Untied State*	Office of Water	aan

Environmental Protection	Regulation} and Standard*	JNOVentDet" 1987

Afiency	Criteria and Standard* Diviiior.	SCD# 15

Washington DC 20460			

Water

w CDA'

\7

RECONNAISSANCE FIELD STUDY FOR VERIFICATION
OF EQUILIBRIUM PARTITIONING: NONPOLAR
HYDROPHOBIC ORGANIC CHEMICALS

-------
gppi os"/7

RECONNAISSANCE FIELD STUDY FOR VERIFICATION
OF EQUILIBRIUM PARTITIONING: NONPOLAR
HYDROPHOBIC ORGANIC CHEMICALS

Work Assignment 77, Task 13

November 1987

Prepared by:

Roger D. Kadeg and Spyros P. Pavlou
Envirosphere Co., Inc.-
Bellevue, Washington

For:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Criteria and Standards Division
Washington, D.C.

Submitted by:

BATTELLE

Washington Environmental Program Office
Washington, D-.C.

-------
ABSTRACT

A reconnaissancs field study was performed to test methodology for
interstitial water sampling and analytical testing, and to provide
preliminary data on field-determined sediment/water partitioning
coefficients for representative nonpolar hydrophobic organic
contaminants. The objectives were to determine appropriate sampling
and analysis procedures and to ascertain the validity of the
equilibrium partitioning approach towards sediment quality criteria
development as applied to field sediments and associated interstitial
water. Elliott 8ay in Puget Sound, adjacent to Seattle, Washington,
was selected as the study area.

A box corer and custom pressurized interstitial water extractor were
tested and proved satisfactory, although the extractor required
modifications to reduce plugging. Approximately 400-800 ml of
interstitial water were extracted from 0.3 to 0.5 ft' of sediment.
Standard analytical solvent extraction and gel permeation
chromatography c-leanup techniques were used, followed by standard
Environmental Protection Agency gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
(1625) and gas chromatography/electron capture detector (608) analysis
with additional extract preconcentration. Detection limits of
approximately 0.05-0.4 ppb in interstitial water and 4-17.3 ppb in
sediment for the selected hydrophobic contaminants were achieved.

Samples were collected at 12 stations and analyses performed for
6 stations representing four general areas. Results on supporting
parameters of pH, salinity/conductivity, and temperature showed little
variability and were representative of oreviously reported values for
Elliott Bay. Distribution of hydrophobic contaminants in the sediment
among locations agreed with previously reported spatial patterns,
although levels of contamination were generally lower. Mo relationship
between sediment total organic carbon and interstitial water dissolved
organic carbon could be demonstrated.

7120a

-------
Field organic carbon-normalized Dartitioning coefficients (K ) were

oc

determined for naphthalene, phenanthrene, pyrene, anthracene, and
fluoranthene. The log Kqc values are, respectively, 4.8, 5.2, 5.7,
4.8, and 5.3. These values are in agreement, within uncertainty, of
previously predicted values as well as other field study results
obtained for Puget Sound marine waters. This preliminary investigation

provides support for the application of the equilibrium partitioning
approach in developing sediment quality criteria.

7120a

11 i

-------
CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT	i i

1.0 INTRODUCTION		1.1

1.1	BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE		1.1

1.2	OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH		1.3

2.0 FIELD METHODS . . . .		2.1

2.1	.SITE SELECTION		2.1

2.2	VESSEL SELECTION 		2.8

2.3	SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND SAMPLE PROCESSING 		2.9

2.3.1	Box Corer			2.9

2.3.2	Station Positioning 		2.12

2.3.3	Sample Processing 			2.12

2.3.4	Pressure Extraction Equipment . 		2.14

2.3.5	Safety Plan		2.16

3.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS 		3.1

3.1	SAMPLE STORAGE AND EQUIPMENT PREPARATION 		3.1

3.2	DEWATERED SEDIMENT EXTRACTION		 . . .	3.1

3.3	INTERSTITIAL WATER EXTRACTION 		3.4

3.4	GEL PERMEATION CHROMATOGRAPHY OF SEDIMENT EXTRACTS . .	3.4

3.5	GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS ....	3.5

3.6	GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/ELECTRON CAPTURE DETECTOR ANALYSIS	3.6

4.0 DISCUSSION AND RESULTS			4.1

4.1	EFFECTIVENESS OF SAMPLING PLAN		4.1

4.2	PERFORMANCE OF EQUIPMENT AND ONBOARD INSTRUMENTATION .	4.1

4.3	SAMPLE ARCHIVING 		4.3

4.4	MEASUREMENT OF ANCILLARY PARAMETERS . 			4.4

4.5	CHEMICAL ANALYSIS			4.4

4.6	FIELD-DETERMINED PARTITION COEFFICIENTS 		4.11

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AMD RECOMMENDATIONS 		5.1

5.1	SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS		5.1

5.2	RECOMMENDATIONS		5.3

5.2 1 Sampling Equipment		5.3

5.2.2 Sample Processing 		5.4

5.2.J Sample Analysis/Analytical Methods		5.5

6.0 REFERENCES		6.1

APPENDIX A - ORIGINAL DATA			A.l

APPENDIX B - HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN		B.l

7120a

iv

-------
FIGURES

Page

2.1a Sediment Sampling Stations Locations 	 2.5

2.1b Sediment Sampling Stations Locations 	 2.6

2.2	Sediment Box Core Sampler	 2.10

2.3	Pressurized Interstitial Water Extractor	 2.15

4.1 Comparison of Field Koc and Predicted Koc Ranges . . . 4.21

7120a

v

-------
TABLES

Page

2.1	Selected Contaminants for Analysis 		2.2

2.2	Sediment Sampling Stations Locations 		2.7

3.1 Sample Surrogates 		3.2

4.1	Summary of Sampling Activity 		4.2

4.2	SupDortinq Parameter Data From Overlying Bottom Water .	4.5

4.3	Summary of Chemical Analyses 		4.7

4.4	Concentrations of Detected Contaminants in Extracted
Sediment		 4.8

4.5	Concentrations of Detected Contaminants in Extracted
Interstitial Water 	 4.9

4.6	Summary of Field-Determined Sediment/Water

Partition Coefficients for Naphthalene 	 4.12

4.7	Summary of Field-Determined Sediment/Water

Partition Coefficients for Phenanthrene 	 4.13

4.8	Summary of Field-Determined Sediment/Water

Partition Coefficients For Pyrene 	 	 4.14

4.9	Summary of Field-Determined Sediment/Water

Partition Coefficients for Anthracene 	 4.15

4.10	Summary of Field-Determined Sediment/Water

Partition Coefficients for Fluoranthene 	 4.16

4.11	Comparison of Field-Determined and Predicted
Partition Coefficients for Selected Nonpolar

Hydrophobic Chemicals 	 4.18

4.12	Comparison of Field-Measured Koc and

Predicted Koc Distributions .... 	 4.20

4.13	Comparison of Field-Measured PAH Koc Values 	 4.22

7120a

vi

-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

This report is the third in a series of documents prepared by
Envirosphere Company for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Criteria and Standards Division in support of the agency s program to
develop sediment quality criteria. The report presents the results of
a reconnaissance field study to test methodology for interstitial water
sampling, to perform analytical testing, and to obtain preliminary data
on field-determined partitioning coefficients for selected nonpolar
hydrophobic organic chemicals. Field partitioning data will be used to
verify the theoretical basis for the equilibrium partitioning (EP)
approach towards criteria development.

Because the field verification is intended to validate the theoretical
basis of the EP approach, a summary of the basic elements of the EP
approach is provided below.

 The concentration of contaminant at the water/sediment interface
is assumed to be at equilibrium, and therefore can express
partitioning by the equation

Cs

K =	(1)

T~
w

concentration of the contaminant in the sediment
concentration of the contaminant in the interstitial water
the equilibrium distribution constant or sediment/water
partition coefficient.

where C$ =

Cw =
K =

7120a

1.1

-------
	Bioavailable form C is the "free" concentration of a

w

contaminant in the aqueous pnase, i.e., the concentration of the
contaminant in the interstitial water that is not bound to liqands
in the water such as dissolved organic carbons.

	Sorption is controlled by the physical chemical properties of the
sediment and chemical composition of the aqueous phase.

	Proper normalization of contaminant concentration is required to
reflect the specific sorptive characteristics of the sediment.

The EP approach is used to develop sediment criteria for nonpolar
organic compounds by modifying Equation (1) as follows:

By setting Cw = CWgr in Equation (1), the criterion can be
expressed as

CSQC = KCWQC

(2)

where K
C

WQC
'SQC

= Kqc for nonpolar organic contaminants
= contaminant chronic water quality criteria concentration
= sediment quality criteria concentration (permissible
contaminant concentration value)

In the previous reports (Kadeg, Pavlou, and Duxbury 1986, Pavlou et al.
1987), organic carbon-normalized sediment/water partition coefficients

(Koc) were used with existing chemical water quality criteria to
determine permissible sediment contaminant concentrations (PCCs) for
different nonpolar contaminants. The KQC values were oredicted from
empirically-determined regression equations utilizing octanol-water

partition coefficients (K ) or were 1aboratory-measured K values

ow	oc

reported in the literature. These KQC values must be verified bv
both laboratory and field studies to confirm the validity of the EP
approach in the sediment criteria development process. This
verification can be achieved by computing K from-direct measurements of

7120a

1.2

-------
the concentration of the contaminant in the sediment and its
corresponding concentration in the interstitial water. The K is
subsequently normalized to the measured sediment organic carbon content
to compute	The field-determined Kqc values may then be

compared with the previously predicted or laboratory-determined KQC
values.

1.2 OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH

The objectives of this study are to determine the validity of the
equilibrium partitioning approach as applied to field sediments and
interstitial water samples and, because this study is at the
reconnaissance level, to determine the appropriate sampling and
analysis methods. The following steps outline the approach taken to
meet these objectives:

	Determine the concentration of nonpolar hydrophobic contaminants
in sediment and associated interstitial water samples, and
determine the total -organic carbon (TOC) of sediment. Using these
data, calculate the field Kqc values for each contaminant.

	Apply existing and/or develop new sampling and analytical methods
for measuring these contaminants in sediments and interstitial
water.

	Compare preliminary field Kqc values for each contaminant with
the previously reported values.

	Obtain information on the suitability of the selected sampling and
analytical methods, and how sampling and analysis can be improved.

	Based on the above results, provide recommendations for an
intensive field verificatior, program.

7120a

1.3

-------
2.0 FIELD METHODS

This chapter describes the rationale for the selection of the sites,
vessel, and sampling equipment, and specific methods for sample
extraction and processing.

2.1 SITE SELECTION

The study area and sampling sites within the study area were selected
based on the following criteria. For the study area the criteria wore:

	typical coastal and/or estuarine environment receiving chronic
contaminant input

	known sediment contamination with nonpolar hydrophobic compounds

t extensive historical data

	proximity to the survey team

	availability of selected sampling equipment and sampling vessel.
For specific sampling sites within the area the criteria were:

t proximity to contaminant sources

t historical data for the site, particularly for the trace organic
constituents listed in Table 2.1

t a gradient or variety of sediment textures and availability of
ancillary sediment chemistry data, especially total organic carbon
as well as pH and salinity

7121a

2.1

-------
TABLE 2.1. Selected Contaminants for Analysis

CAS No.	Compound

78-59-1

Isophorone

91-20-3

Naphthalene

91-58-7

2-Chloronaphthalene

208-96-8

Acenaphthylene

83-32-9

Acenaphthene

86-73-7

Fluorene

85-01-8

Phenanthrene

120-12-7

Anthracene

206-44-0

Fluoranthene

129-00-0

"Pyrene

56-55-3

Benzo(a)anthracene

213-01-9

Chrysene

205-99-2

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

207-08-9

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

50-32-8

Benzo(a)pyrene

53-70-3

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene

193-39-5

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

53-70-3

8enzo(ghi)perylene

91-57-6

2-Methylnaphthal ene

132-64-9

Dibenzofuran

319-84-6

A1pha-BHC

319-85-7

Beta-BHC

319-86-8

Delta-BHC

58-89-9

Gamma-BHC (Lindane)

76-44-8

Heptachlor

309-00-2

Aldrin

1024-57-3

Heptachlor Epoxide

959-98-8

Endosulfan I

60-57-1

Dieldrin

72-55-9

4,41-ODE

72-20-8

Endrin

33212-65-9

Endosulfan II

72-54-8

4,4'-DDD

1031-07-8

Endosulfan Sulfate

50-29-3

4,4'-DDT

72-43-5

Methoxychlor

53494-70-5

Endrin Ketone

57-74-9

Chlordane

8001-35-2

Toxaphene

12674-11-2

Aroclor-1016

11104-28-2

Aroclor-1221

11141-16-5

Aroclor-1232

53469-21-9

Aroclor-1242

12672-29-6

Aroclor-1248

11097-69-1

Aroclor-1254

11096-82-5

Aroclor-1260

7121a

2.2

-------
 level of contamination in the sediments is high $nouqh to ensure
that the corresponding concentrations in the interstitial water
could be detected with state-of-the-art analytical methods.

Puget Sound, Washington, was selected as the best area for this
reconnaissance study based on the above selection criteria. Puqet
Sound contains s.everal major estuary embayment systems which have
received chronic contaminant inputs in areas adjacent to metropolitan

sites such as Everett, Seattle, and Tacoma, Washington. There is
demonstrated sediment contamination with nonpolar hydrophobic
compounds. Through a review of the literature and ongoing work in the
area, and through discussions, with agencies and organizations currently
conducting studies in Puget Sound, several key investigations
containing relevant data were identified. These data sources
included: Pavlou and Dexter (1977), Dexter (1976), Pavlou et al.
(1973), Krogslund (1976), Pavlou et al. (1977),'Mai.ins et al. (1980),
Dexter et al. (1981), Konasewich et al. (1982), Romberg et al. (1984),
Stober and Chew (1984), and Tetra Tech, Inc. (1985). All members of
the survey team, comprised of Envirosphere personnel, live in the
greater Everett/Seattle/Tacoma area adjacent to Puget Sound. Finally;
all sampling equipment and the vessel were readily available through
use of local vessel contractors, the University of Washington
Department of Oceanography, and Envirosphere's Bellevue Regional Office.

From the historical information it became immediately apparent that two
embayments had the most extensive! database and were best suited for
specific sampling sites. These embayments were Commencement Bay,
adjacent to Tacoma, Washington, and Elliott Bay, adjacent to Seattle,
Washington. The most extensive data for the nonpolar hydrophobic
compounds in Table 2.1 were presented in the Tetra Tech (1985) and
Metro investigations (Romberg et al. 1984). These data were used to
select the station locations for this study.

7121a

2.3

-------
Of over 90 stations evaluated from the Tetra Tech and Metro databases,
approximately 55 percent were in Commencement Bay and 45 percent were
in Elliott Bay and adjacent areas. However, 15 of the 24 stations
indicating the highest potential for detecting a broad range of
compounds were located in Elliott Bay. These stations covered a wide
spatial distribution. The areas of highest contamination in
Commencement Bay appeared to occur for the most part in the rather
constricted waterways (e.g., City Waterway and Hybelos Waterway) which
are not representative of a typical marine embayment. On this basis,
Elliott Bay was selected as the sampling area. Figures 2.1a and 2.1b
illustrate the locations of the stations that were sampled during the
field survey and Table 2.2 provides details on these locations and
cross references to station identification numbers from previous
investigations.

To determine which sites should have sufficiently elevated interstitial
water concentrations to allow detection of the target compounds in the
interstitial water, the following procedure was used. Using the
equilibrium partitioning relationship shown previously (Equation [1]),
the interstitial water concentration, Cw, was set at the EPA method
detection limit (MDL) for the compound of interest. The corresponding
Kqc value for the compound was assigned using the data in Kadeg,

Pavlou, and Duxbury (1986). Equation (1) was solved for C , the
minimum sediment concentration required for detection of the compound
in interstitial water. Because the TOC of the sediments was not known,
to express this value in units of gram of contaminant/gram dry
sediment, the KQC values were converted to (dry weight
normalized partition coefficients) using a series of TOC values (0.5,
1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and 5.0 percent). These projected minimum
concentrations were then compared with the measured values in the two
embayments to determine which contaminants would be above detection
limits.

7121a

2.4

-------
" M m

I m

*


-

T.r-"o_

*4 '



C"!

" &

> ^
-:* -

~7

-

#?\.
'

ii- /
*. *

- ~?V:

xr /



* !

" * " S -i~

"-.'.V. ST/A-sr ,: _],
;V*	I  '

^:F

*	l l ATTntstifH-'itfr

	-;. 	.-~~f==; !t "- itTip;.i^^pt;rrn^fesa

ft	^Z*'i sfl^/aa-rtCrT'-rrrr- M ? 'i- *  i

:ifS

i **- *

* P*lCAUT
-------
2.6

-------
01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

TABLE 2.2. Sediment Sampling Stations Locations

Date

Col lected

Depth
(feet)

loran Coordinates

Metro/NOAA

Station

Equivalent

Description

3/2S/87

52

28004.6

42299.7

401603

So. Denny Wy. CSO

3/25/87

115

28003.9

42299.7

401810

So. Denny Wy. CSO

3/25/37

52

28004.3

42299.8

near 401603

So. Denny Wy. CSO

3/25/87

69

27991.8

42294.4

S0034

West Duwamish Head

3/26/87

76

28045. S

42293.5

SO 104

Off West Point

3/26/87

52

28004.7

42Z99.7

401603

So. Denny Wy. CSO

3/26/87

66

27993.0

42301.6

S0090

near Piers 54, 56

3/26/87

43

27977.6

42296.8

near 0149

So. Harbor Is. Duwamish Y

3/27/87

39

28039.5

42297.7

near S0028

Salmon Bay entrance

3/27/87

89

28001.3


42300.1

A061

off Pier '69

3/27/87

39

28005.8

42299.3

(Tear S0031

No. Denny Wy. CSO

3/27/87

52

28004.7

42299.7'

401603

So. Denny Wy. CSO

2.7

-------
2.2 VESSEL SELECTION

Vessels available in the Puget Sound area were screened for this study
based on the following criteria:

	large A-frame boom and winch with sufficient capacity for the
large box corer required for adequate sample volumes

	sufficient deck space and clearance to operate the box corer

	sufficient work space for pressure extraction equipment (including
high pressure gas cylinders) (see Section 2.3.4) and sediment
processing

	storage space for gear, equipment, and collected samples

	experienced skipper, preferably with knowledge of sediment
sampling equipment, and general background in marine sciences

	midsized vessel having sufficient maneuverability in nearshore
areas and yet capable of navigating in adverse weather conditions
often encountered in Puget Sound

	full electronics including radio, ship-to-shore communication
system, Loran, and radar

	running seawater for deck and equipment washdown

	reasonable rental rates

	scheduling availability.

Based on these criteria, the Research Vessel (R/V) Kittewake, which
satisfied all of the above requirements, was selected. The vessel has
a 57-ft beam and was custom built as a research vessel for Puget Sound

7121a

2.8

-------
applications by its skipper/owner Charles Eaton. Mr. Eaton holds a
degree in oceanography and has extensive experience with sediment
sampling equipment.

2.3 SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND SAMPLE PROCESSING

This section describes procedures
processing sediment samples.

2.3.1 Box Corer

and equipment used in collecting and

Based on the review of the sediment sampling methods used in previous
sediment studies in Puget Sound and the large volume of material
required for extracting sufficient quantities of interstitial water,
the best suited sampling device was a large box-type corer.
Specifically, a custom designed corer, maintained by the University of
Washington Department of Oceanography, was selected due to its
versatility, proven reliability, ease of operation, and availability.
Figure 2.2 illustrates the basic components of the corer.

During the survey, the corer was placed on the stern of the vessel and
attached to the A-frame boom and winch. The sampling blade and lever
arm assembly was manually raised and locked in the up or "armed"
position, permitting access to the box mount as shown in Figure 2.2.
The removable stainless steel sampling box, approximately
9 x 11 x 22 in., was slid into place using the box guides and then
attached to the sampling assembly by four pressure bolts, two on each
wide side of the box. The water flaps, which permit free passage of
water during descent, were tied in the up position with a piece of
string. The armed box corer was then raised with the winch and
carefully guided over the stern of the boat and suspended in a fixed
position with the bottom of the frame approximate.y 1 ft above the
water surface. The trigger pins, which hold the movable weighted main
shaft, were removed. Removing the pins allows the movable shaft to
drive the box into the sediment when reaching bottom.

7121a

2.9

-------
FIGURE 2.2. Sediment Box Core Sampler

2.10

-------
When the "clear" signal was given, the winch was released, and the box
corer was released to free-fall to the bottom; driving the stainless
steel sample box into the sediment. The winch was engaged, slowly
raising the corer, which pulled the lever arm, causing the sampling
blade to cut through the sediment and seal an intact sediment core in
the sample box. The movement of the lever arm also broke the string,
causing the water flaps to drop and seal the overlying water in the
sampler. The box corer was then winched back to the surface where the
frame bottom was again positioned approximately 1 ft above the surface,
and the trigger pins reinserted. The excess bottom sediment (mud) was
quickly hosed off the frame and other portions of the corer using
running seawater, taking care not to contaminate the collected core.
The boom was then adjusted and the corer lowered onto the stern of the
boat.

The contents of the corer were visually inspected for signs of an
improper or incomplete sample, e.g., entrained material in the sample
olade (sticks, rocks, plastic, trash, etc.). The sample was discarded
if such materials were found during this inspection. Next, the water
flap was lifted and, using a hose made of inert material, the overlying
water was siphoned off the top of the sediment core. A portion of this
overlying water was collected for analysis of ancillary parameters
and/or archiving.

Next, the sampling blade and lever arm were raised, and the stainless
steel sampling box loosened to place the collected core directly on the
fiberglass working deck for immediate subsampling. Alternatively, a
stainless steel plate was driven between the sampling blade and latched
to the sample box, and the lever arm raised. This stainless steel
sampling box could then be removed, containing an intact sample for
temporary storage prior to subsampling. The sample was visually
inspected again for obvious signs of integrity violation, (e.g.,
washout, trash, bottles, cans) and was discarded if it failed
inspection. Typically, a suitable core length sample was from H to
22 in., the maximum depth of the stainless steel box.

