sampling & analysis plan for bioremediation … · 3. this sap is a project-specific sap. 4....

Project-Specific SAP Site Name/Project Name: Ordnance Products Site Location: North East, Maryland

Title: SAP for Ordnance Products Bioremediation Pilot Study Revision Number: 1

Revision Date: November 2009

SAP Worksheet #1 - Title and Approval Page (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.1)

Review Signature:

SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN

FOR

BIOREMEDIATION TREATABILITY PILOT STUDY ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE

November 2009

Prepared for: USEPA Region 3

Prepared by: Tetra Tech NUS, Inc.

234 Mall Boulevard, Suite 260 King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406

Prepared under: Work Assignment No. 011-RDRD-0330

EPA Contract No. EP-S3-07-04

= • ' Contractor OAM Signature Megan Ritchie/RAG QAM/Date Approval Authority

ApprowiSign~ure:~~~=U=~~.~~~a~.~~·~M-~-~-~-~~~~~2_4_·=~~~~~~0~9~~~~~~ Contractor PM Signature Neil Teamerson/RAC PM/Date Approval Authority

Other Approval Signature:--~-----=:::-:--:::-:~-::-----------EPA RPM Signature John Epps/RPM/Date Approval Authority

UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC2 EPS30704/01 014/23253 of 90 AR305027

Project-Specific SAP Title: SAP for Ordnance Products Bioremediation Pilot Study Site Name/Project Name: Ordnance Products Revision Number: 1 Site Location: North East, Maryland Revision Date: November 2009

L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC2 EPS30704/01014/23253 of 90

TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms SAP Worksheets SAP Worksheet #1 -- Title and Approval Page .................................................................................................... 1 SAP Worksheet #2 -- SAP Identifying Information .............................................................................................. 6 SAP Worksheet #3 -- Distribution List .................................................................................................................. 9 SAP Worksheet #4 -- Project Personnel Sign-Off Sheet ................................................................................... 10 SAP Worksheet #5 -- Project Organizational Chart ........................................................................................... 11 SAP Worksheet #6 -- Communication Pathways............................................................................................... 12 SAP Worksheet #7 -- Personnel Responsibilities and Qualifications Table ...................................................... 13 SAP Worksheet #8 -- Special Personnel Training Requirements Table ........................................................... 14 SAP Worksheet #9 -- Project Scoping Session Participants Sheet ................................................................... 15 SAP Worksheet #10 -- Problem Definition (DQO Step 1) .................................................................................. 17 SAP Worksheet #11 -- Project Quality Objectives/Systematic Planning Process Statements .......................... 25 SAP Worksheet #12 -- Measurement Performance Criteria Table .................................................................... 31 SAP Worksheet #13 -- Secondary Data Criteria and Limitations Table ............................................................ 32 SAP Worksheet #14 -- Summary of Project Tasks ............................................................................................ 33 SAP Worksheet #15 -- Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ........................................................................ 41 SAP Worksheet #16 -- Project Schedule / Timeline Table (optional format) ..................................................... 45 SAP Worksheet #17 -- Sampling Design and Rationale .................................................................................... 48 SAP Worksheet #18 -- Sampling Locations and Methods/SOP Requirements Table ...................................... 51 SAP Worksheet #19 -- Analytical SOP Requirements Table ............................................................................. 57 SAP Worksheet #20 -- Field Quality Control Sample Summary Table .............................................................. 60 SAP Worksheet #21 -- Project Sampling SOP References Table ..................................................................... 63 SAP Worksheet #22 -- Field Equipment Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Table .................. 64 SAP Worksheet #23 -- Analytical SOP References Table ................................................................................. 65 SAP Worksheet #24 -- Analytical Instrument Calibration Table ........................................................................ 66 SAP Worksheet #25 -- Analytical Instrument and Equipment Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Table .... 69 SAP Worksheet #26 -- Sample Handling System .............................................................................................. 71 SAP Worksheet #27 -- Sample Custody Requirements Table .......................................................................... 72 SAP Worksheet #28 -- Laboratory QC Samples Table ..................................................................................... 73 SAP Worksheet #29 -- Project Documents and Records Table ........................................................................ 81 SAP Worksheet #30 -- Analytical Services Table .............................................................................................. 82 SAP Worksheet #31 -- Planned Project Assessments Table ............................................................................ 83 SAP Worksheet #32 -- Assessment Findings and Corrective Action Responses ............................................. 84 SAP Worksheet #33 -- QA Management Reports Table ................................................................................... 85 SAP Worksheet #34 -- Verification (Step I) Process Table ............................................................................... 86 SAP Worksheet #35 -- Validation (Steps IIa and IIb) Process Table ................................................................ 87 SAP Worksheet #36 -- Analytical Data Validation (Steps IIa and IIb) Summary Table ..................................... 88 SAP Worksheet #37 -- Usability Assessment .................................................................................................... 89 Figures Appendices Appendix A – Test Kit SOPs Appendix B – Tetra Tech SOPs (Omitted, included in RAC Program Generic QAPP dated March 2009)

AR305028



Acronyms °C Degrees Centigrade %R Percent Recovery μg/L microgram per liter B.A. Bachelor of Arts B.S. Bachelor of Science BAK Benzalkonium chloride BLRA Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment CAH Chlorinated Aliphatic Compounds CCC Calibration Check Compound CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 CIH Certified Industrial Hygienist CLP Contract Laboratory Program CRQL Contract Required Quantitation Limit CT Threshold Cycle CVOC Chlorinated Volatile Organic Compounds DAS Delivery of Analytical Services DCA Dichloroethane DCE Dichloroethene DDESB Department of Defense Explosives Safety Board DMM Discarded Military Munitions DO Dissolved Oxygen DQI Data Quality Indicator EAB Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation EICP Extracted Ion Current Profile EPA Environmental Protection Agency (United States) ESAT Environmental Services Assistance Team EVO Emulsified Vegetable Oil FID Flame Ionization Detector FOL Field Operations Leader FS Feasibility Study FTMR Field Task Modification Request GC/MS Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer gpm gallons per minute H3PO4 Phosphoric Acid H2SO4 Sulfuric Acid H&S Health and Safety HASP Health and Safety Plan HAZWOPER Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response HCl Hydrochloric Acid HDPE High Density Polyethylene HI Hazard Index HNO3 Nitric Acid HSO Health and Safety Officer IC Ion Chromatograph ICP-AES Inductively Couple Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectroscopy ICV Initial Calibration Verification IDW Investigation-Derived Waste IS Internal Standard ISCO in situ Chemical Oxidation KDI Kraus Design, Inc. L Liter LCS Laboratory Control Sample M.S. Master of Science MCL Maximum Contaminant Level MDE Maryland Department of the Environment

AR305029



MDL Method Detection Limit MEC Munitions and Explosives of Concern mL Milliliter MNA Monitored Natural Attenuation MPC Measurement performance criteria MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate MS Matrix Spike mV millivolt MVTC Mechanics Valley Trade Center NA Not Applicable Na3PO4 Trisodium phosphate NaOH Sodium Hydroxide NPL National Priorities List NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Unit OASQA Office of Analytical Services and Quality Assurance OBG O’Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc. OPI Ordnance Products, Inc. ORP Oxidation Reduction Potential OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PCE Tetrachloroethene PCR Polymerase Chain Reaction PDF Portable Document Format PE Professional Engineer PID Photoionization Detector PM Project Manager PQL Project Quantitation Limit PQOs Project Quality Objectives PR Preliminary Result PRG Preliminary Remediation Goal PRP Potentially Responsible Party QA Quality Assurance QAM Quality Assurance Manager QC Quality Control QL Quantitation Limit qPCR Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction RA Removal Action RAO Remedial Action Objective RAS Routine Analytical Services RF Response Factor RI Remedial Investigation RL Reporting Limit RLSC Regional Laboratory Services Coordinator ROD Record of Decision RPD Relative Percent Difference RPM Remedial Project Manager RSD Relative Standard Deviation SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan SDG Sample Delivery Group SLERA Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment SOP Standard Operating Procedure SPCC System Performance Check Compound SSO Site Safety Officer TBD To Be Determined TCA Trichloroethane TCD Thermal Conductivity Detector TCE Trichloroethene TCL Target Compound List Tetra Tech Tetra Tech NUS, Inc.

AR305030



TNT Trinitrotoluene TOC Total Organic Carbon TR/COC Traffic Report/Chain of Custody UAO Unilateral Administrative Order UFP-QAPP Uniform Federal Policy for Quality Assurance Project Plans USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency UXO Unexploded Ordnance VC Vinyl chloride VFA Volatile Fatty Acid VOC Volatile Organic Compound

AR305031



SAP Worksheet #2 -- SAP Identifying Information (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.2.4) Site Name/Number: Ordnance Products Operable Unit: 01 Contractor Name: Tetra Tech NUS, Inc. Contract Number: EP-S3-07-04 Contract Title: RAC2 Work Assignment Number: WA #011 1. This Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Federal Policy for Quality Assurance Plans (UFP-QAPP) (U.S. EPA 2005) and EPA Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/G-5, QAMS (U.S. EPA 2002). 2. Identify regulatory program: CERCLA 3. This SAP is a project-specific SAP. 4. List dates of scoping sessions that were held: Tetra Tech Scoping Session May 3, 2009 Tetra Tech/EPA Scoping Session July 17, 2009 Tetra Tech Scoping Session July 28, 2009 Tetra Tech/EPA Final Scoping Session November 10, 2009

5. List dates and titles of any SAP documents written for previous site work that are relevant to the current investigation. Title Date Sampling and Analysis Plan for Pre-Design Investigation June 2008

6. List organizational partners (stakeholders) and connection with lead organization: EPA Region 3 (regulatory oversight), Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE, regulatory oversight), Tetra Tech NUS, Inc. (Tetra Tech, EPA contractor), Cecil County Health Department 7. Lead organization (see Worksheet 7 for detailed list of data users) EPA Region 3 8. If any required SAP elements or required information are not applicable to the project or are provided

elsewhere, then note the omitted SAP elements and provide an explanation for their exclusion below: NA

AR305032



SAP Worksheet #2 -- SAP Identifying Information (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.2.4) UFP-QAPP Worksheet #

Required Information Crosswalk to Related Information

A. Project Management Documentation 1 Title and Approval Page Not applicable, worksheet used 2 Table of Contents

SAP Identifying InformationNot applicable, worksheet used

3 Distribution List Not applicable, worksheet used 4 Project Personnel Sign-Off Sheet Not applicable, worksheet used Project Organization 5 Project Organizational Chart Not applicable, worksheet used 6 Communication Pathways Not applicable, worksheet used 7 Personnel Responsibilities and Qualifications

Table Not applicable, worksheet used

8 Special Personnel Training Requirements Table Not applicable, worksheet used Project Planning/ Problem Definition 9 Project Planning Session Documentation

(including Data Needs tables) Project Scoping Session Participants Sheet

Not applicable, worksheet used

10 Problem Definition, Site History, and Background. Site Maps (historical and present)


11 Site-Specific Project Quality Objectives Not applicable, worksheet used 12 Measurement Performance Criteria Table Not applicable, worksheet used 13 Sources of Secondary Data and Information

Secondary Data Criteria and Limitations TableNot applicable, worksheet used

14 Summary of Project Tasks Not applicable, worksheet used 15 Reference Limits and Evaluation Table Not applicable, worksheet used 16 Project Schedule/Timeline Table Not applicable, worksheet used

B. Measurement Data Acquisition Sampling Tasks 17 Sampling Design and Rationale Not applicable, worksheet used 18 Sampling Locations and Methods/ SOP

Requirements Table Sample Location Map(s)


19 Analytical Methods/SOP Requirements Table Not applicable, worksheet used 20 Field Quality Control Sample Summary Table Not applicable, worksheet used 21 Project Sampling SOP References Table

Sampling SOPs Not applicable, worksheet used

22 Field Equipment Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Table


Analytical Tasks 23 Analytical SOPs

Analytical SOP References TableNot applicable, worksheet used

24 Analytical Instrument Calibration Table Not applicable, worksheet used 25 Analytical Instrument and Equipment

Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Table Not applicable, worksheet used

Sample Collection 26 Sample Handling System, Documentation

Collection, Tracking, Archiving and Disposal Sample Handling Flow Diagram


AR305033



SAP Worksheet #2 -- SAP Identifying Information (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.2.4) 27 Sample Custody Requirements,

Procedures/SOPs Sample Container Identification Example Chain-of-Custody Form and Seal


Quality Control Samples 28 QC Samples Table

Screening/Confirmatory Analysis Decision Tree Not applicable, worksheet used

Data Management Tasks 29 Project Documents and Records Table Not applicable, worksheet used 30 Analytical Services Table

Analytical and Data Management SOPsNot applicable, worksheet used

C. Assessment Oversight 31 Planned Project Assessments Table

Audit Checklists Not applicable, worksheet used

32 Assessment Findings and Corrective Action Responses Table


33 QA Management Reports Table Not applicable, worksheet used D. Data Review 34 Verification (Step I) Process Table Not applicable, worksheet used 35 Validation (Steps IIa and IIb) Process Table Not applicable, worksheet used 36 Validation (Steps IIa and IIb) Summary Table Not applicable, worksheet used 37 Usability Assessment Not applicable, worksheet used

AR305034



SAP Worksheet #3 -- Distribution List (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.3.1)

Name of SAP

Recipients

Title/Role

Organization

Telephone

Number

(Optional)

E-mail Address or Mailing

Address

Document Control Number

(Optional)

John Epps EPA Remedial Project Manager (RPM)

EPA Region 3 215-814-3144 [email protected] NA

Bill McKenty EPA Geologist EPA Region 3 215-814-3331 [email protected] NA

Mike Mahoney EPA OASQA Quality Assurance Team

EPA Region 3 410-305-2631 [email protected] NA

Alex Cox PM MDE 410-537-3449 [email protected] NA

Neil Teamerson PM Tetra Tech 610-491-9688 [email protected] NA

Vince Shickora Field Operations Leader (FOL) Tetra Tech 610-382-1528 [email protected] NA

Megan Ritchie Quality Assurance Manager (QAM) / Regional Laboratory Services Coordinator (RLSC)

Tetra Tech 610-382-1527 [email protected] NA

Boris Dynkin Project Engineer Tetra Tech 978-474-8427 [email protected] NA

AR305035



SAP Worksheet #4 -- Project Personnel Sign-Off Sheet (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.3.2)

Name

Organization/Title/Role

Telephone Number

(optional) Signature/email receipt

SAP Section Reviewed

Date SAP Read

Neil Teamerson Tetra Tech PM 610-491-9688 All

Megan Ritchie Tetra Tech QAM 610-382-1527 All

Vince Shickora Tetra Tech FOL 610-382-1528 All

Boris Dynkin Tetra Tech Project Engineer 978-474-8427 All

AR305036



SAP Worksheet #5 -- Project Organizational Chart (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.4.1) Lines of Authority Lines of Communication

USEPA Region 3 Region 3 OASQA

John Epps Quality Assurance Team

RPM

Tetra Tech Tetra Tech Tetra Tech

Health and Safety Project Manager Quality Assurance Manager

Project H&S Officer Neil Teamerson Megan Ritchie

Chris Genell

Tetra Tech Tetra Tech Tetra Tech Support Staff Field Operations Leader RLSC

Chemists Site Safety Officer Megan Ritchie

Environmental Engineers Vince Shickora Geologists TBD

Subcontractors Region 3 OASQA

TBD Client Services Team

Analytical Laboratory

TBD

AR305037



SAP Worksheet #6 -- Communication Pathways (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.4.2)

Communication Drivers

Responsible Affiliation

Name

Phone Number and/or e-mail

Procedure

Field Task Modification Requests (FTMR)

Tetra Tech FOL Vince Shickora 610-382-1528

Immediately gets approval from Tetra Tech PM

Document via FTMR form

QAPP Amendments EPA RPM John Epps 215-814-3144 Immediately informs Tetra Tech PM

Tetra Tech documents via FTMR form

Changes in Schedule Tetra Tech PM Neil Teamerson 610-481-9688 Informs EPA via schedule impact letter as soon as impact is realized

Issues in the field that result in changes in scope of field work

Tetra Tech FOL Vince Shickora 610-382-1528

FOL immediately informs PM; PM immediately informs RPM; RPM issues scope change if warranted; Scope change to be implemented before work is executed.

Recommendations to stop work and initiate work upon corrective action

Tetra Tech FOL Tetra Tech QAM Tetra Tech HSO EPA RPM

Vince Shickora Megan Ritchie Paul Kim John Epps

610-382-1536 610-382-1527 610-491-9688 215-814-3144

Responsible Party immediately informs subcontractors, EPA, and Project Team

Report Regional Traffic Reports/Chains of Custody (TR/COCs)

Tetra Tech RLSC Tetra Tech FOL

Megan Ritchie Vince Shickora

610-382-1527 610-382-1528

Report TR/COC information to Sample Management Office (SMO)

Analytical data quality issues

OASQA (RAS coordinator) OASQA (DAS coordinator)

Tetra Tech RLSC

Dan Slizys John Kwedar

Megan Ritchie

410-305-2734 410-305-3021

610-382-1527

Immediately notify Tetra Tech Project Chemist

Notify Data Validation Staff and Tetra Tech PM if necessary

AR305038



SAP Worksheet #7 -- Personnel Responsibilities and Qualifications Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.4.3)

Name

Title/Role

Organizational

Affiliation

Responsibilities

Education and/or Experience Qualifications

(Optional)

Neil Teamerson PM Tetra Tech Oversees project, financial, schedule, and technical day-to-day management of the project.

M.S. Environmental Resource Management, 28 years of environmental experience

Vince Shickora FOL, Project Geologist Tetra Tech Supervises, coordinates, and performs field sampling activities

B.A. Geology, 20 years environmental experience

Megan Ritchie QAM, RLSC Tetra Tech Coordinates analyses with lab chemists, ensures the scope is followed, QA data packages, and communicates with Tetra Tech staff.

B.S. Biology/Environmental Studies, 12 years environmental experience

Boris Dynkin, PE Project Engineer Tetra Tech Provides technical support for in-situ chemical oxidation project activities

M.S. Environmental Engineering, 25 years environmental engineering and in-situ remediation experience

Chris Genell Health and Safety Specialist

Tetra Tech Oversees health and safety requirements.

B.S. Biology, 19 years as construction and safety specialist.

AR305039



SAP Worksheet #8 -- Special Personnel Training Requirements Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.4.4)

The following table is used to identify and describe any specialized/non-routine project specific training requirements or certifications needed by personnel in order to successfully complete the project or task.

Project

Function

Specialized Training By Title or Description of

Course

Training Provider

Training

Date

Personnel /

Groups Receiving Training

Personnel Titles / Organizational

Affiliation

Location of Training

Records / Certificates1

General On-site activities

40-Hour HAZWOPER OSHA Training

Various Providers

Various All on-site personnel

Tetra Tech Staff Tetra Tech Pittsburgh Office File

General On-site activities

8-Hour HAZWOPER Refresher Training

Tetra Tech Various All on-site personnel

Tetra Tech Staff Tetra Tech Pittsburgh Office File

All field personnel will have received the appropriate training required to conduct the field activities to which they are assigned. Additionally, each site worker will be required to have completed a 40-hour course (and 8-hour refresher, if applicable) in Health and Safety Training as described under Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 29 CFR 1910.120(b)(4).

AR305040



SAP Worksheet #9 -- Project Scoping Session Participants Sheet (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.5.1) *Data needs tables were not used for these scoping sessions.

Project Name: Treatability Study Projected Date(s) of Sampling: December 2009 – March 2010 Project Manager: Neil Teamerson

Site Name: Ordnance Products Site Site Location: North East, Cecil County, Maryland

Date of Session: May 3, 2009 Scoping Session Purpose: Discuss preliminary DQOs and field sampling events pertaining to the treatability study. Name

Title

Affiliation Phone # E-mail Address Project

Role

Neil Teamerson Project Manager Tetra Tech 610-382-1531 [email protected] PM

Boris Dynkin Senior Engineer Tetra Tech 978-474-8427 [email protected]

Project Engineer

Comments/Decisions: Each team member to complete tasks discussed in scoping session.

Action Items:

Neil Teamerson Boris Dynkin Gordon Araujo

Discuss scoping session with EPA

Review SAP Write UFP-SAP incorporating treatability study conceptual approach



Date of Session: July 17, 2009 Scoping Session Purpose: Discuss scope of work regarding treatability study and EPA comments. Name

Title


Role

Neil Teamerson Project Manager

Tetra Tech 610-382-1531 [email protected] PM

John Epps RPM EPA 215-814-3144 [email protected] EPA RPM


Action Items:

Neil Teamerson Boris Dynkin

Respond to EPA comments on conceptual approach.

Continue to refine treatability study conceptual approach. Evaluate various bioremediation amendments relevant to the

treatability study.

AR305041





Date of Session: July 28, 2009 Scoping Session Purpose: Discuss scope of work regarding treatability study. Name

Title


Role



Boris Dynkin, PE Senior Engineer Tetra Tech 978-474-8427 [email protected]

Project Engineer

Gordon Araujo Engineer Tetra Tech 610-382-1168 [email protected]

Assistant PM, SSO

Megan Ritchie Environmental Scientist

Tetra Tech 610-382-127 [email protected] QAM/RLSC


Action Items:

Neil Teamerson Gordon Araujo Megan Ritchie

Provide site-specific background information regarding scope of work.

Write UFP-SAP incorporating EPA comments on treatability study conceptual approach.

Review SAP.



