QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN DELTA … ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN DELTA QUARRIES AND DISPOSE STOTLER...

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN

DELTA QUARRIES AND DISPOSESTOTLER LANDFILL

RI/FS

Section No.: 0.0Revision No.:' 2Date: August 29, 1988Page: 1 of 5

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN

DELTA QUARRIES AND DISPOSAL, INC./STOTLER LANDFILL

RI/FS

JUNE 3, 1988

REVISED

AUGUST 29, 1988

Meiser & Earl, Inc.

Project Manager/QA Officer

USEPA

Project Officer

QA Officer ~ "

IIJ

Section No.: 0.0Revision No.: 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 2 of 5

INDIVIDUALS RECEIVING A COPY OF THE QAPP

Donna McCartney, Remedial Project Officer, USEPAJohn Scalera, QAO USEPAMike Krancer, Esq.Carl Everett, Esq.Heidi Smith, Project Manager, M&EEd Melser, M&EBob Hershey, M&E

Section No.: 0.0Revision No-. : 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 3 of 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS•

1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION

3.0 QA OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA

4.0 SAMPLING PROCEDURES

5.0 SAMPLE CUSTODY

6.0 CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY

7.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

8.0 DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION AND REPORTING

9.0 INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL CHECKS

10.0 PERFORMANCE AND SYSTEM AUDITS

11.0 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE

12.0 SPECIFIC SOP'S USED TO ASSESS DATA PRECISION,ACCURACY, REPRESENTATIVENESS AND COMPLETENESS

.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION

14.0 QA REPORTING PROCEDURES

APPENDICES


LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

\BLE • ... PAGE

*-. DELTA RI/FS TASKS 5 of 10

2-1 LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS . 2 of 10

2-2 SUBCONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITIES 4 of 10

4-1 SUMMARY OF SAMPLING PROGRAM FOR THE DELTA SITE 3 of 7

7-1 QUALITY CONTROL PROTOCOLS FOR NON-TCL PARAMETERS 2 of 3

7-2 ANALYTICAL METHODS , 3 of 3

FIGURE

1-1 SITE LOCATION MAP _ . 3 of 10

2-1 PROJECT TEAM ORGANIZATION 3 of 10

^300246


LIST OF APPENDICES

A NUS LABORATORY'S QUALITY ASSURANCE

B NUS LABORATORY'S QA/QC PROGRAM

C RESUMES OF MEISER & EARL, INC'S. TECHNICAL STAFF

D RESUMES OF SUBCONTRACTORS

E METHODS OF ANALYSIS FOR GROSS ALPHA AND GROSS BETA AND ALPHA-EMITTING RADIUMISOTOPES

F ELECTROMAGNETIC INDUCTION FOR LATERAL WASTE EXTENT GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY

G OPERATING AND CALIBRATION PROCEDURES

H NUS LSD PROCEDURES MANUAL .-..INORGANIC REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-HSC PARAMETERS

I NUS DETECTION LIMITS - ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

J NUS DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION AND REPORTING

K DATA SUMMARY FORMS, DATA VALIDATION SUMMARY FORMS, DATA PACKAGE REPORTINGFORMS

L LANCY'S PROGRAM FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION

M BIOASSAY QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM

N BIOASSAY RECORDS AND DATA REPORTING

0 CLP PRESERVATIVES AND HOLDING TIMES, AND COMPARISON OF.QC PROTOCOLS FOR GCAND GC/MS ANALYSES

Section No.: 1.0Revision No.: 2Date: August 29, 1988Page: 1 of 10

1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1 Introduction

Meiser & Earl, Inc. (M&E) has been contracted by Delta Quarries and

Disposal, Inc. (Delta) to complete a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility

Study (RI/FS) at the Delta Quarries and Disposal, Inc./Stotler Landfill Site

(Delta Site) in Antis and Logan Townships, Blair County, Pennsylvania. The

schedule for completion of the Delta RI/FS is presented in the Delta Remedial

Investigation site Operations Plan (RISOP).

The field and analytical data generated during the RI will be the basis for

identifying and evaluating remedial measures as part of the FS. Therefore, the

quality of the data generated during the RI is crucial in ensuring the quality

of the FS remedial alternatives. In addition, the site-specific Quality

Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) is essential to ensure that data collected are

representative and legally defensible.

Quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) protocols must be instituted

Jiring field activities, office functions and laboratory analysis. The QAPP

will detail QA/QC procedures pertinent to these three areas. Field activities

requiring QA/QC include sampling, sample handling and documentation, daily site

logs, drilling and aquifer testing. Data validation, review and compilation,

and progress reports are office activities which require consistent QA/QC review

throughout the RI. Laboratory analyses and analytical reports require extensive

QA/QC as dictated by the Contract Laboratory Program (CLP). The Quality

Assurance Manual and QA/QC Program Summary for the Laboratory Services Division

Group of NUS Corporation are attached as Appendices A and B.

This QAPP and the RISOP compliment each other and should be used together

AR3002U8


throughout the Delta RI/FS. Much of the QA/QC protocols are detailed in the

RISOP and are referenced in the QAPP as such.

1-2 Objectives - - --

The two objectives of this RI/FS are to: 1) determine the nature and

extent of any threat to the public health or welfare or the environment caused

by any release or threatened release of hazardous substances, pollutants or

contaminants from the Delta Site, and 2) determine and evaluate alternatives for

remedial action, if any are necessary, to prevent, mitigate or otherwise respond

to or remedy any release or threatened release of hazardous substances,

pollutants or contaminants from the Delta Site. ' The first objective, as

described above, will be accomplished during the Remedial Investigation (RI)

and the second objective will be completed during the Feasibility Study (FS).

1.3 Site Background _......

The Delta Site includes a landfill about 57 acres in size (see Figure 1-1).

This landfill was originally operated from about 1964 to 1976 as two seperate

landfills, Stotler Landfill and Parshall Landfill. In 1976 the .operation of the

two landfills was combined and managed as the Stotler Landfill. Delta Quarries

and Disposal, Inc. purchased the Stotler Landfill in 1978 and operated it until

1985. A closure plan for the landfill is being completed in compliance with a

Consent Order and Agreement (COA) between Delta and the Pennsylvania Department

of Environmental Resources (PADER) dated November 1, 1984. As part of this COA,

a minimum 4-foot soil cover was placed over the entire landfill during the

Summer of 1987.

Meiser & Earl has been the hydrogeology consultant for the Delta Landfill

fift3002i*9

FIGURE /-/ Section No. 1.0SITE LOCATION MAP Revision No. .1

DELTA QUARRIES AND DISPOSAL/STOTLER LANDFILL***'*' June 3' 19fAnt is and Logon Townships Page: 3 of 1^

Altoona, PA

<APPROXIMATE FILL BOUNDARY!

From: U.S.G.S. 7 1/2' Bellwood.PAQuadrangle, PR 1972.

I 1512 W. COLLEGE AVE.SCALE: r—————I N

0 2OOO f«et

MEISER & EARL, INC. / HydrogeologiS

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801

Section No.-: 1.0Revision No.: 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: A of 10

since January 1979. Since then, M&E has performed field investigations

including permit applications, ground-water monitoring and compliance tasks for

the PADER COA. Findings and observations of our investigations include the

following:

o Results of ground-water monitoring around the landfill

have shown volatile organic contamination (VOC's), in

particular In the area west of the site;

o Initial studies indicate that the main ground-water

flow directions are to the west toward the Little Juniata

River and to the northeast along bedrock strike and

o Surface erosion and sedimentation is being managed by

on-site surface-water diversions and sedimentation ponds.

A more comprehensive summary of analytical results of samples collected at

the Delta Site is found in the Delta Work Plan (WP) , Section II.

1 - 4 Scope . . _ . - - . -

The Work Plan comprises a scope of work designed to meet the objectives of

the RI/FS, stated earlier. The RI/FS is comprised of two phases to meet these

objectives: the remedial Investigation and the feasibility study. The WP scope

of work will address both the RI and the FS by completing 28 tasks (Table 1-1).

The RI tasks are grouped into three phases: Initial Activities, Site

Characterization and Post Screening Field Investigation. Therefore, Tasks 1

through 24 are part of the RI, Tasks 25 through 27 comprise the FS and Task 28

involves preparing the preliminary and final RI and FS reports.

