Model QA Project Plan
PLEASE READ THIS PAGE BEFORE USING THE MODEL QAPP!!
1) Consult EPA QA/R-5, "EPA Requirement for Quality
Assurance Project Plans for Environmental Data Operations"
and EPA QA/G-5 "EPA Guidance for Quality Assurance Project
Plans" before preparing a QAPP.
2) This model QAPP is based on an example Superfund site and
should be used as guidance for the preparation of a QAPP.
Remember that some elements and SOP references may not apply
to your project or you may need to include additional
information not found here. If an element does not apply to
your project, this must be clearly stated in the QAPP.
3) The bold text indicates "boilerplate" language which may
be used in QAPPs prepared for Region 7 projects if the Sops
and procedures included in the boilerplate language will be
used for your project.
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Rawhide Superfund Site
Any town, USA
prepared by Contractors-R-Us
Contractors-R-Us Project Manager Date
Contractors-R-Us QA Manager Date
EPA Project Manager Date
EPA Project Manager Supervisor Date
EPA QA Manger Date
Table of Contents
A. Project Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
A3. Distribution List. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
A4. Project/Task Organization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
A5. Problem Definition/Background. . . . . . . . . . . . .3
A6. Project/Task Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
A7. Quality Objectives and Criteria for Measurement Data .5
A9. Special Training Requirements/Certification. . . . . .5
A10. Documentation and Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
B. Measurement/Data Acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Be. Sampling Process Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
B2. Sampling Methods Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . .6
B3. Sample Handling and Custody Requirements . . . . . . .6
B4. Analytical Methods Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . .7
B5. Quality Control Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
B6. Instrument/Equipment Testing, Inspection, and
Maintenance Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
B7. Instrument Calibration and Frequency . . . . . . . . .7
B8. Inspection/Acceptance Requirements for Supplies and
Consumables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
B9. Data Acquisition Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . .8
B10. Data Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
C. Assessment/Oversight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
C1. Assessments and Response Actions . . . . . . . . . . .8
C2. Reports to Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
D. Data Validation and Usability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
D1. Data Review, Validation, and Verification Requirements9
D2. Validation and Verification Methods. . . . . . . . . .9
D3. Reconciliation with User Requirements. . . . . . . . .9
Figure 1 - Project Organization
Figure 2 - Overall Site Map
Figure 3 - Site Map with Sampling Locations
Analytical Services Request Form
Sampling Supplies Request Form
(Note: The Appendices are not available in this HTML document.
To view the document with the appendices, download the zipped
A. Project Management
A3. Distribution List
Contractors-R-Us: John Smith, Project Manager
Joe Jones, Project Supervisor
Susan James, QA Manager
Mary Brown, Field Team Leader
EPA - Region 7 Mark Johnson, Project Manager
Jane Doe, Project Supervisor
Mike Peterson, QA Manager
Lisa Dixon, Lab Director
A4. Project/Task Organization
The individuals directly involved with the Rawhide project
and their specific responsibilities are outlined below. See
also, Appendix A, Figure 1.
Mark Johnson, EPA Region 7 Project Manager: Overall
coordination of the project and decision maker. Review and
approve QAPP and subsequent revisions in terms of project scope
and objectives. Ensure QAPP implementation.
Mike Peterson, EPA Region 7 QA Manager: Review and approval
of QAPP and subsequent revisions in terms of quality assurance
aspects. Conduct assessments of field activities.
Lisa Dixon, EPA Region 7 Lab Director: Coordination and
scheduling of lab analysis, data review, and validation.
John Smith, Contractors-R-Us Project Manager: Overall
coordination of field work. Oversee preparation of QAPP.
Implement final, approved version of QAPP.
Susan James, Contractors-R-Us QA Manager: Review and
approval of QAPP. Conduct in-house audits of field operations.
Mary Brown, Contractors-R-Us Field Team Leader: Direct the
sampling operations according to the QAPP.
