QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
FOR FIELD INVESTIGATIONS TO SUPPORT
DEVELOPMENT OF THE ELLIOTT BAY TOXICS ACTION PLAN
Prepared by
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region X
Seattle, Washington
February, 1985
Approvals:
Project Manager
State QA Officer
EPA Region X
QA Officer
-------
TETRA TECH, INC.
11B2O NORTHUP WAV-
BELLEVUE. WASH SBOD5
SUITE 10O (2O6) Bee-3536
February 26, 1985
TC-3991-01
Mr. John Underwood
Office of Puget Sound
Region X EPA
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Dear John:
Tetra Tech is pleased to submit 30 copies of the Quality Assurance
Plan for the Elliott Bay Sampling and Analysis Design. To facilitate
distribution, 22 copies have been submitted under separate cover to
Ms. Joan Thomas, WDOE. This report was prepared as part of Work Assign-
ment No. 1, EPA Contract No. 68-03-1977.
If you should have any questions concerning this document, please do
not hesitate to call me or Dr. Robert Pastorok at (206) 822-9596.
Very truly yours,
Thomas C. Ginn, Ph.D.
Director
Environmental Systems Engineering
TCG/blm
Encl osures
Ms. Joan Thomas, (22 copies)
Dr. John Armstrong, (1 copy)
Mr. James Bdzusek , (1 copy)
-------
0
Section No.
Revision No.
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 1 of 3
CONTENTS
1. Title and Signature Page
2. Table of Contents
3. Introduction
4. Project Description
5. Project Organization and Responsibilities
6. Objectives for Measurement
7. Sampling Procedures
8. Sample Custody
9. Calibration Procedures and Frequency
10. Analytical Procedures
11. Data Reduction, Validation, and Reporting
12. Internal Quality Control Checks
13. Performance and System Audits
14. Preventive Maintenance
15. Specific Routine Procedures Used to Assess Data Precision,
Accuracy and Completeness
16. Corrective Actions
17. Quality Assurance Reports to Management
18. References
19. Appendix A - Glossary of Terms
20. Appendix B - Field Techniques
Page
i
i i
1
2
4
8
11
15
22
24
26
29
34
36
39
41
43
46
47
51
ll
-------
Section No. 2_
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 198b
Page 2 of 3
FIGURES
Number Page
1 QA program organization -- management and contractor 5
2 Sample alteration checklist 14
3 Station identification form 16
4 Sample log form 17
5 Chain-of-custody form 19
6 Packing list 20
7 Example laboratory tracking form 21
8 Data flow and reporting scheme 27
9 System audit checklist 35
10 Corrective Actions checklist 42
iii
-------
Section No. 2
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 3 of 3
TABLES
Number Page
1 Personnel responsible for quality assurance activities 6
2 QA officers responsible for quality assurance of laboratory
and data analysis tasks 7
3 Objectives for measurement data 9
4 Sample containers, preparation, and preservatives 12
5 Calibration procedures and frequency 23
6 Taxonomic experts used for species identification/confirmation
of Puget Sound benthos 32
7 Preventive maintenance approach for specific pieces of
equipment used in sampling, monitoring, and documentation 37
8 Quality assurance reports to management 44
iv
-------
Section No. 3_
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 1 of 1_
INTRODUCTION
An important part of an effective multidisciplinary field investigation
program is a definitive Quality Assurance (QA) program coupled with efficient
utilization of personnel and physical resources. The development of a
comprehensive and well-documented Quality Assurance Program Plan is required to
obtain quality data that are scientifically and legally defensible, and
to have the requisite levels of precision and accuracy with minimum expenditures
of resources.
This manual addresses the major QA/QC considerations and QA/QC guidelines
for field investigations to support development of the Elliott Bay Toxics
Action Plan. As the project proceeds, new considerations may need to be
addressed and additional guidelines provided in order to maximize the efficiency
and quality of the project work plan. The QA framework provides for documen-
tation of these adjustments through periodic QA/QC reports to the EPA.
These reports will be consulted when assessing the overall QA/QC effort
for this project.
-------
Section No. 4
Revision No. 0
Date February 22. 1985
Pag e i of 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The specific tasks to be completed under the Elliott Bay Toxics Action
Plan Field Investigation are as follows:
t Determine the type, magnitude, and spatial distribution
of toxic contamination of surface sediments and selected
biota in Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River
• Determine the toxicity of sediments using the standard amphipod
bioassay
• Determine the spatial distributions and abundances of benthic
macroinvertebrate species and associated community structure
properties
t Determine the spatial distributions and prevalences of selected
pathological conditions in English sole
t Relate toxic contamination of selected biota, sediment toxicity,
fish pathology, and comnunity structure of benthic macroinverte-
brates to sediment quality
t Relate toxic contamination of biota to human health threat
from seafood consumption
• Identify and rank areas of toxic contamination and adverse
effects
t Evaluate sources of contaminations in relation to high priority
problem areas.
-------
Section No. 4_
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 2 o f 2
The methods and schedule for sampling and analysis are detailed in
the "Sampling and Analysis Design" dated February, 1985. The QA/QC Plan
will be used with that document to outline the performance of the above
tasks.
-------
Section No. 5_
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 1 of 4
PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Project organization and individuals responsible for quality assurance
are shown in Figure 1. Responsibilities of these personnel are summarized
in Table 1. QA officers charged with quality assurance of specific laboratory
and data analysis tasks are shown in Table 2.
Each QA officer is responsible for ensuring that:
• Sample receipt and custody records are properly handled
for all samples received at the appropriate laboratory
• Instruments are calibrated and maintained as specified
t Internal quality control measures and analytical methods
are performed as specified and as required to meet specified
accuracy and precision requirements
• Corrective action is taken and the project QA coordinator
is notified when problems occur.
• Data and required quality control information are reported
when requested.
-------
0
Section No.
Revision No.
Date February 22. 1985"
Page 2 of 4
John Underwood, EPA
PROGRAM MANAGER
Barry Towns, Region X EPA
EPA CHIEF QUO
EPA-WDOE COORDINATOR
WDOE
QAO
Thomas Ginn, Tt
PROJECT MANAGER
Ann Bailey, Tt
PROGRAM QA COORDINATOR
Julia Wilcox, Tt
PROJECT QA COORDINATOR
QA—BEOTHOS
QA--CHEMISTRY
Marcia Landolt (UW)
QA—PATHOLOGY
Peter Chapman (EVS)
QA—BIOASSAY
Roberta Feins, Tt
QA—DATA ANALYSIS
Figure 1. QA Program Organization - Management and Contractor
5
-------
Section No.
