File No. 130623-002 Mr. Jason P. Ericson, P.G. Dominion ...... 6 August 2018 File No. 130623-002 Mr....

www.haleyaldrich.com

6 August 2018 File No. 130623-002 Mr. Jason P. Ericson, P.G. Director, Environmental Dominion Energy 5000 Dominion Blvd Glen Allen, VA 23060 Subject: Focused Soil Assessment Clifton Substation

Clifton, Virginia Dear Mr. Ericson: Haley & Aldrich, Inc. (Haley & Aldrich) has completed a focused soil assessment at the Dominion Energy, Inc. (Dominion Energy) Clifton Substation in Clifton, Virginia. As reported in the March 2018 Oil Spill Report prepared by Dominion Energy, a release of mineral oil occurred in January 2018 as a result of an internal electrical failure at transformer #1C. Dominion Energy personnel were onsite when the failure occurred; no oil was observed to have been released from the containment system. This focused soil assessment was conducted to confirm the absence of mineral oil in the shallow soils between the substation and the properties to the east-northeast. The result of this effort as described in detail below provides confirmation of the assessment objective. FIELD INVESTIGATION ACTIVITIES Prior to subsurface sampling on 25 June 2018, Accumark, Inc. (a private utility locating company) was contracted to screen the boring locations for the presence of utilities. Hand-auger borings were advanced at four locations (SS-1, SS-2, SS-3 and SS-4) as shown on Figure 1. The depth of the hand-auger borings was to be five feet below ground surface (ft bgs) or the depth at refusal, if the auger could not be further advanced to the target depth. Boring location SS-1 was advanced to 5.0 feet bgs. Stones and other fill material were encountered in the subsurface at the remaining three locations which were located at the bottom of a man-made slope and near a stream bed. The Haley & Aldrich field geologist attempted several hand auger borings at each sampling location and encountered refusal at varying depths in borings SS-2, SS-3, and SS-4. As outlined in Table 1, the final depths for borings SS-2, SS-3 and SS-4 were 1.25 ft bgs, 2.0 ft bgs, and 1.0 ft bgs, respectively. During the sampling activities, the Haley & Aldrich field geologist observed the soils at one-foot intervals for signs of staining and screened them with a photoionization detector readings (PID). No visible signs of staining or contamination were observed in any of the soil samples recovered. PID readings ranged from 1.0 to 2.0 parts per million (ppm) at all boring locations. Given that there were no visible signs of contamination and PID readings were consistent with background, a soil sample was collected from the

HALEY & ALDRICH, INC. 7601 Lewinsville Road Suite 101 McLean, VA 22102 703.336.6200

Clifton Substation 6 August 2018 Page 2

terminal depth of each boring and placed in laboratory-provided bottleware. The soil samples were shipped on ice to REI Consultants, Inc. (a division of Pace Analytical) (VELAP ID 460148) for the analysis of total hydrocarbons (TPH) by a gas chromatography-flame ionization detector (GC-FID) method (e.g., EPA Method 8015). The samples were quantified for two carbon ranges of hydrocarbons: TPH-Diesel Range Organics (DRO) (C10-C28) and TPH-Oil Range Organics (ORO) (C22-C36). At the completion of sampling, each of the hand-auger locations were backfilled with remaining soil. DATA EVALUATION AND CHROMATOGRAPH COMPARISON Upon receipt of the laboratory analytical results, the data were validated in accordance with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review (USEPA, 2017). The results presented in the laboratory analytical report were found to be compliant with project data quality objectives and to be useable data. The laboratory analytical report and data validation report are provided in Attachment A and the tabulated data are provided in Table 2. In addition, gas chromatographs of the samples and a mineral oil standard were provided as part of the analysis and are included in Attachment A. As indicated in Table 2, no TPH constituents were detected in samples SS-1 or SS-3. Sample SS-2 exhibited a TPH-ORO concentration of 21.4 mg/kg and sample SS-4 exhibited an even lower TPH-ORO concentration of 9 mg/kg. Comparison of the gas chromatograph fingerprints of the dielectric mineral oil standard and the SS-2 and SS-4 samples indicates that the hydrocarbon content detected in SS-2 and SS-4 is not mineral oil. If mineral oil was present, the gas chromatograph fingerprints would be represented by a Gaussian-shaped hump similar to what is shown in the mineral oil standard. Additionally, the carbon range for mineral oil is generally limited to C12 to C24 (in the TPH-DRO), where results of the four samples are non-detect (ND). The gas chromatograph fingerprints of SS-2 and SS-4 do not show any type of petroleum product. The TPH-ORO hydrocarbons detected in the SS-2 and SS-4 samples are likely natural hydrocarbon residual (e.g., leaf litter). Petroleum product, including mineral oil, is not evident in any of the four soil samples. ANALYTICAL DATA The USEPA Regional Screening Level (RSL) table and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) Voluntary Remediation Program (VRP) screening tables present screening values that are protective of human health for various TPH ranges. Based on the carbon range for the TPH-DRO analysis (C10-C28), the TPH-Medium Aliphatic (defined by the USEPA RSL User’s Guide as C9-C18) screening values were used for comparison. Based on the carbon range for the TPH-ORO analysis (C22-C36), the TPH-High Aliphatic (defined by the USEPA RSL User’s Guide as C19-C32) screening values were used for comparison. Table 2 presents the comparison of the TPH-DRO and TPH-ORO analytical results to the applicable direct-contact USEPA Industrial and Residential Soil RSLs and the VDEQ VRP Tier III Industrial Soil Screening Levels. The VDEQ VRP Tier II Residential Soil Screening Levels do not apply as those values are based on values derived from the USEPA Soil Screening Level (SSL) guidance for transfer from soil to air or groundwater. As indicated in Table 2, Sample SS-2 exhibited a TPH-ORO concentration of 21.4 mg/kg

