EPA/600/R-08/128 | February 2009 | www.epa.gov/ord 

Guide for Development of 

Sample Collection Plans for 

Radiochemical Analytes in 

Environmental Matrices Following 

Homeland Security Events 

Office of Research and Development 

National Homeland Security Research Center 

 

 

EPA/600/R-08/128 | February 2009 | www.epa.gov/ord 

Guide for Development of Sample 

Collection Plans for Radiochemical 

Analytes in Environmental Matrices 

Following Homeland Security Events 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

Office of Research and Development, National Homeland Security Research Center, 

Cincinnati, Ohio 45268 

Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory, 

Montgomery, Alabama 36115 

Office of Emergency Management, National Decontamination Team, 

Erlanger, Kentucky 41018 

COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION 

Alexandria, Virginia 22304-3540 

Office of Research and Development 

National Homeland Security Research Center 

 

 

Disclaimer / Acknowledgements 

Disclaimer 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development funded the 

research described here under Contract Number EP-W-06-046 to Computer Sciences Corporation. It has 

been subjected to the Agency’s review and has been approved for publication. Note that approval does 

not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views of the Agency. 

Acknowledgements 

This guide was developed collaboratively by EPA’s National Homeland Security Research Center 

(NHSRC), EPA’s Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (ORIA), and EPA’s Office of Emergency 

Management National Decontamination Team. The document team consisted of Ms. Kathy Hall 

(NHSRC, project lead), Dr. John Griggs (ORIA), and Mr. Scott Hudson, CHP (NDT). Special 

acknowledgment and appreciation is extended to Ms. Schatzi Fitz-James, Office of Emergency 

Management, Homeland Security, Laboratory Response Center, for her support of the Radiological 

Emergency Response Laboratory Network effort. 

We also wish to acknowledge the external peer reviews conducted by Mr. Bob Dye, EPA Region 7; Mr. 

Richard Poeton, EPA Region 10; Nidal Azzam, EPA Region 2; and NHSRC internal peer reviewer Mr. 

John Drake, DCMD, whose thoughtful comments contributed greatly to the quality of the guide. 

Technical Support was provided by Mr. Larry Umbaugh, Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC). 

SCP Guide ii February 2009 

 

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents 

Table of Contents 

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS................................................................................................................... V
 

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 1
 

2.0 OVERVIEW OF THE SCP DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ...........................................................................2
 

2.1 PHASE I – DATA ACQUISITION AND REQUIREMENTS DETERMINATION .......................................................3
 

2.2 PHASE II – SCP DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT..............................................................................................3
 

2.3 PHASE III – SCP IMPLEMENTATION.............................................................................................................3
 

3.0 PHASE I - SCP DATA ACQUISITION AND REQUIREMENTS DETERMINATION ...........................4
 

3.1 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES (DQOS) AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP) ........................5
 

3.2 RADIOLOGICAL AND INDUSTRIAL HEALTH AND SAFETY PLANS .................................................................5
 

3.3 INITIAL SITE INFORMATION.........................................................................................................................6
 

3.4 IDENTIFY REAL PROPERTY RADIOLOGICAL CONTAMINANTS ......................................................................7
 

3.5 IDENTIFY CONTAMINATED AREAS ..............................................................................................................7
 

3.6 IDENTIFY CONTAMINATED MEDIA ..............................................................................................................8
 

4.0 PHASE II - SCP DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................................9
 

4.1 REVIEW OF SUCCESSFUL SAMPLING PLANS ..............................................................................................11
 

4.2 DEFINING RADIOANALYTICAL LABORATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR SCP SAMPLE ANALYSIS ....................11
 

4.3 CLASSIFY AREAS BY CONTAMINATION POTENTIAL ..................................................................................12
 

4.4 SELECT BACKGROUND REFERENCE AREAS...............................................................................................12
 

4.5 IDENTIFY SURVEY UNITS ..........................................................................................................................13
 

4.6 DEVELOP A CONCEPTUAL CLEANUP MODEL OF THE SITE FOR SCP PLANNING.........................................13
 

4.7 SELECTION OF SAMPLING DESIGNS ...........................................................................................................13
 

4.8 WRITING THE SCP - CONTENT OF MAJOR ELEMENTS ...............................................................................20
 

4.8.1 Project Background ............................................................................................................................. 20
 

4.8.2 Project Organization and Responsibilities .......................................................................................... 20
 

4.8.3 Project Scope and Objectives .............................................................................................................. 21
 

4.8.4 Non-Measurement Data Acquisition .................................................................................................... 21
 

4.8.5 Field Activities – Project Sample Collection Procedures ....................................................................21
 

4.8.6 Radiological Field Measurements and Instrumentation ......................................................................22
 

4.8.7 Field Operations Documentation ........................................................................................................ 22
 

4.8.8 Sample Packaging and Shipping Requirements ...................................................................................23
 

4.8.9 Sampling Waste ................................................................................................................................... 23
 

4.8.10 Project Quality Assurance (QA) ..................................................................................................... 23
 

4.8.11 Non-Conformance/Corrective Actions............................................................................................24
 

4.8.12 SCP Appendices .............................................................................................................................. 25
 

4.9 SCP REVIEW AND APPROVAL ...................................................................................................................25
 

4.10 SCP DISTRIBUTION ................................................................................................................................... 26
 

5.0 PHASE III - SCP IMPLEMENTATION ....................................................................................................... 27
 

5.1 PERSONNEL TRAINING ..............................................................................................................................27
 

5.2 FIELD SAMPLE COLLECTION .....................................................................................................................27
 

5.3 PROJECT LIAISON ...................................................................................................................................... 27
 

5.4 SCP COMPLIANCE MONITORING ...............................................................................................................28
 

5.4.1 Project, Field, and Laboratory Audits ................................................................................................. 28
 

5.4.2 Project Activity Reports....................................................................................................................... 28
 

5.5 SITE DISPOSITION ...................................................................................................................................... 29
 

6.0 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................ 30
 

7.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................. 31
 

APPENDIX A SAMPLE COLLECTION PLAN DESIGN ELEMENTS AND DEVELOPMENT 

CHECKLIST ............................................................................................................................................................. 33
 

SCP Guide iv February 2009 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Abbreviations and Acronyms 

Abbreviations and Acronyms 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

COC Chain of Custody 

D&D Decontamination and Decommissioning 

DCGL Derived Concentration Guideline Level 

DOE	 U.S. Department of Energy 

DOT U.S. Department of Transportation 

DQO Data Quality Objective 

ERLN Environmental Response Laboratory Network 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

FRMAC Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center 

HASP	 Health and Safety Plan 

HSA	 Historical Site Assessment 

IATA International Air Transportation Association 

IMAT Incident Management Assistance Team 

MARLAP	 Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols Manual 

MARSSIM	 Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual 

MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration 

MQO Measurement Quality Objective 

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology 

PAG Protective Action Guides 

PE Performance Evaluation 

QA Quality Assurance 

QAPP	 Quality Assurance Project Plan 

QC Quality Control 

RPG Radiation Protection Group 

RSP Radiation Safety Plan 

SAM Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental Restoration Following 

Homeland Security Events (U.S. EPA) 

SCP Sample Collection Plan 

SHO	 Safety and Health Officer 

SOP Standard Operating Procedure 

SOW Statement of Work 

SCP Guide v February 2009 
Section 1.0 - Introduction 

1.0 Introduction 

The purpose of this document is to provide a framework to assist incident commanders, project 

managers, state and local authorities, contractors, and enforcement divisions in developing and 

implementing an approach for sample collection during the cleanup of an urban environment after 

a radiological homeland security event. Information in this document can be used to develop a 

systematic and integrated methodology to sample collection, which will meet data use needs and 

site disposition objectives. This document incorporates site-specific optimization processes to 

include quantitative and qualitative assessments applied at each stage of site cleanup decision 

making: from initial scoping and stakeholder outreach, to evaluation of cleanup options, to 

implementation of the chosen alternative. 

It is projected that, following initial site investigation and response, contaminated sites will be 

turned over by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Federal Radiological Monitoring and 

Assessment Center (FRMAC) to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for cleanup. 

Traditional radiological site cleanup processes may not be completely followed after a homeland 

security event because of the urgency to resume use of the affected area as soon as possible. 

The elements in this document are intended to provide a general guide for preparation of 

homeland security event-specific sample collection plans (SCPs) for the collection of 

environmental data in compliance with EPA requirements regarding quality assurance (QA), 

quality control (QC), and data quality objectives (DQOs). Additional guides may be issued to 

clarify or amend the traditional cleanup protocols. The elements can be used for developing 

SCPs for site investigation, characterization, cleanup, final status surveys to release a site, or to 

support decision making for the final disposition of the site following a homeland security 

radiological event. It is assumed that the number of SCPs required, and the details contained 

within each, is dependent on the size and complexity of the specific event site. 

This document does not provide information and instructions that are included in the following 

documents, which must be developed for each project/site in addition to an SCP: 

• Quality assurance project plan 

• Radiation safety plans and associated procedures 

• Health and safety plan and associated procedures 

The information in this document is intended to apply only to the development of SCPs for 

cleanup of real property sites contaminated with radioactive materials from a homeland security 

event. EPA’s Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental Restoration Following 

Homeland Security Events (SAM) should be reviewed for analytical methods to be used during 

laboratory analysis of specific radionuclides. EPA’s Sample Collection Procedures for 

Radiochemical Analytes in Environmental Matrices (EPA/600/S-07/001) should be reviewed for 

information regarding sample collection procedures and equipment. If additional contamination 

is present (e.g., unexploded ordnance, chemical warfare agents, biological wastes, hazardous 

chemical waste, and/or mixed waste), additional direction will be required. It will be necessary to 

develop an SCP that includes information on how to handle these materials. 

