Office of Solid Waste and Emergency EPA 542-F-07-001 

Response (5203P) May 2007 

 www.brownfieldstsc.org 

INTRODUCTION

Since its inception in 1995, the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency’s (EPA) Brownfields Initiative and 

other revitalization efforts have grown into major 

national programs that have changed the way 

contaminated property is perceived, addressed, and 

managed in the United States. In addition, over time, 

there has been a shift within EPA and state regulatory 

agencies in the way that hazardous waste site 

cleanups are managed. 

Project managers, regulators, technology providers, 

and other stakeholders are increasingly recognizing 

the value of implementing a more dynamic approach 

to site cleanup that is flexible and focuses on realtime decision-making in the field to reduce costs, 

improve decision certainty, and expedite site 

closeout. As shown in Figure 1, the Triad approach 

uses (1) systematic project planning, (2) dynamic 

work strategies (DWS), and (3) real-time 

measurement technologies to reduce decision 

uncertainty and increase project efficiency (Source: 

EPA 2003). 

The approaches used in Triad projects require 

specific procedures and tools for data interpretation 

and management. For example, technologies such 

as open-path air monitoring systems and subsurface 

geophysical detection tools can generate thousands 

of individual data points that must be assimilated and 

manipulated by computer to provide the full benefit of 

their real-time imaging capabilities. Fortunately, data 

management and decision support tools (DST) have 

become more available in recent years, and 

experienced Triad practitioners are already exploiting 

them (ITRC 2003). 

The Brownfields and Land Revitalization Technology 

Support Center (BTSC) created this bulletin to focus 

on implementing a data management program for a 

Triad project, and includes: 

1. A brief introduction to the Triad approach 

2. Answers to frequently asked questions about 

data management on Triad projects, such as the 

following: 

• How do Triad practitioners plan for data 

management and interpretation? 

• Who prepares the dynamic work strategy 

(DWS) and data management plan, and 

what are the essential elements of the data 

management plan? 

• How are data collected and used in a Triad 

investigation? 

About the Brownfields and Land Revitalization 

Technology Support Center (BTSC) 

EPA established BTSC (www.brownfieldstsc.org) to 

ensure that brownfields and other land revitalization 

decision-makers are aware of the full range of 

technologies available for conducting site 

assessments and cleanups and can make informed 

decisions about their sites. The center can help 

federal, state, local, and tribal officials evaluate 

strategies to streamline the site assessment and 

cleanup process at specific sites; identify, review and 

communicate information about complex technology 

options; evaluate contractor capabilities and 

recommendations; and plan technology 

demonstrations. 

Localities can submit requests for assistance through 

their EPA Regional Brownfields Coordinators 

(http://www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/corcntct.htm) or by 

calling 1-877-838-7220 toll free. For more 

information about BTSC, contact Carlos Pachon at 

(703) 603-9904 or pachon.carlos@epa.gov. 

Management and Interpretation of Data 

Under a Triad Approach – Technology Bulletin 

May 2007 

Figure 1: The Triad Approach.
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

2

• What types of tools are used to manage, 

interpret, and communicate data? 

• How do Triad practitioners balance the need 

for data review with the need for rapid data 

turnaround? 

3. Three examples of data management are 

addressed, with state agencies as the primary 

regulatory body: 

• Milltown Redevelopment Site, Milltown, New 

Jersey 

• Metal Etching Site, Freeport, New York 

• Underground Storage Tank (UST) Sites, 

South Dakota 

4. Sources of additional information for project 

teams and stakeholders who develop or provide 

input on a data management program in support 

of a Triad project 

THE TRIAD APPROACH 

Triad is a three-pronged approach for improving 

decision-making and streamlining environmental 

cleanup projects. The Triad approach draws on 

advancing science, technology, and practitioner 

experience to develop strategies for making site work 

more defensible, resource-effective, and responsive 

to stakeholder concerns. 

Data management is an essential cross-cutting 

component to the three elements of the Triad 

approach: systematic project planning, dynamic work 

strategies, and real-time measurement technologies. 

Systematic project planning provides the 

overarching framework for project planning, 

contracting, and stakeholder communication. The 

systematic planning process compels the stakeholder 

group (which consists of regulators, landowners, civic 

leaders, public participants, and their representatives) 

to reach consensus on critical issues, such as 

schedule, milestones, data management, 

communication, and — most importantly — exit 

strategy as early as possible in the project’s life cycle. 

Although stakeholder participation is necessary for all 

hazardous waste site remediation and closure efforts, 

it plays a particularly important role in the Triad 

approach. Stakeholder participation is particularly 

important because of the Triad's reliance on nonstandard analysis to support real-time decisionmaking and its use of dynamic work strategies that 

often defer significant sampling program decisions to 

the field (Triad Resource Center 2006). Developing 

data flow plans, and gaining an understanding of the 

data user’s needs are essential tasks during 

systematic planning. 

Dynamic work strategies (DWS) are embodied in 

dynamic (flexible) planning documents. The key 

aspect of a dynamic work strategy is a defined 

decision logic that members of the field team can 

follow as they collect and evaluate data. The decision 

logic is a set of guidelines or decision rules that 

provide a logical framework the project team will use 

to make decisions on how, when, where, and why 

sampling and analysis will be conducted. The DWS 

informs field team members and project stakeholders 

on the amount and type of data to be collected initially 

and as the investigation progresses. The DWS, with 

the decision logic at its core, is incorporated into 

project planning documents and may be summarized 

in a flow chart or diagram (Figure 2). 

