Trenton Channel
Remedial Investigation Report
Interim Final, July 2010
X-/EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Great Lakes National Program Office
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604-3511
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
525 West Allegan Street
f P.O. Box 30473
— Lansing, Ml 48909-7973
-------
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Great Lakes National Program Office
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3511
-------
-------
Trenton Channel
Remedial Investigation Report
Great Lakes Legacy Act Program
Prepared for:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Great Lakes National Program Office
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3511
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Water Division
Constitution Hall
South Tower, 2nd Floor
525 West Allegan Street
Lansing, Michigan 48933
Interim Final, July 2010
-------
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This document was prepared under the direction of Dr. Amy Mucha, Project Lead and
Dr. Marc Tuchman, Alternate Project Lead, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Great
Lakes National Program Office; and Michael Alexander, Project Manager, Michigan
Department of Environmental Quality; and Louis Blume, Work Assignment and Quality
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Great Lakes National Program Office.
The report was prepared by Molly Middlebrook Amos, Kenneth Miller, Judith Schofield,
Justin Telech, Harry McCarty, and Elizabeth Benjamin of Computer Sciences
Corporation, under Environmental Protection Agency Contract Number EP-W-06-046.
The geostatistical analysis was conducted by Pierre Goovaerts.
The Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation was accomplished through the efforts of
many project partners. David Wethington and Diana Mally, Former Project Leads, Dr.
Amy Mucha, Current Project Lead, and Dr. Marc Tuchman, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Great Lakes National Program Office and Michael Alexander, Project
Manager, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality wish to acknowledge the
assistance of RaghuNagam, Project Manager, and Richard Baldino, Quality Manager,
STN Environmental, JV. In addition, Rosanne Ellison, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Large Lakes Research Station, is acknowledged for providing the locational data
and associated references to develop the map illustrating the active combined sewer
outfalls and former industrial outfalls along the Trenton Channel (Figure 7.1).
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
My 2010
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS V
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS XIII
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY XV
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1
2.0 SITE BACKGROUND 5
2.1 GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION 5
2.2 SITE HISTORY 7
2.3 INVENTORY OF EXISTING DATA 8
3.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS 11
3.1 DEMOGRAPHICS AND LAND USE 11
3.2 HYDROLOGY 11
3.3 GEOLOGY 12
3.4 ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 13
3.5 FEATURES AND CHALLENGES UNIQUE TO THE PROJECT 14
4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 17
4.1 PROJECT QUALITY DOCUMENTATION 17
4.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES 17
4.3 PROJECT FUNDING 20
4.4 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 20
4.4.1 Project Planning, Permits and Notifications 20
4.4.2 Project Communication, Roles and Responsibilities 21
5.0 SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS 23
5.1 SAMPLING DESIGN AND TECHNICAL APPROACH 23
5.2 SAMPLING DESIGN 26
5.2.1 Phase I Sampling Design 26
5.2.2 Phase II Sampling Design 28
5.3 SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS METHODS 32
5.3.1 Sediment Core Sampling 32
5.3.2 Surficial Sediment Sampling 34
5.3.3 Analytical Methods 34
5.4 SEDIMENT DEPTH SURVEY 37
5.5 DATA MANAGEMENT AND DATA QUALITY 38
5.5.1 Data Management 38
5.5.2 Laboratory Data Collection 39
5.5.3 Database 39
5.5.4 Data Quality 40
6.0 PROJECT RESULTS 43
6.1 SEDIMENT DEPTH 43
6.2 SEDIMENT PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC 47
