GUHMNCX FOR PREPARATION OP COMBINED
fOBX/QUALITY ASSURAICE PROJECT PLN4S
FOR ENVHOtffNIAL MONITORING
I
(d*S OA - 1)
OFFICE OP WATER REGULATIONS AND SEAKMROS
U.S. ENVmXMENTAL FK3TECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, O.C. 20460
.•lay, 1984
-------
In order to help ensure that EPA's environnental monitoring
data is of known quality, the Agency has established specific requirements
for development of Quality Assurance Program Plans and Quality Assurance
Project Plans. These QA plans are required for environnental monitoring
tasks accomplished within EPA, by its contractors and its grantees. By
regulation, all QA Project Plans oust conform in content with QM4S-
005/80 "Interim Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality Assurance
Project Plans." /
This OW Worx/OA Project Plan Guidance document was developed in
confonnance with QAMS-005/8Q and has been authorized as an official alter-
native to that document. The OW document reflects extensive experience in
use of QAMS-005/80 and is in itself a product of more than two years of
intensive development by a Pederal/Regional/State team. The culmination
of the development process was a large scale pilot implementation of the
OW document beginning in April 1983. During the pilot implementation,
the guidance was applied to a wide range of Agency, State and contractor
environmental monitoring tasks involving water programs, solid waste
programs and Superfund programs. A pilot implementation workshop held
in October 1983 indicated uniform concurrence in the clarity and utility
of the document by EPA, State and contractor participants. In the
meantime, the OW guidance document was selected as the agency-wide model
for QA project plan development.
The OW guidance document was prepared to expedite the preparation of
water monitoring plans which will ensure practical, cost-effective data
acquisition and use. While water monitoring examples are utilized in the
guidance for illustration purposes, the guidance has been utilized for and
is applicable to other media and program applications including those of
RCRA and Superfund. .
The docunent is designed to eliminate the necessity for preparation of
multiple documents such as standard work plans and quality assurance projects
plans. The format and approach are designed to ensure practical utility
recognizing that the detail of each plan can vary widely. Simple
tasks will frequently require brief plans. Complex tasks may involve
a comprehensive document.
Effective implementation of the guidance document can have a range of
important payoffs. Duplication of effort through each State developing
its own QA project plan format and procedures will be eliminated, conserving
valuable State resources. Economic waste resulting from data acquired
at considerable cost and effort - but of limited and often suspect reli-
ability - will be reduced. A basis for combining or excluding data from
diverse sources will exist since the quality of each data base will be
defined. This latter capability is of special importance in such areas as
cooperative monitoring where the data of the regulated community may be
co-mixed with other data sources.
Additional information on implementation and updates of the .guidance
document can be obtained from Martin W. frossman, QA Officer, EPA (Wt-553)
Washington, D.C. 20460.
-------
FABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Foreword
I.
II.
III.
IV.
Page
Introduction I-I
work/DA Project Plan Guidance ii-i
0. Title Page 1
1, Project Name 1
2. Project Requested By 1
3. Date of Request 1
4. Date of Project Initiation 1
5. Project Officer 1
6. Quality Assurance Officer 1
7. Project Description 1
8. Project Fiscal Information (Optional) 4
9. Schedule of Tasks and Products 4
10. Project Organization and Responsibility 5
11. Data Quality Requirements and Assessments 7
12. Sampling Procedures 9
13. Sample Custody Procedures 9
14. Calibration Procedures and Preventive Maintenance 10
IS. Documentation, Data Reduction and Reporting 11
16. Data Validation 12
17. Performance and System Audits 13
18. Corrective Action 14
19. Reports 15
Wbrk/QA Project Plan Short Fora III-I
Example Work/W Project Plan IV -I
Appendix
-------
Introduction
I. Need for a QA Guidance Docunent
Good professional practice dicates that environmental neasureaent
tasks be adequately conceived, documented and executed so that the
resulting data can be used with some definable degree of confidence.
Penalization of sound Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) procedures
can help ensure control and documentation of data quality. However, unless
such procedures are built into the standard documents and practices
utilized to develop, administer, and evaluate environmental measurement
tasks the procedures can became a marginally useful and burdensome
requirement.
•
This guidance document has been developed to facilitate the incorporation
of sound and useful QA/QC practices into environmental measurement tasks
performed with financial assistance from the Environmental Protection Agency
and/or mandated under Environmental Regulations, which the Agency is responsible
for administering.
Under the Agency's mandatory Quality Assurance Program all its in-house
and externally supported efforts must incorporate sound Quality Assurance
procedures. A key requirement is the Quality Assurance Project Plan. In
order to inftaMnt this requirement the Agency has developed a generalized
Quality Assurance guidance document, Q/MS-005/80, for multimedia use.
Experience with QM4&-005/BO indicated the need to: refine the guidance;
better describe the elements of QA planning; logically combine a work
plan with QA planning; and provide practical examples to assist in preparation
of the QA plans. It was particularly apparent that effective implementation
- 1 -
-------
of QA/QC requirements, required combining the features of a QA Project
Plan with a work plan. Thus a single document would eliminate the dual
effort of preparing two plans and assure the practical incorporation of
QA/QC controls.
Development Process
The EPA guidance development task force was constituted in April 1982
consisting of the lead representative from the Office of Water (OW), a
representative from the Quality Assurance Management Staff (QMS), and
Quality Assurance Officers (QAO's) from EPA Regions II, III and VTI.
These Regional QAO's are responsible for all media programs. Their
i
ample experience in water, air, solid waste and hazardous materials QA '
applications was especially valuable.
This initial team met in July 1982 to formulate a development approach
and schedule (see Exhibit #1). State representatives were quickly selected
to complement the task force. (The task force composition is shown in
Appendix A.) An initial evalution of QAMS-005/80 "interim Guidelines
and Specifications for Preparing Quality Assurance Project Plans* was
conducted. Based on a review of QAMS-005/80 and the team's application
experience with the document, a development package was produced. The
package consisted of a description of the new approach rationale, a
document outline, specific assignments and the schedule depicted previously
in Exhibit II.
In undertaking this effort a range of technical and practical issues
were addressed, including:
- 2 -
-------
Exhibit »i
Date
4/22/82
7/12,13/82
7/16/82
7/21/82
7/23/82
7/27/82
7/30/82
7/30/82
7/30/82
8/27/82
9/1,2/82
1V15/82
1/4/83
1/20 - 21/83
4/15/83
GUIDANCE DOCUMENT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE
APRIL 1982 - APRIL 1983
Activity
Establish Task Force of Headquarters and Regional QA
Officers
Task Force work session (resolve aproach, document
outline, assignments, schedule.)
Complete development package, mail out for Task Force
review.
Complete development package review (Task Force call in
and mail revisions to Martin Broaaman.)
Incorporate Task Force revisions into development
package. Mail cut to Task Force members.
Present concept and development plan to QA/QC Sub Group
of Standing Working Group on Water Monitoring and
wasteload Allocation.
Regional Task Force members finalize selection of state
Task Force members.
i^velopment package sent to-Regions-for-Region/state
review.
Task Force begins initial draft of guidance document
(see individual assignment list - products due as
available with all inputs due 9/1/82.)
Region/State comments due on development package.
Task Force work session to incorporate Region/State
comments, and revise development package. Review
initial draft inputs. Develop new guidance document
outline, task force assignments, and revised development
schedule.
Draft guidance document/development package out for
review to Regions/States and Standing Working Group
on Water Monitoring and Wasteload Allocation.
Comments on draft guidance document and development
package due.
Task Force work session for revision of guidance
document and planning pilot implementation schedule.
Guidance document completed and ready for pilot
implementation by Regions/States.
- 3 -
-------
(1) How can Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) be effectively
integrated into current procedures without creating undue burden while
increasing the utility of the data?
(2) How can flexibility be built into QA/QC guidance such that simple
and comprehensive environmental measurement tasks cap all be accommodated
with "appropriate" coverage?
(3) What constitutes a "project" or "task?"
(41 What range of environmental meaffur-saent tasks can be acccnmodated
under a QA/QC guidance document?
(5) How can Federal QA/QC requirements be effectively adapted and
updated for State use to ensure requirements are met while variations in
State procedures and requirements are accaonodated?
The issues previously described dominated the development of this guidance
document and led to the following resolutions and characteristics:
(1) The QA/QC aspects should be integrated by combining the features
of a QA project plan with a work plan. Thus, a single document eliminates
the dual effort and assures practical incorporation of QA/QC controls.
(2) Flexibility in utilization of the guidance for comprehensive tasks
and those of limited scope was to be achieved by retaining the basic elements
for small and large scale efforts but modifying the detail. For example,
in relatively simple or routine tasks or sub-tasks of a larger program the
information My be covered by a simple reference to a SOP or the major
program docunnt. In the sane way, for cases where a State already has an
"official* work plan requirement, the appropriate elements could be included
in the guidance document by reference.
- 4 -
-------
(3) The decision as to what constitutes a task or "project" admittedly
is a somewhat subjective one. However, the combination Wbrk/QA project plan
oust be comprehensive and detailed enough to cover the task or projects in a
definitive way.
(4) The document was to be designed to cover all aspects of water
environmental aeasuranent froe network design to field wnpling through
laboratory analysis and data reduction and, where applicable, computer input.
(5") The problem of developing a document meeting both Federal and
State requirements was addressed through constitution of a Federal,, Regional,
State task force for development and implementation. Furthermore, the develop-
ment and implementation effort has been designed to provide continuing update,
expansion and improvement of the guidance.
The guidance objectives were carefully addressed throughout the develop-
ment and review process. On-going Federal, Regional, and State inputs
were assured through the task force makeup. The development concept
plans and draft guidance document were critiqued by each of EPA's Regions
and selected State reviewers from these Regions. In addition, the same
materials were reviewed by the QA/QC subgroup of EPA's Standing working Group
on Hater Monitoring and Wasteload Allocation. This Group was constituted of
technical personnel from ASIWPCA, USGS, Industry and environmental groups.
