region 2 rac2 remedial action contract · 2020-06-18 · region 2 rac2 remedial action contract...
TRANSCRIPT
Region 2 RAC2
Remedial Action Contract
Revised Draft Rl/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Contract No.: EP-W-09-002 WA#: 040-RIC0-023J
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
Washington Township, New Jersey
November 12, 2014
CDMth Sm1
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page i of ii
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Table of Contents QAPP Worksheet #1 Title and Approval Page .............................................................................................. 1 QAPP Worksheet #2 QAPP Identifying Information ..................................................................................... 2 QAPP Worksheet #9 Soil Investigation Resampling Project Scoping Session Participants Sheet ................. 7 QAPP Worksheet #10 Problem Definition .................................................................................................... 8 QAPP Worksheet #11 Project Quality Objectives/Systematic Planning Process Statements ...................... 9 QAPP Worksheet #14 Summary of Project Tasks ....................................................................................... 11 QAPP Worksheet #15 Reference Limits and Evaluation Tables .................................................................. 14 QAPP Worksheet #16 Project Schedule/Timeline Table ............................................................................ 37 QAPP Worksheet #17h Sampling Design and Rationale Revised Remedial Investigation .......................... 38 QAPP Worksheet #18 Sampling Locations and Methods/SOP Requirements Table .................................. 42 QAPP Worksheet #20 Field Quality Control Sample Summary Table ......................................................... 43
List of Tables Table 1 Summary of Sampling and Analysis Program Table 2 Soil Boring Summary
List of Figures Figure 1 Project Schedule Figure 2 Proposed Soil Boring Locations *Required TSOPs will be included in the field copy of the QAPP Addendum.*
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page ii of ii
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
INTRODUCTION CDM Federal Programs Corporation (CDM Smith) received Work Assignment 040‐RICO‐023J under the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 2 Remedial Action Contract (RAC2) number EP‐W‐09‐002 to perform a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) at the Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination (PVGWC) site, Operable Unit 3 (OU3) (the site). The OU3 RI field investigation was completed in April 2012. Supplemental sampling events were conducted in March 2013 to refine the extent of the contamination within the onsite properties. Because of concerns regarding the reliability of select analytical results for previously collected RI soil, groundwater, sediment and surface water samples, environmental samples are proposed to be re‐collected from previously sampled locations in support of the RI/FS and the associated risk assessments. Sampling locations include the Albea Americas, Inc. (Albea) property (formerly the American National Can property) and all the adjacent properties, including Warren Lumber Yard (WLY), Vikon Tile Corporation (VTC), Area of Concern 1 (AC 1) and the railroad right‐of‐way. This document is Addendum No.3 to the Final Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) dated June 7, 2011, and documents the resampling soil investigation as outlined in the Work Plan Letter dated October 8, 2014 (CDM Smith 2014) and approved by EPA. The following tasks will be performed during the revised remedial investigation: Collection of soil samples from 4 deep soil borings beneath the Albea building in the area of the
former molding room and advanced to the water table (~125 feet [below ground surface] (bgs) using rota‐sonic drilling methods. Two soil samples will be collected from the initial 10 feet (0 to 2 and 5 to 7 feet) and then every 10 feet to depth based on field observations. Groundwater screening samples (GSS) will be collected from the deep water table, if field observations indicate contamination at or above the water table.
Collection of soil samples from 17 exterior deep soil borings on the Albea and adjacent properties (13 onsite, 1 background and 3 contingency) advanced to the water table or bedrock surface (~100‐125 feet bgs) using rota‐sonic drilling methods. Soil samples will be collected as described in the previous bullet, GSS will also be collected from the deep water table, if field observations indicate contamination at or above the water table.
Collection of soil samples from 24 (21 onsite and 3 contingency) exterior shallow soil borings within the drainage pathway on the Albea and adjacent properties, advanced to approximately 40 feet bgs using geo‐probe drilling methods. Soil samples will be collected as described in the first bullet. GSS will be collected from the perched groundwater.
This QAPP Addendum only addresses the field work listed above, and includes only those worksheets, tables, figures, and appendices that have been revised or added for the facility supplemental soil investigation. Information not included herein can be found in the June 2011 Final QAPP. The following is a list of the revised and added elements included in this QAPP Addendum No. 3: Worksheets #1, 2, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17h, 18, and 20 Table 1 Table 2 Figure 1 Figure 2
Prepared by:
Date:
Revised Draft Rl/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 1of43
QAPP Worksheet #1 Title and Approval Page
REVISED DRAFT Rl/FS QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP) ADDENDUM NO. 3 for the
Revised Remedial Investigation Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (Rl/FS) Washington, New Jersey
US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 2
CDM Federal Programs Corporation (CDM Smith) 14 Wall Street, Suite 1702 New York, NY 10005 (212) 785-9123
November 12, 2014
CDM Smith Site Manager (SM):
Signature: ___ ~-~-~----------Edward Leonard, CHMM
CDM Smith Project Quality Assurance (QA) Manager:
Signature :_C_~+--+-~---1---r----. J~Mullins
CDM Smith Remedial Action Contract (RAC) 2 Program Manag { ,
EPA Remedial Project Manager (RPM):
Signature: ______________ _ Michelle Granger
/ · EPA Region II Hazardous yvaste Support Section:
Signature : _______________ _ .. William Sy
CfnTith Pohatcong Va lley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 2 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #2 QAPP Identifying Information
Site Name/Project: Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund
Site, OU3 RI/FS Site Location: Washington, New Jersey Operable Unit: OU3 Contractor Name: CDM Smith Contractor Number: EP‐W‐09‐002 Contract Title: RAC Region 2 Work Assignment Number: 040‐RICO‐023J Document Control Number: 3323‐040‐02310 Guidance Used to Prepare QAPP: Requirements for QAPPs for Environmental Data Operation
QA/R5; Guidance for QAPPs, QA/G5; and Uniform Federal Policy for QAPPs Manual.
Regulatory program: Superfund Approval entity: EPA Region 2 Is QAPP generic or project‐specific: Project Specific: Revised Draft RI/FS QAPP Addendum No. 3 Dates of Scoping Sessions: A scoping conference call was held with EPA via teleconference
on September 17, 2014 regarding the revised remedial Investigation.
Dates and titles of QAPP documents written for previous site work: Final QAPP, Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3, June 7, 2011; Revised Final QAPP Addendum No. 1, Vapor Intrusion, Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3, March 22, 2013. Final QAPP Addendum No. 2, Facility Supplemental Soil Investigation, Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3, February 12, 2014. Organizational Partners (Stakeholders) and Connection with Lead Organization: United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) Date Users: CDM Smith, EPA Region 2 Required QAPP elements and required information that are not applicable to the project, explanation for their exclusion: Worksheets 3 through 8, 12, 13, 19, and 21 through 37 are included in the Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 3 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #2 QAPP Identifying Information
Required QAPP Element(s) and Corresponding QAPP Section(s)
Required Information
QAPP Worksheet #/ Crosswalk to Required
Documents 2.1 Title and Approval Page ‐ Title and Approval Page 1 2.2 Document Format and Table of
Contents 2.2.1 Document Control
Format 2.2.2 Document Control
Numbering System 2.2.3 Table of Contents 2.2.4 QAPP Identifying
Information
‐ Table of Contents ‐ QAPP Identifying
Information
2
2.3 Distribution List and Project
Personnel Sign‐Off Sheet 2.3.1 Distribution List 2.3.2 Project Personnel Sign‐
Off Sheet
‐ Distribution List ‐ Project Personnel Sign Off
Sheet
Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
2.4 Project Organization
2.4.1 Project Organizational Chart
2.4.2 Communication Pathways
2.4.3 Personnel Responsibilities and Qualifications
2.4.4 Special Training Requirements and Certification
‐ Project Organizational Chart
‐ Communication Pathways ‐ Personnel Responsibilities
and Qualifications Table ‐ Special Personnel Training
Requirements Table
Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
2.5 Project Planning/Problem
Definition 2.5.1 Project Planning
(Scoping) 2.5.2 Problem Definition, Site
History, and Background
‐ Project Planning Session Documentation (including Data Needs tables)
‐ Project Scoping Session Participants Sheet
‐ Problem Definition, Site History, and Background
‐ Site Maps (historical and present)
Introduction 9
10
Figure 1
2.6 Project Quality Objectives and
Measurement Performance Criteria 2.6.1 Development of Project
Quality Objectives Using the Systematic Planning Process
2.6.2 Measurement Performance Criteria
‐ Site‐Specific PQOs - Measurement Performance Criteria Table
11
Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 4 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #2 QAPP Identifying Information
Required QAPP Element(s) and Corresponding QAPP Section(s)
Required Information
QAPP Worksheet #/ Crosswalk to Required
Documents
– Sources of Secondary
Data and Information ‐ Secondary Data Criteria
and Limitations Table
Final QAPP (CDM Smith
2011)
2.8 Project Overview and Schedule
2.8.1 Project Overview 2.8.2 Project Schedule
‐ Summary of Project Tasks ‐ Reference Limits and
Evaluation Table ‐ Project Schedule/
Timeline Table
14 and Schedule 15
16
3.1 Sampling Tasks
3.1.1 Sampling Process Design and Rationale
3.1.2 Sampling Procedures and Requirements 3.1.2.1 Sampling
Collection Procedures
3.1.2.2 Sample Containers, Volume, and Preservation
3.1.2.3 Equipment/ Sample Containers Cleaning and Decontamination Procedures
3.1.2.4 Field Equipment Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Procedures
3.1.2.5 Supply Inspection and Acceptance Procedures
3.1.2.6 Field Documentation Procedures
‐ Sampling Design and Rationale
‐ Sample Location Map ‐ Sampling Locations and
Methods/ SOP Requirements Table
‐ Analytical Methods/SOP Requirements Table
‐ Field Quality Control Sample Summary Table
‐ Sampling SOPs ‐ Project Sampling SOP
References Table ‐ Field Equipment
Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Table
17h
18, Figure 1, Table 1
Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
20
Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
3.2 Analytical Tasks
3.2.1 Analytical SOPs 3.2.2 Analytical Instrument
Calibration Procedures
‐ Analytical SOPs ‐ Analytical SOP References
Table ‐ Analytical Instrument
Calibration Table
Final QAPP (CDM Smith
2011)
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 5 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #2 QAPP Identifying Information
Required QAPP Element(s) and Corresponding QAPP Section(s)
Required Information
QAPP Worksheet #/ Crosswalk to Required
Documents
3.2.3 Analytical Instrument and
Equipment Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Procedures
3.2.4 Analytical Supply Inspection and Acceptance Procedures
‐ Analytical Instrument and Equipment Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection Table
3.3 Sample Collection Documentation, Handling, Tracking, and Custody Procedures 3.3.1 Sample Collection
Documentation 3.3.2 Sample Handling and
Tracking System 3.3.3 Sample Custody
‐ Sample Collection Documentation Handling, Tracking, and Custody SOPs
‐ Sample Container Identification
‐ Sample Handling Flow Diagram
‐ Example Chain‐of‐Custody Form and Seal
18
Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
3.4 Quality Control Samples
3.4.1 Sampling Quality Control Samples
3.4.2 Analytical Quality Control Samples
‐ QC Samples Table ‐ Screening/Confirmatory
Analysis Decision Tree
20 Final QAPP (CDM Smith
2011)
3.5 Data Management Tasks
3.5.1 Project Documentation and Records
3.5.2 Data Package Deliverables
3.5.3 Data Reporting Formats 3.5.4 Data Handling and
Management 3.5.5 Data Tracking and
Control
‐ Project Documents and Records Table
‐ Analytical Services Table ‐ Data Management SOPs
Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
4.1 Assessments and Response
Actions 4.1.1 Planned Assessments 4.1.2 Assessment Findings and
Corrective Action Responses
‐ Assessments and Response Actions
‐ Planned Project Assessments Table
‐ Audit Checklists ‐ Assessment Findings and
Corrective Action Responses Table
Final QAPP (CDM Smith
2011)
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 6 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #2 QAPP Identifying Information
Required QAPP Element(s) and Corresponding QAPP Section(s)
Required Information
QAPP Worksheet #/ Crosswalk to Required
Documents 4.2 QA Management Reports ‐ QA Management Reports
Table Final QAPP (CDM Smith
2011) 4.3 Final Project Report Worksheet 14 and
Schedule 5.1 Overview 5.2 Data Review Steps
5.2.1 Step I: Verification 5.2.2 Step II: Validation
5.2.2.1 Step IIa Validation Activities
5.2.2.2 Step IIb
Validation Activities
5.2.3 Step III: Usability
Assessment 5.2.3.1 Data Limitations
and Actions from Usability Assessment
5.2.3.2 Activities
‐ Verification (Step I) Process Table
‐ Validation (Steps IIa and IIb) Process Table
‐ Validation (Steps IIa and IIb) Summary Table
‐ Usability Assessment
Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
Final QAPP (CDM Smith 2011)
5.3 Streamlining Data Review
5.3.1 Data Review Steps To Be Streamlined
5.3.2 Criteria for Streamlining Data Review
5.3.3 Amounts and Types of Data Appropriate for Streamlining
None
Streamlining of Data Validation will not be
performed
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 7 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #9 Soil Investigation Resampling Project Scoping Session Participants Sheet
Site Manager: Edward Leonard Site Name: Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3 Site Location: Washington, New Jersey
Date of Session: September 17, 2014
Scoping Session Purpose: Presented scope of work for resampling event at site
Name Affiliation Phone Number E‐mail Address Project Role
Edward Leonard CDM Smith (732) 590‐4695 [email protected] Site Manager (SM)
Joseph Button CDM Smith (212) 377‐4389 [email protected] Task Manager
Michelle Granger EPA (212) 637‐4975 [email protected] EPA Remedial Project Manager (RPM)
Kim O’Connell EPA (212) 637‐4399 [email protected] EPA Section Chief
Comments/Decisions: CDM Smith and EPA reviewed and discussed the proposed resampling scope. Modifications to scope included:
As confirmed with the EPA project risk assessor, other organics analyses are not needed at depth for the human health and ecological risk assessments. However, analysis of other organics is required to complete a full CERCLA RI. Therefore, the approach used in the original RI sampling approach (30 – 40% of samples analyzed for other organics) will be included in the resampling scope. All previous organics analyses will be resampled during this program.
Human Health Risk Assessment, Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment and RI Reports – EPA confirmed that all questionable organics data must be replaced with the new data. EPA also stated that a statement will be required in the introduction as to why the data was replaced, and CDM Smith should edit the text, tables and figures as necessary, re‐evaluate conclusions and recommendations and reissue new reports. Both draft and final version will be prepared.
FS Report ‐ After validation of resampling data, all recently collected data (RI resampling, supplemental sampling and vapor intrusion (VI) data related to investigation, remediation and Operations & Maintenance data) will be re‐evaluated and a meeting to determine how to move forward on the FS will be convened.
Access Agreements –EPA requested CDM Smith provide a status of the access agreements, including a summary of actions needed for resampling access. EPA to contact Office of Regional Counsel to move access forward as soon as possible.
Action Items: Upon finalizing the work plan letter, CDM Smith will coordinate with the facility owner to discuss access. An additional logistics/coordination meeting will be held with the facility owner prior to mobilization.
