electronic image products. Images are/67531/metadc... · DISTRIBUTION SHEET To From Page 1 of...

DISTRIBUTION SHEET To From of 1 D i s t r i b u t i o n T.S. Basra Date 05/04/95 Project Title/Work Order EDT No. 242-A EVAPORATOR QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN ECN No. 622104 WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-009,REV. 2

Text Text Only Attach./ EDT/ECN Name MSIN With All Appendix Only

Attach. Only

Cent ra l F i l e s ( 2 ) O.S.T.I. ( 2 ) T.S. Basra (5) K.E. B e l l 1. E. Borneman M.W. Bowman 3.6. Coenenberg S.J. Eber le in D.L. F l y c k t K.D. Fowler J.E. Geary C.J, Geier R.D. Gustavson M.D. Gu th r ie J.M. Jones S.J. L i j e k J.G. K r i s t o f s k i E. Le 0.3. McCain H.K. Meznarich G.L. M i l l e r A.G. Miskho C.H. Mulkey R.J. N i k l a s W.E. Ross J.A. S h e r i f f R.R. True L.W. Vance

L8-04 L8-07 R1-51 T6-06 R2-06 R1-52 H6-24 R2- 12 S6-71 R2-11 S5-07 R2-36 R1-51 R1-43 S5-13 81-42 T6-06 R1-43 R2-12 T6-16 T6-06 H6-20 R1-51 R1-51 S5-07 B1-42 S1-57 H4-16

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

B.H. Von Bargen R1-43 X

A-6000-135 (01/93) WEF067

DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document.

t.y

‘*ECN NI! 622104 3 .....-..............*................. ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE

PuJs lo f Y A

2. ECN Category (mark one) 3. Originator’s Name, Orgmkation, MSIN, and Telephone No. 4. Date

Supplemental [I Tejpal S. Basra, Tank Farms Environmental Engineering, 7C420, 04/28/95 Direct Revision ChangeECN El R1-51,373-5039 Temporary *&Y Supersedure CancelNoid

1 5. Project TitlefNo./Work Order No.

242-A Evaporator Quality Assurance Project Plan (242-A QAPjP) n

n 8. Document Numbers C h g e d by this ECN

(includes sheet no. and rev.)

WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-009, REV. 1

6. Bldg./Sys./Fac. No.

242-A 7. Impact Level

Q I

9. RelatedECNNo(s). 10. Related PO No.

70483 8,11/04/94 N/A 1 la Modificafion Work 1 lb. Work Package 1 1 c. Modification Work Complete 1 1 d Restored to O r i d Con&-

tion (Temp. or Standby ECN only) No. a Yes (SU out Blk. N/A NIA N/A

l l b ) N No (NABlks. l lb , l l c , l l d ) 12. Description of Change

Cog. Engineer Signature & Date Cog. w e e r Signature & Date

The entire document, 242-A Quality Assurance Project Plan, WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-009, REV. 1, is being replaced with WHC-SD-QAPP-009, Rev. 2, ECN# 622 104. Rev. 2 provides QNQC guidance for Sampling and Analysis of candidate feed tank waste in accordance with EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Environmental Data Operations, EPA, 1994, WHC-SD-WM-DQO-014, Rev. I , 242-A Evaporator Liquid Effluent Retention Facility Data Quality Objectives, Von Bargen, 1994, and WHC-SD-WM-EV-060, Rev. 5,242-A Evaporator Waste Analysis Plan, Basra 1995. Synopsis of signflcant changes is as follow: 1) Process condensate sampling requirements at time of discharge to &ERF waste, deleted. 2) Entire Section 2.2.2 Sample collection for process condensate, deleted 3) Entire Section 2.3.2 sample handling and custody requirements for LERF, deleted. liner compatibility, deleted. 4) Table 1 Process condensate stream sampling containers/volume, holding times, and preservation methods. deleted. 5) Table 3 Quality assurance objectives for process condensate steam compliance andytes, deleted 13a. Just5cation (mark Criteria Chmge [XI Design Improvement one> &-Found 0 FacilitateConst. Const. Error/Omission Design Ekror/Omission n 13b. Justification Details The revision of this document implements the deletion of RCRA sampling of process condensate while discharging into the LERF during evaporator operations, Rationale for deletion of process condensate sampling requirements is documented in the Evaporator Data Quality Objective, WHC-SD-WM-DQO-014, Rev. 1.

0 Enwanmental 0 n [I

14. Distribution (include name, MSIN, andno. of copies)

CFFICl.r’,L EELEASE See a attached distribution

A-790G013-1

o f 1 ENGINEERING CHANGE NOTICE

18. Change Impact Review: Indicate the related documents (other than the engineering documents identified on Side 1) that will be affected by the change described in Block 12. Enter the affected document number in Block 19.

[I [I [I [I El [I [I

Tank Calibration Manual

Health Physics Procedure

Spares Multiple Unit Listing

Test ProcedureslSpecification

Component Index

ASME Coded Item

Human Factor Consideration

[I El [I [I [I [I [I

SeismidStress Analysis

Stress/Design Report

lnterface Control Drawing

Calibration Procedure

Installation Procedure

Maintenance Procedure

Engineering procedure

[I [I [I [I [I El 11

SDD/DD

Functional Design Criteria

Operating Specification

Criticality Specification

Conceptual Design Report

Equipment Spec.

Const. Spec.

1. ECN (use no. from pg. 1)

622 1 04

Procurement Spec.

Vendor Information

15. Design 16. Cost Impact

ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION Verification Required [I Yes Additional [I $ Additional [I $ [XI No Savings 4 % Savings w.8 $

Operating Insauction

Operating Procedure [I [I

17. Schedule Impact (days)

Improvement [I NfA Delay [I

[I 11

Computer Software

Electric Circuit Schedule 11 [I

[I [I [I

OM Manual

FSAUSAR

Safety Equipment List

11 [I [I

ICRS Procedure

Process Control ManuaUPlan

Process Flow Chart

[I 11 [I

Operational Safety Requirement

IEFD Drawing

Cell Arrangement Drawing

[I [I

[I [I [I [I

Purchase Requisition Essential M a t e d Specification

Fac Proc Samp Schedule

Inspection Plan

Inventory Adjustment Request

[I -+?/4 .A3 [I [I [I [I

Radiation Work Permit

Environmental Impact Statement

Environmental Report

Envlronmental Permit

19. Other Affected Documents: (NOTE: Documents listed below will not be revised by this ECN.) Signatures below indicate that the signing organization has been notified of other affected documents listed below.

Document NumberRevision Document NumberRevision Document Number Revision

MA 20. Approvals

OPERATIONS AND ENGINEERING Cog Engineer * Tejpal S Basra

Signature

4*d 4- h Cog. Mgr. * R.D. Gustavson p.2. & J J- QA 'Roger True r- Safety Security

Environ. ww& ProjectsPrograms

Tank Waste Remediation System Facilities Operations Restoration & Remediation Operations & Support Services IRM Other Treatment System Plant Engineering

Signature ARCHITECT-ENGINEER PE

QA Safety

Design Environ. Other

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Signature or Letter No.

ADDITIONAL

Date

A-7900-013-3 (06/92) GEF096

P p 3 u f 9 WASTE TANKS ADMINISTRATION Manual WHC-IP-0842

UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTIONS Sect i on 15.9, REV 1 Page 15 o f 25 E f f e c t i v e Date September 3, 1993

.. -

APPENDIX B

Unreviewed Safety Question Forms

FigurS'B-1. Unreviewed Safety Quest ion -"Changes Screening Form. (1 Sheet)

REFERENCE ITEM # ECN #622104 TITLE 242-A EvaDorator Qual i t v Assurance Pro.iect P1 an. WHC-SD-WM-EV-009,

Rev. 2

Does the referenced item: A.

Basis: ECN #622104 does no t make DroDosed chanaes t o t h e f a c i l i t y o r procedures which d i f f e r from condi t i ons described i n WHC-SD-WM-SAR-023, "242-A EvaDora tor lCrys ta l l i ze r Safety Analysis ReDort". Rev. 1-B, o r WHC-SD-W105-SAR- 001. F ina l Safety Anal v s i s Report 242-A Evaporator L i a u i d E f f l u e n t Retention F a c i l i t y " , Rev. 0-C. This ECN imDlements chanqes t o t h e Qua l i t y Assurance Pro jec t Plan which Drovides suidance necessary t o meet OA/QC reauirements f o r c o l l e c t i o n and ana lys is o f candidate feed tank samDles. ImDlementation o f t h i s document has no e f f e c t on the accidents described i n Table 9-1, "Summary o f Radio loq ica l Conseauences".

Make PROPOSED CHANGES t o the f a c i l i t y - o r procedures which d i f f e r from cond i t ions described i n the AUTHORIZATION BASIS documentation?

N/A- NOA Ye s /May be-

B.

Basis: ECN #622104 does no t make DroDosed chanqes t h a t represent cond i t ions t h a t have no t been anal vzed i n WHC-SD-WM-SAR-023. "242-A EvaDorator lCrvsta l I i z e r Safety Anal v s i s ReDort" , Rev. 1-B. Chaoter 9 o r WHC- SD-W105-SAR-001. F ina l Safety Anal v s i s ReDort 242-A EvaDorator L i q u i d E f f l u e n t Retention F a c i l i t y " , Rev. 0-C. This ECN imDlements chanses t o t h e Qua l i t y Assurance Pro jec t Plan which Drovides suidance necessary t o meet QA/OC reauirements f o r c o l l e c t i o n and analys is o f candidate feed tank samDles. ImDlementation o f t h i s document has no e f f e c t on the accidents described i n Table 9-1, "Summary o f Radio loq ica l Conseauences" . C. Describe t e s t s o r experiments which d i f f e r from those described i n the

AUTHORIZATION BASIS documentation? N/A- NOL Y es/Maybe-

Basis: ECN #622104 does no t describe any t e s t s o f exDeriments a t a l l . This ECN im lements chanqes t o t h e Qua l i t y Assurance Pro.iect Plan which Drovides guidance necessary t o meet OA/QC reauirements f o r c o l l e c t i o n and ana lys is o f candidate feed tank samDles. ImDlementation o f t h i s document has no e f f e c t on the accidents described i n Table 9-1, "Summary o f Radio loq ica l Conseauences".