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 3 of 4
TABLE 1. PERSONNEL RESPONSIBLE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES
Personnel
Responsibil ities
Program Manager
EPA QA Officer
EPA-WDOE Coordinator
WDOE QA Officer
Tetra Tech
Project Manager
Tetra Tech
Program QA Coordinator
Project QA Coordinator
Review final program QA needs, problems,
and requests; approve appropriate QA corrective
actions as needed.
Provide contacts for EPA
analytical procedures;
with EPA QA policies.
methodologies and
ensure compliance
Provide coordination between EPA and state
personnel and policies.
Provide technical QA assistance and review
in relation to state policies and procedures.
Oversee project performance to ensure contract
compliance. Implement necessary action and
adjustments to accomplish program objectives.
Monitor field investigations, coordinate
field and laboratory sample tracking, and
act as liaison between agencies and contract
personnel.
Provide technical QA assistance; review and
approve project QA plans; arrange contract
or other external procurement packages for
QA needs; coordinate corrective actions;
prepare and submit QA reports to management.
Oversee all contractor QA activities to ensure
compliance with contract specifications;
provide technical QA assistance; direct imple-
mentation of QA contractor plan; coordinate
required corrective actions; prepare and
submit QA project reports to Tetra Tech.
-------
Section No. 5_
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 4 o f 4
TABLE 2. QA OFFICERS RESPONSIBLE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE
OF LABORATORY AND DATA ANALYSIS TASKS
QA Officers Responsibility
Sediment Analyses: extractable organics
Sediment Analyses: ancilliary parameters
Priority Pollutant Analyses: analytical
laboratories
Benthic Infauna
Bioassays
Pathology
Data Analysis
-------
Section No. 6_
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 1 of 3
OBJECTIVES FOR MEASUREMENT
Measurement parameters vary depending upon the circumstances surrounding
a specific sampling event, the type and concentration of material, and
the media to be sampled. All measurements will be made to yield consistent
results that are representative of the media and conditions measured.
All data will be calculated and reported in units consistent with those
of other agencies and organizations to allow comparability of data bases.
Quality assurance objectives for precision, accuracy, and completeness
have been established for each measurement parameter, where possible, and
are presented in Table 3.
Benthic taxonomy and pathology are not included in Table 3, since
the parameters listed are not directly applicable to these analyses. Information
regarding these analyses is described in Section 10 (Analytical Procedures)
and Section 12 (Internal Quality Control Checks).
-------
TABLE 3. OBJECTIVES FOR MEASUREMENT DATA
Parameter
Priority Pollutant
Analyses
Volatiles
Pesticides
PCBs
Neutrals
Acids/bases
Trace Metals
Sb,Cr,Cu,Pb,N1,
Ay.As.Tl ,Zn,
plus Fe and Mn
Be.Cd
Se
Hy
As,Cr,Cu,Sb,Pb,
Hg,N1 ,Se,Tl
Zn
Be.Cd.Ay
Matrix
Sediment
Fish tissue
Sediment
Fish tissue
Hater
(particulate
only)
Sedi ment
Fish tissue
Hater
(particulate
only)
Sediment
Fish tissue
Water
(particulate
only)
Sediment
Fish tissue
Hater
(particulate
only)
Sediment
Sediment
Sediment
Sediment
Fish tissue
Fish tissue
Fish tissue
Units
uy/kya
ug/kgb
ug/kga
ug/kyb
uy/kya
uy/kya
ug/kyb
uy/kya
ug/kya
uy/kgb
ug/kya
uy/kya
ug/kyb
uy/kga
ug/kga
ug/kya
ug/kya
uy/kya
uy/kgb
ug/kgb
ug/kgb
Method
Detection
Limit
5
5
25
0.1-5
250
5
20
500
5
10
250
10
20
500
100
20
50
10
10
200
1
Accuracy
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
5-10%
10%
10*
10*
10*
10%
10%
Precision
c
c
c
c
c
+15*
+30*
+_30%
+15%
+30*
+30*
+30%
+60%
^60%
+_10*
+_10%
+10*
^10*
+20*
^20*
^20%
Completeness
99*
99%
99*
99%
99%
99%
99%
99%
99%
99*
99%
99*
99*
99*
99*
99*
99%
99%
99%
99*
Methodology
Purge + trap
GC/MS
Extraction/
GC/MS
EC/GC
EC/GC
Extraction/
EC/GC
Extraction/
GC/MS
Extraction/
GC/MS
Graphite or
flame AA,
ICP
Graphite AA
Gaseous
hydride
Cold vapor AA
Graphite AA/
cold vapor AA
Flame or
graphite AA
Graphite AA
Preservation Maximum
Reference Bottle"1 Holding Time6
Tetra Tech V 14 days
(In prep.)
Tetra Tech N 7 days/40 days
(In prep.)
Tetra Tech N 7 days/40 days
(In prep.)
Tetra Tech N 7 days/40 days
(In prep.)
Tetra Tech N 7 days/40 days
(In prep.)
EPA/COE 1981 M 6 months
-a a 73 (s>
QJ QJ fD fD
tO c-t- < O
EPA/COE 1981 M 6 months O> a> -"• r+
(/) — J
EPA/COE 1981 M 6 months -^ Q' °
rt> rj
f\> o- -z.
EPA/COE 1981 M 6 months c £ °
EPA/COE 1981 F 6 months o ~t
-h'-c
EPA/COE 1981 F 6 months f\j
» O
-------
TABLE 3. (Continued)
Sb.Cu.Pb.Fe.Mn,
Ni.Ag.Tl.Zn.Cr,
As
Cd.Be
Se
Conventional
Analyses
Total organic
carbon
Total nitrogen
Total sulflde
Total volatile
solids
Total solids
Grain size
Oil and grease
Total extractable
lipids
Bioassays
Amp hi pod
aOry weight basis.
bWet weight basis.
Aqueous ug/kga 100 10% +10%
(particulate
only)
Aqueous ug/kga 20 10% +10%
(parti cul ate
only)
Aqueous ug/kya 50 10% +10%
(parti cul ate
only)
Sediment Percent3 0.01 +5% +3%
Sediment Percent3 0.01 j+5% +5%
Sediment my/kga 1 +10% +10%
Sediment Percent3 0.01 -- +5%
Sediment Percent*1 0.05 ~ +5%
Sediment Percent3 0.01 — ±5%
Sediment mg/kga 10 — +10%
Fish tissue mg/gb 0.1 « +5%
Sediment Percent NA NA NA
survival
cAccuracy to be determined with appropriate reference standard 1f available; precision
dSee Table 4 for type
eWhere two times are
of containers and preservation.
given, the first refers to the maximum time prior to extraction.