Clifton Substation 6 August 2018 Page 3

which is more than 1,000 times lower than the USEPA Residential Soil RSL (23,000 mg/kg) and 150,000 times lower than the USEPA and VDEQ VRP industrial screening values (350,000 mg/kg). Sample SS-4 exhibited an even lower TPH-ORO concentration of 9 mg/kg. The detections are also significantly less than 100 mg/kg, which is the level that the VDEQ considers an indication of a release. CONCLUSIONS Petroleum product, including mineral oil, is not evident in any of the four soil samples. The analytical results for soil samples SS-1 and SS-3 indicate no hydrocarbon detections in the TPH-DRO or TPH-ORO range. While analytical results for soil samples SS-2 and SS-4 indicated low-level detections of hydrocarbons in the TPH-ORO range, comparison of the sample chromatograms to that of mineral oil typically used in electrical equipment indicated that the hydrocarbon detected in samples SS-2 and SS-4 is unrelated to any type of petroleum product. Even so, the results were well below applicable USEPA/VDEQ screening levels and the VDEQ reporting level that are protective of both industrial and residential receptors. We appreciate the opportunity to provide environmental consulting services on this project. Please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 804-467-8572 or [email protected] should you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely yours, HALEY & ALDRICH, INC.

Montgomery S. Bennett, P.G., RSM Senior Client Leader Tables: Table 1 – Soil Boring Summary Table 2 – Summary of Soil Analytical Results Figures: Figure 1 – Soil Sample Location Map Attachments: Attachment A – Laboratory Analytical Report and Data Validation Report

TABLES

TABLE 1SOIL BORING SUMMARYCLIFTON SUBSTATIONCLIFTON, VA

Boring IDTotal Depth (ft bgs)

Soil Interval (ft) Soil Description PID (ppm) Notes0−1 Clayey fine SAND with trace to little Rip Rap fragments, no staining/odor 2.01−2 Lean CLAY with trace to little Rip Rap fragments, no staining/odor 1.22−3 Lean CLAY, no staining/odor 1.13−4 Lean CLAY, no staining/odor 1.04−5 Lean CLAY, no staining/odor 1.0 sample collected at 4−5 interval

SS‐2 1.25 0−1.25 Lean CLAY with little Rip Rap fragments, no staining/odor 1.2 sample collected at 0−1.25 interval0−1 Clayey fine SAND with little Rip Rap fragments, no staining/odor 2.01−2 Lean CLAY with little Rip Rap fragments, no staining/odor 1.2 sample collected at 1−2 interval

SS‐4 1 0−1 Lean CLAY with little Rip Rap fragments, no staining/odor 1.0 sample collected at 0−1 interval

