Appendix_A_Sampling_and_Analysis_Plan_for_RCRA_Subpart_X_Permit_OBOD_Area.pdf

Sampling and Analysis Plan for

RCRA Subpart X Permit

OB/OD Area at

Tooele Army Depot-North Area

Tooele, Utah

Contract No. W91278-12-D-0011

Task Order No. 0004

August 2014

Prepared for

Tooele Army Depot-North Area (TEAD-N)

Under Contract to

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Mobile District prepared by

Tetra Tech, Inc.

RCRA Subpart X Permit OB/OD Area at

Prepared by

20251 Century Boulevard, Suite 200

Germantown, MD 20874-7114

Approved for Submittal by:

Anthony Apanavage, P.G., Project Manager

Germantown, Maryland

8068 iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................v

FIELD SAMPLING PLAN

1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND...................................................................................... 1-1

2.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES .................................. 2-1

3.0 PROJECT SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................. 3-1

4.0 FIELD ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................. 4-1

5.0 FIELD OPERATIONS DOCUMENTATION ......................................................... 5-1

6.0 SAMPLE PACKAGING AND SHIPPING REQUIREMENTS ............................ 6-1

7.0 INVESTIGATION DERIVED WASTES ................................................................ 7-1

8.0 FIELD ASSESSMENT/THREE-PHASE INSPECTION PROCEDURES ........... 8-1

9.0 NONCONFORMANCE/CORRECTIVE ACTIONS .............................................. 9-1

10.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE ............................................................................................. 10-1

APPENDIX A REFERENCES

APPENDIX B TETRA TECH NUS, STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

APPENDIX C U.S. ARMY AND USACE ORDNANCE AVOIDANCE PROCEDURES

APPENDIX D USACE EM 200-1-3 Requirements for the Preparation of Sampling and

Analysis Plans

APPENDIX E EPA METHOD 8330B MANUAL

APPENDIX F LABORATORY SOP FOR EPA METHOD 8330B

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN

1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................ 1-1

2.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................... 2-1

3.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................... 3-1

4.0 SAMPLING LOCATIONS AND PROCEDURES ......................................................... 4-1

5.0 SAMPLE HANDLING, CUSTODY, PRESERVATION, AND HOLDING

TIME REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................. 5-1

6.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES ....................................................................................... 6-1

7.0 CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY ................................................. 7-1

8.0 INTERNAL QC CHECKS ................................................................................................. 8-1

9.0 CALCULATION OF DATA QUALITY INDICATORS ............................................... 9-1

10.0 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ............................................................................................... 10-1

11.0 DATA REDUCTION, REVIEW, VALIDATION, AND REPORTING .................... 11-1

12.0 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ................................................................................... 12-1

13.0 PERFORMANCE AND SYSTEM AUDITS .................................................................. 13-1

14.0 QC REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT ............................................................................. 14-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (CONTINUED)

APPENDIX B LABORATORY CERTIFICATION LETTERS (TO BE PROVIDED LATER)

SITE-SPECIFIC SAFETY AND HEALTH PLAN

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PERSONNEL ASSIGNMENTS ........................................ 1-1

2.0 EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN .................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 BACKGROUND AND SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................ 3-1

4.0 FIELD OPERATIONS .................................................................................................. 4-1

5.0 TASKS/HAZARDS/ASSOCIATED CONTROL MEASURES ................................ 5-1

6.0 HAZARD ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................. 6-1

7.0 AIR MONITORING ...................................................................................................... 7-1

8.0 TRAINING/MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS .............................. 8-1

9.0 SITE OPERATIONS AND CONTROL ...................................................................... 9-1

10.0 SPILL CONTAINMENT PROGRAM ...................................................................... 10-1

11.0 CONFINED-SPACE ENTRY ..................................................................................... 11-1

12.0 MATERIALS AND DOCUMENTS ........................................................................... 12-1

APPENDIX A MEDICAL DATA SHEET

APPENDIX B U.S. ARMY AND USACE ORDNANCE AVOIDANCE PROCEDURES

APPENDIX C ACTIVITY HAZARD ANALYSIS

APPENDIX D OSHA POSTER

8068 iv

8068 v

INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Mobile District has tasked Tetra Tech Inc.

(Tetra Tech) to develop a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) for monitoring of operations at the

Tooele Army Depot-North Area (TEAD-N) open burning (OB) and open detonation (OD) area.

This task will be performed under Contract Number W91278-12-D-0011, Delivery Order

Number 0004. The environmental sampling study will be conducted at the area in support of the

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subpart X Permit.

This SAP Plan consists of three parts: the Field Sampling Plan (FSP), Quality Assurance

Project Plan (QAPP), and the Site-Specific Safety and Health Plan (SSHP). The FSP provides sample rationale and details sample collection methods and investigation techniques. Site background information is also provided in the FSP. The QAPP describes the policy, organization, functional activities, and quality control protocols necessary to achieve Data

Quality Objectives (DQOs). This document has been developed in accordance with the USACE

Engineering Manual (EM) 200-1-3 Requirements for the Preparation of Sampling and Analysis

Plans (USACE, 1994) and the TEAD Chemical Data Quality Management Program

(TEAD, 2004).