99% Graphite AA
99% Graphite AA
99% Gaseous
hydride or
graphite AA
99% High temp
combustion
99% High temp
combustion
99% TltrlmetHc;
specific ion
probe
99% 550° combus-
tion; gravi-
metric
99% 105° drying
99% Sieve and
plpet
analysis
99% Freon
extraction;
gravimetric
99% Methylene-
chloride +
methanol
extraction;
gravimetric
99%
EPA/COE 1981 P 6 months
EPA/COE 1981 P 6 months
EPA/COE 1981 P 6 months
EPA/COE 1981 C 28 days
EPA/COE 1981 C 28 days
Green and S 24 hours
Schnitker
1974
EPA/COE 1981 C 24 hours
EPA/COE 1981 C 7 days
Buchanan and G 6 months
Ka1n 1971
EPA/COE 1981 H 28 days
Tetra Tech N 7 days
(In prep.)
-o o TO t/>
a>
(Q
0>
Swartz et al. A 14 days
1985 (^
O
-h1-
to be determined by replicate analyses performed during the study.
the second to the maximum
CJ
time prior to Instrumental analysis.
jj f^ to
rt- < O
in ~J.
->. 0
-n o 3
CT "Z.
-5 z o
= o .
<
•^J
N3
o o*
-_*
•O
30
Ji
-------
Section No. 7_
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 1 of 4
SAMPLING PROCEDURES
The ultimate accuracy of any data generation begins with a sampling
procedure that is well conceived and carefully implemented. A plan describing
sampling locations, sample types, sampling equipment, and methods is developed
in a companion document [Sampling and Analysis Design (Tetra Tech 1985)].
This section of the QA/QC Plan reviews how the samples will be handled
in order to maintain sample integrity.
The specific methods for sample container preparation, sample preservation
and holding times, and special sample handling requirements are listed
in Tables 3 and 4. Sample containers will be kept closed and in the cooler
until each set of sample containers is to be filled. After filling, the
containers will be securely closed, sediment will be rinsed from the sides
of the containers, and containers will be immediately placed in a cooler
on ice.
CHANGES IN PROCEDURES
Any changes in sampling procedures outlined in the Sampling and Analysis
Design or QA/QC Plan will be described on the Sample Alteration Checklist
(Figure 2). Prior approval from the Project Manager will be needed to
implement changes.
11
-------
Section No.
TABLE 4. SAMPLE CONTAINERS,
Preser-
vation
Bottlea
V
N
M
A
C
G
H
E
R
Parameter
Group
Volatile
organics
Ex tractable
organics
Metals
Bioassays
Conventional
parameters
Grain size
Oil and
grease
Benthic
ecology
Archive
sample
Container
40 ml glass
vial; teflon
lined silicon
septum cap
500 ml glass
jar; teflon
lined lid
250 ml wide-
mouth pyrex
jars0
Polyethylene
bags
250 ml poly-
propylene
bottle
Polyethylene
bags
1-1 glass jar
500-4,000 ml
glass jars
500 ml glass
jar; teflon
lined lid
Revision No.
Date February
Page 2 of
PREPARATION, AND PRESERVATIVES
Container
Preparation
Detergent wash;
distilled water
rinse; heated at
105° C for >1 h
Detergent wash;
distilled water
rinse; kiln fired
at 4500 c for >! n
Soak in 20% HN03;
distilled/DI rinse
None (single use)
Detergent wash;
distilled water
rinse
None (single use)
Detergent wash;
Freon rinse
Detergent wash;
tap rinse
Detergent wash;
distilled water
rinse; kiln fired
at 4500 c for <1 h
0
22, 1985
4
Preservation
and Handling
Fill leaving
no air space;
keep in dark
on ice (4° C)
Keep on ice
(40 C)
Keep on ice
(40 C)
Keep in dark
on ice (4° C)
Keep on ice
(4° C)
Keep on ice
(40 C)
Keep on ice
(40 C)
Fill jar only
half full with
sediment; preserve
in 10% formalin
in borax buffered
seawater
keep frozen
(-100 c)
12
-------
0
Section No.
Revision No.
Date February 22, 1985
Page 3 of 4
Fish tissue
Sulfide
Whole fish -
aluminum foil;
muscle tissue -
glass jar
4-oz polyethylene
cup with lid
Jar: same as N
Preweigh cup with
lid and 50 ml SOAB
Keep frozen
(-100 C)
Add 10-20 g of
sample to cup
in the field.
Mix and seal.
Keep on ice
(40 c)
a Letter codes correspond to those in Table 3.
b Glass jars preferred over plastic, since the wide-mouth glass jars are easiest to
fill with sediment.
13
-------
Section No. 7
Revision No. 0
Date February 22. 1985
Pag e 4 of 4
SAMPLING ALTERATION CHECKLIST
Sample Program Identification^
Material to be Sampled:
Measurement Parameter:
Standard Procedure for Analysis:
Reference:
Variation from Standard Procedure:
Reason for Variation:
Resultant Change 1n Field Sampling Procedure:
Special Equipment, Material, or Personnel Required:
Author's Name: Date:
Approv al: T111 e:_
Date:
Figure 2. Sampling Alteration Checklist.
14
-------
Section No. 8
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 1 of 7
SAMPLE CUSTODY
Sample custody is a vital aspect of remedial investigation programs
generating data that may be used as evidence in a court of law. The possession
of samples must be traceable from the time the samples are collected until
they are introduced as evidence in enforcement proceedings.
FIELD SAMPLING OPERATIONS
The most important aspect of sample custody is thorough record-keeping.
Onboard the sampling vessel, a station identification form (Figure 3) and
a sample log (Figure 4) will be completed for each station occupied and
each sample taken.
Sample containers will be labeled prior to the time of sampling with
the following:
Survey Code
Sampling Date
Sample Number (1-99)
Bottle Code (see Table 4).
At the time of sampling, the appropriate sample containers will be
selected, and the sample number and bottle code for each subsample recorded
on the sample log form. After each bottle is filled and before it is placed
in onboard storage, the field supervisor will initial the label to document
proper sample handling.
At the end of each survey day, and prior to transfer off-ship, chain-
of-custody entries will be made for all samples, using the form in Figure
15
-------
8
0
Section No.
Revision No.
Date February 22, 1985
Pa9 e 2 of 7
ELLIOTT BAY SYSTEM - STATION IDENTIFICATION
Parameters in upper case letters must be filled out.
