[QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN FOR PERFORMANCE …2 4 2 4 9 4 / 5 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 1 4 3 4 ng 3 4 1 4 2 4 2 4 1 4 1 4: 1 4 Robert C. Clinger Ulric Gibson Al Sun, P.E. Williejr r. Buchholz,,

^;-

':

001246

IIIIIIIIIIII

COM CAMP DRESSER & McKEE iNC.A manage***/* contuitanis 2*45

Austin• 5 1 2 3

Cent*' 22

August 28, 1985

Mr. Robert E. Hannesschlager, P.E.Acting chief, Superfund Branch

U.S. Environmental Protection Aqen-vRegion VT *1201 Elm StreetDallas, Texas /S270Mr. John Cochran, Regional Site Project OfficerU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyRegion VI1201 Elm StreetDallas, Texas 75270Project: REM II - EPA Contract No. 68-C1-6939/141/WP1Document No.: 141-WP1-EP-BKZD-1Subject: Work Plan

North Cavalcade streetHouston, TexasDear Mr. Hannesschlager and Mr. Cochran-

proved for Basic Ordering Agreements under ou™ n conS ^

Call us if you have comments or questionsSincerely,CAMP^DRESSER & McKEE INC.

v( LX,CNff.DRESSER & McKEE INC.

Robert S. Kier, Ph.D.Site ManagerRSK/WFD/1n©m

William F. Buchholz, Jr. , P.E.Region VI Manager

001247

I

tSections iRevision: 4Dates 8/28/85Page: i of 2

t QUALITY ASSURANCE FLAN FOR PERKKKANCE0?RS1EDXAL INVESirGATICN/FEASlBILIW STUDY*—- CAVALCADE SITEHOUSTON,

iiCONTRACT MO. 68-01-693$K ASSIGNMENT NO. 4S-6L78BOCUMB/T NUMBER:

28, 1985

Prepared Syj

Approved 8ysion VI Quality Assurane* Coordinator

"—**«- *• euumoiz, jr., Hvfi.Region vi Manager W

Approved By: _s?__s4&&*) ^<^^C^S-So&rt^rrnngir, F.C. "^/Quality Assurance DirectorApproved By:

Approved By:

Mr. John cbchran£PA Region VI Site Project Officer

"oHicer

001248

IIIIIIIII1IIIII

Section: 1Revision: 4Date: 8/78/B5Page: 2 of 2

1. INTRODUCTIONThis Quality Assurance Project Plan, submitted as part of the NorthCavalcade Street Site Work Plan, describes the procedures that will beimplemented to assure quality is maintained throughout the course of theNorth Cavalcade RI/TS. it has been prepared in compliance with the USEPAAdministrator's memorandum of May 30, 1979 requiring the preparation ofQAPPs for all monitoring and measurement activities that generate andprocess environmentally related data for the agency's use.TtUs Q&PP has also been prepared in accordance with the requirements of theRffl II Quality Assurance Program Plan (Document No. 999-QC1-RT-ACAB-3) andthe following guidelines established by the USEPA and the REM II qualityassurance program management, respectively;

o USEPA. Febmary 1983. Interim Guidelines and Specifications forPreparing Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA-600/4 - 83*004.o REM II. June 1985. Generic Guidance for Quality Assurance ProjectPlans, Document No. 99$-CCn3A~AV»f-r

This docunei-t specifies the procedures (field and laboratory) which must beimplemented to assure that the data gathered at the North cavalcade StreetSite are consistent with specific quality goals of accuracy, precision,completeness and representativeness.in tvo phases;

determined thatdditional regation program will be implemented?ifc is

follow-up investi

ii

001249

111111111111111

SECTION1.

2.3.4 .5.6.7.8.9.

10.11.12.13.14.15.16.

• *4««<ratr\-r >•

Section: 2Revision: 4Date: 8/28/85Page: 1 of 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page with Approval SignaturesIntroductionTable of ContentsProject DescriptionProject Organization and ResponsibilityQA Objectives for Measurement DataSampling ProceduresSample and Document Custody ProceduresCalibration Procedures and FrequencyAnalytical ProceduresData Reduction, Validation and ReportingInternal Quality Control ChecksPerformance and System AuditsPreventive MaintenanceData Measurement Assessment ProceduresCorrective ActionQuality Assurance Reports to Management

APPBJDICES I - ReferencesII - Glossary of TermsIII - LetterDistribution1. Quality Assurance Director2. Deputy Quality Assurance Director3. Regional Quality Assurance Coordinator,

Region VI4. REM n Regional Manager, Region VI5. REM VI Site Manager6. REM XI Onsite Coordinator7. USEPA Project Officer, Region VT8. USEPA Remedial Project Manager Region VI9. US6PA

NO. OFPAGES REVISION

2 4

2 49 4

/ 5 42 42 42 41 43 4

ng 3 41 42 42 41 41 4

: 1 4

Robert C. ClingerUlric GibsonAl Sun, P.E.Williejr r. Buchholz,,Robert Keir, Ph.D.Michael EdgarJohn CochranRussell hartley

DATE08/28/85

08/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/8508/28/85

P.k\

001250

iiiiiiiiii11

FIGURES3-13-2

3-33-44-14-24-3

12-1

TABLE5-16-17-19-110-110-2

. —— ____M» ̂«^^^^™^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^™^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


LIST OF FIGUBES

Site Location MapCurrent Land Use, Property Ownership andContaminant AreasProposed Project ScheduleSchedule of DeliverablesProgram Organizational ChartProject Organizational ChartQuality Assurance Organizational ChartAudit Flow Chart

LIST OF TABLES

Precision and Completeness ObjectivesDuplicate, Blank Container and Preservative RequirementsSample Custody ProceduresAnalytical ProceduresData Validation and Tracking SystemQA Level of Effort for Analytical Services

001251

IIIIIIIIII

II


3. PROJECT DESCRIPTIONThe North Cavalcade Street site encompasses about 21 acres northeast of theintersection of Haury and Cavalcade Streets in Houston, Texas. This loca-tion is approximately one mile west of the intersection of Loop 610 andRoute 59 (Figure 3-1). The site is bounded on the east and west by HoustonBelt and Terminal railroad lines (Figure 3-2).A small firm by the name of Houston Creosote began wood treating operationson about 10 acres of the site in 1946, In addition to office space, thefacility included, at a minimum, creosote and pentachiorophenol (PCP)storage areas, pressure vessels, a treatment plant, drying and storageareas, and two ponds or pits, one for process blowdown waste and a largerone for storing creosote wastes.The wood treating operations ceased sometime between 1962 and 1964. Sometime after 1964, the southwest portion of the site was developed for twowarehouses, one on property owned by Great Southern Life Insurance Companyand the other owned and occupied by Coastal Casting Service Company. R.D.Eichenour and D. Dover own additional portions of the site (Figure 3-2) ,In the early 1980's , the Houston Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA)became interested in the site for a combined rail yard, shop, and stationfor a proposed light rail transit system. During routine geotechnicalinvestigations by McClelland Engineers, Inc. (MED for preliminary designpurposes, several localized areas were found to be contaminated with creo-sote waste products. Camp Dresser & McKee inc. (COM) was then retained toperform a contaminant survey and to develop remedial measures that wouldmitigace the contamination and allow use of the land by MTA. During thecourse of CDM's work KTA revised their construction plans to largely ex-clude the North Cavalcade Street site. CDM's report, "Cavalcade Contam-inant Survey," dated July 11, 1983, and other submittals document thepresence of soil and shallow groundwater contaminated with creosote wasteproducts and heavy metals. Contaminants encountered on or nearby the siteinclude chrysene, fluoranthene, arsenic, chromium, lead, zinc, PCS and PCP.Well logs and analytical results from these investigations are detailed inAppendix It and Section 3 .0 , respectively, in the Project Operations Plan(POP). Failure of the bond issue that would have financed the light railsystem resulted in cessation of CDH's work on the site.During the course of CDH's work, the Texas Department of Water Resources(lt«R) was apprised of conditions at the site and was provided copies ofthe data and the CDH report. After failure of the bond issue, TDWRnotified current owners of the site that hazardous wastes may exist ontheir land. At that time, two of the owners, Great Southern Life InsuranceCompany and Coastal Casting Services Company, retained consultants toconduct site investigations which were completed in October 1983. Only theconsultants for Great Southern Life Insurance Company, William F. GuytonAssociates, inc. and Southwestern Laboratory/ inc., collected additionaldata, the consultant for Coastal Casting Services Company, McClellandEngineers, Inc., relied on information collected during their work with

