Validated data for SDGs 22-27 of the Camp Edwards impact area groundwater study: Massachusetts Military Reservation, Cape Cod, Massachusetts

208 Pages·1998·13.2 MB·English

VALIDATED DATA FOR
SDGs
22-27
OF THE
CAMP EDWARDS
IMPACT AREA GROUNDWATER
STUDY
MASSACHUSETTS
MILITARY
RESERVATION
CAPE COD, MASSACHUSETTS
Prepared for
NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU
ARLINGTON,
VIRGINIA
Prepared by
OGDEN
ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY
SERVICES
239 Littleton Road, Suite IB
Westford, Massachusetts 01886
March 1998
'
.
m
-!*•*<*
H
m
-,*<a ItJr. J, J> . / i
•
sal %*'** I
.4
HH
?. •
OGOEN
ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGYSERVICES
239 Littleton Road, Suite 1B
Westford,MA01886
508 692 9090
Fax[phone]
March 3, 1998
Mr. Michael Jasinski
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office ofSite Remediation and Restoration
JFK Federal Building (HBT)
Boston, Massachusetts 02203-0001
RE: Camp Edwards Impact Area Groundwater Study
Revised page for Final FSP for Storm Water
Dear Mike:
Enclosed please find three copies ofa page that has been revised for the above-referenced document.
This page was changed in accordance with our discussion concerning the timing ofstorm water sampling
at last Thursday's technical meeting. At this meeting we agreed that it would be possible to open the
sampling "window" beyond 30 minutes from the start ofrunoff. The revised language indicates that
samples will be collected "as soon as possible after the start ofrunoff, and that the samples will be
analyzed "provided that the timing ofsample collection is acceptable to EPA and MADEP."
Please let me know ifyou have any questions regarding this submittal.
—gt Marc Grant/P.E.
- -Senior Environmental Engineer
Cc: LTC Richard Murphy NGB
,
CPT James Boggess, MAARNG
Don Muldoon, MADEP- SERO
Impact Area Review Team (distribution attached)
MIJA8303.DOC
£N
Digitized by the Internet Archive
2013
in
http://archive.org/details/validateddatafor2227unse
Final FSP Storm Water
Legend Basemap Legend
O
ProposedSampleLocations AreaOutsideMMR <i
PhotoLocations £23 waterBodies
/V Roads Ar* MMRBoundary
/V Contours •"' ImpaaArea 175
<V
Roads
FEET
mi F I G U R E
Proposed Sampling Locations at
A.16-2
Indian Trail/Chadwick Road
toeUVtlm/otim/mtrw6K*v*nncmnMJo\iiBiivkxx1LfitKx11gtl6J-*ai
L:\MMR\PLANS\FINAL\STORM\FFSPSTW.DOC 3 Of9 03/03/98
Final FSP Storm Water
sampled during storm events, ifthere is sufficient storm water flow for filling sample containers.
UXO
All sample locations are subject to clearance in order to allow foot traffic and shallow
UXO
excavations for sampling. Locations 1-5 and 7 have already been cleared and have been
excavated to allow placement ofsample containers. Locations 6, 8, 9, and any future locations
UXO
on the hillside east ofSucconsette Pond will require clearance priorto sampling. Sample
MMR
collection will be consistent with SOPs and the Ogden Health and Safety Plan.
Field team members will prepare a sample collection container at each sample location by
placing a stainless steel bucket in a shallow excavation in the path ofthe storm water runoff. A
cover will be placed over the bowl to protect the container from direct collection ofrainfall.
Storm water grab samples will be collected from a major storm event (>1 inch in 24 hours) as
soon as possible after the start ofrunoffflow. When runoffbegins at night, sampling will occur
as soon as possible on the following morning due to restrictions on night operations in the
Impact Area. Potential major storm events will be identified by monitoring daily forecasts from
the U.S. National Weather Service (contact Southern NE Forecast Center in Taunton MA, or by
Internet at www.nws.noaa. gov/er/box/maps/maps.html). When a major storm event is forecast
collection buckets will be put in place or emptied and decontaminated ifpreviously put in place.
VOC
sample vials will be collected first and filled directly from the effluent water stream if
possible or otherwise from the collection bowl. The method ofVOC vial filling will be
documented in the field notes for reference during report preparation. The remaining sample
containers will be filled from the sample collection bucket by submerging, pouring from the
bucket, ortransferring with a decontaminated scoop or container. Samples will be preserved and
MAANG
analyses placed on hold until Ogden confirms with meteorological personnel that the
measured amount ofprecipitation is at least one inch in 24 hours. Ifprecipitation exceeds this
amount, samples will be analyzed provided that the timing ofsample collection is acceptable to
EPA and MADEP. Ifprecipitation does not exceed this amount, NGB, EPA, and MADEP will
be contacted to determine whetherthe samples should be analyzed.