PAGE OF
JST
2-22-85
Object Id:
SURVEY*: _
Comment:
(number)
Pipe/trib:
STATION*:
SPC Zone:
SPC Zone:
(N/S) East:
(N/S) East:
Hater Depth: (ft)
(or Land Elevation)
Position: (ft)
(along line)
LOCATIOH:
_ North: (ft) (start)
_ Horth: (ft) (end)
Tidal Zone: _ (S=sub,I=inter)
Bank:
(R/L/C) Distance: _
(from line)
(ft)
DATE
OCCUPIED
TIME
START
TIME
END
SAMPLES TAKEN (LIST SAMPLE NUMBERS)
OBSERVER:
SIGNATURE:
ORG.CODE
DATE:
Figure 3. Station Identification Form.
16
-------
Section No.
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 3 of 7
PAGE OF
ELLIOTT BAY SYSTEM - SAMPLE LOG
Parameters in upper case must be filled out. 2-22-85
OBJECT ID: - -
SURVEY: (number) STATION!:
DATE: / / (mm/dd/yy)
TIME(start): : _ (hh:mm) Time(end) : (end) (hh:mm)
SAMPLE*: EPA Number:
SAMPLE OF:
GEAR TYPE AND
SIZE:
Water Depth: . (m)
UPPER DEPTH: . (n) LOWER DEPTH: . (m)
Sample Vol: . (1) Sample Area: . (sq m)
Separation (method):
Coapos it ion
SUBSAMPLE
NUMBER
OBSERVER:
( me thod ) :
* OF
CONTAINERS
EPA
Number
01
SIGNATURE :
DESTINATION (and comments)
-
iG.CODE DATE: / /
Figure 4. Sample Log Form.
17
-------
Section No. 8
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 4 of 7
5. Finally, information on the labels will be checked against sample log
entries, and samples will be recounted before transfer off-ship.
SHIPPING
All samples will be accompanied by chain-of-custody forms and packing
lists (Figure 6) with sample numbers and requested analysis. Copies of
all forms will be retained by Tetra Tech and included in QA/QC reports.
Prior to shipping, all bottle closures will be taped closed, glass
bottles will be placed in plastic bags, all bottles will be securely packed,
and original chain-of-custody forms (enclosed in plastic) will be placed
inside the cooler. The entire cooler opening will be taped closed, a "This
End Up!" label will be attached to each side of the cooler, and a "Fragile-
Glass" label will be attached to the top of the cooler. A custody seal
will be attached in such a way that it will be broken when the cooler is
opened.
LABORATORY
The sample custodian at each laboratory will fill out the chain-of-
custody record upon receipt of the samples and note questions or observations
concerning sample integrity. A sample-tracking record that will follow
each sample through all stages of laboratory processing (Figure 7) will
be maintained by the sample custodian.
18
-------
8_
0
Section No.
Revision No.
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 5 o f 7
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
PROJECT
SAMPLE NO.
SITE
DATE
TIME
RELINQUISHED BY: /s,g^u^i
RELINQUISHED BY: tsignawm
RELINQUISHED BY: /s^w^i
DISPATCHED BY: ts/gntun)
METHOD OF SHIPMENT:
DATE
.
SAMPLERS: ISignaiurel
SAMPLE MATRIX
WATER
SEDIMENT
TISSUE
>
3
g
r-
o
— <
i
m
3)
NUMBER
OF
CONTAINERS
REMARKS
TAG NO.
RECEIVED BY: isignawni DATE/TIME
RECEIVED BY: /signature! DATE/TIME
REC'V'D BY MOBILE LAB FOR FIELD DATE/TIME
ANAL.: ISignaturel
'TIME
RECEIVED FOR LAB BY: tsyruwrei DATE/TIME
Figure 5. Chain of Custody Form.
19
-------
8
0
Section No.
Revision No.
Date February 22. 1985
Pag ego f 7
PACKING LIST
Project:
Sampling Contact:
(name)
(phone)
Sampling Date(s):
Date Shipped:
Task Name/Code:
Ship To:
Attn:
For Lab Use Only
Date Samples Rec'd:
Received By:
1..
2..
3..
4..
5..
6..
7..
8..
9..
10..
11..
12..
13..
14..
15..
16..
17..
18..
19..
20..
Sample
Numbers
Sample Description
(Analysis/Matrix/Concentration/Preservative)
Figure 6. Packing List.
20
-------
8
0
Section No.
Revision No.
Date February 22, 1985
Page 7 of 7
W/O No.
LA3 TRACKING P-EPORT: - -
FRACTION
CODE X
PREP/ANAL
R£QOIR£D
(LOC-SN-FSC)
R£S?ONSI3LZ
INDIVIDUAL
DATE
DELIVERED
Page
DATE
COMPL2TEC
1
1
I
i
!
i
t
I
i :
i i
Figure 7. Example Tracking Form.
21
-------
Section No. 9
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 1 of 2
CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY
Calibration procedures, calibration frequency, and standards for measure-
ment parameters and systems are shown in Table 5.
22
-------
0
Section No.
Revision No.
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 2 of 2
TABLE 5. CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY
Parameter/System
Calibration Frequency
Standard
Navigation:
Wild Model T-l
Theodolite
Hewlett-Packard
Model 38-5-A EDM
Presurvey check; daily
field calibration
Presurvey check; daily
field calibration
Calibrate over measured
distance and angles
Calibrate over measured
distance and angles
Water Qua!ity:
Hydrolab Water
Quality Analyzer
(DO, pH, tem-
perature, depth,
conductivity)
Bioassays:
Test probes
(salinity, tem-
perature, DO)
Chemistry:
Analytical Labora-
tory: mass
spectrometer with
capillary column
gas chromatograph
Elemental analyzer
(carbon and nitrogen)
Specific Ion Probe
(sulfide)
Analytical balances
Before and after each
day's use
Continual during test
Daily
Standard curve (minimum of
4 points) start of run; one
standard every 10 samples
thereafter
Standard curve (minimum of
4 points) start of run; one
standard every 10 samples
thereafter
Calibrated over complete
range quarterly
Hydrolab Manual;
Standard Methods
Standard Methods;
manuals
Blank, DFTPP, and
response standard
Acetanilide
Lead perch!orate
titrant vs. hydrogen
sulfide in water
Class S weights
23
-------
Section No. 10
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 1 of 2
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
CHEMISTRY
Methods and references for analyses are summarized in Table 3. These
methods will be the same or comparable to procedures described in Tetra
Tech (1985).
BIOASSAYS
References are given in Table 3.
