|
Date: |
January 18, 1996 |
|
Time: |
9:00 am - 4:30 pm |
|
Place: |
CSSA, Boerne, TX |
|
Reference: |
Contract F11623-94-D0024 Delivery Order RL17 SOW Para. 3.0.2 Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) Camp Stanley Storage Activity (CSSA) Closures and Integrated Spill and Waste Management Plan Meeting Minutes 1 (CDRL A007) |
|
Subject: |
TIM for CSSA Environmental Projects - Parsons ES - contractor |
The meeting was held in the CSSA building 1 conference room, on January 18, 1996. The following were in attendance:
|
Name |
Organization |
|
Rod Chatham |
CSSA Director, Special Projects CSSA |
|
Brian Murphy |
CSSA, Environmental Officer |
|
Tom Tutweiler |
CSSA |
|
Paul B. Oliver |
CSSA |
|
Jo Jean Mullen |
AFCEE/ERD Brooks AFB |
|
Bill Kessler |
AFCEE/ERC |
|
Rene G. Hefner |
AFCEE/ERC |
|
Ernest Torres |
Inchcape Testing Services |
|
Jerry Pressley |
Inchcape Testing Services |
|
Susan Roberts |
Parsons ES |
|
Julie Burdey |
Parsons ES, contractor |
|
Ken Rice |
Parsons ES |
The purpose of this technical interchange meeting was to discuss environmental projects being performed by Parsons ES at CSSA. The current projects and their contracting mechanisms are listed below.
|
Active Projects |
Contract |
||||
|
SWMU Closures/Integ. Waste Mgt Plan |
AMC Contract RL17, mod 1 |
||||
|
WMU Closures
|
AL/OEB order 126, mod 2 |
||||
|
Groundwater Evaluation (Well 16) |
AL/OEB order 67, mod 3 |
The meeting agenda included an introduction of participants, submitting meeting submittals to attendees (list attached), discussion of laboratory questions and concerns regarding the AFCEE Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), and updates on each project. The following are minutes of the meeting.
Two representatives from Inchcape Testing Services attended the meeting to discuss AFCEE QAPP requirements. Pre-bidding has identified Inchcape as the laboratory that will likely do the analyses for the AFCEE/AMC work at CSSA. Jerry Pressley from Inchcape said that the lab had taken several days to review the QAPP, and they found that they will be able to perform the analyses following the QAPP’s requirements. However, they had a few questions. Bill Kessler from AFCEE said he was willing to help answer their questions and give his opinion, but he did not want to undermine Beth Garland’s role in the project. He added that he may have to defer some decisions to Beth.
A list of Inchcape’s questions was distributed (attachment 1). Each question was discussed in detail, as described below:
Metals Questions:
Inchcape stated that they would rather use single point calibration. They indicated that the multi-point calibration takes more time. Jo Mullen indicated that she thought that the multi-point calibration was required by SW-846. Jerry Pressley said that the method defers to the manufacturer’s recommendations. Bill Kessler asked the lab if their ICP machines were equipped with software to run three standards. Jerry Pressley said that two of their three machines have the software. Bill said that it does not take much extra time to run the multi-point calibration with the software; therefore, AFCEE would prefer that Inchcape use those two machines for running the CSSA samples. Resolution: Inchcape must do daily multi-point calibration for AFCEE/AMC work at CSSA.
Bill Kessler indicated their are no requirements if blanks are under PQL. A corrective action is required if blank is above PQL. Inchcape understood this requirement.
The Inchcape procedure is more stringent than what AFCEE requires, so Bill Kessler thinks that it will likely be acceptable to Beth Garland.
Bill Kessler directed Inchcape to follow the QAPP. He added that Inchcape may request a variance for analytes that have MDLs near PQL levels. Values between the PQL and MDL would be flagged as an estimated value.
Inchcape showed Bill Kessler and Jo Mullen an example of their data package. Bill said that Inchcape does not necessarily have to use the forms in the QAPP, but several important items must be included:
|
All forms must have SDG# (for analytical/extraction batch). |
|
|
Must have a field ID/lab ID cross-reference table. |
|
|
A reporting package must be one analytical batch. |
|
|
Need instrument run log - sequence log. |
|
|
Calibration must be tied to the results. |
|
|
Detection limits must be included on the forms. |
|
|
All QC samples must have unique IDs (such as LCS1, LCS2, not just LCS). |
Susan Roberts suggested that the lab send an example data package (including the items described above) to AFCEE for review. Jerry Pressley said they could send a package to them in about five days. Jerry asked if he should send the package to Parsons ES, or to AFCEE directly. Susan said he could send it directly to AFCEE.
Bill also asked Inchcape if they were aware that the flagging criteria are different. Jerry Pressley said that the lab had reviewed the criteria, and understands the requirements and the ramifications.
GC Questions:
Bill Kessler said that he would rather defer all questions regarding explosives analysis to Beth Garland. Questions 1 through 4 dealt with explosives analysis, and the fact that Inchcape uses the USACE method. Bill suggested that, if the lab would like a variance, they should submit a detailed description of the lab’s procedures & AFCEE will review. The description should provide enough information so that AFCEE just has to say yes or no. If AFCEE accepts the procedure, the lab’s description can be added as a variance to the QAPP.