ABBREVIATIONS:ft bgs ‐ feet below ground surfaceppm ‐ parts per million

5SS‐1

SS‐3 2

Haley & Aldrich, Inc.\\haleyaldrich.com\share\grn_common\132504 ‐ Dominion Clifton Substation\Deliverable\Table 1 ‐ Soil Boring Summary.xlsx JULY 2018

TABLE 2SUMMARY OF SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTSCLIFTON SUBSTATIONCLIFTON, VA

Location Name SS‐1 SS‐2 SS‐3 SS‐4Sample Name SS‐1 SS‐2 SS‐3 SS‐4Sample Date 06/25/2018 06/25/2018 06/25/2018 06/25/2018

Lab Sample ID 18063396‐01A 18063396‐02A 18063396‐03A 18063396‐04ASample Depth (bgs) 5 (ft) 1.25 (ft) 2 (ft) 1 (ft)

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (mg/kg) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (C10‐C28) ‐ Diesel‐Range Organics 9.6 44 44 ND ND ND NDTotal Petroleum Hydrocarbons (C22‐C36) ‐ Oil‐Range Organics 23000 350000 350000 ND 21.4 ND 9

ABBREVIATIONS:mg/kg: milligram per kilogramRSL: Regional Screening LevelHI: hazard indexND: Not detected

NOTES:1. Screening criteria for TPH (C10‐C28) ‐ Diesel Range Organics are based on VRP/USEPA screening values for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Aliphatic Medium) defined as C9‐C18 2. Screening criteria for TPH (C22‐C36) ‐ Oil Range Organics are based on VRP/USEPA screening values for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Aliphatic High) defined as C19‐C32

USEPAIndustrial Soil

RSLHI = 0.1May 2018

USEPAResidential Soil

RSLHI = 0.1May 2018

VRPTier III

Industrial Soil Screening Level

May 2018

Haley & Aldrich, Inc.\\haleyaldrich.com\share\grn_common\132504 - Dominion Clifton Substation\Deliverable\Table 2 - 2018-0705_HAI Soil Quality.xlsx JULY 2018

FIGURES

@A@A

@A

@A

FAILED TRANSFORMER

MRS. AIKINS' RESIDENCECLIFTON CREEK DRIVE

WESLEY TYLER ROAD

SS-1 SS-2SS-3

SS-4

DOMINION ENERGY - CLIFTON SUBSTATION12895 CLIFTON CREEK DRIVECLIFTON, VIRGINIA

SOIL SAMP LES

FIGURE 1SCALE: AS SHOWNJUNE 2018

LEGEND@A SOIL SAMP LE

GIS FILE PATH: \\haleyaldrich.com\share\grn_common\132504 - Dominion Clifton Substation\GIS\M

aps\2018_06\132504_001_0001_PROPOSED_BO

RING_LAYO

UT.mxd ―

USER: ajospe ― LAST SAVE

D: 6/28/2018 12:18:44 P

M

0 175 350SCALE IN FEET

DRAFT

NOTES1. ALL LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONSARE AP P ROXIMATE.2. AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCE: ESRI

ewrightText BoxSOIL SAMPLE LOCATION MAP

ewrightRectangle

ATTACHMENT A

Laboratory Analytical Report and Data Validation Report

PO Box 286Beaver, WV 25813TEL: (304) 255-2500Website: www.reiclabs.com

REI Consultants, Inc.

TEL: 540.464.1880Lexington, VA 24450782 North Lee Highway

TEL: 304.241.5861Westover, WV 2650116 Commerce Drive

Thursday, July 05, 2018

Ms. Erin Wright

HALEY & ALDRICH, INC.

7926 JONES BRANCH DR. SUITE 870

McLEAN, VA 22102

TEL:

FAX:

(978) 234-5031

RE: 132504-002

Work Order #: 18063396

Dear Ms. Erin Wright:

REI Consultants, Inc. received 4 sample(s) on 6/26/2018 for the analyses presented in the following report.

Sincerely,

Jimmy Suttle

Project Manager

(304) 250-6234

Page 1 of 8

WO#: 18063396

Date Reported: 7/5/2018Original

REI Consultants, Inc. - Case Narrative

Client:

Project: 132504-002

HALEY & ALDRICH, INC.

