
43?
115
64
45?.C
143.8
516.0
497.7
52C.C
32 5. G
320.C
279.C
107.4
131 .5
11 P,. 3
-------
TABLE C-76
OJ
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAfi NUfBtR
1
2
t r. V I ft C N vl E M A L "Cf.ITOf.ING AM. S U r F 0 K T LArCRATo<
-------
TABLE C-77
E NV I HtN^t M»L MOMTOfcl^G AND SCFhCI-T L A.l-OP f. T OF Y
OfFICL OF ci£EAKCH AND DEVELOPMENT
MAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** £FA fFT HOD (15 VALIDATION STUDY - H /J (.) *
I f h 7 Y P F.
DISTILLED WAT
AMPUL NO: 3 4
TRUE CONC: 74.7 5t.
Co
t-1
VO
ER
74
RAw I/ AT A
TAP W A T E
3
. ->
FCP t«EUZOtG,M,I)PLRY'.LNE A^/^LYS1^ MY
fi SURFfCF WATfcR 1'iCUSTMAL
4 3 4 3
f ,r 74. n 5^.: 74."
LAB NUKBEK
1
2
3
4
c
fc
7
f
2
fc
22
7.1
t .^
t . 9*
* *
71.*;
c
3
?
f . 3
4.4
4.5
9 67.3
1
1
*,
1
1
1
c
1
2
7
4
5
1 1
15
4
2
1 2
"*
9 . n
2.C*
5 . 1
4.3
1 . -J
T< . ^
If
57
18
1 CC,
56
47
21
j -j
51
1C9
1L2
39
2t
96
i 1
.
.
«
»
O
7
4
5 *
r *
-\
7
t
t
2
(
c *
f
i.
4
^
1°
t -
17
41
3,4
1C
H
T I
ML
41
3 1
24
7?
11'
.s
.7
*
C
->
~i
< .
, *
.4
. r *
.4
. : »
. >
. 2
.f
. 2*
. -^ *
4
i
1
1
2
c
1
2
1
4
2
7.
J ,
r.
c
_
*
-f
_
-
a t
7.
1.
A.
- .
: .
: .
y ' 7 ~ ^ i T 7-19
'- 42. (J 1^.3 ^?,9
* * r . : - z . 2 * 4 . i
7 21 .? f .* t^.c
^ 4 4 . ? ^ K . f- «
1 :, . . ^ . :
: ^ . ^ 7 . : ; ^ . g
f . * .' . ' i . 1
31. 7 4'-.^ ic.*
^* 177.:* ir.f 51.^
2 <;7.v* ??.: 3T.?
7 J r . f ;,->.- ^ 7 . :
7 '-/.'. c . : g . ,
7« ; . >. 24.1 37.-
* '- . i t . 4 1 : . '
1. ^
-------
TABLE C-78
ENVlKCN^tMAL MCNlTPM «G AM) TUFPIkT LA[-jk/T,ji«t
OFFICF CF ^ESttKCH AM, DcVfLOPvErT
E '* V 1 F< C N M E f. T A L PROTECTION AGENCY
* ETA METHOD fit.*- VALIDATION STUDY - !:/< C) «
PAu D»TA FGf. eEK7C
:.r
r-
L. 9
. .'
3.5
9 u
C '-
-'
t .1*
t .
I- -'
?.4
7.^
C
27* ."
12C."
^1^ .4
21.:*
19: .r
7 - - ,"
. _ .V
25?.:
3<«1 . '
21^.2
31P.:
444 ,^«
7 3 f . f
191 .C
Z33.9
427.1.
f 4 9 . :,
:
?
1
1
L.
1
7
4
^
1
1
4
1
<
1
3
3
9
c
t.
f.
h
6
)
t
3
4
6 5
2.; 27f.r
2." '72.i.
" . ' * 237.,":
7.5« 23, f*
9. J ' 13.- . '
^ . - 1 5 7 . '
: . o 3i4.;
9.-! 14.'
2.4 1 u7 . r-<
1 . T ' 2 & . .:
5 . * <£:.-.
1 . > 5 3 7 . r
7 . -1 1 ^ 5 . f .
9.7 1 t 9 .>-
r . 4 r :* y . 4
7*. 4 5C.4
29- . :
2 3 : . -.
T < r c
- j »
5r .fc
4.7
16.' .'
1 3 c . "
5C 2 . n
242 .2
! 3 1 . "
? 5 ' . f
^ ' -
? 1 1 .'
^ . u
2 :- r- . 9
91 .9
,7,
^ 7
U7
54
t 2
<.:
i T
1 t 9
1 16
* 47
7 1 ?
444
194
21
24?
t T
>
. 7
7
. ,
.9
.7
,c
.
^
L
. 7
. *
."
c
.
.1
.2
f . 1
. 1
-------
TABLE C-79
t »4 V I * C t»v £ ', T A L P C M T f M \ C AND t iJ r F C ^ T L A f a K A T 0 M
0 F F I C t OF r't-L4KCH AND rrVFLOPvENT
ENV1&ONVENT»L PROTtCTICN AGENCY
* EPA METHOD tt.T, VALIDATION S T C D Y - b / i <>) *
RAW DATA FCR t3E NZO - UG/L
DISTILLED WATEH
HP V A T C
SURFACE WATFR I'.DUSTKIAL E f F L I^ '. T
U)
ho
I-1
x\
AMTUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAfc NUKbEft
1
2
3
6
;
t
7
P
9
1C
11
12
13
U
15
*
4
4
^
7
6
i"'
2
2
7
7
S
7
6
2
C
1
.-
-*
-
,d
-/ *
.6
.7
. J*
. ?
.7
.4
.2
.A
i
. .
.4
.5
. 5 *
7
4
7
1
S
6
2
1
4
1
A
7
4
7
1
2
. L'
. p
.4
. C *
. i.
. v^
. -J *
.3
. s
. r
f
.5
fc
.5
.7
.1*
1
. ^
7 *
r . 7
i . r *
5.'
7.-
' . C *
: .4
" . r*
4.6
f . ?
2.7
9 . '
q . *
' . i
2 . r
i
7
>
t .
1* .
C .
1
s.
* .
^
f t
4.
A e
4.
7.
,
4.
1.
1
2 l'.r
7 ?.1
"* * " *
'; ' . " «
/ <;. i
f. r ' m
-' 3 . -
: .i
* """*
f- 4.1
^ * t . '?
1 l . ?
4 7. c.
T 4.4
4 ? . «
? ' .7
c
7 e 7
:. ?
p ^ #
°. :
T C
«
' . " «
1 .5
I . 3
d.4
O A
c
4.5
f .?
f" <:
7.2
^ .?
1
q.-
/ 7
11 .:
i ,
f .c
t . r
-.,<",
"'."
r.
4 . '
7.~
6.1
r *"'
4 ,f
11.1
1 .*
-7
-
-.
-
(
1
C
1
s
^
V
. 1
-------
TABLE C-80
OlSTlLLf 0 WATER
t NVlhC:»vt N TAL MONITORING /".C. r>l'rfDPT LAiCSATuhr
OffiCC Cf FtStAKCH AND t f VF LGPVE'.'T
ENVIRONMENTAL F o 0 T t C T I 0'.' OGENCY
* EPA rFTHCO tt r> VALIDATION STUDY - H/I- C)
Aw DATA f C * r r \ ? 0 U ) f L U 0 S ;, N T H E N E ANALYSIS T-Y * A i t ^ TlfPt
MFD I UK YCUt-FN FAIR, UMTS - UT/t
TAP UATEP SURfACE *AT£H INDUSTRIAL E f f L U t'. T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
CJ
N> LA6 NUM0E
i
i
A
1
1
1
1
1
1
c
(S
7
fc
9
r
1
2
3
A
5
3
: 61 .
R
9.
45.
5r.
32.
27.
A? .
77.
37.
5?.
3
.,7
33
ir
^ -^
£*
24
C
V
c
*
.4
. 2
.A
.6
.0
. r
.1
.7
. i
.5
.1
tr.r
-^.5
# .:
27.A
:.?
* . " *
A? .:
6.6
42 . *
i7 .4
1C .C
57.'
17.-
34 . *
7 j <
' *
* 7
i .7
11?.;
1 . . ~>
;. 7. 1
<< . 1
1 t . v
J ' . '
-1 .'
;. r r
J ~ 9 ~
.. > . 4
' . ^
-------
TABLE C-81
DISTILLED taA f t
F. NVI i\f'. ». t NT AL YON I TORlNo AI.D S U t K" >-T L A I -C ft « K * 1
CFFlCt CF ^tSEARCH A». D l/'VFLOP^CNT
t '*VI f-OM- M. T«L PROTECT Jft. A G E f-C Y
* h F A fETHOC. it 5 VALIDATION STUDY - 0 Tt ( . > »
;*W DATA FO1; "EN'OdOfU'OCANTHiINE ANALYSIS t'Y ., A T r K TYPE
H I r, rt Y 0 U 0 c '» P A I k , U M T 5 - U C / L
T A F WATER SU^MCf WATER IM>USTtflAL F f F L I - '< T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
U)
NJ
^ LAD NUMBER
1
2
7
4
5
6.
7
P
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
4
5
1 C
3
T.
5
a
5
6
A
7
6
r
5
12.:
51 ,n
45 .S
0 . C
5 3 . "**
5? .C
£4,"
5 {-, . C
3C.1
?7.:
7 r/ . '
15.-
95.-
jv .:
93 .6
5: .3*
54
44
5 3
63
It
44
£ Z
51
7 1
3 5
_ 7
4 1
45
t, 2
51
13
(
J. ]
^ '-
f .7
4 . r
7
- . -
7 . j
2.0
1.1
6 . 5
i- . n
* i'i
. *
4 . i
L
9 . 5
5. j
*-.!*
5
f 1 2 . '
-. C 7 "
526 . P
54.4*
? i 6 . I
5,4.:
"? o # r
j * >. ^
! 4 5 . '
315.9.
5 J6."
670.T*
366 ."
4 1 j _,
t z r j.
r 7 7 7
, - - ~i
2;i .f
c
4
5
X
7
7
f.
2
6
6
1
4
4
5
1
4
f
2
<,
j
t
C i
. .
t . '
7 . '
C . * *
1. :
76.-'
9
1
6
f
u
;
1
-.
7
1
L .
f . ~
1.7.
r-
' .
3 . - *
1. I
C
'- '
1.'
f . <*
5
5 12.:
47.:.^
475. /
(. " . 6 «
? .. 7 . '
269."
446..'
2 9 . r
1^4 c
M4.'.
7 £ c . -
I j -;
r. . . ' *
f>t.t:^.
7 'i 1 c
:u.7
t
5 4 ' . : ^12
4^v.' ?63
5^7.7 7HC
1U.7* Ml
3; ,c 77
3 <. 3 . : 5 7
' 5 7 . . }'>!:
c t C' r t ~, 1
2 6 f . 1 1 7 r
5 v * . " r' 9 '
? » . n
-------
TABLE C-82
u>
NVIRONMENTAL .".CM TIDING .1 r. D ?(JPPCf 3 ' 7 ->
I. *. » ^ ' . C
.3 t . 4 7 . «
.? A . - » . :
.4 3 . ! 1 . f,
.2 ?.4 ?.4
. f 1 7 . E 5.3
.(.* :.~* c.-^*
.7 t .: ».*
.5 1 . L r . "
. t 1 . 2 ' . P
.7 i . ?: C . *,
.4 !?.<; 15.4.
.4 1 .» 1.7
. '. * c . i' * 6 . 9 «
. K *, . 9 p . 5
.5 1.2* "..'
£
7
,'
r
3
4
"
t
1
1
7
i;-
1
15
5
"i
1
' '
i
."*
. '" *
.0
7
.C*
.(
.1
.4
. y
.<< *
j
.-:*
. r
. *
7
7
\
r
"i
L
5
i.
-i
L.
~
1 2
.5
1 P
.,
~>
.2
.2
. i": *
.'«
.9
*
. (' *
.7
.4
t;
. .
. "
. ?
.?
. ^ *
.4
e
1
f- . T
5.7
r'.r-
? . i
34. c«
r , r «
r.r
? ?
1 .5
? . -
U.7
1.7
*
£ . 1
1 .'
7
/^
;
;
t.
i :
;
7
1
5
7
7
1
u
1
-
.
7
. L
^
u
.7
*
""
-^
. o
a '^
. i*
.'
-------
TABLE C-83
t NV I * CNV£NT AL MOMT°(-ING A f> D SUpPr>KT L AP ^«< » Tc fc Y
OFFICE C F FtSEAKCH AND DtVELOF*tM
tNVlRON^EN TAL PRCTLCTIt*1 A G c K C Y
* * ETA METHOD ft 2 f VALIDATION STUDY - 3 / f. (2) «*
R A Ir' DATA FOP e E N Z Y L HUTYL PhTHALATE ANALYSIS c Y U A T L P T Y r :
" E U I U v YOUCFN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED wATEP
TAP UATE
SURFACt WATER INDUSTRIAL ? F f L U t f. 1
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
co
ts>
U1
LAB NUMBE
1
2
T
4
5
6
7
e
9
C
1
?
3
4
5
: 63
R
2 p
3*.
31
11
2f>
6
54
6
12
3*
52
16
65
5 7
7
7
.8
.4
» v
.7
.9
.5*
.3
c
.6
.6
.4
.9
.1
.4
.4
57.
41.
22 .
29.
U.
5.
C.
* -
C *
£ ,
^ 1
41 .
U.
74 .
t 5 .
1.
L
(
''
7
4.
J.
C' *
5
5
^
V
1
L
1
I
1
67
j!
2*
27
17
16
7
7 C
"
24
1:
C 1
7
64
5'
U
7
.4
.P
7
.1
.(
.0
.4
.' *
. "*
.1
.7
C
.7*
r
V
.7*
5 7
t 7
52
U
12
7 7
7
7 ,-
i r
1 t
"i
A T
. 7
15 . '
5 F . "
1 7 . ."
1 5 . " *
y . 5
U.1
4
57.
5r .
1
1 Q .
11.
47.
C
42 .
7.
i 1 .
r .
55.
15.
K 4 .
?» .
3C.
-
r
c
1
t
h
7
7
-»
L
>,
f
5 .
1
Q .
1
(.
tr
1C
2C
1?
4 i
^
7
57
T
t c
30
40
1,-
7c 1
4?
9
7
* -
. ^
. 1.
_ ^
. *^
e ?
. s
.7
% <
, >
.1
.2
.C
.1
. c
4 .
-------
TABLE C-84
to
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAb NUMBER
1
2
4
5
6
7
c
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
DISTILLED WATfR
5 t
512.C 54C."
515. «
252.'
?51. T
191 .?
565.D
377.:
557.L
1297.1.
464.2
61.2
?fct .2
z: 7! ;
256. G
1 9 6 .
I " 91. 7 *
4 i 1 . ti
1S4.7
EKV I KGr.v E.'JT» L "UNIIC-UNG AND Sl.fPrM I A'< C « A T j & >
OFFKc Cf RESEARCH AM) ttVtLCP"tNT
£ N V 1 R 0 N V E KT*L PR&TLCTICN AGENCY
* * E F P y.FTHCD d 2 5 VALIDATION STUDY - H / *, ( < > »
RAJ DATA FOK EENZYL [ U T Y L FHTHALATE ANALYSIS tY U T t. S TYT;
HIGH Y'HjOcN PAIR, UMTS - UC/L
TAP WATER
336.T
132.3
457.r
'I4 .2
4 t v . C
? 9 5 . r
475,'
? 1 «.:
5 4 = '. S
67. 4*
TV?.'
15 5.:
4 ^ 2 . L
415.2
'7'. :
45?.i
24.: *
WATfcf, 1'. CUSTK1AL E * f L U i. ". I
c
.
t - r r
4^ 3 .r
4 t 4 . " *
ii?.r
t
c / w ^
c 5 ° . 4
371.1
213.°
9r . 7
3 i L' '
* '' . 4
x ; " n
7 7T . ?
s 'j ° . r
4S4 ,C
5 1 7 . ' *
I 7 3 . '
c
5 1 : . ;
A ._ .6
?76 . c
1 .' - . 1
ik".r
64 .t
** 5 .c *
5 5 r . 0
1 c 1 . '
^40."
4 U . -.
t ~ ~) >
3 2i* . "
c _^ C
r . c
l . ^
1.1
? ;. ^
7s. :
7 t
5 / ^
1s v
' » 7
1 s y
1 1 r
4 1 :
5 «
-------
TABLE C-8!:
E MV i «cr.vE NT * L voMTCcir.G A *t SU^PO^T LA^O^A'J^Y
OfflCL Of KLSEAfiCH AND DEVELOP^ CM
E N V 1 S 0 V £ 'J T A L PROTECT' CA « G F N C Y
** £ P A T E T h G D i £ 5 VALIDATION STuOt - [,/. ('-)
BAU DATA FOR MS(/-CHLnkOtTHOXY>v£ThV. E * h; A L V C 1 S i. Y . A T f
LOW 1 0 L. D £ % P A I fv , UMTS - UC/L
DISTILLED UATFR
TAP W A T E ^
SURFACE W A T £ R INDUSTRIAL t F F L I L ' 7
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAP NUKriER
1
2
T
4
5
6
7
6
9
1C
11
1?
1 "!
14
15
U
1
H
c
j
12
7
r
~-
7
1 '.
. ? *
.1
.3
» _'
.?
11
4
7
7
5
<>
14
;
*:
<,
i
0
11
_
1
r
2
.r.
.t
.4
.t
. <5
. n
.r.
. S
. L
. 1
4.
. "j
.7
. «
. >u
. 1«
12
"
7
L
1C
12
C
1?
7
7
r
"
1:
'
fc
b
1
"
c
7
^
. r
.4
i
.r
.-»
i
. «.
.4
r *
c
^
. "" *
."
u
11.
1 ^
\ .
1 .
".
9.
L'
1 "- .
7.
1 r .
jy .
4.
1 1 .
* .
~
1
1:."
3 t . >
1 T . JJ
* 4 c
5 11 .'
7 f .<:
: : . c
1 ir . ^
~> ', i
L. L
' 1 t . -> «
1?.T
34 .A.
I C
a .a
11.:
1 . '.
1 ! . 1
1 ^ . i
1 1 .
T ^ . ""
1 - /
1 ' *
" C
c
1 ? . 7
1 4 . 7
0. 1
TyP£
-------
TABLE C-36
EVVI"CKvfcNTAL f 0 M T o M N C AT, t> S U
-'
. ?
.3
.*
.0
,T
.6
. 1
.'
77
d
1 L5
112
PZ
t c
5 9
91
9 1
62
9:
1 0Q
f '
79
79
! 1
4
. i
.1
. ?
7
. J1
.7
.6
. 2
. 4
.»
. u
.C
.7
. i.
. fj*
79
6?
t1
jr
i
t7
c *
7 t
5:1
* t c
ll-i
1 14
M
<>."
51
7*1
12
7
r
> ft
.1
,1
.4
.4*
.7
.? »
. r
'n *
t,
i
.1
.5
.1
.1
77
4"
v C
£7
'_,e
i
6r
95
J "
t c
9?
1 ._ 5
77
SA
A?
17
:
.1
.1
.7
<-*
.°
.7
. -
.A
7
.1 -
.4
.7
. \
, ;'
79. '
uc . '
i '« c
63 . r
^ 7 . 7
56
A? . 7
<-. 7 . 2
7:
111 .:.
1 'i 2 . '
1 £ 5 . '
F 1 . -
1 Z 7 . <3
79.'
6 ? » t
77
C
C 7
J
u
71
t, V
f ''
Jr-
s. 7
Kc
115
75
t A
f )-
11:
«»
.r
.7
. -
. ",'
. 7
7
. A
. A
r
.1
. : *
«
. ^
.7
,5
^
7"." 7 7 .
5 5 . r -, 7 .
9 T . < 11*.
1 : 5 . " - -- .
1 J, 3 . ^ ' 7
»
5 .
cZ.I 77.
1 At .7
77.7 7*.
50.0 : - .
-------
TABLE C-87
f '. V I n P N * E '. TIL "C\nCKjNC A N C
: f F I C L OF TfMKfM A K i, t f V i L 0 P " t M
£SV I RCS^E '> T*L PhCTKCTICS 'CF^ft
» fcPA ifTHOP ' _ c VALlDATlOf; 1TU"Y - t/'4 (J)
PAW DATA fCf. bIS(t'-CHLO(:'"(:THOXY)vETH#>.: ANALYSIS n Y h-A T t >>
HICh YOLKS'. FAIR, U M T r, - U C. / L
DISTILLED WATtP TAF V ( H t S-JKMC' wATCP 1'. D II S T * I A L F f F L J L'. T
AKPUL NO:
T^UE CONC:
UJ
vO
LAB ^Uf'BER
1
?
3
4
5
f
7
c
9
1C
11
12
1!
U
13
5
M7.r
C 1?.?
f 52. R
t C.4 .4
773.7
4 1 ? . C
59'.4
6t^ . 2
662.4
c 2 1 . :
^72 ."
7& ; . z
675.?
5 2 S . 1
57C.C
2 8 5 . 2
6
646.0
76F.7
93 7 . 7
# t r . 4
7 L f . :
s : ;. . ;
279.4
741.T
: .i
554. (
9 7 1 . r-
S 7 ? . t
fc L " . r
42?. 7
1 1 C . v
MV .'
c
j
M7.7
45 ! . c
77^ .f
4 y# .A
t i 4 . "
7 : f . r
4 1 V . 1 .
?;4 .n
{4" .1
c r * . :
141' .'»
734.:
712.:
C4".7
f : i . 5
31^.'
t '
t- 4 i . : ', 1 7 . ^
57(3.>;. 7i7..
P 1 1 .i 731 .'
S5(! .4 43. .4
7*.^ . 7 ( 4 . '
4t T . " ' lr- . ~
44C . 1 e -,7. 1
7 / i * C r
s 7 c . : c. 2 7 . ?
Q47.7 1 ' 3 1 . -
1 1 i c . ' 1 ?...:
7 4 £ . - t * r, . r
743 .' i^4 . '
^C 1.7 727 .f
-.- 417
?1 7 .' c 19
M r .c 4<;*
4i 4 . . '51
';,-." 4 * *
4 3 . ' 177-
'21.1 77;
7 c " . 7 .- 7
C t T./ ' -'
7 5 rr . . « 1 1 ' ;
1i;..'« 75 ^
7e . ' 5 ^
75 r . "* 1 7
1 , i . i 7 f
4£->.« 57V
; t ' . <, 2 i *
C
_
_
. r
. '
%
.
t
e ^
*
7
. t
? -. 1 . '.
-------
TABLE C-88
f»JVI&0\vENTAL
TFFICt OF
*CTH'JD
OMNC A',,) S U r F ". K T I A f 0 " A T J «' Y
ftAriC" AMJ DF V<"LOP'»E':T
*L PROTECTION * G E N I Y
VALIDATION STuCT - f'/N (?)
DATA FOR !IS(?-CHLGRCI^OFKOFVL)tTHE(- ANALYSIS ft »»TE& TYfE
LrW YOUCiN FAIR, I'NlTS - L'G/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURF&CF WATEP INDUSTRIAL E f F L U t f> T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
£J LAP NUWBE
0 1
5
6
7
5
9
j
1
2
3
4
5
: 14
K
11
1
12
16
£
1 Ci
7
15
35
11
12
1
f
»>
»
6
1
r
.6
.9
.7
.4
.8
n
-
- *
.."
.4
. -*
."*
.9
.2*
15
17
12
17
f. **
1 c
. 1 '
12
1?
21'
*
1 C
1d
^,
11
u
'c
. b
.6
. t
.fc
r
. V-
. 3
.1
.1
.5*
.1
.5
.1
.C
.1
.C *
14
17
15
11
13
14
21
1C
17
*
"
C
1
V
f
J
.9
.5
.1
.c
.6*
»
. .
. 2
. I *
.(
. C *
.6*
'
1
>
1
1
1
2
& r
5.7
S . I
2.1
1 *
-
u.1»
2.*
: . 4
e.<
5.4
r . 3*
# .:
1
14. r
g . '
13.?
4 .3
14 .i
27.'
C r
£
14. t
27. >
1 . '"
1 5 . r'
1C .'
^ . "
11 .4
: . r
2
1 * . . '
15.4
1C .-
5.3
C . ' i
A
7.4
1?.?
1^.4
3 3 t ?
11.7
u .<;
15. *
j . ' *
u ^
^ p ~ *
14
11
12
1
il
1 T
14
1C
1 '
1?
16
U
14
T
1
-1
* ,'
.1
.7-
*
.^
.7
.i
.1
, 7
. i.
.?
*
,Q
. c «
i. 1
1 l .!
1 C ^
*.-*
1 " .1
,
u .:
i :.^
14.4
4. :
i' . 4
1 ' '
14.7
4. '
-------
TABLE C-89
DISTILLED WATER
E.NVIF-CN1EN TAL "OMTO'vI'.G AND SUPPORT LAI-, C^AT^Y
OFFICE OF PESEARCh AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA [» F T H 0 D 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/fJ (?> * *
DATA FO& b 1 £ ( 2 - C H LO P 0 I S 0 D & 0 P YL H Th F ft ANALYSIS 'Y .j A T F F- TYFE
rtEDIU''i YCUDCN PA IF-, UMTS - UC/l
TAP WATER
SUPFACt HATf-P INDUSTRIAL EFFLULM
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC: 79
£ LAR NUXBEk
H-1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
C
6
7
F
9
r
w
1
2
3
4
5
73
99
135
114
64
i j
92
76
1 li 2
91
39
5H
105
72
27
T
,1
.9
.1
.9
.0
.9
.6
.5
.r *
.7
~!
. C
.4
.9
.1
.J*
r1
5 3
£7
106
82
8V
63
79
52
159
U
75
69
76
6?
54
. o
.4
.1
.4
.9
r
. >_
T
. -i
.(
f.
>
.:*
. " *
.7
.7
7
.5
. I*
71
61
fe '
6?
6 6
9?
4:
75
1 3C
117
95
67
11
4':
51
A1
i
. ."
. 7.
.5
!
7
» C
.4
.C*
. : «
C
.6
.7
. ~>
.7
. :*
,1
65
fcl
67
- t
6f
69
96
92
1 CT.
£1
79
72
63
36
25
A
.7
.5
. <.
.6
.4
.7
-t
. £.
. 2
. :*
.6
.2
-J
_
. 8
. J
.7*
7?
1 16
76
5^
75
44
3?
5t
66
146
66
67
69
1 ?4
<^
37
3
r
j
.?
A
.
._
. ?
. 2.
.9
.C,*
.
.6
.9
. 1
.
.1*
?1
69
94
5°
71
97
i ~'>
69
59
15:
c 1
71
6fc
61
64
"
4
T
.
.4
. 2
o
.
. f-
C
r
.9
.9
. : *
. i
.f-
. £
. j'
)
. .
.C*
7
79.:
3^.^ *
96 .4
5 r Q
77.1
*
C, . r *
? : .<
-------
TABLE C-90
ENVIRONMENTAL MfiMTCRINC AND SUPPORT
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DFVELCP"ENT
ENTAL PROTECTION AGFKCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - H/N (?) **
RAW DATA FOR bIS(2-CHLOP01SOPROfYL)ETHFR ANALYSIS DY w A T £ fi
HIGH VOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
01STILLFO WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE V! A T F. R INDUSTRIAL [ F F L I11 M
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC: 53?
£ LAQ NUMBER
1 444
1
1
1
1
1
1
p
3
4
^
6
7
e
9
C
1
2
3
4
5
659
646
442
724
47?
662
5f 2
1510
539
624
4C1
943
403
777
5
-"V
.8
.6
n
. "
. ~
.3
.7
. j»
. J
.1
.T
.7
.5
.4*
6
499.:
502.0
647.5
477. n
564.:
?. fe ? . C
213. L
544. C
b1?.C
r 7 9 . '. *
5 '19.:
6 : 3 . :
452.:
1 1 7 . S
335. t
2 2 ( ., 4 *
77?
59.S
775
315
59C
74'.
tif 1
717
113'
t 9*
599
426
7 S5
4 1 5
161
C
w
i.
.1
c
. V
f
. c
r
.C
. L'
. r'*
.r
. *
. -
. 1
.9
.2
I
534.4
467.9
247.:,
' . "*
7 " 1
677.:
7 1 C . 9
^u.:*
5 9 1 . u
5 £ 4 . ;
4t 5 . :
761.9
27^.5
227.1*
r «" ^
677
555
327
44:
2frlr
49t
33
462
1 ;.6C
c-79
417
4t. 7
5U
762
U4
5
. 0
« ' .
. r>
.5
->
.
.C
. r
.6
.2
. C*
. c
. 7
^
j
.9
.4*
6
4 9 <5 . j
M 7 . '.
4 ?£ . 5
741 . ^
2 7 f . L
*" . r *
2^4..:
5J7. j
491.6
962.0*
5 1 2 . c.
4(2."
44t . ^
274."
? (. 7 . r
7 . -»
5
471 .5
714.5
; s 7 . r,
*
29c . r
49.'
46".''
1 7 D n . : . *
455.'
C 1 rv *s
1 - -
431 .0
*
72 9. o
34.''*
0
- i. - »
4<,rv .
352.
5-9.
453.
i*>9 t .
534.
6iJ .
4^4 .
Si,; .
4 y :< .
63.
c 5t .
9 * .
C
C.
r
_
"
"
1
~
r
^
I
-
1
A
-------
TABLE C-91
u>
E.NV i h cis''tNT« L MONITORING A\D TOPPOKT LAT O«;MT J(
. 7
.1
r
.9
.*»
.8
.H*
7
5
f
1
t
7
3
1
r
5
1
7
t
*"
6
1
^
.2
.4
. 1.
t.
. i,
.C
7
. -
C
* J
o
.7
.1
7
. 9
. 7
.4
.3-
1
F.:
2.2
4.9
.r*
:.4
2.7
: . o
2.2
Z.1
1 .4
~f m C
i . r *
12 .9*
! .1
3.4
3 .L
7
4
4
1
r
"
r
1
1
1
4
,~,
t
r
1
1
-s
.2
.2
.4
.»
. 2
. ~ *
."* '
. "*
.7
.9
c
^
.1*
.9
. : *
. c
. 2
1
t , r
2 . =
c. . c *
L.T.
i.4
1 . 9
n.r*
1 .^
*" *
3.3*
6 ^ *
2 . c
3.6
C ~ *
. . '. «
2
7.2
2.S
" . r*
P.r«
r.:-
.
:.c*
~ . " *
1 . r
t.:«
:.3
~J.6
2.6
* r
" .( *
i. . *"
8
7
(-
1
?
4 v
2
7
1
1
-
J"
t
f
^
1
.0
. "
.7
.1
. 1
.3 *
. 7
.0
."
. »
.')
.7
.
. v
.< *
£
7.:
t i
4 . 1
k. _
T
c. .
4. '
1 .;
1 . 2
2.4
. . .
^ *
21 .<.
L . :«
T ^
*_ *
-------
TABLE C-92
ENVIRONMENTAL PC N I T r'=< I NG A H f SU'PCWT LA(-ORATOht
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVnCN*ErT»L PRGTFfTICr. AGENCY
** EPA KETHOD ^25 VALIDATION STUDY - d/N C) * *
DATA FOP E. IS<2-ETHYLHtXYL)PHTHALMf ANALYSIS "it . A T E ( TYPL
MEDIU" YOUuEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED W A T L R
TAP WATEP
SURFACF WATER INDUSTRIAL EFfLUtM
CO
p-
V
\
i^x
A>9\
v» °"\
Y£-<
V o
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAP NU!*Bffc
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
1C
11
1 2
13
1 4
1 5
V.
A
fc'j
11
83
1 2
43
49
36
T 1
_j _>
52
5 3
59
37
46
7
64
1 s;
7
n
.2
.9
.4
.6
.1
.1
.6
.5
"7
j
.6
.»
.0
.7
i
^
. 5 *
57
43
69
23
55
1C
25
26
5£
54
75
31
5j
41
5P
15
4
r.
L
t_
T
.4
.C
.9
.9
.9
.4
.3
.5
.7
.6
.4
r
v
.9*
ft"1
1 T
56
£
1
15
"
14
r
2'
42
1?
T 7
It
51
95
7
m r
. 1
s.
,7
.r
* .
. " *
.
. f *
.1
.5
o
'
.7
.6
.1
.5*
57
14
47
2
1
1 4
t
2 r.
11
7 r
32
43
44
14
i -t
14
t.
. ~
. '
.5
.6
.1 '
. 3.
. C *
.6
.?
.4
I
.6
.9
.7
.?
.1
5C
1:
1 T
t.
13
2^
*
1r
7
23
25
1e
7 '
2 T
c
r
7
. 3
, V
. 9
.7*
. 1
r
. 2
.5
. 7
t 7 *
7
. .
.7
. j
.c
. c
^ "' V
57
1r
U
L
1
19
')
f'
^
53
29
16
29
1 i
1 *
r
^
r
. -
r
« _
^
.1*
.1
C,
i
. 1
d
J
.5*
r
7
.
. 1
.4
. 5
. ' .
3
60.:
4.1
15. v
7 .6
14 C
' .
r -5
1 " . 6
15 .f.
C /
25.5
3"1 .3
5.5
5< .^
IZ.1*
3 ? . 7
' . " *
-
17.-
U .2
U .r
5.5
1 .7
79.9
-. . ^
I : . 9
C
i-
i : . *>
C - C
,7.2
4!r . 1
w t . *
, (
-------
TABLE C-93
Cn
ENVIRONMENTAL KONI TCU'tNG At.C fUPPOST
OFFICE OF PESt.&CH AND D E VE LO F.v L '. T
LNWI«CN"EMAL PROTECTION fCFNCV
** £ F A ^
2 5 VALIDATION LTUDT - P/N C) *
RAW DATA F 0 fc CISft-EThYLHEXYDPHTHALATE ANALYSIS .> Y w » T E » T T P E
HIGH Y 0 U D E M P A 1 rt , U M T f - U&/L
TAP WATER
SUPFACE U A T E & IMUSTMAL FFTLl'.'. T
AMPUL NO: 5
TRUE CONC: 512.1
LAP NUMBER
1 5 j 8 . 0
2
T
4
5
6
7
g
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
434.°
257. C
54^. n
35C.6
353.6
64 8. f
537.4
694.1
526.5
434.:
325.1
1 75.1
571 .C
145. *
54^
525
429
625
516
449
2C3
725
697
441
473
524
382
442
543
2
c
.C
'-
t
m -/
.C
.(?
.6
.(:
.L
'
.1
.5
i
.'.
.ft
«
. * *
512
4:2
67
282
45:
477
54C
52'"
6 44
<-6"
444
3*4
7 9V
49?
5:7
c
r
c
7
. P
.E*
, 7'
.5
. 1
. C
c,
X
.4
. P
.r
w'
.4
.6
.7
6
455.
422.
123.
27?.
m.
299.
1 i.
C . C
-»..-
***
444 .
467.
3c< .
4:7.
C24.
U4.
s
4
<
"
5
1
Z
3
4*
O
"
~
6
i
C12
343
71
17,
259
'. s; 7
2 c
3 5Q
7t7
S27
79c
7 5 ?
419
3^ ?
795
5
1
. 4
~>
. <;
. 5
. 4
. 'J
. L' «
.4
.1
r
.7
. ;
. =
475
7 9*
131
14?
746
?>.6
etc
5-4
* 8Q
417
427
» «. c
?-. c
451
? 14
6
.r
.»
.4*
*
.9
.5
:
.4
. ; *
.4
.1
r
.(.
i
t
c
19C .7
27C .6
13".?
159.-
"i:7 . "
172. r
(* . * -
1/7.7
' O 1 ^
_J T 1 L
7 6 7 . 5
413.?
7 4' . "
1 ? "> . :
494 .1
25* .'
7.:.-
-------
TABLE C-94
ENVIRONMENTAL KCMTGRING AND SUPPORT LAIiCRATjMY
OFFICE OF RFTEARCH AND DFVFLCF^ENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGFNft
* EFA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - R/N <~> -
P. A k DATA FOR CHPYSENE ANALYSIS t-Y W A T E K TYF'L
LOW YOUDEN ?AIRt UNIT? - UG/L
DISTILLED I.ATFR
TAP WATER
SURFACE ta A T £ R INDUSTRIAL
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
CJ
U)
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3,
4
c
6
7
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
6.0
7 .9
5.3
2.2«
4.4
4.5
3.3
3. A
5.5
7.2
4.4
3.4
4.4
5.9
2.°
:.7*
5
4
£
2
2
3
5
i
3
4
1
4
4
,-
4
7
2
.4
.6
. 5
. " *
.3
. u
. f
. 1
.2
,t
.7
.9
.6
.:*
7
w<
.4*
A
?
6
1
2
4
3
7
c
3
2
7
s
c
t
3
1
r
.f.
7
.7«
.6
.?
c
.5
.C
.6
.8
. 2
.6
.f
r
V.
.s
c
2
f.
f
2
-t
1
7
*"
C
7
t
4
4
5
C
2
.4
.4
.7
.^*
. 1*
<
. c
.1
. 5
. '
.1
t
. <<
.4
'
.9
X,
2
r
1
3
4
I
1
C
5
4
4
4
b
2
1
.C
7
.C*
. r *
. r
, 7
.r
.