BENTHIC TAXONOMY
In the laboratory, benthic samples will be washed to remove excess
formalin and sediments, and sorted. Each organism will be identified to
the lowest possible taxon permitted by current taxonomic literature (preferably
to species) and enumerated. The 0.1-mm portion will be rescreened on a
0.5-mm Tyler sieve screen. The data tab taken from the sample bag will
remain with the sample and will be placed into the glass jar with the sample.
The jars will be labeled with a permanent marker on labels affixed to the
lid and on the side of the jar. A record of the sample will be made at
this time on a rescreening data sheet. Information listed on this sheet
will include sample number, locations, rescreening date, number of jars
used for the sample, and the name of the person who rescreened it.
All samples are to be sorted with a dissecting microscope set at the
lOx power level. Spot checks will be made by the taxonomy supervisor as
sorters finish sorting a dish of the sample. The organisms will be placed
in a separate vial for identification and enumeration.
24
-------
Section No. 10
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 2 of 2
Following identification, all data will be docked for subsequent computer
analysis. A reference collection will be provided upon conclusion of this
study.
PATHOLOGY
In the field, a l-cm3 subsample will be excised from each liver to
be examined and immediately placed in 10 percent buffered formalin. If
a liver contains grossly visible abnormalities, the subsample will be taken
at the border between the normal and abnormal tissue and include both types
of tissue. If no abnormalities are visible, the subsample will be taken
from a random location.
At the laboratory, the fixed tissue will be dehydrated through a graded
series of ethanols, cleaned in xylene, and embedded in paraffin. The paraffin-
embedded tissues will be sectioned (5 urn) on a rotary microtome, placed
on a glass microscope slide, and stained with hematoxylin and eosin dyes.
The prepared slides will be examined by light microscopy for the presence
of histopathological changes. A numerical coding system will be used to
describe lesions and score their severity.
25
-------
Section No. 11
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e i of 3
DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION, AND REPORTING
All samples collected for the Elliott Bay Toxics Action Plan will
be promptly packaged and shipped to designated laboratories according to
U.S. Department of Transportation regulations. The laboratories, analytical
responsibilities, and data flow that will be followed are illustrated in
Figure 8. All laboratories for this study will be required to submit results
that are supported by sufficient backup data and quality assurance results
to enable reviewers to determine conclusively the quality of the data.
Sample analysis data, when reported by each laboratory, will include
the following information, where applicable, for data validation:
• Replicate results
• Internal standard recoveries
• Spike recoveries
0 Gas chromatograms and reconstructed ion current chromatograms
• Procedural blank results
• Field blank results
• Mass spectra of target and tentatively identified compounds
• Instrument tuning compound results
• Detection limits
26
-------
Section No. n_
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 2 of 3
Analytical Laboratories (to be designated) -- organics, VOA, metals, grainsize,
ancillary analyses
Taxonomic Laboratory (to be designated) -- benthic infauna
EVS Consultants -- bioassays
University of Washington -- pathology
Data and Quality
Control Information
Tetra Tech - Data Compilation and Analysis
Figure 8. Data Flow and Reporting Scheme.
27
-------
Section No. 11
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 30 f 3
• Positive and negative controls (bioassays)
• Reference toxicants (bioassays)
• Recorded testing parameters (bioassays).
Data processing quality control includes checking and verifying input
data by manual comparison as well as by computer programs that perform
compatibility checks and flag "outliers" for confirmation. Computerized
plotting of data is routinely used as a tool for rapid identification of
outliers. These activities will be conducted by Tetra Tech, which is respons-
ible for overall data management and processing.
28
-------
Section No. 1?
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 1 of 5
INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL CHECK
CHEMISTRY
Analytical laboratories will demonstrate the ability to produce acceptable
results using the modified methods recommended or their equivalent. Additional
measurements of comparability among laboratories producing similar data
will be performed. Results of interlaboratory replicate analyses and intra-
laboratory triplicate analyses will indicate whether the level of precision
is acceptable. The data will be evaluated based on the following criteria
(as appropriate for inorganic or organic chemistry analyses):
0 Performance on EPA method tests:
MS performance (DFTPP)
GC performance (tailing factors)
Blanks
Precision of calibration and samples
Linearity of response and linear range
• Percent recovery of internal standards
• Adequacy of detection limits obtained
• Precision of replicate analyses.
29
-------
Section No. 12
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 2 of 5
• Comparison of the percentage of missing or undetected substances
among replicate samples.
BIOASSAY
All bioassays will be conducted with well-established controls. For
every test series with a particular organism, one bioassay test chamber
will contain clean, inert material plus dilutent seawater. A second control
with only dilutent seawater will also be run. The complete bioassay series
will be repeated if more than 10 percent of the control animals die. Only
healthy organisms of similar size and life history stage will be used in
bioassays.
Reference toxicants will be used to provide insight into mortalities
or increased sensitivity that may occur as a result of disease, salinity
tolerance/sensitivity, and loading density. Reference toxicants can also
provide insight into nonleathal effects that occur due to acclimation,
insensitivity, or stress tolerance developed in handling and bioassay.
Accordingly, concurrent bioassays will be implemented for each species
with a reference toxicant [sodium pentachlorophenate (NaPCP)]. Such tests
will constitute "negative" controls.
The use of "standard" or "benchmark" marine bioassay organisms such
as the sensitive amphipod (Rhepoxynius abronius) is an integral part of
the QA/QC bioassay protocol. Complete QA/QC bioassay protocols include
the techniques and methodologies previously described (i.e., the use of
reference toxicants, reference organisms, positive and negative controls)
together with blind testing of samples and duplicates, and with regular
measurements of temperature, pH, salinity, and dissolved oxygen during
bioassay.
30
-------
Section No. 12
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 3 of 5
BENTHIC TAXONOMY
Effective QA/QC features will be used to ensure accurate and repro-
ducible results. The processing of sediment biological samples may especially
be prone to error or oversight that could result in bias or improper interpre-
tation of results. To eliminate this concern, the following laboratory
QA/QC protocol will be followed rigidly:
1. A minimum of 20 percent of each sample will be resorted.
If the resort indicates a loss of 5 percent or greater in
the total sample, the entire sample will be resorted.
2. Complete sorting (including resorting), processing, and
laboratory records will be maintained for each sample.
3. An aliquot of 10 g will be archived from each sieved sediment
sample and held for a minimum of 1 year.
4. A voucher collection of specimens representing each species
(or lowest taxonomic unit of identification) will be maintained
in a permanent reference collection.
5. Species will be verified by comparison with a reference
collection, if possible. Any species observed that is not
represented in this collection will have its identification
verified by an outside expert. Taxonomic experts to be
used are listed in Table 6.
