Field Analytical Methods

1. Dynamic Field-Based Strategy for Field Analytical Methods

2. Start: “Define the nature and extent of contamination.” 1 2 3 2 3 2 1 We need more information 2 1 It ends when the $$ runs out!!

3. EXIT ?? EXIT ?? EXIT ?? EXIT ?? Closeout Start here The Historical Process • Identify the site and rapidly charge into the maze • 1980s: • Work needed to be accomplished right away • Limited experience, knowledge • Few tools available for monitoring or cleanup

4. EXIT Closeout Begin only when ready Today: Optimizing the Process • Perspectives first--take stock of the problem; define clear goals • Chart an efficient course toward goals; map a site strategy that uses smart tools • ONLY THEN begin field work, and navigate intelligently toward goals

5. Performance ManagementEffective and Timely Planning Too little commitment to project planning Finish PROJECT EXECUTION STYLE IDEAL COMMITMENT TO PROJECT PLANNING PLAN Do Check TIME Too much commitment to project planning.

6. The Triad Approach to Optimization

7. Applications to Clean-up • All phases of the remedial “pipeline” can benefit from the adoption of the triad approach Closeout Long Term Monitoring Remedial Action Site Investigation

8. Proceed with data collection effort with end goal decision objectives defined • Review & Optimize • Technology • Monitoring Plan • Clean-Up Goals • Operation • Data Issues Define Clean-up Goals Select Best Technology NO NO NO Performance Parameter Selection Is System Performing OK Have Goals Been Met Are Objectives Being Met YES YES YES Performance Evaluation PERIODIC CONSULTATION & REVIEW Field Based Analytical Strategies

9. Data Quality vs. Information Value ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ $ $ $ $ $ $ Few higher quality data pointsLower information value of the data set Many lower quality data points Higher information value of the data set More likely Less likely Goal: A defensible site decision that reflects the “true” site condition

10. Technical Team Development • Assembling the technical team • Getting the right people involved • May be outside the “normal” field-based team • statistician, hydrologist, biologist, chemist

11. Evaluating Resources and Constraints • Assessing team dynamics, expertise, and other constraints • Evaluating in-house options • Identification of and resources to mitigate contingencies • Determining the budget • Establishing the schedule

12. Develop a Communications Strategy • Determine who needs to give input on each type of decision • Specify lines of communication for field decisions • Assess options for data transfer

13. Sift and Sort Data Needs • Group Similar Data Needs • Identify Data Need Overlaps • Balancing Sensitivity Requirements • Meeting Process Requirements Risk GW Data Needs Compliance SW Data Needs Remedy Responsibility

14. Conceptual Site Model Integrating New Information • Developing a conceptual site model (CSM) • A mechanism to communicate key site features • A visual representation of data

15. Identifications of COCs • What you are going to monitor • ID the waste or mediumof interest • dependant on fate and transport potential, exposure scenarios, bioavailability • general chemistry:DO, pH, TOC, bicarbonate..

16. Establish Cleanup Goals/Action Levels • Define Regulatory Requirements • Establish Background and/or Anthropogenic Levels for Inorganic/Organic Parameters • Determine Preliminary Risk-Based Cleanup Goals • Evaluate Practicability to Meet Cleanup Goals • Establish Clean-up Goals with Regulator Concurrence

17. Data Collection and Processing Platform Iterative way to incorporate data into CSM Data Management Tool Soft ware Visual Sampling Plan Output Processing Spatial Depiction Graphical Display

18. Determining Process End Goals • Define the decisions that must be made • Develop decision rules • ID data necessary to support decision making • Determine limits on decision errors

19. Establishing Site Closeout End Goals • Site closure is a process not an endpoint • Institutional Controls • 5-year reviews • Clearly identify when cleanup actions will be modified or stopped Closeout 36 months

20. ?? A MW4 (< 0.01) Source Release Mechanism Transport Media Exposure Point Exposure Route Receptor NORTH SB2 (1,000 / ND) MW2 (< 0.01) ?? ?? Creek SB1 (3,000 / ND) Leaching, Percolation Shallow GW Off-Site Ingestion/ Shower Humans MW1 (0.15) ?? SB4 (200 / ND) Former Solvent Storage Tank Burial Trench TCE/PCE in Soil Volatili- zation Atmosphere On-Site Inhalation Workers, Wildlife Drainage Pattern SB3 (15,000 / ND) ?? MW3 (< 0.07) Potential Potable Supplies A' Desorption in Runoff SW & Sediments Off-Site Contact in River Aquatic Life Refine Field Analytical CSM MW 3 MW 1 MW 4 MW 6 MW 5 ditch 450' MSL Sandy Loam • Using the CSM to define data needs • Integrating new information into the CSM 440' Coarse Sand Sand 430' Clay 420' Clay 410'

21. XRF Field Case Study - Firing Range Small Arms Firing Ranges,Presidio of San Francisco

22. XRF Field Case Study - Firing Range • Problem: Perform full characterization of 8 historic firing ranges for heavy metals at the Presidio of San Francisco. • Decisions: • Where are the ranges? • How can time be saved using XRF? • What criteria should be used in the investigation to determine when to halt further investigation?

