United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA-600/4 V>2 030a
May 1982
Research and Development
Environmental
Monitoring at
Love Canal
Volume I

-------
                                       EPA-600/4-82-030 a
                                       May 1982
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING  AT LOVE CANAL
                        Volume I
              U.S. Environment.:-.! Pictco^rj ,^-ncy
              ii^on V, L;br?rv          " "
              •• y- South r-., Itvrn C"> ,;:[
              '-  ---^o, iliinuiG 60004

              Office of Research and Development

              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                     401 M  Street,  S.W.

                  Washington, D.C.  20460

-------
                             DISCLAIMER
    This  document was  initiated prior  to  the Agency's  recently
instituted  peer  and  policy  review system.   However,  the report
has  been reviewed  by  many  scientists  within  the U.S.  Environ-
mental  Protection Agency, and  approved for  publication.   Mention
of  trade names  or commercial  products  does  not constitute  en-
dorsement or  recommendation of use.

    The  reader is cautioned to  consider  this  report  in  its  en-
tirety.   Reliance upon or use of  any individual  segment of  this
report  without consideration of  the whole  document may  be  mis-
leading  and  could possibly lead  to erroneous conclusions.
               For sale by the Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office
                                ton, B.C. 20402
                US.

-------
                            FOREWORD


    This report describes  the results of  a  comprehensive multi-
media  environmental  monitoring  study  conducted by  the  U.S.  En-
vironmental  Protection  Agency  (EPA)  at  Love  Canal,  in Niagara
Falls,  New  York.    EPA  was  directed  to  conduct  this  study in
response to  a presidential  state  of  emergency  order  that  was
declared at  Love Canal  on May  21,  1980.   The purpose  of  this
study, which was  conducted during the  summer  and fall  of 1980,
was  to provide  an  environmental  data  base on which decisions
could  be made  regarding  the  habitability of  residences  in  the
Love Canal emergency declaration area.  Due  to the existence  of a
state of emergency at  Love Canal,  the design  and  field sampling
portions of  the  project  were  completed  under severe  time  con-
straints.

    The monitoring  program performed  by EPA  at  Love  Canal  in-
volved  the collection  and analysis of  approximately 6,000 field
samples, making   the Love  Canal  study  the most  comprehensive
multimedia monitoring effort ever conducted  by EPA at a hazardous
wastes  site.   The precision  and  accuracy of  the  environmental
measurements obtained  were documented  through  application of an
extensive quality  assurance program.   As a result,  this study
exemplifies  the  design and  execution of  a  state-of-the-art  en-
vironmental monitoring program.

    Volume  I,  Chapter  1,  consists of  an overview of  the entire
project and  is intended to be accessible to  a wide audience.  The
remainder  of  Volume  I provides  additional information concerning
the design of  the  project  and study findings.   Technical details
regarding specific aspects of the quality assurance programs  used
to  validate  the  monitoring  data  are  included as Appendixes to
Volume I.   Volumes II  and  III present  the Love  Canal monitoring
data.

    The EPA  environmental  monitoring  data have been reviewed by
the U.S. Department  of Health  and  Human Services.   The data  from
the  organic  chemical analyses  have  also been  reviewed  by  the
National Bureau of Standards (NBS).  The results of  these reviews
are presented in a report entitled "Interagency Review:  Comments
by  the U.S.  Department of  Health  and  Human  Services  and  the
National Bureau of Standards on the U.S. Environmental Protection
                               111

-------
Agency's Love Canal Monitoring Study," available from the Nation-
al Technical  Information  Service.   Also  included  in that report
is the EPA response to the NBS review.

    In addition to the review performed by the National Bureau of
Standards, the EPA Love Canal report  was  reviewed  extensively by
numerous  Agency  scientists.  The  results of  these  reviews have
been  incorporated  in  this  final  report,  and  have  addressed all
significant  concerns  expressed  by  the  reviewers.    The review
comments did  not  affect  the major  finding of  the  EPA multimedia
environmental  monitoring  study:   namely,  the data  revealed no
clear evidence of  environmental  contamination  in the residential
portions  of  the  area encompassed  by the  emergency declaration
order  that  was directly  attributable to  the  migration  of sub-
stances from  Love  Canal.
                               Courtney Riordan
                               Acting Assistant  Administrator
                               for Research  and  Development
                                 IV

-------
                              ABSTRACT


    During  the summer  and fall of  1980 the  U.S.  Environmental
Protection  Agency  (EPA)  conducted   a  comprehensive  multimedia
environmental monitoring program  in  the vicinity of the inactive
hazardous wastes landfill known as Love Canal, located in Niagara
Falls, New  York.   As a  result  of a  presidential  state  of emer-
gency order issued on May  21,  1980,  EPA was instructed to assess
the extent and degree of environmental contamination that was di-
rectly attributable to the migration  of substances  from  Love Ca-
nal into  the  occupied,  residential area  around  the former canal
defined by:   Bergholtz Creek on  the  north? 102nd  Street  on the
east  and  103rd Street  on  the  southeast;  Buffalo  Avenue  on the
south; and 93rd Street on the west.  The area closest to the for-
mer canal, currently owned by the  State of New York and contain-
ing the unoccupied  so-called ring 1  and  ring 2 houses,  was ex-
cluded from the emergency declaration order.

    The studies conducted  at  Love Canal by EPA  included  a major
hydrogeologic  investigation,  and  the collection and  analysis of
approximately  6,000  environmental samples  consisting of  water,
soil,  sediment, air, and biota.   An  extensive quality assurance/
quality control program was applied to all phases of the analyti-
cal work to document the precision and accuracy of the monitoring
data.   'Strict  chain-of-custody procedures were  also  employed to
assure the integrity of the monitoring data.

    The EPA multimedia  environmental  monitoring data  revealed  a
limited pattern  of  environmental  contamination  in the  area im-
mediately adjacent  to  Love Canal, probably caused by localized
and highly selective  migration  of  toxic  substances from  the
former canal to the  vicinity of certain ring 1  residences.   The
data also revealed that  contamination that had probably migrated
from  Love Canal  was present  in  those storm sewer   lines  that
originated near the  former canal,  and was present  in  area creeks
and rivers  (primarily in the  sediment)  at locations near  to and
downstream from the  outfalls of those storm sewers.

    Apart from  these findings,  the monitoring  data revealed  no
clear  evidence of environmental contamination in the  area encom-
passed by the  emergency  declaration  order that was directly at-
tributable to  the migration  of substances from  Love Canal.   The
data also provided no evidence,  outside of ring 1,  supporting the
                                v

-------
hypothesis  that  swales  preferentially transported  contaminants
from the former canal into the surrounding neighborhood. Further-
more, the data revealed that the barrier drain system surrounding
the  landfill  was  effectively  intercepting  substances  migrating
laterally  from  Love  Canal  and  was  drawing  near-surface  ground
water back to the drains for collection and subsequent treatment.

    In addition to the report presented in this Volume, two other
Volumes  have  been  prepared to  document  the Love  Canal  study.
Volume  II  consists of  a complete  enumeration of  all  validated
field samples collected  at  Love  Canal and Volume III consists of
a  collection  of  statistical  tabulations  of the  validated  Love
Canal monitoring data.
                                 vx

-------
                             CONTENTS
                                                              Page
Foreword	   iii
Abstract  .........  	  ...........     v
Figures .	    ix
Tables	   xii
Abbreviations and Symbols  	    xv
Acknowledgments  	 xviii

CHAPTER 1    Overview	    1
     1. 1  The EPA Monitoring Program	    6
          1.1.1  Selection of  Sampling  Sites	  .    6
          1.1.2  Samples Collected	    «
          1.1.3  Statistical Analysis of  the  Data  .....    9
          1.1.4  Substances Monitored	   12
          1.1.5  Sampling  Procedures and  Sites  Sampled  .  .   13
          1.1.6  Limitations	   16
     1.2  Results	   1«
     1. 3  Conclusions	   21

CHAPTER 2    Background	   23
     2.1  Site Location .	  .   23
     2.2  Site History	  .   24

CHAPTER 3    Design of the Monitoring Studies    	   34
     3.1  Objectives	   34
     3.2  Implementation	   35
     3.3  Quality Assurance/Quality Control  (OA/QC)  and
          Data Validation  	  ......   39
          3.3.1  Limits of Detection and  Ouantitation  .  .  .   43
          3.3.2  Precision and Accuracy Goals  	   43
     3.4  Data Analysis and Data Reporting   ........   45
     3. 5  Limitations	   47

CHAPTER 4    Results of the Investigations   	    49
     4.1  Hydrogeologic Program  	  .....   49
          4.1.1  Geology of the Love Canal Area	    50
                 4.1.1.1  Geological Setting   	   50
                 4.1.1.2  Topography and  Drainage	    54
                 4.1.1.3  Occurrence of Ground Water  ...   60
                               VII

-------
                         CONTENTS (continued)
                                                              Page

          4.1.2  Geophysical Investigations	,  .  .  .    61
                 4.1.2.1  Objectives of the  Geophysical
                          Investigations	    61
                 4.1.2.2  Major Results of the  Geophysical
                          Investigations	    63
          4.1.3  Hydrology of the Love Canal  Area  .....    63
                 4.1.3.1  Ground-Water Movement .......    66
                 4.1.3.2  Ground-Water Flow  Modeling   ...    71
          4.1.4  Implications of the Hydrogeologic
                 Program Findings	    73
     4.2  Evidence of Contamination Movement   	    75
          4.2.1  Ground-Water Contamination  	    77
                 4.2.1.1  Shallow System	    77
                 4.2.1.2  Bedrock Aquifer  	  ....    R3
          4. 2. 2  Soil Contamination	    87
          4.2.3  Sump Contamination	    97
          4.2.4  Sanitary and Storm  Sewer  Contamination  .  .   107
          4.2.5  Surface Water and Stream  Sediment
                 Contamination	   116
          4.2.6  Air Contamination	123
     4.3  Evidence of Other Environmental  Contamination  .  .   144
          4.3.1  Drinking Water Contamination 	   144
          4.3.2  Food Contamination	147
          4.3.3  Radioactive Contamination  ........   149
          4.3.4  Biological Monitoring of  Contaminants  .  .   152
          4.3.5  Dioxin  ( 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD)	156

CHAPTER 5    Summary and Conclusions   	   162

Appendix  A  Lists of Substances Monitored at Love  Canal  .   166
Appendix  B  Comparative Data and Existing Standards  for
             Substances Monitored at Love  Canal 	   171
Appendix  C  Quality Assurance for Water Samples  	   221
Appendix  D  Quality Assurance for Soil, Sediment,
             and Biota Samples	245
Appendix  E  Quality Assurance for Air Samples   	   266
Appendix  F  Report on the  Audit of  Gas  Chromatography/
             Mass Spectrometry Data  Provided by Love
             Canal Project  Analytical  Laboratories   ....   287
                                Vlll

-------
                              FIGURES

Number
 1  General Site Location Map  	     2
 2  The General Love Canal Study Area  	  .....     3
 3  Detail of the General Love Canal Study Area	     4
 4  Sampling Areas  	  .........    10
 5  Love Canal Remedial Action Project Plan  View	    30
 6  Remedial Project:  Transverse View   	  .  .    31
 7  Sample Page of the Data Listing Presented  in
    Volume II .......................    46
 8  Well A (Overburden) Installation Site Codes	    51
 9  Well B (Bedrock) Installation Site Codes   	    52
10  Generalized Columnar Section of Geologic Units
    in Love Canal Area	    55
11  Index Map Showing Location of Project Area and
    Physiographic Provinces 	  ....    56
12  Location of Storm Sewers Near Love Canal	    59
13  Three Dimensional Plot of Shallow Electromagnetic
    Conductivity Data from Canal Area	    64
14  Site Map Showing Major Results of Geophysical Survey  ,    65
15  Completed Shallow (Overburden) Well   .........    67
16  Completed Bedrock Well	    68
17  Regional Lockport Dolomite Potentiometric  Surface  ...    69
18  Lockport Dolomite Potentiometric Surface   .......    70
19  Overburden Static Water Table .............    72
20  Well A Sampling Sites, Benzene, Maximum
    Concentrations  	    BO
21  Well A Sampling Sites, Toluene, Maximum
    Concentrations	    SI
22  Well A Sampling Sites, Y-BHC, Maximum Concentrations  .    82
23  Well B Sampling Sites, Benzene, Maximum
    Concentrations  	  ..........    84
24  Well B Sampling Sites, Toluene, Maximum
    Concentrations  . . .	    85
25  Well B Sampling Sites, Y-BHC, Maximum Concentrations .     86
26  Soil Sampling Site Codes  ...............    88
27  Typical Soil Sampling Configuration  Used at  Each Site  .    90
28  Soil Sampling Sites (First), Benzene, Maximum
    Concentrations  	 .........    93
29  Soil Sampling Sites (Second), Benzene, Maximum
    Concentrations  	    94
30  Soil Sampling Sites, Y-BHC, Maximum  Concentrations   .  .    95
31  Soil Sampling Sites, Cadmium, Maximum Concentrations  .    96
                                IX

-------
                         FIGURES (continued)

Number                                                        Page

32  Sump Water Sampling  Site  Codes	   99
33  Sump Water Sampling  Sites,  Benzene,  Maximum
    Concentrations   	  104
34  Sump Water Sampling  Sites,  Toluene,  Maximum
    Concentrations	105
35  Sump Water Sampling  Sites,  Y-BHC,  Maximum
    Concentrations   	  106
36  Storm Sewer Sampling Site Codes  	  109
37  Storm Sewer Sediment Sampling  Sites,  Benzene,
    Maximum Concentrations   	  Ill
38  Storm Sewer Water  Sampling  Sites,  Toluene,
    Maximum Concentrations   	  112
39  Storm Sewer Sediment Sampling  Sites,  Toluene,
    Maximum Concentrations   	  113
40  Storm Sewer Water  Sampling  Sites,  Y-BHC,  Maximum
    Concentrations   	  114
41  Storm Sewer Sediment Sampling  Sites,  Y-BHC,
    Maximum Concentrations   	  115
42  Surface Water and  Stream  Sediment  Sampling
    Site Codes	117
43  Stream Sediment  Sampling  Sites,  Benzene,  Maximum
    Concentrations   	  118
44  Surface Water Sampling  Sites,  Toluene,
    Maximum Concentrations   	  119
45  Stream Sediment  Sampling  Sites,  Toluene,
    Maximum Concentrations   	  120
46  Surface Water Sampling  Sites,  Y-BHC,  Maximum
    Concentrations   	  121
47  Stream Sediment  Sampling  Sites,  Y-BHC,  Maximum
    Concentrations   	  122
48  Air Sampling Site  Codes	125
49  Outside Air Sampling Sites, Benzene,  Maximum
    Concentrations   	  130
50  Living Area Air  Sampling  Sites,  Benzene,  Maximum
    Concentrations   	  131
51  Basement Air Sampling Sites, Benzene, Maximum
    Concentrations   	  132
52  Concentration of Benzene  in Living Area Air Samples
    Collected in Canal Area  Residences	  135
53  Concentration of Benzene  in Living Area Air Samples
    Collected in Control Area Residences	  136
54  Median Concentration of Benzene  in Living Area Air
    Monitoring Sites Located  in the  Declaration
    and Canal Areas	137
55  Median Concentration of  Toluene  in Living Area Air
    Monitoring Sites Located  in the  Declaration
    and Canal Areas	  138

-------
                         FIGURES (continued)

Number                                                        Page

56  Median Concentration of  1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethylene in
    Living Area Air Monitoring  Sites  Located
    in the Declaration and Canal  Areas	139
57  Median Concentration of  Benzene Observed in Air for
    Each Sampling Campaign	141
58  Median Concentration of  Toluene Observed in
    Air for Each Sampling Campaign	  142
59  Median Concentration of  1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethylene
    Observed in Air for Each Sampling Campaign	143
60  Drinking Water Sampling  Site  Codes   	  145
61  Drinking Water Sampling  Sites, Chloroform,
    Maximum Concentrations   ..  	  .........  148
62  Oatmeal and Potatoes Sampling Site  Codes  .......  150
63  Biota Sampling Site Codes	154
64  Sampling Site Codes for  Dioxin {2,3,7,R-TCDD)  	  157
                                XI

-------
                              TABLES

Number                                                         Page
  1  Summary of Love Canal  Field  Samples  	    R
  2  A Summary of Love Canal  Sites  Sampled  and Represented
     in the Validated Data  Base	   14
  3  Chemicals Disposed at  Love  Canal  by  Hooker
     Electrochemical Company  (1942-1953)  	   25
  4  Identification of EPA  Laboratories
     and Project Subcontractors   	   36
  5  Geophysical Methods and  Applications  	   62
  6  Frequency of Detection of Contaminants in Validated
     Love Canal Samples	   76
  7  Significant Differences  Observed  in  Extent of Shallow
     System Ground-Water Contamination at Love Canal ....   79
  8  Significant Differences  Observed  in  Extent of Soil
     Contamination at Love  Canal	   91
  9  Significant Differences  Observed  in  the Extent of
     Sump Water Contamination at  Love  Canal	100
 10  Significant Differences  Observed  in  the Extent of
     Air Contamination at Love Canal	128
 11  Three Highest Concentrations of  Selected Compounds
     Observed in Regular Air  Monitoring   	  133
 12  Frequency of Detection of Contaminants in
     Additional Validated Love Canal  Samples 	  146
 13  Minimum Detection Levels for Particular
     Gamma-Emitting Radionuclides  	  151
 14  Scope of the Biological  Monitoring Program  	  153
 15  Results of Storm Sewer Sediment  Determinations for
     2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD	159
A-l  Substances Monitored in  Love Canal
     Water/Soil/Sediment/Biota Samples 	  166
A-2  Substances Monitored in  Love Canal Air Samples  ....  169
B-l  Control Sites	172
B-2  U.S. Average Data	176
B-3  Air	177
B-4  Surface Water	178
B-5  Drinking Water	179
B-6  Biota	180
B-7  List of Compounds Found  in  Ambient Air Using
     TENAX	182
                                xix

-------
                          TABLES (continued)

Number                                                        Page

B-8  Average Daily Concentrations of Toxic Chemicals
     Found toy Singh	197
B-9  Summary of Current Standards for Substances
     Monitored in Love Canal Air Samples  ..........   198
B-10 Analytical Results of Chloroform,  Bromoform,
     Bromodichloromethane, and  Dibromochloromethane,
     and Total Trihalomethanes  in Water Supplies
     from NORS and NOMS	   201
B-ll EPA National Drinking Water Regulations  	   202
C-l  Measured Method Detection  Limits in
     Micrograms per Liter from  Analyses of
     Laboratory Control Standards   	   229
C-2  Estimated Method Detection Limits  for
     all Laboratories  .......... 	   230
C-3  Measured Method Detection  Limits in  Micrograms
     per Liter for Method 608 in Reagent  Water	231
C-4  Percentages of Acceptable  Performance
     Evaluation Results	233
C-5  Summary Statistics and Lower Control Limits
     for Methods 624 and  625 Surrogates from
     EMSL-Cincinnati Measurements   .....  	   238
C-6  Relative Standard Deviations (RSD) for Organic
     Analytes in Laboratory Control Standards   	  .   242
C-7  Relative Standard Deviations (RSD) for Inorganic
     Analytes in Water Samples	   243
D-l  Summary Statistics and Acceptance  Limits for
     Modified Method 624 and Modified Method 625
     Surrogates from all  Laboratory Measurements  	  .   258
D-2  Relative Standard Deviations (RSD) for Organic
     Analytes in Laboratory Control Standards
     NBS Sediment	262
D-3  Relative Standard Deviations (RSD) for Metals
     Analytes in Laboratory Control Standards
     NBS Sediment	263
D-4  Mean Percent Recoveries and Standard Deviations
     of NBS Certified Values in SRM River
     Sediment 1645 ....... 	   264
E-l  Volatile Organics on TENAX	271
E-2  Pesticides on Foam Plugs	272
E-3  Detection Limits for Inorganics 	   273
E-4  Results from Analyses of Blank TENAX Samples   	   273
E-5  Results from Air TENAX Duplicate Samples   	   27«
E-6  Results of Audits of Sampler Flow  Rates	279
E-7  Results from the Analyses of Calibration Check
     Samples	279
E-8  Results from the Analyses of Calibration Check
     Samples by Level and Analytical System   .	281
                               Xlll

-------
                          TABLES (continued)

Number                                                        Page

E-9  Approximate Concentrations of  Calibration
     Check Samples	282
E-10 Summary of Results  for Polyurethane  Foam
     Check Samples	282
E-ll Results from the Analysis of Blind Audit
     Samples by ICAP	283
E-12 Results from the Analysis of National  Bureau of
     Standards Standard  Reference Materials by  NAA 	   283
F-l  Summary of EMSL-Cincinnati Audit  of  Love
     Canal GC/MS Water Samples  	   289
F-2  Summary of the EMSL-Las Vegas  and ERL-Athens
     Audit of Love  Canal  Soil and Sediment  Samples	290
F-3  Summary of the Love  Canal Water  Data Audit	292
F-4  Summary of the Love  Canal  Soil and Sediment Audit .  .  .   292
F-5  Summary of Non-Target Compound Audit  	   296
                                xiv

-------
                     ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
ACEE
ACGIH

AES
amu
B
BCL
(BCL2, BCL3)
BHC
CFR
cm/s
CMTL
DEC

DOH
DOT
EMSL-Cin

EMSL-LV

EMSL-RTP

EPA
ERGO
ERL-Ada

ERL-Athens

ERL-Corvalis

ERL-Duluth

eV
9
GCA
GC/ECD
GC/FID
GC/MS
GSRI
 (GSLA, GSNO)
HERL-RTP
Acurex Corporation, Energy and Environment Division
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hy-
gienists
Advanced Environmental Systems, Inc.
atomic mass unit
Below limit of detection

Battelle Columbus Laboratories
Hexachlorocyclohexane (benzenehexachloride)
Code of Federal Regulations
centimeters per second
Compuehein/Mead Technology Laboratories
New York State Department of Environmental Conser-
vation
New York State Department of Health
New York State Department of Transporation
U.S. EPA Environmental Monitoring  and  Support
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio
U.S. EPA Environmental Monitoring  Systems  Labora-
tory, Las Vegas, Nevada
U.S. EPA Environmental Monitoring  Systems  Labora-
tory, Research Triangle Park,  North Carolina
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Energy Resources Company, Inc.
U.S. EPA Robert S. Kerr Environmental  Research
Laboratory, Ada, Oklahoma
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory,  Athens,
Georgia
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory,  Cor-
valis, Oregon
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory,  Duluth,
Minnesota
Electron volt
gram
GCA Corporation
Gas chromatography/electron capture detector
Gas chromatography/flame  ionization detector
Gas chromatography/mass  spectrometry

Gulf South  Research  Institute
U.S. EPA Health Effects Research  Laboratory,
Research Triangle  Park, North  Carolina
                                 xv

-------
                ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS (continued)
HIVOL
Hooker
HRGC/HRMS

I CAP

IIT
K
kg
f
LCARA
LCS
LD
LOD
LOQ
m
Mg/kg
lag/'
mg/kg
mg/l 3
mg/m
MWRI
MS
NA
NAA
NAI
NASN
NBS
NF
ng
ng/kg
ng/t
ng/m
nm
NIOSH

N'OMS
NORS

NPDES
NTIS
NUSN
NYS
OMSQA

OSHA
PAI
PCB
pCi
High-volume sampler
Hooker Chemicals and Plastics Corporation
High resolution gas chromatography/high resolution
mass spectrometry
Inductively coupled argon plasma  (emission spec-
trometer)
IIT Research Institute
hydraulic conductivity
kilogram
liter
Love Canal Area Revitalization Agency
Laboratory control standard
Less than limit of detection
Limit of detection
Limit of quantitation
meter
micrograms per kilogram
micrograms per liter
micrograms per cubic meter
milligrams per kilogram
milligrams per liter
milligrams per cubic meter
Midwest  Research Institute
Mass spectrometer
Not analyzed
Neutron  Activation Analysis
Negative agreement index
National Air Surveillance Network
National Bureau of Standards
Not found
nanograms
nanograms per kilogram
nanograms per liter
nanograms per cubic  meter
nanometer
National Institute of  Occupational Safety and
Health
National Organics Monitoring  Survey
National Organics Reconnaissance Survey of
Halogenated  Organics
National Pollutant Discharge  Elimination System
National Technical Information Service
National Urban  Soil  Network
State  of New York
U.S.  EPA Office  of Monitoring Systems and Quality
Assurance
U.S.  Occupational  Safety and Health Administration
Positive agreement  index
Polychlorinated biphenyl
picocuries
                                xvi

-------
PE
PEDC
PFOAM
PJBL
ppb
ppm
ppt
QA/QC
QAB
RSD
SD
SDWA
SRM
SWRI
T
TCDD
TENAX
THM
TLV
TOG
TOX
TRW
TWA
WSU
  ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS (continued)

Performance evaluations
PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
Polyurethane foam
PJB/Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.
parts per billion
parts per million
parts per trillion
Quality assurance/quality control
Quality Assurance Branch, EMSL-Cin
Relative standard -deviation
Standard deviation
Safe Drinking Water Act
Standard Reference Material
Southwest Research Institute
trace
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TENAX sorbent
Trihalomethanes
Threshold limit value
Total organic carbon
Total organic halogens
TRW, Inc.
Time-weighted average
Wright State University
                               xvn

-------
                         ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    The writing of  this  report was accomplished  through the ex-
ceptional efforts of John Deegan, Jr.   As Project Coordinator, he
provided the leadership that was essential  to  develop a coherent
and  understandable  record of  what was  done  at  Love  Canal,  to
determine  the  significance  of the  monitoring  results, and  to
produce  this  report.   As On-Scene  Coordinator,  he  capably and
articulately represented  the Agency during  a  period  of extreme
stress, and was responsive to the concerns of local residents.

    In a project  of this  magnitude it is  impossible  to acknowl-
edge the individual contributions  of the  numerous  other partic-
ipants  without inadvertently  omitting  someone.    Therefore,  a
general  acknowledgment of  the  immense  commitment  of  time and
energy contributed  by  the hundreds of  EPA  and  contractor person-
nel involved in the conduct of this study must suffice,  including
members  of:   the U.S.  EPA Environmental  Monitoring  and Support
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio  (EMSL-Cin),  Robert L.  Booth, Acting
Director; the  U.S.  EPA Environmental  Monitoring  Systems Labora-
tory, Las Vegas,  Nevada (EMSL-LV),  Glenn E. Schweitzer,  Director;
the  U.S.  EPA Environmental  Monitoring  Systems  Laboratory,
Research  Triangle  Park,  North  Carolina  (EMSL-RTP),   Thomas  R.
Hauser,  Director; the  U.S.  EPA Robert S.  Kerr Environmental Re-
search  Laboratory,   Ada,  Oklahoma  (ERL-Ada),   Clinton  W.   Hall,
Director;  and  the  GCA Corporation,  Leonard  M.  Seale,  General
Manager, Technology Division, and subcontractors.  The dedication
of these people  to the task was  essential for the  study1 s com-
pletion.

    Because  of the  important  contributions certain  individuals
made to  this project their  efforts  deserve to  be identified.  To
begin  with,  the  overall management of this project was the re-
sponsibility of Courtney Riordan, Director of the Office of  Moni-
toring Systems and  Quality Assurance  (OMSQA).  Without his con-
tinued oversight  and guidance, this project would  not have been
completed  satisfactorily.    The  Project  Director for  the   field
monitoring portion  of  the project was Thomas R. Hauser,  EMSL-RTP;
Steven M. Bromberg, EMSL-RTP was the Project Officer.
                              xvin

-------
    The following  individuals  also made  major contributions  to
the project:   William L.  Budde  (QA Officer  for  water  analyses,
Appendixes C and F)  and  John A.  Winter (QA water  samples)  EMSL-
Cin;  Steven K.  Seilkop   (statistical  analysis and  consulting),
EMSL-RTPj  Jack W. Keeley, D. Craig Shew,  and  Jerry T.  Thornhill,
ERL-Ada  and Paul  Beam,   Office  of  Water  and Waste  Management
(hydrogeologic program);  Gerald  G.  Akland   and  Terrence  Fitz-
Simons  (statistical  consulting),  Thomas  A.  Hartlage  (air  sam-
pling), Thomas C.  Lawless (data management),  and John  C.  Puzak
(QA Officer for  air analysis,  Appendix E),  EMSL-RTP;  Stuart  C.
Black   (QA Officer  for  soil/sediment/biota analyses), Kenneth  W.
Brown  (water/soil/sediment/biota sampling), Eugene P. Meier, John
A. Santolucito, Andrew D.  Sauter,  and  Allan  E. Smith  (radiation
program), EMSL-LV; W.  Lamar  Miller and R. Charles Morgan, Office
of  Solid  Waste  and Emergency  Response!  James  D.  Bunting  and
William J. Walsh, Office of Legal and Enforcement Counsel; Thomas
G.  McLaughlin, Robert  B.  Medz,   and  Frode  Ulvedal,  Office  of
Research and Development; Robert L. Harless (dioxin analyses) and
Robert G. Lewis,  HERL-RTP; James R. Marshall,  EPA Region II; John
Warren  (statistical  consulting),  Office  of  Policy  and  Resource
Management; Robert M.  Bradway,  David  R.  Cogley,  Rose  Mary
Ellersick,  and Kenneth T, McGregor, GCA  Corporation;  C. Stephen
Kim, New York State Department of Health  (NYS  DOH); and Joseph L.
Slack,  New  York State  Department of  Environmental Conservation
(NYS DEC).

    In many ways, the success of the entire program was dependent
on  those individuals  at  the  EPA  Love  Canal  Field Office who
assisted during the monitoring portion  of the project.   The able
staff  at  the  EPA Love  Canal  Field Office  included:  Christine H.
White,  Helen  E.  Burnett,  Michael A.  Cinquino,  and  Sharon  J.
Thompson.

    Above all  others,  however,  the involvement of the  concerned
residents of  Love  Canal throughout the  course  of  this project
must  be  acknowledged.   Without  their  support,  suggestions, and
cooperation  this study could never have even  been initiated, let
alone completed.
                               xix

-------
                            CHAPTER 1
                            OVERVIEW
     On May  21,  1980  President Carter issued  an order declaring
that a  state of emergency existed in the  area of Niagara Falls,
New York known  as  love Canal  (Figure 1).   This order was issued
out of  concern  that toxic chemical wastes, which had been buried
in a  once  partially  excavated and  now  filled  canal,  were  con-
taminating  the   adjacent  residential areas  and  were subjecting
residents to  increased  health  risks. As  a  result of this order,
the  United  States  Environmental  Protection   Agency  (EPA)  was
directed  to  design  and  conduct  a  comprehensive  environmental
monitoring program at  Love Canal  that would:   (1)  determine the
current extent  and degree of chemical contamination  in the  area
defined by the emergency declaration order (Figure 2);  (2) assess
the short-term  and long-terra  implications of  ground-water  con-
tamination in the general vicinity of Love Canal? and  (3) provide
an assessment of the  relative environmental quality  of the  Love
Canal emergency declaration area.

     The emergency declaration order of May 21, 1980 affected ap-
proximately 800  families residing  in the horseshoe shaped area in
Figure  2  labeled  "DECLARATION AREA."   In  Figure  3,  the  outer
boundary of the  Declaration Area is defined by  Bergholtz Creek on
the north,  102nd Street and 103rd Street  on the  east and south-
east (respectively),  Buffalo Avenue on the south, and 93rd Street
on the  west.   It should be noted  that the emergency declaration
order  of  May  21,  1980 excluded  the  area  in Figure  2  labeled
"CANAL AREA."

     In this  report,  the  Canal Area is the  area  bordered on the
north  by  Colvin Boulevard,  100th Street  on  the east,  Frontier
Avenue on the south,  and  (approximately)  97th  Street on the west.
The Canal  Area  contains the residences located on both sides of
97th and 99th Streets.   In 1978 the State of  New York (NYS) ac-
quired all but 2 of the 238 houses in the  Canal Area  (including a
few houses  on  the north  side  of Colvin  Boulevard),  restricted
virtually the entire  Canal Area from public access by means of a
guarded 8-foot high cyclone  fence, and closed  the public elemen-
tary school on 99th Street.  The houses in the  Canal Area consist
of the  so-called "ring 1" and  "ring 2" houses.  Those 99 houses
whose backyards  adjoin the inactive landfill  have been referred

-------
Figure 1.  General Site Location Map.

-------
                       DECLARATION AREA  —
Figure 2.  The  General Love Canal Study  Area,

-------
                                                           th STREET
                                                      DB- 99th STREET
                                                                   DEURO DR.
Figure  3.   Detail of  the General Love Canal Study Area.

-------
to as  ring  1 houses, while  the  houses on the  east side of 99th
Street, on the west side of 97th Street, and immediately opposite
the landfill  on  the  north  side of Colvin Boulevard were referred
to as ring 2 houses.   (See Figure 2).  The  former  canal was lo-
cated  in  the  area  encircled  by the ring 1 houses and at one time
was approximately  3,000  feet  long,  80 feet  wide,  and  has been
estimated to have  been from  15 to  30  feet deep.

     The  800  families  residing   in  the  Declaration Area  lived
within approximately 1,500 feet of the  former dump  site. Of these
800 families, approximately  550  lived in single-family dwellings
(located  mainly  to  the  north and  east of  the  Canal  Area), 200
lived  in  a  multiple-family complex of  apartment buildings known
as  the La  Salle  Development  (located  to the west  of  the Canal
Area), and 50 lived  in  a cluster  of senior citizen garden apart-
ments  (also  located  to the west  of the Canal  Area).  As part of
the emergency declaration order,  all persons residing in the Dec-
laration  Area were  eligible  for  temporary relocation,  at U.S.
government expense,  for  a  period of up to 1 year while environ-
mental monitoring  was  conducted.   Approximately  300 families (or
an eligible member of  a  family)  took  part in the temporary relo-
cation program.  The temporary relocation program was managed and
funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

     On  October  1,  1980 President Carter and  Governor  Carey of
New York  signed an agreement providing  $20 million  for the  volun-
tary  permanent  relocation  of all  residents living  in  the Love
Canal  Declaration  Area.  An  agency of the State  of New  York, the
Love Canal Area  Revitalization Agency (LCARA),  was  established to
manage  the  permanent relocation  program and to  plan for  future
use  of the  acquired  properties.   As of May  1,  1982  LCARA  records
revealed  that approximately 570  families  had  been permanently
relocated out of the Love  Canal Declaration  Area.

     The  EPA  Love  Canal  final  report  consists of this Volume and
two  companion Volumes.  This Volume contains a  description  of the
design of the monitoring studies, the  results  of  the investiga-
tions,  a summary of the major findings,  and conclusions and rec-
ommendations.  Volume  II  consists  of a  complete listing  of the
analytical  results obtained  from  all  validated  field samples col-
lected  at Love Canal.   Volume III  contains  a set  of statistical
tabulations  that summarize the Love Canal monitoring data  accord-
ing  to various geographical  areas of  interests,  and thus  charac-
terizes  the extent and  degree of environmental  contamination in
the  Love Canal  Declaration  Area.   Other documentation is also
available that  describes  in  detail  certain aspects  of the EPA
Love  Canal  monitoring  program which  are only briefly reported
here.  This  documentation has been prepared under contract,  and is
available to  the public through  the  National Technical Informa-
tion  Service (NTIS).  The  material consists of:  (!)  an  extensive
four volume  set  of sampling  and  analytical protocols and  quality
assurance procedures entitled Quality Assurance Plan, Love Canal
Study, LC-1-619-026,  by GCA Corporation; (2)  a report entitled

-------
Love Canal Monitoring Program, GCA QA/QC Summary Report,  by  GCA
Corporation; (3) a  report  entitled Geophysical Investigation Re-
sults, Love Canal, New York,,  by  Technos,  Inc.?  (4)  a  report en-
titled TheGround-Water Monitoring Program at  Love Canal,  by JRB
Associates? and  (5)  a  report entitled Final Report on Ground Wa-
ter FlowModeling Study of the Love Canal Area, New York, by Geo-
trans, Inc.

1.1  THE EPA MONITORING PROGRAM

     The EPA multimedia environmental monitoring program at Love
Canal was  designed  and conducted under the  direction  of the Of-
fice of Research and Development,  through  its  Office of Monitor-
ing  Systems and Quality Assurance  (OMSQA).    Contract  costs for
the project were $5,4 million.   GCA  Corporation of Bedford, Mas-
sachusetts  was  the prime  management contractor.  A  total of 18
subcontractors were  involved  in  sample  collection and analytical
laboratory  work.

     Field  sampling activities were  started  at Love  Canal on Au-
gust 8, 1980 and were concluded  on October 31,  1980.  During that
time  period,  more  than  6,000 field  samples  were  collected and
subsequently analyzed  for  a large number of substances known (or
suspected)  to  have been  deposited  in  the  inactive  hazardous
wastes landfill.  The analyses performed on  the  samples collected
at  Love  Canal   resulted   in  the  compilation  of  approximately
150,000  individual  measurements of  environmental contamination
levels in  the general  Love Canal area.   A comprehensive  quality
assurance/  quality control  (QA/QC)  program, involving the  anal-
ysis  of  5,743 QA/QC samples, was applied  to  all phases  of the
analytical  work  performed  during  the project to  document the
precision  and  accuracy of  the analytical results.  Detailed re-
ports describing the QA/QC programs are included as Appendixes C
through E  of  this  Volume.   The integrity of the data was  assured
through the use of strict chain-of-custody  procedures that  fully
documented  the  collection, transportation,  analysis, and  report-
ing  of each Love Canal sample.

1.1.1  Selection of  Sampling  Sites

     The  selection  of  sampling  locations  was  designed to  accom-
plish  three objectives:    first,  to  monitor the Declaration  Area
using a statistically  valid sampling design so that estimates of
characteristic  environmental  concentrations  of contaminants could
be  obtained|  second,  to  locate  and  trace  pathways  of  chemicals
that had  migrated  from  the  former  canal?  and third,  to  obtain
multimedia  environmental measurements for  the  purpose of  validat-
ing  the presence  of suspected  transport  pathways.   In order to
achieve these objectives,  the following guidelines were used for
site selection  purposes.

      1.  Written permission of the property  owner/occupant had to
          be obtained prior  to initiating sampling activities at
          any  site.

-------
2.  Simple random  sampling  of sites was  to be  employed  to
    obtain representative coverage  of  the entire Love Canal
    Declaration Area.

3.  Suspected transport  pathways  (based on  information  ob-
    tained from  prior  investigations conducted  at  Love  Ca-
    nal) were to be sampled as close to the  former  canal  as
    was possible, and followed away from the former canal as
    far as was feasible.   This sampling  was performed  in
    order  to ascertain  if  contamination  in  the  Declaration
    Area was  directly attributable to Love Canal.

    Pathways sampled included:

    a-  swales—former low-lying soil features in the vicin-
        ity  of Love  Canal that  surface-water  runoff  once
        preferentially  followed.    The  locations  of  known
        former  swales  in  the general  Love  Canal  area  are
        identified in Figure 2.

    D-  wet areas—residential areas where  standing surface
        water  once  tended  to  accumulate  (the  NYS wet/dry
        designation was used for classification purposes).

    c.  sand lenses—sandy  deposits in soils  through which
        ground water could readily move.

    <3.  buried atiIities — storm and  sanitary  sewers  that
        were located in  close proximity to the canal.

    e-  other  pathways—information  obtained  from  local
        residents  directed  sampling activities  to numerous
        areas of suspected chemical migration.

4.  Creeks and rivers  in the  general vicinity  of Love Canal
    (particularly  near  storm sewer outfalls  in  Black Creek
    and the  Niagara  River)  were to be  sampled to determine
    the extent and degree of  contamination  in those waters
    resulting  from  the discharge of contaminated  water  and
    sediment from  storm  sewer lines, or from other  (unknown)
    sources.

5.  Multimedia measurements were to be conducted at selected
    sampling sites.

6.  Control  sampling sites  were  to be selected  such  that
    they  were  physically similar  to Declaration Area sites,
    except that  they were  to be sufficiently distant  from
    the former canal so  as  to be free from potential contam-
    ination  related directly to Love Canal, and  not be loca-
    ted near any other known  hazardous waste landfill areas.
    Control  sites  were  selected  throughout the  greater
    Niagara  Falls  area,  and  on Grand  Island  (located south
    of Niagara Falls).   See Table B-l in Appendix B for more
    detailed information on the location  of  control sites.
                            7

-------
     7.
         Indoor  air  monitoring was to be performed only  in  unoc-
         cupied   residences  in  order  to  reduce  the  potentially
         confounding  influence  of airborne contaminants  that
         might be present due to habitation activities.

1.1.2  Samples Collected

     A total of  6,853 field samples were collected by EPA  during
the Love Canal  monitoring program.  Of these  samples 6,193 were
analyzed and 5,708 were  validated  through  application of  an ex-
tensive QA/QC program,  which involved  the analysis  of  an  addi-
tional 5,743 QA/QC samples.   In  total,  the validated Love  Canal
data base contains  the results  from  analyses performed  on  11,451
samples (field samples plus QA/QC  samples).  Table 1  reports the
number  of  field samples  collected,  analyzed,  and validated ac-
cording to  each  environmental medium  sampled.

           TABLE 1.  SUMMARY OF LOVE CANAL  FIELD SAMPLES
Medium
Water
Soil
Sediment
Air
Biota
Totals
Samples
Col-
lected
2,687
1,315
290
2,089
472
6,853
Samples
Ana-
lyzed
2,457
1,156
266
2,024
293
6,193
Samples
Vali-
dated
2,065
1,132
259
1,967
285
5,708
Percent
Rejected
by QA/QC
14.6
0.7
2.4
2.6
1.5
6.8
Percent
Other*
8.5
13.2
8.3
3.2
38.1
9.9
Percent
Vali-
dated
76.9
86.1
89.3
94.2
60.4
83.3
"I" Includes  samples  that were  damaged,   lost,  not resported,  etc.
Note:  Percentages are based on the number of samples collected.

    The  Declaration  Area  was  subdivided  into 10 sampling  areas
that  facilitated  the  use  of  statistical  estimates  of  typical
environmental  concentration levels   of  substances  monitored
throughout  various   sections  of  the  general  Love  Canal  area.
Sampling  areas were  defined  (as feasible)  according to  those
natural  and  manmade physical  features of  the Declaration  Area
that  might be  related  to chemical  migration pathways.   Conse-
quently, the likelihood was increased  of  more  readily  permitting
the potential  identification  of  chemical  concentration gradients
of substances  that had migrated  from the  former canal.   Typical
physical boundaries of the sampling areas  included:   (1) streets,
whose buried utilities (such as storm sewer lines) might serve as
barriers  to,   or  interceptors  of,   the subsurface  migration  of
chemicals,  and whose  curb drains  would   serve as  barriers  to
or collectors  of  overland flow;  and  (2)  creeks, which  serve as

-------
natural recharge/discharge boundaries to the shallow ground-water
system in the area.  Within each of  the  10 sampling areas, sites
were both  intentionally selected to maximize  the probability of
detecting  transport  pathways  (for  example,  purposely  locating
sampling sites in former swales, sand lenses, and wet areas), and
randomly  selected  to provide  a  statistically  representative
sample  of  residences.   The  fenced Canal  Area  compound  was also
sampled, and  was  identified as  sampling  area  11.    Figure  4
depicts  graphically  the boundaries  of sampling  areas  1 through
11.

    In  addition  to  the  11 geographical  sampling areas  just de-
scribed,  a number  of other  sites outside the  Declaration Area
were sampled and, for convenience,  have been grouped according to
sampling area  designations (even though  they  do not necessarily
refer to physically contiguous geographical areas).  For example,
sampling  area  97  consisted  of  those  sites located  outside the
boundary of the  Declaration Area that  were sampled at the expli-
cit  request  of area residents.   Sampling  area  97 sites were not
considered control sites.  Another  sampling  area, referred to as
98,  consisted  of  sites (including  one  site  in  the Declaration
Area) that were  intentionally selected  for a special ambient-air
monitoring  study to determine  transport  patterns and background
levels  of  airborne pollutants.    Finally, sampling  area  99 con-
sisted  of  those sites  explicitly  selected as  control  sites for
each environmental medium  sampled,  and  those  sites that were ex-
plicitly  selected  as control sites  for comprehensive multimedia
sampling.  Due to the distance of sampling area 99 sites from the
Declaration and  Canal Areas,  they  are often not displayed  in sub-
sequent figures  identifying medium-specific sampling locations.

     Both  the number  of  sites sampled and  the  number of  samples
collected  in each  sampling area varied  according to the environ-
mental  medium  sampled.  Air  was the only medium for which  there
was  an  explicit attempt to  sample  an  equal  number  of  sites in
each sampling  area.   For  all other  media, the intensity of sam-
pling  in a  sampling  area  was  a function  of  distance  from the
former  canal  (that  is, sampling  intensity decreased  with dis-
tance),  availability of  the medium  for  sampling  purposes  (for
example,  the sampling  of  sump  water was  contingent on the pre-
sence of a sump in a residence),  and  the appropriateness of the
sampling area  approach  for  the  medium  sampled.   As an  illustra-
tion of  this last  point, note that the sampling  area approach to
characterizing  bedrock ground-water quality  was rejected as in-
appropriate  because  bedrock  ground-water movement was recognized
as obviously not constrained  by  street boundaries.

1.1.3   Statistical Analysis of  the Data

     In  order to perform  statistical analyses  on the monitoring
data, the  data  were  aggregated  (by medium and sample source) ac-
cording to Declaration  Area  (sampling  areas 1 through 10), Con-
trol Area  (sampling  area 99),  and  Canal Area (sampling area 11).

-------
NOTE: THi DECLARATION AREA CONSISTS OF SAMPLING AREAS 1 THROUGH
                    Figure 4.   Sampling  Areas,
                                   10

-------
The statistical tabulations and analyses performed  on the aggre-
gated monitoring data (presented in Volume III) consisted of sub-
stance-by-substance comparisons of  frequencies of detections and
median  concentration  levels observed  in  each of  the three data
aggregating  units  (that  is,  Declaration,  Control,  and  Canal
Areas).

    The extent of  environmental  contamination in an  area of in-
terest  (for example,  the Declaration  Area)  was defined  as the
percentage of  times  a substance was  identified as present  at a
"trace" or  greater concentration level in the field  samples ana-
lyzed and  validated.    A difference  of percentages  test,  using
Fisher's  exact test  to  compute  probability values,  was used to
determine if statistically  significant  differences  in the extent
of  chemical contamination existed  between  the three aggregating
units.  (See,  for  example, Y.  M. M.  Bishop,  S.  E.  Fienberg, and
P.  W. Holland,  Discrete MultivariateAnalysis,  M. I.  T. Press,
1975, 364). The  degree  of environmental contamination in an area
of  interest  was  defined as the median concentration  of  all  field
sample  measurements  for  a  substance  in the  aggregating unit of
interest. A difference of medians test, using  Fisher's exact test
to compute probability values, was used to determine  if  statisti-
cally significant  differences  in the degree of chemical  contami-
nation levels existed between the Declaration, Control,  and Canal
Areas.   (See,  for  example,  A.  M.  Mood, F. A.  Graybill,  and D. C.
B°es, ^ntrg d u c tion _to the_JTheo£y__of_Stat.i s t i c s, McGraw-Hill,
1974, 521).

    Other  statistical  procedures  used  to   sumrnariEe   the  vast
amount  of data  collected at  Love Canal by  EPA and  presented in
Volume  III  consisted  of  grouping  the  data into frequency distri-
butions,  with intervals  defined  according  to the concentration
levels  observed;  computing various percentiles  of  interest;  re-
porting finite (quantified) minimum and maximum  observed concen-
trations;  and  computing  the mean (arithmetic  average)  value of
the observed finite concentrations.

    The statistical  criteria used  to aid in  a determination of
the presence of  Love  Canal-related  environmental  contamination in
the Declaration  Area  were designed  to achieve three objectives:
(1)  test  the  validity  of the postulated  process of contaminant
movement  from  the  former  canal  into the Canal Area,  and  from  the
Canal Area into  the  Declaration Area;  (2)  safeguard the public
health  by  establishing  a requirement  of  using only  lenient sta-
tistical  evidence (that  provides  a margin  of safety)   to assess
the extent  and degree of contamination in  the Declaration  Area;
and   (3)  obtain  acceptably high  power in  the statistical  tests
employed  that  might  otherwise  have been affected  adversely  (in
certain instances)  by  the  relatively  small  number  of control
sites samples  that could be collected  during the short  sampling
time  period  available for conducting  this study.
                                 11

-------
1.1.4  Substances Monitored
    Due  to  time  and  budgetary  constraints,  the  EPA  monitoring
program at Love Canal was intentionally directed at the identifi-
cation of a finite number of  chemicals  in  each  sample  collected.
In order to increase  the  efficacy  of  this  approach,  efforts were
devoted to developing lists of  targeted  substances that would be
routinely monitored  in each  specific  sample  type collected  at
Love  Canal.    To  this  end,  the following  activities  were con-
ducted:   (1)  samples of  air  and leachate were  collected  by EPA
directly at  the former canal  prior  to  the  initiation  of field
sampling activities  and were  analyzed comprehensively;  (2)  the
results from previous environmental monitoring  studies conducted
at Love Canal by the State of New York and EPA were reviewed; and
(3) records  submitted by the  former  owner  of   the site,  Hooker
Chemical and Plastics Corporation  (concerning  the 21,800 tons of
chemical wastes buried  in  the landfill)  were  examined.   These
efforts permitted EPA to identify those substances that were most
abundant  in  the  source,  prevalent  in  the  environment,  and  of
toxicological significance.    The end  result  was the construction
of 2  lists  of   targeted substances;  a list of  approximately 150
substances for  water/soil/sediment/biota samples; and  a list of
50 substances for air samples.  The specific substances monitored
at Love Canal  are  listed  in Tables A-l  and A-2  in Appendix A of
this Volume.

    The EPA monitoring program conducted at Love Canal represents
a directed,  comprehensive effort in environmental monitoring at a
hazardous wastes site.  Due  to the large number of environmental
samples analyzed and the large number of targeted substances mon-
itored,  it  is  unlikely  that  significant  amounts of contaminants
that  had  migrated  from Love  Canal  would have  been  undetected.
Furthermore, the intentional  inclusion  of  specific substances on
the target list that  were known to be present  in Love Canal, and
which  (due to  their physical  and chemical  properties)  might also
serve  as effective  and  efficient indicators  of subsurface migra-
tion  of leachate, was designed to  permit a determination and as-
sessment of chemical migration from the source.

    The  EPA  monitoring  program  at Love Canal  also  included the
following two   features.   First,  analytical  subcontractors were
required  to analyze  each  field  sample for  all  targeted sub-
stances,  and  were  also required  to  identify  the next  20 most
abundant substances  found  in the  sample.   Second, EPA  conducted
an audit of the results obtained by analytical subcontractors, in
order  to determine  the  accuracy of substance identifications and
completeness of substance  identifications  in those field  samples
analyzed  by  the subcontractors.   The results of  the  audit, re-
ported in Appendix F of this Volume,  provided additional confirm-
ation  of the validity of  the  analytical chemistry data  presented
in this report.
                                12

-------
1.1.5  Sampling Procedures and Sites Sampled

    A total  of 174 ground-water monitoring  wells were installed
by EPA  at Love  Canal  and at  control  sites.   Samples  of ground
water were  obtained  from 136  of  the monitoring wells.   The re-
maining  38  wells  were  either dry  or the  sample  results  were
rejected by the data validation and  QA/QC process.

    Two  separate ground-water  systems exist  in the  Love Canal
area and were  monitored  individually.   A  shallow overburden sys-
tem was  often encountered,  usually at a  depth of  less  than 20
feet  below the  land  surface.   Wells  installed to  monitor the
shallow  system were referred  to as "A Wells."  Ground-water sam-
ples  collected from  a total  of 79  A  Wells are  included in the
validated data base.   The major aquifer present in the Love Canal
area  is  located  in the  underlying  Lockport  Dolomite  bedrock,  a
unit  that  was  encountered typically at a  depth of approximately
40 feet  below  the  land surface.   The major water bearing zone of
the dolomite was found to occupy approximately the top 20 feet of
the unit.  The bedrock aquifer was sampled separately through the
installation of bedrock wells, referred to as "B Wells."  Ground-
water samples  collected  from  a total of 57  B  Wells  are  included
in the validated data base.   Most  sites sampled had both A and B
Wells installed.

    A large  number of other water  samples  were collected at Love
Canal.   These included:  (1) residential drinking water (including
both  raw and  finished water  samples collected  from  the Niagara
Falls Drinking Water  Treatment Plant); (2) sanitary sewer water;
(3) storm sewer water; (4) sump water; and  (5) surface water from
area  creeks  and  rivers (sites in  or near  to the Declaration Area
were  usually located  in  proximity  to  storm sewer outfalls).   A
full  enumeration of  the  number of  water  sampling sites  that are
represented in the validated data base is given in Table  2.

    A total  of  171  soil sampling  sites  are  represented in the
validated data base.   The procedure  used for collecting soil sam-
ples  was designed  to maximize the  probability  of  detecting the
subsurface migration of  chemicals  through  soils.   Because it was
not possible to  stipulate  the soil depth  at which leachate might
move  laterally  from  Love Canal,  and/or percolate downwards
through  soils, the more permeable top  6 feet of soil was  sampled.
At each  soil sampling  site  a  total  of  7 soil  cores,  each 6 feet
long  and 1  3/8  inches  in  diameter, were  collected  following a
pattern  (typically a  circular shape)  that  was  representative of
the physical area sampled.  Two of the seven soil cores were ana-
lyzed for the presence of targeted  "volatile" compounds.  The re-
maining  five  soil  cores were composited  and  analyzed  for addi-
tional targeted  substances.   A full  enumeration of the number of
soil  sampling  sites  that are represented in  the validated data
base is  given in Table 2.
                                13

-------
  TABLE 2. A SUMMARY OF LOVE CANAL SITES SAMPLED AND REPRESENTED
                       IN THE VALIDATED DATA BASE
Sampling Areas
/"•«.-, .-,,3

Water
Drinking
Ground: A Wells
B Wells
Sanitary sewer
Storm sewer
Sump
Surface
Soil
Sediment
Sanitary sewer
Storm sev?er
Stream
Sump
Air
Basement
Living
Outside
Transport study
Occupied/
Unoccupied study
Sump/Basement-
Air study
Biota
Crayfish
Dog hair
Maple leaves
Mice
Oatmeal
Potatoes
Worms
1-10

31
49
29
1
22
33
4
112

1
18
4
—

9
55
8
—

3

0

1
20
14
5
12
11
4
11

3
19
13
0
3
13
—
24

0
4
—
3

1
6
1
—

0

9

	 ^
—
6
2
2
2
2
99

5
11
15
0
1
1
5
9

0
1
5
—

0
4
0
—

0

0

1
15
11
2
4
3
3
Sub-Total

39
79
57
1
26
47
9
145

1
23
9
3

10
65
9
—

3

9

2
35
31
9
18
16
9
97 98 Total

5 — 44
79
57
_ — 1
•— -™ X
2 — 28
7 — 54
10 — 19
28 — 171

1
1 — 24
9 — 18
__ 	 q

10
65
9
5 5

4 — 7

9

__ __ 2
35
	 	 21
_ _ ___ Q
18
16
	 	 g
Note:  Dashes signify not applicable
                                14

-------
    Sediment samples  were collected  from  a number  of different
sources during  the  Love  Canal monitoring program.  Sediment sam-
ples were collected from area creeks and  rivers,  in conjunction
with  the collection  of  surface-water  samples.    As  was noted
earlier, sites  in  or  near to  the Declaration  Area  were  usually
located in proximity  to  storm sewer outfalls.   In addition, sedi-
ment  samples  were  collected,  as  available,  from  the following
sources:   (1)  sanitary  sewers;  (2)  storm  sewers;  (3)  sumps; and
(4) from the on-site Leachate Treatment Facility located adjacent
to  the  former  canal  on  97th Street.   A full  enumeration of the
number  of  sediment sampling  sites that are  represented  in the
validated data  base is given  in  Table  2.

    In addition to  the organic  and inorganic  chemicals routinely
determined  in  water/soil/sediment samples, EPA conducted  a moni-
toring program  to  define and quantify  the radionuclides  present
in  the general  Love Canal area.   Those radionuclides  analyzed for
by EPA included all gamma-emitting radionuclides and,  in drinking
water samples,  tritium.

    Air monitoring at Love Canal  was conducted  in 65  continuously
unoccupied  residences.   In each  of these  residences,  living area
air was monitored  by  means  of collecting integrated  12-hour sam-
ples  using  the sorbents  TENAX  and polyurethane foam  (PFOAM).   A
maximum of  13  daytime (6 a.m. to 6  p.m.)  air   sampling campaigns
were  conducted in each  of  these residences throughout the  dura-
tion  of  the monitoring program.   In  addition  to the  normal day-
time  sampling  campaigns, 3 nighttime campaigns  (also  of  12  hours
duration) were  conducted in  some of these  same residences.  Each
sampling  area  contained  from four to eight living area air  moni-
toring sites.

    In 9 of the 65  air monitoring sites, basement air  and  outdoor
(ambient)  air  were also monitored using  the  sorbents TENAX and
PPOAM.   In  addition,  outdoor sampling  sites  were monitored with
high-volume  (HIVOL)  particulate  samplers,  which were  started si-
multaneously with  the TENAX  and  PFOAM  samplers,  and were  operated
for 24-hour periods.   Air samples from basement and  outdoor  loca-
tions  were  collected  in synchronization  with  the  13  regularly
conducted living  area air sampling campaigns.

    Residences  in  which  multiple air  sampling  locations were es-
tablished  were referred to  as   "base"  residences.  At each base
residence,  efforts were  made  to sample all  environmental  media
and usually included  indoor and outdoor  air,  ground  water  from
both  A  and  B Wells, drinking water,  sump  water, soil, and  food-
stuff introduced  to the  residence as  part  of  the limited  biologi-
cal monitoring program  conducted at  Love Canal.   All  sampling
areas immediately  adjacent  to the former canal  contained  one base
residence.  Due to limited  availability of appropriate locations
and  residential  structures,  it was  not  possible   to secure  a
                                 15

-------
control  site  that  satisfied  the   requirements  established  to
designate it a base residence.

    Three  special   air  monitoring   research  studies  were  also
conducted at Love Canal.  These studies involved an investigation
of the airborne transportation of pollutants in the Niagara Falls
area,  the  effects  of domiciliary occupancy  on indoor air pollu-
tion levels, and an examination of  the  interrelationship between
contaminant concentration  levels in basement  sumps  and basement
air.

    An enumeration of the number of air  monitoring sites that are
represented in the validated data base is given in Table 2.

    A limited biological sampling program was conducted by EPA at
Love  Canal  for  the purpose  of investigating  the  use  of local
biological systems to monitor the biological availability and bi-
ological accumulation of substances  found in appropriate environ-
mental media.    The biota  program   involved  the collection  and
analysis of a limited number of samples, including:   (1) crayfish
(40 composite samples);  (2)  domestic dog hair;  (3)  silver maple
leaves;  (4)  field  mice {100  samples);  and  (5) common earthworms
(30  samples);  as  well  as  (6)  purposely   introducing  foodstuff
(oatmeal and  potatoes)  into the basements  of  base  residences to
determine their  potential  for  accumulation of  volatile  organic
compounds.   The biological monitoring  program was intentionally
not directed at  attempting to  determine health or  ecological ef-
fects of toxic chemicals in biota. A full enumeration of the num-
ber of biota sampling sites  (approximately  commensurate with the
number of samples except for crayfish, mice, and earthworms) that
are represented in the validated data base is given in Table 2.

1.1.6  Limitations

    Even though  EPA conducted  a major sampling  effort  at  Love
Canal, resulting  in the acquisition of a  considerable amount of
environmental monitoring data,  it  is acknowledged that  the pro-
ject  was conceived, initiated,  and conducted  under  severe bud-
getary and  time  constraints.   It  was recognized, however,  that
the  critical  nature of  the problem  at  Love  Canal,  involving a
large number of  nearby residents, meant that  the monitoring pro-
gram  conducted  by  EPA had to  be  initiated  quickly,  be thorough,
and of high  quality.   Consequently,  a  number  of decisions  were
made  by  EPA, concerning  the  design  and  conduct of the monitoring
studies,  that have  potential  influence on  the interpretation of
the study findings.

    First,  due to  the  size  of the geographical  area  involved, a
statistical survey  design was formulated  to determine the extent
and degree of environmental  contamination in the Declaration Area
that was directly and incrementally  attributable to the migration
of toxic substances from Love Canal. Thus,  for each environmental
                                16

-------
medium monitored, a sampling design  with an appropriate sampling
frame  was  employed for  site  selection.   In  all  media, the sam-
pling  design  used combined aspects  of  both  purposive selection
(for   example,  intentionally  locating  some  sampling sites  to
maximize the probability of detecting chemicals that had migrated
from Love Canal), and simple random  sampling.  Whenever possible,
sampling sites  were stratified  according  to  geographical areas
that were  defined by natural  or  manmade physical boundaries, in
order  to  facilitate   the   identification  of  potential   spatial
variability in  contamination levels  in the  Declaration Area.

    Second, a finite (but  large)  list  of targeted substances was
identified for  monitoring  in each environmental medium sampled.

    Third, because a state  of  emergency  existed  at Love Canal,  a
3-month  time constraint  (as opposed  to 6 months,  1 year, or long-
er) was  imposed on sampling.  While  this time frame  limited the
scope  of the  investigation, it still provided substantial  infor-
mation regarding potential environmental  contamination hazards in
the Declaration Area resulting directly  from  Love Canal.

    Fourth, all routine  living  area  air  monitoring   residences
had to be unoccupied continuously throughout  the  study period, in
order  to  control  for   the  potentially  confounding   effects  of
household  activities on indoor air pollution levels.    By  repeti-
tively monitoring air, a 3-month  time series  of data was obtained
that  incorporated the  potential  for  detecting  temporal  trends
(for  example,   trends  due   to  changes  in temperature, humidity,
precipitation,  and  wind direction)  in  concentration   levels, and
were sampled repetitively.

    Fifth, all  EPA sampling  activities  at Love Canal   were  depen-
dent  on  the cooperation and  willingness of  area residents  (and
state  and  local authorities)  to grant EPA  written permission to
sample on their property.  In recognition of the importance of the
EPA monitoring  program to each individual,  a  high rate of  cooper-
ation  (in excess of 90 percent) was  generally displayed by Decla-
ration Area residents.

    Partially due to these  factors,  the  ability  to use the find-
ings  of  the  EPA monitoring  program to  predict  future weather-
influenced conditions  at Love  Canal may  be limited.    In  similar
fashion, the statistical limitations and uncertainties associated
with all sampling  designs  (in contrast  to  a complete  census in-
volving  environmental monitoring  at  all  residences), are acknowl-
edged.   Consequently,  any  attempt  to infer  prior  conditions in
the Declaration Area (such  as  air pollution levels) from the cur-
rent environmental monitoring data is risky and has not been per-
formed.
                                 17

-------
1.2  RESULTS

    The EPA ground-water monitoring program  revealed  no evidence
of contamination attributable  to  Love  Canal  in the bedrock aqui-
fer and only very localized contamination  in  the  shallow system.
In general,  evidence of contaminated  ground water that  was di-
rectly attributable to the migration of substances  from the for-
mer canal was found  only in a  few shallow system A Wells located
immediately adjacent  to Love  Canal  in the  residential  lots  of
some ring  1  houses.  Clear  evidence of ground-water contamination
directly attributable to Love Canal was not  found  outside of the
area around ring 1 houses or in the Declaration Area.

    On the basis  of  tests  conducted  in  monitoring wells,  and  a
ground-water flow model constructed specifically according to hy-
drogeologic conditions  encountered  at  Love Canal,  it  was deter-
mined that the barrier drain system (the Leachate Collection Sys-
tem)  was functioning  effectively.   The barrier drain  system was
installed  completely around Love Canal  by  the City  of Niagara
Palls and the State  of  New York in 1978  and  1979,  as  a contain-
ment remedy  designed to halt  the  lateral migration of chemicals
through  the  soil.    In addition,  a  clay  cap  was placed  on the
landfill.   The  EPA  findings  suggested  that  the  barrier drains
were operating  to  intercept chemicals  which might be migrating
laterally  from  the former  canal,  to lower the hydraulic head in
the  former  canal   (preventing a  so-called   "bathtub  overflow"
effect), and  to move nearby ground water towards the drains for
collection and  subsequent  treatment.   As a result of  the draw-
back influence  of  the barrier  drains,  which extend approximately
1,700 feet in the  more  permeable  sandy soils and 180  feet in the
less permeable clays  found in the area, nearly all nearby shallow
system contamination  should be  recovered  (assuming no additional
attenuation  of  contaminants)  that resulted  from the  prior mi-
gration of contaminants out of Love Canal.

    The soil monitoring program yielded results that were consis-
tent with  the  ground-water monitoring findings.   In  particular,
clear  evidence  of soil contamination  attributable  to Love Canal
was  found  only  in the  yards of a relatively  few  ring 1 houses,
and  tended to coincide with those sampling sites where  contami-
nation was also  found in shallow  system A Wells.   The soil  find-
ings suggested  that  the consistent multimedia  pattern  of  environ-
mental contamination  observed at certain  ring  1 locations was due
to  the presence  of  local, highly  heterogeneous  soil  conditions
that  permitted  the  relatively  more  rapid migration  of  contami-
nants  from Love Canal  to  those  locations.   In particular, soil
contamination directly  attributable to the migration  of  contami-
nants  from Love  Canal  was  found to be  confined  to  ring  1,  and was
associated with  the  discrete presence  of  sandy  soil (for  example,
in the  form of  a  sand  lens),  and with the relative abundance of
more permeable  fill  materials   (for example,  filled  swales).  No
evidence  of soil  contamination outside  of  ring  1 was  found in
                                 18

-------
support  of the  hypothesis  that swales  served  as  preferential
routes of  chemical  migration from  Love  Canal.   Furthermore, no
patterns of soil contamination  were found outside of ring 1, and
no clear evidence of soil contamination was found in the Declara-
tion Are.a,  that  could  be directly attributed to the migration of
contaminants from Love Canal.

    Evidence of  contamination  in sump water  and  sump sediment
samples  was  found  in relatively  few  ring 1 houses.   The  ring 1
sites at which  sump contamination  was found  tended  to coincide
with, or be located  near to, those  sites  where contamination was
found in shallow system A Wells and in soil samples.  These sites
were  located  mainly south  of  Wheatfield  Avenue  and  on the  97th
Street (west)  side of Love  Canal. Relatively high levels of  con-
taminants  were  found in  the few ring 1  sumps that contained an
amount of  sediment  adequate for  separate  sampling  and analysis
purposes.  No  pattern of  sump contamination was found outside of
ring 1  houses,  and  no  clear evidence of sump contamination was
found  in the  Declaration Area  that could be directly  attributed
to the migration of contaminants from Love Canal.

    Samples of storm sewer water  and  sediment  revealed  that high-
ly  contaminated  sediment and  contaminated  water  were traceable
from  the Canal  Area  to local outfalls, and that approximate  con-
centration  gradients  (for   certain  compounds)  corresponding to
storm-water flow directions  existed.  Because  of the remedial ac-
tions taken at the site (and based  on the findings of the hydro-
geologic  program),   it  is  likely  that  only  residual  (that is,
prior  to remedial  construction)  contamination was  found  in the
storm  sewer lines.  Furthermore, it  is possible that the contami-
nation found  in  the storm  sewer  lines near  Love  Canal resulted
from the following;  (1)  infiltration of  the storm sewer laterals
on Read and Wheatfield  Avenues  that were  connected  (respectively)
to  the  northward and southward  flowing storm sewer lines on  97th
Street, and the storm sewer  lateral on Wheatfield Avenue that was
connected  to  the  southward flowing  storm sewer  line  on   99th
Street;  (2) historical  (that is,  prior to remedial construction)
overland  flow of  contaminated  surface water  and  sediment  that
would have  been  collected by curb drains on  all streets immedi-
ately adjacent to or crossing the former  canal;  (3) a  catch basin
and drain  that was located  near the former  canal in the backyard
of houses  at 949-953 97th Street, and which emptied  into the  97th
Street northward  flowing storm sewer  line;  and  (4)  by the  dis-
charge  of  contaminated  water  and sediment  that  was taken-up by
the no  longer  operating sump pumps located in  the  basements of
certain  ring  1  houses,  and discharged   into  the 97th  and  99th
Streets storm sewer lines.
                                19

-------
    Because of the relatively low solubility  in  water  of many of
the organic compounds monitored, and the continuing flow of water
through the storm sewer lines,  the concentration levels of organ-
ic compounds detected in storm sewer sediment samples were gener-
ally higher (due to certain organic compounds  being  more readily
sorbed  on  sediment particles)   than  corresponding concentrations
in storm sewer water samples.   It should also be noted that sedi-
ment samples could not be collected at all storm sewer sites sam-
pled, and that sediment  tended  to be more readily  available for
collection at storm sewer line junctions and turning points.

    Surface-water  samples  and  sediment  samples collected  from
Love Canal  area creeks  and  rivers revealed  highly contaminated
sediment and contaminated water  in the  general  vicinity of those
storm sewer outfall locations  that were  fed  by lines connecting
to the  97th and  99th Streets storm  sewers.   In  particular,  the
sediment samples  collected  in  Black  Creek near  the  96th Street
storm sewer outfall revealed that high levels  of  toxic organic
compounds were present,  as did  sediment samples collected in the
Niagara River  near  the 102nd Street storm  sewer  outfall.  Due to
the  close  proximity of  the  102nd Street  landfill  to  water and
sediment sampling sites in the Niagara River, it was not possible
to unequivocally  identify the  source(s)  of  contaminated Niagara
River sediment near the 102nd Street outfall.

    The  air monitoring program  results were  consistent with the
findings obtained  from monitoring other  environmental  media.  In
essence, indoor  air contamination levels  were  elevated in a few
ring 1  houses, namely  those  houses where  other  media monitoring
efforts  (for  example, the  special sump/basement  air  monitoring
study)  also  identified  the  presence  of  contaminants  that  had
migrated from  Love Canal.   Outside of  the relatively  few ring 1
houses  so affected,  no  pattern  of regular  (living  area) indoor,
or basement air contamination was observed. Furthermore, no clear
evidence of air pollution was found  in  the Declaration Area that
could be directly  attributed to  contamination emanating  from Love
Canal.

    The  three  special  air  monitoring research  studies  conducted
at Love Canal provided limited evidence of the following results.
First,  airborne contaminants detected  indoors were also detected
in  the  outside ambient  air,  and may have been transported from
upwind  sources.   Second, activities  associated  with domiciliary
occupancy  suggested that such  activities could  potentially in-
crease  indoor air pollution levels.  And third, highly contamina-
ted  sumps  (which were found in only a limited  number  of ring 1
residences) could  serve as potential contributing sources of high
levels  of indoor air pollution.
                                20

-------
    Analyses of drinking water samples revealed that the drinking
water  sampled  satisfied  existing  EPA drinking  water  quality
standards.  Furthermore,  no drinking water  samples  collected in
Declaration  or Canal  Area residences  revealed the  presence of
contamination that was directly attributable to Love Canal.

    The  results of  monitoring  for  radioactive  contaminants in
water/soil/sediment samples revealed  that  only normal background
radioactivity  was present in  the Declaration  Area and  in the
Canal Area.   Analyses conducted  indicated  that  the predominant
gamma-emitting  radionuclides  observed  were  naturally  occurring
radionuclides such as  radium-226 and  the  so-called daughter pro-
ducts of  its- radioactive  decay. Water  samples analyzed revealed
that  no  gamma-emitting  radionuclides  were  present  above  back-
ground levels,  and  drinking water concentrations of tritium were
well below  the EPA drinking  water  standard.   Soil  and sediment
samples  analyzed  revealed the  presence  of  only low  levels of
naturally occurring  radionuclides such as  potassium-40  and the
daughter  products  of  radium-226 and thorium-232, and low concen-
trations of cesium-137 comparable to worldwide  fallout  levels.

    The  limited biological  monitoring program provided results
that  were consistent  with the  findings  obtained  from environ-
mental monitoring  activities. In  general,  no evidence  of  either
biological  availability or  biological accumulation  of environ-
mental contaminants was observed among  the  species sampled  in the
Declaration Area  that could  be  attributed  directly to environ-
mental contaminants that had  migrated  from  Love Canal.

    Finally, the results of  a special monitoring program for the
highly  toxic  compound 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin  (2,3,
7,8-TCDD),  revealed  evidence  of  limited  environmental contami-
nation  in the  general Love  Canal  area.    In  particular,   it was
determined  that  2,3,7,8-TCDD  was present:   (1) in the untreated
leachate  sampled  at  the Leachate Treatment  Facility  (but was not
detected  in the treated effluent);  (2) in  the sumps of certain
ring  1  residences (sumps  that also contained  high concentrations
of  numerous other  chlorinated  organic compounds);  and  (3)  in
sediment  samples  collected from certain storm  sewers that  origi-
nated near  the former  canal, and in  sediment samples collected
from  local creeks  and  the  Niagara  River  near  the outfalls of
those storm sewers (sediments  that  also  contained  high concen-
trations  of numerous other chlorinated  organic compounds).   These
results for 2,3,7,8-TCDD at  Love Canal both confirmed  and  exten-
ded the findings  reported  publicly in  1980  by  NYS.

1.3  CONCLUSIONS

    The  results of the  EPA  multimedia environmental  monitoring
program  conducted at  Love Canal  during  the  summer  and fall of
1980  revealed  a  limited  pattern  of  environmental  contamination
                                 21

-------
restricted mainly to the immediate vicinity of  the  inactive haz-
ardous wastes  landfill.   The  data suggested that  localized and
highly selective migration  of  toxic chemicals  through  soils had
contaminated a  few  ring 1 houses  located  mainly  south  of Wheat-
field Avenue.  The  data  also revealed that  substantial residual
contamination was present in those local storm sewer lines origi-
nating near the former canal, and was also present in the surface
water  and  sediment  of area  creeks and rivers  at locations that
were  near  to and  downstream from  the outfalls  of those  storm
sewer lines.