A5. Problem Definition/Background
The Rawhide Superfund Site is a former leather tannery
disposal area (the actual tannery was located elsewhere).
Between 1982 and 1985, tannery waste sludge was landfarmed over
part or all of a 29-acre pasture. "Landfarming" refers to a
process of waste disposal that involves spraying or pouring waste
onto the soil and then disking the waste into the soil. Sludge
containing high levels of chromium compounds was disposed of at
this site. Historical site information indicates that several
portions of the landfarm area have received little or no waste.
High concentrations of chromium III and VI have been
detected in surface soil samples at the landfarm (based upon the
results of a preliminary assessment performed in June 1988).
This may indicate that wastes were dumped on the ground, but not
disked into the soil. Groundwater sampling in wells and springs
within three miles of the site have shown the presence of
chromium and lead at levels below the maximum contaminant level
(MCL) of 0.1 mg/L for chromium and the action level of 0.015 mg/L
Due to the high levels of chromium in the surface soil, the
site has been placed on the National Priorities List (NPL).
The site is currently used to graze cattle. Several
residences are located adjacent to the site (see Appendix A,
Figure 2). Potential human exposure routes identified by the
site risk assessor include ingestion and inhalation of soil
particulates and ingestion of ground water. Chromium VI
compounds are suspected human carcinogens through the inhalation
pathway only. Chromium III compounds are not considered
carcinogenic. Direct contact with chromium compounds can cause a
The potential land use for the site is residential and
residents can be exposed to contaminants in soil and groundwater
via ingestion. They can also be exposed to contaminated
particulates via inhalation. Since the site is on the NPL, a
remedial investigation will be performed to determine which areas
of the soil pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the
environment and require further response action.
A6. Project/Task Description
The purpose of this project is to determine if chromium-contaminated soil exists on-site and if it exceeds the health-based action level established for the site. The objectives for
the project involve measuring the mean concentration of total
chromium in surface soils on site for comparison to the health-based action level. The resulting data will be used to determine
if the site poses a threat to potential residents and to
recommend further response actions. If the mean total chromium
concentration in the surface soil of an exposure unit (see
section B1 for additional information on exposure units [EU])
exceeds 600 ppm, then further assessment or a response action
will be recommended.
A health-based non-carcinogenic action level of 600 PPM for
total chromium has been established for this site because it is
lower than the risk-based carcinogenic PRG of 700 PPM for
hexavalent chromium and is considered more protective (these
action levels were identified in consultation with ATSDR).
The project is scheduled to begin Monday, October 28 and is
expected to last four days. Sampling supplies are requested for
pickup on October 25. (See appendix B for the completed ASR and
SSR.) The activity number for this project is DSZR2 and samples
will be delivered to the lab on Friday, November 1. Surface soil
equipment will be used for sampling and ICAP will be used for
A7. Quality Objectives and Criteria for Measurement Data
The project data quality objective is to provide valid data
of known and documented quality for the exposure units sampled to
determine the mean total chromium concentration for comparison to
the associated action level. The data quality indicators to be
measured are identified below.
The goals for analytical precision and accuracy are
described in R7 ENSV SOP 3122.2C and will be applicable to this
project. The acceptance limit for the precision assessed via
field duplicate samples can be found in the R7 ENSV LAST QCSUM
Representativeness will be addressed by collecting the
samples as described in this document.
Comparability will be addressed by collecting, analyzing,
and reporting the data as described in this document.
A completeness goal of 100% is needed for the project.
Valid data is required for each EU in order to make a decision
regarding the need for further action or no action for that EU.
A9. Special Training Requirements/Certification
No special training requirements or certifications are
required for this project except for the 40-hour HAZWOPER class
and annual refreshers. Information concerning the personnel
qualifications for those individuals performing the work can be
found in the Regional Laboratory Quality Manual and the
Contractors-R-Us Quality Management Plan (approved by EPA on July
A10. Documentation and Records
This information is covered by Region 7 ENSV SOPs 2410.1B,
"LABO Analytical Data Management Procedures" and 2410.10A,
"Analytical Data Submission Packages".