Make PROPOSED CHANGES t h a t represent cond i t ions t h a t have no t been analyzed i n t h e AUTHORIZATION BASIS?

N/A- NO& Ye s /May be-

1'9,2 L/ o?=y WASTE TANKS ADMINISTRATION Manual WHC-IP-0842

Sect i on 15.9, REV 1 UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTIONS Page 16 of 25

Effective Date September 3, 1993

D. Is a change in a TSR, OSR, or compliance plan to OSR involved?

Basis: ECN #622104 does not chanue any TSR. OSR. or comliance plan to OSR as described in WHC-SD-WM-SAR-023. "242-A EvaDorator/Crvstall izer Safetv Anal vsis ReDort", Rev. 1-6. ChaDter 9 or WHC-SD-W105-SAR-001. Final Safetv Analvsis ReDOrt 242-A Evaporator Liauid Effluent Retention Facilitv". Rev. 0-C. This ECN imlements chanqes to the Qual itv Assurance Project Plan which Drovides guidance necessarv to meet OA/OC reauirements for collection and analysis of candidate feed tank samoles. ImDlementation of this document has no effect on the accidents described in Table 9-1. "Summarv of Radiolouical Consequences".

N/A- NOL Ye s /May be-

USQE #l'Brian Von Barqen USQE #2-E?vis Le Print Name Pr int Name

S i g V Date ~ 3 k r Date

/- Signature

RELEASE AUTHORIZATION

Document Number: WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-009, REV 2

Document Title: 242-A Evaporator Quality Assurance Plan

Release Date: 5/4/95

This document was reviewed following the procedures described in WHC-CM-3-4 and is:

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

WHC Information Release Administration Specialist:

/7 / May 4, 1995

/ #:’ ,fP firs M. Broz

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER. Reference herein t o any spec i f i c comnercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessari ly cons t i t u te o r imply i t s endorsement, recomnendation, o r favoring by the United States Goverrment o r any agency thereof o r i t s contractors or subcontractors.

This repor t has been reproduced from the best avai lab le copy. Pr in ted i n the United States o f America. from:

Avai lable in paper copy and microfiche. Avai lable t o the U.S. Department of Energy and i t s contractors

U.S. Department of Energy O f f i ce o f S c i e n t i f i c and Technical Information (OSTI) P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831 Telephone: (615) 576-8401

Available t o the publ ic from: U.S. Department of Comnerce National Technical Information Service ( N T I S ) 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 Telephone: (703) 487-4650

SUPPORTING DOCUMENT 2. Title

242-A Evaporator Quality Assurance Plan, WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-009, Rev. 2

5. Key Words

242-A Evaporator, Double Shell Tank, Waste Analysis, Quality Assurance, Data Quality Objectives, Waste Sampling and Characterization of candidate feed tank(s) at the Evaporator.

3. Number 4. Rev No.

WHC-SD- WM-QAPP-009 Rev. 2

6. Author

Name: Tejpal S. Basra

OrganizatiotdCharge Code 7c4 > /

7. Abstract

This quality assurance project plan (QAPjP) provides planning, implementation, and assessment guidance according to the requirements in EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Enviommental Data Operations, EPA QAm-5, January 1994 for compliance and non-compliance analytes in the candidate feed stream.

8.

ce of work under

the accuracy, completeness, information, apparatus, pro

not infringe privately owned

4 state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof

9. Impact Level Q

10. RELEASE STAMP

A-6400-073 (1 1/91) {EF) WEF124

RECORD OF REVISION

242-A EVAPORATOR OUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN

(1) D o c u i b m t N-r

WHC-SD-WM-QAPP- Page 1 009

(3) Revision (4) Description o f Change - Replace, Add, and Delete Pages

Rev. 1 ~3 (7) Replace Rev. 0 w i t h Rev. 1 ~ ~ - 7 o C l s 3 8

RS 2 Replace Rev. 1 (ECN 70483g) w i t h Rev. 2 0 I :mr - is53775 r1216/93

(ECN 622104)

I I

Authorized for Release

(5 ) Cog. Engr. 1 (6) Coq. Wqr. Dare

& ,3. LJr- 44h

?.> &&- q - & G f

/

I I 1

I

I

242-A EVAPORATOR QUALITY ASSUWCE PROJECT PLAN

WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-009, REV.2

Tejpa l S. Basra WESTINGHOUSE HANFORD COMPANY

APRIL 2 8 , 1995

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi- bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer- ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recorn- mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28. 1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPPM39 Rev . 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii IST OF ACRONYMS AND TERMS . . . . . . . . . . . iii 1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 PROBLEM DEFINITION/BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 PROJECT/TASK DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.4 QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA FOR MEASUREMENT DATA . 6

1.4.1 Uses of the Data . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.4.2 Measurement Performance Criteria . . . . . 6

1.5 CONFLICT WITH OTHER DOCUMENTS . . . . . . . . 7 2.0 MEASUREMENT/DATA ACQUISITION . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.1 SAMPLING PROCESS DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.2 SAMPLE COLLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.3 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY REQUIREMENTS . . . . 11 2.4 ANALYTICAL METHODS REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . 12 2.5 QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . 24 2.6 INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING, INSPECTION. AND . . .

MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . 27 2.7 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY . . . . . 28

3.0 ASSESSMENT/OVERSIGHT . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 3.1 ASSESSMENTS AND RESPONSE ACTIONS . . . . . . 28 3.2 REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . 29

4.0 DATA REVIEW VERIFICATION AND USEABILITY . . . . . 31 4.1 DATA DELIVERABLES. REVIEW. AND VERIFICATION . . .

REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 4.2 CORRECTIVE ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . 32

5.0 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

i

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-003 Rev. 2

L I S T OF TABLES

Table 1 Quality Assurance Objectives for Candidate Feed Tank Stream Compliance Analytes . . . . . . . . . . 13

Table 2. Quality Assurance Objectives for Evaporator's Candidate Feed Tank Stream Noncompliance Analytes. . . . . . 16

Table 3. QC Samples and Acceptance Limits for Candidate Feed Tank sample analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Table 4. Laboratory QA Plan Sections Describing Various Assessment Activities. . . . . . . . . . . . 30

L I S T O F FIGURES

Figure 1. Logic for Candidate Feed Tank Sample Collection, Analysis, and Validation. . . . . . . . . . . . 4

ii


ACL ALARA DST DQO E PA EQL HATS ICP LCS MOU MS/MSD PIC PMI POP Pro j ect PQL QA/QC RCRA RPD SDLA TC TCP TIC TSPE TWRS TFEE WAP WHC

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND TERMS

Analytical Chemistry Laboratories As Low As Reasonably Achievable Double-Shell Tank Data Quality Objective U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Estimated Quantitation Limit Hanford Action Tracking System Inductively Coupled Plasma Laboratory Control Standard Memorandum of Understanding Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate Person-in-Charge Program Management and Integration Plant Operating Procedure 242-A Evaporator Project Practical Quantitation Limit Quality Assurance/Quality Control Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Relative Percent Difference Sample Data Laboratory Administration Total Carbon Tank Characterization Plan Total Inorganic Carbon Treatment System Plant Engineering Tank Waste Remediation System Tank Farms Environmental Engineering Waste Analysis Plan Westinghouse Hanford Company

iii

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPP- Rev. 2

1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

1.1 PROBLEM DEFINITION/RACKGROUNJJ

The purpose of t h i s q u a l i t y assurance p ro jec t p lan (P lan ) i s t o provide requirements f o r a c t i v i t i e s pe r t a in ing t o sampling, shipping, and ana ly tses . These requirements include, bu t a r e not l imi ted t o , sample r ece ip t , handling and s torage , a n a l y t i c a l measurements, submi t ta l of da t a de l iverables , a rch iv ing s e l e c t e d por t ions of samples, re turn ing unneeded sample ma te r i a l t o Westinghouse Hanford Company ( W H C ) , and/or sample d i sposa l assoc ia ted wi th candidate feed tank samples f o r t h e 242-A Evaporator p r o j e c t . I f t a sks are added o r de l e t ed l a t e r , o r i f t h e labora tory makes opera t ing changes o r procedural modi f ica t ions pe r t inen t t o t h i s scope, t h e work au thor iza t ion document ( see paragraph 3 of Sect ion 1 .3 ) may have t o be modified.

This p lan r equ i r e s o n s i t e and o f f s i t e l a b o r a t o r i e s t o conform t o t h e requirements contained i n t h i s document. Conformance t o these requirements by t h e labora tory w i l l he lp ensure t h a t q u a l i t y da t a i s generated and t h a t t he 242-A Evaporator i s opera t ing i n a s a f e and compliant manner.