SCP Guide 1 February 2009
Section 2.0 – Overview of the SCP Development Process 

2.0 Overview of the SCP Development Process 

Figure 2.1 provides a flowchart of major SCP developmental elements and the general processes 

of project needs determination through development of sample collection plans and eventual site 

disposition. The general phases of this process are presented in Figure 2.1, specific SCP elements 

are described in this document for each phase. The user is encouraged to review the flowchart for 

each phase. Other elements, as determined in relevant documents listed in Section 6.0, may also 

be included in the SCP development process. 

Figure 2.1 

SCP Guide 2 February 2009
Section 2.0 – Overview of the SCP Development Process 

SCP Guide 3 February 2009

2.1 Phase I – Data Acquisition and Requirements Determination 

Before preparing an SCP the project should assemble a core SCP design team. Team members 

may include, but are not limited to: 

• Risk assessors 

• Statisticians 

• Technical planners 

• Health physicists 

• Radiochemists 

• Civil engineers 

• Radiological engineers 

• Health and safety specialists 

• Construction specialists 

• Public and media relations specialists 

• Regulatory specialists 

• State and local subject matter experts 

• Legal specialists 

• Incident commanders 

• On-scene coordinators 

The SCP design team must review the information provided in the Phase I section (see Section 

3.0), and perform a thorough review of all appropriate documents, including any statements of 

work (SOWs), quality assurance project plans (QAPPs), DQOs, health and safety plans (HASPs), 

radiation safety plans (RSPs), or specifications regarding the impending cleanup effort and 

disposition decision. 

2.2 Phase II – SCP Design and Development 

The SCP design team gathers the important site information obtained in Phase I and prepares the 

SCP prior to any field activities. The SCP will likely be amended or revised several times during 

cleanup. For each SCP developed, the format and content should be consistent with this 

document, regardless of the size of the project. Section 4.0 describes the general format and 

content considerations for an SCP. A good working knowledge of these elements is necessary to 

understand the type of information required and to determine if additional sources of information 

are needed. Appendix A lists the typical elements that should appear in the SCP. Specific 

elements that should be included will depend on the size and/or complexity of the cleanup 

project, and the SCP format should be modified as appropriate. 

2.3 Phase III – SCP Implementation 

An EPA approved and cleared SCP, from the Phase II process, must be in place before data 

collection activities commence. All SCP activities must be performed in compliance with the 

approved/cleared SCP and should be monitored and verified throughout implementation (See 

Section 5.0). 

While data collection activities are being performed, SCP compliance is monitored by conducting 

field, desk, and laboratory audits. SCP defined QA elements (i.e., field control samples, QA 

laboratory analyses, data assessment procedures) are also monitored to ensure SCP compliance. 

QA audits of the SCP must conform to requirements set in the QAPP. 

When all of the SCP activities are completed, an evaluation is made to determine if the site 

cleanup sampling goals and objectives have been met. If the goals and objectives have not been 

met, the SCP is reevaluated by returning to Phase II.
Section 3.0 – Phase I – SCP Data Acquisition and Requirements Determination

3.0 Phase I - SCP Data Acquisition and Requirements Determination 

To prepare an SCP, it is necessary to understand all requirements included in the project DQOs, 

QAPPs, and the site-specific requirements included in the project’s HASP and RSP as shown in 

Figure 3.1. SCP developers also must consider all available existing information regarding the 

specific site and project, including data collected during the initial response phase of the event.

SCP developers should consult with the response team to obtain information collected during the 

initial phase of the event. As time permits, the team should review data from previous 

investigations, and/or information regarding site constraints. Before preparing an SCP, 

developers should perform a thorough review of all appropriate project documents, including any 

SOWs, QAPPs, DQOs, HASPs, RSPs, or specifications regarding the project or containing 

project planning results. 

The level of specificity outlined within these project documents may vary from outlining general 

project goals to specifying sampling and analytical requirements to meet project DQOs. Project 

documents should identify additional applicable references that might be required for obtaining 

background information, including (but not limited to): 

• Engineering regulations and guidance documents 

• Regulatory program and status reports from previous investigations 

• Construction data 

• Ownership/operational histories 

• Site maps and photographs 

• Information on regional and site geology, hydrogeology, hydrology, topography, ecology, 

climatology, demographics 

• Current and future land use 

Figure 3.1 

 

SCP Guide 4 February 2009
Section 3.0 – Phase I – SCP Data Acquisition and Requirements Determination

3.1 Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) 

According to EPA policy, systematic planning must be used to develop acceptance or 

performance criteria for collection, evaluation, or use of environmental data. Systematic planning 

identifies the expected outcome of the project, technical goals, cost and schedule, and the 

acceptance criteria for the final result, which must be documented in a QAPP. As defined in the 

Code of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR 300.430, the QAPP describes policy, organization, and 

functional activities, as well as the DQOs and measures necessary to achieve adequate data. The 

QAPP is a plan that provides a process for obtaining data of sufficient quality and quantity to 

satisfy data needs. 

The development of a QAPP is separate from the SCP, but is essential in defining project DQOs 

and activities needed to ensure that project quality criteria are met. A site-specific QAPP is 

usually developed in parallel with the development of an SCP. Information pertaining to the 

preparation of a project-specific QAPP can be found in EPA QA/G-5, Guidance for Quality 

Assurance Project Plans, December 2002. Project managers and planners should also review 

information regarding the DQO process provided in Guidance for Systematic Planning Using the 

Data Quality Objectives Process, EPA QA/G-4, EPA/240/B-06/001, February 2006; and MultiAgency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual, NUREG-1575, Rev. 1; EPA 402-R-97-

016, Rev. 1; DOE/EH-0624, Rev. 1; August 2000 (MARSSIM). 

Specific QAPP DQO elements related to collection of environmental data include: 

• Measurement quality objectives (MQO) 

• Cleanup goals, cleanup options, and establishment of derived concentration guideline levels 

(DCGLs). [NOTE: MARSSIM should be consulted to gain a thorough knowledge of 

DCGLs and how they are interconnected to the SCP and the DQOs of the QAPP.] 

• Survey units identification 

• Data assessment including data quality indicators for precision, bias, completeness, 

representativeness, reproducibility, comparability, sensitivity, and statistical confidence 

• Data verification 

• Data validation 

3.2 Radiological and Industrial Health and Safety Plans 

Safety is a primary consideration in any sampling event, and is a critical consideration during 

development of an SCP. Personnel safety requirements and considerations for a particular site 

may extend beyond radiological concerns, and may include physical hazards and chemicals that 

are toxic, corrosive, emit harmful or explosive vapors, or are incompatible when mixed. The SCP 

must be consistent with all radiation and industrial safety requirements and procedures associated 

with a site. The SCP also must include or reference site-specific personnel safety and protection 

plans for radiation and industrial health/safety. 

 

Radiation protection requirements included in the site RSP are developed and implemented by the 

site radiation protection group (RPG), which is responsible for: 

• Developing and implementing a RSP and radiation work plans for individuals working at the 

site 

• Taking measurements of the radiation levels of all sampling sites and associated activities 

• Dictating the radiation protection requirements for entering and working in a radioactively 

contaminated sampling area 

• Stopping any activity to protect personnel from overexposure to radiation or from radioactive 

material contamination 

SCP Guide 5 February 2009
Section 3.0 – Phase I – SCP Data Acquisition and Requirements Determination

Industrial safety requirements included in the site HASP are developed and instituted by a 

designated safety individual (e.g., safety and health officer, SHO), who is responsible for: 

• Developing and implementing a HASP and safety work plans 

• Assessing all site activities for potential safety concerns 

• Ensuring that personnel are informed as to the potential hazards in a sampling area and 

dictating the requirements for safely working at the site 

• Stopping any job or activity to protect personnel from a dangerous situation 

3.3 Initial Site Information 

When FRMAC turns a site over to the EPA for cleanup, FRMAC typically will provide detailed 

response-stage investigation data for review and use in planning the site cleanup. In general, the 

information will detail how the investigation was conducted, identify contamination boundaries 

and grid systems, and detail contamination gradients. This information is critical for designing an 

appropriate and successful SCP that is consistent with the site investigation. The detailed 

information provided by FRMAC should include: 

• Location of ground zero 

• Preliminary site assessment information and data 

• Site inspections 

• Event cleanup actions 

• Historical site assessments and investigations 

• Any initial corrective cleanup actions performed to secure and control the effected site 

• Identification of radiological contaminants, contaminated areas, and contaminated media 

• Meteorological data 

In addition to the information typically provided by FRMAC, but that is also important in 

designing a SCP includes information and data generated during engineering evaluations and cost 

analyses. 

If detailed response data/information is not available when the site is turned over to the EPA, as 

might be the case following a homeland security incident, the information provided in this 

document will enable the planning team to develop an SCP for site investigation and 

characterization, site cleanup, final status surveys, and site disposition. A historical site 

assessment (HSA) or operational history, if applicable, can also be performed to identify areas of 

environmental concern or liability from historical or current use of radiological substances (see 

MARSSIM Chapter 3). Information tracking these uses should be collected, and includes: 

Existing Radiation Data Prior to the Homeland Security Contamination Event - 

Review of applicable documents and records to determine if any information is available, 

via public records, regarding potential pre-existing radiological contamination. 