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 8 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #10 Problem Definition
Problem Summary Concerns regarding the reliability of all organic (VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs and pesticides) analytical results for soil, groundwater, sediment and surface water previously received in conjunction with the RI/FS, environmental samples are proposed to be re‐collected from previously sampled soil, groundwater, surface water and sediment locations in support of the RI/FS and the associated risk assessments. Project Description The investigation will include soil, groundwater, surface water and sediment sampling in and around the Albea Americas, Inc. (Albea) property (formerly the American National Can property (ANC)) and all the adjacent properties, including Warren Lumber Yard (WLY), Vikon Tile Corporation (VTC), Area of Concern 1 (AC 1) and the railroad right‐of‐way. Project Decision Conditions Soil field screening data (from a photo ionizing detector) and quick turnaround time analytical results will be evaluated and reviewed with EPA throughout the program to determine if additional sampling is required to refine the extent of contamination of soils at the site. Three deep and three shallow contingency borings are built into the program to be used if additional sampling is needed.
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 9 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #11
Project Quality Objectives/Systematic Planning Process Statements But half the overall project objectives The revised RI will include soil, groundwater, surface water and sediment sampling below, adjacent to and in the drainage areas surrounding the Albea facility for the analyses presented below to replace unreliable date provided in the previous remedial investigation. Who will use the data? EPA and CDM Smith will use the data. What type of data are needed? The sampling program will include the following:
Soil o Shallow Soil Samples: Trace level TCL VOCs by SOM01.2 (with a 7‐day turnaround time [TAT] for the onsite samples).
TLC SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides by SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
o Deep Facility Soil Samples: TCL VOCs by SOM01.2 (with 48‐hour TAT) TCL SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides by SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
o Deep Exterior Soil Borings: TCL VOCs SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides by SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
Groundwater
o Shallow Soil Borings: Trace level TCL VOCs SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
o Deep Facility Soil Borings: Trace level TCL VOCs SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
Surface Water: TCL VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides by SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
Sediment: TCL VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides by SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT) What will the data be used for? Data will be used to replace unreliable data reported in previous remedial investigation. How “good” do the data need to be in order to support the environmental decision? Definitive level data required to support project decisions and risk assessments. The project action limits and quantitation limits for soil VOCs are specified on Worksheet #15. All laboratory analyses will be performed in compliance with EPA’s Field and Analytical Services Teaming Advisory Committee policy. Preference will be given in the
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 10 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #11
Project Quality Objectives/Systematic Planning Process Statements following order: EPA’s Region 2 Division of Environmental Science and Assessment (DESA) laboratory, an EPA Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) laboratory, or a CDM Smith subcontract laboratory. Data must meet the data quality objectives that have been specified for the site. Where, when, and how should the data be collected? The samples will be collected from locations shown on Figure 2. Worksheet #17h and Table 1 presents the sampling program design, rationale, sampling procedures and analytical parameters. Locational data will be documented by hand measurement from known interior features. Who will collect and generate the data? CDM Smith will collect the analytical samples that will be shipped to DESA, CLP, and/or CDM Smith’s subcontract laboratory for analysis.
How will the data be reported? Validated analytical data will be downloaded from EPA’S website or forwarded to CDM Smith from a subcontract laboratory for evaluation and use in the Supplemental Investigation Report and FS. Analytical data generated by a laboratory under subcontract to CDM Smith will be received in electronic and hard copy and validated by CDM Smith personnel. Following completion of all laboratory analysis and receipt of all electronic and hard‐copy data, the Supplemental Investigation Report will be generated by CDM Smith and submitted to EPA with tabulated data. CDM Smith will use global information system (GIS) to facilitate spatial analysis of data to generate figures for reports and presentations. How will the data be archived?
Data from a subcontract laboratory will be received in EPA Region 2 electronic format and validated Final DESA or CLP validated data will be submitted to CDM Smith in electronic format and hard copy Electronic data will be input into the project's EQuIS database EPA will archive CLP laboratory raw data Hard copies of analytical data received by CDM Smith will be archived in the project files for 10 years after contract expiration
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 11 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #14 Summary of Project Tasks
Sampling Tasks: Sampling tasks are summarized on Table 1 and 2 below: Analysis Tasks: See Table 1 Quality Control Tasks: Field blanks and field duplicates will be collected as described on Worksheet #20. MS/MSDs will be collected if samples are assigned to the DESA laboratory. Secondary Data: Secondary data listed in Worksheet #13 in the Final QAPP (June 2011) and results from the 2013 Supplemental Soil Sampling event and the 2013 vapor intrusion sampling event were reviewed and used to plan sample locations. These results were added to the project database. These data were validated and found to be useful for its intended use. Only valid data were included in the data evaluation. Data Management Tasks: Analytical data will be imported into the Environmental Quality Information Systems (EQuIS) database after validation. Field measurements will also be added to the database.
All final laboratory data will be submitted to CDM Smith in electronic format consistent with CLP deliverables. The Analytical Service Coordinator (ASC) will review all analytical data.
Hard copies of analytical data received by CDM Smith will be archived in project file. Electronic data will be uploaded into the CDM Smith Database system. Electronic data will be consistent with EPA Region 2 requirements for electronic data deliverable (EDDs). Electronic analytical data will be archived on CDs and copies of CDs will be forwarded to the EPA.
CDM Smith’s Field Team Leader is responsible for tracking all samples from the point of collection to shipment for laboratory analysis. The data coordinator is responsible for tracking samples from shipment for laboratory analysis to the subsequent data validation and data management efforts. The sample handling and custody requirements, including field log books and generation of sample paperwork, sample labels, and custody seals discussed in Worksheets #26 and #27 of Final QAPP (June 2011), will be followed according to TSOP 1‐2. The analytical services coordinator (ASC) or data coordinator will receive non‐routine analytical services (non‐RAS) data from the laboratory(s) and will track it through the data validation process. For non RAS data, the ASC will submit the electronic “Analytical Services Tracking System Data Requirement” form (Appendix C of Final QAPP [June 2011]) to the Regional Sample Control Center by the first day of each month for the previous month’s sampling.
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 12 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #14 Summary of Project Tasks
CDM Smith will be responsible for tracking and maintaining custody of the laboratory data packages through the data validation process. Data validation will be in accordance with the procedures described in Worksheets #35 and #36 of the RAC2 Region 2 Generic QAPP (December 2013). Once the data is validated, it will be input into CDM Smith’s database.
A project electronic spreadsheet using Scribe software will be developed for sample tracking purposes prior to field activities. The tracking system will be initiated in the field during sample collection and will be updated during the sample analysis and data validation phases. The data will be entered by project staff and then checked by the data coordinator for accuracy and to document changes to sample locations or samples which are not collected due to field conditions. This tracking system will ensure that no data is lost during the data management process. The following information is recorded in the tracking system:
Area of Concern (sample location area) Sample Matrix SDG Number CLP Case No. CLP No. Analytical Parameter Collection Date Shipment Date
Sample Number Date Received from Lab Date Submitted for Data Validation Name of Data Validator Date of Data Validation Completion Database Entry Date Database QC Date Comments (i.e., duplicate samples).
Analytical data collected during the field effort will be entered into EQuIS. This data management system will also include location data. The database management system will provide data storage, retrieval, and analytical capabilities. The system will be used to support report preparation by providing data users the data they need to complete their work using spreadsheets, word processing, statistical, and graphics software. To facilitate the use of the database, CDM Smith will provide subcontract laboratories with the specifications for the EPA Region 2 analytical data EDD. Once it is uploaded into the database, validated analytical data will be used in the data evaluation phase. A 100 percent quality control check will be performed to ensure accuracy on all hand‐entered data (i.e., data qualifiers added by CDM Smith validators on subcontract laboratory data, sample field notations). Data tables that present the results of the sampling program will be prepared and compared to applicable screening criteria. Graphics and GIS software will be used to present sample results and illustrate contaminants detected.
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 13 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #14 Summary of Project Tasks
As a quality control check, reports, tables, and graphical figures will be compared to source material from the database to check for errors and omissions. CDM Smith will provide EPA with final analytical data as part of the Region 2 EDD requirement. The EQuIS data base system will be the primary data management system software. This software is managed on CDM Smith’s computer network in compliance with software licensing requirements. Access to the project database is limited to authorized personnel only via their computer. CDM Smith will take reasonable care to protect the data and will perform periodic backups to prevent wholesale loss of project data. Control of the computer hardware and software will be as per CDM Smith’s quality procedure 4.1. After CLP data is validated, the package is returned to the EPA regional project manager. The original CLP data packages with all associated forms are retained by EPA for archival. Non‐CLP data packages received from a laboratory subcontractor will be validated by CDM Smith’s ASC or designee. These packages are stored in electronic format on CDM Smith’s computer network where they are accessible to the project manger and other team members. Copies of the non‐CLP data packages, in electronic format, will be submitted to EPA (as directed) during project close‐out. Documentation and Records: Information regarding samples will be recorded in site field logs. Any changes that are made to the field logs shall be initialed and dated. Documents will be maintained in the project files and/or the RAC 2 document control system. Chain‐of‐Custody (COC) forms and FedEx air bills will also be completed for the sampling event. The results of this field investigation will be presented in the Revised Remedial Investigation Report (RRIR).
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 14 of 43
Federal
EPA National Primary
Drinking Water
Standards (1)
NJDEP
Groundwater
Quality Standards
Class IIA Water
(2)
NJDEP
Drinking
Water
Standards
(3)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Trace
SIM
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Trace
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Low
MDLs QLs
1,1,1‐Trichloroethane 71‐55‐6 200 30 30 30 10 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,1,2,2‐Tetrachloroethane 79‐34‐5 NL 1 1 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,1,2‐Trichloro‐1,2,2‐trifluoroethane 76‐13‐1 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,1,2‐Trichloroethane 79‐00‐5 5 3 3 3 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,1‐Dichloroethane 75‐34‐3 NL 50 50 50 17 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,1‐Dicholoroethene 75‐35‐4 7 1 2 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2,3‐Trichlorobenzene 87‐61‐6 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2,4‐Trichlorobenzene 120‐82‐1 70 9 9 9 3 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2‐Dibromo‐3‐chloropropane 96‐12‐8 0.2 0.02 0.2 0.02 0.50 N/A 0.05 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2‐Dibromoethane 106‐93‐4 0.1 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.50 N/A 0.05 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichlorobenzene 95‐50‐1 600 600 600 600 200 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichloroethane 107‐06‐2 5 2 2 2 1 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichloropropane 78‐87‐5 5 1 5 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,3‐Dichlorobenzene 541‐73‐1 NL 600 600 600 200 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,4‐Dichlorobenzene 106‐46‐7 75 75 75 75 25 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,4‐Dioxane 123‐91‐1 NL 10 NL 10 10 N/A NL NL 100 Trace N/A N/A
2‐Butanone 78‐93‐3 NL 300 NL 300 100 N/A NL 5 10 Trace N/A N/A
2‐Hexanone 591‐78‐6 NL 300 NL 300 100 N/A NL 5 10 Trace N/A N/A
4‐Methyl‐2‐pentanone 108‐10‐1 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 5 10 Trace N/A N/A
Acetone 67‐64‐1 NL 6000 NL 6000 2000 N/A NL 5 10 Trace N/A N/A
Benzene 71‐43‐2 5 1 1 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Bromochloromethane 74‐97‐5 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Bromodichloromethane 75‐27‐4 80 1 80 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Bromoform 75‐25‐2 80 4 80 4 1.33 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Bromomethane 74‐83‐9 NL 10 NL 10 3.33 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Carbon Disulfide 75‐15‐0 NL 700 NL 700 233 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Carbon tetrachloride 56‐23‐5 5 1 2 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Chlorobenzene 108‐90‐7 100 50 50 50 17 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Chloroethane 75‐00‐3 NL 5 NL 5 1.67 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Chloroform 67‐66‐3 80 70 80 70 23 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Chloromethane 74‐87‐3 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
cis‐1,2‐Dichloroethene 156‐59‐2 70 70 70 70 23 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
cis‐1,3‐Dichloropropene + 10061‐01‐5 NL 1 NL 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Cyclohexane 110‐82‐7 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Dibromochloromethane 124‐48‐1 80 1 80 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Dichlorodifluoromethane 75‐71‐8 NL 1000 NL 1000 333 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Ethylbenzene 100‐41‐4 700 700 700 700 233 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Isopropylbenzene 98‐82‐8 NL 700 NL 700 233 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
m, p‐Xylene * 1330‐20‐7 10,000 1000 1000 1000 333 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Methyl acetate 79‐20‐9 NL 7000 NL 7000 2333 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Methyl tert‐butyl ether 1634‐04‐4 NL 70 70 70 23 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Methylcyclohexane 108‐87‐2 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Methylene chloride 75‐09‐2 5 3 3 3 1 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
o‐Xylene ** 1330‐20‐7 10,000 1000 1000 1000 333 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
MDLsProject Selected
Option
Achievable Laboratory
Limits***New Jersey
Project Action Limit (PAL)
QAPP Worksheet #15g
Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Groundwater VOCs
CAS NumberVolatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/L)
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)****
CRQL
Analytical Method
Project
Action Limit
(PAL)
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 15 of 43
Federal
EPA National Primary
Drinking Water
Standards (1)
NJDEP
Groundwater
Quality Standards
Class IIA Water
(2)
NJDEP
Drinking
Water
Standards
(3)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Trace
SIM
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Trace
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Low
MDLs QLsMDLs
Project Selected Option
Achievable Laboratory
Limits***New Jersey
Project Action Limit (PAL)
QAPP Worksheet #15g
Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Groundwater VOCs
CAS NumberVolatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/L)
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)****
CRQL
Analytical Method
Project
Action Limit
(PAL)
Styrene 100‐42‐5 100 100 100 100 33 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Tetrachloroethene 127‐18‐4 5 1 1 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Toluene 108‐88‐3 1,000 600 1000 600 200 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
trans‐1,2‐Dichloroethene 156‐60‐5 100 100 100 100 33 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
trans‐1,3‐Dichloropropene + 10061‐02‐6 NL 1 NL 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Trichloroethene 79‐01‐6 5 1 1 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Trichlorofluoromethane 75‐69‐4 NL 2000 NL 2000 667 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Vinyl Chloride 75‐01‐4 2 1 2 1 0.50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 16 of 43
1. EPA National Primary Drinking Water Standards (web page http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/index.html),
EPA 816‐F‐03‐016, June 2003. last updated November 28, 2006.
2. New Jersey Ground Water Quality Standards Class IIA (NJAC 7:9C), July 7, 2008, downloaded November 13, 2008
3. New Jersey Drinking Water Standards, February 2005 (http://www.state.nj.us/dep/watersupply/standard.htm), downloaded November 13, 2008
+ 1,3‐dichloropropene criteria was used for cis‐ and trans‐1,3‐dichloropropene criteria.
* m‐xylene and p‐xylene reported as one compound under S0M01.2. Xylene (total) was used for m,p‐xylene criteria.
** Xylene (total) was used for o‐xylene criteria.
***The laboratory is TBD. CDM Smith will implement the EPA Region 2 FASTAC policy for obtaining analytical services.
See Appendix C for DESA information regarding this worksheet.
EPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency NJDEP = New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
CAS = Chemical abstract service SIM = selective ion monitoring
CRQL = Contract Required Quantitation Limit TOGS = Technical and Operational Guidance Series
MA = modified analyses c = based on carcinogenic target risk criteria
MDL = method detection limit n = based on noncancer hazard index criteria
N/A = Not Applicable
NL = Not Listed or chemical name listed but no value available
PAL= Project Action Limit
μg/L = micrograms per liter
Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Groundwater VOCs
Notes for QAPP Worksheet #15g
**** Highlighted analytes have PQLGs that may not be acheivable using standard laboratory analyses. CDM Smith will utilize nominal CRQLs as available rather than using modified analyses for these analytes as the nominal CRQLs will not impact the projects data quality objectives.