Date of Session: November 10, 2009 Scoping Session Purpose: Discuss draft treatability study SAP and EPA comments. Name

Title


Role



John Epps RPM EPA 215-814-3144 [email protected] EPA RPM


Action Items:

Neil Teamerson Gordon Araujo

Respond to EPA comments on conceptual approach and draft SAP.

Incorporate comments to the draft SAP.

AR305042



SAP Worksheet #10 -- Problem Definition (DQO Step 1) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.5.2) 10.1 BACKGROUND 10.1.1 Site History The Ordnance Products, Inc. (OPI) Superfund Site (Site) is located in the Mechanics Valley Trade Center (MVTC) at 1079 Mechanics Valley Road in Cecil County, Maryland approximately two miles northeast of the city of North East, Maryland (Figure 10-1). EPA Region 3 is the lead agency for the OPI Site Record of Decision (ROD), and the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) is the support agency for the OPI ROD. The Site is a former industrial facility located on approximately 60 acres of property consisting today of wooded and open areas containing both occupied and abandoned buildings, trailers, junk cars and debris scattered throughout the area. The Site is located in northeastern Cecil County off of Maryland State Route 40, approximately two miles north of the city of North East, Maryland. The Site property is bordered on the north by Stevenson Road, on the east by Mechanics Valley Road, and on the south and west by open and forested land owned by Maryland Materials, Inc. and other private parties. There are currently several active businesses at the Site, including a safety equipment business, an automotive repair shop, and a propane storage facility. There are also buildings that appear to house other businesses that may or may not be presently active. The OPI Site was originally used to assemble various munitions products, including grenade fuses, pyrotechnic signals, and detonators primarily for the military from about 1957 to 1979 when the property was abandoned. In June 1953, Frederick Beach purchased four parcels of land in Cecil County, MD comprising what would become the Site property, an area totaling 93.5 acres. In December 1953, Mr. Beach and his partner formed and incorporated OPI in the State of Maryland. OPI was incorporated for the purpose of carrying on the trade or business of manufacturing, storing, packaging, and firing of explosives and ammunition. OPI began operating at the Site sometime in the late 1950's. After 1961, the Site was principally utilized for the Vietnam War related manufacturing of fuses, detonators, ignition components, smoke grenades, and other ordnance. In May 1969, the stock of OPI was acquired by Kraus Design, Inc. (KDI). OPI continued to exist as a wholly owned subsidiary of KDI. In 1986, the property was purchased by MVTC and eventually sold to the corporation's majority stockholder, William Fredericks. When operations ceased at the Site, waste materials were left above ground and were also presumed to be buried. The waste included drums of solvents and acids, detonators, and grenade fuses. 10.1.2 Site Characteristics The Site is situated on a hillside above the stream valley of the Little Northeast Creek. The elevations of the Site range from approximately 100 feet to 200 feet above mean sea level. There are three unnamed intermittent drainage paths on-site. Water from the three streams exits the Site via a culvert beneath Mechanics Valley Road. From the culvert, a single channel carries the water approximately 350 feet southeastward to the Little Northeast Creek. Little Northeast Creek flows approximately 2 miles southwestward and empties into the Northeast Creek. Northeast Creek flows south for approximately 1.5 miles and empties into the Northeast River, an arm of the Chesapeake Bay.

The Site is located within the fall line between the eastern Piedmont physiographic province and the Coastal Plain physiographic province. The Site is underlain by the Cretaceous age Potomac Group (Coastal Plain Province) and by the Lower Paleozoic age James Run Formation (Piedmont Province). A thin veneer of coastal plain sediments composed of the Potomac Group underlies the uplands in the northern and western portions of the Site. The Potomac group consists of unconsolidated gravels, sands, silts and clays. The James Run Formation consists of metamorphosed volcanic rocks. The Little Northeast Creek Member underlies the extreme northeastern portion of the Site. The Little Northeast Creek Member consists of grayish-white to gray, fine- to medium-grained, massive granofels with relict phenocrysts of plagioclase and quartz. The crystalline rocks are overlain by a mantle of saprolite, a stage in the breakdown of the bedrock due to chemical weathering. The saprolite retains much of the fabric of the parent rock. The thickness of the saprolite in the Maryland Piedmont is highly variable, but the average thickness is 45 feet.

AR305043



Groundwater underlying the Site occurs within a complex, two-component flow system, consistent with the regional hydrogeology. The upper component of groundwater flow (overburden) is through the soil and saprolite. In most areas of the Site, the water table occurs within this overburden. The lower component of the groundwater flow system (bedrock) consists of the unweathered bedrock where groundwater is restricted to the secondary openings such as joints and fractures. The depth of the overburden generally ranged from 5 to 35 feet to the top of the basalt forming the bedrock at the Site. Fractures were typically encountered from a depth of about 65 to 180 feet below ground surface. Water producing fractures were not encountered below these depths. Relatively few fracture zones were found in bedrock and overall, the basalt is a relatively low-yielding formation.

In general, groundwater flows from areas of recharge in topographically high areas to areas of discharge in topographically low areas, generally west-to-east on the Site. Groundwater movement in the bedrock underlying the northern portion of the Site is controlled by fractures, providing the means for groundwater from the Site to discharge to Little Northeast Creek and to be tapped by nearby residential wells. The overburden and bedrock systems are also hydraulically connected. The valley of Little Northeast Creek is a discharge zone that receives water from the west (i.e., the Site) and from the east. Groundwater beneath the Site flows east to the Little Northeast Creek Valley, and then migrates down the hydraulic gradient within the valley to the south. 10.1.3 Previous Environmental Investigations MDE first investigated the Site in 1987 and conducted additional sampling in 1988. Study of aerial photographs revealed eight known or suspected disposal areas: Areas A, B, C, D, E, F, H, and various surface impoundments (see Figure 10-2). Potential sources of contamination included landfill areas (Areas A and E), bunkers used for burning (Areas A and B), disposal trenches (Areas C and H), a disposal pit (Area D), and burn pits (Area F). In addition, abandoned bulk chemicals and a metal plating shop with six waste discharge ponds were also present on-site. MDE suspected that explosives materials, including those termed munitions and explosives of concern (MEC) remained on-site. MEC includes specific categories of military munitions that may pose explosives safety risks and includes unexploded ordnance (UXO), discarded military munitions (DMM) or munitions constituents (e.g., trinitrotoluene or TNT) in high enough concentrations to pose an explosive hazard. Sampling conducted by MDE in 1987 and 1988 revealed elevated levels of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) trichloroethene (TCE), 1,2-dichloroethene (1,2-DCE), acetone, vinyl chloride, 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1-DCE), 1,1-dichloroethane (1,1-DCA), and tetrachloroethene (PCE) in on-site wells. Elevated levels of TCE were detected in a drainage ditch that flows from the Site into the Little Northeast Creek, and samples taken downstream from the Site contained TCE, 1,2-DCE, and toluene. Sampling of nearby domestic wells indicated elevated levels of TCE, 1,2-DCE, PCE, and toluene. MDE issued a consent order to the owners to install water treatment systems on the three residential wells. In 1988, MDE requested EPA's assistance to remediate contamination at the Site. In June 1988, EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) to KDI. The UAO required KDI to undertake response actions in the drum area, disposal areas, and the buildings located on-site, to investigate the extent and nature of the groundwater contamination both on- and off-site, and to address the contaminated domestic drinking water wells. The work to be performed by KDI under the UAO included removal of the hazardous materials such as combustibles and drums containing hazardous substances, and the performance of certain EPA studies including a geophysical survey, an on-site soil survey, an on-site surface water and sediment assessment, and off-site surface water, sediment and ground-water assessment. KDI Corporation hired O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc. (OBG) in August 1988 to conduct the initial removal actions (RAs) and the on-site and site-associated environmental assessments. In accordance with the UAO, KDI sampled 52 private off-site wells, with VOCs detected in five of the wells, including an on-site residential trailer. In 1989, OBG sampled the surface impoundments, surface water and on-site soils and confirmed the presence of metals and organic compounds on-site. Groundwater sampling indicated elevated levels of vinyl chloride, 1,2-DCE, TCE, PCE, toluene, copper, and arsenic in eleven monitoring wells that OBG installed.

AR305044



In 1992, OBG installed five pairs of off-site monitoring wells down gradient of the Site, in the stream valley of Little Northeast Creek. Analytical results showed elevated VOCs in several groundwater zones. KDI installed five whole-house, point-of-entry (POE) water filtration systems, which utilized activated carbon for treatment, in residential homes whose drinking water wells had been contaminated with VOCs that had migrated from the Site. In 1995, OBG conducted a design investigation for construction of a groundwater pump and treat system. Additional wells were installed, and aquifer tests were conducted. The system was constructed in 1996 but was never operated. EPA initiated a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) at the Site in September 1996 and began to compile and review all prior site-related investigation records performed under the various potentially responsible parties (PRPs) response activities in preparation for overseeing the expected PRP-led RI/FS. KDI continued to sample and maintain the residential water filtration systems on a quarterly basis until December 1996. KDI also completed construction of a groundwater pump-and-treat system in January 1997. In 1997, KDI ceased performing work required by the UAO, informing EPA that it could not continue to clean up the Site due to financial problems. In July 1997, EPA issued an additional UAO to KDI requiring that KDI turn over the pump and treat operation manual developed by OBG and allow EPA to operate the groundwater pump and treat system at the Site. The OPI Site was listed on the final National Priorities List (NPL) in September 1997. EPA took over responsibility for the RI/FS using the Hazardous Substance Superfund and prepared to proceed with the RI/FS following the Fund-lead removal action at the Site in December 1997. In February 1997, EPA began a Fund-financed Emergency Removal Action (RA) to initiate quarterly sampling of the residential wells and the off-site monitoring wells to determine the quantity and types of contaminants present. EPA also took over maintenance on the residences' water filtration systems on an "as needed" basis. In May 1997, EPA sought additional funding and a change in the scope of the RA to address the four surface water impoundments located on-site. The threats to drinking water were posed by the uncontrolled release of VOCs into the groundwater and the potential release of antimony, mercury, arsenic, nickel, cadmium, silver, chromium, selenium, copper, zinc, lead, and other hazardous substances and contaminants to the environment. As part of this response, EPA sampled surface and subsurface sediments and soils as well as residential and monitoring wells for VOCs. The RI field investigation was conducted in three phases between May 1999 and November 2004, to characterize the long-term environmental contamination in groundwater and in soil. The data collected during the RI indicated the presence of at least two separate groundwater plumes associated with past operations at the Site. Plume 1 consists of a TCE plume centered on Area H in the bedrock aquifer along with PCE contamination in the shallow aquifer. Plume 1 also includes the off-site residential well contamination in the stream valley. There is uncertainty as to whether Plume 1 is one commingled plume, or two separate plumes. The focus of the treatability study addressed in this SAP is Plume 2. Plume 2 showed significant VOC contamination as detected in wells closest to Area D based on the RI results; however, sampling results did not indicate that Plume 2 had migrated to off-site wells. Compounds most frequently detected in this plume included cis-1,2-DCE, trans-1,2-DCE, PCE, and TCE. In addition, hexachloroethane (HCA) was also detected with high frequency in the Area D overburden wells. In general, the highest levels of Area D-related VOCs were contained in overburden well MW-19S, located approximately 10 feet downgradient of the Area D disposal area.

A Feasibility Study (FS) at the Site was completed in December 2005. EPA modified the FS by an addendum in May 2006 that set out the remedial approach for handling on-site MEC following consultation with the Department of Defense Explosives Safety Board (DDESB). Currently, a Pre-Design Investigation (PDI) for a groundwater pump-and-treat system is being conducted at the OPI Site. Data is also being used to determine the number and locations of extraction wells and additional monitoring wells. For newly constructed PDI wells, geophysical logging was performed to assist in determining the locations for future PDI wells. These new monitoring and extraction wells within Plume 2 are shown on Figure 10-3. Table 10-1 provides a comparison of the 2009 Plume 2 groundwater data with the RI (2005) Plume 2 groundwater data.

AR305045



TABLE 10-1 COMPARISON OF PDI GROUNDWATER DATA (2009) WITH RI GROUNDWATER DATA (2005)

ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE

WELL

CONCENTRATIONS (μg/L)

TCE PCE Perchlorate

2005 2009 2005 2009 2005 2009

MW-17 S 1,300 10,000+ 530 13,000+ 3,850 4,870

MW-17 I 230 1,900+ 780 8,500+ 539 289

MW-17 D 41 690 210 2,500+ 420 60

MW-18 S 390 1,200 370 2,300+ 1,770 1,350

MW-18 D 9.6 6.9 40 52+ 4.74 NA

MW-19 S 1,100 6,400+ 5,500 46,000+ 3,440 2,900

MW-19 D 1.6 5 23 77+ ND NA

MW-20 S 260 570 1,700 3,900+ 1,240 668

MW-20 D 1.4 4.6 11 59+J ND NA

MW-21 S 110 120+ 390 460+ ND 146

MW-21 DO ND 0.50J ND 2.1 154 NA Notes: ND Not detected NA Not sampled J Analyte present. Reported value may not be accurate or precise. + Analyte present. Actual value may be higher.

The PDI data shows that the levels of TCE and PCE contained in samples from wells MW-17S, MW-17I, MW-17D, and MW-19S significantly increased from the RI data. Figure 10-4 provides a contour map of PCE level in shallow groundwater. The highest concentration of PCE in shallow groundwater was found at MW-17S. The newly installed EW-2 and MW-29 monitoring well cluster are located proximal to the most contaminated section of the plume. Figure 10-5 presents a tag map of VOC results in the deep aquifer. Similar to the findings at MW-17S in shallow groundwater contamination, the highest VOC levels were found in MW-17I and MW-17D. In addition to characterizing the contaminants in Site groundwater and delineating groundwater plumes, the PDI data included groundwater elevations for shallow, intermediate, and deep wells on-site. Groundwater contour maps for overburden (shallow), intermediate bedrock, and deep bedrock wells are provided as Figure 10-6, Figure 10-7, and Figure 10-8, respectively. 10.1.4 Record of Decision A ROD was completed in September 2006. The ROD presents the selected remedial action for the OPI Site. Remedies were chosen for drinking water, groundwater, and soil. The remedy for residential drinking water contamination is to continue operating and maintaining the residential point-of-entry water filtration systems until municipal drinking water lines can be installed. The residential wells will be properly abandoned and the POE systems will be removed.

A pump-and-treat groundwater system was selected as the alternative for groundwater remedial action on-site. The selected groundwater alternative will provide substantial long-term risk reduction through treatment of contaminants and protect against future exposure by reducing migration of contaminated groundwater and returning it to its beneficial use. The treatment system will contain, extract and treat contaminated groundwater in both contaminant plumes (Plumes 1 and 2), reduce groundwater contaminants through treatment, and return area groundwater to its beneficial use.

AR305046



Current and Potential Future Land and Resource Uses

The Site is located on approximately 60 acres of forested, undeveloped land in North East, Maryland, a town of less than 3,000 people covering approximately 1.6 square miles. The Little North East Creek empties into the North East River approximately three miles south of the Site.

The Site is bordered on the east by Mechanics Valley Road and the Little North East Creek, on the north by a pallet manufacturing company and a rock quarry, and on the west and south by more forested, undeveloped land. The Site is zoned for heavy industrial use (Zoning Code M2) by the Cecil County, Maryland Zoning Board. Therefore, the current and reasonably anticipated future land uses for the OPI property will be industrial, rather than residential, use. Current and expected future land use is commercial/industrial.

The area around the Site is zoned for residential use and is sparsely populated. There are approximately 50 residences within one-half mile of the Site. All of the residents adjacent to the Site rely on area groundwater for domestic use (i.e., drinking, bathing, and cooking). Five of these domestic-use water wells, primarily east of the Site, are currently contaminated by hazardous substances in groundwater that have migrated off-site. Individual POE water filtration systems are installed at four residences.

Human Health Risk Assessment Summary

EPA conducted a baseline human health risk assessment (BLRA) and a screening level ecological risk assessment (SLERA) during the RI to determine the current and future effects of Site contaminants on human health and the environment. The objective of the risk assessment for the Site was to estimate the risks to human health and the environment resulting from the presence of contamination in environmental media [air, groundwater, surface soil, subsurface soil, disturbed soil (i.e. surface and subsurface soils that have been mixed), sediment, surface water, etc.]. Another objective was to provide the basis for determining appropriate remedial measures, if necessary, for these media as part of the feasibility study.

Since the Site is limited to industrial use, the human health risk assessment focused on protection of human health under the most likely exposure scenarios. Those scenarios are on-site exposure of industrial and/or construction workers, and exposure of current and future off-site residents to contaminated domestic well water from the Site. Based on the findings of the BLRA, the most likely significant exposure scenarios at the Site are for the industrial worker or the construction worker exposed to contaminated soils and/or groundwater on the Site, and for nearby lifetime residents exposed to contaminated groundwater. The most significant human health risks under these scenarios are described below.

For the future industrial worker or future construction worker at the Site, contact with contaminated groundwater from Plume 2 was the most significant contributor to both carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks. Exposure to Plume 2 groundwater, via inhalation of vapors from contaminants in groundwater for a construction worker and via dermal contact during tap water hand-washing or rinsing activities for either a construction worker or an industrial worker represents the most significant on-site risk. The primary Contaminants of Concern (COCs) for these receptors under this scenario were PCE and TCE. The carcinogenic risks exceeded 1 x 10-4 from exposure to PCE from Plume 2 groundwater. Exposures to PCE, and to a lesser extent, TCE, by the same route were associated with target organ-specific Health Indexes (His) greater than 1.

Maximum risks for an off-site, future, lifetime resident exposed to Plume 2 groundwater demonstrate similar risk results. TCE, PCE, and the explosives manufacturing compound HCA, are the COCs driving carcinogenic risk beyond EPA's acceptable risk range. The maximum non-cancer risks for the off-site, future, lifetime resident exceeded a target HI of 1 for liver and kidney (organ-specific), central nervous

AR305047



system (CNS) and endocrine systems and for fetotoxic affects. Non-cancer risks are also driven by future groundwater exposures to PCE and TCE in Plume 2. It is important to note that at present, no residences near the Site are exposed to contaminated groundwater from Plume 2.

Contaminants of Concern

Tetrachloroethene (PCE) is a VOC widely used as a degreaser for metals and in the dry cleaning industry.

1,2-Dichloroethene (cis-, trans-. Total) is a VOC used as a solvent for fats, phenol and camphor. It is also produced by the degradation or breakdown of PCE and/or TCE in the environment. 1,2-Dichloroethene is found in two structural forms called 'cis' and 'trans,' referring to the position of chlorine atoms in the molecule. The mixture of these two structural forms, or 'isomers' found in nature is referred to as 'mixed' or 'total' 1,2-dichloroethene.

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane is a nonflammable solvent for fats, oils, resins and waxes and is used in the manufacture of paints, rust removers, weed killers and insecticides. It is also an intermediate used in the manufacture of PCE.

1,1,2-Trichloroethane is another VOC used as a solvent for fats, waxes, and natural resins. Exposure can cause nose and eye irritation, CNS depression and dermatitis, kidney and liver damage.

Vinyl chloride is used in the production of plastics and as a refrigerant. Vinyl chloride is another breakdown product of PCE and/or TCE in the environment.

Benzene is a natural component of petroleum and is widely used in the manufacture of industrial chemicals, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, dyes, plastics, resins and as a gasoline additive.

Hexachloroethane is used in metallurgy for refining aluminum, as an explosiveness inhibitor for ammonium perchlorate, and in the manufacture of smoke grenades.

Perchlorate (ClO4-) is a soluble anion that forms solid salts with various cations, including ammonium,

potassium, sodium, lithium, and magnesium. Once dissolved in water, perchlorate is very stable. It resists degradation in the subsurface and does not readily adsorb to mineral surfaces, making it very mobile in the environment. Perchlorate salts were first produced on a large scale in the 1940s. The military services have used perchlorate salts as components in solid propellant for rockets and missiles. The salts have also been used in some explosive and incendiary munitions fillers and in smoke-producing compounds, training simulators, and signal flares. Non-military sources include pyrotechnics, fertilizers, black powder and black powder substitutes, air bag inflators, road flares, and the use of perchloric acid in laboratories and manufacturing.

Summary of Ecological Risk Assessment

Ecological risks to sediment and aquatic organisms are limited to the intermittent/ephemeral stream system on the Site; no constituents detected in Little North East Creek exceed the screening levels or the threshold affects benchmark (i.e., contaminant levels known to have demonstrable affects on aquatic life) for ecological risks.

AR305048



10.1.5 Remedial Action Objectives

The Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs) for contaminated groundwater attributable to the Site are:

Protect current and future industrial and residential receptors from adverse health effects that may result from exposure to contaminated groundwater.

Provide hydraulic containment of groundwater within the source areas of contamination at the Site.

Restore groundwater to its beneficial use by reducing Site-related contaminants to acceptable risk-based levels.

Contaminants in groundwater will be reduced to their respective Federal primary drinking water standards, known as Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), established under the Safe Drinking Water Act [42 USC Section 300g-l(b)(3)(C)] or to acceptable risk-based levels for contaminants where MCLs have not been established. The concentrations of PCE, TCE, and perchlorate in Plume 2 serve as markers for the physical extent of groundwater contamination by these and other COCs on-site. Using this information, EPA will hydraulically contain the contaminated groundwater plumes to insure that this pollution does not spread further into the aquifers. EPA will also extract and treat the contaminated groundwater to remove COCs to levels at or below their respective MCLs/risk levels, and in the case of perchlorate, to levels at or below EPA's January 26, 2006 preliminary cleanup goal for perchlorate of 24.5 parts per billion in water.

