HomeMy WebLinkAbout20012462.tiff GROUNDWATER MONITORING
WORK PLAN
VARRA COAL ASH BURIAL PROJECT
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
CGRS NO. 1-135-2755aa
by
CGRS,INC.
1301 Academy Court
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
800.288.2657
June 6, 2001
2001-2462
CGRS,Inc.
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Objectives 1
1.2 Background Information 1
2.0 PILOT STUDY 2
2.1 Project Start-up 2
2.2 Hydrology Determinations 2
2.3 Soil Borings 3
2.4 Monitoring Well Installation 3
2.5 Groundwater Level Measurements and Chemical Analyses 3
2.6 Water Quality &Hydrogeologic Monitoring 3
2.7 Aquifer Characterization 5
— 2.8 Contingency Plan and Abatement 5
3.0 ORGANIZATION AND STAFF ASSIGNMENTS 6
3.1 Project Personnel 6
3.2 Subcontractors 6
4.0 OVERVIEW-QUALITY ASSURANCE/OUALITY CONTROL 6
5.0 REMARKS 7
FIGURES
Figure 1 -Site Location Map
Figure 2-Registered Well Location Map
Figure 3-Area Use and Site Condition Map
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A-Methods and Procedures
Attachment B -Quality Assurance Project Plan
CGRS, Inc.
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WORK PLAN
VARRA COAL ASH BURIAL PROJECT
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
CGRS NO. 1-135-2755
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document presents the proposed work scope for the evaluation of coal ash burial in saturated media.
This will be accomplished by conducting a pilot field program, which consists of burying 400 tons of coal
ash in water table conditions in Weld County, Colorado. Rigorous water quality monitoring is proposed
over a one-year period to determine long-term leachability characteristics of coal ash under natural
conditions. Quarterly background water quality monitoring at the proposed test area is ongoing and has been
conducted over a one-year period. The field investigation will be performed in conjunction with a variety of
laboratory studies in order to evaluate potential liabilities or benefits associated with coal ash burial.
Specifically, this project addresses issues associated with the reclamation of gravel quarries under saturated
conditions. A variety of laboratory experiments were conducted in order to evaluate coal ash leaching
potentials.This work is performed under the authorization of Varra Companies.
— 1.1Obiectives
The purpose of this project is to identify potential liabilities with the reclamation of gravel quarries with
coal ash and to determine if coal ash meets the criteria for classification as an inert fill. Specific objectives
for the Varra Coal Ash Burial Project are to determine:
• Leaching characteristics of coal ash with respect to varying water quality conditions;
• Permeabilities of various types of coal ash (bottom and fly ash);
• Affects of coal ash burial on local hydrology and water quality;
• Hydrogeologic properties of coal ash; and
• Physical characteristics of coal ash in saturated media.
1.2 Background Information
The study area is an active gravel quarry located in the NW 1/4, Section 31, Township 3 North, Range 68
West, 6i° P.M., Weld County, Colorado (Figure 1). The surficial geology of the area as documented by
Colton, 1978, varies between wind blown deposits of clay, silt and sand and sandy to gravelly alluvium,
which are Holocene in age. Colluvium consisting of bouldery to pebbly sandy silt and clay may contain and
interfinger with alluvium of various ages. The depth to groundwater at the site generally varies between
three and ten feet below ground surface (bgs). The inferred groundwater flow direction is to the northeast
roughly parallel to the St. Vrain River drainage. The Pierre Shale underlies the unconsolidated alluvial
CGRS, Inc.
deposits in this area. The depth to bedrock in this area as documented by field observation varies between
15 and 30 feet below ground surface.
A United States Geological Survey investigation documented groundwater occurrence and movement near
the study area. Underflow calculations in the vicinity of the study area indicate that 600 acre-feet of water
passes across a two mile section of the alluvial valley.If the average depth to bedrock varies between 20 and
30 feet below ground surface then the average hydraulic conductivity is calculated to vary between 97 and
147 feet per day. Assuming a hydraulic gradient of 0.0023 feet per foot and a porosity of 0.27, the seepage
velocity(actual groundwater flow velocity)is estimated to vary between 0.83 and 1.25 feet per day.
Water well records obtained from the Colorado Division of Water Resources indicate that one well may be
located within one-quarter mile of the proposed test plot. The registered well owner is Dakolios
Construction and the permitted use of the well is industrial. The location of registered wells within a half-
- mile radius of the proposed test plot are depicted on Figure 2. Field verification of well locations and
construction details, if available will be performed prior to project start-up.
2.0 PILOT STUDY
2.1 Project Start-up
The project start-up will consist of developing a work plan and a site specific Health and Safety plan. All
required permits will be obtained prior to conducting the investigation. Utility companies will be contacted
for the location of all underground utilities prior to commencing investigative activities (telephone, sewer,
electrical,cable television,natural gas lines,oil and gas pipelines,buried tanks and wells).
2.2 Hydrology Determinations
A site-specific investigation will be conducted prior to pilot project. We anticipate that between three and
four groundwater monitoring wells will be installed to determine local hydrology and water quality. The
investigation at a minimum will determine local groundwater flow direction and rate, soil conditions,
porosity and hydraulic conductivity. Groundwater quality will be determined by obtaining water samples
from one monitoring well on a quarterly basis until the ash placement is completed. Analytical parameters
will be identical to those presented in the column-leaching test. At least two samples will be analyzed prior
to the pilot project. The results of the investigation will be presented in a report to all interested parties for
approval. It is anticipated that up to ten wells will be installed to monitor variations in local aquifer
characteristics as a result of coal ash burial.
2
CGRS,Inc.
2.3 Soil Borings
Up to ten soil borings will be drilled by hollow stem auger techniques at locations depicted on Figure 3.
Soil samples will be collected on five-foot intervals using a split-spoon sampler. Boring logs will be
constructed and will include interpretations of soil characteristics, conditions encountered during drilling,
sample locations,and any other observations pertinent to the soil boring operation.
2.4 Monitoring Well Installation
Soil borings will be converted to two-inch diameter monitoring wells. The wells will be installed and
screened from approximately five feet above the groundwater table to the vertical limit of the well. The
monitoring wells will be constructed using two-inch diameter, flush threaded, schedule 40 PVC casing and
factory slotted screen. Soil boring and groundwater monitoring methods and procedures are presented in
Attachment A.
2.5 Groundwater Level Measurements and Chemical Analyses
In soil borings completed as groundwater monitoring wells, the ground surface elevation of each boring
and/or monitoring well will be surveyed to the nearest 0.01 foot, and referenced to an arbitrary datum if
actual elevations cannot be determined. The areal location will be surveyed to the nearest 0.5 feet.
_ Groundwater level measurements will be taken in the borings and wells by using an electrical water level
indicator.This data will be used to construct a groundwater contour map, which will assist in characterizing
groundwater flow direction and the hydraulic gradient of the water table surface.
The hydraulic conductivity will be estimated by performing slug and/or aquifer testing. Prior to initiating the
pilot project, groundwater quality samples will be obtained and analyzed for pH, TSS, TDS, and other
relevant parameters identified in the laboratory leaching tests. Samples will be obtained from no less than
one up-gradient and two down gradient wells.The anticipated locations of the monitoring wells are depicted
on Figure 3.Typical monitoring well construction details are described in Attachment A.
2.6 Water Quality & Hydrogeologic Monitoring
The effects on groundwater quality and hydrology as a result of coal ash burial will be evaluated by placing
roughly 400 tons of coal ash within a trench at the location shown on Figure 3.The coal ash will be placed
so that the water table intersects the coal ash and that any fluctuation of the water table will be within the
coal ash bed. The coal ash will be buried in a trench measuring 10 feet in width, 100 feet in length and
roughly 10 feet in depth.
In order to evaluate hydraulic characteristics of bottom ash and fly ash, one-half of the trench will be filled
with fly ash. A native soil divider will be left and the other half of the trench will be filled with bottom ash
and fly ash. Bottom ash will be placed in the lower one-half of the saturated portion of the trench and fly ash
3
CGRS, Inc.
will be placed to one foot below ground surface. Approximately one foot of native soil will be place over
the entire trench.
Variations in water quality will be verified through quarterly water quality monitoring for analytical
parameters identified in the laboratory quality assurance plan (Appendix B).The results of the analyses will
be submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Division of Minerals and
Geology and Weld County Health Department. Within one week of coal ash burial water quality samples
will be obtained from all monitoring wells. Water quality samples will be obtained on a weekly basis for
one month, then monthly till the end of the first quarter and then on a quarterly basis until project
termination.
Action Level (AL) wells will be placed between the ash and point of compliance(POC) wells. The distance
of the wells will be 10, 25 and 40 feet from the trench. This staggered spacing will document water quality
at various distances downstream from the trench. Water quality data will be used to validate analytical fate
and transport models presented previously. The Al wells will provide early warning of possible adverse
environmental impacts. However, the intent of the project is to determine if coal ash can be safely deposited
in wet, high-energy environments. Analytical models predict that no standards will be exceeded at fifty feet
downgradient of the trench, which is where the Division requires POC wells be placed. An exceedenance in
water quality standards in AL wells should not constitute a violation of the permit. The petitioner reserves
the right to terminate the project based on AL well water quality data. If a standard(s) is exceeded in an AL
well no less than monthly monitoring will occur (in AL wells) to monitor possible adverse impacts at the
POC wells.
If a standard is exceeded in a POC well,the well will be re-sampled within one week of receiving analytical
results. If the confirmation sample confirms the initial finding then the project will be terminated and the ash
removed from the trench.The ash will be disposed of at an approved landfill as soon as the material reaches
and acceptable moisture level.
Background water quality data indicate that iron, lead, sulfate and nitrate have been measured at levels
above established standards. Boron and nitrite have been measured at levels very close to established
standards. Water samples will be obtained from wells placed in the trench. These data, as well as column
leaching data, should establish the elements or compounds of concern. The determination that the ash has
contributed to groundwater degradation shall be determined by the State's project manager with
recommendations made by CGRS.
4
CGRS, Inc.
2.7 Aquifer Characterization
In order to estimate the hydraulic conductivity (K) of the aquifer, a minimum of four slug tests will be
conducted at monitoring wells deemed to be representative of the aquifer at the site and in the downgradient
area. Water level measurements and times will be recorded using an InSitu Troll SP4000 pressure
transducer. The test results will be input into standardized software, utilizing the Bouwer Rice Method, to
determine hydraulic conductivity in the aquifer at each well. The average groundwater flow rate (v)can be
estimated using the following equation:
v= Ki/4)
where:
v=average groundwater flow rate(ft/day)
K=hydraulic conductivity(ft/day)
i=hydraulic gradient(ft/ft)
=porosity (dimensionless).
Permeability testing will be conducted in wells completed within the ash on a periodic basis to evaluate
possible changes in hydraulic conductivity with time.
2.8 Contingency Plan and Abatement
If adverse changes to water quality as predetermined by all interested parties are observed during testing, the
coal ash will be immediately excavated and stored in a dry impoundment within the Varra property
boundary. Native soils will be placed in the trench and water quality will be monitored on a monthly basis
for the constituents of concern. Additional remedial activities, if needed, will be commensurate with the
extent and degree of water quality degradation. The water quality monitoring schedule is rigorous and
should allow for the detection of adverse environmental conditions long before any significant degradation
could occur. If the project is terminated it is likely that the only corrective action that will be required is
source removal and monitoring. Monitoring will be conducted until it can be demonstrated that points of
exposure(POEs)are not subject to impact.
Any other required remediation will be dependant on the physical and chemical characteristic of the
contaminate of concern. Corrective action could include oxidant/reductant injection, permeable reactive
barrier, groundwater pump and treat or any combination of the above. Analytical data generated from the
column experiment indicates that boron and selenium are the most leachable elements (nonmetals). As such,
it is likely that the most effective form of remediation would be groundwater recovery and treatment.
Previous analytical studies show that a single well pumping less than 10 gpm would capture all groundwater
bypassing the trench. Treatment for boron or selenium could be accomplished by ion exchange or reverse
osmosis. Dilution with natural waters is also an option.
5
CGRS, Inc.
3.0 ORGANIZATION AND STAFF ASSIGNMENTS
3.1 Project Personnel
Mr. Joby Adams of CGRS will serve as project coordinator and contact to Varra Companies. Dr. James
Warner (CSU Groundwater Program Leader) of Colorado State University will provide senior technical
review. Mr. Chester Hitchens of CGRS will serve as field coordinator and will be responsible for
supervising drilling activities and will perform or supervise water quality sampling.
3.2 Subcontractors
Subcontracted services for this project will include Drilling Engineers of Fort Collins, Colorado, and
Technology Laboratories,Inc.,of Fort Collins,Colorado.
Drilling Engineers will be responsible for drilling soil borings and completing the borings as groundwater
monitoring wells.Technology Laboratory will analyze groundwater samples for the analytes of concern.
4.0 OVERVIEW- QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL
Quality assurance (QA) is a management system for ensuring that all information, data, and decisions
_ — resulting from the project are technically sound and properly documented. Quality Control (QC) is the
functional mechanism through which quality assurance achieves its goals. Quality control programs, for
example, define the frequency and methods of checks, audits, and reviews necessary to identify problems
and dictate corrective action to resolve these problems, thus ensuring data of high quality. Thus, a QA/QC
program pertains to all data collection,evaluation, and review activities that are part of the project.
The use of qualified personnel for conducting various portions of the project is of paramount importance to
an effective QA/QC program. This pertains not only to qualified QA/QC specialists, but also to specialists
in other fields, including hydrogeologists, air quality specialists, soil scientists, analytical chemists and other
scientific and technical disciplines. The project manager should ensure that qualified specialists, primarily
individuals with the proper education, training, and experience, including licensed or certified professionals,
are directing and performing the various project activities. The same general principles apply to selection of
contractors and/or outside laboratories.
Another important aspect of the QA/QC program is the communication between the QA/QC organization
and the project manager. Regular appraisal by the project manager of the quality aspects related to the
ongoing project data-gathering efforts provides the mechanism whereby the established objectives may be
met.
6
CGRS, Inc.
QA/QC procedures should provide details relating to the schedule, information to be provided, and the
mechanism for reporting to the project manager. Reports to the project manager should include:
• Periodic assessment of measurement data accuracy,precision, and completeness;
• results of performance audits;
• Results of system audits;
• Significant QA/QC problems and recommended solutions; and
• Resolutions of previously stated problems.
The individual responsible for preparing the periodic reports should be identified. These reports should
contain a separate QA/QC section that summarizes data quality information. The Quality Assurance Project
Plan is presented as Attachment C.
5.0 REMARKS
The scope of work is based upon current available information and our understanding of this project. As the
project develops, changes to the project scope of work may be required. If changes in the scope of work are
dictated by the needs of the project,these changes will be presented prior to implementation.
This report was prepared by CGRS,INC.
M` Dateo62/ /
Joby L Adam P.G.
Princip 1/Hydrogeologist
Reviewed by:
-44b, )� u, role Date 6/7/G/
Chester Irtchens,P.G.
Senior Hydrogeologist
7
; o
1 •N'.\ _V---->" \\N•Th 4906 .° '
:14 -7 C-----)1/ (-tett ���III
O in = �•
�/ch �g50 il � r,C
J
4950 •it '4894 4 78 • '' 478 r
I,. O ii -"a' --� _ — j5 N crm p
\ 1 e ,I,
J / I —��J �_ <.Aft; `� /I. SDitch \—, 0 II D�
1 / 1.1,0 , „--,_— 'i T-
29 p 50 i � � ii
I Y
9
// Y
II J Oli
Y60
4.
o ° /
O
/ SITE
4897 ii, __ LOCATION _.. - _ \
• _..—_ - - - ---
v'
'11 ► M _ .
II .. YYYY���
s
48,0 1 : - / z:\ 3 ?I II •y850 \ _ . I Y .
_lam///1 9. `•I St Vrain Sch
II -•U'J J� '�.•. aeoz
,',,tI IR- 'r}
B� P
-:1}__ 4 — / Po
4809
o %v f
e/
B II
�/ n
491 r • ° 4833 ' o 480. r" ///��� \ / —��\ __oe
_- u
avo
BzJ
/ �} 1
_ N FIGURE 1
i _,OWANDA QUADRANGLE VARRA COMPANIES
COLORADO-WELD Co SITE LOCATION MAP - COAL ASH STUDY AREA
I 7 5 SERIES PROJECT NO. PREPAVED BY C G RS
1-135-2755 JLA y,7J,r COLORADO GROUNDWATER
H.....-..- 0.1 DATE 07/02/98 REVIE D BY RESOURCE SERVICES
0 2000
4 %749 .
i % CJ_°6
-)n1 m 1 � v ;t•- ��
e a •
aso
\Ss c4
/ o$iy
•4894 66 \ — •6 I --I
0
2
~ /
),/} cp :.
489r i1. r
829 - -- S.-- Lf
�../'iI _ 099
,` , n F I ,
?? gy�pp..
.1$ . y`4kttP� I 4,,
\ yp ...8082t V)-3m SCII P r/r6 .. � o 32 0,
- \r '� ,,
\ �.• 1 '�''D31 lin `A551
E09
o
_K-
"- f � _ ° �I. I J/ r SEEP �'
Ilc u II
a "m41: om
II
-. �,Th ' • • 1.1. (
B ' '"------‘
•4813 e 48/3 / — --
�4823 _
r+n Hce "' e iir7 - - _� ç
asc
) / / AAA oi�ii� ,482 .' �/ �•
7-4830,-_, �iTCN
;.)„__z- . , --c u ,
�_ I�/// _
- f , P
FIGURE 2
GOWANDA QUADRANGLE REGISTERED WELL LOCATIONS
COLORADO-WELD Co. VARRA COMPANIES
7.5 SERIES PROJECT NO. PREPARED BY CGRS
- 1-135-2755 JLA COLORADO GROUNDWATER
00 DATE 07/02/98 REVIEWED BY RESOURCE SERVICES
CGWeld Gounry Planning Dept.
JAN 0 4 1999
RECEIVED
December 29, 1998
Glenn F. Mallory
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE)
Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South
Denver, CO 80246-1530
RE: Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County Colorado
CGRS No. 1-135-2755
Dear Mr. Mallory:
Enclosed please find the draft work plan for the Varra Coal Ash Burial Project. Please note that
while the work plan describes in detail the laboratory testing methods and proposed field work,
the work plan does not include analytical results or a discussion of analytical results as all of the
results have not been received. When all results have been received and tabulated a final work
plan will be submitted to all interested parties for review. The work plan is being submitted as a
draft in hopes that the time required for review will he lessened once the final draft has been
submitted.
I have included a summary of analytical results available at this time (Table 2). The results are for
water samples obtained form the Sequential Extraction Leaching Procedure (SELP), which is
described in detail in the work plan. This test should represent the maximum leaching capability
of a material, as it is an agitated extraction test.
A review of analytical results shows that none of the samples exceeded hazardous waste
characteristic levels. In addition, as a general trend, second extraction results were lower than
initial extraction analyses. Aluminum and iron were the analytes most prevalent in exceeding
primary or secondary drinking water standards.
It is our belief that the non-agitated column leaching test will be most indicitative of field
conditions and comparisons of pore volume flow through verses concentration will be made to
access possible adverse impacts to waters of the State.
P.O. Box 14£39 Sri ,, 71,-/ �:
WORK PLAN
VARRA COAL ASH BURIAL PROJECT
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
CGRS NO. 1-135-2755
by
CGRS, INC.
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY
GROUNDWATER PROGRAM
April 1, 1999
CGRS,Inc.
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Objectives 1
1.2 Background Information 1
1.2.1 Local Geology/Hydrology 1
1.2.2 Coal Ash Source 2
2.0 INITIAL LABORATORY TESTING 3
2.1 Hydraulic Conductivity 3
2.2 Porosity 3
2.3 Analytical Data 4
2.3.1 SELP 4
2.3.2 SGCLP 5
2.3.3 TCLP 5
2.3.4 SGLP 6
3.0 ANALYTICAL RESULTS 7
3.1 SELP 7
3.2 TCLP 7
3.3 SGLP 8
3.4 SGCLP 8
3.5 Overview of Laboratory Data 8
4.0 PILOT STUDY 9
4.1 Project Start-up 9
4.2 Hydrogeology Determinations 9
4.3 Background Water Quality 10
4.4 Water Quality and Hydrogeologic Monitoring 10
4.5 Contingency Plan and Abatement 11
5.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE 11
6.0 ORGANIZATION AND STAFF ASSIGNMENTS 11
6.1 Project Personnel 11
6.2 Subcontractors 12
7.0 OVERVIEW-QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL 12
8.0 REMARKS 13
CGRS,Inc.
FIGURES:
Figure 1 -Site Location Map
Figure 2-Registered Well Location Map
Figure 3 -Area Use and Site Condition Map
TABLES:
Table 1 -Results for Hydraulic Conductivity and Porosity Tests
Table 2-Analytical Results—SELP
Table 3 -Analytical Results—TCLP
Table 4-Analytical Results—SGLP
Table 5-Analytical Results-SGCLP
Table 6-SELP Analytical Data in Excess of Water Quality Standards
APPENDIX:
Appendix A—Selected Data—Groundwater Quality and Hydrogeology of the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer in the
Milton Reservoir Area,Weld County,Colorado
Appendix B-Methods and Procedures
Appendix C—Quality Assurance Project Plan
CGRS,Inc.
WORK PLAN
_ VARRA COAL ASH BURIAL PROJECT
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
CGRS NO. 1-135-2755
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document presents the proposed work scope for the evaluation of coal ash burial in saturated
media. The field investigation will be performed in conjunction with a variety of laboratory studies
in order to evaluate potential liabilities or benefits associated with coal ash burial. Specifically, this
project addresses issues associated with the reclamation of gravel quarries under saturated
conditions. A variety of laboratory experiments were conducted in order to evaluate coal ash
leaching potentials for different pH ranges relative to effluent pore volume. The information
generated by this project will be invaluable to private companies or regulatory agencies insofar as
evaluating under what conditions coal ash can be placed without incurring significant liability. This
work is performed under the authorization of Varra Companies. The generation of this report was
a joint effort between CGRS, Inc. and Colorado State University Groundwater Program(CSU).
1.1 Objectives
The purpose of this project is to identify potential liabilities with the reclamation of gravel quarries
with coal ash and to determine if coal ash meets the criteria for classification as an inert fill.
Specific objectives for the Varra Coal Ash Burial Project are to determine:
• Leaching characteristics of coal ash with respect to varying water quality conditions;
• Permeabilities of various types of coal ash(bottom and fly ash);
• Affects of coal ash burial on local hydrology and water quality;
• Hydrogeologic properties of coal ash; and
• Physical characteristics of coal ash in saturated media.
1.2 Background Information
1.2.1 Local Geology/Hydrogeology
The study area is an active gravel quarry located in the NW 1/4, Section 31, Township 3 North,
Range 68 West, 6th P.M., Weld County Colorado (Figure 1). The surficial geology of the area as
1
CGRS,Inc.
documented by Colton, 1978, varies between wind blown deposits of clay, silt and sand and sandy
to gravelly alluvium, which are Holocene in age. Colluvium consisting of bouldery to pebbly sandy
silt and clay may contain and interfmger with alluvium of various ages.
The depth to groundwater at the site generally varies between three and ten feet below ground
surface(bus). The inferred groundwater flow direction is to the northeast roughly parallel to the St.
Vrain River drainage.
Water well records obtained from the Colorado Division of Water Resources indicate that one well
may be located within one quarter mile of the proposed test plot. The registered well owner is
Dakolios Construction and the permitted use of the well is industrial. The location of registered
wells within a half-mile radius of the proposed test plot are depicted on Figure 2. Field verification
of well locations and construction details, if available will be performed prior to project start-up.
Groundwater quality data for the immediate study area are limited. Reeder, 1993, describes in
detail the regional hydrogeology near the area of interest. Water quality data for 36 domestic wells
completed as bedrock aquifers (Larimie-Fox Hills Formation) in the Milton Reservoir were
compiled by Reeder. A review of water quality data indicate that all wells sampled exceeded water
quality standards for total suspended solids and a large percentage exceeded standards for pH.
Field and analytical data documented by Reeder and other background information are presented in
Appendix A.
1.2.2 Coal Ash Source
Public Service coal comes from a number of Colorado mines in Routt, Moffat, Delta and Gunnison
counties. These mines include West Elk, TwentyMile, Powderhorn, and ColoWyo. This coal is
normally purchased under long term contracts, which specify certain analytical parameters.
Therefore, the chemical and physical properties of the coal (and resulting ash) do not change
significantly from year to year. Analytical information for each of these coal sources is available
as is the analytical information on the ash. This information has been provided in our earlier
submittal. Comparisons of analytical data completed in the early 1990s with recent data indicate
little variation in any of the ash constituents.
2
CGRS,Inc.
2.0 INITIAL LABORATORY TESTING
Public Service Company generated analytical data indicating that fly ash is not a characteristic
hazardous waste. Numerous analytical methods were used such as toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure (TCLP). CGRS in conjunction with Colorado State University Groundwater Program
performed a number of tests that included:
• Hydraulic Conductivity Testing(Permeameter Test);
• Porosity Determination;
• Sequential Extraction Leaching Procedure(SELP);
• Synthetic Ground Water Column Leaching Procedure(SGCLP);
• Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure(TCLP); and
• Synthetic Ground Water Leaching Procedure(SGLP).
A discussion of these tests is provided below.
2.1 Hydraulic Conductivity
The hydraulic conductivity of the ash was performed using either a "Constant Head" or "Falling
Head" Permeameter. The Constant Head Permeameter works better for high permeability porous
materials and the Falling Head Permeameter works best for low permeability porous materials.
With either test the flow rate and the potentiometric head loss are measured through a sample of
the ash. The hydraulic conductivity was then calculated using Darcy's Law. The hydraulic
conductivity of the ash is required to determine the expected rate of groundwater flow through the
buried ash and the effects of burial on ground water flow patterns.
2.2 Porosity
Porosity is the ratio of the volume of the voids to the bulk volume of the sample. With this test the
volume and dry weight of a sample of ash was measured. The ash was then saturated with water
under a vacuum pressure and the weight of the saturated sample measured. For saturated
conditions the volume of the voids is equal to the volume of the water. The porosity is required to
determine the pore volume for the ash. The results of hydraulic conductivity and porosity testing
are summarized in Table 1.
3
CGRS,Inc.
TABLE 1 -Results for Hydraulic Conductivity and Porosity Tests
Sample ID Hydraulic Porosity
Conductivity
K(ft/day)
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3
0.24 0.51
Cherokee 4 Ash with Sodium
0.23 0.46
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum
0.09 0.49
Bottom Ash
178. 0.51
Recycled Concrete
111. 0.29
Recycled Asphalt
130. 0.33
The bottom ash, the recycled concrete and the recycled asphalt all had relatively high hydraulic
conductivity values in the range of 111 to 178 feet/day. The three fly ash samples had very low
hydraulic conductivity values in the range of 0.09 to 0.24 feet/day. The porosity of the fly and
bottom ash ranged from 0.46 to 0.51. These values are characteristic of very fine porous
materials. The porosity of the recycled concrete and asphalt was 0.29 and 0.33, respectively.
2.3 Analytical Data
2.3.1 "Sequential Extraction Leaching Procedure"(SELP)
The purpose of the"Sequential Extraction Leaching Procedure" (SELP) test was to determine the
total quantity of the various chemical contaminants that may be potentially leached from the ash.
The SELP test used synthetic groundwater with varying pH levels as the leaching fluid(s). With the
SELP test, a specified weight(e.g. one kilogram) of the ash was combined with a specified volume
of water(e.g. one liter) and agitated by rolling for a specified period of time (e.g. 18 hours). This
represented a single extraction. The concentration of the chemical contaminant was then measured
in the water. The SELP test was repeated for several sequential extractions until most of the
4
CGRS,Inc.
chemical contaminants have been extracted from the ash. This normally requires three or more
extractions. Only two extractions were performed due to budgetary constraints.
The SELP test was repeated for synthetic groundwater with varying pH values to represent a range
of possible site conditions. Synthetic groundwater(s)with pH values of 5, 7 and 8.5 were used. The
fast extraction from the SELP test for each pH value was analyzed for the full suite of chemical
compounds. These include:
• Sulfate • Chloride • Fluoride • Cyanide
• Mercury •Nitrate •Nitrite
• 20 other metals (Aluminum, Antimony, Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium, Boron,
Cadmium, Chromium, Cobalt, Copper, Iron, Lead, Lithium, Manganese, Nickel,
Selenium, Silver, Thallium, Vanadium and Zinc). Conductivity and pH will of
the leachate was measured at C SU prior to sending the sample to the laboratory
for chemical analyses.
The SELP test was conducted at CSU. The extracted water samples from the test were sent to
Analytica Environmental Labs for chemical analyses. Analytical results from the first extraction
were used to identify those compounds to be analyzed for in subsequent extractions of the SELP
test and in the SGCLP test. Those chemical compounds, which were either non-detect or detected
at very low concentrations during the first extraction were not analyzed for in subsequent
extractions of the SELP test or in the SGCLP test.
2.3.2 "Toxic Characteristics Leaching Procedure" (TCLP)
The "Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure" (TCLP) test is designed to determine the mobility
of toxicity characteristic constituents and is the EPA method for classifying wastes as hazardous or
non hazardous based on toxicity. The full suite of chemical compounds(see list for SELP test) was
analyzed during the TCLP test.
2.3.3 "Synthetic Ground Water Leaching Procedure"(SGLP)
The"Synthetic Ground Water Leaching Procedure" (SGLP) test is identical to the TCLP test with
the exception that synthetic groundwater is used as the leaching fluid. A description of the TCLP
test is provided above. The SGLP test was developed to simulate geochemical conditions more
5
CGRS,Inc.
closely approximating natural ground water than for the TCLP test. The results of the SGLP are
directly comparable to the TCLP test.
Groundwater obtained from the study area was used for the test. The full suite of chemical
compounds (see list for SELP test) were analyzed during the SGLP test. The groundwater used in
the SGLP test as the leaching fluid was analyzed for full suite of chemical compounds. The
difference in the before and after chemical concentrations in the ground water used in the SGLP
test represents the concentration of the chemical contaminants leached from the ash.
2.3.4 "Synthetic Groundwater Column Leaching Procedure" (SGCLP)
The purpose of the "Synthetic Groundwater Column Leaching Procedure" (SGCLP) test was to
determine the rate as a function of pore volume at which the chemical contaminant will be leached
from the buried ash. The SGCLP test used synthetic groundwater with varying pH levels as the
leaching fluid(s). With the SGCLP test, a specified weight (e.g. one kilogram) of the ash was
placed in a column. Once the column was saturated, the testing period began. One pore volume of
water was passed through the column and the concentration of the various contaminants measured
in the outflow water. The SGCLP test was then repeated for several sequential pore volumes of
water. The hydraulic head on the column was adjusted so that one pore volume of water was
passed through the sample in about 12 hours. Water samples were obtained for analyses at 2, 4
and 8 pore volumes of water flow through.
The SGCLP test was repeated for synthetic ground water with varying pH values to represent a
range of possible site conditions. Synthetic ground water(s) with pH values of 5, 7 and 8.5 were
used as the leaching fluid(s). For the fly ash, which has a very low hydraulic conductivity, the
SGCLP test was conducted for 1, 2 and 4 pore volumes. For the bottom ash, the recycled concrete
and the recycled asphalt, which have high hydraulic conductivity, water samples were analyzed at
2, 4 and 8 pore volumes.
The chemical analyses for the first extraction of the SELP test was used to determine the suite of
chemical compounds of interest in the SGCLP test. Chemical compounds, which were either non-
detect or detected at very low were eliminated from further testing. The SELP test is a highly
6
CGRS,Inc.
agitated test where as the SGCLP test is not. The SGCLP test was conducted at CSU with the
collected water samples sent to Analytica Environmental Labs for chemical analyses.
• Sulfate • Chloride • Fluoride • Cyanide
• Mercury •Nitrite. Nitrate
• 10 other metals from the following list of 20 metals (Aluminum, Antimony,
Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium, Boron, Cadmium, Chromium, Cobalt, Copper, Iron,
Lead, Lithium, Manganese, Nickel, Selenium, Silver, Thallium, Vanadium and
Zinc). Conductivity and pH will of the leachate was measured at CSU prior to
sending the sample to the laboratory for chemical analysis.
3.0 ANALYTICAL RESULTS
3.1 "Sequential Extraction Leaching Procedure" (sELn
Analytical results for the SELP are presented in Table 2. As mentioned, the purpose of the SELP
testing was to estimate the maximum leaching capability of a material. In general, substantial
concentration reductions were observed in second extraction analyses. Of the metals analyzed, at
all pHs Aluminum, Boron, Iron and Manganese appeared to be the most leachable. None of these
elements are listed in the primary drinking water standards. It appears that variations in pH have
some effect in leaching characteristics of the sample set. At a pH of 8.5, there were 14 elements
that exceeded standards in samples obtained from Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3. These concentrations
were generally much higher than other ash samples as well. Recycled asphalt had the next highest
number of elements that were in excess of drinking water standards for metals.
At a pH of 7, samples obtained from Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum appeared to be the most
leachable and at a pH of 5, samples obtained from the recycled asphalt had the most elements
exceeding drinking water standards. Of the nonmetals fluoride appeared to be the most leachable
compound, insofar as having the most number of samples exceeding the agricultural water quality
standard.
3.2 "Toxic Characteristics Leaching Procedure"(TCLP)
The results of TCLP testing are presented in Table 3. A review of Table 3 shows that none of the
samples tested exhibited characteristics of a hazardous waste. Overall, analyte concentrations were
7
CGRS,Inc.
much less than those resulting from the SELP testing, which was a more aggressive test. Boron,
fluoride and manganese appeared to be the most leachable analytes in this test.
3.3"Synthetic Ground Water Leaching Procedure"(SGLP)
Analytical results for the SGLP are presented in Table 4. Water was obtained from the gravel
quarry pond immediately adjacent from the proposed study area (Figure 3) and was used as the
leaching fluid. This water is considered to be representative of local groundwater quality and was
analyzed to determine background water quality of the leaching medium. A review of Table 4
shows that the only analytes that were in excess of any standards were boron, manganese,
selenium, fluoride, sulfate and nitrite. The water obtained from the quarry had sulfate and fluoride
concentrations of 2,900 and 4 mg/L, respectively. These concentrations are considered high enough
to inhibit leaching of these analytes to the surrounding groundwater regime.