6.3 SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY 51
6.3.1 Organics 51
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
6.3.2 Metals 55
6.4 PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY AND GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS 62
6.4.1 Total Organic Carbon 62
6.4.2 pH 63
6.4.3 Percent Solids 65
6.4.4 Atterberg Limits 66
6.4.5 Specific Gravity 67
6.5 SEDIMENT TOXICITY 67
6.6 CORRELATION BETWEEN SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY AND TOXICITY DATA 72
6.7 OBSERVED COC RESULTS IN SEDIMENT IN COMPARISON TO CBSQGS 72
6.7.1 Mercury 73
6.7.2 TotalAroclors 78
6.7.3 Total PAHs 82
7.0 NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION 83
7.1 POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION SOURCES 83
7.2 VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL EXTENT OF CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN 85
7.2.1 Distribution of Total PAHs 87
7.2.2 Distribution of Total PCBs 92
7.2.3 Distribution of Mercury 99
7.2.4 Distribution of Contaminants of Concern in Transects D, E, and F 106
7.2.5 Assessment of pH 107
7.3 SEDIMENT THICKNESS AND VOLUME 108
7.4 RELATIONSHIP OF CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN CONCENTRATIONS TO SCREENING LEVELS 109
8.0 SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS 113
8.1 ECOLOGICAL AND HUMAN HEALTH 113
8.2 CONSENSUS-BASED SEDIMENT QUALITY GUIDELINES 113
8.3 EQUILIBRIUM SEDIMENT BENCHMARK Toxic UNITS FOR PAHs IN SEDIMENT SAMPLES 114
8.4 LIMITED CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL 117
9.0 PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVE 119
9.1 DEVELOPMENT OF REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVES AND PRELIMINARY REMEDIATION GOALS 119
9.1.1 Remedial Action Objectives 119
9.1.2 Preliminary Remediation Goals 119
9.2 ESTIMATION OF REMEDIALAREAANDSEDIMENTVOLUMES 120
9.2J Remedial Area and Sediment Volume Estimates 120
9.2.2 Uncertainty Analysis 123
10.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 125
10.1 SUMMARY 125
10.2 NEXTSTEPS 126
10.3 DATA NEEDS 126
11.0 REFERENCES 127
APPENDIX A-TECHNICAL APPROACH FOR GEOSTATISTICAL MODELING AND ESTIMATION OF SEDIMENT
VOLUMES 131
APPENDIX B-DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF PAH RESULTS 141
APPENDIX C - DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF ADDITIONAL SVOC RESULTS 145
APPENDIX D - DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF INDIVIDUAL AROCLOR RESULTS... ... 155
My 2010
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPENDIX E - REFERENCES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES CONDUCTED IN THE TRENTON CHANNEL
BETWEEN 1985 AND 2007 157
APPENDIX F - DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF PCB CONGENER RESULTS 173
APPENDIX G - PAH EQUILIBRIUM SEDIMENT BENCHMARK TOXIC UNITS CALCULATED FOR SEDIMENT
SAMPLES FROM THE TRENTON CHANNEL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SITE 179
APPENDIX H - OBSERVED RESULTS FOR INDIVIDUAL SAMPLES DESCRIBED IN THE TRENTON CHANNEL
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT 184
APPENDIX I - RESULTS OF HYALELLA AZTECA AND CHIRONOMUS TENTANS TOXICITY TESTS FROM
PHASE I AND PHASE II SEDIMENT SAMPLES ... ...ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
List of Tables
TABLE 4-1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF KEY GOVERNMENTAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL 22
TABLE 5-1 SAMPLE IDENTIFIERS AND LOCATIONAL INFORMATION FOR PHASE I SEDIMENT SAMPLING 27
TABLE 5-2 SAMPLE IDENTIFIERS AND LOCATIONAL INFORMATION FOR PHASE II SEDIMENT SAMPLING 32
TABLE 5-3 CLASSES OF ANALYTES ASSESSED IN SEDIMENT SAMPLES DURING PHASE I AND PHASE II 35
TABLE 5-4 ANALYTICAL METHODS AND REPORTING LIMITS, BY LABORATORY 36
TABLE 6-1 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF SEDIMENT DEPTH MEASUREMENTS 44
TABLE 6-2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF CALCULATED TOTAL PAH RESULTS 51
TABLE 6-3 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF OIL AND GREASE RESULTS 52
TABLE 6-4 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF ORO AND DRO RESULTS 53
TABLE 6-5 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF TOTAL AROCLOR RESULTS 54
