GLEC BPM003500_Method_of_Approach.pdf

GREAT LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER, INC.

Attachment 3-A Method Proposal (Method of Approach)

Outlined below, Great Lakes Environmental Center, Inc. (GLEC) provides a narrative response to each question that demonstrates their understanding of the Scope of Work requirements and describes GLEC’s overall method of approach for providing the service stated in this solicitation.

Offeror Shall mark areas of expertise they are proposing to provide services for:

1) Stream Chemistry _X_

2) Lake Chemistry _X_

3) Biological and Habitat _X_

4) Streamflow Duration Method (SDAM) _X_

5) Groundwater Sampling _X_

6) Fish Tissue _X_

Question 1: (All Sample Types) - Describe how your company selects a Project Manager for a project.

Providing high-quality products and services is GLEC’s primary objective. All activities that involve obtaining, using, evaluating, or reporting of primary and/or existing data or information, and/or the production of a technical deliverable, require efficient management and implementation of appropriate quality management controls.

For any new project at GLEC, the project scope of work is reviewed by the company President and/or Vice President, strategic planning and marketing staff, and one or more senior technical staff members who discuss the technical requirements, approach, responsibilities and staffing for the project and generate the proposal. It is at this time when staff members are identified and assigned project management responsibilities. Considerations for project manager (PM) designation include level of understanding and expertise in the project scope area(s), level of experience managing projects of similar size and scope, availability, type of client (i.e., government, industrial, etc.), any pre-existing relationships with the client, and other considerations including, but not limited to:

Number of and level of staff necessary to conduct the work (project intensity);

Need for subcontractors or consultants (project complexity);

Whether the PM is being developed or trained for future project management activity and roles, etc. (professional development).

Prior to selection, GLEC senior management may discuss the roles and responsibilities and expectations with the potential PM for the project. In some cases, PMs are switched if the President, Vice President or Senior Management determines a need for it and based on some of the additional considerations outlined above. It is GLEC’s policy that all management and technical personnel involved in conducting work must be qualified to perform their assigned duties, and that training and education are documented.

GLEC PMs are fully responsible for establishing the quality objectives for a project and for ensuring that appropriate operating mechanisms are established for achieving project objectives. This includes planning, communicating with GLEC staff and the client, coordinating and implementing work activities, and approving all draft and final deliverables. GLEC’s PMs communicate with technical staff on a frequent basis to ensure that work is proceeding within the scope, technical approach, schedule, and budget defined in the performance work statement (PWS) and proposal. The PM may or may not be the principal investigator and has primary responsibility for QC.

For this procurement, GLEC has chosen Dennis McCauley as the proposed Project Manager. Dennis McCauley is one of GLEC’s most experienced and qualified project managers, having over 35 years of experience working in the field of environmental biology/water quality monitoring and assessment conducting field and laboratory investigations of water quality trends in lakes, rivers and streams, coastal shorelines and wetlands. Dennis has been employed by GLEC for the past 30+ years and currently serves as President and Senior Environmental Scientist for field studies, toxicology, and aquatic biology.

Between 2004 and 2016 (12 years), Dennis served as the GLEC Work Assignment or Task Order Leader for every National Aquatic Resource Survey (NARS) assessment, beginning with the National Wadeable Streams Assessment. In addition, Dennis has served as the Deputy Program Manager for two Office of Water (Health and Ecological Criteria Division) mission level contracts, as the Program Manager for a Michigan Department of Environmental Quality contract, and as the sub-contractor Task Order Leader for an EPA Region 2 contract monitoring coastal water quality in the US Virgin Islands. Dennis is currently serving as the NARS Contract #EP-C-16-008 Program Manager at GLEC and is currently overseeing four Task Orders.

Question 2: (All Sample Types) - Describe how your company ensures that a project is delivered on-time, on-budget, and completed correctly the first time.

GLEC uses a tried and true system for planning and implementation of work processes to meet both our clients and our own expectations regarding project delivery. It includes mechanisms to support the accomplishment of basic quality management-related activities, such as:

Identifying and documenting the specific development approach to be followed in performing project and task activities;

Facilitating project team understanding of the approach and the process by which it is to be implemented; and

Verifying compliance with the approach throughout project performance.

GLEC’s process of planning and implementation consists of three major activities. These activities are the joint responsibility of the project manager (PM) and the project quality assurance officer (QAO).

Work Processes Evaluation - The purpose of the process evaluation is to provide assurance that the standards and procedures needed for executing the project activities are in place and are compliant with GLEC’s requirements. During process evaluation, the QAO reviews the planned task activities as documented in the appropriate project performance work statement (PWS). The project QAO ensures that processes are documented and verifiable for the execution of the planned activities, and that any gaps in the documented approach are identified and resolved. Any identified process gaps are brought to the attention of the PM, who ensures that the issues are rectified prior to process execution.

Work Process Orientation - The purpose of process orientation is to ensure that the documented processes for the execution of planned activities are communicated and understood by the project team.

Process orientation is accomplished by conducting training and discussing the specific aspects of the project with the project staff. The training and discussions focuses on the processes that are to be executed to accomplish the work, the project and task activities and deliverables that will be assessed by the QAO, the schedule for accomplishing the work, and the location of standards and procedures. Quality goals are presented with a description of measurement data that will be collected and analyzed.

