Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SFUND RECORDS CTR
2061863
Anaconda, Yermgton Mine Site Emergency ResponseAssessment Final Report
Yerington, Lyon County, Nevada
prepared for
The United States Environmental Protection AgencyRegion IX Emergency Response Office
prepared by:
The Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team
Ecology & Environment, Incorporated
Long Beach, California
Revised November 1, 2001
Contract # 68-W-01-012
TDD# 09-01-01-0006
Job# 001275.0050.01.SF
Anaconda, Yerington Mine Site Emergency ResponseAssessment Final Report
Yerington, Lyon County, Nevada
prepared for
The United States Environmental Protection AgencyRegion IX Emergency Response Office
prepared by:
The Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team
Ecology & Environment, Incorporated
Long Beach, California
Revised November 1, 2001
Contract # 68-W-01-012
TDD# 09-01-01-0006
Job# 001275.0050.01.SF
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Site Description 12.1 Location 12.2 Site Description 12.3 Operational History 32.4 Regulatory Involvement .: 6
2.4.1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 62.4.2 Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) 6
3.0 Investigative Efforts 73.1 Previous Sampling and Analyses 7
3.1.1 Groundwater • • • • 73.1.2 Surface Water 8
3.2 EPAESI, October, 2000 83.2.1 Pregnant Solution Samples 93.2.2 Tailings 93.2.3 Leachate Salts 93.2.4 Groundwater 9
4.0 Preliminary Emergency Response Office Assessement 12
5.0 Sampling Event at the Colony, February 2001 135.1 Site Activities 135.2 Laboratory Analysis and Results 16
5.2.1 The Colony Sampling Results 165.2.2 The Luzier Lane Salt Crust Samples 19
6.0 Arimetco Solvent Exchange Sampling Event, May 2001 , 216.1 Vat Sampling ' 216.2 Soil Sampling 226.3 The Sulfide Tailings Pile Boring 256.4 Site Security 266.5 Weather Observations 266.6 Laboratory Analysis 26
6.6.1 Vat Samples 266.6.2 Soil Samples 26
7.0 Summary and Conclusions 29
8.0 List of References 30
APPENDIX A: QASP Re: Colony Sampling EventAPPENDIX B: Colony Sampling Event Data Summary ReportsAPPENDIX C: SAP Re: Vat Sampling EventAPPENDIX D: Vat Sampling Event Data Summary Reports
List of Figures
Figure 2-1: Site Location Map 2Figure 2-2: Site Layout Map 4Figure 5-1: The Colony Site Location Map 14Figure 6-1: Soil boring locations around the Arimetco solvent exchange vats 24
List of Tables
Table 3-1: START ESI, October 2000: Highest Concentrations Samples By Type 11Table 5-1: Highest Metals Concentrations from The Colony; Results in mg/kg 17Table 5-2: Metals Analyses of Salt Crust North of Luzier Lane 20Table 6-1: Vat Measurements Recorded By START 22Table 6-2: Hazard Categorization Data Summary 23Table 6-3: Soil Boring Screening Results Using an OVM; Results in parts per million (ppm) .. 24Table 6-4: Solvent Exchange Vat Sampling Laboratory Data Summary 27Table 6-5: Soils Results for Vat Sampling Event 28
List of Photos
Photo 1: The Entrance Gate to the Anaconda Facility 1Photo 2: The Yerington Mine Pit 3Photo 3: Sulfide Tailings Piles 5Photo 4: Tailings Ponds at the North End of Site 5Photo 5: The Solvent Exchange Vats 5Photo 6: The Evaporation System 6Photo 7: Security Issues along the West Side of Site 12Photo 8: Security Issues at the North End of Site 12Photo 9: Bermed Mine Road 12Photo 10: Dunes on the Sulfide Tailings Pile .. 13Photo 11: Soil Sampling at the Colony 15Photo 12: Boring Holes at the Colony 15Photo 13: The Salt Crust Field at the North End of the Site 16Photo 14: The GeoProbe On Site 21Photo 15: Sampling the Vats 21Photo 16: Hazard Categorization On Site 22Photo 17: The GeoProbe at B-12 25Photo 18: Logging B-12 25Photo 19: The complete boring section from B-12 25
1.0 IntroductionOn October 5, 2000, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) On-SceneCoordinator (OSC) Brad Shipley tasked Ecology & Environment, Incorporated's (E & E's),Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team (START) to respond to environmental andpublic safety issues at the Anaconda Copper Company's Yerington Mine Site (Site) near the townof Yerington, Lyon County, Nevada. The Site is an abandoned copper mining, muling andprocess facility. Issues of public concern include the abandonment of several square miles of minetailings, evaporation ponds, and pregnant leachate solutions, contamination of groundwater,potential dust hazards, and site security. The START was initially tasked under the START Icontract (TTD #09-0010-0003) to conduct soil and air samphng, laboratory analyses, and providetechnical assistance to the project. On December 15, 2000, the START I contract ended and theproject carried over to START II under the current TDD. After more information was acquired,the tasks were amended to include surface and subsurface soil samphng at locations at the Site, aswell as off-site areas which might be affected by the Site, sampling of abandoned solvents, and aSite security assessment. The air sampling issues were rescinded after the initial investigationrevealed no down-wind targets within a quarter mile of the Site.
2.0 Site Description
2.1 LocationThe Anaconda Site is located at 102 Burch Drive near Yerington, Nevada. The geographiccoordinates for the site are 38° 59' 38.57" latitude and 119° 11' 53.64" longitude, taken by globalpositioning system (GPS) at the mine office on Burch Drive. The Site covers several square milesand includes Township 13N, Range 25E, Sections 4, 5, 8, 9, 16,17, 20, and 21 on the MasonValley and Yerington USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles. The location of the Site is shown in Figure2-1.
2.2 Site DescriptionThe Site occupies 3,468 acres (about 5.5 squaremiles) of disturbed land in a rural areaapproximately 1 mile west of the City ofYerington (NDEP, 1994). The Site is borderedto the north by open agricultural fields, to thewest and southwest by the Singatse MountainRange and the town of Weed Heights, to thesouth by Bureau of Land Management (BLM)land, and to the east by Highway 95 A, whichseparates the site from"the city of Yerington(NDEP, 1994; USGS, 1987a;USGS, 1987b).Land ownership includes parcels owned by BLM,Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) andArimetco, Inc.
Photo 1 The Yerington pit lake where much of theoxide, and later sulfide ores processed at the site wereextracted. Photo by B Castellana, 7/28/00
-V
55
1994 MAGELLAN GcographixSMSanta Barbara, CA (800) 929-4MAP
Figure 2-1: Site Location MapAnaconda Copper Company Emergency Response
Yerington, Lyon County, Nevada
The Site layout is shown in Figure 2-2. The Siteconsists of an office/process facility, an open-pit mine(Photos 1 and 2), an overburden dump, sulfide andoxide stockpile dumps, leach pads, tailings piles, andevaporation ponds. The Anaconda office/processfacility consists of a lead shop, a welding shop, amaintenance shop, two warehouses, an electro-winning plant, and an office building. Several largeleach vats are also present near the facility area.From 1965 to 1978, the site also consisted of a milland a concentrator (NDEP, 1994). From 1989 to1999, the Arimetco company constructed andoperated several heap leach pads on the Site,covering many of the former evaporation ponds andtailings piles (Arimetco, 1998; E & E, 2000).Arimetco also constructed a more modernelectrowinning facility and solvent exchange vats atthe Site.
Photo 2: The entrance to the Anaconda Yerington minefacility off Burch Drive. The original Anaconda facilityis visible past the gate The sign on the gate reads"Danger: Unsafe Mine - Stay out and stay alive " Photoby B.Castellana, 07/28/00.
2.3 Operational HistoryThe Site was undeveloped before 1951. From 1951 to 1978, the Site was occupied by theAnaconda Copper Company, which is now owned by ARCO of Denver, Colorado. In 1978,Anaconda closed down its mining and milling operation. A large portion of the site was boughtby Don Tibbals, a private entrepreneur, in 1978. Don Tibbals sublet part of the Anaconda site toa transformer salvaging company called Unison, a subsidiary of Union Carbide Corp. In 1988,Don Tibbals sold the majority of his portion of the original Anaconda Site to Arimetco Inc., whichis headquartered in Arizona. Mr. Tibbals retains ownership of some portions of the Site,including the Yerington Pit (NDEP, 1994).
Work started at the Site in December 1951, and beneficiation started in November 1953. From1953 to 1965, operations at the facility consisted of mining the Yerington Pit for copper oxides.The oxide ores were leached in sulfuric acid, and the copper was allegedly precipitated onto oldtin cans. The resulting copper slabs were sent off site for smelting. In 1965 the mill andconcentrator were built to allow processing of both copper oxide and copper sulfide ores. Acopper precipitate was produced from the oxide ore and a copper concentrate was produced fromthe sulfide ore. Both were shipped off site for smelting (NDEP, 1994).
The method used to extract copper from copper oxide ore involved leaching with 1% sulfuricacid. The leach solution was then pumped to three solvent extraction tanks (total volume:200,000 gallons) to be mixed with a kerosene solution, containing 5% Acorga (>99% Alkydhydroxy) to extract the copper from the weak acid solution into the kerosene solution! A 10%sulfuric acid was applied to the copper-laden kerosene solution to leach out the copper; this highlyconcentrated copper solution was pumped to the electro-winning plant and plated out on stainlesssteel sheets. The acid solution from which the copper had been extracted was then sent back tothe leach pads to be used again. Chemicals used in the mining and milling process
•co
Figure 2-2: SiteLayout
Anaconda CopperCompany,
Yerington MineLyon County NevadaRemoval Assessment
June 2001
Site Area
Historical extent oftailings pond
Arimetco Leach Pad
Containment Pond
Sampling Location
Solvent Exchange Vats
Monitoring WellO
Superfund TechnicalAssessment and Response Team
ecology & environment me
TDD# 09-01-01-0006Job# 001275.0050.01 SF
Basemap Source USGSYerington and Mason Valley7 5 Minute Quads, 1987 B Castcllana, 2001
included sulfuric acid, Acorga, and kerosene. Cobaltsulfate, sodium thiosuLfate, and potassium iodide wereused in the lab for analytical purposes. Acetylene gas,nitrogen gas, oxygen gas, liquid nitrogen, unleadedgasoline, and diesel fuel were also used on site forvehicle maintenance and refueling (NDEP, 1994).
During Anaconda's 25-year mining and millingoperation, 350 million tons of ore and waste rock weremined from the Yerington Pit, and 189 million tons ofwaste were generated (Photo 3). This waste consistedof gangue from the sulfide ore processing and tailings,plus iron and sulfate-rich acid brine from the oxide oreprocessing (NDEP, 1994; Arimetco, 1998). Tailingswere transported and disposed of in a slurry form in anumber of on-site tailings ponds (Photo 4). The acidbrine was disposed of in on-site evaporation ponds,which were unlined prior to 1964 (Anaconda, 1984).
Arimetco began its leaching operations in 1989; overthis operating period, Arimetco built and ran five lined,heap-leach pads (see Figure 2-2). These pads werecomprised of tailings and low-grade ore left by theAnaconda operations, along with newly dug ores fromthe Mac Arthur pit located approximately 3 miles northof the site. Arimetco also constructed a new solventexchange system (Photo 5) and electrowinning processplant south of Burch Drive (Arimetco, 1998). Afterfiling for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in January of 1997,Arimetco continued its copper recovery operationsthrough November 1999. Arimetco abandoned the Sitein January 2000 leaving the five operational leach padswith approximately 90 million gallons of pregnant leachsolution still in the system (E & E, 2000).
Anaconda/ARCO conducted groundwater and surfacewater sampling at the site in 1983 as ordered by NDEP.Anaconda/ARCO conducted groundwater monitoringsince the mid 1980s as part of a 1985 NDEP order toinstall pumpback wells to control the groundwaterplume under the Site. Arimetco installed monitoringwells and leak detection systems as part of their permitto operate at the site. Monitoring well sampling andstatus of the leak detection system were reportedquarterly through November 1999 (Arimetco, 1998;Arimetco, 1999).
Photo 3 Sulfide tailings piles to the North of BurchDrive The top of the piles was used as evaporationponds as well Photo by B Castellana, 7/28/00
Photo 4 View of the tailings ponds at the northern end ofthe site from the Northwest along Luzier Lane Photo byB Castellana, 2/14/01
Photo 5 The Arimetco solvent exchange vats, whichwere constructed in the mid-1980s, contain acidicprocess solution and a kerosene-based organic solvent.Photo by C Carlson, 5/17/01
2.4 Regulatory Involvement
2.4.1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)The Site is still listed in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS)database under the name Arimetco Inc. (EPA ID# NVD986774842), as of December 1, 2000, asa limited quantity hazardous waste generator, which is equivalent to an exempt small quantitygenerator. The EPA conducted a Preliminary Assessment (PA) and a Site Inspection (SI) in 1990and 1994, respectively. The EPA conducted an Expanded Site Inspection (ESI) in October,2000.
2.4.2 Nevada Division of EnvironmentalProtection (NDEP)
Based on the conclusions of a US GeologicalSurvey (USGS) report, which was publishedin 1982, the NDEP issued a Finding ofViolation and Order to Anaconda CopperCompany in November 1982. This actioncited Anaconda for polluting the groundwaterimmediately north of the waste fluid ponds.It also directed the company to conductadditional on-site groundwater monitoring,sample selected nearby domestic wells,sample soil and water from ditch locations,and sample solids from the tailings andevaporation ponds (Applied HydrologyAssociates, 1983). In 1985, the NDEP issuedan Administrative Order that directedAnaconda to install and monitor thepumpback well system (Applied Hydrology Associates, 2000).
Photo 6: The evaporation system on the vat leach tailingspile. Note the sulfur crust on the pile and the heavyequipment at the base of the leach pad. Photo by B.Castellana, 10/22/00.
The NDEP was involved in regulating activities associated with the Arimetco facility's copperrecovery operation. The NDEP Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation had the authorityover the facility's zero discharge permit (NDEP, 1994). The Site is currently in violation of itsdischarge permits, due to the release of pregnant solutions from leach pads (Arimetco, 1999).
The NDEP assumed the role of lead agency in January 2000 when Arimetco abandoned the site.The NDEP currently maintains a staff to manage the pregnant process solutions (Photo 6) andother hazardous substances at the site (E & E, 2000).
3.0 Investigative Efforts
3.1 Previous Sampling and Analyses
3.1.1 GroundwaterIn 1976, the NDEP made a request to the USGS to conduct a study of groundwater qualitydown-gradient of the Site, based on the perceived threat posed by the evaporation ponds locatedin the northern portion of the Site. In response to this request, the USGS sampled mining wastefluids, monitoring wells, domestic wells, and agricultural wells in the area from 1978 through1979. The USGS installed an array of monitoring wells and analyzed groundwater and sourcewaters for metals, pH, sulfate, and fluoride/chloride (unspecified methodology). The 1982 reportconcluded that shallow groundwater up to 0.2 mile down-gradient of the site had been impactedby hazardous substances emanating from the site. Elevated concentrations of arsenic, cadmium,cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, selenium, and zinc were identifiedin both process fluids and waste fluids from the tailings pond area and in groundwaterhydraulically down-gradient of the Site. Furthermore, deeper groundwater (50 to 455 feet belowground surface [bgs]) suffered deteriorating quality over the history of site activity, which may beattributable to the site. Finally, the report indicated that all hydrologic units in the area areconnected, due to observed variabilities in the shallow groundwater attributed to heavy pumpingof the deeper groundwater (USGS, 1982).
The 1982 USGS report prompted the NDEP to issue a Finding of Violation and Order toAnaconda in 1982. Anaconda hired Applied Hydrology Associates (AHA) to conduct additionalon-site groundwater monitoring, sample selected nearby domestic wells, sample soil and waterfrom ditch locations, and sample solids from the tailings and evaporation ponds. Analysesperformed include conductivity (EPA Method 120.1), pH (EPA Method 150.1), total dissolvedsolids (EPA Method 160.1), total suspended solids (EPA Method 160.2), and metals and otherions (Atomic Absorption). The 1983 AHA results for groundwater were similar to those of theUSGS study. In addition, the AHA report concluded that surface water quality in drainageditches north of the site was being degraded, possibly by groundwater seeps emanating from thesite (AHA, 1983).
In 1985, NDEP issued an Administrative Order to ARCO, requiring the installation of agroundwater pumpback system north of the site to control the migration of hazardous substancesfrom beneath the site. ARCO installed the pumpback system in 1985 and has performed regulargroundwater monitoring since 1986. Analyses included alkalinity and bicarbonate (EPA Method2320B), chloride and sulfate (EPA Method 300.0), pH (EPA Method 150.0), total dissolvedsolids (EPA Method 2540C), metals (EPA Method 200.7), and lead (EPA Method 3113B). Theresults of the 1999 Annual Report indicate that key water quality parameters (pH, sulfate, anddissolved iron) have steadily improved in some wells over the 1986 to 1999 monitoring period,presumably due to the effectiveness of the pumpback system. The pH in the pumpback wellsranged from 3.98 to 7.53. Cadmium and chromium were detected in PW-4 (22 and 110 ug/1,respectively) during the most recent sampling event, which occurred in August 1999; backgroundconcentrations in groundwater for these metals were non-detect (AHA, 2000).
In 1999, ARCO performed a direct push (Hydropunch™) study of the shallow groundwaterdown-gradient of the site. Groundwater was sampled at each of the direct push locations andsubmitted to a laboratory for the same analysis suite as performed for the ARCO monitoringprogram. Arsenic was detected in groundwater from several locations, ranging from 420 to 1.7ug/1 (AHA, 2000).
Arimetco performed quarterly groundwater monitoring at several locations on the site beginningin 1989 as part of its NDEP-required monitoring program. Quarterly monitoring indicatedconcentrations exceeding of maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) of arsenic, chromium, sulfate,copper, lead, and mercury at several shallow groundwater monitoring wells on the Site (Arimetco,1998; Arimetco, 1999). Data for 1999 indicated high concentrations of arsenic (up to 388 ug/1),cadmium (up to 624 ug/1), lead (up to 87 ug/1), and chromium (up to 1,106 ug/1) in wells on site,with respect to background. In addition, leak-detection system data at the newly-installed leachpads revealed that several detectors were reading leakage rates that were out of compliance. Twodetectors read daily leakage rates of over 2,000 gallons per day, and ran annual average leakagerates of over 700 gallons per day each (Arimetco, 1999).
In November 1999, under the direction of the EPA, the NDEP conducted a sampling event at theAnaconda site. Groundwater samples were collected from 15 public and private drinking waterwells in the vicinity of the site, as well as monitoring wells. The results of the NDEP samphngevent indicated that samples taken from drinking water wells near the site on Luzier Lane andLocust Street had arsenic concentrations between 30 and 60 ug/1, while samples collected fromdrinking water wells at a greater distance from the site had arsenic concentrations below thedetection limit (<20 or 10 ug/1) (NDEP, 1999).
3.1.2 Surface WaterIn 1983, water samples collected in the drainage ditches were analyzed for conductivity (EPAMethod 120.1), pH (EPA Method 150.1), total dissolved solids (EPA Method 160.1), totalsuspended solids (EPA Method 160.2), and metals and other ions (by Atomic Absorption). TheAHA report concluded that surface water quality in drainage ditches north of the Site was beingdegraded, possibly by groundwater seeps emanating from the Site (AHA, 1983).
The November 1999 NDEP sampling event included samples taken from surface water drainagelocations in the Wabuska Drain. Surface water sampling indicated that concentrations of arsenicand lead were elevated in samples collected in the Wabuska Drain near the site relative to samplescollected further down-stream from the site (NDEP, 1999).
3.2 EPA ESI, October 2000From October 19 through October 23,2000, the START, under the direction of the EPA,conducted a sampling event as part of an ESI at the Site (see Anaconda Copper Company,Yerington Mine Site ESI, TDD# 09-0005-0006). The START collected groundwater samplesfrom six monitoring wells on and around the site. Standing water was also collected from a cellarin the Anaconda process facility. In addition, five pregnant solution samples, 11 tailings samples,and 11 leachate salt samples were collected. All samples were analyzed by the EPA Region IX
8
Laboratory, in Richmond, California for metals by EPA Method 6010 and for mercury by EPAMethods 7470 and 7471. The highest reported concentrations, by sample type, are presented inTable 3-1.
3.2.1 Pregnant Solution SamplesFive pregnant solution samples, including one field duplicate, were collected from the containmentponds at the Arimetco heap leach pads (sample PS-3 is representative of these). These solutionscontained about one percent sulfuric acid and were expected to have high concentrations ofmetals, based on previous sample results (Arimetco, 1999). The results of the October 2000 ESIsampling event indicated the presence of several metals, including beryllium (up to 1,600 ug/1),cadmium (up to 500 ug/1), chromium (up to 7,000 ug/1), lead (up to 400 ug/1), mercury (up to 9ug/1), and selenium (up to 1,000 ug/1) at elevated concentrations in the pregnant solutions withrespect to background groundwater.
3.2.2 TailingsEleven tailings samples, including one field duplicate, were collected at representative tailingspiles and evaporation ponds (Samples T-2 and T-8 are representatives). The results of theanalyses of tailings samples indicated the presence of several metals, including arsenic (up to1,200 mg/kg), beryllium (up to 1.7 mg/kg), cadmium (up to 3 mg/kg), chromium (up to 230mg/kg), lead (up to 1,000 mg/kg), and mercury (up to 62 mg/kg) at elevated concentrations withrespect to reference samples.
3.2.3 Leachate SaltsEleven leachate salt samples, including one field duplicate, were collected from representativecontainment ponds, evaporation ponds, and seep locations (SALT 2 is representative). An off-site leachate salt sample (SALT-9) was collected north of Luzier Lane in the low area where sitewastes may have left the site. The results of analysis of the leachate salt samples indicate thepresence of arsenic (up to 310 mg/kg), beryllium (up to 0.8 mg/kg), chromium (up to 21 mg/kg),lead (up to 44,000 mg/kg), and mercury (up to 1.6 mg/kg). The highest arsenic concentrationwas detected in the sample collected north of Luzier Lane.
3.2.4 GroundwaterGroundwater was collected from six monitoring wells screened in the shallow zone. The wellssampled include both on-site, and off-site monitoring wells. The results of the analysis ofgroundwater samples indicated arsenic (<20 ug/1), beryllium (<1 ug/1), cadmium (<5 ug/1),chromium (<1Q ug/1), lead (<5 ug/1), mercury (<0.2 ug/1), and selenium (<20 ug/1) concentrationsbelow the analytical detection limits in the background monitoring well (USEPA-2). These metalswere detected in the other five wells (Data from MW-5 are presented in Table3-l) at thefollowing concentrations: arsenic (10 to 400 ug/1), beryllium (1-270 ug/1), cadmium (30 to 170ug/1), chromium (up to 400 ug/1), lead (up to 20 ug/1), and selenium (up to 100 ug/1).
The "cellar" sample (sample CELLAR) was collected from a flooded, underground room wherethe START observed leachate salts at the water line. The START also observed that the handrails at the base of the stairway had been eaten away by the corrosive action of the flooding water.This is presumed to be groundwater which has seeped into the cellar area. The results of the
cellar sample indicated the presence of toxic metals: beryllium (1,100 ug/1), cadmium (600 ug/1),chromium (9,000 ug/1), lead (300 ug/1), and mercury (9 ug/1). In addition, the cellar samplecontained elevated concentrations of aluminum, calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese,and zinc with respect to background.
The results of the October 2000 ESI sampling indicated the presence of toxic metals in sourcematerials at the site and established a release to groundwater. The local groundwater is the solesource of drinking water for the approximately 3,000 people living within 4 miles of the Site. Inaddition, data from previous investigations suggest a release to surface waters near the Site, athreat of airborne contaminates emmanating from the site, and an impact to private drinking waterwells within a quarter mile of the Site. The Site is currently under review for listing as aSuperfund Site on the National Priorities List.
10
Table 3-1 : START ESI, October 2000: Highest Concentrations Samples By Type
aluminum
antimony
arsenic
barium
beryllium
cadmium
calcium
chromium
cobalt
copper
iron
lead
magnesium
manganese
mercury
nickel
potassium
selenium
silver
sodium
thallium
vanadium
zinc
ground waterbackground
ug/1
USEPA-2
200
5(U)
20 (U)
55
1(U)
5(U)
42,000
10 (U)
5(U)
20
500
5(U)
11,000
19
02(U)
50 (U)
5,000
20 (U)
R
90,000
5(U)
20 (U)
10
source:pregnantsolution
ug/1
PS-3
25,000,000
200 (U)
600 (J)
200 (U)
1,600
500
420,000
7,000
54,000
3,000,000
2,100,000
200 (U)
22,000,000
600,000
9
27,000
140,000
1000
20 (U)
2,100,000
200 (U)
200 (U)
61,000
source:tailings
mg/kg
T-2
6,300
20 (U)
40 (J)
40
05
1(U)
4,200 (J)
7
26
5,600
30,000
4(J)
3,800
100
0 34 (J)
10
1,000(J)
17(J)
2(U)
50 (J)
100 (U)
35
17
source:tailingspond
mg/kg
T-8
16,000
20 (J)
1,200
620
1 7
3
900 (J)
230
82
570
180,000
1,000
800
30
62 (J)
160
2,000 (J)
320
3
600 (J)
100
33
370
source:leacbate
salts
mg/kg
SALT-2
21,000
30 (U)
10(U)
30 (J)
07
1(U)
12,000
21
66
71,000
22,000
44,000
8,800
340
1 6
20 (J)
700 (J)
10 (U)
3(U)
1,300(J)
100(U)
64
63
source:off-site
leacbate salts
mg/kg
SALT-9
21,000
20 (U)
310(J)
110 (J)
08
1(U)
7,700
15
9
83
22,000
9(J)
7,200
470
004
10(J)
5,000 (J)
8(U)
2(U)
56,000 (J)
100 (U)
150
58
ground waterdown-gradient
ug/1
MW-5
2,200,000
20 (U)
400
20
270
170
310,000
400
7,400
150,000
6,000,000
20
1,600,000
110,000
05
5,400
26,000
100
R
290,000
20 (U)
6,600
14,000
ground waterseep
ug/1
CELLAR
16,000,000
200 (U)
700 (J)
100(J)
1,100
600
640,000
9,000
47,000
25,000
17,000,000
300
16,000,000
620,000
9
30,000
50,000 (U)
I,000(U)
200 (U)
1,800,000
200 (U)
2,000
120,000
(U) - Parameter analyzed but not detected; the associated value is the sample quantitation limit, adjustedfor dilution, if any,.
(J) - The associated value is an estimated quantity.
Boldface - values (and analytes in groundwater) which exceed USEPA Primary Maximum ContaminationLevels
11
4.0 Preliminary Emergency ResponseOffice Assessement
The START was tasked to perform a preliminarysite walk with OSC Shipley on October 21, 2000.The site walk was coordinated with the ESIdescribed above which was also performed by theSTART. The START and OSC Shipley toured thesite with a representative of the NDEP and JoeSawyer of SRK, and Associates, the NDEPconsulting firm tasked to manage the site. Thegroup toured the existing Arimetco leach pads, aswell as the Anaconda evaporation ponds to thenorth.
After the tour and a drive around the site, OSCShipley instructed the START to perform a detailedsecurity survey of the site, documenting anyproblems encountered. In addition, the START wastasked to observe dust conditions at and around theSite. The START conducted this survey over thenext week while performing the ESI.
Over the course of the inspection, the STARTobserved several locations where the fence was indisrepair or non-existent, including an area alongBurch Drive which houses the abandoned solventexchange vats and the electrowinning facility. Therewere several locations where persons on foot,motorcycles, and/or four-wheel-drive vehicles couldaccess the Site. The START observed numeroustire tracks at these locations where vehicles hadpreviously gained access to the Site. The STARTalso noted that in many of these locations, earthenbarricades had been erected to prevent access(Photos 7 - 9). While samphng wells in the areanorth of the Site, the START observed minors withmotorcycles entering the Site. "Posted" signs weresporadically placed around the perimeter where thefence was intact.
The START observed evidence of eolian transport oftailings at several places on site during the week.The characteristic red color of the iron bleed pondswas observed blown over the yellow evaporationpond deposits to the east of the bleed pond. Dunes
12
Photo 7: Area along an Arimetco leach pad where thereis no fence. The photo was taken from the unpaved roadalong the western boundary of the site, off Burch Drive.The leach basin at the base of the pile was dry during theinspection. Photo by B. Castellana, 10/22/01
Photo 8. Tire tracks leading into the unfenced area at thenorthern end of the site (near the old pump station).These tracks lead onto the tailings ponds and to roadsleading to the leachate pads. Photo by B. Castellana,10/22/01.
Photo 9: Road leading into an unfenced area on thewestern side of the site. The staff have erected anearthen barrier to discourage access. Note tire tracksover the berm. Photo by B. Castellana, 10/22/01.
composed of sand-sized grains were observed in theevaporation ponds constructed on the sulfide tailingsarea, where the finer materials present in the tailingsbelow had clearly blown away (Photo 10).