3.4 "Synthetic Groundwater Column Leaching Procedure" (SGCLP)
The results for the SGCLP are presented in Table 5. A review of Table 5 shows that boron is the
most leachable element with fluoride and sulfate being the most prevalent nonmetal constituents in
excess of applicable standards. With the exception of aluminum and barium all constituents of
concern decreased dramatically with respect to increasing pore volumes. It appears that variations
in pH may have had a slight affect on leachability of different coal ash samples.
3.5 Overview of Laboratory Data
The various testing regimes document hydraulic and leaching characteristics of coal ash.
Permeabilities of coal ash varied over three orders of magnitude. The hydraulic conductivity of
bottom ash closely approximated recycled concrete and recycled asphalt and is comparable to
permeabilities associated with medium and coarse-grained sands. Fly ash samples were three
orders of magnitude less permeable than bottom ash and non-ash samples and have permeabilities
comparable with silt and clay.
In general, the most prevalent elements or compounds detected in the leaching studies coincide with
the general composition of coal ash(aluminum, barium, boron, iron and manganese). The intent of
SELP study was to determine the maximum leachability of coal ash under different saturated
environments — namely different pH values. Fluctuations in pH did seem to have an affect on the
8
CGRS,Inc.
leachability of various samples. It appears that under certain conditions, recycled asphalt is more
reactive with fluids than coal ash. Recycled concrete had minor reactivity with different leaching
fluids. A summary of samples exceeding a water quality standard in the SELP testing is presented
in Table 6.
The TCLP testing showed dramatically reduced analyte concentrations. Boron, fluoride and
manganese were the analytes the exhibited the most leachability above water quality standards in
-- this test.
The SCLP was identical to the TCLP testing with the exception that the gravel quarry water was
used as the leaching medium. A review of Table 4 shows that boron was the most leachable
element. Background levels of sulfate and fluoride exceeded water quality standards and were high
enough to mask all leaching characteristics of these compounds.
The SGCLP showed that boron, fluoride and sulfate were by far the most leachable compounds.
Boron and sulfate concentrations decreased dramatically compared to pore volume flow through.
4.0 PILOT STUDY
4.1 Project Start-up
The project start-up will consist of developing a work plan and a site specific Health and Safety
plan. All required permits will be obtained prior to conducting the investigation. Utility companies
will be contacted for the location of all underground utilities prior to commencing investigative
activities (telephone, sewer, electrical, cable television, natural gas lines, oil and gas pipelines,
buried tanks and wells).
4.2 Hydrology Determinations
Prior to initiating coal ash placement, the local groundwater flow direction will be estimated from
groundwater monitoring wells installed to determine hydraulic characteristics of the local aquifer
and local groundwater quality. It is anticipated that ten wells will be installed to monitor variations
in local aquifer characteristics as a result of coal ash burial. The hydraulic conductivity will be
estimated by performing slug and/or aquifer testing. Prior to initiating the pilot project groundwater
9
CGRS,Inc.
quality samples will be obtained and analyzed for pH, TSS, TDS, and other relevant parameters
identified in the laboratory leaching tests. Samples will be obtained from no less than one up-
gradient and two down gradient wells. The anticipated locations of the monitoring wells are
depicted on Figure 3. Typical monitoring well construction details are presented in Appendix B.
4.3 Background Water Quality
In addition to the laboratory testing presented herein, background groundwater quality samples will
be obtained from site monitoring wells immediately subsequent to their placement and immediately
prior to coal ash placement. The gravel quarry water obtained for the laboratory testing should be
chemically consistent with local groundwater as it is in hydraulic connection with proposed testing
site. The three sampling events should establish baseline levels of the constituents of concern.
4.4 Water Quality &Hydrogeologic Monitoring
The effects on groundwater quality and hydrology as a result of coal ash burial will be evaluated
by placing roughly 400 tons of coal ash within a trench at the location shown on Figure 3.The coal
ash will be placed so that the water table intersects the coal ash and that any fluctuation of the
water table will be within the coal ash bed. The coal ash will be buried in a trench measuring 10
feet in width, 100 feet in length and roughly 10 feet in depth.
In order to evaluate hydraulic characteristics of bottom ash and fly ash, one-half of the trench will
be filled with fly ash. A native soil divider will be left and the other half of the trench will be filled
with bottom ash and fly ash. Bottom ash will be placed in the lower one-half of the saturated
portion of the trench and fly ash will be placed to one foot below ground surface. Approximately
one foot of native soil will be place over the entire trench.
Variations in water quality will be verified through quarterly water quality monitoring for
analytical parameters identified in the laboratory quality assurance plan (Appendix C). The results
of the analyses will be submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment,
Division of Minerals and Geology and Weld County Health Department. Within one week of coal
ash burial water quality samples will be obtained from all monitoring wells. Water quality samples
will be obtained on a weekly basis for one month and then on a monthly basis. The length of
10
CGRS,Inc
sampling will be determined after reviewing the initial analytical results; it is not anticipated that
more than three months will be required before water quality parameters equilibrate.
Surface water quality will be monitored by obtaining samples from the Saint Vrain river
downstream of the study area. Surface water samples will be obtained at the same frequency as
groundwater samples.
4.5 Contingency Plan and Abatement
If adverse changes to water quality as predetermined by all interested parties are observed during
testing, the coal ash will be immediately excavated and stored in a dry impoundment within the
Varra property boundary. Native soils will be placed in the trench and water quality will be
monitored on a monthly basis for the constituents of concern. Additional remedial activities, if
needed, will be commensurate with the extent and degree of water quality degradation.
5.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE
Upon authorization to initiate field testing, two weeks will be required to contract subcontractors
and initiate field activities. Based on laboratory experiments it is anticipated that approximately
three months will be required to perform field activities. The project length is based partially on
pore volume flow through calculations and the observed leachability of coal ash samples. It is
anticipated that a summary report will be submitted within four months of coal ash placement. The
report will detail analytical results, hydraulic characteristics of the ash bed, observed variations in
hydrogeology and water quality.
6.0 ORGANIZATION AND STAFF ASSIGNMENTS
6.1 Project Personnel
Mr. Joby Adams of CGRS will serve as project coordinator and contact to Varra Companies. Dr.
James Warner (CSU Groundwater Program Leader) of Colorado State University will provide
senior technical review. Mr. Chester Hitchens of CGRS will serve as field coordinator and will be
responsible for supervising drilling activities and will perform or supervise water quality sampling.
CGRS,Inc.
6.2 Subcontractors
Subcontracted services for this project will include Drilling Engineers of Fort Collins, Colorado,
and Analytica Environmental Laboratories, Inc., of Broomfield, Colorado.
Drilling Engineers will be responsible for drilling soil borings and completing the borings as
groundwater monitoring wells. Analytica will analyze groundwater samples for the analytes of
concern.
7.0 OVERVIEW - QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL
Quality assurance (QA) is a management system for ensuring that all information, data, and
decisions resulting from the project are technically sound and properly documented. Quality
Control (QC) is the functional mechanism through which quality assurance achieves its goals.
Quality control programs, for example, define the frequency and methods of checks, audits, and
reviews necessary to identify problems and dictate corrective action to resolve these problems, thus
ensuring data of high quality. Thus, a QA/QC program pertains to all data collection, evaluation,
and review activities that are part of the project.
The use of qualified personnel for conducting various portions of the project is of paramount
importance to an effective QA/QC program. This pertains not only to qualified QA/QC specialists,
but also to specialists in other fields, including hydrogeologists, air quality specialists, soil
scientists, analytical chemists and other scientific and technical disciplines. The project manager
should ensure that qualified specialists, primarily individuals with the proper education, training,
and experience, including licensed or certified professionals, are directing and performing the
various project activities. The same general principles apply to selection of contractors and/or
outside laboratories.
12
CGRS,Inc.
Another important aspect of the QA/QC program is the communication between the QA/QC
organization and the project manager. Regular appraisal by the project manager of the quality
aspects related to the ongoing project data-gathering efforts provides the mechanism whereby the
established objectives may be met.
QA/QC procedures should provide details relating to the schedule, information to be provided, and
the mechanism for reporting to the project manager. Reports to the project manager should
include:
• Periodic assessment of measurement data accuracy, precision, and completeness;
• results of performance audits;
• Results of system audits;
• Significant QA/QC problems and recommended solutions; and
• Resolutions of previously stated problems.
The individual responsible for preparing the periodic reports should be identified. These reports
should contain a separate QA/QC section that summarizes data quality information. The Quality
Assurance Project Plan is presented as Attachment C.
8.0 REMARKS
The scope of work is based upon current available information and our understanding of this
project. As the project develops, changes to the project scope of work may be required. If changes
in the scope of work are dictated by the needs of the project, these changes will be presented prior
to implementation.
13
CGRS,Inc.
This report was prepared by CGRS, INC.
Date 1-////77
Joby L. da , P.G.
i ydrogeologist
CGRS,Inc
Reviewed by:
/_/• N/_.. Date f{//97
r. James W. Warner, P.E.
Groundwater Program Leader
Colorado State University
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
pp REg/ ''•,
�0• '�SW wq?'tye0'
pe Z^S
`4 16492 '°:
'',41/011A1. ,6,,,
14
REFERENCES
Dragun, J., 1988. The Soil Chemistry of Hazardous Materials. Hazardous Materials Control
Research Institute. Silver Spring, Maryland, pp 76-80
Hassett, D.J. "A Generic Test of Leachability: The Synthetic Groundwater Leaching Procedure"
In Proceedings for the Waste Management for the Energy Industries Conference; University of
North Dakota, April 29-May 1, 1987.
Hem, J. D., 1992. Study and Interpretation of the Chemical Characteristics of Natural Water.
U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper: 2254
Reeder, D.C., 1993. Groundwater Quality and Hydrogeology of the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer
in the Milton Reservoir Area, Weld County, Colorado: Colorado State University Unpublished
Master's Thesis.
Sorini, S. 1997. "A Summary of Leaching Methods" American Coal Ash Association, Inc.
Alexandria, Virginia.
1 i °) " . \\\____ _ _ + __ ....
4 100-±7
o
4906 _-, — .1
4
19 i —
1
e
et •
40 ' / \---//- ^05011�
/ I J94444
co _�_
O` il
I ///// i ii: —_ ---,4,\ i I a
ii iI II-. Vn n
/ it %
3 a/ O I_I / _ Ditch �' •
n O
//�— II ` ii I 29 :oil__
I:
II 0 \ 4850 ..'a /-- -/ k p`A/,
800 , 1 �0 J� \ im / ��
0 SITE
I- e '°. 1LOCATION �. Wes.• -
II •1: 3 F-! 7- / 4799
1 �I 5,0 ; y.. Y�^O"`7 R'�..:. - _i /
4g5� V,� p�y �'4Wt
/
p51
a
4809
/ 0 55Q/ -
BM ' 46Uv
� 4813
'462] 4813 a •
CHANCE — - II (7-7------__ °65C
•
) a II Q / •
o / J
N FIGURE 1
J .;OWANDA QUADRANGLE VARRA COMPANIES
COLORADO-WELD Co SITE LOCATION MAP -COAL ASH STUDY AREA
I 7 5 SERIES PROJECT NO PREPA ED BY CG RS
1-135-2755 JLA COLORADO GROUNDWATER
J
DATE 07/02/98 REVIE D BY RESOURCE SERVICES
i 0 2000
\ 1 4906 - —�� J' I �' �'
\ / 19 (7, /> ( �J`
o -1 v 485° JJJa
�°a _
I Y ,478 479
0950 c 66 \ , ! it I
dE
p
__ -_-/lam/ /� 9Ad it
e /
e•
Ditch \-•%-",„ 5, cy.„±
} __/--- '-'- ---- ___y :r
v °p
9
0 II
i o
489] •it 828 -- r II.o ^� is Y i— 4799
rj 'w
ae5° ' �" �' �q�St Vrain Sch y
\, 1._... ,:.5" to //) a oo •I e /
32
5,55 o
�I`31 V �� As7
°'''1 1 4 4809
...... , -4-_ 'wry ! .
i yE,
/. ffII BM ' e`
/ • 4 -
9 4813 • _ 4813 c `�
48T3 � u CI\--
oscCMANOE� - -' III 0
/_61 aII _.40N ^
II ,- 4630��`� O re
,y I/�
�\ 4 / - > V V
FIGURE 2
GOWANDA QUADRANGLE REGISTERED WELL LOCATIONS
VARRA COMPANIES
COLORADO-WELD CO.
7.5 SERIES PROJECT NO. PREPARED BY CGRS
1-135-2755 JLA COLORADO GROUNDWATER
Impuil
DATE 07/02/98 REVIEWED BY RESOURCE SERVICES
I0 2000
Ta
Analytical Results
Fly Ash Disposal Project
Weld County,Colorado
CGRS Project No. 1-135-2755
Total Metals Analytical Results (mg/L)
Sample pH Ex Al Sb As Ba Be B Cd Cr Co Cu Fe Pb Mn Ni Se Ag TI V Zn LI Hg
Class F Silo Ash with 8.5 1 27.00 ND ND 3.80 0.003 5.70 ND 0.13 ND 0.03 7.40 ND 0.07 ND ND ND ND 0.05 0.05 0.24 ND
Gypsum (C Silo) 2 970 ND ND 8.40 ND 0.69 ND 0.07 ND 0.01 2.20 ND 0.02 ND ND ND ND 0.02 0.02 0.12 ND
Bottom Ash 8.5 1 29.00 ND ND 1.30 0.002 1.70 ND ND ND 0.09 15.00 ND 0.14 0.02 ND ND ND 0.05 0.15 0.05 ND
2 37.00 ND ND 1.60 0.003 1.20 ND ND ND 0.12 21.00 ND 0.21 0.01 ND ND ND 0.06 0.22 0.04 ND
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 8.5 1 780.00 ND 0.40 5.20 0.082 120 0.05 0.52 Oil 0.80 210.00 0.62 1.40 0.18 0.64 ND ND 1.70 1.10 1.50 NA
2
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash 8.5 1 1.50 ND ND 0.98 ND 48 ND 0.19 ND ND 0.31 ND ND ND 0.23 ND ND ND ND 0.76 ND
with Sodium 2 3.70 NA NA 2.10 NA 17 NA 0.63 NA NA 0.26 ND NA NA 0.10 NA NA NA NA 0.26 NA
Recycled Concrete 8.5 1 1.90 ND ND 0.32 ND ND ND 0.07 ND 0.05 0.56 ND 0.02 0.02 ND ND ND ND 0.01 0.02 ND
2 47.00 NA NA 0.71 NA NA NA 0.05 NA 0.15 56.00 NA 170 0.04 NA NA NA NA 0.57 0.05 NA
Recycled Asphalt $.5 1 150.00 ND ND 1.90 0.009 0.09 ND 0.17 0.06 0.41 160.00 0.41 4.30 0.12 ND ND ND 0.31 1.50 0.15 ND
2 2.50 NA NA 0.25 ND ND NA 0.06 ND 0.02 0.27 ND ND ND NA NA NA ND ND 0.02 NA
Class F Silo Ash with 7 1 750.00 ND ND 1.90 0.073 21.00 0.01 0.50 0.11 0.59 200.00 0.10 2.00 0.22 ND ND ND 1.30 0.61 0.56 0.002
Gypsum(C Silo) 2 12.00 NA NA 13.00 ND 0.30 ND 0.04 ND 0.01 3.30 ND 0.03 ND NA NA NA 0.02 0.01 0.14 ND
Bottom Ash ] 1 0.45 ND ND 0.08 ND 1.00 ND ND ND ND 0.24 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.03 ND
2 6.10 ND ND 0.27 ND 0.62 ND ND ND 0.02 3.40 ND 0.04 ND ND ND ND 0.02 0.08 0.01 ND
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 7 1 0.54 ND ND 0.79 ND 45 ND 0.11 ND ND 0.06 ND ND ND 0.19 ND ND 0.01 ND 0.73 ND
2 110.00 ND ND 6.70 0.008 22 ND 0.05 ND 0.09 32.00 0.11 0.13 0.02 0.13 ND ND 0.17 0.13 0.33 0.001
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash 7 1 0.21 ND ND 0.88 ND 45 ND 0.18 ND ND 0.06 ND ND ND 0.20 ND ND ND ND 0.76 ND
with Sodium 2 84.00 NA NA 5.30 NA 24 NA 0.11 NA NA 22.00 NA NA NA 0.14 NA NA NA NA 0.31 NA
Recycled Concrete 7 1 2.60 ND ND 0.15 ND ND ND 0.13 ND 0.06 0.64 ND 0.02 ND ND ND ND ND 0.01 0.02 ND
2
State Water Quality 5.0 0.006 0.050 2.0 0.004 0.750 0.005 0.100 0.050 .20/1.0 0.30/5.0 0.050 0.050 0.200 0.050 0.050 0.002 0.100 2.0 2.50 0.002
Standards A P P P P A P P A NS S/A P S P P P P A A A P
Notes:
ND=Not Detected
NA=Not Analyzed
EX=Extraction
mg/L=milligrams per liter
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
5-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
Page 1 of 4
Ta 2
Analytical Results
Fly Ash Disposal Project
Weld County,Colorado
CGRS Project No.1-135-2755
Total Metals Analytical Results (mg/L)
Sample pH Ex Al Sb As Ba Be B Cd Cr Co _ Cu Fe Pb Mn Ni Se Ag Ti V Zn Li Hg
Recycled Asphalt 7 1 1.2 ND ND 0.089 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.88 ND 0.026 ND ND ND ND 0.01 0.011 0.009 ND
2 26 NA NA 0.39 ND 0.18 NA NA ND NA 28 NA 0.076 NA NA NA NA 0.062 0.36 0.03 NA
Class F Silo Ash with 5 1 0.10 ND ND 0.98 ND 6.10 ND 0.10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.19 ND
Gypsum (C Silo) 2 0.13 NA NA 0.94 NA ND NA 0.06 NA NA NA _ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.13 NA
Bottom Ash 5 1 6.40 ND ND 0.36 ND 1.20 ND ND ND 0.03 4.20 ND 0.05 ND ND ND ND 0.02 0.06 0.03 ND
2 0.37 NA NA 0.06 NA 0.56 NA NA NA ND 0.20 _ ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND 0.01 ND
Cherokee Silo Ash 213 5 1 44.00 ND ND 2.90 0.0036 51.00 ND 0.13 ND 0.04 12.00 ND 0.05 ND 0.27 ND ND 0.06 0.06 0.77 0.0001
2 5.10 NA NA 1.70 NA 15.00 NA ND NA ND ND NA ND NA ND NA NA 0.03 ND 0.22 ND
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash 5 1 0.61 ND ND 0.77 ND 51.00 ND 0.21 ND ND 0.11 ND ND ND 0.21 ND ND ND ND 0.77 ND
with Sodium 2 4.10 NA NA 1.10 NA 22.00 NA 0.05 NA NA 0.28 NA NA NA 0.13 NA NA NA NA 0.24 NA
Recycled Concrete 5 1 1.30 ND ND 0.45 ND 0.08 ND 0.06 ND 0.04 0.56 ND 0.01 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.02 ND
2 2.30 NA NA 0.23 NA ND NA 0.08 NA 0.02 0.09 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.02 NA
Recycled Asphalt 5 1 120.00 ND ND 1.60 0.01 0.09 ND 0.13 0.05 0.33 140.00 0.33 3.90 0.10 ND ND ND 0.26 1.30 0.12 ND
2 87.00 NA NA 1.00 0.01 0.08 NA 0.07 0.03 0.22 90.00 0.19 2.30 0.62 NA NA NA 0.17 0.86 0.08 NA
State Water Quality 5.0 0.006 0.050 2.0 0.004 0.750 0.005 0.100 0.050 .20/1.0 0.30/5.0 0.050 0.050 0.200 0.050 0.050 0.002 0.100 2.0 2.50 0.002
Standards A P P P P A P P A A/S S/A P S P P P P A A A P
Notes:
ND=Not Detected
NA=Not Analyzed
EX=Extraction
mglL=milligrams per liter
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
Page 2 of 4
1 I
Table 2
Analytical Results
Continued
Sample pH Ext Other Analytical Results (mg/L)
Total Cyanide Free Cyanide Chloride Fluoride Sulfate Nitrate Nitrite
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum (C Silo) 8.5 1 ND NA 130 8.4 23 7.9 4.6
2 ND NA 20 5.8 65 3.3 1
Bottom Ash 8.5 1 ND NA 29 0.95 170 1.1 0.031
2 ND NA 6.5 0.35 45 0.31 0.067
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 8.5 1 NA 0.021 5.1 3.1 ND 0.35 0.013
-
2 NA 0.016 5.7 1.3 69 ND 0.0058
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with Sodium 8.5 1 0.021 4.9 5.8 1100 0.14 ND
2 NA 0.012 1.2 3.1 59 0.15 0.0082
Recycled Concrete 8.5 1 HA. 0.047 26 5.3 10 1.4 0.096
2 NA 0.027 1.5 1.2 8.3 0.4 0.034
Recycled Asphalt 8.5 1 NA 0.012 10 0.98 44 ND 0.0078
2 NA ND 1.6 1.2 8.2 0.2 0.0055
Trip Blank 1 8.5 NA NA 31 1.5 2.6 NA NA
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum (C Silo) 7 1 ND 120 11 840 7.4 1.3
2 N A ND 31 7.4 19 2.1 1
Bottom Ash 1 NA ND 23 0.89 140 0.87 0.048
2 NA ND 5.1 0.46 33 0.16 ND
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 7 1 NA ND 4.1 4.7 430 0.23 0.014
2 NA ND 1.8 2.3 60 0.17 0.32
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with Sodium 7 1 0.011 3.4 5.1 430 0.2 0.017
2 NA ND 1.8 3.1 49 0.12 0.036
Recycled Concrete 7 1 NA 0.11 26 4.1 31 0.92 ND
2
State Water Quality Standards 0.2 250 2.0 250 10 1
P S A P P P
Note:
NA-Not Analyzed
ND=Not Detected
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
Other Analytical Page 3 of 4 \\CGRS_HQ_SERVER\JOBY\EXCEL\Varra Chem List2.zls
Analytical Results in Excess of Water Quality Standards
Fly Ash Disposal Project
Weld County, Colorado
CGRS Project No. 1-135-2755
TOTAL METALS
Ex Total
Class F Silo Ash with 1 6 11 1 18
Gypsum (C Silo) 2 3 3 0 6
Bottom Ash 1 4 1 3 8
2 4 2 0 6
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 1 11 4 6 21
2 NR 8 2 10
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash 1 4 3 3 10
with Sodium 2 4 5 2 11
1 2 1 4
Recycled Concrete 1
2 3 NR 0 3
1 9 1 8 18
Recycled Asphalt
2 0 3 7 10
pH 8.5 7 5
OTHER ANALYTICAL
Class F Silo Ash with 1 2 2 3 7
Gypsum (C Silo) 2 1 1 2 4
1 0 0 1 1
Bottom Ash
— 2 0 0 0 0
1 1 2 2 5
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3
2 0 1 1 2
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash 1 2 2 2 6
with Sodium 2 1 1 1 3
1 1 1 2 4
Recycled Concrete
2 0 0 1 1
1 0 2 0 2
Recycled Asphalt
2 0 0 0 0
pH 8.5 7 5
Ex-Extraction#
NR-Results not received at this time
Page 1 of 4
ATTACHMENT A
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
CGRS, Inc.
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
Soil Borings
Soil sampling will be conducted in accordance with ASTM:D 1586-87. Using this procedure, a 2-inch O.D.
split-spoon sampler will be driven into the soil by a 140 pound weight falling 30 inches. After an initial set
of 6 inches, the number of blows required to drive the sample an additional 12 inches, known as the
penetration resistance (N value), will be recorded. The N value is an index of the relative density of
cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils.
Soil Classification/Characterization
As samples are obtained in the field, they will be visually inspected and classified in accordance with
ASTM:D 1488-84. Representative portions of the samples will then be retained for further examination and
for verification of the various strata, the N value, water level data, and pertinent information regarding the
method of maintaining and advancing the boring will be provided. Charts illustrating the soil classification
procedure,descriptive terminology and symbols used on the logs will be provided.
Decontamination
_ — To avoid potential transport of contaminated materials to the project site, all drilling equipment and down-
hole tools will be steam cleaned prior to mobilization.
Monitoring Well Construction
Monitoring wells will be installed utilizing the following general construction criteria:
• borehole diameter: minimum 6.25inches;
• well diameter: 2 inches;
• estimated depth: 15 —30 feet below ground surface;
• casing material: schedule 40, flush thread PVC;
• well screen: 2 inch I.D., 10 feet in length, #0.01 slot PVC;
• estimated screened interval: 5 feet above and 10- 25 feet below the groundwater table;
• annular pack: 10-20 silica sand;
• protective casing: minimum 12 inch I.D., steel flush or above grade, locking cap; and
• annular seal: cement grout and bentonite pellets.
Groundwater Sampling
All borings where groundwater is encountered will be sampled from the suspected cleanest to the most
contaminated according to the protocols listed below. All pertinent information will be recorded on a
sampling information form.
CGRS, Inc.
Field Protocol
Step 1 -Measure water level.
Step 2-A dedicated polyethylene bailer will be used to develop each boring. Three bore volumes will be
evacuated from each boring prior to sampling.
Step 3-Collect water samples. Water samples will be collected using a polyethylene bailer. A field blank
will be collected during the sampling program to ensure quality control.
Step 4-Store samples in a cooler on ice for transport to the laboratory. Follow all documentation and
chain-of-custody procedures.
Step 5-Clean equipment. Water level measurement equipment will be cleaned with ethanol followed by a
deionized water rinse.
Upon completion of soil or groundwater sampling, a chain of custody log will be initiated. A copy of the
chain of custody will be returned to the project manager.
Chemical Analysis
All analytical parameters are described in the Laboratory Quality assurance plan presented as Appendix C.
Groundwater Elevation Measurements
The following outlines our standard groundwater quality sampling methodology. Before purging any of the
soil test borings or monitoring wells,water level measurements must be taken.
Measuring Point
Establish the measuring point for the well. The measuring point is marked on the north side of the top of the
temporary monitoring well riser. The top of the riser is normally a 2 inch casing inside a locked protective
casing. The riser will be PVC pipe, galvanized pipe or stainless steel pipe. The measuring point should be
described on the groundwater sample collection record.
Access
After unlocking or opening a monitoring well, the first task will be to obtain a water level measurement.
Water level measurements will be made using an electronic water level indicator. Depth to water and total
depth of the well will be measured for calculation of purge volume.
CGRS, Inc.
Measurement
To obtain a water level measurement, lower a decontaminated electronic water level probe into the
monitoring well. Care must be taken to assure that the electronic probe hangs freely in the monitoring well
and is not adhering to the well casing. The electronic probe will be lowered into the well until the audible
sound of the unit is detected and the light on the electronic sounder illuminates. At this time, the precise
measurement should be determined by repeatedly raising and lowering the probe to obtain an exact
measurement. The water level measurement is then entered on the groundwater sampling collection record
sheet or groundwater level data sheet to the nearest 0.01 feet.
Decontamination
The electronic probe shall be decontaminated immediately after use by wiping with isopropyl alcohol-
- soaked paper towels. Always proceed in order from the suspected cleanest well or soil test boring to the
suspected most contaminated one.
Purge Volume Computation
All soil test borings and temporary monitoring wells will be purged prior to sample collection. Depending
upon the rate of recovery, three to five volumes of groundwater present in a well or bore hole shall be
withdrawn prior to sample collection. If a well or bore hole bails dry, the well or bore hole should be
allowed to recharge and a sample taken as soon as there is sufficient volume for the intended analysis. The
volume of water present in each well or bore hole shall be computed using the two measurable variables,
length of water column in soil boring or monitoring well and diameter.
Purging and Sample Collection Procedures
Bailing
• Obtain a laboratory decontaminated disposable bailer and a spool of nylon rope or equivalent
bailer cord. Tie a bowline knot or equivalent through the bailer loop. Test the knot for adequacy
by creating tension between the line and the bailer. Tie again if needed. New rope will be used
for every sample or purge. New clean latex gloves will be used when touching the rope or bailer.
• Spread a clean plastic sheet near the base of the well. The plastic sheet should be of sufficient
size to prevent bailer or bailer rope from contacting the ground surface.
• Place the bailer inside the well to verify that an adequate annulus is present between the bailer
and the well casing to allow free movement of the bailer.
• Lower the bailer carefully into the well casing to remove the sample from the top of the water
column, taking care not to agitate the water in the well.
CGRS, Inc.
• Pour the bailed groundwater into a bucket. Once the bucket is full, transfer the water to a barrel and
contain on-site.
• Raise the bailer by grasping a section of cord, using each hand alternately. This bailer lift method
will assure that the bailer cord will not come into contact with the ground or other potentially
contaminated surfaces.
Sampling
Instructions for obtaining samples for parameters are reviewed with the laboratory coordinator to
insure that proper preservation and filtering requirements are met.
• Appropriate sample containers will be obtained from the contract laboratory. After samples are
collected, they will be put on ice in coolers (4°C). Care will be taken to prevent breakage during
transportation or shipment.
• Samples collected by bailing will be poured directly into sample containers from bailers. The
sample should be poured slowly to minimize air entrapment into the sample bottle. During
collection,bailers will not be allowed to contact the sample containers.
• Upon completion of sampling a chain-of-custody log will be initiated. Chain-of-custody records
will include the following information: project name and number, shipped by, shipped sampling
point, location, field ID number, date, time, sample type, number of containers, analysis required
and sampler's signature. The samples and chain-of-custody will be delivered to the laboratory.
Upon arrival at the laboratory the samples will be checked in by the appropriate laboratory
personnel. Laboratory identification numbers will be noted on the chain-of-custody record. Upon
completion of the laboratory analysis, the completed chain-of-custody record will be returned to the
project manager.
Field Cleaning Procedures
For all equipment to be reused in the field,the following cleaning procedures must be followed:
• Disassemble the equipment to the extent practical.
• Wash the equipment with distilled water and laboratory-grade detergent.
• Rinse with distilled water until all detergent is removed.
• Rinse the equipment with isopropyl or methanol, making sure all surfaces, inside and out, are
rinsed.
• Triple rinse the equipment with distilled water.
Laboratory Selection
The project manager should consider the following factors when selecting a laboratory:
• Capabilities (facilities, personnel, instrumentation), including:
• Participation in interlaboratory studies (e.g., EPA or other Federal or State agency sponsored
• analytical programs);
• Certifications (e.g., Federal or State);
CGRS, Inc.
• References (e.g. other clients); and
• Experience (UST, RCRA and other environmentally related projects).
• Service;
• Turnaround time; and
• Technical input(e.g., recommendations on analytical procedures).
The project manager is encouraged to gather pertinent laboratory-selection information prior to extensively
defining analytical requirements under the project. A request may be made to a laboratory to provide a
qualifications package that should address the points listed above. Once the project manager has reviewed
the various laboratory qualifications, further specific discussions with the laboratory or laboratories should
take place. In addition, more than one laboratory should be considered. For large-scale investigations,
selection of one laboratory as a primary candidate and one or two laboratories as fall-back candidates
should be considered.
The quality of the laboratory service provided is dependent on various factors. The project manager should
be able to control the quality of the information (e.g., samples) provided to the laboratory. It is extremely
important that the project manager communicate to the laboratory all the requirements relevant to the
_ — project. This includes the number of samples and their matrices, sampling schedule, parameters and
constituents of interest, required analytical methodologies, detection limits, holding times, deliverables,
level of QA/QC, and required turnaround of analytical results.
Field and Laboratory Ouality Control
General
Quality control checks are performed to ensure that the data collected is representative and valid data.
Quality control checks are the mechanisms whereby the components of QA objectives ore monitored.
Examples of items to be considered are as follows:
I. Field Activities:
• Use of standardized checklists and field notebooks;
• Verification of checklist information by an independent person;
• Strict adherence to chain-of-custody procedures;
• Calibration of field devices;
• Collection of replicate samples; and
• Submission of field blanks, where appropriate.
2. Analytical Activities:
CGRS, Inc.
• Method blanks;
• Laboratory control samples:
• Calibration check samples;
• replicate samples;
• Matrix-spiked samples;
• "Blind"quality control samplers;
• Control charts;
• Surrogate samples;
• Zero and span gases; and
• Reagent quality control checks.
Blind Duplicates
Blind duplicate samples will be collected for 10% of the samples collected or once per site, whichever is
greater. These blind duplicate samples will be forwarded to the laboratory as a check of laboratory
reproducibility.
Equipment(Rinseate)Blank
The equipment (rinseate) blank is designed to identify potential cross-contamination in the field between
sample sources due to deficient field cleaning procedures. This blank also addresses field preservation
procedures, environmental site interference, integrity of the source blank water for field cleaning and those
concerns singularly addressed by the travel blank. Equipment blanks are taken once per site, when
equipment is cleaned in the field. This provides a quality control check on field cleaning procedures.
Field Blank
Field blanks are used to evaluate the sample container filling procedure, the effects of environmental
contaminants at the site, purity of preservatives or additives and those concerns uniquely addressed by the
travel blank.
Field blanks are taken downwind of the most contaminated area of the site by filling laboratory cleaned and
prepared sample containers (appropriate for the parameters group) with deionized or organic-free water
supplied by the laboratory. The blank sample container is then sealed, grouped,transported and stored with
the real samples collected for the same parameters group.
CGRS, Inc.
Travel(Trip)Blanks
The travel blank is designed to address interferences derived from improper sample container cleaning
preparation, contaminated source blank water, sample cross-contamination during storage/transport and
extraneous environmental conditions affecting the sampling event to and from the site, including delivery to
the laboratory.
Travel blanks are composed in the appropriate sample container using source blank water. Preservatives or
additives are added if required for the parameters group. Travel blanks are then sealed and stored in the ice
chest where real samples will be stored and transported. Travel blanks are to originate at the laboratory
providing the blank water for the equipment and field blanks.
Protocol for Analyzing Blank Samples
If used, the equipment blank will be analyzed first. If contamination is found to be present, the field blank
will then be analyzed. If the equipment blank is not used, the first blank analyzed will be the field blank. If
any blank is found to be contaminant-free, the sequence of analyses will be terminated.