Work Process Verification - The purpose of process verification is to provide assurance that the approved processes identified for the project are implemented and followed as intended. Process verification is accomplished by conducting audits and assessments, the goals of which depend upon when they are conducted in the course of the project schedule. At an intermediate point in the project, the QAO may conduct an audit to determine whether planned activities are being performed, and specified standards and procedures are being followed. At or near the completion of the project, the QAO may conduct an audit to verify that the activities have been completed, data are collected, deliverables are in production, relevant action items are resolved, discrepancies are documented, and lessons learned are captured. The findings of audits or assessments are reported to the PM.

At GLEC, each project is assigned a unique project number and all time worked and expenses on a project is recorded to that number. GLEC utilizes an Ajera time accounting system to accomplish this.

Consequently, time worked on a project can be directly accessed and monitored by the PM.

Vital to the success of each of the above processes is the direct and frequent communication between the PM and the field crews, and subsequent communication with the ADEQ program and project managers.

GLEC PMs maintain frequent contact with all field crews and address any issue immediately that potentially affects the outcome of the work. This project is no exception.

Question 3: (All Sample Types) - Provide a description of a project that your company has successfully completed that is similar to the scope of work of this solicitation. The description shall include the contract dollar amount, period of performance, client, schedule variances, health and safety violations and whether the contract was performed within budget.

Example Project Title: Support for the National Aquatic Resource Surveys (NARS) Value: $32,800,000 Client: United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water Performance: 2004-Present

The U.S. EPA’s Report on the Environment includes the National Aquatic Resource Surveys (NARS), a comprehensive statistical survey and assessment of the condition of the Nation’s surface waters. Each survey is designed to generate statistically valid estimates of the ecological health of water bodies through sampling a representative assemblage of aquatic community, water quality, human health and associated ecological data. The NARS assessments are conducted in cooperation with state and tribal water quality agencies, and the results are published in reports to the U.S. Congress. GLEC has played a key role assisting EPA with the design and execution of each of the NARS surveys (Table 1).

GLEC’s responsibilities for the NARS program over the years have included deploying field crews to all conterminous U.S. ecoregions (Table 1); national logistics support and training of contractors, state field crews and trainers; conducting field audits; development of QAPPs, Field Manuals, SOPs and Quick Reference Guides; GIS applications for survey sites and tracking; and technical writing, editing, and graphic communications for official EPA publications. Field sampling activities include the assessment of stream bed and riparian habitats, stream and lake morphology, water chemistry, macroinvertebrates, fish community, periphyton, sediment enzyme activity, fish tissue and fecal indicators. GLEC played a key role in the publication of two official EPA survey reports to date: Wadeable Streams Assessment – A Collaborative Survey of the Nations Streams and National Lakes Assessment – A Collaborative Survey of the Nation’s Lakes. GLEC support for each of the NARS Assessments is summarized in the following table. For each assessment, there were zero time lost injuries, schedule variances, or health and safety violations. Each assessment was performed on-time and well within the proposed budgets.

Table 1. Summary of GLEC’s On-Going Support of U.S. EPA NARS Assessments.

NARS Survey (Year)

Media*

Sampled

GLEC GLEC Subcontractors

Number of Crews

Number of Site Visits

EPA Regions Sampled

Number of Crews

Number of Site Visits

EPA Regions Sampled

WSA (2004) W, B, P 2 142 3,4,5,6 - - -

NLA (2007) W, B, S, P 4 180 2,4,5,6 - - -

NRSA (2008/2009) W, B, P 8 265 4,5,6 - - -

NCCA (2010) W, B, S, P 3 210 5 - - -

NWCA (2011) W, B, S, P 2 71 4,5,6 - - -

NLA (2012) W, B, S, P 2 67 1,6,7,8 - - -

NCCA (2015) W, B, S, P 6 412 5,10 6 187 2,3,4,5

NLA (2017) W, B, S, P 4 145 5,6,7,8 4 103 1,2,4,5

NRSA (planned 2018-2019)

W, B, P 4 334 4,5,6,7,8,9 11 549 1,2,4,6,8,9,10

GLEC Team Member Totals 35 1,826 All 21 839 All but 7

*W = Water, B = Biological Constituents, S = Sediment/Soils, P = Physical Habitat.

NOTE: GLEC owns and routinely operates all of the field sampling equipment necessary to perform the types of monitoring required for NARS field work.

Question 4: (All Sample Types) - Provide a description of past performance regarding Quality Assurance/Quality Control.

a. How did past sampling and analysis projects meet specific Data Quality Objectives?

As one of our best examples for all sample types where past sampling and analysis projects met data quality objectives (DQOs), all of the field and laboratory work that GLEC completes under our National Aquatic Resource Survey (NARS) contract is overseen by a survey-specific Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). GLEC and its subcontractors followed QAPPs and met DQOs for every NARS sampling program, including for the National Lakes Assessment (NLA), National Rivers and Streams Assessment (NRSA), National Coastal Conditions Assessment (NCCA), and National Wetlands Condition Assessment (NWCA). Each QAPP outlines data quality objectives, accuracy, precision, representativeness and comparability requirements that must be met for the respective programs. We also have QAPP requirements and met the DQOs for many Michigan Energy, Great Lakes & Environment (EGLE) projects that address these sampling types; most of which are associated with sampling water chemistry in streams.

b. Did the data generated from performed sampling activities meet the project specific criteria such as precision, accuracy, representativeness and comparability?