The START observed a windstorm which blewthrough the area on October 21, 2001. The STARTdrove around the site and observed dust cloudsbillowing off the freshly plowed agricultural fields tothe North of the site. The START observed minordust in the tailings area but did not observe any dustclouds emanating from the Site. The STARTreported these findings to OSC Shipley on October25, 2000. A follow-up discussion of site securityissues is presented in Section 6.4.
Photo 10: Tailings dunes forming on the sulfide tailingspile. The dunes are covered with ripple marks,indicating eolian transport. Photo by B. Castellana,10/17/01.
5.0 Sampling Event at the Colony, February 2001In December, 2000, the EPA became aware that several houses in the Yerington Paiute Colonyhousing development in the City of Yerington had been constructed on tailings from the Site. OSCShipley tasked the START to perform surface and subsurface sampling in the yards of severalhomes, as well as the community playground. OSC Shipley also tasked the START to make anyobservations that might indicate a release of metals and or acid associated with the tailings.
5.1 Site ActivitiesThe START created an emergency Quality Assurance Sampling Plan (QASP; see Appendix A) andacquired a laboratory to perform the metals and soil pH analyses. The START mobilized to thesite on February 13, 2001, meeting OSC Shipley and Misty Wilson (Paiute Tribe EPA) onFebruary 14, 2000.
The Colony is located off Bridge Street, south of Highway 95 A in the City of Yerington (seeFigure 2-2). The development consists of homes surrounding a common playground/park area(Figure 5-1). The development was constructed on the uneven floodplain of the Walker River.The tailings were deposited along with other fill material to level the site, as well as raise theconstruction base elevation as a flood-prevention measure. According to Paiute EPA records,tailings were used only under the footprint of the houses; clean fill was used everywhere else.
Data from a rock collected by Paiute EPA at the Colony playground indicated copperconcentrations above the Residential Preliminary Remediation Goal of 23,000 parts per million(ppm). The PRGs are risk based tools which are based on exposure pathways for which generallyaccepted methods, models and assumptions have been developed (i.e. ingestion, dermal contact,and inhalation) for specific land-use conditions and do not consider impact to groundwater orecological receptors. They are not intended to be used as stand-alone decision-making tools or todetermine if a waste is hazardous under RCRA. In some cases, the predictive risk-based modelsgenerate PRG levels that lie within or even below typical background concentrations. After
13
W Bridge
to
MapQue:
Figure 5-1:The Colony
Site Location MapAnaconda Copper
CompanyEmergency Response
AssessmentYerington,
Lyon County,Nevada
Superfund Technical Assessmentand Response Team
•ecology and environment. Inc
TDD:09 0101-0006JOB: 001275.0050.01.SF
Sampling Location
Soil Boring Location
OE ,100m
0
Jfr Bridge St
Bovajrc<u
oUo
c
oU
__ BovardSt
Playground
South StThe Colony !
Housing Development
The Playground Sampling Locations
PG-1,PG-10
BasketballCourt
Picnic bench
o.PG-5
PG-2. .
See-saw
Swing set
PG-3
Raised bedSwing set
lPG-6
Jungle gym
PG-41
10 yards
discussing the sampling technique with M. Wilson, theSTART learned that the samples were discrete ore clastspicked specifically for their green color. Laboratoryanalyses were performed on the material scraped fromthese clasts.
Upon arrival at the playground, the START found thesite completely covered with about one inch of snow.When the snow was scraped off, the START observedthat the surface soil consist of a poorly sorted, gravellysand. The gravel clasts include variably angular clasts ofbasaltic, granitic, and sedimentary origin. The Site minetailings tend to be granitic and very angular. There weresome clasts which contained ore minerals malachite[Cu2CO3(OH)2] and/or other hydrous copper minerals.The material observed at the surface may have had somecomponent of tailings, but was not composed entirely oftailings.
The START collected six surface samples at thecommunity playground, then performed a hand-augerboring to a depth of 2 feet. The surface soil locationswere chosen on the basis of highest exposure potentialto the park users: Sample PG-1 and duplicate PG-10were collected in an elongate area at the north end of theplayground. Sample PG-2 was collected in the soilbeneath the see-saw. Sample PG-3 was collected in theskid area beneath the northwestern swing set. SamplePG-4 was collected from the soil under the jungle gym.Sample PG-5 was collected from the skid area under thesouthern swing set. PG-6 was collected from the soilnear the picnic bench. Samples were collected using adedicated metal trowel.
Photo 11: The START collecting surface soil samples ina yard at a residence in the Colony housing development.Samples were collected in areas of the yard deemed themost likely frequent exposure areas such as gardens andplay areas. Photo by B. Castellana, 2/14/01.
Photo 12: Soil borings performed near the foundation ofa house in the Colony development. The boringsindicated very little tailings outside the footprint of thehouses. Photo by B. Castellana, 2/14/01.
The subsurface boring was advanced using a hand augernear the location for sample PG-6. The boring extended to a depth of 2 feet bgs. The STARTobserved fill material similar to the surface gravelly sand in the first 18 inches of the boring. TheSTART observed a dark brown silty sand/ sandy silt which appeared to be native.
The START then collected surface soil samples at six residences (Photo 11); the exact locationshave been omitted from this report due to privacy issues. The START collected surface soilsamples RS-1 through RS-6 near the footprints of various houses. The START also conductedsoil borings to a depth of 2 feet at the locations of RS-2, RS-4, and RS-5. A similar fill wasencountered to a depth of approximately 18 inches in all borings except a thin (2-4") layer of
15
tailings was observed approximately 16 inches bgs.at the soil boring advanced at RS-5 location (Photo12). The START collected a yard sample (RS-6) ata location where clean fill, rather than mine tailings,was used in the yard and house footprint; thissample represents a local background.
At the request of OSC Shipley, the STARTperformed a boring at the salt flat location at thenorth drainage area of the site (Figure 2-2).Previous sampling by the START indicated thatarsenic concentrations in the white, crusty materialobserved here were in range of 300 ppm. TheSTART collected a surface sample (LU-S) locatedapproximately 50 feet north of Luzier Lane, thenadvanced a hand-auger boring to 2 feet. Sampleswere collected at the 6-inch (LU-6) and 24-inch(LU-24) intervals. The soil underlying the saltmaterial was a clayey silt with clay.
Photo 13: The salt flat location at the north end of thesite, as viewed from Luzier Lane. This area is atopographic depression and is the most likely place thatsurface fluids migrating from the site would flow Alsonote that there is no fence at this location and there aretire tracks leading into the site from the road. Thesample location is on the north side of the road, behindthe photographer. Photo by B. Castellana, 10/22/01.
The START collected a background sample (BK-1) up gradient from the mine site, 500 feetnorthwest of the corner of Luzier Lane and Locust Street (Figure 2-2). The background samplewas collected at a location thought to have the least impact from mining operations at the Site.
5.2 Laboratory Analysis and ResultsThe samples were packaged and shipped to a laboratory for analysis by EPA Methods 6010/7071(total metals) and EPA Method 9045 (pH). The results are presented in Table 5-1. The data arecompared to the two background samples, as well as the EPA Region IX PRGs. The laboratorydata summary reports are presented in Appendix B of this report. The data were validated by athird-party validation subcontractor and are considered usable for their intended purpose; thevalidation reports and raw data packages are maintained in the START archive.
5.2.1 The Colony Sampling ResultsThe analyses of the surface samples collected at the Colony indicate some metals concentrationsthat were higher than the local background sample. Copper concentrations in the surface samplesfrom the Colony ranged from 59.7 to 893 ppm; the background copper concentrations rangedbetween 60.7 and 23.3, Arsenic concentrations ranged from 4.9 to 11.2 ppm in the surface soilsamples at the Colony;4he background arsenic concentrations range from -5.1 to 2.6 ppm. ThepH of these soils from the Colony ranged from 7.1 to 8.8; background samples were both 7.4.
The results indicate that there is likely some ore material present in the fill used in the yards andplayground of the Colony. The origin of the ore materials might be either from tailings oroverburden from the Yerington Mine and/or any of the other smaller claims in the area. Theoverall concentrations of metals in all of the samples collected at the Colony are below the
16
Table 5-1: Highest Metals Concentrations from The Colony; Results in mg/kg
Analyte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
PH
PG-1
6,330
1.5
5.0
87.5
0.42
0.24
7,690
7.1
6.0
246
10,600
8.7
4,310
299
0.073
6.2
3,040
<0.91
<0.23
297
<0.46
22.5
39.1
7.7
PG-2
6,310
<0.27
5.9
73.3
0.38
<0.089
7,210
7.4
5.5
893
10,900
7.2
3,740
256
<0.035
5.7
2340
<0.72
<0.18
247
<0.36
23.2
32
8.3
PG-3
6,470
<0.22
5.3
77.4
0.38
<0.073
6,510
8.0
5.3
244
10,800
5.5
3,730
264
0.041
5.8
1,970
<0.58
O.15
221
<0.29
22.0
29.3
8.1
PG-4
6,570
<0.21
5.5
80.5
0.40
0.070
6,600
7.5
5.6
231
11,300
5.1
3,610
271
0.054
5.8
1,700
<0.91
<0.23
297
O.46
22.5
39.1
8.8
PG-5
6,210
<0.26
7.4
77.8
0.43
O.086
5,940
7.1
5.4
347
10,600
7.0
4,040
281
O.064
5.9
2860
<0.56
<0.14
274
<0.34
24.8
36.4
8.1
PG-6
6,790
<0.25
7.2
84.8
0.41
0.084
7,820
8.8
7.2
399
12,000
7.4
4,070
305
0.15
6.5
2,590
0.67
O.I 7
182
O.34
25.9
34.5
8.2
RS-6*
6,960
O.24
5.1 (J)
123
0.47
0.21 (J)
7,310
9.0
7.7
60.9
12,200
8.0
4,730
370
O.035
7.3
3,160
0.63
O.I 6
296
O.32
23.4
51.8
7.4
BK-1*
2,760
O.26
2.6
45.9
0.17
0.088
2,460
2.1
1.9
23.3
4,300
4.3
1,430
191
O.017
1.7
1,530
0.70
O.I 8
52
O.35
6.8
20
7.4
PRG
76,000
31
0.39**
5,400
150
37
-
210
4,700
2,900
23,000
400
-
1,800
23
1,600
-
390
390
-
-
550
23,000
-Total metals analysis by EPA Method 6010/7471.pH analysis by EPA Method 9045.mg/kg = milligrams per kilogramPRG = US EPA Region IX Residential Preliminary Remediation Goals, which are risk-based guidelines.(J) = The reported quantity is an estimate and may reflect matrix interferences during analysis.* BK-1 and RS-6 are both background samples.** All samples analyzed, including background, exceed cancer-endpoint PRG for arsenic. The non-cancer-endpoint PRG is 22 ppm.
17
Table 5-1: Highest Metals Concentrations from The Colony; Results in mg/kg
Analyte
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
PH.
RS-1
5,820
0.27
7.9
62.5
0.28
O.091
11,300
6.3
7.9
82.4
10,200
4.9
3,950
206
O.016
5.8
1,780
0.73
O.I 8
438
O.36
20.5
24.7
7.8
RS-2
6,710
O.27
11.2
73.5
0.31
O.089
18,300
8.5
8.5
151
12,400
5.4
5,040
260
O.038
6.8
2,220
0.71
O.18
209
0.35
25.0
25.5
8.3
RS-3
7,860
O.31
9.0
127
0.50
0.13
16,000
9.9
7.5
103
13,500
48
6,720
342
0.089
8.6
3,840
0.73
O.21
473
O.41
29.4
88.9
8.3
RS-4
6,660
O.24
.9.2
75.2
0.31
O.078
18,800
7.1
7.8
59.7
11,800
5.3
4,360
253
O.029
6.8
2,220
0.63
O.I 6
234
O.31
23.8
31.9
7.3
RS-5
8,810
O.27
9.3
114
0.50
0.13
13,700
10.8
9.7
95.5
14,500
9.7
6,250
338
O.061
8.8
3,730
O.71
O.I 8
405
0.35
31.5
53.6
7.3
RS-6*
6,960
O.24
5.1 (J)
123
0.47
0.21 (J)
7,310
9.0
7.7
60.9
12,200
8.0
4,730
370
O.035
7.3
3,160
0.63
O.I 6
296
O.32
23.4
51.8
7.4
BK-1*
2,760
O.26
2.6
45.9
0.17
O.088
2,460
2.1
1.9
23.3
4,300
4.3
1,430
191
O.017
1.7
1,530
0.70
O.I 8
52
O.35
6.8
20
7.4 .
(Residential)
76,000
31
0.39**
5,400
150
37
-
210
4,700
2,900
23,000
400
-
1,800
23
1,600
-
390
390
-
-
550
23,000
-Total metals analysis by EPA Method 6010/7471.pH analysis by EPA Method 9045.mg/kg = milligrams per kilogramPRG = US EPA Region IX Residential Preliminary Remediation Goals, which are risk-based guidelines.(J) = The reported quantity is an estimate and may reflect matrix interferences during analysis.* BK-1 and RS-6 are both background samples.* All samples analyzed, including background, exceed cancer-endpoint PRG for arsenic. The non-cancer-endpoint PRG is 22 ppm.
18
residential PRGs, with the exception of arsenic, which exceeds the cancer-endpoint PRG for allsamples, including background. The arsenic concentrations in the soils from the playground andresidential yards were not significantly higher (greater than three times) than the background values,suggesting that any tailings from the Site did not increase the concentration of arsenic in these soils.
The pH of the soils are in the neutral to basic range and are consistent with the background sample.The results indicate that little or no residual process acid (pH range of Arimetco process solutionsrange from 3 to 1) was present in the samples collected by START. In addition, the ore materialsare probably not generating acid; this is probably due to the lack of sulfide phases in the dominantlyoxide tailings. The salt crust (LU-S) and boring samples (LU-6 and LU-24) were also analyzed formetals and pH. Metals analyses indicated concentrations of several metals, including arsenic,calcium, iron, magnesium, potassium, and sodium, above background concentrations. Arsenicconcentrations were highest in the 6-inch sample (154 ppm) and lowest in the 24-inch sample (55.1).Copper concentrations, which were higher than background, also decreased between thesurface/near surface samples and the 24-inch sample. Iron and manganese concentrations wereabove three times background and generally highest in the 6-inch sample and lowest in the surfacesample; concentrations ranged from 1,270 to 2,370 ppm (iron) and 294 - 637 ppm (manganese).The pH of the surface and 6-inch samples were measured at 10; the 24-inch sample pH was 9.5.
5.2.2 The Luzier Lane Salt Crust SamplesA comparison of the samples collected at the Luzier Lane salt location to the range of tailings andsalts collected at the mine site during the October, 2000 EPA ESI investigation, as well asbackground and the salt sample collected north of Luzier Lane during the same ESI investigation arepresented in Table 5-2. The data show that metals concentrations in the Luzier Lane salt samplesthat are above background are generally consistent with the range of metals found on the site except:copper concentrations are an order of magnitude lower in the Luzier Lane salt samples than anysample from the Site.
There are two possible origins of the salt material to the north of Luzier Lane. The salt may haveemanated from the site, either by surface flow or a groundwater to surface water pathway from thetailings ponds to the south. The low copper concentrations in the salts (which are still up to threetimes background) may result from sub-surface fractionation as a result of the low solubility ofcopper in groundwater. Alternatively, the salts may be naturally occurring, as a result of ephemeral,standing water (playa lake) in this area.
The START recommends two lines of investigation to resolve the origin of this salt. Samphng andanalysis of regional playa lake/salt flat deposits would provide a background level for metals towhich the Luzier Lane samples could be compared. A cursory scan of the geological literature fromthe region indicates little or no published metals data on these types of deposits. Also, an aerialphotograph survey of the Site prior to mining activities (pre-1951) would establish that the salt flatexisted prior to the mining operation; this would not necessarily preclude a contribution to the metalsin the salt flat by mine activities.
19
Table 5-2: Metals Analyses of Salt Crust North of Luzier Lane.
analyte
aluminum
antimony
arsenic
barium
beryllium
cadmium
calcium
chromium
cobalt
copper
iron
lead
magnesium
mercury
nickel
potassium
selenium
silver
sodium
thallium
vanadium
zinc
pH
LU-S
9,620
0.33 (U)
154(J)
70.0
0.50
0.11 (U)
6,250
9.1
6.2
57.1
12,700
8.0 (J)
4,480 (J)
0.039 (U)
7.0
3,490 (J)
0.87 (U)
0.22 (U)
51,000
0.43 (U)
65.7
34.0
10
LU-6
18,300
0.32 (U)
169 (J)
165.0
1.20
0.11 (U)
14,500
15.5
12.4
52.7
23,700
12.4(J)
8,390 (J)
0.033 (U)
14.5
4,870 (J)
0.84 (U)
0.21 (U)
22,600
0.42 (U)
167
61.2
10
LU-24
14,300
0.36 (U)
55.1 (J)
194.0
0.95
0.12 (U)
5,610
14.1
12.1
36.6
23,400
10.6 (J)
8,930 (J)
0.037 (U)
11.8
3,410(J)
0.96 (U)
0.24 (U)
9,520
0.48 (U)
74.5
65.7
9.5
BK-1
2760
0.26 (U)
2.6 •
45.9
0.17
0.088 (U)
2,460
2.1
1.9
23.3
4,300
4.3 (J)
14309
0.017 (U)
1.7
1530(J)
0.70 (U)
0.18(U)
52.0
0.35 (U)
6.8
20.0
7.4
SALT-9
21,000
20 (U)
310(1)
110
0.8
1(U)
7,700
15
9
83
22,000
9
7,200
0.04
10
5,000
8(U)
2(U)
56,000
100 (U)
150
58
-
tailings pond
6,300 - 24,000
(U)
6 - 1,200
20-620
0.2- 1.7
(U)-3
400 - 38,000
6-230
2- 120
570 - 6,700
13,000 - 250,000
4-1,000
800- 18,000
0.06 - 62
(U) - 160
700 - 14,000
2-320
(U)-3
50 - 23,000
(U)
21 -53
14 - 370
-
tailings salt
3,400 - 64,000
(U)
(U)-310
(U)-110
0.5 - 4.8
(U)-2
400 - 36,000
14-35
18-260
850 - 130,000
3,300- 130,000
0.7 - 44,000
2,700 - 69,000
(U)-1.9
6-200
700 - 8,000
(U)-23
(U)
1,300- 15,000
(U)
(U)-64
63 - 230
-Total metals analysis by EPA Method 6010/7471; all metals results are in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).pH analysis by EPA Method 9045.(J) = The reported quantity is an estimate and may reflect matrix interferences during analysis.(U) = The result is below the method quantification limit, which is the value shown.
20
6.0 Arimetco Solvent Exchange SamplingEvent, May 2001
During the month of March 2001, OSC Shipleyrelinquished the Anaconda Site to OSC B. Mandel.OSC Mandel tasked the START to investigatehazardous materials issues associated with theArimetco solvent exchange vats (see Photo 5) at theabandoned site. The purpose was to determinewhether the contents of the solvent exchange vats metthe RCRA hazardous waste criteria for ignitability,corrosivity, and toxicity, as well as investigate a releaseto the surface/subsurface soils using the GeoProbe™direct-push, sampling rig (Photo 14). In response, theSTART created a site/task-specific Samphng andAnalytical Plan (SAP), which is included in this reportas Attachment C. Laboratory analysis were conductedunder a new subcontract. The START also contactedJ. Sawyer with regard to buried utilities issues aroundthe solvent exchange vats.
The START arrived on site on April 30,2001, and metwith OSC Mandel and members of the US CoastGuard Pacific Strike Team (Strike Team). TheSTART identified boring locations to be advancedaround the solvent exchange vats and performed initialmeasurements of the contents of the three vats inanticipation of sampling. As directed by the siteHealth and Safety Plan, the borings were commencedin Level D, and the vat activities were performed inmodified Level C with splash-protection clothing.
Photo 14: The sampling event at the Arimetco solventexchange vats was performed with the assistance of theUS Coast Guard Pacific Strike Team Photo by B.Castellana, 5/01/01.
Photo 15 The START sampling the Arimetco solventexchange vats. The sulfide ore stockpile is visible in thebackground. Photo by B. Mandel, 5/01/01
6.1 Vat SamplingThe vats each measured 34 feet by 75 feet and contained stratified liquids approximately 2 feet deep(Photo 15). The START noted that the vats were constructed in a secondary containment area, andthere did not appear to be any recent staining in the secondary containment area. The STARTadvanced a hollow glass rod into each vat in order to estimate the quantities of the multi-phasedcontents. In each vat, the START observed a floating organic layer underlain by an immiscibleaqueous layer. The organic layer was brown and viscous in appearance in all three vats. Theaqueous layers were blue-green in Vat 1, clear yellow in Vat 2, and blue in Vat 3. While there wasno anticipated sludge layer beneath the aqueous layer, the START observed a separate "chunky"phase associated with the organic layer in Vats 1 and 3. The layers and approximate volumes arepresented in Table 6-1.
21
Table 6-1: Vat Measurements Recorded By START
Vat
Vat 1
Vat 2
Vat 3
medium layer
organic
aqueous
organic
aqueous
organic
aqueous
description
brown liquid
blue liquid
brown liquid
yellowish liquid
brown liquid
blue liquid
thickness
0.625 feet
1.875 feet
0.5 feet
1.5 feet
0.4 feet
1.6 feet
volume (ft3)
1,593.75
4,781.25
1,275
3,825
1,020
4,080
volume (gal)
1 1,922
35,766
9,537
28,611
7,630
30,518
The START collected field screening samples from each layer and performed hazard categorizationtests on the samples. The samples were screened for solubility/reactivity, pH, oxidizing capacity,and flammability (Photo 16). The results of this screening are presented in Table 6-2. The pH of theaqueous liquid in Vat 1 was approximately 1.0; the pH of the other aqueous and organic liquids inthe vats was about 3.0. The aqueous liquid in Vat 1 tested positive as an oxidizer, the contents ofvats 2 and 3 screened as weak oxidizers. Flamability tests on the organic liquids indicated flashpoints between 100 and 200 degrees Fahrenheit.
The results of the screening indicated that theorganic materials in all three vats might beconsidered flammable, and the aqueous liquid inVat 1 was corrosive. Based on these screeningdata, two representative samples of each medium(organic and aqueous) were collected and sent toa laboratory for confirmation analysis. Aqueoussamples were analyzed for pH and TCLP metals.Organic samples were analyzed for ignitability,TCLP metals, and TPH. Results for thesesamples are presented in Section 6.6 of thisreport.
Photo 16: The START performing hazard categorizationof the vat contents at the site. Photo by B. Castellana,5/01/01.
6.2 Soil SamplingThe START performed a walk through of the vat area with J. Sawyer, who pointed out buriedutilities and potential contamination issues around the vats. There were several locations around thevats where the soil was stained; these were typically located at product transfer points or placeswhere piping showed signs of leakage. Soil boring locations were marked on the north and southsides of the vat area. In addition, a suitable background location was identified near the fence alongBurch Drive. Soil borings and soil samphng were performed in accordance with the standardoperating procedures outlined in the SAP.
22
Table 6-2: Hazard Categorization Data Summary
Sample
V-l Blue
V-l Brown
V-l Chunks
V-2 Brown
V-2 Clear
V-3 Yellow
V-3 Brown
V-3 Chunk
Description
Blue/green liquid
Brown, viscous liquid
Chunky yellow amorphoussolid
Brown, viscous liquid
Clear, yellow liquid
Opaque, yellow liquid
Viscous, brown liquid
Chunky yellow amorphoussolid
solubility/reactivity
soluble
insoluble;floater
slightly soluble;floater
soluble
soluble
soluble
insoluble;floater
insoluble;floater
PH
1
3
1
3
3
3
4
4
oxidizer
yes
no
no
weak
weak
slight
slight
slight
Flammability(°F)
nonflammable
100 - 140°
100-140°
140-200°
nonflammable
nonflammable
100-140°
nonflammable
Si
The locations of the borings with respect to the vats are presented in Figure 6-1. The Strike Teamoperated the GeoProbe™ and a START geologist logged the cores. The START and Strike Teamadvanced 9 borings to a depth of 12 feet around the solvent exchange vats, and an additional 2borings to a depth of 12 and 16 feet adjacent to a nearby sump. According to J. Sawyer, the sumpwas where the facility buildings drained; leak detection wells located adjacent to the sumps indicatedthat the sumps were leaking. Borings could not be advanced on the east and west sides of the vatsdue to limited access.
A START geologist examined the cores for staining while logging the sections. Logging andsamphng was performed by slicing open the GeoProbe™ MacroCore™'s acetate sleeves with arazor and cutting the core with a knife to expose a fresh surface. The borings included mostly fillmaterial, which included some tailings, and native soil. Soils were generally poorly sorted, gravellysands with some silt present. Screening samples were collected at a minimum of every 4 feet, as wellas where physical evidence indicated the presence of hydrocarbons. Samples from the borings werescreened using an organic vapor meter (OVM) by the method described in the SAP. Screeningresults are presented in Table 6-3. A subset of the screening samples were sent to a laboratory forconfirmation analysis; the laboratory data are discussed in Section 6.6.
The screening results indicate that hydrocarbons are present in the subsurface around the solventexchange vats. The highest readings around the vat were observed in the 4 to 8 foot depth rangeand diminished below. These locations corresponded generally with the transfer points and pipelocations that showed evidence of leaking. The highest readings around the sump were observed atthe 12- foot depth.
23
After all the borings were advanced, the borings were abandoned by backfilhng with a cement slurry.The core material was disposed of by placing on the lined tailings piles at the site.
Table 6-3: Soil Boring Screening Results Using an OVM; Results in parts per million (ppm)
depth
2ft.
4ft .
6ft.
8ft .
1 0 f t
12 f t
B-l
105
137
90
4.4
B-2
2.6
3.5
2.6
5.2
B-3
90
5.2
5.2
B-4
10.0
6.1
4.4
B-5
.
8.8
2.6
6.1
B-6
70
4.4
2.6
B-7
5.7
5.2
3.5
B-8
57
12.5
3.5
B-9
53
142
120
B-10
0
0
80
B-ll
15
20
15
Anmetco Solvent Exchange Vats
B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5
B-& B-7 B-6
B-10
Raffenate Pond #2
B-11
Scale
1OO &0 6O 4O 2O O
\
' Raffenate•• Pond #1
\
1OO feet
Figure 6-1: Soil boring locations around the Arimetco solvent exchange vats.
24
6.3 The Sulfide Tailings Pile BoringThe NDEP requested a soil boring in the sulfide tailings area(Figure 2-2). NDEP was interested in the moisture contentand permeability of the sulfide tailings because they wereconsidering the application of process solutions to assistwith dust control and fluid management. In addition, NDEPrequested that, if recovery was sufficiently advanced into theunderlying native soil, a well be installed in the boring.
The GeoProbe™ set up at a location identified by J. Sawyer;which was located in a former evaporation pond at the topof the sulfide tailings pile. The START observed that thesurface was a bright yellow-grey, indicating hydrated,oxidized iron minerals were present. In addition, theSTART noted sand drifts accumulated at the bermwalls atmany locations, many exhibiting ripple marks. The surfacewas a hard crust of clay to sand-size clasts which becameairborne when disturbed.
The boring was performed by continuously coring in four-foot, MacroCore intervals. The cores were sealed in theacetate sleeves with Teflon tape and nylon caps. TheSTART provided descriptions of the cores based on the soilfrom the cutting shoe and observations through the acetatesample sleeve. Observations included oxidation state(yellow = oxidized; grey = non-oxidized), grain size (clay,silt, sand), and moisture content (dry, damp, moist). Thetailings exhibited layering on the millimeter to meter scale.Oxidation varied considerably from layer to layer, generallydecreasing with depth. Moisture content also generallyincreased with depth, but also varied as a function of grainsize: the finer fractions tended to retain more water than thesand-size fractions.
The total depth of the boring was 48 feet. The entirerecovery was tailings, and no native soils were encountered.In spite of the fact that recovery through 48 feet was good,there was some concern that the weight of the casing in thehole created an increased risk in losing the sampling tube.OSC Mandel made the decision to abandon the boring afterthe 44 to 48- foot sample was collected. The boring wasabandoned by backfilling with a cement slurry. The sealedcores were handed over to Mr. Sawyer to hold for theNDEP.
6.4 Site Security
Photo 17: The GeoProbe advancing boring B-12 on thesulfide tailings pile. Photo by B Castellana, 5/02/01.
Photo 18: Logging boring B-12 through the sulfidetailings. Moisture and grain-size estimates were madefrom the material from the cutting shoe The acetatesleeves were sealed with Teflon tape and labeled. PhotobyB. Castellana, 5/02/01.
25
Photo 19: The complete boring section from B-12. Theblack caps denote the bottom of the core, and the sectionincreases in depth from the bottom of the picture to thetop. Note the variability of color (orange = oxidized,grey = non-oxidized) within each core, and the generaltrend from oxidized near the surface to non-oxidized atdepth. Photo by B. Castellana, 5/02/01.
During this sampling event, the START noted that several security issues that the START hadobserved on previous site visits had been corrected. The fence had been mended at the locationalong Luzier Lane as well as where the process lines cross Burch Drive leading into the solventexchange vats. Large tires had been placed along the area previously used to gain entry by dirt bikesand quad runners near the Anaconda pump station at the northern end of the site.