    Apart from these findings, the Declaration  Area exhibited no
clear  evidence  of  Love Canal-related  contamination  in  any envi-
ronmental medium monitored.   Also,  in all media monitored, the
data  revealed  that  the  occurrence  and  concentration  levels of
monitored substances  observed  in the  Declaration Area  could not
be attributed in a consistent fashion  to the migration of contam-
inants from Love Canal.  The data  also provided no  evidence sup-
porting  the  hypothesis that (outside  of  ring  1)  swales may have
served as preferential routes  for  chemicals to migrate from the
former canal.  Finally, the data suggested that the barrier drain
system surrounding the landfill  was  operating  effectively to in-
tercept  the  lateral  migration  of  contaminants from  Love Canal,
and was also drawing near-surface ground water back to the drains
for  collection  and  decontamination at the onsite Leachate Treat-
ment Facility.

    The  patterns of  environmental  contamination  discovered  at
Love Canal, that could be attributed directly to the migration of
contaminants from  Love Canal, were  found to be  consistent with
the  geology of  the  site.   Because  of  the  naturally  occurring
clayey soils in  the general Love Canal area, the  rapid and dis-
tant  migration of  substantial  amounts of  contaminants from the
former  canal  to surrounding  residences  is  highly  unlikely.
Migration  of  contaminants  from  Love Canal  was  found  to have
occurred over relatively short distances, probably through selec-
tive  soil  pathways  consisting  of  more permeable  materials, and
was confined to ring 1 of the Canal Area.  Even though the trans-
port of contaminants was greater in the more permeable soils, the
random deposition and  apparent discontinuity  of these  soils made
it highly  doubtful  that  much contamination outside  of ring 1 had
occurred by ground-water transport.
                                22

-------
                             CHAPTER 2
                            BACKGROUND


    In order to understand the events leading to the May 21, 1980
emergency declaration order  and  to better understand the context
in which the EPA  Love Canal study was conducted,  a  brief review
of the  major historical  developments pertaining  to use  of the
Love Canal site is presented.

2.1 SITE LOCATION

    The Love Canal Declaration Area is located  in the southeast-
ern portion of the La Salle section of the City of Niagara Falls,
New York close  to the corporate  boundary of the  Town  of Wheat-
field (Figure 1).   The inactive  hazardous  wastes landfill known
as Love Canal physically  occupies the  central  16-acre portion of
the rectangular plot of ground bounded by Colvin Boulevard on the
north, 99th Street on the east, Frontier Avenue on the south, and
97th Street on the west.   Two roads, Read and Wheatfield Avenues,
cross the landfill in an east-west direction. A public elementary
school,  known as  the 99th  Street Elementary School,  occupies a
portion of the  land  between Read and Wheatfield  Avenues  and was
built adjacent  to the  eastern  boundary  of the  landfill.   The
southernmost portion of  the  site  is approximately  1,500  feet
north of  the Niagara River.   Another inactive hazardous wastes
site, known as the 102nd Street landfill,  is located to the south
of Love  Canal  and  is  approximately bounded  by  the  following:
Buffalo Avenue on  the north; the  Niagara  River  on the south; and
lines that would be  formed  on  the east by extending 102nd Street
to the Niagara River, and on the west by extending 97th Street to
the Niagara River.

    The area encompassed  by the  May 21,   1980 state  of emergency
order, and the  focus of  the EPA Love Canal  investigations, was
the area previously  identified as "DECLARATION AREA"  in Figure 2
and referred to in this report as the  Declaration Area.  The area
identified with the  legend  "CANAL AREA" in  Figure 2  (referred to
in this report as the Canal Area) depicts the location of the in-
active landfill, and  included  nearly all  of the houses that were
acquired and evacuated  by  the State  of   New York in 1978.   The
boundaries of the Declaration Area  corresponded   roughly  to the
following streets and features identified in Figure 3:  Bergholtz


                                23

-------
Creek on  the  north;  102nd Street on  the  east (and its imaginary
northward  extension  to  Bergholtz Creek);  103rd  Street   on  the
southeast; Buffalo  Avenue on  the south;  and  93rd  Street on the
west.  The residences on  the west side  of 93rd Street and on the
east side  of  102nd  and 103rd  Streets were  included in the state
of emergency order and in the Declaration Area.

2.2  SITE HISTORY

    In  the early 1890's an entrepreneur  named William T. Love en-
visioned  the  founding  of a planned  industrial community  that he
named Model City,  to be  located  north  of  Niagara Falls  in  the
present town of Lewiston, New York.   Love's plan was to dig a ca-
nal diverting  water  from the Niagara River northward to the Niag-
ara  escarpment in  order  to  economically  produce hydroelectric
power for the  industries  that  Love  hoped to  lure  to  Model City.
Work began on  the canal on May 23,  1894  in the La Salle section
of Niagara  Falls.   The  canal  was  located  in  a  400-foot  wide
right-of-way and according to newspaper reports was to be 80 feet
wide at the top, 30  feet  deep,  and  40 feet  wide at the base.  Ap-
parently, due  to  the joint occurrence  of a financial depression
in the 1890's  and the  development of a practical  means  for  gen-
erating  alternating  current by Nikola  Tesla  (1856-1943),  which
permitted the  economical transmission  of electrical  power  over
long distances, Love's dream of Model City, fueled by  the natural
energy source  of a power canal, soon evaporated.

    While some uncertainty exists today as to both the originally
excavated depth and the  southernmost  extension of  the former ca-
nal  that  bears Love's  name,  it is known from aerial photographic
evidence that   in 1938 the portion of Love Canal bounded by Colvin
Boulevard, 99th Street, Frontier  Avenue, and 97th Street was open
and filled to   some depth with water.  It is also known that exca-
vated soils were piled near the edge of the canal, forming mounds
estimated as 10 to 15 feet high in places.

    In 1942 the company known today as Hooker Chemicals and Plas-
tics Corporation (Hooker) entered into  an  agreement  with  the Ni-
agara Power and Development  Company (then owner of the canal) to
purchase Love's unfinished canal.  Although Hooker did not actual-
ly acquire  the property  until  1947,  Hooker acknowledged  that it
used the canal between 1942 and 1953 for the disposal of at least
21,800 tons of various chemical wastes.  A  list  of the types of
wastes buried   in Love Canal is presented in Table 3.

    According  to NYS  interpretations of aerial photographs taken
throughout the time period,  Hooker  apparently deposited chemical
wastes in the  canal by first constructing dikes across the canal,
which formed impounded areas of water,  and  then filled the canal
on a section-by-section basis.  It is not known how much, if any,
of the impounded water was drained  from the canal  prior to land-
filling operations.
                                24

-------
TABLE 3.  CHEMICALS DISPOSED AT LOV1 CANAL BY HOOKER ELECTROCHEMICAL
                             COMPANY (1942-1953 )t
Physical
Type of Waste
Misc. acid chlorides other than
benzoyl--includes acetyl, caprylyl,
butyryl, nitro benzoyls
Thionyl chloride and misc.
sulfur/chlorine compounds

Misc. chlorination--includes
waxes, oils, naphthalenes, aniline

Dodecyl (Lauryl, Lorol) mercaptans
(DDM), chlorides and misc. organic
sulfur compounds
Trichlorophenol (TCP)


Benzoyl chlorides and benzo-
trichlorides

Metal chlorides
Liquid disulfides (LDS/LDSN/BDS)
and chlorotoluenes
Hexachlorocyelohexane
(r-BHG/Lindane)

Chlorobenzenes


State
liquid
and
solid
liquid
and
solid
liquid
and
solid
liquid
and
solid
liquid
and
solid
liquid
and
solid
solid
liquid

solid


liquid
and
solid
Total Estimated
Quantity
(Tons)
400


500


1,000


2,400


200


800


400
700

6,900


2,000


Container
drum


drum


drum


drum


drum


drum


drum
drum

drum and
nonmetallic
containers
drum and
nonmetallic
containers
  'Benzylchlorides—includes benzyl       solid
    chloride, benzyl alcohol, benzyl
    thiocyanate

  Sodium sulfide/sulfhydrates            solid

  Misc. 10% of above

  Total
 2,400




 2,000

 2,000

21,800
drum
drum
   TInteragency Task  Force on Hazardous Wastes,  Draft Report on Hazardous Waste
   Disposal in Erie  and Niagara Counties,  New York, March 1979.  Hooker Electro-
   chemical Company  is now known as the Hooker Chemicals and Plastics Corpora-
   tion.
                                       25

-------
    The significance  of the  issue  of whether  or not  water was
drained from  impounded  areas prior  to Hooker dumping  wastes in
the canal  looms  in potential  importance  when the  topography of
the site is considered.  Although the general Love Canal area is
quite flat, the region was traversed by a number of naturally oc-
curring shallow  (less  than  10  feet deep)  surface depressions,
sometimes called swales, that served  as preferential  pathways of
surface-water  runoff.   Some  of  the  swales,  which  are now all
filled, were intersected during excavation of the canal. The wavy
lines superimposed  on  Figure 2  illustrate  the  approximate  loca-
tion  of known  former  swales  in the general  vicinity of  Love
Canal.

    It has been offered by others that Hooker's active landfill-
ing operations  may have  displaced   impounded water,  potentially
contaminated with toxic chemicals,  into the drainage pathways. In
addition,   if  the  open  swales  were  later  filled  with rubble and
more  permeable  sandy-soils  during  residential  constuction,  then
leachate  may  have  preferentially   migrated from the  landfill
through the filled  swales to nearby houses.  The EPA monitoring
program was designed to test the validity of this hypothesis.

    It  is  also known  that  the City of Niagara  Falls  disposed of
solid wastes (mainly in the portion of the canal bounded today by
Read  and Wheatfield Avenues)  in Love Canal.  No  other source of
wastes disposed of in the canal has yet been identified.

    Shortly after  Hooker  terminated disposal activities  at  Love
Canal  in  1953 the  land was  acquired for the purchase  price of
$1.00 by the Niagara Falls Board of Education for the purpose of
constructing an elementary school on the  site.   In 1955 the 99th
Street Elementary School,  located adjacent to the eastern edge of
the landfill on 99th  Street  between Read  and Wheatfield Avenues,
was completed  and  opened.  A French  drain system  was  installed
around  the  school  at the time  of construction  and was connected
at some later time to a storm sewer line on 99th Street.

    As  early as 1938, a number of private  residences were located
near  the northeast  corner of Love Canal.  By 1952 approximately 6
to 10 houses existed on 99th Street  (the backyards of these  hous-
es faced toward the active dumping  in the canal), mainly located
around  the central and south-central portions of  the canal. By
1972  virtually all of  the  99  houses on  97th  and  99th Streets
whose backyards  faced  the  former  canal,  the  so-called  ring 1
houses,  were   completed.    In  general,   residential  development
around  Love Canal  occurred  primarily from the mid-1950's through
the early  1970"s.   By 1966,  all  evidence of earlier excavation at
the site  had  been  eliminated by subsequent construction activi-
ties .
                                26

-------
    Shortly after the canal  was  filled in 1953,  Read  and Wheat-
field Avenues were  built across  the landfill.  Anecdotal reports
by area residents relate that chemical wastes, fly ash, and muni-
cipal  refuse  were  encountered  during the construction of these
streets.  In 1957 the City of Niagara Falls  installed  a sanitary
sewer line  across the  former canal under Wheatfield Avenue.  The
sewer pipe  was  laid approximately  10  feet  below the  surface of
Wheatfield  Avenue.   Contrary  to  specification  documents,  which
stipulated  that  the sewer pipe  be encircled with  gravel,  field
inspection  notes  compiled by the State of New York Department of
Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC) reported that only excavated
soils were  used to  backfill  the  trench.

    In  1960  the City of Niagara  Falls  installed a  storm sewer
line under  Read Avenue,  entering  from  97th Street and  ending  in a
catch basin located approximately  midway  between 97th and  99th
Streets.   Field inspection  notes  (NYS DEC)  once again  reported
that only excavated soils were used to fill the trench.   Although
city records do not identify the  construction of  storm sewer  lat-
erals on  Wheatfield Avenue, connecting  to storm  sewer lines on
97th and  99th  Streets,  field inspection notes (NYS DEC)  reported
that storm  sewer  laterals were built  at some  time on  Wheatfield
Avenue  entering from  both 97th and 99th Streets and each running
towards the former  canal  for  approximately  170  feet.   As  with
other  sewer lines  installed by  the City of  Niagara Falls  around
Love Canal,  these  too  were  reportedly  (NYS  DEC)  backfilled  with
excavated soils.

    As  early as 1966 a  little league  baseball diamond  was located
on  the  northern portion of Love  Canal just south  of Colvin  Boule-
vard.   In 1968  the La  Salle Expressway  was  constructed north of
Buffalo Avenue.  The construction of  this four-lane divided high-
way  required  the relocation of  Frontier  Avenue approximately 50
feet northward.  During the  relocation of Frontier Avenue,  chemi-
cally-contaminated  soils  and drummed  wastes were  encountered.  \t
the  request of  the  State of  New  York  Department of Transportation
(DOT),  Hooker agreed to remove  40 truckloads of wastes and soil.
At  the same time  that  Frontier  Avenue  was  relocated, the storm
sewer  line  under   Frontier  Avenue  was  also  relocated  by  DOT.
Field  inspection notes  (NYS DEC)  reported  that  the  storm sewer
line installed  by DOT was constructed  according to specifications
and  encircled  with gravel  prior to  backfilling the  excavation
trench.

    As  a  result of  unusually high precipitation in 1975 and 1976,
a very  high ground-water level apparently developed  in the  gener-
al  Love Canal  area. At  about this time  a number of problems be-
came markedly  noticed  by Love Canal  residents, namely:   (1)  por-
tions of  the  landfill  subsided  and drums surfaced in  a number of
locations?  (2)  ponded  surface water,  heavily  contaminated  with
                                 27

-------
chemicals, was found in the backyards  of  some ring 1 "houses; (3)
unpleasant chemical odors  (caused by the  volatilization  of sur-
faced chemical wastes)  were  cited by residents  as  a factor con-
tributing  to both  discomfort  and  illnesses;  (4)  evidence  of
through-ground migration  of  toxic  chemicals became  apparent  in
the basements  of some  ring  1 houses  with  the  appearance  of  a
noxious,  oily  residue accumulating  in basement sumps,  the cor-
rosion of  sump pumps,  and  the physical evidence of chemical in-
filtration  through cinder-block  foundations?   and   (5)  noxious
chemical fumes were noticed emanating  from several  near-by storm
sewer manhole covers.

    By November of 1976, the  frequency and magnitude of the prob-
lems at Love Canal  cited by area residents prompted a meeting of
local, state, and federal officials  where  it was agreed that NYS
DEC would  conduct and  be responsible for  an investigation of the
site, and that EPA would provide technical assistance. During the
subsequent year,  a number of  environmental samples were collected
in ring 1 houses and at the 99th Street Elementary School.

    Partially as  a  result of  these  investigations,  Commissioner
Robert  P.  Whalen  of the State of New York  Department  of Health
(DOH) in April of 1978 declared the site to be a threat to health
and ordered that the area nearest the landfill be fenced. In June
1978 NYS  DOH initiated a house-to-house  health survey and col-
lected air samples  in  ring 1 houses.   After reviewing all avail-
able Love Canal data,  Commissioner Whalen declared a health emer-
gency at Love Canal on August 2,  1978. The order issued by Whalen
resulted  in, among  other things, the closing of the 99th Street
Elementary School and  a recommendation  for the temporary evacua-
tion of  pregnant  women and all  children  under the  age of  2 who
resided in the first two rings of houses around the former canal.

    On  August  7,  1978 Governor  Carey  announced that  NYS  would
purchase  (at full  replacement value)  all  ring 1 houses  at Love
Canal.  This announcement of  the permanent relocation of Love Ca-
nal residents was subsequently expanded to include  all  238 rings
1  and  2 houses.    On  the same  date,  President  Carter  issued  an
order declaring that a state  of emergency existed in the southern
portion of Love  Canal,  where  contamination was at  its worst lev-
el, enabling the  use  of federal  funds and  the  Federal Disaster
Assistance Agency  to  aid the City of  Niagara Falls in providing
remedies at the site.

    During the latter part of 1978 and through the spring of 1979
the City  of  Niagara Falls  (partly with the aid of federal funds)
designed and constructed a barrier  drain  system  parallel to, and
on both  sides  of,  the southern portion of  Love  Canal.   The bar-
rier drain system installed by the  City of Niagara Falls was es-
sentially  a  French drain  containing perforated tile-pipe.   The
perforated tiles were  buried  in  a trench  12 to 15  feet in depth,

-------
 covered  with 2  feet  of uniformly  sized gravel,  and then back-
 filled with sand.  Initially,  leachate collected from the land-
 fill  was treated onsite by an EPA mobile activated-carbon  filter
 system.   Subsequently,  a  permanent activated-carbon  Leachate
 Treatment Facility  (partially  financed by  an  EPA  cooperative
 agreement with NYS DEC) was  constructed near  the  northeast  corner
 of  97th  Street  and Wheatfield Avenue. The Leachate Treatment  Fa-
 cility became operational  at the end  of 1979.

    In the  spring of  1979, NYS  DEC  assumed  responsibility for  the
 construction of  additional  portions  of the barrier drain  system
 in  the central and northern  sections  of Love  Canal.   The portions
 of  the barrier  drain system constructed by DEC were  connected to
 the southern system,  and  included a complete  encircling of  the
 former canal in  the  north  (south of Colvin Boulevard) and  in  the
 south (approximately located in the  center of Frontier Avenue).
 In  the  north,  the drains were  located  in trenches up to 18 feet
 in  depth.  Figure 5  illustrates the  approximate location of  the
 entire barrier  drain system installed  at Love  Canal by the City
 of  Niagara  Falls and  NYS DEC. The entire DEC  project  was complet-
 ed  by the  end  of 1979, with contract  costs  totalling more than
 $13 million  (including construction of the  Leachate Treatment
 Facility).

    The  purposes of  the remedial construction at Love Canal were
 many.   First, a  leachate  collection system was  installed  around
 the entire  perimeter  of the  former  canal in order to  prevent con-
 tinuing   lateral  migration  of   contaminants  from  the landfill.
 Second,   lateral  trenches  were   dug  from the main barrier drain
-trench  towards   the  former  canal and filled  with sand to  hasten
 dewatering   of  the  site  and  to  facilitate  construction.     And
 third,  a relatively  impermeable clay cap was installed over  the
 landfill to minimize  volatilization  of  contaminants,  prevent
 human contact with hazardous wastes, prevent runoff of contami-
 nated surface water,  and to minimize the amount  of precipitation
 infiltrating the  landfill  and  thus   reduce  the  generation   of
 leachate.  In Figure  6 a  cross  section  of the former canal  and
 the barrier drain system are illustrated, along with  an identifi-
 cation of the general soil units (and  their permeabilities) that
 exist in the area.

    It  should be pointed  out that access  to the Canal  Area  and
 the landfill has been  restricted  to  the general  public  since
 1979.   Public access to the site was eliminated by  the erection
 of  an 8-foot high cyclone fence around the entire area;  for  se-
 curity purposes,  the  Canal Area is also patrolled.   In Figure 5,
 the approximate  location of this fence  around the site was iden-
 tified.   The reason  the fence does not restrict  access to  all of
 99th  Street is   due to  the presence of  two families  (as  of Feb-
 ruary 1982)  who  still reside on the  east side of  99th Street,  and
 have  declined to sell their  homes to  the State.
                                 29

-------
U)
o
                               D D D D O O O D O D D O D D O O O O O D D DP D
                       DnaDDDDaaDoooa
                                                     97th STREET
                             0130000000000
                            00000 0000
                       0000000000000
                       0000000000000
                       DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
                                                 3   99th STREET
                                                 ui
                                                 I
DDaODDDDDDDDDD ODDDOD
               L
DOG DO DD
                  KEY:
               	CANAL BOUNDARY                      o MANHOLES
               	  BARRIER DRAINS, LATERALS               ® WETWELLS (WITH MANHOLE)
               •—  FORCEMAINS                          • LYSIMETERS
               •—  GRAVITY MAIN-PARALLELS WEST BARRIER DRAIN  C3 1st RING OF HOMES
               —  8-FOOT HIGH CYCLONE FENCE              a 2nd RING OF HOMES
                       (A) PERMANENTLEACHATE
                           TREATMENT FACILITY
                       @ UNDERGROUND LEACHATE STORAGE
                       C5) 99th STREET SCHOOL
                                                  (ADAPTED FROM A FIGURE PREPARED BY THE NEW YORK STATE
                                                  DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION. USED BY PERMISSION)
                 Figure 5.   Love  Canal  Remedial Action Project Plan  View  (not  to scale)

-------
                              CLAY CAP, 3ft. THICK (PERMEABILITY: W7amM
PERMEABILITY:

1Q"7to1Q"8cm/i
             SILT FILL-PERMEABILITY: >10"Bcm/i
                                                                       SILTY SAND-PERMEABILITY: >Hr*em/i

                                                                                   BASEMENT
                                            LOVE
                                            CANAL   ,r
                                          OHIO. DEPTH I
                                            FILL
                                         COMPOSITION
                                          AND DEPTH
                                          UNKNOWN
                                                                                                          GROUND LEVEL
                                                                                                          1.8-2.5 ft.
                                                                                                          4.0-5.5 ft
                                                                                                          8.0ft.
                                                                                                          12.0ft.
                                                                                            23.0 ft.
                                                                                         — 38.0 ft.
LEGEND: BURIED UTILITIES ARE


     S - STORM SEWER


     A - SANITARY SEW1R

     W - WATER MAIN
                Figure  6.   Remedial  Project:   Transverse View
                              (Looking  North  from a  Position Located
                              South  of  Wheatfield Avenue).

-------
    During  remedial  construction  the  encountering  of  buried
wastes in the northwestern portion of the landfill necessitated a
westward extension of the barrier drain system on the 97th Street
side  of  the former  canal  between Read  Avenue  and  Colvin Boule-
vard.  During  the construction  of  that  portion  of the  barrier
drain system  a  catch basin was  discovered  near  the former canal
boundary, along  the property line between 949 and 953 97th Street
that had been installed by the City of Niagara Falls for the pur-
pose of  draining  the  immediate  area.   The catch  basin  was found
to be connected  to  the  97th Street  northward flowing storm sewer
line.

    During the construction of  the  southern portion of  the bar-
rier drain  system three  separate pieces  of  field tiles were dis-
covered.   It was  offered  by local  residents  that at  one time
these tiles were used to drain some property (or properties) east
of the site into the canal.  These field tiles were documented in
NYS DOH  field inspection notes  as being  located near the follow-
ing lots: 454 99th Street?  north side  of 474 99th Street; and on
the lot  line between 474  and 476  99th  Street.   Both  the catch
basin on 97th Street and  the  field  tiles   on  99th Street were
cut-off  by installation of the barrier drain system.

    After a yearlong investigation,  the Department of Justice, on
behalf of EPA,  filed a  civil  lawsuit against Hooker (and related
corporate defendants) on December 20, 1979 for improper hazardous
waste disposal at four Niagara Falls sites.   The lawsuit alleged,
among other things,  that Hooker  had  caused  or  contributed to the
creation  of  an  "imminent  and   substantial  endangerment"  and  a
nuisance at Love Canal.

    In January 1980 EPA, at the  request of the Department of Jus-
tice, contracted for a limited pilot cytogenetic assessment of 36
Love Canal residents for evidence-gathering  purposes.  The intent
of the study  was  twofold:   first, to determine if excess chromo-
some damage was present  among Love Canal residents,-  and second,
to determine if the prevalence and severity of cytogenetic abnor-
malities detected warranted  a full-scale investigation.   On May
19, 1980 the results of the assessment were released.

    From a  scientific  point of  view,  the EPA  pilot cytogenetic
assessment  suggested that   the  testing of additional  Love Canal
residents was probably  warranted.   However,  a  great  amount  of
uncertainty as to the cause of the observed chromosomal abnormal-
ities remained.   In  particular, the  lack  of  physical  evidence
attributing  (in  a dose-response fashion) cytogenetic  damage  to
incremental exposure to  toxic chemicals migrating  directly from
Love Canal  left  the  cause  of  the observed damage unknown. In ad-
dition,   the  personal  health implications resulting  from damaged
chromosomes remained unknown.
                                32

-------
    Partially as  a result of  these events President  Carter de-
clared on  May 21,  1980 (for  the  second time)  that a  state of
emergency existed  at  Love  Canal.   This action led  to  the tempo-
rary relocation of  those residents  desirous of moving  and to the
initiation of the EPA Love Canal environmental monitoring studies
described in this report.  On June 10, 1980 EPA officials from the
Office of Monitoring  Systems and Quality  Assurance  (OMSQA),  went
to Love Canal to outline to area residents the nature  of the en-
vironmental monitoring  studies that  EPA planned  to  conduct.   EPA
field sampling activities  at  Love  Canal began on August 8,  1980
and were concluded on October 31,  1980.

    As was mentioned  earlier,  on  October 1,  1980 a plan for the
permanent relocation  of all desirous Love  Canal  emergency decla-
ration area  residents was  announced.  This plan implemented the
Supplemental Appropriations and Rescission Act of  1980  (commonly
known as the Javits-Moynihan  amendment), 94 Stat.  857,  that au-
thorized the federal  government to  provide up  to $15 million fi-
nancial assistance  to  the  State  of New  York for  the permanent
relocation of residents living in the Declaration Area.  Partial-
ly as a  result  of this agreement  an Agency of  the State of New
York, the  Love  Canal Area  Revitalization Agency  (LCARA),  under
the  leadership of  Mayor Michael C.  O'Laughlin of  Niagara Falls,
assumed the  responsibility for acquiring  the  property  of  those
residents who desired to sell  their property,  and  for relocating
renters in the La Salle Development and senior citizens area.  In
addition,  LCARA was given  the  responsibility  for long term plan-
ning and revitalization of the general Love Canal area.
                                33

-------
                            CHAPTER 3
                           DESIGN OF THE
                        MONITORING STUDIES

     The  environmental  studies  initiated  by  EPA  at  Love Canal
were designed  as an integrated  multimedia (that is,  air, soil,
sediment, water,  and biota)  monitoring program to  characterize
the incremental  extent and  degree of  chemical  contamination in
the May 21,  1980 emergency declaration area directly attributable
to the migration of  contaminants  from the  former canal.   The use
of a multimedia  data collection strategy was  intended to permit
the evaluation  of  the  importance  of  each of  the media pathways
(environmental routes)  througli which individuals might be exposed
to toxic  substances,  and permit an eventual  assessment of total
incremental exposure.

3.1  OBJECTIVES

     The general objectives of the multimedia  study designed and
conducted by EPA at Love Canal were as  follows:

   1.   To  characterize  in  each medium sampled the   incremental
       extent  and  degree  of  environmental contamination  in the
       Declaration Area directly attributable to Love  Canal»

   2.   To determine  the presence  and  direction of  ground-water
       flow in  the area,  and  evaluate the effectiveness  of the
       remedial construction performed at Love Canal.

   3.   To determine  if  swales, sewer  lines,  and other geological
       features  (for example,  sandy soil deposits  in the form of
       sand lenses) had a  significant  effect on the  migration of
       toxic substances from the former canal.

   4.   To obtain measurements of environmental contamination.

   5.   To  determine  potential temporal variability in  air con-
       tamination  levels   and  infer  the  causal mechanisms  (for
       example,  changes in ambient temperature)  influencing the
       observed contamination patterns.
                                34

-------
   6.  To  investigate the  use of  locally  available  biological
       systems as potential indicators of contaminants present in
       the environment.

   7.  To  provide an  assessment  of  the  relative  environmental
       quality of the Love Canal emergency declaration area.

3.2  IMPLEMENTATION

    The EPA studies were  initiated  by first identifying the data
requirements  of  the  overall  objectives and  then  designing data
collection  mechanisms appropriate  for  such  activities.   Within
the overall limitations of time,  budget,  and feasibility, a mul-
timedia monitoring  program was designed and implemented at Love
Canal. As was previously mentioned, the contract costs associated
with the Love Canal project were $5.4 million. GCA Corporation of
Bedford, Massachusetts was  selected as the prime management con-
tractor.   Other  subcontractors involved in  the  study,  and their
areas of involvement, are identified in Table 4.  The EPA Nation-
al Enforcement Investigations  Center  (Denver, Colorado) provided
assistance and guidance to sampling personnel in health and safe-
ty related matters during the  collection of  field samples.

    As was mentioned  previously,  the  identification of chemicals
to be  determined  in field samples  was  accomplished  by reviewing
all available data  concerning the  contents  of  the landfill, in-
cluding:   (1)  reviewing  the list of  chemical wastes  that Hooker
reported to have buried  in  Love  Canal  (Table  3);  (2)  reviewing
the results of all known  previous  environmental monitoring stud-
ies performed  at Love Canal  (including those  conducted  by both
NYS DOH and EPA); and (3)  through the analysis of  air, liquid,
and sediment  samples  collected by EPA directly from the Leachate
Treatment Facility and directly from  the barrier drain  system at
Love Canal, prior to the initiation of EPA field sampling activi-
ties.  As  a result  of these  efforts,  comprehensive lists of sub-
stances to monitor in water/soil/sediment/biota samples  and in
air samples were  derived.  The two  lists  are presented  in Appen-
dix A of this Volume.

    At  the outset of the monitoring  program it was  postulated
that chemicals in the former canal were likely to have selective-
ly migrated from the source according to environmental medium and
according to  location in  the  landfill  (due to  highly heterogen-
eous soil  conditions  at  the  site), and in  concentration levels
that decreased with increasing distance from Love Canal. In addi-
tion,  it was  also recognized:   (1) that former swales  may have
preferentially allowed the  migration  of chemicals from the site
(due to the possibility  that  materials  used to fill the swales
had greater permeability than the surrounding natural soils); (2)
that residences located in historically wet  areas  (that is, with
                                35

-------
   TABLE 4.  IDENTIFICATION OF EPA LABORATORIES AND PROJECT
                            SUBCONTRACTORS


                           EPA Laboratories

    Laboratory (Abbreviation)                Activity

Environmental Monitoring and        Q&/QC for water samples;
Support Laboratory,  Cincinnati      audit of gas chromatography/
(EMSL-Cin)                           mass spectrometry (GC/MS)
                                    subcontractor analyses

Environmental Monitoring Systems    Water monitoring; soil/sedi-
Laboratory, Las Vegas               ment/biota monitoring and
(EMSL-LV)                           QA/QC? audit of GC/MS sub-
                                    contractor analyses

Environmental Monitoring Systems    Air monitoring and QA/QC for
Laboratory, Research Triangle Park  air samples; contract super-
(EMSL-RTP)                           vision; data processing

Environmental Research Laboratory,  Hydrogeologic program
Ada (ERL-Ada)

Environmental Research Laboratory,  Audit of GC/MS subcontractor
Athens (ERL-Athens)                  analyses
Environmental Research Laboratory,  Analysis of selected samples
Corvalis (ERL-Corvalis)

Environmental Research Laboratory,  Analysis of selected samples
Duluth  (ERL-Duluth)

Health  Effects Research Laboratory, QA/QC for PFOAM samples?
Research Triangle Park (HERL-RTP)   confirmation of TCDD results


              Analytical Subcontractor Laboratories

  Laboratory (Abbreviation)             Type of Analysis

Acurex  Corporation (ACEE)           Organics in soil, sediment,
                                    and water

Advanced Environmental Systems,     TOX and TOC
Inc.  (AES)

Battelle Columbus Laboratories      Air volatile organics
(BCL, BCL2, BCL3)

Compuchem/Mead Technology           Organics in soil, sediment,
Laboratories (CMTL)                 and water

                            (continued)
                                 36

-------
                      TABLE 4  (continued)
              Analytical Subcontractor Laboratories

  Laboratory (Abbreviation)             Type of Analysis
Energy Resources Company
(ERCO)

Gulf South Research Institute
(GSRI, GSLA,  GSNO)
IIT Research Institute (IIT)

Midwest Research Institute
(MWRI)

PEDCo Environmental
(PEDC)
PJB/Jacobs Engineering Group
(PJBL)
Southwest Research Institute
(SWRI)
TRW, Inc. (TRW)

Wright State University (WSU]
Inorganics in soil, sediment,
and water

Air semi-volatile organics;
organics in soil, sediment,
and water

Air volatile organics

Organics in biota


Air volatile organics?
preparation of TENAX
cartridges

Organics in soil, sediment,
and water; inorganics in
soil,  sediment,  and water

Air semi-volatile organics;
organics in biota, soil,
sediment, and water? in-
organics in biota, soil, and
sediment; preparation of
polyurethane foam plugs

Organics in water

TCDD (Dioxin) determinations
                       Other Subcontractors
       Organization
         Activity
Empire Soils

Geomet Technologies

GeoTrans

JRB

Research Triangle Institute


Technos
Well drilling

Field sample collection

Ground-water modeling

Supervisory geologists

Provision of quality control
TENAX cartridges

Geophysical investigation
                                 37

-------
standing surface-water  problems)  were also  typically associated
with the  presence of  former  swales;  (3)  that loceil  creeks and
rivers  may  be  contaminated  and serve  as additional  sources of
human exposure; (4) that manmade construction activities (such as
streets and  Utilities  buried therein) may have had  a major in-
fluence on the  subsurface migration  of toxic substances from the
former canal; and (5) that efficiency in statistically estimating
typical chemical concentration levels, and the mapping of concen-
tration isopleths  in  certain  media,  could  be enhanced through
stratification of the Declaration Area into more compact sampling
areas  (in  order to  increase intra-area  environmental homogene-
ity) .

    With these  considerations  in mind, the  sampling  area scheme
described previously, and schematically  represented in Figure 4,
was superimposed on  the Declaration Area.   Within each sampling
area,  for  a variety of media,   site selection occurred by both
simple  random  selection (that is,  with  equal  probability), and
purposive selection.    At  nine  residences,  referred   to  as base
sites,   extensive  integrated  multimedia  environmental monitoring
was  conducted.   The  purposive  selection  of sampling  sites was
conducted with the intent of increasing the likelihood of detect-
ing transport pathways  through which toxic contaminants may have
migrated into the Declaration Area from Love Canal.

    It can be seen in Figure 4 that the distribution and location
of sampling areas around the Canal Area (area 11)  was designed to
facilitate the  estimation  of concentration  isopleths.   In  addi-
tion,  it  can be  seen  that nearly  all sampling  area boundaries
were coincident with existing physical boundaries, and that  prox-
imity of residences  to area  creeks was also  incorporated in the
design  (area 4). In subsequent figures identifying media specific
sampling locations,  it  will  be  apparent to  the reader that  (for
relevant media) sites were often intentionally selected  to permit
monitoring of former swales located throughout the area.

    Efforts  were  made  for  all monitored medium/source/location
combinations to obtain  control sampling  sites  that were selected
specifically for comparison purposes.  As a matter of convenience
all control  sites data  were  collected in  one organizational  sam-
pling area,  area 99, and are  reported in this fashion in Volumes
II and  III of  this  report.   It should be  noted that  the control
sites  do  not  really represent  a  physically  bounded  area, but
rather are simply a collection of medium-specific  sampling sites.
Due to  the  physical distance separating  control  sampling sites,
no specific  control area could be  identified in Figure 4.   When-
ever possible,  control  sites  are  identified  and included in  sub-
sequent figures showing medium-specific sampling locations.

    Special  attention  was  given  to  selecting  control site  loca-
tions in the Niagara Falls area that were not influenced directly
                                38

-------
by Love Canal or any other known hazardous waste sites.  The con-
trol  sites were monitored  to determine  normal  pollutant levels
found  near to  (but not influenced by) Love  Canal.   The relative
concentration differences found  between  the Declaration Area and
other  areas of interest were determined by subtraction.

    As was mentioned earlier, EPA  responded to the  requests of
local  residents  living outside  the  Declaration Area  to collect
additional environmental samples. The results from these sampling
efforts were  combined  (in Volumes II  and III)  in  one organiza-
tional sampling  area,  area  97.  Also included  in  Volumes II and
III  are  data for  sampling  area  98.   The data  included  in this
sampling area were obtained as part  of  the previously mentioned
ambient-air  transport  monitoring study,  which was  conducted to
determine  the nature and amount of pollutants  being transported
to the Declaration Area from sources other than Love Canal.

3.3  QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL (QA/QC) AND DATA VALIDA-
     TION

    Because QA/QC procedures form an integral part of any assess-
ment of the appropriateness and utility of the Love Canal data, a
brief  discussion  of certain QA/QC  concepts, processes,  and re-
sults  is presented here.   A more detailed  discussion of medium-
specific QA/QC procedures and  results may be found in Appendixes
C through  E of this  Volume.   In  addition, a comprehensive report
entitled Love CanalMonitoring Program,GCAQA/QC Summary Report,
describing  the  QA  role  and activities  of   the  prime contractor
(GCA  Corporation),  may be obtained  from the  National Technical
Information Service (NTIS).

    In response  to the presidential  order  declaring  a  state of
emergency  at  Love  Canal,  and the  great anxiety  experienced by
local  residents associated with  this  action,  the monitoring pro-
gram devised by EPA  was  restricted  to a  3-month sampling period.
Given  this  sampling-period  time  constraint, necessary cost con-
traints,  and  a  directive to  determine  the  extent and degree of
environmental contamination in the Declaration  Area  directly at-
tributable to the migration of contaminants from Love Canal, com-
prehensive medium-specific sampling designs  were developed.   The
major objective of the survey design was  to collect and analyze a
statistically adequate  number of samples to characterize  accu-
rately Declaration Area  contamination caused by Love  Canal,  and
to minimize  the effects  and  uncertainties  associated with  the
constrained sampling  time period.   The  analytical  requirements
established by EPA were designed to complement the extensive sam-
pling  programs.   This was  accomplished  by  targeting  (using  the
process described  earlier)   a  relatively large number  of  sub-
stances to be determined  in environmental samples.   As  a result
of these efforts,  the  likelihood was minimized  that substantial
evidence  of  environmental contamination  would  be  missed  in  the
Declaration Area samples collected.
                                39

-------
    Given these general program  requirements,  analytical methods
were selected  such that  the following considerations  were sat-
isfied.    First, the  shortness  of  the sampling  time  period  (3
months),  and  the  magnitude  of  the  sampling program  (more than
6,000 field samples  were collected),  necessitated  the  use  of a
large number of  analytical  subcontractors.   Typically,  the quan-
tity of samples collected at Love Canal required that  more than
one  analytical  subcontractor laboratory be  used  for  each medium
sampled.

    Second, the relatively large  number of  targeted  organic com-
pounds  to  be determined  in  environmental  samples, and the number
of analytical subcontractors needed  to analyze the  samples col-
lected, required  the  use of  uniform  analytical methods that had
the capacity for rapid sequential analysis of the large  number of
organic compounds of interest at  Love Canal.

    Third, potential problems resulting from the organic analyti-
cal  requirements  of   the  program  were  minimized  by   selecting
(whenever possible) already existing analytical methods, in order
to take advantage of any prior experience that the subcontractors
may have had with the methods.

    Fourth, the  state  of emergency  at Love Canal  precluded any
opportunity for  formal multilaboratory testing of certain state-
of-the-art organic analytical methods selected for use during the
project.

    Finally, in recognition  of  these factors, a  primary goal of
qualitative accuracy for organic  analyses (that is, correct iden-
tification of detected substances) was established. Consequently,
gas  chromatographic/mass  spectrometric  (GC/MS)  instrumentation
was selected for most  organic analyses because it most completely
and  reliably met the aforementioned requirements  for the analysis
of targeted organic  compounds in water,  soil,  sediment, and air
samples.

    Given  the constraints just  enumerated,  the primary  objective
of the  EPA Love Canal  QA/QC  program was to generate environmental
monitoring data  that  possessed  the  maximum  accuracy, precision,
and  specificity attainable.  In order to achieve these objectives,
the  QA/QC program developed by  EPA  consisted of  the  following
components  (additional detailed  documentation may be found  in the
previously  mentioned  GCA Corporation report  Quality  Assurance
Plan, Love Canal Study, LC-1-619-206,  available from NTIS).

    First, internal QC programs  were  specified by EPA for use at
each of the analytical subcontractor  laboratories.   The QC pro-
grams required by  EPA  established minimally acceptable  standards
that all  subcontractors  satisfied.   Many subcontractors adopted
more stringent QC programs that  were approved by  EPA.
                                 40

-------
    Second,  the  prime contractor  (GCA Corporation)  managed  the
day-to-day quality  assurance program, which  provided continuing
and immediate oversight of all subcontractors, and timely identi-
fication and correction of  sampling  and  analytical problems (de-
tails regarding the results  of  this  program may  be found in Love
CanalMonitoring Program,  GCA QA/QC Summary Report).  The  QA pro-
gram  that  the GCA  Corporation  managed  was  devised  by  EPA  and
included the following components:

   1.  Requirements  for  sample  collection,  preservation,  and
       holding times

   2.  Requirements for on-site  sampling  systems audits and per-
       sonnel performance audits

   3.  Requirements  for  analytical   methods,  calibrations,  and
       control chart  usage

   4.  Requirements for external analytical QA programs, includ-
       ing the use of EPA performance evaluation and  quality con-
       trol  samples

   5.  Requirements for internal analytical QA programs, includ-
       ing the measurement of reference compounds, method blanks,
       laboratory control  standards,  laboratory duplicates,  and
       surrogates  or  target  compound spikes.   Requirements for
       spiking concentrations,  laboratory control standards, and
       control limits were stipulated  for some methods.

   6.  Requirements for  the collection and  analysis  of a  speci-
       fied  number of replicate  field  samples  and  field blanks

   7.  Requirements for splitting  field samples  between  laborato-
       ries

   8.  Precision  and  accuracy goals were  specified  as  appropri-
       ate .

     Third, EPA performed an  intentionally redundant retrospective
evaluation of  the QA/QC program, which involved reviewing  all  of
the  analytical data generated by the subcontractors,  and  validat-
ing  those portions of  the  monitoring data  satisfying EPA stan-
dards  (details of  this process are  presented  in  Appendixes  C
through  E of this  Volume).   Briefly, the  process of  validating
data involved  the purposeful rejection of certain analytical re-
sults whenever compelling QA/QC  evidence  was  present  that identi-
fied the occurrence of  errors in sampling,  preservation, or ana-
lytical  method execution  which  were  associated  with  those re-
sults.   No other  data (such  as  statistical  "outliers")  were elim-
inated from  the Love  Canal data  base.  Volume II contains a list-
ing  of all validated  Love Canal  data.
                                 41

-------
    Finally, because many of the  analytical  methods employed for
medium-specific organic analyses were state-of-the-art procedures
not  yet  formally  (multilaboratory)  tested,  the  comprehensive
QA/QC procedures  employed  were designed to  permit,  as appropri-
ate, estimation of the precision and accuracy of these methods by
EPA.  The  basis for such estimation was  through the acquisition
and analysis of QA specific duplicate and  triplicate field sam-
ples at  Love Canal, and  the analysis of  well-characterized ex-
ternal QC samples  (that is, specially prepared samples whose ana-
lytes and  concentration  levels were unknown to  the analytical
subcontractors) and internal QC samples.  Procedures  employed for
these purposes are  described  in the  GCA  Corporation  document
Quality Assurance Plan, Love Canal Study, LC-1-619-206.

    As used  here,  the term  "accuracy"  includes  both qualitative
accuracy, the ability of a measuring system  to correctly identify
the presence or absence  of  a particular analyte in a sample when
the analyte  is  actually  present or absent,  and quantitative ac-
curacy,   the  ability of a measuring  system to specify the amount
of  an analyte  present in a particular  sample.   The  term  "preci-
sion" refers  to the  amount  of variability  (that  is, the likely
range of values that  would  be observed  in  identically repeated
measurements)  associated  with  any one   particular   measurement
value.

    In  order to determine the  presence  and concentration levels
of  the  relatively large  number of targeted  substances  (presented
in  Tables  A-l and A-2 of Appendix  A)  to be  determined in Love
Canal samples,  an extensive,  detailed  set of procedures  (proto-
cols) were  established that stipulated  the exact mariner in  which
all sampling and  analytical  activities were  to be  conducted. Even
though  the  protocols  used served to standardize all  such  activi-
ties, it must  be  recognized  that  the numerous  complex actions re-
quired,  and the sophisticated  instrumentation employed,  resulted
in  a certain amount of unavoidable  variability  in  the application
of  measurement system methodologies.   Knowledge about  the  vari-
ability  inherent  in all  environmental measurement  systems  becomes
increasingly important as the concentration of  the analyte(s)  of
interest in  a sample decreases.   Consequently,  for  low-level
 (sometimes  called "trace")  environmental measurements,  it is  es-
sential  that the  variability  of  the measurement  systems  used  be
known  (or be  estimated),  in  order  to  understand  the  confidence
that can be associated with  any one  particular measurement value.
The establishment of  appropriate  QA/QC  procedures  was designed  to
document fully the  process by which the  Love Canal  monitoring
data  were generated,   and  to  provide  some indication  of measure-
ment  systems  variability.   The  reader interested in additional
detailed information  on  the QA/QC programs used  at  Love  Canal,
and the  results   of  these efforts, should  consult  Appendixes  C
through E of this Volume,  and the  previously mentioned  GCA Cor-
poration reports  available from NTIS.
                                 42

-------
    Before concluding this section, it should be pointed out that
a comprehensive QA/QC effort  was  conducted by EPA at Love Canal.
As a result, the Love Canal data are carefully validated environ-
mental measurements,  and (given the  constraints  previously men-
tioned)  are  representative  of the  current  state-of-the-art  in
environmental measurement methodology  in  terms of precision, ac-
curacy, and specificity.

3.3.1  Limits of Detection and Quantitation

    The  measurement  of  low-level   ("trace")  amounts  of  organic
compounds in environmental  samples  is  a  challenging task for the
analytical chemist.  Because  of the  inherent uncertainties asso-
ciated with  such  efforts,  it  has  become  common  practice  to re-
quire that a certain concentration level of a compound be present
in a  sample  before an  analyst will assert that  the  compound  is
actually present.  The  smallest amount of  a  compound recognized
as measurable  in  a sample  (with  a given  finite  probability)  is
called the  limit  of detection (LOD).   The  LOD varies  from one
compound to another, from one sample  matrix to another,  from one
measurement system to another,  and  can vary in the same  measure-
ment system from one determination to the next.

    A concentration level somewhat higher  than  the LOD should  be
established whenever  applicable as the  level at  which  the con-
centration of a compound present in a sample  (with a given finite
probability) will  be  quantified.   This concentration level of a
compound in a sample is  referred  to  as  the limit of quantitation
(LOQ).   Concentration levels  of compounds  in the interval LOD to
LOQ  are  often,  by  convention,  called   "trace"   values  of  the
compounds.   The LOQ  also varies  from  one compound  to  another,
from one sample matrix to another, from one measurement system to
another,  and  can vary  on the  same  measurement  system  from one
determination  to  the next.    Statistical  analyses of the  moni-
toring data  generated  from Love Canal field  samples  treated all
"trace" concentrations of compounds as positive occurrences  (that
is, detections) of  those compounds in samples  analyzed.   Appen-
dixes  C  through E  (in  the sections  entitled  "Limits of  Detec-
tion/Quantitation")  contain additional details  on LOD  and LOQ,
and present  tables indicating  LOD  values   for  certain monitored
substances.

3.3.2  Precision and Accuracy Goals

    For the analysis of organic compounds in all media, a primary
goal of maximizing specificity  (that is,  maximizing the probabil-
ity of  correct compound  identification)  was  established  at the
initiation of the  study.   The approach selected  to  achieve this
goal was through the  application  of chromatographic methods that
use a  mass  spectrometer  (MS)  detector.    In these methods,  the
mass spectrometer was  required to be operated  in the repetitive
scanning mode.   Compound  identification  criteria were  provided
                                43

-------
that employed both relative chromatographic retention time infor-
mation and  mass spectra  data.  The  only  exceptions to  this ap-
proach to qualitative accuracy  involved  determinations of 2,3,7,
8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin  (2,3,7,8-TCDD),  and  a  few pesti-
cides at below parts per billion levels.  For 2,3,7,8-TCDD deter-
minations,  which were  measured at  concentrations  as low  as 10
parts per trillion,  the highly  specific  approach of high resolu-
tion gas  chromatography/high  resolution  mass spectrometry (HRGC/
HRMS) with  selected  ion monitoring was  used.   For  certain pesti-
cides determinations,  which were  measured at various  low  parts
per trillion  levels, gas  chromatography  with an electron capture
detector  (GC/ECD) was  used.   In addition, confirmation of pesti-
cide  identification  by GC/MS  was required,  whenever concentra-
tions permitted, to  minimize false-positive identifications.

    The  requirement  for  complete  spectra acquisition  to assure
high  qualitative accuracy  in  compound   identification  placed  a
major constraint on  the precision of concentration measurements,
and on  method detection and quantitation limit goals.  For  exam-
ple, it  is  known (P. Olynyk, W.  L. Budde,  and J. W. Eichelberger,
J. Chromatographic Science, 1981,  19, 377) that  in  water, the ac-
ceptable  total  method  precisions expected for one  of  the methods
used  are in the relative  standard deviation  (RSD)  range of  2  to
13  percent, depending  on the  analyte.    Precisions  better  than
this were neither required  nor  expected  of the analytical subcon-
tractors.   Precisions better  than  50 percent  RSD were  expected in
water  and air;  precisions  better  than  100 percent were  expected
in  the  other  media.  Furthermore,  it is  also  known  (J. A. Glaser,
D. L. Foerst,  G. D.  McKee,  S. A.  Quave,  and W. L. Budde,  Environ-
mental  Science and Technology,   1981,  1426)   that   in  water,  the
minimum method quantitation limits  expected  for the  methods used
are  in  the  range of  1  to 10 micrograms per liter  (parts  per bil-
lion),   depending  on  the  analyte;   minimum  method  quantitation
limits  were estimated  for other  methods  and  are reported in Ap-
pendixes D and  E.   Quantitation  limits  below these  values were
neither required nor expected  of the analytical  subcontractors,
except  as  noted previously  for  2,3,7,8-TCDD and  certain  pesti-
cides .

     For metals  analytes,  highly  reliable methods based on ab-
sorption and emission  spectrometries were selected  to assure high
qualitative accuracy  in  element  identification.   Precision and
method  quantitation goals were  of the same  order of  magnitude as
those described for  the organic analytes.

     The precision and  accuracy  of  the  monitoring data  obtained
 from Love Canal are documented  in Appendixes C  through  E,  in the
 sections entitled  "Estimates  of Data Precision"  and "Estimates of
Data Accuracy."
                                 44

-------
3.4  DATA ANALYSIS AND DATA REPORTING

    The entire  EPA Love Canal validated  data base  is  listed in
Volume II of this report. The data are organized by sampling area
and within each sampling area by sampling station  (site).  Within
each sampling site, the data are further organized according to a
medium/source/location  taxonomy  that  facilitates reference  to
particular collections of data. (See Table 2).  For each analysis
reported, a wide  variety of  information is presented, including:
sample identification  number;  medium  (for  example,  air); source
(for example, TENAX, PFOAM,  or HIVOL);  location (for example, LI
or L2  for living  area,  BA  for  basement, or Ol for outside); date
on  which  the sample was  collected;  time  of day  the sample was
collected;  subcontractor  responsible for  sample  collection; and
analysis  information  including  analysis method, analysis  labora-
tory,  sample size,  substances detected,  and  the corresponding
concentration of  the substance in the sample.

    In Figure  7,  a  sample page from  the  validated data  listing
contained  in Volume  II is  presented.   Due  to  confidentiality
agreements, sampling locations are identified in this report only
by  unique sampling area and  station  codes. In subsequent figures,
the approximate location of  medium-specific  sites  in  the vicinity
of  the Declaration and Canal Areas  is  indicated,  along with the
corresponding sampling area  and station code.

    Statistical summaries  of the  validated data are  collected  in
Volume III  of  this report.  For  the sake  of consistency  in pre-
senting data, the summaries  constructed involved  aggregating the
data  by  both  sampling area,  and by  Declaration  Area  (sampling
areas  1  through 10),  Canal Area  (sampling  area 11), and  Control
Area   (sampling  area  99).   It  is  recognized  that  for  certain
medium/source combinations,  the aggregation  of  data by  sampling
area  is  inappropriate  (for example,  bedrock  aquifer  ground-water
results  cannot be interpreted  according  to the  sampling  area
schema).   Nonetheless,  the  data  for all medium/source/location
combinations (which  are  presented in Volume III),  follow  the or-
ganizational convention described.

    The  analytical results  from  QA/QC sites  (that  is,  sites  at
which  duplicate and triplicate samples  were  collected),  where ex-
plicit identification  of the site specific  field  sample  was not
stipulated,  were  subjected  to  random  (equiprobable)   selection
prior  to  statistical  analyses of the data.  These  same  data were
also  used for  the  production  of certain  graphical summaries  of
the data  that are presented  in later sections of  this Volume.  As
a result of this  action, significant conceptual difficulties were
avoided  in  dealing with the multiple  sets of analytical  results
from  QA/QC  sites; namely, problems  that  are associated with the
alternative procedure  of attempting  to  represent the  site  by  com-
puting mean  concentrations whenever below detection  (B) or  trace
                                 45

-------
                                «*RAW   DATA   LISTING**
            THIS REPORT IS BASED ON VALIDATED DATA ENTERED  INTO THE SYSTEM THROUGH  06/17/81     01   003
                                       *»* SITE DATA «**


SAMPLING APEA  01 STATION 003                                            COORDS 400410 E 1122490 N MAP OVERl
                                      *** SAMPLE DATA *»*


SAMPLE-ID  A102I2  MEDIUM AIR   SOURCE  PFOAM  SAMPLE DATE 09/08/80  START TIME 0653  CONTRACTOR  GEOI1E
LOG LI  PUMP  4784        START/END/AVG FLOW 1339.90/1297.30/1268.60  END TIME 2053  OUR  0720 VOL   913.39

                                     *** ANALYSIS RESULTS ***

      METHOD   ECGCF     SPECIFIC METHOD            ANALYSIS  LAB  SWRI     OU4N SIZE      0.0 N/A
    COMPOUND                          CAS    PC  COHCEHTRATION       REPORTED CONC        COMMENT
 POLYURETH.5NE PLUGS  BELOU DETECTION LIMIT

                                      *********** *********
                                      »** SAMPLE DATA ***
SAMPLE-ID A10429  MEDIUM AIR   SOUPCE  PFOAM  SAMPLE DATE 09/16/80  START TIME 0843  CONTRftCTOR  GEOME
LOC LI  FUMP  4764        START/EUO/AVG FLOW 1205.00/1347.00/1276.00  END TIME 2043  PUR  0720 VOL   918.72

                                     *** ANALYSIS RESULTS ***

      METHOD   ECGCF     SPECIFIC METHOD           ANALYSIS LAB  GSLA     QUAN SIZE     0.0 N/A
    COMPOUND                          CAS    PC  CONCENTRATION       REPORTED CONC        COMMENT
 POLYURETHANE PLUGS  BELOW DETECTION LIMIT
                                      *** SAMPLE DATA ***


SAMPLE-ID A10616  MEDIUM AIR   SOURCE  PF04M  SAMPLE DATE 09/21/80  START TIME 0831  CONTRACTOR  GEOME
LCC LI  PUMP 5940        START/END/AVG FLCW 1272.40/1267.00/1269.70  END TIME 2031  OUR  0720 VOL   914.18

                                     *** ANALYSIS RESULTS ***

      METHOD  ECGCF     SPECIFIC METHOD           ANALYSIS LAB  GSLA     QUAN SIZE     0.0 N/A
    COMPOUND                         CAS    PC  CONCENTRATION      REPORTED CONC        COMMENT
 POLYURETHANE PLUGS  BELOW DETECTION LIMIT
                                       *** SAMPLE DATA *'*


SAMPLE-ID A10298  MEDIUM AIR   SOURCE  TENAX  SAMPLE DATE 09/08/80  START TIME 0853  CONTRACTOR  SEOME
LOC LI  PUMP 10616       START/END/AVG FLOW   eS.al/  30.69/  29.45  END TIME 2053  DUR 0720  VOL    21.20

                                     *** ANALYSIS RESULTS ***

      METHOD GCMST     SPECIFIC METHOD           ANALYSIS LAB  BCL      QUAN SIZE     0.0 N/A
    COMPOUND                         CAS    PC  CONCENTRATION      REPORTED CONC        COMMENT
BENZENE                            71-43-2 T01         3.679 UG/M3        78.000 NG/SM EXTRAPOLATED
0-DICHLCROBENZENE                   °5-SO-l T07        49.009 UG/MJ      1039.000 HS/S11 EXTRAPOLATED
1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOPOETHYLENE         127-18-4 T09         5.1S8 UG/M3       110.000 NG/SM EXTRAPOLATED
TOLUENE                            108-88-3 T10        41.745 UG/M3       885.000 N3/SM EXTRAPOLATED
DICHLCPOMETHANE                     75- 9-2 T23   QU4LITATIVE
PHENOL                             108-95-2 T24   QUALITATIVE
0-XYLENE                           95-47-6 T25   QUALITATIVE
M-XYLEHE                           108-38-3 T26   QUALITATIVE
P-XYLENE                           106-42-3 T27   QUALITATIVE
                                       *** SAMPLE DATA ***


SAMPLE-ID A10485  MEDIUM AIR   SOURCE  TENAX  SAMPLE DATE 09/16/80  START TIME 0844  CONTRACTOR  GEOME
LOC LI  PUMP  10616       START/END/AVG FLCW   30.60/  30.40/  30.50  END TIME 2044  DU3  0720 VOL    21.96

                                     ***  ANALYSIS RESULTS »**

      METHOD  GCMST     SPECIFIC METHOD           ANALYSIS LAB PEDC     QUAN SIZE     0.0 N/A
    COMPOUND                          CAS    PC  CONCENTRATION      REPORTED CONC        COMMENT
  Figure  7.     Sample  Page  of   the  Data  Listing  Presented  in
                      Volume  II.
                                                  46

-------
(T) values  were obtained.   However, the procedure  followed re-
quires that  care must  be exercised when  attempting  to  compare
Volume II results with Volume III summary tables.

    The only statistical  tests performed on  the  Love Canal moni-
toring data  involved substance-by-substance  comparisons between
Declaration Area,  Canal Area, and  Control  Area  aggregations of
the data.   Differences  in the extent of environmental contamina-
tion in areas  of interest were assessed statistically  by a dif-
ference of percentages  test,  using  Fisher's exact test to deter-
mine probability values.  The extent of  contamination in an area
was defined  as the percent of positive  determinations (qualita-
tive identifications) of  the  substance of interest  at a trace or
greater concentration level.   Differences  in the degree of envi-
ronmental contamination  in  areas of interest  were  assessed sta-
tistically through the use of a difference in medians test, again
using  Fisher's  exact  test for  the computation of  probability
values.  Due to  the large number of  substances monitored, and the
large  number  of substance-by-substance  comparisons  that  can be
made,  statistical  inference  problems  may  occur.  The  reader is
cautioned to realize that for a  given  level  of significance a, a
proportion of  results  approximately equal to  a  will, by chance,
demonstrate  statistical  significance.    Such outcomes,  known as
Type I errors  (that  is,  rejecting  the  null  hypothesis when it is
true), must be considered when attempting to evaluate the statis-
tical  results  presented  in Volume III.

    The statistical criteria established for assessing the extent
and degree of  environmental  contamination  in an area of  interest
were as follows.   First,  directional alternative hypotheses were
postulated,  incorporating the expectation  of  greater contamina-
tion in the Canal  Area  than  in  the  Declaration Area, and greater
contamination  in the Declaration Area  than in  the  Control Area
(control sites are identified for selected medium/source/location
combinations  in  Appendix B,  Table 8-1).  And  second, a level of
significance of  <*=  0.10 was  selected   (as  compared  to  the more
commonly  employed  levels of  0.05  or 0.01)  for  rejection of the
null hypothesis  of no  difference in environmental  contamination
between  the areas  monitored.   This  level  of  significance was
selected to obtain acceptably high  power in  the  statistical test
procedures employed, particularly when comparing the Declaration
Area monitoring  data to the  Control  Area  monitoring  data for
certain  medium/source/location  combinations.    As  a  result of
these  two  actions,  the probability  of  detecting  statistical
trends in  the  monitoring data that  were suggestive  of the migra-
tion of  contaminants from Love  Canal  into  the  Declaration Area
was increased  considerably above the usual practice.

3.5  LIMITATIONS

    As was mentioned in  Section  1.1.6,  the EPA  Love  Canal study
was limited by both time  and budgetary constraints.    As a result,
                                47

-------
medium-specific sample designs  and  site-specific  sampling frames
were employed, and a large number of field samples were collected
over a relatively short time interval.  Obviously, therefore, the
1980 EPA Love Canal  study represents but  a  finite characteriza-
tion of  environmental conditions  in the  Love  Canal  Declaration
Area, and  retrospective  assessment  of  the extent and  degree of
contamination present  in  the Declaration  Area  (for  example, air
pollution  levels)  at some  past date is  uncertain,  and  has not
been performed.
                                48

-------
                            CHAPTER 4
                    RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATIONS


    The major results  of  the  EPA Love  Canal  environmental moni-
toring program  have been  organized  by environmental  medium and
are presented in subsequent subsections of  this  report.   The or-
ganization of  this section on results deliberately  follows the
same sequence of topics that was  presented  in Section 1.2 of the
Overview.  The  intent here is to provide  the reader with addi-
tional details on  sampling, analytical,  and interpretive aspects
of the Love Canal monitoring program.

4.1 HYDROGEOLOGIC PROGRAM

    The hydrogeological study  conducted by  EPA at Love Canal was
multidimensional.   Integral parts included defining  the geology
and occurrence  of  ground water  within the study area,   locating
areas of  ground-water contamination  (both  vertically and later-
ally) , and determining the directions  and  rates  of  movement of
contaminants  through the subsurface soils and rock.

    The  first  phase of the program involved  the collection and
analysis of existing geological and hydrological data in order to
guide the  project  through  subsequent  stages.   Included  in this
phase, and  occurring  concurrently,  were geophysical investiga-
tions using  the most  advanced techniques  in ground-penetrating
radar and  electromagnetic  conductivity.    These  activities were
designed to determine the occurrence of ground water in the study
area, to  help  locate potential  plumes  of contamination moving
from the former canal, and to provide a partial basis for select-
ing monitoring well site locations.

    The  second  phase  of  the  program involved  a  test  drilling
program that was  initially designed to determine the number and
depth of  permeable  water-bearing zones  existing  vertically in
both the overburden and underlying bedrock,  and to determine if
ground water in  the overburden and bedrock were  connected or if
separate aquifers existed.  Data developed during the test drill-
ing program served  to  guide the  subsequent  installation  of moni-
toring wells.  The  174 monitoring wells  installed by EPA at Love
                                49

-------
Canal were used for  the purpose  of  obtaining samples of the sub-
surface materials  at selected  drilling sites,  obtaining  water-
level data,  determining aquifer  flow characteristics,  and col-
lecting a  large  number  of samples  of ground water  for chemical
analysis.   Stringent requirements were  imposed on all aspects of
well construction in order to avoid potential cross-contamination
of water-bearing  zones.   Substances  of interest that  were rou-
tinely determined  in ground-water samples are  identified  in Ap-
pendix A of this Volume.

    The third phase  of  the  hydrogeologic program was  the  devel-
opment of a  verified ground-water model for  predicting the move-
ment of contaminants in the ground water under varying conditions
of recharge and discharge.  An extensive report on the results of
this  effort,  Final Report on Ground-WaterFlow Modeling Study of
theLove Canal,  New York,  is available from NTIS.

    Figures 8 and  9 identify the  locations  of  wells  drilled in
the  general  Love  Canal  area as  part  of  the  EPA  hydrogeologic
program.  Figure 8 identifies the location of monitoring wells in
the vicinity of Love Canal  that  were drilled into the overburden
and  used  to  monitor  contamination  in the shallow  system;  these
wells were referred  to  as "A Wells."   In Figure 9,  the location
of  monitoring  wells  in  the  vicinity  of  Love  Canal  that were
drilled  into the  underlying bedrock,  and  used for  monitoring
contamination in the bedrock aquifer, are  indicated? these wells
were referred to as  "B Wells."

4.1.1  Geology of the Love Canal Area

    In order to understand the potential for contamination migra-
ting  from the former canal,  a thorough  understanding of the geo-
logy, as well as  the occurrence  and movement of ground water, at
the  site was necessary.   The information obtained  from the geo-
logical^ portion of the program was used to optimize  the placement
of ground-water monitoring  wells and was also  used partially to
guide the selection of soil sampling locations.

4.1.1.1  Geological Setting
    During the Pleistocene epoch, western New York State experi-
enced several periods of glaciation.   As a  result, the general
Love Canal area exhibits features that are characteristic of gla-
cial erosion and deposition.  Bedrock in the vicinity of Love Ca-
nal  consists of a  unit  known as  Lockport Dolomite,  a mineral de-
posit composed  of  calcium  magnesium carbonate.   Underlying the
Lockport Dolomite is a relatively impermeable unit referred to as
Rochester  Shale.    The  Lockport Dolomite was  encountered during
well  drilling  activities  at  a  depth of  approximately  20  to 45
feet below the land  surface, and ranged in thickness from approx-
imately 160 to 180  feet.  Generally, the Lockport Dolomite may be
                                50

-------
                                     x99015
                                                 x99016
x98072
                                    \03517x   !

                                        03B11 xxxiio41 H035x
                                           03525
                                                                   x 05030
                                                                              99550x
                                                                  x 07015
                                                                  x 07014
                                                                   x07019
                                                                         X07504
                                                                     x07501
                                                                 x09019
                                                                 x 09015
                                                                       x11041
       Figure  8.   Well A (Overburden)  Installation  Site Codes.
                                         51

-------
                                     X99015
                                                 x99016
                                                                  x05027
                                                                   X07015
                                                                  X07014
                                                                   X07019
X99072
                                                                    x05030
                                                                               99550x
I
                                                                         X07504
                                                                     X07051
                                                                        X10041





                                                                       x 10051
                                                                   x10040
                                                                                 X99560
        Figure 9.   Well  B  (Bedrock)  Installation Site Codes,
                                          52

-------
described as  a dark gray to  brown,  massive to thin-bedded dolo-
mite, locally  containing small, irregularly shaped masses of gyp-
sum  and  calcite.   The  Lockport Dolomite was found to dip towards
the  south at a rate of approximately 30 feet per mile.

     In  the  general  Love Canal  area,  the Lockport  Dolomite  is
overlaid by a  deposit  of glacial till  ranging  in thickness from
approximately  1  to 5  feet;  in the Canal Area  the till was found
to vary  from approximately  5  to  20  feet thick.   The glacial till
consists of an unsorted mixture of clay, sand, and rocks that was
deposited on the Lockport Dolomite by the  advance and retreat of
glaciers.   Prom  field testing  activities the glacial  till was
found  to  be  relatively   impermeable  (K  of  approximately 10  '
cm/s).

     Layers of  clay,  silt,  and fine sand exist  above the glacial
till and were  found to vary in thickness from approximately 6 to
29  feet.   These materials  were deposited  in  the area  by lakes
that were  formed by the  melting and  retreat  of  glaciers during
the  late Quaternary period.  Two glacial  lakes were chiefly re-
sponsible for these deposits.  The older glacial lake, Lake Dana,
deposited reddish sediments, which had  eroded from bedrock to the
north, on top  of the  till.   The lacustrine deposits attributable
to Lake  Dana  were  found to vary from  approximately  2 to 20 feet
thick, and were characterized as very moist to wet, very plastic,
very sticky, silty-clay to  clay.  The permeability of these mates
rials was  found to  be relatively  low (K  of  approximately 10~
cm/s).

     Above the  Lake Dana  deposits were the  deposits of Lake Tona-
wanda, which ranged in thickness  from approximately 3 to 8 feet.
The  materials  deposited  by  Lake Tonawanda  tended  to be coarser,
reddish brown  to gray  sediments  that were characterized as some-
what moist, firm,  varved, silty-clay  to clay.   At a depth of ap-
proximately 5  to 8 feet below surface levels  the lacustrine de-
posits were found  to  be extremely firm to very firm silty-clay,
and  vertical dessication cracks have sometimes been noted as pre-
sent (according to reports  prepared by  other investigators).  The
permeability of  the Lake  Tonawanda  deposits was found to be gen-
erally low (K of approximately 10 'cm/s).

    Above the  Lake  Tonawanda  deposits were layers of silty sand,
clayey silt, and  other fill materials  varying  in thickness from
but  a few inches to approximately 3  feet in the general Love Ca-
nal  area.   The permeability  of  these materials was  found  to be
greater than the underlying clays (K greater than or equal to ap-
proximately 10   cm/s).  Also present in the lacustrine sediments
were random  deposits  of  more sandy  materials occurring  in the
form of sand lenses.  These more permeable sandy zones were found
to  occur neither  in  considerable thickness  nor  to  extend  over
large areas.    Rather, these  features  were  found  to occur  as
                                53

-------
typically small, generally disconnected deposits as is character-
istic of heterogeneous lacustrine material.  Figure 10 summarizes
in general terms the geologic units found in the Love Canal area.

4.1.1.2  Topography and Drainage
    The Love Canal site is located on the flood plain of the Nia-
gara River within the eastern limit of the City of Niagara Falls,
New York.   The eastern border  of the Declaration  Area adjoins,
and is  partially located in,  the Town of Wheatfield,  New York.
The general area  (Figure  11)  is  relatively flat and is dominated
by three  major features:   the United  States  and Canadian Falls;
the Niagara gorge; and the Niagara Escarpment.

    The Niagara Escarpment,  a steep cliff marking the end of high
land,  extends in an easterly direction from the Niagara River im-
mediately south of Lewiston,  New York  to  well beyond the general
Love Canal area.  At the Niagara River, the escarpment is approx-
imately 200  feet  high,  and gradually  diminishes towcird the east
into a broad, gently-sloping incline. North of the escarpment the
land slopes gently towards Lake Ontario.   South of the escarpment
the land slopes gently toward the upper Niagara River.

    Streams in  the  general  Love  Canal area  eventually flow into
the Niagara River.  On the north, Bergholtz Creek and Black Creek
(which  joins  Bergholtz  Creek near 96th Street)  flow in an east-
to-west direction.  Bergholtz Creek joins Cayuga Creek at a point
northwest of  the  former  canal  near  the   intersection  of Cayuga
Drive and 88th Street.   Cayuga Creek  flows  in  a generally north
to south direction and empties into the Little Niagara River near
South 87th  Street.   The  Little  Niagara  River  joins  the Niagara
River on the west side of Cayuga Island.   Given the existence of
certain climate-  and weather-related  conditions and  the gentle
slopes  of  the three creekbeds,  local  and temporary reversals of
water flow direction are known to occur in Cayuga, Bergholtz, and
Black Creeks.

    Prior to the early 1970's, a  number of surface soil features,
sometimes  referred  to  as swales,  existed  in  the  general Love
Canal area.  Swales were generally shallow depressions  (less than
10 feet deep)  that  presumably served to  preferentially drain the
area  of surface  water  run-off.   The location of  known former
swales in the general Love Canal  area are depicted in Figure 2 by
superimposed  wavy lines.   The  identification  of  former swales
throughout the  area was  performed by the  Remote Sensing Program,
School   of  Civil   and  Environmental   Engineering,   Cornell
University, from  the  inspection of historical aerial photographs
of the  site taken between 1938 and 1966.

    A variety  of arguments  have  been  offered concerning the po-
tential importance of swales  in contributing to the migration of
contaminants  from Love  Canal to  the  adjacent residential areas.
                                54

-------
Ol

Ul
           «~r- - <»•. -•-•. «'fc»>"~.., •	
            / /  / / ~ /  /
            /  / / /  /  /  /
              ±
                 / /  /  /  /
            j_ /.__./....: /  / /
            /  J  /   /.J
            ,l-Q , I  ...- I  X
	J	71.  I   I
— / — /—/ —/ — -
              =>—?--J-jr-,cr j~_a_-
System
Quaternary
Silurian

3
Middle
4!
0
Formation
Unit
Pill
Lacustrine
Deposits
Glacial
Till
Lockport
Dolomite
Rochester
Shale
Thickness
(Feet)
0.1-3
6-29
1-25
160-180
SO
General Geologic and Hydrologic Characteristics
- Covers nearly entire study area
- Varies from local soil material to construction rubble and
industrial wastes
- Sand lenses randomly occur as elongated lacustrine deposits
throughout region and consist of loamy to sandy clay; some-
times exposed at. surface in undisturbed areas
- Total thickness of former glacial lake deposits increases
from north to south in vicinity of canal
- Upper sequence deposited in former Lake Tonawanda (3-8 feet
thick) is reddish brown to gray, moist, firm to very firm,
varved, silty-clay to clay; dessication cracks reported in
selective areas within sequence
- Lower sequence (2-20 feet thick) attributable to former Lake
Dana is reddish brown, very moist to wet, very plastic , very
sticky, silty-clay to clay
- Permeability of lacustrine deposits is generally low
- Reddish brown, moist, firm, silty to sandy clay with gravel
and cobbles j sandy zones t well-sorted gravel
- Two or three ridges of till oriented NE-SW are in Canal Area
- General ly low permeabi 11 t,y
- Approximately 5-20 feet thick in Canal Area
- Dark gray to brown, massive to thin bedded dolomite dipping
at low angle to south? secondary deposits of sul fides ,
su 1 fates , and carbonates occur throughout the format ion
- Principal aquifer in Niagara Falls area; major producing
zones in upper part of formation
- Artesian and unconfined water table conditions exist associ-
ated with vertical fracture zones, cavities formed by solu-
tion of minerals and between bedding planas
- Vertical joint system hydraulically connected to Niagara
River
- Dark -gray calcareous shale? relatively impermeable
                NOT TO SCALE
              Figure 10.   Generalized Columnar Section  of Geologic Units in  Love  Canal Area,

-------
                                     HURON PLAIN    I
                                        ,.	J

                          SCALE
CBZ
10
             BL-BL
                        10
                   20
30
40
                          MILES
Figure  11.
Index Map Showing Location of Project Area and
Physiographic Provinces.
                               56

-------
For example, it has been argued by some that if the former swales
were filled with  rubble and more permeable  soils during periods
of residential  construction activity near Love  Canal,  then they
may have  preferentially allowed  chemicals  to migrate  some dis-
tance from  the  dump site into the surrounding neighborhood, par-
ticularly in response  to certain climate influenced ground-water
conditions  (the so-called "overflowing bathtub" analogy frequent-
ly used to describe unusually high ground-water conditions at the
site during the period 1976 to 1978).  Alternatively, it has been
offered that when the  landfill was open, water  impounded in the
canal was contaminated by dumping activities  and displaced from
the canal  into the  still open  intersecting swales,  and subse-
quently into the  surrounding  neighborhood.   Finally, it has been
argued that if  the swales had been  filled with  already contami-
nated  soils that  were removed  from the Love Canal  site  after
dumping activities were  concluded in 1953  (the so-called "trans-
port by dump  truck" conjecture}, then  the  surrounding neighbor-
hood would  exhibit isolated  areas  of  relatively low-level con-
tamination  in   some  of  the  former  swales  and   other  low-lying
areas.