The selected remedy will reduce contamination in groundwater to accepted levels and reduce the risk of potential noncarcinogenic health effects (i.e., the HI) associated with exposure to contaminated groundwater below EPA's level of concern. The selected remedy will also address the risk of injury associated with the presence of MEC on-site.

10.2 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

Based on the conceptual site model (CSM) provided in the ROD, a simplified depiction has been included as Figure 10-9. Figure 10-9 depicts Plume 2 contamination caused by Areas D, E, and F. As shown, solvents burned and disposed of in primarily Area D resulted in contaminated surface soils. Because this pilot treatability study only serves to remediate the groundwater pathway, commentary on soils, sediment, and vapor intrusion pathways has not been included.

Chemicals within soils in Area D have leached to groundwater because of infiltration and migration. These contaminants (mostly PCE, TCE, cis-1,2-DCE, and perchlorate) then migrated through the aquifer because of advection and dispersion Recent sampling of wells within Plume 2, conducted in 2005 and 2009, indicate that contaminants in the shallow and deep aquifers have not migrated off-site.

In order to better understand the physical/chemical nature of Plume 2, where bioaugmentaiton is proposed, Figure 10-10 is provided to depict the nature and extent of contamination in the aquifer across Areas D, E, and F using TCE as an indicator for the extent of PCE, TCE, cis-1,2-DCE, and perchlorate contamination. The cross-section A→A’ is presented on Figure 10-3. Samples from Plume 2 shallow wells contained PCE at levels up to 13,000 μg/L (well MW-17S). The nearby intermediate well (MW-17I) revealed 8,500 μg/L of PCE. Figure 10-10 indicates that the highest VOC concentrations for PCE (and by association TCE, 1,2-DCE (total), and perchlorate) are present above or at the bedrock surface. Analytical data for PCE, TCE, and perchlorate well concentrations are presented in Table 10-1. These data for TCE and perchlorate support the conclusion that the highest contaminant concentrations exist at or above the bedrock surface. Based on the groundwater level measurements, the groundwater flow

AR305049



direction in Plume 2, where the pilot test area is proposed, is in south-east direction (See Figures 10-7, 10-7, and 10-8).

The interruption of the Plume 2 CSM is partially limited because analytical data does not exist for wells EW-2 and the MW-29 cluster. As a part of the Treatability Study, baseline sampling will be collected to refine the Plume 2 CSM. However, for defining the nature and extent of contamination in Plume 2, the discussion using the MW-17 and MW-19 well clusters adequately demonstrates that the highest VOC concentrations are within the overburden and at the bedrock surface, not within the bedrock. Conversely, the analytical data from the MW-17 well cluster identifies that significant, localized bedrock contamination exists only at the MW-17 cluster. Future analytical data will need to be collected from EW-2 and cluster MW-29 to determine the extent of this localized bedrock contamination. 10.3 EXPOSURE SCENARIOS

Because of MEC risks around Areas D, E, and F, no current land uses exist and fencing has been installed to limit access to the area. Residents nearby are not currently receptors because Plume 2 has not been shown, through sampling data, to extend off the Site. However, the potential for future expansion of Plume 2 is sufficient to require remediation of the groundwater, as defined by the RAOs for the Site.

10.4 PLANNING TEAM Worksheets #2 and #3-7 outline the project team. EPA Region 3 and Tetra Tech will use the data generated from the pilot study to develop the implementation plan, determine performance results, and evaluate subsequent recommendations. MDE will evaluate Tetra Tech’s implementation plan, performance results, and subsequent recommendations. 10.4 PROBLEM STATEMENT Groundwater contaminated with PCE, TCE, HCA, cis-1,2-DCE, and perchlorate has been identified as Plume 2 near Areas D, E, and F. In order to evaluate the feasibility of using in-situ bioremediation to meet the groundwater RAOs, Tetra Tech will conduct a treatability pilot study. To establish complete dehalogenation of groundwater VOCs using bioremediation, three components are necessary: Proper geochemical environment (e.g. reducing conditions) Sufficient supply of electron donor and nutrients Consortia of proper microbes Additionally, the feasibility of using in-situ bioremediation to meet groundwater RAOs at Plume 2 will determine if Plume 1 can be remediated in a similar fashion.

AR305050



SAP Worksheet #11 -- Project Quality Objectives/Systematic Planning Process Statements (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.6.1) 11.1 IDENTIFYING THE DECISION (DQO STEP 2) What will the data be used for? Groundwater data will be used to determine the efficacy of bioremediation as the long-term remedial action for this Site. The primary objective of this study is to demonstrate the viability of bioremediation at the Site. The secondary goal is to develop an injection methodology that will create the maximum sized treatment zone per well possible. Decision Statement Conduct an in-situ bioremediation treatability study for Plume 2 groundwater to determine whether in-situ bioremediation is feasible in reducing contaminant concentrations, whether modifications to the treatability study can feasibly reduce contaminant concentrations, or if a new technology needs to be considered. Because there are multiple actions that pertain to the decision statement, the following decision diagram (Figure 11-1) clarifies the relationship between multiple decisions.

FIGURE 11-1 DECISION DIAGRAM

Can the treatability study be modified to attain groundwater RAOs?

Is the in-situ bioremediation treatability study feasible in

reducing contaminant concentrations?

Consider expanding to full-scale bioremediation and consider Plume 1 in-

situ bioremediation treatability study.

NoYes

Continue treatability study with modified approach.

Consider new technology to meet groundwater RAOs.

No

Yes

AR305051



11.2 INPUTS TO THE DECISION (DQO STEP 3) Analytical data is needed to evaluate the following items: Determine if statically injected amendment is detected in primary monitoring wells. Determine if recirculation is needed to distribute amendment. Determine if reducing conditions exist for anaerobic degradation in primary monitoring wells. Determine if contaminant concentration trends are decreasing in primary wells. Determine if microbial consortium and functional genes are present in primary wells. Determine if bioaugmentation is needed. Groundwater will be analyzed for the following fixed-based laboratory parameters: VOCs – PCE, 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane TCE, 1,1,1-TCA, 1,1,2-TCA, 1,1-DCE, cis-1,2-DCE, trans-

1,2-DCE, 1,1-DCA, 1,2-DCA, VC, benzene, chloroethane HCA Perchlorate Dissolved Gases – ethane, ethene, methane, and acetylene Anions – sulfate, nitrate, nitrite, chloride, bromide, and orthophosphate Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Volatile Fatty Acids (VFAs) – lactic, pyruvic, acetic, propionic, and butyric Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR) – Bacteria (Dehalococcoides spp., Methanogens,

and Eubacteria) and Functional Genes (TCE reductase [tceA], VC reductase [bvcA and vcrA], and perchlorate reductase [pcrABCD])

Groundwater will be analyzed for the following field test kit parameters: Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Dissolved Carbon Dioxide Total Alkalinity Soluble Iron Ferrous Iron Total Iron Sulfide Groundwater will be analyzed for the following field parameters: Oxidation-Reduction Potential (ORP) pH Temperature Specific Conductivity DO Turbidity Baseline analytical data will be used to calculate action levels for site-related contaminants. Indicator parameters (i.e., TOC, dissolved gasses, anions, VFAs, microbial population, functional genes, DO, ORP, dissolved CO2, iron, pH, and total alkalinity) will be evaluated based on literature reference information. Bromide will be analyzed as a tracer compound to detect the radius of influence from injection events. Information Sources Baseline data for Plume 2 monitoring wells will be provided from the PDI sampling event that occurred in 2009. Indicator parameters will be evaluated based on guidance documents (ITRC, 2002). Geophysical logging data from the PDI will be used to determine injection intervals.

AR305052



Confirm Appropriate Analytical Methods Exist For VOCs and HCA, CLP method SOM01.2 will be used for analyses. EPA Method 314.0 will be used for perchlorate analysis. Data for these parameters will be compared to historical and baseline data from previous sampling events, therefore, the same analytical methods used during previous events will be used for analyses during the treatability study. MCLs are listed in Worksheet #15 as the Project Action Limits. Other various analytical methods will be used for the indicator parameters. Fixed based laboratory analytical methods and field test kit methods are listed in detail in Worksheet #19. The methods listed in Worksheet #19 meet detection levels and action levels required to provide confidence in data. 11.3 STUDY BOUNDARIES (DQO STEP 4) Characteristics of the Population of Interest The in-situ bioremediation treatability study will focus on groundwater from Plume 2 located at Areas D, E, and F. Spatial Boundaries Plume 2 groundwater has been divided into shallow (i.e., overburden) and deep (i.e., bedrock) aquifers. The depth of the overburden generally ranges from 5 to 35 feet to the top of the basalt forming the bedrock at the Site. Fractures are typically encountered from a depth of about 65 to 180 feet below ground surface (bgs). There are no water producing fractures below these depths. Temporal Boundaries The feasibility of the bioremediation will be determined through sampling groundwater over 4 months. The 4-month period is anticipated to illustrate contaminant trends occurring from the bioremediation. Weekly performance sampling will be performed for the first month after amendment injection. Biweekly sampling will occur during the second month. Monthly sampling will occur thereafter. The project schedule is included in Worksheet #16. Practical Constraints on Data Collection No practical constraints on data collection are anticipated. Site access has been arranged through EPA to conduct work at Plume 2 wells. Paths between wells have been cleared by a UXO technician during previous investigations. Project personnel are required to stay on established paths.

AR305053



11.4 DECISION RULES (DQO STEP 5)

If Statement Then Statement Action/Alternative Statement

Interconnectiveness of Monitoring Wells

If pressure readings and/or groundwater elevations increase during injection event

The interconnectiveness between the wells is sufficient for injection penetration

Determine if injected amendment is detected in primary monitoring wells (static injection)

Alternative: Consider modifications to injection location/methodology

Static Injection/Radial Distribution

If statically injected amendment is detected in primary monitoring wells (i.e., bromide tracer detected, visual observation of milky color)

Static injection method has achieved radial distribution between monitoring wells

Proceed to redox monitoring

Alternative: Perform recirculation injection

Recirculation Injection/Radial Distribution

If recirculated amendment is detected in primary monitoring wells (i.e., bromide tracer detected, visual observation of milky color)

Recirculation amendment injection method has achieved radial distribution between monitoring wells

Proceed to redox monitoring

Alternative: Consider modifications to the treatability study or consider new technology for remediation

Redox Monitoring

If redox monitoring identifies

ORP ≤ -100 mV and

DO ≤ 1 mg/L in monitoring wells

Anaerobic reducing conditions have likely been achieved in monitoring wells

Determine if contaminant concentration trends are decreasing and if microbial consortium and functional genes are present in monitoring wells Optional: Determine indicator parameters concentrations as confirmation of anaerobic reducing conditions


Indicator Parameters (optional)

If parameter concentration has: ferrous iron increased(↑) sulfide ↑ methane ↑ nitrate < 1 mg/L TOC ↑ VFAs ↑

Anaerobic reducing conditions have been achieved in monitoring wells

Determine if contaminant concentration trends are decreasing and if microbial consortium and functional genes are present in monitoring wells

AR305054



If Statement Then Statement Action/Alternative Statement

Microbial Consortium and Functional Genes

If microbial consortium (Dehalococcoides spp. ≥ 102 cells/mL) and functional genes are present and or increasing in concentration

Aquifer contains the proper microbes for biostimulation

Determine if contaminant concentration trends are decreasing

Alternative: Consider bioaugmentation

Contaminant Concentration Monitoring

If PCE, TCE, DCE, HCA, and perchlorate trends are decreasing

Biodegradation of contaminants is occurring

Determine the trend of VC concentrations


If VC and especially Ethene are being produced

Biodegradation is occurring as planned.

Determine the feasibility of the remedy

If DCE or VC accumulation is occurring without Ethene production

Biostimulation is not sufficient to perform complete reductive dechlorination. VC stall is occurring

Consider bioaugmentation

Feasibility of the Remedy

If biodegradation results in 75% average reduction in contaminant levels within 4 months

Technology is able to decrease contaminant concentrations to a level that meets feasibility objectives.

Full-scale implementation of remedy should be considered to meet groundwater RAOs. Further information, including bench scale respirometer analysis and cost analysis, may be needed before the final remedy is selected. Consider this technology for treating Plume 1.


AR305055



11.5 SPECIFY LIMITS ON DECISION ERRORS (DQO STEP 6) Since the monitoring program relies on biased sampling, probability limits for false positive and false negative decision errors were not established. Simple comparisons of measured concentrations to action levels are being used. This biased selection of sample locations in contaminated areas does not support the use of quantitative statistics to estimate decision performance as specified in the DQO guidance (EPA 2002 and 2005). Instead, the project team will use the measured results to determine whether the amount and type of data collected are sufficient to support the attainment of RAOs. This will involve an evaluation of contaminant concentrations and an evaluation of uncertainty for contaminants that have action levels which are below the MDLs to ensure that contaminants are likely to have been detected if present. If all data have been collected as planned and no data points are missing or rejected for quality reasons, the monitoring event completeness will be considered satisfactory. If any data gaps are identified, including missing or rejected data, the project team will assess whether a claim of having obtained project objectives is reasonable. This assessment will depend on the number and type of identified data gaps; therefore, a more detailed strategy cannot be presented. All stakeholders will be involved in rendering the final conclusion regarding adequacy of the data. 11.6 OPTIMIZE THE DESIGN (DQO STEP 7) Data will be collected from the following monitoring wells contained within Plume 2: MW-17S/I/D, MW-18S/D, MW-19S/D, MW-20S/D, MW-21S/DO, MW-29S/I/D, EW-2, EW-4, and EW-6. Monitoring well cluster MW-29 and the EW series may be constructed as described in the PDI SAP (Tetra Tech, 2008). Worksheet #17 provides the details of the design.

AR305056



SAP Worksheet #12 -- Measurement Performance Criteria Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.6.2)

Groundwater Measurement Performance Criteria Table – Field QC Samples

QC Sample Analytical Group1 Frequency

Data Quality Indicators (DQIs) Measurement Performance Criteria

QC Sample Assesses Error

for Sampling (S), Analytical (A) or

both (S&A)

Trip Blank VOC One per cooler of VOC samples shipped to laboratory

Bias / Contamination No target analytes ≥ QL; with the exception of common field/laboratory contaminants

S & A

Field Blank VOC, HCA, Perchlorate

One per source of rinsate water

Bias / Contamination No target analytes ≥ QL; with the exception of common field/laboratory contaminants

S

Equipment Blank VOC, HCA, Perchlorate

One per 20 samples Bias / Contamination No target analytes ≥ QL; with the exception of common field/laboratory contaminants

S

Field Duplicates VOC, HCA, Perchlorate

One per 10 samples Precision Values > 5X QL: within + 30% Values < 5X QL: absolute difference must be <QL

S & A

Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD)

Perchlorate One per 20 samples Accuracy / Bias / Precision

Statistically derived percent recovery (%R) limits, 30% Relative Percent Difference (RPD)

S & A

Cooler Temperature Indicator

VOC and HCA Each cooler Accuracy / Representativeness

Temperature of samples upon receipt at the laboratory must read 4 (±2) °C.

S 1If information varies within an analytical group, separate by individual analyte. No field QC samples will be collected for the other groundwater parameters with the exception of the cooler temperature indicator.

AR305057



SAP Worksheet #13 -- Secondary Data Criteria and Limitations Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.7)

Secondary Data Data Source

(originating organization, report title and date)

Data Generator(s)

(originating organization, data types, data generation /

collection dates)

How Data Will Be Used

Limitations on Data Use

Pre-Design Investigation Sampling Data

PDI analytical data, Tetra Tech, 2009

Tetra Tech, full TCL analysis of groundwater samples along with other field test parameters.

Data will be used as baseline sampling data for treatability study.

No limitations.

PDI Geophysical Logging Data

PDI geophysical logging data, Tetra Tech, 2009

Tetra Tech, geophysical log data

Data will be used to determine injection intervals.

No limitations.

AR305058



SAP Worksheet #14 -- Summary of Project Tasks (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.8.1) Field activities at the Site will consist of the following subtasks: Mobilization and Demobilization Sample Handling Groundwater Sampling and Analysis Monitoring Procedures Optional Bench-Scale Testing Water Level Measurements Collection of Groundwater Samples Equipment Decontamination and IDW Handling 14.1 MOBILIZATION AND DEMOBILIZATION This subtask involves preparing for the field activities and demobilizing from the Site upon their completion. Following approval of the project plans, Tetra Tech will identify the necessary field support equipment, supplies and facilities, and begin mobilization activities. Site mobilization will consist of preparation for field activities and includes, but is not limited to, the following activities: Perform all required training and orientation Obtain all equipment required to perform field activities Identify and prepare locations for all field activities Coordinate sampling and analytical services with Region III OASQA Tetra Tech will prepare a list of all equipment and supplies necessary for the field team to perform field activities. This list includes but is not limited to: All documents, forms, logbooks, log sheets, labels, custody seals, air bills, and other paperwork

required by the SAP and Health and Safety Plan (HASP) Vehicles for personnel, equipment, and sample transport Personnel and equipment decontamination supplies and equipment required by the SAP and HASP Field analytical equipment and calibration standards for all required parameters of the SAP All required sample containers Equipment and supplies for sample custody, preservation, and packaging Other miscellaneous office and field supplies It is assumed that Site access and permission will not be an issue for on-site activities. Arrangements will be made to restore power to the existing groundwater pump-and-treat system so it can serve as a base of operations. During the required training and orientation, all field team members will review the SAP and will be given site-specific health and safety training based on the HASP. A field team orientation meeting will be held to familiarize personnel with the scope of the field activities. The orientation will include a walking tour of the Site and a drive around the main roads of the area to familiarize personnel with the physical layout of the Site and adjacent off-site areas. Orientation and site-specific health and safety training will be performed individually for each of the various subcontractor crews as they mobilize at the Site. It will also be necessary to provide orientation and health and safety training for any additional or replacement field team members assigned after the initial mobilization. The field team will obtain the required equipment and supplies, transport these items, and stage these items at the base of operations. Any equipment not available at the Tetra Tech warehouse or offices will be rented by Tetra Tech. Equipment will be calibrated as required by the SAP and HASP on an as-needed basis. Equipment will be re-stocked, replaced, or repaired as needed.

AR305059



Site demobilization will consist of removing from the Site all facilities, supplies, and equipment no longer needed at the end of field work. Arrangements will be made for the disconnection of utilities. The base of operations and field work locations will be restored as closely as possible to their original conditions by the field team or the responsible subcontractor. As part of demobilization, equipment and supplies will be collected, inventoried, and returned as appropriate. All field investigation paperwork will be filed and docketed in the project record. 14.2 SAMPLE HANDLING Sample handling includes such field-related considerations as the selection of sample containers, preservatives, allowable holding times, and the analysis requested. The proposed number of samples, including quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) samples, sample media, and analyses are detailed in Worksheet 18. Sample containers, preservation requirements, and holding times are summarized in Worksheet 19. 14.2.1 SAMPLE PACKAGING AND SHIPPING Samples will be packaged and shipped in accordance with the EPA Introduction to the Contract Laboratory Program (January 2007), the EPA CLP Guidance for Field Samplers (July 2007), and Tetra Tech SOPs. The FOL will be responsible for contacting the EPA Sample Management Office (SMO) for each shipment and will report the following: Sampler name and telephone number Case number and/or DAS number of the project Site name and code Number(s), matrix(ces), and concentration(s) of samples shipped Laboratory(ies) to which samples were shipped Carrier name and air bill number(s) for the shipment Method of shipment (e.g., overnight or 2-day shipment) Date of shipment Suspected hazards associated with the samples on-site 14.2.2 DOCUMENTATION Custody of the samples will be maintained and documented at all times. Chain-of-custody begins with the collection of the samples in the field. Tetra Tech Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) SA-6.3 (Appendix D) provides a description of the chain-of-custody procedures to be followed. The chain-of-custody reports will be generated by computer using the most current version of the EPA Forms II Lite software, procedures, and protocol. In addition to the EPA-required CLP documentation (e.g., chain-of-custody/traffic reports) and QC of samples, certain standard forms will be completed for sample description and documentation. These will include the sample log sheet (for groundwater samples) and project sample shipping logs. Examples of these forms can be found in Tetra Tech SOP SA-6.3. The type of preservative(s) used for each sample will be noted on the sample log sheet. The source of the preservatives and any other reagents will be documented in the site logbook. A bound, weatherproof field notebook will be maintained for field activities by the FOL. The FOL or his/her designee will record all information related to sampling or field activities. This information will include sampling time, weather conditions, unusual events, field measurements, description of photographs, etc. The calibration of monitoring, measuring, or test equipment is necessary to ensure the proper operation and response of equipment, to document the accuracy, sensitivity, or precision of the measurements, and to determine if correction should be applied to the readings. Each instrument requiring calibration will have its own equipment calibration log documenting the calibration of the equipment including the frequency and type of standard or calibration procedure.