7121a

2.11

-------
2.3.2 Station Positioning

During samoling,. the vessel was anchored over the designated site using
Loran and radar positioning equipment. The Loran coordinates of the
site were recorded in the field notebook. These coordinate's were
periodically monitored, and the vessel repositioned as necessary to
adjus.t for any drift or anchor drag. Surface water at the area of
sample entry was visually inspected for any floating debris or oil
sheen. Samples were not taken if debris or sheen were seen. The corer
was lowered and triggered as described previously. Following sample
retrieval, the corer was raised and the sample box visually inspected.
If there was any indication of integrity failure, the sample was
rejected. A repeated failure to pass either debris, sheen, or sample
integrity inspections at a given anchor point resulted in a
repositioning of the vessel to new coordinates.

2.3.3 Sample Processing

Immediately upon collection, the sediment sample was processed in one
of several ways. If the sample was to be archived, it was placed in
either precleaned amber glass jars or precleaned, 4-in. diameter, 2-ft
length stove pipe tubes sealed with aluminum foil. The sample was
transferred directly from the core to these containers using stainless
steel trowels. The sediment core sample was manually segregated over
depth, placing approximately the upper third layer in one set of
containers, the middle third in another set, and the bottom third in a
third set of containers. Material that had come in contact with the
vessel deck was not used. Under no circumstances was the sediment
stirred, mixed, or otherwise homogenized in a manner which might
disrupt equilibrium conditions or unduly elevate particulates in the
interstitial water. These containers were then placed in storage
coolers on ice until archived. Samples for archiving were typically
placed in tiie freezer within 12 h of collection and frozen to
approximately -lo'C. Appropriate data sheets and chain-of-custody
forms were completed for each sample.

7121a

2.12

-------
If the sediment core sample was to be used for extraction, it was
transferred in a similar manner (using stainless steel trowels) to a
temporary, precleaned covered storage bucket, or placed directly into
one of three pressure extraction devices, which are described in
Section 2.3.4. Extracted interstitial water was collected in
precleaned 2 1 amber glass jars. In addition, 50-75 ml of methylene
chloride (ACS spectroscopic grade or better) was volumetrically added
to the extracted interstitial water as a preservative and to minimize
sample loss to glass walls. The extracted sediment was removed from
the teflon pressure extractors using stainless steel trowels and placed
in 2 1 amber glass jars. Both the extracted water and sediments were
placed -in storage coolers on ice for transfer to the laboratory for
analysis. Appropriate data sheets and chain-of-custody forms were
completed for each sample.

As noted in Section 2.3.1, overlying water samples were also
collected. Immediately upon collection, these samples were analyzed
for temperature, salinity, conductivity, and pH using a Yellow Springs
Instrument Company (YSI) Model 33 SCT meter and an Orion Model 231 pH
meter equipped with a Fischer standard gel-filled combination pH
electrode. These measurements were not made on the extracted
interstitial water due to the small volumes of interstitial water
collected. Subsampling of interstitial water for ancillary
measurements was avoided to provide the largest possible volumes for
total sample analysis for organic contaminants. The data for the
overlying water, however, did provide an indication of the interstitial
water conditions because the overlying water was collected from less
than 5 cm above the sediment water interface. All overlying water
samples were archived by placing in a freezer within 12 h of collection
and freezing to approximately -10*C. Appropriate data sheets and
chain-of-custody forms were completed for these samples.

7121a

2.13

-------
2.3.4 Pressure Extraction Equipment

Interstitial water was extracted from the sediment using customized
teflon pressure extractor equipment designed by Dr. Eric Crecelius of
Battelle Marine Research Laboratory at Sequim, Washington.^

Figure 2.3 is a schematic diagram of the equipment. The device was
operated as described below.

A precleaned, 4-in. diameter 0.45 u glass fiber filter was placed in
the bottom filter holder. The tube, or sidewall, was then positioned
over the filter and seated with a teflon Q-ring. The sediment to be
extracted was added until the tube was from one-fourth to three-fourths
full (approximately 0.5-2 1 of sediment). The tube lid, with a
matching 0-ring, was then placed over the four exterior ready-bolts,
sealing the sediment in the tube. The lid was tightened down using
four wing nuts on the ready-bolts: The lid contains the input line
from a medium pressure inert (nitrogen) gas source, and a safety
pressure release pop-up valve.

To operate the extractor, high purity nitrogen gas was fed from a
two-stage regulator to a bank of control valves, one valve for each
extractor tube. The pressure to this bank could be varied from 0 to
the maximum operating pressure of approximately 80 psiq. After setting
the operating pressure, the control valve was ODened, allowing the gas
to pass through a final line cleanup filter and into the extractor.
The pop-up valve was left open for a few moments to purge the system of
atmospheric gas. The pop-up valve was then closed to pressurize the
system. The high pressure gas was forced through the sediment, causing
the interstitial water to pass through the filter and subsequent teflon
water line in the bottom of the extractor to the sample collection
.jar. The first few milliliters of interstitial water sample were, not
collected, but were used to purge the interstitial water line.

Pressure was adjusted at the two-stage regulate, during the extraction

(a) Telephone conversations with Dr. Eric Crecelius, Battelle Marine
Research Laboratory, Sequim, Washington, September 1986.

7121a

2.14

-------
Teflon tube
body

Inert pressurized
gas

Extracted interstitial water

FIGURE 2.3. Pressurized Interstitial Water Extractor

2.15

-------
process to maximize interstitial water -flow. Maximization of flow was
usually accomplished by starting at a relatively low pressure, e.g.,
20 psig, and subsequently increasing the pressure to the maximum
operating pressure. After several hours, when the interstitial water
ceased to flow, or flowed at a minimal rate, the pressure to the system
was shut off, the pop-up valve was opened to release internal pressure,
and the lid was removed. As stated previously, the extracted sediment
was then carefully removed using a stainless steel trowel and placed in
2 1 or 1 gal sample jars. The equipment was then ready for cleaning
and reuse. A new filter was required for each extraction sequence.

2.3.5 Safety Plan

To satisfy corporate requirements and to ensure good, safe field
practices, a detailed safety plan was written prior to the cruise.

This plan addressed potential chemical exposure and risk as well as
standard safe-boating practices. The plan was reviewed and signed by
all field personnel. The plan also covered potential diving
activities, an option that was not exercised due to the s'atisfactory
operation of the sediment sampling equipment. A copy of the safety
plan is presented in Appendix B. All procedures identified in this
plan were followed during the sampling cruise.

7121a

2.16

-------
3.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS

This chapter describes the analytical methods that were used to
determine the contaminant concentrations in the sediment samples and
associated interstitial water samples. The analysis for trace organic
contaminants was performed by Analytical Resources Inc. (ARI), Seattle,
Washington, and the TOC and DOC measurements were made by AT-Amtest
Inc., Redmond, Washington. These laboratories were selected based on
their extensive experience in Puget Sound sediment analysis, their
proximity to the -study area, and cost effectiveness.

3.1	SAMPLE STORAGE AND EQUIPMENT PREPARATION

The dewatered sediment samples were delivered to the analytical
laboratory in large mouth 2 1 or 1 gal glass jars. Extracted
interstitial water samples were delivered to the laboratory in 2 1
amber glass jars. Sediment and water samples were stored in the dark
at 4"C from time of receipt at the laboratory until they were
solvent-extracted for analysis. Samples were typically extracted
within 48 h. All samples were extracted within 15 d of collection.

All glassware, sodium sulfate (NaS04), and 1aboratory utensils used
during the extraction were heated to 450"C for 6 h and/or rinsed with
clean methylene chloride (C^C^) prior to use.

3.2	OEWATERED SEDIMENT EXTRACTION

Each dewatered sediment sample was thoroughly stirred in the jar prior
to removing material for analysis. After homogenization, 30-50 g (wet
weight) of sediment was placed in a tared 300 ml beaker with
approximately 50 g of Na2S04. The sample was then covered with
100 ml of solvent (CH2Cl2/acetone [1:1], and spiked with the
base/neutral and Desticide/PC8 surrogates listed in Table 3.1.

7122a

3.1

-------
2

4

6

8

10

14

16

13

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44

46

48

50

51

53

55

57

59

61

63

65

67

69

71

73

75

77

79

81

82

84

86

TABLE 3.1. Sample Surrogates

Compound

Amount Added

Sediment

Intersti tial
Water

D5-Phenol (Q.M. = 71)

D4-2-Chloropheno1 (Q.M. = 132)
D4-2-Nitrophenol (Q.M. = 143)

D3-2,4-Dimethyl phenol (Q.M. = 125)
2,3,5,5-D4-pCresol
D3-2,4-Dichlorphenol (Q.M. = 167)
D2-4-Chloro-3-Methylphenol (Q.M. = 109)
D2-2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (Q.M. = 200)
D2-2,4,5-Trichlorophenol (Q.M. = 200)
D3-2,4-Dinitrophenol (Q.M. = 187)
D4-4-flitrophenol (Q.M. = 143)
D2-2-Methyl-4,6-Dinitrophenol (Q.M. = 200)
*C6-Pentachlorophenol (Q.M. = 256)
D8-Bis(2-Chloroethyl)Ether (Q.M. = 101)
1,3-Dichlorobenzene (Q.M. = 152)
D4-1.4 Dichlorobenzene (Q.M. = 152)
D4-l,2-Dichlorobenzene (Q.M. V 152)
D12-B1s(2-Chloroisopropyl)Ether (Q.M. = 131)
*C13-Hexachloroethane (Q.M. = 204)
D5-Nitrobenzene (Q.M. = 128)

06-Isophorone (Q.M. = 88)
D3-l,2,4-Trichlorobenzene (Q.M. = 183)
08-Maphthalene (Q.M. = 136)
0a-l,2,3-Trichlorobenzene (Q.M. = 183)
C4-Hexachlorobutadiene (Q.M. = 231)
D7-2-Chloronaphthalene (Q.M. = 169)
Q8-Acenaphthylene (Q.M. = 160)
C4-Hexach1orocycl opentadiene (Q.M. = 241)
D4-0imethylphthalate (Q.M. = 167)
03-2,6-Dinitrotoluene (Q.M. = 167)
QlO-Acenaphthene (Q.M. = 164)
03-2,4-0initrotoluene (Q.M. = 168)
010-Fluorene (Q.M. = 176)

05-4-Chlorophenylphenyl	ether (Q.M. = 209)
Q4-0iethyl phthalate (Q.M. = 153)
D8-8is(2-Chloroethyoxy)Methane (Q.M. = 97)
DIO-Ofphenyl amine (Q.M. = 179)

06-Nitrosodiphenyl	amine (Q.M. = 175)
010-1,2-0iphenyl hydrazine (Q.M. = 32)
C6-Hexachlorobenzene (Q.M. 292)
05-4-Bromophenyl Phenylether (Q.M. = 253)
010-Phenanthrene (Q.M. = 188)

010-Anthracene (Q.M. = 188)

80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
80 ug/sample
40 ug/sample
40 ug/sample
40 ug/sample
40 ug/samp1-
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug/samp
40 ug./ samp
40 ug/samp

8
8

ug/samp
ug/samp
8 ug/samp
8 ug/samp
8 ug/samp
8 ug/samp
8 ug/samp
8 ug/samp
8 ug/samp
8 ug/samp
8 ug/samp
8 ug/samp
8 ug/samp
4 Ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp
4 ug/samp

3.2

-------
38

89

91

93

95

97

98

100

102

104

106

108

110

112

114

116

118

TABLE 3.1. Sample Surrogates (Continued)

Compound

Amount Added

Sediment

Intersti ti al
Water

D8-Carbazole (Q.M. = 175)

D4-Di-N-Butyl Phthalate (Q.M. = 153)
DlO-Fluoranthene (Q.M. = 212)

DIO-Pyrene (Q.M. = 212)

D4-Benzyl 3utyl Phthalate (Q.M. = 153)
D8-8enzidine (Q.M. = 192)
012-Benzo(a)Anthracene (Q.M. =240)
D12-Chrysene (Q.M. = 240)
D8-3,3'-DichlorObenzi'Sine (Q.M. = 258)
D4-Bis(2-thylhexyl) Phthalate (Q.M. = 153)
D4-Di-N-0ctyl Phthalate (Q.M. = 153)
D12-Benzo(b)Fluoranthene (Q.M. = 264)
D12-Benzo(k)Fluoranthene (Q.M.-= 264)
D12-8enzo(A)Pyrene (Q.M. = 264)
D14-Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene (Q.M. = 292)
D14-Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene (Q.M. = 292)

Resp. for Indeno(l,2,3-CD)Pyrene
D12-Benzo(qhi)Perylene (Q.M. = 288)

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sannle	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

40 ug/sample	4

ug/sample

ug/sample

ug/sample

ug/sample

ug/sample

ug/sample

ug/sample

ug/sample.

ug/sample

ug/samole

ug/sample

ug/samole

ug/sample

ug/sample

ug/sample

ug/sample

40 ug/samole 4 ug/sample

3.3

-------
The sample, solvent, and surrogate mix was then stirred using a 3/4 in
ultrasonic probe (Branson Sonifer, 350 W) at full power using a
50 percent pulse for 3 min. The solvent was decanted through a glass
wool plug into a 300 ml Erlenmeyer flask. The stirring was repeated
twice with fresh solvent mixture. The comDosited extract was then
dried by passing it through a chromatography column containing
approximately 35 g of MaSO^. The dried extract was collected in an
assembled Kuderna-Danish (K-D) concentrator flask attached to a three
ball Snyder column and the solvent volume reduced to approximately 8 ml
on an 80"C water bath. The concentrator tube was removed from the K-D
flask and sample extract placed under a gentle stream of clean, drv
nitrogen and reduced to 2 ml. The extract was then cleaned uo using
gel permeation chromatography (GPC) as described in Section 3.4.

3.3	INTERSTITIAL WATER EXTRACTION

The entire aqueous interstitial water sample (300-500 ml) was placed in
a 2 1 separatory funnel and 60 ml of CH2C12 added. The sample was
spiked with base/neutral and pesticide surrogates (Table 3.1). The
sample was shaken vigorously for about 2 min, the water and CH2C1?
allowed to separate, and the solvent drawn off into a 300 ml Erlenmever
flask containing approximately 20 g of NaS04. The extraction was
repeated twice and the composited extract dried and concentrated to
1 ml using the same method as described in Section 3.2 for sediment
extracts. The sample extracts were stored in the dark at 4C pending
gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis. Analyses were
typically performed within 3 d of extraction, and in no cases later
than 5 d after extraction.

3.4	GEL PERMEATION CHROMATOGRAPHY OF SEDIMENT EXTRACTS

The sediment extract cleanup was performed to reduce the quantitv of
extraneous contaminants, including sulfur, in the extract. The method
used a chromatography system consisting of a Waters pump, a Reodyne
sample injector valve, a Waters refractive index detector connected to

7122a

3.4

-------
a strip chart recorder, and a Spectrum chromatography column. The

2.5 cm ID column was packed with 40 cm (bed height) BioBeads SX-3
(BioRad Inc.).

The column was eluted with	at 5 ml per min and calibrated

with a mixture of corn oil, bis-ethylhexylphthalate, and
pentachlorophenol. The entire sample (approximately 2 ml) was injected
and effluent was collected from 30 to 60 min after injection. The
collected sample from the GPC system (approximately 150 ml) was then
concentrated using a K-D concentrator flask on an 80C water bath to
approximately 5 ml, followed by sample reduction under a dry nitrogen
stream to 250 ul for GC/MS analysis.

3.5 GAS CHROMATQGRAPHY/MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS

The sample extracts	were analyzed for the PAH subset of contaminants

listed in Table 2.1	using the GC/MS isotopic dilution method after EPA

method 1625 (40 CFR	136 Appendix A). Specific instrument conditions
were as follows:

Gas Chromatograph	- Hewlett-Packard 5790 Injector Temp. 200C

Column	- 0.32 cm ID by 30 m DB-5 0.25 u phase thickness (J

and W) column connected directly to MS source
through transfer oven at 260C

Temperature Program - 40C (4 min) then 8C/min ramp to 310*C for 9 min

Mass Spectrometer - Finnigan 4000 with Incos Data System

Mass Range - 35 to 500 AMU
Scan Time - 1 sec

Sample extracts were concentrated to 250 ul by sap"vie reduction under a
dry nitrogen stream, and 1 ul of the reduced extract was injected into
the GC/MS. This sample volume resulted in detection limits in the

7122a

3.5

-------
range of 0.05-0.4 ppb for interstitial water and 4-123 ppb for sediment
depending on sample size and GC/MS resDonse. The interstitial water
detection limits compare favorably to the average detection 1imit of
0.1 ppb reported by Socha and Carpenter (1987).

3.6 GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/ELECTRON CAPTURE DETECTOR ANALYSIS

A one-tenth volume fraction of all the sediment sample extracts and

selected interstitial water extracts were analyzed for the pesticide
and PCB subset of contaminants on Table 2.1. Analysis was by gas

chromatograDhy/electron capture detector (GC/ECD) analysis after EPA
method 608 (40 CFR 136 Appendix A), following GPC cleanup and before
final concentration. The aliquot was diluted 1:2 with acetone and
cleaned up by passing it through an alumina (Activity III) column
(0.8 x 5 cm). The column was eluted with 10 ml of n-hexane:methylene
chloride (5:1). The 10 ml pesticide/PCB fraction was concentrated to
1 ml using nitrogen blowdown and analyzed on a Hewlett Packard 5890 gas
chromatograph using DB-5 megabore (0.32 mm ID x 15 cm) column with a
phase thickness of 1 urn. The temperature was programmed'from 140C
(1 min hold) to 250C at 3.5uC/min with a post temDerature of 270C for
10 min. The pesticide/PCBs were quantified using a single point
calibration with all standards run immediately before the analysis
runs. For a few samples, pesticide/PCB analyses were performed on a
separately extracted aliquot of interstitial water to which the
base/acid-neutral (BAN) surrogates required for GC/MS PAH analysis were
not incorporated. This procedure eliminated interference of the BAM
PAH surrogates in the GC/ECD analysis. In these cases approximate!-/
10 percent of the total interstitial water was separately extracted',

concentrated, cleaned up with alumina, and analyzed by GC/ECD using'the
methods described above.

7122a

3.6

-------
4.0 DISCUSSION AND RESULTS

This chapter presents the field survey results, a discussion of the
effectiveness of the sampling plan, the performance of the equipment
and onboard instrumentation, and the computational methods used to
determine the field partition coefficients for the nonpolar hydrophobic
chemicals measured in the sediments and interstitial water.

4.1	EFFECTIVENESS OF SAMPLING PLAN

The chosen station locations were accessible and easily located using
the electronic locating equipment. The sediment textures of samples
taken from these sites were within the expected range, i.e., primarily
consolidated silt and clay material characteristic of Elliott Bay. The
sediments collected off the Denny Way combined sewer overflow (CSO)
station contained extraneous material such as glass bottles, PVC pipe,
cans, and plastic bags. The presence of this material necessitated
resampling Stations 03, OS, and 12 to obtain satisfactory sediment
grabs. Resampling was.also required at Station 07 due to'the presence
of an oily sheen at the bottom of the'sediment core indicating an
extremely contaminated sample. The odor of the sample and the presence
nearby of ferry dock pilings suggested that the material was highly
contaminated with creosote residues. The number of stations occupied
and the type and number of samples collected are summarized in Table
4.1.

4.2	PERFORMANCE OF EQUIPMENT AND ONBOARD INSTRUMENTATION

The box corer functioned as anticipated; core depths were approximately
14 to 18 in. The bottom seal plate on the removable stainless steel
box, however, was difficult to hammer into place. Instead of removing
the sample box intact and disassembling it, or subsampling with hand
corers, investigators placed the core sample on a clean portion of the
fiberglass deck and subsampled with stainless steel shovels.

7142a

4.1

-------
TABLE 4.1. Summary of Sampling Activity

	Number	

Day 1	Day 2 Day 3 Total

Date	(3/25/87) (3/26/87) (3/27/87)

Locations
occupi ed

Stations occupied

Sediment cores
collected

Overlying water
samples

Sediment samples
archived

Overlying water
archived lb)

Samples extracted/
shipped for
analysis

Cores shipped
off-site l^

(a)	For Day 1 stations: 1, 2, 3, 4
For Day 2 stations: 5, 6, 7, 8
For Day 3 stations: 9, 10, 11, 12

(b)	Located at Envirosphere's Offices, Bellevue, WA, includes
composites and individual horizons.

(c)	To ARI Laboratories.

(d)	To Dr. I.H. Suffet, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA.

4 4	4	12

(see	footnote a)

6 9	7	22

6 9	4	19

15 15	io.	40

6 9	4	jg

0	3	2

7142a

4.2

-------
During this subsampling, care was taken to minimize disruption of the
sediment and core horizons. The cores taken could readily be divided
into upper third, middle third, and bottom third using this procedure.
A few cores (two or three) were archived by these horizons; the balance
were archived as composites.

The sediment extraction equipment did not work as well as expected.
The equipment (three tubes) was originally reported to be able to
extract approximately 0.5-2 1 per hour of interstitial water, based on
previous operating experience for similar sedimentary material. The
actual rates were significantly lower, typically around 0.1-0.15 1 per
hour, with a maximum rate of about 0.3 1 per hour in the more sandy,
coarse sediment encountered at Station 05. As a consequence, the
collection of interstitial water required excessive time .(greater than
3 h/sample). The sample volumes were only about one-third of the
originally anticipated quantities (approximately 0.4-0.8 1 instead of
the estimated 1.5-2.0 1). The lower extraction rates were attributed
to the packing of the fine mud material on the 0.45u filter, forming a
semi-impermeable plug. The low extraction rates were the'limiting
factor in sample processing and constrained the number of samples
processed for analysis. Reducing the sediment quantity loaded in the
extraction tubes and adjusting the overpressure (initially at 20 psig
and increasing incrementally to a final value of approximately 80 psig)
slightly improved extraction rates. These alterations in procedure
increased the extraction equipment maintenance and required continual
monitoring and changing/reloading of filters. While the basic
extraction procedure is sound and workable, some operational and design
modification, as suggested in Chapter 5, could improve overall
performance and thereby increase the volume of interstitial water
extracted within a reasonable period of time.

