DSHW-1997-002968 - 0901a06880158f0b

DEFENSE AND LAUNCH VEHIWES DIVISION
P.O. BOX 689
BRIGHAM CITY, UT 84302-0689
801-863.3511
8 May 1997
W110:FY97:53
Mr. Dennis R. Downs, Executive Secretary
State of Utah
Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste
288 N. 1460 W.
P.O. Box 144880
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4880
Dear Mr. Dowois
SUBJECT: Response to Comments on
Revised pages to the Closure Plan are also
replace pages up to and including 25.
THMOKOL
AEROSPACE & iNDUSIRIAL TECHNOlOGIf S
^f 12 my
Closure Plan for Old Open Buming Sites at M-225
Thiokol received comments from your office on the M-225 Closure Plan on 18 March 1997.
These comments were reviewed, and a meeting was held with Mr. JefF Vandel and Mr. Bill
Wagner to discuss our responses. Through this discussion, the process was expedited and a
consensus was reached. Our responses an; included in the enclosed attachment.
included to replace those in your copy. Please
We request final approval ofthe Plan so that is can be implemented this spring.
Questions on this submittal should be addressed to Paul Hancock at 863-3344.
Sincerely
A. K. Lemon, Manager
Facilities, Maintenance & Waste Managerr|ent
AKL/bms
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON
BURN SITES
THIOKOL
THE M-225 OB/OD FACILITY OLD
CLOSURE PLAN
CORPORATION
Ma)
1.0 Introduction
A minor correction is needed in the las
Solid and Hazardous Wastes Committee" with Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Control
7,1997
paragraph ofthis section. Please replace "Utah
Board.
This correction has been made.
1.4 Waste Characterization
In this section it is stated that the possi]?le hazardous contaminants, from previous
activities at the M-225 facility, are listc d in Table 1.4. It appears that this list is
incomplete. Compounds that were reported to be bumed at M-225. but do not appear in
the list include RDX. beryllium, cadmium, aluminum, molybdenum and silver. Please
add these compounds to Table 1.4. or provide a justification for why they should not be
included in the table.
11 RDX has been added to the list and wi
Silver has also been added. We do no:
to or treated in the M-225 buming grounds
the previous investigation, however, it
knowledge ofany disposal. Initial infcjrmation
indicated that beryllium propellant resipue
subsequent investigations have shown
nature of the propellant it was treated alt
building M-243). The plan has been modified
not included because it is not a hazardous
nature, it is not determined to be a concem
other metals are routinely reported. Thiese
2.1 Closure Performance Standard
be analyzed using the same method as HMX.
have record of beryllium or cadmium being sent
These compounds may have been listed in
was part of a complete metal analysis rather than
(when the closure plan was first written)
was treated at the M-225 site, however,
hat this was not he case. Due to the unstable
a safer more accessible site (SMUM #20, near
to reflect this information. Aluminum is
waste constituent, also due to it's ubiquitous
to the enviroiunent. Under ICP metal analysis
will be available upon request.
As in section 1.0. "Utah Solid and Hazardous Wastes Committee" needs to be replaced
with Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board
This correction has been made.
contamination exists at M-225. the site
2.2 Decision Matrix
According to the Decision Matrix shov/n in Figure 2.2. if it is determined that extensive
will be closed with the contamination in place and
post-closure activities would ensue. Tliis matrix doesn't include the possibility that
corrective action may be required baseil on the level of risk present at the site. The level
of risk which requires corrective action is outlined in R315-101-6(e).
The Decision Matrix has been modified to better clarify this possibility
4.1 Previous Investigation
In the second sentence ofthe second pe:
units were sampled and found not to contain significant levels of hazardous constituents.
ragraph ofthis section, it is stated that the old
The Division disagrees with this staten ent because the previous investigation did not
adequately demonstrate the nature and extent ofthe contamination. This is the objective
ofthe additional sampling. Please eithi;r revise or remove the statement referred to
above. In addition, it appears that approval ofthe azide pit excavation was given in order
to facilitate the investigation ofthe extent ofcontamination
This statement has been revised.
4.2.1 Shallow Boring Program
It is stated in this section that the location ofthe proposed background bore hole is shown
in Figure 4.2.1. The proposed location ofthe bore hole is not shown in this figure.
The figure has been revised to include the background bore hole location.
It is also stated in this section that each boring will be advanced to a depth of 20 feet.