ATTACHMENT B
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
Table of Contents
1.0 Project Management 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 QAPP Distribution List 1
1.3 Project Organization 1
1.4 Problem Definition/Background 2
1.5 Intended Usage of Data 2
1.6 Project Task/Description 2
1.7 Measurement Quality Objectives 3
1.8 Data Quality Objectives 3
1.8.1 Data Precision and Accuracy 4
1.8.2 Data Representativeness 4
1.8.3 Data Comparability 4
1.8.4 Data Completeness 5
1.9 Special Training Requirements 5
1.10 Documentation and Records 5
2.0 Measurement/Data Aquisition 6
2.1 Sampling Process Design 6
2.2 Sampling Method Requirements 7
2.3 Sample Handling and Custody Procedures 7
2.3.1 Sample Identification 7
2.3.2 Sample Method Requirements 7
2.3.3 Sample Custody 7
2.3.4 Chain of Custody Records 8
2.3.5 Transfer of Custody and Shipment 8
2.3.6 Laboratory Custody Procedures 9
2.4 Laboratory Deliverables 9
2.5 Field and Laboratory QA/QC Procedures 10
2.6 Instrument/Equipment Testing, Inspection and Maintenance Requirements 10
2.7 Instrument Calibration and Frequency 10
2.8 Inspection/Acceptance Requirements 11
2.9 Data Acquisition Requirements 1 1
2.10 Data Management 11
3.0 Assessment/Oversight 12
3.1 Assessment and Response Actions 12
3.2 Reports 13
4.0 Data Validation and Usability 14
4.lData Review Validations and Verification 14
4.2 Validation and Verification Methods 14
4.3 Reconciliation with DQO's 14
Table of Contents - Continued
Figures
Figure 1 -Area Use and Site Condition Map
Figure 2—Monitoring Well Placement Map
Figure 3 —Monitoring Well Construction Detail
Table
Table 1 —Summary of Parameters, Sample Containers, Holding Times and Analytical Methods
Table 2—Contents of Digital Analytical Deliverables
Appendix
Appendix A—Resumes
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP)
FOR THE
VARRA COAL ASH BURIAL PROJECT
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
1.0 Project Management
1.1 Introduction
This Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) presents the organization, objectives, planned
activities and specific Quality Assurance (QA)/Quality Control (QC) procedures associated the
Varra Coal Ash Project. Specifically it is being prepared as part of a column leaching study. All
QA/QC procedures will be structured in accordance with applicable technical standards. This
abbreviated QAPP bas been prepared in accordance with the U.S. EPA RCRA QAPP Instructions,
and other relevant guidance documents.
1.2 QAPP Distribution List
The following have been provided copies of the work plan and this QAPP.
a) Brad Janes—Varra Companies
b) Chris Varra—Varra Companies
c) Christina Kamnikar—DMG
d) George Moravec—CDPH&E
e) Harry Posey—DMG
f) Jerald Ritenour—Barringer Laboratories
g) Ken Niswonger—CDPH&E
h) Roger Doak—CDPH&E
i) Trevor Jiricek—Weld County Health
1.3 Project Organization
Name/Affiliation Title/Responsibility
Chris Varra—Varra Companies Petitioner
Christina Kamnikar—DMG MLR Permit Review
George Moravec—CDPH&E Water Quality Overview
Glen Mallory —CDPH&E Certificate of Designation Review
Jerald Ritenour—Barringer Laboratories Laboratory Project Manager
Joby Adams—CGRS, Inc. Project Manager
Ken Niswonger—CDPH&E Technical Oversight
Robert Zielinski—USGS Column Leaching Method Oversight
Roger Doak—CDPH&E Certificate of Designation Review
Trevor Jiricek—Weld County Health USR/Certificate of Designation Review
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page I
1.4 Problem Definition/Background
Varra Companies has submitted a proposal to reclaim approximately 11 acres of a mined out,
flooded gravel quarry using coal ash as fill material. Numerous permits have been submitted
proposing bench scale testing followed by a small scale field study to evaluate the economic and
technical feasibility of using coal ash as fill material in saturated conditions. The proposed field
study consists of placing 400 tons of coal ash below the water table at the Varra gravel quarry in
Weld County,Colorado
Five different leaching experiments were conducted in order to evaluate coal ash leaching
potentials. Two of the leaching experiments compared element and compound water quality for
different pH ranges relative to effluent pore volume. However, the data generated from the
different leaching tests were not comparable to each other or to water quality standards. It was
recommended by various member of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
(CDPH&E) that additional leaching tests be performed that would simulate, to the extent
possible, conditions that would be encountered at the Varra property. A modified form of ASTM
D 4874-95 Standard Test Method for Leaching Solid Material in Column Apparatus was used to
simulate field conditions. Testing results have been submitted as part of a permit application to
conduct the pilot study.
1.5 Intended Usage of Data
CGRS will use the data obtained in a variety of ways. The major applications of data are:
Health and Safety—Data are used to determine concentration of chemicals to which workers will be
or are being exposed.
Site Characterization—Data are used to determine local physical and chemical properties of soil and
water at the Varra property. Samples of soils, surface and ground water will be analyzed in the field
using portable or transportable instruments or sent to the laboratory for certified chemical analyses.
Project Feasibility—Data obtained from the pilot study will be used to assess the feasibility of large
scale reclamation using coal ash.
Risk Assessment—Data are used to calculate the effects of target analytes upon human health and
other environmental receptors. Column study data will be compared to field data to assess the
validity of column leaching studies and analytical solute transport and groundwater flow solutions.
1.6 Project Task/Description
The purpose of the pilot project is to determine the feasibility of using coal ash as fill material in
saturated conditions. This project will be accomplished by submitting required permits in
combination with conducting bench scale leaching tests and a small scale ash burial and water
quality monitoring program. The permit submittals are required as coal ash is classified as a solid
waste and as such is subject to regulation under RCRA. The laboratory testing and proposed field
tests are being conducted to fulfill permit requirements as well as provide assurance to all parties
involved the placement of coal ash below the water table at this specific site will not cause
adverse environmental impacts.
The scope of work for this project involves, development of Health and Safety and site-specific
work plans, field investigations, laboratory analysis of water samples, analysis of hydraulic and
hydrogeologic properties, and the preparation of a report detailing the results of the investigation.
Varna Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 2
Project Timetable
Activity Projected Start Date Anticipated Completion Date
Submit supplemental information 03/2000 07/2000
and finalize permits to regulatory
agencies
Install pre-project monitoring wells Upon receipt that project Two week after notice
is technically feasible
from CDPHE
Finalize CD and USR submittals 09/2000 10/2000
Construct pilot trench/monitoring 10/2000 11/2000
network
Conduct monitoring 11/2000 11/2001
Submit monitoring information to 11/2000 12/2001
— -- regulatory agencies
1.7 Measurement Quality Objectives
Quality assurance (QA) is a management system for ensuring that all information, data, and
decisions based upon the interpretation of the analytical data are technically sound and properly
documented. Quality control (QC) is the mechanism whereby the QA system is ensured. The QA
system is presented in this QAPP. The goal of the environmental data collection is to produce data
capable of withstanding scientific scrutiny and of a quality appropriate for a specific task. This will
allow CGRS, Inc. to fully assess the impact of past activities and target analytes, i.e., identification,
quantification,and delineation of the extent.
Data quality refers to the level of uncertainty associated with a data set. Data quality objectives
(DQOs) for each task will reflect the amount of uncertainty in the data that will be acceptable to
meet the goals of the program and the objectives of the task. Project and task DQOs are discussed
in Section 1.8. Techniques to validate and verify the quality of the data are presented in Section 4.2.
Quality assurance objectives differ for individual sample matrix groups and parameters by site. The
QA objectives will be based on a common understanding of the intended use of the resulting data,
available laboratory procedures, and available resources. Special attention must be paid to the
detection limits and holding times. These limits are sometimes insufficient for the analysis of
drinking water,groundwater,and/or soils.
1.8 Data Quality Objectives
DQOs are qualitative and quantitative statements that specify the quality of the data required to
support decisions made during the project. DQOs are applicable to collection activities and are
Varm Companies
_ Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 3
based on the end use of the data being collected. DQOs will be described in detail within individual
sampling and analyses plans(SAPs).
Precision, Accuracy, Representativeness, Completeness and Comparability (PARCC) parameters
are indicators of data quality. The end use of the measurement data should define the necessary
PARCC parameters. Numerical precision, accuracy, and completeness goals must be established
in each site SAP and will aid in selecting the measurement methods.
1.8.1 Data Precision and Accuracy
Precision is a measurement of the reproducibility of a measurement under a given set of conditions.
The closer the numerical values of the measurements, the more precise is the overall measurement.
Precision will be stated in terms of the standard deviation for three or more measurements of the
percent difference for two measurements, depending on the necessary precision of a particular
study. Laboratory precision will be within established control limits for a particular analytical
method, if known. For chemical analyses, laboratory precision will be assessed using laboratory-
spiked samples
Accuracy is defined as the degree of agreement between the measurement and average of
measurements of measurements for a parameter and the accepted reference or true value. It will be
expressed as the difference between the measured value (X) and the reference or true value (T), the
difference in percent between two values, 100(X-T)/T, or a ratio of the two values, X/T,depending
upon the study. Laboratory accuracy will be within established control limits for a particular
method when known. For chemical analyses, laboratory accuracy will be assessed using
laboratory-spiked samples.
1.8.2 Data Representativeness
Representativeness expresses the degree to which data accurately and precisely represent a
characteristic of a population, parameter variations at a sampling point, a process condition or an
environmental condition. Accurate sample collection requires that samples be undisturbed and
representative of the native substance being sampled. All measurements will be made so that the
results are accurately representative of the media (air, biota, soil or water) and specific time, place
and conditions being measured.
Representativeness of a sample will be ensured by systematic,documented and (whenever possible)
random sampling designs. Project Managers designing SAPs will ensure that, whenever possible,
probabilistic sampling designs are used and that a sufficient number of samples are collected to
meet the DQOs of the project. To minimize the introduction of error during the field program,
general requirements for sample collection and handling have been devised and are described in the
QAPP. Specific procedures will be presented in respective SAPs.
1.8.3 Data Comparability
Data comparability expresses the confidence factor by which one data set can be compared to
another. All data will be calculated and reported in units consistent with all the sites involved and
the regulatory standards allowing for comparability of databases within the project. Data
comparability will be achieved using standard field and analytical methods or written procedures.
Data with different quality objectives will be compared in a statistically defensible manner outlined
when the data are presented. Factors that will ensure data comparability are summarized as follows:
• Standard procedures for sample collections;
• Standard sample handling and transport;
Varra Companies
_ Quality Assurance Project Plat
Page 4
• Uniform sampling containers (i.e. containers that are supplied, constructed, cleaned and
prepared identically);
• Standardized forms and/or electronic data storage devices for recording field and
analytical data, prepared sample identification tags, and Chain-of-Custody (COC)
records;
• Field team performance observations;
• Field and laboratory instrument performance;
• Standardized protocols for field and laboratory instrument calibrations using certified
standard solutions;
• Data documentation audits to determine data adequacy; and
• Known and validated uncertainties for field and analytical data.
1.8.4 Data Completeness
Completeness is defined as a measure of the amount of valid data obtained from a measurement
system compared to the amount that was expected under correct normal conditions. Field sampling
conditions are unpredictable and non-uniform. Other problems affecting field completeness will be
equipment/instrument malfunctions and problems with sample recovery. These problems will be
reduced by training field team members to perform basic repairs and by supplying spare parts and
equipment at the field site.
Analytical completeness is affected by a sample not analyzed before its holding time is expired; if it
is damaged during handling, shipping, unpacking, or storage; or if the laboratory data cannot be
validated and the sample cannot be reanalyzed.
Critical samples are those samples that are essential to the successful completion of the project. The
completeness goal for crucial samples is 100%. The project team will present any deviation from
the sampling plan.
1.9 Special Training Requirements
No special training requirements or certifications are required for this project except for the 40-hour
HAZWOPER class and annual refreshers. Resumes of CGRS personnel who may be involved with
this project are presented in Attachment A.
1.10 Documentation and Records
Activities that affect data and data quality and that potentially will be used as evidence will be
documented. The project manager will maintain a supply of and will control these documents. The
following documents will be used if appropriate:
➢ Sample labels;
➢ Chain-of-Custody records;
➢ Sample analysis request sheets;
➢ Electronic data storage devices and/or field logbooks;
➢ Calibration logbooks;
➢ Shipping logbooks;
➢ SAPs;
➢ QAPP:
➢ Progress and interim reports;
V arra Companies �. � .
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 5
➢ Information written on photos, maps and drawings;
➢ Laboratory data packages; and
➢ Data qualification packages.
All information pertinent to field sampling operations will be recorded including all field
observations and in situ measurements necessary to explain and reconstruct sampling operations.
The primary repository for the information will be a Dell computer backed up with a field logbook.
Each sample will be identified with a label.Labels will be placed on the containers prior to or at the
time of sampling. Samples requiring refrigeration will be placed in a chest immediately after
collection. A description of sampling locations, sample containers, time of collection, preservations
if any used and various other pertinent facts relative to sample collection and preservation will be
recorded in the field logbook.
Sample/data collection activities will be documented fully and accurately. Log books will be used
to record mapping locations and specific considerations associated with sample acquisition,
preparation, transportation, receipt by a certified laboratory and analysis to be performed on the
sample. Sample locations will be surveyed so the exact sample locations will be known. In addition,
logbooks will be used to record when and where photographs, temperatures, pressures, etc. are
taken. Field sampling team will have at least one person designated as the Site Supervisor who will
be thoroughly familiar with documentation procedures. The site supervisor will personally perform,
or at least oversee, the completion of documents that accompany the samples. For consistency in
data recording, whenever possible, one person on each field sampling team will record data. Using
one person to record data will permit timely recording of observations, enable more data to be
recorded,and minimize any chances of contaminating field records.
Documentation in logbooks, sample tags, labels, custody seals and other accountable serialized
documents will be completed with permanent reproducible ink. None of these documents will be
destroyed or thrown away, even if the comments are illegible or if inaccuracies are recorded that
must be replaced. The documents will be marked "VOID" and maintained by CGRS. CGRS will
hold all documentation for 5 years subject to the availability of any other authorized person.
Document control means that controlled documents will receive review and concurrence as
appropriate, the distribution of the documents will be recorded and revisions will be made in all
distributed copies. The preparation, issuance and revisions of documents that specify quality
requirements or prescribed activities affecting quality will be controlled to ensure that correct
documents are used. Control will consist of item identification, secure storage and documented
distribution.
2.0 Measurement/Data Acquisition
2.1 Sampling Process Design
The pilot trench will be constructed downgradient of the proposed large scale reclamation as shown
on Figure 1. The trench will consist of two coal ash cells with a native soil divider as shown on
Figure 2. The ash will be obtained from Public Service Company's Cherokee power plant and will
consist of a combination of Class F silo ash with gypsum and Cherokee 4 fly ash with sodium.
Monitoring wells will be installed within the ash deposit(s) and compliance points or sentinel wells
will be installed no less than 50 feet downgradient of the trench. It is anticipated that a minimum of
eight wells will be installed up, down and cross gradient to the trench; however, additional wells
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 6
will be installed as necessary to adequately monitor variations in water quality and groundwater
flow direction.
Water quality samples from site monitoring wells on a periodic basis in order to evaluate possible
changes in water quality. The sampling frequency will be weekly for the first month, biweekly for
the second month, monthly for the third month and then quarterly until project termination.
2.2 Sampling Method Requirements
All groundwater samples will be obtained using protocol presented in the Work Plan. All samples
will be analyzed after the 0.45 µm filtration with the exception of field parameters. The samples
will be collected in appropriate sample containers and will be transported to the laboratory under
strict chain-of-custody procedures and holding times. Samples will be analyzed for alkalinity as
bicarbonate and carbonate, chloride, fluoride, phosphorus, nitrate, nitrite, and sulfate along with
other metals aluminum,antimony,arsenic, barium,beryllium,boron,calcium,cadmium,chromium,
cobalt, copper, iron, lead, lithium, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, phosphorous,
potassium, selenium, silver, thallium, titanium, uranium, vanadium and zinc. Field parameters such
as pH, conductivity and temperature will be measured with a HyDAC digital conductivity, pH and
temperature meter.
2.3 Sample Handling and Custody Procedures
2.3.1 Sample Identification
A sample identification scheme will be used that maintains consistency for the names of water
quality samples, as well labels affixed to each sample container, and entered on to the Chain-of-
Custody(COC)forms. The following scheme will be followed:
1. Samples from the field study will be identified by the monitoring well it was obtained
from. For example water obtained from monitoring well MW-1 would be identified as
PT-MW-1.
2. Water samples obtained from the gravel quarry will be identified as Pond.
2.3.2 Sample Method Requirements
Analytical procedures for water and soil samples will conform to the USEPA guidelines described
in SW 846 (Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste/PhysicaUChemical Methods, 3rd ed.). Table
1, presents the analyses that are anticipated on the project.
2.3.3 Sample Custody
Strict chain-of-custody (COC) protocol will be maintained throughout the life of the field program
and will be controlled through the use of a COC Record supplied by the laboratory. The following
procedures will be used to document,establish,and maintain custody of field samples:
• Sample labels will be completed for each sample using waterproof ink; making sure that
the labels are legible and affixed firmly on the sample container;
• All Sample-related information will be recorded in the project log book;
• The field sampling technician will retain custody of the samples until they are transferred
or properly dispatched to a laboratory; and,
• As fieldwork is conducted the on-site CGRS technical lead will determine whether these
procedures are being followed, if corrections need to be made, and if additional samples
are required.
Varna Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 7
2.3.4 Chain of Custody Records
A Chain of Custody Record will be maintained in the field for all samples to be shipped to the
laboratory for analysis. The three lines of information to be entered into the COC box titled "Project
or P.O.#" are:
Line 1. Client Name, i.e. "Varra Companies"
Line 2. Project Name, i.e. "Varra Coal Ash Project"
Line 3. Site Number, i.e. "2755aa"
The three lines of information will be provided on the laboratory paper(hard copy)reports as a page
header, and on the electronic deliverables as three individual fields in each analytical record.
The "Sample Identification" entries to the COC will be completed as described in Section 2.3.1 of
this QAPP.
2.3.5 Transfer of Custody and Shipment
Due to the evidentiary nature of field sample collection,the possession of samples must be traceable
from the time the samples are collected until they are introduced as evidence in legal proceedings.
A sample is defined as being under a person's custody if any of the following conditions exist: (1) it
is in their possession, (2) it is in their view after being in their possession, (3) it is in a secure locked
location after having been in their possession, and (4) it is in a designated secure area. The
following procedures will be used in transferring and shipping samples:
• Field personnel will maintain detailed notes in field logbooks documenting the collection
and identification of the required samples. The logbooks will be checked against the
COC records for completeness and traceability.
• A COC record will accompany all sample shipments. When transferring samples, the
individuals relinquishing and receiving will sign, date, and note time on the record. The
COC documents transfer of sample custody from the field-sampling technician to another
person or to the laboratory.
• Each cooler is to contain samples from one site. No mixing of samples from multiple
sites will be allowed in a given cooler.
• Samples will be properly packaged for shipment and shipped to the laboratory for
analysis with a separate signed COC record enclosed in each sample box or cooler. Two
copies of this record will accompany the samples to the laboratory. The laboratory
maintains one file copy, and the completed original will be returned to the project
manager as part of the final analytical report. This record will be used to document
sample custody transfer from the field-sampling technician to the laboratory or to the
CGRS offices. Just prior to shipment to the laboratory, coolers will be secured with
custody seals.
• Whenever samples are split with a facility operator or government agency, a separate
COC record will be prepared for those samples and so marked to indicate with whom the
samples are being split.
• The COC record showing identification of the contents will accompany all packages.
The original record will accompany the shipment and the field team leader will retain a
copy.
• A bill of lading will be used for all samples sent by common carrier. Receipt of bills of
lading will be retained as part of the COC permanent documentation.
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 8
2.3.6 Laboratory Custody Procedures
The laboratory, at a minimum, will check all incoming samples for integrity and note any
observations of the original COC record. Each sample will be logged into the laboratory system by
assigning it a unique laboratory identification number. This number and the field sample
identification number will be recorded on the laboratory report. The original COC record will be
returned to the CGRS project manager for filing. The laboratory sample custodian will use the
following procedures to maintain the COC records once the samples arrive at the laboratory.
• The samples received by the laboratory will be cross-checked to verify that the
information on the sample label matches that on the COC record included with the
sample shipment.
• The "Received by Laboratory" box on the COC record will be signed on receipt. Any
discrepancies between the COC record and the shipment contents will be resolved as
soon as possible through communication with CGRS personnel.
• The status of the sample receipt and analysis will be tracked within the analytical
laboratory by a laboratory information management system (LIMS) or equivalent
computerized management system.
For data that are input by an analyst and processed using a computer, a copy of the input data will
be kept and identified with the project number and any other needed information. The samples
analyzed will be clearly noted and the input data signed and dated by the analyst.
2.4 Laboratory Deliverables
The laboratory is required to submit EPA QC Level III data packages (CLP-equivalent) to CGRS,
Inc. within 21 days from the date of acceptance on the Sample Receipt Form. Details of the
deliverables are presented below.
• Sample Receipt - The laboratory will complete and submit a "Sample Receipt" form for
all sample shipments received. The purpose of the form is to note problems with sample
packaging, COCs, and sample preservation. Problems noted on the form will be
communicated to CGRS, Inc. as soon as possible.
• Reporting of Analytical Results — For each analytical method performed, the laboratory
will report all analytes as detected concentrations or as less than the specific limits or
quantification. All samples with out-of-control spike recoveries being attributed to
matrix interferences should be designated as such. All soil/sediment and solid waste
samples should be reported on a dry-weight basis with percent moisture also reported.
Also, report dates of extraction/preparation, dates of analysis, and dilution factors when
applicable. An electronic deliverable (LIMS) will be provided that conforms to the
CGRS project data requirements. An example of the data deliverable is provided as
Table 2.
• Internal Quality Control Reporting — Internal QC samples should be analyzed at rates
specified in the method (SW-846). At a minimum, QC deliverables will consist of
laboratory blank results, surrogate spike percent recoveries, results of IC/ICP analyses,
laboratory control sample data, laboratory duplicate results, and if requested, calibration
and tuning data. The internal QC data will not be delivered unless requested by Varra or
CGRS personnel.
Varna Cuinparnec
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 9
2.5 Field and Laboratory QA/QC Procedures
Quality control checks are performed to ensure that the data collected are representative and valid.
Quality control checks are the mechanisms whereby the data quality objectives are monitored. The
quality control samples to be collected on the project are described below.
• Duplicate Samples — As a check for laboratory reproducibility, blind duplicate samples
(unknown by the laboratory to be duplicates) will be collected and submitted to the
laboratory at a rate of one for every 10 water samples collected, or once per site,
whichever is greater.
• Field Blank Samples —To evaluate sample bottle filling procedures and the effects of
environmental contaminants at the site, one VOA water sample per site is collected in
laboratory-cleaned and prepared containers of deionized or organic-free water supplied
by the laboratory. Field blanks are collected downwind of the most contaminated area
within a site. The sample is sealed, labeled and shipped with the real samples collected
for the same parameter group.
• Travel (Trip) Blanks — Trip blanks are intended to address interferences derived from
improper sample container cleaning, preparation, contaminated source blank water,
sample cross-contamination during storage and shipment, and environmental conditions
affecting the sampling event to and from the site, including delivery to the laboratory.
Trip blanks will originate at the laboratory and will consist of VOA vials filled with
source blank water, and will be sealed and stored in the cooler where real samples will be
stored and shipped.
• Equipment Blanks — Rinseate blanks, intended to provide quality control on field
cleaning procedures, will be collected once per site.
2.6 Instrument/Equipment Testing,Inspection and Maintenance Requirements
SOPs or manufacturer instructions for calibration of equipment will be referenced or included in
each site SAP. These procedures for calibration will conform to manufacturer's recommended
procedures or explain the deviation from said procedures. A copy of the procedure should be kept
with the instrumentation. Calibration standards will be traceable to the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) or other nationally recognized sources. The information will be
recorded in the equipment calibration logbook. The date of calibration, an identification of
standards used, the names of personnel performing calibration, the results of any calibration, and a
list of any corrective actions taken will be recorded in the calibration logbook. One logbook will be
maintained for each piece of equipment or device.
A list of field equipment used in a sampling task will be included in each site SAP. A review of
each site SAP by the Project Manager will ensure that measuring and test devices are of the proper
type,range,and accuracy for the test to be performed within the established DQOs of a task.
All measuring and test devices requiring calibration will be marked with calibration due dates.
Documented and approved laboratory procedures will be used to calibrate analytical instruments. If
necessary, at the discretion of the Program Manager, audits of instrument calibration laboratories
will be performed to ensure proper calibration of instruments. Audits conducted by the Project
Manager may be used to satisfy the audit requirements.
2.7 Instrument Calibration and Frequency
This section provides guidance for control, calibration, and adjustment of field and laboratory
measuring and testing instruments. Once calibrated, these devices must then be transported and
handled to prevent the device from becoming out of calibration.
Varna Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 10
A calibration program will control measuring and test equipment used in the field and laboratory.
Equipment of the proper type, range, accuracy and precision will provide data compatible with
project requirements and desired results. Calibration of measuring and test equipment may be
performed internally using reference standards or externally by agencies or manufacturers.
Data generated from equipment that has failed calibration shall be evaluated and qualified for use
on the project. The evaluation/qualification process is the responsibility of the Project Manager.
The method of qualification and the results of the data evaluation will be documented.
2.8 Inspection/Acceptance Requirements for Supplies and Consumables
No special requirements are needed.
2.9 Data Acquisition Requirements
Paper and electronic transfer of data will be conducted with multiple levels of redundancy. Data
will be verified manually and at time electronically at each stage of transfer to ensure accuracy. The
flow data from collection through storage is described in the CGRS data management system.
Data validation is the process by which a sample measurement, method, or piece of data is deemed
useful for a specified purpose. Data validation methods will depend on the type of study that
generated the data,the type of sampling,the test method,and the end use (DQOs)of the data.
The Project Manager is responsible for specifying (in the site-specific SAP) the systematic process
to be used to review the body of data against a set of criteria to assure that the data are adequate for
their intended use. The process shall consist of data editing, screening, checking, auditing,
verification, certification, and review. Criteria for accepting or rejecting data are dependent on the
DQOs for a particular task. Data qualified for use in one task may not be acceptable for use in
another task.
2.10 Data Management
The data management system provides control and retention for project-related information. Data
control includes receipt from external sources, transmittal, transfer to storage and indication of
record status. Retention includes receipt at storage areas, indexing, and filing, storage and
maintenance and retrieval.
The control of records provides for the flow of information both internal and external to CGRS.
Typical controls applied by CGRS for the various record systems are described in the following
sections.
Project related materials which are incoming to CGRS in the form of correspondence, drawings,
sketches, logs, authorizations, or other information shall be routed to the project manager after the
original is marked with the date received by a secretary assigned this duty. The manager shall
then mark the original with the project number and determine which personnel shall review the
incoming materials and shall route the materials accordingly.
As soon as practical, correspondence originals shall be placed in the project file. If the
correspondence is required by CGRS personnel for reference, a copy should be made rather than
holding the original.
Client drawings should be placed in the project file when they are received. The file index shall
indicate the date received, drawing number and revision number. If revised issues of drawings
pertinent to a project are received, superseded drawings shall be marked "void," "see revision," or
with a similar notation.
Varra Companies
_ Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page I I
Project-related materials transmitted external to CGRS including correspondence, reports,
drawings and sketches shall be appropriately reviewed, approved and, as required, signed prior to
transmittal.
Project correspondence shall, as a minimum, be signed by the project manager or an individual
assigned this responsibility by the project manager. If joint signatures are desirable, the originator
of the correspondence, when different than management, may also sign.
Outgoing project correspondence and reports should be read, as appropriate, by the project
manager prior to mailing. If, because of scheduling difficulties, it is necessary to mail
correspondence prior to the project manager reading the final copy, the department manager or
office manager shall read the correspondence. A copy shall then be routed to the project manager.
Drawings issued in final form shall be approached prior to issuance by the project manager or a
member of the project team delegated this responsibility by the project manager. Drawings which
are issued "preliminary" do not require approval prior to issue; however, they shall be clearly
marked to indicate preliminary status. Drawings issued as a separate transmittal shall be
accompanied by a transmittal letter listing each drawing by number. If a drawing is
"preliminary," it shall be stated in the letter. A copy of the drawing may be maintained by CGRS
with the letter of transmittal, if deemed necessary by the project manager.
If an original drawing is transmitted to the client at their request, a good quality reproducible of
that drawing shall be prepared prior to transmittal and filed in the CGRS original drawing file
maintained by Drafting personnel. The transmittal letter shall explicitly state that the original
drawing has been transmitted to the client.
Records submitted to the project file, with the exception of correspondence, should be bound,
placed in folders or binders, or otherwise secured for filing. Folders or binders containing
calculations and their checkpoints shall be marked with the title of the calculations.
3.0 Assessment/Oversight
3.1 Assessment and Response Actions
The project manager will conduct an audit of the field activities for this project as requested by
authorized review personnel.
An audit will be conducted on field activities as field data are generated, reduced, and analyzed.
Items will include, but are not limited to, calibration records of field equipment, daily entries in
logbooks, decontamination procedures, photographs, video logs, data logs, drilling, well
installation,and sampling.
The primary objective of the field audit is to determine the status of sampling operations. Emphasis
is placed on:
• Verifying that operational aspects and procedures are in accordance with the protocols
and QA/QC plan;
• Verify the collection of all samples, including duplicates and field blanks;
• Verifying that documentation is in order and sufficient to establish the collection location
of any sample collected;
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 12
• Determining discrepancies that exist and initiating corrective action, as appropriate; and
• Collecting independent samples.
Records inspected include:
• COC forms;
• Sample logs;
• Sample shipping logbooks;
• Sample collection logbooks;
• SAPs; and
• SOPs and sampling procedures.
After completion of the surveillance, any deficiencies will be discussed with the field staff and
corrections will be identified. If any of these deficiencies could affect the integrity of the samples
being collected, the audit team will inform the field staff immediately so that corrective action can
be implemented immediately. The project manager will submit a surveillance report to the manager
of the task and to the organization or subcontractor that was observed.
3.2 Reports
Periodic reports on the performance of the QA program may be prepared by the project manager.
When appropriate, analytical laboratory QA/QC reports will be included. At the completion of a
task and after data verification and validation,all QC data will be sent to the files.
Results from a data collection activity will be reported in units consistent throughout a task. Data
from each different task will be compared using referenced statistical methods when data are
presented. When applicable, for example, presenting data on chemical concentrations, the method
detection limit, the environmental background concentration, and any applicable State or Federal
regulatory limits will be presented with the analytical data.
At minimum, laboratory reports will contain the following information for sample analysis:
• Title of project and project identification number;
• Name of report;
• Date report was prepared;
• Name, address, and telephone number of the laboratory;
• Sample identification number(s);
• Matrix of samples;
• Level III—Method blanks, blank/spikes, surrogates, matrix spikes, control charts, matrix
spike duplicates, duplicates, GC/MS tuning information, raw data, internal standard area
summaries, and initial and continuing calibration data;
• Level IV — When requested a data package as thorough as those required by the CLP
shall be delivered. The package shall include a summary and the remainder of the
package, including initial and continuing calibration, matrix spikes, matrix spike
duplicates, as applicable, blanks, duplicates, surrogate recoveries, chromatograms, mass
spectra, laboratory control samples, and absorbance data. For methods that are not
defined by the CLP, the calibration information, method blanks, blank/spikes,
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 13
chromatograms, absorbance, matrix spikes, and matrix spike duplicated should be
included;
• Level V—Method blank data and the control chart from the blank/spike;
• Date of analysis was performed;
• Signature of laboratory manager;
• Method precision, accuracy, and completeness attainable;
• QA checks to be run as part of the method; and
• Limitations of the method.
4.0 Data Validation and Usability
4.1Data Review Validations and Verification
Data reduction refers to computations and calculations performed on data. This includes, but is not
limited to, summary statistics, standard errors, confidence limits, test of hypothesis relative to the
parameters, and model validation.
Paper and electronic transfer of data will be conducted with multiple levels of redundancy. Data
will be verified manually and at times electronically at each stage of transfer to ensure accuracy.
The flow data from collection through storage is described in the CGRS data management system.
Data validation is the process by which a sample measurement, method, or piece of data is deemed
useful for a specified purpose. Data validation methods will depend on the type of study that
— generated the data, the type of sampling, the test method, and the end use(DQOs) of the data.
The project manager is responsible for specifying the systematic process to be used to review the
body of data against a set of criteria to assure that the data are adequate for their intended use. The
process shall consist of data editing, screening, checking, auditing, verification, certification, and
review.
4.2 Validation and Verification Methods
The project manager will perform the final review and approval of the data prior to it being entered
into the last system as valid. The project manager will look at field duplicates, matrix spike/matrix
duplicates, lab blanks and lab duplicates to ensure they are acceptable. The project manager will
also compare the sample descriptions to the field sheets for consistency and will ensure that any
anomalies in the data are appropriately documented.
4.3 Reconciliation with DQOs
Once the data results are compiled, the project manager will review the field duplicates to determine
if they fall within the acceptance limits as defined in the QAPP. Completeness will also be
evaluated to determine if the completeness goal for this project's requirements as outlined in the
QAPP (including the accuracy for lab spikes) the data may be discarded and re-sampling may
occur. The project manager will be responsible for determining the cause of failure and make the
decision to discard the data and re-sample. If the failure is tied to the analysis calibration and
maintenance techniques will be reassessed as identified by the appropriate lab personnel. If the
failure is associated with the sample collection and re-sampling is needed the samplers will be
retrained.
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 14
xi/ / --2531.23
f 0 ;
'`ems- N
sr, ea? � _ 00,,0 _ � -
1 ,is 0 i- _—_—,-2.1Y-; �y T 11
` 'A 1 �1 \
\ \ S11ui N
' 2111 ,.r,«e,no,0.M ro,..Lrre.-....a,
X4789.2 1 111 \ CYK4NWY 66
I lh
/ 11 I S
I.
,1 11`
q, 1'', o
X4789.5 1 I ..',. IW
WLLO CO 4 - 2- /
LMJ CG
EXHIBIT D
COAL ASH TRENCH AND MONITORING �i.vr2}aCCS#
WELL LOCATION PLAN =RL"z/
z.nr2: aft co, 901140
d
COO CevairrRrE124
—Yre'i r..E✓Xwn/
/
EXHIBIT B
1DEX MAP
FIGURE 1
AREA USE AND SITE CONDITION MAP
VARRA COAL ASH PROJECT
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
LEGEND: ... _ ,..y,.. ° .....