4.3 SAMPLE ARCHIVING

Raw sediment samples were archived in precleaned glass jars with teflon
sealed lids. Sediment was transferred directly from the core into the
jars, using stainless steel trowels. An alternate procedure involved

7142a

4.3

-------
filling 2-ft lengths of 3- or 4-in. diameter metal stove pipes with the
sediments. The tubes were precleaned with spectroscopic grade
methylene chloride prior to use. Heavy gauge aluminum foil and duct
tape was used to seal the bottom of the tube, and the tube was placed
upright on the deck and then directly filled with sediment using the
trowels. The top of the tube was also sealed with heavy gauge aluminum
foil and duct tape. The tubes fit horizontally in a standard size ice
chest for storage until freezing. Each tube contained approximately
3-5 1 of sediment. The use of these tubes eliminated concern over
breakage during freezing.

4.4	MEASUREMENT OF ANCILLARY PARAMETERS

Due to the difficulties with the extraction equipment, there was
insufficient interstitial water to measure in situ ancillary
parameters. Therefore, these quantities were measured in a subsample
of the collected overlying water, which should exhibit similar
characteristics for the given parameters because the sample can be
considered as representative of the chemistry of the sediment/water
interface. Table 4.2 presents the results of these measurements.

These values are consistent with those reported from previous studies
(e.g., Romberg et al. 1984) and reflect the characteristic
well-buffered, cold, moderately saline marine water of a typical
industrialized embayment in Paget Sound. The lowest conductivity and
salinity values were measured at Station 09 in the Salmon Bay Canal
area, reflecting the conditions resulting from the freshwater input
from the Lake Washington/Lake Union Ship Canal lock system As the
data illustrate, there is little variation in pH, conductivity/
salinity, and temperature values among the sampling stations.

4.5	CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

Due to the small volumes of interstitial water, only selected sample
were submitted for analysis. The stations and cores analyzed and the

7142a

4.4

-------
TABLE 4.2. Supporting Parameter Data from Overlying Bottom Water

Oepth	Conductivity Salinity Temperature^ ^

Station Core Date Tine (m) (units) Umhos)	(pot) (*C)

01

02

3/25

10:00

IS



01

01

3/25

10:19

16



02

03

3/25

11:40

35



03

04

3/25

12:30

16



03

05

3/25



16



04

06

3/25

14:30

21



05

07a

3/26

7:58

23

7.57

05

07 b

3/26

8:01

23

7.30

06

08

3/26

9:32

16

7.92

06

09

3/26-

10:19

16

7.87

OS

10

3/26

11:10

16

7.79

07

12

3/26

12:58

20

7.70

07

13

3/26

13:55

20

7.70

07

14

3/26

14:35

20

7.64

08

15

3/26

15:10

13

7.74

09

16

3/27

8:05

12

7.30

10

I7, ,

3/27

..

27

7.76

10

18

3/27

11:05

27

7.75

11

19

3/27

12:01

12

7.87

No. samples







12

Range









7.64-;

Arithmetic Mean







7.77

Standard

deviation (a)





0.08

27,400

25.0

11.5

27,000

22.5

10.0

28,000

25.2

9.2

28,300

25.4

0.9

28,100

25.3

9.5

28,900

26.1

10.2

29,000

28.0

8.5, 9.0

29,000

23.1

8.2, 8.0

23,300

27.6

8.7, 8.5

28,700

27.8

8.6, 8.5

28,900

26.7

9.1, 9.0

29,600

26.2

10.8, 10.5

29,900

26.7

10.1, 9.7

30,100

26.9

10.0

29,900

27.0

9.9, 9.8

22,800

21.2

7.9, 8.6

30,100

27.8

8.9, 9.3

31,800

28.1

11.0, 11.2

30,500

27.7

10.1, 10.0



18

18

22,800-

21.2-

7.9-11.5

30,500

23.1



28,583

26.2

9.5

1,690

1.83

0.91

(a) The pH values were not measured the first day due to defective probe.

{bl !l! ?hr?,^te!!!PeratUr*s ape Ppesented, the first value is from the
thermal conductivity device on the SCT meter and the second value Is from the

approximate?yC*0^2 C in'lclu^cy^ P" TOter- Bth deVl"S 3re cons'"de^ "e

(c)	This water sample was analyzed approximately 1/2 h after collection. Results

SSESTupS1tco?^^n"mP-rab,e WUh ath" *'*  *<

(d)	Station summaries.

7142a

4.5

-------
analyses performed are summarized- in Table 4.3. There were a total of
six sediment and four interstitial water analyses for both PAH and
pesticides/PCBs, an additional interstitial water analysis for PAH
only, six sediment analyses for TOC, and five interstitial water
samples for DOC. Appendix A contains the raw data from these
analyses. Tables 4.4 and 4.5 present the contaminant concentrations in
sediments and interstitial water that were above their detection
limits, i.e., "hits" only.

The data in Table 4.4 show several trends. Contaminant concentrations
are generally lower'than those reported in the earlier study used as a
basis for site selection (Romberg et al. 1984). The lower
concentrations may be attributed to several factors: 1) nonrepresent-
ative sampling due to smaller number of samples collected and the high
patchiness of contamination in Elliott Bay as noted by Romberg et al.
(1984), and 2) recent pollution control measures and source reduction
together with natural degradation, particularly for the PAHs.

The relative magnitude of. the contaminant levels observed in Romberg
et al. (1984) the recent Metro study is confirmed by this work. For
example, the unusually high PAH concentrations in sediments off Piers
54 and 56 (Station 07) were verified, as well as the elevated levels of
PAHs in Salmon Bay (Station 09). The high PC8 concentrations off the
Denny Way CSO (Stations 03, 06, 11) and the absence of PCBs in Salmon
Bay (Station 09) were also corroborated.

Pesticides were not measured above detection limits in any of the

samples, thus confirming the relatively low levels reported in previous

studies (Pavlou and Oexter 1977) as well as the apparent patchiness of

the pesticide contamination in Elliott Say noted in Romberg et al

(1984). None of the samples taken for this study appear to have hit a
pesticide contaminated area.

7142a

4.6

-------
TABLE 4.3. Summary of Chemical Analyses^

Sediment PAH/ Sediment	Interstitial Water

Station Core Pestic1de/PC3 TOC Full Suite PAH only 00C

03	05	x	g	X

06	03	X	T	X

07	12

09	16

10	17
U	19

,(&)

(a) X	>	complete test

D		complete test	in	duplicate

T s	complete test	in	triplicate

0		complete tost	in	quadruplicate

(b)

Sample analysis repeated at oreconcentratlon to 50 al of 4:1 concentrated

ex tract

4.7

-------
TABLE 4.4. Concentrations of Detected Contaminants in Extracted Sediment, ug/kg

Station

Comoound

03

06 <4>

07

09

09 duo

10

U (4)

Range

Mean (b)

3ange

IRomoerg et al

naphthalene

56

47

283

42

46

--

"

42-283

97

55-1570

acenaphthylene

55

59

228

109

103





59-228

113.

6.1-3272

acenaonthene

--

--

260

--





--

--



38.9-304

f1uorene

37

35

357

64

38

--



54-357

136

57-2094

pnenanthrene

329

294

2121

534

522

269

137

137-2121

608

489-12,989

anthracene

143

151

1010

216

196

161

94

94-1010

282

133-7651

fluoranthene

617

934

2880

1150

1130

399

223

228-2880

1048

1045-39,145

oyrene

375

1060

8340

1570

1570

698

293

293-8340

2058

1325-30,249

benzo( a) anthracene

272

364

1400

563

590

213

103

103-1400

501

226-13,701

chrysene

378

480

2010

746

734

311

163

163-2010

689

634-26,690

benzoi b)f1uoranthene

280

293

1640

441

209

302

13S

135-1640

471

1142-39,112

benzoi k)f1uoranthene

428

368

2330

737

321

237

139

139-2330

659

1142-39.112

benzof a)oyrene

445

331

1350

751

791

412

165

165-1850

678

530-16.913

dibenzoi a,h)anthracene

137

124

361

no

149

42

28

28-361

136

43-5759

i ndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

138

192

700

359

344

131

65

55-700

290

122-32,722

5enzo(ghiloerylene

211

221

367

515

460

213

69

59-367

271



















265-74,607

2-methylnaohthalene



39

161

--

"

--

--

39-161

100



dibenzofuran

..



163













aroclor-1248
aroclor-1254
aroclor-1260

520
718
370

430
560
300

410

127

220

430-520
127-748
300-370

475
573
338

(a) Pesticides/PCSs run qn seoarate aliquot, eliminating SAH surrogate interference,
fbl Sased only on cnose stations exhibiting values above detection Units.

(c)	The range of values is far measurements aOove detection limits for saooles collected
Elliott Bay.

(d)	Values corrected for trace amount in method ft lank.

5.76-981

44.5-1550

23.6-1285

We same locations within

4.8

-------
TABLE 4.5. Concentrations of Detected Contaminants
in Extracted Interstitial Water, ug/l

Stati on^a'

Compound

03

06

07

09

11

naphthalene

0.09

0.04

0.06

0.14 0.1 (c)

anthracene

pyrene

phenanthrene

0.2 (t>) -
0.3 (c) o.08
0.1

0.22

fluoranthene

0.2

(a)	Interstitial water was not analyzed for Station 10 as results from
other stations and Station 10 sediment analysis indicated no
contaminants would be detected.

(b)	Values corrected for trace amount in method blank.

(c)	Yalue uncorrected for trace amount in method blank due to
detection limit boundary.

7142a

4.9

-------
The lower sediment contaminant concentrations, coupled with the smaller
than expected sample volumes of interstitial water, resulted in the
reduction of the number and types of contaminants detected in the
interstitial water. As shown in Table 4.5, a total of 11 "hits" for
five PAHs (naphthalene, phenanthrene, pyrene, anthracene, and
fluoranthene) were reported. Given the paucity of field-determined
sediment/water partition coefficients and of field data on interstitial
water contamination (Socha and Carpenter 1987, Brownawell and
Farrington 1986), these results, although limited, do provide
additional and valuable information.

To test the effect of the extracted water volume on our ability to
detect contaminant concentrations in interstitial water, the following
test was performed on the interstitial water extract for Station 07. A
4:1 preconcentration extract (0.25 ml) was further concentrated down to
50 ul and directly injected into the GC/MS. Hits and corresponding
concentrations were determined for 9 PAHs (Appendix A) in this sample.
While this technique is not suitable for general quantification due to
inadequate accuracy and precision, it does suggest the presence of
these compounds at lower-than-detection levels and argues for a larger
sample of interstitial water. An increase in the sample volume by a
factor of 2 or 3 should be sufficient to measure the ambient levels of
contaminant in interstitial water using currently available analytical
methodology. Suggested modifications to the IW extractor that would
provide this volume are discussed in Section 5.2

The relationship between interstitial water DOC and sediment TOC was
also examined. Using a computerized curve fitting routine, geometric,
exponential, linear, and polynomial regressions were run for the five'
paired TOC-DOC data sets. No satisfactory relationship was found
Only second order or higher polynomial regressions yielded coefficients
of determinate (r ) values greater than 0.45 with none above 0 85
A similar test r, the data set (16 pairs) of Brownawell and Farringion
1986) again showed no obvious relationship between interstitial water
DOC and sediment T0Cr with all r2 values less than 0.1.

7142a

4.10

-------
4.6 FIELD-DETERMINED PARTITION COEFFICIENTS

Using the data summarized in Tables 4.4 and 4.5 with the TOC data in
Appendix A, field-determined organic carbon-normalized sediment/water
partition coefficients were calculated for naphthalene, phenanthrene,
pyrene, anthracene, and fluoranthene. The following relationship was
used to compute these quantities:

C*	K

Koc = db x TOC x 100 = TTTC x 100	(3)

uw

where K = the organic carbon-norraalized sediment/water

Uv#

partition coefficient

Kd = the dry weight normalized sediment water partition
coefficient

C* = the concentration of contaminant x in the
sediment, ug/kg

Cx s the concentration of contaminant x in the
w

interstitial water (extracted pore water), ug/l
TOC = the total organic carbon content in percent

The data used in this calculation and the resulting partition

coefficients are summarized in Tables 4.6 through 4.10. Also included

in these tables are the quantity of dissolved organic carbon (DOC)

measured in the interstitial water, the applicable detection limit for

interstitial water (DLj^) as determined when the samples were

analyzed, and the projected interstitial water concentrations

(IW . ) for samples which had corresponding sediment contaminant
proj 	...

data but no detectable interstitial water concentrations. The latter
quantity was computed to test whether the lack of detection of that
contaminant in the interstitial water was due to analytical artifacts

7142a

4.11

-------
TABLE 4.6. Summary of Field-Determined Sediment/Water
Partition Coefficients for Naphthalene

Sed.

Station Cone. I^Was.
Uo. (ug/kg) Ug/1)

TOC 00C
(fract.) (fract.

*d  *-0C , 0LIW *Mproj,
x 103 x 1Q3 (ti.g/1) Ug/U

03

55

0.09

0.0197

MM

0.733

37.2

0.06

06

47

:jd

0.0261

0.000181



--

0.1

07

233

0.04

0.0509

0.000108

7.03

139

0.04

09

44

0.06

0.0095

0.000096

0.733

77.2

0.06

10

NO

MM

0.0164

'0.000075

--

--

_ _

11

NO

ND

0.00787

0.000045

....



0.2

0.02

MO
NO

Geometric mean

1.56

73.6

sed. conc.	=	measured concentration in the sediment

IMnieas.	"	measured concentration in the interstitial water

TOC	*	total organic carbon content of the sediment, drv weiahi-

DOC	*	dissolved organic carbon content of the interstitial water

Kd	a	unnormalized sediment/water partition coefficient

Koc	=	sediment water partition coefficient normalized to sediment TOC

OLiw	=	detection limit in the interstitial water	sediment iuu

IUproj.	=	thef%fical ?0r?je"fel"terstU1al concentration calculated
from Koci iOC, and sed. conc.

NO	=	not detected

MM	=	not measured

7142a

4.12

-------
TABLE 4.7. Summary of Field-Determined Sediment/Water
Partition Coefficients for Phenanthrene

Station
Mo.

Sed..

Conc.

UgAg)



TOC

{fract.)

DOC

(fract.)


-------
TABLE 4.8. Summary of Field-Determined Sediment/Water
Partition Coefficients for Pyrene

Station
No.

Sed.

Conc.

Ug/kg)

Ityneas.
Ug/iT

TOC

(fract.)

OOC

(fract.)

Kd ,
x 1Q3

Koc ,

X 103

OLlU
(ug/l)

Wproj.

(ug/l1

03

375

;io

0.0197

riM

--



0.08

0.075

05

1,060

0.3
-------
TABLE 4.9. Summary of Field-Determined Sediment/Water
1 Partition Coefficients for Anthracene

03

143

M0

0.0197

HM

--



:.;a

0.13

06

151

0.1

0.0261

0.000181

1.51

57.5

0.1

--

07

1,010

ND

0.0509

0.000103

--



0.08

0.35

09

204

MO

0.0095

0.000096



--

0.05

0.37

10

161

NM

0.0164

0.000075

--

--



0.17

11

94

NO

0.00787

0.000045



	

. 0.2

0.2

measured concentration in the sediment

measured concentration in the interstitial water

total organic carbon content of the sediment, dry weight

dissolved organic carbon content of the interstitial water

unnormalized sediment/water partition coefficient

sediment water partition coefficient normalized to sediment TQC

detection limit in the interstitial water

theoretical projected interstitial concentration calculated

from Koc. rOC, and sed. conc.
not detected
not measured

7142a

sed. conc.	*

iw,eafjc	

ooc	.

*d	*

K0c	"

DLiw	*

*wproj.	

NO	*

NM	

4.15

-------
TABlt 4.10. Summary of Field-Determined-Sediment/Water
Partition Coefficients for Fluoranthene

^ ZSIvVm-

03

517

fJO

0.0197

NM

--

--

0.08

0.18

06

934

0.2

0.0251

0.000181

4.57

178

0.2'



07

2,880

NO

0.0509

0.000108





0.08

0.32

09

1,140

MO

0.0095

0.000096

--



0.06

0.67

10

399

NM

0.0154

0.000075

--

--

--

0.14

11

223

UD

0.00787

0.000045

--



0.2

0.16

sed. conc.	*	measured concentration in the sediment

I^meas	3	measured concentration in the interstitial water

TOC	=	total organic carbon content of the sediment, dry weight

00C		dissolved organic carbon content of the interstitial water

K
-------
or whether the contaminant was lower than the detection limit. The

IWnrni- was computed from Equation (3) by setting K at the
K ' U'J 	oc

geometric mean value listed on the tables and using the measured TOC
normalized sediment concentrations for the compound at the designated
location. In samples where the contaminants were not detected, the
projected IW concentrations were not consistently lower than the
detection limit (DL); however, the projected concentrations were very
close to the detection limit where the uncertainty of the analytical
method may be a factor in the reliability of the value reported. The
use of the mean partition coefficient in these calculations therefore
might not be sufficient to account for these inconsistencies, i.e.,
predict a lower than DL concentration, due to the uncertainty in the
Koc and the close range of the measured concentration to the
detection limit. One can therefore conclude that using Equation (3) to
estimate the undetected concentration is not unreasonable, within the
expected field and analytical uncertainty.

Table 4.11 provides a comparison of the results of these.field-derived
partitioning coefficients with the.previously reported values (Pavlou
et al. 1987). The mean TOC value for each station was used in Equation
(3). For verification purposes, both the 50 percentile (mean) K

oc

values and associated 95 percent confidence intervals as reported by
Pavlou et al. (1987) are included. It can be seen that the
field-determined marine water partition coefficients are in agreement
with the median predicted values within less than an order of
magnitude. This agreement is a good demonstration of the environmental
applicability of the EP method particularly when it is recognized that
the predicted Koc values have been estimated primarily from
freshwater data.

The results for Station 06 (see Tables 4.7-4.10) exhibit extremely good
agreement with the predicted KQC values. The slightly lower KQC
values at Station 06 relative to the ones determined at other stations
might be attributed to the higher dissolved organic carbon in the
interstitial water at this station (approximately 2-3 times that at

7142a

4.17

-------
TABLE 4.11. Comparison of Field-Determined and

Predicted Partition Coefficients for
Selected Nonpolar Hydrophobic Chemicals

Number of	Pavlou et al. 1987

Contaminant

Sampl es
(Stations)

log'3)
Koc

a

50 percentile
log Koc (b)

a

Ranged'

Naphthaiene

3

4.87

0.23

3.52

0.39

2.88-4.16

Phenanthrene

3

5.20

0.36

4.22

0.55

3.32-5.12

Pyrene

3

5.77

0.49

4.88

0.43

4.18-5.59

Anthracene

1

*.75



4.42

0.58

3.47-5.37

F1 uoranthene

1

5.25



5.31

0.70

4.15-6.46

a is the standard deviation.

(a)	The value reported is the arithmetic mear, of the log value

(b)	Source is Table 3.3 of Pavlou et al. (1937).

(cT Range is defined from the 5 to 95 percentile values of the K

distribution (Table 3.3 in Pavlou et al. 1987), which approximates the 95
percent confidence interval.

7142a

4.18

-------
other locations). The lower K	 values are not unreasonable since it

oc

is expected that increasing the 00C content would enhance the
dissolution of PAH from the particulate matrix into the aqueous phase
(Geschwend and Wu 1985). The better agreement with the predicted Kqc
values may be associated with the fact that many laboratory-determined
K values have been performed under high DOC and/or high particulate

Uv

conditions (Lyman and Loreti 1987).

To further evaluate the field Kqc values, cumulative probability

distributions were generated for the field measured K values. The

oc

results of these analyses are presented in Table 4.12 and Figure 4.1.

These quantities are compared with the predicted K distributions

oc

(Pavlou et al. 1987). As can be seen from these data, there is good

agreement between the field and predicted K distributions.

oc

The field-determined KQC values also agree within approximately 0.5

to 1 order of magnitude with a recent study by Socha and Carpenter

(1987), who reported field-determined Kqc values for 11 PAHs from

sediments collected at two sites in Puget Sound (Eagle Harbor and

central basin). The KQC values were determined from the Eagle Harbor

site, as interstitial water PAH concentrations were below detection

limits for the central basin samples. Table 4.13 provides a comparison

of these results with the present study results. The K values

oc

reported by Socha and Carpenter are lower. The lower values may be
attributed to their gentle stirring of the samples prior.to
interstitial water extraction, or their extraction of the water by
centrifugation, both of which could elevate microparticulates and DOC,
subsequently increasing apparent interstitial water PAH
concentrations. Unfortunately, Socha and Carpenter did not measure
interstitial water DOC, due to the small sample sizes, and these
hypotheses cannot be verified. The PAH contamination in Eagle Harbor
sediments was also 1 to >2 orders of magnitude higher than this study,

7142a

4.19

-------
TABLE 4.12. Comparison of Field.Measured	, ,

Kqc and Predicted K Distributions^3'

'Uontnalene	'henantnrgng ?vrne	 Antnracene	"1 uorantnene

L9 Koc

Parameter	field	predicted field	Dredicted field predicted	field!t>)predicted	field'B)oredicted

5 percentile	4.4	2.88	4.5	3.32	4.8 4.18	4.7 3,47	5,2 4.16

95 percentile	5.2	4.16	5.7	5.12	6.6 5.59	4.8 5.37	5,J 6.4fi

Median	4.8	3.52	5.2	4.22	5.7 4.88	4.8 4.42	5.3 5.3J	

Standard	0.26	0.39	0.37	0.55	0.54 0.43	0.009 0.58	0.009 0.70
deviation

(a)	Previously predicted values are presented In Pavlou et al. (1987).

