#5595_2012

INSPECTION REPORT ROUTING SHEET

To be attached to all inspection reports in-house only.

Laboratory Cert. #: 5595

Laboratory Name: Agriment Services, Inc.

Inspection Type: Field Initial

Inspector Name(s): Todd Crawford

Inspection Date: August 9, 2012

Date Report Completed: August 24, 2012

Date Forwarded to Reviewer: August 24, 2012

Reviewed by: Chet Whiting

Date Review Completed: September 4, 2012

Cover Letter to use: X Insp. Initial Insp. Reg. Insp. No Finding Insp. CP ___Corrected

Unit Supervisor: Dana Satterwhite

Date Received: September 4, 2012

Date Forwarded to Linda: September 10, 2012

Date Mailed: September 10, 2012

_____________________________________________________________________

On-Site Inspection Report

LABORATORY NAME: Agriment Services, Inc.

ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1096
Beaulaville, NC 28518

CERTIFICATE #: 5595

DATE OF INSPECTION: August 9, 2012

TYPE OF INSPECTION: Field Initial

AUDITOR(S): Todd Crawford

LOCAL PERSON(S) CONTACTED: Ronnie G. Kennedy, Jr.

I. INTRODUCTION:

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 facility has all the equipment necessary to perform the analyses. Proficiency Testing (PT) samples
have been analyzed for all certified parameters for the 2012 proficiency testing calendar year, however
the final report has not yet been issued.

Please be reminded that acceptable PT results must be received in our office before September 30,
2012 in order to satisfy the 2012 PT requirements. Be sure to report the correct method reference as
well as your EPA Lab Code number and NC Certification number when submitting results.

Contracted analyses are performed by Microbac Laboratories, Inc. (Certification #11).

III. FINDINGS, REQUIREMENTS, COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

Documentation

A. Finding: The laboratory needs to increase the documentation of purchased materials and
reagents.

Requirement: All chemicals, reagents, standards and consumables used by the laboratory
must have the following information documented: Date Received, 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 and/or 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. Ref: Quality Assurance Policies for Field
Laboratories.
Page 2
#5595 Agriment Services, Inc.

B. Finding: Data is frequently recorded using a pencil.

Requirement: All documentation errors must be corrected by drawing a single line through the
error so that the original entry remains legible. Entries shall not be obliterated by erasures or
markings. Wite-Out®, correction tape or similar products designed to obliterate documentation
are not to be used. Write the correction adjacent to the error. The correction must be initialed
by the responsible individual and the date of change documented. All data and log entries must
be written in indelible ink. Pencil entries are not acceptable. Ref: Quality Assurance Policies for
Field Laboratories.

C. Finding: The laboratory is not documenting Proficiency Testing (PT) sample analyses in the
same manner as environmental samples.

Requirement: All PT sample analyses must be recorded in the daily analysis records as for any
environmental sample. This serves as the permanent laboratory record. Ref: Proficiency Testing
Requirements, February 20, 2012, Revision 1.2.

Comment: 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.

pH – Standard Methods, 18th Edition, 4500 H+ B

D. Finding: Values were reported that exceed the method specified accuracy (0.1 units) for this
analysis.

Requirement: 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. Ref: Standard
Methods, 4500 H+ B-2000, (6).

E. Finding: Meter calibration times are not consistently documented.

Requirement: Time of calibration must be documented whenever sample analysis is
performed. Ref: North Carolina Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification Approved
Procedure for Field Analysis of pH.

IV. PAPER TRAIL INVESTIGATION:

The paper trail consisted of comparing field testing records and contract lab reports to Discharge
Monitoring Reports (DMRs) submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality. Data were
reviewed for permit # AWS980023 for July and December, 2011, and June, 2012. No transcription
errors were detected. The facility appears to be doing a good job of accurately transcribing data.

Although no instances were observed, the analyst stated that he was unaware that data qualifiers from
the contract laboratory reports needed to be transcribed to the DMRs. The Quality Assurance Policies
for Field Laboratories document states in part: 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 Discharge Monitoring Report (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.

Page 3
#5595 Agriment Services, Inc.

V. CONCLUSIONS:

Correcting the above-cited findings will help this lab to produce quality data and meet certification
requirements. The inspector would like to thank the staff for its assistance during the inspection and
data review process. Please respond to all findings.

Report prepared by: Todd Crawford Date: August 24, 2012
Report reviewed by: Chet Whiting Date: September 4, 2012