All NARS data must meet the program-specific criteria such as precision, accuracy, representativeness and comparability to be published and available for public review. In addition to NARs, an example of a high-profile project where GLEC and its subcontractor managed and performed sampling activities that met the project-specific criteria and prepared an extensive Data Quality Compliance Memorandum was for the US EPA, Office of Water, study report to congress on incidental vessel discharges. Under this project (see US EPA publication: EPA 833-R-10-005), GLEC and its subcontractor supported EPA in collecting wastewater characterization data for nine vessel discharges sampled from a total of 61 vessels (1 to 4 discharges sampled per vessel). The sampling program exceeded the original sampling goals for the project and achieved the required completeness, thus, GLEC was able to certify all statements and conclusions made concerning the integrity of the analytical data (accuracy, completeness, and representativeness) and its uses and limitations, as well as its statement on completeness of the sampling program.

c. For the given project, what was the percentage of usable data? What percentage of the data were rejected?

For study report to congress on incidental vessel discharges, completeness was defined in terms of the percentage of data that are collected and deemed to be acceptable for use in the study. Completeness was assessed in three different areas and was defined as follows:

a minimum of 90% completeness for sampling and analytical completeness; and a minimum of 81% for overall completeness (determined by multiplying sampling and analytical completeness goals).

Per above, GLEC was able to certify for EPA (and Congress) that these project completeness goals were met.

Question 5: (All Sample Types) - Describe how sampling trips would be arranged relative to your base of operations for maximum efficiency.

GLEC is uniquely qualified to provide the type of coordination and logistics support relative to our base operations in order to achieve maximum efficiency of all sample types. For the 2018/2019 NRSA alone, GLEC completed 31 site and sampling visits in Arizona including one extended visit in the Arizona waters of the Grand Canyon. During these surveys GLEC was responsible for the following tasks: 1) obtaining, assembling and distributing kits (sampling materials) to field crews; 2) organizing and tracking the field crews to ensure that all sampling events were completed during EPA’s time requirements; 3) using a computerized tracking system to record inventory, requested supplies and the status of sampling; and 4) coordinating between the organizations (i.e., prime contractor, subcontractors and EPA) supporting the field sampling. Consequently, the Arizona DEQ can be confident of our abilities and capacity to sample away from our state of origin.

a. Describe how you would efficiently mobilize/demobilize for trips

GLEC has proven particularly adept at organizing and tracking off-site field crews to ensure that all sampling events are completed during the sponsor’s time requirements. That adeptness is predicated on the ability of highly-experienced and skilled project managers (PMs) and field logistics coordinators (FLCs), which will be used to efficiently mobilize/demobilize crews for trips under the subject procurement. Our highly-qualified and skilled FLCs will utilize a tried and true system for achieving maximum efficiency. For example, during the NLA 2012 and 2017, as well as during the NCCA 2015 and 2020, GLEC’s FLC was responsible for organizing and tracking field crews and their sampling progress to ensure that all sampling events were completed within the index period. Specifically, during the NLA 2012 and 2017, and during the NCCA 2015 and 2020, GLEC tracked a total of 287 field crews from 154 separate organizations that completed a total of 5,181 site visits. Sampling progress for all crews was tracked following a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) developed by GLEC. In compliance with this SOP, GLEC: 1) tracked attendees at Train-the-Trainer and Regional training sessions; 2) tracked crew leader contact information and performance evaluation results, including those for assistance visits; 3) obtained data from status and tracking forms submitted by field crews, site evaluation spreadsheets and other communications; 4) compiled data into a spreadsheet in order to retain an independent list of sites sampled and samples collected; 5) logged deviations from survey protocols;

and 6) used the data to generate regularly updated summary tables that allowed EPA staff and other stakeholders to see the progress of the season. Identical organizing and tracking tasks were completed by GLEC FLCs during the NRSA 2013/14 and 2018/19, and the NWCA 2011 and 2016 and these same tasks are currently being implemented by GLEC for the NWCA 2021.

For field sampling, GLEC will primarily mobilize field crews from our Traverse City, Michigan office.

Additional technicians, if necessary, will be mobilized from our Columbus, Ohio office and using a Utah based subcontractor, as necessary. However, it is important to note that we expect the majority of any field sampling project will be completed by GLEC staff. Understandably, an Arizona based field crew may be expected to mobilize and travel more efficiently than a crew from out of state. However, given the long distances and remoteness of Arizona sampling locations, any contractor will be challenged with the logistics. Consequently, once a sampling event is scheduled, GLEC staff will be dispatched via commercial air carriers to the closest location in Arizona. GLEC has a great deal of experience and efficiency in successfully mobilizing and operating field crews in other states, including Arizona. If selected as a field sampling contractor, GLEC will leave basic sampling equipment, such as trailers, boats, instruments and miscellaneous hand-held equipment in Arizona to minimize the mobilization of equipment for individual assignments.

Question 6: (All Types Except Fish Tissue) - This scope of work includes data collection and data entry using ADEQ protocols and data systems. https://static.azdeq.gov/wqd/sampling.pdf

a. Describe your data collection experience and data entry experience and as it relates to the scope of work.