Samples will be collected as indicated in Table A.16-1. Samples will be analyzed forthe
following compounds:
Explosives by EPA Method 8330
CLP Metals and cyanide by ILM04.0
CLPVOCbyOLC02.1
CLPSVOCbyOLC02.1
CLP Pesticide/PCB by OLC02.1
Herbicide by EPA Method 8151
EDB by Method 504.1
L:\MMR\PLANS\FINAL\STORM\FFSPSTW.DOC 4 of9 03/03/98
VALIDATED DATA FOR SDGs 22-27
OF THE
CAMP EDWARDS
IMPACT AREA GROUNDWATER STUDY
MASSACHUSETTS MILITARY RESERVATION
CAPE COD, MASSACHUSETTS
Prepared for
NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU
ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA
Prepared by
OGDEN ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGYSE&V1CES
239 Littleton Road, Suite IB
Westford, Massachusetts-W886
March 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Group A, Water Data for Methods 504 (EDB), 8021 (MTBE), 8330SC (Explosive Scan), and
OC21V(VOCs), pp. 1-34
Group B, Soil Data for Methods 350.2M (N2), 353M (N03/N02), 365.2 (P04), CYAN,
(cyanide), IM40 (metals), and IM40HG (mercury), pp. 1-26
Group C, Water Data for Methods 350.2M (N2), 353M (N03/N02), 365.2 (P04), CYAN,
(cyanide), IM40 (metals), and IM40HG (mercury), pp. 1-24
Group D, Soil Data for Methods 802IS (EDM/MTBE) and OM31V (VOCs), pp. 1-6
Group E, Soil Data for Methods OM31B (SVOCs). pp. 1-9
Group F, Water Data for Methods OC21B (SVOCs), pp. 1-21
Group G, Soil Data for Methods 8330 (explosives), 8515 (HMX/RDX screen), CRRSCT
(TNT/DNT screen), pp. 1-5
Group H, Water Data for Methods 130.2 (hardness), 300.0 (C1/S04), 310.1 (alkalinity), IM40HD
(hardness), and TOC, pp. 1-11
Group 1, Soil Data for Methods 8151 (herbicides) and OM31P (pesticides), pp. 1-6
Group J, Water Data for Methods 8151 (herbicides) and OL21P (pesticides), pp. 1-14
Group K, Water Data for Methods 8330 (explosives), pp. 1-13
March 1998
Q
DATA QUALIFIER REFERENCE TABLE
Qualifier Organtcs Inorganics
U The analyte was analyzed for. but was not The material was analyzed for, but was not
detected above the reported sample quantisa- detected above the level of the «*™-'atH
tion limit value. The associated value is either the
sample quantitation limit or the sample
detection limit.
The analyte was positively identified; the The associated value is an estimated
associated numerical value is the approx- quantity.
imate concentration of the analyte in the
sample.
a N The analysis indicates the presence of an Notapplicable.
analyte for which there is presumptive evi-
dence to make a "tentative identification."
NJ The analysis indicates the presence of an Notapplicable.
analyte that has been "tentatively identified"
and the associated numerical value represents
its approximate concentration
UJ The analyte was not deemed above the re- The material was analyzed for, butwasnot
ported sample quantitation limit. However, detected. The associated value is an esti-
the reported quantitation limit is approx- mate and may be inaccurate orimprecise.
imate and may or may not represent the
actual limit of quantitation necessary to
accurately and precisely measure the analyte
in the sample.
Thesample resultsarerejected due toserious The data are unusable. (Note: Analyte
deficiencies in the ability to analyze the may or may not be present).
sample and to meet quality control criteria.
The presence or absence of the analyte
cannot be verified.
*
QUALIFICATION CODE REFERENCE TABLE
Qualifier Organics Inorganics
H Holding umes were exceeded. Holding times wereexceeded.
S Surrogate recovery was outside QC limits. The sequence ornumberofstandards used for
the calibration was incorrect
C Calibration %RSD or %D were noncom- Correlauon coefficient is <0.995.
pliant.
R CaJibration RRF was <0.05. %R for calibration is not within control
limits.
B Presumed contamination from preparation Presumed contamination from preparation
(.method) blank. (method) or calibration blank.
L Not applicable. Laboratory Control Sample %R were not
within control limits.
Q MS/MSD recovery was poor or RPD high. MS recovery was poor.
E Not applicable. Duplicates showed pooragreement.
Internal standard performance was unsatis- ICP ICS results were unsatisfactory.
I
factory.
%D
Notapplicable. ICP Serial Dilution were not within (
control limits.
M Tuning (BFB or DFTPP) was noncompliant. Not applicable.
T Presumed contamination from trip blank. Not applicable.
False positive - reported compound was not
present Not applicable.
False negative - compound was present but Not applicable.
not reported.
F Presumed contamination from FB. or ER. Presumed contamination from FB or ER.
$ Reported result or other information was Reported result or other information was
incorrect incorrect
TIC identity or reported retention time has Not applicable.
beenchanged.
The analysis with this flag should not be The analysis with this flag should not be
used because another more technically sound used because another more technically sound
analysis is available. analysis is available.
Instrument performance for pesticides was Post Digestion Spike recovery was not
poor. within control limits.
Unusual problems found with the data that
•# Unusual problems found with the data that
have been described in Section 1, "Data have been described in Section 1, "Data
Validation Findings." The numberfollowing Validation Findings." The number follow-
the asterisk (*) will indicate the subsection ing the asterisk (*) will indicate the sub-
where a description of the problem can be section where a description of the problem (
canbe found
found.