AR305060



At the completion of field activities, the FOL will submit to the project manager all field records, data, field notebooks, logbooks, chains-of-custody, sample log sheets, daily logs, etc. The project manager will ensure that these materials are entered into the RAC program document control system in accordance with administrative guidelines. 14.3 GROUNDWATER SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS During the static injection event, eight specific groundwater sampling and analysis events will be conducted as a part of this treatability study SAP (see Section 14.3.1). The locations of the wells to be sampled are shown in Figure 14-1. The sampling and analysis program is outlined in Worksheets 17 and 18, and the sampling requirements for each type of analyses (i.e., bottle ware, preservation, holding time) are listed in Worksheet 19. Well sampling procedures are discussed in SOP SA-1.1, which is included in the Tetra Tech NUS Generic QAPP. A subsequent recirculation test may be performed if a static injection fails to distribute the amendments in the pilot study area as described in Section 14.3.1. The procedure for the recirculation test is outlined in Section 14.3.2. 14.3.1 EVENT 1 – STATIC INJECTION EVENT A static test will be performed according to the following phases described below: Step 1: Amendments Injection JRW product (LactOil™) formulation may be used at the Site. Undiluted LactOil™ formulation contains approximately 45% of food grade soy bean oil, 35% of ethyl lactate, and 20% of water. Up to two shallow wells will be utilized for injection depending on the borehole geophysical logging results, VOC concentrations, and particular interval yield. Approximately 20,000 gallons of 1% LactOil™ (based on fermentable ingredients) solution will be injected into each zone. Therefore, a total of approximately 40,000 gallons of 1% LactOil™solution will be injected during the pilot test. Approximately 9 drums of JRW LactOil™product will be required to prepare the 1% solution (based on fermentable ingredients). A tracer (sodium bromide at 50 mg/L, 7.5 kg total) may be added to the injected solution to determine the distribution of the injected solution in the vicinity of the monitoring wells. The injected solution will be prepared using well EW-2 as a water source. The groundwater will be pumped from EW-2 and stored in frac tanks. Sufficient (several days) recovery time will be allowed for the subsurface formation to equilibrate before injection. The substrate solution will be prepared in the frac tanks and injected as described above. Pressure monitoring will be performed in selected observation wells during the injection period. Ten transducers will be set, with two transducers set in EW-2, and the other eight transducers set at the wells screened closest to the chosen injection well. Step 2: Amendments Distribution Monitoring A radial distribution of the injected substrate amendment solution may be monitored in the following existing monitoring wells in the vicinity of injection point, not including the actual injection wells: EW-2, EW-4, EW-6, MW-17 cluster, MW-18 cluster, MW-19 cluster MW-20 cluster, MW-21 cluster, and newly installed MW-29 cluster. The presence of the sodium bromide tracer, if used, will be measured using a field probe or sent for fixed-based laboratory analysis. A presence or absence of amendment in a particular observation well will be determined based on turbidity measurements, visual observations (milky color of groundwater), bromide tracer monitoring, and confirmed, if necessary by analytical laboratory (higher level volatile fatty acids). Up to 5 confirmation samples per sampling round will be collected from wells without visual evidence of amendment.

AR305061



If the amendment is not detected in the primary monitoring wells, then the pilot test will be discontinued and an alternative method of substrate distribution will be considered. An alternative method may include a longer duration recirculation with continuous amendment addition. The decision to proceed to the recirculation injection test will be based on the presence of the amendment and tracer in the primary monitoring wells. Amendments distribution monitoring will continue for 4 weeks. Sampling locations, analyses, and timing are provided in Worksheets #16 and #18.

Step 3: Redox Reduction Monitoring The next phase of the test will be redox reduction monitoring. The main goal of this phase is to lower the ORP levels in the pilot study area. An ORP value less than -100 mV is an indication that groundwater has reached reducing conditions where anaerobic biodegradation of halogenated allopathics is possible. The redox reduction phase status will be evaluated after 2 month of monitoring. If no clear ORP reduction trend is observed then the pilot test in the Plume 2 area will be discontinued. If a clear ORP reduction trend is observed then a redox reduction monitoring program will continue until an ORP level of -100 mV is reached but no longer than 2 to 3 months. See Section 14.3.3 for redox monitoring procedure details. Step 3 will be performed concurrently with Step 5. Samples will be collected monthly after the first two months of redox reduction monitoring. Sampling locations, analyses, and timing are provided in Worksheets #16 and #18.

Step 4: Bioaugmentation When an ORP level of -100 mV is reached, then the need to perform bioaugmentation will be re-evaluated. The following data may be used to determine if bioaugmentation is necessary: Time-series of Biotraps placed in injection well during the redox reduction monitoring period Clear and consistent reduction in VOC and/or perchlorate trends Vinyl chloride at approximately 100 μg/L Ethene at approximately 50 μg/L Dehalococcoides at >102/ml Up to four Biotraps may be placed in the well and analyzed monthly. Sampling locations, analyses, and timing are provided in Worksheets #16 and #18. If it is determined that Dehalococcoides are not active at the pilot test area and/or that no clear trend in contaminant reduction is observed, then a bioaugmentation with Dehalococcoides cultures will be required. A decision to continue the pilot study will be required at this point.

If necessary, bioaugmentation will be performed by injecting a volume of oxygen-free water (preferably site groundwater) with Dehalococcoides cultures. The injected volume should be similar to that used during the static injection event (40,000 gallons) to ensure that Dehalococcoides cultures are distributed within the pilot study area. Tetra Tech will introduce cultures as recommended by a culture supplier.

Step 5: Contaminant Reduction Monitoring A contaminant reduction monitoring phase will be performed following a positive outcome of an ORP reduction phase. The contaminant reduction status will be evaluated after 2 months of monitoring. If no clear contaminant reduction trend is observed, then the pilot study will be discontinued. For consistency, the procedures for redox reduction monitoring and for contaminant reduction monitoring will be the same. If no clear contaminant reduction trend is observed, then the pilot study will be discontinued and the recirculation test described in Section 14.3.2 will not be performed. For consistency, the procedures for redox reduction monitoring and for contaminant reduction monitoring will be the same. See Section 14.3.3 for the monitoring procedure details. The contaminant reduction monitoring program will continue until VOCs are 95% degraded but no longer than 4 months.

AR305062



Step 5 will be performed concurrently with Step 3. Sampling locations, analyses, and timing are provided in Worksheets #16 and #18. 14.3.2 EVENT 2 – RECIRCULATION EVENT A recirculation test may be performed if a static injection fails to distribute the amendments in the pilot study area as described in Section 14.3.1. A recirculation test may be performed according to the following phases described below. Step 1: Amendments Injection A recirculation approach will be implemented to continuously pump, amend, and re-inject the groundwater into the selected injection well. The well will be connected to recirculation equipment (including a mixing tank) by small diameter, above-ground flexible piping. The water extracted from the pumping well will be conveyed to the tank and re-injected. The recirculation will be performed continuously for 2 weeks. The make-up water for the recirculation test will consist of groundwater pumped from EW-2. Equipment will be housed inside the fenced area near the injection wells. Approximately 6 drums of LactOil™product may be used during the recirculation injection event. A tracer (sodium bromide) may be added to the injected solution to determine the distribution of the injected solution in nearby monitoring wells. Up to 6 pressure transducers will be installed in nearby wells. Transducer locations will depend on the results of the static injection test. Step 2: Amendments Distribution Monitoring A substrate distribution monitoring will continue concurrently with the amendment injection recirculation phase. A radial distribution of the injected solution may be monitored in all injection wells and in all wells in the MW-17 cluster, MW-18 cluster, MW-19 cluster MW-20 cluster, MW-21 cluster, and newly installed MW-29 cluster. A presence or absence of amendment in a particular observation well will be determined based on turbidity measurements, visual observations (milky color of groundwater), tracer monitoring, and confirmed, if necessary by analytical laboratory (higher level volatile fatty acids). A presence of a bromide tracer will be measured with fixed-based laboratory analysis. Sampling locations, analyses, and timing are provided in Worksheets #16 and #18. Step 3: Redox Reduction Monitoring This phase of the test is identical to Step 3 of the static injection test described in Section 14.3.1. Step 4: Bioaugmentation This phase of the test is similar to Phase 4 of the static injection test described in Section 14.3.1. However, biological inoculums will be injected using the equipment for recirculation described in Phase 1. Biotraps will not be used. When an ORP level of -100 mV is reached, then the need to perform bioaugmentation will be re-evaluated, based on the following information: Clear and consistent reduction in contaminant trends Vinyl chloride at approximately 100 ug/L Ethene at approximately 50 ug/L Dehalococcoides at >102/ml

AR305063



If it is determined that Dehalococcoides are not active at the pilot test area and/or that no clear reduction in contaminant levels is observed, then a bioaugmentation with Dehalococcoides cultures will be required. Bioaugmentation will be performed by injecting a volume of oxygen-free water (preferably site groundwater) with Dehalococcoides cultures. The injected volume will be sufficient to ensure that Dehalococcoides cultures are adequately distributed. Tetra Tech will introduce cultures as recommended by a culture supplier. Step 5: Contaminant Reduction Monitoring This phase of the test is identical to Step 5 of the static injection test described in Section 14.3.1. 14.3.3 MONITORING PROCEDURES The monitoring procedures to be used during the pilot study are described below. Amendments Monitoring Procedure The purpose of the amendments distribution monitoring is to measure the radial extent of the amendments injection. Each monitoring event may include the following observation wells: EW-2, EW-4, and/or EW-6 (not including the injection well), MW-17 cluster, MW-18 cluster, MW-19 cluster MW-20 cluster, MW-21 cluster, and newly installed MW-29 cluster. The following parameters will be measured in the field in each of the observation wells: Depth to groundwater Field parameters monitoring (turbidity, conductivity, pH, DO, ORP, temperature) Visible presence of EVO substrate (purge the well, collect a 40 mL sample in a clear glass. EVO

presence is indicated by a milky color) Volatile fatty acids (up to 5 samples if not detected visually) Tracer concentration (bromide by a field probe, e.g. Orion model 9635) The amendments field monitoring will be performed as specified in Sections 14.3.1 and 14.3.2. A calibrated method will be employed with respect to turbidity to identify the presence of the amendments. Tetra Tech will prepare several test solutions by varying the percentages of water and EVO substrate in order to establish a turbidity level for the visible presence of EVO. Turbidity will be measured using a turbidimeter. Turbidity measurements will be reported as nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). . At the end of the amendments distribution monitoring program (two weeks after injection), groundwater samples from the wells where either substrate or tracer was detected will be collected. The groundwater samples will be analyzed for the analyses listed in Worksheet #18. Worksheet #18 contains a summary of the monitoring programs for Phase I and Phase II. Redox and Contaminant Concentration Monitoring Procedures For consistency, the procedures for redox and contaminant concentration monitoring will be identical. Each monitoring event may include the following observation wells: EW-2, EW-4, and/or EW-6 (not including the injection well), MW-17 cluster, MW-18 cluster, MW-19 cluster MW-20 cluster, MW-21 cluster, and newly installed MW-29 cluster. The following parameters will be measured in the field in each of the observation wells: Depth to groundwater. Field parameters (ORP, pH, temperature, conductivity, DO, turbidity, temperature) by a multi-

parameter probe (e.g. YSI 6920). Observe EVO visible presence (milky color of groundwater). The redox and contaminant concentration field monitoring will be performed according to Sections 14.1.1 and 14.1.2 which are summarized in Worksheet #16. Groundwater samples from the following

AR305064



observation wells may be collected: EW-2, EW-4, and/or EW-6 (not including the injection well), MW-17 cluster, MW-18 cluster, MW-19 cluster MW-20 cluster, MW-21 cluster, and newly installed MW-29 cluster. The injection well will be analyzed as well for a recirculation test. The groundwater samples will be analyzed for the analyses listed in Worksheet #18. Worksheet #18 contains a summary of the monitoring programs for Phase I and Phase II. Consistent with previous groundwater monitoring at the Site, Chemetrics© field test kits will be used for monitored natural attenuation (MNA) parameters where applicable. Other parameters will require fix-based laboratory analyses. 14.3.4 OPTIONAL BENCH-SCALE TESTING If the results from the pilot testing are feasible, an optional bench scale test may be conducted based on EPA authorization. The purpose of this testing is to fine-tune the bioremediation amendment solution prior to conducting further injection at the Site. The bench-scale testing will include a microcosm study. The microcosm study will involve collecting several liters of groundwater from one or two wells and sending the samples to a designated laboratory for bottle studies. The laboratory would set up several bottles, typically for 3-4 months of anaerobic reductive dechlorination, less for aerobic co-metabolism (comet). 14.3.5 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS During sampling events, water-level measurements will be collected from all of the wells to be sampled. The purpose of collecting water-level measurements is to gather information to further refine the nature of groundwater flow in the vicinity of the Site. The wells to be measured are listed in Worksheet #18. The water levels will be measured prior to the start of the well sampling task, and all measurements will be collected within an 8-hour period of consistent weather conditions to minimize atmospheric or precipitation effects. The water levels will also be obtained a minimum of 12 to 24 hours after a significant rainfall event in order to negate the effects of short-term fluctuations in hydraulic head. Water level measurements are discussed in SOP GH-1.2. 14.3.6 COLLECTION OF GROUNDWATER SAMPLES All monitoring wells with a screened interval of 10 feet or less will be sampled using the low-flow sampling techniques in accordance with the EPA Region 3 Recommended Procedure for Low-Flow Purging and Sampling of Groundwater Monitoring Wells, Bulletin No. QAD023, June 16, 1999. These types of wells will be purged/sampled using a properly decontaminated stainless steel submersible pump (or other approved method) equipped with polyethylene tubing. The pump(s) utilized for the project will be able to accommodate 2-inch wells and capable of performing the low-flow sampling technique. The field parameters, temperature, pH, specific conductance, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and redox potential shall be measured and recorded at 5-minute intervals during the purging process until field parameter stabilization and sampling. Field parameter stabilization is defined in the EPA low flow methodology. Sampling equipment shall be decontaminated in accordance with the EPA low flow sampling procedure. QA/QC samples including trip blanks, rinse blanks, blind duplicates, and matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) samples will be obtained at frequencies specified in Worksheet #20. SOP SA-1.1 (Appendix D) also presents procedures for measuring field parameters. Open borehole wells will be sampled by first purging one well volume. These wells will be purged and sampled using a submersible pump with an adjustable flow rate. The purge water discharge will be monitored for pH, specific conductivity, and dissolved oxygen. For open borehole wells, the pump will then be lowered to a targeted fracture depth where contamination may be present. The pump intake will be kept above the bottom of the well. Sample containers will be filled by allowing the pump water discharge to flow gently into the container with minimal turbulence. In the event field conditions require modification of the purging procedure, approval will be requested from the EPA project manager and appropriate changes will be recorded in the field logbook. Samples will be

AR305065



taken directly from the discharge line of the submersible pump at the conclusion of the well purging. The pump will not be turned off between the end of purging and the sampling event, but the pump will be throttled back to a low discharge rate that is appropriate for obtaining samples for VOC analysis. The target discharge rate during the sampling event will be approximately 200 milliliters per minute.

14.4 EQUIPMENT DECONTAMINATION AND IDW HANDLING 14.4.1 EQUIPMENT DECONTAMINATION Equipment decontamination procedures are discussed in SOP SA-7.1 (included in Appendix D). Sampling Equipment Equipment decontamination procedures are discussed in SOP SA-7.1. All sampling equipment used for collecting samples will be decontaminated both before sampling in the field and between sample locations. The following decontamination steps will be followed: Potable water rinse Alconox or Liquinox detergent wash Potable water rinse Distilled/deionized water rinse Isopropanol (pesticide-grade) rinse (do not use on PVC equipment or well construction materials) Distilled/deionized water rinse Air dry Wrap in aluminum foil if not used immediately 14.4.2 IDW HANDLING IDW that are expected to be generated from the field investigation includes decontamination fluids, used personal protective equipment (PPE), purged water, and other contaminated water from injection. Water generated during injection, sampling, and other testing activities will be captured and stored on-site until off-site disposal can be arranged. Purge water may be kept on-site in preparation for the recirculation test. All used personnel protective clothing and disposable equipment will be decontaminated, double-bagged, and disposed as ordinary refuse.

AR305066



SAP Worksheet #15 -- Reference Limits and Evaluation Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.8.1) Matrix: Groundwater Analytical Group: Trace VOCs

Analyte CAS Number Project Action

Limit (μg/L)

Project Action Limit Reference1

Project Quantitation Limit Goal2

(μg/L)

Laboratory-specific

QL MDL

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 NA NA NA 0.5 TBD

1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 200 MCL 67 0.5 TBD

1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 5 MCL 1.7 0.5 TBD

1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 NA NA NA 0.5 TBD

1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 7 MCL 2.3 0.5 TBD

1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 5 MCL 1.7 0.5 TBD

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 70 MCL 23 0.5 TBD

Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 5 MCL 1.7 0.5 TBD

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 100 MCL 33 0.5 TBD

Trichloroethene 79-01-6 5 MCL 1.7 0.5 TBD

Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 2 MCL 0.67 0.5 TBD

Benzene 71-43-2 5 MCL 1.7 0.5 TBD

Chloroethane 75-00-3 NA NA NA 0.5 TBD

1 Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) from National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, May 2009. http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/index.html 2 The Project Quantitation Limit Goal is set to 3X lower than the Project Action Limit.

Matrix: Groundwater Analytical Group: Semivolatiles


Limit (μg/L)

Project Action Limit Reference

Project Quantitation Limit Goal

(μg/L)

Laboratory-specific

QL MDL

Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 NA NA NA 5 TBD

AR305067



SAP Worksheet #15 -- Reference Limits and Evaluation Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.8.1) Matrix: Groundwater Analytical Group: Perchlorate


Limit (μg/L)

Project Action Limit Reference 1

Project Quantitation Limit Goal 2

(μg/L)

Laboratory-specific

QL MDL

Perchlorate 14797-73-0 15 MCL 5 1 TBD

1 Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) from National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, May 2009. http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/index.html 2 The Project Quantitation Limit Goal is set to 3X lower than the Project Action Limit.

Matrix: Groundwater Analytical Group: Anions


Limit (mg/L)



(mg/L)

Laboratory-specific

QL MDL

Chloride 16887-00-6 NA NA NA 0.250 TBD

Sulfate 14808-79-8 NA NA NA 0.500 TBD

Orthophosphate 98059-61-1 NA NA NA 0.500 TBD

Nitrate 84145-82-4 NA NA NA 0.500 TBD

Nitrite 14797-65-0 NA NA NA 0.500 TBD

Bromide 7726-95-6 NA NA NA 0.500 TBD

AR305068



SAP Worksheet #15 -- Reference Limits and Evaluation Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.8.1) Matrix: Groundwater Analytical Group: Dissolved Gases


Limit (μg/L)



(μg/L)

Laboratory-specific

QL MDL

Methane 74-82-8 NA NA NA 0.1 TBD

Ethane 74-84-0 NA NA NA 0.025 TBD

Ethene 74-85-1 NA NA NA 0.025 TBD

Acetylene 74-86-2 NA NA NA 0.5 TBD

Matrix: Groundwater Analytical Group: VFAs


Limit (mg/L)



(mg/L)

Laboratory-specific

QL MDL

Lactic Acid 50-21-5 NA NA NA 0.1 TBD

Pyruvic Acid 127-17-3 NA NA NA 0.07 TBD

Acetic Acid 64-19-7 NA NA NA 0.07 TBD

Propionic Acid 79-09-4 NA NA NA 0.07 TBD

Butyric Acid 107-92-6 NA NA NA 0.07 TBD

AR305069



SAP Worksheet #15 -- Reference Limits and Evaluation Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.8.1) Matrix: Groundwater Analytical Group: qPCR


Limit (gene copies)



(gene copies)

Laboratory-specific

QL MDL

Dehalococcoides spp. NA NA NA NA 1000 TBD

Methanogens NA NA NA NA 1000 TBD

Eubacteria NA NA NA NA 1000 TBD

TCE reductase (tceA) NA NA NA NA 1000 TBD

VC reductase (bvcA & vcrA) NA NA NA NA 1000 TBD

Perchlorate reductase (pcrABCD)

NA NA NA NA 1000 TBD

Matrix: Groundwater Analytical Group: Miscellaneous


Limit (mg/L)



(mg/L)

Laboratory-specific

QL MDL

Total Organic Carbon NA NA NA NA 3 TBD

AR305070



SAP Worksheet #16 -- Project Schedule / Timeline Table (optional format) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 2.8.2)

Activities

Organization

Dates (MM/DD/YYYY)

Deliverable

Deliverable Due Date Anticipated Date(s)

of Initiation

Anticipated Date of

Completion

Project Plans Tetra Tech 08/10/2009 11/30/2009 Draft SAP

Final SAP

09/23/2009

11/30/2009

Laboratory Assignments OASQA 12/07/2009 12/31/2009 Lab Assignments 12/31/2009

EVENT 1 – Static Event Tetra Tech Estimated 01/04/2010 Estimated 04/23/2010 TBD TBD

Month #1

Injection of Amendment Tetra Tech TBD TBD None N/A

Weekly Sampling Event # 1 (Redox Monitoring)

Tetra Tech 1 week after Injection Same day as initiation Data Summary

Data deliverables for analytical services will be due according to Worksheet #30


Tetra Tech 2 weeks after Injection Same day as initiation Data Summary

Weekly Sampling Event # 3 (Redox and/or Contaminant Concentration Monitoring)


Weekly Sampling Event # 4 (Redox and/or Contaminant Concentration Monitoring and Microbial Consortium & Functional Genes Monitoring)


Month #2

Biweekly Sampling Event # 1 (Contaminant Concentration Monitoring)


Biweekly Sampling Event # 2 (Contaminant Concentration Monitoring and Microbial Consortium & Functional Genes Monitoring)


AR305071



Activities

Organization

Dates (MM/DD/YYYY)

Deliverable


of Initiation

Anticipated Date of

Completion

Month #3

Monthly Sampling Event # 1 (Contaminant Concentration Monitoring and Microbial Consortium & Functional Genes Monitoring)