The Triad approach differs from conventional 

investigations in its emphasis on collecting data using 

real-time measurement technologies. These 

technologies allow data to be collected or analyzed at 

a much greater density or rate than is typically 

obtained through a conventional remedial 

investigation (RI) or other site characterization 

project. The Triad approach uses real-time 

measurement technologies to increase the amount of 

data available to support decision-making and to 

provide these data to the project team in a matter of 

minutes or hours. Thus, decision-making for many 

projects can occur in real time while equipment is 

mobilized to the site and samples are being collected, 

rather than after months of data review, report 

preparation, and approval. It is no surprise then, that 

management and communication of data is of utmost 

importance to the success of a dynamically managed 

project. 

The primary tool that guides a Triad project is the 

conceptual site model (CSM). The CSM is a planning 

tool that organizes what is known about a site and 

helps the project team identify what more must be 

known to make defensible project decisions. The 

CSM unifies existing data into a concise description of 

a site’s physical setting, contaminant release, 

transport mechanisms, and exposure points that 

describe the problem. The CSM is treated as a 

working hypothesis of site conditions that will be 

refined and improved over the course of the project. 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

3

A well-implemented Triad project must use data 

management procedures that promote clear 

visualization of the CSM and encourage participation 

of all stakeholders in its development and refinement. 

Furthermore, data management and collection 

procedures should allow for review and refinement of 

the CSM in nearly real time. This distinction is a 

critical difference between the Triad and more 

conventional approaches to site investigation and 

poses the central data management challenge for 

Triad projects. 

Triad practitioners recognize that the uncertainty 

inherent in site characterizations results largely from 

(1) sampling uncertainties, which are minimized by 

high-density, sometimes lower-quality sampling of 

heterogeneous media using real-time sampling and 

analytical methods, and (2) analytical uncertainties, 

which are minimized by higher-quality, lower-density 

laboratory analysis. The Triad practitioner combines 

both types of data into a collaborative data set that 

maximizes the strengths of each data type to 

minimize overall uncertainty. Collaborative data sets 

combine information from multiple data collection 

tools, ranging from test kits and hand-held meters to 

survey information and analytical laboratory data. It is 

essential that the data management system of a Triad 

project provides an efficient means for assembling 

and using collaborative data sets. 

The Triad practitioner also looks for tools and 

techniques that allow the core technical team — the 

environmental professionals who conduct the project 

— to share and interpret data as rapidly as possible 

without compromising overall data quality. Tools 

such as relational databases, data reduction or 

visualization software (also called “decision support 

tools” [DST]), and project Web sites or file sharing 

sites improve the ability of the core technical team to 

share data and new insights with project 

stakeholders. As a result, all interested parties may 

meaningfully participate in refining the CSM and 

Figure 2. Example of a Subset of a Decision-logic Diagram. The decision-logic subset depicted in 

these diagrams forms part of a dynamic work strategy (DWS) plan, and was created during 

systematic planning. Enormous amounts of data from parallel sampling schemes may be 

generated once field work begins, and a data management plan is critical to allow quick 

information dissemination and presentation so that the project team can interact and make 

decisions in real time. 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

4

adjusting the sampling plan. Further information 

about the Triad approach is available at 

www.triadcentral.org. 

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 

Five frequently asked questions are answered below 

to help potential Triad practitioners understand how 

familiar data management issues are handled under 

the Triad approach. 

How do Triad practitioners plan for data 

management and interpretation? 

Triad investigations are dynamic. A DWS is 

developed before the project team mobilizes to the 

field, and the DWS rather than a static grid-based 

sampling plan is used to guide the investigation. The 

DWS may identify a number of initial sampling 

locations, but subsequent (referred to as “adaptive”) 

sampling locations are based on predetermined 

criteria and are driven by collection and interpretation 

of real-time data. 

The DWS must have a parallel data management 

strategy that allows real-time data interpretation and 

decision-making by project stakeholders. For this 

reason, it is important for project planning documents 

to include a data management plan that contains a 

detailed discussion of data management procedures, 

equipment (software and hardware), lines of 

communication, reporting guidelines, and time 

frames. Careful planning further allows the project 

team to adequately assess costs and resource needs 

associated with data management. 

Who prepares the DWS and data management 

plan, and what are the essential elements of the 

data management plan? 

Preparation of the DWS and data management plan 

is usually the responsibility of the core technical team; 

however, these plans should not be prepared until 

stakeholder input and concerns are obtained during a 

series of systematic planning meetings. As the Triad 

methodology is applied to a broader class of 

environmental projects and programs, some may 

initially view its principles as conflicting with regulatory 

standards and approaches. Thus, it is critical to the 

success of a Triad project to encourage the 

participation of regulators, landowners, and the public 

from the outset and to maintain a spirit of 

transparency and cooperation throughout the project. 

The Triad approach can incur more costs upfront 

because critical issues are addressed at the outset of 

the project; however, the initial expenditure should be 

more than offset by the savings that will result from 

fewer mobilizations and phases of work, with less 

conflict and more efficient coordination between 

stakeholders later in the project. 

A successful data management strategy depends on 

input not only from data management specialists but 

also from those who will be generating and using the 

data, including vendors, geoscientists, chemists, and 

other technical specialists. The data management 

plan must address how data from different sources 

will be integrated to support decisions by considering 

the following elements: 

• Origin of data streams: Data may be 

generated by a variety of field or laboratory 

instruments, and results may be documented 

using various manual and electronic formats. 

The quality and format of the various data 

streams must be understood so that they may be 

merged effectively into a common database. 

• Data pathways and communication: Project 

managers must recognize that a number of key 

participants in project decision-making may be 

remote from the site during significant periods of 

time. The data management plan for the project 

should recognize this issue as important and 

provide for the rapid turnaround and distribution 

of results and data analysis to stakeholders. The 

data management plan should also assign 

responsibility for all aspects of the management 

and security of the data throughout the project 

life cycle. 