The analytical results presented in this report were produced using documented laboratory SOPs that incorporate appropriate quality control procedures as described in the applicable methods. Verification of required sample preservation (as required) is recorded on associated laboratory logs. Any deviation from compliance or method modification is identified within the body of this report by a qualifier footnote which is defined at the bottom of this page.

All sample results for solid samples are reported on an "as-received" wet weight basis unless otherwise noted.

Results reported for sums of individual parameters, such as TTHM and HAA5, may vary slightly from the sum of the individual parameter results, due to rounding of individual results, as required by EPA.

The test results in this report meet all NELAP and/or VELAP requirements for parameters clearly designated as PA, VA, PA/VA, or VELAP in the column labeled NELAP.

Please note if the sample collection time is not provided on the Chain of Custody, the default recording will be 0:00:00. This may cause some tests to be apparently analyzed out of hold.

All tests performed by REIC Service Centers are designated by an annotation on the test code. All other tests were performed by REIC's Main Laboratory in Beaver, WV.

This report may not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of REIC.

DEFINITIONS:MCL: Maximum Contaminant LevelMDL: Method Detection Limit; The lowest concentration of analyte that can be detected by the method in the applicable matrix.Mg/Kg or mg/L: Units of part per million (PPM) - milligram per Kilogram (weight/weight) or milligram per Liter (weight/volume).NA: Not ApplicableND: Not Detected at the PQL or MDLPQL: Practical Quantitation Limit; The lowest verified limit to which data is quantified without qualifications. Analyte concentrations below PQL are reported either as ND or as a number with a "J" qualifier.Qual: Qualifier that applies to the analyte reported.TIC: Tentatively Identified Compound, Estimated Concentration denoted by "J" qualifier.Ug/Kg or ug/L: Units of part per billion (PPB) - microgram per kilogram (weight/weight) or microgram per liter (weight/volume).

QUALIFIERS:X: Reported value exceeds required MCLB: Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank at a concentration > 1/2 the PQLE: Analyte concentration reported that exceeds the upper calibration standard. Greater uncertainty is associated with this result and data should be considered estimated.H: Holding time for preparation or analysis has been exceeded.J: Analyte concentration is reported, and is less than the PQL and greater than or equal to the MDL. The result reported is an estimate.S: % REC (% recovery) exceeds control limits

CERTIFICATIONS:Beaver, WV: WVDHHR 00412CM, WVDEP 060, VADCLS 00281, KYDEP 90039, NCDWQ 466, PADEP 68-00839, VADCLS(VELAP) 460148Bioassay (Beaver, WV): WVDEP 060, VADCLS(VELAP) 460148, PADEP 68-00839Lexington, VA: VADCLS(VELAP) 460150Morgantown, WV: WVDHHR 003112M, WVDEP 387

Page 2 of 8

WO#: 18063396


REI Consultants, Inc. - Analytical Report

Client: HALEY & ALDRICH, INC. Collection Date: 6/25/2018 12:20:00 PM

Project: 132504-002

Lab ID: 18063396-01A Matrix: Solid

SS-1Client Sample ID:

Analysis AnalyzedResult MDL Qual UnitsPQL DF

Date Received: 6/26/2018

VASite ID:

NELAP

PERCENT MOISTURE Method: SM2540 B-1997 Analyst: DF

Percent Moisture 22 1.0 wt%NA 1 07/02/18

SEMI-VOLATILE RANGE ORGANICS Method: SW8015C Analyst: SS

TPH (Diesel Range: C10 - C28) ND 7.95 mg/Kg3.97 1 PA/VA06/29/18

TPH (Oil Range: C22 - C36) ND 7.95 mg/Kg3.97 1 PA/VA06/29/18

Surr: o-Terphenyl 98.9 49.2-135 %RecNA 1 06/29/18

Page 3 of 8

WO#: 18063396




Project: 132504-002





VASite ID:

NELAP





TPH (Oil Range: C22 - C36) 21.4 7.98 mg/Kg3.99 1 PA/VA06/29/18


Page 4 of 8

WO#: 18063396




Project: 132504-002





VASite ID:

NELAP





TPH (Oil Range: C22 - C36) ND 8.00 mg/Kg4.00 1 PA/VA06/29/18


Page 5 of 8

WO#: 18063396




Project: 132504-002





VASite ID:

NELAP





TPH (Oil Range: C22 - C36) 9.00 7.98 mg/Kg3.99 1 PA/VA06/29/18


Page 6 of 8

Pace Analytical Services, LLC.