6.5 Weather ObservationsWeather conditions during the May 2001 sampling event included variable temperatures and highwinds. The START noted dust blowing off the sulfide tailings piles all along the site perimeter along .Highway 95A and Burch Drive. In addition, the START noted that the process solution evaporationsystem installed by NDEP continued to operate during high-wind conditions. At one point, while theSTART/Strike Team was performing the last boring at the sulfide tailings pile, the evaporation unitswere observed blowing away from the target leach pad, rather than on it.
6.6 Laboratory AnalysisThe subset of the field screening samples from the solvent exchange vats and the surrounding soilswere packaged and sent to a laboratory for confirmation analysis. Two samples of the organic liquid(plus one duplicate) were analyzed for ignitability, TCLP metals, and TPH. Two representatives(plus one duplicate) of the aqueous samples were analyzed for pH and TCLP metals. Four soilsamples (plus one background and one duplicate) were analyzed for pH, TPH, and total metals. Theresults of these analyses are presented in Tables 6-4 and 6-5. Laboratory data summary reports arepresented in Appendix D of this report. The data were validated by a START chemist and areconsidered usable for their intended purpose; the validation reports and raw data packages aremaintained in the START archive.
6.6.1 Vat SamplesThe two hydrocarbon vat samples (V-l-HC and V-3-HC) ignited in the laboratory at 250 degreesFarenheit. The hydrocarbon range was 100 percent in the diesel range for both. Only mercury wasdetected in the TCLP for V-3-HC; the results indicated no leachable metals above regulatorythresholds.
. The pH of the aqueous vat samples ranged from 2.5 (V-2- Aq) to less than 1 (V-l- Aq). TCLP ..analysis of the V-l-Aq indicated leachable concentrations of cadmium, chromium, lead, and mercury; 'only cadmium and chromium were above RCRA hazardous waste thresholds.
The laboratory results for the vat samples indicate that there are hazardous wastes in the solventexchange vats, as defined by 40 CFR Parts 261.22 and 261.24, based on pH and TCLP analyses.The aqueous liquid in Vat 1 has a pH that is less than 2, and the aqueous liquid in Vat 1 has a TCLPcadmium of 2 mg/1 and TCLP chromium of 5.4 mg/1, which is twice the RCRA hazardous wastedetermining factor of 1 mg/1 and 5 mg/1, respectively. The organic liquids in the vats are notflammable under RCRA standards.
6.6.2 Soil SamplesTotal metals analyses of the soil samples indicate the presence of several metals above background,most notable copper. None of these metals concentrations (with the exception of arsenic, which is
26
above the PRG in the background as well) is above the Industrial PRGs, which are shown in Table 6-5 (none is above the Residential PRG, as well; see Table 5-1). The TPH analysis of the soils indicatediesel-range hydrocarbon concentrations ranging from 570 to 9,100 ppm. The pH in the soils rangefrom 8.9 in the background sample to 4.1 in the most heavily hydrocarbon-contaminated sample.There does appear to be a relationship between soil pH and hydrocarbon concentration: the sampleswith the highest hydrocarbon concentrations have the lowest pH values.
The laboratory results for the soils indicate that there appears to be a small release from the vat areaand the adjacent sump. Hydrocarbons were detected in soils from several boreholes around the vatsusing the OVM; confirmation analysis indicates that hydrocarbon concentrations were in excess of9,000 ppm. The range of hydrocarbons observed in the soil is consistent with the organic materialobserved in the vats.
Table 6-4: Solvent Exchange Vat Sampling Event Laboratory Data Summary
Sample
V-l-Aq
V-l-HC
V-2-Aq
V-3-HC
medium
aqueous
hydrocarbon
aqueous
hydrocarbon
PH
EPA 9045C
<1
-
2.5
-
*ignitability
EPA 1010
op
250
-
250
TPH
EPA 8015
100%C10-C24
-
100% C.O-CM
TCLP (regulatory threshold inparentheses)
EPA 13 11/6010(RCRA waste threshold inparentheses)
ug/1
cadmium- 2,200(1,000)chromium - 5,400 (5,000)lead - 2,600 (5,000)mercury- 4.1 (200)
-
-
mercury - 6.4 (200)mg/kg = milligrams per kilogramug/1 = micrograms per literppm = parts per millionTPH = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon results in percentage for organic liquid samples.TCLP = Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure.* RCRA flammable liquid is defined as ignitable below 140°F.
27
Table 6-5: Soils Results for Vat Sampling Event
sampleID
S-I
S-2
S-3
S-4
S-5
S-6
Location
B-l (6ft.)
B-9 (8ft.)
B-3 (4ft.)
B-6 (4ft.)
B-6 (4ft.)
BK-'l (8ft.)
pHEPA 9045C
7.8 .
5.4
8.1
4.1
4.2
8.9
TPHEPA 8015mg/kg
5,300
6,800
570
9,100
9,100
nd(l.O)
OVMppm
137
142' .
90
70
70
2.6
Total Metals**EPA 6010/7471mg/kg
calcium 17,000cobalt 8.3copper 890thallium 0.32
cobalt 5.9copper 1 ,300iron 11,000mercury 0. 1 5selenium 1 . 1
copper 86
aluminum 13,000cadmium 1.1cobalt 7.4copper 1 ,300iron 14,000lead 4.9magnesium 6,100manganese 300mercury. 0.08molybdenum 0.94nickel 13selenium 0.97
copper 1,300mercury 0.06molybdenum 1 .2selenium 1.6
aluminum 5,300cadmium 0.47cobalt 2.8copper 42iron 5,300lead 2.4magnesium 2,500manganese 140mercury ndmolybdenum ndnickel 6.3selenium nd
PRG
mg/kg
-100,00076,000
140
100,00076,000
100,000610
10,000
.76,000
100,000810
100,00076,000
100,0001,000
-32,000
61010,00041,00010,000
76,000610
10,00010,000
100,000810
100,00076,000
100,0001,000
-32,000
61010,00041,000
10,00mg/kg = milligrams per kilogramppm = parts per millionTPH = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon**Only results that are 2X background or above are reported for total metals; background levels for theseanalytes are provided as sample S-6.PRG = USEPA Region IX Prelimmary Remediation Goal (see text) number provided is the industrial value.
28
7.0 Summary and ConclusionsThe Anaconda Copper Company, Yerington Mine Site is an abandoned copper ore mining, milling,and extraction facility occupying about 5.5 square miles in rural Nevada. Past regulatory activitieshave largely focused on surface and groundwater quality issues associated with the Site. Previoussamphng has demonstrated a presence of toxic metals, especially arsenic, lead, cadmium, chromium,beryllium, and selenium. Reports indicate the release of toxic metals to groundwater from the Site.Additional data suggest a release of toxic metals to surface water pathways and drinking waterwells adjacent to the site. The State of Nevada is currently maintaining a staff at the Site in order tomanage the approximately 90 million gallons of acidic process solutions abandoned by Arimetco,the former operator, in 1999.
The START was tasked by OSC Shipley to address security issues at the site, as well as collect soilsamples at houses constructed on tailings from the site. The security survey revealed several issues,such as areas around the site where people have gained access with dirtbikes and four-wheel-drive,off-road vehicles. After EPA's having brought these issues to NDEP's attention, many of theseissues have been addressed. The fact remains that the site is large and is manned by a small crewduring working hours who are not there for security purposes.
Sampling at the Colony housing development in Yerington, Nevada indicated that, while there mayhave been a tailings/overburden component to the yard fill, there was not a significant hazard posedby the slightly increased metals concentrations. Arsenic concentrations, which exceeded EPARegion LX PRGs were similar to background concentrations and do not appear to have beenexacerbated by the presence of materials derived from the Site. Samples collected from theencrusted area north of Luzier Lane had arsenic levels well above background at the surface, anddecreased with depth below the surface. It is unclear whether this material came from the Site or isresidual from a pre-existing playa lake.
The START was tasked by OSC Mandel to assess hazardous waste issues at the abandonedArimetco solvent exchange vats and to determine whether a release from these vats to thesubsurface had occurred. The START sampled the vats and performed subsurface soil samplingwith the aid of the USCG Pacific Strike Team and the GeoProbe™. The START performed fieldscreening and submitted a subset of these data for laboratory confirmation analysis. The results ofthe laboratory data indicate that the aqueous materials in at least two of the vats exceed RCRAthresholds for hazardous waste determining levels. The subsurface sampling results indicate thatthere has been a release to the subsurface soils around the vats. Levels in the vats appeared stableand the vat secondary containment area was clean and sound. The soil contamination observedaround the vats is consistent with poor hygiene practices while the plant was operational, ratherthan leaking containment.
29
8.0 List of References
Anaconda, 1984. Water Quality Investigations and Mitigation Plan, Yerington Mine Site,Yerington, Nevada. Prepared by Anaconda Minerals Company; submitted to Nevada Division ofEnvironmental Protection, February 17, 1984.
AHA, 1983. Evaluation of Water Quality and Solids leaching Data Adjacent to the Weed HeightsOperation Near Yerington, Nevada. Submitted to Anaconda Minerals Company, Denver,Colorado, by Applied Hydrology Associates, Denver, Colorado, May 25, 1983.
AHA, 2000. 1999 Annual Monitoring and Operation Summary: Pumpback Well System,Yerington, Nevada. Prepared by Applied Hydrology Associates, Inc.; prepared for ARCOEnvironmental Remediation L.L.C.; April, 2000.
Arimetco, 1998. Arimetco Yerington Mine and Process Facility Site Assessment of GroundwaterQuality. Prepared by Dennis Dalton; submitted to Arimetco, Inc., July, 1998.
Arimetco, 1999. Water Pollution Control Report, Third Quarter, 1999: Permit NEV88039,Arimetco Yerington/MacArthur mine. Arimetco, Inc., submitted to Nevada Division ofEnvironmental Protection, Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation, October 28, 1999.
E & E, 2000. Anaconda Copper Company, Yerington Mine Site, Expanded Site Inspection.Prepared by Ecology & Environment, Incorporated; submitted to the US Environmental ProtectionAgency, December 2000.
NDEP, 1994. Site Inspection Prioritization: Anaconda Copper Company, Yerington Mine, WeedHeights, NV. Prepared by Nevada Department of Environmental Protection, Superfund Branch,Bureau of Corrective Actions; Submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency,Region IX; September 8,1994.
NDEP, 1999. State of Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Sampling Event Data andField Log, November, 1999.
USGS, 1982. Groundwater Quality Downgradient from Copper-Ore Milling Wastes at WeedHeights, Lyon County, Nevada. U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report # 80-1217, 1982.
USGS, 1987a. U. S. Geological Survey, Mason Valley 7.5-Minute Topographic Map, 1987.
USGS, 1987b. U. S. Geological Survey, Yerington 7.5-Minute Topographic Map, 1987.
30
APPENDIX A: QUALITY ASSURANCE SAMPLING PLAN REGARDINGCOLONY SAMPLING EVENT
1
Quality Assurance Sampling Plan
Anaconda Emergency ResponseYerington, Nevada
Job Number: 0050-0 1-SFTDD: 09-01-01-006
U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyContract Number: 68- W-0 1-012
Prepared by:Benjamin Castellana
Superfund Technical Assessment and Remedial TeamEcology and Environment, Inc.
February 8, 2001
APPROVALS
Ecology and Environment, Inc.
Benjamin CastellanaProj&ef Manager
Date
U.S. EPA
Brad Shipley DateOn-Scene Coordinator
Howard Edwards DateQuality Assurance Coordinator
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
.'•*
— 1.0 Introduction and Background 1
2.0 Data Use Objectives 1
-,-? 3.0 Quality Assurance Objectives 1
"" , 4.0 Approach and Sampling Methodologies 2^_£ 4.1 Sampling Equipment 2
|° 4.2 Sample Location Rationale 24.3 Sample Collection ... 2
_ 7; 4.4 Field Quality Control (QC) Samples 2^jt, 4.5 Sample Handling and Shipment 3
4.6 Sample Labeling 3llf 4.7 Sampling Equipment Decontamination 3U* 4.8 Sample Documentation 3
4.9 Property Access 5
mfi 5.0 Analytical Methods and Procedures 5
L|| 6.0 Quality Assurance Requirements 6Wr
^ 7.0 Schedule of Activities 7E iv
•I** 8.0 Project Organization and Responsibilities 7
t> 9.0 Deliverables 8
— 1.0 Introduction and BackgroundOn February 1, 2001, United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) B. Shipley tasked the Superfund Technical Assessment and
— Response Team (START) to assist in the assessment of metals contamination at a housingdevelopment near the Anaconda Copper Company, Yerinton Mine Site. The housingdevelopment was constructed on graded material derived from the mine tailings pile. Some of
"" the tailings have been shown to be enriched in some metals above the US EPA Region IXPreliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) for residential soils. While the developer wasrequired to cap the graded fill with a geotextile and a native soil cap, there may be some
"" evidence that tailings materials are exposed at the surface in some areas of the development,including residential yards and a playground.
2.0 Data Use Objectives"?~ The EPA has directed the START to perform an assessment of metals contamination at the
«^> site with the following objectives:
K • conduct discretionary sampling of soils at the playground and up to 5 residential yards.
• conduct several shallow borings to determine whether the fill is to the prescribedI $ standards.ij£
The collected data will be used to identify the presence of toxic metals in order to determine- S further enforcement actions against potentially responsible parties.
7i The action level for this project is based on the USEPA Region DC PRGs. The PRGs are risk§- 3 based tools based on exposure pathways for which generally accepted methods, models and
assumptions have been developed (i.e. ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation) for specificI ••?, land-use conditions and do not consider impact to groundwater or ecological receptors. TheyI | are not intended to be used as stand-alone decision-making tools or to determine if a waste is
hazardous under the Resource Conservation and Reclaimation Act. In some cases, thel"^ predictive risk-based models generate PRG levels that lie within or even below typical^ background concentrati on s.
t 3.0 Quality Assurance Objectives••£ The quality assurance objectives for this assessment, as determined by the requirements stated
in "Data Quality Objectives Process for Superfund" Interim Final Guidance, September, 1993,* ;, EPA/540/G-93/071, Publication No. 9355.9-01, are listed in the table below:
Table 1: Quality Assurance Objectives
Parameter .
Metals
PH
Matrix
soil
soil
Data Use
characterization
characterization
QA Objective
definitive
definitive
4.0 Approach and Sampling Methodologies
4.1 Sampling EquipmentThe following equipment will be utilized to collect soil samples:
Table 2: Sampling Equipment
Parameter
Metals, pH
Sampling Equipment
trowel, plastic baggies,gloved hand, glass jars
Fabrication
plastic, glass
Dedicated
Yes
4.2 Sample Location RationaleSample locations will be chosen to support the following goals of the removal activities:
• Characterize metals concentrations in soils. Data will be compared to a site actionlevel discussed below; soils which screen above the action level may indicate a threat
. t o human health and the environment.
The START will collect discretionary samples from the site area. All sampling locations willbe selected in the field by the START Project Manager (PM) in consultation with OSCShipley and/or Paiute Tribal representatives. The number and frequency of sampling will bebased on the PM's professional judgement and consultations with OSC Shipley. The totalnumber of field samples is not expected to exceed 20 samples, including qualityassurance/quality control (QA/QC) samples.
4.3 Sample Collection
Soil SamplingThe START identify sample locations based on previous data, visual appearance and thepotential for human exposure. Sample locations will be recorded by approximate location onthe site and using a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit to recored coordinates taken atsampling points. Surface samples will be collected with a dedicated plastic trowel or gloved
LI
I S
"•??s
hand, depending upon the efficiency of recovery. Samples will be transferred to an 8-ounceglass jar and stored in a cooler with ice before transport to the laboratory.
4.7 Field Quality Control (QC) SamplesEquipment BlanksSince only dedicated equipment will be used during this investigation, an equipment blankwill not be collected during this effort.
Duplicates • :
One duplicate soil sample will be taken for every ten field samples collected, based on thetotal number of samples to be determined in the field by the PM and the FOSC. Twoduplicate soil samples are expected; these duplicates will be collected as an additional sampleat locations PG-1 and RS-1, with designations PG-10 and RS-10, respectively.
Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate
One out of every twenty laboratory-analyzed soil samples will be submitted for matrixspike/matrix spike duplicate analysis. This number is not expected to exceed one sample.
4.5 Sample Handling and ShipmentSamples will be placed in appropriate jars and labelled according to Section 4.6. Caps will besecured with custody seals. Sealed jars and bottles will be encased in bubble wrap and placedin metal or plastic coolers. Ice will be sealed in collection bags and placed in the coolers.Table 3 lists relevant sampling handling information.
Table 3: Sample Containers and Preservation Methods
Matrix
Soil
. Soil
Analysis.
pH EPA Method 9045
Metals EPA Methodfift 10/7471
Container
8-oz, wide-mouth jar
8-02, wide-mouth jar
Preservation
4°C, cool
4°C, cool
Holding Time
ASAP
28 days
A chain-of-custody form will be completed as described in Section 4.12, placed in a plasticbag, and affixed to the underside of each cooler lid. The lid will be sealed and affixed oh atleast two sides with custody seals so that any sign of tampering will be clearly visible.
4.6 Sample LabelingSamples will be numbered according to the following examples:
Playground soil samplesResidence soil samplesBackground sample
PG-1RS-1BK-1
4.7 Sampling Equipment DecontaminationAll sampling equipment will be dedicated, so decontamination will not be necessary.
4.8 Sample DocumentationAll sample documents will be completed legibly, in black ink. Any corrections or revisionswill be made by lining through the incorrect entry and initialling the error.
Field LogbookThe PM will maintain'a field logbook detailing site activities and observations. Entries willinclude the following:
1. Site name and project number.2. Name(s) of personnel on-site.3. Dates and military times of all entries.4. Descriptions of all site activities, including site entry and
exit times.5. Noteworthy events and discussions.6. Weather conditions.7. Site observations.8. Identification and description of samples and locations.9. Subcontractor information and names of on-site personnel.10. Date and time of sample collections, along with chain-of-
custody information.11. Photodocumentation record.12. Site sketches.13. Signature of person making entry.
Sample LabelsSample labels will clearly identify individual samples,and include the following:
1. Site name and number.2. Time and date of sample collection.3. Any sample preservation.4. Analysis requested.5. Initials of sampler6. Sample number
Sample labels will be securely affixed to the sample container.
Chain-of-Custody FormA Chain-of-Custody record will be maintained from the time samples are prepared forshipment until their final deposition. Every transfer of custody will be documented on achain-of-custody form. When samples are not under direct control of the individualresponsible for them, they will be stored in a locked container secured with a custody seal.
The Chain-of-Custody Form should include the following:
_ •*•
a f<
IIm, Vi
'IIffcit
1. Sample identification number.2. Sample date and time.3. Sample location.4. Analyses requested5. Name(s) and signature(s) of sampler(s).6. Signature(s) of any individual(s) with control over samples.
Custody SealsCustody Seals demonstrate that a sample container has not been tampered with, or opened.The individual in possession of the sample(s) will sign and date the seal and affix so that thecontainer cannot be opened without breaking the seal. The name of this individual, along witha description of the sample packaging, will be noted in the field logbook.
4.9 Property AccessSite access will be the responsibility of the FOSC and the Paiute Tribe.
5.0 Analytical Methods and Procedures
Analyses will be conducted for all samples collected according to the methods described inTable 4.
Table 4: Analytical Methods and QA/QC Requirements
Method
EPA 9045C
EPA 6010/7471
Parameter
PH
see table 5
#ofSamples
20
20
MS/MSD
NA
/
Matrix
soil
soil
Detection Limit
NA
see table 5/ - Matrix spike and matrix spike dup for one submitted sample
km,
Table 5:Parameter and Detection
Method
Analytes
EPA 6010/7471
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Banum
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
^ead
Magnesium
vlanganese
vlercury
Nickel
'otassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
PreliminaryRemediation Goa
(mg/kg)
76,000
31
039*
5,400
150
37
NA
210
4,700
2,900
23,000
400
NA
1,800
23
1,600
NA
390
390
NA
52
550
23,000
Method DetectionLimit
(mg/kg)
500
12
2
40
1
1
1,000
2
10
5
20
06
1,000
3
004
8
1,000
1
2
1,000
2
10
4
Limit Criteria
Accuracy(% Recovery for
MS/MSD)
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
Precision(RPD for
MS/MSD andduplicates)
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
PercentComplete
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
Method Detection Limits are those applicable to E.MO4 0.MS/MSD = Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike DuplicateRPD = Relative Percent Differencemg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (ppm)* Natural background may be above PRG
TSif
$
"Ttft
tw'jV
^<-LJo
6.0 Quality Assurance RequirementsThe following requirements apply to the respective QA Objectives and parameters identifiedin Section 3.0 and apply to analyses performed by START contracted laboratories:
The following QA Protocols for Definitive data are applicable to all sample matrices andinclude:
1. Provide sample documentation in the form of field logbooks, appropriate field datasheets and chain-of-custody forms.
2. Initial and continuing calibrations will be documented.
3. The detection limit will be determined and recorded, along with the data, whereappropriate.
4. Analytes will be identified and quantified.
5. QC blanks will be analyzed.
6. Matrix spike recoveries will be documented.
7. Analytical error determination in the form of replicate samples must be performed on10 percent of the samples.
8. Total measurement error documenting the precision of the measurement system fromsample acquisition through analysis will be determined.
7.0 Schedule of ActivitiesThe proposed work schedule is presented in Table 6.
Table 6: Proposed Schedule of Work
Activity
Pre-Mobilization PlanningSampling Plan Preparation
Mobilization
Field Work
Demobilization
Lab Analysis - Summary- Data Package
Start Date
02/01/01
02/13/01
02/14/01
02/15/01
End Date
02/05/01
02/13/01
02/15/01
02/15/01
02/23/0103/16/01
8.0 Project Organization and Responsibilities
The EPA OSC B. Shipley will provide overall direction to the START staff concerningproject sampling needs, objectives and schedule. The START member on site will be theprimary point of contact with the OSC. The PM is responsible for the development andcompletion of the QASP, project team organization, supervision of all project tasks, and thecompletion of required reporting and deliverables.
The following personnel will work on this project:
Personnel Responsibility
B. Shipley EPA On-Scene Coordinator
Ben Castellana START Project Manager
Tom Fortner Site Safety Officer/Sampling support
9.0 DeliverablesThe PM will keep the OSC informed about the technical and financial progress of this project.Activities under this project will report, status, trip reports, analytical and final reports.Activities will also be summarized into the monthly and annual START reports.
The following deliverables will be provided under this project:
OASPThe preparation of this document fulfills the requirement for a QASP. It is due prior to thecommencement of field activities.
Data Validation ReportA review of the data generated under this plan will be performed by a qualified STARTsubcontractor. The assessment of data acceptability or usability will be provided separately, oras part of the analytical report.
The data validation report will be prepared for samples analyzed under this plan. Informationregarding the analytical methods or procedures employed, sample results, QA/QC results,chain-of-custody documentation, laboratory correspondence, and raw data will be providedwithin this deliverable. The review requirements for the Definitive Data Quality objectives(DQOs) are listed below: ' • J
—3
jt8
— Definitive DataData generated under this DQO will be evaluated with the appropriate criteria contained in theRemoval Program Validation Procedures which accompany OSWER Directive #9360.4-1.
Specific activities for the Definitive include the following:V-v
— 1. The samples will be evaluated for holding times, blank contamination, matrix spikerecovery for the sampe lot, surrogate recovery, blank summaries and detectioncapability. ' • .
f c » - • . • • . . . ' '2. The data package will be evaluated for completeness, chain-of-custody, the laboratory
j y. comments and perceived problems.
_*£• Final Reportf i| A final report will be prepared to correlate available background information with data
generated under this sampling event and to identify supportable conclusions and''?J recommendations which satisfy the objectives of the QASP. A draft report will be submitted^ before the final report if so requested by the OSC.
-3^
S
• 4-L*
0
i s
APPENDIX B: COLONY SAMPLING EVENT DATA SUMMARYREPORTS
Ecology and Environment, Inc. Laboratory ResultsAnalytical Services Center4493 VValden Avenue NYS ELAP ID#: 10486Lancaster, New York 14086 Phone:(716)685-8080
March 14, 2001
Mr. Ben CastellanaE and E Long Beach Office11. Golden Shore Dr.Long Beach, CA 90802
RE: Anaconda Emergency Response
|f Work Order No.: 0102090M"
Dear Mr. Ben Castellana,? j. Ecology and Environment, Inc. received 18 samples on Friday, February 16, 2001 for the•"" analyses presented in the following report.
- 1 You will receive an invoice under separate cover.
^e$ E & E will retain the samples addressed in this report for 30 days, unless otherwise instructed11 . by the client. If additional storage is requested, the storage fee is SI.00 per sample container per"" month, to accrue until the client authorizes sample destruction.
I ,'-' Sincerely, ' 'U ' ' ' '
TonyvBogoBn
Project Manager
CC:Enclosures as note
....... . 1Q^ case
n
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center
Lancaster, New York 14086
Phone: (716) 685-8080
Laboratory Results
NYS ELAP ID#: 10486
CLIENT:Project:Lab Order:
Date Received:
Lab Sample ID
01 02090-01 A
01 02090-02 A
0102090-03A
0102090-04A
0102090-05A01 02090-06 A
01 02090-07 A
01 02090-08 A
01 02090-09 A
01 02090- 10A
0102090-1 1A
0102090-12A
0102090-13A01 02090- 14A
01 02090- 15A
01 02090- 16A
0 102090- 17A01 02090- ISA
E and E Long Beach OfficeAnaconda Emergency Response0102090 -
02/16/2001
Client Sample ID
PG-1
PG-2
PG-3
PG-4
PG-5
PG-6PG-10
RS-1
RS-2
RS-3
RS-4
RS-5
RS-6
BK-1
RS-10
LU-S
LU-6LU-24
Work Order Sample Summary
Alt. Client Id Collection Date
02/14/2001 9:48:00 AM
02/14/2001 9:57:00 AM
02/14/2001 10:04:00 AM
02/14/2001 10:08:00 AM
02/14/2001 10: 12:00 AM
02/14/2001 10: 16:00 AM
02/14/2001 10:22:00 AM
02/14/2001 10:50:00 AM
02/14/2001 11:12:00 AM
02/14/2001 11:37:00 AM
02/14/2001 11:55:00 AM
02/14/2001 12:22:00 PM
02/14/2001 12:42:00 PM
02/1 4/2001 3 :20:OOPM
02/14/2001 12:00:00 PM
02/14/2001 2:5 1:00 PM
02/14/2001 2:56:00 PM02/14/2001 3:10:00 PM
L
Ecology & Environment Inc. LIMS Version 3.1.1.6 - 03/09/2001 3:00:00 P
i rENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'
Office of Enforcement
mnni*iJ, < !
"i •JJUILIJIJIIW pn « f»mvf | M f
B&$ S«K> .," '* A/ ' *,
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, California 94105
PROJ NO PROJECT NAME
SAMPLEBS fStrnature)
STA NO DATE TIME STATION LOCATION
NO
OF
CONTAINERS
REMAR
P6- Z/At 2t xy x2&±
,
& /Zt ' ~ 0 ^f*f\ \lf X/00
DUt-J X 7<
^_ V19/2- \s*^TJ[ y y
Xv
IP&L X X XS0t /y'Cv',« V X
•RS-3 x: XX X
fes-5 50'-y X y X
O^LMY Cr>-?o-/e X X >
Mi/ 9X y
-y/v 12,00 yDate /Time Received by Relinquished by (Signtturtl Date /Time Received by
Relinquished by ISigmturt) Date /Time
iJfine
Received by: ($ign»tur») Relinquished by (Signmturtl- — ----
Date /Time Recen/M-by (Signtturtt.J
RehnqJfined by Date /Time Received for Laboratory by Date /Time Remarks J>
Dutribution Origin*! Accompcnin Shipnyctf; Copy to Coordmttor Field FiUt Cfl
9
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYOffice of Enforcement
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
REGION 9
75 Hawthorne StreetSan Francisco, California 94105
PROJ NO PROJECT NAME
SAMPLE
STA NO TIMECO
STATION LOCATION
NO
OF
CON-TAINERS
REMARKS
LU-B y yLl) -6 XLU-tt 1510 > • XV
Relinquished by 1 Signs turr) Data /Timn Rnc«iw«rt by: ISignmturtl Relinquished by: (Signtwrt) Received by: (Signttun)
RelmgSfod by ts,gn»tur»t Date /Time Received by: (Sign*tun) Relinquished by: ISigntwrt)
Relinquished by(ts,gnfture>riSigm Date /Time Received for Laboratory by: Date /Time
Distribution: Original Acc&mpaniM Shipn^rtt; Copy to Coordinator Fitld Filtt
Remarks
I ,«
PACKAGE RECEDE
Ecology ana itnviroiiinem, uac. A.Coaler Receipt Form
NUMBER OF COO
v-cntcr
A. Preliminary Examination Phasewtiha»tiDorackjB|ihp?
FROJECTORSmNAME:
CIRCLE ONErfB, so s*
Enter omer ben aad pwt airbill • below, f CM* CW j
Shis as hign taart or tagewui goods
I Did cookrti) have cuaody se»b?