• Level and timing of quality assurance and 

quality control (QA/QC): Triad-based programs 

often include QA/QC components that are either 

unique or significantly different in scope and 

nature from what a conventional program would 

require. Fewer QC requirements are typically 

pre-defined for real-time measurement systems 

that are deployed in the field. This lack of predefined requirements offers the opportunity to 

develop QC protocols that are customized to the 

site-specific needs and performance goals of a 

project. The concept of customized QC 

requirements is consistent with EPA's 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

5

Performance Based Measurement System 

(PBMS) initiative (http://www.cluin.org/search/t.focus/id/195/). 

• Data analyses (visualization and statistical): 

Triad practitioners should have a clear idea of the 

statistical analyses, geostatistical programs, and 

visualization software that will be appropriate to 

interpret and evaluate the data at early planning 

stages of the project. Planning for data 

evaluation up front assures that the data are 

formatted appropriately for the analytical tool and 

that the analytical suite is appropriate for the 

project’s objective and the site’s characteristics. 

• Data stream integration: Care is required if 

databases are used to store collaborative data 

sets. The two separate data sets should not be 

indiscriminately mixed together because they 

often will not be statistically comparable. Blind 

merging of data sets with different QC protocols, 

(such as in statistical programs to calculate 

means and standard deviations) should be 

avoided, and clear, consistent data identification 

protocols should be used to minimize timeconsuming errors in identifying and managing 

data. 

• Correspondence between data and the 

decisions they support: It is important to 

understand how the data will be used to support 

different decisions as the project progresses. 

The linkage between data and decisions may be 

best summarized in a table or matrix format, 

providing a direct means to assess whether data 

collection and analysis techniques are being 

used appropriately. 

• Data archive and repository: As part of the 

systematic planning process, it is important for 

project managers to be aware of the records that 

must be included in the project archives and 

make sure the mechanisms are in place to 

capture the appropriate documentation.

How are data collected and used in a Triad 

investigation? 

The key to using data to drive decision-making in the 

field is to ensure that the data are readily available as 

the investigation is being conducted. Real-time data 

collection and analysis methods may yield immediate 

graphical results. For instance, subsurface 

investigations increasingly rely on characterization 

tools that use direct-push drilling equipment. One 

example is the cone penetrometer test (CPT), which 

generates a lithologic profile as a sensor is pushed 

through soil. Other tools create profiles of organic 

contaminants as the sensors are advanced through 

the subsurface environment, such as the membrane 

interface probe (MIP) or the laser-induced 

fluorescence (LIF) sensor. 

Vendors of these services can usually plot the profiles 

as the sensors are advanced, giving the field team a 

hard-copy graphic depiction of subsurface 

characteristics of interest, such as a continuousprofile CPT tip resistance (indicating soil type), 

dynamic pore pressure (indicating permeability), or 

MIP response (indicating contamination by volatile 

organic compounds [VOCs]). Many vendors can 

quickly generate additional visualizations, such as 

modeled plan view or three-dimensional plume maps. 

The team can select the following day’s sampling 

locations after they have reviewed these work 

products and by following the predetermined decision 

logic established during systematic project planning. 

Similarly, a variety of instruments and tests kits are 

available to rapidly analyze samples for metals, 

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), 

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), and other classes of 

chemicals. Test kit results are usually recorded in 

logbooks but may be logged electronically using a 

personal data assistant (PDA). Other hand-held 

instruments such as the photoionization detector 

(PID) and X-ray fluorescence (XRF) detector include 

data loggers or more comprehensive data systems 

with electronic data porting capabilities. Location 

data, such as locations of surface sampling or 

boreholes, can be recorded electronically using global 

positioning system (GPS) equipment. 

Although many decisions can be made using 

graphical printouts or data recorded in log books, a 

Triad investigation is most efficient when data can be 

captured electronically and then downloaded in a 

seamless manner to a relational database (a 

database where relationships between data items are 

organized in tables that can be linked through a 

common field). As noted previously, many vendors of 

real-time analytical technologies can quickly generate 

representations of electronic data in the field. 

Alternatively, different types of data can be 

transferred to a central on-site or off-site location for 

incorporation into the relational database and for 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

6

further analysis using widely available software. 

Numerical detector responses can be tabulated and 

correlated with laboratory data within a relational 

database. 

What types of tools are used to manage, interpret, 

and communicate data? 

The streamlined manner used to acquire data during 

a Triad project is mirrored by the tools and techniques 

used for data management and interpretation. DSTs 

are interactive software tools decision-makers use to 

answer questions, solve problems, and support or 

refute conclusions. They may have a single function, 

but more often incorporate multiple functions, such as 

data acquisition, spatial data management, modeling, 

and cost estimation. DSTs are designed to bring data 

management and interpretation capabilities as close 

(in both time and space) to data collection activities 

and decision-making as possible while still 

maintaining the integrity of the work products they 

develop. 

The DST matrix (http://www.frtr.gov/decisionsupport/) 

is a Web-based resource EPA created to assist Triad 

practitioners in selecting a DST to meet project 

objectives. The matrix provides detailed information 

for 25 DSTs. Additional information about the DST 

matrix is provided at the end of this bulletin. 

Examples of data management, interpretation, and 

communication tools are presented below. Links to 

specific programs are provided in the DST matrix. 

Examples of available tools include: 

Scribe (http://www.ertsupport.org/scribe_home.htm) is 

a data management DST developed by EPA’s 

Environmental Response Team (ERT) that allows a 

greater number of project teams working at small to 

medium sites to realize the benefits of maintaining 

data in a relational database. Scribe can import 

electronic data, including analytical laboratory results 

in electronic data deliverable (EDD) format and 

sampling location data such as GPS coordinates. 

