Sampling-Analysis_Plan_and_QAPP_Addendum_for_LUC_and_LTM_Activities_at_Site_DP005.pdf

SAMPLING & ANALYSIS PLAN AND QUALITY

ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN ADDENDUM

for

LAND USE CONTROL AND LONG TERM

MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES AT SITE DP005

DOBBINS AIR RESERVE BASE

COBB COUNTY, GEORGIA

Department of the Air Force Civil Engineering Center

2261 Hughes Ave Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, TX 78236

SEPTEMBER 2015

Quality Assurance Project Plan Dobbins Air Reserve Base September 2015

Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

QAPP Worksheet #1 & 2 – Title and Approval Page

QAPP Worksheet #3 & 5 – Project Organization and QAPP Distribution

QAPP Worksheet #4, 7, & 8 – Personnel Qualifictaions and Sign-off Sheet

QAPP Worksheet #6 – Communication Pathways

QAPP Worksheet #9 – Project Planning Session Summary

QAPP Worksheet #10 – Conceptual Site Model

QAPP Worksheet #11 – Project/Data Quality Objectives

QAPP Worksheet #12-1 – Measurement Performance Criteria Table – VOCs

QAPP Worksheet #12-2 – Measurement Performance Criteria Table – SVOCs

QAPP Worksheet #13 – Secondary Data Criteria and Limitations Table

QAPP Worksheet #14/16 – Project Tasks and Schedule

QAPP Worksheet #15-1 - Reference Limits and Evaluation Table VOCs (8260B) …………………… 20 QAPP Worksheet #15-2 - Reference Limits and Evaluation Table SVOCs (8270D) …………………. 22 QAPP Worksheet #17 – Sampling Design and Rationale QAPP Worksheet #18 - Sampling Locations and Methods

……………………………………………………….277

QAPP Worksheet #20 – Field Quality Control Summary QAPP Worksheet #21 – Field SOPs

QAPP Worksheet #22 – Field Equipment Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection

QAPP Worksheet #23 – Analytical SOPs

QAPP Worksheet #24-1 – Analytical Instrument Calibration VOC

QAPP Worksheet #24-2 – Analytical Instrument Calibration SVOC QAPP Worksheet #25 – Analytical Instrument and Equipment Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection

QAPP Worksheet #26 & 27 – Sampling Handling, Custody, and Disposal

QAPP Worksheet #28-1 – Analytical Quality Control and Corrective Action - VOCs QAPP Worksheet #28-2 – Analytical Quality Control and Corrective Action - SVOCs QAPP Worksheet #29 – Project Documents and Records

QAPP Worksheet #31, 32, & 33 – Assessments and Corrective Action

QAPP Worksheet #34 – Data Verification and Validation Inputs

QAPP Worksheet #35 – Data Verification Procedures

QAPP Worksheet #36 – Data Validation Procedures

QAPP Worksheet #37 – Data Usability Assessment References ……………………………………………………………………………………….67

FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Site DP005 Groundwater Sampling Locations and Site Features

Page ii

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVATIONS

%R Percent Recovery oC Degrees Celsius

AFCEC Air Force Civil Engineering Center

AFLCMC Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

AIPG American Institute of Professional Geologists

AL Alabama

AR Arkansas

ARB Air Reserve Base

B.S. Bachelors of Science

CA Corrective Action

CCV Continuing Calibration Verification

CHMM Certified Hazardous Materials Manager cm Centimeter

COC Chain-of-custody

DL Detection Limit

DO Dissolved Oxygen

DoD Department of Defense

DQI Data Quality Indicators

DQO Data Quality Objective

ECD Electron Capture Detector

E.I.T. Engineer in Training

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

EPD Environmental Protection Division

FID Flame Ionization Detector

GA Georgia

GC Gas Chromatograph

GIS Geographic Information System

HASP Health & Safety Plan

HAZWOPER Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response

ICAL Initial calibration

ICP Inductively Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectroscopy

ICS Interference Check Solutions

ICV initial calibration verification

IDQTF Intergovernmental Data Qaulity Task Force

IDW investigation derived waste

ISTD Internal Standard

KS Kansas

KY Kentucky

LCS Laboratory Control Spike

Page iii

LNAPL Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid

LOD Level of Detection

LOQ Level of Quantification

LTM Long Term Management

LUC Land Use Control

MB Method Blank

MCL Maximum Contaminant Level

MDLs Method Detection Limits mg/l Milligram per Liter

MO Missouri

MS Mass Spectrometer

M.S. Master of Science ms matrix spike msd matrix spike duplicate mV millivolt

NA Not Applicable

NE Nebraska

NTU Nephelometric turbidity units

OH Ohio

ORP Oxydation Reduction Potential

PA Pennsylvania

PBR Performance Based Remediation

PE Professional Environmental Engineers, Inc.

P.E. Professional Engineer

P.G. Professional Geologist

PID Photoionization Detector

QA Quality Assurance

QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan

QC Quality Control

REC Recovery

RLs reporting limits

RPD Relative Percent Difference

RPM Remediation Project Manager

RSD Relative Standard Deviation

S&A Sampling & Analytical

SDG Sample Delivery GroupSOP Standard Operating Procedure

SVOCs Semi-Volitale Organic Compounds

TN Tennessee

UFP Uniform Federal Policy

U.S. United States

UST Underground Storage Tank

Page iv

VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds μg/L microgram per liter μmhos micromhos

Introduction

INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) Addendum has been prepared by Professional Environmental Engineers, Inc. (PE), for the Department of the Air Force Civil Engineering Center (AFCEC) under General Services Administration contract number GS10F200BA, delivery order FA8903-15-F-0011. The document is intended for use during Land Use Control (LUC) and Long Term Management (LTM) activities at Site DP005 of Dobbins Air Reserve Base (ARB) located in Cobb County, Georgia (refer to Figure 1 – Site Location Map).

This project-specific QAPP addendum will supplement the site-wide UFP-QAPP already in place at Dobbins ARB. It will describe, in comprehensive detail, the necessary quality assurance (QA), quality control (QC), and other technical activities that will be implemented to ensure that the results of the work performed under this contract satisfy the stated performance criteria. It was prepared in accordance with the Uniform Federal Policy (UFP) for Quality Assurance Project Plans (March 2012), and all worksheets for this document were obtained from the UFP-QAPP website located at http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/part2ufp_wbk_0305.pdf.

Background and Purpose Dobbins ARB was constructed in 1941 and is the only remaining operational U.S. Military Facility in northern Georgia. The facility is currently home to several branches of military service including the Air Force Reserve Command, the Georgia National Guard, and the Marine and Navy reserve units.