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 17 of 43
Federal
EPA National
Recommended
Water Quality
Criteria (1)
NJDEP Surface
Water Quality
Criteria for Fresh
Water (Chronic) (2)
NJDEP Surface
Water Quality
Criteria for Fresh
Water (Human
Health) (2)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Trace
Water by SIM
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Trace
Water
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Low
Water
MDLs QLs
1,1,1‐Trichloroethane 71‐55‐6 NL NL 120 11 4 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,1,2,2‐Tetrachloroethane 79‐34‐5 4 NL 4.7 4.7 2 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,1,2‐Trichloro‐1,2,2‐trifluoroethane 76‐13‐1 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,1,2‐Trichloroethane 79‐00‐5 16 NL 13 13 4 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,1‐Dichloroethane 75‐34‐3 NL NL NL 47 16 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,1‐Dicholoroethene 75‐35‐4 7100 NL 4.7 4.7 2 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2,3‐Trichlorobenzene 87‐61‐6 NL NL NL 8 3 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2,4‐Trichlorobenzene 120‐82‐1 70 NL 21 21 7 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2‐Dibromo‐3‐chloropropane 96‐12‐8 NL NL NL NL NL N/A 0.05 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2‐Dibromoethane 106‐93‐4 NL NL NL NL NL N/A 0.05 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichlorobenzene 95‐50‐1 1300 NL 2000 0.7 0.7 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichloroethane 107‐06‐2 37 NL 0.29 0.29 0.29 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichloropropane 78‐87‐5 15 NL 0.5 0.5 0.5 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,3‐Dichlorobenzene 541‐73‐1 960 NL 2200 150 50 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,4‐Dichlorobenzene 106‐46‐7 190 NL 550 26 9 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
1,4‐Dioxane 123‐91‐1 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL NL 100 Trace N/A N/A
2‐Butanone 78‐93‐3 NL NL NL 14000 4667 N/A NL 5 10 Trace N/A N/A
2‐Hexanone 591‐78‐6 NL NL NL 99 33 N/A NL 5 10 Trace N/A N/A
4‐Methyl‐2‐pentanone 108‐10‐1 NL NL NL 170 57 N/A NL 5 10 Trace N/A N/A
Acetone 67‐64‐1 NL NL NL 1500 500 N/A NL 5 10 Trace N/A N/A
Benzene 71‐43‐2 51 NL 0.15 0.15 0.15 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Bromochloromethane 74‐97‐5 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Bromodichloromethane 75‐27‐4 17 NL 0.55 0.55 0.55 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Bromoform 75‐25‐2 140 NL 4.3 4.3 1 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Bromomethane 74‐83‐9 1500 NL 47 47 16 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Carbon Disulfide 75‐15‐0 NL NL NL 0.92 0.9 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Analytical Method
New Jersey
Project Action
Limit (PAL)
QAPP Worksheet #15hReference Limits and Evaluation Table - Surface Water VOCs
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action Limit (PAL)
CAS NumberVolatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/L)MDLs
Project Selected Option
Achievable Laboratory
Limits **CRQL
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 18 of 43
Federal
EPA National
Recommended
Water Quality
Criteria (1)
NJDEP Surface
Water Quality
Criteria for Fresh
Water (Chronic) (2)
NJDEP Surface
Water Quality
Criteria for Fresh
Water (Human
Health) (2)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Trace
Water by SIM
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Trace
Water
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Low
Water
MDLs QLs
Analytical Method
New Jersey
Project Action
Limit (PAL)
QAPP Worksheet #15hReference Limits and Evaluation Table - Surface Water VOCs
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action Limit (PAL)
CAS NumberVolatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/L)MDLs
Project Selected Option
Achievable Laboratory
Limits **CRQL
Carbon tetrachloride 56‐23‐5 1.6 NL 0.33 0.33 0.33 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Chlorobenzene 108‐90‐7 1600 NL 210 1.3 1.3 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Chloroethane 75‐00‐3 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Chloroform 67‐66‐3 470 NL 68 1.8 1 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Chloromethane 74‐87‐3 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
cis‐1,2‐Dichloroethene 156‐59‐2 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Cyclohexane 110‐82‐7 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Dibromochloromethane 124‐48‐1 13 NL 0.4 0.4 0.4 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Dichlorodifluoromethane 75‐71‐8 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Ethylbenzene 100‐41‐4 2100 NL 530 90 30 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Isopropylbenzene 98‐82‐8 NL NL NL 2.6 1 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Methyl acetate 79‐20‐9 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Methyl tert‐butyl ether 1634‐04‐4 NL NL 70 70 23 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Methylcyclohexane 108‐87‐2 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Methylene chloride 75‐09‐2 590 NL 2.5 2.5 1 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Styrene 100‐42‐5 NL NL NL 72 24 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Tetrachloroethene 127‐18‐4 3.3 NL 0.34 0.34 0.34 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Toluene 108‐88‐3 15000 NL 1300 2 1 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
trans‐1,2‐Dichloroethene 156‐60‐5 10000 NL 590 590 197 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Trichloroethene 79‐01‐6 30 NL 1 1 1.0 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Trichlorofluoromethane 75‐69‐4 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Vinyl Chloride 75‐01‐4 2.4 NL 0.082 0.082 0.082 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Xylene (total)* 1330‐20‐7 NL NL NL 13 4 N/A NL 0.5 5 Trace N/A N/A
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 19 of 43
Federal CRQL
EPA National
Recommend
ed Water
Quality
Criteria (1)
NJDEP
Surface
Water
Quality
Criteria for
Fresh Water
(Chronic) (2)
NJDEP
Surface
Water
Quality
Criteria for
Fresh Water
(Human
Health) (2)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Water
MDLs QLs
Aroclor‐1016 12674‐11‐2 0.000064 0.014 0.000064 0.000064 0.000064 N/A 1 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1221 11104‐28‐2 0.000064 0.014 0.000064 0.000064 0.000064 N/A 1 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1232 11141‐16‐5 0.000064 0.014 0.000064 0.000064 0.000064 N/A 1 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1242 53469‐21‐9 0.000064 0.014 0.000064 0.000064 0.000064 N/A 1 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1248 12672‐29‐6 0.000064 0.014 0.000064 0.000064 0.000064 N/A 1 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1254 11097‐69‐1 0.000064 0.014 0.000064 0.000064 0.000064 N/A 1 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1260 11096‐82‐5 0.000064 0.014 0.000064 0.000064 0.000064 N/A 1 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1262 37324‐23‐5 0.000064 0.014 0.000064 0.000064 0.000064 N/A 1 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1268 11100‐14‐4 0.000064 0.014 0.000064 0.000064 0.000064 N/A 1 N/A N/A
Project
Action Limit
(PAL)
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
New Jersey
Analytical Method Achievable Laboratory
Limits**
MDLs
QAPP Worksheet #15i
Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Surface Water Aroclors
Aroclors (All units: μg/L) CAS Number
Project Action Limit
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 20 of 43
Federal CRQL
EPA National
Recommend
ed Water
Quality
Criteria (1)
NJDEP
Surface
Water
Quality
Criteria for
Fresh Water
(Chronic) (2)
NJDEP Surface
Water Quality
Criteria for
Fresh Water
(Human
Health) (2)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Water
MDLs QLs
4,4'‐DDD 72‐54‐8 0.00031 0.001 0.00031 0.00031 0.00031 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
4,4'‐DDE 72‐55‐9 0.00022 0.001 0.00022 0.00022 0.00022 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
4,4'‐DDT 50‐29‐3 0.00022 0.001 0.00022 0.00022 0.00022 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
Aldrin 309‐00‐2 0.00005 3 0.000049 0.000049 0.000049 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A
alpha‐BHC 319‐84‐6 0.0049 NL 0.0026 0.0026 0.0026 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A
alpha‐Chlordane 5103‐71‐9 0.00081 0.0043 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A
beta‐BHC 319‐85‐7 0.017 NL 0.0091 0.0091 0.0091 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A
delta‐BHC 319‐86‐8 NL NL NL 141 47 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A
Dieldrin 60‐57‐1 0.000054 0.056 0.000052 0.000052 0.000052 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
Endosulfan I 959‐98‐8 89 0.056 62 0.056 0.056 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A
Endosulfan II 33213‐65‐9 89 0.056 62 0.056 0.056 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
Endosulfan sulfate 1031‐07‐8 89 NL 62 62 20 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
Endrin 72‐20‐8 0.06 0.036 0.059 0.036 0.036 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
Endrin aldehyde 7421‐93‐4 0.3 NL 0.059 0.059 0.059 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
Endrin ketone 53494‐70‐5 NL NL NL NL NL N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
gamma‐BHC (Lindane) 58‐89‐9 1.8 0.95 0.98 0.95 0.316666667 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A
gamma‐Chlordane 5103‐74‐2 0.00081 0.0043 NL 0.00081 0.00081 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A
Heptachlor 76‐44‐8 0.000079 0.0038 0.000079 0.000079 0.000079 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A
Heptachlor epoxide 1024‐57‐3 0.0038 0.0038 0.000039 0.000039 0.000039 N/A 0.05 N/A N/A
Methoxychlor 72‐43‐5 NL 0.03 40 0.03 0.03 N/A 0.5 N/A N/A
Toxaphene 8001‐35‐2 0.0002 0.0002 0.00028 0.0002 0.0002 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
QAPP Worksheet #15j
Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Surface Water Pesticides
Pesticides (All units: μg/L) CAS Number
Project Action Limit
New Jersey
MDLs
Analytical Method Achievable Laboratory
Limits**
Project
Action Limit
(PAL)
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 21 of 43
Source:1 EPA 2009. National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. Criteria based on Freshwater CCC (chronic) values.
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/wqctable/. Note several values for metals will be adjusted based on site specific water hardness.2 NJDEP Surface Water Quality Standards. (web page http://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/rules/njac7_9b.pdf). April 2011.
* m‐xylene and p‐xylene reported as one compound under S0M01.2. The RSL is based on m‐xylene.
**The laboratory is TBD. CDM Smith will implement the EPA Region 2 FASTAC policy for obtaining analytical services.
Notes:
µg/L ‐ microgram per liter
mg/L ‐ milligram per liter
EPA ‐ Environmental Protection Agency
NJDEP ‐ New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
NL ‐ not listed
NRWQC ‐ National Recommended Water Quality Criteria
RI ‐ remedial investigation
Notes for QAPP Worksheet #15h‐jReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Surface Water
***Highlighted analytes have PQLGs that may not be achievable using standard laboratory analyses. CDM Smith will utilize nominal CRQLs as available rather than using modified analyses for these analytes as the nominal CRQLs will not impact the projects data quality objectives.
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 22 of 43
CRQL
EPA
EcoSSLs
(1)
Soil PRGs
(3)
NJDEP Non‐
Residential Direct
Contact Soil
Remediation
Standard (4)
NJDEP Default Impact
to Groundwater Soil
Remediation
Standard (5)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Low Soil
MDLs QLs
1,1,1‐Trichloroethane 71‐55‐6 NL 640,000 NL 4,200,000 200 29,800 200 67 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,1,2,2‐Tetrachloroethane 79‐34‐5 NL 560 NL 3,000 5 127 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,1,2‐Trichloro‐1,2,2‐trifluoroethane 76‐13‐1 NL 910,000 NL NL NL NL 910,000 303,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,1,2‐Trichloroethane 79‐00‐5 NL 160 NL 6,000 10 28,600 10 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,1‐Dichloroethane 75‐34‐3 NL 3,300 NL 24,000 200 20,100 200 67 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,1‐Dicholoroethene 75‐35‐4 NL 24,000 NL 150,000 5 8,280 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2,3‐Trichlorobenzene 87‐61‐6 NL 4,900 20,000 NL NL 20,000 4,900 1,633 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2,4‐Trichlorobenzene 120‐82‐1 NL 6,200 20,000 820,000 400 20,000 400 133 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2‐Dibromo‐3‐chloropropane 96‐12‐8 NL 5 NL 200 5 35 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2‐Dibromoethane 106‐93‐4 NL 34 NL 40 5 1,230 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichlorobenzene 95‐50‐1 NL 190,000 NL 59,000,000 11,000 2,960 2,960 987 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichloroethane 107‐06‐2 NL 430 NL 3,000 5 21,200 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichloropropane 78‐87‐5 NL 940 NL 5,000 5 32,700 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,3‐Dichlorobenzene 541‐73‐1 NL NL NL 59,000,000 12,000 37,700 12,000 4,000 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,4‐Dichlorobenzene 106‐46‐7 NL 2,400 20,000 13,000 1,000 20,000 1,000 333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,4‐Dioxane 123‐91‐1 NL 4,900 NL NL NL NL 4,900 1,633 N/A 100 N/A N/A
2‐Butanone 78‐93‐3 NL 2,800,000 NL 44,000,000 600 89,600 600 200 N/A 10 N/A N/A
2‐Hexanone 591‐78‐6 NL 21,000 NL NL NL 12,600 12,600 4,200 N/A 10 N/A N/A
4‐Methyl‐2‐pentanone 108‐10‐1 NL 2,200,000 NL NL NL 443,000 443,000 147,667 N/A 10 N/A N/A
Acetone 67‐64‐1 NL 6,100,000 NL NA 12,000 2,500 2,500 833 N/A 10 N/A N/A
Benzene 71‐43‐2 NL 1,100 NL 5,000 5 255 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Bromochloromethane 74‐97‐5 NL 16,000 NL NL NL NL 16,000 5,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Bromodichloromethane 75‐27‐4 NL 270 NL 3,000 5 540 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Bromoform 75‐25‐2 NL 62,000 NL 280,000 20 15,900 20 7 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Bromomethane 74‐83‐9 NL 730 NL 59,000 30 235 30 10 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Carbon Disulfide 75‐15‐0 NL 82,000 NL 110,000,000 4,000 94 94 31 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Carbon tetrachloride 56‐23‐5 NL 610 NL 2,000 5 2,980 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Chlorobenzene 108‐90‐7 NL 29,000 40,000 7,400,000 400 40,000 400 133 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Chloroethane 75‐00‐3 NL 1,500,000 NL 1,100,000 NA NL 220,000 73,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Chloroform 67‐66‐3 NL 290 NL 2,000 200 1,190 200 67 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Chloromethane 74‐87‐3 NL 12,000 NL 12,000 NA 10,400 4,000 1,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
cis‐1,2‐Dichloroethene 156‐59‐2 NL 16,000 NL 560,000 200 NL 200 67 N/A 5 N/A N/A
cis‐1,3‐Dichloropropene + 10061‐01‐5 NL 1,700 NL 7,000 5 398 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Cyclohexane 110‐82‐7 NL 120,000 NL NL NL NL 120,000 40,000 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Dibromochloromethane 124‐48‐1 NL 680 NL 8,000 5 2,050 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Dichlorodifluoromethane 75‐71‐8 NL 9,400 NL 230,000,000 25,000 39,500 25,000 8,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Ethylbenzene 100‐41‐4 NL 5,400 NL 110,000,000 8,000 5,160 5,160 1,720 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Isopropylbenzene 98‐82‐8 NL 260,000 NL NL NL NL 260,000 86,667 N/A 5 N/A N/A
EPA Regional
Screening Level
(2)
Volatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/kg)
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Achievable
Laboratory
Limits**
Project Action
Limit (PAL)
Ecological Action
Limit
Project Action Limit
New Jersey
Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Soil VOCsQAPP Worksheet #15k