8068 vi

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Field Sampling Plan

RCRA Subpart X Permit

OB/OD Area at prepared by

RCRA Subpart X Permit OB/OD Area at

Prepared by

20251 Century Boulevard, Suite 200

Germantown, MD 20874-7114

Approved for Submittal by:

Anthony Apanavage, P.G., Project Manager

Germantown, Maryland

Rev. 0

08/20/14

8068 iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND...................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 SITE HISTORY ................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1.1 Site Description ..................................................................................... 1-2

1.1.2 Physiography and Topography ............................................................. 1-8

1.1.3 Geology and Soils ................................................................................. 1-8

1.2 SUMMARY OF EXISTING SITE DATA ....................................................... 1-10

1.3 SITE-SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF PROBLEMS ............................................ 1-18

2.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES .................................. 2-1

3.0 PROJECT SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................. 3-1

3.1 TASK DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 3-1

4.0 FIELD ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................. 4-1

4.1 SURFACE SOIL ............................................................................................... 4-1

4.1.1 Surface Soil Sample Locations ............................................................. 4-1

4.1.2 Composite Surface Soil Sampling Requirements ................................. 4-2

4.1.3 Sample Collection and Field and Laboratory Analysis ........................ 4-9

4.1.4 Background, QA/QC, and Blank Samples and Frequency ................... 4-9

4.2 FIELD PROCEDURES .................................................................................... 4-13

4.2.1 Sampling Methods for Surface Soil ...................................................... 4-13

4.2.2 Field Measurement Procedures and Criteria ......................................... 4-15

4.2.3 Sampling for Chemical Analysis .......................................................... 4-15

4.2.4 Sample Containers and Preservation Techniques ................................. 4-16

4.2.5 Field Quality Control Sampling Procedures ......................................... 4-16

4.2.6 Decontamination Procedures ................................................................ 4-18

4.3 OTHER MATRICES ........................................................................................ 4-18

5.0 FIELD OPERATIONS DOCUMENTATION ......................................................... 5-1

5.1 DAILY QUALITY CONTROL REPORTS ..................................................... 5-1

5.2 FIELD LOGBOOK AND/OR SAMPLE FIELD SHEETS ............................. 5-1

5.3 PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORDS ........................................................................ 5-3

5.4 SAMPLE DOCUMENTATION ....................................................................... 5-3

5.4.1 Sample Numbering System................................................................... 5-3

5.4.2 Sample Labels and Tags ....................................................................... 5-4

5.4.3 Chain-of-Custody Records.................................................................... 5-5

5.5 FIELD ANALYTICAL RECORDS ................................................................. 5-7

5.6 DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES/DATA MANAGEMENT AND

RETENTION .................................................................................................... 5-7

6.0 SAMPLE PACKAGING AND SHIPPING REQUIREMENTS ............................ 6-1

8068 iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

7.0 INVESTIGATION DERIVED WASTES ................................................................. 7-1

8.0 FIELD ASSESSMENT/THREE-PHASE INSPECTION PROCEDURES ........... 8-1

8.1 CONTRACTOR QUALITY CONTROL ......................................................... 8-1

8.1.1 Preparatory Phase.................................................................................. 8-1

8.1.2 Initial Phase ........................................................................................... 8-3

8.1.3 Follow-up Phase.................................................................................... 8-4

8.2 SAMPLING APPARATUS CHECKLIST ....................................................... 8-5

8.2.1 Sampling Apparatus .............................................................................. 8-5

9.0 NONCONFORMANCE/CORRECTIVE ACTIONS .............................................. 9-1

10.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE ............................................................................................. 10-1

APPENDIX B TETRA TECH NUS, STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

APPENDIX C U.S. ARMY AND USACE ORDNANCE AVOIDANCE PROCEDURES

APPENDIX D USACE EM 200-1-3 REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PREPARATION OF

SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLANS - Appears on CD only

APPENDIX E EPA METHOD 8330B MANUAL

APPENDIX F LABORATORY SOP FOR EPA METHOD 8330B

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4-1 Summary of Sampling Program – Surface Soil ................................................ 4-10

Table 4-2 Summary of Container and Sample Handling Requirements for

Soil Media ......................................................................................................... 4-17

Table 8-1 Example Field and QA/QC Samples ................................................................ 8-2

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 TEAD-North Location Map .............................................................................. 1-4

Figure 1-2 TEAD-North Local Map ................................................................................... 1-5

Figure 1-3 TEAD-North OB/OD Location Map ................................................................ 1-6

Figure 4-1 OD Unit Surface Soil Sample Locations ......................................................... 4-3

Figure 4-2 OB Unit Surface Soil Sample Locations ......................................................... 4-5

Figure 4-3 Static Firing Rocket Silos Surface Soil Sample Locations .............................. 4-7

Figure 4-4 TEAD-North Background Sampling Area ....................................................... 4-11

Figure 4-5 TEAD-North Background Surface Soil Sampling Locations ........................... 4-12

8068 v

ACRONYMS

ACGIH American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists

AEHA U.S Army Environmental Hygiene Agency

APE Ammunition Peculiar Equipment

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials

BGS Below Ground Surface

CCQC Contractor Chemical Quality Control

CM Centimeters

COPCs Chemicals of Potential Concern

D/F Dioxins/Furans

DCD Desecret Chemical Depot

DoD Department of Defense

DQCR Daily Quality Control Reports

DQO Data Quality Objectives

DSHW Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste

EM Engineering Manual

FOL Field Operation Leader

FSP Field Sampling Plan

GPS Global Positioning System

IDW Investigation Derived Waste

ISM Incremental Sampling Methodology

LIMS Laboratory Information Management System

LQAP Laboratory Quality Assurance Plan

NEW Net Explosive Weight

NIOSH National Institute of Occupational Health & Safety

OB Open Burning

OD Open Detonation

ORP Oxidation Reduction Potential

PVC Polyvinyl chloride

QA Quality Assurance

8068 vi

QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan

QC Quality Control

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

RFI RCRA Facility Investigation

SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan

SOP Standard Operating Procedure

SSHP Site-specific Safety and Health Plan

SVOC Semivolatile Organic Compound

TEAD-N Tooele Army Depot-North Area

TLV Threshold Limit Values

TOCDF Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility

TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

Tetra Tech Tetra Tech, Inc.