4R30025I

Section No.; 1.0Revision No.: 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 5 of 10

TABLE 1-1

LIST OF TASKS

Task 1: Data Collection, Evaluation and ManagementTask 2: Initial Site.ReconnaissanceTask 3: Site Specific Health and Safety PlanTask 4: Remedial Investigation Site Operations PlanTask 5: Project ManagementTask 6: Topographic MappingTask 7: Rights of Entry and Other AuthorizationsTask 8: Community Relations SupportTask 9: Data Quality Objectives and Applicable or Relevant

and Appropriate RequirementsTask 10: Field SurveyTask 11: Well Inventory-Task 12: Soil Gas SurveyTask 13: Lateral and Vertical Extent of Waste SurveyTask 14: Soil InvestigationTask 15: Surface Water and Sediments SurveyTask 16: Aquatic and Terrestrial Life Studies and Wetlands DelineationTask 17: Hydrogeologic InvestigationTask 18: Ground-Water ModelingTask 19: Data ValidationTask 20: Field AuditTask 21: Risk AssessmentTask 22: Analysis and Evaluation of Remedial Investigation DataTask 23: Selection of Remedial Action Objectives and EvaluationTask 24: Identification of Potential Remedial MeasuresTask 25: Performance of Laboratory and Field Treatability StudiesTask 26: Evaluation of Remedial Alternatives —"ask 27: Conceptual Design of Selected Remedial Measureiask 28: Preparation of Preliminary and Final Remedial Investigation

and Feasibility Study Reports

5R300252

Section No.: 1.0Revision No,: 2Date; August 29, 1988Page: 6 of 10

A description of the sampling network design and rationale is presented in

the RISOP. The RISOP will address: 1) design of the overall monitoring

systems, 2) specific sampling types, locations and techniques, 3) justificaion

for the overall monitoring design, 4) parameters to be measured, 5) sample

matrices, 6) frequency of sample collection, and 7) sample collection

procedures.

1.5 Data Collection, Evaluation and Management

Data to be collected, evaluated and managed throughout the Delta RI/FS

includes the "existing data" and new data to be generated. For purposes of the

Delta RI/FS, "existing data" will include information currently held by M&E

since our involvement at the site in 1979 and any additional existing

information collected. "New data" will include all information generated as a

result of the Delta RI/FS mainly from field-related tasks. A distinction should

be made between "analytical data" and "other information" gathered. "Analytical

data" includes laboratory analyses from sampling episodes. Existing analytical

.-ta is comprised of ground-water analyses from episodes of monitoring Site and

residential wells. New analytical data to be generated during the Delta RI/FS

will include analytical results from ground-water, surface-water, soil and

sediment sampling episodes. "Other information" includes such items as geologic

logs, maps and cross sections, water-table maps, aerial photography, topographic

maps, etc. For purposes of this QAPP, "data" will generally refer to analytical

data only. Data usages are presented in more detail in the Delta Work Plan and

RISOP.

5R300253

Section No.: 1.0^Revision No. : 2Date: August 29, 1988Page: 7 of 10

1.5.1 Data/Information Collection - A collection of additional existing

data/information will be conducted to supplement background information

currently held by M&E. This data/information collection task primarily will

serve to fill in chronological data gaps. Meiser & Earl has extensive site

information and analytical results since our involvement at the Delta Site from

1979 to the present. Background information currently held by M&E has been

summarized in Section II - "Site Background", of the Delta RI/FS Work Plan. The

collection of "new" existing data/information will focus on activities prior to

1979. In particular, sources of new information may include:

o State and regional PADER and USEPA file data;

o County Planning Commissions and Township Municipal Authorities;

o Local residents and former employees of the Delta facility

knowledgeable about historic disposal of wastes;

o Local well drilling companies;

o Historical aerial photographs, and

* U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service.

The collection of existing data/information also will yield a summary of

previous response actions conducted by either Local, State, Federal or private

parties. This history of response actions and a summary of existing

data/information will be presented in the RI Report.

Collection of new data will be made during the Delta RI/FS, mainly during

field activities. This information will supplement existing information and

will provide additional data for site characterization. The media to be

sampled, the number of samples and sample types to be collected, plus the

analyses to be conducted are listed in Table 4-1. The quality assurance

Section No.: 1.0Revision No.: " 2Date: August 29, 1988

. . : Page: 8 of 10

objectives and criteria for the new data to be collected are discussed in

Section 3.0, Sampling procedures are presented in Section 4.0,

If a modification of the RI/FS Work Plan is needed based on the review of

these data, M&E will make a recommendation to USEPA for a revised scope of work.

1.5.2 Data Evaluation - Evaluation of existing data/information, in

particular analytical data, will follow procedures outlined in "Guidance on

Remedial Investigations Under CERCIA", EPA/540/G-85/002, June 1985. Existing

analytical data will be evaluated for validity, sufficiency and sensitivity. As

clarified at meetings with USEPA held December 3, 1987 and March 11, 1988, the

intended use of existing analytical data is only for the purposes of comparison

with the new analytical data to be generated. The abundant existing analytical

data will not be used exclusively to determine remedial actions since it was not

analyzed under CLP protocols and subsequently has not undergone scrutiny by

USEPA. Existing analytical data will, however, be qualitatively evaluated

according to the above-mentioned USEPA document guidances.

As part of the evaluation of existing data, the accumulated data will be

evaluated to identify any additional data gaps not addressed in the WP, QAPP and

RISOP. Additional data gaps will be discussed with USEPA and addressed

accordingly.

New data generated as part of the Delta RI/FS will be evaluated by

undergoing CLP validation procedures as described in Work Plan Task 19. In

addition, new data will be evaluated to determine whether it meets identified

data quality objectives (DQO's) (Work Plan Task 9, RISOP Section 5.0), and has

undergone quality assurance and quality controls (QA/QC's) as delineated in this

QAPP. New data also will be evaluated for its sufficiency in characterizing the

flft300255


nature and extent of contamination. This Is of particular interest when

evaluating whether additional sampling Is required and in Identifying possible

remedial measures.

1.5.3 Data Management - Data management must be conducted for two types of

information generated during the Delta RI/FS. The first type of Information to

ft managed will be the technical data such as existing and new analytical data

and other Site-related information. The technical data includes both Site

background data/Information and data/information generated by the RI/FS tasks.

The second type of Information to be managed is related to project

management, which Includes schedules, task cost estimates, project tracking

forms, and monthly progress reports. Project management is discussed further In

Work Plan Task 5.

Meiser & Earl will be processing and storing the existing and new

data/information throughout the RI/FS. Field measurements and observations will

be recorded in the field logbook. A carbon copy of the logbook pages will be

kept In the project file as part of the permanent record. Additional data-

processing methods, including sample identification and chain-of-custody

procedures, are discussed In RISOP Section 25.0.

Data storage and document control will be maintained at M&E throughout the

RI/FS project. Existing data/information gathered will be sorted, organized and

filed chronologically. A duplicate set of all existing and new analytical

results will be maintained. Newly-generated RI/FS data/information, however,

will be separated and distinguished from existing data/information. All

analytical and project management data pertinent to the Delta Site also will be

4R300256

Section No.; 1.0Revision No.. : 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 10 of 10

computerized for storage. Back-up computer discs of analytical and report-

related information will be made and stored in a separate location. All

reports, correspondence, phone call reports, subcontractor information and

project tracking forms will be kept in both a project file and a main file.

This duplication effort will protect the project data/information from

intentional or accidental destruction or damage. Section 8.0 details additional

QA/QC protocols related to data management. . . -

5R300257


2.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION

Meiser & Earl will act as the prime contractor for the Delta RI/FS and will

participate in all phases of the project. Resumes of M&E's technical staff are

presented in Appendix G. We have assembled a team of ten firms to provide the

variety of specialized services needed to complete the comprehensive

requirements of the RI/FS. These firms are subcontracted directly to M&E.

2.1 Subcontractors

Meiser & Earl has selected these subcontractors, listed on Table 2-1, on the

basis of: 1) their qualifications and experience and 2) their working

relationship with M&E established on previous projects. Our familiarity with

these companies, gained through project experience, enables us to better

coordinate their responsiblities and intergrate our expertise with theirs.

The "Project Team Organization", Figure 2-1, shows the various disciplines

of each subcontractor and their position with respect to the Field Investigation

and/or Data Evaluation portions of the Delta RI/FS. This Figure also depicts

the management structure of the three key personnel from Meiser & Earl: Heidi

Smith, Bob Hershey and Ed Meiser. The "Subcontractor Responsibilities", Table

2-2, summarizes the specific tasks that each of the ten firms will provide.

Health and safety training, as mandated by OSHA regulations (29 CFR Part

1910) for hazardous waste site activities will be required of all

subcontractors who have the potential to encounter hazardous waste. Meiser &

Earl provides this training to its employees.

A summary of our association with each of the subcontractors follows..