Scribe can print sample labels and chain-of-custody 

documents. Scribe is integrated with a software 

extension called “Scriblets” to capture and import 

sampling and monitoring data collected using handheld PDAs during field work. The ability to sort, 

query, post, and plot data in the field frees project 

teams from the need to load data in an office setting. 

On Triad projects, this ability means that the field 

team can conduct an initial evaluation of the data 

moments after a measurement is made using a realtime tool. 

Spatial Analysis and Decision Assistance (SADA) is a 

package of data analysis tools developed by the 

University of Tennessee using grants provided by 

EPA. SADA incorporates tools for visualization, 

geospatial analysis, statistical analysis, human health 

risk assessment, ecological risk assessment, 

cost/benefit analysis, and design of sampling plans. It 

includes a data import module that allows the user to 

incorporate electronic data rapidly, thus making it 

ideal for use in the field. 

The need to distribute real-time data to geographically 

remote stakeholders and members of the project 

team has increased the use of project-specific Web 

pages. Sample results and maps can be posted to 

the Internet almost as soon as they are generated. 

Electronic access encourages greater participation 

among stakeholder groups, which leads to an 

enhanced sense of ownership among group 

members. 

How do Triad practitioners balance the need for 

data review with the need for rapid data 

turnaround? 

Triad practitioners use a variety of techniques to 

maintain data quality while expediting processing, 

reviewing, and reporting field data. Before the project 

team designs a sampling program around a real-time 

sampling and analysis technique, it should be tested 

during a demonstration of methods applicability

(DMA). Confirmation is often provided by collecting 

collaborative data sets. 

A DMA is an initial site-specific performance 

evaluation for a method, a series of related methods, 

or a data collection tool. Investigations that use the 

Triad approach depend more heavily on field-based 

analytical equipment and emerging technologies. A 

DMA usually consists of using the real-time 

technology on a limited suite of samples while 

sending paired samples to an off-site laboratory for 

standard laboratory analysis for the same analytes or 

parameters. The DMA sample results are evaluated 

using statistical methods such as regression analysis 

and analysis of variance to (1) evaluate the adequacy 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

7

of the real-time method for achieving the project’s 

data quality objectives (DQO), (2) establish 

appropriate sampling and analysis procedures, and 

(3) develop action levels for the real-time methods. 

By conducting the DMA before the field sampling 

program, many problems and data “bottlenecks” that 

may arise during the sampling program can be 

anticipated and corrective measures can be 

established proactively. 

Making full use of collaborative data sets is another 

key to balancing rapid generation of data with 

thorough review. As noted previously, collaborative 

data sets integrate data obtained rapidly using realtime techniques with analytical data from an off-site 

laboratory. A subset of samples that were analyzed 

using real-time measurement technologies may be 

split, with the other portion sent to an off-site 

laboratory to manage uncertainty in real-time 

measurements. These samples are selected based 

on their representativeness (already established by 

the refined CSM) to support specific decisions that 

require more analyte-specific information or more 

accurate quantitation (ITRC 2003). 

The real-time data can be used to support most 

aspects of the DWS, as long as the adequacy of the 

real-time techniques is established ahead of time 

during the DMA. If the DMA is not completed before 

the field program begins, quick data reporting 

turnaround (24 or 48 hours) is required for a portion of 

the samples analyzed off site to allow timely 

evaluation of the data adequacy. 

Similar to conventional investigations, data review 

requirements should be documented in the quality 

assurance project plan (QAPP). It is important that 

the provisions of the QAPP be carefully followed 

during the investigation (Triad Resource Center 

2006). 

EXAMPLES OF DATA MANAGEMENT AND 

INTERPRETATION UNDER THE TRIAD 

APPROACH 

The three examples below illustrate the use of 

procedures and tools for data management and 

interpretation for Triad projects. 

Example 1: Milltown Redevelopment Site, 

Milltown, New Jersey 

Milltown Redevelopment is a Brownfields site in 

Milltown, New Jersey. A large, diverse stakeholder 

group was formed to plan, conduct, and oversee the 

project. The stakeholder group included 

representatives from federal, state, and local 

agencies, as well as a potential site developer. 

The primary project goals were to (1) develop and 

revise a CSM of site geology, hydrology, and 

contaminant fate and transport by collecting soil, 

sediment, and ground water samples and geologic 

logs on a regular grid, and (2) delineate potential 

areas of concern (AOC) on a closer grid spacing of 

adaptive sampling locations. 

Site Facts

• The 22-acre Brownfields site is in the heart of 

downtown Milltown, New Jersey. More than 50 

percent of the site is covered with warehouses 

and industrial buildings. 

• Industrial use of the site began with a rubber 

manufacturing plant in the late 1800s, succeeded 

by numerous other industries. 

• The Milltown Redevelopment Authority and 

Middlesex County Improvement Agency entered 

into an agreement with a developer to improve 

the parcel for mixed uses, including more than 

300 age-restricted residential units, commercial 

space, and open space along Mill Pond, the main 

waterway through central Milltown. 

• Principal contaminants of concern (COC) 

included VOCs (particularly chlorobenzene), 

PAHs, PCBs, pesticides, and total petroleum 

hydrocarbons (TPH). 