B. Measurement/Data Acquisition
B1. Sampling Process Design
For this project, surface soil is defined as the top 0-2
inches of soil within the geographic boundaries of the 29-acre
landfarm area, excluding forested areas where landfarming and
disposal could not have taken place. The entire site has been
divided into square areas that are approximately 200 x 200 feet.
These areas are approximately one acre (one acre is actually 43,
560 ft2)in size and correspond to the expected residential lot
size (see Appendix A, Figure 3). These areas are referred to as
exposure units (EUs; R7 ENSV SOP 2230.1A, "Procedure for
Collecting Soil Samples and Using the Resulting Data to Calculate
Exposure Unit Statistics"). EUs which overlap the site
boundaries will be combined with EUs having forested areas so
that 20 EUs of approximately one acre will result. A separate
decision will be made for each EU.
The center of each EU will be marked with a wire flag and
composite soil samples will be collected from each EU using a
B2. Sampling Methods Requirements
A systematic grid with nine nodes will be used to collect
three composite samples from each EU. The samples will consist
of nine aliquots collected from each of the nine nodes at a depth
of 0-2 inches in accordance with R7 SOP 2231.12 "Soil Sampling"
(the section addressing the collection of surface soil samples).
Stainless steel spoons will be used to collect the soil aliquots
which will be homogenized in aluminum pie pans. Dedicated
stainless steel spoons and aluminum pie pans will be used for
each exposure unit. The aluminum pie pans will be bagged and
disposed of with the other PPE (i.e., gloves) as described in the
site Health and Safety plan. The stainless steel spoons will be
decontaminated after sample collection is complete in accordance
with R7 ENSV SOP 2231.6A, "Sampling Equipment Decontamination."
Duplicate samples will be collected as composites of nine
aliquots that are offset from the original grid nodes at a
frequency of 10% of all samples collected.
With 20 EUs and three composites per EU, 60 soil samples and
6 duplicates will be collected for a total of 66 soil samples.
Contractors-R-Us will conduct the sampling in accordance
with this QAPP.
B3. Sample Handling and Custody Requirements
Sample containers, preservation, and holding times will be
those found in R7 ENSV SOP 2130.4B, "Sample Container Selection,
Preservation, and Holding Times."
Chain-of-custody and field documentation will be in
accordance with R7 ENSV SOP 2130.2A, "Field Chain of Custody for
Environmental Samples" and R7 ENSV SOP 2130.3B "Identification,
Documentation, and Tracking of Samples," respectively. The time
of collection, location, sample section size, number of aliquots,
and the sample depth will be recorded on field sheets produced by
the EPA LAST system.
B4. Analytical Methods Requirements
The soil samples will be analyzed by the R7 Laboratory in
accordance with R7 ENSV SOP 3122.2C, "Analysis of Metals by TLA
ICAP 61". The typical detection limit for chromium following
this SOP is 0.908 mg/kg which is adequate to meet the action
level of 600 PPMThe overall implementation of the quality
assurance program by the Regional laboratory is addressed in the
R7 ENSV Sops 1640.1, "Region 7 Laboratory Quality Assurance
Project Plan" and 1610.1C, "Regional Laboratory Quality Control
B5. Quality Control Requirements
Duplicate samples will be collected at a frequency of 10% of
all soil samples collected. No split samples, field blanks, or
trip blanks are planned for this project.
Laboratory quality control elements, including spikes and
blanks, will be performed in accordance with the above referenced
analytical SOP and SOP 1610.1C.
B6. Instrument/Equipment Testing, Inspection, and Maintenance
The only field equipment being used during this project are
stainless steel spoons and aluminum pie pans . No field
equipment requiring testing, inspection, and maintenance will be
For the analytical instrumentation, the testing, inspection,
and maintenance will be performed in accordance with the above
referenced analytical SOP and manufacturer's recommendations.
