Managing Uncertainty through Better Upfront Planning and Flexible Workplans Albert Robbat, PhD Tufts University, Chemistry department Center for Field Analytical Studies and Technology Medford, Massachusetts 02155 tel 617-627-3474; [email protected]Northeast States’ Improving the Quality of Site Characterization
31
Embed
Managing Uncertainty through Better Upfront Planning and Flexible Workplans
Managing Uncertainty through Better Upfront Planning and Flexible Workplans. Northeast States’ Improving the Quality of Site Characterization. Albert Robbat, PhD Tufts University, Chemistry department Center for Field Analytical Studies and Technology Medford, Massachusetts 02155 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Managing Uncertainty through Better Upfront Planning and Flexible Workplans
Albert Robbat, PhD
Tufts University, Chemistry department
Center for Field Analytical Studies and Technology
No degradation or loss of analyte due to time delays
T y pe o f A na ly s isS ite 1
Sa m ple sS ite 2
S a m ple sSite 3
S a m p le sT o ta l Sa m ple s
A na ly ze d
P r o je cte d A ctu a l P r o je c te d A c tu a l P ro je c te d A c tua l P ro je c te d A c tua l
VO C S am p le sSc re e n ed
1 62 21 0 13 5 17 7 28 8 2 1 4 5 8 5 6 0 1
VO C S am p le sQ u a nt ifie d
42 51 36 5 8 5 9 4 9 1 3 7 1 5 8
P C B/P A H S am p le sQ u a nt ifie d
42 46 0 1 2 0 1 0 4 2 6 8
M e ta ls Sa m p le sq ua n tif ied
51 22 44 5 4 3 6 4 5 1 3 1 1 2 1
S a m p l e n u m b e r i n c l u d e s f i e l d d u p l i c a t e s .
D y n a m i c W o r k p l a n P r o j e c t e d a n d A c t u a l N u m b e r o f S a m p l e s A n a l y z e d
Projected vs Actual Number of Samples Analyzed
Traditional Approach
Off-SiteSamples Results
1. Planning Phase
2. Sample Collection 6. Decisions Made
3. Transportation
4. Lab Analysis
5. Results Returned
Characteristics- pre-planned sampling grids- off-site lab analysis- static work plans
Problems- high cost per sample- surprise results- pressure to oversample- multiple trips to field
Dynamic Workplan Approach
Planning Phase
Sample Collection Decisions Made
Field Analysis
Characteristics- Real time sample analysis- Rapid field decision making- Dynamic workplans
Advantages- Reduce cost per sample- Increase # of samples- Reduce # of field visits- Faster, better, cheaper
Requirements- Field analytical methods- Decision support in the field
Select Core Technical Team• Designate one member with authority to make final field decisions• Develop workplan “thought process and rules-to-follow” in the
field• Although in Massachusetts and Connecticut upfront buy-in is not
needed, adherence to the documented “thought process” will help insure acceptance of field data results
Develop Conceptual Model & Decision Making Framework
• Produce map depicting vadose zone and groundwater flow systems that can influence contaminant movement
• Establish DQO’s to ensure type, quantity, and quality of field data
Develop Standard Operating Procedures • Produce performance methods that support the DQO process • Document MDL’s prior to field mobilization
Systematic Planning and Dynamic Workplan
Develop Data Management Plan • Integrate chemical, physical, geological, and hydrogeological data
Develop Quality Assurance Project Plan • Define technical team/regulators responsibilities consistent with
EPA/state policy
Prepare Health and Safety Plan • Establish DQO’s to monitor worker/community safety
Systematic Planning and Dynamic Workplan
Field Requirements• Collect samples quickly
• Analyze samples quickly
• Review and report results quickly
Performance-based
PBMS/Keys to Success
Experienced, trained personnel
Data produced must provide level of assurance that it meets sufficient accuracy, precision, selectivity, sensitivity, and representativeness to meet project-specific DQO’s
Legal Defensibility, Rule 702, Determination of Reliability• technique tested, subject to peer review, accepted by scientific
community• method reproducible, with potential rate of error known
Visible & well-documented practices and procedures manuals for effective quality system
High Performance/Quality Control
Blanks, LCS, SRMs, MS, MSDs
Calibration & Continuing Calibration
Peak Integration
MDL’s
DQO’s
Data Useability
Reporting
In situ or Hand-held Vapor Analyzers• ECD, FID, PID provides signal response in seconds
Portable GC’s with Selective Detection• ECD, FID, PID provides screening data in seconds to 10’s
minutes
Field GC’s with Selective Detection• ECD, FID, PID provides semiquantitative data in 10’s of minutes
Field GC’s with Mass Spectrometry Detection• Provides semiquantitative to quantitative data in seconds to 10’s
of minutes
In situ Mass Spectrometry• Provides semiquantitative data in seconds
Immunoassay or colorimetric Kits• Provides screening data in 2-15 min
Field Analysis of Organics
eNose Detection of Volatiles
By Direct Measuring MSOr TECP-MS
50 compounds detected in 20 sec
x-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy• Provides screening to quantitative data in seconds to 10’s of minutes
Inductively Coupled Plasma/Optical Emission Spectroscopy• Provides quantitative data in minutes
Anodic Stripping Voltammetry• Provides quantitative data in minutes
Immunoassay or colorimetric Kits• Provides screening data in 2-15 min
Field Analysis of Metals
Selected Projects! Hanscom Air Force Base, Bedford, MA (Volatiles, Semi-volatiles, Metals)
! Joliet Army Amunition Plant, Joliet, IL (Explosives)
! NJ Superfund Site (Metals)
! MCAS, Yuma, AZ (Volatiles, Semi-volatiles, Metals)
! Fort Devens, Ayer, MA (Volatiles, Semi-volatiles)
! KY Pipeline Company (PCBs)
! Landfills, MA & VA (Volatiles, Semi-volatiles, Metals)