The final test of the utility of the guidance document was the pilot
implementation scheduled to begin in April 1983. Exhibit 12 shows the schedule
developed to carry out the pilot implementation and subsequent planned steps
in guidance development and implementation. Pilot implementation was to
consist of introduction of this guidance in the "normal course of business*
by Federal, Regional and State task group members. The process was to be
as natural possible to "shake out" problems and evaluate the clarity and
-5-
-------
Exhibit #2
Date
GUIDANCE DOCUMENT DEVELOmEOT SCHEDULE
APRIL 1983 - OCTOBER 1983
Activity
04/15/83
04/15/83
06/06-10/33 -
06/27-30/83 -
07/22/83
08/15/83
10/26,27/83
10/28/83
12/31/83
Guidance Document distributed for pilot implementation.
(State use in ambient monitoring and intensive surveys.
State and contractor use in RCRA and Superfund programs)
Implementston support (ongoing) provided as needed.
(va. State Mater Control Board, N.J. Dept. of Environmental
Protection etc.) Develop, on on-going basis, concepts for
a nationwide implementation. Plans include workshop for
pilot implementation participants and National/Regional
rkshops for PY 84.
Ptugiam Plan/Project Plan implementation meetings for six
States of Region I (Separate meetings with Water Program
staffs & consolidated lab staffs in each state.) Original
plan of briefing on OW guidance document expanded to
include: FY 84 QA grant requirements (40CFR Part 30);'QA
Program Plan requirements; and OW Project Plan guidance
document. .,.«-,
Guidance document task force members meet at QA Officer's
Meeting, San Francisco to develop draft user inquiry
critique for States & contractor's utilizing document in
pilot implementation.
Pilot implementation inquiry packages developed and
provided to task force members. (Package consists of memo
requesting responses to nine questions on pilot implemen-
tation.)
Responses to pilot implementation inquiry due. Initiate
analysis of responses and planning for Fall workshop
based upon responses.
Fall workshop on pilot implementation (Participants to
include state representatives, contractors, task force
members and Regional QAO's participating in National/
Regional project plan workshops in Spring FY 84.)
Critique of workshop inputs and plans for Guidance
Document expansion/revision.
Guidance Document revised with summary of findings and
recommendations from pilot implementation.
- 6 -
-------
effectiveness of the guidance.
A description of planned and already on-going applications of the guidance
as of April 1983 is included as Appendix B. Pollowup of the pilot
implementation was conducted through a user inquiry form shown in Exhibit
13 and the October 1983 workshop on the pilot applications. Application areas
included ambient water monitoring, intensive surveys, and permit compliance
monitoring. Media applications included water program, RGRA and Superfund
areas. * In addition to the use of the guidance in OA plan development,
sane States - including Pennsylvania - used the document as a training
device on monitoring and as a guide in developing specific State-wide
quality assurance programs. Brief suaraaries of many of the pilot applications
are included in Appendix C.
The pilot implementation and resulting workshop indicated that the
two year Federal/State development and refinement process involved in
the guidance document had yielded a highly useful and versatile guide
for development of QA Project Plans. Based upon the pilot implementation,
the workshop, and additional responses to the user inquiry form, it was
included that the guidance document was ready for nationwide implementation.
It was also apparent that a number of technical developments could further
greatly assist States and contractors to improve the quality of their plans.
The proposed nationwide implementation schedule and technical development
areas are depicted in Exhibit 14. The concept reflected in this schedule
involved the production of a "loose-leaf" guidance document which could be
expanded on a periodic basis as new technical development inputs were
available. Each new development was to be fully critiqued and pilot
tested prior to issuance. Resource constraints and the impact of other
priorities have thus far delayed these additional developments. However the
- 7 -
-------
Exhibit #3
To: Users of the EPA "Guidance for Preparation of Combined Work Assurance
Project Plans for Environmental Monitoring"
From: Martin Brossman, Quality Assurance Officer, EPA (WH-553)
Application Experience
You have been identified as having utilized the subject Quality
Assurance guidance in a water (or other media) monitoring project. In
order to help us improve this guidance, we would like some feedback from
you on your application. We would appreciate a response to the following:
(1) Title of project and a very brief description.
(2) Which sections of the guidance, corresponding to nmbers 0 through 19
trf the Table of Contents, were unclear to you? Explain.
(3) Which sections of the guidance were not relevant to your project? Explain.
(4) Would it be helpful if we provided you with "text" for some of the sections?
(This might include standardized statements for sections on data quality
requirements, corrective action, and data validation.)
(5) Would "generic" plans be helpful to you in conjunction with the guidance
document? (This might include a large scale ambient water monitoring
network project, and an intensive survey etc.)
(6) Can you suggest any items not covered in th*:guidance which were critical
for planning to ensure quality data?
(7) Do you plan to continue using this type of QA plan approach for future
monitoring projects?
(8) If the above answer is no, what alternative approach do you plan to use?
(9) Additional comments. (A copy of your QA plan will be helpful).
Users' Workshop
A Users' Workshop will be held in the Fall of 1983 in Washington, DC.
This Workshop will be used to discuss your utilization and set priorities
for expansion of our guidance document. Please provide your name, complete
address and telephone number along with those of other colleagues who may
be interested in attending.
Responses
Please return your responses by August IS, 1983 tot
Martin Brossman, Quality Assurance Officer (WH-553)
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
Telephone: (202) 382-7040
- 8 -
-------
Exhibit *4
GUIDANCE DOCUMENT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE
Date
1/27/84
3/26/84
04/16/84-
05/11/84
05/01/84
9/30/84
Activity
Detailed guidance document development schedule completed
based on pilot effort. Structure for "loose leaf coded
guidance document resolved. Funding and publication
issues resolved (Contract support established through ow
or ORD.) Plans for National/Regional workshops. (Note
the following are tentative schedules.)
Guidance manuals published for distribution and use at
National/Regional QA Project Plan Workshops.
Regional OA Project Plan two day workshops conducted for
Regions 1, II, III, V, VIII, DC, and X.
Guidance document development tasks in confotnance with
schedule developed on 1/27/84. Extent of task development
dependent on contract support, and/or State support.
(1) Development of data quality objectives guidance
including precision, accuracy, comparability,
completeness, representativeness etc. ;
(2) Expansion of sections on; (a) documentation, (b)
data reduction, data management and reporting,
and (c) data validation.
(3) Development of generic project plans.
(4) Development of SOP references for use with project
plans.
(5) Development of implementation guidelines based
on State experience - interdepartmental
coordination, organization, assignment of
responsibilities, resource implications, admin-
istrative procedures etc.
(6) Analysis and incorporation of OA bicnonitoring
approaches.
(7) Support to other programs on adaptations of OW
guidance. (Supported program to provide funding
or staff augmentation.)
(8) Participation in Monitoring and wasteload
Allocation workshops.
(9) Inputs and descriptions for Monitoring Strategy
and adaptation of project plan as required for
special OW priority tasks.
- 9 -
-------
wide-spread implementation of the current guidance document will provide
useful information when the full development plan can be implemented.
In addition to the applications of the guidance document already described,
the OW guidance document was recommended as an Agency-wide model in
December 1983. The guidance's adaptability is also illustrated by its
utilization to develop the QA Plan for EPA's National Dioxin Study in
April 1984. This study involves multi-media chemical and biological
»
monitoring. Other Agencies including UBGS are considering use of the
guidance. The docunent has been implemented by individuals and staffs
of environment Canada, the International Joint Commission, EPA contractors,
and an extensive list of corporations. This broad base of applications
combined with the State applications, should provide a wealth of user
•
experience and basis for further improvements.
Use of Guidance Document
A variety of options exist to meet acceptable QA/QC requirements in
environmental measurement projects. QA/X requirements may be incorporated
into existing regulations or certification programs. Some States have
developed adequate OA Project Plans independently or in collaboration with
EPA Regional Offices. This guidance document has been prepared by incorporating
the combined experience of the Federal/Regional/State team together with inputs
from contractors and industry users. It is recommended that guidance be used
for developing work/Oft Project Plans for each specific environmental
monitoring project or continuing operation.
The guidance document has been developed to afford considerable
flexibility in use. If work plans already exist, or are under development
-10-
-------
to meet, a pre-established requirement, the appropriate sections of
those plans can be simply included by reference, in addition, existing
Standard Operating Procedures (SOP's) can be referenced. This procedure
minimizes preparation time but ensures completeness^ Further flexibility
is afforded by choice of a more comprehensive narrative format or "short
form." Section II of the document provides a structured format and narrative
description for developing work/QA Project Plans covering comprehensive
environmental monitoring projects. Section III provides a "fill-in" form
utilizing the structured format of Section II to facilitate preparation
of plans of more limited scope or plans which can be covered well by
reference to SOP's, or more ccnprehenisve project/program descriptions.
Section IV provides an example of an actual Work/QA Project Plan, utilizing
the format and narrative guidance described in Section II. The example
is not comprehensive since it represents an adaption of an existing water
monitoring project description into the suggested Work/QA Project Plan format.
However, the example is useful as an application guide.
- 11 -
-------
SECTION II
-------
II. Work/QA Project Plan Guidance
Title Page (With Project Officer, QA Officer and Agency/Division Director
signatures.)*
1. Project Name
2. Project Requested By
3. Date of Request
4. Date of Project Initiation
5. Project Officer
6. Quality Assurance Officer
7. Project Description
The purpose of the project description is to defins the objectives
(goals) of the project and describe how the project will be designed to
obtain the information needed to accomplish the project goals. The
•
project description should consist of the following:
A. Objective and Scope Statement
This section should consist of a comprehensive statanent
addressing the project's objective (purpose) and an overview of
the project's scope (activities). Background information
pertaining to the project (i.e., reconnaissance information)
should be Included.
* As illustrated by the Title Pages in Sections II and III, the exact
format^of this page will vary according to specific State organizations
and their designated responsible individuals.
-------
B. Data Usage
This section should consist of a comprehensive statement
outlining the intended data usage. It is important to clearly
indicate this usage so that suitable sampling, analytical and
QA/QC protocols are selected. When applicable, secondary uses
of the data should be identified. The following are examples of
data uses:
- verify self-monitoring data;
• verify compliance with NPOES permit;
- support permit reissuance and /or revision;
- support other program elements such as Mater quality
standards; and
• possible usage In an enforcement action.