Site DP005 is located in an area of the facility that is adjacent to the jet fuel tank storage area which has been in operation since the 1950s. Currently the tank storage area contains two above ground storage tanks currently in daily operation and six previously-removed 25,000-gallon underground storage tanks (USTs). Common practice during early tank clean out activities (up until the mid-1970’s) was to dispose of fuel sludge in unlined burial pits. During at least one of these cleanouts, tank sludge was disposed of in a pit in the general proximity of the six USTs. Site investigation that included soil and groundwater sampling identified contamination that could have been attributed to sludge disposal although the exact location of the burial site could not be identified. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) associated with fuel and fuel sludge were identified above acceptable contaminant levels.

Computer modeling confirmed that these contaminants could impact a nearby stream unless actions were taken to remove the source and limit the migration of groundwater contamination.

As a result of pilot testing conducted at the site, a dual phase vacuum extraction system was deployed to remove light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) and contaminated groundwater, and to extract vapors from the soil pores. This remediation system was in operation for approximately four years and successfully removed LNAPL to a non-detect status and has removed VOCs and SVOCs in the groundwater to a point, as determined by computer modeling, that the contaminants will not impact surface water bodies. Although sampling results have indicated that levels of VOCs in groundwater are progressively decreasing, these levels remain in excess of State of Georgia in-http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/part2ufp_wbk_0305.pdf

Introduction stream water quality standards. During the latest two years of semi-annual sampling, LNAPL has not been detected. The original remediation goals have been met, although the site will require LUCs and LTM until residual levels of contamination are below maximum contaminant levels (MCLs).

Activities to be conducted by PE at the site under this contract include well abandonment, sampling and analysis of on-site groundwater, management and disposal of investigation-derived waste (IDW), and preparation of an Annual LUC and LTM Report documenting all activities performed.

QAPP Worksheet #1 & 2 – Title and Approval Page

Document Title: UFP-QAPP Addendum for Land Use Control and Long Term Management at Dobbins Air Reserve Base Site DP005

Project Name and Site Location:

Contract Name and No.:

Preparer's Name and Organizational Affiliation:

Preparer’s Contact Information:

Land Use Control and Long Term Management at Dobbins ARB, Marietta Georgia

Land Use Control and Long Term Management at Dobbins ARB, Contract # GS10F200BA, Delivery Order FA8903-15-F-0011 Jarron Hewitt, E.I.T. and Mike Kirby, P.G.

Professional Environmental Engineers Inc.

500 S. Ewing Ave, Suite E St Louis, MO 63103 Telephone:(314)531-0060

Preparation Date: September 2015

Lead Organization: U.S. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center(AFLCMC) and Air

Force Civil Engineering Center (AFCEC)

Lead Organization's Project

Manager Approval:

Tim Clendenin, Restoration Program Manager (RPM) / AFLCMC, Date

Lead Organization: Dobbins ARB

Lead Organization's Project Manager Approval:

Laurel Cordell,RPMIDobbins ARB ,Date

Regulator Organization: Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD)

Regulatory Approval:

Contractor Name:

Susan Eason, EPD, Date

Professional Environmental Engineers, Inc. (PE)

Preparer's Project

Manager:

Robert Louden, PE, Date

Preparer's Program Quality

Assurance Officer Mike Kirby, PE, Date

Site Name/Project Name: Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Site DP005 Site Location: Marietta, Cobb County, Georgia Site Number/Code: DP005 Operable Unit: Not applicable Contractor Name: Professional Environmental Engineers, Inc.

Contractor Number: GS10F200BA Contract Title: Land Use Control and Long-Term Management at Dobbins Air

Reserve Base Site DP005

1. Identify guidance used to prepare QAPP:

This Site-Specific UFP-QAPP was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Intergovemmental Data Quality Task Force (IDQTF) Uniform Federal Policy for Quality Assurance Project Plans, Part 1: UFP-QAPP Manual (UFP-QAPP Manual) (IDQTF 2005); and the DoD Quality Systems Manual for Environmental Laboratories Version 4.2 (DoD QSM 4.2) (DoD 2010).

2. Identify regulatory program:

DoD Environmental Restoration Program and Georgia EPD UST Program

3. Identify approval entity:

Georgia EPD __________________________________________________________________

4. Is this QAPP generic or site specific?

Site specific

5. List dates of scoping sessions that were held:

15 April 2015 (between PE and AFCEC)

6. List dates and titles of QAPP documents written for previous site work, if applicable:

Facility-Wide Uniform Federal Policy Quality Assurance Program Plan for Performance-Based Remediation, Air Force Plant 6 and Dobbins Air Reserve Base, 2013 _____________________

7. List organizational partners (stakeholders) and connection with lead organization:

None _______________________________________________________________________

8. List data users:

AFCEC, EPD, and PE ____________________________________________________________

9. If any required QAPP elements and required information are not applicable to the project, then identify the omitted QAPP elements and required information below:

Not applicable (none omitted).

QAPP Worksheet #3 & 5 – Project Organization and QAPP Distribution

QAPP Recipients Title Organization Telephone

Number E-mail Address

Antonio Lodico Program Manager AFCEC (210) 395-0638 Antonio.lodico@us.af.mil

Laurel Cordell Remediation

Project Manager AFCEC (478) 327-9272 Laurel.cordell@us.af.mil

Joy Lozano Professional

Geologist AFCEC (210) 861-8766 Laquita.lozano.ctr@us.af.mil

Gregario Armend Contract Officer AFCEC (210) 395-8275 Gregario.armend@us.af.mil

Bob Louden Project Manager PE

(816) 556-3290 (o)

(314) 267-6008 (c) louden@pe-engrs.com

Bernadette Chiasson Site Manager PE (832) 748-8068 bchiasson@pe-engrs.com

Bill Pietroburgo, CHMM Health & Safety

Manager

PE

(314) 531-0060 (o)

(314) 486-3772 (c) bpietroburgo@pe-engrs.com

Mike Kirby, P.G. QC Manager PE

(816) 556-3290 (o)

(913) 908-1372 (c) mkirby@pe-engrs.com

Filippe Cade, P.E. Project Engineer PE

(314) 531-0060 (o)

(314) 267-9089 (c) fcade@pe-engrs.com mailto:Antonio.lodico@us.af.mil mailto:Laurel.cordell@us.af.mil mailto:Laquita.lozano.ctr@us.af.mil mailto:Gregario.armend@us.af.mil mailto:louden@pe-engrs.com mailto:mkirby@pe-engrs.com mailto:fcade@pe-engrs.com

PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

ENGINEERS, INC.

Project Engineer

Filippe Cade

PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

ENGINEERS, INC.

Site Manager Bernadette Chiasson

PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

ENGINEERS, INC.