001252

Sec t i o n 3 :R e v i s i o nSate : £/ 8/C5Pace : 2 of

NORTHCAVALCADE

CAVALCADE" ^r

\ MCCDYPARK UFFLY PARK

MAJORBUSINESSDISTRICTHOUSTON

. LEGEND

SITE LOCATION MAP

CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE INC.

001253

GREAT SOUTHERN LIFE—itNSURANCe COL1 .60 AC.

IBIKIffll11 *

COASTAL CASTINGSERVICE caZ 98 AC.

H B fi I RY CO.using tint im«tti>uat i in *ttntii*tniti itiHHBHttttm**it>tmnni«ijf lttIt,"" — " ~

COASTAL CASTINGSERVICE CO.2 67 AC.

CD CONTAMINANT AREAS

290 580 FEET

FIGURE 3-2CURRENT LAND USE

PROPERTY OWNERSHIPAND

CONTAMINANT AREAS

o LJ rj (^>ft* a> f& roiQ r* < Ofl> ft) —*• r»-• - • • </» -J--•- otl> CO O 3o 'ro oj-+t CO -P. • •

001254

IIIIIII1II


CDM. In April, 1964 TOJR recommended the site for the National PriorityList (NPL). On October 2, 1984, the site was placed on the NPL, with EPAtaking the lead in the RI/FS effort. The site has a Hazardous RankingSystem Score of 37.1 and is a fund lead project.Camp Dresser & HcKee Inc. was tasked by the EPA to perform a RemedialInvestigation Feasibility Study (RI/FS) on the North Cavalcade site. TheWork Plan details the elements that comprise the remedial investigationwhich include the Project Operations Plan, study area survey, source sitecharacterization, feasibility study testing, data validation, contaminantpathway evaluation, public health evaluation, remedial investigationreport, EPA designated activities, quality assurance systems audit andtechnical and financial management.The remedial investigation is scheduled to take place in the fall cf 1985.Ttie proposed project schedule is shown in Figure 3-3. Detailed proceduresto be implemented during the RI as well as plans for data analysis areincluded in the POP which are in accordance with CDM's Technical OperationsManual. Figure 3.4 illustrates a schedule of deliverables for the project.The field sampling tasks to be conducted will consist of air, monitor well,surface water, sediment, and soil sampling. The rationale for the samplingprogram (POP Section 9 .0 ) is to achieve the objectives of the feasibilitystudy. The intended end use of the data collected during the remedialinvestigation is to develop a feasible, cost-effective and environmentallysound clean up program for the site. The data collected may also be usedfor enforcement purposes.1I

001255

IIIIIIII

Sec t i on : 3Revis ion : 4Date : 8/28/85

: 5 of 9FIGURE 3-3

PROPOSED PROJFrr cr-ur*rsT«.«

WORK PLANINVESTIGATION

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 U 15 16 17 18 19 20(NO AUDIT SCHEDULE PROVIDED )

1.2.3.4 .5.6.7.8.9.10.11.

Proj Oper PlanStudy area survSource/site charFeas study testData validationContain path evalPub health evalRemed inv reptEPA desig act x x x x xOual assur System Aud i t xTech/fin manag x x x x x

X X X X

x x x x x x x x x xX X X X

x x x x x x x x x xx x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x xX X X X X X X

x x x x x x x x x x xX

FEASIBILIY

1- Prelim RemedAlter Dev

2. Remed alt scr3. Remed aid anal4. Coup sval alt5. Feas study rept6. EPA desig act7. Pre-design rpt8. Wk ass compl rept9. Oual assur System Audit

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xx x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x xX X X X X X X

X X X X XXx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xx x x

X XX X10 . Tech/fin raanag x x x x x x x x x x x x x x * v v « ~ - - -

001256

SCHEDULE OF DELfVERABLESNUMBER OF DAYS J'RQM USEPA APPROVAL OF THE WORK PLAN

DELIVERABLE

Project Operations PlanSite SurveyTransport PathwayIdentificationAerial Photo EvaluationBackground, ContaminantLevelAir Qual ity InvestigatioShallow AqufferInvestigationsDe*P A%i&Ft1 gat ionsSoil InvestigationsSurface WaterInvestigationsSediment invest igations—————————— . — . ————Non-Soil Materials1 _ .. _ Investigate-[Geophysical SurveyInvest igationI FA**; ^f-ttrtv fcfernn Por^r*-

WORKASSIGNMENT

ftUTH.

0000

000

0

000

00

0

DUE

90420

9090

390390390390

390390390

390390

?on

QUALI IYCONTROL PLAN

ACTIVITY

1 . 02 . 1 , 2.22.3 , 2 .42 .5

3 . 13 .23.3 A

3.3 B3 .43.53 .6

3 ,73 -8

R 0

DATE

80410

8080

380380380

380

380380380

380380

ir*^

QUALITYSURVEILLANCE' " • • " " """" • • •ACTIVITY DATE

REM II APPROVAL

RM

75105

7575

375375375

375

375375375

37537b

TOM HSM FAM QUAD

USEPA REVIEW

PO CO RPO

90420

9090

390390390390

39039039r

39C391

i "> i~i

HSPO

90420

9090

390390390390

390390390

390390

•>/> n

STATEREVIEW

OTHERREVIEW

———

001257

SCHEDULE OF DELIVERABLENUMBER OF DAYS FROM USEPA APPROVAL OF THE WORK PLAN

DEUVERA8LE

Independent Rev. of QAData

Contaminant Pathway &Trans. Fval.r - •[Pu f aT i c Heal th EvaluationDraft RI Report

Firtaf RI ReportRem. Response Obj . Memo

ReportRem. Response AlternativRem. Alternat ive Screeni

Memo ReportSummary of EvaluationsRecommended Rem. A ! t .

Memo ReportDraft F .S . ReportFinal f . S . ReportPredes ign ReportProject Progress Mtgs

WORKASSIGNMENT

AtfTH.