The purpose of t h e 242-A Evaporator p ro jec t i s t o reduce t h e volume of aqueous waste i n t h e Double Shel l Tank ( D S T ) System and w i l l r e s u l t i n considerable savings t o t h e d i sposa l of mixed waste. The 242-A Evaporator feed stream o r i g i n a t e s from DSTs i d e n t i f i e d a s candidate feed tanks . The 242-A Evaporator reduces t h e volume of aqueous waste contained i n D S T s by b o i l i n g o f f water and sending t h e condensate ( c a l l e d process condensate) t o t h e Liquid Eff luent Retention F a c i l i t y (LERF) s torage bas in where it i s s to red p r i o r t o t reatment i n t h e Eff luent Treatment F a c i l i t y ( E T F ) . The process condensate must conform t o any waste acceptance c r i t e r i a contained i n t he LERF/ETF WAP. A f t e r going through t h e 242-A Evaporator, t h e concentrated waste ( s l u r r y ) i s re turned t o t h e DST Sytem and must conform t o waste a c c e p t a b i l i t y c r i t e r i a descr ibed i n t h e l a t e s t rev is ion of t h e Double S h e l l Tank Waste Analysis Plan (WAP) (Mulkey and Jones 1 9 9 5 ) . I n add i t ion t o t h e process condensate, feed and s l u r r y streams, u t i l i t y streams such a s cool ing water and steam condensate a r e sampled p e r t h e process con t ro l p lan . The requirements i n t h i s p lan do not apply t o process con t ro l sampling. A DQO document

1


(Von Bargen 1995), contains the rationale for sampling requirements, identifies how to determine the number of samples, the parameters to be measured, and the data quality requirements such as precision, accuracy, and practical quantitation limits.

The objective of this quality assurance project plan is to provide the planning, implementation, and assessment of sample collection and analysis, data issuance, and validation activities for the candidate feed tanks. Analytes for environmental compliance as well as for safety and process control sampling are included in this document. The RCRA compliance analytes are the same as those listed in Basra 1995 and Von Bargen 1995. Quality assurance requirements for the following streams which are associated with the Evaporator process are documented as follows:

4 Feed, slurry, process condensate, steam condensate, and cooling water samples for process control purposes only -- current edition of 242-A Evaporator Sample S c h e d u l e , FSS-T- 630-00001.

a 242-A-81 Raw Water Sump Sampling for TEDF discharge requirements - TEDF Quality Assurance Project Plan (Project W-O49H), WHC-SD-LEF-QPP-002

1.2 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION

The data obtained from analysis of candidate feed tanks, process, and eff.luent streams are used by Treatment Systems Plant Engineering (TSPE) and 242-A Evaporator Operations to:

a Determine if tank waste should be processed

Adjust process conditions

Prevent exceeding effluent emission limits

Improve the accuracy of process models and thus our understanding of the operation.

TSPE is responsible for approving all safety and process control data. Along with Tank Farms Environmental Engineering (TFEE), both groups approve all compliance data.

2

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPPM)S Rev. 2

evaluating all compliance sample data which is required by the latest revision of the 242-A WAP (Basra 1995). Together with TSPE, TFEE approves and accepts final products and deliverables relating to compliance streams. TFEE is responsible for ensuring that this Plan is kept up-to-date by incorporating applicable changes in regulations, laboratory capabilities, and DQO developments annually. TFEE interfaces with the laboratories and operations to ensure that there is a mutual understanding of analytical capabilities and program needs. TFEE also identifies problems in the sampling and analytical procedures, then works with TSPE and the laboratories to correct these problems. Procedures affected by changes to this Plan shall be updated.

Once a sample has been received, the laboratory providing analysis is responsible for sample and data management and data verification (Von Bargen 1995). For candidate feed tank sampling, the laboratory selection and QA/QC requirements provided in this document are presented in a contractual document, the Tank Characterization Plan (TCP) which is issued by the Tank Characterization Program.

The Characterization Plans and Reports (CPR) organization writes the instructions (in the TCP) for the sampling groups and laboratories to collect and analyze tank samples based upon program needs. The CPR keep records of data packages for possible future program needs.

Tank Farm Operations is responsible for all field activities in preparation, collection, packaging, and shipment of the samples. Compliance, Sampling and Support Operations is a division of Tank Farm Operations that handles all field responsibilities of sampling and shipping candidate feed tank samples.

Assessment of laboratory performance is conducted internally by the laboratory or externally using a formal audit system (see Section 3.1 of this report).

Figure 1 is an organization chart displaying the interfaces among these groups regarding the generation and transfer of samples and data. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) (O'Rourke, 1994) clarified the interfaces among these groups. Note that this figure only includes the candidate feed tank sampling and analysis.

3

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28, IS% WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-KQ Rev. 2

Figure 1. Logic for Candidate Feed Tank Sample Collection, Analysis, and Validation