C
. t *
.r*
.1
. f,
. t
7
.1
5
2
c
^
2
7
3
1
fc
'
4
c
t
7
2
.4
t
. -
.:
. :
.1
»
c
, 2
.9
.£
.1*
.g
. t
.4
.t
.?
6
7
7
r
1
43
1
12
2
5
D
1
4
19
f
L.
1
s f
, ^
.4
."
*
. * *
.c
,t
.f
.1
. '
.6
.F
. 7 .
.1
.f
_
5.4
: . i
( .'<
, "
; j
C -
7 . r-
_ *
1 . . r
7 c
4. :
1 . t
7
c ^ 2
A *
M * V-
1 . -
-------
TABLE C-95
UJ
TAL MONITORING AND CUFPPRT LA(-uKATCtr
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DFVFLf^EM
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* * EPA METHOD 6
VALIDATION STUDY - F / ,\ (.)
RAW OATA FOR CHCYSENt ANALYSIS PY WATER
MFoiu" VUUCEN PA IK, UNITS - UG/L
OIST1LLFD WATER
TAP WATER
SURMCE WATER INDUSTRIAL E f F L b L f. T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE COKC
LAB NUMBE
1
2
3
4
5
t
7
e
V
ir
11
12
13
14
15
i
: 45.
f,
23 .
C -
is.
27.
3?.
47.
29.
56.
41.
57.
L. r »
31.
9.
49.
4. -
?
n
2
3*
4
9
2
a
1
7
4
5
6
3
1
3*
4
43. C
51.2
45.4
15.C*
37.6
3C.4
31.2
25.5
3«-.1
42.4
4d.5
24.6
33. i
46.5
44. d
b.5*
45
27
-" V-
i
1?
27
32
1 f-
"
11;
A:
1^
3?
35
34
C "
j j
7
.r.
. '
. c
.5*
.C*
.9
.F
.P
. C '
.1
.1
.f
.9
,n
t
. .
.1
<'
i r
3f
4
7
1 c
2E
19
44
3 T
31
2C
29
37
34
>
4
.3
.8
.2 *
.; *
. 3
-x
. ;
.6
T
f
.7
.5
.7
,P
c
. ~
.7
. ?
45
3fc
<, 3
c
15
'c t.
2 ~
14
19
2f
4o
- c
2.9
S?
36
t
''
.c
.7
.5*
« *
. ?
. t
. v
.7
.5*
.< *
. t
c
.9
. c
.6
"T
2?
£f
4
4
2 c
3d
14
1*
4p
-,4
- 7
'c f
^ t.'
2?
11
A
.6
. 2
.6«
D
.
c
. ,
.9
. -
.5
. ^ *
. 1 *
. /,
.7
r
v
->
'
.4
7
4 s . r
30."
31 .p
x .<; *
3?.c
*
7.4
39.**
25.1
;? .4
5 ? . "
I7 .4
35.1
35. f
35.9
13. K
19.7
-------
TABLE C-96
DISTILLED WATER
ENV1RCNVEMAL KCNlTOF-INf. AM, SUPPORT
OfflCt CF KtSEAPCH AM) DFV
CNVI &ONKENTAL PROTECTION AGFNCY
* EPA CETHOD 62") VALIDATION STUDY - H/N < - )
R A w DATA FOR CH(-tSENE ANALYSIS t'Y W » T E f TYPE
HIGH YOU DEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE UATEH INDUSTRIAL F F F L U I r. T
CO
CO
oo
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
' 2
;
4
5
6
7
»
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
3«4
474
375
135.
279
214
306
418
t 3?
53h
497
238
246
153
424
53
5
?
.3
.9
.1*
.T
n
'
.1
» \}
.5
. 2
.0
.0
.0
.1
.5
.7*
6
4 1 1 . C
*«.:
375.9
331.4.
4P1.G
26 C.C
1 7 C . r
427. C
541.3
32*. C
5 9 1 . C
-303. C
2 « 3 . r
392.5
396.9
246. F«
384
276
357
34
159
334
324
384
773
444
4£y
259
263
391
39C
31^
5
r
>:
.7
.£
. "*
. 2
r
. _
. ~
.'*
r
.f
r
'J
.7
.P
r
>
6
411.
» C 7
35 p .
57.
2t 5.
255-.
'12.
399 .
r
^ .
367.
43f .
277.
25P.
775.
795 .
t 2 .
i
5
1*
7*
L
**
"
3 *
^
r
~
v
?
3
1 *
3i?4
365
1 £?
39
45
193
1 5 5
2?
222
546
554
235
251
3d 5
343
257
c
r
. .
r
.7
. 7 *
. 1
_
.
^
.
.f
,~
*
L
. 0
.
.P
411
433
3c2
c v
1 1
?27
19I[
4C4
337
53 P
627
?73
'7^
2 i.1
364
133
6
r»
.
^
. 2
.7*
.5
-
?
'
.4
. " *
', *
*
. *"
.6
.9
.7
c
-M-r
p».'
2 5 «! . c
9C.7-
3^.1
14.4
1 4 5 . T
7fc4 . C *
?61 . £
c 1 3 . 1
566."
24S .r
; 6 ° . r
1 11 .t
7 5 " . 5
1 5a .2
A,
4ii.:
737 .7
52.6*
1 7r . ~
*
1 - * . .
^* r "* *
c .7 .4
c _1 . J
3 7 5 . c
: o c . '
^ ^ f -
*
4,7.5
1^.1
-------
TABLE C-97
vo
D1ST1LLEI WATER
K 0 N I T 0 H '. G AND MJFPOFT LAf-C
OfflCE OF RESEARCH AMU CFVFLOP*ENT
f. T A L PROTECTION AGENCY
** EFA METHOD (.2*1 VALIDATION STUDY - R/r, C) * *
fc«w DATA FOh D-lHC ANALYSIS EV WATtS TYTC
LC*. YOUDEN PAI*, UMTS - UG/L
TAP W A T E fr
AMPUL NO:
TR
UE CONC:
?
1
.3
7
i.
,2
*
1
r
7
2
. 2
LAB NUMBER
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
A
5
6
7
f-
<)
0
1
2
3
4
5
J
r
o
^
8
"
1
1
0
r
4
1
^
r
C
.6
.2*
.?
. ^. *
.6*
."*
.6*
.1
. C
,7
, f *
. ~>*
. " *
.4
,C«
1
r
V.
£
f
C
^
4
Q
r
;
4
w
r
7
.5
.C*
.1
. 0
.'-
.r«
. z *
.3
. ; *
. 1
.C
.r,*
.'. *
.5
.C*
1
r
4
>
7
"I
C
:
-.
^
i
^
r
#
-
.9
. r *
.?
.r.
.1
."
.?*
.r«
."*
7
-
.1
. ' *
. r *
. ' *
C
. ^
1
'__
-
r>
X
*
t.
-
1
C
4
L
-
4
L
. c
. 3
.F
, >
.1
« ~J
2
r*.
.'
\
*t
.1
.3
C
SUSFACF LATtP INCUSTRTAL
1 .7
.9
1 .9
0.0
r T
^
^ _ ^ ,
1 .
i L *
-------
TABLE C-98
KOMTOfrlNG A N D SL'PPCPT I A I- o5! A T 0 ( Y
OFFICE CF P f S E A B C H AND DEVFLOF-EM
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD i i-5 VALIDATION STUDY - r/u t:>
K A U CATA F 0 > O-I-HC ANALYSIS P Y W A T t R T Y T .
I* F D I U f V C U D '.». ^ A I P , IU. 1 T S - U G / L
DISTILLED WATfP
TAP w A 1 L
SURFACE WATC'v INDUSTRIAL t F f U c. . T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAO NUMBER
1
2
7
4
t.
A
7
e
9
v:
11
12
13
14
15
6'
1?
1
?1
r
17
r,
56
1
7
6
4?
19
(**
25
\~
?
:
.1
~f
.7
. n»
.?
.C*
.7«
c
. _
. ~
.3
.9*
.5
. J*
.2
. ." *
57
31
i
2*
"
41
r
46
r
-^
7
42
16
0
4n
1
4
.L
.6
.9
. n
. " *
. 2*
. r *
.->
. f- *
. 0 *
.4
.3*
.3
v *
C
C;
6C
56
1
Z9
""
2?
~
44
1
14
2
44
13
^
51
1C
I
P
.Q
V
£.
.7
.Z
.C*
.9*
.4
. f.
.4
.4
n
,r
.4*
.2
5^
45
to
t .
1
23
r
35
1
14
1
41
5
C
i?
L
4
.6
.7
.7
.1
.7
,-r *
.5*
.6
c
. J
.6
.3
.fe
.-
. ? *
.t
6,:
42
1
~
_,
U
"
52
'__,'
4
1 r
44
17
t
7
1C
1
_
7
_
. 1
" *
*
7
. : *
7
. .
. ' «
.C
B c
. 2*
r
. *
7
. '
4
c 7 r
? -» c
1 .1
\<> . :
j V .
35. i
i*" ^ * *
47.-^
f . «
I?.1
1 . *
^ 7 . ' *
C.1
'.'.'*
1 r 7
? . r *
7
en."
4?.e
1 .?
17.4
Lt .4
*
" . r
t (. . 1
'.'*
44 ,7
4.
47.:
Q .B
*
34 .5
14.'
,
' 7 , "
i ' .c
1
V.
1 i .^
^ -.
^
'->'. ^
m "
-- .1
.1.1
ic . *
H .^
~' . <
U.I
-------
TABLE C-99
ENV 1 kCNvE % T *L fCMTORI'^G A\D SUPPORT L A F-0 P A TO * 7
OFFICE CF RESE/kCH A t>. 0 rfVFLOP^ENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A C F K C Y
* * E F A KFTHOO 625 VALIDATICN STL'Dt - 6/N C)
R A k CAT* F C « D - r H C ANALYSIS h Y UATtP T Y p £
HIGH YCUDEN DAIR, UMTS - L'C/L
OISTlLLf D WATER
TAP WATE
SURFACE W A T fc
INDUSTPIAL FFFLL.r. T
»HPUL NO:
TRUE COMC:
u>
-P-
LAB NUMBER
1
2
?
4
5
t,
1
£
9
n
1
2
i
4
5
5
5 1 1 . C
3 « C . <"
1 7 . C
329.:
?c . 5
7V4 . ^«
1 ~'.£
5 }5 .C
1 7 . 3
232.0
2..4.J
* 5 f- . J
2U .?
i' . "
434.1
t.?
6
.547.
2M.
1*. .
24S.
u.
6V.
55.
5^2.
12.
174.
2 C<5 .
S11.
2^3.
i- .
34V.
1 I .
r
1
^
6
3
;
6
' *
6
c
c
r>
"
C *
3
1
511
7 Tf C
12
j 9<3
11
272
1 19
475
1'
7 "" C
137
4 tl
23S
~
492
94
5
. ;'.
. f
. .
.1
.r
^
n
.:*
7
!c
r
r
* '
.c*
.9*
.5
54
41
1
it
13
46
1 Cc
f 5
1
4C
1 t
4.4
24
4 C
6
7.:
C ..1
7
.
t .7
1.".
3. !'
r > 2 »
4 . ? *
T T
?.:
R . :
i .
; . ?
r . '. «
3.5*
4.9
51
39
1
1 2
1
7 ;
91
2
7 r
-* *
12
4 t.
r A
u
1C
5
1 ."
i . r
T > -
* . t.
C '
7 . .
5.'*
1 . 7
f .1
5,r
i
. " «
" t
: .'*
4 1
I
1 .3
6
5 4 7 . C
4 2 z . r
i7 .:
1 s, * . t
t .7
42".:
1 C- 5 . "
5M .:
v , ?
O -.
U 7 . '
4 6 f- . :
T j '
. i
1.4.1
3:.3
5 t
5 1 1 . C c v, 7 . '
4 to . "* », - c .
12 .r 14 . '
1 1 L . : 1 1 2 . ".
34.7 -<;.:
1 3 . t : ; ^ .
r . -r *
5 6 * . "> » C i ' . "
9 .^ 11.4
'«."».' ' , r- .
204.' ITC.;
4 £ 3 . ? 4 ] . .'
> 5 " . " r i ' . '.
*
r . ? . -' rj . -> . ;
c : . n 1 . ' . 1
-------
TABLE C-100
DISTILLED WATf
t V V 1 *> r N '' L '. T A L f»OMTGi-lN(, t\D S Jj P F P '- T L A f- o l. A T
i :
. r 7.2
1
fc . r
7
i
. 2
1
. r
c
» ~ o
1
LAG NUMBER
1
2
3
^
c
t
7
f.
9
10
11
12
1!
14
1S
6
?
1
5
6
t
*
11
>
I.
2
6
4
r
_J
1
.4 5.5
. * 1 '.: . 0
.0 c . ;
.1 6 . c
. 1 6 . L
. ' C . C
.6 3.0»
. * 4 . (
.$ 1.2
.0 1 . <5
E 2.1
.* 6.7
. ? 0.5
.5 5.7
. j * 0 . C
1.7
7 I
n.r
" .4
1 .7
' . ' .
T
c
1 .4
1.1
? ."
7.:*
2.1*
4. f
r .4
3.1
i
t
~
l_
1
r
"
1
2
?
<;
i
c
r
c
«
. 5
. ,*
7
7
. ".
. 1 *
,*
.1
.1
. "
V
. :
. ?
.7
5 7
r >
I . r *
? . *
2.:
" . n-
1 .f
; . '
(^ C. l(
I .$
4 . 4
2 . n
1 . '
. <
1 '
2.c
1.S-
: . : * A
. "
. . i
* 0
r .r i
i < r 4
" . " »
? . " i
7 t ?
4." J
") ' . T
; 7
r . 7 7
Z . 4
-
. i.
. f
7
7
C
. ^
. "
. ;
.1
. "
.<;
. >
.
.4
i C
1 . i
-------
TABLE C-101
LJ
LJ
AHPUL NO:
TRUE COKC:
LAB NUMBER
1
i
4
5
6
7
9
1C
11
1?
^2
14
15
OlSTILL-tO
9.
41.9
49. (
54.4
5.4.7
6^.5
4'. .4
t.:
1 3. T'
it*vnrb»i*>fni rot.MCKI^C AN? suf^OfcT LAf CHATTY
GfflCE OF ? t S E * R C H AT.; CFvFLOF*fcM
£ M V I « C f, I" t N T A L P h 0 T t C T I C N A G r N C Y
L r A » £ T H C t 625 VALIDATION STUDY - i-/N (I)
FAW DATA fCfc PI-f.-GCTYLFHTMALAU ANALYSIS fT * T f «. TtM
* F M U f V C I' D F ", P A I P , U N I T 5, - I'C/L
y A T t K T A F U .* T i P
4
t 7 i"
^ ' . -
7C, r
7 *. . 4
1s-.?
4c.S
52.5
It.!
1 1- . f
55 . v
55.4
6r t (
19.:
5..V
3 < . ?
5! .'
I''. 4.
f
1
C
1
L
1
1
2
L
1
L.
1
7
1 .
7
:.:
. t
"» * V
1 .4*
7 g
C C
".7
? < '
7 A
5.5
1 .c
1 .1
1 . »
4.d
C .t
f . d *
^ 7
1 :
<.£
C
1
15
S
1?
<;
! 1
? 1
T
21
1 3
I ~l
1 :
4
C
.4
.c
7
. 5
. ^
. L
C
« J
.2
"^
.C
A
. V
.4
?
SUP r *tc wATtfi i p
}
d>:.r
T C
3 1 . ^
' .' -
.5. 1
2 £ . 1
1 .4
ic .:
4 . '
1C . c
7 f~ I
1V .4
i r.
17..
17. r
1 i
4
s7. :
t .t
1C .r.
f . L
1 . ,"
V .t
t T
7.7
I A
51.2*
cc . /
U . 1
L . r
. .
:" .1
< .4
'. DlliTR 1
t
A i- r
7 7
1 7 ."
4 . "
3 ,
11 .=?
Z?.1
4.-»
; 1 7
3° . '
5 . r
c ^ 7
, f T
^ 7 . *
~ .,'
1 ; .
1 . .
-------
TABLE 0-102
"iCMTOf.INC AND SUPPORT L A I ' L
OFFICE Of f- [ S E A k C H A f. C CifVFLOP^tM
NTAL PROTECTION A G F K C Y
< T
* F. P A r* £ T H 0 f> C 2 5 VALIDATION STUDY - l/N (.)
RAW CAT.« FCK D I -.J-CC T YL PHTriALATl ANALYSIS P V wME« TYP
HIGH > 0 U D c N '' A I & , UNIT? - UC/L
DISTILLED k*TFk
TAP WAT£0
ATFF INDUSTRIAL F h F L U i. ' T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC: 512
G->
P* LAP NU*bE«
1 4t 1
1
1
1
1
X i
'A. 1
2
3
A
c
i
7
£
9
0
1
2
'?
i.
5
371
176
512
33A
41"
5 A 5
3tr>
7.0
495
72*
3 il
257
577
«?C?
5
~>
.?
.?
-
.1
.9
. 1
.6
.C1
.0
. r
. >
.6
.7
.?*
fit.
3d A
A57
A73
A31"
?'_6
5f C-
37i
t A c.
Af P
337
3?f
1 V "*
533
231
. r.
r
L
L
. V
. L
.6
f
. '
.1
. i.
.1
.3
.A*
' 12
T 7 C
C C
232
At
7A1
A7'
A 1?
< 2
AAA
3: 1
374
A17
56 "
1 1 i9
c
. V
. ?
.A*
. "
. ^
.9
r
.1
.9
r
.r
r
t
.2*
c A* . " c 12. " 5
AAT . _ A17. ' A
3 5 ; . i ? J(- . *> T
9 * . ^ * 5 7 . v *
217. : 1(2."
3 c 2 . 1 272.^ 3
Al2.r J-7A.J
At A , : n .0 5
AA7.C 2^^.^ A
9AC.T* 7.r."* 7
4 i 1 . " 5 I C . . A
217.: 27t.--. 7
33C. r 74,;.;.
4*7.7 Al7.r ?
51A.7 ""»1.r A
1 9ft . 1 7^ * . 1
A * . :
w A . "
37.2
92.'*
61.^
31.'.
re r
J . T
*. 5 . n
54.3
J. r . " *
C ' -
2."."
7A.^
5 * .t
79. t
74. f
167
213
1 u,1
1 5 c
57
231
S 24
175
~> ~ ^
"^ c
2l:A
1 A1
5 1 5
4 .3
.7
.A
. "
. ^
.7
* .
,
*
, ^
. 7
.1
-------
TABLE C-103
ENTAL KOMI OR ING AND SUPPORT LAi-oRAT..<-r
OFFICE CF RtSCAKCH ASD DFVELOPfEM
PROTECTION A&FNCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - F'/N (2) *
u>
Ul
AWPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
4
5
6
7
3
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
D
1
1
I
6
H
6
5
2
e
7
9
7
j
A
7
r
fj
4
"
ST1LLE
1
.6
.1
.8
.9
.7*
. ,<;
.9
.6
.4*
.0
,r
.9
.0
. 6
.9 *
D UATER
2
7.2 c
A
9
5
5
6
6
4
6
9
2
6
6
1
4
1
. t-
.£
.7
.C-
*
7
-
.3
. c.
.9
7
. _.
.1
.*>
,
. 4_
3
. 2
.8 *
.9
7
~
-1
. 9
.6*
.5*
.4
. 6
->
. c
.*
.1
.:*
SUR
1
c ~
s
t.
4
t
0
6
4
6
11
«
f
if
J
',
4
r
.7
*t
'*
**
^
.
.4
<
7
.
.7
.r
. ?
.5
RAW DATA fCR D I E L D S I N ANALYSIS P V U A T E N TYPE
LOU YOUrUN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
SURF ACt WATLfi INDUSTRIAL E F F L L1 L \ T
2
7 ~>
t .(
4 .4 »
c c
4.4
f ^
1Z.1-
l'.7
4.t
4.6
4.7
1
c .C
6.:
7.2
O.D*
7.4
6.7
6.4
P.1
6.1
4.
. 1
<: . .
1.6*
1 :.7
2.1
6 , ^
' . 7
-------
TABLE C-104
DISTILLED uATER
Ef.VI RCfv,v,LNTAL l*O^MOF.It«G ANC SUPPORT
OFFICE CF RESEARCH AriO DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA f.ETHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - H/U CO *
RAW DATA F 0 P D1CLDRIN ANALYSIS BY WATES TYTF
XEDIU" YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UC/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATtP INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE COKC:
LAP NUPBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
3
60. n
45. J
6 9 . :
39.1
43.0
91.7*
59.3
42.9
64.5
71.2*
43 .6
57.'
3B ,4
47.1
59.2
2C .C«
4
57.:
44.2
5 6 . r
45.1
37.8
49. C
40.
. "
.2
C
57
44
57
27
23
43
45
36
60
79
3Q
51
T C
44
46
1 p
4
w
.9
r
V.
. : *
.6
.1
7
-
.4
.0*
.4*
.2
.7
. :
.3
..
.7
6C
55
t?
£CJ
<.:
2S
7 7
34
b~
73
35
5*
4f
55
4£
5:
J
.r
C
-'
. L
. r-.
.1
.1
.4
C
. (
.3.
C
-
. 1
. ~J
. ~
. 0
.9
57
4^
- 51
2?
3:
52
C 7
3 1
35
36
35
S 7
3Q
^5
4 ^
* 7
4
'-
.4
-
.c*
-»
-j
i.
XJ
.T
.2*
C
*
. K *
.6
.6
.( *
7
. t
.1
,
.7
.7
4
57.:
3il .7
<* . C
12.5
i.' .6
64. >
c-. .7
1 '* f
*<-_
39.1
.1 .4
A -
- t. ..
v: . 1
4 1 .i
49.:-
:2 .4
-------
TABLE C-105
U)
DISTILLED WATER
AL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAbCRATc^r
OFFICE OF FESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRON"ENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD ?2r. VALIDATION STUDY - H/K (c) «*
RAW DATA FOR DIELDMN ANALYSIS t- Y WATER TYPt
HIGH YC'UDEN PAIR, UMTS - UC/L
TAP WpTEfi SUFFICE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUt'.T
A1PUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAP NUMBER
1
2
7
4
c
6
7
9
9
13
11
12
13
14
15
512
439
43:>
233
373
492
374
396
53s
?bC
324
440
24*
5dt
465
136
c
.
*
»
O
f*
:
i
0
0
r
rj
6
p*
2
0
ri
7
z
1*
6
5 4 c . C
557. Q
43C'.C;
56'. 7
1 p : . c
7cC.O
?C1.C>
4»,1 .0
ft 3 2 . «
5 4 2 . C *
274. f
527. C
2 s :, . c
3 7 C . 3
435.:
1c 8.1*
5
512.:
7 37. r
39: .r
£7.4*
1 1 9 . C
92T.C*
374.0
'6 7.C
57°. 9*
c d ? . C *
' 4 :- . c
4 1 1 . r
262. r
356.3
5 15 .7
423.7
6
5*,?.-
474.:
423.:
112.1*
121.3
54C. .
399. :
374.:
666.1*
c. u r . 7' *
'Z8 . "
415.:
245. J
429.6
44'.?
1 1 : . *.
51Z
5L5
T A r
91
1 13
41e
444
2;1
446
F C9
?S2
3c5
25c
365
34:
359
5
.0
. r
. '^
.5*
L
_
. 4
. 3
.1
. - *
.
. !
. :
.3
-
~T
-
6,
5 4 o . C
534.:
'33.:
1-4.5*
u 7 . :
511.;
196. 1
3 7 1 . r
4t^ . 1
77*"."*
"- P Q
_ c ^ . '-
4 L t . "
273.0
^12.7
3c 1 . 3
2 7"1. r
c
512."
T7t .'
27^.:
9 5 . c .
11'."
69.2
176 ,T*
'ts.:
2 c f . 6
6 5 = . : *
? 6 3 . -"
4 = 7. r
254 .?
f .2
469.4
7 c 5 . :
»
: ^ . i
4 c 1 . -j
T^ 4 . C
71 .^
w C ">
* ' i_
^s 2 . .
1 -4 * .
4 . ; . :
f .4 . 7
c . <;
£ J 3 . L
47:.,
c ': 6 . :
4c'5 . 3
155. 7
-------
TABLE C-106
oo
ENVIRONMENTAL NGMTOrtlNG AND SUPPCFT L A I C R * T o I- Y
OFFICE Of &ESEAKCH AND DEVELOPMENT
MAL PPCTECTICM AGENCY
** EPA METHOD d i 5 VALIDATION STUDY - Ei /N (n) *«
PAW DATA FCfi &I":ETHYL PHTHALATE ANALYSIS t< Y WATtF TYPE
LOW YOLDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED UATCR
TAP WATER
SURFACE UAThR INDUSTRIAL F F F L U t N T
4 .5
1 . .
AMPUL NOT
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
?
?
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
5
r
C
r.
0
3
T
(
C
7
2
'j
i
rj
Q
p
1
:
.6
.0*
.G*
.7
.4
.:*
.3*
.G*
. T
.3
.?«
. -*
.0*
.C *
.0*
t.
2
V
o
r
T
r
T
r\
c
r
1
0
r
'
D
p
^
.5
.7
.:
.n*
. G *
. j
.:*
.4-
. C *
.9
. 2
.0*
.r*
. t,*
.c*
. c*
c
1
c
f.
1
T
^
7
"
>
2
'
?
"
A
?
1
.C
.d
* 5
.f *
L
.C*
.c*
.?.*
. r*
-r
.2
.f *
.7
. ' ' *
,1
. r
4
1
r
n
p
r
r
2
r
1
r
^
r
i
C
;~
r
2
.5
.f
. :*
c
^
,f
.4
. : *
.5*
. C*
c
. s
. ?«
.' *
. 1*
. " »
.:*
. 2
1
5.:
1 .?
2.1
3s1'*
C . r *
1 c
c . *
7.2
C . r*
" n
«- i-
c .r*
c.r-
r . ' *
\~> * J *
c.r*
r.f -
L
1
'
'
r
T
L
1
1
C
f
-
r-
^
2
.5
.f
.: *
.c*
. r *
*
*- *
2
.r-
.4
"*
. L *
. " *
.-;
. C *
C
« J
1
f r
4 ,°
r r
.
" . r
r- *'.
" . °
4 . t
-
""* 7
1 . -
c.r
" . °
e cj
1 .1
-------
TABLE C-107
NTAL I* C M T 0 Kl \ F. AND S U f ' .'' 0 S T LAlu»ATCr S I S L< V WATt^ TYPE
MEDIUM YiUl'tf* PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED UATES
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL FMLl-L'iT
AMPUL NO:
^ TRUE CONC
-P-
LAP NUMBE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
\ 1A
A 15
1 0
* V -
R
7
r
13
6
10
r
32
j
2
'J
50
r>
r
15
2
i
.6
.?
-J
.2
.6
.n*
.5*
.0*
.7
,7
.2 *
.e
. C *
7
_
. ?
36
1V
c.
1:
6
^
L2
^
r
ii
44
r
_
Z5
1
4
.C
.6
.6
.C
.5
.t-
. J*
.4*
. . *
. 6
. V
.7*
7
. C *
v
.6
T
3 ?. . 0
i? . 3
C.C*
1? .?
4.4
3.7
:.c*
2T.1
1 .3
? .7
'- c -
45.6*
6.4
1 L
\.
A.i
4 3
27.9 3 C . 6
r . "j Z 5 . ^
r r x 7
* - t -
4.5' Z . 5
9.7 9.2
" . ' * v . : *
ic.:* c^ . '
i . c /i . r «
C .Z 1 .'
4.9 1 . S
4 r . - 45.-
<~ ~~ t r "*.
5.7 u.:
2 ° 1 r *
4.2 t .5
If
1°
1
C
4
1 Z
r
24
*~
7
46
1
2 1
*
vj
, C
. ^
r
. t-
. 'r.
.7
.5
0 C
.6
.9
. p
. 0»
.1*
.4
i
. :»
.9
3?
26
1
16
3C
r
*
17
~.
1?
C
3C
n
16
Q
3
r-
. r *
.1
. 7
. ^»
c
9 2
. c *
. " *
.1
.t
7
.' *
*
.t
."
fc,
? 1 . ! «
7 .t
1: .4
C "
^ ' M
<.. 1
.7. 1*
?.1*
1 :.2
c . ^
- 4 . :
... i*
V
J * 1
J .4
-------
TABLE C-103
01
o
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAR
4
4
5
6
7
P
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
ENVIRONMENTAL MCMTCRING AND SU°POPT L A h uk A 1 0 ^ Y
OFFICE OF PESSARCH Af^D DFVELOPVEM
ENVlKCNP FNTAI. PPCTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 6.25 VALIDATION STUPY - H / n (i) - *
HAW DATA FOR DIV,ETHYL PHTHALATE ANALYSIS I: Y l^TCF Ttff
HIGH YOU DEN P A I f< , UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUS TRIAL E F F L U L » T
32C
199
1
1C?
54
131
f.
2b5
c
c
»
314
4
Uf
223
12
C
. "t
.0
.6
.4
.7
«
. c
.:*
. i *
.(
.9
."
r<
*
.3
.4
.'
.6
343
11J-,
1 :
ir9
4T
169
1 9
173
9
2e
11
2fc 3
13
53
75
23
6
C
'
1
-
.2
)
.0
.3*
.1
.6
.6
. ?
.2
t,
-<
.1
.fi
32C
i
7?
12
53
19
167
9
65
7
3C.1
r
99
273
73
c
is
.6
»
\2
.4
. ~ *
.1
. r
.4
*>
o o
.9
.6
.8
343
6
1 Cr»
e .w
K4
1 1 1
? ? 1
4
£?
55
29C
1
127
2 2 Z
32
4
.4
T
. 1
.4
s
. "> «
.7
.1
.4
. 1
. '_,
.7
-1
_
.2
7V'"
4 1
63
; 5
1C5
3,^
21
1;
37
4
2i3
^
144
U4
'_
C
r
.7
c
. 7.
. ?
4
.
.7
.4
. C
-i
. r *
. »
. ;
.4
7 ,
5
67
^°
112
£ 1
7 r -
2r
41
11
2s>7
c
141
J
?4V
6
T ?!
^
J
.0
.3
.0
.4
, "
4.
. 2
.5
. C
T
.*
.2
. »
72"
2c?
21
Qf
46
n 7
C '
7 r
1 3f-
1C
171
4<^
.?4?
3
3P
1"
17
c
.r.
.0
.9
.1
.4
. ?
. 7 *
. "*
. "
^ "
t j
.f *
.4 =
.(
.i
7.5'
0.4
-------
TABLE C-109
DISTILLED WATER
tt.VlKCM'cNTAL KOMTOnlNG A N C. 5 L- r f 0 K T L A r 0 F. A T - I
OFFICE OF »' i S E A f, C h AND DfVFLOF^t^.T
ENVIRON MMAL PROTECTION AGENCY
« EFA fETSfOD t < S VALIDATION STUDY - 0 / r« ( ~ )
RAW OAT A FvR E NOR IN iLDEHYTE Af^LYriS !-Y .. A T ? l< IVf-E
LOW Y G U ?> E N r A 1 K , UMTS - U fc / L
TAP WATER
AM^UL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAfl NUMBER
1
2
T
4
5
6
7
£
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
21
:5
;.
22
«
17
r
?
2
631
5
1 *
*~
i
1C
4
1
*
C
>.-
, 3 *
v'
.?
.1
.:*
. =
.2
.r'*
. ^
. "'
. '
. T *
.9
>
. ~
t
-t r r
C - U
z:.r
c . c *
24.4
4 . f-
21. r
" . : *
3.7
: . r *
921.1*
3 .^
2C . :
t .1
1 C *
2i.4
31.1
1 I
2 2 . 0 : 5 . *
12. «. 14. f
r .r * r . ~ *
3.Q 1.1
3.6 1 : . v
11. f U.3
r . r * n . " *
1 . ? 5.7
r.^* r.:*
iv."* 75-.:*
c c ^ c
1° .4 21.^
T t v 1
* . '. * ? . . . *
1^.4 15.5
15.0 4 . «
1 2
2 2 . T 25.7
1 / . 4 5 f . 9
1:.? i *.i
13.5 1 r . '
1 *- ^
r- . r » n . "
4.5 4. -
r . " i " . r »
? i 5 . : - v 5 7 . - -
6.7 7. '
2?. 4 2"-. ?
> . "* 1.3
: . i c- . 4 .
1 r . 7 17.0
' . : . * i : . 9
22
1?
'
U
^
4
1
-1 (^ T
*
-. C
C .
1
24
4
1
r
.C
, r
2
^
7
C
. '
^
.1
. r
r
. >
. "*
-------
TABLE C-110
riSTILLED UATER
E SV I PC "At NT A L I'OM TG-c If.C M. C> cLrpOTT
CfflCt Of NfcTEAHCrt AM ttV
NTAL PROTECTION AGFNCY
* * EM METHOD 625 VALIDATION STuDt - d / '. (?)
RAW D^TA FO* ENDS IN eLDEHYDF ANALYSIS n Y *ATth ^Y^
MEDIU" YGUDEN PMf, UNITS - Uf>/L
TAP WATl R
UATtR INDUSTRIAL E F F L I: L'\ T
AKPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
u>
JJJJ LAP KUPdE
2
T
t,
C
,'
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
7
e
9
0
1
2
i
4
5
3
: 110.3
R
161.1
:.-}*
135.3
7 C C
^ . ,
3?. 2
325..;-
2t.S
1.2
3?JC .T*
<. " . 9
13*.'
15.5
C . r< *
115.3
G . C *
1Z5
111
U1
34
115
25.1
31
t
2 5 > -;
1 -
U4
31
V.
141
£ 3
4.
r
. _
. ^
. '. *
c .
.(.
.f
.-
.1
.:*
.5-
.
.4
. 1*
^
r
>~
119
75
?'
25
77
244
7 -,
F44
3C
111
3 T
f 4
144
15r>
3
.G
.7
A
T
L
.C
r
.
. ~
.C
.4
i
&
,_
.P
^
12.
6°. 7
11^.
t7.5
1.:
1 1Cr. . C «
31.1
U5.
^ r
125. c
17',.:
< . C »
71.:
7' .6
34 . 7
3.1*
. 9 ;-..'*
'7.3
12?."
c.7
r.:»
1 1C.9
r7.7
31.7
1 .' 1 .
. 7
11 c . ,
.1
-------
TABLE C-lll
Ln
ENVIfrOr^E MTAL KOMTCKING AND SUPPORT
OFFICE OF P £ 5 r. »^CH A N 0 DEVELOPS NT
ENVIkCNXEMAL PPOTECTIG*. A G F N C Y
** FPA "ETHCO '.2' VALlDATlOf. STUDY - c / f, C)
A U I A T A F0f< ENDRU ALDCHYDf A ?.' M Y S I S PY wATEiv T Y"-
HIGH YCUDuN FAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SU9FACF WATtP INDUSTRIAL
AMPUL NO: 5
TRUE COMC: 65i.?
LAP NUMBER
i
7
'0 >j
i ^
i_ _
4 «;
95
47
:?
7^
c
.f
w
.r
. L
. '.*
,1
. <.
.F*
. C *
r
^
w *"
.4
. '
«4
6
4
1
7
2W'
2
5*)
1
c
\
t
5
~
t 5 f 5
11.; C. 5 c . ' 611.0 s1. 5 * . r
t f- . : ? c f- . ; > r <> . - " 5 ? . '
*" * * * f«'** *
77.' 177. 56. <. ?Z1 .'
3 ^ . -j . z c 7 . : T ; f . : - ? . -
51".;* 4 < _ ~ . r « Z36C.1* ?56."
i2.r. 13.1 22^.r 177."
t.:* ." . r k.5« r.-*
1 - . : 7 <; w - . r . 1 9 4 ^ - . : z c 7 : r . *
41.' 16"-.- 155..] 1V. .r
CJ.T 5vz.r t:4.c 7£ :. . :
5 ? . Z 5 ^ . ' 2.1.7 1 r, 1 . r
31.1 i " . c * ' . r <
44.: 4d7.: 411.2 ?3?.4
C1.6 '37.i 711.6 23°. 7
r 1 1 . .'
C ^
_ -. * ^
171."
c 7 .
C ^' "^
I L, ''
. « i
v " -.'".".
1 1 ; . :
1 ; 7 . :
.'13. :
f c c. . .
1 1 : . 1
-------
TABLE C-112
lwCNvt NT AL "ONITTPINC AND SUPPORT LAt-u
OFFICE OF f.ESF*kCh A'JC C-ftfFLCPvEM
M*L PROTECTION *GE'.CY
* » E F A r f T h 0 D > 2 5 VALIDATION S T 0 f> Y - L / r, (?)
RAu DATA FOR FLUOPE'.E ANALYSIS f- V W f- T F fv TYPF
LOto VCUDtN FA IK, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLfeD WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE W A T *:
1 *- C U S T Ik I A t E F F L U l M
*MPUL NO:
TRUE COfcC:
i£ LAB NUPbFt
P- 1
2
i
t,
5
6
7
8
\ 14
*\ 15
7.7 t
?.5 3.t 4.r 7.- 4
5.6 5.5 :.: 5.4 6
5.r -.C* 4.5 :,,7 5
4.2 3." 4.5 4.t 3
:.« 1.7. *.!* 1.7. A
i
^-1
m 7
c
. r *
. i
.6
. ?»