Site Safety and Health Officer Currently Unassigned

Air Force Civil Engineer Center

Program Manager Antonio Lodico

(210) 395-0638 antonio.lodico@us.af.mil

Contracting Officer Gregario Armend

(210) 395-8275 gregario.armend@us.af.mil

Remediation Project Manager Laurel Cordell

(478) 327-9272 laurel.cordell@us.af.mil

PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

ENGINEERS, INC.

Project Manager Robert Louden

PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

ENGINEERS, INC.

Quality Control Manager Mike Kirby

Test America Savannah Deborah Harbuck

PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

ENGINEERS, INC.

Corporate H&S Manager Bill Pietroburgo

Safety Kleen

Fowler Well Drilling David Vann

QAPP Worksheet #4, 7, & 8 – Personnel Qualification and Sign-off Sheet

QAPP Worksheet #4, 7, & 8 – Personnel Qualifictaions and Sign-off Sheet

PE:

Name ProjectTitle/Role Education/Experience Specialized

Training/Certification s

Signature/Date

Bob Louden Program Manager B.S., M.S., Geology, 25 years environmental consulting experience overseeing and coordinating hazardous waste projects.

Certified Hazardous Materials Manager (CHMM)

Bernadette Chiasson Site Manager B.S., M.S., Environmental Science, 25 years of experience in environmental compliance with over 10 years of groundwater monitoring experience.

Registered Environmental Professional, HAZWOPER certified

Mike Kirby Quality Control Manager B.S., M.S., Geology, 25 years of environmental assessment and remediation experience.

Professional Geologist (KS, MO, TN, AR, NE), AIPG

Certified Professional

Geologist HAZWOPER certified

Filippe Cade Project Engineer B.S., Environmental Engineering, 20 years of experience managing environmental investigation and remediation projects.

Professional Engineer (MO, NE, OH, GA, PA, AL, KY)

QAPP Worksheet #6 - Communication Pathways

QAPP Worksheet #6 – Communication Pathways

CommunicationDriver

Organization

Name Contact

Information

Procedure (timing, pathway, documentation)

Communication with AFCEC (Lead Agency)

Project Manager /

AFCEC

Antonio Lodico

Antonio.lodico@us.af.

mil

(210) 395-0638

Primary point of contact for AFCEC;

provides technical guidance and direction to PE; can delegate communication to other internal or external points of contact; communicates with EPD.

Communication with GA EPD (Lead Regulatory Agency)

Project Manager /

EPD

Susan Eason

Primary point of contact for EPD; provides regulatory support to the project; reviews project deliverables and provides technical comments.

Communication with PE (Contractor Organization)

Project Manager / PE Robert Louden louden@pe-engrs.com

(816) 556-3290 (o)

(314) 267-6008 (c)

Primary point of contact for PE;

responsible for communication with the client through work plans, monthly progress reports, E-mail updates, teleconference calls, andmeetings. Has the authority to initiate and approve corrective actions.

Communication with PE Field Staff Site Manager / PE Bernadette Chiasson bchiasson@pe-engrs.com

(832) 748-8068

Primary point of contact for communicating issues and problems at the field team level; documents and conveys progress of field activities.

mailto:Antonio.lodico@us.af.mil mailto:Antonio.lodico@us.af.mil mailto:louden@pe-engrs.com mailto:louden@pe-engrs.com mailto:bchiasson@pe-engrs.com

QAPP Worksheet #6 - Communication Pathways

QAPP Changes in the Field, Daily Field Progress Reports, Field Corrective Action

Site Manager / PE Bernadette Chiasson bchiasson@pe-engrs.com

(832) 748-8068

Notifies PE Project Manager and of changes to QAPP in the field and rationale for changes.Documents changes in daily field progress reports and memoranda to AFCEC and EPD.

Documents need for field corrective action in daily field progress reports.

Health and Safety Requirements Health and Safety

Manager / PE Bill Pietroburgo bpietroburgo@pe-engrs.com

(314) 531-0060 (o)

(314) 486-3772 (c)

Handles internal communication regarding safety and healthrequirements.

Empowers personnel the right to stop work for any identified health and safety issue. Responsible for receiving, reviewing, and correcting any and all health and safety related issues.

QAPP Worksheet #9 - Project Plannign Session Summary

QAPP Worksheet #9 – Project Planning Session Summary

Project Kickoff Meeting

Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia Land Use Control & Long-Term Management

Site DP005 – AVGAS Sludge Burial Site A

MEETING MINUTES: 15 APR 15

Attendees:

Name Role Affiliation Antonio Lodico Program Manager AFCEC/CZRE Laurel Cordell RPM AFCEC Joy Lozano PG AFCEC Gregario Armend Contract Officer AFCEC

Bob Louden Project Manager Prof. Env. Engineers, Inc. (PE) Filippe Cade Program Manager PE Mike Kirby Senior Hydrogeologist PE Bernadette Chiasson Senior Scientist PE

The meeting, scheduled to begin at 0900 CST, began at approximately 0905 to allow for all of the multiple participants to call in. Topics discussed during the meeting followed the proposed agenda as follows:

1) INTRODUCTIONS

Bob Louden introduced the PE project team and included information on the team’s roles for this project. Antonio Lodico introduced the Air Force team and included information on their roles for the project.

2) UNDERSTANDING OF THE SCOPE OF WORK

Bob Louden summarized the general scope of work and PE’s understanding of the tasks/ requirements. In general, PE will submit a health & safety plan (HASP), sampling & analysis plan (SAP, Including field sampling plan and QAPP), and project management plan for abandoning 8 on-site wells and performing a single groundwater monitoring/sampling event for the remaining 10 wells on site. PE will then submit a final report of findings for the work and participate in bi-monthly progress meetings. Antonio Lodico agreed with PE’s understanding of the work scope.

QAPP Worksheet #9 - Project Plannign Session Summary

3) QUESTIONS/CONCERNS

1. PE asked for a map of the site with the location of wells to be abandoned and sampled;

Antonio stated that he would provide this map to PE.

2. PE asked for copies of well records (for wells to be sampled and abandoned), including well construction diagrams and original boring logs; Joy stated that she will search for these and provide them to PE.

3. PE stated that a site-wide QAPP was referenced in the scope of work (and that the scoped QAPP was to supplement but not contradict the site-wide one) and asked for a copy of the document. In addition, PE asked for any other previous reports/plans for this site for reference purposes. Antonio stated that reports/plans existed in a database that we may be able to get access to. If not, he would obtain the information from the database himself and send it to PE on a disk (electronically).

4. Antonio re-affirmed that the contract was for 1-year duration so that we would need to plan for document reviews/approvals as part of our project schedule. PE asked about the typical review time required by the Air Force to review PE draft documents and was told approximately 2 weeks. Antonio also stated that the GA EPD would be reviewing final documents.

5. Antonio stated that monthly progress reports were also required as part of the scope of work and that deliverables were to be submitted by PE electronically (no hardcopies).