The stakeholder group identified several concerns 

through a series of systematic planning meetings, 

including the management of the large volume of data 

that would be generated by field analytical methods 

over a relatively short, 2-month time frame (Mack 

2006a). EPA’s Brownfields Technical Support Center 

(BTSC) identified Scribe and Scriblets (see “Scribe” 

on page 6) as DSTs that would meet the project 

team’s needs for data management (Figure 3) and 

address the stakeholder concerns. Another outcome 

of systematic planning was the development of a 

DWS for selecting successive rounds of sampling 

locations in real time, thus allowing rapid delineation 

of potential AOCs. 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

8

Figure 3: Generalized Schematic Diagram of

Data Pathways. At Milltown, Scribe was used as 

the central data management software, with 

Scribblets used on PDAs to feed field data to 

Scribe. This allowed the project team to make 

real-time decisions during the sampling 

mobilization. 

Source: Mack

Data Management Tools and Procedures

Scriblets allows the user to set up a sampling 

template before field work begins; a field technician 

uses the template to enter data electronically as they 

are generated in the field. A sample numbering 

sequence was assigned in Scriblets before sampling 

began, providing sample numbers automatically as 

the sampling event progressed. Sample data, realtime analytical results, and sampling location data 

(coordinates generated using GPS survey equipment) 

were entered into Scriblets in the field and then 

imported to the Scribe database by connecting the 

PDA to a laptop computer with a USB cable. The 

result was an all-electronic data pathway that 

minimized the potential for transcription errors. 

Scribe facilitated “in the trailer” review of data and 

enabled the project team to plan the next day’s 

sampling locations before team members left the site 

for the day. After each round of sampling, the data 

were imported to Scribe, reviewed, queried, and 

exported to AutoCAD (visualization software) through 

an electronic data format the project team created in 

Scribe. Most importantly, Scribe made available in 

real time many of the features and advantages of a 

relational database while the team was still in the 

field. 

Data Interpretation Tools and Procedures

The DWS anticipated the need for rapid delineation of 

AOCs, and so it provided decision logic diagrams in 

the work plan. Decision logic diagrams facilitate 

delineation of contaminated zones in the field 

because they provide general rules, rather than 

predetermined sample locations. (An example of a 

decision rule would be, “step out 5 feet in each 

cardinal direction from each grid location where the 

field instrument’s action level was exceeded and 

collect an additional instrument reading at each new 

location.”) Scribe provided quick turnaround of 

preliminary sample results; as a result, optimal 

adaptive sampling locations were identified shortly 

after sample results collected previously were 

reviewed in Scribe and plotted in AutoCAD. Scribe’s 

data querying capabilities allowed sample results to 

be sorted by analyte or depth and plotted with any 

associated data item (such as data qualifier) that was 

entered to the database through Scriblets, while still 

assuring the relational integrity of the data were 

maintained. In this manner, the ground water plume 

delineation was expedited, and the CSM was 

developed to explain the likely source of the plume 

and mechanisms that contributed to its spread. 

Data Communication Tools and Procedures

A project-specific Web site was set up on the EPA 

ERT’s Web server. Passwords were issued to all 

stakeholders to provide access to the Web site. 

Maps were posted to the Web site daily, along with 

progress reports and information about meeting times 

and places. The Web site allowed stakeholders, 

including any who were not present at the site, to 

review tables and maps summarizing the project 

team’s updated understanding of the distribution of 

COCs at the end of each day and then provide input 

for the next day’s sampling. 

Project Results

The field team was able to sample more than 400 

locations in approximately 5 weeks. The field team 

collected more than 130 ground water samples and 

600 soil samples, generating 30,000 analytical results 

that were loaded into the database and that 

underwent QC review in a short time. 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

9

The benefits of streamlined data acquisition and 

processing using Scribe were evident during the 

dynamic investigation of the chlorobenzene plume. 

During a site walk-through immediately preceding the 

Triad investigation, a vat was discovered under a 

formerly used loading dock that had been obscured 

by heavy brush. A sample from the vat verified the 

presence of chlorobenzene. Although the vat would 

likely have been discovered during a conventional 

study, the Triad DWS provided a flexible means to 

adapt the sampling strategy immediately after the 

discovery was made in the field, without modifying the 

written plans. The DWS provided clear direction to 

the sampling teams and the means for quick 

concurrence on the sampling strategy from project 

stakeholders. The plume was delineated in 

approximately 4 days after 63 ground water and 28 

soil samples were collected from 46 sampling 

locations (shown as black dots on Figure 4). 

Points of Contact

James Mack 

New Jersey Institute of Technology 

138 Warren Street 

Newark, NJ 07102 

Telephone: (973) 596-5857 

E-mail: mack@adm.njit.edu

Ms. Denise Nickel 

Senior Project Manager 

Middlesex County Improvement Authority (MCIA) 

101 Interchange Plaza 

Cranbury, NJ 08512 

Telephone: (609) 409-5002 

E-mail: DRN@mciauth. com

Example 2: Metal Etching Site, Freeport, New 

York 

The Metal Etching Site is a New York State 

Superfund site in Freeport, Nassau County, New 

York, adjacent to Freeport Creek. The New York 

State Department of Environmental Conservation 

(NYSDEC) conducted an RI of the site to identify and 

delineate contamination in surface and subsurface 

soil, sediment, soil gas; source areas; ground water 

contamination; and impacts to surface water. 

Site Facts

• The 2-acre site is currently used for commercial 

boat storage, sales, and maintenance. 

• The site operated from 1966 through 1999, and 

products were printed or etched using 

anodization, chromate conversion, and chrome 

or nickel plating processes. 

• The primary method for disposal of sanitary and 

industrial wastewater at the site was through 

sanitary sewer lines. AOCs identified at the site 

included the former plating area, chemical and 

waste storage areas, wastewater treatment 

operations, failed sewer lines and connections, 

waste storage areas, and historical spill areas. 

• Site-related COCs included chromium, cadmium, 

nickel, and chlorinated hydrocarbons such as 

tetrachloroethene (PCE), and trichloroethene 

(TCE). 