.7
Tt
r
.1
.7
7
c. .4
y m ~)
7.d
5 . '
4.5
*
7 7 ^
/ C
7.7-
5.5
^ . Q
6.7
T.1
1 ,7
f t
J J
1
( "~ f
6." 17
^7 /
^ - c
4
1.2* 1
^ . ^ c
4 .t 5
5.4- 7
^ .i 1
4.T 7
4. A t
T1 .4*
7,c '
4.1 <
I
_
t
. 1
4
1
-
*
_
« J.
.1
* L.
-------
TABLE C-113
DISTILLED WATE*
NVlhCK-Uf. T*L KCMTOHING AND FLPTOhT L A I U « A T t- r
C F F 1 C k Of RESLAhCH AN 0 DEVFLOFwc\T
E*vV1^0M*E'JTAL PROTECTJC* AGM.CY
** ETA KETHOD * i 5 i/ALIDATK\ S ' U D Y - H / f. (7)
RAU DAT* FOP fLUC'U'kE ANALYSIS .It I. A T E n TYPE
PC DiliP YCIKEN PAI1;, UMTS - LC/L
TAP k A T E
SURFACE WATK? I INDUSTRIAL EMUU'T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
Ui
Ui
LAB NU"HEk
1
2
3
4
r
6
7
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
1*
45
3fr
4s
43
39
36
11
4C
i>t
43
45
3£
3,1
45
3t
1?
i
"
.fr
.6
.?
t)
.C-
,5«
.2
.9
.1
.f
. a
c
. -*
.1
7
» -
.t
4
43.
34 .
41.
3r.
3 ^
~ »
_*
6.
4'.
4C .
3t .
44.
3t .
34.
45.
37.
16.
-'
h
3
6
r
?
7 »
i;
4
*
~
7
5
4
r«
3«
4r
41
45
31
3C
37
1?
T C,
47
S9
4'
3 *
7 -3
i:
4:
7 '-
7
.0
.7
.7
.5
*
.t
.4.
.7
.?*
.7 «
.(
.f
.7
C
.7
.:*
4'
3 ^
4Z
z<;
3^
i-4
17
42
17
47
T t
T 5
3 7
3.7
Z **
U
4
-
.2
-
. 5
. 1
. 5'
.Z
.6
.1*
. 5«
. J
.7
. "
. .
. i
.1-
i
45. i
i6.4
4t . t'
27.1
37 . l
1S .^
1 ? . ?
4r . ."
Z^ . 7
d " . : *
4 1 .
7 C
_ J .
3 5 7
1C, <
36 ,C
7 c r
4 :
^ ,«
^ ;
Z7
5
31
1Z
37
Z 4
51
7 '
7 c;
« 4
T T.
7 7
64
4
^
.7
.1
r
m 2
7
* .
. t
.7
.1
. *
. c.
.
. *
.1
. f
.5*
T
45 .:
3"-.?
4T.1
z s . :
f 1 .?*
*
9 .f
4 : .*
z 7 . ?
5 1 . '
4r = °
3' : . 7
34. e
7 Q ^
4 "" .4
3 7 . 4
-------
TABLE C-114
r, T AL i»OMTCF.JSC AND SUPPO««T L A H I', h A T o S Y
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND C(:VFLCFM£M
ECTlG*. AGFNCV
* fcFA METHOD t:5 \MLITATIOf. STUDY - ! . C
T C ~>
» ' . ^
4 s . '
?".:
u 4 . :
2 r . '
2r .9
9 . :
^ r
1 i . "
J c . *"
,-7.<,
6s..
41 .4
7 ^~
- *9
1 7''
7 3 C'
t, :
1 '. '
7 24
"51
'If'
n'r"
1 ..4
? r ,-
i ;o
415
1 9*
."
. 2
.?
'-
.1
r
m ""
*
-
'
4 "
9 7
4 5
-------
TABLE C-115
L > W U f V F N T * L H C M T C M N f> AM ^ U P F ^ 1 j < i
OFFICE Of ~ t S t A R C H A r D C/ E V f L '
tNVlSONftfTAL PHOTtCTIOr A G F N C r
** cPA *FTHCD 625 t/ALIDATION S T U f> T - (/'< l.J
< A U DATA F P fi HEPTACHLO& FFOXIDt ANALYSIS L- f U A T c c j ,
LOW YCUDtM PA I*, Uf, ITS - UG/L
DlSTlLLfb wATtfi
TAP WATEP
S I! P F « C ? W * T f- d 1 '< [/ U S T M A I E M L L! t ' T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
CJ
Ol
LAR NU«Bf
1
2
I
4
5
ft
?
8
9
1C
11
1?
13
14
15
R
4
6
4
7
1!
7
T
4
7
c
^
7
-
4
u
1
.2
.?
. 1
.£
. '
7
.?
. ' '
.3
.7
. 5
.7
. ."
. S
.4
b.
7.:
4.C
«..!
r . r *
t . t
c
w
6."»
3.5
7 1
-' -
" . '.
2.i
r. 1
7
" . * *
c o
p J
I
1
C
5
(
14
C
4
~
7
c
4
7
7
«,
7
1
. 1
.t
.7
.9
.C
.7
. t
. " *
r
. ^
.4
.7
.1
fc.
L
.9
r
7
7
i.
4
7
4
t.
"
f
t
c
"
'
4
1
<. 1
.: 2.4
. 'f 4 . t
.6 4 . ,"
.1 t.l
t.7
.< 4.:
. 7 4 .
-------
TABLE C-116
f, VIKCNvtM»L WOMTCFilNC. »t,D S U c r C K T L A ( D
OFFICE OF ft . S t A H C H AM/ C>rVFLPPwtM
L \ V I H G N * t f J T A L PSOTfCTION AGENCY
0 * Y
* * t F A MFTHCD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - b/U 1C) *
£ A W I A T A F 0 H HFPTACHLOR FPCXItF A N» L Y S ] S P Y 1. A T >_ K T Y " I
K F 0 I U v YCUDTf. PAIR, UMTS - tG/L
DJST1LLF.& WATER
TAF WATEB
SURFACE »ATER INDUSTRIAL
A*PUL NO:
w TRUE CONC
Ln
co
: 6?
3
..1
4
7
57.:
61
r
5
4
7. :
6^.r
LAt KU*6FK
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
4
5
6
7
9
9
J
1
2
3
4
3
5 5
6;
4F
69
111
11
4*
43
54
41
4?
S7
46
5^
57
.4
.1
.2
. !~
.9
.#
. 2
.1
.9
.4
.c
.5
. 1
.1
£.2.
54.
37.
t: .
47.
(4.
47.
45.
45.
4r .
4?.
t 5.
* *^
C i.
At*
12.
1 73 ."
c 1 5 . :
r 3 = . 4
r 4 7 7
4 1 ;«!;
9 r ' . 5
4 4l .9
4 r . ~ *
* 7^.2
? H 4 . S
9 41 ,7
2 7(« .7
? 41.?
7 4^ . "
f. 4 <> . I
59.5
I . "
A4.4
3^.7'
4 ' . 1
79. =
*»*--
36.?*
C * C,
3r . 1
4 t . Z
54.:
4 f .5
41.3
1: .?
t -1:
c 7
37
4 7
35
: 7
46
11
Cf
j t,
V7
f J
77
<^
47
.7
.
.7
, 7
.5
. r
. c
.4.
A
,4
t
--
. l
.4
.t
.7
6
t
4
i.
c
<:
4
^
d
4
i.
t
7
t
4
4.4
0 . "
7 C
7.4
T . -
/ -7
'.7
> . Q
' . S
S . '
c.
f-.5
r. .5
' . V
7. *
L ^ r
- T f
12.r-
- 1 c
1 -k .?
5r .1
^» A ^
T ^
i, 7 . *
j '" c
5 , ' . T
51 .*«
2i .4
11.7
-------
TABLE C-117
E\VIKON*cK'TAL MONITORING AND SUPFCf-.T L Al- eft A Tt * Y
CFFlCfc OF RESEARCH AN D D F V E L 0 F N I N T
P^OTfCTlGN AGENCY
C)
* EF'A 'lETHCC ( 2 c VALIDATION STUDY - D
RAW DATA FOR HEFTACHtOP EPOXIDt ANALYSIS ( Y W*,TLR TYPt
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UC-/L
DISTILLED WATFS
TAP WATER
SLf. FACE wATCf INDUSTRIAL F F F L U r ', T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
CO
01
VO
LAB NUMBER
1
?
T
4
5
6
7
?
9
A 1C
i\ 11
*X 12
&v\ 13
\/v\ 1 *
NM\ 15
V°A
5)2
636
53r
?:-7
731
611
812
f 17
5S6
59?
329
375
416
639
457
142
5
.0
.D
.?
.")
.0
.0
.:>
,-t
.4
.0
.3
w
.C
.7
.4
.6
t
5 4 F . "
1158. r *
5c:.r
225.2
454.'
?3">.e*
293.:
5 5 i.1 . ''
455.6
449.C
2 r 3 . ;.
452.:
475.3
455.1
416.6
5 9 1 . 5
512
t5t
5c:
1C7
31F
1r2?
6c?
4f 5
3S4
574
> x J
353
452
449
37C
?9P
5
'.
.
r-
v
.d
.
.:
.c
.
.1*
r
-
.
-
~
.9
.4
.?
6
545.-
792.?
5L1'.:
11 }.~
294.:
67r.T*
9^6.:
6 1 c . :
n t . A *
77c.:
> c .- *,
- ^ -
35' .C
399.0
4feS.1
^96.6
1 <; 4 . 2
512
757
51"
96
7u3
44(
63F
7 7
13 -5
5V?
2Vr
324
432
45C.
'6:-
779
C
r
V.
.r
* >~
.1
. c
. >.
r
. .
.4
.r*
L,
-
.c
.7
.9
.4
c
5 «. r . >:
-5 2 r . c
c :?.r
14r.7
7 6 f . :
i ; 7 . -^
4 7 7 . C
544.:
3^2 . 3*
6 2 r . f
3T-.C
37'". ;
471.0
2i*. :
4 1 ? . 7
r 4 6 . 5
c
r i : . :
tu.:
31?.:
1 : *> . : *
15" .'
51 .*
4^^ .r'
49T .?
?U.?
7'. 7
2 h r . '
421 .'
435."*
*
354.3
32". f
1
C.
- *» -
'.^ ? . "
3 ; i.
^' '-
- 1 . v
: 1 " . .
275 ..
~ - X
i. _
s L <- . :
C c i 7
-J - -
759. 7
r < T .
411...
435 .:
41,7. c
1
-------
TABLE C-118
E.NV 1 f- ON^tMTAL fCMTOfilNG AND SUpPO(-T L Ab OR M T'J * Y
OFFICE OF ^EStAhCH AND DEVELOP" F. NT
ENVIRON!1 EMAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD
VALIDATION STUDY - 1 /!» (')
RAW DATA FOfc H F XA C HL 0 F CL UT A D I E N t ANALYSIS HY wATEK 1 Y F' E
LOW V 0 U P F N PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED UATErt
TAP WATER
r. U P F » C f WATER 1 *. D U S T R I f L E F F L L t \ T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAP NUMBER
1
2
T.
4
5
6
7
g
9
10
11
1?
13
14
15
1C
1
*
4
f
t
A
3
e
9
5
<.'
6
13
»
7
1
.
. L
. ?
. C
,5
.9
.C
.6
. ?
.?
.5
.7
,5
e;
->
.4
..
4 .*
c .6
> t~>
7. :
C . T
7 Q|
r t;
*
c . :
S.7
t
c . :
i
f -1
1 ..'
11.0
? . <.
f- . i,
7 . *»
i r
r B -
T ^
A 7
t ^
4 . 1
-------
TABLE C-119
^FMAL MOMTGRIUG M. D SUPPORT LAEO
CFFICF OF RtSf.ARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA ^fcTHCD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N (?) *
PAW DATA FOR HE X A C HL 0 ROD UT A D 1 6 N E ANALYSIS P Y h » T £ K TYPE
KEDIU" YGUDFN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATEf,
TAP WATE»
SURFACE U'ATJIF INDUSTRIAL F F F L U c N T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
u>
cr>
M LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
1 2
13
14
15
3
75.1
1 *, . 9
48.7
66. c
58. 1
5r.7
6J.1
49.7
49.5
62.E
60.2
48.3
47.5
62.1
54.7
2°. 2
71
42
4C
59
77
51
C "
48
57
54
35
40
53
97
54
3C
4
.C'
.6
.1
.9
.1
.C
U
.9
.4
<:
.(
.9
.4
.6*
.1
.9
75
36
56
5"
55
52
36
45
cl
99
51
if
57
4?.
6 i
4?
3
.:>
-»
* 4
.7
.3
<-v
.4
.1
n
.»*
. n
.1
.9
-
. 5
.7
71
51
49
<,S
47
37
52
61
?f<
72
71
43
4P
43
36
27
4
-
.5
.4
7
* -
>w
.1
7
.5
. 5
.6*
.9
.7
.6
C
J
.6
.2
75
54
SC
44
62
25
3^
43
T <:
ft
U(
42
54
1 -4
04
s3
3
r
C
./,
. £
. ^
c
. f
.
4 -
.r'»
. <.
.9
. ~
f
'.
.5
. C
75
4?
6T
33
112
22
51
6°
79
54
t,f.
i,*-
*
6q
47
3 H
. c 71.:
. ? 4 C . b
. (. ^ 1 . ''
77'
"* «» 4 . 4
* C 5 S
.° 4? .f
.2 41.7
. K -' .4
. ? * t 2 . 2 «
.4 5 : . :
. r; it .5
.4 .,0 ^
5 *
4 c . 7
.7 ,:.'..-
-------
TABLE C-120
ENV1KCN*:*>.T«L NO M TO RING AND SUf-PC^T LAP ORATORY
OFFICE CF f.tSEAF,CH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRON CENTAL PPOTECT1CN AGENCY
** EP* METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - P/N () *
RA* DATA FOR HEXACHLGKCbl'TADIENE ANALYSIS RY W * T E * TYCE
HIGH YCUDE^ PAIR, UMT^ - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SUPFACE WATEF INDUSTRIAL r F F L U c K T
AMPUL K 0 : 5
TRUE COUC: 64C.C
LO
0
10 LAP NUI*8Efi
1 S i 4 . '.
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
H
5
6
7
e
9
r
1
2
3
A
5
359.6
676 .5
532."
422."
55*.:
36?.. r<
613.:
c s 9 . i
37'. 1
372.0
42*. . D
1 1 U . " *
4G7.3
533.7
6.
7 5 " . r
389.4
677. £
475. C
4 9 c. . r
2 2 fc <. ~
411.-
723.5
482."
395.:
393. C
522.C
622.9
395.1
237.4
64'
759
77"
7 6r
5Z3
761
5 :4
799
697
4:5
34?
44r
49i
752
4:*
5
.C
.1
.?
. '
.
. 1
r
.7
."*
r,
. j
a .>
.C
.6
.5
."
6
6*5.:
437. "
4C3.7
477. c
352.:
399. C .
766.:
445.-
'16.3
1 1 1 c . : *
299.T
'54.3
426."
43?. 4
7t 7 .f
47.0*
5
6 4 C . C
T 5 ri . L
446.2
r 9 * . 4
7 3 4 . "
2 ? 9 . L
419. r
U.1*
477.2
C1£ . [ »
4 ,. 4 . '
7 1 5 . C
494.C
5f ?. 9
42h . 1
i C 7 . >
6
6E5.:
'64
754
424
91
542
7 r T
5
.C
r-
\f
.1
.1
.r
..
">
.
. r *
^
_
.0
r
. i
.B*
.F.
c
6 c 5 . r.
4 * 1 . C
4 5 5 . f
2 c .' . :
' ' c;
7 1 2 . '-
: i z . "
4t " . .
7 5 1 . 3
r 4 r fr *
7 4 c . "
7o3 . :
t. c : . :
t -i . 6 *
4c y . 7
) T r
c - - . ^
-------
TABLE C-121
(-0
LNVIFTN-E-JTAL POMTOI-I\G AND SUPPORT LA ORATORY
OfflCC OF "ECEAfiCH AND i)EVELO^tM
ENVIRONMENTAL PPOTECTIGM AGCNCY
** EPA rETHOC i2c. VALIDATION STUDY - H/N C) **
RAw 0*T» F C ft hcXACHLOcOETHANE A N A I V S I S R Y W A T F K T Y H f
LC* YCUCLN PAIR, UNIT? - UG/L
DISTILLFD WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL F f F L U c. '. T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC: 7
LAB fllMBER
1
2
3
L
1
6
7
9
1 ?
11
12
1?
1 4
15
1
c
l:
J
4
i.
2
5
5
7
*
1
I
"
4
;
1
.6
. L
. C1*
.0
.2
.3
.6
.1
C
-
.c
.7
.6
, ' *
.£
,r*
t
i,
L
t
2
t
5
T
3
r
1
2
4
_
3
w
.3
.1
. c
.3*
.7
w
.9
. 2
.5
.1
. g
.e
. e
. C *
,Q
. V *
7
2
5
4
-------
TABLE C-122
DISTILLED WATEK
fCMTuSlNG A ,\ n
C F F I C t CF RtSEANCH AND
ENV1RCNWEMAL PROTECTION A b E N C Y
* * EPA M F T H 0 D e 2 5 VALIDATION STUDY - f< / N (J ) * »
DATA F C << HEXACHLG^GETHAME Af, ALYS15 ri Y j A T E P TYFE
MF01U" YCUDFN P A I & , UMTS - UC/L
TAP UATER
SURFACE U'ATfcR INDUSTRIAL E F F L 0 L '. T
AHPUl. NO:
U, TRUE CONC
CT>
->
LAP NUMBF
1
1
1
1
\ 1
VS. 1
V\
&<\
.* O \
\o V\
\o \
V>, \
1
2
*
4
5
6
7
8
Q
0
1
2
2
4
5
: 5Z
Q
13
It
5'
37
3C
4f
30
34
39
4 :
32
34
24
41
15
3
^
_
.*
.8
.6*
.5
.3
A
..-
C
_
.3
.'
.:
.4
.2
.0
.1
.? *
49
25
37
C "
47
47
i >
3 B
21
42
24
2t
1 f.
c4
/,1
9
4
* ^'
.1
C
--
.7*
.3
.1
L
.t
.9
r
i.
.1
.6
.5
.?*
. *
.9.
52
:&.
4^
42
7 1
JO
26
2?
t,(
57
4?
T f
42
2«
5'
31
7
.
.3
.2
.4
V
.
.P
.4
.5
.4
.?*
.4
.7
.9
.1
.1
f
. i
t.
7
4
3
7
7
7
3
7
4
<;
c
7
T
1
4
<;. :
7.1
2.4
1.7
3.1
C 7
« -j
^.5
r>.1
?.7
^.:«
<=.?*
c . 5
5.6
Z.1
' . *
9.:J
c 7
^ L.
42
45
32
53
23
15
34
2^
5i
7 .»,
31
41
125
i f
J r
i
.r'
.4
.^
r
^
r,
-
.t
. *
.4
.4
.<: -
.5
.7
.6
.1*
.1
.1
4^
17
5 r
7 r
4 P.
49
2?
1 7
7 c
4;
7 1
7 7
7 C
J
7 r
4?
?
4
r
* -
i
.,
.1
.4
C
-
~j
v_
X
.ft
. 9 «
.»
u
.
. .
. <
. V
.',
7
52.'
25.6
46 ,c
3a.?
77.0
1C.5
26.:
3 P."
4' .1
61.2
34.5
34.4
3d.?
* r
-
40.?
ir..(
.4.:
-------
TABLE C-123
Ol
ENVIRONrENTAL PGMTCMNG AND S I r r 0 fi T LAhOKMJ&Y
OFFICE CF FvESMRCH AVO CFVFLOrvENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA r E T H C D ". <: *; VALIDATION STUDY - b/N (2) «
A * DATA F C * HE*ACHLCTGETHANE ANALYSIS h Y WATfn TYPT
HIGH YCUri-N PAIn, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP kATE P
SURFACE wATEK INDUSTRIAL EFFLULNT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
£
V
1C
11
12
13
14
15
5
4*S. r
7 5 2 . J
3 4 ' . 'j
, 4 '/ 2 *
~ '. ', » -J
2 S . :.
4 -i ^ . r,
341."'
*- V * *
557.?-
25F .C
317. d
7 2 7 . r'
675.1*
743.7
7 9 . 4 «
6
4 t . : . I
>
1 S 4 . f.
3 5 C . 9
421.?*
353. C
71^ r
1 7 Z . C
3 7 4 . (J
4 3 r . ^
323. ' J
?l<> . ..
? 5 ( , L
4 1 7 . j
29?. 1
312.3
117. S
C
44°.
24. c.
37°.
2f- " .
371 .
Z7e .
76e .
7 * C
- ^ .- .
5 2 ~" .
~* / /
- C_ - .
7C2.
341 .
'27.
224 .
317.
?
:
4
7
-
*
>-
5
n *
",
n
0
»
4
4
46r
3C1
35)*
39C
332
256
24 l
314
7 67
^ y 4
2 2 r
31 5
3 I f:
?7(.
2 '_1
174
6
. j
. \
.9
->
.'7
. "
. z
t j
. P
. ? *
. "i
.
. Z
1
, Z
.4
5
44P .C
255.:
32".^
p r c c;
752.r
244 .;
7 79 .
14 .9*
* 52 « v
552.:*
3 : K . "
2 9 2 . "
3 1 9 . ;
446. :
273.4
247. <
4
3
3
2
?
3
4
4
?
1
3
2
~
r
6
& c . :
74. :
1 b . ~>
91.2
*} r
'-.?*
5 1* . ;
3f . "
4C .4
r 4 . ' *
79 .'.
ir . :
^ ' i"i
^ v. . L
Z 2 . '"
6 : . 5
12.r
C
44^ ."
2 9 4- . C
5 I r 1
._
2 1 " . 4
P73.C
*
3 1 ? . r
7cQ . '
^51 c
4 6T .r *
295."
2^2.:
7 Z 1 . <-
r- ,r *
3 ? 2 . ^
112.3
c
4 - ' . .
3 . ": , f
1 , < . f
', L 4 . '
T . '-
1 1 H : . ~
2 < * . >.
417 ..
t-. ' . f
" : 4 .
? / 2 . .
7 . 1 . .
7 i r, . ,
i1 .3
41^.7
7 ' ~ . i
-------
TABLE C-124
I KCN"E NTAL KOMTOfllt.G AND SUPPORT
OFFICE OF P E S t A R C H AM, D^VELC
PROTECTION AGENCY
*« IPA "1ETHOD ,tr5 VALIDATION STUDY - b/N (?) *
RAW DATA FOR 1 NO E NO < 1 , 2 , 3 -C , D ) P YK E N E ANALYSIS PY .ATtS TYFr
LOW Y C U D E «.' PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATEP INDUSTRIAL EFFLUcN T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB MU*BE«
1
2
7
4
5
6
7
£
<>
1 J
11
12
13
14
15
1
7.4
".9
5. 1)
0. ?«
6.8*
5.0
C.D*
:.c*
2.4
"* .9
I.'1
0.0*
4.2
1.4
2.3
C.5
I
11. C
6.9
9.7
0 . C *
6.4*
e.c
f .1
'? . C *
2.1
3.6
C.fc
c.o*
t f
- '
3.3
U.4
1.7
7
Q
4
^
,^
7
r
r
r
?
4
r
4
C
5
1
.4
.3
.P
.0*
,r*
.P
.0*
.c*
.c*
.c
.5 *
.0-
i
'_
."
.c *
.4
2
11.
C.
4.
-1
V.
?.
T
-
C.
1.
? .
2.
£.
r.
5.
:.
4.
7 .
5
1
2
j*
2
a
3*
?
:>
6
4*
3«
6
'*
3*
2
1
7.
0.
2.
C.
6.
2.
0.
t~ .
C .
r.
7.
r
7
- .
I .
r .
c .
4
f *
5
t .
6
5
0
r *
C*
t
? *
C*
1
r *
1
r *
11
2
2
"*
~
V
*~
1
3
t
C1
4
c
r
.
L
. t.
.C
.2
.C*
.C-
*
.c*
. r.
.4
.7
.1*
.0*
, ^
.8
. ">*
.C*
7
3
2
C
C
-5
0
r
>
"
2
o
4
1C
r
1
.4
.4
.c
.r*
.:«
.6
.rv*
.0*
. ' ,
.f
. c
."*
.1
*
.9,
."*
L.
^^.^
1 .f
5 . ;_
" » I
'.
^ _
1 . fc
C . f
2 .?
C.7
- '
i.2
~
^ ~
-------
TABLE C-125
tNVISCNwtNT»L CCMTOP1NG A NO SUPPORT LATORATCKY
o F F 1 c t OF RESEARCH ' \i> CFVFLOPVEM
ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTION AGENCY
* * £PA METHOD 6 2 c VALIDATION STUDY - H / fc (2 ) - *
NAW DATA FOR 1NDENO(1,<,3-;,D)PYRENE ANALYSIS f < Y » * T E fc TtPF
«EfcIt;M YGUOE* PAIR, Uf'lTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE *i A T E P IVDUSTRIAL £ I F L U t \ T
AMPUL NO: 3
TRUE CONC: 74.0
u>
cr>
LAt1 NUMBE
1
2
T
4
5
6
7
f
9
10
11
1?
I7
14
15
;R
0 .5
6T.1
7.C*
isp.n*
53.4
56.6
35.7
74.3
36.7
56. 0
158.0*
43.1
1 & . 1
110.3
2?. 9
56
45
43
14
5C
3 V
28
13
37
29
T ,"
1C6
36
23
5 '
11
4
-i
. i..
.1
. 2
..:*
.9*
. 4
.4
.0
.5
C
-/
.9
.C*
.5
.2
.9*
1
-
74
13
4?
1
5
2"
24
13
L
19
169
45
31
It
t>fc
3?
3
«
-
.4
.*;
.6*
7
. .
.2
.i
. «
.C*
.3
.5*
'-'
.5
.4
. ' *
.t
56
f.
34
r
2
1 ~>
1 C
9
I7
19
97
3!
2''«
1C
3 *
14
4
.3
.7
.4
.i*
.4
.2
.9
.9
.5
.4
= 5*
. "
c
. J
"I
. _
. 3 *
.?
74
2:
29
1
13
3 p
I7
12
?
15
57
us
3C
3v
11
c
3
-------
TABLE C-126
ENVIRONMENTAL KON1TCRING AND SUCP3RT LA?ORATGI-*
OFFICE OF P £ S t A K C H AND OEVELOP^EMT
ENVIRONMENTAL PPOTEC1IGN AGENCY
* EPA VETHCD 6Z5 VALIDATION STUDY - b/l* C)
RAW DATA FOR I ND E NO ( 1 , 2 , 3 -C , D ) P YP E NE ANALYSIS PY ./> T t «
HIGH YCUD£i\ rAIK, UU1TS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATE&
TAP WATEP
SURFACF WATER INDUSTRIAL E f F L U t'. T
AHPOL NO:
TRUE CCNIC: 275
oj
oo
LAP NUKBER
1 253
? ? C 7
1
i
1
1
1
1
»
4
5
6
7
f
9
C
1
2
3
A
5
^
565
156
193
333
4C9
22C
242
1C74
179
165
465
57
5
.1
t
. "*
.C«
.?
. :
.?
.2
."}
.a
.0*
r*
. 2
.2
. ?
6
29Z.P
i E 4 . :
296.9
25P . >
514.L*
2 f r . c
96.2
467. r
371.
3c c .T1
344.2
22*-.:
498.:*
i 71 .C*
1 p ? . :
13C.4
4 : 7 . i -
12?.:
27b
^ T
K?
111
245
5
199
2^6
462
c. h 0
179
U6
7 32
1Z5
5
.0
.4*
..
n
-*'
.1
.5
r
*
, *
:
r
-
.f.
. 5
. 2
29Z
27 =
55
L
154
1 ?7
?d 8
A07
2C4
4c4
r 14
?CC
;8
r 16
ft^
.G
.6-
.9
. "*
.0
. ?
.7
.C
. '
,^«
.r
.4
. °
.1
5
27? .?
141 .9
51 .4
Sf-.r
35.7
1 j j . "}
335 .1
1 ?c .'
2c9 . v
? 4 1 . ~
c 6Z . "*
1 9? ,r
22?. «
4 T 4 t
> L -
z i 1.:
1 . C T
44.:
1 1Z.L
c1 .1
z >_ 7.r
417.-
2 j 2.:
4 -j 7.:
-------
TABLE C-127
DISTILLED WATER
OFFICE OF FEbtAXCH A'Jb DEVELOfvfcM
FNVIHON/ENTAL PhOTECTIG'. AGEKCV
* EPA KETHOD C.25 VALIDATION STUPY - F-/ N (Z) *
RAJ DATA FOP N-N1TRCSODI-N-PROFYLAK1NF ANALYSIS L> Y w A1 £ P TYPi.
LOU YOUDc'. PAIR, UMTS - UC/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUt'-T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
>
\
LAB NUP8FR
1
2
3
5
t
7
P
9
10
1
2
3
C
\ 5
s\
18
16
10
V
13
"
t
r
23
1 3
*
21
*1
U
>,__
:
1
O
* 'J
.4
.2
.0*
[7*
. C *
.i
.0*
<*
.2
.C. *
.5
.0-
. f *
.r *
2
2 C . C
^ . C1
r . f
o r L
zii:
U.7
4. 1
V.r
13.n
4 .4
' .<"
- " rt
C . 7.
2?. 7
* '_
f. j .
1 - .<
5.7
15. >
.. -. '
^.7
1?.:
1".?
12.f
L . l *
19.£
"'. r *
17.'
i:-.?
17.t
17.n
'. r *
: o. 7
4 .
10.'
<<.4
i2.r
i7,;
21.4
1
16.
1T.C
C ."
1F . 4
2".4'
1C.3
n . ",,
1 1 :
c 1
5 1
1:
^ /
7
-------
TABLE C-128
E*JVlhrr.*£NT«L .v 0 M T 0 « I \ C AND S U P F i" q T
OFFICE OF RESEARCH Af.D l>rVFLOF"EM
£ %VI F.fl.\w£M*L P»OTfcCTlOH AGEKCY
* tPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - r. / N C) *
RA* DATA FOR %-M T f- 0 SC D I -'. - PK C P YL* « I K E A N A L Y S I :> r Y wnT
M£DIUV Y G U D E \ FAIR, UN ITS - Uf.'L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP W A T E
E W A T E P IKCUSTF.IAL E F f L U ,_ M
A«PUL NO:
TRUE CONC: 55
UJ
O
LAP NUWPEK
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
i
4
5
6
7
e
9
u
1
2
3
4
5
94
155
122
91
9?
74
122
111
121
135
f 3
75
*»,
96
1 ^
3
.}
C
*
.7
. "
. 1
.<>
.6
« r
i
. .
.3
. ~>
.7
.3
V
.2
.5*
1 c :
?i
124
1 f *
Q:
117
C 1
1 C
111
n c
1 66
72
99
^
9S
47
4
. C
. V
.t
. >
. 7
-'
L
.7
.4
u
. 1
. t
.7
. ? *
.9
.7
^
71
j4
O T
77
K1
"*.
117
£r'
13 =
1 4?
4f
fc«
^
>. 5
74
T
r
w
r
^
.6
. G
. 7
*"' *
,r
.?
r
!c
L.
.5
."
.7
.1
11C
t >-:
!: 4
67
Cp
114
7"
1 l 5
175
1 3 ^
13C
v
91
**
lr
5 ~t
4
J
. 1
.1
.1
.1 .
. '
.4
. ",
7
. "1
. ?
. r
.1
. j*
.7
i
95
173
fi9
£ .'
1 16
7'
41
231
Si.
1 213
1C 5
45
1. c
^
21
45
"
. "
.5
. '
*
.5
C
9
. °
. '
.
. <
^
. "
. V
c.
4
' 'j *.
76. 7
1 2 * . &
1 .t .4
11"'*. 1
1 4 1 . '"
51.7
rt ' . *
r 1 . 9
122. r
145 .r
72.7
= <;.4
1 " . 5
6 f *
27.-
7
51 .V
77 .1
c <~
11?."
- c i
2f. . ?
1 Z7 .c
174 ,r
^4 . "»
72 .t-
?6 .4
' ,r
44. c
TYPE
-------
TABLE C-129
fcNVI&CN'YENTAL MOMTnuiNG ANC SUFFCF-.T L Al- WR ATO << V
OFFICE OF P t i t » (* C M AND CEVTLCP'EM
MAL P'tCTtCTICN AGENCY
* tPA "FTHOD CiS VALIDATION STUDY - £)/'« (<:)
P*y CAT* FOB N-M TROSGC I -N-PRCPYLAMlf.F ANALYSIS uY » A T f S T Y P £
HIGH YGUtErj PAIR, UNITS - LJt/L
OIST1LLFD VAlEk
TAP WA
SUPFftCf WATER INDUSTRIAL £FFi_r[\T
*t»PUL NO:
TRUE CON.C:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
t
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
527. C
474.^
1213.1
: . ~ *
447.".
321.;
472.^
1 c 3 : . ?
1219.2
7 2 2 ">
1 1 3 : . ?
*> e 2 . 0
43<; .:
1 » 5 . :
47; .r
314.1
6
4 t 9 . '
4 s 3 . :
1 1 t 4 . t
377.:
* i, T ~
45'.':
1 4 z . :
37.1
1 <:. 1 1 . 4
4* 2 . '
Mi.:
' t ' . r
47:.:
r . :
4 C I . >
? " ' ^
C
527.'
L , C . .
1 1 ? 1 .?
747 .<
? 5; 4 . '
< ? 4 . "
:- 6 c . "
11, \.
1417 .?
f 1 r n
9 : 1 . r
t zr . *
4 t ' . "
277.:*
7 v 7 . 4
7
471 ."
t r c . 7
772.'
f r
-------
TABLE C-130
tMVl RONHtMAL fCMTiHlNG M.D SUPPORT LAr-jPATCfY
OfflCL OF PESEUKCH AM DEVELOPMENT
cNVI F.CN"Ef.TAL PPCTECTION AGENCY
* ETA *ETHGu i.21 VALIDATION STUDY - b/N (?) *
&AU LATA FCP MTfrOhf NZiAE ANALYSIS MY WATtfc T Y n £
LCU Y C U C e N P A I f< , UMTS - DC/L
DISTli.LED WATER
TAP UATE P
SUKFBCE WATE1? IMUSTMAL eFFLUcf. T
AMPUL fjO:
TPUE CONC
LAB NUX0F
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
?
3
4
5
6
7
£
9
r,
1
£
i
A
5
: 1u
fi
9
t
1 C
1!
7
?
6
6
1 1
(
n
6
1 ?
(.
~
1
.C
.?
. ."'
£ 9
.9
.2
. ""
. :
.1
. 7
.7
."»
i
. ~-
. 5
.3
. " *
«!-
S.7
4 . r
'"" . 4
4.3
fc.C
^ . 1
6.5
5.5
7,c
-* r
.- >
c .c.
? , J
1 . '
'.'
: .:*
t 2 1
11. c
.4 «
V
T
.
9 7
. r ,
. r
7
1*
4
^
r
1:
-
5
9
<5
f
1 -;
f 4
A
c
L
CJ
1
r
. .
r
c
-
9 r
c
.4
1
9 r
f ""
s
.4
. r
7. t
-------
TABLE C-131
MENTAL POMTOR1NC AND SUPPORT LAI>09ATocY
OFFICE CF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
EN VI WO (CENTAL PROTECTION' AGENCY
** EPA X.ETHOD (525 VALIDATION STUDY - L'/N (?) « *
RAW DATA FOR N I T R OF- E N Z b NE ANALYSIS HY WATEK TYKE
KEDIU^ YOUDfcN PAIR, UNITS - U^/L
DISTiLLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUX. T
AMPUL NO:
53 TRUE CONC:
U)
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
t
7
A
9
10
11
1?
13
14
15
I
75. C
75.4
95.7
99.B
60.4
s o . o
79.2
7?. 4
81 .4
5fi .3
83.1
9C.9
55.7
81 .3
56.4
14.6*
4
71. j
51 .5
77.:
1C6.G
73.5
92. G
55.7
7C.6
f : .7
3C.4
75.;
74. S
5^.2
fe2 . £
5C .6
33.5-
3
75.:
65.4
7*. 3
64.1
dl.4
93.2
41.4
7n. 3
'.r*
1C7.C1*
94. ft
67.0
66.1
41 .
65.1
5 C. . 2 *
4
71.C
52.4
75.3
54.7
67.^
77.3
62.6
79,4
75.7
97.6*
71.9
7C.3
4? .',
47.9
3?. 3
17.7*
75
121
71
53
7?
C 7
J _/
3-^
05
7J
116
th
74
60
103
55
71
j
.r
-/
. 3
. 5
e
>
^'
.4
i
» -<
r
.<
.:*
.9
.4
.4
.9
.1
.5
71
6:
-^
49
fe1
1 U
56
6c
C T
114
» i
?>
59
61
51
17
4
. 0
. 2
. 0*
.1
.4
. '..
.6
.7
. 7
. ' *
c
. V
.1
.4
C
* C
t '-
75
7 C
Q 7
146
198
9fe ?
6?
79
PI
14?
72
7"-
54
S''
c »
7
. r>
c
.6
. ",
. n*
.-1*
.2
. 1
r
.^
. 7
.4
c
*
.E
.2
71
-A
7^
U ? t
1 _>
1 lf
C V
7 i
^4
1
77
L4
C 'J
^ "
r
<.