*
C. Monitoring Network Design and Ratlona'c-
This section should address the design of the overall monitoring
system, the specific locations of the sampling sites, and the
justification for the overall monitoring network design. As
discussed in Section II, data representativeness, comparability,
and completeness should be considered an integral part of the
monitoring design. Other relevant factors which Influence the
design of the monitoring network should also be considered
«nd reflected in the plan (e.g., homogeneity of the system
under Investigation, accessibility of the sampling area, stream
flow conditions, tidal fluctuation, weather conditions).
- 2 -
-------
Monitoring Parameters and Frequency of Collection
This section should discuss the types of parameters to be
collected at the various sa-oling sites. This may be done
In tabular form provided the following Information is listed:
• sampling site location (e.g.. latitude/longitude. River Mile
Index. Depth); f
• type of sample (e.g.. grab sample, cross-sectional
stream composite sample);
• sample matrix (e.g., stream surface water, river bottom
sediment);
- parameters to be analyzed (e.g., copper, lead); and
- sampling frequency.
"Type of sample" should be only a brief description. A
detailed description of the «ample collection method will be
addressed 1n Item 12.
Parameter Table
This table should provide the following information for each
parameter analyzed:
- sample matrix;
- analytical method reference; and
- sample holding time.
The analytical method reference must correspond to that specific
procedure which is followed in the laboratory for the analysis
of that parameter in that matrix. If an EPA-approved method is
used, a citation of the method's reference is sufficient. If
- 3 -
-------
no EPA-approved method is available or if the method to be used
is a modification of an EPA-approved method, the method must be
validated and documented in detail. The documented method should
be made part of the project plan by either incorporation into
the laboratory's Standard Operating Procedures (SOP's) or by
/
becoming an attachment to the project plan.
8. Project Fiscal Information (Optional)*
*
To aid in the planning, control, and the allocation of existing resources
and to assist in the documentation and justification for future resources,
the financial requirements/expenditures for travel, per diem, mileage,
salaries and benefits, clerical services, expendable supplies, laboratory
services and any outside contractual arrangements should be delineated.
In addition, major equipment items such as automobiles, trucks, boats,
helicopters, drilling equipment, special safety equipment, etc., required
to implement the study plan for the project, should be specified and the
source and cost of each item identified. A factor for administrative
overhead cost may also be computed to complete the fiscal picture.
9. Schedule of Tasks and Products
The progress of the project from conception to Implementation should be
followed, ft 1s necessary to plot each phase of the project contained
in the prtxfict schedule, from initial request to final project report.
* This section Is optional depending on existing State procedures.
- 4 -
-------
This includes:
- the date of the request which initiates the project;
- the date by which the project plan will be submitted to all
interested parties;
• the date by which comments on the plan are to be received by the
project officer;
- the date(s) of the field reconnaissance;
- the date(s) of the field sampling activities;
- the date(s) the samples will be submitted to the laboratory for analysis;
- the date(s) by which all analyses are to be completed and the data
submitted to the project officer;
- the date(s) the data will be entered into STORE! or other computerized
systems;
- the date of the completion of the draft interim/final project report;
- the date by which the reviewers' comments on the report(s) must be receives;
- the date for completion of the peer review process; and
- the date for the issuance of the final project report.
Each step in this process should be scheduled in an objective and realistic
time frame to assure that adequate attention is devoted to the minimization
of effort and the maximization of information.
10. Projfct Organization and Responsibility
In order for a monitoring study to proceed smoothly and yield valid and
useable data, it is essential that all individuals are clearly informed.
-------
of their responsibilities. The Project Organization and Responsibility
Section of the Work/QA Project Plan should, at a minimum, identify key
individuals responsible for:
- sampling operations
• sampling QC.
- laboratory analyses
- laboratory QC.
• data processing activities
*
• data processing QC.
- data quality review
- performance auditing
- systems auditing (on-site evaluations)
- overall QA
- overall project coordination
It is often useful on a project to indicate how these Individuals relate
in the organization(s). An organizational chart is a convenient way of
illustrating this.
For each key individual named, a brief sentence or two explaining
that individual's responsibility should suffice. Telephone numbers should
be listed with the key Individuals 1n order to facilitate communications.
Where tlwre are several different monitoring institutions or subcontractors
Involvtd, complete addresses should be provided.
- 6 -
-------
11. Data Quality Requirements and Assessments
It 1s Important In project planning that a cooperative effort be
undertaken by the project officer, sampling, and analytical personnel to
define what levels of quality shall be required for the data. These data
quality requirements shall be based on a common understanding of the
Intended use of the data, the measurement process, and availability of
resources. Once data quality requirements are clearly established, QC
protocols shall be defined for measuring whether these requirements are
being met during the study.
As a minimum, requirements should be specified for detect1on/quantitat ion
limits, precision, and accuracy for all types of measurements, where
these are appropriate. A procedure for determining method detection
limits 1s covered 1n "Methods for Organic-Chemical Analysis for Municipal
and Industrial Wastewater," EPA 600/4-82-057.
Customarily, laboratory personnel provide the project officer with method
options covering a given parameter and type of sample. These options are
accompanied by respective detection/quantitation limits and statements of
precision and accuracy. Once the method options are selected, the detection/
quantitation limit, precision, and accuracy requirements should be
Incorporated Into the Work/QA Project Plan. Along with each requirement,
there shield be a protocol for monitoring whether these requirements Mere
• ', -
met. For example, intralaboratory precision can be monitored by using
replicate samples. Accuracy can be monitored with the use of field and
method blanks, spikes, surrogate spikes, National Bureau of Standards'
Standard Reference Materials (SRM's), EPA QC reference samples, etc.
- 7 -
-------
Wherever possible criteria should be set for the "total measurement."
This could be accomplished, for example, with the use of field replicate
samples.
Frequency of QC sample analysis and statistical reporting units shall be
defined in the Work/QA Project Plan.
When discussing data quality requirements, consideration should also
be given to data representativeness, comparability, and completeness.
- Representativeness is a quality characteristic. For most water
monitoring studies, it should be considered a goal to be
achieved rather than a characteristic which can be described in
quantitative terms. An example of the need for representativeness
is 'in the planning for the collection of surface water samples
— from a stream and the subsequent us£ of the data for determining
wasteload allocations. The question to be addressed is ho* the
sample will be collected to ensure its relationship to the stream
characteristics (i.e., the taking of grab samples in a restricted
zone of the stream compared to a complete transect sampling).
• Comparability is also a quality characteristic which must be
considered in study planning. Depending on the end use of data,
comparability must be assured in the project in terms of sampling
plans, analytical methodology, quality control, data reporting,
etc. For example, a comparability question would be whether
analysis based on different portions of fish are comparable (i.e.,,
whole versus edible portions).
- 8 -
-------
- Completeness Is a measure of all Information necessary for a valid
scientific study. A useful way to evaluate completeness is to
carefully compare project objectives with the proposed data
acquisition and resulting potential "short falls" in needed
information. Generally, it is not useful to try and measure this
in quantitative terms for most water monitoring projects.
12. Sampling Procedures
For each environmental parameter or parameter group to be measured, a
complete description of the sampling procedure must be documented.
Included as vital elements in the sampling documentation should be:
inclusion of specific sampling procedures (by reference to Standard
Operating Procedures or by detailed descriptions of state-of-the-art
methods, where used); flow diagrams or tricking mechanisms to chart
sampling operations; and descriptions of sampling devices, sampling
containers, preservation techniques, sample holding times and sample
identification forms.
13. Sample Custody Procedures
Sample custody is a vital aspect of any monitoring program generating
data which may be used as evidence in a court of law. In this regard, proper
procedures for the acquisition, possession, and analysis of samples for
documenting vW at Ions of State and/or Federal regulations and/or statutes
are vital to th* acceptance of such data 1n court. This area 1s generally
referred to as the "cha1n-of-custody of samples".
- 9 -
-------
If the intended use of the data generated from this monitoring project
is enforcement related (see Item 7B), then a detailed description of the
sample handling procedures utilized in the field, as well as the laboratory,
must be documented. This procedure may be made part of the project plan
or, if documented in the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) manual
(both sampling and laboratory SOP's), 1t may be Incorporated by reference.
When documenting the sample chain-of-custody procedures, the following
information should be included:
1. Since chain-of-custody begins with the cleaning of the sample
containers to be used, a written record of the laboratory's
source and manner of preparation of all sample containers should
be referenced. This should include the laboratory's quality
control procedures for assuring that the "cleaned" containers
are truly decontaminated.
2. A detailed description of how sample containers are handled (in
both the field and laboratory) to prevent either inadvertent
contamination or potential opportunities for tampering.
3. An example of the chain-of-custody form should be included with
*
an explanation of the signing procedure.
14. Calibration Procedures and Preventive Maintenance
The purpose of this section is to document, by describing in detail or
referencing the appropriate SOP, methods which are utilized to assure
that field and laboratory equipment are functioning optimally. The
frequency of application of these methods should also be appropriately
recorded.
- 10 -
-------
Exhibits 14.1 and 14.2 are examples of check lists for Held and
laboratory equipment.
An equipment log book is to be maintained in addition to the check list.
The equipment log book should remain with the piece of equipment except
/
when the equipment is sent out for repairs. The log book should contain
records of usage maintenance, calibration, and repairs.
Exhibit 14.1
Field Equipment Check List Example
Automatic Sample
Battery
Pump Tubing
Discharge Tube
Splash Shield
Bottles
Intake Nozzle
Task Frequency
Clean and charge After each sampling
Soak, scrub, rinse After each sampling
Soak, scrub, rinse After each sampling
Scrub, rinse After each sampling
Clean, rinsev dry After each sampling
Disassemble, clean, rinse After each sampling
Exhibit 14.2
Laboratory Equipment Check List Example
Absorption
Spectrophotoxttr
Calibrate against
standard
Frequency
Each nth
determination
Identify Each Sample
Number and Date
Standard number 5.
11/10/82
15. Documentation, Data Reduction and Reporting
The purpose of this section is to describe documentation, data
reduction, and reporting:
- 11 -
-------
A. Documentation - There must be adequate documentation available wi;n
all data. This is necessary to help In fully Interpreting the data as
well as to protect it against legal and scientific challenges. Records
must be legible, complete and properly organized. In some cases, they
must be protected, using a document control system.
