UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Data Validation
Guidelines
Modules 1, 2, 3, and 4
Revised Table for Sample
Qualification in the
Presence of Blank
Contamination
Environmental Data Quality Workgroup
02/09/2022
CLEARED
For Open Publication
Department of Defense
OFFICE OF PREPUBLICATION AND SECURITY REVIEW
Feb 15, 2022
ADELSON.JORDAN.M.1268693137
Digitally signed by ADELSON.JORDAN.M.1268693137
Date: 2022.02.09 10:44:41 -05'00'
GILLETTE.JOHN.S.1123328350
Digitally signed by GILLETTE.JOHN.S.1123328350
Date: 2022.02.10 12:36:33 -06'00'
NEBELSICK.JOHN.D.1231361207
Digitally signed by NEBELSICK.JOHN.D.1231361207
Date: 2022.02.14 17:28:53 -06'00'
Data Validation Guidelines
Modules 1, 2, 3, and 4
Revised Table for Sample Qualification
in the Presence of Blank Contamination
John Nebelsick
Date
Army
Principal
John Gillette, Ph.D.
Date
Air Force
Principal
Jordan Adelson, Ph.D.
Date
Navy Principal, EDQW Chair
The Table A below replaces the following tables in the DoD Data Validation Guidelines Modules
and supersedes the previous replacement table dated 05/05/2021.
Module 1, Table III
Module 2, Table I
Module 3, Table II
Module 4, Table III
Table A: Sample Qualification in the Presence of Blank Contamination
Sample
Row
Number
Result
Validated
Result
Validation
Qualifier
1
non-detect or
detect ≤ LOD
Report at LOD
U
2
> LOD and ≤ 5x
blank
Report at Sample
Result
J+
3
> 5x blank
Report at Sample
Result
None
LOD = Limit of Detection
Note 1: The laboratory blank contamination qualifier (typically, B) is a part of the laboratory report. The validation
qualifier is identified in the validation report with reason codes for the qualifiers traceable to the blank contamination.
See the General Data Validation Guidelines appendices 5 and 7 for examples. During the data usability assessment,
the DUA team has both sets of information available.
Note 2: The Data Validation Subgroup acknowledges the differences in the QSM requirements for qualification of the
method blank by the laboratory and qualification of all blanks by the validator. The method blank, having gone
through only the laboratory processing steps and not the field sample handling, should be the most controlled of the
blanks. Additionally, the laboratory may reprocess the method blank and samples in order to address the
contamination. The laboratory does not evaluate the results of or qualify data based upon field, equipment, trip, or
other blanks.
The Data Validation Subgroup encourages project development teams to set acceptance requirements for blanks
based upon project DQOs. In the absence of those project-specific requirements, these guidelines are written to allow
for a higher blank contamination tolerance resulting in a more conservative approach to qualification based upon
potential contamination. In other words, the assumption that detects in samples are attributed to contamination rather
than true sample concentration is minimized, thus minimizing the assumption of false positives.
It is expected that during data usability analysis, the DUA team will review qualifications from the laboratory and from
the validator as well as comments contained in the laboratory case narrative and the validation report. The DUA team
can then take into consideration whether they believe it more appropriate to consider a result qualified as biased high
as a non-detect based upon decision criteria and other quality measures within the data set.