Resumes of the key personnel of each subcontractor are presented in Appendix D.

flR300258

TABLE 2-1 . ' Section No.: 2.0Revision No.: 2

MEISER & EARL, INC. Date: August 29, 1988LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS Page: 2 of 10

Delta Quarries and Disposal/Stotler LandfillRI/FS

CKS Engineers, Inc. Associates NUS Corporation88 South Main Street ' 5350 Campbells Run RoadDoylestown, PA 18901 Pittsburgh, PA 15205215-340-0600 412-788-1080Mr. Joe Nolan, P.E. Ms. Peg Marple

Funk's Well Drilling Phoenix Safety Associates, Ltd.R.D. 2, Box 131 1220 Valley Forge RoadNewville, PA 17241 Suite 34717-776-3181 or 717-423-6688 Valley Forge, PA 19481Mr. Lester Funk 215-935-1770

.._ . _ _ _ _ Ms. Barb RaskobGeoTrans, Inc. _ . • _ = . - .200 Exchange Place tallamy, VanKuren, Gertis & AssociatesSuite A Legislative Route 17065Herndon, VA 22070 P.O. Box 197703-435-4400 Lanse, PA 16849Mr. Charles R. Faust 814-345-5607

Mr. James E. Panel, P.L.S.Lancy Environmental Services CompanyP.O. Box 419Pittsburgh, PA 15230-0419412-772-1218Mr. John Rltzert

Layne Geosciences1401 Pershing BoulevardReading, PA 19607215 775-9921Mr. David Raymes

Martin and Martin, Inc.149 East Queen StreetChambersburg, PA 17201717-264-6759Mr. Richard M. Bodner, P.E.

Mine Tech EngineersR.D. #4, Box 87Altoona, PA 16601814 946-4242Mr. Kent Sell

3H30G259

O

gN

aUJ g£E w

£2u.

K- ^O Q^ D

Q- WUJDCc:<r>a§mo

> * «tn

' O S * —I " P S t-

o -t- «ss

flR300260

co00

O 0")

CM

• oo z2Cc o

O -H•H CD •• •J-> -H 02 CU > JJ C<D (D ffl (LCO Q£ O D.

•H M 1. V \•3 C •* *> iV O •! —I *

Section No.: 2.0* v .Revision No.: 2

Date: August 29, 1 98£Page; 4 of 10

*J w< M«l S W w« Jfl Q- •*«M ct •*< >-f a- •-< -HI O * cae ̂ rtf ^ 5 c

S ̂ rJ *> *> oS 3e -.-« u -( ofc J;f • c «O| CL. n (c

•2 ' JJ2 « £O-4J l~* r-t Q.fc. 3 C-°« n * v2 £ ** •»Q. 5 c tO O i-l cr** C

• *O•; « c n•O C « (B£ Q. c cO Q. O Ot. Q -rt T<ft- e *> jj

if ̂ o ci-< a. u n

..«**'>•f W £1

n 9 t- «

nvc-p * ^ ac»

v i.B *iW I c «

O -^t5 te

n v .. *g•-i _ o T M

* C = t -rt•** * .£ •- -uT< n •" ««" « CM *•-^ « "^ 5 ' ' c* g «t <*

S2 |fj 3tM M 5 fe.̂ r*^

sj;v -o

;5i l.|s as. I «? IK.

3 3 s5:3 -I I351 *s :«sl HI si

flR30n?fi


CKS Engineers, Inc. (CKS) - Raymond Schiwall, P.E., President of CKS, first

worked with us in 1983 on a project in southcentral Pennsylvania involving

extensive ground-water contamination by trichloroethylene (TCE). Meiser &

Earl's role in evaluating the extent of contamination complemented Mr.

Schiwall's task of assessing recovery and treatment of the TCE pollution. Since

that time M&E has consulted with CKS on an as-needed basis. Mr. Schiwall's

credentials and experience in the area of waste-water control, specifically In

landfill leachate and hazardous waste treatment, are essential to completing the

Delta RI/FS. Other CKS engineers offer expertise in landfill leachate

collection and treatment, landfill gas collection and disposal, design of

treatment facilities and selection of mechanical components. Joe Nolan will be

the project manager from CKS for the Delta RI/FS.

Funk's Well Drilling (Funk's) - Les Funk, owner and operator of Funk's Well

Drilling (FWD), has worked with M&E on numerous drilling projects since 1983.

These jobs Include drilling and test pumping public water supply wells, drilling

and construction of specialized monitoring wells for landfills and hazardous

waste sites and test drilling for hydrogeologic investigations. Mr. Funk has

demonstrated skill and efficiency while drilling in the difficult conditions

offered by the cavernous limestones and weathered sandstones typical of the

bedrock geology of the Delta Site. Funk's Well Drilling prides themselves in

their modern drilling equipment and comprehensive related services and

innovative drilling techniques. Mr. Funk currently serves on the Safety Council

of the National Water Well Association (NWWA) and has been an active member of

NWWA since 1972.

flR300262

Section No.: 2.0Revision No-1 : 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 6 of 10

GeoTrans, Inc. (GeoTrans) - Meiser & Earl's association with GeoTrans began

in 1985, but our professional affiliation with Charlie Faust, Executive Vice

President, Jack Guswa, Vice President and several other key members of the firm

dates back to the late 1960's. Our project experience with GeoTrans includes

consultation regarding ground-water modeling and geophysical surveying at two

landfill sites. GeoTrans expertise in quantifying ground-water movement and

predicting contaminant migration.ranks among the very best in the field.

GeoTrans has extensive project experience in hazardous waste investigation6-, in

particular their application of ground-water modeling to the evaluation of

remedial alternatives. This work comprises numerous USEPA-directed hazardous

waste projects including RI/FS projects. Mr. Faust and Rich Rabold, Senior

Hydrologist, will be the project managers for the Delta RI/FS.

Lancy Environmental Services Company (Lancy) -"Meiser & Earl has worked

with Rich Mazinski, now serving as Manager of Sales and Marketing at Lancy,

since 1976 as a consultant in chemical analytical work. Prior to his position

with Lancy, Mr. Mazinski was the Manager of Marketing and Sales for NUS

Laboratory Services Group at NUS Corporation. Mr. Mazinski has offered the

highly qualified staff of Lancy to basically fill, three specialized slots in the

project team: 1) provide QA validation of analytical data; 2) conduct an

aquatic and terrestrial study and wetlands investigation, and 3) conduct a risk

assessment of the Site. Mr. John Ritzert, Manager of Technical Operations, will

be the project manager from Lancy for this project. We feel that Lancyrs

project experience and the resumes of their staff supports our confidence in

their ability to complete these tasks in the Delta RI/FS.

flR300263

Section No.: 2.0Revision No.: 2Date.- August 29, 1988Page: 7 of 10

Layne Geosciences (Layne) - Layne will be performing the borehole

geophysical work at the Delta Site. The project manager, David Raymes and his

partner Jim Mattern, will be the key personnel involved. Layne is capable of

providing full geophysical services as they relate to the environmental and

ground-water industries. As a division of Layne-Westem Co., Inc., Layne can

provide full turnkey drilling services, including large water supply development

systems to customized environmental geotechnical projects. Meiser & Earl feels

that Layne cannot only_perform the borehole geophysics, but has the experience

to interpret the results in a useful, site-related manner.

Martin and Martin, Inc. (M&M) - Richard M. Bodner, P.E., Partner and

Director of Engineering at M&M, has worked with M&E on sanitary landfill site

designs and hazardous waste site closures since 1976. Our professional..

affiliation with Mr. Bodner precedes that time. Of particular importance to the

Delta RI/FS is M&M's previous experience at the Delta Site. Mr. Bodner was

involved with the engineering design of the original Stotler Landfill permitted

by PADER in 1973. Since Delta's acquisition of the Site in 1978, Mr. Bodner has

worked with M&E on phasing out the landfill operation and Site closure. Martin

and Martin boasts an impressive record in the field of waste management and

their familiarity with the Site is unique.

Mine Tech Engineers (Mine Tech) - Meiser & Earl has teamed with Mine-Tech

Engineers for the design and installation of weirs at the Delta Site. Mine-Tech

has had extensive experience with the coal industryu and with watershed studies

installing weirs of various sizes and designs to evaluate hydrollc budgets and

characteristics. Most recently, Mine-Tech Installed a weir for M&E in Cambria

AR30026U


County. We have found Mine-Tech's design and construction to be sturdy and

their service has been professional and timely. Kent Sell will be the project

manager for the design and construction of the weirs.

NUS Corporation (NUS) - NUS Laboratory Services Division, formerly Penn

Environmental Corporation (PEC), has provided analytical services for M&E since

our founding in 1976. Al Kupiak, formerly President of PEC and presently Vice

President and General Manager of the NUS Laboratory Services Group, has worked

with M&E as a special consultant on several occasions and is well-acquainted

with our firm. We have had an excellent working relationship with NUS over the

past years, relying not only on their expertise in analytical services, but also

on their consultation for interpreting data and recommending appropriate

sampling and preservation techniques. Peg Marple, Manager of Customer Services,

will be the project manager at NUS for this project. . As proven by their past

performance on USEPA-directed RI/FS projects, NUS is clearly qualified to handle

any of our laboratory analytical needs.