3 Were custody seals unbroken and tntaa cc reecpt'',
Were custody scab dated and signed'
NA
NO NAN'0* N*
NO NA
5 Sip here to acknowledge receipt of cooler (s)
Date ecclerts) opened
ceipt of cooler (
"7 /&• f O L
Cxiolerts) opened by (pnnt)
6 Were the C-O-C forms received'
7 Was the project identifiable mam the C-O-C form'1 __________If YES. enter the project number and name ta the beading above.
AIRBILL *L -^-^5 o
Thermomeier Correcuon Farm*. C) • If No or Temperature Ouuide of Aceepuble Range prepare a PM Notification form
B. Unpacking Phaseg Was :nou£r- C3:un| frjierui usei in cooiens)"1 .
T\pe o- maienal VeraucuUte ^Bubble Otner
9 1'required »asenougti ice used'.If YES. type of ice used Dry Blue Other
10 Was a temperature blank vial included inside cooiaU)*If YES. indicate temperature blank vul temperanot m abie above If NO. indicate cooter temperature in table above
11 w.~ ,11 ~~.n,»~, ^AtA m mamg pkmc >»«*»
YES
12. Did all conoiaers amvt unbroken and in food condition'.
13 Samples stored in W Cooter before Login Phase?If ye*. Signature la _«__._______________,
NO NA
NO NA
^ NA
Nb) HA
NO* NA
Signature Out
C. Login PhaseSamples Logged u By (pom);
Date/TuBr.
Date/Time-.
14 Were all container Ubdj complete <e.g. date, tine f
Signature
15 Were all C-O-C forms Tilled out properly in ink aad signed'.
16 Did the C-O-C form agree wuh conuiaen received4 ____
17 Were the correct containers used for the tests requested4 __
IS Were the correct preservative usitd on the sample labels*
19 Was a suflieieat sample volume seat for the tens requested''.
20. Were all vobiile samples reeaved •uboot head space*
•Prepare a PM Norifu-rooa fcrm
Ecology and Environment, Inc. Laboratory ResultsAnalytical Services CenterLancaster, New York 14086 NYSELAPID#: 10486
Phone: (716)685-8080
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach Office
Project: Anaconda Emergency Response CASE NARRATIVELab Order: 0102090
METALSIron was out of the linear range in the continuing calibration blank (CCB) before sample RS-4 in run010221210R. Samples RS-4, RS-5, RS-6, BK-1, RS-10, LU-S, LU-6 and LU-24 were rerun for iron in run01022121 1R, and all QC passed. Samples LU-6 and LU-24 were diluted ten-fold for iron.
The matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate of sample PG-1 was out of control for arsenic, lead, magnesium,mercury, potassium, and thallium. All samples are flagged with an "N". The associated laboratory controlsample met QC criteria.
Matrix spike criteria were not applied to aluminum, calcium, copper, iron, magnesium and manganese as theamount detected in the sample exceeded the spike amount added by four or more times.
WETCHEMISTRYNo discrepancies were encountered during these analyses.
-J
I certify that this data package is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract, both technically -^and for completeness, for other than the conditions detailed above. Release of the data contained in this • Ihardcopy data package has been authorized by the Laboratory Manager or the Manager's designee, as verifiedby the following signature.
/./ ITony Bogorrh " _ iProject Manager
J
. \crvi . jn -
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
BK-1ab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
"~Lac Code: EANDE Case No.: 0102090
atrix (soil/water) : SOIL_
Tevel (low/med): LOW
—6 Solids: 96.7__
Concentration Units: MG/KG
SDG No. : BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-14A
Date Received: 02/16/01
CAS No. Analyte ConcentrationC Q M
y
y--
_-:olor After:
Comments:
BK-1
7429-90-57440-36-07440-38-27440-39-37440-41-77440-42-87440-43-97440-70-27440-47-37440-48-47440-50-87439-89-67439-92-17439-95-47439-96-57439-98-77439-97-67440-02-07440-09-77782-49-27440-22-47440-23-57440-28-07440-62-27440-66-657-12-5
ore: NA
er: Y
AluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumBoronCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMaanesiumManaaneseMolybdenumMercuryNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZincCyanide
Clarity
Clarity
27600.262.6
45.90.17
0.08824602.11.9
23.343004.31430191
0.0171.715300.700.1852.00.356.8
20.0
Before :
After:
UN
B
U
NN
B NB
NUUBU N
C
C
PPPPPNRPPPPPPPPPNRCVPPPPPPPPNR
Texture: G.
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET SAMPLE NO.
LU-24Lab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lab Cede: EANDE Case No. = 0102090 SDG No.: BK-1
Matrix (soil/water): SOIL „ Lab Sample ID: 0102090-18A
Level ilow/med) : LOW Date Received: 02/16/01
% Solids: 77.1
Concentration Units: MG/KG
lolor
CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q
7429-90-5 Aluminum7440-36-0 Antimony7440-38-2 Arsenic7440-39-3 Barium7440-41-7 Beryllium7440-42-8 Boron7440-43-9 Cadmium7440-70-2 Calcium7440-47-3 Chromium7440-48-4 Cobalt7440-50-8 Copper7439-89-6 Iron7439-92-1 Lead"439-95-4 Magnesium7439-96-5 Manganese"439-98-7 Molybdenum7439-97-6 Mercury7440-02-0 Nickel7440-09-7 Potassium7782-49-2 Selenium7440-22-4 Silver7440-23-5 Sodium7440-28-0 Thallium7440-62-2 Vanadium7440-66-6 Zinc57-12-5 Cyanide
ore: NA Clarity
er: Y __ Clarity
143000.36 U55.1 N194
0.95
0.12 U561014.112.136.6
2340010.6 N8930 N532
0.037 N11.83410 N0.96 U0.24 U95200.48 U N74.565.7
Before: C
After: C
M
PPPPPNRPPPPPPPPPNRCVPPPPPPPPNR
:-24
FORM I - IN
Texture: CY
Artifacts:
.13
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
LU-6aD Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract: _ _ _ _ _
~Lac Code: EANDE Case No. = 0102090 SDG No.: BK-1
latrix (soil/water): SOIL _ Lab Sample ID: 0102090-17A•
'.evel (low/med) : LOW .Date Received: 02/16/01
.* Solids: 78.9...
Concentration Units: MG/KG
L
7429-90-7440-36-7440-38-7440-39-7440-41-
i 7440-42-t 7440-43-
-7440-70-S 7440-47-:, 7440-48-
7440-50-7439-89-
:- 7439-92-! 7439-95-
7439-96-5. 7439-98-; 7439-97-
7440-02-7440-D9-7782-49-7440-22-7440-23-
;:' 7440-28-7440-62-7440-66-57-12-5
Color Before: NA
Color After: Y
Analyte Concentration C Q
•50•23•789234861457607245026
AluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumBoronCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMacmesiumManganeseMolybdenumMercuryNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZincCyanide
Clarity
Clarity
183000.32 U169 N1651.2
0.11 U1450015.512.452.72370012.4 N8390 N637
0.033 N14.54870 N0.84 U0.21 U226000.42 U N167
61.2
Before: C
After: C
M
PPPPPNRPPPPPP
_P..'PPNRCVPPPPPPPPNR
LU-6
Texture: G.
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN
14
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
LU-SLao Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lab Code: EANDE Case No. = 0102090
Matrix (soil/water) : SOIL
Level (low/med): LOW
% Solids: 83.8.__
Concentration Units: MG/KG
SDG No. : BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-16A
Date Received: 02/16/01
Color After:
Ccmmencs:
LU-S
CAS No. Analyte Concentration C
7429-90-5 Aluminum7440-36-0 Antimony7440-38-2 Arsenic7440-39-3 Barium7440-41-7 Beryllium7440-42-8 Boron7440-43-9 Cadmium7440-70-2 Calcium7440-47-3 Chromium7440-48-4 Cobalt7440-50-8 Copper7439-89-6 Iron7439-92-1 Lead74.39-95-4 Magnesium7439-96-5 Manganese7439-98-7 Molybdenum7439-97-6 Mercury7440-02-0 Nickel7440-09-7 Potassium7782-49-2 Selenium7440-22-4 Silver7440-23-5 Sodium7440-28-0 Thallium7440-62-2 Vanadium7440-66-6 Zinc57-12-5 Cyanide
ore: NA Clarity
er: Y Clarity
96200.33 U154
70.00.50 B
0.11 U62509.16.2
57.1127008.0
4480294
0.0397.0
34900.87 U0.22 U
510000.43 U65.734.0
Before: C
After: C
Q M
PP
N PPPNRPPPPPP
N PN P
PNR
_ _N_ __CVP
N PPPP
N PPPNR
FORM I - IN
Texture: G.
Artifacts:
15
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
PG-1-.ab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT
" Lab Code: EANDE Case No.: 0102090
'"Matrix (soil/water) : SOIL._.•
.Level (low/med): LOW
-% -Solids: • 81.7.._
•v. Concentration Units: MG/KG.
Contract:
SDG No. : BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-01A
Date'.Received: 02/16/01
•I
*;'Color Be;
_ vi Color After :
Comments:
CAS No. Analyte Concentration C Q.
7429-90-5 Aluminum7440-36-0 Antimony7440-38-2 Arsenic7440-39-3 Barium7440-41-7 .Beryllium7440-42-8 Boron":7440-43-9 . Cadmi urn .-.7440-70-2 Calcium7440-47-3 Chromium7440-48-4 C ob a It.7440- 50-8 _ Copper ..7439-89-6 Ixon74 3 9-9 3-1" Lead7439-95-4 Magnesium7439-96-5 Manganese7439-98-7 'Molybdenum7439-97-6 Mercury74 4 0-02-0" Nickel7440-09-7 Potassium7782'-49-2 Selenium7440-22-4 Silver7440-23-5 .Sodium_._7440-28-0 Thallium7440-62-2 Vanadium744'0-66-6 Zinc57-12-5 Cyanide
ore: NA .. .... Clarity
er: Y _. Clarity
63301.55.0 N
87.50.42 B
0.24 B76907.16.0246
106008.7 N
•4310 N299
0.073 N6.2 .
3040 N' 0.91 '.U
0.23 U.297 . ._0.46 U N22.5 •39.1
Before: C
After: C
M
PPPPPNRPPPPPPPPPNRCVP . .P•PPPP,..PPNR
Text
Arti
'• — -~
FORM I - IN
16
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET SAMPLE NC.
PG-10Lab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lab Code: EANDE Case No.: 0102090
Matrix (soil/water) : SOIL
•Level (low/med) : LOW
%. Solids: 87.9
SDG No.: BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-07A
Date. Received: 02/16/01
Concentration Units: MG/KG.'
CAS No.
7429-90-57440-36-07440-38-27440--39-37440-41-77440-42-87440-43-97440-70-27440-47-37440-48-47440-50-87439-89-67439-92-17439-95-47439-96-57439-98-77439-97-67440-02-07440-09-77782-49-27440-22-47440-23-57440-28-07440-62-27440-66-657-12-5
Analyte Concentration C Q M
AluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumBoronCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMolybdenumMercuryNickelPotassium'SeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZincCyanide
63500.204.9
84.20.37
0.06779906.76.3274
101006.8
-4180286
0.0676.1
28.70• 0.54
0.13268
0.2720.534.3
PU P
N PPPNR
U PPPPPP
N PN P
PNR
N CVP
N P. U . -PU P
PU N P
PPNR
Color Before: NA
Color After:
Comments:
< _ — -J
Clarity B.efore:
Clarity After:
FORM I - IN
Texture: G.
Artifacts:
"1
17
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
PG-2,ab-Name: ECOLOGY .AND ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lab Code: EANDE Case No.:.0102090
^-'Matrix (soil/water) : SOIL
.Level (low/med) : LOWi
- '% Solids: . 88.7_.
Concentration Units: MG/KG.
SDG No. : BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-02A
Date Received: 02/16/01
CAS No, Analyte ConcentrationC M
-.•'s, S-j
mi"
•E '"^1§fc*
<T(V
* 3'•I z.t"
:s: ••- Color A f t e r :
Comments:
PG-2
7429-90-5 Aluminum'7440-36-0 Antimony7440-38-2 Arsenic7440-39-3 Barium-7440-41-7 Beryllium .7440-42-8 Boron"7440-43-9 Cadmium7440-70-2 Calcium7440-47-3 Chromium7440-48-4 Cobalt7440-50-8 Copper7439-89-6 Iron7439-92-1 Lead7439-95-4 Magnesium7439-96-5 Manganese7439-98-7 Molybdenum7439-97-6 Mercury7440-02-0 'Nickel744-0-09-7 Potassium7782-49-2 Selenium7440-22-4 Silver7440-23-5 Sodium7440-28-0 Thallium7440-62-2 Vanadium7440-66-6 Zinc57-12-5 Cyanide
ore: NA - Clarity
er: Y Clarity
63100.27 U5.9 N
' 73.30.38 B
'0.089 U72107.45.5893
109007.2 N3740 N256 •
0.035 N5.7 - •
. 2340 N' 0.72 U
0.18 :U
2470.36 U N23.232.0
Before: C
After: C
PPPPPNRPPPP
' PPPPPNRCVPP
- 'PPPPPPNR
Texture: G_
Artifacts:
FORM I -. IN'
18
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET SAMPLE NO.
PG-3Lab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lao Coae: EANDE Case No. = 0102090
Matrix i soil/water) : SOIL _
Level ilow/med): LOW __
% Sciids: 91.7__
Concentration Units: MG/KG
SDG No.: BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-03A
Date Received: 02/16/01
CAS No.
"'429-90-5~440-36-07440-38-27440-39-37440-41-77440-42-87440-43-97440-70-27440-47-37440-48-4"M40-50-8^439-89-6"439-92-17439-95-4'439-96-5"439-98-77439-97-67440-02-07440-09-77782-49-27440-22-47440-23-5^440-28-0"440-62-27440-66-657-12-5
ore : NA
Analyte Concentration C Q M
AluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumBoronCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesium_ManganeseMolybdenumMercuryNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZincCyanide
Clarity
64700.225.3
77.40.38
0.07365108.05.3244
108005.53730264
0.0415.819700.580.152210.2922.029.3
Before :
PU P
N PPPNR
U PPPPPP
N PN P
PNR
N CVP
N PU PU P
PU N P
PPNR
C
olor After: Y
Comments :
Clarity After:
FORM I - IN
Texture: G
Artifacts :
1
19
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
PG-4Lac Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lac Coae: EANDE Case No.: 0102090
Matrix 'soil/water): SOIL_
Level (low/med) : LOW
% Solids: 90.5_
Concentration Units: MG/KG
SDG No.:BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-04A
Date Received: 02/16/01
CAS No. Analyte ConcentrationC M
S A
L"
Li-:•
7429-90-5 Aluminum7440-36-0 Antimony7440-38-2 Arsenic7440-39-3 Barium7440-41-7 Beryllium7440-42-8 Boron7440-43-9 Cadmium7440-70-2 Calcium7440-47-3 Chromium7440-48-4 Cobalt _. .7440-50-8 Copper7439-89-6 Iron7439-92-1 Lead7439-95-4 Magnesium7439-96-5 Manganese7439-98-7 Molybdenum7439-97-6 Mercury7440-02-0 Nickel7440-09-7 Potassium7782-49-2 Selenium7440-22-4 Silver7440-23-5 Sodium7440-28-0 Thallium7440-62-2 Vanadium7440-66-6 Zinc57-12-5 Cyanide
65700.21 U5.5
80.50.40
0.070 U66007.55.6231
113005.1
3610271
0.0545.817000.56 U0.14 U2740.28 U2 4. .836.4
PP
N PPPNRPPPPPP
N PN P
PNR
N CVP
N PPPP
N PPPNR
olor Before: NA
Color After
ro-'
Clarity Before: C
Clarity After: C
Texture: G.
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET SAMPLE NO.
PG-5Lab Nare: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lab Ccoe: EANDE Case No. = 0102090 SDG No.: BK-1
Matrix [soil/water) : SOIL Lab Sample ID: 0102090-05A
Level ilow/med) : LOW Date Received: 02/16/01
< Solids: 89.5 __
Concentration Units: MG/KG
CAS No. Analyte ConcentrationC M
7429-90-5 Aluminum7440-36-0 Antimony7440-38-2 Arsenic7440-39-3 Barium7440-41-7 Beryllium7440-42-8 Boron7440-43-9 Cadmium7440-70-2 Calcium7440-47-3 Chromium7440-48-4 Cobalt7440-50-8 Copper7439-89-6 Iron7439-92-1 Lead7439-95-4 Magnesium7439-96-5 Manganese7439-98-7 Molybdenum7439-97-6 Mercury7440-02-0 Nickel7440-09-7 Potassium7782-49-2 Selenium7440-22-4 Silver7440-23-5 Sodium7440-28-0 Thallium7440-62-2 Vanadium7440-66-6 Zinc57-12-5 Cyanide
62100.26 U7.4 N
77.80.43 B
0.086 U59407.15.4347
106007.0 N
4040 N281
0.064 N5.92860 N0.69 U0.17 U190
0.34 U N22.230.7
PPPPPNRPPP
_ .PPPPPPNRCVPPPPPPPPNR
Color Before: NA
:oior Arte:
.ommer.ts
Clarity Before:
Clarity After:
Texture: G_
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
PG-6 ',ab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lab Code: EANDE Case No'. : 0102090
-Matrix (soil/water): SOIL.__
-.evel (low/med) : LOW ____
•"'* -Solids: 90.1.... . . ' - • ' •
'": Concentration. Units: MG/KG.
SDG No.. : BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-06A
Date Received: 02/1 6/01
Comments :
PG-6
CAS No. Analyte Concentration
7429-90-5 Aluminum7440-36-0 Antimony7440-3S-2 Arsenic7440-39-3 Barium7440-41-7 Beryllium7440-42-8 Boron7440-43-9 Cadmium7440-70-2 Calcium7440-47-3 Chromium7440-48-4 Cobalt7440-50-8 Copper"1.7439-89-6 'Iron7439-92-1 Lead "" "!
7439-95-4 Magnesium7439-96-5 Manganese7439-98-7 Molybdenum7439-97-6 Mercury7440-02-0 Nickel .74-40-09-7 Potassium '7782-49-2 'Selenium ' -•7440-22-4 Silver7440-23-5 Sodium7440-28-0 Thallium7440-62-2. Vanadium7440-66-6 Zinc57-12-5 Cyanide
'ere: NA Clarity
er: Y _.. . Clarity
6790• - 0.25
7.284.8 .0.41
0.08478208.87.2399
120007.44070-305-
0.156.5
2590' 0.670.17182
0.3425.934.5
Before :
After:
C Q M
PU P
N PP
B PNR
U PPPPPP
N P 'N 'P
PNR
N CVP
N P 'U P •U P
PU N . P
PPNR
C
C
Texture: G.
Artifacts: '
FORM I - IN
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET SAMPLE NO.
RS-1Lab l<are: ECCLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lab Ccae: EANDE Case No. .-0102090 SDG No.: BK-1
Matrix (soil/water): SOIL_ Lab Sample ID: 0102090-08A
Level low/med) : LOW _ Date Received: 02/16/01
t> Sclias: 93.2 _
Concentration Units: MG/KG
CAS No. Analyte ConcentrationC M
7429-90-57440-36-07440-38-27440-39-37440-41-77440-42-87440-43-97440-70-27440-47-37440-48-47440-50-87439-89-67439-92-17439-95-47439-96-57439-98-77439-97-67440-02-07440-09-77782-49-27440-22-47440-23-57440-28-07440-62-27440-66-657-12-5
AluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumBoronCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMolybdenumMercuryNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZincCyanide
58200.27 U7.962.50.28 B
0.091 U113006.37.9
82.4102004.9
3950206
0.016 B5.817800.73 U0.18 U4380.36 U20.524.7
PP
N PPPNRPPPPPP
N PN P
PNR
N CVP
N PPPP
N PPPNR
Color Before: NA
Color After:
Comments:
Clarity Before:
Clarity After:
FORM I - IN
Texture: G
Artifacts:
23
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
RS-10ab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
"Lab Coae: EANDE Case No.: 0102090
~atnx (soil/water) : SOIL
Tevel (low/med) : LOW
»- Solids: 93.3__
Concentration Units: MG/KG
SDG No. : BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-15A
Date Received: 02/16/01
!lL*
LL
CAS No. Analyte Concentration C
7429-90-5 Aluminum7440-36-0 Antimony7440-38-2 Arsenic7440-39-3 Barium7440-41-7 Beryllium7440-42-8 Boron7440-43-9 Cadmium7440-70-2 Calcium7440-47-3 Chromium7440-48-4 Cobalt7440-50-8 Copper7439-89-6 Iron7439-92-1 Lead7439-95-4 Magnesium"439-96-5 Manganese7439-98-7 Molybdenum7439-97-6 Mercury7440-02-0 Nickel7440-09-7 Potassium7782-49-2 Selenium7440-22-4 Silver7440-23-5 Sodium7440-28-0 Thallium7440-62-2 Vanadium7440-66-6 Zinc57-12-5 Cyanide
olor Before: NA Clarity
olor After: Y Clarity
56900.26 U8.4
55.90.27 B
0.085 U14300
6.37.1
72.710600
5.44130220
0.022 B6.1
19100.68 U0.17 U443
0.34 U20.828.0
Before: C
After: C
Q M
PP
N PPPNRPPPPPP
N PN P
PNR
N CVP
N PPPP
N PPPNR
Comments :
RS-10
Texture:
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN
24
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
RS-2Lab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lac Coae: EANDE Case No.: 0102090
Matrix (soil/water): SOIL_
Level (low/med) : LOW _
% Solids: 91.1__
Concentration Units: MG/KG
SDG No.: BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-09A
Date Received: 02/16/01
Color Afi
Commer.t s:
RS-2
CAS No.
7429-90-57440-36-07440-38-27440-39-37440-41-77440-42-87440-43-97440-70-27440-47-37440-48-47440-50-87439-89-6"439-92-17439-95-47439-96-5^439-98-77439-97-67440-02-07440-09-77782-49-27440-22-47440-23-57440-28-07440-62-2"440-66-657-12-5
ore : NA
er : Y
Analyte Concentration C Q
AluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumBoronCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobalt _CopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMolybdenumMercuryNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZincCyanide
Clarity
Clarity
67100.27 U11.2 N73.50.31 B
0.089 U183008.58.5151
124005.4 N
5040 N260
0.038 N6.8
2220 N0.71 U0.18 U2090.35 U N25.025.5
Before: C
After: C
M
PPPPPNRPPPPPPPPPNRCVPPPPPPPPNR
FORM I - IN
Texture: G_
Artifacts:I
-J
25
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
RS-3ao Narre: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lac Ccae: EANDE Case No. = 0102090 SDG N o . : BK-1
* atri:« ( so i l /wa te r ) : SOIL_ Lab Sample ID: 0102090-10A
"evei i l ow/med) : LOW Date Received: 02/16/01
-, Solias : 83 . 5 _
Concentrat ion Units : MG/KG
L=_, Color
CAS No.
"429-90-57440-36-07440-38-27440-39-37440-41-77440-42-87440-43-97440-70-27440-47-37440-48-47440-50-87439-89-67439-92-1"439-95-4"439-96-57439-98-77439-97-67440-02-07440-09-77782-49-27440-22-47440-23-57440-28-07440-62-27440-66-657-12-5
ore: NA
er: Y
Analyte Concentration C Q
AluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumBoronCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMolybdenumMercuryNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZincCyanide
Clarity
_ Clarity
78600.31 U9.0 N127
0.50 B
0.13 B16000
9.97.5103
1350048.2 N6720 N342
0.089 N8.63840 N0.83 U0.21 U473
0.41 U N29.488.9
Before: C
After: C
M
PPPPPNRPPPPPP
_ PpPNRCVPPPPPPPPNR
itirnents :
P.S-:
Texture: G
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN 26
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET SAMPLE NO.
RS-4Lab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
Lab Code: EANDE Case No.: 0102090 SDG No.: BK-1
Matrix (soil/water): SOIL__ Lab Sample ID: 0102090-11A
Level (low/med) : LOW .. .Date Received: 02/16/01
% Solids: 89.8
Concentration Units: MG/KG
CAS No. Analyte ConcentrationC Q M
7429-90-57440-36-07440-38-27440-39-37440-41-77440-42-87440-43-97440-70-27440-47-37440-48-47440-50-87439-89-67439-92-17439-95-47439-96-57439-98-77439-97-6"440-02-07440-09-77782-49-27440-22-47440-23-57440-28-07440-62-2"440-66-657-12-5
AluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumBoronCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMolybdenumMercuryNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZincCyanide
66600.249.2
75.20.31
0.07818800
7.17.8
59.7118005.3
4360253
0.0296.8
22200.630.162340.3123.831.9
PU P
N PP
B PNR
U PPPPPP
N PN P
PNR
_B N .___ _CVP
N PU PU P
PU N P
PPNR
:olor Before: NA
lolcr After: Y
Comments:
RS-4
Clarity Before:
Clarity After:
Texture: G.
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEETSAMPLE NO.
RS-5ao Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract:
'.ao Code: EANDE Case No.: 0102090
'atrix (soil/water) : SOIL _
T,evel (low/med) :
% Solids:
LOW
SDG No. : BK-1
Lab Sample ID: 0102090-12A
Date Received: 02/16/01
82.0
oncentration Units: MG/KG
CAS No. Analyte ConcentrationC Q M
7429-90-5"440-36-07440-38-27440-39-37440-41-77440-42-8-'440-43-97440-70-27440-47-37440-48-47440-50-87439-89-67439-92-1"439-95-4"439-96-57439-98-77439-97-67440-02-07440-09-77782-49-2^440-22-47440-23-57440-28-0"440-62-2"440-66-657-12-5
AluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumBoronCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMolybdenumMercuryNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZincCyanide
88100.279.31140.50
0.131370010.89.795.5
145009.7
. 6250338
0.0618.837300.710.184050.3531.553.6
PU P
N PPPNR
B PPP
_ PPP
N PN P
PNR
N CVP
N PU PU P
PU N P
PPNR
c. Color Before: NA
1- o i- • Y. L tr j- . I
Clarity Before:
Clarity After:
Comments :
RS-5
Texture: G
Artifacts:
FORM I - IN
2S
INORGANIC ANALYSIS DATA SHEET . SAMPL^ NO •
RS-6Lab Name: ECOLOGY_AND_ENVIRONMENT Contract: ..;_.... .
Lab Code: EANDE Case No.: 0102090 SDG No.: BK-1.
Matrix (soil/water) : SOIL.... ' Lab Sample ID: 0102090-13A
-Level (low/med) : LOW ..__. . Date. Received: 02/16/01
% Solids: . 88.0..... - • • . ;
Concentration Units: MG/KG'
CAS No.
7429-90-57440-36-07440-38-27440-39-37440-41-77440-42-87440-43-97440-70-27440-47-37440-48-47440-50-87439-89-67439-92-17439-95-47439-96-57439-98-~7 -7439-97-67440-02-07440-09-777'82.-49-27440-22-47440-23-57440-28-07440-62-27440-66-657-12-5
ore: NA
er: Y
Analyte Concentration C
AluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumBoronCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLead. .._.MagnesiumManganeseMolybdenum 'MercuryNickel
. Potassium .'..
.'SeleniumSilverSodium.ThalliumVanadiumZincCyanide
Clarity
Clarity
69600.24 U5.1 N123
- 0.47
0.21 B73109.07 .760.9
122008.0 N
.4730 N370 .
0.37 N7.3
.3160 N- . 0.63 .U .
0:16 U296
0.32 U N23.4 -,51.8
Before: C
After: C
Q M
..PPPPPNRPPP.P..PD
.P
. .P..
.P
NRCVPP-PP
., PP..PPNR
J
Color Before: NA Clarity Before: C ......... Texture:
Color After: Y Clarity After: C Artifacts
Comments:
RS-6 ' - '.
FORM I - IN29
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center
' 4493 Walden Avenue
"Lancaster. New York 14086-
Laboratory Results
NYS ELAP ID#: 10486
Phone: (716) 68S-S080
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach Office
Lab Order: 0102090
'roject: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-01A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ED: PG-1
Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 9:48:00 AM
Matrix: SOIL % Moist: 12.30
\nalyte Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ED Analvst
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1_9045C_PH_S
7.7 0.10 S.U. 2/19/01 WC f=>H 010219A CMC
Definitions: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limn
j • Analyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum-Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quantitation range
SUIT - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matrix Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier.
D - Diluted due to matrix or extended target compounds
N - Single Column Analysis <4 1 r*
LIMS Version #: 3 1 1 6 - l'20/Ol 6*0:00 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center4493 Walden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
Laboratory Results-
NYSELAPID*: 1048Phone: (716) 685-808JT
CLIENT: " E and E Long Beach OfficeLab Order: 0102090Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-02A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ED: PG-2Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 9.57.00 AM
Matrix: SOIL % Moist: 11
Analyte
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1 9045C PH S
Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ED
pH 83 0 10 S.U 2/19/01 WC PH 010219A CMC
Definitions. ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - Analvte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
• - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limit.