Feed Tanks Sampling, & Support Operations

1 242-A Feed

1

I “1 I

5 ro

I 1

Anal y t i ca 1 Laboratory

242-A Evaporator

~~~~~1 Characterization Engineering Engineering

4


1.3 PROJECT/TASK DESCRIPTION

This Plan sets forth the instructions and specifications for QA/QC analyses of 242-A Evaporator candidate feed tank samples which are taken to comply with requirements specified in the latest editions of the 242-A Evaporator WAP (Basra 1995) and the 242-A Evaporator DQO document (Von Bargen 1995). Requirements specified in EPA documents (EPA 1994), and Section I I E , Quality Assurance/Quality Control of the Hanford Site permit (Butler 1994) were used as the basis for these requirements.

Program Management Integration (PMI) serves as the initial point of contact for scheduling, and contractual communications associated with the laboratory operations described in this Plan. Only onsite laboratories analyze candidate feed samples due to the high level of radioactivity. The Office of Quality Assessment verifies that the laboratory is capable of fulfilling the quality assurance requirements stated in Von Bargen (1995), Basra (1995), and this Plan.

A work authorization document (TCP, MOU, or Work Order) must be used as a contractual device to direct onsite laboratories (222- S) in the performance of analytical work for the Evaporator Program. The work authorization document must include the work scope (i-e., number of samples, field blanks, sampling locations, expected date of arrival at the laboratory, etc.), QA/QC reference document(s), and reporting and deliverable requirements including dates, approval designators (see Section 12.7 of WHC- CM-3-5), and funding sources.

Any deviations from this Plan shall be evaluated and formally documented by letter or internal memorandum by PMI as part of its determination of the laboratories ability to provide satisfactory service.

According to the Hanford F e d e r a l F a c i l i t y and Consent O r d e r , (Ecology et al. 1990), Section 9.6.6, Data Delivery Schedules, "Laboratory analysis and QA documentation, including validation and transmittal to the regulators, shall be limited to the following schedule:

Transuranics and hot cell samples, 136 days annual average, not to exceed 176 days; Low level and mixed waste (up to 10 mR/hr), 111 days annual average, not to exceed 126 days."

5


Additional details on the content of the validated data package is provided in Section 1.4 of this Plan.

1 . 4 QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA FOR MEASUREMENT DATA

1 . 4 . 1 U s e s of the D a t a

Data and statistical parameters calculated from the data will be used by several groups.

The cognizant process engineer of TSPE uses the candidate feed tank data to statistically determine if analyte concentrations within the process waste are expected to exceed action levels. The results of this determination are documented in a process control plan issued prior to each campaign. TSPE directs 242-A Operations on operating strategies based upon analytical results from candidate feed tank waste analyses.

Evaporator Operations uses the data as an aid for establishing operating parameters to run the plant safely and compliantly.

TFEE uses the data to ensure that the plant operates within environmental compliance requirements.

The Liquid Effluents program may use analytical data from the candidate feed tank to evaluate the impact, if any, that process condensate analytes will have on basin liner integrity, safety requirements, and Effluent Treatment Facility treatment needs.

1 . 4 . 2 M e a s u r e m e n t P e r f o r m a n c e C r i t e r i a

Continuation of the 242-A Evaporator waste processing is contingent in part upon the ability of the analytical support laboratories and sampling organizations to show internal and external auditors and reviewers that the quality of their work is sufficient to support process control, safety, and compliance decisions (see Section 3.1 for more details). Several criteria are used to measure performance including precision, accuracy, detection limits, representativeness, and comparability.

Precision and accuracy are quantitatively expressed using the definitions given in Section 7.8.2 of Von Bargen (1995). For analytes that are not spiked, the relative percent difference

6

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-OOE) Rev. 2

(RPD) of duplicate samples. Precision encompasses the variabilities associated with preparation, and analysis, including representativeness of collected samples and subsample aliquots, completeness of sample digestion or extraction, losses during digestion, extraction, and/or transfers, errors in sample or reagent weights and volumes, and instrument response fluctuation. The ability to meet precision criteria depends in part on the concentration level of the analyte and the heterogeneity of the samples.

Accuracy is also defined in Von Bargen (1995) and is a measure of the closeness of the measurement to the true value. The variabilities that characterize precision can also cause inaccurate measurements. However, matrix effects such as interferences can potentially cause large inaccuracies without adversely affecting precision.

Representativeness of candidate feed samples is determined by the sampling design through the use of appropriate subsampling and mixing methods and the use of consistent analytical methods. The sampling design and sampling processes have been reviewed for variability in the tank.

The Sample Exchange Evaluation program compares data generated by the 222-S and ACL on identical waste samples. It promotes consistency in sample preparation and analysis procedures by:

Identifying significant differences and, Ensuring that the best procedures are utilized.

Additional details on comparability are provided in), Section 4.2 Meznarich (1995), and Section 14.4 and Appendix C of Kuhl-Klinger (1994 ) . 1.5 CONE'LICT W I T H OTHER DOCUMENTS

The specifications contained in the 242-A Evaporator/Liquid Effluent Retention Facility Data Quality Objectives (Von Bargen 1995) will prevail in the event that there are conflicts between the 242-A Evaporator Waste Analysis Plan (Basra 1995), the 242-A Evaporator/Liquid Effluent Retention Facility Data Quality Objectives and this document. The latest revisions to the referenced documents must be used.

7

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28.1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPPM39 Rev. 2

2.0 MEASUREMENT/DATA ACQUISITION

2.1 SAMPLING PROCESS DESIGN

Prior to an upcoming evaporator operational campaign, samples are collected from candidate feed tanks to assess the ability to process the waste. Feed tank sampling will be coordinated between the 242-A program office and the laboratory.

The strategy for determining the number of samples and sample locations for candidate feed tanks is described in Section 5.2, of Basra (1995), and in Section 7.1 of Von Bargen (1995). TSPE uses this strategy and tank liquid levels to specify the number of samples and their locations. For a given number of candidate feed tank samples, sample locations are chosen to provide the most representative sampling for that tank. The number and location of samples will be specified within the work authorization (e.g. TCP or work package) document for each candidate feed tank. If the variability of the samples results does not provide adequate confidence in the decision process, additional samples may have to be collected.

2.2 SAMPLE COLLECTION

Sample bottles must be certified to meet the standards (such as those in SW-846) for cleanliness required for regulatory samples. All sample bottles (including blanks) for volatile organics must have an open top with a volatile organics free septum. Candidate feed tank sample bottles for volatile organics are not required to meet zero headspace requirements due to As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) concerns.

For each Evaporator campaign, DSTs are selected based on the 242- A Evaporator's ability to process the waste, tank space needs, and program requirements. Samples are to be taken by Compliance Sampling and Support Operations in accordance with the latest revision of Plant Operating Procedure (POP) T0-080-065, S u p e r n a t a n t or S l u d g e S a m p l i n g of Non-Aging, N o n - W a t c h l i s t W a s t e Storage Tanks (WHC 1994a). It includes safety precautions such as avoiding the area directly above the tank riser, sampling steps, chain-of-custody requirements, how to fill out sample identification forms, sample pickup, and weather conditions under which sampling shall not be conducted. Additional information on

8

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPPM39 Rev. 2

documentation, labelling, and sample custody can be found in the Sample Handling and Custody Requirements section. No quality control (QC) verifications are required by this procedure. There are QC witness points (see WHC CM-4-2) where the QA manager may elect to witness the activity:

0 When sample bottle serial number is confirmed to match serial number on Attachment 1 - Sampling Data Sheet

0 When sample is taken at the correct tank depth

0 When sample is placed in correct sample pig

The POP must be in place before the sampling event. A sampling event is defined as all samples collected from a single tank. Laboratories and sampling organizations shall strive to meet SW- 846 holding times. However, adherence to SW-846 holding times is not strictly required if documented cases show that additional time was required to ship, process, and analyze radioactive samples (Morant, 1994). All waste is grab sampled ("bottle-on-a- string") with a sample bottle inserted in the sample bottle holder assembly (see Figure 1 of TO-080-065).

At all subsurface sampling locations, four 100 milliliter (ml) nominal dark glass bottles are drawn: two for organics (one for semivolatiles, one for volatiles), one for the boildown and mixing study, and one for inorganics and radionuclides analyses. Samples from one sampling location are used for preparing QC checks (matrix spike (MS) and matrix spike duplicate (MSD) 1 . Duplicate samples are not collected because for most analytes, MS/MSDs are analyzed. The MS/MSDs provides precision information for analytical measurement. The latter can only be determined if analytes are present that have analytical uncertainty that is not too large a percentage of the overall uncertainty. MS and MSDs are used when contaminants may not be present and spiking samples with them allows an assessment of the precision. One surface grab sample is collected from each of the Evaporator feed tanks if data on separable organics is not available from compatibility sampling (Appendix 2A, Von Bargen 1995).

For each tank sampled, three field blanks and two trip blanks are collected. Both are prepared in a manner that simulates the sampling process as closely as possible except that a sample is not actually collected. A field blank provides an indication of

9

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April =,IS5 WHC-SD-WM-QAPPM39 Rev. 2

contamination from sample collection, transport, preparation or extraction, and analysis. A trip blank is similar to a field blank except it is not subjected to the sample collection process and is not opened in the field. Typically, it is expected that one set of blanks will be collected per sampling event. If sampling event duration exceeds four days, the program will consider collecting additional blanks.

Two field blanks are taken for organic analysis (two 100 ml bottles, one for semivolatiles, one for volatiles), and one for inorganic/radionuclide analysis (200 ml total), and the bottles are so marked. Field blank bottles are filled with reagent grade water at the laboratory prior to shipment to the sampling site. Similar to an actual sample, four bottles from the same batch of bottles used for tank waste samples are employed. Each one is installed in the sample holder, then the bottle screw cap is removed and a rubber stopper (part of the sample holder assembly) is inserted. The field blank bottle is lowered approximately one foot into the riser, then the rubber stopper is pulled out, the bottle is allowed to fill and the assembly is taken out of the riser. The bottle cap is then replaced.

Two trip blanks are used, one for volatile organics, the other for semivolatile organics and they are so marked. There is not an inorganic/radchem trip blank due to the extremely low probability of inorganic contamination in a trip blank. Trip blank bottles are filled with reagent grade water at the laboratory prior to shipment to the sampling site.

Decontamination instructions are included in TO-080-065. A new certified sample bottle and sample holder assembly is employed for each sample collected to avoid cross contamination. After the sample is collected and the bottle capped, the bottle and holder are lowered again into the vapor space and rinsed with deionized water. It is then lifted out and wiped off.

10


2 . 3 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY REQUIREMENTS