CAS Number
Analytical Method
MDLs
Federal
Final Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 2
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 23 of 43
CRQL
EPA
EcoSSLs
(1)
Soil PRGs
(3)
NJDEP Non‐
Residential Direct
Contact Soil
Remediation
Standard (4)
NJDEP Default Impact
to Groundwater Soil
Remediation
Standard (5)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2 Low Soil
MDLs QLs
EPA Regional
Screening Level
(2)
Volatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/kg)
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Achievable
Laboratory
Limits**
Project Action
Limit (PAL)
Ecological Action
Limit
Project Action Limit
New Jersey
Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Soil VOCsQAPP Worksheet #15k
CAS Number
Analytical Method
MDLs
Federal
Methyl acetate 79‐20‐9 NL 7,800,000 NL NA 14,000 NL 14,000 4,667 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Methyl tert‐butyl ether 1634‐04‐4 NL 43,000 NL 320,000 200 NL 200 67 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Methylcyclohexane 108‐87‐2 NL NL NL NL NL NL NL NL N/A 5 N/A N/A
Methylene chloride 75‐09‐2 NL 11,000 NL 97,000 7 4,050 7 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Styrene 100‐42‐5 NL 820,000 300,000 260,000 2,000 300,000 2,000 667 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Tetrachloroethene 127‐18‐4 NL 550 NL 5,000 5 9,920 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Toluene 108‐88‐3 NL 720,000 200,000 91,000,000 4,000 200,000 4,000 1,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
trans‐1,2‐Dichloroethene 156‐60‐5 NL 15,000 NL 720,000 400 784 400 133 N/A 5 N/A N/A
trans‐1,3‐Dichloropropene + 10061‐02‐6 NL 1,700 NL 7,000 5 398 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Trichloroethene 79‐01‐6 NL 440 NL 20,000 7 12,400 7 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Trichlorofluoromethane 75‐69‐4 NL 79,000 NL 340,000,000 22,000 16,400 16,400 5,467 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Vinyl Chloride 75‐01‐4 NL 60 NL 2,000 5 646 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Xylenes (Total)* 1330‐20‐7 NL 63 10,000 170,000,000 12,000 10,000 10,000 3,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Final Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 2
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 24 of 43
NJDEP Non‐
Residential
Direct Contact
Soil
Remediation
Standard (4)
NJDEP Default
Impact to
Groundwater
Soil Remediation
Standard (5)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Low SIM
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Low Soil
MDLs QLs
1,1'‐Biphenyl 92‐52‐4 NL 5,100 NL 34,000,000 90,000 NL 90,000 30,000 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
1,2,4,5‐Tetrachlorobenzene 95‐94‐3 NL 1,800 NL NL NL 2,020 1,800 600 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2,2'‐Oxybis (1‐chloropropane) 108‐60‐1 NL 4,600 NL 67,000 3,000 19,900 3,000 1,000 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2,3,4,6‐Tetrachlorophenol 58‐90‐2 NL 180,000 NL 0 0 199 199 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2,4,5‐Trichlorophenol 95‐95‐4 NL 610,000 9,000 68,000,000 44,000 9,000 9,000 3,000 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2,4,6‐Trichlorophenol 88‐06‐2 NL 6,100 4,000 74,000 200 4,000 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2,4‐Dichlorophenol 120‐83‐2 NL 18,000 NL 2,100,000 200 87,500 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2,4‐Dimethylphenol 105‐67‐9 NL 120,000 NL 14,000,000 700 10 10 10 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2,4‐Dinitrophenol 51‐28‐5 NL 12,000 20,000 1,400,000 300 20,000 300 300 N/A NL 330 N/A N/A
2,4‐Dinitrotoluene 121‐14‐2 NL 1,600 NL 3,000 200 1,280 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2,6‐Dinitrotoluene 606‐20‐2 NL 6,100 NL 3,000 200 33 33 33 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2‐Chloronapthalene 91‐58‐7 NL 630,000 NL NL NL 12 12 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2‐Chlorophenol 95‐57‐8 NL 39,000 NL 2,200,000 500 243 243 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2‐Methylnapthalene 91‐57‐6 NL 31,000 NL 2,400,000 5,000 3,240 3,240 1,080 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
2‐Methylphenol 95‐48‐7 NL 310,000 NL 3,400,000 NA NL 310,000 103,333 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
2‐Nitroaniline 88‐74‐4 NL 61,000 NL 23,000,000 NA 74,100 39,000 13,000 N/A NL 330 N/A N/A
2‐Nitrophenol 88‐75‐5 NL NL NL NL NL 1,600 1,600 NL N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
3,3'‐Dichlorobenzidine 91‐94‐1 NL 1,100 NL 4,000 200 646 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
3‐Nitroaniline 99‐09‐2 NL NL NL NL NL 3,160 3,160 NL N/A NL 330 N/A N/A
4,6‐Dinitro‐2‐methylphenol 534‐52‐1 NL 490 NL 68,000 300 144 144 144 N/A NL 330 N/A N/A
4‐Bromophenyl‐phenylether 101‐55‐3 NL NL NL NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
4‐Chloro‐3‐methylphenol 59‐50‐7 NL 610,000 NL NL NL NL 610,000 NL N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
4‐Chloroaniline 106‐47‐8 NL 2,400 NL NL NL 1,100 1,100 367 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
4‐Chlorophenyl‐phenyl ether 7005‐72‐3 NL NL NL NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
4‐Methylphenol 106‐44‐5 NL 31,000 NL 340,000 NA 163,000 31,000 10,333 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
4‐Nitroaniline 100‐01‐6 NL 24,000 NL NL NL 21,900 21,900 7,300 N/A NL 330 N/A N/A
4‐Nitrophenol 100‐02‐7 NL NL 7,000 NL NL 7,000 7,000 2,333 N/A NL 330 N/A N/A
Acenaphthene 83‐32‐9 29,000 340,000 20,000 37,000,000 74,000 29,000 29,000 9,667 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Acenaphthylene 208‐96‐8 29,000 340,000 NL 300,000,000 NA 29,000 29,000 9,667 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Acetophenone 98‐86‐2 NL 780,000 NL 5,000 2,000 300,000 2,000 667 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Anthracene 120‐12‐7 29,000 1,700,000 NL 30,000,000 1,500,000 29,000 29,000 9,667 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Atrazine 1912‐24‐9 NL 2,100 NL 2,400,000 200 NL 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Benzaldehyde 100‐52‐7 NL 780,000 NL 68,000,000 NA NL 6,100,000 2,033,333 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Benzo (a) anthracene 56‐55‐3 1,100 150 NL 2,000 500 1,100 500 170 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Benzo (a) pyrene 50‐32‐8 1,100 15 NL 200 200 1,100 200 170 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Benzo (b) fluoroanthene 205‐99‐2 NL 150 NL 2,000 2,000 59,800 600 170 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene 191‐24‐2 1,100 170,000 NL 30,000,000 NA 1,100 1,100 367 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
QAPP Worksheet #15lReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Soil SVOCs
Semi‐Volatile Organic
Compounds
(All units: μg/kg)
CAS Number
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action Limit Achievable
Laboratory Limits**
Project
Action Limit
(PAL)EPA EcoSSLs (1) Soil PRGs (3)
Federal New Jersey
MDLs
Ecological
Action LimitEPA Regional
Screening
Level
(2)
Analytical Method
CRQL
Final Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 2
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 25 of 43
NJDEP Non‐
Residential
Direct Contact
Soil
Remediation
Standard (4)
NJDEP Default
Impact to
Groundwater
Soil Remediation
Standard (5)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Low SIM
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Low Soil
MDLs QLs
QAPP Worksheet #15lReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Soil SVOCs
Semi‐Volatile Organic
Compounds
(All units: μg/kg)
CAS Number
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action Limit Achievable
Laboratory Limits**
Project
Action Limit
(PAL)EPA EcoSSLs (1) Soil PRGs (3)
Federal New Jersey
MDLs
Ecological
Action LimitEPA Regional
Screening
Level
(2)
Analytical Method
CRQL
Benzo (k) fluoroanthene 207‐08‐9 NL 1,500 NL 23,000 16,000 148,000 6,000 2,000 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Bis (2‐chloroethoxy) methane 111‐91‐1 NL 18,000 NL NL NL 302 302 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Bis (2‐ethylhexyl) phthalate 117‐81‐7 NL 35,000 NL 140,000 790,000 925 925 308 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
bis‐(2‐chloroethyl) ether 111‐44‐4 NL 210 NL 2,000 200 23,700 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Butylbenzylphthalate 85‐68‐7 NL 260,000 NL 14,000,000 150,000 239 239 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Caprolactam 105‐60‐2 NL 3,100,000 NL 340,000,000 8,000 NL 8,000 2,667 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Carbazole 86‐74‐8 NL NL NL 96,000 NA NL 24,000 8,000 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Chrysene 218‐01‐9 1,100 15,000 NL 230,000 52,000 1,100 1,100 367 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Dibenzo (a,h)‐anthracene 53‐70‐3 1,100 15 NL 200 500 1,100 200 170 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Dibenzofuran 132‐64‐9 NL 7,800 NL NL NL NL 7,800 NL N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Diethylphthalate 84‐66‐2 NL 4,900,000 100,000 550,000,000 57,000 100,000 57,000 19,000 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Dimethylphthalate 131‐11‐3 NL NL NL NL NL 734,000 734,000 NL N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Di‐n‐butylphthalate 84‐74‐2 NL 610,000 200,000 68,000,000 620,000 200,000 200,000 66,667 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Di‐n‐octylphthalate 117‐84‐0 NL NL NL 27,000,000 3,300,000 709,000 709,000 236,333 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Fluoranthene 206‐44‐0 1,100 230,000 NL 24,000,000 840,000 1,100 1,100 367 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Fluorene 86‐73‐7 29,000 230,000 NL 24,000,000 110,000 29,000 29,000 9,667 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Hexachlorobenzene 118‐74‐1 NL 300 NL 1,000 200 199 199 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Hexachlorobutadiene 87‐68‐3 NL 6,100 NL 25,000 600 40 40 40 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Hexachlorocyclo‐pentadiene 77‐47‐4 NL 37,000 10,000 110,000 210,000 10,000 10,000 3,333 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Hexachloroethane 67‐72‐1 NL 4,300 NL 140,000 200 596 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Indeno (1,2,3‐cd)‐pyrene 193‐39‐5 1,100 150 NL 2,000 5,000 1,100 600 200 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Isophorone 78‐59‐1 NL 510,000 NL 2,000,000 200 139,000 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Napthalene 91‐20‐3 29,000 3,600 NL 17,000 16,000 29,000 6,000 2,000 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Nitrobenzene 98‐95‐3 NL 4,800 NL 340,000 200 1,310 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
N‐Nitroso‐di‐n propylamine 621‐64‐7 NL 69 NL 300 200 NL 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
N‐Nitrosodiphenylamine 86‐30‐6 NL 99,000 NL 390,000 200 545 200 170 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Pentachlorophenol 87‐86‐5 2,100 890 3,000 10,000 300 2,100 300 300 N/A 6.7 330 N/A N/A
Phenanthrene 85‐01‐8 29,000 1,700,000 NL 300,000,000 NA 29,000 29,000 9,667 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Phenol 108‐95‐2 NL 1,800,000 30,000 210,000,000 5,000 30,000 5,000 1,667 N/A NL 170 N/A N/A
Pyrene 129‐00‐0 1,100 170,000 NL 18,000,000 550,000 1,100 1,100 367 N/A 3.3 170 N/A N/A
Final Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 2
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 26 of 43
CRQL
NJDEP Non‐
Residential
Direct Contact
Soil
Remediation
Standard (4)
NJDEP Default
Impact to
Groundwater
Soil
Remediation
Standard (5)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Soil
MDLs QLs
Aroclor‐1016 12674‐11‐2 NL 390.00 n 371 e 1,000 200 371 200 67 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1221 11104‐28‐2 NL 140.00 c 371 e 1,000 200 371 200 67 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1232 11141‐16‐5 NL 140.00 c 371 e 1,000 200 371 200 67 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1242 53469‐21‐9 NL 220.00 c 371 e 1,000 200 371 200 67 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1248 12672‐29‐6 NL 220.00 c 371 e 1,000 200 371 200 67 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1254 11097‐69‐1 NL 110.00 n 371 e 1,000 200 371 200 67 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1260 11096‐82‐5 NL 220.00 c 371 e 1,000 200 371 200 67 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1262 37324‐23‐5 NL 110.00 n 371 e 1,000 200 371 200 67 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1268 11100‐14‐4 NL 110.00 n 371 e 1,000 200 371 200 67 N/A 33 N/A N/A
QAPP Worksheet #15mReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Soil Aroclors (PCBs)
Achievable Laboratory
Limits**New Jersey
MDLs
Aroclors
(All units: μg/kg)CAS Number
Project Action
Limit (PAL)
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***EPA EcoSSLs (1) Soil PRGs (3)
Federal
Analytical Method
Ecological
Action LimitEPA Regional
Screening Level
(2)
Project Action Limit
Final Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 2
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 27 of 43
CRQL
EPA EcoSSLs (1)
EPA Regional
Screening Level
(2)
Soil PRGs (3)
NJDEP Non‐
Residential
Direct Contact
Soil
Remediation
Standard (4)
NJDEP Default
Impact to
Groundwater
Soil
Remediation
Standard (5)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Soil
MDLs QLs
4,4'‐DDD 72‐54‐8 21 2,000 NL 13,000 3,000 21 21 7 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
4,4'‐DDE 72‐55‐9 21 1,400 NL 9,000 12,000 21 21 7 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
4,4'‐DDT 50‐29‐3 21 1,700 NL 8,000 7,000 21 21 7 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Aldrin 309‐00‐2 NL 29 NL 200 100 3 3 2 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
alpha‐BHC 319‐84‐6 NL 77 NL 500 2 99 2 2 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
alpha‐Chlordane 5103‐71‐9 NL 1,600 NL 1,000 30 224 30 10 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
beta‐BHC 319‐85‐7 NL 270 NL 2,000 2 4 2 2 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
delta‐BHC 319‐86‐8 NL 270 NL NL NL 9,940 270 90 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
Dieldrin 60‐57‐1 5 30 NL 200 3 5 3 3 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Endosulfan I 959‐98‐8 NL 37,000 NL 6,800,000 2,000 119 119 40 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
Endosulfan II 33213‐65‐9 NL 37,000 NL 6,800,000 2,000 119 119 40 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Endosulfan sulfate 1031‐07‐8 NL 37,000 NL 6,800,000 1,000 36 36 12 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Endrin 72‐20‐8 NL 1,800 NL 340,000 600 10 10 5 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Endrin aldehyde 7421‐93‐4 NL 1,800 NL NL NL 11 11 4 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Endrin ketone 53494‐70‐5 NL 1,800 NL NL NL NL 1,800 600 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
gamma‐BHC (Lindane) 58‐89‐9 NL 520 NL 2,000 2 5 2 2 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
gamma‐Chlordane 5103‐74‐2 NL 1,600 NL 1,000 30 224 30 10 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
Heptachlor 76‐44‐8 NL 110 NL 700 300 6 6 2 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
Heptachlor epoxide 1024‐57‐3 NL 53 NL 300 9 152 9 3 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
Methoxychlor 72‐43‐5 NL 31,000 NL 5,700,000 100,000 20 20 7 N/A 17 N/A N/A
Toxaphene 8001‐35‐2 NL 440 NL 3,000 200 119 119 40 N/A 170 N/A N/A
Project Action
Limit (PAL)
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Analytical Method
Ecological
Action Limit
Project Action Limit
Federal
QAPP Worksheet #15n
Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Soil Pesticides
Achievable Laboratory
Limits**New Jersey
MDLs
Pesticides
(All units: μg/kg)CAS Number
Final Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 2
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 28 of 43
1. EPA Ecological Soil Screening Levels (EcoSSLs). http://www.epa.gov/ecotox/ecossl/
2. EPA Regional Screening Levels (RSL) for residential soil based on carcinogenic target risk of 10‐6 and noncancer hazard index of 0.1,
http://www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/human/rb‐concentration_table/index.htm). November 2013.