4) CLOSING

Meeting was adjourned after questions/comments were addressed.

QAPP Worksheet #10 - Conceptual Site Model

QAPP Worksheet #10 – Conceptual Site Model

The problem to be addressed by the project:

The site is located adjacent to an area of the ARB that was previously used as a fuel storage area. Previous site environmental investigations identified VOCs and SVOCs in groundwater at concentrations above MCLs on site. LNAPLs and dissolved-phase groundwater contaminants were remediated through the use of dual phase vacuum extraction over a four-year period.

Although VOCs and SVOCs have also been removed to levels that will not impact nearby surface water bodies, these contaminants still exceed Georgia in-stream water quality standards and MCLs. LUCs and LTM activities are required to monitor remaining contaminants in groundwater.

The environmental questions being asked:

What are the current concentrations and extent of VOCs and SVOCs in groundwater?

At what rate are VOCs and SVOCs degrading in groundwater?

Are controls in place to manage the VOCs and SVOCs remaining in groundwater at the site?

Synopsis of Previous Investigations:

The possible classes of contaminants and the affected matrices:

The classes of contaminants that are anticipated to be found on site include VOCs and SVOCs.

Historical sampling has found VOCs and SVOCs in concentrations above the MCLs for groundwater and above Georgia water quality standards for surface water, which will be considered to be the affected matricies for this project.

Rationale for inclusion of chemical and nonchemical analyses:

Historical site characterization efforts have detected VOCs and SVOCs in the groundwater at concentrations exceeding regulatory limits; therefore, samples collected in this investigation will be analyzed in the laboratory for VOCs and SVOCs to monitor contamination degradation.

Stabilization parameters [dissolved oxygen (DO), oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), pH, temperature, specific conductivity, and turbidity] will be monitored during low flow purging methods prior to collecting samples at each well. Achieving stabilization of these parameters will ensure that all stagnant waters within the well are removed and are replaced by groundwater from the adjacent formation that is representative of actual aquifer conditions.

QAPP Worksheet #10 - Conceptual Site Model

Project decision conditions (if/then statements):

If, after this round of annual sampling, VOC and SVOC contamination continues to be above MCLs, then additional rounds of sampling will be required for Long-Term Management.

For additional information about the site, refer to the Facility-Wide UFP-QAPP for Performance- Based Remediation at Air Force Plant 6 and Dobbins ARB, Worksheet #10.

QAPP Worksheet #11 - Project/Data Quality Objectives

QAPP Worksheet #11 – Project/Data Quality Objectives

Previous activities at this site have removed LNAPL contamination and the previous two years of groundwater sampling have demonstrated reducing VOC levels in groundwater.

However the remaining contaimination remains in excess of State of Georgia in-stream water quality standards and must continue to be monitored/managed.

What are the goals of the study?

This project is intended as part of a long-term management plan for site DP005. This work includes abandoning eight (8) monitoring wells that were constructed during previous site investigations and have since become unused or damaged but not properly closed or reported to the Georgia EPD. One round of low-flow groundwater sampling will be conducted from ten

(10) remaining monitoring wells on site and samples will be analyzed by an analytical laboratory.

This will provide additional data on the levels of remaining contamination at the site; the data will be documented in a Long Term Management Report which will provide information on all prveious activities performed at the site and recommendations for future management.

What are the information inputs?

A single round of groundwater monitoring data will be collected and analyzed. This data will help track the progress of natural attenuation and be used to evaluate land use controls utilized at the site. Groundwater quality data will also be used to help determine future action at the site.

What is the analytic approach?

The site is located in an area of Dobbins ARB adjacent to the former fuel storage area and a potential disposal site for sludge produced in the clean-out of jet fuel tanks. Although previous sampling at the site was unable to identify this potential sludge-disposal area, VOCs and SVOCs were identified as contaminants of concern for the site. As such, groundwater samples collected during current site activities will be analyzed for VOCs and SVOCs.

Data obtained from this round of groundwater monitoring will be instrumental in developing long-term land managment strategies for the site. Contamination still exists on site and must be reduced below MCLs to be protective of human health and the environment. Results of this sampling will help to determine the rate at which contamination levels are reaching the MCLs and will provide for the development of future sampling plans and other land use controls.

Where, when, and how should the data be collected/generated?

Field activities will tentatively take place in the Fall of 2015. Groundwater samples will be

QAPP Worksheet #11 - Project/Data Quality Objectives collected from the 10 site wells one time using AFCEC-approved low-flow sampling methods. On-site monitoring well samples will be field analyzed for DO, ORP, pH, temperature, specific conductivity, and turbidity to ensure stabilization of the well prior to sampling. On-site samples will also be analyzed for VOCs and SVOCs for contaminant delineation and migration. The groundwater samples will be sent to an analytical laboratory which will generate analytical data.

Data results will be reviewed after completion of the sampling round of the monitoring wells and summarized in a final report.

Data Reporting

Upon receipt of all analytical results and completion of data analysis, PE will prepare a report of findings. Other relevant information to be included in the report include the laboratory analytical reports, analytical data summary tables, figures with sample locations and groundwater surface contours, well abandonment documentation, disposal documentation, and an interpretation of results.

QA/QC activities and results will be documented in a QA/QC section of the report. These summaries of QA/QC activities will assess the performance of measurement systems and data quality based on the following information:

Data QA reviews, including assessment of accuracy, precision, completeness, and representativeness;

Significant QA issues discovered, corrective actions taken, and recommendations for future actions; and;

Any significant deviations from the Program QAPP or applicable QAPP Addendum.

In the event of an emergency, or in case it is essential to implement corrective action immediately, reporting may consist of verbal conversations with appropriate personnel. A summary of the emergency events and implemented corrective action will be included in the QA/QC section.

QAPP Worksheet #13 – Secondary Data Criteria and Limitations Table

QAPP Worksheet #12-1 – Measurement Performance Criteria Table–VOCs

Matrix Groundwater

Analytical Group

VOCs

Concentration Level

Low

Sampling Procedure

Analytical Method/SOP

Data Quality Indicators (DQIs)

Measurement Performance Criteria

QC Sample and / or Activity Used to Assess Measurement

Performance

QC Sample Assesses Error for Sampling (S), Analytical

(A) or both (S&A)

Low-flow sampling using a portable pump from monitoring wells.

EPA 8260B

Precision Relative Percent Difference (RPD), reference Worksheet 15.

Laboratory Duplicate A

Precision RPD, reference Worksheet 15. Field Duplicate S & A

Precision RPD, reference Worksheet 15. Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike

Duplicate S & A

Accuracy ± Percent Recovery, reference Worksheet 15.

Laboratory Control Spike (LCS) A

Accuracy ± Percent Recovery, reference Worksheet 15.

Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate

S & A

Representativeness Contamination of samples with a target analyte as referenced in Worksheet 28.

Method Blank, Trip Blank S & A

Comparability Qualitative evaluation of QAPP compliance with industry standard methods, matrix specific units.

All samples S & A

Sensitivity

Reference Worksheets 15 and 28. Initial Calibration, Continuing Calibration Verification, Method

Detection Limits (MDLs),Reporting Limits (RLs)

A

Completeness > 90% Laboratory Analysis. Percent Completeness S & A

QAPP Worksheet #12-2 – Measurement Performance Criteria Table–SVOCs

Matrix Groundwater

SVOCs

Concentration Level

Low

Sampling Procedure

Analytical Method/SOP

DQIs Measurement Performance

Criteria

QC Sample and / or Activity Used to Assess

Measurement Performance

QC Sample Assesses Error for Sampling (S), Analytical

(A) or both (S&A)

Low-flow sampling using a portable pump from monitoring wells.

EPA 8270D

Precision RPD, reference Worksheet 15. Laboratory Duplicate A

Precision RPD, reference Worksheet 15. Field Duplicate S & A

Accuracy ± Percent Recovery, reference

Worksheet 15.

LCS A

Representativeness Contamination of samples with a target analyte as referenced in Worksheet 28.

Method Blank S & A

Comparability

Qualitative evaluation of QAPP compliance with industry standard methods, matrix specific units.

All samples S & A

Sensitivity Reference Worksheets 15 and

28.

Initial Calibration, Continuing Calibration Verification, MDLs, RLs

A

Completeness > 90% Laboratory Analysis. Percent Completeness S & A

This worksheet identifies sources of secondary data (data generated for purposes other than this specific project or data pertinent to this project generated under a separate QAPP) and summarizes information relevant to their uses for the current project.

Data Type Source Data uses relative to current project

Factors affecting the reliability of data and limitations on data use

Previous Report – includes site background information and groundwater chemical data

Sullivan-Weston Services JVA, LLC, 2015. Long Term Management Report: Perform Land Use Control and Long-Term Management for Site

DP005, AVGAS Sludge Burial Site A, Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Marietta, Georgia

Data provides comparison with historical groundwater analytical data from the site

None

QAPP Worksheet #14/16 – Project Tasks and Schedule

QAPP Worksheet #14/16– Project Tasks and Schedule

Activity ResponsibleParty PlannedStartDate PlannedCompletionDate Deliverable(s) Deliverable Due Date

Abandonment and Decomissioning of 8

Existing Monitoring Wells

Fowler Well Drilling & Pump Service, LLC and PE October 2015 October 2015

Well Decomissioning

Reports October 2015

Groundwater Sampling of 10 Existing Monitoring

Wells PE October 2015 October 2015 Field Data Forms October 2015

Analysis of Groundwater Samples For VOCs, SVOCs, and fuels Test America October 2015 November 2015

Grounwater Analytical Data, Validated Data

Report

November 2015

Land Use Control & Long- Term Management

Reporting PE October 2015 February 2016

LUC and LTM Report

February 2016

Disposal of IDW to a treatment facility or appropriate disposal facility

Safety Kleen, PE November 2015 November 2015 Waste Disposal

Manifests November 2015

QAPP Worksheet #17 – Sampling Design and Rationale

QAPP Worksheet #15-1 – Reference Limits and Evaluation Table – VOCs (8260B)

Analyte Description CAS Number Reference

RL Limit Units

Reference

MDL

Limit

Units

Reference

LCSREC

Recovery Low

Reference

LCSREC

Recovery High

Units Reference

LCSRPD

Precision

Units

Reference

MSREC

Recovery Low

Reference

MSREC

Recovery High

Units Reference LOD Limit

Units

Acetone 67-64-1 10.0 ug/L 7.00 ug/L 39 160 % 20 % 39 160 % 10.0 ug/L

Benzene 71-43-2 1.00 ug/L 0.430 ug/L 79 120 % 20 % 79 120 % 1.00 ug/L

Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 1.00 ug/L 0.440 ug/L 79 125 % 20 % 79 125 % 1.00 ug/L

Bromoform 75-25-2 1.00 ug/L 0.430 ug/L 66 130 % 20 % 66 130 % 1.00 ug/L

Bromomethane 74-83-9 5.00 ug/L 2.50 ug/L 53 141 % 20 % 53 141 % 5.00 ug/L

2-Butanone 78-93-3 10.0 ug/L 3.40 ug/L 56 143 % 20 % 56 143 % 10.0 ug/L

Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 2.00 ug/L 0.430 ug/L 64 133 % 20 % 64 133 % 2.00 ug/L

Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 1.00 ug/L 0.330 ug/L 72 136 % 20 % 72 136 % 1.00 ug/L

Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 1.00 ug/L 0.260 ug/L 82 118 % 20 % 82 118 % 0.500 ug/L

Chloroethane 75-00-3 5.00 ug/L 2.50 ug/L 60 138 % 20 % 60 138 % 5.00 ug/L

Chloroform 67-66-3 1.00 ug/L 0.500 ug/L 79 124 % 20 % 79 124 % 1.00 ug/L

Chloromethane 74-87-3 1.00 ug/L 0.400 ug/L 50 139 % 20 % 50 139 % 1.00 ug/L cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 1.00 ug/L 0.410 ug/L 78 123 % 20 % 78 123 % 1.00 ug/L cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-01-5 1.00 ug/L 0.400 ug/L 75 124 % 20 % 75 124 % 1.00 ug/L

Cyclohexane 110-82-7 1.00 ug/L 0.390 ug/L 71 130 % 20 % 71 130 % 1.00 ug/L

Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 1.00 ug/L 0.320 ug/L 74 126 % 20 % 74 126 % 1.00 ug/L

1,2-Dibromo-3- Chloropropane

96-12-8 5.00 ug/L 1.10 ug/L 62 128 % 20 % 62 128 % 2.00 ug/L

1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 1.00 ug/L 0.440 ug/L 75 127 % 20 % 75 127 % 1.00 ug/L

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 1.00 ug/L 0.370 ug/L 80 119 % 20 % 80 119 % 1.00 ug/L

1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 1.00 ug/L 0.430 ug/L 80 119 % 20 % 80 119 % 1.00 ug/L

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 1.00 ug/L 0.460 ug/L 79 118 % 20 % 79 118 % 1.00 ug/L

Dichlorodifluoromethane 75-71-8 1.00 ug/L 0.600 ug/L 32 152 % 20 % 32 152 % 1.00 ug/L

1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 1.00 ug/L 0.380 ug/L 77 125 % 20 % 77 125 % 1.00 ug/L