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

UXO Unexploded Ordnance

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

8068 1-1

1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND

1.1 SITE HISTORY

Tooele Army Depot-North Area (TEAD-N) was established in 1942 in Tooele Valley in

Tooele County, Utah as shown in Figure 1-1. Construction of facilities was completed in 1943.

Originally the facility was known as the Tooele Ordnance Depot, which functioned as a storage depot for World War II supplies, ammunition, and combat vehicles. In 1949 TEAD assumed command of the Deseret Chemical Depot (DCD), which was known as TEAD South Area. In

1962 the depot was designated the Tooele Army Depot. Since that time the depot has been assigned maintenance mission responsibilities for topographic equipment, troop support items, construction equipment, power generators, and various wheeled vehicles. The depot currently retains only the conventional ammunition storage, maintenance demilitarization and ammunition equipment development and maintenance portions of its mission.

Destruction of chemical weapons by the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility

(TOCDF), the first full-scale disposal facility in the continental United States, began in

August 1996 at DCD. The last chemical agent munition in the DCD stockpile was destroyed on

January 21, 2012. On July 11, 2013, DCD was formerly transitioned back to Tooele Army Depot and was renamed Tooele Army Depot-South Area (TEAD-S), the name the depot had between

1969 and 1985. The depot’s new mission is to assist with the storage and distribution of conventional ammunition in support of United States military readiness.

TEAD-N is approximately 35 miles southwest of Salt Lake City and 17 miles north of the

TEAD-S. Currently, TEAD-N is a Joint Munitions Command, ammunition storage site responsible for storing training ammunition, and war reserve ammunition and designs and manufactures ammunition peculiar equipment (APE) for all of the Department of Defense

(DoD). The open burning/open detonation (OB/OD) area is located in the southwestern corner of TEAD-N and consists of the OB Unit (pans), the OD Unit (pits) and the Static Fire Unit

(silos). The location of TEAD-N is shown on Figure 1-2.

8068 1-2

1.1.1 Site Description

The OB/OD area is approximately 3,000 feet from the nearest western boundary of TEAD-N and

4,000 feet from the nearest southern boundary of TEAD-N as shown in Figure 1-3. The northern base boundary is approximately 4 miles north of the OB/OD area and downtown Grantsville is about 6 miles north of the OB/OD area. The OB/OD area consists of three separate regulated units; the OB Unit (pans), the OD Unit (pits) and the Static Fire Unit (silos). The OB/OD area has been in operation since the 1940s, used for demilitarization activities including munitions detonation and propellant burning.

OB activities at TEAD-N have occurred on 14 burn pads in the burn unit within the demolition range. A maximum of 12 burn pans are used per day, with a maximum of two burns conducted per pan per day. There are approximately 60 burn days per year and the maximum amount burned for any single event is currently 1,000 pounds net explosive weight (NEW) per pan (TEAD, 1998). Currently, only burn pans 1-6 are being used. The OB/OD area was added to the Hazardous Waste Permit on September 30, 2005 and the burning in pans is limited to

6,000 pounds NEW per day and 60 days per year.

In addition, "static firing" is conducted in six silos that were added in 1998

(ATSDR, 2003). The silos were limited to 755 pounds NEW for each single event. The OB/OD area was added to the Hazardous Waste Permit on September 30, 2005 and the static fire silos were limited to 6,040 pounds NEW per day and 60 days per year.

The OD process at TEAD-N has been conducted in 19 subsurface pits. The depth of the pits are determined by the quantity of munitions to be treated. There are approximately 90 OD days per year and the maximum amount detonated for any single event is currently 750 pounds

NEW per pit. This maximum weight limit for explosive materials has been in place since 1996

(TEAD, 1998). Between 1992 and 1996 the maximum amount detonated allowed for any single event was 1,500 pounds NEW. Prior to 1992, TEAD allowed a maximum detonation limit of up to 3,000 pounds per pit. Currently, only pits 1-10, and 12-16 have been in use. The OB/OD area

8068 1-3 was added to the Hazardous Waste Permit on September 30, 2005 and the open detonation pans were limited to 7,500 pounds NEW per day and 90 days per year.

OB/OD activities are not conducted all year round because of the frequent and long-lasting temperature inversions that occur in winter months. Typically OB/OD operations occur from April to November. All materials treated by OB/OD are solids.

Tooele Army

Depot - South

To Salt Lake City & SLC Int'l Airport

Tooele Army Depot - North

OB/OD Area

Grantsville Reservoir

Grantsville

Tooele Valley Airport

Tooele

StocktonRush Lake

5 50

Miles

PGH P:\GIS\TOOELE\MAPDOCS\MXD\TOOELE_NORTH_SITEMAP.MXD 08/12/14 JEE

CONTRACT NUMBER

FIGURE NO. REV

0FIGURE 1-1

TEAD - NORTH LOCATION MAP

TOOELE, UTAH

TO NUMBER

DATE

AS NOTED

SCALE

DATECHECKED BY

DRAWN BY

J. ENGLISH 07/25/14

T. APANAVAGE 08/12/14

Topographic map provided by ESRI's ArcGIS Online USA Topo Maps map service (© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed).

