#349 11-final

INSPECTION REPORT ROUTING SHEET

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

Laboratory Cert. #: #349

Laboratory Name: Warren County WWTP Laboratory

Inspection Type: Municipal Maintenance

Inspector Name(s): Jeffrey R. Adams

Inspection Date: June 21, 2011

Date Report Completed: June 27, 2011

Date Forwarded to Reviewer: June 27, 2011

Reviewed by: Todd Crawford

Date Review Completed: June 28, 2011

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

Unit Supervisor: Dana Satterwhite

Date Received: July 1, 2011

Date Forwarded to Alberta: July 8, 2011

Date Mailed: July 8, 2011

_____________________________________________________________________

On-Site Inspection Report

LABORATORY NAME: Warren County WWTP Laboratory

NPDES PERMIT #: NC0020834

ADDRESS: P.O. Box 281
Warrenton, NC 27589

CERTIFICATE #: 349

DATE OF INSPECTION: June 21, 2011

TYPE OF INSPECTION: Municipal Maintenance

AUDITOR(S): Jeffrey R. Adams

LOCAL PERSON(S) CONTACTED: William Perkinson and Al Alexander

I. INTRODUCTION:

This laboratory was inspected to verify its compliance with the requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0800 for
the analysis of environmental samples.

II. GENERAL COMMENTS:

The laboratory was clean and well organized. The facility has all the equipment necessary to perform the
analyses. The laboratory is doing an exceptional job, maintaining its traceability requirements, however,
some quality control procedures need to be implemented. Proficiency testing samples have been
analyzed for all certified parameters for the 2010 proficiency testing calendar year and the graded results
were 100% acceptable. As a reminder, the 2011 proficiency testing results must be submitted by your
vendor and received in the certification laboratory no later than October 31, 2011.

The laboratory was given a packet containing North Carolina Laboratory Certification quality control
requirements and policy changes during the inspection.

III. FINDINGS, REQUIREMENTS, COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

Analytical Balance Weights:

A. Finding: The analytical balance weights have not been verified against ASTM standard
weights.

Requirement: ASTM Class 1 and 2 weights must be verified at least every 5 years. ASTM
Class 1 weights (20 g to 25 kg) and ASTM Class 2 weights (10 g to 1 mg) are equivalent to the
NBS Class S weights specified in 15A NCAC 2H .0805 (a) (7) (K). Ref: North Carolina
Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification Policy. A guidance and technical
assistance document on weight verifications was left for the analysts during the
inspection.

Page 2
#349 Warren County W W TP Laboratory

IV. PAPER TRAIL INVESTIGATION:

The paper trail consisted of comparing laboratory benchsheets and contract lab reports to Discharge
Monitoring Reports (DMRs) submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality. Data were
reviewed for the Warren County WWTP (NPDES permit #NC0020834) for February, March and April,
2011. The following errors were noted:

Date Parameter Location Value from
Contract Data
Value on DMR
02/08/11 Ammonia
Nitrogen
Effluent <0.02 mg/L 0.00 mg/L*
02/15/11 BOD Effluent <2.6 mg/L** <2.0 mg/L

*The North Carolina NPDES Permitting and Compliance Section’s, Instructions for Completing a DMR,
requires the following: For calculation purposes only, recorded values of less than a detectable limit (<
#.##) may be considered to equal zero (0) for all parameters except Fecal Coliform, for which values of
"less than" may be considered to be equal to one (1). Values of results which are less than a
detectable limit should be reported in the daily cells using the "less than" symbol (<) and the detectable
limit used during the testing (or the value with appropriate unit conversion). Please note there is never
a case when an average would need to be recorded along with a "less than" symbol.

** A lower detection limit of 2.0 mg/L is established by the method requirement for a minimum DO
depletion of 2.0 mg/L. The contract laboratory will be contacted by this office regarding the proper
reporting of BOD results.

In order to avoid questions of legality, it is recommended that you contact the appropriate Regiona l
Office for guidance as to whether an amended Discharge Monitoring Report will be required. A copy of
this report will be forwarded to the Regional Office.

V. CONCLUSIONS:

Correcting the above-cited finding 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: Jeffrey R. Adams Date: June 27, 2011
Report reviewed by: Todd Crawford Date: June 28, 2011