TABLE 6-6 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF TOTAL PCB CONGENERS 55
TABLE 6-7 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF TOTAL METALS 55
TABLE 6-8 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF TCLP METALS 58
TABLE 6-9 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF SIMULTANEOUSLY EXTRACTED METALS 60
TABLE 6-10 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF AVS AND SEM/AVS RATIO RESULTS 61
TABLE 6-11 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON RESULTS 62
TABLE 6-12 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF pH RESULTS 63
TABLE 6-13 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF TOTAL SOLIDS 65
TABLE 6-14 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF ATTERBERG LIMITS 66
TABLE 6-15 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY 67
TABLE 6-16 TOXICITY RESULTS, PHASE I 68
TABLE 6-17TOXICITY RESULTS, PHASE II 69
TABLE 6-18 OBSERVED MERCURY RESULTS IN SEDIMENTS IN COMPARISON TO CBSQGs 73
TABLE 6-19 OBSERVED TOTAL AROCLORS RESULTS IN SEDIMENTS IN COMPARISON TO CBSQGs 78
TABLE 6-20 OBSERVED TOTAL PAH RESULTS IN SEDIMENTS IN COMPARISON TO CBSQGs 82
TABLE 7-1 RESULTS OF CBSQG COMPARISON FORTRANSECTS D-F (N=29) 106
TABLE 7-3 OVERALL DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF TRENTON CHANNEL 109
TABLE 8-1 LIST OF PAHs USED AND UNUSED IN ESBTU CALCULATIONS 115
TABLE 8-2 RESULTS FOR EVALUATION OFTOXICITY USING ESBTU CALCULATIONS 117
TABLE 9-1 VOLUME ESTIMATES AND MASS OF CONTAMINANT FOR THE SEDIMENT EXCEEDING THE CBSQGs PER THE
PROJECT CRITERIA 121
TABLE 9-2 VOLUME ESTIMATES AND MASS OF CONTAMINANT FOR THE SEDIMENT EXCEEDING THE CBSQGs PER COC 121
List of Figures
FIGURE I-ITRENTON CHANNELSITE LOCATION MAP 3
FIGURE 2-1 TRENTON CHANNEL SITE AND PROJECT SAMPLING AREAS 6
FIGURE 4-1 PHASE I AND PHASE II SAMPLING GRID ILLUSTRATING THE USE OF TRANSECTS 19
FIGURE 5-1 PHASE I AND PHASE II SAMPLING LOCATIONS 24
FIGURE 5-2 PHASE I AND PHASE II SAMPLING LOCATIONS OVERLAID ON THE TRANSECTS..., ... 25
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
FIGURE 6-1 PROJECT SEDIMENT DEPTH RESULTS 45
FIGURE 6-2 KRIGED SEDIMENT DEPTH AT THE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE 46
FIGURE 6-3 SOIL TEXTURE CLASSIFICATION RESULTS FOR 0-1 FOOT AND 1-3 FOOT DEPTH INTERVALS 48
FIGURE 6-4 SOILTEXTURE CLASSIFICATION RESULTS FOR 3-5 FOOT AND 5-7 FOOT DEPTH INTERVALS 49
FIGURE 6-5 SOILTEXTURE CLASSIFICATION RESULTS FOR 7-9 FOOT AND 9-11 FOOT DEPTH INTERVALS 50
FIGURE 6-6 MEAN pH RESULTS FOR ALL DEPTH INTERVALS FOR EACH PHASE I SAMPLING LOCATION 64
FIGURE 6-7 PHASE I AND PHASE II SURVIVAL DATA FOR CHIRONOMUS DILUTUS 70
FIGURE 6-8 PHASE I AND PHASE II SURVIVAL DATA FOR HYALELLA AZTECA 71
FIGURE 6-9 Box PLOTS OF THE OBSERVED MERCURY RESULTS IN THE SPECIFIED TRANSECTS 74
FIGURE 6-10 OBSERVED MERCURY RESULTS FOR 0-1 FOOT AND 1-3 FOOT DEPTH INTERVALS 75
FIGURE 6-11 OBSERVED MERCURY RESULTS FOR 3-5 FOOT AND 5-7 FOOT DEPTH INTERVALS 76
FIGURE 6-12 OBSERVED MERCURY RESULTS FOR 7-9 FOOT AND 9-11 FOOT DEPTH INTERVALS 77
FIGURE 6-13 Box PLOTS OF THE OBSERVED TOTAL AROCLOR RESULTS IN THE SPECIFIED TRANSECTS 78
FIGURE 6-14 OBSERVED TOTAL PCB RESULTS (AS AROCLORS) FOR 0-1 FOOT AND 1-3 FOOT DEPTH INTERVALS 79
FIGURE 6-15 OBSERVED TOTAL PCB RESULTS (AS AROCLORS) FOR 3-5 FOOT AND 5-7 FOOT DEPTH INTERVALS 80
FIGURE 6-16 OBSERVED TOTAL PCB RESULTS FOR 7-9 FOOT AND 9-11 FOOT DEPTH INTERVALS 81
FIGURE 7-1 ACTIVE COMBINED SEWER OUTFALLS AND FORMER INDUSTRIAL OUTFALLS LOCATED ALONG THE TRENTON
CHANNEL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SITE 84
FIGURE 7-2TRENTON CHANNELSITE BOUNDARY MAP 86
FIGURE 7-3 SEDIMENT SURFACE TOTAL PAH CONCENTRATIONS AT THE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING (OTO 1 FOOT) 88
FIGURE 7-4 SEDIMENT SURFACE TOTAL PAH CONCENTRATIONS AT THE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING (OTO 1 FOOT) IN RELATION TO THE ACTIVE COMBINED SEWER OUTFALLS AND FORMER INDUSTRIAL
OUTFALLS 89
FIGURE 7-5 ESTIMATED TOTAL PAH CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT AT THE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE BASED ON
GEOSTATISTICAL MODELING, VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL
DIRECTION) 90