GLEC retains the most experienced NARS field data collection staff in the country. GLEC has provided and managed field crews for 11 NARS assessments since 2007 (12 including the NWCA 2021), seven of which included more than 100 sampling events over the course of the four-month index period. Every NARS assessment completed by GLEC has included sampling of at least three media types such as water, biological constituents, sediment/soils, physical habitat and other environmental data. During each of the surveys GLEC was responsible for assessing site suitability using selection protocols specific to each survey (e.g., Site Evaluation Guidelines [SEGs]) and organizing and tracking our field crews to ensure that all sampling events were completed during EPA’s four-month index period. Since 2015, GLEC field crews have been submitting the data for the national assessments with field tablets which allow the upload of the field collected data directly to the EPA Information Management staff. For this assessment, we understand that all GLEC field crews will be required to read and understand ADEQ protocols and data systems and to receive training from ADEQ staff. However, it is also important to note that the ADEQ protocols and data systems described at https://static.azdeq.gov/wqd/sampling.pdf are very similar in scope and application to the national protocols GLEC implements for the U.S. EPA assessments.

One highly-relevant example of GLEC’s data entry experience is from the work GLEC does in support of Michigan EGLE’s water chemistry monitoring program (WCMP). Every year since 2002, GLEC conducts water quality monitoring of Grand Traverse Bay (Lake Michigan), Saginaw Bay (Lake Huron) and Michigan’s Great Lakes Connecting Channels. The monitoring includes the collection of water quality data for a large suite of parameters, including nutrients, conventional parameters, limnological parameters, trace metals (cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, zinc, mercury), organic contaminants such as PCBs and PFAS. Additionally, GLEC collects benthic macroinvertebrate and corresponding sediment samples at one location in Saginaw Bay twice per sampling season. Once ambient water quality data are available from the analytical chemistry laboratories, GLEC staff enter the monitoring data into the STORET database and summarize the information collected in reports that describe trends in these water bodies and compliance with Michigan’s Rule 57 Water Quality Values. Beginning in 2018, GLEC began entering field data into a tablet based Data Collection Application that reports the field data directly to the Project Manager. GLEC anticipates using a similar system for the ADEQ.

b. How do you ensure quality data that meets your customer’s needs?

GLEC ensures quality through the development of strong, collaborative and client-approved Quality Management Plans (QMPs) and or project-specific Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs), as well as annual training and sign off of dedicated sets of internal field and laboratory standard operating procedures for sampling, testing, and use of specialized equipment. As an example, GLEC is currently participating in EPA Region 2’s U.S. Virgin Islands Basic Water Quality Monitoring (USVI BWQM) Program involving: quarterly monitoring of selected water quality constituents, reporting field and analytical results, performing personnel training, updating quality assurance (QA) and field operations documentation, and conducting a toxicity study related to selected metals. GLEC works with the University of the Virgin Islands and subcontractors for the collection and analysis of water samples at 136 locations (544 sampling events over four months) in the nearshore waters of St. Croix, St. Thomas and St.

John islands. In situ measurements of dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature, water depth, Secchi disc transparency, salinity, and turbidity are conducted at each sampling location. Collected samples are analyzed in the laboratory for total phosphorus, total suspended solids (TSS), total Keldahl nitrogen, and E. coli. The IDEXX Quanti-Tray Enterolert system is used for the analysis of Enterococcus. All laboratory analyses, data gathering and analyses, field sampling, and reporting procedures are specified in the EPA-approved QAPP developed by GLEC for the BWQM program.

Question 7: (Stream Chemistry / Lake Chemistry) - E. coli has an eight (8) hour holding time, which makes taking samples to a lab challenging when sampling multiple sites per day in remote locations.

a. What strategy will you use to collect credible E. coli data within holding times?

Once collected, all E. coli samples will immediately be placed on wet ice and stored at four degrees Celsius until processing. E.coli samples collected by GLEC will be analyzed in a mobile laboratory that is contained in, and powered by, the vehicle and will be driven to each site. The availability of this mobile laboratory will allow for E.coli analysis to occur within eight hours of sample collection.

b. If your solution includes equipment, describe the method you are using and specifics regarding the equipment (such as a portable incubator).

E. coli analyses will be completed using the IDEXX Colilert system. Field technicians collect surface water into a 120 mL shrink-banded sterile IDEXX plastic sample bottle and pour off excess water until the water level reaches the 100 mL fill line. A snap pack of Colilert® reagent is added to the 100 mL aliquot of sample which is shaken vigorously to dissolve the reagent. The technician transfers the sample to a Quanti-Tray®/2000 and seals the tray using a Quanti-Tray® Sealer. The sample is incubated at 35.0 ± 0.5°C for 24 + 4 hours. Additional information regarding the IDEXX Colilert procedure can be found in GLEC SOP MIC 5006. Results are reported as Most Probable Number (MPN)/100 mL and/or Prescence/Absence. The minimum detection limit for this analysis is one MPN/100 mL of sample and the maximum detection limit is 2,419 MPN/100 mL of sample. If requested, dilutions may be made to allow quantification of high levels of bacteria, e.g., if ‘too numerous to count’ is not acceptable. With dilutions, the quantification limit for the GLEC mobile laboratory is >241,960 MPN/100 mL.