    As a  result of the  generally level topography  of  the  site,
surface water  run-off  was historically poor.  During rainy per-
iods, areas of  ponded  water and  marshy ground formed,  typically
to the  southwest  and  southeast  of  the canal.   Houses  that were
later built in areas where water problems  historically occurred
have been referred to by other investigators as "wet" houses; for
example, a  wet/dry dichotomy  of Love Canal  houses was developed
and used for classification purposes by NYS DOH in their epidemi-
ological investigations at Love Canal. The NYS DOH wet/dry class-
ification scheme was also used by EPA for the selection of a num-
ber of sampling sites.

    At the  present time, surface-water drainage  principally oc-
curs  in  the general  Love Canal  area  through a  system of  storm
sewers installed  by the  City  of  Niagara Falls.  Typically,  storm
sewers in  the  Love Canal  Declaration  Area  were  found  to be ap-
proximately 10 feet deep.

    Of particular interest to this  investigation were  the  storm
sewer  lines that  virtually surround  the  Canal  Area,    On 97th
Street a  storm sewer  line  starts at approximately  Read Avenue,
heads northward,  and eventually  discharges  into  Black Creek near
96th Street.   A storm sewer lateral on  Read Avenue, terminating
in a catch  basin  located approximately midpoint  between 97th and
99th Streets,  was built by the city in 1960.  Prior to remedial
construction,   the lateral  on Read  Avenue was connected to  the
97th Street northward flow storm sewer line.   On Colvin Boulevard
a storm sewer  line originating  near 98th Street heads westward
and joins  the  97th Street storm sewer.  In addition,  prior to re-
medial construction a catch basin installed for drainage purposes
by the  City of Niagara  Falls  near  the  former  canal  boundary,
                                57

-------
along the property line at 949-953  97tin  Street,  was  connected to
the 97th  Street northward flowing  storm sewer line.   Figure 12
shows the approximate location of the features just mentioned and
other relevant Canal Area storm sewers.

    The southward flowing storm  sewer  line  on  97th Street origi-
nates  near  Read Avenue  and  connects  to a  storm sewer  line on
Frontier  Avenue that flows  eastward,  and  eventually discharges
into  the  Niagara River  at the  so-called 102nd  Street outfall.
Prior to  remedial construction,  a storm  sewer  lateral  on Wheat-
field Avenue, terminating in  a catch basin located approximately
170 feet  east  of 97th Street, was  connected to  the  97th Street
southward flowing storm sewer line.

    On 99th Street the northward  flowing  storm sewer  line origi-
nates near Read Avenue and eventually discharges into Black Creek
(which is located  in a below-grade  culvert from  98th  Street to
approximately the imaginary northward extension of 102nd Street),
between 101st and 102nd Streets.  The  southward-flow  99th Street
storm  sewer  consists of  a portion  between Read  and Wheatfield
Avenues,  and another portion  originating  near  Wheatfield Avenue.
The portion of  the 99th Street storm sewer line between Read and
Wheatfield Avenues  flows  south and  turns  eastward on Wheatfield
Avenue, turns  south again on  101st Street, and  eventually dis-
charges into the Niagara River at the 102nd Street outfall. Prior
to remedial construction, the  French drain built around the 99th
Street Elementary School  was  connected to  the  99th  Street storm
sewer line just north of Wheatfield Avenue.  (See Figure 12).  In
addition, prior to  remedial construction,  a  storm sewer lateral
on Wheatfield  Avenue,  terminating  in  a  catch basin  located ap-
proximately 170 feet west of  99th  Street,  was connected  to the
99th  Street  storm  sewer line  at  Wheatfield  Avenue.   The portion
of the 99th  Street  storm sewer line originating  south  of Wheat-
field Avenue is connected to the Frontier Avenue storm sewer line
and  eventually  discharges into  the Niagara  River at  the 102nd
Street outfall.

    According to NYS DEC  field inspection notes  and  NYS DOH re-
ports, the  storm sewer  lines installed  by the  City of Niagara
Falls around Love Canal  were built  without  granular  bedding and
the  trenches  were backfilled  with   the excavated  natural soils.
As a  result  of this  construction practice, a  "curtain of clay"
around the  site, likely  severing  all naturally  occurring more
permeable soil  pathways leading  from the  former canal  (including
filled former  swales),  may have  been  built inadvertently by the
city.   The  storm  sewer  line currently  under  Frontier Avenue,
which was relocated by NYS DOT in 1968, does have a granular bed-
ding,  but it was encompassed by the  barrier drain  system con-
structed by NYS DEC.  The storm  sewer leads  and  catch basins on
Read and Wheatfield Avenues were  all removed during remedial con-
struction, as was the catch  basin and  pipe located near the for-
mer  canal on  97th   Street,  and   the entire French drain system
                                58

-------
Ul
VO
            A  FLOW DIRECTION
            •  MANHOLE
            •  BACKYARD CATCH BASIN
               (REMOVED)
DEURO DR.
                            Figure 12.  Location  of Storm Sewers  Near Love Canal.

-------
around  the 99th  Street  Elementary School.   Across  Wheatfield
Avenue, a  natural gas main, as well as  a sanitary sewer line in-
stalled by the City of Niagara Falls  in 1957,  still remain.   Ac-
cording to NYS DEC field  inspection notes,  neither  line was  con-
structed with a granular bedding and both were intercepted by the
barrier drain  system  installed by NYS DEC.  In  1980  the City of
Niagara Falls  plugged  the Wheatfield Avenue sanitary  sewer  line
near the intersection of Wheatfield Avenue and 99th Street.

    As a result of the relatively close proximity of storm sewer
lines to Love Canal,  interest was focused on characterizing their
current transport of contaminants  to  area  creeks and rivers.  It
was recognized that prior to  remedial  construction, a  number of
sources may have contributed to storm sewer contamination includ-
ing:  (1) overland flow of contaminants that were likely captured
by  curb  drains near  ring 1 houses;  (2)  subsurface  migration and
infiltration of contaminants  into  the  storm sewers, particularly
through the storm sewer  laterals  on Read and Wheatfield Avenues,
the catch basin and pipe  located near the former canal at 949-953
97th Street and connected to the 97th Street northward-flow storm
sewer  line,  and  the  French  drain  built  around the  99th Street
Elementary School; and  (3)  the  discharge of potentially contami-
nated water and sediment  taken-up  by  basement  sump  pumps in  ring
1 and ring 2 houses and  discharged into Canal  Area storm sewers.
As  a  result of remedial   construction activities  and the evacua-
tion of ring 1 and ring  2 families by 1979, the only potentially
remaining  source  of  continuing  storm  sewer  contamination  was
through  the  residual  subsurface  migration and  infiltration of
contaminants into  storm  sewer  lines on 97th  and  99th Streets,
Colvin Boulevard,  and Frontier Avenue.

4.1.1.3  Occurrence of Ground Water
    Ground water was  found to occur  in the Lockport Dolomite in
three types of openings:   (1) bedding  planes—horizontal planes
that  separate individual layers of  the  rock;  (2)   vertical
joints—fractures that interrupt the horizontal continuity of the
rock  unit; and (3)  solution  cavities—cavities  in  the  rock  from
which gypsum and calcite  have been dissolved.   Most of the water
moving  through the upper portion  of  the  Lockport  Dolomite was
found to move  through  the horizontal  bedding planes contained in
the top 10 to  16  feet  of the  unit.  Ground-water flow in the up-
per portion of the  Lockport  (the  top 20 feet of  the  unit), was
found  to  be  affected by the  major trends  of  vertical  fractures
connecting the bedding planes.  The lower portion of the Lockport
(145  to  170   feet  thick) was  characterized  by seven distinct
water-bearing  zones  having well-developed  bedding  plane separa-
tions.   Flow   in the  lower portion of  the  Lockport Dolomite was
found to generally follow the inclination of the formation.

    Field  tests conducted on the bedrock aquifer yielded the fol-
lowing  results:   (1)  the Lockport  Dolomite  is  not  a homogeneous
aquifer, but contains distinct water-bearing zones;  (2) the upper
portion  of the rock has  significant vertical  permeability; (3)


                                60

-------
the primary  water-bearing  zones  are  in  the  upper  part  of the
aquifer;  (4)  fractures  have a substantial effect on the rate and
direction of  ground-water movement  in  the upper portion  of the
bedrock?  (5)  the  upper  portion of the bedrock aquifer is  hydrau-
lically connected to the Niagara River; and (6) the bedrock  aqui-
fer in the vicinity  of  Love Canal is confined below by the  Roch-
ester  Shale and above by the glacial till, and is artesian.

    The  deposits  above  the  Lockport  Dolomite  (the  overburden
material) were found  not  to be significant sources  of water for
the area.   The  unconfined  water-table aquifer  existing  in the
overburden material  was  found  to  be  bounded  by Bergholtz and
Black  Creeks on  the north,  Cayuga Creek  on the west,  and the
Little Niagara and Niagara  Rivers  on the  south.   In general, the
glacial till and the two  silty-clay  units were found to be of low
permeability with  small areas  of  sandy  layers  occurring  within
where ground water could  move more readily.

4.1.2   Geophysical Investigations

    The geophysical  investigations conducted at  Love  Canal were
performed using an integrated approach  employing  multiple  surface
remote-sensing techniques.  This approach was adopted  in order  to
permit the correlation  of data records obtained  from  two  or more
remote sensing techniques employed at a particular location.  Due
to technical (that is,  instrument) requirements,  geophysical mea-
surements were conducted  only  in  those areas  around  Love  Canal
that  were relatively free  from residential  interferences.   The
techniques listed  in Table  5  summarize  the  geophysical   methods
employed  at  Love  Canal,  their  mode  of measurement,  and the type
of information each technique provided.

4.1.2.1  Objectives of  the Geophysical  Investigations
    The overall goal  of the geophysical investigations performed
at Love Canal was to provide basic information concerning  the hy-
drogeologic  characteristics of  the  site.    Specific  objectives
were:

   1.   To  furnish  information  concerning the  natural hydrogeo-
       logic variation  of the site that could aid in  understand-
       ing the ground-water  transport  of contaminants  from the
       former canal.

   2.   To investigate the former canal  and  Canal  Area  using geo-
       physical methods in  order  to tentatively  identify and as-
       sess the potential for migration of  contaminants  from the
       site.

   3.   To provide data  that would aid  in the placement  of some
       monitoring  wells  used  to  obtain  information  on   ground-
       water  contamination.
                                61

-------
         TABLE  5.   GEOPHYSICAL  METHODS  AND APPLICATIONS
Method
Ground
Penetrating
Radar
Responds to
Changes in:
Complex
dielectric
constant
Mode of
Measurement
Continuous
Application to
Love Canal Setting
--Provides continuous soil
profiles to 3-6 feet
— Reveals changes in soil
stratigraphy and drainage
patterns, and discerns
areas of fill
Electromagnetics

   • Shallow EM
                   Bulk
                   electrical
                   conductivity
                 Continuous
                 and  station
                 measurements
     Deep EM
Bulk
electrical
conductivity
Continuous
and station
measurements
Resistivity
Sounding
Seismic

   • Reflection



   • Refraction
Bulk
electrical
resistivity
Station
measurements
Soil or rock
"velocity"
contrasts

Soil or rock
"velocity"
contrasts
Station
measurements
Station
measurements
Metal
Detector
Magnetometer
Electrical
conductivity
Magnetic
                                    Continuous
                                    Continuous
-Provides  continuous  spa-
 tial  or station  measure-
 ments of  bulk  conductivi-
 ty to depths of  approxi-
 mately 18 feet
-Reveals spatial  changes
 in geo/hydrologic  condi-
 tions and areas  of con-
 ductive contamination
-Provides  continuous  spa-
 tial  or station  measure-
 ments of  bulk  conductivi-
 ty to depths of  45-50
 feet
-Shows spatial  changes  in
 geo/hydrologic conditions
 and discriminates  areas
 of conductive  contamina-
 tion

-Provides  data  on changes
 in resistivity with  depth
-Enables detailed assess-
 ment  of selected anoma-
 lies  delineated  in EM
 data
-Provides data on subsur-
 face stratification
-Provides data on subsur-
 face stratification,
 thickness,  and depth  of
 layers
-Provides a  measurement of
 the "velocity" or density
 of the soil or lithified
 components

-Provides a  means of map-
 ping location and esti-
 mating quantity of buried
 metals (e.g., barrels) to
 a maximum depth of 5-10
 feet for single targets

-Provides a  means of
 mapping locations and
 estimating  quantity of
 buried ferrous metals at
 depths up to 10-18 feet
 for single  targets
                                       62

-------
   4.  To identify  subsurface  anomalies (which may  include such
       features  as  swales  and sand  lenses)  that  may  serve  as
       preferential transport pathways  for  the  migration  of
       contaminants.

4.1.2.2  Major Results of the Geophysical Investigations
    The multiple remote  sensing geophysical  methods  used at Love
Canal provided  information  on  the geological  variability of the
general Love Canal  area,  and yielded  suggestive information con-
cerning  the detection  and  delineation of  potential  migration
pathways from  the  former canal.   Figure 13  illustrates the type
of information  obtained  from one  of the remote  sensing  (shallow
electromagnetic) geophysical methods used?  the figure depicts the
likely presence  of  contaminants  located directly in  and immedi-
ately adjacent  to  the  landfill.   A graphical  summary  of the in-
ferred findings  from the  geophysical  investigations  conducted at
Love Canal  is  presented  in  Figure  14.   More  detailed information
on  the  results  of  the  geophysical  investigations  conducted  at
Love  Canal  can be  found  in  Geophys ica1 Investigat ion Re suits,
Love Canal,  New York, available from NTIS.

4.1.3  Hydrology of the Love Canal Area

    The hydrology of the general  Love  Canal area  was determined
from a combination  of  activities  that incorporated:   (!) review-
ing  the  results of  studies previously conducted in  the region;
(2) the results obtained from EPA geophysical surveys of the gen-
eral Love Canal area;  (3) the  results  obtained  from EPA geolog-
ical  surveys  of the  area  conducted  during  the construction  of
ground-water monitoring wells?  and  (4)  the development and veri-
fication of a ground-water movement model of the area.

    As part of  the  hydrogeologic program,  a  total  of 174 ground-
water monitoring wells  (A and  B Wells) were  installed throughout
the general area.  During the investigation,  five different types
of  wells  were  constructed.  Monitoring wells installed  in the
overburden and  screened in  the silty clays above the glacial till
were  referred  to as A  Wells.   Shallow bedrock  monitoring wells
were drilled 5  feet  into  the Lockport Dolomite and  were  referred
to as B Wells.  C Wells were monitoring wells drilled through the
dolomite and  into  the  underlying  Rochester Shale.    D Wells were
originally  B  Wells  that were  extended to greater depths in the
dolomite for  hydrogeologic  testing purposes.   And T  Wells were
wells that were screened  at various levels in  the  overburden for
hydrogeologic  testing  purposes.   The  distribution of  well types
constructed during the program was:   89 A  Wells; 85  B Wells; 4 C
Wells; 3 B Wells were modified to D Wells;  and 4 T Wells.  A com-
plete description  of the  hydrogeologic program,  including well
logs and as-built diagrams  for all wells,  can be found in the re-
port TheGround-Water Monitoring Program at Love Canal, available
from NTIS.   Figures 15 and 16 illustrate the typical installation
of shallow overburden and bedrock wells at Love Canal.
                                63

-------

-------
                         LEGEND
HIGH,  RELATIVE ELECTROMAGNETIC CONDUCTIVITY
LOW

      MODERATELY HIGH CONDUCTIVITY

      EXTREMELY HIGH CONDUCTIVITY
                                       SUSPECTED SWALE

                                       SUSPECTED SAND LENS
Figure 14.   Site Map Showing  Major  Results of
              Geophysical  Survey.
                           65

-------
    Hydrologic testing of the bedrock aquifer was conducted using
pumping tests to determine the transmissivity and storage coeffi-
cient of the  aquifer.   These values were  determined empirically
to be 0.015 square feet per  second  and  1.49  x 10   respectively.
The following results were determined from the hydrologie testing
conducted at Love Canal.

   1.  The Lockport  Dolomite is not  a  homogeneous  aquifer,  but
       contains distinct water-bearing zones.

   2.  The  upper  portion of the unit  has  significant  vertical
       permeability.

   3.  The primary water-bearing  zones  are  located  in  the upper
       portion of the dolomite.

   4.  Fractures substantially affect both the rate and direction
       of ground-water movement  in  the  upper portion of the bed-
       rock.

   5.  In  the well  locations  tested,   no  hydraulic  connection
       apparently exists between the overburden and the bedrock.

4.1.3.1  Ground-Water Movement
     The Lockport Dolomite aquifer maintains steady-state flow on
a regional basis by  recharge from the  topographic high occurring
near  the  Niagara  Escarpment.   Discharge generally  occurs along
the Niagara Escarpment, along the gorge wall of the lower Niagara
River, towards the covered conduits of the Niagara Power Project,
and along parts of the upper Niagara River.   In the general Love
Canal area, the gradient of ground-water movement in the dolomite
is south  and  southwesterly  towards the  upper  Niagara  River.   On
the basis of  bedrock aquifer tests conducted by  EPA at  Love Ca-
nal,   it  was  estimated  that  if  contaminants  were  to enter  the
Lockport Dolomite at the southern end of Love Canal, and assuming
no attenuation, the  average  length  of  time required for the con-
taminants to reach the upper Niagara River would be approximately
1,000 days.   In  Figures 17  and 18  the  potentiometric  surface of
the Lockport Dolomite is presented from both a regional and local
perspective.   The  data used  to construct  Figure  17 were derived
from  R.  H.  Johnston, Ground Water in the Niagara Falls Area, New
York, State of New York Conservation Department  Water Resources
Commission Bulletin GW-53 (1964).

     As was mentioned previously, the shallow ground-water system
in the  general Love  Canal  area  is probably  bounded  toward the
north by  Bergholtz  and Black Creeks,  toward the west  by Cayuga
Creek, and  toward  the south by the Little Niagara  River and the
Niagara River.  In Figure 19 the  static water table of the over-
burden aquifer  is  presented.  The  elevations  shown in Figure 19
indicate  that during  the study  period,  discontinuities  likely
                                66

-------
     LOCKING CAP ~
       10" VAULT -
     SET IN GROUT
          GROUT
       BENTONITE-
    OVERBURDEN
      SILICA SAND
    • ••/• • - • .«•.'«•»' v x " i~'- i,' "•• V 5;
                  ••»<•••. . • > -i-1
          2' BLANK	f^-»
r*        £. OUMI^IV        	• I >t»
"l"»  *"t*.«..   ,   -y«l        _ *****
:>v/""?,/"•«*«••?• !^^,7* r "' '"r Vv
;i^t- - ,'t' 4 * ,-v"V"•'*  • ' SS *\' * * •
: %  ,*•"***''•* «• -" "^. ** *, •' • AiMMi
 ."  .                 •' .'• '.' *.*.* •",'—
     /'I Ar-l A I  Til I     *H_f." »£". ,'^-* «. .

                           :i:»
                                 i
                                   .-5-
                                     i
                                                LOCK
                                             6" AUGER HOLE
                                             2" CASING
                                                              LAND SURFACE
                                          ~2" SCREEN, 2' LONG
                                      	 BENTONITE   '^".

                                      :'•>?•              •;:
                                             (BI^-i ***&**>+ ^ Jk 1%  i * ..
P' ;\':, •    ••": -•• . > ? •              • ^
':^T •_•*'-•• i  --"^. %*  %,i  t.'.i,	•/»• 	WELDED CAP  ' '. •.
..*  •                '•«.*•'.'  ***»-,'-'i'r  « .  ~    .       fc   .* -
•• '**   GLACIAL TILL   >.'.' T^lLiV.' «;  '%'' ,' '<^3 ' "' / '. *"«b  " .

 (^M?^^;lo?
-------
10" VAULT 	 J[
SET IN GROUT &£>


OVERBURDEN
^9 * * • ^'^^ *» / * ^ * /
y>* * • . GLACIAL
s "* " - TILL '-"'O
3\ x x
£ \ \
I \ \ \
' , , X. LOCKPORT X
•£\ DOLOMITE
? \
4\ \ \
< \ \
/ \ \
t \ \
^ \ \ \
i-
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
s
S
S
S
s
s
^
s
s
s
',
5
Id
\





s

\


y*-~-'





^ ~






\
X
V
\

f^ S
'* 	 6" AUGER HOLE >
; , 	 GROUT ^

CASING X
* ^i
/ ^
; VQ/^;p^9-^
; "• . ^" o "' * " \" - ••^'•3
3* ->^ » ^
X^B5/ " ?
\ \ \ §
X \ \ ^
\ olRMo" £

^ TRI-CONE ^
v HOLE ~\"^
X>. \ ^t
\ \ \ *
X \ \ ^
                                     LAND SURFACE
Figure 16.  Completed Bedrock Well.
                   68

-------
cr>
vo
                                              PUMPED-STORAGE
                                             RESERVOIR NIAGARA
                                               POWER PROJECT
                                            AVERAGE ELEVATION
                                                 645 FEET
GENERALIZED STEADY-STATE
POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE IN
LOCKPORT DOLOMITE (DATA
FROM JOHNSTON, 1964);
FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL;
CONTOUR INTERVAL = 10 FEET
              AMERICAN
                FALLS
                                 MAJOR
                                PUMPING
                                 CENTER
 DATA POINT LOCATIONS
          SCALE
                 1 MILE
                       Figure  17.   Regional Lockport  Dolomite  Potentiometric Surface.

-------
                                             565.4
564.7
            564.6
                         564.7
    564.6
564.7
                        564.6
                              564.7     563.9
                564.6
                           564,7
                                   564.8
                                    564.9
                                         564.8
                                              564.9
                                   564.2  564.3.
                                        564,2 ^
                                          I   564.4
                                         564.2
             564.0
                                                               565.3
                                                           565.4
                                                                565.3
                                                         565.0
                                                    565.0
                                                    565.0
                                                     564.9
                                                     565.0
                                                                       565.3
                                     565.0
                                                            665.0
                                                                  565 J
                                                               565.1
                                                              565.0
                                                           566.0
                                                                    565.2
                                             565.2
  NOTE: VALUES REPORTED ARE IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL.
        THE CONTOUR INTERVAL USED IS 0.5 FOOT.
    Figure  18.   Lockport Dolomite  Potentiometric  Surface,
                                       70

-------
existed in  the  shallow system.   Due to  the  generally low perme-
ability of  overburden materials and the  relatively short period
of time for field measurement of water level elevations, the sur-
face presented  should be interpreted with  considerable caution.
Even though  the surface may  only approximate a  steady-state at
one particular  point  in time,  some general  trends  can be noted.
As may be  seen  in  the illustration,  the  water surface elevations
suggest a general  southwesterly gradient  with a  possible ground-
water mound near the  north  end  of the landfill and a slight de-
pression near the  south end of the  landfill.   As  a  result  of a
broken water  line  on 97th Street  (located  near  the intersection
of 96th Street with 97th Street between Colvin Boulevard and Read
Avenue),  which  remained unrepaired for a number  of weeks during
the latter part of the  study  period,  the observed slight ground-
water mound near the  northern portion  of the canal probably sig-
nifies that the shallow system  had  not yet fully  returned to
equilibrium at  the time of  water-level measurements in that gen-
eral  vicinity.     The  slight  ground-water   depression near  the
southern end of the  landfill was  probably caused  by the remedial
measures instituted at Love Canal.

     In most locations,  the computed hydraulic head of the shal-
low system was  found  to  be  nearly equal  to  the hydraulic head in
the dolomite.   Therefore,  it  is likely that  the  hydraulic heads
measured  in the  shallow system  are dependent  on  highly local
variations  in permeability,  in recharge,  in evapotranspiration,
and in discharge to the creeks and rivers.   These factors prob-
ably help  to  account  for the  features noted  in the figure.   Due
to the low  permeability and heterogeneous nature  of the overbur-
den, ground-water  movement  in  the  overburden is  generally  very
slow except in highly localized areas of more permeable material.

4.1.3.2  Ground-Water Flow Modeling
     An extensive  report on the modeling of ground-water movement
in  the  general  Love  Canal  area  was  mentioned earlier  as being
available from NTIS.  Some  of the major  findings  from the model-
ing effort are restated here.

   1.   In  the  general   Love  Canal  area the vertical  movement
       through  the confining  bed  separating the  overburden and
       dolomite aquifers is very  low with vertical velocities on
       the order of 0.001 inches/year.

   2.   Assuming a  downward movement through  the  confining  bed
       (although the  heads probably  fluctuate seasonally),  and
       that the confining bed was  not  breached during excavation
       and does not contain fracture zones,  it would take a  non-
       attenuated  contaminant hundreds to thousands  of  years to
       migrate down to  the  dolomite.  If attenuation occurs,  as
       is likely,  travel time  will increase.
                                71

-------
                                                     567J
                        570.1
                             564.9
                                              567.2
56
564S
564.6
564,7
564.0
563.6
9.8
570
570.:
564.8 5643

563.8
5652
56
56i.6
566.0
565.4 5g7
5®<
\ 563'4 562
\ \^ 56


9
i

563.2

1,9

1 5
560.6
•'«
j6566.
uri



51.6
"
\\ "H.
5652
569.5
57
572.2
568.9


562.9
564

568.2
56
5655
563.7

\ \ 567j559^S
L,«INrtU
XAREA
5.6
567.6
0.0 566.3
563'3 565.3


6
5633 562"6
S65'° 569.4
1 .7 569.3
568.6
sesa
564.8
565.4
                                    565.4
566.2
                             563.6\
                                                        569.0
                                  \  \
NOTE: VALUES REPORTED ARE IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL.
        Figure 19.   Overburden  Static Water Table.
                                 72

-------
   3.  It was estimated  that  ground water could migrate  through
       the overburden at rates ranging from up to approximately  1
       foot/year in the less permeable material,  to  up  to  approx-
       imately 60 feet/year in the more permeable material.   How-
       ever, due to the discontinuous and heterogeneous nature of
       the  overburden material,  the  potential  attenuation of
       organic contaminants in clayey soils,  and the construction
       of sewer systems virtually around  the  entire landfill, it
       is  highly  unlikely that  contaminated  shallow  system
       ground-water migrated beyond ring 1 houses.

   4.  Selective  contamination  of certain ring  1  houses by
       ground-water movement  prior  to remedial  construction was
       likely to have  occurred  as  a function of  random deposits
       of more permeable material in the overburden  (for example,
       sand lenses and filled swales),  and man-made construction
       activities (for example,  a backyard catch basin  and drain-
       age pipe);  overland flow of contaminants to certain ring  1
       houses was a  likely mechanism of transport prior to reme-
       dial construction  when pools  of surfaced chemicals  were
       present at the site.

   5.  The barrier drain system installed around the landfill was
       found to be  an effective remedial measure to contain the
       outward migration of Love Canal  contaminants  in the  shal-
       low system.  The barrier drain system will also  cause most
       shallow  system  ground  water that  may have migrated  from
       the  landfill  over  the  past 30  years  to  locations  outside
       the barrier  drain  system (through relatively high perme-
       ability  soil  pathways),  to flow towards the  drain system
       for  eventual  collection  and  subsequent  treatment  in the
       Leachate Treatment Facility.

4.1.4  Implications of the Hydrogeologic Program Findings

     The  implications  of  the  hydrogeologic program  findings are
of significant  importance  in understanding the  extent  and nature
of the environmental  contamination  problems  at  Love Canal.   His-
torically speaking,  it is  clear that contamination  of the  envi-
ronment occurred  in  the  area  immediately  surrounding  the former
canal.  Prior to remedial construction, local residents were sub-
jected to  potential exposure  to  Love  Canal contaminants from  a
variety of environmental sources:  (1) the overland  flow of chem-
icals that  formed  in pools around the  site;  (2)  the volatiliza-
tion and airborne transport of surfaced contaminants? and  (3) the
highly selective ground-water transport  of contaminants from the
former canal to certain ring 1 houses.

     Furthermore,  it  is  clear that  (prior to  remedial construc-
tion) contamination  had  entered nearby buried utilities  and had
probably been transported  considerable  distances  from  the former
canal.  In particular, transport occurred through the storm sewer
                                73

-------
lines around  Love  Canal, which  subsequently contributed  to  the
contamination of local creeks and  rivers  by  virtue of their dis-
charge into those waterways.  The  historically  active mechanisms
that likely contributed  to  storm sewer contamination were noted
previously as including:   (1) the collection of surfaced contami-
nants which  were transported  by precipitation  run-off  to curb
drains surrounding the site; (2) the infiltration of contaminants
into storm sewer lines located  adjacent to  the  landfill (for  ex-
ample, ground-water  transport  may  have occurred more readily to
the laterals  on  Read  and Wheatfield Avenues  and  through specific
permeable soil  pathways  to  storm  sewer   lines  on  97th  and 99th
Streets),-  (3)  the  discharge  to  storm   sewers  of  contaminants
taken-up by  sumps  in certain  ring  1 houses  that  had  been sub-
jected to contamination by ground-water transport and/or overland
flow; (4)  the discharge of  contaminants  taken-up by the French
drain surrounding the 99th  Street  Elementary School;  and (5)  the
infiltration and collection of surfaced contaminants  in the catch
basin located near the landfill at 949-953 97th Street.  As a re-
sult of  remedial actions conducted  at the  site during  1978  and
1979, it  is  likely  that  only  residual contamination remains in
the nearby sewer systems.

     Based on the findings of the hydrogeologic program, the fol-
lowing implications  are  offered regarding the likely extent  and
degree of environmental contamination at Love Canal.

   1.  Contamination  in  the shallow  system  will  likely  be con-
       fined  primarily   to  the  Canal Area,  with  contamination
       movement  occurring  selectively along  discontinuous, more
       permeable, soil pathways.

   2.  Contamination  in  the bedrock  aquifer  (directly attribut-
       able to Love Canal) is not likely,  unless the glacial till
       was breached during excavation activities.

   3.  Contamination  of  other  environmental media  is highly  un-
       likely  outside of  ring  1,  except as  impacted  by storm
       sewer  transport of contaminants.

   4.  Contaminated  soil, directly  attributable  to the migration
       of  contaminants  from Love  Canal,  will likely be present
       only  in  ring  1.    Contamination   in  soil will  likely be
       greatest  where both  overland flow  and ground-water  trans-
       port contributed  to the migration  of contaminants from the
       former canal.  {From historical evidence and the direction
       of ground-water  movement,  contaminated soil  is likely to
       be higher  south  of Wheatfield Avenue, and probably on the
       97th Street side, than elsewhere).  Contaminated soil  out-
       side  of  ring  1,  if  found,  probably resulted from other
       causes  or from use  of  contaminated  fill  materials (that
       is, it is unlikely to be related directly to Love Canal).
                                74

-------
   5.   Contaminated sumps, directly attributable to the migration
       of contaminants  from Love  Canal,  will likely  be  present
       only in certain  ring  1  houses where  soil  conditions per-
       mitted the  more  ready ground-water  transport  of contami-
       nants. As a result of ground-water flow patterns, contami-
       nation in sumps is likely to be higher on the southwestern
       side  (97th  Street  south of  Wheatfield Avenue)  of  Love
       Canal than elsewhere.

   6.   Contamination  is  likely present  in  storm  sewers  and  in
       area creeks and  rivers  near storm  sewer outfalls,  and  is
       likely to  be  residual   (prior  to  remedial  construction)
       contamination.   As a result of likely transport mechanisms
       that were operative  prior  to  remedial  construction,  con-
       tamination will probably be higher in storm sewer lines  on
       97th Street, and  in area  waterways near outfalls  fed  by
       the 97th  Street storm sewer line,  than elsewhere.

   7.   Because  the  majority of organic  compounds deposited  in
       Love Canal are attenuated  by  clay  (as opposed  to being  in
       aqueous solution), ground-water transport and other water-
       borne transport will likely be retarded. As a result, col-
       located  water  and  sediment  samples  will  likely  reveal
       higher levels of contamination in the sediment than in the
       water (when contamination is present).

   8.   Because the former canal has been capped since 1979, which
       has  altered  the  hydrogeological  characteristics   of  the
       landfill, contamination  in air  directly attributable  to
       Love Canal will  likely  not be present  in  the  Declaration
       Area.  It  is  likely  that  only certain, selectively con-
       taminated ring  1  residences will display evidence  of air
       contamination that is directly attributable to Love Canal,
       and  incrementally  significant  above background.   Further-
       more,  it is  likely that  air contamination  in the  vast
       majority of ring 1 residences was terminated in 1979, as a
       result of the  completion of remedial  actions  at the site
       and  the simultaneous cessation of  sump pumps  operating  in
       Canal Area residences in 1979.

4.2  EVIDENCE OF CONTAMINATION MOVEMENT

    The monitoring efforts at Love Canal were conducted by EPA  to
obtain evidence  regarding the migration  of contaminants from the
former canal into  the surrounding  Declaration Area.   The  results
of these studies are  presented  in  this  section of  the report.  In
Table  6, a  summary of the magnitude  of  the multimedia monitoring
efforts designed to identify evidence of chemicals migrating from
Love Canal  is presented.  The data in Table 6 enumerate for each
medium/source/location sampling  combination the total  number  of
analytes  determinations,  the  number of  samples   analyzed (note
that  this  number  does  not necessarily  refer  to  the  number  of
                                75

-------
       TABLE  6.  FREQUENCY OF  DETECTION OF  CONTAMINANTS  IN
                        VALIDATED LOVE CANAL SAMPLES
Declaration Area
Medium/Source/
Location
Ground Water
Shallow

Bedrock

Soil

Sump Water

Sump Sediment

Sanitary Sewer
Water
Sanitary Sewer
Sediment
Storm Sewer Water

Storm Sewer
Sediment
Surface Water

Stream Sediment

Air
HIVOL

PFOAM

TENAX

Deter-
minations^
(Samples)

6,675
(233)
4,966
(179)
22,361
(753)
18,752
(694)
0
(0)
152
(6)
74
(1)
1,612
(87)
2,399
(116)
2,268
(84)
2,538
(79)

1,088
(109)
10,865
(636)
21,082
(896)
Percent
Detect

8.5

8.4

9,4

10.2

—

22.4

62.6

8.3

15.5

7.1

21.3


45.3

6.3

36.5

Control
Deter-
minations Percent
(Samples) Detect

1,580 9.0
(55)
2,688 8.5
(94)
1,607 9.7
(57)
650 10.2
(23)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
142 3.5
(5)
76 18.4
(2)
727 5.8
(28)
746 14.6
(22)

0
(0)
541 6.1
(32)
791 40.2
(34)
Canal
Deter-
minations
(Samples)

2,438
(81)
1,859
(67)
4,442
(158)
2,432
(97)
159
(6)
0
(0)
0
(0)
344
(17)
637
(28)
0
(0)
0
(0)

89
(9)
1,232
(74)
2,006
(108)
Area
Percent
Detect

10.6

6.2

10.4

14.4

36.5

__

—

10.2

28.3

—

—


41.6

6.3

36.3

 Total number  of  specifically targeted  chemicals analyzed for in all com-
 bined validated  samples

Note:   Inorganic  substances represent approximately the following percent
       of the  determinations in the medium/source identified:  water,  9;
       sediment,  9; soil, 9; and HIVOL,  100.
                                    76

-------
sites  sampled),  and the  percent of  the  analytes determinations
that were identified at  a trace or greater  concentration.   (See
Appendixes C through E of this Volume for information on analyti-
cal limits of detection).

    The relatively  large  number of substances monitored  at Love
Canal  possess  a wide  range  of physical  and  chemical properties
that are associated with  their potential for migrating  from the
former  canal.    In particular,    the substances  monitored vary
considerably in terms of solubility, vapor pressure, and sorbtive
behavior; characteristics  that are commonly used to indicate the
potential mobility  of  a chemical  in  the  environment.   Based  on
these  characteristics,  the  targeted substances  include chemicals
that are expected to vary in potential mobility from (relatively)
high  to  low.   As  a consequence of the relatively  wide  range of
chemical  and  physical  properties  possessed by the  substances
monitored,  the  likelihood   of detecting  the presence  of Love
Canal-related  contamination  in  the   Declaration  Area  was
increased.    Because   the  targeted  substances   also  represented
those  that  were most  abundant in  the  source,  prevalent  in the
environment, and of toxicological concern,  and  because purposive
sampling was  employed  along  suspected  pathways  of  contaminant
transport, it is highly unlikely  that the presence of substantial
amounts of  Love Canal-related  contamination in  the  Declaration
Area would have been missed by  the monitoring program.

    In the sections  that  follow the  results  from the monitoring
program  conducted   at  Love  Canal  are presented.   It  should  be
noted that while all of the monitoring results were considered in
the  statements  of  findings, only  a  relatively  limited number of
substances are presented  for discussion purposes.   To the  extent
possible, a consistent set  of  chemicals are discussed across all
medium/source/location  combinations  in  order   to  provide con-
tinuity and comparability to the  findings.

4.2.1  Ground-Water Contamination

    Evidence of contaminant movement in ground water was obtained
through the installation  (described previously)  and sampling of a
large number of monitoring wells  throughout  the  general  Love Ca-
nal area.  Ground-water contamination was monitored separately in
the overburden shallow system  (A  Wells) and  in  the bedrock aqui-
fer  (B  Wells).   The  findings   from these monitoring  efforts are
described sequentially.  It  should be noted  that no ground-water
monitoring wells were  installed  inside the  boundary  of  the bar-
rier drain system encircling the former canal.

4.2.1.1  Shallow System
    In general,  neither  the extent  (that is, the  relative fre-
quency with which  substances were detected  at a  trace or greater
concentration)  nor  the degree  (the value of  the  median concentra-
tion measurement for  a particular substance) of contamination in
                                77

-------
the Declaration Area differed significantly (a- 0.10, one-tailed)
from the  ground-water contamination  observed  at shallow  system
control sites.   Statistically  significant  differences in the ex-
tent of shallow  system ground-water contamination, based on com-
parisons between the  Canal  Area  and  Declaration Area, were found
for the  substances  identified  in Table 7.   (See Volume  III  for
additional details).  Note,  that  the  results of  the statistical
tests reported in Table 7  (and in similar  subsequent tables)  are
not pair-wise  independent.   Consequently,  the  Type  I error rate
(that is, the probability of incorrectly rejecting the null hypo-
thesis) is greater than a,

    As can be  seen  from the data  summarized  in  Table 7,  and pre-
sented in detail in Volume  III,  virtually  no evidence of shallow
system ground-water contamination was found at sites  sampled out-
side the  Canal  Area.   The absence  of Declaration  Area shallow
system ground-water contamination, that was directly  attributable
to the migration of contaminants from the former canal, conformed
to the  findings  and  implications  of the  hydrogeologic  program.
Specifically,  the data  revealed  that contamination  of the over-
burden aquifer was  confined to the  Canal  Area, and  that  within
the  Canal  Area  only selective migration  (along more permeable
soil pathways) of contaminants from Love Canal had occurred.

    Three examples  of typical  shallow system  findings  are pre-
sented  in  Figures  20 through  22 to  illustrate the overburden
ground-water  contamination  observed at  Love Canal.    Additional
figures are  included in  Volume  III.    The results  presented  in
Figures 20 through  22 are for benzene, toluene, and "V-BHC (Lin-
dane),  respectively. These compounds were  selected  for presenta-
tion because of  their migration  properties and  because they were
illustrative  of  shallow  system   findings,  were  among the  most
frequently detected  organic compounds  in  the shallow system,  and
were known  waste materials  deposited  in  the  former canal.  In
Figures - 20 through  22,  the  maximum concentration of  the compound
of interest  observed at  each  site is presented. This procedure
was adopted  in order to  incorporate  the  information obtained at
those  QA/QC  sites  where  multiple  field   samples may have been
collected. Consequently,  the  concentration  levels  presented  in
these  figures are  likely  to  be conservative  (that is,  high)
indicators of the  actual  concentration   levels  present  in  the
shallow system ground water at those sites sampled.   Note that in
all figures  no systematic evidence was observed of  contaminants
that had migrated from Love Canal into the Declaration Area, even
though numerous  wells were sited in the  Declaration Area along
suspected  transport  pathways  (for example,  in  or   near  former
swales).

    Additional detailed analyses of the shallow system monitoring
data  (using  a variety  of  statistical  methods  such  as  correla-
tional  analysis,  principal  components  analysis,  and  cluster
analysis—see, for  example,  S.  James Press, Applied  Multivariate
                                78

-------
TABLE  7.   SIGNIFICANT  DIFFERENCES OBSERVED IN  EXTENT OF  SHALLOW
                SYSTEM GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION AT LOVE CANAL
Percent Detect
(Number of Samples)
Compound/Element
2 , 4-Dichlorophenol
2,4, 6-Tr ichlorophenol
1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 2-Diehlorobenzene
1,2, 4— Trichlorobenzene
1,2,3, 4-Tetrachlorobenzene
Acenaphthy lene
Fluorene
1 , 1-Dichlorethene
Tetrachloroethene
2-CMorotoluene
3-Chlorotoluene
4-Chlorotoluene
Chlorobenzene
Chromium
Lead
Decl,
2,1
(47)
0.0
(47)
0.0
(47)
0.0
(47)
0.0
(47)
0.0
(47)
4.3
(47)
4.3
(47)
2.3
(43)
2,3
(43)
0.0
(43)
0.0
(43)
0.0
(43)
2.3
(43)
66.0
(43)
72.3
(47)
Control
9.1
(11)
0.0
(11)
0.0
(11)
0.0
(11)
0.0
(11)
0.0
(11)
0.0
(11)
0.0
(11)
0.0
(11)
27.3
(11)
0.0
(11)
9.1
(11)
0.0
(11)
0.0
(11)
70.0
(10)
77.8
(9)
Canal
18,8
(16)
13.3
(15)
12.5
(16)
12.5
(16)
12.5
(16)
12.5
(16)
18.8
(16)
18.8
(16)
14.3
(21)
19,0
(21)
19.0
(21)
10.0
(20)
9.5
(21)
23.8
(21)
92.9
(14)
100.0
(13)
Comparison
Canal - Decl.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No (0-0.104)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Decl . - Control
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
NO
No
No
Comparisons based on a one-tailed difference of
exact test, for the areas indicated, and in the
proportions test {a=0.10), using Fisher's
order presented.
                                      79

-------
xB
                                                                xT
    Legend:

    T—Trace
    B—Below Detection
    N—No Analysis
                                                               xB
                                                                        xB
            Figure 20.
Well  A Sampling Sites,
Benzene,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per liter,  ppb).
                                     80

-------
xB
   Legend:

   T-Trace
   B—Below Detection
   N—No Analysis
                                                                       xB
                Figure  21.   Well  A Sampling Sites,
                             Toluene, Maximum Concentrations
                             (micrograms per liter,  ppb).
                                   81

-------
xO.01
    Legend:

    T-Trace
    B—Below Detection
    N—No Analysis
                                                                 xT
                                                               xB
                                                                        xB
                 Figure 22.
Well  A Sampling Sites,
T-BHC, Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms  per liter,  ppb).
                                    82

-------
Analysis, Holt,  Rinehart  and Winston, 1972),  revealed  that con-
tamination  by organic  compounds  in the  shallow  system  ground
water was  restricted to  the  Canal Area.   In fact,  the results
showed that  only three  A Wells, all  located  within ring 1, were
highly contaminated.  The results  also suggested  that no pattern
of contamination,  directly  attributable  to the migration  of or-
ganic compounds from the former canal into the surrounding neigh-
borhood,   could be  discerned outside of  ring 1.   That  is,  no
patterns of  shallow  system  ground-water  contamination were found
outside  of  the Canal Area  that  corresponded  to suspected trans-
port  pathways (for  example,  former  swales or sand  lenses),  or
that indicated the existence of concentration gradients emanating
from the former  canal.  Furthermore,  the infrequent detection of
quantifiable  levels  of  organic  compounds in the Declaration Area
occurred ordinarily  as  geographically isolated instances of con-
tamination,  and  did not display  systematic  detection  patterns
across compounds.  Because  all  three highly contaminated shallow
system ground-water  sites are  located on what is  now NYS-owned
property,  their  addresses  are  identified here:   well  104A  was
located in a  suspected  former swale and near the barrier drain in
the lot south of 754 99th Street; well 77A was located in a known
sand lens and near the  barrier  drain in  the backyard of 775 97th
Street; and  well 75A was  located in a suspected former swale and
near the barrier drain  in the lot at the southwest corner of 99th
Street and  Colvin  Boulevard.   A total of  46  A Wells (out  of the
79  sampled)   had  organic  contaminants present at only  trace or
lower levels.

4.2.1.2  Bedrock Aquifer
    In general,  neither  the extent  nor  the  degree of bedrock
aquifer  contamination  in the Declaration  Area (or  in  the Canal
Area)  differed  significantly  (a =0.10,  one-tailed)   from  the
ground-water  contamination  observed  at  bedrock  aquifer control
sites.   Furthermore, the  levels  of contamination  observed  in the
bedrock  aquifer  were generally  very low,  displayed random pat-
terns of occurrence, and  did not  reveal  plumes  of contamination
that directly emanated  from Love Canal.

    Three  examples  of  typical bedrock  aquifer results  are pre-
sented in  Figures  23 through 25 to illustrate the Lockport Dolo-
mite  ground-water contamination observed  in  the  general  Love
Canal area  (additional  figures are  included  in Volume III).  The
organic  compounds  displayed in  Figures  23 through  25,  benzene,
toluene,  and  Y-BHC (respectively), were selected because of their
migration properties and  because they were illustrative of bed-
rock  aquifer findings,  were  among the  most  frequently detected
compounds in  the bedrock  aquifer,  and were known waste materials
present  in  the landfill.  As before, the  maximum concentration of
the compound  of interest observed at  each  site is presented.
                                83

-------
xT
    Legend:

    T-Trace
    B—Below Detection
    N-No Analysis
                                                                        xB
                                                                       xB
            Figure  23.
Well  B Sampling Sites,
Benzene, Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per liter,  ppb).
                                     84

-------
x16
   Legend:

   T-Trace
   B-Below Detection
   N-No Analysis
                                                                        xB
                                                                    I
                                                                      xB
                 Figure  24.
Well  B Sampling Sites,
Toluene, Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per liter,  ppb).
                                   85

-------
xB
    Legend:

    T—Trace
    B—Below Detection
    N—No Analysis
                                                                        xB
                                                                      xfl
              Figure  25.
Well  B Sampling Sites,
Y-BHC,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per liter,  ppb).
                                     86

-------
    It can be  seen  in Figures 23  through 25 that  no  clear pat-
terns of  Love Canal-related  bedrock aquifer  contamination were
suggested  by  the data.    Rather,   the  data  revealed   that very
low-level, wide-spread  contamination in  the  bedrock aquifer was
likely present, and that the source  {or  sources)  of the contami-
nation observed  in  the  aquifer could not be identified.  In par-
ticular,  the data revealed  that  anomalous up-gradient  contamina-
tion  was  present  in  the  aquifer  at substantial  distances from
Love  Canal.    The  data  also suggested  that  no  clear  evidence
existed of an incremental contribution to bedrock aquifer contam-
ination which  could be directly attributed to the  migration of
contaminants from Love Canal into the aquifer.

    The absence  of  clear,  consistent evidence  demonstrating the
migration of contaminants  from the former canal into the bedrock
aquifer conforms to the findings  of the  hydrogeologic program.
Furthermore, these  findings provide indirect  support  to the in-
ference that  the glacial  till  under  the  former  canal  was not
likely breached as a result of excavation or dumping activities.

    Additional detailed  analyses  of the  bedrock  aquifer  moni-
toring data suggested that the observed low-level organic contam-
ination found in bedrock ground-water samples was both widespread
and nonsystematie;  that  is,  contamination was observed  up-gradi-
ent and at substantial  distances from the  former  canal. In par-
ticular, it was observed that all of the bedrock monitoring wells
located closest  to  Love Canal (that  is,  in the Canal  Area) had
only  low-level organic  contamination present (with  total concen-
trations less than  100 parts per billion—micrograms per liter),
and that  bedrock monitoring wells  located  in  the  Canal Area en-
circled the  landfill.  Given the  southerly direction  of ground-
water movement  in  the Lockport Dolomite  near  Love  Canal and the
lack of clear evidence of a plume of contamination in the bedrock
aquifer that originated in the Canal Area,  it is likely  that con-
tamination observed  in the  aquifer  was  not directly  related to
the migration  of contaminants from Love Canal. A  total of 21 B
wells (out of the 57 sampled) had organic contaminants present at
only trace or lower concentration levels.

4.2.2  Soil Contamination

    The extent and degree of soil contamination at Love  Canal was
determined through  the collection  of  soil samples  at  171 sites
(Figure 26), and the  analysis  of those  samples  for the targeted
substances listed in  Appendix  A.   Soil  sampling sites were often
intentionally located along suspected transport pathways, includ-
ing former swales,  sand  lenses,  and wet/dry areas.  In  addition,
sites were  located  at places  where residents  reported the sus-
pected presence of chemical contamination,  the deposition of fill
materials  thought to  have  been  removed  from the Canal Area, or
the deposition of fill  materials thought to be chemical-industry
wastes.   Soil  samples  were also intentionally  collected at each
                                87

-------
                  X     X
                02024  02025
                  02026

             02027   x

                  02028
                                                  x06014  x07014

                                                       X07004
                                              1102506001070111
                                               xix   ix x07017
xO?Q13

  1 x07801
                                   X11015

                                     CANAL

                                      AREA 11Q22x.
                                                 06015x
                                                  .08011
                                           11003x
                                           11023	1
                                             xl 06003
                                               *   P7Q16
                                                     x
    97814 x01031
9755Qx*
                   03505  03502x

                         03506x

                      X03B08

                         03507x
                                                         X09001
                                                       x09012
                                                         xnftrms  x10028

                                                              X10016
                                                      J09013J x10014

                                                               x10022
Figure  26.   Soil  Sampling Site  Codes.
                             88

-------
base  residence  for the  purpose of  multimedia monitoring.   And
finally, in order  to  assure that the soil samples collected ade-
quately  represented the  entire general  Love Canal  area,  sites
throughout the  Declaration  Area and  Canal Area were randomly se-
lected  (that is, with  equal probability)  for sampling. It should
also  be noted  that no  soil samples  were collected  inside  the
boundary of the barrier drain system encircling the former canal.

    Soil sampling at each site was conducted as follows.  Because
it was not possible to stipulate ahead of time the depth at which
contaminants migrating  from the landfill might be located in the
soil, but  with  knowledge that  the top 6 feet of soil typically
included nearly all of the  more permeable soil  material,  it was
decided that the entire  top 6  feet of soil would be sampled. The
device used to  sample soil was a truck-mounted soil corer, 6 feet
in length and 1 3/8 inches  in  diameter.   Because it was not pos-
sible to stipulate  ahead of time the likely geographical distri-
bution of  contaminants  at a given sampling  site,  it  was decided
that  at each  sampling site a total of seven soil cores would be
collected.  Of  the seven soil cores collected at each site,  two
cores were appropriately handled, and subsequently analyzed sepa-
rately  for  volatile organic compounds.  The  remaining  five soil
cores were homogenized,  and subsequently  analyzed  for the addi-
tional targeted substances  of  interest.   A typical soil sampling
scheme  employed at Love  Canal  is  presented  in  Figure 27; note,
however, that  the  actual  sampling  configuration used  at  a site
was dependent on the size of the area available for sampling.

    The results from  the  soil  monitoring program revealed a pat-
tern  of  Love  Canal-related  environmental  contamination that was
consistent with the findings  of the hydrogeologic  program,  and
corresponded to the ground-water monitoring  findings.  In general,
the  patterns  of soil  contamination  that were  observed revealed
that  contaminants  had  migrated directly  from the former canal to
the immediate vicinity of certain ring 1 residences.  In particu-
lar,  evidence of soil contamination that  was directly attribut-
able  to the migration of contaminants from  Love  Canal was found
near:   (1) those ring 1  residences  that  were suspected of having
been  subjected  to  the overland  flow of  contaminants  from  the
landfill  prior  to  remedial construction;  and (2) those  ring 1
residences that had been constructed in the vicinity of more per-
meable  soil pathways  conveying  through-ground migration of con-
taminants  from  the landfill prior  to remedial  construction.   A
summary of the  statistically significant soil monitoring findings
is presented in Table 8. Again, recall that the Type I error rate
is larger than  a.

    As  can  be  seen from  the results  presented  in Table  8,  and
from  a  review of the  detailed  tables included in Volume III, the
soils monitoring data revealed that Love  Canal-related environ-
mental contamination  was  confined to the Canal Area.   Supporting
                                89

-------
                                        30-FOOT
                                        CIRCLE
           CORES ANALYZED FOR VOLATILE ORGANICS

           CORES COMPOSITED AND ANALYZED FOR OTHER
            SUBSTANCES
Figure  27.
Typical  Soil Sampling Configuration
Used at  Each Site.
                          90

-------
           TABLE 8.  SIGNIFICANT  DIFFERENCES OBSERVED IN  EXTENT OF  SOIL
                              CONTAMINATION  AT LOVE  CANAL
Compound/Element
Phenanthrene
a-BHC
6-BHC
"V-BHC (Lindane)
Heptachlor epoxide
Endrin
DDT
1, 1-Dichloroethene
Chloroform
3-Chlorotoluene
Chlorobenzene
Cadmium
Percent Detect
(Number of Samples)
Decl. Control Canal
23.8
(105)
8.3
(109)
10.1
(109)
6.4
(109)
0.9
(109)
9.2
(109)
5.5
(109)
2.3
(213)
19.2
(213)
0.0
(213)
1.4
(212)
4.6
(108)
44.4
(9)
0.0
(9)
0.0
(9)
0.0
(9)
0.0
(9)
0.0
(9)
0.0
(9)
0.0
(17)
41.2
(17)
0.0
(17)
0.0
(17)
0.0
(9)
39.1
(23)
26.1
(23)
39.1
(23)
21.7
(23)
8.7
(23)
26.1
(23)
21.7
(23)
17.8
(45)
42.2
(45)
4.4
(45)
6.7
(45)
39.1
(23)
Comparison'
Canal - Decl. Decl. - Control
No (a =0.1 08)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
^Comparisons are .based on a one-tailed difference of proportions test (a=0.10), using
 Fisher's exact test, for the areas  indicated, and in the order presented.

-------
this finding was the observation that patterns of soil contamina-
tion detected  in the  Canal  Area were  often also  in  relatively
close  correspondence with  the  occurrence of  shallow  system
ground-water contamination at Love Canal.

    Even though  direct evidence of Love Canal-related  soil  con-
tamination was  found in the  Canal  Area,  relatively  few statis-
tically significant  differences  in  the  extent of soil contamina-
tion occur when the Canal Area is compared to control  sites.  This
result was considered  a  likely  consequence  of:  (1)  the generally
limited through-ground migration of  substances  from the  former
canal  (recall  that  no  soil  samples were  collected inside  the
boundary  of the  barrier  drain  system?    (2)  the  preferential
through-ground  migration of  substances  from the  former  canal
along relatively local, narrow,  more-permeable soil pathways;  (3)
the selective overland flow of contaminants from the former canal
that occurred prior to remedial construction (it  was not possible
to estimate the  ameliorating  effects of microbial degradation on
either  the  extent or  degree  of  soil  contamination observed  at
Love Canal); and (4)  the relatively small  number of soil samples
collected at control sites which limited the power of the statis-
tical test  employed.  In addition, the  relatively infrequent  oc-
currence of quantifiable soil monitoring results  also  rendered a
determination of differences  in the degree  of soil contamination
found at Love Canal statistically impractical.

    In  Figures  28  through 31,  four examples of  soil  monitoring
findings are presented to illustrate the typical  patterns of soil
contamination  found  in  the general Love  Canal  area  (additional
figures are included in Volume  III),  The  substances displayed in
these three figures  are  (respectively)  benzene (from  both of the
two  soil  cores  collected  at  each  site for  volatile  organics),
 y-BHC, and cadmium.   As  before, the maximum concentration of the
substance of  interest observed  at  each site is  presented.  From
the results displayed in these figures it  can be seen  that  soil
contamination,   which was directly  attributable   to contaminants
having migrated  from Love Canal,  was confined to the  Canal Area.
Furthermore, no consistent patterns  of contamination  migrating
out of the Canal Area were found in the soil monitoring data.

    Additional  detailed  analyses  of  the   soil  monitoring  data
revealed that  soil contamination which  was  directly attributable
to the migration of  contaminants  from Love  Canal  was  confined to
the Canal Area.   In  particular, substantial Canal Area soil  con-
tamination was  prevalent at  site 11018 (741  97th Street),  which
was the soil sampling site located closest to the known sand lens
on the  97th Street  side of  Love Canal,  and at   site  11005  (684
99th  Street),  which  was  located  in the former major  swale  that
crossed Love Canal.  Both of these sites are located in ring 1.
                                92

-------
Legend:

T-Trace
B-Below Detection
N-No Analysis
            Figure 28.   Soil Sampling Sites  (First),
                         Benzene,  Maximum Concentrations
                         (micrograms per kilogram, ppb).
                                   93

-------
Legend:

T-Trace
B—Below Detection
N-No Analytis
CANAL
AREA



5

xB
xB ..r
xB
xB
I, XB
1 xB
•L
^\
^^^
^ ^^^
xB
xE


xB



M








xN
xB
xB

xB

o X
xB
xB
xB
xB
xB
xB



KB
xB
xN x

xN
3 xB

xB

xBXB
xB
xB
xB
xB
xB

                                                                   xB
                                                                   xB
                                                                   xN
                                                                        xT


                                                                       xT
                                                                     xB
                                                                   xT
                                                                   xT
                                                                      xN
            Figure  29.
Soil  Sampling  Sites  (Second),
Benzene,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per kilogram, ppb) ..
                                    94

-------
Legend:

T-Trace
B-Below Detection
N—No Analysis
         Figure 30.
Soil  Sampling Sites,
Y-BHC,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per  kilogram,  ppb)
                                95

-------
Legend:

T—Trace
B—Below Detection
N—No Analysis
             Figure  31.  Soil  Sampling  Sites,
                          Cadmium, Maximum Concentrations
                          (micrograms per kilogram ppb).

-------
    Even though relatively prevalent  soil  contamination was also
observed at a few other sites, the absence of compelling evidence
revealing a  gradient  of soil  contamination emanating  from Love
Canal towards those sites, suggested that the observed contamina-
tion was not  due  to the  natural  migration of  contaminants from
the landfill.  Rather, it is likely that soil contamination found
in the  Declaration Area  occurred  from other  causes  because  no
pattern of soil contamination was found outside of the Canal Area
that corresponded  to  the  shallow  system  ground-water  gradient,
and only  isolated  instances of soil  contamination were found in
the Declaration Area  (and these were often at  substantial dis-
tances from the former canal).  A total of 10 soil sampling sites
(out of the 171 sampled)  had organic contaminants present at only
trace or lower concentration levels.

4.2.3  Sump Contamination

    The objective of the sump monitoring program was to provide,
through indirect means, additional evidence of Love Canal-related
environmental contamination involving shallow system ground water
and soil.  Such  indirect  evidence  would be  obtained whenever Love
Canal-related contamination was found  present  in sump water sam-
ples.   In  order to attribute  sump contamination to the migration
of contaminants from Love  Canal,  the  monitoring  program was de-
signed  to  assist  in  demonstrating that  contamination migrating
from Love Canal had been taken-up  from the ground water by base-
ment sumps, and was not present due to other causes. Furthermore,
it  was  recognized  that  contaminated  basement  sumps  could also
serve as sources  of potential human exposure to toxic substances
that might pose a threat to human health.  Because human exposure
to  contaminants  taken-up by  basement sumps could  also  occur by
inhalation of volatilized  airborne  pollutants,  a special program
of  sump/basement-air  monitoring  was  designed  and  conducted at
Love Canal.

    The sump  was  stirred to obtain  a sample of  the  entire sump
contents, because the amount of sediment present in sumps was not
ordinarily adequate for sampling purposes  (except for a few Canal
Area residences).   These sump water  samples  were collected rou-
tinely  and  analyzed for  the  targeted substances  identified in
Appendix A.  At two Canal Area residences  (site 11072 at 771 97th
Street, and site 11071 at 779 97th Street), sufficient amounts of
sediment were  present  in the sumps and both  sump water and sump
sediment samples  were  collected and  analyzed  for  targeted sub-
stances.  At each of the base residences,  sump water samples were
collected at the same time, and with  approximately the same fre-
quency, as  the regular air monitoring campaigns were conducted.
In other sites at which  sumps  were  sampled only one routine col-
lection of sump water samples was performed.
                                97

-------
    An initial undisturbed  sample  of water was collected  at all
sump  sampling  sites for  the determination of  targeted volatile
organic compounds.  Subsequent to  the  collection  of this sample,
the sump  was vigorously agitated with a paddle for 2  minutes to
simulate the turbulence caused by  the  activation  of a  sump pump.
Additional  samples  of  sump water were then  collected  for the
analysis of other targeted substances.

    The extent and degree of sump water contamination at Love Ca-
nal was  determined  through  the  collection and analysis  of sump
water samples from  54 sites  (Figure  32).   As  with other environ-
mental media  sampled at  Love  Canal,  sump  sampling  sites  were
selected  to satisfy a  number of  different criteria:   (1)  sites
were  often  intentionally  selected  (when in existence  and avail-
able  for sampling)  along  suspected preferential  soil transport
pathways;  (2)  sumps were sampled  in residences where  the occu-
pants reported the  suspected presence of contaminants; (3) sumps
were  repetitively sampled in each  base  residence  for the purpose
of multimedia monitoring; and (4) sumps were randomly (with equal
probability)  selected  for  sampling from  throughout  the  entire
Declaration Area.  In addition to the samples collected at multi-
media monitoring sites,  nine sites in the Canal Area were sampled
as  part  of  the  previously  mentioned  special  sump/basement-air
study. Due to program constraints and limited voluntary access to
residences outside of the Declaration Area, only one control site
sump  (located in a residence on Grand Island)  was  sampled.

    The results  from the  sump monitoring program  revealed a pat-
tern  of environmental contamination  consistent  with the findings
of  the  hydrogeologic  program,  and  corresponding  to both  the
ground-water and soil  monitoring  findings.  The pattern  of sump
contamination observed  revealed  that substantial  amounts of con-
taminants had  preferentially migrated  directly from  Love Canal
prior to remedial construction and been taken-up by sumps located
in certain ring  1 residences.  In particular,  evidence  of residu-
al  sump  water  contamination  (and  in two  instances, evidence of
high  residual sump sediment  contamination), that was directly at-
tributable to the migration  of  contaminants from  Love  Canal, was
found  in:  (1) those  ring  1 residences that  were  suspected of
having been  subjected historically to the  overland flow of con-
taminants from the  landfill prior to  remedial  construction; and
(2) those ring 1 residences  that had been  constructed  in the vi-
cinity of more permeable  soil pathways  conveying through-ground
migration of contaminants  from  Love Canal  prior to remedial con-
struction.  Due  to  a lack of appropriate historical data,  it was
not possible to  determine the amount  of the  residual  contamina-
tion  observed in these ring  1 sump samples that had been degraded
through natural  processes.   It is  important to note that the sump
pumps in  all  Canal  Area  residences  which  were sampled  had been
disconnected and inoperable  since  1979,  at least  1 year prior to
EPA monitoring.  A  summary of the  statistically significant sump
water monitoring findings is presented  in Table  9. Once again,
note  that the Type  I error rate is larger than a.


                                98

-------
                                                     x97303
                                                        97302 x




                                                   97300X  973X01
                                                       97003 x
                                                   10027x
Figure 32.   Sump Water Sampling  Site  Codes,
                                                           97534 x
                         99

-------
                        TABLE  9.   SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES  OBSERVED IN THE EXTENT OF
                                           SUMP  WATER  CONTAMINATION AT LOVE  CANAL
O
O
Percent
(Number of
Compound
2-Nitrophenol
Phenol
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
Hexachloroethane
1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 3-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
1,2, 3-Trichlorobenzene
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
Naphthalene
2 , 4-Dichlorotoluene
Hexachlorobenzene

Decl.
0.0
(104)
4.8
(104)
0.0
(104)
0.0
(103)
11.5
(104)
1.9
(104)
0.0
(104)
0.0
(104)
0.0
(104)
0.0
(104)
6.7
(104)
0.0
(104)
1.0
(104)

Detect
Samples )
Control Canal
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)

23.1
(13)
30.8
(13)
15.4
(13)
23.1
(13)
46.2
(13)
53.8
(13)
38.5
(13)
30.8
(13)
15.4
(13)
53.8
(13)
30.8
(13)
23.1
(13)
38.5
(13)
(continued)
Comparison^
Canal - Decl.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Decl. - Control
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No

                    'Comparisons were based on
                    exact test, for the areas
a one-tailed difference of proportions test (a=0.10), using Fisher's
indicated, and in the order  presented.

-------
                               TABLE  9  (continual!)
Percent Detect
(Number of Samples)
Compound
Anthracene
1,2,3, 4-Tetrachlorobenzene
Tetrachlorotoluenes
«-BHC
/3-BHC
S-BHC
y-BHC (Lindane)
trans-1 , 2-Dichloroethene
Chloroform
1 , 2-Dichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Benzene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Decl .
10.6
(104)
0.0
(104)
0.0
(89)
17.1
(105)
17.1
(105)
14.4
(104)
18.1
(105)
0.0
(104)
7,7
(104)
1.0
(104)
1.9
(104)
7,7
(104)
0.0
(104)
Control
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
0.0
(4)
40.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
20.0
(5)
20.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
40.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
Canal
38.5
(13)
46.2
(13)
36.4
(ID
42.9
(14)
35.7
(14)
35.7
(14)
50.0
(14)
31.3
(14)
37.5
(16)
12.5
(16)
31.3
(16)
43.8
(16)
18.8
(16)
Comparison^
Canal - Decl.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No (a =0.102)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Decl. - Control
Ho
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
(continued)
'Comparisons were based on
exact test, for the areas
a one-tailed difference of proportions test (a=0.10),  using Fisher1
indicated, and in the order presented.

-------
                                                  TABLE 9  (continued)
o
to
Percent Detect
(Number of Samples) Comparison*
Compound
o-Xylene
m-Xylene
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
2-Chlorotoluene
3-Chlorotoluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
Decl.
1.9
(104)
3.8
(104)
14.4
(104)
16.3
(104)
0.0
(90)
0.0
(90)
1.9
(104)
3.9
(90)
Control
0.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
20.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
0.0
(5)
Canal Canal - Decl. Decl. - Control
25.0 Yes No
(16)
31.3 Yes No
(16)
37.5 Yes No
(16)
43.8 Yes No
(16)
40.0 Yes No
(15)
40.0 Yes No
(15)
37.5 Yes No
(16)
25.0 Yes No
(16)
                  Comparisons were based on a one-tailed  difference of proportions test  (o>=0.10), using Fisher's

                  exact test, for the  areas indicated,  and in the order presented.

-------
    As can  be  seen from  the  results presented  in Table  9,  and
from a review of  the  tables  included in Volume III, the sump wa-
ter  monitpring  data   revealed  that  direct  Love  Canal-related
environmental contamination  (note, for  example,  the chlorinated
benzenes  and  chlorinated  toluenes)  was  confined  to  the  Canal
Area.   Supporting these statistical findings was the observation
that patterns of sump water contamination found in the Canal Area
were  also ordinarily  closely  associated with  the  occurrence of
both shallow system ground-water  contamination and soil contami-
nation.

    Three examples of  typical  sump water monitoring  results are
presented in  Figures  33 through  35  to  illustrate the pattern of
sump water contamination found at Love  Canal (additional figures
are  included  in Volume  III).   The  compounds  displayed in these
figures are benzene, toluene, and Y-BHC (Lindane), respectively.
As was done previously, the maximum concentration of the compound
of  interest  observed  at  each  site  is  presented.  In  Figures 33
through 35 it can be seen that the pattern of sump water contami-
nation revealed by  the data is  consistent  with  the  findings of
shallow system ground-water contamination displayed in  Figures 20
through 22, and the  findings of  soil contamination displayed in
Figures  28  through 31.   In particular,  note  that (once again)
evidence of direct Love Canal-related environmental contamination
is restricted to  the vicinity of  certain ring 1 residences in the
Canal Area.

    Additional detailed analyses  of  the  sump monitoring data re-
vealed that sump water contamination directly attributable to the
migration of  contaminants from  Love Canal  was confined  to  the
Canal Area. In particular, Canal  Area contamination was prevalent
at the following sites, all located in ring 1:  site 11071 at 779
97th  Street;  site 11070  at 783  97th  Street;   site  11072  at 771
97th Street;  site 11021 at  476   99th Street;  site 11073  at  703
97th Street; and site 11005 at 684 99th Street.  It is  noteworthy
that the three most highly contaminated  sumps  (identified by the
sump  water  monitoring  data)  were located:  (1) in  those  ring  1
residences closest in proximity to the known sand lens  located on
the  western  side  of Love Canal,  south  of Wheatfield Avenue; (2)
near  the  highly  contaminated  shallow  system  well  number  77A,
which was installed through  the  known sand  lens in ring 1 at 775
97th Street;  and  (3)  near  the highly  contaminated  ring  1  soil
sampling  site  11012  at 741 97th  Street, which  was the soil sam-
pling site located closest  to  the sand lens.   In addition,  evi-
dence  of  both  sump  water  contamination and  soil  contamination
were identified at site 11005 (684 99th Street), which was previ-
ously  noted  as  being  located  along the former major swale that
crossed Love Canal.  (See Figures 2 and 14). Of the 54  sites sam-
pled for sump water contamination, a total of 11 sites  had organ-
ic  contaminants  present  at  only trace  or lower  concentration
levels.
                                103

-------
Legend:

T-Trace
B—Below Detection
N—No Analysis
                                                             t
                                                             xB
         Figure 33.
Sump Water Sampling Sites,
Benzene,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per  liter, ppb).
                               104

-------
                                                             xB
Legend:

T-Trace
B—Below Detection
N—No Analysis
     Figure 34.
Sump Water Sampling Sites,
Toluene,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per  liter, ppb).
                              105

-------
                                                            -N-
Legend:

T-Trace
B—Below Detection
N-No Analysis
                                                         xB
                                                         xB
                                                             xB
        Figure 35.
Sump Water Sampling Sites,
7-BHC,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per liter,  ppb).
                              106

-------
    Because  only two  sump sites  were  found  to  have  sufficient
sediment present for sampling and analysis purposes, an extensive
discussion of the monitoring results obtained  is unnecessary. The
reason for this  is because  it  is  sufficient to note that at sump
sampling  sites  11071  (779 97th  Street)  and  11072  (771  97th
Street), where  both sump  water and  sump sediment  samples  were
collected, high  contamination of both media was present.

    Now, it  is  well  known that  many  of the  organic compounds
monitored  at  Love Canal are both  hydrophobic and readily sorbed
on sediments.  That  is, their  equilibrium  sorption  behavior,  as
characterized by the partition coefficient Kp or Koc , is rela-
tively high? see, for example,  S.  W.  Karickhoff,  "Semi-Empirical
Estimation of Sorption  of Hydrophobic Pollutants on Natural Sedi-
ments and  Soils," Chemosphere,  Vol.  10  (1981), 833-846.   There-
fore, it  was not surprising to find  the  presence of  highly con-
taminated  (solution  phase) sump  water  in  association  with the
presence of  very high  concentrations  (sorbed  phase)  of certain
organic contaminants  present  in the  sump sediment  (particularly
since  the   sump  water  had not  been refreshed  by  pumping,  and
consequently diluted,  since 1979). The reader  interested in the
specific  results obtained  from  the analysis of  sump  sediment
samples is referred to Volume II.

    Before concluding this section it is perhaps worth mentioning
again that,  prior to  remedial  construction  in 1979,  Canal Area
basement sumps were  discharged  into the  local  storm  sewer lines
on 97th  and  99th Streets.  The  likely consequences of  this activ-
ity on the distant transport of contaminants  from Love Canal into
the  surrounding  environment are  discussed  in the  next two sec-
tions of the report.