E - Value above quantitation range
Surr - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q-Qualifier.
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compound_
N - Single Column Analysis 146
LIMS Venion * 3 ' ! 6 2/20/0! 6-00-00 PM
"Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center
"4493 Walden Avenue' ancaster. New York 14086-
Laboratory Results
NYSELAPID#: 10486Phone: (716) 685-8080
. CLIENT: E and E Long Beach Office
>b Order: 0102090,'roject: Anaconda Emergency Response
'Lab ID: 0102090-03A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: PG-3
.Alt. Client ID:Collection Date: 2/14/01 10.04.00AM
Matrix: SOIL •/« Moist:
vnalyte
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C
« 9045C PH S
Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID Anahst
81 010 su 2/19/01 WC PH 010219A CMC
i fi 5
Definitions* ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - Analyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
• - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quantitation range
SUIT - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compounds
N - Single Column Analysis
LIMSVenwn* 3! 16 2,20/01 60000PM147
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center4493 Walden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
Laboratory Results
NYSELAPIDtf: I04iPhone: (716) 685-808"b"
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach Office
Lab Order: 0102090Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-04A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: PG-4Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 10:08:00 AM
Matrix: SOIL */. Moist:
Analyte Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1 9045C PH S
PH 88 0 10 S.U 2/19/01 WC PH 010219A CM<
Definitions: N'D - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - Analyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quantitation range
Surr - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compound.—»
N - Single Column Analysis
' 14SLIMS Vmton # 3 1 I 6 - 2/20/01 6-00 00 PV
Ecology and Environment, Inc.\nahtical Services Center4493 Vialden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
Laboratory ResultsNYSELAPID#: 10486
Phone: (716) 685-8080
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach OfficeLab Order: 0102090Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ED: 0102090-05A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: PG-5Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/1401 10-12:00 AM
Matrix: SOIL •/. Moist: 10 50
Analvte Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID Anahst
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1_9045C_PH_S
81 010 SU 2/19/01 WC_PH_010219A CMC
i
i c
Definitions: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limn
J - Analyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
• - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quanutation range
Surr - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compounds
N - Single Column Analysis <4 4.Q
LIMS Vtnioo »: 3 I I 6 - 2/20/01 6-00-00 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center4493 VValden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
Laboratory Resultsr
NYSELAPID#: 1048<Phone: (716) 685-8080*"
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach OfficeLab Order: 0102090Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-06A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: PG-6Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 10 16 00 AM
Matrix: SOIL % Moist:
Analyte
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C
1 9045C PH S
Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID
PH 82 0 10 SU 2/19/01 WC PH 010219A
Anahst
CMC
Definitions- ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - Analvte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - V alue exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quamitation range
Sun - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compounds
N - Single Column Analysis 1 5i O
LIMS Venton » 3 1 1 6 - 2/20/01 6-00-00 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center4493 Walden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
Laboratory ResultsNYSELAPID#: 10486
Phone: (716) 685-8080
* CLIENT:Lab Order:
^Project:
" Lab ID:
E and E Long Beach Office
0102090Anaconda Emergency Response
0102090-07A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: PG-10Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 10.22:00 AM
Matrix: SOIL •/•Moist: 1210
Analyte
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1_9045C_PH_S
Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ED AnaUst
8 1 010 SU 2/19/01 WC PH 010219A CMO
-jr.
i ai_*
I /I
I *
Definitions- ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limn
j - Analyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quantitation range
SUIT - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compounds
N - Single Column Analysis 1 ^ "
mm LIMS Version* 3 I I 6 - l'20/OI 6-00 00 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center4493 Walden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
Laboratory ResultsNYSELAPID#: 104S<
Phone: (716)685-8080"
CLIENT:Lab Order:Project:
Lab ID:
Analyte
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1_9045C_PH_S
PH
E and E Long Beach Office0102090Anaconda Emergency Response
0102090-08A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: RS-1Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 10:50:00 AM
Matrix: SOIL Moist: 6.:
Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID
0.10 s.u. 2/19/01 WC_PH_010219A CMC
Definitions: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - Analyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quantitation range
Surr - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matrix or extended target compound.
N - Single Column Analysis
UMS Vfnion #: 3 M 6 - 2/'20'QI 630:00 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.\nalytical Services Center4493 W'alden AvenueLancaster. New York 14086-
Laboratory Results
NYSELAPIDfl: 10486Phone: {716)685-8080
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach OfficeLab Order: 0102090Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-09A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: RS-2Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 11.12.00AM
Matrix: SOIL % Moist: 891
Analvte Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID Anahst
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C
1 9045C PH_S
•J pH 8.3 0.10 S.U 2/19/01 WC PH 010219A CWO
Definitions: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - Analvte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analvte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery I'mits
£ - Value above quantilauon range
SUIT - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compounds
N - Single Column Analysis
_ LI MS V tnnn # 3 1 1 6 - 2/20/01 6-00-00 PM153
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center4493 W alden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
CLIENT:Lab Order:Project:
Lab ID:
E and E Long Beach Office0102090Anaconda Emergency Response
0102090-10A Sample Type: SAMP
Laboratory Result*NYSELAPID#: 104*
Phone: (716) 685-808TT
Client Sample ID: RS-3Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 11:37:00 AM
Matrix: SOIL •/.Moist: 16
Anaiyte Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1_9045C_PH_S
pH 8.3 0.10 S.U 2/19/01 WC PH 010219A CMC
Definitions: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
) - Analyte delected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery- limits
E - Value above quantitation range
SUIT - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compounc
N - Single Column Analysis t
LIMSVeruonH!- 3 1 1 6 120/01 6-00-00 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.knalytical Services Center
14493 Walden Avenue'.ancaster. New York 14086-
Laboratory Results
NYSELAPID#: 10486Phone: (716)685-8080
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach Officelab Order: 0102090'roject: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-11A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: RS-4Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14,01 11 55 00 AM
Matrix: SOIL •/.Moist: 1020
Vnarvte
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C?_9045C_PH_S
Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID Anahst
7 3 010 SU 2/19/01 WC_PH_010219A CMC
Definitions- ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
i - Analyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quantitation range
Surr - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compounds
N - Single Column Analysis
LIMS Ver»H>o» 3 I 1 6 - 2/20/01 6-00-00 PM155
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center4493 \Valden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
Laboratory Results
NYSELAPID#: 1044Phone: (716) 685-8080
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach Office
Lab Order: 0102090
Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-12A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: RS-5
Alt. Client ID:Collection Date: 2/14/01 12 22 00 PM
Matrix: SOIL •/.Moist:
Analyte
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1_9045C_PH_S
pH
Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID
73 010 SU 2/19/01 WC_PH_010219A O.K
Definitions: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limn
i - Analvte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quantitation range
Surr - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compomc' ,'
N - Single Column Analysis
LIMS V enron * 3 M 6 - Z'JO/Ol 6-00-00 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.\nalytical Services Center
4493 Walden AvenueLancaster. New York 14086-
Laboratory Results
NYS ELAP ID#: 10486
Phpne: (716) 685-8080
CLIENT: " E and E Long Beach Office
Lab Order. 0102090Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-13A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: RS-6
Alt. Client ID:Collection Date: 2/14/01 12 42 00 PM
Matrii: SOIL •/.Moist: 1200
•Vnalyte
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C
1 9045C PH S
Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch CD Anahst
74 010 SU 2/19/01 WC_PH 010219A CMC
I „B i
A.XI f
'•Vtl
Definitions: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - Analyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
£ - Value above quantitation range
Surr - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Mamx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compounds
N - Single Column Analysis
LIMS Version t 3 1 1 6 - 2/20/01 6OO-00 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.\nalytical Sen ices Center
4493 Walden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
Laboratory Results
NYS ELAP ID#: 1048__Phone: (716)685-8080
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach Office
Lab Order: 0102090Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-14A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: BK-1Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 3 20 00 PM
Matrix: SOIL % Moist:
\nalvte Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID AnaNv
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1_9045C_PH_S
pH 74 010 SU 2/19/01 WC PH 010219A CXIC
Definitions ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - Analyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - V alue exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quanttiation range
Surr - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier - ,
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compowds •"
N - Single Column Analysis ,
L fMS \ ersion * 3 1 I 6 120/01 6-00 00 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.knahtical Services Center
"4493 V\alden Avenue.ancaster. New York 14086-
Laboratory Results
NYSELAPID#: 10486Phone: (716) 685-8080
-CLIENT: E and E Long Beach Office
Lab Order. 0102090project: Anaconda Emergency Response
" Lab ID: 0102090-15A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: RS-10Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 12 00 00 PM
Matrix: SOIL Moist: 6'2
Vnalvte Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID Analvst
'PH BY METHOD EPA 9045Ct_9045C_PH_S
7 1 0 10 SU 2M9/01 WC PH 010219A C.MC
r\ >iIw
Definitions* SD - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - Analvte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - V aiue exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quamitauon range
Surr - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compounds
N - Single Column Analysis * *] CT Q
,_. LlVJSVemoo* 3 1 1 6 2.20/01 6 0000 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center4493 Walden AvenueLancaster, New- York 14086-
Laboratory Results"
NYSELAPID#: 10486Phone: (716) 685-8080~
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach Office
Lab Order: 0102090Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-16A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: LU-SAlt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 2:51:00 PM
Matrix: SOIL •/.Moist: 16.1
Analvte Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ID
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C
1_9045C_PH_S.
PH 10 0.10 s.u. 2/19/01 WC_PH_010219A
Analyst
CMC
Definitions: ND - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - Analyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Anal vie detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quamitation range
SUIT - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matrix Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matrix or extended target compounds •*
N - Single Column Analysis
LI VIS Version #: 3 1 I 6 - 2'20/01 6:00:00 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center4493 Walden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
Laboratory Results
NYS ELAP ID#: 10486Phone: (716)685-8080
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach OfficeLab Order: 0102090Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-17A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: LU-6Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 2 56 00 PM
Matrii: SOIL % Moist: 2110
Analyte Result Q Limit Units DF Date Analyzed Run Batch ED Anahst
"" PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1_9045C_PH_S
10 010 su 2/19/01 WC PH 010219A CMC
I V
L
I
Definitions ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit
J - \nalyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
* - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quanutation range
Surr - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier<»
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended krg
N - Single Column Analysis
LIVIS Version* 3 1 1 6 120/01 60000 PM
Ecology and Environment, Inc.Analytical Services Center4493 Walden AvenueLancaster, New York 14086-
Laboratory ResultrNYS ELAP ID#: 1048f
Phone: (716) 685-8080~~
CLIENT: E and E Long Beach Office
Lab Order: 0102090Project: Anaconda Emergency Response
Lab ID: 0102090-18A Sample Type: SAMP
Client Sample ID: LU-24Alt. Client ID:
Collection Date: 2/14/01 3 1000PM
Matrix: SOIL % Moist: 229 ,
Analyte
PH BY METHOD EPA 9045C1_9045C_PH_S
pH
Result Q Limit Units DF Date Anahzed Run Batch ID Analv si
95 0 10 SU 2/19/01 WC PH 010219A
V7
&
"S»-jS
*1
Definitions ND - Not Detected at ihe Reporting Limit
J - \nalyte detected below Reporting limits
B - Analyte detected m the associated Method Blank
H - Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level
• - Recovery outside limits
R - RPD outside recovery limits
E - Value above quanntation range
SUIT - Denotes Surrogate Compound
M -Matnx Spike recovery outside limits
Q - Qualifier
D - Diluted due to matnx or extended target compounds
N - Single Column Analysis
I target compc
162LIMS Venion * 3 1 1 6 2 20/01 6 00 00 PM
'-V
, "j.
APPENDIX C: SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PLAN FOR VATSAMPLING EVENT
1
Anaconda Emergency ResponseYerington, Nevada
Removal Assessment
Sampling and Analysis Plan
Contract No.: 68-W-01-012TDD No.: 09-01-01-0006
Job No.: 0050-01SF
April 2001
Prepared for:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9
Prepared by:C. Carlson and C. Elliott
Ecology and Environment, Inc.
Superfund Technical Assistance and Response Team
IB«F
rrr
Anaconda Emergency ResponseYerington, Nevada
Removal AssessmentSampling and Analysis Plan
; Contract: 68-W-01-012L-? TDD No.: 09-01-01-0006f job No.: 0050-01SF•^• $ .; i?
*.'I >s
K
Approved by:f
^ Castellana, START Project-ManagerEcology and Environment, Inc.
Approved by:Craig BeifsopvLong Beach START Manager andSTAR31OnaIity Assurance Officer DesigneeEcology and Environment, Inc.
Approved by:Bob Mandel, USEPA On-Scene CoordinatorU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9
_ Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1— 1.1 Project Organization 1
1.2 Distribution List 2-1.3 Statement of the Specific Problem 2
2. Background 32.1 Location and Description 3
"" 2.2 Hydrogeologic Setting 32.3 Operational History 62.4 Previous Investigations and Regulatory Involvement 7
"^ 3. Project Objectives 83.1 Project Task and Problem Definition 8
"" 3.2 Data Use Objectives 8"\ 3.3 Action Levels 8
__ 3.4 Decision Rules 93.5 Data Quality Objectives 9
J*v( 3.5.1 Data Quality Objective Process 9y» 3.5.2 DQO Data Categories 9
3.5.3 Data Quality Indicators 9."^ 3.6 Data Management 9•_•' 3.7 Schedule of Sampling Activities 10^ 3.8 Special Training Requirements/Certifications 10
M 4 Sampling Rational 13fff 4.1 Process Vat Sampling 13
I *•* 4.1.1 Sampling Locations and Rationale 13-* 4.1.2 Analytes 13
4.2 Soils Sampling 13I ' 4.2.1 Sample Locations and Rationale 13•* 4.2.2 Analytes 14
* " 5 Analytical Methods 16** 5.1 Process Vat Samples 16,s 5.2 Soil Samples 16
6 Methods and Procedures 186.1 Field Procedures 18
^ 6.1.1 Sampling Equipment 186.1.2 Mapping Equipment 186.1.3 Equipment Maintenance 18
_ 6.1.4 Inspection/Acceptance Requirements for Supplies and Consumables ..196.1.5 Underground Utilities Clearance 19
— 6.2 Sampling Procedures 196.2.1 Process Vat 196.2.2 Soils 20
- 6.3 Field Screening 206.3.1 Process Vat Samples 20
: re* . 6.3.2 Soil Samples 20™" . 6.4 Decontamination Procedures 21
7 Disposal of Investigation-Derived Waste '. 22
';; 8 Sample Identification, Documentation and Shipment 23_-;l 8.1 Field Notes 23" 8.1.1 Field Logbooks 23
jyr 8.1.2 Photographs '. 24_j»v' 8.2 Container, Preservation and Holding Time Requirements 24""_ 8.3 Labeling 24- fj| 8.4 Sample Chain-of Custody Forms and Custody Seals 24••Cv? 8.5 Packaging and Shipment 25
_,, 8.5.1 Soil Samples 25\ H 8.5.2 Process Vat Samples 26
, 9 Quality Assurance and Control 289.1 Field Quality Control Samples 28
9.1.1 Assessment of Field Contamination (Blanks) 289.1.1.1 Equipment and Field Blanks 289.1.1.2 Temperature Blanks 28
9.1.2 Assessment of Sample Variability (Field Duplicate or Co-locatedSamples) 28
9.2 Background Samples 289.3 Laboratory Quality Control Samples ,. 29
. . 9.4 Analytical and Data Package Requirements ..299,5 Data Validation ". . . 30
"" . 9 . 6 Field Variances 30- f| 9.7 Assessment of Project Activities 30-__* 9.7.1 START Assessment Activities .. 31~ ' 9.7.2 EPA Assessment Activities 31. '-•;; 9.7.3 Project Status Reports to Management 31jj*: 9.7.4" Reconciliation of Data with DQOs 31
'*: 10 References 33
^, Appendix A: Data Quality Objectives Worksheet 35
— Appendix B: Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan 38
Appendix C: E & E SOPs 39
List of Figures
Figure 2-1: Site Location Map 4Figure 2-2: Site Map 5Figure 4-1: Soil Boring Locations Map 15
List of Tables
Table 1.1: Organizational Chart , 1Table 3-l:Data Quality Indicator Goals - Process Vat Samples 11Table 3-2:Data Quality Indicator Goals - Soil Samples 12Table 5-1: Analytical Methods and Procedures Matrix = Soil 17
List of Acronyms
AHA Applied Hydrology AssociatesARCO Atlantic Richfield CompanyBLM Bureau of Land ManagementCERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability ActCFR Code of Federal RegulationsCLP Contract Laboratory ProgramCROWDS Concerned Residents Opposed to Waste DumpsitesDQI Data Quality IndicatorDQO Data Quality ObjectiveE&E Ecology and Environment, Inc.EPA Environmental Protection AgencyERT Environmental Response TeamESI Expanded Site InspectionFIT Field Investigation TeamGC/MS Gas Chromatograph/Mass SpectrometerGPS Global Positioning SystemIDW Investigation-Derived WastesMS/MSD Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike DuplicateNDEP Nevada Department of Environmental ProtectionOSC On-Scene CoordinatorPA Preliminary Assessment
^ PCB Polychlorinated BiphenylS ^ PM Project ManagerI-*" PPE Personal Protective Equipment
,^ PRGs Preliminary Remediation Goalsif I PST Pacific Strike TeamfcT' QA Quality Assurance
QC Quality Controli"5s SAP Sampling and Analysis Planfj-' SIP Site Inspection Prioritization
SOP Standard Operating Procedurel'" SSI Screening Site Inspection
START Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team"" TTLC Total Threshold Limit Concentration
USCG United States Coast GuardUSGS United States Geological SurveyVOCs Volatile Organic Compounds
'-ri
L
Li;
1. Introduction
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has directed the Ecology andEnvironment, Inc. (E&E), Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team (START) toperform an emergency response removal assessment of the process vats at the Anaconda MineSite (Site) located in Yerington, Lyon County, Nevada. The Anaconda facility was identified asa potential hazardous waste site and entered into the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation, and Liability Information System on October 1, 1979 (NVD083917252).
In March 2001, EPA On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) Bob Mandel tasked the START to preparefor a removal assessment of the process vats located at the Site to determine whether they posedan imminent and substantial endangerment to human health or the environment, warranting anEPA-funded removal action.
The specific field sampling and chemical analysis information pertaining to the Site is addressedin this Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP), in accordance with the EPA documents EPARequirement for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Environmental Data Operations (QA/R-5),October 1997, Guidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process (QA/G-4), September 1994 andData Quality Objective Process for Superfund (EPA 540/G-93/71), August 1993.
This SAP describes the project and data use objectives, data collection rationale, qualityassurance goals, and requirements for sampling and analysis activities. The SAP also defines thesampling and data collection methods that will be used for this project. The SAP is intended toaccurately reflect the planned data-gathering activities for this site investigation; however, Siteconditions and additional EPA direction may warrant modifications. All significant changes willbe documented in the final report.
1.1 Project OrganizationThe following is a list of project personnel and their responsibilities:
Title/Responsibility
EPA On-Scene Coordinator
START Project Manager/ Field Geologist
START Staff/ Health and Safety Officer and Field Chemist
START Staff/ Sample Manager
START Quality Assurance Officer
United States Coast Guard (USCG) Pacific Strike Team (PST)
Laboratory Project Manager Curtis and Tompkins
Name
Bob Mandel
Benjamin Castellana
Cheryl Elliott
Caren Carlson
Craig Benson
Tom Larson
Phone Number
(415) 744-2290
(562) 435-6188
(562) 435-6188
(562)435-6188
(562)435-6188
(415)883-3311
EPA On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) - The EPA OSC is Bob Mandel. Mr. Mandel is theprimary decision maker for this investigation and is the primary contact for the START ProjectManager.
START Project Manager (PM) - The START PM is Benjamin Castellana. Dr. Castellana isresponsible for the performance of tasks assigned to the START by the EPA. Specifically, Dr.Castellana is responsible for: preparing the SAP, working with the laboratories, implementingthe sampling design, collecting, handling, documenting and transporting samples, generatingfield documentation of sampling activities, working with the START Quality Assurance (QA)Officer to ensure project quality assurance goals are met, and preparing a final report forsubmission to the EPA.
START QA Officer - The START Project QA Officer is Craig Benson, who will oversee theimplementation of the SAP for this project, including whether specified quality control (QC)procedures are being followed as described. Mr. Benson will discuss QA issues with the projectmanager but will not be involved in the data collection, analysis, interpretation, or reportingprocess except in a review or oversight capacity, with the ability to stop work if the SAP is notbeing properly followed. Mr. Benson will also oversee the data validation activities performedon this project.
United States Coast Guard (USCG) Pacific Strike Team (PST) - The USCG PST isresponsible for maintenance and operation of the EPA-owned Geoprobe™ unit.
Analytical Laboratory - The analytical services was procured utilizing a START BasicOrdering Agreement laboratory. The laboratory, Curtis and Tompkins, is responsible forhandling, analysis and documentation of samples in accordance with the specified analyticalmethods.
1.2 Distribution ListCopies of the final SAP will be distributed to the following persons and organizations:
Bob Mandel, EPA Region 9• EPA Region 9 Quality Assurance Office• Ecology & Environment files.
1.3 Statement of the Specific ProblemHistorical mining operation disposal practices at the site created a number of potential hazardoussubstance sources. The focus of this removal assessment are three abandoned approximate30,000-gallon process vats, which may contain hazardous materials, specifically ignitable, toxicand corrosive liquids. This removal assessment is being performed to determine whether theseprocess vats pose an imminent and substantial threat to human health and the environment. Theresults of this assessment will determine whether an EPA-funded removal is warranted/required.
— 2. Background
Site background information presented in this section was obtained from a review of several— reports detailing previous investigations. A complete list of report reference is provided in
Section 10.
~ 2.1 Location and DescriptionThe Anaconda Mine Site is an abandoned, low-grade copper mine and extraction facility locatedat 102 Burch Drive near Yerington, Lyon County, Nevada. The mine and mill are located
~~ approximately 2 miles west of Yerington, directly off of Highway 95. The geographiccoordinates for the site are 33° 50' 50" latitude and 119° 50' 50" longitude (the site includes
_ ' Township 13N, Range 25E, Sections 4, 5, 8,9,16, 17, 20, and 21 on the Mason Valley and"" Yerington USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles)(USGS, Mason Valley, 1987 and USGS, Yerington,• '* 1987). The location of the Site is shown in Figure 2-1.
The Site occupies 3,468.5 acres of disturbed land in a rural area (NDEP, 1994). The Site isbordered to the north by open agricultural fields, to the west and southwest by the Singatse Range
_' ' and the town of Weed Heights, to the south by Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land, and to.,., the east by Highway 95, which separates the Site from the city of Yerington.(NDEP, 1994,USGS,
[ Mason Valley, 1987 and USGS, Yerington, 1987).» ^
v,- The Site layout is shown in Figure 2-2. The Site has historically consisted of an office/process. £ facility, an open-pit mine, an overburden dump, sulfide and oxide stockpile dumps, leach pads,— tailings piles, and evaporation ponds. The facility consists of a lead shop, a welding shop, a
v maintenance shop, two warehouses, an electro-winning plant, and an office building. Severalt '% large leach vats are also present near the facility area and are the subject of this investigation.•" From 1965 to 1978, the Site also consisted of a mill and a concentrator (NDEP, 1994). From
». 1987 to 1998, the Arimetco company constructed and operated several heap leach pads on thef *t site, covering many of the former evaporation ponds and tailings piles (Arimetco, 1999).™" Arimetco also constructed and operated a solvent extraction/electro winning facility to process
existing ores and ores from the nearby MacArthur mine. The vats which are the subject of thisf investigation are part of the Arimetco solvent extraction plant.
- ^ 2.2 Hydrogeologic Settingr The Site is located in a basin-and-range geologic setting, which is typical of much of the State of
Nevada. The Yerington mine orebody is emplaced in the Yerington Batholith, which is a series. of Jurassic-age, hydrothermally altered granodioritic intrusive rocks comprising the local[„, crystalline basement. These basement rocks are exposed in the McLeod hills directly east of the
Site, as well as in the walls of the Yerington Pit. The batholith is unconformibly overlain by a; , Tertiary volcanic series, which includes ignimbrites, non-welded tuffs, and volcaniclastic_. sediments. The Tertiary volcanic seriesls exposed to the East of the Site in the McLeod Hills, to
the west of the Site in the Singatse Range, and a small outcrop is mapped in the Yerington Pit.| * These deposits are unconformibly overlain by Quaternary alluvial and fluvial deposits associatedL, with the post-Basin-and-Range extension. These Quaternary sediments range in thickness from 0
to over 1000 feet thick across the site (Proffit and Dilles, 1984).
1IIIJI
Las VegasDEATH VALLEY NATIONAL MONUMENT* Hende
IW4 MAGELLAN GeographixSMSanta Barbara, CA (SCO) 929JMAP
Figure 2-1: Site Location MapAnaconda Copper Company Expanded Site Inspection
Yerington, Nevada
C ! 'f"-" i"' g ••" |!<f«!m
Animetco Solventxchange Vats
Basemap: USGS Yerington 7.5-minut« Quadrangle. 1987
Superfund Technical Assessment &Response Team
TDD # 09-01-01-0006
Jpb # O01275.0050.01.SF
Figure 2-2: Site Location(Southern Half of Anaconda Yerington Mine Site)
Groundwater is constrained to the Quaternary sediments in the region. Hydrology in the nearsurface of the Site is better understood in the northern half of the site than the southern half,largely due to the recent groundwater studies (USGS, 1982, Arimetco, 1999; ARCO, 2000). Thehydraulic surface of shallow groundwater in the northern half of the site dips to the North; thereis a pronounced westerly trend to the North of the McLeod Hills as a result of a strong additiveinfluence to groundwater by the Walker River. The McLeod Hills act as a hydrologic barriersouth of this area.
The hydrology of the southern half of the Site is much less clear. There is a thin veneer ofQuaternary sediments between the Walker River and the Yerington Pit; seeps observed in thewalls of the pit suggest that groundwater may flow toward the pit from most directions in thatlocalized area. There appear also to be low-lying breaks in the crystalline basement wheregroundwater from the Walker River may flow toward the site. Additionally, the hydraulicgradient on the western side of the Site is thought to flow from the southwest from the vicinity ofWeed Heights.
2.3 Operational HistoryThe Site was undeveloped before 1951. From 1951 to 1978, the Site was occupied by theAnaconda Copper Company, which is owned by Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) ofDenver, Colorado. In 1978, Anaconda closed down its mining and milling operation. A largeportion of the Site was bought by Don Tibbals, a private entrepreneur, in 1978. Don Tibbalssublet part of the property to a transformer salvaging company called Unison, which is asubsidiary of Union Carbide Corp. In 1988, Don Tibbals sold the majority of his portion of theoriginal Anaconda property to Arimetco Inc., which is headquartered in Arizona (NDEP, 1994).
Work started at the Site in December 1951, and beneficiation started in November 1953. From1953 to 1965, operations at the facility included mining the Yerington Pit for copper oxide. Theoxide ores were leached in sulfuric acid, and the copper was allegedly precipitated onto old tincans. The copper slabs formed were sent off site for smelting. In 1965 the mill and concentratorwere built to allow processing of both copper oxide and copper sulfide ores. A copper precipitatewas produced from the oxide ore and a copper concentrate was produced from the sulfide ore.Both were shipped elsewhere for smelting (NDEP, 1994).
The method used to extract copper from copper oxide ore involved leaching with 1 percent (%)sulfuric acid. The leach solution was then pumped to three solvent extraction tanks (totalvolume: 200,000 gallons) to be mixed with kerosene, which contains 5% Acorga (>99% Alkydhydroxy) by volume. Kerosene made up approximately half of the tanks' volume. Acorga in thekerosene enabled copper to be extracted from the weak acid solution into the kerosene solution.Then a 10% sulfuric acid was applied to the copper-laden kerosene solution to leach out thecopper. Finally, the highly concentrated copper solution was pumped to the electro-winningplant and plated out on stainless steel sheets. The acid solution from which the copper had beenextracted was then sent back to the leach pads to be used again. Chemicals used in the miningand milling process included sulfuric acid, Acorga, and kerosene. Cobalt sulfate, sodiumthiosulfate, and potassium iodide were used in the lab for analytical purposes. Acetylene gas,
6
— nitrogen gas, oxygen gas, liquid nitrogen, unleaded gasoline, and diesel fuel were also used onsite for vehicle maintenance and refueling (NDEP, 1994).
— During Anaconda's 25-year mining and milling operation, 350 million tons of ore and waste rockwere mined from the Yerington Pit (Arimetco, 1999), and 189,034,000 tons of waste weregenerated .(NDEP, 1994). This waste consisted of gangue from the sulfide ore processing and
•— tailings plus iron and sulfate-rich acid brine from the oxide ore processing. The tailings weretransported and disposed of in a slurry form in a number of on-site tailings ponds. The acid brinewas disposed of in on-site evaporation ponds which were unlined:prior to 1964 (Anaconda,
~ 1984).