Interviews - Interviews with current owner(s), building management companies, 

manager(s) or other responsible parties, local government officials, and residents to 

obtain as much information as possible regarding the site and any operations and 

activities that occurred on it. Included in this inquiry would be past and present 

environmental practices, improvements or alterations, site operations, and plans for future 

use. 

SCP Guide 6 February 2009
Section 3.0 – Phase I – SCP Data Acquisition and Requirements Determination

SCP Guide 7 February 2009

Site Reconnaissance - A site visit or inspection to observe current uses (and evidence of 

past uses, whenever possible), including those likely to involve the use, treatment, 

storage, disposal, or generation of radioactive materials. 

Evaluation of Data - A written report to document initial investigation phase findings, 

observations, and recommendations, including suspected or identified areas of 

radiological concern or liability and what sampling and analyses activities were 

conducted to verify the suspected areas of contamination. This report should demonstrate 

that inquiries were sufficient to ascertain site ownership and uses prior to the event. and 

to minimize any future liability in the event that radiological contamination is found after 

cleanup or the detection threshold is lowered after the site is turn over for cleanup. 

3.4 Identify Real Property Radiological Contaminants 

Once potential areas of concern or contamination are identified and evaluated, an SCP strategy is 

developed so that sufficient data can be obtained to allow a designated individual or group to 

conclude that the contaminant(s) of concern: 

• Is present at levels above the cleanup goals and cleanup is necessary, or 

• Is present at levels below the cleanup goals and no further action is required, or 

• Is not present above specified detection limits and no further action is required. 

If contamination is present at levels above the cleanup goals risk-based release limits, the SCP 

should ensure that sufficient data are generated to characterize the extent of contamination. 

3.5 Identify Contaminated Areas 

Prior to cleanup following initial response to a homeland security event, affected and unaffected 

real property areas will need to be assessed to identify the extent of contamination. Sample 

collection and analysis will be required to assess the type, degree and extent of contamination. 

This assessment, as defined by FRMAC1

, is the evaluation and interpretation of environmental 

radiological data obtained during or following a radiological emergency. The primary products 

of the FRMAC assessment include interpretation of the post-event radiological situation in terms 

of the Protective Action Guides (PAGs). 

Assessment of the area for cleanup actions will rely on initial post-event measurements and 

model predictions. Initial field measurements from the Incident Management Assistance Team 

(IMAT) first responders and FRMAC teams will be used in SCP development effort to identify 

the areas of contamination. This information includes: 

• Field survey measurements 

• Aerial radiological surveys 

• Laboratory analyses of various samples, such as soil, air, water, vegetation, and foods 

• Meteorological information 

• Models (plume dispersion area, deposition rates, and re-suspension probabilities) 

It should be noted that the initial assessment models and cleanup goals might be enhanced and/or 

changed after the results of detailed radiological characterization are gathered. 

Prior to cleanup actions, information garnered from FRMAC assessments are coupled with data 

obtained from historic information (local public, corporate, and governmental information). This 

 

1

 FRMAC Assessment Manual Methods, Volume 1, SAND2003-1071P 
Section 3.0 – Phase I – SCP Data Acquisition and Requirements Determination

SCP Guide 8 February 2009

information is used to identify areas where contamination could have spread or areas that may 

affect the actions for cleanup of the area. Examples of historic information to examine include: 

• Infrastructure data (water, cable, electric, and sewer systems, underground transport or other 

types of pipe chases or transport facilities) 

• Geological and geographical data (water table information, soil composition, bedrock strata) 

• Documentation of facilities, businesses, or dwellings where radioactive materials used, 

stored, or disposed of prior to the radiological emergency (radioisotopes used by medical 

professionals, radiological sources used by industries, contaminated backfill material, etc.) 

• Records, such as news articles or local emergency responder reports, that indicate spills, 

discharges, or other unusual occurrences that could have resulted in the additional spread of 

contamination. (These should include spills of solvents or other materials that may influence 

transport mechanisms in ground water and soil.) 

Areas immediately surrounding, or adjacent to, the affected area are included in the identification 

of contaminated areas because of the potential for inadvertent spread of contamination from 

airborne re-suspension, meteorological conditions, wildlife movements, etc. (See MARSSIM 

Chapter 3.) 

3.6 Identify Contaminated Media 

The next step in evaluating the data gathered is to identify potentially contaminated media. 

Identification of media that have the potential to contain, or that do not contain residual 

contamination, is used for preliminary classification and for planning subsequent SCP sampling 

activities. MARSSIM Section 3.3.6 provides guidelines on evaluating the likelihood for release 

of radioactivity into the following environmental media: surface soil, subsurface soil, sediment, 

surface water, ground water, air, and buildings. The evaluation will result in a finding of either 

“Suspected Contamination” or “No Suspected Contamination,” which may be based on analytical 

data, professional judgment, or a combination of the two. 
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

4.0 Phase II - SCP Design and Development 

The information and documents gathered and generated during Phase I are used to design and 

develop the project SCP as shown in Figure 4.1. SCPs are designed to layout and describe 

project requirements for conducting and completing all field sampling activities, corresponding 

data assessment activities, and reporting requirements. Elements that are included in an SCP are 

listed in Appendix A and described in detail in this section. Specific elements that should be 

included will depend on the size and/or complexity of the cleanup project, and the SCP format 

should be modified as appropriate. The SCP is prepared and approved prior to initiation of any 

field activities and is expected to be amended or revised several times during cleanup. 

Figure 4.1 

Prior to initiation of SCP design, the decision maker(s) and sample collection planning team 

should review the QAPP and corresponding DQOs, from Phase I, to identify the data needs and 

purpose for sample collection(s), including: 

 

• Sample collection locations and frequencies 

• Types of samples to be collected or measurements to be performed 

• Target radionuclide(s) 

SCP Guide 9 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

• Potential interfering radionuclides and chemical contaminants 

• Radiological field measurements and instrumentation to support sample collection 

• DCGL for each radionuclide of interest 

• MQOs for each radionuclide (e.g., required method uncertainty, required Minimum 

Detectable Concentration (MDC)) 

• Analytical or screening methods that will be used in the field and laboratory to assay samples 

• Analytical bias and precision (e.g., quantitative or qualitative) 

• Number of samples to be collected 

• Type and frequency of field QC samples to be collected 

• Amount of material to be collected for each sample 

• Sample tracking requirements 

• Sample preservation, filtration, and shipping requirements 

• Additional standard operating procedures (SOPs) to be followed or developed 

• Cost of the methods being used (cost per analysis as well as total cost) 

• Where possible, the use of surrogate measurements should be considered to expedite the field 

sampling activities and reduce analytical costs. 

• Site-specific background (from background reference areas) for the radionuclide(s) of interest 

• Turnaround time required for sample results to maintain project schedules 

• Analytical measurement documentation requirements 

For projects that encompass several sub-sites or involve a long-term effort, it may be beneficial to 

generate a comprehensive SCP that includes addendums to cover all aspects of sampling and 

analytical requirements. These addendums to the SCP must clearly identify the DQOs that are 

specific to a given sub-site(s), applicable matrices, site-specific sampling and analysis 

requirements, and any deviations from the comprehensive SCP. Information addressed in the 

comprehensive SCP may be referenced in the SCP addendums. When this approach is used, all 

addendum references to the comprehensive SCP must be verified by the project technical 

planning team during the document review process. Preparatory phase inspections (field audits) 

must ensure that all appropriate plans (comprehensive and addendum SCPs) are available on site, 

and that field personnel are familiar with procedures included in both. 

A separate SCP may be developed for the final status survey. Final status surveys are performed 

after cleanup is complete to demonstrate that residual radioactivity levels satisfy criteria for site 

disposition. These surveys provide data to demonstrate that radiological parameters do not 

exceed the established DCGLs and that DQOs have been met. Final status survey SCPs are 

designed based on these objectives and the known or anticipated radiological conditions at the 

site. The SCP must include an appropriate number and location of measurement and sampling 

points to demonstrate compliance with the release criterion. Planning for a final status survey 

SCP should include early discussions with the appropriate agencies concerning logistics for 

confirmatory surveys and sampling. Confirmatory activities are usually limited in scope to 

include checking conditions at selected locations, comparing findings with those of the final 

status survey, and performing independent statistical evaluations of the data developed from the 

final status survey. An independent verification survey may be performed to provide data to 

substantiate results of the final status survey. Independent evaluations of final site conditions are 

more extensive than the confirmatory activity listed above, and involve validation of the cleanup 

final status survey procedures, results, and documentation. The independent verification survey is 

not a replacement or supplement to the final status survey, but it serves to validate the final status 

survey prior to releasing the effected lands/facilities for public use. 

SCP Guide 10 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

4.1 Review of Successful Sampling Plans 

When preparing an SCP, the design should match the needs of a given project with the resources 

available. Project needs generally consist of the cleanup objectives and tolerable limits of 

uncertainty. Project resources may include personnel, time, and equipment. The goal of the SCP 

should be to acquire and use all of the information available so that the data collected meet the 

needs of the data user (i.e., decision maker). 

The following is a list of some site-specific sampling plans that have been used successfully in 

support of site disposition. These sampling plans range from complex site characterization plans 

to smaller sub-site project plans. 

• Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, The D&D Characterization Protocol, MAN007-DDCP, July 2002, can be downloaded at: 

http://rockyflats.apps.em.doe.gov/references/027-D&D%20Char%20Protocol-Reduced.pdf 

• NASA Plum Brook Reactor Facility, Characterization Plan, MW-PL-02-004, September 

2002, can be downloaded at: http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/pbrf/documentsrecords/char_plan/characterization_plan_MW-PL-02-004.pdf 

• 105+ Basin Sediment Disposition Phase Two Sampling and Analysis Plan - Bechtel Hanford, 

Inc., BHI-00984, Rev 0, March 1997, can be downloaded at: 

http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/servlets/purl/16071-NoYaHn/webviewable/16071.pdf 

4.2 Defining Radioanalytical Laboratory Requirements for SCP Sample Analysis 

Early consideration of analytical capability is essential to the success of the SCP. Prior to 

defining radioanalytical laboratory requirements, SCP designers should review the Multi-Agency 

Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols Manual, NUREG-1576; EPA 402-B-04-001A; 

July 2004 (MARLAP), Volume 1, Chapters 5 and 7, for a detailed discussion on obtaining 

laboratory services. The methods listed in SAM should be reviewed to aid in discussions with the 

laboratory. The radioanalytical laboratory(s) that will perform the analyses should be selected 

early in the planning process, so that they may be consulted regarding the analytical methods to 

be used and to ensure sampling activities will address the analytical needs. Designers and 

planners should focus on choosing a laboratory that is a member of the Environmental Response 

Laboratory Network (ERLN). Designers must select the methods that will be used to analyze 

samples, and design the SCP to meet the analytical needs of those methods. 

SCP designers should also consider the use of mobile laboratories to provide on-site analytical 

capability and minimize off-site sample transportation. The SCP must identify: 

• ERLN member laboratories 

• Communications protocols between the project management, field personnel, and laboratory 

personnel 

• Chain-of-custody requirements 

• Numbers of samples each the laboratory(s) are expect to receive 

• Project requirements for analytical result turnaround times 

• SAM approved analytical procedures that the laboratory will follow 

• Corrective action processes for suspect analytical data 

• Documentation, reporting, and project deliverables requirements 

Procurement of laboratory services usually requires a SOW describing the analytical services 

needed. Careful preparation of the SOW is essential to ensuring the laboratory performs the 

SCP Guide 11 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

SCP Guide 12 February 2009

required services in a technically competent and timely manner (consult MARLAP, Volume 1, 

Chapters 5 and 7, for expanded details). SOWs must be reviewed by personnel familiar with 

radioanalytical laboratory operations. For complicated sites requiring a large number of analyses, 

it is recommended that a portion of this evaluation take the form of an audit. For smaller sites or 

facilities, the decision maker(s) may decide that a review of the laboratory’s qualifications is 

sufficient. There are eight criteria that should be reviewed during this evaluation: 

1. The laboratory should possess appropriate well-documented procedures, instrumentation, and 

trained personnel to perform the analyses required to address the DQOs (e.g., radionuclide(s) 

of interest and target detection limits). 

2. The laboratory should be experienced in performing the same or similar analyses. 

3. The laboratory should have satisfactory performance evaluation results from formal 

monitoring or accreditation programs, and should be able to provide a summary of QA audits 

and proof of participation in inter-laboratory cross-check programs. Equipment calibrations 

should be performed using National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) traceable 

reference radionuclide standards whenever possible. 

4. The laboratory should have adequate capacity to perform all analyses within the desired 

timeframe to meet project required turnaround times. 

5. The laboratory possesses a radioactive materials handling license or permit for the samples to 

be analyzed. SCPs for large projects may indicate that more than one analytical laboratory is 

necessary to meet the SCP objectives. 

6. The laboratory should provide an internal quality control review of all generated data. The 

reviewers must be independent of the data generators. 

7. The laboratory should have an active and fully documented QA program in place, and the QA 

program comply with the project DQOs. 

8. The laboratory should have adequate protocols for method performance documentation and 

sample security. 

4.3 Classify Areas by Contamination Potential 

After a radiological homeland security event, areas of the event site will have differing potential 

for contamination and, accordingly, will not need the same level of sampling to demonstrate 

compliance with established cleanup goals. The sampling process will be more efficient if the 

SCP is designed so that areas with higher potential for contamination (based in part on results of 

the Phase I assessment) receive a higher degree of sampling. 

Site classification is a critical step in designing the SCP. The working hypothesis of MARSSIM 

is that all impacted areas that are being evaluated for release have a reasonable potential for 

radioactive contamination above the DCGL. This initial assumption means that all areas are 

initially considered to be Class 1 areas2

 unless some basis for reclassification as non-impacted, 

Class 3, or Class 2 is provided. 

Areas that have no reasonable potential for residual contamination may not need any level of 

sampling, and may be designated as non-impacted areas. These areas have no radiological impact 

from the homeland security event and are typically identified during Phase I. Background 

reference areas are normally selected from these non-impacted areas. 

4.4 Select Background Reference Areas 

The SCP should clearly identify background reference areas. Typically, these are non-impacted 

areas, and should have physical, chemical, geological, radiological, and biological characteristics 

 

2 As defined by MARSSIM
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

that are similar to the site being evaluated. In some situations, a reference area may be associated 

with the survey unit being evaluated, but cannot be contaminated by the homeland security event. 

Generally, reference areas should not be part of the survey unit being evaluated. (See MARSSIM 

Chapter 4.) 

4.5 Identify Survey Units 

Each survey unit is a physical area consisting of structures or land areas of specified size and 

shape for which a separate decision will be made as to whether or not that area exceeds the 

release criterion. This decision is made as a result of the final status survey, and the survey unit is 

the primary entity for demonstrating compliance with the release criterion. The SCP must clearly 

define each survey unit in the site. (See MARSSIM Chapter 4.) 

 

To facilitate sample collection design and ensure that the numbers of sampling points for a 

specific site are relatively uniformly distributed among areas of similar contamination potential, 

the site is divided into survey units that share a common history or other characteristics, or are 

naturally distinguishable from other portions of the site. A survey unit should not include areas 

that have different contamination classifications; however, depending on the size of the survey 

units, it may be advantageous to combine dissimilar areas into one survey unit to conform to dose 

models and minimize sampling densities. (See NUREG-1505 Chapter 12.) 

4.6 Develop a Conceptual Cleanup Model of the Site for SCP Planning 

A site model serves as the basis for defining sample collection needs during development of the 

SCP to support site cleanup goals. Project planners should gather and analyze available 

information to develop a conceptual site model that shows locations of known contamination, 

areas of suspected contamination, types and concentrations of radionuclides in impacted areas, 

potentially contaminated media, and locations of potential reference (background) areas. The 

diagram should include the general layout of the affected area including schools, public parks, 

business centers, transportation infrastructure, water treatment facilities, lakes, streams, drainage 

and sewer systems, buildings, and roads. 

4.7 Selection of Sampling Designs 

The main goal in the development of the SCP is to collect samples that are representative of the 

site conditions. An accurate assessment of contamination can minimize the number of samples 

required to achieve cleanup DQOs. Using the conceptual cleanup model, crucial pathways and 

media requiring assessment are identified for possible sampling. Sampling strategies can be 

grouped into either statistical or non-statistical methods. To ensure that samples are as 

representative as possible, statistics are often used to design an appropriate sampling strategy and 

to provide a sound basis for supporting project decisions. In selecting the sampling design for the 

project, use an environmental statistician is recommended to ensure the sampling design provides 

the data needed to support project decisions. 

EPA’s Guidance on Choosing a Sampling Design for Environmental Data Collection for Use in 

Developing a Quality Assurance Project Plan (EPA QA/G-5S, EPA/240/R-02/005) is a tool-box 

of statistical designs for sample collection that can be consulted during development of the SCP. 

An SCP may contain some or all of the designs. However, it is important that the design(s) 

selected meet the objectives of the QAPP and can support the DQOs and DCGLs of the project. 

Sample collection designs can be based on, but not limited to: 

Judgmental or Bias Sampling - In judgmental or bias sampling, selection of sampling units 

(i.e., the amount and location and/or timing of sample collection) is based on knowledge of the 

SCP Guide 13 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

feature or condition under investigation and on professional judgment. This type of sampling, 

based on professional judgment, differs from statistical scientific theory probability-based 

sampling. Therefore, conclusions are limited and depend entirely on the validity and accuracy of 

professional judgment. Expert judgment may also be used in conjunction with other sampling 

designs to produce effective sampling for defensible decisions. 

Simple Random Sampling - In simple random sampling, particular sampling units (e.g., 

locations and/or times) are selected using random numbers, and all possible selections of a given 

number of units are equally likely. For example, a simple random sample of a set of drums can 

be taken by numbering all the drums and randomly selecting numbers or by sampling an area 

using pairs of random coordinates. This method is easy to understand, and the equations for 

determining sample population size are relatively straightforward. Simple random sampling is 

most useful when the population of interest is homogeneous (e.g., no major patterns of 

contamination or hot spots are expected). Advantages of this design include: 

- Provides statistically unbiased estimates of the mean, proportions, and variability 

- Relatively easy to understand and implement 

- Sample size calculations and data analysis are straightforward 

An example is shown in Figure 4.2. 