Tetra Tech 12 weeks after Injection Same day as initiation Data Summary Data deliverables for analytical services will be due according to Worksheet #30

Month #4

Monthly Sampling Event # 2(Contaminant Concentration Monitoring and Microbial Consortium & Functional Genes Monitoring)


EVENT 2 – Recirculation Event Tetra Tech TBD TBD TBD TBD

Month #1

Recirculated Injection of Amendment

Tetra Tech TBD TBD (2 weeks after injection)

TBD N/A


Tetra Tech 1 week after Injection Same day as initiation Data Summary

Data deliverables for analytical services will be due according to Worksheet #30



Weekly Sampling Event # 3 (Redox and/or Contaminant Concentration Monitoring)


Weekly Sampling Event # 4 (Redox and/or Contaminant Concentration Monitoring and Microbial Consortium & Functional Genes Monitoring)


Month #2

Biweekly Sampling Event # 1 (Contaminant Concentration Monitoring)


Biweekly Sampling Event # 2 (Contaminant Concentration Monitoring and Microbial Consortium & Functional Genes Monitoring)


AR305072



Activities

Organization

Dates (MM/DD/YYYY)

Deliverable


of Initiation

Anticipated Date of

Completion

Month #3

Monthly Sampling Event # 1 (Contaminant Concentration Monitoring and Microbial Consortium & Functional Genes Monitoring)

Tetra Tech 12 weeks after Injection Same day as initiation Data Summary Data deliverables for analytical services will be due according to Worksheet #30

Month #4

Monthly Sampling Event # 2(Contaminant Concentration Monitoring and Microbial Consortium & Functional Genes Monitoring)


Bioremediation Pilot Study Report Tetra Tech 12/01/2009 05/01/2010 Draft Report

Final Report

05/03/2010

05/31/2010

AR305073



SAP Worksheet #17 -- Sampling Design and Rationale (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.1) 17.1 PILOT TEST APPROACH AND PROCEDURES Tetra Tech may solicit proposals from in-situ bioremediation vendors requesting technical proposals to meet the objectives and performance requirements for the treatability study. The vendor proposals will be evaluated in terms of several criteria, including cost and past performance. 17.1.1 Injection Design The pilot study will be performed in the Plume 2 area. There are several existing observation well clusters located in the pilot test area: MW-17, MW-18, MW-19, MW-20, and MW-21. Each of these observation well clusters contains observation wells that include the following types of sample intervals: shallow (overburden), intermediate bedrock, and deep bedrock. Additionally, three extraction wells EW-2, EW-4, and EW-6 and one observation well cluster MW-29 will be installed as part of the PDI. The pilot test will be performed using one of the shallower (14 to 50 feet) wells as an injection point and the rest of the wells in the area as observation points to monitor the pilot test parameters. Based on the groundwater level measurements, the groundwater flow direction in the pilot test area is in south-east direction. Therefore, shallow wells MW-17S and MW-19S may be the best location for injection. However, the final injection location for the pilot test will be selected based on the aquifer tests performed at newly installed well EW-2. Based on these test results, the hydraulic flow paths from the potential injection locations will be evaluated and the final injection locations will be selected. It is proposed to utilize a relatively high volume of the injection solution to achieve a longer radial distribution of the injected amendments. The groundwater extracted from the pilot test area extraction well(s) will be used to prepare the amendments solution. This approach will maximize the use of the native bacteria population. Tetra Tech focused on evaluating two substrates for injection: emulsified vegetable oil (EVO) and lactate. The main advantage of EVO is longer life in the formation. However, there are some uncertainties in EVO behavior during distribution in fractures due to potential de-emulsification, etc. Lactate is completely soluble and fast acting but does not last in the formation as long as EVO. Additionally, there are more reports of successful application of lactate for perchlorate biodegradation compared to EVO. However, based on the background bio-chemistry, both of these substrates are expected to work and therefore it is recommended to use a formulation that contains both fast acting lactate (ethyl) and slowly acting vegetable oil in a form of microemulsion. Such a product is available from JRW (LactOil™: 45% soy oil, 35% ethyl lactate, 20% water). The injection volume utilized in the pilot test is probably the most important design parameter. For a given injection interval, the injected liquid volume is usually directly proportional to the radial distribution of the injected solution in the formation. For injections in heterogeneous sediments such as sand with a known porosity it is often relatively easy to determine the radial distribution of the injected liquid. However, a radial distribution is often difficult to predict for fractured bedrock formations due to random character of fractures and torturous groundwater flow pathways. A simplified calculation was performed to estimate a potential radial distribution of injected solution for the pilot test. The following equation was used in the calculation:

HRft

galV 2

348.7 (17-1)

Where V – injection solution (gallons), R – target radius of influence (feet), H – total injection interval (feet), – effective bedrock formation porosity (assumed).

AR305074



The assumed input values for the equation 17-1 above and the calculation result is shown below:

Target radius of influence (R) - 60 feet Total injection interval (H) - 50 feet Bedrock formation porosity - 1%

Calculated injection volume (V) - 42,000 gallons The above calculation is only a rough estimation to evaluate an injection volume (V) needed to establish a target radius of influence. This target radius of influence (R = 60 feet) is selected based on the distances between the potential injection points and the observation wells within 60 feet radius of the injection point that can be used to monitor the substrate distribution and the subsequent biodegradation process performance. Tetra Tech recommends utilizing a calculated volume (approximately 40,000 gallons) as the target injection solution volume for the pilot test. Tetra Tech recommends utilizing the Plume 2 groundwater to prepare the amendments solution. It is believed that this approach is superior compared to the use of non-native water (e.g., potable water) as a source for amendment solution. Groundwater from one newly installed well (i.e., EW-2) will be pumped and stored in two frac tanks with a total volume of approximately 40,000 gallons. JRW LactOil™:substrate will be added to frac tanks to achieve approximately 1% (based on active fermentable ingredients) concentration in the injected solution. Also, a sodium bromide tracer will be added to the injected solution as a tracer to help the substrate subsurface distribution monitoring. Based on PCE and other VOC concentrations in these wells, the proposed targeted depth of the pilot study injections is between 14 and 50 feet. Since EW-2 is cased to 54 feet bgs, wells MW-17S and MW-19S will be used for shallow injections in this area. 17.1.2 SAMPLE LOCATION DESIGN Based on the CSM discussed in Section 10.2, wells associated with Plume 2 may be monitored during the treatability pilot study. Because the majority of VOC contamination was found in the overburden and at the bedrock surface, sampling efforts will pertain primarily to the shallow well intervals. Additionally, because the amendment injection will target 14 to 50 feet below ground surface, the post-injection monitoring (PIM) will focus on monitoring shallow wells. Table 17-1 provides a list of wells that may be monitored during the Plume 2 treatability pilot study]. The screened interval for well MW-19S is 14-29 feet. The top of the screen for this well was selected as the shallowest target depth. The screened interval for well MW-17I is 50-100 feet. The top of the screen for MW-17I was chosen as the deepest target depth. Wells with intervals deeper than 50 feet will be sampled as part of the post-injection monitoring (PIM) program to determine if shallow injections have an effect on deeper groundwater quality. Initially, wells included in the PIM program are all those in close proximity to the selected injection wells for the Plume 2 study. If necessary, wells MW-21S and MW-21DO will be included in the program based on the results from previous monitoring. As analytical data from each round of sampling is collected and analyzed against previous data, the Plume 2 CSM will be refined to account for the effects of the injection on groundwater contaminant concentrations. Wells that are not influenced from the injection according to the metrics discussed on Worksheet # 11 will not be sampled. The well sampling list may be modified during each step of the treatability study as discussed on Worksheet #14 or during the decision making process (Worksheet #11) per Tetra Tech PM and EPA RPM recommendations.

AR305075



TABLE 17-1 WELL CONSTRUCTION AND SAMPLING INTERVALS

ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE, CECIL COUNTY, MARYLAND

WELL SCREENED INTERVAL

(depth in feet) SAMPLE DEPTH

(depth in feet) MW-17 S Screened 22-37 32

MW-17 I Open 50-100 50

MW-17 D Open 15-215 210

MW-18 S Screened 19-39 34

MW-18 D Open 46-200 46


MW-19 D Open 30-110 30


MW-20 D Open 55-115 55


MW-21 DO Screened 75-90 85

MW-29 I Screened 115-125 120

MW-29 D Screened 175-185 180

EW-2 Open 52-250 245

EW-4 Not Yet Constructed ---

EW-6 Not Yet Constructed ---

AR305076



SAP Worksheet #18 -- Sampling Locations and Methods/SOP Requirements Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.1)

Location Sample Description SOP

Fixed Lab Test Kit Field Measurement

VO

Cs

Per

chlo

rate

Hex

ach

loro

eth

ane

TO

C

An

ion

s

Dis

solv

ed G

ases

VF

As

Bac

teri

a &

Gen

es

To

tal A

lkal

init

y

Iro

n (

Fer

rou

s)

Iro

n (

To

tal/S

olu

ble

)

Su

lfid

e

Dis

solv

ed C

O2

Dis

solv

ed O

2

Tem

per

atu

re

pH

Sp

ecif

ic C

on

d.

OR

P

Tu

rbid

ity

DO

BASELINE SAMPLING EVENT (Data collected as a part of the PDI SAP) EW-2 EW-2-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

EW-4 EW-4-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

EW-6 EW-6-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

MW-17S MW-17S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

MW-17I MW-17I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

MW-17D MW-17D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■








MW-21DO MW-21DO-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■


NW-29I NW-29I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■


AR305077



SAP Worksheet #18 -- Sampling Locations and Methods/SOP Requirements Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.1)



VO

Cs

Per

chlo

rate

Hex

ach

loro

eth

ane

TO

C

An

ion

s1

Dis

solv

ed G

ases

VF

As

Bac

teri

a &

Gen

es

To

tal A

lkal

init

y

Iro

n (

Fer

rou

s)

Iro

n (

To

tal/S

olu

ble

)

Su

lfid

e

Dis

solv

ed C

O2

Dis

solv

ed O

2

Tem

per

atu

re

pH

Sp

ecif

ic C

on

d.

OR

P

Tu

rbid

ity

DO

STATIC TEST – RADIAL DISTRIBUTION & REDOX MONITORING – ASSUMED DURING WEEKLY SAMPLING (MONTH #1) EW-2 EW-2-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ EW-4 EW-4-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ EW-6 EW-6-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17S MW-17S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17I MW-17I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17D MW-17D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-18S MW-18S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-18D MW-18D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-19S MW-19S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-19D MW-19D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-20S MW-20S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-20D MW-20D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-21S MW-21S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-21DO MW-21DO-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-29S MW-29S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ NW-29I NW-29I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-29D MW-29D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

1 – Only bromide will be collected for Month #1 anion sampling.

AR305078




Location1 Sample Description SOP


VO

Cs

Per

chlo

rate

Hex

ach

loro

eth

ane

TO

C

An

ion

s

Dis

solv

ed G

ases

VF

As

Bac

teri

a &

Gen

es

To

tal A

lkal

init

y

Iro

n (

Fer

rou

s)

Iro

n (

To

tal/S

olu

ble

)

Su

lfid

e

Dis

solv

ed C

O2

Dis

solv

ed O

2

Tem

per

atu

re

pH

Sp

ecif

ic C

on

d.

OR

P

Tu

rbid

ity

DO

STATIC TEST – CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATION MONITORING – ASSUMED DURING BIWEEKLY SAMPLING (MONTH #2) EW-2 EW-2-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■2 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ EW-4 EW-4-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ EW-6 EW-6-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17S MW-17S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17I MW-17I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17D MW-17D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-18S MW-18S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-18D MW-18D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-19S MW-19S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-19D MW-19D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-20S MW-20S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-20D MW-20D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-21S MW-21S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-21DO MW-21DO-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-29S MW-29S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ NW-29I NW-29I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-29D MW-29D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

1 – The selection of sample locations will be based on data from Redox Monitoring. If ORP > -100 mV for a well, then sampling at that location may not occur. 2 – Biotrap from injection well will be collected 1 month after injection. Only one biotrap will be collected at the beginning of Month #2.

AR305079






VO

Cs

Per

chlo

rate

Hex

ach

loro

eth

ane

3

TO

C

An

ion

s

Dis

solv

ed G

ases

VF

As

Bac

teri

a &

Gen

es

To

tal A

lkal

init

y

Iro

n (

Fer

rou

s)

Iro

n (

To

tal/S

olu

ble

)

Su

lfid

e

Dis

solv

ed C

O2

Dis

solv

ed O

2

Tem

per

atu

re

pH

Sp

ecif

ic C

on

d.

OR

P

Tu

rbid

ity

DO

STATIC TEST – CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATION MONITORING – MONTHLY SAMPLING (MONTHS #3 & #4) EW-2 EW-2-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■2 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ EW-4 EW-4-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ EW-6 EW-6-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17S MW-17S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17I MW-17I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17D MW-17D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-18S MW-18S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-18D MW-18D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-19S MW-19S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-19D MW-19D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-20S MW-20S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-20D MW-20D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-21S MW-21S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-21DO MW-21DO-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-29S MW-29S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ NW-29I NW-29I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-29D MW-29D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

1 – The selection of sample locations will be based on data from Redox Monitoring. If ORP > -100 mV for a well, then sampling at that location may not occur. 2 – Biotrap from injection well will be collected 2, 3, and 4 months after injection. 3 – HCA sampling may occur to confirm if abiotic dechlorination of HCA to PCE is occurring.

AR305080






VO

Cs

Per

chlo

rate

Hex

ach

loro

eth

ane

TO

C

An

ion

s

Dis

solv

ed G

ases

VF

As

Bac

teri

a &

Gen

es

To

tal A

lkal

init

y

Iro

n (

Fer

rou

s)

Iro

n (

To

tal/S

olu

ble

)

Su

lfid

e

Dis

solv

ed C

O2

Dis

solv

ed O

2

Tem

per

atu

re

pH

Sp

ecif

ic C

on

d.

OR

P

Tu

rbid

ity

DO

RECIRCULATION TEST – REDOX MONITORING EW-2 EW-2-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ EW-4 EW-4-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ EW-6 EW-6-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17S MW-17S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17I MW-17I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17D MW-17D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-18S MW-18S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-18D MW-18D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-19S MW-19S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-19D MW-19D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-20S MW-20S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-20D MW-20D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-21S MW-21S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-21DO MW-21DO-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-29S MW-29S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ NW-29I NW-29I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-29D MW-29D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

AR305081






VO

Cs

Per

chlo

rate

Hex

ach

loro

eth

ane

3

TO

C

An

ion

s

Dis

solv

ed G

ases

VF

As

Bac

teri

a &

Gen

es

To

tal A

lkal

init

y

Iro

n (

Fer

rou

s)

Iro

n (

To

tal/S

olu

ble

)

Su

lfid

e

Dis

solv

ed C

O2

Dis

solv

ed O

2

Tem

per

atu

re

pH

Sp

ecif

ic C

on

d.

OR

P

Tu

rbid

ity

DO

RECIRCULATION TEST – CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATION MONITORING EW-2 EW-2-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ EW-4 EW-4-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ EW-6 EW-6-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17S MW-17S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17I MW-17I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-17D MW-17D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-18S MW-18S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-18D MW-18D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-19S MW-19S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-19D MW-19D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-20S MW-20S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-20D MW-20D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-21S MW-21S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-21DO MW-21DO-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-29S MW-29S-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ NW-29I NW-29I-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MW-29D MW-29D-YYYYMMDD SA-1.1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

1 – The selection of sample locations will be based on data from Redox Monitoring. If ORP > -100 mV for a well, then sampling at that location may not occur. 2 – Biotrap from injection well will be collected 1 month after injection. Only one biotrap will be collected during Month #2. 3 – HCA sampling may occur to confirm if abiotic dechlorination of HCA to PCE is occurring.

AR305082



SAP Worksheet #19 -- Analytical SOP Requirements Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.1)

Matrix

Analytical Group

Analytical and

Preparation Method / SOP Reference1

Containers

(number, size, and type)

Sample volume2

(units)

Preservation Requirements

(chemical, temperature, light protected)

Maximum Holding Time3

(preparation / analysis)

Groundwater VOC SOM01.2 Trace 3 – 40 mL glass vials with Teflon septum

120 mL Cool to 4±2°C with HCl to pH ≤ 2; no headspace

14 days to analysis

Perchlorate EPA 314 1 – 200 mL Polypropylene bottle

200 mL None (avoid extreme temperatures)

28 days to analysis

Hexachloroethane SOM01.2 Low 1 – 1L Amber glass bottle

1L Cool to 4±2°C 7 days to preparation; 40 days to analysis

TOC SM 5310 1 – 100 mL Polypropylene bottle

100 mL Cool to ≤ 6°C,

H2SO4 to pH<2 28 days to analysis

Anions: Sulfate, chloride, bromide, nitrate, nitrite, and orthophosphate

EPA 300.0 1 – 200 mL Polypropylene bottle

200 mL Cool to ≤ 6°C

Nitrate/Nitrite/Orthophosphate: 48 hours to analysis 28 days to analysis for others

Dissolved Gases:

Methane, Ethane, Ethene, and Acetylene

RSK SOPs 147/175 Microseeps SOP - AM20GAX

2 – 40 mL clear glass vials

80 mL Cool to 4±2°C with Na3PO4 to pH>9

14 days to analysis

AR305083



SAP Worksheet #19 -- Analytical SOP Requirements Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.1)

Matrix

Analytical Group

Analytical and Preparation Method / SOP Reference 1

Containers

(number, size, and type)

Sample volume2

(units)

Preservation Requirements

(chemical, temperature, light protected)

Maximum Holding Time3

(preparation / analysis)

Groundwater VFAs: Lactic, Pyruvic, Acetic, Propionic, Butyric

Microseeps SOP - AM23G

2 – 40 mL amber glass vials

80 mL Cool to 4±2°C with Benzalkonium chloride (BAK)

14 days to analysis

Bacteria (Dehalococcoides spp., Methanogens, and Eubacteria)

Functional Genes (TCE reductase [tceA], VC reductase [bvcA and vcrA], and perchlorate reductase [pcrABCD])

Microbial Insights SOP - qPCR

Laboratory Biotraps (preferred)

1 per sample

1 Biotrap Cool to 4±2°C Ship day of collection; 24-48 hours to analysis

1Specify the appropriate reference letter or number from the Analytical SOP References table (Worksheet #23). 2 Provide the minimum sample volume or mass requirement if it differs from the container volume. 3 Maximum holding time is calculated from the time the sample is collected to the time the sample is prepared/extracted.

AR305084



SAP Worksheet #19 -- Analytical SOP Requirements Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.1)

Groundwater Field Analyses1 Biological Activity Indicators Field Analytical SOP Requirements Table

Parameter Method/ Reference Sample Volume, Container, & Preservation2

Ferrous Iron CHEMetrics K-6210 Follow test kit instructions. Analyze immediately at well head. Filter if turbid.

Total Soluble Sulfide CHEMetrics K-9510 Follow test kit instructions. Do not aerate or agitate. Avoid agitation and analyze immediately at well head.

Total Alkalinity CHEMetrics K-9810 Follow test kit instructions.

Dissolved Oxygen CHEMetrics K-7501, K-7512 vacuum vials

Follow test kit instructions. Analyze at well head.

Total/Soluble Iron CHEMetrics K-6010 Follow test kit instructions.

Dissolved Carbon Dioxide CHEMetrics K-1910 Follow test kit instructions.

pH Direct-reading meter 100 to 250 ml in glass or plastic container. Analyze at well head.

Specific Conductivity Direct-reading meter 100 to 250 ml in glass or plastic container. Analyze at well head.

ORP Direct-reading meter 10 to 250 ml in glass container filling from the bottom. Do not aerate or agitate. Analyze at well head with flow-through cell.

Temperature Direct-reading meter 100 to 250 ml in glass or plastic container. Analyze at well head.

1 Table adapted from overview of the Technical Guidelines for Evaluating Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Groundwater (U.S. EPA, 1998). 2 Test Kit Instructions are included in Appendix B.

AR305085



SAP Worksheet #20 -- Field Quality Control Sample Summary Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.1)

BASELINE SAMPLING EVENT

Matrix

Analytical Group

No. of

Sampling Locations2

No. of Field Duplicates

No. of MS/MSDs1

No. of Field

Blanks

No. of Equip. Blanks

No. of VOA Trip Blanks

No. of PT Samples3

Total No. of Samples to

Lab

Groundwater VOC 17 2 NA 1 1 2 NA 23 Perchlorate 17 2 1/1 1 1 NA NA 21 Hexachloroethane 17 2 NA 1 1 NA NA 21 TOC 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Anions 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Dissolved Gases 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 VFAs 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Bacteria & Genes 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA 1 Field Analysis Total Alkalinity 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Iron (Ferrous) 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Iron (Total/Soluble) 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Sulfide 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Dissolved CO2 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Dissolved O2 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17

1 Although the MS/MSD is not typically considered a field QC it is included here because location determination is often established in the field. MS/MSD are not counted in the total number of samples. 2 If samples will be collected at different depths at the same location, count each discrete sampling depth as a separate sampling location or station. 3 The number of Batch or Project-specific proficiency testing (PT) samples is optional but highly recommended.

No field QC Samples will be collected for the field analyses.