Candidate feed tank samples are not preserved (including cooling) because of concerns with the additional radiation exposure which would result. It is not practical to cool the bulky sample pigs and shipping containers. Biological activity, which is generally the largest problem in environmental samples, is unlikely due to the high salt content, extreme pH, and high radioactivity of these tank waste samples. Chemical changes are typically low because of the low organic concentrations.

Candidate feed tank samples are loaded into sample pigs or casks and transported to an onsite laboratory according to the current revisions of T0-080-075, Perform Transport of CSSO Samples i n the Sample Truck (WHC 1994c) or TO-080-090, Load/Transport the Onsi te Trans fer Cask (WHC 1994b). The forms and work sheets that are filled out by the Person in Charge, including the chain of custody form, are described in T0-080-065. The exact locations of sample collection are recorded on the Sampling Information Work Sheet. Samples are identified by a unique shipping number or sample number which is written on the shipping tag. Sample labels and/or sample tags must be filled out at the time of sampling and secured to each sample bottle. The labels and tags identify the sample number, collector's signature, date and time of collection, location of sampling point, and sample chain-of-custody procedures to be followed to track and document sample collection, shipment.

Upon arriving at the laboratory, pigs are logged and surveyed for radiological control. The sample logging information and any additional observations are recorded on the pigs and the chain of custody form, then placed into a holding area for storage before removal of the sample. Tank Farm Operations decontamination procedures for sample pigs and casks are contained in the current revisions of TO-080-075 and TO-080-090. Additional details on receipt and handling of samples by the laboratories is provided in Section 6.0 of Meznarich (1995) and Section 6.0 of Kuhl- Klinger (1994). Actual sample volumes may vary due to the manner in which samples are collected. There is often j u s t enough volume to perform the required tests, leaving little room for error. If excess sample is available from one sample bottle, following removal of sample for the analyses that are designated to be performed from that sample bottle, it may be used to provide additional material f o r testing other analytes.

11

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28, I C E WHC-SD-WM-QAPPM)S Rev. 2

In te rchangeabi l i ty i s permissible only f o r samples from t h e same group o f four sample b o t t l e s .

2 . 4 ANALYTICAL METHODS REQUIREMENTS

The performance based ex t r ac t ion and a n a l y t i c a l methods a r e l i s t e d i n Table 7 . 2 of Von Bargen (1995) and Tables 2 through 5 of t h i s Plan. Laboratories a r e required t o maintain w r i t t e n procedures using these methods f o r de t ec t ing t h e appl icable ana ly tes . I n cases where a procedure needs t o be modified t o a t t a i n a lower de t ec t ion l i m i t o r because of l o w percent recoveries o r high r e l a t i v e percent d i f fe rences i n QC samples, the procedure may be modified t o make QC parameters acceptable . These changes w i l l be documented i n t h e case n a r r a t i v e and approved i n t e r n a l l y by t h e laboratory and p ro jec t management. Additional approval i s required by TFEE i f t h e procedure modifications c o n f l i c t with t h e methods spec i f i ed i n t h e l a t e s t e d i t i o n o f t h e 242-A Evaporator Waste Analysis Plan.

Section 5.4 of Basra (1995) , Analyt ical Methods and QA/QC, explains why deviat ions from SW-846 protocol may be necessary due t o t h e unique nature of candidate feed tank waste. I f t h e r e i s a problem i n t h e a n a l y t i c a l system, the labora tory employee who recognizes t h e problem i s responsible f o r i n i t i a t i n g appropriate co r rec t ive ac t ion .

12

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPPMIS Rev. 2

Quality Assurance Objectives for Candidate Feed Tank Stream tes Compliance Anal

Analyt e of

i n t e r e s t

Technolog y-based

ana ly t i ca 1 methods

3s t imat ed =ant it a t ion l i m i t

(mat r ix s p e c i f i c )

P rec i s ion (RPD

between dupl i ca t e s p i k e s ) ,

%

Accuracy ( %

recovery >f matrix

sp ike )

Action l eve l l

ke tone Purge and t r a p and GC/MS o r

G C / F I D ( VOA 1

28 mg/L <25 >87 mg/L3 40-110

~

1 -but ano 1 Purge and t r a p

GC/MS o r G C / F I D

( s e m i -VOA o r VOA)

~~

20 mg/L <25 >226 m g / ~ ~

30-110

2- mtoxyeth

anol

30 mg/L <25 30-110 >95.2 m g / ~ ~

Purge and t r a p


(semi-VOA o r VOA)

Purge and t r a p


( s emi-VOA o r VOA)

Purge and t r a p


(semi-VOA o r VOA)

Purge and t r a p


( semi -VOA or VOA)

1 8 mg/L 40-110 >58 mg/L3 2- but anone

(methyl e t h y l

ketone)

<25

2- hexanone

18 mg/L 40-110 <25 No s p e c i f i c

l i m i t

methyl i s obut y l

ketone ( M I B K )

20 mg/L <25 40-110 N o s p e c i f i c

l i m i t

13


T a b l e 1. Quality Assurance Objectives for Candidate Feed Tank Stream .ance Anal C o m p l i

Technolog y-based

ana ly t i ca 1 methods

tes

Precis ion (RPD

between dup 1 i ca t e s p i k e s ) ,

%

<25

Analytical

Category

E s t ima t ed quan t i t a t i on l i m i t

(matr ix s p e c i f i c )

Accuracy ( %

recovery of matr ix

sp ike )

Action l eve l l

Analyte of

i n t e r e s t

Purge and t r a p


(semi-VOA o r VOA)

24 mg/L 40-110 Organics2 2- pent anone

N o s p e c i f i c 1 i m i t

I’etrahydr ofuran

( THF)

20 mg/L <25 30-110 N o s p e c i f i c

l i m i t

Purge and t r a p


( s e m i -VOA o r VOA)

Solvent Ext rac t io n GC/MS

(Semi- VOA )

Tr ibu ty l 9hosphat e

( TBP 1

50 mg/L <25 40-120

Inorganic 400 pg/ml <20 75-125 > 0 . 2 9 Molar

(5,000 mg /L 1

Kj e ldahl d i s t i l l a t

ion/ au to t i t r a

t i o n ion

s e l e c t i v e e l e c t rode

Different i a l

scanning calorimet

e r

Other ~ 2 0 4 Exotherm NA <335 O F

absolute value of r a t i o of exotherm

t o sndo t herm

>1

none


Table 1. Quality Assurance Objectives fo r Candidate Feed Tank Stream .ante Anal tes

Prec is ion (RPD

between dupl ica te s p i k e s ) ,

%

Comp

Technolog y-based

ana ly t ica 1 methods

Analyte of

Accuracy ( %

recovery of mat r ix

sp ike)

Action l eve l l

Analyt ical

Category

Estimated quant i t a t ion l i m i t

(matr ix s p e c i f i c )

i n t e r e s t

Other Mixing and sompatibili ty study

Lab specific

NA NA NA Visual : unusual

changes in color,

temperature , clarity ,

etc.

TC <20 75-125 TC-TIC >87 ppm;

25 ug/mL TIC/TOC analyzer

w/coulometr ic near IR detectors

TIC/TOC analyzer

w/coulometr ic near IR detectors

TIC 25 ug/mL <2 0 75-125 TC-TIC >87 ppm; required

for mo de 1 in q

1. In deriving the action levels, the ratio of feed flowrate to slurry

2. Methods technology shall be based on EPA 1992 (SW-846). 3. For individual organic species limits in the candidate feed tanks, the

sum of the fractions rule applies(see Table 4A.1 of Von Bargen (1995) TC and TIC are not included in the sumation of organics.

4 . Precision is evaluated on the deviation between a sample (unspi ked) and sample replicate.

flowrate (R) is assumed to be 2.

15

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPPM)S Rev. 2

Table 2. Quality Assurance Objectives for Evaporator's Candidate Feed Tank Stream Noncompliance Analytes -

Practical quantitatio n limits ( matrix specific)

25pg/L

- Precision ( RPD between duplicatesp ikes), 8

baltical :ategory

Analyte of interest

Technology- based analytical methodsa

Accuracy ( % rec. of matrix spike )

Action level

Aluminum I A l )

I CP/OES < 2 0 75 - 125 No specific limit Cnorganic

3 sodium (Na) ICP/OES < 2 0 75 - 125 >8 .0 M 20pg/L

Fluoride (F- IC/conducti vity or ISE

< 2 0 75 - 125 No specific limit Ions /

anions I

Hydroxide (OH-)

Titration 2 5 O,ug/mL < 20 N/A [OH] < 0.01 M, [OH1 >

5.0 M

Phosphate ( pod3-

1 opg/mL < 20 75 - 125 >0.1 M IC/conducti vity

IC/conducti vity

Sulfate ( so,2-)

lOpg/mL < 20 75 - 125 No specific limit

IC/ co nduct i vity

1 opg/mL < 20 75 - 125 [NO,] < 0.011 M, [NO,] > 5.5

M

1 opg/mL < 2 0 75 - 125 [NO,] > 5.5 M

IC/Conducti vity

Proportiona 1 counter

tadionucl ides

Total beta ( P )

4E-3 pCi/mL 70 - 130 NA < 25

2E-3 pci/miL < 20 70 - 1 3 0 > 1.0 pci/fi

Ion exchange/ Solvent

extraction/ AEA

GEA 134cs 3E-4 wCi/mL < 25" N/A > 1 5 wci/mL

137cs GEA 4E-4 pCi/mL < 25" N/A > 800 pci /a

Ion exchange/ solvent

extraction/ AEA

1E-3 uCi/mL < 25 70 - 130 RST: >0.16 pCi/a

criticality : Pu-

239/240 + , 1.077E-10 X (U-gross) > 0.005 a/l

239/240 pub

16

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPPMIS Rev. 2

Table 2. Quality Assurance Objectives for Evaporatorls Candidate Feed Tank Stream Noncompliance Analytes

Analyte of interest

Precision (RPD between duplicatesp ikes), %

Accuracy (8 rec. of matrix spike )

Action level

ha1 tical Zategory

Practical quantitatio n limits (matrix specific)

2E-3 pCi/mL

Technology- based analytical methodsa

Radionucl ides

238pub Calculated or

ion exchang e/ solvent extraction/

AEA

< 25 NA >1.3 E-3 pci /mL

z41Pu Calculated no

procedure

N/A N/A >15 pCi/mL

Io6Ru GEA 3E-3 wci/mL < 25" N/A

2E-5 pCi/mL < 25 7 0 - 130 PC-RST 3H Lachat distillatio n/ liquid scintillati

ons

14c Persulfate oxide/liqui

d scintillati

on

1E-5 pCi/mL < 25 70 - 130 > 0.26 pci/mL

GEA 2E-4 pCi/mL < 25" N/A > 1.2 pci /a

Anion- cation

exchange/ distillatio n / 1 i quid

scintillati on

3E-5 pci/mL < 25' N/A > 7.83-2 pci /mI,

90Sr Separation/ beta count- proportiona 1 counter

8E-5 pCi/mL < 20 75 - 1 2 5 > 220 pci /a

94Nb GEA 2E-4 pCi/mL < 25' N/A > 9.83-2 pci /a

17

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPP€O9 Rev. 2

T a b l e 2. Quality Assurance Objectives for Evaporator's Candidate Feed Tank Stream Noncompliance A n a ytes

___ ____

Analyte of interest

~ ~~

Technology- based analytical methods"

_ _ _ ~ ~

Practical quantitatio n limits (matrix specific )

Waltical Zategory

Precision (RPD between duplicatesp ikes), %

Action level


"Tc 2E-4 pCi/mL < 20 75 - 125 > 2.0 pci/mL

Solvent extraction/

liquid scintillati on or ion exchange/

beta proportiona 1 counting

Extraction/ precipitati

on/ GEA

Radi onucl ides

2E-4 pCi/mL < 2 0 75 - 125 > 2.63-3 pCi/a

129Ib

144~e GEA < 25" N/A PC RST 1E-3 pCi/mL

ls4Eu GEA 5E-4 pCi/mL < 25" N/A > 5.0 uci /niL

lssEu GEA 5E-4 pCi/mL < 25" N/A > 7.0 wci /rriL

2 2 6 ~ ~ b Calculated or GEA

3E-3 pCi/mL < 25b N/A > 3.33-2 pci/niL

237Np Extraction/ alpha count-

proportiona 1 counter

2E-4 pCi/mL < 2 0

~

PC RST 70-130

z3au gross Laser

fluorimeter or laser induced kinetic

phosphoresc ence

1E-1 pg/mL < 20 70 - 130 Criticality P~-239/240

+ 1.077E- 10 x (U- gross) : > 0.005 g/l

244cmb Ion exchange/ solvent

extraction/ AEA

2E-3 pCi/mL < 20" N/A

Total alpha (AT 1

Proportiona 1 counter

2E-5 pCi/mL < 25" 70 - 130 Transuranic S :

AT > 100 nci / g

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPPM39. Rev. ’2

T a b l e 2. Qudlity Assurance Objectives for Evaporator’s Candidate Feed Tank Stream Noncomliance Analytes

Ualtical Zategory

Analyte of interest

Technology- based analytical methods”


Action level

Practical quantitatio n limits ( matrix specific)

NA

Precision (RPD between duplicatesp ikes) , %

< 20 Others NA Specific gravity

Appearance

SpG > 1.41 Lab specific

Lab specific

NA NA NA NA

PH Potentiomet ric

Electrode

NA <0.3 pH unitsc

NA <8.0

Combustion/ co u 1 ome t r i c autotitrati

on

100 ug/mL < 20 > 2600 mg/L TOG of surf ace sample

7 5 - 125

Bo ildown study

Lab specific

NA NA NA Visual : unusual

changes in color,

temperature , clarity,

etc.

Methods technology shall be based on T e s t Methods for E v a l u a t i n g Solid Waste (SW 846) (EPA 1986).

a.

b. These analytes have practical quantitation limits that may pose a problem because they are close to, or exceed the action level. See Section 2.5 of this Plan for more details.

Precision is evaluated on the deviation between a sample (unspiked) and sample replicate.

C.

19


~ ~~ ~

T a b l e 3 . QC S a m p l e s and A c c e p t a n c e Limits for C a n d i d a t e Feed Tank Sample Ana rsis

2Matrix spike dup l i c a t e

(MSD)

'Calib. check.

(spiked blank)

Analysis 'Matrix spikes ( M S )

3 ~ r e p . blank

o r metho

d blank

ORGANICS :

1 / S E , RPD < 25

l / b a t ch

l /ba tch 1/SE, % r ec . 40-110

Acetone

1 / S E , RPD < l / b a t c h 1 -But ano 1 1 / S E , % r ec . 30-110

1 / S E , % r ec . 30-110

l / b a t ch 25

1 / S E , RPD < 25

2-Butoxyethanol l /ba tch l / b a t ch

2-Butanone (Methyl Ethyl Ketone, MEK)

1 / S E , % rec . 40-110

1 / S E , RPD < 25

l / b a t ch

l / ba t ch

T r i - butylphosphate, (T BP )

1 / S E , % rec. 40-120

l / b a t ch

1 /SE , RPD < 25

l /ba tch

2-Hexanone 1 / S E , RPD < l / b a t ch

l / b a t c h 1 / S E , % r ec . 40-110

1 / S E , % rec . 40-110

Methyl i sobu ty l ketone, M I B K )

l / b a t ch

1 / S E , RPD < 25

l /ba t ch

l / ba t ch l / b a t ch

2 -Pent anone 1/SE, RPD < 25

1/SE, % r ec . 40-110

Tetrahydrofuran 1 / S E , RPD < 25

l / b a t ch

1 / S E , % rec . 30-110

l / ba t ch

l / b a t c h