In the Work/QA Project Plan, SOP's should be referenced or included
which define the type of record to be maintained as well as Indicating
where and how records will be stored.
8. Data Reduction and Reporting - "Paper work" errors are commonly found
in the calculations, reductions and transfer of data to various forms and
reports and transmittal of data into data storage systems. Quality
control procedures should be carefully designed to eliminate errors, during
these steps. Calculation procedures should be 'described, to the-extent
•
possible, in an;-Vtical SOP's. SOP's should be referenced 1n the Work/QA
Project Plan which describe review and cross-check procedures for
calculations. Also, the SOP's should completely cover the step-wise
procedures for entering data onto various forms and Into computer systems.
In addition to handling data, procedures should cover routine data transfer
and entry validation checks. Where data forms are used, they should
be included in the SOP's.
16. Data Validation
Each program must establish technically sound and documented data validation
criteria which will serve to accept/reject data in a uniform and consistent
manner.
"- 12 -
-------
Data validation can be envisioned as a systematic procedure of reviewing
a body of data against a set of established criteria to provide a specified
level of assurance of its validity prior to its intended use.
Data validation is, of necessity, conducted "after the fact." It requires
that the techniques utilized are applied to the body of the data in a
systematic and uniform manner. The process of data validation must be
close to the origin of the data, Independent of the data production
process, and objective in approach.
*
Criteria for data validation must Include checks for Internal
consistency, checks for transmlttal errors, checks for verification of
laboratory capability, etc. These criteria Involve utilization of
techniques such as interpretation of the results of: external perfonnanca
evaluation audits; split sample analyses; duplicate sample analysis (field
and laboratory); spiked addition recoveries'; inytrumenfcallfcrations; •
detection limits; intra-laboratory comparisons; inter-laboratory com-
parisons; tests for normality; tests for outliers; and data base entry
checks.
17. Performance and System Audits
Performance and systems audits are an essential part of every quality
control program. A performance audit Independently collects measurement
data usin^ performance evaluation samples. A systems audit consists of a
review of th« total'data production process which Includes on-site reviews
of a field and laboratory's operational systems and physical facilities
for sampling, calibration and measurement protocols.
- 13 -
-------
To the extent possible, these audits should be conducted by individuals
who are not directly involved in the measurement process. Audits serve
three purposes:
(1) to determine if a particular group has the capability to conduct
the monitoring before the project is initiated;
(2) to verify that the QA Project Plan and associated SOP's are being
implemented; and
(3) to detect and define problems so that Immediate corrective action
can begin.
A Hork/QA Project Plan should specify who will conduct the audit, what
protocol will be used, what the acceptance criteria will be and to whom
the audit reports will go. Generally, the dates for conducting the
audits should be listed unless it is decide'd to conduct these unannounced.
Performance evaluation samples produced by fPA can be used as a type
of performance audit. These samples can also be obtained from the
National Bureau of Standards, United States Geological Survey commercial
sources or in-house sources. Generally, it should not be necessary to
conduct these audits if the group being tested has successfully performed
within the last 6 months for the particular parameters in question.
18. Corrective Action
A corrective «ct1on program, which must have the capability to discern
errors or effects at any point in the project implementation process, is
an essential management tool for both project coordination and Quality
Assurance/Quality Control activities.
- 14 -
-------
A plausible corrective action scheme must be designed to identify defects,
tally defects, trace defects to their source, plan and implement measures
to correct identified defects, maintain documentation of the results of
the corrective process, and continue the process until each defect is
eliminated.
Each organization must develop a corrective action protocol which is
technically effective as well as administratively compatible.
19. Reports
Formal reports must be issued to inform appropriate management personnel
of progress in the execution of the worlc plan. The reports should Include
an assessment of the status of the project in relation to the proposed
time table. The reports should also address any results of ongoing
performance and systems audits, data quality assessments and significant
quality assurance^problems with proposed corrective action procedures.
The final report shall be issued, consistent with the rationale for
executing the Work/QA Project Plan. The report shall also include appropriate
data quality assessment.
- 15 -
-------
SECTION III
-------
III. Worfc/QA Plan Short Form
Title Page
(Project Name)
(Responsible Agency)
(Project Officer's Signature)
(Project Officer's Name)
(Project Quality Assurance Officer's Signature)_
(Project Quality Assurance Officer's Name)
-1-
-------
1. Project Name:
2. Project Requested By:
3. Date of Request:
4. Date of Project Initiation^
5. Project Officer: __
o. Quality Assurance Officer:
7. Project Description
A. Objective and Scope Statement:
b. Data Usage:
-2-
-------
C. Monitoring Network Design and Rationale:
D. Monitoring Parameters and their Frequency of Collection
£. Parameter Table
Analytical
Number of Method Sample Holaing
Parameter Samples Sample Matrix Keference Preservation Tiine
-3-
-------
8. Project Fiscal Information (Optional)
A. Survey Costs
Salaries
Supplies
Equipment
Mileage
• B. Laboratory Services
C. Administrative Overhead
0. Consultant Services
Total Project Cost
9. Schedule of Tasks and Products
Activity/Date|
I
-4-
-------
TO. Project Urbanization ana Responsibility
The following is a list of fcey project personnel and tneir corresponding
responsibilities:
/
- sampling operations
- sampling QC
- laboratory analysis
_^ laboratory QC
- data processing activities
_^ data processing QC
- data quality review
_- performance auditing
- systems auditing
- overall QA
- overall project coordination
(Note: an organizational chart should be supplied with this plan)
-5-
-------
11. Data Quality Requirements and Assessments
SampleDetectionguantitationtstimatedAccuracyEstimated?recis
Parameter natrlx Limit Limit Accuracy Protocol Precision
1.
Z.
3.
4.
5.
o.
7.
a.
9.
Data Representativeness:
-6-
-------
Data Comparaoility:
Data Completeness:
12. Sampling Procedures:
3. Sample Custody Procedures:
14. Calibration Procedures and Preventive Maintenance:
-7-
-------
15. Documentation, Data Reduction, and Reporting
A. Documentation:
8. Data Reduction and Reporting:
16. Data Validation:
17. Performance and Systems Audits:
-ti-
-------
18. Corrective Action:
19. Reports:
-9-
-------
SECTION IV
-------
Work/QA Project Plan
Site Specific Study on Little River
at Citiesburg, USA
Project Officer
T. Arivtwater
Quality Assurance Officer
J. R. Qatar
Agency Director
C. T. Barfern
-------
1. Project Name: Site Specific Study on Little River at C1t1esburg, USA
2. Project Requested By: U.S. EPA
3. Date of Request: 1/82
4. Date of Project Initiation: 9/1/82
5. Project Officer: T. A. Atwater
6. Quality Assurance Officer: J. R. Oatar
7. Project Description (Technical)
A. Objective and Scope Statement
The site specific criteria modification study at CHIesburg, USA is
designed to Investigate the Impact of the Jandar Company discharge
to Little River as related to cyanide. The effluent from Jandar Comoany
flows through an outlet Into Puddle Creek. The Creek confluence with
Little River is approximately one-half nrile from the Jandar discharge.
Map 1 outlines the study area.
,-^
- " " A preliminary site survey was conducted 1n 1981 to determine site ap-
plicability. Little River 1s bordered by a levee system. There are
gates at the confluence with the Tuscon River to prevent the Tuscon
River from causing backwater flooding.
8. Data Usage
The data collected 1n the study will be utilized to determine the impact
of the cyanide contamination on the biota of the receiving stream. The
data will be used to determine if a specific criteria could be set for
cyanide in; Little River. .
C. Monitoring Network Design and Rationale
Each section contains general Information and a detailed description of
the work effort.
1. Bloassay Toxldty Testing - General Information
Fish - Little River 1s best described as a "typical little stream".
During the preliminary site Inspection during 1981, the
river near the confluence with Puddle Creek contained a
riffle area. The remainder of the creek appeared to con-
sist of a mud bottom. Conservation Commission personnel
Indicate the fisheries expected of a river such as Little
River would likely .support primarily minnows, suckers and
chubs. During high water it Is likely that Little River may
be Inhabited "by any fish species found 1n the Tuscon River.
-------
Map 1
Little River
Notes:
1.
2.
Distance from Jandir to
Little River approximately 1/2 mile
Distance fro* Puddle Creek-Little River
confluence to Tuscan River approximately
1 mile
Description
Point A - dilution meeting standards at 7Q}g
B - effluent discharge
Bl - just downstreaa of B In Puddle Creek
C - upstream control zone
D - recovery zone
El - backwater mixing area
E2 - Jandar discharge coming out of culvert
F - upstream of Jandar
G - mixing zone
Tuscon River
-------
Fish available at the hatcheries for bloassay testing ars:
channel catfish, blueglll (juvenile) and fathead minnows!
Toxicity data 1s available for blueglll and fathead minnows
1n EPA's Section 304 criteria guideline document; however,
toxldty Information Is not available for channel catfish!
Reported LCso values for juvenile blueglll ranges from 74
to 180 ug/1 cyanide. Juvenile fathead minnow 1050 values
range from 81.5 to 230 ug/1.
Macro invertebrates - In response to the types of macro Invertebrates
that may be present In Little River, the Conservation
Commission provided the following candidates:
mayflies, dragonflles, damsel flies, caddis flies, mosquito
midge and flies, snails, mo Husks, scuds, water fleas,
worms, water strlders, etc. Reviewing the Section 304
toxldty Information of the Invertebrates mentioned above,
only scud appears to have a comparable LC§Q to the fathead
minnow and blueglll. Sufficient quantities of scud may be
available either 1n Little River or 1n the Tuscon River.
Recommendation - Use both fathead minnows and channel catfish as
fish bloassay species and scud as the macro invertebrate
organism.
Conditions Applicable to all 81o.assay Testing
Control Site Water - Control site water shall consist of river
water obtained upstream from where any effect of the efflu-
ent could occur. The reference to control site water used
in any bloassay study shall not consist of control site
water Influenced by runoff conditions. Control site *ater
influenced by runoff used in any aspect of the bioassay
tests may be high 1n turbidity, suspended solids, nutrients
and other nonpolnt related pollutants. A baclc-up system
for storing the control site water needed during the
bloassay tests should be made available for water storage
N prior to the occurrence of a runoff event.
