#5497 - 07-2010-FINAL

To be attached to all inspection reports in-house only.
Laboratory Cert. #:
Laboratory Name:
Inspection Type:
Inspector Name(s):
Inspection Date:
Date Report Completed:
Date Forwarded to Reviewer:
Reviewed by:
Date Review Completed:
Cover Letter to use:
Unit Supervisor:
Date Received:
Date Forwarded to Alberta:
Date Mailed:
5497
Town of Grover
Field Maintenance
Chet Whiting
July 29, 2010
August 31, 2010
August 31, 2010
David Livingston
September 2, 2010
Insp. Initial X Insp. Reg. Insp. No Finding Insp. CP
Gary Francies
9/2/2 10
9hlZoin
'` io 4

Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
5497
Mr. Mike Church
Town of Grover
P.O. Box 189
Grover, NC 28086
f
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
September 7, 2010
SUBJECT: North Carolina Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification (NC WWIGW LC)
Maintenance Inspection
Dear Mr. Churches
Dee Freeman
Secretary
Enclosed is a report for the inspection performed on July 29, 2010 by Chet Whiting. Where finding(s) are cited
in this report, a response is required. Within thirty days of receipt, please supply this office with a written item
for item description of how these finding(s) were corrected. If the finding(s) cited in the enclosed report are not
corrected, enforcement actions may be recommended. 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 email, or if you have
questions or need additional information please contact me at 828-296-4677.
Sincerely,
�.
Gary Francies
Unit Supervisor
Laboratory Section
CC: Chet Whiting
Central files
DENR DWQ Laboratory Section NG Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification Branch
1623 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699A623
Location: 4405 Reedy Creek Road, Ralegh, North Carolina 27607-6445
Phone: [phone] t FAX: [phone]
Internet www.dvhq%b.org
An Equal opportunity lAffirmative Ado Employer Customer ServicT1-877-623-6748 wx^N.ncvvatetquality.org
NonrthCarolina
Naturally

CERTIFICATE #:
TYPE OF INSPECTION:
AUDITOR{S):
LOCAL PER SONS) CONTACTED:
MossoninlitTaTolirgi •
On -Site inspection Report
Town of Grover
P.O. Box 189
Grover N.C. 28086
5497
July 29, 2010
Field Maintenance
Chet Whiting
Mike Church
This laboratory was inspected to verify its compliance with the requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0800 for
the analysis of environmental samples.
If. GENERAL COMMENTS:
The laboratory was clean, well maintained and well organized. Bench sheets and documents were well
designed.
Findings A and B are new policies that have been implemented by our program since the last inspection.
A. Finding: A few instances were observed where error corrections are not performed properly.
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-OutO, 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.
B. Finding: The auto-pipettors had not been calibrated annually as required.
Requirement: Mechanical volumetric liquid -dispensing devices (e.g., fixed and adjustable auto-
pipettors, bottle -top dispensers, etc.) must be calibrated at least every twelve months. Each
liquid -dispensing device must meet the manufacturer's statement of accuracy. For variable
volume devices used at more than one setting, check the accuracy at the maximum, middle and
minimum values. Testing at more than three volumes is optional. When a device capable of
variable settings is dedicated to dispense a single specific volume, calibration is required at that
setting only. Ref: Quality Assurance Policies for Field Laboratories.

Page 2
##5497 Town of Grover
Total Residual Chlorine — Standard Methods, 18`h Edition, 4500 CI' G
C. Finding: The laboratory is not properly reporting data at or below the reporting limit.
Requirement: The concentrations of the calibration standards must bracket the concentrations of
the samples analyzed. One of the standards must have a concentration equal to or below the
lower reporting concentration for Total Residual Chlorine. Ref: Technical Assistance for Field
Analysis of Total Residual Chlorine
Comment: The reporting limit is currently adjusted by subtracting a background blank. The
reporting limit is defined as the true value of the standard. The current true value for the lowest
instrument curve verification standard is 25 pg/L. All readings below that value are to be reported
as less than 25 pg/L.
D. Finding: The calibration check standard is not in the mid -range of the verified calibration curve.
Requirement: When a five standard annual curve verification (option 1) is used the laboratory
must check the calibration curve each analysis day. To do this, the laboratory must analyze a
blank to zero the instrument and analyze a check standard each day that samples are
analyzed. The check standard concentration must be at mid range and recovery must be within
10% of the known value. Ref: Technical Assistance for Field Analysis of Total Residual
Chlorine.
Recommendation: We recommend extending the range of the analytical curve to 400 pg/L.
The current curve verification standards are 10, 20, 50, 100, and 130 pg/L. For ease of
preparation and too cover the entire range of the factory set calibration curve, we recommend
the following verification standard concentrations: 20 or 25, 30, 50, 200, & 400 pg/L. The low
gel standard could then be used for calibration verification since it will then be in the mid range.
Comment: This procedure may be performed in house or may be contracted to a vendor or
another laboratory. Each analyst does not have to perform a calibration verification if the
factory set curve is always used for sample measurement, and it is verified annually for
accuracy.
pH — Standard Methods, 181h Edition, 4500 H{ S
E. Finding: The pH meter was calibrated with three buffers; however no calibration check was
performed.
Requirement: In all cases, the meter must be calibrated with at least two buffers. Calibrating
with the pH 4 and pH 10 buffers meets standard methods requirements and brackets the pH
range for most monitoring (with the exception of sludge) scenarios. The calibration; however,
must bracket the range of the samples being analyzed, In addition to the calibration standards,
the meter must be verified with a third calibration standard (e.g., pH 7 buffer). Ref: Technical
Assistance for Field Analysis of pH.

IV.
V.
Page 3
#5497 Town of Grover
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 March, April and May, 2010. The following errors were noted:
Date
Parameter
Location
Contract Laic Data
Value on DMR
4/27110
BOD
Effluent
4.6 mg/L
4.8 mg/L
Date
Parameter
Location
Bench Sheet
Value on DMR
416/10
Temperature
Effluent
18ZC
17.4"C
514/10
Temperature.
Effluent
20.FC
20.5°C
3/31/2010 Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorous results from the contract laboratory facility were not
reported on the March DMR.
In order to avoid questions of legality and a possible monitoring frequency violation, it is recommended
that you contact the appropriate Regional 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,
CONCLUSIONS:
Correcting the above -cited findings and implementing the recommendation 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: Chet Whiting
Report reviewed by: David Livingston
Date: August 31, 2010
Date: September 2, 2010