OPROPOSED MONITORING
WELL LOCATION
INFERRED GROUNDWATER APPLICANT:
FLOW DIRECTION 1" =APPR(
4 VARRA COMPANIES
12910 WELD COUNTY ROAD 13
O SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION LONGMONT, COLORADO 80504
_ * POND SAMPLE LOCATION AFTER:
NELSON ENGINEERS
640 GREELEY NATIONAL PLAZA
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
PHONE 356-6362
I
i
NESTED WELL SET
NE SW
T T -
TRENCH DEPTH ESTIMATED AT 10'BGS
/ 7/ _ _ _ _ _
, _ S _
/// \\\ /// /// \\\ /// \\\ /// \\\ /// \\\
A A
(PIERRE SHALE)
A 100'
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
rra NATIVE SOIL FIGURE 2
k:-:-:- FLY ASH MONITORING WELL PLACEMENT
VARRA COAL ASH PROJECT
WATER TABLE SURFACE
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
7-
_ MONITORING WELL IS SCREENED PROJECT NO. PREPARED BY
(DASHED AREA REPRESENTS SCREENED INTERVAL) 2755aa RACAD CG RS
DATE REVIEWED BY COLORADO GROUNDWATER
6/19/00 -} RESOURCE SERVICES
v ;
TYPICAL MONITORING WELL
r VENTED CAP
LOCKING STEEL CASING
(4"DIAMETER)
2"ID SCH 40 PVC RISERWiliZ
tit GROUT
,: ' ,,
,,,,
#10-20 SILICON SAND
„
--_
- "„ 2"ID SCH 40 PVC
FACTORY SLOTTED SCREEN
(0.1 SLOT)
--
'1
/// \\\ /// \\\ /// \\\ /// \\\ /// \\\ /// \N\
6-1/4"
FIGURE 3
MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
VARRA COAL ASH PROJECT
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PROJECT NO. PREPARED BY
2755aa RACAD CGRS
DATE REVJEWED BY COLORADO GROUNDWATER
6/19/00 -r0 RESOURCE SERVICES
Table 1
Summary of Parameters, Sample Containers,
Holding Times, and Analytical Methods
and No. a of Holding Time(I)
Parameter Matrix "Typ Analytical
Containers' Method(Z)
Alkalinity
Water 1-100 ml P,G
14 days cool to 4C SM 2320B
Chloride
Water 1-200 ml,P,G
28 days no preservative required EPA 300.0
Fluoride
Water 1-500 ml,P
28 days no preservative required EPA 300.0
Sulfate
Water 1 -200 ml,P
28 days cool to 4C EPA 300.0
Nitrate/Nitrite
Water 1 -l00 ml,P,G
48 hours cool to 4C EPA 300.0
_ I-500 ml P,G
Mercury Water 28 days,HNO3 to pH<2 245.1/7170
Total Metals(RCRA)
Water 125-500 ml nalgene 6 months except Mercury at 28 days. For
(Red dot) water,preserved with HNO3,not filtered. 6010/7000
Dissolved Metals(RCRA)
Water 125-500 ml nalgene 6 months except Mercury at 28 days. Filtered 6010/7000
and preserved in Lab.
Anions/General Chemistry
Water 250 ml nalgene 28 days 200 Series
Notes: (1)All collected samples to he kept cool(4 degrees C) (2)USEPA Method,SW-846(Revised),1986
Table 2
Contents for Digital Analytical Deliverables
Origin of Data
Laboratory Name of Example of Delivered Generated by Generated in
_ CGRS and Lab by Tech
Data Field Digital Data Entered on COC Lab
COMPANY NA Vara Companies X
SITE_NAME Coal Ash Project X
SITE_NO 2755aa X
SAMPLE_ID1 MW-1 X
SAMPLE_DAT 08/27/97 X
LAB_ID L15316-01 X
MATRIX Water X X
METHOD M6010 ICP X
DATE_ANALY 09/04/97 X
ANALYTE Silver,total (3051) X
TEXT_RESUL (blank if ND) X
NUMBER_RES (blank if ND) X
QUALIFIER U X
DILUTION 106 X
MDL 0.50000 X
PQL 3.00000 X
UNITS mg/L X
DATE_RECEI 09/03/97 X
DATE_EXTRA 09/04/97 X
CAS_ 007440-22-4 X
BATCH_ID WG47359 X
APPENDIX A
RESUMES
JOBY L. ADAMS, P.G.
CG
Joby Adams is co-owner and principal hydrogeologist in the CGRS Fort Collins office.
He has experience in both the mining and environmental fields, with background as
follows:
Specialization
• Pipeline facility assessment and remediation design
• Finite element and finite difference groundwater flow and solute transport modeling
• Air dispersion modeling
• Compressible gas flow modeling
• Well hydraulics
• Water well design and installation
• UST investigation and remediation
• Groundwater quality monitoring, sampling, and chemical analysis
• Soil vapor surveys (design, investigation and analysis)
• Precision tank and line testing (volumetric and nonvolumetric)
Education
• M.S. in Hydrogeology-Colorado State University
• B.S. in Geology-Colorado State University
• National Water Well Association Portable Gas Chromatography Symposium
• EPA State UST Programs Symposium
• American Society for Testing and Materials Seminar for Phase I Environmental
Assessments
• OSHA Health and Safety training and certification
• ASTM RBCA Training
Affiliations
• American Institute of Mining Engineers
• Colorado Groundwater Association
• Colorado Petroleum Storage Tank Committee Registered Professional
Environmental Scientist
• Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute
• Missouri Professional Geologist
• National Water Well Association
• Oklahoma Corporation Commission, Petroleum Storage Tank Division,
Certification of UST Consultant, ID#496
• Utah Certified Consultant
• Wyoming Professional Geologist
Representative Experience
➢ Conducted research related to elemental leachability of coal combustion by-
products and applicable testing methods. Received Department of Energy grant
(ECBC) for research related to elemental leachability of coal combustion by-
products in saturated conditions.
➢ Provided Expert Testimony services regarding the elemental leachability of slag
•
deposits near Leadville, Colorado.
Page 1
JOBY L. ADAMS, P.G.
CG
Representative Experience (Continued)
> Project Manager for a multi-million dollar environmental due diligence for the
purchase of eight natural gas plants and 18 associated compressor stations
throughout Oklahoma.
> Supervised personnel and subcontractors for activities consisting of excavating
and logging over 30 trenches and drilling 836 soil borings of which 239 were
completed as groundwater monitoring wells. Aquifer tests and periodic
groundwater monitoring were performed as well.
> Generated corrective action plans and cost estimates for two gas plants with
corrective action costs exceeding 25 million dollars.
> Project geologist - on-site investigations for subsurface contamination by
hydrocarbons
> Coordinated drilling and sampling to determine extent of subsurface herbicide
contamination
> Logging geologist
> Tanker rollover emergency response
> Remedial system design and evaluation
➢ Expert witness testimony
> Precision tank and line testing
> Generated process safety management plans for companies using ammonia
> Experienced with gas chromatography(using photoionization, flame ionization and
thermal conductivity detectors)
> Designed and performed soil vapor surveys in regard to litigation preparation
> Designed, permitted, installed and monitored remedial systems to remove
subsurface hydrocarbons in the states of Arizona, Colorado, Nebraska, New
Mexico, Utah, Washington and Wyoming
Publications/Papers
• "A Feasibility Study for the Beneficial Use of Coal Ash as Fill Material in Saturated
Conditions" - Under peer review for publication.
• "Soil Vapor Surveys with Soil Venting as an Aquifer Restoration Technique -A
Case History", Delta Environmental Technical Review, March 1990, Vol. 2, No. 1,
pages 6-9(with J.M. Kerr and B.S. Steadman)
• "Subsurface Contamination by the Herbicide Atrazine" Colorado State University
Unpublished Master's Thesis, 1994.
Page 2
JOBY L. ADAMS, P.G.
CGS
Professional Speaking Engagements
➢ "Case History of the Varra Coal Ash Project"— Invited Speaker to the Seventeenth
Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, University of Pittsburgh,
September 2000.
➢ "Investigation and Remediation Techniques and Theories in regard to Subsurface
Contamination by Petroleum Hydrocarbons" - Colorado School of Mines UST
Program (ongoing)
S. "Case Histories of Investigation and Remediation Projects in Regard to Petroleum
Hydrocarbon Contamination Assessment and Abatement" - Colorado State
University(Advanced Topics in Hydrogeology Guest Lecture Series, 1992)
➢ "Case Histories of Investigation and Remediation Projects and Theories and
Applications of Field Tracer Studies" - Colorado State University, Department of
Civil Engineering, Groundwater Program (ongoing)
Page 3
CHESTER HITCHENS
CG
Chester Hitchens is a hydrogeologist with CGRS, Inc. with twelve years of professional
experience at providing services specializing in design and implementation of site
investigations involving petroleum and petrochemical products. Mr. Hitchen's
background includes:
Specialization
• Contaminant recovery system design, including soil vapor extraction, air sparging
and hydraulic containment/recovery
• Management of petroleum cleanups
• Air rotary, mud rotary, reverse rotary and auger drilling
• Groundwater sampling techniques for both organic and inorganic contaminants,
organic and biomonitoring analyses
• Communication with state and other regulatory agencies
• Prepurchase environmental investigations
• RBCA and expert witness
Education
• M.S. (in progress) Geology—Colorado State University
• B.A. Geology—University of Northern Colorado
• ASTM RBCA Training
Affiliations
• Wyoming Professional Geologist#817
• New Mexico Environment department Certified Scientist#087
• Colorado Petroleum Storage Tank Fund Registered Professional Environmental
Scientist#5148
• Certified Washington State Site Association
• Association of Ground Water Scientists and Engineers
• South Dakota Certified Petroleum Release Remediator#R-141
• Instructor Hydrogeology—University of Northern Colorado
Representative Experience
• Managed over 75 investigation and remediation projects at service stations, bulk
plants, industrial facilities and automobile dealerships.
• Negotiated closure and clean up stipulations with various regulatory agencies, both
with and without performing remedial activities.
• Served as an expert witness regarding various technical aspects of an alleged
-- gasoline loss in a residential subdivision, including date of release, volume of
release and hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer.
• Served as technical advisor for a responsible party(RP) associated with a gasoline
release to a surface water body. The RP was issued a Notice of Violation from the
United States Environmental Protection Agency. Mr. Hitchens provide technical
assistance to the RP's attorney and negotiated with the state of Idaho attorney
general to prepare a Content Decree for the proposed clean up activities at the
facility.
Page 1
CHESTER HITCHENS
CG
Representative Experience (Continued)
• Served as a Project Hydrogeologist on site investigations involving soil and
groundwater contamination in Colorado, Idaho, Nebraska, New Mexico,
Washington and Wyoming. Projects involve initial site investigation, evaluation of
hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer, contaminant transport and preparation and
implementation of remedial action plans for soil and groundwater clean up.
• Conducted water rights adjudication for municipalities. Projects involved reviewing
of court records, establishing baseline data for groundwater usage, and
development of a data for the municipalities for the management of their ground
water usage.
• Evaluated potential for groundwater recharge and hydrogeology of an alluvial basin
in southwestern Arizona. Project involved defining the saturated and unsaturated
hydraulic characteristics of the basin, conducting long-term aquifer tests on large
diameter irrigation wells, developing a groundwater flow model to predict the
impacts of future groundwater usage an examining geochemical data for the
groundwater and surface water proposal to be used for recharge.
• Conducted groundwater contamination investigation associated with a dynamite
plant. Project involved review of the facility records to determine past operations
and disposal practices, examination of fate and transport of contaminants leached
from unlined disposal ponds and evaluation of steam and groundwater interaction
relating to contaminant transport.
Page 2
RANDY S. PRICE, C.P.G.
Randy Price is a co-owner and our Environmental Services Field Manager. He has
over 9 years of environmental consulting experience and specializes in site
investigations utilizing various drilling and sampling methodologies. Mr. Price's
background is as follows:
Specialization
• Project management of a variety of projects including Phase I and II ESAs, fuel
tank decommissioning at both singular and multiple sites.
• Site investigations utilizing groundwater, soil and soil vapor sampling for organic
and inorganic analyses
• Groundwater monitoring well installation and design
• Phase I and II environmental site assessments
• UST removal and closure
• Designing and installation of remediation systems (i.e., groundwater recovery,
SVE and AS remedial systems)
• UST regulatory interpretation, consultation and representation
Education
• B.S. in Geology- Fort Lewis College
• Graduate level courses in Hydrogeology-Colorado State University
• Professional Seminars
• "Groundwater Investigations Using Portable Gas Chromatography and Other
Field Instrumentation"
• "Soil Gas: The State of the Art and Beyond"
• "Site Assessments and Remedial Action for Petroleum Contaminated Soils"
• EPG Service School -"Operation & Maintenance of Remediation Equipment"
• OSHA Health and Safety training and certification
• OSHA Hazardous Waste Supervisor training
• Cathodic protection training
• ASTM RBCA Training
Affiliations
• Utah Certified Consultant#CC0092
• American Institute of Professional Geologists, CPG-8890
• Association of Groundwater Scientists and Engineers, National Groundwater
Association
• Colorado Hazardous Waste Management Society
• Colorado Petroleum Storage Tank Committee Registered Professional
Environmental Scientist, #503
• Wyoming Professional Geologist, PG-537
Representative Experience
• Wellsite geologist - extensive experience with geophysical well logs, sample
descriptions, coring and drilling procedures
• Supervised and managed the removal of numerous USTs
• Project geologist - on-site investigations for subsurface contamination by
hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents
Page 1
RANDY S. PRICE, C.P.G.
CG
Representative Experience (continued)
• Design and implement sampling strategies for site characterization related to
surface and subsurface chemical releases
• Aerial photograph interpretation, regulatory review, site assessments,
owner/employee interviews and media sampling performed for Phase I and II real
estate assessments for due dilignece projects throughout Texas, Lousiana,
Nebraska,Wyoming, Utah, Maryland, Iowa and Colorado.
• Gas chromatography using photoionization, flame ionization, thermal conductivity
and electron capture detectors
• Project manager of an 8,300 gallon release into a monitoring well. Obtained site
closure in 2.5 years at a cost of less than $250,000.
• Field team leader for subsurface investigation to evauate 15 miles of natural gas
pipeline in southwestern Colorado. Sampling activities were performed utilizing an
ATV Geoprobe. Sample analysis was performed on site in a mobile laboratory.
Page 2
JAMES W. WARNER, Ph.D., P.E.
CG
Dr. Jim Warner is a senior engineering consultant for CGRS. He is also an associate
professor and groundwater/environmental hydrogeology program leader in the
Department of Civil Engineering at Colorado State University. Dr. Warner has over
twenty years of experience as a practicing groundwater engineer and is the author of
over eighty technical publications and reports on groundwater. Dr. Warner has worked
internationally and is currently involved with the Egypt Water Use and Management
Project. He is also on the peer review committee for the United States Department of
Energy.
Specialization
• Groundwater flow and contaminant transport modeling
• Aquifer remediation
• Code development
• Feasibility studies and remedial investigations
• Geostatistics
Education
• Ph.D. in Civil Engineering - Colorado State University
Major Field of Study-Groundwater Hydrology/Water Resources Systems Engineering
• Graduate level courses in Civil Engineering- California State University at Long
Beach
Major Field of Study-Hydraulics and Surface Water Hydrology(total of seven courses)
• M.S. in Systems Engineering -California State University at Fullerton
- Major Field of Study-Statistics and Optimization
• M.B.A. in Business Administration- California State University at Fullerton
Major Field of Study-Operation Research and Statistical Decision Theory
• B.S. in Civil Engineering- California State University at Fresno
• OSHA Health and Safety training and certification
Affiliations and Honors
• American Geophysical Union (AGU)
• American Institute of Hydrogeology(AIR)
• American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE)
• American Water Resources Association (AWRA)
• Dean's Council Award for Outstanding Civil Engineering Faculty- 1993
• Geological Society of America (GSA)
• International Association of Hydrogeologists (IAH)
• International Water Resources Association (IWRA)
• National Water Well Association (NWWA)
• Professional Engineer(#16492) - State of Colorado
• Professional Engineer- State of Wyoming
• Professional Hydrogeologist-American Institute of Hydrogeologist
Page 1
CG � JAMES W. WARNER, Ph.D., P.E.
Representative Experience
• Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, Groundwater/Environmental
Hydrogeology program -Colorado State University(1981 to present):
♦ Conduct research and advise graduate students in groundwater
• Develop and teach graduate courses in groundwater contaminant transport
modeling, quantitative hydrogeology, solutions to groundwater problems,
groundwater engineering, geostatistics and conjunctive use of groundwater
and surface waters
• Graduated 15 Ph.D. students and 32 M.S. students
• Civil Engineering Groundwater Program Leader- Colorado State University
• Groundwater hydrologist - US Geological Survey, Water Resources Division
(1968-1981):
♦ Seven years in the Denver, Colorado office
♦ Six years in the Laguna Nigel, California office (Southern California District
Office
• Project chief/member on complex hydrologic studies
• Office consultant on technical matters related to groundwater hydrology
• Groundwater technical adviser - Egypt Groundwater Research Institute in Cairo,
Egypt
- . • assist in developing research plans
• train Egyptian engineers in groundwater
• assist in formulating plans of action to control groundwater contamination
• assist in implementation of conjunctive use of groundwater with surface water
for irrigation use in Egypt
• Groundwater modeling projects
• Groundwater author- over 80 technical publications and reports
• Associate editor-Journal of Engineering Geology
• Research funding - has received over$1.6 million in external funding over the past
six years
• Research areas - computer code development, groundwater flow and contaminant
transport modeling, stochastic modeling, fracture-flow modeling, monitoring criteria,
conjunctive use of groundwater and surface water, toxic wastes in groundwater
systems, multi-phase multi-species contaminant transport, water resources
systems analysis, microbial growth in aquifer systems and aquifer remediation
• Computer code development for the Colorado State University finite element
groundwater modeling package, also used by consulting firms, the US Army Corps
of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station (i.e., Rocky Mountain Arsenal) -
GWFLOW (2-dimensional flow model), GWTRAN (2-D/quasi 3-D contaminant
transport model), GWFRAC (double porosity flow model), GWCH2O (vertically
integrated density dependent flow model), GWBIO (2-D model for solving
biologically active contaminant transport), GW3D-REACT (full 3-D multi-species
contaminant transport model)
Page 2
Mr. Glenn Mallory
Varra Coal Ash Project
December 29, 1998
Page 2
If you have any questions regarding this letter or require further information, please contact me at
(800) 288-2657.
Sincerely,
CGRS, C.
Nio,-
, ' ,
Joby Adams, P.G.
r crpal/Hydrogeologist
Attachments
cc: Mr. Chris Varra — Varra Companies
Mr. Dave Goss — PSC
Mr. Terry Staley - PSC
Mr. Trevor Jiricek -Weld County Health Department
Mr. Harry Pose - Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology
Mr. Ben Patton-Weld County Planning
\\CGRS HQ SERVERWoby\WINWORD\LETTERS\statecoverltr.doc
l l 1 I I I I I ) I I I I I
TAbu 2
Analytical Results-SELP
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County,Colorado
CGRS Project No.1435-2755
Total Metals Analytical Results (mg/L)
Sample pH Ex Al Sb As Ba Be B Cd Cr Co Cu Fe Pb Mn Ni Se Ag Ti V Zn Li Hg
Class F Silo Ash with 85 1 27.00 ND ND 3.80 0.003 5.70 ND 0.13 ND 0.03 7.40 ND 0.07 ND ND ND ND 0.05 0.05 0.24 NO
Gypsum (C Silo) 2 9.70 ND ND 8.40 ND 0.69 ND 0.07 ND 0.01 2.20 ND 0.02 ND ND ND ND 0.02 0.02 0.12 ND
1 29.00 ND ND 1.30 0.002 1.70 ND ND ND 0.09 15.0 ND 0.14 0.02 ND ND ND 0.05 0.15 0.05 ND
Bottom Ash 85
2 37.00 ND _ ND 1.60 0.003 1,20 ND ND ND 0.12 21.0 ND 0.21 0.01 ND _ ND ND 0.06 0.22 0.04 ND
1 780.00 ND 0.40 5.20 0.082 120 0.05 0.52 0.11 0.80 210.0 0.62 1.40 0.18 0.64 ND ND 1.70 1.10 1.50 NA
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 8.5
2 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with a5 1 1.50 ND ND 0.98 ND 48 ND 0.19 ND ND 0.31 _ ND ND ND 0.23 ND ND ND ND 0.76 ND
Sodium 2 3.70 NA NA 2.10 NA 17 NA 0.63 NA NA _ 0.26 ND NA NA 0.10 NA NA NA NA 0.26 NA
1 1.90 ND ND 0.32 ND ND ND 0.07 ND 0.05 0.56 ND 0.02 0.02 ND ND ND ND 0.01 0.02 ND
Recycled Concrete 8.5
2 47.0 NA NA 0.71 NA NA NA 0.05 NA 0.15 _ 56 NA 1.70 0.04 NA NA NA NA 0.57 0.05 NA
1 150.0 ND ND 1.90 0.009 0.09 ND 0.17 0.06 0.41 160 0.41 4.30 0.12 ND ND ND 0.31 1.50 0.15 ND
Recycled Asphalt 8.5
2 2.50 NA NA 0.25 ND ND NA 0.06 ND 0.02 0.27 ND ND ND NA NA NA ND ND 0.02 NA
Class F Silo Ash with 7 1 750.0 ND ND 1.90 0.073 21.0 0.01 0.50 0.11 0.59 200.0 0.10 2.0 0.22 ND ND ND 1.30 0.61 0.56 0.002
Gypsum(C Silo) 2 12.0 NA NA 13.0 ND 0.30_ ND 0.04 ND 0.01 3.30 ND 0.03 ND NA NA NA 0.02 0.01 0.14 ND
`1 0.45 ND ND 0.08 ND 1.00 ND ND ND ND 0.24 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.03 ND
Bottom Ash 7
2 6.10 ND ND 0.27 ND 0.62 ND ND ND 0.02 3.40 ND 0.04 ND ND ND ND 0.02 0.08 0.01 ND
1 0.54 ND ND 0.79 ND 45 ND 0.11 ND ND 0.06 ND ND ND 0.19 ND ND 0.01 ND 0.73 ND
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 7
2 110.0 ND _ ND 6.70 0.008 22 ND 0.05 ND 0.09 32.0 0.11 0.13 0.02 0.13 ND ND 0.17 0.13 0.33 0.001
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash 1 0.21 ND ND 0.88 ND 45 ND 0.18 ND ND 0.06 ND ND ND 0.20 ND ND ND ND 0.76 ND
with Sodium 7 2 84.0 NA NA 5.30 NA 24 NA 0.11 NA NA 22.0 NA NA NA 0.14 NA NA NA NA 0.31 NA
1 2.60 ND ND 0.15 ND ND ND 0.13 ND 0.06 0.64 ND 0.02 ND ND ND ND ND 0.01 0.02 ND
Recycled Concrete 7
2 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR
State Water Quality 5.0 0.006 0.050 2.0 0.004 0.750 0.005 0.100 0.050 .20/1.0 0.30/5.0 0.050, 0.050 0.200 0.050 0.050 0.002 0.100 2.0 2.50 0.002
Standards A PPPP A P P A NS S/A P S P P P P A A A P
Notes:
ND=Not Detected
NA=Not Analyzed
EX=Extraction
mg/L=milligrams per liter
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
NR-Samples Not Analyzed
Page 1 of 4
I I I i i I I I I I I I I I
I )
TABLE 2
Analytical Results-SELF
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County,Colorado
CGRS Project No.1-135-2755
Total Metals Analytical Results (mg/L)
Sample pH Fat Al Sb As Ba Be B _ Cd Cr Co Cu Fe Pb Mn Ni Se Ag Ti V Zn Li Hg
1 1.2 ND ND 0.089 ND ND NO ND ND ND 0.88 ND 0.026 ND ND ND ND 0.01 0.011 0.009 ND
Recycled Asphalt 7
2 26 NA NA 0.39 ND 0.18 NA NA ND NA 28 NA 0.076 NA NA NA NA 0.062 0.36 0.03 _ NA
Class F Sib Ash with 5 1 0.10 ND ND 0.98 ND 6.10 ND 0.10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.19 ND
Gypsum (C Sib) 2 0.13 NA NA 0.94 NA ND_ NA 0.06 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.13 NA
1 640 ND ND 0.36 ND 1.20 ND ND ND 0.03 4.20 ND 0.05 ND ND ND ND 0.02 0.06 0.03 ND
Bottom Ash 5
2 0.37 NA NA 0.06 NA 0.56 NA NA NA ND 0.20 ND ND NA NA NA NA ND ND 0.01 ND
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 5 1 44.0 ND ND 2.90 0.0036 51.00 ND _0.13 ND - 0.04 12.00 ND 0.05 ND 0.27 ND ND 0.06 0.06 0.77 0.0001
2 5.10 NA NA 1.70 NA 15.00 NA ND NA ND ND NA ND NA ND NA NA 0.03 ND 0.22 ND
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with 5 1 0.61 ND ND 0.77 ND 51.00_ ND 0.21 ND ND 0.11 ND ND NO 0.21 ND ND ND ND 0.77 ND
Sodium 2 4.10 NA NA 1.10 NA 22.00 NA 0.05 NA NA 0.28 NA NA NA 0.13 NA NA NA _ NA 0.24 NA
1 1.30 ND ND 0.45 ND 0.08 ND 0.06 ND 0.04 0.56 ND . 0.01 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.02 ND
Recycled Concrete 5
2 230 NA NA 0.23 NA ND NA 0.08 NA 0.02 0.09 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.02 NA
Recycled Asphalt 5 1 120.0 ND ND 1.80 0.01 0.09 ND 0.13 0.05 0.33 140.0 0.33 3.90 0.10 ND ND ND 0.26 1.30 0.12 ND
2 87.0 NA NA 1.00 0.01 0.08 NA 0.07 0.03 0.22 90.0 0.19 2.30 0.62 NA NA NA 0.17 0.86 0.08 NA
State Water Quality 5.0 0.006 0.050 2.0 0.004 0.750 0.005 0.100 0.050 .20/1.0 0.30/5.0 0.050 0.050 0.200 0.050 0.050 0.002 0.100 2.0 2.50 0.002
Standards A PPPP A P P A AIS S/A P S PPPP A A A P
Notes:
ND=Not Detected
NA=Not Analyzed
EX=Extraction
mg/L=milligrams per liter
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
NR-Samples Not Analyzed
Page 2 of 4
I
TABLE 2
Analytical Results- SELP
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County, Colorado
CGRS No. 1-135-2755
Sample pH Ext Other Analytical Results(mg/L)
Total Cyanide Free Cyanide Chloride Fluoride Sulfate Nitrate Nitrite
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum (C Silo) 8.5 1 ND NA 130 8.4 23 7.9 4.6
2 ND NA 20 5.8 65 3.3 1
Bottom Ash 8.5 1 ND NA 29 0.95 170 1.1 0.031
2 ND NA 6.5 0.35 45 0.31 0.067
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 8.5 1 NA 0.021 5.1 3.1 ND 0.35 0.013
2 NA 0.016 5.7 1.3 69 ND 0.0058
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with Sodium 8.5 1 NA 0.021 4.9 5.8 1100 0.14 ND
2 NA 0.012 1.2 3.1 59 0.15 0.0082
Recycled Concrete 8.5 1 NA 0.047 26 5.3 10 1.4 0.096
2 NA 0.027 1.5 1.2 8.3 0.4 0.034
Recycled Asphalt 8.5 1 NA 0.012 10 0.98 44 ND 0.0078
2 NA ND 1.6 1.2 8.2 0.2 0.0055
Trip Blank 1 8.5 NA NA 31 1.5 2.6 NA NA
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum (C Silo) 7 1 NA ND 120 11 840 7.4 1.3
2 NA ND 31 7.4 19 2.1 1
Bottom Ash 1 NA ND 23 0.89 140 0.87 0.048
2 NA ND 5.1 0.46 33 0.16 ND
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 7 1 NA ND 4.1 4.7 430 0.23 0.014
2 NA ND 1.8 2.3 60 0.17 0.32
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with Sodium 7 1 NA 0.011 3.4 5.1 430 0.2 0.017 -
2 NA ND 1.8 3.1 49 0.12 0.036
Recycled Concrete 7 1 NA 0.11 26 4.1 31 0.92 ND -
2
-
State Water Quality Standards 0.2 250 2.0 250 10 1
P S A P P P
Page 3 of 4
I I
TABLE 2
Analytical Results - SELP
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County, Colorado
CGRS No. 1-135-2755
Sample pH En Other Analytical Results(mg/L)
Total Cyanide Free Cyanide Chloride Fluoride Sulfate Nitrate Nitrite
Recycled Asphalt 7 1 NA ND 8.1 2.1 ND ND 44
2 NA 0.011 1.9 0.52 11 ND ND
Trip Blank 2 7 NA NA ND 1.6 ND 0.14 ND
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum (C Silo) 5 1 NA ND 120 14 760 7.9 8.40
2 NA ND 29 11 16 2 3.60
Bottom Ash 5 1 NA ND 23 2.8 120 0.78 0.031
2 NA ND 7.9 1.6 37 0.24 ND
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 5 1 NA 0.013 4.8 7.3 640 0.2 0.012
2 NA ND 2.4 5.6 28 0.31 ND
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with Sodium 5 1 NA 0.016 4.5 7.4 550 0.75 0.019
2 NA ND 2.4 8.1 61 0.31 0.028
Recycled Concrete 5 1 NA 0.015 24 5.5 8.1 1.1 4.70
2 NA 0.056 15 6.7 20 0.63 0.047
Recycled Asphalt 5 1 NA ND 13 2.4 45 0.20 ND
2 NA ND 5.3 1.4 14 0.33 ND
State Water Quality Standards 0.2 250 2.0 250 10 1
Note: P S A S P P
NA-Not Analyzed
ND=Not Detected
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
Page 4 of 4
TABLE 3
TCLP Analytical Results
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County Colorado
CGRS NO.1-135-2755
Sample Ex Al Sb As Ba Be B Cd Cr Co Cu Fe Pb Mn Ni Se Ag Ti V Zn Li Hg
Class F Silo Ash with
Gypsum (C Silo) 0.32 ND ND 3.10 ND 2.20 ND 0.031 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NA ND ND 0.05 NA
Bottom Ash 0.96 ND ND 0.62 ND 0.96 ND ND ND 0.0083 0.063 ND 0.12 0.02 ND ND NA ND 0.10 ND NA
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3
ND ND 0.16 0.35 ND 24 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.11 ND 0.41 ND NA 0.18 ND 0.21 NA Cherokee 4 Fly Ash
with Sodium ND ND 0.23 0.37 ND 25 0.0057 ND ND ND ND ND 0.08 0.011 0.390 ND NA 0.34 0.0082 0.19 NA
Recycled Concrete ND ND ND 0.36 ND 0.17 ND 0.061 ND 0.012 ND ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.041 ND 0.019 NA
Recycled Asphalt 0.37 ND ND 0.52 ND 0.24 ND ND 0.015 0.015 0.25 ND ND 0.02 ND ND NA ND 0.26 ND NA