(b)	Single KQC value selected as median. The distribution and standard deviation	c	.	.
sediment foC measurements. "anaara deviate comes from vanaOilUv in

7142a

4.20

-------
NAPHTHALENE

1-

	O

1	1

1

1





PHENANTHRENE



,	

1	

_o	

1	M	1

1
H





PYRENE





1

1	Cr-

1x

		

1





ANTHRACENE







0	

H





FLUORANTHENE





1	

1*



O	

1

1

















2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0

I-	1 FIELD, THIS STUDY

I	*	1 FIELD, SOCHA & CARPENTER (1987)

I	OI PREDICTED

FIGURE 4.1. Comparison of Field K0c and Predicted Kqc Ranges

-------
TABLE 4.13. Comparison of Field.-Measured PAH Koc Value's

	Log Knr 	

Compound	Present Study	Socha and Carpenter (1987)

Na-phthalene

4.87

NM

Phenanthrene

5.20

4.59

Pyrene

5.77

4.67

Anthracene

4.76

NM

FT uoranthene

5.25

4.79

1,2 Benzofl uorene

NM

5.46

Benzo(a)anthracene

ND

5.49

Chrysene

ND

5.50

Benzo(e)pyrene

NM

o.07

8enzo(a)pyrene

ND

5.81

Perylene

NM

5.49

Benzofluoranthenes

ND

5.67

Benzo(g,h,i)perylene

ND

5.15

NM = not measured - analysis was not performed for this compound.
MO = not detected - compound not detected in interstitial water.

7142a

4.22

-------
hence additional K values were determined. Socha and Carpenter

oc

also employed different contaminant extraction procedures (e.g.,
concentration on XAD-2 resins), which -may introduce additional
variability on sample recovery and contribute to the uncertainty of the
results. Given all of the above differences, the agreement between the
two investigations is fairly good.

In summary, the field-determined K values for the five PAH
sediment/water matched data sets, (napthalene, phenanthrene, pyrene,
anthracene, and fluoranthene) confirm the order of magnitude estimates
made by laboratory-determined Kqc values. These results, although
based on limited field measurements, suggest that the EP approach is a
verifiable and hence valid method for predicting interstitial water
concentrations of contaminants in marine and freshwater systems.

7142a

4.23

-------
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter summarizes the conclusions of this study and-presents
general and specific recommendations for follow-up work.

5.1 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The objective of this study was to determine the validity of the
equilibrium partitioning approach as app.lied to field sediments and
interstitial water samples. The methods and procedures for the
sampling and extraction of sediment and associated interstitial water,
and the analytical procedures for direct measurement of hydrophobic
organic contaminants in these phases, were also evaluated as part of
the reconnaissance study. The resulting contaminant concentrations
measured in the phases were used to develop preliminary field K

oc

values. These values were compared with previously predicted values
(Pavlou et ah 1987).

Key observations wefe as follows:

	Sampling with the large box corer proved to be a rapid and
effective means of collecting sediment samples of sufficient
vo 1 ume.

	Pressurized sediment interstitial water extraction equipment,
while conceptually sound, will require some design modification
prior to future use. However, the extractor does appear to be
superior to centrifugation techniques used in other studies (Socha
and Carpenter 1987).

	Using 1:4 extract preconcentration, analysis of sediment and
interstitial water sample extracts by isotop.u dilution method gas
chromatography/mass spectrometry for PAHs (a'cer EPA method 1625)
or gas chromatography/electron capture detection analysis for PCBs '
and pesticides (after EPA method 608) provided satisfactory

6825a

5.1

-------
detection limits with reproducible results. Larger interstitial
water volumes (2-4 1), however, are required to increase the
number of compounds that can be detected and quantified.
Detection limits were comparable to those reported in a previous
study (Socha and Carpenter 1987).

	Typical sampling rates indicate that approximately four stations
with two cores at each station can be reasonably sampled in one
sampling period (10 h).

	There is limited variation in the ancillary parameters of pH,
conductivity, salinity, and temperature throughout nearshore
Elliott Bay.

	There is a fair degree of variability and patchiness of PAH and
PC3 contamination in Elliott Bay sediments, with both groups of
contaminants widespread.

t Levefs of PAH and PCB contamination were generally lower than

those previously .reported, although general trends (patterns)

remained consistent with those reported from previous studies

(Romberg et al. 1934). Significant pesticide contamination was
not found.

 Median (50 percentile) field '
-------
The field determined Kqc values are generally slightly higher
than the predicted values but were within an order of magnitude or
less of the 95 percent confidence intervals. In addition, there
is reasonable agreement with the field log KQC values reported
by Socha and Carpenter (1937) of 4.59 for phenanthrene, 4.67 for
pyrene, and 4.79 for fluoranthene.

	Dissolved organic carbon may have an effect on K values by

oc

increasing apparent contaminant concentrations in the interstitial
water. There are insufficient data to statistically verify this
observation.

	No apparent straightforward relationship exists between sediment
TOC and corresponding interstitial water DOC, based on curve
fitting regression analysis.

Given the above observations, this reconnaissance study was successful,
and in view of the good agreement between the field and predicted
partition coefficients, the equilibrium partitioning theory appears to
be valid. A more intensive survey in both marine and freshwater
environments is recommended to obtain the necessary data for more
extensive validation for the EP approach.

5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

5.2.1 Sampling Equipment

As described in Section 2.3, the sampling equipment performed up to
expectations and was satisfactory, with one significant exception.

When fine sediments were encountered, the interstitial water extraction
tubes did not extract the water at a sufficiently high rate to keep
pace with sediment core collection. It is therefore recommended that
the extraction equipment be modified. The fundamental design concept
is sound, i.e., the water is extracted from the sediment with a minimum
of disruption and disturbance to the sediment. We recommend
maintaining the design, but modifying the equipment to increase the

6825a

5.3

-------
surface area of filter in contact with pressurized sediment and to
decrease overall pressure per unit area on the filter material, thus
reducing the potential for plugging. In addition, it is suggested that
the loading heights (depth of sediment) in the tubes be decreased. In
other words, we recommend the use of larger diameter, shorter tubes.
Pressure calibration curves should also be developed for various
texture sediments to optimize operating conditions. This calibration
would include operation under both fixed and variable pressures.
Finally, it is recommended that additional tubes be constructed and
that at least two banks of extractors (two gas cylinders, regulators,
and associated tubes) be available so that two independent samples can
be extracted simultaneously.

The box corer functioned up to expectations, and its continued use is
recommended. Seating the bottom plate on the sample box, however, was
quite difficult. We recommend the placement of the core directly on
the clean, fiberglassed deck for subsampling. The rate of damaging
(bending) the removable stainless steel boxes due to striking bottom
rocks and debris was higher than anticipated (two of three boxes in
2d). It is therefore recommended that additional core boxes be on
hand, and/or arrangements be made for quick repair.

5.2.2 Sample Processing

Using stainless steel trowels for the immediate, direct processing
(subsampling) of the sediment cores placed on the stern deck proved to
be very effective, and this procedure is recommended. The archiving of
samples in the stove pipe (Section 4.3) also appears to be a cost
effective alternative to numerous glass containers. The use of larger
(1-5 gal) metal containers (cans) should be investigated as a possible
more rapid and effective alternative. The objective would be to store
the core, to the extent possible, in discrete, intact segments without
resorting to time consurr.ng, elaborate sectioning procedures that are
n
-------
As previously noted, the volumes of extracted interstitial water were
not as great as desired. Using the recommended equipment
modifications, it is suggested that an attempt be made to extract
virtually all the sediment from a core, rather than a representative
subsample, and that interstitial water volumes be maximized, with an
upper goal approaching 2-4 1 per core. Alternatively, adjacent cores
could be pooled to achieve these volumes.

5.2.3 Sample Analysis/Analytical Methods

The analysis of the samples and the analytical methods proved to be
very satisfactory in terms of reliability and desired detection
limits. We therefore recommend no significant changes to the
procedures employed. It is recommended that spiked samples be tested
with the extraction equipment to see if statistically significant
losses are occurring on the filters and equipment surfaces, and if
recovery factors should be developed. Unfortunately,, this loss factor
is a universal problem when processing these nonpolar hydrophobic
compounds and could require an extensive effort to adequately quantify
these losses.

Some recent work by Hanchak and Suffet (1987) suggests that the use of
acetone in the solvent extractions may introduce certain artifacts.
Therefore, it is suggested that the use of pure methylene chloride,
methylene chloride/benzene, or methylene chloride/hexane (Tetra Tech
1986) rather than mixed solvent during sample extractions be considered.

6825a

5.5

-------
6.0 REFERENCES

Brownawell, 3.J., and J.W. Farrington. 1986. Biogeocherni stry of PCBs
in Interstitial Waters of a Coastal Marine Sediment. Geochiim'ca et
Cosmochimica Acta (50):157-169.

Code of Federal Regulations, Office of Federal Register. 1986. Title
40 Protection of the Environment, Part 136, Appendix A - Methods
for Organic Chemical Analysis of Municipal and Industrial
Wastewater. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Dexter, R.N. 1975. An Application of Equilibrium Adsorption Theory to
the Chemical Dynamics of Organic Compounds in Marine Ecosystems.
Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

Dexter, R.N., D.E. Anderson, E.A. Quinlan, L.S. Golstein, R.M.
Strickland, S.P. Pavlou, J.R. Calyton, Jr., R.M. Kocan, and
M. Landolt. 1981. A Summary of Knowledge of Puget Sound Related
to Chemical Contaminants. NOAA Tech. Memo OMPA-13. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Marine Pollution
Assessment, Boulder, Colorado.

Geschwend, P.M., and Shian-Chee Uu. 1985. On the Constancy of
Sediment-Water Partition Coefficients of Hydrophobic Organic
Pollutants. Environ. Sci. Technol. 19(1):90-96.

Hunchak, K., and I.H. Suffet. 1987. Analysis of Acetone-Hexane

Artifacts Produced in the Soxhiet Extraction of Solid Environmental
Samples. Journal of Chromatography. 392:185-198.

Kadeg, R.D., S.P. Pavlou, and A.S.. Duxbury. 1986. Elaboration of
Sediment Normalization Theory for Nonpolar Hydrophobic Organic
Chemicals. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Criteria and
Standards Division, Washington, D.C.

6826a

6.1

-------
Konasewich, D.E., P.M. Chapman, E. Gerencher, G. Vigers, arid
N. Trelear. 1932. Effects, Pathways, Processes, and
Transformation of Puget Sound Contaminants of Concern. . NOAA Tech.
Memo 0MPA-20. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Boulder, Colorado.

Krogslund, K. 1976. Data Report: R/V ONAR Cruises 552, 608, 615,
665, and R/V HOH 902. Hydrographic, Chemical and Biological
Measurements. Special Report No. 61, Ref. No. M75-135. Department
of Oceanography, University of Washington, Seattle., Washington.

Lyman, W.J., and C.P. loreti. 1987. Prediction of Soil and Sediment
Sorption for Organic Compounds - Final Report. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Monitoring and Data Support Division,

Washington, D.C.

Mai ins, D.C.-, B.8. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks, and H.O. Hodgins.
1980. Chemical Contaminants and Biological Abnormalities in
Central and Southern Puget Sound. NOAA Tech. Memo OMPA-2.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Marine
Pollution Assessment, Boulder, Colorado.

Pavlou, S.P., K.A. Krogslund, R.N. Dexter, and J.R. Clayton. 1973.

Data Report: R/V ONAR Cruises 434, 450, 502. Hydrographic,
Chemical and Biological Measurements. Special Report No. 54, Ref.
No. M73-81. Department of Oceanography, University of Washington,
Seattle, Washington.

Pavlou, S.P., and R.N. Dexter. 1977. Environmental Oynamics of
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) in Puget Sound: Interpretations
and Criteria Recommendations. Special Report No. 75, Department of
Oceanography, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

6826a

6.2

-------
Pavlou, S.P., R.N. Dexter, VI. Horn, and K.A. Krogslund. 1977.
Pol.ychlorinated Biphenyls in Puget Sound: Baseline Data and
Methodology. Special Report Ho. 74, Ref. No. M77-36. Department
of Oceanography, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

Pavlou, S., R. Kadeg, A. Turner, and M. March!ik. 1987. Sediment
Quality Criteria Methodology Validation: Uncertainty Analysis of
Sediment Normalization Theory for Nonpolar Organic Contaminants.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Criteria and Standards
Division, Washington, D.C.

Romberg, G.P., S.P. Pavlou, R.F. Shokes, W. Horn, E.A. Crecelius, P.
Hamilton, J.T. Gunn, R.D. Muench, and J. Vinelli. 1984. Toxicant
Pretreatment Planning Study Technical Report CI: Presence,
Distribution and Fate of Toxicants in Puget Sound and Lake
Washington. Metro Toxicant Program Report No. 6A. Water Quality
Division, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, Washington.

Socha, S.B., and R. Carpenter. 1987.' Factors Affecting Pore Water
Hydrocarbon Concentrationsin Puget Sound Sediments. Geochimica et
Cosmochimica Acta (51):1273-1284.

Stober, Q.J., and K.K. Chew. 1984.	Renton Sewage Treatment Plant

Project: Duwamish Head -- Final	Report for the Period (July to 31

December, 1984). FRI-UW-8417 --	University of Washington, School

of Fisheries, Fisheries Research	Institute, Seattle, Washington.

Tetra Tech, Inc. 1985. Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Remedial
Investigation  Final Report. TC-3752 (2 vol. plus Appendices
I-IV) EPA-910/9-15-134a,b. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, Washington.

Tetra Tech, Inc. 1986. Puget Sound Estuary Program  Recommended

Protocols for Measuring Selected Env ,'ronmenta 1 Variables in Puget .
Sound -- Final Report. TC-3991-04. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue,
Washington.

6826a

6.3

-------
APPENDIX A
ORIGINAL DATA

-------
am test inc.

RECEIVED
MAY i o 1987

ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY
sums

CLIENT: Envirosphere

REPORT TO: Mr. Roger Kadeg

10900 HE Eighth Street, Suite 1600
Bellevue, WA 98004-4405

14603 N.E.87tli  REDMOND. WASHINGTON 98053  206/885 1664
ANALYSIS REPORT

DATE RECEIVED: 4/7/87
DATE REPORTED: 5/12/87

Laboratory
Sample Nos.

Client

Identification

TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON IN SEDIMENT

Total Organic Carbon
(Dry Wt. %)*

703553

703554

703555

703556

703557

703558

03-BX-05-C4A

06-BX-08-C4

07-BX-12-C3

09-BX-16-C4

10-BX-17-C4

11-BX-19-C4

1.86, 1.83, 2.01, 2.17
2.67, 2.56, 2.60
4.99, 5.18
0.96, 0.94
1.47, 1.99, 1.47
0.76, 0.87, 0.73

*Samples were oven dried at 60C.

Cont inued

-------
At

-2-

CLIENT: Envirosphere
REPORT TO: Mr. Roger Kadeg

DATE RECEIVED: 4/7/87
DATE REPORTED: 5/12/87

Laboratory

Sample

Numbers

703513

703514

703515

703516

703517

DISSOLVED ORGANIC CARBON IN SEDIMENT

Client

Identification

Sample
Weight
(gins.)

06-BR-08	A St B Composite

07-BR-12	A & B Composite
O.'-BF -16

10-BR-17	A & B Composite

11-BR-19	A & B Composite

1,040.

910.

1,080.

1,080.
680.1

1,080.
630. 1

REPORTED BY

SPM/pb

JJ

Shawn P. Moore



Extract

Volume

(mis.)

95.

85.

77.

115.
73. 1

133 .
81. 1

Dissolved
Organic
Carbon
(mg/1)

181.

108 .

96.

80.
69. 1

50.
40. )

-------
ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC,

3008-B 16th W.

SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577	_

i Method Blank Sediment

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

Lot? temple iD Nc
Dnlft Received:
C V h c*'r^Ctc195 1

205-99-2

flenzo( b)fluoranthene

101 u

69'S 1

<>07-08-9

Rorrot kMlouranthene

i oo u

|

i SO-32-6

i*en?ot atovrene

11 s u

19% 1

15-70-3

niaenzo( a,n/anthracene

i ">? 11
1 I . w

! 603 !

| 107-T0-5

imnenoi 123-cd*ovrene '

! 10*4 M

1 ftA
-------
! aDoratorv Name: ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.	i

Client: ENViRQSPHEP.E	! Methods lank

i ID-	721MB3	I	Sediment

Soil/Sediment

ORGAN ICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTlClDES/PCSs

Date Received;	NA

Oate Extracted:	3/28/87

Oate Analyzed:	4/ \ /87

Conc/Dil Factor:	l to 20

Percent Moisture (decanted):	0.0

CAS Number

GPC Cleanup: NO
Separatory Funnel Extraction: NO
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction:
Surrogate Recovery: 152%

ug/L

319-84-6

Aloha-BHC

16.0 U

319-85-7

Beta-8HC

16.0 U

319-86-8

Delta-BHC

16 0 U

58-89-9

Gamma-8HC (Lindane)

16.0 U

76-44-3

Heotacnlor

16.0 U

309-00-2

Alarm

16.0 U

1024-57-3

Heotacnlor Eooxide

16.0 U

959-98-8

Endosulfan l

16.OU

60-57-1

Oi8ldrin

32.0 U

72-55-9

4.4--00E

32.0 U

72-20-8

Endrin

32.0 U

33212-65-9

Endosulfan II

32.0 U

72-54-8

4.4'-000

32.0 U

1031-07-8

Endosulfan Sulfate

32.0 U

50-29-3

4,4'-0DT

32.0 U

72-43-5

Metnoxvcftlor

160 U

53494-70-5

Endrin Ketone

32.0 U

57-74-9

Chloroane

160 U

8001-35-2

Toxaonene

320 U

12674-M-2

Aroclor-1016

160 U

1U 04-28-2

Aroclor-1221

160 U

11141-16-5

Aroclor-1232

160 U

53469-21-9

Aroclor-1242

160 U

12672-29-6

Aroclor- 1248

160 U

! 1097-69-1

Aroclor- 1254

320 U

11096-82-5

Aroclor- 1260

320 U

U Indicates compound was analyzed for but not
detected- Report the rmmmum detection
limit.

FORM I

-------
Lat? rumple ID No-
O^te Rt-iceiveQ:
Date Extracted:
'.ire Anaivzeo-

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3008-8 16th W.
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

721 new
NA

3/31/87

4/i/$7

.'2t3 Released:

CAS Number

Method Blank
Pore Water

Cone/Dilution Factor 4 to i
Sample volume- 600 ml?

GPC Cleanup- MO

^eparatorv Funnel E !

208-96-8

Acenaonthvlene

0.2 U

77 "S 1

83-32-9

Acenaohthene

0.3 U

69 55 !

36-73-7

Fluorene

0.2 U

7TP 1
l w/.O j

85-01-8

Phenanthrene

0.2 n

87 %

120-12-7

Anthracene

0.1 u

30 %

2015-44-0

Fluoranthene

0 21.1

 975

129-00-0

Pvrene

0.1 ri

1015

S6-55-3

Benzo(a)anthracene

0.3 u

129?> j

218-0 J-9 

Cnrvsene

0 3 u

1

20S-99-2

8enzo(b)fluoranthena

0.4 U

r^;>
0
W

207-08-9

8en2o( k )f louranthene

0.3 U

M5S j

50-32-d

Ben2o( a)ovrene

0.4U

1215 1

53-70-3

Dibenzo( a,h/anthracene

0.4 U

1 105S 1

193.39-5

indenot 123-od)ovrene

0 3 U

1 10

53-70-3

eenzo(qm)oervlene

0.4 u

1 105

91-57-6

2-Methylnaohthalene

0,2 U 

*- 1

132-64-9

DiDenzoruran

0.2 U

- 1

i r the result is a value greater than or
'alue equal to the detection limit, report the value

indicates compound was analyzed for Put not detected.
U Report the minimum detection limit for the sample
with tne qualifier u

I ndicates an estimated value. This Hag is used
j wnen estimating a concentration for a comoound
that meets identification criteria Out the result 13
'ess than '.he specified detection limit

This flag is used when the analyte is found in the
?. oiank as wen as the sample indicates possible/probable
blank contamination and warns the data user to take
appropriate action.

rt 1 ndicates the analvte toes not meet
identification criteria but is present
in the expert opinion of the analyst

** Amount quantitated relative to
2-FluoroOipnenyl internal standard.

' Amount quantitated relative to
laoeled Dibenzo* amantnracene

J8Rec Percent recoveries .jre ot' labeled
jnaioos.

-------
LaDoratory Name: ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.
Client: ENVIROSPHERE
Lao ID.

Matrix-

721 MB
Water

Method Blank
Water

ORGAN ICS ANALYSIS OATA SHEET
PESTIClDES/PCBs

Oate Received:	NA

Date Extracted:	3/31/87

Data Analyzed:	4/3/87

Conc/Di! Factor:	! to 10

Percent Moisture (decanted):	NA

CAS Number

GPC Cleanup: NO
Separatory Funnel Extraction: YES
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction:
Surrogate Recovery.- 217?

ug/L

319-84-6

Alpha-BHC

0.025 U

319-85-7

6eta-5HC

0.025 U

319-86-3

Delta-BHC

0.025 U

58-89-9

Gamma-BHC (Lindane)

0.025 U

76-44-8

Heptachlor

0.025 U

309-00-2

Aldrin

0.025 U

1024-57-3

Heptachlor Epoxide

0.025 U

959-98-8

Endosulfan 1

0.025 U

60-57-1

Oieldrin

0.050 U

72-55-9

4,4'-DDE

0.050 U 

72-20-8 

Endrin

0.050 U

33212-65-9

Endosulfan 11

0.050 U

72-54-8

i

I

O

0
o

1

t

0.050 U

1031-07-8

Endosulfan Sulfate

0.050 U

50-29-3

4.4"-00T

0.050 U

72-43-5

Methoxycnior

0.080 U

53494-70-5

Endrin Ketone

0.050 U

57-74-9

Chlordane

1 U

8001-35-2

Toxaphene

. 5 U

12674-11-2

Aroclor- 1016

1 U

11104-28-2

Aroclor-1221

1 U

11141-16-5

Arocior-1232

1 U

53469-21-9

Arcclor-1242

1 U

12672-29-6

Aroclor-1248

1 U

11097-69-1

Aroclor -1254

1 u

11096-82-5

Aroclor-1260

1 u

U Indicates compound was analyzed for but not
detected. Report the minimum detection
limit.