If no capabilities are available for storing water, the
bloassay test should be terminated and resumed when back-
ground water quality persists.
Bloassay Testing - All references to bloassay testing shall be
describing 96-hour toxldty testing using a flow-through
dlluter unit. Standard flow-through tests will be con-
ducted following ASTM and APHA standard methods, as modi-
fled by the protocol used during the winter. This modifi-
cation essentially Involves the spiking of testing aquaria
to approximately one-half of nominal concentrations at the
onset of the test. .
-------
Cyanide Toxicant - The reagent, MaCN, shall be used to increase
the cyanide concentration 1n test solutions. Duplicate
tanks of each studied toxicant concentration and control
will be run.
The spiking solution for all bloassay tests should be pre-
pared In distilled or delonlzed Mater.
Acclimation - All organisms used In the bioassay testing shall be
acclimated at least 24 hours prior to the beginning of the
bloassay test. The acclimation will be 1n control site
water unless otherwise specified.
Organisms - Ten representatives of each organism used 1n the bio-
assay tests will be contained 1n each tank.
Chemical Testing - Free cyanide will be measured on-s1te with a
cyanide specific electrode at least three times daily in
each tank.
Blank samples and standardized solutions will be run prior
to each analysis for calibration. Time, temperature and pri
measurements will be recorded concurrently with each cyan-
ide ana-lysis. Dissolved oxygen measurements will be checked
at least twice dally 1n all tanks for diurnal variations.
Once during each blo'assay test, quality assurance samples
of the stock toxicant-cyanide splice-so"hrth>n and all cali-
bration curve solutions will be analyzed 1n the laboratory
for free cyanide and pH. Calibration curve sample col lee
tion should coincide with an on-s1te determination.
Note: The stability of the stock cyanide solution should be
checked to ensure that no decomposition, degradation or
volatility 1s occurring.
Summary of Bloassay Testing
Bloassay testing will consist of:
Reconstituted laboratory water spiked with NaCN.
Screening test using control site water spiked with NaCN.
Definitive test using control site water spiked with NaCM.
Screening test using effluent.
Definitive test using effluent.
2. Stream Biology Sampling
a. Benthos
b. Perlphyton (Diatoms)
c. F1sh
d. MacroInvertebrates
-------
Purpose - The purpose of the stream biological sampling is to
Identify the biological Integrity of the stream reach under
study and to determine to what extent the wastewater dis-
charge Impacts the stream's biology through population
comparisons.
Study Area - The stream reach being studied 1s along Little River
in the vicinity where Puddle Creek enters the Little River.
The Creek to which Jandar discharges, as a surface water of
the state. 1s protected by the general water quality cri-
teria. The concern of the water quality In the Creek 1s to
protect against the tox1 city to aquatic life and wildlife.
However, since the Creek 1s probably Intermittent and is
probably not suitable for the maintenance of aquatic life,
the only concern should be that toxics in acute toxic con-
centrations are not being found 1n the Creek.
Little River, however, has « sustained flow and does sup-
port aquatic life. Benthos, macro Invertebrates, perlphyton
and fish distributions should assist in determining any
Impact from the Jandar discharge to the biological com-
munity. Four zones will be defined and will be used to
describe stream areas in which the biological evaluation
will occur.
The four zones or stream study areas are described below
and are depicted 1n Map 1.
Control Zone - Stream area upstream from any-Impact from the wastewater
discharge (pt. Con Map 1).
Impact Zone - Stream area highly influenced by the effluent. Pre-
ferably the area where the effluent has been diluted with
stream flow expected under worst case 7Q/10 conditions.
(Dependent upon plant discharge and current Little River
flows.)
Mixing Zone - Between the Impact zone and recovery zone.
Recovery Zone - Stream area 1n which the effluent has >nixed com-
pletely with stream flow and water quality has returned to
control zone conditions.
tote: Approaching the mouth of Little River a habitat change can
be expected. Therefore if the recovery zone 1s deemed to
b_e far enough from the other zones where a habitat change
could be expected, an additional site 1n the mixing zone
rather than the recovery zone should be considered.
Identification of the Study Zones
The boundary limits of each of the biological study zones should
be characterized. Changes 1n flow, temperature and biological
-------
activity may cause the boundaries of each zone to greatly fluc-
tuate. Therefore, weekly sampling during the biological sampling
1s recommended to Identify and characterize each zone.
Specific conductance, pH, temperature, free cyanide, D.O. and flow
measurements can be used to help Identify the zones.
3. Chemical Sampling
- Preliminary Chemical Testing
- Chemical Characterization of the Impact of the Effluent
- Sediment Sampling
a. Preliminary Chemical Testing
The purpose of performing preliminary chemical testing 1s to
answer the following questions:
1) Is the Creek above the discharge being affected by any
upstream dischargers?
2) What are the constituents of the Jandar discharge and at
what concentrations are these being discharged? Is cyanide
the only toxic of concern?
3) What degradation occurs to the discharge between the point
of entry into the drainage ditch and where it enters Little
River?
4) Is the control zone in Little River being affected by any
dischargers?
The answers to the above questions should be obtained prior to
the start of any further studies. The results of these analyses
will direct chemical analyses Identified during the bloassay
testing.
b. Chemical Characterization of the Impact of the Effluent
In order to chemically characterize each of the zones selected
for biological sampling, grab samples will be collected in
triplicate from each zone. In addition, a grab sample of the
"fr«sh" effluent will be collected for analysis. The full scan
should be performed Initially, subsequent chemlca'i character-
ization may be performed with a reduced parameter 11st.
c. Sediment Sampling
Sediment samples will be collected at the four zones selected
for biological sampling and at points F, Bl and El on Map 1.
-------
0. Monitoring Parameters and Their Frequency of Collection
1. Bloassay Toxldty Testing 1n Detail
a. Reconstituted Laboratory Water Spiked with NaCN.
1) Description
The purpose of this test Is to compare toxlclty results
using reconstituted laboratory water with reported litera-
ture
2) Additional Chemical Testing
Laboratory measurements for free cyanide and pH will be
conducted for quality assurance. Three samples will be
collected from each cyanide concentration and the control
used in the toxlclty testing at day two and day four of
the bloassay. The tank of each concentration with a
replicate analysis will be alternated.
Other parameters could be measured during day two and day
four not as quality assurance analyses but to characterize
the composition of .the reconstituted water. Only samples
from the control tanks would be needed for analysis of
these other parameters since the only difference tx:^een
the tanks 1s the cyanide concentration.
b. Bloassay Toxlclty Test Using Control Site Water Spiked with
NaCN.
1) Description
Screening Test - A wide range of cyanide concentrations
will be utilized 1n the screening test to provide
a gross 96-hour LCso estimate. In selecting the
range of cyanide concentrations to be used, litera-
ture reported values for the tested organisms as
well as the results from the reconstituted labora-
tory water bloassay should be considered.
Definitive - Based on the results of the screening test,
the appropriate range of cyanide concentrations
will be used.
2) Additional Chemical Testing During the Screening and
Definitive Tests Laboratory measurements of free cyanide
and pH will be conducted for quality assurance. Three
samples will be collected from each cyanide concentration
and the control used 1n the toxlclty testing during day
-------
two and day four of the bioassay. The tank, of each con-
centration with a replicate analysis will be alternated.
The collection of the quality assurance samples will be
taken concurrently with the on-s1te cyanide analysis.
Laboratory analyses from samples collected during day two
and day four of the bioassay testing will also be con-
ducted based on the results of the preliminary chemical
testing — described In Section 3. Samples only need to
be analyzed from the control tanks since the only dif-
ference among the tanks will be the cyanide toxicant
concentration.
Bioassay Toxldty Test Using Control Site Water - Effluent and
NaCN Spike (1f necessary)
1) Description
The purpose of this bioassay test Is to determine the
toxlclty of cyanide 1n the effluent. Synerglstic or antag-
onistic effects to the tox1 city of cyanide may be caused
by other pollutants contained In the effluent. In addition,
other pollutants 1n the effluent may exert tox1dty greater
than that of cyanide..
Toxic concentrations of pollutants other than cyanide
should be tested for prior to the start of this bioassay
test. This testing has been Identified 1n the preliminary
chemical testing 1n Section 3 of this report.
The percent mixture of control site water and effluent needs
to be evaluated. Discharge permit effluent limitations
assume no dilution in the Creek and no degradation of the
cyanide. Thus, the assumption 1s that under worst case
conditions, the characteristics of the effluent at the
point of discharge to the Creek 1s the same as that which
enters Little River. The effluent Is discharged in pulses
from the treatment system which Is operated during two work
shifts. Thus, a 24-hour continuous discharge 1s not to be
expected. The study using the effluent should be designed
to utilize "fresh" effluent being discharged to the drainage
ditch during the two work shifts. During the plant's off-
hours, stored effluent should be used In the bioassay test.
The estimated 7Qio flow at Little River 1s 2 cfs. According
to Water Quality Standards, only 25% of the volume of the
receiving stream my be used for the mixing zone. Thus,
.5 cfs of Little River 1s used for dilution. Design flow at
Jandar 1s .570 mgd-(.88 cfs). Average monthly plant flows
-------
from Discharge Monitoring Reports show approximately
one-half of the design flow 1s being discharged (.44 cfs).
The suggested worst case percentage mixture of control
site water to effluent to be used 1n the bloassay test
Is 1:1.76. However, 1t Is also suggested that further
Information from files be Investigated to substantiate
this. In addition, the cyanide concentration 1n the
effluent way dictate the percentage mixture of control
site water-effluent. However, that cannot be determined
until Initial testing results are available.
Screening Test - The screening test will use a varying
range of cyanide concentrations, the results may
Influence the percent mixture of effluent -- control
site water to be used.
Definitive Test - The definitive test will be based on the
results of the screening test.
2) Additional Chemical Testing During Bloassay Test Using
Control Site Water - Effluent - Cyanide Spike (if neces-
sary)
* . . —
Laboratory measurements of free cyanide and pH will be
conducted for quality assurance. Three samples will be
collected from each cyanide concentration and the control
used in the tox1 city testing during day two and clay four
of the bloassay. The tank of each concentration with a
replicate analysis' will be alternated. The collection of
the quality assurance samples will be taken concurrently
with an on-s1te cyanide analysis.