Chicago, IL 60695-4056PO Box 684056

TEL: (304)255-2500Website: www.reiclabs.com

Sample Receipt Checklist18063396Work Order Number:Client Name:

Completed By: Reviewed By:

6/27/2018 10:03 AM

RCPNo: 1

Reviewed Date:Completed Date: 6/26/2018 12:34:49 PM

Date and Time Received: 6/26/2018 12:33:15 PM Received by: Zach Cook

Whitney Williams Jimmy Suttle

Client Notification/Response

Yes x No

Yes x NoIs it clear what analyses were requested?

5. Yes xNo Not PresentCustody seals intact?

6. Yes x NoSamples in proper container type and preservative?

7. Yes x NoWere correct preservatives noted on COC?

Yes x No

13.

8.Yes x NoSufficient sample volume for indicated test?9.Yes x NoWere container labels complete?10.Yes x NoAll samples received within holding time?11.Yes x NoWas an attempt made to cool the samples? 12.

Yes x NoSample Temp. taken and recorded upon receipt?

Sample containers intact?

4.

Are matrices correctly identified on Chain of custody?

Yes x NoChain of custody present?

3.

1.Yes x NoChain of custody signed when relinquished and received?2.

Carrier Name:

Yes xNo No VialsWater - Were bubbles absent in VOC vials? 14.

To 0.9 ºC

15. Are Samples considered acceptable? Yes x No

FedEx

Client Instructions:

HAL019 18063396Work Order Number:Client Name:

Client Contacted:

Comment:

Yes No NA Person Contacted:x

Contact Mode: Phone Fax: Email: In Person:

SS-3 received at 8.8 °C. Proceed with analysis per Erin Wright.

Date Contacted: Contacted By:

Regarding:

Corrective Action:

NA

NA

16. COC filled out properly? Yes Nox

HAL019

Page 7 of 8

SM2540 B-1997PERCENT MOISTURE

ORGANIC SOLIDS

Form 3: Duplicate

REIC / PACE 225 Industrial Park Road, Beaver, WV 25813 Page 1 of 11

DUPLICATE RECOVERY3B

Lab Code - Lab Name: LWV060 - REI Consultants, Inc.

Matrix: Solid

Lab Sample ID: 18063875-01ADUP

Sample wt/vol: N/A% Moisture: N/A %

Workorder: 18063396

18063875-01ADUPClient ID: HAL019Contract: Phone

Extract Volume: N/A

DUP

Date Collected: N/ADate Received: N/A

Extract Batch - Date: R429583 - N/A

Project Name: 132504-002

Conversion Factor: 1.00

SAMPLERESULTCOMPOUND

DUPLICATERESULT LIMIT

RPDDUP% RPDUNITS

REPORTING

Date Analyzed: 7/2/2018 6:16:14 AM

Dilution Factor: 1.00GC Column: ---- ID: ---- (mm)

Run Id: OVEN1_180702ARun No - Instrument ID: 429583 - OVEN1

Calibration ID - Date: Not Required

Sequence No - File ID: 7289464 - N/A

Test Code: MOIST_ORGTest No: SM2540 B-1997

Percent Moisture 18 17 wt% 5.71%



Matrix: Solid

Lab Sample ID: 18063618-08ADUP

Sample wt/vol: N/A% Moisture: N/A %

Workorder: 18063396

18063618-08ADUPClient ID: HAL019Contract: Phone

Extract Volume: N/A

DUP


Extract Batch - Date: R429583 - N/A





RPDDUP% RPDUNITS

REPORTING

Date Analyzed: 7/2/2018 6:16:14 AM

Dilution Factor: 1.00GC Column: ---- ID: ---- (mm)

Run Id: OVEN1_180702ARun No - Instrument ID: 429583 - OVEN1

Calibration ID - Date: Not Required

Sequence No - File ID: 7289485 - N/A

Test Code: MOIST_ORGTest No: SM2540 B-1997

Percent Moisture 10 10 wt% 0.00%

SW8015C / SW3550BSEMI-VOLATILE RANGE ORGANICS

ORGANIC SOLIDS

Form 1: Method BlankForm 3: Spikes and/or Duplicates



Matrix: Solid

Lab Sample ID: MB-86938

Date Analyzed: 6/29/2018 6:08:58 PMDilution Factor: 1.00

Sample wt/vol: 25 g% Moisture: - %

Workorder: 18063396

MB-86938Client ID: HAL019

GC Column: RTX-5 ID: .53 (mm)