4.2.4  Sanitary and Sto r m S e we r Con t am ina t ion

    Samples of  sanitary sewer  water  and  sediment were collected
from the Love Canal Declaration Area  access point located at the
intersection of  Wheatfield Avenue and  101st  Street  (site 08016,
see Volume II).   This particular  sampling  location  was selected
because it was directly connected  to the portion  of the sanitary
sewer line that  was  installed  across the landfill,  under Wheat-
field Avenue, by the  City  of Niagara Palls  in 1957. In addition,
the  location  selected  was  sufficiently far  from Love  Canal  to
(potentially) provide  evidence of  the  distant transport of in-
filtrated  contaminants.   Because  the  sanitary sewer  line  under
Wheatfield Avenue was  encompassed  by the barrier  drain system in
1979  and plugged at 99th Street by the city in early 1980, it was
deemed likely that any  residual contamination present  in the line
would be due to historical transport.

    Prom the  analysis  performed  on  the  sanitary  sewer  samples
collected,  the  presence  of Love  Canal-related  contaminants  in
both  sanitary sewer water and sanitary sewer sediment  samples was
                                107

-------
revealed clearly, with higher concentration levels present in the
sediment samples.  In particular, a number of substances detected
in  the  sanitary sewer samples  were identified as  indicators of
the direct migration  of  contaminants  from Love Canal (the speci-
fic results may be found in Volume II).  For example, in sanitary
sewer water samples a number  of chlorinated toluenes were found;
while in sanitary  sewer  sediment samples, evidence  of  high con-
tamination was  found  involving  chlorinated benzenes, chlorinated
toluenes, and hexachlorocyclopentadiene (C-56).

    A total of 29 sampling sites  (identified where  possible in
Figure 36) were  included in the  storm  sewer  portion of  the moni-
toring program.  Storm sewer  sampling was  conducted during  the
months of  August and October 1980,  and  involved  the collection
and analysis  of water  and sediment  samples  (when  available in
adequate amounts)  for the  targeted substances  identified  in  Ap-
pendix A.   In a  previous  section  (4.1.1.2)  on  topography  and
drainage, the existence,  location,  and direction of water-flow in
storm sewer  lines in  the  immediate vicinity  of Love  Canal  was
discussed; they were graphically displayed in Figure 12.

    Also discussed in Section 4.1.1.2 was the existence and loca-
tion  of  certain features that,  prior to  remedial construction,
may have  contributed  to  the transport of contaminants  from Love
Canal into the nearby storm sewers.  These included:  (1) a French
drain around the 99th Street Elementary School that was connected
to a storm sewer line on 99th Street; (2) storm sewer laterals on
Read  and  Wheatfield  Avenues that  were connected to  storm sewer
lines on 97th  and  99th Streets;  and (3)  a catch basin at 949-953
97th  Street  located  near the boundary of the  former canal that
was connected  to a storm sewer  line on 97th Street, In addition,
it was  noted  that prior to remedial construction,  the overland
flow  of  surfaced  contaminants  may have  reached  the encircling
streets where  they would have been captured  by the existing curb
drains.

    From that  which  was discussed  previously in  Sections 4.2.1
and 4.2.2 it may be concluded that prior to remedial construction
at  Love  Canal,  a  potential existed  for  the  migration (through
permeable  soil pathways)  of  contaminants from the  former canal
into the storm sewer lines  on 97th and 99th Streets, and laterals
on Read and Wheatfield Avenues,   As a result of remedial measures
taken at the site, however, it  is  likely that only residual con-
tamination remains in the  affected storm sewer lines.   From  the
information presented in Section 4.2.3, it must also be concluded
that,   prior  to  1979, the  sumps  of  certain  ring  1  residences
served to collect, and subsequently discharge,  contaminants into
the storm  sewer lines with which they were  connected.   Based on
the monitoring evidence presented  in Section  4.2.3,  it  is likely
that  the  storm  sewer  line  on  97th Street,  south  of Wheatfield
Avenue,  received the  greatest   amount  of contamination  through
this mechanism.  Furthermore,  it is highly unlikely (based on  the
                                108

-------
                                                X09017
                                                x10033
Figure  36.   Storm Sewer  Sampling Site Codes
                        109

-------
evidence  presented  in Sections  4.2.1 through 4.2.3)  that storm
sewers sampled in the  Declaration Area would  display evidence of
direct Love  Canal-related contamination, except  for  those storm
sewers that directly connect to the storm sewer lines originating
on 97th and  99th  Streets.  Because all  storm sewers  in the gen-
eral Love Canal area that connect to Canal Area storm sewer lines
were displayed in Figure 12, no additional details on storm sewer
water-flow directions will be presented here.

    The evidence obtained from the storm sewer monitoring program
revealed a clear pattern of direct, Love Canal-related contamina-
tion in  all  storm sewer  lines  that connect  to  the  storm sewers
originating on 97th  and  99th Streets.   In  general,  the patterns
of contamination revealed by the data suggested the occurrence of
decreasing contaminants  concentrations  with  increasing distance
from the  Canal Area,  in  both  storm sewer water  and  storm sewer
sediment samples.  Furthermore, the data revealed no evidence of
Love  Canal-related  contamination  in  storm  sewers  sampled  that
were isolated from direct Canal Area flow.

    In Figures  37 through  41,  typical  examples  of  results  from
the  storm sewer  monitoring program  are presented.   Additional
storm sewer  figures  are  presented  in Volume III.   In Figure 37
the  results  obtained  for benzene  are presented  for  storm sewer
sediment  samples? in  Figures 38 and  39  the  results  obtained for
toluene  are  presented for  storm  sewer water  and   storm sewer
sediment  samples,  respectively;  and  in  Figures  40   and  41,  the
results for "Y-BHC (Lindane)  are presented.  As can be seen in the
figures,   clear evidence  of Love Canal-related  contamination is
evident in those  storm sewers  that connect to the 97th and 99th
Streets sewer  lines,  with high, levels of contamination displayed
in sediment samples.   In addition, it is clear from the data pre-
sented in Volume II,  and from the figures, that sediment contami-
nation concentration  levels were related to  accumulation points
in the storm sewers which consist of turning points and junctions
(for examples, sites 11033,  04508, 02501, 04506,  and  11031). Pre-
sumably,  the relatively  low levels of organic contaminants found
in storm  sewer water  samples was  due to the  continuing  flow of
water in  the operating storm sewers (which  would dilute the con-
centration levels) ,  the  low solubility  in  water of  some  of the
organic  compounds monitored,  and  the  preferential  sorption of
some of the organic compounds monitored on sediment particles.

    Because a considerable  amount of additional storm sewer moni-
toring data  are  similar  to that  which  was  just presented,  no
other storm  sewer data will be  offered.  The reader interested in
additional details of  this  monitoring  effort  may consult Volumes
II and III for more  information.   Before concluding, however, it
should be  noted  that  numerous  Love Canal-related compounds were
found in  both  storm sewer  water  and  sediment samples, including
chlorinated  benzenes   and toluenes,  and  a  number  of pesticides
such as the four targeted isomers of hexachlorocyelohexane (BHC).
                                110

-------
                                                         xB
Legend:

T-Trace
B—Below Detection
N—No Analysis
    Figure  37.
Storm  Sewer Sediment Sampling  Sites,
Benzene,  Maximum Concentrations
{micrograms per kilogram, ppb).
                              Ill

-------
Legend:

T-Trace
B—Below Dttection
N—No Analysis
    Figure  38,
Storm Sewer Water  Sampling Sites,
Toluene,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per liter, ppb).
                             112

-------
Legend:

T—Trace
B—Below Detection
N—No Analysis
  Figure  39.
Storm  Sewer Sediment Sampling Sites,
Toluene,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per kilogram, ppb).
                            113

-------
Legend:

T—Trace
B—Below Detection
N—No Analysis
     Figure 40.
Storm Sewer Water  Sampling Sites,
T-BHC,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per  liter, ppb).
                             114

-------
Legend:

T-Trace
B—Below Detection
N—No Analysis
    Figure 41,
Storm  Sewer Sediment Sampling  Sites,
T-BHC,  Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per kilogram, ppb).
                               115

-------
4.2.5  Surface Water and Stream Sediment Contamination

    Surface waters  in  the  general  Love  Canal area are identified
in  Figures  1  and  3,   and  were   discussed  briefly  in  Section
4.1.1.2.  To reiterate, Bergholtz Creek  forms the northern bound-
ary of the Declaration Area, and flows  from  east to west.  Black
Creek, which flows  from east to west, is  located north  of Colvin
Boulevard  in  the  Declaration Area, is  below grade in  a culvert
between 102nd  Street and  98th Street,  and joins Bergholtz Creek
near 96th Street.   The  upper Niagara River,  which also flows from
east  to  west, is  located  approximately  1/4 mile  south  of  the
Declaration Area;  a tributary  known as  the  Little  Niagara River
circles to the north  of  Cayuga Island.   Bergholtz  Creek joins
Cayuga Creek approximately  1/4 mile northwest  of the Declaration
Area  at  a point near  the  intersection  of Cayuga Drive  and 88th
Street.  Cayuga Creek,  which flows from north to south,  joins the
Little Niagara River near South 87th Street.   Because of the gen-
tle slopes  to the beds in  Black,  Bergholtz, and  Cayuga Creeks,
water-flow  is  known to occasionally  experience  gentle  reversals
due to certain weather-dependent conditions.

    Samples  of water  and sediment  were collected  from  19 sites
located in  the creeks  and  rivers mentioned  previously.   The lo-
cation of  each site selected  for  surface  water  and sediment sam-
pling  is  presented, where  possible,  in  Figure 42.   In  addition,
samples  of water  and  sediment were  collected  from  Fish Creek,
north of Niagara University, for control purposes. As can be seen
from  the  location of  surface  water  and  sediment  sampling sites
presented  in Figure 42, and from the location of storm sewer out-
falls  shown  in Figure 12,  sites  in Black Creek  and  the Niagara
River  were  intentionally  selected  in relatively close  proximity
to the outfalls.  Sites  in  Black  Creek, Bergholtz Creek, the Ni-
agara River, and the Little Niagara River were also sampled down-
stream from  Love  Canal-related storm  sewer  outfalls,  in order to
obtain  some  idea  of the  likely distance that  contaminants from
Love Canal may have been transported in those waterways.

    Sediment  samples were collected in  a  manner  analogous to the
procedure  used for  collecting  soil samples.   Namely,  a number of
subsamples  were  collected  at  a  site  and  homogenized  prior  to
analysis for targeted substances other  than volatile organic com-
pounds.   Separate sediment  samples were collected for the analy-
sis of  targeted volatile  organic  compounds.   A sampling pattern,
dependent  on the  space available,  similar   to that displayed in
Figure  27 was used for  the collection  of  sediment samples  in
creeks and  rivers.   Wherever possible,  an Ekinan dredge  was used
to collect  sediment samples; at times,  a stainless steel trowel
was used  to  collect sediment  samples  when the depth and hardness
of accumulated sediments prohibited use of the dredge.

    In  Figures 43  through  47, typical  examples of  the results
obtained  from the  surface  water  and stream sediment monitoring
                                116

-------
                                                               I
                                                                 97026x
                                                  X97543 x97537
                                                       x97536
Figure  42.   Surface  Water and Stream Sediment Sampling  Site Codes,
                                   117

-------
                                                                    xB
Legend:

T-Trace
B-Below Detection
N—No Analysis
                                                x7.4
                                                     x400

                                                      xB
          Figure  43.   Stream Sediment Sampling Sites,
                       Benzene,  Maximum Concentrations
                       (micrograms per kilogram,  ppb).
                                   118

-------
Legend:

T—Trace
B—Below DetBction
N—No Analysis
                                                               I
                                                                     xB
                                                      xT
                                                       x35
            Figure 44.   Surface Water Sampling Sites,
                          Toluene, Maximum Concentrations
                          (micrograms per liter, ppb).
                                    119

-------
                                                                -N-
Legend:

T-Trace
B—Below Detection
N—No Analysis
                                                                   xT
                                               x14
                                                    x37

                                                     x53
         Figure  45.   Stream Sediment Sampling Sites,
                      Toluene, Maximum Concentrations
                      (micrograms per kilogram,  ppb).
                                120

-------
Legend:

T-Trace
B—Below Detection
N-No Analysis
                                                              1
                                                                      xT
                                                  xB
                                                       xT
                                                        xB
          Figure  46.   Surface Water  Sampling  Sites,
                       Y-BBC,  Maximum Concentrations
                       (micrograms per liter,  ppb).
                                   121

-------
                                                                   xB
Legend:

T-Trace
B-Below Detection
N—No Analysis
                                               x34   x2500

                                                     x30
        Figure 47.   Stream  Sediment  Sampling  Sites,
                      Y-BHC,  Maximum Concentrations
                      (micrograms per  kilogram,  ppb).
                                 122

-------
program are presented.  Additional surface water and stream sedi-
ment  figures are  presented  in  Volume  III.    In Figure  43 the
results obtained for benzene  in  stream  sediment samples are pre-
sented;  in Figures  44  and 45 the  results for  toluene are pre-
sented  for  water  and  sediment  samples,  respectively;   and  in
Figures  46  and  47,  the results  for a-BHC are presented.  hs can
be seen  in these figures,  clear evidence  of Love Canal-related
contamination was  found in Black Creek at, and downstream  from,
the 96th Street storm sewer outfall in  the creek  (sites 04015 and
04016). Because a Canal Area-related storm  sewer  outfall in  Black
Creek  is  also  located  in  the underground  portion of  the creek
between 101st and 102nd Streets, the closest  point to the  outfall
that could  be  sampled  was  located  downstream  where  Black Creek
surfaces  near  98th  Street  (site 04014).   At  this site too, evi-
dence  of  Love  Canal-related  contamination  was  found.   Specific
details of the results  obtained may be  found  in Volume  II.

    The  evidence  obtained  near  the  102nd  Street  outfall  (site
97543) was  also  suggestive of the transport of contaminants from
Love Canal,  However, due to  the  proximity of  the  102nd Street
landfill,  it  was  not  possible  to  identify  the  contamination
present  at  the  site  as due totally  to the  direct  migration of
contaminants from  Love Canal.   In particular,  substantial con-
centration levels of identical contaminants  were found in  sedi-
ment samples collected  upstream  from the  outfall.  In passing, it
should be noted that contaminated sediment was also found  in both
Cayuga  Creek and the  Little Niagara  River.    Given  the  limited
evidence  identifying  the  existence  of  mechanisms  for  the direct
migration  of Love Canal-related  contaminants to these  waterways,
it cannot be concluded  unequivocally  that the source of contami-
nation is Love Canal.

    Before concluding this portion of the report,  it  may be use-
ful to review the major results obtained  thus far. To begin with,
a clear, consistent pattern of ground-water,  soil,  and sump con-
tamination was  found in certain ring  1 residences.  In addition,
both the  sanitary  and storm  sewer  lines  constructed immediately
adjacent  to  Love Canal  were found  to  be  contaminated and were
continuing to contribute to the distant transport of contaminants
from Love  Canal.   Finally,  the  evidence  obtained also suggested
that creeks  and  rivers  in  the immediate  vicinity  of  Love Canal-
related storm sewer  outfalls,  and  for some undetermined distance
downstream from  those  outfalls,  were contaminated  by  the direct
migration of contaminants from the former canal through the storm
sewer system,

4.2.6  Air Contamination

    The air monitoring program was designed to determine the spa-
tial and temporal variability in airborne contamination caused by
                                123

-------
pollutants migrating  from  the former canal.   To accomplish this
goal, the  selection  of  a  sufficient  number  of air  monitoring
sites and sampling periods had to  be balanced against time, bud-
getary,  and logistical constraints.  Consequently, a sampling de-
sign was selected for air  monitoring purposes that  involved par-
titioning the Declaration Area into homogeneous units (Figure 4).
The  sampling area  scheme adopted was intended to categorize the
residences of the  Declaration Area  according  to characteristics
that may have been related to the  migration of contaminants from
Love Canal,  including distance and direction from the Canal Area,
and proximity to local creeks (Figure 3).   In addition,  criteria
established for the selection of specific  residences within each
sampling  area  included  the  following:  (1)  adjacency to  known
former  swales;  (2)  adjacency to  historically  wet  or dry  areas
(that is, areas  where standing  water tended  to accumulate); and
(3) all sites had to be unoccupied throughout the duration of the
study period.

    A total of 61 sites in the Declaration and Canal Areas, and 4
control sites, were selected  for  regular air monitoring purposes
(Figure 48).  The air monitoring control  sites were: site 99020,
located on Stony Point Road,  Grand Island; site 99021, located on
West River Parkway, Grand  Island;  site 99022,  located  on Pierce
Road, Niagara  Falls;  and  site  99023,  located on  Packard  Road,
Niagara Falls. At each of the regular air monitoring sites, up to
13 daytime air  sampling  campaigns (consisting  of integrated 12-
hour sampling periods) were  conducted.   Three  special  air moni-
toring  research studies,  an air  pollutant  transport study,  a
sump/basement-air  study  and  an  occupied/unoccupied study were
also conducted at Love Canal, The data from these special studies
are  included  in  Volume II, but are  not considered  in  detail in
this report.

    Prior to the initiation  of  the  air  monitoring  program, each
sampling  site  was cleared of certain  household items,  such as
cleaning products, aerosol cans,  and all  other organic consumer
products, and was  forced-air ventilated for 4 hours.  Throughout
the  duration of the study, all entry points in each air monitor-
ing  residence  were secured  with  evidence tape, and  doors were
padlocked to prohibit unauthorized entrance and potential tamper-
ing with sampling equipment.

     It  should be  pointed out that the  sampling  design  used for
indoor air monitoring purposes was based,  in part, on the results
obtained from previous air monitoring studies conducted by vari-
ous  organizations  at  Love Canal.   These  previous  studies sug-
gested  that  (among  other things)  relatively  large  variations in
day-to-day indoor air pollutant  concentration levels were  likely
to be observed, and that such variations were  likely to be  caused
by  a number of  factors.  For example,  variability  in indoor air
pollutant concentration levels could be influenced by:  (1) rapid
                                124

-------





xO
X020B:
vf
1003

x1
1004


I bllOOl

_




06
11005x |
xl
bO
)06
xO(
                                                        x04514
                                                     x06005
                                b0200t
    "-X02056
     \

X03520 \-_
                                          CANAL

                                          AREA
                      X03503
              ^
                                X03502
                                X03519
                                                         X07004
                                                           xO,7002

                                                        !xQ7003
                                                           X07005
                                                     X06003


                                                      06004
                                                              b07501
                                                 11003  *
                                                          b07001
                                                   0800409004
                                               xl 1002
                                                       x08002
                                                               x 10005
                                                               K10003
                                         X11006
                                                           x09005
                                                 08006x X08003
                                                   08001b
LEGEND:


b - BASE RESIDENCE
                                                            b09001

                                                            X09003   x10006
                                                              x 10004
Figure  48.    Air  Sampling Site  Codes
                            125

-------
fluctuations in  ambient  concentrations?  (2) the  use  or presence
of  certain  consumer products  in a residence  (particularly when
occupied residences are sampled)? and (3) differences in the sam-
pling and analytical methodologies  used  for monitoring purposes.
The air  monitoring program employed  at  Love Canal  was designed
specifically to  minimize  the  confounding effects of  these types
of problems.

    Three different sampling  devices  were  used  to  collect  air
samples  in  the  Love  Canal  area.   For suspended  particulates,
high-volume (HIVOL)  samplers  employing glass fiber  filters were
used.   The  relative volatility  of  organic  vapor  phase compounds
required the use of two  solid sorbents  for monitoring purposes.
The more volatile compounds were collected on TENAX; polyurethane
foam  (PFQAM)  was used to  collect semivolatile compounds  in  air
and to monitor  for 2, 3, 1, 8-TCDD.  (See Section 4.3.5).  Appendix
A of this Volume lists those compounds and elements for which air
analyses were performed.

    High-volume  samplers  were operated  for 24 hours at  a flow
rate of  50  cubic feet per minute.  TENAX  samplers  were operated
for 12-hour sampling periods at  a  flow  rate of  30  cubic  centi-
meters per minute, and polyurethane foam samplers were also oper-
ated for 12 hours,  but at  a  flow rate of 1,250 cubic centimeters
per minute.  On  each of  the  13 regular daytime sampling periods,
all samplers  were  started at  6  a.m.    TENAX and  PFOAM sampling
periods ended at 6 p.m.;  the high-volume samplers continued until
6  a.m.  the  following  day.   A total  of three  nighttime  12-hour
sampling periods,  immediately  preceding  regularly scheduled day-
time  campaigns,  were  also  conducted  at some  sites.   Nighttime
sampling began at 6 p.m.  and lasted until 6 a.m.; the regular 12-
hour  daytime  samples  were collected  immediately  following  the
night samples.   As  a result of this sampling schedule there were
three occasions  in  the study  for which night/day comparisons  and
estimates  of   24-hour  concentrations  could  be  obtained.   The
findings of the  night/day air  pollution  comparisons  study  re-
vealed that no significant differences were observed.

    In  nine  residences,  referred to  as  base  residemces ,  multi-
media environmental monitoring was performed.  In each base resi-
dence three different  air monitoring  locations were  sampled  si-
multaneously.   The  purpose of  this  design  was  to permit an over-
all estimate of  indoor pollutant  levels and to identify potential
pollutant entrance  sources.  One sampling location, the basement,
was intended to  permit estimation of  the concentration levels of
organic  compounds  potentially  evaporating  from  the  sump  and
through foundations walls.  Duplicate samples were collected at a
second  sampling  location,  the first  floor living  area,  was  in-
tended to permit estimation of pollutant levels occurring  in the
most  commonly occupied  area  of  the  residence,  and  for  quality
assurance purposes.  And finally, a sampling location  immediately
outside the  residence, just above  ground  level,  was selected to
                                126

-------
permit  estimation  of  ambient  concentration levels  of monitored
substances.  All three sampling locations at base residences con-
tained  both  TENAX  and PFOAM  samplers.    The  outside  site also
contained  a  HIVOL  sampler.    The  remaining  residences  in each
sampling area, and the four control area homes, were sampled only
in the  living area.

    In  Table  10,  the  statistically  significant  results obtained
from the  air monitoring  program  are presented.   More extensive
tabulations  of air  monitoring data,  describing the  extent and
degree of air contamination found in the general Love Canal area,
are presented in Volume III of this report.

    As  can be seen  from  the  results presented  in  Table  10, the
extent  of  indoor air  contamination in the  Declaration Area was
significantly  (a =0.10,  one-tailed)  greater than at control sites
for o-chlorotoluene  (in living area samples),  and o-dichloroben-
zene (also in living area samples).  It can also be seen in Table
10 that the only other statistically significant difference found
was for chlorobenzene  in living  area  air samples,  comparing the
Canal Area to the Declaration Area.

    The  reader is  cautioned  to  interpret  these few significant
results carefully,  and to consider  the following points.   First,
apart from three  compounds,  detection percentages were low over-
all.  For the  three compounds  detected most frequently, benzene,
toluene,  and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene,  a  known contamination
problem  (described  in  Appendix E)  associated with  the sampling
collection medium  TENAX was observed  (detection percentages for
these compounds on  TENAX  were,  respectively,  95,  86,  and  77 per-
cent) .   Second,  relatively  high detection percentages should not
be equated with  the occurrence of  relatively high concentration
levels.   Third,  the detection  percentages were not found to dis-
play any consistent patterns of spatial variability (for example,
increased detection was  not  related to  decreased  distance from
Love Canal).   (See  Volume III for  appropriate  tables).   Fourth,
due to  the  large  number of  sequential  statistical  comparisons
that were performed, care must be exercised (because of increased
Type I  errors) in the  interpretation of the few results observed
that satisfied a nominal  level of significance. Finally, the lack
of internal  consistency  (Table 10)  exhibited by the  few signi-
ficant  results obtained suggests  that these outcomes  may be due
to chance.

    In  order to  characterize the  degree  of air  contamination
found in  the  Declaration and Canal  Areas, the  monitoring data
were  subjected  to  a number of  different  statistical  analyses.
First,  at each  site the maximum  observed concentrations  (across
all sampling  campaigns)  of  the organic  compounds  monitored were
determined according to  source  (that  is, TENAX  or  PFOAM)  and
location.    Second, the  concentration   levels  of  the  organic
                                127

-------
 TABLE 10.   SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES OBSERVED IN THE  EXTENT OF AIR
                         CONTAMINATION AT  LOVE CANAL
                               Sampling Location Comparison^
                     Outdoors
                Basement
                     Living Area
   Compo und
   Canal-
Declaration
   Canal-
Declaration
   Canal-   Declaration-
Declaration   Control
o-Chlorotoluene
o-Dichlorobenzene
Chlorobenzene
No
No
No
Ho
No
NO
No (a =0.104)
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
                                           Percent Detect
                                         (Number of Samples)
Living Area
Compo und
o-Chlorotoluene
o-Dichlorobenzene
Ch 1 o robe n ze ne
Declaration
27. 5
(461)
43. 4
(459)
1. 3
(460)
Control
6.7*
(30)
10.0*
(30)
0.0*
(31)
Canal
37.0
(54)
24. 1
(54)
7.4
(54)
^Comparisons  are  based on a one-tailed difference of proportions test
 (o=0.10),  using  Fisher's exact test,  for the areas indicated, and in
 the order  presented.

*The  reported percent does not differ  significantly  from  zero at the
 o=0.05  level.
                                    128

-------
compounds monitored at each site were reviewed (according to sam-
pling campaign) for temporal trends. Third, the median concentra-
tions of  the  organic compounds monitored  at  each site were com-
puted according to source  and  location.   And  finally,  the median
concentrations of  the organic  compounds monitored at each site
were computed  according  to sampling campaign.  Because quantifi-
able results for organic compounds monitored on PFOAM were so in-
frequent,  they are  not  presented  in  this  report.   The  reader
interested  in the  results obtained from  both  PFOAM  and  HIVOL
monitoring should consult Volume III for details.

    The  remainder  of this  section discusses  the  air monitoring
results  for  the  three most  frequently detected  compounds?  ben-
zene,  toluene, and  1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene.    It  should  be
noted once  again  that these  three compounds  are  known contami-
nants  of the  collection  medium  TENAX,  and  therefore must  be
interpreted in the context of  the  discussion  presented in Appen-
dix E (especially in Table E-4).  No other organic compounds were
detected frequently enough to permit additional discussion.

    To  illustrate  the results  obtained,  the  maximum concentra-
tions of benzene obtained  from air  monitoring conducted  at each
site, across all regular air  monitoring campaigns, are presented
(respectively) for outside,  living area, and  basement air  moni-
toring locations in Figures 49 through 51.  Additional figures of
maximum air pollutant concentrations (for selected compounds) are
presented in Volume  III.   In  Table 11,  the three highest concen-
trations of certain  organic  compounds found  in air  are reported
according to sampling location,  and by Declaration,  Control, and
Canal Areas,

    A review of the  results presented in Figures  49  through 51,
the values  reported  in  Table  11,  and the  additional  tables and
figures presented in Volume III, revealed that no consistent pat-
terns were  found in  the  maximum values of air contaminants  which
could be directly attributed to  the migration of  those compounds
from Love Canal.   In light of the  findings presented in Section
4.1 and  other  portions  of Section 4.2, and the  remedial actions
performed at   the  site,  these  results  are consistent  with the
implications  of  the  hydrogeologic  program and  the   other  data
obtained from the monitoring program.

    Even though maximum concentration levels are often of consid-
erable interest to  individuals,  because in some  way  they may be
thought to represent "worst case" estimates of environmental con-
tamination,  problems  of  statistical interpretation exist.   Such
problems exist because both the occurrence and the reliability of
the obtained maximum values may be  plagued by measurement  prob-
lems. To illustrate this point, it is often the case that maximum
                                129

-------
                                                         x13.1   -It-
Legend:

T—Trace
B-Below Detection
N—No Analysis
                                                             x6.9
                                                           x4.9
         Figure  49.  Outside Air Sampling Sites,
                      Benzene, Maximum Concentrations
                       (micrograms per cubic meter).
                                130

-------
Legend:

T-Trace
B-Below Detection
N—No Analysis
                                                            x5.7
                                                            xB.4
                                                            xfi.0
                                                                x4.7
                                                            x7.5
      Figure  50.  Living Area Air Sampling  Sites,
                   Benzene, Maximum  Concentrations
                    (micrograms per cubic meter).
                                131

-------
Legend:

T—Trace
8-Below Detection
N—No Analysis
                                                           x6.5
                                                         x7.4
      Figure 51.
Basement Air Sampling Sites,
Benzene, Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per cubic meter).
                             132

-------
                        TABLE  11.   THREE  HIGHEST CONCENTRATIONS OF  SELECTED COMPOUNDS
                                             OBSERVED IN  REGULAR AIR  MONITORING
                                                 (MICROGRAMS PER CUBIC METER)t
OJ
Living Area

Substance
Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride
CMorobenzene
o-Chlorotol uene
p-Chlorotoluene
o-Dichlorobenzene
p-Dichlorobenzene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethy lene
Toluene
Declaration
Area
40,21,20
77,45,16
3,3,T
8,6,6
5,5,4
68,64,64
25,23,21
104,64,60
92,90,68

Control
39,27,21
4,T,B
B,B,B
6,T,B
T,T,B
T,T,T
4,1, T
142,108,68
68,52,47
Canal
Area
27,15,13
4,4,T
3,T,T
4,2,2.
3,2,2
6,5,T
T,T,T
89,44,32
57,32,27
Basement
Declaration
Area
15,14,14
11,5,3
3,B,B
5,4,4
5,4,4
9,9,6
17,5,4
158,40,37
57,48,42
Canal
Area
12,8,6
B.B.B
B,B,B
2.T.T
2,T,B
T,T,B
B.B.B
30,27,9
32,19,18
Outdoors
Declaration
Area
23, 15,13
4,3,3
3,T,B
4,4,4
4,4,3
T.T.T
T.B.B
20,20,19
19,18,14
Canal
Area
10,9,6
4.B.B
B,B,B
T.T.B
B,B,B
T.B.B
B.B.B
44,36,11
27,23,12
       B:  Below detection
       T:  Trace concentration
       tThe reader is cautioned to interpret carefully the  extreme values reported in this table, and to not
        ascribe statistical significance to these results.

-------
concentrations are reported by only one analytical laboratory and
on one particular date,  whereas other analytical laboratories may
not report concentration levels anywhere near such maxima (and in
some cases do not even report concentration levels above the lim-
it of detection).

    With this caveat  aside,  the  reader may still  choose  to cau-
tiously compare  the  values reported in Table  11  to  the existing
air pollution standards  and recommended work-place  limits  iden-
tified in  Appendix  B of this Volume.   Such  a  comparison reveals
that the maximum concentrations observed at Love Canal were often
orders of magnitude  less  than the corresponding workplace stand-
ards and  recommended exposure limits.  However,  it must be ac-
knowleged that the applicability of comparing workplace standards
and limits (even after conservative adjustments are attempted) to
residential exposure levels is unknown.

    The air  monitoring  data  obtained  from Love  Canal  were also
reviewed  from  a temporal  (that  is, sampling  campaign) perspec-
tive.  Typical examples of the results obtained from this effort,
once again for  benzene,  are presented in Figures  52  and 53.  In
these two figures, the individual air monitoring results obtained
from living area air samples collected in all Canal Area and con-
trol sites sampled are presented in conjunction with the sampling
campaign date.

    As can be seen  from the results displayed  in  Figures  52 and
53, some variability in  concentration  levels was observed across
time. However, most of the variability observed in the sample re-
sults could be accounted for by measurement errors.  On the basis
of other statistical analyses  conducted with these data,  no sig-
nificant functional  relationships were observed  between the ob-
tained  concentration levels  and  such  factors as distance from
Love  Canal,  wet/dry residences,  proximity to  a former  swale,
diurnal/nocturnal sampling, and  sampling campaign.  In addition,
the infrequent  occurrence  and isolation of  the (relatively) ex-
treme values present in  the data displayed in  Figures  52  and 53
should be noted.

    The air  monitoring  data  obtained  from Love  Canal  were also
considered in terms  of  the median concentration values that were
observed.  At each  site regularly monitored,  the median concen-
tration value  of all measurements for each  substance monitored
was determined.   Three  typical examples of  the results obtained
from  this  effort are  presented  in Figures 54 through 56.   In
these figures, the living area median concentrations for benzene,
toluene,  and  1, 1, 2,2-tetrachloroethylene (respectively)  are
displayed  for each air  site  regularly  monitored.   As can be seen
from the  results displayed in Figures  54  through 56,  no pattern
of air  contamination that  was directly related  to the migration
of  these  compounds  from  Love Canal  was  found  (highest  median
concentrations are indicated  in the figures).
                                134

-------
to
Ul
             40 -
             30 -
           O
        m  <
        -
           CJ
           z
           O
           o
             20
             10
                 SEP.
                  8
SEP.
16
SEP.
 21
SEP.
26
SEP.
30
OCT.
 5
OCT.
 9
1 ' I' '
OCT.
 15
OCT.
 20
OCT.
 25
OCT.
 30
                                                  SAMPLE DATE
                 LEGEND:
  H	h 11001
                                       D D  D 11004
                                            11002
                                            11005
                                                        *• 11003
                                                        A 11006
            Figure  52.
 Concentration of Benzene  in Living  Area Air  Samples  Collected in
 Canal Area Residences (micrograms per cubic  meter).

-------
            40-
            30-
           z
           o
        "J
         Ol
            20-
U)
ON
           o
           z
           o
           o
            10-
             0-3
               SEP.
               21
         SEP.
          26
SEP.
 30
OCT.       OCT.
 5         9
    SAMPLE DATE
OCT.
 15
OCT.
 20
OCT.
 25
OCT.
 30
                LEGEND:
+—*—*  99020
X  X X  99022
                                      B—B 99021
                                      ©—0- 99023
           Figure 53.
         Concentration  of Benzene  in Living Area Air Samples  Collected in
         Control Area Residences  (micrograms per cubic meter).

-------
                                                               (SITE 05001}
Figure 54.
Median Concentration of Benzene  in Living Area Air
Monitoring Sites Located  in  the  Declaration and Canal
Areas (micrograms per cubic  meter).

-------
OJ
03
                                                                   (SITE 09004)
          Figure 55.
Median Concentration of Toluene  in Living Area Air Monitoring  Sites
Located in the Declaration  and Canal Areas (micrograms per cubic meter)

-------
                    5.3 /zg/m3
                   (SITE 02053)
                                                               5.2 M9/m3
                                                              (SITE 04515)
oo
VD
                   6.
                 (SITE 08006)
                             5.
                            (SITE 09003)
                                                                              5.1 /ug/m°
                                                                             (SITE 10005)
        Figure 56.
Median  Concentration of 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethylene in  Living Area Air
Monitoring Sites  Located  in  the Declaration and Canal Areas (micrograms
per  cubic meter),

-------
    Finally, the air monitoring data were considered  in terras of
the median  concentration  values that were  observed  in each sam-
pling campaign,  At each site regularly monitored, the median con-
centration  value  of  all  measurements for  a compound,  for each
compound monitored,  was  determined  according  to sampling cam-
paign.  Three typical  examples  of  the results obtained from this
effort, incorporating the  same compounds just discussed (benzene,
toluene, and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene), are presented (respec-
tively) in  Figures  57  through 59.   From a  review of  the results
presented  in  Figures 57  through  59,  it can  be  seen  that  except
for  living  area  air  samples collected  in  the  Control  Area on
October  20, 1980,  the data  displayed  considerable  across-time
consistency. In  passing,  the reader  is  reminded  that  only four
living  area control  sites  were monitored  for  air  contaminants
during  each sampling  campaign,  and  greater  variability  in the
computed median concentration values is to be expected.  Further-
more,  the  relatively  minor  variability  observed in  the   median
concentrations  across time  was found  to be  non-systematic and
attributable mainly to random fluctuations  in ambient concentra-
tions of these compounds  throughout the general  area.

    The results  from  other   detailed  statistical analyses  (not
reported here)  conducted  on  the  Love Canal  air monitoring data
revealed the  following.   First, some  intraresidence variability
in  living  area  air  concentration  levels was observed to be  asso-
ciated  with changes  in temperature.   Second,  the data suggested
that  in the Declaration  Area some compounds  were detected more
frequently  in living  area samples  than  in samples collected out-
doors.   These  compounds  included:   o-chlorotoluene  (26 percent
vs.  15  percent);  o-dichlorobenzene (42  percent  vs.  10 percent);
p-dichlorobenzene  (15  percent vs.  1 percent); and 1,1,2,2-tetra-
chloroethylene  (93  percent  vs. 82  percent).  In addition, the
median  living area  concentration  of 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene
was  higher  than the  outdoor  median concentration  (4   ^g/mj vs.
trace).  Third,   in  the Declaration  Area  only  one  compound, o-
chlorotoluene, was  detected  more  frequently  in  living area  sam-
ples  than  in  basement  samples   (26  percent  vs.  16 percent).
Fourth, there  was no  indication  that  residences constructed in
historically  "wet"  areas exhibited  either  different  percentages
of  concentrations  above   the  detection  level  or  different  median
concentration levels  than non-wet residences. And finally,  there
were  no indications  that  residences  existing in, or adjacent to,
former  swales exhibited  either more  frequent detections of  com-
pounds  monitored,  or  different median  concentration  levels of
compounds  monitored,  than non-swale residences.

    The three  special air monitoring  research  studies conducted
at  Love Canal provided  limited evidence of  the following  addi-
tional  results.  First, airborne contaminants detected  during the
regular indoor  air monitoring  program  were also detected  (ordi-
narily  at  somewhat  lower concentration  levels)  in  the  ambient
air,  and  were  transported  from  upwind.    Second,   highly
                                 140

-------
  30—
  20-
5
  10-
   o-i
                                                                                    ry.
                                                                    OCT.
                                                                     25
    AUG.
     22
                  AUG.
                  30
SEP.
 8
'! » j I I I
SEP.
 16
"I"'
SEP.
 21
SEP.
26
SEP.
 30
''"'	'I'""
 OCT.
  6
OCT.
 9
r? T f i ri
 OCT.
 15
OCT.
 20
OCT.
 30
                                             SAMPLE DATE
     LEGEND:
     X
-+—+- BASEMENT-DECLARATION AREA
 X X LIVING-DECLARATION AREA
                                      O
                          O  B LIVING-CONTROL AREA
                          e— e- OUTDOORS-DECLARATION AREA
     MEDIAN-O IMPLIES THAT MEDIAN CONCENTRATION IS BELOW DETECTION
Figure  57,.
Median Concentration of  Benzene  Observed in Air  for  Each  Sampling
Campaign (micrograms per cubic meter).

-------
to
            60~
            50
            40-
            30-
            20-
            10-
             0-
                     AUG.
                      22
           AUG.
            30
'"I"'
 SEP.
  8
SEP.
16
'••I'"
 SEP.
 21
SEP.
26
SEP.
 30
OCT.
 5
OCT
OCT.
 15
OCT.
 20
OCT.
25
OCT.
 30
                                                        SAMPLE DATE
               LEGEND:
-+—•** BASEMENT-DECLARATION AREA
 X X LIVING-DECLARATION AREA
                                                 B	B	O LIVING-CONTROL AREA
                                                 •6—©—©• OUTDOORS-DECLARATION AREA
               MEDIAN=0 IMPLIES THAT MEDIAN CONCENTRATION IS BELOW DETECTION
            Figure  58.
         Median  Concentration  of Toluene  Observed in  Air for Each Sampling
         Campaign (micrograms  per cubic meter).

-------
to
                 100-
                  7S-
              -§0 50
              2-
                  25
                      I ' ' ' ' ! ' '  ' ' t ' ' ' '"'I '
                          AUG.  AUG.  SEP.
                          22
         30
                                                               T
SEP.   SEP,   SEP.  SEP.   OCT.  OCT.   OCT.  OCT.  OCT.  OCT.
16    21    26    30    5     9    15    20   25    30
                                                    SAMPLE DATE
                     LEGEND:
                     •+—*—4- BASEMENT-DECLARATION AREA
                     XXX LIVING-DECLARATION AREA
                                ODD  LIVING-CONTROL AREA
                                •O—«—$•  OUTDOORS-DECLARATION AREA
                     MEDIAN=0 IMPLIES THAT MEDIAN CONCENTRATION IS BELOW DETECTION
          Figure  59.
Median Concentration  of 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethylene  Observed in Air
for  Each Sampling Campaign  (mierograms per cubic meter),

-------
contaminated sumps  (which were  found  in  only a limited number of
ring 1 residences) could serve  as  potential  contributing sources
of  high  levels of  indoor  air  pollution.  And third, activities
associated with domiciliary occupancy suggested that such activi-
ties could potentially increase air pollution levels.

4.3  EVIDENCE OF OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION

    As part of the Love Canal multimedia environmental monitoring
program,  a  number  of additional studies  were conducted  for  the
purpose of  obtaining  information about the likely extent and de-
gree to which  residents were  directly exposed  to  environmental
contamination  that  had migrated from  Love Canal.  The studies of
potential human exposure conducted  included:   (1)  drinking water
monitoring;  (2)  monitoring  for the uptake of Love Canal-related
contaminants in  household  foodstuff;   (3)  environmental  radioac-
tivity monitoring;  and  (4)  monitoring for the presence of dioxin
(2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin)   in  environmental  samples.
Finally,  a limited biological monitoring program was conducted at
Love Canal  for the purpose  of investigating  the  potential bio-
logical availability  and biological  accumulation  of Love Canal-
related  contaminants  in  selected   locally  available  biological
species.  In  Table  12, a  summary is presented of the magnitude of
these additional monitoring efforts conducted at Love Canal.

4.3.1  Drinking Water Contamination

    As part of  the  multimedia environmental  monitoring program
conducted  at Love  Canal,  an investigation of potential human ex-
posure to  toxic  substances  in  drinking water was performed.  The
monitoring  that  was  performed entailed  collecting  samples of
drinking water  at  a total  of 44 sites,  involving 42 residences,
and  analyzing  those  samples  for   the substances  identified in
Appendix  A of  this Volume.   Included in the 44  sites  were two
separate sites  located in the Drinking Water  Treatment Plant  of
the  City  of Niagara Falls.  The  two  sites  located  in the plant
(sites 97013  and 97014)  were sampled  for the purpose of monitor-
ing  raw  (untreated) and  finished   drinking  water,   respectively.
In  Figure  60,  the  location of drinking water  sites sampled  in the
general vicinity of Love Canal  are  presented.  In addition  to the
sites  identified in Figure  60, five  control sites were sampled:
site  99010,  located on  82nd Street,   Niagara Falls; site  99020,
located on Stony Point Road, Grand  Island; site  99021, located on
West River  Parkway,  Grand  Island;   site  99022,  located on  Pierce
Road,  Niagara  Falls;  and  site  99023, located  on  Packard Road,
Niagara Falls.
                                144

-------

    X97524
                                                       x05001
                  X97512
X02002




 x02004
                    x01003 x03501





                  x97514


\
•>nm
j&uu


\l

xl





**s
1
1004

CANAL
AREA

x11


!••«•


x1
002

0£
AW^iJ 1
r-^--1
x06(
x060
x060
x060
1008

»J
I 	 — I
X)5
x070
31
xC
x07C
)7
33
x070
x090l
x 08 003
001 x
xO
xO!
                                                           X10004
Figure  60.   Drinking  Water Sampling Site Codes,
                            145

-------
        TABLE  12.   FREQUENCY OF DETECTION OF CONTAMINANTS
                  IN ADDITIONAL VALIDATED LOVE CANAL  SAMPLES
                 Declaration Area
Control
Canal  Area
                  Deter-            Deter-             Deter-
                 minations^ Percent  minations Percent  minations Percent
Medium/Source
Drinking Water

Foodstuff
Oatmeal

Potatoes

Biota
Crayfish

Dogs

Maple Leaves

Mice

Worms

( Samples )
4,403
(173)

507
(13)
468
(12)

3,169
(31)
308
(23)
150
(15)
3,604
(48)
1,573
(19)
Detect
8.3


11.2

3.4


0.9

62.7

66.0

4.1

2.3

(Samples )
674
(26)

156
(4)
117
(3)

880
(9)
244
(18)
140
(14)
3,601
(45)
616
(5)
Detect
12.9


12.2

3.4


2.2

64.8

64.3

3.6

1.3

(Samples)
710
(25)

117
(3)
78
(2)

0
(0)
0
(0)
80
(8)
553
(7)
528
(6)
Detect
7.6


10.3

4.0


—

—

68.8

4.2

0.9

%otal  number of specifically targeted chemicals analyzed for  in all
 combined validated  samples

Note:   Inorganic substances represent approximately the following percent
       of the determinations in the medium/source identified:  drinking
       water, 9; dogs, 100; maple  leaves, 100;  and, mice, 4.
    Drinking  water samples  were collected  throughout the  course
of the study  period,  but were obtained  only once from each resi-
dential tap  sampled.   The Niagara  Falls Drinking Water  Treatment
Plant was  sampled  twice, in mid-September  and mid-October,  1980.
Samples of drinking  water  were obtained  by  appropriate  proce-
dures, and consisted  of  composites of tapwater that were collect-
ed over a  period of  4 consecutive days at  each site sampled?  an
additional sample  of tapwater was  collected on  the  first  day  of
sampling for  the analysis  of targeted  volatile compounds.   Cri-
teria used for the selection  of residential  drinking water  sam-
pling sites included:   (1)  sampling at base residences as part  of
the multimedia monitoring  program?  (2) sampling  residences  in the
Declaration and  Canal Areas  served by each distribution  main? and
(3)  randomly (with  equal  probability)  selecting  residences for
sampling.  In addition,  a  number of residential  taps  were sampled
at the request of  local  residents.
                                 146

-------
    The findings of the drinking water  monitoring  program may be
stated concisely.  First, no evidence was found  (at the limits of
detection employed in this study) that the drinking water samples
analyzed were  directly contaminated by  the  infiltration  of con-
taminants from Love Canal into  the  water distribution mains sam-
pled.  Second, organic compounds primarily detected in the drink-
ing  water  were  trihalomethanes,  which  are  typically  formed  in
drinking water  as a result of  the  bacteria-killing chlorination
treatment  process.   The   concentration   levels   of  the  trihalo-
methanes found  in the drinking water were  less than, or compar-
able to, the levels commonly reported elsewhere.  (See appendix B
of  this  Volume).  Third, the  concentration  levels of substances
detected in drinking water samples satisfied the existing EPA Na-
tional Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations, and the Recom-
mended National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations.  (See Table
B-ll  in  Appendix B  of  this Volume).   In  comparing the obtained
drinking water  concentration  levels of  the  results presented in
Appendix B,  note that  1  part  per billion (ppb)  equals 0.001 part
per million  (ppm).   Finally,  the  observed  variability in concen-
tration  levels  of substances detected  in  drinking water samples
could not  be distinguished  from either  measurement error varia-
tion  or  from the day-to-day  variation  in  finished water quality
normally observed at treatment plants.

     In  Figure  61, one typical  example   of the   findings obtained
from  the  drinking water  monitoring program  is presented.   The
compound presented  in Figure  61 is  the trihalomethane,  chloro-
form.  As can be seen, no pattern of drinking water contamination
was  found  in the Declaration Area.  Additional figures  are in-
cluded in Volume III.

4.3.2  Food Contamination

    One of the supplementary, limited monitoring studies conduct-
ed  at Love Canal involved  the purposeful introduction  of food-
stuff into a select number of air monitoring residences.  The ob-
jective of this  investigation was to determine whether or not the
foods  introduced accumulated  airborne contaminants  that  were
present  in  the  residence by virtue  of  direct  migration from the
former canal.  It was suspected that if accumulation was found to
occur,  then residents  might  also   be  subjected  to  incremental
chemical insult  (assuming sufficient accumulation  occurred) from
the  ingestion of such foods.

    The  items  selected for  introduction to  a  limited  number  of
residences were  oatmeal  and (not locally grown) potatoes.  These
foods were  chosen due to their common usage and  because they were
thought to  be  relatively  efficient  accumulators of airborne con-
taminants.    Quantities of  these  foods  were acquired  and intro-
duced to the basements of certain air monitoring residences for a
period of  approximately  30  days, and analyzed  subsequently  for
                                147

-------
                                                        x18
Legend:

T-Trace
B—Below Detection
N—No Analysis
    Figure 61.
Drinking Water Sampling Sites,
Chloroform, Maximum Concentrations
(micrograms per liter, ppb).
                            148

-------
the volatile compounds listed in Table  A-l  of Appendix  A to this
Volume.  Those sites in the general Love Canal area in which sam-
ples of  oatmeal  and potatoes were stored  are  identified (where
possible) in Figure 62.

    In addition to the sites identified in Figure 62,  the follow-
ing control  sites were  sampled (site  locations  were previously
identified):  sites 99020,  99022,  and  99023 for both  oatmeal and
potatoes r and site  99021  for oatmeal only.   A  total  of 18 sites
were used for oatmeal  monitoring  and 16 sites  were used  for po-
tato monitoring.   Those  residences  in which samples of oatmeal
and potatoes were introduced included  base  residences  and other
randomly selected air monitoring sites.

    The  results obtained  from the  analysis  of oatmeal and potato
samples  suggested that  these  foods  may  potentially accumulate
airborne contaminants.  It should be noted, however, that the few
compounds which   were  detected  in  food  samples  analyzed after
storage  were present  typically at very low trace concentrations
(although they were not detected  in  one sample analyzed prior to
storage).   The  degree to which these  findings represent false-
positive determinations  is not  known.  Details  on the  compounds
found  in foodstuff  field  samples  may be found  in  Volumes II and
III.

    The  following points  should be considered when attempting to
interpret the meaning of  the  results  obtained  from  the oatmeal
and potatoes monitoring program.   First, only  a  few  of the com-
pounds monitored  were  uniquely  detected after  storage.   Second,
those  compounds  uniquely  detected after storage  were  typically
observed at very low trace concentrations.  Third, because no air
contamination was found that could be directly attributed to con-
taminants migrating from the former canal, no significance can be
attached to  the  results  of  the oatmeal and  potatoes monitoring
program  findings.   And finally,  because no  samples  were stored
for an identical  length of time in a  controlled, contaminant-free
environment and then subsequently analyzed, no attribution of the
source of observed compounds found in stored  field samples can be
unequivocally made.

4.3.3  Radioactive Contamination

    The multimedia environmental monitoring program also included
an extensive investigation of the potential presence  of radioac-
tive contamination  in  the general  Love Canal area.   In order to
characterize the  extent  and  degree  of  radionuclides present in
the environment,  many of  the same  sites sampled for water, soil,
and sediment were sampled simultaneously for the determination of
radioactive  contaminants. The  following numbers  of  sites  were
sampled to determine the radionuclides presents 106 soil sampling
sites; 36 sump water sampling sites? the one sanitary sewer sam-
pling site;  20 storm sewer water and 11 storm sewer sediment sam-
pling  sites; 2  surface  water  and  2  stream  sediment  sampling


                                149

-------
                                                        X07002
                                                           X07501
                                                       X07001
                                                   08001  x09001
                                                     X !   !
Figure 62.   Oatmeal  and Potatoes Sampling Site Codes
                               150

-------
sites? and  10  drinking water sampling  sites.   Due to  the large
percentage of sites sampled in each of the medium/source/location
categories identified, and because all  sampling  sites  were iden-
tified in  previous figures, no  additional  site-specific figures
showing the  locations sampled  for radioactive  contaminants  are
presented.

    All samples  collected  for  the determination  of  radioactive
contamination were analyzed for gamma-emitting  radionuclides by
high  resolution  gamma spectroscopy.   The particular  system  em-
ployed allowed  for the detection of  all  gamma-emitting radionu-
clides present  in a  sample  in  quantities  significantly above
background  levels.   In  Table  13  the  minimum  detection  levels
(based on a  350-gram  sample counted  for 30  minutes and the aver-
age  efficiency  of the detectors  used)  are reported  for those
gamma-emitting radionuclides detected in Love Canal samples.

    Drinking water samples were  also analyzed  for  tritium  (the
radioactive  form  of hydrogen),  in  addition to  the  analysis  for
gamma-emitting  radionuclides.    The  standard method  for tritium
analysis,  liquid  scintillation  counting  of beta  emissions,  was
employed.   The minimum  detection  level  of tritium  in drinking
water, corresponding  to this method,  was  approximately 300 pico-
curies per  liter   (300 pCi/liter).  The EPA drinking  water stan-
dard  for tritium is 20,000 pCi/liter.

        TABLE 13. MINIMUM DETECTION LEVELS FOR PARTICULAR
                       GAMMA-EMITTING RADIONUCLIDES

Radionuclide        Water Samples         Soil/Sediment Samples

 Potassium^    2.2 grams per liter       0.0019 grams per gram

 Radium-226    50 picocuries per liter   0.04 picocuries per  gram

 Radium-228    200 picocuries per liter  0.2 picocuries per gram

 "Approximately  0.0118 percent of all  natural  potassium consists
 of the radioactive isotope potassium-40.

Notes  No  americium-241  was  detected  in  any  samples  analyzed.
       Because of  the  concerns  expressed  by some residents about
       its potential presence, its minimum detection level is re-
       ported here:   in  water,  280 picocuries per  liter;  and in
       soil/sediment,  0.025 picocuries per gram.

    In general, the results obtained from monitoring for environ-
mental radioactive contamination  in the  Declaration  and Canal
Areas revealed  no evidence of  radioactive  contamination present
at,  or  having  migrated  from,  Love  Canal.    Those radionuclides
found in  soil  consisted of the  naturally occurring potassium-40
and the  (so-called)  daughter products of the  radium-226 and the
                                151

-------
thorium-232 decay chains.  Three  soil  samples  were  also found to
contain low levels of cesium-137, comparable in  concentration to
the levels of cesium-137 attributed to worldwide fallout.  Radio-
analyses  of  all  water samples  collected,  including  drinking
water, revealed that no gamma-emitting radionuclides were present
above background  levels. Analyses of the drinking  water samples
for  tritium  yielded  a  maximum  concentration of  approximately
1,800 picocuries  per  liter,  a value well  below the  current  EPA
drinking water maximum contaminant level (20,000 pCi per liter).

    Storm  sewer  sediment  samples collected  from the  Canal  Area
were  found  to contain low levels of  potassium-40,  corresponding
to 5  to 8  milligrams  of  total potassium per  gram  of sediment.
All  Canal  Area storm sewer  sediment  samples  also  contained  low
levels of cesium-137  (0.014 to 0.79 pCi per gram).   These levels
are consistent with  values  found in other  parts of the country,
and are attributable  to worldwide fallout.   Radium-226  in storm
sewer sediment from  the Canal Area varied  in  concentration from
0.39 to 0.94 pCi per  gram.  All  of  the storm sewer  sediment sam-
ples  from  the  Canal  Area contained  daughter products of thorium-
232.    Assuming equilibrium  of  the  daughter  products with  the
thorium-232,  the  concentration ranged from 0.23 to  0.36  pCi of
thorium-232 per gram of sediment.

    Storm  sewer  sediment samples collected  in the  Declaration
Area  contained from  2 to 27  milligrams of  potassium per gram of
sediment.  A total of 24 samples were found to contain cesium-137
at concentrations ranging from 0.084 to 0.97  pCi per gram,  com-
parable once  again  to worldwide  fallout  levels.   Radium-226 in
storm sewer sediment  samples  from the  Declaration Area varied in
concentration  from 0.20 to  6.6 pCi per gram;  only three  of  the
samples had concentrations of radium-226  greater than 1 pCi  per
gram  (1.6,  2.2, and 6.6 pCi per  gram).  In  addition,  a number of
storm sewer sediment  samples  from the  Declaration  Area contained
the daughter products of thorium-232,  at levels  that indicated a
thorium-232  concentration  ranging  from  0.22 to  1.9  pCi  of
thorium-232 per gram of sediment.

    Finally, stream sediment  samples collected from the Declara-
tion Area were found to contain only trace quantities of natural-
ly occurring potassium-40.   Samples of stream  sediment collected
from a control site revealed  similar concentrations  of potassium-
40,  and also  contained low  levels  of radium-226  (0.3 pCi  per
gram) and thorium-232 (0.1 pCi per gram).

4.3.4  Biological Monitoring of Contaminants

    A limited program of biological monitoring, involving select-
ed native  biological  species, was  conducted for the  purpose of
investigating the potential biological availability and biologi-
cal accumulation of contaminants that may have migrated from Love
Canal.   It should be  made  clear that the  biological monitoring
                                152

-------
program was neither designed nor intended to provide insight into
the health or ecological effects of those contaminants that might
be found  in  biota.   Furthermore, the monitoring program was not
intended, and made  no  attempt,  to determine the  behavior of any
chemicals found in the biological species investigated, to deter-
mine the kinetics of biological uptake, or to  determine  the im-
pact of the chemicals monitored on the species considered.  Rath-
er,  the  biological  monitoring  program  was  intended  to  provide
limited,   suggestive indication of  the  accumulation  of contami-
nants  in  biological systems,  thereby potentially increasing the
sensitivity of  the  entire monitoring program to the presence of
environmental contaminants that may have migrated from the former
canal.

    The local species selected for monitoring purposes were cray-
fish  (Orconectes  propinquis),  domestic dogs  (Canis familiaris),
field  mice  (Microtus pennsylvanicus),  silver  maple  tree leaves
(Acer  saccharinum),  and worms  (Lumbricus  sp.).   In Table 14, the
scope of the biologica1 monitoring program is presented.  In Fig-
ure  63 the  locations of biota  sampling  sites in the Declaration
and Canal Areas are presented.

    The  procedures   used  to collect  samples of  the  biological
species monitored  were as  follows.   Crayfish  were  obtained  by
seining  approximately  100  meters  of Black  Creek  and Bergholtz
Creek, in the general vicinity of local storm sewer outfalls.

       TABLE 14. SCOPE OF THE BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
                             Number of Samples
                             (Number of Sites)
 Targeted
Substances
Specy
Crayfish


Dogs

Mice

Mice

Silver
Maple

Worms


Sample
10 grams
composite;
whole body
2 grams of
neck hair
whole car-
cass
body hair

10 grams
composite;
leaves
10 grams
composite ?
whole body
Declaration
31
(1)

23
(20)
36
(5)
12
(5)
15
(14)

19
(4)

Control
9
(1)

18
(15)
33
(2)
12
(2)
14
(ID

5
(3)

Canal
—
__

—
—
5
(2)
2
(2)
8
(6)

6
(2)

Monitored
Organics


Inorganics

Organics

Inorganics

Inorganics


Organics


Note:  Targeted substances monitored  are  identified in Table
       A-l of Appendix A  in  this  Volume.   Dashes signify not
       applicable.
                                153

-------
                                                     S05036
                                              S05037 S05035
                                              d05021
                                                  n
                                                  :17 CI05016
                                                         m07505
                                                       10052
                                                        is  m10055
                                                         w
                                                        10003
c -CRAYFISH
d - DOG
m-MICE
s -SILVER MAPLE
w-WO RMS
s10053
 Figure 63.   Biota  Sampling  Site Codes
                           154

-------
Crayfish were obtained similarly from the control site 99035, lo-
cated north  of  Niagara University in Fish  Creek.   Subsequent to
capture, the crayfish were  stored  in  a  holding tank (filled with
the local  creek  water from which they  were  taken)  for a fasting
period  of  48 hours,  in order  to  allow purging  of  the digestive
tract.  After the holding period expired, the whole bodies of two
or three crayfish were homogenized to form  a composite sample of
approximately 10 grams,  which was necessary for  analysis  pur-
poses .

    Samples  of dog hair  were obtained  from  mature  domestic dogs
(household pets) ,  that were raised  in the  Declaration  Area and
provided voluntarily  by  local  residents.   Approximately 2 grams
of hair were taken from  each  dog  by clipping along  the side of
the neck.

    Field mice were captured by means of live traps placed at the
locations indicated in Figure 63,  and at control sites 99035 (lo-
cated north  of  Niagara  University along Fish Creek)  and 99071
(located near the intersection of 66th  Street and Frontier Avenue
in Niagara Falls).  Shortly after capture, the obtained specimens
were  sacrificed  by cervical dislocation.    Samples of hair were
obtained by  shaving each mouse of all body hair, and forming com-
posites of body hair from three mice captured in the same general
location.  After shaving, each mouse was skinned and the legs and
tail  were  removed.  The  carcass was  then eviscerated and the re-
mainder  homogenized   to  form  a  sample that  was   submitted  for
analysis.

    The  leaves   from  silver maple  trees were  collected  in  the
general area of  the sites  identified  in Figure 63 and at control
sites.  Samples  were  formed by compositing  10  outer  leaves from
each  of 10  silver maple  trees located at  each  site.   Composite
samples that were  formed consisted of  at  least 10 grams  of dry
leaves.

    Finally,  worms were collected from the  sites  identified in
Figure  63  and  from the control sites 99008 (located on Frontier
Avenue,  Niagara  Falls), 99020  (located  on Stony Point  Road, Grand
Island), and 99021 (located on West River Parkway, Grand Island).
Prior to sampling, each  site was watered (if necessary)  in order
to saturate  the  surface soil.   One-meter square plots were then
dug to  a  depth  of  15 centimeters and  the   unearthed  worms were
collected.   After  collection, the  worms  were  placed  in moist
cornmeal for 24  hours to allow  purging of  the  digestive tract.
Next,  10-gram composite  samples of worms obtained from each plot
were homogenized prior to analysis.

    The  results  from the biological monitoring program were found
to be of  limited value.   Because the  results obtained  did  not
demonstrate the biological uptake of contaminants from the former
canal (that  is,  the  findings  conformed with the results  of the
                                155

-------
environmental monitoring program),  they will not be discussed  in
detail "here.   The interested  reader  is instead referred to  Vol-
umes II and III of this report  for more  specific information.

4.3.5  Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD)

    By intent, the results of  specific monitoring for tetrachlor-
inated dibenzo-p-dioxins  (TCDDs),  particularly the 2,3,7,8-TCDD
isomer,  in environmental  samples collected  in the  vicinity  of
Love Canal were  reserved for  unified presentation.  The motiva-
tion for  a separate  discussion of  the  sampling,  analytical, and
quality  assurance  procedures  and  results  for  TCDDs  analyses
stemmed,  in part,  from the  high  toxicity of  the 2,3,7,8-TCDD
isomer and,  in  part, from the expressed concerns  of local  resi-
dents regarding potential sources of  human  exposure.

    As part of the  multimedia environmental  monitoring program
conducted  at  Love Canal,  a  number of  samples were  analyzed  by
high  resolution  gas chromatography/high  resolution mass   spec-
trometry  (HRGC/HRMS)  for  the determination  of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD.   In
Figure 64,  the locations  of  sites monitored for 2,  3, 7,8-TCDD are
given, and are  identified by  medium and  source.   As  with  many
other environmental  samples  collected at  Love Canal,  the  selec-
tion of 2,3,7,8-TCDD monitoring sites was directed intentionally
towards known or  suspected transport  pathways.  For example, the
limited  results  from previous investigations  of   TCDDs  at  Love
Canal by   NYS were   used  partially to  aid  in the selection  of
2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD sampling sites .

    All samples collected  for  the  determination  of 2,3,7,8-TCDD
were analyzed by  Wright State  University  (WSU) under the  direc-
tion  of  the  EPA  Health  Effects  Research  Laboratory,   Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina  (HERL-RTP).   Air samples were  col-
lected on  polyurethane  foam plugs  and  were extracted  with  ben-
zene.  Water,  soil,  and  sediment samples  were collected as de-
scribed previously and  were  extracted  using petroleum  ether and
agitation.   Primary extracts  were subjected, as  necessary,  to
extensive  additional purification prior to analysis.  The labeled
internal  standard   3*7ci^-2, 3, 7,8-TCDD  was added to  all samples
before primary  extraction.    Additional  details concerning the
analytical  methods  used  for  2,3,7,8-TCDD  determinations  may  be
found in  G. F. Van  Ness, et  al., Chemosphere,  Vol.  9 (1980),
553-563,   and  R.  L.  Harless,  et  al., Analytical Chemistry,  Vol.
52,  No. 8  (1980),  1239-1245.

    The limit of detection for the  methodology was  ordinarily  in
the range  of 1 to 20 nanograms per "kilogram or  nanograms per  lit-
er  (parts  per trillion  -- ppt),  and  varied according  to  sample
medium and sample source.  For  example, samples containing  a  rel-
atively high organic content  (such as  aquatic sediment  samples)
had an associated limit of  detection near the upper  end of the
range, while samples free of organic  interferences  had a  limit  of
detection  near the lower end of the range.


                                156

-------
                                                       &07501
                                            11032 08015 09017
                                          11021
AIR
GROUND WATER
LEACHATE TREATMENT FACILITY
STORM SEWER SEDIMENT
STREAM SEDIMENT
SUMPS
SOILS
                                                       10033
                                             • 97543
Figure  64.   Sampling Site  Codes for Dioxin
                (2,3,7,8-TCDD).
                           157

-------
    Analytical performance of WSU  was  evaluated regularly during
the  Love Canal  project.    Performance  evaluation samples  were
prepared by HERL-RTP  by adding known  amounts  of 2,3,7,8-TCDD to
specially obtained samples of soil.  These samples were submitted
to WSU,  along with actual Love Canal  field  samples,  in a manner
that  precluded  their  identification  as performance  evaluation
samples.   The performance evaluation  samples  prepared contained
either no  added  analyte,  60 ppt of  2,3,7,8-TCDD,  or  120  ppt of
2, 3, 7,8-TCDD.   On  the basis of these  samples  the performance of
WSU for 2,3,7,8-TCDD determinations was judged, in all instances,
acceptable.

    All  analytical determinations  for  2,3,7,8-TCDD by WSU  were
validated by  HERL-RTP.   Every extract  containing  a positive de-
termination of TCDDs  was  divided by WSU, and  a  portion was  sent
to  HERL-RTP  for  confirmation  and  isomer  identification on  a
different HRGC/HRMS  system.   All postive  determinations  of
2,3,7,8-TCDD  were  validated  in this   fashion,  and  all  samples
collected for the  analysis of TCDDs were validated.

    The  recovery  2,3,7,8-TCDD  from the performance  evaluation
soil  samples  varied from  32  to 77 percent.  These results,  how-
ever, are not  considered  valid  indicators of the accuracy of the
soil  and sediment  methodology.  As  is  pointed  out in  Appendix D,
in the section entitled "Limits of Detection/Quantitation," it is
very  difficult to  add a known amount of an analyte (or analytes)
to  a  soil/sediment sample and  simulate the natural  sorption or
uptake processes.  Therefore, while the results  from  the perfor-
mance evaluation samples  cannot be used to estimate the accuracy
of the method, they do  generally confirm the method limit of de-
tection .

    In  addition,  one  Love Canal water sample that contained no
detectable amount  of  2,3,7,8-TCDD  was  spiked  by WSU  with 91 ppt
of  2,3,7,8-TCDD.   This water  sample  was  sent  to HERL-RTP (in
blind  fashion)   for  extraction and  analysis.    The  recovery of
2,3,7,8-TCDD from  this  water  sample by HERL-RTP was  71 percent,
which is an indicator of  the accuracy  of the method for 2,3,7,8-
TCDD  determinations in water samples.

    The precision  of  the  methodology  for 2,3,7,8-TCDD determina-
tions is  indicated by the positive results  from the  measurement
of duplicate Love  Canal field samples presented in Table 15.  When
expressed in terms of percent relative range (the difference be-
tween duplicate  measurements  as a percentage  of the  mean of the
two measurements), the  precision  of  the method was  5.2 percent
and 26 percent for the  two duplicates  with hundreds of parts per
billion concentrations, and 87 percent  for the one duplicate with
parts per trillion concentrations.

    The results obtained  from the special 2,3,7,8-TCDD monitoring
program were  as  follows.   The  presence  of  2,3,7,8-TCDD in  Love
                                158

-------
    TABLE 15.  RESULTS OF STORM SEWER SEDIMENT DETERMINATIONS
                             FOR 2,3,7,8-TCDD
                        (micrograms per kilogram)
 Site
Location
   2,3,7,8-TCDD
Concentration (ppb)
11030  97th Street and Read Avenue
04508  97th Street and Colvin Boulevard*
02501  96th Street and Colvin Boulevard*
04506  96th Street and Greenwald Avenue*
                                  329
                              672 and 638*
                                  5.39
                                  170
04507
02032
11031
11033
10032
10033
10035
11032
08015
09017
06017
07018
03511
03510
01028
03526
02031
97th Street and Greenwald Avenue
96th Street, near Apt. 620 in Court 2
97th Street and Wheatfield Avenue1"
97th Street and Frontier Avenue*
100th Street and Frontier Avenue*
102nd Street and Frontier Avenue*
Buffalo Avenue near 10108 Buffalo*
99th Street and Wheatfield Avenue*
101st Street and Wheatfield Avenue*
102nd Street and Wheatfield Avenue*
100th Street and Colvin Boulevard*
101st Street and Colvin Boulevard*
Frontier Avenue between 93rd and
96th Streets
93rd Street and Frontier Avenue
Frontier Avenue between 92nd and
93rd Streets
93rd Street and Read Avenue
93rd Street and Colvin Boulevard
B
B
199
393 and 303*
0.2 and B*
B and B*
B
0.2
0.4
B
0.054
B
B and B*-
B
B and B*
B
0.165 and 0.419*
*Storm sewer line turning point or junction
*Duplicate analyses performed

B:  Below detection

Note:  As best as possible, storm sewer sites are organized by
       sewer line and presented according to sequential waterflow
       direction originating at those sites located closest to
       the midpoint of Love Canal.  (See Figure 12).
                                159

-------
Canal was  determined from the  analysis of  two leachate samples
collected  in the  Leachate  Treatment Facility  (site  11076).  The
results of the  analyses conducted  on  the solution phase samples
of leachate revealed a concentration of 1.56 micrograms per liter
(ppb) in the untreated influent sample, and below detection level
results  (approximately  5  to  10  nanograms  per  liter)   for  the
treated effluent sample.

    The presence  of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD was not detected in  any of the
ground-water samples analyzed.  And, no 2, 3,7,8-TCDD was detected
in any of  the soil  samples analyzed.  Note, however, that no soil
samples were  collected directly  in the  known sand  lens  on the
western side  of  Love  Canal,  where  2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD had  been found
previously by NYS DOH.

    The  only  sumps  found to  contain  measurable  amounts  of
2,3,7,8-TCDD were located in ring 1 residences  in the Canal Area.
The sumps  found to  contain 2,3,1, 8-TCDD were also noted previous-
ly  as containing  high  levels  of  contamination, with  numerous
other organic compounds present. In particular, the sump sediment
sample collected  from  site  11072  (located at 771 97th Street),  a
residence  identified previously as  collinear with the known sand
lens on the western side of Love Canal, had a high concentration
of 9,570 ppb of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD present.  In addition, the two sumps
located in the  residence  at site 11021  (476 99th  Street)  had
2,3,7, 8—TCDD present  at concentrations of  0.5 ppb and  0.6 ppb.
The sample of  sump  sediment  obtained  from  site  11073 (703 97th
Street) contained no measurable amount of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD,

    The presence of  2,3,7,8-TCDD  was  detected  in  a  number of
storm sewer sediment samples collected from throughout the gener-
al Love Canal area.  The results obtained are  summarized in Table
15.   Note  that in Table  15  an attempt was made to group sampling
sites by storm sewer  line,  and  to list sites by waterflow direc-
tion starting at Love Canal. As can be seen  from the results pre-
sented  in  Table  15,   decreasing  concentrations  of  2,3,7,8-TCDD
were found in certain storm sewer lines as distance from the for-
mer canal  increased.  In particular, starting  with the storm sew-
er turning points  on 97th  Street and on  99th Street, decreasing
concentration-s  of  2, 3, 7,8-TCDD  were  found  in the  storm sewer
lines heading  in the direction  of the 96th  Street  outfall,  the
outfall in Black Creek between  101st  and 102nd Streets,  and the
102nd Street outfall.  (See Figure  12).

    These  findings  strongly  suggest that the  transport  of sedi-
ment by waterflow served as the  likely mechanism of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD
movement through the  storm  sewer  lines  sampled. The  fact that
2,3,7,8-TCDD has very low solubility in water  and very high sorp-
tion properties on  sediment, tends to support  this hypothesis.

    The stream  sediment  samples  analyzed  for  2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD  re-
vealed that  2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD had  likely been transported through the
                                160

-------
storm  sewer  lines  into  the creeks  and river sampled.   At  site
04014,  located in  Black Creek  near 98th  Street,  0.075  ppb of
2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD was  detected.   Further west in Black Creek, at  site
04015, located near the  storm sewer outfall,  37.4  ppb of  2,3,7,8-
TCDD  was  detected.   While at  site 04016,  located  in Bergholtz
Creek near its junction with Black Creek,  1.32 ppb of  2,3,7,8-
TCDD  was  found.    Further  downstream in  Bergholtz Creek at  site
97526, located west of 93rd Street,  the presence  of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD
was not  detected.  Also sampled was site  97543,  located in  the
Niagara River  near the  102nd Street storm  sewer  outfall.  Sedi-
ment  from  this site was analyzed  in triplicate and yielded  con-
centrations of 0.1, 0.06,  and 0.02 ppb  of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD.  Because
of  the proximity  of site 97543  to the 102nd Street  landfill,  and
the failure to detect 2, 3, 7,8-TCDD in  the  storm  sewer site  sam-
pled  closest   to  the outfall   (site  10035),  the  source  of  the
2, 3, 7,8-TCDD present  in the Niagara River  could  not  be clearly
identified.

    Finally,   no   2,3, 7,8-TCDD  was  detected  in any of  the   air
samples analyzed.