.1
.4
; _
t, _
-
.7
.4
.5
.1
. t.
. t
7
.1
-------
TABLE C-132
EMV I fiC*," tNTAL KOMTGMMG AND SUPPORT L A i- OFU T
OFFICE OF PtSEtftCH AND DEVELOPMENT
E^TAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** tPA METHOD 6Z5 VALIDATION STUDY - R / X <;> **
SAW DATA FOC MTROt- CNZF ME ANALYSIS FY WATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDLN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LO
LAR NUMBER
1
2
3
t.
5
6
7
^
9
10
11
;\ 12
%\ 13
W>
^K
639
61T
1165
669
656
707
72?
762
632
128C
747
753
5 jC'
4a01
547
475
5
'*.'
'_»
.9
r-
-
.,?
.C
.r
.4
.0
.1
.0
.?
.5*
.4
.7*
685
454
1233
7i2
<52~
6£0
3C4
734
944
693
7Z 'x
t29
6CS
341
504
366
6
. J
. ;
.7
r
i~
.c
639
317
1 ruf
665
795
5
J
.r
.6
.4
*
AS
Ai:
1n5
66
K4
6
5.
6 .
7.
7
.
r .
.; ?35.C 576.
. c
.0
. J
.r
.n
.c
.c
.5
.fi
. "*
4f>7
797
11:-1
"i C4?
924
732
523
447
449
6
r
» -'
.c
.2
.0*
*
,
.:
i
-j
t
.
.?
.1*
47
0 T,
112
1"6
?C.
76
4c
56
44
S
T
_ .
1.
* .
C,
7.
c
^ .
<5 .
i
^
6.
6.
r>
^
1
;
?
r
j
^
»
r *
3
**;
?
?
3
9*
5
639.
695.
"59.
511 .
1 1 J. " .
453.
<-9r.
6:.
714.
1UC.
*if r .
. 9 A .
512.
797.
411.
r
,'.
1
r;
r
r
"
2
9
r *
c
0
C
6
5
SURFACE WATER .'INDUSTRIAL EFFLUi.NT
659.-
694
?9
1
i
1*
"
c
r
T.
0*
p
"
~,
6*
4
4
?<. ' .
- 1 c .
^t 1 .
1 1 1 > .
7 j. j .
i -/
* v 1 .
.'e? .
^ ' ^
* .
t4 5 .
7; 5 .
c i'5 .
* _'
-> *
57rv.
7U.
_,
f.
_
~ 4
-
^
7
L
_,
- *
1
7
-------
TABLE C-133
TAL "tGM 7 Ofc I NG AND SUPPORT L«l3OPA7oK»
OFFICE OF KfcSEAfiCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVlRCNPEt.TAL PROTECTION «GENCY
** EPA METHOD 6Z5 VALIDATION STUDY - D/N C) *
RAI» DATA FOR PHE N A K TH
-------
TABLE G-134
u>
KCMTORING AND SUPPORT L At- OS ATO f- Y
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DFVFLOP^ENT
NTAL PROTECTION. AGFNCY
« EPA PETHGD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - 0/N (i) «
fiAH DATA FOR PHENANTHRENE ANALYSIS P Y WATER TYPE
MECIUV YOUDfN PAIR, UMTS - LG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP UATE P
SUPFACE WATER 1\DUSTRIAL F F F L U L \ T
AKFUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
;
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1*
1*
15
3
75."
66.7
75.1
68.6
7C.5
j.O*
77.1
67.7
61.*
71.2
1G2 ."
64.3
55.7
75. «
66.'
39.5*
71
65
67
66
62
":
5F.
66
6f
62
S3
61
6C
62
6T
33
4
J
.2
.6
. 6
.2
.;.'*
.7
. V
.7
.2
.2*
.9
.t
.('
.6
.2*
75
63
r
52
63
62
66
62
8C
<>?
83
62
67
5P
6i
65
T
.
. C
.0*
. '-*
c6
» -
.C
. c
,0*
.4*
.f *
. j
i
. >.
.4
frj
.4*
71
62
67
51
63
45
62
6c
61
74
72
61
55
57
54
42
t
. j
.6
.1
.5*
.^ .
-^
.1
.1
.7
.9*
.3*
.1
.6
.4
.9
.9*
75
66
7'
46
/-
t
67
ti
54
1 o1
91
60
62
69
68
5e
3
\^'
.1
.7
.5«
, ^,
."-
.7
.5
. 2
. " *
.7*
.7
. C
r
. ^
.5
r
_
71
61
74
4f.
61
57
62
6t
A7
cZ
a4
6°
59
62
57
94
4
.0
.1
.4
.7*
.4
-J
.9
.1
7
%
.' *
.9*
. 3
. 5
.9
.9*
75
7?
6?
29
1 01
^
34
64
63
85
9"
5C
5P
11*
69
55
3
n
. -
.7
.4
.9*
,r.
.C
.9
.^
.4
. ."
,c
.^
.
.^
.?
-,
71.:
ts.1
69 . 7
s : . - «
-(: . (
<: 4 . . *
57.9
e 1 .2
43 .Z
7T ..:
7C.1
5^.6
5V. 4
U5.5*
£,3.9
52.6^
-------
TABLE C-135
ENVlROKPtNTAL MONITORING AND SUrPOPT L
OFFICE OF ktSEASCH AND D£VELOPVEST
£NVldON*1tMAL PROTECTION *GENlV
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B / .\ (2)
RAU DATA FOR PHE M» NTHftENE ANALYSIS r-Y UATES TYPt
HIGH YOUDEK PAIrt, UMTS - UC/L
DISTILLED UATFR
TAP WATER
SUPFACE WATER If.DUSTPIAL F f F L b L \ T
*MPUL »JO:
TRUE COKC: 64C>
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
R
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
c 42"
4S5
51?
649
A 1 8
c t rt
447
44?
.fl3?-
731
44C
4 j<
718
59G
11?
5
n
.5
. ";
.C
~
.s
. "
.1
.1
.0
.0
.c
.5
.2
.7*
6
6E5.G
665. C
474.7
623. f
578.;
r- .c*
272.E
452.1
4 i 2 . 6
558. f
797. C
rct.c
5:?.:
524.:
577.1
173.5*
5
4 ?/.:
45? .6
3;? .c*
4 54 . r
e j7.r
42C .8
435.:
5 1 ° . 1
7 4 < . r *
7 '-, 4 . r *
421.71
46?."
561 .i
546.:
164.9*
6
6? s.n
6 2 ? . :
4? F . 7
33C.:-
425.7
46* . "j
5 : c . ?
4 i. 2 . "
507.5
1 C1 9 r . *
721. '«
421.'
44^.-
522.7
56?. 2
147.7.
-*
6 «.:.,-
r 2 9 . J
463.6
24Q.7*
t 4 4 . '"",
: 2 7 . ».
* 55 . ?
47. i
3 5 p. . 4
1 " 5 "'..
? 12 . ^*
3 p ? . r
451.:
5 9 / . "
52^ . s
2 22.°
6S5
6C6
4
.6
. n
.1
(. - '- . :
1 4 ? . :
411.1
1 r 6 . I
4 J - . "
4 :> c t
71' i,
' -, S , w
: 1 2 . ^
.' v 1 .
c - c
4 1 : . "
4 - v . '
? : 4 . 1
1^7.7
-------
TABLE C-136
ENVIRONMENTAL KCMTOfilNG AND SUPPOkT LACC^AT^Y
OFF1CI Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
EMVIKCN!"E\'TAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA MFTHCD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ti/N C) *
PAW DATA FOfc PY^FNE ANALYSIS fcY WATEP TYPc
LOW YOUCEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE UATEK INDUSTRIAL
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
?
3
4
t
A
7
8
9
1C
11
12
1 1
14
15
5
2
4
3
4
4
3
3
T
S
7
7
4
4
^
1
1
.0
.9
, V
c
. J
.a
. ?
.5
.4
.2
.»
.9
.8
.3
.4
.5
.1
2
4.5
3.7
5,0
3.9
t. « 2
3.C
4.9
3.2
3.1
4.1
1 »f
3. ft
4.5
' . C
r .9
1.1*
c
2
7
2
i,
4
7
3
2
f
7
3
5
7
4
2
1
r*
.7
.1*
.9*
.4
. 5
.7
.9
.9
.4*
c
.7
.«;
.9
.1
.9
4
2
4
2
7
7
7
7
^
4
4
3
4
2
7
1
2
.5
.1
>
. 1
,f>
.?
.7
. J
- '
. **
.9
.6
.7
.»
c
!o
c
2
4
2
4
T
7
4
2
t
4
5
4
4
7
C
1
C
. 3
.F
.7*
'
. p
. E
.1
.4
. C *
-i
L
.9
.3
.(S
. 0
2
4.
I
6
7 .
? .
4.
**
3.
? .
6 .
4.
4.
4.
4 .
4.
7
_- .
5
7
h
f
1
*
t
7
2
1 *
7
5
7
7
t
4
1
" . r'
P. 7
5.?
n r
', ^
5.'v
* . :
F .0
? . «
4.4
4 ,F
4.1
4.P
1 3 . T
C 7
? .9
4 . ?
t. . t'
4 . '"
9.H
1 .5
9 . 5
2 . 'i
4. 3
1.-.
4. :
5.1
^.:
2.4
-------
TABLE C-137
KVlkCN'CENTAL "XNITOkJNG AND SUPPC&T
OFFICE OF PEftARCH ASD OFVcLOP^EKT
ENV1KCN^EM»L PROTECTION AGE^Cr
** fcPA *ltTHOO 625 VAlIDATlOfJ STL'DV - b/.N (?) *
PAW DATA FOR Prf-ENE ANALYSIS t-Y WATL" TYP£
rEOI'J" YCUDtN PAIR, UNITS - IG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WAT^R
SURFACE WATER 1^'DUSTRIAL CFFLUc'.T
AMPUL NO:
w TRUE COKC
-J
vO
LAB NUMBE
1
1
1
\ 1
£\ 1
xV\ 1
1
2
T
4
c
6
7
p
9
C
1
2
3
t.
5
3
: 3 5 . C
R
26.5
4C. t-
24.4
39.7
30.6
39.9
32.7
27.2
13.4
3" . 3
32.5
2^.7
27.4
3C.7
1C. 9*
4
36.0
33.:
34.5
26.4
42.3*
27.5
27,2
31.4
2 1- .3
33.1
3L.2
29,7
32.1
31.3
27.3
13.2*
3E
32
41
19
32
32
31
2?
14
47
2 5
31
35
2*
29
7 7
C
.?
. 7
.6*
r
. V
.7
.9
.4
.6*
.2*
.9
.1
.5
.2
.C
P
36. C
2.p.2
33.9
2C.I*
28.? '
21.4
27.2
3:. 5
2P.3
3 6 . r *
2? .?
31.6
32.5
27..=
24.9
1r.4*
33
32
41
M-
2P
17
29
i<3
21
42
24
3 2
32
56
34
7 r
t
. _
.
.7
.7*
. t
.9
.ft
. (j
- 4
. " *
c
. ^
. £
. :*
.4
.f
36
27
32
18
27
27
7 -)
26
17
45
26
I ^
3 :
2^
2"?
31
r
V
.4
.1
.4-
.6
.1
L
. * *
.t
.5
. 7
.4
. £
-
3F
7 2
31
7
37
4
1",
7<>
27
4"
2?
i?
1 7
tf
» 7
;»
7
r«
. -
,7
.1
.4*
.4
.7
.7
,(t
. c
. >
.8
.(
.1
T
-
^ r
^
,1
I f . t
-------
TABLE C-138
D1ST1LLFD WATER
TAP
M/a CCMTCRING AND SL'PFOf.T LAr-G
OFFICt OF / r, (D *
RAW DATA FCF> PYfiENE ANALYSIS bY WATEF TtP.
HIGH YOuDE'< PAl<
,r'
.3
. u
T
.
.0
. 3
.«
.5
.9.
d
343. C
7 - 7 . C
2dC .4
3 5 3 . C
?66 . ^
25?. I
1 3 3 . r *
295. C
322 .i
2C.5.0
2 1 :' . 1
277.0
271.:
257.7
24f .4
&7<, 2*
c
J
?2" .
2 1C .
25".
7? .
U3.
M7.
2 39 .
i S E
?22 .
281.
c «.' * .
225 .
747.
2dc .
r 3^ .
15C.
r
'.
F
!' *
""
r
r,
r
i?
r *
r
r
n
e
1
p
fc
343 .
3 L 4 .
26".
V f. r
1,1.
22?.
24.= .
274.
219.
529.
?27 .
2 3^ .
261.
243.
2
^
d
"i *
'i
f
r;
5
^
4*
c.
3 2 C, . 0
267.;
26;.?
6^.7*
152.:
157.
? 7 : . c
23.1*
1^9.6
4 5 6 . '"
224.C
215.;
2<.3 . r
3 '. r- . ?
23F. .?
175.6
*
343.
7 jn .
Z 73 .
97.
u: .
71".
21 j.
273.
Z51.
45C.
' ji .
?34.
272.
1(^ .
2V!; .
? 1 2 .
r,
r
2
? *
"
11
n
r
1
f , *
r
.-
"
r
t
2
i
7 Z " . "
25..^
?45 . 1
1 '.. '? j 7
14'.'"
15.9
1 5 < . C
?7^ . "
u 7 . n
419. C
197.''
?I" . "
2 5 : . C
5 F . 3
Zvi.4
12^."
111.
7 . .- . 7
-------
TABLE C-139
CO
TAL CONITOFPJG AND SU^FOfiT
OFFICE CF RCSEARCH AM; DFVFLOPrLM
ENVIRONMENTAL P KG T E C T I C'.' AGENCY
** EPA PETHOD (2r VALIDATION STUDY - U/.N O «*
PAU CATA FOR 1 , 2 -0 1 C H LO R0»- T N 2 E N E ANALYSIS PY « M I k TYPE
LOW YCUDfcN FMfct UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
T«P WATER
SURFACk * A T b ft INDUSTRIAL £ F F L U t 'J T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAP NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
1
6,3
2.2
7.5
5.3
5.1
4.6
3.2
4.3
6.4
7.3
9.0*
2.1
f .5
7.7
4.5
25.9.
!
5
3
5
7
c
.*
4
3
6
4
5
-I
9
t'
4
r
2
.4
.3
.1
.C
.2
.C.
.b
.6
. t
.6
.6*
. 2
.1*
.0*
->
. _
. :*
ft
3
c
-f
7
5
4
5
9
4
8
^
6
^
?
7
1
.r
.7
.4
.9
.c
. i
.t
.t
.,* *
T
.2*
.5
.9
.0*
.r*
.6
5
2
2
t
4
4
A
4
P
^
6
3
9
2
r
9
2
.4
.7
.1
.1
,1 .
,4
.t
. i
. !>
. 8
.9*
.1
.?
^
.3*
.5
1
6.
L .
7
~> .
J .
6.
4.
2.
3 .
5.
7.
13.
J
-
7
^.
8.
* .
n
t;
5
r *
*
t
7
<;
7
n
V
4
5
6
r *
4
C*
5
7
2
3
7
2
5
5
6
19
3
0
j
A
p
2
.4
.3
.7
.6
.4
*
.f
.6
.9
.C
. 5 *
.6
. 5
. : *
r
^
. *
6
C
4
?.
7
7
4
7
4
13
3
7
c
7
1
r
.n
7
. f
7
*
.4
. J
.5
. ?.
. » *
.4
c
*
r
. ^
L
5.4
1 .9
3 .0
7 .6
1C/.7
3 . '"
7 c
^ . v
C '"
5.9
6. Z
3. :
*; . 1
c
- . 4.
4.;-.
-------
TABLE C-140
ENVIRONMENTAL * 0 M T 0 K I N f. AMD SUPPOKT I A ( C " A T C ^ Y
OFf ICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EFA !»ETHCD 625 VALIDATION STUPY - R/I< C) «*
PAW DATA FOR 1,2-DICHLCftOSFN7ENE ANALYSIS F< , UNITS - Uf./L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP UATER
SUSFACE UATER INDUSTRIAL E F F L U
AMPUL NO:
TRUF CONC: 45
u>
oo
LAB NUMBER
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
£
5
t
7
8
9
0
1
2
t
4
c
1 ?
45
v
22
2?
37
32
39
36
9*
37
35
37
7 5
11
3
. j
.2
.9
. !>*
.3
. 3
.4
.6
. *
.2
.1*
.6
.*.
.6
.1
47. r
29.7
4 : . c
47.2
42.9
27. r
32.6
3f .r.
46. C
39.2
4 ? . : »
3'. .b
42.1
32.S
36.1
K9.7*
4'^
32 ,'
44.7
3^.6
32. t-
32. l
24.7
54.7
7?.c*
5f .9
9^ .6*
33.9
4?. 6
24. T
3*.^*
31.3
4
47.:
33.*
4C .6
17 C
26. J
21.7
7 5 ,7
4?.:
47. :
4t.4
5 9 . 5 *
3f .7
ft r . K
2 e . 1
12. 7«
62.7
3
40.
~1 .
f
4 .
17.
2".
i ;
29 .
45.
6 : .
30.
39.
1 «7 .
3^ .
53 .
,^
g
*
.* *
r
<;
i
7
7
6
s
t
7
9«
1
4
M
4!.?
I «5 . ?
44.7
» " C
3' .4
29 .4
27.9
32.4
^ "* ~
44.7
17.6
32.3
4 " . *.
27. .c
32.2
'-. >
4"
tc
4?
4C
64
24
3?
C ^
21
6 "
32
62
'.9
}1
r
.9
. 1
. t;
.^
*
.9
.f
.4
.6
. *
.2
.
*
.4
.7
4?.:
_ i- C
; c c
_ - ~>
1 1 . i
_ '"
J ^
t c . 1
..(,..,
45..'
16.5
1 7.4
c7 . 4
- 1 . C
"" ? . *»
J t .
-------
TABLE C-141
00
ENVIRONMENTAL POMTOwlNG AND SUPPORT L Al'(.f< AT J & Y
OFFICE CF F<£SfcARCH ANC/ DEVELOFMENT
P\VIffON*EMTAL PROTECTION AGFNCY
** £PA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - b/U C)
RAW DATA FOR 1 , 2 -1 I C HLO POP E N Z E ML ANALYSIS I- Y wATE* TVPt
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
1AP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL PFFLULf, T
AHPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
E
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
364.
341.
313.
40t.
1 V »
231.
34i.
236.
345.
5C1 .
375.
324.
737.
474.
269.
947.
i
n
I
Q
0
f>
r,
i
,?
1
0*
Q
n
-»
«;
P*
411
US
341
7? 6
36 C
27C
13£
3C6
42 :
3C3
726
351
2v 1
256
245
253
6
^
L
-i
-
.3
. 7
.0
r
i
/-»
_.
.c
. »
.L,
_ *
J
. i
~\
.1
_
3*4
244
325
?13
7 68
32C
'1^
339
456
47^
6*7
27
? 26
214
!1H
6
. V
.c
c
^
.c
'J
n
v
.i.
.r
f
t.
.f
. "
t_
. f,
.(. .
* i.' " .
3 1 : .
^ t .
5 ' .
? 1 < .
" J- ' .
-
:
r
,3
,"
;
-
*
~
^
~
_'
7
-------
TABLE C-142
DISTILLED WATER
C'.'VIRCNrENtAL POMTCRING AND SUPPORT LAPOPATO^Y
OFFICE C F FtSEASCH A". D DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRCNKENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA KE1HOO fc 2 c VALIDATION STUDY - t/N (?) «
R A » DATA F 0 N 1,2,4-TRlChLGPOBENZFNF AN ALYSISbY .. A T t fi T Y T E
LOW YGUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
LO
CO
-P-
-»»\
«rS\
\^A
\ o \
vm
Vu
\o» O-A
YJ--A
V o\
\1^\
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC: 11
LAb NUMBFR
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
6
c
6
7
P
5
n
1
2
3
A
5
A
1:
7
1 2
A
J
7
8
13
10
4
P
11
2
1
,r>
.0
.*
.7
.6
.3
.£
.8
.1*
.2
.0*
.P
. 6"
!c>*
A ^
s
1C
?
1C
1 L
12
9
i :
52
4
6
1C
r
6
c.
2
. i.
. i,
. 2
.6
.1
.:
.1
. 2
. 3
.7*
.4
. 2*
.ft
. " *
.7
.3*
11
5
11
6
16
9
1 1
1^
9
5
1:
6
12
(
A
7
1
.1
.3
.5
.'*
.P
. r
. 1
.F.
.«
J
C
^
.2*
, /
.«;
.e
WATER INDUSTRIAL E f F L L' L >\ T
1C
,.
?
c
1C
c
p
9
rc
11
*! 4
C
11
6
r
t
2
J
4
.1
. r
,1*
.Q
* ^
.7
'
.1
t 2
«
.5-
^ '^
. "i*
.5
1
11.C
C "
^ ,f
5.2
11 .7
9. A
7 *^
r . 7
6.9
1 3 . c -
U.7
t . "
11 .4
7.5
9.
-------
TABLE C-143
ENVIRONMENTAL KOMTOK1NG Af,D SUPPGfcT LAC-ORATORY
OFFICt GF RESEARCH AND DEVFLOF^EM
ENVI RON*E F;TAL P^CTECTIGK AGENCY
* EPA K F T H 0 0 625 VALIDATION STUDY - H / N (')
RAW DATA FOK 1 ,2 ,4-TRICHL0 ROBEN/ENF ANALYSIS HY WATtR TYPi
*?DIUI* YGUDFN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SUPFACF UATLR INtUSTKIAL CFFLUt'. T
AMPUL NO:
u, TRUE CONC
oo
Ul
LAB NUMBE
1
7
t
4
5
6
"»
fi
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
: 74
R
71
95
59
/?
74
7?
T? 7
81
57
6C
91
67
19
1
.0
. 1
.9
.2
.5
.4
e
.
. ',
,Q
.0*
.9
.5
.2
.?*
4
i.b.7
79.6
67.3
122. T*
7 3. . :
67.3
72.1
77. v
75.-*
7'.- .j
4f .? *
75.:'
95.2
cL.7
12.?*
74
61
e1
56
96
62
57
6C
7?
9°
C '
. \.
f. i
92
5C
^,4
6?
7
.C
1
.9*
. 2
.5
.6
. 2
.9
**
.7
.* *
.2
.6
C
-» ->
71
4fi
97
59
71
69
c.2
7f
71
49
75
5 2
44
2?
4
.4
.7
.7*
.9
. »
c
.4
.6
.1*
. T
.6
.4
74
63
6£
41
92
4":
54
6")
50
V9
56
47
75
116
73
d4
'
.9
.6
. J
.1
. ?
7
.
7
.
. 9
. -;.
.'
.6
.5
.*
"T
^
. ,;
72
47
46
iir
74
52
5°
41
72
75
51
A2
57
62
24';
4
.C
w
.6
. - «
.7
.1
.2
.*
.5*
.7
, ";
. ?
p ".
.1
. 1
74
52
77
5^
9C
64
7n
ef
7F
59
43
71
^
74
75
'_
T
^
C
. 1
f *
*
.1
c
J
.7
. 3
.1
..H
.4
. Q*
.1
.7
72.;
-, C 1
^ J * -
i ::-.:
; 7 . 4
57. 2
s t . -
47,1
i Q . I1
6 4 . v
. <. . 1
7 - T
' *
f- . y
s 7. -
0* , 1
-------
TABLE C-144
Ef>VIhC*ME'*TAL fOMTOhING AND 5.LFP1RT LAf-ORATuRY
OFFICE, OF FiESfcARCH AND DEVELOP" EN T
E % V I R 0 N,', £ ', T /> L PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA I-.ETHGD 625 VALIDATION STUOY - n/N (?)
DATA F C f< 1,2,*.-TMCHLOhOREN/ENF ANALYSIS H Y ^ A T £ p T Y r j.
HIGH YCUDEN PAIR, UNITS - U G / L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATE o
W A T t P INDUSTRIAL E F F L U t \ T
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC: 591
co
cr>
LAt NUMHER
1 509
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
t
6
7
6
9
C
1
2
7
4
5
466
626
792
417
625
472
M1
87?
4> 4
388
522
1262
A 54
196
5
r
. :
.rj
v '
.3
,n
. .>
.1
.:*
r/
j *
.c
.5*
.4
.6*
6
622.0
432. L
5 ': 1 . 2
6 U . fj
616. C
461.:
261.:
4 fc 7 . C
691.7
2 7 3 L . C *
453.:
412.:,*
593.:
57:. 7
447.9
175.5*
591
3S1
4*9
444
575
tot
3?6
471
722
248
c 7 ^
35C
d 26
469
394
566
--'
n
-J
.1
r
1^
.r*
.r
.c
^
->
-
r
u
.n
p
. L.
r'*
.4
.3
.6
i22
45 T
577
'C-i
377
3h5
J46
5 h5
^42
4e7
369
546
427
4C1
2 1C
..1
. 1
.3
.r-
n
-
r>
. 2
. C-*
2
* -'
.T*
. J
. 7
"
5
591.:
4 1 : . c
429. c
?6I.s
11 75.'.
2 i B . -
*. j : , '
33,5*
434. d
t 2 J . " *
C71 .'
342.:
54".-
62F.3
437.1
437.7
622
46:
45fa
479
52P
"* 0 ^
369
433
574
654
4*.1
'92
545
32:
6u^
15C6
6
.C
.4
.0
f
. r
. "
.0
.7
,T»
. 1
. [
w
7
.4
. 2*
591
45"
?4f
717
515
7C
4-yft
51r
43^
°25
371
"'04
573
5F
595
1 56
c
r
.
^
.
?
. i
.4
.?»
. K
r-
.
. <~
i
.
. ^
. *
,P
-
.1*
.4
. »
4 j 5 - :
u-7.4
4 7 c . :
^ ^1 . " *
1 i . "'»
517.:
C 7
-' L - .
7^4.7
*. r* /
i v 4 . w
3 L 5 . :
379.:
579.:
i1 .4*
f^c . ,
< « 9 . -
-------
TABLE C-145
t NV I KOf,«C NTft L XCMTOhING AND SU^POriT L A i- o F< A Tu fr r
OFFICE OF (*ES-:*RCH AND DEVELOP? EM
ENVIRON f'EMAL PROTECTION A G E ?J C Y
** EPA f.FTHCD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - (.-/;, (?) »*
FAU DATA FOR 1 , 4-C 1 C HLO ROli E N ZEN t ANALYSIS PY . * T F r< TYHf
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATFP
SURFACE WATER 1\DUSTPIAL E F T L U _ M
HhPUL NO:
LJ TRUE CONC:
oo
LAF) NUMBER
1
2
7
4
5
6
7
8
9
13
11
1Z
13
14
15
1 2
I
t
1
6
^
0
<-,
4
9
6
3
c.
1:
g
25
1
. 7
. e.
.4
.2
.4.
.1
.3
.4
.6
.1
.3
.1
n »
*>
.?
.9.
i.
11.
7.
4.
7.
3 .
6.
12.
c
8.
6.
9 .
r
^ .
3 .
L' .
7.
*
V
r
7
7
9
1
j
~*
-
9
7
9
1
r*
r *
h
r t
1?
4
6
7
6
6
11
9
£
o
4
c
fj
6
/»
6
1
3
.4
.3
.?
. c
.p
.3
.r
. 2
,4
.6
.2
.C*
.1
.0*
.5
I
11.
4.
2 .
4 .
*.
t.
9.
? .
->
c .
c
.
e
- .
4.
r
*~
c
^
c.
9.
-
1
2
c
5
j
2
5
6
6
:>
(.
"' *
5
0 *
5
12
3
4
c
^
6
5
-?
6
t
Q
&
5
c
C
14
\
l
1
t-
c
.?
.9
7
_
.7
. 1
. 4
, "
, «;
.9*
c
^
. r_ *
. "*
.f *
. '. *
-, 1
3
4
4
,c
6
s
7
p
Q
4
fc_*
f
V
£
7
L
r
J
r
w
2
. 1
*
c
.1
. Q
.1
.1*
.6
. ;*
."*
.4
.4
12
7
7
8
^
9
8
K
c
1C
5
K
4
1
^ ~\
.4
.9
.2
.0
*
.5
. "
.1
.4
.6
.1
.r.*
*
.2
.?
1 1
2
t
1 1
c
r
f
-
f
6
A
-
<,
£
t
,
^
9 "
^
.1
.7
*.
^
-'
.7
. ^
. t>
. ~
.4
.1
-------
TABLE C-146
ENW1PCN/tNTAL YCMTORING AND SUPfOFT LAfCSATGi-Y
OFFICE Cf RESEARCH A'.C. DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PPCTECTION A&ENCY
* * EPA NMHOD 615 VALIDATION STUDY - h/N <") -«
RAW DATA FOR 1 , 4 -0 1 C H LO ROB F M 2 E Nf ANALYSIS f Y UMET TYfE
V YCUDEN PMS, UMTS - Uf./L
DISTILLED * A U R
TAP WATEP
SUPFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL E F F L U t! N T
AI*PUL NO:
TRUE CONC
co
LAP NUWBE
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
e
6
7
8
9
c
1
2
3
4
5
: 79.0
R
2?. 6
71. "
49.6
45.1
7V. 9
6V. 7
4 1 . ?.
4a.4
51.2
44.4
5t .8
6k. 3
61.9
11.1
4
77. r,
41.'.
56.6
73.3
4 6 . C
49. C
74.1
55.1
1 6 . :
48.7
76 .5
37.9
57.5
6-. 4
M.5
1C9.7*
79
47
62
61
32
44
5(
57
9T
63
1 cf
4^
67
4?
62
5"
7
.
,P
.7
^
. 5
.2
.2
.9
.5
.?
.r
.4
.3
. 1
.4
.9
4
77.:
4 ». . .«
51.7
47. T
3 7. '4
79.?
6:.7
6T.6
56.C
d4.1
3^.5
56.5
55.4
15.'
42.7
56
47
26
47
44
5t
65
67
39
i?
169
5°
53
3
.1
.7
C
_-
. ?
.9
.5
.9
.4«
. 4
c
. ^
.<:*
. 4
.4
77
3«
117
49
61
53
c J
49
£ 7
C C
7C
41
54
3 -*
56
"
4
J
f
m >
. ."*
.1
.4
.1
.3
.9
.7
.6
.9*
.9
7
-
. 4
. C
.c*
7
70. r
44.'
59 .0
117. V
84 .1
61 .1
51.9
6r.6
6^.4
31.7
39.7
r . "
6Q . 5
5T .4
-------
TABLE C-147
ENU 1 f OME'M AL "OMTOklNG AND SUPPORT LAt-UPAT^RY
OFMCb OF KhSEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
EiiVlKON"l VfAL PRCmCTICN AGENCY
** fcPA METHOD 6JC VALIDATION STUDY - ['/.< (2) **
RAW C A T A FOR 1,^-D1CHLOPCEENZENE ANALYSIS r. Y «ATE^ T Y F f
HIGH YCUDE PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE HATEF. INDUSTRIAL E F F L U t_ N T
A1PUL NO: 5
TRUE COMC: 617.0
CO
00
VO
6
(=46.1
5
C
646.:
617
5
'*
C46
6
li w
5
0
LAG NUMBER
1
1
\ ^
t'VV 1
X%*°\ 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
n
1
t.
?
4
5
469
435
54?
47:
195
71:
476
769
59"
712
359
5J1
593
44ti
993
. "
.4
J
. ?
.r
.n
.T
.0
. -J
. ^
. ?
. .j
. ?
.2
.4
7 1 4 . C
4t I . "
499.9
4 f 9 . C
371. C
271. P
3 9 5 . J
625.1
339.0
315.0
?£9.C
P73.C*
331.2
793.3
6795.6*
312.?.
469. ?
3 7 5 . r
52?. n
383.r
434. C
5 2 7 . r
673. T
54* .:
y 46 . :
741 .:
711. T
472.1
26r . 0
347.9
T7?.;
437.5
4J-4.1
556.;.
~ 7 ~ r>
C - '-
4:^.:
5C9.:
6 7 7 . 7
59? ,r
6t f . "
357.C
C. 5 ? * "
4Z1.6
24C."
199.1
744
~v7
337
^76
22*
579
25
5Z,C
5^3
P15
71 '
6_7
5 CZ
7o4
261
.
.7
'T
. "
. "
^
. 7
C
« -~
, r>
. 1 *
v^
.1
.4
443
792
3 7 5
2S4
257
el'
413
667
4;9
76"
777
7 J4
:?r
? ^ 5
71Z
r^
.2
.F
r~,
-
.C
r
^
»
'.
» V
. T*
_'
C
.4
c
.4
752."
2^6.:
761."
» 4 4 . '
Jri* . r
544.:
4 1 1 . -
5:9.1
69?. r
492."
". 3 . :
67:.:
*
467. c
2:^.4
j - 7 . :
~ . t >
-.1 .:
C 7
314.C
c. ». 6 . C
M 7 . :
6 i r . 5
t ? C . j
2 j L » :
7 3 4 . :
6 C 1 . «.
i1 . 4
CU.1
2 4 :; . r
-------
TABLE C-148
fOMTOPINC AND SUPPORT
OFFICE OF ^FStAKCH A N u DEVEL
t '>:tflrtONll'cM»L PROTECTION
si . '' »
D U'A
4
4
A
A
b
5
4
7
A
1
1
4
r
7
1
TfcP
.5
. 2
.2
.5*
.C
. 1
.4
."5
.5
.9*
.A>
.9
.C*
7
.2*
c
t
*
7
4
4
5
/,
7
7
1
6
3
A
?
TAP WATER
1 2
c
.9
.7*
.1*
.f.
.2
c
. I
.? *
.9
.5*
. C
.5
.?
.n*
?
2
5
c
7
c
4
5
4
1
4
I
7
1
. 7
.7
. 5'*
. "
.
. 1
.2
. A *
7
. >
.A*
.5
.?
. 2
.2*
SURFACE
1
5."
2 . I
t.
3
7
f,
I.
i,
t
7
c.
1
c
7
A
9
. ~
j
, 'j
. (_
^
. ri
. ;
a ~ *
7
.4*
.5
. s
. c
.<: *
UAT
A
1
»
?
f
7
A
3
5
A
1
c
2
.'.
7
EP I N D U STRIA
2 1
.5 rj."
.V 5.1
.5
. "
.1
*
. ~->
.9
\.
.4 *
.0
.2*
.1
.6
r
j
i
A. 7
14 .9-
* . 1 *
f.2
4 ,°
6 .9
A.1
4 .*
5.7
1 .4*
5 .'
*
* .1
7 .
-------
TABLE C-149
ENVIRONMENTAL fOMTOHUG AND SU»PPPT L A I- Oc A T 0 f- Y
OFFICE OF n t s E A & c H AND OFVELOP^LM
NTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - b/l. (")
PAW DATA FOP. 2-CHLCRO NAPHTHALENE ANALYSIS t'Y wATm TYFE
KEDIUV YCUCEN "«!&, U'JlTS - UC/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER 1NDUSTKIAL eFFLlU'.'T
Af»PUL NC:
TRUE CONC
to
vo
i-1
LAP NUVBE
1
?
7
4
c
6
7
£
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
: 3?
ft
22
39
44
39
29
33
35
29
37
37
13
3 :
7 r.
3 ?
g
7
. -'
it
.
.8
. 0
.**
.6
.*
. ?
. 1
, i.
.7
.1*
. ~
r
~
. ^
.7.
36
i!6
7 C
7 -
4t
77
Z6
3 6
3:
31
32
1C
33
39
12
4
4
.9
.1
r
- *
.7
.7
. 1
.f-
. c
.2
.9*
. ;
.1
. (.
.6*
3£
3Z
36
31
41
3T
. y
34
7 C,
4.u"
35
11
36
25
34
3''
3
.6
.3
.1
.4*
.7
.1
.»=
.5
.7.
.P
.9*
. 2
.p
*(.
.t*
t *
2*
34
Z7
37
2?
Z '
I C
3 1
36
27
11
7 1
23
2 f
c
4
r,
d
.6
/
*-
.f
. *
. *
.1
. «
r *
7
«
- *
.4
.1
.6
. ; *
3 1
31
1. X
2t
Z v
~ '*
i *
54
22
4
.9
rf-
7
c
c
.1*
. *.
. »«
. 9
. i?
r
. ^
7
^
3C..O
27 .9
3 7 . P
T f O
£. ' .
3 ? . ?
3^ .V
Z 5 . c
j '
*. ^ r
C -'
5 B . A *
33.2
11."*
32.1
z- - . 1
3 : , 4
7 <
- * J
\
27.1
34."
1.^ .?*
57.5*
«
L * * ,
^ ^ » *
i * 4.4
'V . '.- *
1 2 .-
.
31 .:
.. r *
-------
TABLE C--150
N)
E> VI SCU'ENTAL KGMIO&1NG AUO SUPPORT L AHGS wTo*-' Y
CFFICi OF ^EStAfcCH AND DFVFLOP^LNT
ESV1*OVEMAL P"07ECTIGN AGENCY
*« EPA W.:THOD
' VALIDATION STUDY - L/u <") *
PAW DATA FOB 2-CHLOPOSAPHTHALEf.t A\»LYSIS " Y **Trt. TYF
HIGH Y 0 U P F \ F'AIR, UMTS - UG/L
AMFUL NO:
TRUE COfxC:
LAB NUMSfk
1
2
3
4
c
6
7
F
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
DI
72?