FORM I

-------
Lad Sample 10 No-
Date Received-
Date Extracted
Date Analyzed:

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3008-B 16th W.
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206)285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

721MB2WR
NA
4/10/87
4/15/87

Data Released:

Method Blank II
Pore Water

CAS Number

Cone/Dilution Factor: 4 !o !
Sample volume: 500 mis

6PC Cleanup: NO

Separator/Funnel Extraction: YES

Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction:

ng/l SRec

NO

78-59-1

Isoohorone

0.08 IJ

62.2.

91-20-3

Naothalene

0.06 U

623

91-58-7

2-ChloronaDhthalere

0.12 U

712

208-96-8

Acenaohthylene

0.08 U

665?

83-32-9

Acenaohthene

0.13U

692

86-73-7

Fluorene

0.11 U

683

85-01-8

Phenanthrene

0.09 U

85 2

120-12-7

Anthracene

0.09 U

64

206-44-0

Fluoranthene

0.09 U 

612

129-00-0

Pvrene

0.09 U

672

56-55-3

Renarf a)anthracene

0.13 U

772

218-01-9

Chrvsene

0.13 U

782

205-99-2

Benzo(b)f1uoranthene

0.15 U

832

207-08-9

Ben2o(k)flouranthene

0.15 U

862

50-32-8

Benzo( a)ovrene

0.19 IJ

972

53-70-3

Dibenzo(a.h)anthracene

0.29 IJ

1 122

193-39-5

inrtmot 123-rt)ovrene

0 22 U

1 12$

53-70-3

Ben2o( ahi )perylene

0.24 U

1042

91-57-6

2-nethvlnaohthalene

0.11 U



132-64-9

Dioenarfuran

0.09 IJ

**

If the result is a value greater than or
Value equal to the detection limit, report the value

Indicates compound was analyzed for but not detected.
U Report the minimum detection limit for the sample
with the qualifier U.

indicates an estimated value. This flag is used
J when estimating a concentration for a compound
that meets identification criteria but the result is
less than the specified detection lim it.

This flag is used when the analyte is found in the
B blank as well as the sample. Indicates possible/probable
blank contamination and warns the data user to take
appropriate action.

n l ndtcates the analyte does not ident.itication
criteria but is present in the expert opinion
of the analyst..

** Amount quantitated relative to

2-fluoroOiphenyl internal standard.

f Amount qumitated relative to
labeled 4-njthylphenol.

XRec Percent recoveries are of labeled
analogs.

-------
Method lank
Water

i'ir

ORGAN ICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTlClDES/PCBs

Date Kece'ven.

NA

oPC CieanuD '-<0



Dot* t 

 ir.





CAS Murncer



iAiona-6HC



 3 i

! %!.*:)-5"C

, 0 025 Oi

 3 ' ^ ~ 6  6

:Deita-5HC



 56--39-9

! Gem ma-5 K ; Linearis

0 025

,7 A-44-o

1 s-ecr>cn ior



: 30^-00-2

:Aicrin

 o ::r .;i

 ' 0:-i-57-T

HrD'X'iOr ED0."Cr





lEnac&uiiap. i

<\ *\m'C  1



'D'^irin

; i') i'i-i"; : !i

'72-55-9

i 4,**'-DD

1 0 050 Ui

j72-20-8

! tr.cr m

iO nso ui

!332 J 2-65-

9!E.ncosulfan II

i o.oso ui

172-54-3-

I4,4'-DDD

1 0 050 Uj

1:031-07-8

iEncosulfan Sulfate

1 0.050 UI

>50-29-3

!ad'-nr.T

::=_=_! .

1 0 05"i ii'

; 72-a3-5

irie'.noxvcnior

' ^ 0.3Q 1 |l

i55-9-^-70-

 i - wri < e:,:ne

 c ,

 57-7--i

"j!"i'0ro6o
-------
1st* Sample ID No-
Date Received:
Date Extracted:
Dare Analyzed.

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3008-8 16th W.
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PHAs by Isotope Dilution

7218
3/25/87
3/23/37
4/2/87

Data Released;

03-BX-05-C4a
03-BX-05-C4b

CAS Number

Cone/Dilution Factor I to 4
Percent moisture- 46 i :?

pH:	3.55

GPC Cleanup: YES
Separator/ Funnel Extraction: NO .
Continuous Liquid-liquid Extraction. NO

ug/Kg SRec

78-59-1

isoohorone } 07 0

65

91-20-3

Napthalene 1 66 tt

r>6*>

91-53-7

2-Chloronaohthalene 1 U4U

12%

208-96-8

Acenaphthylene 1 fiS m

72%

83-32-9

Acenaohthene

1 ^ *1  1

1 L < U

:*

<

86-73-7

Fluorene

87 M ! 76:3

85-01-8

Phenanthrene

368 B 1 84$

120-12-7

Anthracene

143

7"? <9

I

206-44-0

Fluoranthene

617

' 96? 

129-00-0

Pyrene

875

J03S

S6-SS-3

Benz7 <9 .
1

218-01-9

Cfirvsene

378

12795

205-99-2

Benzo( bKluoranthene

280

159$

207-08-9

Benzo( (c)flouranthene

428

I28S

50-32-8

8enzo(a)ovrene

445

160

53-70-3

Dibenzo(a.h)anthracene

137 J

1 76

193-39-5

lndeno( 123-cd)nyrRnn '

188

17635

53-70-3 8enzo( qtti )oerylene

21 1

I72S

91-57-6 2-flethylnaohthalene

106 U

*

132-64-9 IDi&enzofuran

60 U



if the result is a value greater than or
Value equal to the detection limit, report the value

indicates compound was analyzed for but not detected.
'J Report the minimum detection limit for the sample
witn the qualifier u

II I ndicates the ana Me does not meet spectral
indentification criteria. Out is present
in the expert opinion of '.he analyst

** Amount quantitated relative to

2-Huorooiphenyl internal standard.

indicates an estimated value. This flag is used	' Amount quantitated relative to

J wnen estimating a concentration for a comoouno	laoeied Dioenzt a.n /antnrrjeene

that meets identification criteria out the result is

ipee ttvyi the specified detection limit	SRec Percent recover!?? are of Reeled

jnaloos

This flag is used when the analyte is found in the
5 OMnit as well as the sample indicates possi0le/prooaole
Plank contamination and warns the data user to take
appropriate action.

-------
03-BX-05-C4a
03 -8X-05 -C4b

ORGAN ICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTICIDES/PCBs

vaie Kecsiveo:
C-ite E/tr acted
Date Analyzed:
Oonc/Dil r,jctor-
;r:srrt ^cistwe (:ec3nteo)

1725'? 7



'3PC C'ean

9 /Of

J' -v/ 'J 



ieoaraicr-

4/1/37



Ccntinucu

1 to 20



iorr X3'.i?

-6 '





CAJNumoer



-jg/L

v - 'j - - o

'A!c-i.3-6^C

- r t 

13:9-65-7

1 ??t2-5HC

: ~ - r ,,

i319-36-3

!0elt.s-3hC

 * c T ; i

i 5-r-.-f.9-?

C- jm m a- 5 HC ' L; ndane1

7 - i

i 76-44-6

"i-eoticnior

- - r r ;.

1309-00-2

; A'nir fn

 r t i,

; i C2-J-57-~

. r-rc'rcr.tor EsoxMe

r t 1 |

! ?59-96-j

'Er.dCiUii'sn ;

" C T

! -

 v^-crm

"(" r '



1J. J'-DDE

' r "i r , . '

72-20-6

iSrdm

 t \ '

!332i2-65-9

iEncosuifan !i

1 50 6 v 

i72-SA-a

! 4.4--ODD

: ff .** si ; ! '

I 1031-07-8

iEnnosuifan 'Sulfate

' 50 6 u 1

150-29-3

 4.4--DDT

i 50.6 |J :

172-43-5

' - "etno;
-------
lab Sample ID No:
Date Received:
Date Extracted:
Oate Analyzed:

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3OO8-0 16th W.
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

Data Released



721A
3/25/87
4/10/87
4/15/87

CAS Number

03-BP-05-C3
Pore Water

Cone/Dilution Factor: 4 to l
Sample volume 550 mis

GPC Cleanup: MO

Separator/ Funnel Extraction- YES

Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction; NO

ug/L

ZRec

78-59-1

i?oohorone

0 08 U

69?

91-20-3

Naothalene

0.09 n

69$

91-53-7

2-Chloronaohthalene

0.11 u

78S

208-96-8

Acenaonthytene

0 07 (J

74%

83-32-9

Acenaohthene

0.12U

( i /o

86-73-7

Fluorene

0.10U

80S

85-01-8

Phenanthrene

0.08 U

7435

120-12-7

Anthracene

0.08 U

79

w


-------
aoor3tor< Name: anal*' >CAL RESOURCES, INC.
l:er- ENVi-'OSP^E-'E

:C :	"2 ' A

12frvx	vv^ter

03-BP-05-C3

ORGAN ICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTICIOES/PCBs

Date Received:	3/25/87

Date Extracted	4/10/3?

Date Analyzed:	4/! 0/8 7

Ccnc/Dil Factor	I to 10

Percent Moisture (decanted):	MA

vcc

GPC Cleanup. NO
Separatory Funnel Extraction:
Continuous liquid-Liquid Extraction
Surrogate Recovery 57 2.1

CAS Number



ug/L

319-84-6 i

Alona-BHC

1 0 050 Ul

319-35-7 i

3eta-3HC

10 050 Ui

319-86-8 i

Deita-3HC

! 0 050 Ul

58-39-9 iC-amma-3HC (Lindane)

10.050 Ul

76-44-8 iHeotacfilor

! 0.050 u!

309-00-2 (Alarm

' 0 050 Ul

1024-57-3 I'Heotacnlor Epoxide

i 0.050 Ul

959-98-8

Endosulfan I

10 100 Ul

60-57-!

Oieldrin

1 0 100 1J

72-55-9

4,4'-00E

1 0.100 u

72-20-8

Er.dnn

10 100 u

33212-65-9

fEndosulfan ll

I0.I00U

72-54-8

4,4'-0D0

o

o
o

o

1031-07-8

Endosulfan Sulfate

I 0.100 u

50-29-3

4,4'-DDT

10 100U

72-43-5

Methoxvchlor

1 0.160 U|

53494-70-5!Enorin Ketone

10 100 Ul

57-74-9

iChlordane

i 2 u !

8001-35-2

iToxaonene

1 10 u

12674-1 1 -2IArocior- 1016

1 2U

11104-28-2

|Arcclor-1221

1 2 U

11 141 - 16-5lAroclor- 1232

1 2 U

53469-2 l-9IAroc!nr-1242

1 2 U

12672-29-6 i Aroclor - 1248

1 2 U

11097-69-1

lAroclor-! 254

1 2 U

11096-82-SiAroclor-1260

1 2 U

U indicates compound was analyzed for out not
detected. Report trie minimum detection

limit.

FORM I

-------
Lad rumple 10 No-
Date Received:
-2t8 Extracted
D^te Angivzsd:

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC,

3008-8 16th W.
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data She8t
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

7210
3/26/87
3/28/57

4/2/87
Data Released:

06-BX-08-C4

CAS Number

Cone/Dilution Factor: I to 4
Percent moisture 71 6

PH:	3.5 i

C-PC Cleanup: YEJ-
"Separator/ Funnei Extraction- NU
Continuous L iquid-L iguid EAtr.jction: NO

jig/Kg SRec

78-59-1

isoohorone

70 U

t 'J '>

91-20-3

Naothalene

47 tt

74?>

91-58-7

2-Chlcronaohthalene

83 U

?c rv

i o

208-96-8

Acenaohthvlene

59 M

745?

33-32-9

Acenaohthene

92 U

o2<5

86-73-7

Fluorene

85 M

79

85-01-8

Phenanthrene

333 B



120-12-7

Anthracene

151

1 v.^

206-44-0

Fluoranthene

934

!0*S

129-00-0

Pvrene-

1060

1213

S6-55-3

Benzo(a)anthracene

364

127!?

218-01-9

Chrvsene

480

12825

205-99-2

Benzo( bWuoranthene

293

15-455

207-08-9

Benzo( k) flour an thene

368

! 45

50-32-8

Benzo(a)ovrene

331

I52S

53-70-3

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracane

124 J

1 o-jct

1 7 1 sO

193-39-5

lnriano( 123-cti)Dvrene

192

107*?

53-70-3

Benzo( dtii )oery1ene

221

1763 !

91-57-6

2-nethvinaohtbaien8

39 M

!

132-64-9

DiDenzofuran

44 IJ

**

if the result is a value greater than or
Value equal to the detection limit, report the value

indicates compound was analyzed for but not detected.
U Report the minimum detection limit for the sample
with the qualifier u

indicates an estimated value. This Hag is used
.< *nen estimating a concentration tor a 'impound
tnat meets identification criteria out the result is
'nan 'he specified detection limit

flag is used wnen the analyte is found in the
* O'lank as well as 'hesamole indicates oossioie/prooaole
olariK contamination and warns the data user to take
appropriate action.

M I ndlcates the anaM.e (Joes not meet
identification criteria but is oressnt.
in the expert opinion of the snalyjt



Amount quantitated relative to
2-FluoroDtpnenyl internal standard.

Amount quantitated relative to
laoeled Dibenzot an /anthracene

jRec Percent rec^veri? }r* o'
analogs.

-------
Gb-BX-08-04

ORGAN ICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PEST!C!DES/PC8s

,*j,ar0 pr,o]vP^'	7
jaw Extractea. 2v'7

C-sts Analvzec.	J/'!/37

>c/D:i - =ctor	; ?o 20

:...55r,uC

i*C-3rjtorv runnel ''':C':or 'a.
Ccntir.yoiJi	E :r

rrCC-"f!'. ; ' ; 7

" * "  i  > w. - ,,

i v'

:5 i 0^-6 '^icna-BK

'Z~, .

oeU.vSHC





>5-4v-9

i ';*mm,

'4.4' "ODD



! Th >'

: '031-07-3

i Epcceu Iran

iulrr.e

: T*f ? ;;

i50-29-3

; 4,-r-ODT



 3o 7



 vcnior

 ; j- :



- < jrnris



1=7-7-1-9

" ^ ' |*i[" "ana



: 3a -

,2001-35-:

:Tox.2onene



 ; r* 

' '2574-i

lArccior-!

J i n

;u :

;ii104-23-:

lArcclor- I

22 i

: 154 1;

! 1 i ' 4 1 - ! c - 5

.Aroclor -!

"7~

' J A  '
J-*

5346'?-21 - 9

lArccior - l

: 47

i i-:4ij

\ 2672-29-6

Aroclor-

1248

430

: 11097-69-1

Arocior-

1254

560

11096-82-5 Aroclor- 1260	, 300

indicates ccmco'.jr.ti yiaivZ3d 'or iut iot
'istectw -eoor' *ri9 nt.nmum 'X'.oc'ion
'; rn i f

FORM I

-------
ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3008-B 16th W.

SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206)285-1577

06-BP-08-C3

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

L?D "ample ID
Date Received:
D-^te Extracted:
vate-Analyzed:

PSi92S6d;

Mo-	721C

3/26/37
3/31/37
4/1/37

Cone/Dilution Factor. 4 to!

Sample volume- S00 m I?

GPC Cleanup: NO

6eoaratorv Funnel Extras ion- rS

Continuous Uauid-liduidE.< traction. NO

CAS Number



ug/i

ZRec

7-59-I

Koonorone

02 u

593 !

91-20-3

Naothaiene

0.1 u

54~>

91-58-7

2-Chloronaonth3lene

0.2 U

Kb % 1

208-96-8

Acenaonthviene

0 1 \)

72 25

83-32-9

Acenaohthene

0.2 U

63%

36-73-7

Fluorene

n "> u

74S

8S-01-8

Phenanthrene

0.4 8

815

120-12-7

Anthracene

0.1 M

i *

206-44-0

Fluoranthene

0.2 tl

% %

129-00-0

Pvrene

0.4 B

97

56-55-3

Senro( a)anthracene

0.2 U

1185

218-01-9

Chrvsene

0.2 U

10635

205-99-2

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

0.3 U

12435

207-08-9

BenzoOOflouranthene

0.2 U

I08S

50-32-8

Benzot a^ovrene

0.3 U

1243?

53-70-3

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene

0.3 U

! 108

193-39-5

incenot 123-cd)ovrene

0 2 I.'

1 103

53-70-3

8enzo( ani )pervlene

0.3 U

103%

91-57-6

2-liethvlnaphthalene

0:2 U



132-64-9

Dihen20ftjran

0 '1 IJ

**

it trie result is a value greater than or
value equal to the detection limit, report the value

indicates comoound was analyzed for Out not detected.
U Report the minimum detection limit for the sample
witn the qualifier U

indicates an estimated value. This flag is used
j wnen estimating a concentration for a comoound
inat meets identification criteria Cut the result is
!? than the specified detection limit

This flag is used when the analyte is found in the
8 oiank .as well as the sample, indicates possioie/prooaole
plank contamination and warns the data user to take
appropriate action.

n i noicat.es the ana)vie ijoes not. meet
identification criteria Put is present
in the expert opinion of he iri'ilvr

** Amount quantitated relative to
2-FluoroOiphenyl internal ?randard,

' Amount quantitated relative 'o
iaoeled Oiftenzot an j.vunrxene

ZRec Percent recoveries are of lapeleo
analogs.

-------
Laboratory Name: analytical RESOURCES, INC
Client: ENVIROSPWEPE
L-OiD:	721C

Matrix:	Water

06-8P-03-C3

ORGAN ICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTIClDES/PC8s

Date Received:	3/25/37

Date Extracted;	3/31 /87

Date Analyzed:	4/3/87

Ccnc/Otl Factor:	! to 10
Percent Moisture (decanted): MA

CAS Number

GPC Cleanup: NO
Separator/ Funnel Extraction- YES
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction:
Surrogate Recovery: 189?

ug/L

319-84-6

Aloha-0HC

J 0.031 U

319-85-7

8eta-8HC

0.031 U

319-36-8

Delta-8HC

0.031 U

58-89-9

Gamma-8HC (Lindane)

0.031 U

76-44-8

Heotachlor

0.031 U

.509-00-?

Aldrin

0.031 U

1024-57-3

Heotachlor Epoxide

0.031 U

959-98-8

Endosulfan 1

0.031 U

60-57-1

Oieldrin

0.063 U

72-55-9

4,4'-0DE

0.063 U

72-20-8

Endrin

0.063 U

33212-65-9

Endosulfan II

0.063 U

72-54-8

4,4'-DDD

0.063 U

1031-07-8

Endosulfan Sulfate

0.063 U

50-29-3

4.4--00T

0.063 U

72-43-5

Methoxvchlor

0.100 U

53494-70-S

Endrin Ketone

0.063 U|

57-74-9

Chlordane

1.250 U

8001-35-?

Toxaphene

6.250-U

12674-11-?

Aroclor- 1016

1.250 U

11104-28-?

Aroclor-1221

1.250 U

11141-16-5

Aroclor-1232

1.250 U

53469-?1-9

Aroclor-1242

1 250 U

12672-29-6

Aroclor- 1248

1.250 U

11097-69-1

Aroclor- 1254

1.250 U

11096-82-5

Aroclor- 1260

1.250 U

U Indicates compound was analyzed for but not
detected. Report the minimum detection
limit.

FORM I

-------
lab Sample ID
Date Received:
Date Extracted:
Date Analyzed-

Oalgca;

no-

analytical RESOURCES, INC.

3008-8 16th W.
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

721F
3/26/37
3/23/37
4/2/87

Kk

CAS Number

07-BX-12-C3

Cone/Dilution Factor I to 4
Percent moisture- 47 5 $

pH:	3.26

SPC Cleanup: YES
Separator/ Funnel 'Extraction: MO
Continuous L iquid-L iquid Extraction.

ug/Kg ZRec

73-59-1 (isoohorone

104 I.I

75?

91-20-3 iNaothalene

283

73 S

91-53-7 !2-Chlorcnaohthalene

123 U

11%

208-96-8 lAcsnaohthvlene i 228

70S

83-32-9 lAcanaohthena | 260

76$

86-73-7 IFluorene

357

7! %

85-01-8 IPhenanthrene

2160 3

65;s

120-12-7 1 Anthracene

1010

17%

?n6-44-0 iFluoranthene

2880

 103

129-00-0

Pvrene

8340

HI.?

56-55-3

8enzo(a)anthracene

1400

134*.

218-01-9

Chrvsana

2010

1253

205-99-2

Benzo( b )fluoranthene

1640

192S

207-08-9

Benzo( k )f1ouranthene

2330

I59S

50-32-8

Benzo(a)Dvrene

1850

19*3

53-70-3

D i benzo(a,hJanthracans

361

2 ICS

193-39-5

lndeno( 123-cd)ovrene '

700

2105

53-70-3

8enzo(ahi)oerviene

867

ncio**

91-57-6

2 - Methv 1 naohthalana

161

*

132-64-9

Oibenzofuran

163 J

~*

value if the result is a value greater than or

equal to the detection limit, report the value

U Indicates compound was analyzed for but not detected.
Report the minimum detection limit for the sample
with the qualifier U

j indicates an estimated value. This flag is used
wnen estimating a concentration for acomoouno
that meets identification criteria out the result is
ls than th? specified detection limit

This flag is used when the analyte is found in the
B plank as well as the sample Indicates possipie/prooable
blank contamination and warns the data user to take
appropriate action.