State Water Quality 5.0 0.006 0.050 2.0 0.004 0.750 0.005 0.100 0.050_.20/1.0 0.30/5.0 0.050 0.050 0.200 0.050 0.050 0.002 0.100 2.0 2.50 0.002
Standards A P P P P A P P A NS S/A P SP P P P A A A P
Notes:
ND=Not Detected
NA=Not Analyzed
EX=Extraction
mg/L=milligrams per liter
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
Page 1 of 2
I I I I I 1 I 1 I I � I I I I I I I I I
TABLE 3
TCLP Analytical Results
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County, Colorado
CGRS NO. 1-135-2755
Sample - Other Analytical Results(mg/L)
Total Cyanide Free Cyanide Chloride Fluoride Sulfate Nitrate Nitrite
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum (C Silo) ND NA 98 8.4 220 3.4 46
Bottom Ash ND NA 32 0.013 140 0.81 ND
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 ND NA 0.61 5.8 240 ND ND
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with Sodium ND NA ND 41 140 ND ND
Recycled Concrete ND NA 7.2 ND 41 0.29 ND
Recycled Asphalt ND NA 5.9 0.27 29 ND ND
State Water Quality Standards 0.2 250 2.0 250 10 1
P S A P P P
Note:
NA-Not Analyzed
ND=Not Detected
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
Page 2 oft
TABLE 4
SGLP Analytical Results
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County, Colorado
CGRS No. 1-135-2755
Sample Ex Al Sb As Ba Be B Cd Cr Co Cu Fe Pb Mn Ni Se Ag Ti V Zn Li Hg
Ash with Gypsum
(C Silo) 1 0.28 ND ND 0.71 ND 3.40 ND 0.033 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NA ND 0.010 0.094 NA
Bottom Ash 1 0.073 ND ND 0.12 ND 0.80 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.010 ND ND ND NA ND ND 0.057 NA
Cherokee Silo
Ash 2/3 1 ND ND ND 1.10 ND 16 ND 0.033 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.31 ND NA 0.04 ND 0.26 NA
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash
with Sodium 1 ND ND ND 1.10 ND 16 ND 0.06 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.340 ND NA 0.07 0.005 0.23 NA
Recycled Concrete 1 0.32 ND ND 0.11 ND 0.13 ND 0.068 ND 0.012 0.22 ND ND ND ND ND NA 0.01 0.011 0.054 NA
Recycled Asphalt 1 0.12 ND ND 0.067 ND 0.58 ND ND ND ND 0.074 ND 0.071 ND ND ND NA ND ND 0.051 NA
Gravel Quarry Water ND ND ND 0.010 ND 0.30 ND 0.06 ND ND 0.056 ND 0.028 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.027 NA
State Water Quality 5.0 0.006 0.050 2.0 0.004 0.750 0.005 0.100 0.050 .20/1.0 0.30/5.0 0.050 0.050 0.200 0.050 0.050 0.002 0.100 2.0 2.50 0.002
Standards APPP P A P P A AB S/A PSPP PP A A A P
Notes:
ND=Not Detected
NA=Not Analyzed
EX=Extraction
mglL=milligrams per liter
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
Page 1 of 2
I I 1 I I I I 1 i 1 I
1 j 1
TABLE 4
SGLP Analytical Results
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County,Colorado
CGRS No. 1-135-2755
Sample Other Analytical Results(mg/L)
Total Cyanide Free Cyanide Chloride Fluoride Sulfate Nitrate Nitrite
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum (C Silo) ND NA 150 4.5 2700 4.1 4.63
Bottom Ash ND NA 110 0.9 3000 1.9 ND
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 ND NA 83 5.3 3400 0.083 ND _
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with Sodium ND NA 84 _ 4.4 3300 0.86 ND
Recycled Concrete ND NA 110 0.19 2500 1.3 0.12 -
Recycled Asphalt ND NA 97 _ 0.95 2800 1 ND
Gravel Quarry Water ND NA 76 4.0 2900 1 ND
State Water Quality Standards 0.2 250 2.0 250 10 1
P S A P P P
Note:
NA-Not Analyzed
ND=Not Detected
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
Page 2 of 2
I I
TA.,LE 5
Analytical Results-SGCLP
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County,Colorado
CGRS Project No.1-135-2755
Total Metals Analytical Results (mg/L)
Sample pH PV Al Sb As Ba Be B Cd Cr Co Cu Fe Pb Mn NI Se Ag Ti V Zn Li Hg
1 ND NA NA 0.29 NA 290 NA 0.31 NA NA ND NA NA NA NA NA NA ND 0.023 1.20 NA
Class F Silo Ash with 8.5 2 ND NA NA 1.80 NA 9.50 NA 0.20 NA NA ND NA ND NA NA NA NA ND 0.0073 0.31 NA
Gypsum (C Silo) 4 ND NA NA 2.50 NA 2.0 NA 0.09 NA NA ND NA ND NA NA NA NA ND ND 0.22 NA
1 0.24 NA NA 0.059 ND 2.10 NA NA NA 0.0087 ND ND ND NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA
Bottom Ash 8.5 4 0.23 NA NA 0.022 ND 0.52 NA NA NA ND ND ND ND NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA
8 0.29 NA NA 0.033 NA 0.30 NA NA NA ND ND NA ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
l
1 0.98 NA NA 0.53 ND 130 NA 0.076 ND NA 0.11 ND ND ND NA NA NA 0.026 NA NA NA
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 8.5 2 0.94 NA NA 1.10 ND 40 NA ND ND NA 0.19 NO ND ND NA NA NA ND NA NA NA
4 5.80 NA NA 7.20 ND 22 NA ND ND NA ND ND ND ND NA NA NA ND NA NA NA
1 6.60 NA NA 0.72 NA 140 NA 0.46 NA NA 0.82 NA NA NA 1.10 NA NA NA NA 2.80 NA
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with 8.5 2 0.91 NA NA 0.69 NA 47 NA 0.016 NA NA 0.25 NA NA NA 0.19 NA NA NA NA 0.53 NA
Sodium 4 5.90 NA NA 9.30 NA 19 NA ND _ NA NA 0.17 NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA 0.21 NA
1 ND NA NA 1.30 ND 25.00 NA 0.33 ND 0.048 ND 0.27 ND ND NA NA NA ND NA 0.79 NA
Class F Silo Ash with 7 2 ND NA NA 1.50 ND 4.40 NA 0.22 ND 0.026 ND 0.09 ND ND NA NA NA NO NA 0.29 NA
Gypsum(C Silo) 4 ND NA NA 6.50 ND 0.81 NA 0.017 ND ND ND ND ND ND NA NA NA ND NA 0.27 NA
1 0.30 NA NA 0.04 ND 2.20 NA NA NA NA ND NA ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Bottom Ash 7 4 0.18 NA NA 0.023 ND 0.65 NA NA NA NA ND NA ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
8 0.39 NA NA 0.058 ND 0.39 NA NA NA NA 0.071 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
1 1.40 NA NA 0.41 ND 190 NA 0.21 ND 0.0086 ND ND ND NA 1.30 NA NA 0.013 NA 4.30 NA
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 7 2 0.46 NA NA 0.77 ND 54 NA 0.015 ND ND 0.076 ND ND NA 0.22 NA NA ND NA 0.47 NA
4 5.40 NA NA 5.30 ND 21 NA ND ND ND 0.17 ND ND NA ND NA NA ND NA 0.16 NA
1 1.00 NA NA 0.58 NA 210 NA 0A7 NA NA ND NA NA NA 1.40 NA NA NA NA 5.10 NA
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash
7 2 0.30 NA NA 0.63 NA 64 NA 0.018 NA NA 0.051 NA NA NA 0.21 NA NA NA NA 0.52 NA
with Sodium
4 5.60 NA NA 6.70 NA 22 NA ND NA NA ND NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA 0.35 NA
State Water Quality 5.0 0.006 0.050 2.0 0.004 0.750 0.005 0.100 0.050 .20/1.0 0.30/5.0 0.050 0.050 0.200 0.050 0.050 0.002 0.100 2.0 2.50 0.002
Standards A P P P P A P P A A/S S/A P S P P P P A A A P
Page 1 of 4
/ )
1. LE 5
Analytical Results-SGCLP
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County,Colorado
CGRS Project No.1-135-2755
Sample pH pv Al Sb As Ba Be B Cd Cr Co Cu Fe Pb Mn Ni Se Ag Ti V Zn Li Hg
1 0.091 NA NA 15 NA 20 NA 0.34 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.10 NA
Class F Silo Ash With 5 2 0.710 NA NA 14 NA 0.11 NA ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.82 NA
Gypsum (C Sib) _4 0.24 NA NA 29 NA ND _ NA ND NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.11 NA
1 0.087 NA NA 0.11 NA 3.10 NA ND NA ND ND NA ND NA NO NA NA ND 0.0068 0.12 NA
Bottom Ash 5 4 0.130 NA NA 0.018 NA 0.47 NA ND NA NA ND NA NA NA ND NA NA NO ND ND NA
8 0.26 NA NA 0.02 NA 0.23 NA NA NA ND ND NA NO NA NA NA NA ND ND ND NA
1 0.42 NA NA 0.42 NA 170 NA 0.087 NA NA 0.062 NA NA NA 1.10 NA NA 0.02 0.036 5.50 NA
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 5 2 0.25 NA NA 0.68 NA 41 NA 0.014 NA NA 0.089 NA NA NA 0.19 NA NA ND 0.025 0.61 NA
4 4.80 NA NA 5.10 NA 22 NA ND NA NA ND NA NA NA 013 NA NA ND ND 0.19 NA
1 9.20 NA NA 7.30 NA 49 NA 0.081 NA NA 2.0 NA NA NA 0.31 NA NA NA NA 1.70 NA
Cherokee Fly Ash With 5 2 10.00 NA NA 25.00 NA 14 — NA ND NA NA 1,30 NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA 0.26 NA
Sodium 4 12.00 NA NA 12.00 NA 10.00 NA ND NA NA 0.16 NA NA NA ND NA NA NA NA 0.009 NA
State Water Quality 5.0 0.006 0.050 2.0 0.004 0.750 0.005 0.100 0.050 .20/1.0 0.30/5.0 0.050 0.050 0.200 0.050 0.050 0.002 0.100 2.0 2.50 0.002
Standards A P P P _ P A P P A A/S S/A _ P S P P P P A A A P
Notes:
ND=Not Detected
NA=Not Analyzed
pv=Extraction
mg/L=milligrams per liter
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
Page 2 of 4
•
i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
TABLE 5
Analytical Results - SGCLP
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County, Colorado
CGRS No. 1-135-2755
Sample pH PV Other Analytical Results(mg/L)
Total Cyanide Free Cyanide Chloride Fluoride Sulfate Nitrate Nitrite
1 ND NA 290 7.7 1400 17.0 22.0
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum (C Silo) 8.5 2 ND NA 59 6.8 1100 4.0 5.1
4 ND NA 30 T2 860 2.7 3.2
1 ND NA 74 1.5 350 1.4 0.379
Bottom Ash 8.5 4 ND NA 8.2 0.57 46 0.22 ND
8 r 0.015 NA 2.2 0.98 16 ND ND
1 ND NA 12 11 1700 0.034 0.022
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 8.5 2 ND NA 9.5 7 930 ND 0.006
4 ND NA 3.5 3.9 7 ND ND
1 ND NA 12 19 3080 1.2 0.093
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with Sodium 8.5 2 ND NA 6.64 10.2 1100 ND 0.013
4 ND NA 1.69 3.72 5.9 0.18 ND
1 ND NA 557 17 1700 30 47
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum (C Silo) 7 2 ND NA 52 14 1400 4.3 5.6
4 ND NA 29 9.3 300 3.9 4
1 ND NA 86.1 2.25 449 0.703 1.25
Bottom Ash 7 4 ND NA 4.96 1.5 36.4 ND ND
8 ND NA 1.9 4.6 10 ND ND
1 ND NA 6.9 11.1 1600 0.44 0.019
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 7 2 ND NA ND 12,4 777 ND 0.007
4 ND NA ND 5.04 8.2 0.166 ND
1 0.02 NA 5.7 11 1300 0.3 0.03
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with Sodium 7 2 ND NA ND 8.9 870 ND 0.0086
4 ND NA ND 7.1 10 0.17 ND
State Water Quality Standards 0.2 250 2.0 250 10 1
P S A P P P
Page 3 of 4
I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
l
TABLE 5
Analytical Results- SGCLP
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County, Colorado
CGRS No. 1-135-2755
Sample pH PV Other Analytical Results (mg/L)
Total Cyanide I Free Cyanide I Chloride I Fluoride I Sulfate I Nitrate I Nitrite
Sample pH PV Other Analytical Results (mg/L)
Total Cyanide Free Cyanide Chloride Fluoride Sulfate Nitrate Nitrite
1 0.014 NA 1300 7 2100 74 120.00
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum (C Silo) 5 2 ND NA 110 4.2 13 8.1 13.00
4 ND NA 3.5 4 5.2 1.7 0.62
1 ND NA 170 2.5 890 0.17 0.0064
Bottom Ash 5 4 ND NA 1.6 0.57 13 ND ND
8 ND NA 0.94 0.42 6.2 ND ND
1 ND NA 2.2 7.9 1500 ND 0.013
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3 5 2 NA NA 1.2 5.2 760 ND 0.0067
4 ND NA 1.5 3.7 7.9 0.18 ND
1 ND NA 6 11 3100 0.4 0.09
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash with Sodium 5 2 ND NA 0.6 2.3 3.5 ND 0.03
4 ND NA 1 1.7 0.64 ND ND
State Water Quality Standards 0.2 250 2.0 250 10 1
Note: P S A S P P
NA-Not Analyzed
ND=Not Detected
pv=Pore Volume
A-Agricultural Standard
P-Primary Drinking Water Standard
S-Secondary Drinking Water Standard
Page 4 of 4
TABLE 6
SELP
Analytical Results in Excess of Water Quality Standards
Fly Ash Disposal Project
Weld County,Colorado
CGRS Project No.1-135-2755
ELEMENTS
Ex Total
Class F Silo Ash with 1 6 12 1 19
Gypsum (C Silo) 2 3 3 0 6
1 4 1 3 8
— Bottom Ash 2 4 2 0 6
1 14 4 6 24
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3
2 NR 8 2 10
-- Cherokee 4 Fly Ash 1 4 3 3 10
with Sodium 2 4 5 2 11
1 1 2 1 4
Recycled Concrete
2 3 NR 0 3
1 9 1 8 18
Recycled Asphalt
2 0 3 7 10
pH 8.5 7 5
OTHER ANALYTICAL
Class F Silo Ash with 1 2 2 3 7
Gypsum (C Silo) 2 1 1 2 4
1 0 0 1 1
Bottom Ash
2 0 0 0 0
1 1 2 2 5
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3
2 0 1 1 2
Cherokee 4 Fly Ash 1 2 2 2 6
with Sodium 2 1 1 1 3
1 1 1 2 4
Recycled Concrete 2 0 0 1 1
1 0 2 0 2
Recycled Asphalt
2 0 0 0 0
pH 8.5 7 5
NR-Samples not ran by laboratory
varracompare
APPENDIX - A
Selected Data—Groundwater Quality and Hydrogeology of the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer in the
Milton Reservoir Area, Weld County,Colorado
I
p
I •
Fort Collins
I
Larimer Greeley
County
Study Area
RWIT
Boulder .
County Weld
' Longmont County
r • Boulder
Adams
County
Jefferenn
County
-------urd:
Golden Denver -
Arapahoe
County
0 feet 52300 105600
SCALE: 1:633,600
Figure 1 - Location of the study area.
1.
2
i
I — ' .I s _ __r '
v A...1 I I \.
1L , --7 J�urArt AIRA � y'• r' /1 .` . `ll
. r-
7
iU 'E4 . flfl7
...A. F .�•ii—
eta ' I I a1..._ _ -
• --i rte'— -3 I s
s,,it \ h
O I I
• �
` P ,L? ;�` �.. ; A%L 7' �`�� 'L e = R T
t ).O. La it; i �'�
'.� ' ��
_ I• J '� > _ -sra---- I _ I'�
_ I - d lie . I r . ��•..
10 L .OAMCMETFAS
EXPLANATION
I OUTCROP GC PRF,'.MAAV.M ROOKS .— -APPRO%ANTE 1D41 OF THE 3.1RMA N
FOX HILLS AOUFE%
MfA UtOOLLA0 OY ME 1 flMS' DATA PCOETS
FOX 1!015 MUAFA • Mood mowed n 1961
FAULT-0.r..1 dr.nMr.E
• NsE
I -BOO POTENT101QTNC COIFTOUR-9oIn anrd Yvm...la11.010.1111110011m
Smutted nMgwm Y.J n.f. It.calmly P�r�rn9.d
merited n M Lan..rFo M4 ma*.[MindComm dr.N+fir'brad
.butyl YA Inn Daum.w1...y
I - Figure 9 - Potentiometric Hap of the R1-f Aquifer in the
Denver Basin (Robson and Banta, 1987) .
Iii
I 34
I
GROUNDWATER QUALITY OF THE AREA
The compiled groundwater quality data were compared
with Federal and State Applicable or Relevant and
Appropriate Requirements (ARAR's) . The ARAR's were obtained
from the Colorado Department of Health (1985) water quality
numeric recommendations and standards. Table IX summarizes
the ARAR's and water quality parameters which exceed
applicable standards.
Sulfate, iron, fluoride, pH, ROE and, manganese
_ - parameters were found to exceed applicable standards.
Figure 19 shows the distribution of samples exceeding ARAB
concentrations. With the exception of pH and ROE, the
highest percentage of samples that exceed ARAR's are from
Data Groups "B" and "C" . Over 60% of Data Group "C" samples
and, 45°- Data Group "B" samples exceed the ARAR' s for
sulfate concentrations. Additionally, the ARAB
concentration for dissolved iron is exceeded by 36% of the
samples from Data Group "B" . Thirteen percent of the Group
"C" samples exceed the ARAB for fluoride. Over 82% of the
samples from Data Group "A" exceed the applicable water
quality standard for pH. All of the samples (groups "A" "B"
- and "C") exceed the ARAR value (500mg/1) for ROE (TDS) .
67
I.
Table IX - ARAR's and Summary of Exceedances
I. PARAMETER APPLICABLE STANDARDS PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLING STATIONS
ag/L EXCEEDING STANDAkuS
GROUP A GRWP B GRWP C
L
Na NS
SO4 250 - CDH 6W DWSTD OX 45% 63%
r Ca MS
L Mg NS
Fe 0.3 - COH GW GUSTO 8% 36% 13%
Fl 2.0 - CDR GW DWSTD 0% 0% 13%
L
Cl 250 - CON GW DUST() 0% 0% O%
pH 6.5-8.5 - COX GU DWSTD 82% 36% 25%
CO3 NS
LROE (TDS) 500 - CDH GW DWSTD 100% 100% 100X
EC NS
NO3-N 10.0 - CDH GW DWSTD OX OX 0%
L K NS
Ba 1.0 CDN GW DWSTD O% 0% 0%
Co NS
I Pb 0.05 - CDH GW DWSTD 0% DX OX
Mn 0.05 - CDH GW DWSTD 0% 18% 38%
Mo 0.1 - CON AG O% 0% 0%
Sr NS
IV 0.1 - CDH AG 0% 0% 0%
Be 0.1 - CDH AG OX 0% 0%
Cu 1.0 - CDH 6W DWSTD 0% 0% 0%
I
Li 2.5 - CON AG 0% 0% 0%
Si MS
Zn 2.0 - CGH AG 0% OX L-
' Cd 0.01 - CDH GW DWSTD OX DX 0%
Ag 0.05 CDH CV DWSTD 0% 0% OX
Cr 0.05 - CDH GW DWSTD 0% 0% OX
' Ni 0.2 - CDH kG OX 0X OX
I
I CDH - Colorado Department of Health
SW - Surface Water
_ GW - Groundwater
I.. DWSTD - Drinking Water Standard
NS - No Standard
NA - Not Available
I
i 68
DISTRIBUTION OF SAMPLES EXCEEDING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
I
i
70—
b1
U
CCUJ
,01
fl ao
I
to—
I -
FO4 Fe F PH ROE Mn
PARAMETERS
ISM GROUP A _GROUP B GROUP C
' WATER QUALITY STANDARDS:
5Oe 250
Fe 03
I F 2.0
pH 63-83
ROE 500
Mn 0.05
I •UNITS IN mg/L except for pH
I
Figure 19 - Graph represents the distribution of parameters
exceeding ARAR concentrations.
69
Eighteen percent of Data Group "B" samples and 38% of Data
Group "C" samples exceed the ARAR concentration (0. 05 mg/1)
for manganese.
Despite having iron, pH, and ROE parameters
exceeding ARAR concentrations (Table IX) , the Data Group "A"
samples, representing the groundwater from the Kl-f Aquifer,
is of better quality for human consumption and domestic
purposes than the groundwater of Data Groups "B" and "C" .
However, the NA-CO3+HCO3 groundwater in the K1-f Aquifer may
not be suitable as drinking water for persons on low sodium
diets. The mean ROE value of 592 mg/L exceeds the ARAR
concentration of 500 mg/L due to the high mean
concentrations of sodium (242 mg/L) and carbonate +
bicarbonate (461 mg/L) ions.
The groundwater collected from wells in Data Group
"B" was of a lesser quality than the groundwater from Data
Group "'." . The mean sulfate, ROE and dissolved iron
concentrations within Data Group "B" exceed ARAR' s. The
high sulfate concentrations in the drinking water obtained
from wells in Group "B" may act as a laxative if consumed
and the high iron concentrations may cause staining of
plumbing and bathroom fixtures (Driscoll, 1986) . In
addition, the high soodium-sulfate concentration may not
have an aestically pleasent taste or smell. The groundwater
quality from wells in Data Group "B" is not suitable for
70
human consumption and most domestic purposes.
The water quality of the groundwater sampled from
wells comprising Data Group "C" is unfit for human
consumption. The mean sulfate concentration of 647 mg/L and
the mean ROE value of 1390 mg/L exceeds the ARAR
concentrations summarized in Table IX, with the mean ROE
value exceeding 1, 000 mg/L the groundwater is classified as
brackish (Freeze and Cherry, 1979) . Water which has a
dissolved solids concentration greater than 1000 mg/L is a
high salinity hazard and is unsuitable for most types of
irrigation due to the potential salt buildup in the soil
(Robson, 1989) .
II -
71
JUN-16-1998 10:28 ..._
REPORT DATE 04/29/98 COLORADO WELLS, APPLICATIONS. AND PERMITS PACE 1
COLORADO DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES
E D CO OWNER INFORMATION
- ACTIVITY STATUS 1ST 11S6D ANNUAL ACRES GEOL WKLL WELL WATER SEC LOCAT'N TOWN P
CD DATE CD DATE WD MD DB USE DATE APROP IRR AQFR YIELD DEPTH LEVEL COORDINATES QTRS SC SHIP RANGE M
1 62 6IEGRISI CONST 6999 YORK St DENVER, CO 90729 GRAVEL PIT
_ AP 02/20/90 AU 03/20/90 5 0 G r,'w 11 3 N 67 H S
1 62 OAKOLIOS ERNEST R. COI.UNN, CO 80401
AP OS/n3/85 AU 05/07/45 2 A Ow SW 31. 3 N 67 W S
169F 1 62 VARRA COMPANIES 2130 S 96TH ST BROOMFIELD, CO 60020
_ EP 01/02/67 EP 02/06/98 5 4 GW r O100N.0200E NENE 31 3 N 67 W S
1 62 VARRA COMPANIES 2110 S 46111 BROOMFIELD. CO 80020 GRAVEL PIT /^�
__ AP 07/16/90 AU 05/21/90 5 0 G Gw 4tbr; SWNE 31 3 N 67 W S
426AD 1 62 DAKOLIOS CNSTR CO DENVER, CO 80221 /
AD A 4 NENW 11 3 N 67 W 5
1 62 VAµkA COMPANIES 2130 5 96TH BROOMFIELD. CO 80020 GRAVEL PIT
_ AP 07/16/90 AU 09/20/90 S 0 G CW SWNW 31 1 N 67 w S
1 936 1 62 ST VRAIN SAN DIST 600 KIMMAR% ST STE B LONGMONT, CO 80502 n,.,wt'°.✓
RP 09/19/87 SA 12/12/88 5 3 12/15/87 0.13 KLF 2.50 150 12 22155,2405E NWSE 31 3 N 6; w S
-=796M 1 62 ST. VRAIN SAN. 600 KI'MBARK ST STE B LONGMONT, CO 00502 OWLFt
_ NP 12/01/67 SA 5 0 OT/06/BB OW 18 19135,2910E NWSE 31 3 N 67 W S
32796M 1 62 ST. VRAIN SAN. 600 KIMBARK ST STE ➢ LONGMONT. CO 60502 c,{1.2 r
NP 12/01/97 SA 5 0 07/08/88 OW 18 19+aS,2410E NWSE 11 3 N 67 W S
795M 1 62 ST VRAIN SANITATION DIST GOO KIMBARK ST STE 8 LONGMONT. CO 60502
5 0 12/15/87 18 1933.5,2925E NWSE 31 N F7 W S
1 62 VARRA COMPANIES 2130 S 96TH BkOOMFILLD. CO 00020
AP 12/23/96 5 C 5'(fi4.(( ?It Ow NESW 31 3 N 4'r w S
1 a5 1 62 GOULD L LONGM0N1', CO 80501
NP n4/06/02 AR 04/27/63 5 R SWSW 11 1 N a7 W 5
154183 1 62 GOULD LEE 12146 WELD CNTY RD 13 LONGMONT. CO 90501
_ NP 04/26/89 AR 05/16/89 5 89 GB 75.00 32 10 03905,O100w SWSW 11 3 N 67 W S
1_.183 A 1 62 GOULD LEE 12148 WELD CNTY RD 11 LONGMONT, CO 90501
NP 04/26/69 AR 05/19/89 5 89 Ow 03905,OtO0W Sw5W 31 3 N 47 w 5
569 1 62 GOULD LEE RT 4 LONGMONT. CO 90501
S 9 05/03/66 25.00 25 6 SWSW 31 3 N 67 W S
JUN-16-1998 10:27 c.ep+
REPORT DATE 04/29/99 COLORADO WELLS, APPLICATIONS, AND PERMITS
ONCE 1
COGOWADO DIVISION OF BAYER RESOURCES
F MIT D CO ONNER INFORMATION
ACTIVITY STATUS 1ST USED ANNUAL ACRES GEOL WELL NELL WATER $6C LOCAT'N
CD DATE CD DATE WD MU DD USE DATE APROP IRE AQFR YIELD DEPTH LEVEE COORDINATES Q1R5 SC SHIP RANGE M
9705E 1 G2 WALpH Nlx PRODUCE. 1NC 19460 Us Hwy 05 OLLCREST. CO 90622
-- RC 12/02/92 5 t 02/28/40 1000.00 16 �.
2 374 1 62 RALPH NIX PRODUCE 16759 WCR 44 GILCRESI, CO 80623 SENT 26 3 N 6% u 5
NP 10/10/76 RC 04/24/97 2 A L CH 15.0R 70 )I. /[40N,ON%5G SEND 28 A N 6/ w ≤
2409F R 1 G2 KURTZ CATTLE CO ; AGRICOLA REALTY 6 MGMT FT NONCAN. CO 80701
NP 11/10/94 2 1
CW ON 2592N,2gG5E SENW 26 3 N 67 N ti 124F 1 62 KURT'/, HELENE 0 6 MAX 5676 E 17111 AVE DENVER 20, CO 50220 -
5 1 05/20/63 1000.00 18 5
NWSN 28 ] N 67 N 5
%"'1]7 1 62 RALPH NIX PRODUCE. INC 19480 VS Huy 85 GILCREST, CO ROfi2J
KC 12102/92 5 8 05/10/09 15.00
24 a lU\N 20 1 N 6'I N S
136175 1 62 LEER 6 AULT. CO 00521
NP 04/27/54 5 0 01/70/85
1 12 1 62 KURTZ ALBERT R F D I'LATTEVILLE. CO 80651 NE 29 3 N 67 W S
5 9 loon 18 4
N ENE 39 7 N v7 w 5
1 6; LE511 B AULT. CO 50610
TN 04/16/34 5
1 40MH 1 62 CO DAIRY FARMS NENw 29 1 N 67 w 5
C/0 LEER DRILLING AULT, CO 80610
mil 02/05/52 E D Ow
e N27N,249vw NE NH 29 I N 67 W 5 97A29VE 1 62 AURORA DAIRY CORP 7386 HWY 66 LONGMONT. CO 00000
AV 02/07/92 5 39 OW
062%N,2497W Nrivw 29 3 N 6% u II
144175 1 62 PSI, ASSOCIATES LONOMONT, CO 80501
'- NP 10/12/82 RC 01/20/84 5 a
NCNH 29 3 N 67 N S
2 R 1 62 COLORADO DAIRY FARMS 7388 HWY 66 LONGMONT', CO 80501
NP oz/06/9a SA 07/15/92 5 9 n2/26/92 150.80 GW 290
.00 25 2 2a2741,21 02W NFNW 29 3N 6iWS
25867F 1 62 PSF ASSOCIATES %708 STATE HWY 66 LONGMONT. CO 80501
AB 02/14/92 S 9 09/09/82 205.00 70 2 a''27N,2797w NENW 29 3 N 67 W S
JUN-16-1 VO JUN-16-11 1 : F.GJ
REPORT DATE 04/29/90 COLORADO WELLS, APPLICATIONS, AND PERMITS VAQE 1
COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
t "T D CO OWNER INFORMATION
ACTIVITY STATUS 1ST USED ANNUAL ACRES GEOL WELL WELL WATER SEC LOCAT'N TOWN P
CU DATE CD DATE WU MD DB USE DATE APHOP IRA AQPR YIELD DEPTH LEVEL COORDINATES QTRS SC SHIP RANGE M
19074MH 1 62 AT&T COMMUNICATIONS a CERTIFIED ENV CONSULT SALT LAKE CITY. UT 04115
NH 10/19/92 5 0 M OW 0.E0 10 6 NR 30 3 N 67 W S
_ .462 1 62 HESS LANCE - CEC 2757 S 300 WEST MD SALT LAKE. UT 84115
NP 11/01/93 5 0 M UNC O114N,7c93E NWNE 30 3 N 67 w S
'-"5467 1 62 HESS LANCE - CEC 2757 S 300 WEST MR SALT LAKE. UT 84115
_ NP 11/01/91 5 0 M UNC 0177N,2444E NWNE 30 3 N 67 w 5
175464 1 62 HESS LANCE -- CSC 2757 S 300 WEST MR SALT LAKE. UT 04115 NP 11/01/91 5 0 M UNC 0094N,2498E NWNW 30 3 N 6' W S
;465 1 62 HESS LANCE - CEC 2757 5 300 WEST ID SALT LAKE, UT 81115
NP 11/01/93 5 0 M INC 0177N,2491E NWNE 30 3 N 67 W 5
Colorado eamflow I i
Page i 1
r Streamflow
Colorado Streamflow Information
Here's the streamflow information you requested:
ST. VRAIN CREEK NEAR PLATTEVILLE, AT THE
MOUTH
400
7 350
m 300
` 250
a 200
2 150
100
u 50
0
20-Jun 21-Jun 22-Jun 23-Jun 24-Jun 25-Jun 26-Jun 27-Jun 28-Jun 29-Jun 30-Jun
Chart prepared on 6/30/98 10:07:28 AM - Days go from Midnight to Midnight
Estimated Channel Capacity 1650 CFS
WaterTalk (303) 831-7135 Division 1, Station 59
[Another Stream]
Nat ii al Resource, I Parks I \\'ildlite Wale) p Geology Oil & Gas I Mining I l And I Overview
http L'www dnr state co us/scripts/gage/gage.idc 6/30/98
I I I I I I I I I I I i I I
Coloradc trent Streamflow Conditions - Wate... ! Page 1 :3
GS . . .
science'agnanglngwnrld
Colorado Current Streamflow Conditions - Water Quality
Updated TUESDAY JUN 30, 1998 13:08:11
Streamflow conditions are monitored by the U.S. Geological Survey with support from Federal, State, and local cooperators.
PROVISIONAL DATA SUBJECT TO REVISION--Select a station number from the table to view graph(s) and other data for a station.
Water Specific Dissolved pH
Station Station Temp Rainfall Flow Stage Conductanc Oxygen Standard
Number Name °C Inches ft3/s ft µS/cm mg/L Units Date/Time
a SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN
06 97100 Tarryal Creek below Park Gulch near __ __ 20 3.85 -- -- -- 06/30
Como, Co 08:00
06701970 Spring Cr above mouth nr South Platte 06/30
0 41 3.76
Co. 12:50
06706800 Buffalo Creek at mouth at Buffalo 06/30
0 31 3.75
Creek 11:00
06709000 Plum Creek near Sedalia, Co. -- 0 29 1.85 -- -- -- 06/30
10:45
06709530 Plum Creek at Titan Rd nr Louviers, 06/30
3.4 6.27
Co 11:30
0671024? South Platte River below Union Ave, 06/30
87 10 91
at Englewood 09:30
06/30
0671 1565 South Platte River at Englewood, Co. 0 -- 112 1.73 389 1.6 7.8
10:30
06/30
06712000 Cherry Creek near Franktown, Co. -- 0 2.6 2.16 -- -- -_
09:45
(lbw l � 1 South Platte R at 64th Ave. Commerce __ 146 2.65 -- -- __ 06/30
City, Co. 09:00
http //nwis-colo crusgs.gov/rt-cgi/gen_thl_pg_ex 6/30/98
I I
Coloraac rreiit Streamlflow Londitions - Wate..' Page 2 3
Leavenworth Creek @ mouth nr 06/30
06714800 Georgetown, Co 0 48 4.33 0 - 12:30
06716500 Clear Creek near Lawson, Co. -- 0 488 4.52 -- -- __ 06/30
12:30
06719505 Clear Creek at Golden, Co. -- -- 676 6.51 -- __ __ 06/30
10:00
06720255 Uvalda Intercept bl 56th Av at Rocky 06/30
0 .35 -665.7
Mtn Ars, Co 12:15
06720285 Havana Intercept bl 56th Av, at Rocky 06/30
0 1.3 10.63
Mtn Ars, Co 07:45
06720460 First Cr bel Buckley Rd, at Rocky Mtn 06/30
0 0 .81
Arsenal, C 07:45
06720490 First Cr at Hwy 2, near Rocky Mtn -- -- 0 72 06/30
Arsenal, Co 07:00
06730200 Boulder Cr at North 75th St nr Boulder -- -- 300 5.86 -- -- -- 06/30
12:00
06741510 Big Thompson River at Loveland, Co. -- -- 159 2.62 -- -- -- 06/30
11:00
0675 150 North Fork Cache La Poudre River 06/30
100 2.98
below Halligan Reservoir near V Dal 10:45
06752260 Cache La Poudre River at Fort Collins, 06/30
14.9 409 3.51 48 8.3
Co. 12:15
06752280 Cache La Poudre R ab Boxelder C, nr 06/30
273 5.16
Timnath, Co. 10:45
06754000 South Platte River near Kersey, Co. -- -- 509 3.65 -- -- _- 06/30
10:30
393109104464500 Cherry Creek near Parker, Co -- -- 1.9 2.66 -- -- __ 06/30
01:45
3936471054?5317 South Clear Creek abv Naylor Creek 7 6 -- 3.3 7.41 68 -- -- 06/30
nr Georgetown 02:00
394839104570300 Sand Creek at mouth nr Commerce -- -- 310 5.74 06/30
City,co 04:30
UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN
http //nwis-colo.cr usgs gov/rt-cgi/gen_tbl_pg_ex 6/30/98
APPENDIX —B
Methods and Procedures
CGRS,Inc.
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
Soil Borings
Soil sampling will be conducted in accordance with ASTM:D 1586-87. Using this procedure, a 2-
inch O.D. split-spoon sampler will be driven into the soil by a 140 pound weight falling 30 inches.
After an initial set of 6 inches, the number of blows required to drive the sample an additional 12
inches, known as the penetration resistance(N value), will be recorded. The N value is an index of
the relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils.
— Soil Classification/Characterization
As samples are obtained in the field, they will be visually inspected and classified in accordance
with ASTM:D 1488-84. Representative portions of the samples will then be retained for further
examination and for verification of the various strata, the N value, water level data, and pertinent
information regarding the method of maintaining and advancing the boring will be provided.
Charts illustrating the soil classification procedure, descriptive terminology and symbols used on
the logs will be provided.
Decontamination
To avoid potential transport of contaminated materials to the project site, all drilling equipment and
down-hole tools will be steam cleaned prior to mobilization. To prevent cross contamination
between soil borings or monitoring wells all down-hole equipment will also be steam cleaned and
rinsed with water between soil borings.
Monitoring Well Construction
Monitoring wells will be installed utilizing the following general construction criteria:
• borehole diameter: minimum 6.25 inches;
• well diameter: 2 inches;
• estimated depth: 15 feet below ground surface;
• casing material: schedule 40, flush thread PVC;
CGRS,Inc.
• well screen: 2 inch I.D., 10 feet in length, #0.01 slot PVC;
• estimated screened interval: 5 feet above and 5 feet below the groundwater
table;
• annular pack: 10-20 silica sand;
• protective casing: minimum 12 inch I.D., steel flush or above grade, locking
cap; and
• annular seal:cement grout and bentonite pellets.
Groundwater Sampling
All borings where groundwater is encountered will be sampled from the suspected cleanest to the
most contaminated according to the protocols listed below. All pertinent information will be
recorded on a sampling information form.
Field Protocol
Step 1 -Measure water level.
Step 2 -A dedicated polyethylene bailer will be used to develop each boring. Three bore volumes
will be evacuated from each boring prior to sampling.
Step 3 -Collect water samples. Water samples will be collected using a polyethylene bailer. A
field blank will be collected during the sampling program to ensure quality control.