6. Laboratory intercalibration of identifications has been
in process for 5 years in the Puget Sound area; a verified
museum exists and this process will continue throughout
this project.
31
-------
12
0
Section No._
Revision No.
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 4 o f 5
TABLE 6. TAXONOMIC EXPERTS USED FOR SPECIES IDENTIFICATION/
CONFIRMATION OF PUGET SOUND BENTHOS
Oligochaetes
Polychaetes
Coelenterates
Amphipods
Decapods
Harpacticoids
Mollusca
Holothuroids
R. Brinkhurst (Institute of Ocean Sciences, Victoria)
K. Banse (University of Washington)
M. Jones or K. Fauchild (Smithsonian Institution)
or other recognized experts for individual families
F.6. Hockberg (Santa Barbara Museum of Natural
History)
E. Bousfield (National Museum, Ottawa)
C. Staude (Friday Harbor Marine Labs)
T.H. Butler (Pacific Biological Station)
J. Cordell (University of Washington)
D. Cadien (Marine Biological Consultants)
M. Wright (Allan Hancock Foundation)
32
-------
Section No. 12
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 5 o f 5
PATHOLOGY
All slides will be examined by trained microscopists with a minimum
of 2 years practical slide-reading experience and completed course work
in fish pathology and fish histology. To ensure consistent readings, a
minimim of five slides indicated as bearing lesions and five slides indicated
as normal will be reviewed from each microscopist. The review will be
conducted by Dr. Bruce B. McCain at the Northwest and Alaska Fishery Center,
Seattle, Washington.
33
-------
Section No. 13
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 1 of 2
PERFORMANCE AND SYSTEM AUDITS
Performance and system audits for sampling and analysis operations
consist of on-site reviews of field and laboratory quality assurance systems
and equipment for sampling, calibration, and measurement. Environmental
monitoring equipment will be serviced periodically and calibrated during
field use.
Some analytical laboratories are required to take part in a series
of performance and systems audits conducted by the National Enforcement
Investigations Center (NEIC). For laboratories not involved in these audits,
the Environmental Monitoring Systems/Support Laboratories provides the
necessary audit materials, devices, and technical assistance. These labora-
tories also conduct scheduled interlaboratory performance tests and provide
guidance and assistance in the conduct of system audits.
The Program Quality Assurance Coordinator (QAC), in conjunction with
the EPA, will develop and conduct external system audits based on the approved
project plan. Performance audits will be conducted soon after the measurement
system begins generating data. They will be repeated periodically as required
by task needs, durations, and costs.
The Project QAC ensures that each QA Officer for each aspect of the
project has performed adequate internal audits of performance and systems
before submitting quality assurance reports to the program QAC (see Section
17). The QA officers are listed in Section 5. The following checklist
(Figure 9) will be completed by the Project QAC when auditing each aspect
of the project.
34
-------
Section No. 13
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 2 o f 2
SYSTEMS AUDIT CHECKLIST
Sample Program Identification:
Sampling Dates:
Material to be Sampled:_
Measurement Parameter:
Sampling and Monitoring Equipment 1n Use:
Audit Procedures and Frequency:
Field Calibration Procedures and Frequency:
Signature of QA Coordinator: Date:
Figure 9. System Audit Checklist,
35
-------
Section No. 14
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e i of 3
PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE
Preventive maintenance of equipment is essential if project resources
are to be used in a cost-effective manner. Preventive maintenance will
take two forms: 1) a schedule of preventive maintenance activities to
minimize downtime and ensure accuracy of measurement systems; and 2) avail-
ability of critical spare parts and backup systems and equipment. Table 7
sunmarizes the preventive maintenance approach for specific pieces of equipment
used in sampling, monitoring, and documentation.
36
-------
14
Section No._
Revision No. 0 ___
Date February ZZ, 1985
Page 2 of 3
TABLE 7. PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE APPROACH FOR SPECIFIC PIECES OF EQUIPMENT
USED IN SAMPLING, MONITORING, AND DOCUMENTATION
Equipment
Preventive Maintenance
Vessel:
Power (main and auxiliary)
Winch
Crane/A-frame
Radar
Fathomometer
Radios (CB, VHF)
Navigation:
Theodolite (Wild Model T-l)
EDM (Hewlett-Packard Model
3805-A)
Polaroid camera
Safety:
HNu photoionizer
Escape mask (or equivalent)
Organic vapor monitoring badge
Respirator
Biological/Sediments:
van Veen grab (0.1 m2)
Sieves
Otter trawl
Microscopes
Bioassay laboratory
Presurvey check;
Presurvey check;
Presurvey check;
Presurvey check;
Presurvey check;
Presurvey check;
regular inspection
regular inspection
regular inspection
regular inspection
regular inspection
regular inspection
Presurvey checkout and calibration;
spare parts
Presurvey checkout and calibration;
spare parts
Battery check; spare film packs
Battery check; calibration with benzene
gas
Spare unit on board; test before each
day's survey
Spares on board
Spare cartridge on board
Backup unit on board; regular inspection
Backup unit on board; regular inspection
Backup unit on board; regular inspection
Regular inspection and service
Two controlled environment rooms as
backup; alternate power system; critical
spare parts (pumps, heater, refrigerator,
seawater systems, air supply, etc.);
regular inspection and service
37
-------
Section No. 14
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page 3 of 3
Water Qua!ity:
Hydrolab water quality analyzer Presurvey checkout and calibration;
spare parts and batteries
Chemistry:
Manufacturer's recommendations and schedule for preventive maintenance
are followed for major pieces of equipment. Critical spare parts are
maintained on hand for these instruments.
38
-------
Section No. 15
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 1 of 2
SPECIFIC ROUTINE PROCEDURES USED TO ASSESS
DATA PRECISION, ACCURACY, AND COMPLETENESS
Routine procedures to be used to measure precision and accuracy include:
1. Replicate analysis:
a. Volatiles; trace metals; acid, base, and neutral organic
compounds: Duplicate every 20 samples or each batch
(whichever is more frequent)
b. Bioassays: Amphipod, each test with five replicates
c. Benthic taxonomy: 20 percent of each sample resorted
d. Ancillary parameters: Minimum of 10 percent of the
samples analyzed
e. Pathology: Minimum of 10 slides reviewed by outside
laboratory.
2. Matrix spike:
a. Trace metals; volatiles; acid, base, and neutral organic
compounds: Duplicate every 20 samples or each batch
(whichever is more frequent)
b. Bioassay: Reference toxicant bioassay per set (maximum
bioassays per set = 50)
39
-------
Section No. 15
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 2 of 2
3. Procedural blank:
a. Trace metals; volatiles; acid, base, and neutral organic
compounds: Each set of samples processed
b. Bioassay: Each set of samples processed (control with
"clean" sediment and control with dilutent seawater
only).