3. Efroymson, R.A., G.W. Suter II, B.E. Sample, and D.S. Jones. 1997. Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) for Ecological Endpoints.
Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management Contract No. DE‐AC05‐84OR21401.
4. NJDEP Non‐Residential Direct Contact Health Based Criteria and Soil Remediation Standards (Last Revised 6/2008);
http://www.state.nj.us/dep/srp/guidance/rs/, downloaded January 31, 2014
5. NJDEP Guidance Document, Development of Site‐Specific Impact to Groundwater Soil Remediation Standards Using the Soil‐Water Partition Equation;
http://www.state.nj.us/dep/srp/guidance/rs/igw_intro.htm, downloaded January 31, 2014
* m‐xylene and p‐xylene reported as one compound under S0M01.2. The RSL is based on m‐xylene.
**The laboratory is TBD. CDM Smith will implement the EPA Region 2 FASTAC policy for obtaining analytical services.
See Appendix C for DESA information regarding this worksheet.
CAS = Chemical abstract service
CRQL = Contract Required Quantitation Limit
EPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency
MDL = method detection limit
N/A = Not Applicable
NJDEP = New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
NL = Not Listed or chemical name listed but no value available
PAL= Project Action Limit
Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Soil
Notes from QAPP Worksheet #15k‐n
***Highlighted analytes have PQLGs that may not be achievable using standard laboratory analyses. CDM Smith will utilize nominal CRQLs as available rather than using modified analyses for these analytes as the nominal CRQLs will not impact the projects data quality objectives.
Final Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 2
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 29 of 43
New Jersey CRQL
EPA
Freshwater
Sediment
Screening
Benchmark (1)
NJDEP
Guidance for
Sediment
Quality (3)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Low Soil
MDLs QLs
1,1,1‐Trichloroethane 71‐55‐6 30.2 640,000 ns 213 213 71 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,1,2,2‐Tetrachloroethane 79‐34‐5 1360 560 c 850 560 187 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,1,2‐Trichloro‐1,2,2‐trifluoroethane 76‐13‐1 NL 910,000 ns NL 910,000 303,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,1,2‐Trichloroethane 79‐00‐5 1240 160 n 518 160 53 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,1‐Dichloroethane 75‐34‐3 NL 3,300 c NL 3,300 1,100 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,1‐Dicholoroethene 75‐35‐4 31 24,000 n 19.4 19 6 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2,3‐Trichlorobenzene 87‐61‐6 858 4,900 n NL 858 286 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2,4‐Trichlorobenzene 120‐82‐1 2100 6,200 n 5062 5,062 1,687 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2‐Dibromo‐3‐chloropropane 96‐12‐8 NL 5 c NL 5 5 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2‐Dibromoethane 106‐93‐4 NL 34 c NL 34 11 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichlorobenzene 95‐50‐1 16.5 190,000 n 294 294 98 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichloroethane 107‐06‐2 NL 430 c 260 260 87 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,2‐Dichloropropane 78‐87‐5 NL 940 c 333 333 111 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,3‐Dichlorobenzene 541‐73‐1 4430 NL o 1315 1,315 438 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,4‐Dichlorobenzene 106‐46‐7 599 2,400 c 318 318 106 N/A 5 N/A N/A
1,4‐Dioxane 123‐91‐1 NL 4,900 c NL 4,900 1,633 N/A 100 N/A N/A
2‐Butanone 78‐93‐3 NL 2,800,000 n NL 2,800,000 933,333 N/A 10 N/A N/A
2‐Hexanone 591‐78‐6 NL 21,000 n NL 21,000 7,000 N/A 10 N/A N/A
4‐Methyl‐2‐pentanone 108‐10‐1 NL 2,200,000 ns NL 2,200,000 733,333 N/A 10 N/A N/A
Acetone 67‐64‐1 NL 6,100,000 n NL 6,100,000 2,033,333 N/A 10 N/A N/A
Benzene 71‐43‐2 NL 1,100 c 340 340 113 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Bromochloromethane 74‐97‐5 NL 16,000 n NL 16,000 5,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Bromodichloromethane 75‐27‐4 NL 270 c NL 270 90 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Bromoform 75‐25‐2 654 62,000 c 492 492 164 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Bromomethane 74‐83‐9 NL 730 n 1.37 1.37 1.37 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Carbon Disulfide 75‐15‐0 0.851 82,000 n NL 0.85 0.85 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Carbon tetrachloride 56‐23‐5 64.2 610 c 1450 610 203 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Chlorobenzene 108‐90‐7 8.42 29,000 n 291 291 97 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Chloroethane 75‐00‐3 NL 1,500,000 n NL 1,500,000 500,000 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Chloroform 67‐66‐3 NL 290 c 121 121 40 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Chloromethane 74‐87‐3 NL 12,000 n NL 12,000 4,000 N/A 5 N/A N/A
cis‐1,2‐Dichloroethene 156‐59‐2 NL 16,000 n NL 16,000 5,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
cis‐1,3‐Dichloropropene +
10061‐01‐5 NL 1,700 c NL 1,700 567 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Cyclohexane 110‐82‐7 NL 120,000 ns NL 120,000 40,000 N/A 5 N/A N/A
QAPP Worksheet #15oReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Sediment VOCs
Volatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/kg)
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action
Limit (PAL)
Achievable Laboratory
Limits**
MDLs
Project Action Limit
CAS Number EPA Regional
Screening
Level
(2)
Federal
Analytical Method
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 30 of 43
New Jersey CRQL
EPA
Freshwater
Sediment
Screening
Benchmark (1)
NJDEP
Guidance for
Sediment
Quality (3)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Low Soil
MDLs QLs
QAPP Worksheet #15oReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Sediment VOCs
Volatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/kg)
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action
Limit (PAL)
Achievable Laboratory
Limits**
MDLs
Project Action Limit
CAS Number EPA Regional
Screening
Level
(2)
Federal
Analytical Method
Dibromochloromethane 124‐48‐1 NL 680 c NL 680 227 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Dichlorodifluoromethane 75‐71‐8 NL 9,400 n NL 9,400 3,133 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Ethylbenzene 100‐41‐4 1100 5,400 cs 1400 1,400 467 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Isopropylbenzene 98‐82‐8 86 260,000 ns NL 86 29 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Methyl acetate 79‐20‐9 NL 7,800,000 n NL 7,800,000 2,600,000 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Methyl tert‐butyl ether 1634‐04‐4 NL 43,000 c NL 43,000 14,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Methylcyclohexane 108‐87‐2 NL NL 0 NL NL NL N/A 5 N/A N/A
Methylene chloride 75‐09‐2 NL 11,000 c 159 159 53 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Styrene 100‐42‐5 559 820,000 ns 254 254 85 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Tetrachloroethene 127‐18‐4 468 550 c 450 450 150 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Toluene 108‐88‐3 NL 720,000 ns 2500 2,500 833 N/A 5 N/A N/A
trans‐1,2‐Dichloroethene 156‐60‐5 1050 15,000 n 654 654 218 N/A 5 N/A N/A
trans‐1,3‐Dichloropropene +
10061‐02‐6 NL 1,700 c NL 1,700 567 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Trichloroethene 79‐01‐6 96.9 440 n 1600 440 147 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Trichlorofluoromethane 75‐69‐4 NL 79,000 n NL 79,000 26,333 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Vinyl Chloride 75‐01‐4 NL 60 c 202 60 20 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Xylenes (Total)* 1330‐20‐7 NL 63 n 120 63 21 N/A 5 N/A N/A
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 31 of 43
New Jersey
EPA Freshwater Sediment Screening
Benchmark (1)
NJDEP Guidance for
Sediment Quality (3)
Analytical Method - SOM01.2 Low SIM
Analytical Method - SOM01.2 Low Soil
MDLs QLs
1,1'-Biphenyl 92-52-4 1220 5,100 n NL 1,220 407 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 1090 1,800 n 1252 1,252 417 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2,2'-Oxybis (1-chloropropane) 108-60-1 NL 4,600 c NL 4,600 1,533 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 284 180,000 n NL 284 284 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 NL 610,000 n NL 610,000 203,333 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 213 6,100 n 208 208 208 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 117 18,000 n 81.7 81.7 81.7 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 29 120,000 n 304 304 304 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 NL 12,000 n 6.21 6.21 6.21 N/A NL 330 Low N/A N/A
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 41.6 1,600 c 14.4 14.4 14.4 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 NL 6,100 n NL 6,100 2,033 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2-Chloronapthalene 91-58-7 NL 630,000 n 417 417 417 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 31.2 39,000 n 31.9 31.9 31.9 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2-Methylnapthalene 91-57-6 20.2 31,000 n 70 70 23 N/A 3.3 170 SIM N/A N/A
2-Methylphenol 95-48-7 NL 310,000 n NL 310,000 103,333 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 NL 61,000 n NL 61,000 20,333 N/A NL 330 Low N/A N/A
2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 127 1,100 c 127 127 127 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
3-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 330 Low N/A N/A
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 NL 490 n NL 490 490 N/A NL 330 Low N/A N/A
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 101-55-3 1230 NL NL 1,230 410 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 NL 610,000 n NL 610,000 203,333 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
4-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 NL 2,400 c NL 2,400 800 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
4-Chlorophenyl-phenyl ether 7005-72-3 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
4-Methylphenol 106-44-5 670 31,000 n NL 670 223 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 NL 24,000 c NL 24,000 8,000 N/A NL 330 Low N/A N/A
4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 NL NL 13.3 13.3 13.3 N/A NL 330 Low N/A N/A
MDLs
Federal CRQL
Analytical Method
QAPP Worksheet #15pReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Sediment SVOCs
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/kg)
CAS Number
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action Limit
(PAL)
Project Action Limit Achievable Laboratory Limits**
EPA Regional Screening Level
(2)
Project- Specific Option
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 32 of 43
New Jersey
EPA Freshwater Sediment Screening
Benchmark (1)
NJDEP Guidance for
Sediment Quality (3)
Analytical Method - SOM01.2 Low SIM
Analytical Method - SOM01.2 Low Soil
MDLs QLsMDLs
Federal CRQL
Analytical Method
QAPP Worksheet #15pReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Sediment SVOCs
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/kg)
CAS Number
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action Limit
(PAL)
Project Action Limit Achievable Laboratory Limits**
EPA Regional Screening Level
(2)
Project- Specific Option
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 6.7 340,000 n 16 16 5 N/A 3.3 170 Sim N/A N/A
Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 5.9 340,000 44 44 15 N/A 3.3 170 Sim N/A N/A
Acetophenone 98-86-2 NL 780,000 n NL 780,000 260,000 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Anthracene 120-12-7 57.2 1,700,000 n 220 220 220 N/A 3.3 170 Low N/A N/A
Atrazine 1912-24-9 6.62 2,100 c NL 6.62 6.62 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Benzaldehyde 100-52-7 NL 780,000 n NL 780,000 260,000 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Benzo (a) anthracene 56-55-3 108 150 c 320 150 50 N/A 3.3 170 Sim N/A N/A
Benzo (a) pyrene 50-32-8 150 15 c 370 15 5 N/A 3.3 170 Sim N/A N/A
Benzo (b) fluoroanthene 205-99-2 NL 150 c 10400 150 50 N/A 3.3 170 Sim N/A N/A
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene 191-24-2 170 170,000 170 170 57 N/A 3.3 170 Sim N/A N/A
Benzo (k) fluoroanthene 207-08-9 240 1,500 c 240 240 80 N/A 3.3 170 Low N/A N/A
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane 111-91-1 NL 18,000 n NL 18,000 6,000 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 117-81-7 180 35,000 c 182 182 182 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
bis-(2-chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 NL 210 c 3520 210 210 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Butylbenzylphthalate 85-68-7 10900 260,000 c 1970 1,970 657 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Caprolactam 105-60-2 NL 3,100,000 n NL 3,100,000 1,033,333 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Carbazole 86-74-8 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Chrysene 218-01-9 166 15,000 c 340 340 340 N/A 3.3 170 Low N/A N/A
Dibenzo (a,h)-anthracene 53-70-3 33 15 c 60 15 5 N/A 3.3 170 Sim N/A N/A
Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 415 7,800 n NL 415 415 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Diethylphthalate 84-66-2 603 4,900,000 n 295 295 295 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Dimethylphthalate 131-11-3 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 6470 610,000 n 1114 1,114 371 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Di-n-octylphthalate 117-84-0 NL NL NL NL NL N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Fluoranthene 206-44-0 423 230,000 n 750 750 250 N/A 3.3 170 Low N/A N/A
Fluorene 86-73-7 77.4 230,000 n 190 190 190 N/A 3.3 170 Low N/A N/A
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 20 300 c 20 20 20 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 33 of 43
New Jersey
EPA Freshwater Sediment Screening
Benchmark (1)
NJDEP Guidance for
Sediment Quality (3)
Analytical Method - SOM01.2 Low SIM
Analytical Method - SOM01.2 Low Soil
MDLs QLsMDLs
Federal CRQL
Analytical Method
QAPP Worksheet #15pReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Sediment SVOCs
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
(All units: μg/kg)
CAS Number
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action Limit
(PAL)
Project Action Limit Achievable Laboratory Limits**
EPA Regional Screening Level
(2)
Project- Specific Option
Hexachlorobutadiene 87‐68‐3 NL 6,100 n 26.5 26.5 26.5 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Hexachlorocyclo‐pentadiene 77‐47‐4 NL 37,000 n 901 901 300 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Hexachloroethane 67‐72‐1 1027 4,300 n 584 584 195 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Indeno (1,2,3‐cd)‐pyrene 193‐39‐5 17 150 c 200 150 50 N/A 3.3 170 Sim N/A N/A
Isophorone 78‐59‐1 NL 510,000 c 432 432 144 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Napthalene 91‐20‐3 176 3,600 c 160 160 53 N/A 3.3 170 Sim N/A N/A
Nitrobenzene 98‐95‐3 NL 4,800 c 145 145 145 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
N‐Nitroso‐di‐n propylamine 621‐64‐7 NL 69 c NL 69 69 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
N‐Nitrosodiphenylamine 86‐30‐6 2680 99,000 c NL 2,680 893 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Pentachlorophenol 87‐86‐5 504 890 c 23000 890 297 N/A 6.7 330 Low N/A N/A
Phenanthrene 85‐01‐8 204 1,700,000 n(7) 560 560 187 N/A 3.3 170 Low N/A N/A
Phenol 108‐95‐2 420 1,800,000 n 49.1 49.1 49.1 N/A NL 170 Low N/A N/A
Pyrene 129‐00‐0 195 170,000 n 490 490 490 N/A 3.3 170 Low N/A N/A
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 34 of 43
New Jersey CRQL
EPA
Freshwater
Sediment
Screening
Benchmark (1)
NJDEP
Guidance for
Sediment
Quality (3)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Soil
MDLs QLs
Aroclor‐1016 12674‐11‐2 59.8 390 n 7 7 7 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1221 11104‐28‐2 59.8 140 c NL 59.8 59.8 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1232 11141‐16‐5 59.8 140 c NL 59.8 59.8 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1242 53469‐21‐9 59.8 220 c NL 59.8 59.8 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1248 12672‐29‐6 59.8 220 c 30 30 30 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1254 11097‐69‐1 59.8 110 n 60 60 60.0 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1260 11096‐82‐5 59.8 220 c 5 5 5 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1262 37324‐23‐5 59.8 110 n NL 59.8 59.8 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Aroclor‐1268 11100‐14‐4 59.8 110 n NL 59.8 59.8 N/A 33 N/A N/A
Analytical Method
CAS Number
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action Limit
Federal
EPA Regional
Screening
Level
(2)
QAPP Worksheet #15qReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Sediment Aroclors (PCBs)
Aroclors
(All units:
μg/kg)
Project Action
Limit (PAL)
Achievable Laboratory
Limits**
MDLs
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 35 of 43
New Jersey CRQL
EPA
Freshwater
Sediment
Screening
Benchmark (1)
NJDEP
Guidance for
Sediment
Quality (3)
Analytical
Method ‐
SOM01.2
Soil
MDLs QLs
4,4'‐DDD 72‐54‐8 4.88 2,000 c 8 8 3 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
4,4'‐DDE 72‐55‐9 3.16 1,400 c 5 5 5 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
4,4'‐DDT 50‐29‐3 4.16 1,700 c 8 8 8 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Aldrin 309‐00‐2 2 29 c 2 2 2 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
alpha‐BHC 319‐84‐6 6 77 c 6 6 2 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
alpha‐Chlordane 5103‐71‐9 3.24 1,600 c(8) 7 7 2 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
beta‐BHC 319‐85‐7 5 270 c 5 5 5 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
delta‐BHC 319‐86‐8 6400 270 c NL 270 90 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
Dieldrin 60‐57‐1 1.9 30 c 2 2 2 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Endosulfan I 959‐98‐8 2.9 37,000 n NL 2.90 3 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
Endosulfan II 33213‐65‐9 14 37,000 n NL 14 5 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Endosulfan sulfate 1031‐07‐8 5.4 37,000 n(9) 34.6 34.60 12 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Endrin 72‐20‐8 2.22 1,800 n 3 3 3 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Endrin aldehyde 7421‐93‐4 NL 1,800 n 480 480 160 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
Endrin ketone 53494‐70‐5 NL 1,800 n NL 1,800 600 N/A 3.3 N/A N/A
gamma‐BHC (Lindane) 58‐89‐9 2.37 520 c 3 3 3 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
gamma‐Chlordane 5103‐74‐2 3.24 1,600 c(8) 7 7 2 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
Heptachlor 76‐44‐8 68 110 c 0.6 0.60 0.60 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
Heptachlor epoxide 1024‐57‐3 2.47 53 c 5 5 5 N/A 1.7 N/A N/A
Methoxychlor 72‐43‐5 18.7 31,000 n 13.6 13.6 5 N/A 17 N/A N/A
Toxaphene 8001‐35‐2 0.1 440 c 0.077 0.077 0.077 N/A 170 N/A N/A
QAPP Worksheet 15r
Reference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Sediment Pesticides
Pesticides
(All units: μg/kg)
Project Action
Limit (PAL)
Achievable Laboratory
Limits**
MDLs
Analytical Method
CAS
Number
Project Quantitation Limit Goal (PQLG)***
Project Action Limit
EPA Regional
Screening Level
(2)
Federal
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 36 of 43
Source:1 EPA Freshwater Sediment Screening Benchmarks . August 2006. http://www.epa.gov/reg3hscd/risk/eco/btag/sbv/fwsed/screenbench.htm.