Phoenix Safety Associates, Ltd. (Phoenix) - Because,of the potential for

encountering hazardous situations at the Delta Site, and in response to OSHA

regulations (29 CFR Part 1910) under SARA, M&E has teamed up with Phoenix to

ensure worker safety during on-site activities. Meiser & Earl's Project

Manager, Heidi Smith, has worked with Phoenix on previous RI/FS projects. We

understand the need to provide competent and well-trained safety personnel at

the Delta Site and we feel that Phoenix has demonstrated their capabilities in

this capacity. Phoenix is a specialized firm with extensive experience in

health and safety-related services. In particular Phoenix has written Health

BR300265


and Safety Plans (HASP) and provided Site Safety Supervisors (SSS) for dozens of

Superfund sites. John Walsh will be the project manager from Phoenix for this

proj ect.

TVG & Associates (TVG) - Meiser & Earl has contracted with TVG since 1976

for the preparation of topographic maps for site studies. Their, services

include providing the aerial photography, establishing necessary ground control

and producing the detailed topographic map. The map used in recent site closure

activities with PADER at the Delta Site was prepared by TVG. We are satisfied

with the responsiveness of this firm to our mapping requirements and with the

accuracy of their products. The TVG contact for the Delta RI/FS will be James

Panel.

2.2 On-Site Personnel - During Delta RI/FS site operations the following

personnel will be on site. The responsibilities of the personnel are listed

below.

2.2.1 On-Site Coordinator (OSC) - The OSC, Bob Hershey, is responsible for

the overall management of site operations. Responsibilities include site health

and safety, emergency coordination, community relations, document coordination,

sample handling and packaging and sample transportation to the laboratory. The

OSC may designate other personnel to assist in any of the activities listed but

will maintain ultimate responsibility.

2-2.2 Quality Assurance Officer (QAO) - The QAO, Heidi Smith, is

responsible for coordinating all quality assurance activities such that complete

integration of the QAPP is achieved. The QAO is responsible for ensuring that

flR300266

Section No.: 2.0Revision No". : 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 10 of 10

field sampling personnel are briefed on the QAPP and site-specific or project-

specific QA/QC procedures. The QAO ensures that the QAPP objectives are met by

the laboratory and reviews the laboratory's QA/QC program to verify that it

meets M&E's QA/QC objectives. Upon receipt of analytical data from the

laboratory, the QAO will forward the data to Lancy Environmental Services

Company to complete the data validation.

2.2.3 Site Safety Supervisor (SSS) - The SSS is responsible for overseeing

the implementation of the Health and Safety Plan (HASP) and Contingency Plan

during site operations. This includes air monitoring, if required, personnel

decontamination, supervision of first aid treatment during emergencies and

ensuring compliance of field personnel with the HASP* Phoenix Safety

Associates, Ltd. will provide the SSS during field activities.

2.2.4 Sampling Team - The. sampling team is responsible for collecting

samples and field data according to the requirements of the QAPP and Remedial

Investigation Site Operations Plan (RISOP).

2.2.5 Drilling Supervisor - The drilling supervisor is responsible for

monitoring the progress of Funk's Well Drilling, documenting subsurface

conditions encountered during drilling, collecting samples and ensuring that the

construction and installation of monitoring wells is in accordance with the

RISOP. The drilling supervisor also will oversee any other drilling-related

activities such as pumping tests and slug tests. Meiser & Earl will provide

drilling supervision during the Delta RI/FS.

1R300267

Section No.: 3.0Revision No.: 2Date; August 29, 1988

1 of 7

3.0 QA OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA

Both quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) play an integral part

in sampling and investigative programs such as the Delta RI/FS. The main

objective of this QAPP is to establish procedures for implementing the Delta

RI/FS. The QAPP will act as a guidance document to ensure that data generated

throughout the RI/FS are accurate, complete, meaningful, representative,

comparable, scientifically reliable and legally defensible. The intended data

usages for the Delta RI/FS field tasks are presented in the Delta Work Plan and

the RISOP. Newly-generated data will supplement existing site background

information. QA objectives and criteria are geared to meet the overall

objectives of the Delta project as stated in Section 1.2. As stated previously,

the QAPP and RISOP compliment each other and should be used together throughout

this project.

3.1 QA Objectives

The QA/QC objectives are to:

o Ensure that all measurements made are representative of

the media (air, water, soil, aquatic and terrestrial

life, etc.) and conditions being measured;

o Calculate and report data in units consistent with similar

data for purposes of comparability;

o Ensure that sample collection procedures are acceptable

and recognized;

o Be aware of and recognize deficiencies or errors which

may affect data quality;

o Monitor and ensure the proper handling of samples during

5R3GQ268


and after collection, and document and maintain accurate

tracking of each sample, and

o Ensure that QA/QC protocols meet the site-specific and

task-specific data quality objectives (DQO's).

Three fundamental mechanisms will be employed to achieve these quality

goals: prevention, assessment, and correction. Descriptions of these

mechanisms are:

0 Prevention of errors through planning, documented

instructions and procedures and careful selection and

training of skilled, qualified personnel.

o Quality assessment through a program of audits and

surveillances to supplement continual .informal review.

0 Correction for prevention of recurrence of conditions

adverse to quality.

The QAPP has been prepared to meet these objective. This plan describes

the QA Program to be implemented and the quality control (QC) procedures to be

followed by M&E and its subcontractors during the course of the Delta RI/FS.

The QAPP describes the project organization structure and specifies the

procedures, documentation requirements, sample custody requirements, audit and

corrective action provisions, etc, to be applied to provide confidence that all

activities meet the intent of the requirements. The QAPP is prepared in

accordance with USEPA guidance as presented in "Interim Guidelines and

Specifications for Preparing Quality Assurance Project Plans", QAMS-005/80.

3.2 Analytical Quality Assurance Criteria for Data

QA criteria have been established for precision, accuracy,

4R300269


representativeness, comparability and completeness for each major measurement

parameter for the Delta RI/FS project. These objectives are presented in RISOP

Section 5.0 and are pertinent to both the analytical laboratory and field

procedures. Definitions for precision, accuracy, representativeness,

comparability, and completeness (PARCC) are as follows:

o Precision - A measure of the mutual agreement among individual

measurements of the same property, usually under prescribed similar

conditions. Precision is expressed in terms of the standard deviation.

Comparison of replicate values Is best expressed as the relative percent

difference (RPD). Various measures of precision exist depending upon

the "prescribed similar conditions".

| o Accuracy - The degree of agreement of a measurement (or an average of

replicate measurements), X, with an accepted reference or true value, T,

expressed as the difference between the two values, X-T. Accuracy is a

measure of the bias in a system.

o Representativeness - Expresses the degree to which data accurately and

precisely represent a characteristic of a population, parameter

variations at a sampling point, a process condition or an environmental

f concern.

o Comparability - Expresses the confidence with which one data set can bei' compared to another.i

o Completeness - A measure of the amount of valid data obtained from a

I measurement system compared to the amount that was expected to be

obtained under correct normal conditions.

I The minimum analytical sensitivity is dictated by protocols of the CLP. An

Section No.: 3.0Revision No.:• 2Date: August 29, 1988Page: 4 of 7

assessment of the sensivity requirements has been made and the desired QA/QC .

objectives are met by the CLP requirements.

The applicable methods of analysis necessary to comply with these

objectives are dictated by CLP protocols. Methods for gross alpha and gross

beta, and alpha-emitting radium isotopes are presented in Appendix E. The

objective of analyzing for gross alpha and gross beta is to screen for any

radiation present. Subsequent analyses may be deemed necessary based upon

levels found of these parameters.

3.3 ' Specific Routine Procedures Used to Assess Data Precision,Accuracy and Completeness . ; .

As part of the analytical QC program, NUS laboratory will apply precision

and accuracy criteria specified in the QAPP and CLP protocol for each parameter

that is analyzed. When the analysis of a sample set is completed, the QC data

generated are reviewed and evaluated to validate the data set. Review is based

on the following criteria which are applicable to VOC's, base neutral and acid

extractable organic compounds (including PCB's), and pesticides, metals and wet

chemistry.

o Reagant/Method Blank Evaluation - The .reagent and/or method blank

results are evaluated for high readings characteristic of background

contamination. If high blank values., are observed, laboratory glassware

and reagents are checked for contamination and the analysis of future

samples halted until the system can be brought under control. A high

background is defined as a background value sufficient to result in a

difference in the sample values, if not corrected, greater than or equal

flR30027


to the smallest significant digit know to be valid. A method blank

should contain no greater than two times the parameter detection limit

for most parameters.

o Equipment and Trip Blank Evaluation - Equipment and trip blank results

are evaluated for high readings similar to the reagent and/or method

blanks described above. If high equipment/trip blank readings are

encountered (i.e., a value sufficient to result in a difference in the

sample values, if not corrected, greater than or equal to the smallest

significant digit known to be valid), procedures for sample collection,

shipment, and laboratory analysis are reviewed. If both the reagent

and/or method blanks and the trip blanks exhibit significant background

contamination, the source of contamination is probably within the

laboratory. Ambient air in the laboratory and reagents should be ^^

checked as possible sources of contamination. High trip blank readings

may be due to contaminated sample bottles or cross contamination due to

sample leakage and poorly sealed sample containers.