289
277
344
»70
219
2v9
283
276
436
334
118
2S5
52 1
251
95
STILL
5
.:.
. 7
.2
.6
.0*
. r
r '
.0
.5
.0*
n
.0*
-\
.1*
c
.2*
ED fcAT
C,
342.
299.
297.
335.
4t< .
26C.
122.
3^9.
722 .
2cf .
323.
129.
345.
245 .
24 «.
1C6.
£fi
''
*
4
t.
r_ *
r,
U«
r,
9
_'
'J
Q*
'1
t,
9
C*
32'"
219
26?
24?
42?
7l'r
237
29C
333
3M
3°2
114
295
256
229
173
T"f>
5
r
"i
.4
.3
. "*
,c
. -
r
. '
.1
,:*
. *
.«?
.c
.4
Q
>
.1*
WATER
fc
742.
297.
279.
272.
4?!» .
2:2.
2t r.
34P.
32t.
474.
32'.
1 16.
719,
243.
242.
r3.
SUCF«CE WATEP IN DUST
-
J
T
M
:.*
"
r
~
<.
^«
**
* *
r
c
^
7
1*
C
?2r.^
237. :
2 i,6 ^7
2 ^1 . 7
394.-
1 f 9 . .
259.4
22 .4
22V.4
43? . r «
374. .
94 .F*
291.,;
3C6 . ;J
P 2 * . /
2 2 C . 1
t
3 -, 2 . 0 7 2 "
~> t? . ~ 25B
2fc4.4 19r
225.; 579
1 v C . " 7 C "
2 2 7 r ^ '
23 7. .': 241
277."1 73f
2 9 1 . i 2 *. 1
39r."« 46^
3 5 1 . J 2 6 (.
Ki . 7* 1 31
3 27 . r 29*
1 J 6 . 5 41
243.7 ?73
742. : 154
PI A
5
^
*
.2
. ' *
. ' *
.£
r-
r
v
.4
r
. c
r *
. J
.C*
. fi
.4
C 0 '' .
773.2
-------
TABLE C-151
ENVIRONMENTAL MOMTOwTNG AND SU^POPT
OFFICE CF (-E SEARCH Af.D DEVELOPMENT
TAL PROTECTION *GFNCY
** EPA METHOD tt.1. VALIDATION STUDY - H/N (?)
PAU DATA FO* 2 ,A-D1MT90TOLUE NF ANALYSIS hY k a T L F TYPE
LOw YOUDEN PAIS, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP W
S I' ?« F A C C W A T E ^ If. DUSTHIAL £ F F L U i. N T
ASPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
U)
VO
LAG NUMBER
1
?
3
4
5
f
7
P
9
1C
11
12
13
1A
15
1 2>
1
w-
7
r
£
f
A
9
12
#
~*
?
6
A
C
1
. "
.5
. 0*
.2
.1
.7
.6
.6
. ?
. <
.6
. ?*
. «
. **
7
.0*
11
2
2?
2
C'
£
r
5
A
V
^
A
1C
i
3
0
2
, r
c?
. 3 *
.7
.0*
< i
.'"*
.<,
.2
. 7
.<;
.1
.5
. '. *
.8
.0*
1:
5
22
5
^
?
3
A
j
c
r
^
1 ?
5
c
^
1
9 ~*
.7
.f^*
.6
.0
.1
^
."
.9
i
.9
. Z*
.9
,t
.7
C
11
?
1?
r
7
'
*
A
A
1 C
f
*
12
7
j
2
. ^
. "
.A
. ' *
.5.
C
^
. ;*
r
-*
.1
. ^
. 0
.:*
.2
.: *
c
j
3
i
12.:
i..?
6.::
: . r. *
3.7
A . &
j , L «
t . A
A .7
9.r
7. 2
7.^
1C .;
7.7
9.5
i . i;
11
1
c
'_,
1
~
5
?
U
7
6
11
<
A
Q 1
X*
n
. 7
.7
.2
. r
*
.C *
. :
mt
^
.^.
. '
.3
. C
7
. T«
12
A
7
3
i r
A5
"
1:
s
11
1 c
G
1"
11
5V
1
. ^
.1*
.?
.6*
c
.c *
. : *
.1
.7
7
.?
7
.7
4
. 7
. 5»
1 1
A
'it
c
12
_
13
C
1 «
1
5
11
r_
r
^
_
.'r*
*
. t *
. i
>
il
.
.6
. 5
. t
«
^
i
. -
*
.9
. '" *
-------
TABLE C-152
[ KV 1 hCNr't.MAL "CMTOUNG »ND SUPPORT L A'"- OP A 7 w fr T
OFFICE Of P t S t A ft C H AND DFVELOF'ftST
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGCNCY
** EPA METHOD tt5 VALIDATION £TUDY - l;/N (D *
RAW DATA FCR 2 , 4-DIMT30TOLUFNF ANALYSIS fi Y U A T c < T
* E D 1 U * »0 U 0 ? N P * I R i UMTS - UG/L
DISTULED WATCR
TAP WATER
StRFACfc W A T E P IKDbSTRIAL E F f L U c \ T
AKPUL NO:
TRU£ CONC: 79
v£>
1 54
2 ?:
1
1
1
.\ 1
Vv 1
Vs\ 1
m,
V» 0\
YcA
v>, \
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
C
1
2
T
4
5
6C
51
69
47
64
7C
51
79
57
1 1
1 1 *
64
2 2
j
. j
.3
.?
.4
.1
.»
c
. -
-i
^
.8
.4
.9*
. *
- *
77
44
63
37
7T
UP
64
7:
61
£6
5£
6°
89
66
15
4
.C
.4
.1
C
* .'
. 7
.3*
. F.
.7
.6
,c
. *i
.4
.9
. C*
4°
71
3^
37
81
6i
4P
133
6ft
77
47
7<
5?
a6
51
11
j
.1
.
.c
.9
. 1
.4
.7*
»
V _
.0
c
.'
«6
.1
4
77.:
49.4
34.5
45.1
5 " . i
1 5 r . C
53.6
7.1.-
65.6
tl.4
51.6
69.?
61.5
55.5
19.6
f 1
75
37
4r>
34
44
er
6C
69
69
64
t£
9C
*3
1?Z2
-
r
'
-
. 7
.4
L
. c"
. r
. i
m c
1
. I
7
e
. .
^
. .
.7*
4p
c c
i<;
6?
r>5S
1 1 '
49
44
7:
77
tf
64
65
*;?
119
4
.4
C
>
. 7
i
_/
. !?
. "*
.9
. A.'
.t
.7
.(
. C,
T
. t-
t
. .
. '.
7
79. "
3 ? . c *
fc?.7
!°.1*
9C.7 .
*
C1 . ' *
7^ .1
72.'
7',.'
76.6
61 .0
71.7
*
7C <*
» ' .
711 .0*
t ~l X-
*. Z . 7 «
76.--
1 "^ ^ '^ *
^7
J -. a L
c 2 . s
53.4
c,1 .4
u«. . "
52. 5
o7. 1
.
C4 .V
7 3 . .c
-------
TABLE C-153
f K VI RCK*lfiT AL SOMTu^lNG A'.D SUPPOMT L Af JP *. 7 j ^ Y
OF* ICE CF KfSEAfcCH AM' DEVELOPMENT
IMVISONM-NTAL PfiO'rtCTICN AGENCY
** EPA "ETMOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - L-/fJ <2) *
BAU DATA fOk 2,4-DIMTfc070LUfcf,E "H/1 LYSIS &V WATt^ TYPE
HIGH YCUDtN fA]fi, UMTS - UC/L
DISTILLED WATEP
TAP WATER
SUPMCE WATER INDUSTRIAL E F t L U t f. T
AHPUL NO: 5
TRUE CONC: M*. r
CO
VO
Ui
LAP NUMBER
1 5oi .:
2 563.7
4 55"!:
t 177T'.;*
i <. 3 i . :
S 75a.7
9 59?. "
13
11
12
13
14
15
7e6.'J
5j9.:
r 3 T . n
1 f : 5 . i «
72ft. a
P fj Q * A
d
769. C
5C5.4
5 i 7 . C
2 5 4 . C
1 6 V . C
i 4 1 . C
t L 7 . :
1 3 1 . C
579.5
7Zc .6
4C4 . t *
5 ,.7
?67
69'
' ?5
524
[. : r
454
1 75
5^4
c 2 5
1
5
.6
-\
C
' .
.6
. '
. :
.c
. r
.6
A
.9
54'.
5C'.
K99
£24
69 :
r - i
577
5d7
67C
4C6
t
.
,7
.n"
.7*
-
. r
-^
^
.
.1
,c
-)
. t.
5
61?.:
" . r *
4V7. /
4 ' 3 . C
34"."
74". f
3 -. . w
775.7
76 5 . "
4 S ? . '"
c c. ,*
-- ^ \, m -
575. <
4V 4 . 1
9fv9r. .c
646
627
C 1 ~9
"T C 7
4. - ^
3V?
C C '
7
c
t
3
4
1 2
p i
r
f.l
b7
39
v
.
.1
7
. r
L-
-i
.4
.4
. "**
c
f \ a .-
1
4 9 4 . :
4 ; 1 . -
p.?.'*
^ r i r
5 i r' . 4
7T1.-
i z ; . r
c 4 & . C-
e c4 ,"~
2 6 ? . r- *
63" .<
5 45 ! .'7*
f w 'T , 7
' ^ 4 .
71 .,
4 /" . "
4 7 t . '
c * -
. - 7 . ;
» ' t
( t .' _
c 7 c . .
-------
TABLE C-154
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAP KUfBER
1
2
3
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
ENTAL ».CMTC&I»G AND SUFPOkT
OfflCt Of hfJtA&CH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** t. PA WFTHOP 6Z5 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N C) *
CAW DATA fO* 4-bNCi»CPHEN YL PHENYL ETHER ANALYSIS uY WAlEF TYPF
LOW YOLDfcN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
7.
4.1
I . .
i. c
4.2
f. r'
1 . 7
DI
£
_
4
6
f
6
4
4
4
£
5
4
5
6
6
1
STILLED
1
-
. *
.5
.4
.5
.9
.ft
.6
.4
.1
.8
.1
.
-------
TABLE C-155
10
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAT 0*ATC" 1
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND D F VF L C P* L t: T
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA KfTHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - 6/N (2) *
RAW DATA FOR 4-P P C^"OF HC N YL PHENYL ETHER ANALYSIS cY WATLK TYPE
C.ED1U* YOUOfN PAIf, UMTS - UG/L
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
t
t.
5
6
7
8
9
1P
11
12
13
14
15
DI
6C
47
4?
4C
57
0
63
51
41
54
176
53
46
66
61
19
STJLLFD KATE*
3
.C
.5
. 1
.5
.6
.2*
.9
*
.5
.7
.0*
.s
.4
.6
.1
. " «
4
57.C
46.9
43. b
34.6
64.4
57.6
49.4
49.2
4f .9
49.3
57.6
5G.7
5C. t
82.7*
57.5
15-6*
6T
4T
47
3C
51
55
6?
4P
21
73
50
53
55
46
56
52
TAP UATER
i
.3
,T
.2
.5*
T
-i
.6
.4
.6
.6*
.3*
1
-
.5
.2
.fc
.6
.fi
57
4?
43
31
43
5 ?
57
51
34
55
45
49
e t
4Z
51
17
4
V
7
-
.4
.4*
.6-
. 6
.7
T
-/
.4-
. I *
.4
.0
.7
.2
.?
.2*
SUHFACF UATEK 1NDUST
6f
47
4?
16
9
35
50
49
t -
67
57
45
51
57
62
A j
7
«P
.2
.4
.6*
.1
.6
.7
.7
.1*
.3*
.7
.«
.7
.4
.9
. 5
57
37
52
L'f-
51
69
45
49
3U
63
4F
47
49
£
5C
54
4
^>
W
.6
.6
. ? *
.3
*
.7
1
-J
T
o C
.1*
.5
.1
.'
.t
.3
.1
6f
4?
t -
15
5 t
2 ?
57
<.?
6?
c r
48
57
21
57
41
RIAL EFFLUENT
2
r
.1
.7
."*
.?.
*
,4
.6
. 1
.*
.5
.9
C
. ^
.3
. 4
.7
;,
cj 7 . C
4 F . ?
<. 9 . -r
U.5*
Z. t- . 4
ta L * w
4 1 . 4
' - . C
29.4
: 7 . 5 *
J - I-
13.?
- * ~i
*
51 .4
35.1
-------
TABLE C-156
ENVIRONMENTAL PCNITOPING AND SUPPORT LAPCRATORY
OFFICE CF RESEARCH ASD DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGFKCY
** EPA hETHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/f (Z) **
RAW DATA FOR 4-B ROP* OPHE N VL FHENYL ETHER ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAlRf UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED hATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLULM
u>
vO
O3
AMPUL MO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
\
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
512
49f
444
226
550
448
544
5u6
449
648
497
451
451
958
497
15G
5
.0
,C
. 1
.?*
.0
.0
* '?
.3
.6
.3*
.1
.0
r*
* J
.5*
.7
.7*
6
548.0
68 8. C
446. C
242.1
649. C
45?. 0
242.0
502.f.
5 '. 9 . 7
44?. C
476. T
522.0
456.0
56?. 9
489. f
191.2*
512
375
432
144
446
537
507
5:7
356
547
475
4!9
41?
471
455
?6?
5
.C
.2
.6*
.C
. o
.r
r
. ^
.3*
.0*
.C
.C
.c
.1
*
-<
.4
54£
526
4,5
151
44?
4C1
57?
59?
1 -^ r
779
47?
4 4£
4t1
42?
473
149
6
V
-f
. 3
.?*
f
-
J
J
J
. z*
»
. :
.3
c
.<'
.6
.3
512
4C9
461
122
418
C
47C
31
224
665
49Z
?64
399
45?
44B
?66
5
.r
c
.<:
.5*
.'
. : *
.c
.9*
. ft *
. :
t r
. r
r>
-
.>
.3
.r
548
477
44:
153
44P
371
317
538
4 1 5
653
517
39^
44?
2S2
5 L, 2
34?
6
.?
n
^
.4
.7*
,c
.
.
.0
,-
. :*
.r
.c
. '*.
.7
.6
'-
512
441
?61
1 <.5
'16
4t;
34?
44K
3Z?
6 57
7 j e
4 C'
7 61
96
4 ?a
'21
5
r
.r
.4
.:*
t ..
.9
.
."
^
!:,*
r
r
u
n
. .7
.*
.1
i
5 s . 0
4t t . 1
4 c 5 . <.
1 w : . D
7 y9. I
7 - f
: 1 1 . ^
r 5 " "*
.- t ^ -
5^7.!
7 <. 4 . r
? 7 c . ,
479.:
r j 1 . '.
5:^.7
27Z .5
-------
TABLE C-157
ENV I fi O. CENTAL fOMTGUNG AND SUFPCRT L Al- OR M T o f< t
OFFICE CF PESEAfcCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEf.CY
** EPA P u T H 0 D ^25 VALIDATION STUDY - R/S CD **
R A b DATA FCk 4,4 -DDT ANALYSIS P V UATFk TYPL
LOU YOUDE'J PAIR, UMTS - U&/L
D1ST1LLT
AfPUL NO:
w TRUE CONC:
VO
VO
LAP NUMBER
1
2
3
4
*>
t
7
fc
9
1C
1 1
\ 1?
5\ 1?
>\ « /
;>'oA
& <\ i 5
1
p.
? .
1 .
c.
4.
G .
1.
4.
9.
3.
3.
rj.
C .
1 .
0.
1
9
*
4
7
7
C*
C
5
1*
7
7
r *
Cl*
4
0*
D u A
7
T
r
3
3
C
1
2
7
1
3
f
2
i
r
TER
2
.0
.3
*
. C*
.0
.c
.G»
.5
.2
. £ *
.7
. 2
.C*
G *
.4
.C*
c
2
"*
1
5
r-
1
2
7
3
?
'?
*
4
1
TAP b
1
r
c
*
,r*
.4
.7*
,r*
.C
.1
.2*
.3
.C
.C*
. r*
.3
.£
ATEP
7
2
'
1
5
"*
1
r
f.
4
7
C
r
7
r
SURFACE
^
.3
7
-
*
>
.?
.1*
.3*
.6
. r *
.4*
T
.
.9
.:*
. r. *
T
.0*
a
1
|"
1
4
r
1
1
7
3
3
L
j
3.
n
1
. C
i
. _ '
*
. C *
.1
.4
.r."
.
.1*
. «,
t.
. '
. i *
.c*
. "
.c*
WATER IN
I
7. :
1 .u
A
' .r*
'. . t
*
C .C*
1.2
". 9
9.3*
t r
3.9
r.:*
r r ^
T «"
r.9
DUSTRIAL f
1
p . r
? "
*
; ,< *
1 .?
2.r
'? . C -
r . r «
r .?*
9.4*
2.fe
7.4
0."*
!.
6.9*
1.1
FcLl'c
t
7.
1 .
9
1 .
^
r .
^ .
1 .
c
,*. ^
2
C.
£ *
-^
N
-
c
-)
5
^
A
i
I
7
i
L
D
A
-------
TABLE C-158
ENVIRONMENTAL I' 0 M T 0 R 1 N G AND SUPPORT LAf-l
OFFICE OF RESEARCH A\D DFVELOFPC'iT
NTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** ETA ^ETHCO 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/N C)
RAW DATA FOR 4 , t -DDT ANALYSIS H Y WATER TYPE
C.EDIUK YGLICEN PA1P, UNITS - UG/L
D1STHLFD WATER
TAP W A T E r,
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL
AMPUL NO: 3
TRUE CONC: 6C'.C
P-
o
o
LAP NUMBER
1 12.7
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
t
7
P
9
0
1
2
?
4
5
*
6.P
27.°,
127.0*
64.2
35.5
42.5
55. A
34.7
44.6
3 .0
C .3*
S5.7
10. C
4
5 7 . C
39.5
*
2T.4
20.7
45?.^*
34.9
26. f
53.C
4^.7
25.4
43. C
v.F
n . C; *
53.4
7.9
3
t : . .?
4.3
4.5
5'. 2*
42. a
15.1
11.5
3? .4*
34.9
17.9
6C.5
:."*
37.3
75."
57
21
4
7.
2'
35
15
21
43
2"
1 9
J
r
27
11
4
* J
*
.4
..2
.5*
.2
*
.2
.6*
.3
.5
.:*
. ~ *
.4
.4
t;
24
4
s
6
w
12
4
34
23
37
u
23
17
7
. C
*
C
t.
. ^
r
. C*
.4
.2
.1*
. »
.1
. c»
.r*
.1
'_
57
14
4
c
32
2*
U
1 ?
62
t '.
35
f
r
I1
C.
4
r-
_
.4
*
.?
c
c
. >
.7
r
^
.8
.9*
.1
.1
. 0*
.0*
. 1
. ~*
ftC
T
U
"*
""
42
1s
53
2?
16
9
2°
9
7
n
.7
*
. 1 «
.7
.<«
.r*
.T
."»
.°*
. 7
.f
.?.
*
.4
.4
b7. .
A
3 .7.
4 . >
1r . T
L. *
-> '^ --
^ . 2
_<.;*
12 .1
c1 .6
J: . ;
4
u2 .7
7 . f
-------
TABLE C-159
\
ENVIP
KOMTGHI?.C- AND SUPPORT LArQcATG&ir
OFFICE CF RESEARCH A\D DEVFLOP^-ENT
ENVlhONKcNTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - B/% (?) **
DATA FOR 4,4 -DDT ANALYSIS PY WMEU
HIGH YOU DEN P A I P , UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATFR
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUCMT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NU*BFR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
f
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
512.
49.
229.
4C.O.
242.
1290.
1C4C*.
605.
74P.
74.
49C.
£8.
. .
*93 .
125.
^
1
*
7
r
r
6
0
n
0
1
0
1
D*
1
2
6
5 4 8 . J
649. C
*
3f 3 .t
2b2.C
9CP.C
523.0
116C.C
1C98.9
451.0
23ft.r
567. C
3C3.C
: . c *
469.3
265.4
512
324
69
153
76?
15 LI
75"J
495
M7
310
43*
212
"*
45':
1 r- -J C1.
5
.0
r
. ^
*
.3
.'
.r*
. c.
. 7
i
!r*
.c
.c
.:
.c*
.1
T
6
54*.
4M .
94.
13C.
146?,
1 ?2: .
7e:.
499.
922.
225.
463.
299.
C .
46".
27C.
"J
r\
*
6
5
T*
; *
:
6
D *
^>
c
r>
*' *
9
4
f 12
426
fe7
1 o'1
456
2 «, 7 0
27
487
7fe4
297
425
333
^
^
423
55V
5
*
.2
. "
r
^
. C »
.8
.4
. : *
r-
_
»
. c
^ *
.6
C
5 A 0 . 0
4&3 . "
*
113.2
ec . 3
1 1 2 ' . '
43^..?
1 : 4 '- »r,
7 tt r f
7 i f . "
251.:
463."'
361.'
'.' . r
6 U.5
127.7
M2
230
1G4
7?
132
r, j!"
2C4
0 1 6
211
477
332
r
59:
"43
5 t
. : < 4 * . 3
. r 4 o i . I
* A
. 1 * t 5 . 7 *
. £ 112.:
* c c . :
.<"<* K7.C-
C 1 7 » ( . i *
ff c " r r
.'* 7:5. _
P ^ -J C "
. : i - 1 . :
r. 7 T -
. C * *
.9 3 , ' . ft
t C 4 . *
-------
TABLE C-I60
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUD* - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR PENTACHLOROPHENOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DI'TILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLULNT
-F-
O
NJ
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
1
13.0
4.8
11.4
c.o*
30.1
15.0
C'.C*
3.2
D.O*
2C.6
13.5
41 .6*
25.4
0.0*
12.?
6.4
2
14.4
1C.O
5.5
U.2
11.6
1C. 8
C.O*
3.fc
C.O*
22.6
13. fc
53.3*
28.4
0.0*
33.2
12.3
1
13.0
5.8
8.4
1£.4
12.4
9.4
15.1
1.6
24.5
6.1
11.2
35. f
19.0
O.C*
O.P*
9.7
2
14.4
5.8
fc.1
15.1
24.9
5.6
9.9
1.5
38.5
22.2
15.6
C.C*
21.5
C.O*
30. 7
14.9
1
13. C
11.5
15.?
C.O*
21.4
1C. 8
14.2
o . r. *
Q.C-
19.8
11,5
26.5*
23.9
O.C*
1C. 2
10.5
2
14.4
9.1
12. &
6.8*
27,8
13.0
16.1
1.9
O.D«
12.4
16.4
39.7*
21.7
25.7
2.2
10.2
1
13. C
4.6
0.0*
12.0
12.6
1 .5*
15.C
6.4
T.O*
4.4
16.7
3?. 5
21.0
*
15.1
10.4
2
14.4
c.:*
4.L
P.G*
1 9 . G
:.?*
1C.*
1 .9
«.6.2*
7.4
16. fc
<:6.5
24.1
*
«.1
12.6
-------
TABLE C-161
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAPORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA KETrtOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS *
RAW DATA FOr. PENTACHLOROPHENOL ANALYSIS DY WATfiR TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNT
AWPUL NO:
TK
-F-
o
UE CONC:
3
65.0
4
72. G
65
3
.0
4
72.3
65
3
.r
4
72. C
3
65.0
4
72. C
W LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
39.5
49.6
81.8
56.6
49.6
0.0*
30.5
71.8
73.7
49.4
8C.1*
73.7
219.5*
76.0
49.4
51.7
51.1
86.3
75.2
55.4
32.5
49.1
78. C
140. C*
61.2
9C.8*
78.5
1G7.Q
58.2
47.4
43
4*
34
51
19
59
42
113
112
53
69
72
C
62
55
.3
.5
.6
.4
.1
.3
>
. ^
.5
,C
.2
.2
.7
.C*
,8
.8
45.2
46.6
56.3
69.1
64.0
55.5
42.5
65.2
55.7
63.2
73.0
65.8
44.3
33.5
7C.S
47
64
39
40
54
67
34
85
55
65
7:
74
C
44
59
.7
.0
.7*
.4
>
.5
.5
.6
.5
.7
.6*
.9
.C*
.3
.9
46.3
68.5
24.5*
51.6
57.5
76.1
32.3
73.7
135.0*
48.3
98.2*
81.9
15.9
47.5
57.1
29.'
6?.?
43.9
61 .1
8.6*
58.9
52.5
61.1
21.9
47.6
4? .1
74 .7
139.5*
37.4
71.2
41.8
55.5
74.1
76.7
7.8
36.4
14.3
79.5
32.4
49.0
45. S
9C.3
72.9
56.9
-------
TABLE C-162
DISTILLED WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
480.0
343.0
41C.9
366.2
4 1 8 . C1
389.0
405.5
396.0
911.6
874.0
392..D
581.9*
239.0
1259.6
829.7
439.5
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAEORATQPV
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENV1RON*£MAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR PE NTAC HLOROPHE NOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TlrPt
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WA1ER
6
432. C
372.0
302.2
313.4
355. C
373.0
330.5
436.0
948.9*
734.0*
321. C
6C3.3*
232. C
496.5
359.0
427.4
5
48C.O
295.8
374.3
225.3
497.0
95.7
458.0
421.0
P4C.P
218. C
364.0
4*3.4
239.0
2C5C
-------
TABLE C-163
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
F.NVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 6?5 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS
RAW DATA FOR PHENOL ANALYSIS bY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL
AHPUL NO: 1
^ TRUE CONC: 6.0
o
Cn
LAP NUMBER
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
0.9
4.5
0.0*
6.6
7.2
1.6
2.8
3.1
3.5
4.0
2.0
4.?
7.0*
5, 6
5.1
2
7.C
2.5
4.6
7.1
2.9
2.1
13.1*
2.9
2.5
3.3
3.7
2.4
4.5
11.2*
3.3
7.6
6
1
2
^
2
t.
1C
2
»
3
3
?
3
17
4
18
1
.C
.6
.6
.0*
.3
.0
.9*
.7
.0
.9
.6
,c
.?
.?*
.6
.9*
2
7.:
0.9
3.4
C.G*
7.1
1.3
2 .6
2.6
1.8
2.1
4.7
3.3
4.8
6.4*
13.6
17.4
1
6.0
i .9*
3.0
2.9*
4.9
1.8
',.2
C.P*
7 )
3.9
6.2
2.3
4.0
11 .6*
4.2
7.8
2
7.C
2.6*
4.C
3.7*
7.9
4.5
1.0
2.6
2.9
4.3
3.7
2.7
4.6
7.1*
5.7
15.9*
1
6."
2.5
4.F
14.2*
5.1
0.0*
3.F
2.4
5.3
4.9
3.0
3.1
2.6
11.0*
6.2
7.7
7
-
4
2C
4
Z9J
2
5
4
3
t
5
» 7
4
t
i
.J
^
.5
.7*
.(.
. 1 *
.5*
.4
.5
r
* ~j
% £
9 T
^
. !
j
. ~
.1
-------
TA3LF r-164
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
3
70.0
4
63.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND OEVELOPKENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - AC10 a
RAW DATA FOR PHENOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
KED1UM YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
3
70.0
4
63.3
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL FFFLUtNT
3
70.C
63.!
7
70.0
4
63.0
LAB NURBE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
'11
12
13
14
15
R
17.3
40.6
53.0
53.3
36.8
29.6
24.7
2C.3
30.4
26.9
24.2
35.5
60.1*
9.6
36.8
26. C
40. C
31.1
46.4
21.5
49.6
22.8
33.7
34.8
29.3
2C.8
30.8
48.9*
33. a
24.0
13.7
34.2
8.4*
75.7
23.4
29.9
31.5
30.0
28.3
32.2
27. C
25.5
59.2*
23.1
77.7
20.5
29.9
5.6*
40.1
22.7
2.1
26. C
17.8
14.6
31.5
27.7
30.7
58.1*
34.3
35.1
22.1*
5C.C
Z3.7*
47.3
39.4
44 .9
27.6
2S.9
37.9
36.1
27. C
35.2
59.0*
40.9
3<.9
22.3*
27.1
^6.8*
51.9
18.4
26.5
22.6
22.6
33.2
26. S
26.0
32.5
57.1*
33.2
53.2
22.2
23.5
55.9*
75.6
70.0
35.7
27.8
24.8
38. f
22. *
29.6
37.6
82.7*
37.6
33.5
20.7
38. -5
65.3*
27.2
O.C*
17. S
U . 0
2L2
30.6
ie.7
27.H
50. 2
93. 5*
36. C
39.4
-------
TABLE C-165
DISTILLED WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
5
420. C
6
467.C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAPORATOPY
OFFICE of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA KETHOD 6?5 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS *
RAW DATA FOR PHENOL ANALYSIS E-Y WATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
5
42C.O
t
467.?
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
5
42C.O
6
467.C
5
4ZC.C
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
£
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
143.0
238.0
£0.5
312.0
126.3
334.6
147.0
143.5
23C.O
195.0
127.8
154.0
339.6*
67.9
12C.O
169. C
261.0
1G7.1
224.0
215.0
179.6
200. C
226.7
278. C
201.0
161.7
168. C
369. T*
1 1 '£ . 7
» ', 6 . 5
123. C
273.2
54.6*
1 12 .0
120.3
16UC
16P.O
2 1 " . 0
111 .C
198. C
155.4
166.0
352.6*
11E.3
177.4
1 56 . 0
281.?
92.7*
354.0
141 .3
261.0
175. C
23?. 9
244.0
181.0
165.1
17S.O
397.0*
111.2
181.0
129. r*
229.4
67.3*
213.:
76. r
135.3
157.0
234.^
211.0
17C.?
157.5
14P.C
257. P*
141 .4
173.1
124.0*
344.:
70.1*
329.0
2 fc 5 . 1
190.3
1*4.0
247.3
264. C
1 9 5 . 0
166.2
1 6 2 . r>
398.4*
117.1
164.6
i 53 .C
19? .4
311 .1*
272. C
21C.n
231 .5
151 .r
?41 .1
232. C
156.0
134.7
152.0
*
1.J4.6
15&.5
174. C
264."
3-9.9*
1 c 7 , r
74C . ?
34£ .5
' S 1 . C
213.7
313.0
146. C
1S5.7
172. C
468 .6*
124.3
of .1
-------
TABLE C-166
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 2-CHLCROPHENOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/i.
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EffLUc'iT
1
7.0
2
s.r
7.0
1
7.C
2
8.0
1
7.0
£-
O
CO LAB NUMBE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
1
1
. 1
*2\ 1
&\\ 1
1
2
3
4
5
R
1
6
2
5
9
5
5
5
t
7
4
12
11
5
3
.7
.7
.?
.3
.4
.2
.4
.2
.6
.8
.9
.9
.2*
.8
.3
5.4
6.9
1C. 3
4.2
6.6
fc.C
5.4
4.4
0.7
7.5
6.0
15.9*
6.7*
9.5
4.3
4.C
5.9
9.1
2.6
6.4
7.3
5.6
5.6
6 .»
7.5
6.1
12.6*
7.4*
fc.C
4.C
1.1
6.C
4.5
7.7
1.9
5.4
5.7
5.1
C.O*
9.5
6.7
14.7*
6.4*
ZT.9*
5.5
«,
5
3
5
5
6
0
6
7
6
4
14
11
3
3
. 2
.6
.9*
.5
.0
C
^
.c*
.5
.9*
.3
.6
.P*
.1*
.9
.3
4.K
6.7
4.7*
4.7
6.8
4.6
5.9
5.1
9.3*
P.1
6.4
14.9*
20.8*
6.6
4.8
A . 1
4.6
7.2
4.1
3.3
5.9
5. A
fi.H
8.1*
6.6
6.1
1Q.5
14.0*
5 .0
3.6*
A. 3
l. . "
7,9
4. 1
c.:*
5,3
C 3
f -
7.3
t-9*
7.6
6,2
14.8*
16.2*
6.C
6.2*
-------
TABLE C-167
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
3
80.0
4
72.G
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
PAW DATA FOR 2-CHLOROPHENOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
MEDIUM YOIIDEN PA1 f , UNITS - UG/L
1AP WATLR
4
72.C
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
80.0
4
72.0
3
80.?
4
72.C
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
36.7
7G.3
110*9
52.4
69.3
M.7
62.7
48.2
88. C
64.2
5E.1
97.1
231.9*
67.5
7C.9
5B.5
69.6
71.7
4t.G
52.3
57. C
67.8
57.6
83.2
72.6
5C.1
88.3
137.4*
64.5
48.1
26.4
66. S
53.5
76.2
55.3
5?. 5
72.5
61 .1
26. C
6<5.9
62.1
ic:.c
117.1*
7C.O
67.1
55.3
58.1
4*.1
45.3
51.0
94.1
63.7
44.5
15.9
7C.9
58. C
84.8
16S.4*
68.2
37.7
47.7
78.9
44.2*
44.2
67. C
56.9
70.5
74.9
91.3*
9C.2
£3.6
96. e
105.2*
62.7
46.3
48.9
54.5
35. d*
42.1
57.6
66.0
54.1
47.4
36.6*
61 .4
60.4
91.2*
124.6*
i3.2
50.7
45.7
6» .1
56.4
66. n
48. n
47.2
76. r*
64 .2
93. G*
57. C
66.5
94.4
124.2*
65.3
3P.3*
O.4
6C .2
67.7
34.6
57.6
2 P. 3
49.3
44.7
7 1 * j
45.5
5
9?. 4
146.6*
54.4
42.2*
-------
TABLE C-1'58
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1?
14
15
01ST1LLFD WATER
5
4 8 C . 0
329.0
423.0
263.8
303.0
31.0
*95.0
372.0
316.5
SS'-.O
4S3.0
311.2
245.C
1129.5*
40?.1
243.0
ENVIRONMENTAL PON1TOR1NG AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND D E VE I OP*E NT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD fc?5 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS
RAW DATA FOR 2-CHLOROPH£NOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
6
533.0
411. C
437.2
260.4
265.C
424. C
418.0
46,8.0
323.3
6G5.0
4G8.C
462.5
256.0
917.4*
430.3
196.9
5
4?C.O
2 1 C . C
447,9
" . '" *
336.3
3^4.9
547.0
4C3.C
329.7
222.0
4C4.T
3 4 C . 6
251.0
1426.3*
484.3
?34.3
t
533.0
3EP.Q
U1.2
?25.4
2 9 C . 0
33P.9
641.0
4 2 9 . 'J
338.?
617.0
382.:
399.7
259.0
125<5.9*
409.5
213.7
420
2S2
4CC
164
247
2F9
UO
39 j
316
4fe3
?63
376
23i
947
469
2C6
5
.0
r
_.
^>
-
.c«
^
\
. r
.0
. c
.F
.C*
."
.0
-i
. i.
.7*
.2
.2
6
533. C
285. C
5C6.2
185. C*
' 3 C . C
462. C
443 c 3
441. C
556.3
692. C*
45s. 0
372.0
255.0
17/9.1*
4 7 1 . C
229.2
480
327
34*
342
279
364
355
348
354
557
M2
249
*25
230
5
t
0
0
6
4
0
1
n
0
4
C*
5
u
*
?
3*
6
533.
367.
435.
476.
219.
47C.
423.
466 .
4:9.
634.
336.
256 .
13V4.
377.
131.
0
r%
>
c
1
1
"
n
L*
6
"l
4
^
s
7
5
-------
TABLE C-169
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
1
eo.o
2
72.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS «*
RAM DATA FOR 2-METHYL-4,6-DIN1TROPHENOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOU YOUDtN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
60.0
2
72.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNI
1
80.0
2
72.0
1
80.0
2
72.0
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
3.6
6^.4
0.0*
55.7
4.8
42.3
27.7
0.0*
85.9
130.0*
34.6
66.7
C.O*
37.2
19.1
13. fl
52.2
33.1
66.8
74.9
47.0
14.4
39.8
77.3
7C.9*
42.9
54.8
0.0*
54.9
56.9
15.2
5C.1
116.6
61.1
4.7
34.5
26.3
8:. 4
87.3
£3.3*
4C.O
6T.9
o.o*
36.4
71.4
P. 4
42.1
21.7
156.0*
27.8
26.7
16.7
50.8
85.4
130.0*
C.O*
5t.9
C.O*
6C.3
73,7
26.7
64.9
O.C*
79.2
1C2uC
46.6
C.C*
114. £*
97.7
110. C
C.C*
61.0
0.0*
19.2
65.1
U.2
67.5
5.6*
80.6
97.6
32.6
34.4
50.8*
81.9
71.8
36.1
51.9
0.0*
29.2
27.6
18.7*
52.?
43.7
1C4.0
173.5
5S.F.
26.6
204.3*
91 .r
1G8.P
0.0*
61 .?
*
47.3
81.1
1^.7.