3 NJDEP Freshwater Sediment Screening Guidelines. (webpage http://www.state.nj.us/dep/srp/regs/sediment/table_01.htm). March 2009.
Site specific background levels will be developed using site data (when available) and NJ ambient background values. The background data will be compared to
the proposed screening levels to determine the final RI Screening Criteria.
* m‐xylene and p‐xylene reported as one compound under S0M01.2. The RSL is based on m‐xylene.
**The laboratory is TBD. CDM Smith will implement the EPA Region 2 FASTAC policy for obtaining analytical services.
Notes: FOOTNOTES FOR HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING LEVELS:
* ‐ value for total PCBs(1) OSWER screening value for residential soil
µg/kg ‐ micrograms per kilogram(2) screening value for mercuric chloride (and other mercury salts)
ca ‐ value based on cancer effects(3) screening value for nickel soluble salts
EPA ‐ Environmental Protection Agency (4) screening value for vanadium and compounds
m ‐ concentration may exceed ceiling limit (5) screening value for acenaphthene
mg/kg ‐ milligrams per kilogram(6) screening value for pyrene
n ‐ value based on noncancer effects(7) screening value for anthracene
NA ‐ not applicable(8) screening value for chlordane
NJDEP ‐ New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection(9) screening value for endosulfan
RI ‐ remedial investigation
NL ‐ not listed
s ‐ concentration may exceed saturation concentration
***Highlighted analytes have PQLGs that may not be achievable using standard laboratory analyses. CDM Smith will utilize nominal CRQLs as available rather than using modified analyses for these analytes as the nominal CRQLs will not impact the projects data quality objectives.
Notes for QAPP Worksheet #15o‐rReference Limits and Evaluation Table ‐ Sediment
2 EPA 2011. EPA Regional Screening Level (RSL) for residential soil. To account for exposure to multiple chemicals, RSLs for chemicals based on noncancer effects are decreased by a
factor of 10 to account for a target hazard quotient (HQ) of 0.1. November. http://www.epa.gov/region09/superfund/prg/index.html
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 37 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #16 Project Schedule/Timeline Table
See attached Figure 1
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 38 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #17h Sampling Design and Rationale Revised Remedial Investigation
Describe and provide a rationale for choosing the sampling approach: Concerns regarding the reliability of select analytical results for soil, groundwater, sediment and surface water previously received in conjunction with this RI/FS, environmental samples are proposed to be re‐collected from previously sampled locations in support of the RI/FS and the associated risk assessments. Sampling locations include the Albea Americas, Inc. (Albea) property (formerly the American National Can property) and all the adjacent properties, including Warren Lumber Yard (WLY), Vikon Tile Corporation (VTC), Area of Concern 1 (AC 1) and the railroad right‐of‐way. The borings are summarized on attached Table 1, while Figure 2 shows the proposed soil boring locations. Table 2 provides the sampling rationale for each location. Sampling Design: The number and selection of locations were selected upon review of the unreliable data. All sample naming schemes are detailed in the Final QAPP (June 2011). Sample locations names will be modified starting with the 200 to identify them as being from this investigation. The revised remedial investigation events are detailed below. Shallow Soil Borings A total of 24 shallow borings will be advanced to approximately 40‐feet bgs during this event (21 plus three contingency. A 2‐inch ID macro‐core sampler will be advanced to depth. Lithologic samples will be collected continuously using a 4‐foot long macro‐core sampler with lexan liners. Upon retrieval from the sampler, each 4‐foot sample will be opened by the driller and screened for VOCs using a photo‐ionization detector (PID) by the field geologist. The lithology of each sample will be characterized and logged by the field geologist. The sampling and lithologic logging procedures are detailed in the TSOPs 1‐4 and 3‐5 (field copy will have all required TSOPs). It is assumed that up to six soil samples will be collected from each of the 40‐foot soil borings. Samples will be analyzed as described in Table 1. All borings will at least be sampled at a depth of 0 to 2 feet and 5 to 7 feet. The depth of the remaining samples will be selected in the field based on visual observations, highest PID screening results, and to provide proper vertical coverage. Perched Groundwater Sampling Following completion of the soil borings a DPT drill rig will be used to collect up to 15 groundwater screening samples from the perched groundwater zones. Samples will only be attempted in zones that show significant evidence of perched groundwater. Adjacent to the original borehole locations, the DPT rods will be advanced to the sampling depth first, and a four‐foot screen will be exposed to the formation. Prior to sampling, the screen will be briefly developed using a peristaltic pump (or a check valve if depth to groundwater is too great) to clear the screen and formation of silt and fine‐grained particles. Following a brief development of no longer than 30 minutes, a grab sample of the groundwater will be collected. If the screening samples collected contain excessive amounts of sediment, CDM will work with the laboratory and the driller to revise the approach. Contingencies could include changing the type or size of the sample bottles, additional development of the screen interval or alternative sampling methods. The CDM Smith RQAC will check that all DQOs can be met by the alternative sampling methods. Field parameters including pH, conductivity, temperature, DO, ORP, and turbidity will be measured at the time of sampling. If the perched zone does not provide sufficient water for a sample then a sample will not be collected. Samples will be analyzed for TCL Trace level VOCs.
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 39 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #17h Sampling Design and Rationale Revised Remedial Investigation
Deep Facility Soil Borings A total of 4 deep borings will be advanced to approximately 125‐feet bgs during this event below the facility. Sonic drilling methods were selected. Due to height constraints, exhaust and dust control issues, sonic drilling is the cleanest drilling method with the capabilities of collecting samples in the geologic materials at the site. To advance each of the deep soil borings through the facility floor an appropriate sized concrete hole will be cut through the floor using a concrete coring tool. Following concrete coring a 4‐inch diameter casing will be advanced to depth using a mini‐sonic drill rig. Lithologic samples will be collected in 10‐foot sections using the 4‐inch lead casing. Upon retrieval from the sampler, each ten‐foot sample will be screened for VOCs using a photo‐ionization detector (PID). The lithology of each sample will be characterized and logged by the field geologist. The sampling and lithologic logging procedures are detailed in TSOPs 1‐4 and 3‐5. At each interior deep soil boring, subsurface soil samples will be collected at 0 to 2 feet, 5 to 7 feet, and every 10 feet from 10 feet bgs to a total depth of approximately 125 feet bgs. The goal of the sampling being to collect a soil sample from each ten‐foot depth interval. Exact sample depths will be selected in the field based on results of the field screening with the PID. Each boring will be advanced to the top of bedrock or into the regional groundwater table (water levels in nearby wells will be reviewed by the field crew to gain an understanding of the depth of the regional water table), whichever is encountered first. It is assumed that up to 14 soil samples will be collected from each of the deep soil borings as described above. Each soil sample will be analyzed for TCL VOCs and moisture content. In addition, at up to five of the sampling intervals additional soil volume will be analyzed for TOC, grain size, TCL SVOCs, PCBs and pesticides. The additional parameters will be collected at the 0 to 2 feet (surface soil) and 5 to 7 feet soil samples and 30 percent of the subsurface soil samples (assumed to be the 30, 60 and 90‐foot samples). The depth of the samples will be selected in the field based on visual observations and PID screening results. A summary of the analyses proposed for each boring type is presented on Table 1. If contamination is observed in deep soils (via PID) a groundwater grab sample will be collected at the base of each boring within the regional groundwater table. If bedrock is encountered before the regional groundwater table then a sample will not be collected at that location. Groundwater screening samples will be collected by advancing the 4‐inch casing to depth. Once at depth, a stainless steel bailer will be lowered to the bottom of the casing to grab a sample for trace TCL VOCs. Deep Exterior Soil Borings A total of 17 deep borings (14 plus 3 contingency) will be advanced to approximately 100 to 125‐feet bgs during this event. Sonic drilling methods were selected in order to reach the proposed depths in this area as the glacial geology has proven to be difficult to penetrate during previous investigations. Lithologic samples will be collected in 10‐foot sections using the 4‐inch lead casing. Upon retrieval from the sampler, each ten‐foot sample will be screened for VOCs using a photo‐ionization detector (PID). The lithology of each sample will be characterized and logged by the field geologist. The sampling and lithologic logging procedures are detailed in TSOPs 1‐4 and 3‐5. At each deep exterior soil boring, subsurface soil samples will be collected at 0 to 2 feet, 5 to 7 feet, and every 10 feet from 10 feet bgs to a total depth of approximately 125 feet bgs. The goal of the sampling being to collect a soil sample from each ten‐foot depth interval. Exact sample depths will be selected in the field based on results of the field screening with the PID. Each boring will be advanced to the top of bedrock or into the regional groundwater table (water levels in nearby wells will be reviewed by the field crew to gain an understanding of the depth of the regional water table), whichever is encountered first. It is assumed that up to 14 soil samples will be collected from each of the deep soil borings as described above. Each soil sample will be analyzed for TCL VOCs and moisture content. In addition, at up to five of the sampling intervals additional soil volume will be analyzed for TOC, grain size, TCL SVOCs, PCBs and pesticides. The additional parameters will be collected at the 0 to 2 feet
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 40 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #17h
Sampling Design and Rationale Revised Remedial Investigation
(surface soil) and 5 to 7 feet soil samples and 30 percent of the subsurface soil samples (assumed to be the 30, 60 and 90‐foot samples). The depth of the samples will be selected in the field based on visual observations and PID screening results. A summary of the analyses proposed for each boring type is presented on Table 1. If contamination is observed in deep soils (via PID) a groundwater grab sample will be collected at the base of each boring within the regional groundwater table. If bedrock is encountered before the regional groundwater table then a sample will not be collected at that location. Groundwater screening samples will be collected by advancing the 4‐inch casing to depth. Once at depth, a stainless steel bailer will be lowered to the bottom of the casing to grab a sample for trace TCL VOCs. Bore Hole Abandonment After sampling, the boreholes will be backfilled with a cement‐bentonite grout. Borings completed using HSA or sonic drilling methods will be grouted using tremie pipe to grout from the base of the borehole as the drilling tools are retracted. Borings completed using DPT methods will be abandoned by filling the borehole with grout upon completion. Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Following the site reconnaissance, locations will be selected for surface water and sediment sampling. The locations will focus on drainage ditches, outfalls, seeps, drainage pipes and areas of ponded water. Up to 14 surface water and sediment samples will be collected as part of this RI. Surface water samples will be collected following EPA‐approved methodologies which will be fully detailed in the QAPP. All surface water samples will be analyzed for TCL VOC and TCL pesticides/PCBs through the EPA CLP. All samples will be analyzed using the most current EPA‐approved methods, which will be detailed in the QAPP. Table 1 summarizes the number and type of analyses for the surface water samples. Sediment samples will be collected following EPA‐approved methodologies. All sediment samples will be analyzed for TCL parameters through the EPA CLP. Table 1 summarizes the number and type of analyses for the sediment sampling.
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 41 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #17h
Sampling Design and Rationale Revised Remedial Investigation
Field procedures for this activity are detailed in the following TSOPs (previously provided):
TSOP 1‐1 Surface Water Sampling
TSOP 1‐2 Sample Custody
TSOP 1‐3 Surface Soil Sampling
TSOP 1‐4 Subsurface Soil Sampling, Section 5.2. Direct Push Rig, Section 5.2.3 Split‐Barrel (or Split‐Spoon) Sampling
TSOP 1‐10 Field Measurement of Organic Vapors, Section 5.1 Direct Reading Measurement
TSOP 1‐11 Sediment or Sludge Sampling
TSOP 1‐14 Lagoon Sampling
TSOP 2‐1 Packing and Shipping of Environmental Samples
TSOP 2‐2 Guide to Handling Investigation Derived Waste
TSOP 3‐1 Geoprobe Sampling
TSOP 3‐5 Lithologic Logging
TSOP 4‐1 Field Logbook Content and Control
TSOP 4‐2 Photographic Documentation of Field Activities, Sections 5.2.2 General Guidelines for Still Photography and 5.2.4 Photographic Documentation
TSOP 4‐10 Borehole and Well Decommissioning, except Sections 5.3 (Well Overdrilling) and 5.4 (Borehole or Well Purging)
Worksheet 17c Decontamination Procedures (Final QAPP [CDM Smith 2011])
Table 1 Analytical groups/concentrations Low and Trace level VOCs, SVOCs, Pesticides and PCBs Sampling locations Figure 2 shows the locations of the soil borings. Number of samples/frequency See Worksheet 20 and Table 1.