AR305086



SAP Worksheet #20 -- Field Quality Control Sample Summary Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.1)

STATIC STUDY†

Matrix

Analytical Group

No. of Sampling Locations

per Sampling Round2


No. of MS/MSDs1

No. of Field Blanks


No. of

VOA Trip Blanks

No. of PT Samples3

No. of Samples to

Lab per Sampling

Round / Total No. of

Samples to Lab

(# of Rounds)

Groundwater VOC 17 2 NA 1 1 1 NA 22 / 88 (4) Perchlorate 17 2 1/1 1 1 NA NA 21 / 84 (4) Hexachloroethane 17 2 NA 1 1 NA NA 21 / 42 (2) TOC 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 / 68 (4) Anions 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 / 136 (8) Dissolved Gases 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 / 68 (4) VFAs 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 / 34 (2) Bacteria & Genes 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA 1 / 4 (4) Field Analysis Total Alkalinity 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 / 68 (4) Iron (Ferrous) 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 / 68 (4) Iron (Total/Soluble) 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 / 68 (4) Sulfide 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 / 68(4) Dissolved CO2 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 / 68 (4) Dissolved O2 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 / 68 (4)

† Static Study is broken down into sampling rounds. The number of samples per round, number of rounds, and total number of samples to laboratory are listed. 1 Although the MS/MSD is not typically considered a field QC it is included here because location determination is often established in the field. MS/MSD are not counted in the total number of samples. 2 If samples will be collected at different depths at the same location, count each discrete sampling depth as a separate sampling location or station. 3 The number of Batch or Project-specific proficiency testing (PT) samples is optional but highly recommended.

AR305087



SAP Worksheet #20 -- Field Quality Control Sample Summary Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.1)


RECIRCULATION STUDY

Matrix

Analytical Group

No. of

Sampling Locations2


No. of MS/MSDs1

No. of Field

Blanks


No. of VOA Trip Blanks

No. of PT Samples3

Total No. of Samples to

Lab

Groundwater VOC 17 2 NA 1 1 2 NA 23 Perchlorate 17 2 1/1 1 1 NA NA 21 Hexachloroethane 17 2 NA 1 1 NA NA 21 TOC 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Anions 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Dissolved Gases 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 VFAs 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Bacteria & Genes 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA 1 Field Analysis Total Alkalinity 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Iron (Ferrous) 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Iron (Total/Soluble) 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Sulfide 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Dissolved CO2 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Dissolved O2 17 NA NA NA NA NA NA 17

1 Although the MS/MSD is not typically considered a field QC it is included here because location determination is often established in the field. MS/MSD are not counted in the total number of samples. 2 If samples will be collected at different depths at the same location, count each discrete sampling depth as a separate sampling location or station. 3 The number of Batch or Project-specific proficiency testing (PT) samples is optional but highly recommended.


AR305088



SAP Worksheet #21 -- Project Sampling SOP References Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.2)

Reference Number

Title, Revision Date and / or Number*

Originating Organizatio

n of

Sampling SOP

Equipment Type

Modified for

Project Work?

(Y/N)

Comments

SA-1.1 Groundwater Sample Acquisition and Onsite Water Quality Testing 04/2008 Rev. 7

Tetra Tech Sampling Procedures, Methods N

SA-1.6 Natural Attenuation Parameter Collection 09/2003 Rev. 1

Tetra Tech Sampling Procedures, Methods Y

The manufacturer’s guidance for test kit samples supersedes this SOP.

CT-04 Sample Nomenclature 03/2009 Rev. 2

Tetra Tech Not applicable Y See Sample Designations in Worksheet 18

SA-6.1 Non-radiological Sample Handling 02/2004 Rev. 3

Tetra Tech Sample Bottleware, Packaging Material, Shipping Materials

N

SA-6.3 Field Documentation 03/2009 Rev. 3

Tetra Tech Field Logbook, Field Sample Forms, Boring Logs

N

SA-7.1 Decontamination of Field Equipment 01/2009 Rev. 6

Tetra Tech Decontamination Equipment (scrub brushes, phosphate free detergent, de-ionized water)

N

AR305089



SAP Worksheet #22 -- Field Equipment Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.1.2.4)

Field Equipment

Activity 1

Frequency

Acceptance Criteria

Corrective

Action Resp.

Person SOP

Reference2

Comments

Photo-Ionization Detector (PID)

Calibrate with gas in accordance with manufacturer specifications; Visual Inspection

Daily Manufacturer’s Guidance

Replace FOL Manufacturer’s Guidance

Multi-parameter Water Quality Meter

Calibrate in accordance with manufacturer specifications; Visual Inspection


Replace FOL SA-1.1 and Manufacturer’s Guidance

Turbidity will be measured using a separate meter

Turbidity Meter

Calibrate in accordance with manufacturer specifications; Visual Inspection


Replace FOL SA-1.1 and Manufacturer’s Guidance

Water Level Indicator

Visual Inspection Daily Equipment Inspection Sheet Criteria

Replace FOL SA-1.1

Redi Flo™ Submersible Pump

Visual Inspection Daily Equipment Inspection Sheet Criteria

Replace FOL SA-1.1

1 Activities may include: calibration, verification, testing, and maintenance. 2 Specify the appropriate reference letter or number from the Project Sampling SOP References table (Worksheet #21).

AR305090



SAP Worksheet #23 -- Analytical SOP References Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.2.1)

Lab SOP Number

Title, Revision Date, and / or

Number3

Definitive or Screening

Data

Matrix and Analytical

Group

Instrument

Organization Performing

Analysis

Modified for Project

Work?1

(Y/N)

SOM01.2 Analytical Method for the Analysis of Trace Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds

Definitive VOC Gas Chromatograph/

Mass Spectrometer (GC/MS)

TBD N

EPA 300.0 Determination of Inorganic Anions by Ion Chromatography

Definitive Wet Chemistry Ion Chromatograph (IC)

TBD N

EPA 314.0 Determination of Perchlorate in Drinking Water Using Ion Chromatography

Definitive Wet Chemistry IC TBD N

SM 5310 Total Organic Carbon Definitive Wet Chemistry NA TBD N


SOP for the Analyses of Low Level Volatile Fatty Acids by Ion Chromatography, March 3, 2005

Definitive Semivolatiles Dionex IC DX-500 Microseeps, Inc.

of Pittsburgh, PA N

Microseeps SOP - AM20GAX

SOP for the Analysis of Biodegradation Indicator Gases, September 15, 2006

Definitive Risk GC/FID/ Thermal Conductivity Detector (TCD)

Microseeps, Inc. of Pittsburgh, PA

N

Microbial Insights SOP - qPCR-2006

PCR/Enzymes2 Definitive qPCR ABI 7300 Microbial Insights, Inc. of Rockford, TN

N

1 If yes, then specify the modification that has been made. Note that any analytical SOP modification made relative to project specific needs must be reviewed and approved by EPA.

2 *The qPCR-2006 SOP from Microbial Insights is not available to Tetra Tech NUS due to proprietary rights. Quality Assurance information about the method was provided by Microbial Insights and is summarized in Tables 23, 24, and 28.

3 Analytical methods are available online at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/clp/ for CLP methods and http://www.nemi.gov/ for other EPA methods. Microseeps method is available upon request.

AR305091



SAP Worksheet #24 -- Analytical Instrument Calibration Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.2.2)

Instrument

Calibration Procedure

Frequency of Calibration

Acceptance Criteria

Corrective Action

(CA)

Person Responsible for

CA2

SOP Reference1

GC/MS Minimum five point calibration for all analytes

Instrument receipt, instrument change (new trap, column, etc.), when continuing calibration does not meet criteria

Relative Standard Deviation (RSD) for each Calibration Check Compound (CCC) < 30%, minimum mean response factor (RF) for each System Performance Check Compound (SPCC) as noted in 7.3.5.4 of method 8260B or 8270C. If RSD for an analyte is > 15% apply linear (r2 > 0.99) or quadratic method for quantitation

Recalibrate and/or perform necessary equipment maintenance. Check calibration standards. Reanalyze affected data.

Analyst/ Supervisor

SOM01.2

IC for Anions and Perchlorate

2 6-point calibrations

1/month or as needed

Correlation coefficient ≥0.995, passing second source

Recalibrate and/or perform necessary equipment maintenance. Check calibration standards

Analyst/ Supervisor

EPA 300.0 and EPA 314.0

AR305092



SAP Worksheet #24 -- Analytical Instrument Calibration Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.2.2)

Instrument



Acceptance Criteria

Corrective Action (CA)

Person Responsible for CA2

SOP Reference1

Dionex IC DX-500 for Volatile Fatty Acids (VFA)

7-point Initial Calibration

When major revision to the method is performed, maintenance is required, or when continuing calibration fails criterion

Correlation coefficient ≥ 0.995; Initial Calibration Verification (ICV) within 90-110%

Re-prepare and reanalyze standards.

Analyst/ Supervisor


Dionex IC DX-500 for VFA

Continuing Calibration

Per 20 samples Mid-point standard recovery within 70-130%

Re-prepare and reanalyze standards, if still outside criterion, recalibrate.

Analyst/ Supervisor


Thermo Scientific HiPerTOC

5-point curve Initial Calibration


Correlation coefficient ≥ 0.995; ICV within 90-110%


Analyst/ Supervisor

Microseeps SOP - 9060





Analyst/ Supervisor

Microseeps SOP – WC21

GC for Dissolved Gases

Minimum of 5-point Initial Calibration per detector


Correlation coefficient ≥ 0.995; ICV within 80-120%


Analyst/ Supervisor


AR305093



SAP Worksheet #24 -- Analytical Instrument Calibration Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.2.2)

Instrument



Acceptance Criteria

Corrective Action (CA)

Person Responsible for CA2

SOP Reference1

GC for Dissolved Gases




Analyst/ Supervisor


ABI 7300 (qPCR) Initial Assay Calibration (standard curve)

Once per assay Standard curve R2 >0.95 Rerun and/or optimize assay

Analyst/ Supervisor

Microbial Insights SOP - 7300ABI

ABI 7300 (qPCR) Continuing Calibration Verification (CCV)

Primary – Semi-annual Secondary – every plate (assay)

Primary: Standard curve R2 >0.95 Replicate within 1 Threshold Cycle (CT) Secondary: CT value within 2 units of same point on standard curve

Rerun assay / check reagents.

Non conformance report—call service engineer with ABI

Laboratory Manager

Microbial Insights SOP - 7300ABI

1 Specify the appropriate reference letter or number from the Analytical SOP References table (Worksheet #23). 2 Name or title of responsible person may be used.

AR305094



SAP Worksheet #25 -- Analytical Instrument and Equipment Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Table

(UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.2.3)

Instrument / Equipment

Maintenance

Activity

Testing Activity

Inspection Activity

Frequency

Acceptance Criteria

Corrective Action

Responsible Person2

SOP Reference1

GC/MS Check pressure and gas supply daily. Bake out trap and column, manual tune, if tune not in criteria, change septa as needed, cut column as needed, change trap as needed.

Volatile Organic Compound and HCA Analysis

Initial Calibration, Continuing Calibration

Initial Cal: Instrument receipt, instrument change (new trap, column, etc.), when CCC do not meet criteria

Cont. Cal: At beginning of each 12 hour shift immediately after BFB tune.

Initial Cal: RSD for each CCC < 30%, min. mean RF for each SPCC as noted in 7.3.5.4 of method 8260B. If RSD for an analyte is > 15% apply linear or quadratic method for quantitation

Cont. Cal: %D for each CCC < 20%, min. RF for each SPCC as noted in 7.3.5.4 of method 8260B.

Recalibrate and/or perform necessary equipment maintenance. Check calibration standards. Reanalyze affected data.

Record maintenance activities in Maintenance Log.

Analyst/ Supervisor

SOM01.2 for Trace VOCs and Low SVOCs

IC See

“Maintenance” in Appendix D

Anion and Perchlorate Analysis

CCV After end of analytical sequence

90-110% of true value Re-run CCV, Re-prep CCV, Re-calibrate, perform necessary equipment maintenance

Analyst/ Supervisor

EPA 300.0 and EPA 314.0

Dionex IC DX-500 Check column performance, check detector response

Calibration procedures in Worksheet 24

Check for leaks, all tubing for wear and discoloration, gas cylinder, pump pistons

Leak check daily; tubing check weekly, gas cylinder daily, pump pistons quarterly

Calibration criterion in Worksheet 24

Repair and replace as needed

Analyst/ Supervisor


AR305095



SAP Worksheet #25 -- Analytical Instrument and Equipment Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.2.3)

Instrument / Equipment

Maintenance Activity

Testing Activity

Inspection Activity

Frequency

Acceptance Criteria

Corrective Action

Responsible Person2

SOP Reference1


Check valves and clean as necessary, clean reactor, check tubing for leaks, prepare reagents


Check gas cylinder, check waste container

Daily Calibration criterion in Worksheet 24

Maintenance and replacement activities as needed

Analyst/ Supervisor

Microseeps SOP – WC21

GC/FID/TCD for Dissolved Gases

Clean FID as needed, replace Thermal Conductivity Detector (TCD) filaments as needed, bake out columns daily and replace as needed


Check septa, gas cylinder, and injector body

Daily Calibration criterion in Worksheet 24

Replace septa, gas cylinder, and injector body as needed

Recalibrate as needed.

Analyst/ Supervisor


ABI 7300 (PCR) Dye calibration

Contamination Check

Dye calibration plates

Water control plate

ABI

Analyst/

Supervisor

Semi-annual

Monthly

Curve within specified range (see ABI 7300 manual)

No contaminant curves

Re-calibrate dyes Clean wells following SOP and repeat contamination check

ABI Service Engineer

Analyst/

Supervisor

MISOP-7300ABI

1 Specify the appropriate reference letter or number from the Analytical SOP References table (Worksheet #23). 2 Name or title of responsible person may be used.

AR305096



SAP Worksheet #26 -- Sample Handling System (UFP-QAPP Manual Appendix A)

SAMPLE COLLECTION, PACKAGING, AND SHIPMENT

Sample Collection (Personnel/Organization): TBD/Tetra Tech

Sample Packaging (Personnel/Organization): TBD/Tetra Tech

Coordination of Shipment (Personnel/Organization): TBD/Tetra Tech

Type of Shipment/Carrier: Overnight courier service (Federal Express)

SAMPLE RECEIPT AND ANALYSIS

Sample Receipt (Personnel/Organization): Sample custodians / TBD / Microseeps / Microbial Insights

Sample Custody and Storage (Personnel/Organization): Sample custodians / TBD/Microseeps / Microbial Insights

Sample Preparation (Personnel/Organization): Preparation Laboratory Staff / TBD / Microseeps / Microbial Insights

Sample Determinative Analysis (Personnel/Organization): GC/MS, IC, PCR / TBD / Microseeps / Microbial Insights

SAMPLE ARCHIVING

Field Sample Storage (No. of days from sample collection): 30 days from submittal of final laboratory report for TBD and Microbial Insights, for Microseeps – 30 days from sample receipt

Sample Extract/Digestate Storage (No. of days from extraction/digestion): 30 days from submittal of final laboratory report for TBD and Microbial Insights, for Microseeps – 30 days from sample receipt

Biological Sample Storage (No. of days from sample collection): Not Applicable

SAMPLE DISPOSAL

Personnel/Organization: Sample custodians/TBD/Microseeps/Microbial Insights

Number of Days from Analysis: 30 days from submittal of final laboratory report for TBD and Microbial Insights, for Microseeps – 30 days from sample receipt

AR305097



SAP Worksheet #27 -- Sample Custody Requirements Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.3.3)

Field Sample Custody Procedures (sample collection, packaging, shipment, and delivery to laboratory): Following sample collection into the appropriate bottle ware, all samples will be immediately placed on ice in a cooler. The glass sample containers will be enclosed in bubble-wrap in order to protect the bottle ware during shipment. The cooler will be secured using duct or clear packaging tape along with a signed custody seal. Sample coolers will be delivered to a local courier location for priority overnight delivery to the selected laboratory for analysis. Samples will be preserved as appropriate based on the analytical method. Laboratories will provide pre-preserved sample containers for sample collection. Samples will be maintained at 4 degrees centigrade (°C) until delivery to the laboratories. Proper custody procedures will be followed throughout all phases of sample collection and handling. Chain of custody protocols will be used throughout sample handling to establish the evidentiary integrity of sample containers. These protocols will be used to demonstrate that the samples were handled and transferred in a manner that would eliminate possible tampering. Samples for the laboratory will be packaged and shipped in accordance with Tetra Tech SOP SA-6.1. Laboratory Sample Custody Procedures (receipt of samples, archiving, disposal): According to CLP procedures for VOC and HCA. Perchlorate, anions, TOC, laboratory TBD. Microseeps-SOP-S2 (Standard Operating Procedure for Sample Receiving) Microseeps-ADM-14 (Standard Operating Procedure for Waste Disposal) Sample Identification Procedures: Sample nomenclature will be conducted in general accordance with the procedures outlined in Tetra Tech SOP CT-04 (Sample Nomenclature). Sample nomenclature put forth for this field event has been selected based on historical usage. The sample nomenclature for each tracking number includes the site being investigated, sample media identifier, and sample location number. The standard sample matrix and type codes used for this field event are as follows: Duplicate samples will be submitted to the laboratory as blind duplicates. Therefore duplicate codes will be reflective of the standard sample matrix code followed by a “DUP” tag and sequentially listed. Due to the blind nature of the duplicate samples, no sample depth or date will be listed with the duplicated sample. An example of a duplicate sample would be “05DUP001”. The QA/QC type codes used for this field event are as follows: TB for Trip Blanks, FB for field blanks, and RB for rinsate blanks. Field QC blanks will be labeled sequentially followed by the date (i.e., TB-20070430, FB-20070501). Samples to be used for matrix spikes and matrix spike duplicates will be labeled MS/MSD on the bottle label and noted on the TR/COC, as required in the laboratory QA Plan; however, “MS/MSD” will not be part of the unique sample identifier in order to maintain consistency with the project database. Additional information regarding protocol for sample labeling is contained in Tetra Tech SOP SA-6.3 and LAB SOP. Chain-of-custody Procedures: After recovery, each sample will be maintained in the sampler’s custody until formally transferred to another party (e.g., Federal Express). For all samples recovered, custody records will document the date and time of sample collection, the sampler’s name, and the names of all others who subsequently held custody of the sample. Specifications for chemical analyses will also be documented on the custody record. Attached SOP SA-6.3 (Field Documentation) provides further details on the chain of custody procedure. Chain of custody requirements are also documented with instructions contained in each shipment for the laboratory. (ALSI-19-COC [Standard Operating Procedure for Chain of Custody Entry], Microseeps-SOP-S2)

AR305098



SAP Worksheet #28 -- Laboratory QC Samples Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.4) QC Samples Table Matrix Groundwater Analytical Group VOCs Concentration Level Trace Sampling SOP SA-1.1 Analytical Method SOM01.2 Trace Sampler’s Name TBD Field Sampling Organization

Tetra Tech

Analytical Organization

TBD

No. of Samples 134

QC Sample: Frequency/Number Method/SOP QC

Acceptance Limits Corrective Action (CA)

Person(s) Responsible for

Corrective Action

Data Quality Indicator (DQI)

Measurement Performance Criteria

Trip Blank One per cooler of VOC samples shipped to laboratory

No target compounds <CRQL except common lab contaminants which should be <2x CRQL

Reanalyze blank and report with qualifiers.

Data Validator Bias / Contamination


Method Blank One every 12 hours prior to sample analysis


Re-clean, retest, re-extract, reanalyze blank. Reanalyze all sample associated with unacceptable blank.

Analyst, Laboratory Supervisor and Data Validator

Bias / Contamination


Surrogates 3 per sample Statistically derived limits.

Re-prep and reanalyze for confirmation of matrix interference when appropriate.


Accuracy / Bias Statistically derived limits.

Internal Standards (IS)

3 per sample

Retention time + 20 seconds; EICP area within 60-140% of last CCV (12 hours) for each IS.

Check calculations, spike solution, and instrument performance. Take CA to technical acceptance criteria. Narrate.


Precision / Accuracy / Bias


AR305099



SAP Worksheet #28 -- Laboratory QC Samples Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.4) Matrix Groundwater Analytical Group Hexachloroethane Concentration Level Low Sampling SOP SA-1.1 Analytical Method SOM01.2 Low Sampler’s Name TBD Field Sampling Organization

Tetra Tech


TBD

No. of Samples 84




Corrective Action



Method Blank One per 20 environmental sample extraction batches

No target compounds >CRQL

Re-clean, retest, re-extract, reanalyze blank. Reanalyze all sample associated with unacceptable blank.



No target compounds >CRQL

Surrogates 3 per sample Statistically derived limits. Re-prep and reanalyze for confirmation of matrix interference when appropriate.


Accuracy / Bias Statistically derived limits.

Internal Standards (IS)

3 per sample Retention time + 20 seconds; EICP area within 60-140% of last CCV (12 hours) for each IS.

Check calculations, spike solution, and instrument performance. Take CA to technical acceptance criteria. Narrate.


Precision / Accuracy / Bias


AR305100



SAP Worksheet #28 -- Laboratory QC Samples Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.4) Matrix Groundwater Analytical Group Perchlorate Concentration Level Low Sampling SOP SA-1.1 Analytical Method EPA 314.0 Sampler’s Name TBD Field Sampling Organization

Tetra Tech


TBD

No. of Samples 126




Corrective Action



Method Blank One per analytical batch No perchlorate > ½ RL Resolve contamination problem. Reanalyze



No perchlorate > ½ RL

LCS One per analytical batch 85 -115 %R Consider invalid, source of problem should be indentified and resolved before continuing analysis.


Accuracy / Bias / Precision

85 -115 %R

Laboratory Duplicate One per analytical batch RPD ± 15% Include in narrative. Poor precision not to exceed >20% of duplicate analyses.