    To reiterate,  it was determined that  2,3,7,8-TCDD was present
in  the  untreated  leachate, in the  sumps  of certain ring 1 resi-
dences, in the sediment  of storm  sewers  emanating from near  the
former canal,  and  in the sediment  of local  creeks  and the Niagara
River  sampled  in  the  vicinity  of outfalls  of storm sewer lines
that  originated * near  Love  Canal.   These results   for Love  Canal-
related  2,3,7,8-TCDD  environmental contamination  are  in confor-
mity  with  the  findings  presented earlier, and are also in  agree-
ment  with  the  less comprehensive  results  reported by  NYS DOH in
1980,
                                161

-------
                            CHAPTER 5
                     SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

    The  EPA multimedia  environmental  monitoring program conducted
at Love Canal provided a substantial amount of information on the
extent  and  degree of environmental contamination  in  the Declara-
tion Area  that  resulted directly  from  the  migration of contami-
nants from  the  former  canal.   In  general,  the monitoring data re-
vealed  that except for  residual  contamination  in  certain local
storm  sewer lines  and  portions of creeks  located near  the  out-
falls of  those  storm  sewers, the occurrence  and  concentration
levels  of  chemicals found in the Declaration  Area (in each media
monitored)   were  comparable to  those  found  at nearby  control
sites.   The monitoring data also  revealed that contamination that
had most likely migrated directly from  Love  Canal  into residen-
tial areas  was confined  to  relatively localized  portions of ring
1 in the Canal  Area (that  is,  near certain unoccupied houses lo-
cated  adjacent  to the former  canal).   In  addition, comparative
data  from   other  locations  in the  United  States  (presented  in
Appendix B  of this Volume)  revealed  that  the  observed occurrence
and  concentration  levels  of  .those chemicals monitored  in the
residential portions of  the Declaration Area  and elsewhere were
comparable. Furthermore, comparisons of the concentration levels
of environmental  contaminants  found  in the  residential portions
of the  Declaration  Area  with existing EPA standards  revealed that
no environmental standards were violated.

    A review of  all of  the  environmental monitoring  data collect-
ed  at  Love Canal also  revealed  that  no  evidence  was obtained
which  demonstrated that residential portions of the  Declaration
Area exhibited  measurable  environmental  contamination  that was
directly attributable to  the  presence of  contaminants that had
migrated from the  former canal.  In addition,  it is unlikely that
undetected  Love Canal-related contamination  exists in the  resi-
dential portions  of the Declaration  Area,  because  the targeted
substances  monitored  and  the  sampling  locations  selected for
monitoring   purposes were  intentionally directed (based  on the
best available  evidence) to maximize the probability of  detecting
contaminants that had migrated from the former canal.
                                 162

-------
    The absence of Love Canal-related environmental contamination
in the Declaration Area, other than that which was mentioned pre-
viously,  conformed  with  the  results  and   implications  of  the
hydrogeologic investigations conducted  in  the general Love Canal
area.     Specifically,   the  well-defined  multimedia  pattern  of
environmental contamination found  in shallow system ground-water
samples, in soil  samples, and  in sump samples collected  at cer-
tain locations in ring 1 of the Canal Area, was in full agreement
with (and corroborated) the  hydrogeologic program results.

    The  following points  highlight the  major findings of the EPA
multimedia  environmental  monitoring  program  conducted   at  Love
Canal.

   •  The hydrogeologic program  results demonstrated  that there
      is little potential for migration of contaminants from Love
      Canal into  the Declaration Area.   These findings conformed
      fully  with  the   results  of  the   multimedia environmental
      monitoring  program.   Furthermore,  the  close correspondence
      of  the  multimedia monitoring  data to  the  implications of
      the  geological   and  hydrological  characteristics  of  the
      site  minimized   the likelihood that potential  limitations
      inherent  in the  state-of-the-art  analytical methods used
      during the  study resulted in artifactual or  fallacious con-
      clusions regarding  the  extent and degree  of environmental
      contamination at Love Canal.

   •  The results  from the  hydrogeologic program  suggested that
      the  barrier drain  system,  which  was  installed  around the
      perimeter of Love Canal in 1978 and 1979, is working as de-
      signed.   In particular, the  outward migration  of  contami-
      nants through more permeable  overburden soil has been con-
      tained,  and the  movement  of  nearby shallow system ground
      water  is  towards  the drain.   Consequently,  contaminated
      shallow  system  ground water beyond  the barrier drain will
      be  drawn  towards  Love  Canal,  intercepted   by  the barrier
      drain system, and decontaminated  in the Leachate Treatment
      Facility.   Previously reported EPA  testing of  the effec-
      tiveness of the  Leachate Treatment Facility  demonstrated an
      operating efficiency  of greater than 99 percent removal of
      all  monitored  organic compounds  in  the influent leachate.
      Discharged  liquids  from  the facility  are   transported
      through  the sanitary  sewer  system to   the  City of Niagara
      Falls wastewater treatment plant for additional treatment.

   •  Except for  some  apparently isolated pockets  of shallow sys-
      tem ground-water contamination located  immediately  adjacent
      to  the  former canal,  no general  pattern  of contamination
                                163

-------
   was found in the shallow system.   Furthermore,  no signifi-
   cant shallow system ground-water contamination attributable
   directly to migration from Love Canal was  found  outside of
   ring 1 in the Canal Area.

*  Low level, widespread contamination was observed throughout
   the bedrock  aquifer.   However,  ground-water samples  from
   the bedrock  aquifer  located in  the Lockport Dolomite  did
   not reveal  a pattern  of  contamination  that had  migrated
   directly from Love Canal.

*  No Love Canal-related patterns of  contamination  were found
   in soil samples collected  in the Declaration Area. Patterns
   of  soil  contamination  attributable to  contaminants  having
   migrated from Love Canal were found in  ring 1 of the Canal
   Area,  and were associated  with known or suspected preferen-
   tial  transport  pathways in the  soil,  and  with  the  occur-
   rence of shallow system ground-water contamination.

*  No  evidence  of Love Canal-related contamination  that  had
   migrated preferentially through former swales into the Dec-
   laration  Area  was found,  nor were "wet"  area  residences
   found to  have  higher concentrations of  contamination  than
   "dry"  residences.

*  Evidence  of  residual  contamination that  had most  likely
   migrated  from Love  Canal  was present  in  sump samples  col-
   lected in a  few residences  located immediately  adjacent to
   the former canal (that  is,  within ring 1).

•  Evidence  of  residual  contamination that  had most  likely
   migrated  from  Love  Canal  was found  in those  storm sewer
   lines which originated  near Love Canal in the Canal Area.

*  Evidence  of  residual  contamination that  had most  likely
   migrated  from  Love Canal  was  present  in  the  sediments of
   certain creeks and rivers  sampled near to those storm sewer
   outfalls of sewer  lines originating near the former canal.

*  Results from monitoring activities in  the residential por-
   tions of  the Declaration Area  revealed  that the contamina-
   tion  present was  comparable to that at  the control  sites,
   to  concentrations  typically  found  in the  ambient environ-
   ment,  and to concentrations found in other urban locations.
   In general, no environmental contamination  that was direct-
   ly  attributable to the  migration of contaminants from Love
   Canal was found in  the Declaration Area  (outside  of  the
   previously mentioned storm sewer lines and creeks).
                             164

-------
    Finally, a  review  of the results from the  entire  Love Canal
environmental monitoring  study revealed  that:    (I)  except  for
contamination present in sediments of certain storm sewers and of
certain local surface waters,  the  extent and degree of  environ-
mental  contamination  in  the  area  encompassed  by  the  emergency
declaration order of May  21,  1980  were  not attributable  to  Love
Canal;  (2) the short-term implications of ground-water  contamina-
tion  are  that  a  continued effective  operation  of the  barrier
drain system  surrounding  Love Canal will contain the  lateral mi-
gration of contaminants through the overburden,  and the long-term
implications are that  little  likelihood  exists for  distant
ground-water transport of contaminants present in the  Canal Area;
and  (3) a  review of  all of  the  monitoring data  revealed  that
there was  no  compelling  evidence that the environmental quality
of  the  Declaration  Area  was significantly different from control
sites or other areas throughout the United States for  which moni-
toring  data are available.
                                165

-------
                            APPENDIX A
              LISTS OF SUBSTANCES MONITORED AT LOVE CANAL
    The  following  two  tables  contain  lists  of  substances  that
were  routinely  determined  in  samples  collected  during  the  EPA
Love Canal multimedia environmental monitoring program. Table A-l
contains a list of targeted organic and inorganic substances that
were determined in water, soil,  sediment,  and biological samples.
In Table  A-2,  a  list is presented of  targeted  organic and inor-
ganic substances that were determined in air samples.
          TABLE A-l.
SUBSTANCES MONITORED IN LOVE CANAL
WATER/SOIL/SEDIMENT/BIOTA SAMPLES
                  Volatiles-Method 624 Analytes
               (Medium:  Water/Soil/Sediment/Biota)
Methylene chloride
Chloromethane
1,1-Dichloroethene
Bromomethane
1,1-Dichloroethane
Vinyl chloride
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Chloroethane
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
Trichlorofluoromethane
Chloroform
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Carbon tetrachloride
Bromochloromethane
Bromodichloromethane
2,3-Dichloropropene
1,2-Dichloropropane
Trichloroethene
            trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
            Benzene
            Acrolein
            Acrylonitrile
            Dibromochloromethane
            1,1,2-Trichloroethane
            Bromoform
            1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
            Benzyl chloride
            o-Xylene
            m-Xylene
            p-Xylene
            Tetrachloroethene
            Toluene
            2-Chlorotoluene
            3-Chlorotoluene
            4-Chlorotoluene
            Chlorobenzene
            Ethyl benzene
            1,2-Dibromoethane
                           (continued)
                                166

-------
                      TABLE A-l (continued)
          Phenols and Base/Neutrals-Method 625 Analytes
               (Mediums  Water/Soil/Sediment/Biota)
2-Chlorophenol
3-Chlorophenol
4-Chlorpphenol
2-Nitrophenol
Phenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
2,3,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
2,4-Dinitrophenol
2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
4-Nitrophenol
Hexachloroethane
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
N-nitrosodi-n-propylaraine
Hexachlorobutadiene
1,2,3~Triehlorobenzene
N-nitrosodimethylamine
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1,3,5-Trichlorobenzene
Nitrobenzene
Naphthalene
Isophorone
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
  (C-56)
2-Chloronaphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
DimethyIphthalate
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
Fluorene
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
4-Chlorophenylphenylether
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,4-Dichlorotoluene
Diethylphthalate
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Hexachlorobenzene
4-Bromophenylphenylether
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Di-n-butyl phtalate
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzidine
ButylbenzyIphthalate
Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Chrysene
Di-n-octyIphthalate
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo{a)pyrene
3,3-Dichlorobenzidine
Indeno(l,2,3-dc)pyrene
Dibenzo(a,h5anthracene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Pentachloronitrobenzene
2,4,6-Trichloroaniline
4-Chlorobenzotrifluoride
(Trifluoro-p-chlorotoluene)
1,2,3,4—Tetrachlorobenzene
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene
Tetrachlorotoluenes
  (18 position isomers—ring
  and methyl substitution)
                           (continued)
                               167

-------
                      TABLE A-l (continued)
   Aroclors (PCBs) and Pesticides-Methods 608 and 625 Analytes
               {Mediums  Water/Soil/Sediment/Biota)
a-BHC
0-BHC
6-BHC
T-BHC (Lindane)
Heptaehlor
Aldrin
Mirex
Endosulfan I
Heptachlor epoxide
DDE
Endrin
Endosulfan II
Dieldrin
Endosulfan sulfate
ODD
Chlordane
DDT
Toxaphene
Aroclor 1221
Aroclor 1254
Aroclor 1016
Aroclor 1232
Aroclor 1242
Aroclor 1248
Aroclor 1260
                            Inorganics
               (Medium:  Water/Soil/Sediment/Biota)
                               and
                       Fluoride and Nitrate
                         (Medium:  Water)
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Fluoride
Nitrate
Note:  2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin was quantitatively
       determined in a select number of samples.
                                168

-------
          TABLE A-2.
SUBSTANCES MONITORED IN LOVE CANAL
          AIR SAMPLES
                            Volatiles
                         (Source: TENAX)
Quantitative Analysis
            Qualitative Analysis
Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
o-Chlorotoluene
p-Chlorotoluene
1,2-Dibromoethane
o-Dichlorobenzene
p-Dichlorobenzene
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
            Chloroform
            1,2-Dichloroethane
            2,4-Dichlorotoluene
            o-Chlorobenzaldehyde
            p-Chlorobenzaldehyde
            Benzyl chloride
            (a -Chlorotoluene)
            1,1-Dichloroethane
            1,1-Dichloroethylene
            (Vinylidene chloride)
            1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC)
            1,2-Dichloroethylene
            Dichloromethane
            Phenol
            o-Xylene
            m-Xylene
            p-Xylene
                  Pesticides and Other Compounds
                         (Source:  PFOAM)
Quantitative Analysis
            Qualitative Analysis
T-BHC (Lindane)
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (C-56)
1,2,3,4-Tetrachlorobenzene
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1,3,5-Trichlorobenzene
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorobenzene
            Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
            1,2,4,5-Tetrachloro-
              benzene
            Of, a, 2 ,6-Tetrachloro-
              toluene
            Pentachloro-1,3-butadiene
            Pentachloronitrobenzene
              (PCNB)
            1,2,3,5-Tetrachloro-
              benzene
            ce-Benzenehexachloride
              (a-BHC)
            Heptachlor
                           (continued)
                               169

-------
                      TABLE A-2 (continued)
                            Inorganics
                         (Source:  HIVOL)
Quantitative Analysis

Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Note:  2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin was quantitatively
       determined in a select number of samples.
                                170

-------
                            APPENDIX B
            COMPARATIVE DATA AND EXISTING STANDARDS FOR
                SUBSTANCES MONITORED AT LOVE CANAL
COMPARATIVE DATA

     The  Love  Canal multimedia environmental  monitoring program
included  sampling at  control  sites selected specifically for the
purpose of collecting comparative data that permitted the testing
of  statistical  hypotheses  rergarding  the  extent and  degree of
Love Canal-related contamination in the Declaration Area.  Due to
limited availability  of  appropriate control sites  and  the rela-
tively short time period  during which this study was to be con-
ducted, the  number  of control  sites  samples that  could be col-
lected was (in certain instances)  restricted.   An enumeration of
control sites locations  for selected  medium/source/location com-
binations is presented in Table B-l.

NONCONTEMPORARY COMPARATIVE DATA

     The  Love Canal monitoring  program was  designed  to  include a
control area, in this case a site-specific control.  Another use-
ful kind  of control, however,  is  background data  on concentra-
tions  of  various chemicals in pertinent  media  from around  the
nation.

     The  principal  problem  in assembling data  on national back-
ground concentrations is  the  lack  of  routine monitoring networks
for many  of  the  chemicals of interest.   Most of  the data on or-
ganic chemicals, for  example,  were collected for regulatory pur-
poses, compliance,  or enforcement, and are  therefore  related to
unusually  high  discharges  or  leakage  of  chemicals from known
sources.

     There are,  however,  some nationwide monitoring networks that
are sources of useful data.   Examples are:   (1) the National Air
Sampling  Network,  (NASN) which collects  data  on metals  in  air
samples?  (2)  the National  Organics Reconnaissance  Survey  (NORS)
for organics in  drinking  water; and (3) the National  Urban Soil
Network (NUSN) for pesticides in soil.  Other than data  from such
networks, only various research projects proved fruitful.


                                171

-------
                       TABLE B-l.   CONTROL SITES
Site Code
                            Address
                  Ground Water - A Wells  (Shallow System)

           95th Street, Niagara Falls  (near  DeMunda  Avenue)
           Cayuga Drive, Niagara Falls  (near 98th Street)
           Cayuga Drive, Niagara Falls  (near 95th Street)
           Jayne Park, Niagara Falls  (near South  86th Street)
                        Niagara Falls  (near  Brookhaven Drive)
                        Niagara Falls  (near  Colvin Boulevard)
                        Niagara Falls  (near  Read  Avenue)
                        Niagara Falls  (near  Read  Avenue)
           Pasadena Avenue, Niagara Falls (near Lindbergh  Avenue)
           Luick Avenue, Niagara Falls  (near 91st Street)
           Griffon Park, Niagara Falls
99015
99016
99017
99072
99550
99551
99552
99553
99554
99555
99559
99015
99016
99017
99033
99034
99072
99550
99551
99553
99555
99556
99558-B1
99558-B2
99559
99560
99008
99010
99012
99017
99020
99021
99022
99023
99051
Deuro Drive
91st Street
92nd Street
91st Street
                      Ground Water  -  B  Wells (Bedrock)

           95th Street, Niagara  Falls (near DeMunda Avenue)
           Cayuga  Drive, Niagara Falls  (near 98th Street)
           Cayuga  Drive, Niagara Falls  (near 95th Street)
           Jayne Park, Niagara  Falls  (near South 91th Street)
           Buffalo Avenue,  Niagara  Falls (near 8Rth Street)
           Jayne Park, Niagara  Falls  (near South 86th Street)
           Deuro Drive, Niagara  Falls (near Brookhaven Drive)
           91st Street, Niagara  Falls (near Colvin Boulevard)
           91st Street, Niagara  Falls (near Read Avenue)
           Luick Avenue, Niagara Falls  (near 91st Street)
           Brookside  Avenue, Niagara  Falls (near 90th Street)
           Williams Road,  Town  of Wheatfield (near Robert Moses Pkwy.)
           Williams Road,  Town  of Wheatfield (near Robert Moses Pkwy.)
           Griffon Park, Niagara Falls
           Williams Road,  Town  of Wheatfield (near Robert Moses Pkwy.)

                                     Soil

           Frontier Avenue, Niagara Falls (near 82nd Street)
           82nd Street, Niagara  Falls (near Laughlin Drive)
           60th Street, Niagara  Falls (near Lindbergh Avenue)
           Cayuga  Drive, Niagara Falls  (near 95th Street)
           Stony Point  Road, Grand  Island (near Love Road)
           West River Parkway,  Grand  Island (near White Haven Road)
           Pierce  Avenue,  Niagara Falls (near 22nd Street)
           Packard Road, Town  of Niagara (near Young Street)
           Woodstock  Road,  Grand Island (near Long Road)

                                 (continued)
                                   172

-------
                        TABLE B-l  (continued)
Site Code                   Address
                                 Sump Water

99021      West River Parkway, Grand Island (near White Haven Road)

                       Storm Sewer Water and Sediment

99529      91st Street,  Niagara Falls (near Bergholtz Creek)

                     Surface Water and Stream Sediment

99004      Bergholtz Creek, Town of Wheatfield (near Williams Road)
99005      Black Creek,  Town of Wheatfield (near Williams Road)
99025      Cayuga Creek, Niagara Falls (near Cayuga Drive)
99035      Fish Creek, Town of Lewiston (near Upper Mountain Road)
99073      Niagara River (approximately coincident with the imaginary
            extension of 102nd Street, Niagara Falls)

                                    A i r

99020      Stony Point Road, Grand Island (near Love Road)
99021      West River Parkway, Grand Island (near White Haven Road)
99022      Pierce Avenue, Niagara Falls (near 22nd Street)
99023      Packard Road, Town of Niagara (near Young Street)
                                   173

-------
     In evaluating the quality of the reported data, three desig-
nations are used:   high  quality (Q),  which has excellent quality
control procedures?  research quality  (R),  which  has  very  good
quality control;  and  uncertain (U),  which  has  unknown quality
control, but  has  results consistent  with other  published  data.
These designations  are  indicated for  each entry in the  following
tables.

     The tables that  follow are of two  types.   One  type (Table
B-2)  is nationwide  average data  that could  not be  related  to
specific monitoring locations. The other type (Tables B-3 through
B-5)  is reported  by city,  where the  cities  have been  aggregated
according  to  commercial  cities  (no  significant  industry),  in-
dustrial cities, and chemical cities (significant chemical indus-
tries).  Some of the cities included in the  three categories are:

     Commercial          Industrial          Chemical

     Honolulu, HI        Pittsburgh, PA      Edison, NJ
     Cheyenne, WY        Birmingham, AL      Baltimore,  MD
     Sacramento, CA      Gary, IN            Houston, TX
     Phoenix, AZ         St. Louis, MO       Belle, WV
     Ogden, UT           Cincinnati, OH      Pasadena,  TX
     Cedar Rapids,  Ih    Detroit, MI         Passaic, NJ

     Very  little  data were  identified for  the  types  of samples
collected  in  the biomonitoring  program  (dog and mice  hair, mice
tissues, worm and crayfish  tissues, and silver maple? leaves).  No
analyses  of  such  samples  for  organics  were  located.    The few
analyses for metals that were located  are  presented  in  Table B-6.

     The  five tables  of comparative data  that follow include the
following  information:

        Chemical—the name  of the chemical detected.
        Range—the  range of mean values  reported.
        Qual.—the  quality  of the data  (Q,H,U) explained above.
        Max.—the  maximum  value  reported.    A  blank   indicates
              maximum unknown.
        No.—the  number  of  cities  in  that category.
        Time—the years  in  which analyses occurred.

     Table  B-2 summarizes the U.S.  average  data that consists  of
research  quality,   in general,  and which  were collected between
1964 and  1979.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Air  Quality Data  for  Metals 1976 from  the NASN.  EPA-600/4-79-Q54.

Ambient Air Carcinogenic Vapors—Improved Sampling and  Analytical
Techniques and  Field  Studies.   EPA-600/2-79-008.
                                 174

-------
Analysis of EPA Pesticides Monitoring Networks. EPA-560/13-79-
014.

Benzo-a-Pyrene data from SAROAD.

Biological Monitoring for Environmental  Pollutants.   EPA-600/3-
80-089 to 092.

Cycling and Control o-f Metals,  Proceedings of  a Conference,
NERC-Cincinnati.  February 1973.

Geochemical Environment in Relation to Health  and  Disease.   Ann.
N.Y. Acad. Sci., vol. 199.  1972.

Monitoring to  Detect Previously Unrecognized Pollutants  in  Sur-
face Waters.  EPA-560/6-77-015.

National Organics Reconnaissance  Survey  for Halogenated  Organics
JAWWA 67:  643-47.  1975.

Water Quality  Criteria Data Book. Vol. 1  and  Vol.  2.   1970-71.
                                175

-------
TABLE B-2,
U.S. AVERAGE DATA
(ppb)
Chemical
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Mercury
Selenium 0
Zinc
Lindane
Heptachlor
Aldrin
Heptachlor
epoxide
Endrin
Dieldrin
Chlordane
Toxaphene
2DDT
PCB
Triehloro-
ethene
Carbon tetra-
chloride
Tetrachloro-
ethene
1,1, 1-Trichloro-
e thane
1,2-Dichloro-
ethane
Vinyl chloride
Methylene
chloride
Soil Mean
or Range

5ppm

6ppm
0 . 3ppm
5-l,OOOppm
l-200ppm
15ppm

0.071ppm
.l-200ppm
10-300ppm



1-6


1-8
2-117

5-175














Drinking
Sediment Water
Range Range
<2-100
<10-20
<1-200
<.01-<5
<0.1-9
<0.1-11
<0. 4-980
<0. 1-100
<0.1-10
<0.5-<10

<10-3,000






0.43-1.99
3.1-21.7

1.71-5.77
2.2-48.2
0.06-3.2

0,1-30

0.1-21

0.1-3.3

0.8-4.8

0.1-9.8
0.2-13

Surface
Water
Range

10-100


1-130


1-80

0.1-20


0.005-0.76
0.005-0.031
0.001-0.26
0.001-0.067

0.005-0.94
0.003-0.17
0.006-0.075
0.5-0.75
0.012-0.292
0.006-0.12
0.1-42

0.2-10

0.1-9

0.1-1.2

0.1-45

0.2-5.1
0.4-19

              176

-------
                                                       TABLE B-3.    AIR
(ptg/m )
Gcwnereial Cities
Chemical
Range
Max. Qual.
o-BHC 0.0009-0.002
Lindane 0.0002-0.001
Heptachlor 0.0001-0.005
Dieldrin 0.0002-0.0004
Chlorfane 0.0008-0.018
HOT 0.002
PCS 0.004-0.068
Methylene chloride
1 , 1-Dieihloroethane
Vinyl chloride
Chloroform
1 , 2-C4cJiloroethane
1 , 2-Dichloroethene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
Carbon tetrachloride
Trichloroethene
1,1, 2-Trichloroethane
1 , 1 , 2 , 2-Tetrachlaro-
ethane
Benzyl chloride
Tetra-
chloroethene
Chlorobenzene
1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 3-Diehlorobenzene
Hexachl.orobutadiene
Tridilorebenzenes
Benzo-a-Fyrene
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cacfcniun
Chronium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc

0.0003
ND-0.1
0.02-0.06
0.00019-0.00037
0.002
0.005-0.026
0.067-0.53
0.54-1.55
0.004-0.041
0.0001-0.138

0.0009

0.24
0.00055
30.18
0.043
0.83
4.19
0.079
0.44
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q

O
U
U
U
U
Q
Q
Q
Q
U
No.
3
3
3
3
2
1
2

1
4
5
7
1
4
7
7
7
6
Industrial Cities
Range
0.0006-0.002
0.0003-0.002
0.0003-0.009
0.0002-0.002
0.003-0.031
0.005-0.006
0.003-0.011
0,69
ND-0.44
0.3
ND-1.07
ND-0.09
ND-0.11
ND-0.066
ND-0.28
ND-0.21
ND-0.24
ND
ND
0.0001-0.002
ND-0.1
0.01-0.08
0.00018-0.00033
0.009-0.035
0.004-0.016
0.055-0.54
0.22-1.23
0.004-0.033
0.054-0.475
Max. Qual.
1.1
1.1
0.4
2.3
0.13
1.0
0.35
0.56

0.004

0.37
0.00098
0.046
0.021
0.79
1.71
0.05
0.96
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
U
U
U
U
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
U
No.
5
5
5
5
5
2
3
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
7
5
10
10
4
7
11
11
11
10
Chemical Cities
Range
0.7-35
0.15-22.7
2.4
T-7,8
0.022-1.1
0.25-3.4
T-1.9
0.08-2.5
0.07-2.96
0.22
0.74
0.34
0.02-1.77
ND-Q.45
0.008-0.75
0,015-0.29
0.07
ND-0.065
0.0001-0.0006

0.02-0.36
0.0001-0.0003
ND-0.001
0.005-0.034
0.068-0.31
0.83-1.84
0.004-0.047
0.06-0.272
Max. Qual.
100 R
R
R
11.1 R
9.5 R
5.3 R
7.7 R
13.7 R
10.6 R
4.5 R
1.4 R
8.0 R
9.2 R
2.6 R
R
R
0.12 R
1.16 R
0.0015 U

1.16 U
0.0013 U
0.071 0
0.072 Q
0.35 Q
3.44 Q
0.060 Q
0.77 0
No.
5
3
1
7
7
3
7
7
7
1
1
1
6
7
6
6
1
2
4

8
9
9
7
8
8
9
9
Time
1975-77
1975-77
1975-77
1975-77
1975-77
1975-77
1975-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1976-77
1977-78
1978-79
1978-79
1978-79
1978-79
1978-79
1978-79
1978-79
1978-79
1978-79
ND:  Below limit of detection

-------
CD
                             TABLE B-4.   SURFACE WATER (pig/liter)
                                                  (1976)
Industrial Cities
Chemical
Chloroform
1 , 2-Dichloroethane
1,1, 1-Triehloroe thane
Bromodichloromethane
Trichloroethene
Benzene
Dibromochlorome thane
1,1,2 , 2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Pentachlorophenol
1 , 4-Diehlorobenzene
Di ( 2-ethylhexyl )phthalate
Di-n-butylphthalate
Range
1-43


4-7
300
270
4-8
1
1
4
10
1-150

Qual.
R


R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R

No.
6


2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
5

Chemical Cities
Range
1-87
1-9
2
1-8
1-4
1
4
1
1-5

21
2-5
1-4
Qual.
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R

R
R
R
No.
4
3
1
2
3
1
3
1
2

1
4
3

-------
                             TABLE B-5.
DRINKING WATER  (^g/liter)
          (1975)
M
•xl
Commercial Cities
Compound
Chloroform
1 , 2-Diehloroethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
Bromodichlorome thane
Dibromochloromethane
Bromoform
Range
0.4-311
T

0.9-29
T-16
2-3
Qual,
Q
Q

Q
Q
Q
No.
9
3

8
7
3
Industrial Cities
Range
4-93
T-0.4
T-2
0.8-28
T-17
T-l
Qual.
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
No.
12
5
3
11
10
3
Chemical Cities
Range
0.6-86
T-6
T-3
T-16
T-5

Qual.
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q

No.
7
4
3
7
7

       T:  Trace

-------
                TABLE B-6.  BIOTA
   Element
  Silver Maple Leaf
Concentrations   Qual.
  Mouse Hair
Range     Qual,
Antimony
Cadmium
Chromium
Mercury
Selenium

0
0



.1
.3


1
R
R 5,600-8
<8
200-27
,300

,200

,000
R

R
R
R
     Tables B-7  and B-8  contain  the results  from  EPA sponsored
ambient air monitoring  studies.   Table  B-7 presents the results,
in nanograms per cubic  meter  (ng/m  ), of measurements in ambient
air for the substances  listed conducted by Research Triangle In-
stitute, as well as the results of  other EPA studies  (References
1, 2, and  3).   Table  B-8 presents  the  results from a study con-
ducted  for EPA of  air samples collected  near  the downtown areas
of Los  Angeles  and Oakland,  California, and  Phoenix,  Arizona.
This study incorporated  the use of  gas  chromatography with elec-
tron capture detector  (ECD),  or flame ionization detector  (FID),
for measurement purposes.

REFERENCES FOR TABLES B-7 AND B-8

1.  Pellizzari, E.  D. and J.  E. Bunch.   Ambient Air Carcinogenic
    Vapors.    Improved   Sampling  and  Analytical Techniques  and
    Field Studies.  EPA-600/2-79-081.  May 1979.

2.  Pellizzari, E.  D.   Analysis of  Organic Air Pollutants by Gas
    Chromatography  and  Mass  Spectroscopy.   Final  Report.   EPA-
    600/2-79-057.  March 1979.

3.  Interim  Report  on  Monitoring   Methods  Development   in  the
    Beaumont-Lake Charles Area.   EPA 600/4-80-046.  October 19PO
    (author not listed).

4.  Singh, H.  B., L. J.  Salas, A. Smith,  and H. Shigeishi.  Atmo-
    spheric  Measurements of  Selected  Toxic  Organic Chemicals:
    Halogenated Alkanes;  Chlorinated  Ethylenes,  Chlorinated
    Aromatics,  Aromatic  Hydrocarbons,   and  Secondary Organics.
    Interim Report, Grant No. 805990,  SRI Project  7774,  SRI In-
    ternational.  April  1980.

    Table  B-9  summarizes the  current standards  for  some  of the
organic compounds  and  elements monitored in  air at Love  Canal.
The information  reported in Table  B-9  includes standards  of the
U.S.  Occupational   Safety and  Health  Administration  (OSHA)  and
National Institute  of Occupational  Safety and  Health  (NIOSH), and
                                180

-------
recommended exposure limits of the American Conference of Govern-
mental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH).  The occupational standards
reported here are presented  for  informational  purposes only, and
are not  to be  interpreted  as  applicable directly  to acceptable
household or ambient exposure levels.

     Table B-10 presents the analytical results from the National
Organics Reconnaissance Survey of Halogenated Organics (NORS) and
the National Organics  Monitoring Survey (NOMS) of drinking water
supplies.  The table contains findings for chloroform, bromoform,
bromodichloromethane,  dibromochloromethane,  and  total  trihalo-
methane  concentrations  in the water  supplies  of 80  U.S.  cities
(NORS) and 113 public water systems (NOMS).

     The EPA national drinking water regulations are presented in
Table B-ll.   Table B-ll includes both  the  national interim pri-
mary  drinking  water regulations  as  well as the  recommended na-
tional secondary drinking water  regulations.
                                181

-------
        TABLE B-7.
LIST OF COMPOUNDS FOUND IN AMBIENT AIR
              USING TENAX
Compound
Vinyl chloride





Ethyl chloride
Vinylidene chloride
( 1 , 1-Dichloro-
ethylene)










Ethyl bromide


Methylene chloride















Location Cone. Range (ng/m )
Clifton, NJ
Passaic, NJ
Belle, WV
Nitro, WV
Deer Park, TX
Plaquemine, LA
Plaquemine, LA
Edison, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Linden, NJ
Staten Island, NY
Charleston, WV
Front Royal, VA
Bristol, PA
N. Philadelphia, PA
Marcus Hook, PA
Plaquemine, LA
Geismar, LA
Liberty Mounds, OK
Houston, TX
Edison, NJ
Eldorado, AK
Magnolia, AK
Paterson, NJ
Clifton, NJ
Passaic, NJ
Hoboken , NJ
Fords, NJ
Edison, NJ
E. Brunswick, NJ
Sayreville, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Burlington, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Staten Island, NY
Niagara Falls, NY
Belle, WV
( continued)
400
120,000
2-4,000
50,000
100
30-1,334
1,378
T(454)
T(303)
T(263)
T(263)
T(263)
T(500)-2,500
T(333)
T(263)
T(263)
36-990
T-200
T
T-430
T-1,000
T
T
1,091
1,545
400
T
9,286
T-1,250,000
T(l,000)-125,000
T-7,600
T(500)-26,778
35-625
T(l,000)
T(555)-l,000
9778-19,500
44-11,556
8,700

Ref .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

^T means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
 detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                  182

-------
                       TABLE  B-7 (continued)
Compound
Methylene chloride
(continued)














1 , 2-Dichloro-
ethylene









Chloroprene isomer
3 -Chloropropene
1 , 1-Dichloro-
e thane






Chloroform

Location Cone. Range (ng/m )
Nitro, WV
South Charleston, WV
Bristol, PA
N. Philadelphia, PA
Marcus Hook, PA
Charleston, WV
St. Albans, WV
W. Belle, WV
Institute, WV
Front Royal, VA
Birmingham, AL
Geismar, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Houston, TX
Magna , UT
Upland, CA
E. Brunswick, NJ
Edison, NJ
Niagara Falls, NY
St. Albans, WV
W. Belle, WV
S. Charleston, WV
Nitro, WV
Institute, WV
Front Royal, VA
Magna, UT
Grand Canyon, AR
Sayreville, NJ
Edison, NJ
Edison, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deer Park, TX
Plaquemine, LA
Geismar, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Magna , UT
Pater son, NJ
( continued)
T(555)-50,000
T(714)-ll,334
T(571)
T(555)-560
T(555)-l,000
T(l,000)-2,818
T(714)-778
T(714)-l,778
1,636-4,091
T(714)-238,250
T(715)-l,000
442-2,333
160-2,160
0-4,300
T(714)-23,714
1,800-42,000
4,847
T(565)-5,263
T(29)-334
T(263)
T(263)
T(213)
T(213)
T(213)
T(213)-2,974
T(334)
260
4,067
T-28,667
22,700
229
555
T-478
75,500
34-477
3,015-10,443
T(334)
3,750

Ref .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1

TT means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means  estimated minimum
detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                   183

-------
                      TABLE B-7 (continued)
    Compound
Location
Cone.  Range (ng/m )
                              (continued)
Ref.
Chloroform Clifton, NJ
(continued) Passaic, NJ
Hoboken, NJ
Newark, NJ
Staten Island, NY
Fords, NJ
Bound Brook, NJ
E. Brunswick, NJ
Edison, NJ
Sayreville, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Burlington, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Niagara Falls, NY
S. Charleston, WV
Nitro, WV
Bristol, PA
N. Philadelphia, PA
Front Royal, VA
Marcus Hook, PA
Charleston, WV
St. Albans, WV
W. Belle, WV
Birmingham, AL
Houston, TX
Pasadena, TX
Deer Park, TX
Freeport, TX
La Porte, TX
Plaquemine, LA
Geismar, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Magna, UT
Upland , CA
1,2-Dichloro- Paterson, NJ
ethane Clifton, NJ
Passaic, NJ
8,300
4,167
2,083
37,000
144-20,830
16,700
4,167
186-20,000
T(230)-266,000
9,000-30,000
T(75)-l,178
T-439
T(167)
250
464-13,484
T(125)-2,161
T(125)-39,000
150-250
T(97)
T(125)-14,517
T(97)-235
T(167)
T(125)
T(125)
T(125)-l,000
T(125)-ll,538
T
T-53,846
T-280
7,692-8,850
419-5,800
857-11,742
181-6,968
T(125)
400-14,000
T
64,516"
T
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1,
1,
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1,
1
1,
1
1
1
1
1










2
2


















2

2





'T means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                  184

-------
                       TABLE B-7 (continued)
Compound Location Cone. Range (ng/m }
1 , 2-Dichloro- Hoboken, NJ
ethane Newark, NJ
(continued) Fords, NJ
Bound Brook, NJ
Edison, NJ
Sayreville, NJ
E. Brunswick, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Burlington, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Staten Island, NY
St. Albans, WV
W. Belle, WV
Charleston, WV
Nitro, WV
S. Charleston, WV
Institute, WV
Front Royal , VA
Bristol, PA
N. Philadelphia, PA
Marcus Hook, PA
Birmingham, AL
Houston, TX
Pasadena, TX
Deer Park, TX
Freeport, TX
La Porte, TX
Plaquemine, LA
Geismar, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Magna, UT
Dominquez, CA
Upland, CA
1, 1 , 1-Trichloro- Paterson, NJ
ethane Clifton, NJ
Passaic, NJ
{ continued)
T
T
T
T
T(347)-57,000
37,913
T(150)
T(151)-101
T-53
T
T(195)
T(195)
T(334)
T(213)
T(212)
T(151)
T(263)
T(213)
T(213)-2,974
T(258)
T(195)-960
T(195)
200-400
T(258)-242
158
T-66,300
3,300-4,500
778
10-3,700
100-10,333
78-10,341
21-1,240
T(334)
14,814
T( 277) 860
T
T
13,000

Ref .
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1,2
1,2


1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

'T means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                   185

-------
                      TABLE  B-7 (continued)
Compound Location Cone
1,1,1-Trichloro- Hoboken, NJ
ethane Newark, NJ
(continued) staten Island, NY
Fords, NJ
Bound Brook , NJ
Edison, NJ
E. Brunswick, NJ
Sayreville, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Burlington, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Niagara Falls, NJ
S. Charleston, WV
Bristol, PA
N. Philadelphia, PA
Marcus Hook, PA
Charleston, WV
St. Albans, WV
Nitro, WV
W. Belle, WV
Institute, WV
Front Royal, VA
Birmingham, AL
Houston, TX
Pasadena, TX
Deer Park, TX
Freeport, TX
La Porte, TX
Plaquemine, LA
Geismar, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Liberty Mounds, OK
Tulsa, OK
Vera , OK
Beaumont, TX
Lake Charles, LA
Magna, UT
( continued)
. Range (ng/m )
T
T
T
T
T
T(417)-500,000
T(417)
T-30
T-3,116
T-2,842
T(294)
129-650
T(334)-3,890
T(312)-5,000
T(267)
T(277)
T-1,600
T(217)-278
T(334)
T(334)
T(312)
T(217)-347
T(100)-2,933
T(334)-2,267
522-995
T
144-1,000
15,200-16,600
T-27,700
68-8700
T-675
78-500
T-(417)
T(334)
T(334)
727-8,381
32-35,000
T(334)

Ref .
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1,3
1

T means trace;  a number in  parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
detectable amount under the sampling  and analysis conditions.
                                  186

-------
                       TABLE B-7 (continued)
Compound Location Cone. Range (ng/m )
1 , 1 , 1-Trichloro- Grand Canyon, AR
ethane Lqs Angeles, CA
(continued) Upland, CA
Carbon tetrachloride Paterson, NJ
Clifton, NJ
Passaic, NJ
Hoboken , NJ
Newark, NJ
Staten Island, NY
Fords, NJ
Bound Brook, NJ
East Brunswick, NJ
Edison, NJ
Sayreville, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Burlington, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Niagara Falls, NY
S. Charleston, WV
Bristol, PA
N. Philadelphia, PA
Marcus Hook, PA
Nitro, WV
W. Belle, WV
St. Albans, WV
Institute, WV
Front Royal, VA
Houston, TX
Pasadena, TX
Deer Park, TX
Freeport, TX
La Porte, TX
Plaquemine, LA
Geismar, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Liberty Mounds, OK
Tulsa, OK
( continued )
T(217)-218
8340
T(454)-51,721
T
T(59)
T
T
T
T(74)
334
T
T(120)-20,000
T-13,687
T(125)
T-71
19-32
T(125)
T(74)
T(83)-5,038
T(95)-2,222
T(95)
T(74)
T(74)
T(95)
T(91)
T(74)-3,630
T(59)-441
T(59)-l,190
T(87)-238
T-146
T-846
T-11,538
T-1,230
T-4,628
183-10,100
74-1,037
T
T

Ref .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

^T means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
 detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                  187

-------
                       TABLE  B-7 (continued)
Compound
Carbon tetrachloride
(continued)




Dibromomethane


l-Chloro-2-bromo-
ethane

1,1, 2-Trichloro-
ethane








Trichloroethylene
















Location Cone. Range (ng/m )
Vera, OK
Beaumont, TX
Lake Charles, LA
Magna, UT
Grand Canyon, AR
Upland , CA
Paterson, NJ
Edison, NJ
E. Brunswick, NJ
Edison, NJ
El Dorado, AK
Magnolia, AK
Edison, NJ
Sayreville, NJ
Ed i son , NJ
Linden, NJ
Deer Park, TX
Freeport, TX
Plaquemine, LA
Geismar, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Paterson, NJ
Clifton, NJ
Passaic, NJ
Hoboken, NJ
Staten Island, NY
Bound Brook , NJ
Edison, NJ
E. Brunswick, NJ
Sayreville, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Burlington, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Niagara Falls, NY
Charleston, WV
S. Charleston, WV
( continued)
T
611-16,380
30-10,154
T(95)-166
T(59)
T(134)-l,461
130
63,000
42
5,000-27,000
T-73
32-1,089
294-17,571
3,500
4,467
200
3,334-6,700
T-3,821
36-1,840
120-9,611
54-553
3,500-40,400
1,200
T
T
T
T(73)
T
T(178)-93,000
T-82,000
T-3,737
T-242
4-56
T(92)
T(77)
T(73)-15,880
T(56)
T(55)-179

Ref .
1
3
1,3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

^T means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
 detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                  18B

-------
                       TABLE B-7  (continued)
Compound Location Cone. Range (ng/m )
Trichloroethylene Nitro, WV
(continued) St. Albans, WV
Bristol, PA
N. Philadelphia, PA
Marcus Hook, PA
W. Belle, WV
Institute, WV
Front Royal, VA
Birmingham, AL
Houston, TX
Pasadena, TX
Deer Park, TX
Freeport, TX
La Porte, TX
Baton Rouge, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Beaumont, TX
Liberty Mounds, OK
Tulsa, OK
Magna , UT
Grand Canyon, AR
Dominquez, CA
Upland, CA
1 , 2-Dibromoethane Sayreville, NJ
Edison, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Beaumont, TX
El Dorado, AK
Magnolia, AK
Tetrachloroethylene Paterson, NJ
Clifton, NJ
Passaic, NJ
Hoboken, NJ
Newark, NJ
Staten Island, NY
Fords, NJ
Bound Brook, NJ
Edison, NJ
( continued )
T(55)-360
T(98)-45
T(100)
T(92)
T(80)
T(55)
T(55)
T(74)-420
T(100)-134
T(100)-160
76-5,071
321
0-200
T-43
T(132)
392-6,000
0-1,034
T
T
T(100)
T(130)
9,210
T(167)-3,400
591
T-757
T
0-1,000
T-271,283
26-62,484
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T-394,000

Ref .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

^T  means  trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
 detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                  189

-------
                       TABLE  B-7 (continued)
Compound Location Cone
Tetrachloroethylene E. Brunswick, NJ
(continued) Sayreville, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Burlington, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Linden, NJ
Niagara Falls, NY
Charleston, WV
S. Charleston, WV
St. Albans, WV
Nitro, WV
W. Belle, WV
Institute, WV
Front Royal, VA
Birmingham, AL
Houston, TX
Pasadena, TX
Deer Park, TX
Freeport, TX
La Porte, TX
Lake Charles, LA
Beaumont, TX
Plaquemine , LA
Geismar, LA
Baton Rouge , LA
Liberty Mounds, OK
Tulsa, OK
Vera, OK
Magna, UT
Grand Canyon, AR
Dominquez, CA
Upland, CA
Chlorobenzene Pater son, NJ
Clifton, NJ
Hoboken, NJ
Newark, NJ
Staten Island, NY
Fords, NJ
Bound Brook, NJ
{ continued )
. Range (ng/m )
T-2,722
T(49)-60,000
T-218
185
T(189)-276
T(106)-960
T(155)-51,992
T(19)-109
T(35)-l,536
T(26)-434
T(19)-52
T(19)
T(19)
T(19)-2,994
T{25)-58
T(44)-260
T-20
T-2,019
0-1,585
T-83
T-10,547
0-3,900
T-1,224
7-100
T(59)-364
T
T
T
T(34)-80
T{234)
20,000
70-7,258
T
T
T
T
T(135)
T
20,000

Ref .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

*T means  trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
 detectable  amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                   190

-------
                       TABLE B-7 (continued)
Compound
Chlorobenzene
( continued )

























1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloro-
ethane


Chlorotoluene
isomer ( s )
Pentachloroethane

m-Di chlorobenzene



Location Cone
E. Brunswick, NJ
Edison, NJ
Sayreville, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, TX
Burlington, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Niagara Falls, NY
S. Charleston, WV
Nitro, WV
Charleston, WV
W. Belle, WV
Bristol, PA
N. Philadelphia, PA
Marcus Hook, PA
Institute, WV
Front Royal, VA
Birmingham, AL
Plaquemine, LA
Geismar, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Houston, TX
Lake Charles, LA
Beaumont , TX
Magna, UT
Grand Canyon, AR
Upland, CA
Edison, NJ
Baton Rouge, LA
Iberville Parish, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Niagara Falls, NY
Iberville Parish, LA
Linden, NJ
Iberville Parish, LA
Clifton, NJ
Hoboken, NJ
Newark , NJ
(continued )
3 t
. Range (ng/m )
T(77)-l,127
T(60)-12,791
T{60)-4,000
T-272
11-512
T(278)
T(231)
T(197)-4,232
T(18)
T(18)
T(18)
T(18)
450
T(238)
T(242)
T(18)
T(18)
38-122
29
T-900
T(128)
T(132)-125
7-29
T-1100
T(100)
T(104)
T(136)-152
1,389-2,2785
0-71
0-5,800
37-430
25-226,514
0-35
76
0-13
T(33)
T{33)
T{33)

Ref .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1,3
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
1
1

'T means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                  191

-------
                       TABLE B-7  (continued)
Compound Location Cone
m-Dichlorobenzene Bound Brook, NJ
(continued) Edison, NJ
East Brunswick, NJ
Sayreville, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Burlington, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Staten Island, NY
S. Charleston, WV
St. Albans, WV
Nitro, WV
Institute, WV
W. Belle, WV
Front Royal, VA
Bristol, PA
N. Philadelphia, PA
Marcus Hook, PA
Charleston, WV
Birmingham, AL
Baton Rouge, LA
Houston, TX
El Dorado, AK
Lake Charles, LA
Magna , UT
Grand Canyon, AR
Upland, CA
o-Dichlorobenzene Edison, NJ
East Brunswick, NJ
Sayreville, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Burlington, NJ
Bridgeport, NJ
Staten Island, NY
South Charleston, WV
Nitro, WV
St. Albans, WV
( continued)
. Range (ng/m )
T(33)
T(49)-33,783
T(33)-659
T(72)-126
T-78
T-1,240
T(185)
T(154)
T(90)
T-38
T(18)
T(20)
T(12)
T(9)
T(17)-279
T(172)
T{167)
T(161)
101
T(94)-557
T(85)
T(83)
16
6-27
T{69)
T(260)
T(26)-382
T(49)~12,433
T(33)-l,500
T
T--89
T-1,319
T(185)
T
T(90)
T(17)-309
T(9)-39
T(23)

Ref .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1,3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

^T means  trace? a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
 detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                   192

-------
                       TABLE B-7   continued)
    Compound
   Location

Cone. Range (ng/m )
  isomers
Bromotoluene isomer

Dichlorotoluene
  isomer(s)

Benzyl Chloride
Chloroaniline isomer

Trichlorobenzene
  isomer
Edison, NJ
Niagara Falls, NY
Ford,  NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Niagara Falls, NY
Edison, NJ
Bound Brook, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Bound Brook, NJ
Edison, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Niagara Falls, NY
Front Royal, VA
Bristol, PA
N. Philadelphia,  PA
Upland, CA
Deer Park, TX

         (continued)
472-1,873
T(53)-4372
T
29-107
T(106)-158,682
4,513-8,033
33
T-5,960
867
1,160
T-113
T-150
T(23)-43,700
T(7)
T(103)
T
T(43)
25-2,000
                      Ref .
o-Dichlorobenzene
( continued)








Dichlorobenzene
isomers





Chlorobenzaldehyde
W. Belle, WV
Institute, WV
Front Royal, VA
Bristol, VA
N. Philadelphia, PA
Baton Rouge, LA
Tulsa, OK
Houston, TX
Lake Charles, LA
Upland, CA
Fords, NJ
Bound Brook, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Niagara Falls, NY
Liberty Mounds, OK
Tulsa, OK
Niagara Falls, NY
T(8)
T(9)-59
T(13)-58
T(172)
T(167)-185
T(84)
T
T(86)
T
T(26)
T
T
T-30
T-1,240
T(29)-100,476
80
T
T(18)-4,058
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1,3
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
^T means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
 detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                   193

-------
                        TABLE B-7  (continued)
    Compound
   Location
Cone. Range (ng/m )
  butadiene
Bromopropane isomer

Allyl bromide

1, 2-Dichloropropane
Bromodichloro-
  methane
Chlorodibromo-
  methane
Dichloropropane
  isomers
El Dorado, AK         T-47
Magnolia, AK          T-734
El Dorado, AK         T-30
Magnolia, AK          9-16
Geismar, LA           36-3,999
Beaumont,  TX         0-1,450
Lake Charles, LA      23
Iberville Parish, LA  0-2,200
El Dorado, AK         T-26
Magnolia, AK          T
El Dorado, AK         T-81
Lake Charles, LA      34-230
Deer Park, TX         T-2,586
Preeport, TX          69-1,478
Plaquemine, LA        T-2,239

         (continued)
Ref.
Trichlorobenzene
isomer
( continued )

1 , 3-Hexachloro-
butadiene





Chloronitrobenzene
isomer
Dichloronitro-
benzene isomer
Tetrachloro-
benzene isomer(s)
Tetrachloro-
toluene isomer(s)
Pentachlorobenzene
2~Chloro-l,3-
Freeport, TX
La Porte, TX
Plaquemine, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Niagara Falls, NY
Deer Park, TX
Freeport, TX
La Porte, TX
Plaquetnine, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Deepwater, NJ

Deepwater, NJ

Niagara Falls, NY

Niagara Falls, NY

Niagara Falls, NY
Houston, TX
8-13
T
20-40
23-117
26-414
25-2,066
T
T
18-37
23-117
T-12
T-360

T-2,704

T(21)-9,600

16-970

T(23)-494
266-4,000
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1

1

1

1

1
1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          3
                          1
                          2
                          1
                          1
                          1
                          1,3
                          1
                          1
                          1
 'T means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
 detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                   194

-------
                       TABLE B-7  (continued)
    Compound
   Location
Cone. Range (ng/m )
Ref.
Dibromochloro-
  propane isomer(s)
Dichlorobutane
  isomer(s}
l-Chloro-2,3-
  dibromopropane
1,l-Dibromo-2-
  Chloropropane
1,2 & 1,3-Dibromo-
  propane
Dichlorodibromo-
  methane
Chlorobromo-
  propane isomer
l-Chloro-3-bromo-
  propane
l-Chloro-3-bromo-
  propene
Bichloropropene
  isomer
Bromoform
Bromobenzene

Tetrachlorobutadiene
Tetrachloropropane
  isomer
Benzene
Acetone
Cyanobenzene
  (benzonitrile}

Furan
El Dorado, AK
Magnolia, AK
p'laquemine, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
El Dorado, AK

El Dorado, AK

El Dorado, AK
Magnolia, AK
El Dorado, AK

El Dorado, AK

El Dorado, AK
Magnolia, AK
El Dorado, AK

Deer Park, TX
Plaquemine, LA
El Dorado, AK
Magnolia, AK
Lake Charles, LA
El Dorado, AK
Magnolia, AK
Iberville Parish, LA
Iberville Parish, LA

Iberville Parish, LA
Baton Rouge, LA
Beaumont, TX
Linden,  NJ
Baton Rouge, LA
Linden,  NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Lake Charles, LA
Linden,  NJ
Deepwater, NJ

         (continued)
    T-187
    25-6,653
    54-7,200
    13-193
    T-20
    T
    T
    7-40

    T-83

    T-23
    T-1,688
    T

    T-1,293
    10-260
    T-104
    8-380
    68-729
    T-4,276
    23-140
    0-17
    0-240

    420-16,000
    80-11,000
    900-33,333
    43-21,300
    68-3,294
    T-49
    T-35
    19-62
    9-46
    T-59
1
1
1,2
1,2
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1,3
1
1
2
2

2
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
 'T means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
 detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                   195

-------
                       TABLE B-7  (continued)
   Compound
Location
Cone. Range (ng/m )
Ref.
t-Butanol
iso-Propanol
Methylethyl ketone
Benzaldehyde
Acetophenone

Methylvinyl ketone

Cyclohexanone
Diethyl maleate
Diethyl fumarate
Tolualdehyde
Methylmethacrylate
Dibenzofuran
Phenylacetylene
Nitrobenzene
Aniline (or
methylpyridine)
Chloroaniline isomer
Nitrophenol
o-Nitrotoluene
p-Nitrotoluene
1 , 2-Dibromopropane
Toluene

Ethyl benzene

Naphthalene
Xylene( s }
1-Methylnaphthalene
n-Nonanal
Ethyl acetate
Linden, NJ
Linden, NJ
Linden, NJ
Linden, NJ
Linden, NJ
Lake Charles, LA
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Linden, NJ
Linden, NJ
Linden, NJ
Linden, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Deepwater, NJ

Deepwater, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Deepwater, NJ
Lake Charles, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Beaumont, TX
Lake Charles, LA
Beaumont, TX
Lake Charles, LA
Beaumont, TX
Lake Charles, LA
Lake Charles, LA
Beaumont, TX
87-1,745
4-59
T-84
36-557
131-1,167
133-270
10-45
T-72
T-629
T-1,085
T-882
T-83
16-95
29-3,279
T-41
105-123
28

T-5,960
24-73
T-47
59-86
23
290-2,179
1378-32,157
57-354
102-3,598
56-118
32-26,765
T-24
260-1,105
T-933
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
"T means trace; a number in parentheses by the T means estimated minimum
detectable amount under the sampling and analysis conditions.
                                  196

-------
   TABLE B-8.
AVERAGE DAILY  CONCENTRATIONS OF TOXIC CHEMICALS
               POUND BY SINGH*
Compounds
Methyl chloride
Methyl bromide
Methylene chloride
Chloroform
Carbon tetrachloride
1 , 2-Dichloroe thane
1 , 2-Dibromoethane
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1,1, 2-Trichloroethane
1,1,1, 2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Vinylidene chloride
Trichloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
Chlorobenzene
o-Dichlorobenzene
m-Dichlorobenzene
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
m/p-Xylenes
o-Xylene
4-Ethyl toluene
1,2, 4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3, 5-Trimethylbenzene
Phosgene
Peroxyacetyl nitrate
Peroxypropionyl nitrate
Los Angeles
3,002
244
3,751
88
215
519
33
1,028
9
4
17
5
399
1,480
200
125
77
69
6,040
11,720
2,250
4,610
1,930
1,510
1,880
380
-
4,977
722
Phoenix
2,391
67
893
111
277
216
40
824
16
9
17
30
484
994
200
226
87
31
4,740
8,630
2,000
4,200
1,780
1,510
1,740
400
_
779
93
Oakland
1,066
55
416
32
169
83
16
291
8
4
7
13
188
308
100
40
65
30
1,550
3,110
600
1,510
770
660
-
_
50
356
149
'See  Reference 4.
                                197

-------
TABLE B-9.  SUMMARY OF  CURRENT STANDARDS FOR SUBSTANCES
                MONITORED IN LOVE CANAL AIR SAMPLES
Substance
Benzene


Carbon
tetrachloride

Chloroben zene

o-Chlorotoluene

p-Chlorotol uene
1, 2-Dibromo-
ethane








o-Dichloro-
benzene
p-Dichloro-
benzene
1, 1, 2,2-Tetra-
chloroethylene

Toluene



OSHAf
Environmental
Standards
lOppm, 8 hr. TWA
(30 mg/m3)

lOppm, 8 hr. TWA
(65 mg/m3)

75ppm, 8 hr. TWA

__

—
20ppm, 8 hr. TWA
(152 mg/m3)








SQppm, ceiling
(300 mg/m3}
75ppm, 8 hr. TWA
(450 mg/m3)
lOOppm, 8 hr. TWA
(678 mg/in3)

200ppm, -B hr. TWA
(750 mg/m3)


NIOSH*
Recommended
Limit
Ippm ceiling
(3.2 mg/m3)
(60-minute)
2ppm ceiling
(12.6 mg/m )
( 60-minute)
—

__

—
0.13ppm ceiling
( 1 mg/m3 )
{ 15-minute)







— ,**

-_—

SOppm, 1,0 hr.
TWA ..
(339 mg/nT)
lOOppm, 10 hr.
TWA -
(375 mg/m )
(continued)
ACGIH*
Adopted
Value
30 mg/m ,
TLV-TWA

65 mg/m »
TLV-TWA

350 mg/m ,
TLV-TWA
250 mg/m ,
TLV-TWA
—
no
exposure








3
300 mg/m
ceiling
450 mg/m
TLV-TWA
670 mg/m
TLV-TWA

375 mg/m
TLV-TWA


NIOSH
Considered
Health Effect
blood changes,
including
leukemia
liver cancer


—

_ —

—
damage to
skin , eyes ,
heart, liver,
spleen, res-
piratory and
central ner-
vous systems;
potential for
cancer and
mut agenesis
__

-.—

nervous system.
heart, respira-
tory, liver
central nervous
system depres-
sant

                           198

-------
                          TABLE  B-9  (continued)
   Substance
    OSHA'
Environmental
  Standards
                                        NIOSH*
                                      Recommended
                                        Limit
 ACGIH*       NIOSH
Adopted    Considered
 Value    Health Effect
y-BHC
(Lindane)

Hexachloro-
  benzene

Hexachlorocyclo-
  pentadiene
  (C-56)

1,2,3,4-Tetra-
  ehlorobenzene

1,2,3-Trichloro-
  benzene

1,2,4-Trichloro-
  benzene

1,3,5-Trichloro-
  benzene

2,4,5-Trichloro-
  phenol

Pentachloro-
  benzene
                                   0.5  rag/in"
                                   TLV-TWA
                                   0.1  mg/m"
                                   TLV-TWA
                                   40 mg/m
                                   TLV-TWA
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
0,5 mg/m , 8 hr.
TWA
0.01 mg/m ,
8 "hr. TWA
0.002 mg/m3,
8 hr. TWA
0.1 mg/m , 8 hr.
TWA
0 . 5 mg/m ,
10 hr. TWA
0.002 mg/m
ceiling
(15-minute )
0.0005 mg/m3
(130-minute)
0.04 mg/m ,
10 hr. TWA
0.5 mg/in
TLV-TWA
0 . 2 mg/m3
TLV-TWA
0.002 mg/m3
TLV-TWA
0.05 mg/m ,
TLV-TWA
irritation;
heart and lung
effects
dermatitis,
lung and lym-
phatic cancer
lung cancer
lung and kidney
effects
                                   (continued)
                                      199

-------
                           TABLE B-9  (continued)
Substance
Copper
Lead
OSHA^
Environmental
Standards
0.05 mg/m ,
8 hr. TWA
NIOSH*
Recommended
Limit
0.
10
1 mg/m ,
hr , TWA
ACGIH*
Adopted
Value
1 mg/m
TLV-TWA
0,15 mg/m3
TLV-TWA
NIOSH
Considered
Health Effect
kidney, blood,
and nervous
 Nickel
 Zinc
1 mg/m ,  8 hr.
TWA
0.015 mg/m"
10 hr. TWA
1 mg/m
TLV-TWA
system effects

skin effects;
nasal cancer
TU.S.  Occupational  Safety  and Health Administration  (OSHA) environmental stand-
 ards  as of March 1,  1981.  The phrase "8 hr. TWA" means the time-weighted av-
 erage concentration,  for  a  normal 8-hour workday or 40-hour workweek, to which
 nearly all workers may be exposed without adverse effect; the phrase "ceiling"
 means the concentration maximum to which workers may be exposed,

*The National Institute of  Occupational  Safety  and Health (NIOSH) recommended
 work-place exposure  limits  as  of March 1, 1981.  Values are reported as "ceil-
 ing"  or time-weight average;  the health  effects  considered  in the establish-
 ment  of the limit  are also  listed in  the table,

*The American Conference  of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) thresh-
 old limit  values  (TLV)  for chemical substances  in workroom air  adopted for
 1980.   Threshold limit values "refer to airborne concentrations of substances
 and represent conditions under which it  is believed that nearly  all workers
 may be repeatedly exposed  day after  day without adverse effect.   Because of
 wide  variation in individual  susceptibility,  however,  a small  percentage of
 workers may experience discomfort from some  substances at concentrations at or
 below the threshold  limit;  a smaller  percentage may be affected more seriously
 by aggravation of a pre-existing condition or  by development of an occupa-
 tional illness."   Values  are reported as "ceiling" or time-weighted average.

 Note:   Values  repotted are  in  parts per million (ppm) and milligrams per cubic
        meter (mg/m') .   To  convert  from  milligrams to micrograms, use  1  mg =
        1,000 jig.
                                       200

-------
           TABLE B-10.
ANALYTICAL  RESULTS OF CHLOROFORM,  BROMOFORM,  BROMODICHLOROMETHANE,
      AND DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE, AND TOTAL TRIHALOMETHANES IN
                  WATER SUPPLIES FROM NORS AND NOMS1"
           {Concentrations  in milligrams per liter,  ppm)
                Compound
                                         NORS
                                          NOMS
                                                  Phase I  Phase II
                                                  Phase III
                                           Dechlorinated  Terminal
to
O
               Chloroforms
               Bromoform;
               D ib rompchlo r o-
                 methane:
               B romodichlorp—
                 methane:
               Total Trihalo-
     Median     0.021
     Mean        —
     Range   NF-0.311

     Median     0.005
     Mean        —
     Range   NF-0.092
     Median     0.001
     Mean
     Range   NF-0.100
     Median     0.006
     Mean        —
     Range   NF-Q.116
   0.027
   0.043
NF-0.271

      LD
   0.003
NF-0.039
      LD
   0.008
NF-0.19
   0.010
   0.018
NF-0.183
   0.059
   0.083
NF-0.47

      LD
   0.004
NF-0.280
   0.004
   0.012
NF-0.290
   0.014
   0.018
NF-0.180
   0.022
   0.035
NF-0.20

      LD
   0.002
NF-0.137
   0.002
   0.006
NF-0.114
   0.006
   0.009
NF-0.072
   0.044
   0.069
NF-0,540

      LD
   0.004
NF-0.190
   0.003
   0.011
NF-0.250
   0.011
   0.017
NF-0.125
methanes:

NF:
LD:

Not Found
Less than
Median
Mean
Range
Detection
0.027
0.067
NF-0.482
Limit
0
0
NF-0

.045
.068
.457

0
0
NF-0

.087
.117
.784

0
0
NF-0

.037
.053
.295

0
0
NF-0

.074
.100
.695

                'The National Organics Reconnaissance  Survey of Halogenated Organics {NORS)
                involved 80 U.S.  cities.   The National Organics Monitoring Survey {NOMS)
                involved 113 public water systems.  Phase  I of NOMS is comparable to NORS.
                Phase  II  analyses were performed after THM-producing reactions  were  al-
                lowed  to  run  to  completion.   Phase  III analyses were  conducted  on  both
                dechlorinated samples and on  samples that were  allowed  to  run to comple-
                tion  {terminal).

-------
      TABLE B-ll.  EPA NATIONAL  DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
    National Interim Primary
   Drinking Water Regulations^
   (milligrams per liter,  ppm)
                        Recommended National Secondary
                          Drinking Water Regulations*
                          (milligrams per liter, ppm)
Inorganics
     Maximum
Contaminant Level
Inorganics
     Maximum
Contaminant Level
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Nitrate (as N)
Selenium
Silver
Fluoride
0.05
1. 0
0. 01
0.05
0.05
0.002
10.0
0.01
0.05
1.4 - 2.4"
Chloride
Copper
Iron
Manganese
Sulfate
Zinc
Total Dissolved
Sol ids


250.0
1.0
0. 3
0.05
250.0
5.0

500.0


Organics

Edrin                   0.0002
Y-BHC (Lindane)         0.004
Methoxychlor            0.1
Toxaphene               0.005
2,4-Dichlorophenoxy-
  acetic acid  (2,4-D)   0.1
2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy-
  propionic acid
  (2,4,5-TP Silvex)     0.01
Total Trihalomethanes   0.1
  As published in the Federal Register, Vol. 40, No. 248, December  24,
  1975, 59566, and subsequently amended

  ^Selected contaminants reported from:  National Secondary  Drinking
  Water Regulations, EPA-570/9-76-000, July, 1979

  *The  fluoride standard varies according to the annual average maximum
  daily air temperature for the location in which the community  water
  system is situated.

Note:  Total  trihalomethanes is the  sum of chloroform, dibromochloro-
       methane, bromodichloromethane,  and bromoform rounded to two
       significant  figures.
                                   202

-------
         The  following  information  has  been  extracted  from  an  article
published   by  EPA    in   the   Federal   Register,   Vol.   45,   No.   231.
November  28,   1980.     The  material  has  been  provided   here   to  sum-
marize  current  EPA  water quality  criteria.

                                SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
Acenaphthene

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for acenaphthene
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 1,700 ng/1 and would occur at
tower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of acenaphthene to
sensitive freshwater aquatic animals but
toxicity to freshwater algae occur at
concentrations as low as 520 fig/1.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for acenaphthene
indicate that acute and chronic toxicity
to saltwater aquatic life occur at
concentrations as low as 970 and 710
fig/1, respectively, and would1 occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. Toxicity to algae occurs at
concentrations as low as 500 fig/1.
Human Health
  Sufficient data is not available for
acenaphthene to derive a level which
would protect against the potential
toxicity of this compound. Using
available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is 20 jtg/L It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.

Acrolein

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for acrolein
indicate that acute and chronic toxicity
to freshwater aquatic life occurs at
concentrations as low as 68 and 21 u.g/1,
respectively, and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for acrolein
indicate that acute toxicity to saltwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 55 jig/1 and would occur at lower
concentrations among species  that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of acrolein to sensitive
saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of acrolein
ingested through water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 320 u.g/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of acrolein
ingested through contaminated aquatic
organisms alone, the ambient water
criterion is determined to be 780 (ig/1,
Acrylonitrile

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for acrylonitrile
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 7,550 ftg/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No definitive data are available
concerning the chronic toxicity of
acrylonitrile to sensitive freshwater
aquatic life but mortality occurs  at
concentrations as low as 2,600 ftg/1 with
a fish species exposed for 30 days.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  Only one saltwater species has been
tested with acrylonitrile and no
statement can be made concerning acute
or chronic toxicity.

Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of acrylonitrile
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated  aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable  at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at W~*, 10"*, and 10"'.  The
corresponding criteria are ,58 fig/1, .058
fig/1 and .006 fig/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 6.5 fig/1, .65 fig/1, and .065 fig/
1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels  may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.
Aldrin-Dieldrin

Dieldrin
Fresh water Aquatic Life
  For dieldrin the criterion to protect
fresh water aquatic life as derived using
the Guidelines is 0.0019 ftg/1 as a 24-
hour average and the concentration
should not exceed 2.5 fig/1 at any time.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For dieldrin the criterion to protect
saltwater aquatic life as derived using
the Guidelines is 0.0019 fig/1 as a 24-
hour average and the concentration
should not exceed 0.71 fig/1 at any time.
Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of dieldrin
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at ID"5,10"s, and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are .71 ng/1, .071
ng/1, and .0071 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are .76 ng/1, .076 ng/1, and .0076
ng/1 respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level,
Aldrin
Freshwater Aquatic Life  .

  For freshwater aquatic life the
concentration of aldrin should not
exceed 3.0 fig/1 at any time. No data are
available concerning the chronic toxicity
of aldrin to sensitive freshwater aquatic
life.
Saltwater Aquatic Life

  For saltwater aquatic life the
concentration of aldrin should not
exceed 1.3 fig/1 at any time. No data are
available concerning the chronic toxicity
of aldrin to sensitive saltwater aquatic
life.
                                                       203

-------
Human Health

  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of aldrin through
ingestion of contaminated water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water concentration should be
zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10"5, 10"6, and 10"7. The
corresponding criteria are .74 ng/1, .074
ng/1, and .0074 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water,  the
levels are .79 ng/1, .079 ng/1, and .0079
ng/1, respectively. Other concentrations
respresenting different risk levels may
be calculated by use of the Guidelines.
The risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.

Antimony
Freshwater Aquatic Life
   The available data for antimony
indicate that acute and chronic toxicity
to freshwater aquatic life occur at
concentrations as low as 9,000 and 1,600
Hg/1, respectively, and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. Toxicity to algae occurs at
concentrations as low as 610 fig/1.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
   No saltwater organisms  have been
adequately tested with antimony, and
no statement can be made concerning
acute or chronic toxicity.
Human Health
   For the  protection of human health
from the toxic properties of antimony
ingested through water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is  determined to
be 146 fig/1.
   For the  protection of human health
from the toxic properties of antimony
ingested through contaminated aquatic
organisms alone, the ambient water
criterion is determined to be 45,000 jig/1.

Arsenic
Freshwater Aquatic Life
   For freshwater aquatic life the
concentration of total recoverable
trivalent inorganic arsenic should not
exceed 440 fig/1 at any time. Short-term
effects on embryos and larvae of aquatic
vertebrate species have been shown to
occur at concentrations as low as 40 fig/
1.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for total
recoverable trivalent inorganic arsenic
indicate that acute toxicity to saltwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 508 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of trivalent
inorganic arsenic to sensitive saltwater
aquatic life.

Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of arsenic
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10"5,10"6. and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are 22 ng/1, 2.2
ng/1, and .22 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only.
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 175 ng/1, 17.5 ng/1, and 1.75
ng/1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented  for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.

Asbestos

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  No freshwater organisms have been
tested with any asbestiform mineral and
no statement can be made concerning
acute or chronic toxicity.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  No saltwater organisms have  been
tested with any asbestiform mineral and
no statement can be made concerning
acute or chronic toxicity.

Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of asbestos
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10"5, 10"6,  and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are 300,000
fibers/1,30,000 fibers/1, and 3,000 fibers/
1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.

Benzene
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for benzene
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentiations as
low as 5,300 fig/I and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive  than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of benzene to
sensitive freshwater aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for benzene
indicate that acute toxicity to saltwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 5,100 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No definitive data are available
concerning the chronic  toxicity of
benzene  to sensitive saltwater aquatic
life, but adverse effects occur at
concentrations as low as 700 fig/1 with a
fish species exposed for 168 days.
Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of benzene
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 'LO"5. 10"6,  and 10"1. The
corresponding ^criteria are 6.6 fig/1, .66
fig/1, and .066 fig/1, respectively. If the
above estimates  are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 400 fig/1, 40.0 fig/1, and 4.0 fig/
1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels  may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
                                                         204

-------
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.

Benzidine

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for benzidine
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 2,500 ng/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of benzidine to
sensitive freshwater aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  No saltwater organisms have been
tested with benzidine and no statement
can be made concerning acute and
chronic toxicity.

Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of benzidine
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient  water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10'', 10"«, and 10"7. The
corresponding criteria are 1.2 ng/1, .12
ng/1, and .01 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 5.3 ng/1, .53 ng/1, and .05 ng/
1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information  purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.
Beryllium
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available  data for beryllium
indicate that acute and chronic toxicity
to freshwater aquatic life occurs at
concentrations as low as 130 and 5.3 ng/
1, respectively, and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested.
Hardness has a substantial effect on
acute toxicity.