Contract: Phone

Extract Volume: 10 g

MBLK


Extract Batch - Date: 86938 - 6/29/2018 12:32:16

Run Id: SVGC8_180629ARun No - Instrument ID: 429655 - SVGC8

Calibration ID - Date: 8126 - 5/25/2018 11:25:37 ASequence No - File ID: 7297317 - 03F0301.D


1

CAS NO. COMPOUND CONCENTRATION Q PQLMDL

Test Code: 8015UST_SV_S

ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

UNITS


Test No: SW8015C

Prep Factor: 0.40000

4.00 8.00 TPH (Oil Range: C22 - C36) ND mg/Kg



Matrix: Solid

Lab Sample ID: MB-86938

Date Analyzed: 6/29/2018 6:08:58 PMDilution Factor: 1.00


Workorder: 18063396

MB-86938Client ID: HAL019

GC Column: RTX-5 ID: .53 (mm)

Contract: Phone

Extract Volume: 10 g

MBLK




Calibration ID - Date: 8126 - 5/25/2018 11:25:37 ASequence No - File ID: 7297316 - 03F0301.D


1

CAS NO. COMPOUND CONCENTRATION Q PQLMDL

Test Code: 8015UST_SV_S

ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

UNITS


Test No: SW8015C

Prep Factor: 0.40000

4.00 8.00 TPH (Diesel Range: C10 - C28) ND mg/Kg


SYSTEM MONITORING SPIKE RECOVERY3


Matrix: Solid

Lab Sample ID: LCS-86938


Workorder: 18063396

LCS-86938Client ID: HAL019Contract: Phone

Extract Volume: 10 (µl)

LCS




Conversion Factor: 1.00SPIKEADDED

SAMPLERESULT RESULT

QC LIMITSREC.COMPOUND

SPIKE% REC.

SPIKE REPORTINGUNITS

Date Analyzed: 6/29/2018 6:41:25 PM

Dilution Factor: 1.00GC Column: RTX-5 ID: .53 (mm)


Calibration ID - Date: 8126 - 5/25/2018 11:25:37 A

Sequence No - File ID: 7297319 - 04F0401.D

Test Code: 8015UST_SV_STest No: SW8015C

TPH (Diesel Range: C10 - C28) N/A 340 85% 42.2 - 142%400 mg/Kg

# Column to be used to flag recovery and RPD values with an asterisk* Values outside of QC limits

Spike Recovery: 0 out of 1 outside limits


SYSTEM MONITORING SPIKE RECOVERY3


Matrix: Solid

Lab Sample ID: 18063471-01AMS

Sample wt/vol: 25.17 g% Moisture: - %

Workorder: 18063396

MSClient ID: HAL019Contract: Phone


MS




Conversion Factor: 1.00SPIKEADDED

SAMPLERESULT RESULT

QC LIMITSREC.COMPOUND

SPIKE% REC.

SPIKE REPORTINGUNITS







TPH (Diesel Range: C10 - C28) 20 370 88% 29.1 - 141%400 mg/Kg

# Column to be used to flag recovery and RPD values with an asterisk* Values outside of QC limits

Spike Recovery: 0 out of 1 outside limits


SYSTEM MONITORING SPIKE/DUPLICATE RECOVERY3D


Matrix: Solid

Lab Sample ID: 18063471-01AMSD

Sample wt/vol: 25.17 g% Moisture: - %

Workorder: 18063396

Client ID: HAL019Contract: Phone


MSD


Extract Batch - Date: 86938 - 6/29/2018 12:32:16 PM


Conversion Factor: 1.00LCS / MS

SPIKESAMPLERESULT

LCS / MSRESULT

LCS / MS% REC

QC. RECLIMITSCOMPOUND

LCSD / MSDRESULT

LCSD / MSD% REC LIMIT

RPDLCSD / MSD% RPDUNITS

REPORTINGSPIKE

LCSD / MSD


Dilution Factor: 1.00GC Column: RTX-5 ID: (mm)