NYSDEC required that the Triad approach be used 

for the RI. The goal of using the Triad approach was 

to complete the RI during one mobilization effort, 

thereby decreasing time and costs for the 

investigation, while increasing confidence in project 

decisions through a greater sampling density. 

Data Acquisition Tools and Procedures

Surface soil, subsurface soil, and ground water 

samples were collected on a grid with a borehole 

spacing of 70 feet throughout much of the site, with a 

more focused grid (20-foot spacing) in areas of 

particular interest. The DWS called for adaptive 

samples to be collected at two new locations offset 10 

feet from areas where contaminants were detected at 

concentrations above cleanup goals. 

The team evaluated the use of field analytical 

methods (XRF for metals and a field gas 

chromatograph [GC] for VOCs) but decided against 

them because of concerns regarding the high number 

of confirmation samples that would be required to 

collaborate the XRF with the field GC measurements. 

Furthermore, elevated detection limits would restrict 

the usefulness of the XRF to sources and other highconcentration areas. In the case of VOC analysis, the 

sample throughput for the field GC would be too low 

to support the cost of the instrument and analyst. 

Instead, a nearby laboratory was used to analyze 

samples using modified EPA SW-846 methods, which 

Mill 

 Pond 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

10

required less QA/QC and could be completed 

overnight. Samples were delivered to the laboratory 

by noon of each day, and the results were returned to 

the field team by 11:00 a.m. the next day, thus 

providing data almost as quickly as on-site analytical 

methods. 

A collaborative data set was collected to support the 

objectives of the project; real-time data was combined 

with data collected using standard methods and each 

type of data had a specific purpose. The advantage 

gained by collecting data in real time was in obtaining 

the most complete “snapshot” of contaminant 

distribution that time and budget would allow. 

Confirmation sampling, using standard (SW-846) 

laboratory methods, indicated that the real-time data 

for soil and ground water could be used to prepare 

contaminant distribution plots and plume maps, which 

were used to refine the CSM in real time and select 

locations for ground water wells. The confirmation 

sampling indicated real-time ground water data did 

not meet all of the DQOs for making decisions about 

the need for remediation; therefore, ground water 

monitoring wells were installed and samples collected 

for analysis using EPA SW-846 methods. The 

locations of the wells, however, were based on 

contaminant distributions plotted from the real-time 

data. 

Data Management Tools and Procedures

A relational database was constructed using 

geographical information system (GIS) software. The 

database contained chemical data, water levels, and 

survey data. Tables presenting the analytical results 

as well as maps of contaminant distribution and 

ground water flow were all prepared from the 

database using the GIS software interface. Because 

field personnel obtained electronic data deliverables 

(EDDs) from the laboratory daily, updated 

contaminant distribution maps were quickly prepared 

and the field program was redirected as indicated by 

the DWS. 

The GIS software was used to automatically integrate 

the collaborative data set, which included real-time 

and compliance data. Real-time data were used to 

delineate the extent the media were contaminated 

and to develop the CSM; compliance data were used 

to quantify the level of contamination to facilitate 

comparison with regulatory standards and guidance 

values. 

As discussed above, the database queries were used 

to prepare graphical representations of contaminant 

distributions, which were used in the RI report to 

identify areas that would require remediation. Ground 

water flow and the impacts of tidal fluctuations were 

evaluated using spreadsheets containing data 

exported from the database. 

Data Communication Tools and Procedures

Data were shared with the stakeholders through email messages. Contaminant distribution maps and 

tables were prepared in .pdf format and transmitted in 

the e-mail messages. 

Project Results

The real-time analysis required by the Triad approach 

(daily redox potential [Eh] measurements using a 

downhole Eh sensor) quickly revealed that a strongly 

reducing environment predominated the site 

subsurface. The reducing environment had 

immobilized metals, and metal contamination was 

limited to former waste storage and disposal areas. 

Furthermore, it was established that tidal recharge 

promoted biodegradation of the VOC plume. 

Daily analysis permitted early elimination of 

hexavalent chromium as a COC, which resulted in 

significant cost savings because ground water 

samples did not require analysis for hexavalent 

chromium. The real-time data defined a plume of 

chlorinated VOCs extending across the site, with the 

reducing environment in the shallow aquifer 

effectively degrading PCE to TCE to cis-1,2-

dichloroethene and finally to vinyl chloride (Figure 4). 

The chlorinated solvents in the deeper portions of the 

aquifer, however, did not appear to be degrading 

under existing conditions. 

Real-time analysis coupled with the GIS software 

permitted stakeholder input in redirecting sample 

collection to more accurately define the affected 

areas. Without real-time analysis and visualization, 

the chlorinated VOC plume may have been 

incompletely characterized because installation of the 

monitoring well network would have been based more 

on ground water flow than on chemistry. Finally, the 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

11

identification of chlorinated VOCs as COCs allowed 

the timely delineation of a soil vapor plume and 

identified the potential for soil vapor intrusion. 

Points of Contact

Kevin Carpenter 

New York State Department of Environmental 

Conservation 

625 Broadway 

Albany, NY 12233-7020 

Telephone: (518) 402-9553 

E-mail: kjcarpen@gw.dec.state.ny.us

Gregory K. Shkuda, Ph.D. 

Environmental Resources Management, Inc. 

520 Broad Hollow Road 

Melville, NY 11747 

Telephone: (631) 756-8947 

E-mail: Greg.Shkuda@erm.com 

Example 3: “Legacy” UST Sites, South Dakota

The South Dakota Petroleum Release Compensation 

Fund (PRCF) conducted a pilot program in the fall of 

2004 to evaluate the effectiveness of the Triad 

approach to expedite closure of “legacy” UST sites. 