B7. Instrument Calibration and Frequency
No field instruments requiring calibration will be used for
For the analytical instrumentation, the calibration will
performed in accordance with the above referenced analytical SOP
and manufacturer's recommendations.
B8. Inspection/Acceptance Requirements for Supplies and
No special requirements are needed.
B9. Data Acquisition Requirements
No data will be used from other sources.
B10. Data Management
Data management will be in accordance with R7 ENSV Sops
2120.2A, "Document Control" and 2410.1B "LABO Analytical Data
C1. Assessments and Response Actions
The EPA QA manager (or his designee) will conduct an audit
of the field activities for this project as requested by the EPA
project manager according to R7 ENSV SOP 2152.2A, "Conducting On-Site Reviews of Field Sampling Activities." The EPA QA manager
(or his designee) will have the authority to issue a stop work
order upon finding a significant condition that would adversely
affect the quality and usability of the data. The EPA project
manager will have the responsibility for initiating and
implementing response actions associated with findings identified
during the on-site audit. Once the response actions have been
implemented, the EPA QA manager (or his designee) will perform a
follow-up audit to verify and document that the response actions
were implemented effectively.
In-house audits performed by the contractor may be conducted
in accordance with the Contractors-R-Us Quality Management Plan
(approved by EPA on July 1, 1995).
Assessments and response concerning the analytical aspect of
the project are addressed in the Sops 1610.1C, 1640.1A, and
3122.2C. The information covers examples of conditions
indicating out-of-control situations, whom is responsible for
initiating the corrective actions, and what steps may be taken.
C2. Reports to Management
Once the project is complete and the resulting data
obtained, the EPA project manager will prepare a final project
report. The report will include a summary of the activities
performed during the project and the resulting data (along with
any statements about problems concerning data quality). The EPA
project manager will also identify any EU where the mean total
chromium concentration exceeds the action level and recommend the
need for further assessment or recommend a response action. The
report will be forwarded to the EPA project supervisor.
D. Data Validation and Usability
D1. Data Review, Validation, and Verification Requirements
The data will be peer reviewed by a qualified analyst and
the lab Section Manager as identified in R7 ENSV Sops 1640.1A and
1610.1C. The EPA project manager will be responsible for overall
validation and final approval of the data in accordance with
project purpose and use of the data.
D2. Validation and Verification Methods
The data will be validated in accordance with R7 ENSV Sops
1610.1C and 1640.1A. QC spot checks will be performed by the R7
laboratory following the frequency and criteria outlined in R7
ENSV Sops 1640.1A and 1610.5A, "Quality Control Spot Checks of
Regional Laboratory Data Packages."
The EPA project manager will perform the final review and
approval of the data prior to it being entered into the LAST
system as valid. The EPA project manager will look at field
duplicates, matrix spike/matrix spike duplicates, lab blanks, and
lab duplicates to ensure they are acceptable. The EPA project
manager will also compare the sample descriptions with the field
sheets for consistency and will ensure that any anomalies in the
data are appropriately documented.
D3. Reconciliation with User Requirements
Once the data results are compiled, the EPA project manager
will review the field duplicates to determine if they fall within
the acceptance limits as defined in this QAPP. Completeness will
also be evaluated to determine if the completeness goal for this
project has been met. If data quality indicators do not meet the
project's requirements as outlined in this QAPP (including the
accuracy for lab spikes), the data may be discarded and re-sampling may occur. The EPA project manager will evaluate the
cause of the failure (if possible) and make the decision to
discard the data and re-sample. If the failure is tied to the
analysis, calibration and maintenance techniques will be
reassessed as identified by the appropriate lab personnel. If
the failure is associated with the sample collection and re-sampling is needed, the samplers will be retrained.