Figure 4.2 

Simple Random Sampling 

(from EPA QA/G-5S, EPA/240/R-02/005)

Stratified Sampling - In stratified sampling, the target population is separated into nonoverlapping strata, or subpopulations that are known or thought to be more homogeneous 

(relative to the environmental medium or the contaminant), so that there tends to be less variation 

among sampling units. Strata may be chosen on the basis of spatial or temporal proximity, or on 

the basis of preexisting information or professional judgment. This design is useful when the 

target population is heterogeneous and the area can be subdivided based on expected 

contamination levels. Advantages of this sampling design are that it has potential for achieving 

greater precision in estimates of the mean and variance, and that it allows computation of reliable 

estimates for population subgroups of special interest. Greater precision can be obtained if the 

measurement of interest is strongly correlated with the variable used to make the strata. An 

example is shown in Figure 4.3.

SCP Guide 14 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

Figure 4.3 

Stratified Sampling 

(from EPA QA/G-5S, EPA/240/R-02/005)

Systematic and Grid Sampling - In systematic and grid sampling, samples are taken at 

regularly spaced intervals over space or time. An initial location and/or time is chosen at random. 

The remaining sampling locations are defined so that all locations are at regular intervals over an 

area (grid) or time (systematic). Examples of systematic grids include square, rectangular, 

triangular, or radial. In random systematic sampling, an initial sampling location (or time) is 

chosen at random and the remaining sampling sites are specified so that they are located 

according to a regular pattern (e.g., at the points identified by the intersection of each line in one 

of the grids). Systematic and grid sampling is used to search for hot spots and to infer means, 

percentiles, or other parameters. It is also useful for estimating spatial patterns or trends over 

time. This design provides a practical and easy method for designating sample locations and 

ensures uniform coverage of a site, unit, or process. An example is shown in Figure 4.4. 

SCP Guide 15 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

Figure 4.4 

Systematic/Grid Sampling 

(from EPA QA/G-5S, EPA/240/R-02/005)

Ranked Set Sampling - In ranked set sampling, m sets (each of size r) of field locations are 

identified using simple random selection. The locations are ranked independently within each set 

using professional judgment or inexpensive, fast, or surrogate measurements. One sampling unit 

from each set is selected (based on the observed ranks) for subsequent measurement using a more 

accurate and reliable (hence, more expensive) method for the contaminant of interest. Relative to 

simple random sampling, this design results in more representative samples and so leads to more 

precise estimates of the population parameters. 

Ranked set sampling is useful when the cost of locating and ranking locations in the field is low 

compared to laboratory measurements. It is also appropriate when an inexpensive auxiliary 

variable (based on expert knowledge or measurement) is available to rank population units with 

respect to the variable of interest. To use this design effectively, it is important that the ranking 

method and analytical method are strongly correlated. 

Adaptive Cluster Sampling - In adaptive cluster sampling, initial measurements are made of 

randomly selected primary sampling units using simple random sampling. Whenever a sampling 

unit is found to show a characteristic of interest, additional sampling units adjacent to the original 

unit are selected and measurements are made. Several additional rounds of sampling and analysis 

may be needed. Adaptive cluster sampling also tracks selection probabilities for later phases of 

sampling so that an unbiased estimate of the population mean can be calculated. An example 

application of adaptive cluster sampling is delineating the borders of a plume of contamination. It 

is useful for estimating or searching for rare characteristics in a population, and is appropriate for 

inexpensive, rapid measurements. It enables delineating the boundaries of hot spots, while also 

using all data collected with appropriate weighting to give unbiased estimates of the population 

mean. An example is shown in Figure 4.5. 

SCP Guide 16 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

Figure 4.5 

Adaptive Cluster Sampling

(from EPA QA/G-5S, EPA/240/R-02/005) 

Composite Sampling - In composite sampling, volumes of material from several selected 

sampling units are physically combined and mixed to form a single homogeneous sample. 

Compositing can be very cost effective because it reduces the number of radiochemical analyses 

needed. It is most cost effective when analytical costs are large relative to sampling costs; it 

demands, however, that there are no safety hazards or potential biases (e.g., increased radiological 

dose rates or radioanalyte cross contamination) associated with the compositing process. 

Compositing is often used in conjunction with other sampling designs when the goal is to 

estimate the population mean and when information on spatial or temporal variability is not 

needed. It can also be used to estimate the prevalence of a rare trait. An example is shown in 

Figure 4.6. 

Figure 4.6 

Composite Sampling 

(from EPA QA/G-5S, EPA/240/R-02/005) 

SCP Guide 17 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

Table 4-1 provides a comparison of advantages and disadvantages for each of the sampling 

designs listed above. 

Table 4-1 Comparison of Sampling Designs 

Sampling Design Statistical or NonStatistical Application Advantage Disadvantage 

Judgmental or Bias 

Sampling Non-Statistical 

An individual subjectively 

selects sampling 

locations that appear to 

be representative of 

average conditions. 

Good for 

homogeneous, welldefined sites 

Not usually recommended. 

Conclusions are limited and 

depend entirely on the validity 

and accuracy of professional 

judgment. 

Simple Random 

Sampling Statistical 

Representative sampling 

locations are chosen 

using the theory of 

random chance 

probabilities.

Good for sites where 

background 

information is not 

available and no 

visible signs of 

contamination are 

present.

May not be cost-effective for 

samples located too close 

together. Does not take into 

account spatial variability of 

media. 

Stratified Sampling Statistical 

Site is divided into several 

sampling areas (strata) 

based on background or 

site survey information; 

each stratum is evaluated 

using a separate random 

sampling strategy.

Good for large sites 

characterized by a 

number of soil types, 

topographic features, 

past/present uses, or 

manufacturing/storage 

areas.

Often more cost-effective than 

random sampling. More 

difficult to implement in the 

field and analyze results. Does 

not take into account spatial 

variability of media.

Systematic and Grid 

Sampling Statistical 

Most common statistical 

strategy; involves 

collecting samples at 

predetermined, regular 

intervals within a grid 

pattern.

Best strategy for 

minimizing bias and 

providing complete 

site coverage. Can be 

used effectively at 

sites where no 

background 

information exists. 

Ensures that samples 

will not be taken too 

close together.

Does not take into account 

spatial variability of media.

Ranked Set Sampling Statistical 

In ranked set sampling, 

sets of field locations are 

identified using simple 

random sampling. The 

locations are ranked 

independently within each 

set using professional 

judgment or inexpensive, 

fast, or surrogate 

measurements. 

More efficient than 

simple random 

sampling. Ranked set 

sampling is useful 

when the cost of 

locating and ranking 

locations in the field is 

low compared to 

laboratory 

measurements. 

Does not take into account 

spatial variability of media.

Adaptive Cluster 

Sampling Statistical 

Sampling designs in 

which the procedure for 

selecting sites or units to 

be included in the sample 

may depend upon values 

of the variable of interest 

observed during the 

survey. 

Takes advantage of 

population 

characteristics so as 

to obtain more precise 

estimates of 

population values for a 

given sample size. 

Coefficients of variation for the 

adaptive sampling may be 

rather large compared to other 

designs. 

Composite Sampling Statistical 

A composite sample is 

made from a number of 

discrete samples which 

have been collected 

from a body of material 

and combined into a 

single sample with the 

intention that this single 

sample is representative 

of the components of that 

body of material. 

Analytical cost 

savings. 

Limitations include aspects of 

false negatives or positives 

and loss of information 

regarding any relationships 

between radionuclides in 

individual samples. 

SCP Guide 18 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

Listed below are several commercially available software tools that can be used to aid designers 

in the development of SCPs. 

NOTE: Mention of company names, trade names, or commercial products in this document does 

not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. 

• COMPASS software was designed to facilitate the use of MARSSIM and to guide the user 

into making informed decisions in designing final status surveys. COMPASS also simplifies 

the application of statistical tests by performing the calculations and providing prospective 

power curves that help determine what level of confidence the user is willing to accept for a 

particular number of measurements or samples in a survey unit. After performing the final 

status survey, COMPASS assesses the data for comparison to the cleanup goals. COMPASS 

is available for download at http://orise.orau.gov/ieav/survey-projects/marssim.htm#compass 

• COMPLY is a computerized screening tool for evaluating radiation exposure from 

atmospheric releases of radionuclides. The tool may be used for demonstrating compliance 

with some EPA and Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations. COMPLY is available for 

download at http://www.epa.gov/radiation/assessment/comply.html 

• Cumulative Probability Plot can be used to plot empirical data on cumulative probability 

distribution graphs. The software computes parametric statistics and a “test statistic” based 

on “sampling by variables.” It is useful for visual presentation of characterization and final 

status surveys. Cumulative Probability Plot is available for download at 

http://www.radprocalculator.com/Probability.aspx 

• Elipgrid-PC Hot Spot Probability Calculations is used for design and analysis of sampling 

grids for locating elliptical targets (e.g., contamination hot spots). It computes the probability 

of success in locating targets based on the assumed size, shape, and orientation of the targets, 

and on the specified grid spacing. It can also be used to compute a grid spacing from a 

specified success probability, compute cost information associated with specified sampling 

grids, determine the size of the smallest hot spot detected given a particular grid, and create 

graphs of the results. ELIPGRID-PC is available for download at 

http://dqo.pnl.gov/software/elipgrid.htm 

• GENII-NESHAPS provides a set of software for calculating radiation dose and risk from 

radionuclides released to the environment. The GENII-NESHAPS Edition is specifically 

designed to help site managers plan and improve compliance with 40 CFR 61, subparts H and 