TEAD

North

Salt Lake City

§̈¦80

§̈¦15

§̈¦70

§̈¦84

U t a h

W y o m i n g

N e v a d a

I d a h o

A r i z o n a

Grantsville

TooeleTooele Army Depot - North

OB/OD Area

Stockton Rush Lake

Grantsville

Reservoir Drainage

Basin

2.5 2.50

Miles

PGH P:\GIS\TOOELE\MAPDOCS\MXD\TOOELE_NORTH_LOCAL_SITEMAP.MXD 08/12/14 JEE

CONTRACT NUMBER

FIGURE NO. REV

0FIGURE 1-2

TEAD - NORTH LOCAL MAP

TOOELE, UTAH

TO NUMBER

DATE

AS NOTED

SCALE

DATECHECKED BY

DRAWN BY

J. ENGLISH 07/25/14

T. APANAVAGE 08/12/14

Topographic map provided by ESRI's ArcGIS Online USA Topo Maps map service (© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed).

Legend

Subarea of Interest

Firing Control Bunker

M ai n E nt ra nc e

R oa d

Access Road

Box Elder Wash

Static Fire Unit

PROJECT: TO04August 2014 REV 0

0 200 400 600

SCALE IN FEET

OB Pans

Legend

Figure 1-3

TEAD - North OB/OD Location Map

OD Pits

Monitoring Well

8068 1-8

1.1.2 Physiography and Topography

The Tooele Valley encompasses approximately 250 square miles within a

400-square-mile drainage basin. It is bordered by the Oquirrh Mountains on the east, by the

Stansbury Mountains on the west, and by South Mountain and Stockton Bar on the south. To the north, the valley fronts on the Great Salt Lake. Elevations in the region range from 11,031 feet above sea level at Deseret Park to 4,200 feet above sea level at the edge of Great Salt Lake.

The average slope of the land surface at TEAD-N ranges from about 3% near the base of the mountains and flattens to about 1% at the north-central boundary of the installation.

Elevation ranges from about 5,250 feet along the southern boundary (in the vicinity of the

OB/OD area) to about 4,430 feet along the northern boundary of TEAD-N.

Topography of the valley floor is shaped by coalescing alluvial fans formed by erosional debris washed from the adjacent mountains. The valley is floored with ancestral Lake

Bonneville sediments. The topography at TEAD-N is characterized by a gently rolling surface intersected by a series of shallow gullies that drain the facility. The OB/OD area is characterized by gently sloping surfaces dissected by intermittent stream channels. The OB/OD area is located primarily on Hiko-Peak series (HCD) with the surrounding ridges consisting of Berent Hiko-

Peak series complex (RGF). The Hiko-Peak series developed in alluvium from mixed rock types. They are located on fan terraces at elevations of 4,400 to 6,000 feet above mean sea level and consist of a gravelly loam to very gravelly loam. The soils are deep, well-drained, moderately permeable and alkaline.

1.1.3 Geology and Soils

TEAD-N lies in the south end of Tooele Valley, a structural depression filled with unconsolidated and semiconsolidated basin fill sediments covering approximately 300 square miles. Mountains border the valley to the east, west and south, with the Great Salt Lake forming the northern boundary. To the east are north-trending Oquirrh Mountains, to the west are the

Stansbury Mountains, and South Mountain lies to the south of TEAD-N. The Mississippian to

8068 1-9

Permian Oquirrh Formation, consisting mostly of intercalated quartzite and limestone, composes the Oquirrh and South Mountains. The Stansbury Mountains are underlain by several various formations but predominantly the Oquirrh Formation and the Cambrian Tintic Quartzite

(USGS, 2005).

Tertiary and Quaternary age basin sediments make up Tooele Valley. The deposits range from clays to coarse gravels and represent a multitude of depositional environments, including alluvial fan, near shore (beach), lacustrine, and fluvial. Along the east and southeast sides of the valley, a thick sequence of coarse sediments shed off the Oquirrh Mountains to form a thick sequence of coalescing alluvial fans. Climatic fluctuations caused subaerial and lacustrine depositional conditions alternated in the valley during the Tertiary and Quaternary. Basin fill sediments thicken to the north and have been reported to be greater than 8,000 feet in the north-central part of the valley (Stokes, 1988).

Coarse-grained alluvial fan sediments are the main component of the basin fill material in the vicinity of TEAD-N. The most notable geologic feature is a shallow but largely buried bedrock block within the eastern portion of TEAD-N. The block is composed of Paleozoic interbedded quartzite, sandstone, and limestone. The bedrock high is a homoclinal ridge exposed over an elliptical-shaped area near the northeastern boundary of TEAD-N. Bedding strikes roughly east-northeast, which is approximately the orientation of the ridge, and dips to the north-northwest. Drilling evidence suggests that the northwest margin of the block is fault bounded. Geophysical data and drilling also suggest that the southeast margin of the block may be defined by a fault, and that the bedrock contact plunges to the south and the northeast beneath alluvial cover (USGS, 2005).

Soils in the OB/OD area are composed of gravelly loam, loam, or fine sand that developed on alluvial and/or lacustrian deposits. A clayey silt layer was encountered between approximately 146 and 193 feet below ground surface (bgs) during previous sampling

(ERTEC, 1982). The valley fill overlies Paleozoic interbedded quartzite, sandstone, and limestone formations. In general, these soils are deep, well-drained, moderately permeable, and alkaline.

8068 1-10

1.2 SUMMARY OF EXISTING SITE DATA

The U.S Army Environmental Hygiene Agency (AEHA) conducted an investigation at

TEAD-N OB/OD area between 1981 and 1985. The investigation focused on the burn pan unit and trash burn pits located to the east of the active OB/OD area and on the cluster bomb area located to the northwest. Surface and subsurface soil samples were analyzed for six energetic compounds, reactivity, RCRA metals, and extraction procedure toxicity for eight RCRA metals.

Energetics were detected in trace concentrations in 38% of the samples taken from the top 18 inches of soil (ERTEC, 1982).

In 1992, a Phase I RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) was conducted at the OB/OD area.