47.3
23.7
63. 1
13S.1*
235.9*
U.1
127.3'
K2.5
63.3
26.1
52.9
*
30.9
63.4
-------
TABLE C-170
DISTILLED WATER
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
3
160.0
4
144.C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE' OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 2-METHYL-4,6-DINITROPHENOL ANALYSIS BY kATER TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
3
160.0
4
144.3
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
T
160.0
4
144.0
3
160.C
4
K.4.C
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
f
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
51
141
186
77
21
95
77
142
195
166
136
114
0
124
163
.3
.1
.9
.9
.3
.2
.8
.1
.0
.0*
.0
.0
.0*
.9
.8
46.6
123.6
196.8
215.0
196.6
148.0
88.7
227.4
161.0
271. C*
18.3
1C1.0
163.2
96.7
1 4 4 c 0
61.1
128.8
83.1
143.0
256.8
91 .';
84.0
P56.2
2 c 5 . r;
306.0*
120. 2
122.0
O.C*
IOfi.9
223. P
37.6
1C4.8
136.5
174.0
327.1*
80.3
73.7
14S.7
94.6
275.0*
9.7
9C.5
O.C*
68.5
20?. 8
55
143
86
195
336
111
91
'.CO
19C
332
124
116
n
97
242
.2
.2
.9*
.0
.3
.0
.7
.3*
.0
.6
.0
.C*
.0
.3
43.9
120.6
60.3*
123.0
259.2
99.6
71.0
156.4*
185.0
156. C
105.8
108.0
O.C*
89.5
2G6.C
46.3*
1ST, 7
133.3
240.0
23C.8
71 .3
10?. 0
535.7*
17$. C
254.0
114.9
119.0
*
85.1
224.2
54
) C/4
r<3
2or
21 1,
K. J
58
144
173
194
1o7
122
86
168
.1*
. 1
.5
.0
. J
.9
» (
.0*
.C
.C
.3
.6
*
.7
.5
-------
TABLE C-171
OJ
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AKD DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 2-METHVL-A,t-0 IMTROPHENOL ANALYSIS BY UATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED UATER
TAP UATER
SURFACE UATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
A
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
U
15
5
1067.0
93A.O
108?. 9
789.9
1370. C
937.7
1C21.P
1110. C
3025.1*
1260. C
2530.0*
1111. A
358.0
3539.?*
1AA0.1
1295.2
6
960.0
956. C
860.9
909.9
1AAO.G
981.3
1CC1.C
11GO.C
2336.5*
1250.0
2CAC.O*
871. 0
348.0
U89.7
853.6
978. A
5
1067.0
1C55.0
1CA7.7
5A6.5
2C2C.C
635. ?
599.0
1UD.C
:<85.S*
698.0
Z270.0*
993.8
936.0
231OC.C*
1337.7
U19.7
6
960.0
83C.O
28C.5
78C.O
2CAC.O*
1198. A
910.2
1C3C.3
579A.?*
126C.O
1CSC.O*
832.2
750.0
A253.8*
807. C
1C7A.6
5
1C67.0
8C1.0
1073.1
511.9*
1A/3.0
926. A
53A.C
11AC.C
2GS9.A*
1280. C
129C.C
1n95.3
339.0
2A06.9*
1017.8
1098.8
6
960.0
782.0
963.5
512.9*
1510. C
1575.2
881.0
975.0
92^5.0*
1CAC.O
2153.0
876.6
339. C
19311.0*
1103.7
1157. A
5
1067.0
voo.o*
978.1
752.0
2100. 0
S01.6
118C.O
956.0
2713.8*
107C.C
2130.0
9A2.2
3A1.0
*
937. T
1189.0
6
96C.O
628.0*
898.1
567.9
129C.li
A59.0
750.0
111C.O
6966.9*
1TOO.O
1105.0
883.9
35C.O
2609.8*
703.3
667. A
-------
TABLE C-172
AMPUL NO:
TRUE COrtC:
DISTILLED WATER
1
14.0
2
15.6
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFl'CE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 2-NITROPHENOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN FAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
U.O
SURCACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNl
1
H.O
2
15.6
1
U.O
2
15.6
L*9
1
2
3
4
$
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
U
15
NUHBER
2.7
12.5
c.r*
11.0
17.4
9.7
9.5
6.7
15.4
18.2
25.0
21.6
1C. 2
13.5
4.4*
11.3
12.4
23.6
9.3
14.2
10.8
1C. 7
9.4
16.1
14.4
31.9
23.1
5.2
2C.7
7.3*
7.5
11.1
8.6
7.6
16.5
13. £
v: .4
15.3
12.6
14.1
19.5
2C.8
6.1
12.9
5.9
7.6
11. C
11.0
18.3
9.3
8.7
1C. 3
1C. 2
14.5
22.1
26.9
24c6
11.4
29.6
9.6
7.5
11. C
2.9*
13.3
1C. 2
12.2
O.C*
8.7
15.1
13.6
24.2
22. C
18. C
5.6
< .9
11.5
12.5
C.D*
11.8
14.2
8.6
12. e
9.3
23.3
15.4
24.5
21.9
5P.C*
14.1
5.4
8.7
10.5
26.2
c!9
1C.9
17.4
17.8
14.9
22.3
21.4
1
15.1
5.9
P..
10,
1F,
9,
9,
1C,
13,
21.
21,
14,
22,
24,
12.?
1C.9
-------
TABLE C-173
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAPOPATOPY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS *
RAW DATA FOP 2-NITRCPHENOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYFt
MEDIUM YOUDFN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACF WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
p-
Ul
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LA9 NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
3
70. C
51.4
63.6
117.1
48.8
76.3
66.9
60.9
50.1
76.7
59.5
95.4
78.5
348.5*
89.5
56.7*
4
78 .0
94.1
75.4
89. r
54.2
75.5
76.3
90.4
117. C
1C5.C
102.0
1C2.3
84.4
199.1*
71.7
53. S*
3
7H.C
6C.9
6?.1
69.5
84.4
65.8
54.9
67.0
91.2
91 .4
77.6
??. 3
81.9
53.7
6P.C
61 .6
4
78.0
£1.6
63.6
55.5
55.4
71.0 '
61.8
7P.6
56.4
45.2
93.3
77. n
78.4
218. C*
63,4
46.4
»
7C.O
55. C
6«.6
47.7*
47.4
85. C
56.5
70. C
7C.1
83.8
1C5.C
8C.4
bO.8
36.8
71.9
47.4
4
78.0
7&.1
63.9
36.9*
54.6
77.8
78.1
72. f
64.9
1 1 P C
69.9
104.8
88.3
4C.4
7C.9
57.7
3
7C.C
58.4
64 .0
95.1
79.4
22.9
45.6
77.5
67.5
IGC.O
66.4
80.1
80. s
73.4*
66.0
32.?
<
78. C
64.4
69. C
121. 7
45.2
£2.9
3^.4
11.2
61.3
vC . C
62 .£
99.2
1 C 1 . 3
341.7
78,5
44.8
-------
TABLE C-174
A1PUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
DISTILLED WATER
5
520.0
772.0
487.6
278.3
380.0
486.0
453.0
525.0
693.3
587.0
667.0
603.2
263.0
1859.5*
666.1
392.0*
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAGORATOKY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS *
RAW DATA FOR 2 -N 1 TROPHE NOL ANALYSIS BY W A. T E R TYPE
HIGH YCUOEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE MATES INDUSTRIAL EFFLULNT
6
468. C
62C.C
417.4
312c9
285.0
541.0
395.0
492.0
639.5
646.0
49C.C
640.4
253. C
978.2
452.6
259.8*
5
52C.O
622. C
497,6
197.7
447.0
421. C
514. C
564.0
7C1.0
339.!?
588. C
533.4
270. C
2527. C*
759.5
373.3
6
468. C
711.0
428.5
291.1
43C.O
441. r
548.0
481.0
516.2
915.0*
382*0
*98. 2
26?. 0
1769.6*
42C.5
279.4
5
52T.O
630.:-
5G7.7
224.5*
364 .C
447.T
253.0
58C.C
567.4
555. C
448. C
c.09.5
248. C
1332.4*
567t9
294.9
6
468.0
434.C
47S.3
189. r
345. C
552. G
425. C
4 jt . C
620.6
750.0
577. C
471.8
252.0
2905.2
568.3
321.5
520.C
6 fi 7 .0
42?.0
320. 5
328.C
434.r
454.0
733. P
713.<"
5 (. 4 . C
4-'5.6
270.C
1
465.?
344.7
4t8.:
C72.0
43J- .3
267.2
2o2.C
?9<;.?
5 5 V . C
5 5 ' . 2
3 5 4 . C
4£C.4
25t.C
148C.5'
41C .8
161.7
-------
TABLE C-175
AMPUL NC:
TRUF CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
1 2
«.0 9.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 2 , A-DICHLOROPHENOL ANALTSIS DY kAT£R TYPE
LOW VOUDFN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
8.C
c
9.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLl'ENT
1
E.C
n
9.C
1
e.r
2
9.G
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
2.3
8.7
2.5
5.9
9.8
5.6
7.0
5.0
8.1
8.6
9.0
11.3
7.6
7.6
T.4
5.9
8.6
11.8
4.9
8.7
6.9
6.2
5.2
9.4
8.7
10.9
12.7
2.9
14.3
5.3
4.3
7.5
7.2
4.4
13.5
8.C
6.5
5.4
7.6
8.1
8.8
1J.7
7.4*
7.4
3.8*
3.4
7.8
5.7
9.6
8.5,
5.0
6.6
C ">
> w
2.7
11.3
1C.1
12.3
18.3*
31.8*
5.7*
5 . 0
8.4
1.0*
4.6
6.6
6.4
c.e
5.4
8 . 9
7.6
7.4
1T.fr
2C.C*
9.«3
3.4*
5.8
8.9
3.5*
7.4
9.C
6.1
7.7
4.9
10.6
9.4
9.8
11.9
22. r*
9.4
2.9*
5.1
3.P
14.5*
5.4
4.8
6.2
7.4
9.4
8.6
7.8
9.6
8.2
21. T*
8.3
4.2*
i.9
4.C
11.3
5.8
6 .6
6.3
t .2
8.7
9.5
9.3
9.2
1?.i
19.7*
8.2
d.9*
-------
TABLE C-176
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
3
90.0
4
M.C
INVI fcONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTTON AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VAL1DAMON STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 2 ,4-DICHLOROPHENOL ANALYflS EY WATER TYPE
MEDIUM YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UC/L
TAP WATER
3
9C.C
4
81.0
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EfFLUtNT
3
9C.C
4
£1.0
3
9C.D
4
.c
00
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
45.3
89.3
130.9
71S?
96.4
81.8
73.9
61.9
101. C
73.3
78.5
93.2
247.1*
103.6
84.0
65.1
84.1
85.4
56. C
69.4
67.3
84.?
74.1
86.4
83.1
68.1
84.3
187.3*
68.7
61.4
55.8
84.0
41 ,P
1C7.C
PC. 5
58. 7
87.7
80.1
70.7
R2.2
68.1
97.7
1CA.O*
b8.7
7C.5*
5/.1
?2.8
5?. 4
6C.9
76. G
81.3
75.7
57.9
3*. 5
EC. 6
69.3
73.2
16C.7*
65.8
46.7*
61.2
91 .9
51 .4*
55. Q
129. C
97.4
7
-------
TABLE C-177
DISTILLED WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL KOMTOHING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIkONKENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 2 , 4-DICHLORCPHENOL ANALYSIS DY WATER TYPE
HIGH VOUDEfc PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
WATE R
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
VO
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
ft
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
54j.O
399.0
496.1
270.9
455.0
443.-0
442.0
434.0
597.7
629.0
525. P
424.2
294.0
1211.3*
650.1
281 .4
t
6CC.C
541.0
5C4.2
362.9
388.0
539.0
469.0
544.0
497.2
649.0
486. C
576.3
311. C
1020.6*
471.7
241.2
5
54C.3
387.:.
497.5
138.5
522.0
394.:
541.0
472. C
49C.1
32°. 3
473.0
'«C0.5
303.8
1443.7*
699.6
281 .3*
6
6CC.O
466.0
518.2
293.7
577.0
469.0
604.0
512.0
549.2
714.0
443. C
465.8
328.0
1561.5*
445.0
263.5*
5
540.0
361
455
164
353
418
224
46C
456
567.C
429.:
445.4
276.C
968.1*
575.6
252.:*
C
C
5*
0
C
C
C
1
6
600.0
39P.C
578.5
186.7*
533.0
591. C
531.:
53C.C
767.2
777.C
530.0
442.3
307.0
1485.9-
651.2
262.f*
5
540.0
404.0
44! .8
464.5
'76.C
38". r
42*.0
412.0
491 .7
626 .C*
431.0
37C.4
292.0
*
411 .6
257.2*
6
630.0
459. 0
537.9
475.?
352.G
499.0
546.:
6C1.2
7 1 1 . C
4u9,f,
4.C.I
146*.7*
443.7
136.0*
-------
TABLE C-178
ENVIRONMENT^ L MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAPOR*TO*Y
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
** EP» METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS *
RAk DATA FOR 2 , 4 -D 1 ME TH YL PHE NOL ANALYSIS RV WA'itR TYPE
LOW VOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONf
1
: 9.3
2
1 C . C
1
9.C
2
1C.C
Q
1
P
<-
2
K.C
9
1
.0
1C.O
to
° LAB NUMBER
1
1
1
yv 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
C
1
2
3
f
. 2
*\
. ',
.2*
.1*
.7
.7*
3.3*
7.4
7.9
6.6
6.2
5."
7.P
Q.6
11.5
12. 7
8.1
21.7*
29.9*
13.7
0,5*
0
1
22
?
1
C
11
1 ?
<5
1C
8
0
5
1
.C*
.2
.4*
.2
.7.
.0*
.1
n
.P
.4
.2
.C*
*
.?
.3
C -
1 .6
1 °. 2a
2.7
C.C*
c.c*
7.7
1C..7
fc.?
6.7
6.8
C.5*
46.6*
9.3
4.?
-------
TABLE C-179
fO
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
R
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
DISTILLED WATER
3 4
100.0 90.0
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 2 ,4-DI METHYLPHENOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
KEDIUK VOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
4
9C.O
3
1GC.C
4
9C.O
3
ico.r
9C.C
27.0*
83.7
TiO.n*
2 4 . 3 ~
73.5
75.4
69.3
71.0
72.7
79.2
64.5
122.2*
304.3*
62.4
114.0*
41.1*
78.4
64.9
41. P*
61.3
C.O*
79.5
101.0
62. C
65.3
52.6
121.0*
162.7*
66. 2
Id. 7
12.2
74.1
r.c*
33.2
64.2
56. t
"3.6
86.5
39.2
P7.9
51.2
139.0*
1212.2*
56. P
2.0*
11.5
65.4
C.O*
42.1
46.0
C.C*
7?. 7
57.4
26.6
66.6
56.9
61.4*
156.1*
57.4
7.6*
31.9*
88.6
45.9
33. 1
80. 6
C.9
44. 3
61 .5
74.7
1C2.C
62.9
1 : 2 . r *
59.3*
79.?
11 .4*
23.9*
53.9
72.6
32.4
66.7
6P.4
36.0
66.1
89.3
72.4
59.2
116.3*
121.6*
7P..F
1.9*
1C.1
66.2
102.3*
29.2
5.5*
3.3*
77. n
21.1
?7.r
46.5
54. C1
6.2*
1 1 3 . r
71.4
13.4
25.2
63.4
117. C*
21.1
c.c*
: .:*
52.7
31.4
66. C
56.7
62.7
r.c*
39.6
55.8
6.5
-------
TABLE C-180
to
to
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
\7.
13
14
15
NUMBFR
DISTILLED WATER
5
600.0
25C.O*
509.3
258.1
288.0*
33C.3
1C. 6
385.0
574.7
532.0
505.0
318.2
623.0*
1130.7*
316.0
348.8
ENVIRONMENTAL MOMTORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS *
RAW DATA FOR 2 ,4-D 1 K,E TH VLPHc NOL ANALYSIS BY HATER TYPE
HIGH fOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
6
667. C
319.0*
521.8
328.5
163.0*
477.0
3SP.3
5C4.C
596.3
627.0
482.0
449.3
722. C*
920.9*
522.8
439.0
5
60?. r
242. C
505.3
114.7*
329.0
356.7
66.1
43ii .P
556.C
294. P
467. C
286.3
766. D*
1744.5*
26E.2
21.2*
6
667.0
158.0
539.2
227.3*
158.0
'63.7
528. 7
481. C
505.0
654.0
4 5 C . 0
359.1
7 1 5 . f *
1312.2*
371.4
14C.7*
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
5
6CO.C
116. C*
473 ,7
149.8
214.0
369.1
6.P
3 5b . C
c- 1 3 . r
491. C
428. C
366.4
545. C*
767.2*
498.6
34.8*
6
667.0
UC.C*
603. C
165.9
3C1.0
G.C*
4C1 .7
391 .C
59C.4
769. C1
5(jC.O
355.4
43P.O*
2332.5*
30?. 6
58.4*
5
60C.O
202.5
i C 7 . 7
)l .C
1 .F.
6 ? 1 . r<
2C1.T
29! .1
0.0*
*
19.3
1C6.4
6
667. :
1 2 C . 5
495 .9
1 ji .f
1t . 1«
62 . r *
659,
376,
317,
141 ,
7u9,
245,
86 ,
C
5
C*
6
5
1
-------
TABLE C-181
to
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DcVELOPKENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
* EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS *
RAW DATA FOR 2 , A-D1N1TROPHENOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOh YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED kATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtNT
1
10P.O
2
9C.C
1C3.C
2
9C.O
1
100.0
tL
9C.O
1
1GO.O
2
9C.C
LAS NUMBER
1
?
3
4
5
fc
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
o.n*
82.2
0.0*
155.0
C.1 '
o.n*
27.2
C.O*
12C.T
70. 1
0.0*
74.1
C.C*
39.1
0.6
11.9
62.1
C.C*
173. C
9.9
60.6
4.0
C.O*
92.6
123. C
C.C*
19.9
C.O*
48-9
48.2
16.4
59.0
c.c*
4C2 .C*
9.2
36.4
16.7
67.9
43.°
131 .C
o.c*
73.9
C.C*
3C.5
S8.6*
4.4
53.0
C.O*
392. T*
P. 7
35.4
1C. 6
C.O*
95.3
65.9
C.O*
73. D
C.n*
6V. 3
E9.6*
79.1
76.9
:.r*
257. C*
4.0*
66.5
C.C*
16.3
124. C
164. C
C.C*
77.2
r.c*
5.9
63.4
16.7
77.7
r.c*
2 3 8 . C *
4.?*
4C.3
33. C
C.C*
i o 9 . r
n 7 . r
1 2 P . C
48,8
O.C*
1C. 7
2.2
39.?
50. «
O.C*
? 13 .C*
51.9
122. C
17.6
79.4
135.:
56.2
C.C*
7P."1
*
4.C s*
126. <»
£ . S
43.1
C.C*
let . C*
2 2 . t
53.1
13.7
r.c*
u c . :
1:1. :
o.c*
61 .t
157.3
19,4
7 P. ft
-------
TABLE C-182
N)
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CQ*C:
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
ft
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
ENVIRONMENTAL KOMTORING AND SUPPORT LAnORATO&t
OFFICE Of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS *
RAU DATA FOR 2 . 4-D1NITROPHENOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
PED1UF YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
DISTILLED MATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
3
200.0
4
180.0
3
2cc.:
4
1 e o .
3
::.o
13C.C
66.3
172.5
119. n
82.?
29.3
107.1
34.8
146.0
253.0
331.0
84. 4
150.4
0.0*
169.4
15.7
58
158
81
456
18
2C4
77
208
254
155
160
116
16
94
102
.8
.5
.3
.0*
.7
.C
.9
.4
. C
.0
n
o
.c
.5
.6
.7
79.4
163.5
C.C*
5 ,; 7 . C *
24.4
126.0
81. P
420.3
294.T
255. C
3(30.0
19?. C
r.c*
122.4
471.8*
40.3
137.2
64. S*
7 C 5 . 0 *
64.0
119.0
71.2
290.?
126.0
255.0
0.0*
127.6
C.C*
57.4
399.3*
1 !C
169
0
416
£6
228
142
159
1P5
1f 6
250
146
C
97
625
.0
. s
.C*
.r*
.0*
.0
.c
.c
.0
.c
.0
n
WJ
.C*
.4
. r*
54.2
149. C
0.0*
311 .0*
60.2*
144.0
9S.O
369.1
310. 3
291.0
233.7
149.0
O.C*
94. R
436.5
52
191
129
mo
91
1C9
186
359
293
189
200
180
6?
119
.4
.4
.C-
.0*
.7
.0
.0
.9
.?
.C
.0
.r
*
.0 .
.1
ut
11<5
9f=
121
9?
t 4
93
43C
239
12Z
0
let
99
294
. . '
c
. J*
. 0*
.7
.7
.6
. 7*
.C
.0
. C*
.9
*
.6
.C
-------
TABLE C-183
DISTILLED WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAF-ORATOPf
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDT - ACIDS *
RAW DATA FOR 2»4-DINITROPHENOL ANALYSIS 3V JATE.R TTPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE yATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
A«
-------
TABLE C-184
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
1
11.9
2
13.2
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAFGRATOM
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** f.PA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 2,4,6-TRIChLOROPHENOL ANALYSIS UV WATtR TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
11.9
13.2
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtM
1
11 .9
2
13.2
1
11.9
(L
i~*.2
LAB NUMBER
1
2
T
4
5
6
7
P
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
3.D*
12.2
5.6
7.8
12.4
10.0
9.4
5.5
15.4*
11.8
14.9
13.6
10.6
12.1
5.4
6
12
20
6
11
10
6
7
14
13
1o
16
2
22
7
.5*
.6
.7
.9
.6
.8
.4
.0
.1*
.2
.9
.3
.6
.9
.4
5.6
11.3
29.6*
6.3
:2.s*
11.9
9.5
10. C
12.2
11.9
12.6
13.7
3.1
12.1
5.4*
11.2
11.5
2t .?
14.8
11.5 .
8.1
8.7
8.6
14.9
14.5
14.8
16.1
2C.1
27.9
8.1*
6
1?
7
6
9
12
G
7
13
11
17
14
28
8
5
.4
.3
.4
.3*
.3
-»
1
^
.3
.«
.5
.5
C
» J
.4*
.4
.2
7
15
10
7
11
1C
10
7
13
13
16
15
33
12
7
.5
.0
.2
.1*
.9
.6
.2
.5
.3
1
I
f\
i
.8
.0
.8
.1
7.5
9.?
22.1
t .6
7.9
12.7
10.7
6.3
12.4
10.5
24. C'
1C. 9
*
13.3
5 .**
5
9
7
T
9
i T
Q
14
13
13
13
14
3fc
12
6
.7
.s
.7
3
.5
.3
>.
C
--
.5
.5
.6
.4
.0*
.1
.1*
-------
TABLE C-185
N>
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
DISTILLED WATER
3
59.0
4
66.C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 2 , 4 , 6-TRICHLOROPHENCL ANALYSIS BY WATLk TYPE
MEDIUM YCUDEN PAJR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFuUcNT
3
59.C
4
66.0
3
59.C
4
66.0
3
59.1
66 .
24.6*
61.2
100.7
33.5
58.7
62.4
47.0
43.8
66.5*
50.0
63.6
60.4
172.9*
37.6
51.7
42.1*
68.7
71. C
5C.7
56.1
73.4
63.7
62.4
77.4*
61.8
7C.1
66.6
143. C*
6?. 2
47.0
53.6
58.0
1 1 F. . 5 *
44.9
51.6
52.0
55.9
57.1
72.8
51.7
55.2
64. C
42.1
65.9
43.2*
4C.5
59.6
134.5*
38.3
6C.9 '
62.4
57.9
53.7
47.5
62.1
62.9
56.8
119.3*
67.4
4C.1*
35.6
62. T
46.0
32.8*
112.2*
59.4
47.8
53.7
72.7
64.1
57.1
62.2
24.1
59.6
40.5
36. C
66.0
34.3
34.6*
5°. 2
76.4
54.5
52.9
87.7
155.8*
73.0
6P.5
73.8
64.2
44.5
2° . 5
65.4
49.8
44.3
36.7
53.6
56.4
52.7
65 ,ft
46.4
57.2
59.8
175 .1*
5£ . 2
34.'*
AC. 3
69.1
119.6*
53.7
38.3
35. £
47.6
AS .9
67.9
47.0
£6.4
71.3
131.7.
66 . a
37.1«
-------
TABLE C-186
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACToS **
DISTILLED WATER
RAW DATA FCR 2 , 4 , 6-T R I CH LOROPH E NOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
HIGH YOUDEN PAlRt UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
t-o
oo
LAB
1
2
3
5
6
7
P.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NUMBER
5
440.0
286.0*
427.1
239.5
303.0
382.0
46C.O
354.0
527.4
531.0*
379.0
395.5
266. 0
959.3*
677.0
273.3
6
396.0
3 1 C . C *
355.1
254.7
249. C
345.0
396.0
378.0
370.3
467.0*
3C5.0
353.7
251. C
585.3*
374.3
236.5
5
440.0
429. C
4 1 2 . 7
Z99.5
514. C
286- 0
484.0
387. C
455.9
261.0
347. C
376.5
273. C
1283.4*
724.5*
280.2*
6
396.3
28C.O
355.4
423.2
435.0
293.0
474.0
352.0
2C7.6
51C.O
297.D
362.0
257.0
1155.1*
351.2
262.9*
5
44C.C
267.0
452.9
U5.1
253.0*
372.G
2 :: 4 . o
372.0
4C6.C
494.0
349.0
399. C
252. C
764.4*
541. P
279.8
6
396.0
244.0
409.C
146.3
283.0*
4 1 3 . C
438.0
363.0
478.6
532.0
325.0
327.2
250.0
1C39.9*
576.8
233.4
5
440.0
292.5
400.7
294.6
299.T
270. C
513.0
349.P
4 1 P. . 1
517.0
719.C
361.6
271 .0
428.2
246.9*
6
?96.C
272.5
789.1
142. «
132.C
1ti2.C
368
2S2
515
275
334
251
1106
368.7
236.6*
, Li
,5
i C
L
7*
-------
TABLE C-187
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPO&T LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA WETHOD 625 V«L1DAT10N STUDY - ACIDS **
PAW DATA FOR 4-CHLORO-?-"ETHYLPHEhOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOW YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC
-P-
K>
VD
1
: 9.0
2
10.
C
1
9.C
2
in.:
9
1
.C
2
1C.C
1
9.n
t
1C. 3
LAB NUMBER
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
i>
5
1.6
10.0
3.6
5.C
10.5
6.1
7.8
e.o
8.6
9.6
9.2
13.7
12.1
11.3
5.2
4.
9.
1C.
3.
9.
6.
7.
6.
9,
9.
10.
15.
2.
17.
5.
3
r-
8
p
0
8
1
1
*)
C
J
5
4
9
7
4
2.5*
7.8
C.O*
3.1
ir,6
B.1
7.7
5.P
9.:-
9.9
9.5
12.9
3.6
1C. 3
2.9
C.1*
P. 4
C.3*
5.7
5.9
C.O*
7.6
6.1
1.2
11.9
1C. 9
14.3
12.2
1C. 3*
5.6
4
5
1
i
7
3
1
y
9
9
8
1!
34
F
2
.4
.1
.5*
.9
.6
r-
t-'
c
^
.6
.?
.2
r
t.
.4
.9*
.9
.7
3.9
8.6
4.2*
5.6
9.1
7.4
9.4
5.F.
11.0
1^.4
11.1
14.6
7C.C-
11.4
3.C
5.2
1 .7
15.'
4.6
*.3*
7.7*
9.9
13.4
fl.9
t .f
11 .2
6.1
*
11 .6
2.7
3.7
2 .3
7.5
4 .9
4.5*
( .6*
7.£
11.C
1C.1-
9.7
1C. 9
11.3
*
* .9
7.0
-------
TABLE C-188
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLED WATER
3
133.3
A
9G.C
EKVI BONr*EMAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT
OFflCt OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** FPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FCR 4 -C HL C KO-3-KE TH YLPHE NOL ANALYSIS BY . A T E
tfEDIUf YCL'OEN PA1S, UNITS - UC/L
TAP WATER
10:. :
4
90.:
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUEf. T
1CC.C
4
90.0
3
ICG."
9C.'
TYPE
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
42
92
160
50
96
92
81
72
105
79
79
112
34C
6
95
.7
.2
.2
.6
.3
.4
.6
.4
.0
.2
.1
.3
.«*
.8
.9
5K.7
87.7
96. C
52.0
74. C
48. C
88.1
67. 1
96.7
t6.5
68.3
99.2
175.0*
98.7
77.3
13
87
3
65
46
72
99
69
27
89
64
116
97
87
56
.3*
.4
.6*
.1
.«
.4
< T
.6
.2
.9
*0
o
.6
.6
.7
41.1*
75.3
3.5*
39.6
77.2
11.3
61.7
65.3
19.1
85.1
7d.7
£7.1
163.5*
ec.3
54.6
6C.9
97.9
55.?*
49.1
11C.C
39.8
83.7
96.2
1C6.T
1C8.C
t6.4
113. C
12C.6*
91.7
65.3
51.4
69.?
29.8*
37.9
76.4
87.1
71.3
69.2
1 C 4 . C
75. H
83.6
102. C
111.2*
86. 1
46.9
48.9
61.1
1C4.3
64.4
47.8*
56.2*
93.2
77.7
1C5.1
74.4
67.1
96.1
1 2 P . 1 *
34.6
57.8
51
7C
114
42
.55
13
62
65
£1
62
£2
67
353
61
51
.7
. *
. <5
.3
. 3
. 0*
r
.C
.5
.C
. ft
.1
.4*
.9
.6
-------
TABLE C-189
DISTILLED WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPOflT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 6?5 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
RAW DATA FOR 4-CHLCRO-3-fETHVLPHENOL ANALYSIS BY *ATEfi TYPE
HIGH VOUDEN PAIRt UMTS - UG/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE HATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUfcNT
u>
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
LAB NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5
630.0
386.0
525.7
344.3
399. C
463. G
313.0
459. C
777.0
643. G
548.0
526.7
36f .3
1239.3*
456.3
406.7
6
667
508
545
464
359
C
460
616
613
7CO
512
754
654
979
433
352
.C
.C
.4
.3
.C
,,0*
.0
.0
.4
.C
.c
.4
.0
.8
.1
.5
6 CD
254
533
118
43S
397
356
533
637
278
496
551
375
1839
564
333
b
.C
.C*
.8
.3*
.0
.C
.r
.c
.1
n
w
.C
.7
.C
.8*
.r
.4
667
372
54?
262
4£5
492
62 ~.
553
739
629
48T
63?
698
1362
4C7
346
t
.0
.2*
»4
.3*
. 3
*'
. G
. 0
.3
.3
. C
. S
.0
.5*
.3
.8
5
6uC.C
? 1 7 . :
543.7
215.6*
277 .C
;;s.r
1 1 7 . C
477. C
523.5
594.0
4S£. C1
611.7
346. P
967.7*
536.2
283.6
6
667.0
364.0
638.7
263.?*
449. C
6 4 6 . P
592. r
592. G
787.1
816. C
557. C
615.3
381 .P
2C60.3*
SS3.3
32<3.9
60P.C
372.0
452.5
545.1
2S2.C
129.r,
1C 5. CM
458.r
613.8
66^ .0
4 7 r . 0
431.3
341.C
1
'94.6
342.'
6
667.C
54f .7
5*2.9
236.0
212.C*
397.C*
556.C
633.1
f. 3 2 . C
417.0
577.9
623.C
116S . 1*
4^2.6
1 7 0 . C
-------
TABLE C-190
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
DISTILLEJ WATER
1
21.6
2
24. C
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LAFGRATO&t
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** FPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS **
DATA FOR 4-N 1 TROPHE NOL ANALYSIS BY WATER TYPE
LOU YOUDEN PAIR, UNITS - UG/L
TAP WATER
1
2-;. t
2
24. C
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUEM
1
21.6
2
24.0
1
21 .6
2
24.0
LAB NUMBE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
R
0.0*
9.9
0.0*
41.7*
17.3
3.1*
3.3
6.S
12.5
2C.6
23.?
15.1
0.0*
0.1*
9.2
2.8
13.1
5.3
19.5
8.2
2.C
3.3
4.2
36.9
1C.O
30.8
12. S
r.c*
C.C*
12.6
3.2
C.C*
7.1
1S.9*
6.8
C.O*
1.5
12.2
55.6*
8.5
17. r
16.3
C.C*
C.C*
12.2*
C.S*
c.o*
2 * . 5
32.6*
4.4
C.?*
4.3
1C. 6
1 0 . 0
7.0
28.2
12,3
C.3*
C.j*
21.3*
4
3
C
26
13
n
r
r
w
29
6
12
16
C
21
14
.3
.?
.0*
. c,
. ?
. r a
.C*
.C*
.6
.1
.4
.6
.C*
.C
.C*
o.c*
5.5
r.o*
2i- .C
5 .6
C.C*
2.4
8.3
;. 2.8
13.7
15.2
12.7
?.C*
C.C*
15.3*
p
C
r
7 1
1 "I
f
I.
3
31
13
?
20
20
56
34
.0*
.C*
.n*
C
9 '-
. 3*
P
.0
.2
.2
.5
r
. ^
*
.3
.?*
c
r
L'
C
1P
c
*"
n
2t
19
9
28
13
67
i6
.6
. C *
. C *
.4
.: *
. G*
.t
.5
.6
. £
.4
.4
*
.2*
.2*
-------
TABLE C-191
POMTORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA METHOD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS *
RAW DATA ?OR 4 -N 1 T ROPHE NOL ANALYSIS Fi V WATER TYPE
HfDIU* YOUDEN PAIR, UMTS - UG/L
DISTILLED WATER
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUtM
AMPUL NO:
TRUE CONC:
u>
OJ
3
108.0
4
120.0
3
1C?.0
4
120. 0
3
1C3.0
4
120. C
103
3
.0
4
12C.
0
LAB NUMBER
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
33.0
45.1
123.8
92.5
59.6
66.7
9.3
27.2
110.0
55.6
57.3
58.6
0.0*
84.1
51.1
43.6
305.1*
38.2
100.0
44.7
13C.C
12.6
105.7
7C.8
109. C
51.3
60.?
114.1
51.4
65.1
37.4
34.5
63.7
154.0*
30.5
:.D*
16.'
6<3.2
6C.3
92.7
5£ .8
6 C.I
r.C*
84.2
115.8*
31.2
35.5
74.1
79.6*
98.5 '
C.3*
26.3
72.7
112.0
1C2.C-
62.6
55.4
C.O*
c.o*
Ut.C*
35.1
76.4
C . C*
U2.:
78.3
fc6.1
16.?
68.5
46.2
1 C 0 . C
56.6
59. T
r.:*
63.6
126.7*
49.4
49.9
31.9*
1 (jr; .0
36.2
102. C
14.1
69. P
78. C
61.8
85.5
62.6
C.O*
58.4
175.9*
41
6
91
139
48
196
21
69
65
82
63
57
72
141
.9
.5*
. 2
^
. .
.2
.0*
.4
.5
.7
.7
. <-
.2
*
i
. s
.P*
45.
7.
1 ui .
8C.
43.
67.
16.
«.7.
45.
56.
7f .
74.
9< o
177.
3
1*
5
1
C
1
3
6
7
9
1
*
c
5*
-------
TABLE C-192
ENVIRONMENTAL KCNITORING AND SUPPORT LAUORATOPY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
** EPA KETHCD 625 VALIDATION STUDY - ACIDS
DISTILLED LATER
RAW DATA FOR 4 -N 1 TROPHE NOL ANALYSIS BY WATtR TYPE
HIGH YOUOEN PAIR, UNITS - Ufc/L
TAP WATER
SURFACE WATER INDUSTRIAL EFFLUINT
AMPUL NO:
ThUE CONC:
NUMBER
5
«oc.o
320.0
1882.1<
402.«
626.P
276. f
43C.O
331.0
633.5
1120.0
E34.0
344.1
249.0
852.6
349.1
555.3
6
720.0
286.C
1622.1*
369.9
434.0
C.C*
347.0
364.0
767.0
405.G
801.0
379.0
23P.C
381.8
28£.6
579.9
5
*i/:.c
284.:
431.5
313.4
7SP.T*
215.0
42r.P
36P.C
P69.1
229.0
S72.C
527.5
264. C
4649.4*
249.1
1264.7*
6
72:. c
31? .:
233.3
V., 3 . 1
66C.C*
215.0
575. IJ
6 1 3 . C
741.3
54C.3
494.0
43C.8
245.0
6C2.3
297. P
1U5.2*
5
f c : . c
?32.r
356.2
32:. 1*
364. C
155. C
352.0
361,:
840.4
12CC.C*
563.C
477.1
23S.C
537.3
57t.4
1308. 1*
6
720. C
236. C
269. C
227.1*
5 1 6 . r;
5 1fc . Z
695. C
212. C
905. P
391. r
799.0
4C9.7
220.0
206C.P*
?C7,6
1C91.S*
5
800.r
391 ,
731
271
69^,
,n
,p»
,6
,C
190.r
PC7.r.
326.r
.7
57F.C
777.:
454.^
?t2.C
393.1
1164.9*
1
C
72 C . 1
25^.1*
296.?
379.C
257.:
414.C
33f" .0
1G*.i
1 4 7 C . C *
4K .2
24F.C
75C.C*
175.2
£56. <:
-------
TABLZ C-L93
BLANK VALUE! FOR VALIDATION ANALYSES - CISTILLEC HATER
C3«P-UKP
iCESAPMTMFVC
»c;»i APHThYL!i*E
ALDRIN
iNTHPICENE
o.»MC
2FN70IA)AMKRACEKE
9ENZO( A)PYREKE
?E.«?.?'E>*LLORANTt-Enr
9IS(?-C**LC»CETHYL)ETHER
JI-K-OUTYLFMHALATF.