Salt water Aquatic Life
  The limited saltwater data base
available for beryllium does not permit
any statement concerning acute or
chronic toxicity.
Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of beryllium
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in  incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10"5,10" 6, and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are 37 ng/1, 3.7
ng/1, and .37 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aqua tic. organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 641 ng/1. 64.1 ng/1, and 6.41
ng/1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable"  risk level.
Cadmium
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable cadmium the
criterion (in ng/1) to protect freshwater
aquatic life as derived using the
Guidelines is  the numerical value given
by e(i-«tto|-»M» ag a 24-hour
average and the concentration (in ng/1)
should not exceed the numerical value
given by e(1" n-o«*—>l-n» at any
time. For example, a hardnesses of 50,
100, and 200 mg/1 as CaCO, the criteria
are 0.012,0.025, and 0.051 ug/1,
respectively,  and the concentration of
total recoverable cadmium should not
exceed 1.5, 3.0 and 6.3 ftg/1, respectively,
at any time.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable cadmium the .
criterion to protect saltwater aquatic life
as derived using the Guidelines is 4.5
ng/1 as a 24-hour average and the
concentration should not exceed 59 ng/1
at any time.
Human Health
  The ambient water quality criterion
for cadmium is recommended  to be
identical to the existing drinking water
standard which is 10 (ig/1. Analysis of
the toxic effects data resulted  in a
calculated level which is protective of
human health against the ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms. The calculated value
is comparable to the present standard.
For this reason a selective criterion
based on exposure solely from
consumption of 6.5 grams of aquatic
organisms was not derived.
Carbon Tetrachloride
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available date for carbon
tetrachloride indicate that acute toxicity
to freshwater aquatic life occurs at
concentrations as low as 35,200 ng/1 and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those tested. No data are available
concerning the chronic toxicity of
carbon tetrachloride to sensitive
freshwater aquatic life.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for carbon
tetrachloride indicate that acute toxicity
to saltwater aquatic life occurs at
concentrations as low as 50,000 fig/1 and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
that those tested. No data are available
concerning the chronic toxicity of
carbon tetrachloride to sensitive
saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of carbon
tetrachloride through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the  present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10"', 10"',
and 10"'. The corresponding criteria are
4.0ng/l, .40 fig/1, and .04 ng/1.
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 69.4 ng/1. 6-94
ng/1, and .69 n8/l> respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The  risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
Chlordane
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For chlordane the criterion to protect
freshwater aquatic life as derived using
the Guidelines is 0.0043 ng/1 as a 24-
hour average and the concentration
should not exceed 2.4 ng/1 at any time.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For chlordane the criterion to protect
saltwater aquatic life as  derived using
the Guidelines is 0.0040 ng/' as a 24-
hour average and the concentration
should not exceed 0.09 ng/1 at any time.
                                                         205

-------
Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of chlordane
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10"', 10"*, and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are 4,8 ng/1, ,46
ng/1, and .046 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 4.8 ng/1, .48 ng/1, and .048 ng/
1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on  an
"acceptable" risk level.
Chlorinated Benzenes

Fresh water Aquatic Life
  The available data for chlorinated
benzenes indicate that acute toxicity to
freshwater aquatic life occurs at
concentrations aa low a* 250 ftg/1  and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species thai are more sensitive
than those tested No data are available
concerning the chronic toxicity of the
more toxic of the chlorinated benzenes
to sensitive freshwater aquatic life but
toxicity occurs at concentrations as low
as 50 jig/1 for a fish species exposed for
7,5  days.
Saltwater Aquatic Lifa
  The available data for chlorinated
benzenes indicate that acute and
chronic toxicity to saltwater aquatic life
occur at concentrations as low as 180
and 129 ug/1, respectively, and would
occur at lower concentrations among
species that are more sensitive than
those tested.
Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of
hexachlorobenzene through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10~6,10"*.
and 10"'. The corresponding
recommended criteria are 7.2 ng/1, .72
ng/1, and .072 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 7.4 ng/1, .74 ng/1, and .074 ng/
1, respectively.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of 1,2,4,5-
tetrachlorobenzene ingested through
water and contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water criterion
is determined to be 38 fig/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of 1,2,4,5-
tetrachlorobenzene ingested through
contaminated  aquatic organisms alone,
the ambient water criterion is
determined to be 48 fig/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties, of
pentachlorobenzene ingested through
water and contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water criterion
is determined  to be 74 fig/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of
pentachlorobenzene ingested through
contaminated aquatic organisms alone,
the ambient water criterion is
determined to be 85 ng/1.
  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for trichlorobeniene.
  For comparison purposes, two
approaches were used to derive
criterion levels for monochlorobenzen*.
Based on available toxicity date, for the
protection of public health, the derived
level is  488 j*g/l Using available
organoleptic data, for controlling
undesirable taste and odor quality of
ambient water, the estimated level is 20
jig/1. It should be recognized that
organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have (imitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects

Chlorinated Ethanes

Freshwater Aguatic Life
  The available freshwater data for
chlorinated ethanes indicate that
toxicity increases greatly with
increasing chlormation, and thai acute
toxicity occurs at concentrations as low
as 118,000 fig/1 for 1,2-dichloroethane,
18,000 ftg/1 for two trichloroethanes,
9,320 fig/1 for*two tetrachloroethanes,
7,240 fig/1 for pentachioroethane, and
980 jtg/1 for hexachloroethane. Chronic
toxicity occurs at concentrations as low
as 20,000 p.g/1 for 1,2-dichloroethane,
9,400 fig/l for 1,1,2-trichlorocthane, 2,400
fig/1 for 1,1,2,2,-tetrachloroethane, 1,100
fig/1 for pentachioroethane, and 540 fig/1
for hexachloroethane. Acute and
chronic toxicity would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested.

Saltwater Aquatic Life

  The available saltwater data for
chlorinated ethanes indicate that
toxicity increases greatly with
increasing chlor nation and that acute
toxicity to fish and invertebrate species
occurs at concentrations as low as
113,000 fig/1 for 1,2-dichloroethane,
31,200 ftg/1 for 1,1,1-trichloroethane,
9,020 fig/1 for 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane,
390 jig/1 for peril achloroethane, and 940
fig/1 for hexachloroethane. Chronic
toxicity occurs at concentrations as low
as 281 ng/1 for pentachioroethane. Acute
and chronic  toxicity would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested.

Human Health

  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of 1,2-di-
chloroethane through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical.  However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental  increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10""*, 10"*,
and 10"', The corresponding criteria are
9.4 fig/1, ,94 fig/i, and .094 p.g/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 2,430 fig/1, 243
ftg/1, and 24,3 pg/i respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of 1,1,1-
trichloroe thane ingested through water
and contaminated aquatic organism, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 18.4 mg/1.
  For the pr&tecfion of human health
from the toxic properties of 1,1,1,-tri-
chloroethane ingested through
contaminated aquatic organisms alone,
the ambient water criterion is
determined to be 1,03 g/1.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
                                                         206

-------
effects due to exposure of 1,1,2-
trichloroethane through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at  10"s, 10" s,
and 10"'. The corresponding criteria are
6,0 jig/1, .6 fig/1, and .06 ftg/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 418 fig/1, 41.8
Hg/1, and 4.18 fig/1 respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of 1,1,2,2-tetra-
chloroethane through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10"*, 10"*,
and 10" *. The corresponding criteria are
1,7 jig/1, .17 fig/1 and .017 fig/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made far consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 107 jig/1,10,7
fig/L and 1.07 |tg/l, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of hexa-
chloroethane through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at  10"5.10"f,
and 10"'. The corresponding criteria are
19 fig/1,1.9 fig/1, and .19 fig/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 87.4 fig/1, 8.74
fig/1, and ,87 ftg/1, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines, The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for
monochloroethane.
  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time dsie to the insufficiency in
the available data for 1,1,-
dichloroe thane.
  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for 1,1,1,2-
tetrachloroethane.
  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for
pentachloroe thane.

Chlorinated Naphthalenes

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for chlorinated
naphthalenes indicate that acute
toxicity to freshwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 1,600 fig/t
and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested, No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of chlorinated
naphthalenes to sensitive Freshwater
aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for chlorinated
napthalsnes indicate that acute toxicity
to saltwater aquatic life occurs at
concentrations as low as  7.5 ftg/i and
would occur at lower  concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those tested. No  data are available
concerning the chronic toxicity of
chlorinated naphthalenes to sensitive
saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health
  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for chlorinated
napthalenes.

Chlorinated Phenols

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available freshwater data for
chlorinated phenols indicate that
toxicity generally increases with
increasing chJorination, and that acute
toxicity occurs at concentrations as low
as 30 fig/1 for 4-chloro-3-methyIphenol to
greater than 500,000 fig/1 for other
compounds. Chronic toxicity occurs at
concentrations as low as 970 fig/1 for
2,4,6-trichlorophenol. Acute and chronic
toxicity would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available saltwater data for
chlorinated phenols indicate that
toxicity generally increases with
increasing chlorination and that acute
toxicity occurs at concentrations as low
as 440 fig/1 for 2,3,5,8-tetrachlorophenol
and 29,700 fig/1 for 4-chlorophenol.
Acute toxicity would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of chlorinated phenols
to sensitive saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health
  Sufficient data is not available for 3-
monochlorophenol to derive a level
which would protect against the
potential toxicity of this compound.
Using available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quahty of ambient water, the estimated
level is 0.1 ftg/1. It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations arid have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  Sufficient data is not available for 4-
monochlorophenol to derive a level
which would protect against the
potential toxicity of this compound.
Using available organolsptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is 0.1 fig/1. It should be recognized
that organoieptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  Sufficient data is not available for 2,3-
dichlorophenol to derive a level which
would protect against the potential
toxicity of this compound. Using
available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is .04 fig/1. It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  Sufficient data is not available for 2,5-
tlichiorophenol to derive a level which
                                                         207

-------
would protect against the potential
toxicity of this compound. Using
available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is .5 fig/1. It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  Sufficient  data is not available for 2,6-
dichlorophenol  to derive a level which
would protect against the potential
toxicity of this compound. Using
available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is .2 fig/1. It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  Sufficient  data is not available for 3,4-
dichlorophenol  to derive a level which
would protect against the potential
toxicity of this compound. Using
available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is .3 fig/1. It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  Sufficient  data is not available for
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol to derive a
level which  would protect against the
potential toxicity of this compound.
Using available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is 1 fig/1. It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  For comparison purposes, two
approaches  were used to derive
criterion levels for 2,4,5-trichlorophenol.
Based on available toxicity data, for the
protection of public health, the derived
level is  2.6 mg/1. Using available
organoleptic data, for controlling
undesirable taste and odor quality of
ambient water, the estimated level is 1.0
fig/1. It should be recognized that
organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from  the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of 2,4,6-
trichlorophenol through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime fare estimated at 10"s, 10~6,
and 10"'. The corresponding criteria are
12 fig/1,1.2 fig/1, and .12 fig/1
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 36 fig/1, 3.6 fig/1,
and .36 fig/1, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
  Using available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is 2 fig/1. It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criterion
have limitations  and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  Sufficient data is not available for 2-
methyl-4-chlorophenql to derive a level
which would protect against any
potential toxicity of this compound.
Using available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is 1800 ng/1. It should be
recognized that organoleptic data as a
basis for establishing a water quality
criterion have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  Sufficient data is not available for 3-
methyl-4-chlorophenol to derive a level
which would protect against the
potential toxicity of this compound.
Using available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is 3000 fig/1. It should be
recognized that organoleptic data as a
basis for establishing a water quality
criterion have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
  Sufficient data is not available for 3-
methyl-6-chlorophenol to derive a level
which would protect against the
potential toxicity of this compound.
Using available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is 20 fig/1. It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criterion
 have limitations and have no
 demonstrated relationship to potential
 adverse human health effects.

 ChloroalkyI Ethers

 Freshwater Aquatic Life
   The available data for chloroalkyl
-ethers indicate that acute toxicity to
 freshwater aquatic life occurs at
 concentrations as low as 238,000 fig/1
 and would occur at lower
 concentrations among species that are
 more sensitive than those tested.  No
 definitive data are available concerning
 the chronic toxicity of chloroalkyl ethers
 to sensitive freshwater aquatic life.
 Saltwater Aquatic Life
   No saltwater organisms have been
 tested with any chloroalkyl  ether and no
 statement  can be made concerning acute
 and chronic toxicity.
 Human Health
   For the maximum protection of human
 health from the potential carcinogenic
 effects due to exposure of bis-
 (chloromethyl)-ether through ingestion
 of contaminated water and
 contaminated aquatic organisms, the
 ambient water concentration should be
 zero based on the non-threshold
 assumption for this chemical. However,
 zero level may not be attainable at the
 present time. Therefore, the levels which
 may result in incremental increase of
 cancer risk over the lifetime are
 estimated at 10"*, 10"*, and 10"7. The
 corresponding criteria are .038 ng/1,
 .0038 ng/1,  and .00038 ng/1, respectively.
 If the above estimates are made for
 consumption of aquatic organisms only,
 excluding consumption of water, the
 levels are  18.4 ng/1,1.84 ng/1, and .184
 ng/1, respectively. Other concentrations
 representing different risk levels may be
 calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
 risk estimate range is presented for
 information purposes and does not
 represent  an Agency judgment on an
 "acceptable" risk level.
   For the maximum protection of human
 health from the potential carcinogenic
 effects due to exposure of bis (2-
 chloroethyl) ether through ingestion of
 contaminated water and contaminated
 aquatic organisms, the ambient water
 concentration  should be zero based on
 the non-threshold assumption for this
 chemical.  However, zero level may not
 be attainable at the present time.
 Therefore, the levels which may result in
 incremental increase of cancer risk over
 the lifetime are estimated at 10"6,10"*,
 and 10"7. The corresponding criteria are
 .3 jig/l,  .03 ug/1, and .003 fig/I,
                                                         20R

-------
 respectively. If the above estimates are
 made for consumption of aquatic
 organisms only, excluding consumption
 of water, the levels are 13.6 fig/1,1.36
 fig/1, and .136 fig/1, respectively. Other
 concentrations representing different
 risk levels may be calculated by use of
 the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
 is presented for information purposes
 and does not represent an Agency
 judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
   For the protection of human health
 from the toxic properties of bis (2-
 chloroisopropyl) ether ingested through
 water and contaminated aquatic
 organisms, the ambient water criterion
 is determined to be 34.7 jig/L
   For the protection of human health
 from the toxic properties of bis (2-
 chloroisopropyl) ether ingested through
 contaminated aquatic organisms alone.
 the ambient water criterion is
 determined to be 4.36 mg/1.

 Chloroform

 Freshwater Aquatic Life

   The available data  for choloroform
 indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
 aquatic life occurs at  concentrations as
 low as 26,900 fig/1, and wculd occur at
 lower concentrations  among species
 that are more sensitive than the three
 tested species. Twenty-seven-day LC50
 values indicate that chronic toxicity
 occurs at concentrations as low as 1,240
 Hg/1, and could occur at lower  '
 concentrations among species or other
 life stages that are more sensitive than
 the earliest life cycle  stage of the
 rainbow trout.

 Saltwater Aquatic Life

  The data base for saltwater species is
 limited to one test and no statement can
 be made concerning acute or chronic
 toxicity.
Human Health

  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of chloroform
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be  attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result  in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10-', lO'", and 10~7. The
corresponding criteria are 1.90 /ig/1. .19
fig/1, and .019 ftg/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 157 ftg/1.15.7 jig/1, and 1.57
fig/1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.
2-Chlorophenol

Freshwater Aquatic Life

  The availabe data for 2-chlorophenol
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 4,380 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive that those tested.
No definitive data are available
concerning the chronic toxicity of 2-
chlorophenol to sensitive freshwater
aquatic life but flavor impairment occurs
in one species of fish at concentrations
as low as 2,000 fig/1.

Saltwater Aquatic Life

  No saltwater organisms have been
tested with 2-chlorophenol and no
statement can be made concerning acute
and chronic toxicity.

Human Health

  Sufficient data is not available for 2-
chlorophenol to derive a level which
would protect against the potential
toxicity of this compound. Using
available organoleptic data, for
controlling undesirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is 0.1 fig/1. It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
Chromium
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable hexavalent
chromium the criterion to protect
freshwater aquatic life as derived using
the Guidelines is 0.29 fig/1 as a 24-hour
average and the concentration should
not exceed 21 fig/1 at any time.
  For freshwater aquatic  life the
concentration (in fig/1) of total
recoverable trivalent chromium  should
not exceed the numerical  value given by
"e(1.08[ln(hardness)] + 3.48)" at any
time. For example, at hardnesses of 50,
100 and 200 mg/1 as CaCO, the
concentration of total recoverable
trivalent chromium should not exceed
2,200, 4,700, and 9,900 fig/1, respectively,
at any time. The available data indicate
that chronic toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low a 44 fig/1 and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable hexavalent
chromium the criterion to protect
saltwater aquatic life as derived using
the Guidelines is 18 ftg/1 as a 24-hour
average and the concentration should
not exceed 1,260 fig/1 at any time.
  For total recoverable trivalent
chromium, the availabe data indicate
that acute toxicity to saltwater aquatic
life occurs at concentrations as low as
10,300 fig/1, and would occur at lower
concentrations amoung species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of trivalent chromium to
sensitive saltwater aquatic life.

Human Health
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of Chromium
III ingested through water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 170 mg/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of Chromium
III ingested through contaminated
aquatic organisms alone, the ambient
water criterion is determined to be 3433
mg/1.
  The ambient water quality criterion
for total Chromium VI is recommended
to be identical to the existing drinking
water standard which is 50 fig/1.
Analysis of the toxic effects data
resulted in a calculated level which is
protective of human health against the
ingestion of contaminated water and
contaminated aquatic organisms. The
calculated value is comparable to the
present standard. For this reason a
selective criterion based on exposure
solely from consumption of 6.5 grams of
aquatic organisms was not derived.
Copper
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable copper the
criterion to protect freshwater aquatic
life as  derived using the Guidelines is 5.6
ftg/1 as a 24-hour average and the
concentration (in ftg/1) should not
exceed the numerical  value given by
e(0.94[ln(hardness)]-1.23) at any time.
For example, at hardnesses of 50,100,
and 200 mg/1 CaCO, the concentration
of total recoverable copper should not
exceed 12, 22, and 43 u.g/1 at any time.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable copper the
                                                          209

-------
criterion to protect saltwater aquatic life
as derived using the Guidelines is 4.0
fig/1 as a 24-hour average and the
concentration should not exceed 23 fig/1
at any time.

Human Health
  Sufficient data is not available for
copper to derive a level which would
protect against the potential toxicity of
this compound.  Using available
organoleptic data, for controlling
undesirable taste and odor quality of
ambient water,  the estimated level is 1
mg/1. It should be recognized that
organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
Cyanide

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For free cyanide (sum of cyanide
present as HCN and CN~, expressed as
CN) the criterion to protect freshwater
aquatic life as derived using the
Guidelines is 3.5 jig/1 as a 24-hour
average and the concentration should
not exceed 52 jig/1 at any time.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for free cyanide
(sum of cyanide present as HCN and
CN", expressed as CN) indicate that
acute toxicity to saltwater aquatic life
occurs at concentrations as low as 30
fig/1 and would occur at lower
concentrations  among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. If the
acute-chronic ratio for saltwater
organisms is  similar to that for
freshwater organisms, chronic toxicity
would occur  at concentrations as low as
2.0 ng/1 for the  tested species and at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested.
Human Health
   The ambient  water quality criterion
for cyanide is recommended to be
identical to the existing drinking water
standard which is 200 fig/I. Analysis of
the toxic effects data resulted in a
calculated level which is protective of
human health against the ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms. The calculated value
is comparable to the present standard.
For this reason  a selective criterion
based on exposure solely from
consumption of 6.5 grams of aquatic
organisms was  not derived.
DDT and Metabolites
Freshwater Aquatic Life
DDT
  For DDT and its metabolites the
criterion to protect freshwater aquatic
life as derived using the Guidelines is
0.0010 fig/1 as a 24-hour average and the
concentration should not exceed 1.1 fig/1
at any time.

TDK
  The available data for TDE indicate
that acute toxicity to freshwater aquatic
life occurs at concentrations as low as
0.6 jig/1 and  would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more  sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxi.jity.of TDE to sensitive
freshwater aquatic life.

DDE
  The available data for DDE indicate
thdt acute toxicity to freshwater aquatic
life occurs at concentrations as low as
1,050  fig/1 and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more  sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of DDE to sensitive
freshwater aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life

DDT
  For DDT and its metabolites the
criterion to protect saltwater aquatic life
as derived using the Guidelines is 0.0010
fig/1 as a 24-hour average and the
concentration should not exceed 0.13
jig/1 at any time,

TDE
  The available data for TDE indicate
that acute toxicity to saltwater aquatic
life occurs at concentrations as low as
3.6 jig/1 and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of TDE to sensitive
saltwater aquatic life.

DDE
   The available data for DDE indicate
that acute toxicity to saltwater aquatic
life occurs at concentrations as low as
14 fig/1 and  would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data  are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of DDE to sensitive
saltwater aquatic life.

Human Health
   For the maximum protection of human
health from  the potential  carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of DDT through
ingestion of contaminated water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water concentration should be
 zero based on the non-threshold
 assumption for this chemical. However,
 zero level may not be attainable at the
 present time. Therefore, the levels which
 may result in incremental increase of
 cancer risk over the lifetime are
 estimated at 10"s, 10"', and 10~7. The
 corresponding criteria are .24 ng/1, .024
 ng/1. and .0024 ng/1, respectively. If the
 above estimates are made for
 consumption of aquatic organisms only,
 excluding consumption of water, the
 levels are .24 ng/1, .024 ng/1, and .0024
 ng/1, respectively. Other concentrations
. representing different risk levels may be
 calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
 risk estimate range is presented for
 information purposes and does not
 represent an Agency judgment of an
 "acceptable" risk level.
 Dichlorobenzeaes

 Freshwater Aquatic Life
   The available data for
 dichlorobenzenes indicate that acute
 and chronic toxicity to freshwater
 aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
 low as 1,120 and 763 fig/1, respectively,
 and would occur at lower
 concentrations among species that are
 more sensitive than those tested.
 Saltwater Aquatic Life
   The available data for
 dichlorobenzenes indicate that acute
 toxicity to saltwater aquatic life occurs
 at concentrations as low as 1,970 fig/1
 and would occur at lower
 concentrations among species that are
 more sensitive than those tested. No
 data are available concerning the
 chronic toxicity of dichlorobenzenes to
 sensitive saltwater aquatic life.

 Human Health
   For the protection of human health
 from the  toxic properties of
 dichlorobenzenes (all isomers) ingested
 through water and contaminated aquatic
 organisms, the ambient water criterion
 is determined to be 400 fig/1.
   For the protection of human health
 from the toxic properties of
 dichlorobenzenes (all isomers) ingested
.through contaminated aquatic organisms
 alone, the ambient water criterion is
 determined to be 2.6 mg/1.
 Dichlorobenzidines

 Freshwater Aquatic Life

   The data base available for
 dichlorobenzidines and freshwater
 organisms is limited to one test on
 bioconcentration of 3,3'-
 dichlorobenzicline and no statement can
 be made concerning acute or chronic
 toxicity.
                                                         210

-------
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  No saltwater organisms have been
tested with any dichlorobenzidine and
no statement can be made concerning
acute or chronic  toxicity.

Human Health

  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of
dichlorobenzidine through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero base on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10"*, 10"*,
and 10~7. The corresponding criteria are
.103 tig/I .0103 fig/1, and .00103 fig/1.
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are .204  jig/1, -0204
fig/1, and .00204 ftg/1, respectively.
Other concentrations representing
different risk levels may be  calculated
by use of the Guidelines. The risk
estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.
Dichloroethylenes

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for
dichloroethylenes indicate that acute
toxicity to freshwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 11,600 jig/I
and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
definitive data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of dlchlorethylenea
to sensitive freshwater aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for
dichlorethylenes indicate that acute
toxicity to saltwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 224,000 ng/\
and  would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity dichloroethylenes to
sensitive saltwater aquatic  life.
Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of
1.1 -dir.hloroethylene through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10"*, 10"*,
and 10"'. The corresponding criteria are
.33 jig/1, .033 jig/1, and .0033 jig/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 1B.5 fig/1.1.85
fig/1, and .IBS jig/1, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk  estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficency in the
available data for 1,2-dichloroethylene.
2,4-Dichloropbenol

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for 2,4-
dichlorophenol indicate  that acute and
chronic toxicity .to freshwater aquatic
life occurs at concentrations as low as
2,020 and 365 jig/1, respectively, and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
that those tested. Mortality to early life
stages of one  species of  fish occurs at
concentrations as low as 70 jtg/1,

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  Only one test has been conducted
With saltwater organisms on 2,4-
dichlorophenol and no statement can be
made concerning acute or chronic
toxicity.

Human Health
  For comparison purposes, two
approaches were used to derive
criterion levels for 2,4-dichlorophenol.
Based on available toxicity data, for the
protection of public health, the derived
level is 3.09 mg/1. Using  available
organoleptic data, for controlling
undesirable taste and odor quality of
ambient water, the estimated level is 0.3
jig/1. It should be recognized that
organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
Dichloropropanes/Dichloropropenes

freshwater Aquatic Life

  The available data for
dichloropropanes indicate that acute
and chronic toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 23,000 and 5,700 jig/1,
respectively, and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested.
  The available data.for
dichloropropenes indicate that acute
and chronic toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 6,060 and 244 fig/I, respectively,
and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested.

Saltwater Aquatic Life

  The available data for
dichloropropanes indicate that acute
and chronic toxicity to saltwater aquatic
life occurs at concentrations as low as
10,300 and 3,040 jig/1, respectively, and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those tested.
  The available data for
dichloropropenes indicate that acute
toxicity to saltwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low a as 790 fig/1,
and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of dichloropropenes to
sensitive saltwater aquatic life.

Human Health

  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for dichloropropanes.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of
dichloropropenes ingested through
water and contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water criterion
is determined to be 87 fig/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of
dichloropropenes ingested through
contaminated aquatic organisms alone,
the ambient water criterion is
determined to be 14.1 mg/1.

2,4-Dimethylphenol

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for 2,4-
dimethylphenol indicate that acute
toxicity to freshwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 2,120 jig/1
and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of dimethylphenol to
sensitive freshwater aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
                                                         211

-------
  No saltwater organisms have been
tested with 2,4-dimethylphenol and no
statement can be made concerning acute
and chronic toxicity.
Human Health
  Sufficient data are not available for
2,4-dimethylphenol to derive a level
which would protect against the
potential toxicity of this compound.
Using available organoleptic data, for
controlling undersirable taste and odor
quality of ambient water, the estimated
level is 400 fig/1. It should be recognized
that organoleptic data as  a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
2,4-Dinitrotoluene

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for 2,4-
dinitrotoluene indicate that acute and
chronic toxicity to freshwater aquatic
life occurs at concentrations as low as
330 and 230 u-g/1, respectively, and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those tested.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available  data for 2,4-
dinitrotoluenes indicate that acute
toxicity to saltwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 590 u.g/1 and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those tested. No data are available
concerning the chronic toxicity of 2,4-
dinitrotoluenes to sensitive saltwater
aquatic life but a decrease in algal cell
numbers occurs at concentrations as
low as 370 ng/L
Haitian Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential  carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of 2.4-
dinitrotoluene through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero  level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10~5,10~8,
and 10"'. The corresponding criteria are
1.1 ug/1, 0.11 ug/1, and 0.011 fig/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 91 fig/I, 9.1 fig/1,
and 0.91 ug/1, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.

1,2-Diphenylhydrazine'

Freshwater Aquatic Life

  The available data for 1,2-
diphenylhydrazine indicate that acute
toxicity to freshwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 270 fig/1 and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those tested. No data are available
concerning the chronic toxicity of 1,2-
diphenylhydrazine to sensitive
freshwater aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life

  No saltwater organisms have been
tested with 1,2-diphenylhydrazine and
no statement can be made concerning
acute and chronic toxicity.

Human Health

  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of 1,2-
diphenylhydrazine through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result  in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10"s, 10" ',
and 10"'. The corresponding criteria are
422 ng/1, 42 ng/1, and 4 ng/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 5.6 u.g/1, 0.56
fig/1, and O.OS8 fig/1, respectively.
Other concentrations representing
different risk levels may be calculated
by use of the Guidelines. The risk
estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.
Endosulfan

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For endosulfan the criterion to protect
freshwater aquatic life as derived using
the Guidelines is 0.056 fig/I as a 24-hour
average and the concentration should
not exceed 0.22 fig/1 at any time.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For endosulfan the criterion to protect
saltwater aquatic life as derived using
the Guidelines is 0.0087 fig/1 as a 24-
hour average and the concentration
should not exceed 0.034 fig/1 at any
time.
Human Health
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of endosulfan
ingested through water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 74 jig/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of endosulfan
ingested through contaminated aquatic
organisms alone, the ambient water
criterion is determined to be 159 fig/1.
Endrin

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For endrin the criterion to protect
freshwater aquatic life as derived using
the Guidelines is 0.0023 fig/1 as a 24-
hour average and the concentration
should not exceed 0.18 u.g/1 at any time.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For endrin the criterion to protect
saltwater aquatic life as derived using
the Guidelines is 0.0023 u.g/1 as a 24-
hour average and the concentration
should not exceed 0.037 fig/1 at any
time.
Human Health
  The ambient water quality criterion
for endrin is recommended to be
identical to the existing drinking water
standard which is 1 fig/1. Analysis  of the
toxic effects data resulted in a
calculated level which is protective of
human health against the ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms. The calculated value
is comparable lo the present standard.
For this, reason a selective criterion
based on exposure solely from
consumption of 6.5 grams of aquatic
organisms was not derived.
Ethylbenzene
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for ethylbenzene
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 32,000 ug/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No definitive data are available
concerning the chronic toxicity of
ethylbenzene to sensitive freshwater
aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life

  The available data for ethylbenzene
indicate that acute toxicity to saltwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 430 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of ethylbenzene to
sensitive saltwater aquatic life.
                                                         212

-------
Human Health

  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of
ethylbenzene ingested through water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water criterion is
determined to be 1.4 mg/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of
ethylbenzene ingested through
contaminated aquatic organisms alone.
the ambient water criterion is
determined to be 3.28 mg/1.

Fluoranthene

Freshwater Aquatic Life

  The available data for fluoranthene
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 3980 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among  species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of fluoranthene to
sensitive freshwater aquatic life.
Saltwater Aquatic Life

  The available data for fluoranthene
indicate that acute and chronic toxicity
to saltwater aquatic life occur at
concentrations as low as 40 and 16 fig/1,
respectively, and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested.
Human Health

  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of fluoranthene
ingested through water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 42 ug/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of fluoranthene
ingested through contaminated aquatic
organisms alone, the ambient water
criterion is determined to be 54 fig/l.

Haloe there

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for haloethers
indicate that acute and chronic toxicity
to freshwater aquatic life occur at
concentrations as low as 360 and 122
fig/1, respectively, and would occur at
lower concentrations among  species
that are more sensitive than those
tested.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  No saltwater organisms have been
tested with any haloether and no
statement can be made concerning acute
or chronic toxicity.
Human Health
  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for haloethers.
Halomethanes
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for halomethanes
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 11,000 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of halomethanes to
sensitive freshwater aquatic life.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for halomethanes
indicate that acute and chronic toxicity
to saltwater aquatic life occur at
concentrations  as low as 12,000 and
6,400  /ig/1. respectively, and would
occur at lower concentrations among
species that are more sensitive than
those tested. A  decrease in  algal cell
numbers occurs at concentrations as
low as 11,500 fig/1.
Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of
chloromethane, bromomethane,
dichloromethane,
bromodichlorome thane,
tribromomethane,
dichlorodifluoromethane,
trichlorofluoromethane, or combinations
of these chemicals through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which  may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk, over
the lifetimes are estimated at 10"*, 10"',
and 10"7. The corresponding criteria are
1.9 fig/1, 0.19 jig/1, and 0.019 fig/1,
respectively. If  the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 157 /ig/1,15.7
fig/1,  and 1.57 fig/1, respectively. Other
concentrations  representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines.  The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
Heptachlor

Freshwater Aquatic Life
   For heptachlor the criterion to protect
 freshwater aquatic life as derived using
 the Guidelines is 0.0038 fig/1 as a 24-
 hour average and the concentration
 should not exceed 0.52 fig/1 at  any time.

 Saltwater Aquatic Life

   For heptachlor the criterion to protect
 saltwater aquatic life as derived using
 the Guidelines is 0.0036 fig/1 as a 24-
 hour average and the concentration
 should not exceed 0.053 fig/1 at any
 time.
 Human Health

   For the maximum protection of human
 health from the potential carcinogenic
 effects due to exposure of heptachlor
 through ingestion of contaminated water
 and contaminated aquatic organisms,
 the ambient water concentration should
 be zero based on the non-threshold
 assumption for this chemical. However,
 zero level may not be attainable at the
 present time. Therefore, the levels which
 may result in incremental increase of
 cancer risk, over the lifetimes are
 estimated at 10" • 10" •  and 10~7. The
 corresponding criteria are 2.78 ng/1, .28
 ng/1, and .028 ng/1, respectively. If the
 above estimates are made for
 consumption of aquatic organisms only,
 excluding consumption of water, the
 levels are 2.65 ng/1, .29 ng/1, and .029
 ng/1, respectively. Other
 concentrations  representing different
 risk leveis may be calculated by use of
 the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
 is presented for information purposes
 and does not represent an Agency
 judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
 Hexachlorobutadiene

 Fresh water Aquatic Life

   The available data for
 hexachlorobutadiene indicate that acute
 and chronic/toxicity to  freshwater
 aquatic life occur at concentrations as
 low as 90 and 9.3 fig/1,  respectively, and
 would occur at  lower concentrations
 among species that are more sensitive
 than those tested.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for
hexachlorobutadiene indicate that acute
toxicity to saltwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 32 fig/I and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are  more sensitive
that those tested. No data are available
concerning the chronic  toxicity of
hexachlorobutadiene to sensitive
saltwater aquatic life
Human Health
                                                      213

-------
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of
hexachlorobutadiene through ingestion
of contaminated water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water concentration should be
zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for  this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result  in incremental increase of
cancer risk, over the lifetimes are
estimated at 10's, 10"g, and 10"', The
corresponding criteria are 4,47 fig/1, 0.45
fig/1, and 0.045 fig/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 500 |ig/l, 50 fig/1, and § fig/1
respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
-risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on  an
"acceptable" risk level.
Hexachlorocyclohexane

Lindane
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For Lindane the criterion to protect
freshwater aquatic life as derived  using
the Guidelines is 0.080 fig/1 as a 24-hour
average and the concentration should
not exceed 2,0 fig/1 at any  time.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For saltwater aquatic life the
concentration of lindane should not
exceed 0.16 fig/1 at any time. No data
are available concerning the chronic
toxicity of lindane to sensitive saltwater
aquatic life.
BHC
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available date for a mixture of
isomers of BHC indicate that acute
toxicity to freshwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 100 fig/1 and
would occur at  lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those  tested. No data are available
concerning the  chronic toxicity of a
mixture of isomers of BHC to sensitive
freshwater aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life

  The available date for a mixture of
isomers of BHC indicate that acute
toxicity to  saltwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 0.34 fig/1
and would occur at lower
concentrations  among species that are
more sensitive  than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxiciiy of a mixture of isomers
of BHC to sensitive saltwater aquatic
life.

Human Health

  For the maximum protection of human
health from the  potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of alpha-HCH
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk, over the lifetimes are
estimated at 10~5,10~s, and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are 92 ng/1, 9.2
ng/1, and .92 ng/1, respectively. If (he
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 310 ng/1,  31,0 ng/1, and 3.1
ng/1 respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the  potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of beta-HCH
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk, over the lifetimes are
estimated at 10"*, 10~ •, and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are 163 ng/1,16.3
ng/I, and 1.63 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 547 ng/1, 54.7 ng/1, and 5.47
ng/1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable"  risk level.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the  potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of tech-HCH
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in  incremental increase of
cancer risk, over the lifetimes are
estimated at 10"s, 10~«, and 10"*. The
corresponding criteria are 123 ng/1,12.3
ng/1, and 1.23 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 414 ng/1, 41.4 ng/1, and 4.14
ng/1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of gamma-HCH
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentrations
should be zero based on the non-
threshold assumption for this chemical.
However, zero level may not be
attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10"5,10"*,
and 10"'. The corresponding criteria are
186 ng/1,18.6 ng/1. and 1.86 ng/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 625 ng/1, 62.5
ng/1, 6.25 ng/1, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
   Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for delta-HCH.
   Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for epsilon-HCH.
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

Freshwater Aquatic Life
   The  available data for
hexachlorocyclopentadiene indicate that
acute and chronic toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 7.0 and 5.2 fig/1, respectively, and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those tested,
Saltwater Aquatic Life
   The available  data to
hexachlorocyclopentadiene indicate that
acute toxicity to saltwater aquatic life
occurs at concentrations as low as 7.0
ftg/1 and would occur at lower
concentration:) among species that are
                                                         214

-------
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of
hexachlorocyclopentadiene to sensitive
saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health
  For comparison purposes, two
approaches were used to derive
criterion levels for
hexachlorocyclopentadiene. Based on
available toxicity data, for the
protection of public health, the derived
level is 206 fig/1. Using available
organoleptic data, for controlling
undesirable taste and odor quality of
ambient water, the estimated level is 1.0
fig/1. It should be recognized that
organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criterion
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
Isophorone

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for isophorone
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life ocurs at concentrations as
low as 117,000 fig/1  and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that  are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of isophorone to
sensitive freshwater aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for isophorone
indicate that acute toxicity to saltwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 12,900 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that  are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of isophorone to
sensitive saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of isophorone
ingested through water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 5.2 mg/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of isophorone
ingested through contaminated aquatic
organisms alone, the ambient water
criterion is determined to be 520 mg/1.
Lead

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable lead the
criterion (in fig/1) to protect freshwater
aquatic life as derived using the
Guidelines is the numerical value given
by e(2.35[ln(hardness)]-9.48) as a 24-
hour average and the concentration (in
fig/1) should not exceed the numerical
value given by e(1.22[ln(hardness)]-0.47)
at any time. For example, at hardnesses
of 50,100, and 200 mg/1 as CaCO, the
criteria are 0.75, 3.8, and 20 fig/1,
respectively, as 24-hour averages, and
the concentrations should not exceed 74,
170, and 400 ftg/1, respectively, at any
time.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for total
recoverable lead indicate that acute and
chronic toxicity to saltwater aquatic life
occur at concentrations as low as 668
and 25 fig/1, respectively, and would
occur at lower concentrations among
species that are more sensitive than
those tested.

Human Health
  The ambient water quality criterion
for lead is recommended to be identical
to the existing drinking water standard
which is 50 fig/1. Analysis of the toxic
effects data resulted in a calculated
level which is protective to human
health against the ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms. The calculated value
is comparable to the present standard.
For this reason a selective criterion
based on exposure solely from
consumption of 6.5 grams of aquatic
organisms was not derived.
Mercury

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable mercury the
criterion to protect freshwater aquatic
life as derived using the Guidelines is
0.00057 fig/1 as a 24-hour average and
the concentration should not exceed
0.0017 fig/1 at any time.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable mercury the
criterion to protect saltwater aquatic life
as derived using the Guidelines is 0.025
fig/1 as a 24-hour average and the
concentration should not exceed 3.7 fig/1
at any time.
Human Health
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of mercury
ingested through water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 144 ng/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of mercury
ingested through contaminated aquatic
organisms alone, the ambient water
criterion is determined to be 146 ng/1.
  Note.—These values include the
consumption of freshwater, estuarine, and
marine species.
Naphthalene

Freshwater Aquatic Life

  The available data to naphthalene
indicate that acute and chronic toxicity
to freshwater aquatic life occur at
concentrations as low as  2,300 and 620
fig/1, respectively, and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested.

Saltwater Aquatic Life

  The available data for naphthalene
indicate that acute toxicity to saltwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 2,350 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of naphthalene to
sensitive saltwater aquatic life.

Human Health

  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for naphthalene.

Nickel

Freshwater Aquatic Life

  For total recoverable nickel the
criterion (in fig/1)  to protect freshwater
aquatic life as  derived using the   i,
Guidelines is the numerical value given
by e(0.76 [In (hardness)] +1.06) as a 24-
hour average and  the concentration (in
fig/1) should not exceed the numerical
value given by e(0.76[ln (hardness)] ~f-
4.02) at any time. For example, at
hardnesses of 50,100, and 200 mg/1 as
CaCOj the criteria are 56, 96, and 160
fig/1, respectively, as 24-hour averages,
and the concentrations should not
exceed 1,100,1.800, and 3,100 fig/1,
respectively, at any time.

Saltwater Aquatic Life

  For total recoverable nickel the
criterion to protect saltwater aquatic life
as derived using the Guidelines is 7.1
fig/1 as a 24-hour average and the
concentration should not  exceed 140 fig/
1 at any time.

Human Health
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties  of nickel
ingested through water and
contaminated  aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 13.4 fig/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties  of nickel
ingested through contaminated aquatic
organisms alone, the ambient water
criterion is determined to be 100 fig/1.
                                                       215

-------
Nitrobenzene

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for nitrobenzene
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 27,000 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No definitive data are available
concerning the chronic toxicity of
nitrobenzene to sensitive freshwater
aquatic life,

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for nitrobenzene
indicate that acute toxicity to saltwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 6,680 |ig/l and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of nitrobenzene to
sensitive saltwater aquatic life.

Human Health
  For comparison purposes, two
approaches were used to derive
criterion levels for nitrobenzene.  Based
on available toxicity data, for the
protection of public health, the derived ,
level is 19,8 rag/1. Using available
organoleptic data, for controlling
undesirable taste and odor quality of
ambient water, the estimated level is 30
fig/l. It should be recognized that
organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
Nitrophenols

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for nitrophenols
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 230 fig/1 and would occur at
tower concentrations among species
that are more sensitiva than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of nitrophenols to
sensitive freshwater aquatic life but
toxicity to one species of algae occurs at
concentrations as low as ISO ng/I.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for nitrophenols
indicate that acute toxicity to saltwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 4,850 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of nitrophenols to
sensitive saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health

  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of 2,4-dinitro-o-
cresol ingested through water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 13.4 jig/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of 2.4-dinitro-o-
cresol ingested through contaminated
aquatic organisms alone, the ambient
water criterion is determined to be 765
M5/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of
dinitrophenoi ingested through water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water criterion is
determined to be 70 jug/!,
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of
dinitrophenoi ingested through
contaminated aquatic organisms alone,
the ambient water criterion is
determined to be 14.3 mg/1.
  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot  he derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for mononitrophenol.
  Using the present guidelines, a
satisfactory criterion cannot  be derived
at this time due to the insufficiency in
the available data for Iri-nitrophenol.

Nitrosamines

Freshwater Aquatic Life

  The available data for nitrosamines
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 5.85O (Ag/1 and would  occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than  those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of nitrosamines to
sensitive freshwater aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for nitrosamines
indicate that acute toxicity to saltwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 3,300,000 jig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than  those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of nitrosamines to
sensitive saltwater aquatic life.

Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of n-
nitrosodimethylamine through  ingestion
of contaminated water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water concentration should be
zero based on ths non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable af the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk, over the lifetimes are
estimated at 10-", 10"*, and 10"', The
corresponding criteria are 14 ng/1,1.4
ng/1, and .14 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 160,000 ng/1,16,000 ng/1, and
1,600 ng/1, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of n-
nitrosodiethylamine through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
Incremental increase of cancer risk, over
the lifetimes are estimated at 10~s, 10"",
and 10"'. The corresponding criteria are
8 ng/1,0.8 ng/1, and 0.08 ng/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 12,400 ng/1,1,240
ng/1, and 124 ng/1, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure in n-nitrosodi-n-
butylamine through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic Organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk, over
the lifetimes are estimated at 10" 8,10"*,
and 10~7. The corresponding criteria are
64 ng/16.4 ng/1 and .064 ng/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 5,868 ng/1, 587
ng/1, and 58.7 ng/1, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
                                                         216

-------
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure in n-
nitrosodiphenylamine through ingestion
of contaminated water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water aoncentration should be
zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not  be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels  which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk, over the lifetimes are
estimated at 10" 5, 10" • and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are 49,000 ng/1
4,900 ng/1 and 490 ng/1, respectively. If
the above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 161,000 ng/1,16,100 ng/1, and
1,610  ng/1, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure in n-
nitrosopyrrolidine through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental  increase of cancer risk, over
the lifetimes are estimated at W', 10" •
and 10"7. The corresponding criteria are
160 ng/116.0 ng/1 and 1.60 ng/1,
respectively. If the  above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 919,000 ng/1,
91,900 ng/1, and 9,190 ng/1, respectively.
Other concentrations representing
different risk levels may be  calculated
by use of the Guidelines. The risk
estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.
Pentfichlorophenol
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for
pentachlorophenol indicate that acute
and chronic  toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occur at concentrations as
low as 55 and 3.2 p.g/1, respectively, and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those tested.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for
pentachlorophenol indicate that acute
and chronic toxicity to saltwater aquatic
life occur at concentrations as low as 53
and 34 fig/1, respectively, and would
occur at lower concentrations among
species that are more sensitive than
those tested.
Human Health
  For comparison purposes, two
approaches were used to derive
criterion levels for pentachlorophenol.
Based on available toxicity data, for the
protection of public health, the derived
level is  1.01 mg/1. Using available
organoleptic data, for controlling
undesirable taste and odor quality of
ambient water, the estimated level is 30
Hg/1. It should be recognized that
organoleptic data as  a basis for
establishing a water quality criterion
have limitations and  have  no
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
Phenol
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for phenol indicate
that acute and chronic toxicity to
freshwater aquatic life occur at
concentrations as low as 10,200 and
2,560 jug/1, respectively, and would
occur at lower concentrations among
species that are more sensitive than
those tested.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for phenol indicate
that acute toxicity to saltwater aquatic
life occurs at concentrations as low as
5,800 ug/1 and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of phenol to sensitive
saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health
  For comparison purposes, two
approaches were used to derive
criterion levels for phenol. Based on
available toxicity data, for the
protection of public health, the derived
level is 3.5 mg/1. Using available
organoleptic data, for controlling
undesirable taste and odor quality of
ambient water, the estimated level is 0.3
mg/1. It  should be recognized that
organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criterion
 have limitations and have no
 demonstrated relationship to potential
 adverse human health effects.

 Phthalate Esters

 Freshwater Aquatic Life
   The available data for phthalate
 esters indicate that acute and chronic
 toxicity to freshwater aquatic life occur
 at concentrations as low as 940 and 3
 f.g/1, respectively, and would occur at
 lower concentrations among species
 that are more sensitive than those
 tested.

 Saltwater Aquatic Life
   The available data for phthalate
 esters indicate that acute toxicity to
 saltwater aquatic life occurs at
 concentrations as low as 2944 fig/1 and
 would occur at lower concentrations
 among species that are more sensitive
 than those tested. No data are available
 concerning the chronic toxicity of
 phthalate esters to sensitive saltwater
 aquatic life but toxicity to one species of
 algae occurs at concentrations as low as
 3.4
 Human Health
   For the protection of human health
 from the toxic properties of dimethyl-
 phthalate ingested through water and
 contaminated aquatic organisms, the
 ambient water criterion is determined to
 be 313 mg/1.
   For the protection of human health
 from the toxic properties of dimethyl-
 phthalate ingested through
 contaminated aquatic organisms alone,
 the ambient water criterion is
 determined to be 2.9 g/1.
   For the protection of human health
 from the toxic properties of diethyl-
 phthalate ingested through water and
 contaminated aquatic organisms, the
 ambient water criterion is determined to
 be 350 mg/1.
   For the protection of human health
 from the toxic properties of diethyl-
 phthalate ingested through
 contaminated aquatic organisms alone,
 the ambient water criterion is
 determined to be 1.8 g/1.
   For the protection of human health
 from the toxic properties of dibutyl-
 phthalate ingested through water and
 contaminated aquatic organisms, the
 ambient water criterion is determined to
 be 34 mg/1.
   For the protection of human health
 from the toxic properties of dibutyl-
 phthalate ingested through
contaminated aquatic organisms alone,
the ambient water criterion is
determined to be 154 mg/1.
  For the protection of human health
                                                        217

-------
from the toxic properties of di-2-
ethylhexyl-phthalate ingested through
water and contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water criterion
is determined to be 15 mg/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of di-2-
ethylhexyl-phthalate ingested through
contaminated aquatic organisms alone,
the ambient water criterion is
determined to be 50 mg/1,

Polychlorinated Biphenyls

Freshwater Aquatic Life

  For polychlorinated biphenyls the
criterion to protect freshwater aquatic
iife as derived using the Guidelines is
0.014 jig/I as a 24-hour average. The
available data indicate that acute
toxicity to freshwater aquatic life
probably will only occur at
concentrations above 2,0 ftg/1 and that
the 24-hour average should provide
adequate protection against acute
toxicity,

Saltwater Aquatic Live

  For polychlorinated biphenyls the
criterion to protect saltwater aquatic life
as derived using the Guidelines is 0.030
fig/1 as  a 24-hour average. The available
data indicate that acute toxicity to
saltwater aquatic life probably will only
occur at concentrations above 10 fig/!
and that the 24-hour average should
provide adequate protection against
acute toxicity.

Human Health

  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of PCBs through
ingestion of contaminated water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water concentration should be
zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 1(TS, 10"6, and 19''. The
corresponding criteria are .79 ng/1, 0.79
ng/1, and .0079 ng/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are .79 ng/1, .079 ng/1, and ,0079
ng/1. respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk leveis may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines, The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
(PAHs)

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The limited freshwater data base
available for polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, mostly from short-term
bioconcentration studies with two
compounds, does not permit a statement
concerning acute or chronic toxicity,

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The a\ailable data for polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons indicate that
acute toxicity to saltwater aquatic life
occurs at concentrations as low as 300
ug/1 and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons to sensitive saltwater
aquatic life,

Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health  from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of PAHs through
ingestion of contaminated water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water ooncentiation should be
zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in inerpmenlal increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 1Q~S, 10"',  and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are 28 ng/1, 2.8
ng/1, and ,28 ng/I, respectively If the
above  estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only.
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 311 ng/'l, 31,1 ng/1. and 3.11
ng/1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented fur
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable*" risk level.

Selenium

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable inorganic
selenite the criterion to protect
freshwater aquatic life  as derived using
the Guidelines is 35 fig/I as a 24-hour
average and the concentration should
not exceed 260 fig/1 at  any time.
  The  available data for inorganic:
aelenate indicate that acute toxicity to
freshwater aquatic life occurs at
concentrations as low as 760 jtg/1 and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those tested. No data ate available
concerning the chronic toxicity of
inorganic selenate to sensitive
freshwater aquatic life.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable inorganic
selenite the criterion to protect saltwater
aquatic life as derived using the
Guidelines is 54 ;ig/l as a 24-hour
average and the concentration should
not exceed 410 jig/1 at any time.
  No data art! available concerning the
toxicity of inorganic selenate to
saltwater  aquatic life.
Human Health
  The ambient water quality criterion
for selenium is recommended to be
identical to the existing drinking water
standard which is 10 fig/1. Analysis of
the toxic effects data resulted in a
calculated level which is protective of
human health against the ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms. The calculated value
is comparable to the present standard.
For this reason a selective criterion
based on exposure solely, from
consumption of 6.5 grams of aquatic
organisms was not derived.
Silver
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For freshwater aquatic life the
concentration (to jig/1) of iota!
recoverable silver should not exceed the
numerical value given by "e[l,72(ln
(hardness)-6,52)]" at any time. For
example, at hardnesses of 50,100, 200
mg/I as CaCO* the concentration of
total recoverable silver should not
exceed 1.2, 4,1, and 13 fig/1, respectively,
al any time. The available data indicate
that chronic toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life may occur at concentrations
as low as  0.12; jig/I.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For saltwater aquatic life the
concentration of total recoverable silver
should not exceed 2.3 fig/1 at any time.
No data are available concerning the
chronic toxicity of silver to sensitive
saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health
  The ambient water quality criterion
for silver  is recommended to be
identical to the existing drinking water
standard  which is 50 fig/1. Analysis of
the toxic effects data resulted in a
calculated level which is protective of
human health against the ingesUon of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms. The calculated value
ia comparable to the present standard.
                                                         21B

-------
For this reason a selective criterion
based on exposure solely from
consumption of 6.5 grams of aquatic
organisms was not derived.
Tetrachloroethylene
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for
tetrachloroethylene indicate that acute
and chronic toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occur at concentrations as
low as 5,280 and 840 p.g/1, respectively,
and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for
tetrachloroethylene indicate that acute
and chronic toxicity to saltwater aquatic
life occur at concentrations low as
10,200 and 450 fig/1, respectively, and
would occur at lower concentrations
among species that are more sensitive
than those tested.
Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of
tetrachloroethylene through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the  levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10~5,10"6,
and 10"'. The corresponding criteria are
8 jig/1, ,8 fig/1, and .08 u.g/1, respectively.
If the above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 88.5  ftg/1, 8.85 fig/1, and .88
fig/1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may  be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.
Thallium
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for thallium
indicate that acute and chronic toxicity
to freshwater aquatic life occur at
concentrations as low as 1,400 and 40
fig/1, respectively, and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. Toxicity to one species of fish
occurs at concentrations as  low as 20
fxg/1 after 2,600 hours of exposure.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for thallium
indicate that acute toxicity to saltwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 2,130 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of thallium to
sensitive saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of thallium
ingested through water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 13 fig/1.
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties sjf thallium
ingested through contaminated aquatic
organisms alone, the ambient water
criterion is determined to be 48 fig/I.

Toluene
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for toluene
indicate that acute toxicity to freshwater
aquatic life occurs at concentrations as
low as 17,500 fig/1 and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more  sensitive than those
tested. No data are available concerning
the chronic toxicity of toluene to
sensitive freshwater aquatic life.

Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for toluene
indicate that acute and chronic toxicity
to saltwater aquatic life occur at
concentrations as low as 6,300 and 5,000
fig/1, respectively, and would occur at
lower concentrations among species
that are more  sensitive than those
tested.
fluman Health
  For the protection of human health
from the toxic properties of toluene
ingested through water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the
ambient water criterion is determined to
be 14.3 mg/1.
  For the protection of human  health
from the toxic properties of toluene
ingested through contaminated aquatic
organisms alone, the ambient water
criterion is determined to be 424 mg/1.

Toxaphene
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  For toxaphene the criterion to protect
freshwater aquatic life as derived using
the Guidelines is 0.013 fig/1 as  a 24-hour
average and the concentration should
not exceed 1.6 jtg/1 at any time.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For saltwater aquatic life the
concentration of toxaphene should not
exceed 0.070 ftg/1 at any time. No data
are available concerning the chronic
toxicity of toxaphene to sensitive
saltwater aquatic life.

Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of toxaphene
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10"5, 10" *, and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are 7.1 ng/1, .71
ng/'l. and .07 ng/1, respectively. If the
abqve estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 7.3 ng/1, .73 ng/1, and .07 ng/1,
respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines. The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.

Trichloroethyiene

Freshwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for
trichloroethylene indicate that acute
toxicity to freshwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 45,000 fig/1
and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are  available concerning the
chronic toxicity of trichloroethylene to
sensitive freshwater aquatic life but
adverse behavioral effects occurs to one
species at concentrations as low as
21,900 fig/1.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  The available data for
trichloroethylene indicate that acute
toxicity to saltwater aquatic life occurs
at concentrations as low as 2,000 jig/1
and would occur at lower
concentrations among species that are
more sensitive than those tested. No
data are  available concerning the
chronic toxicity of trichloroethylene to
sensitive saltwater aquatic life.
Human Health
  For the maximum protection  of human

-------
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of
trichloroethylene through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on
the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not
be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in
incremental increase of cancer risk over
the lifetime are estimated at 10"*, 10"*,
and 10" *. The corresponding criteria are
27 fig/1. 2.7 f*g/l, and .27 fig/1,
respectively. If the above estimates are
made for consumption of aquatic
organisms only, excluding consumption
of water, the levels are 807 fig/1, 60.7
fig/1, and 8.07 fig/1, respectively. Other
concentrations representing different
risk levels may be calculated by use of
the Guidelines. The risk estimate range
is presented for information purposes
and does not represent an Agency
judgment on an "acceptable" risk level.
Vinyl Chloride
Freshwater Aquatic Life
  No freshwater organisms have been
tested with vinyl chloride and no
statement can be made concerning acute
or chronic toxicity.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  No saltwater organisms have been
tested with vinyl chloride and no
statement can be made concerning acute
or chronic toxicity.

Human Health
  For the maximum protection of human
health from the potential carcinogenic
effects due to exposure of vinyl chloride
through ingestion of contaminated water
and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However,
zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10~5, Hr«, and 10"'. The
corresponding criteria are 20 fig/1, 2,0
fig/1, and .2 fig/1, respectively. If the
above estimates are made for
consumption of aquatic organisms only,
excluding consumption of water, the
levels are 5,246 fig/1, 525 ftg/1, and 52.5
fig/1, respectively. Other concentrations
representing different risk levels may be
calculated by use of the Guidelines, The
risk estimate range is presented for
information purposes and does not
represent an Agency judgment on an
"acceptable" risk level.

Zinc
Freshwater Aquatic Life
   For total recoverable zinc the criterion
to protect freshwater aquatic life as
derived using the Guidelines is 47 fig/1
as a 24-hour average and the
concentration (in ftg/1) should not
exceed the numerical value given by
e<»»3IIn (h.rtne»)l + I 9» aj any time. For
example, at hardnesses of 50,100, and
200 mg/1 as CaCO;i the concentration of
total recoverable zinc should not exceed
180, 320, and 570 fig/1 at any time.
Saltwater Aquatic Life
  For total recoverable zinc the criterion
to protect saltwater aquatic life as
derived using the Guidelines is 58 fig/1
as a 24-hour average and the
concentration should not exceed 170 fig/
1 at any time.

Human Health
  Sufficient data is not available for
zinc to derive a level which would
protect against the potential toxicity of
this compound. Using available
organoleptic data, for controlling
undesirable taste and odor quality of
ambient water,  the estimated level is 5
mg/1. It should be recognized that
organoleptic data as a basis for
establishing a water quality criteria
have limitations and have not
demonstrated relationship to potential
adverse human health effects.
                                                        220

-------
                             APPENDIX C
                  QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR WATER SAMPLES
OVERVIEW OF QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM

    This Appendix  summarizes the quality  assurance (QA) activi-
ties  and  data validation  procedures used  for Love  Canal  water
analyses. The initial planning for the Love Canal project includ-
ed a comprehensive quality assurance effort/ perhaps more compre-
hensive than any previous EPA effort. Details of all of  the qual-
ity assurance  plans  developed for  the  study are  presented in a
four-part  document  entitled  QualityAssurance Plan, Lgye_Canal
Study, LC-1-619-206 that was prepared by the GCA Corporation,  the
primecontractorFor the project, and approved by the EPA quality
assurance officers. That document  consists of  a. main volume plus
Appendix A on  sampling procedures,  Appendix B on analytical pro-
cedures, and Appendix  Q on the  subcontractor's QA plans,  A more
detailed discussion of the results of the prime contractor's  and
subcontractor's  quality assurance  efforts  is  contained  in  the
Love Canal Monitoring  Program, GCA QA/QCSummary Report   by   the
GCA  Corporation.  These  documents,  which  are  available through
NTIS, should be consulted  for more details on the project.

    The design of  the  water monitoring  program at Love  Canal  and
the related  quality  assurance plan  was  developed  by EPA and  de-
scribed in detail in writing to  the  prime  contractor.  This writ-
ten  guidance  was  intended  to  establish  minimum  standards  for
quality assurance, and it  was expected that  the prime and subcon-
tractors would amplify  the requirements  in  their individual  QA
plans.   During the design, study, and data  evaluation  phases  of
the Love Canal project, the plans and results were  reviewed by an
independent  group,  the sampling  protocols  study  group  of  the
EPA's Science Advisory Board.

    It was the responsibility  of the prime contractor to oversee
the day-to-day quality assurance  programs of the  subcontractors
using  the  approved plans  and  written guidance  provided by EPA.
This  written  guidance  formed  the  basis for  the  GCA Corporation
quality  assurance  plan document mentioned earlier. Briefly,  the
                                 221

-------
written quality assurance  guidance  provided by EPA  included the
following items:

   1.  Directives on sample collection,  preservation, and holding
       times

   2.  Directives on analytical methods

   3.  Directives on  the  external quality assurance  program in-
       cluding the  use  of  performance evaluation  samples  and
       quality control samples provided by  EMSL-Cincinnati.   The
       purpose of the  external quality  assurance program  was  to
       give the prime  contractor  some of the  tools  necessary  to
       oversee the day-to-day quality assurance program.

   4.  Directives on  the  internal quality assurance  program in-
       cluding required measurements of gas  chromatography/mass
       spectrometry (GC/MS)  reference compounds,  method  blanks,
       laboratory control standards,  laboratory duplicates,  sur-
       rogate analytes for EPA analysis methods 624  and  625, and
       known  additions (spikes)  for other  methods.    Required
       spiking concentrations were given and,  for  laboratory con-
       trol standards, required control  limits were provided. The
       use of laboratory control charts  was  required. It  was also
       required that  recoveries  be  compared  to control  limits,
       and that failure to meet control limits would trigger  an
       investigation to determine the cause of the  deviation and
       a correction of the problem.   The purpose of  the  internal
       quality assurance program was  to provide tools  for  use  in
       the day-to-day  quality  assurance program, and tools to  be
       used in the  retrospective  review of the  data by EPA for
       validation and estimation of precision  and  accuracy.  Lim-
       ited precision and accuracy goals were  stated  in  terms  of
       the control limits that were  provided  for some of the in-
       ternal quality control samples.

   5.  Directives on  field  replicates (which  were to  be  used  to
       determine interlaboratory precision)  and field blanks.

   6.  All analytical  subcontractors who analyzed water  samples
       were  required  to address  points 1  through  5  exactly  as
       described.   However, it must be recognized  that because of
       different capabilities  of  different  methods  for different
       analytes,  not  all types of quality assurance  samples were
       applicable to all methods and analytes.

    To reiterate, it  was  the  responsibility of the  GCA  Corpora-
tion  to  oversee  this  quality  assurance program on  a day-to-day
basis.  It was impossible for EPA to manage  this function because
more  than 6,000  field samples  were collected  in  less   than  3
months, and the vast majority of analytical  data was not  received
by EPA until  after nearly  all  the  samples had  been  collected and
analyzed.

                                222

-------
    It was  the responsibility of EPA  to  validate the Love Canal
data, and to estimate the precision and accuracy of the validated
data.   The  process of data  validation involved the rejection of
certain analytical results whenever there was compelling evidence
present concerning  systematic errors  in  sampling,  preservation,
or analysis associated with  those results.   These functions were
accomplished by a retrospective (and intentionally redundant) re-
view of all the quality assurance data collected during the proj-
ect.  The remainder  of  this  Appendix summarizes the water analy-
ses  quality assurance  program  including  the  specific  actions
taken as  a  result of  the day-to-day  quality  assurance program,
the data validation  process,  and the  estimation of precision and
accuracy.

METHODS SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES

    Analytical methods  for water  analyses were selected with the
recognition that  some  trade-offs  would be  necessary  between the
desire to acquire  the most  accurate,  precise,  and sensitive mea-
surements possible at the current state-of-the-art,  and the need
to  control  costs  and  find  a suitable number  of subcontractors
with the experience  and capacity  to do the  analyses.   (See Sec-
tion  3.3  for  details).   Therefore,  the  following methods were
selected as the ones that best met the project needs.

    For the  C  -C  halogenated hydrocarbons  and some  substituted
benzenes, the  method selected was  EPA's  proposed Method  624 as
described in the Federal  Register,  Vol. 44,  No. 233,  December 3,
1979, p. 69532.  Briefly, in this method  the analytes are purged
from a water sample with a stream of finely divided bubbles of an
inert gas, trapped on the sorbent TENAX,  thermally desorbed into
a  packed  gas  chromatographic column, and  detected with  a mass
spectrometer repetitively scanning  from  33  to 260  atomic mass
units (amu)  at approximately 5-second intervals.

    This method  was  selected because  its scope  and  limitations
have been studied,  and a number of laboratories had extensive ex-
perience with its application to industrial wastewater and drink-
ing water  samples.   However, the  method has  not  been formally
validated in a multilaboratory study,  and the  same  class  of com-
pounds may be measured with other  methods  which would likely give
somewhat different results for  some analytes.  The  standard re-
porting units  for  Method 624  are  micrograms per  liter;  further
information about the method  is contained in later  parts  of this
section.  Single laboratory  precision  data  for this method was
published in  the  Journal of Chromatographic Science,   1981,  19,
377.

    For most of  the other  organic  compounds  on  the Love  Canal
water monitoring list,  the method  selected was EPA proposed Meth-
od 625  as described  in the  Federal  Register,  Vol.  44, No.  233,
                                223

-------
December 3, 1979, p. 69540.  Briefly, this method partitions ana-
lytes in a water sample between the  pH  adjusted  water and an or-
ganic  solvent,   methylene  chloride,  by  mixing   the  two  liquid
phases in  a  separatory funnel or a  continuous extractor.   After
separate partitions were  formed  at pH  12  and pH 2  (in  that or-
der),  the  individual  methylene  chloride  solutions  were  either
analyzed separately (referred to  as Method  625BW)  or  combined
(referred to as Method 625CW) and analyzed.   In  either case, the
organic solvent was dried,  concentrated to a low volume,  and an
aliquot injected into a fused silica capillary gas chromatography
column.   Mass spectrometric  detection  used  repetitive  scanning
from  35  to 450  amu at approximately  1- to  2-second intervals.
Again, this method was selected because its scope and limitations
have been studied,  and a number of laboratories had extensive ex-
perience with its application to industrial wastewater samples.

    The application of  the fused silica capillary  column was an
exercise of  an  option in  a  version  of  Method 625  that  was pre-
pared  for  final rulemaking.   Fewer laboratories had experience
with these columns, but they were considered essential because of
the potentially complex mixtures  of  organic compounds that could
have been present in some Love Canal samples.  Method 625 has not
been formally validated in a multilaboratory study,  and the same
class of compounds may be measured with other methods which would
likely give  somewhat  different results  for some analytes.   The
standard reporting units for Method 625 are micrograms per liter;
further information about this method is contained in later parts
of this section.

    The great strength of Methods 624 and 625 is that each method
provides the  complete 70  electron volt  (eV) mass  spectrum for
each analyte.  This, together with the  retention index,  allows a
very high  degree of qualitative accuracy,  that is,  these methods
are highly reliable in the identification  of  the method analytes
plus any other analytes that are susceptible to the sample prepa-
ration and chromatographic  conditions.   Another great  strength
common to  these  methods  is  their utility  with numerous analytes
(1  to 100 or  more)  simultaneously  present  in  a  water sample.
Thus, the methods are very cost effective.   The  weakness of both
methods is that  they  are  not the most  precise or sensitive mass
spectrometric methods that could be chosen.  Methods that use se-
lective ion  monitoring,  like that used for 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-
dibenzo-p-dioxin, are  both more  precise and sensitive,  but are
also much  more  costly and time consuming  to apply when a large
number of analytes  are to  be measured.   The application of fused
silica capillary columns with Method 625 may be considered both a
strength and  a  weakness.   The strength  is  the  high resolution
chromatographic performance  of  the  columns,  and  the  weakness is
that the columns are so new that only a small number of laborato-
ries had experience in using  them.   Also,  their  aveiilability was
limited at the time of the study.  Additional information on the
scope and  limitations of  Methods  624 and 625  is  presented later
in the section titled "Qualitative Analyses."


                               224

-------
    A few of the chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides were known to
be sensitive  to the pH  12  extraction conditions  of  Method 625,
and measurements were  desired for certain  very toxic pesticides
at levels  below the detection limits  for  Method 625.   (See the
general  discussion  later concerning  detection limits).   There-
fore,  the  chlorinated  hydrocarbon pesticides  and a  few related
compounds  (PCBs), were  measured  using EPA  proposed Method 608 as
described in the Federal  Register, Vol.  44,  No. 233,  December 3,
1979, p. 69501.  Briefly, in this method the liquid-liquid parti-
tion  with  methylene chloride is  carried   out  with  the aqueous
phase at pH 5-9.  After separation,  drying, and concentration of
the organic solvent to  a low volume, an extract  aliquot was in-
jected into a  packed gas chromatographic column with an electron
capture  detector  (GC/ECD).    The scope  and limitations  of this
method are well known,  and many  laboratories  have extensive ex-
perience in using it with a wide variety of water sample types.
It was also required that any pesticides identified by this meth-
od be  confirmed by  the  analysis  of  the same  extract  with GC/MS
using  Method  625 conditions.   Method  608  has  undergone formal
multilaboratory validation,  and  a report will be issued in the
near future by EPA.  The standard reporting units are micrograms
per liter,  and  further information about this method is contained
in later parts of this section.

    Fluoride was analyzed by  either  Method  340.1, (Colorimetric,
SPADNS with Bellock Distillation) or Method  340.2 (Potentiomet-
ric,  Ion Selective  Electrode).   These methods  appear in Methods
for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes,   EPA-600/4-79-02T)  arid
are approved for National Pollutant  Discharge  Elimination System
(NPDES) and Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)  monitoring.  Data from
these methods are judged to be equivalent.   Method 340.1  involves
distillation to remove  interferences,  then  the sample is treated
with the SPADNS reagent.  The loss  of color  resulting  from the
reaction of fluoride with the zirconyl-SPADNS  dye is a  function
of the fluoride concentration.   In Method  340.2,  the fluoride is
determined potentiometrically  using  a fluoride electrode in con-
junction with  a standard  single junction  sleeve-type reference
electrode and  a pH  meter having  an expanded millivolt scale or a
.selective ion meter having a direct concentration scale for fluo-
ride.

    Nitrate was analyzed by  either  Method  353.2 (Colorimetric,
Automated,  Cadmium  Reduction)  or Method 353.3 (Spectrophotomet-
ric,   Cadmium  Reduction).   These methods  appear  in  Methods for
Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, EPA-600/4-79-020,  and are
approved for NPDES and SDWA monitoring.  The methods are chemical-
ly identical,  the difference being that Method 353.2 is performed
using automated instrumentation.   In  these methods,  a   filtered
sample is  passed  through a column containing  granulated copper-
cadmium  (Cu-Cd) to  reduce nitrate to  nitrite.   The nitrite (that
which was originally present  plus reduced  nitrate) is determined
                                225

-------
by  diazotizing  with  sulfani.lamide,  and  coupling  with  N-(l-
naphthyl)ethylenediamine dihydrochloride,  to  form a  highly col-
ored azo dye that is measured colorimetrically.   Separate,  rather
than  combined,  nitrate-nitrite  values  are  readily  obtained  by
carrying  out  the  procedure first  with,  and  then without,  the
Cu-Cd reduction.

    Mercury was analyzed by either Method 245.1  (Manual  Cold Va-
por Technique) or  Method 245.2  (Automated  Cold  Vapor Technique).
These  methods appear  in  Methods for Chemical  Analyses  of Water
and Wastes, EPA-600/4-79-020,  and are approved for NPDES  and SDWA
monitoring.   These methods  are  chemically  identical,   the  dif-
ference being that  Method  245.2  is  performed  using automated in-
strumentation.  In these methods, mercury is measured by  a flame-
less atomic absorption  procedure based on the  absorption  of ra-
diation at 253.7 nanometers  (nm)  by mercury vapor.   The mercury
is reduced to the  elemental state and aerated from solution in a
closed  system.   The mercury  vapor passes  through a cell  posi-
tioned  in  the  light path of an  atomic  absorption spectrophotom-
eter.   Absorbance  (peak  height) is  measured  as  a  function  of
mercury concentration and recorded.

    Selenium was  analyzed  by  Method  270.2   (Atomic  Absorption,
furnace technique).  This  method appears  in Methods for  Chemical
Analysis for Water and Wastes,  EPA-600/4-79-020andisapproved
for NPDES and SDWA monitoring.   The furnace technique was used in
conjunction with an atomic absorption spectrophotometer.   In this
technique, a  representative aliquot of sample  is placed  in the
graphite tube in the furnace,  evaporated to dryness, charred, and
atomized.  A light  beam  from a hollow  cathode furnace lamp whose
cathode  is made  of the  element to  be determined   is  directed
through  the  furnace into  a monochromator,  and onto a  detector
that measures the  amount  of light absorbed.  Absorption depends
upon  the  presence  of  free unexcited ground  state atoms  in the
furnace.  Because  the wavelength  of the light beam is character-
istic  of  only the  metal being  determined,  the  light energy ab-
sorbed  is  a  measure of  the concentration of that metal  in the
sample.

    All  other  metallic  elements  were analyzed by Method  200.7
(Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic  Emission  Spectrometric Method
for Trace Element Analysis of Water and Wastes).  This method was
proposed  for  NPDES monitoring  in the Federal Register,  Vol. 44,
No. 233, December  3, 1979.  For  the Love  Canal  study, the diges-
tion procedure outlined  in paragraph  8.4 of the Federal  Register
was used and the sample was concentrated to one-fifth of  the ori-
ginal  volume.    The basis  of  the method  is  the  measurement  of
atomic  emission  by an optical spectroscopic  technique.   Samples
are nebulized and  the  aerosol that  is  produced  is transported to
the plasma torch where excitation occurs.   Characteristic atomic-
line  emission  spectra  are produced  by  a radio  frequency induc-
tively  coupled plasma (ICP). The spectra are dispersed by a grat-
ing spectrometer and  the intensities of the  lines are monitored


                                226

-------
by photomultiplier tubes.  The photocurrents from the photomulti-
plier tubes are processed and controlled by a computer system.

    A background  correction  technique  was  required to compensate
for  variable background  contribution  to   the  determination  of
trace elements.   Background was to be  measured  adjacent to ana-
lyte lines on samples during analysis.   The position selected for
the background  intensity  measurement,  on either  or both sides of
the analytical  line,  was to be  determined by the  complexity of
the spectrum adjacent to  the  analyte  line.   The  position used
must be free of spectral interference and reflect the same change
in background intensity  as  occurs  at the  analyte wavelength mea-
sured.  Background  correction  was  not  required in  cases of line
broadening where  a  background  correction measurement would actu-
ally degrade the analytical result.

Qualitative Analyses

    For those materials  named  in this  report as  Method  608 ana-
lytes, Method 624 analytes,  Method 625  analytes,  metals analytes,
and anions,  the analytical laboratories had available known con-
centration calibration  standards,  and  the  results  were  reported
in micrograms per liter.  However, with mass spectrometric meth-
ods,  compounds  not  on the  analyte list are often  detected,  and
may be  identified by  their  mass  spectra.   These  compounds  are
designated  as  qualitative   identifications,  but  concentrations
were not measured because appropriate  calibration standards were
not available.  In  general,  Methods 624 and 625  will observe any
compound structurally  similar  to  any  Method analyte and  with  a
molecular weight less than 260 and 450, respectively.