This depth was selected, it is reported. l)ecause any contamination present is expected to
be found within this interval (based on soil characteristics and other factors). The burial
ofthe old units with fill material during
bore hole depth of 20 feet beneath the old ground surface (prior to filling) should be
adequate. However, since the depth of fill material is not addressed, the depth of
characterization provided by 20 foot bore holes is unknown. In addition, the depth ofthe
the upgrade ofthe facility is not addressed. A
azide pit excavation needs to be address ed for the same reason.
Twenty feet depth was chosen because
greater than 20 feet depth at an operatin|g
concems may limit excavation to less
to indicate this intent.
i)f the physical constraints of removing soil to
facility of relatively small dimension. Safety
than 20 feet depth. Section 4.2.1 has been modified
It is reported that the bore hole soil samples will be analyzed for the constituents listed in
Table 4.2.1. Based on the information that Thiokol has provided on the materials that
were bumed at the old units, it appears that there are some constituents that should be
added to this list. The constituents that should be added are: RDX. beryllium, cadmium,
and silver. In addition, the pH ofthe soil samples should be measured in order to fully
characterize the samples.
Please see the answer to comment 1.4. We will measure the soil pH in two samples at
one ofthe bore holes in each pit, one at the surface ofthe native soil and one at the five
foot interval.
Will the soil samples be analyzed on-site at Thiokol's analytical laboratory? If so. is
the laboratory certified for all ofthese constituents?
The samples will be analyzed on-site. Thiokol's analytical laboratory is certified for all
constituents listed for analysis in the plan. A copy ofthe latest State ofUtah certification
for Thiokol Environmental Laboratory is included as an attachment.
In the second to last sentence ofthis section, it is stated that the locations ofthe soil
borings will be determined by using a random number generator and the grids on Figure
4.2.1. Ifthe old bum units can still be accurately located, it is the Division's opinion that
off-setting the previous bore holes at each unit would be a more effective method for
characterizing the site. If. however, the old units can not be accurately located, randomly
selecting the bore hole locations as proposed would be appropriate.
Thiokol believes the random selection of borehole locations within the known pit
locations is appropriate to preserve the representativeness ofthe sampling data.
However, the sampling grids have been modified to insure that the borehole location is
within the pit boundaries.
In regard to the grids in Figure 4.2.1 that may be used to select random locations for the
bore holes: there is no scale on the figure. Please provide a scale for the Figure or report
what the distance will be between the proposed grid lines.
The figure has been revised to include the scale for proposed grid lines.
Based on the information that the Division currently has, it appears that additional
characterization ofthe azide pit may not be necessary. Additional data from the previous
investigation and corrective action is needed, however, before a risk-based closure with
no fiirther action could be approved. The data needed includes: the depth ofthe azide pit
excavation, all ofthe volatile organic compound (VOC) data for the azide pit bore hole
samples (we're missing trichloroethene among others), pyridine data from the bore hole
samples, and VOC and metal data from the confirmation samples (if it exists). If it is
determined that additional sampling ofthe azide pit is not necessary, the Division would
suggest utilizing the 2 bore holes plarmed for the pit somewhere else (the detonation pit
for example).
The azide pit excavation varied from 8-10 feet deep. The Method 8240 VOC data
(including trichloroethene) for the original boreholes ofthe azide pit were submitted to
the DSHW on 15 April 1997. This data indicated the constituent of concem was pyridine
(and azide). Confirmation sampling was accomplished using method 8270, which is
more sensitive and appropriate for pyridine analysis than 8240. Metal conformation
analyses were not performed because anomalous metal values were not found in the
borehole sampling. Thiokol believes both ofthe boreholes planned for the Azide pit
should remain at the pit as additional confirmation samples.
4.2.2 Statisfical Methods
Due to the possibility that the soil below one ofthe old bum units (the composite pit for
example) is contaminated while the soil under the other units is clean, pooling the data
collected from the same stratum at each unit would not be appropriate. Each unit will
have to be compared to the background data separately. Since samples from different
units can not be pooled to make comparisons with background data, the number of
samples available for comparisons is reduced to two per stratum per unit (unless the
previous bore hole samples are used). In addition, under the proposed closure plan, only
one sample per stratum would be available to use as background data (again unless the
previous background data is used). Ifthe ANOVA technique is going to be used, more
samples are needed in order to make meaningfiil comparisons. Ifthe previously collected
background data were used, and possibly the previous data collected from each unit, and
the four strata are pooled together (from each unit and the background holes) the
ANOVA technique could be used on the pooled data.