The GLEC mobile E. coli laboratory consists of the following portable supplies and equipment:

IDEXX 120 mL plastic sample bottles

IDEXX Colilert® reagent packets

IDEXX Quanti-Trays®

IDEXX Quanti-Tray® Sealer Plus which is powered by a small generator

UV Viewing Cabinet with 6-watt fluorescent lamp for the analysis and counting of Quanti- Trays® at the end of the incubation period.

Darwin Chambers® portable incubator with digital read-out thermometer (item number NQ72Plus). Features of the incubator include a high temperature cutoff, a high/low alarm, double wall foam insulation, a leak resistant gasket that locks in temperature, a lockable lid for maximum security, a vehicle power supply, and an AC/DC power supply.

The IDEXX Colilert system can be operated out of a vehicle (standard pickup truck or utility van).

Alternately, GLEC could identify local laboratories using standard filtration and augar incubation techniques, if necessary. Those samples would need to be field filtered and transported to a laboratory for analysis within six hours of filtration. Field samples could also be field filtered and held frozen for qPCR or d,d PCR analysis, if requested or necessary (e.g., for E coli source tracking).

Question 8: (Stream Chemistry, Lake Chemistry, Groundwater) - Field parameters typically include: pH, dissolved oxygen (streams and lakes), conductivity, temperature, flow (streams) and depth (lakes).

a. List the make, model, range, resolution and accuracy of your equipment that will be used to complete the scope of work.

For this project we intend to use a YSI Professional Digital Sampling System (ProDSS) multi-parameter water quality meter outfitted with temperature, conductivity, pH, dissolved oxygen, and depth sensors. The ProDSS will be used with either a 4-meter or 50-meter cable, as needed. This meter will be used to collect discrete multi-parameter water quality data. The range, accuracy, and resolution of the YSI’s sensor array as specified by the manufacturer is presented in the table below.

YSI ProDSS Sensor Range Accuracy Resolution

Temperature (°C, °F, K) -5 to 70°C

(23 to 158°F) ± 0.2°C

0.1°C or 0.1°F (user selectable)

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L, ppm) temp comp range -5 to 50°C

0 to 50 mg/L 0 to 20 mg/L (± 0.1 mg/L or 1% of reading, whichever is greater) 20 – 50 mg/L (±8% of reading)

0.1 or 0.01 mg/L (user selectable)

Dissolved Oxygen (% saturation)

0 to 500% 0 to 200% (±1% of reading or 1% air saturation, whichever is greater) 200% to 500% (±8% of reading)

0.1% or 1% air saturation

(user selectable)

Specific Conductance (µS, mS)

0 to 200 mS/cm

±0.5% of reading or 0.001 mS/cm, whichever is greater

0.001, 0.01, 0.1 mS/cm pH (mV, pH units)

0 to 14 units ± 0.2 units 0.01 units

Depth (m, ft)

0 to 100 m (0 to 328 ft)

±0.004 m (±0.013 ft) for 1, 4, and 10-m cables

±0.04 m (±0.13 ft) for cables 20-m and longer

0.001 m or

0.01 t

We also intend to use an OTT MF pro – Water Flow Meter to measure stream discharge. This is a handheld electromagnetic water flow meter with automatic discharge calculation. The range, accuracy, and resolution of the OTT MF pro as specified by the manufacturer is presented in the table below.

OTT MF pro Range Accuracy Resolution

Velocity measurement

0…6 m/s

Accuracy at 0 to 3 m/s (± 2% of meas. value ± 0.015 m/s)

Accuracy at 0 to 5 m/s (± 4% of meas. value ± 0.015 m/s)

0.001 at meas. value (<10)

0.01 at meas. value (<100)

0.1 at meas. value (>100)

Depth measurement

0…3.05 m The larger of ± 2% of meas. value or ± 0.015 m NA

b. Will this minimum range, resolution and accuracy of multiprobe equipment be available when the contract is awarded, if not explain what countermeasures you intend to employ?

All listed equipment will be available. GLEC maintains six YSI ProDSS multi-parameter meters and six OTT MF Pro Water Flow meters.

Question 9: (Biological and Habitat) - Describe your approach for conducting a SEM macroinvertebrate survey for perennial or intermittent streams, using ADEQ protocols:

https://static.azdeq.gov/wqd/sampling.pdf

GLEC has extensive, documented experience sampling in perennial and intermittent and ephemeral streams in the Great Plains Region, in addition to several other U.S. Regions. An example project which describes our general approach and demonstrates experience in this area involves the Wadeable (Procedure 51) Streams Assessments GLEC completed for the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE). Michigan EGLE qualitatively evaluates the macroinvertebrate community, fish community, and habitat quality of streams in Michigan using Procedure 51. Since 2001 GLEC has had a contract with Michigan’s EGLE under which we have been responsible for the assessment of hundreds of wadeable stream reaches throughout Michigan using Procedure 51 protocols.