No equipment blanks will be collected as part of the Delta RI/FS since all

sampling equipment will be either dedicated or disposable and replaced.

o Standard Calibration Curve Verification - The calibration curve or

midpoint calibration standard (check standard) is evaluated daily to

determine curve linearity through its full range and that sample values

are within the range defined by the low and high standards. If the

curve is not linear, sample values must be corrected for a nonlinear curve

to the standards. In addition, if average response factors are used to

calculate sample concentrations, these factors will be verified on a

5R300272


daily basis. Verification of calibration curves and response factors is

accomplished when the evaluated response for any parameter varies from

the calibrated response by Less than ranges specified.

o Duplicates Sample Analysis - Duplicate sample analysis is used to

determine the precision of the analytical method for the sample matrix.

The duplicate results are used to calculate the precision as defined by

the RPD. If the precision value exceeds the control limit, the sample

set must be reanalyzed for the parameter in question. Precision limits

are updated periodically following review of data. Values of precision

are specified in CLP protocol.

o Reference Sample Analysis - The results of reference sample analysis are

compared with the true values, and the percent recovery of the reference

sample is calculated. If correction is required (excessive or

inadequate percent recovery), the reference sample is reanalyzed to

demonstrate that the corrective action has been successful.

o Surrogate Standard Analyses - Surrogate standard determinations are

performed on all samples and blanks for GC/MS analyses. All samples and

blanks are fortified with surrogate spiking compounds before purging or

extraction to monitor preparation and analysis of samples. Recoveries

must meet criteria as specified in CLP protocol. If acceptance criteria

are not met, corrective action is taken to correct the problem and the

affected sample is reanalyzed. These criteria are applicable to only

VOC's and acid extractables/base neutrals.

o Matrix Spike Evaluation - The observed recovery of the spike versus

theoretical spike recovery is used to calculate accuracy as defined by

4R300273


the percent recovery. If the accuracy value exceeds the control limit

for the given parameter (as specified in CLP protocol) , the appropriate

laboratory personnel are notified and corrective action is taken before

the sample set is reanalyzed for the parameter in question.

3.4 Data Quality Objectives

Data quality objectives (DQO's) for the Delta RI/FS project, in particular,

field tests, are presented in the Delta RI/FS RISOP, Section 5.0, These DQO's

are established to ensure that environmental, health effects and treatibility

data will be of adequate quality and appropriate for the intended uses. The

DQO's are organized into three stages: Stage I - RI/FS Scoping Process, Stage

II - Identify Data Uses and Needs, and Stage III - Data Collection Program.

DQO's will be evaluated to identify data use, types, quality and quantity and

then will be refined to ensure that forseeable needs for environmental, health-

related and treatibility data are met for all Delta RI/FS tasks. DQO's for

specific field tasks are presented in Table 5-3 of the RISOP.

Section No.: 4.0Revision No.: : 2Date: August 29, 1988Page: 1 of 7

4.0 SAMPLING PROCEDURES

Quality assurance and quality control during field activities should be the

foremost concern during the Delta RI/FS. Preparation is the key toward proper

QA/QC in the field. Completion of sampling tasks is eased by planning (i.e.

scheduling), understanding sampling techniques and sample documentation

procedures, having the proper calibrated field equipment, coordinating the

sampling activities with the laboratory personnel and evaluating existing site

background information.

Site background information necessary to evaluate QA/QC protocols for the

Delta RI/FS project is addressed in Section 1.0 and in the Delta RI/FS Work Plan

Section II. Evaluation of existing analytical data and information also is

discussed in Section 1.0. The useability of existing data in relation to the

new Delta RI/FS data to be generated also is addressed in Section 1.0. Based

upon existing analytical data, the known analytes of interest are VOC's. The

indicator contaminants will be further defined based upon results of RI/FS

sampling and the risk assessment.

The media to be sampled during the Delta RI/FS include surface water,

ground water, sediment and soil, as described in Work Plan Tasks 14, 15 and

17. Air quality will be monitored daily during field activities. In addition,

benthic macroinvertebrates, fish and terrestrial life will be sampled during the

Aquatic and Terrestrial Life Studies and Wetlands Investigation task (Work Plan

Task 16).

Details of sampling procedures for these media are included in the RISOP.

Please refer to this document for specifics of sampling. The RISOP addresses:

sampling objectives, sample types, numbers, locations and frequency; rationale

flR300275


for site selection; sample collection methods; sampling devices and containers;

preservatives; holding times; reagents; transport and storage; preparation of

sampling equipment and containers; number of blanks, etc. A listing of CLP

preservatives and holding times is presented in Appendix 0. A summary of the

sampling program is presented in Table 4-1.

Details and the theory of electromagnetic induction to be used to determine

the lateral limit of waste are discussed in Appendix F.

Information regarding QA/QC protocols related to sample control and ,

management, record-keeping requirements and coordination with the laboratory are

presented in the following paragraphs.

4.1 Sample Control

The purpose of this section is to ensure QA/QC in sampling and analysis by

the use of field Control Samples. To successfully comply with this QA/QC

Program, it is essential that control samples of sufficient type and quantity

are collected during the Delta RI/FS.

Specifically, there are two control samples which include three types of

blanks: field blanks, trip blanks and equipment blanks; and duplicates or split

samples. As stated previously, equipment blanks will not be necessary during

this project. It is imperative that the control sample provide the desired

effect. Periodically, the Project Manager should document the control sample

data as well as specific observations delineating the effectiveness of the

control samples for each analytical method. These observations will include

rationale for each of" the following:

o Selection of the samples used for blanks or duplicates;

o Number of blanks and duplicates,

AR300276

Section No.: 4.0Revision No.: 2Date: August 29, 1988Paqe: 3 of 7

TABLE 4-1SUMMARY OF THE SAMPLING PROGRAM FOR THE DELTA SITE

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION ' , SAMPLES SUBMITTED FOR ANALYSISNUMBER BLANKS ANALYSIS*

TRIP EQUIPMENT FIELD

Soil 8 1 TCL/TAL

Surface Water - 1 - 1 TCL/TAL,C,E

West Flow 1 ... TCL/TAL, C,E

F A M Spring 1 - ' - » - - - - - TCL/TAL,C,E

Western Wetland 3 - :- - TCL/TAL,C,E

Eastern Wetland 2 . . . TCL/TAL,C,E

Tributary to Sandy Run 1 . . - . . - . , , TCL/TAL,C,E

Shawley Pond 1 - =-: - TCL/TAL,C,E

Sandy Run 2 - - - TCL/TAL,C,E

Little Juniata River 3 ... TCL/TAL,C,E

Sediment (same locations 14 1 . - - TCL/TAL,Das surface water)

Ground WaterExisting Monitoring Wells 5 1 - 1 TCL/TAL,A&B, C

Residential Wells 16 1 - 1 TCL/TAL,A&B,C

Proposed Monitoring Wells 14 - 1 - 1 TCL/TAL,A&B,C

Pumping Tests 8 __ 1 __i__ - ..- F

TOTAL 79 7 - 4

Analysis Breakdown:80 samples to be analyzed for the TCL and TAL41 samples to be analyzed for A&B57 samples to be analyzed for C15 samples to be analyzed for D16 samples to be analyzed for E9 samples to be analyzed for F

flR300277

Section No.: 4.0Revision No,: 2

TABLE 4-1 CONTINUED - Date: August 29Page: 3a of 7

^Analysis Key:TCL - Target Compound ListTAL - Target Analyse ListA&B - Gross Alpha and BetaC - Dissolved oxygen**, pH**, temperature**, specific

conductance**, Eh**, hardness, alkalinityD - Grain size, percent moisture, total organic carbon (TOC), Eh, pHE - BOD, COD, total solids, dissolved solids, ammonia nitrogen, nitrate

nitrogenF - VOC's

** To be analyzed in the field.

3R300278

Section No.: - 4.0Revision No.: 2Date: August 29, 1988Page: 4 of 7

o Descriptions of the method of control sample collection.

Correct usage for each type of control sample is discussed in the following

paragraphs.

4.1.1 Field control - These control samples are those introduced into the

train of actual samples as a monitor on the performance of the sampling

procedures and the analytical system. A control sample may consist of a

standard or natural matrix. Blanks can provide an indication of positive

interferences introduced in the field and in the laboratory. They will not

provide information on matrix effects, accuracy, precision or natural

background. Matrices to be used for control blanks must be determined to be

free of contamination prior to use.

Field blanks are used to check for contaminant introduction due to: 1)

interaction between the sample and the container, 2) a handling procedure which

alters the sample analysis results or 3) ambient air contamination. A field

blank is created by filling a designated sample container with

distilled/deionized water. The field blank should not be labelled as such so

that it remains obscure from the other samples when being analyzed. The field

blank should be transported to the sampling location, and returned to the

laboratory in a manner identical to the handling procedures used for all

samples. These blanks should be subjected to the same analyses. Blanks will be

collected during the Delta project to provide quality control during sampling

(see Table 4-1). For definitions of field blanks, refer to Section 13.0 of the

RISOP.