Eighty-two test pits were completed in the Main Demolition Area (known as SWMU 1 consists of the entire OB/OD area). Two soil samples were collected from each pit. Samples were analyzed for 23 metals, cyanide, energetics, and specific anions. A limited number of soil samples were also analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), dioxins/furans, and explosive reactivity. Results indicated elevated levels of metals. Minor levels of VOCs and SVOCs were detected. Also six energetics were detected.

Three soil borings were completed to depths of 100 feet bgs; and seven soils samples were taken from each boring. Phase I results indicated that contamination does not exist in soil samples deeper than 10 feet bgs (Montgomery-Watson, 1993).

Seven test pits were completed within the OB area boundary during the Phase I RFI. Soil samples were collected from pits and analyzed for metals, cyanide, and explosive compounds.

Only surface soils showed elevated levels of metals compared to background. No VOCs or

SVOCs were detected in soil samples taken from the OB area. Explosive compounds detected included 2,4-DNT, 2,6-DNT, and RDX. Also, sediment samples were collected from the nearest drainage ditch (Box Elder Wash) upstream and downstream for the OB/OD area. Results did not indicate contaminants were migrating from the area via the surface water pathway. Groundwater monitoring was not conducted during the RFI.

8068 1-11

A follow-up Phase II RFI was conducted in 1994. Antimony, arsenic, chromium, mercury, selenium, and thallium were detected at depths great than 10 feet. The boring results do not show a consistent pattern of migration from the surface soil to the subsurface. The soil boring data for metals may be attributed to past site practices that involved burial/disposal trenches. However, a more likely explanation for these subsurface metals is the potential for alluvial deposits.

1997 BASELINE INVESTIGATION

A baseline site investigation for the OB/OD area began on July 7, 1997 and was conducted in three stages corresponding to the media of concern. Surface soil and sediment sampling was conducted from July 7 to 12, 1997. A total of 81 composite surface soil/sediment samples (including 9 duplicates) were collected and analyzed explosives, SVOCs, metals, cyanide, and field screening TNT. Eight composite samples were collected from each exposure area. A total of 24 discrete subsurface soil samples were collected from four soil borings to establish background conditions. Borings were also taken from a total of eight OD pits. One monitoring well was installed (MW-01) downgradient of the OB/OD units and the samples were analyzed for total metals, cyanide, explosives, and SVOCs. Chemicals of Potential Concern

(COPCs) were developed for all media based on the validated data set and conservative health impact screening criteria. Aluminum (17,825 mg/kg), arsenic (7.79 mg/kg), cadmium

(5.70 mg/kg), total chromium (22.38 mg/kg), copper (291.71 mg/kg), lead (1,767.85 mg/kg), 2,4,6-TNT (2.87 mg/kg), RDX (7.43 mg/kg), dibenz(a,h)anthracene (0.19 mg/kg), hexachlorobenzene (1.55 mg/kg), and pentachlorophenol (0.64 mg/kg) were COPCs for surface soil. The concentrations listed above along with each analyte represent average concentrations for a select zone in mg/kg collected during the 1997 soil sampling event. Sampling zones included source zone, operations zone, impact zone and boundary zone. However, aluminum, arsenic, and chromium were not detected at elevated levels at the OB/OD area, concentrations were higher within the boundary zone and background. A naturally higher mineral content soil in those zones may have contributed to the concentrations. Surface soil concentrations of chromium and calcium exceeded one tenth of the 1998 USEPA Region IX screening levels considering potential infiltration to groundwater (based on generic hydrogeological conditions).

8068 1-12

Arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, 2,4,6-TNT, and RDX were identified as COPCs for subsurface soil. Groundwater COPCs include lead, zinc and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate.

2006 INVESTIGATION

In April 2006, a total of 29 surface soil samples were collected from the OD Unit, the OB

Unit, the Static Fire Unit and a Background Area. Two discreet (Static Fire Unit) and twenty-seven composite soil samples were collected along with field Quality Control/Quality Assurance

(QA/QC) samples from the source zone of each area. The samples were sent to a State of Utah certified laboratory for chemical analysis. The soil samples were analyzed for Metals, Explosives, Perchlorate, and Dioxins/Furans (OB, Static Fire and Background Areas only). The following presents a summary of the April 2006 surface soil sampling event.

Arsenic

Arsenic was detected in all soil samples collected during the investigation.

Concentrations in excess of both residential and industrial screening criteria were reported in all samples including background. This was typically the case for arsenic data for soils as screening criteria for this compound were low relative to background concentrations. Arsenic concentrations ranged from 1.94 to 7.19 mg/kg with a mean concentration of 3.78 mg/kg. The range of background arsenic concentrations was 5.17 to 6.16 mg/kg. Clearly the arsenic concentrations in soils at the OB/OD unit were similar to background and therefore did not represent an increased exposure due to site activities (Tetra Tech, August 2006).

Open Detonation Unit

One compound exceeded residential and industrial screening criteria at the OD Unit.

RDX was detected in 5 of 15 surface soil samples at the OD Unit in excess of the residential screening criteria (4.4 mg/kg) and only 1 of 15 had a concentration of RDX in excess of the industrial screening criteria (16 mg/kg). The maximum detected concentration of RDX was in

SS-OD-03 at 87mg/kg. The other four samples with concentrations in excess of the residential

8068 1-13 screening criteria ranged from 4.75 to 5.39 mg/kg, only marginally exceeding the criteria (Tetra

Tech, August 2006).

Open Burning Unit

Two analytes exceeded residential screening criteria in the OB Unit. Lead concentrations in 4 of 5 soil samples collected in the OB Unit exhibited concentrations in excess of both the residential and industrial screening criteria. Concentrations of lead in all samples from the OB area ranged from 324 to 1620 mg/kg (estimated values based on data validation) with residential and industrial screening criteria being 400 and 800 mg/kg, respectively. The maximum background concentration of lead was 40.1 mg/kg (estimated value based on data validation).