^IREKZ-tA»K)ANTHPACEVE
9IETI-YL °NTMLATE
CNOCSULFAH SULF'TE
FLUOPaNTHEKT
HF.PTACML3*
HCXACHL3li~EnZENE
IS9P"?R;NE
:AP»TNAL£NE
PC9* 1 2 & 9
1 ^-f!T{"HLrtRrRFh7F ftf
itJ~Uit.nkwl*lDtn£L ITt
2.6-CIKITRCTCLUENE
3.3t-OIChLCRC8lEN'I01Nf
-CHLJR'TPHEML "(-EKTL ETrER
.*«-ODD
4,4. «n Q£
"^SJJlrLL-JlNlfhE"
\
0
g
G
9
r
f
g
3
3
2.4
C
c
c
0
c
0
o
c
0
g
9
;
ft
7
'c
t
r
C
C
g
0
c
2.8
C
2.2
C
C
c
c
e
c
r
0
e
Q
g
c
c
c
c
c
1
g
0
9
c
a
c
g
g
g
9
0
g
3
0
*
9
r<
9
g
3
A
9
0
9
9
9
« 5 6 7
9 9 0.8 0
3 0 :.B t
9 ? 0 0
3 ! 1.2 C
9999
o g c 9
9 « 0 I
o 3 r c
0 C C t
l.« 1.1 0 C
3 9 : C
7.8 3 9 C
9991]
9 0 C 9
9900
9 0 3 C
3 9 C C
3.4 0 1.3 9
3900
On n n
J U U
a : g o
0095
0 8 C 9
9030
8 9 9 C
0300
8 S
0 3
3 0
9 9
5 9
3 9
3 0
0 0
J ft.
3 C
2.7 3.3
3 0
3.1 9
0 9
9 0
3 3
9 9
0 9
9 0
9 9
^ 1*
. U
9. 0
(I 0
3 0
3 1
3 9
3 9
10
0
9
9
3
9
ft
9
3
"
1.2
9
3
a
9
9
9
0
9
9
?
9
9
3
3
3
11
3
0
9
9
9
ft
9
0
9
0
3
9
9
3
9
0
9
9
9
3
9
9
ft
9
12
9
C
1
3
U
3
3
9
5
3
9
ft
9
9
3
0
9
3
3
9
9
3
9
0
9
13
9
0
9
9
C
9
n
9
9
9
9
9
0
9
0
'.
3
=
9
0
3
g
c
ft
14 1«
o g
9 0
; g
26.1 0
9 0
3.1 0
n ft
"; 9
9 9
l.o 0
9 J
9.T 0
9 0
9 9
0
9 0
9 0
0 S
; a
9 0
? 9
9 5
9 0
0 0
3 9
BENZYL BL'TU Pl-THALATE
?ISC2-CHL?RCETt-3»Y»°YRENE
|-NITROi-OI-K-P'»CPYLAI1ISE
UTRCBENZEKt
1.2-OIOLCROP.ENZEKE
1.2.4-TPIOLCROFENZENE
2-CHLORINAFhlHALENC
2,»-OINITRCT:LUENE
«-B»CKOPHEMl "t-EKYL ETI-ER
«.4'-OCT
435
-------
TABLE C-194
VAHOAT101 AKAI.YSES - 7»i
LABORATORY
co».*u»c
tCENAPHTHFNE
ACE^'PWTHY'. EM.
JNTHtACEME
3-5HC
9ENZ9£THc'R
TI-N-BUTYLF^THALATE
? IP ENZOf t.h) ANTHRACENE
OIETHYL PHTMIATE
EN^JSULfAN SL'LFITE
r-LUORA«ITHE*E
HEPTACHL?R
"EXACHLORIBENZENE
! S3P>"3R3tAMHE"C
ITNZTL auTYt PMTUALATE
?IS(2-CHIOR5FTHO»Y> "ETHANE
3 ISCJ-OLORCISQPRCPYL^T^R
'iIS(2-ETH»LfCXYL)°HTHAl.ATE
CHRYSENE
1-8HC
H-K-OCTYlPI-TMALATE
">IFLC» It
3IHETHYL PfTHALITE
"NOR IN ALPEt* YC£
CLUO»:NE
-E°TACHLO» F.FOXICE
lEXACHLOROBUTAOIENE
MrXA'-ML-ROF^ANE
INOEN3PYRENf
4-NnR3iCDI-k-P"?0YLAHl»«E
"IT'OflENJEHF
PHEN AN IH RENE
"YREkt
1 .2-OICHLCRCBESZESE
1.2«»-TRlCn:ROEENZrNE
l.^-OIC-L'JRCBENZLKE
2-CHL3RONAFK7HALENE
2.«-OINIT>'CTCLUEKE
4-8Ro«c.'rfJ:kYL °"EKYL ETHER
»,» s-OOT
1
9
C
3
3
C
3
r
J.S
C
;
r
t
C
c
9
C
a
9
9
*
C
9
0
0
C
2..
1.2
1
0. 7
j
C
^
f
C
c
)»
c
9
9
9
3
C
0
c
f.
9
C
C
c
9
2
C
0
c
c
c
0
9
9
f
0
9
9
r
9
9
C
C
5
0
C
t
9
e
c
0
c
c
c
f
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
9
C
0
C
9
C
C
3
9
0
9
0
0
9
9
3
.3
3
9
9
9
f
0
2.7
0
0
0
9
C
9
9
9
9
9
9
2.6
9
9
9
5
0
D
3
3
9
9
0
9
3
9
1!
0
r
3
9
C
9
0
1
a
9
0
9
9
C
0
0
9
9
1 .«
0
11.9
9
9
9
3
9
9
3
9
0
0
9
9
9
0
9
9
9
9
a. i
9
9
C
0
9
9
0
9
0
9
9
9
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
3
0
K
9
9
3
9
1
!
C
1.
9
1
3
9
9
3
3
9
9
3
ft
9
9
9
3
9
9
3
9
3
J.5
3
3
C
»
1.6
9
9
3
9
3
ft
0
9
9
3
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
*
1 .0
1 A
0
1.2
C
C
D
9
C
C
3
C
3
0
ti
I
1 .!
9
0
;
9
C
9
0
0
C
9
1.1
; .9
.1
0
9
0
C
3
9
C
C
9
9
1.2
i;
9
5
C
C
0
c
c
-
0
0
c
0
3
c
c
c
c
*
9
9
3
9
9
?
0
;
9
9
9
9
C
C
9
£
C
C
0
0
1.2
9
C
9
C
9
9
9
0
9
C
C
r
c
0
c
t
0
0
c
0
9
9
H
,
3
3
^
i
9
0
0
1.1
9
1.*
1
1
0
3
3
0
0
9
J
3
0
3
0
9
o
l.C
9
3
<1
3
3
3
3
3
3
9
3
9
9
9
0
3
9
3
3
3
ft
9
9
9
9
'
3
0
3
9
3
9
0
3
9
9.9
9
3
9
9
0
9
3
;
9
9
3
9
9
3
9
9
ft
0
0
9
1.6
9
9
9
9
9
ft
ft
9
9
9
9
9
9
a
3
9
9
n
9
9
3
3
19
,
0
3
»
C
0
0
J
"7
9
9
ft
9
9
C
0
ft
9
9
3
9
"
9
9
9
9
*
9
0
? 2
3
9
9
3
"
5
9
0
9
9
n
3
9
9
3
n
3
C
0
9
ft
9
11
9
9
9
:
0
0
a
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
3
3
9
3
C
9
0
9
3
9
3
9
9
9
0
C
9
9
9
9
9
3
0
9
9
9
0
9
3
0
0
0
0
0
ft
c
»
9
9
9
3
9
3
9
9
1.3
9
0
3
9
9
9
9
9.6
ft
0
0
9
1
9
9
9
0
0
0
9
5 .6
3
3
9
9
0
9
9
n
9
9
ft
9
0
9
9
9
9
0
0
0
9
0
JI
3
A
9
5
9
?
9
0
9
9
9
3
9
9
9
9
C
3
J
0
9
0
3
3
9
9
9
9
0
3.1
9
9
9
0
0
ft
9
9
0
9
9
0
9
9
9
3
9
9
9.!
0
9
9
3
1*
0
n
!«.«
0
1.2
9
ft
ft
1.1
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
ft
9
9
9
9
0
9
D
0
0.9
3
9
1 .'
9.*
9
9.2
9.S
9
9
ft
9
9
0
3
9
3
1..
9
9
C
e
1.9
3..
1
9
1«
9
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
0
9
ft
0
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
9
9
0
9
9
9
0
0
9
0
9
0
9
0
9
9
0
9
0
9
C
9
9
0
0
0
9
9
ViLUEi
«»">ULES
436
-------
TABLE C-195
VALUES FOR VALIDATION AKIYSEJ - PYRENr
'C I-H-P'CPTLAHINE
ZEUT
'EKE
'L3RCEEK7EKE
ICMlCPCiSENZrnt
LCRCEEf.ZENE
INAFrTHALEVE
TRCTCLUENE
0
g
n
g
^
3
p
p
g
c .«
c
c
c
c
0
c
0
3
n
9
g
1
C
9
0
C
c
c.e
0
g
0
g
:
c
;
0
9
C
0
C
:
9
p
9
9
9
9
9
g
0
t
0
c
c
r
c
r
12. g
g
c .6
C
C
g
c
c
g
c
c
c
c
e
g
c
t
c
c
.4
C
? .6
11. »
C
C
1 C *
'
?
e
c
c
c
:
c
g
c
c
c
t
0
c
c
c
c
0
c
e
g
2.7
9
9
0
9
9
p
g
3.3
g
0
g
0
p
(i
n
0
9
9
9
"
t
ft
9
0
0
g
0
g
g
w
c
9
9
C
0
0
0
0
g
g
n
3
9
rj
9
ft
0
0
0
9
g
0
o
9
0
9
9
0
g
1.1
g
9
3
0
0
g
p
;
C
g
0
c
g
g
g
9
9
9.«
9
3
3
;
J.»
3
C
a
a
a
g
0
g
9
i)
9
g
a
9
C
*
g
c
p
p
9
0.9
C
P
9
9
9
9
g
9
p
g
p
3
?
0
g
c
p
0
9
9
9
0
9
C
9
3
0
1
9
9
p
9
p
ft
(i
g
0
9
g
g
g
e
«.j
c
1.8
2.8
0
J
0
0
0
0
0
c
c
3
c
c
;
9
c
7.4
p
c
0
0
c
7
3
1.9
g
c
5.2
3
C
C
g
9
3
0
J
9
C
1.8
C
C
9
;
9
C
C
C
0
0
1
:
c
0
c
c
0
c
c
0
0
p
9
c
0
c
9
9
e
r
c
g
g
c
c
c
9
g
c
c
0
g
c
p
0
6
3
(1
0
0
g
g
g
g
g
p
c
0
3
0
0
0
0
>
1
0
3
3
0
1.1
3
1.2
9
0
9
1
3
9
9
0
3.
9
3
3
9
C
9
9
9
3
0
g
(i
g
0
3
9
9
9
g
(i
9
9
?
9
3
3
1
9
g
9
3
9
9
1
1
3
p
0
1
a
0
3
9
1
g
3
"
:
3
c
n
g
0
p
g
g
3
T
*
9
9
n
9
3
"
g
P
0
»
t
9
g
9
9
g
g
g
3
9
g
3
g
9
3
a
9
0
;
p
0
3
p
3
0.9
5
3
C
0
3
0
1!
9
1
9
C
C
9
9
9
g
3
0
P
9
^ t
1
9
3
0
9
0
9
g
5
g
rj
9
0
9
9
C
a
9
9
0
C
g
9
9
0
9
9
0
a
3
3
0
0
9
9
C
g
3
3
g
9
g
0
g
9
g
g
g
g
g
9
9
In o
j r
9
g
9
0
g
9
9
3
9
g
5
p
9
g
g
9
g
9
3
0
9
g
g
g
3
0
P
9
9
C
0
1.0
g
3
9
g
3
g
9
c
9
g
g
3
g
9
g
9
5
l.»
9
9
9
9
9
9
g
0
9
1
9
9
C
9
0
g
g
g
g
0
3
g
c
0
0
9
g
g
3
9
0
3
9
g
a
0
9
g
j
0
?
»
0
9
0
9
9
3
C
9
g
9
0
0
3
3
9
9
9
3
9
g
9
0
9
9
9
9
0
0
g
g
3
3
0
C
0
g
0
g
9
3
;
9
9
0
9
0
n
9
9
g
3
"
9
g
g
g
9
9
g
9
9
9.6
g
9
19.6
9
0
0.3
9.1
0
3
1.6
n
g
g
9
9
9.3
l.S
9
n
1 .9
g
i.g
g
3.3
9
0
g
»
g
g
5
0
g
0
1.3
g
g
9
g
3
0
e
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0.*
0
0
"2.3
g
0
9
0
g
0
3
0
3
g
9
g
n
9
a
g
0
g
0
c
u
g
437
-------
VILIC!
TABLE C-196
V»LID»MCN imiTSTS - I»CUST«1«L EFFLUENT
COHPCUHO
ICENtPKTHfliE
»CEN»»HTHYLENE
1J34-(,7»C10
3 t 0 0 27.3 1.40 : 3 C
C t 0 C 63.41.79 3 C 0
11
0
12
0
C
15
13.1
a
i« i?
0 0
9 9
Mf »CENE
PMTr»L»T£
tN SUFITE
S4PHTM4LESE
CHL3«3»Mf Ml P"ENTl £!>£»
«,4«-000
«,«'-OCE
1EN'S»K)'LCCI»*NT (£!«'
BE1ZYL 8LTYt. PM
2[S<2-CT"Yl>£jouTH»'..»*E
-"-.ȣ HE
H-1-OCTYLPMTMIl.ME
1IFLCRIN
fTICHLC» EFCJICE
fEX»CML3R381,T»OIE»fC
"EX.CML3II3ETMNE
PYMEfiE
1.2-OICH.-HCBE»Zt»E
2.«-OINITRCTCLUtNC
-"HCBCPx'kYL PHEIiYl ETM£«
«.»«-OCT
3
C
ft
f
f.
C
c
0
ie
1
c
0
c
1.0
c
0
ft
ft
3
3
:
^
0
c
;
2 .(
»
r
2.'
0
n
C
3
C
C
;
C
C
c
c
3
C
C
1.)
a
3
3
3
0
0
9
t
t
f
f
C
3
C
C
c
0
0
c
0
W
0
c
t
c
c
(1
3
t
C
t
ft
(
c
c
ft
3
0
C
0
c
c
c
c
t
c
0
c
c
t
0
0
c
e
o
9
C
"
ft
0
0
c
9
0
3
9
n
0
9
f
C
0
0
3
C
r
0
a
c
3
3
0
0
0
9
0
9
9
0
C
ft
9
9
C
ft
3
9
9
P
9
3
0
C
J
3
0
9
a
0
3
0
7.3
0
0
9
3
3
A
0
0
0
ft
0
0
0
0
3
9
0
0.7
3
0
?
0
3.?
3
3
C
9
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
9
27.3
63.*
1
:
i
e
0
0
9
9
C
i'O
"
0
c
6.I.-
A
0
C
1161
0
0
9
3
9
9
C
9
9
;
9
0
*
9
P
n
5
9
9
3
e
9
19."
6
3
3
9
9
e
A
9
l.» 9
1 .7 3
0 C
l.i C
; t
3 3.7
C 3
0 0
C C
t 0
: i.o
r, o
C.3 9
e o
0 3
C C
2.3 r
A fl
0 0
0 S
0 C
C t
0 0
9 C
C C
C C
: 1.7
C 0
0 C
9 7.2
C C
C 9
0 1.6
C 9
t 9
C 0
0 0
9 t
? t
9 0
0 C
C C
0 0
2.« 9
o ;.<»
c ;
c c
0 0
0 1
0 9
9 8
C 0
: 3
1 C
0 C
o :
3 i
3 9
3 3
C 3
0 C
9 1
2.3 0
3 9
!) 3
9 0
9 3
9 3
3 5
A A
9 3
9- 9
0 9
3 3
3 9
9 0
9 0
: 9
3 9
3 C
3 3
) 9.4
i a
3 ?
3 9
3 9
1 0
9 3
3 9
3 0
3 0
9 9
0 9
9 9
9 9
9 0
t 9
* 3
3 3
9 3
9 0
9 9
9 9
3 9
C
0
3
;
3
n
0
ft
e
3
3
0
0
3
5
C
n
0
9
:
'
3
ft
ft
c
;
G
"
t.5
C
9
:
9
C
C
ft
(1
9
9
f
0
"
9
0
«
0
J
0
0
3
3
0
"
3
3
3
3
C
C
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
9
9
9
0
3
0
0
0
9
0
0
3
0
9
3
9
3
0
0
9
P
9
9
9
0
9
9
9
9
j
0
3
3
0
C
9
0
C
9
3
9
9
9.2
3.5
9
9
0.4
C
9
3
3
9
3
0
1
9
7
9
9
9.4
9
9
3
9
1.6
9
9
3.2
9
C
9
9
0
C
9
0
9
9
9
0.5
0
9
9
0
9
0
9
13.1
9
3
70.1
9
9
"
0
9
0
n
9
9
9
9
0
3
9
0
0
9
9
9
9
3
298
0
0
's.;
9
9
9
3
0
0
9
0
9
0
9
1.7
79.1
13.9
0
9
9
0
0
0
9
0
9
0
8.7
9
9
0
0
0
0
C
3
0
9
9
0
A
0
9
0
C
A
0
9
0
ti.a
c
9
?.
ft
0
3.3
?*
9
9
0
9
0
0
3
0
9
9.9
0
n
9
0
C.7
9
9
9
9
9
3
9
e
9
9
9
0
0
9
0
9
0
0
9
0
9
0
0
«
i)
9
0
9
0
9
0
9
8
f
9
9
0
a
0
0
3
0
e
a
c
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
438
-------
TABLE C--197
BLANK VALUES FOR VALIDATION ANALYSES - DISTILLED WATER
l»eC»»TORY
COHP-HnO
PENT4CHL3KCPKKCL
PHCNOL
2-CHLDROPHEKOL
J-iETHYL-4 tf-riNITR^FUFNt
?-fi I TR QPHt MTL
2,4-DI CHfRCFHt'fCl
2«4-C-IHETHYl r H f K r' L
?. t-01 MTR CF-ff »^L
2,4,t,-jq ICK.1R OKHENOL
t-CHURO-'-rrTHY', PHENOL
t-Hl TROPHEK ^L
1
0
0
0
31 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1 .5
0
0
1.1
0
0
2.."
0
0
0.3
J.9
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
1.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
*
0
0
0.7«
3
0
0
0
0
3.7«
11.1
2.6*
0
3
0
6
70.5
1.4
U
C
0
0
1.7
0
0
0
c
7
C
0
c
c
c
a
c
f
0
0
0
f
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
s
c
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
a
0
0
to
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
c
G
a
11
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
12
ti
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
9
i
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
3.4
0
0
0
1.3
0
14
0
1.4
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
15
0
2.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
« VMLUES ; -? A"FUL£S 2
5.
-------
TABLE C-198
BLANK VALUES FOR VALIDATION ANALYSES - TAP WATER
PHFNOL
2-NITRTPHEKCL
-P-
->
O
2.1-OIMTRrfrFfoL
2,t.£-TRJOLOROPHENOL
4-NI
L4PORATORY
7 8 5
11
13
15
2.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
p
0
0
2.*
O.fl
c
6.9
C.I
C.2
'.7
e.;
0.2
C.t
£.5
0
n
0
0
0
0
0
c
3.2
0
0
0
1.7
0
£1
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
1 .7
2 1
G
r,
a
1.3
p
t
0
0
0
3
0
0
c
G
2.3
Q
C
C
0
0
0
0
r,
0
0
0
c
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 0
Q 0
Q 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Q
)
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Q
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
c
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0.9
9
0
G.3
0
0
0
0
2.0
n
0
0
0
0.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
TABLE C-199
BLANK VALUES FOR VALIDATION ANALYSES - SURFACE WATER
LABORATORY
COH°9UMO
PENTftCHL-'RCFKNaL
PHENOL
'-CHLORTPHE KOL
2-HETHYL-*,t-CINITROPHENCL
'-NiTROPHOci.
2.4-DI CHLORCFhENOL
? t»-DIrtETHYlt-hEKOL
2t4-riMTNCFl-EM>L
2,
-------
TABLE C-200
BLANK VALUES FOR VALIDATION ANALYSES - INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT
LABORATORY
-P-
-JS
N>
COMPOUKC
FCUTACHLORCPhCKOL
PhFNOL
2-CHLOROPHEKCL
2-METrtYL-l.ft-DlNITROPHENCL
2-N1TROPHEKOL
2«4-niCHL"R3Ft-EM)L
?»*-DIKETHtLlrnEKOL
?t4-DIMTRCFhEM3L
2t4,*-TRICH.CROPhEI>'OL
4-CHLORO-3->'CTKYLPHF:'OL
4-NITROPHEKCL
1
17.4
0
0
0
0
0
7.5
0
0.*
0
0
2
14.4
1 .1
? .1
10.0
2.0
E.3
= .3
?2.7
4.2
£.9
1C. 2
3
0
30.2
0
0
3.2
0
7.5
0
8.3
6.7
0
«
0
1.4
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
c
5
0
1R60
21 .9
0
0.7
C
2.1
0
0
0
0
6
0
1.5
0
0
0
0
1 .9
0
0
0
c
7
0
c
0
0
c
0
c
0
0
0
c
a
3
3
0
0
0
0
n
D
0
C
G
"
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
a
n
0
0
a
0
a
0
0
0
11
a
c
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
12
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
c
0
0
a
0
0
0
14
3
1.0
0
0
0
0
? ."
0
0
0
0
"
0
9 .9
D
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
(1
-------
TABLE C-201
PERFORMANCE SAMPLE FOR METHOD 625
Compound Concentration - pg/L
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 7.0
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 15.2
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 23.0
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 12.3
Hexachlorobutadiane 37.4
iGophocone 50.2
Naphthalene 85.2
2-Nitrophenol 2J .6
Pentachlorophenol 10.1
Di-n-octylphthalate 20.4
Fluorene 45.1
Pyrene 22.3
Dieldrin 37.2
4,4'-DDE 11.2
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 15.2
Biphenyl* 20.0
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene** 23.0
N-nitrosodi-n-propyl amine 27.1
Nonpriority pollutant interference.
Did not go completely into solution.
443
-------
APPENDIX D
EPA METHOD 625 - B/N AND ACIDS
United Spates
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmento1 Monitoring and
Support Labora.ory
Cincinnati OH 45268
ich and Development
Base/Neutrals and Acids
Method 625
1. Scope end Application
1.1 This method covers the determi-
nation of a number of organic
compounds that are partitioned into an
organic solvent and are amenable to
gas chromatography. The parameters
listed in Tables 1 and 2 may be
qualitatively and quantitatively
determined using this method.
1.2 The method may be extended to
include th« parameters listed in Table 3.
Benzidine can be subject to oxidative
losses during solvent concentration.
o-BHC, r-BHC, endosulfan I and II, and
endrin are subject to decomposition
under the alkaline conditions of the
extraction step. Hexachlorocyclopenta-
diene is subject to thermal decomposi-
tion in the inlet of the gas chromatc-
graph, chemical reaction in acetone
t»olution and photochemical decompo-
sition. N-nitrosodimethylamine is
difficult to separate from the solvent
under the chromatographic conditions
described. N-nitrosodiphenylanrvne
decomposes in the gas chromato-
graphic inlet and cannot be separated
from diphenylamine. The preferred
method for each of these parameters is
listed in Table 3.
1.3 This is a gas chromatography/
mans spectrometry (GC/MS) method
applicable to the determination of the
compounds listed in Tables 1, 2, and 3
in municipal and industrial discharges
as provided under 40 CFR 136.1. Until
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency establishes performance cri-
teria based upon the results of inter-
laboratory testing, any alternative
GC/MS method which meets the per-
formance criteria described in Section
8.2 will be permitted. Performance
must be verified for such modification
by analyzing wastewater as described
in Section 8.2.2. In addition, the
laboratory must successfully partici-
pate in the applicable performance
evaluation studies.
1.4 The method detection limit (MDL,
defined in Section 16)<'> for each
parameter is listed in Tables 4 and 5.
The MDL for a specific wastewater
differ from those listed, depending
upon the nature of interferences in the
sample matrix.
1.5 This method is restricted to use
by or under the supervision of analysts
experienced in the operation of gas
chromatograph/mass spectrometers
and skilled in the interpretation of mass
spectra. Each analyst must demon-
strate the ability to generate accept-
able results with this method using the
procedure described in Section 8.2.
2. Summary of Method
2.1 A measured volume of sample.
approximately one-liter, is serially
extracted with methylene chloride at a
pH greater than 11 and again at pH
less than 2 using a separator/ funnel or
a continuous extractor. The methylene
chloride extract is dried an4
concentrated to a volume of 1 mL.
Chromatographic conditions are
described which permit the separation
and measurement of the parameters in
the extract. Qualitative identification is
performed using tha retention time and
the relative abundance of three
characteristic ions. Quantitative
analysis is performed using either
525-r
July 1982
444
-------
external or internal standard techniques
with a single characteristic ion.
3. Interferences
3.1 Method interferences may be
caused by corvt-aininants in solvents,
reagents, glassware, and other sample
processing hardware that lead to
discrete artifacts and/or elevated
baselines in the total ion current
profiles. All of these materials must b«
routinely demonstrated to be free from
interferences under the conditions of
the analysis by running laboratory
reagent blanks as described in Section
8.5.
3.1.1 Glassware must be scrupulously
cleaned<3>. Clean all glassware as soon
as possible after use by rinsing with the)
last solvent used in it. This should be
followed by detergent washing with
hot water, and rinses
-------
5.5 Balance Analytical, capable of
accurately weighing 0.0001 g.
5.6 GC/MS system.
5.5. J Gas chromatograph An
analytical system complete with a
temperature programmable gas
chromatograph and all required
accessories including syringes,
analytical columns, and gases. The
injection port must be designed for on-
column injection when using packed
columns and for splitless injection
when using capillary columns.
5.5.2 Column for Base Neutrals1.8
m long x 2 mm ID glass, packed with
Supelcoport (100/120 mesh) coated
with 3% SP-2250 or equivalent. This
column was used to develop the
accuracy and precision statements in
Table 6 and the VIOL data in Table 4.
Guidelines for the use of alternate
column packings are provided in
Section 1 3.1.
5.6.3 Column for Acids1.8 m long
x 2 mm 10 glass, packed with
Supelcoport (10O/1 20 mesh) coated
with 1 % SP-1 240 DA or equivalent.
This column was used to develop the
accuracy and precision statements in
Table 7, and the MDL data in Table 5.
Guideline? for the use of alternate
column packings ere given in Section
13.1.
5.5.4 Mass SpectrometerCapable
of scanning from 35 to 450 amu every
saven seconds or less utilizing a 70
volt (nominal) electron energy in the
electron impact ionization mode and
producing a mass spectrum which
meets all the criteria in Table 9 when
50 i:g of decsfluorotriphenyl phosphine
(DFTPP; ttlstperfluorophenyl) phenyl
phosphine) is injected through the gas
chromatograpnic inlet Any gas
chromatograph to ma. !» spectrometer
interface that gives ac <>ptable
calibration points at 50 q per injection
for each compound of ii. .rest in
Tables 1 through 3 and e'.-niev^ all
acceptable performance criteria
(Section 1 2) may b« used. G.-*
cr.ror,iatograph to mass spectrc/neter
interfaces constructed of all glass cr
glas* lined materials are recommei d<-d.
Glass can be deactivated by silani:mq
with dichlorodimethylsilane.
5.5.5 A computer system must be
interfaced to the mass spectrometer
that allows the continuous acquisition
and storage on machine readable media
of all mass spectra obtained
throughout the duration of the
chromatographic program. The
computer must have software that
allows searching any GC/MS data file
for ions of a specific mass and plotting
such ion abundances versus time or
scan number. Thif type of plot is
defined as an Extracted Ion Current
Profi'e (EICPI. Soitware must also be
available that allows integrating the
abundance in any EICP between
specified time or scan number limits.
6. Reagents
6.1 Reagent watar Reagent water is
defined as a water in which an inter-
ferent is not observed jt the method
detection limit of each parameter of
interest.
6.2 Sodium hydroxide solution ( 1 0
N) Dissolve 40g NaOH in reagent
water and dilute to 1 00 mL.
6.3 Sodium thiosulfate- (ACS)
Granular.
6.4 Sulfuric acid solution
(1 + 1 )- Slowly add E'< ml of H2S04
(sp. gr. 1 .84) to 50 mL of roagent
water.
6.5 Acetone, methanol, methyleno
chloride Pesticide quality or
equivalent.
6.6 Sodium sulfate-(ACS) Granular,
anhydrous. Purify by heating at 400 °C
for four hours in a shallow tray.
6.7 Stock standard solutions (1 .00
Ijg/nU Stock standard solutions can
be prepared from pure standard
materials or purchased as certified
solutions.
6. 7. 1 Prepare stock standard
solutions by accjrately weighing about
0.01 00 g of pure material. Dissolve
the material in pesticide quality
acetone or other suitable solvent and
dilute to volume in u 1 0-rr.L volumetric
flask. Larger volumes may be used at
the convenience of the analyst. If
(.impound purity is assayed at 96% or
g- ater, the weight may be used
witnout correction to calculate the
concentration of the stock standard.
Corrmercially prepared stock standards
may be used ft any concentration if
they are cetifi-if* by the manufactu;ar
or t'< jr, (;.(j93eno<4
-------
the working range «10% relative
standard deviation. RSD), linearity
through the origin may be assumed and
the average ratio or calibration factor
may b« usad in place of a calibration
curve.
7.2.3 The working calibration curve
or calibration factor must be verified on
e«:h working day by the measurement
of on* or mora calibration standards. If
tht response tor any parameter varies
from the predicted response by more
than ± 1 0%, the test must be repeated
using a fresh calibration standard.
Alternatively, a new calibration curve
or calibration factor must be prepared
for that compound.
7.3 Internal standard calibration
procedure. To use thia approach, the
analyst must select one or more
internal standards that are similar in
analytical behavior to the compounds
of interest. The analyst must further
demonstrate that the measurement ol
the internal standard is not affected by
method or matrix interferences. Table
8 lists some recommended internal
standards. Phenanthrene*d10 has been
us«d for this purpose. Use the base
peak ion as the primary ion for
quantification of the standards. If
interferences are noted, use the next
two most intense ions as the
secondary ions.
7.3, 1 Prepare calibration standards
it a minimum of three concentration
levels for each parameter of interest by
adding appropriate volumes of one or
more stock standards to a volumetric
flask. To each calibration standard or
standard mixture, add « known
constant amount of one or more
internal standards, and dilute to volume
with acetone. One of the calibration
standards should be at a concentration
mar, but arx ve, the MOL and the other
concamrutiors should correspond to
the expected renge of concentrations
found in real Camples or should define
the working range of the GC/MS
system.
7.3.2 Analyze 2 to 5 »*L of e«ch
calibration standard and tabulate the
irsa of the primary characteristic ion
(Tables 4 and 5) against concentration
for each compound and internal
itandard. and calculate response
factors IRF) for each compound using
equation 1 .
Eg. 1 RF - (A.C^/IAi.C.)
where:
A, - Area of the characteristic km
for the parameter to be
Area of tha characteristic ion
for the internal standard.
C|, » Concentration of tha internal
standard, (M3/L).
C, - Concentration of the
parameter to be measured,
(M/U.
If the RF value over tho working range
iaa constant «10% RSOI. the RF can
be assumed to be invariant and the
average RF can be used for
calculations. Alternatively, the results
can be used to plot a calibration curve
of response ratios. A,/A,,, vs. RF.
7.3.3 The working calibration curve
or RF must be verified on each working
day by the measurement of one or
more Calibration standards. If the
response for any parameter varies from
the predicted response by more than
± 10%, the test mi*st be repeated
using a fresh caiihrition standard.
Alternatively, a new calibration curve
must be prepared.
8. Quality Control
8.1 Each laboratory that uses this
method is required to operate a formal
quality control program. The minimum
requirements of this program consist of
an initial demonstration of laboratory
capability and the analysis of spiked
samples ss a continuing check on
performance. The laboratory is required
to maintain performance records to
define the quality of data that is
generated. Ongoing performance
checks must be compared with estab-
lished performance criteria to
determine if the results of analyses are
within accuracy and precision limits
expected of the method.
8.1.1 Bs'ora pe. forming any
analyses, the analyst must
demonstrate the ability to generate
acceptable accuracy and precision with
this method. This ability is established
as described in Section 8.2.
8.1.2 In recognition of the rapid
advances that are occurring in chroma-
tography, the analyst is permitted
certain options to improve the
separ itions or lower the cost of
measurements. Each ume such
modifications are made to the method,
the analyst is required to repeat the
procedure in Section 8.2.
8.1.3 The laboratory must spike all
samples with surrogate standards to
monitor continuing laboratory
performance. This procedure is
described in Secticn 8.4.
8.2 To establish the ability to
generate acceptable accuracy and
precision, the analyst must perform tha
following operations.
8.2.1 Select a representative spike
concentration for each parameter to ba
measured. Using stock standards.
prepare a quality control check sample
concentrate in acetone 1000 times
more concentrated than the salected
concentrations. Quality control check
sample concentrates, appropriate for
use with this method, will be available
from tho U.S Environmental Protection
Agency, Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio
45268.
8.2.2 Using a pipet, ado 1.00 ml. of
the chick sample concentrate and 1.0
mL of the surrogate standard dosing
solution (Section 6.81 to each of a
minimum of four 1 GOO-mL aliquots of
reagent water. A representative
wast 8water may be used in place of
the reagent water, but one or mere
additional aliquots must be analyzed to
determine background levels, and the
spike level must exceed twice the
background live! for the test to be
valid. Analyze the uliquots according to
the method beginning in Section 10.
8.2.3 Calculate the average percent
recovery, (R), and the standard devia-
tion of the percent recovery (s), for all
parameters and surrogate standards.
W^stewater background corrections
must be made before R and s
calculations ara performed
8.2.4 Using Table 6 or 7, noto the
average recovery (X) and standard
aaviation (p) expected for ouch method
parameter. Compare these to th»
calculated values for R and s. If s > p or
|X R| > p. review potential problem
areas and repeat the test.
8.2.5 The U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency plans to establish
performance criteria for R and s based
upon the result of interlaboratory
tasting. When they become available.
these criteria must be met before any
samples may be analyzed.
8.3 The analyst must calculate
method performance criteria for each
of the surrogate standards.
8.3.1 Calculate upper and lower
control limits for method performance
for each surrogate standard, using the
values for R and s calculated in Section
8.2.3:
Upper Control Limit (UCL) » R -t- 3s
Lower Control Limit (LCD » R - 3s
The UCL and LCL can be used to
construct control charts'71 that are
useful in observing trends in
performance. The control limits above
must be replaced by method perfor-
mance criteria as they become avail-
62S-4
)82
447
-------
able from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
8.3.2 For each surrogate standard,
the laboratory must develop and
maintain separate accuracy statements
of laboratory performance for
wastewater samples. An accuracy,
statement for the method is defined as
R ± s. The accuracy statement should
be developed by the analysis of four
alkjuots of wastewater as described in
Section 8.2.2. followed by the calcula-
tion of R and s. Alternately, the analyst
may use four wastewater data points
gathered through the requirement for
continuing quality control in Section
8.4. Ths accuracy statements should
be updated regularly.17'
8.4 The laboratory is required to
spike all samples with the surrogate
standard spiking solution to monitor
»->ike recoveries. If the recovery for any
surrogate standard does not fall within
the control limits for method
performance, the results reported for
that sample must be qualified as
described in Section 1 5.3. The
laboratory should monitor the
frequency of data so qualified to
ensure that it remains at cr below 5%.
8.S Before processing any samples,
the analyst should demonstrate
through the analysis of a one-liter
aliquot of reagent water, that all
glassware and reagent interferences
are under control. Each time a set of
samples is extracted or there is a
change in reagents, a laboratory
reagent blank should be processed as a
safeguard against laboratory
contamination.
8.6 It is recommended that the
laboratory adopt additional quality
assurance practices for use with this
method. The specific practices that are
most productive depend upon the
needs of the laboratory and the nature
of the samples. Field duplicates may be
analyzed to monitor the precision of
the sampling technique. Whenever
possible, the laboratory should perform
analysis of standard reference
materials and participate in relevant
performance evaluation studies.
9. Sample Collection,
Preservation, and Handling
9.1 Grab samples must be collected
in glass containers. Conventional
sampling practices^) should be
followed, except that the bottle must
not be prewashed with sample before
collection. Composite samples should
be collected in refrigerated glass
containers in accordance with the
requirements of the program.
Automatic sampling equipment must
be as free as possible of Tygon and
other potential sources of
contamination.
9.2 The samples must be iced or
refrigerated at 4 °C from tha time of
collection until extraction. Fill the
sample bottles and, if residual chlorine
is present, add 80 mg of sodium
thiosulfate per each liter of water. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
methods 330.4 and 330.5 may be
used to measure the residual
chlorine191. Field test kits a~e available
for this purpose.
9.3 All samples must be extracted
within 7 days and completely analyzed
within 40 days of extraction.
