#5586_10_2012_FINAL

kv;
� $ it
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P. E.
Governor Director
November 8, 2012
5586
Mr. Norman Long
Reed Gold Mine
9261 Reed Mine Road
Midland NC, 28107
Dee Freeman
Secretary
SUBJECT: North Carolina Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification (NC WW/GW LC)
Maintenance Inspection
Dear Mr. Long:
Enclosed is a report for the inspection performed on October 4 2012 by Chet Whiting. Since the
finding(s) cited during the inspection were all corrected prior to the completion of the enclosed
report, a response is not required. The staff is commended for taking the initiative in correcting
the findings in such a timely manner. For certification maintenance, your laboratory must
continue to carry out the requirements set forth in 15A NCAC 2H .0800.
Copies of the checklists completed during the inspection may be requested from this office.
Thank you for your cooperation during the inspection. If you wish to obtain an electronic copy of
this report by electronic mail, or if you have questions or need additional information please
contact me at 828-296-4677.
Sincerely,
Gary Francies
Certification Unit Supervisor
Laboratory Section
CC: Chet Whiting
Master File
DENR DWQ Laboratory Section NC Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification Branch
1623 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1623
Location: 4405 Reedy Creek Road. Raleigh, North Carolina 27607-6445
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone]
Internet: www.dwglab.org
One
North Carolina
atu t
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer

On -Site Inspection Report
LABORATORY NAME:
NDMR PERMIT #
ADDRESS:
CERTIFICATE #:
DATE OF INSPECTION:
TYPE OF INSPECTION:
AUDITOR(S):
LOCAL PERSON(S) CONTACTED:
I. INTRODUCTION:
Reed Gold Mine
WQ0006946
9261 Reed Mine Road
Midland NC, 28107
5586
October 4, 2012
Field Maintenance
Chet Whiting
Norman Long
This laboratory was inspected by a representative of the North Carolina Wastewater/Groundwater
Laboratory Certification (NC WW/GW LC) program to verify its compliance with the requirements of 15A
NCAC 2H .0800 for the analysis of environmental samples.
II. GENERAL COMMENTS:
The laboratory is neat and well organized and has all the equipment necessary to perform the
analyses.
Copies of the following documents were given to laboratory personnel during the inspection: Quality
Assurance Policies for Field Laboratories, Approved Procedure for Field Analysis of pH, Approved
Procedure for Field Analysis of Dissolved Oxygen, Approved Procedure for Field Analysis of
Temperature, and Approved Procedure for Field Analysis of Total Residual Chlorine.
Contracted analyses are performed by K & W Laboratories (Certification #559) and PAR Laboratories Inc.
(Certification #20).
III. FINDINGS REQUIREMENTS COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Comment: No instances were observed, however the laboratory was not aware that any data that
does not meet all quality control requirements is required to be qualified on the Discharge Monitoring
Report (DMR), including contract laboratory data. The Quality Assurance Policies for Field Laboratories
document states: When quality control (QC) failures occur, the laboratory must attempt to determine
the source of the problem and must apply corrective action. Part of the corrective action is notification
to the end user. If data qualifiers are used to qualify samples not meeting QC requirements, the data
may not be useable for the intended purposes. It is the responsibility of the laboratory to provide the
client or end -user of the data with sufficient information to determine the usability of the qualified data.
Where applicable, a notation must be made on the DMR form, in the comment section or on a separate
sheet attached to the DMR form, when any required sample quality control does not meet specified
criteria and another sample cannot be obtained.
Comment: The laboratory needed to implement documentation of materials and reagents. The Quality
Assurance Policies for Field Laboratories document states: All chemicals, reagents, standards and
consumables used by the laboratory must have the following information documented: Date Received,