The concentration of Nitroglycerin in the duplicate of SS-OB-03, 76.9 mg/kg (estimated value based on data validation), exceeded the residential screening criteria (35 mg/kg) but not the industrial criteria (120 mg/kg). The concentration of Nitroglycerin in SS-OB-03 was 1.34 mg/kg which indicated a wide disparity in the reproducibility of the compound concentration. The duplicate precision was noted as a concern in the data validation report and the results were therefore qualified as estimated. Disparity of nitroglycerin results in the duplicate pair was most likely due to non-homogenization of the sample during the collection process. In all surface soil samples collected during this sampling event, Nitroglycerine was detected in 62 percent of samples but the mean concentration was only 3.70 mg/kg (Tetra Tech, August 2006).

Static Firing Unit

One dioxin/furan compound, 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCDD, exceeded screening criteria at the

Static Firing Unit. Three of 6 soil samples had concentrations of this compound in excess of both the residential and industrial screening criteria. Concentrations ranged from 3.2 to

4.7 µg/kg with screening criteria ranging from 0.39 (residential) to 1.6 (industrial) µg/kg (Tetra

Tech, August 2006).

8068 1-14

2007 INVESTIGATION

On July 18, 2007, Tetra Tech collected surface soil samples from the OD pits (OD Unit), the Burn Pan Area (OB Unit), and a Background Area. Based on the analytical data from the

April 2006 sampling event and the reduced activity within the past year it was determined that no samples would be collected from the Static Fire Unit during this sampling event. However, four additional composite surface soil samples were collected from the top of the berm adjacent to the

OD Pits. Composite soil samples from each location, along with field Quality Control/Quality

Assurance (QA/QC) samples, were sent to a State of Utah certified laboratory for chemical analysis. The soil samples were analyzed for Metals, Explosives, Perchlorate, and

Dioxins/Furans (OB, and Background Areas only). The surface soil sampling data was used at a later date to update the existing air dispersion model and risk assessment. In addition to the surface soil sampling, one groundwater monitoring well (MW-1) was sampled on July 19, 2007.

The groundwater sample was analyzed for Metals, Explosives, Perchlorate, and Dioxins/Furans

(Tetra Tech, December 2007).

Arsenic was detected in all soil samples collected during the investigation.

samples including background. This was typically the case for arsenic data for soils as screening criteria for this compound were low relative to background concentrations. Arsenic concentrations ranged from 2.5 to 7.3 mg/kg with a mean concentration of 4.37 mg/kg. The range of background arsenic concentrations was 5.9 to 6.3 mg/kg. Clearly the arsenic concentrations in soils at the OB/OD area were similar to background and therefore did not represent an increased exposure due to site activities (Tetra Tech, December 2007).

One organic explosive compound, RDX, exceeded residential screening criteria at the

OD source area. RDX was detected in two (SS2-OD-09 and SS2-OD-16) of the 19 surface soil

8068 1-15 samples collected at the OD area in excess of the residential screening criteria (4.4 mg/kg). One of the 2 samples exceeding the residential screening criteria (SS2-OD-16) had a concentration of

RDX which equaled the industrial screening criteria (16 mg/kg). The other sample (SS2-OD-09) with a concentration in excess of the RDX residential screening criteria, was detected at 6.7 mg/kg, only slightly exceeding the criteria. (Tetra Tech, December 2007).

Two analytes exceed residential screening criteria in the OB source area. Lead concentrations in 4 of 5 soil samples collected in the OB source area exhibited concentrations in excess of both the residential and industrial screening criteria. Concentrations of lead in all samples from the OB area ranged from 205 to 8840 mg/kg (estimated values based on data validation) with residential and industrial screening criteria being 400 and 800 mg/kg, respectively. The maximum background concentration of lead was 47.3 mg/kg (estimated value based on data validation).

Concentrations of nitroglycerin decreased from the previous April 2006 sampling event.

Nitroglycerine was not detected in any sample at a level greater than the residential screening criteria (35 mg/kg). Nitroglycerine was detected in sample SS2-OD-13 at 2.1 mg/kg (estimated) and in sample SS2-OD-HILL3 at 5.6 mg/kg.

Static Fire Unit

No surface soil samples were collected during the July 2007 sampling event based on the reduced demilitarization activity in 2007 within the Static Fire Unit.

Groundwater Investigation

One monitoring well (MW-01) was sampled as part of the July 2007 sampling event.

The location of MW-1 is presented in Figure 1-3. The analytical data was compared to the

8068 1-16

USEPA Region 9 Tap Water Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs). No analytes exceeded the

USEPA Region 9 Tap Water PRGs.

2009 INVESTIGATION

On November 18, 2009, Tetra Tech collected surface soil samples from the OB Unit, the

OD Unit, the Static Fire Unit and a Background Area using the EPA 8330B Method ISM approach. Composite soil samples from each location, along with field Quality Control/Quality

Assurance (QA/QC) samples, were sent to a State of Utah certified laboratory (Test America) for chemical analysis. The soil samples were analyzed for Metals, Explosives, Perchlorate, and

Dioxins/Furans (OB, Static Fire and Background Area only). In addition to the surface soil sampling, one groundwater monitoring well (MW-1) was sampled on November 18, 2009. The groundwater sample was analyzed for Metals, Explosives, Perchlorate, and Dioxins/Furans.