I. GENII-NESHAPS is available for download at 

http://www.epa.gov/radiation/assessment/genii.html 

• MARSSIMPower2000 implements the final status survey designs described in the 

MARSSIM manual. MARSSIMPower2000 is available for download at 

http://cvg.homestead.com/marssimpower2000.html 

• RESRAD is a DOE-developed code used for calculation of dose from all pathways from 

radioactively contaminated sites. Developed by Argonne National Laboratory, RESRAD 

codes are available for download at http://web.ead.anl.gov/resrad/home2/ 

• Spatial Analysis and Decision Assistance (SADA) is University of Tennessee developed 

and incorporates tools from environmental assessment fields. These tools include integrated 

SCP Guide 19 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

modules for visualization, geospatial analysis, statistical analysis, human health risk 

assessment, ecological risk assessment, cost/benefit analysis, sampling design, and decision 

analysis. SADA is available for download at http://www.tiem.utk.edu/~sada/index.shtml 

• Visual Sample Plan provides statistical solutions to sampling design (how many samples to 

take and where to take them) and provides mathematical and statistical algorithms. Visual 

Sample Plan is available for download at http://dqo.pnl.gov/vsp/

4.8 Writing the SCP - Content of Major Elements 

When all of the appropriate site information is gathered, the SCP designers take the information 

and assemble the SCP. Appendix A provides a checklist of elements that may be used as a 

template for writing a site-specific SCP. The specific elements that would be appropriate to 

include in an SCP will depend on site conditions (e.g., the extent and type of the contamination, 

site size, project needs, and DQOs). 

4.8.1 Project Background 

With the information gathered during Phase I, including response information turned 

over by FRMAC, the SCP should provide both a site history, including descriptions of 

the use of the site, permits, and the use of chemicals and radioisotopes and radiological 

event information. The historical and response data from any investigation and event 

sampling efforts should be identified and summarized. An assessment of the quality of 

the data should be included, as well as a discussion of any problems encountered during 

initial site assessment and event response. The SCP should include a description and a 

map of the location, size, and important physical features of the affected area, such as 

schools, public parks, business centers, transportation infrastructure, water treatment 

facilities, lakes, streams, drainage and sewer systems, buildings, and roads. 

This section of the SCP should also describe the initial investigation radiological issues 

and the project’s planned approach toward resolution. 

4.8.2 Project Organization and Responsibilities 

This element of the SCP identifies key field personnel or organizations responsible for 

each field activity during the clean up and remediation. A chart showing project 

organization and lines of authority should be included. The chart should identify QC 

management organizations and identify their appropriate independent reporting chain 

outside project management. This section of the SCP should describe the 

responsibilities of all project field personnel, including subcontractor roles and their key 

points of contact, sampling personnel, and liaison personnel between field, laboratory, 

and QC managers. 

This section of the SCP should also identify organizations responsible for: 

• Project planning 

• Project coordination 

• Sample collection 

• Disposal of sampling waste 

• Sample custody 

This section should also identify any special training requirements and/or personnel 

certifications necessary to perform the project work. 

SCP Guide 20 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

4.8.3 Project Scope and Objectives 

The SCP must describe specific project objectives of the sampling effort. It should 

identify the planned project activities, QA procedures to be implemented to support 

project activities, relevant regulatory standards, and the project schedule. The intended 

use of data should be stated and should satisfy the intended uses of the data for meeting 

identified regulatory requirements and project specific clean up criteria. An outline 

should be included of the project schedule to include project plan review periods, 

fieldwork, sample analysis, data management and validation, and project report writing. 

4.8.4 Non-Measurement Data Acquisition 

The SCP should describe data needed from non-measurement sources, such as 

databases, literature, handbooks, and local authorities. Information of this type may be 

needed to support assessment of: 

• Data supporting modeling activities

• Public transportation infrastructure 

• Street and highway uses 

• Land uses (residential, recreational, agriculture, etc.) 

• Meteorological data 

• Hydrogeological data (local or regional aquifers) 

• Geological data (site bedrock formations, soil series) 

• Well surveys 

• Local relevant or significant habitats 

• Endangered species 

4.8.5 Field Activities – Project Sample Collection Procedures 

The SCP should provide detailed site-specific instructions and requirements that are to 

be used in conjunction with the sample collection procedures described in EPA’s Sample 

Collection Procedures for Radiochemical Analytes in Environmental Matrices

(EPA/600/S-07/001, December 2006). The design team should refer to these sample 

collection procedures for detailed information on how the samples required under the 

SCP are to be collected. The SCP must provide details to describe the field activities to 

be performed, including but not limited to, information regarding: 

• Sampling and field data-gathering procedures and methods to be used to collect 

environmental matrix specific field measurements and samples for: 

- Soil and sediment 

- Aqueous and liquid-phase 

- Ground water/drinking water 

- Air 

- Surfaces 

- Building materials 

• Collection of geophysical data 

• Drilling or borings 

• Installation of ground water monitoring wells 

• Sample sizes required, for each matrix, to meet DQOs and MQOs 

• Number of samples to be collected for each sampling location 

• Sample container types and sizes 

• QC requirements (e.g., field control QC samples) 

• Specific sample collection equipment to be used 

SCP Guide 21 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

• Considerations for sample filtration in the field (if required) 

• Sample preservation requirements 

• In situ field measurements (if any) 

4.8.6 Radiological Field Measurements and Instrumentation 

Many site cleanup projects will include on-site screening for detection and/or 

measurement of contamination. This screening can assist with project planning and 

reduce the burden of sample collection and analyses. Site RSP requirements for the 

sampling efforts to be performed should be identified, along with the support function 

interface between the RPG and the sample collection personnel. A listing of sitespecific matrices, the expected radionuclides present in the matrices, and the appropriate 

instrumentation and measurement techniques to be used for each matrix should be 

detailed. 

4.8.7 Field Operations Documentation 

The SCP should identify requirements regarding the records that will be used to 

document all field operations, and should also identify the records and schedule for 

those which require periodic submittal. The SCP also should include proposed 

documentation forms. Corrections to documentation entries must be defined in the SCP 

according to the requirements of the QAPP and corrective action procedures. Field 

operations documents may include but are not limited to: 

• Daily QC reports 

• Field logbooks 

• Field work forms 

• Boring logs 

• Well installation and development forms 

• Photographic records 

• Field analytical records

This section should also address the sample documentation records, such as: 

• Sample numbering system 

• Sample labels and tags 

• Field sampling logs 

• Chain-of-custody forms and custody seals 

• Lab notification documentation forms 

Sample custody requirements should be defined for: 

• Field sample collection 

• Sample transfer to the laboratory(s) 

• Laboratory custody control 

The SCP should also define project records custody requirements for originals of field 

documentation and laboratory reports. It should define records management practices 

for but not limited to: 

• SOPs 

• SOP review documentation and record retention requirements 

SCP Guide 22 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

• Corrective action reports 

• Shipment manifesting and bills of lading 

• Waste profile forms 

• Test logs 

• Drum logs, etc. 

4.8.8 Sample Packaging and Shipping Requirements 

The SCP should include a discussion of sample packaging and shipping requirements in 

accordance with appropriate federal and state regulations (e.g., Department of 

Transportation [DOT] regulations found at 49 CFR 171–178; International Air 

Transportation Association [IATA] regulations). It should identify: 

• Appropriate laboratory(s) 

• Laboratory(s) addresses and points of contact 

• Sample submittal schedule 

• Mode of sample transportation (e.g., overnight courier) 

• Manifesting requirements for the shipment. 

It is recommended that the receiving laboratories also document the condition of field 

samples upon receipt at the laboratory. This enables verification of correct sample 

volumes, sample preservation, chain-of-custody completeness and accuracy, and overall 

packaging techniques. 

Sample packaging and shipping procedures described in Module I, Section 7.0, of 

EPA’s Sample Collection Procedures for Radiochemical Analytes in Environmental 

Matrices (EPA/600/S-07/001, December 2006) should also be reviewed before 

completing this section of the SCP. 

4.8.9 Sampling Waste 

The SCP should describe procedures that will be used for collecting, labeling, storing, 

and disposing of the sampling waste. The SCP should detail procedures for assessing 

corresponding sample results or sampling the waste to determine whether it is 

hazardous. The SCP should address how the sample results will be evaluated to 

determine disposal options for the sampling waste. Disposal actions must be conducted 

with the concurrence of appropriate project technical personnel and management. 