0

000

0

0! 0

iqJ 00

0000

0

DUEA«-'le^df

390420390

480

360450

480540

570540600600

As

QUALITYCONTROL PLAN

ACTIVITY

d 5,0

6 . 07 . 08 . 1

8 . 3

I . I1 . 2

2 . 03 .0

4 . Q5 . 06 . 07 . 0

. 10 .0

DATE

-

3804 1 0380

470

35044U

470530

560530590590

-

QUALITYSURVEILLANCEACTIVITY DATE

REM II APPROVAL

RM

-

375?05375

165

345*35

165525

555525585585

-

row HSM FAM QUAD

USEPA REVIEW

PO CO RPO

-

390420390

480

360450

480540

570540600600

-

HSPO

-

390420390

480

360450

480540

570540600600-

STATEREVIEW

OTHERREVIFW

001258

IIIIIIIIIIIII

4. PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITY

ling staff to thetiorlal structureorganizational structure.Assurance unit.


. m II in general is£?ICnii?lllty ft0m «"• on 8ite sa"îr ««,£*< -1

h

shows,th« organlSIPiquwTfdt«K "^ ̂ project

^ displays organization of the Quality

control

procedures have been followedand Site Health c Safetyrequirements of the Heaprotective equipaent is w o r o n

O»t QCSafefcy Supervisor&<&6Cini* to *»««t the necessary

A.5 .5 , respectively of th.The Quality Assurance Direc isQuality Assurance Program Plan «quality assurance prKres conSseeing that Quality AssuranceAssurance mrecto/will

SeCti°n A '5 '3asPects of the™^6 aP?toval °fPerformance audits, and

Director's, in^Jleaienting, and administering the quality assurance

2) Interfacing with EPA on quality assurance matters;3) Reviewing

consists* _a . _„.confonuance with _ ___ .*.,«*««u»i0(-

r^n **r*———— -- •• - program,of '

will be provided as n d e d j ^procedures. Auditors

001259

»»i»«* ••*! »•"•»*•« ««•*•*(«4*iH *«* €••*••) Ot*Ml««

tCNNM ftOWCOM OftOU*c

Figure 4-1 Program Organizational Chart~u o ^jOi v IT"fD

fv> co o^ rsO tv ..-K (X)^- I-(..n or

001260

IIIIIIII

III

ISAFETY

NANCY JOHANNESMEYER

TECHNICAL OPERATIONSDEPUTY

PROJECT MANAGERDAVID DOYLE

REMHTZr MANAGER

WILLIAM BUCHHOLZ

REMHSITE MANAGER"ROBERT KIER

FIELDOPERATIONSMICK EDGAR

Sector: 4Reviser , ; 4Date: 5/28/85Page: 3 of 5

QUALITY ASSURANCE \UNIT

DIRECTOR

REMIT REGIONS! OACOORDINATOR

J.W. SUN

REMIT SITEQAC

SARAH LANDTISER

ANALYTICALTONY ST. CLAIR

FIGURE 4-2PROJECT ORGANIZATION CHART

CAMP DRESSER & MCKEG INC.

001261

C. K*«M«y a*«r R

ntf a*OH VH

MHch**l H KaliBkn, C> 9 d-

AUDIT

TtCHNtCAL

O«n4«t L. Hultan

COM office OP rwe CMAIMMAN

t..r.:£:;:;L,QUAUTY »s9u«*Mce uMir

AtiitUnt Dlreel«rUlrte P. QH.»»». Ph.D . »• K.

ir

».c

EP* neaioie ft

O*rM ft.

tf* HCaiON

W»li»f A*»(. It . f E

Jcafe V. C*«e

Cf>A RCaiOH V

Oi**M A. Fl»w«r». F.B.

em fleotON uu+Ntr A *•!• *<••:• C»ardln«lo<

f PA ftcaiOM V)Qu«tllp A»*w*nc* CtvttfMliat

J . W . Sun

. P C.

T3 CJ » OOft) CH rt» fBlO rt < OfD IT) -• <-«•

Figure 4-3 Quality Assurance Organizational Chartc. co o^ 3O (V ••-*, CO

<n fnin

001262

IIIIIIIIIII

5)


Preparing a monthly report on the status of the quality assuranceprogram for Chairman and the National Project Manager. This reportwill include summaries of audit findings and corrective actions,and progress in incrementing arid quality assurance program;6) Working with all levels of personnel to identify and eliminatepotential quality assurance problems;7) Supporting Corporate Qu. lity Assurance audits of hazardous wastemanagement activities.

Regional Quality Assurance CoordinatorThe Regional Quality Assurance Coordinators are responsible for allprocedures and tasks pertaining to quality assurance in their respectiveregions and report to the Quality Assurance Director {and his Deputy) forquality assurance activities.Specific duties include:

1) Monitoring project activity to verify compliance with qualityassurance plans;2) Reviewing appropriate sections of Work Plan documents for approval;3) Reporting periodically to the Quality Assurance Director on qualityassurance activities;4) Providing quality assurance for all technical deliverable.* produceu

in the region. (Routine audits of regional work assignmei ts . )

I

001263

IIIIIII


5. OA OBJECTIVES FOR MEASUREMENT DATA

III

Quality assurance objectives for measurement data are usually expressed interms of accuracy, precision, completeness, representativeness andcomparability. Definitions of these characteristics are as follows:o Accuracy - the degree of agreement of a measurement (or an averageoi measurements of the same thing), X, with an accepted referenceor true value, T, usually expressed as a percentage of the refer-ence or true value, 100 (X--T)/T> and sometimes expressed as aratio, X/T. Accuracy is a measure of the bias in a system.o Precision - a measure of mutual agreement among individual measure-ments of"the same property, usually under prescribed similarconditions. Precision is best expressed in terms of the standard

deviation. Various measures of precision exist depending upon the"prescribed similar conditions/'0 Completeness - a measure of the amount of valid data obtained froraa measurement system compared to the amount that was expected to beobtained under normal conditions.o Representativeness - expresses the degree to which data accuratelyand precisely represent a characteristic of a population, parametervariations at a sampling point, a process condition, or an environ-mental condition.o Comparability - expresses the confidence with which one data setcan be compared to another.

lable 5-1 summarizes the QA sbjectiês of the North Cavalcade Site RI. Itshould be noted that these criteria are presented for the purpose of goal-etting. Reference to data quality objectives (DQO's) is contained inAppendix III.•c bxtensive discussion of specific routine procedures to assess precision,accuracy and completeness can be found in Section 6,0 of the ProjectOperations Plan.

001264

111111111̂BIII

TABLE 5-1PRECISION AND COMPLETENESS OBJECTIVES

Measurement Reference * SampleParameter — - - - • •

VolatileOrganicsAcid/BaseNeutralPriorityMetalsTotalCyanidevolatileQrganicsAcid/BaseNeutralsPriorityMetalsTotalCyanideNitratesTron

EPA Method Matrix

8240 Soil

82SO/8270 Soil

6010

9010

624

625

200.7

335353.3236 1

Soil

Soil

Water

Water

Water

WaterWaterWater

Representative

grab

grab

grab

grab

grab

grab

grab

crabgraburab

Precision

"ect ion: 5Revi s ion : 4Date: 6/28/8*Page: 2 of 2

(Relative StandardDev i a t i o n )

25% RSD

20% RSD

20% RSD

251 RSD

20% RSD

15% RSD

15% RSD

20% RSD15% RSD15% RSD

Completeness

90%

90%

90%

90%

90%

90%

90%

90%90%90%

s Pesticide &iii

FOB

* Methodsfor E v a )

608

for Chmicaluat ing So l i

Water

Analysis ofd Was t e s , SW

grab

Water and Wastes•46 , July 1982.