The surface soil sampling strategy conducted was based on the field sampling and laboratory analysis presented in the SW-846 EPA Method 8330B Nitroaromatics, Nitroamines and Nitrate Esters by High Performance Liquid Chromotography and the Guide for

Characterization of Sites Contaminated with Energetic Materials (Thiboutot, S.G. Ampleman and A.D. Hewitt, 2004, ERDC/CRREL TR-02-1, U.S. Army Engineer Research and development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH. 2002).

The EPA Method 8330B Method incorporates an incremental sampling methodology (ISM) approach which uses the advantages of more spatial coverage and an increased sample mass to overcome the problems associated with sample heterogeneity. The procedures for ISM are specifically designed to minimize sampling error and provide a more scientifically-representative mean concentration of the contaminant(s) present in the decision unit (DoD, 2008).

Arsenic was detected in all soil samples collected during the 2009 investigation.

samples including background. This is typically the case for arsenic data for soils as screening

8068 1-17 criteria for this compound are low relative to background concentrations. As shown in Appendix

F, arsenic concentrations ranged from 1.9 to 6.4 mg/kg with a mean concentration for all samples of 3.38 mg/kg. The range of background arsenic concentrations was 4.8 to 6.4 mg/kg. Clearly the arsenic concentrations in soils at the OB/OD unit are similar to background and therefore do not represent an increased exposure due to site activities.

One organic explosive compound, RDX, exceeded residential screening criteria at the

OD unit. RDX was detected in each of the 15 surface soil samples collected at the OD unit in excess of the residential screening criteria (5.5 mg/kg). Six of the 15 samples exceeding the residential screening criteria (SS3-OD-06-D, SS3-0D-07, SS3-OD-08, SS3-OD-13, SS3-OD-14, and SS3-OD-15) had a concentration of RDX which exceeded the industrial screening criteria

(24 mg/kg). One surface soil sample (SS3-OD-07) exceeded the residential screening criteria

(55,000 µg/kg) for perchlorate.

Two analytes exceed residential screening criteria in the OB unit. Lead concentrations in

3 of 5 soil samples collected in the OB unit exhibited concentrations in excess of both the residential and industrial screening criteria. Concentrations of lead in all samples from the OB unit ranged from 322 to 27,000 mg/kg (estimated values based on data validation) with residential and industrial screening criteria being 400 and 800 mg/kg, respectively. The maximum background concentration of lead was 31.4 mg/kg (estimated value based on data validation).

Four of five soil samples (SS3-OB-01, SS3-OB-02, SS3-OB-03, and SS3-OB-05) exceeded the residential screening criteria for 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCDD (0.45 µg/kg). The maximum concentration of 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCDD was 0.6 µg/kg (estimated value based on data validation) for sample SS3-OB-02.

8068 1-18

Static Fire Unit

Seven analytes exceed residential screening criteria in the Static Firing Unit. Six analytes are dioxin/furans (1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCDD, 1,2,3,6,7,8-HXCDD, 1,2,3,7,8,9-HXCDD, 1,2,3,7,8-PECDD, 2,3,4,7,8-PECDF, and 2,3,7,8-TCDD) and the seventh is an explosive

(2,4-Dinitrotoluene). All six samples in the Static Firing Unit exceed the residential screening criteria for 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCDD (0.45 µg/kg). The concentrations range from a maximum of

4.9 µg/kg to a minimum of 2.5 µg/kg. Sample SS3-SILO-02 exceeds the residential screening criteria for six dioxin/furans and the explosive 2,4-Dinitrotoluene. Concentrations of

1,2,3,7,8,9-HXCDD exceed the residential screening criteria (0.045 µg/kg) for soil samples

SS3-SILO-02 (0.34 µg/kg), SS3-SILO-03 (0.19 µg/kg), SS3-SILO-05 (0.25 µg/kg), and

SS3-SILO-06 (0.2 µg/kg). Soil samples SS3-SILO-05 and SS3-SILO-06 exceed the residential screening criteria for 2,4-Dinitrotoluene (1.6 µg/kg) with concentrations of 12 and 9 µg/kg, respectively.

Groundwater Investigation

One monitoring well (MW-01) was sampled as part of the November 2009 sampling event. The analytical data was compared to the USEPA Region 9 Tap Water Preliminary

Remediation Goals (PRGs). No analytes exceeded the USEPA Region 9 Tap Water PRGs.

1.3 SITE-SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF PROBLEMS

The use of these sites for OD and burning of military munitions has resulted in the potential for unexploded ordnance (UXO) at the surface and in the subsurface soils. The potential presence of UXO must be considered during any soil sampling. If the presence of

UXO is indicated, the primary impact will be to relocate soil sample locations. Although not anticipated, there is a potential that UXO may be present throughout the entire OD Unit. In this case, sampling operations will cease, and field changes to the SAP will be presented to a representative from the TEAD-N Environmental Office and the Utah Division of Solid and

8068 1-19

Hazardous Waste (DSHW) environmental engineer onsite during the sampling event for approval, to address alternative sampling technologies.

Field changes will be properly documented on a field form or in a field logbook and will be signed and approved by the on-site DSHW representative.

8068 2-1

2.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The project will be managed from the Tetra Tech Inc. (Tetra Tech) Germantown, Maryland office, where the Project Manager (PM) and other project personnel are based.

Responsibility within Tetra Tech for this project proceeds from the Project Manager, to the technical staff.

The PM will be responsible for all contract negotiations with the Army and the subcontractors; will maintain client relationships; and will assume overall responsibility for staffing, maintenance of schedule, adherence to budget, and quality of technical work being performed. The PM will be responsible for the preparation of the Sampling and Analysis Plan

(SAP), oversight of field activities, oversight of subcontractors, and preparation of reports.

The PM will also be responsible for performance of field activities and will act as the

Field Operations Leader (FOL). The PM will also serve as the Site Health and Safety Officer. A field technician will assist the Project Manager with onsite sampling.