~~~

I C P (A1 and Na) 1 / S E , RPD < 20

1 / S E , % rec . 75-125

l / b a t ch

Total U (U-gross) (by Fluor. )

1 / S E RPD < 20

l / b a t c h 1 / S E % r ec . 70-130

l / b a t ch

M

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-CCQ Rev. 2

T a b l e 3 . QC S a m p l e s and A c c e p t a n c e L i m i t s for C a n d i d a t e Feed Tank Sample y s i s

2Matrix spike duplicate

(MSD)

Ana

'Matrix spikes (MS)

'Calib. check (spiked blank)

3~rep. blank or

metho d

blank

l/bat ch

Analysis

1 / S E % rec. 75-125

1/SE RPD < 20

l/batch except F; F % rec. 70- 110

1 sample dup/SE RPD < 0.3 pH units duplicate not MSD

l/batch N / R N / R PH

OH N / R l/bat ch

l/batch 1 sample dup/ SE RPD < 20 duplicate not MSD

1 / S E % rec. 75-125

l/bat ch

l/batch 1/SE RPD < 20

4N/R N/R l/batch 1 sample dup/SE RPD < 20

1/SE RPD < 20

1/SE % rec. 75-125

l/bat ch

TC/TIC/TOC l/batch

N/R N / R N / R 1 sample dup/SE RPD < 20

1 / S E RPD < 20

1/SE % rec. 70-130

l/bat ch

l/batch

21


T a b l e 3. QC S a m p l e s and A c c e p t a n c e L i m i t s for C a n d i d a t e Feed Tank Sample Ana r s i s

'Matrix spike dup 1 i c a t e

(MSD 1

6Calib. check

(spiked blank)

Analysis 'Mat r i x spikes ( M S )

3 ~ r e p . blank

o r metho

d blank

1 / S E % rec. 70-130

1 / S E RPD < 25

l /ba t ch l / b a t ch

H3

l / ba t ch cI4 1 / S E % r ec . 70-130

N / R

1 /SE RPD < 25

l / b a t ch

l / b a t ch

N / R 1 sample dup/bat ch RPD < 20

l / b a t ch

l / b a t c h 1 / S E % rec . 75-125

1 /SE RPD < 20

Np237 l / b a t c h 1 / S E % rec . 70-130

1 /SE RPD < 20

l / b a t ch

N / R N / R 1 sample dup/SE

l / b a t ch

RPD < 25

l / b a t ch

1 sample dup/SE

*se7' N / R N/R

RPD < 25

*srgO l / b a t ch

l / b a t c h 1 /SE RPD < 20

1 /SE % r ec . 75- 125

T c g 9 l / b a t c h l / b a t ch

1 / S E % rec . 75- 125

4N/R

1 sample dup/SE RPD < 20

1 sample dup/SE RPD < 25

l / b a t ch

* GEA l / b a t c h f o r Co60, cs137 . only

( Co6', Nbg4, Ru106, cs134, ~ s ~ ~ ~ , ~ e ~ ~ ~ ,

E u ' ~ ~ , Ra'26 )

22

242-A ELaporator QAPjP April 28,1995

l/bat ch

WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-009 Rev. 2

l/batch

T a b l e 3. QC S a m p l e s and A c c e p t a n c e L i m i t s for C a n d i d a t e Feed Tank Sample

l/bat ch

Analysis

l/batch

* pu239/240

*Total alpha

*Total beta

Ana

'Matrix spikes (MS)

1/SE % rec. 7 0 - 130

1/SE % rec. 70- 130

1/SE % rec. 70- 130

pis

'Matrix spike duplicate

(MSD 1

1 Sample Dup/SE RPD < 25

1/SE RPD < 25

1/SE RPD < 25

3~rep. blank or

metho d

blank

%alib. check (spiked blank)

ch I 'The Matrix Spike (MS) shall be valid only when the spike concentration is more than 125% of the unspiked sample value.

'The RPD shall be calculated and reported only when both the sample and the dup[licate are >lox the product of the instrument detection limit (1DL)times the dilution factor.

3The Blank value shall not exceed either 1) EQL or 2) 5% value of action level limit, or 3) 5% value of the mean sample concentration or whichever is higher.

'Not Required (N/R)

'One sample duplicate per sampling event or whenever an exotherm is observed

6Control limits will be no greater than either those shown on the standard manufacturer's certificate (i.e. vendor supplied values), or f3 standard deviations of the average concentration for that standard's historical performances as measured from an active data base.

%Rec. = Percent Recovery SE = Sampling Event

Batch = A group of related samples that are analyzed together.

*MS is not possible - Requires either use of carrier or a tracer.

23


2 . 5 QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS

QC checks are made to assess the precision and accuracy of a test measurement. QC checks permit comparison of sample results with acceptable ranges defined in Von Bargen (1995) and provide precision and accuracy estimates to evaluate the confidence of decisions.

Basra (1995) contains a list of the RCRA. compliance parameters of interest in Table 5-2 for candidate feed tanks. This table is recreated in Table 1 of this Plan along with the precision, accuracy, and estimated quantitation limits (EQL) given in Tables 7.2 and 7.4 of Von Bargen (1995). In addition, the QA parameters for noncompliance parameters of interest for candidate feed tanks, from Tables 7.2 and 7.4 of Von Bargen (1995), are given in Table 4 of this Plan. Von Bargen (1995) determined that the compliance, process control, and safety parameters listed in these tables shall be quantified to assure a safe, controlled, and environmentally compliant operation. Analyses must meet the requirements given in Tables 1 through 3.

Section 7.8 of Von Bargen (1995) expresses precision as the relative percent difference (RPD) between matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate results and accuracy by the percent recovery (%R) of the spike and gives precision and accuracy acceptance criteria in Table 7.4. These requirements were developed to ensure the production of data of sufficiently good quality that correct decisions can be made to comply with process control, safety, and environmental compliance limits stated in Von Bargen (1995). These decisions must occur before the processing of waste can be made. It also gives EQLs that are typically a factor of five greater than the instrument detection limit, where the instrument detection limit is defined in Section 12.4.1.2 of(Mezanarich 1995). For radionuclides, the minimum detectable activity is determined at 222-S using the latest revision of WHC procedure LA-508002, Detect ion Levels for Radioisotopic Counting and at ACL using Section 10.4.3 of Kuhl-Klinger (1994).

EQLs are recommended administrative limits, not strict requirements. They reflect normal laboratory performance capability. EQLs may be exceeded for samples with high ionic strength or interfering analytes. Section 7.8.6 of Von Bargen (1995) identifies analytes whose EQLs may be cause for concern. This would occur when the EQL is greater than the action level, or when the EQL is less than the action level, but the upper 90% confidence level of the analyte mean exceeds the action level.

If the laboratory suspects that analyte EQLs will not be met, it must report the discrepancy to the program, who will work with the laboratories to determine what analytical options should be.pursued to best meet the needs of the program. The applicability of these EQLs will be evaluated as more campaign data are collected and new EQLs are generated from new data. Von Bargen (1995) also gives guidelines on the use of and control limits for blank spikes, rerun criteria if a blank spike does not meet QC criteria, how blanks are used to estimate the degree of sample contamination, and special

24

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-009. Rev. 2

QC considerations for organics and radionuclides.

Matrix spikes and matrix spike duplicates containing the analytes listed in Table 7.3 of Von Bargen (1995) are added to one sample per sampling event as chosen by the laboratory, after the samples have been collected and shipped to them. MS/MSDs provide a measure of sample preparation and analysis variability and accuracy.