15% RSD

EPA - 600/4-79-02,

90%

Test Methods

I001265

IIIIIIII


6. SAMPLING PROCEDURESSamples to be collected at the site include air, soil, groundwater, surfacewater and sediment.Each matrix has a standard sampling procedure associated with it in theREM II Site Investigation Procedures Manual. The methods to be utilized atthe North Cavalcade site are based on:

MatrixSampling of Organic Vapors andAirborne ParticulatesSubsurface Soil SailingMonitoring Well Installation andGroundwater SamplingSurface Water SamplingSediment SamplingSample Bottle Preparation,Sample Preservation and Maximum

Hold TimespH - Electrometric MethodField Measurement of SpecificConductanceSite Location Procedure andPhotographic Evidence

Method No.

38160163816031381601338160123816011

3817007381010038160073817002

These methods are detailed in Appendix V of the Proj- Jt Operations Plan.An extensive discussion cf health and safety guidelines can be found inSection 8.0 of the Project Operations Plan. Section 9.0 of the POP alsodiscusses each field activity as to health and safety guidelines. Alsoincluded are detailed procedures, responsibilities, equipment, and samplemanagement.A duplicate sample will be taken for every 10 samples collected in aparticular matrix. One field blank sample will be collected for each dayof sampling. One field blank will be provided for each day of airsampling. Trip blanks will be enclosed in each sample case shipped eachday. These trip blanks will consist of analyte-free water obtained fromthe laboratory and will be analyzed for Priority Pollutant Volatilecoffipounds only. Table 6-1 shows duplicate and blank retirements.The Onsite Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that all samples areadequately packed, labeled, and transported to the correct laboratoryfacility. The Analytical Coordinator will dispense correct sample numbers.The Site Quality Assurance Coordinator will be responsible for provision ofsample duplicates, field blanks and trip blanks.The guidelines used to select sampling locations can be found in Section4.0 of the Work Plan and 9.0 of the POP.i Containers and preservatives for each sample matrix can be found in Table6-2.

001266

1I11111111(HI

Table 6-1CONTAINER AND PRESERVATIVE REQUIREMENTS

Matrix (Parameter)

AIR{Acid Base Neutrals)

SOIL(All Parameters)

WATER(Volatile Organics)WATER(Acid/Base NeutralNitrates)MATER(PriorityPollutant Metals)

WATER(Cyanide)WATERfPp^f iî'^ i PC'S \\ fwww^ * *4 it * , * ^ttij 1

SampleContainer

SiliatedGlassFilters

2-16 02.wide mouthjars

2-40 ml.VGA vials1 Gal. GlassAmber

1 L. Glass orpolyethylene

1 L. Glass orpolyethylene1 fzal r:i*~~j. uax . <'-i.Ka.aoAmber

Shipping Con.jiner

Coleman cooleror equivalentwAermiculiteor similar shockabsorber .Place in 2 mil. thickpolyethylene bagand put in metal canfilled wAermiculite.Ship same as above.Same asabove.Same asabove.

Same asabove.

Same asabove.Saiit? asabove.

Sectv:n: 5Rev i s e :n: 4Date: : /28/85Page: 2 of 2

Preservative

Keep tubes coolprior to use.

Cool, 4 'C .

Cool, 4 °C .

Cool, 4 e C.

HNtX to pH<2

Add NaOK to pH>12GlasscontainersHexane rinsed &Baked.

001267

IIIIISection: 7Revision: 4Date: 8/28/85Page: 1 of 2

SAMT,E AND DOCUMENT CUSTODY PROCEDURES

II

Samples will be identified using a coding system that will allow easy re-trieval of information concerning a particular sample.Each sample will be labeled as follows:XXX-YY-ZZZ-000

XXX - Site CodeVY - Matrix Type SampleZZZ - Station Location No.000 - NO. of sample at a particular station

All samples will be labeled with a chain-of-custody label. Each metal can(or other sample container) shall be marked with the laboratory nams &address and D.O.T. class. This will assure the proper handling of samplesin the event they should be separated trom the shipping container. Theshipping container will also be labeled with the laboratory name andaddress. A completed chain of custody record will be enclosed in everyshipping container. An unbroken chain of custody between the point ofsampling and the time analysis results are received will ensure legallysound evidence in the event of enforcement action. Table 7-1 lists SOP'sfor sample custody.Ail samples will be shipped via Federal Express to the contracted labora-tory, delivered to * ;e laboratory by COM staff or picked up by laboratorypersonnel. All sampxes to be collected will be documented with photo-graphic evidence of the sample location. At each location where sampleswere collected a derailed description of the location, measurement made,e;,c., will be recon'^d in a bound notebook and signed by the samplers.S^cîon 10 .0 of the Iroject Operations Plan provides details and proceduresinvolving sample custody.Document control pro' ̂ i,:res will follow the;. - establish,and H of the REH Ii Quality Assurance Program Plan.Ttoese procedures cover the following documents:

in Sections C, F,

Working pocuments and DeliverabiesAll working documents designated in the Work Plano

o

Technical Operations ManualHealth and Safety Assurance ManualQuality Assurance Program PlanAll working documents required for the productiondeliverables

o All deliverables as described in Figure 3 . 4 .ipment/Seryices Procurement Documentso Supplieso Subcontractors

001268

ISection: 7Revision: 0Date: 6/28/85Page: 3 of 3

TABLE 7-1SAMPLE CUSTODY PROCEDURES

Procedure TitleSection LSample Handling and ClassificationField NotebooksSite Location Procedure and

Photogrphic EvidenceSample IdentifictionSample Container LabelingSample Bottle Preparation, Preservation

and Maximum Hold TimesSamples Collected for Quality Control Purposes

Section M

Chain of Custody

SIPH Method Number

381700038170013817002

381700338170043817007

3817010

3817005

J

001269

IIIIIIIIII

Section: 8Revision: 4Date: 8/28/K5Page: 1 of 1

REM II Site Investigation Protocol will be used to calibrate allequipment that will be used on site. The following lists the calibrationmethod numbet that will be utilized for on-site field equipment.

8. CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY

Equipment

HNU PI 101D.O. PROBECONDUCTIVITY METERpH METERLUCLUM PE RADIATIONMETER

RESPIRABLE DUSTMONITOR

OVA

X-RAY FLUORESCENCEMACHINE

CalibrationMethod

3816008381500138160013810100

See LudlumManual

See Mini ramManualSee OVAManual

See XRFManual

CalibrationFrequency

Once/WeekEach working dayonce/monthbefore going onsitesolutionSee LudlumManual

See Mini ram Manual

See OVAManual

See XRF Manual

CalibrationStandards

Isobutylenewater w/known DOknown standardpH buffer

known radiationfields

Seo Mini ramManualMethane &other specificgasesSee XRF Manual

An extensive discussion of calibration procedures can be found in Section1 1 .0 of the Project Operations Plan. Specific equipment use and calibra-tion procedures are included in Appendices IV and V.The calibration procedures and frequency of calibration of laboratoryinstns*mts will follow the specifications of the laboratory contract.use and frequency of these procedures will be verified during thelaboratory site evaluations.