Thiokol proposes pooling data from the two boreholes ofeach unit rather than from each
strata and comparing this with pooled data from the two background boreholes (1990 and
1997). In many cases this will be sufficient to perform ANOVA comparisons.
Based on the previous analytical data, it appears there's a good chance that at least 50%
ofthe sample results will be non-detect. Please include in your response an outline ofthe
procedures that will be followed ifthe test of proportions or control chart (including the
type) statistical methods are used.
Thiokol agrees that there is a high probability that many ofthe sample data will be less
than the detection level. In this case, values of constituents will be assigned a value of
one-half the detection level, and ANOVA will be performed. A visual illustration of
these relationships may also be prepared.
4.2.3 Risk Assessment
There is a typographical error in this secfion. Please replace R315-105 with R315-101 in
the first and second sentences.
This has been corrected.
4.2.4 Reporting Data
Thiokol is proposing that the results of Phase I. the investigative phase, be submitted
in the Closure Report after Phase II. Closure Action, is complete. The Division
recommends that the bore hole data be submitted for review before a closure action (or no
action) is taken.
Section 3.6 has been changed to better clarify the reporting procedures to the division
after Phase I is completed.
It appears that there are a few parameters and methods that should be added to Table
4.2.2 in this section. The parameters are: RDX and HMX (suggested method 8330): lead,
beryllium, cadmium, and silver (suggested method 6010. TCLP would not be
appropriate): pyridine (suggested method 8260) and sodium azide (method may vary). If
the bum units at M-225 are closed in accordance with the risk-based closure standards.
the Division recommends that Thiokol ensures that the method detection limits are
adequate (low enough) for all ofthe analytes before the analysis is done. This must be
done so it can be shown that the levels detected do not present a risk to human health or
the environment.
Please refer to the response for section 1.4 conceming additional analytical parameters.
The method detection limits for the parameters in a soil matrix are adequate for the
closure according to residential risk based standards.
4.3 Phase II Closure
In paragraph 1 ofthis section it is stated "ifno statistically significant hazardous waste
constituents above background are detected or constituents below risk-based levels are
detected in the soil, then the site will be closed with no ftirther actions." What land use
scenario will these levels be based on? Will standard default parameters for residential
land use be used?
The statement has been modified to clarify that closure will be to residential parameters.
In paragraphs 2 and 3 "R315-105" should he replaced with R315-101.
This statement has been corrected.
4.3.1 Closure With No Continued Action
As mentioned in section 4.2.2 above, an ANOVA may not be appropriate for the data
generated from sampling the separate units at M-225. Therefore, the use of "statistically
significant" results may not apply.
Please see response to Section 4.2.2.
4.3.2 Closure by Excavation of Wastes
It is stated in the third paragraph that the location ofthe background bore hole is
identified in Figure 4.2.1. The location ofthe bore hole is not shown on this figure.
The figure has been revised to include the scale for proposed grid lines.
4.3.3.4 Groimdwater Monitoring Well Installation
If groundwater monitoring is necessary. Thiokol's proposal to use well X-4 and the
down gradient springs will have to be evaluated.
Thiokol appreciates UDSHW's willingness to consider the proposed approach.
4.3.4 Post Closure
It is stated in this section that the post-closure plan, if necessary, will comply with the
requirements that apply to surface impoundments. The post-closure plan may need to
comply with the post-closure requirements that apply to landfills if hazardous waste or
waste constituents are left in place above risk-based levels, and it is shown that
groundwater has been impacted by past activites at M-225.
The nature ofthe old M-225 pits more closely resembles surface impoundments than
landfills, and the closure requirements for surface impoundments is perhaps more
appropriate than landfill requirements. The units may contain contaminated soils but no
landfill type materials are present in the pits.
5.3 Soil Sampling and Analysis
It is stated in this section that fifty two samples and one field blank will be analyzed. The
Division generally suggests 1 trip blank and 1 duplicate sample be analyzed for every 10
to 20 samples to ensure QA/QC. The cost estimate may need to be revised to account for
additional duplicate and field blank samples.
Thiokol will increase the munber of duplicates taken to 3. Since these are soil samples it
is difficult, or of little value to take various types ofsoil blanks that are meaningful
especially for metals. The SW846 states that" a universal blank matrix does not exist for
solid samples, and therefore, no matrix is used." We do find however, that since there
can be interferences or false posifives with natural soils there is value in taking
duplicates and background soils as QC checks for most parameters.
fiPR 02 '97 l,l:48flM THIOKOL R&D
Department
of Health
DIVISION OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
AND LABORATORY SERVICES J
DEC 06 1996
State of'Utah
p. 2/7
MiobadO. Leavitt
Governor
RodL.BeUt
Executive Director
Charles D. Brokopp, Dr. PiH.
Director
DENNIS J FZFS PHS
THIOKOL SNVIROMMENTAL IAB
M/S 245 PO BOX 707
BRIGHAM CITY UT a4302'0707
RECEIVED
DEC t 2 1996
Thiokol Snvlfonmental
Laboratory
Fraser Laboratory
46 North Medical Drive
Salt Lake City, Utah 84113-1106
l^lepbone: [phone]
Fax: (SOl) 684-8486
cusromer ID:
Account NOI
THIO
8018633524
On the basis of your most recent audit results and compliance with the
SLOP requiremente> tha laboratory listed ie certified for envitonine^tal,
nionitoring under the Safe Drinking Na^er Act and authorized to|perfbrm the
following analytes, oi groups ]ofi analytea(by oethodi 'f i y
CADNIU/4
CHROHIIIH 200.
HETALS
XNTIMOKY 200.9
ARSENIC 200.7A
ARSENIC 200,9^
BARIUM 200.7
BERYLLlUH 200.7
200.9
.7
CHROMIUM 200.9
COPPER 200.7
COPPER 200.9
'•"•iRWli^ 200.7 ;••"•:
LEAD 200.9
MANGANESE 200.7
MERCURY 245.1
HICKEL 200.7
SELENIUM 200.9
SILVER 200.7
* THALLIUN 200.9
ZINC SCO.7
MINERALS
ALKALl'^ITY 310.1
CALCIL:-: 200.7
CHLORIpS 300.0
CONDUCVIVITY 120.1
0-PH0tip;4ATE 300.OA
SODIUM 200.7
NUTRIENTS
FLUORIDE 300.0
FLUORIDE 360.2
NITRAT& 300.OA
NITRATE/NITRITE 300.OA
NITRITE 300.OA
SULFATE 37S.4
MISCELLANEOUS
FOAKtiNS AQEMTli; «2S.1
PH 150.1
TD6-S0I.IDS '>60.1
TURSICITY ISO.I
ORGAN :CC UNRECiULATEO
BASE KEUTKAL-ACIDS 52S.1 - UN'
CAR3AMA7E0 ^21.1 - UN
CHL0R:I'JATED PI^STICIDES SOS-UN
VOC "J 324.2 - UN
ORGANIC:: nuai':j:-:20
BASE/»SU"fy,L£;';4CID8 S2S-1-RG
CARBAIHiTlia S31.1 - RG
CHLOR:'!«£ATfi: ?E37ICISE3 308-Rl
PCS soa ANij yasA - RG
VOC'S :;24.S - SG
I
* provisioiai certification
This labcjratory's certification ie effective NOV 2i 1996.
verify the moa: jurrent certificate letter for the
The expiration li^ce for thfs leboratory's certification fs APR 30 'i'i^?3. The Utah i
Enviroranntal Lniuratery Certification Prosram (ELCP^^e^@^^f;|^i^U.f-.-it3 and satalisers to
•iiUI4,M,^r.%%N Pleasa call 801-584-8469.
Mi^
^!3II^
fiPR 02 '97 li:49firi THIOKOL R&D p ^^y
Page Two
THIOKOL ENVIRONMENTAL LAB
DEC 06 1996
Safe Drinking Water Act
The analytes or groupa of analytes by method which a laboratory is
authorised to perforin at any given time will be those indic&ted in "bhe
most recent certificate letter. The most rsoent certification letter
supersedes all previous eartification os authorization letters- AiV/
discrepancies must be documented an.i. notice raceivcsd by this Bureau
within IS days of receipt. The certification v^ill b@ i^ecalled in the
event that your Laboratory's certification is revoked.
Respectfully,
r Charles .;jrokopp, Or. P.H.
Oirector
ce. Utar. Department of Environmental Quality
Kevin W. Brown - Division of Drinkirig Water
Oennis Downs - Division of solid and Hazardous Wasts
Don A. Ostler - Divieion of Water Quality
U.S. BPA Region viii QAO
The expiratfo,-i date fer this laboratory's certification is APR 30 1998. The Utah .
Environmental Laboratory Certification Proaram (ELCP) encourages ei;ents an^ data users to
verify the meat current certificate letter for the authorized method. Please call 801-584-8469.
fiPR 02 '97 ll:49fiM THIOKOL R&D P. 4/7
Utah
Department
of Health
l;l'>-!S:OV 1>1-' L'l'IIJUMIOKiOY
ASr> I..\»OR.vTOR.Y )5EH\'lc;I!S
AUG 27 1996
State ofUtah
Michael O. Leavitt
Oiivpmor
RodUBetit
Bxc-MtivB Diiwiiir
Charles a Brokopp, I>r. Rii
nin,i.ti;r £cew£^
Bureau of Laboratory Improvement
4(> N'.!Vth Medical Drive
Suit Lake Citv, Utah S-iUo-llOS
Tek'phune;l801i5S4.84(59
Fii.\;i801i3?4-8501
OENNIS J FIFE PHD
THIOKOL ENVIRONMENTAL LAB
M/S 245 PO BOX 707
BRIGHAM CITY UT 84302-0707
SW^' «96
•^^^^i
Customer ID:
Account No: ,
THIO
8018633524
On the basis of your rscst recent audit results and compliance with the
ELCP requirements, the laboratory listed ie certified for environmental
monitoring under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and authorised
to perform the following analytes, or groupa of analytes by methodj
METALS j I
ALUMINUM 601OA
ANTIMONY 6010A
ARSENIC 601OA
ARSENK 7060
BARIUM 6010A
BERYLLIUM 6010A
CADMIUM 601QA
CADMIUM 7131
CHROMIUM 60IOA
COBALT 601OA
COPPER 601OA
IRON 601OA
LEAD 601OA
LEAD 7421
MANGANESE 6010A
MERCURY 7471
MOLYBDENUM 601OA
UIC!CSL"6C1QA
SELENIUM 6010A
SILVER 6010A
THALLIUM 6010A
THALLIUM 7841
VANADIUM 60IOA
ZINC 6010A
MINERALS
BORON 6010
CALCIUM 6010A
SODIUM 601QA
MISCELLAKEOUS
AROMATIC VOLATILE ORG 8020
CHLORIDE 9056
CHLORIDES 92S1
CHLORIDSS 92S2
CHLORINATED HERBICIDES Q1S0B
CYANIDE TOTAL/AMENABLE 9012
FLUORIDE 9:S6
IGNITA3!L1"',' 1010
NITRAT; 9054
NITRATE 9200
NITRITE 905i
OIL 6 GilSASi 9070
ORQANOCHl. ?1'3T 3080
PCB aoso
PH 9Ql>0
Pf. 9045
PHENOLICS 9J6a
SJMIVOLATUiiS 82703
SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE 9050
SULFATi 905.i .
SULFATES 9033
. SUL f I SSS '}:.i;3
TCL? !^!:TA: 1311
TOLP SiMi-VOLATILE 1311
. TCLP V3LA-;„£ 1311
TOTAL ORG,;;.;: CARBON 9060
The expiration date for this laboratory's certiflcsrfor, is A?R 30 '9?S. The Uiah
Envfronmental Laboratory Certification Program (ELCPj-fe.iccursses iLients snd data users to
verify the most current certificate letter for the authorized mathod. Plesse call 801-586-8469.
fiPR 02 '97 ll:50ftM THIOKOL R&D ) P.5/7
Page Two
THIOKOL ENVIRONMENTAL LAB
AUG 27 1996
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
HAGNESIUM 6010A VOLATILES 8260A
POTASSIUM 6010A
This laboratory's certification is effective AUG 26 1996. ,
The analytes or groups of analytes by method which a laboratory is
authorized to perform at any given time will be those indicated in the
most recent certificate letter. The most recent certification letter
supersedes all previous certification or authorization letters. Any
discrepancisB must ba documented and notice received by this Bureau
within 15 days of receipt. The certification will be recalled in the
event that your Laboratory's certification is revoked.
Respectfully,
Charles Brokopp, Dr. P.H.
Director
oe, Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Kevin w. Brown - Division of Drinking Water
Dennis Downs - Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste
Don A. Ostler - Division of Water Quality
U.S. EPA Region VIII QAO
The expiration date for this laboratory's certification ts APR 30 1998. The Utah
Envirornientel.Laboratory Certification Program (ELCP) encourages clients and data users to
verify the most current certificate letter for the authorized method. Plaase call 801-5B4-8469.
APR 02 '97 ll:50ftM THIOKOL R&D
State ofUtah
p. 6/7
iUtah
Department
of Health
;);\ISI(JN or l;PU)):.viiu[,oc;v
ANP I.J\1JOR.\TORY SI;R.VICnS
AUG 27 1996
Mich^ielO. Leavitt
GiivcTTior
fiodLBetit
ExwuSvft Dilwuir
ChiirlQs D. Brokopp, X>r. P.U.
DiTWtor
DENNIS J FIFE PHD
THIOKOL ENVIRONMENTAL LAB
M/S 245 PO BOX 707
BRIGHAM CITY UT 84302-0707
RECEIVED
SEP O'I 1996
TJiickP' Hnvii'O'inQentai
Bureau of Laboratory Improvement
46 North Medical Drive
Salt Lake City, Utah 84113-1103
Telephonc;(801 ».'384.84f5i)
Fax;!801) 584-8501
Customer ID:
Account Mo:
THIO
8018633524
On the basis of your most recent audit results and ccmpliance with the
ELCP requirements, the laboratory listed is certified for environmental
monitoring under the Clean Water Act and authorized to perform the
following analytes, or groups of analytes by method:
HETALS
ALUMINUM 200,7
ANTIMONY 200.7
ANTIMONY 204.2
ARSENIC 200.7
ARSENIC 206.2
BARIUM 200.7
BERYLLIUM 200.7
CADMIUM 200.7
CHROMIUM 200.7
COBALT 200.7
COPPER 200.7
IRON 200.7
LEAD 200.7
LEAD 239.2
MANGANESE 200.7
MERCURY 245.1
NOLYBOENUM 200.7
NICKEL 200.7
SELENIUM 200.7 .
SELENIUM 270.2
SILVER 200.7
THALLIUM 200.7
TIN 200.7
VANADIUM 200.7
ZINC 200.7
MINERALS
ACIDITY 305.1
NUTRIENTS
ANMONIA 350.1
AMMONIA 350.3
NITRATE/NITRITE 353,2
NITRITE 354.1
ORTHOPHOSPHATE 365.1
ORTHOPHOSPHATE 365.2
PHOSPHORUS 365.2
PHOSPHORUS 365.6
SULFATE 375.^
• TICM 351.i
RESIDU:-
• RESIDUE fILTERABLE TDS 160.1
RESIDUE MONPILT TSS 160.2
RESIDUE TOTAL 160.3
DEMAND
BOD 405.1
COO HACH
TOC ilS.1
ORGANIC
BA5E/HEUTRA> S i ACIDS 625
ORG COMP NONPEST 601
ORG COMP NONPEST 602
ORGAi^JOCHLOR
PCS 403
PEST 608
The expiration date for this laboratory's certification is APR 3C 1998. The Utah
Environnental Laboratory Certification Pregrani (ELCP) encourages clients and dats users to
verify the most current certificate letter for the authorized method, please call 801•584-8669.
APR 02 '97 li:50flM THIOKOL R&D p. 7/7
Page Two
THIOKOL ENVIRONMENTAL LAB
AUG 27 1996
Clean Water Act
ALKALINITY 310.1
BORON 200.7
CALCIUM, 200.7
CHLORIDE 325.2
FLUORIDE 360.2
HARDNESS 130.2
HAGNESIUM 200.7
PH 150.1
POTASSIUM 200.7
SODIUM 200.7
SPECIFIC CaNOUCTA.NCE 120.1
SULFIDE'376.1
PURGEABLE AROMATIC 602
PURGEABLE HALOCARBONS 601
PURGEABLES 624
INORGANIC
CL TTL RES 4500CL G
'•• COLOR 110.2
CYANIDE 335.3
OtL ANO GREASE 413.1
PHENOLS 420.2
SURFACTANTS 425.1
TURBIDITY 180.1
* Provisional Certification
This laboratory's certification is effective AUG 26 1996.
The analytes or groups of analytes by method which a laboratory is
authorized to perform at any given time will be those indicated in the
most recent certificate letter. The most recent certification letter
supersedes all previous certification or authorization letters. Any
discrepancies must be documented and notice received by this Bureau
within 15 days of receipt. The certification will be recalled in the
event your Laboratory's certification is revoked.
Respectfully,
Charles Brokopp, Dr. P.H.
Director
cc. Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Kevin W. Brown - Division bf Drinking Water
Dennis Downs - Division of Solid and Haaardous Waete
Don A. Ostler - Division of Water Quality
U.S. EPA Region VIII QAO
The expiration date for this laboratory's certification Is APR 30 1998. The Utah
Environmental Laboratory Certification Prcgram (ELCP) v'-ncouragps clients and data usars to
verify the most current certificate letter for th« authorized method. Please call BOI-S84-B4-j9.