How can primary decision-makers assure the quality of decisions made in the field and justify changes made in initial sampling plans?
Work plans that incorporate dynamic work strategies will include “if-then” logic and contingency plans to guide decision-making in the field. The primary issue this question raises pertains to decisions that are not anticipated by the work plan guiding field activities. In these cases, the work plan should specify the decision-making process and level of technical and/or Triad core team review required to support the decision so that the decision-making process is clear to field staff. Where the significance of a decision is not great (e.g., moving a sampling location a short distance because of access problems), the decision may be one that can be made and documented by field staff without additional review. Other decisions (such as changing the real-time measurement methodology used because of performance issues) will require a more formal review and approval process by senior technical staff and/or the Triad core team. Decision-makers can assure the quality of decision made in the f
Related Questions
- What is the primary reason that soil-gas sampling for vapor intrusion differs from soil-gas sampling for typical site assessment?
- When an employee changes status to terminated (02) do we discontinue reporting after the initial month of termination?
- What is the difference between Primary, Secondary & Advanced Secondary effluent quality?