The

001270

eiiiiii


9. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURESGeneral Programmatic requirements for analytical procedures are establishedin Section E and N of the REK II Quality Assurance Prograa Plan. Section Eestablishes the need for formally documented procedures. Section Nretires:

o

ii

The specification of analytical procedures in the ProjectOperations Plan (POP) for all engineering data (screeningfield samples, pilot laboratory studies) and non-CLPgenerated data.Groundwater samples will be taken to determine the aerial extent andmanitude of groundwater contamination at North Cavalcade Site. Subsurfacesoil sample will be taken to determine the vertical and aerial extent ofsoil contamination. Surface water and sediment samples will be taken indrainage pathways to determine surface migration of contaminants. Airsamples will be collected to evaluate ambient air quality. Wells andsurface water will also be sampled in the second round.Table 9-1 shows procedures and method numbers to be used for each of thefield investigation activities and laboratory work. All sample analyseswill be performed by an EPA approved laboratory. Selection of the labora-tory will be based on evaluation of technical competence and price.

001271

IIIIIIII

Project Operas.jns Plan - FinalNorth Cavalcade Site

Sec t i o n : 9Revu ion : 4Date: 8/28/85Page: 2 of 3

TABLE 9-1SAMPLE MATRIX

OR TYPE ANALYSIS REQUIRED METHOD NO.

SOILSSurrogatesFull laboratoryscreen (up to30 samples)

Selected HighlyContaminatedSamples (up to10 samples)

SE33IMENT

ISURFACE WATER(1st & 2ndround)

GROUWDWATEP.WATER(1st round)

GC/FID Surrogate Orgar.icsMetal Analysis~ Priority Pollutant Organicr;- Priority Pollutant Metals- Total Cyanide- Iron- Priority Pollutant Organics- Priority Pollutant Metals- Iron- Cyanide- EP Tcxicity

ab

ab

Modified 610XRF8240/8250/8270/80806010901060108240/8250/8270/8080601060109010131C

- Priority Pollutant Organics a 8240/8250/8270/8080Volatile Organics, Acid-Base/HeutralExtractables, Pesticides/PCBs- Priority Pollutant Metals 6010- Total Cyanide 9010- iron 6010

Priority Pollutant OrganicsPriority Pollutant MetalsTotal CyanideIronPHTemperatureConductivityPriority Pollutant Or7anicsPriority Pollutant Metals*Total CyanideNitratesIron*pHTemperatureConductivity

ab

ab

624/625/608200.7335.1303B150.1170.1120.1624/625/608200.7335.1353.3303B150.1170.1120.1

12-2

001272

IIII

I

Project: Oper ons plan - FinalNorth Cavalcaae Site

Sect ion : 9Revis ion: 4Date: 3/28/85Page: 3 of 3

(con't)

SAMPLE MATRIXOR TYPE ANALYSIS REQUIRED METHOD NO

GSCUNTS-ZATERWATER(2nd round)

GEOTECHNICAL-SOILS

Priority Pollutant OrganicsPriority Pollutant MetalsCopper (Cu), Chrome (Cr) .Zinc £Zn) , Arsenic (As)IronPHTemperatureConductivitySieve (200 mesh)Natural Moisture ContentUnconfined Compressive StrengthVertical Permeability TestsAtterberg Limits

624/625/608200.7304303B150.1170.1120.1ASTM D-0422-63ASTM D2216ASIT-I D2166ASTM D2434ASTM 4318-63

a. Priority Pollutant Organics include Volatile Organics (VQA),Acid-Base/tteutral (A-B/tt), Extractables, and Pesticides/PCSs.

b. A library search will be performed that will identify up to 10compounds of the volatile organic nature and up to 20 compoundsfrom the acid, base/neutral '-jmpounds with concentrations of up to10 percent of internal standards.

c. Analyze one-third of samples collected for VQA and pesticide/KBs.Analyze all samples for A-B/N.d. Analyze one- Jiird of samples collected for priority pollutantmetals. Analyze remaining two-thirds for Cu, Cr, Zn, and As.e. Consult with EPA.

References:1. Method for Organic Chemical Analysis cf Municipal and Industrial

Wastewater, EPA-6QO/4-82-C57, July, 1982.2. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes, SW-846, July, 1982.3. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes,EPA~600/4-79~020, March, 1979.

12-3

001273

IIIIIIIIIIIIII


10. DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION AND REPORTINGData reduction, validation and reporting are in accordance with the generalrequirements established in Section G of the HEM II Quality AssuranceProgram Plan and can be found in Section 13.0 of the Project OperationsPlan.Should variance from obtaining the completeness goals occur, the SiteManager will confer with EPA and a determination will be made as to thevalidity of the task completeness and the requirement for continuedsampling. Results that are outside the stated precision and accuracycontrol limits will be flagged as out of control data. A n»mo will beprepared by the lab stating the reason, as understood, for out of controldata reported. The Site Manager will then confer with EPA and determineif:

1) data accepted, with explanation2) data rejected, the sample will be re-analyzed3) data rejected, field sampling repeated

This method will be employed to ensure that all data accepted is ofsufficient quality, but data will not be rejected without evaluation of theci rcumstances .A standard quality assurance sample will be submitted for selected sampleparameters. An identification number will be assigned to it and will besubmitted to the laboratory as a bonafide sample, the results of thequality assurance analyses will be recorded in a permanently boundnotebook. A monthly QA report prepared by the QA Coordinator will advisethe Laboratory Director and the Laboratory Manager of the level of bothprecision and accuracy of laboratory results. The minimum number of QCchecks is provided in Table 10-2.Hie overall accuracy of a commercial laboratory's data can be determined byassessing the laboratory's performance on the USEPA's WP and WS PerformanceEvaluation series. If the laboratory analyzes Standard Reference Materials(SKM's) issued by the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) along with theinvestigative saniples, the reported percent recovery data can be used toassess accuracy. As a general rule, the reported result should be within10% Relative Standard Deviation (RSD) of the true value.The laboratory supervisor or his delegate will verify all paperwork, log insamples establishing unique log numbers and label, assign priority andhazard rating criteria, and store in refrigerated Sample Bank.

lab chemist will be responsible for calculating and reporting theaeasurad value of all analyses. Data reduction will take place at thispoint and will be reported along with problems encountered and deviationsmade from standard procedures.Hie subcontracted laboratory will be responsible for putting all datareceived through a QA/QC review. All data will be reviewed for complete-

001274

IIIIIIIIIII


ness, correctness, accuracy, precision and representativeness,will be the principal method of validating data. This review

Data assessment of geotechnical data will be established by the geotech-nical laboratory with review for verification of reduction results andconfirmation of QJVQC requirements by COM.Final report of laboratory data will be submitted to CDM and will includecopies of chain-of-custody fonas, variances from standard methodology,analytical problems encountered (if applicable), sample analytical data,results for QC duplicates and blanks, and recovery data for matrix andsurrogate spikes.Copies of report (hard or computer disk) will be retained and stored by thelaboratory for one year, after which data becomes inactive and transferredto archives. When applicable, documentation of data reduction methods forfield measurements and geotechnical laboratory results will be includedwith data in appropriate project reports.All data generated by local (private) laboratories will be subject to theREM II Data Validation Procedures estblished in the following documents:

o Memorandum 999-PMl-IO-AEGQ-l, REM II Data Validation Procedure,Don Muldoon to Gary Dunbar, July 23, 1984.o Memorandum 999-HS2-I&-AQUW-1, Update of Data Validation Processfor REM II, Don Muldoon to Gary Dunbar, January fl, 1985.o REM II Technical Operations Manual, Section 6.

Following data validation, all data generated at the North Cavalcade sitewill be entered into REMTECH, the REM II technical data base. The datawill be processed, and available for controlled access by the Site Managerand authorized personnel using a site-specific access code.