4.8.10 Project Quality Assurance (QA) 

The SCP must include QA/QC elements that are consistent with the QAPP and are 

applied throughout the project to ensure proper execution of the SCP and appropriate 

data generation. The project assessment activities should be discussed as they pertain to 

the QA objectives identified in the QAPP. In general, the SCP should provide 

specifications for QA activities by defining in detail: 

• Project schedules 

• Proper technical review/approval of project documents 

• Radiochemical DQOs and MQOs identified in the QAPP, and their respective data 

quality indicators 

• QA/QC protocols necessary to achieve the DQOs and MQOs 

• Analytical methods and measurements 

• Evaluation of laboratories 

SCP Guide 23 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

• QA samples and sample handling procedures/verification 

• QA sample analysis 

• Use of single- and double-blind performance evaluation (PE) samples 

• Equipment calibration and maintenance documentation 

• SCP QA implementation protocols 

• Establishing key field personnel experience requirements 

• Level of decision making empowered to key field personnel 

• Communication protocols between the field and project stakeholders 

• Data assessment procedures for the evaluation and the identification of any data 

limitations, including data review, validation, and reporting 

• Generation of required quality reports 

• Sampling requirements to support the final status survey 

EPA or EPA contract audit personnel should conduct a variety of audits (field, 

laboratory, office) to identify procedures that could cause problems with sampling and 

analytical results. The audits should be scheduled as early as possible, and should cover 

project activities from initial investigation to post closure monitoring to include but not 

be limited to: 

• Sample collection from all media (i.e., air, ground water, surface water, soil, 

sediment, and waste) 

• Placement of sampling devices 

• Decontamination of equipment or activities that could cause cross-contamination 

• Post sample collection activities (packaging/shipping) 

• Laboratory activities 

• Data reporting, including electronic media 

• Chain-of-custody procedures and documentation 

• Field logs 

• Well installation and development (if deemed necessary based on the event) 

4.8.11 Non-Conformance/Corrective Actions 

The SCP must address notification and corrective actions that should be followed by 

field and laboratory personnel if there are deviations from the SCP or problems with 

samples upon receipt at the laboratory. Typical problems or deviations include, but are 

not limited to: 

• Improperly preserved samples 

• Improper chain-of-custody documentation 

• Broken sample containers or questionable sample integrity 

• Sample relocation 

• Insufficient sample amount 

Corrective action procedures must address: 

• Corrective actions required if field and/or analytical procedures are found to deviate 

from the requirements in the SCP 

• Re-sampling with additional analysis of new samples 

• Reanalysis of existing field or QC samples 

• Proper data qualification 

• Corrective action protocols necessary in the event of deficiency or failure 

SCP Guide 24 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

• Notification processes 

• Contingencies 

The SCP must state that significant changes to or deviations from the approved SCP will 

not be made without the written approval of EPA project management. 

4.8.12 SCP Appendices 

The SCP appendices should include, but not limited to, the following items: 

• References 

• List of abbreviations and acronyms 

• Standard project forms to be used 

- Chain-of-custody forms 

- Sample labels 

- Shipping manifest 

- Audit forms 

- Non-conformance reporting forms 

- QA report forms 

• Summary tables 

- Data quality objectives summary 

- Site cleanup objectives 

- Proposed monitoring well information 

- Sample container preservation and holding time requirements 

- Names and addresses of owners of property near the site 

- Sample container types and quantities 

- Summary of sample matrices and locations 

- Summary of number of samples and analyses 

- Listing of approved analytical laboratories and contact information 

• List of figures 

- Project organization 

- Sampling schedule 

- Proposed on-site and off-site sampling locations 

- Proposed monitoring well locations and construction 

4.9 SCP Review and Approval 

The SCP should be reviewed to determine whether it will provide data that satisfy regulatory 

requirements, data use needs and DQOs, and whether it is compatible with all site constraints. As 

a guide, reviewers should use a checklist that contains general information that typically should 

be included in an SCP. Review checklists can be prepared by reviewing Appendix A and 

identifying project specific variations. 

NOTE: Due to the complexity that each site-specific SCP may require, a detailed checklist is 

beyond the scope of this document. 

Once an SCP has been approved, appropriate personnel sign the signature page. Personnel 

signing the SCP are determined on a project-specific basis. It is recommended that the incident 

commander/project manager sign the title page of the SCP, and that the technical manager sign 

the title page of the associated QAPP. Deviations from the approved SCP must receive written 

approval. In addition, there may be significant changes in the project that necessitate appending 

or modifying the SCP. Similar procedures of review and approval for those modified sections are 

necessary prior to execution of the modifications. 

SCP Guide 25 February 2009
Section 4.0 – Phase II – SCP Design and Development

SCP Guide 26 February 2009

4.10 SCP Distribution 

Once approved, the final SCP and/or its approved modifications must be distributed to all 

appropriate parties, including project and technical managers, primary and QA laboratory(s), 

appropriate regulatory authorities, stake holders, and subcontractors (i.e., drilling or sampling 

firms, data validation firms, etc.). 
Section 5.0 – Phase III – SCP Implementation

5.0 Phase III - SCP Implementation 

An approved SCP must be in place before implementing the SCP activities. Figure 5.1 outlines 

the SCP implementation elements. 

Figure 5.1 

5.1 Personnel Training 

Prior to implementation of the SCP, project personnel must be adequately trained for their 

specific duties and possess a full understanding of all aspects of the SCP. Training must include 

safety and health requirements and practices as defined in the HASP and RSP. 

5.2 Field Sample Collection 

Prior to performing sample collection, sampling personnel should ensure that proper field 

equipment is available and in good condition, and sample collection and handling procedures 

(including sample preservation) are performed in accordance with the SCP and following 

specifications provided in EPA’s Sample Collection Procedures for Radiochemical Analytes in 

Environmental Matrices, EPA/600/S-07/001, December 2006). 

5.3 Project Liaison 

A liaison between project management, field, and laboratory personnel should be identified to 

ensure smooth transition of all samples from the field to the laboratory or laboratories. Liaison 

SCP Guide 27 February 2009
Section 5.0 – Phase III – SCP Implementation

duties also may include implementation of proper sample documentation, packaging, and 

shipping procedures. 

5.4 SCP Compliance Monitoring 

Before data collection activities are implemented, an approved SCP must be in place and 

execution must be performed in compliance with the approved SCP. There are several QA 

elements that may be applied to the project to ensure proper SCP compliance. These include, but 

are not limited to: 

• Field and laboratory audits 

• Field and laboratory quality control samples 

• Equipment calibration and maintenance documentation 

• QA sample handling verification 

• QA sample analysis using of single- and double-blind performance evaluation samples 

• Data review and/or data validation 

• Electronic media audits 

• Generation of QA reports and data quality assessment reports 

5.4.1 Project, Field, and Laboratory Audits 

During implementation of the SCP, field activity audits should be performed for any 

phase of field work, from initial investigation and data collection, to post closure 

monitoring. Field audits should be scheduled as early in the activity as possible to 

identify procedures that could cause problems with the sampling and analytical results. 

This oversight is necessary to ensure that approved procedures, as specified in the SCP, 

are used. Field audits include monitoring critical activities such as well installation and 

development (if deemed necessary based on the event), placement of other sampling 

devices (e.g., composite), decontamination of equipment or activities that could cause 

cross-contamination, sample collection from all media (i.e., air, ground water, surface 

water, soil, sediment, and waste), and post sample collection activities (packaging/ 

shipping). Laboratory audits must also be performed to ensure that procedures for 

proper communication, proper documentation, and awareness of project DQOs are in 

place and that these procedures are in compliance with the analytical SOW. 

5.4.2 Project Activity Reports 

While data collection activities are being performed, the sampling team should 

communicate daily with appropriate project personnel regarding project status by 

submitting at least, but not limited to, the following: 

• Field sampling progress reports in relationship to project schedules including field 

work forms, boring logs, well installation and development forms, photographic 

records, field analytical records 

• Sample shipment reports 

• Waste accumulation reports 

• Other project required field reports 

Project quality assurance monitoring of data collection activities must include all of the 

applicable QA/QC requirements identified in the SCP and the QA group should 

communicate daily with appropriate project personnel regarding project status by 

submitting at least, but not limited to, the following: 

SCP Guide 28 February 2009
Section 5.0 – Phase III – SCP Implementation

SCP Guide 29 February 2009

• Field and laboratory DQO and MQO evaluation reports 

• QA samples and sample handling procedures/verification reports 

• QA sample analysis reports 

• Non-conformance reports 

• Corrective action reports 

5.5 Site Disposition 

For most sites, following review of data results generated during one or more surveys, a 

disposition decision is based on a demonstration of compliance with site cleanup goals. When 

survey results are used to support a decision, the decision maker(s) 

needs to ensure that the data 

will support that decision with satisfactory confidence. Actions must be taken to manage the 

uncertainty in the survey results, so that sound, defensible decisions may be made. These actions 

include design and implementation of proper survey and sampling plans to control known causes 

of uncertainty, proper application of QC procedures to detect and control significant sources of 

error, and careful analysis of uncertainty before the data are used to support decision making. 

If the decision maker(s) determine that the cleanup goals have not been met to satisfy the site 

QAPP due to a sample collection issue, then the SCP will be re-optimized through reevaluation 

and redesigned. Additional sampling and analysis may be required to satisfy compliance 

demonstration and site disposition. 
Section 6.0 – Additional Resources 

6.0 Additional Resources 

In addition to the information provided in this document, the following documents are 

recommended as resources for generating an SCP that clearly identifies project goals, associated 

data needs, and application of QA elements based upon the QAPP project goals designed to reach 

site release: 

• Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols Manual, NUREG-1576; EPA 

402-B-04-001A; July 2004 (MARLAP) 

• Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual, NUREG-1575, Rev. 1; EPA 

402-R-97-016, Rev. 1; DOE/EH-0624, Rev. 1; August 2000 (MARSSIM) 

• Guidance for Developing Quality Systems for Environmental Programs, EPA QA/G-1, 

EPA/240/R-02/008, November 2002 

• Guidance on Assessing Quality Systems, EPA QA/G-3, EPA/240/R-03/002, March 2003 

• Guidance on Systemic Planning Using the Data Quality Objectives Process, EPA QA/G-4, 

EPA/240/B-06/001, February 2006 

• Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/G-5, EPA/240/R-02/009, December 

2002 

• Guidance on Choosing a Sampling Design for Environmental Data Collection for Use in 

Developing a Quality Assurance Project Plan, EPA QA/G-5S, EPA/240/R-02/005, 

December 2002 

• Guidance on Technical Audits and Related Assessments for Environmental Data Operations, 

EPA QA/G-7, EPA/600/R-99/080, January 2000 

• Guidance on Environmental Data Verification and Data Validation, EPA QA/G-8, 

EPA/240/R-02/004, November 2002 

• Sample Collection Procedures for Radiochemical Analytes in Environmental Matrices, 

EPA/600/S-07/001, December 2006 

• EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/R-5, EPA/240/B-01/003, 

March 2001 

SCP Guide 30 February 2009
Section 7.0 – References

7.0 References 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Requirements for the Preparation of Sampling and Analysis 

Plans, EM 200-1-3, February 2001. 