M i ndicates the analvte does not meet,
identification criteria but is present,
in the expert opinion of the analyst

** Amount quantitated relative to
2-Fluorobipftenyl internal standard.

' Amount quantitated relative to
laoeied Dioenzoi an/anthracene

ZRec Percent receiver i< jr? of 'aoeleo
analogs.

-------
Lmoratory Mame: ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.
Client. E.WBOSPHERE
L jo '0	72 1F

Matrix'	Sediment

07-BX-12-C3

0R6ANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTICIDES/PC8s

Date Received:	3/25/87

Date Extracted:	3/23/87

Date Analyzed:	4/1/87

Conc/Dil Factor-	I to 20

Percent Moisture (decanted):	47.5

CAS Number

GPC Cleanup: NO
Separator/ Funnel Extraction: MO
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction: NO
Surrogate Recovery: 1495

ug/L

319-84-6

Alona-BHC

27.4 U

319-85-7

Beta- SHC

27.4 U

319-86-3

De!ta-8HC

27 4 U

53-89-9

fomma-BHC (Lindane)

27 4 U

76-44-8

Heotachlor

27.4 U

309-00-2

Aldrin

27.4 U

1024-57-3

Heotacnior Epoxide

27 4U

959-98-3

Endosulfan I

27.4 u

60-57-1

Oleldrin

54 7 U

72-55-9

4,4'-DDE

54.7 U

72-20-8

Endrin

54 7 U

33212-65-9

Endosulfan II

54.7 U

72-54-8

4,4'-DDD

54.7 U

1031-07-3

Endosulfan Sulfate

54.7 U

50-29-3

4.4'-0DT

54.7 U

72-43-5

Methoxvcnlor

247 U

53494-70-5

Enann Ketone

54.7 U

57-74-9

Chloroane

274 U

8001-35-2

Toxaonene

547 U

12674-11-2

Aroclor- 1016

274 U

11104-28-2

Aroclor- 1221

274 1J

11141-16-5

Aroclor-1232

274 U

53469-21-9lAroclor-1242

274 U

12672-29-61 Aroclor- I248

274 U

J 1097-69-

Aroclor- 125-4

410

11096-82-5

Aroclor- 1260

547 U

U Indicates compound was analyzed for but not
detect? 1 Report the minimum detection
1 in, u.

FORM I

-------
ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3008-8 16th W.

SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

07-BX-12-C3

lab Sample ID
Date Received:
Date Extracted:
Date Analyzed-

Ps'.62S8C'

No-

721F
3/26/37
3/2S/37
4/2/87

frA hu-izLu/

CAS Number

Cone/Dilution Factor 1 to 4
Percent moisture- 47 5$

pH:	3.26

GPC Cleanup; YES
Separator/ Funnel E x traction: MO
Continuous liquid-liquid E.< traction.

jig/Kg ZRec

73-59-1

isoohorone

104 I.I

75?

91-20-3

Naothalene

283

73*

91-53-7

2-Chlorcnaohthalene

123 U

TTT

208-96-8

Acsnaohthvlene

228

70S

83-32-9

Acenaohthene

260

76 S

86-73-7

Fluorene

357

713

85-01-8

Phenanthrene

2160 8

65,?

120-12-7

Anthracene

1010

67$

206-44-0

Fluoranthene

2880

 103$

129-00-0

Pvrene

8340

111$

56-55-3

8enzo(a)anthracana

1400

134$,

218-01-9

Chrvsene

2010

125$

205-99-2

Benzo( b Hluoranthene

1640

192$

207-08-9

Benzo( k )f1ouranthene

2330

159$

50-32-8

Benzo< a)ovrene

1850

196$

53-70-3

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracsne

361

210$

193-39-5

lndeno( 123-cd)ovrene

700

210$

53-70-3

Benzo(ahi)oervlene

867



91-57-6

2-Methvlnaohthalene

161

#

132-64-9

Oibenzofuran

163 J



value if the result is a value greater than or

equal to the detection limit, report the value

U indicates compound was analyzed for but not detected.
Report the minimum detection limit for the sampls
with the qualifier U

J I ndicates an estimated value. This flag is used
wnen estimating a concentration for a comoouna
mat meets identification criteria out the result 13
ls fhan the specified detection limit

This flag is used when the analyte is found in the
B plank as well as the sample, indicates possipie/prooadle
Plank contamination and warns the data user to take
appropriate action.

M 1 ndicates the anaivte does not meet
identification criteria but is present
in the expert opinion of the analyst

** Amount quantitated relative to
2-F1 uoroO)pnenyI internal standard.

' Amount quantitated relative to
laoeied Oibenzouan/anthracene

ZRec Percent recoveries are of 'aoeleo
analogs.

-------
Lab Sample ID No:
Dale Received:
Date Extracted:

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3008-B 16th W.
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

721 EC
3/26/87
4/10/87

Date Analyzed:	4/15/87

Data

CAS Number

Concentrated
07-BP-12-C3
Por* Water

Cone/Dilution Factor: 4to1 (toSOul)
Samplevolume: 550 mis

GPC Cleanup: NO

Separatory Funnel Extraction: YES

Continuous Liquid-Liquid Enaction-. NO

g/L

ZRec

78-59-1

tsoohorone

0.03 n

823

91-20-3

Naothalene

0.04 n

733

91-58-7

2-Chloronaohthalene

0.11 u

773

208-96-8

Acenaphthylene

0.07 U

323

83-32-9

Acenaphthene

0.12U"

833

86-73-7

Fluorene

0.10U

783

85-0 J-8

Phenanthrene

0.03 n

863

120-12-7

Anthracene

0.03 n

6o3

206-44-0

Fluoranthene

0.03 M

753

129-00-0

Pyrene

0.10

803

56-55-3

0en2o( a)anthracsne

0.12 U

1223

218-01-9

Chrv3ene

0.02 n

1083

205-99-2

Benzo
-------
bOQf^orv Nem9 -NAL < T i C-1_ RESOURCES, i NC.	i

"n: -:w "E	! Q7-BP-12-03

'"a f'/	Wa'or

ORGAN ICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTICiDES/PC8s

Date P?C8'vecJ
Date Extracted:
Date Analyzed:
Conc/DH Factor
Percent Moisture i decanted).

3/25/37
4/10/37
4/10/87
l to 10
MA

OPC Cleanup: NO
Separatory Funnel Extraction: YES
Continuous Liquid-liQUid E/tr ?ction- NO
Surrogate Kecoverv 56.3*

CAS Number	ug/L

319-84-6

Alpha-BHC

0 050 U

319-85-7

Beta-BHC

0.050 U

319-36-3

Delta-3 HC

0.050 U

53-89-9

Gamma-BHC (Lindane)

0.050 U

76-44-8

Heotactilor

0.050 U

309-00-2

Alarm

0 050 U

1024-57-3

Heotacnior Eooxide

0.050 U

959-98-8

Endosulfan 1

0.100 U

60-57-1

Dieldnn

0,100 U

72-55-9

4.4--D0E

0.100U

72-20-8

Endr'in

0.100'J

33212-65-9

Endosulfan 11

0.100 u

72-54-8

4,4'-000

0.100 u

1031-07-3

Endosulfan Sulfate

0.100 u

50-29-3

4,4'-DDT

0.100 u

72-43-5

Metnoxvch lor

0.160 V

53494-70-5lEndrin Ketone

0.100 V

57-74-9

Chlordane

2 U

8001-35-2

Toxaonene

10 u

12674-1 l-2IAroclor-1016

2 U

11104-28-2

Aroclor-1221

2 U

11141- !6-5lAroclor- 1232

2 U

53469-21 -9|Aroclor- 1242

2 U

12672-29-6IAroclor- 1248

2 U

11097-69- 1 iAroclor- 1254

2 U

1 l096-82-5iAroc)or- 1260

2 IJ

U I ndicates com pound was analyzed for but not
detected. Report the minimum detection
limit.

FORM I

-------
ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC

3008-8'16th W.

SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

09-BX-16-C4
Reinject

Lab Sample ID No-
Date Received:
Date Extracted:
Date Anaivzed:

721 HO
3/27/37
3/28/87
4/2/87

Oata Released:	f

Conc/Oilution Factor: ! to i
Percent moisture- 2r> 6 '?

pH:	8.1 I

GPC Cleanup- YES
Separator/Funnel Estracnon- no
Continuous Liquid-Liquid extraction.

CAS Number



ug/Kg

XRec

78-59-1

isoohorone

18 'J

70* !

91-20-3

Napthalene

46

61  1

91-58-7

2-Chloronaohthaiene

''in

im ' J

 i  |

208-96-8

Acenaphthylene

103

|

33-32-9 lAcenaDhthene

24 U

7C* T '

/ >> 1

86-73-7

Fluorene

88

6-ss ;

85-01-8

Phenanthrene

561 B

b\% >

120-J2-7

Anthracene

196



206-44-0

Fluoranthene

1 130

95 ? }

129-00-0

Pyrene

1570

10735 i

56-S5-3

Benzo< a)anthracene

590

105? |

218-01-9

Chrysene

734

94% 1

205-99-2

Benzo( b Kluoranthene

209

I 7 i J> 1

i J 1 ,0 |

207-08-9

8enzo( k)flouranthene

321

89
-------
lad Sample ID No:
Date Received-
Date Extracted;
Date Analyzed

Data Released:.

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3008-8 16th W.
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organ ies Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

72! H
3/27/87
3/28/87
4/2/87

09-BX-I6-C4

CAS Number

Conc/Dllutlon Factor: I to 4
Percent moisture: 26.6 *

pH:	8.11

6PC Cleanup: YES
Separator/ Funnel Extraction: NO
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction: NO

jig/K4 XRec

78-59-1

Isoohorone

72 U

62$

91-20-3

Naothalene

42 fl

595?

91-58-7

2-Chloronaohthalene

85 U

618

208-96-8

Acenaohthvlene

109

61*

83-32-9

Acenaohthene

95 U

60*

86-73-7

Fluorene

64 tl

58*

85-01-8

Phenanthrene

623 B

67*

120-12-7

Anthracene

216

55*

206-44-0

Fluoranthene

1150

81*

129-00-0

Pvrene

1570

91*

56-55-3

Benzo(a)anthracene

568

100*

218-01-9

Chrvsene

746

96*

205-99-2

Ben2o( b Hluoranthene

441

138*

207-08-9

Ben2o( k)f1ouranthene

737

103*

50-32-8

Benzo(a)ovrene

751

153*

53-70-3

Oibenzo
-------
Laboratory Same: ANALVT!CAL PESO'iPCES, INC.
Client: ENVinOSPHERE
Lab ID'	721H

Matrix.	Sediment

09-BX-16-C4

ORGAN ICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTICIDES/PCBs

Date Received:.
Date Extracted
Date Analyzed:
Cone/Oil Factor

3/25/87
3/28/87
4/1/87
I to 20

Percent Moisture (decanted): 26.6

CAS Number

GPC Cleanup: NO
Separator/Funnel Extraction: NO
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction: NO
Surrogate Recovery: 130%

ug/l

319-84-6 lAlofia-8HC

19.6 U

319-85-7

Beta-6HC

19.6 U

319-36-8

Delta-8HC

19.6 U

58-89-9

Gamma-3HC (Lindane)

19.6 U

76-44-8

Heotachlor

19.6 U

309-00-2

Aldrin

19.6 U

1024-57-3

Heotacnior Epoxide

19.6 U

959-98-8

Endosulfan I

19.6 U

60-57-1

Dieldrin

39 3 U

72-55-9

4.4'-DDE

39.3 U

72-20-8

Endrin

39.3 U

33212-65-9

Endosulfan II

39.3 U

72-54-8

4.4'-DDD

39.3 U

1031-07-8

Endosulfan Sulfate

39.3 U

50-29-3

4.4--DDT

39.3 U

72-43-5

ttethoxvchlor

196 U

53494-70-5

Endnn Ketone

39.3 U

57-74-9

Chlorcane

196 U

8001-35-2

Toxaonene

393 U

12674-11-2

Aroclor-1016

196 U

11104-28-2

Arocfor-1221

196 U

11 141-16-5

Aroclor-1232

196 U

53469-21-9

Aroclor-1242

196 U

12672-29-6

Aroclor-1248

196 U

1 1097-69-1

Aroclor-1254

393 U

11096-82-5

Aroclor-1260

393 U

U Indicates compound was analyzed for but not
detected. Report the minimum detection
limit.

FORM I

-------
ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC

3008-B 16th W.

SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

09-BP-16-C3
Pore Water

721G
3/27/37
4/10/37

4/15/87

f .<]

Data Released: EZtfs

CAS Number

!_30	ID No

Dale Received:
Date Extracted:
Date Anqlysefl'

Cone/Dilution Factor 4 to i
Sample volume: *00 ml?

GPC Cleanup-. MO

Separator/ Funnel Extraction- yj

Continuius liquid-LiMUid Extraction. NO

lig/L XRec

78-59-1

isophornne

0 1 (J

?4
-------
Lab Sample ID No:
Date Received:

Date Extracted:
Date Analyzed:

Data Released:	

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3008-8 16th W
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PMAs by Isotope Dilution

1O-BX-17-C4

721 J
3/27/87
3/28/87
4/3/87

CAS Number

Cone/Dilution Factor: I to 4
Percent moisture: 32.4 %

pH: 8.35
GPC Cleanup: YES
Separator/ Funnel Extraction: NO
Continuous Liquid-liquid Extrxtion: NC

ug/Kg XRec

78-59-1
91-20-3

91-58-7

208-96-8
83-32-9

86-73-7

85-01-a
120-12-7

206-44-0
129-00-0

56-55-3

218-01-9

205-99-9
207-08-9

Isoohorone

Napthalene

2-Chloronaohthaipnfl

Acenaontfivifinfl

Acenaohthena
Fluorene

Phenanthrana

Anthracene

Fluoranthene

Pyrene

Benzo(a)anthracane

50

-32-8
53-70-3

J93-39-S

53-70-3
91-57-6

132-64-9

Chrysena

Benzo< b )fluoranthen

Benzol k )f1ouranthena

Ben2o(a)nyrflnw

P1ben2o(a.h)anthracene

lndeno( 123-cd)oyrene

8enzo( Qh^pervlena

flethy I naphthalene

101 u

70 U

123 U

89 U

141 U

10 u

308 B

161

399

698

213

311

302

287

42 M

181

213

Dldenzofuran

18 U

63*

582

675?

6\%

65

622

65%

66$

77%

8 2%

95 %

94S

120?

106 X

102$

102%

*#
**

If the result is a value greater than or
Value equal to the detection limit, report the value

Indicates compound was analyzed for but not detected.
U Report the minimum detection limit for the sample
with the qualifier U.

Indicates an estimated value. This flag is used
J when estimating a concentration for a compound
that meets identification criteria but the result is
less than the specified detection limit.

This flag is used when the analyte is found in the
B blank as well as the sample. Indicates possible/probable
blank contamination and warns the data user to take
appropriate action.

n Indicates the analyte does not identify
criteria but is present in the expert op )
of the analyst

** Amount quantitated relative to
2-Fluorobiphenyl internal standard-

' ..mount quantitated relative to
'adeled 4-Methylphenol.

SRec Percent recoveries are of labeled
analogs.

-------
IO-BX-I 7-04

ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTIC1 DES/PCSs



I'm - ecsived:
2 j'.fc

Idle Anaiv'si
'2' "iC'.Zf

o . -ar^n?so i

-.-.v  /

7 , 17

S' im'J* V 1

J / ' . P. "*

*<*

ieMmorv

: ' '	 -VJ -.i





'.rO rUl7lD0f





 " r : 

' - 

. T'^'r :--C

- - 7

!: '-*-^6-^

' viiiti-iH.',

r ,



"';amm-SHO . l ircarey"

" ~ 7 . t

, 76-44-'?.

:Hec?3cnlcr

- * 7  1 

;30'?-00-2

: 4':cr:n

"** T 

' - 3

-rc-rcrior E:o '??

: i

' -?v?-96-o

 t^CO'iuIlin 1

-  T

nil-"- 1

:" C-:eiorm

' : " .;

;::-ss-9

Ia.4'-CDE

7 ; I

j 7^-20-8

i Ersdrin

! ^ 7 'J 

TT1 I

itncosulfan li

1 44 7 11

I / L. J"* J

' 4.4'-0D0

" i 44-j:

11OTI

iSnoosuiftn vjiwe

, -1.1 " n ;

' TO-29-3

< . .. ~ r. -
 -,-t -'JJ 1

** / ' 1

'.j-.f



> 7* ,

70-5

 r'ior:n  .iTcr.*

- --1 ~ .

" /  "'i- <

1 (.ti ior-are

"* -

; " 1 - 7 ST _ ^

: i;0 1 - ^ v"-

iTo^conene

 aa-ii

1;2^74-ii-2

iAr color- 101 h

| " ~ ^ . 1

1'';04-25-:

Arxlor- 122!

1->7  . 

i ' ' I 4!-''5

'Arsclor- I LIZ

' 12: tj 

"34*0-2 :

: Arxlor-12-12

j ^ ^j }

!l ,-'*72-20-6

Uroclor- 1248

! 223 ii 

: I 1097-69-1

Aroclor- 1254

 127

IO

1

c 1

0

lAroclor- i 260

1 1 !

u Indicates compound .jnalvced for out not
steered. Report tne Tiintmum oetect'cn
'  rn: t

FORM I

-------
Lab Sample ID No:
Date Received:

Date Extracted:
Date Analyzed:

Data Released:	

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3008-8 16th w
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

1 1-BX-19-C4

Organlcs Analysts Data Sheet
PHAs by Isotope Dilution

721 L
3/27/87
3/28/87
4/3/87

CAS Number

Cone/Dilution Factor: I to 4
Percent moisture: 39.6 %

pH:	8.49

GPC Cleanup: YES
Separator/ Funnel Extraction: NO
 Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction: N(

ug/Kg ZRec

78-59-1 llsoohorone

76 U

62%

9i-?n-3 INaothalene

52 U

62$

91-58-7

2-Chloronaohthalene

93 U

70?

208-96-8

Acenaphthylene

67 U

65%

83-32-9

Acenaphthene

106 U

75%

86-73-7

Fluorene

82 U

7\%

85-01-3

Phenanthrene

176 B

78%

120-12-7

Anthracene

94

73?

206-44-0

Fluoranthene

228

86%

129-00-0

Pvrene

293

88?

56-55-3

Benzo(a)anthracane

103

1011

218-01-9

Chrvsane

163 J

101?

205-99-2

Benzo(b)f1uoranthene

135

1 16?

207-08-9

Benzo( k )f louranthene

139

98%

50-32-8

Benzola)Dvrene

165

) 133?

53-70-3

D1benzo
-------
I I-8X-I9-C4

ORGAN ICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTICIDES/PCBs

Date Seceivec:
Dote Extract*!
Date Ar,j!y:sd.
Donc/C:: "3C'or
:r:sm '-'oiiture > ^ecanteai

3/25.- -S7
3/:3/37
V! ,'87
' to 20
2'} 6

-I'tWO: \0
liOirnof\ rijn'"ci c.. 22-*

CA: Nijnr.Cer

;3:9-3--6

'Alona-SHC

'  *5 i

:3V?-,35-7

i5et3-5HC

:: ' 'J

7

 Osl '3- 3

' r - :;

 53-3v-9

!i;.?mna-5HC >' Lincane>

' C v

:7*-44-3

iH?ot-2cr.ior

! r- .

30''-00-2

'Alcrw

:  i 

 1024-57-3

'^ctocnlor Esc*-Ci?

 :

|oco_93-3

'E.iCCjulfan :

 : .

'60-57- :

;D"?'0nn

, :? ; r

72-55-9

i4.4,-0DE

, TT - 

72-20--'?

iEflflrm'

i ZZ i v

33212-65-9

itnaosulfan it

i 33.6 ij

72-54-3

1'4.4*-000

i jj.o U

'03;-07-e

itnaosuitan iuifate

1 33 o -J

50-29-3

I4.4--DDT

i > . a 

 7 Z

' mm " ** V " ^

^etnovcpior

! i v  '

5T^v--70-5

tw-r-1 rj'ono

?: ,,

57-74--J

Cr.!of"ane

::;

JOC 1-35-2

;;oxaonene .

,

12674-11-2

:Aroc!or- ! 0 :6

1 ,

!!104-28-2

lAroclor-! 22!



;!!4i-!6-5

lAroclor-! '?-jz

i ! :

53469-2!-9

.'Aroclor- 1 2-2

i ' u ;

i 2672-29-6

lAroclor -1 _+)*

; ' 63 'J :

11097-69-1

lAroclor- 1254

220 :

; ! n Vo ~ o~

,Ar.?rior- 12':-0

: 336 :J 1

U !naicotes comcouna was anaivzea :'or out r.ct
:e:ectec. Seoor'. '.ne minimum 'K"<' ion
limit

FORP1 I

-------
Lab Sample ID No-
Date Received:
Date Extracted:
Date Anglv29a

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

3008-8 1 6th W.
SEATTLE, WA 98119
(206) 285-1577

Organics Analysis Data Sheet
PNAs by Isotope Dilution

72 !K
3/27/87
4/3/87'
4/3/87

Data Released:

CAS Number

11-BP-19-C3
Pore Water

Cone/Dilution Factor. 4 ;.c !

Sample volume 600 ml?

GPC Cleanup- HO

Separator/ Funnel Enaction- rES

Continuous L iquid-L iquid E^trxtion:

ug/L SRec

78-59-1

isoohorone

0 2 1.)

50* I

91-20-3

Naothaiene

0.2 U

49 %

91-58-7

2-Chloronaohthalene

0.3 U

495?

208-96-8

Acenaonthvlene

02 U

49

83-32-9

Acenaohthene

0.3 U

5058

86-73-7

Fluorene

0.2'J

64

85-01-8

Phenanthrene

0.1 JB

553

120-12-7

Anthracene

0.2 U

Cf. 9
>jO*>

206-44-0

Fluoranthene

0 2 U

62 %

129t00-0

Pyrene

0.3 U

f>\%

56-55-3

8enzo(a)anthracsne

0.3 U

673

'218-01-9

Chrvsene

0.3 U

65?