10. Separatory Funnel
Extraction
10.1 Samples are usually extracted
using separatory funnel techniques. If
emulsions will prevent achieving
acceptable solvent recovery with
separatory funnel extractions,
continuous extraction (Section 11)
may be used. Tho seoaratory fu''ne;
extraction scheme described Lm! r>
assumes a sample volume of one-liter.
When sample volumes of two liters are
to be extracted, us- 250-, 100-, 3r-d
100-mL volumes of methyl nne chloride
for the serial extraction of the base/
neutrals and 200-, 100-, and 100-mL
volumes of methylene chloride for the
acids.
10.2 Mark the water meniscus on the
cide of the sample bottle for later
determination of sampler volume. Pour
the entire sample into a two-liter
separatory funnel. Pipet 1.00 mL
surrogate standard spiking solution into
the separatory funnel and mix well.
Check the pH of the sample with wide-
range pH paper and adjust to pH > 11
with 10 N sodium hydroxide.
10.3 Add 60 mL methylene chloride
to the sample bottle, seal, and shake
for 30 seconds to rinse the inner
surface. Transfer the solvent to the
separatory funnel and extract the
sample by shaking the funnel for two
minutes with periodic venting to
release excess pressure. Allow the
organic layer to separate from the
water phase for a minimum of 10
minutes. If tha emulsion interface
between layers is more than one-third
the volume of the solvent layer, the
analyst must employ mechanical
techniques to complete the phare
separation. The oof'""-" i^rit^ut
drpan?- ."-^n the sample, but may
stirring, filtration of the
emulsion through glass wool, centrifu-
gation, or other physical methods.
Collect the methylene chloride extract
in a 250-ml Erienmeyer flask. If the
emulsion cannot be broken (recovery of
lass than 80% of the methylene
chloride, corrected for the water
solubility of methylene chloride),
transfer the sample, solvent, and
emulsioi. into the extraction chamber
of a continuous extractor and proceed
as described in Saction 11.3.
10.4 Add a second 60-mL volume of
nrvethylene chloride to the sample bottle
and repeat the extraction procedure a
second time, combining the extracts in
tha Erlenmoyer flask. Perform a third
extraction in the same manner. Label
the combined extract as base/neutral
fraction.
'(0.5 Adjust the pH of the aqueous
phase to less than 2 using sulf unc acid
(1 + 1). Serially extract three times
with 60-mL aliquots of methylene
chloride Collect and combine rho
extracts in a 250-mL Erlenmeyar flask
and labal the combined extract as the
acid fraction.
10.6 For each fraction, assemble a
Kuderna-Oanish (K-D) concentrator by
attaching e 10-rnL concentrator tube
to a 500-mL evaporative flask. Other
concentration devices or techniques
may be used in place of the K-D if the
requirements of Saction 8.2 are met.
10.7 For each fraction, pour the
combined extract through a drying
column containing about 10 cm of
anhydrous sodium sulfate. and collect
the extract in the K-D concentrator.
Rinse the Erienmeyer flask and column
with 20 to 30 mL of methylene
chloride to complete the quantitative
transfer.
10.8 To the evaporative flask for
each fraction, add one or two clean
boiling chips and attach a three-ball
Snyder column. Prewet the Snyder
column by adding about 1 mL
methylene chloride to the top of tha
column. Place the K-D apparatus on a
hot water bath (60 ° to 65 °C) so that
the concentrator tube it partially
immersed in the hot water, and the
entire lower rounded surface of the
flask is bathed with hot vapor. Adjust
the vertical position of the apparatus
and the water tempsrature as required
to complete the. concentration in 15 to
20 minutes. At the proper rate of
distillation the balls of the column will
actively charter but the chambers will
no* f'nnH with rf»"^"*£U -%«vent.
Wrian-tne apparent volume of liquid
reaches 1 mL, remove tha K-D
apparatus from the water bath and
625-5
July 1982
448
-------
allow it to drain and cool for at least 10
minutes. Remove the Snyder column
and rinse the flask and its lower joint
into the concentrator tube with 1 to 2
ml of methylene chloride. A 5-mL
syringe is recommended for this
operation.
10.9 Add another one or two clean
boiling chips to the concentrator tub*
md attach a two-ball micro Snydar
column. Prewet the Snyder column by
idding about 0.5 mL of methylene
chloride to the top of the column. Place
the K-D apparatus on a hot water bath
(60eto65eC) so that the
concentrator tube is particlly immersed
in the hot water. Adjust the vertical
position of the apparatus and the water
temperature as required to complete
the concentration in 5 to 10 minute*.
At the proper rate of distillation the
bails of the column will actively charter
but the chambers will not flood with
condensed solvent. When the apparent
volume of liquid reaches about 0.5 mL.
remove the K-D apparatus from the
water-bath and allow it to drain for at
least 10 minjtes while cooling.
Remove the Snyder column and rinse
its the flask and its tower joint into the
concentrator tube with 0.2 mL of
acetone or methylene chloride. Adjust
the final volume to 1.0 mL with the .
solvent. Stopper the concentrator tubs
and store refrigerated if GC/MS
analysis will not be performed
immediately. If the extracts will be
stored longer th«;n two days, they
should be transferred io Teflon-sealed
screw-cap bottles and labeled
base/neutral or acid fraction as
ipp'opriata.
10.10 Determine the original sample
volume by refilling the sample bottle to
the mark and transferring the water to
11000-mL graduated cylinder. Record
foe sample volume to. the nearest 5
mL
11. Continuous Extraction
11.1 When experience with a sample
horn a given source indicates that a
strious emulsion problem will result or
in emulsion is encountered in Section
10.3, using a separator/ funnel, a
continuous extractor should be usod.
11.2 Mark the water meniscus on the
i*d« of the sample bottle for later
"Haturement of the sample volume.
Check the pH of the sample with wide*
'inge pH p«psr atid adjust to pH 11
with 1C N sodium hydroxide. Transfer
At sample to the continuous extractor
nd usir.g a pipet, add 1.00 mL of
Togate standard spiking solution and
"to well. Add 60 mL of methylene
chloride to the sample bottle, seal and
shake for 30 seconds to rinse the inner
surface. Transfer the solvent to the
extractor.
11.3 Repeat the sample bottle rinse
with an additional 50- to 1 00-ml
pordon of methylgne chloride and add
th'i rinse to the extractor.
11.4 Add 200 to 500 mL of
merhylens chloride to the distilling
fifisk, add sufficient reagent water to
ensure proper operation, and extract
for 24 hours. Allow to cool, then
detach the boiling fttik, and dry,
concentrate and seal tha extract as in
Section 10.6 through 10.9. Hold the
aqueous phase for acid extraction (See
Section 11.51.
11.5 Charga a ciean distilling flask
with 500 ml. of methylene chloride and
attach it to the continuous extractor.
Carefully, adjust the pH of the aqueous
phase to less than 2 u.ung sulfuric acid
(1 + 1). Extract for 24 hours. Dry,
concentrate and label snd seal the
extract as described in Sections 1 0.6
through 10.9.
12. Daily GC/MS Performance
Tests
12.1 At the beginning of each dey .
that analyses are to be performed, the
GC/MS system must be checked to see
that acceptable performance criteria
are achieved for DFTPP. Each day that
benzidine is to be determined, the
tailing factor criterion described in
Section 1 2.4 must be achieved. Each
day the acids are to be determined, the
tailing factor criterion in Section 1 2.5
must be achieved.
12.2 These OFTPP performance test
require the following instrumental
parameters.
Electron Enorg\ 70 volts (nominal)
Mass Range 35 to 450 amu
Scan Time to give at least 5
scans per peak but
not to exceed 7
seconds per scan.
12.3 DFTPP performance test<' °> -
At the beginning of each day, injttct
2pL (50 ng) of DFTPP standard
solution. Obtain a background cor-
rected mess spectra of DFTPP and
check that all the key ion criteria in
Table 9 are achieved. If all the &'.... *
are not achieved, the analyst must
retune the mass spectrometer and
repeat the test until all criteria are
achieved. The performance criteria
must be achieved before any samples,
blanks, or standards are analyzed. The
tailing factor tests in Section 12.4 and
12.5 may be performed simultaneously
with tha test.
12.4 Column performance test for
basa/neutrals At tho beginning of
each day that the base-rteutral fraction
is to be analyzed for beniidine, the
benzidine tailing factor must be
calculaiad. Inject 1 00 ng of benzidine
either separately or as a part of a stan-
dard mixture that may contain DFTPP
and calcuiate tha tailing factor. The
benzidine tailing factor must be lasu
than 3.0. Calculation of the tailing
factor its illustrated in Figure 1 3.(11I
Rapiaca the column packing if the
tailing factor criturion cannot be
achieved.
12. £ Column performanee for
acidsAt the beginning of each day
that the acids are to be determined,
inject 50 ng of pentachlorophenol
either separately or as a part of a
standard mix that may contain DFTPP.
The tailing factor for pentachlorophenol
must be less than five. Calculation of
the tailing factor is illustrated in Figure
1 3" i). Replace the column packing if
the tailing factor criterion cannot be
achieved.
13. Gas Chromatography/
Mass Spoctrom^try
13.1 Table 4 summarizes the
recommended gas chromatographic
operating conditions for the
base/neutral fraction. Table 5
summarizes the recommended gas
chromatographic operating conditions
for determination of the acid fraction.
Thesa tables include retention times
and MDL that were achieved under
these conditions. Examples of the
parameter separations achieved by
theie columns are shown n Figures 1
through 1 2. Other packed columns or
chromatographic conditions may be
used if the requirements of Section 8.2
and Section 1 2 are met. Capillary
(open-tubularl columns may also be
usnd if the relative standard deviations
of responses for replicatn injections are
demonstrated to tx» less than 6% and
the requirements of Section 8.2 snd
Section 12 are met
13.2 A'ter the GC/MS perf ormanco
i e^L'irer'ients of Section 1 2, calibrate
tiie system daily as described in
Section 7.
13.3 If the internal standard
approach is being used, the internal
standard must be added to sample
extract and mixed thoroughly, imme-
diately, before injection into tho
instrument. This minimizes lo»ses due
to adsorption, chemical reaction or
evaporation.
13.4 Inject 2 to 5 pL of the sample
extract using the solvent-flush
625-6
July 1982
449
-------
UKhnique1121. Smaller (1.0 ML) volumes
m.iy ba injected if automstic devices
are employed. Record the volume
injected to the nearest 0.05 ijL.
13.5 If the response for any ion
exceeds the working range of the
GC/MS system, dilute the extract aM
reanalyze.
13.6 Perform all qualitative and
quantitative measurements as
described in Sections 14 and 1 5.
When the extracts are not being used
for analyses, store them at 4°C pro-
tected from light in screw-cap vials
equipped with unpierced Teflon-lined
septa.
14. Qualitative Identification
14.1 Obtain an EICP for the primary
ion and the two other ions listed in
Tables 4 and 5. Sen Section 7.3 for
ions to be used with internal arid
surrogate standards. The following
criteria must be met to make a
qualitative identification.
74.1.1 The characteristic ions for
each compound of interest must
maxinize in the same or.within one
tcan of each other.
74.1.2 The retention time must fall
within ± 30 saconds of the retention
time of the authentic compound.
74.1.3 The relative peak heights of
the three characteristic ions in the
EICP s must fall within ± 20% of the
relative intensities of thgse ions in a
reference mass spectrum. The refer-
ence mass spectrum can be obtained
by a standard analyzed in the GC/MS
system or from a reference library.
14.2 Structural isomers that have
very similar mass spectra and less than
30 seconds difference in retention
time, can be explicitly identified only if
the resolution between authentic
isomers in a standard mix is acceptable.
Acceptable resolution is achieved if the
baseline to valley height between the
isomere is less than 25% of the sum of
the two peak heights. Otherwise,
structural isomers are identified as
isomeric pairs.
15. Calculations
15.1 When a compound has been
identified, the quantitation of that
compound will be based on the inte-
grated abundance from the elCP of the
primary characteristic ion in Tables 4
and 5. Use the base peak ion for
internal and surrogate standards. If the
sample produces an interference for
the first listed ion, use a secondary ion
to quantitate. Quantitation will be per-
formed using external or internal
standard techniques.
75. 7. 7 If tha exterrwl standard
calibration procedure is used, calculate
the amount of material infected from
the area of the characteristic icn using
the calibration curve or calibration
factor in Section 7.2.2. The concentra-
tion in the sample can bti calculated
from equation 2:
Eq. 2. Concentration, <
where:
A « Amount of material injected,
in nancgrar.is.
V| - Volume of extract injected
(ML).
V, - Volume of total extract (ML).
V, » Volume of water extracted
75.1.2 If the internal standard cali-
bration procedure was used, calculate
the concentration in the samp!; using
tha response fiictor (RF) determined io
Section 7.3.2 and equation 3.
Eq. 3
Concentration, Mg/L = *'
(Ai.)(RFi(V0)
where:
A, * Area of the characteristic ion
for the parameter to be
measured.
Ait m Area of the characteristic ion
for the internal standard.
I, » Amount of internal standard
added to each extract IMQ).
V0 - Volume of water extracted
(liters).
15.2 Report results in micrograms
per liter without correction for recovery
data. When duplicate and spiked
samples are analyzed, report all data
obtained with the sample resu'ts.
1 5.3 If the surrogate standard
recovery falls outside tha control limits
in Section 8.3, data for all parameters
in that fraction of the sample must be
labeled as suspect.
16. Method Performance
16.1 The method detection limit
(MOD is defined as the minimum
concentration of a substance that can
be measured and reported with a 99%
confidence that the value is above
zero'1). The MDL concentrations listed
in Tables 4 and 5 were obtained using
reagent water*'31.
16.2 The average recoveries and the
average standard deviations of the
percent recoveries, presented in Table
5, were the result of a study of the
accuracy and precision of this method
by several laboratories. The values
listed represent the results from two to
four laboratories!141.
16.3 The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency is in the process of
conducting an interlaboratory method
study to fully define the performance
of this method.
17. Screening Procedure for
2.3.7.8-TCDD
17.1 If the sample must be screened
for the presence of 2,3,7.8-TCDD, it is
recommended thKt th« reference mate-
rial not be handled in the laboratory
unless extensive safety precautions are
employed. It is sufficient to analyze the
base/neutral extract by selected ion
monitoring (SIM) GC/MS techniques,
as follows:
i 7. 7. 7 Concentrate the base/neutral
extract to a fir.5! volume of 0.2 mL.
17.1.2 Adjust the temperature of the
base/neutral column (Section 5.6.2) to
220°C.
7 7.1.3 Operate the mass spec-
trometer to acquire data in the SIM
mods using the ions at m/e 257, 320
and 322 and a dwell time no greater
than 333 milliseconds per ion.
17.1.4 Inject 5 to 7 ML of the base/
neutral extract. Collect SIM data fc; r
total of 10 minutes.
7 7. 7.5 The possible) presence of
2.3.7.8-TCDD is indicated if all three
ions exhibit simultaneous peaks at any
point in the selected ion current
profiles.
17.1.6 For each cccurrence where
the possible presence of 2,3,7,8-
TCDD is indicated, calculate and ratain
the relative abundances of each of the
three icns.
17.2 False positives to this test may
be caused by the presence of single or
coeluting combinations of compounds
whose mass spectra contain all of
these ions.
17.3 Conclusive results of the
presence and concentration level of
2,3,7.8-TCDD can be obtained or.ly
from a properly equipped laboratory
through the use of method 6 < 3 of
other approved alternate test
procedures.
625-7
July 1982
450
-------
References
1. See Appendix A
2. "Sampling and Analysis Proc.xJuren
for Screening of Industrial Effluents for
Priority Pollutants." U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Enviro-imental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
Cincinnati. Ohio 45268. March 1977,
Revised April 1977. Available from
Effluent Guidelines Division,
Washington. DC 20460.
3. ASTM Annual Book of Standards,
Part 31. D 3694. "Standard Practice
for Preparation of Sample Container*
and for Preservation," American
Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, PA, p. 679. (1980).
4. "CarcinogensWorking with
Carcinogens," Depenment of health.
Education, and Welfare, Public Hearth
Service. Canter for Disease Cositroi,
National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Hearth, Publication No.
77-206. Aug. 1977.
S. "OSHA Safety and Health
Standards, General Industry."
(29CFR1910), Occupational Safety
and Health Administration, OSHA
2206, (Revised, January 1976).
6. "Safety in Academic Chemistry
Laboraties," American Chemical
Society Publication, Committee on
Chemical Safety, 3rd Edition, 1979.
7. "Handbook of Analytical Quality
Control in Water and Wastewater
Laboratories." EPA-600/4-79-019.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268,
March 1979.
8. ASTM Annual Book of Standards,
Parr 31. D 3370, "Standard Practice
for Sampling Water," American
Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, PA, p. 76, 1980.
9. "Methods 330.4 (Titrimetrte, DPO-
FAS) and 330.5 (Spectrophotometric.
OPD) for Chlorine, Totai Residual/'
Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Water and Wastes. EPA 600-4/79-O20.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory, Cincinnati. Ohio 45268.
March 1979.
10. Eichdberger, J.W., Harris. L.E.,
tnd Budde. W.L., "Reference Com-
pound to Calibrate Ion Abundance
Measurement in Gas Chromatography-
Mass Spectrometrv," Anatyticg/
Chtmisrry. 47, 995 (1975).
11. McNair, H.M. and Bonelli, E.J.,
"Basic Chromatography," Consolidated
Primi'Kj, Berkeley, California, p. 52,
1969.
12. Burke, J.A.. "Gaa Chromatography
'or Pesticide Residue Analysis; Some
Practical Aspects," Joumtl of th»
Association of Official Analytical
Chemists, 43. 1037 (1905).
1 3. "Method Detection umit for
Methods 624 and 625." Olynyk. P.,
Budde, W.L., Eicholberser. J.W.,
unpublished report October, 1 980.
14. Kloepfer, R.O., "POTW Toxic
Study, Analytical Quality Assurance
Final Report," U.S. Envi-onmemal
Protection Agency. Region Vli, Kansas
City. Kansas 6611 5, 1981.
62S-9
1382
451
-------
Tab/* 1. Base,Neurry/£xT-9ctaotes
Parameter
A cenaph thene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Aldrirt
Benzotalanthracene
Benzolblfluoranthene
Benzolklfluoranthene
Benzolaipyrene
Benzo Ighilperylene
Benzyl butyl phthalate
P-BHC
6-BHC
Bisl2-chloro«thyl)ether
Bisl2-chloroethoxy}rr>9thane
Bis(2 ethylhex yllphthalate
Bts 12 -chlorotsoprop yllnther
4-8romophenyl phenyl ether
Chlordane
2-Chtoronaph thalene
4-Chiorophenyl phenyl ether
Chrysene
4, 4 '-ODD
4,4' -DDE
4,4' -DDT
Dibenzola.hlanthracene
Di-n-butylphthalate
/, 3-Dichlorobenzene
/ , 2 -Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Oichlorabenzene
3. 3 '-Dichlorobanzidine
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
2, 4-Dinitrotoluene
2. 6-Dinitrotolueno
Di-n-octylphthalate
F.ndosulfan sulfate
Endrir aldehyde
Fluorantherta
Huonne
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexach/orobu tadiene
Hexachloroethane
Indsnol 1.2. 3-cdlpyreno
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
N-Nitrosodi-n-propYlamim
PCB-1016
KB- 1221
PCB-1232
rc 'ft- 1242
PCB-U43
PCS- 1254
PC B- 12 60
Phenanthrent
Pyrene
Toxaphene
1,2,4- Trichlorobenzene
STORETNo.
34205
34200
34220
39330
34526
34230
34242
34247
34521
34292
39338
34259
34273
34278
39100
34283
34636
39350
34581
34641
34320
39310
39320
393OO
34556
39110
34566
34536
34571
34631
39380
34336
34341
34611
34626
34596
3435 1
34366
34376
34381
39410
39420
39700
34391
34396
344O3
34408
34696
34447
34428
34671
39488
39492
39496
3950O
39504
39508
34461
3*469
39400
34551
CAS No
83-32-9
203 96-8
120 12-7
3C3-00-2
56-55-3
205-99-2
207-08-9
50-32-8
191-24-2
85-63-7
319-85-7
319-86-8
1 j 1-44-4
111-91-1
117-81-7
108-60-1
101-55-3
S/-74-9
91-58-7
7005-72-3
218-01-9
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
53-70-3
84-74-2
541-73-1
95-50- ;
1 06-46-7
91-94-1
60- 57-1
84-66-2
131-11-3
121-14-2
6O6-20-2
1 1 7-84-0
1031-07-8
7421-93-4
2O6-44-O
86-73-7
76-44-8
1024-57-3
118-74-1
87-68-3
67-72-1
193-39-5
78-59-1
91-20-3
S8-9S-3
621 64-7
12674-11-2
1 1 104-28-2
11141-16-5
53469-21-9
12672-29-6
11097-69-1
1 1096-82-5
85-01 -8
? 25-00-0
300 1-3 5-2
120-62-1
62$-9
July 1982
452
-------
Ttbtt 2. ACJZExtrsctables
Parameter
STOXETNo.
CAS ho.
4-Chloro 3-methylphenol
2-ChlofOphenol
2.4-fJichlorophenol
2, t-Dimethylphenol
2, 4-Dinitropht~<)i
2-Methy!-4. 6-^.nttrophenot
2-Nitroph«oot
4-Nitrophenoi
PtrtttchktrophertoJ
Phenol
2. 4. 6- Trichtorophenot
34452
345S6
34601
34606
34616
.34657
34591
34646
39032
34694
34621
59-50-7
55-57-5
120-83-2
105-67-9
51-28-5
534-52-1
88-75-5
1OC-02-7
87-86-5
1O8-95-2
88-06-2
Table 3. Addition^ Ex tractable Parameters*
Parameter STORETNo.
CAS No.
Method
Btnzidine
t-BHC
rBHC
Endosulfanl
Endosulfmn II
Endrin
HtxechJorocyclopentadiern
N-Nitrosodimethylaminm
N-Nrtmsodipnen yiatmne
39120
39337
39340
34361
34356
39390
34386
34438
34433
92-87-5
319-84-6
58-89-8
959-98-8
33213-65-9
72-20-8
77-47-4
62-75-3
86-30-6
605
608
608
508
608
6O8
612
60S
605
Set Section 1.2 of method
Chrometographic Conditions, Method Detection Limits and Characteristic Ions for Base/Neutral Extractables
Characteristic Ions
Arromr
;. 3-Oicruesotxtnzene
1, 4-Oichlorot>anzene
Hnxech/orotithane
Bi.tl 2 -chloroethyl tether
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
Bu(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
N-Nitrosodi-n-propyl tmine
Nitrobenzene
HixachlorotHjtadiene
1.2,4- Tnchlorotenzerxt
Isophorine
Naphthalene
3is(2-chJoroetrioxy/rnethene
HexechiorocYCfopentfdien* '
2-ChJon.nephthehne
Acenephthylene
Acenaphthene
Dimethyl phtheJtte
2, 6-Oinitrotoiuene
Ruorene
4-Chlorophenyi phenyl ether
2,4-Oirutrotohj«ne
Diethylphthalate
N-Nitrotodichenyiemine *
Htxach/orofjenzene
+BHC*
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether
1-BHC*
Anthracene
HeptecMor
t-BHC
Aldrin
nmtwniron
Time
Imin.t
7.4
7.8
8.4
8.4
8.4
9.3
11.1
11.4
11.6
It. 9
12.1
12.2
13.9
15.9
17.4
17.8
18.3
18.7
19.5
19.6
19.8
20.1
20.5
21.0
21.1
21.2
22.4
22.8
22.8
23.4
23.4
23.7
24.0
maifrw
Detection
Limit liig/LI
1.9
4.4
1,6
5.7
1.9
5.7
1.9
0.9
1.9
2.2
1.6
5.3
1.9
3.5
1.9
i.6
1.9
1.9
4.2
5.7
22
1.9
1.S
1.9
5.4
1.9
4.2
1.9
3.1
1.9
Electron Impact
Primary
146
146
117
93
146
45
130
77
225
180
82
128
93
237
162
1a2
154
163
165
166
204
165
149
169
284
183
248
183
171
178
181
100
183
66
Chemical Ionize tion
Secondary
148
148
201
63
148
77
42
123
223
182
95
129
95
235
164
151
153
194
89
>S5
206
63
177
if
-------
Table 4.
(Continued)
Parameter
Dibutyl phthalate
Heptachlor epoxide
Endosulfan 1 *
Fluoranthene
Dieldrin
4,4' -DDE
Pyrene
Endrin*
Endosulfan II*
4,4' -ODD
Benzidine '
4, 4' -DDT
Endosulfan sulfito
Endrin aldehyde
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Bis<2-ethyihexyl) phthalate
Chrysene
Benzolalanthracene
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
Di-n-octylphthalate
Benzo lot fluoranthene
Benzolk/fluorantnene
Benzo talpyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-c, dlpyrene
Dibenzo la, hlan thracene
Benzo Ighi/perylene
N*Nitrosodimethyl amine *
Chlordane ' *
Toxaphene '
PCB IO16"
PC3 1221'
PCB 1232'
PC3 1242'
PCB 1248'
PC9 1254'
PCB 1260'
neienaur,
Time
Imin.l
24.7
25.6
26.4
26.5
27.2
27.2
27.3
27.9
28.6
28.6
28.8
29.3
29.8
29.9
30.6
31.5
jr. 5
32.2
32.5
34.9
34.9
36.4
42.7
43.2
45.1
19 to 30
25 to 34
18 to 30
15 to 30
15 to 32
15 to 32
12 to 34
22 to 34
23 to 32
ivieifivu
Detection
L',nit !ng/LI
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.5
S.f
1.9
2.8
44
4.7
5.6
2.5
2.5
2.5
7.8
16.5
2.5
4.8
2.5
2.5
3.7
2.5
4.1
30
36
Electron Impact
Primary
149
353
237
202
79
246
202
81
237
235
134
235
272
67
149
149
228
228
252
149
252
252
252
276
278
276
42
373
/5S
224
190
190
224
234
294
330
Secondary
150
355
339
1O1
253
248
101
263
339
237
92
237
387
345
91
167
226
229
254
253
253
253
138
J39
138
74
375
231
260
224
224
260
330
330
362
704
35?
34;
100
279
176
100
82
341
)65
185
165
422
260
206
27')
229
226
126
125
125
125
277
279
277
44
377
233
294
260
260
294
362
362
394
Chemical tonization
IMethanel
149
203
203
185
149
149
228
228
252
252
7!52
276
278
276
205
231
231
213
299
229
229
253
253
253
277
279
277
279
243
243
225
327
257
257
281
281
281
305
307
305
'See Section 1.2.
* These compounds are mixtures of various isomers. (See Figures 2 to 12)
Gas Chrometographic conditions: Glass column 1.3m long x 2 mm ID packed with Supelcoport 1100/120 mesh) coated ith
3% SP-2250. Carrier gas: helium at a flow rate of 30 ml per mm.
Temperature: Isothermal at SO'C for 4 min., then 8 ° per mm to 2 70 °C. Hold at 270 "C for 30 min.
Tat>l»S.
Chromatogra.ohic Conditions, Method Detection Umits and Characteristic Ions for Acid Extractables
Parameter
2-Chlorophenoi
2-Nitrophenol
Pht.no!
2, 4-Uimethylphenol
2, 4-Dichlorophenol
2,4,6- Trichlorophenol
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
2.4-Dinitrophenol
2-Methyl-4, 6-dinitrophenol
Pen tachlorophenol
4-Nitrophenol
neieniion
Time
(min.)
5.9
6.5
8.0
9.4
9.8
11.8
13.2
15.9
16.2
17.5
20.3
meinuu
Detection
Limit f^ig/U
3.3
3.6
1.5
2.7
2.7
27
3.0
42
24
3.6
2.4
Electron Impact
Primary
128
139
94
122
162
196
142
184
198
266
65
Secondary
64
65
65
107
164
198
107
63
182
264
139
130
109
66
121
98
200
144
154
77
268
109
Chemical lonization
{Methane)
129
MO
S5
123
163
197
143
185
199
267
140
131
168
123
151
165
199
171
213
227
265
168
157
122
135
163
167
201
183
225
233
269
122
Chromatographic conditions: 1.8m long x 2 mm ID glass column packed with Supelcoport (100/120 mectil coated with 1%
SP-1240. Carrier gas: helium at a flow rate of 30 mL per min. Column temperature, isothermal at 70 °C for 2 min, then 8 "per
min, to 200"-
625-11
July 1982
454
-------
Tabte 6. Accuracy and Precision for Base/Neutral Extractables
Reagent Water Wastewater
Parameter
Acenaphthnne
Acenat'htfiylone
Aldrin
Anthracene
Benzo atantiVvcene
Benzo'btfluoraHthertfi
Beruolklflvoranthene
BemolghilperYler*
Bemofalpyrene
Benzidine
Butyl benzyl phthalal "
P-fl«C
6-BHC
Bist2-chloroethox y/mefi tsne
8ist2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-cnJoroisopropyiletritr
Bis 12-ethylhexyl) pfitfialate
4-Bromophenyl phenyt other
2-Chloronaphthalene
4-Chlorophenyl prtenyi ether
Chrysene
4,4'-DDD
4. 4' -DDE
4.4'-ODT
Dibcnzate.htanthrtcene
Di-n-Lutyi phthalate
1. 2-Oichloroberuane
1, 3-Oichloroberuerie
1. 4-Dichkxvberuane
3, 3 '-Dichlorobemidine
Diethylohthaittte
Dimethyl phthalate
2. 4-Dinitrotoluene
2. 6-Oinitrotoluene
Di-n-octylphtrtale te
Endosulfan sulfate
Fkioranthene
Ruoisnv
HeptacMor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Htxachlorocyclopentadierm
Haxachloroethane
Indent) 11,2.3-cd; pyrene
Isophorore
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylantine
N-Nitrosod>phenylamine
PC8-I22'
PCB-r2f4
Pi tenant firen»
Pyrene
1.2.4- Trichlorobenzane
Average
Percent
Recovery
77
78
72
84
83
96
96
80
90
87
47
69
56
84
56
71
129
80
73
45
83
80
69
63
82
70
59
55
61
184
42
25
83
79
97
79
89
77
69
82
79
46
27
46
65
75
6
72
68
84
77
80
84
86
64
Standard
Deviation
(%)
23
22
6
14
19
68
68
45
22
61
32
25
, 18
33
36
33
50
17
24
11
19
9
20
15
39
25
27
28
31
174
28
33
32
18
37
29
19
16
6
7
20
25
25
21
37
33
3?
31
39
24
11
13
14
15
16
A veragu
Percan'.
Rttcov«ry
ti3
82
_
75
75
41
47
68
43
63
74
_
82
72
71
82
75
79
75
70
93
62
54
S3
143
48
35
79
79
89
80
80
71
48
12
52
ill
77
75
37
76
86
~
75
80
69
Standard
Deviat'on
1%)
29
23
_
22
28
21
27
40
21
55
43
_
74
37
39
63
20
27
28
4O
51 '
28
24
35
145
28
36
34
25
62
26
20
22
28
12
26
43
42
35
54
45
31
~
~
22
23
26
Spiked between 5 to 24OO v&L.
1982
455
-------
Table 7. Accuracy and Precision for Acid Extractables
Reagent Water
Waste water
Pcrameter
Average Standard
Percent Deviation
Recovery (%>
A verage Standard
Percent Deviation
Recovery (%l
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
2-Chlorophenol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
2, 4-Oimethylphenol
2, 4-Dinitropher "I
2-Methyl-4, 6-dinitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
2-Nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
2,4,6- Trichlorophenol
79
70
74
64
78
83
41
75
86
36
77
18
23
24
25
21
18
20
25
20
14
20
75
71
80
58
103
90
43
75
66
36
81
21
25
21
26
SS
35
16
27
.~j6
21
20
Spiked from 10 to 1500^/L
Table 8. Suggested Internal and Surrogate Standards
Base/Neutral Fraction
Acid Fraction
Aniline-ds 2-Fluorophenol
Anthracene-dig Pentafluorophenol
Benzo(a)anthracene-d ] 2 Phenol-dg
4,4'-Dibromobiphenyl 2-Porfluoromethyl phenol
4,4 '-Dibromooctafluorobiphenyl
Decafluorobiphenyl
2,2 '-Difluorobiphenyl
4-Fluoroaniline
1 -Fluoronaphthylene
2-Fluoronaphthylene
Naphthalene-d B
Nitrobenzene-d5
2,3.4,5,6-Penfefluorobiphenyl
Phenanthrene-dfQ
Pyridine-ds
7>o/# 9. DFTPP Key Ions and Ion Abundance Criteria
Mess
Ion Abundance Criteria
51
68
70
127
197
198
199
275
365
441
442
443
30-60% of mass 198
less than 2% of mass 69
less then 2% of mass 63
40-60% of mass 19P
less than 1 % ofmo^s 198
base peak, 100% relative abundance
5-9% of mass 158
10-30% ofmnss 198
greater than 1% of mass 198
present but less than mass 443
greater than 40% of mass 198
1 7-23% of mass 442
625-13
July 1982
456
-------
Ln
i I
I
I
i
Ol
3'
o,
a'
531
3
o
c
3
2-Chlorophenyl
2-Nitrophanol
Phenol
2.4 pimeth ylphenol
2.4 Dichlorophenol
2.4.6- Trichlcroptienol
4-Ch!aro-3-Methylphenol 5
2.4-Dinitrophenol
2-Mothyi^4.$-Dinitfophenol
Pentac^lorophanol
4-Nitrcphenol
!
3
o
Ol
3
c
4 Haptichlor
Aldrin
Haptachlor
- Endosultan I _. .. . . . ., ___
Dieldnn & 4.4'-DDE
Endosulfan II 4 4.4'-DDD
4.4'-DOT
^- Endoiulien Suttete
, 1.3-Dichlorobaniana
1.4- Dichlorobeniene
1.2-Dichlorobentene + Hexuchloroethana
BiilMethyl-2-Chloroethyl)Ether +Bisl2-CMoroethyl)fther
, Haxachlorobutadiena
. 1.2.4-Trichlorobentent
Isophorona
Naphthalene
. Nitrobeniana
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
2 Chloronaphthalene
, Acenaphthylene
Acenaphlhene
_, Dimethyl Phthalala
_ 2,6-Dinitrotoluena
Fluoeene + 4-Chloroph9nol Phenyl Ether
I Diethylphthalate
Haxachlorobeniena \ f 1,2-Diphenylhydrazina
4 -Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether
Phenfnlhrene
Anthracene
d-WAnlhracena
Dibutyl Phthalete
* $ Bamidina
Flu.iranthsne
Pyrena
Beniyl Btyl Phthtlate
Bis(2-Ethylhaxyl)Phthat«te
Dioctyl Phthalate
_ lndano(1,1.3-cd)Pyrana
-f Oibenio(ah)Anthracana
Beniofghijperylene
D t> O
ft 3 S.
IP
r^ f»* ***
O 3 Uj
|-3?
«?l
«!
-------
Column: 3% SP-2250 on Supalcoport
Program: 50°C. 4 min., 8" per min. to 270°C.
Detector: Mass spectrometer
18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Retention time, minutes
IFlgurt 4. Gas chromatogram of chlordano.
34 36
Column: 3% SP-2250 on Supilcoport
Program 50°C. 4 min.. 8° per min. to 270°C.
Detector: Mass spectrometer
22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
Retention time, minutes
Figure 6, Gas chromatogram of toxephane.
625-15
1982
458
-------
Column: 3% SP-2250 on Supelcoport
Program: SO°C. 4 min.. 8° per min. to 270°C.
Detector: Mass spectrometer
Column: 3% SP-2250 on Supa/coport
Program: 50°C. 4 min., 8° per min. to 2?0°C.
Detector: Mass spafti ometer
-------
Column: 3% SP-2250 on Supalcoport
Program: 50°C. 4 min.. 8° per min. to 270°C.
Detector: Mass spectrometer
Column: 3% SP-2250 on Supe/coport
Program: 50°C. 4 min.. 8° per min. to 270°C.
Detector: Mass spectrometer
m/z=3S to 4SO
J8 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Retention time, minutes
Figure 8. Gas crtroma'.ogram of PCB-1232.
18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Retention time, minutes
Figura 9. Gas chromatogram of PC8-1242.
625-17
July 1932
-------
r ... f BC
Tailing Factor = -r-r
AS
Example calculation:
Peak Height = DE = 100mm
10% Peak Height = BO = 10 mm
Peak Width at 10% Peak Height = AC = 23 mm
AB =11 mm
BC = 12 mm
Therefore: Tailing Factor = - =1.1
Figure 13. Tailing factor calculation.
62f-19
July 1982
461
-------
Column: 3% SP-2250 on Supelcoport
Program: 50°C. 4 min.. 8° per im. to 270°C.
Detector. Mess spectrometer
A
18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Retention time, minutes
Rgura 10. G«» chrometoyrem of PCB-1248.
Column- 3% SP-2250 on Supetcaport
Program: SO"C. 4 mm..8° per mits to 270°C.
Cetactor: Mass spectrometer
18 20 22 24 2<5 28 30 32 34 36 38
Retention time, minutfs
Flgur* 11. Get ehromatogrtm of PCB-1254.
Column: 3% SP-2250 on Supelcoport
Progrem: SVC. 4 min.. 8" our min. to 270°C.
Detector: Mess spectrometer
m/r=J5 to 450
m/z=394
m/z=330
625-18
18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
Retention time, minutes
Figure 12. Gt chromatogrum of PCS-1260.
July 1982
462
------- |