Field data captured during a Procedure 51 assessment include: qualitative fish community survey, macroinvertebrates (total number of taxa; total number of mayfly taxa; total number of caddisfly taxa;

total number of stonefly taxa; percent mayfly composition; percent caddisfly composition; percent contribution of the dominant taxon; percent isopods, snails and, leeches; and percent surface dependent), and habitat quality (substrate and instream cover; channel morphology, riparian, and bank structure;

epifaunal substrate/available cover; embeddedness; pool substrate characterization; velocity/depth combinations; pool variability; sediment deposition; channel flow status; channel alteration; frequency of riffles or bends; channel sinuosity; bank stability; bank vegetative protection; and riparian vegetative zone width). We anticipate applying our Procedure 51 assessment experience while implementing similar assessments using ADEQ protocols. Our highly-experienced GLEC field crews will follow the protocols outlined by ADEQ at: https://static.azdeq.gov/wqd/sampling.pdf.

a. Under what conditions would you decide not to collect macroinvertebrate sample?

Typically, GLEC would likely not collect macroinvertebrate samples when less than 50% of the sampling reach is dry (no water).

b. Do you have Biologists on staff with experience conducting macroinvertebrate surveys? Provide resume (attached separately).

GLEC is proposing Jim Stricko, David Rosier and Craig Davis as the field crew leaders for this project.

Their resumes are attached. Additionally, GLEC has macroinvertebrate taxonomists on staff that are certified in EPT taxa (Charles McKnight: resume also attached). Several of our field crew staff are proficient in the family level field identification of macroinvertebrates. If necessary, GLEC also has access to several national macroinvertebrate taxonomy laboratories.

c. What experience do you have collecting algal/benthic diatom samples? Provide project reference?

Algal and benthic diatoms samples are routinely collected by GLEC crews as part of the U.S. EPA NRSA and NLA. The proposed field crew leaders (see above and resumes in Attachment) have extensive experience with the collection of diatom samples. For example, in 2008/09 EPA initiated the NRSA, and during this survey GLEC conducted 265 site visits over the two survey years (approximately 132 per year) at randomly selected river and stream sites in EPA Regions 4, 5 and 6. Similarly, during NRSA 2018/19 GLEC was responsible for completing 362 site visits over both survey years (approximately 181 per year) in EPA Regions 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9. While sampling, the GLEC crew collected data/samples of three media: physical habitat, biological constituents (including benthic diatoms), and water quality.

Unique to the NRSA 2018/19, in 2019 GLEC was directed to sample 27 additional sites in Arizona.

Question 10: (Streamflow Duration Assessment Method) (SDAM) - Describe your approach for identifying riparian vegetation and their wetland plant status. Include your approach for field identification of macroinvertebrates.

a. What resources would you use in the field to make the identifications required by the SDAM Beta method (reference documents, apps, etc.)?

GLEC field crews will follow the protocols outlined by ADEQ at:

https://static.azdeq.gov/wqd/sampling.pdf. Previously, GLEC field crews have operated under EPA SDAM protocols that are based in part on the New Mexico Environment Department (2011), Hydrology protocol for the determination of uses supported by ephemeral, intermittent and perennial waters:

https://www.env.nm.gov/swqb/documents/swqbdocs/MAS/Hydrology/HydrologyProtocolAPPROVED05 -2011.pdf. These protocols are used to assess field indicators of streamflow duration in the arid southwest, western mountains, great plains, and other regions of the country. As a rule, only perennial and intermittent systems can support riparian areas with distinct riparian communities. Ephemeral streams generally do not possess the hydrological conditions that allow true riparian vegetation to grow. Although riparian vegetation consists largely of hydrophytic species (e.g., Salix) in certain streams, distinct riparian corridors of some streams may consist exclusively of upland or non-hydrophyte taxa (e.g., Chilopsis, Prosopis), particularly in the desert.

The wetland indicator status of a plant is determined by consulting the National Wetland Plant List (NWPL). The NWPL, formerly called the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands, was revised by the USACE, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USEPA, and the Natural Resource Conservation Service in 2013, biannually since, and is available at: http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/. GLEC is aware that the wetland indicator of status may change across regions.

Identification of benthic macroinvertebrates is typically done in the field. However, there are some scenarios where specimens may be collected and identified within 24 hours at a different location. In addition, vouchers will be taken to confirm identifications of aquatic insects or non-endangered mollusk taxa. For a standard sample, field crews will conduct identifications of BMI (at flowing or dry sites).

Identifications of all taxa that require family level ID, and can be collected, (i.e., aquatic insects and non-endangered mollusks) will be confirmed in the laboratory. All specimens of all identified families should be collected together (one vial per site, or more if needed, with Sample ID designated by “S”). If familial abundance is >10, only 10 specimens are needed. If morphotaxa abundance is >10, only 10 specimens are needed.

b. Describe how would you provide quality control on these identifications?

Each sample/vial should receive a unique sample ID to aid in sample tracking and data management.

Sample IDs are created using the ADEQ naming convention. For an unknown sample, any aquatic insect, non-endangered mollusk taxa or plant where the identification is unknown or uncertain will be vouchered for laboratory identification. Each morphotaxon should be vouchered separately (one vial per morphotaxon, with Sample ID designated by “U”). Field identifications are compared to the laboratory identification and differences are discussed between the field biologist and the taxonomist to gain a consensus on the accurate name for the sample.

Question 11: (Fish Tissue) - Describe your approach for collecting representative consumable fish from lakes or streams that could be used to issue a fish consumption advisory?

a. What equipment would you use?

b. What countermeasures would you employ if you could not collect the required 5 individual fish per species limit needed for an advisory?

c. Describe your chain of custody and labeling process.