Field duplicate samples are not collected because the sampling variability obtained from analysis of field duplicates is believed to be small relative to tank spatial variability. Laboratory duplicate samples are prepared instead of MS/MSDs for analytes which are not amenable to spiked duplicate analyses (see Von Bargen (19951, Section 7.8.5.2). The spikes are approved standards and are added by a technician overseen by a chemist according to laboratory procedures. The laboratory attempts to spike samples to a level at least 1.25 times the concentration of each analyte in order to reduce the relative error associated with the difference between the sample and sample plus spike results. Spiking at 1.25 times the sample concentration may not be possible when an analyte is present at a high concentration ( > 0.1%). Under this condition a sample dilution shall be performed. The relative percent difference between the expected (calculated) concentration of the diluted sample and its observed concentration must not exceed 5 percent. Criteria for spike recovery are not applicable if the spike concentration is too low. Spiked and nonspiked analytes are listed in Table 7.3 of Von Bargen (1995). RPD criteria for radiochemical analysis only can be acheived when the analyte activity has a less than 20% analytical uncertainty. When uncertainty (e.g. counting uncertainty) exceeds 2 0 % , the duplicate results shall be evaluated based on statistical comparability. Re-analysis to decrease uncertainty, is at the discretion of the laboratory with consideration of RPD of other analytes, sample size, and counting time. Table 3 lists the required frequency of MS/MSD, preparation blank, and blank spike analyses forcandidate feed analytes. It also gives percent recovery requirements for MS and spiked blanks and RPDs between MS/MSD. Table 3 should be used with Tables 1 and 2 to determine whether a given analyte is spiked into a candidate feed tank sample. Table 3 is consistent with Table 7.4 of Von Bargen (1995).

Each sample for organic analysis should have a minimum of four surrogate compounds added as an accuracy check (two for volatiles and two for semivolatiles). Surrogate compounds are chemically similar to certain groups of target compounds, but have a unique mass because they are labeled with isotopes. They are therefore distinguishable by the mass spectrometer detector used in organic analysis. Surrogate compounds for volatile organic analytes typically used in environmental protocol analyses are 1;2 - Dichloroethane - d4 and Bromofluorobenzene with percent recovery QC criteria of 76 to 114 and 86 to 115, respectively. Similarly, surrogate compounds for semi-volatile analytes are typically Nitrobenzene - d5 and Terphenyl - d,, with percent recovery QC criteria of 35 to 114 and 33 to 141, respectively. The laboratory may choose other surrogates if the analytes of

25


concern a r e d i f f e r e n t than those found on environmental p ro tocol ana ly te l i s t s .

I n i t i a l c a l i b r a t i o n s a r e used t o e s t a b l i s h t h e base l ine response o f an a n a l y t i c a l instrument . Continuing c a l i b r a t i o n checks o r instrument c a l i b r a t i o n v e r i f i c a t i o n s a r e used t o v e r i f y t h a t instrument response has not f l uc tua ted s i g n i f i c a n t l y . These c a l i b r a t i o n s a r e procedure s p e c i f i c . Addit ional d e t a i l s on ca l ib ra t ions , inc luding s tandards spec i f i ca t ions , can be found i n Sec t ions 8 . 2 , 8 .3 , and 8 . 4 of Kuhl-Klinger, Sect ion 7 . 0 of Meznarich (1995) .

A blank spike i s simply reagent grade water t h a t i s spiked wi th a known amount of s tandard organic mater ia l , then prepared and analyzed i n the same manner as a normal sample. It i s analyzed once pe r batch of samples ( a group of samples prepared and analyzed during t h e same per iod of t ime) t h a t i nd ica t e s whether t h e method i s s t i l l " in control" ; i . e . , i f t h e e n t i r e method (prepara t ion and measurement) i s performing wi th in acceptable l i m i t s . It provides another measurement of procedure performance (accuracy/prec is ion) on s tandard mater ia l s .

Analysis of blanks w i l l be the same a s f o r waste samples except f o r radionucl ides . For these , t o t a l alpha and t o t a l be ta screening t e s t s w i l l be run i n i t i a l l y a s pe r Appendix 3A of Von Bargen (1995) . F i e ld blank contamination s h a l l be evaluated by comparison t o a reagent blank o r prepara t ion blank run a t t he same t i m e . The f i e l d blank i s acceptab le i f t he concent ra t ion of each contaminant ana ly te i s l e s s than o r equal t o :

5% of t h e ac t ion l e v e l ,

b 5% of t h e average sample r e s u l t pe r tank f o r candidate feed, o r pe r campaign f o r process condensate blanks, o r

b The EQL, whichever i s h igher .

Trip blanks w i l l only be analyzed i f contamination, a s def ined above, i s de tec ted i n t h e f i e l d blank, and only f o r those contaminating ana ly tes de tec ted i n t h e f i e l d blank. This s t r a t e g y implies t h a t t r i p blank analyses, i f requi red , may exceed holding t imes. I f holding t imes a r e exceeded f o r t r i p blanks, t h e q u a l i t y of t he da t a should not be impacted. Preparat ion blanks a r e labora tory generated blanks t h a t go through t h e e n t i r e sample prepara t ion . They a r e t y p i c a l l y employed f o r procedures us ing an ex t r ac t ion , d i sso lu t ion , o r d iges t ion . A reagent blank does not go through t h e prepara t ion process , and i s t y p i c a l l y t h e matr ix of t h e a n a l y t i c a l s tandards . It may be used t o subt rac t from t h e sample s i g n a l during t h e de t ec t ion s t ep .

Contamination of t he blanks i s ind ica ted when any ana ly te exceeds 20% o f t h e lowest sample concentrat ion i n t h a t ba tch . This c r i t e r i o n i s not v a l i d when t h e sample concent ra t ion i s l e s s than 1 0 times t h e de t ec t ion l i m i t f o r an

26


analyte.

Section 7.8.4 of Von Bargen (1995), Rerun Criteria, discusses how to proceed if blank spikes, reagent, or preparation blanks analyses do not meet QC criteria.

If the "over the top" (5 inches above open pit) dose rate is > 2 rem/hour or 25 rad/hour, samples will be processed within a hot cell and the potential for contamination during sample processing in the hot cells will be determined by a hot cell blank for each sampling event. This will consist of a reagent water rinse of the equipment after it has undergone a standard clean-up performed between samples in the hot cell. The degree to which analytes specified in this project plan appear in the hot cell blank indicates the level of cross contamination from the sample breakdown equipment. The determination of contamination of the hot cell blank is described in Section 7.8.3 of Von Bargen (1995).

Laboratory QC requirements shall be described in QA Plans Meznarich (1995) for WHC and Kuhl-Klinger (1994) for ACL, and may also be described in individual laboratory procedures.

2.6 INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING, INSPECTION, AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS

Acceptance testing or calibrations of computer controlled instruments and small equipment, sometimes involving the use of QC standards and reference materials, must be performed as described in Section 7.0 and 11.0 of Meznarich (1995), and Section 8.4 of Kuhl-Klinger (1994) unless stated otherwise in this Plan. Calibrations must be documented according to the guidelines provided within the applicable procedure.

The final acceptance of the suitability of equipment for operation is determined by the passing of annual internal audits and periodic external audits by Environmental Services Quality Assurance (for WHC) and by Analytical Services (for ACL). (See Section 3.0 of this Plan for additional details.) Resolution of equipment deficiencies is discussed in Section 4.2 of this Plan.

Field sampling groups must implement a program that will assure the needed availability of sampling equipment. The preventive maintenance program for laboratory instrumentation described in Section 14.8 of Meznarich (1995), and Section 16.0 of Kuhl-Klinger (1994) discusses the preventive maintenance schedule, critical facility equipment (such as fume hoods, electrical, and heating and ventilation), vendor service contracts, keeping of critical spare parts lists, and recording in maintenance logs. Minor maintenance activities are typically listed in the analytical method and/or recommended by the manufacturer.

27

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995

~ ~~

WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-OW Rev. 2

2.7 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY

Section 7.0 of Meznarich and section 8.4 of Kuhl-Klinger (1994) summarize the required frequency and calibration method for each analytical technique. The analyst is responsible for confirming that calibrations are satisfactory prior to performing analysis. The laboratory QA plans also cover the preparation, storage, and traceability of standards used to calibrate instruments. Balance calibrations are discussed in Section 7.4 of Meznarich (1995) and Sections 8.1 and 8.2 of Kuhl-Klinger (1994).

3.0 ASSESSMENT/OVERSIGHT

3.1 ASSESSMENTS A N D RESPONSE ACTIONS

A QA program can only be effective if systems are in place to continuously monitor or assess the laboratory or sampling group's ability to conform to program requirements. The goals and responsibilities of the laboratory QA programs are contained in Meznarich (1995), and Kuhl-Klinger (1994). General information on assessment activities at the laboratories are located in the following sections of the laboratory quality assurance plans as shown in Table 4.

Surveillances and audits of the 222s laboratory are conducted monthly by WHC Analytical Services Quality Assurance and cover every aspect of laboratory work, including conduct of operations, safety, data validation, and chain of custody (sample control) (see WHC-CM-4-2). The 222-S laboratory is audited by WHC-QA Compliance Assurance Group and assessed by the WHC-AS Office of Quality Assessment. The manager of WHC-AS Operations Assurance and Support reviews all audits, assessments and surveillances. The findings are entered into the HATS database for tracking of the non-compliant issues. Reports are issued to the responsible managers who shall address the corrective action and report back to the Operations Assurance and Support Manager with information on action taken.

The ACL's internal auditing program is deemed adequate at this time, and will always be subject to review by TWRS Quality Assurance. Presently, surveillances are conducted at least quarterly and sometimes monthly. ACL surveillance conditions and corrective actions are coordinated through ACL's Quality Operations and Standard Laboratory. More detail on the conduct of external and internal audits/assessments and performance evaluations are contained in the procedures and/or policy manuals.