Duplicates or splits of field samples will be collected by USEPA's

oversight contractor, Geoscience Consultants, Ltd. At this writing, the number

4R300279

Section No.: 4.0Revision No. : 2Date; August 29, 1988Page: 5 of 7

and at which sampling locations samples will be collected are unknown. Also

unknown is the CLP laboratory who will be analyzing these splits. The split

samples will be duplicates of samples collected by M&E in the field. These

splits will act as control samples to check laboratory performance.

4.1.2 Trip and equipment blanks - These blanks are collected following

procedures outlined in the USEPA RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring Technical

Enforcement Guidance Document, September 1986. Collection specifications are as

follow:

Trip Blanks are collected to monitor conditions in transport and handling

from the laboratory to the field and back to the laboratory. A trip blank is

filled at the laboratory with Type II reagent-grade water, transported to the

site, handled like a sample and returned to the laboratory for analysis. One

trip blank per sampling event is recommended (Table 4-1).

Equipment Blanks are collected to ensure that the non-dedicated sampling

device has been effectively cleaned in the field. The sampling equipment is

filled with Type II reagent-grade water or Type II reagent-grade water is pumped

through the device. This water is transferred to sample bottles, and returned to

the laboratory for analysis. A minimum of one equipment blank for each day that

ground-water monitoring wells are sampled is recommended. As previously stated,

equipment blanks will not be collected during the Delta Project since disposable

and dedicated sampling equipment will be used.

The results of the analysis of the control samples should not be used to

correct the ground-water data. If contaminants are found in the blanks, the

sources of the contamination should be identified and corrective action,

including resampling, should be initiated.

AR300280

Section No.: 4.0Revision No.. : 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 6 of 7

4.2 Sample Management

The management of samples, up through the point of transferring the samples

to the laboratory, will be under the supervision of the On-Site Coordinator

(OSC). Responsibilities of the OSC are as follow:

o The OSC under guidance from the Project Manager, will ensure that

samples are being labeled, preserved, stored and transported according

to the prescribed methods (see Section 25.0 of the RISOP);

o If the OSC determines that significant deviations from the sampling

protocol have occurred, resulting in a suspected compromise of the

sample integrity, the Project Manager will be informed and all samples

taken during that sampling run prior to correction of the procedure will

be discarded and fresh samples taken;

o The OSC will introduce control samples (field blanks) into the sample

flow in an inconspicuous fashion. A random introduction of control

samples should be accomplished during the logging-in process without

leaving such clues as a sudden perturbation in the sequence of

laboratory numbers.

o The OSC will assign M&E identification numbers to all samples.

The identification numbers will be sequential and will be maintained

in the bound field logbook to associate the number with the sample.

Record-keeping requirements applicable to sampling activities include

mainaining a field logbook of all field activities, documenting custody and

transport of the samples and managing the data generated. Sample custody is

described in Section 25.0 of the RISOP and data management procedures are

detailed in the RISOP. Description of the field logbook is discussed below.

Section No. : 4.0Revision No.: 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 7 of 7

Maintenance of a site-specific field logbook is essential to document

accurate and precise field operations. Complete recording of all field

activities, including sampling activities, must be kept to document and defend

all daily activities. The field logbook should be bound and have consecutively

numbered duplicate pages. All daily activities including: personnel on site,

meetings, tasks completed, field data measurements and observations, weather

conditions and problems encountered should be recorded in waterproof ink. This

logbook acts as a permanent record of all site events. The on-site coordinator

(OSC) is responsible for maintaining and keeping the site log. A more complete

list of items to be recorded includes:

o Names of on-site personnel;

o Sample type and number;

o Sampling date and time;

o Weather conditions;

o Sampling location and identification number;

o Ground-water levels, when applicable;

o Brief description of drilling activities;

o Field measurements such as pH, specific conductance,water temperature, flow rate, etc., when applicable;

o Instrument calibration details;

o Documentation of site meetings;

o Photographs taken, including a schematic depicting where thepictures were taken and a coordinating numbering system and

o Sampling remarks and observations.

Specific items to be recorded during each field activity are detailed in

the RISOP.

flR300282

Section No.: "5.0Revision No.: 2Date; August 29, 1988Page; 1 of 3

5.0 SAMPLE CUSTODY

A sample is in an individual's custody if: 1) it is in his or her actual

physical possession or 2) it is in view after being in physical possession, or

3) it was in physical possession and then locked up or sealed to prevent

tampering or 4) it is in a secured area. Evidentiary documentation will be

stored following USEPA Region III protocol. Sample custody also is addressed in

the RISOP.

Before leaving for the field, all team members involved in field sample

collection will familiarize themselves with the procedures specified in the QAPP

and with all unique sampling and chain-of-custody procedures to be employed

during the specific field operations. The Project Manager, Equipment Manager,

Site Safety Supervisor and Laboratory Sample Custodian should be consulted as

appropriate. The NUS Sample Custodian Is April Litterini who will be

responsible for tracking and logging. All sample containers will be obtained

from the laboratory properly cleaned and decontaminated.

All field personnel must verify the sampling methods to be employed during

sample collection by making proper reference to the QAPP and RISOP, Prior to

sampling, the field sampling team members must ensure that all sample containers

are in his/her physical possession or in his/her view at all times, or ensure

that the containers are stored in a locked place at all times, to maintain

proper custody. All sample gathering activities must be recorded in the field

logbook; all sample transfers must be documented on the chain-of-custody form

all samples are to be identified with sample labels and all sample bottles are

to be sealed with custody seals. Refer to the RISOP for an example of this form

and label. All information is to be recorded in waterproof ink. All M&E field

AR300283

Section No.: 5.0Revision No,: 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 2 of 3

personnel are personally responsible for sample collection and the care and

custody of collected samples until the samples are transferred to laboratory

personnel or properly dispatched.f

Chain-of-custody forms must be fully completed in duplicate, using black

carbon paper where possible, by the field technician who has been designated by

•the project manager as being responsible for sample shipment to the appropriate

laboratory for analysis. The information specified on the chain-of-custody form

will contain the same level of detail found in the field logbook, with the

exception that the on-site measurement data need not be recorded. The custody

form will Include, among other things, the following information: name of

person collecting the samples; date samples were collected; type of sampling

conducted (composite/grab); location of sampling station; number and type of

containers used and signature of the M&E person relinquishing samples to a non-

M&E person, such as a Federal Express agent, with the date and time of transfer

noted. Any required rapid turnaround times In the laboratory will be noted on

the chaln-of-custody form. The duplicate custody record will have the signature

of the relinquishing field technician and a statement Identifying the means of

transport, time and date. The duplicate custody record should be placed in a

plastic bag, taped to the underside of the Ice chest lid, and the ice chest

closed. The chest will be tightly bound with filament tape. At least two

custody seals are to be signed by the individual relinquishing custody and

affixed to the chest so that the chest cannot be opened without breaking them.

All samples taken In the field must be identified by using a sample label

attached to or affixed around the sample container. The sample label must

contain the project name; the date, time, and sampling location; designation of


the sample as a grab or composite; notation of the type of sample (e.g., ground-

water, soil, etc.); identification of preservatives used; any remarks and the

signature of the sampler. Sample information must be printed using waterproof

ink. Field identification should enable cross-referencing with the field

logbook.

Custody seals are preprinted, adhesive-backed seals with security slots

designed to break if they are disturbed. Individual sample bottles are sealed

over the cap. Sample shipping containers such as ice chest or cardboard boxes

are sealed in as many places as necessary to ensure security. Seals are signed

and dated before use. On receipt at the laboratory, the custodian will check

and certify, by completing logbook entries, that seals on ice chests are Intact.

Sample custody begins at the time of sampling. Field logbooks, chain-of-

custody forms, sample labels, and custody seals must all be completed in

accordance with procedures detailed above and in the RISOP.

Environmental and hazardous samples will be properly packaged, labelled

for shipment and dispatched to the laboratory for analysis as detailed in the

RISOP. United States Department of Transportation regulations concerning

shipment of hazardous materials are contained in 49 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR) Parts 170-179. These requirements for shipping containers must be

followed.


6.0 CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY

The methods or procedures to assure that the field and laboratory equipment

are functioning optimally are presented as Appendix G.

6*1 Laboratory Equipment

The laboratory equipment will be maintained and calibrated in accordance

with NUS Laboratory Services Division (LSD) Procedure Manual, Section G5.0.

This manual includes details of the following:

o Frequency of calibration procedures;

o Use of equipment logbooks required to record usage, maintenance,

calibration and repair;

o Calibration standards to be used, with the appropriate source and

traceabillty procedures, and

o Calibration documentation requirements such as:

- Date of calibration;

- Identification of standards used;

- Personnel performing calibration, and

- Corrective actions taken.