Step 4-Store samples in a cooler on ice for transport to the laboratory. Follow all documentation
and chain-of-custody procedures.
Step 5 -Clean equipment. Water level measurement equipment will be cleaned with ethanol
followed by a deionized water rinse.
Upon completion of soil or groundwater sampling, a chain of custody log will be initiated. A copy
of the chain of custody will be returned to the project manager.
CGRS,Inc.
Chemical Analysis
All analytical parameters are described in the Laboratory Quality assurance plan presented as
Appendix C.
Groundwater Elevation Measurements
The following outlines our standard groundwater quality sampling methodology. Before purging
any of the soil test borings or monitoring wells, water level measurements must be taken.
Measuring Point
Establish the measuring point for the well. The measuring point is marked on the north side of the
top of the temporary monitoring well riser. The top of the riser is normally a 2 inch casing inside a
locked protective casing. The riser will be PVC pipe, galvanized pipe or stainless steel pipe. The
measuring point should be described on the groundwater sample collection record.
Access
After unlocking or opening a monitoring well, the first task will be to obtain a water level
measurement. Water level measurements will be made using an electronic water level indicator.
Depth to water and total depth of the well will be measured for calculation of purge volume.
Measurement
To obtain a water level measurement, lower a decontaminated electronic water level probe into the
monitoring well. Care must be taken to assure that the electronic probe hangs freely in the
monitoring well and is not adhering to the well casing. The electronic probe will be lowered into
the well until the audible sound of the unit is detected and the light on the electronic sounder
illuminates. At this time, the precise measurement should be determined by repeatedly raising and
lowering the probe to obtain an exact measurement. The water level measurement is then entered
on the groundwater sampling collection record sheet or groundwater level data sheet to the nearest
0.01 feet.
CGRS,Inc.
Decontamination
The electronic probe shall be decontaminated immediately after use by wiping with isopropyl
alcohol-soaked paper towels. Always proceed in order from the suspected cleanest well or soil test
boring to the suspected most contaminated one.
Purge Volume Computation
All soil test borings and temporary monitoring wells will be purged prior to sample collection.
Depending upon the rate of recovery, three to five volumes of groundwater present in a well or
bore hole shall be withdrawn prior to sample collection. If a well or bore hole bails dry, the well or
bore hole should be allowed to recharge and a sample taken as soon as there is sufficient volume
for the intended analysis. The volume of water present in each well or bore hole shall be computed
using the two measurable variables, length of water column in soil boring or monitoring well and
diameter.
Purging and Sample Collection Procedures
Bailin
• Obtain a laboratory decontaminated disposable bailer and a spool of nylon rope or equivalent
bailer cord. Tie a bowline knot or equivalent through the bailer loop. Test the knot for
adequacy by creating tension between the line and the bailer. Tie again if needed. New rope
-- will be used for every sample or purge. New clean latex gloves will be used when touching the
rope or bailer.
• Spread a clean plastic sheet near the base of the well. The plastic sheet should be of sufficient
size to prevent bailer or bailer rope from contacting the ground surface.
• Place the bailer inside the well to verify that an adequate annulus is present between the bailer
and the well casing to allow free movement of the bailer.
• Lower the bailer carefully into the well casing to remove the sample from the top of the water
column, taking care not to agitate the water in the well.
CGRS,Inc.
• Pour the bailed groundwater into a bucket. Once the bucket is full, transfer the water to a
barrel and contain on-site.
• Raise the bailer by grasping a section of cord, using each hand alternately. This bailer lift
method will assure that the bailer cord will not come into contact with the ground or other
potentially contaminated surfaces.
Sampling
• Instructions for obtaining samples for parameters are reviewed with the laboratory coordinator
to insure that proper preservation and filtering requirements are met.
• Appropriate sample containers will be obtained from the contract laboratory. After samples are
collected, they will be put on ice in coolers (4°C). Care will be taken to prevent breakage
during transportation or shipment.
• Samples collected by bailing will be poured directly into sample containers from bailers. The
sample should be poured slowly to minimize air entrapment into the sample bottle. During
collection, bailers will not be allowed to contact the sample containers.
• Upon completion of sampling a chain-of-custody log will be initiated. Chain-of-custody records
will include the following information: project name and number, shipped by, shipped sampling
point, location, field ID number, date, time, sample type, number of containers, analysis
required and sampler's signature. The samples and chain-of-custody will be delivered to the
laboratory. Upon arrival at the laboratory the samples will be checked in by the appropriate
laboratory personnel. Laboratory identification numbers will be noted on the chain-of-custody
record. Upon completion of the laboratory analysis,the completed chain-of-custody record will
be returned to the project manager.
Field Cleaning Procedures
For all equipment to be reused in the field, the following cleaning procedures must be followed:
• Disassemble the equipment to the extent practical.
• Wash the equipment with distilled water and laboratory-grade detergent.
CGRS, Inc.
• Rinse with distilled water until all detergent is removed.
• Rinse the equipment with isopropyl or methanol, making sure all surfaces, inside and out, are rinsed.
• Triple rinse the equipment with distilled water.
Laboratory Selection
The project manager should consider the following factors when selecting a laboratory:
• Capabilities (facilities, personnel, instrumentation), including:
• Participation in interlaboratory studies(e.g., EPA or other Federal or State agency sponsored
analytical programs);
• Certifications (e.g., Federal or State);
• References (e.g. other clients); and
• Experience(UST, RCRA and other environmentally related projects).
• Service;
• Turnaround time; and
• Technical input(e.g., recommendations on analytical procedures).
The project manager is encouraged to gather pertinent laboratory-selection information prior to
extensively defining analytical requirements under the project. A request may be made to a
laboratory to provide a qualifications package that should address the points listed above. Once the
project manager has reviewed the various laboratory qualifications, further specific discussions
with the laboratory or laboratories should take place. In addition, more than one laboratory should
be considered. For large-scale investigations, selection of one laboratory as a primary candidate
and one or two laboratories as fall-back candidates should be considered.
The quality of the laboratory service provided is dependent on various factors. The project
manager should be able to control the quality of the information (e.g., samples) provided to the
laboratory. It is extremely important that the project manager communicate to the laboratory all the
requirements relevant to the project. This includes the number of samples and their matrices,
sampling schedule, parameters and constituents of interest, required analytical methodologies,
detection limits, holding times, deliverables, level of QA/QC, and required turnaround of analytical
results.
CGRS,Inc.
Field and Laboratory Quality Control
General
Quality control checks are performed to ensure that the data collected is representative and valid
data. Quality control checks are the mechanisms whereby the components of QA objectives ore
monitored. Examples of items to be considered are as follows:
1. Field Activities:
• Use of standardized checklists and field notebooks;
• Verification of checklist information by an independent person;
• Strict adherence to chain-of-custody procedures;
• Calibration of field devices;
• Collection of replicate samples; and
• Submission of field blanks, where appropriate.
2. Analytical Activities:
• Method blanks;
• Laboratory control samples:
• Calibration check samples;
• replicate samples;
• Matrix-spiked samples;
• "Blind"quality control samplers;
• Control charts;
• Surrogate samples;
• Zero and span gases; and
• Reagent quality control checks.
Blind Duplicates
Blind duplicate samples will be collected for 10% of the samples collected or once per site,
whichever is greater. These blind duplicate samples will be forwarded to the laboratory as a check
of laboratory reproducibility.
CGRS,Inc.
Equipment(Rinseate)Blank
The equipment (rinseate) blank is designed to identify potential cross-contamination in the field
between sample sources due to deficient field cleaning procedures. This blank also addresses field
preservation procedures, environmental site interference, integrity of the source blank water for
field cleaning and those concerns singularly addressed by the travel blank. Equipment blanks are
taken once per site, when equipment is cleaned in the field. This provides a quality control check
on field cleaning procedures.
Field Blank
Field blanks are used to evaluate the sample container filling procedure, the effects of
environmental contaminants at the site, purity of preservatives or additives and those concerns
uniquely addressed by the travel blank.
Field blanks are taken downwind of the most contaminated area of the site by filling laboratory
cleaned and prepared sample containers (appropriate for the parameters group) with deionized or
organic-free water supplied by the laboratory. The blank sample container is then sealed, grouped,
transported and stored with the real samples collected for the same parameters group.
Travel(Trip)Blanks
The travel blank is designed to address interferences derived from improper sample container
cleaning preparation, contaminated source blank water, sample cross-contamination during
storage/transport and extraneous environmental conditions affecting the sampling event to and
from the site, including delivery to the laboratory.
Travel blanks are composed in the appropriate sample container using source blank water.
Preservatives or additives are added if required for the parameters group. Travel blanks are then
sealed and stored in the ice chest where real samples will be stored and transported. Travel blanks
are to originate at the laboratory providing the blank water for the equipment and field blanks.
CGRS,Inc.
Protocol(or Analyzing Blank Samples
If used, the equipment blank will be analyzed first. If contamination is found to be present, the
field blank will then be analyzed. If the equipment blank is not used, the first blank analyzed will
be the field blank. If any blank is found to be contaminant-free, the sequence of analyses will be
terminated.
APPENDIX C
Quality Assurance Project Plan
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
FOR THE
VARRA COAL ASH BURIAL PROJECT
WELD COUNTY,COLORADO
1.0 Introduction
This Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) briefly describes the field data collection activities
and laboratory analyses being conducted as part of the Varra Coal Ash Burial Project in Weld
County, Colorado. The work described in this QAPP is being conducted to address possible
concerns related to coal ash burial in saturated mediums.
Described in the sections below are the project objectives, scope of work, sample handling and
Chain-of-Custody procedures, data quality assurance, and laboratory deliverables.
2.0 Objectives
The data being collected are intended to support the following objectives:
• Identify potential on-site and off-site contamination to soils, groundwater, and
surface water that have occurred from past operations at the various sites;
• Determine the extent of contamination(if any);
• Characterize hydrogeologic and surface water conditions in sufficient detail to
describe hydrostratigraphy, direction and velocity of groundwater flow, and the
relationship between groundwater and surface water;
• Develop and implement monitoring programs for the various media; and,
• Employ industry standard field and laboratory methods suitable to meet CLP or
equivalent(such as EPA QC Level III)Data Quality Objectives.
3.0 Scope of Work
The scope of work for this project involves, development of Health and Safety and site-specific
Work Plans, field investigations, laboratory analysis of water samples, analysis of hydraulic and
hydrogeologic properties, and the preparation of a report detailing the results of the investigation.
Field investigative techniques include soil and groundwater sampling using direct push and
hollow stem auger techniques.
3.1 Sample Identification
A sample identification scheme will be used that maintains consistency for the names of
boreholes and monitoring wells, as well labels affixed to each sample container, and entered on to
the Chain-of-Custody(COC)forms. The following scheme will be followed:
1. Samples from soil borings that are not converted to monitoring wells are named SB;
2. Samples from soils collected during drilling of monitoring wells are named MW; and
3. Depth of soil sampled indicated by @(depth interval).
For example a soil sample might be identified as MW-4 @ 10-11.5. Groundwater, surface water,
and sediment samples will be named with no depth interval (i.e. MW-4, SW-4, SED-4,
respectively).
3.2 Analytical Suites
Analytical procedures for water and soil samples will conform to the USEPA guidelines
described in SW 846 (Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste/Physical/Chemical Methods, 3'd
ed.). Table 1 —C, presents the analyses that are anticipated on the project. The analytical suite at
a particular site will be determined on a site by site basis.
3.3 Sample Custody
Strict chain of custody (COC)protocol will be maintained throughout the life of the field program
and will be controlled through the use of a COC Record supplied by the laboratory. The
following procedures will be used to document, establish, and maintain custody of field samples:
• Sample labels will be completed for each sample using waterproof ink; making sure that
the labels are legible and affixed firmly on the sample container;
• All Sample-related information will be recorded in the project log book;
• The field sampling technician will retain custody of the samples until they are transferred
or properly dispatched to a laboratory; and,
• As fieldwork is conducted the on-site CGRS technical lead will determine whether these
procedures are being followed, if corrections need to be made, and if additional samples
are required.
3.3.1 Chain of Custody Records
A Chain of Custody Record will be maintained in the field for all samples to be shipped to the
laboratory for analysis. The three lines of information to be entered into the COC box titled
"Project or P.O.#"are:
Line 1. Client Name, i.e. "Varra Companies"
Line 2. Site Name, i.e. "Pit 112"
Line 3. Site Number, i.e. "2755"
The three lines of information will be provided on the laboratory paper (hard copy) reports as a
page header, and on the electronic deliverables as three individual fields in each analytical record.
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 1
The "Sample Identification" entries to the COC will be completed as described in Section 3.1 of
this QAPP.
3.3.2 Transfer of Custody and Shipment
Due to the evidentiary nature of field sample collection, the possession of samples must be
traceable from the time the samples are collected until they are introduced as evidence in legal
proceedings. A sample is defined as being under a person's custody if any of the following
conditions exist: (1) it is in their possession, (2) it is in their view after being in their possession,
(3) it is in a secure locked location after having been in their possession, and (4) it is in a
designated secure area. The following procedures will be used in transferring and shipping
samples:
• Field personnel will maintain detailed notes in field logbooks, documenting the
collection and identification of the required samples. The logbooks will be checked
against the COC records for completeness and traceability.
• A COC record will accompany all sample shipments. When transferring samples, the
individuals relinquishing and receiving will sign, date, and note time on the record.
The COC documents transfer of sample custody from the field sampling technician to
another person or to the laboratory.
• Each cooler is to contain samples from one site. No mixing of samples from multiple
sites will be allowed in a given cooler.
• Samples will be properly packaged for shipment and shipped to the laboratory for
analysis with a separate signed COC record enclosed in each sample box or cooler.
Two copies of this record will accompany the samples to the laboratory. The
laboratory maintains one file copy, and the completed original will be returned to the
project manager as part of the final analytical report. This record will be used to
document sample custody transfer from the field sampling technician to the
laboratory or to the CGRS offices. Just prior to shipment to the laboratory, coolers
will be secured with custody seals.
• Whenever samples are split with a facility operator or government agency, a separate
COC record will be prepared for those samples and so marked to indicate with whom
the samples are being split.
• The COC record showing identification of the contents will accompany all packages.
The original record will accompany the shipment and the field team leader will retain
a copy.
• A bill of lading will be used for all samples sent by common carrier. Receipt of bills
of lading will be retained as part of the COC permanent documentation.
Varna Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 2
3.33 Laboratory Custody Procedures
The laboratory, at a minimum, will check all incoming samples for integrity and note any
observations of the original COC record. Each sample will be logged into the laboratory system
by assigning it a unique laboratory identification number. This number and the field sample
identification number will be recorded on the laboratory report. Samples will be stored and
analyzed according to the methods described in Section 3.1. The original COC record will be
returned to the CGRS project manager for filing. The laboratory sample custodian will use the
following procedures to maintain the COC records once the samples arrive at the laboratory:
• The samples received by the laboratory will be cross-checked to verify that the
information on the sample labels matches that on the COC record included with the
sample shipment;
• The "Received by Laboratory" box on the COC record will be signed on receipt.
Any discrepancies between the COC record and the shipment contents will be
resolved as soon as possible through communication with CGRS personnel;
• The status of the sample receipt and analysis will be tracked within the analytical
laboratory by a laboratory information management system (LIMS) or equivalent
computerized management system.
For data that are input by an analyst and processed using a computer, a copy of the input data will
be kept and identified with the project number and any other needed information. The samples
analyzed will be clearly noted and the input data signed and dated by the analyst.
3.4 Laboratory Deliverables
The laboratory is required to submit EPA QC Level III data packages (CLP-equivalent) to CGRS,
Inc. within 21 days from the date of acceptance on the Sample Receipt Form. Details of the
deliverables are presented below.
• Sample Receipt - The laboratory will complete and submit a "Sample Receipt" form
for all sample shipments received. The purpose of the form is to note problems with
sample packaging, COCs, and sample preservation. Problems noted on the form will
be communicated to CGRS, Inc. as soon as possible.
• Reporting of Analytical Results — For each analytical method performed, the
laboratory will report all analytes as detected concentrations or as less than the
specific limits or quantification. All samples with out-of-control spike recoveries
being attributed to matrix interferences should be designated as such. All
soil/sediment and solid waste samples should be reported on a dry-weight basis with
percent moisture also reported. Also, report dates of extraction/preparation, dates of
analysis, and dilution factors when applicable. An electronic deliverable (LIMS) will
be provided that conforms to the CGRS project data requirements. An example of
the data deliverable is provided as an appendix.
• Internal Quality Control Reporting—Internal QC samples should be analyzed at rates
specified in the method (SW-846). At a minimum, QC deliverables will consist of
laboratory blank results, surrogate spike percent recoveries, results of MS/MSD
analyses, laboratory control sample data, laboratory duplicate results, and if
requested, calibration and tuning data. The internal QC data will not be delivered
unless requested by Varra or CGRS personnel.
Vane Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 3
3.5 Field and Laboratory QA/QC Procedures
Quality control checks are performed to ensure that the data collected are representative and
valid. Quality control checks are the mechanisms whereby the data quality objectives are
monitored. The quality control samples to be collected on the project are described below.
• Duplicate Samples — As a check for laboratory reproducibility, blind duplicate
samples(unknown by the laboratory to be duplicates) will be collected and submitted
to the laboratory at a rate of one every 10 water samples collected, or once per site,
whichever is greater. No duplicate soil samples will be collected.
• Field Blank Samples —To evaluate sample bottle filling procedures and the effects of
environmental contaminants at the site, one VOA water sample per site is collected in
laboratory-cleaned and prepared containers of deionized or organic-free water
supplied by the laboratory. Field blanks are collected downwind of the most
contaminated area within a site. The sample is sealed, labeled and shipped with the
real samples collected for the same parameter group.
• Travel(Trip) Blanks—Trip blanks are intended to address interferences derived from
improper sample container cleaning, preparation, contaminated source blank water,
sample cross-contamination during storage and shipment, and environmental
conditions affecting the sampling event to and from the site, including delivery to the
laboratory. Trip blanks will originate at the laboratory and will consist of VOA vials
filled with source blank water, and will be sealed and stored in the cooler where real
samples will be stored and shipped.
• Equipment (Rinseate) Blanks—Rinseate blanks, intended to provide quality control on
field cleaning procedures, will be collected once per site.
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 4
Table 1 - C
Summary of Parameters, Sample Containers,
Holding Times, and Analytical Methods
Parameter Matrix ta
No.and Type of Holding Time(1) Analytical
Coniners-` Method(2)
Free Cyanide.
Water 1-200 ml P,G
14 days,4C,NaOH to ph>12 EPA 300.0
Chloride
Water 1-200 ml,P,G
28 days no preservative required EPA 300.0
-- Fluoride
Water 1-500 ml,P
28 days no preservative required EPA 300.0
Sulfate
-- Water 1 -200 ml,P
28 days cool to 4C EPA 300.0
Nitrate
Water 1 -100 ml,P,G
48 hours cool to 4C EPA 300.0
Mercury Water 1-500 ml P,G 28 days.HNO3 to pH<2 245.1/7170
Total Metals(RCRA)
Water 125-500 ml nalgene
(Red dot)
6 months except Mercury at 28 days. For 6010/7000
water,preserved with HNO3,not filtered.
Dissolved Metals(RCRA)
Water 125-500 ml nalgene 6 months except Mercury at 28 days. Filtered 6010/7000
(Green dot) and preserved in Lab.
Anions/General Chemistry
Water 250 ml nalgene(White 28 days 200 Series
Notes: (1)All collected samples to be kept cool(4 degrees C) (2)USEPA Method,SW-846(Revised), 1986
Table 2 - C
Content of Digital Analytical Deliverables
— (LIMS Download)
_ Origin of Data
Generated by CGRS Generated in Lab
Laboratory Name of Data Example of Delivered and Entered on by Analytica
Field Digital Data COC
COMPANY_NA Varra Energy X
SITE_NAME Coal Ash Project X
SITE_NO 2755aa X
SAMPLE_ID1 MW-I X
SAMPLE_DAT 08/27/97 X
LAB_ID L15316-01 X
MATRIX Water X X
METHOD M6010 ICP X
DATE_ANALY 09/04/97 X
ANALYTE Silver, total (3051) X
TEXT_RESUL (blank it ND) X
— NUMBER_RES (blank if ND) X
QUALIFIER U X
DILUTION 106 X
MDL 0.50000 X
PQL 3.00000 X
UNITS mg/Kg X
DATE_RECEI 09/03/97 X
DATE_EXTRA 09/04/97 X
CAS_ 007440-22-4 X
BATCH ID WG47359 X
TABLE3 - C
Analytical Suites
Field Pilot Test
Varra Coal Ash Project
Weld County, Colorado
CGRS No. 1-135-2755
Analvte Standard Units
Aluminum 5.000 mg/L
Arsenic 0.050 mg/L
Barium 2.000 mg/L
Boron 0.750 mg/L
Cadmium 0.005 mg/L
Chromium 0.100 mg/L
Colbalt 0.050 mg/L
Iron 0.300 mg/L
Lead 0.050 mg/L
Manganese 0.050 mg/L
Mercury 0.002 mg/L
Selenium 0.050 mg/L
Chloride 250 mg/L
Fluoride 2.0 mg/L
Free Cyanide 0.20 mg/L
pH 6.5-8.5 s.u.
Sulfate 250 mg/L
Total Dissolved Solids 500 mg/L
mg/L-milligram per liter
s.u.-standard units
NE1D
E.N\IAt MO y
�p
WORK PLAN
VARRA COAL ASH BURIAL PROJECT
WELD COUNTY, COUNTY COLORADO
CGRS NO. 1-135-2755
by
CGRS, INC.
December 29, 1998
IJi u4 UU
CGRS,Inc.
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Objectives 1
1.2 Background Information 2
-- 1.2.1 Local Geology/Hydrology 2
1.2.2 Coal Ash Source 3
2.0 INITIAL LABORATORY TESTING 3
2.1 Hydraulic Conductivity 3
2.2 Porosity 3
2.3 Analytical Data 4
2.3.1 SELP 4
2.3.2 SGCLP 5
2.3.3 TCLP 7
2.3.4 SGLP 7
3.0 PILOT STUDY 7
4.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE 9
5.0 ORGANIZATION AND STAFF ASSIGNMENTS 9
3.1 Project Personnel 9
3.2 Subcontractors 9
6.0 OVERVIEW-QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL 9
7.0 REMARKS 10
FIGURES:
Figure 1 -Site Location Map
Figure 2—Registered Well Location Map
Figure 3—Area Use and Site Condition Map
APPENDIX:
Appendix A—Selected Data—Groundwater Quality and Hydrogeology fo the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer in the Milton
Reservoir Area, Weld County,Colorado
Appendix B-Methods and Procedures
Appendix C—Quality Assurance Project Plan
CGRS, Inc.
WORK PLAN
VARRA COAL ASH BURIAL PROJECT
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
CGRS NO. 1-135-2755
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document presents the proposed work scope for the evaluation of coal ash burial in saturated
media. The field investigation will be performed in conjunction with a variety of laboratory
studies in order to evaluate potential liabilities or benefits associated with coal ash burial.
Specifically, this project addresses issues associated with the reclamation of gravel quarries under
saturated conditions. A variety of laboratory experiments were conducted in order to evaluate coal
ash leaching potentials for different pH ranges relative to effluent pore volume. The information
generated by this project will be invaluable to private companies or regulatory agencies insofar as
evaluating under what conditions coal ash can be placed without incurring significant liability.
— 1.1 Objectives
The purpose of this project is to identify potential liabilities with the reclamation of gravel quarries
with coal ash and to determine if coal ash meets the criteria for classification as an inert fill.
Specific objectives for the Varra Coal Ash Burial Project are to determine:
• Leaching characteristics of coal ash with respect to varying water quality conditions;
• Permeabilities of various types of coal ash (bottom and fly ash);
• Affects of coal ash burial on local hydrology and water quality;
• Hydrogeologic properties of coal ash; and
• Physical characteristics of coal ash in saturated media.
1.2 Background Information
1.2.1 Local Geology/Hydrogeology
The study area is an active gravel quarry located in the NW 1/4, Section 31, Township 3
North, Range 68 West, 6th P.M., Weld County Colorado (Figure 1). The surficial geology of
the area as documented by Colton, 1978, varies between wind blown deposits of clay, silt and
sand and sandy to gravelly alluvium, which are Holocene in age. Colluvium consisting of
bouldery to pebbly sandy silt and clay may contain and interfinger with alluvium of various ages.
1
CGRS,Inc.
The depth to groundwater at the site generally varies between three and ten feet below ground
surface (bgs). The inferred groundwater flow direction is to the northeast roughly parallel to the
St. Vrain River drainage.
Water well records obtained from the Colorado Division of Water Resources indicate that one
well may be located within one quarter mile of the proposed test plot. The registered well owner
is Dakolios Construction and the permitted use of the well is industrial. The location of registered
wells within a half mile radius of the proposed test plot are depicted on Figure 2. Field
verification of well locations and construction details, if available will be performed prior to
project start-up.
Groundwater quality data for the immediate study area are limited. Reeder, 1993, describes in
detail the regional hydrogeology near the area of interest. Water quality data for 36 domestic
wells completed as bedrock aquifers (Larimie-Fox Hills Formation) in the Milton Reservoir
were compliled by Reeder. A review of water quality data indicate that all wells sampled
exceeded water quality standards for total suspended solids and a large percentage exceeded
standards for pH. Field and analytical data documented by Reeder and other background
information are presented in Appendix A.
1.2.2 Coal Ash Source
Public Service coal comes from a number of Colorado mines in Routt, Moffat, Delta and
Gunnison counties. These mines include West Elk, TwentyMile, Powderhorn, and ColoWyo.
This coal is normally purchased under long term contracts which specify certain analytical
parameters. Therefore, the chemical and physical properties of the coal (and resulting ash) do
not change significantly from year to year. Analytical information for each of these coal
sources is available as is the analytical information on the ash. This information has been
provided in our earlier submittal. Comparisons of analytical data completed in the early 1990s
with recent data indicate little variation in any of the ash constituents.
2
CGRS, Inc.
2.0 INITIAL LABORATORY TESTING
Public Service Company generated analytical data indicating that fly ash is not a characteristic
hazardous waste. Numerous analytical methods were used such as toxicity characteristic
leaching procedure (TCLP). CGRS in conjunction with Colorado State University Groundwater
Program performed a number of tests which included:
• Hydraulic Conductivity Testing (Permeameter Test);
• Porosity Determination;
• Sequential Extraction Leaching Procedure (SELP);
• Synthetic Ground Water Column Leaching Procedure (SGCLP);
• Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP); and
• Synthetic Ground Water Leaching Procedure (SGLP).
A discussion of these tests and the loading calculations to the environment is provided below.
2.1 Hydraulic Conductivity
The hydraulic conductivity of the ash was performed using either a "Constant Head" or
"Falling Head" Permeameter. The Constant Head Permeameter works better for high
permeability porous materials and the Falling Head Permeameter works best for low
permeability porous materials. With either test the flow rate and the potentiometric head loss
are measured through a sample of the ash. The hydraulic conductivity was then calculated
using Darcy's Law. The hydraulic conductivity of the ash is required to determine the
expected rate of groundwater flow through the buried ash and the effects of burial on ground
water flow patterns.
2.2 Porosity
Porosity is the ratio of the volume of the voids to the bulk volume of the sample. With this test
the volume and dry weight of a sample of ash was measured. The ash was then saturated with
water under a vacuum pressure and the weight of the saturated sample measured. For saturated
conditions the volume of the voids is equal to the volume of the water. The porosity is
required to determine the pore volume for the ash. The results of hydraulic conductivity and
porosity testing are summarized in Table I.
3
CGRS,Inc.
TABLE 1 -Results for Hydraulic Conductivity and Porosity Tests
Sample ID Hydraulic Porosity
Conductivity
K (ft/day)
Cherokee Silo Ash 2/3
0.24 0.51
Cherokee 4 Ash with Sodium
0.23 0.46
Class F Silo Ash with Gypsum
0.09 0.49
Bottom Ash
178. 0.51
Recycled Concrete
111. 0.29
Recycled Asphalt
130. 0.33
The bottom ash, the recycled concrete and the recycled asphalt all had relatively high hydraulic
conductivity values in the range of 111 to 178 feet/day. The three fly ash samples had very
low hydraulic conductivity values in the range of 0.09 to 0.24 feet/day. The porosity of the fly
and bottom ash ranged from 0.46 to 0.51. These values are characteristic of very fine porous
materials. The porosity of the recycled concrete and asphalt was 0.29 and 0.33, respectively.
2.3 Analytical Data
2.3.1 "Sequential Extraction Leaching Procedure" (SELP)
The purpose of the "Sequential Extraction Leaching Procedure" (SELP) test was to determine
the total quantity of the various chemical contaminants that may be potentially leached from the
ash. The SELP test used synthetic groundwater with varying pH levels as the leaching fluid(s).
With the SELP test, a specified weight (e.g. one kilogram) of the ash was combined with a
4
CGRS, Inc.
specified volume of water (e.g. one liter) and agitated by rolling for a specified period of time
(e.g. 18 hours). This represented a single extraction. The concentration of the chemical
contaminant was then measured in the water. The SELP test was repeated for several
sequential extractions until most of the chemical contaminants have been extracted from the
ash. This normally requires three or more extractions. Only two extractions were performed
due to budgetary constraints.
The SELP test was repeated for synthetic groundwater with varying pH values to represent a
range of possible site conditions. Synthetic groundwater(s) with pH values of 5, 7 and 8.5 were
used. The first extraction from the SELP test for each pH value was analyzed for the full suite
of chemical compounds. These include:
• Sulfate • Chloride • Fluoride • Cyanide
• Mercury • Nitrate • Nitrite
• 20 other metals (Aluminum, Antimony, Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium, Boron,
Cadmium, Chromium, Cobalt, Copper, Iron, Lead, Lithium, Manganese,
Nickel, Selenium, Silver, Thallium, Vanadium and Zinc). Conductivity and
pH will of the leachate was measured at CSU prior to sending the sample to the
laboratory for chemical analyses.
The SELP test was conducted at CSU. The extracted water samples from the test were sent to
Analytica Environmental Labs for chemical analyses.
Analytical results from the first extraction were used to identify those compounds to be
analyzed for in subsequent extractions of the SELP test and in the SGCLP test. Those chemical
compounds, which were either non-detect or detected at very low concentrations during the
first extraction were not analyzed for in subsequent extractions of the SELP test or in the
SGCLP test.
5
CGRS,Inc.
2.3.2 "Synthetic Groundwater Column Leaching Procedure" (SGCLP)
The purpose of the "Synthetic Groundwater Column Leaching Procedure" (SGCLP) test was
to determine the rate as a function of pore volume at which the chemical contaminant will be
leached from the buried ash. The SGCLP test used synthetic groundwater with varying pH
levels as the leaching fluid(s). With the SGCLP test, a specified weight (e.g. one kilogram) of
the ash was placed in a column. Once the column was saturated, the testing period began.
One pore volume of water was passed through the column and the concentration of the various
contaminants measured in the outflow water. The SGCLP test was then repeated for several
sequential pore volumes of water. The hydraulic head on the column was adjusted so that one
pore volume of water was passed through the sample in about 8 hours. Water samples were be
obtained for analyses at 2, 4 and 8 pore volumes of water flow through.
The SGCLP test was repeated for synthetic ground water with varying pH values to represent a
range of possible site conditions. Synthetic ground water(s) with pH values of 5, 7 and 8.5
were used as the leaching fluid(s). For the fly ash, which has a very low hydraulic
conductivity, the SGCLP test was conducted for 1,2 and 4 pore volumes. For the bottom ash,
the recycled concrete and the recycled asphalt, which have high hydraulic conductivity, water
samples were analyzed at 2, 4 and 8 pore volumes.
The chemical analyses for the first extraction of the SELP test was used to determine the suite
of chemical compounds of interest in the SGCLP test. Chemical compounds, which were either
non-detect or detected at very low were eliminated from further testing. The SELP test is a
highly agitated test where as the SGCLP test is not. The SGCLP test was conducted at CSU
with the collected water samples sent to Analytica Environmental Labs for chemical analyses.
• Sulfate • Chloride • Fluoride • Cyanide
• Mercury • Nitrite • Nitrate
• 10 other metals from the following list of 20 metals (Aluminum, Antimony,
Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium, Boron, Cadmium, Chromium, Cobalt, Copper,
Iron, Lead, Lithium, Manganese, Nickel, Selenium, Silver, Thallium,
Vanadium and Zinc). Conductivity and pH will of the leachate was measured
at CSU prior to sending the sample to the laboratory for chemical analysis.
6
CGRS, Inc.
2.3.3 "Toxic Characteristics Leaching Procedure" (TCLP)
The "Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure" (TCLP) test is designed to determine the
mobility of toxicity characteristic constituents and is the EPA method for classifying wastes as
hazardous or non hazardous based on toxicity. The full suite of chemical compounds (see list
for SELP test) was analyzed during the TCLP test.
2.3.4 "Synthetic Ground Water Leaching Procedure" (SGLP)
The "Synthetic Ground Water Leaching Procedure" (SGLP) test is identical to the TCLP test
with the exception that synthetic groundwater is used as the leaching fluid. A description of the
TCLP test is provided above. The SGLP test was developed to simulate geochemical conditions
more closely approximating natural ground water than for the TCLP test. The results of the
SGLP are directly comparable to the TCLP test.
Groundwater obtained from the study area was used for the test. The full suite of chemical
compounds (see list for SELP test) were analyzed during the SGLP test. The groundwater used
in the SGLP test as the leaching fluid was analyzed for full suite of chemical compounds. The
difference in the before and after chemical concentrations in the ground water used in the
SGLP test represents the concentration of the chemical contaminants leached from the ash.
3.0 PILOT STUDY
The project start-up will consist of developing a work plan and a site specific Health and Safety
plan. All required permits will be obtained prior to conducting the investigation. Utility companies
will be contacted for the location of all underground utilities prior to commencing investigative
activities (telephone, sewer, electrical, cable television, natural gas lines, oil and gas pipelines,
buried tanks and wells).
Prior to initiating coal ash placement, the local groundwater flow direction will be estimated
from groundwater monitoring wells installed to determine hydraulic characteristics of the local
aquifer and local groundwater quality. It is anticipated that ten wells will be installed to monitor
7
CGRS,Inc.
variations in local aquifer characteristics as a result of coal ash burial. The hydraulic
conductivity will be estimated by performing slug and/or aquifer testing. Prior to initiating the
pilot project groundwater quality samples will be obtained and analyzed for pH, TSS, TDS,
and other relevant parameters identified in the laboratory leaching tests. Samples will be
obtained from no less than one up-gradient and two down gradient wells. The anticipated
locations of the monitoring wells are depicted on Figure 3. Typical monitoring well construction
details are presented in Appendix B.