28


3.2 REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT

The results of audits, surveillances, performance evaluations, and data quality assessments of site laboratories and sampling groups generated by internal laboratory and external quality assurance organizations shall be available to 242-A Evaporator operations management, Tank Farms Environmental Engineering, and TWRS Quality Assurance as applicable to the program.

Status reports to the program will not be required for this project. The laboratory will develop a schedule dealing with all aspects from sample receipt through delivery of the data package. The schedule will be reviewed weekly for progress versus targeted dates. Final data package content will be dictated by the work authorization documents described in Section 1.3 of this Plan.

Resolution of significant quality assurance problems identified in these reports is addressed in Section 4.2 of this Plan.

29

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995

review1

Readiness review2

Technical systems audit/surveillance

Performance evaluation

WHC-SD-WM-PAPP-009 Rev. 2

NA

13.2

13.3

~ ~~

Table 4. Laboratory QA Plan Sections Describing Various Assessment Activities

Assessment Activity Laboratory Quality Assurance Plan Section

Meznarich (1995)

Peer review1 8.0 & 9.0

~

Kuhl-Klinger (1994 )

12.0

14.1

NA

14.1, 14.2

14.5 & Appendix C

Audit of data quality I 13.4 14.4

Data quality assessment I 12.0 & 13.4 12.0 & 14.4

'Peer review and management reviews of data, instrument performance, quality of standards, and safety regulations are conducted frequently and are considered an essential component of laboratory operations.

2Readiness reviews are only performed for a new facility, a major modification to an existing facility, or a change in the safety envelope (see WHC-CM-1-3). For example, proposed construction of new hot cells in the 222-S laboratory has prompted a readiness review.

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-009 .Rev. 2

4.0 DATA REVIEW VERIFICATION AND USEABILITY

4.1 DATA DELIVERABLES, REVIEW, A N D VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

Laboratory d a t a management p rac t i ces a r e described i n Sect ions 1 0 . 1 through 10 .5 , Sect ion 12.0, and Section 13 .0 of Kuhl-Klinger (1994) and Sect ions 4.0, 9.0, and 10.0 of Meznarich ( 1 9 9 5 ) . Data management p r a c t i c e s include da ta reduct ion and review, report preparat ion and review, and da ta t r a n s f e r and s torage .

The d a t a de l ive rab le s w i l l be preliminary da ta ( n o t ye t v e r i f i e d ) and completed da ta ( labora tory v e r i f i e d ) . A complete da t a package i s requi red f o r Evaporator compliance sampling of candidate feed tanks. Preliminary da ta must be provided based on program needs and schedule. It w i l l t y p i c a l l y be used t o support t h e development of t h e process con t ro l p lan o r t o achieve useable da t a with l o w e r de tec t ion l i m i t s . The prel iminary da ta package w i l l c o n s i s t of summary da ta spreadsheets and any o the r information mutually agreed upon a s necessary by systems engineering and t h e labora tory .

The 242-A Evaporator candidate feed tank compliance da ta , f o r ana ly tes i n Table 1 of t h i s Plan, w i l l be v e r i f i e d by t h e Laboratory under cont rac t with the Evaporator program. This type of da ta package v e r i f i c a t i o n was chosen because i t i s appropr ia te f o r an intermediate treatment f a c i l i t y such a s the Evaporator (Geier 1 9 9 5 ) . The following information must be included i n t he review:

Chain of custody Requested versus reported ana lys i s

Analy t ica l blanks Matrix sp ikes

b Matrix sp ike dup l i ca t e s LCS and sur roga te recovery.

b Holding t imes

The da ta r epor t must be sen t t o TSPE. A tabula ted q u a n t i t a t i v e da ta summary f o r t h e appl icable i tems i n t h e above l i s t s h a l l be included i n t h e r epor t . A l l parameters t h a t do not meet t h e q u a l i t y assurance ob jec t ives i n Section 2 . 5 of t h i s Plan must be flagged i n the r epor t . A l l da ta packages w i l l be converted i n t o supporting documents f o r e f f i c i e n t r e t r i e v a l .

TSPE w i l l use t h e da t a f o r c r i t i c a l analytes i d e n t i f i e d i n Von Bargen ( 1 9 9 5 ) t o c o n s t r u c t new indiv idua l and composite power curves f o r t h a t campaign and a l l campaigns, respec t ive ly . Power curves a r e a t o o l t o a s s i s t t he program i n s e l e c t i n g t h e number o f samples t o be c o l l e c t e d i n subsequent campaigns.

31

242-A Evaporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-aX Rev. 2

4.2 CORRECTIVE ACTION

Corrective action must be followed in accordance with the guidelines presented in Section 15.0 of Meznarich (19951, Section (16.0) of Kuhl- Klinger (1994), Morant (1994) and WHC-CM-4-2.

32

242-A Emporator QAPjP April 28,1995 WHC-SD-WM-QAPP-OX Rev. 2

5 . 0 REFERENCES

Basra, T. S. 1995, 242-A E v a p o r a t o r W a s t e Analysis P l a n , WHC-SD-WM-EV-060, Rev. 5 , Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Butler, D . , 1994, T h e Dangerous W a s t e Portion o f the RCRA P e r m i t for the TSD o f Dangerous W a s t e ( a t H a n f o r d ) , Permit No. WA7890008967, Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington.

DOE, 1995, H a n f o r d A n a l y t i c a l Services Q u a l i t y A s s u r a n c e P l a n , DOE/RL-94-55, Rev. 1 U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations, Richland, Washington.

Ecology, EPA, and DOE, 1990, Hanford F e d e r a l F a c i l i t y Agreement and Consent Order , 2 vols., as amended, Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U. S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington.

EPA, 1994, EPA R e q u i r e m e n t s for Q u a l i t y A s s u r a n c e P r o j e c t P l a n s f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l Data O p e r a t i o n s , Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

EPA, 1992, Tes t Methods f o r E v a l u a t i n g S o l i d W a s t e P h y s i c a l / C h e m i c a l Me thods , Revis ion 1 , SW-846, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

EPA, 1982, Handbook f o r S a m p l i n g and Sample P r e s e r v a t i o n o f W a t e r and W a s t e w a t e r , EPA-600/4-82-029, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Geier, C. J. , 1995, E v a p o r a t o r Sample V a l i d a t i o n Change, Internal Memo #9550956, February 23, 1995, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Kuhl-Klinger, K. J. , 1994 , Q u a l i t y A s s u r a n c e P l a n f o r Ac t iv i t ies Conducted by the A n a l y t i c a l Chemistry L a b o r a t o r y , MCS-033, Rev. 2 , Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Meznarich, H.K., 1995, Quality A s s u r a n c e Program P l a n for L a b o r a t o r y A n a l y s e s and Process T r a i n i n g , WHC-SD-CP-QAPP-016 , Rev. 0, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Miller, G.L., 1994, A n a l y s i s and C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of D o u b l e - S h e l l Tank 241-AP-108, Case and N a r r a t i v e , WHC-SD-WM-DP-065, Rev. 0 , Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Morant, P., 1994, D e v i a t i o n s from Approved EPA Methods a t H a n f o r d S i t e L a b o r a t o r i e s , WHC-SD-WM-LB-009, Rev. 1, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

242-A Evaporator QAPjP March 24,1995 DRAFT WHC-SO-WM-QAPP-009 Rev. 2

I

MOSS, S.S., 1993, Q u a l i t y A s s u r a n c e P r o j e c t P l a n f o r Chemical A n a l y s i s o f H i g h l y R a d i o a c t i v e Mixed W a s t e Samples i n S u p p o r t o f E n v i r o n m e n t a l Ac t iv i t ies on the Hanford S i t e , WAC-SD-CP-QAPP-002, Rev OA, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

O'Rourke, J.F., 1994, Memorandum of U n d e r s t a n d i n g : C l a r i f i c a t i o n of 242-A E v a p o r a t o r S a m p l i n g and A n a l y t i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s , Rev. 1 Internal Memo #7C241-94-002, January 4, 1994 Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Payne, M.A. 1993, W a s t e T a n k s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Section 6.1, Tank Farms Quality Assurance Program, WHC-IP-0842, Rev. 0, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Von Bargen, B.H. r 1995, 242-A E v a p o r a t o r / L i q u i d E f f l u e n t Retent ion F a c i l i t y Data Q u a l i t y O b j e c t i v e s , WHC-SD-WM-DQO-014, Rev. 1, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

WHC, 1994a, S u p e r n a t a n t or S l u d g e S a m p l i n g o f Non-aging Non-Watch L i s t S t o r a g e T a n k s , TO-080-065, Rev. A-0, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

WHC, 1994br L o a d / T r a n s p o r t the Onsi te T r a n s f e r Cask, TO-080-090, Rev. E-0, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

WHC, 1994c, P e r f o r m T r a n s p o r t of C S S O Sample i n the Sample T r u c k , TO-080-075, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

WHC, 1986, Detection Levels f o r R a d i o i s o t o p i c C o u n t i n g , LA-508-002, Rev. A- 2 , Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Mulkey and Jones, WHC-SD-WM-EV-053, Doubl.e-Shel1 Tank W a s t e A n a l y s i s P l a n , Rev.2 Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington

WHC-CM-1-3, Management R e q u i r e m e n t s and P r o c e d u r e s , Westinghouse Hanf ord Company, Richland, Washington.

WHC-CM-2-14 Hazardous M a t e r i a l P a c k a g i n g and Shipping, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

WHC-CM-3-5, Document Control and Records Management Manual , Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

WHC-CM-4-2, Q u a l i t y A s s u r a n c e Manual, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

34

electronic image products. Images are/67531/metadc... · DISTRIBUTION SHEET To From Page 1 of...

Documents

Transcript of electronic image products. Images are/67531/metadc... · DISTRIBUTION SHEET To From Page 1 of...