U.S. Department of Energy, Decommissioning Handbook (DOE/EM-0383), January 2000. 

U.S. Department of Energy, Statistical and Cost-Benefit Enhancements for the DQO Process for 

Characterization Decisions (DOE/EM-0316), September 12, 1996. 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Planning 

Guidance for Protection and Recovery Following Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD) and 

Improvised Nuclear Device (IND) Incidents, FR Doc E8-17645, Federal Register: (Volume 73, 

Number 149) [Page 45029-45048], August 1, 2008. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidance for Developing Quality Systems for 

Environmental Programs, EPA QA/G-1, EPA/240/R-02/008, November 2002. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidance on Assessing Quality Systems, EPA QA/G-3, 

EPA/240/R-03/002, March 2003. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidance on Systemic Planning Using the Data Quality 

Objectives Process, EPA QA/G-4, EPA/240/B-06/001, February 2006. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA 

QA/G-5, EPA/240/R-02/009, December 2002. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidance on Choosing a Sampling Design for 

Environmental Data Collection for Use in Developing a Quality Assurance Project Plan, EPA 

QA/G-5S, EPA/240/R-02/005, December 2002. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidance on Technical Audits and Related Assessments 

for Environmental Data Operations, EPA QA/G-7, EPA/600/R-99/080, January 2000. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidance on Environmental Data Verification and Data

Validation, EPA QA/G-8, EPA/240/R-02/004, November 2002. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Data Quality Assessment: A Reviewers Guide, EPA 

QA/G-9R, EPA/240/B-06/002, February 2006. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Data Quality Assessment: Statistical Methods for 

Practitioners, EPA QA/G-9S, EPA/240/B-06/003, February 2006. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidance on Quality Assurance for Environmental 

SCP Guide 31 February 2009
Section 7.0 – References

SCP Guide 32 February 2009

Technology Design, Construction, and Operation, EPA QA/G-11, EPA/240/B-05/001, January 

2005. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans, 

EPA QA/R-5, EPA/240/B-01/003, March 2001. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Sample Collection Procedures for Radiochemical 

Analytes in Environmental Matrices, EPA/600/S-07/001, December 2006. 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, A Nonparametric Statistical Methodology for the Design 

and Analysis of Final Status Decommissioning Surveys, NUREG-1505, June 1998. 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation 

Manual, NUREG-1575, Rev. 1; EPA 402-R-97-016, Rev. 1; DOE/EH-0624, Rev. 1; August 

2000. 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Assessment of 

Materials and Equipment (Draft Report for Comment), NUREG-1575, Supp. 1; EPA 402-R-06-

002; DOE/EH-707, December 2006. 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical 

Protocols Manual, NUREG-1576 EPA 402-B-04-001A, July 2004. 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Manual for Conducting Radiological Surveys in Support 

of License Termination (NUREG/CR-5849), Draft Report for Comment, June 1992. 
Appendix A

Appendix A 

Sample Collection Plan Design Elements 

and Development Checklist 

Title Page 

Approval Page 

Table of Contents 

1.0 Project Background 

1.1 Site History and Contaminants 

1.2 Summary of Site Data Prior to Homeland Security Event 

1.3 Site-Specific Definition of Problems (including a description of homeland security event) 

1.4 FRMAC Event Response Data 

2.0 Project Organization and Responsibilities 

3.0 Project Scope and Objectives 

3.1 Task Description 

3.2 Applicable Regulations/Standards/Risk Based Cleanup Goals 

3.3 Project Schedule 

4.0 Nonmeasurement Data Acquisition 

5.0 Field Activities 

5.1 Ground Water 

5.1.1 Rationale/Design 

5.1.1.1 Monitoring Well Location and Installation (if deemed necessary based on the 

event) 

5.1.1.2 Sample Collection and Field and Laboratory Analysis 

5.1.1.3 Upgradient, QA/QC, and Blank Samples and Frequency 

5.1.2 Monitoring Well Installation (if deemed necessary based on the event) 

5.1.2.1 Drilling Methods and Equipment 

5.1.2.2 Materials 

5.1.2.3 Installation 

5.1.2.4 Documentation 

5.1.2.5 Well Decommission/Abandonment 

5.1.2.6 Water Level Measurement 

5.1.3 Aquifer Testing 

5.1.4 Field Measurement Procedures and Criteria 

5.1.5 Sampling Methods for Ground Water - General 

5.1.6 Sample Handling Methods for Ground Water - Filtration 

5.1.7 Sample Containers and Preservation Techniques 

5.1.8 Field Quality Control Sampling Procedures 

5.1.9 Decontamination Procedures 

5.2 Subsurface Soil 

5.2.1 Rationale/Design 

5.2.1.1 Soil and Rock Boring Locations 

5.2.1.2 Discrete/Composite Soil Sampling Requirement 

SCP Guide 33 February 2009
Appendix A

5.2.1.3 Sample Collection and Field and Laboratory Analysis 

5.2.1.4 Background, QA/QC, and Blank Samples and Frequency 

5.2.2 Field Procedures 

5.2.2.1 Drilling Methods 

5.2.2.2 Boring Logs 

5.2.2.3 Field Measurement Procedures and Criteria 

5.2.2.4 Sampling for Radiochemical Analyses 

5.2.2.5 Sample Containers and Preservation Techniques 

5.2.2.6 Field Quality Control Sampling Procedures 

5.2.2.7 Decontamination Procedures 

5.3 Surface Soil and Sediment 

5.3.1 Rationale/Design 

5.3.1.1 Surface Soil Sample Locations 

5.3.1.2 Sediment Sample Locations from On-site and/or Off-site Drainage Channels 

5.3.1.3 Sediment Sample Locations from Ponds, Lakes, and Lagoons 

5.3.1.4 Discrete/Composite Soil and/or Sediment Sampling Requirements 

5.3.1.5 Sample Collection and Field and Laboratory Analysis 

5.3.1.6 Upgradient, QA/QC, and Blank Samples and Frequency 

5.3.2 Field Procedures 

5.3.2.1 Sampling Methods for Surface Soil/Dry Sediment 

5.3.2.2 Sampling Methods for Underwater Sediments from Ponds, Lakes, and 

Lagoons 

5.3.2.3 Field Measurement Procedures and Criteria 

5.3.2.5 Sampling for Radiochemical Analyses 

5.3.2.6 Sample Containers and Preservation Techniques 

5.3.2.7 Field QC Sampling Procedures 

5.3.2.8 Decontamination Procedures 

5.4 Surface Water 

5.4.1 Rationale/Design 

5.4.1.1 Surface Water Sample Locations 

5.4.1.2 Sample Collection and Field and Laboratory Analysis 

5.4.1.3 Upgradient, QA/QC, and Blank Samples and Frequency 

5.4.2 Field Procedures 

5.4.2.1 Sampling Methods for Surface Water - General 

5.4.2.2 Sample Handling Methods for Surface Water - Filtration 

5.4.2.3 Field Measurement Procedures and Criteria 

5.4.2.4 Sample Containers and Preservation Techniques 

5.4.2.5 Field Quality Control Sampling Procedures 

5.4.2.6 Decontamination Procedures 

5.5 Other Matrices 

5.5.1 Rationale/Design 

5.5.1.1 Sample Locations 

5.5.1.2 Discrete/Composite Sampling Requirements 

5.5.1.3 Sample Collection and Field and Laboratory Analysis 

5.5.1.4 Background/Upgradient, QA/QC, and Blank Samples and Frequency 

5.5.2 Field Procedures 

SCP Guide 34 February 2009
Appendix A

SCP Guide 35 February 2009

5.5.2.1 Sampling Methods 

5.5.2.2 Field Measurement Procedures and Criteria 

5.5.2.3 Sample Containers and Preservation Techniques 

5.5.2.4 Field Quality Control Sampling Procedures 

5.5.2.5 Decontamination Procedures 

6.0 Radiological Field Measurements and Instrumentation to Support Sample Collection 

7.0 Field Operations Documentation 

7.1 Daily Quality Control Reports (QCR) 

7.2 Field Logbook and/or Sample Field Sheets 

7.3 Photographic Records 

7.4 Sample Documentation 

7.4.1 Sample Numbering System 

7.4.2 Sample Labels and/or Tags 

7.4.3 Chain-of-Custody Records 

7.5 Field Analytical Records 

7.6 Documentation Procedures/Data Management and Retention 

8.0 Sample Packaging and Shipping Requirements 

9.0 Sampling Wastes 

10.0 Project Quality Assurance 

11.0 Non-Conformance/Corrective Actions 

Appendices 

References