Bill Kessler said that AFCEE wants samples bracketed by successful calibrations.
Reporting requirements were discussed previously.
& 8. Inchcape said that these questions do not apply to this project, but they were just wanted to know for future reference. Bill Kessler indicated that PQLs are generally 10 times the MDL, but some were lowered based on ARARs.
Julie Burdey added that she spoke with Terra Laboratories about the AFCEE QAPP. AFCEE would like the QAPP requirements to be followed during sampling and analysis of background surface soil samples. Julie indicated that Terra said they did not have any problems or questions about the QAPP, except regarding reporting forms. She added that she would give the list of things which must be included (that Bill Kessler pointed out earlier) to Terra. Jo Mullen asked that Terra also send an example data package to AFCEE.
Actions: Both Inchcape and Terra Labs will send an example data package to AFCEE prior to starting field work.
Following the QAPP discussion, Inchcape personnel and Julie Burdey left the meeting.
Susan Roberts, project manager AMC order RL17, provided an update of the project status (see attachment 2). The revised Work Plan and the Field Sampling Plan (FSP) were delivered to AFCEE and CSSA personnel. A project budget status and a preliminary schedule was also included.
Susan provided details on the project status which included a request for an extension of the January 20th deliverable date for final Work Plan and Sampling Analysis Plan (SAP) which incorporates the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) and the FSP. The extension was requested to allow AFCEE and CSSA necessary time to review revisions on the Work Plan and FSP. In addition, Parsons ES requires the extension to incorporate the AFCEE QAPP into the SAP for the SWMU closures. The extension request of January 31, 1996 was tentatively agreed upon by participating parties.
Susan also asked Jo Mullen when Parsons ES may receive comments back from the review of the Integrated Waste Management Plan. Jo indicated that she will provide notice to Parsons ES when the comments could be expected after she talked with the reviewer. Brian Murphy indicated that CSSA is still reviewing the plan.
Susan indicated that Parsons ES will provide an outline of the proposed closure certification report to CSSA and AFCEE for review and comments. In addition, a draft letter of notification to the TNRCC will be provided for review and comments by CSSA and AFCEE.
Julie Burdey, order 126 project manager, gave an update on the project status (see attachment 3). Most of the work on the project is currently being done at the B-20 site. A crew of ten unexploded ordnance (UXO) personnel have been working at the site for several weeks. A number of additional UXO items have been found, five of which were approximately 1/4-mile from the site.
Julie said that the there is over $400,000 left in the project. Currently scoped work at the B-20 site is estimated to cost $330,000. Background sampling is estimated to cost $24,500, and $5,000 is estimated for air permit finalization. Therefore, there is about $40,000 left which has not been scoped. Rod Chatham indicated that he wanted to make sure that these funds are used before the contract ends (in June). Julie said there were some issues that have come up at the B-20 site which warrant further effort at the site. Surface clearance to the locations where UXO items were found 1/4-mile from site will likely be required by TNRCC. Brian Murphy said that this should be discussed with Richard Clarke (TNRCC). In addition, concern has arisen that UXO may be buried in the area where surface soils metals level exceed RRS1 (central portion of site). Only subsurface magnetic anomalies in the northern portion of the site are currently being removed. When (and if) these soils are removed in the future, they cannot contain any UXO. The remaining $40,000 could be used to do additional work to address these concerns. Brian Murphy added that the UXO concern at the DD site could also possibly be addressed. Julie will estimate costs to do these tasks, so that CSSA and AL/OEB can choose how to spend the remaining funds.
Regarding the schedule, Julie said that field work at the B-20 site will be continuing until mid-February (approximately). Brian added that Army EOD personnel will be conducting a blow-in-place at the site on January 31, 1996. Brian said that he plans to have them detonate all UXO found at the site to date. A controlled burn will be conducted on February 1 and 2. CSSA will provide tanker trucks, and Brian, Tom Tutweiler, and perhaps Col Schmelling will be providing support.
Regarding background sampling, Julie submitted copies of the Sampling Plan for Evaluation of Background Metals Levels in Soil Types at Camp Stanley Storage Activity to the meeting attendees. This version of the plan incorporates comments made by CSSA and AFCEE/AMC on the draft plan. Julie said that the lab has been contacted, and they will be following the AFCEE QAPP. However, she said she was concerned that the lab did not have any questions. She will follow up with the lab to make sure that they understand the QAPP requirements. She will also direct them to submit an example data package. Julie said she hopes that the plan can be submitted to the regulators early next week. Sampling will not be conducted until at least 30 days after it has been submitted (to wait for regulatory approval). However, there is not much time left on the contract.
Susan Roberts, project manager for order 67, provided an update on the project status for order 67 (see attachment 4). The update included budget status as well as the field activities completed, deliverables submitted, and projected activities for next period.
Susan summarized the data from the sampling effort of on-site and off-site wells. CSSA expressed concern over implications of possible contamination of an off-site well. Susan suggested a re-sampling effort and splitting samples between Chemron and Inchcape. CSSA agreed with the effort and provided authorization. Parsons ES is scheduled to resample the wells on Friday, 19 January 1996.
Technical issues were discussed for the oxidation pond. Jo expressed concerns about the data collection and activities associated with the ongoing work at the oxidation pond.