Anmetco began its leaching operations in 1988; over this operating period, Arimetco built and"™ ran four lined, heap-leach pads. The materials comprising the leach heaps were taken from: -*' tailings and low-grade ore piles left by the old Anaconda operations along with newly dug ores
from the MacAurthur pit located approximately three miles north of the site (Arimetco, 1999).After filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in January of 1997, Arimetco continued its mining
- ^ operations until January of 2000 when they walked off the site leaving the four operational leach^ pads with a large quantity of pregnant leach solution still in the system
r"}.j § 2.4 Previous Investigations and Regulatory InvolvementU'" Numerous and extensive investigations have been performed at the site beginning in the fall of
1976 by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and ending in E&E START'S Expandedt •$ Site Inspection (ESI) in October 2000. These investigations assessed groundwater, surface water,s- soil, evaporation ponds and tailings piles to determine the impact of the Site on the surrounding
environment. A detailed summary of each of these investigations is provided in the ESI report.i v None of these investigations assessed the contents or impact of the process vats.
L-
3. Project ObjectivesThe EPA has tasked the START to perform a removal assessment at the Site to determinewhether the three 30,000-gallon process vats pose an imminent and substantial threat to humanhealth or the environment. These vats are considered abandoned and may contain hazardousmaterials, specifically corrosive, toxic and ignitable hazardous waste.
3.1 Project Task and Problem DefinitionTo establish whether the site poses any hazards, the removal assessment will consist of processvat sampling and sampling of the soil immediately surrounding the vats. Field screening testswill be performed on process vat and soil samples to determine optimumconfirmation/enforcement samples to submit for certified laboratory analysis. Field screeningtests will include pH and ignitability for process vat samples and volatile organic compounds(VOCs) for soil samples. Confirmation laboratory analysis will include pH, ignitability, totalpetroleum hydrocarbons and metals. Information gathered during the removal assessment will beused to determine whether an USEPA-funded removal action is required/warranted.
3.2 Data Use ObjectivesData collected during this site investigation will be used to:
• Determine whether the process vat contents meet the criteria for a hazardous waste, asdefined by 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 261 Subpart C, and pose animminent and substantial threat to human health or the environment.
• Determine whether materials from the process vats have been released into the soilsbeneath the vats.
The data will be used specifically to assist in the determination of whether EPA-funded removalactions are warranted at the Site.3.3 Action LevelsIgnitability, pH and metal analytical results of the process vat contents will be compared to 40CFR Part 261 Subpart C - Characteristics of Hazardous Waste to determine if the characteristicsof hazardous waste are met. Action levels are presented in tabular format in Table 3-1. TPHanalytical results will be used to characterize the process vat material and will not be comparedto any regulatory action levels. This data may also assist in disposal arrangements, should theybe required.
Soil sampling will be performed to determine the presence or absence of "process vat" typematerials only. For comparison purposes only, soil sample analytical results will be compared toprocess vat analytical results and background analytical results in an attempt to determinewhether process vat solutions have been released into the environment. Because metals arepresent in elevated concentrations in the soils surrounding the vats, soils data will be compared toa background location in similar materials located at least 100 feet away from the vats.Detectable concentrations of compounds encountered in the soils beneath the vat that are alsocharacteristic of the process vat samples and are not detected in the background sample willindicate a release from the vats to the environment. Metal soil data will also be compared to
8
— EPA Region 9 2000 Industrial Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) as a means tomeasure/quantify concentrations detected.
— 3.4 Decision RulesIf hazardous materials are present in the process vats, an EPA-funded removal action may beperformed. Detectable Concentrations of "process vat" solutions in the soils beneath the vat
~ demonstrate an unauthorized release to the environment, further indicating the need for an EPA-removal. If concentrations of analytes of concern are below the minimum action levels, it mayindicate that no further action on behalf of the EPA is necessary. In this case, recommendations
"~ for any further action, if required, may be prepared and submitted to the NDEP forimplementation.
3.5 Data Quality Objectivesf
_:- 3.5.1 Data Quality Objective ProcessThe Data Quality Objective (DQO) process, as set forth in the USEPA document, Guidance for
« £; the Data Quality Objectives Process, EPA QA/G-4, September 1994, was followed to establishI/-- the data quality objectives for this project. An outline of the process and the outputs for this
project are included in Appendix A.
f I—^ 3.5.2 DQO Data Categories
This investigation will involve the generation of definitive data for process vat solutions andj fi underlying soils. Field screening data will be used to select samples for laboratory analysis. This--*' screening data is not intended to meet the screening plus 10% definitive data category but will be
. used to select optimum samples for laboratory analysis in an effort to reduce laboratory analyticalt Jf costs. The specific requirements for this data category are detailed in Section 9. The data-"'" " generated under this project will comply with the requirements for that data category as defined^ in Data Quality Objective Process for Superfund, EPA 540/G-93/71, September 1993. All
I tj, definitive analytical methods employed for this project will be methods approved by the EPA.
3.5.3 Data Quality Indicators| ^ Data quality indicator goals (DQIs) for this project were developed following guidelines in EPA
Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/G-5 Final. All sampling will be guidedi \j| by procedures detailed in Section 6.2 and standard operating procedures (SOPs) to ensure|_1; representativeness of sample results. Tables 3-1 and 3-2 document the DQIs for this project.
± ,- 3.6 Data Managementj^;' Samples will be collected and logged on a chain-of-custody form as discussed in Section 8.4.
Samples will be kept secure in the custody of the sample manager at all times, who will assure• that all preservation parameters are being followed. Process vat samples will be transferred toL the START subcontracted laboratory as hazardous materials via a certified carrier. The soil
samples are anticipated to be environmental or non-hazardous and sent as a regular parcel. Allj , samples will be placed in a properly custody-sealed container with chain-of-custody-* documentation. The laboratory should note any evidence of tampering upon receipt.
L
i u
Data validation will be performed by a START chemist. The data validation reports andlaboratory data summary sheets will be included in the final report to be submitted to the EPA "™OSC. Before submittal, the final report will undergo a technical review to ensure that all datahave been reported and discussed correctly. _
3.7 Schedule of Sampling ActivitiesIt is anticipated that field activities will begin the week of April 30, 2001. Field activities are «expected to last four days, including two days for mobilization. Subsequently, samples will beanalyzed, data evaluated and validated, and a final report prepared. The target date for ; ,completion of the final report is June 30, 2001. • —
.3.8 Special Training Requirements/Certifications :Special training or certification requirements specific to this project include Hazardous Materials -*Shipping certification to properly ship the process vat samples to the laboratory. Additional . ,training requirements relevant to E&E's health and safety program comply with 29 CFR : -*•:1910.120. The Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan is presented in Appendix B. ""
j
_J
10
3
II
L-;
sw-
t &
V:;- ; ; :>? '- '"" .> •;••". •-- .' •:•- .-:-::;:•— 'Taibie'M:;.'.T:r"-' ."." ""• " • 'Data Quality Indicator Goals -Process Vat Samples
Method
Analytes
EPA 1311/6010B
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead '
Mercury
Silver
EPA 8015
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon
EPA 9054CpH
EPA 1010
Ignitability
Action Level(mg/1)
5.0
100.0
1.0
5.0
5.0
0.2
50
NA
<2or>12.5
140 °F
Method DetectionLimit(mg/1)
0.01
0.01
0.005
0.01
002
0.01
0.0005
001
' 10 mg/kg
NA
NA
Accuracy(% Recovery for
MS/MSD)
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
70-130
NA
NA
Precision(RPD for
MS/MSD andduplicates)
<35
-<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
NA
NA
PercentComplete
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
Action levels for metals are from 40 CFR 261.24 Toxicity Characteristics. Copper is not a listed waste but wasadded due to the site history.There are no action levels for total petroleum hydrocarbons. This data will only be used to characterize thematerial and for disposal purposes.Action levels for pH are from 40 CFR 261.22 Characteristics of CorrosivityAction level for ignitability is from 40 CFR 261.21 Characteristics of Ignitability •MS/MSD = Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike DuplicateRPD = Relative Percent Differencemg/1 = milligrams per litermg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (ppm)NA=Not applicable
t :
\<ir
u
r^,;^:.^.,;:.,:.:,...:...r.;....^,.. Table3-2:
Data Quality Indicator Goals - Soil SamplesMethod
Analytes
EPA 6010/7471
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic (Cancer Endpomt)
Banum
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium (Total)
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel (Soluble Salts)
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
EPA 8015
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon
EPA 9054C
PH
Action Level(mg/kg)
100,000
820
27
100,000
2,200
810
-
450
100,000
76,000
100,000
750
-32,000
610
41,000
-
10,000
10,000
-130
14,000
100,000
NA
<2or>125
Method DetectionLimit
(mg/kg)
40
12
2
40
1
1
1,000
2
10
5
20
061,000
3004
8
1,000
1
2
1,000
2
10
4
10
NA
Accuracy(% Recovery for
MS/MSD)
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
75-125
70-130
NA
Precision(RPD for
MS/MSD andduplicates)
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
<35
NA
PercentComplete
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
>90
Action levels for metals are USEPA PRGs - indicates no PRG applies.There are no action levels for total petroleum hydrocarbons This data will only be used to characterize thematerial and for disposal purposes.Action levels for pH and ignitability are RCRA hazardous standardsMS/MSD = Matnx Spike/Matrix Spike DuplicateRPD = Relative Percent Differencemg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (ppm)NA=Not applicable
12
- 4 Sampling RationalThe objective of this sampling event is to determine whether the process vats contain hazardousmaterials and determine whether those materials have been released into the environment. In
"" order to accomplish these objectives, judgmental or biased samples will be collected from theprocess vats and the soils near the vat base. These samples will be field screened to determinethe optimum samples to send to a certified laboratory for analysis.
4.1 Process Vat Sampling
"~ 4.1.1 Sampling Locations and RationaleTo determine whether the process vats contain hazardous materials, samples will be collected
_ from each phase of each of the three 30,000-gallon vats. It is anticipated that the following threephases will be present in each of the vats:
,_, • aqueous acidic phase,• product phase (hydrocarbon, suspected kerosene), and» sludge phase.
f^ Phases will be determined initially using a clear glass drum thief and obtaining a representative_ }! column sample to determine the approximate location of each phase layer. An estimated twelve*-'" samples will be collected. Whether these samples will be submitted for analysis depends on the
,,v field screening results.5 „
-" 4.1.2 AnalytesProcess vat samples, at a minimum, will be field tested for corrosivity and ignitability. At a
I \ minimum, samples that meet field screening criteria for the ignitability will be analyzed by acertified laboratory for ignitability by EPA Method 1010. Samples that meet field screening
•"-& criteria for corrosivity will be analyzed by a certified laboratory for pH by EPA Method 9045C.| }t Additional samples may be analyzed for these parameters based on the sampler's judgement and*"* for characterization purposes. Sludge samples will be analyzed by the Toxicity Leaching
Characteristic Procedure (TCLP) for metals by EPA Methods 1311/6010B.
LAdditionally, select samples from the hydrocarbon phase will be analyzed by EPA Method 8015
j-'.; to determine the hydrocarbon content. These samples will be selected based on professional[^' judgment. This additional information will assist with characterization of the waste and to make
disposal arrangements, if necessary.
L 4.2 Soils Sampling
|i 4.2.1 Sample Locations and RationaleL Soil samples will be collected from the soils immediately surrounding the process vats to- determine whether a release from the vats has occurred. Ten to 20 soil sample locations will be
^ - symmetrically placed around the three vats. Figure 4-1 indicates projected soil sampling-- locations. Exact soil sampling locations will be determined in the field based on accessibility of
the Geoprobe™, visible signs of potential contamination (e.g. stained soils), and on the best
~ 13
professional judgement of the sampling team. Judgmental sampling is the most appropriate _approach to soil sampling since the objective is simply to determine whether or not subsurfacecontamination exists. Ten symmetrical locations are planned however additional samplinglocations may be added based on preliminary results and/or visual indicators. _
Samples will be collected continuously from ground surface to 12 feet bgs. Twelve feet wasdetermined to be a sufficient depth to determine if a release has occurred from the vat to the _subsurface.
In addition, one background location will be sampled. Background is defined for the purposes of — •this study as either topographically up gradient, or, if such a location is unfeasible or impractical,background may be defined by a location determined to be outside of the influence of the processvats and will be located at least 100 feet from the process vats. — '
T5
4.2.2 Analytes ?:_ -4
Soil samples will be field screened for volatile organic compounds (VOCs)using a tiered ™"approach. Samples will be screened by visuarexamination and for head-space screening using a -^photon ionization detection screening device. Headspace will be performed by placing the soil f \sample in a locking, disposable plastic bag and disturbing the sample. In addition, the head space "~of the soils will be screened using the HapSite GC/MS. If available, a total petroleum 'phydrocarbon (TPH) screening test may be applied. _Jf
Four samples which exhibit the strongest concentrations plus one background and one blind "|laboratory duplicate will be analyzed for TPH by EPA Method 8015, Total Limit Threshold ' _JConcentration (TTLC) metals by EPA Methods 6010/7471 and pH by EPA Method 9045C tocorrelate soils data to the process vat samples. Sample selection will be based on professional Ifjudgement.
1
14
Figure 4-1: Soil boring grid design for Anaconda ERsubsurface investigation.
•0-
-O-
100
Primary soil boring locations (13-1 through B-10).
Secondary soil boring locations (5-11 through 13-14 shown).Additional borings may be required based on screening datafrom primary and secondary borings.
50
Approximate Scale
0 100 feet
AnacondaTDD# 09-01-01-0006Job # 001275.0050.01.SF
L
5 Analytical Methods —To provide analytical quality control for the analytical program, the following measures will beutilized:
• Samples selected for definitive sample analysis will be conducted by the STARTsubcontracted laboratory, Curtis and Tompkins, Ltd., Berkeley, California, a Californiacertified laboratory. **
• A Contract Laboratory Program (CLP)-type data package will be required from thelaboratory for all the resultant data. , j
• Additional volume of sample will be collected for at least one sample for each relevant ""analytical method to be utilized for matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD)analysis. . _j
Sample containers, preservatives, holding times, and estimated number of field, confirmation,and QC samples are summarized in Table 5-1. " jj
5.1 Process Vat Samples iSamples from each phase of each of the three vats will be collected. Based upon field screening *_i;
results, up to twelve samples (one per phase per vat plus one duplicate per analysis) will besubmitted for laboratory analyses. Vat samples may be analyzed for the following parameters ibased on field screening results: —
Hydrocarbon Phase - Ignitability, pH, TPH j• Aqueous Acid Phase - pH —'
Sludge Phase - pH, TCLP metalsI
A duplicate sample for each analytical method will be collected. The TPH and ignitability ~(
duplicate will consist of one sample jar. The duplicate sample location will be determined on siteby field personnel. One MS/MSD will be collected for TPH and for TCLP metals analysis.MS/MSD does not apply to pH or ignitability. In this case, laboratory control samples will be "~used. . . f
i5.2 Soil SamplesSoil samples will be submitted from up to four locations, to be determined in the field based on Jscreening results. Sample location and sample depth will be determined in the field using _Jprofessional judgement. Additionally, one background plus one field duplicate will besubmitted. Soil samples will be analyzed for one or more of the following parameters:
TTLC metalsTPHpH
A duplicate soil sample will be collected at the first location. A second volume of sample to beused as a MS/MSD sample will be collected at the second sample location.
16
Table 5-1: Analytical Methods and ProceduresMatrix = Soil and Sludge/Liquid
(ANALYSES REQUESTED r '•' -•-•-- - : - ^ - . . - , - , - - ; - - . . - - - - • - - , - , ; - - : -- T -- -, . - ~CHEMISTRY TYPE
SPECIFIC ANALYSES REQUESTED
PRESERVATIVES
ANALYTICAL HOLDING TIME(S)
SAMPLE x SAMPLE
INORGANIC/ORGANIC
Total Metals • EPA 6010/7471TPH - EPA 8015pH - EPA 9045C
Ignitability - EPA 1010
Chill with ice to 4°C
<180 days/<28 days for Hg - Metals<14 day to extraction/<40 to analysis - TPHAnalyze ASAP - Corrosivity and Ignitability
No. of Containers per Analysis
1 Concentration
Sample "Sampling Special Ix8ozNumber Igaitability pH Metals TPH Date . Designation LOW HIGH glass jar
Soil samples, metals by 6010B/7471
S-l
S-2
S-2 MS/MSD
S-3
S-4
S5
S-6
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/03/2001
05/03/2001
05/02/2001
05/03/2001
MS/MSD
duplicate pH,metals, TPH
background
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Process Vat samples, metals by 131 1/601 OB
V-H-I
V-H-2
V-H-3
V-H-4
V-A-1
V-A'2
V-A-3
V-A-4
V-S-1
V-S-2
V-S3
V-S-4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
05/02/2001
MS/MSD TPH
duplicate TPH,ignitability
duplicate pH
MS/MSD metals
duplicate metals
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Total Number of Samples
Total Number of Sample Containers
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
up to 16
up to 16
17
6 Methods and Procedures
6.1 Field ProceduresField equipment will be operated in accordance with the EPA Environmental Response Team(ERT) SOP numbers 2050 Geoprobe™ Operation, 2010 Tank Sampling and 2012 Soil Samplingand E&E's Hazard Categorization Manual, contained in Appendix C.
•6.1.1 Sampling EquipmentThe following equipment will be used to obtain environmental samples from their respectivemedia:
Parameter
Matrix :
: Process
Product
Vat Solutions
Equipment Fabrication Dedicated
Disposable drum thief Glass or Plastic Yes
Parameter : Soils
Matrix : Soils
Equipment Fabrication Dedicated
Geoprobe™ MacroCore Sampler
Acetate sleeves
Hand trowel
Sample mixing bags
Hardened steel
Acetate
Plastic
Plastic
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
6.1.2 Mapping EquipmentAll proposed soil sample locations will be located with a hand-held Global Positioning System(GPS) unit. The sampling locations will be presented on a scale map in the final report.
6.1.3 Equipment MaintenanceThe Geoprobe™ hydraulic unit will be inspected and serviced prior to use by the PST. Anyhydraulic leaks or other problems that could impair function of the unit will be repaired prior touse. Drive rods and samplers will be inspected prior to use to ensure they are not bent and havethreads in good condition. Sufficient spare pars (drive points, acetate sleeves, etc.) will beavailable to complete the sampling event.
J
18 J
bI
The EPA is responsible for maintenance of the Inficon Hapsite™. The Inficon Hapsite™ is afield-portable gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer (GC/MS) which provides field analysis forVOCs.
The START Organic Vapor Monitor (OVM) will be calibrated daily according to themanufacturer's instructions. Calibration data will be recorded in the instrument log.
6.1.4 Inspection/Acceptance Requirements for Supplies and ConsumablesThere are no project-specific inspection/acceptance criteria for supplies and consumables. It isstandard operating procedure that: personnel will not use broken or defective materials; itemswill not be used past their expiration date; supplies and consumables will be checked againstorder and packing slips to verify the correct items were received; and the supplier will be notifiedof any missing or damaged items.
6.1.5 Underground Utilities ClearanceThe START will notify Joe Sawyer, who is the State of Nevada's on-site consultant, of theapproximate locations of the proposed borings. The START will request information regardingunderground pipelines and utilities at the site. If non-Arimetco utilities are present, the STARTwill notify the local underground utility locator service.
6.2 Sampling ProceduresAll samples will be collected in accordance with ERT SOPs 2010 and 2012 (Appendix C). Anydeviations to these SOPs will be recorded in the field logbook.
6.2.1 Process VatPrior to sampling the process vats, the air quality will be surveyed to determine the appropriatehealth and safety protection required. Once that has been determined and the appropriate geardonned, the first step of the process vat sampling will be to determine the depths of each phase todetermine the volume of each phase. Each phase of each vat will be sampled using a clear glassor polyvinylchloride hollow tube. A representative sample will be collected from each vat byinserting the tube to the bottom slowly and allowing the tube to fill. Once full, the end of thetube will be covered with the sampler's thumb and the sample will be retrieved. The layers willbe visually evaluated to determine the depths of each phase. If this is not possible or cannot bediscerned from the sample, the contents of the tube will be placed into a glass jar and the layerswill be allowed to separate. The volumes of each phase will be interpolated from the relativeamounts of material in each phase.
The process vat samples will be collected as grab samples (independent, discrete samples) fromeach of the phases in each tank using the methods described above. If it is not possible to collectsamples directly from each phase in the vat, the vat profile sample, after separation, will be used.Phases will be separated using pipettes or by other means.
19
Process vat samples selected for laboratory analysis will be placed into new, certified clean, 8ounce glass jars. Sample containers will be closed as soon as they are filled, immediately chilledto below 4 degrees Celsius (°C), and processed for shipment to the laboratory.
6.2.2 SoilsExact sampling locations will be determined in the field based on accessibility, visualobservations and professional judgement. Soil sample locations will be collected only fromportions most likely to be contaminated and will be recorded in the field logbook as sampling iscompleted. The sampling location will be photographed and a GPS unit will be used to record aprecise location.
Surface debris will be cleared prior to sampling. If the sample location is covered with asphalt orconcrete, the surface will be cut through with a concrete corer until soil is contacted.Measurements for sample intervals are to be made at the soil surface below any coveringconcrete or asphalt.
Continuous cores will be collected from 0 to 12 feet bgs at all locations using dedicated acetatesleeves.
All strata will be collected using a Geoprobe™ MacroCore sampler, a 4-foot long steel sampletube lined with a 1.5-inch diameter acetate sleeve. Once the MacroCore sampler has been drivento the desired depth and pulled back to the surface, the acetate sleeve will be removed and cutopen for geologic logging of the soils and screened using the methods described above.
Soil samples selected for laboratory analysis will be placed into new, certified clean, 8-ounceglass jars. Sample containers will be filled to the top with measure taken to prevent soil fromremaining in the lid threads prior to being sealed to prevent potential contamination migration toor from the sample. Sample containers will be closed as soon as they are filled, immediatelychilled to 4°C, and processed for shipment to the laboratory.
6.3 Field Screening
6.3.1 Process Vat SamplesProcess vat samples will be placed in a sample-dedicated 4-ounce glass jar for field testing.Process vat solutions will be field screened using field hazard categorization techniques definedin E&E's Hazard Categorization Manual provided in Appendix C. Results will be recorded inthe logbook and used to select appropriate samples for laboratory analysis.
6.3.2 Soil SamplesSoils will be screened in the field for the presence of waste materials. A START geologist willperform visual inspection of the continuous soil borings conducted at each location which will be
20
documented in boring logs by the START geologist. The acetate sleeves will be cut open andevaluated for VOCs using a Thermo-Environmental Instruments organic vapor meter todocument any concentrations of contaminants. If no concentrations are observed, at least oneheadspace test will be conducted from the deepest portion of each bonng. The headspace testwill be performed by placing approximately 5 centimeters of the core in a zip-locked bag, sealingthe bag, disturbing the sample, and analyzing the headspace using the Inficon Hapsite™. TheHapsite™ is a field-portable gas GC/MS which provides field analysis for VOCs. The unit isowned by the EPA Richmond Laboratory and will be used if available. The unit will be operatedby a certified operator in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. The headspace readingswill be recorded and the remaining core sample will be placed in an ice chest pending selectionof samples to send to the laboratory.
All field screening results will be used to determine the optimum samples to ship to thelaboratory for confirmation.
6.4 Decontamination ProceduresThe decontamination procedures that will be followed are in accordance with approvedprocedures. Decontamination of sampling equipment must be conducted consistently to assurethe quality of samples collected. All non-dedicated equipment that comes into contact withpotentially contaminated soil or water will be decontaminated. Disposable equipment intendedfor one-time use will not be decontaminated, but will be packaged for appropriate disposal.Decontamination will occur prior to and after each use of a piece of equipment.
Decontamination steps for the non-dedicated Geoprobe™ accessories and augers that come incontact with soil are as follows:
• Physical removal of soils^ • Non-phosphate detergent and tap water wash, using a brush if necessary
I A • Tap water rinse•-'* • Deionized/distilled water rinse (twice)
• Air dry
*"* Only new dedicated acetate sleeves will be used to collect soil samples.
« t Equipment will be decontaminated in a predesignated area on pallets or plastic sheeting, andclean bulky equipment will be stored on plastic sheeting in uncontaminated areas. Cleaned small
I . equipment will be stored in plastic bags. Materials to be stored more than a few hours will also\ - be covered.
i
i- ,'
I .ifr ?.
21
7 Disposal of Investigation-Derived WasteIn the process of collecting environmental samples at this site, several different types ofpotentially contaminated investigation- derived wastes (IDW) will be generated, including thefollowing:
• Used personal protective equipment (PPE);• Disposable sampling equipment; '• Decontamination fluids;• Soil cuttings. • - •
The USEPA's National Contingency Plan requires that management of IDW generated duringsite investigations comply with all relevant or appropriate requirements to the extent practicable.This sampling plan will follow the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR)Directive 9345.3-02 (May 1991) which provides the guidance for management of IDW duringsite investigations. Listed below are the procedures that will be followed for handling IDW. Theprocedures are flexible enough to allow the site investigation team to use its professionaljudgement on the proper method for the disposal of each type of IDW generated at each samplinglocation.
• Used PPE and disposable sampling equipment will be double bagged in plastic trash bagsand left on site for future disposal. Any PPE or dedicated equipment that is to bedisposed of that can still be reused will be rendered inoperable before disposal.
• Decontamination fluids that will be generated in the sampling event will consist ofdeionized water, residual contaminants, and water with non-phosphate detergent. Thevolume and concentration of the decontamination fluid will be sufficiently low to allowdisposal at the site. The water (and water with detergent) will be poured onto the ground.
• Soil cuttings generated during the subsurface sampling will be placed back in the soilboring from which the sample was obtained.
22
8 Sample Identification, Documentation and Shipment
8.1 Field Notes
8.1.1 Field LogbooksField logbooks will document where, when, how, and from whom any vital project informationwas obtained. Logbook entries will be complete and accurate enough to permit reconstruction offield activities. Logbooks are bound with consecutively numbered pages. Each page will bedated and the time of entry noted in military time. All entries will be legible, written in ink, andsigned by the individual making the entries. Language will be factual, objective, and free ofpersonal opinions. At a minimum, the following information will be recorded, if applicable,during the collection of each sample;
• Sample location and description• Site or sampling area sketch showing sample location and measured• Sampler's name(s)• Date and time of sample collection• Type of sample (e.g., sediment)• Type of sampling equipment used• Field instrument readings and calibration• Field observations and details related to analysis or integrity of samples (e.g., weather
e conditions, noticeable odors, colors, etc.): :l • Preliminary sample descriptions«- • Sample preservation
,,v • Lot numbers of the sample containers, sample identification numbers and any explanatory| ^ codes, chain-of-custody form numbers*-' • Shipping arrangements (overnight air bill number)
• Name(s) of receiving laboratory(ies)s s--I •>-
In addition to sampling information, the following specific information may also be recorded inthe field logbook for each day of sampling:
• Team members and their responsibilities• Time of arrival on site and time of departure• Other personnel on site• A summary of any meetings or discussions with any potentially responsible parties, or
representatives of any federal, state, or other regulatory agency• Deviations from sampling plans, site safety plans, and SAP procedures• Changes in personnel and responsibilities as well as reasons for the change• Levels of safety protection
23
• Calibration information for equipment used on site• Record of photographs
8.1.2 PhotographsPhotographs will be taken at the sampling locations and at other areas of interest on site. Theywill serve to verify information entered in the field logbook. When a photograph is taken, thefollowing information will be written in the logbook or will be recorded in a separate fieldphotography log:
• Time, date and location• Description of the subject photographed• Name of person taking the photograph
8.2 Container, Preservation and Holding Time RequirementsAll sample containers used will be 8 ounce certified clean glass jars. Preservation and holdingtime requirements are summarized in Table 5-1.
8.3 LabelingAll samples collected will be labeled in a clear and precise way for proper identification in thefield and for tracking in the laboratory. The samples will have preassigned, identifiable, andunique numbers. At a minimum, the sample labels will contain the following information:sample location, date of collection, analytical parameter(s), and method of preservation. Eachsample will be assigned a unique sample number as indicated in Table 5-1.
8.4 Sample Chain-of Custody Forms and Custody SealsChain-of-custody record forms are used to document sample collection and shipment tolaboratories for analysis. All sample shipments for analyses will be accompanied by a chain-of-custody record. Form(s) will be completed and sent with the samples for each laboratory andeach shipment (i.e., each day). If multiple coolers are sent to a single laboratory on a single day,form(s) will be completed and sent with the samples for each cooler.
The chain-of-custody-form will identify the contents of each shipment and maintain the custodialintegrity of the samples. Generally, a sample is considered to be in someone's custody if it iseither in someone's physical possession, in someone's view, locked up, or kept in a secured areathat is restricted to authorized personnel. Until the samples are shipped, the custody of thesamples will be the responsibility of the START. The sampling team leader or designee will signthe chain-of-custody form in the "relinquished by" box and note date, time, and air bill number.
A self-adhesive custody seal will be placed across the lid of each sample. The shippingcontainers in which samples are stored (usually a sturdy picnic cooler or ice chest) will be sealedwith self-adhesive custody seals any time they are not in someone's possession or view before
24
shipping. All custody seals will be signed and dated.