Specifically, the PRCF wanted to evaluate whether 

the Triad approach could be used to reduce decision 

uncertainties associated with petroleum release sites 

on a real-time basis. 

Site Facts

• Five sites were chosen for the study, including 

three active gas stations, one closed gas station, 

and a railroad fueling site. 

• The time since the petroleum releases had been 

first discovered on the sites ranged from 1 to 14 

years. 

• All the sites were considered “legacy” sites 

because, although the petroleum releases had 

been known about for years, none of the sites 

was moving toward regulatory closure. 

• Three of the sites had been previously assessed 

at costs ranging from $35,000 to $103,000 

(including field work and report preparation), but 

the results did little to reduce decision 

uncertainty. 

Figure 4: Vinyl Chloride contaminant distribution map, Metal Etching site, Freeport, NY. For

rapid, economic results, an off-site laboratory returned analytical results by 11 AM the day after

samples were taken. The project team utilized GIS software to visualize data and direct

sampling efforts to accurately define affected areas. The team communicated the contaminant 

distribution maps and tables to all stakeholders via e-mail. Source: Shkuda and others 2006 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

12

• COCs included benzene-toluene-ethylbenzenexylene (BTEX), methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE), 

diesel fuel, gasoline, ethylene dibromide (EDB), 

naphthalene, terephthalic acid (TPA), and total 

petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH). 

The Triad pilot program sought to reduce decision 

uncertainty by increasing data density through the 

use of the MIP as the primary investigation tool. The 

MIP is a direct-sensing tool that enables investigators 

to obtain rapid, continuous profiles of subsurface 

characteristics and display logs of results in real time. 

These capabilities promote a fast, iterative 

investigation process that minimizes mobilizations 

and ideally can collapse multiple phases of 

assessment under a conventional approach into a 

single event. These events can generate huge 

amounts of data, and require a pre-plan to organize 

and utilize the data in real time. The PRCF estimates 

that a UST site assessment using a conventional 

approach would require 12 to 18 weeks from the time 

the samples were sent to an off-site lab to when 

stakeholders are notified additional information is 

needed (South Dakota PRCF, 2005). A primary goal 

of this pilot program was to shorten that time frame to 

a few days. 

Legacy Data and Systematic Planning

A systematic planning meeting presided over by an 

independent facilitator was held before the beginning 

of the field program and was essential to the project’s 

success. Existing assessment data were made 

available to all stakeholders at the meeting, along 

with three-dimensional models of each site’s 

subsurface geology and chemistry. This process 

provided all stakeholders with a single representation 

of the preliminary CSM of existing conditions to 

promote a common understanding at the outset of the 

problems to be solved. The stakeholders were able 

to establish objectives and ground rules (such as the 

required participation of all project team members at 

the site every day) and to develop a generic protocol 

for use at each site to obtain data. All data that were 

needed to comply with South Dakota Department of 

Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Tier 1 

petroleum release reporting requirements were 

acquired within 4 days per site. 

Data Acquisition Tools and Procedures

Confirmation samples (including VOC contamination 

in both soil and ground water matrices because MIP 

sensors are not matrix-specific) were collected from 

all sites to establish the site-specific sensitivity of the 

MIP sensors to fuel hydrocarbons. The development 

of this collaborative data set mitigated regulatory 

concerns that decisions were being made based on 

data that had not been analyzed at a fixed laboratory. 

Logs of sensor response were printed immediately 

after the MIP profile was conducted. In many cases, 

the log itself can be used to identify contaminated 

intervals and target depths for confirmation soil 

sample collection and to select locations and depths 

for subsequent borings. Direct-sensing methods are 

ideal for use in conjunction with a DWS and usually 

allow for new sample or boring locations to be 

selected in real time as the work progresses. The 

MIP borehole location was established on the site 

coordinate system within minutes after it was 

completed using GPS survey equipment. 

Data Interpretation and Communication Tools and 

Procedures

The project team uploaded the MIP results and the 

GPS survey data to the vendor’s proprietary data 

processing and contouring program twice daily to 

update the existing three-dimensional model of the 

site. On-site, three-dimensional renderings of the 

geologic structure and the plume extents (Figure 5) 

allowed the project team to identify data gaps 

immediately and fill them before the team demobilized 

from the site. 

Each morning, results from the previous day were 

evaluated by team members and compared to project 

objectives. These results were also uploaded to a 

project Web site daily. The Web site allowed project 

team members who could not be present in the field 

to fully participate in the ongoing evaluation of data. 

The quick data turnaround time enabled the project 

team to follow through on one of the ground rules 

established from the start of the project – that all 

parties be satisfied that the objectives were met 

before the team demobilized from the site. 
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

13

Project Results

Throughout the course of the project, 133 borings 

were advanced, generating almost 350,000 MIP data 

points. In contrast, only about 1,400 data points 

would have been generated if conventional drilling 

methods had been used at the same number of 

boreholes (assuming one PID reading for every 2.5 

feet of core and one discrete sample per borehole). 

The greater data density not only reduced the 

potential for data gaps, but three previously unknown 

USTs were found during the project. All three USTs 

were believed to have contributed to the plumes, and 

have been removed. 

Stakeholders met after the assessment to select the 

next course of action. Additional corrective action is 

planned for two of the sites, consisting of monitored 

natural attenuation, and it is expected that another 

site will be eligible for a no further action (NFA) 

determination. 

The possible NFA determination at one site highlights 

the value of increased data density and the benefits 

of continuous evolution of the CSM. The ground 

water plume was believed to be located within a 

source water protection zone and therefore needed to 

meet EPA maximum contaminant levels (MCL). 