Calibration ID - Date: 8126 - 5/25/2018 11:25:37 AM



QC. RECLIMITS

MSD

TPH (Diesel Range: C10 - 397 441 106%



Matrix: Solid


Sample wt/vol: 25.17 g% Moisture: N/A %

Workorder: 18063396

MSDClient ID: HAL019Contract: Phone


MSD







RPDDUP% RPDUNITS

REPORTING







TPH (Diesel Range: C10 - C28) 370 441 mg/Kg 17.52%



Matrix: Solid


Sample wt/vol: 25.17 g% Moisture: N/A %

Workorder: 18063396

MSDClient ID: HAL019Contract: Phone


MSD







RPDDUP% RPDUNITS

REPORTING







TPH (Oil Range: C22 - C36) ND ND mg/Kg 0.00%

DBPix Evaluation

www.ammara.com

Haley & Aldrich, Inc. 1 July 2018

Data Usability Summary Report

Project Name: Chesterfield Power Station – Dominion Energy (Clifton)

Analytical Laboratory: REI Consultants, Inc. (Division of Pace Analytical) – Beaver, WV

Validation Performed by: Vanessa Godard

Haley & Aldrich, Inc. prepared this Data Usability Summary Report (DUSR) to summarize the review and validation of the Dominion Energy soil samples collected on 25 June 2018. Analytical results for each Sample Delivery Group (SDG) below were reviewed with guidance provided by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to determine the data’s usability. This data validation and usability assessment was performed per the guidance and requirements established by the EPA National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review. The following quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) criteria from the analysis of the project samples were reviewed as applicable:

1. Sample Delivery Group Number 18063396 Holding Times/Preservation Reporting Limits and Sample Dilution Reporting Basis (Wet/Dry) Blank Sample Analysis Surrogate Recovery Compliance Laboratory Control Samples Matrix Spike Samples Field and Laboratory Duplicate Samples System Performance and Overall Assessment

Analytical precision and accuracy were evaluated based on the laboratory control, matrix spike, or lab duplicate analyses performed concurrently with the project samples. Data reported in this sampling event were reported to the laboratory method detection limit (MDL). Results found between the MDL and RL are flagged “J” estimated. Sample data were qualified by the laboratory in accordance with standard operating procedures (SOPs). Based on a check of the data qualifiers assigned as project sample results, these flags were applied to the reported results in accordance with the laboratory-specific SOPs. The results presented in each laboratory report were found to be compliant with the data quality objectives (DQOs) for the project and usable; any exceptions are noted in the following pages.

Haley & Aldrich, Inc. 600 South Meyer Ave Suite 100 Tucson, AZ 85701 520.289.8621


1. Sample Delivery Group Number 18063396 1.1 SUMMARY This DUSR summarizes the review of SDG number 18063396. Samples were collected, preserved, and shipped following standard chain of custody protocol. Samples were also received appropriately, identified correctly, and analyzed according to the monitoring schedule. Chains of custody were appropriately signed and dated by the field and/or laboratory personnel, with the following exceptions: Custody seals were not utilized.

Analyses were performed on the following samples:

Sample ID Sample Type Lab ID Sample

Collection Date Matrix Methods

SS-1 N 18063396-01 6/25/2018 Soil Percent Moisture and

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

(Diesel and Oil Ranges)

SS-2 N 18063396-02 6/25/2018 Soil

SS-3 N 18063396-03 6/25/2018 Soil

SS-4 N 18063396-04 6/25/2018 Soil Holding Times: Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (DRO & GRO) by EPA 8015C --------------------------------------------------- 7 days extraction + 40 days analysis Percent Moisture by EPA 2540B ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7 days 1.2 HOLDING TIMES/PRESERVATION The samples were prepared and analyzed within the holding time and preservation criteria specified per method protocol, with the following exceptions: Sample SS-3 was received slightly above the recommended temperature of 6.0 degrees C at 8.8 degrees

C. As the sample was received on ice with a temperature below 10 degrees C, there is evidence that chilling was clearly underway, and the sample was analyzed quickly (on the 4th day following collection), no action is required.

