Maps or diagram See Figure 1. 7.3 Assumptions underlying design

7.2 Maps or diagram

See Figure 1.

7.3 Assumptions underlying design

This studies assumes that the target population of samples is representative of the Spokane area.

7.4 Relation to objectives and site characteristics

Objectives of the project are supported by the study design.

7.5 Characteristics of existing data

See Section 3.0.

3. Sampling Procedures

8.1 Field measurement and field sampling SOPs

8.1.1 Field Measurements

Not applicable.

8.1.2 Bulk Solid Samples

Sampling equipment will be decontaminated prior to sampling using with Ecology’s Standard Operating Procedures as guidance. See Section 8.4. ³²

8.2 Containers, preservation methods, holding times

Table 7. Containers, sample size, preservation methods, and holding times

8.3 Invasive species evaluation

Not applicable.

8.4 Equipment decontamination

Field staff will clean sampling equipment prior to field collection using Ecology’s SOP Number EAP090, Decontaminating Field Equipment for Sampling Toxics in the Environment (Friese, 2014), as guidance. Sampling equipment will be scrubbed with Liquinox and hot tap water, followed by sequential rinses with deionized water, and acetone³³. Equipment will be air dried, and then wrapped in aluminum foil (shiny side out) prior to transport to the field location.

8.5 Sample ID

Ecology will uniquely identify each sample as follows:

• 
  Date and time sample was taken
  
• 
  Field Station Identification
  
  • 
    First 4 digits of street address
    
  • 
    First 2 letters of street name
    
  • 
    Sample type identifier
    
    • 
      C = Composite
      
    • 
      S = Single
      
    • 
      D = Duplicate
      
  • 
    Matrix identifier
    
    • 
      S = Soil
      
    • 
      W = Water
      
    • 
      O = Other
      
  • 
    Lab Sample Number
    
    • 
      Unique identifier for individual sample container
      

8.6 Chain-of-custody

Chain of custody will be maintained for all samples throughout the project. Samples will be stored in a cooler or freezer and shipped immediately to the laboratories or stored in Ecology’s locked chain-of-custody room in Spokane. MEL’s chain of custody form will be used for documentation of shipment to laboratories.

8.7 Field log requirements

Field data will be recorded on a “Field Sheet” (See Appendix A) using permanent, waterproof ink for all entries.

• 
  Name of Project
  
• 
  Street address, with Latitude/Longitude
  
• 
  Date/time of sampling
  
• 
  Field personnel
  
• 
  Map/diagram of sampling locations/photo log
  
• 
  Notes:
  
  • 
    Any changes or deviations from the QAPP
    
  • 
    Environmental conditions
    
  • 
    Field measurement results
    
• 
  Identity of QC samples collected
  
• 
  Unusual circumstances that might affect interpretation of results
  

8.8 Other activities

• 
  Confirm sampling locations and schedule with WSDOT.
  
• 
  Coordinate sample handling and composite procedures with MEL.
  

3. Measurement Methods

9.1 Field procedures table/field analysis table

Not applicable.

9.2 Lab procedures table

Soil samples will be analyzed by MEL using EPA Method 8082. With this method, MEL is capable of analyzing for a select set of congeners and Aroclors. See Table 6.

9.3 Sample preparation method(s)

All soil samples will be prepared prior to shipment to the laboratory as described in the Standard Operating Procedure for Sample Collection and Compositing. (Appendix C).

9.4 Special method requirements

The concentrations of PCBs in the samples are unknown. See Table 8 for expected ranges of concentrations.

9.5 Lab(s) accredited for method(s)

Manchester Environmental Laboratory (MEL) will be used for this project. MEL is accredited by Washington State for Method 8082.

3. Quality Control (QC) Procedures

10.1 Table of field and lab QC required

Table 9. QC samples, types, and frequency

Rinsate blanks are used to indicate if there is bias in the sampling results due to contamination of the sampling equipment. Rinsate blanks will be prepared following the cleaning procedure at the beginning and end of the pre- and post-demolition sampling, for a total number of 4 blanks.

Quality control samples will be in accordance with EPA Methods 8082 and 1668C as well as and MEL AXYS Analytical Services, Ltd. standard operating procedures.

10.2 Corrective action processes

The project manager will work closely with the contract laboratory and MEL staff conducting the data review to examine data that fall outside of QC criteria. The project manager will determine whether data should be re-analyzed, rejected, or used with appropriate qualification.

3. Data Management Procedures

11.1 Data recording/reporting requirements

All field data and observations will be recorded on the Field Sheets. See Appendix A.