8.5 Packaging and Shipment
Samples will be shipped for immediate delivery to the contracted laboratory. Upon shipping, thelaboratory will be notified of the following information, as appropriate:
• Sampling contractor's name• Name and location of the site or sampling area• Case number• Total number(s) by relative concentration and matrix of samples shipped• Carrier, air bill number(s), method of shipment (priority next day)• Shipment date and when it should be received by labatory• Irregularities or anticipated problems associated with the samples• Whether additional samples will be shipped or if this is the last shipment.
All samples will be placed in coolers with the appropriate chain-of-custody forms. All formswill be enclosed in plastic bags and affixed to the underside of the cooler lid.
• Screw caps will be checked for tightness. If bottles are not full, sample volume level ofliquid samples will be marked on the outside of the sample bottles with indelible ink.
• Bottle/container tops will be secured with clear tape and custody seals.• Sample labels will be affixed onto the containers with clear tape.
8.5.1 Soil SamplesSoil samples collected at the site are anticipated to be environmental or non-hazardous and will
«• be sent as regular parcels. All soil sample containers will be placed in a strong outside shipping„„ container. The following outlines the packaging procedures that will be followed for low
I ^ concentration samples:f
• The drain plug of the cooler will be sealed with tape to prevent melting ice from leakingE out of the cooler.
• The bottom of the cooler will be lined with bubble wrap to prevent breakage duringshipment.
! • All glass sample containers will be wrapped in bubble wrap to prevent breakage.• All sample containers will be sealed in heavy duty plastic zip-locked bags. Sample
r ' * numbers will be written on the bags with indelible ink.* • Samples will "be placed in a sturdy cooler.
• Empty space in the cooler will be filled with bubble wrap or styrofoam peanuts to prevent: v movement and breakage during shipment.•^ • Ice used to cool samples will be double sealed in two zip-locked plastic bags and placed
25
on top of and around the samples to chill them to the correct temperature.• Each ice chest will be securely taped shut with fiberglass strapping tape, and custody
seals will be affixed to the front, right and back of each cooler.
8.5.2 Process Vat SamplesProcess vat samples are anticipated to be hazardous materials as defined by the International AirTransport Association's (IATA) Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR). Samples will be shippedusing the Tentative Determination Clause as defined by State Variation USG-14. It is anticipatedthat the samples will be ignitable, corrosive, and/or ignitable and corrosive liquids.
Using the Precedence of Hazards Table in Section 3.10.1 of the DGR, it was determined thatignitable is the primary hazard and corrosive is the subsidiary hazard. Given the informationpresently available, the samples will be shipped under the proper shipping name flammableliquid, corrosive, n.o.s., UN 2924, 3 (8), PG H.
The samples will be packaged in a United Nations-certified shipping cooler for hazardousmaterials following the manufacturer's instructions which are reprinted below in their entirety.
PACKAGING INSTRUCTIONSINSULATED PACKAGE
NINE - 8 oz. WITH ABSORBENT BAGCertified United Nations performance packages are tested to specific performance requirements.In order to insure compliance with the regulations governing United Nations performancepackaging it is imperative that the package is assembled per the proper instructions. If any step isomitted, the package will no longer be in compliance and the package is no longer acceptable forthe transportation of hazardous materials or dangerous goods.
(1.800.923.9123) www.HAZMATPAC.com1. Remove all of the components located inside the UN approved container with the exceptionof the HAZMATPAC inner ice chest.2. PREPARING THE INNER CONTAINER: Fill the inner container with the desired chemical.NOTE: The packaging system is tested for materials less than or equal to 2.0 specific gravity.ALWAYS CHECK THE CHEMICAL'S COMPATIBILITY WITH INNER CONTAINER.Screw the cap onto the container. Secure the cap with 1" x 9" red tape provided. The tapeshould be stretched clockwise around the cap and the container.3. PREPARING THE ABSORBENT BAG: Partially pull out the absorbent lining and insert thecontainer. Hold on to the outer bag and let the weight of the container push the absorbent liningwith the container to the bottom of the bag. Fold the top flaps of the absorbent lining over thetop of the container and close with a twist tie or cable tie.4. The absorbent bag should be placed into the inner partition so that the corners of the bag fitinto the corners of the inner partition.5. Place inner unit into 4 MIL poly bag and close with two twist ties or one cable tie.
26
f <?
§!=•
6. Line the cooler with 2 MIL poly bag and insert inner unit.7. Fill all remaining space with ice, dry ice, ice packs or heat packs and close liner bag with twisttie or cable tie.8. Fold the flaps of the box closed and seal with 48mm x 28" clear packaging tape. The tapemay easily applied by peeling off a 2" piece of the backing first and using the exposed section asthe starting point.9. Mark and label the box to specification. (Proper shipping name, hazard class, UN number orED number, etc.).This container is a certified UN performance package. It must be assembled as tested or thepackage is not in compliance.THE SHIPPER HAS THE END DECISION AS TO THE SUITABILITY AND PROPERUSAGE OF ANY PACKAGE. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PERSON OFFERINGA HAZARDOUS MATERIAL FOR TRANSPORTATION TO ENSURE THAT SUCHPACKAGINGS ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THEIR LADING. THIS PARTICULARLYAPPLIES TO CORROSIVITY, COMPATIBILITY AND REGULATORY COMPLIANCE.
In addition, the process vat samples will be:• Shipped with blue ice• Marked with the proper shipping name, name and address of shipper and consignee• Labeled with flammable and corrosive hazard class labels and orientation arrows• Shipped using a Federal Express Dangerous Goods Airbill.
27
9 Quality Assurance and Control
9.1 Field Quality Control SamplesThe QA/QC samples described in the following subsections, which are also listed in Table 5-1,will be collected during this investigation.
9.1.1 Assessment of Field Contamination (Blanks)
9.1.1.1 Equipment and Field Blanks '"Equipment and field blanks will not be collected during this investigation as only dedicatedsampling equipment will be used to collect samples (new disposable drum thieves and newacetate liners).
9.1.1.2 Temperature BlanksFor each cooler that is shipped or transported to an analytical laboratory, a 40-milliliter vial willbe included that is marked "temperature blank." This blank will be used by the sample custodianto check the temperature of samples upon receipt.
9.1.2 Assessment of Sample Variability (Field Duplicate or Co-located Samples)Duplicate samples will be collected for each analytical method for each matrix. Process vat \duplicate sampling locations will be based on field observations and field screening data. _J
A duplicate soil sample will be collected at sample location one (S-l) as indicated in Table 5-1. jThe rationale for the choice of the duplicate sample location is random, based on the assumption —'that all locations will be equally contaminated.
II
Duplicate samples to be analyzed will be placed inside a scalable bag and homogenized with a —*gloved hand. Homogenized material from the bag will then be transferred to the appropriatewide-mouth glass jars for the regular, duplicate, and MS/MSD samples. |
Duplicate and MS/MSD samples will be preserved, packaged, and sealed in the same manner as ,the regular samples of the same matrix. A separate sample number will be assigned to each |duplicate. ""*
19.2 Background Samples |One background soil sample will be collected to differentiate between process vat and non-process vat contributions to contamination. The background soil sample will be submitted to the slaboratory for analysis via EPA Methods 6010 and 7471 for total metals, EPA Method 8015 for _Jtotal petroleum hydrocarbons, and EPA Method 9045C for pH.
\J
28 ' J
_ 9.3 Laboratory Quality Control SamplesAn additional volume of soil will be collected at the second sample location (S-2) for laboratoryQC analyses for TPH and metals. An additional volume of product will be collected from the
_ hydrocarbon and sludge layers from one of the vats for TPH and metals QC analysis. Therationale for the choice of the MS/MSD sample location is random, based on the assumption thatall locations will be equally contaminated. MS/MSD does not apply to pH and ignitability.
The laboratory will be alerted as to which sample is to be used for QC analysis by a notation onthe sample container labels and the chain of custody record or packing list.
9.4 Analytical and Data Package RequirementsL r" It is required that all samples be analyzed in accordance with the methods listed in Table 5-1."" The laboratory is required to supply documentation to demonstrate that their data meet the
requirements specified in the method.
""" The data validation package shall include all original documentation generated in support of this7^ project. In addition, the laboratory will provide original documentation to support that all; - requirements of the methods have been met. This includes, but is not limited to, sample tags,
custody records, shipping information, sample preparation records, and instrument printouts suchi *f£ as mass spectra. Copies of information and documentation required in this document are«_i acceptable. The following deliverables are required. Note that the following data requirements
are included to specify and emphasize general documentation requirements and are not intendedI '& to supersede or change requirements of each method.i **
r<t, • Copy of the chain of custody, sample log-in records, and a Case Narrative describing the| 'x analyses and methods used and discussing the presence or any interferences and theL/- failure of the lab to meet any of the requirements or re-analyses.
'„. • Analytical data (results) up to three significant figures for all samples, method blanks,| » MS/MSD, Laboratory Control Samples (LCS), duplicates, and field QC samples.«•""* • QC summary sheets: EPA CLP forms that summarize the following
^ 1. MS/MSD/LCS recovery summaryI '•• 2. Method/preparation blank summary** 3. Initial and continuing calibration summary
7 4. Sample holding time and analytical sequenceI ^ 5. Calibration curves and correlation coefficients
6. Duplicate summary. " 7. Detection limit information? ?'", • Analyst bench records describing dilution, weighing of samples, percent moisture"** (solids), sample size, sample extraction and cleanup, final extract volumes and amount
injected.• Detailed explanation of the quantitation and identification procedure used for specific
29
analyses, giving examples of calculations from the raw data. __• The final deliverable report will consist of sequentially numbered pages.• Internal/surrogate recoveries• Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass Spectrometer (ICP/MS) tuning conditions. _• Reconstructed ion current chromatogram and quantitation reports for all sample
standards, blanks, MS/MSD, and PE samples.• For every compound identified and each field sample, provide raw versus enhanced —
spectra and enhanced versus reference spectra.• For target analytes, the reference spectrum shall be the check standard for that sample.
9.5 Data ValidationData validation of analytical data generated will be performed by the START in accordance with - the USEPA Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data "~Review and USEPA Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Inorganic 7Data Review. A Tier 3 traditional full validation for all data will be required. „<
To meet requirements for categorization as definitive data, the following criteria will be ;evaluated: ^
• Holding times• Sampling design approach• Blank contamination• Initial and continuing calibration |• Detection limits _J• Analyte identification and quantitation• Matrix spike recoveries 1• Performance evaluation samples when specified _J• Analytical and total error determination
LCS 1
Upon completion of validation, data will be classified as one of the following: acceptable for usewithout qualifications, acceptable for use with qualifications, or unacceptable for use. I
9.6 Field Variances _TJAs conditions in the field may vary, it may become necessary to implement minor modifications 1to this plan. When appropriate, the EPA OSC will be notified of the modifications and a verbalapproval obtained before implementing the modifications. Modifications to the original plan will •*be documented in the-final report. *
9.7 Assessment of Project Activities •j
1
30 I
_ 9.7.1 START Assessment ActivitiesThe following assessment activities will be performed by the START:
_ • All project deliverables (SAP, Data Summaries, Data Validation Reports, InvestigationReport) will be peer reviewed prior to release to the EPA. In time-critical situations, thepeer review may be concurrent with the release of a draft document to the EPA. Errors
— discovered in the peer review process will be reported by the reviewer to the originator ofthe document, who will be responsible for corrective action.
• The START QA Officer will review project documentation (logbooks, chain of custody— forms, etc.) to ensure the SAP was followed and that sampling activities were adequately
documented. The QA Officer will document deficiencies and the PM will be responsiblefor corrective actions.
9.7.2 EPA Assessment Activities• EPA assessment activities, which includes checking for leaks around the base of the outside~ solvent extraction tanks and associated piping, screening soil samples or soil vapors for
hydrocarbons consistent with tank contents, sampling liquids and sludges in solvent tanks todetermine whether they are hazardous substances, estimating the quantity of solids and liquids insolvent tanks, and documenting site security around solvent extraction area. The SAP is intended
i :; to accurately reflect the planned assessment activities for this site investigation; however, Site•;_* conditions and additional EPA direction may warrant modifications. All significant changes will
be documented in the final report.
-L.' 9.7.3 Project Status Reports to ManagementIt is standard procedure for the START PM to report to the EPA task manager any issues, as they
I \ occur, that arise during the course of the project that could affect data quality, data use«-"" objectives, the project objectives, or project schedules.
i f 9.7.4 Reconciliation of Data with DQOs-* " ' Assessment of data quality is an ongoing activity throughout all phases of a project. The
following outlines the methods to be used by the START for evaluating the results obtained fromI , the project.u.
• Review of the DQO outputs and the sampling design will be conducted by the STARTE QA Officer and the EPA QAO prior to sampling activities. The reviewer will submit~" comments to the START PM for action, comment, or clarification. This process will be
iterative.| • A preliminary data review will be conducted by the START. The purpose of this review
is to look for problems or anomalies in the implementation of the sample collection andanalysis procedures and to examine QC data for information to verify assumptions
^ underlying the DQOs and the SAP. When appropriate to sample design, basic statistical
31
quantities will be calculated and the data will be graphically represented.When appropriate to the sample design and if specifically tasked to do so by the EPAOSC, the START will select a statistical hypothesis test and identify assumptionsunderlying the test.When appropriate to the sample design and if specifically tasked to do so by the EPAOSC, the START will examine the underlying assumptions of the statistical hypothesistest in light of the environmental data. This will be accomplished by determining theapproach for verifying assumptions, performing tests for assumptions, and determiningcorrective actions.
1
J
32
_ 10 ReferencesThe Anaconda Company, June 19, 1978 (Anaconda, 1978). Letter to Mr. Hugh Ricci, P.E.,
Environmental Specialist, State of Nevada, Division of Environmental Protection,— regarding termination of mining operations at the Anaconda Company.
Anaconda Minerals Company, February 17, 1984 (Anaconda, 1984). Water Quality— Investigations and Mitigation Plan, Yerington Mine Site, prepared for the Nevada
Division of Environmental Protection.
~~ Applied Hydrology Associates, May 25,1983 (AHA, 1983). Evaluation of Water Quality andSolids Leaching Data Adjacent to the Weed Heights Operation Near Yerington, Nevada,prepared for Anaconda Minerals Company.
ARCO Environmental Remediation L.L.C., April 2000 (ARCO, 2000). 1999 Annual monitoring" and Operation Summary: Pumpback Well System, Yerington, Nevada. Prepared by~~ Applied hudrology Associates, Inc.
_ Anmetco, Incorporated, October 28, 2000 (Arimetco, 2000). Water Pollution Control Report"" Third Quarter 1999 for Permit NEV88039.
n*_/• Arimetco Yerington Mine and Process Facility Site Assessment if Groundwater Quality.
Prepared by Dennis Dalton; submitted to Arimetco, Inc., July 1999 (Arimetco, 1999)
L' Concerned Residents Opposed to Waste Dumpsites, June 22,1983 (CROWDS, 1983). Letter toWilliam D. Ruckelshaus, Administrator, EPA, regarding environmental concerns
I ' associated with the Anaconda Copper Company.
Ecology and Environment, Inc., January 24,1990, (E&E, 1990). Site Inspection Re-Evaluation,r * Anaconda Copper Company, EPA ID#NVD083917252, prepared for EPA Region IX.Ew*
Ecology and Environment, Inc., September 18,1980 (E&E, 1980). Off-Site Inspection,*- Anaconda Company, Weed Heights, Nevada, prepared for EPA Region IX.
Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, June 5, 2000 (NDEP, 2000). Expanded SiteI 1 Inspection, Anaconda Copper Co. Yerington Mine, prepared for EPA Region DC.
Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, September 8, 1994. (NDEP, 1994). SiteI Inspection Prioritization, Anaconda Copper Co. Yerington Mine, prepared for EPA
Region DC.
33
United States Department of the Interior Geological Survey, 1982 (USGS, 1982). Ground-WaterQuality Downgradient from Copper-Ore Milling Wastes at Weed Heights, Lyon County,Nevada, prepared in cooperation with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protectionby Seitz, Harold R., Van Denburgh, A. S., and La Camera, Richard J., open file report 80-1217.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, March 14, 2000 (EPA, 2000). Letter to RobertW. Quintero, Chairman, Walker River Paiute Tribe, regarding concerns about theAnaconda Copper Mine site.
United States Geological Survey, Mason Valley 7.5-Minute Topographic Map, 1987. (USGS,Mason Valley, 1987).
United States Geological Survey, Yerington 7.5-Minute Topographic Map, 1987. (USGS,Yerington, 1987).
34
- Appendix A: Data Quality Objectives Worksheet
— 1. State the Problem - Summarize the contamination problem that will require newenvironmental data, and identify the resources available to resolve the problem.
~ Planning Team:Bob Mandel, EPABenjamin Castellana, Ecology & Environment, Inc,
~~ Caren Carlson, Ecology & Environment, Inc.Cheryl Elliott, Ecology & Environment, Inc.
""" Bob Mandel of the EPA is the primary decision maker of the scoping team.
__ Problem:Three approximate 30,000 gallon process vats are abandoned at the site. These vats may containignitable, corrosive and toxic hazardous materials. There is also a concern that these materials
._, have been released to the environment.•> T
. Available Resources:L Current budget not to exceed approx. $40,000; use of START BOA laboratories; START
personnel. All work and reporting should be completed by June 30, 2001.
•» 2. Identify the Decision - Identify the decision that requires new environmental data to« address the contamination problem.
I *—
ei •}
Principal Study Questions: Do the vats contain hazardous materials? Have the vats releasedhazardous materials to the environment? Does the site pose an imminent and substantialendangerment to human health and the environment?
Define the alternative actions that could result from the resolution of the principal studyquestion:a) Results could cause an EPA-funded removal.b) Recommendations for further action could be prepared and sent to the State.c) No further action could occur at the site.
Decision Statement: If the process vats are found to contain large volumes of hazardousmaterials, an EPA-funded removal may be performed. If "process vat" type materials are foundin the soils beneath the vat, a release may have occurred and an EPA-funded removal might bewarranted. The ultimate determination of whether an EPA-funded removal will be performed is
35
up to the discretion of the EPA.
4. Identify Inputs to the Decision - Identify the information needed to support the decision,and specify which inputs require new environmental data.
Information required to resolve the decision statement: Definitive laboratory analyses ofmetals, total petroleum hydrocarbons, pH, and ignitability in process vat and soil samples arerequired.
Source(s) for information: Data sources will consist of data derived from this sampling event.
Information needed to establish action levels: Action levels for hazardous wastes are describedin 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart C. Action levels for soils are detection of "process vat" typematerials that are not detected in the background sample.
Confirm that measurement methods exist to provide data:EPA Methods 6010B, 1311 and 7471, 9045C, 1010, and 8015.
5. Define the Study Boundaries - Specify the spatial and temporal aspects of theenvironmental media that the data must represent to support the decision.
Specific characteristics that define population being studied: Process vat solutions and soilsimmediately surrounding the vats.
Spatial boundary of decision statement: Soils will be assessed up to 100 feet horizontally and12 feet vertically from the vats.
Temporal boundary of decision statement: The data will represent present conditions.
When to collect samples: There do not appear to be any scientifically-based temporalconstraints on the sampling event.
Practical constraints on data collection: No practical constraints.
6. Develop a Decision Rule - Develop logical "if...then" statements that define theconditions that would cause the decision maker to choose among alternative actions.
Statistical parameter that characterizes a population: Each analytical result, not statisticalparameter, will be evaluated against the action levels.
36
_. Specify the action level(s) for the study: Action levels for hazardous wastes are described in40 CFR Part 261, Subpart C. Action levels for soils are detection of "process vat" type materialsthat are not detected in the background sample.
Decision Rules:
— a) If the process vats are found to contain hazardous waste, an EPA-funded removal may berequired.
~ b) If soils beneath the vats are found to contain "process vat" type materials, an EPA-fundedremoval may be required.
™* 6. Specify the Limits on Decision Errors - Specify the decision makers acceptable limitson decision errors, which are used to establish performance goals for limiting uncertainty
I ' in the data.MM
= . Use of biased sampling points precludes statistical determination of limits on decision errors.^ Measurement error, rather than sampling error, is deemed to be the primary factor affecting any
decision error. Validated, definitive data will be required to limit measurement error. Sampling, ,j error will be limited to the extent practicable by following approved EPA methods and applicableL" SOPs. Sampling error and tolerable limits cannot be quantified.
I | 7. Optimize the Design for Obtaining Data - Identify the most resource-effectiveL sampling and analysis design for generating data that are expected to satisfy the DQOs.
0
All samples will be field screened to determine the optimum samples to send in for certifiedlaboratory analysis.
One goal of the sampling event is to establish whether an observed release to soil from theprocess vats has occurred. Soils samples will be collected from numerous locations to fulfill thisgoal.
l"- The other goal of this sampling event is to document the presence of hazardous substances in theprocess vats. Each phase of the process vats will be sampled to satisfy this goal.
i
_.
37
Appendix B: Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan
38
Appendix C: E&E SOPs
II-1 :••:
39
APPENDIX D: VAT SAMPLING EVENT DATA SUMMARY REPORTS
cb
L
L
L
Laboratory Number: 151818Client: Ecology & EnvironmentProject Name: Anaconda ERProject*: 0050015FReceipt Date: 05/03/01
CASE NARRATIVE
Metals (EPA 601 OB):
The recoveries for potassium were below the acceptable QC limits for the matrixspike and it's duplicate for batch number 63499. The recoveries for potassium forthe blank spike and its duplicate were acceptable so the quality of the sampledata should not be affected.
The concentration of aluminum, calcium, copper, iron, magnesium andmanganese in the matrix spike and its duplicate rendered the spike amountinsignificant. The associated blank spike and its duplicate were acceptable so thequality of the sample data should not be affected No other analytical problemswere encountered.
CurtiS & TompkinS, Ltd., Analytical Laboratories, Since 1878
2323 Fifth Street, Berkeley. CA 9471O Phone (51O) 486-O9OO
Laboratory Number 151818
Target Analyte List MetalsEPA 6010A/7470
Ecology & Environment350 Sansome St.Suite 300San Francisco, CA 94104
Project**: 0050015FLocation: ANACONDA ER
Sample ID
S-lS-2S-2 MS/MSDS-3S-4S-5S-6
Lab ID
151818-001151818-002151818-003151818-004151818-005151818-006151818-007
LL
This data package has been reviewed for technical correctnessand completeness. Release of this data has been authorizedby the Laboratory Manager or the Manager's designee, as verifiedby the following signatures. The results contained in thisreport meet all requirements of NELAC and pertain only tothose samples which were submitted for analysis.
Signature: Date:
1 JS ignature'-. /' ZUJL^ ' ] faitf *, - S i/Project Man
Date: -<?/
CA ELAP # 1459 Page 1 of
cb Curtis &. Tompkins. Ltd
;_
_4g
"""
«•_.'...t s;f >x
._ v
r ,N,**"]-j
F -
f1 Lab #:Client :Field ID:Lab ID:Matrix:Units :
Moisture :
AnAlyteAluminum' AntimonyArsenicBariumBeryllium
, CadmiumCalciumChromium
, Cobalt' CopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMercuryMolybdenumNickelPotassium
L' Selenium••s*
v?
I~ ;
ilLM-
E
L-i .,
SilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZinc
Target Analyte
151818Ecolocrv & EnvironmentS-6151818-007Soilmg/Kg
3%
Result5,300
ND3.3
460.240.47
4,6003.52.842
5,3002.4
2,500140
NDND
6.3960
NDND
240ND
1514
List Metals
Project^ :Location:Basis:Diln Fac:Sampled:Received:
W, ' -420000
2200040
220000
220022000
.4
.7
.22
.44
.088
.22
.44
.88
.44
.4
.13
.44
.020
.88
.88
2222
224488
Satchf Prepared634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963614634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499
05/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/14/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/01
0050015FANACONDA ERdry1.00005/01/0105/03/01
Analyzed05/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/01
Prep AnalysisEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
30503050305030503050305030503050305030503050305030503050
METHODEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
305030503050305030503050305030503050
EPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B74716010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B
ND= Not Detectedj^ RL= Reporting Limit""" Page 1 of 1
cb Curtis &. Tompkins. Ltd
Target Analyte List Metals
Lab #:Client :Field ID:Lab ID:Matrix:Units:
Moisture :
AnalyteAluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMercuryMolybdenumNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZinc
151818Ecolocrv & EnvironmentS-5151818-006Soilmg/Kg
8%
Restilt9,600
ND3.8540.350.77
4,4005.05.1
1,30010,000
3.44,0001700.0631.29.4
1,5001.6
ND130
ND1919
Project^:Location:Basis:Sampled:Received:
*982000024009
980240000
2400
24000
&
.9
.24
.49
.098
.24
.49
.98
.8
.15
.49
.021
.98
.98
.24
.24
.24
.49
.98
Dilti J?a20.001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.00020.0020.001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.000
te Batch!634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963614634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499
Prepared05/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/14/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/01
0050015FANACONDA ERdry05/01/0105/03/01
Analyzed05/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/01
3EPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
30503050305030503050305030503050305030503050305030503050
METHODEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
305030503050305030503050305030503050
EPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
-
^
alysi.! J6010Beoiop^eoio;601066010B60106010_J'6010B6010- ]6010 |6010B*6010B ,6010 \6010B-'74716010 |6010_J6010B6010"!6010 16010?6010B6010 IeoioJ*
ND= Not DetectedRL= Reporting LimitPage 1 of 1
j
cb Curtis &. Tompkins. Ltd
•
-Lab #:Client:Field ID:Lab ID:Matrix:Units :
Target Anaiyte List Metals •
151818Ecology t EnvironmentS-4151818-005Soilmg/Kg
Project :Location:Basis:Sampled:Received:
0050015FANACONDA ERdry05/01/0105/03/01
Moisture: 9%
-~i' Analytef Aluminum
E Antimony_» Arsenic
Bariumtvi' BerylliumCadmiumk_
CalciumChromium
1 f Cobalt•-? Copper
j IronI ; Lead|_. ' Magnesium
Manganese." " Mercury§ *"'1 f Molybdenum•_*
*-'
NickelPotassium
L SeleniumSilverSodium
1 i Thalliumi -j Vanadium
1 Zinc
Restalt-13,000
ND4.3640.421.1
4,5006.47.4
1,30014,000
4.96,1003000.0770.94
132,100
0.97ND
190ND
2526
J&r " £*ila Jfac fcafcchi epared942.80.240.470.0940.24240.470.949.4940.14240.470.0210.940.94
240.240.24
240.240.470.94
20.001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.00020.0020.001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.000
634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963614634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499
05/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/14/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/01
Analyzed;05/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/01
" fccep AnalysisEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
30503050305030503050305030503050305030503050305030503050
METHODEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
305030503050305030503050305030503050
EPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B74716010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B
ND= Not DetectedRL= Reporting LimitPage 1 of 1
cb Curtis & Tompkins Ltd
Target Analyte List Metals
Lab #:Client:Field ID:Lab ID:Matrix:Units:
Moisture :
AnalyteAluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMercuryMolybdenumNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZinc
151818Ecology &S-3151818-004Soilmg/Kg
6%
EnvironmentProject :Location:Basis :Sampled:.Received:
Hesraflt J&, j&ilu ?ac Batchf Prepared5,100
ND2.0390.240.47
9,0003.42.886
5,4001.9
2,900140
NDND
6.71,100
NDND
110ND
1412
420000
48000040240000240024000
.8
.9
.24
.48
.096
.24
.48
.96
.48
.8
.14
.48
.020
.96
.96
.24
.24
.24
.48
.96
1.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.00020.001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.000
634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963614634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499
05/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/14/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/01
0050015F —ANACONDA ERdry05/01/0105/03/01
Analysed05/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/01
fcrepEPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050METHODEPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050EPA 3050
t
-*!
Analysis ~_*EPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B74716010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B
-*
^:=3
I*
-I
•i|
Mvj
1
*<]_J
1
|
1_J
1
J
ND= Not DetectedRL= Reporting LimitPage 1 of 1
j
cb Curtis &. Tompkins. Ltd
; ; % Target Attalyte List Metals
Lab #:Client:Field ID:Lab ID:Matrix:Units :
151818Ecology & EnvironmentS-2 MS/MSD151818-003Soilmg/Kg
Project^ :Location:Basis :Sampled :Received :
0050015FANACONDA ERdry05/01/0105/03/01
Moisture:
_».
-
_
-fc_
^
t *imf
=
L-I 1
b.
L *
•
i
b.
AnalyteAluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMercuryMolybdenumNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZinc
Itesislt7,800
ND3.8490.270.75
3,7005.05.3
1,1009,700
4.24,5001400.191.0
101,600
1.3ND
150ND
1917
*£'912.70.230.460.0910.23
230.460.919.1910.14
230.460.0200.910.91
230.230.23
230.230.460.91
Mitt fac20.001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.00020.0020.001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.000
Batch*634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963614634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499
Prepared05/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/14/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/01
Analyzed05/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/01
3?rep AnalysisEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
30503050305030503050305030503050305030503050305030503050
METHODEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
305030503050305030503050305030503050
EPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B74716010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B
irJM
ND= Not Detected~ RL= Reporting Limit""" Page 1 of 1
cb Curtis & Tompkins Ltc
- , Target Analyte List Metals ••
Lab #:Client :Field ID:Lab ID:Matrix:Units:
Moisture :
AnalyteAluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMercuryMe 1 ybdenumN'ickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZinc
151818Ecology & EnvironmentS-2151818-002Soilmg/Kg
6%
Result7,300
ND3.6510.310.74
3,9004.65.9
1,30011,000
4.13,9001700.15
ND10
1,5001.1
ND180
ND1818
Project :Location:Basis:Sampled :Received:
&X< JOiln ?ac BatchS Prepared420000
250099802500002500
25000
.9
.9
.25
.49
.098
.25
.49
.98
.8
.15
.49
.021
.98
.98
.25
.25
.25
.4998
1.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.00020.0020.001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.000
634996349963439634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963614634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499
05/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/14/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/01
0050015FANACONDA ERdry05/01/0105/03/01
Analyzed05/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/01
*
1
-a
fcrep Analysis. -s-iEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
30503050305030503050305030503050305030503050305030503050
METHODEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
305030503050305030503050305030503050
EPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
6010B "f6010B 16010B --6010B &|6010B 16010B !6010B y?6010B 16010B '|6010B i6010B "I*6010B 1,6010B I6010B -J7471 16010B i6010B 16010B [6010B \6010B i6010B "T6010B I6010B f6010B -4
ND= Not DetectedRL= Reporting LimitPage 1 of 1
cb Curtis & Tompkins. Ltd
r~
Lab #:Client:Field ID:Lab ID:Matrix:Units:
Target Analyte List Metals
151818Ecology & EnvironmentS-l151818-001Soilmg/Kg
Project*.-Location:Basis :Sampled:Received:
0050015FANACONDA ERdry05/01/0105/03/01
,Moisture: 5%
AnalyteAluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumCadmiumCalciumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMercuryMolybdenumNickelPotassiumSeleniumSilverSodiumThalliumVanadiumZinc
Heffult " $1> £*iltt ?ac Batchf Prepared9,900
ND4.6
650.390.77
17,0005.18.3
89010,000
3.44,400260
NDND
101,200
NDND
2100.32
2221
9720000
480000970
2400.0.0.
240.0.
240.0.0.
.9
.24
.48
.097
.24
.489748
14
480199797
2424
244897
20.001.0001.0001.0001.0001.00020.001.0001.0001.00020.001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.0001.000
634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499634996349963614634996349963499634996349963499634996349963499
05/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/14/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/0105/08/01
Analyzed05/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/14/0105/10/0105/10/0105/10/01
fcrepEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
30503050305030503050305030503050305030503050305030503050
METHODEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
305030503050305030503050305030503050
Analysis "EPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B74716010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B
[i
I
t-
ND= Not Detected_^ RL= Reporting Limit
Page 1 of 1
cbLaboratory Number: 151818Client: Ecology & EnvironmentProject Name: Anaconda ERProject*: 0050015FReceipt Date: 05/03/01
CASE NARRATIVE
This hardcopy data package contains sample results and batch QC results for seven soilsamples received from the above referenced project on May 3, 2001. The samples werereceived cold and intact.
General Chemistry: I
No analytical problems were encountered.
J
cb Curtis & Tompkins Ltd
.. , •- " ~ ; -;'
Lab #:Client:Project/:Analyte:Matrix:Units:Diln Pac:
- .. ,*!*!«.S-lS-2S-2 MS/MSDS-3S-4S-5S-6
•• •• ^ ' " * - ' ' « "" / /**s ' •• , S' %f J \ f ^ \ v. Sv $•• •• '•'•k'v. •• > f f f f' ^-','^--^ - ^ *; i, ••'-<-", y'^--y •> "X s% •• ^ •• "• ^ "• i* " ^ % ••
151818Ecology & Environment0050015FPHSoilSU1.000
t» :J_ ^«Mt>4B»^^ t\ IM«151818-001151818-002151818-003151818-004151818-005151818-006151818-007
;' fv. ^ -, - '-
•••>
1OA-.7.85.45.48.14.14.28.9
"- -;' ' ' > - '
^:r-\ *, ••'/•• '•< 'f ,
Location:Analysis :
Batch/:Sampled:Received :Analyzed:
'' ~*..r.;. .Vf;... •:..•;,...•• ..."
V ^ s\ $ •. \ '•
- V^y X^ - 'v .- ,. ,-- ' - ,ff ^-V* "~ X-> v
% ,v-. % ^ K-. "• f •. '. -. v_j. «. ^ -. •" •
ANACONDA EREPA 9045C
6356005/01/0105/03/0105/10/01
' Itt* ^vl V\ x _._^S _ ' „..,.. ,, , ,\.^^^.; ^
1.01.01.01.01.01.01.0
j_j RL= Reporting LimitPage 1 of 1
cbLaboratory Number: 151818Client: Ecology & EnvironmentProject Name: Anaconda ERProject*: 0050015FReceipt Date: 05/03/01
CASE NARRATIVE
This hardcopy data package contains sample results and batch QC results forseven soil samples received from the above referenced project on May 3, 2001.The samples were received cold and intact.
Total Extractable Hydrocarbons (EPA 8015M):
No analytical problems were encountered.
J
Curtis & TompkinS, Ltd., Analytical Laboratories, Since 1878
2323 Fifth Street. Berkeley, CA 9471O. Phone (51O) 486-O9OO
Laboratory Number 151818
Total Extractable HydrocarbonsEPA 8015(Mod)
C
Ecology & Environment350 Sansome St.Suite 300San Francisco, CA 94104
Project^: 0050015FLocation: ANACONDA ER
Sample ID
S-lS-2S-2 MS/MSDS-3S-4S-5S-6
Lab ID
151818-001151818-002151818-003151818-004151818-005151818-006151818-007
iL
This data package has been reviewed for technical correctnessand completeness. Release of this data has been authorizedby the Laboratory Manager or the Manager's designee, as verifiedby the following signatures. The results contained in thisreport meet all requirements of NELAC and pertain only tothose samples which were submitted for analysis.
Signature: Date:
Signature: \QuuJU' ' f-C/iaer^'Q-5/Project Mafaager
Date: —&
CA ELAP # 1459 Page 1 of
cbSOP Volume: Client ServicesSection: 1.1.2Page- 1 of 1Effective Date: 10-May-99Revision1 1 Number 3 of 3Filename: F:\QC\Forms\QC\Cooler.wpd
COOLER RECEIPT CHECKLIST
Curtis & Tomokins,
Login#:Client:
Date Received:
A.
1.
2.
3.4.5.6.7.
8.
B.
1.2.3.4.
5.6.7.8.9.
Preliminary Examination Phase
. Project:Number_pf Coolers: /
CQhs)<1
Date Opened: 'By (print)•J
Did cooler come with a shipping slip (airbill, etc.)?.If YES, enter carrier name and airbill number: jf/57 SJ-SS"Were custody seals on outside of cooler? YES MOHow many and where? Seal date: Seal name: ^"x^Were custody seals unbroken and intact at the date and time of arrival? YES NOWere custody papers dry and intact when received?Were custody papers filled out properly (ink, signed, etc.)?Did you sign the custody papers in the appropriate place? ,Was project identifiable from custody papers?If YES, enter project name at the top of this form.If required, was sufficient ice used? Samples should be 2-6 degrees C.Type of icer*i&l~ k'** ^ ^^- Temperature: ^. V °d
Login PhaseDate Logged In: By (print):Describe type of packing in cooler:Did all bottles arrive unbroken? ES NOWere labels hi good condition and complete (ID, date, time, signature, etc.)?-*^^* NODid bottle labels agree with custody papers? .( ps NOWere appropriate containers used for the tests indicated? •£%£& NOWere correct preservatives added to samples? YES NOWas sufficient amount of sample sent for tests indicated? ^Es NOWere bubbles absent in VOA samples? If NO, list sample Ids below YES NOWas the client contacted concerning this sample delivery? YES NOIf YES, give details below.Who was called? By whom? Date:
Additional Comments:
Filename F \qc\forms\cooler wpd Rev 1 4/95
k...ONiv,_...AL: , ^.BC\ _,/Office of Enforcement
r - i ""in r'"**- p"--, |~- »*-••_, f* e m , I * II > * »v ^ ££ R^ _ "J1. •
IAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
i :\ t: «75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, California 94105
PROJ NO PROJECT NAME
SAMPLERS (Signature)
STA NO DATE TIMEO
-TR
STATION LOCATION
NO.
OF
CON-TAINERS
^020
LJLAA€>-*
<///>!
5-3 / t30
5-4 r//A/ /HI I'tr*Sv5" ^//M
5-6 f///»/ <??JQ
^5 ±e rC.«*'h*.Hanl
Relinquished by ISigntturc) Date/Time
IH&
Received by: (Sifn»tur»l Relinquished by: (Signtturt) Date /Time Received by: (Signttun)
Relinquished by (Signtturtl Date / Time Received by: IS!gn»tur») Relinquished by: (Stgnttuni Date /Time Received by (Signtturt)
Relinquished by tSigntturt) Date/Time Received for Laboratory bytturt)
Date /Time
SAf*/Distribution Origin*! AccomptnlM ShTpment; Copy to Coordinator Fl«ld FllM
RemarK,
At
9 25728
cb Curtis & Tompkins Ltd
- '
Lab #:Client:Project/:Matrix :Units:Batch#:
' V, ^ ,, "X, '" ijotaii «*ii*<151818Ecology & Environment0050015FSoiltag/Kg63517
et*&lJt Hy drocaiLocation:Prep:Analysis:Sampled:Received:Prenared:
^ Mr -v- ' 'ANACONDA ERSHAKER TABLE -»EPA 8015M05/01/0105/03/0105/08/01
Field ID:
Lab ID:Basis:
S-lSAMPLE151818-001dry
Moisture:Diln Fac:Analyzed:
r < --."" *ttB »fc_ ,-";; - '• ***..-, <"-^< -ItSittlifc "V..? s - '. .Diesel C10-C24 5,300
_..-JflCi .53
5% I,50.00 —05/11/01
!
/*'?• \ '(??¥/• '•"' i' ' , ' ''•,,'.. a
Hexacosane DO 60-136
Field ID:Type:Lab ID:Basis:
ti^ a
S-2SAMPLE151818-002dry
iMilirli* ' - - x -"-" ''-" HI*
Moisture :Diln Fac:Analyzed:
allt ' ' ^' is "f ' 8
6%50.0005/11/01
£ , v^voc , ','..'^ -.„,-.:, ,v ^ ,; ><f v s ,
Diesel C10-C24 6,800 53
Hexacosane' .ffg Irfr«*«* J'-DO 60-136
Field ID:Type:Lab ID:Basis:
S-2 MS/MSDSAMPLE151818-003dry
Moisture:Diln Fac:Analyzed:
6%50.0005/11/01
L AnaiviKi »»* ^ JBiLDiesel C10-C24 7,900 53
Hexacosane
Field ID:Type:Lab ID:Basis:
S-3SAMPLE151818-004dry
Moisture :Diln Fac:Analyzed:
6%5.00005/11/01
L. Attaivt*Diesel C10-C24 570
Hexacosane.Surr-jftgafcei ^££2.
94i__L.
60-136
'•t
jDO= Diluted OutND= Not DetectedRL= Reporting LimitPage 1 of 2
t
cb Curtis &. Tompkins. Ltd
Laboratory Number: 151846Client: Ecology & EnvironmentProject Name: Anaconda ERProject*: 005001SFReceipt Date: 05/07/01
CASE NARRATIVE
This hardcopy data package contains sample results and batch QC results for six liquidsamples received from the above referenced project on May 7, 2001. The samples werereceived at ambient temperature and intact.
!|*"" General Chemistry:
tjf No analytical problems were encountered.
N
CurtiS & Tompklns, Ltd.. Analytical Laboratories, Since 18782323 Fifth Street Berkeley, CA 94710, Phone (510) 486-0900, Fax (510) 486-0532
Laboratory Number 151846
Ecology & Environment350 Sansome St.Suite 300San Francisco, CA 94104
Project^: 005001SFLocation: Anaconda ER
Sample ID Lab ID
This data package has been reviewed for technical correctnessand completeness. Release of this data has been authorizedby the Laboratory Manager or the Manager's designee, as verifiedby the following signatures. The results contained in thisreport meet all requirements of NELAC and pertain only tothose samples, which were submitted for analysis.
Signature:
Signature':
Date: 1
Date: -Proj ect Manage?
J
*r
j
CA ELAP # 1459 Page 1 of
cbSOP Volume Client ServicesSection. 1.12Page 1 of 1Effective Date 10-May-99Revision: 1 Number 3 of 3Filename- F:\QC\Forms\QC\Cooler.wpd
COOLER RECEIPT CHECKLIST
Curtis & Tompkins /
Loeinfl: /,£ / f ffi" Date Received: 5/7/<?fClient: Ea?/^» Q*J £ j iV</>j»™Tqf Project:
Number of Coolers:
A.
1.
2.
3.4.5.6.7.
8.
1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.
Preliminary Examination PhaseDate Opened :_S/ZZ___ By (print):.Did cooler come with a shipping slip (airbill, etc )?If YES, enter carrier name and airbill number: hr/g.X''Were custody seals on outside of cooler?How many and where? "XlW/fotk- Seal date-S/3/g(
sign) A
Were custody seals unbroken and intact at the date and time of arrival?Wert custody papers dry and intact when received9
Were custody papers filled out properly (ink, signed, etc.)?Did you sign the custody papers in the appropriate place?Was project identifiable from custody papers?If YES, enter project name at the top of this form.If required, was sufficient ice used? Samples should be 2-6 degrees CType of ice: PU?X.fc. Temperature: fl^/i.
YES
B. Login Phase /ogn se r*n/t/( \Date Logged In: *l(( ' By (print): Job ''Describe type of packing in cooler: &Vro4o*A c*>l*r M I»ft7b0«r/Did all bottles arrive unbroken? ..... ..........Were labels in good condition and complete (ID, date, time, signature, etc.)?..Did bottle labels agree with custody papers? ....................................................Were appropriate containers used for the tests indicated? .................................Were correct preservatives added to samples?Was sufficient amount of sample sent for tests mdicat d? ............................Were bubbles absent in VGA samples? If NO, list sample Ids belowWas the client contacted concerning this sample delivery? ................................If YES, give details below.Who was called? _ _ By whom? _ Date:
Additional Comments:
^LSIGNATURE*
HUNT NAME TTOE Oiupeaar. AniOya or Tidmidmiaan) „ _ _err/tf-T
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYOffice of Enforcement
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
REGION 9
75 Hawthorne StreetSan Francisco, California 94105
PROJ NO
OC^OOISP
PROJECT NAME
SAMPLE RS* (Signature!
STA NO DATE TIME STATION LOCATION
NO
OF
CON-TAINERS
EMARKS
V-l-fy X X msftnsp TCtpV-t-HC X X
5jlk XV-3-1* tyi/o X X KV-4- X X\M-H
? X X
Normal Turn Around 1\M.
to;Br±
Relinquished by (Signature! Date /Time Received by: ($ign»tun) Relinquished by: (Sign»wr»i Date /Time Received by: iSign»turt)
Relinquished by (Sigmtunl Date /Time Received by: (Sigruturti Relinquished by: (Signttunl Date/Time Received by ISigntturtl
Relinquished by (Sigmturg) Date/Time Received for Laboratory by:tSigndurtl
Date /Time
Distribution Origin*! Accompenie* Shipment, Copy to Coordinator Field Filet1 ' i i i i r i i
Remark, 01ll
i i i i
cb Curtis & Tompkins. Ltd
! J Flash Point - s
Lab #:Client:Proiecttt :Analyte :Matrix:Units :Basis:Diln Fac:
151846Ecology & Environment005001SFFlash PointMiscell.degFwet1.000
Location:Prep:Analysis :Batchtf :Sampled:Received:Analyzed:
Anaconda ERMETHODASTM D-936368905/01/0105/07/0105/i7/01
Fi«ld IDV-l-HCV-3-HCV-4-HC
&ab 10 Result151846-002 250151846-004 250151846-006 250
R£1.01.01.0
,*>'.
S u«U
RL= Reporting LimitPage 1 of 1
cb Curtis &. Tompkins Ltd
PH
Lab #:Client:Proiectff:Analyte :Matrix:Units :Diln Fac :
' Field Il>V-l-AGV-2-AGV-4-AG
151846Ecology & Environment005001SFpHMiscell .SU1.000
Z,zd> Jp - Result151846-001 <1.0151846-003 2.5151846-005 <1.0
Location:Prep:Analysis :Batchtt :Sampled:Received:Analyzed:
Anaconda ERMETHODEPA 904 5C6350505/01/0105/07/0105/08/01
Rt -.1.01.01.0
—t •*
M
I iM
RL= Reporting LimitPage 1 of 1
cb Curtis &. Tompkins Ltd
Laboratory Number: 151846Client: Ecology & EnvironmentProject Name Anaconda ERProject*: 005001SFReceipt Date: 05/07/01
CASE NARRATIVE
This hardcopy data package contains sample results and batch QC results for six liquidsamples received from the above referenced project on May 7, 2001. The samples werereceived at ambient temperature and intact.
Metals f EPA 601 OB):
«, The recoveries for barium and silver in the matrix spike were outside the acceptable QClimits. The recoveries for both metals were within acceptable QC limits in the matrix spike
"" duplicate so the quality of the sample data should not be affected.f
The concentration of cadmium in the matrix spike rendered the spike amount insignificant."" The corresponding matrix spike duplicate was acceptable so the quality of the sample data''"' should not be affected.
The recoveries for the matrix spike and its duplicate for mercury (batch number 63635;MSS Lab ID 151846-001) were below the acceptable QC limits. The recoveries for the
_ matrix spike and its duplicate for mercury (batch number 63635; MSS Lab ID 151934-001)^ were within acceptable QC limits so the quality of the sample data should not be affected.T' No other analytical problems were encountered.
Curtis & TompkinS, Ltd,, Analytical Laboratories, Since 18782323 Fifth Street, Berkeley, CA 94710, Phone (510) 486-0900, Fax (510) 486-0532
Laboratory Number 151846
Ecology & Environment350 Sansome St.Suite 300San Francisco, CA 94104
Project^: 005001SFLocation: Anaconda ER
Sample ID
V-l-AGV-3-HCV-4-AG
Lab ID
151846-001151846-004151846-005
This data package has been reviewed for technical correctnessand completeness. Release of this data has been authorizedby the Laboratory Manager or the Manager's designee, as verifiedby the following signatures. The results contained in thisreport meet all requirements of NELAC and pertain only tothose samples-which were submitted for analysis.
Signature: Date:Opyat tkj /Manager
/ Y iSignature: / (Occo }^^OJtf'c\
Project Man&gerVa j
Date: 6 11 1/0f
CA ELAP # 1459 Page 1 of
cb Curtis &. Tompkms, Ltd
TCLP Jfetals y ,
Lab #:Client :Proiecttt:Field ID:Type:MSS Lab ID:Lab ID:Matrix:Units:
151846Ecology & Environment005001SFV-l-AGSDUP151846-001QC145018TCLP Leachateug/L
Location:Prep:Analysis :Diln Fac:Batchtf :Sampled:Received:Prepared :Analyzed:
Anaconda EREPA 3010EPA 6010B200.06352205/01/0105/07/0105/09/0105/18/01
;Anaiy1^ArsenicBariumCadmiumChromiumLeadSeleniumSilver
MSS R<s*tilt<1,000<2,000
2 ,2405,3602,580
<1,000<1,000
RftffUlfcNDND
2 ,2005,1802,520
NDND
XL1,0002,0001,0002 ,000
6001,0001,000
RPDNCNC232NCNC
Lim42202520294030
' V
L*
__ NC= Not CalculatedND= Not DetectedRL= Reporting Limit
RPD= Relative Percent Difference" Page 1 of 1
Lab ff:Client:Proiectft:Analyte :Field ID:MSS Lab ID:Matrix:Units:Diln Fac:
151846Ecology & Environment005001SFMercuryzzzzzzzzzz151934-001Waterug/L1.000
Location:Prep:Analysis:Batchtt :Sampled:Received:Prepared:Analyzed:
Anaconda ERMETHODEPA 74706363505/10/0105/10/0105/15/0105/15/01
, . SyjS* tail.. ID K§S 'ji'fill - ; Sp|k*d R ft|$k %REC fetal*!*' SSJP J»dLttMS QC145429MSD QC145430
<0. 05300 5.0005.000
5.2505.370
105 80-114107 80-114 2 22
RPD= Relative Percent DifferencePage 1 of 1
8-oVi
9?
L... ( I I Ia
I I
cb Curtis & Tompkins Ltd
Lab #:Client:Units:Sampled:
151846Ecoloov &ug/L05/01/01
TCLP Metals
Project!*:Environment Location:
Received:
-005001SFAnaconda ER05/07/01
Field ID:Type:
V-l-AGSAMPLE
Lab ID;Matrix:
151846-001TCLP Leachate
L
1L
AnalvteArsenicBariumCadmiumChromiumLeadMercurySeleniumSilver
Result ..-..NDND2,2005,4002,600
4.1NDND
1,2,1,2,
1,1,
Jti0000000000006002.0
000000
Diln Fac200.0200.0200.0200.0200.01.000200.0200.0
Batch#6352263522635226352263522636356352263522
Prepared05/09/0105/09/0105/09/0105/09/0105/09/0105/15/0105/09/0105/09/01
Analyzed05/18/0105/18/0105/18/0105/18/0105/18/0105/15/0105/18/0105/18/01
'r«t>EPA 3010EPA 3010EPA 3010EPA 3010EPA 3010METHODEPA 3010EPA 3010
AnalvsisEPA 6010BEPA 6010BEPA 6010BEPA 6010BEPA 6010BEPA 7470EPA 6010BEPA 6010B
I ".Field ID:— Type:
V-3-HCSAMPLE
Lab ID:Matrix:
151846-004TCLP Leachate
U8!V
f >'I S_*.'
AnalvteArsenicBariumCadmiumChromiumLeadMercurySeleniumSilver
ResultNDNDNDNDND
6.4NDND
SI* '1,0002,0001,0002,0006002.0
1,0001,000
Diln ?ac Batchf Prepared Analyzed l>r«o200.0 63522 05/09/01 05/18/01 EPA 3010200.0 63522 05/09/01 05/18/01 EPA 3010200.0 63522 05/09/01 05/18/01 EPA 3010200.0 63522 05/09/01 05/18/01 EPA 3010200.0 63522 05/09/01 05/18/01 EPA 30101.000 63635 05/15/01 05/15/01 METHOD200.0 63522 05/09/01 05/18/01 EPA 3010200.0 63522 05/09/01 05/18/01 EPA 3010
Anal vs isEPA 6010BEPA 6010BEPA 6010BEPA 6010BEPA 6010BEPA 7470EPA 6010BEPA 6010B
LJField ID:Type:
V-4-AGSAMPLE
Lab ID:Matrix:
151846-005TCLP Leachate
AnalvteArsenicBariumCadmiumChromiumLeadMercurySeleniumSilver
Result SitNDND
2,5,2,
NDND
3004001004.3
1,2,1,2,
1,1,
000OOP0000006002.0
000000
Diln Fac Batchfl200.0200.0200.0200.0200.01.000200.0200.0
6352263522635226352263522636356352263522
Prepared05/09/0105/09/0105/09/0105/09/0105/09/0105/15/0105/09/0105/09/01
An&lvzed05/18/0105/18/0105/18/0105/18/0105/18/0105/15/0105/18/0105/18/pl
P-A-p ftnalv*! fEPA 3010EPA 3010EPA 3010EPA 3010EPA 3010METHODEPA 3010EPA 3010
EPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPAEPA
6010B6010B6010B6010B6010B74706010B6010B
I •>
ND= Not DetectedRL= Reporting LimitPage 1 of 2
cb Curtis &. Tompkins. Ltd
Lab #:Client:Proiecttf:Field ID:Type:MSS Lab ID:Lab ID:Matrix:Units :
AnalyteArsenicBariumCadmiumChromiumLeadSeleniumSilver
151846Ecology &005001SF
TCLP
Environment
V-l-AGSSPIKE151846-001QC145019TCLP Leachateug/L
j MSS Result<260.0<860.02,240.5,3602,580
734 .0<140.0
Metals.
Location:Prep:Analysis :Diln Fac :Batchtf :Sampled:Received:Prepared :Analyzed:
Spiked1,0002,000200.0
2,0002,0001,000200.0
-
Anaconda EREPA 3010EPA 6010B200.06352205/01/0105/07/0105/09/0105/18/01
Result "670.0
1,3342,3606,9404,3201,770392.0
'
sa
y' '67 65-13X67 * 75-1; i60 NM 70-1W79 70-12487 66-1: :104 65-l_j<196 * 72-125
*= Value outside of QC limits; see narrativeNM= Not MeaningfulPage 1 of 1
HUH-) |P'"l""1J»lM-1i|,_J •"
*- i /-I rf *-"
«*I-»P-«--BJ r""*"""t - „ .. , •_ .r " 3
••;••;: : , «*»»««, - .- ' -Lab ft:Client:Proiectft:Analyte :Field ID:MSS Lab ID:Matrix:Units :Diln Fac:
151846Ecology & Environment005001SFMercuryV-l-AG151846-001 •TCLP Leachateug/L1.000
Location:Prep:Analysis :Batchtt :Sampled:Received:Prepared :Analyzed :
Anaconda ERMETHODEPA 74706363505/01/0105/07/0105/15/0105/15/01
ifyia*! fcate ID »|SiS...S**'ttlf , 1 $&£$$*£ R«mt& - " %RBK! feiwl K3PO- fcilttMS QC145427MSD QC145428
4.100 5.0005.000
5.9105.740
36 * 80-11433 * 80-114 3 22
*= Value outside of QC limits; see narrativeRPD= Relative Percent DifferencePage 1 of 1
8-nc/>
9?
cb Curtis &. Tompkins L'c
Laboratory Number: 151846Client: Ecology & EnvironmentProject Name: Anaconda ERProject #: 005001SFReceipt Date: 05/07/01
CASE NARRATIVE
This hardcopy data package contains sample results and batch QC results for six liquidsamples received from the above referenced project on May 7, 2001. The samples werereceived at ambient temperature and intact.
Total Extractable Hydrocarbons (EPA 8015M):
No analytical problems were encountered.
_J1I
Curtis & TompkinS, Ltd.. Analytical laboratories, Since 18782323 Fifth Street Berkeley, CA 94710, Phone (510) 486-0900, Fax (510) 486-0532
Laboratory Number 151846
Total Extractable HydrocarbonsEPA 8015(Mod)
Ecology & Environment350 Sansome St.Suite 300San Francisco, CA 94104
Project^: 005001SFLocation: Anaconda ER
Sample ID
V-l-HCV-3-HCV-4-HC
Lab ID
151846-002151846-004151846-006
y
E'I
This data package has been reviewed for technical correctnessand completeness. Release of this data has been authorizedby the Laboratory Manager or the Manager's designee, as verifiedby the following signatures. The results contained in thisreport meet all requirements of NELAC and pertain only tothose samples, which were submitted for analysis.
Signature:
Signature:
Date:
Date:Project Manager
CA ELAP # 1459 Page 1 of
cb Curtis & Tompkins Ltd
, - Uotal Extraetable Hydrocarbons - —
Lab #:Client: -Proiect#:Matrix :Units :Basis :Batchtf:
Field ID:Type:Lab ID:
,
151846Ecology &005001SFMiscell.mg/Kgwet63616
V-l-HC 'SAMPLE151846-002
A,ns*lvfce ' s
Diesel C10-C24
:..Hexacosane
Field ID:Type:Lab ID:
Diesel CIO
- -Hexacosane
Field ID:Pype:Lab ID:
Surroaate
V-3-HCSAMPLE151846-004
Analvtd-C24
Suiey-etfjate ^ ' •
V-4-HCSAMPLE151846-006
AnalvteDiesel C10-C24
SurrooateHexacosane
Fype:L,ab ID:
..
BLANKQC145358
AnalvfceDiesel C10-C24
Surrojaate
Environment
Result1,100,000
%RBC J*ijnit8DO 60-136
Result1,100,000
%HBC MttidLtSDO 60-136
Result1, 100, 000
%RBC LimitsDO 60-136
- ResultND
%REC Limits
Location:Prep:Analvsis :Sampled:Received:Prepared :
Diln Fac:Analyzed:
XL9,900
Diln Fac :Analyzed:
KL10, 000
;
Diln Fac:Analyzed:
Rt,10, 000
,
Diln Fac:Analyzed:
llt>400
Anaconda EREPA 3580EPA 8015M05/01/0105/07/0105/14/01
25.0005/16/01
-
25.0005/16/01
25.0005/16/01
,,
1.00005/14/01
' ; ,
f ••
-I1
fa\
1
-1
am*
J
t^i
'
Hexacosane 50-136
DO= Diluted OutND= Not DetectedRL= Reporting LimitPage 1 of 1