Since there may be possible interference from ether
pollutants in the effluent, the composition of these other
pollutants during the bloassay test should be well charac-
terized. Dally triplicate samples should be taken from
the control tank and highest cyanide concentrations tanks
and analyzed for total cyanide, cyanide amenable to
chlorlnation, free cyanide, and other constituents deter-
mined from the preliminary chemical testing - Section 3.
Z. Biological Sampling in Detail
a. Benthic MacroInvertebrates
The mud bottom of Little River makes benthic sampling for
macroInvertebrates Feasible. Zones determination mdy 5e
assisted by preliminary Investigation of the benthos used in
conjunction with the chemical characterization of the -ones-
Benthic samples should be collected from each zone.
-------
b. Perlphyton (Diatoms)
During the macro Invertebrate sampling, four perl phy ton
samplers will be placed In each zone for a two to four week
period. Perlphyton Includes zoogleal and filamentous bacteria,
attached protozoa, rotifers, and algae, and also the free-living
microorganisms found swimming, creeping or lodged among the
attached forms. These communities of microorganisms are greatly
Influenced by water quality and are very useful 1n assessing the
effects of pollutants on lakes and streams.
The numbers and kinds of common non-diatom species (cells/m?)
will be reported. Samples will be cleared of all non-diatoms
and permanent slides of diatoms will be made. Diatom species,
numbers and diversity will be determined.
c. F1sh Sampling
Electroflshlng and seining will be conducted for 1n each zone.
Three trips will be made through each zone. F1sh will be Iden-
tified to species and reported as catch per unit effort and
relative abundance. Ideally low flow conditions should prevail.
The Conservation Commission will perform the fish biological
sampling.
Due to the size of the stream, small frame nets and other
techniques may be employed for obtaining fish sampling data.
d. Macrolnvertebrates
•
For the macro Invertebrate sampling, the use of Hester-Oendy
samplers will provide satisfactory substrate for colonization
of known sensitive species which can be Identified in a cost-
effective manner. Five samplers will be placed 1n each zone to
determine field variability and allow for statistical compar-
isons between zones. The samplers will remain 1n situ for six
weeks. The need for Hester-Dendy samplers 1n all zones should
be evaluated. The riffle area 1n the control zone may be a
naturally suitable substrate for colonization as well as the
bridge approximately 400 yards downstream from the confluence
with the Creek.
10
-------
3. Chemical Sampling
a. Preliminary Chemical Testing
The following sites will be sampled — Points C, El, B, 61, F
(See Hap 1).
Each sample will be analyzed for
BOD, COO. TOO
C°ndUCtanCe Field «asurement
]
chroml urn
total cyanide, cyanide amenable to chlorl nation, free
cyanide
NH3
flow
b. Chemical Characterization of the Impact of the Effluent
The zones selected for biological monitoring will be sampled. The
samples will be analyzed for
BOD, COO, TOC
C°ndUCtanCe] Field measurement
chromium
total cyanide, cyanide amenable to chlorlnation, free
cyanide
NH3
flow
c. Sediment Sampling
The zones selected for biological monitoring will be
sampled and analyzed for chromium, total cyanide, free
cyanide and cyanide amenable to chlorlnation.
11
-------
E. Parameter Table
Parameter
Free cyanide
Total cyanide
Amenable cyanide
BOO
COO
TOC
NHi-N
Chroml urn
Free cyanide
Total cyanide
Amenable cyanide
Chromi urn
Free cyanide
Total cyanide
Amenable cyanide
Chroml urn
Number of
Samples
300
300
300
50
50
50
50
50
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
Sample
Matrix
water
water
water
water
water
water
water
water
sediment
sediment
sediment
sediment
sediment
1 eachate
sediment
1 eachate
sediment
1 eachate
sediment
1 eachate
Analytical
Method ^ Sample Holding
Reference* Preservation Time
335.2 ** **
335.2 ** **
335.1 ** **
405.1 ** **
410.4 ** **
415.1 ** **
350.1 ** **
#218 ** **
335.2 ** **
335.2 ** **
335.1 ** **
#218 ** '** .,
335.2 ** **
335.2 **
335.1 ** **
#218 ** **
* - Sediment and 1eachate sample preparation documented In Laboratory Methods Manual
** - As specified in procedure EPA Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes.
12
-------
Project Fiscal Information (Optional)*
A- Anal^ical $0000
B' Suppl1es 0000
oooo
°- Perd1em /0ooo
E. Man.hours ^
1) Field
2) Laboratory
3) Clerk/Secretary
$ 3TO
General and Administrative 0000
Total $
*Note: Fiscal information included in related grant/contract,
13
-------
9. Schedule of Tasks and Products
1 . Project request
2. Project plan review
i
3. Project plan finalized
4. Field reconnaissance
5. Sample collection
6. All lab. analysis completed
and submitted to project
officer
7. Data entry Into STORE!
8. Interim project report
9. Final project report
Oct
Y
Mov
1981
Dec
1982
Jan
y
Feb
i
Mar
-*RT_
May
June
-
July
— 1
Aug
\
i
Sept
J
• -* I
,1
1
:*
^
Oct
>|
n
f
-------
10. Project Organization and Responsibility
AGENCY DIRECTOR
C.T. Barfern
Quality Assurance
Officer J.R, Datar
project officer
T.A. Atwater
Tabo ralo'rylCfiaTy ses
J.T. Spectra
FTeicTOperations
N.D. Sampla
I
Contacts
U.S. E.P.A.
Jandar Company
State
E.H. Here
J.K. fickle
B.G. Getter
15
-------
11. Data Quality Requirements and Assessments
Detection Limits and Quality Assurance Objectives
Detection
Parameter
Free cyanide
Total cyanide
Amenable cyan 1de
Chromium
BOO
TCC
COO
NH -M
Sample
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
Limit
0.02 mg/L
0.02 mg/L
0.02 mg/L
0.01 mg/L
5 mg/L
5 mg/L
5 mg/L
0.01 mg/L
-
Accuracy
85-90%
recovery
85-90%
recovery
85-90%
recovery
Bias % + 3C
•^^^M^V
Bias % * 15
.
1% relative
error
1% relative
error
Precision
* 0.005
* 0.005
^ 0.005
^0.008
^20%
+ 5 mg/L
* 5 mg/L
+ 0.005 mg/L
QA Protocol
1 duplicate/10 samples
1 standard addition/10 samp1
1 standard/day
1 duplicate, 1 standard,
1 splice/20 samples
1 duplicate/10 samples
1 duplicate/10 sample?
1 standard addition/15 sane
1 standard/10 samples
1 duplicate/10 samples 4
1 standard addition/15 sam:|
1 standard/10 samples
1 duplicate, 1 standar-i,
1 splice/20 samples
Note: The example shown here Is Incomplete as specified 1n Section III - 111.
It does not contain all the data qualifiers desired Including a discussion
of representativeness etc.
16
-------
Careful sample site selection was a primary consideration to attempt to
assure the maximum possible representativeness of the collected samples.
The stream sample sites (see Map 1) were selected to best represent points
of suspected drainage Impact.
The biological zones were selected to compare normal blotlc stream
background to stream biota In the potentially Impacted area.
12. Sampling Procedures
Reference - Field Operations Section
Procedure Manual
(Revised and Approved 9/10/81)
13. Sample Custody Procedures
Not Applicable
14. Calibration Procedures and Preventive Maintenance
Field Equipment
Reference - Field Equipment Logs
- pH Meter
- 0.0. Meter
- Price AA Meter
Laboratory Equipment
Reference - Procedure Manuals
- Nutrient Analysis Section
- Metals Analysis Section
17
-------
15. Documentation, Data Reduction and Reporting
A. Documentation
Reference - Laboratory Notebook
- Nutrient Analysis Section
- Metals Analysis Section
B. Data Reduction and Reporting
Reference - Procedure Manual
- Nutrient Analysis Section
- Metals Analysis Section
16. Data Validation
The validation of data is the prime responsibility of J.T. Spectra
utilizing methods documented in the Procedure Manuals referenced in
Section is.
Final validation is the responsibility of the Q.A. Officer.
17. Performance and Systems Audits
The laboratory has participated in several EPA WS and WP performance
evaluation studies. Records are available on all series supplied to date.
18. Corrective Action
The corrective action mechanism is defined in the Procedure Manuals
cited in Sections 12 and 15.
19. Reports
Interim reports will be issued twice during the course of the study.
Final report is the responsibility of the Project Officer (See
Section 9).
-18-
-------
APPENDICES
-------
Appendix A
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
TASK FORCE MEMBERS
EPA Headquarters
Mr. Martin Brosaman
Quality Assurance officer (W9-553)
Environmental Protection Agnecy
Washington, D.C. 20460
FTS: 382-7040 CCML: (202)382-7040
Mr. Thomas W. Stanley
Quality Assurance Management Staff
(RD-680)
Environnental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
FTS: 382-5784 CCML: (202)382-5784
Region II
Mr. Gerard P. McRenna
Quality Assurance Officer
Environmental Services Division
Edison Environmental Laboratory
Environmental Protection Agency
Region II
Edison, KJ 08817
FTS: 340-6645 GCML: (609)321-6645
Mr. Stephen W. Jenniss
Quality Assurance Coordinator
New Jersey Dept. of Environmental
Protection
P.O. Box OMB
Trenton, HJ M625
CCML: (60*J»2-3950
Region III
Mr. Charles Jones, Jr.
Quality Assurance Officer
Environmental Services Division
Environmental Protection Agency
Curtis Building
6th and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, PA 19106
FTS: 597-8173 CCML: (215)597-8173
Mr. Paul E. Baker
Quality Assurance Officer
Bureau of Laboratories
PA Dept. Of Environmental Resources
P.O. Box 1467
3rd and Reily streets
Harrisburg, PA 17120
CCML: (717)787-4669
Region VII
Dr. Harold G. Brown
Quality Assurance Program staff
Environmenal Services Division
Environmental Protection Agency
Region VII
25 Funston Road
Kansas City, KS 66115
PIS: 926-3881 CCML: (816)236-3881
Dr. Roger C. Splinter
Associate Director
University of Iowa Hygienic Laboratory
Iowa City, Iowa 52242
CCML: (319)353-5990
-------
Appendix B
Current Implementation of the OW Ccmbined Wbrk/QA Project Plan Guidance
Summary as of April 29, 1983
General
Planned and on-going applications of the guidance include uses to meet
FY83 and PY84 State grants as well as independent State monitoring efforts
and State/Federal contractor activities. Program area applications include
Water Programs, Superfund, and RCRA.