GLEC field crews will follow the protocols outlined by ADEQ at:

https://static.azdeq.gov/wqd/sampling.pdf. Typically, GLEC field staff collect whole fish for the analysis of contaminants following EPA and State procedures. A brief summary of those procedures is given below.

Whole Fish Collection The focus is on obtaining fish species that are commonly consumed by humans, that satisfy legal requirements of harvestable size for each river site (or at least consumable size if no legal harvest requirements exist), and that are sufficiently abundant within a sampling reach. Each whole fish tissue sample will typically consist of five adult fish of the same species that are similar in size (i.e., the smallest individual in the sample is no less than 75% of the total length of the largest individual).

Equipment and Supplies Error! Reference source not found. lists the equipment and supplies necessary for field crews to collect whole fish tissue samples. This list provides information to ensure that field crews bring all of the required equipment to the site.

Equipment and Supplies: Whole Fish Tissue Sample Collection

For collecting whole fish tissue sample

Electrofishing equipment (including variable voltage pulsator unit, wiring cables, generator, electrodes, dip nets, protective gloves, boots, and necessary safety equipment) Scientific collection permit Sampling vessel (including boat, motor, trailer, oars, gas, and all required safety equipment)

Coast Guard approved PFDs Maps of target sites & access routes Global Positioning System (GPS) unit Livewell and/or buckets Measuring board (millimeter scale) Clean nitrile gloves

For storing and preserving whole fish tissue sample

Aluminum foil (solvent rinsed and baked) Heavy-duty food grade polyethylene tubing Large plastic (composite) bags Composite (Tyvek) tag

Knife or scissors Dry Ice Plastic cable ties Coolers

For documenting the whole fish tissue sample

Whole Fish Tissue Collection Form Clipboard Clear tape strips

Sample Identification Labels Black ink pen Fine tipped indelible markers

For shipping the whole fish tissue samples

Preaddressed FedEx airbill Coolers

Tracking Form Chain-of-custody labels Packing/strapping tape Hazard Class 9 shipping labels Dry ice

The procedures for collecting and processing whole fish tissue samples are presented in Error!

Reference source not found..

Whole Fish Tissue Sample Procedure

Whole Fish Tissue Method

1. Put on clean nitrile gloves before handling the fish. Do not handle any food, drink, sunscreen, or insect repellant until after the whole fish sample has been collected, measured, and wrapped.

2. Rinse potential target species/individuals in ambient water to remove any foreign material from the external surface and place in clean holding containers (e.g., livewells, buckets).

3. Collect one target species sample from each designated site. The sample should consist of 5 fish of adequate size to provide a total of 500 grams of edible tissue for analysis. Select fish for each sample based on the following criteria:

all are of the same species, all satisfy legal requirements of harvestable size for the sampled river, or at least be of consumable size if no legal harvest requirements are in effect, all are of similar size, so that the smallest individual in a composite is no less than 75% of the total length of the largest individual, and all are collected as close to the same time as possible, but no more than one week apart Accurate taxonomic identification is essential in assuring and defining the organisms that have been collected and submitted for analysis. Do not mix species in a single whole fish sample.

4. Measure each individual fish to determine total body length. Measure total length of each specimen in millimeters, from the anterior most part of the fish to the tip of the longest caudal fin ray.

5. Record site ID, date, sample ID, species (common name), and specimen length on the Whole Fish Tissue Collection Form in black ink. All samples must meet these two criteria (i.e., fish are all the same species and fish lengths are all within 75% of the largest specimen length). Make sure the sample ID numbers and specimen numbers/lengths that are recorded on the collection form match the corresponding information on each individual specimen label.

6. Remove each fish selected for analysis from the clean holding container(s) using clean nitrile gloves.

Dispatch each fish using a clean wooden bat (or equivalent wooden device).

7. Wrap each fish in extra heavy-duty solvent-rinsed, oven-baked sheets of aluminum foil with the dull side in.

8. Prepare a Sample Identification Label for each sample, ensuring that the label information matches the information recorded on the Whole Fish Tissue Collection Form.

9. Cut a length of food grade plastic tubing that is long enough to contain each individual fish and to allow extra length on each end to secure with cable ties. Place each foil wrapped specimen separately into an appropriate length of tubing. Seal each end of the tubing with a plastic cable tie. Attach the fish sample label to the outside of the food grade tubing with clear tape and secure the label by taping around the entire fish (so that tape sticks to tape).

10. Place all the wrapped fish in the whole fish composite sample from each river site in a large plastic composite sample bag, complete the bag label, and tape it to the Tyvek composite tag, then seal the composite bag with a cable tie with the composite sample tag attached.

11. After the sample is packaged, place it immediately on dry ice for shipment. If samples will be carried back to a laboratory or other facility to be frozen before shipment, wet ice can be used to transport wrapped and bagged fish samples in the coolers to a laboratory or other interim facility.

12. If possible, keep all (five) specimens designated for a particular sample in the same shipping container (ice chest) for transport.

13. Samples may be stored temporarily on dry ice. Depending on site logistics, Immediately ship the samples packed on dry ice to keep samples frozen for up to 48 hours

(50 pounds are recommended), via priority overnight delivery service, so that they arrive at the analytical laboratory within less than 24 hours from the time of sample collection, or freeze the samples within 24 hours of collection at ≤-20°C, and store the frozen samples until shipment within 2 weeks of sample collection.