205-99-2

Benzo( b)fluoranthene

0.4 U

80S

2Q7-Q8-9

8enzo(k)flouranthene

0.3 U

72 S

50-32-8

Benzo(a)ovrene

0.3 U

80 %

53-70-3

Dibenzo( a, h) anthracene

0.4 U

74;?

193-39-5

Inceno( 123-cd)ovrene '

0 3 U

74*

53-70-3

6enjo( am )oeryiene

0.3 U

7'j 

t i.O

91-57-6

2-ttethvlnaofithalene

0.3 U

1 **

132-64-9

Dibenzofuran

0.2 U

**

if the result is a value greater than or
Value equal to the detection limit, report the value

Indicates compound was analyzed for but not detected.
U Report the minimum detection limit for the sample
with the qualifier U

Indicates an estimated value. This flag is used
.j wnen estimating a concentration for a comoound
that meets identification criteria Out the result is
less 'han the specified detection limit

This flag is used when the analyte is found in the
B blank as well as the sample indicates possible/probable
blank. contamination and warns the data user to take
appropriate action.

M Indicates the analvte ooes not meet
identification criteria but is present
in the expert opinion of the analyst

**' Amount quantitated relative to

2-FluoroOiphenyl internal standard.

' Amount quantitated relative to
labeled Didenzotan/anthrxene

XRec Percent recoveries ,^re of labeled
analoos.

-------
Laboratory Name: ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC.

Client ENVIP.OSPHEP.E '	| II-BP-I9-C3

Lad ID:	721K	i	

i^atr-.x	Water

0R6ANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET
PESTlCIDES/PCBs

Date Received:	3/25/87

Date Extracted:	4/3/87

Date Analyzed:	4/3/87

Conc/DIl Factor:	I to 10

Percent Moisture/decanted):	NA

CAS Number

GPC Cleanup: NO
Separator/ Funnel Extraction: YES
Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction:
Surrogate Recovery: 50.7?

NO

ug/L

319-84-6

Alona-8HC

0.042 U

319-85-7

8eta-BHC

0.042 U

319-86-8

Delta-8HC

0.042 U

58-89-9

Gamma-3HC (Lindane)

0.042 U

76-44-8

Heotacnlor

0.042 U

309-00-2

Aldrm

0,042 U

1024-57-3

Heo tacti lor Eooxide

0.042 U

959-98-8

Endosuifan I

0.083 U

60-57-1

Dieldnn

0.083 U

72-55-9

4.4"-DDE

0.083 U

72-20-8

Endrin

0.083 U

33212-65-9

Endosuifan II

0.083 U

72-54-8

4.4'-ODD

0.083 U

1031-07-8

Endosuifan Sulfate

0.083 U

50-29-3

4.4"-DDT

0.083 U

72-43-5

nethoxvcrilor

0.133 U

53494-70-5

Endnn Ketone

0.083 U

57-74-9

CMoroane

1.67 U

3001-35-2

Toxaohene

3.33 U

12674-11-2

Aroclor-1016

1.67 U

11104-28-2

Aroclor-1221

 1.67 U

1 M41-16-5

Aroclor-1232

1.67 U

53469-21-9

Aroclor-1242

1.67 U

12672-29-6

Aroclor-1248

1.67 U

11097-69-1

Aroclor-1254

1.67 U

11096-82-5

Aroclor-1260

1.67 U

U indicates compound was analyzed for but not
detected. Report the minimum detection
limit.

FORM I

-------
APPENDIX B

HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN

6825a

-------
SAFETY PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE
WORK ASSIGNMENT 56, TASK 4
ELLIOTT BAY
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON

FOR

BATTELLE PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORIES
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTRY DIVISION
2955 GEORGE WASHINGTON WAY, RTL BLDG. #235
RICHLAND, WASHINGTON 99352

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CRITERIA AND STANDARDS DIVISION
WASHINGTON, D.C.

BY

ENVIRQSPHERE COMPANY
10900 N.E. 8TH STREET
BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98004

MARCH 1987

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY	Page 1 of 18

SAFETY PLAN	Revision 0

SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE Date 3/87

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I.	GENERAL		2

II.	PROJECT DESCRIPTION 		5

III.	HAZARD ASSESSMENT 	 ....	6

IV.	SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS FOR SAMPLING 		11

V.	EMERGENCY PROCEDURES 		13

VI.	DIVE REQUIREMENTS			14

VII.	MEDICAL OATA/FIELD TEAM REVIEW	'		16

VIII.	APPROVALS		  	17

APPENDIX A ENYIROSPHERE DIVE MANUAL (DIVERS ONLY) 		18

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY	Page 2 of 18

SAFETY PLAN	Revision 0

SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE Date 3/87

SECTION I. GENERAL

1.1 PURPOSE

Compliance with this Safety Plan is required for all workers and
third-parties who participate in the cruise. The purpose of this
Safety Plan is to describe safety procedures to be followed by all
cruise participants. Cruise participants shall be issued a personal
copy of this Plan and shall read and sign this plan (Section VII) prior
to going on the cruise. The procedures contained herein are designed
to make all cruise participants aware of safety rules and standard
procedures in case of emergency.

Telephone (206) 451-4606 Telephone (206) 451-4096
1.2 EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBERS (See also Section V. Emergency

Project Manager

Cruise Safety Officer/
Dive Master

Name Roger Kadeg

Name Steve Harding

Procedures)

U.S. Coast Guard (VHF-FM Channel 16)
U.S. Coast Guard Rescue Coordinator:
Seattle Police:

Virginia i-iason Hyperbaric Unit:

442-7070
442-5586
911

583-6543

After Hours: 583-6437

(Diver illness)

Seattle Harbor Patrol (Port of Seattle):
Seattle Fire Department (Marine Patrol):
King County Police:

344-4080

728-3340
911

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY	Page 3 of 18

SAFETY PLAN	Revision 0

SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE Date 3/87

1.3	GENERAL HAZARD RATING

Moderate. Cold, unpredictable winter weather, hydraulic equipment
(boom and sampler) operating on deck of research vessel, vessel deck
may be unstable and wet. Skin protection from potentially contaminated
bottom sediments is required, personal flotation devices (PFDs), and
hard hats are required (see Section IY).

1.4	SAFETY PERSONNEL

1.4.1	Envirosphere Northwest (ENW) Region Health and Safety Manager

The ENW Health and Safety Manager has overall responsibility for
development of this Safety Plan. He shall be consulted when any
changes or modifications to this plan are required or requested. The
contents of this Safety Plan shall be approved according to
Section VIII.

1.4.2	Project Manager

The Project Manager has overall project responsibility for
implementation of this Safety Plan on the cruise.

1.4.3	Cruise Safety Officer and Dive Master

The Cruise Safety Officer and Dive Master shall be responsible for
implementing this Safety Plan on the cruise, maintaining conformanc.
with safety and emergency procedures, coordinating distribution and use

5499a

-------
EMVIROSPHERE COMPANY

Page 4 of 18
Revision 0
Date 3/87

SAFETY PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE

of this Safety Plan, and maintaining safety and dive equipment. The
Cruise Safety Officer and Dive Master has stop-work authority which he
shall execute upon determination of- unsafe conditions.

1.4.4- Cruise Participants

All cruise participants shall be responsible for complying with this
Safety Plan during the cruise.

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY	page 5 of 18

SAFETY PLAN	Revision 0

SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE Date 3/87

SECTION II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1	LOCATION AND SCHEDULE

The cruise will take place within the waters of Elliott Bay in Puget
Sound immediately west of Seattle, Washington, west to Eagle Harbor on
Bainbridge Island. The cruise is scheduled for late March or early
April 1987.

2.2	DESCRIPTION

The main objective of the cruise is to collect contaminated bottom
sediment samples; extract the associated pore water, and measure the
concentration of contaminants in both the sediment and pore water for a
suite of hydrophobic organic chemicals. This will provide the needed
backup data to verify previously projected equilibrium partitioning
coefficients.

Collection and extraction of samples will occur on-board the vessel.
Samples will be appropriately processed and packaged on-board for
shipment to an analytical laboratory or for archiving. Extreme care to
avoid cross-contamination of samples is required.

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY

Page 6 of 18
Revision 0
Date 3/87

SAFETY PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE

SECTION III. HAZARD ASSESSMENT

3.1	GENERAL

The overall hazard assessment for the cruise is variable and is
dependent on weather conditions, sea state, bottom and sediment
conditions, the chemical toxicity of sediments sampled, and the
operational aspects (operation of boat and sampling equipment) of the
job.

3.2	WEATHER AND SEA STATE

Expected weather for the cruise ranges from clear and calm (optimum
conditions for sampling) to severe storms with high winds, rough seas
and rain. Daytime temperatures for March in Puget Sound are generally
moderate, ranging from the 40s to 60s (*F). The decision for
cancelling a cruise because of inclement weather shall ultimately rest
with the skipper of the vessel, in consultation with the Cruise Safety
Officer and project leaders. Marine weather forecasting is available
through NOAA Weather Radio (60.55 MHz) and consultation with the Coast
Guard.

The greatest hazard from inclement weather and rough seas is the
possibility of personnel losing balance on deck and falling into
machinery or overboard. Cruise participants must also know -nd
recognize symptoms of hypothermia and are responsible to drejs for the
cruise so as to remain warm and dry. Cruise participants shall wear
U.S. Coast Guard approved Personal Flotation Devices (PFDs) at all
times while on-board the vessel as described in Section IY.

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY

SAFETY PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE

Page 7 of 18
Revision 0
Date 3/87

3.3	BOTTOM AND SEDIMENT CONDITIONS (DIVERS ONLY)

The greatest hazard from the bottom and sediment conditions will be
from the restricted visibility caused by the resuspension of sediments
during the hand-operated core sampling.

Divers used on this project shall be experienced in diving in areas of
restricted visibility. In the event the divers lose visual contact
while underwater, they will ascend to the surface and begin the dive
again. The Envirosphere Diving Safety Manual shall be used for
emergency procedures. A minimum of one copy of the Diving Safety
Manual shall be on board' the vessel for reference during the cruise.

3.4	SEDIMENT TOXICITY AND HAZARD ASSESSMENT

Many toxic chemicals have beep identified in historical sediment
samples collected in the study area. This discussion relates to
sediment samples because the hazards of interstitial water will be far
less due to the lower concentration of contaminants in the water
column. Historical samples have been analyzed for metals, PAHs,
persistent pesticides, PCBs, phthatates, and volatile organics. These
chemicals could pose a hazard if significant quantities were ingested,
inhaled, or absorbed through the skin. However, ingestion of sediment
samples is considered highly unlikely. Eating, drinking, and smoking
will be prohibited while crew members are engaged in sample collection
(Sectio iY). Facilities will be provided for washing prior to eating,
drinkin?, or smoking. Protective clothing and gloves will be worn
while working and removed when leaving the work area.

5499a

-------
ENVIRQSPHERE COMPANY	Page 8 of 18

SAFETY PLAN	Revision 0

SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE Date 3/87

Inhalation of toxic concentrations of chemicals contained in sediments
is considered highly unlikely for the following reasons. Most
toxicants identified have very low vapor pressures (<1 mm Hg); those
volatile contaminants present in the sediments are at concentrations
far below recommended maximum airborne concentrations. Samples will
remain cool and wet during collection, processing, and packaging. The
sample volumes will remain very small compared to the air space where
samples are collected (i.e., the open deck of the research vessel) and
natural air movement will prevent the accumulation of toxic
concentrations of sediment contaminants.

Absorption of sediment contaminants through the skin is a possible
route of exposure. Little data is available, however, for the
contaminants identified in historical samples on acceptable exposure
levels based on skin contact. This is understandable since so many
factors affect the degree of absorption of chemicals through the skin.
Chemical structure, contact time, and concentration are critical,
however, other factors play an important role including skin thickness,
wetness, associated contaminants, total skin area affected, and the
integrity of the skin (e.g., cuts, scrapes, abrasions). Because of the
limited information on acceptable exposure levels and the carcinogenic
properties of some of the sediment contaminants, efforts will be made
to keep skin contact with sediment samples to a minimum (Section IY).

3.5 VESSEL AND EQUIPMENT OPERATIONS

Cruise participants shall be constantly alert of the vessel and
equipment operations going on around them. Sampling requires use of a
hydraulic boom and sampler. Cruise participants shall maintain a safe
distance from these operations as appropriate and shall wear hard hats

5499a

-------
ENVIRQSPHERE COMPANY

safety PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE

Page 9 of 18
Revision 0
Date 3/87

when working near such operations. Cruise participants shall be aware
that a sudden wave can cause loss of balance and result in falling into
a piece of moving machinery or overboard. Loose clothing which could
be caught in moving machinery shall be avoided or secured.

3.6 SAMPLE PREPARATION

Concentrated (18 N) sulfuric acid and spectrographic grade, methylene
chloride will-be used for sample preparation.

The primary health hazard of sulfuric acid is that of eye and skin
irritation. It will be added in 1 ml aliquot.s to pore water
subsamples. Pipets with pipeting aids will be used to add the sulfuric
acid. Mouth pipeting will be prohibited. Chemical splash goggles will
be worn and distilled water will be available for eye irrigation in the
event of an accident.

Methylene chloride has been identified as a "potential human
carcinogen" by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
(NIUSH) based on studies of laboratory animals. Epidemiologic
investigations of human populations have been inconclusive. NIOSH
recommends that all feasible precautions be taken to maintain exposures
to the lowest feasible limit. The American Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists has designated methylene chloride as an
"industrial substance suspect of carcinogenic potential for man" and
has established an 8-hour Time Weia'ited Average exposure limit of
50 ppm.

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY

Page 10 of 18
Revision 0
Date 3/87

SAFETY PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE

Methylene chloride will be added to approximately 8 pore water
samples. Fifty milliliters will be added to each sample using a 50 ml
pipet with pipeting aid. Methylene chloride will also be used to rinse
graduated cylinders and the water extraction apparatus. To minimize
exposures precautions will be taken to minimize the volatilization of
methylene chloride. All containers will be kept closed when not in
use. Sample containers will be closed as soon as methylene chloride is
added. Ventilation will be provided to the work area whenever
methylene chloride is in use by opening doors and windows in the cabin.

These measures and the small number of samples that need preparation
should insure that exposures to methylene chloride are minimized and
remain well below the exposure limit of 50 ppm recommended by the ACGIH.

5499a

-------
ENYIROSPHERE CQMPAMY

Page 11 of 18

SAFETY PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE

Revision 0
Date 3/87

SECTION IV. SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS FOR SAMPLING
4.1 PERSONAL PROTECTION

This section discusses protection to be utilized by all cruise
participants during the cruise. Dive requirements are presented
separately in Section YI.

4.1.1	Hypothermia Protection

Due to the possibility of wet and cold conditions, preventive measures
must be taken against hypothermia. Cruise participants shall wear a
waterproof layer of clothing over warm clothing as appropriate. Wool
is a superior fabric to cotton or synthetic fabrics since it acts as an
insulator even when wet. A dry change of clothing is recommended.
Waterproof boots are required. Boots should reach mid-calf as a
minimum and have non-skid soles.

4.1.2	Safety Gear

The following safety gear shall be worn by cruise participants as
described below:

Hard hats shall be worn when in proximity to overhead gear as
determined by the Cruise Safety Officer.

Rain gear, waterproof boots, and waterproof gloves shall be
worn by sampling personnel and other cruise participants as
appropriate to protect them from coming into direct skin

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY

SAFETY PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE

Page 12 of 18
Revision 0
Date 3/87

contact with the sediments sampled. Sample personnel shall
use the deck hose to keep themselves free of sediments and
shall wash face and hands with soap and water prior to eating,
drinking, smoking, or using the head. Divers will rinse off
diving gear and shower at the end of each shift.

o U.S. Coast Guard approved Personal Flotation Devices (PFDs)
shall be worn by all cruise participants at all times when on
board the vessel.

4.1.3 Sample Collection

Samples must always be collected in a safe manner. The vessel skipper
or Cruise Safety Officer may limit the number of personnel on deck
during sampling to reduce the risk of accidental injury.

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY

Page 13 of 18

SAFETY PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE

Revi si on 0
Date 3/87

SECTION V. EMERGENCY PROCEDURES

EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBERS LISTED IN SECTION I.

5.1	PROCEDURE FOR PERSONAL INJURY

In the event of serious personal injury, first perform emergency first
aid as appropriate to stabilize the victim. The vessel skipper will
then contact the Coast Guard or Seattle Harbor Patrol and proceed as
directed to transport the victim to a medical facility. The Cruise
Safety Officer shall notify the Project Manager and Regional Health and
Safety Manager as soon as possible.

5.2	PROCEDURE FOR DIVE ACCIOENT

In the event of a diving-related accident or the onset of symptoms
which could be a result of diving, the vessel skipper will contact the
Coast Guard Group Seattle on YHF-FM Channel 16. The Coast Guard will
then assume responsibility for medical evaluation and will contact the
Coast Guard Rescue Coordinator. Once contacted, the Rescue Coordinator
will outline the appropriate action for transport to the Virginia Mason
hyperbaric facility for treatment.

5499a

-------
EMVIROSPHERE COMPANY

Page 14 of 18
Revision Q
Date 3/87

SAFETY PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE

SECTION VI. DIVE REQUIREMENTS

SCUBA diving will be utilized on the sediment criteria verification
cruise for the purpose.of site selectibn for box core sampling and
hand-sampling bottom sediments. Divers will meet all requirements of
the Envirosphere Dive Manual as determined by the Envirosphere Dive
Master before any dives are made.

It is anticipated that a few to several dives will be made in the range
of depths of 40 to 80 FSW. All dives will be made under the direct
supervision of the Envirosphere Dive Master. The duration of each dive
should not exceed 10 minutes of bottom time. A repetitive dive profile
will be maintained on board to insure that the divers stay within no
decompression limits.

On each dive, two divers will descend a weighted incremented line to a
known bottom depth. Their work will be confined to the area in visual
contact with the divers' line. Upon the completion of each dive, the
divers will ascend the line together.

If at any time the divers lose visual contact with each other, they
will abort the dive and ascend to the surface. Diver recall will be
-accomplished by the diving-tender banging together two metal pipes
repeatedly below the surface of the water.

In the event that either diver fails to surface at the completion of
the dive or upon recall a single diver may reenter the water if
line-tended from the vessel to search the immediate area. If a brief

5499a

-------
ENYIRQSPHERE COMPANY	Page 15 of 18

SAFETY PLAN	Revision 0

SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE Date 3/87

search is unsuccessful the vessel
the Coast Guard on VHF-FM channel
and rescue.

skipper will initiate a radio call to
16 and request assistance with search

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY	Page 16 of 18

SAFETY PLAN	Revision 0

SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE Date 3/87

SECTION VII. MEDICAL DATA/FIELD TEAM REVIEW

7.1 MEDICAL DATA (to be filled out by all cruise participants for use

in case of accidental injury)

Name	Home Telephone 	

Address 						

Age	Height 	 Weight	 Sex 	

Blood Type __		 Allergies, Med. Alert? 		

Name, Address, and Telephone of Next of Kin (to be notified in case of
accident 	

Name of Personal Physician 		

Telephone ___	 Hospital Choice

7.2 FIELD TEAM REVIEW

I have read and review this project specific Safety Plan, understand
the information contained therein and will comply.

				 Da*e

(Signature)

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY	Page 17 of 18

SAFETY PLAN	Revision 0

SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE Date 3/87

SECTION VIII. APPROVALS

APPROVALS

The undersigned certify that this Safety Plan is adequate for the
protection and safety of cruise participants and that this Plan is
approved for use.

Envirosphere NW
Regional Health
and Safety Manager

Date ^ /fcl}

Envirosphere NW
Regional Health
and Safety Officer

Project Manager

Envirosphere
NW Regional
Office Manager

'A Aiy czh





5499a

-------
EMVIROSPHERE COMPANY

SAFETY PLAN
SEDIMENT CRITERIA VERIFICATION CRUISE

Page 18 of 18
Revision 0
Date 3/87

APPENDIX A

ENVIROSPHERE DIVE MANUAL
(DIYERS ONLY)

One copy as a minimum will be
available for use on board the vessel
during the cruise.

5499a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY
DIVISION OF EBASCO SERVICES
DIVING SAFETY MANUAL

Page 1 of 10
Revision 1
Date 3/87

INTRODUCTION

Envirosphere employees participating in SCUBA diving activities shall
conform to the standards described in the following sections.

Personnel Qualifications and Organization Requirements

No employee of Envirosphere shall use SCUBA in carrying out his or her
responsibilities without prior, written.authorization of the NW Region
Envirosphere Health and Safety Manager and review of the diver and dive
by the Envirosphere Dive Coordinator. Dive authorization shall include
dive purpose, justification, approximate time period covered, estimated
number of dives, and individuals included.

DIVE TEAM ORGANIZATION

Envirosphere's dive team organization is presented in Table 1.
Envirosphere Dive Coordinator

An Envirosphere authorized diver shall qualify as Dive Coordinator when
he or she:

1) can adequately document completion of 50 hours underwater diving
time or 100 dives, whichever occurs first;

5464a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY	Page 2 of 10

DIVISION OF EBASCO SERVICES	Revision J_

DIVING SAFETY MANUAL	Date 3/87

TABLE 1

ENVIROSPHERE DIVE TEAM

Stephen Harding	Envirosphere Dive Coordinator,

Dive Master

Dave Rapp	Diver

5464a

-------
FNVIROSPHERE COMPANY
DIVISION OF E3ASC0 SERVICES
DIVING SAFETY MANUAL

Page 3 of 10
Revision 1
Date 3/87

2)	demonstrates current diving experience; and

3)	can document methodologies and demonstrate the ability to maintain
contact with agencies and groups responsible for upgrading the
techniques and equipment utilized in dive activities.

The NW Regional Envirosphere Health and Safety Manager shall designate
the Dive Coordinator and shall retain a record of the qualifications of
all Envirosphere divers in his region. He shall be assisted in this
task by the Dive Coordinator. The Dive Coordinator shall annually
review the kinds of diving operations in which Envirosphere authorized
divers are participating, and make any recommendations necessary to
insure that all diving programs are conducted in a safe manner.