Specific
Region I
Applications survey to be conducted June 6-10 by Martin Brosanan, QA
Officer, OWRS and Warren Oldaker, QA Officer, Region I in each State.
Briefings of and meetings with State Water Division Directors and State
Laboratory Division Directors will be conducted to resolve applications.
•
Region II
Series of applications planned in New Jersey with the efforts lead by
an EPA Regional and State member of the guidance task force development
team - Jerry McKenna, QA officer, Region II and Stephen Jenniss, N.J.,
State water Quality Assurance Coordinator.
, (1) New York Bight monitoring surveys to be conducted by EPA Region II
• staff between June and September 1983. These are a series of
water monitoring surveys. Sampling will be conducted using
EPA helicopter. OW QA guidance will be tested in a typical
intramural study of water quality.
(2) New York Bight monitoring survey to be conducted by EPA-OWRS
contractor in August 1983. This will be a comprehensive study
abend EPA vessel "Antelope" *nd will be carried out with
EHk contractor sampling personnel and laboratories. OW QA guidance
will b* tested in a typical contractor study of water quality.
(3) Several hazardous waste site investigations to be conducted this
sunner by the NUS Corp. Field Investigation Team (FIT). This
contractor is under national contract and has personnel assigned
to Region II. Analytical support for studies will probably be
provided by an EPA contract analytical laboratory. OW QA guidance
will be tested in a non-water monitoring program area.
-------
Appendix B (Continued)
(4) New Jersey use in State operated water monitoring projects. The New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) will apply the
guidance to a number of specific intensive water monitoring surveys
and to an ambient, fixed monitoring network survey. These surveys
will be conducted during the summer of 1983. Also planned is use of
the guidance for potable water monitoring (surveillance monitoring) of
water supplies conducted directly by KJDEP for typical state programs.
Analytical support will be provided by the New Jersey Department of
Health.
Region III
Applications in Region III are lead by an EPA Regional and a State member
of the guidance task force development team - Charles Jones, QA Officer, Region
III, and Paul Baker, Pa. Quality Assurance Officer.
The State of Pennsylvania is currently utilizing the guidance document
in its development of its State-wide multimedia Quality Assurance Program and
plans to apply the guidance to some stream surveys in its new PY84 program.
(Pa. State begins its Fiscal Year in July). The guidance document is serving a
new purpose in Pa. Paul Baker leads a State Quality Assurance Task Force
involving all environmental programs with representation from the laboratory
and the separate Bureaus. This task force is developing a State QA Program
Document for the State Department of Natural Resources. The State document
will conver all media. The ON QA guidance doucment is being utilized as a
reference in developing the State QA program.
The State of Maryland will be utilizing the OW QA guidance document to meet
its FY83 grant program requirements. This effort is guided by the Region III
QA Officer, Charles Jones, working with the State Representatives.
The State of Virginia is currently utilizing the OVJQA guidance document to
meet its FY83 grant program requirements. (Al Willett, Director, Surveillance
Division, VA State Water Control Board met with Martin Brossman, QA Officer,
OWRS and Charles Jones, QA Officer, Region III at EPA Headquarters on April 19,
to work out Implementation plans). As Virginia progresses with its water
program implementation applications we also expect applications to RCRA and
Superfund.
Region V and VI
A series of applications are anticipated in these two regions. Status will
be reported in the next update.
Region VIII
An intensive water monitoring survey is being planned by the States of Iowa
and South Dakota and the U.S. EPA with guidance from task force development team
member Dr. Roger Splinter. This monitoring program involves agencies with mon-
itoring and analytical responsibility in the two States and, because of the States
geographical location, two EPA Regions (VII and VIII). The monitoring program
is being planned for the Big Sioux River in Northwest Iowa and will include
biological monitoring. Preliminary planning will be completed in mid May
and the OW QA guidance document will be utilized to develop the worx/QA plan.
-------
APPENDIX C
OW Wbrk/QA Project Plan Guidance Document Applications
The development of the OH Wbrk/QA Project Plan Guidance Docunent
involved a series of critiques and applications to evaluate the viability
of the guidance. In addition, in April 1983, a formal pilot implementation
program was initiated by the development task force. The plan here was
to seek as diverse a set of applications as feasible to be followed up by
a formal critique questionsire in August of 1983 and a workshop in October
1983. Inputs from these activities provided the basis for the current
form of the guidance document and the development plans for FY84.
*
The following listing of applications of the guidance document in the
pilot jj&lementation period is provided to an* 1st future users of the guidance.
Direct inquiries can be made to the responsible contact in regard to the
application. Effective dialogue between users can both facilitate technical
development of new plans and provide guidance in handling related
administrative/management issues.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Waiter
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
1. Title of Project or Document
Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs (U.^. Virgin Islands)
Territorial Pollution Control Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) QA
Project Plan
Area of Application
*
"Generic" Plan for DCCA's Compliance Sampling inspections of Permitted
Facilities
Date of Application
Fall 1983
*
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Austin L. Noorehead
Quality Assurance Officer
Dept. of Conservation and Cultural Affairs
Building III, Apartment 114
Water Gut Hones
Christiansted, St. Croix
U.S. Virgin Islands 00820
Smeary of Document
Plan covers all sampling and analytical activities to be undertaken by DCCA
in support of TFDES program. Plan is "Generic" because it covers repeated
sampling suxveya, not just one event. All parameters, required on TPDES
permits are) covered.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Ojjality Assurance Guidance Document
2. Title of Project or Document
Dioxin Survey of 80 Lister Avenue Site in Newark, N. J.
Area of Application
Used by NUS Corp. Field Investigation Team (FIT) and Region II
Surveillance and Monitoring Branch for Dioxin Survey
Date of Application
Spring 83
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Mark Raulenteek
Environmental Scientist
Environmental Protection Agency
Edison, N. J. 08837
FTS 340-6776
Suntnary of Document
QA Project Plan done for Dioxin Site Investigation of Streets, Soil and Fish
from Area of 80 Lister Ave. work Was Done by EPA Region II, FIT and CLP
(Superfund) Lab Contractor
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
3.
Title of Project or Document
Hudson River PCB Study of Hotspots
Area of Application
Sampling and Analysis of Upper Hudson River Sediments to Determine Change
over 5 Year Period in PCB Concentrations
Date of Application
Sumer 1983
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Rollie Honnett
Physical Scientist
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region II
Edison, New Jersey 08837
FTS 340-6687
Svmnary of Document
Study and QA Project Plan prepared and used jointly by EPA Region II, NUS
Corp. PIT and MM Teams. Samples were analyzed under special CLP (Super-fund)
Contract.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of office of Mater
Quality Assurance Guidance Oocunent
4.
Title of Project or Document
Sunner 1983 New York Bight Survey
Area of Application
Marine Monitoring Study - NOAA/EPA Region II/RDQTOS (OURS) Contractor
Date of Application
Suraner 1983
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Robert Shakes
Marine Oceanographer
JRB Associates
La Jolla, California
619 456-6632
Summary of Document
Study & QA project Plan for study done in support of Region II's Ocean
Dumping Program. 12 mile, 15 mile Mud Dump and NOAA Sites were studied.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Docunent
5. Title of Project or Document
Quality Assurance/Work Plan Biological Survey of the Big Sioux River
Application
Intensive Stream Survey to Determine Point Source Impacts on Biological
Community.
rate of Application
June 1983
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone}
Project Coordinator
Mr. Morris Preston
Iowa Dept. of Water, Air and Waste Management
H.s. waller aldg.
900 East Grand
Des Moines, Iowa 50319
(515) 281-8877
of Document
addresses an intensive stream survey carried out by several
JTa^deral). Addresses it«t» in the format of the Guidance
The unique feature of this document is the fact that several
different agencies had responsibilities.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
6. Title of Project or Docuaent
Quality Assurance/Work Plan
Analytical Services: Remedial Investigation at the New Brighton/Arden
Hills Multi-Point Source Site
Area of Application
Hazardous Waste site Cleanup
Describes QA/Wbrk pian for all Analytical Services and Sampling
Date of Application
Projected 12/83 - 5/84
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
R.C. Splinter, Assoc. Director
University of Iowa Hygienic Laboratory
Oakdale Campus
Iowa City, Iowa 52242
(319) 353-5940
Sunmary of Document
The document is in confoznance with the Guidance Document. All items are
addressed. Both field and laboratory activities an covered. Where
appropriate, lengthy analytical procedures are referenced to laboratory
procedures •mual.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
7. Title of Project or Docunent
/
Quality Assurance/Work Plan Rock Creek Environmental Study
Area of Application
Intensive Stream Survey
Date of Application
November 15, 1983
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Project Coordinator
Ms. Cynthia Caneron
Iowa Dept. of Water, Air and Waste Management
900 East Grand
Des Moines, Iowa 50319
Sutmary of Docunent
^^••^^••^•^•••MMMHW^^H^^M^^H^K ^
Docunent is written in the Guidance Document format. Joint planning for
Work/Plan QA Plan done between laboratory, field and program planning personnel,
Docunent J.MIMSB i a chemical and biological study of a stream segment to
determine multiple source impact on stream quality.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
8. Title of Project or Document
QA/Vtork Plan: Industrial Waste Survey for the New Jersey statewide
Pretreatnent Monitoring Program (Draft)
Area of Application
Industrial Waste Survey
Date of Application
Begin approx. 1/84
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Robert Hirst, DWR QAO
MJ DEP, DWR, OQA
CN-029
1474 Prospect St.
Trenton, N. J. 08625
609-292-3950 •
Simnary of Document
Determination of impacts of toxic industrial wastes on biological treatment
processes at POTMs. Includes sampling of industrial discharges to municipal
systons, POIW influents, effluents, and sludges
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of ftater
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
9. Title of Project or Docunent
OA/Wbrk plan for Compliance Monitoring (Draft) MJ DSP, DNR, Bnergency
Response/Cxnpliance Monitoring (ERQCM) unit
Area of Application
NJ Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NJPDES) Ccnpliance Monitoring
Date of Application
10/1 - 9/31 every fiscal year
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Christopher Schiller, Project Officer
N7 DEP, DWR, ERCCM
CN-029, 25 Artie Pkwy.