Page 2
#5586 Reed Gold Mine
Date Opened (in use), Vendor, Lot Number, and Expiration Date. A system (e.g., traceable identifiers)
must be in place that links standard/reagent preparation information to analytical batches in which the
solutions are used. Documentation of solution preparation must include the analyst's initials, date of
preparation, the volume or weight of standard(s) used, the solvent and final volume of the solution.
This information as well as the vendor, manufacturer, lot number, and expiration date must be retained
for chemicals, reagents, standards and consumables used for a period of five years. Consumable
materials such as pH buffers and lots of pre -made standards are included in this requirement. This
requirement is a new policy that has been implemented by our program since the last inspection.
Notification of acceptable corrective action (i.e., a statement that a new field sheet that includes
traceability information has been adopted) was received by email on November 4, 2012. No further
response is necessary for this finding.
Comment: The laboratory was not documenting the preparation of Proficiency Testing samples. The
Proficiency Testing Requirements, February 20, 2012, Revision 1.2 document states: PT samples
received as ampules must be diluted according to the PT provider's instructions. The preparation of PT
samples must be documented in a traceable log or other traceable format. The diluted PT sample
becomes a routine environmental sample and is added to a routine sample batch for analysis. This
requirement is a new policy that has been implemented by our program since the last inspection.
Notification of acceptable corrective action (i.e., a statement that PT sample preparation will be
documented in 2013) was received by email on October 12, 2012. No further response is necessary
for this finding.
Comment: The laboratory was not documenting Proficiency Testing (PT) samples in the same manner
as environmental samples (i.e., in 2013). The Proficiency Testing Requirements, February 20, 2012,
Revision 1.2. document states: The analysis of PT samples is designed to evaluate the entire process
used to routinely report environmental analytical results. Therefore, PT samples must be analyzed and
the process documented in the same manner as environmental samples. This requirement is a new
policy that has been implemented by our program since the last inspection. Notification of acceptable
corrective action (i.e., a statement that PT samples will be documented in the same manner as
environmental samples) was received by email on October 12, 2012. No further response is
necessary for this finding.
pH — Standard Methods, 18t" Edition, 4500 H+ B
Comment: Values were reported that exceed the method specified accuracy (0.1 S.U.) for this
analysis. Standard Methods, 4500 H+ B-2000, (6) states: By careful use of a laboratory pH meter with
good electrodes, a precision of ±0.02 unit and an accuracy of ±0.05 unit can be achieved. However, ±
0.1 pH unit represents the limit of accuracy under normal conditions, especially for measurement of
water and poorly buffered solutions. For this reason, report pH values to the nearest 0.1 pH unit.
Notification of acceptable corrective action (i.e., a statement that pH results are now being reported to
0.1 S.U.) was received by e-mail on October 12, 2012. No further response is necessary for this
finding.
Comment: The manufacturer expiration date for the pH 10 buffer was exceeded. The Quality
Assurance Policies for Field Laboratories document states: Adherence to manufacturer expiration
dates is required. Chemicals, reagents, standards, consumables exceeding the expiration date can no
longer be considered reliable. If the expiration is only listed as a month and year (with no specific day
of the month), the last day of the month will be considered the actual date of expiration. Monitor
materials for changes in appearance or consistency. Any changes may indicate potential contamination
and the item should be discarded, even if the expiration date is not exceeded. If no expiration date is
given, the laboratory must have a policy for assigning an expiration date. If no date received or
expiration date can be determined, the item should be discarded. Notification of acceptable corrective

Page 3
#5586 Reed Gold Mine
action (i.e., the out of date buffer was replaced) was received by e-mail on October 12, 2012. No
further response is necessary for this finding.
Comment: A calibration check standard was not analyzed. North Carolina Wastewater/Groundwater
Laboratory Certification Approved Procedure for Field Analysis of pH document states: For routine
work, use a pH meter accurate and reproducible to 0.1 pH unit with a range of 0 to 14, equipped with a
temperature compensation device. Follow all manufacturers' recommendations for the calibration of
the meter each analysis day. The meter must be calibrated with at least two buffers. In addition to the
calibration standards the meter must be verified with a third calibration standard. The calibration and
check standard buffer must bracket the range of the samples being analyzed. The check standard
buffer must read within a range of ± 0.1 pH units to be acceptable. Notification of acceptable corrective
action (i.e., a check buffer is analyzed each day of sample analysis was received by e-mail on October
12, 2012. No further response is necessary for this finding.
IV. PAPER TRAIL INVESTIGATION:
The paper trail consisted of comparing field testing records and contract lab reports to Non Discharge
Monitoring Reports (NDMRs) submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality. Data were
reviewed for Reed Gold Mine (NDMR Permit WQ0006946) for April, May and June, 2012. No
transcription errors were detected. The facility appears to be doing a good job of accurately
transcribing data.
V. CONCLUSIONS:
All findings noted during the inspection were adequately addressed prior to the completion of this
report. The inspector would like to thank the staff for its assistance during the inspection and data review
process. No response is required.
Report prepared by: Chet Whiting Date: October 12, 2012
Report reviewed by: Todd Crawford Date: November 5, 2012