1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 1.00 ug/L 0.500 ug/L 73 128 % 20 % 73 128 % 1.00 ug/L

1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 1.00 ug/L 0.360 ug/L 71 131 % 20 % 71 131 % 1.00 ug/L

1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 1.00 ug/L 0.670 ug/L 78 122 % 20 % 78 122 % 1.00 ug/L

Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 1.00 ug/L 0.330 ug/L 79 121 % 20 % 79 121 % 1.00 ug/L

2-Hexanone 591-78-6 10.0 ug/L 2.00 ug/L 57 139 % 20 % 57 139 % 5.00 ug/L

Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 1.00 ug/L 0.350 ug/L 72 131 % 20 % 72 131 % 1.00 ug/L

Methyl acetate 79-20-9 5.00 ug/L 1.80 ug/L 56 136 % 20 % 56 136 % 5.00 ug/L

Methylcyclohexane 108-87-2 1.00 ug/L 0.430 ug/L 72 132 % 20 % 72 132 % 1.00 ug/L

Methylene Chloride 75-09-2 5.00 ug/L 2.50 ug/L 74 124 % 20 % 74 124 % 5.00 ug/L

4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 10.0 ug/L 2.10 ug/L 67 130 % 20 % 67 130 % 5.00 ug/L

Methyl tert-butyl ether 1634-04-4 10.0 ug/L 0.300 ug/L 71 124 % 20 % 71 124 % 0.500 ug/L

Styrene 100-42-5 1.00 ug/L 0.270 ug/L 78 123 % 20 % 78 123 % 0.500 ug/L

1,1,2,2- Tetrachloroethane

79-34-5 1.00 ug/L 0.620 ug/L 71 121 % 20 % 71 121 % 1.00 ug/L

Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 1.00 ug/L 0.740 ug/L 74 129 % 20 % 74 129 % 1.00 ug/L

Toluene 108-88-3 1.00 ug/L 0.480 ug/L 80 121 % 20 % 80 121 % 1.00 ug/L trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 1.00 ug/L 0.370 ug/L 75 124 % 20 % 75 124 % 1.00 ug/L trans-1,3- Dichloropropene

10061-02-6 1.00 ug/L 0.420 ug/L 73 127 % 20 % 73 127 % 1.00 ug/L

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 5.00 ug/L 2.50 ug/L 69 130 % 20 % 69 130 % 5.00 ug/L

1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 1.00 ug/L 0.370 ug/L 74 131 % 20 % 74 131 % 1.00 ug/L

1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 1.00 ug/L 0.330 ug/L 80 119 % 20 % 80 119 % 1.00 ug/L

Trichloroethene 79-01-6 1.00 ug/L 0.480 ug/L 79 123 % 20 % 79 123 % 1.00 ug/L

Trichlorofluoromethane 75-69-4 1.00 ug/L 0.420 ug/L 65 141 % 20 % 65 141 % 1.00 ug/L

1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane

76-13-1 1.00 ug/L 0.360 ug/L 70 136 % 20 % 70 136 % 1.00 ug/L

Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 1.00 ug/L 0.500 ug/L 58 137 % 20 % 58 137 % 1.00 ug/L

Xylenes, Total 1330-20-7 2.00 ug/L 0.570 ug/L 79 121 % % 79 121 % 0.500 ug/L

Notes:

ug/L = micrograms per liter MDL = method detection limit LOD = level of detection RL = reporting limit LCSREC = laboratory control sample recovery LCSRPD = laboratory control sample relative percent difference MSREC = matrix spike recovery LOQs, LODs , DLs, and SOPs are evaluated and reviewed quarterly and/or annually and therefore are subject to change. The laboratory will adhere to the most current limits and SOPs

QAPP Worksheet #15-2 – Reference Limits and Evaluation Table – SVOCs (8270D)

Analyte Description

CAS

Number Reference

RL Limit Units

Reference

MDL

Limit

Units

Reference

LCSREC

Recovery Low

Reference

LCSREC

Recovery High

Units Reference

LCSRPD

Precision

Units

Reference

MSREC

Recovery Low

Reference

MSREC

Recovery High

Units Reference LOD

Limit Units

Acenaphthene 83-32-9 10.0 ug/L 0.760 ug/L 47 122 % 20 % 47 122 % 2.00 ug/L

Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 10.0 ug/L 0.850 ug/L 41 130 % 20 % 41 130 % 2.00 ug/L

Acetophenone 98-86-2 10.0 ug/L 0.570 ug/L 46 118 % 20 % 46 118 % 2.00 ug/L

Anthracene 120-12-7 10.0 ug/L 0.690 ug/L 57 123 % 20 % 57 123 % 2.00 ug/L

Atrazine 1912-24-9 10.0 ug/L 1.20 ug/L 44 142 % 20 % 44 142 % 2.00 ug/L

Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 10.0 ug/L 1.10 ug/L 10 152 % 20 % 10 152 % 2.00 ug/L

Benzo[a]anthracene 56-55-3 10.0 ug/L 0.550 ug/L 58 125 % 20 % 58 125 % 1.00 ug/L

Benzo[a]pyrene 50-32-8 10.0 ug/L 0.710 ug/L 54 128 % 20 % 54 128 % 2.00 ug/L

Benzo[b]fluoranthene 205-99-2 10.0 ug/L 2.60 ug/L 53 131 % 20 % 53 131 % 5.00 ug/L

Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 191-24-2 10.0 ug/L 0.870 ug/L 50 134 % 20 % 50 134 % 2.00 ug/L

Benzo[k]fluoranthene 207-08-9 10.0 ug/L 1.20 ug/L 57 129 % 20 % 57 129 % 2.00 ug/L

1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 10.0 ug/L 0.580 ug/L 49 115 % 20 % 49 115 % 2.00 ug/L

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane

111-91-1 10.0 ug/L 0.940 ug/L 48 120 % 20 % 48 120 % 2.00 ug/L

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 111-44-4 10.0 ug/L 1.10 ug/L 43 118 % 20 % 43 118 % 2.00 ug/L bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether

108-60-1 10.0 ug/L 0.780 ug/L 37 130 % 20 % 37 130 % 2.00 ug/L

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 117-81-7 10.0 ug/L 1.60 ug/L 55 135 % 20 % 55 135 % 5.00 ug/L

4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether

101-55-3 10.0 ug/L 0.770 ug/L 55 124 % 20 % 55 124 % 2.00 ug/L

Butyl benzyl phthalate 85-68-7 10.0 ug/L 1.20 ug/L 53 134 % 20 % 53 134 % 2.00 ug/L

Caprolactam 105-60-2 10.0 ug/L 0.790 ug/L 30 111 % 20 % 30 111 % 2.00 ug/L

Carbazole 86-74-8 10.0 ug/L 0.710 ug/L 60 122 % 20 % 60 122 % 2.00 ug/L

4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 20.0 ug/L 2.20 ug/L 33 117 % 20 % 33 117 % 5.00 ug/L