001275

IIIIIIIIIII

REM Cr ^TPACTOR L A B O R A T O R Y DATAf Sect ion : 10

Rev i s i o n : 4Date: 8/28/85Paqe: 3 of 4

Data Validat ion and Tracking System

001276

TABLE 10-2LEVEL OF EFFORT FOR ANALYTICAL SERVICES

Sect ion : 10Revis ion: 4Hate: 8/28/85Page: 4 of 4

Parameter Lab Blanks Spikes or Surrogates Lab Duplicates Reference Samples

Base/Neutral/AcidCompounds

Volatiles

Pesticides and PCB's

Priority PollutantMetalsCyanide

IronNitrate

Surrogate Analysis{Modified Method 610 }

XRF Analysis

Cane per analytical runand at least one perset of samples

One per day or 8 hourshift

One per set of samplesor a minimum of 1 in 10

One per 10 samples

One per analytical runot at least one perset-up

Surrogates added toeach sample and matrixspikes added to onesample per setSurrogates added toeach sample and matrixspikes added to onesample per setOne spike per set ofsamples or a minimumof 1 in XOOne per 10 samples

One per analytical runor at least one perset-up

One per set of samples Quarterlyor s minimum of 1 in 10

One per set of samples Quarterlyor a minimum o£ 1 in 10

One per set of samples Quarterlyor a minimum of 1 in 10

One per 10 samples

One per analytical runor at least one perset-upOne per 10 samples One per 10 samples One per 10 samplesOne per set of samplesor at least one per20 sablesOne per analytical runand at least one perset of samplesNot Applicable

One spike per set ofsamples or at leastone per 20 samplesOne spike per set ofsamples or at leastone per 10 samplesNot Applicable

One per set of samplesor at least one per20 samplesOne per set ofsamples or at leastone per 10 samplesOne per 10 samples

Quarterly

Quarterly

QuarterlyQuarterly

Mot specificallyfor this project

Not applicable

001277

IIIIIII

I

Section: 11Revision; 4Date: 8/26/85Page: 1 of 1

11. INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL CHECKSGeneral programmatic requirements for internal quality control checks areestablished in Sections £, J and P of the REM II Quality Assurance ProgramPlan. Section E lists a number of Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) onsample collection and quality control which are found in Section 3.0 of theSite investigation Procedures Manual (SIPM). Section J lists the types oftechnical reviews required for quality control of deliverables. Section Pestablishes the requirements for controlling nonconfonaances and therelated internal quality control checks.Quality control checks for this project include sample duplicates, stan-dards, surrogates, matrix spikes and blanks. Sampling procedures arespecified in Section 9.0 of the Project Operations Plan. Section 14 .0Internal Quality Control checks outlines types of QC checks. Procedures arecontrolled through standard sampling procedures in the field and specificEPA methods in the laboratory.Calibration of field equipment will be performed according to the methodsprescribed in the field investigation protocols. When an instrument is notlisted in the protocol, it will be necessary to refer to the operationsmanual for that particular instrument. It will be the responsibility ofthe Regional Equipment Manager to see that field equipment is calibrated atthe prescribed frequency. Instrument tuning and performance checks are QCefforts that are to be conducted by the laboratory. Internal QC for thegeotechnical laboratory includes calibration of instruments and usage ofthe QA/QC procedures specified in the AS1M standards listed in Section 9 ofthis document.Site-specific internal QC checks for deliverables will be implemented asestablished in Figure 3.4 of this document. These pertain to single personand committee review.

I

I001278

I1IIIIIII

Section: 12Rsvision: 4Date: 6/28/85Page: 1 of 2

12. PERFORMANCE AND SYSTEM AUDITSAudits will be performed in accordance with the procedures established inSection 0 of the REM II Quality Assurance program Flan and Euwaarized inits Audit Flow chart reproduced as Figure 12-1. All audits must beinitiated by the REM II Quality Assurance Director (QAD) or his Deputy, orby the COM Corporate Quality Assurance Manager. The REM II QA Coordinatorfor Region VI, Al Sun, and auditors appointed by the QAD (Robert Clinger),or his Deputy (Ulric P. Gibson), will be responsible for implementing theaudits.12.1 SYSTEMS AUDITSSystems audits will be carried out to verify that:

o Hie necessary procedures of the Work Plan, Remedial Investigation,and Feasibility Study phases are established.

o Ifce reviews and sign-offs required in Section 3 of the TOM (seeTables 3-5, 3-6 and 3-7) are being implemented.

The schedule of systems audits is presented in Figure 3-3.12.2 PERFORMANCE AUDITSThe QAD, or his Deputy, will determine the need for a performance audit(s),taking into consideration the reconsaendations of the REM II Regional QACoordinator. Such audits are carried out to observe and verify theimplementation of the procedures established in the planning documents(Work Plan, Project Operations Plan). Should the QAD decide in favor of aperformance audit, he will establish the schedule and identify the auditteam in accordance with Section 0 of the REM II Quality Assurance ProgramPlan.

I001279

f MdTVfACI lV tTT

1

-te- APPQMftEQ ft

1

~»» Pflf PAfltP »t AUOtTtEAkJ t A«*ROVCO•T o*. otRfCton

j

^^ Auotrco

4

AUDITCOHOUCfCO

i

/ w

>/ \/'ABE -<OM \ **— a*-&attf ORMANCI y — ̂ "\(e.Miif not/\V 1N/ ri»1^3

OA DMCCfOH MO tire 3TECH OP WAMAOCR *

MCED *O»— •*•

. . ._.

H CM OPWAMAdEft

MAIfOMAtIf CH OP UAHAQER

ICOftPORAIf OUA t l TV ASSURANCeUttNAQFfl R M IC lASAnV t COMfERT O B t S t H V t COn«€CHVE Att lOM

AUttIT tEAU t EADCRtNFOMMl It CMMA MA Of ft t

Of

AUDIT ' « CADE ftNOfWItS ( * . 4 C C 1 O R

Of CdUPtE ilOt* OFAUDIT *

PECOUMt MUAf!OMS

-oQJ ct> n>< nCD -•• rf-.. Oooo u

Figure 12-1 Audit Flow Chart o ro-ti CD

001280

III1IIIIII


PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCEPreventative maintenance of field monitoring equipment used at the NorthCavalcade Street Site will be conducted in accordance with Section K of theREM II Quality Assurance Program Plan. The master equipment controlrecord, general equipment maintenance, repair and calibration, and criticalspare parts and equipment which will be used for the site sampling andanalytical program are detailed in Section 16.0 and Appendix IV of the POP.An equipment inventory control system is maintained by the Regional Equip-ment Manager. The documentation for each piece of equipment includes allpertinent information relative to its make and maintenance requirements.The Regional Equipment Manager will be responsible for supplying spareparts to all critical equipment used on site. See Table 13-1 formaintenance of equipment.