The effects on groundwater quality and hydrology as a result of coal as burial will be evaluated by
placing roughly 400 tons of coal ash within a trench at the location shown on Figure 3. The coal
ash will be placed so that the water table intersects the coal ash and that the seasonal fluctuation of
the water table will be within the coal ash bed. The coal ash will be buried in a trench measuring
10 feet in width, 100 feet in length and roughly 10 feet in depth. In order to evaluate hydraulic
— characteristics of bottom ash and fly ash, one-half of the trench will be filled with fly ash. A
native soil divider will be left and the other half of the trench will be filled with bottom ash and fly
ash. Bottom ash will be placed in the lower one-half of the saturated portion of the trench and fly
ash will be placed to one foot below ground surface. Approximately one foot of native soil will be
place over the entire trench.
Variations in water quality will be verified through quarterly water quality monitoring for
analytical parameters identified in the laboratory quality assurance plan Appendix C. The results
of the analyses will be submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment,
Division of Minerals and Geology and Weld County Health Department. Within one week of coal
ash burial water quality samples will be obtained from all monitoring wells. Water quality samples
will be obtained on a weekly basis for one month and then on a monthly basis. The length of
sampling will be determined after reviewing the initial analytical results; it is not anticipated that
more than three months will be required before water quality parameters equilibrate.
8
CGRS, Inc.
4.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE
Based on laboratory experiments it is anticipated that approximately three months will be required
to perform field activities. The project length is based partially on pore volume flow thorugh
calculations. It is anticipated that a summary report will be submitted within four months of coal
ash placement.
5.0 ORGANIZATION AND STAFF ASSIGNMENTS
5.1 Project Personnel
Mr. Joby Adams of CGRS will serve as project coordinator and contact to Varra Companies.
Mr. Chester Hitchens will serve as field coordinator and will be responsible for supervising
drilling activities and will perform water quality sampling as well.
5.2 Subcontractors
Subcontracted services for this project will include Universal Drilling of Brighton, Colorado,
and Quanterra Laboratories of Brighton, Colorado.
Universal Drilling will be responsible for drilling soil borings and completing the borings as
groundwater monitoring wells. Quanterra Laboratory will analyze groundwater samples for
inorganic related constituents.
6.0 OVERVIEW- QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL
Quality assurance (QA) is a management system for ensuring that all information, data, and
decisions resulting from the project are technically sound and properly documented. Quality
Control (QC) is the functional mechanism through which quality assurance achieves its goals.
Quality control programs, for example, define the frequency and methods of checks, audits, and
reviews necessary to identify problems and dictate corrective action to resolve these problems, thus
ensuring data of high quality. Thus, a QA/QC program pertains to all data collection, evaluation,
and review activities that are part of the project.
The use of qualified personnel for conducting various portions of the project is of paramount
importance to an effective QA/QC program. This pertains not only to qualified QA/QC specialists,
but also to specialists in other fields, including hydrogeologists, air quality specialists, soil
9
CGRS, Inc.
scientists, analytical chemists and other scientific and technical disciplines. The project manager
should ensure that qualified specialists, primarily individuals with the proper education, training,
and experience, including licensed or certified professionals, are directing and performing the
various project activities. The same general principles apply to selection of contractors and/or
outside laboratories.
Another important aspect of the QA/QC program is the communication between the QA/QC
organization and the project manager. Regular appraisal by the project manager of the quality
aspects related to the ongoing project data-gathering efforts provides the mechanism whereby the
established objectives may be met.
QA/QC procedures should provide details relating to the schedule, information to be provided, and
the mechanism for reporting to the project manager. Reports to the project manager should
include:
• Periodic assessment of measurement data accuracy,precision, and completeness;
_ — • results of performance audits;
• Results of system audits;
• Significant QA/QC problems and recommended solutions; and
• Resolutions of previously stated problems.
The individual responsible for preparing the periodic reports should be identified. These reports
should contain a separate QA/QC section that summarizes data quality information. The Quality
Assurance Project Plan is presented as Attachment C.
7.0 REMARKS
The scope of work and estimated costs are based upon current available information and our
understanding of this project. As the project develops, changes to the project scope of work may
be required. If changes in the scope of work are dictated by the needs of the project, these
changes will be presented prior to implementation.
10
CGRS,Inc.
This report was prepared by CGRS, INC.
Date
Joby L. Adams
Principal/Hydrogeologist
Reviewed by:
Date
Dr. James W. Warner, P.E.
Groundwater Program Leader
Colorado State University
11
CGRS, Inc.
APPENDIX A
SELECTED DATA— Groundwater Quality and Hydrogeology of the Laramie-Fox Hills
Aquifer in the Milton Reservoir Area,Weld County Colorado
1
r P
Fort Collins
Larimer Greeley
County
Study Area
ti�1111,�IT�111�1 •1 1,�1 1
it ..n•,alilPl;"!;�1u71�,�;1,�� �1.
Boulder
County Weld
' Longmont
County
' Boulder
Adams
County
Jeffercnn
County
Golden Denver
Arapahoe
County
0 feet 52300 105600
SCALE: 1:633,600
Figure 1 - Location of the study area.
2
I
•
:2I —�� • ��
^r r' L ---
n ,,.. _ t
j \'Y.r �►., ..� NIL .-1 i '-'5: •
ice;_ % '
lli: sf et se
k = avT / /iAu▪ fnd --.L.‘":—.1000— -, p 3--
-./ •1
r I �'
\ >._d-'�,'�eceCY ' T
_ -, „ C.x r� e j e� - 1 ' -, ♦ t _�c
'ice_ p \`_ --1- ...."C°I i tt Y
1_ Si _ E _ ,� R 4. _A I P — a-R . -
I 6- � ) -
y, o I i I' I
' f t. + I I /rl rt.,. 1 .
j .
�C . t J
_r � ' �
'p I ., �( �_ i , �I� '-�- ' ` I r �
01
E _ �_ , ,-n� _ ' , 1 ,1
¢ x a w.mi..
1 HI 1C
n ro.�.c..cTtRs
D(PLANATION
' OUTCROP Of PRECAMBRIAN ROCIL — 'APPRO%A1ATE QUFIMIT OF THE I..RAM�
FOX MA1 AOUFFA
MlA u1001LAM.r ME LAAANS DATA POINTS
•FO%10.15 A^li 1FER Had.on*n 1%1
----FAULT-O.MC dr.mired
—42W--POTENOOMElltr CONTOUR-9v°+ • Had„mead Smarts'.n..ua...°a
.1t4.aI aa.d.. Led n.i. .^m weak Pan""1
I =wised a the La.n..-F..1s vatic
0...d dr.m.nN bud
Groot..uar1100 Ion. Daum is r N
` Figure 9 - Potentiometric Map of the R1-f Aquifer in the
Denver Basin (Robson and Banta, 1987) .
I 34
I
GROUNDWATER QUALITY OF THE AREA
The compiled groundwater quality data were compared
with Federal and State Applicable or Relevant and
Appropriate Requirements (ARAR's) . The ARAR's were obtained
from the Colorado Department of Health (1985) water quality
numeric recommendations and standards. Table IX summarizes
the ARAR's and water quality parameters which exceed
applicable standards.
Sulfate, iron, fluoride, pH, ROE and, manganese
- parameters were found to exceed applicable standards.
Figure 19 shows the distribution of samples exceeding ARAR
concentrations. With the exception of pH and ROE, the
highest percentage of samples that exceed ARAR' s are from
Data Groups "B" and "C" . Over 60% of Data Group "C" samples
and, 45 Data Group "B" samples exceed the ARAR' s for
sulfate concentrations. Additionally, the ARAR
concentration for dissolved iron is exceeded by 36% of the
samples from Data Group "B" . Thirteen percent of the Group
"C" samples exceed the ARAR for fluoride. Over 82% ,of the
i.'
samples from Data Group "A" exceed the applicable water
quality standard for pH. All of the samples (groups "A" , "B"
and "C") exceed the ARAR value (500mg/1) for ROE (TDS) .
67
II
t -
a
■ Table IX - ARAR' s and Summary of Exceedances
I
ill PARAMETER APPLICABLE STANDARDS PERCENTAGE OF SAMPLING STATIONS
Rg/L EXCEEDING STANDARDS
GROUP A GROUP B GROUP C
II
Na NS
504 250 - CDH GW DWSTD 0% 45% 63%
Ca NS
III Mg NS
Fe 0.3 - CDH GW DWSTD 8% 36X 13%
Ft 2.0 - CDH GW DWSTD 0% 0% 13%
NI Cl 250 - CDH GW DWSTD 0% OX 0%
pH 6.5-8.5 - CDH GW DWSTD 82% 36% 25%
CO3 NS
IIROE (TDS) 500 - CDH GW DWSTD 100% 100X 100%
EC NS
NO3-N 10.0 - COH GW DWSTD 0% OX OX
K NS
I Ba 1.0 - CDH GW DWSTD 0% 0% 0%
Co NS
Pb 0.05 - CDH OW DWSTD OX OX 0X
Mn 0.05 - CDH GW DWSTD 0% 18% 38%
Mo 0.1 - CDH AG 0% DX OX
Sr NS
. V 0.1 - CDH AG OX OX OX
Be 0.1 - CDN AG 0% OX OX
Cu 1.0 - CDH GW DVSTD 0% 0% 0%
Li 2.5 - CDH AG 0% 0% 0X
II Si NS
Zn 2.0 - CON AG 0% 0% C_
Cd 0-01 - CDH GW DWSTD 0% 0% 0%
II Ag 0-05 - CDH Gil DWSTD OX 0% 0%
Cr 0.05 - CDH 6W DWSTD 0% 0% OX
Ni 0.2 - CDH AG 0% OX OX
il
CON - Colorado Department of Health
■ SW - Surface Water
GW - Groundwater
DVSTD - Drinking Water Standard
▪ -- NS - No Standard
NA - Not Available
IN
68
I DISTRIBUTION OF SAMPLES EXCEEDING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
10D- I
= L.
.o-.
,o-
I
so- i
LU
CC
LU
rI
$O4 Fe F PH HOE Mn
PARAMETERS
{ gm GROUP A NM GROUP B IZE;S GROUP C
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS:
I
sa 150
Fe 03
F 20
pH 63-Si
ROE 5O3
Mn 0.05
•UNITS IN ms/L accpt for pH
I
Figure 19 - Graph represents the distribution of parameters
exceeding ARAR concentrations.
I
69
Eighteen percent of Data Group "B" samples and 38% of Data
Group "C" samples exceed the ARAR concentration (0. 05 mg/1)
for manganese.
Despite having iron, pH, and ROE parameters
exceeding ARAR concentrations (Table IX) , the Data Group "A"
samples, representing the groundwater from the Kl-f Aquifer,
is of better quality for human consumption and domestic
purposes than the groundwater of Data Groups "B" and "C" .
However, the NA-CO3+HC03 groundwater in the Kl-f Aquifer may
not be suitable as drinking water for persons on low sodium
diets. The mean ROE value of 592 mg/L exceeds the ARAR
- -- concentration of 500 mg/L due to the high mean
concentrations of sodium (242 mg/L) and carbonate +
bicarbonate (461 mg/L) ions.
The groundwater collected from wells in Data Group
"B" was of a lesser quality than the groundwater from Data
Group "'S . The mean sulfate, ROE and dissolved iron
concentrations within Data Group "B" exceed ARAR' s. The
high sulfate concentrations in the drinking water obtained
from wells in Group "B" may act as a laxative if consumed
and the high iron concentrations may cause staining of
plumbing and bathroom fixtures (Driscoll, 1986) . ' In
addition, the high soodium-sulfate concentration may not
have an aestically pleasent taste or smell. The groundwater
quality from wells in Data Group "B" is not suitable for
70
human consumption and most domestic purposes.
The water quality of the groundwater sampled from
wells comprising Data Group "C" is unfit for human
consumption. The mean sulfate concentration of 647 mg/L and
the mean ROE value of 1390 mg/L exceeds the ARAR
concentrations summarized in Table IX, with the mean ROE
value exceeding 1, 000 mg/L the groundwater is classified as
brackish (Freeze and Cherry, 1979) . Water which has a
dissolved solids concentration greater than 1000 mg/L is a
high salinity hazard and is unsuitable for most types of
irrigation due to the potential salt buildup in the soil
(Robson, 1989) .
71
JUN-16-1998 10:28
REPORT OATS 04/29/98 COLORADO WELLS. APPLICATIONS. AND PERMITS FACE t
COLORADO DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCE'S
D CO OWNER INFORMATION
- ACTIVITY STATUS 1ST USED ANNUAL ACRES GEOL WKL.L WELL WATER SEC LOCAT'N TOWN p
CD DATE CD DATE WD MD DO USE DATE APROP LER AQFR YIELD DEPTH LEVEL COORDINATES (FIRS SC SHIP RANGE H
1 62 SIEGRIST CONST 6909 YORK ST DENVER. CO 80229 GRAVEL. PIT
AP 02/20/90 AU 03/20/90 S 0 G GW 11 3 N 67 H S
1 62 DAKOLIOS ERNEST R. COIbEN, CO 80401
AP 0ti/03/85 AU 05/07/85 2 8 CW SW 31 3 N 67 W S
2169F 1 62 VARRA COMPANIES 2130 S 90TH ST BROOMFIELD, CO 80020
EP 07/02/07 EP 02/06/96 5 5 GW .dc
r I 0100N.0200E NFNF. 31 3 N 6] W 5 4I.--
1 67 VARRA COMPANIES 2130 S 981'FI BROOMFIEJ3, CO 80020 CRAVEL PIT ill
_ AP 07/16/90 AU 09/21/90 5 0 G GW �•(1 SWNE 31 3 N 67 N 5
0426AD 1 62 DAKOLIOS CNSTR CO DENVER, CO 80221 /
AD A 4 NENW 'n 3 N 67 W S
1 62 VAAkA COMPANIES 2130 S 96TH BROOMFIELD, CO 80020 GRAVEL PIT
AP 07/16/90 AU 09/20/90 $ 0 G GW SWNW 31 3 N 67 W S
9938 1 62 ST VRAIN SAN DIST 600 KIMBARK ST STE B LONGMONT, CO 80502 (a„,wtkic..../
NP 09/14/87 SA 12/12/80 5 3 12/15/87 0.33 KLF 2.50 150 12 22155,2405E NWSE 31 3 N 6'1 w S
—72796M 1 62 ST. VRAIN SAN. 600 KIMBARK ST STE B LONGMONT. CO 80502 oY\--Xl
NP 12/01/87 SA 5 0 07/00/88 CH 18 19335,2410E NWSE 31 '3 N 67 N S
3279GM 1 62 ST. VRAIN SAN. 600 KIMBARK ST STE ❑ LONGMONT. CO 60502 "?
NI' 12/01/87 SA S D 07/08/08 OW 10 1Y135,2410E NWSE 31 ) N 67 W 5
2795M 1 62 ST VRAIN SANITATION DIST G00 KIMBARK ST STE B LONGMONI, CO 80502
S 0 12/15(87 10 1.9335,2925E NWSE 31 ) N 67 H S
1 62 VARRA COMPANIES 2130 S 96IH Bk0OMF16LD. CO 80020
- AP 12/21/96 9 G 7r&4.d{9('f GW NESW 31 3 N 6'r w S
6 1 62 GOULD L LONGMONT, CO 80501
NP 04/06/82 AR 04/21/8'3 5 8 SW514 31 1 N F7 w 5
154183 1 62 GOULD LEE 12148 WELD CNTY RD 1; LONGMONT CO 805111
NP 04/26/89 AR 05/18/89 5 89 GW 75.00 32 10 0390S,0100W SWSW 33 3 N 67 W S
__4183 A 1 62 GOULD LEE 12148 WELD CNTY RD 13 LONGMONT. CO 90501
NP 04/26/89 AR 05/18/89 5 89 GW 03905,0100W SWSW 31 3 N Al W 5
3569 1 62 GOULD LEE RT 4 LONGMONT. CO 90501
S 9 05/03/68 28.00 25 6 5045W 71 3 N 67 N S
TnTnl 0 170
r.u4
JUN-16-1998 10:27
REPORT DATE 04/29/99 COLORADO WELLS, APPLICATIONS, AND PERMIT'S PACE 1
COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
:SNIT D CO OWNER INFORMATION
ACTIVITY STATUS 1ST USED ANNUAL ACRES CEOL WELL WELL WATER sCC LOCAT'N TOWN P
CD DATE CD DATE ND MO DO USE DATE APROP IRR ACFR YIELD DEPTH LEVEL COORDINATES QTES SC SHIP RANGE M
9705E 1 62 RALPH NLX PRODUCE, INC 19480 US Hwy 05 O(LCREST. CO 50123
RC 12/02/92 5 t 02/28/16 1000.0n 1(. ,. SCNE 20 3 N 7 w S
'0371 1 62 RALPH NIX PRODUCE 16959 WCR 44 G.ILCRESI, CO 90623
NP 10/.10/96 RC 04/24/97 2 8 L Ow 15.00 70 2', 2S4DN,0975V 5!:99- 20 3 N 67 w 5
_ 2189P K 1 62 KURTZ CATTLE CV 1 ACKICOLA REALTY 6 MGMT FT MORGAN. CO 80701
NP 11/10/91 2 1 Cw 4n 2572N,2865E SENW 29 1 N 67 N s
4124? 1 62 KURTZ HELENE D 6 MAX 5636 G 1"PIU AVE DENVER 20, CO 50220
5 1 05/20/63 1000.00 40 _ NWSW 28 3 N 67 H 5
-5973 1 62 RALPH NIX PRODUCE, INC 19490 US HWY 05 OILCRESI', CO 00623
Nc 12/02/92 5 6 05/10/09 15.00 21 1 SWMW 20 1 N 667 N s
136175 1 62 LESN B AULT. CO 80521
NP 04/27/81 5 0 01/30/85 NE 29 3 N 67 N S
0512 1 62 KURTZ ALBERT K F D ('LATTEVILLE. CO 80651
5 9 10.00 19 4 NENE 29 3 N 67 w 5
1 62 LESN 8 ADLT, CO 80610
TH 04/16/94 5 NENW 29 3 N 67 H 5
9640MH 1 62 CO DAIRY EARNS C/O LESN DRILLING AUI:1', CO 90610
MH 02/0./92 S 0 Qw 00329,2497w NENW 19 3N 67 2N5
-a2029VE 1 62 AURORA DAIRY CORP 7388 HWY 66 LONGMONT. CO 00000
AV 02/07/92 5 39 GN 092O4,2n97W NENW 29 3 N 6,7 w 5
1!4179 1 62 PSF ASSOCIATES LONOMON'1', CO 90501
__
NP 10/12/82 RC 01/20/94 5 A NENW 29 3 N 67 W S
R 1 62 COLORADO DAIRY FARMS 7309 HWY 66 LONGNONT', CO 80501
NP 02/06/92 SA 07/15/92 5 9 n3/79/92 350.0 GW 290.00 25 2 0927N,2402W NENW 29 7N 9) N2
25867E 1 62 PSI' ASSOCIATES 7308 STATE HWY 66 LONGMONT, CO 80501
AB 02/14/92 5 9 09/09/82 205.00 19 2 0747N,2297W NENW 29 3 N 67 w S
T.00SUN-16-1`3'3d 1b:Cl
REPORT DATE 04/29/98 COLORADO WELLS, AP'PLICATIONS, AND PERMITS 0AOK 1
COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
P"^^' D CO OWNER INFORMATION
ACTIVITY STATUS 1ST USED ANNUAL ACRES GEOL WELL WELL WATER SEC LOCAT'N TOWN P
CD DATE CD DATE. WD MU DB USE DATE APROP IRR AQPR YIELD DEPTH LEVEL COORDINATES OTRS SC SHIP RANGE M
19874MH 1 62 AT&T COMMUNICATIONS 1 CERTIFIED ENV CONSULT SALT LAKE CITY, WI 04115
MH 10/14/92 S O M OW 0 S 10 6 N2 30 I N G7 W S
5462 1 62 HESS LANCE - CEC 2757 S 300 WEST KR SALT LAKE, UT 84115
NP 11/01/92 5 0 M [WC 0134N,2493E NWNE 30 3 N 57 W S
-5463 1 62 HESS LANCE - CEC 2757 S 300 WEST KB SALT LAKE, UT 84115
NP 11/01/93 5 0 M UNC 0177N,2'4'E NINE 30 3 N G7 W S
175464 1 62 HESS LANCE - CEC 2757 5 300 WEST KR SALT LAKE. VT 84115
NP 11/01/91 5 0 M I7NC 0094N,2498E NWNA 30 3 N 67 W S
5465 1 62 HESS LANCE - CEC 2757 S 300 WEST KB SALT LAKE, UT 84115
NP 11/01/93 5 0 M INC 0177N,2491E NWNE 30 3 N G7 W S
Colorad ireamflow Page 11
r Streamflow
Colorado Streamflow Information
Here's the streamflow information you requested:
ST. VRAIN CREEK NEAR PLATTEVILLE, AT THE
MOUTH
400
= 350
m 300
250
a 200
2 150
E 100
a 50
0 ,
20-Jun 21-Jun 22-Jun 23-Jun 24-Jun 25-Jun 26-Jun 27-Jun 28-Jun 29-Jun 30-Jun
Chart prepared on 6/30/98 10:07:28 AM - Days go from Midnight to Midnight
Estimated Channel Capacity 1650 CFS
WaterTalk (303) 831-7135 Division 1, Station 59
[Another Stream]
Natural Resources I Parks F Wildlife l Wafer Ceologv Oil & Gas I Mining I Land Overview
http://www.dnr.state.co us/scripts/gage/gage.idc 6/30/98
I I I I 1
Colorad ltrrent Streamflow Conditions - Wate... i Page 1 113
�� ..
science for achanging worlds ,,..e
Colorado Current Streamflow Conditions - Water Quality
Updated TUESDAY JUN 30, 1998 13:08:11
Streamflow conditions are monitored by the U.S. Geological Survey with support from Federal, State, and local cooperators.
PROVISIONAL DATA SUBJECT TO REV ISION--Select a station number from the table to view graph(s) and other data for a station.
Water Specific Dissolved pH
Station Station Temp Rainfall Flow Stage Conductance Oxygen Standard
Number Name °C Inches fP/s ft µS/cm mg/L Units Date/Time
*SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN
06697100 Tarryal Creek below Park Gulch near 06/30
20 3.85
Como, Co 08:00
06701970 Spring Cr above mouth nr South Platte 06/30
0 41 3.76
Co. 12:50
06706800 Buffalo Creek at mouth at Buffalo 06/30
0 31 3.75
Creek 11:00
06709000 Plum Creek near Sedalia, Co. -- 0 29 1.85 -- -- __ 06/30
10:45
06709530 Plum Creek at Titan Rd nr Louviers, -- -- 3.4 6.27 06/30
Co , 11:30
South Platte River below Union Ave, 06/30
06710247 at Englewood -- -- 87 10.91 -- -- 09:30
0671 1565 South Platte River at Englewood, Co. 0 -- 112 1.73 389 1.6 7 8 06/30
10:30
06/30
06712000 Cherry Creek near Franktown, Co. -- 0 2.6 2.16 -- -- __
09:45
06714? 15 South Platte R at 64th Ave. Commerce 06/30
146 2.65
City, Co. 09.00
http://nwis-colo.cr.usgs.gov/rt-cgi/gen_tbl_pg_ex 6/30/98
i
Coloradr lrrent Streamflow Conditions - Wate.. } Page 2 t3
Leavenworth Creek @ mouth nr 06/30
06714800 Georgetown, Co 0 48 4.33 0 12:30
06/30
06716500 Clear Creek near Lawson, Co. -- 0 488 4.52 -- -- __
12:30
06/30
06719505 Clear Creek at Golden, Co. -- -- 676 6.51 -- -- __
10:00
06720255 Uvalda Intercept bl 56th Av at Rocky 06/30
0 .35 -665.7
Mtn Ars, Co 12:15
06720285 Havana Intercept bl 56th Av, at Rocky 06/30
0 1.3 10.63
Mtn Ars, Co 07:45
06720460 First Cr bel Buckley Rd, at Rocky Mtn 06/30
0 0 .81
Arsenal, C 07:45
06720490 First Cr at Hwy 2, near Rocky Mtn 0 72 06/30
Arsenal, Co 07:00
06/30
06730200 Boulder Cr at North 75th St nr Boulder -- -- 300 5.86 -- -- __
12:00
06/30
06741510 Big Thompson River at Loveland, Co. -- -- 159 2.62 -- -- __
11:00
0675 1150 North Fork Cache La Poudre River 06/30
100 2.98
below Halligan Reservoir near V Dal 10:45
06752260 Cache La Poudre River at Fort Collins, 06/30
14.9 -- 409 3.51 48 -- 8.3
Co. 12:15
06752280 Cache La Poudre R ab Boxelder C, nr 06/30
273 5.16
Timnath, Co. 10:45
06/30
06754000 South Platte River near Kersey, Co. -- -- 509 3.65 -- -- __
10:30
06/30
393109104464500 Cherry Creek near Parker, Co -- -- 1.9 2.66 -- -- __
01:45
393647105425317 South Clear Creek abv Naylor Creek 06/30
7.6 3.3 7.41 68
nr Georgetown 02:00
394839104570300 Sand Creek at mouth nr Commerce 310 5.74 06/30
City,co -- -- 04.30
gill UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN
http://nwis-colo.cr.usgs.gov/rt-cgi/gen_tblpg_ex 6/30/98
CGRS,Inc.
APPENDIX B
Methods and Procedures
CGRS,Inc.
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
Soil Borings
Soil sampling will be conducted in accordance with ASTM:D 1586-87. Using this procedure, a 2-
inch O.D. split-spoon sampler will be driven into the soil by a 140 pound weight falling 30
inches. After an initial set of 6 inches, the number of blows required to drive the sample an
additional 12 inches, known as the penetration resistance (N value), will be recorded. The N
value is an index of the relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils.
Soil Classification/Characterization
As samples are obtained in the field, they will be visually inspected and classified in accordance
with ASTM:D 1488-84. Representative portions of the samples will then be retained for further
examination and for verification of the various strata, the N value, water level data, and pertinent
information regarding the method of maintaining and advancing the boring will be provided.
Charts illustrating the soil classification procedure, descriptive terminology and symbols used on
the logs will be provided.
Decontamination
To avoid potential transport of contaminated materials to the project site, all drilling equipment
and down-hole tools will be steam cleaned prior to mobilization. To prevent cross contamination
between soil borings or monitoring wells all down-hole equipment will also be steam cleaned and
rinsed with water between soil borings.
Monitoring Well Construction
Monitoring wells will be installed utilizing the following general construction criteria:
• borehole diameter: minimum 6.25 inches
• well diameter: 2 inches
• estimated depth: 15 feet below ground surface
• casing material: schedule 40, flush thread PVC
CGRS, Inc.
• well screen: 2 inch I.D., 10 feet in length, # 0.01 slot PVC
• estimated screened interval: 5 feet above and 5 feet below the groundwater
table
• annular pack: 10-20 silica sand
• protective casing: minimum 12 inch I.D., steel flush or above grade, locking
cap
• annular seal: cement grout and bentonite pellets.
Groundwater Sampling
All borings where groundwater is encountered will be sampled from the suspected cleanest to the
most contaminated according to the protocols listed below. All pertinent information will be
recorded on a sampling information form.
Field Protocol
— Step 1 -Measure water level.
Step 2 -A dedicated polyethylene bailer will be used to develop each boring. Three bore volumes
will be evacuated from each boring prior to sampling.
Step 3 -Collect water samples. Water samples will be collected using a polyethylene bailer. A
field blank will be collected during the sampling program to ensure quality control.
Step 4 -Store samples in a cooler on ice for transport to the laboratory. Follow all documentation
and chain-of-custody procedures.
Step 5 -Clean equipment. Water level measurement equipment will be cleaned with ethanol
followed by a deionized water rinse.
Upon completion of soil or groundwater sampling, a chain of custody log will be initiated. A
copy of the chain of custody will be returned to the project manager.
CGRS,Inc.
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
Soil Borings
Soil sampling will be conducted in accordance with ASTM:D 1586-87. Using this procedure, a 2-
inch O.D. split-spoon sampler will be driven into the soil by a 140 pound weight falling 30
inches. After an initial set of 6 inches, the number of blows required to drive the sample an
additional 12 inches, known as the penetration resistance (N value), will be recorded. The N
value is an index of the relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils.
Soil Classification/Characterization
As samples are obtained in the field, they will be visually inspected and classified in accordance
with ASTM:D 1488-84. Representative portions of the samples will then be retained for further
examination and for verification of the various strata, the N value, water level data, and pertinent
information regarding the method of maintaining and advancing the boring will be provided.
Charts illustrating the soil classification procedure, descriptive terminology and symbols used on
the logs will be provided.
Decontamination
To avoid potential transport of contaminated materials to the project site, all drilling equipment
and down-hole tools will be steam cleaned prior to mobilization. To prevent cross contamination
between soil borings or monitoring wells all down-hole equipment will also be steam cleaned and
rinsed with water between soil borings.
Monitoring Well Construction
Monitoring wells will be installed utilizing the following general construction criteria:
• borehole diameter: minimum 6.25 inches
• well diameter: 2 inches
• estimated depth: 15 feet below ground surface
• casing material: schedule 40, flush thread PVC
i
CGRS, Inc.
• well screen: 2 inch I.D., 10 feet in length, # 0.01 slot PVC
• estimated screened interval: 5 feet above and 5 feet below the groundwater
table
• annular pack: 10-20 silica sand
• protective casing: minimum 12 inch I.D., steel flush or above grade, locking
cap
• annular seal: cement grout and bentonite pellets.
Groundwater Sampling
All borings where groundwater is encountered will be sampled from the suspected cleanest to the
most contaminated according to the protocols listed below. All pertinent information will be
recorded on a sampling information form.
Field Protocol
— Step 1 -Measure water level.
Step 2 -A dedicated polyethylene bailer will be used to develop each boring. Three bore volumes
will be evacuated from each boring prior to sampling.
Step 3 -Collect water samples. Water samples will be collected using a polyethylene bailer. A
field blank will be collected during the sampling program to ensure quality control.
Step 4 -Store samples in a cooler on ice for transport to the laboratory. Follow all documentation
and chain-of-custody procedures.
Step 5 -Clean equipment. Water level measurement equipment will be cleaned with ethanol
followed by a deionized water rinse.
Upon completion of soil or groundwater sampling, a chain of custody log will be initiated. A
copy of the chain of custody will be returned to the project manager.
ii
CGRS, Inc.
Chemical Analysis
All analytical parameters are described in the Laboratory Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)
presented as Appendix C.
Groundwater Elevation Measurements
The following outlines our standard groundwater quality sampling methodology. Before purging
any of the soil test borings or monitoring wells,water level measurements must be taken.
Measuring Point
Establish the measuring point for the well. The measuring point is marked on the north side of the
top of the temporary monitoring well riser. The top of the riser is normally a 2 inch casing inside a
locked protective casing. The riser will be PVC pipe, galvanized pipe or stainless steel pipe. The
measuring point should be described on the groundwater sample collection record.
Access
_ After unlocking or opening a monitoring well, the first task will be to obtain a water level
measurement. Water level measurements will be made using an electronic water level indicator.
Depth to water and total depth of the well will be measured for calculation of purge volume.
Measurement
To obtain a water level measurement, lower a decontaminated electronic water level probe into the
monitoring well. Care must be taken to assure that the electronic probe hangs freely in the
monitoring well and is not adhering to the well casing. The electronic probe will be lowered into
the well until the audible sound of the unit is detected and the light on the electronic sounder
illuminates. At this time,the precise measurement should be determined by repeatedly raising and
lowering the probe to obtain an exact measurement. The water level measurement is then entered
on the groundwater sampling collection record sheet or groundwater level data sheet to the nearest
0.01 feet.
Decontamination
The electronic probe shall be decontaminated immediately after use by wiping with isopropyl
alcohol-soaked paper towels. Always proceed in order from the suspected cleanest well or soil test
boring to the suspected most contaminated one.
iii
CGRS, Inc.
Purge Volume Computation
All soil test borings and temporary monitoring wells will be purged prior to sample collection.
Depending upon the rate of recovery,three to five volumes of groundwater present in a well or bore
hole shall be withdrawn prior to sample collection. If a well or bore hole bails dry,the well or bore
hole should be allowed to recharge and a sample taken as soon as there is sufficient volume for the
intended analysis. The volume of water present in each well or bore hole shall be computed using
the two measurable variables, length of water column in soil boring or monitoring well and
diameter.
Purging and Sample Collection Procedures
Bailing
• Obtain a laboratory decontaminated disposable bailer and a spool of nylon rope or equivalent
bailer cord. Tie a bowline knot or equivalent through the bailer loop. Test the knot for
_ _ adequacy by creating tension between the line and the bailer. Tie again if needed. New rope
will be used for every sample or purge. New clean latex gloves will be used when touching the
rope or bailer.
• Spread a clean plastic sheet near the base of the well. The plastic sheet should be of sufficient
size to prevent bailer or bailer rope from contacting the ground surface.
• Place the bailer inside the well to verify that an adequate annulus is present between the bailer
and the well casing to allow free movement of the bailer.
• Lower the bailer carefully into the well casing to remove the sample from the top of the water
column,taking care not to agitate the water in the well.
• Pour the bailed groundwater into a bucket. Once the bucket is full,transfer the water to a barrel
and contain on-site.
iv
CGRS, Inc.
• Raise the bailer by grasping a section of cord, using each hand alternately. This bailer lift
method will assure that the bailer cord will not come into contact with the ground or other
potentially contaminated surfaces.
Sampling
• Instructions for obtaining samples for parameters are reviewed with the laboratory coordinator
to insure that proper preservation and filtering requirements are met.
• Appropriate sample containers will be obtained from the contract laboratory. After samples are
collected, they will be put on ice in coolers (4°C). Care will be taken to prevent breakage
during transportation or shipment.
• Samples collected by bailing will be poured directly into sample containers from bailers. The
sample should be poured slowly to minimize air entrapment into the sample bottle. During
collection, bailers will not be allowed to contact the sample containers.
• Upon completion of sampling a chain-of-custody log will be initiated. Chain-of-custody records
will include the following information: project name and number, shipped by, shipped
sampling point, location, field ID number, date, time, sample type, number of containers,
analysis required and sampler's signature. The samples and chain-of-custody will be delivered
to the laboratory. Upon arrival at the laboratory the samples will be checked in by the
appropriate laboratory personnel. Laboratory identification numbers will be noted on the chain-
- of-custody record. Upon completion of the laboratory analysis, the completed chain-of-custody
record will be returned to the project manager.
Field Cleaning Procedures
For all equipment to be reused in the field,the following cleaning procedures must be followed:
• Disassemble the equipment to the extent practical.
• Wash the equipment with distilled water and laboratory-grade detergent.
• Rinse with distilled water until all detergent is removed.
• Rinse the equipment with isopropyl or methanol, making sure all surfaces, inside and out,are rinsed.
• Triple rinse the equipment with distilled water.
v
CGRS,Inc.
Laboratory Selection
The project manager should consider the following factors when selecting a laboratory:
• Capabilities(facilities, personnel, instrumentation), including:
• Participation in interlaboratory studies(e.g., EPA or other Federal or State agency sponsored
analytical programs);
• Certifications(e.g., Federal or State);
• References(e.g. other clients); and
• Experience(UST,RCRA and other environmentally related projects).
• Service;
• Turnaround time; and
• Technical input(e.g., recommendations on analytical procedures).
The project manager is encouraged to gather pertinent laboratory-selection information prior to
extensively defining analytical requirements under the project. A request may be made to a
laboratory to provide a qualifications package that should address the points listed above. Once the
project manager has reviewed the various laboratory qualifications, further specific discussions
with the laboratory or laboratories should take place. In addition, more than one laboratory should
be considered. For large-scale investigations, selection of one laboratory as a primary candidate
and one or two laboratories as fall-back candidates should be considered.
The quality of the laboratory service provided is dependent on various factors. The project manager
should be able to control the quality of the information(e.g., samples) provided to the laboratory. It
is extremely important that the project manager communicate to the laboratory all the requirements
relevant to the project. This includes the number of samples and their matrices, sampling schedule,
parameters and constituents of interest, required analytical methodologies, detection limits, holding
times, deliverables, level of QA/QC, and required turnaround of analytical results.
Field and Laboratory Quality Control
General
Quality control checks are performed to ensure that the data collected is representative and valid
data. Quality control checks are the mechanisms whereby the components of QA objectives ore
monitored. Examples of items to be considered are as follows:
vi
CGRS, Inc.
I. Field Activities:
• Use of standardized checklists and field notebooks;
• Verification of checklist information by an independent person;
• Strict adherence to chain-of-custody procedures;
• Calibration of field devices;
• Collection of replicate samples; and
• Submission of field blanks,where appropriate.
2. Analytical Activities:
• Method blanks;
• Laboratory control samples:
• Calibration check samples;
• replicate samples;
• Matrix-spiked samples;
• "Blind" quality control samplers;
_ — • Control charts;
• Surrogate samples;
• Zero and span gases; and
• Reagent quality control checks.
Blind Duplicates
Blind duplicate samples will be collected for 10% of the samples collected or once per site,
whichever is greater. These blind duplicate samples will be forwarded to the laboratory as a check
of laboratory reproducibility.
Equipment(Rinseate)Blank
The equipment (rinseate) blank is designed to identify potential cross-contamination in the field
between sample sources due to deficient field cleaning procedures. This blank also addresses field
preservation procedures, environmental site interference, integrity of the source blank water for
field cleaning and those concerns singularly addressed by the travel blank. Equipment blanks are
taken once per site, when equipment is cleaned in the field. This provides a quality control check
on field cleaning procedures.
vii
CGRS, Inc.
Field Blank
Field blanks are used to evaluate the sample container filling procedure, the effects of
environmental contaminants at the site, purity of preservatives or additives and those concerns
uniquely addressed by the travel blank.
Field blanks are taken downwind of the most contaminated area of the site by filling laboratory
cleaned and prepared sample containers (appropriate for the parameters group) with deionized or
- organic-free water supplied by the laboratory. The blank sample container is then sealed, grouped,
transported and stored with the real samples collected for the same parameters group.
Travel(Trip)Blanks
The travel blank is designed to address interferences derived from improper sample container
cleaning preparation, contaminated source blank water, sample cross-contamination during
storage/transport and extraneous environmental conditions affecting the sampling event to and from
the site, including delivery to the laboratory.
Travel blanks are composed in the appropriate sample container using source blank water.
Preservatives or additives are added if required for the parameters group. Travel blanks are then
sealed and stored in the ice chest where real samples will be stored and transported. Travel blanks
are to originate at the laboratory providing the blank water for the equipment and field blanks.
Protocol for Analyzing Blank Samples
If used, the equipment blank will be analyzed first. If contamination is found to be present, the
field blank will then be analyzed. If the equipment blank is not used, the first blank analyzed will
be the field blank. If any blank is found to be contaminant-free, the sequence of analyses will be
terminated.
VI.ii
CGRS, Inc.
APPENDIX C
Quality Assurance Project Plan
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
FOR THE
VARRA COAL ASH BURIAL PROJECT
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
1.0 Introduction
This Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) briefly describes the field data collection activities
and laboratory analyses being conducted as part of the Varra Coal Ash Burial Project in Weld
County, Colorado. The work described in this QAPP is being conducted to address possible
concerns related to coal ash burial in saturated mediums.
Described in the sections below are the project objectives, scope of work, sample handling and
Chain-of-Custody procedures, data quality assurance, and laboratory deliverables.
2.0 Objectives
The data being collected are intended to support the following objectives:
• Identify potential adverse environmental impacts to groundwater resources and
- surface waters from coal ash burial;
• Determine variations in water quality from coal ash burial (if any);
• Characterize hydrogeologic and surface water conditions in sufficient detail to
describe hydrostratigraphy, direction and velocity of groundwater flow, and the
relationship between groundwater and surface water;
• Develop and implement monitoring programs for the various media; and,
• Employ industry standard field and laboratory methods suitable to meet CLP or
equivalent(such as EPA QC Level III) Data Quality Objectives.
3.0 Scope of Work
The scope of work for this project involves, development of Health and Safety and site-specific
Work Plans, field investigations, laboratory analysis of water samples, analysis of hydraulic and
hydrogeologic properties, and the preparation of a report detailing the results of the investigation.
Field investigative techniques include soil and groundwater sampling using direct push and
hollow stem auger techniques.
3.1 Sample Identification
A sample identification scheme will be used that maintains consistency for the names of
boreholes and monitoring wells, as well labels affixed to each sample container, and entered on to
the Chain-of-Custody(COC)forms. The following scheme will be followed:
1. Samples from soil borings that are not converted to monitoring wells are named SB;
2. Samples from soils collected during drilling of monitoring wells are named MW; and
3. Depth of soil sampled indicated by @ (depth interval).
For example a soil sample might be identified as MW-4 @ 10-11.5. Groundwater, surface water,
and sediment samples will be named with no depth interval (i.e. MW-4, SW-4, SED-4,
respectively).
3.2 Analytical Suites
Analytical procedures for water and soil samples will conform to the USEPA guidelines
described in SW 846 (Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste/Physical/Chemical Methods, 3rd
ed.). Table 1 presents the analyses that are anticipated on the project.
3.3 Sample Custody
Strict chain of custody(COC) protocol will be maintained throughout the life of the field program
and will be controlled through the use of a COC Record supplied by the laboratory. The
following procedures will be used to document, establish, and maintain custody of field samples:
• Sample labels will be completed for each sample using waterproof ink; making sure that
the labels are legible and affixed firmly on the sample container;
• All sample-related information will be recorded in the project log book;
• The field sampling technician will retain custody of the samples until they are transferred
or properly dispatched to a laboratory; and,
• As fieldwork is conducted the on-site CGRS technical lead will determine whether these
procedures are being followed, if corrections need to be made, and if additional samples
are required.
3.3.1 Chain of Custody Records
A Chain-of-Custody Record will be maintained in the field for all samples to be shipped to the
laboratory for analysis. The three lines of information to be entered into the COC box titled
"Project or P.O.#"are:
Line 1. Client Name, i.e. "Varra Companies"
Line 2. Site Name, i.e. "Pit 112"
Line 3. Site Number, i.e. "2755"
The three lines of information will be provided on the laboratory paper (hard copy) reports as a
page header, and on the electronic deliverables as three individual fields in each analytical record.
The "Sample Identification" entries to the COC will be completed as described in Section 3.1 of
this QAPP.
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page I
33.2 Transfer of Custody and Shipment
Due to the evidentiary nature of field sample collection, the possession of samples must be
traceable from the time the samples are collected until they are introduced as evidence in legal
proceedings. A sample is defined as being under a person's custody if any of the following
conditions exist: (1) it is in their possession, (2) it is in their view after being in their possession,
(3) it is in a secure locked location after having been in their possession, and (4) it is in a
designated secure area. The following procedures will be used in transferring and shipping
samples:
• Field personnel will maintain detailed notes in field logbooks, documenting the
collection and identification of the required samples. The logbooks will be checked
against the COC records for completeness and traceability.
• A COC record will accompany all sample shipments. When transferring samples,the
individuals relinquishing and receiving will sign, date, and note time on the record.
The COC documents transfer of sample custody from the field sampling technician to
another person or to the laboratory.
• Each cooler is to contain samples from one site. No mixing of samples from multiple
sites will be allowed in a given cooler.
• Samples will be properly packaged for shipment and shipped to the laboratory for
analysis with a separate signed COC record enclosed in each sample box or cooler.
Two copies of this record will accompany the samples to the laboratory. The
— - laboratory maintains one file copy, and the completed original will be returned to the
project manager as part of the final analytical report. This record will be used to
document sample custody transfer from the field sampling technician to the
laboratory or to the CGRS offices. Just prior to shipment to the laboratory, coolers
will be secured with custody seals.
• Whenever samples are split with a facility operator or government agency, a separate
COC record will be prepared for those samples and so marked to indicate with whom
the samples are being split.
• The COC record showing identification of the contents will accompany all packages.
The original record will accompany the shipment and the field team leader will retain
a copy.
• A bill of lading will be used for all samples sent by common carrier. Receipt of bills
of lading will be retained as part of the COC permanent documentation.
3.3.3 Laboratory Custody Procedures
The laboratory, at a minimum, will check all incoming samples for integrity and note any
observations of the original COC record. Each sample will be logged into the laboratory system
by assigning it a unique laboratory identification number. This number and the field sample
identification number will be recorded on the laboratory report. Samples will be stored and
analyzed according to the methods described in Section 3.1. The original COC record will be
returned to the CGRS project manager for filing. The laboratory sample custodian will use the
following procedures to maintain the COC records once the samples arrive at the laboratory:
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 2
• The samples received by the laboratory will be cross-checked to verify that the
information on the sample labels matches that on the COC record included with the
sample shipment;
• The "Received by Laboratory" box on the COC record will be signed on receipt.
Any discrepancies between the COC record and the shipment contents will be
resolved as soon as possible through communication with CGRS personnel;
• The status of the sample receipt and analysis will be tracked within the analytical
laboratory by a laboratory information management system (LIMS) or equivalent
computerized management system.
For data that are input by an analyst and processed using a computer, a copy of the input data will
be kept and identified with the project number and any other needed information. The samples
analyzed will be clearly noted and the input data signed and dated by the analyst.
3.4 Laboratory Deliverables
The laboratory is required to submit EPA QC Level III data packages (CLP-equivalent)to CGRS,
Inc. within 21 days from the date of acceptance on the Sample Receipt Form. Details of the
deliverables are presented below.
_ • Sample Receipt - The laboratory will complete and submit a "Sample Receipt" form
for all sample shipments received. The purpose of the form is to note problems with
sample packaging, COCs, and sample preservation. Problems noted on the form will
be communicated to CGRS, Inc. as soon as possible.
• Reporting of Analytical Results — For each analytical method performed, the
laboratory will report all analytes as detected concentrations or as less than the
specific limits or quantification. All samples with out-of-control spike recoveries
being attributed to matrix interferences should be designated as such. All
soil/sediment and solid waste samples should be reported on a dry-weight basis with
percent moisture also reported. Also, report dates of extraction/preparation, dates of
analysis, and dilution factors when applicable. An electronic deliverable (LIMS) will
be provided that conforms to the CGRS project data requirements. An example of
the data deliverable is presented in Table 2.
• Internal Quality Control Reporting—Internal QC samples should be analyzed at rates
_ specified in the method (SW-846). At a minimum, QC deliverables will consist of
laboratory blank results, surrogate spike percent recoveries, results of MS/MSD
analyses, laboratory control sample data, laboratory duplicate results, and if
requested, calibration and tuning data. The internal.QC data will not be delivered
unless requested by Varra or CGRS personnel.
3.5 Field and Laboratory QA/QC Procedures •
Quality control checks are performed to ensure that the data collected are representative and
valid. Quality control checks are the mechanisms whereby the data quality objectives are
monitored. The quality control samples to be collected on the project are described below.
• Duplicate Samples — As a check for laboratory reproducibility, blind duplicate
samples (unknown by the laboratory to be duplicates) will be collected and submitted
Varra Companies
_. Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 3
to the laboratory at a rate of one every 10 water samples collected, or once per site,
whichever is greater. No duplicate soil samples will be collected.
• Field Blank Samples—To evaluate sample bottle filling procedures and the effects of
environmental contaminants at the site, one VOA water sample per site is collected in
laboratory-cleaned and prepared containers of deionized or organic-free water
supplied by the laboratory. Field blanks are collected downwind of the most
contaminated area within a site. The sample is sealed, labeled and shipped with the
real samples collected for the same parameter group.
• Travel (Trip) Blanks—Trip blanks are intended to address interferences derived from
improper sample container cleaning, preparation, contaminated source blank water,
sample cross-contamination during storage and shipment, and environmental
conditions affecting the sampling event to and from the site, including delivery to the
laboratory. Trip blanks will originate at the laboratory and will consist of VOA vials
filled with source blank water, and will be sealed and stored in the cooler where real
samples will be stored and shipped.
• Equipment(Rinseate) Blanks — Rinseate blanks, intended to provide quality control on field
cleaning procedures,will be collected once per site.
Varra Companies
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Page 4
Table 1
Summary of Parameters, Sample Containers,
Holding Times, and Analytical Methods
No.and Type of Analytical
Holding Time(1)
Parameter• MatrixMethod(2)
Containers
Free Cyanide . _...._..
Water 1-200 ml P,G
14 days,4C,NaOH to ph>12 EPA 300.0
Chloride
Water 1-200 ml,P,G
28 days no preservative required EPA 300.0
Fluoride
Water 1-500 ml,P
28 days no preservative required EPA 300.0
Sulfate
Water I -200 ml,P
28 days cool to 4C EPA 300.0
Nitrate
Water 1 - 100 mL P,G
48 hours cool to 4C EPA 300.0
Mercury Water 1-500 ml P,G 28 days,HNO3 to pH--t2 245.1/7170
Total Metals(RCRA)
Water 125-500 ml nalgene(Red
dot)
6 months except Mercury at 28 days. For (010/7000
water,preserved with HNO3,not filtered.
•
Dissolved Metals(RCRA)
125-500 ml nalgene 6 months except Mercury at 28 days. Filtered 6010/7000
Water (Green dot) and preserved in Lab.
Anions/General Chemistry
Water 250 ml nalgene(White 28 days 200 Series
dot)
Notes: (1)All collected samples to be kept cool(4 degrees C) (2)USEPA Method,SW-846(Revised), 1986
Table 2
Content of Digital Analytical Deliverables
- (LIMS Download)
Origin of Data
Laboratory Name of Data Example of Delivered Generated by CGRS Generated in Lab
Field Digital Data and Entered on by Quanterra
COC
COMPANY_NA Varra Energy X
SITE_NAME Coal Ash Project X
SITE_NO 2755aa X
SAMPLE_ID1 MW-1 X
SAMPLE_DAT 08/27/97 X
LAB_ID L15316-01 X
MATRIX Water X X
__ METHOD M6010ICP X
DATE ANALY 09/04/97 X
ANALYTE Silver, total(3051) X
TEXT RESUL (blank if ND) X
NUMBER_RES (blank if ND) X
QUALIFIER U X
DILUTION 106 X
MDL 0.50000 X
PQL 3.00000 X
UNITS mg/Kg X
DATE_RECEI 09/03/97 X
DATE_EXTRA 09/04/97 X
CAS 007440-22-4 X
BATCH ID WG47359 X
VARRA COMPANIES - COAL ASH PROJECT
ANALYTICAL SUITES
FIELD PILOT TESTS
Analyte Standard Units
Aluminum 5.000 mg/L
Arsenic 0.050 mg/L
Barium 2.000 mg/L
Boron 0.750 mg/L
Cadmium 0.005 mg/L
Chromium 0.100 mg/L
Colbalt 0.050 mg/L
Iron 0.300 mg/L
Lead 0.050 mg/L
Manganese 0.050 mg/L
Mercury 0.002 mg/L
Nickel 0.100 mg/L
Selenium 0.050 mg/L
Chloride 250.000 mg/L
Free Cyanide 0.200 mg/L
pH 6.5-8.5 s.u.
Sulfate 250.000 mg/L
CG'S
April 9, 1999
Mr. Roger Doak
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment(CDPHE)
Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South
Denver, CO 80246-1530 weld County Planning Dept.
RE: Varra Coal Ash Project R 2 Iggq
Weld County, Colorado O
CGRS No. 1-135-2755 ED
Dear Mr. Doak:
Enclosed please find the application checklist to aid you in your review of our coal ash proposal.
Information requested on your checklist, which may not be adequately addressed in our work plan
or USR application, is addressed below.
> In regard to operational data the normal business hours for Varra quarry operations is 7 AM
to 5 PM, Monday through Friday.
➢ In regard to qualifications of the person responsible for correcting noncompliance, we offer
CGRS, Inc.'s Statement-of-Qualifications, which details our company's experience. The
resumes attached within provide qualifications of individuals involved in this project.
S. We have provided precipitation data as Attachment A to this letter.
➢ Groundwater travel calculations and hydrologic properties of the surficial aquifer will be
made prior to deposition of any materials as stated in our Work Plan. We anticipate that the
hydraulic conductivity will be about of 100 feet per day.
• Available background water quality data from unconsolidated alluvial aquifers is provided in
Attachment A. The spatial distribution of these data is over the Boulder - Fort Collins -
Greeley area.
➢ A financial assurance plan will be provided by Varra Companies upon approval of the
Certificate of Designation.
P.O. Box 1489 f,xt Collins, CO 80522 P5o nn (970) 493-7/80 Fax. (9/0) 493 /988
Mr. Roger Doak
Varra Coal Ash Project
April 9. 1999
Page 2
If you have any questions regarding this letter or require further information, please contact me at
(800) 288-2657.
Sincerely,
CGRS, INC.
b . Adams, P.G.
Principal/Hydrogeologist
Attachments
cc: Mr. Chris Varra - Varra Companies
Mr. Trevor Jiricek -Weld County Health Department
Mr. Ben Patton- Weld County Planning
04/06/99 16:07 FAX 3037595355
CDP V1002
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITES AND FACILITIES
APPLICATION CHECKLIST
LANDFILL
(THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT AN APPLICATION FORM)
(This document is meant to be used as a checklist, application format
and annotated table of contents for applications)
FACILITY NAME Varra Companies, Inc. COUNTY Weld
Unincorporated X Incorporated City Longmont
GENERAL DATA (3 .3 .1)
Mailing Address
Name : Varra Companies
Attention : Chris Varra
Address : 12910 Weld County Rd. 13 Zip 8nsnd
City : Longmont State r0
Phone : (303 ) -666 -8269
Location : Twn 3 0 Rng (new Section 3/
Area Total site 35 acres ac. Disposal area 0.25 ac.
Type of Facility Gravel Quarry
Discussion of facility service area, including transportation
corridors and surrounding access. Page 8 in application
LOCATION RESTRICTIONS AND SITE STANDARDS (3 . 1)
Page f in application
OPERATIONAL DATA (3 .3 . 2)
OPERATOR
Name Varra Companies, Inca
Attention: Chris Varra
Address. . : 12910 Weld County Rd. 13
City Longmont State rn Zip flfsna
Phone : ( 303 ) 666 - 8269
Qualifications of person responsible for correcting
non-compliance. Page / in application sae Cove/ le fe
Hours of operation (3 .3 .2 . (B) ) Page f in application._ y
•Describe Gravel quarry operations 7am-5pm m-f
JANUARY 1994 Page 1 of 6
04/06/99 16:08 FAX 3037595355 CDP 10003
Description of Waste Stream and volumes (3 . 3 . 2 . (C) ) Page / in
application M/A
•Describe Not applirahle - Deposits on estimated 400 tons within a
trench measuring 100 ft in length 1O ft. in width and
10 ft. in depth.
Commercial Yes/No
Community Yes/No
Industrial Yes/No
Asbestos Yes/No
Inert Material Yes/No
Construction Demolition Yes/No
Special Yes/No
Sludge Yes/No
Other
Expected life of facility ( 1 years
Personnel Descriptions (3 . 3 .2 . (D) ) Page / in applicatTc.s\ pg 11 in workplan
Equipment (3 . 3 .2. (E) ) Page f in application Appendi*B in wnrrplan
Size and types of disposal cells (3.3 .2. (F) ) Page # urn application
•Describe Page 10 in Work Plan. A single trenrh measuring 100 ft in length
10 ft in width and 10 ft in depth wi ll be used for the rnnal
ash nlarement.
Composition and frequency of cover material (3 .3 .2 . (G) ) Page / in
application page 10 in work plan
Fencing (3 .3.2 . (H) ) Page / in application N/A
Provisions to minimize nuisance conditions (3 .3 .2 . (I) ) Page # in
application Page i USE Section 3, Part E
Fire Protection (3 .3 .2 . (J) ) Page / in application Page 2nf DSR. Section K
Windblown debris (3 .3 . 2 . (K) ) Page / in application N/A
Conceptual plans for impacts to surface or ground waters (3 . 3 . 2 . (L) )
Page / in application Page 11 in Work Plan Section 4.5
Sources of water for on site use (3 . 3 . 2 . (M) ) Page # in application_W1L
Hazardous waste exclusion plan (2 . 1. 2 . ) Page # in application _Nat___
Surface water control systems (2. 1. 6) Page # in application N/A
JANUARY 1994 Page 2 of 6
04/06/99 16:08 FAX 3037595355 CDP VI 004
GEOLOGICAL DATA (3 . 2 .1)
Unconsolidated materials (3.2 . 1. (A) )
Page t in application page 1 in work plan
Name(s) Allvvinm- Holnrene in age
Type(s) candy to C;ravnlly al1uvinm
Thickness(es) ,n-snp
Consolidated materials (3 .2.1. (B) )
Page 1 in application N/A
Name(s)
Type(s)
Thickness(es)
Regional and local geological structure (3 .2. 1. (C) )
Page 1 in application N/A
Regional strike Dip
Local strike Dip
Geological structures
Geological hazards (3.2.1. (D) Page / in application N/A
Precipitation See Attachment A
Floodplain (3.1.7) Page 1 in application page 4 of USR
Aquifer recharge area (2. 1.5) Page 1 in application N/A
Groundwater travel calculation (3.2 .5 (11) ) Page f in applicationpq.9 of
Airport restriction (3 .3. 1) Page / in application N/A work plan
Notification of FAA if airport within 5 miles (3 .3 .1) Page 1 in
application N/A
HYDROLOGIC DATA (3 . 2 .2)
Surface water features within 2 miles (3 .2 .2 (A) )
Page 1 in application see attachment
*Summarize The Saint Vrain Creek lies approximately 270 feet immediately
south of the proposed study area (see Figure 3 in work plan)
Depth to and thickness of perched zones and uppermost aquifer
(3 .2 .2 . (B) ) Page 1 in application
*Summarize Allu ial depos s a e st'ma d o Va y tween 90 and 50 feet.
in t.hir•kness and overlies the Laramie-Fnx Hills fnrmatinn
JANUARY 1994 Page 3 of 6
04/06/99 16:08 FAX 3037595355 _ CDP (j005
Ground water wells within one mile of site boundary (3 . 2 . 2. (C) )
Page / in application Appendix A work plan, pg. 2 Work plan
Hydrologic properties of perched zones and uppermost aquifer
(3 . 2 .2. (D) ) Page / in application -,E£ (avrf Ce7TE2
Perched Zone Upper Aquifer
Name
Unconfined/confined unconfined
Hydraulic conductivity (cm. /sec) estimated at 0 n9n
Hydraulic gradient (ft. /ft. ) tn he determined
Porosity, (Percent %) tn be determined
Flow direction estimated N 40 degrees W
Potentiometric surface (ft,bgs) 4- 10'
Transmissivity (cm2/sec) tn }le determined
Storativity, S to he estimated
Site location in relation to the base floodplain of nearby drainages
(3 .2 .2. (E) ) Page / in application page 4 of USR
Potential for impacts to existing surface and ground water quality
(3 .2 .2 . (F) ) Page f in application purpose of the proposal -See tables of
leaching studies
Existing quality of ground water beneath the. proposed facility
(3 .2 .2 . (G) ) Page t in application Appendix A of Wnrk Plan and Attachment
to this checklist
ENGINEERING DATA (3 . 2 .3 . )
Daily and intermediate cover material; type, quantity, and location
(3 .2 . 3 . (1) ) Page / in application < 1 feet gnil
Liner and final cover material; type, quantity, and location
(3 .2 . 3 . (2) Page / in application N/A
Maps and plans drawn to a conveniently readable scale showing the
following information (3 . 2 . 3 . (3) ) :
(a) Location and depth of cut for liners Page # in application Fig 3
(b) Daily, intermediate, and final cover Page / in application pig -4
(c) Location and depths of proposed fill and processing Page / in
application page 10 Work plan
(d) Location, dimensions, and grades of all surface water diversion
structures Page / in application N/A
(e) Locations and dimensions of all surface water containment
structures Page / in applicationFig. 3 Aerial photo in USR application
JANUARY 1994 Page 4 of 6
04/06/99 16:09 FAX 3037595355 GDP V]006
(f) Spatial distribution of engineering, geologic, and hydrologic
data; relation to proposed facility Page / in applicationSCE (bvfizz,crTZZ
(g) Location of all proposed facility structures and access roads Page
f in application page 2 TJSR
(h) Location of all proposed monitoring points for surface water,
ground water, explosive gases Page i in application Fig 3 work plan
(i) Final contours and grades of the fill surface after closure Page 1
in application Page / in application NA
(j) Location of fencing Page # in application ,JR
(k) Location of each discrete phase of development Page # in
application NIA
(1) Design details of the final cap, liner, and leachate collection
system Page / in application 0
Construction details for all proposed monitoring points for (3 . 2. 4) :
•Surface water quality Page f in application Appendix B page 1 Work Plan
•Ground water quality Page f in application Appendix A
•Explosive gases Page / in application N/A
Liner design components (3 .2 . 5 .A)
(1) Barrier layer hydraulic conductivity N/A cm/sec
Page / in application
(2) Barrier layer thickness N/A feet
Page / in application N/A
(3) Barrier layer porosity % (If available, for HELP model)
Page f in application
(4) Barrier layer slope N/A feet/foot
Page / in application
(5) Maximum design hydraulic head on barrier layer N/A inches
Page / in application
(6) Distance to relevant point of compliance (<=150 m) feet
Page 1 in application to he established
(7) Distance and characteristics, including quality, of the uppermost
aquifer or monitored unit Page f in application sEE gnncwme, r '1
(8) Climatic factors Page / in application N A
(9) Estimated volume, physical characteristics, and chemical
characteristics of the leachate Page f in application Tables 2-6 work
(10) Chemical compatibility of the barrier layer to estimated leachate plan
chemical characteristics Page # in application IJ/R
(11) The distance ground water beneath the site would flow during the
facility's operating life and post-closure care period Wp feet
(12) The distance to domestic wells or springs shown to tap the
uppermost aquifer downgradient of the site feet
Barrier layer type (Section 3 . 2 .5. (C) ) Page i# in application
• Summarize N/A
JANUARY 1994 Page 5 of 6
04/06/09 16: U0 PAX JOS/00b3bb UUt' 4007
Leachate collection and removal systems (3 .2.5. (D) ) Page # in
application N/A
• Summarize
Surface water control systems (3.2 . 6) Page / in application N/A
Provision for as-built construction documentation (3 . 2.7) Page # in
application N/A
Quality assurance and quality control plan (3 . 3 .3) Page / in
application Section 4.5 Work Plan
Cover material requirements (3 .3.4) Page / in application N/A
Soil balance calculations (3.3 .5) Page # in application N/A
Water availability (3 .3 . 6) Page / in application N/A
Leachate and landfill gas condensate management (3 . 3 . 7) Page # in
application N/A
Recordkeeping (2.4, 3.4) Page # in application N/A
Waste volumes ( )
Water monitoring ( )
Gas monitoring ( )
Approved operational plan ( )
Construction as-built ( )
Operation variances ( )
Training program ( - )
Special waste program ( )
Ground water monitoring plan (2 . 2) Page # in application Appendix B,C
page 10 of workplan
Explosive gas monitoring (2 . 3) Page ,/ in application N/A
Closure plan (3 .5, 2.5) Page # in application to be determined
Post-closure care and maintenance (3 . 6, 2 . 6) Page # in
application N/A
Financial assurance plan (1. 8) Page / in application See attached letter
JANAURY 1994 Page 6 of 6
ATTACHMENT A
PRECIPITAION AND WATER QUALITY DATA
http://ccc.atmos.colostate.edo!- bin/mlydb.pl
Monthly Climatic Data for GREELEY UNC for years 1995 - 1997
Station - 53553 Latitude - 4025 Longitude - 10442 Elevation - 4650
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
Monthly mean temperature.
Ave 27. 6 34. 0 41. 4 46. 5 57. 0 67.7 73. 5 72. 9 63. 5 51. 0 38. 6 32 . 4 50. 5
Max 30 .3 35 .9 44.3 50.4 59 .7 69 .7 74.5 75.4 66.0 51.7 42 . 1 33 .0 50 . 6
Year 1995 1995 1997 1996 1997 1996 1997 1995 1997 1996 1995 1995 1996
Min 25 .3 32.7 38.4 44. 5 51 . 6 64.0 72 .9 71.2 62 .0 50 .2 36.4 31 .2 50.3
Year 1997 1997 1996 1997+ 1995 1995 1995 1997 1996 1995 1997 1997 1995
Count 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Monthly mean maximum temperature.
Ave 39 .9 46.7 56 .2 59 . 5 69 .3 81 . 8 88. 6 88.0 77 .5 65.7 51.1 44.1 64. 0
Max 42 . 5 49 .2 61.2 64.8 74.1 84.7 90.2 91.6 80.2 66 .2 55 .8 46 .3 64.7
Year 1995 1995 1997 1996 1997 1996 1997 1995 1997 1996 1995 1996 1996
Min 36.2 42 .8 52 .4 56 .5 60 . 9 77 .1 87 .0 84. 6 76.1 65 .2 48 .1 41.0 63 .7
Year 1997 1997 1996 1995 1995 1995 1996 1997 1995 1995 1997 1997 1995
Count 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Monthly mean minimum temperature.
Ave 15 . 3 21 .3 26 . 6 33 . 5 44.6 53 . 6 58 .4 57 .8 49 .5 36.3 26. 1 20.6 37 .0
Max 18.2 22 . 6 28 .0 36 . 0 46 .4 55 .3 59 .3 59 .2 51.7 37 .2 28 .4 21 .4 37 .3
Year 1995 1997 1995 1996 1996 1997 1996 1995 1997 1996 1995 1997 1997
Min 13 .3 18 .9 24.4 31 . 9 42 .2 50 .9 57 . 1 56.4 47 .7 35.3 24. 8 19. 5 36.6
Year 1996 1996 1996 1997 1995 1995 1995 1996 1996 1995 1997 1996 1996
Count 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Total monthly precipitation.
Ave 0. 55 0. 48 0. 61 1. 67 2.73 2. 66 1. 80 1.28 1. 81 1.00 0.44 0.14 15 .18
Max 0 . 82 0.88 0.94 2 . 85 4.13 3 .99 2 . 54 2 .97 2 .86 2 .07 0 .46 0 .32 17 .05
Year 1997 1995 1996 1995 1995 1995 1996 1997 1995 1997 1995 1997 1995
Min 0 . 06 0 .08 0 .44 0.67 1.61 1 . 65 0 . 57 0.23 0 .83 0.44 0.41 0.00 12 .35
Year 1995 1996 1995 1996 1997 1996 1995 1995 1997 1996 1996 1996 1996
Count 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Total monthly snowfall.
Ave 8 .0 5 . 8 5 .5 6 . 9 0 .0 0.0 0.0 0 .0 1.7 9 .7 4 . 8 1 .7 44.1
Max 13 .0 9 .7 5 . 6 10.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 .0 20.2 5.8 3 .5 59 .2
Year 1997 1995 1995 1995 1997+ 1997+ 1997+ 1997+ 1995 1997 1995 1997 1997
Min 0.5 0 .7 5. 5 4 .0 0 . 0 0.0 0.0 0 .0 0.0 3 . 0 3 . 5 0 .0 29 .9
Year 1995 1996 1997+ 1996 1997+ 1997+ 1997+ 1997+ 1997 1996 1997 1996 1996
4/8/99 10:47 AM
Water Quality of Unconsolidated Alluvial Deposits
Boulder - Fort Collins - Greeley Area
Varra Coal Ash Burial Project
Weld County, Colorado
CGRS Project No. 1-135-2755
Number of Number of Samples where
Constituent Units Standard -Range Samples standard was exceeded
Dissolved Solids mg/L 500 53-6,570 178 161
Dissolved Arsenic ug/L 50 < 1-5 89 0
Dissolved Chloride mg/L 250 .4-1,100 295 2
Dissolved Fluoride mg/L 1.8 .2-5 145 12
Dissolved Iron ug/L 300 <1-16,000 164 15
Dissolved Manganese ug/L 50 < 1-920 92 14
Dissolved Magnesium mg/L 125 1.9-510 170 30
Dissolved Nitrite (plus
nitrate as nitrogen) mg/L 10 .00-73 289 43
Dissolved Selenium ug/L 10 < 1-100 94 15
Dissolved Sulfate mg/L 250 5.9-3,640 180 136
Hardness, as calcium
carbonate mg/L None 31-3,540 177 N/A
Hillier and Schnider, 1972. Well Yields and Chemical Quality of Water, Boulder-Fort Collins-Greeley Area, Colorado.
US Geological Survey Miscellaneous Series, Map 1855-J.
Hello