SELECTION OF ANALYTICAL SUBCONTRACTORS

    Details of  the  selection process are given  in the GCA Corpo-
ration  document Love Canal Monitoring  Program,  GCA QA/QC Summary
Report.  Briefly, EPA  provided  to  the  prime contractor the names
of a number of laboratories that were known, from past or ongoing
environmental monitoring programs,  to have  the generally required
capabilities.  Technical  evaluation criteria were prepared,  pro-
posals were  solicited,  and  a prospective bidders  conference  was
held.   The proposals received were reviewed in terms of the eval-
uation criteria, which included immediate  availiability to initi-
ate analyses, quality  assurance plan,  experience with  analyses,
and availability of appropriate equipment,  personnel, and manage-
ment.   Experience with specific analyses and methods was examined
in detail,  and capacities for handling  samples  in a timely manner
and preferences  for executing  certain methods were considered.
Finally cost proposals were considered, but this  was not the com-
pelling factor.   One bidder was  not selected because the bid  was
considered too  low  to  permit the  subcontractor to  carry out  the
analyses with  the  required  minimum quality assurance  program.
Because of the  urgency of the program  and  the deadlines imposed
                                227

-------
on EPA, no time was  available to conduct a preaward inter-labora-
tory study,  with actual samples, to refine the selection process.

LIMITS OF DETECTION/QUANTITATION

    The American  Chemical  Society's (ACS) Subcommittee on Envi-
ronmental Analytical  Chemistry  published  guidelines  (Analytical
Chemistry, 1980, 52, 2242)  for  data acquisition  and data quality
evaluation in environmental  chemistry.   Included in these guide-
lines  are  recommendations  on  limits  of detection  and quantita-
tion.  A  procedure  was developed by EMSL-Cincinnati to determine
a method  detection  limit  that is consistent with  the  ACS guide-
lines  (Environmental Science and Technology,  1981,  1426).    As
part of the Love Canal quality assurance plan for water analyses,
sufficient data were collected  to apply this procedure to a lim-
ited number of analytes.

    Analytical laboratories were  required  to analyze one labora-
tory control  standard  (LCS)  for each set of samples processed in
a group at the same time on  the  same  day.   An LCS was defined as
a solution of analytes of "known concentration  in reagent water.
Not  all  method  analytes were  included  in  the LCS' s  in order to
contain costs, and only some were at" an appropriate concentration
for  the  procedure.   Where  data were available  and appropriate,
the  method  detection limits were  calculated from  subcontractor-
supplied analytical results;  these  limits  are  presented in Table
C-l  (laboratory  abbreviations  are explained in Table 4  of the
text).  It must be  recognized that the  results  in Table C-l were
computed  from measurements made  over  a period  of weeks,  rather
than the  recommended procedure  of  making all measurements  in  a
single day.   Therefore, these values include week to week vari-
ability in the method detection  limits.

    The data  in Table  C-l,  which are specific  to Method  624 or
Method 625 and  the  reagent water matrix,  cover  the range  of 0.5
to 79 micrograms per liter with a mean of  approximately 14 micro-
grams per liter.  There was  considerable variance among the ana-
lytical  laboratories  in   method detection  limits  for a  given
analyte, and the data suggest that  some laboratories were not op-
erating  consistently at the  state-of-the-art possible with the
methods.  This is neither unusual nor unexpected.

    The data  in  Table C-l, which  were  determined in reagent wa-
ter, may be applied reasonably to the sample matrices of the Love
Canal  samples.   It has been  shown that Methods  624  and 625 are
not  sensitive to  the different  matrices  of the  ground, drinking,
surface, sump, or storm sewer waters of the Love Canal  area.  (See
the  later section on data  validation),   Similarly, it  is reason-
able to  assume that the  method detection limits  of  most  of the
organic analytes not shown  in Table C-l  fall into the  same range
of 0.5 to 79  micrograms per liter.  Again, considerable variance
in detection limits probably existed among the analytical labora-
tories .


                                228

-------
TABLE C-l.  MEASURED METHOD DETECTION  LIMITS  IN MICROGRAMS
 PER LITER FROM ANALYSES OF LABORATORY CONTROL  STANDARDS
Analytical
Analyte
Method 624
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Bromoform
sym-Tetrachloroe thane
Carbon tetrachloride
Trichloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Method 625
1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
1,2,3, 4-Tetrachlorobenzene
2,4, 6-Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol
2 , 6-Dinitrotoluene
4-Nitrophenol
2-Chloronaphthalene
0-BHC
Fluor anthene
Di-n-butylphthalate
ACEE PJBL

26 16
16 17
29 17
42 40
23 31
37 30
26 23
21 28
— —

23
3.5 9.6
17
17
19
16
6.4
1.8 15
9.5
2.4 —
27
GSNO

16
12
8.6
14
8.1
13
9.4
13
—

20
17
—
24
21
25
14
17
—
20
14
Laboratory Code
CMTL TRW EMSL-Cin

11 2.4 4.4
8.3 2.0 6.0
5,5 1.6
1.8 4.7
1.7 6.9
2.7 2.8
1.6 1.9
2.4 4.1
9.5 — 6.0

34 — 5.0
32 — 1.9
0.5
2.7
30 ~ 3.6
1.9
21 — 2.4
1.9
4.2
2.2
79 — 2.5
                             229

-------
    Table C-2  gives  estimated method  detection  limits generated
from  statements  in the  methods,  instrumental detection limits,
precision  data,   and  experience  using  them.    They were  not
rigorously determined but  are  levels expected to be reported by
an analyst using the specified methods.  Table C-3 gives measured
method detection  limits for Method  608 in  reagent  water.  These
were  measured  by  one  of the  subcontractor  analytical laborato-
ries,  and  may  be  considered  typical of  the other   laboratories'
probable performance.

           TABLE C-2. ESTIMATED METHOD DETECTION LIMITS
                       FOR ALL LABORATORIES

                                          Estimated
                                          Detection
Analyte
Arsenic
Antimony
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Fluoride
Nitrate
Limit (fig/liter)
53
32
2
0.3
4
7
6
42
2
15
10
?
40
2
200
100
                                 230

-------
  TABLE  C-3.  MEASURED  METHOD DETECTION  LIMITS  IN MICROGRAMS PER
               LITER FOR METHOD  608  IN REAGENT  WATER'
Analyte
ff-BHC
p-BHC
6-BHC
T-BHC
DDD
DDE
DDT
Endosulfan I
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan Sulfate
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Endrin
Chlordane
Toxaphene
PCB 1242
Limit
.003
.006
.009
.004
.011
.004
.012
.014
.004
.066
.003
,083
.004
.002
.006
.014
.235
.065
'Measured by SWRI under contract to EMSL-Cincinnati

    Data from the Love  Canal  samples  include few reports of con-
centrations below the method detection limits in Tables C-l, C-2,
and C-3,  but the  range  of  values reported in  Table C-l  is a
function of  the analytical laboratory.   Reports  of  "trace"  for
analytes in  field samples are the result of subjective judgments
by individual laboratories, and represent detections that were of
                                231

-------
sufficient  magnitude  to  identify  the substance,  that is, above
the limit of  detection,  but not of  sufficient  magnitude to  mea-
sure the  amount  present, that  is,  below the method quantitation
limit.   The  meaning  of "trace" is  further  obscured  by the vari-
ance in method detection  limits among laboratories.

    Method detection limits were not used to validate  data  in the
Love Canal  data  base.   Variability in quantitation and detection
limits  among  laboratories is  a well-known  phenomenon  and  is  un-
avoidable.  Some laboratories may have quantified  substances  that
others  called  "trace,"  or did not report the  substances.  These
occurrences  do not invalidate  the  results.   At  the  worst,   the
method detection limits are at the low micrograms  per  liter level
(none  exceed  200).   Because  the  conclusions  of  the  study  were
based  on  samples  contaminated at several orders  of  magnitude  or
higher  concentrations,  that  is, parts  per  million  to parts  per
thousands, the observed  variability  and  magnitudes of the  method
detection limits had  no affect on  the overall conclusions  of the
study.   The  method detection  limits given  in Table  C-l   that  are
below  approximately 10  micrograms  per liter,  and  given in  Tables
C-2 and C-3,  are believed to  represent  the  state-of-the-art  with
the methods.

ANALYTICAL LABORATORY PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS

    The Quality  Assurance  Branch  (QAB)  of EMSL-Cincinnati  con-
ducted extensive  performance  evaluations (PE)  of the analytical
laboratories before and during the course of the  analytical work.
The purpose of this effort  was  to  support the day-to-day quality
assurance program of the  prime contractor,  GCA Corporation.   Spe-
cially prepared  samples  of  method  analytes  and detailed  instruc-
tions  were  sent  overnight to  the  prime  contractor's  sample  bank
at Love Canal, using chain-of-custody procedures.  The prime  con-
tractor sent  these unknown PE  samples  to the analytical labora-
tories  at  approximately 1-month intervals,   along with  shipments
of Love Canal  samples.  Results from the PE samples were  sent di-
rectly to QAB, which  judged them as acceptable or nonacceptable,
and reported each evaluation  series  immediately to the prime  con-
tractor 's quality assurance officer.

    The prime  contractor  contacted each subcontractor analytical
laboratory by  telephone  on  receipt  of the PE sample results,  and
informed  the  laboratory  of the  nature of  the  results.    Discus-
sions  centered on  the  unacceptable  values and corrective actions
that were  required.    These  results and  the  required corrective
actions were also discussed during laboratory site visits.  Table
C-4 is a  summary of the  percentages of  acceptable PE results  by
analytical  method  analyte group and analytical  laboratory.    In
order  to  have  an  acceptable  result,  the  analytical  laboratory
must have correctly identified  the  analyte  and  measured  its  con-
centration  to within  the acceptance limits  established by  QAB.
The general performance of the laboratories in identification was
                                232

-------
TABLE C-4.  PERCENTAGES OF ACCEPTABLE  PERFORMANCE EVALUATION  RESULTS
Analytical
Method
Group One
Method 624
Method 625
Method 608
Metals Methods
Anions Methods
Group Two
Method 624
Method 625
Method 608
Metals Methods
Anions Methods
Total Organic
Carbon
Group Three
Method 624
Method 625
Method 608
Metals Methods
Anions Methods
Number of
Analytes
12
12
7
14*
2
12
12
7
14
2*
1
12
12
7
14
2*

PJBL GSNO
92 77
100T 54
88 71
93
100
100 92
58
100
93
100
—
100 92
100 47
25 71
93
50
Analytical Laboratory Code
SWRI CMTL ACEE TRW ERGO AES EMSL-Cin
58 54 33
58 46 69 — — — 58
50 88 86 -- — -- 71
93
— 100
58 100 — — — 92
50 55 — — — 64
100 63 — — — 100
— 100 — 80
	 7 c 	 TC
— — — — —~~ — • — i j — / j
„ .. - - _ o -
100 — 75 92 — — 92
77 — 67 100 — — 92
86 — 100 78 — — 100
86 — 100
— 100 100*
   Data obtained with  conventional packed column
  *Two concentrations  of  each analyte were included in the PE sample.
  'Only one of four  results reported
                                        233

-------
excellent, with  very  few analytes missed.   The  unacceptable re-
sults  in  Table C-4 were  due  largely to  concentrations measure-
ments  that were  outside the  acceptable range.   As  previously
noted, Method 625 employed the relatively new fused silica capil-
lary columns,  and  there  was some  initial difficulty  in adjusting
to this in some laboratories.   The PE samples served to assist in
this adjustment  and  to provide data on  the  applicability of the
columns.

    One hundred  and  fifty sets of quality  control  (QC)  samples
for  Methods  624,  625,  608,  trace metals,   and  nitrate/fluoride
were  provided  to  the analytical  laboratories  to assist  their
within-laboratory  quality control  programs.   These  samples  were
provided with  true values which were retained by  the  prime  con-
tractor, and used in a manner  similar to the PE samples.

    Information  from  PE  and QC samples  was  not  used  to estimate
precision and accuracy of the  analytical measurements or to vali-
date data  for  the  Love Canal  monitoring program,  because the PE
and QC samples were concentrates in  an  organic  solvent that  were
added  to  reagent water  at the analytical laboratory  before the
application of the method.   Therefore, although  the  analytical
laboratories were  unaware  of  the   true  concentrations,  they  were
aware that the samples were PE  and QC samples and  may have taken
unusual care  in  their analyses.   The purpose of  the  PE  and QC
samples was to discover  problems with the  execution  of the meth-
ods  and  enable corrective action  by the  prime  contractor  on  a
timely basis.

SAMPLE PRESERVATION

    Directions  for  sample  preservation were  included  in  the
analytical methods referenced  previously.    For  the  organic  com-
pound methods  {624, 625, and 608), preservation  requirements in-
cluded shipment  and  storage  of samples in  iced or  refrigerated
containers.   There was  a very high degree of compliance  with
these preservation requirements.

    Maximum holding  times  for  samples before analyses  were  also
specified in the methods.  There was a high percentage of samples
that were not analyzed within the specified holding times because
the  magnitude  of the  analytical  requirements  of  the  Love Canal
study, plus numerous other on-going environmental studies, liter-
ally  overwhelmed  the  national capacity  for low-level chemical
analyses.  The situation was  especially severe with regard to the
organics analyses  using  Methods 624  and 625, which employ state-
of-the-art gas  chromatography/mass spectrometry technology,  and
Method  608.    An  analysis of  the  sample holding  times revealed
that most Method 608 and Method 625 samples were extracted within
the  7-day  holding time,  and analyzed  within the  30-day extract
holding time.  However,  most Method  624 samples  were held longer
than the 14-day holding time.
                                234

-------
    A  study  was undertaken  by EMSL-Cincinnati to  determine the
effects  of  prolonged sample  holding times  on  the  stability  of
Method 624 analytes.  Representative compounds that were known to
be susceptible to biological  degradation  in nonchlorinated water
at submicrogram  per  liter  concentrations were  added to  a  non-
chlorinated well water sample and a nonchlorinated surface (lake)
water  sample at  concentrations of  100  micrograms  per liter.   The
samples were stored  at  6° C in standard sample  containers  for up
to 50  days,  the  longest period that  any Love Canal  Method 624
sample  was  held.    Multiple analyses  according  to  Method  624
showed  that  at  this  concentration,  which was  representative  of
the concentrations  found  in  many Love Canal  samples,  there  were
no detectable  losses  of any of the  study  compounds  over the 50-
day period.

    An  extensive  analysis  was made  of  the holding  times  on all
Method  624 samples  to seek a correlation  between actual holding
time and  the  presence or absence  of compounds  known  to  be  sus-
ceptible to losses at the submicrogram per liter level.  The  con-
centration range of concern was generally  from  5  to 3,300 micro-
grams  per liter.   No correlation was found  and  it was concluded
that the  extended holding times for  Method 624  samples  did not
impact  the reliability  of  the data for the compounds susceptible
to losses  at  submicrogram per  liter  levels.   No  samples  were
invalidated because holding times were exceeded.

DATA VALIDATION PROCEDURE

    Validation of data  is  the  systematic process  of rejecting
analytical results  whenever  compelling evidence  exists  of  sys-
tematic errors in sampling,  preservation,  or analysis associated
with those results.   Data validation for all methods was based on
the retrospective  statistical analysis of results  from  a series
of quality assurance  samples  that  were analyzed by all laborato-
ries.   The form  of  the quality assurance  was slightly different
depending on the method, but a common feature was the analysis by
EMSL-Cincinnati of approximately 5 percent of the water samples.
Each of the samples analyzed by EMSL-Cincinnati  was a member  of a
group of three that were collected at Love Canal at the same  time
and place by  the sampling team.   Two of   these samples  were de-
livered to the same subcontractor  laboratory with different  sam-
ple numbers  and,  therefore,  were  blind  duplicates.   The  third,
with a different sample number,  was delivered to EMSL-Cincinnati.
The details of the  validation process  are  given in this section.
The section entitled "Estimates of Data Precision" contains addi-
tional information obtained from the field triplicate samples.

Methods 624 and 625

    For Methods 624 and 625,  the principal validation  tool was a
series of quality control  compounds,  often called surrogate  ana-
lytes,   that were  added  to  each water sample.  The  compounds se-
lected as surrogates were valid method analytes  that were neither


                                235

-------
commercially produced nor naturally occurring.  Therefore, it was
highly unlikely that  any of them would be  found  in  any environ-
mental sample.  The compounds fluorobenzene and 4-foromofluoroben-
zene were added by the analytical laboratories to each water sam-
ple intended for Method  624  at a  concentration in the range of 5
to  25  micrograms  per  liter.  The  compounds  2-fluorophenol,  1-
fluoronaphthalene,  and  4,4'-dibromooctafluorobiphenyl were added
by  the analytical laboratories to each water  sample  intended for
Method 625 at a concentration in  the  range of 5 "to 25 micrograms
per liter.  Analytical laboratories reported the quantities added
(true values) and the amounts measured.  Statistics were computed
by  EMSL-Cincinnati in  terms of the percentage recoveries of the
amounts added to allow comparisons  among  laboratories that added
different amounts within the specified range.

    The recoveries (percentages  of  the true values)  for the five
surrogates  in  both methods  by  all  analytical  laboratories were
analyzed statistically to determine if there were any significant
differences related to  the  types  of samples,  that is, ground wa-
ter, drinking  water,  surface water,  sump water, or  storm sewer
water.  No statistically significant differences were found, that
is, there were  no  unusual matrix effects  in  any of  these sample
source types, and all  subsequent  data analyses were  conducted by
combining results from different sample types. The recoveries for
each  surrogate  were  tested  for  normality using several  standard
statistical tests.  The  conclusion was that the data were approx-
imately normally distributed, and that use  of  standard  deviations
and statistical tests based  on normal theory were justified.

    The standard for  performance  with the surrogate  analytes was
established  with  the 5  percent  of  the water samples analyzed by
EMSL-Cincinnati, which  developed Methods  624  and  625  and  operated
in  control  based  on extensive experience.   Table C-5 contains a
summary of  the  statistics and  the lower control limits that were
expressed as 99 percent  confidence  limits.  No upper  control lim-
its were  used  because there were very few reports of  excessively
high  recoveries.   High measurements  are  indicative of  positive
interferences  that were  precluded by  the  nature of the  surrogates
and the high  selectivity of the mass  spectrometric detector.  Low
percentages  of  true  values  are  indicative of  losses due  to  care-
less handling,  reduced  equipment  efficiency,  or inadequate  sensi-
tivity.   Lower control  limits were  set at the 99 percent  confi-
dence  level to ensure  the  high  probability  that any  recoveries
below  them  were due  to nonrandom systematic method errors.

    It should  be  pointed  out  that  the  lower acceptance  limits
 (Table C-5) for the  three  Method 625 surrogates  2-fluorophenol,
1-fluoronaphthalene,  and 4,4'-dibromooctafluorobiphenyl  were not
the same as the  lower control limits provided initially to the
analytical  subcontractors for  use in their internal  quality con-
trol  programs.  The  lower  internal  quality  control  limits that
                                 236

-------
were provided to the analytical subcontractors (Quality Assurance
Plan, Love Canal Study, LC-1-619-206) were based on data obtained
fromMethod625using  a packed  gas  chromatography column.   As
noted previously  in the  section entitled  "Methods  Selected for
the  Analysis of  Water Samples,"  fused silica  capillary column
technology was  selected for use with Method  625.   It was recog-
nized that while significant advantages were  to be gained through
the  selection  of  this  relatively new  column  technology,  no data
on precision would  be  available prior to  the study.   Therefore,
packed column  control  limits  were provided as guidelines for use
by the analytical subcontractor laboratories.

    As part  of  the  retrospective data validation process, accep-
tance limits were developed  based  on the  actual  experience de-
rived  from  the  fused   silica  capillary columns.   These limits,
which  are reported  in Table  C-5,  are  somewhat lower  than the
packed column control limits and reflect relatively greater vari-
ability  in   measurements obtained  from  the capillary  columns.
The  relatively  greater variability in  capillary column measure-
ments was judged  acceptable in  light  of the considerable advan-
tages derived from the  new technology.   In  addition, it should be
pointed  out that  even  though somewhat greater  variability was
obtained  from  the fused  silica  capillary  column technology, the
data validation confidence limits were  not altered.  That is, the
original  packed column control  limits  and the derived capillary
column acceptance  limits were both set  at the 99 percent confi-
dence level.

     In  order to invalidate  the data  from a  sample,  it  was re-
quired that  at least  two surrogate  compounds in the  sample have
their recoveries  out of  control.  Out  of  control low recoveries
of  two  surrogate  compounds is strongly suggestive of  poor method
execution,  and the  high  probability that  all  other  method ana-
lytes would  be measured low or completely missed because of poor
method execution.

     With  Method 624, data from  five Love  Canal  samples were in-
validated.   One of  these was a field blank,  three were sump sam-
ples,  and one  was   a  ground-water  sample.   Three  subcontractor
laboratories were  represented, and no  analytes  were  reported in
any  of these samples except the laboratory contaminant methylene
chloride  and some  trace levels of other analytes.   (See  the next
section).  With Method  625, data from  12 samples were  invalidated
because  at least 2  of  the  3  surrogate recoveries were below the
lower  control  limits shown  in Table C-5.    The invalidated data
did  not  include any  significant  analyte  measurements,  but includ-
ed  several  traces  and large  quantities of  the  phthalate  ester
laboratory contaminants.   The invalidated Method  625 data were
mainly  from sump,  ground water,  or field  blank  samples and in-
cluded measurements  from four  laboratories.
                                 237

-------
    TABLE C-5. SUMMARY STATISTICS AND LOWER CONTROL LIMITS FOR
 METHODS 624 AND 625 SURROGATES FROM EMSL-CINCINNATI MEASUREMENTS

                                           Relative
                   Number    Mean          Standard   Lower Con-
    Surrogate        of     Recovery       Deviation  trol Limit
     Analyte      Samples  (Percent)  S.D. (Percent)   (Percent)
Fluorobenzene        22

4-Bromofluoro-
  benzene            22

2-Fluorophenol       26

1-Fluoronaphtha-
  lene               26

4,4'-Dibromoocta-
  fluorobiphenyl     26
99


99

57


73


79
10


13

20


23


24
10


13

36


32


30
68


60

 1
 2.8
 8.3
S.D.j  Standard deviation

Invalid Ground-Water Samples

    There were 28 ground-water Method  624  samples from bedrock B
Wells that were contaminated  only  by  chloroform.   It is well es-
tablished that this compound is formed during the disinfection of
water with chlorine  to prepare water  suitable for human consump-
tion.  It was  determined  by  the  EPA Environmental Research Labo-
ratory in  Ada, Oklahoma, which  was responsible  for  the ground-
water monitoring program, that the wells from which these samples
were taken were  not purged adequately prior  to  sampling.   Ordi-
nary hydrant water  (drinking  water) was  used  as  a drilling fluid
during the bedrock  well drilling  process,  and type B Wells were
supposed  to  have been purged of  these  fluids  before  sampling.
Consequently,  all samples  from  these  wells were invalidated, not
because the  analyses  were at fault, but because  the samples may
not  have  been representative of  the  ground water.   While a few
other ground-water  samples also  contained  chloroform, other con-
taminants were present;  therefore, samples from these wells were
not  invalidated.

Laboratory Contamination

    Methylene  chloride was the solvent used in Method 625, and it
was  an analyte in Method 624.  There were 84 water  samples analy-
zed  by  Method 624  in  which  methylene chloride was  the only re-
ported analyte, and 94 percent of these  reports  came from 2 lab-
oratories, CMTL and GSNO.  This  evidence  strongly suggested the
presence of  laboratory contamination that was not unexpected with
such highly  sensitive  analytical methodology. Therefore, although
                                 238

-------
a  few  reports  of  methylene  chloride  may  have been  valid,  the
overwhelming number were very likely laboratory contaminants, and
it was impossible to distinguish the former from the latter. Con-
sequently,  all  reports  of  methylene  chloride in  water samples
were deleted from the validated data.

    Late in the  data  reporting  period, after the methylene chlo-
ride problem was discovered,  one  of the  laboratories was inspec-
ted by EPA  personnel.-  A large opening was  found  in the labora-
tory between  the area where  the methylene  chloride extractions
were conducted  and  the  room where the analytical instrumentation
was located.  This  finding  supported the  strong probability that
methylene chloride  was  a laboratory contaminant  in at least one
of the laboratories.

    There were  a very  large number  of  reports for two compounds,
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate  and  dibutyl phthalate,  in  both real
and quality control samples.  There  also were  significant differ-
ences in the amounts of  these compounds reported in several labo-
ratory  duplicates.    Finally,  it is well-known that  these com-
pounds  are  widely  used  plasticizers and are  frequently used  in
bottle  cap  liners.    Many of the  early  samples that  arrived  at
EMSL-Cincinnati  for analysis had poorly fitted  and  leaking  Teflon
cap liners.   This was corrected  later in  the study and fewer  of
these phthalates were observed.   On  this  basis,  all  reports  of
these two compounds in  samples  were judged highly  unreliable and
all reports were removed from the validated data.

Method 608

    Validation  of data  from  samples  analyzed  by  Method 608 was
based on the quality  control requirement that an  LCS was to  be
analyzed  with  each  batch of  samples processed in  a group  at the
same time.  Recoveries of LCS analytes were evaluated, and  if un-
acceptable  recoveries were reported,  all  of  the  data obtained
with Method 608 on  that day by that laboratory were invalidated.
Using this  approach,  all the data  obtained  by one laboratory  on
one day were invalidated because  the laboratory reported zero LCS
recoveries,  suggesting  major method execution errors  or  instru-
ment failures.

    Method  608  employs  an electron capture  gas  chromatographic
detector, and  is subject  to  false  positive identifications.   In
order to minimize these  errors,  two column confirmation and gas
chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS)  confirmations were re-
quired  for  all Method 608  results.    However,  GC/MS confirmation
was  limited by the  difference  in  detection  limits between the
methods.   Users  of the  Love Canal data should be aware  of the
probability  that low level,  less  than 0.5 micrograms per  liter,
measurements by Method 608  were  not confirmed by GC/MS.
                                 239

-------
Metals and Anions

    Validation of data  from samples analyzed  for  metals and  the
anions fluoride  and  nitrate was based on the quality control  re-
quirement that a certain percentage of  samples  were spiked with
the  analytes  at  a  specified  concentration.    Specifically,  the
first 10  samples from each  type of water  sample  (ground,  sump,
drinking, storm  sewer, and  surface), and 5 percent of the  remain-
ing samples, were spiked with these analytes at  concentrations in
the range of  10  to 10,000  micrograms  per  liter.  The  concentra-
tions were  selected as  appropriate  for the analyte,  and the lab-
oratories were  required to measure the background  levels  first
and subtract these from  the spike  concentrations before the per-
centage recoveries were computed.

    The  standard of  performance with  these  methods  was  estab-
lished by the  results obtained from EMSL-Cincinnati measurements
of 5 percent of  the  samples.   The  EMSL-Cincinnati recoveries  for
the 14 metal  and 2 anion parameters  were  tabulated by  parameter
and sample  source type.  The mean recovery and standard  deviation
were  calculated   for  the total population  and  for  each  sample
type.  A  mean  recovery of  +11  percent  of  the  actual spike  value
(based on the total  population) was  used as the  criterion  for
valid data.

    The spike recovery data from the  other analytical  laborator-
ies were  compared with  the criterion, and data meeting it were
accepted as valid.  For some data, poor spike recoveries could be
traced to  improper  spiking technique,  and  the data  were  ruled
valid.   In  other cases,  no explanation could  be found for  the
poor recoveries  and all data analyzed on that day, in that  sample
source type,  by  that  laboratory,  were ruled  invalid.    Overall,
some  data  from  two  laboratories were invalidated,  and in  every
case  these  were  all  measurements  of  one  metal in  a  particular
source type on a particular day.

ESTIMATES OF DATA PRECISION

    The purpose  of the  field triplicate samples  described  at  the
beginning of the data validation section was to establish  inter-
laboratory  and  intralaboratory precision.    In  addition, some
methods required taking two aliquots of 10 percent of the  samples
to  obtain  further  information  about  intralaboratory  precision.
However,  a  high  percentage  of the total samples  gave all analytes
below detection  limits,  and insufficient  information  was  avail-
able  to  estimate  the precision of the measurements  from  these
samples.

    With  Method  625,  close to  75  percent of all  water  samples
contained no  analytes above  the method quantitation  limit.   An
additional  10  percent of the water samples  contained only  trace
                                240

-------
quantities.   These  findings  were reflected  in the  results  ob-
tained with  the  field  triplicate samples  and laboratory dupli-
cates, and insufficient results were available  from these  samples
to estimate  precision.   Similar  observations  were made with  all
other methods.

    Data  precision may  be estimated  using the  results  of  the
measurements  of the  laboratory  control standards  that were  de-
scribed earlier under Limits  of  Detection/Quantitation.   This  is
a less desirable approach because the LCS measurements  do  not  in-
clude  the  variability associated with  sampling,  transportation,
storage, and preservation  of  samples.   Also,  these data may have
been  obtained  over a period  of  weeks by  some laboratories,  and
the values may include  wee"k-to-week variations that may signifi-
cantly exceed  variations within  a given analysis  day.  Neverthe-
less,  lacking  the information from  the  replicate  field samples,
the LCS measurements may be  used to provide  rough estimates  of
data precision.

    Table C-6  shows the relative standard  deviations  for repli-
cate  measurements  of Method  624  and Method 625  analytes in  LCS
samples.  No statistics were  computed unless at least five repli-
cate measurements  were  available. Some laboratories did not ana-
lyze  a  sufficient  number of  some types  of  samples to  accumulate
five  LCS  measurements.   All  the LCS concentrations  were in  the
range  of  10  to 50 micrograms per  liter.   The precision of  any
single measurement of a Method 624  or  Method  625  analyte in  any
Love Canal water  sample, at the  95  percent confidence  level,  may
be estimated using the formula:

          Analytical Result + 2 x (RSD from Table C-6).

The RSD should be selected from  Table  C-6  according to the ana-
lyte  measured  and the laboratory analyzing the sample.   If  the
exact analyte  is not in Table C-6, a structurally similar  analyte
may be used? for  example,  if  the  analyte of interest is 2-nitro-
phenol, the  RSD for 4-nitrophenol may be used.   If RSD data  for
the reporting  laboratory is not in Table C-6,  use the mean RSD of
all laboratories  reporting  that  analyte.  Additional single lab-
oratory precision  data for Method 624 was published in  J.  Chroma-
tographic Science,  1981,  377.  For  metals  and anions,  a  similar
estimate may be made  using  the  relative standard  deviations pre-
sented in Table C-7.

    Precision  estimates were  not  used  to validate  the Love Canal
data.  Data  validation  procedures are explained in detail in  the
previous section entitled,  "Data Validation Procedures."

ESTIMATES OF DATA ACCURACY

    Method 624  is  well established  as  a method without bias when
it is  used to  analyze samples that  have a  matrix  similar to  the
                                241

-------
   TABLE O6.   RELATIVE STANDARD DEVIATIONS (RSD) FOR ORGANIC
                  ANALYTES IN LABORATORY CONTROL STANDARDS
Analytical Laboratory Code
Analyte ACEE PJBL GSNO CMTL TRW
Method 624
Benzene 42
Chlorobenzene 28
Chloroform 55
Broraoform 77
sym-Tetrachloroethane 38
Carbon tetraehloride 53
Trichloroethylene 44
Tetrachloroethylene 36
Toluene —
Method 625
1 » 4~Dichlorobenzene
1 , 2 , 4-Tr ichlorobenzene
1 , 2 , 3 , 4-Tetrachlorobenzene —
2, 4,6-Trichlorophenol —
Pentachlorophenol —
2, 6-Dinitrotoluene —
4-Nitrophenol —
2-Chloronaphthalene —
0-BHC
Fluoranthene
Di-n-butylphthalate —
^As reported in J. Chroma tographic

11
12
12
39
31
17
18
23
—

37
30
32
47
52
45
40
32
30
—
38
Science,

27 12 4.3
25 9.4 3.9
16 — 5.3
42 — - 2.6
29 — 2.7
33 -- 14
19 — 5.6
30 — 7.6
__ Ti _„

79 32
62 32
— —
63
59 87
70
— 109
56
—
55
73 77
1981, 377; all
EMSL-Cinf

7
10
3
7
12
4
2
6
9

17
15
_
20
25
16
42
12
7
21
17
data

.4


.6

.5
.9
.7
.3



_





.7



obtained during a single  work  shift
                                 242

-------
 TABLE C-7.  RELATIVE STANDARD DEVIATIONS (RSD) FOR INORGANIC
                       ANALYTES IN WATER SAMPLES
Analytical Laboratory Code
Analyte
Arsenic
Antimony
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Fluoride
Nitrate
ERGO
8.1
12
5.9
5.7
13
11
17
13
19
12
13
12
16
20
10
82
PJBL
33
38
46
12
14
14
12
11
25
10
23
39
38
11
10
15
SWRI
11
36
21
29
25
38
32
31
25
30
47
46
15
22
6
11
EMSL-Cin
11
43
4.
7.
5.
8.
5.
16
10
30
8.
3
15
19
13
2.


3
3
6
1
3



7




6
reagent water matrix used to calibrate the procedure.  The  sample
types analyzed  in this study had  no  unusual matrix effects, and
the Method 624  results  are  without bias.   (See the discussion of
surrogate recoveries  as a  function of water  sample  type in the
Data Validation Procedures section).

    Data from Methods 625 and 608 have a significant bias because
the  liquid-liquid partition  is  not  100  percent  efficient,  and
                                243

-------
these methods  do not  provide a  procedure  to  correct  for  these
losses.   Recoveries of Method 625 and 608 analytes generally fall
in the 50 to 90 percent range (Table C-5), and  this was confirmed
in this study by  measurements of a number of analytes in  labora-
tory control standards.

    Measurements of  metals  and  the two  anions  were without  sig-
nificant bias in the Love Canal samples.  This  was discussed pre-
viously in the section on data validation.

    Estimates  of data  accuracy  were used  to  validate  the  Love
Canal data.   These  procedures  for surrogate analytes  and  other
analytes were  described  in  detail in the "Data Validation Proce-
dures" section.

SUMMARY OF MAJOR ACTIONS TAKEN AS A RESULT OF THE GCA CORPORA-
  TION'S QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTION

    The  activities   of  the   prime contractor  in  the  day-to-day
quality  assurance program  are  described  in detail in  the  Love
Canal Monitoring Prog rain, GCA QA/QCSummary  Report  on  the  Love
Canal study.  The purpose of this section is to summarize  briefly
the major QA actions initiated by the GCA Corporation.

    The  prime  contractor routinely  discussed,  by  telephone and
during site visits,  the results of the external quality assurance
samples with the  analytical  laboratories.  Requirements for cor-
rective action were provided during these discussions.  The prime
contractor also  monitored  the results  from  the internal  quality
assurance program, and discussed  these  with  the analytical  labo-
ratories during  telephone conversations and  site visits.   Again,
requirements for corrective action were  provided.

    One  significant  action   that resulted  from  the  day-to-day
quality assurance program was the removal of the laboratory PJBL
from the  analysis of samples by  Method  625  in  water,  soils, and
sediment.  During a  site visit and during discussions of  the in-
ternal and external  quality  assurance samples,  it was discovered
that PJBL was  using  packed  columns with  Method 625,  and  did not
have the  capability  to analyze the samples with the fused silica
capillary columns.

    All previous  results using  Method 625 provided  by PJBL were
therefore invalidated, work  on Method 625 was  suspended at PJBL,
and TRWW  replaced PJBL for  the analysis  of  Method  625.    Eventu-
ally,  PJBL   developed  the  capability  to use  the  fused   silica
capillary columns and all the sample extracts were reanalyzed.

    Details  of  this incident and other  activities  of the  prime
contractor  are  given  in the Love Canal MonitoringProgram, GCA
QA/QC Summary Report referenced earlier.
                                244

-------
                             APPENDIX D
         QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR SOIL, SEDIMENT, AND BIOTA SAMPLES
OVERVIEW OF QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM

    This Appendix summarizes the quality assurance activities and
data validation procedures  used in the soil, sediment, and biota
analyses.  Details  of the quality  assurance plans are presented
in  a  four-part  document entitled Quality Assurance Plan, Love
Canal Study,  LC-1-619^206,  that was issued  by the  GCA Corpora-
tion, the  prime contractor for the project,  and  approved by the
EPA  quality  assurance  officers.    As  was  mentioned previously,
that document  consists  of a main  volume plus  Appendix A on sam-
pling procedures,  Appendix B  on  analytical procedures,  and Ap-
pendix Q  on  the subcontractor's QA plans.   A more detailed dis-
cussion of the  results  of the  prime contractor's and subcontrac-
tor's quality  assurance  efforts  is contained  in the Love Canal
Monitoring Program,GCA QA/QC SummaryReport prepared by the GCA
Corporation.Thesedocuments(availablefrom  NTIS)  should be
consulted  for more details on the  project.

    The design  of the soil, sediment,  and biota monitoring pro-
gram at Love  Canal and the related quality  assurance plans were
developed by EPA and described  in  detail to  the prime contractor.
This  guidance was  intended to establish minimum  standards for
quality assurance,  and  it was  expected  that the GCA Corporation
and subcontractors would  amplify the requirements in  their plans.
During the design,  study, and  data evaluation phases of the Love
Canal project,  the plans and  results  were  reviewed  by an inde-
pendent group,  the sampling protocols  study group  of the EPA's
Science Advisory Board.

    It was the  responsibility  of  the  prime contractor to oversee
the  day-to-day  quality assurance  programs of the subcontractors
using the  guidance  provided  by EPA and the approved plans.  This
guidance  formed  the basis for   the  GCA Corporation quality assur-
ance plan  document  that was mentioned earlier.  Briefly,  the  soil,,
sediment,  and biota  quality  assurance guidance  provided by EPA
included  the  following  items.
                                245

-------
   1.  Directives on sample collection

   2.  Directives on analytical methods

   3.  Directives on the external quality  assurance  program,  in-
       cluding  the  use  of  performance evaluation  samples  and
       quality control samples provided by EMSL-Cincinnati.   The
       purpose of the  external quality assurance program was  to
       give the prime  contractor  some of the tools  necessary  to
       oversee the day-to-day quality assurance  program.

   4.  Directives on the  internal quality assurance program  in-
       cluding required measurements of gas  chromatography/mass
       spectrometry (GC/MS)  reference compounds, method  blanks,
       laboratory control  standards,  laboratory  duplicates,  sur-
       rogate  analytes for  modified Methods  624 and  625,  and
       known  additions (spikes)  for  other  methods.    Required
       spiking concentrations were given.   The purpose  of the in-
       ternal quality  assurance program was to provide  tools  for
       use in the day-to-day quality assurance program,  and  tools
       to be used in the retrospective review of the data by EPA
       for validation and  estimation of precision and accuracy.

   5.  Directives on field replicates,  which  were to be  used  to
       determine interlaboratory precision, and field blanks

   6.  All analytical subcontractors who analyzed soil,  sediment,
       and  biota  samples   were   required  to  address   points  1
       through 5 exactly as  described.  However,  it  must be rec-
       ognized that because  of different  capabilities  of differ-
       ent methods for different analytes,  not all types of  qual-
       ity assurance samples were applicable  to  all methods  and
       analytes.

    To "reiterate, it was  the responsibility of  the  GCA Corpora-
tion to  oversee this  quality  assurance  program on  a  day-to-day
basis.   It was impossible  for EPA to manage this function because
over 6,000  field samples  were  collected  in  less than  3  months,
and the vast majority  of analytical  data was  not received by EPA
until nearly all the samples were collected and analyzed.

    It was  the responsibility of EPA to  validate  data for  the
Love Canal data  base  and  to estimate  the  precision  and accuracy
of the validated data.   Validation involved the rejection of cer-
tain analytical results whenever there was compelling evidence of
systematic errors  in  sampling,  preservation,  or analysis  asso-
ciated with those results.   These functions were accomplished by
a retrospective  (and  intentionally redundant) review of  all  the
quality assurance data collected during the project.  The balance
of  this  Appendix summarizes the quality  assurance  program  in-
cluding the specific actions taken  as a  result  of the  day-to-day
quality assurance program,  the data validation  process,  and  the
estimation of precision and accuracy.
                                246

-------
METHODS SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS OF SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLES

    Analytical methods  for soil and  sediment analyses  were se-
lected with the  recognition  that some trade-offs would be neces-
sary between  the desire to  acquire the most  accurate,  precise,
and sensitive measurements possible at the current state-of-the-
art, and the need to  control  costs  and find a suitable number of
subcontractors with  the experience and capabilities  to do the
analyses.  Some of these trade-offs were discussed in Section 3.3
of the report, with emphasis on the pre-study goals for accuracy,
precision, and  limits of detection/quantitation.   The following
methods  were  selected  as the  ones  that  best  met the  project
needs.

    For  the C,-CU  halogenated hydrocarbons  and  some substituted
benzenes, the method  selected was  a modification of  EPA's  pro-
posed Method 624 as  described in the  Federal  Register,  Vol. 44,
No. 233, December 3,  1979,  p. 69532, and presented in Appendix C,
Quality Assurance for Water Samples.  The modifications to Method
624 for soil and sediment analyses consisted of placing a mixture
of  soil  or  sediment  and reagent water  in  a  modified screw-top
vial and  purging as  in Method 624,  except that  the sample-water
mixture was heated to 55°C during  the purge.  The rationale for
this modification  was  that  the method  analytes are  not sorbed
strongly on the  soil/sediment particulate matter,  because  their
structures do not generally  contain polar  functional groups, and
the analytes have  typically  low solubilities  in  water and  rela-
tively high vapor pressures  at  ambient temperatures.  Therefore,
at 55°C and with the  agitation of  the purge gas,  the method ana-
lytes would  rapidly  equilibrate between  the  sorbed  and liquid
phases,  and be  subject  to  purging from the water as  in Method
624.

    The  modified soil and sediment Method 624,   which is desig-
nated Method 624PS in the Love Canal data base, has not been for-
mally validated in a multilaboratory study.  Only unpublished in-
ternal EPA reports  describe the method  and  preliminary results.
This same class  of  compounds may be measured  with other methods
which  would   likely   give  somewhat  different results for  some
analytes.  Method 624PS  is not  limited to  the analytes listed in
Method 624  (as  amended  for  the  Love Canal  study),  but  will ob-
serve any  compound structurally similar  to the  method  analytes
and with similar physical and chemical properties.  The method is
limited  to  compounds  with a  molecular weight   from  33 to  260
atomic mass units  (amu),  because this was the limit of  the  mass
spectrometer scan.   The standard reporting units for Method 624PS
are micrograms  per kilogram, and  further information about the
method is contained in later parts of this section.

    For most  of the  other organic  compounds  on the  Love  Canal
monitoring list, the  method selected was a modification  of  EPA's
proposed Method  625  as described  in the  Federal  Register,  Vol.
                                247

-------
44, No.  233,  December  3,  1979, p.  69540,  and presented  in  Ap-
pendix C, Quality Assurance for Water Samples.  The modifications
to Method  625 for  soil and sediment  analyses consisted  of  ex-
tracting the pH adjusted soil or sediment with methylene chloride
using a  high  speed mechanical  stirrer.   Separate extractions at
pH 12 and  pH  2  (in that order) were followed by  centrifuging to
facilitate phase separation.   The  separated individual methylene
chloride solutions were dried,  concentrated to  a  low volume,  and
either analyzed separately  (Method 625BS in  the  Love Canal data
base)  or combined  and analyzed (Method  625CS in the  Love Canal
data base).   The  optional Method 625  fused silica  capillary  gas
chromatography column was  used with  modified Method  625.   In
addition,  an  optional  gel  permeation chromatographic  procedure
was included in the method for preprocessing heavily contaminated
samples before gas chromatography,  but it was  determined early in
the study  that preprocessing was  not necessary for  all samples.
Only two analytical laboratories,  GSRI and SWRI, received heavily
contaminated soil/sediment samples in the early part of the study
and became accustomed to  routine application  of  the gel permea-
tion chromatographic procedure.

    The principal modifications to Method 625  for soil  and sedi-
ment analyses were the use of a high speed  mechanical stirrer,
centrifuging to separate phases, and the  optional gel permeation
chromatography.    These modifications  to Method  625,  originally
established to  allow the  application  of Method  625 to sludges
formed in wastewater  treatment  plants, were developed previously
by the Midwest Research Institute  (MWRI) under contract to EPA.
A final  report on  this  project  has been  prepared, peer reviewed,
and is scheduled for release during 1982.  This report,  and other
internal EPA studies, indicated that the modifications  were suc-
cessful,  and the method was a  viable choice.   In  particular,  the
MWRI report  indicated  good recoveries  from  the gel  permeation
chromatographic preprocessing,  which  makes  possible valid com-
parisons of results from samples receiving and not receiving this
treatment.   Nevertheless,  two  alternative  extraction procedures
were considered,  and  tested  briefly  with Love  Canal  soil  and
sediment samples,  before  the  final choice  was made  in  favor of
modified Method 625.

    The two alternative extraction procedures considered were as
follows.    First,  an extraction procedure using a Isl mixture of
acetone  and hexane with  the  high speed  mechanical  stirrer  was
tested,  but qualitatively  had  no apparent  advantages.   And sec-
ond, an extraction procedure based on steam distillation that had
been used  by the  New  York State Department  of  Health  for  the
analysis of Love  Canal samples was  also  tested  briefly.   This
method was  rejected because  it may produce  chemical artifacts,
such as nitroaromatic compounds, that  are probably  formed at  the
temperatures required for  steam  distillation.    Other  thermally
promoted chemical changes were considered likely,  which also made
the method unattractive.
                                248

-------
    The modified  Method 625  selected for  the analysis of  Love
Canal soils  and  sediments  has not  been  formally validated  in a
multilaboratory study.  This  same class  of  compounds  may be  mea-
sured with other methods which would likely give somewhat differ-
ent results  for  some analytes.   Modified Method 625  is  not  lim-
ited to  the analytes listed  in  Method  625  (as amended  for the
Love Canal  study),   but  will observe  any  compound  structurally
similar to any method analyte and with similar physical and chem-
ical properties.    The method  is  limited  to  compounds with  a
molecular weight  from 35 to 450  amu, because  that was  the limit
of the mass  spectrometer scan.   The standard  reporting units for
modified Method 625  are micrograms  per kilogram, and  further in-
formation about  the method is contained in later parts  of  this
section.

    The great  strength  of  modified Methods 624 and 625  is  that
each method  provides the complete  70  eV mass  spectrum  for  each
analyte.  This, together with the retention index,  allows  a  very
high degree  of qualitative  accuracy, that  is,  these  methods are
highly reliable in the identification of the method analytes  plus
any other analytes that are susceptible to the sample  preparation
and chromatographic conditions.   Another great strength common to
these methods  is  their  utility with numerous  analytes  (1  to 100
or more) simultaneously in  the same sample.  Thus,  the  methods are
very cost  effective. The weakness  of  both methods is  that  they
are not the most  precise or  sensitive  mass  spectrometric methods
that could be  chosen.  Methods that use  selected  ion  monitoring,
like that used for  2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin,  are  both
more precise and  sensitive, but  also more costly to apply when a
large number of analytes are  to  be  measured.   The  application of
fused silica  capillary  columns with modified  Method  625  may be
considered both a strength  and  a weakness.   The strength  is the
high resolution  chromatographic  performance of the columns,  and
the weakness  is  that the columns are so new that  only a limited
number of laboratories had  experience in using them.  Also, their
availability was  limited at the time of the study.

    A few of the chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides were known to
be sensitive to the pH 12 extraction conditions of modified Meth-
od 625,  and measurements were desired for certain very toxic  pes-
ticides at levels below the detection  limits  for  modified Method
625. (See a later general discussion of detection limits).  There-
fore, the  chlorinated hydrocarbon  pesticides  and  a  few related
compounds  (PCBs)  were measured  using  modifications  to  methods
that  are  described in  Manual  of Analytical Methods for the
Analysis of Pesticides in Humans  and Environmental  Samples,  EPA-
600/8-80-038,June,1980.Soilswereextractedbyaprocedure
entitled "Organochlorine Insecticides in Soils and Housedust" in
the aforementioned  report,  but  the extracts were  analyzed using
the conditions described in EPA  proposed Method 608 as described
in the Federal Register, Vol.  44,  No.  233,  December 3,  1979,  p.
69501.
                                249

-------
    Briefly,  the  air dried  and  sieved soil  was extracted  in a
Soxhlet apparatus with  a  Isl mixture of acetone  and  hexane, the
extract was  concentrated, partitioned  on  alumina  and florisil,
and analyzed  using a  packed gas  chromatography  column  with an
electron capture detector  (GC/ECD).   Sediments were extracted by
a procedure entitled  "Organochlorine and  Organophosphorus Insec-
ticides in Bottom Sediment"  in  the same report, but were again
analyzed with  the Method  608 conditions referenced  previously.
The sediments were air dried, blended in a mixer with sodium sul-
fate,  extracted in a chromatographic column with a 1:1 mixture of
acetone and hexane, and the  extract was added to water.   The wa-
ter was  then extracted  in a separatory  funnel with 15 percent
methylene chloride in  hexane, the extract  was concentrated, par-
titioned on  florisil,   and  analyzed with the Method  608 condi-
tions .

    It  was  required  that   any  pesticides   identifed by GC/ECD
(Method 608)  be confirmed  by the  analysis  of  the same extract
with  gas  chromatography/mass spectrometry  using the Method  625
conditions.   The complete  soils  and sediments  methods  have  not
undergone  formal  multilaboratory validations.   The standard  re-
porting units  are micrograms per  kilogram,  and further  informa-
tion  about these  methods is  contained in  later parts  of  this
section.   The  soil and sediment  GC/ECD method is referred to as
modified Method 608 in  the balance  of this Appendix.

    All  elements  except  mercury  were  analyzed  by  either direct
flame  aspiration or  furnace  atomic absorption spectrometry.   The
samples  were  digested with nitric  acid  and  hydrogen   peroxide
prior  to measurements  using  the  methods described  in  Methods  for
Chemical Analysis  forWater and Wastes, EPA-600/4-79-020.    For
furnace atomic absorption methods,  background  correction  and cal-
ibration with  the  method of standard additions was required;  for
direct  flame aspiration,  justification  was required to omit  cali-
bration by  standard  additions.   Mercury was measured by  the  cold
vapor  atomic  absorption  procedure  as  described  in  Methodsfor
Determination of  Inorganic  Substances  inWater  and FluvialSedi-
ments ,  Book  5, Chapter Al,  U.S.  Geological  Survey,  1979.    The
mercury is reduced to  the elemental state, aerated  from  solution,
and  passed through  a cell  positioned  in the light  path of  an
atomic  absorption  spectrometer.    Parts of  or all of  the methods
for the elements  have been validated in multilaboratory  studies.
The   standard  reporting  units  for  elemental  measurements  are
micrograms  per kilogram.    More  detailed information about  the
atomic  absorption  methods and background correction  is  presented
in Appendix C,  in  the  section  entitled  "Methods  Selected  for
Analysis of Water  Samples".

Qua1itati ye  Ana1ys es

    For those  materials named in this  report as modified Method
608  analytes,  modified Method 624 analytes,  modified Method  625
                                 250

-------
analytes,  and metals  analytes,  the analytical  laboratories had
available known concentration  calibration  standards,  and the re-
sults were  reported in micrograms  per kilogram.   However,  with
mass  spectrometric  methods,  compounds not on  a targeted analyte
list  are often detected,  and  may  be  identified by  their  mass
spectra.  When observed, these compounds are designated as quali-
tative identifications, but  concentrations were not measured be-
cause appropriate  calibration  standards were  not available.  In
general, modified  Methods  624  and'  625  will  observe any compound
structurally  similar  to any  method analyte  and  with  a molecular
weight less than  260  and  450 respectively.   Qualitative analyses
were  required of the  20 most abundant  total  ion current peaks in
the chromatogram that were nontarget compounds.

METHODS  SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS OF BIOTA SAMPLES

    Analytical methods  for biota analyses  were selected with the
overall  goal  of the biological  monitoring  program in  mind.   This
goal  was to provide limited, suggestive indication of the accum-
ulation  of  substances monitored in biological  systems,  thereby
potentially increasing the  sensitivity of the entire monitoring
program.  Therefore,  not all target analytes discussed under wa-
ter samples (Appendix  C)  and soil and sediment samples (previous
section  of this Appendix), were  determined in  all biota samples.
Because  the biological monitoring effort was  very limited,  ana-
lytical  methods and quality  assurance procedures were selected to
minimize costs  and to keep  the  effort in  perspective  with the
overall  study.

    Because of EPA's  very  limited  experience and capabilities in
chemical analyses  of  biota  samples, no pre-study precision, ac-
curacy,  or detection limit goals were established.  The following
methods  were  selected as the  ones  that  best  met  the  project
needs.

    Mouse,  crayfish,  and  earthworm tissue were  analyzed  for the
Method  625  analytes  (Appendix  A)  plus the  qualitative analytes
described under soils  and  sediments.   The procedure  used  was an
adaptation of one  published in Analytical  Chemistry,  1978, 50,
182 (from the EPA Environmental  Research Laboratory, Duluth, Min-
nesota)  that  was intended  for  high  fat content fish tissue.   The
adaptation  is  described   in Organics Analysis Using Gas Chroma-
tography-Mass Spectrometry (W.  L.  Budde and J.  W. Eichelberger,
Ann Arbor  Science  Publishers,  Inc., Ann Arbor,  Michigan,  1979).
Briefly, in this  method frozen  tissue  samples were blended with
solid carbon  dioxide and anhydrous  sodium  sulfate,  and the  dried
mixture  extracted  in  a Soxhlet  apparatus  with a  1:1  mixture of
acetone  and hexane.  The extract was concentrated to a low volume
and the  fatty material was separated from the compounds of inter-
est with gel  permeation chromatography.  The concentrated eluate
was examined  by gas  chromatography/mass  spectrometry  using the
conditions  described  for  modified  Method  625  in the  soils and
                                251

-------
sediments section  of this Appendix.   This  method has  not been
validated in  a  multilaboratory study,  and this  same  class  of
compounds may be measured  with other methods which  would likely
give somewhat different  results  for  some  analytes.   The standard
reporting units are micrograms per kilogram.

    Potatoes and oatmeal were analyzed for halogenated Method 624
analytes.  The procedure employed  a  headspace  sampling technique
after digestion  of a  small  sample with  hot sulfuric acid  in a
sealed  container.    The headspace gases  were  analyzed with  a
packed gas  chromatographic  column  using a  halogen  specific Hall
detector.  All results from this method must be considered tenta-
tive because  they  were not  confirmed by  mass spectrometry  or
another  spectrometric  technique.  All  concentrations were  con-
sidered  crude estimates  for  exploratory  purposes  because  the
method was essentially untested.

    Metals  were  measured  in hair  from  dogs  and  mice,  and  in
silver maple  tree  leaves.   Hair was  cleaned, digested in nitric
acid, and analyzed using the  atomic  absorption  methods described
in Appendix  C. The furnace technique  was employed for most metals
except cadmium,  where direct aspiration in a flame was permitted,
and mercury, where the cold vapor technique was used.

    Metals in vegetation were measured with atomic  absorption or
inductively  coupled  argon plasma  (ICAP)  emission  spectrometry.
Vegetation was digested  with  nitric  and perchloric  acid and,  in
some cases,  sulfuric  acid.   The instrumental techniques are de-
scribed in Appendix C of this Volume.

METHODS SELECTED FOR RADIOACTIVITY

    Soil, sediment,  and water  samples  were examined  for radio-
activity.   Because the methods used  for  water  samples were very
similar  to  those  used for soil  and  sediment samples,  they were
not described previously in Appendix  C.

    Soil, sediment,   and water  samples  were   collected in  300
milliliter Teflon-lined  aluminum cans.   The analysis  for gamma-
emitting  radionuclides was  accomplished  with   a  well  shielded
computerized  gamma ray  spectrometer  using a  solid  state  high
resolution  gamma  ray  detector  (lithium  drifted  germanium  or
intrinsic germanium).   This  analysis required  no  sample prepa-
ration,  and  the  samples were not even  removed from  the sealed
aluminum cans.  Because  samples  were  not  removed from their con-
tainers,  the  possibility of  laboratory losses  or  contamination
was  essentially  eliminated,  and the  principal  quality assurance
activity was a daily instrument calibration and frequent measure-
ments of  calibration  check samples.   All  radioactivity measure-
ments were  performed  by EMSL-Las Vegas.   This  EPA  laboratory is
also responsible  for  conducting  a nationwide  quality assurance
                                252

-------
program for  measurements of radionuclides  in environmental sam-
ples.  All  standards  used were traceable to  the National Bureau
of Standards.

    The method detection limit for a given radionuclide is depen-
dent on the abundance of the gamma rays emitted and their energy.
For cesium-137 the detection limit is approximately 50 picocuries
per  liter  of water  and  40  picocuries per  kilogram of  soil  or
sediment.   After counting the gamma emissions from drinking water
samples,  the containers were opened, the water was distilled, and
an aliquot  of the distillate  mixed with a  liquid scintillating
material.    The mixture  was  then  analyzed  for tritium by scintil-
lation counting.   The detection  limit for this  procedure is ap-
proximately  300  to 400 picocuries per liter.   (See Table 13 and
Section 4.3.3 in the text for additional information).

SELECTION OF ANALYTICAL SUBCONTRACTORS

    Details  of  the  analytical subcontractors  selection process
are  given  in the QA/QC summary report on  the Love Canal project
prepared by the  GCA Corporation.  Briefly,  the process included:
(1)  the provision  by  EPA to the  prime contractor of the names of
a  number  of  laboratories  that were  known  from  past  or ongoing
environmental monitoring  programs  to have the generally required
capabilities;  (2)  technical  evaluation  criteria were prepared;
(3)  proposals were solicited;  and (4) a prospective bidders con-
ference was  held.   The proposals received were reviewed in  terms
of the evaluation  criteria, which  included immediate availability
to  initiate  analyses,  quality  assurance  plan,  experience with
analyses,  and availability of appropriate  equipment, personnel,
and  management.    Experience  with specific  analyses  and methods
was  examined in  detail, and capabilities for handling samples in
a  timely  manner  (and preferences  for executing  certain  methods)
were  considered.    Finally,  cost  proposals  were considered, but
this  was  not a compelling  factor.  One bidder  was not  selected
because the bid  was considered too low to permit the  subcontrac-
tor  to  carry out  the analyses with  the  minimum  required quality
assurance program.  Because of the urgency of the program and the
deadlines  imposed  on  EPA, there was  no time  to conduct a  preaward
interlaboratory study with  actual  samples to  refine the  selection
process.

LIMITS OF  DETECTION/QUANTITATION

     In Appendix  C, it was possible to calculate  limits of  detec-
tion (LOD)  for  several methods  from subcontractor supplied re-
sults of  the analyses of laboratory control  standards.  A  labor-
atory control standard was defined  as  a  solution  of analytes of
known concentration  in reagent water.  By contrast, in the  soil,
sediment,  and biota media, there  are substantial  impediments to
the  measurement  of  limits  of detection.   In  particular,   it  is
very difficult to  add  a known  amount of an  analyte or  analytes to
                                 253

-------
a soil, sediment, or  biota  sample and simulate the natural  sorp-
tion or  uptake processes.   Therefore, known  additions  (spikes)
are often  superficial and  do  not rigorously  test an  analytical
method.  In the Love Canal project, an attempt was made to devel-
op laboratory  control  standards  based on known additions of  ana-
lytes  to  a common  standard media, National Bureau  of Standards
(NBS)  Standard Reference  Material  (SRM)  1645,  river sediment.
The SRM  1645  contains high levels of a  number  of  organic  com-
pounds, but  only a  few that were on the Love  Canal  monitoring
list,  and none  of  the  concentrations  were  certified  by  NBS.
Furthermore,  there  does  not exist a SRM containing certified low
concentrations  of  appropriate  analytes  that  could  be  used  to
measure limits of quantitation.

    Disregarding the superficial nature of the known additions to
NBS sediment,  the analyses  could have been used to calculate  lim-
its of detection except  that  the concentrations  added were  far
too high  to  be  applicable to the LOD procedure  used for water
analyses (Environmental Science and Technology, 1981,  1426).  High
level  spikes,  in the milligrams per kilogram range, were  made be-
cause  of the high levels of background in the SRM, and because of
anticipated high  levels  of contamination in Love Canal  samples.
Under  these circumstances,  no measurements of limits of detection
were possible.

    Because modified Methods 608,  624,  625,  and the metals  meth-
ods are very similar to the methods used in water  samples, except
for the  extraction  of the  sample,  it is reasonable   to  estimate
the  limits of detection  for soil/sediment/biota  samples at  the
same order of  magnitude  as  those calculated  or estimated for the
water  samples.    The  limits of  detection for  water   samples  are
given  in  Tables  C-l,  C-2,  and  C-3 in  Appendix  C,   and  are  de-
scribed  and  discussed  in  the section on "Limits  of  Detection/
Quantitation."

    Method detection limits were not used to validate  data  in the
Love Canal data  base.   Variability in quantitation and detection
limits among  laboratories  is well known and  unavoidable.    Some
laboratories  may have  quantified substances that others  called
"trace" or did  not  report the substances.   These occurrences  do
not invalidate  the  results.  At  the  worst,  the method detection
limits were  probably  several  hundred micrograms  per kilogram.
Because the conclusions  of the  study  were based  on samples  con-
taminated  at several orders of magnitude or higher concentrations
(that  is,  parts per  million  to  parts per  thousand),   the  magni-
tudes  of the method detection limits had no affect on  the overall
conclusions of the  study.

ANALYTICAL LABORATORY PERFORMANCE  EVALUATIONS

    In the soil,  sediment, and  biota  media  no specific  perform-
ance  evaluation  (PE)  samples were available.    Therefore,   the
                                254

-------
performance of  the  laboratories was evaluated  using  the samples
described in Appendix  C  because:  (1)  the analytical laboratories
conducting these  analyses  were often the  same  laboratories con-
ducting water analyses;  (2)  the analytical methods  were similar
to water  methods?  and (3) the  analyses were conducted  over the
same time period.

    As pointed out in Appendix C,  information from PE samples was
not  used  to estimate  precision and  accuracy of  the  analytical
measurements or  to  validate  data for  the Love Canal  data base,
because the  PE  samples were  concentrates in an  organic solvent
that were added to  reagent  water  by  the  analytical  laboratory
before the  application of the  method.   Therefore,  although the
analytical laboratories were unaware of the true concentrations,
they were aware that  the samples  were  PE samples and  may have
taken unusual care in their analyses.   The purpose of the PE sam-
ples was  to  discover problems with the  execution of the methods
and enable corrective  action by the prime contractor  on  a timely
basis.

    For  analytical   laboratories  analyzing  soil, sediment,  and
biota samples,  the  PE samples  in water did not,  and  could not,
evaluate  performance  in   the  sample  preparation parts of  the
soil/sediment/biota  methods.    However,   because the  remaining
parts of the methodology were very similar (for example,  the con-
centration, chromatography, and mass spectrometry), the PE sam-
ples served a useful purpose.   In Table C-4 of Appendix C, a sum-
mary is presented of the  percentage of  acceptable PE results,  by
analytical method  analyte group and  analytical  laboratory.   In
order to  have  an  acceptable  result,  the  analytical  laboratory
must have correctly  identified  the  analyte and  measured  its con-
centration to within the acceptance limits specified by the Qual-
ity Assurance  Branch,  IMSL-Cincinnati.   The performance  of the
laboratories  in identifications  was  generally  excellent,  with
very few  analytes missed.  The  unacceptable  results  in Table C-4
were largely due  to concentrations measurements  outside the ac-
ceptable range.  One laboratory shown in Table C-4 (SWRI), analy-
zed only  soil and sediment field  samples and no water field sam-
ples.  As noted previously under methods selected for analysis of
water  samples,  Method 625  employed  the  relatively  new  fused
silica capillary columns, and there was initially some difficulty
in adjusting to this in some laboratories.  The PE samples served
to assist  in  this adjustment and to  provide data on  the appli-
cability of the columns.   The performance evaluation results con-
firmed that  the  analytical laboratories were qualified  users  of
th e me thodo1ogy.

    It should also be  noted that  there  was an attempt to prepare
PE samples in a solid  matrix by known  additions of organic anal-
ytes to   a  common  material,  the  National  Bureau of  Standards
Standard  Reference  Material  1645,  river sediment.   This effort
was not successful  because the samples were  not  homogeneous and
the results could not be used.
                                255

-------
SAMPLE PRESERVATION

    Directions for sample preservation were  included  in the ana-
lytical methods referenced previously.   For the modified organic
compounds methods  (608, 624,  and  625),  preservation requirements
included shipment  and  storage of  samples in iced or refrigerated
containers.   There was  a very  high degree of  compliance  with
these preservation requirements.

    Maximum  sample holding  times prior  to  analysis were  also
specified in  the  methods,  and were based typically on the water
samples holding time  requirements.   There was  a relatively high
percentage of samples that were not analyzed within the specified
holding times  because the magnitude  of the  analytical  require-
ments of the  Love  Canal study, plus  numerous other ongoing envi-
ronmental  studies,  literally  overwhelmed  the  national  capacity
for  low-level  chemical analyses.   The  situation  was especially
prevalent with regard to  the organics  analyzed  using  modified
Methods 624  and 625,  which  employ state-of-the-art  gas chroma-
tography/mass spectrometry technology, and Method  608.   An anal-
ysis of the holding times revealed that  most modified Method 608
and modified  Method 625 samples  were extracted  within the 7-day
holding time,  and  analyzed  within  the  30-day  extract  holding
time.  However, most modified Method 624 samples were held longer
than the 14-day holding time.  It should be noted, however,  that
the applicability  of  this 14-day  holding time  limit  to  soil and
sediment samples analyses  using modified Method 624 was not known
empirically.

    A study  was  undertaken by EMSL-Cincinnati  to  determine the
effects of  prolonged  sample  holding times  on  the stability  of
modified Method 624 analytes.   Four modified  Method  624 samples
that had been analyzed, and then held for 97 days at 4°C and pro-
tected from light  (which was considerably longer than the longest
holding time period),  were reanalyzed.  Only one sample gave some
evidence of  losses of benzene and  toluene.    The  conclusion was
that for samples stored from 1 to 60 days before analysis accord-
ing  to  the  instructions  in  the   methods,  there was  probably  no
significant losses of volatile analytes.   Therefore,  no samples
were invalidated because holding times were exceeded.

DATA VALIDATION PROCEDURES

    Validation means the rejection of  certain analytical results
whenever there  was compelling evidence  of  systematic  errors  in
sampling,  preservation,  or  analysis  associated with  those re-
sults.  Data validation for soil,  sediment,  and biota samples was
rendered particularly  difficult  because there was  so little ex-
perience with  the  methods.   Furthermore, there was either little
(or no)  single laboratory or multilaboratory performance data,  or
precision  and  accuracy   data.    Therefore,   lenient  validation
standards were established that were based on general principles,
                                256

-------
and very few samples were invalidated.  For soil samples, a total
of  nine  samples were  rejected by  the data  validation process,
where obvious  errors in  methods  execution were  observed.   For
sediment and  biota  samples,  seven  samples  each were  rejected;
again, for obvious  errors in methods execution.  With  all these
media, it was  reasoned  that  it was  better to employ conservative
invalidation criteria (leading to but few rejections of results),
rather than risk losing potentially valuable information because
of insufficient experience with the methods.

Modified Methods 624and 625 with Soil and Sediment

    For these methods the principal  validation  tool  was a series
of  quality  control  compounds,  often called  surrogate  analytes,
that were added to each sample.  The compounds selected as surro-
gates were valid method analytes that were  neither commercially
produced nor naturally  occurring.   Therefore,  it was  highly un-
likely that any of  them would be  found in any environmental sam-
ple.  The compounds  are shown in  Table D-l  along  with the multi-
laboratory mean percentage  recoveries, relative  standard devia-
tions, and acceptance  limits.  Analytical  laboratories reported
the  quantities added   (true  values) and  the  amounts  measured.
Statistical acceptance  limits were  computed by  EMSL-Las Vegas,
but were used  carefully because of  the previously  mentioned un-
certainties  associated  with  making known  additions  to  solid
matrices.

    As was mentioned in the  section  on  Limits of  Detection/Quan-
titation,  it is very difficult to add a known  amount  of an ana-
lyte or analytes to a  soil,  sediment, or biota sample  and simu-
late the natural sorption or uptake processes.   Therefore, known
additions (spikes)  are  often  superficial  and do not  rigorously
test an analytical method.    Alternatively,  a  spike may rapidly
and (nearly)  irreversibly sorb to a  solid particle  and the fail-
ure to  recover it  may  not  be indicative of  laboratory perform-
ance.  Therefore,  recognizing the limitations of the  methods,  a
sample was accepted  as  valid if at  least one of  the two to four
surrogates used in  the  sample  was reported  in agreement with the
acceptance limits  in Table D-l.   A  minimum  surrogate recovery of
1 percent was  often considered acceptable, but occurred rarely.
Only one of 452  samples analyzed by modified Method 624 was in-
validated.  With modified Method 625, 15 samples were invalidated;
13 of these samples were  from CMTL.   In all  cases,  these samples
were invalidated because surrogates were either  not reported or
recoveries were so high that major  method execution errors were
suspected.

Laboratory Contamination

    Methylene  chloride  was  the solvent used in  modified Method
625, and  it  was an analyte  in modified  Method 624.   Methylene
chloride was reported  as the only  analyte  in a  large  number of
                                257

-------
    TABLE D-l.  SUMMARY STATISTICS AND ACCEPTANCE
LIMITS FOR MODIFIED METHOD 624 AND MODIFIED METHOD  625
     SURROGATES FROM ALL LABORATORY MEASUREMENTS
Surrogate
Analyte
Method 624 — modified
Carbon tetrachloride- C
Carbon tetrachloride- C
1 » 2-Dichloroethane-D .
1 , 2-Dichloroethane-D4
Toluene-D0
o
Toluene-Dg
4-Chlorotoluene-D4
4-Chlorotoluene-D
Fluorobenzene
4-Bro»nof luorobenzene
Method 625— modified
Hexachlorobenzene- C.
Hexachlorobenzene- C,
D
Tetrachlorobenzene- C^
Tetrachlorobenzene- C,
4-Chlorotoluene-D4
4-Chlorotoluene-D4
Pentachlorophenol- C,
Pentachlorophenol- C-
2-Fluorophenol
1-Fluronaphthalene
4,4' -Dibromooctof luoro-
biphenyl
Nitrobenzene-D_
Phenol-D.,
Sample
Type
soil
sediment
soil
sediment
soil
sediment
soil
sediment
soil
soil
soil
sediment
soil
sediment
soil
sediment
soil
sediment
soil
soil

soil
sediment
sediment
Mean
Recovery
(Percent)
99
82
68
67
97
102
87
81
93
95
56
46
51
68
21
41
22
37
57
69

62
48
47
Relative
Standard
Deviations
(Percent)
26
33
29
15
13
17
23
28
14
4.2
64
89
55
56
119
56
112
103
54
62

60
67
70
Acceptance
Limits
(Percent)
,47-151
28-136
28-108
47-87
72-122
68-136
47-130
35-127
68-118
87-103
1-128
1-128
1-107
1-144
1-71
1-87
1-76
1-113
1-119
1-155

1-136
1-112
1-113
                            258

-------
reagent and field blanks, and in many modified Method 624 samples
it was  the only analyte  detected.   This  evidence strongly sug-
gested  the  occurrence of laboratory contamination which was not
unexpected  with such highly  sensitive analytical  methodology.
Therefore, although a few reports of methylene  chloride may have
been valid, the overwhelming number were  very  likely laboratory
contaminants and it was impossible to distinguish  the former from
the  latter.    Therefore,  all  reports  of  methylene  chloride  in
modified Method 624  samples were deleted  from  the  data base  to
maintain the integrity of the study.

    Late  in  the data  reporting  period,   after   this  methylene
chloride problem was  discovered,  one  of the laboratories was in-
spected by EPA  personnel.   A large  opening was  found in the lab-
oratory between the area where the methylene chloride extractions
were conducted  and the  room where  the  analytical  instrumentation
was located.   This  finding  supported  the strong probability that
methylene chloride was  a  laboratory contaminant  in  at  least one
of the laboratories.

    Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate is a plasticiser used  in the formu-
lation  of  many plastic  articles common to  analytical   laborato-
ries, and was detected  in widely varying amounts  in both reagent
blanks and field blanks.  Therefore, all reports of  this compound
were judged highly  unreliable and all  reports  were removed from
the validated data base.

Modified Method 608 with Soil and Sediment

    For  this  method  the  principal validation  tool was  the re-
quirement that  a  laboratory control standard was  to be analyzed
with each batch of samples processed in a group at the same time.
A laboratory control  standard (LCS) was a known addition of three
method analytes  to  a  common matrix,  the previously discussed NBS
SRM river sediment 1645.  The uncertainties associated with known
additions to solid matrices, which were discussed  in the previous
section, were also applicable to this method.  The three analytes
were heptachlor, aldrin,  and dieldrin,  which are chlorinated hy-
drocarbon pesticides.  Recoveries of  these from  the LCS matrix
averaged 77 to  101  percent,  depending  on the laboratory, and the
acceptance  limits were in  the  range  of 20  to  150  percent.   No
samples were invalidated by this procedure.

    Modified Method 608  employs an electron  capture gas chroma-
tographic detector,  and  is  subject  to  false positive identifica-
tions.    In  order  to minimize these, two column confirmation and
gas chromatography/mass  spectrometry  (GC/MS) confirmations  were
required for  all modified  Method  608  results.    However,  GC/MS
confirmation was  limited by  the difference in detection limits
between  the  methods.    Users of the  Love  Canal  data  should  be
aware of the probability that low level, less than 0.5 micrograms
per kilogram, measurements  by modified Method 608  were  not con-
firmed by GC/MS.
                                259

-------
Metals in Soil and Sediment

    As with  modified  Method 608,  laboratory  control  standards
(LCS) consisting  of known additions  (spikes)  to the  common ma-
trix, NBS  SRM river  sediment  1645, were  required.    Again,  the
uncertainties  of  the  spiking  procedure were  present.   The NBS
sediment contained metals analytes, but did  not contain the four
Love  Canal  analytes  barium,  beryllium,   selenium,  and  silver.
Therefore,  known  additions  were  required,  and some known addi-
tions to  real Love  Canal  samples  were  included in the  quality
assurance  program.    Each  laboratory  analyzed  10  LCS  samples
initially,  then another LCS or a spike of a Love Canal  sample for
every 10 environmental  samples.   The  laboratories  were required
to measure  the background levels  first  and subtract  these from
the  spike  concentrations before  the  percentage  recoveries were
computed.