Completeness will be measured for each set of data received by dividing
the number of valid measurements actually obtained by the number of valid
measurements that were planned, as specified in the sampling plan.
40
-------
Section No. 16_
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 1 o f 2
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
Corrective actions fall into two categories: 1) handling of analytical
or equipment malfunctions; and 2) handling of nonconformance or noncompliance
with the QA requirements that have been set forth. During field operations
and sampling procedures, the field supervisor will be responsible for correcting
equipment malfunctions. All corrective measures taken will be included
in the cruise log, and, if required, a sampling alteration checklist will
be completed (Figure 2).
The QA officers listed in Section 5 are responsible for their respective
areas of involvement. Predetermined methodology, limits of acceptability,
and required sample handling are listed in Tables 1 and 2. Corrective
action required to conform to the specifications will be recorded by the
QA officer and reported to the Project QAC within 3 days. Corrective actions
will be documented using the Corrective Action Checklist (Figure 10), and
included in the QA/QC report to the Program QAC.
41
-------
Section No. 16
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 2 of 2
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS CHECKLIST
Sample Program Identification:
Sampling Dates:
Material to be Sampled:
Measurement Parameter:__
Acceptable Data Range:
Corrective Actions Initiated By:
Title: Date:_
Problem Areas Requiring Corrective Action:
Measures to Correct Problems:
Means of Detecting Problems (field observations, systems audit, etc.):.
Approval for Corrective Actions:
Title: Date:_
Signature:
Figure 10. Corrective Actions Checklist.
42
-------
Section No. 17
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Page i of 3
QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT
Quality assurance reports will be submitted to Tetra Tech periodically
over the course of the project. QA reporting will be tied to the completion
of various elements of the work rather than to general time periods. QA
reports will be submitted by the Project QAC to the Program QAC within
7 days following the completion of the task elements in Table 8.
The QA reports from the project QAC will contain copies of the following
information, where appropriate:
1. Cruise report
2. Station log
3. Sample log
4. Chain-of-custody forms
5. Packing lists
6. Corrective action checklist
7. Systems audit checklist
8. Sampling alteration checklist.
The completed forms will be accompanied by a technical memo from the
Project QAC summarizing the reports and noting significant quality assurance
problems that arose during the reporting period.
43
-------
Section No. 17
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e2o f 3
TABLE 8. QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT
Approximate Date
Task of Completion
Preliminary sediment sampling (subtidal) June
Clam sampling (intertidal) June
Chemistry and bioassay sediment sampling (intertidal) June
Storm drain sediment sampling June
CSO/drain sampling July
Chemistry and bioassay sediment sampling (subtidal) August
Benthic infauna sampling August
Fish and crab sampling August
Fish liver sampling August
CSO/drain discharge sampling November
44
-------
Section No. 17
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 3 of 3
Data along with the appropriate quality control information will be
reported separately as the information is received. The handling and contents
of the data reports are discussed in Section 11.
45
-------
Section No. 18
Revision No. 0
Date February 22. 1985
Pag e 1 of 1
REFERENCES
Buchanan, J.B., and J.M. Kain. 1971. Measurement of the physical and
chemical environment, pp. 30-52. In: Methods for the Study of Marine
Benthos. N.A. Holme, and A.D. Mclntyre (eds). IBP Handbook No. 16. Blackwell
Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK.
Green, E.J., and D. Schnitker. 1974. The direct titration of sulfide
in estuary muds of Montsweag Bay, Maine. Mar. Chem. 2:111.
Swartz, R.C., W.A. DeBen, J.K.P. Jones, J.O. Lamberson, and F.A. Cole.
1985. Phoxocephal id amphipod bioassay for marine sediment toxicity. pp.
284-307. In: Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard Assessment, Proceedings of
the Seventh Annual Symposium. R.D. Cardwell, R. Purdy, and R. Comotto-Banner
(eds). American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.
Tetra Tech. (in preparation). Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Remedial
Investigation Report for Tasks 3, 4, and 5.
Tetra Tech. 1985. Draft sampling and analysis design for development
of Elliott Bay Toxics Action Plan. Prepared for U.S. EPA, Region X. Bellevue,
WA.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers. 1981.
Procedures for handling and chemical analysis of sediment and water samples.
Technical Report EPA/COE-81-1. U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS. 471 pp.
46
-------
Section No. 19
Revision No. 0
Date February 22. 1985
Pag e 1 of 4
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
AUDIT
A systematic check to determine the quality of operation of some function
or activity. Audits may be of two basic types: 1) performance audits
in which quantitative data are independently obtained for comparison with
routinely obtained data in a measurement system, or 2) system audits of
a qua! itative nature that consist of an on-site review of a laboratory's
quality assurance system and physical facilities for sampling, calibration,
and measurement.
DATA QUALITY
The totality of features and characteristics of data that bears on
their ability to satisfy a given purpose. The characteristics of major
importance are accuracy, precision, completeness, representativeness, and
comparability.
Accuracy
The degree of agreement of a measurement (or an average of measurements
of the same thing), X, with accepted reference or true value, T, usually
expressed as the difference between the two values, X-T, or the difference
as a percentage of the reference or true value, 100 (X-T)/T, and sometimes
expressed as a ratio, X/T. Accuracy is a measure of the bias in a system.
47
-------
Section No. 19
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e ? of 4
Precision
A measure of mutual agreement among individual measurements of the
same property, usually under prescribed similar conditions. Precision
is best expressed in terms of the standard deviation. Various measures
of precision exist depending upon the "prescribed similar conditions."
Completeness
A measure of the amount of valid data obtained from a measurement
system compared to the amount that was expected under correct, normal condi-
tions.
Representativeness
Expresses the degree to which data accurately and precisely represent
a characteristic of a population, parameter variations at a sampling point,
a process condition, or an environmental condition.
Comparability
Expresses the confidence with which one data set can be compared to
another.
DATA VALIDATION
A systematic process for reviewing a body of data against a set of
criteria to provide assurance that the data are adequate for their intended
use. Data validation consists of data editing, screening, checking, auditing,
verification, certification, and review.