Additional responsibilities of the Dive Coordinator include:

1)	maintaining dive personnel records;

2)	maintaining all dive equipment in a safe operating condition;

3)	ensuring that all program dives have satisfied all safety
requirements in this procedure;

4)	ensuring that all safety procedures are followed during each diving
operation; and

5464a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY
DIVISION OF EBASCO SERVICES
DIVING SAFETY MANUAL

Page 4 of 10
Revision 1
Date 3/87

5) acting as Dive Master for program dives whenever possible.

Dive Master

A Oive Master shall be in charge of each program diving operation. The.
Dive Coordinator shall function in this capacity whenever possible.

When the Dive Coordinator cannot be present, an individual shall be
appointed by the Dive Coordinator as Dive Master for a specific dive.
The Dive Master will supervise safety and health aspects of the diving
operation and ensure that the requirements of this procedure are met
for each program dive.

Technical responsibilities of the Dive Master involving environmental
monitoring tasks being conducted shall be secondary to diver safety
during the performance of dive activities.

DIVE RECORDS

The following SCUBA diving records shall be kept on file at the
Envirosphere NW Region Office in 8ellevue, Washington for each program
diver:

1)	Diving Certificate, Certificate of Training in CPR and First Aid;

2)	Consent and Understanding of Risk;

3)	Medical History and Examination;

4)	Open Water Checkout; and

5)	Dive Logs.

A dive log shall be maintained by the Dive Coordinator and shall
contain records of equipment inspection and repairs/modifications as
well as all logged project dives and dives necessary to fulfill company
required physical conditioning and equipment familiarity.

5464a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY
DIVISION OF EBASCO SERVICES
DIVING SAFETY MANUAL

Page 5 of 10
Revision 1
Date 3/87

Copies of forms to be retained as dive records are presented in
Attachment I.

Evidence of Training and Certification

Each SCUBA diver employed by Envirosphere shall have on file adequate
written evidence of professional diver training and certification.

These records shall be filed by the Envirosphere NW Region Health and
Safety Manager. A certificate of SCUBA training by any one of the
following diver training agencies shall be considered adequate:

National Aquatics Council (YMCA)

National Association of Underwater Instructors (NAUI)

Professional Association of Diving Instructors (PAOI)

U.S. Navy

Diving certificates issued by other agencies may be accepted by
Envirosphere if it is established that the standards for such
certification are at least equal to those established by the National
SCUBA Training Council.

Each SCUBA diver employed by Envirosphere shall have on file a copy of
a certificate of training in CPR (Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) and
First Aid as approved by the American Red Cross.

Minimum Experience '.equirements, Open Water Checkout

In addition to the required Certificates of Training (above), each
Envirosphere diver shall participate in at least 12 dives per year with
no longer than 6 months elapsed time between any 2 dives in order to
maintain diver experience.

5464 a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY
DIVISION OF E3ASCO SERVICES
DIVING SAFETY MANUAL

Page 6 of 10
Revision 1
Date 3/87

It shall be the responsibility of the individual diver to maintain a
dive log of both personal and job-related dives to assure compliance
with this requirement and to inform the Dive Coordinator of all dives
pursuant to the minimum requirements. The Dive Coordinator shall
retain on file as part of the divers' records (see above) adequate
proof of compliance of individual divers with minimum experience
requirements. The Dive Coordinator may reinstate a diver who falls
below the minimum number of certification dives by conducting a
checkout dive with the individual in question and documenting the
results of this dive. During the checkout dive, the diver must
demonstrate familiarity and proficiency in the use of SCUBA equipment
and surface and underwater swimming skills. Additional checkout dives
will be required if the Diving Coordinator is not satisfied. The diver
shall not receive, certification if he or she fails to meet the
certification requirements.

Medical Requirements

Each member of the Envirosphere SCU8A dive team shall pass an annual
medical examination performed by a certified physician. A record of
each examination (Attachment B) shall be kept in the dive files. Any
major illness or injury which requires hospitalization for more than 24
hours shall require the diver to successfully pass a second physical
examination appropriate to the nature and extent of the injury or
illness thereby clearing the diver to return to active status.

Envirosphere SCUBA divers shall be prohibited from consumption of
alcoholic beverages or prescribed medication (except Actifed and
Sudafed) within 24 hours of the scheduled dive. The prescription
requirement shall be waived only upon receipt of written approval from
a licensed physician.

5464a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY
DIVISION OF EBASCO SERVICES
DIVING SAFETY MANUAL

Page 7 of 10
Revision 1
Date 3/87

SAFETY REQUIREMENTS
General Safety

The ultimate responsibility for safety shall be with the individual
SCUBA diver. The diver shall refuse to dive if it is his or her best
judgment that diving conditions are unsafe or mismatched to his or her
individual abilities. Specific procedures for dive emergencies are
given in Attachment II.

Pre-Oive Procedure

The following procedure shall be followed prior to each dive.

1)	The dive master shall ensure that this Safety Plan and a list of
telephone numbers for emergency aid are present at the dive site
and that required first aid supplies are available.

2)	The dive master shall comply with OSHA Standards governing the
assessment of the safety and health aspects of the proposed dive,
employee briefing and equipment inspection. Copies of applicable
standards shall be present at the dive site.

3)	Immediately prior to and during all dive operations when the boat
is anchored, a dive flag shall be flown to warn other boat
operators to stay well clear of the boat and diver. The diver
shall confine his surface activity to the close vicinity of the
dive boat and shall remain alert to the ..anger from passing boats.

5464a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY	Page 8 of 10

DIVISION OF E8ASCO SERVICES	Revision J_

DIVING SAFETY MANUAL	Date 3/87

Dive Procedure

The following procedure shall be followed when diving.

A checklist of SCUBA diving equipment is presented in Table 2.

1)	Envirosphere shall comply with all provisions of OSHA Standards.

2)	The diver shall be line-tended from the surface, or accompanied by

another diver in the water in continuous visual contact during the
diving operation.

3)	No dive shall be initiated with SCUBA tanks containing less than
1000 p.s.i. of compressed air.

41 All SCUBA tanks utilized on the program shall be equipped with pull
rods to provide a reserve breathing gas supply. This valve shall
always be in the closed position until the reserve is actually
required.

Post-Dive Procedure

Upon completion of each dive, the D1ve Master shall check the diver's

condition and shall instruct the diver to report any physical problems

resulting from the dive and any potential problems for anyone repeating

the dive. This information shall be entered in the dive log at the end
of each div? by the Dive Master.

5464a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY
DIVISION OF EBASCO SERVICES
DIVING SAFETY MANUAL

Page 9 of 10
Revision 1
Date 3/87

TABLE 2

SCUBA DIVING EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST

1.	SCUBA tanks with backpacks

2.	Regulators equipped with submersible pressure gauges, and
buoyancy compensator inflation hoses

3.	Buoyancy compensators

4.	Drysuit

5.	Gloves, boots

6.	Fins

7.	Face masks, snorkels

8.	Diving knives

9.	Dive flag (red and white, civilian)

10.	100-foot floating line

11.	Weight belts and weights

12.	Depth gauge or depth marked boat oar

13.	Waterproof watch

14.	First aid supplies

15.	Logs and required manuals, standards
EXPENDABLES

1.	Air

5464a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE COMPANY
DIVISION OF EBASCO SERVICES
DIVING SAFETY MANUAL

Page 10 of 10
Revision 1
Date 3/87

REFERENCES

Alaska Department of Labor. 1985. Occupational and Safety Standard,
Commercial Diving Operations, Section 18.60.010 of the Alaska
Statutes, Subchapter 06.

American Red Cross. 1981. Standard first aid and personal safety.
Doubleday and Company, Inc., Garden City, New York. 268 pp.

Chapman, Charles F. and Maloney, E.S. 1983. Chapmans piloting,
seamanship, and small boat handling, 56th Rev. Hearst Books.

Maloney, E.S. 1977. Piloting, seamanship, and small boat handling.
American Book-Stratford Press, Inc., New York. 644 pp.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 1979. The
NOAA diving manual, diving for science and technology. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

OSHA. 1985. Occupational safety and health standards, subpart T -
conmercial diving operation. Code of Federal Regulations, Title
29, Chapter XVII, Part XVII.

U S Coast Guard. 1982. Regulations for commercial diving operations.
Code of Federal Regulations, Tit! 3 46, Chapter I, Part 197.

U S. Navy. 1985. Diving manual, Vol. 1. Navy Department, Washington,
D.C. NAVSHIPS 0994-001-900. U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C., Loose-leaf pubk. n.p.

624 pp.

5464a

-------
ATTACHMENT I

DIVING FORMS

Envirosphere diving regulations and procedures require each person
diving under Envirosphere auspices, including visiting divers, to
submit the following forms or records to the Envirosphere Dive
Coordinator.

A.	Diving Registration

The registration form identifies the diver, diver's organization,
and presents the diver's history of water and diving skills. It
serves as an aid in determining the diver's level of proficiency
for certification purposes and should be filled out in as much
detail as possible. It will also be necessary to submit copies of
CPR and SCUBA certification credentials.

B.	Consent and Understanding of Risk

The signed written consent form indicates that the diver has become
familiar with Envirosphere diving regulations and agrees to abide
by them.

C.	Medical History and Examination

These forms indicate the criteria considered by the examining
physician in evaluating a candidate's physical fitness for diving.
The completed medical forms remain in the diver's file.

D.	Open Water Checkout

The diving skills listed on this form must be passed by all
candidates for Envirosphere certification. These skills must be
supervised by the Diving Safety Coordinator or by a qualified
Diving Instructor approved by him.

E.	Diving Log Sheet

Envirosphere has adopted a uniform diving log sheet for all persons
diving under Envirosphere auspices. All divers are required to log
all dives under Envirosphere auspices and submit a copy to the
Diving Safety Coordinator.

Facsimiles of these forms are included in this Attachment.

5464a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE DIVING SAFETY PROGRAM
DIVING REGISTRATION

Personal History (please print)	Date 	

Name 		 					

Last	First	m.I.

Department _____	;			 Mail stop	

Position 				 Work Ph. 	 Home Ph. _____

Home Address 	

Street

City	State	'	~TTp"

Height	 Weight 	 Sex 	Age	 Date of Last Diving Physical 	

No. of Years: Swimming 	 Skin/SCUBA Diving 	Hard Hat 	Other _

Type of Diving Card & No. 				

Date & Place of Certification

Approx. No. Dives: 0-30' 	 30-60' 	 60-100' 	 100-130* 	 Deepest

Hours of Diving Experience	Frequency of Dives Per Year 	

Date & Place of Last Dive 	

List swimming and diving schools attended with the date of completion:

First Aid Card: Yes _ Date	 No CPR Card: Yes Date	No

List diving activities or jobs held, type of work it involved, and ths
geographical location:-		.		* dna T:ne

My diving will be under Envirosphere auspices: Yes 	 No

Signature		

5464a

-------
ENVIROSPHERE DIVING SAFETY PROGRAM
CONSENT AND UNDERSTANDING OF RISK

The undersigned, and in the event the undersigned is under eighteen years of

age, the undersigned's parents and/or guardians hereby declare:

1) That he/she/they are fully aware of the special dangers and risks inherent
in diving.

.2) That the undersigned has read and is familiar with the Diving Safety
Manual as published by Envirosphere, and

3) That being fully informed as to these risks and to the material contained
in the Diving Safety Manual, he/she/they consent to participation in
diving under the auspices of Envirosphere.

Dated, this 	 day of	> 19	

Father (or guardian)	Mother (or guardian)

Participant	Department

EMERGENCY CONTACT

Name !	' Relationship	Phone

Address

5464a

2

-------
ENVIROSPHERE
PHYSICAL EXAMINATION FOR SCUBA DIVING

Medical History
(To be completed by applicant)

Name	;	 Age	 Sex 	 Date 	

Department 	 M.S. 	 Work Ph. 	

Home Address 						 Home Ph.

			Soc* Sec- 	

1.	Have you had previous experience in diving? Yes 	 No

Years: Swimming 	 Skin/SCUBA Diving 	 Hard Hat 	 Other

Certification: Type	 Date 		 Depth

Frequency of dives per year	 Total hours 	 Deepest Dive

Planned depth 	 Planned frequency 		

2.	When driving through mountains or flying do you have trouble equalizing'
pressure in your ears or sinuses? Yes 	 No

3.	Have you ever been rejected for service, employment, or insurance for
medical reasons? (If yes, explain under remarks or discuss with doctor.)
Yes	No 	

4.	Do you smoke? Yes 	 No 	 (If yes, how much) 	

5.	In what sports or exercise do you regularly engage? 	

6.	When was your last physical examination? Date	Results

7.	When was your last chest X-ray?	Date	Results	'

8.	Have you had an electrocardiogram?	Date	Results

9.	Have you had an electroencephalogram? Date	Results

Check the blank if you have, or ever have had, any of the followina Fxniain
under remarks or discuss with doctor.	9' txP'ain

5464a

3

-------
10.	Frequent colds or sore throat.

11.		 Hay fever or sinus trouble.

12.	Trouble- breathing through nose (other than during colds).

13.		 Painful or running ear, mastoid trouble, broken eardrum.

14.		Hard of hearing.

15.		 Asthma or bronchitis.

16.		 Shortness of breath after moderate exercise.

17.		Pleurisy.

18.		Collapsed lung (pneumothorax).

19.		 Chest pain or persistent cough.

20.		Tire easily.

21.		Spells of fast, irregular, or pounding heartbeat.

22.		 High or low blood pressure.

23.		 Any kind of "heart trouble".

24.		 Frequent upset stomach, heartburn, or indigestion, peptic ulcer.

25.		 Frequent diarrhea or blood in stool.

26.		 Anemia or (females) heavy menstruation.

27.		 Belly or backache lasting more than a day or two. .

28.		 Kidney or bladder disease; blood, sugar, or albumin in urine.

29.		 Broken bone, serious sprain or strain, dislocated joint.

30.		 Rheumatism, arthritis, or other joint trouble.

31.		 Severe or frequent headaches.

32.		 Head injury causing unconsciousness.

33.		 Dizzy spells, fainting spells or fits.

34.		 Trouble sleeping, frequent nightmares, or sleepwalki/ig.

35.		 Nervous breakdown or periods of marked nervousness or depression.

35. 	 A phobia for closed-in spaces, large open places, or high places.

37.		 Any neurological or psychological condition.

38.		 Train, sea, or air sickness, nausea.

39.		 Alcoholism or any drug or narcotic habit (including regular use of

sleeping pills, benzedrine, etc.)

40.		 Recent gain or loss of weight or appetite.

41.		 Jaundice or hepatitis.

42.		 Tuberculosis.

43.		Diabetes

44.		Rheumatic fever.

45.		 Dental bridgework or plates.

46.		 Susceptibility to panic.

47.		 Pain from altitude or flying.

48.		Surgery.

49.		 Any symptoms of the bends.

50.		Any serious accident, injury, or illness not mentioned above

(describe under "Remarks", give dates).

5464a

4

-------
(THIS SIDE TO BE COMPLETED BY MEDICAL STAFF)

A. Examinations:

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Height 	

Blood Pressure

(cm). Weight

Pulse

Vision:
(kg) Uncorrected

	 Corrected

Color Vision

R. Eye L. Eye

Please check the following items; if

Norm Abnor

General appearances (in-
cluding obesity, gross
defects, postural abnor-
mal ities)

Head and neck
Eyes

Nose and sinuses
Ears (including hearing,
otitis, perforation)

Mouth and throat
Spine

Lungs and chest
Heart

Explanation of abnormalities:

abnormal, give details below.

Norm Abnor

10.	Abdomen

11.	Inguinal rings (males

12.	Genitalia (males)

13.	Anus & rectum (if
indicated)

14.	Extremities

15.	Skin (eruptions or
reactions)

16.	Neurologic

17.	Psychiatric (including
apparent motivation for
diving, emotional stab-
ility, claustrophobia

B. imnrflctinn of History and Physical Examination: (circle one)

Satisfactory Questionable Unsatisfactory		

Signature of Examiner Date

C Test Results: (See Appendix II, Information to Medical Personnel)

14/17 chest X-ray	 Hematocrit 	 Urinalysis 	

yq	FEV] 	 W8C	Tympanogram	

12-TeadTCG	Sickle cell screen	 Audiogram	

D. Final Impression: (circle one)

Approval:	I find no defects which I consider incompatible

with diving.

Conditional-Approval: I do not consider diving in this person's oest

interests, but find no defects which present
marked risk. I have discussed my i;,.session with
him/her.

Disapproval:	This applicant has defects which in my opinion

clearly would constitute unacceptable hazards to
his/her health and safety in diving.

Signature of reviewing physician	Date	

5464a

5

-------
ENVIROSPHERE DIVING SAFETY PROGRAM

SCUBA OPEN WATER CHECKOUT DIVE

Name

Recognized Diving Card Numoer

Department

Date of last medical clearance

The Envirosphere Diving Safety Manual requires an initial ocean or
other open water checkout dive. The above named .applicant for
certification must satisfy the specific test requirements of a
qualified Diving Instructor, designated by the Diving Safety
Coordinator. These requirements include demonstrating an ability to
perform the following:

Initial Requirements

1.	Remove and replace SCUBA and face mask at a depth greater than 15
feet.

2.	Exchange mouthpiece with partner: 1) partner with air; b) partner
without air at a depth greater than 15 feet.

3.	Make a controlled emergency ascent to tne surface from depth
greater than 15 feet.

4.	Snorkel 1,000 feet with SCUBA in position.

5.	Surface dive without SCUBA to depth greater than 15 feet.

6.	Demonstrate proficiency in diving rescue techniques:

a)	Bring unconscious diver to the surface

b)	In water mouth-to-mouth resuscitation while towing unconscious
diver.

Signature of the Diving Instructor on this sheet indicates successful
completion of the checkout dive.

Approved:

Diving Instructor

Date

Place

5464a

6

-------
ENVIROSPHERE DIVING SAFETY PROGRAM
DIVING LOG SHEET

Nainc of Diver

Date

Name of Partner(s)

Location o( Dive

Max.

Depth

Bottom
Time

Safety
Stop

Surface
Interval!

Purpose
of Dive

Commenu

























































































































































































































-------
ATTACHMENT 2
EMERGENCY DIVE PROCEDURES

A. Fire

Responsibility
Dive Master

Action

1.	Assures that one or more ABC-type fire
extinguishers, as required by OSHA, are
available for each vessel or structure
from which diving operations are
conducted.

2.	Assures that flammable liquids
(including fuel) are stored in approved
containers. If on a mobile structure,
secure thein to a solid anchorage on the
vessel or structure. Never carry more
flammable liquids than is necessary for
the completion of the dive mission.
The following procedures are required
for all dives:

(a)	In the event of fire, stop all
diving operations.

(b)	The dive master is responsible for
assuring that all Envirosphere
divers are aware of the emergency
and find safe refuge.

(c)	Attempt to extinguish any fire on 3
vessel or structure as quickly as
possible.

(c!) In the event of an uncontrolled
fire on a vessel, start evacuation

procedures.

5473a

-------
B. Emergency Loss of Communication

Responsibi1ity
Dive Master

Diver

3.

Action

If a SCUBA diver is line-tended and
does not respond to pull signals,
assume that an emergency situation
exists and implement appropriate
procedures (retrieval or sending a
standby diver to assist).
If performing a line-tended SCUBA
dive and contact with the surface
is lost, immediately attempt to
re-establish contact. If
unsuccessful, abort the dive.
If using a buddy system and contact
between divers is lost, surface
immediately and reestablish contact
before completing the dive mission.

C. Interruption of Air Supply

Responsibi!ity
Diver

Action

1.	Upon interruption of the primary
air supply, begin an immediate
return to the surface.

2.	When diving using the buddy system,
if the air supply is interrupted,
signal to the "buddy" to ascend
after switching to the emergency
breathing supply (if available) or
initiate "buddy breathing."

5473a

2

-------
3.

When diving line-tended, signal
situation to the surface before
beginning to ascend.

D. Diver Entanglement or Entrapment

Responsibility
Diver

Action

1. When entangled or entrapped,

immediately signal the surface or
the buddy, if passible, who will
then provide assistance. When in
this situation, do not panic, but
slowly and methodically attempt to
get free. The predive briefing
should alert the dive team if this
situation is a possibility.

E. Decompression Sickness or Other Diving Disease

Responsibi1ity
Dive Master/Emergency
Medical Personnel

Action

If radio communication is
available, contact the nearest
Coast Guard unit, state that there
is a case of air embolism or
decompression sickness, give the
exact location and request air
transportation to the nearest
available decompression chamber.
If radio communication is not
available, telephone the Coast
Guard or the approoriate law
enforcement agency to summon help.

5473a

3

-------
Qualified Dive Team
Members

Dive Master

Give first aid and artificial
respiration as required and keep
the injured lying in a head-low,
left-side down position.
If possible, accompany the injured
to the decompression chamber to
tell the attending physician the
circumstances. Do not attempt
decompression in the water.

F. Uncontrolled Buoyant Ascent

Responsibility
Diver

Action

1. When presented with the situation
of an uncontrolled buoyant ascent,
do everything possible to slow the
ascent, such as sticking fins out
and/or thrusting upward with the
arms. The most important point,
however, is to exhale while rising
to reduce the possibility of air
embolism.

G. Physical Injury

Responsibility
Dive Master

Action

When a diver is injured, terminate
the dive and bring the diver to the
surface as quickly as possible.
First aid should be administered
and the diver should be taken to a
medical facility for profession
attention. In the case of a wound,
special care should be taken to get

5473a

4

-------
H. Acute Illness

the wound clean to avoid the added
risk of infection. See Appendix 3
of this Safety Plan for general
first aid.

Responsibility
Dive Master

Diver

Action

1.	When aware of an illness before a
dive, prohibit.the affected diver
from working as a diver for the 
duration of the illness.

2.	When diving during the onset of
acute illness, immediately
terminate the dive, return to the
surface, and request medical
assistance.

5473a

5

-------