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 12, 2014
Page 42 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #18 Sampling Locations and Methods/SOP Requirements Table
Please see Table 1 for sample types and analytical methods; Table 2 shows the sampling locations and rationale. TSOPs 1‐3, 1.4, and 3.1 all apply to sampling activities. The depth of all soil samples are shown on Table 1 and described on Worksheet 17h.
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3,
Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0
November 12, 2014
Page 43 of 43
Sample Type Matrix Analytical ParameterConcentration
Level
Analytical and
Preparation SOP
Reference
Environmental
SamplesDuplicates
MS/MSD (Additional
Volume)Equipment Blanks Trip Blanks
Total No. of
Samples
Acronyms:PCBs Temp TemperatureSVOC Semi‐Volatile Organic Compound TOC Total Organic CarbonTAT Turn Around Time TSS Total Suspended SolidsTCL Target Compound List Turb TurbidityTDS Total Dissolved Solids VOC Volatile Organic Compound
8 NA 8
NA
160
4 4 (PCBs and Pest only) 4 80
3 62
1 22
12 NA 12
Deep Facility Soil Borings: 4 deep
soil borings to 125‐ft bgs
TCL VOCs, moisture content (48‐hr TAT) 56 3 NA
TCL SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides 20 1 1 (PCBs and Pest only)
TCL SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides 72
Shallow Soil Borings: 24 shallow
soil borings to 40‐ft bgs (21 onsite
and 3 contingency).
Soil
TCL VOCs, moisture content (7‐Day TAT)
Low
Deep Exterior Soil Borings: 17
deep soil borings to 100‐125 ft
bgs (13 onsite, 1 background and
3 contingency).
TCL VOCs, moisture content 238
SOM01.2
144
Shallow Soil Borings ‐
Approximately 15 groundwater
screening samples
Groundwater
TCL VOCs
Trace
15
262
TCL SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides 85 5 5 (PCBs and Pest only) 5 95
17
7
1 16
1
Surface Water TCL VOCs, PCBs and Pesticides 14 1
1 per cooler
Poly‐Chlorinated Biphenyls
1Sediment Sediment TCL VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides Low 14
QAPP Worksheet #20
Field Quality Control Sample Summary Table
1 (PCBs and Pest only) 1 NA 16
1 NA 1
1 (PCBs and Pest only)
Deep Facility and Exterior Soil
Borings ‐ Approximately 5 grab
samples from regional water
table
TCL VOCs 5 1 NA
Surface Water
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
Tables
Table 1
Summary of Sampling and Analysis Program
Pohatcong Valley OU3 Site
Washington Township, New Jersey
Sample Type Matrix Analytical ParameterConcentration
LevelField Parameters Sampling Frequency/Intervals
Total
Environmental
Samples
Note: All samples will be submitted for standard TAT analysis unless otherwise noted.
Acronyms:
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls
SVOC Semi‐Volatile Organic Compound
TAT Turn Around Time
TCL Target Compound List
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
Temp Temperature
TOC Total Organic Carbon
TSS Total Suspended Solids
Turb Turbidity
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
20
5614 samples per boring. (0‐2ft, 5‐7ft, 10ft, 20ft, 30ft, 40ft,
50ft, 60ft, 70ft, 80ft, 90ft, 100ft, 100 ft and 120 ft) NoneTCL VOCs, moisture content (48‐hr TAT)
TCL SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides
Low
238
85
72
144TCL VOCs, moisture content (7‐Day TAT)
TCL SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides
Soil
Deep Exterior Soil Borings: 17
deep soil borings to 100‐125 ft
bgs (13 onsite, 1 background and
3 contingency).
None14 samples per boring. (0‐2ft, 5‐7ft, 10ft, 20ft, 30ft, 40ft,
50ft, 60ft, 70ft, 80ft, 90ft, 100ft, 100 ft and 120 ft)
Deep Facility Soil Borings: 4 deep
soil borings to 125‐ft bgs
None 5 samples per boring. (0‐2ft, 5‐7ft, 30ft, 60ft, 90ft)
TCL VOCs, moisture content
TCL SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides None 5 samples per boring. (0‐2ft, 5‐7ft, 30ft, 60ft, 90ft)
3 samples per boring. (0‐2ft, 5‐7ft, 30ft)
Shallow Soil Borings: 24 shallow
soil borings to 40‐ft bgs (21
onsite and 3 contingency).
None 6 samples per boring. (0‐2ft, 5‐7ft, 10ft, 20ft, 30ft and 40ft)
None
Sediment Sediment None 14 samples collected at Surface Water locations. 14TCL VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides Low
14 samples 14Trace TCL VOCs, PCBs and Pesticides
Trace
Groundwater
None
1 grab sample per boring if indicated by results of PID soil
screening. Collected from the bottom of boring within the
regional GW Table.
5
pH, Temp, Cond,
DO, ORP and Turb
1 sample per boring collected from perched groundwater
when encountered.15TCL VOCs
TCL VOCs
Surface Water Surface WaterpH, Temp, Cond,
DO, ORP and Turb
Shallow Soil Borings ‐
Approximately 15 groundwater
screening samples
Deep Facility and Exterior Soil
Borings ‐ Approximately 5 grab
samples from regional water
table
1 of 1
Table 2
Soil Boring Summary
Pohatcong Valley OU3 Site
Washington Township, New Jersey
Area of Concern Proposed Resampling ID Historic Detections Rationale Proposed Resampling Scope
SBI‐209Deep Facility Boring Location. Locations to be
relocated slightly.
SBI‐210
Deep Facility Boring Location. This location will
be moved to the center of the known source
area.
SBI‐211Deep Facility Boring Location. Locations to be
relocated slightly.
SBI‐212Deep Facility Boring Location. Locations to be
relocated slightly.
SBD‐201
No soil exceedances detected,
however only one soil sample was
collected.
Soil samples were not collected in this area, SBD‐201 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of soil
contamination along the drainage pathway adjacent to the former ANC building and outside the previous excavated
area of the former dry well and leach field (AOC 5). MW6, adjacent to SBD‐201, detected TCE at 100 ppb.
Deep Boring Location
SBS‐203Adjacent to area of TCE
contamination under PPPI facility.
SBS‐203 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of soil contamination in the area adjacent to the
former ANC building in the previous excavated area (AOC 7)
This will be completed as a Shallow Boring
Location as the contamination found here was
shallow. ID changed to SBS‐203
SBD‐204 Soil samples were not collected.Soil samples were not collected in this area. SBD‐204 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of soil
contamination adjacent to the former ANC building in the area directly downslope of the former Blak‐Sol tank.Deep Boring Location
SBD‐205 Deep Boring Location
SBS‐206
This will be completed as a Shallow Boring
Location as no historic contamination has been
found in the area. ID changed to SBS‐206
SBD‐207
Maximum TCE detections in this
area (1.1 ppm at 0.5 feet bgs, 13
ppm at 3 feet bgs and 9.8 ppm at
15 feet bgs).
Soil samples were not collected between 16 and 81 feet bgs, SBD‐207 will assist in the delineating the vertical extent of
soil contamination in the area of historic soil and groundwater exceedances at PVANC32 and PVANC39. SBD‐207 is also
located downslope of the railroad underdrain.
Deep Boring Location
SBD‐236 Deep Boring Location
SBD‐237 Deep Boring Location
PPP (Exterior)
Soil samples were not collected.
Soil samples were not collected. SBD‐205 and SBS‐206 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of soil
contamination adjacent to the former ANC building in the area downgradient of the former Blak‐Sol tank near MW13
where the highest TCE concentration (4000 ppb) was detected in groundwater.
Not ApplicableThese contingency borings were added during the RI to investigate potential release areas as were determined by
reviewing documents provided by USEPA (DOJ)
PPP (Facility)
Maximum TCE detections in this
area (100 ppm at 1.3‐1.8 feet bgs
and 9500 ppm at 76‐76.5 feet
bgs). PID readings of 96.3ppm at
17 feet bgs.
Samples collected in this area were only from 0 to 15 feet bgs except DL913 (total depth 100 feet). Sampling did not
extend beyond drain line 9, SBI‐209 and SBI‐210 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of soil
contamination under the former ANC building.
Samples were not collected between 27 and 64 feet bgs except BS13, BS15‐BS17, and MW12. Sampling did not extend
beyond drainage lines and the former Blak‐Sol tank. SBI‐211 and SBI‐212 will assist in delineating the soil contamination
under the former ANC building.
1 of 4
Table 2
Soil Boring Summary
Pohatcong Valley OU3 Site
Washington Township, New Jersey
Area of Concern Proposed Resampling ID Historic Detections Rationale Proposed Resampling Scope
SBS‐208
No soil exceedances detected,
however only one soil sample was
collected.
One soil sample was collected from 0 to 6 inches bgs in this area, SBS‐208 will assist in delineating the horizontal and
vertical extent of soil contamination along the drainage pathway adjacent to the former ANC building and outside the
previous excavated area of the former seepage pit (AOC8) and outfall (AOC18).
Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐209 Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐210 Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐211
No TCE detections in the soil
samples collected. Perched water
in this area contained 1 ppb TCE.
Soil samples were not collected past 8 feet. SBS‐211 will assist in characterizing contamination related to roof drains
discharging into this drainage area.Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐212 Soil samples were not collected.
No soil samples were collected in this area. SBS‐212 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of soil
contamination adjacent to the former ANC building in the area downgradient of the former Blak‐Sol tank and in an area
that may possibly have been a drum storage area.
Shallow Boring Location
SBD‐215 Deep Boring Location
SBD‐239
Original location SBS‐19 was sampled deeper
using a contingency deep boring. This will be
resampled as a Deep Boring Location.
SBS‐213 Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐214 Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐217
Sampling locations on the WLY property were concentrated in the northeastern portion of the property and did not
extend below 15 feet bgs. SBS‐217 and SBS‐241 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of soil
contamination on the WLY property and further delineate the extent of soil contamination near the former railway.
Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐241 Aerial photo report suggested potential dumping in this area. Shallow Boring Location
SBD‐220Maximum TCE detection was 7
ppm at 2 feet bgs.
Soil samples were not collected below 15 feet bgs. SBD‐20 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of
soil contamination on the VTC property downgradient of the former Morris Canal drainage pathway.Deep Boring Location
SBS‐221Maximum TCE detection was 2.28
ppm at 2 feet bgs.
One soil sample was collected at 2 feet bgs. SBS‐221 will assist in delineating the extent of soil contamination within the
former Morris Canal on the VTC property adjacent to the county sampling location SB‐L4 which detected TCE at 2.28
ppm.
Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐222 Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐223 Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐224 No TCE detections over standards.Soil samples were not collected below 15 feet bgs. SBS‐224 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of
soil contamination on the VTC property within the former Morris Canal Shallow Boring Location
Soil samples were not collected below 10 feet bgs. SBS‐222 and SBS‐223 will assist in delineating the horizontal and
vertical extent of soil contamination on the VTC property along the drainage area.
PPP (Exterior)
Maximum TCE detection of 64 ppbSoil samples were not collected deeper than 2 feet bgs. SBS‐209 and SBS‐210 will assist in characterizing contamination
related to a runoff channel and storm sewer outfall discharging into this drainage area.
WLY
Soil samples were not collected.
Sampling locations on the WLY property were concentrated in the northeastern portion of the property and did not
extend below 15 feet bgs. SBD‐215 and SBD‐239 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of soil
contamination on the WLY property.
Only one soil sample was collected to a depth of 2 feet bgs in this area. SBS‐213 and SBS‐214 will assist in delineating the
horizontal and vertical extent of soil contamination in the drainage pathway downgradient of the former ANC building
and effluent pipe (DL9) noted in RI.
Maximum TCE detection in this
area is 3 ppm just northeast of
WLY.
VTC No soil exceedances detected,
however soil sampling did not
extend beyond 10 feet bgs.
Maximum TCE detected was 270
ppb (one soil sample to 2 feet was
collected).
2 of 4
Table 2
Soil Boring Summary
Pohatcong Valley OU3 Site
Washington Township, New Jersey
Area of Concern Proposed Resampling ID Historic Detections Rationale Proposed Resampling Scope
SBS‐225
Soil samples were not collected in
the northern portion of the
property
Soil samples were not collected in the northern portion of the AC1 property. SBS‐225 will assist in delineating the
horizontal and vertical extent of soil contamination on the AC1 property on the edge of the drainage area.
This will be completed as a Shallow Boring
Location. Additional deep boring SBD‐38 was
added in AC1 as a contingency boring. ID
changed to SBS‐225
SBD‐226
Maximum TCE detections in this
area (3.1 ppm at 0.5 feet bgs, 52
ppm at 8 feet bgs, and 9.8 ppm at
15 feet bgs).
Soil samples were not collected below 15 feet bgs. SBD‐226 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of
soil contamination within the drainage pathway of the railroad underdrain.Deep Boring Location
SBD‐227Soil samples not collected in this
area.
Soil samples were not collected directly downgradient of maximum TCE detection at PVAC106. SBD‐227 will assist in
delineating the extent of soil contamination adjacent to PVAC106 within the drainage pathway.Deep Boring Location
SBD‐228Maximum TCE detection was 6
ppb at 15 feet bgs.
Soil samples were not collected below 15 feet bgs. SBD‐228 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of
soil contamination in the ponded area of AC1.Deep Boring Location
SBD‐238 Contingency boring added during the initial RI to investigate high historic detections. Deep Boring Location
SBS‐229Maximum TCE concentration of 52
ppm at 8 ft bgs.
Soil samples were not collected directly downgradient of the railroad underdrain. SBS‐229 will assist in delineating the
extent of soil contamination downgradient of the railroad underdrain within the drainage pathway.Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐230Soil samples were not collected directly downgradient of maximum TCE detection at PVAC106. SBS‐230 will assist in
delineating the extent of soil contamination adjacent to PVAC106 within the drainage pathway.Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐231Maximum detection of 6 ppb at
0.5 foot bgs.
Soil samples were not collected below 2 feet bgs. SBS‐231 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent of
soil contamination on the AC1 property in the area leading to the basin area.Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐232 Soil samples were not collected.Soil samples were not collected outside the basin area on the AC1 property. SBS‐232 will assist in delineating the extent
of soil contamination outside the basin area.Shallow Boring Location
SBS‐233
No soil exceedances detected,
however only one soil sample was
collected.
One soil sample was collected from 0 to 6 inches bgs. SBS‐233 will assist in delineating the horizontal and vertical extent
of soil contamination within the downgradient basin area.Shallow Boring Location
AC1
3 of 4
Table 2
Soil Boring Summary
Pohatcong Valley OU3 Site
Washington Township, New Jersey
Area of Concern Proposed Resampling ID Historic Detections Rationale Proposed Resampling Scope
OFF SBD‐235 Background DataIf analytical resultsfrom SBD‐35 are representative of background concentrations, the data will be used to establish
background concentrations for soil and perched groundwater.Background Deep Boring Location
TBD SBS‐242 through 244 NA Three shallow contingency borings to be used as results dictate. Contingency Shallow Boring Locations
TBD SBD‐245 through 247 NA Three deep contingency borings to be used as results dictate. Contingency Deep Boring Locations
Notes:
Acronyms:
AC1 ‐ Area of Concern 1 ppm ‐ parts per million
ANC ‐ American National Can PPP ‐ Pechiney Plastics Packaging, Inc.
