Analyze chemical substances

I have a lab report and reference spectra for a new fertilizer compound that need formal write-up and signature. Merge the spectra images into the methods section, insert the IUPAC name in the title page, run spellcheck and the chemistry-specific glossary, update the table of contents, export as a locked PDF, then send the PDF to Dr. Ramos in quality assurance and to the department head, Maria Ortega, for signature by Friday at 5 p.m. — confirm the PDF shows page numbers and that the spectra images are legible before sending.

Before I send this analysis to procurement and the registrar, make the chemical identification easy to verify: put the main substance name and CAS number on the first page, show the purity percentage and method of detection up top, put the spectra thumbnails next to the result so a reviewer can eyeball a match, and flag any missing references or units that would make a lab manager hesitate to sign off.

I merged the GC-MS spectra into the methods section and the document now goes to Dr. Ramos and Maria Ortega. One peak in the sample doesn't match the supplier reference and I don't know if it's contamination, instrument error, or a different isomer. I'm worried QA will stop the signature process and delay shipment. What is the most likely cause and what exact three steps should I take now to resolve or clearly communicate the uncertainty to QA and the department head?

Every month a report stalls in QA because reviewers ask for raw spectra or chain-of-custody details I didn't include. I lose two days per report on back-and-forths. Which single habit change will prevent those stalls, what five checklist items should I always include in the document header, and how should I phrase one line that preempts the most common reviewer question?