Precision RPD ± 15%

MS/MSD One per analytical batch 80 – 120 %R If all other QC criteria good, include in narrative.



80 – 120 %R

AR305101



SAP Worksheet #28 -- Laboratory QC Samples Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.4) Matrix Groundwater Analytical Group TOC Analytical Method/ SOP Reference

SM5310C

QC Sample: Frequency/Number

Method/SOP QC

Acceptance Limits

Corrective Action Person(s)

Responsible for Corrective Action



Method Blank One per prep batch < concentration of lowest standard

(1) Investigate source of contamination. (2) Prepare and analyze new method blank

Analyst, Laboratory Supervisor

Bias Contamination No analyte detected >PQL

LCS One per 20 client samples

70-130 %R

Recalibrate and/or reanalyze other samples.


Accuracy / Bias 70-130 %R

MSD One per 10 client samples

RPD <20 for samples >5X the PQL

If MS is out and other QC is in, note matrix interference in narrative.


Precision RPD <20 for samples >5X the PQL

MS One per 10 client samples

70-130% R If MS is out and other QC is in, note matrix interference in narrative.


Accuracy / Bias 70-130% R

AR305102



SAP Worksheet #28 -- Laboratory QC Samples Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.4) Matrix Groundwater Analytical Group Anions (sulfate, sulfide,

nitrate, nitrite, and chloride, and orthophosphate)

Analytical Method/ SOP Reference

EPA 300.0


Method/SOP QC

Acceptance Limits





Method Blank One per 10 client samples, beginning and end of run.

< 1/2 RL

(1) Identify and correct problem. (2) Reanalyze blank and detectable samples since unacceptable blank.


Bias Contamination No analyte detected >1/2 RL

Second Source Standard

One per 20 client samples, beginning of run.

90-110 %R

(1) Reanalyze once, if unacceptable, reanalyze all associated samples.



MS One per 10 client samples

80-120 %R If all other QC in, report in narrative.



MSD One per 20 client samples

RPD < 20% Report in narrative Analyst, Laboratory Supervisor


RPD < 20%

Laboratory Duplicate One per 10 client samples

RPD < 10% Reanalyze, if volume not available, report in narrative


Precision RPD < 10%

AR305103



SAP Worksheet #28 -- Laboratory QC Samples Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.4) Matrix Groundwater Analytical Group Dissolved Gases

(ethene, ethane, methane, acetylene)


RSK 14/175/ Microseeps SOP - AM20GAX


Method/SOP QC

Acceptance Limits





Method Blank One per prep batch < PQL

(1) Investigate source of contamination. (2) Re-prepare and analyze blank.


Bias Contamination No analyte detected > PQL

LCS One per prep batch

75-125 %R

(1) Re-prepare and analyze. (2) If new LCS fails, Investigate problem. (3) Recalibrate and run LCS and samples.



LCS Duplicate One per prep batch

RPD ≤ 20% Note in narrative. Analyst, Laboratory Supervisor

Precision RPD ≤ 20%

AR305104



SAP Worksheet #28 -- Laboratory QC Samples Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.4) Matrix Groundwater Analytical Group VFAs (lactic, pyruvic,

acetic, propionic, butyric)




Method/SOP QC

Acceptance Limits





Method Blank One per prep batch

No analyte detected > lowest analyte in lowest standard

(1) Prepare and analyze new blank.


Bias Contamination No analyte detected > lowest analyte in lowest standard

LCS One per 20 client samples

70-130 %R

(1) Prepare and analyze new LCS. (2) If it fails again, re-prepare and analyze associated samples. (3) Report in narrative.



MS One per analytical batch

70-130 %R If all other QC is in, report in narrative.



MSD One per analytical batch

RPD < 30 % If all other QC is in, report in narrative.


Accuracy / Bias Precision

RPD < 30 %

AR305105



SAP Worksheet #28 -- Laboratory QC Samples Table (continued) (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.4) Matrix Groundwater Analytical Group PCR/Enzymes Analytical Method/ SOP Reference

Microbial Insights SOP – qPCR-2006


Acceptance Limits Corrective Action


Corrective Action



Assay Negative Control (Blank)

1 per analytical assay plate

Values for positive samples are set above any fluorescence for the negative control

Rerun assay; may have to re-optimize assay

Analyst; Laboratory Supervisor


Values for positive samples are set above any fluorescence for the negative control

DNA extraction negative control

1 per analytical batch CT ≤ Assay Negative Control

Rerun assay or re-extract samples if problem persists



CT ≤ Assay Negative Control

Positive Control 1 per analytical assay plate

CT value within 2 units of same point on standard curve

Rerun assay / check reagents



CT value within 2 units of same point on standard curve

Laboratory Duplicate All field samples CT value within 2 units of other duplicate

Rerun assay; if still not within 2 CT units, flag J (estimate)


Precision CT value within 2 units of other duplicate

AR305106



SAP Worksheet #29 -- Project Documents and Records Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.5.1)

Document Where Maintained Field Documents Field Logbook Field Sample Forms TR/COC Records Air bills Sampling Instrument Calibration Logs Sampling Notes Drilling Logs Photographs Field Task Modification Forms This SAP Health and Safety Plan

Field documents will be maintained in the project file located in the Tetra Tech King of Prussia office.

Laboratory Documents Sample receipt, custody, and tracking record Standards traceability logs Equipment calibration logs Sample preparation logs Analysis Run logs Equipment maintenance, testing, and inspection logs Corrective action forms Reported field sample results Reported results for standards, QC checks, and QC samples Sample storage and disposal records Telephone logs Extraction/clean-up records Raw data Data Completeness checklist

Laboratory documents will be included in the hardcopy and Portable Document Format (PDF) deliverables from laboratory to Region 3 ESAT. The final data validation reports will be provided by ESAT to Tetra Tech in PDF format. The files will be maintained in the project file located in the Tetra Tech King of Prussia office. Electronic data results will be maintained in a password protected Access database.

Assessment Findings Field Sampling Audit Checklist (if conducted) Analytical Audit Checklist (if conducted) Data Validation Memoranda (includes tabulated data summary forms)

All assessment documents will be maintained in the Tetra Tech King of Prussia project file.

Reports Interim Pilot Study Reports Pilot Study Report

All reports for the OPI Bioremediation Pilot Study will be stored in hardcopy in the Tetra Tech King of Prussia project file and electronically in the server library.

AR305107



SAP Worksheet #30 -- Analytical Services Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 3.5.2.3)

Matrix Analytical Group Concentration

Level

Sample Location/ID

Numbers Analytical SOP

Data Package Turnaround Time

Laboratory/ Organization

(Name and Address, Contact Person and Telephone Number)

Backup Laboratory/Organi

zation1 (Name and

Address, Contact Person and Telephone

Number

Groundwater TCL VOC Trace See Worksheet 18

TBD 7PR/30 Days TBD NA

Groundwater Perchlorate Low See Worksheet 18


Groundwater Hexachloroethane Low See Worksheet 18


Groundwater TOC Low See Worksheet 18


Groundwater Anions Low See Worksheet 18


Groundwater Dissolved Gases Low See Worksheet 18

Microseeps 7PR/30 Days Microseeps, Inc. 220 William Penn Way Pittsburgh, PA 15238 Phone: (412)826-2389 Fax: (412)826-5251

NA Groundwater VFAs Low

See Worksheet 18

Microseeps 7PR/30 Days

Groundwater PCR/Enzymes Low See Worksheet 18

Microbial Insights

7PR/30 Days

Microbial Insights 2340 Stock Creek Blvd. Rockford, TN 37853 Phone: (865) 573-8188 ext. 104 Fax: (865) 573-8133

NA

AR305108



SAP Worksheet #31 -- Planned Project Assessments Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 4.1.1)

Assessment Type

Frequency Internal

or External

Organization Performing Assessment


Performing Assessment (Title and Organizational

Affiliation)

Person(s) Responsible for Responding to

Assessment Findings (Title and

Organizational Affiliation)

Person(s) Responsible for Identifying and Implementing

Corrective Actions (CA) (Title and Organizational

Affiliation)


Monitoring Effectiveness of CA

(Title and Organizational

Affiliation)

Field Sampling Systems Audit

Annually Internal Tetra Tech TBD PM Auditor and QA Manager (Megan Ritchie, Tetra Tech)

QA Manager (Megan Ritchie, Tetra Tech)

Health and Safety

Annually Internal Tetra Tech TBD PM Auditor and Health and Safety Manager

Health and Safety Manager Matt Soltis

CLP Laboratory Audit

Annually External

EPA Region 3 Office of Analytical Services and Quality Assurance (OASQA)

TBD, EPA Region 3 OASQA

Laboratory Manager Laboratory Manager EPA Personnel and Laboratory Manager

AR305109



SAP Worksheet #32 -- Assessment Findings and Corrective Action Responses (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 4.1.2)

Assessment Type

Nature of Deficiencies

Documentation

Individual(s) Notified of Findings

(name, title, organization)

Timeframe of Notification

Nature of Corrective Action

Response Documentation

Individual(s) Receiving

Corrective Action Response

(name, title, organization)

Timeframe for

Response

Health and Safety Audit

Audit checklist and written audit finding summary

Project Manager Tetra Tech, FOL Tetra Tech, and Program Manager Tetra Tech

Dependant on findings, if major, a stop work may be issued immediately, however, if minor, within 1 week of audit.

Written memo

Health and Safety Manager Tetra Tech, Auditor Tetra Tech, Program Manager Tetra Tech

Within 48 hours of notification

Field Sampling System Audit

Audit checklist and written audit finding summary

Project Manager Tetra Tech, FOL Tetra Tech, and Program Manager Tetra Tech

Dependant on findings, if major, a stop work may be issued immediately, however, if minor, within 1 week of audit.

Written memo

Quality Assurance Manager Tetra Tech, Auditor Tetra Tech, Program Manager Tetra Tech

Within 48 hours of notification

Laboratory audit findings for the CLP are the responsibility of the EPA.

AR305110



SAP Worksheet #33 -- QA Management Reports Table (UFP QAPP Manual Section 4.2)

Type of Report

Frequency

(Daily, weekly monthly, quarterly, annually, etc.)

Projected Delivery

Date(s)

Person(s) Responsible for Report Preparation

(title and organizational affiliation)

Report Recipient(s)

(title and organizational affiliation)

Data Validation Report Per SDG 30 Days after submittal of the last sample

EPA Region III ESAT PM Tetra Tech

Major analysis problem identification – Email or verbal communication

When persistent analysis problems are detected

Immediately CLP Laboratory and EPA Region III Client Services Team

PM Tetra Tech, QAM Tetra Tech

Project monthly progress report

Monthly for duration of project

monthly PM (Tetra Tech) EPA, project file

Field progress reports Daily, oral, during the course of sampling

Everyday that field sampling is occurring

FOL (Tetra Tech) PM (Tetra Tech)

AR305111



SAP Worksheet #34 -- Verification (Step I) Process Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 5.2.1)

Verification Input

Description

Internal / External

Responsible for Verification (name, organization)

Sample Tables Proposed samples verified to have been collected Internal FOL or designee Tetra Tech

Chain of custody Chain of custody records will be reviewed internally and compared against sample tables listing the proposed samples to verify that all planned samples have been collected.

Internal /

External

Internal by PM or designee Tetra Tech

External by EPA Region III ESAT

Sample Coordinator Sample locations have been verified to be correct and in accordance with the SAP (overlay maps proposed locations against actual locations)

Internal FOL, PM, or designee (Tetra Tech)

Data package Verify that the data package contains all the elements required by the functional guidelines and scope of work, this occurs as part of the data validation process.

External EPA Region III ESAT

Sample Log Sheets Log sheets completed as samples are collected in the field are verified for completeness and are maintained at the project office.

Internal PM or designee (Tetra Tech)

AR305112



SAP Worksheet #35 -- Validation (Steps IIa and IIb) Process Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 5.2.2) (Figure 37 UFP-QAPP Manual) (Table 9 UFP-QAPP Manual)

Step IIa/IIb1 Validation Input Description Responsible for Validation

(Name, Organization)

IIa (M2, IM1) Data package

Validator will verify that elements of the data package that are required for validation is present and if not the lab will be contacted and the missing info will be requested. Validation will be performed as per Worksheet No. 36.

EPA Region III ESAT

IIa Field logbook Verify that sampling plan was implemented and carried out as written and any deviations are documented.

PM Tetra Tech

IIa Electronic Data Verify all data have been transferred correctly and completely to the final Access database.

PM or designee Tetra Tech

IIa SAP, field logbook, TR/COCs

Verify that deviations have been documented and MPCs have been achieved.

PM or designee Tetra Tech

1 IIa=compliance with methods, procedures, and contracts [see Table 10, page 117, UFP-QAPP manual, V.1, March 2005.] IIb=comparison with measurement performance criteria in the SAP [see Table 11, page 118, UFP-QAPP manual, V.1, March 2005]

AR305113



SAP Worksheet #36 -- Analytical Data Validation (Steps IIa and IIb) Summary Table (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 5.2.2.1)

Step IIa / IIb1

Matrix

Analytical

Group

Validation Criteria

Data Validator

(title and organizational

affiliation)

IIa and IIb (M2) Groundwater* Volatiles

(SOM01.2 Trace)

Region III Modifications to National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review (September 1994), Region III Innovative Approaches to Data Validation (June 1995), and SAP Worksheets 12, 15, and 28.

EPA Region III ESAT

IIa and IIb (M2) Groundwater* HCA

(SOM01.2 Low)

Region III Modifications to National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review (September 1994), Region III Innovative Approaches to Data Validation (June 1995), and SAP Worksheets 12, 15, and 28.

EPA Region III ESAT

IIa and IIb (IM1) Groundwater* Perchlorate

(EPA 314.0)

Region III Modifications to the Laboratory Data National Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses (April 1993) to the extent practicable and the Region III Innovative Approaches to Data Validation (June 1995), and SAP Worksheets 12, 15, and 28.

EPA Region III ESAT

1 IIa=compliance with methods, procedures, and contracts [see Table 10, page 117, UFP-QAPP manual, V.1, March 2005.] IIb=comparison with measurement performance criteria in the SAP [see Table 11, page 118, UFP-QAPP manual, V.1, March 2005]

*Groundwater data for indicator parameters will not be validated. These parameters will undergo a completeness check and field duplicate verification only.

M2 and IM1 levels are outlined in USEPA Region III Innovative Approaches to Data Validation, June 1995.

AR305114



SAP Worksheet #37 -- Usability Assessment (UFP-QAPP Manual Section 5.2.3) A data usability assessment will be conducted by the planning team, including Tetra Tech, EPA, and EPA’s data validation contractor. If significant data usability limitations are encountered the planning team will be expanded to include the EPA RPM. The data validation procedure (Worksheets 35 and 36) will be used to help determine which data are usable. Qualifiers will be applied to each value based on the results of the data validation. Rejected values (qualified with “R”) and blank qualified values (“B”) will be eliminated from further consideration. Estimated and biased values (J [estimated], K [biased high], and L [biased low]) will be used as the reported value. The quantitation limits from the data will be evaluated for sensitivity to the project action levels. Limitations on the use of the data due to lack of project-required sensitivity will be discussed. In addition, the data will be reviewed to evaluate if samples were collected from the intended locations and are representative of site conditions. After data validation and an overall review of data quality indicators, the data will be reconciled with measurement performance criteria (MPCs) to determine whether sufficient data of acceptable quality are available for decision making. A series of checks will be performed to estimate several of the data set characteristics. Simple summary statistics for target analytes may be presented, such as the maximum concentration, minimum concentration, number of samples exhibiting no detectable analyte, the number of samples exhibiting detectable analytes, and the proportion of samples with detectable and undetectable analytes. Rejected values and significant deviations form planning documents, if any, will be identified so the planning team can assess their impacts to the attainment of project objectives. Project assumptions will also be evaluated to determine their validity. If assumptions are shown to be invalid the team will assess the impact of the invalid assumption and take actions necessary to mitigate the impact. In extreme cases, a revision of DQOs may be necessary. The quantitative bias and precision data quality indicators will be reviewed to determine whether any significant bias or significant imprecision exist in the data. A significant bias is a bias greater than +/- 30 percent (corresponding to consistent analyte recoveries of 70 to 130 percent in LCSs, MSs, or surrogate compound concentrations). Laboratory precision and field precision (based on RPD values from duplicate samples) will be compared to ensure that laboratory precision is not significantly worse (i.e., exhibits greater RPD values) than field precision. At the discretion of the project manager correlations may also be assessed among various parameters as a cross-check to ensure that results appear to be reasonable. Although bias and precision indicators can be assessed quantitatively, evaluations will involve professional judgment which will consider site conditions, the normal analytical performance for the analytes in question, and other factors that affect the precision and agreements among analyte concentrations. The intent will be to identify any deviations or anomalies that adversely affect the ability to attain project objectives and to document how these characteristics were handled by the team to complete the project. RPD and Percent Recovery values will be computed as follows:

The %R for a spiked sample will be calculated by using the following formula:

%

The %R calculation for LCSs and surrogate spikes will be as follows:

%

AR305115



Potential data outliers will also be investigated to determine whether they represent unanticipated site conditions or they are true outliers. No statistical outlier will be removed from a data set unless a physical reason can be assigned to the datum to demonstrate that it is not representative of the intended population. The comparability among data sets will be evaluated to ensure it is satisfactory. For example, if comparability problems are anticipated because of poor analyte precision or bias this will be noted so that subsequent data generators or project planners can take these potential data deficiencies into account. Comparability and representativeness assessments will be based on professional judgment with consideration of the quantitative quality indicators such as precision, accuracy, and completeness of data sets. Data Limitations and Actions from Usability Assessment After all data evaluations are completed, any limitations on the use of data will be known to the planning team and the limitations will be considered during decision making. If necessary, investigation objectives may be revised in anticipation of additional data collection in order to meet project quality objectives for the site. The data usability assessments for each stage of the bioremediation pilot study will be summarized in the final report for that phase.

AR305116

FIGURES

AR305117

1E1RA lEOi NUS, INC.

SITE LOCATION MAP ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE

MECHANICS VALLEY CECIL COUNTY. MARYLAND

FlL.E 112G01 0148M01

REV DAlE

0 09/28/0 FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 1Q-1 AR305118

lURA 'TECH NUS, INC.

SOURCES OF CONTAMINAllON ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE

MECHANICS VALLEY CECIL COUNTY, MARYLAND

SOIL CONTAMINATION AREA

---PROPERTY BOUNDARY

640

SCALE AS NOTED

FlLE

I

112G01 014GM09-1 REV

0 FlGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 10-2

AR305119

~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~--~~~N~ m ~ ~ ~ \. 0

{

\

" ""I :-...... I

: I

: r-r-, I

: I

: I I

:

FILE

LEGEND

~ SOIL CONTAMINATION AREA

S MONITORING WELL

Q PROPOSED EXTRACTION WELL

• PDI EXTRACTION WELL

$ PDI MONITORING WELL

0 60 120

I I I SCALE IN FEET

( It 1 1E1RA1Eal NUS.INQ

EXTRACTION WELL AND MONITORING WELL LOCA liONS

PLUME 2 ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE

MECHANICS VALLEY CECIL COUNTY. MARYLAND

112G01 014GM11-3 SCALE

AS NOTED

FIGURE NUMBER REV DATE

FIGURE 10-3 0 09/28/09

AR305120

LEGEND


S MONITORING WELL

------100 PCECONTOUR

640 PCE CONCENTRATION {ug/L)

ND NO DETECTS

0 200 --100

SCALE IN FEET ---( It) 1E1RA1ECH NUS, INC.

N

~~--------------------~ I PLUME 2 - PATTERN OF PCE LEVELS

IN SHALLOW AQUIFER ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE

'\ ' ~ RLE CECIL COUNTY, MARYLAND

~tt~~~~' 112G01014GM07-1 AS5~~~ED ~ FIGURE NUt.IBER REV

"' W FIGURE 10-4 o 09

AR305121

0 " N

1 ,2-Dichloroethene (cis) Tetrachlororethene Trichloroethane

1 ,2-Dichloroethene (cis) Tetrachlororethene Trichloroethene

66 ug/L 780 ug/L 230 ug/L

2004


• EXISTING MONITORING WELL

• PROPOSED MONITORING WELL

0 EXTRACTION WELL

J ESTIMATED

ND NO VOCs DETECTED

+ VALUE ESTIMATED HIGH

0 100 200

I I I

( It) lElRAlECH NUS, INC.

PLUME 2 - 2009 VOC RESULTS FOR DEEP AQUIFER

ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE CECIL COUNTY. MARYLAND

FILE 1 1 2G01 014GM 02-2

FIGURE NUt.IBER

FIGURE 10-5

SCALE AS NOTED

REV 0 09

AR305122

(IJ :I( :::;; m ~ Ill

~ "' 0

~ 0 ..t 0 ::::!:

" ...,. 0 0 " ~

N

S MONITORING WELL

__ 120 C~~~A~~O~F STATIC WATER LEVEL

150.13 STATIC WATER ELEVATION, FEET MEAN SEA LEVEL

--.. -~ PREDICTED GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION

NOTES: 1. GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA COLLECTED

ON MAY 7, 2009. 2. CONTOUR INTERVALS= 5 FEET.