Trenton, N. J. 08625 609-292-0427
Robert Hirst, DWR QAO
,,NJ DEP, DWR, COA
CN-029, 1474 Prospect St.
Trenton, N. J. 08625 609-292-3950
Sonnary of Docunent
24-hour composite sampling plan for compliance with NJPDGS (permits)
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
10. Title of Project or Document
Compliance and investigative Monitoring for the New Jersey ttoter Pollution
Control Act and the New Jersey Safe Drinking Miter Act. (Draft)
Area of Application
Water pollution Compliance Monitoring
Date of Application
Continuous
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Eugene Roche, Project Officer
NJ DEP, DWR, Enforcement Element
CN029, 1474 Prospect St.
Trenton, N. J. 08625 609-984-5720
Robert Hirst, DW? QAO
MJ DEP, DWR, OQA
CN029, 1474 Prospect St.
Trenton, N. J. 08625 609-292-3950
Sunnary of Document
(1) Grab and 4-hour composite sampling for compliance with NJPDES
permit and conditions
(2) Complaint investigation sampling
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
11. Title of Project or Document
QA Plan for Monitoring and Analytical Activities to Evaluate Selected Pollutants
in the Delaware River in the vicinity of Philadelphia, PA.
Area of Application
Evaluate potential difference in surface water quality between high and
low tidal stages of the Delaware River. Data needed to predict effectiveness
of potential raw water intake options for drinking water.
Data at Application
Sept. - Oct. 1983
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Catherine Campbell
Project Officer
(JSEPA
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 382-2733
John Richards
Task Manger
Versar Inc.
6850 Versar Center
Springfield, VA 22151
Summary of Document
Monitoring and analytical support involved influent, effluent, sludges
and air emissions. Sampling included wide range of organics and metals.
Tidal, temperature and conductivity measurements also made.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
12. Title of Project or Document
QA/Wbrk Plan: Vht*r Quality Survey of the Passaic River
Area of Application
Comprehensive water, sediment and biological sampling
Date of Application
This project was initiated in August 1983.
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Dr. Shing-Fu Hsueh, Chief, Bur. of Systems Analysis (Project Officer)
HI DEP, DWR
CN-029, 25 Artie Pkwy.
Trenton, N. J. 08625
Robert Hirst, DWR QAD
KJ DEP, DVR
CN-029, 1474 Prospect St.
Trenton, N. J. 08625
Summary of Document
Sampling of surface waters, sediments, periphyton, macrophytes, and point
sources. Data generated will be used in the development of a new model
for the
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
13. Title of Project or Document
QA/Work plan: Allentotm Lake Hater Quality Monitoring Survey
Area of Application
impact of restoration project on water quality.
Date of Application
Sanpling began in Suoner, 1983 and will continue until 1985.
Contact (None, title, address, telephone)
Debra Haranond, Sampling Project Coordinator -
NJ DEP, DWR, Data Acquisition and Analysis Unit
CN-029, 25 Arctic Pkwy.
Trenton, N. J. 08625
Robert Hirst, DWR QAO
NJK DEP,CNR, OQA
CN-029, 1474 Prospect St.
Trenton, N. J. 08625
Summary of Document
Sailing of lake water and leachate from dredge spoils to monitor impacts
of restoration project on water quality
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Oocunent
14. Title of Project or Docunent
QA/Wbrk plan: Landing Creek Intensive Survey
Area of Application
Intensive Survey (Water Sampling)
Date of Application
Sampling was initiated during the sunner of 1983.
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone}
Paul Morton, Sampling Project Coordinator
K3 DEP, DWR, Data Acquisition and Analysis Unit
CN-029, 25 Arctic Pkwy.
Trenton, N. J. C8625
Robert Hirst, DWR QAO
NJ;'DEP, DWR, OQA
QM)29, 1474 Prospect St.
Trenton, N. J. 08625
Smeary of Doctment
Surface water sampling to aid the Division in deciding to upgrade or eliminate
a municipal discharge on Landing Creek. The data will also be used to develop
a new model for the creek and a new wasteload allocation for the municipal
facility.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
15. Title of Project or Document
QA/Work plan: 1983 Rancocas Creek Intensive Survey
Area of Application
Intensive Survey (Fish Issue and Sediment)
Date of Application
Sampling was initiated during the sunner of 1983
•
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Barbara Kurtz, Sampling Project Coordinator
NJ DEP, DWR Data Acquisition and Analysis Unit
CN-029, 25 Artie Pkwy.
Trenton, N. J. 08625
Robert Hirst, DWR QAO
NJ DEP, DWR, OCA
CN-029, 1474 Prospect St.
Trenton, N. J. 08625
Sunnary of Document
Pish tissue and sediment sample analysis to determine the impacts of a
heavy metals (Cr-tot 6 Cr+6) discharge in the Rancocas Creek. A ban
on fishing in the lower segment of the Creek nay be imposed if the data
exhibits a need to take such action.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Hater
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
16. Title of Project or Doctment
QA/Wbrk Plan: Upper Lanington River Intensive Survey
Area of Application
Intensive Survey for model development
Date of Application
Sampling was scheduled to begin during late Pall of 1983
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Paul Morton, Sampling Project Coordinator
NJ DEP, DWR, Data Acquisition and Analysis UKnit
CN-029, 25 Artick PJcwy.
Trenton, N. J. 08625
Sunnary of Document
Water quality and sediment oxygen .demand monitoring to aid in the development
of a WQ model for the Upper Lamington River and a wasteload allocation for a
irunicipal sewage treatment plant on the segment.
-------
Special Applications
The previous examples of applications of the OW Wbrk/OA project plan
guidance have been devoted to specific environmental monitoring tasks. The
Pennsylvannia Department of Environmental Resources has also utilized
the document; to assist in its environmenal training programs; establish
priorities for development of SOP's; and develop a Bureau 0* plan.
Examples follow in the format of pilot applications proceeding this
section.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
Title of Project or Document
Department of Environmental Resources Standard Operation Procedure
(SOP) Development
Area of Application
The document is being used to provide guidance in developing standard
operating procedures and other necessary QA documents for a sound QA
program.
Date of Application
Continuing
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Paul Baker
QA Officer
PA OCR, Bureau of Laboratories
P. 0. BDX 1467
Hbq. PA. 17120
(717)787-4669
Sumary of Document
Utilizing the work/QA project plan guidance document, specific SOP's are
developed which conform to acceptable department practice. Thus, in the
future, OA project plans can be expeditiously developed by proper reference
to the appropriate SOP. The following have been or are under development
to date:
1. A department chain-of-custody SOP has been developed.
2. la development:
a. A document to cover uniform sampling activities in the
department.
b. A document to cover laboratory analytical activities.
c. A department sample shipment SOP.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Hater
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
Title of Project or Document
Development Guide for Compliance Monitoring, Ambient Monitoring,
Self Monitoring, and Special Surveys
*
Area of Application
All 106 and 205J activities of Clean Water Act
Date of Application
FY 84
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Kenneth Walizer
PA DER, Bureau Water Quality Management
P.O. Box 2063
Hbq. PA 17120
(717) 787-8184
Sunaary of Document
The document in intended to cover compliance monitoring, anbient
monitoring, sftlf-aonitoring activities and special surveys.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of Office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
Title of Project or Document
Bureau of Solid ftoste Project Plan
Area of Application
Used by the Bureau in all its environmental monitoring activities
including development of a Bureau specific project plan
Date of Application
FY 84
Contact (Mane, title, address, telephone)
David M. Friedman
QA Officer
PA D£R
Bureau of Solid Waste Management
P.O. Box 2063
Hbq. PA. 17120
(717) 787-7381
Sunnary of Document
Utilizing the work/QA project plan guidance document the Bureau
has developed a Bureau specific project plan for its activities. This
document includes references to specific methods, procedures and
regulatory acquirements under the appropriate section of the guidance
document.
-------
Survey of Pilot Application of office of Water
Quality Assurance Guidance Document
Title of Project or Document
OA Training in Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
Area of Application
Training for Environmental Monitoring
Date of Application
Continuing
Contact (Name, title, address, telephone)
Paul Baker, OA Officer
PA DER, Bureau of Laboratories
P.O. Box 1467
Hbq, PA. 17120
(717) 787-4669
Summary of Document
Document is used as part of a training package. The document provides an
effective nathcd for showing department employees (field, lab, management)
the necessary elements to consider when carrying out environmental monitoring
activities.
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. DC 2046C
A6 31 B84
OFFICE
RESEARCH AND O
SUBJECT: OWRS Guidance for Preparation of QA Project Plann
PROM: Stanley Blacker, Director -' -*• *- V-'Ww; <-*••-*
Quality Aaaurance Management Staff (RD-680)
TO: Martin W. Brossman, QAO
Office of Vacer Regulation* and Standarda (WH-553)
QAHS has reviewed the document "Guidance for Preparation of Combined
Work/Quality Aasurance Project Plane for Environmental Monitoring" (OWXS-QA-1,
May 1984) and finds that it is an acceptable alternative to QAMS 005/80,
"Interim Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality Aaaurance
Project Plans" (December 1980). Organization* preparing plans in
accordance vlth OVRS/-QA-1 are considered to have satisfied EPA quality
assurance program requirements for the preparation of QA Project Plans.
Substantial efforts on data quality objectives leading toward the
development of improved guidance for preparation of QA project plans
are underway. Because changes in existing guidance documents may be
required, QAMS encourages all users of existing guidance to continue to
use that guidance but to remain flexible to change.
QAMS appreciates the effort you and other members of your workgroup have
put into the preparation of OWRS-QA-1. The document la a valuable addition
to quality assurance guidance available within the Agency.
------- |