FIGURE 7-6 TOTAL PAH CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT AT THE TRENTON CHANNELSITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING, VIEW FROM NORTHWEST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 91
FIGURE 7-7 TOTAL PAH CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT AT THE TRENTON CHANNELSITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING, VIEW FROM NORTHEAST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 92
FIGURE 7-8 SEDIMENT SURFACE TOTAL PCB CONCENTRATIONS AT THE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING (OTO 1 FOOT) 93
FIGURE 7-9 SEDIMENT SURFACE TOTAL PCB CONCENTRATIONS AT THE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING (OTO 1 FOOT) IN RELATION TO THE ACTIVE COMBINED SEWER OUTFALLS AND FORMER INDUSTRIAL
OUTFALLS 94
FIGURE 7-10 TOTAL PCB CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT AT THE TRENTON CHANNELSITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING, VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 95
FIGURE 7-11 TOTAL PCB CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT AT THE TRENTON CHANNELSITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING, VIEW FROM NORTHWEST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 96
FIGURE 7-12 TOTAL PCB CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT AT THE TRENTON CHANNELSITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING, VIEW FROM NORTHEAST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 97
FIGURE 7-13 TOTAL PCB CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT AT THE TRENTON CHANNELSITE IN TRANSECTS B AND C BASED ON
GEOSTATISTICAL MODELING (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 98
FIGURE 7-14 SEDIMENT SURFACE MERCURY CONCENTRATIONS AT THE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING (OTO 1 FOOT) 100
FIGURE 7-15 SEDIMENT SURFACE MERCURY CONCENTRATIONS AT THE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING (OTO 1 FOOT) IN RELATION TO THE ACTIVE COMBINED SEWER OUTFALLS AND FORMER INDUSTRIAL
OUTFALLS 101
FIGURE 7-16 MERCURY CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT ATTHE TRENTON CHANNELSITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING, VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 102
FIGURE 7-17 MERCURY CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT ATTHE TRENTON CHANNELSITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING, VIEW FROM NORTHWEST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 103
My 2010
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FIGURE 7-18 MERCURY CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENT ATTHE TRENTON CHANNELSITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING, VIEW FROM NORTHEAST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 104
FIGURE 7-19 Box PLOTS OF THE RESULTS OF THE WILCOXONSIGNED-RANK TEST FOR THE THREE COCs 107
FIGURE 7-20 PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDENCE ATTHE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL MODELING, VIEW
FROM SOUTHEAST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 110
FIGURE 7-21 PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDENCE ATTHE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL MODELING, VIEW
FROM NORTHWEST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) Ill
FIGURE 7-22 PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDENCE ATTHE TRENTON CHANNEL SITE BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL MODELING, VIEW
FROM NORTHEAST OF THE SITE (EXAGGERATED 25 TIMES IN THE VERTICAL DIRECTION) 112
FIGURE 9-1 SEDIMENT DEPTH TO DREDGE WHERE COCs IN SEDIMENTS EXCEED THE CONSENSUS-BASED SEDIMENT QUALITY
GUIDELINES BASED ON GEOSTATISTICAL MODELING 122
FIGURE A-l SCATTERPLOTS OF OBSERVED VERSUS ESTIMATED DEPTHS VALUES COMPUTED USING ORDINARY KRIGING AND A
CROSS-VALIDATION (LEAVE-ONE-OUT) APPROACH 137
FIGURE A-2 CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE OF NODES OF THE 3D MODELING GRID AS A FUNCTION OF THE DEPTH OF THE BOTTOM
LAYER. LESS THAN 10% OF THE TOTAL VOLUME OF SEDIMENTS IS FOUND DEEPER THAN 5 FEET 138
FIGURE A-3 EXPERIMENTAL VARIOGRAMS FOR ALL THREE COCs, WITH THE 3D MODEL FITTED 139
FIGURE A-4 HISTOGRAMS OF VOLUMES OF SEDIMENTS TO BE DREDGED ACCORDING TO EACH OF THE 50 SIMULATION MODELS.
