Laserfiche WebLink
Client: Coors Energy Company <br />Project/Site: Keenesburg Mine, CO <br />Job ID: 280 - 26708 -1 <br />Laboratory: TestAmerica Denver <br />Narrative <br />Case Narrative <br />TestAmerica Job ID: 280 - 26708 -1 <br />F47 <br />CASE NARRATIVE <br />Client: Coors Energy Company <br />Project: Keenesburg Mine, CO <br />Report Number: 280 - 26708 -1 <br />With the exceptions noted as flags or footnotes, standard analytical protocols were followed in the analysis of the samples and no <br />problems were encountered or anomalies observed. In addition all laboratory quality control samples were within established control <br />limits, with any exceptions noted below. Each sample was analyzed to achieve the lowest possible reporting limit within the constraints of <br />the method. In some cases, due to interference or analytes present at high concentrations, samples were diluted. For diluted samples, <br />the reporting limits are adjusted relative to the dilution required. <br />Calculations are performed before rounding to avoid round -off errors in calculated results. <br />All holding times were met and proper preservation noted for the methods performed on these samples, unless otherwise detailed in the <br />individual sections below. <br />RECEIPT <br />The samples were received on 03/16/2012; the samples arrived in good condition, properly preserved, and on ice. The temperature of the <br />coolers at receipt was 1.9 °C. <br />A sample ID discrepancy was noted between the information listed on the Chain of Custody and the sample container labels for all <br />samples. The container labels listed the sample ID's ending with a B, which was not reflected on the Chain of Custody. The samples <br />were logged without the B per the Chain of Custody. <br />DISSOLVED METALS (ICP) <br />Samples FPW (280- 26708 -1), DH -96 (280- 26708 -2), DH -122 (280- 26708 -3), AMW -1 (280- 26708 -4), AMW -2 (280- 26708 -5), and SMW -2 <br />(280- 26708 -6) were analyzed for dissolved metals (ICP) in accordance with EPA Method 200.7. The samples were prepared on <br />03/20/2012 and analyzed on 03/22/2012. <br />No difficulties were encountered during the metals analyses. <br />All quality control parameters were within the acceptance limits. <br />SODIUM ABSORPTION RATIO <br />Samples FPW (280- 26708 -1), DH -96 (280- 26708 -2), DH -122 (280- 26708 -3), AMW -1 (280- 26708 -4), AMW -2 (280- 26708 -5), and SMW -2 <br />(280- 26708 -6) were analyzed for Sodium Absorption Ratio in accordance with USDA Handbook 60 - 20B. The samples were analyzed on <br />03/23/2012. <br />No difficulties were encountered during the SAR analyses. <br />All quality control parameters were within the acceptance limits. <br />ALKALINITY <br />Samples FPW (280- 26708 -1), DH -96 (280- 26708 -2), DH -122 (280- 26708 -3), AMW -1 (280- 26708 -4), AMW -2 (280- 26708 -5), and SMW -2 <br />(280- 26708 -6) were analyzed for Alkalinity in accordance with SM20 2320B. The samples were analyzed on 03/22/2012. <br />No difficulties were encountered during the alkalinity analyses. <br />All quality control parameters were within the acceptance limits. <br />TestAmerica Denver <br />Page 4 of 31 3/27/2012 <br />