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 10.0 ug/L 1.00 ug/L 52 119 % 20 % 52 119 % 2.00 ug/L

2-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 10.0 ug/L 0.800 ug/L 40 116 % 20 % 40 116 % 2.00 ug/L

2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 10.0 ug/L 0.870 ug/L 38 117 % 20 % 38 117 % 2.00 ug/L

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether

7005-72-3 10.0 ug/L 0.840 ug/L 53 121 % 20 % 53 121 % 2.00 ug/L

Chrysene 218-01-9 10.0 ug/L 0.510 ug/L 59 123 % 20 % 59 123 % 1.00 ug/L

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 10.0 ug/L 1.00 ug/L 51 134 % 20 % 51 134 % 2.00 ug/L

Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 10.0 ug/L 0.790 ug/L 53 118 % 20 % 53 118 % 2.00 ug/L

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 60.0 ug/L 30.0 ug/L 27 129 % 20 % 27 129 % 50.0 ug/L

2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 10.0 ug/L 1.10 ug/L 47 121 % 20 % 47 121 % 2.00 ug/L

Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 10.0 ug/L 0.880 ug/L 56 125 % 20 % 56 125 % 2.00 ug/L

2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 10.0 ug/L 4.00 ug/L 31 124 % 20 % 31 124 % 10.0 ug/L

Dimethyl phthalate 131-11-3 10.0 ug/L 0.990 ug/L 45 127 % 20 % 45 127 % 2.00 ug/L

Di-n-butyl phthalate 84-74-2 10.0 ug/L 0.830 ug/L 59 127 % 20 % 59 127 % 2.00 ug/L

4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 50.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 44 137 % 20 % 44 137 % 20.0 ug/L

2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 50.0 ug/L 10.0 ug/L 23 143 % 20 % 23 143 % 20.0 ug/L

2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 10.0 ug/L 1.20 ug/L 57 128 % 20 % 57 128 % 2.00 ug/L

2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 10.0 ug/L 1.10 ug/L 57 124 % 20 % 57 124 % 2.00 ug/L

Di-n-octyl phthalate 117-84-0 10.0 ug/L 1.40 ug/L 51 140 % 20 % 51 140 % 5.00 ug/L

Fluoranthene 206-44-0 10.0 ug/L 0.740 ug/L 57 128 % 20 % 57 128 % 2.00 ug/L

Fluorene 86-73-7 10.0 ug/L 0.960 ug/L 52 124 % 20 % 52 124 % 2.00 ug/L

Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 10.0 ug/L 0.790 ug/L 53 125 % 20 % 53 125 % 2.00 ug/L

Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 10.0 ug/L 0.620 ug/L 22 124 % 20 % 22 124 % 2.00 ug/L

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 10.0 ug/L 2.50 ug/L 10 130 % 20 % 10 130 % 10.0 ug/L

Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 10.0 ug/L 0.760 ug/L 21 115 % 20 % 21 115 % 2.00 ug/L

Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene 193-39-5 10.0 ug/L 1.00 ug/L 52 134 % 20 % 52 134 % 2.00 ug/L

Isophorone 78-59-1 10.0 ug/L 0.900 ug/L 42 124 % 20 % 42 124 % 2.00 ug/L

2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 10.0 ug/L 0.780 ug/L 40 121 % 20 % 40 121 % 2.00 ug/L

2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 10.0 ug/L 0.890 ug/L 30 117 % 20 % 30 117 % 2.00 ug/L

3 & 4 Methylphenol 15831-10-4 10.0 ug/L 1.30 ug/L 29 110 % 20 % 29 110 % 5.00 ug/L

Naphthalene 91-20-3 10.0 ug/L 0.700 ug/L 40 121 % 20 % 40 121 % 2.00 ug/L

2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 50.0 ug/L 1.30 ug/L 55 127 % 20 % 55 127 % 5.00 ug/L

3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 50.0 ug/L 5.00 ug/L 41 128 % 20 % 41 128 % 10.0 ug/L

4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 50.0 ug/L 5.00 ug/L 44 119 % 20 % 44 119 % 10.0 ug/L

Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 10.0 ug/L 0.730 ug/L 45 121 % 20 % 45 121 % 2.00 ug/L

2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 10.0 ug/L 0.760 ug/L 47 123 % 20 % 47 123 % 2.00 ug/L

4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 50.0 ug/L 1.90 ug/L 41 118 % 20 % 41 118 % 4.00 ug/L

N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine 621-64-7 10.0 ug/L 0.720 ug/L 49 119 % 20 % 49 119 % 2.00 ug/L

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 10.0 ug/L 0.920 ug/L 51 123 % 20 % 51 123 % 2.00 ug/L

Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 50.0 ug/L 2.00 ug/L 35 138 % 20 % 35 138 % 4.00 ug/L

Phenanthrene 85-01-8 10.0 ug/L 0.770 ug/L 59 120 % 20 % 59 120 % 2.00 ug/L

Phenol 108-95-2 10.0 ug/L 0.830 ug/L 35 101 % 20 % 35 101 % 2.00 ug/L

Pyrene 129-00-0 10.0 ug/L 0.630 ug/L 57 126 % 20 % 57 126 % 2.00 ug/L

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 10.0 ug/L 1.20 ug/L 53 123 % 20 % 53 123 % 2.00 ug/L

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 10.0 ug/L 0.850 ug/L 50 125 % 20 % 50 125 % 2.00 ug/L

Notes:

ug/L = micrograms per liter MDL = method detection limit LOD = level of detection RL = reporting limit LCSREC = laboratory control sample recovery

LCSRPD = laboratory control sample relative percent difference MSREC = matrix spike recovery LOQs, LODs , DLs, and SOPs are evaluated and reviewed quarterly and/or annually and therefore are subject to change. The laboratory will adhere to the most current limits and SOPs

Describe and provide a rationale for choosing the sampling approach:

Previous site investigations have identified VOC and SVOC contamination above MCLs and State of Georgia in-stream water quality standards. Action has been taken to reduce contamination, including removal of LNAPL to a non-detect status and reduction of dissolved and vapor phase hydrocarbons. Semi-annual and annual sampling has been performed in previous years to monitoring decreasing levels of contamination and evaluate the effectivenss of LUCs/LTM activities. Results from the proposed round of sampling will be used for similar purposes, including recommendations for future activities.

Given that previous information exists about the site and the sampling will be conducted from previously installed and sampled monitoring wells, the judgemental type of sampling will be used. Sampling is being conducted primarily to track reduction of contamination over time and develop strategies for future site management.