6.2 Field Equipment

All equipment to be utilized during the field sampling must be examined to

certify that It Is in operating condition. This includes checking the

manufacturer's operating manuals to ensure that all maintenance items are being

observed. Field notes from previous sampling trips should be reviewed so that

any prior equipment problem notations are not overlooked and also to ensure that

all necessary repairs to equipment have been carried out.

Section No.: 6.0Revision Nq.: 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 2 of 5

Field meters to be used during sampling, specifically the pH and specific

conductance/thermistor meters, must be checked to insure proper calibration and

precision response. This activity is to be performed by M&E's Equipment

Manager. The preparation date of standard solutions must be clearly marked on

each of the containers to be taken into the field. A log for each meter must be

maintained during the RI/FS by M&E's Equipment Manager and OSC to document

problems experienced with the meter, corrective measures taken, battery

replacement dates, when used and by whom. Appropriate new batteries must be

kept with the meters to facilitate immediate replacement when necessary in the

field.

The pH meter must be calibrated twice each day using two different pH

buffer solutions according to the following procedures. Rinse the probe

thoroughly between buffer measurements with distilled/deionized water and again

after calibration is completed. Record in the field logbook what buffer

solutions were used. To check the pH meter standardization, select a third pH

buffer solution in the expected pH range of the well water samples and take a

measurement. If the reading differs by more than 0.1 pH units, recalibrate the

instrument. If unacceptable deviations still occur, consult the operating

manual for remedial course of action. At each sampling location, check pH

readings by measuring the pH value of a buffer solution in the expected range of

the sample. If the reading deviates from the known value by more than 0.1

standard units, recalibrate the instrument as previously described above. The

specific conductance/thermistor meter is less likely to exhibit random

fluctuations and will only require daily standardization against a known KC1

solution. Note that specific conductance is temperature-dependent and therefore

W00287


the meter readings must be adjusted to reflect the temperature of the standard

solution. Thoroughly rinse the probe with distilled/deionized water after

immersing in the KC1 standard solution. In addition to daily standardization of

the conductivity readings, the thermistor readings must also be checked daily.

This is accomplished by taking a temperature reading of the KCI standard

solution with both the conductivity probe and a mercury thermometer.

Calibration, operation and maintenance instructions for the following

equipment follow are presented in Appendix G:

o Olympic Well Probe

o Soil test Model 0484 Water Level Introduction

o YSI Models 33 and 33M Specific Conductance and Temperature Meter

o Beckman I 20 and I 21 pH meter

o Beckman I 10 and I 11 pH meters -and I 12 pH/SE meter

o HP-302 Open Stream Velocity Probe

o Century 128 Organic Vapor Analyzer

o HNU PI 101 Trace Gas Analyzer

o Dupont Constant Flow Air Sampling Pump Model P4000

o Dupont Air Sampling Pump Model P200A

o Industrial Scientific Combination Combustible Gas/Oxygen Monitor ModelKX241

o Industrial Scientific Sampling Pump Model SP201

Section No.: 7.0Revision No,: 2Date: August 29, 1988Page: 1 of 3

7.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

The analytical procedures to be used by NUS for all of the TCL/TAL sample

analyses follow standard protocols as dictated by the CLP. Inorganic analysis

requirements for non-TCL/TAL parameters follow the NUS LSD Procedures Manual as

presented in Appendix H. Quality control protocols for non-TCL/TAL parameters

are presented in Table 7-1. Analytical methods for the non-TCL/TAL parameters

are listed on Table 7-2. Specific detection limits to be used by NUS are

presented in Appendix I. Comparison of QC Protocols for GC and GC/KS Analyses

are presented in Appendix 0.

Analytical procedures to be used by Lancy for_.the aquatic and terrestrial

life studies are presented in Section 14.0 of the RISOP. Specific methods of

analysis for gross alpha and gross beta are presented in Appendix E. The

objective behind analyzing for:gross alpha and gross beta is to evaluate the

existence, if any, of radiation in media samples. Additional analysis may be

necessary dependent upon results of the initial radiation screening. USEPA

requested the analysis of gross alpha and gross beta..

5R300289

Section: 7.0Revision No.: 2Date : Auqust 29

TABLE ̂ Page: 2 of 3.

Quality Control for Non-TCL/TAL Parameters

Soil Samples

Grain Size/% MoistureC a l i b r a t i o n : N ACalibration Verification: NAMethod Blank: NADuplicates: 1 in 20 samples from the site

TOCCalibration (of Titrant): DailyCalibration Verification: Daily, 1 in 10 samples and at the

end of the runMethod Blank: Daily (used in calculations)Duplicates: 1 in 20 samples from the site

eHCalibration: NA - Sensitivity of electrode is

evaluated, howeverCalibration Verification: NAMethod Blank: NADuplicates: 1 in 20 samples from the site

Surface Waters

HardnessCalibration: WeeklyCalibration Verification: Daily, 1 in 10 samples and at the

end of the runMethod Blank: DailyDuplicates: I in 20 samples from the siteMatrix Spike: 1 1n 20 samples from the site

BODCalibration: DailyCalibration Verification: Daily, 1 in 10 samples and at the

end of the runMethod Blank: DailyDuplicates: 1 in 20 samples from the site

CODCalibration: DailyCalibration Verification: Daily, 1 in 10 samples and at the

end of the runMethod Blank: Daily (used in calculations)Duplicates: 1 in 20 samples from the siteMatrix Spike: NA

flR300290

Section: 7.0Revision No.: 2Date: August 29, 1986Pager 2a of 3

TABLE 7-1 (cont'd.)

Total Solids/Total Dissolved SolidsCalibration: WTCalibration Verification:, NAMethod Blank: DailyDuplicates: 1 in 20 sampes from the siteMatrix Spike: NA

Ammonia/NitrateCalibration: DailyCalibration Verification: Daily, I in 10 samples and at the

end of the runMethod Blank: Daily (use in calculations)Duplicates: 1 in 20 samples from the siteMatrix Spike: 1 in 20 samples from the site

Gross Alpha/Gross BetaC a l i b r a t i o n : Q u a r t e r l yCalibration Verification (Performance Checks): DailyCalibration Verification (Blank Spikes): Daily, 1 in 10 samples

and at the end of therun

Method Blank: DailyDuplicates: 1 in 20 samples from the siteMatrix Spike: ' 1 in 20 samples from the site

5R30029

Section No.: 7.0_ „ - Revision No.: 2TABLE 7-2 .-- _ , . -. __Date: August 29,

Page: 3 of 3

Analytical Methods

Parameter Reference Method Number

Sediment Samples

Grain Size:sieve analysis ASTM D422hydrometer analysis ASTM D422

Percent Moisture ASTM D2216TOC, Walkley - BlackeH (1)

Surface Water Samples

Hardness Standard Methods 314BBOD Standard Methods 507COD EPA 410.1Total Sol Ids EPA 160.3Dissolved Sol Ids - EPA 160.1Ammonia Nitrogen EPA 350.2Nitrate Nitrogen EPA 352.1

(1) Procedures for Handling and Chemical Analysis of Sediment and WaterSamples, USEPA May 1987

SR300292

Section No.; 8.0Revision No.:. 2Date: August 29, 1988Page; 1 of 4

8.0 DATA REDUCTION. VALIDATION AND REPORTING

Media samples collected and submitted to NUS Laboratory for analyses will

be subject to QA/QC procedures as specified in the CLP. Other analytical data

generated during the RI, such as field analyses, will undergo in-house QA/QC as

dictated by Meiser & Earl. The in-house QA/QC will follow validation,

documentation and reporting protocols similar to but not as detailed as these

specified below for laboratory analytical data to be generated. Both the

analytical and field data will be generated and confirmed so as to be usable

together toward evaluating what risks, if any, are associated with the Delta

Site. Details of data reduction validation and reporting requirements for

laboratory analytical data area detailed below.

All laboratory analytical data generated during the RI will be subject to

quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures. As analytical data is

received from the laboratory it will be forwarded to Lancy Environmental

Services for data validation. Data validation, reduction and reporting

procedures will follow those set forth by CLP protocols for.TCL and TAL

parameters. These procedures as set forth by NUS are presented as Appendix J.

Subsequent to data validation, analytical data and all other field-generated

data will be reduced into concise yet comprehensive tables. Data generated

throughout the RI including QA information will be presented to USEPA, as it

becomes available, in the monthly progress reports. Information presented in

these reports will be further summarized and presented in the RI Report. Data

validation reports summarizing results of the assessment and a statement of the

data's usability also will be presented to USEPA upon receipt from Lancy. The

QA Officer for Meiser and Earl, Heidi Smith, will oversee data validation and

4R300293


reporting during the Delta RI/FS. Details of data validation and reporting are

presented below.