AOC ‐ area of concern TBD ‐ to be determined
bgs ‐ below ground surface TCE ‐ trichloroethene
OFF ‐ offsite VTC ‐ Vikon Tile Corp.
PID ‐ photoionization detector WLY ‐ Warren Lumber Yard
1. Deep borings ‐ soil samples will be collected from 0‐2, 5‐7, 10‐12, and every ten foot interval to the water table or top of bedrock (approximately 125 feet bgs).
2. Shallow borings ‐ soil samples will be collected from 0‐2, 5‐7, 10‐12, and every ten foot interval to a maximum depth of 40 feet bgs.
4 of 4
Figures
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors
1 TASK 1 Project Planning & Support 336 days Mon 9/1/14 Wed 12/23/15
2 1.1 Project Administation 336 days Mon 9/1/14 Wed 12/23/15
3 1.2 Attend Scoping Meeting 1 day Wed 9/17/14 Wed 9/17/14
4 1.4 Develop Work Plan and Associated Cost Estimate 16 days Thu 9/18/14 Thu 10/9/14 3
5 EPA Review of Draft Work Plan 5 days Fri 10/10/14 Thu 10/16/14 4
6 Approval Final Work Plan 3 days Fri 10/17/14 Tue 10/21/14 5
7 1.7 Quality Assurance Project Plan 15 days Wed 10/22/14 Tue 11/11/14
8 Prepare/Submit Draft QAPP 5 days Wed 10/22/14 Tue 10/28/14 6
9 EPA Review 5 days Wed 10/29/14 Tue 11/4/14 8
10 Prepare/Submit Final QAPP 5 days Wed 11/5/14 Tue 11/11/14 9
11 1.10 Meetings 6 days Mon 5/18/15 Mon 5/25/15
12 Present and Review the Resampling Results and Approach
1 day Mon 5/18/15 Mon 5/18/15 33FS+1 wk
13 Approach to the FS 1 day Mon 5/25/15 Mon 5/25/15 33FS+2 wks
14 1.11 Subcontract Procurement 30 days Wed 10/22/14 Tue 12/2/14
15 Drilling Services 6 wks Wed 10/22/14 Tue 12/2/14 6
16 Waste Hauling and Disposal 6 wks Wed 10/22/14 Tue 12/2/14 6
17 1.12 Perform Subcontract Management 102 days Wed 11/26/14 Mon 4/27/15 19SS
18 TASK 3 Field Investigation 127 days Wed 10/22/14 Mon 4/27/15
19 Mobilization 10 days Wed 11/26/14 Tue 12/9/14 15FS-5 days
20 Site Access Support 101 days Wed 10/22/14 Fri 3/20/15 6
21 Exterior Soil Borings (Shallow) 15 days Wed 12/10/14 Thu 1/8/15 19
22 Interior Soil Boring 12 days Fri 1/9/15 Mon 1/26/15 21
23 Exterior Soil Borings (Deep) 34 days Tue 1/27/15 Fri 3/13/15 22
24 Surface Water/Sediment Sampling 2 days Wed 12/17/14 Thu 12/18/14 21SS+5 days
25 Demobilization 5 days Mon 3/16/15 Fri 3/20/15 23
26 Disposal of Field Generated Waste 1 day Mon 4/27/15 Mon 4/27/15 23FS+6 wks
27 TASK 4 Sample Analysis 66 days Wed 12/10/14 Fri 3/20/15
28 4.2 Analytical Services Provided Via CLP, DESA or ERTC
66 days Wed 12/10/14 Fri 3/20/15 21SS
29 TASK 5 Analytical Support & Data Validation 86 days Wed 11/12/14 Fri 3/20/15
30 5.2 Sample Management 86 days Wed 11/12/14 Fri 3/20/15 10
31 TASK 6 Data Evaluation 136 days Mon 4/13/15 Mon 10/19/15
32 6.1 Data Usability Evaluation 10 days Mon 4/13/15 Fri 4/24/15 23FS+4 wks
33 6.2 Data Reduction, Tabulation, and Evaluation 20 days Mon 4/13/15 Fri 5/8/15 23FS+4 wks
34 Submittal of Electronic Data Deliverable to EPA 1 day Mon 10/19/15 Mon 10/19/15 61FS+30 days
35 TASK 7 Assessment of Risk 37 days Mon 5/11/15 Tue 6/30/15
36 7.1 Baseline Human Health (HH) Risk Assessment 37 days Mon 5/11/15 Tue 6/30/15
37 Prepare & Submit Revised HHRA Report 4 wks Mon 5/11/15 Fri 6/5/15 33
38 EPA Review of Revised HHRA Report 1 wk Mon 6/8/15 Fri 6/12/15 37
39 Conference Call to Resolve EPA Comments 1 day Thu 6/18/15 Thu 6/18/15 38FS+3 days
40 Prepare Final HH Risk Assessment 8 days Fri 6/19/15 Tue 6/30/15 39
41 7.2 Ecological Risk Assessment (Screening Level) 29 days Mon 5/11/15 Thu 6/18/15
42 Prepare & Submit Revised Ecological Risk Assessment Report
3 wks Mon 5/11/15 Fri 5/29/15 33
43 EPA Review of Revised Ecological Risk Assessment Report
1 wk Mon 6/1/15 Fri 6/5/15 42
44 Conference Call to Resolve EPA Comments 1 day Thu 6/11/15 Thu 6/11/15 43FS+3 days
45 Prepare Final Ecological Risk Assessment 1 wk Fri 6/12/15 Thu 6/18/15 44
46 TASK 9 Remedial Investigation Report 44 days Tue 5/19/15 Fri 7/17/15
A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F2015
Task
Task Summary
Inactive Task
Inactive Milestone
Inactive Summary
Manual Task
Duration-only
Manual Summary Rollup
Manual Summary
Start-only
Finish-only
Pohatcong Valley OU3 Site
Page 1 Figure 1Project Schedule - Pohatcong Valley OU3 Site
Washington Borough, New Jersey
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Site - OU3Date: Wed 10/15/14
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors
47 Prepare Draft RI Report 4 wks Tue 5/19/15 Mon 6/15/15 12
48 EPA Review of Revised RI Report 2 wks Tue 6/16/15 Mon 6/29/15 47
49 Conference Call to Resolve EPA Comments 1 day Fri 7/3/15 Fri 7/3/15 48FS+3 days
50 Prepare Final RI Report 2 wks Mon 7/6/15 Fri 7/17/15 49
51 TASK 10 Remedial Alternative Screening (Combine with Task 11)
20 days Mon 5/11/15 Fri 6/5/15
52 Remedial Alternative Screening (as a presentation) 4 wks Mon 5/11/15 Fri 6/5/15 33
53 TASK 11 Remedial Alternative Evaluation (Combine with Task 10)
26 days Mon 5/25/15 Mon 6/29/15
54 Remedial Alternative Evaluation (as a presentation) 4 wks Mon 5/25/15 Fri 6/19/15 52SS+2 wks
55 Working Meeting 1 day Mon 6/22/15 Mon 6/22/15 54
56 Submit Meeting Minutes 5 days Tue 6/23/15 Mon 6/29/15 55
57 TASK 12 Feasibility Study Report 1881 days? Mon 9/29/08 Wed 12/23/15
58 Prepare Draft FS Report 5 wks Tue 6/23/15 Mon 7/27/15 55
59 EPA Review of FS Report 2 wks Tue 7/28/15 Mon 8/10/15 58
60 Conference Call to Resolve EPA Comments 1 day Fri 8/14/15 Fri 8/14/15 59FS+3 days
61 Prepare Final FS Report 3 wks Mon 8/17/15 Fri 9/4/15 60
62 Proposed Plan 25 days Tue 8/11/15 Mon 9/14/15
63 EPA prepares Draft Proposed Plan and provides to ERRD, ORC, EQB
4 wks Tue 8/11/15 Mon 9/7/15 59
64 Final Proposed Plan to Public 1 wk Tue 9/8/15 Mon 9/14/15 63
65 Public Comment Period 22 days Mon 9/14/15 Wed 10/14/15
66 Presentation of the Proposed Plan (Public Meeting) 1 day Tue 9/15/15 Tue 9/15/15 64
67 Public Comment Period 30 edays Mon 9/14/15 Wed 10/14/15 64
68 Record of Decision 30 days Thu 10/15/15 Wed 11/25/15
69 Draft ROD to ERRD, ORC, EQB 5 wks Thu 10/15/15 Wed 11/18/15 67
70 Responsiveness Summary 5 days Thu 10/15/15 Wed 10/21/15 67
71 Final ROD for Signature 5 days Thu 11/19/15 Wed 11/25/15 69
72 TASK 16 Work Assignment Closeout 1881 days? Mon 9/29/08 Wed 12/23/15
73 Closeout 4 wks Thu 11/26/15 Wed 12/23/15 71
74
75 Assumptions 1 day? Mon 9/29/08 Mon 9/29/08
76 1 - Field 1 day? Mon 9/29/08 Mon 9/29/08
77 + No overlap of drilling activities 1 day? Mon 9/29/08 Mon 9/29/08
78 + All contingency borings to be installed 1 day? Mon 9/29/08 Mon 9/29/08
79 + Access to all properties 1 day? Mon 9/29/08 Mon 9/29/08
80 2 - Risk Assessment and RI reports prepared in parallel
1 day? Mon 9/29/08 Mon 9/29/08
81 3 - Prposed plan started after Draft FS comments completed
1 day? Mon 9/29/08 Mon 9/29/08
82 4 - Public comment period 30 days 1 day? Mon 9/29/08 Mon 9/29/08
83 1 day? Mon 9/29/08 Mon 9/29/08
8/11
A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F2015
Task
Task Summary
Inactive Task
Inactive Milestone
Inactive Summary
Manual Task
Duration-only
Manual Summary Rollup
Manual Summary
Start-only
Finish-only
Pohatcong Valley OU3 Site
Page 2 FigureProject Schedule - Pohatcong Valley OU3 Site
Washington Borough, New Jersey
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Site - OU3Date: Wed 10/15/14
PPP-SBI-250
PPP-SBI-251PPP-SBI-252
PPP-SBI-253
WLY-SBS-241
WLY-SBS-217
WLY-SBD-239
WLY-SBD-215
VTC-SBS-24
VTC-SBS-223
VTC-SBS-222
VTC-SBS-221
VTC-SBD-220
WLY-SBS-214
PPP-SBS-212
PPP-SBS-211
PPP-SBS-210
PPP-SBS-209
PPP-SBS-208
PPP-SBD-237
PPP-SBD-236
PPP-SBD-207
PPP-SBS-206
PPP-SBD-05PPP-SBD-204
PPP-SBS-203PPP-SBD-201
OFF-SBD-235
AC1-SBS-233
AC1-SBS-231
AC1-SBS-230
AC1-SBS-229
AC1-SBD-238
AC1-SBD-228
AC1-SBD-227
AC1-SBD-226
AC1-SBS-225
WLY-SBS-213
AC1-SBS-232
ButtonJS C:\IMS\GIS\Pohatcong\MXD\2014\QAPP\Figure_2_Soil_Boring_Locations.mxd 11/6/2014
Figure 2Proposed Soil Boring Locations
Pohatcong Valley OU3 Study AreaWashington, NJ
Warren LumberYard (WLY)
Area of Concern 1(AC1)
Vikon TileCorp (VTC)
AmericanNational Can
(ANC)
Deep Soil Boring
Facility Soil BoringShallow Soil Boring
Railroad TracksMorris Canal Centerline, Abandoned (est.)
Drainage BasinIntermittent Stream
DL-9
DL-10
OU1 PSA Boundaries
0 150 300Feet
N
1 in = 150 feet
Facility Drain LinesFloor DrainRoof DrainSanitary SewerStorm Sewer DrainDrainage Pipes
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 25, 2014
Page 9 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #11 Project Quality Objectives/Systematic Planning Process Statements
Overall Project Objectives The revised RI will include soil, groundwater, surface water and sediment sampling below, adjacent to and in the drainage areas surrounding the Albea facility for the analyses presented below to replace unreliable data provided in the previous remedial investigation.
Who will use the data? EPA and CDM Smith will use the data.
What type of data are needed? The sampling program will include the following:
Soilo Shallow Soil Samples: Trace level TCL VOCs by SOM01.2 (with a 7‐day turnaround time [TAT] for the onsite samples).
TLC SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides by SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
o Deep Facility Soil Samples: TCL VOCs by SOM01.2 (with 48‐hour TAT)TCL SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides by SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
o Deep Exterior Soil Borings: TCL VOCs SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides by SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
Groundwatero Shallow Soil Borings: Trace level TCL VOCs SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
o Deep Facility Soil Borings: Trace level TCL VOCs SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
Surface Water: TCL VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides by SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
Sediment: TCL VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs and Pesticides by SOM01.2 (42‐day TAT)
What will the data be used for? Data will be used to replace unreliable data reported in previous remedial investigation.
How “good” do the data need to be in order to support the environmental decision? Definitive level data required to support project decisions and risk assessments. The project action limits and quantitation limits for soil VOCs are specified on Worksheet #15. All laboratory analyses will be performed in compliance with EPA’s Field and Analytical Services Teaming Advisory Committee policy. Preference will be given in the
Revised Draft RI/FS Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum No. 3, Revised Remedial Investigation
Revision Number: 0 November 25, 2014
Page 40 of 43
Pohatcong Valley Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, OU3
QAPP Worksheet #17h Sampling Design and Rationale Revised Remedial Investigation
(surface soil) and 5 to 7 feet soil samples and 30 percent of the subsurface soil samples (assumed to be the 30, 60 and 90‐foot samples). The depth of the samples will be selected in the field based on visual observations and PID screening results. A summary of the analyses proposed for each boring type is presented on Table 1.
If contamination is observed in deep soils (via PID) a groundwater grab sample will be collected at the base of each boring within the regional groundwater table. If bedrock is encountered before the regional groundwater table then a sample will not be collected at that location. Groundwater screening samples will be collected by advancing the 4‐inch casing to depth. Once at depth, a stainless steel bailer will be lowered to the bottom of the casing to grab a sample for trace TCL VOCs.
Bore Hole Abandonment After sampling, the boreholes will be backfilled with a cement‐bentonite grout. Borings completed using HSA or sonic drilling methods will be grouted using tremie pipe to grout from the base of the borehole as the drilling tools are retracted. Borings completed using DPT methods will be abandoned by filling the borehole with grout upon completion.
Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Following the site reconnaissance, locations will be selected for surface water and sediment sampling. The locations will focus on drainage ditches, outfalls, seeps, drainage pipes and areas of ponded water. Up to 14 surface water and sediment samples will be collected as part of this RI.
Surface water samples will be collected following EPA‐approved methodologies as described in TSOP 1-1. All surface water samples will be analyzed for TCL VOC and TCL pesticides/PCBs through the EPA CLP. All samples will be analyzed using the most current EPA‐approved methods, as shown on Worksheet 18. Table 1 summarizes the number and type of analyses for the surface water samples.
Sediment samples will be collected following EPA‐approved methodologies as described in TSOP 1-11. All sediment samples will be analyzed for TCL parameters through the EPA CLP as summarized on Table 1.