48
-------
Section No. 19
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 3 of 4
ENVIRONMENTALLY RELATED MEASUREMENTS
A term to describe essentially all field and laboratory investigations
that generate data involving 1) the measurement of chemical, physical,
or biological parameters in the environment; 2) the determination of the
presence or absence of criteria or priority pollutants in waste streams;
3) assessment of health and ecological effect studies; 4) conduct of clinical
and epidemiclogical investigations; 5) performance of engineering and process
evaluations; 6) study of laboratory simulation of environmental events;
and 7) study or measurement of pollutant transport and fate, including
diffusion models.
PERFORMANCE AUDITS
Procedures to determine quantitatively the accuracy of the total measure-
ment system or component parts thereof.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
The total integrated program for assuring the reliability of monitoring
and measurement data. A system for integrating the quality planning, quality
assessment, and quality improvement efforts to meet user requirements.
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM PLAN
An orderly assembly of detailed and specific procedures which delineates
how data of known and accepted quality data are produced for a specific
project. (A given agency or laboratory would have only one quality assurance
plan, but would have a quality assurance project plan for each project.)
49
-------
Section No. 19
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
4 of 4
QUALITY CONTROL
The routine application of procedures for obtaining prescribed standards
of performance in the monitoring and measurement process.
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES (SOP)
A written document that details an operation, analysis, or action
whose mechanisms are thoroughly prescribed and that is commonly accepted
as the method for performing certain routine or repetitive tasks.
50
-------
Section No. 20
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 1 of 4
APPENDIX B
FIELD TECHNIQUES
STATION LOCATIONS
Navigation Control
The intent of the navigation control effort is to determine clearly
and docunent as precisely as possible where all of the samples were collected.
In some Elliott Bay areas, this is complicated because standard electronic
navigation equipment (e.g., microwave units or Loran C) will not function
accurately. At the same time, horizontal distances to fixed shore objects
are not great and there are many fixed points available for referencing
station locations. During sampling of nearshore areas, the available visual
reference points (i.e., corners of buildings and and piers; spires, towers,
and smoke stacks; and other easily distinguishable, permanent objects)
will be recorded photographically. The water-surface photographs will
be compared to aerial photographs and USGS quadrangle maps and objects
that can be recognized clearly on the aerial photographs or map, and hence
can be located accurately, will be selected and numbered as allowable reference
points. The series of surface photographs with the reference points identified
and numbered will provide the primary station location tool in nearshore
areas.
In practice, stations will be located by establishing ranges between
two reference points. All station locations will be documented by additional
photographs taken when samples are collected and by written descriptions
of the relationships to reference points. The plotted station locations
will be converted to state plane coordinates for entry into the data base.
51
-------
Section No. 20
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 2 of 4
Sampling Methods and Processing
Sediment samples will be collected with a chain-rigged, 0.1-m2 van
Veen sampler. Each station will be located using navigation techniques
discussed above. Before sampling, positions will be visually rechecked
(range alignments) and adjustments will be made in boat position for actual
sampling times. The benthic grab will be deployed upon arrival on station,
as directed by the field supervisor.
Following deployment, and as the grab is recovered onboard the sampling
vessel, it will be placed in a sampling tray with the grab remaining in
the closed position. The hinged lids of the van Veen sampler will be opened
to permit observation of the sample. Following judgment of penetration
depth and subsequent sample acceptability by the field supervisor, qualitative
observations will be recorded on the log sheets of sediment color, odor,
texture, and the presence of recognizable, living organisms.
Care will be taken to ensure a satisfactory recovery of the surficial
sediments, with four major criteria for rejection of a sample:
1. Overfilling, with sediment touching the top of the closed
cover
2. Water leaking from sides or bottom, or visible scour of
the surface near the edges of van Veen when opened
3. Turbid water overlying the sediments
4. Insufficient sampler penetration.
If, through visual check of the substrate surface contained in the
grab, it is determined that the grab misfired, was disturbed, or lost a
significant portion of the substrate, the field supervisor will direct
52
-------
Section No. 20
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 3 of 4
discarding the sample and resetting of the area. In response to variability
of substrates in the study area, the field supervisor may use a series
of grabs at the same station to obtain an acceptable depth of grab penetration.
In medium to coarse sand, a minimum of 3-5 cm is an acceptable penetration
depth. In fine sand and sandy silt, a penetration depth of 7-10 cm is
the minimum acceptable, and in silt a penetration depth of at least 10
cm is acceptable. If two attempts to reoccupy a station are unsuccessful,
another nearby station meeting similar sampling needs will be selected
and documented. Standardized data including collection date, time, station
location, depth, and replicate number will be recorded with the qualitative
features discussed above.
Once onboard, the sample will be held in a vertical position by blocks
and the overlying water will be carefully drained off by an aspirator hooked
to the ship's hose. Subsamples for volatile organic analyses will be taken
first by placing 40-cm3 glass vials (duplicates) at the undisturbed sediment
surface and filling them using a stainless steel spatula. No air space
will remain in the vials. For the remainder of the subsamples, aliquots
will be taken from a composite sample. The upper 2 cm of sediment away
from the edge of the grab will be carefully removed with a glass plate,
transferred to a clean glass beaker, and homogenized by stirring with a
glass rod. Aliquots will be collected as follows:
t 500 cm3 will be transferred to precleaned glass jars with
teflon cap liners (for organic chemical analyses)
• 125 cm3 wiil be transferred to precleaned glass jars (for
metals analyses)
• 100 cm3 will be transferred to precleaned glass jars (for
oil and grease analyses)
53
-------
Section No. 20
Revision No. 0
Date February 22, 1985
Pag e 4 o f 4
• 250 cm3 will be transferred to precleaned polyethylene bottles
(for total carbon, nitrogen, sulfide, total solids, and
volatile solids)
• 100 cm3 will be transferred to Whirl-pak bags (for grain-
size)
t 1,500 cm3 will be transferred to precleaned glass jars (for
bioassays)
• 500 cm3 will be transferred to precleaned glass jars with
teflon cap liners (for archival).
In the sediment surveys, only the top 2-cm layer of each sample will
be collected and analyzed.
Precleaned (solvent-rinsed and muffle-furnaced) glass beakers will
be brought onboard with sets of precleaned (solvent-washed) teflon spatulas
to provide spares for loss or breakage. Beakers should be of adequate
size for compositing samples. Between samples, the beakers will be washed
with site water to remove all residual particulates, and then washed with
methanol and pesticide-grade methylene chloride.
Also between stations, the spatulas and glass rods will be rinsed
with site water, rinsed with solvent, and wrapped in aluminum foil.
The van Veen sampler will be emptied over the side and rinsed free
of all residual particulate matter. Between stations, the sampler will
be stored closed on the sampling tray.
All sampling will be carried out in accordance with the QA/QC Plan
and the Sampling and Analysis Design.
54
------- |