Cooler temperature on arrival to the laboratory was: Degrees C. 1.3 REPORTING LIMITS AND SAMPLE DILUTION No dilutions were performed on data in this report. 1.4 REPORTING BASIS (WET/DRY) Soil samples can be reported on either a wet (as received) or dry weight basis. Dry weight data indicate calculations have been made to compensate for the moisture content of the soil sample. Per the matrix and state requirements, data in this SDG were reported on a dry weight basis. 1.5 BLANK SAMPLE ANALYSIS Method blanks are prepared by the analytical laboratory and analyzed concurrently with the project samples to assess possible laboratory contamination. Method blank samples did not have detections, indicating that contamination from laboratory activities did not occur.

0.9, 8.8


1.6 SURROGATE RECOVERY COMPLIANCE Surrogates, also known as deuterated monitoring compounds, are compounds added to each sample prior to sample preparation to evaluate the percent recovery (%R) to ensure that the organic analytical method is efficient. The percent recoveries were within the limits specified by the EPA. 1.7 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLES The laboratory control sample/laboratory control sample duplicate (LCS/LCSD) analysis is used to assess the precision and accuracy of the analytical method independent of matrix interferences. Compounds associated with the LCS analyses exhibited recoveries within the control limits specified by the SOPs. An LCSD was not reported. As a site-specific MSD, field duplicate, or laboratory duplicate were also not

analyzed, this data set is not supported by any site-specific precision QC. The lab reported non-site-specific lab duplicates and MS/MSD pairs for percent moisture and EPA 8015C, respectively, which provide the required precision QC support.

1.8 MATRIX SPIKE SAMPLES Matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) data are used to assess the precision and accuracy of the analytical method and evaluate the effect of the sample matrix on the sample preparation procedures and measurement methodologies. No client samples were used for MS/MSD analysis in this SDG. 1.9 LABORATORY AND FIELD DUPLICATE SAMPLES The laboratory duplicate sample analysis is used by the laboratory at the time of analysis to demonstrate acceptable method precision. No client samples were used for laboratory duplicate analysis in this SDG. The field duplicate sample analysis is used to assess the precision of the field sampling procedures and analytical method. No field duplicates were collected in this data set. 1.10 SYSTEM PERFORMANCE AND OVERALL ASSESSMENT The results presented in this report were found to be compliant with the data quality objects for the project and the guidelines specified by analytical method. Based on the review of this report, the data are 100% useable. No qualifiers were applied to any data in this report.


References 1. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2017b. National Functional Guidelines for Organic

Superfund Methods Data Review. EPA-540-R-2017-002. January.

Glossary Laboratory qualified and unqualified data are verified against the supporting documentation during the review process. Based on this evaluation, qualifier codes may be added, deleted, or modified by the data reviewer. Results are qualified with the following codes in accordance with EPA National Functional Guidelines: Concentration (C) Qualifiers:

– U The compound was analyzed for but not detected. The associated value is the compound quantitation limit.

– B The compound was found in the sample and its associated blank. Its presence in the sample may be suspect.

Quantitation (Q) Qualifiers: – E The compound was quantitated above the calibration range. – D The concentration is based on a diluted sample analysis.

Validation Qualifiers: – J The compound was positively identified; however, the associated numerical value is an

estimated concentration only.

– J+ The result is an estimated quantity, but the result may be biased high. – J- The result is an estimated quantity, but the result may be biased low. – UJ The compound was not detected above the reported sample quantitation limit;

however, the reported limit is approximate and may or may not represent the actual limit of quantitation.

– JN The analysis indicated the presence of a compound for which there is presumptive evidence to make a tentative identification; the associated numerical value is therefore an estimated concentration only.

– R The sample results were rejected as unusable; the compound may or may not be present in the sample.

Sample Types: – N Primary Sample – FD Field Duplicate Sample – FB Field Blank Sample – EB Equipment Blank Sample – TB Trip Blank Sample –

2018-0806_HAI_Dominion Clifton Focused Soil Assessment MemoTablesFiguresAtt A - Lab Report & Data Validation Report

File No. 130623-002 Mr. Jason P. Ericson, P.G. Dominion ...... 6 August 2018 File No. 130623-002 Mr....

Documents

Transcript of File No. 130623-002 Mr. Jason P. Ericson, P.G. Dominion ...... 6 August 2018 File No. 130623-002 Mr....