14. Ship frozen fish tissue samples to the designated laboratory for interim sample storage on Monday through Thursday (no Saturday delivery to the laboratory).

Field Crew Leader Résumés

JAMES P. STRICKO

Research Scientist Proposed Crew Leader

Education

B.S., Natural Resources, the Ohio State University, 1990 Graduate Studies, Environmental Science, the Ohio State University

Qualifications

Mr. Stricko’s principal area of expertise is in field methodology for aquatic community monitoring. He has extensive experience in field sampling, adult and larval fish identification and laboratory toxicity testing on research projects for industrial, municipal, and government clients including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and U.S. Department of Defense. Mr. Stricko has conducted field investigations to determine wastewater discharge effects on instream fish and macroinvertebrate communities. He has also done stream habitat assessment as part of the field investigations. Mr. Stricko is a fisheries biologist with a specialty in freshwater fish taxonomy. For 27 years he has been collecting, managing, harmonizing, compiling, and analyzing fisheries taxonomic data for a variety of large and small projects. He has significant experience interacting and communicating with private landowners and public lands managers across the country resulting in the ability to obtain permission to access and sample locations across the country including remote sites. His significant experience as both a taxonomist and a field crew leader makes him exceptionally qualified to serve as a Field Crew Leader for the anticipated contract.

Relevant Experience

USEPA National Aquatic Resource Surveys Supported every NARS assessment since the 2007 National Lakes Assessment. Coordinates and conducts NARS regional training sessions, trains state and federal government staff, tribal nation biologists, and contractors in the field methods used to collect, process, and ship samples for the USEPA. Coordinates and conducts field sampling for the National Wetland Condition Assessment, National Lakes Assessment, National Rivers and Streams Assessment, and the National Coastal Condition Assessment. Jim Stricko serves as Field Sampling Crew Leader and Field Survey Team Trainer for EPA’s 2008-2009 National Rivers and Streams Assessment. He was directly responsible for managing field crews to sample approximately sixty sites in EPA regions 2, 4, 5, and 6 during 2008 and 2009. Mr. Stricko also identified landowners and contacted them to obtain permission to access river and stream sites. Mr. Stricko also assisted EPA with training of contractor, Tribal Nation, State Government, and Federal Government participants in the collection of fish community and fish tissue samples at 10 field crew training workshops in 2008-2009. He identified fish voucher specimens from the Northern Plains, Southern Plains, and Xeric ecoregions for GLEC’s portion of the 2008-2009 NRSA Fish Voucher Identification Task. He assisted in the data analysis of the 2008-2009 Fish Voucher Identification database. As part of the 2008-2009 NRSA fisheries data analysis, he compiled the autecology information for several species across the country. During the 2013- 2014 NRSA, Mr. Stricko served as a trainer for the fish community indicator and as a physical habitat indicator at five regional trainings. Mr. Stricko also conducted site Assistance Visits for state and tribal crews across the country. Mr. Stricko observed and worked with sampling crews to insure that all data was collected correctly and completely.

Mr. Stricko also observed field crews and made several suggestions and provided individual instruction for completing data collection tasks in a more efficient manner. Jim Stricko has also served as Field Sampling Crew Leader and Field Survey Team Trainer for NLA 2007, 2012 and 2017. Mr. Stricko has played a key role in the planning and design of the survey field operations manual, and has led field crew training workshops for state and subcontractor crews. He led GLEC field crews in sampling lakes and reservoirs in throughout the U.S., including remote sites requiring special equipment such as pack horses to reach sites and return water chemistry and biological samples to analytical laboratories within prescribed sample holding times. Served as Field Sampling Crew Leader for EPA’s NARS predecessor program National Wadeable Streams Assessment, responsible for the coordination, management, and collection of water samples from wadeable streams in remote locations in EPA Regions 3, 5, and 6. Coordinated field teams, equipment, sampling sites and events, sample collection at selected locations, and technical review of data sheets prior to shipping. Supervised and led a team of four technicians during 3 to 5-week sampling events over one field season. Sampling efforts were coordinated with EPA contractors, and state resource agencies. Responded to questions and concerns from contractors, land owners, state resource agencies, and EPA staff. During the 2018/19 NRSA Mr. Stricko completed sampling at approximately 90 sites in EPA Regions 5, 6, 7 and 8, and served as a physical habitat trainer at one training session.

USEPA Probabilistic Stream Survey in Puerto Rico Coordinates and conducts sampling of 120 wadeable streams in Puerto Rico to assess overall condition by collecting chemical, physical, and biological samples that will determine the biological conditions and the primary stressors responsible for impairments.

CWA Section 316(b): Fish Impingement Mortality and Entrainment Characterization Studies Field supervisor at coal fired power plant impingement and entrainment study.

Oversees field sampling and fish identification tasks.

Aquatic Field Studies Coordinates and conducts fish and macroinvertebrate sampling and identification to determine the impact of industrial wastewaters. Collects fish tissue data to determine wildlife and human risk assessment for metals. Evaluates ecological community data using community metrics analyses such the Index of Biotic Integrity and the Invertebrate Community Index.