23. Requirement & Challenge • Perform rapid and cost effective site investigation of small arms firing ranges • Reduce time needed to characterize ranges • Location of site often not clear, based on very old maps • Provide high quality data set

24. Field X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis An Innovative Solution • “Traditional” (I.e. laboratory based analysis) investigation initially considered • We proposed alternative innovative approach of using field XRF in real time mode using a “dynamic work” plan

25. XRF Basics • Soil sample bombarded by X-ray source • Energy increase excites atoms • Metal atoms re-radiate X-rays - unique wavelength • X-ray detector picks up emissions • Ability to perform multi-metal analysis (e.g. lead, zinc, antimony, copper and barium)

26. XRF Sampling Protocol for the Ranges • Digitize historic maps • Overlay on exiting post maps - locate ranges • Field visit to verify location • Set initial 12 m x 12 m sampling grid to cover berm area and other areas of interest • Locate sample points using portable • GPS (Global Positioning System)

27. Data Management GPS • Use of Global Positioning System to set and find initial sampling points. Allows rapid field based changes. GPS coordinate display unit

28. Dynamic Work Plan Approach • Begin sampling using initial grid • Analyze samples via XRF and post results on site maps • Analytical results dictate vertical/horizontal location of next sample • Development of decision criteria essential to dynamic work plan approach and success of field work • Use site specific levels

29. Example Decision Criteria • If sample results indicate soil sample has >50mg/kg lead, then • take next sample 30 cm deeper at sample location, and • step out 10 meters and take a new surface soil sample. • Reanalyze and repeat vertical and horizontal sample collection until results are less than 50 mg/kg in both vertical and horizontal dimensions.

30. Sample Preparation Items

31. Loading Sample in XRF

32. XRF Field Portable Lab Setup Spectrace 6000

33. XRF Output Display Showing Pb Peak • 20 minutes from receipt of soil sample to analysis results • Quantitative results • Extremely flexible sampling and analysis

34. XRF vs. Laboratory Data Correlation • Excellent agreement between XRF and laboratory samples

35. Advantages of Using XRF • Detection limit for most metals <10 –30 mg/kg • Simplified sample preparation • Quantitative results w/in 20 minutes from receipt of soil sample • Multiple metal analyte list • Extremely flexible sampling and analysis - can “chase contamination”

36. Cost/Time Savings • Traditional Approach Cost • 1 work plan, 2 addenda $54,000 • 3 site mobilizations $ 9,000 • 400 samples $40,000 • 1 report, 2 addenda $54,000 • ~ 11/2 year project management $ 5,000 • Total $162,000

37. Cost/Time Savings, cont. • XRF Approach Cost • 1 work plan $30,000 • 1 site mobilization $ 3,000 • XRF Rental (4 wks) $ 6,000 • 400 XRF samples • Included in rental cost • 70 Lab QC samples $ 7,000 • 1 report $30,000 • Project Management (1/2 yr) $ 1,000 • Total $77,000

38. Regulatory Acceptance • At Presidio SF, Defense Depot Ogden (Utah), Santa Rosa NAAS (Calif), Santa Rosa AAF, Ft. Ord ranges and other sites, have received enthusiastic acceptance from agencies • XRF plus appropriate lab QC accepted

39. Elements of Success • A well thought out dynamic work plan • Pre-established decision criteria • Field personnel (including field chemist) who fully understand the protocols • Large van or small office for sample preparation and analysis

40. Removal Action with Immunoassay Problem: Pesticide contamination of soil in the vadose zone • Focused removal, excavate areas where bags of pesticide were disposed • Characterize to determine the additional extent of pesticide contamination and excavate • Determine how to manage excavated material Decisions:

42. Key Planning Steps • Assemble planning and technical team; • Develop communication strategy; • Develop a CSM; • Develop process for integrating new information into CSM; • Regulators/stakeholders involved throughout process, giving input and buying into plans.

43. Project Data Quality Objectives • Provide analytical results for DDT, cyclodienes (especially dieldrin and endrin) and other identified COCs with quantitation limits that are less than the field/operational action levels in order to guide the removal of contaminated soil from each defined column of soil at the site such that final cleanup goals will be met within a single field mobilization. • Ensure that the turnaround time for the field generated data supports the real-time decision making needs of the dynamic work plan.

44. Project Data Quality Objectives, Cont. • Remove soil in a manner that ensures soil left in place meets the MTCA cleanup standards such that: • no more than 10 percent of sample exceed the cleanup standard, • no sample can exceed two times the cleanup standard; and • the true mean concentration must be below the cleanup standard as measured by a 95% upper confidence limit on the mean. • Provide analytical results that can be used to segregate and classify excavated soil and other remediation wastes for management as solid, hazardous, or dangerous waste according to RCRA and the WA state Dangerous Waste Regulations.

45. Immunoassay Selection • Cross reactivities • Demonstration of applicability - Pilot Studies using actual field matrix • Initial action levels set at 5 ppm for DDT and 0.1 ppm for cyclodienes • Action levels further refined in the field, DDT kit action level raised to 10 ppm.

46. Grid of Pesticide Site Grid Origin x-axis Pre-existing barbed wire fence y-axis Row A FR2/3 FR4/5 Row B Row C Col 1 Col 2 Col 3 Col 4 Col 5 Col 6 Col 7 Col 8 Col 9 North Drawing not to scale

47. Project Phases • Focused removal of pesticide product. • Characterization of the remediation area. • Gross removal of contaminated soil. • Final confirmation sampling for site closure. • Backfilling, grading, and restoration • Characterization and disposal of contaminated materials.

48. Focused Removal Activities

49. Grid Sampling Locations - Characterization Row A FR2/3 FR4/5 Row B Row C Col 1 Col 2 Col 3 Col 4 Col 5 Col 6 Col 7 Col 8 Col 9 Original Remediation Boundary X-Y Coordinate Origin Final Remediation Boundary NorthDrawing not to scale Site Characterization Sample

50. Dividing Push Sample Core into Three 1-Foot Interval Samples Sample Preparation