The Quality Assurance (QA) Officer for the project has assisted in the preparation of the

Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) to ensure the document is consistent with QA requirements specified in the Statement of Work. The QA Officer will be responsible for ensuring quality is met for both the project and laboratory subcontractors.

Subcontractors for this project will include a Utah certified chemical laboratory. The subcontractor selection process consists of development of Statements of Work, identification of qualified companies, formal solicitation, and bid evaluation.

The Health and Safety Manager will be responsible for overall site health and safety and the final approval of the Site-specific Safety and Health Plan (SSHP).

8068 2-2

8068 3-1

3.0 PROJECT SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES

3.1 TASK DESCRIPTION

The environmental sampling study will be conducted in support of the RCRA Subpart X

Permit for the OB/OD area at TEAD-N. The objectives of the environmental sampling study are as follows:

Monitor environmental conditions, Determine the degree to which demilitarization activities associated with the

OB/OD area have impacted surface soil conditions within the immediate vicinity and nearby area.

Determine if groundwater (deep aquifer) has been impacted by activities associated with the OB/OD area.

The Environmental Sampling Study will involve surface soil sampling, groundwater sampling and analysis.

8068 3-2

8068 4-1

4.0 FIELD ACTIVITIES

4.1 SURFACE SOIL

4.1.1 Surface Soil Sample Locations

The proposed surface soil sampling strategy is based on the field sampling and laboratory analysis presented in SW-846 EPA Method 8330B Nitroaromatics, Nitroamines and Nitrate

Esters by High Performance Liquid Chromotography and the Guide for Characterization of Sites

Contaminated with Energetic Materials (Thiboutot, S.G. Ampleman and A.D. Hewitt, 2004, ERDC/CRREL TR-02-1, U.S. Army Engineer Research and development Center, Cold Regions

Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH. 2002). The EPA Method 8330B Method incorporates a incremental sampling methodology (ISM) approach which uses the advantages of more spatial coverage and an increased sample mass to overcome the problems associated with sample heterogeneity. The procedures for MIS are specifically designed to minimize sampling error and provide a more scientifically-representative mean concentration of the contaminant(s) present in the decision unit (DoD, 2008).

Following the EPA Method 8330B recommendations, a sample of 1kg comprised of 30 evenly spaced 1-2 ounce soil aliquots (i.e increments) will be collected from approximately the top 2.0 to 5.0 centimeters (cm) of the ground. The EPA Method 8330B Manual is presented in

Appendix E for reference.

For this investigation the OB/OD area at TEAD-N has been divided into the following exposure units (see Figure 1-3).

OD Pits Source zone/exposure Unit (OD pits).

OB Pans Source zone/exposure Unit (soils within 3 ft of burn pans).

Static Fire Source zone/exposure Unit (soils within 3 ft of concrete missile firing silos).

8068 4-2

Fifteen composite samples will be collected from the OD Unit (one from each of pits

1-16, excluding Pit 11). Pit 11 will not be sampled due to the fact that the pit has been graded over and no longer exists. It was determined by DSHW during the initial site walk that this pit would not be part of the current sampling program. Thirty discrete multi-incremental samples will be collected from within each pit. Aliquots of soil will be collected from the floor, the sidewalls and the backwall of the pit. The 30 discrete samples will be composited into one sample for each pit. Figure 4-1 shows the OD sample locations. Five composite soil samples will be collected from the OB Unit (burn pans) using a similar approach. Thirty discrete multi-incremental samples will be collected from the four sides of the pan. The soils will be collected from within 3 feet of the edges of the pan. Figure 4-2 shows the OB sample locations. Thirty discrete multi-incremental samples will be collected from adjacent to each of the six static fire missile silos. Soil samples will be collected within a 3 foot area off the edge of the concrete pad where the static missile firing silos are co-located. Figure 4-3 shows the static missile firing silo sample locations.

4.1.2 Composite Surface Soil Sampling Requirements

Composite soil samples will be required based on the implementation of EPA Method

8330B to meet the objective of determining contaminant levels over known or suspected source areas. Average contaminant concentrations are required to define a source term input for contaminant migration modeling to assess potential offsite impacts. The ISM composite sample approach will allow more spatial coverage and a large number of samples to be collected per analysis for each exposure area.

Prior to collecting any samples, a grid will be marked out at each sample location using either a tape measure and/or survey pin flags to located the area of sampling (30 composite sample points). Soil samples will be composited from each of these 30 locations for laboratory analysis.

Random Sample Scheme for SS4-OD-01

Firing Control Bunker

M ai n E nt ra nc e

R oa d

Static Fire

Unit

Access Road

Box Elder Wash

Mound

PROJECT: TO04 August 2014 REV 0

0 200 400 600

SCALE IN FEET

Sample Locations

Figure 4-1

Legend

Surface Soil OD Unit

Discrete Soil Sample

Location for

Composite Sample

Sampled OD Pits

Composite Locations

OD Pits

NOT TO SCALE

Mound

O

P

E

N

B

U

R

U

I T

SS4-OB-5

Random Sample Scheme for SS4-OB-01

NOT TO SCALE

Note: Source Exposure Area

(3' Perimeter from Burn Pan)

SS4-OB-4

SS4-OB-3

A c c e s s o a d

B o x

E l d e r

W a s h

B u r n

P a n

SS4-OB-2

SS4-OB-1

K C

A D

D T

O O

E L

E o b m a p s

A u g d w g

PROJECT: TO04

SCALE IN FEET

0 100 20050

Discrete Soil Sample Locations with Respect to Composite Sample

Burn Pan

Figure 4-2

OB Unit Surface Soil Sample Locations