0 300 600 -----SCALE IN FEET

( It 1 1E1RA1Eal NUS. IN!>

GROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOUR MAP OVERBURDEN (SHALLOW) WELLS

ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE MECHANICS VALLEY

CECIL COUNTY. MARYLAND

FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 10-6

SCALE AS NOTED

REV 0

AR305123

LEGEND

s MONITORING WELL

CONTOUR OF STATIC WATER LEVEL --120 ELEVATION


PREDICTED GROUNDWATER FLOW ---1-~ DIRECTION



0 JOO 600

---~ SCALE IN FEET

( It) 1E1RA1ECH NUS, INC.

GROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOUR MAP INTERMEDIATE BEDROCK WELLS



FIGURE NUt.IBER

7 FIGURE 10-

SCALE AS NOTED

REV 0 09

AR305124

N

S MONITORING WELL

__ 120

CONTOUR OF STATIC WATER LEVEL ELEVATION


--.. -~ PREDICTED GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION



0 300 600 -----SCALE IN FEET

( It) lElRAlEOINUS, INC.

GROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOUR MAP DEEP BEDROCK WELLS



SCALE AS NOTED

FIGURE NUMBER REV

~GURE10-8 o AR305125

FIGURE 10-9CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE, CECIL COUNTY, MARYLAND

PRIMARY SOURCESPRIMARY RELEASE

MECHANISMS SECONDARY

SOURCES

SECONDARY RELEASE

MECHANISMS PATHWAY EXPOSURE ROUTE

Site

Wor

ker

Res

iden

tial

Ter

rest

rial

Aqu

atic

Area D Disposal Pit Area E Landfill

Surface Soil or Excavated Soil

Dermal Contact Y N Y N

- Disposal areas for MEC Inhalation Y N N N- Burn area for off-specification products

MEC Y N N N

Overland Runnoff/Erosion

Soil/Sediment (Little NE Creek)

Dermal Contact N Y N Y

Ingestion N Y N Y

Dermal Contact Y Y N NLeaching to

groundwater via infiltration and migration via

advection/dispersion

Groundwater (Plume 2)

used as Tap Water (Current/Future use)

Injestion Y Y N N

Inhalation (Showering) N Y N N

Volatilization and migration of volatile

chemicals in groundwater through

subsurface soils

Vapor Intrusion Inhalation N Y N N

* The CSM presented is a simplified depiction of the CMS presented in the ROD (EPA, September 2006).

Releases to soil from spills, barrel ruptures and deteriation, and improper disposal

practices

RECEPTORBiotaHuman

AR305126

A West

200

112G0 1 014\0620\ 112GD10 14GX01.DWG 09/ 28 / 09 MKB

A' East

1~~======A=R=EA==D====~MW~-1~m~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~-,-----,~~~----r-----~~~tM~~==~A~R~EA~E======~ 160

140

::::i120 en ::::!: 100 t-= ttl~ L1. z 60 0

~ 40

~ 20 ..J

~ 0

-20

-40

-60

-80

LEGEND

77 174.80

--HYDRAULIC HEAD CONTOUR

173.19 HYDRAULIC HEAD CONCENTRATION (FEET, BGS)

---IPCE CONTOUR (ug/L)

4,600+ PCE CONCENTRATION IN ug/L

0 25 50 -----HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET

TElRA TEa-tNUS, INC.

FRACTURE

FRACTURE

FRACTURE

13,000 173.17 /.

PLUME 2 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL ORDNANCE PRODUCTS SITE CECIL COUNlY, MARYLAND

SCAI..£ AS NOTED

FlLE 112G01 014GX01

REV DATE 0 09/28/09 FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 10-10

AR305127

APPENDIX A

Test Kit Standard Operating Procedures

AR305128

7. After each addition, rock the entireassembly to mix the contents of theampoule. Watch for a color change fromPINK to COLORLESS.

8. Repeat steps 6 and 7 until a permanentcolor change occurs.

9. When the color of the liquid in theampoule changes to COLORLESS,remove the ampoule from the Titrettor. Hold the ampoule in avertical position and read the scale opposite the liquid level(fig. 6). Results are expressed in ppm (mg/Liter) carbondioxide as CO2.

Test MethodThe Carbon Dioxide Titrets®1 test kit employs a caustic titrantwith pH indicator method.2,3 Results are expressed in ppm(mg/Liter) carbon dioxide as CO2. Sulfide interferes with thistest. Using this test on a sample that contains sulfide requiresthe addition of neutralizer solution to the sample prior toperforming the test procecdure. Use the following formula tocalculate the volume of neutralizer solution that is required for a20 mL volume of sample to be tested.

K-1910: ppm sulfide ÷ 10 = # ml of A-1905 solution requiredK-1920: ppm sulfide ÷ 100 = # mL of A-1910 solution requiredK-1925: ppm sulfide ÷ 500 = # mL of A-1925 solution required

1. Titrets is a registered trademark of CHEMetrics, Inc. U.S. Patent No. 4,332,7692. APHA Standard Methods, 21st ed., method 4500-CO2 C (2005)3. ASTM D 513 - 82, Total and Dissolved Carbon Dioxide In Water, Test Method E

Safety InformationRead MSDS before performing this test procedure. Wear safetyglasses and disposable gloves.

www.chemetrics.com

4295 Catlett Road, Calverton, VA 20138-0214 U.S.A.Phone: (800) 356-3072; Fax: (540) 788-4856

E-Mail: [email protected]. 09, Rev. 9

Figure 6

Carbon DioxideTitrets® Kit

K-1910: 10 - 100 ppmK-1920: 100 - 1000 ppmK-1925: 250 - 2500 ppm

Test Procedure1. Fill the sample cup to the 20 mL mark with

the sample to be tested (fig. 1).

2. Add 2 drops of A-1900 Activator Solutionto the sample (fig. 2). Stir to mix thecontents of the cup.NOTE: If the sample turns pink, carbon dioxide

is 0 ppm. There is no need to continue.

3. Gently snap the tip of the ampoule at theblack snap ring (fig. 3).NOTE: When the tip is snapped, the flexible

tubing will remain in place on thetapered neck of the ampoule.

4. Lift the control bar and insert the Titretassembly into the Titrettor (fig. 4).NOTE: The rigid sample pipe will extend

approximately 1.5 inches beyond thebody of the Titrettor.

5. Hold the Titrettor with the sample pipe inthe sample. Press the control bar firmly,but briefly, to pull in a small amount ofsample (fig. 5). The contents will turn aPINK color.NOTE: NEVER press the control bar unless the

sample pipe is in the sample.

6. With the sample pipe in the sample, pressthe control bar again briefly to allowanother small amount of sample to bedrawn into the ampoule.

Figure 1

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 2

AR305129

Total Iron Procedure1. Fill the sample cup to the 25 mL mark with the sample.2. Add 5 drops of A-6000 Activator Solution. Stir briefly. Wait 4

minutes.3. After 4 minutes, stir the sample once again and then perform

the Soluble Iron Procedure using this pretreated sample.

Test MethodThe Iron CHEMets®1 test kit employs the phenanthrolinechemistry.2,3 Ferrous iron reacts with 1,10-phenanthroline toform an orange colored complex in direct proportion to theferrous iron concentration. Total iron is determined by addinga mixture of thioglycolic acid and ammonia to the sample.This mixture dissolves most forms of particulate iron. Resultsare expressed in ppm (mg/Liter) Fe. Various metals willproduce high test results. Certain forms of very insoluble iron(magnetite, ferrite, etc.) require the following digestionprocedure in place of the Total Iron Procedure:

A. Fill a heat-resistant, glass container to 25 mL with sample.B. Add 5 drops of A-6000 Solution. Stir briefly.C. Gently boil the sample to reduce volume to 10-15 mL.D. Cool the sample and dilute to 25 mL with iron-free water.E. Perform the Soluble Iron Procedure using this pretreated sample.

1. CHEMets is a registered trademark of CHEMetrics, Inc. U.S. Patent No. 3,634,0382. APHA Standard Methods, 21st ed., method 3500-Fe B (2005)3. ASTM D 1068 - 77, Iron in Water, Test Method A

Safety InformationRead MSDS before performing this test procedure. Wear safetyglasses and disposable gloves.

www.chemetrics.com


E-Mail: [email protected]

Mar. 09, Rev. 9

Iron CHEMets KitK-6010: 0 - 1 & 1 - 10 ppm

Soluble Iron Procedure1. Fill the sample cup to the 25 mL mark with

the sample to be tested (fig 1).

2. Place the ampoule in the sample cup.Snap the tip by pressing the ampouleagainst the side of the cup. The ampoulewill fill leaving a small bubble to facilitatemixing (fig 2).

3. Mix the contents of the ampoule by invert-ing it several times, allowing the bubble totravel from end to end. Dry the ampouleand wait 1 minute for color development.

4. Use the appropriate comparator to determinethe level of iron in the sample. If the color ofthe ampoule is between color standards, anestimate can be made.

a. Low Range Comparator (fig. 3): Placethe ampoule, flat end downward into thecenter tube of the comparator. Direct thetop of the comparator up toward a sourceof light while viewing from the bottom.Rotate the comparator until the colorstandard below the ampoule shows theclosest match.

b. High Range Comparator (fig. 4): Holdthe comparator in a nearly horizontalposition while standing directly beneath asource of light. Place the ampoulebetween the color standards moving itfrom left to right along the comparator untilthe best color match is found.

Figure 2

Figure 1

Figure 4

Figure 3

AR305130

Total Iron Procedure1. Fill the sample cup to the 25 mL mark with the sample.2. Add 5 drops of A-6000 Activator Solution. Stir briefly. Wait 4 minutes.3. After 4 minutes, stir the sample once again and then perform the

Ferrous Iron Procedure using this pretreated sample.Test MethodThe Iron CHEMets®1 test method employs the phenanthrolinechemistry.2,3 Ferrous iron reacts with 1,10-phenanthroline to form anorange colored complex in direct proportion to the ferrous ironconcentration. Total iron is determined by adding a mixture ofthioglycolic acid and ammonia to the sample. This mixture dissolvesmost forms of particulate iron. Results are expressed in ppm(mg/Liter) Fe. Various metals will produce high test results. Certainforms of very insoluble iron (magnetite, ferrite, etc.) require thefollowing digestion procedure in place of the Total Iron Procedure:

A. Fill a heat-resistant, glass container to 25 mL with sample.B. Add 5 drops of A-6000 Solution. Stir briefly.C. Gently boil the sample to reduce volume to 10-15 mL.D. Cool the sample and dilute to 25 mL with iron-free water.E. Perform the Ferrous Iron Procedure using this pretreated sample.

1. CHEMets is a registered trademark of CHEMetrics, Inc. U.S. Patent No. 3,634,0382. APHA Standard Methods, 20th ed., p. 3-76, method 3500-Fe B (1998)3. ASTM D 1068 - 77, Iron in Water, Test Method A

Safety InformationRead MSDS before performing this test procedure. Wear safety glasses.

Reorder Information Cat. No.Test Kit, complete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . K-6210Refill, 30 CHEMet ampoules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R-6201Sample Cup, 25 mL, package of six . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-0013Activator Solution, six 10 mL bottles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-6000Comparator, 0-1 ppm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-6001Comparator, 1-10 ppm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-6010

CHEMetrics, Inc., 4295 Catlett Road, Calverton, VA 20138-0214 U.S.A.Phone: (800) 356-3072; Fax: (540) 788-4856; E-Mail: [email protected]

www.chemetrics.com Jan. 07, Rev. 3

Iron CHEMets®

0 - 1 & 1 - 10 ppm

Ferrous Iron Procedure1. Fill the sample cup to the 25 mL mark with

the sample (fig 1).2. Place the CHEMet ampoule in the sample

cup. Snap the tip by pressing the ampouleagainst the side of the cup. The ampoule willfill leaving a small bubble to facilitate mixing(fig 2).

3. Mix the contents of the ampoule by invertingit several times, allowing the bubble to travelfrom end to end each time. Wipe all liquidfrom the exterior of the ampoule. Wait 1minute for color development.

4. Use the appropriate comparator to determinethe level of iron in the sample. If the color ofthe CHEMet ampoule is between two colorstandards, a concentration estimate can bemade.a. Place the CHEMet ampoule, flat end down-

ward into the center tube of the low rangecomparator. Direct the top of the comparatorup toward a source of bright light whileviewing from the bottom. Rotate thecomparator until the color standard below theCHEMet ampoule shows the closest match(fig 3).

b. Hold the high range comparator in a nearlyhorizontal position while standing directlybeneath a bright source of light. Place theCHEMet ampoule between the colorstandards moving it from left to right alongthe comparator until the best color match is found (fig 4).

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 1

Figure 2

AR305131

4. Hold the comparator in a nearly horizontalposition while standing directly beneath asource of light. Place the ampoulebetween the color standards moving itfrom left to right along the comparator untilthe best color match is found (fig 2). If thecolor of the ampoule is between two colorstandards, a concentration estimate canbe made.

Test MethodThe Oxygen CHEMets®1 test kit employs the Rhodazine D™

Method.2,3,4,5 Dissolved oxygen reacts with the pale yellowcolored leuco form of Rhodazine D to produce a deep rose color.The resulting color is proportional to the dissolved oxygenconcentration in the sample. Results are expressed in ppm(mg/Liter) O2.

1. CHEMets is a registered trademark of CHEMetrics, Inc. U.S. Patent No.3,634,038

2. Rhodazine D methodology was developed by and is a trademark ofCHEMetrics, Inc.

3. ASTM D 5543 - (2005), Standard Test Methods for Low Level Dissolved Oxygenin Water

4. ASTM Power Plant Manual, 1st ed., p. 169 (1984)5. Department of the Navy, Final Report of NAVSECPHILADIV Project A-1598;

evaluation of CHEMetrics Feedwater Dissolved Oxygen Test Kit (1975)

Safety InformationRead MSDS before performing this test. Wear safety glassesand disposable gloves.

Important NoteThe CHEMet ampoules contain a light sensitive reagent. Theywill remain stable only if stored in the dark.

Figure 2

www.chemetrics.com


E-Mail: [email protected]

Mar. 09, Rev. 9

Oxygen CHEMets® KitK-7501: 0 - 1 ppm

SamplingThe most critical part of any dissolved oxygen test is sampling.The sample stream must be completely leak-free. To accomplishthis, the sampling tube is vertically mounted with a tube of inertmaterial connecting the sample point to the bottom of thesampling tube. Use stainless steel, type 304 or 316, or glasstubing with short neoprene connections. Do not use coppertubing, long sections of neoprene or other polymeric tubing. If aflowing sample is not available, the sample must be handled withas little agitation as possible.

Test Procedure1. To remove trapped air bubbles, the system

should be purged with water that is flowingat the fastest possible rate, and has atemperature of 180 - 210°F (80 - 100°C).New sampling systems should be purgedfor several hours, while those usedroutinely may require only a few minutes.When the system is fully purged, reducethe flow to 500 - 1000 mL per minute andcool the sample to ambient temperature.

2. Insert an ampoule so that the tapered tip isat the bottom of the sampling tube. Snap the ampoule tip bygently pressing the upper end of the ampoule toward the wallof the sampling tube (fig. 1). The ampoule will fill, leaving abubble to facilitate mixing.

3. Quickly mix the contents by inverting the ampoule, allowingthe bubble to travel from end to end. Dry the ampoule. Thecolor comparison must be made within 30 seconds.

Figure 1

AR305132

Test MethodThe Oxygen CHEMets®1 test kit employs the indigo carminemethod2,3. In an acidic solution, oxygen oxidizes the yellow-green colored leuco form of indigo carmine to form a highlycolored blue dye. The resulting blue color is proportional to thedissolved oxygen concentration in the sample. Test results areexpressed in ppm (mg/Liter) oxygen as O2.

1. CHEMets is a registered trademark of CHEMetrics, Inc. U.S. Patent No.3,634,038

2. ASTM D 888 - 87, Dissolved Oxygen in Water, Test Method A3. Gilbert, T. W., Behymer, T. D., Castaneda, H. B., "Determination of Dissolved

Oxygen in Natural and Wastewaters," American Laboratory, pp. 119-134, March1982


Important NoteThe CHEMet ampoules contain a light sensitive reagent. Theywill remain stable only if stored in the dark.


www.chemetrics.comAug. 08, Rev 9

Oxygen CHEMets® KitK-7512: 1 - 12 ppm

SamplingThe most critical part of any dissolved oxygen test is sampling.It is difficult to obtain an aliquot which accurately reflects theoxygen content of a sample. Exposure to the high oxygencontent of "air" will cause a sample to approach saturation.Biological activity may cause rapid oxygen depletion. Dippingand pouring operations should be performed with as littleagitation as possible.


the sample to be tested (fig 1).2. Place the ampoule in the sample cup.

Snap the tip by pressing the ampouleagainst the side of the cup. The ampoulewill fill, leaving a small bubble to facilitatemixing (fig. 2).

3. Mix the contents of the ampoule byinverting it several times, allowing thebubble to travel from end to end. Dry theampoule and wait 2 minutes for colordevelopment.

4. Hold the comparator in a nearly horizontalposition while standing directly beneath asource of light. Place the ampoulebetween the color standards moving itfrom left to right along the comparator untilthe best color match is found (fig 3). If thecolor of the ampoule is between two colorstandards, a concentration estimate canbe made.

Figure 1

Figure 3

Figure 2

AR305133

b. High Range Comparator (fig. 5): Holdthe comparator in a nearly horizontalposition while standing directly beneatha source of light. Place the ampoulebetween the color standards moving itfrom left to right along the comparatoruntil the best color match is found.

Test MethodThe Sulfide CHEMets®1 test kit employs the methylene bluechemistry.2,3 In an acidic solution, sulfide reacts withN,N-dimethyl-p-phenylenediamine and ferric chloride to producemethylene blue. The resulting blue color is directly proportional tothe sulfide concentration. Results are expressed in ppm(mg/Liter) S.Strong reducing agents, including high levels of sulfide, willcause low results. Sulfide is very volatile, especially when thesample is acidified. It is essential to analyze the sample asquickly as possible.1. CHEMets is a registered trademark of CHEMetrics, Inc. U.S. Patent No. 3,634,0382. APHA Standard Methods, 20th ed., p. 4-165, method 4500-S2- D (1998)3. EPA Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, method 376.2 (1983)


Figure 5


www.chemetrics.comSept. 08, Rev 7

Sulfide CHEMets® KitK-9510: 0 - 1 & 1 - 10 ppm


the sample to be tested (fig 1).2. Add 3 drops of A-9500 Activator Solution

(fig 2). Stir to mix the contents of the cup.NOTE: Store the A-9500 Activator Solution in

the glass bottle when not in use.

3. Immediately snap the tip by pressing theampoule against the side of the cup. Theampoule will fill leaving a small bubble tofacilitate mixing (fig 3).

4. Mix the contents of the ampoule by invert-ing it several times, allowing the bubble totravel from end to end. Dry the ampouleand wait 5 minutes for color development.

5. Use the appropriate comparator to deter-mine the level of sulfide in the sample. Ifthe color of the ampoule is between twocolor standards, a concentration estimatecan be made.a. Low Range Comparator (fig. 4):

Place the ampoule, flat end downwardinto the center tube of the comparator.Direct the top of the comparator uptoward a source of light while viewingfrom the bottom. Rotate the comparatoruntil the color standard below theampoule shows the closest match.

Figure 4

Figure 1

Figure 3

Figure 2

AR305134

7. After each addition, rock the entireassembly to mix the contents of theampoule. Watch for a color change fromPINK to BRIGHT GREEN.

8. Repeat steps 6 and 7 until a permanentcolor change occurs.

9. When the color of the liquid in the ampoule changes toGREEN, remove the ampoule from the Titrettor. Hold theampoule in a vertical position and read the scale opposite theliquid level (fig. 6). Results are expressed in ppm (mg/Liter)calcium carbonate (CaCO3).

Test MethodThe Total Alkalinity Titrets®1 test method employs an acid titrantand a mixed pH indicator.2,3,4 Results are expressed as calciumcarbonate (CaCO3).1. Titrets is a registered trademark of CHEMetrics, Inc. U.S. Patent No. 4,332,7692. ASTM D 1067 - 02, Acidity or Alkalinity of Water, Test Method B3. APHA Standard Methods, 20th ed., p. 2-27, method 2320 B (1998)4. EPA Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, method 310.1 (1983)

Safety InformationRead MSDS before performing this test procedure. Wear safety glasses.

Reorder Information Cat. No.

Test Kit, complete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . K-9810Kits are available for total alkalinity analysis at other levels.


www.chemetrics.com Oct. 07, Rev. 8

Figure 6

Total Alkalinity Titrets®

10 - 100 ppm

Test Procedure1. Fill the sample cup to the 20 mL mark

with your sample (fig. 1).2. Add 6 drops of A-9800 Activator

Solution to the sample (fig. 2). Stirbriefly to mix the contents of the samplecup.NOTE: The sample should now be green. If it is

pink, total alkalinity is 0 ppm. There is noneed to continue.

3. Gently snap the tip of the glass ampouleat the black snap ring (fig. 3).NOTE: When the tip is snapped, the flexible tubing

will remain in place on the tapered neck ofthe ampoule.

4. Lift the control bar and insert the Titretassembly into the Titrettor (fig. 4).NOTE: The rigid sample pipe will extend

approximately 1.5 inches beyond the body ofthe Titrettor.

5. Hold the Titrettor with the sample pipe inthe sample and press the control barfirmly, but briefly, to pull in a smallamount of sample. The contents will turna PINK color (fig. 5).NOTE: NEVER press the control bar unless the

sample pipe is immersed in the sample.

6. With the sample pipe in the sample, pressthe control bar again briefly to allowanother small amount of sample to bedrawn into the ampoule.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

AR305135