001281

iiiiiiiiii

Sect ion : 13Rev i s i o n : 4Date : S/2S/85Page: 2 of 2

TABLE 13 - 1EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE

EQUIPMENT

HNU Photoana lyzer w / 1 0 . 2 lampOrgan i c Vapor AnalyzerPortab le Power Auger w/3 ft . in terva l sLudlum Rad ia t i on Mete"-Resp i rab l e Dust MonitorSpec i f i c ConductancepH MeterThermometerX-ray Fûrescent AnalyzerWe i r flow measurement device orMarsh McBirney water current meter

Ful l - face resp i rator

MAINTENANCE

Charg i ng Da i l yCheck Gas Cy l . Da i l yDecon after each sampleCharg ing Da i l yInspect da i lyand check batteryCheck Battery Da i l yCheck Battery Da i l yInspect Da i l yCheck battery Da i l yInspect Da i l yand check flailyClean Da i l y

001282

I

II

14. DATA MEASUREMENT ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

S

Section 14Revision i

Dete 08/28/65l of 1

data

in

for calculating precision, accuraw iir^f of

Prf°f^reS l

and detennination of standard^dîkeêcoveries ? «J«antitationConpleteness of data is the percentaae nffor assessnant out of the to?alcon^letenoss criterion for all *"

I

I

001283

IIIIIIIIIIII

Section: 15Revision; 4Date: 8/26/85Page: 1 of 1

15. CORRECTIVE ACTIONAll nor.conformances with the established quality control procedures will beidentified and controlled in accordance with Section P of the RS* IIQuality Assurance Program Plan. The Site Manager/Onsite Coordinator shallensure that no additional work which is dependent on the nonconformingactivity will be performed until the nonconformance is corrected.Corrective actions will be insp^raented and documented in accordance withSection Q of the REM II Quality Assurance Program Plan and the QualityAssurance Audit Procedures. A summary of the procedure for correctingnonconformance is depicted in figure 12-1, Audit Flow Chart.It is the responsibility of any staff member to repcru a suspected non-conformance throughout the course of the project.

I001284

IIIIIIIIIII


16. QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTS TO HANAGD1&ITThe Site Manager is responsible for ensuring that quality assurancerecords are properly stored and filed. It is the responsibility of theSite Quality Assurance Coordinator to maintain and update quality assurancerecords and to prepare periodic quality assurance reports containingassessments of precision and completeness, results of audits problems andrecommended solutions. The Onsite Coordinator ahall identify whichdocuments are to be maintained as quality assurance records. At theconclusion of the Remedial Investigation, a Quality Assurance Report willbe prepared and submitted to EPA.The Quality Assurance director or his designee will review all aspects ofthe implementation of this Quality Assurance Project Plan on a monthlybasis and submit a summary report to the Chairman of the Board and theExecutive Vice President of COM in accordance with Section B.8 of the REHII Quality Assurance Program Plan. These reviews will include anassessment of data quality, and the results of systems and/or performanceaudits as appropriate.In the event of a disagreement between the Quality Assurance Director andthe Technical Operations Manager on the adequacy of corrective actionsimplemented by the latter, the CDM Corporate Quality Assurance Manager maybe informed and requested to confer on a resolution of the dispute inaccordance with Section 0 of the Quality Assurance Program Plan (see Figure12-1 herein).

Section 19.0 of the Project Operations Plan details objectives, implemen-tation and responsibilities regarding quality assurance reporting.

001285

IIIIIIIIIIII

Appendix IRevision: 4Date: 8/28/85Page: 1 of 1

APPENDIX IREFERENCES

CDM Team. October 1984. REM II Quality Assurance Program Plan. Perfor-mance of Remedial Activities at Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites.Document No. 999-QC1-RT-ACAB-3CDM Taam. December 1984. REM IX Site Investigation Procedures Manual(Draft). Performance of Remedial Response Activities at UncontrolledHazardous Waste Sites.CDM Team. June 1985. Model Quality Assurance Project Plan. Document No.999-PM1-IO-BFCY-1CDM Team. April 1985. REM II Technical Operations Manual, performance ofRemedial Activities at Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites. DocumentMO. 999-TS1-RT-ASSK-3CDM Team. August 1985. Project Operations Plan for the North CavalcadeStreet Site, Houston, Texas Work Plan. Document No, 141~WP1-OP~AUNU~3.CDM Team. August 1985. Work Plan for the North Cavalcade Street Site,Houston, Texas, Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study. Document No.141-WF1-WP-AZZF-3.

Muldoon, Donald. July 1984. REM II Data Validation Procedure. Memorandumto Gary Dunbar. Document No. 999-PM1-IO-AEGO-1.Muldoon, Donald. January 1985. Update of Data Validation Process for REMII. Memorandum to Gary Dunbar. Document No, 999-HS2-IO-AQUW-1

USAOHAMA. March 1983. Analytical Methods, Descriptions.USEPA. March 1979. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes,

EPA-600/4-79-02.USEPA. February 1983. Interim Guidelines and Specifications for PreparingQuality Assurance Project Plans, EPA-600/4-83-004.USEPA. 1983. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ChemicalMethods, SW-846.USEPA. July 1984. User's Guide to the Contract Laboratory Program.

II

001286

IIIIIII

Appendix IIRevision; 0

08/28/651 of 2

III

APPENDIX IIGLOSSARY OF TERMS

Audit:A systematic check to determine the quality of operation of somefunction or activity. Audits may be of two basic types: (1) ____audits that consist of a review of the quality control system toensure that a comprehensive set of quality control methods, proced-ures, reviews, and sign-off approvals is established or in place, and(2) pe rfo rmance audit jS in which project activities are observed inprocess £br*"Efieir"compliance with the established quality controlprocedures and requirements.

Data validation:A systematic process for reviewing a body of data against a set ofcriteria to provide assurance that the data are adequate for theirintended use. Data validation consists of data editing, screening,checking, auditing, verification, certification, and review.

Environmentally Related Measurements:A term used to describe essentially all field and laboratoryinvestigations that generate data involving (1) the measurement ofchemical, physical, or biological parameters in the environment; (2)the determination of the presence or absence of criteria or prioritypollutants in waste streams; (3) assessment of health and ecologicaleffect studies; (4) conduct of clinical and epidemiological inves-tigations; (5) performance of engineering and process evaluations; (6)study of laboratory simulation of environmental events; and (7) studyor measurement on pollutant transport and fate, including diffusionmodels,

Qua!i ty Assurance:Hie total integrate program for assuring the reliability of monitoringand measurement data. A system for integrating the quality planning,quality assessment, and quality improvement effort to meet userrequirements.

Quality.Assurance Program Plan;An orderly assemblage of management policies, objectives, andprinciples, and general procedures by which an agency or laboratoryoutlines how it intends to produce data of known and accepted quality.

Quality Assurance Project Plan:An orderly assembly of detailed and specific procedures whichdelineates how data of known and accepted quality are produced for aspecific project. (A given agency or laboratory would have only one

001287

IIIIIIIII

Appendix IIRevision: 0

08/28/852 of 2

oîality assurance program plan, but would have a quality assuranceproject plan for each of its projects.)Quality Control:

routine application of procedures for obtaining prescribedstandards of performance in the ir.onitoring and measurement process.

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPj:A written document which details an operation, analysis, or actionwhose mechanisms are thoroughly prescribed and which is commonlyaccepted as the method for performing certain routine or repetitivetasks.

i

001288

IIIIII

APPENDIX I I I

LETTERiiii

001289

IIIIIIIIIII

CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.envroftmgntai engineer scientists.

A management consultants

August 26, 198S

Mr. John CochranU. S. Environmcntai Protection AgencyRegion VI1201 Elm StreetDallas, Texas 75270Doc. Ctrl, No. I4 I -WPI-EP-BKZC-1Re: North Cavalcade Street Site Quality Assurance Project Plan

Dear John:As you have requested, the letter prepared by Ms. Sarah Landtiser and meresponse to earlier comments by Mr. Sieve Lemmons, QualilVI, is now included as an Addendum to the Quality AssuranceCavalcade Street Site. The issue with respect

Austin r e >3J 7 B 7 1 -

ft

MW, B pr»l* g. ,« „„„„, OTrwB 2S wKKU"*" ""With respect to the additional comments on

, Mr Al Sunassurance in EPA Region V. ; and Ms. Sarah LanSr'. uaCooromator, whose responsibilities are limited to site activi

2' 8nd

the <«

Plans", June 28, 1985 (Doc. No.

