SDMS Document ID
START2
1047969
Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team 2 -
Region Vfll
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Contract No. 68-W-00-118
REMOVAL SUMMARY REPORT
SUPERIOR WASTE ROCK (ROS)
Superior, Mineral County, Montana
TDD No. 0208-0002
DECEMBER 3,2002
OPERATING SERVICES, INC.
In association with: Tetra Tech EM, Inc.
URS Corporation
LT Environmental, Inc
TN & Associates, Inc.
TechLaw, Inc.
503653
-------
URS OPERATING SERVICES
1099 18TH STREET
SUITE 710
DENVER, COLORADO 80202-1908
TEL: (303) 296-3523
FAX: (303)291-8296
December 3, 2002
Mr. Tien Nguyen
On-Scene Coordinator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIE
999 18th Street, Suite 500, Mail Code: 8EPR-ER
Denver, Colorado 80202
SUBJECT: START, EPA Region VIII, Contract No. 68-W-00-118, TDD No. 0208-0002
Removal Summary Report - Superior Waste Rock, Superior, Mineral County,
Montana
Dear Tien:
Enclosed are two copies of the final Removal Summary Report for the Superior Waste Rock (ROS) site,
Superior, Mineral County, Montana. Sampling activities were completed August 19 through August 30,
2002. This document is submitted for your review and approval.
If you have any questions, please call me at 303-291-8229.
Very truly yours,
URS OPERATING SERVICES, INC.
Rebecca Laramie
Environmental Engineer
attachments
cc: T. F. Staible/UOS without attachments
File/UOS
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Stan2\Superior Waste RockVHnal RSR\Transmittal.wpd:bas
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region VDI
Contract No. 68-W-00-118
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Signature Page
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page i of iv
REMOVAL SUMMARY REPORT
SUPERIOR WASTE ROCK (ROS)
Superior, Mineral County, Montana
EPA Contract No. 68-W-00-118
TDD No. 0208-0002
Prepared By:
Rebecca Laramie
Environmental Engineer
URS Operating Services, Inc.
1099 18th Street, Suite 710
Denver, CO 80202-1908
Approved:
Tien Nguyen, Oh-Scene Coordinator, EPA, Region
Date:
Approved:
Date:
T. F. Slaible, START2 Program Manager, UOS
Approved:
Rebecca LararnieTEnvironrnental Engineer, UOS
Date:
This document has been prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under Contract
No. 68-W-OO-l 18. The material contained herein is not to be disclosed to, discussed with, or made available
to any person or persons for any reason without prior express approval of a responsible officer of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. In the interest of conserving natural resources, this document is printed
on recycled paper and double-sided as appropriate.
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste Roclrtfinal RSR\SIG-PAGE.wpd:bas
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region Vffl Distribution List
Contract No. 68-W-OO-l 18 Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page ii of iv
DISTRIBUTION LIST
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Tien Nguyen (2 copies) OSC, EPA Region Vm
URS OPERATING SERVICES, INC.
Rebecca Laramie Environmental Engineer, Region Vin START2
File (2 copies) START2, EPA Region Vffl
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVFmal RSR\Dist-Lst.wpd:bas
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region Vffl
Contract No. 68-W-00-118
REMOVAL SUMMARY REPORT
Superior Waste Rock (ROS)
Superior, Mineral County, Montana
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Table of Contents
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page iii of iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SIGNATURE PAGE
DISTRIBUTION LIST
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 OBJECTIVES
3.0 SITE HISTORY AND PREVIOUS WORK
4.0 SITE ACTIVITIES AND OBSERVATIONS
4.1 Sampling Activities and Sample Identification
4.1.1 Post Removal Samples
4.1.2 Stockpile and Stabilization Samples
4.1.3 Miscellaneous Samples
4.2 Analytical Parameters
4.3 Air Monitoring
5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL
5.1 Laboratory Quality Control
5.2 Field Quality Control
5.2.1 XRF Analysis
5.2.2 Field Quality Control Samples
6.0 ANALYTICAL DATA EVALUATION
7.0 SAMPLE RESULTS
8.0 SUMMARY
9.0 LIST OF REFERENCES
PAGES
ii
iii
1
1
2
3
8
10
11
13
14
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockXfinal RSRVText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region Vm
ContractNo.68-W-00-118
FIGURES
Figure 1
Superior Waste Rock -RSR
Table of Contents
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page iv of iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Superior Removal Locations
TABLES
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Comparison of Assessment Samples to Post Excavation Samples
XRF Sample Results
Laboratory and XRF Results
TCLP Results
Air Monitoring Summary
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Photolog
Validation Reports and Laboratory Data
XRF Results
Street Codes for Sample Identification
Appendix E Bench Scale Stabilization Test Procedure
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste Rock\Final RSRVText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. . Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region Vffl Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-OO-118 Date: 12/2002
Page 1 of 24
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The URS Operating Services, Inc. (UOS) Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team (START2)
was tasked by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region Vin, under Technical Direction
Document (TDD) #0208-0002, to conduct environmental sampling in Superior, Montana, as part of removal
activities. The removal activities and sampling were completed between August 19 and August 30, 2002.
This report describes the field activities completed and the analytical results associated with the removal
activities.
During June 2002, soil samples were collected from 64 residential properties, 20 right-of-ways, and 10
city/county and open space properties within and around Superior, Montana, as part of a removal
assessment. Soil samples were field analyzed using an X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometer (XRF) with 10%
of the samples being sent to a commercial laboratory for confirmation analysis. Five samples were also
laboratory analyzed for lead and arsenic speciation and relative bioavailability estimates. Using the
analytical results, EPA established health-based risk benchmarks of 3,000 parts per million (ppm) for lead
and 400 ppm for arsenic. Based on these benchmarks, removal activities were conducted at three residential
driveways, three right-of-ways, the high school track, and the county fairgrounds during August 2002.
START2 tasks included collecting post-removal soil samples at the base of each excavation, completing a
bench scale stabilization test, and documenting activities during the removal.
Soil samples collected during the removal activities were field analyzed with an XRF for metals.
Approximately 10% of these soil samples were also sent to a commercial laboratory for confirmation analysis
of target analyte list (TAL) metals. In addition, Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) analysis
for metals was performed on representative samples from the stockpiled waste material and from bench scale
stabilization tests. Confirmation sample results and TCLP sample results were validated in accordance with
the criteria contained in EPA guidance documents modified for the analytical method used (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 1994a).
2.0 OBJECTIVES
The goal of the sampling activities is to document the post-removal concentrations of metals at the base of
each excavation. Samples were also collected from the waste material to determine proper stabilization
and/or disposal methods for the stockpiled waste material.
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste Rock\Rnal RSRVText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region VIU
Contract No. 68-W-00-118
3.0 SITE HISTORY AND PREVIOUS WORK
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page 2 of 24
The Superior Waste Rock site includes residential areas in or around Superior, Montana, that were affected
by tailings and waste rock from The Iron Mountain Mine and Mill. The Iron Mountain Mine and Mill is
located approximately 3.5 miles north of Superior. The Iron Mountain Mine and Mill operated from 1909
to 1930 and again from 1947 to 1953 (Montana Department of Environmental Quality (Montana DEQ)
2001). The present owner, ASARCO of Wallace, Idaho, acquired the property around 1916. The mine has
been abandoned since 1954 and foundations are all that remain of the mill and other mining buildings. When
operating, the mill site consisted of a 200-ton mill and approximately 500 feet of tunnels (Montana
Department of State Lands - Abandoned Mine Reclamation Bureau (MDSL-AMRB) 1993). The mill
operation processed silver, gold, lead, copper, and zinc ores (Montana DEQ 2001). The mill also accepted
ore from the Dillon Mill and the Belle of the Hills Mine, which were located upgradient of the Iron Mountain
Mill site. It is believed that the Iron Mountain Mill used flotation methods to separate the metals. Although
the waste rock pile still remains on site, most of the tailings were washed down onto the Flat Creek
floodplain (MDSL-AMRB 1993). Previous START2 sampling activities indicate that a portion of the
tailings from the Iron Mountain Mill was used as fill in the town of Superior (URS Operating Services, Inc.
(UOS)2002a).
During 1993, the Montana Department of State Lands, Abandoned Mine Reclamation Bureau (MDSL-
AMRB) conducted an abandoned mine investigation to determine the potential health and environmental
risks associated with the Iron Mountain Mine and Mill site. The Abandoned Hardrock Mine Priority Sites
Summary Report documents concentrations of arsenic, copper, mercury, lead, zinc, cadmium, manganese,
and antimony at the mill site at more than three times the background sample concentration (MDSL-AMRB
1993).
In 1998, reclamation activities were conducted by ASARCO, the current owner of the mill site. These
activities consisted of removing some tailings from Flat Creek and placing them on the ASARCO property
(Iron Mountain Mine) in an impoundment. The impoundment was covered with topsoil and vegetated
(ASARCO 1999). Additional tailings along Flat Creek were revegetated in place (UOS 2001b). No
sampling data were available for Flat Creek following the ASARCO removal activities. Sample results from
the most recent and complete monitoring conducted in 1997 are included in the Preliminary Assessment (PA)
report prepared by START2 (UOS 200la).
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockXFinal RSRYText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region Vffl Revision: 0
Contract No. 68- W-00- J 1 8 Date: 1 2/2002
Page 3 of 24
During 2001, Region Vm EPA conducted a PA/Site Investigation at the Iron Mountain Mill site. START2
collected 44 environmental samples as part of the SI during October 2001. Eleven soil samples were
collected from the high school track and residential properties in Superior. Soil samples collected from the
high school track indicated elevated concentrations of metals including lead and arsenic. Samples collected
from a residential property and a right-of-way in a residential neighborhood also indicated elevated
concentrations of lead and arsenic. Because of these results, the Region Vin EPA tasked START2 to collect
additional samples from the town of Superior as part of a removal assessment.
During June 2002, additional sampling activities were conducted by START2 to further delineate areas in
Superior where tailings were used as fill material. Samples were collected and field analyzed from a total
of 64 residential properties, 20 right-of-ways, and 10 city/county and open space properties within and
around Superior, Montana (UOS 2002/SAR). Five samples were also laboratory analyzed for lead and
arsenic speciation and relative bioavailability estimates. These samples were used to determine areas
requiring the removal activities discussed in this report.
4.0 SITE ACTIVITIES AND OBSERVATIONS
Removal activities were conducted on three residential driveways, three right-of-ways, the high school track,
and the county fairgrounds ( Photos 6 through 13). Environmental Restoration L.L.C completed the removal
activities, which consisted of excavating the contaminated material, stockpiling the material at the staging
area, and backfilling the excavated area using predetermined fill. The staging area was located at the county
airport and consisted of two stockpiles. Stockpile A contained material that visually appeared contaminated
(Photo 14) and stockpile B contained material that visually appeared clean (Photo 15). Both stockpiles were
lined and covered with visqueen to prevent dispersion of the contaminants. START2 was tasked to document
activities during the removal, to collect samples at the base of each excavation, to collect samples from each
stockpile at the staging area, and to complete a bench scale stabilization test on the excavated material.
START2 field operations were conducted as described below, in accordance with the EPA Region
Residential Soil Lead Sampling Guidance Document, START2 Technical Standard Operating Procedures
(TSOPs), the UOS Field Samplers Guide, and the site specific Health and Safety Plan (EPA 2000; UOS
2000; UOS 1998; UOS 2002b). Sampling activities were conducted in level D personal protective equipment
(PPE).
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste Rock\Final RSRVText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region VIII Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-00-118 Date: 12/2002
Page 4 of 24
4.1 SAMPLING ACTIVITIES AND SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION
All samples were collected with dedicated disposable plastic scoops. Sample identifiers were
written on each sample container with waterproof ink along with the date and time of sample
collection. Sample identifiers, sample date and time, and the location of each sample were also
documented in field log book at the time of sample collection.
4.1.1 Post Removal Samples
Post removal samples were collected after each excavation of contaminated material to
document metals concentrations at the base of the excavation. In small areas of excavation
(right-of-ways and residential driveways) one composite sample was collected as a
representative sample for the area. In larger areas (the high school track and fairgrounds)
the excavated area was divided into sections and a composite sample was collected from
each section. Each sample was homogenized before analysis. All post removal samples
were analyzed using the Spectrace XRF with 10% of samples being sent to a commercial
laboratory for confirmation analysis. Sample results from the XRF are listed in Table 1.
Table 1 also lists the removal assessment results collected in the excavated areas before
excavation occurred. These results delineated the areas for removal actions.
Residential samples were identified based on the area sampled. Samples had similar
designations to the samples collected during the removal assessment samples. Samples were
designated as follows. The first field is the letter "S" that designates the sampling event as
Superior Waste Rock site. The second field is the four digit house number. The third field
is two letters that represent the street on which the property is located (Appendix D). The
fourth field is the section or zone number (most sample locations are considered zone 1).
The fifth field indicates that the sample is a post excavation sample (Z) and the number of
samples collected from that zone (1,2,3). The last field indicates if the sample is a replicate
(R), duplicate (D), or equipment blank (B) sample. If the last field is null, the sample is not
a field quality control sample.
Street right-of-way samples were labeled similarly to the residential samples except that the
house number was replaced with the block number, and the section number was replaced
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVFmal RSRVText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region Vffl . Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-OO-118 Date: 12/2002
Page 5 of 24
with the letter N, S, E, or W to denote the right-of-way direction. The high school track
samples were labeled with S0400HT followed by the zone number (the track was zone 4),
a Z to signify post excavation samples, and a number (1 through 12) to designate the number
of samples collected. Finally, the fairground samples were labeled with S700FG1 to signify
the fairgrounds, followed by a Z to signify post excavation samples, and a number (1
through 2) to designate the number of samples collected.
4.1.2 Stockpile and Stabilization Samples
s^-
Material excavated during removal activities was placed in two separate stockpiles based
on visual observations. Red material that appeared to be tailings was placed in Stockpile
A. This material was typically from the surface of the excavation. Material that appeared
more natural was placed in Stockpile B. Once all excavation was completed, a composite
sample was collected from each stockpile to determine if metals concentrations were above
their respective TCLP regulatory levels for disposal.
Material composited from stockpile A was also used to complete a bench scale test for
stabilization of leachable metals. This material was used because it was likely to have the
highest concentrations of metals. The bench scale test used varying amounts of Portland
cement to stabilize the metals in the tailings. Specifically, 7%,10%, 15%, and 20% cement
by weight was added to the material collected from stockpile. A. Each mixture was
homogenized and then mixed with water. The total mixture was allowed to cure for 24
hours before a sample was collected from each stabilization option. Samples were sent to
a commercial laboratory for TCLP analysis and were compared to analysis from a control
sample with no cement added to the material. The exact procedure for the bench scale test
is described in Appendix E. Results are presented in Table 4.
Stockpile samples were labeled with the designation SOSTKPLA or SOSTKPLB to identify
the stockpile, followed by a number representing the number of samples collected from the
stockpile. Stabilization samples were designated with similar labels; however, the number
representing the number of samples was changed to represent the percentage of cement
added to the material (00 for 0%, 07 for 7%, etc.). All stabilization samples consisted of
material from Stockpile A. The last field for both stockpile and stabilization samples
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVRnal RSRYText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR g
START2, EPA Region VIII Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-OO-l 18 Date: 12/2002
Page 6 of 24 E
indicates if the sample is a replicate (R), duplicate (D), or equipment blank (B) sample. If
the last field is null, the sample is not a field quality control sample.
4.1.3 Miscellaneous Samples ฃ
During removal activities, several samples were collected that were not classified as post K
removal samples or stabilization/stockpile samples. Several samples were collected from
potential clean fill material. These samples are labeled with SOFILL and a letter to .' jg
distinguish each supplier and a number to distinguish the pile of fill sampled. Samples were ,
also collected from the staging area before it was disturbed to document background g|
concentrations. These samples are labeled SOSTGAR with a letter to distinguish each P
sample. Finally ten samples were collected to further delineate contaminated areas or to test rn
^ fp C" for the presence of elevated metals in areas that had not been tested previously. These B
V/n ^^
^ samples are identified using the same methods as those used during the removal assessment g,
and are classified in Table 2 as Assessment samples. H
Specifically, two samples were collected from a residential property located at the northeast g
comer of Flat Creek Road and Cemetery Road. These samples were collected as
A
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. -^ Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region VIII Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-OO-118 Date: 12/2002
Page 7 of 24
were deemed necessary. The previously mentioned samples were collected to further
delineate the contaminated material present at each site.
Sample S0401SP1S1 was collected from a property that had not previously been sampled.
Property owners at 401 Spruce Street requested the EPA to conduct sampling on their
driveway where material appeared to be consistent with mill tailings. Sample results'
indicated elevated levels of lead and arsenic and removal activities were completed on the
driveway. Samples were also collected from the driveway after excavation was completed
as described in Section 4.1.1.
4.2 ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS
Soil samples were analyzed by START2 using a Spectrace 9000ฎ Field Portable XRF. XRF sample
preparation followed the general guidelines set forth below and in Standard Operating Procedure
(SOP) 6 from the EPA Bioavailability Study (EPA 1994b). Sample preparation is also described in
detail in the site specific removal assessment Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) (UOS 2002c). In
general soil samples were homogenized, dried, sieved using a 10-mesh sieve, and placed in an
appropriate container for analysis.
The XRF was operated as per Environmental Response Team (ERT) SOP 1713 and manufacturers
specifications. Quality control for the instrument is discussed in Section 5.2 of this report. Samples
were analyzed on the XRF using analysis times of 180 seconds for the source Cd-109, 30 seconds
for the source Fe-55, and 30 seconds for the source Am-241.
A minimum of 10 percent of the total number of samples collected for field XRF analysis were also
sent to a commercial laboratory for TAL metals analysis (SW846 Method 6010B/7471) as
confirmation of field XRF results.
A total of six soil samples were selected and sent to an independent laboratory for TCLP analysis
(S W846 Methods 1311/ 601 OB/7471). The samples sent for TCLP analysis represented the samples
with the highest concentrations of metals. The acceptable holding times for these samples are 28
days for mercury and six months for all other metals. The definitive data were validated using the
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) procedures associated with definitive data. Information
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockXRnal RSRVText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START?, EPA Region VIII Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-OO-II8 ' Date: 12/2002
Page 8 of 24
pertaining to screening level and definitive data can be found in the Emergency Response Program
(ERP) Generic Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) (UOS 1999).
4.3 AIR MONITORING
Air monitoring was completed during removal activities at the high school track (Photo 5) and the
county fairgrounds. These locations were chosen because they were the first properties where
removal activities were completed and because they were close to the high school and elementary
schools. Specifically, the Data Ram operated forl 1 hours on August 24, 2002, during excavation
of the high school track while the excavation was being completed on the area closest to the
elementary school. During this time the Data RAM was positioned on the elementary school lawn
close to the track and downwind of the track. It should be noted that excavation of the material at
the high school track was completed before the school season started. In addition football practice
was relocated to a nearby park until excavation was completed at the track to minimize exposure of
elevated metals to residents of Superior. The Data RAM also operated for 6 hours during the entire
excavation of contaminated material from the county fairgrounds. The Data RAM was placed inside
the fairground fence line, but closest to the high school to document concentrations of dust near the
school. During air monitoring, the Data RAM recorded the amount of PM-10 paniculate downwind
of the excavation activities (Table 5). Monitoring showed that the levels of dust created from the
removal activities was minimal and did not create a health risk to residents in the area.
5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL
5.1 LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL
Specific QC criteria have been developed to ensure that the Data Quality Objectives (DQOs)
established in the SAP can be achieved. Analytical methods for sample analysis have been selected
on the basis of the required detection limits, known contaminants existing in the study area, and the
range of analytes to be determined. XRF data will be evaluated as screening. Laboratory data will
be evaluated as definitive. The Draft ERP Generic QAPP, Section 10.2 "Laboratory Quality
Control," contains more specific information related to laboratory QC requirements for definitive
data (UOS 1999).
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste Rock\Final RSR\Text.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region VIII Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-OO-118 Date: 12/2002
Page 9 of 24
5.2 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL
5.2.1 XRF Analysis
XRF field analytical data were evaluated as screening data, with an additional ten percent
of these samples being analyzed by an independent laboratory for definitive confirmation
analysis. All XRF data generated for this project were evaluated for instrument calibration,
detection limits, energy calibration checks, blank checks, and field replicates. The field
XRF was operated per ERT SOP 1713 and per manufacturer's specifications
(Environmental Response Team (ERT) 1995).
High lead concentrations may mask arsenic concentrations when analyzed on an XRF. The
arsenic detection limit for the XRF is either three times the standard deviation of the XRF
standard, or one-tenth the lead result, whichever is greater.
5.2.2 Field Quality Control Samples
In addition to the samples collected to determine elevated concentrations of metals, samples
were also collected and analyzed as part of the quality control process.
A duplicate XRF sample was prepared in the lab for every 20 soil samples.
A minimum of 1 per 10 soil samples collected for XRF analysis was analyzed by
an independent laboratory for confirmation of XRF analytical results. The XRF
sample cup was sent to the laboratory for analysis.
Sand rinsate blanks were collected a minimum of one per day to identify potential
contamination from the sample collection and preparation implements.
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste Rock\Rnal RSRYText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region VIII - Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-OO-118 Date: 12/2002
Page 10 of 24
6.0 ANALYTICAL DATA EVALUATION
All soil samples were analyzed with an XRF during field activities. The XRF field analytical data were
evaluated as screening data according to the START ERP Generic QAPP with an additional ten percent of
these samples being analyzed by and independent laboratory (CompuChem) for definitive confirmation
analyses. All XRF data generated for this project were evaluated to ensure that instrument calibration,
detection limits, energy calibration checks, blank checks, and field replicates were within operational control
limits. The XRF was operated as per ERT SOP 1713, and per manufacturer's specifications.
Detection limits were calculated both for the XRF instrument used and for all laboratory confirmation
samples. Detection limits were established as a value three times the standard deviation of a low National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) certified standard run a minimum of seven times over a
specified period of time. In the case of arsenic, the detection limit is as stated above or one-tenth of the lead
concentration for that sample, whichever is greater.
Validation of the confirmation laboratory data was completed by TechLaw, Inc. of Lakewood, Colorado.
All data are acceptable for use as qualified in the data validation reports (Appendix B). The laboratory forms
containing the laboratory results are also in Appendix B. Qualifiers used by laboratory validators consisted
of U and J. A qualifier of U signifies that the metal was not detected at or above the associated numerical
value for that sample. A qualifier of J signifies that the associated numerical value was estimated based on
one of many reasons pertaining to laboratory quality assurance. While the value associated with the J
qualifier is an estimate, the presence of the metal is reliable. Please refer to the data validation packages for
specific criteria for all laboratory confirmation data.
The laboratory data and the XRF metal concentration data were compared using relative percent difference
(RPD). Relative percent difference is the difference between the lab and XRF data divided by the average
of the two values. This method shows less variability for the larger concentration data because the average
(divisor) is higher and the result shows a lower RPD. At lower concentrations, a small variation between
the values shows a larger RPD because the average is lower. This method for XRF data evaluation is more
specific to whatever range of data is of most interest (usually the "action level"). RPD calculations for
arsenic, antimony, lead, and zinc are reported in Table 2. The RPD was not calculated for those results that
were qualified as U or J. An RPD value of 35 percent or less suggests an acceptable concentration variance.
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Stan2\Superior Waste RoclrtFinal RSRYText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region VU1 Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-OO-l 18 Date: 12/2002
Page 11 of 24
Only one sample had an RPD calculated for the lead and arsenic concentrations above 35 percent. Sample
SOSTKPLB had RPDs of 52% and 44%, respectively (Table 3).
7.0 SAMPLE RESULTS
A total of 44 samples were collected during the removal activities conducted in Superior, Montana. This
included 3 sand rinsate samples and 3 duplicate sample aliquots analyzed according to field QA/QC
specifications.
Two samples were collected from the staging area located at the Mineral County Airport. These samples
were used to document metals concentrations at the airport before it was disturbed. The initial samples
collected indicated that the staging area did not have any elevated concentrations of metals present. Both
samples showed concentrations of lead and arsenic below 28 ppm and 34 ppm, respectively (Table 2).
Five soil samples were collected from three perspective clean fill source with a total of five types of materials
to be used as fill. In addition, samples were also collected by Environmental Response (ER) from one of the
fill material sources and sent to an independent laboratory for metals analysis. These sample results
indicated that all perspective fill material had acceptable metals concentrations.
Five soil samples were collected from residential areas that had not previously been sampled to assess the
concentrations of metals in the respective areas. These samples were collected from three locations and
indicated that only one location had metals concentrations above the EPA site specific action levels. The
driveway at 401 Spruce Street had 12,000 ppm lead and 2,800 ppm arsenic in the composite sample. This
location was added to the original list of properties to have removal activities completed on a portion of the
property. Samples were also collected from this property after removal activities as described in the
following paragraph.
A total of 19 soil samples were collected from locations after removal activities had been completed. The
samples were collected from the base of the excavation to document metals concentrations where excavation
had been completed. These samples are listed in Table 1 as post excavation samples and are compared to
the original sample results (assessment samples) from the material that was later excavated. All samples
collected at the base of excavation had metals concentrations below the site specific action levels set for
surficial soil. The highest concentrations of lead and arsenic in post excavation samples occurred at the high
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVFinal RSRYText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region VU1
Contract No. 68-W-OO-l 18
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page 12 of 24
school track and the fairgrounds. One sample from the high school track had 220 ppm arsenic and one
sample from the fairgrounds had 1,300 ppm lead. Both samples were collected from the base of excavation
(12 to 18 inches below ground surface (bgs)) and were covered with 12 to 18 inches of fill after the sample
was collected.
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVFinal RSRVText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. >. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region VIII Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-00-1I8 Date: 12/2002
, Page 13 of 24
8.0 SUMMARY
Removal activities for the Superior Waste Rock site were completed between August 19 and August 30,
2002. Removal activities were completed at three residential properties, the high school track, the county
fairgrounds, and three city owned right-of-ways. A total of 44 samples were collected during the removal
activities. Specifically, 3 sand rinsate samples and 3 duplicate sample aliquots were analyzed according to
field QA/QC specification. Two samples were collected from the staging area located at the Mineral County
airport to document initial concentrations at the airport. Five soil samples were collected from perspective
clean fill and five soil samples were collected from residential areas that had not previously been sampled
to assess the concentrations of metals in the respective areas. A total of 19 soil samples were collected from
locations after removal activities had been completed to document metals concentrations at the base of each
excavation.
i
Soil samples were analyzed on site with an XRF for metals. A minimum of 10 percent of the total number
of samples collected for XRF analysis (seven samples) were sent to a commercial laboratory for TAL metals
analysis as confirmation of field XRF results. Six soil samples were also sent to a commercial laboratory
for TCLP analysis of TAL metals. These samples characterized the waste pile material located at the staging
area and also documented the effectiveness of different amounts of cement added to the material to stabilize
the teachability of metals.
Air monitoring was completed on two separate occasions to ensure that respirable particulates were not
exceeding standards and increasing health risks due to the excavation of material with elevated metals. Air
monitoring was completed for 11 hours during removal of contaminated material from the high school track.
Air monitoring was also completed for 6 hours during removal activities at the county fairgrounds. Both
times a Data RAM with a PM-10 extension was placed downwind of the excavation and at the point closest
to the elementary and high school. Air monitoring indicated that dust suppression methods were working
properly.
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVFinal RSRYText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region vm Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-OO-118 Date: 12/2002
Page 14 of 24
9.0 LIST OF REFERENCES
ASARCO. 1999. Letter from J. C. Pfahl, ASARCO, to Stephen Brown, Garlington, Lohn, and Robenson,
I PLLP. April 26, 1999.
I Environmental Response Team (ERT). 1995. "Spectrace 9000 Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
Operating Procedures." January 26, 1995.
Montana Department of Environmental Quality (Montana DEQ). 2001. Mining History web site.
I . March 2. 2001.
I Montana Department of State Lands - Abandoned Mine Reclamation Bureau (MDSL-AMRB). 1993.
' Abandoned Mine Inventory, Iron Mountain Mine and Mill site. July 23, 1993.
I U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1994a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency CLP National
Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Data Review, EPA 540/R - 94/013 (2/94).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1994b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region VJ1I
| Bioavailability Study - Phase JJ Investigations - Standard Operating Procedures. September 1994.
;
; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2000. Region VHJ Superfund Program Residential Soil Lead
Sampling Guidance Document. Draft Final. April 2000.
I -
URS Operating Services, Inc. (UOS). 1998. "Field Sampler's Guide for Sample Collection and
Documentation." February 1998.
i
URS Operating Services, Inc. (UOS). 1999. "Emergency Response Program (ERP) Generic Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team (START),
EPA Region Vm." March 11, 1999.
URS Operating Services, Inc. (UOS). 2000. START Standard Operating Procedures, Volume 4: Technical
Standard Operating Procedures. September 2000.
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RodrtKnal RSRYTeat.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc. Superior Waste Rock - RSR
START2, EPA Region Vffl Revision: 0
Contract No. 68-W-OO-118 Date: 12/2002
Page 15 of 24
URS Operating Services, Inc. (UOS). 2001a. Preliminary Assessment. Iron Mountain Mill, Superior,
Mineral County, Montana. July 20, 2001.
URS Operating Services, Inc. (UOS). 2001b. Site visit/reconnaissance by Rebecca Laramie and Log Book
#570. March 29, 2001.
URS Operating Services, Inc. (UOS). 2002a. Analytical Results Report for Focused Site Inspection, Iron
Mountain Mill, Superior, Mineral County, Montana. January 24, 2002.
URS Operating Services, Inc. (UOS). 2002b. Site Health and Safety Plan for Superior Waste Rock. May
2002.
URS Operating Services, Inc. (UOS). 2002c. Sampling and Analysis Plan for Superior Waste Rock. May
23, 2002.
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockXRnal RSRVText.wpd
-------
J
Removal Summary Report
TDD No. 0208-0002
Superior Waste Rock (ROS)
Superior, Montana
Superior Removal Locations
Figure 1
December 2002
URS
OPERATING SERVICES
Ouers\ze
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region VIH
Contract No. 68-W-OO-l 18
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page 17 of24
TABLE 1
Comparison of Assessment Samples to Post Excavation Samples
Concentrations in ppm
Sample ID^ >
Sample Type;:'.
Depth (inches bgsp
-^BaMi
%!&&&&$ฃ
pf|jp|^^^
106 3rd AVENUE WEST - RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY
S01063W1S3
S01063W1D1
SOI063W1Z1
Assessment
Assessment
Post Excavation
0-3
9-12
10
June 2002
June 2002
Sept 2002
400 U
34 U
37 U
4,000
29 J
120
400 2nd AVENUE WEST - SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY
S04002WSD1
S04002W1S3
S04002W1D3
S04002W1Z1
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Post Excavation
0-3
0-3
9-12
12
June 2002
June 2002
June 2002
Sept 2002
100 J
1,200
34 U
28 U
770
8,000
110
55
HIGH SCHOOL TRACK
IM-SO-08
IM-SO-20
IM-SO-15
S0400HT4D2
IM-SO-16
|| IM-SO-21
IM-SO-17
SO400HT4D3
IM-SO-18
IM-SO-22
IM-SO-19
SO400HT4D1
SO400HT4S1
S0400HT1S2
S0400HT4Z01
S0400HT4Z02
S0400HT4Z03
S0400HT4Z04
S0400HT4Z05
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
0-3
12-24
0-3
9-12
0-3
12-24
0-3
9-12
0-3
12-24
0-3
9-12
0-3
0-3
12-18
12-18
12-18
12-18
12-18
Oct 2001
Oct 2001
Oct 2001
June 2002
Oct 2001
Oct 2001
Oct 2001
June 2002
Oct 2001
Oct 2001
Oct 2001
June 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
101
79.4
1,340
630
1,690
464
438
370
279
1,360
1,200
190 U
1,700
1,200
220
47 U
55 J
35 U
73 J
562
423
5,150
4,400
4,950
1,890
1,910
1,100
1,550
8,500
6,820
1,900
9,000
6,800
420
110
86
110
280
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVRnal RSRYText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region vm
Contract No. 68-W-OO-l 18
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page 18 of 24
TABLE 1
Comparison of Assessment Samples to Post Excavation Samples
Concentrations in ppira
(continued)
Sample H>$&;
S0400HT4Z06
S0400HT4Z07
S0400HT4Z08
S0400HT4Z09
S0400HT4Z10
S0400HT4Z11
1 S0400HT4Z12
SampleType1
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
Depth (indbeSibgs)^
12-18
12-18
12-18
12-18
12-18
12-18
12-18
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
290
87
21 U
26 J .
31 J
160
120
400 SPRUCE STREET - EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY
S0400SPEC1
S0400SPED1
IS0400SPEE1
S0400SPEF1
S0400SPEG1
S0400SPEDX
S0400SPEZ1
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Post Excavation
0-3
0-3
0-3
0-3
0-3
9-12
12
June 2002
June 2002
June 2002
June 2002
June 2002
June 2002
Sept 2002
400
68 J
67 U
170
150
34 U
37 . U
1,800
300
670
270
1,300
23 U
57
407 IRON MOUNTAIN HEIGHTS - RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY
S0407IH1S1
S0407IH1D1
I! S0407IH1A1
S0407IH1Z1
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Post Excavation
0-3
9-12
12
8
June 2002
June 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
170 U
110 J
36 J
45 J
1,700
820
120
230
401 SPRUCE STREET - RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY
S0401SP1S1
S0401SP1Z1
FAIRGROUNDS
S700FGCSW1
S700FGSWX
S700FG1A13
S700FG1A3
S700FG1A6
Assessment
Post Excavation
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
0-3
12
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
2,800
110 J
12,000
560
'
0-3
9-12
0-3
0-3
0-3
June 2002
June 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
1,500
790
200
930
2,400
7,700
4,000
850
3,300
7,500
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste Rock\FraaI RSR\Text.wpd
-------
I
I
I
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region VIII
Contract No. 68-W-00-118
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page 19 of 24
TABLE 1
Comparison of Assessment Samples to Post Excavation Samples
Concentrations in ppm
(continued)
'^riipi^ip^^:;'
S700FG1Z1
S700FG1Z2
.ItfmpJ^T^fe?..
Post Excavation
Post Excavation
^^fttfcMT^g
8
12
-fflf. ' ; V-i *--+,-. '.3*'.'
Sept 2002
Sept 2002
^P^niPS
ฃ'-..'v,r,7" -v*j*_ j'ซx v,-
51 J
130
33fjf t *'i * w^ivi**1^ wf^
240
1,300
400 3rd AVENUE EAST - SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY
S04003ESD1
S04003ESE1
S04003ESF1
S04003ESG1
S04003ESDX
S04003ESZ1
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Post Excavation
0-3
0-3
0-3
0-3
9-12
12
June 2002
June 2002
June 2002
June 2002
June 2002
Sept 2002
38 U
220 U
43 J
38 U
34 U
28 U
24 U
2,200
230
100
23 U
34 J
U The analyte was not detected above the associated value.
J The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity because quality control criteria were not met
bgs Below ground surface
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2VSuperior Waste RockVfinal RSRVText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region VIH
Contract No. 68-W-OO-118
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page 20 of 24
I
TABLE 2
XRF Sample Results
Concentrations in (ppm)
^S^vpffl^^^^jj^
S0041FC1S1
S0041FC1S2
SOOFCCM1S2
SOOFCCM2S1
S01063W1Z1
S04002W1Z1
S04002W1Z1B
S04002W1Z1D
S04003E1Z1
S0400HT1S2
S0400HT4Z01
S0400HT4Z02
S0400HT4Z03 ,
S400HT4Z04 <
S0400HT4Z05
S0400HT4Z06
S0400HT4Z07
S0400HT4Z08
S0400HT4Z09
S0400HT4Z10
S0400HT4Z11
S0400HT4Z12
S0400SP1Z1
S0401SP1S1
S0401SP1S1BI :
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Post excavation
Post excavation
QA/QC
QA/QC
Post excavation
Assessment
Post excavation
Post excavation
Post excavation
Post excavation
Post excavation
Post excavation
Post excavation
Post excavation
Post excavation
Post excavation
'ost excavation
>ost excavation
Post excavation
Assessment
QA/QC
37 U
37 U
37 U
320 U
37 U
28 U
28 U
47 J
28 U
1,200
220
47 U
55 J
35 U
73 J
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
37 U
2,800 ;
37 U
88
14 J
150
3200
120
55
15 U
81
34 J
6,800
420
110
86
110
280
290
87 '
21 U
26 J
31 J
160
120
57
12,000
'14 U/: '.'
TDD No. 0208-0002;,;
P:\Start2\Superior Waste Rock\RnaI RSR\Text.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region VID
Contract No. 68-W-OO-l 18
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page 21 of 24
TABLE 2
XRF Sample Results
Concentrations in (ppm)
(continued)
>-SaT^:m^:y*&2i}
S0401SP1Z1
S0407IH1A1
S0407IH1Z1
S0407IH1Z1B
S0700FG1A13
S0700FG1A3
S0700FG1A6
S0700FG1Z1
S0700FG1Z2
SOFILLA1
SOFILLA2
SOHLLB1
SOFILLB2
SOFILLB2D
SOFILLC1
SOSTGARA1
SOSTGARA1D
SOSTGARA2
SOSTKPLA1
SOSTKPLB1
'.:-.. '; -,,. -t-:'';.'-'1 ^'liS.'-ifisf'xfl
.Type- :.-- %^ฃ^ฃ|$
Post excavation
Assessment
Post excavation
QA/QC
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Post excavation
Post excavation
Fill Material
Fill Material
Fill Material
Fill Material
QA/QC
Fill Material
Staging Area
QA/QC
Staging Area
Stockpile A
Stockpile B
110 J
36 J
45 J
28 U
200
930
2,400
1 51 J
130
34 U
34 U
58 J
28 U
28 U
28 U
34 U
34 U
34 U
890
130
560
120
230
21 U
850
3,300
7,500
240
1,300
28 U
28 U
21 U
21 U
21 U
21. U
28 U
28 U
28 U
4,800
400
U The analyte was not detected above the associated value.
J The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity because quality control criteria were not met
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVRnal RSRYText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region VIII
Contract No. 68-W-OO-l 18
SOSTKPLB1
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page 22 of 24
TABLE 3
Laboratory and XRF Results (ppm)
138 J
88 J
682
400
52
948. J
1,100
15
SOSTKPLA1
999 J
910
558 J
1858
108
5,700
4,800
17
5,370 J
2,900
60
S700FG1Z1
50.6 J
51 J
15.9 J
56 U
NA
276
240
14
955 J
1,100
14
S0401SP1S1
3,050 J
2,800
2,560 J
2,700
15,100
12,000
23
11,600 J
6,000
64
S0400HT4Z09
8.1 J
47 U
NA
3.4 J
39 U
NA
25.1
26 J
31.2 J
84 J
92
S01063W1Z1
28.9 J
37 U
NA
13.6 J
46 U
NA
168
120
33
246 J
270
S0041FC1S1
4.6 J
37 U
NA
1.2 J
46 U
NA
65.8
88
29
194 J
320
49
U The analyte was not detected above the associated value.
J The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity because quality control criteria were not met
[ ] The associated numerical value was detected below the CRDL, but greater than the method detection limit and is therefore an estimate. Presence of compound is reliable
RPD Relative Percent Difference (%)
NA Not applicable.
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVFmal RSRYText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region VHI
Contract No. 68-W-OO-l 18
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page 23 of 24
TABLE 4
TCLP Results (mg/L)
""""^ ''' i" "-'"i-f'-i
4 Seteiuum
Regulatory
1,000
0.2
Stockpile A
0.028
0.85
0.29
0.006 U
17.5
0.0002 U
0.01 U
0.005 U
1% to Stockpile A
0.47
0.63
0.002 U
0.066
0.005
0.0002 U
0.01 U
0.005 U
10% to Stockpile A
0.027
0.002 U
0.087
0.04
0.0002 U
0.01 U
0.005 U
15% to Stockpile A
0.01 U
1.3
0.002 U
0.087
0.11
0.0002 U
0.01 U
0.005 U
20% to Stockpile A
0.01 U
1.5
0.002 U
0.071
0.18
0.0002 U
0.01 U
0.005 U
Stockpile B
0.01 U
1.4
0.13
0.006 U
0.77
0.0002 U
0.01 U
0.005 U
The analyte was not detected above the associated value.
TDD No. 0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste Rock\Final RSRYText.wpd
-------
URS Operating Services, Inc.
START2, EPA Region VIII
Contract No. 68-W-OO-l 18
Superior Waste Rock - RSR
Revision: 0
Date: 12/2002
Page 24 of 24
TABLE 5
Air Monitoring Summary
Monitoring Date
Excavation Location
Data RAM Location
Start Time
Run Time
Avg Mass
Max Mass
Reason for Maximum Reading
8/24/02
High School Track
Elementary School Lawn
7:26:43
665 minutes
3.3 Mg/m3
51 /ig/m3
Mowing Lawn in vicinity of Data RAM
8/27/02
Fairgrounds
NW corner of Fairgrounds, inside chain link fence
7:36:59
360 minutes
7.7 /ig/m3
19 /ig/m3
Truck driving on High School Track
jig/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter
TOD No. 0208-0002 ,
P:\Start2\SupenoTWasteRock\FinalRSR\Textwpd
-------
I
I
I
1
i
: APPENDIX A
i Photolog
-------
PHOTO 1
Removal activities at the high school track.
Edge of the removal area at the high school track.
TDD No.0208-0002
P:\Stan2\Superior Waste Rock\PhotoRSR.wpd
-------
PHOTO 3
Removal activities at the county fairgrounds.
PHOTO 4
Removal activities at the right-of-way for the 400 block of 2nd Avenue West.
TDD No.0208-0002
P:\Slart2\Superior Waste RockXPhotoRSR.wpd
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PHOTO 5
Data RAM placed on the elementary school lawn to monitor dust from the high school track removal activities.
PHOTO 6
High school track with clean fill.
TDD No.0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockNPhotoRSR.wpd
-------
PHOTO 7
High school track with clean fill.
PHOTO 8
View of driveway at 407 Iron Mountain Heights after removal activities are complete. Lighter material is clean fill.
TDD No.0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVPhotoRSR.wpd
-------
Photo 9
View of righuof-way at the block of 400 Spruce after removal activities are complete.
Photo 10
View of the driveway at 401 Spruce Street after removal activities are complete.
TDD No.0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockVPhotoRSR.wpd
-------
Photo 11
View of the right-of-way at the 400 block of 3rd Avenue East after removal activities are complete.
Photo 12
View of the right-of-way at the 400 block of 3rd Avenue West after the removal activities were completed.
TDD No.0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste RockXPhotoRSR.wpd
-------
Photo 13
View of the driveway at 106 3rd Avenue West after the removal activities were completed.
Photo 14
Stockpile A located at the staging area after all removal activities were completed.
TDD No.0208-0002
P:\Start2\Superior Waste Rock\PhotoRSR.wpd
-------
Photo 15
Stockpile B located at the staging area after all removal activities were completes.
TDD No.0208-0002
P:\Start2\Suoerior Waste RockVPhotoRSR.wpd
-------
APPENDIX B
Validation Reports and Laboratory Data
-------
560 GOLDEN RIDGE ROAD, SUITE 130, GOLDEN, CO 80401
TECH LAW INC.
PHONE: (303) 763-7188
FAX: (303) 763-4896
October 16,2002
Mr. Kent Alexander
URS Operating Services
1099 18th Street, Suite 710
Denver, CO 80202
RE: Transmittal of Data Validation Reports
Superior Waste Rock
TDD No. 0208-0002
Report Nos. 103307
Dear Mr. Alexander:
Please find enclosed one validation report for TDD No. 0208-0002 for the Superior Waste Rock
project. This reports is for the validation of metals analyses.
If you have any questions regarding the enclosed reports, please contact me at (303) 763-7188.
Yours sincerely,
TECHLAW, INC.
Bill Fear
Staff Consultant
enclosure
IF: 01027-981-
(07-
'i ATLANTA BOSTON CHICAGO DALLAS DENVER . LOS ANGELES MINNEAPOLIS NEW YORK PHILADELPHIA PHOENIX SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE WASHINGTON, D.C.
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
REGION Vin
DATA VALIDATION REPORT
INORGANIC
TDD No.
0208-0002
RPM/OSCName
Tien Nguyen
Contractor Laboratory
SVL Analytical Inc.
Site Name
Superior Waste Rock
Contract No.
Not Indicated
'.: Job No; > ',
103307
' Operable Unit ;^ v
Laboratory DPO/Region.v
Review Assigned Date October 7. 2002
Review Completion Date October 9.2002
Data Validator Amy Sallow
Report Reviewer Bill Fear
; . Sample Number^
SOSTKPLB1
SOSTKPLA1
S0700FG1Z1
S0401SP1S1
S0400HT4209
S01063W12I
S0041FC1S1
Laboratory ID
S3 11 633
S3 11 634
S311635
S3 11 636
S3 11 637
S3 11638
S3 11 639
. Matrix
Soil
,--'':' -<;.. An'arysisv . v;"i. ,:-.v ":- ','"':'
' - " "... : '..*.. - .* i , . r..~- ' % i i ;.
Metals and Mercury
103307m
Inorganic - 1
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
DATA QUALITY STATEMENT
( ) Data are ACCEPTABLE according to EPA Functional guidelines with no qualifiers (flags) added
by the reviewer.
( ) Data are UNACCEPTABLE according to EPA Functional Guidelines.
(X) Data are acceptable with QUALIFICATIONS noted in review.
Telephone/Communication Logs Enclosed?
TPO Attention Required? Yes X
Yes.
No
No X
If yes, list the items that require attention:
These samples were collected on August 25 and 28, 2002 but were not received by the laboratory
until September 23, 2002. As a result, mercury was analyzed beyond the 28-day holding time.
103307m
Inorganic - 2
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
INORGANIC DATA VALIDATION REPORT
REVIEW NARRATIVE SUMMARY
This data package was reviewed according to "USEPA Contract Laboratory Program National Functional
Guidelines for Inorganic Data Review," February 1994.
Raw data were reviewed for completeness and transcription accuracy onto the summary forms.
Approximately 10-20% of the results reported in each of the samples, calibrations, and QC analyses were
recalculated and verified. If problems were identified during the recalculation of results, a more thorough
calculation check was performed.
Job No. 103307 consisted of seven soil samples for metals and mercury analyses.
The following table lists the data qualifiers added to the sample analyses. Please see Data Qualifier
Definitions, attached to the end of this report.
= '
...Sample-ID.---
All samples
SOSTKPLB1
S0700FG1Z1
S0400HT4209
S0041FC1S1
SOSTKPLA1
S0401SP1S1
S0400HT4209
S01063W121
S0041FC1S1
All samples
Elements.
Mercury
Antimony
Arsenic
Zinc
Selenium
Thallium
Copper
,i.
Qualifiers ,-
J
UJ
J
Reason for ;,.,;.
i Qualification. '/.^'..^
Holding times
Matrix spike recovery
below QC limits
Laboratory duplicate
RPD >35%
Analytical spike
recovery below QC
limits
O
Serial dilution %D
greater than 10% and
original sample value
at least 50*IDL
,:;.-ReviewSH.
V .Sectid'ii;V;:
II
IX
XI
XII
XV
103307m
Inorganic - 3
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
Method/SOW Number 6010B. 7740. 7841. 7471
Revision 0.0
Inorganic Deiiverables Completeness Checklist
P Inorganic Cover Page
P Inorganic Analysis Data Sheets
P Initial Calibration and Calibration Verification Results
P Continuing Calibration Verification Results
P_ CRDL Standard for ICP and AA
P Blank Analysis Results
P ICP Interference Check Sample Results
P Spiked Sample Results
_P_ Post-digest Spiked Sample Analysis
P Duplicate Sample Results
P Instrument Detection Limits
P Laboratory Control Sample results
NA Standard Addition Results >
P ICP Serial Dilution Results
NA Holding Times Summary Sheet
NP ICP Interelement Correction Factors
JL ICP Linear Ranges
P Raw Data
P Samples P Calibration Standards P Blanks P Spikes
P Duplicates P ICP QC (ICS and Serial Dilution) P LCS
_P Furnace AA _P Mercury Analysis NA Cyanide Analysis
NA Percent Solids Calculations - Solids Only
P Sample Prep/Digestion Logs (Form XIII)
P Analysis Run Log (Form XIV)
P Chain-of-Custody
P Sample Description
P Case Narrative
P Method References
KEY:
P = Provided in original data package, as required by the SOW
R = Provided as Resubmission
NP = Not provided in original data package or as resubmission
NR = Not required under the SOW
NA = Not applicable to this data package or analysis
103307m Inorganic - 4
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
L DELIVERABLES
All deliverables were present.
Yes No X
Comments: A Form 11 was not provided. No action is required.
II. HOLDING TIMES AND PRESERVATION CRITERIA
All holding times and preservation criteria were met.
Yes No X
Comments: According to the sample receipt confirmation form, the sample label for
S0400HT4209 reads S0400HT429. No other shipping or receiving problems were
noted. Chain-of-custody, summary formsk and raw data were evaluated.
The following table lists the analyses outside holding times, number of days outside
holding times, and qualifiers added to the data:
Associated Sample
SOSTKPLB1, S0700FG1Z1, S0400HT4209
SOSTKPLA1, S0401SP1S1, S01063W121,
S0041FC1S1
Days Analyzed Outside
:, Method Holding Time
4
1
r' Analyte
Mercury
: Qualifiers'* .,
J/UJ
These samples were collected on August 25 and 28,2002 but were not received by
the laboratory until September 23, 2002.
INSTRUMENT CALIBRATIONS: STANDARDS AND BLANKS
Initial instrument calibrations were performed according to method requirements.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The instruments were calibrated daily and each time an analysis run was performed.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
103307m
Inorganic - 5
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
The instruments were calibrated using one blank and the appropriate number of standards.
Yes X No
Comments: The calibration correlation coefficients were greater than 0.995.
IV. FORM 1 - SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS
Sample analyses were entered correctly on Form Is.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
V. FORM 2A - INITIAL AND CONTINUING CALIBRATION VERIFICATION
The initial and continuing calibration verification standards (ICV and CCV, respectively) met
method requirements.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The calibration verification results were within 90-110% recovery for metals, 85-115% for cyanide,
and 80-120% for mercury.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The continuing calibration standards were run at 10% frequency.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
VL FORM 2B - CRDL STANDARD FOR ICP AND AA
TCP Analysis: Standards (CRI) at two times the CRDL or the IDL (whichever were greater) were
analyzed at the beginning and the end of each sample run, or at a minimum of twice per eight hours,
whichever was more frequent.
Yes X No
103307m Inorganic - 6
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
Comments: None.
GFAA Analysis: Standards (CRA) at two times CRDL were analyzed at the beginning of each
sample run.
Yes X No NA
Comments: None.
The CRI and/or the CRA were analyzed after the ICV.
Yes X No NA
Comments: None.
Vn. FORM 3 - BLANKS
The initial and continuing calibration blanks (ICB and CCB, respectively) met method requirements.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The continuing calibration blanks were run at 10% frequency.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
A laboratory/preparation blank was run at the frequency of one per twenty samples, or per sample
delivery group (whichever is more frequent), and for each matrix analyzed.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
All analyzed blanks were free of contamination.
Yes No X
Comments: The preparation blank reported zinc at 0.576 mg/Kg. No action was taken, as the
positive results for zinc in all samples were greater than the blank action level.
j 03307m Inorganic - 7
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
Vin. FORM 4 - ICP INTERFERENCE CHECK SAMPLE
The ICP interference check sample (ICS) was run twice per eight hour shift and/or at the beginning
and end of each sample set analysis sequence (whichever is more frequent).
Yes X No
Comments: None.
Percent recovery of the analytes in solution ICSAB were within the range of 80-120%.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
Sample results for aluminum, calcium, iron, and magnesium were less than the ICSA values.
i
Yes No X
Comments: The sample results for iron exceeded the ICSA values in samples SOSTKPLA1 and
S0401SP1S1. No action was taken, as the sample results were greater than 5 times
the ICSA results for the ICSA values greater than the IDL.
IX. FORM 5A - MATRIX SPIKE SAMPLE ANALYSIS
A matrix spike sample was analyzed with every twenty or fewer samples of a similar matrix, or one
per sample delivery group (whichever is more frequent).
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The percent recoveries (%R) were calculated correctly.
% Recovery = ^SSR ~ SR^ X 100 SSR = spiked sample result
$A SR = sample result
SA = spike added
Yes X No
Comments: None.
103307m Inorganic - 8
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
Spike recoveries were within 75-125% (an exception is granted where the sample concentration is
four times the spike concentration).
Yes
No X
Comments: The following table lists the spike recoveries outside control limits, matrix, samples
affected, and data qualifiers:
Element
Antimony
Arsenic
Spike Recovery
57.2%
66.6%
Matrix
Soil
- - Samples Affected !
AH samples
: Qualifiers -._;:.
J/UJ
X. FORM SB - POST DIGEST SPIKE RECOVERY
A post-digest spike was performed for those elements that did not meet the specified criteria (i.e.,
pre-digestion/pre-distillation spike recovery falls outside of control limits and sample result is less
than four times the spike amount added, exception: Ag, Hg).
Yes X
Comments:
No
NA
The post digest spike recovery for antimony and arsenic were within QC limits.1
Results are not qualified based on post digest spike data.
XI. FORM 6-DUPLICATE SAMPLE ANALYSIS
Duplicate sample analysis was performed with every twenty or fewer samples of a similar matrix,
or one per sample delivery group (whichever is more frequent).
Yes X
No
Comments: None.
The RPDs were calculated correctly.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
103307m
Inorganic - 9
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
For sample concentrations greater than five times the CRDL, RPDs were within ฑ20% (limits of
ฑ35% apply for soil/sediments/tailings samples).
Yes
No X
Comments: The following table lists the RPDs outside control limits, matrix, samples affected,
and data qualifiers:
Element
Zinc
%RPDs
65.2%
Matrix
Soil
. . i
. Samples Affected
All samples
r-< ( a
Qualifiers
J/UJ
The duplicate results for lead and mercury were flagged by the laboratory as
exceeding the 20% water criteria at 22.6% and 27.2%, respectively. No action was
required, as the soil criteria of 35% was met.
For sample concentrations less than five times the CRDL, duplicate analysis results were within the
control window of ฑ CRDL (two times CRDL for soils).
Yes X
No
Comments: None.
XH. GFAAQC
Duplicate injections were performed on all GFAA samples and the RSD was within ฑ 20%.
Yes X No NA
Comments: All selenium and thallium results were non-detected and no action was required
Analytical spikes were performed on all GFAA samples and the percent recovery was 85-115%.
Yes No X NA .
103307m
Inorganic - 10
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
Comments: The following table lists the analytical spike recoveries outside control limits,
samples affected, and data qualifiers:
Element
Selenium
Thallium
Samples '''.
SOSTKPLB1
S0700FG1Z1
S0400HT4209
S0041FC1S1
SOSTKPLA1
S040ISP1S1
S0400HT4209
S01063W121
S0041FC1S1
V .' ''.':X'-';%R , ''-;.- .'';
73.7%
63.7%
57.8%
45.0%
71.4%
27.3%
66.8%
56.6%
65.7%
-.'; ^Qualifiers 'V: v
UJ
MSAs were analyzed when required and the correlation coefficient was > 0.995.
l
Yes No NA X
Comments: None.
XIV.
FORM 7 - LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE
The laboratory control sample (LCS) was prepared and analyzed with every twenty or fewer samples
of a similar matrix, or one per sample delivery group (whichever is more frequent).
Yes X No
Comments: None.
All results were within control limits.
Yes X No
Comments: All LCS recoveries were within the QC limits.
FORM 8 - STANDARD ADDITION RESULTS
Results from graphite furnace standard additions were entered on Form VIII as directed in the SOW.
Yes No NA X
Comments: None.
103307m
Inorganic - 11
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
XV. FORM 9 - ICP QC
A serial dilution was performed for ICP analysis with every twenty or fewer samples of a similar
matrix, or one per sample delivery group, whichever is more frequent.
Yes X
Comments:
No
None.
The serial dilution was without interference problems as defined by the method.
Yes No X
Comments: The following serial dilution %Ds were greater than 10% and the original sample
result was at least 50* the IDLs:
Element
Copper
% Difference
40.4
,r ' . ; ..' ^ ^^:'.'[l-^y-A^:^Ky'f;-;x^p^
-. Samples Affec4ed': ' . j^^[piSS:^M!i!!feraงife^
All samples
J - detects
XVI. FORM 10 - QUARTERLY INSTRUMENT DETECTION LIMITS (TOIL) ,
IDLs were provided for all elements on the target analyte list.
Yes X No
Comments: A Form 10 was provided and the IDLs were the same as the CRDL.
XVH. FORM 11 - INTERELEMENT CORRECTION FACTORS FOR ICP
Interelement corrections for ICP were reported.
Yes No X NA
Comments: Interelement correction factors Form 11 was not provided for the ICP metals. No
action was taken.
XVm. FORM 12 - ICP LINEAR RANGES
ICP linear ranges were reported.
Yes X No NA
103307m
Inorganic- 12
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
Comments: A Form 12 was provided, however, the linear ranges were determined more than 3
months prior to sample analysis.
XIX. LINEAR RANGE VERIFICATION ANALYSIS
Linear Range Verification Analysis (LRA) was performed and results were within control limits of
5% of the true value.
Yes No NA X
Comments: None.
XX: FORM 13 - PREPARATION LOG
Information on the preparation of samples for analysis was reported on Form XIII.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
XXI. FORM 14 - ANALYSIS RUN LOG
A Form XIV with the required information was filled out for each analysis run in the data package.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
-\
XXII. Additional Comments or Problems/Resolutions Not Addressed Above
Yes No X
Comments: None.
103307m Inorganic-13
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
INORGANIC DATA QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW
Region Vffl
DATA QUALIFIER DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of Data Validation, the following code letters and associated definitions are provided for
use by the data validator to summarize the data quality. Use of additional qualifiers should be carefully
considered. Definitions for all qualifiers used should be provided with each report.
GENERAL QUALIFIERS for use with both INORGANIC and ORGANIC DATA
R - Reported value is "rejected." Resampling or reanalysis may be necessary to verify the
presence or absence of the compound.
J - The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity because the Quality Control
criteria were not met.
U J - The reported amount is estimated because Quality Control criteria were not met. Element
or compound was not detected.
N J - The analysis indicates the presence of an analyte that has been "tentatively identified" and
the associated numerical value represents its approximate concentration.
N - The analysis indicates the presence of an analyte for which there is presumptive evidence
to make a tentative identification.
U - The material was analyzed for, but was not-detected above the level of the associated
value. The associated value is either the sample quantitation limit or the sample detection
limit.
103307m Inorganic-14
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
ACRONYMS
AA Atomic Absorption
Ag Silver
CCB Continuing Calibration Blank
CCV Continuing Calibration Verification
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CLP Contract Laboratory Program
CRA CRDL standard required for AA
CRDL Contract Required Detection Limit
CRI CRDL standard required for ICP
CV Cold Vapor
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
GFAA Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption
Hg Mercury
ICB Initial Calibration Blank
ICP Inductively Coupled Plasma
ICS Interference Check Sample
ICSA Interference Check Sample (Solution A)
ICSAB Interference Check Sample (Solution AB)
ICV Initial Calibration Verification
IDL Instrument Detection Limit
LCS Laboratory Control Sample
LRA Linear Range Verification Analysis
MSA Method of Standard Additions
PDS Post Digestion Spike
QC Quality Control
RPD Relative Percent Difference
RPM Regional Project Manager
RSD Percent Relative Standard Deviation
SA Spike Added
SAS Special Analytical Services
SDG Sample Delivery Group
SOW Statement of Work
SR Sample Result
SSR Spiked Sample Result
TPO Technical Project Officer
103307m
Inorganic - 15
-------
I
I
U.S. EPA - CLP
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
EPA SAMPLE NO.
|ab Name: SVL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
Lab Code: SILVER Case No.:
atrix (soil/water): SOIL_
Level (low/med): LOW
ft Solids: 100.0
Contract:
S311633
SAS No.:
SDG No.: 103307
Lab Sample ID: S311633
Date Received: 09/23/02
I
I
I
I
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight): MG/KG
1
[CAS No.
i
i
[7429-90-5
[7440-36-0
[7440-38-2
,' 7440-39-3
[7440-41-7
[7440-43-9
[7440-70-2
[7440-47-3
[7440-48-4
[7440-50-8
[7439-89-6
[7439-92-1
[7439-95-4
[7439-96-5
[7439-97-6
[7440-02-0
[7440-09-7
[7782-49-2
[7440-22-4
[7440-23-5
[7440-28-0
[7440-62-2
[7440-66-6
i
i
i
[ Analyte
i
i
[ Aluminum
[Antimony
'Arsenic
[ Barium
[Beryllium
[ Cadmium
! Calcium
[ Chromium
[ Cobalt
[ Copper
! Iron
! Lead
{Magnesium
! Manganese
! Mercury
! Nickel
[Potassium
j Selenium
[ Silver
[ Sodium
[ Thallium
j Vanadium
IZinc
i
i
i
Concentration j C
i
8500!
40.8!
138!
103'!
0.35!
5.0!
13700!
8.0!
4.8!
17.2!
14800!
682!
6660!
649!
1.3!
7.4!
1580!
0.10IU
5.3!
77. 5!
1.0!U
10.4!
948!
i
i
Q JM
1
IP
N IP
N |P
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
E IP
IP
IP
IP
I'D
I '
* lev
IP
IP
w IF
IP
IP
IF
IP
IP
i
J
J
J
J
u:
j
toior Before:
2olor After:
BROWN_
YELLOW
Clarity Before:
Clarity After:
Texture: MEDIUM
Artifacts:
| eminent s:
1 CLIENT ID: SOSTKPLB1
PERCENT SOLIDS NOT APPLICABLE.
FORM I - IN
ILM02.1
-------
U.S. EPA - CLP
EPA SAMPLE NO,
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
Lab Name: SVL ANALYTICAL INC.
Lab Code: SILVER
Case No.:
Contract:
SAS
S311634
SDG No,s 103307
Matrix (soil/water): SOIL_
Level (low/med): LOW
% Solids: 100.0
Lab Sample ID.s S311634
Date Received? 09/23/02
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight) '. MG/KG
1
j CAS No.
i
j 7429-90-5
,'7440-36-0
J 7440-38-2
[7440-39-3
j 7440-41-7
J 7440-43-9
j 7440-70-2
j 7440-47-3
j 7440-48-4
J 7440-50-8
J7439-89-6
[7439-92-1
[7439-95-4
[7439-96-5
j 7439-97-6
[7440-02-0
[7440-09-7
[7782-49-2
[7440-22-4
[7440-23-5
[7440-28-0
[7440-62-2
[7440-66-6
i
i
j Analyte
i
j Aluminum
[ Antimony
[Arsenic
[ Barium
[Beryllium
[ Cadmium
[Calcium
i Chromium
j Cobalt
[ Copper
[Iron
[Lead
[Magnesium
[ Manganese
[ Mercury
[Nickel
[ Potassium
' Selenium
[ Silver
! Sodium
[Thallium
i Vanadium
[Zinc
i
i
i
Concentration [ C
i
5380!
558!
999!
75.3!
Oo20!U
30.9!
4360!
4.6!
4.6!
44.4!
44100!
5700!
3480!
2410!
7.4!
4.8!
994!
1.01U
48.7!
68.0!
1.0!U
6.6!
5370!
i
i
Q [M
1
IP
N |P
N |P
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
E IP
IP
* IP
IP
IP
* lev
IP
IP
IF
IP
IP
W !F
IP
fr IP
1
1
1
J
3
J
y
UJ
J
:olor Before:
lolor After:
BROWN__
YELLOW
Clarity Before;
Clarity After:
Texture ง MEDIUM
Artifactss
! eminent s:
CLIENT_ID: SOSTKPLA1
PERCENT SOLIDS NOT APPLICABLE.
FORM I - IN
ILM02.1
10-OQOt-
-------
U.S. EPA - CLP
EPA SAMPLE NO.
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
lab Name: SVL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
Lab Code: SILVER Case No.:
latrix (soil/water): SOIL_
fcevel (low/med): LOW
Contract:
S311635
SAS No.:
SDG No.: 103307
Lab Sample ID: S311635
Date Received: 09/23/02
I
Solids:
100.0
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight): MG/KG
! I
JCAS No. j Analyte
! 1
j 7429-90-5 [Aluminum
[7440-36-0 [Antimony
[7440-38-2 [Arsenic
j 7440-39-3 [Barium
[7440-41-7 jBeryllium
[7440-43-9 [Cadmium
| 7440-7 0-2 [Calcium
[7440-47-3 [Chromium
17440-48-4 iCobalt
{7440-50-8 jCopper
J7439-89-6 j Iron
[7439-92-1 [Lead
j 7439-95-4 [Magnesium
[7439-96-5 [Manganese
[7439-97-6 (Mercury
{7440-02-0 j Nickel
[7440-09-7 [Potassium
{7782-49-2 {Selenium
17440-22-4 {Silver
17440-23-5 ! Sodium
[7440-28-0 [Thallium
[7440-62-2 j Vanadium
! 7440-66-6 jZinc
! 1
i
i
Concentration [ C
i
7560!
15.9!
50.6!
69.31
0.32!
6.6!
13900!
7.6!
5.2!
16.7!
13800!
276!
8030!
491!
0.52[
7.6!
1880!
0.10,'U
3.0!
54.5!
1.0JU
10!
955!
i
Q |M
IP
N IP
N |P
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
E |P
|P
* IP
IP
i n
t*
* |CV
IP
IP
w IF
IP
IP
IF
IP
* IP
i i
:olor Before:
:olor After:
BROWN__
YELLOW
Clarity Before:
Clarity After:
Texture: MEDIUM
Artifacts:
onunents:
CLIENT_ID: S0700FG1Z1
PERCENT SOLIDS NOT APPLICABLE.
FORM I - IN
ILM02.1
lQ-od-02-
-------
U.S. EPA - CLP
EPA SAMPLE NO.
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
Lab Name: SVL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
Lab Code: SILVER Case No.:
Matrix (soil/water): SOIL_
Level (low/med): LOW
% Solids: 100.0
Contract!
S311636
SAS No.:
SDG No.s 103307
Lab Sample IDs S311636
Date Received: 09/23/02
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight): MG/KG
1 1
JCAS No. j Analyte
i i
i i
j 7429-90-5 jAluminum
,'7440-36-0 jAntimony
i 7440-38-2 i Arsenic
j 7440-39-3 ! Barium
[7440-41-7 jBeryllium
(7440-43-9 | Cadmium
i 7440-70-2 jCalcium
[7440-47-3 j Chromium
j 7440-48-4 ICobalt
[7440-50-8 [Copper
[7439-89-6 [Iron
[7439-92-1 [Lead
[7439-95-4 [Magnesium
[7439-96-5 [Manganese
[7439-97-6 [Mercury
[7440-02-0 [Nickel
j 7440-09-7 [Potassium
[7782-49-2 [Selenium
[7440-22-4 [Silver
[7440-23-5 [Sodium
[7440-28-0 [Thallium
[7440-62-2 [Vanadium
[7440-66-6 [Zinc
i i
i i
i i
i i
Concentration [ C
i
1490!
2560!
3050!
21.8!
0.20|u
72.4!
974!
2.8!
2.6!
91.4!
95100!
15100!
1040!
3140!
18.1!
4.0[
432!
1.01U
160!
51.9!
1.0[U
1.4!
11600 i
i
i
i
Q JM
IP
N !P
H JP
IP
i P
i*^
IP
IP
IP-
IP'
E |P
IP
* IP
i p
i f
ip
i f
* lev
IP
IP
IF
IP
IP
E IF
IP
* IP
i
i
3
5
3
3
LJJ
3
!olor Before: BROWN
!olor After:
lomments:
CLIENT ID:
YELLOW
S0401SP1S1
Clarity Before?
Clarity After:
Texture;
Artifacts?
MEDIUM
PERCENT SOLIDS NOT APPLICABLE,
FORM I - IN
ILM02.1
lO-Od-OZ
-------
I
I
U.S. EPA - CLP
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
EPA SAMPLE NO.
lab Name: SYL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
Lab Code: SILVER Case No.:
|atrix (soil/water): SOIL_
Ievel (low/med): LOW
Solids: 100.0
Contract:
S311637
SAS No.:
SDG No.: 103307
Lab Sample ID: S311637
Date Received: 09/23/02
I
I
I
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight): MG/KG
1
[CAS No.
i
[7429-90-5
! 7440-36-0
[7440-38-2
[7440-39-3
J7440-41-7
j 7440-43-9
[7440-70-2
! 7440-47-3
[7440-48-4
[7440-50-8
[7439-89-6
[7439-92-1
[7439-95-4
[7439-96-5
[7439-97-6
[7440-02-0
[7440-09-7
[7782-49-2
[7440-22-4
,' 7440-23-5
[7440-28-0
[7440-62-2
} 7440-66-6
i
i
i
} Analyte
i
j Aluminum
j Antimony
[Arsenic
[ Barium
[ Beryllium
' Cadmium
[Calcium
[ Chromium
I Cobalt
[ Copper
[Iron
[Lead
j Magnesium
[ Manganese
[ Mercury
! Nickel
[Potassium
| Selenium
1 Silver
i Sodium
j Thallium
j Vanadium
! Zinc
[
I
i
Concentration J C
7510!
3.4!
8.1!
125!
0.34!
0.31!
14300!
7.9!
5.0!
14.1!
12100!
25.1!
7050!
261!
0.08!
7.2!
1700!
0.10IU
0.58!
57.11
O.lOiU
10.3!
31.21
i
i
i i
Q [M
i
IP
N |P
N |P
IP
ip
IB
i *
IP
IP-
IP
E |P
IP
* IP
IP
IP
* lev
IP
IP
w IF
IP
IP
w IF
IP
* P
J
J
o
J
U3
UJ
0
iolor Before:
:olor After:
Comments:
CLIENT ID:
BROWN
YELLOW
S0400HT4209
Clarity Before:
Clarity After:
Texture: MEDIUM
Artifacts:
PERCENT SOLIDS NOT APPLICABLE.
FORM I - IN
ILM02.1
/&
10-06-02
-------
U.S. EPA - CLP
1 EPA SAMPLE NO.
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET J
Name: SVL ANALYTICAL INC.
Contracts
S311638
Jab Code: SILVER
Case No.:
SAS No.ฐ
SDG No.g 103307
latrix (soil/water): SOIL_
jevel (low/med): LOW
i Solids: 100.0
Lab Sample IDs S311638
Date Received* 09/23/02
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight)? MG/KG
JCAS No. j Analyte
i i
[7429-90-5 [Aluminum
J 7440-36-0 [Antimony
j 7440-38-2 j Arsenic
17440-39-3 ! Barium
[7440-41-7 [Beryllium
17440-43-9 jCadmium
i 7440-70-2 [Calcium
[7440-47-3 [Chromium
17440-48-4 ! Cobalt
J 744 0-50-8 | Copper
17439-89-6 i Iron
17439-92-1 [Lead
[7439-95-4 [Magnesium
[7439-96-5 [Manganese
[7439-97-6 [Mercury
[7440-02-0 [Nickel
[7440-09-7 [Potassium
J 7782-49-2 {Selenium
! 7440-22-4 [Silver
17440-23-5 [Sodium
[7440-28-0 [Thallium
[7440-62-2 [Vanadium
[7440-66-6 [Zinc
i i
i i
i i i
i
i
Concentration j C
i
10000!
13.6!
28.9!
100!
0.28!
1.5!
21800!
6.1!
5.9J
16.7!
14400!
168!
3380[
446[
0.15!
8.2!
1660!
1.0[U
1.3!
95.9[
0.10[U
13oO!
246!
i
i
i
i
Q |M
1
!P
N IP
H IP
IP
IP
IP
i P
i*^
IP
IP
E |P
i P
i*
* IP
IP
ip
if
* [CV
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
w IF
IP
* IP
i
!
3
3
3
$
UJ
J
:olor Before: BROWN_
]olor After: YELLOW
Clarity Befores
Clarity Afters
Texture ง
Artifacts:
MEDIUM
I eminent s:
CLIENT
ID: S01063W121
PERCENT SOLIDS NOT APPLICABLE.
FORM I - IN
!LMQ2ol
-------
I
I
U.S. EPA - CLP
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
EPA SAMPLE NO.
Lb Name; SVL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
ab Code: SILVER Case No.:
i
atrix (soil/water): SOIL_
?vel (low/med): LOW
Solids: 100.0
Contract:
S311639
SAS No.:
SDG No.: 103307
Lab Sample ID: S311639
Date Received: 09/23/02
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight): MG/KG
I
1
ICAS NO.
i
i
[7429-90-5
[7440-36-0
i 7440-38-2
j 7440-39-3
j 7440-41-7
J7440-43-9
[7440-70-2
j 7440-47-3
i 7440-48-4
,'7440-50-8
i 7439-89-6
j 7439-92-1
J7439-95-4
i 7439-96-5
i 7439-97-6
17440-02-0
J 7440-09-7
17782-49-2
{7440-22-4
j 7440-23-5
J 7440-28-0
j 7440-62-2
j 7440-66-6
i
i
i
i
i Analyte
i
I Aluminum
,' Antimony
I Arsenic
j Barium
| Beryllium
I Cadmium
! Calcium
I Chromium
! Cobalt
I Copper
j Iron
I Lead
J Magnesium
I Manganese
! Mercury
j Nickel
Potassium
j Selenium
i Silver
! Sodium
! Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
i
i
i
i
Concentration | C
i
12400!
1.2!
4.6!
137!
0.31!
0.92!
12400!
9.8!
5.3!
44.6!
17200J
65.8!
11600!
432!
0.14!
8.5!
4580!
0.101U
0.76!
80.1!
0.10IU
10.6!
194!
i
i
i
Q IM
i
IP
N |P
N JP
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
IP
E IP
IP
* IP
IP
IP
* |CV
IP
1 T>
I*
W IF
IP
IP
W F
P
* P
i
J
J
.
J
3
UJ
uJ
J
Tor Before: BROWN
^i
!.or After: YELLOW
Clarity Before:
Clarity After:
Texture: MEDIUM
Artifacts:
ments:
CLIENT_ID: S0041FC1S1__
PERCENT SOLIDS NOT APPLICABLE.
FORM I - IN
ILM02.1
-------
I. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - HOLDING TIMES
BATCH: 103307
TECHLAW
List all analytes which do not meet holding time criteria
Sample ID
Matrix
List Pre-
servative
(A, B. C)
Date
Collected
Metals
Analysis/1
Date/s
/Hg CVAA
Analysis
Date
CNApalysis
ate
Analysis
Date/s
No. of Days
Past Holding
Time
Action
*1W /
&25-OZ
--5 Pa
-J
6-26
(33J
Q-2S
tl
frZS
b-Z&OL
//
ft
COMMENTS/ 7Al
ฃ
!<$-? ico*.
10(4 Al>
i
7V2) Pfc
J
GFAA 77V/) Sr
j_ 70^) n *
1. If holding times are exceeded, all sample results are estimated (J)/(UJ).
2. If holding times are grossly exceeded (>=2*holding time), detected results are
estimated (J), and non-detected results are rejected (R).
PrpaervatfvM;
A Preserved W/HNO3 and cooled to 4ฐC
B. Cooled to 4ฐC
C. No Preservative
Validated by:
Date:
Review By:
ANALYTE
HOLDING TIME
PRESERVATIVE
Metals
Mercury
Cyanide
180 days
28 days
14 days
AQUEOUS
pH < 2 W/HNO3, 4 Deg. C
pH < 2 W/HN03, 4 Deg. C
pH>12w/NaOH,4Deg. C
SOIL
4Deg.C
4 Deg. C
40eg.C
Holding Time = Analysis Date Collection Date
VERIFY ANALYSIS DATES ON REPORT MATCH RAW DATA.
Inorg98.xls
-------
IIA. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - ICP CALIBRATIONS
BATCH:
TECHLAW
List all ICP analytes that did not meet the percent recovery criteria for initial calibration verification (ICV) and
continuing calibration verification (CCV).
Analyte
ICV
CCV
TRUE
Found
%R
^
Action
,
X
Samples Affected
All % ^-iio^ ^
CCV run after CRI, every 1 0 samples and at end of sequences? (CLP onlyf Yง9/ No
Was a CRDL check sample (CRI) analyzed at the beginning and at the end of each sample run (CLP only)? Yes No
COMMENTS
Actions:
ICV/CCV Actions:
Detected results
Non-detected Results
PERCENT RECOVERY
<75% 75-89% 90-110% 111-125% >125%
R J V J R
R UJ V V V
1. If the Instrument was not calibrated dally and each time the Instrument was set up, qualify the data as rejected (R). |nora98 xls
-------
MB. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - AA CALIBRATIONS
TECHLAW
BATCH:
List all AA analytes that did not meet the percent recovery criteria for initial calibration verification (ICV) and
continuing calibration verification (CCV).
Analyte
ICV
CCV
TRUE
Found
%R
Action
i
Samples Affected
Sft*77
All "/* 10-/0/
1 . Were the correct number of standards and blanks used to calibrate the instrument? (res) No
2. Is the initial calibration correlation coefficient > 0.995? ^Yes^) No l.OOO'~fL / I./VX) 'Sd
If no, list affected analytes and samples:
3. Was a CRDL check sample (CRA) analyzed at the beginning of each sample run? (CLP only) ^YBS-J No
4. CCV run after CRA, every ten samples and at end of sequence? /
''Yes)
No
COMMENTS
Actions:
ICV/CCV Actions:
Detected results
Non-detected Results
PERCENT RECOVER^..
<75% 75-89% /^OMItWy 111-125% >125%
R J V J R
R UJ V V V
1. If three standards and a blank were not used for initial calibration, or the instrument was not calibrated daily and each time the
instrument was set up, qualify the data as rejected (R).
2. If the initial calibration correlation coefficient was less than 0.995, qualify sample results as estimated (J)/(UJ).
Inorg98.xls
-------
IIC. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - Hg CALIBRATIONS
BATCH:
TECHLAW
List all mercury results that did not meet the percent recovery criteria for the ICV and/or CCV standard.
ICV
CCV
TRUE
Found
%R
Action
Samples Affected
AH *fa M-\20/
^ ^
1. Were the correct number of standards and blanks used to calibrate the instrument? CjfgS-^ No
2. Is the initial calibration correlation coefficient > 0.995? /^TeT) No /Jft - ฃ.^J3T
If no, list affected analytes and samples:
3. Was a CRDL check sample (CRA) analyzed at the beginning of each sample run? (CLP only) (Yes) No
4. CCV run after CRA. every ten samples and at end of sequence? "^Yes^ No
COMMENTS
Actions:
Detected results
Non-detected Results
PERCENT RECOVgBX=~
<65% 65-79% 080-120%^ 121-135% >135%
R J V J R
R UJ V V V
1. If four standards and a blank were not used for Initial calibration, or the Instrument was not calibrated daily and each time the
instrument was set up, qualify the data as rejected (R).
2. If the Initial calibration correlation coefficient was less than 0.995, qualify sample results as estimated (J)/(UJ).
Inorg98.xls
1
-------
MATRIX:
I. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - BLANKS
BATCH:
TECHLAW
List the highest positive AND negative blank result >=|DL| below. Use one worksheet for soil matrix and another for water matrix.
Analyte
To
ICB
CCB
PB/MB
PC)
IDL
5^
*&
'iyo
Blank Cone
&$?ฃ>
akMtHL
5 ' Bl. Cone
x<
2M1&
^^
^-^
Actipjl^-
hh\e
\
tt\>S>/ J
/
/
^^
NOTE: Verify that the absolute value of anvanalyte concentraticn in the PB or MB is < CRDL *
^fiiify. U -9 IOOปV AซA^ + Jla - "ป/&
One prep blank per matrix H/
One prep blank per batch *
ICB analyzed immediately after ICV *""
CCB analyzed after each CCV. s
Field/equipment/rinsate blanks analyzed? If so, include above if applicable to project. "A/A
COMMENTS
Actions.
1 If |Blank| < IOL, no action is taken.
2 If Blank > = IDL, the- ?ll sample results > = IDL and < 5'Blan* are non-detected (U).
2 If Blank = < -IDL. all sample results > = IDL and < 5* |B!ank| are estimated (J).
<. If Blank = < -IDL then all non-detected results are estimated iUJ).
" If blank concentration > CRDL, all detected sample results < 5 "Blanks are rejected (R).
If blank concentration > CRDL, all detected sample results > 5 'Blanks and < 10* Blank are estimated (J).
Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
IVA. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - ICP INTERFERENCE CHECK SAMPLE
BATCH:
NOTE: The sample results can be accepted without qualification, if the sample concentrations of Al, Ca, Fe and Mg are less than or
equal to the concentration found in the ICSA solution.
Examine the sample results In ug/L and list any Al, Ca, Fe or Mg results that are greater than the ICSA values.
Sample ID
Anaryte
Sample Result
ICS Value
Comments
HWil
List any analytes in the ICS AB solution that did not meet the criteria of 80-120% R.
Analyte
%R
Action
Samples Affected
QO-\ZO% ^
CLP Protocol Only
Were Interference Check Samples run at the beginning and end of each sample analysis run, or a minimum of twice per 8-hour shift (whichever
is more frequent)? Yes No
COMMENTS
'
Actions:
Detected results
Non-detected results
PERCENT RECOVERY
<50% 50-79% 80-120% >120%
R J V J
R UJ V V
Inorg98.xls
I
-------
I
I
TECHLAW
IVB. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - ICP INTERFERENCE CHECK SAMPLE
BATCH: JQ3307
Note: For the CLP protocol only, report the concentration of any analytes detected In the ICSA solution > |IDL | that should not be present
(apply only to samples with elements identified at concentrations above the ICSA on the previous page).
Analyte
^^ o
A fi
ฃ>*
Be
cA
fr
C*
Cu
Pb
Mr}
M.'
K
Ag
W*
V
~Z.t\ i
ICSA Result
A/L JPt
(-2&\)s S
-H0V tO
!_ t
1 2
& Z
-3^ A
A t,
y &
ฃH) J|
7 Z
^ 10
~1H ฃ00
S S
ht> ^oo
-ฃ ฃ
t^T) 5"
Action
AW ^Ztt
1 1
AW SA
>s>
>v>
>.5<*
_
>5*
Sample/
Result
S3SI&34
>5"-*
.
>-5*
- "-
> ^>
i
'X5*
___
Sample/
Result
Sample/
Result
-
Sample/
Result
Actions:
If the ICSA value > the positive IDL:
1. For non-detected results, no action is taken.
2. Estimate (J) all detected results < = 5'ICSA.
If the ICSA value < -IDL:
1. Estimate (J) detected results < = 5* |ICSA|.
2. Estimate (UJ) non-detected results.
Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
V. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - PRE-DIGESTION MATRIX SPIKE
t&
MATRIX: S*k<3QP-Sป] BATCH: 103307
List all parameters that do not meet the percent recovery criteria. Note: The pre-digestion spike recovery criteria are not evaluated for Ca, Wig, K,
Na, At and Fe for soil samples, and Ca, Mg, K and Na for water samples.
If the sample result exceeds the spike added by a factor of 4 or more, no action is taken.
Sample ID
.ssii&ias
Analyte
^b
As
tt>s4
Spiked
Sample
Result
40
204
-Ji*pS>l
^b
A*
Sample
Results
Spike Added
loo
a
%R
57.L
&ฃ>.&>
Action
0$^J
(J^UJ
Samples Affected
s
k\\ ^
A}) y
,
1 . Was a pre-digestiqn-matrix spike prepared at the required frequency of once every 20 samples, or every SDG (whichever is
more frequent)? (Yes) No
2. Was a post-digestion matrix spike analyzejjjoull ICP elements, except Silver, that did not meet the pre-
digestion matrix spike recovery criteria? CieP NO NA
3. Was a matrix spike prepared for each different sample matrix? f YSS--*'^ No
COMMENTS A I A;fc.,Pb X s*ซฎJe fjcnc >f>.9fJie cone -UoAcitefi
l\a ,/V/fln Zn ; '
1. If any analyte does not meet the % R criteria, qualify all associated samples using the following criteria:
Actions:
PERCENT RECOV
<30% 30-74% (75-125%,) >125%
Detected results J J ^~~V~"^ J
Non-detected Results R UJ V V
Note
If anatyte concentrations in the sample is greater than 4 times the amount spiked, then limits do not apply.
Inorg98.xls
-------
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
VI. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - LABORATORY DUPLICATES
MATRIX: -S0O " BATCH: 103307
List all parameters that do not meet RPD or CRDL criteria.
Sample ID
S3II&S3
M5&
.
Ar.alyte
Pb
H*
^^
7QI*
Sample
Result
iV*
ฃ>1>K
M^
Z0l\
S.O
Dup. Result
&3ft
a.ฐl\
\C&5*ฃWl - lab iAฃ UeJer 2O^\
1 AJ * 36/f'Sola
AL AJi/T-n
~~ '
9 flul aป**>ป4f "Zn
'
-n
COMMENTS ) Ajt^J .' J^-DL ' CRClJS }
L '
Actions:
1. AQUEOUS
If both sample values > 5'CRDL. estimate (J/UJ) all sample results of the same matrix if the RPD is > 20%. ' .
If either sample value < 5'CRDL. and the difference between the duplicate and the original is > CRDL. estimate (J)/(UJ) all sample results of the same
2. SOLID
If both sample value > 5*CRDL. estimate (J/UJ) all sample results of the same matrix if the RPD is ^35%~)
If either sample value < 5'CRDL. and the difference between the duplicate and the original is > 2*CRDL, estimate (J)/(UJ) all sample results of the
Difference = (Sample result - Duplicate sample result|
include outliers for field duplicates (if applicable)
Note
A duplicate sample must be prepared for each sample matrix analyzed or per batch, whichever is more frequent
Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
VII. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLES
fio
MATRIX:
BATCH:
List all parameters that do not meet the percent recovery criteria.
LCS ID
Analyte
True Value
Found Value
%R
Action
Samples Affected
t
All "/i'n ztrt&P/oi
"Xvป ao].j7 /.ifcpfci ซ* Gai&XfS &J-I1C
' $*''#>ฃ
,
Note:
.CS with the same matrix as samples must be prepared for each SDG.
COMMENTS
Actions:
Exception: Antimony and silver have no control limits. An aqueous LCS is not required for CM and mercury.
1. AQUEOUS
Detected results
Non-detected results
PERCENT RECOVERY
<50% 50-79% 80-120% >120%
R J V J
R UJ V V
2. SOLID LCS
Recoveries stipulated by EMSL
Detected results
Non-detected results
BELOW
CONTROL
LIMITS
J
UJ
ABOVE
CONTROL
LIMITS
J
V
Inorg98.xls
-------
I
TECHLAW
VIIIA. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - ANALYTICAL SPIKE ANALYSIS
BATCH:
List all samples whose analytical spike recovery did not meet the 85-115% recovery criteria.
Analyte
3d
I
-L
Tt
Sample ID
S3 J&33-
S3llฃ3*f*
135
L&iz*
637
l&&>
ฃ34
S3llฃJH*ฃ
26*O
jj9*r
55)^53
^W
j*r
ztr
J7
30 -
3*1
/ฃJ3A0
w#
tas'V *
A3^'*?^
Sample
Result
sosTxelM
3X&F6IZ}
wuHnw*
SJDMirciSl
^,
/^
'S
Dotcom i3o
5^|ฃป<5WI2l
sx^'^is '
/
^osr^fuc
5040)5 P 12
Spiked
Sample
Result
True Spike
Value
s
%R
75.7'
^t
ฃ5.7
-ft^
^T7^
-2*^*
HS.O
^?e\
xrr\
3tfr }
** /
ie,f>
&i
45-7
7/.f -
<27^
Action
(A&>
.&&,
(b&
-*
//J^>
*^
ru^
1 1 HIM
^nr^ 1^1 wiปซ
5sercrซซป^
UJ
UJ
U^
LU
UJ
Comment
.
1 . Spike Recovery for CLP Protocol: One point analytical spikes were performed for all GFAA samples? Yes No
2. Spike Recovery for SW-846: One analytical spike was analyzed per batch pr matrix, whichever is more frequent? Yes No
COMMENTS / )J ^ฃ 77 ft 6010 ' ^LA *
If the sample result is <50% of the spike result, or the sample result is >50% of the spike result* and the percent recovery is <40% or
between 80-115%, the following apply.
10%
Actions:
Detected results J
Non-detected results R
Spike result = [spiked sample result - sample result]
PERCENT RECOVERY
10-84% 85-115% >115%
J V J
UJ V V
Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
VIIIB. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - FURNACE AA ANALYSIS
BATCH:
If the sample result is > = 50% of the spike result and the percent recovery was between 40-84% or > 115%, then MSA must be
performed.
List all samples for which an MSA analysis was required but not performed, or MSA results were outside control limits.
Anatyte
Sample ID
1st Corr.
Coeff.
2nd Corr.
Coeff.
Action
Comments
A/A
Actions:
1. Estimate (J/UJ) if an MSA was required and not performed. '
2. If the correlation coefficient was <0.995, the MSA should be performed a second time. If a reanalysis was not performed,
or the reanalysis correlation coefficient was <0.995, or result from the highest correlation coefficient was not reported, then estimate (J/UJ) all
sample results.
List all sample > CRDL whose duplicate injections did not agree within 20% RSD or CV, or samples in which duplicate injections were not
performed.
Sfc
Analyte
S3)&33 -i
Sample ID
=?
Sample
Result
Duplicate
Result
% RSD or CV
7/6.3
-~^
CRDL
Action
Mo*e
Comment
jSortote resift L&
" A
--^_
^\
Spike result = (spiked sample result - sample resu
>:4M 5s *77
Actions:
1. Estimate (J) detected results greater than the CRDL if duplicate injections are ou
2. Estimate (J) all sample results if duplicate injections were not performed.
NOTE: Three separate spiked sample concentration levels, in addition to the unspiked sample must be analyzed for each MSA.
Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
IX. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET -TCP SERIAL DILUTION ANALYSIS
MATRIX: 5v>i) BATCH: l0330 *?
Serial dilution criteria only applies if the original sample result is at least 50' IDL and %D > 10%.
Analyte
e>3)lฃ33l
ฃu
N-*
IDL
3
10
50*IDL
1S0
5M
Sample
Results
}7U
71
Serial Dilution
Result
MM
?1Z
%D
HM9
(W '
202..^
i
Action
~:>(^^'
Mooe
Samples Affected
->/WA,- .y
<36>lfi
INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PLASMA SERIAL DILUTION ANALYSIS:
Serial dilutions were performed for each matrix and results of the diluted sample analysis agreed wtnin
ten percent of the original undiluted analysis. Yes No
Serial dilutions were not performed for the following:
COMMENTS
Actions:
Estimate (J) detected results if %D is > 10%.
NOTES
If results from diluted samples are higher than concentrated sample, matrix interference should be suspected
and sample results may be biased low.
Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
X. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - SAMPLE RESULT VERIFICATION
BATCH:
1. Describe any raw data anomalies (i.e., baseline shifts, negative absorbances, transcription or calculation errors, legibility, etc.
2. List results that fall outside the linear range of the ICP instrument or the calibrated range of the AA or Cyanide instrument, and
were not reanalyzed.
I. Were ICP linear ranges obtained withjna months of. and preceding, the sample analyses?
Yes
C
NA
.. Were ICP Interelement corrections obtained within 12 months of, and preceding, the sample analyses? Yes No
I. Were instrument detection limits present, found to be less thanj3Lฃqual to the CRDL, and obtained withm 3 months of,
preceding, the sample analyses?
Yes
MA
Ol
Were all sample results reported down to the IDL If running CLP protocol?
No
NA
. Were all sample results reported down to MDL If running SW-646 methods?
Yes
No
. Were sample weights, volumes, percent solids, and dilutions used correctly when reporting the results?
Yes
No
-- *\0
\
\
= 'ID
J_
IOMMENTS
fc
/
rep
* *IO
/; -7/OOM
Inorg98.xls
-------
560 GOLDEN RIDGE ROAD, SUITE 130, GOLDEN, CO 80401
PHONE: (303) 763-7188
FAX: (303) 763-4896
September 30, 2002
Mr. Kent Alexander
URS Operating Services
1099 18th Street, Suite 710
Denver, CO 80202
RE: Transmittal of Data Validation Report
Superior Waste Rock
TDD No. 0208-0002
Report No. 102970
Dear Mr. Alexander:
Please find enclosed one validation report for TDD No. 0208-0002 for the Superior Waste Rock
project. This report is for the validation of TCLP metals and mercury analyses.
If you have any questions regarding the enclosed report, please contact me at (303) 763-7188.
Yours sincerely,
TECHLAW, INC.
'- 7
Lisa Tyson
Staff Consultant
enclosure
IF: 01027-102
ATLANTA BOSTON CHICAGO DALLAS DENVER . LOS ANGELES MINNEAPOLIS NEW YORK PHILADELPHIA PHOENIX t SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE WASHINGTON, D.C.
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
REGION
DATA VALIDATION REPORT
INORGANIC
TDD No.
0208-0002
RPM/OSC Name
Tien Nguyen
Contractor Laboratory
SVL Analytical Inc.
. -. Site Name- ",. -;':i;J:\'. ;'";-':
Superior Waste Rock
ContfacfrNo.
Not Indicated
:.- . :".' Jot>iNq;':'4"-';:-.
102970
"''-'''. ^erablfci^t;? >, Of .
^Laboratory DPO/Regioiii: ,
Review Assigned Date September 24. 2002
Lisa Tyson
Review Completion Date September 30. 2002
Data Validator.
Report Reviewer Bill Fear
Sample Number:
SOSTKPLAOO
SOSTKPLBOO
SOSTKPLA07
SOSTKPLA10
SOSTKPLA15
SOSTKPLA20
Laboratory ID
E309034
E309035
E309036
E309037
E3 09038
E3 09039
Matrix ^
Leachate
:/ ",-'.-''' .-.:, Analysis; -,: !"^-\'*.-t.*-*~':-
TCLP Metals and Mercury
102970m
Inorganic -1
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
DATA QUALITY STATEMENT
( X ) Data are ACCEPTABLE according to EPA Functional guidelines with no qualifiers (flags) added
by the reviewer.
( ) Data are UNACCEPTABLE according to EPA Functional Guidelines.
() Data are acceptable with QUALIFICATIONS noted in review.
Telephone/Communication Logs Enclosed?
TPO Attention Required? Yes
Yes
No
X
No X If yes, list the items that require attention:
102970m
Inorganic - 2
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
INORGANIC DATA VALIDATION REPORT
REVIEW NARRATIVE SUMMARY
This data package was reviewed according to "USEPA Contract Laboratory Program National Functional
Guidelines for Inorganic Data Review," February 1994.
Raw data were reviewed for completeness and transcription accuracy onto the summary forms.
Approximately 10-20% of the results reported in each of the samples, calibrations, and QC analyses were
recalculated and verified. If problems were identified during the recalculation of results, a more thorough
calculation check was performed.
Job No. 102970 consisted of six samples for TCLP metals and mercury analyses.
The following table lists the data qualifiers added to the sample analyses. Please see Data Qualifier
Definitions, attached to the end of this report.
Sample ID <
None
Elements
None
<0(Saimfeiฃ u
None
;Sfv: Reason lor '"':' ','.._
;|C;; Qualification ^$
None
-'.fRevitiW*;
;r=:งe\
None
102970m
Inorganic - 3
-------
uos
URS Operating Services. Inc. Data Validation Report
Method/SOW Number TCLP
Revision 0.0
Inorganic Deliverables Completeness Checklist
P Inorganic Cover Page
P Inorganic Analysis Data Sheets
P Initial Calibration and Calibration Verification Results
P Continuing Calibration Verification Results
P CRDL Standard for ICP and AA
P Blank Analysis Results
P ICP Interference Check Sample Results
P Spiked Sample Results
_P_ Post-digest Spiked Sample Analysis
P Duplicate Sample Results
P Instrument Detection Limits
P Laboratory Control Sample results
NA Standard Addition Results
P ICP Serial Dilution Results
NA Holding Times Summary Sheet
NP ICP Interelement Correction Factors
P ICP Linear Ranges
P Raw Data
P Samples P Calibration Standards P Blanks P Spikes
P Duplicates P ICP QC (ICS and Serial Dilution) P LCS
P Furnace AA P Mercury Analysis NA Cyanide Analysis
NA Percent Solids Calculations - Solids Only
P Sample Prep/Digestion Logs (Form XIII)
P Analysis Run Log (Form XIV)
P Chain-of-Custody
P Sample Description
P Case Narrative
P Method References
KEY:
P = Provided in original data package, as required by the SOW
R = Provided as Resubmission
NP = Not provided in original data package or as resubmission
NR = Not required under the SOW
NA = Not applicable to this data package or analysis
102970m Inorganic - 4
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
I. DELIVERABLES
All deliverables were present.
Yes No X
Comments: A Form 11 was not provided. No action is required.
n. HOLDING TIMES AND PRESERVATION CRITERIA
All holding times and preservation criteria were met.
Yes X No
Comments: All samples were analyzed within required holding times. No shipping or receiving
probJems were noted. Chain-of-custody, summary forms, and raw data were
evaluated.
m. INSTRUMENT CALIBRATIONS: STANDARDS AND BLANKS
Initial instrument calibrations were performed according to method requirements.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The instruments were calibrated daily and each time an analysis run was performed.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The instruments were calibrated using one blank and the appropriate number of standards.
Yes X No
Comments: The calibration correlation coefficients were greater than 0.995.
102970m Inorganic - 5.
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
IV. FORM 1 - SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS
Sample analyses were entered correctly on Form Is.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
V. FORM 2A - INITIAL AND CONTINUING CALIBRATION VERIFICATION
The initial and continuing calibration verification standards (ICV and CCV, respectively) met
method requirements.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
i
The calibration verification results were within 90-110% recovery for metals, 85-115% for cyanide,
and 80-120% for mercury.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The continuing calibration standards were run at 10% frequency.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
VL FORM 2B - CRDL STANDARD FOR ICP ANB AA
ICP Analysis: Standards (CRI) at two times the CRDL or the IDL (whichever were greater) were
analyzed at the beginning and the end of each sample run, or at a minimum of twice per eight hours,
whichever was more frequent.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
102970m Inorganic - 6
I
-------
uos
URS Operating Services. Inc. Data Validation Report
GFAA Analysis: Standards (CRA) at two times CRDL were analyzed at the beginning of each
sample run.
Yes. No NA X
Comments: The laboratory did not perform GFAA analyses.
The CRI and/or the CRA were analyzed after the 1CV.
Yes No NA X
Comments: None.
YD. FORM 3 - BLANKS
The initial and continuing calibration blanks (ICB and CCB, respectively) met method requirements.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The continuing calibration blanks were run at 10% frequency.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
\
A laboratory/preparation blank was run at the frequency of one per twenty samples, or per sample
delivery group (whichever is more frequent), and for each matrix analyzed.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
All analyzed blanks were free of contamination.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
102970m Inorganic - 7
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
VIH. FORM 4 - ICP INTERFERENCE CHECK SAMPLE
The ICP interference check sample (ICS) was run twice per eight hour shift and/or at the beginning
and end of each sample set analysis sequence (whichever is more frequent).
Yes X No
Comments: None.
Percent recovery of the analytes in solution ICSAB were within the range of 80-120%.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
Sample results for aluminum, calcium, iron, and magnesium were less than the ICSA values.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
IX. FORM 5A - MATRIX SPIKE SAMPLE ANALYSIS
A matrix spike sample was analyzed with every twenty or fewer samples of a similar matrix, or one
per sample delivery group (whichever is more frequent).
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The percent recoveries (%R) were calculated correctly.
% Recovery = ^SSR ~ SF?) X 100 SSR = spiked sample result
SA SR = sample result
SA = spike added
Yes X No
Comments: None.
102970m Inorganic - 8
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
Spike recoveries were within 75-125% (an exception is granted where the sample concentration is
four times the spike concentration).
Yes No X
Comments: The spike recoveries for selenium (129.0%) and mercury (151.8%) exceeded the
75-125% criteria. However, no qualification was necessary because detected
results for these elements were not reported in the samples.
X. FORM 5B - POST DIGEST SPIKE RECOVERY
A post-digest spike was performed for those elements that did not meet the specified criteria (i.e.,
pre-digestion/pre-distillation spike recovery falls outside of control limits and sample result is less
than four times the spike amount added, exception: Ag, Hg).
Yes X No NA
Comments: The post digest spike recovery for selenium was within QC limits and a post digest
spike was not required for mercury. Results are not qualified based on post digest
spike data.
XI. FORM 6 - DUPLICATE SAMPLE ANALYSIS
Duplicate sample analysis was performed with every twenty or fewer samples of a similar matrix,
or one per sample delivery group (whichever is more frequent).
Yes X No
Comments: None.
The RPDs were calculated correctly.
Yes X No
Comments: None.
For sample concentrations greater than five times the CRDL, RPDs were within ฑ20% (limits of
ฑ35% apply for soil/sediments/tailings samples).
Yes X No
Comments: None.
102970m Inorganic-9
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. _ Data Validation Report
For sample concentrations less than five times the CRDL, duplicate analysis results were within the
control window of ฑ CRDL (two times CRDL for soils).
Yes X No _
Comments: None.
XH. GFAAQC
Duplicate injections were performed on all GFAA samples and the RSD was within ฑ 20%.
Yes _ No _ NA X
Comments: None.
Analytical spikes were performed on all GFAA samples and the percent recovery was 85 - 1 15%.
Yes _ No _ NA X
Comments: None.
MSAs were analyzed when required and the correlation coefficient was > 0.995.
Yes _ No _ NA X
Comments: None.
FORM 7 - LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE
The laboratory control sample (LCS) was prepared and analyzed with every twenty or fewer samples
of a similar matrix, or one per sample delivery group (whichever is more frequent).
Yes X No _
Comments: None.
All results were within control limits.
Yes X No
Comments: All LCS recoveries were within the QC limits of 80-120%.
t
102970m Inorganic-10
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report
XIV. FORM 8 - STANDARD ADDITION RESULTS
Results from graphite furnace standard additions were entered on Form VIII as directed in the SOW.
Yes No NA X
Comments: None.
XV. FORM 9 - ICP QC
A serial dilution was performed for ICP analysis with every twenty or fewer samples of a similar
matrix, or one per sample delivery group, whichever is more frequent.
, Yes X No
Comments: None.
The serial dilution was without interference problems as defined by the method.
Yes X No
Comments: All %Ds were less than 10% or the original sample result was less than 50 times the
IDL.
XVI. FORM 10 - QUARTERLY INSTRUMENT DETECTION LIMITS (DDL)
IDLs were provided for all elements on the target analyte list.
Yes X No
Comments: A Form 10 was provided and the IDLs were the same as the CRDL with the
exception of chromium.
XVn. FORM 11 - INTERELEMENT CORRECTION FACTORS FOR ICP
Interelement corrections for ICP were reported.
Yes No X ' NA
Comments: Interelement correction factors Form 11 was not provided for the ICP metals. No
action was taken.
102970m Inorganic -11
-------
uos
URS Operating Services, Inc. Data Validation Report H
XVIII. FORM 12 - ICP LINEAR RANGES
ICP linear ranges were reported. f|
Yes X No NA . ra
Comments: A Form 12 was provided, however, the linear ranges were determined more than 3
months prior to sample analysis. m
XIX. LINEAR RANGE VERIFICATION ANALYSIS H
Linear Range Verification Analysis (LRA) was performed and results were within control limits of
5% of the true value. ,_,
Yes No NA X .
Comments: None.
XX. FORM 13 - PREPARATION LOG H
Information on the preparation of samples for analysis was reported on Form XIII.
Yes X No g
Comments: None. jj|
XXI. FORM 14 - ANALYSIS RUN LOG ID
A Form XIV with the required information was filled out for each analysis run in the data package.
Yes X No |j
Comments: None. ffi
XXQ. Additional Comments or Problems/Resolutions Not Addressed Above si
Yes X No
Comments: The sample log-in sheet that associates the EPA sample numbers with the assigned H
laboratory numbers was not consistent with other portions of the data package. The
laboratory was contacted and after a review of the data, a revised sample log-in
sheet was provided. N
102970m Inorganic-12
-------
I
I
U.S. EPA - CLP
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
EPA SAMPLE NO.
lab Name: SVL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
Lab Code: SILVER Case No.:
|atrix (soil/water): WATER
r" vel (low/med): LOW
Solids: 0.0
Contract:
E309034
SAS No.:
SDG No.: 102970
Lab Sample ID: E309034
Date Received: 08/30/02
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight): MG/L
CAS No.
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
7440-43-9
7440-47-3
7439-92-1
7439-97-6
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
Analyte
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
i
i
Concentration | C
i
0.028!
0.85!
0.29!
0.00601U
17.5!
0.00020SU
0.010JU
0.0050JU
i
i
i
i
i .
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
" i
Q
N
N
M
P
P
P
P
P
CV
P
P
lor Before:
olor After:
COLORLESS
COLORLESS
Clarity Before: CLEAR_
Clarity After: CLEAR_
Texture:
Artifacts:
imments:
CLIENT_ID:_SOSTKPLAOO
UNITS: MG/L EXTRACT
FORM I - IN
ILH02.1
-------
U.S. EPA - CLP
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
EPA SAMPLE NO,
Lab Name: SVL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
Lab Code: SILVER Case No.:
Matrix (soil/water): WATER
Level (low/med): LOW
% Solids: 0.0
Contract: _
SAS No.
E309035
SDG Nocg 102970
Lab Sample IDs E309035
Date Received: 08/30/02
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight): MG/L
CAS No.
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
7440-43-9
7440-47-3
7439-92-1
7439-97-6
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
i
Analyte
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
i
i
Concentration ' C
i
i _
0.010,'U
1.4!
0.13!
0.00601U
0.77!
0.00020IU
0.010JU
0.0050IU
1 -
1
1
1
1 -
1
1
1 -
1
1
1
1 -
1
[
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Q
N
N
'
M
P
P
P
P
P
CV
P
P
lolor Beforei COLORLESS
lolor After: COLORLESS
lomments:
CLIENT_ID:_SOSTKPLBOO
UNITS: MG/L EXTRACT
Clarity Before? CLEAR_
Clarity After: CLEAR_
Texturฎ 8
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN
ILM02.1
-------
uos
URS Operating Services. Inc. Data Validation Report
INORGANIC DATA QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW
Region VHI
DATA QUALIFIER DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of Data Validation, the following code letters and associated definitions are provided for
use by the data validator to summarize the data quality. Use of additional qualifiers should be carefully
considered. Definitions for all qualifiers used should be provided with each report.
GENERAL QUALIFIERS for use with both INORGANIC and ORGANIC DATA
R - Reported value is "rejected." Resampling or reanalysis may be necessary to verify the
presence or absence of the compound.
J - The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity because the Quality Control
criteria were not met.
t
U J - The reported amount is estimated because Quality Control criteria were not met. Element
or compound was not detected.
N J - The analysis indicates the presence of an analyte that has been "tentatively identified" and
the associated numerical value represents its approximate concentration.
N - The analysis indicates the presence of an analyte for which there is presumptive evidence
to make a tentative identification.
U - The material was analyzed for, but was not-detected above the level of the associated
value. The associated value is either the sample quantitation limit or the sample detection
limit.
102970m Inorganic-13
-------
DOS
URS Operating Services, Inc.
Data Validation Report
ACRONYMS
AA Atomic Absorption
Ag Silver
CCB Continuing Calibration Blank
CCV Continuing Calibration Verification
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CLP Contract Laboratory Program
CRA CRDL standard required for AA
CRDL Contract Required Detection Limit
CRI CRDL standard required for ICP
CV Cold Vapor
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
GFAA Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption
Hg Mercury
ICB Initial Calibration Blank
ICP Inductively Coupled Plasma
ICS Interference Check Sample
ICSA Interference Check Sample (Solution A)
ICSAB Interference Check Sample (Solution AB)
ICV Initial Calibration Verification
IDL Instrument Detection Limit
LCS Laboratory Control Sample
LRA Linear Range Verification Analysis
MSA Method of Standard Additions
PDS Post Digestion Spike
QC Quality Control
RPD Relative Percent Difference
RPM Regional Project Manager
RSD Percent Relative Standard Deviation
SA Spike Added
SAS Special Analytical Services
SDG Sample Delivery Group
SOW Statement of Work
SR Sample Result
SSR Spiked Sample Result
TPO Technical Project Officer
102970m
Inorganic-14
-------
I
I
U.S. EPA - CLP
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
EPA SAMPLE NO.
lab Name: SVL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
Lab Code: SILVER Case No.:
patrix (soil/water): WATER
tevel (low/med): LOW
Solids: 0.0
Contract:
E309036
SAS No.:
SDG No.: 102970
Lab Sample ID: E309036
Date Received: 08/30/02
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight): MG/L
CAS No.
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
7440-43-9
7440-47-3
7439-92-1
7439-97-6
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
Analyte
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
'
i
Concentration | C
i
i
0.47!
0.63!
0.0020JU
0.066!
0.00501U
0.00020,'U
O.OlOiU
0.0050IU
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
Q
N
N
.
M
P
P
P
P
P
CV
P
P
'
olor Before:
]olor After:
COLORLESS
COLORLESS
Clarity Before: CLEAR_
Clarity After: CLEAR_
Texture:
Artifacts:
omments:
CLIENT_ID:_SOSTKPLAO 7
UNITS: MG/L EXTRACT
FORM I - IN
ILM02.1
-------
U.S. EPA - CLP
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
\0
EPA SAMPLE NO,
Lab Name: SVL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
Lab Code: SILVER Case No.:
Matrix (soil/water): WATER
Level (low/med): LOW
% Solids: 0.0
Contracti
SAS No
E309037
SDG NO..S 102970
Lab Sample ID: E309037
Date Received: 08/30/02
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight): MG/L
CAS No.
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
7440-43-9
7440-47-3
7439-92-1
7439-97-6
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
Analyte
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Concentration j C
i
i
0.027!
1.0!
0.0020JU
0.087!
0.0401
0.00020IU
0.010,'U
0.0050JU
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
Q
w
w
M
P
P
P
P
P
CV
P
P
]olor Before: COLORLESS
:olor After: COLORLESS
Comments:
CLIENT_ID:_SOSTKPLA10
UNITS: MG/L EXTRACT
Clarity Befores CLEAR
Clarity Afters CLEAR
Texture s
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN
ILM02
-------
I
I
U.S. EPA - CLP
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
1
EPA SAMPLE NO.
lab Name: SVL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
Lab Code: SILVER Case No.:
latrix (soil/water): WATER
(evel (low/med): LOW
Solids: 0.0
Contract:
E309038
SAS No.:
SDG No.: 102970
Lab Sample ID: E309038
Date Received: 08/30/02
I
Concentration Units (ug/L or ing/kg dry weight) : MG/L
CAS No.
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
7440-43-9
7440-47-3
7439-92-1
7439-97-6
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
Analyte
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Concentration ] C
i
0.010IU
1.3!
0.0020IU
0.087!
0.11!
0.00020IU
0.0101U
0.0050SU
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
' Q
N
N
M
P
P
P
P
P
CV
P
P
'olor Before: COLORLESS
Jolor After: COLORLESS
pomments:
CLIENT_ID:_SOSTKPLA15
UNITS: MG/L EXTRACT
Clarity Before: CLEAR__
Clarity After: CLEAR_
Texture:
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN
ILM02.1
i/r
-------
UoS. EPA - CLP
EPA SAMPLE NO.
INORGANIC ANALYSES DATA SHEET
Lab Name: SVL_ANALYTICAL_INC.
Lab Code: SILVER Case No.:
Matrix (soil/water): WATER
Level (low/med): LOW
% Solids: 0.0
Contract:
E309039
SAS No,,?
SDG No.S 102970
Lab Sample ID? E309039
Date Receiveds 08/30/02
Concentration Units (ug/L or mg/kg dry weight)s MG/L
CAS No.
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
7440-43-9
7440-47-3
7439-92-1
7439-97-6
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
~
t
Analyte
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
i
Concentration ' C
i
i
0.010IU
1.5!
0.0020IU
0.071!
0.18!
0.00020IU
0.010 JU
0.00501U
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
t
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i .
i
i
i
i
i
Q
N
N
,
M
P
P
P
P
P
CV
P
P
'
lolor Before:
!olor After:
COLORLESS
COLORLESS
Clarity Before: CLEAR_
Clarity After: CLEAR,
Texturei
Artifacts?
lomments:
CLIENT_ID:_SOSTKPLA20
UNITS: MG/L EXTRACT
FORM I - IN
ILM02.1
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET -- HOLDING TIMES
BATCH:
List all analytes which do not meet holding time criteria
TECHLAW
Sample ID
ฃ Zoioz y
^oZS
ซ?03ฃ
*>0cP
^^J^
voS^
Matrix
L^U
1
y
List Pre-
servative
(A, B. C)
~//Q-
J
,u
Date
Collected
f'/M/ai-
/ '
^
Metals
Analysis
Date/s
^/rtlto
/' 1
,/
*Hg CVAA
Analysis
Date
A' In lor
1' i
\
\
V
*CN Analysis
Date
Analysis
Date/s
No. of Days
Past Holding
Time
^
/
Action
ss*^7-
^
<-^__^
j
COMMENTS
Actions:
1. If holding times are exceeded, all sample results are estimated (J)/(UJ).
2. If holding times are grossly exceeded (ป=2*holding time), detected results are
estimated (J), and non-detected results are rejected (R).
Preservatives:
A. Preserved W/HN03 and cooled to 4ฐC
B. Cooled to 4ฐC
C. No Preservative
Validated by:
. , ~7
Date:
Review By:
Date:
ANALYTE
HOLDING TIME
PRESERVATIVE
Metals
Mercury
Cyanide
180 days
28 days
14 days
AQUEOUS
pH < 2 W/HN03, 4 Deg. C
pH < 2 W/HN03, 4 Deg. C
pH>12w/NaOH, 4 Deg. C
SOIL
4 Deg. C
4 Deg. C
4 Deg. C
Holding Time = Analysis Date - Collection Date
VERIFY ANALYSIS DATES ON REPORT MATCH RAW DATA.
inorg98.xls
-------
IIA. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET -- ICP CALIBRATIONS
TECHLAW
BATCH:
List all ICP analytes that did not meet the percent recovery criteria for initial calibration verification (ICV) and
continuing calibration verification (CCV).
Analyte
/~.~X^
ICV
CCV
^ /7^
TRUE
1
> r
Found
%R
Action
i
Samples Affected
CCV run after CRI, every 10 samples and at end of sequences? (CLP only) CYes^ No
Was a CRDL check sample (CRI) analyzed at the beginning and at the end of each sample run (CLP only)? /'Yesr) No
COMMENTS V """
Actions:
ICV/CCV Actions:
Detected results
Non-detected Results
PERCENT RECOVERY
<75% 75-89% 90-110% 111-125% >125%
R J V J R
R UJ V V V
1. If the instrument was not calibrated daily and each time the instrument was set up, qualify the data as rejected (R).
Inorg98.xls
I
-------
IIC. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET -- Hg CALIBRATIONS
BATCH: lO
TECHLAW
List all mercury results that did not meet the percent recovery criteria for the ICV and/or CCV standard.
ICV
CCV
r_,
TRUE
L^T---
Found
Vls.d-
%R
-
Action
Samples Affected
. Were the correct number of standards and blanks used to calibrate the instrument? /Ves/ No
2. Is the initial calibration correlation coefficient > 0.995? (Yej) No O c, r ^
If no, list affected analytes and samples:
3. Was a CRDL check sample (CRA) analyzed at the beginning of each sample run? (CLP only) /Cep No
4. CCV run after CRA, every ten samples and at end of sequence? /Ves-^ No
COMMENTS ^ ^
Actions:
Detected results
Non-detected Results
PERCENT RECOVERY
<65% 65-79% 60-120% 121-135% >135%
R J V J R
R UJ V V V
1. If four standards and a blank were not used for initial calibration, or the instrument was not calibrated daily and each time the
instrument was set up, qualify the data as rejected (R).
2. If the initial calibration correlation coefficient was less than 0.995, qualify sample results as estimated (J)/(UJ).
Inorg98.xls
-------
MATRIX:
III. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - BLANKS
BATCH: I O
TECHLAW
List the highest positive AND negative blank result >=|DL| below. Use one worksheet for soil matrix and another for water matrix.
Analyte
/vA> ^ih
f' ' 9 /
tฃ^
ICB
CCB
PB/MB
9
IDL
Blank Cone.
5 * Bl. Cone.
Action
Samples Affected
NOTE: Verify that the absolute value of any analyte concentration in the PB or MB is < CRDL *
Verify
One prep blank per matrix
One prep blank per batch
ICB analyzed immediately after ICV
CCB analyzed after each CCV.
:ield/equipment/rinsate blanks analyzed? If so, include above if applicable to project.
COMMENTS
Actions:
1. If |Blank| < IDL, no action is taken.
2. If Blank > = IDL, then all sample results > = IDL and < 5*Blank are non-detected (U).
3. If Blank = < -IDL, all sample results > = IDL and < 5* |Blank| are estimated (J).
4. If Blank = < -IDL then all non-detected results are estimated (UJ).
* If blank concentration > CRDL, all detected sample results < 5 'Blanks are rejected (R).
* If blank concentration > CRDL, all detected sample results > 5 "Blanks and < 10* Blank are estimated (J).
Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
IVA. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET -- ICP INTERFERENCE CHECK SAMPLE
BATCH: \O3fr~) Q
NOTE: The sample results can be accepted without qualification, if the sample concentrations of Al, Ca, Fe and Mg are less than or
equal to the concentration found in the ICSA solution.
Examine the sample results in ug/L and list any Al, Ca, Fe or Mg results that are greater than the ICSA values.
Sample ID
li
(//
t~~^
Analyte
,
^^
Sample Result
ICS Value
Comments
i
List any analytes in the ICS AB solution that did not meet the criteria of 80-120% R.
Analyte
%R
|
4^
v ^
~L^:
Action
Samples Affected
CLP Protocol Only
Were Interference Check/Samples run at the beginning and end of each sample analysis run, or a minimum of twice per 8-hour shift (whichever
is more frequent)? (Yes / No
COMMENTS ^-/
Actions:
Detected results
Non-detected results
PERCENT RECOVERY
<50% 50-79% 80-120% >120%
R J V J
R UJ V V
Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
V. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET -- PRE-DIGESTION MATRIX SPIKE
MATRIX:
BATCH: I n a
List all parameters that do not meet the percent recovery criteria. Note: The pre-digestion spike recovery criteria are not evaluated for Ca, Vlg, K,
Na, Al and Fe for soil samples, and Ca, Mg, K and Na for water samples.
If the sample result exceeds the spike added by a factor of 4 or more, no action is taken.
Sample ID
ฃ3o5aws
Analyte
1+1
sl
Spiked
Sample
Result
/5;S
3.5-?,^
Sample
Results
*v^
,-JO
Spike Added
/'. 0
^&0
%R
i5l.fr
O9. 0
Action
~T~
J
Samples Affected
i U J . --cc^
I \j U ' V **.s ~~ ~^L
^^^^-^^ _^~~ ~~~"'
-^^-
A^ *? fr ?-v ^^ JJ-, ^1^
3. Was a matrix spike prepared for each different sample matrix? ^Yes^i No \^/
COMMENTS
I
1. If any analyte does not meet the % R criteria, qualify all associated samples using the following criteria:
Actions:
Detected results
Non-detected Results
PERCENT
< 30% 30-74%
J J
R UJ
Note
If analyte concentrations in the sample is greater than 4 times the amount spiked, then limits do not apply.
Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
MATRIX:
IX. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET -- ICP SERIAL DILUTION ANALYSIS
BATCH: /
O
Serial dilution criteria only applies if the original sample result is at least 50* IDL and %D > 10%.
Analyte
C-r.
IDL
z^~ S)
^^-
* "
50'IDL
\ฃsj
^-
Sample
Results
Serial Dilution
Result
%D
Action
Samples Affected
INDUCTIVELY COUPLED PLASMA SERIAL DILUTION ANALYSIS:
Serial dilutions were performed for each matrix and re^uKs of the diluted sample analysis agreed within
ten percent of the original undiluted analysis. f^es/ No
Serial dilutions were not performed for the followinejo/
COMMENTS
Actions:
Estimate (J) detected results if %D is > 10%.
NOTES
If results from diluted samples are higher than concentrated sample, matrix interference should be suspected
and sample results may be biased low.
.Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
X. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET -- SAMPLE RESULT VERIFICATION
BATCH: lo
1. Describe any raw data anomalies (i.e., baseline shifts, negative absorbances, transcription or calculation errors, legibility, etc.
2. List results that fall outside the linear range of the ICP instrument or the calibrated range of the AA or Cyanide instrument, and
were not reanalyzed.
3. Were ICP linear ranges obtained withie
.and preceding, the sample analyses?
No
NA
4. Were ICP interelement corrections obtained wiUuB-43-iiiLinlJiL uf, and preceding, the sample analyses?
No
NA
. Were instrument detection limits present, found to be less tharj
preceding, the sample analyses? Yes f No
ie CRDL, and obtained within 3 months of, and
NA
i. Were all sample results reported down to the IDL if running CLP protocol?
. Were all sample results reported down to MDL if running SW-846 methods?
Yes
NA
3. Were sample weights, volumes, percent solids, and dilutions used correctly when reporting the results?
Yes
No
COMMENTS
i 4***sTT
r. A. ^ .
Inorg98.xls
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
VI. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET - LABORATORY DUPLICATES
MATRIX: 1-e.^^L^^-^ BATCH: ) ft 2-5 ~?
TECHLAW
List all parameters that do not meet RPD or CRDL criteria.
Sample ID
Analyte
Sample
Result
Dup. Results
RPD
Difference3
Action
Samples Affected
t-H-~-*~s
COMMENTS
Actions:
1. AQUEOUS
If both sample values > 5"CRDL, estimate (J/UJ) all sample results of the same matrix if the RPD is > 20%.
If either sample value < 5'CRDL, and the difference between the duplicate and the original is > CRDL, estimate (J)/(UJ) all sample results of the same
2. SOLID
If both sample value > 5*CRDL, estimate (J/UJ) all sample results of the same matrix if the RPD is > 35%.
If either sample value < 5*CRDL, and the difference between the duplicate and the original is > 2*CRDL, estimate (J)/(UJ) all sample results of the
Difference = (Sample result - Duplicate sample result]
Include outliers for field duplicates (if applicable)
Note
A duplicate sample must be prepared for each sample matrix analyzed or per batch, whichever is more frequent.
Inorg98.xls
-------
TECHLAW
VII. INORGANIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEET -- LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLES
MATRIX:
BATCH:
List all parameters that do not meet the percent recovery criteria.
LCSID
f ^
Analyte
,U_ ,
True Value
x99JeX^
Found Value
%R
Action
Samples Atfected
ป
Note:
LCS with the same matrix as samples must be prepared for each SDG.
COMMENTS
Actions:
Exception: Antimony and silver have no control limits. An aqueous LCS is not required for CN and mercury.
1. AQUEOUS
Detected results
Non-detected results
2. SOLID LCS
Recoveries stipulated by EMSL
Detected results
Non-detected results
PERCENT RECOVERY
<50% 50-79% 80-120%
R J V
R UJ V
BELOW WITHIN
CONTROL CONTROL
LIMITS . LIMITS
J V
UJ V
>120%
J
V
ABOVE
CONTROL
LIMITS
J
V
Inorg98.xls
-------
APPENDIX C
XRF Results
-------
TABLE 1A
Site Name
SPECTRACE 9000 XRF DATA (PPM)
ID DATE TIME
S0041FC1S1 8/28/2002
S0041FC1S2 8/28/2002
SOOFCCM1S2 8/28/2002
SOOFCCM2S1 8/28/2002
S01063W1Z1 8/28/2002
S04002W1Z1 8/29/2002
S04002W 1 Zl B 8/29/2002
S04002W1Z1D8/29/2002
S04003E1Z1 8/29/2002
S0400HT1S2 8/23/2002
S0400HT4Z01 8/23/2002
S0400HT4Z02 8/25/2002
S0400HT4Z03 8/25/2002
S0400HT4Z05 8/25/2002
S0400HT4Z06 8/25/2002
S0400HT4Z07 8/25/2002
S0400HT4Z08 8/25/2002
S0400HT4Z09 8/25/2002
S0400HT4Z10 8/25/2002
S0400HT4Z11 8/25/2002
S0400HT4ZI2 8/25/2002
S0400SP1Z1 8/28/2002
S0401SP1S1 8/28/2002
S0401SP1S1B 8/28/2002
S0401SP1Z1 8/28/2002
S0407IH1A1 8/25/2002
S0407IH1Z1 8/25/2002
S0407IH1Z1B 8/25/2002
S0700FG1A13 8/25/2002
S0700FG1A3 8/25/2002
S0700FG1A6 8/25/2002
S0700FG1Z1 8/25/2002
S0700FG1Z2 8/25/2002
SOFILLA1 8/23/2002
SOFILLA2 8/23/2002
1843
1838
1826
1832
1810
1607
1627
1617
1637
1032
1138
916
905
1002
922
932
949
944
1007
1043
1022
1853
1759
1805
1216
1441
1541
1549
850
840
845
1026
1032
1229
1234
Sb
46 U
46U
46U
390
46U
52 U
52 U
52 U
52 U
1200
86 U
44J
39 U
93 J
43 J
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
47 J
2700
46U
120 J
67 J
56 U
56 U
110J
530
1300
56 U
240
86 U
86 U
As
37 U
37 U
37 U
320 U
37 U
28 U
28 U
47 J
28 U
1200
220
47 U
55 J
73 J
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
37 U
2800
37 U
110J
36 J
45 J
28 U
200
930
2400
51 J
130
34 U
34 U
Ba
410
360
450
350
450
490
57 U
480
520 .
190J
490
430
420
360
410
390
440
440
400
400
360
460
210J
66U
460
370
440
90 U
390
420
250 J
430
340
520
480
Cd
110U
110U
130 J
110U
110U
210 U
210U
210 U
210 U
230 U
230 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
MOU
310J
110U
110U
150 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
180 J
150 U
150 U
230 U
230 U
Ca
15000
50000
28000
16000
20000
8100
1600 U
6900
7600
4500 J
28000
22000
32000
20000
22000
18000
17000
19000
19000
21000
19000
8800
3200 J
2300 U
7200 J
7700
19000
1800 U
27000
12000
3200 J
18000
10000
7700
5300 J
CrHl
540 J
910
670 J
520 J
520 J
780 J
410U
480 J
570 J
440 U
440 U
490 J
590 J
440 J
450 J
390 U
400 J
390 U
710J
390 U
780 J
620 J
410J
310J
700 J
630
600 J
300 J
390 J
320 J '
280 J
550 J
580 J
480 J
440 J
CrLO
730 U
730 U
730 U
730 U
730 U
380 U
380 U
440 J
380 U
570 U
570 U
960 U
960 U
960 U
960 U
960 U
960 U
960 U
960 U
960 U
960 U
730 U
730 U
730 U
730 U
270 U
270 U
270 U
270 U
270 U
270 U
270 U
270 U
570 U
570 U
Co
350 U
350 U
350 U
350 U
350 U
470 U
470 U
470 U
470 U
350 U
350 U
230 U
380 J
320 J
230 U
230 U
230 U
330 J
250 J
230 U
290 J
350 U
620 J
350 U
350 U
260 U
540 J
260 U
260 U
320 J
350 J
260 U
260 U
350 U
350 U
Cu
70 U
70 U
70 U
70 U
70 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
49 U
49 U
54 U
54 U
54 U
54 U
54 U
54 U
54 U
54 U
54 U
54 U
70 U
70 U
70 U
70 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
49 U
49 U
Fe
23000
19000
19000
37000
20000
17000
1600U
16000
15000
43000
18000
19000
17000
19000
21000
13000
14000
16000
17000
19000
17000
15000
70000
I300U
17000
22000
22000
1900U
19000
40000
54000
19000
21000
19000
12000
Pb
88
14J
150
3200
120
55
15U
81
34J
6800
420
110
86
280
290
87
21 U
26 J
31 J
160
120
57
12000
14U
560
120
230
21 U
850
3300
7500
240
1300
28 U
28 U
Mn
350 U
390 J
350 U
2400
580 J
400 J
210 U
420 J
360 J
2700
820 J
440U
470 J
710J
580 J
440U
440U
440 U
440 U
440U
440U
500 J
2600
350 U
760 J
740 U
980 J
740 U
940 J
3600
4800
740 U
2000 J
600 J
480 U
U - The analyte was not detected above the detection limit. The detection limit is reported.
J - The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity between the detection limit and the quantitation limit.
Page 1 of 2
-------
TABLE1A
Site Name
SPECTRACE 9000 XRF DATA (PPM)
ID
SOFILLBl
SOFILLB2
SOFILLB2D
SOFDJjCl
SOSTGARA1
DATE
8/25/2002
8/25/2002
8/25/2002
8/25/2002
8/23/2002
SOSTGARA1D 8/23/2002
SOSTOARA2
SOSTKPLA1
SOSTKPLB1
S400HT4Z4
8/23/2002
8/28/2002
8/25/2002
9/20/2002
TIME
956
1001
1007
916
1107
1117
1128
1858
901
1521
Sb
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
86 U
86 U
86 U
910
88 J
55 J
As
58 J
28 U
28 U
28 U
34 U
34 U
34 U
890
130
35 U
Ba
520
440
620
570
310
360
300
320
450
450
Cd
150 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
230 U
230 U
230 U
110U
150 U
180 U
Ca
22000
18000
17000
38000
7200 J
7500
6900 J
8200
14000
20000
CrHI
640
430 J
360 J
290 J
680 J
460 J
790 J
360 J
420 J
700 J
CrLO
270 U
590 J
270 U
330 J
570 U
570 U
570 U
730 U
270 U
1100U
Co
400 J
260 U
260 U
460 J
350 U
350 U
350 U
540 J
300 J
540 U
Cu
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
49 U
49 U
49 U
70 U
38 U
67 U
Fe
22000
16000
13000
17000
20000
20000
20000
37000
19000
13000
Pb
21 U
21 U
21 U
21 U
28 U
28 U
28 U
4800
400
110
Mn
740 U
740 U
740 U
740 U
540 J
690 J
590 J
2500
740 U
660 U
U - The analyte was not detected above the detection limit. The detection limit is reported.
J - The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity between the detection limit and the quantitation limit.
Page 2 of 2
-------
TABLE IB
Site Name
SPECTRACE 9000 XRF DATA (PPM)
ID
S0041PC1S1
S0041FC1S2
SOOFCCM1S2
SOOFCCM2S1
S01063W1Z1
S04002W1Z1
S04002W1Z1B
S04002WIZ1D
S04003E1Z1
S0400HTIS2
S0400HT4Z01
S0400HT4Z02
S0400HT4Z03
S0400HT4Z05
S0400HT4Z06
S0400HT4Z07
S0400HT4Z08
S0400HT4Z09
S0400HT4Z10
S0400HT4Z1 1
S0400HT4Z12
S0400SP1Z1
S0401SP1S1
S0401SP1S1B
S0401SP1Z1
S04071H1A1
S0407IH1Z1
S0407IH1Z1B
S0700FG1A13
S0700P01A3
S0700FG1A6
S0700FG1ZI
S0700PG1Z2
SOFILLA1
SOFILLA2
Hg
28 U
28 U
28 U
28 U
28 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
. 45 U
45 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
28 U
28 U
28 U
28 U
31 U
31 U
31 U
31 U
31 U
31 U
31 U
31 U
45 U
45 U
Mo
6.3 U
6.3 U
6.3 U
6.3 U
6.3 U
6.4 U
6.4 U
6.4 U
6.4 U
9.7 U
9.7 U
5.6 U
5.6 U
5.6 U
5.6 U
5.6 U
5.6 U
5.6 U
5.6 U
5.6 U
5.6 U
6.3 U
6.3 U
6.3 U
6.3 U
4.3 U
4.3 U
4.3 U
4.3 U
4.3 U
4.3 U
4.3 U
4.3 U
9.7 U
9.7.U
Ni
130 U
130U
130 U
130 U
130 U
120 U
120 U
120 U
!20U
97 U
97 U
72 U
72 U
72 U
72 U
72 U
72 U
72 U
72 U
72 U
72 U
130 U
130 U
130 U
130 U
97 U
97 U
97 U
97 U
97 U
97 U
97 U
97 U
97U
97 U
K
27000
28000
28000
22000
21000
25000
2800 U
21000
23000
24000
26000
25000
23000
25000
24000
21000
27000
23000
23000
23000
23000
22000
35000
3400 U
20000
20000
19000
3300 U
23000
32000
33000
24000
23000
22000
26000
Rb
120
110
91
88
90
92
23 U
75 J
82
91
97
110
83
81
100
91
120
95
93
110
95
93
77
21 U
76
98
94
18U
91
100
74
110
83
92
87
Se
8.1 U
8.1 U
8.1 U
8.1 U
8.1 U
27 U
27 U
27 U
27 U
23 U
23 U
25U
25U
25U
25U
25U
25 U
25 U
25 U
25 U
25U
8.1 U
8.1 U
8.1 U
8.1 U
23 U
23 U
23 U
23 U
23 U
23 U
23 U
23 U
23U
23 U .
Ag
40U
68 J
59 J
130 J
67 J
64U
64U
64 U
64 U
180 J
64U
89 U
89 U
89 U
89 U
89 U
89 U
89 U
89 U
89 U
89 U
89 J
220
53 J
73 J
90 U
90 U
90 U
-90 U
90 U
170 J
90 U .
90 U
64U
64U
Sr
79
50 J
180
55 J
170
200
25U
190
260
68
130
71 J
78 J
110
110
120
110
120
79J
97
82 J
220
79
18U
220
160
220
36 U
150
110J
58 J
84 J
81J
240
250
Th
11U
11 J
1IU
11U
14J
11 J
8.4 U
8.4 U
8.4 U
12J
10J
8.4 U
8.4 U
8.4 U
8.4 U
8.4 U
8.4 U
11 J
in
9.6 J
8.4 U
11U
11U
11U
15J
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
5.8 J
II '
Sn
130 U
130 U
130 U
130 U
130 U
100 U
100U
100U
100 V
90 U
90 U
81 U
8.1 U
81 U
81 U
81 U
81 U
81 U
81 U
81 U
81 U
130 U
130 U
130 U
130 U
65 U
65 U
65 U
65 U
65 U
65 U
65 U
65 U
90 U
90 U
Ti
2400 J
2400 J
3400
1700 J
2500 J
2000 J
1300U
1900J
1800 1
1400J
2100 J
1500J
1700 J
1900 J
1700 J
1200 J
1300J
1500J
1100U
1900J
1400 J
1300J
1500J
860 U
1700 J
2600 J
2700 J
980 U
1200 J
1600J
1900 J
1700J
1500 J
2500 J
2500 J
U
15J
19J
I2U
12'U
12U
10U
10U
10U
10 U
I1U
11U
12J
12J
20 J
17J
11 U
11U
11 U
14]
11 U
11U
12U
15J
12U
I2U
15J
7.8 U
7.8 U
7.8 U
12J
10J
12J
18J
11U
11U
Zn
320
150
340
4900
270
I20J
57 U
90 J
300
3100
6000
230 J
83 J
4100
220 J
290
81 U
84 J
97]
450
120 J
130
6000
37 U
2000
890
560
54 U
2200
4000
4400
1100
4400
86 U
86 U
Zr
190
180
240
200
240
220
21 U
230
200
150
210
210
200
210
220
150
200
170
190
200
210
210
170
20 J
180
330
300.
18U
150
210
150
200
190
220
190
U - The analyte was not detected above the detection limit, the detection limit is reported.
J - The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity between the detection limit and the quantitation limit.
Page 1 of 2
-------
TABLE IB
Site Name
SPECTRACE 9000 XRF DATA (PPM)
ID
SOFILLB1
SOFILLB2
SOFILLB2D
SOFILLC1
SOSTOARA1
SOSTGARA1D
SOSTGARA2
SOSTKPLA1
SOSTKPLB1
S400HT4Z4
Hg
31 U
31 U
31 U
31 U
45 U
45 U
45 U
28 U
31 U
57 U
Mo
4.3 U
4.3 U
4.3 U
4.3 U
9.7 U
9.7 U
9.7 U
6.3 U
4.3 U
9.2 U
Ni
97 U
97 U
97 U
97 U
97 U
97 U
97 U
130 U
97 U
99 U
K
28000
26000
30000
30000
20000
22000
21000
26000
24000
25000
Rb
120
too
100
97
110
100
93
88
93
91
Se
23 U
23 U
23 U
23 U
23 U
23 U
23 U
8.1 U
23 U
28 U
Ag
90 U
90 U
90 U
90 U
82 J
64U
64U
40 U
90 U
120 U
Sr
120 J
93 J
140
62 J
130
140
120
130
120
170
Th
11U
11U
11U
11U
7.7 J
6.3 J
14J
11 U
12J
15 U
Sn
65 U
65 U
65 U
65 U
90 U
90 U
90 U
130 U
65 U
110U
Ti
2600 J
1900J
1500J
2700 J
2700 J
2600 J
2500 J
2100 J
1400 J
1200 J
U
I5J
16J
8J
11 J
11 U
12J
16J
I2U
11 J
15 U
Zn
110J
60 J
54 U
54 U
I10J
92 J
110J
2900
1100
300 J
Zr
240
200
190
250
230
250
240
190
200
140
U - The analyte was not detected above the detection limit, the detection limit is reported.
J - The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity between the detection limit and the quantitation limit.
Page 2 of 2
-------
APPENDIX D
Street Codes for Sample Identification
-------
T-Street_Code
10/28/2002
?*?rt^-:'3>M.$&\^
1ST STREET
2ND AVENUE EAST
2ND AVENUE WEST
3RD AVENUE EAST
3RD AVENUE WEST
3RD STREET
4TH AVENUE EAST
4TH AVENUE WEST
4TH STREET
5TH AVENUE EAST
5TH AVENUE EAST
5TH STREET WEST
6TH AVENUE EAST
7TH STREET
ALDER STREET
ALLEY BETWEEN 4TH & 5TH AVENUE
ALLEY BETWEEN 5TH & 6TH AVENUE
ALLEY BETWEEN ALDER & SPRUCE
ALLEY BETWEEN PINE & SPRUCE
ARIZONA AVENUE
CALIFORNIA AVENUE
CEDAR STREET
CEMETARY ROAD
CITY SHOP
COUNTRY LANE
DIAMOND ROAD
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
EVA HORNING PARK
FAIRGROUNDS
FLAT CREEK ROAD
HIGH SCHOOL
HIGH SCHOOL TRACK
ILLINOIS AVENUE
IRON MOUNTAIN HIGHT
IRON MOUNTAIN ROAD
LITTLE PARK
MAIN STREET WEST
MAPLE STREET
MONTANA AVENUE
MULLAN ROAD EAST
MULLAN ROAD WEST
OLAD MULLAN ROAD
PIKE STREET
RIVER STREET
RIVER STREET NORTH
RIVERBEND ROAD
&!$8ffiiSi$&g
1S
2E
2W
3E
3W
3S
4E
4W
4S
5E
5E
Fl
6E
7S
AL
4A
5A
SA '
PA
AR
CA
CE
CM
SP
CO
Dl
EM
EH
FG
FC
HS
HT
.
H
M
P
MN
VIA
VIT
VIE
MW
M
D
I
N
B
Pagel
-------
T-Street__Code
10/28/2002
'V-.T -. -,.- . " -.:"' ; Street '- -.-* -'; ii:--r./;^i..-i?ostei;
RIVERSIDE ROAD
RIVERSIDE ROAD ALLEY
RIVERSIDE ROAD WEST
RIVERSTREET/JOHNSON LANE OPENSPACE
ROBINS NEST LANE
SHAW GULCH LANE
SLOWAY WEST
SOUTHSIDE ROAD
SPRITIS WALK LANE
SPRUCE STREET
SUNNYSIDE LANE
WESTFIELD PARK
RV
RA
RW
OS
RL
SG
SW
SO
SL
SP
SU
WF
Page 2
-------
APPENDIX E
Bench Scale Stabilization Test Procedure
-------
Superior Waste Rock (ROS)
Bench Scale Stabilization Test Procedure
Assumptions:
1. Excavated moist earth: 90 Ibs/cu.ft
2. Portland cement: 94 Ibs/cu.ft.
Background:
During removal activities, material which visually appeared to be contaminated was placed on
stockpile A. All other material was placed on stockpile B. Samples were collected from both
stockpiles. Samples were 15 point composite samples that were each homogenized before
analysis. Both stockpiles were tested for total metals and TCLP to get more accurate values for
characterization (versus the worst case TCLP samples collected previously). The field
stabilization tests were completed on material from stockpile A only.
Procedure:
START2 collected approximately 10 gallons of soil from stockpile A. The material was
collected from 15 different locations and homogenized to get a representative sample.
Approximately 2 gallons of material was placed in each 5-gallon bucket (5 buckets total). A
sample was collected from the control bucket (this is the stockpile A sample described in the
background section ). Based on assumption (1), 2 gallons of soil weighs 28 Ibs. START2 used
this value to calculate the amount of cement needed. This made the percentage of cement by
weight a little less because it is based on the weight of the soil and not the total weight.
ID
Control
7% cement by weight
10% cement by weight
15% cement by weight
20% cement by weight
Soil Weight
28 Ibs soil
28 Ibs soil
28 Ibs soil
28 Ibs soil
28 Ibs soil
Cement Added
0 Ibs cement
1.96 Ibs cement
2.8 Ibs cement
4.2 Ibs cement
5.6 Ibs cement
Total Weight
28 total Ibs
29.96 total Ibs
30.8 total Ibs
32.2 total Ibs
33.6 total Ibs
Actual % Cement
0%
6.5%
9%
13%
17%
START2 used assumption (2) to determine the volume of cement needed to add to each test
bucket. These were 19, 29,43, and 57 ounces of cement respectively. This was done because a
scale was not available for the test.
START2 added the appropriate amount of cement to each of the 4 buckets, dry mixed the soil
and cement completely and then added water and followed the same mixing procedure. The
mixing procedure used a stainless steel spoon to disperse the cement and/or water into the soil
-------
and then a lid was used to cover the bucket. The bucket was then rolled and flipped until the
material was completely mixed.
Based on laboratory data from the site investigation, the soil in Superior had an average moisture
content of approximately 12%. When completing the treatment test, START2 used 20 ounces of
water to the 7% cement/soil mixture (this seemed like the minimum amount of water required to
mix in with the soil/cement mixture). This calculates to abor* 17% total soil moisture.
I
------- |