11.2 Laboratory data package requirements

AXYS Analytical Services, Ltd. will provide laboratory analytical results in the format that matches Appendix B or the Spokane River Quality Assurance Plan, dated July 23, 2014³⁴.The final data package will be delivered to the Ecology Project Manager and MEL and will include:

• 
  All raw data (EPA Tier 4 deliverables) in a fully bookmarked PDF file
  
• 
  All results in an electronic deliverable (EDD) format compatible with Ecology’s EIM database.
  
• 
  Case narratives, which discuss any problems encountered with the analyses, corrective action taken, changes to the requested analytical method, and a glossary for data qualifiers.
  

Laboratory QC results will also be included in the data package. This will include results for check standards, labeled compounds, laboratory duplicates and blanks. The information will be used to evaluate data quality, determine if the MQOs were met, and act as acceptance criteria for project data.

11.3 Electronic transfer requirements

MEL and AXYS Analytical Services, Ltd. will deliver case narratives in PDF format, and electronic data deliverable (EDD) in an Excel spreadsheet format, to the project manager via email. Data generated by MEL (analyses done in-house) will be delivered to the project manager as an EIM ready EDD.

11.4 Acceptance criteria for existing data

Not applicable. This study will not use existing data.

11.5 EIM/STORET data upload procedures

All laboratory data will be uploaded to Ecology’s EIM database following internal procedures, including a review process.

3. Audits and Reports

12.1 Number, frequency, type, and schedule of audits

MEL and AXYS Analytical Services, Ltd. are routinely audited by the Laboratory Accreditation Unit to maintain its Washington State Accreditation and also participate in EPA QSR audits. No audits are planned specifically for this project.

12.2 Responsible personnel

Not applicable. No audits are planned for this study.

12.3 Frequency and distribution of report

A draft report of the annual sampling results will be completed in August 2017 and a final report will be published by December 2017. See Table 4 for the report schedule. Reports will include, at a minimum, the following:

• A brief description of field and laboratory methods.

• A discussion of data quality.

• Summary tables of contaminant concentrations.

• A discussion of the results, including the

• 
  Scope and extent of PCBs in Spokane soils prior to and following demolition activities
  
• 
  Assessment of current demolition techniques effective for managing PCB-containing materials
  

• Recommendations based on the sampling results.

12.4 Responsibility for reports

The project manager will be the lead responsible for the final report.

3. Data Verification

13.1 Field data verification, requirements, and responsibilities

Field notes will be verified by the project manager, including data generated in the field.

13.2 Lab data verification

Data verification involves examining the data for errors, omissions, and compliance with QC acceptance criteria. MEL’s SOPs for data reduction, review, and reporting will meet the needs of the project. Data packages will be assessed by MEL’s QA Officer using the EPA Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review (EPA, 2014).

13.3 Validation requirements, if necessary

Independent data validation will not be required for this project.

3. Data Quality (Usability) Assessment

14.1 Process for determining whether project objectives have been met

After the project data have been reviewed and verified, the principal investigator/project manager will determine if the data are of sufficient quality to make determinations and decisions for which the study was conducted. The data from the laboratory’s QC procedures will provide information to determine if MQOs have been met. Laboratory and QA staff familiar with assessment of data quality may be consulted. The project final report will discuss data quality and whether the project objectives were met. If limitations in the data are identified, they will be noted.

14.2 Data analysis and presentation methods

A summary of the data will be presented in the final report. Other components to be included in the final report are described in Section 12.3.

14.3 Treatment of non-detects

Laboratory data will be reported down to the method detection limit, with an associated “U” or “UJ” qualifier for non-detected results. When calculating total PCB values (T-PCBs), non-detects will be assigned a value of zero. Summed values in the final report will include only detected congener results that are unqualified and/or that have been qualified “J” (indicating that the analyte was positively identified and the associated numerical value is approximate). Congener values that have been qualified “NJ” (indicating that the analyte has been “tentatively identified” and the associated value represents its approximate concentration) will not be included in T-PCB sums. If a sample is comprised of all non-detected congener results, then the final T-PCB value will be assigned “ND” for not detected. T-PCB values will be qualified “J” if more than 10% of the total result is composed of congener values containing “J” qualifiers.

14.4 Sampling design evaluation

The number and type of samples collected for this study will be sufficient to meet objectives.

14.5 Documentation of assessment

Documentation of assessment will occur in the final report.

3. References

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-03/documents/somnfg.pdf

3. Figures

3. Tables

3. Appendices

Appendix A. Field Sheet