8.1 Data Validation

Data validation is the review process necessary for validating laboratory

analytical data. This process is particularly important when the question of

litigation or enforcement arises. The Quality Assurance Officer for Meiser &

Earl is responsible for accumulating the laboratory data package and overseeing

data validation and reporting. The Lancy ESC Quality Assurance Coordinator

(QAC) is responsible for performing the data validation process.

Upon receipt of the NUS laboratory data package from the M&E QAO, the QAC

will review and validate the data according to Contract Laboratory Program (CLP)

QA protocols. Using QA protocols, analytical data quality and laboratory

performance will be determined. The following reference will be used for the

evaluation process:

"Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Organics

Analyses,M 1985 Revision.

"Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganics

Analyses," 1985 Revision.

Data gathered during the performance of this project will be validated

through review for completeness, acceptability and usefulness in accomplishing

the goals for the RI/FS. The data package is searched manually to determine

whether all steps in the CLP Statement of Work (SOW) were properly followed by NUS

(i.e., all required QC and documentation were provided). In the event that required

data is missing, the QAC will notify the QAO who will, in turn, notify NUS and

request the missing information. All such notifications are to be documented on

Section No.- : 8.0Revision No.: 1Date: June 3, 1988Page: 3 of 4

a telephone record log.

Data validation will be performed to determine if the data meets the

objectives and requirements of the DQO's (see Section 5.0 of the RISOP) for the

Delta RI/FS objectives and to evaluate the data usability for its intended

application. The following will be included in the data validation process:

o Work plan compliance screening;

o Determination of completeness of sample analyses;

o Inspection of quality control data, instrument calibration and tuning

data;

o Validation on action-level samples;

o Determination of availability of all critical information and

re-analyses required in the Work Plan;

o Determination of discrepancies among the reported data;

o Investigation of probable cause of discrepancies among the reported

data, and

o Preparation of information needed for data interpretation.

The raw data and QC results are also reviewed to determine data usability.

The QAC will provide some clarity as to whether "in control" and/or "out-of-

control" data are useful. "In control" is defined as being compliant to the

SOW. However, compliant data may not always be useful, and non-compliant data

may be very useful. Specific criteria to be evaluated for compliance

determination include:

o Holding times;

o Preparation and reagent blanks;

o Initial instrument calibration;


o Continuing instrument calibration;

o Instrument tune and performance;

o ICP interference check;

o Spike sample analysis;

o Duplicate sample analysis, and

o GC/MS surrogate recovery.

Upon completion of the review process, the QAC will report the validation

results. The report will consist of a summary letter, glossary of data-

qualifier codes, data summary, results as reported by NUS, DPO report and

support documentation, if any. The summary letter will contain information on

the case overview, summary of major problems and minor issues and information

regarding report content. The report will be issued to the QAO.

Data summary forms for volatiles, BNA's and pesticides are presented in

Appendix K. Examples of inorganic and organic data validation summary forms

are also presented in Appendix K. Reporting forms for volatile organics and

inorganic data packages under the CLP are included as Appendix K.

8.2 Data Reporting

Data reporting procedures for media sampling will follow those detailed in

the NUS LSD Procedures Manual Section G-10.0 as presented in Appendix J. Any

problems found with the Quality Assurance Record will be discussed with USEPA to

determine the need for further action. Records and data reporting for the

bioassays to be conducted by Lancy are detailed in Appendix N.

flR300296

Section No,: 9.0Revision No.: 2Date: August 29, 1988Page: 1 of 1

9.0 INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL CHECKS

The QA officer will oversee and maintain quality assurance during the RI/FS

and assume that QAPP protocols are being met. The QA officer through the

Project Manager and OSC will oversee field activities. The field audit will

provide internal quality control checks among project team members. Any serious

deficiencies noted in this audit will be reported and corrective actions to

remedy the situation will be taken within 24 hours of the time the deficiency

was reported. Refer to Section 21.0 of the RJSOP for details of the field

audi t.

The quality control program associated with the bioassays to be conducted

during Phase III"of the aquatic and terrestrial life studies is presented in

Appendix M.

Internal quality control checks to be followed, such as control samples,

are addressed in Section 6.0. Internal laboratory QC parameters are specified

for NUS Laboratory by CLP protocol. Duplicate or split samples to be collected

by Geoscience Consultants, Ltd. will act as an additional control measure of

field activities. Specifies of the split-sampling effort will be documented as

part of the project record when details are finalized.

Per approval from USEPA, a laboratory audit of NUS is not required as part

of this RI/FS.


10.0 PERFORMANCE AND SYSTEMS AUDITS

As discussed previously, USEPA-approved sampling techniques and CLP or

equivalent analytical techniques will be used to check performance throughout

the Delta project. More specifically, a field audit and periodic Internal

laboratory audits will be conducted, as discussed below.

10.1 Field Audit

A field audit will be conducted as a quality assurance measure during the

Delta RI. The audit will be conducted unannounced to preserve audit integrity.

The audit will verify that field activities, in particular sampling activities,

are "being conducted per the RISOP and QAPP. Should any serious deficiences be

noted during the field audit, they must be reported and corrective actions

should be taken within 24 hours from the time the respondent was informed of the

deficiency. The audit report will be sent to USEPA with 15 calendar days of

completion of the audit. Specific details and procedures of the field audit are

presented In the Delta RI/FS RISOP, Section 21.0.

10.2 Laboratory Audit

As part of the requirements of the CLP program, periodic internal audits

will be conducted at NUS Laboratory, Similarly, internal audits will be

conducted of Lancy's Laboratory facilities used for analysis of the aquatic and

terrestrial life studies samples. Details of the laboratory internal audits can

be found In the CLP protocols.

flH300298

Section No.: 11.0Revision No;: 1Date: June' 3, 1988Page: 1 of.1

11.0 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES

Preventive maintenance procedures aid in ensuring that the RI/FS is

completed efficiently while maintaining quality assurance and quality control.

Preventative maintenance will be the duty of the Equipment Manager. All field

equipment will be maintained and calibrated according to a schedule. In

particular, equipment maintenance is critical to prevent field investigation

downtime due to equipment failure. Communication between field team members and

the Equipment Manager must be open to ensure that any noticed equipment problems

are quickly remedied. A selection of critical_spare parts will be maintained by

the Equipment Manager and will.be stored in the site trailer to speed equipment

repairs. Appendix G presents operating, calibration and maintenance procedures

for field equipment to be used during the Delta RI/FS.


12.0 SPECIFIC SOP'S USED TO ASSESS DATA PRECISION, ACCURACY,REPRESENTATIVENESS AND COMPLETENESS

USEPA-approved techniques will be used in all phases of the sampling and

analysis for the Delta RI/FS project to insure data precision, accuracy and

completeness as described in previous sections of this QAPP. In particular, CLP

protocol is to be followed to evaluate QC objectives. Laboratory QA criteria

and procedures are presented in Section 3 and Appendices A&B, respectively, of

this QAPP.

AR300300


13.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION

Corrective actions can vary from immediate actions, such as instrument

recalibration, to resampling. Any major corrective actions, such as resampling,

will be discussed with and approved by USEPA. NUS corrective action procedures

are presented in Appendix B. Lancy's program for corrective action is described

in Appendix L.

The chain-of-command for taking corrective action is as follows. The

person discovering the problem, whether it be a field or laboratory error, will

notify the M&E QAO, Heidi Smith. Any immediate errors, such as a laboratory

error, will be rectified and the USEPA QAO notified. The USEPA QAO also will be

notified of more involved errors, such as field errors or defective data. The

USEPA Remedial Project Manager, Donna McCartney, then will be notified and a

decision between her, the M&E QAO and the USEPA QAO, John Scalera, will be held.

All corrective actions will be documented, distributed to the appropriate USEPA

personnel and will become part of the Delta RI/FS project record.

flR30030


14.0 QA REPORTING PROCEDURES

Any field problems encountered such as equipment and logistics problems are

reported verbally to the M&E project manager or OSC. It is important to relay

information promptly so that any necessary corrective action can be taken while

project team members are still in the field.

Monthly progress report will be submitted to USEPA for every 30-day period

following approval of the RISOP. Heidi Smith, M&E, will prepare these reports.

These reports will include:

1. A description of the actions that have been taken under the RISOP

during that month;

2. All results of sampling, tests, analytical data, technical

Interpretations and information received by M&E;

3, A description of all activities scheduled for the next .month as well as

anticipated data and

4. A description of any problems encountered and plans for remedying those

problems If appropriate.

These reports will act as a QA mechanism in and of itself to check the

project's progress and to aid in identifying and anticipating problems.

Additional QA reporting procedures are presented in the RISOP.

4H300302

IfIIIIIIItIIIIIIII1I AR300303

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN DELTA … ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN DELTA QUARRIES AND DISPOSE STOTLER...

Documents

Transcript of QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN DELTA … ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN DELTA QUARRIES AND DISPOSE STOTLER...