Describe the sampling design and rationale in terms of what matrices will be sampled, what analytical groups will and at what concentration levels, the sampling locations (including QC, critical, and background samples), the number of samples to be taken, and the sampling frequency (including seasonal considerations):

Ten (10) existing groundwater monitoring wells will be sampled (see Worksheet #18) via low-flow methods. These monitoring well locations are representative of the site and will be identified using the sample location map provided by AFCEC (Figure 2). Low-flow sampling methods will be used for the collection of water samples to reflect the total mobile organic and inorganic loads (dissolved and colloidal sized fractions) transported through the subsurface under ambient flow conditions, with minimal physical and chemical alterations from sampling procedures. Each sample will be analyzed in the field for DO, ORP, pH, temperature, specific conductivity, and turbidity to determine stabilization. Once groundwater conditions stabilize, chemical samples will be collected. The operational criteria for DO, ORP, specific conductance, pH, and temperature are three successive readings at 5-minute intervals within the following ranges, (USACE, 2002):

Parameter Criteria turbidity <50 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) dissolved oxygen

± 10% above 1 milligram per liter (mg/L), or ± 0.1 mg/L below 1 mg/L

Eh (ORP) ± 10 millivolts (mV) specific conductance

± 20 micromhos per centimeter (µmhos/cm) pH ± 0.1 standard units temperature ± 0.5 oC

Chemical samples will be analyzed in the laboratory for VOCs and SVOCs. QC groundwater samples (duplicates) will be collected during the sampling event and sent to the primary laboratory. Additionally, one trip blank per cooler will be included with the samples shipped to the lab for analysis.

Worksheet #18 provides a summary of sampling locations. Worksheet #20 provides a summary of the total number of samples to be collected, including QC samples.

QAPP Worksheet #18 – Sampling Locations and Methods

QAPP Worksheet #18 - Sampling Locations and Methods

Sampling Location / ID Number Matrix

Depth (units) Analytical Group Type

Rationale for Sampling Location

Annual Groundwater Sampling of 10 existing wells

(D5-W11R, D5-W35, D5-

W36, , D5-W51, , DS-W52,

DS=W53. DS-W54, D5-W57,

D5-W58, ITS-7,)

Groundwater

Within Screened Interval

VOCs (8260B), SVOCs (8270D), Adjustable Rate, Submersible (Bladder, Centrifugal, etc.)

To provide additional monitoring of diminishing site contamination at established groundwater monitoring wells and assist in the development of land use control strategies (See

Figure 2 for locations)

QAPP Worksheet #19 & 30 – Sample Containers, Preservation, and Hold Times

QAPP Worksheet #19 & 30: Sample Containers, Preservation, and Hold Times

Matrix Analyte/Analyte

Group

Accreditation Expiration

Date

Method/ Laboratory

SOP1

Container(s) (number, size, & type per sample)

Preservation Preparation

Holding Time Analytical

Holding Time2

Groundwater VOCs

(8260B)

2/38/17 DoD

6/30/16 Georgia

EPA 5030B /

8260B

(SOP SA-VO-004)

3 x 40 mL glass VOA Vials

Cool < 6°C; adjust pH <2

14 Days

(pH < 2)

7 Days

(pH > 2)

Groundwater SVOCs

(8270D)

2/38/17 DoD EPA 3520C / 8270D

(SOP SA-SM-033)

1 L Amber Glass Cool < 6°C 7 Days 40 Days

1Specific information regarding the SOP is providedin the Analytical SOP References table (Worksheet #23).

2 Maximum holding time is calculated from the time the sample is collected to the time the sample is prepared/extracted

QAPP Worksheet #20 – Field Quality Control Summary

QAPP Worksheet #20 – Field Quality Control Summary

Matrix Analytical Group Primary Samples

Field Duplicates MS MSD Trip Blanks Total Samples

Groundwater VOCs

(8260B) 10 1 0 0 2 13

Groundwater SVOCs

(8270D) 10 1 0 0 0 11

QAPP Worksheet #21 – Field SOPs

Refer to Final Facility-Wide UFP-QAPP for PBR contract for SOPs

Number

Title, Revision Date and / or Number Originating

Organization Equipment Type

Modified for Project

Work?(Y/N)

Comments

S-1 Field Equipment Cleaning and Decontamination, December 20, 2011, SESDPROC-205-R2

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta, GA

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 384

S-2 Groundwater Sampling, March 6, 2013, SESDPROC-301-R3

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta

As specified in SOP N

Included in Site-Wide UFP- QAPP, page 401

Stabilization Criteria (USACE, 2002):

Turbidity < 50 NTU Dissolved oxygen ± 10% above 1 mg/L or ±0.1 mg/L below 1 mg/L ORP ± 10 mV Specific conductance ±20 µmhos/cm pH ± 0.1 standard units temperature ± 0.5oC

S-3 Groundwater Level and Well Depth Measurementm January 29, 201, SESDPROC-105-R2

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 432

S-4 Field Turbidity Measurementm, January

29, 201, SESDPROC-103-R3

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 441

Number

Title, Revision Date and / or Number Originating

Organization Equipment Type

Modified for Project

Work?(Y/N)

Comments

Support Division Atlanta

S-5 Field Measurement of Oxidation- Reduction Potential (ORP), January 29, 2013, SESDPROC-113-R1

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 453

S-6 Field Measurement of Dissolved Oxygen (DO), February 12, 2010, SESDRPOC-106- R2

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta, GA

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 474

S-7 Field pH Measurement, January 29, 2013, SESDPROC-100-R3

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta, GA

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 485

S-8 Field Specific Conductance Measurement, August 30, 2012, SESDPROC-101-R5

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta, GA

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 496

S-9 Field Temperature Measurement, February 4, 2011, SESDPROC-102-R3

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta, GA

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 507

S-11 Field Sampling Quality Control, Feburary 5, 2013, SESDPROC-011-R4

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta, GA

As specified in SOP N

QAPP, page 549

Number

Title, Revision Date and / or Number Originating

Organization Equipment Type

Modified for Project

Work?(Y/N)

Comments

S-16 Global Positioning System, April 20, 2011, SESDPROC-110-R3

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta, GA

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 670

S-17 Management of Investigation-Derived Waste, October 15, 2010, SESDPROC-202- R2

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta, GA

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 686

S-18 Standard Operating Procedure for the Creation, Assignmnet and Interpretation of Sample IDs

WESTON

As specified in SOP N Included in Site-Wide UFP-

QAPP, page 696

S-19 Waste Sampling, January 29, 2013, SESDPROC-302-R2

USEPA Region 4 Science & Ecosystem Support Division Atlanta, GA

As specified in SOP N

QAPP, page 711

QAPP Worksheet #22 – Field Equipment Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection

QAPP Worksheet #22 – Field Equipment Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection