Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) - Laschools.org

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 8-1 Flagging Conventions for Data Evaluation and Validation of Organic Methods LAUSD, South Gate, California Quality Control Check Evaluation Flag Samples Affected Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike MS or MSD single compound: Affected compound in native sample Duplicates (MS/MSD) %R UCL but < 200% J positive results Affected compound in native sample % R No qualification for non-detects MS/MSD m/ > 10% but < LCL J positive results Affected compound in native sample UJ non-detects MS/MSD % R >UCL and >200% R all positive results and non-detects All compounds in native sample If > 50% of all MS or MSD spiked compounds are out of control: R all positive results and non-detects All compounds in native sample When sample conc. is >4X spike conc. No evaluation required None RPD > control limit J positive results Affected compound in native sample No qualification for non-detects MS/MSD Surrogates If 2 or more surrogates from the same GC/MS SEMI-VOA chemical family group: %R > UCL J positive results All associated compounds in sample %R < LCL and ≥ 10% J positive results UJ non-detects All associated compounds in sample Any one < 10% J positive results R non-detects All associated compounds in sample GC Methods n/ and GC/MS VOA %R > UCL J positive results All compounds in associated sample %R < LCL and ≥ 10% J positive results UJ non-detects All compounds in associated sample %R < 10% J positive results All compounds in associated sample R non-detects Internal Standards (IS) RT change > UCL from daily CCAL o/ R all positive results and non-detects All associated compounds in sample (GC/MS) IS extracted ion area counts -50% to J positive results All compounds in associated sample +100% of last CCAL UJ non-detects Retention Time Windows Analyte peak not within RTW Report positive result as non-detect, All affected compounds (RTW) (professional judgment should be used prior to eliminating detections) Second-Column Confirmation Primary and confirmation results do not agree within a factor of 50 percent. J positive results All affected compounds Field Duplicates RPD > 35% water or soil Discuss impacts in data quality assessment report Field duplicate pair K:\Depts\Dept48\LAUSD\MSA WORK\Soil Investigation\OU 1 RAP\Appendix\Appendix H - QAPP\Tables.doc 5/7/2008 323
Table 8-1 Flagging Conventions for Data Evaluation and Validation of Organic Methods LAUSD, South Gate, California Quality Control Check Evaluation Flag Samples Affected Breakdown check (DDT) (SW8080A) Breakdown check (Endrin) (SW8080A) % Breakdown for DDT > 20% J positive DDT, DDE, and DDE results R non-detects for DDT if DDD and DDE are positive %Breakdown for Endrin > 20% J positive endrin, endrin aldehyde, and endrin ketone results R non-detects for endrin if endrin aldehyde and endrin ketone are positive Samples following the last in control standard Samples following the last in control standard a/ MS/MSD = Matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate. k/ RPD = Relative percent difference. b/ NFG = National Functional Guidelines. l/ Common lab contaminants: methylene chloride, acetone, 2-butanone, and phthalates. e/ GC/MS = Gas chromatograph/mass spectroscopy m/ %R = Percent recovery. d/ RRF = Relative response factor. n/ Number of surrogates varies with method. Pesticides and PCBs are surrogate specific e/ GC = Gas chromatography and are evaluated as independent chemical family groups. f/ RT = Retention time. o CCAL = Continuing calibration s/ RSD = Relative standard deviation h/ %D = Percent difference. i/ UCL = Upper control limit. j LCL = Lower control limit. K:\Depts\Dept48\LAUSD\MSA WORK\Soil Investigation\OU 1 RAP\Appendix\Appendix H - QAPP\Tables.doc 5/7/2008 324
Page 1 and 2:
126
Page 3 and 4:
128
Page 5 and 6:
130
Page 7 and 8:
132
Page 9 and 10:
134
Page 11 and 12:
136
Page 13 and 14:
138
Page 15 and 16:
140
Page 17 and 18:
142
Page 19 and 20:
144
Page 21 and 22:
146
Page 23 and 24:
148
Page 25 and 26:
150
Page 27 and 28:
152
Page 29 and 30:
154
Page 31 and 32:
APPENDIX G Health and Safety Plan (
Page 33 and 34:
Prepared by: Reviewed by: Approved
Page 35 and 36:
LAUSD Proposed South Region High Sc
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
• Fall Protection • Electrical
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
4.11.2 Substance Abuse and Alcohol
Page 55 and 56:
Hospital Name St. Francis Medical C
Page 57 and 58:
Personal Injury LAUSD Proposed Sout
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Date: Project or Location: Risk/Haz
Page 67 and 68:
6.1 SITE RISK ANALYSIS LAUSD Propos
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Project Name & Number: Location: Ex
Page 85 and 86:
6.4 SAFETY SYSTEMS ANALYSIS LAUSD P
Page 87 and 88:
6.7 SAFETY AND HEALTH ENFORCEMENT L
Page 89 and 90:
Contractor Name: Address: Attention
Page 91 and 92:
TABLE 6-1: HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES OF
Page 93 and 94:
TABLE 6-1: HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES OF
Page 95 and 96:
Name of Trainer: Training Subject:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
10.1.3 Level C Protection LAUSD Pro
Page 107 and 108:
Action levels for potential benzene
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
N Exhibit 12-1 SITE CONTROL ZONES P
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
14.3 SPILL REPORTING PROCEDURES LAU
Page 121 and 122:
EMERGENCY CONTACTS In the event of
Page 123 and 124:
PARSONS - LAUSD Procedures followin
Page 125 and 126:
Site-Specific Health and Safety Pla
Page 127 and 128:
ATTACHMENT 3 ACTIVITY HAZARD ANALYS
Page 129 and 130:
Parsons Activity Hazards Analysis O
Page 131 and 132:
Parsons Activity Hazards Analysis F
Page 133 and 134:
Project Name & Number: LAUSD South
Page 135 and 136:
Parsons Activity Hazards Analysis G
Page 137 and 138:
Parsons Activity Hazards Analysis G
Page 139 and 140:
Parsons Activity Hazards Analysis D
Page 141 and 142:
Parsons Activity Hazards Analysis D
Page 143 and 144:
Parsons Activity Hazards Analysis H
Page 145 and 146:
Parsons Activity Hazards Analysis H
Page 147 and 148: Parsons Activity Hazards Analysis H
Page 155 and 156: APPENDIX H Quality Assurance Projec
Page 157 and 158: new wells and from about 70 previou
Page 159 and 160: • Los Angeles Unified School Dist
Page 161 and 162: SECTION 2 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES T
Page 163 and 164: precision range from zero to the hi
Page 165 and 166: • Use of appropriate sampling pro
Page 167 and 168: Table 2-1 Requirements for Containe
Page 169 and 170: SECTION 3 FIELD DATA REDUCTION, VAL
Page 171 and 172: 3.4 FIELD DATA VALIDATION The Proje
Page 173 and 174: SECTION 5 SAMPLING PROTOCOLS Detail
Page 175 and 176: FM before sending any samples origi
Page 177 and 178: SECTION 6 FIXED-BASE LABORATORY ANA
Page 179 and 180: the reported SQLs take into account
Page 181 and 182: Table 6-2 Practical Quantitation Li
Page 189 and 190: Table 6-3 Comparison of Field and F
Page 191 and 192: SECTION 7 LABORATORY QC SAMPLES AND
Page 193 and 194: Continuing calibrations shall be co
Page 195 and 196: project-specific DQOs. A DQA will b
Page 197: Table 8-1 Flagging Conventions for
Page 201 and 202: Table 8-2 Flagging Conventions for
Page 203 and 204: SECTION 9 QA REPORTS At monthly int
Page 205 and 206: Laboratory project management and s
Page 207 and 208: SECTION 12 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE A
Page 209 and 210: SECTION 14 DATA DELIVERABLES The de
Page 211 and 212: Table 14-1 Required Laboratory Deli
Page 213 and 214: SECTION 16 SUBCONTRACT LABORATORY S
Page 215 and 216: APPENDIX A COLUMN TEST FOR DETERMIN
Page 217 and 218: specific gravity of 1 for water, th
Page 219 and 220: APPENDIX I Transportation Managemen
Page 221 and 222: Prepared by PARSONS 100 WEST WALNUT
Page 223 and 224: emoval of impacted soils. Waste tra
Page 225 and 226: Trucks entering the receiving facil
Page 227 and 228: Communication Truck drivers will ha
Page 234 and 235: Table J-1 South Region High School
Page 240 and 241: RESPONSES TO COMMENTS FROM DTSC DAT
Page 242 and 243: (9/3/08) RESPONSES TO COMMENTS FROM
Page 244 and 245: (9/3/08) between 033-PC-064 and -06
Page 246 and 247: (9/3/08) 5 Page 7-13, Section 7.5.2
Page 248 and 249:
Internal Review Draft (9/8/08) exce
Page 250 and 251:
Internal Review Draft (9/8/08) 7 A
Page 252 and 253:
OPERABLE UNIT (OU) 1 HAZARDOUS WAST
Page 254 and 255:
Sample Location Sample Date Sample
Page 257 and 258:
APPENDIX M List of Potentially Resp
show all

Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) - Laschools.org

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?