001290

IIIIIIIIIII

CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.

3. The Data Quality Objectives (DQOsJhave been addressed in an appendix to the QAPPentitled "Correspondence from EPA Regional Site Project Officer to EPA Office of QualityAssurance Concerning Data Quality Objectives" in accordance with your directive.

4. The final 0* report requirements and contents have been specified in the OAPP,5. The sampling and analytical procedures for air quality monitoring are specified fn theProject Operations Plan for the North Cavalcade Street Site. These procedures havedeen reviewed by Clement Associates and are deemed adequate for performance of aPublic Health Evaluation.

I trust that the changes made in the QAPP for the North Cavalcade Street Site and the additionalresponses contained in the Addendum to the QAPP provide all the relevant information for finalapproval. Should there be any further questions, however, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely yours,CAMP DRESSER &MCKEE INC, ,{/Lcrf^, Î <~ ̂-*^°v^ i ̂Robert 5. KierSite ManagerNorth Cavalcade Street Site.

i

001291

IIIIIIIIIII

environmental engmtffs.s, & management cofisuitam

CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.

0«ve. Sutie 220Austin. Tews 7fl73i512345-6651

July 8, 1985

Mr. Steve LemmonsQuality Assurance OfficerU. S. Environmental Protect ion AgencyFirst International Bui ld ing1201 Elm StreetDa l l a s , TX 75270RE: North Cavalcade Site

Quality Assurance PlanProject No.: 7777-141-WP1-PRPLNDear Mr. Lemmons:This is to confirm the issues and agreements addressed during ourtelephone conversat ion on June 27, 1985. The additional work outlinedherein is subject to approval by John Cochran, ERA Regional Site Proj-ect Officer .The air samples wil l be analyzed by carbon molecular sieve adsorption,£PA Method TO-2. CDM's objective for the air sampling precision is4^ 100£. As the air sampling will be used only as a relative indica-tion of off~site contamination, accuracy is not a critical issue. Thedownwind sample results will be compared to the upwind sample resultsto determine migration of airborne contaminates originating from thesite. In that + 100% precision is anticipated, direct comparison isva l id-and samplTng procedure accuracy need not be estimated.The soil sampl ing program ts based on a two step approach. The firststep will consist of ioils invest igat ions with a power auger (approxi-mately 5 foot depth) . The primary objective of the power augerinvest igat ion step is to determine areal extent of contamination forthe entire s ite, fhis in it ia l step shall redefine, if necessary, theproposed boring and well s i tes , i.e., several auger sites will balocated 1n the vic in ity of each of these boring and well sites. Thefirst step also will include those areas which historically have notexhibited obvious sources of contamination, for example, ponds,lagoons, tanks, or treated pole storage piles. The sampling plan forthese unknown regions will be established by means of a grid system.The known contaminant source areas will be measured in terms ofsurface area. The mean area will serve as the grid spacing size.Approximately 25 percent of the total number of auger borings will beallocated to these unknown areas . The remaining 75 percent will focuson known source areas. This allows for a cost effective as well as arandom and representative sampl ing invest igat ion.

001292

ICAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.

iiiiiiiiii

Mr. Steve LemmonsJuly 8, 1985Page 2

The second step in of the sampling program comprises of hollow stemauger borings (approximately 25 foot depth). The proposed locationsfor these borings were determined by the use of overlays of aerialphotographs dated from 1955 through 1985, previous sampling results,and Interviews with past employees of Houston Creosoting Co. Thisstep is designed to focus upon those areas which show historicalevidence of likely contamination, i .e. the second step is based onpre-conceptual determinations, but includes borings in areas where thepresence of contamination is currently not known. This step allowsfor flexibility in siting sample points, based on results from thegeophysical survey and power auger investigations.We bel ieve this sampling program wi l l generate the most useful andconclusive data possible. The previous sampling data were not con-sidered critical to the formulation of this plan; historical infor-mation from aerial photos was weighed much more heavily. The loca-tions and results of these previous analyses are described in Section3,0 of the Project Operations P lan . The quantity of data generated isinsufficient for val id statistical determination of the level of con-fidence of our proposed plan as too few samples were taken and theemphasis was on delineating areas of maximum levels of contamination.Mr. J. W. Sun of CDH's Dallas Office will contact you to schedule anappointment to discuss other means of establ i sh ing confidence levelsin the field sampl ing program; he is the COM Regional VI QualityAssurance Coordinator.In addition to soil borings, seven monitor wells will be located alongthe perimeter of the site to characterize the hydrogeology and thewater quality entering and ex i t ing the s ite. Well OW-009 was sitedsouth of the drainage ditch to assess possible interactions betweenthe drainage ditch and the groundwater system. Well OW-010 was sitedin the area of a triangular surface impoundment evident 1n historicalphotos. The monitor well sites will be reassessed after results ofthe geophysical survey and the preliminary power auger invest igat ionshave been evaluated.Figure 8.1 in the Project Operations Plan (also attached) shows allproposed sampling locations. The sampling locat ion layout has beenpresented to and approved by John Cochran, EPA Regional Site ProjectOfficer, at a prel iminary meeting in CDM' s Austin officeApril 3, 1985, and by his review of CDM's draft Work Plan for theNorth Cavalcade Street Site.As we discussed in regard to the petroleum hydrocarbon analysis ofsoil samples, due to the small quantity of samples analyzed for thisparameter, we believe an extensive correlation analysis is not an im-portant factor. The primary use of these data is to qualify field in-frared spectrophotometer data. At the conclusion of the Initial re-view of analytical data, it will be decided whether quantitative useof these data is desired to further characterize the s i te . If at this

001293

IIIIIIIII

CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.Mr. Steve LemmonsJuly 8, 1985Page 3

time it is deemed applicable, a correlation analysis shall be perform-ed to determine the indicator compound(s) to be used in judging sitecontamination relative to petroleum hydrocarbons.In regards to your concerns about the laboratory analysis of soil sam-ples, we agree to submit a letter to your office after the surrogatesoil sample screening results have been analyzed. This letter willclarify the criteria employed in choosing which samples will be sentto the laboratory for complete and detailed analyses as described inthe Project Operations Plan. Also included in this letter will bechain-of-custody information; in particular, the person at the labora-tory who is responsible for receiving the incoming samples. This willserve to expedite questions, should they arise, as to the sequence ofsample handling at the laboratory.We further agree to submit a Quality Assurance Final Report to youroffice within 30-60 days of the completion of the Remedial Investiga-tion Final Report. This Report will summarize QA objectives and pro-ject success in meeting set objectives during the RI phase. The re-port will address the following items:

1. Quality assurance management2. Status of completion of project operations3. Data quality assessment4. Results of Performance Evaluations and System Audits5. Identif ication of quality assurance needs

In closing we would Hke to reiterate to you our commitment to theformulation, performance and conc lus ion of an investigation of thehighest caliber. If there Is anything further we can do to assistyou, please do not hesitate to call.Sincerely,CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC,

Sarah A. LandtiserSite Quality Assurance Officerkgmcc: John Cochran

J. W, Sunproject file

CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC

Robert S. KierSite Manager

Enclosure

001294