High-density geologic delineation using the soil 

conductivity probe revealed that the plume lay within 

a geologic unit that was not hydraulically connected to 

the aquifer. Thus, MCLs did not apply; depending on 

the results of a soil vapor survey, the site may be 

closed with an NFA determination. 

The costs of the Triad investigations at the two sites 

that had not been previously investigated were 

$25,000 and $32,000. The costs of the Triad 

investigation are difficult to compare with the 

conventional investigations at the other three sites 

because the Triad investigations built on knowledge 

gained from the conventional assessments. 

However, the conventional assessments left the 

investigators with uncertainty regarding the CSM, 

while the Triad assessments tended to remove those 

uncertainties. More information about the costs and 

results of all five assessments can be obtained from 

the Triad profile for this site (Triad Resource Center 

2006). 

Points of Contact

Dennis Rounds 

South Dakota PCRF 

445 East Capitol Avenue 

Pierre, SD 57501 

Telephone: (605) 773-3769 

E-mail: dennis.rounds@state.sd.us

John Sohl 

Columbia Technologies, LLC 

1448 South Rolling Road 

Baltimore, MD 21227 

Telephone: (410) 536-9911 

Web: http://www.columbiadata.com

SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 

The Triad approach is gaining ever greater 

acceptance by EPA and other federal and state 

agencies, as well as professional and industrial 

organizations. Communities and project teams 

interested in implementing the Triad approach are 

encouraged to contact the BTSC for more information 

and for successful examples of Triad applications. 

More detailed information about data management 

and interpretation and on the Triad approach is 

available in the Brownfields Technology Primer Series 

document titled “Using the Triad Approach to 

Streamline Brownfields Site Assessment and 

Cleanup,” which is available at 

http://www.brownfieldstsc.org. 

Figure 5. Example of a rendering of petroleum

plumes and high conductivity values, for the

South Dakota UST Sites. The Project team fed

newly-acquired data into a 3-D visualization

program in order to make decisions about where

sample next. Source: PRCF 2005
Management and Interpretation of Data Under a Triad Approach 

14

Project profiles, case studies, and other information 

on applying the Triad approach are available at

http://www.triadcentral.org. As additional bulletins 

about other aspects of the Triad approach are 

developed, the BTSC will make them made available 

through these Web sites. 

The DWS is the element of the Triad approach that 

provides the mechanism for making real-time 

decisions in the field. It consists of stakeholderapproved decision trees and decision logic that are 

tied to the CSM. A guide to developing a DWS is 

provided at: 

http://www.triadcentral.org/tech/dsp_sub.cfm?id=23

Further information about DSTs is provided at 

http://www.frtr.gov/decisionsupport/index.htm. This 

Web site provides information on 25 DSTs in a matrix 

format. The Web site describes the DSTs, input and 

output file requirements, and user comments and 

provides a link to a software home page providing a 

free copy of the DST. 

DMAs can be critical for a better understanding and 

management of decision-related uncertainty. DMAs 

are discussed in technical bulletins on the Triad 

approach available from the Triad Resource Center: 

http://www.triadcentral.org/tech/dsp_sub.cfm?id=4. 

Performance-based Management System (PBMS) 

provides the site investigator, regulators, and 

stakeholders the leeway to adjust method 

specifications (including QC) to address site-specific 

needs and issues. A discussion of how PBMS may 

be integrated with the Triad systematic planning 

process is provided at: 

http://www.clu-in.org/search/t.focus/id/195/

REFERENCES 

Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC). 

2003. Technical and Regulatory Guidance for 

the Triad Approach: A New Paradigm for 

Environmental Project Management. Prepared 

by the ITRC Sampling, Characterization and 

Monitoring Team. December. 

Mack, J. 2006a. Milltown Redevelopment Project, 

Applying Triad Under a State Regulatory 

Program. New Jersey Institute of Technology. 

Mack, J. 2006b. Milltown Redevelopment Project 

Stage 2 SI/RI Report. New Jersey Institute of 

Technology and Najarian Associates. April 2006. 

Shkuda, G.K., and others. 2006. “A Simple Twist on 

the Triad Approach.” 1st International 

Conference on Challenges in Site Remediation, 

Chicago, Illinois, October 2005. 

South Dakota Petroleum Release Compensation 

Fund (PRCF). 2005. “A Study of Managing 

Decision Uncertainties Using the Triad 

Approach.” June 15. 

Triad Resource Center. 2006. “Triad Resource 

Center.” Accessed in May. On-line Address: 

http://www.triadcentral.org/index.cfm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2003. 

“Using the Triad Approach to Streamline 

Brownfields Site Assessment and Cleanup.” 

Brownfields Technology Primer Series. EPA 

542-B-03-002. June. 

EPA. 2005. “Case Study for the Use of a Decision 

Support Tool: Using SCRIBE to Manage Data 

during a Triad Investigation, Milltown 

Redevelopment Site, Milltown, New Jersey.“ 

Case study available through 

http://www.frtr.gov/decisionsupport/index.htm. 

NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER

This bulletin was prepared by EPA’s Office of Solid 

Waste and Emergency Response under EPA 

Contract No. 68-W-02-034. The information in this 

bulletin is not intended to revise or update EPA policy 

or guidance on how to investigate or clean up 

Brownfields or other revitalization sites. Mention of 

trade names or commercial products does not 

constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. 

This bulletin can be downloaded from EPA’s 

Brownfields and Land Revitalization Technology 

Support Center at www.brownfieldstsc.org. For 

further information about this bulletin or about the 

Triad approach, please contact Dan Powell of EPA at 

(703) 603-7196 or powell.dan@epa.gov.