    An overall mean recovery was  calculated  for each metal using
the  results  from  all  laboratories.   The means  were  in the range
of 82 to 112 percent generally, the only exceptions being 64 per-
cent  for  antimony  and  77 percent  for selenium  in  laboratories
analyzing soil samples.   A mean standard deviation  of 18.5 per-
cent of the  mean  recoveries  was  calculated for all laboratories,
all metals, and both sample types (soil and sediment).   Two times
this standard  deviation  or 37  percent  was  used as the  acceptance
criterion for LSC samples and  known additions  to Love  Canal sam-
ples.  If any  given measurement  of  any metal in an LCS or sample
spike exceeded the limit  of the metal's  overall mean recovery
plus or minus  37  percent,  that metal  measurement was invalidated
in  all  samples  associated  with the  particular  LCS   or  sample
spike.  Thus,  a sample could have an  invalid recovery  for one or
several metals but  be valid  for the remainder  of  the  metals.   A
total of 49  individual  metals  measurements were invalidated with
more than  90  percent  of the occurrences  involving  antimony, ar-
senic, selenium,  and silver.

Method 625 Ana1ytesin Biota

    Only a  minimal  data  validation effort was  made  for the rea-
sons given  in the  section  entitled,  "Methods  Selected for Ana-
lysis of Biota Samples," and very  few  samples were invalidated.
However, isophorone was  identified as a possible artifact created
by the  use  of acetone during extraction of  samples.    Suspicions
were aroused  when this  compound was found  in  many biota samples
but  not  in any soil  and in  only one  sediment sample.   The GCA
Corporation was requested to investigate this problem.   Their re-
port indicated that soxhlet extraction with acetone under certain
pH conditions can result in the formation of several condensation
products such  as mesityl oxide, phorone, and isophorone.  Consid-
ering that diacetone  alcohol,  mesityl oxide,  and  phorone were
identified  in  the extracts, and  the  half-life  of  isophorone in
                                260

-------
the environment is approximately 1 month, and therefore not like-
ly to have persisted in the environment over the period since the
Love Canal landfill was closed,  it  was  concluded that isophorone
was an analytical artifact.  Because of these reasons, isophorone
in biota  samples  was  removed from the Love  Canal  data base.   It
is not certain, of course, that the half-life of isophorone is or
is not so short when stored in biological tissues.

Metals in Hair and Vegetation

    The same  data validation procedures described  for metals in
soil and  sediment were employed for metals  in hair.   A total of
48 individual  measurements (26 for mice,  22 for dogs)  were in-
validated; virtually all occurrences involved copper.

    The National  Bureau of Standards  SRM orchard leaves was used
as the laboratory control  standard for the single laboratory that
measured metals in vegetation.   The criteria for validation were
the same  as described  under soils  and sediments, but all results
for antimony, beryllium,  chromium,  and  selenium were invalidated
because all LCS samples gave zero percent recoveries.

ESTIMATES OF DATA PRECISION

    The purpose of the field  triplicate  samples  described at the
beginning of  the data validation  section  in  Appendix  C  was to
establish interlaboratory  and  intralaboratory  precision.   In ad-
dition, some  methods  required taking two  aliquots  of 10 percent
of the  samples to obtain  further  information  about  intralabora-
tory precision.   However,  a high percentage of the total samples
gave all analytes below detection limits, and insufficient infor-
mation was  available   to  estimate  the precision of  the measure-
ments from these  samples.

    Data  precision  may be estimated  using the results  of  the
measurements of the laboratory control  standards (LCS) that were
described in the  section  entitled  "Limits  of Detection/Quantita-
tion."  It should be noted that this is a less desirable approach
than using field  triplicate samples, because the LCS measurements
do not  include the  variability  associated  with  sampling,  trans-
portation, storage,  and preservation of samples.  Also these data
may have  been  obtained over a period of weeks  by some laborato-
ries, and the values may include week-to-week variations that may
significantly  exceed   variations within  a  given analysis  day.
Nevertheless,  lacking  the  information  from the  replicate field
samples, the LCS  measurements  may be  used  to provide rough esti-
mates of data precision.

    Table D-2  shows  the relative standard  deviations for repli-
cate measurements of   modified  Method 624,  modified  Method 625,
and modified Method 608 analytes in LCS  samples.  Note that sum-
mary statistics  are reported  in the  table only  when  at least
three replicate measurements  were  available.   Some  laboratories
                                261

-------
TABLE D-2.  RELATIVE  STANDARD DEVIATIONS  (RSD) FOR ORGANIC
   ANALYTES IN LABORATORY CONTROL STANDARDS NBS SEDIMENT
Analytical Laboratory
Analyte
Method 624 — modified
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Method 625 — modified
2-Chlorophenol
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
Pentachlorophenol
4-Nitrophenol
1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
2 , 4-Dinitrotoluene
Di-n-butylphthalate
Pyrene
Benzo( a ) anthracene
Benzo( b ) f luoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indeno( 1,2 ,3-cd)pyrene
Benzo(g,h, i, )perylene
Method 608 — modified
Heptachlor
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Aroclor 1242
ACEE

16
11
14

45
58
37
58
48
65
60
77
19
53
84
62
48
69
58

14
61
37
—
CMTL GSRI

16 47
14 10
15 19

105
117 117
123
—
77
114
81
103
87
121
—
—
—
—
—

15 45
16 20
29 19
58
SWRI

16
13
14

31
44
68
114
67
28
35
55
24
—
--
—
—
—
—

11
12
8.3
—
Code
EMSL-Cin

5.8
5,3
13

--
__
__
__
—
__

—
—
—
—
__
—
__
—

—
--
—
--
                               262

-------
did not analyze  a  sufficient number of some types of  samples  to
accumulate  the  minimum  required  number of  LCS measurements  to
justify  computing   summary  statistics.    The  precision  of  any
single measurement in the Love Canal data  base  at  the  95  percent
confidence level may be estimated using the formula:

         Analytical Result + 1.96 x (RSD from Table D-2).

The RSD should be  selected  from Table D-2 according to the ana-
lyte measured and  the laboratory analyzing  the  sample.   If  the
exact analyte is not in Table D-2,  a structurally similar  analyte
may be  used;  for  example,  if  the analyte  of interest  is  2-
nitrophenol, the RSD  for 4-nitrophenol may be used.  If RSD data
for a reporting  laboratory  of interest is  not in Table D-2,  use

    TABLE D-3.   RELATIVE STANDARD DEVIATIONS (RSD)  FOR  METALS
          ANALYTES IN LABORATORY CONTROL STANDARDS  NBS  SEDIMENT
Analyte
Arsenic
Antimony
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Analytical
ERGO
12
9.4
9.4
7.3
3
8.8
2
7
17
3.1
7.2
4.7
4
4.9
Laboratory
PJBL
47
79
44
19
7
27
25
32
18
15
51
13
28
16
Code
SWRI
10
74
12
8.7
2
12
13
3
9
6.4
4.6
39
7.2
3
                                263

-------
the mean  RSD of  all  laboratories reporting  that analyte.   For
metals and  anions a similar estimate may be made using  the data
in Table D-3.

    Precision estimates  were  not used  to  validate data  for the
Love Canal  data  base.   Data validation  procedures are explained
in  detail  in  the  previous  section  entitled,  "Data  Validation
Procedures."

ESTIMATE OP DATA ACCURACY

    Data  from  modified Methods  624, 625,  and  608 for  organic
analytes  probably have a  significant bias,  but  this cannot  be
estimated because suitable standard  reference materials  were not
available.   The  limitations  of using  known  additions  for this
purpose were explained in detail previously.

    For metals measurements several SRMs were available,  but they
did not  contain  all the analytes of interest.    Table D-4 shows
the mean  percentages of the  NBS certified  values in SRM river
sediment  1645  observed by the  analytical  laboratories,   and the
computed standard deviations.   These values were not used direct-
ly to validate data for the Love Canal data base,  but do indicate

   TABLE D-4.  MEAN PERCENT RECOVERIES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS
        OF NBS CERTIFIED VALUES IN SRM RIVER SEDIMENT 1645
Analytical Laboratory Code
ERGO
Analyte
Arsenic
Antimony
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Thallium
Zinc
Mean
103
47
84
105
99
102
90
—
96
S.D.
11
43
8
7
5
8
12
—
6
PJBL
Mean
113
112
90
78
94
86
90
104
78
S.D.
55
64
15
5
2
12
13
—
4
SWRI
Mean
66
6
89
105
91
93
68
93
92
S.D.
16
6
4
9
4
4
10
80
2
 S.D.:   Standard Deviation
                                264

-------
the difficulties encountered in the measurement of arsenic, anti-
mony, and a few other elements at some laboratories.  As indicat-
ed  previously,  measurements of  these elements were  selectively
invalidated.  For most of the other elements there was no signif-
icant bias in the metals measurements in river sediment.

SUMMARY OF  MAJOR  ACTIONS TAKEN AS A  RESULT OF  GCA'S  QUALITY AS-
  SURANCE FUNCTION

    The  activities  of  the prime  contractor  in  the  day-to-day
quality  assurance program  are described  in detail  in the  GCA
QA/QC  summary  report on the  Love Canal study.   The purpose of
this  section  is  to  briefly summarize major  actions  by the  GCA
Corporation.

    The  prime  contractor  routinely  discussed,  by  telephone  and
during site visits,  the results of the external quality assurance
samples with the  analytical laboratories.   Requirements for cor-
rective action were provided during these discussions.  The prime
contractor  also monitored  the results from the  internal quality
assurance program, and  discussed these with  the  analytical lab-
oratories during telephone conversations and site visits.  Again,
requirements for corrective action were provided.

    One  significant   action  that  resulted from  the  day-to-day
quality assurance program  was  the removal  of  the  PJBL laboratory
from the analyses of  samples by  modified Method 625 in  soils and
sediment.   During a  site visit and during  discussions of the in-
ternal and  external quality assurance samples,  it was discovered
that PJBL was  using  packed columns with  modified  Method 625,  and
did not have the capability to analyze the samples with the fused
silica  capillary  columns.   Consequently,  all previous  results
using modified Method 625  provided by PJBL were removed from the
Love  Canal  data base, and  work  on modified Method 625  was sus-
pended at PJBL.  Eventually, PJBL developed the capability to use
the fused silica  capillary columns and all the extracts were re-
analyzed.   Details of this incident and other  activities  of the
prime contractor  are  given in the  GCA Corporation  QA/QC summary
report referenced previously.
                                265

-------
                             APPENDIX E
                   QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR AIR SAMPLES
OVERVIEW OF QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM

    It was  recognized  during  the  early  planning stages  of the
study that a comprehensive quality assurance (QA) effort would be
required to  support the Love  Canal monitoring  program.   Conse-
quently,  QA procedures  were  developed and  implemented  as an in-
tegral part of the program.  This appendix summarizes the quality
assurance efforts for the  air  portion of  the Love Canal monitor-
ing  study.   Detailed descriptions  of the  quality  assurance and
quality control (QA/QC) procedures used during the collection and
analysis of  air samples are  contained in  the  previously refer-
enced Quality Assurance Plan, Love Canal  Study,LC-1-619-206 com-
piled by the GCA Corporation, and available  from NTIS. Appendix A
to the quality  assurance plan  describes the sampling procedures,
Appendix B  describes the  analytical procedures, and Appendix Q
describes the  QA plans  submitted  by the  subcontractors  used in
this program.  A more detailed -discussion of the QA/QC results of
the prime contractor's  (GCA  Corporation)  and the subcontractors'
quality  assurance  efforts  is  contained in  Love Canal Monitoring
Program, GCA QA/QC  Summary Report, available from NTIS. A listing
of compounds and metals to be  identified  quantitatively or quali-
tatively by each method of analysis  is  given in  Appendix A,  Table
A-2.

    Because the methodologies  selected  for use  in Love Canal air
analyses had not  yet been  used routinely in monitoring networks,
the  quality assurance program  was  designed to minimize variabil-
ity  in the  data and to fully document the precision  and accuracy
of  the  measurements performed  during  the Love  Canal study.  In
order to accomplish these goals,  the air monitoring and quality
assurance programs  were designed by EPA and performed under  con-
tract by the prime  contractor  and the  sampling  and analysis  sub-
contractors.  The contracts  specified  the methods of  sampling and
analysis, including quality  control steps to be used by  the  sub-
contractors, and  emphasized the  importance of  quality assurance
by  requiring  the submittal  and approval  by EPA of an  acceptable
quality  assurance plan.  The format and  content of minimally ac-
ceptable quality  assurance plans was developed  by EPA  and  speci-
fied  in  writing in  each subcontract.


                                 266

-------
    In addition to the  required  QA plans,  the following elements
were included in the design of the Love Canal study that were in-
tended to minimize measurement variability.

   1.  Equipment used to collect air samples was supplied by EPA.
       The equipment had been used previously to collect air sam-
       ples similar to those collected at Love Canal.  The equip-
       ment was  verified to be  in working order  prior  to ship-
       ment.

   2.  Only one subcontractor was  responsible for the collection
       of air  samples.   As a result,  all  required sampling pro-
       cedures  were  consistently  applied  across all  sampling
       sites.

   3.  Materials  used to  collect  air samples  were manufactured
       from a  single lot and supplied to  the field sites.  Both
       TENAX  tubes  and  polyurethane  foam  (PPOAM)  plugs  were
       cleaned by  a  single subcontractor  and verified by EPA as
       being  acceptable for  use prior  to  their  being  used for
       field sampling,  calibration  standards  samples, calibration
       check samples, field blanks, or blind  audit quality assur-
       ance samples.   High-volume  (HIVOL) filters  from the batch
       used  in the  SLAMS  monitoring  network were used  at Love
       Canal.

   4.  TENAX calibration check  samples were prepared by a single
       subcontractor,  and PFOAM calibration check samples were
       prepared by EPA.  These  samples were  subsequently supplied
       to each analytical  subcontractor.  Evaluation of analyti-
       cal  performance  during the Love  Canal study was based on
       common  samples analyzed  by  each laboratory.

   5.  Common  calibration  samples  were supplied  to all  laborator-
       ies  analyzing TENAX tubes.

   6.  The  use of laboratory control  charts to monitor measure-
       ment system  variability and  maintain acceptable  perfor-
       mance  was  required.    Initial control  chart  limits  for
       TENAX  measurements  were   specified based on an  estimate of
       expected  performance  recommended by an experienced,  inde-
       pendent laboratory not  involved  in  the Love Canal study.
       The  actual  results  obtained from the  analysis  of calibra-
       tion check  samples,  however,  were  used  to  subsequently
       establish  control limits that were applicable  directly  to
       the  laboratories performing the analyses.


     Prior to  initiation of the  monitoring  and analysis efforts  it
 was  realized  that  1 or  2 months -might  elapse  before EPA  would
 receive  data  that  had been subjected  to  all of the required  qual-
 ity  control checks  and verifications.   Because of the  length  of
                                 267

-------
time that  might elapse, it  was apparent that  timely corrective
actions  for  problems which  were  uncovered  would  be precluded..
Therefore, EPA  required, as  part  of the external QA program, the
analysis of  sufficient  numbers of  calibration  check  samples and
blind audit  samples  to  allow classification  of the precision and
accuracy of  subcontractor measurements,  which  was independent of
the quality  control  efforts  of the sampling  and analysis labora-
tories.   Because  this  extensive  external  program  existed,  EPA
retained the responsibility  for final validation of the analyti-
cal results, and  determination of  the  precision  and  accuracy of
the air measurements performed at Love Canal.

    Carrying out  the monitoring effort  at Love Canal  was the re-
sponsibility of the prime contractor.   As part of their efforts
they:

   1.  Coordinated  the  distribution of  samples to the field  sam-
       pling  sites and  subsequently to each  analytical subcon-
       tractor .

   2.  Inserted  external quality  control samples (blanks,  blind
       audit  samples,  etc.)   into the  normal  shipments  of field
       samples  in  a manner such that they could not be identified
       as control  samples by  analytical  laboratories,

   3.  Supplied  calibration  and, calibration  check samples to the
       analytical  laboratories.

   4.  Maintained  the day-to-day  overview of the  sampling,  anal-
       ysis,  and  quality  control  efforts of  the  subcontractors
       through  review of data received,  and by  conducting inspec-
       tions at the subcontractor laboratories.

   5.  Performed  the  initial verification of data  transmitted  to
       EPA  to  assure that  the reported analytical results  were
       those actually obtained.

More detailed descriptions and discussions of  the GCA Corporation
QA/QC   efforts are  contained  in the previously  mentioned  docu-
ment  (Love Canal  Monitoring  Program,  GCA  QA/QC  SummaryReport),
and are  summarized in the last section  of this  Appendix.

     In  order  to obtain consultation and advice  from an indepen-
dent group,  the QA plans and results of the  Love  Canal study  were
reviewed by  the sampling protocols study  group  of EPA's  Science
Advisory Board.   Their review was  conducted  during  the design,
study,  and data evaluation phases of the project.

     The remainder of this Appendix describes  the external  quali-
ty assurance program and presents the estimates of data precision
and accuracy for the air samples  collected at  Love Canal.
                                 268

-------
METHODS SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES

     The volatile  organic compounds  were collected  by sorbtion
onto a  TENAX cartridge,  thermally desorbed,  and analyzed by gas
chromatography/mass  spectrometry  (GC/MS).   The method  used for
collecting and  analyzing  volatile organics in air represents the
latest  application of  research  developments  in this field.  This
method  was  used because  it  was  the  only known  technique that
would provide information  (at a reasonable cost) on a wide  vari-
ety of  volatile organics  in  air,  could be used in a routine net-
work operation, and  was  available at  the  time required for per-
forming  the  Love  Canal study.  The methodology was based on the
work performed by E.  D. Pelizzari of  Research Triangle Institute
for EPA and other federal  agencies.    (See  References 1  through
7).

     Pesticides and  related  compounds  (subsequently  referred to
as pesticides  in  the  remainder of  this Appendix)  were collected
on polyurethane foam plugs (PFOAM).   PFOAM  collectors were ana-
lyzed by Soxhlet extraction,  followed by  sample  concentration and
gas chromatography.   High performance  liquid chromatography was
used  for the analysis of chlorinated  phenols.   The  methodology
for PFOAM collection of pesticides was  developed,  in  part,  by the
Analytical Chemistry Branch,  HERL-RTP.   (See  References 8  through
14) .    This  sample  collection  methodology also represented the
latest  application of research developments  in the  field.  The
method  employed has  been  extensively  tested at HERL-RTP for com-
pounds  of  interest,  and was  deemed  the most efficient and  cost-
effective  means available for  monitoring pesticides   and  related
compounds at Love Canal.  The PFOAM procedure was  a valuable com-
plement to  TENAX,  because it was  used  to  collect  and  analyze for
those  less  volatile  compounds that do  not thermally  desorb effi-
ciently from TENAX for GC/MS  determination.

     The methodology  used  to  collect air  particulate  samples
(HIVOL)  for metals  analyses was the  Reference  Method  for the
Determination  of  Suspended  Particulates  in the Atmosphere  (High
Volume  Method)  Code  of Federal  Regulations (CFR),  Title 40,  Part
50, Appendix B.  HIVOL filters were  extracted with  an acid mix-
ture  and most  metals were analyzed by  an  Inductively  Coupled Ar-
gon Plasma Optical Emission  Spectrometer (ICAP) technique.  Ar-
senic,  cobalt,  and chromium were  analyzed by  a Neutron Activation
Analysis (NAA)  procedure,  directly  using  the  HIVOL filters.  These
methods have been  used routinely  to analyze  samples  collected  in
the EPA National  Air  Surveillance Network  (NASN).  The precision
and accuracy of these methods  have  been documented  during their
use in NASN (unpublished data  are available  from  the Environmen-
tal Monitoring  Division,  EMSL-RTP).
                                 ?.69

-------
SELECTION OF ANALYTICAL SUBCONTRACTORS

      Because the methodologies for analysis of volatile organics
and pesticides were  relatively  new,  no detailed  history  of per-
formance of  potential  analytical  subcontractors  was  available.
In order to  acquire  an estimate of the capabilities of the ana-
lytical community, a  short  analytical performance evaluation ex-
ercise was conducted before awarding the analytical contracts for
the Love Canal  study.  Interested organizations  were  invited to
Love Canal to collect  and analyze  volatile  organic compounds and
pesticides at a  common site.   In  addition  to  the field samples,
spiked quality assurance (QA) samples  were  supplied to each par-
ticipant in this performance evaluation. The results of the anal-
yses of the  QA and  field samples  were used  to judge the analyti-
cal capabilities  of potential subcontractors  and eliminate poor
performers from  further consideration.   Final  subcontractor se-
lection was  also  based on  the  number  of samples that the subcon-
tractor could analyze during the  project  period,  and the cost of
such analyses.

     The metals analyses were  all  performed by the Environmental
Monitoring  Division,  EMSL-RTP,  using  techniques  employed on the
NASN samples.  Because  a history of performance was available, no
pre-Love Canal performance  evaluation  analyses were required.

LIMITS OF DETECTION/QUANTITATION

     Because  the  methods  for  collecting and  analyzing  volatile
organic compounds  and pesticides  are  still undergoing  evaluation
as  to precision,  accuracy, sensitivity,   and  other parameters,
each  analytical  subcontractor  was asked  to provide estimates of
their  limit  of  detection (LOD).   A  limit of quantitation  (LOQ),
based on estimated detection limits,  was  selected  by EPA  for  each
type  of  analysis,  so that  all  analytical subcontractors would be
reporting  results in  the  same range.   For the parameters being
quantified  on TENAX,  it was  decided   that  values  above 50 nano-
grams  per  sample  (ng/sample)  would  provide meaningful quantita-
tive  results;  for pesticides  samples,  quantitative results  were
reported  when compounds were  above  90 micrograms per plug  ( ^g/
plug).   Samples  yielding  measurement  signals that were above the
detection  limit but  below the quantitation  limit were  assigned
the value  trace.   As part  of the  monitoring program, a number  of
targeted  organic compounds  were  also  to be identified  whenever
present  in a sample,  but  not  quantified.   When  these  compounds
were  identified in a  sample at levels above the  contractor  sup-
plied  estimated limit  of  detection  they  were labeled  "qualita-
tive."   All concentrations reported  for  TENAX  and PFOAM  analyses
are reported in  units of micrograms per cubic  meter (jjg/m ).  The
estimated  limits  of  detection  and  quantitation for each parameter
analyzed  in the air  samples are  presented  in Tables E-l  (TENAX)
and E-2  (PFOAM).
                                 270

-------
              TABLE E-l.  VOLATILE ORGANICS ON TENAX
                                        Detaction/Quantitation
                                           Limits  (ng/tube)
BCL
Compound
Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
o-Chlorotoluene
p-Chlorotoluene
1 , 2-Dibromoethane
o-Dichlorobenzene
p-Dichlorobenzene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1,2, 3-Trichlorobenzene
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
1,3, 5-Trichlorobenzene
Chloroform
1 , 2-Dichloroethane
2 , 4-Dichlorotoluene
o-Chlorobenzaldehyde
p-Chlorobenzaldehyde
Benzyl chloride (a-Chlorotoluene)
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethylene
1 , 2-Dichloroethylene
Dichlorome thane
Phenol
o-Xylene
m-Xylene
p-Xylene
D
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Q
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual .
PEDCo
D
3
20
5
4
4
13
7
7
15
6
NA
NA
NA
20
15
7
25
25
25
7
15
15
15
30
5
5
5
Q
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
NA
NA
NA
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual .
Qual.
Qual.
Qual .
NA:  Not analyzed
Qual.:  Only qualitative reporting required
                                271

-------
              TABLE E-2.  PESTICIDES ON FOAM PLUGS
                                        Detection/Quantification
                                            Limits  (^g/plug)
                                           GSRI
                SWRI
        Compound
D
Q
D
Q
Lindane
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
1,2,3, 4-Tetrachlorobenzene
1,2, S-Trichlorobenzene
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
1,3, 5-Trichlorobenzene
2, 4, 5-Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorobenzene
Hexaehloro-1 , 3-butadiene
1,2,4, 5-Tetrachlorobenzene
a, a, 2 , 6-Tetrachlorotoluene
Pentachloro-1 , 3-butadiene
Pentachloronitrobenzene
1,2,3, 5-Tetrachlorobenzene
o-BHC
Heptachlor
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
Qual.
Qual.
Qual .
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
Qual.
 Qual.:   Only  qualitative  identification  required
     Limits of detection for the metals  analyses  had been deter-
mined over a  period  of  time by EMSL-RTP prior  to the Love Canal
study.  These limits are based on analyses of HIVOL filter blanks
and are presented in Table E-3.  Because only one laboratory ana-
lyzed  samples for  metals,  quantitative  results were  reported
whenever the value was above the .limit of detection.

     In  order to verify  limits  of detection  and  to  establish
background levels for the TENAX analyses, blank sample tubes were
analyzed  throughout  the  study by  the  subcontractors.   Cleaned
blank TENAX sample tubes were sealed and sent to the field sites.
The tubes  were  returned unopened to  the analytical laboratories
for  analysis.   The analysts  were  unable to  distinguish these
field blanks  from normal  samples.    The analytical  results  for
these field blanks are shown in Table E-4.  The mean and standard
deviation  reported in Table  E-4  are for those samples where con-
centrations were above the limit of quantitation  (50 ng).
                                272

-------
          TABLE E-3.  DETECTION LIMITS FOR INORGANICS
                               (HIVOL SAMPLES)
                   Element
                       sample
                   Antimony
                   Arsenic
                   Beryllium
                   Cadmium
                   Chromium
                   Copper
                   Lead
                   Nickel
                   Zinc
                       26.5
                       16.2
                        0.332
                        0.955
                       22.2
                       10.5
                       28.2
                        2.56
                      353.0
     TABLE  E-4,
RESULTS FROM ANALYSES OF BLANK TENAX SAMPLES'
Number of Number of
Samples With Samples
Quantifiable Listed as
Compound Amounts Trace
Benzene
Toluene
1, 1,2,2-Tetra-
chloroethylene
Carbon
tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
o-Chlorotoluene
p-Chlorotoluene
1 , 2-Dibromoethene
o-Dichlorobenzene
p-Dichlorobenzene
18
31

62

2
0
0
0
0
0
0
108
82

40

1
1
0
0
1
1
0
Standard
Mean?- Deviation^
3.10 1.31
8.20 6.90

6.17 5.08

3.60 0.92
— --
__
__
__
—
__
^A total of 132-blank samples were analyzed.
*Units are f^g/m  and are based on samples with quantifiable
 amounts only.
                                273

-------
    Benzene,  toluene,  and  1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene were  re-
ported as present in the  vast  majority  of blank TENAX tubes (for
example,  benzene  results were  reported at  concentrations above
the detection limit in 126 of  the  132  blanks).   All laboratories
identified  these  compounds  as  being present.   The quantifiable
results for toluene, however, came mostly from one laboratory (29
of the 31 quantifiable results).  Consideration of the levels and
variability of benzene,  toluene,  and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene
found in the  blanks should be made  in  any  interpretation of the
air TENAX results.  Toluene  and benzene are known normal contami-
nants of  TENAX,  and their  presence at low  levels  was expected.
An inspection of the facility used for  cleaning and preparing the
TENAX prior to field sampling indicated that 1,1,2,2-tetrachloro-
ethylene  could  have been introduced  as  a  contaminant  at that
time.

    Analysis  of the field data for  the compounds benzene, tolu-
ene,  and  1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene must take  into account the
probability that  a  single result could have  been caused by con-
tamination on a blank tube.  To be relatively certain that  an ob-
tained single value was not  due to blank  contamination, the field
concentration  should  be  greater  than two  standard deviations
above the  mean values  reported in Table E-4 for these three com-
pounds.   While it  is  true  that values of  benzene, toluene, and
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene  that  are just above the  stated quan-
titation  limits  could  be attributed to blank contamination, the
higher levels monitored at Love Canal  should  not  have been caused
by such contamination. No adjustments  for contamination were made
in reported TENAX analyses.

     Analyses  of field blanks for  the PFQAM and  metals samples re-
vealed  no blank  contamination was  present.   Therefore,  values
above  the  quantitation limits  were  probably  riot caused by blank
contamination.

ANALYTICAL LABORATORY  PERFORMANCE  EVALUATIONS

     In  addition  to the  pre-award  evaluation  of potential ana-
lytical  contractors,  two types of  performance evaluations were
conducted  during  the  Love  Canal project.   First,  EPA performed
audits  at the beginning  of the  study  of the  flow rates  of  the
samplers used for collecting air  samples,  in  order  to verify that
the  sample collection  was being conducted properly.  A team con-
sisting of EPA personnel  independently  measured the flow  rates  of
several  samplers  for  each type of sampler (TENAX,  PFOAM,  and  HI-
VOL).   The results of the audit  (reported later  under  "Estimates
of Data Accuracy")  indicated  excellent  performance  by the  sam-
pling contractor  and no  additional  flow  audits were  conducted  by
EPA during the  3-month sample  collection  period.   And second,  an-
alytical performance was  evaluated on a continuing  basis  through-
out the  study.  Blind  performance evaluation (audit)  samples were
periodically  sent  to  each  analytical  laboratory.  These  samples
                                 274

-------
were prepared by  an  independent contractor (TENAX and metals) or
by EPA (PFOAM) and inserted into the regular field samples by the
GCA  Corporation.   The analyst was  unable to  distinguish these
samples from the  routine  field  samples.   Results of the analysis
of these audit samples are also discussed later  in the "Estimates
of Data Accuracy" section.

SAMPLE PRESERVATION

    In order  to  ensure that  valid  samples were received  at the
analytical  laboratories,  several precautions  beyond  the  normal
chain-of-custody procedures were taken in the handling of  certain
air  samples.   First, TENAX and PFOAM  samples  were maintained at
4° C before  and after sampling in  order to minimize sample degra-
dation.   Second,  it  is  known that the  TENAX  substrate  tends to
form  artifactual  benzene and  toluene  if left  standing  for  long
periods  of time  after cleaning.   In  order to circumvent  this
problem,  TENAX  samples were  required to  be analyzed  within 30
days  of  final  cleaning.   Consequently,  TENAX was  cleaned in
batches during the Love  Canal Study, checked by EPA for  purity,
and  shipped  directly to  Love Canal.    Prudent actions  by GCA
Corporation  personnel ensured that  analyses  were accomplished
within  the 30-day  period.   Third,  in several instances clean
TENAX tubes were  removed  from  service prior to  sample collection,
because the GCA Corporation sample bank  coordinator at Love Canal
determined  that analyses  could  not be performed  within the 30-day
period.  And fourth,  HIVOL samples were  shipped  in  such  a  fashion
that  collected  particles  would not  be  lost   from  the  filters,
using procedures  outlined in  the EPA  Quality Assurance Handbook
for Air Pollution Measurement  Systems, Volume II,  Section  2.2.

DATA VALIDATION PROCEDURES

     For  the volatile  organic  compounds analyzed  from the  TENAX
samples,  EPA  incorporated a  scheme  for final data validation in
the  contractual   requirements  of the  analytical  subcontractors.
Special  standards,   calibration  check  samples,  were  supplied to
each  analytical  laboratory and were analyzed  during  the  first  4
hours  of   each  day's  analytical  activities,   and periodically
thereafter.  These samples were supplied and analyzed  in addition
to calibration samples and other internal  samples  which  were  ana-
lyzed for  quality control purposes.  The samples were prepared by
the  TENAX  quality assurance contractor  using procedures  described
in  References  2,  3,   5, and 6.   The analytical  subcontractor and
GCA  Corporation  were supplied  with  true concentrations of  these
samples.   Both the  analytical  subcontractor and GCA Corporation
were  to monitor the  results of  the  analyses  of  these  samples  on  a
real-time  basis in order  to determine  if the  analysis process was
in  control.  EPA also attempted  to monitor these  results during
the  analysis  period, but results were  usually  received too  late
after  the  analysis  in order  for  EPA  to  effectively alter  poor
                                275

-------
performance on a  real-time basis.   The last  section  of this Ap-
pendix describes the nature of real-time corrective actions based,
on the GCA  Corporation's  monitoring  of the results from calibra-
tion check samples.

    EPA was, however,  able to use  the  results  from the analysis
of the calibration check samples as its main data validation pro-
cedure.   The  results  from  the calibration  check samples  were
plotted in  a  control chart format  (percent  difference from true
value) after all  results  had  been  reported to  EPA for each sub-
stance analyzed.    The reported results  were  included  from all
analytical  systems  and the data analyzed  as  a whole.   For each
substance analyzed,  +2
-------
    Metals data were  validated  from the analyses of the perform-
ance evaluation samples  analyzed  as blind unknowns,  or from the
analysis of National Bureau of Standards (NBS) Standard Reference
Materials (SRM). The  percent  difference of the analytical result
from the  spike or  true value was  determined.   The  results are
shown  in  the section  "Estimates  of  Data  Accuracy."   No metals
data were invalidated due to poor analytical performance.

ESTIMATES OF DATA PRECISION

    To  determine  method precision,  several  field sites were se-
lected  for collocating  samplers.  One of the samplers was desig-
nated the official  sampler  for  the  site and  the other was desig-
nated the duplicate sampler.  The duplicate samples obtained were
then carried through  the analysis procedures  in the normal man-
ner.   The analysts were unable to  identify  the samples as being
duplicates.  The concentration differences (duplicate minus offi-
cial)  between  the  results  from  collocated  samples was  used to
estimate  the  precision  of  the  monitoring data.   Only validated
data were used for the determination of precision.

    Table  E-5  reports  the  results  from  the  collocated  samples
collected in  this study for  the  air  TENAX samples.  During this
study,  a  total  of 98 valid pairs of  duplicate samples were col-
lected.   Differences  in jj-g/nP  were calculated  for each sample
pair .when both reported concentrations were  above the limit of
quantitation for  the  pollutant.   At the <*=0.01 level of  signifi-
cance,  none  of  the  mean differences were  significantly different
from zero.  The standard deviations presented  in  Table  E-5 can be
used to calculate precision estimates for  the  TENAX field  data by
means of  the following  formula:

Field Results  (,ag/m3) ± 1'9*  [Std" Dev" from  Table E-5
    No  estimate of precision could  be made from collocated  sam-
ples  for  the metals or pesticide  analyses because an  insufficient
number  of duplicate  results were  obtained to  yield  meaningful
comparisons.   The  variability of the estimates of accuracy,  how-
ever,  can be  used  to give  an  approximate  estimate of  precision
for  metals,  pesticides,   and those volatile organics which  also
had  too few  results from the collocated samples to estimate  mea-
surement  precision.   A  percentage  interval  equal to  twice  the
standard  deviation of the  percent difference can  be used as  an
approximate  estimate  of  data precision for  the volatile  and  met-
als analyses,  while twice the percent  relative standard deviation
can be  used  for pesticides  and  related compounds.
                                277

-------
       TABLE E-5.   RESULTS FROM AIR TENAX DUPLICATE SAMPLES
Compound
Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
o-Chlorotoluene
p-Chlor otol uene
1 , 2-Dibrome thane
o-Dichlorobenzene
p-Dichlorobenzene
Meant
0.15
-1.05
—
0.60
0.27
—
-3.84
-1.31
Standard
Deviation*
2.99
—
--
0.63
0.45
—
6.48
1.01
Pairs*
52
1
0
3
4
0
9
5
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloro-
  ethylene                 1.95        10.94         56

Toluene                    0.32        10.53         43
  MUnits are v-g/m
  *A total of 98 valid  duplicate  pairs of samples were collected.
  The number in this column represents the number of pairs where
  both results were quantifiable.

ESTIMATES OF DATA ACCURACY

    It has  been the  established practice  in air  monitoring  to
estimate accuracy from independent audits of the measurement pro-
cess  (CFR 40,  Part  58,  Appendix  A).   An audit of the flow rates
of  the  field samplers was  made  during  normal sampling periods.
The flow  audits  were conducted  by  EPA, and  were independent  of
the routine flow measurements  made by  the sampling contractor.
The difference between the  contractor flow rate  and the EPA de-
termined  flow  rate can be  used  to estimate  the  accuracy of the
sampler flow rate.   The results of the  flow  audits are given  in
Table E-6.

    In contrast  to the  standard procedure used  to estimate the
accuracy of TENAX measurements,  EPA elected to determine accuracy
from  the results of the calibration check  samples.   This was  done
because the number of blind  audit samples  needed  to  establish ac-
curacy over the analytical  range would have approximately  equaled
the number  of  calibration check samples.   Doubling  the  number  of
                                 278

-------
       TABLE E-6.   RESULTS OF AUDITS OF SAMPLER FLOW RATES
Sampler Type
TENAX
Polyurethane foam
High-volume
Percent
Mean
-1.8
-4.1
-4.3
Difference
Standard
Deviation
2.5
1.8
6.3
Number of
Samplers Audited
31
36
8
quality assessment samples (from 300 to 600) was judged not to be
the most  cost-effective  means of quantifying  accuracy.   Because
the calibration  check samples and  the blind  audit  samples were
prepared by the  same  contractor,  the  results  from the check sam-
ples were  expected to be  similar to the results  from the blind
audit  samples.    Therefore,  the  percent difference  between the
spike value and  the  analytical  result from the calibration check
sample was  used  to estimate  the  accuracy of  the  analyses.   The
results of the analyses of all calibration check samples are sum-
marized in Table E-7  for each of the substances that were quanti-
fied.

    TABLE E-7.  RESULTS FROM THE ANALYSES OF CALIBRATION
                      CHECK SAMPLES  (TENAX ANALYSES)
Percent Difference
Compound
Benzene
Carbon tetra-
chloride
Chlorobenzene
o-Chlorotoluene
1 , 2-Dibromoethane
o-Dichlorobenzene
1,1,2,2-Tetra-
chloroethylene
Toluene
Mean
-2.3
-5.8
-3.9
0.0
-7.5
-1.2
6.9
-2.0
S.D.
28.7
25.2
27.1
25.9
30.3
25.4
25.7
37.1
Number of
Samples
285
307
308
298
309
309
303
276
S.D.:  Standard deviation
                                279

-------
    To corroborate  the results  from  the calibration  check sam-
ples,  blind  spike  samples  were  periodically  inserted  into the
field  sample  analyses.   Results  from  the  blind  spike samples
analyses fell within the +_3cr (3 standard deviation) limits estab-
lished from the  analyses  of the  calibration  check samples, thus
confirming the  estimates  obtained  from  the check  samples.   The
mean percent differences  (Table  E-7)  were  all  less than +10 per-
cent.   In other  ambient  air  studies,  the data  are  accepted as
reported when biases are documented as less than +10 percent.

    To further  corroborate the  accuracy of the  TENAX analyses,
calibration check  samples and blind  audit  samples were analyzed
by an  independent  laboratory.   Only  a  limited number of samples
(nine) were  analyzed  by  this laboratory  during   the  Love  Canal
study  resulting  in  58 individual  analytical  results.   Ninety-
three percent of these results fell within the +2cr limits  estab-
lished from Table E-7, and all the  results within  the +3cr limits.
Thus,  the independent analyses  also corroborated  the accuracy
estimates.

    A  further  breakdown  of  the  results of the  analysis  of the
calibration check samples was  also  performed.  The  air TENAX  cali-
bration  check  samples  were  divided  into  three  levels,  and the
four  separate  analytical  systems  that  were used  to  perform the
analyses.  One system,  however,  was in operation only a few days
and was not included in the statistical  analyses.   Table E-8 sum-
marizes  the analytical  results  for  the  air  TENAX  calibration
check  samples  by analytical system,  and by sample concentration
level  (in  nanograms  per sample).   In  Table E-8, the mean percent
difference between  the reported  concentration and the true con-
centration,  the  standard  deviation (S.D.)  of  this percent dif-
ference,  and the number of samples analyzed is presented.   Table
E-9  gives  the  approximate concentrations of  the  three  levels  of
calibration check samples used.

    Accuracy  estimates were  made  for polyurethane foam  samples
through analyses of  two blind  audit samples that  accompanied each
lot of field samples sent to the  two  analyzing laboratories. Two
of the same  samples were  also returned  to  the EPA as blind sam-
ples  for  analysis  by  a senior chemist who  was not involved with
preparation of  the QA samples.   The  primary  purpose of this was
to monitor any  losses  that might have resulted from the shipping
and  handling  of the  blind samples.   The  accuracy of  analytical
measurements made by the  two laboratories  was indicated by  their
qualitative and  quantitative performance on  these blind QA sam-
ples.  Table  E-10 provides  a  summary  of  the polyurethane  foam
blind  check  samples results  for  the  two contractor  laboratories
and  the EPA laboratory.

    Analytical  accuracy of  ICAP metals analyses  was also  esti-
mated  from the results of analyses of audit samples.   These sam-
ples  were supplied  as  blind unknowns  to the analytical  laborato-
ries.   The  results for  ICAP  metals accuracy are presented  in
                                 280

-------
TABLE  E-8.
RESULTS  OF ANALYSES  OF CALIBRATION CHECK  SAMPLES BY
            LEVEL AND ANALYTICAL  SYSTEMt
Level 1
Compound System Mean S.D.
Benzene



Carbon
tetra-
chloride

Chloro-
benzene


o-Chloro-
toluene


1,2-Dibromo-
ethane


o-Dichloro-
benzene


1,1,2,2-
Tetra-
chloro-
ethylene
Toluene



1
2
3
ALL
1
2
3
ALL
1
2
3
ALL
1
2
3
ALL
1
2
3
ALL
1
2
3
ALL
1
2
3
ALL
1
2
3
ALL
9
-3
-9
-1
-5
12
-16
-6
-4
13
-15
-5
-3
11
-8
-3
0
20
-30
-9
—9
10
-6
-3
4
21
16
13
-9
-15
10
1
.40
.89
.34
.76
.62
.75
.27
.26
.05
.69
.67
.92
.97
.60
.71
.05
.91
.32
.08
.35
.15
.95
.76
.78
.17
.56
.20
.03
.61
.23
.43
.58
40.77
28.79
16.34
30.23
27.60
15.99
16.48
23.00
34.52
21.78
17.14
27.91
26.50
23.31
20.32
24.39
31.94
26.00
13.99
31.59
26.36
19.93
22.67
25.41
27.49
16.35
30.12
27.15
46.40
56.56
26.18
40.72
N
30
16
39
88
30
21
41
96
32
21
41
98
29
21
40
94
30
21
41
96
32
21
41
98
28
21
39
92
15
16
40
73
Level 2
Mean S.D.
8.61
3.79
-7.50
0.24
-14.22
3.43
-3.27
-6.17
1.16
8.36
-10.70
-2.31
2.07
4.71
-3.11
0.75
0.34
3.80
-18.56
-7.49
3.71
9.44
-7.90
-0.10
7.52
6.56
4.94
6.12
6.47
-19.39
-3.40
-3.57
28.72
30.54
21.87
26.76
28.29
17.20
20.07
23.52
27.85
32.14
18.34
26.29
31.59
25.02
22.32
25.83
33.03
26.05
18.69
27.69
29.31
28.45
19.12
25.43
31.73
22.10
20.17
24.39
37.21
43.00
26.18
35.20
N
29
21
47
99
33
22
48
106
32
22
48
105
29
21
48
101
33
22
48
106
32
22
48
105
33
22
47
105
28
22
46
97
Level 3
Mean S.D.
-1.27
8.52
-19.35
-5.21
-14.48
-0.79
-1.08
-4.91
-5.59
8.01
-10.63
-3.46
-4.98
12.23
0.57
2.10
-11.35
11.08
-14.65
-5.92
1.21
11.31
-8.33
0.19
6.73
7.76
-5.64
2.39
-0.73
-0.16
-9.89
-2.95
35.65
26.20
17.25
29.13
33.08
29.45
20.93
28.78
29.55
32.30
15.79
27. 17
25.88
33.04
22.14
27.13
33.10
35.80
21.66
31.82
28.95
28.24
15.20
25.50
28.67
28.29
16.36
24.88
43.95
43.62
17.74
36.36
N
33
26
37
98
33
30
39
105
34
29
39
105
32
29
39
103
35
30
39
107
34
30
39
106
34
30
39
106
34
30
39
106
 "Units for mean and standard deviation  (S.D.) are percent difference.
                                 281

-------
     TABLE E-9.
APPROXIMATE CONCENTRATIONS OF CALIBRATION
                CHECK  SAMPLES
Compound
Level 1
Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
o-Chlorotoluene
1 , 2-Dibromoethane
o-Dichlorobenzene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloro-
ethylene
Toluene
Level 2
11
7
10
9
8
9
12
11
18
12
17
18
13
18
19
19
TABLE E-10. SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR POLYURETHANE
Check
Compound
1,2,3,4-Tetra- Level
chlorobenzene Average
SD
% RSD
N
Pentachloro- Level
benzene Average
SD
% RSD
N
Hexachloro- Level
benzene Average
SD
% RSD
N
T-BHC (Lindane) Level
Average
SD
% RSD
N
2,4,5-Tri- Level
chlorophenol Average
SD
% RSD
N
1
1,000 ng
74.4
+14.1
18.9%
11
400 ng
77.3
+ 9.9
12.9%
11
600 ng
99.2
+22.9
23.1%
11
100 ng
69.9
+23.0
32.9%
11
300 ng
75.1
+35.2
46.9%
12
2

1,500 ng
78.
+12.
15.
11
200
86.
+17.
20.
11
300
116.
+42.
36.
12
150
77.
+18.
23.
11
3
3
7%

ng
3
7
5%

ng
2
8
9%

ng
5
2
5%

150 ng
89.
+53.
60.
11
6
8
1%

3
750
77.
+25.
32.
10
100
83.
+26.
32.
10
150
104.
+47.
45.
10
75
67.
+48.
71.
10
75
90.
+57.
63.
10

Level

29
20
26
27
19
27
31
28
FOAM CHECK
3



SAMPLES'
Sample Number

ng
6
6
9%

4
5
3,000 ng
64.
+16.
26.
8
3
9
2%

ng 1,000 ng
3
7
1%

ng
2
5
6%

ng
9
8
9%

ng
4
5
6%

69.
+27.
38.
9
120
91.
+31.
34.
8
200
68.
+22.
33.
9
100
68.
+38.
55.
9
7
0
8%

ng
1
2
3%

ng
6
7
2%

ng 1
4
0
5%

750
81
+ 15
19
16
500
85
+ 18
"21
16
200
94
+27
29
16
250
79
+20
"25
16
,000
77
+37
48
17
ng
.8
.8
.3%

ng
.1
.2
.3%

ng
.9
.8
.2%

ng
.7
.0
.1%

ng
.1
.1
.1%

6
900
87
+21
~24
12
400
86
+19
22
11
200
84
+22
27
10
250
82
+22
-27
11
200
86
+16
19
10
ng
.5
.5
.5%

ng
.4
.6
.7%

ng
.3
.7
.0%

ng
.1
.3
.2%

ng .
.2
.4
,1%

Percent recovery + SD, with percent relative standard deviation and number
of samples
                                  282

-------
Table  E-ll.    Analytical accuracy  for  NAA metals  analyses was
estimated from  the  results  of NBS  Standard Reference Materials.
These results are presented in Table E-12.

    Mean percent  differences for  all  metals  analyses  were  less
than jf5  percent, except for  zinc,  which  was -11  percent.   No
changes  to  the  metals data  were made  based on  these  results.
These results were judged consistent with the  results obtained by
EMSL-RTP, both prior and subsequent to the  analysis  of Love  Canal
samples.
            TABLE E-ll.
RESULTS FROM THE ANALYSIS OF
BLIND AUDIT SAMPLES BY ICAP
Element
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Percent
Mean
-0.1
-1.9
-11.2
Difference
S.D.
3.7
4.3
5.5
Number of
Samples
6
6
6
        S.D.:  Standard deviation
   TABLE E-12.  RESULTS FROM THE ANALYSIS OF NATIONAL  BUREAU OF
                 STANDARDS STANDARD REFERENCE MATERIALS  BY  NAA
SRM 1648
Percent Difference
Element
Arsenic
Cobalt
Chromium
Mean
4.7
1.4
-4.5
S.D.
10.1
4.4
4.3
SRM 1632
Percent Difference
Mean
-3.5
4.9
0.0
S.D.
7.9
2.9
3.1
Number of
Samples
12
12
12
S.D.:  Standard deviation
Note:  For each SRM,  12  separate  analyses were  performed.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ACTIONS  TAKEN AS A  RESULT  OF  THE  GCA CORPORATION
  QUALITY ASSURANCE  FUNTIONS

    While  most actions taken by  EPA as a  result  of  the  quality
assurance program occurred  after analyses had  been completed,  the
GCA  Corporation quality  assurance  program was operative  during
the on-going measurement  processes.  One indication of the effec-
tiveness of the GCA  Corporation QA program  was the fact that very
few  samples  had to  be  invalidated  retrospectively by  EPA during
                                 283

-------
its review of the data.  To a great extent, the low number of in-
validated samples were  due  to the adherence of  the  sampling and
analytical subcontractors to  the  required quality assurance pro-
cedures.   In addition,  the  GCA Corporation's management  of the
monitoring efforts, timely  identification of potential problems,
and  initiating  corrective actions  before these  problems  became
major resulted in analytical laboratories operating in control.

    Some examples of the GCA Corporation quality assurance activ-
ities that  eliminated minor  problems before  they  adversely af-
fected the data are as follows:

   1.  By reviewing the  results of  the  calibration check samples
       (TENAX analyses)  as  they were reported,  the  GCA Corpora-
       tion  noticed  that variability in  one  laboratory  was ap-
       proaching unacceptable limits. A site investigation by the
       GCA Corporation of the  laboratory  in  question uncovered  a
       minor  leak  in the injection  system to their  GC/MS.   The
       leak was corrected, and variability of results on the cal-
       ibration check  samples decreased.   No data  needed  to be
       invalidated because the problem was corrected while it was
       still minor.

   2.  The  GCA Corporation  monitored  the  TENAX tube  clean-up
       dates  at  their  Love Canal sample  bank operation,  and re-
       moved blank tubes which, in their  estimation, could not be
       used  to  collect a sample and  be  analyzed within the pre-
       scribed 30-day  time  limit  established at  the  start of the
       monitoring  program.    By  this activity,  the  30-day  limit
       was adhered to throughout the  study.

   3.  Once  the  TENAX  collecting media was  cleaned,  a number of
       tubes  from  each batch  were  analyzed for background before
       the tubes were  sent  to the field.  As  a  result,  one com-
       plete  batch of TENAX  was rejected  and  removed  from the
       study  because  of unacceptably high background analytical
       results.

    Additional  examples  of  the GCA  Corporation  on-going quality
assurance  activities  are described  in  the Love Canal Monitoring
Program, GCA QA/QC Summary Report.
                                284

-------
REFERENCES

 1.  Pellizzari, 1, D.  Development of  Analytical Techniques for
     Measuring Ambient Atmospheric Carcinogenic Vapors.  Publica-
     tion No. EPA-600/2-75-075, Contract No.  68-02-1228.   Novem-
     ber 1975.  187 pp.

 2.  	.    The  Measurement  of  Carcinogenic Vapors  in
     Ambient Atmospheres.   Publication No.  EPA-600/7-77-055, Con-
     tract No. 68-02-1228.  June 1977.  288 pp.

 3.  —	•	.   Evaluation of the Basic GC/MS Computer Analy-
     sis Technique  for Pollutant  Analysis.   Final  Report,  EPA
     Contract No. 68-02-2998.

 4.  Pellizzari, E. D. , and  L. W.  Little.   Collection and Analy-
     sis of Purgeable  Organics  Emitted  from  Treatment  Plants.
     Final Report,  EPA Contract No. 68-03-2681.  216 pp.

 5.  Pellizzari, E. D.  Analysis of Organic Air Pollutants by Gas
     Chromatography  and  Mass  Spectroscopy.    EPA-600/2-77-100.
     June 1977.   114 pp.

 6.  	.    Analysis  of  Organic  Air Pollutants  by Gas
     Chromatography  and  Mass  Spectroscopy.    EPA-600/2-79-057.
     March 1979.  243 pp.

 7.  	,     Ambient  Air  Carcinogenic  Vapors  Improved
     Sampling and Analytical Techniques  and Field Studies.  EPA-
     600/2-79-081.   May 1979.  340 pp.

 8.  Lewis, R. G»,  A.  R.  Brown and M. D. Jackson.  Evaluation of
     Polyurethane Foam  for  Sampling of  Pesticides, Polychlorina-
     ted Biphenyls,  and  Polychlorinated  Napthalenes  in  Ambient
     Air.  Anal. Chem. 49.  1977.   1668-1672.

 9.  Lewis,  R.  G.     "Sampling and Analysis  of  Airborne  Pesti-
     cides",  in  Air Pollution  from  Pesticides  and  Agricultural
     Processes.   R.  E. Lee, Jr.   (Ed.), CRC  Press.    1976.   pp.
     52-94.

10.  Lewis, R, G. ,  K.  E.  MacLeod, and  M.  D. Jackson.   Sampling
     Methodologies   for Airborne  Pesticides  and  Polychlorinated
     Biphenyl.   Paper No. 65,   Chemical  Congress,  ACS-Chemical
     Society of Japan, Honolulu,  Hawaii, April 2-6, 1979.

11.  Manual of Analytical Methods  for the  Analysis of Pesticides
     in  Humans and Environmental Samples,  Section 8.   U.S. Envi-
     ronmental Protection Agency,  Health Effects Research Labora-
     tory,   Research  Triangle  Park,  North  Carolina  27711,  EPA-
     600/8-80-038.   June 1980.
                                285

-------
12.   MacLeod,  K. E.  Sources of Emissions of  PCBs  into  the Ambi-
     ent Atmosphere and  Indoor  Air.   U.S.  Environmental  Protec-
     tion Agency,  Health Effects  Research  Laboratory,  Research
     Triangle  Park,  North  Carolina  27711,  EPA-600/4-78-022.
     March 1979.

13.   Bidleman,  T. F.,  J,  R.  Matthews,  C.  E.  Olney and C. P. Rice.
     Separation of PCBs,  Chlordane,  and p_p_'-DDT  from Toxaphene by
     Silicic Acid  Column Chromatography.    J.  Assoc, Off.  Anal.
     Chem. ,  61:820-828.

14.   Lewis,  R.  G., M.  D.  Jackson and K. E. MacLeod.  Protocol for
     the  Assessment  of  Human  Exposure  to  Airborne  Pesticides.
     U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Health Effects  Re-
     search Laboratory,  Research  Triangle Park, North  Carolina,
     EPA-600/2-80-180.  1980.
                                286

-------
                             APPENDIX F
             REPORT ON THE AUDIT OF GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/
                 MASS SPECTRQMETRY DATA PROVIDED BY
             LOVE CANAL PROJECT ANALYTICAL LABORATORIES
INTRODUCTION
    This  report  provides  the  results  of  an  audit  of  raw  gas
chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) data archived on magnet-
ic tape and  provided  by the Love Canal  project  analytical labo-
ratories.   It is emphasized that the audit was not applied to the
complete  analyses  of  samples by  the contract  laboratories,  but
only to the  interpretation  of raw GC/MS data as provided on mag-
netic tape .

    The audit  was  accomplished by  three EPA  laboratories using
Protocol  for Auditing Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry Data
Provided by Love Canal Project Analytical Laboratories,  revision
1.01 by W. L.  Budde,  E. H.  Kerns, and  J. W.  Eichelberger , dated
July 2, 1981.  The  participating EPA laboratories were the Envi-
ronmental   Monitoring  and Support  Laboratory,   Cincinnati (EMSL-
Cin) , the Environmental  Monitoring  Systems  Laboratory, Las Vegas
(EMSL-LV)  ,  and  the   Environmental   Research  Laboratory,  Athens
(ERL-Athens)  .

SCORING SYSTEM — TARGET COMPOUNDS

    In order to provide a quantitative measure of the performance
of the laboratories,  a  scoring  system  was developed.   This scor-
ing system is based on  two  indices,  the positive agreement index
(PAI) and  the  negative agreement index  (NAI),  which  are defined
as follows;

                                TP
                       PAI = - i=- - xlOO%

                                287

-------
    where:

            TP =  the number  of corapounas on  the method  target
                  compound list that were found by the analytical
                  laboratory and confirmed to  be present  in  the
                  magnetic tape  record  of  the  analysis by  the
                  audit laboratory.

            T  =  the total  number  of compounds  on  the  method
                  target  compound  list  that  were  found by  the
                  analytical laboratory plus any  additional  tar-
                  get compounds that were found by the audit lab-
                  oratory.

            N  =  the number of method target  compounds.

The PAI is a  statement  of the  percentage of positive  occurrences
the two laboratories agreed upon; and, the NAI  is  a statement of
how well  the two laboratories agreed on what target  compounds
were not  present  above the  method  detection  limit.   The  audit
data used  to compute   the  PAI and  NAI   values  for the  samples
audited are shown in Tables F-l and  P-2 (laboratory abbreviations
are explained in Table 4 of the text).  For  Method 624,  the value
of N was 39;  for Method 625, the value of N was  68.   The summary
PAI and NAI values shown  in  Tables F-l and F-2 were computed for
each laboratory from the  totals  shown in the tables, and  there-
fore represent the weighted means.   The  weighted  NAI  values were
computed using a value  of N weighted  by  the number of samples of
each type (Method 624 or 625).

    For most of the possible boundary conditions,  the  minimum and
maximum values of the PAI and  NAI indices are  0 and 100 percent.
However, if no compounds  are in the  sample and  both laboratories
are in perfect agreement on this condition,  the PAI is undefined,
and the index has no meaning.  If every  single  target analyte is
present and  both  laboratories are  in perfect agreement on  this
condition, the NAI is undefined and  the index  has no meaning.

    To assist in  interpreting  the PAI and NAI  scores,  it was de-
sirable to  establish a  reference  point for  performance.    The
EMSL-Cincinnati  had acted as  a referee quality assurance labora-
tory during the  project, and analyzed 5 percent of the water sam-
ples and  3 percent  of the soil and  sediment  samples  (Tables F-3
and F-4).  Data  from three of the samples analyzed by  EMSL-Cin-
cinnati were audited by   ERL-Athens  to  establish  the  level  of
agreement between two highly experienced laboratories  that  were
also involved in  the development of  the  methods and motivated to
generate high quality  scientific work (and work that was  rela-
tively free  from  the fixed price financial constraints  that ex-
isted at the contract laboratories and which may have  impinged on
performance) .  The  weighted  mean PAI  for these  3  samples  was 71
percent and the  weighted mean NAI was 94 percent.  On  this basis,
                                288

-------
TABLE F-l.
SUMMARY OF EMSL-CINCINNATI AUDIT
OF LOVE CANAL GC/MS WATER SAMPLES
Lab.
ACEE














PJBL






TRWW




CMTL







Method
624
624
624
624
624
624
624
624
624
624
625
625
625
625

624
624
625
625
625
625

624
624
624
624

624
624
624
625
625
625
625

Sample No
W20877
W20922
W21732
W25290
W25506
W25511
W25628
W25629
W25654
W25656
W20872
W21733
W25507
W25625

W20796
W20825
W20349
W20808
W20820
W20856

W21976
W22008
W22009
W22026

W21644
W21663
W21773
W21774
W21645
W21818
W25123

T
3
1
2
6
7
4
4
5
3
10
1
16
0
0
62
15
3
9
24
3
0
54
10
8
15
15
48
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
TP
1
0
1
5
5
2
2
5
3
10
1
15
0
0
50
9
3
7
11
3
0
33
8
5
9
11
33
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PAI
33
0
50
83
71
50
50
100
100
100
100
94
undefined
undefined
81
60
100
78
46
100
undefined
61
80
63
60
73
69
0
undefined
undefined
undefined
undefined
undefined
undefined
0
NAI
95
97
97
97
94
95
95
100
100
100
100
98
100
100
98
80
100
97
77
100
100
93
94
91
80
86
88
95
100
100
100
100
100
100
99
(continued)
                     289

-------
                      TABLE F-l  (continued)
Lab.
GSRI






EMSL-
Cin

Method
625
625
625
625
625
625
625
625t
6251"

Sample No.
W21516
W21526
W21537
W25421
W25432
W25525
W25564
W21725
W25199

T
1
6
0
1
0
7
0
15
12
3
15
TP
0
6
0
1
0
6
0
13
9
2
11
PAI
0
100
undefined
100
undefined
86
undefined
87
75
67
73
NAI
99
100
100
100
100
98
100
100
95
98
97
^Audited  by ERL-Athens
  TABLE F-2.
SUMMARY OP THE EMSL-LAS VEGAS AND ERL-ATHENS AUDIT
     OF LOVE CANAL SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLES
Lab . Method
ACEE 6241"
624
624
624
624
624
624
625
625
625

PJBL 624
624
624
624


Sample No. T
S50158
S40085
S40121
S40576
S40586
S50150
S50296
S40087
S40209
S45206

S45526
S45527
S50257
S50262

(
0
4
1
4
1
5
4
0
0
13
32
5
6
7
6
24
continued
TP
0
3
1
2
0
2
2
0
0
10
20
4
3
4
2
13
)
PAI
undefined
75
100
50
0
40
50
undefined
undefined
77
63
80
50
57
33
54

NAI
100
97
100
95
97
92
95
100
100
95
97
97
92
91
89
92

^Audited by ERL-Athens
                                290

-------
                      TABLE F-2 (continued)
Lab , Method
CMTL 624
624
624
624
624
624
625
625
625

GRSI 625
625
625
625
625
624
624
624
624
624
624

SWRI 625
625

625

625
625
625
625

EMSL-Cin 62 5*
Sample No.
S45018
S45027
S45219
S45398
S50025
S50031
S45054
S45119
S50047

S40330
S40332
S40463
S40464
S40491
S40414
S40417
S40425
S40426
S50238
S50380

S40058
S40178
(N25W15)
S40178
(KF25W16)
S40796
S40888
S40908
S50330

S50068
T
2
2
2
3
9
5
0
10
18
51
0
0
0
6
2
0
2
1
0
3
6
20
11
19

21

13
6
15
19
104
20
TP
0
0
1
0
7
2
0
5
7
22
0
0
0
3
0
0
2
1
0
3
4
13
5
10

9

10
3
9
17
63
14
PAI
0
0
50
0
78
40
undefined
50
39
43
undefined
undefined
undefined
50
0
undefined
100
100
undefined
100
67
65
45
53

43

77
50
60
89
61
70
NAI
95
95
97
92
94
92
100
92
82
93
100
100
100
95
97
100
100
100
100
100
94
99
90
84

80

95
95
90
96
90
89
'''Audited by ERL-Athens
                                291

-------
      TABLE F-3.  SUMMARY OF THE LOVE CANAL WATER DATA AUDIT
Samples
Analytical Reported*
Laboratory (624 + 625)
ACEE
CMTL
EMSL-Cin
ERGO
GSRI
ERL-Ada
PJBL
TRWW
Totals
214
149
38
1
159
8
127
69
765
Percent Percent of Subcontractor
of Number Audited by Lab's Total Audited by
i Total EMSL-Cin ERL-Athens EMSL-Cin ERL-Athens
28 14 — 6.5
19 7 — 4.7
5 — 2 — 5.3
o
21 7 -- 4.4
"1 •*.,•» mm. — — :• muii
17 6 — 4.7
9 4 — 5.8
100 38(5%) 2(0.26%)
'In validated data base
   TABLE F-4.  SUMMARY OF THE LOVE  CANAL SOIL AND  SEDIMENT AUDIT
Samples
Analytical Reported*
Laboratory (624 + 625)
ACEE
CMTL
EMSL-Cin
GSRI
PJBL
SWRI
Totals
150
195
24
141
18
174
702
Percent
of
Total
21
28
3
20
3
25
100
Percent of Subcontractor
Number Audited by Lab's Total Audited by
ERL-Athens EMSL-LV ERL-Athens EMSL-LV
1 9 0.7
9
1 4.2
6 5 4.3
4
7
8(1.1%) 34(4.8%)
6.0
4.6

3.5
22.0
4.0

   validated data base
                                    292

-------
it was judged not reasonable to expect a contract analytical lab-
oratory to "have any better agreement with an EPA audit laboratory
than the two expert EPA laboratories had with each other.  Conse-
quently,  it  was assumed  that reasonable,  perhaps  state-of-the-
art, performance would be a  PAI  of  71 percent or better,  and a
NAI of 94 percent or better.

    Throughout  the  audit,  the results reported  in  the validated
data base  were  compared with the  audit  laboratory's interpreta-
tion of the magnetic tape files.  In some cases files from method
blanks  were  available, and  background from  laboratory contami-
nants was  subtracted  before  the scores were computed.   In other
cases,  clearly  corresponding files from method  blanks  could not
be  located and, while the  analytical  laboratory was  given the
benefit  of  the doubt  on common  laboratory  contaminants,  some
additional uncertainty exists in the scores that needs to be con-
sidered when interpreting them.  Therefore, a reasonable range of
uncertainty may be  +10 percent for PAI and  a  reasonable accept-
ance range for  PAI scores  would be 61  to 81 percent.   Missing
method  blank files  and other uncertainties were judged  to have
much less  impact on NAI scores  and a reasonable acceptance range
may be +5 percent or a NAI score of 89 to 99 percent.

LABORATORY SCORES—TARGET COMPOUNDS

    Tables F-3  and  P-4 show the number of samples  in  the val-
idated data  base analyzed by each laboratory,  the percent of the
totals, the  number  audited,  and  the  percent of each laboratory's
total that was  audited.   Overall,  5.26 percent of the water sam-
ples and  5.9 percent  of the soil and  sediment  samples  were ran-
domly  selected  from  the  validated  data  base  and  subsequently
audited.  At the beginning of the  program,  the target audit per-
centage was  5 percent,  and deviations  from this  were caused by a
number  of factors  including?   (1)  incorrect  early  estimates  of
the number of samples  analyzed by each laboratory?  (2)  the fail-
ure  to  achieve distribution of  all  the  magnetic  tapes by the
audit deadline; and (3) inability of  the  audit  laboratories  to
read some  tapes because of technical  difficulties.   In general,
the intensity of the  audit is believed to  be  acceptable and re-
presentative of the overall  performance of contractor  laborato-
ries, that is,  the conclusions  would not  change  if  double  or
triple the number of  samples were audited.  However,  there were
several exceptions  where  a reliable audit  of  contractor labora-
tory performance was not obtained.  The  laboratory CMTL was very
slow in submitting data, and six of the seven water samples exam-
ined had  no  target  compounds above the minimum  detection limit.
This resulted in nearly all  audited  samples having  undefined PAI
scores and the resulting audit was judged indeterminate.  In sim-
ilar fashion, the  laboratory GSRI had three  undefined  water PAI
scores which reduced the  valid  audited percentage to a  very low
2.5 percent.   On the  other hand, the GSRI laboratory  had five
undefined PAI scores  for  soil and sediment samples, but  the re-
maining six  accounted  for a reasonable 4. 2 percent  of  the total
soil and sediment samples analyzed by this laboratory.

                                293

-------
    Examination of  Table F-l reveals  that all the  weighted PAI
means, except  that  of CMTL which was  discussed previously,  fall
into the acceptance range of 61 to 81 percent or higher. Similar-
ly, the  NAI  scores  are all in the range of  89 to 99 percent ex-
cept TRWW, which had an 88 percent.   Only a few individual scores
fell outside these reasonable acceptance ranges.

    Among the  laboratories  analyzing soil and  sediment samples,
two laboratories  (PJBL  and  CMTL)  had below  acceptable weighted
mean PAI scores; all laboratories had weighted mean NAI scores in
the acceptable range.  The PJBL laboratory analyzed only 18,  or 3
percent, of  the total  soil  and sediment samples  and was removed
from the contract work early in the program for quality assurance
reasons.  The  identification of potential  QC  problems associated
with the  performance of CMTL  in  soil and sediment  analyses was
substantially hampered by the late delivery of data  to the prime
contractor and EPA.

DISCUSSION—TARGET COMPOUNDS

    The  raw  archived  GC/MS  data was studied  carefully to assess
those  factors  contributing  to  the  generally less  than perfect
agreement  on  positive occurrences  between   contractor and  EPA
audit  laboratories and between  EPA  laboratories.   In general, it
was found that the contributing factors reduced to differences in
computer algorithms used by various laboratories to automatically
detect peaks in total  or partial  ion chromatograms,  and to  dis-
tinguish  real  signals from chemical and  other noise.   Another
major  reason was  found to be differences  in  judgment and identi-
fication  criteria employed  by various  equipment operators and
data  interpreters.    Although  EPA  methods  do provide compound
identification criteria, interpretations were found  to differ at
times, especially where  there was little or  no direct communica-
tion among interpreters at many sites.  Different interpretations
were especially noticed at concentrations below 30 parts per bil-
lion,   which  is the  region of the  method detection limit for many
compounds.   It was  observed  that   some  data  interpreters  were
willing  to  accept mass  spectra  with some chemical  noise (back-
ground)  as valid  proof for  an  identification, while  other inter-
preters  required  relatively  clean  spectra  before  accepting an
identification as correct.

    A  group  of 18 water samples that  contained 52 discrepancies
in the findings of  the analytical  and audit  laboratories was ex-
amined carefully to determine the effect of concentration levels.
Of the 52 discrepancies, 49 occurred  at  concentrations below 30
micrograms per liter,  which is well into the  region of detection/
quantitation limits  for  many of the  laboratories.  Of the 49 oc-
currences, 22  were  reported  as  "trace"  amounts.  The remaining 3
discrepancies,  which  occurred  above 30 parts per  billion, may
possibly  be  accounted for  by  missing method blanks.   As was
pointed  out  previously,  clearly corresponding data  files   from
                                294

-------
method blanks could not  always be  located  for the audit.  Conse-
quently, in some samples, compounds were found by the audit lab-
oratory that were  not  reported by  the analytical laboratory, and
some of these  may have  been  present  in the  method  blank,  which
caused  the analytical  laboratory to  delete the compound from the
report.  Furthermore, the conclusions  of the  study were based on
levels of contamination that were orders of magnitude higher than
the parts per billion levels that seemed to dominate the discrep-
ancies between the analytical and audit laboratories.  Therefore,
the discrepancies  in findings have  little or  no affect on the
overall conclusions of the study.

NON-TARGET COMPOUNDS

    The  analytical laboratories were required  by the  terms of
their  subcontracts to attempt to  identify up to  20  of the most
abundant  compounds in each  sample that were not on  the target
compound  list  (non-target compounds).  Table F-5 summarizes the
results  of  the audit of  this effort.   In this  table the infor-
mation  from  water, soil, and  sediment samples  analyzed by both
GC/MS methods was  consolidated.

         TABLE F-5.  SUMMARY OF NON-TARGET COMPOUND AUDIT

         Number of samples audited              80
         for non-targeted compounds
          (39 water, 41 soil and sediment)

         Number of samples in which             58(72.5%)
         the analytical  laboratories
         and the audit laboratories
         agreed that none were present

         Total number of compounds               r
         identified by the analytical
         laboratories in the 22
         remaining samples

         Total number of compounds              84
         identified by the audit
         laboratories in the 22
         remaining samples

    ^Does not include  19  identifications reported by EMSL-Cinein-
    nati as an analytical laboratory in 2 samples

    Does not include 16  identifications reported by ERL-Athens as
    an  audit  laboratory for EMSL-Cincinnati as  the analytical
    laboratory in  2 samples
                                295

-------
    hs can be seen  from  the results presented  in  Table  F-5,  the
audit and analytical  laboratories  agreed that no non-target com-
pounds were  present in nearly  three-fourths of the  samples  re-
viewed.   In most  of  the  22  samples  containing  non-target com-
pounds the  audit laboratory  reported  finding  1  or  2  compounds
while  the analytical  laboratory  reported  none.   There  were  5
samples audited  where 6  to  20  compounds were reported  by  the
audit  laboratory but  none  were  reported by  the  analytical lab-
oratory (CMTL and SWRI).

    The results  of  the non-target compounds  audit revealed that
the estimated concentration levels of most omitted compounds was
in the vicinity  of  the method limits  of  detection and quantita-
tion.   Furthermore,  it  was  found  that  in  those  relatively few
samples in which a discrepancy occurred  in  reporting non-target
compounds, the audit  and analytical laboratories agreed that the
samples were already  heavily  contaminated   with   targeted com-
pounds.   Consequently,  the  results  of  the  audit of non-target
compounds was judged  to  not  affect  the  general findings  of the
project.

CONCLUSION

    Considering  the extremely  rapid  start-up  and  completion of
this  project, which allowed  very  little time to develop  the ca-
pabilities of the contract  analytical  laboratories, and  the rapid
response  times required of  the  laboratories,  the overall perform-
ance  of contract laboratories was  judged to be  acceptable.   In
general,  the overall  findings of the project  would  not have been
materially affected even  if there  had  been perfect agreement be-
tween the  analytical laboratories  and  the  audit laboratories.
This  is because  the great majority of discrepancies in  the find-
ings  of the  analytical and  audit laboratories involved substances
occurring at concentration levels  in  the vicinity of the  method
limits  of  detection  and  quantitation,  and  these discrepancies
were  nearly always restricted  to samples   that  were  correctly
identified  as being heavily contaminated with targeted compounds.
The  major  conclusions  of  the  monitoring  study,  however,  were
based on findings  of environmental  contamination at  orders of
magnitude  higher  concentration levels  than the  estimated  con-
centrations  levels  comprising nearly  all discrepancies.
                                 296

-------