FOR EACH COC, DREDGING AIMS TO REMOVE ANY CONTAMINATED BLOCK (10x10x0.5 FT). THE BLACK DOT IN THE BOX
PLOT BELOW EACH HISTOGRAM IS THE VOLUME ESTIMATE OBTAINED FROM THE AVERAGE OF 50 SIMULATION MODELS.
FIVE VERTICAL LINES ARE THE 0.025 QUANTILE, LOWER QUARTILE, MEDIAN, UPPER QUARTILE, AND 0.975 QUANTILE OF
THE DISTRIBUTION... .. 140
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
My 2010
-------
ACRONYMS
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AFDW Ash-free Dried Weight
AOC Area of Concern
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
AVS Acid Volatile Sulfide
BUI Beneficial Use Impairment
CLP Contract Laboratory Program
COC Contaminants of Concern
CBSQG Consensus-based Sediment Quality Guideline
CSO Combined Sewer Overflow
DGPS Differential Global Positioning System
DQO Data Quality Objective
DW Dried Weight
DRO Diesel Range Organic
EDD Electronic Data Deliverable
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPH Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbon
ESBTU Equilibrium Sediment Benchmark Toxic Unit
FD Field Duplicate Sample
GLLA Great Lakes Legacy Act
GLNPO Great Lakes National Program Office
GLSED Great Lakes Sediment Database
GPS Global Positioning System
LEL Lowest Effect Level
MDEQ Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
MS Matrix Spike
MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate
ORO Oil Range Organic
PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl
PCN Polychlorinated Naphthalene
PEC Probable Effects Concentration
QA Quality Assurance
QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan
QC Quality Control
RFS Routine Field Sample
RI Remedial Investigation
SEM-AVS Simultaneously Extracted Metals-Acid Volatile Sulfide
SGeMS Stanford Geostatistical Modeling Software
SVOC Semivolatile Organic Compound
SW-846 Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste
TCLP Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure
TOC Total Organic Carbon
U.S. United States
USAGE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
My 2010
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report describes a joint effort between U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Great
Lakes National Program Office and Michigan Department of Environmental Quality to
conduct a Remedial Investigation that assesses the nature and extent of sediment
contamination in the Trenton Channel in order to aid in eventual remediation.. The
Trenton Channel is an eight-mile strait that flows from the north to the south into the
Detroit River in the area of Wyandotte, Riverview, Trenton, and Gross Ille, Michigan.
The channel is within the Detroit River Area of Concern, a binational area of concern for
both the United States of America and Canada that drains approximately 700 square
miles of land in Michigan and Ontario. The Trenton Channel also lies within the Detroit
River International Wildlife Refuge, the first international refuge designated in North
America.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Great Lakes National Program Office has
identified 11 beneficial use impairments in the Detroit River Area of Concern which also
impact the Trenton Channel (http://epa.gov/glnpo/aoc/detroit.html). The known causes
of impairments include bacteria, polychlorinated biphenyls, polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons, heavy metals, and oil and grease. Combined sewer overflows and
municipal and industrial discharges are major sources of contaminants within the Detroit
River Area of Concern. Stormwater runoff and tributaries (e.g., Ecorse River) in
Michigan are also major sources of contaminants. Additional environmental concerns
include invasive species, changes in the fish community structure, and reductions in fish
and wildlife habitats.
The Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation was funded under the Great Lakes Legacy
Act of 2002. This legislation was specifically developed to address the contaminated
sediment problem in the Great Lakes Areas of Concern. The primary objective of the
Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation was to develop the most appropriate method
applicable to remediate contaminated sediments within the boundaries of the Trenton
Channel site.
Sediment sampling activities at the Trenton Channel site began in mid June 2006 and
continued through July 2007. A full suite of chemical classes were analyzed over the
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
course of both project phases including semivolatile organic compounds, metals,
polychlorinated biphenyls, simultaneously extracted metals-acid volatile sulfide, toxic
characteristic leaching procedure for metals, volatile organic compounds, extractable
petroleum hydrocarbons, and oil and grease. Additional sediment parameters include
total organic carbon, pH, grain size, density, moisture content and Atterberg limits and
toxicity data in sediments.
The results of the analytical testing indicate the presence of a wide range of contaminants
within the sediments. Some areas of the site exceeded the Consensus-based Sediment
Quality Guidelines probable effect concentrations (MacDonald, D.D., et al, 2000) for
several contaminants; however, in other areas, several contaminants were found to be
well below the Consensus-based Sediment Quality Guidelines probable effect
concentrations. Overall, 31%, 36%, and 27% of samples for mercury, total polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons, and total polychlorinated biphenyls, respectively, exceeded the
Consensus-based Sediment Quality Guidelines probable effect concentrations.
The results of the analytical testing also indicate that sediment samples collected along a
reach in southern Wyandotte contain contaminants well below the Consensus-based
Sediment Quality Guidelines probable effect concentrations. In addition, the analytical
results from sediment samples collected within a northern part of the study area
demonstrate a trend of relatively high levels of mercury contamination. Geostatistical
analysis of sediment contaminant data for mercury, total polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons, and total polychlorinated biphenyls was conducted to estimate the
concentrations and the vertical and horizontal extent of contamination.
Based on the statistical sampling design and supported through the geostatistical models,
additional work by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Great Lakes National
Program Office and Michigan Department of Environmental Quality may be deemed
necessary to further assess the site conditions and determine the next course of action.
My 2010
-------
INTRODUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This report describes the results of the Remedial Investigation (RI) for the Trenton
Channel site within the Detroit River Area of Concern (AOC). The RI for the Trenton
Channel site was a joint partnership between U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) and Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality (MDEQ). EPA GLNPO and MDEQ initiated Phase I sampling
and analysis in December 2006 and completed Phase II sampling in July 2007. The RI
was performed under the authority of the Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002.
Trenton Channel is an eight-mile strait that flows north to south into the Detroit River.
The Trenton Channel site, shown in Figure 1-1, is part of the Detroit River AOC. The
Detroit River is a 32-mile international connecting channel linking Lake Saint Clair and
the upper Great Lakes to Lake Erie. The Detroit River AOC is a binational AOC that
drains approximately 700 square miles of land in Michigan and Ontario as well as the
107-square mile City of Detroit "sewershed." Approximately 75 percent of the total land
area of the Detroit River watershed is in Michigan (607.7 square miles). Eleven
beneficial use impairments (BUI) have been identified in the Detroit River and most of
these are impaired in the Trenton Channel. The known causes of impairments in the
Detroit River AOC result primarily from urban and industrial development in the
watershed and include bacteria, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH), metals, and oil and grease. Combined sewer overflows (CSO) and
municipal and industrial discharges are major sources of contaminants within the AOC.
Stormwater runoff and tributaries in Michigan are also major sources of contaminants.
Additional environmental concerns include invasive species, changes in the fish
community structure, and reductions in fish and wildlife habitats.
The Trenton Channel has been severely impacted by historical contamination from
industries, municipal discharges, sewer overflows, and urban runoff from surrounding
communities located along the channel. In addition, upstream sources include municipal
and industrial discharges located along the Rouge River and from water and sewer
departments, as well as industries that ultimately affect the channel. These impacts
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
include the channel's reduced capacity to support recreational activities such as
swimming, and fishing. The health of the aquatic life in the water and sediments of the
Trenton Channel and wildlife along the shoreline are also adversely affected by the
pollution.
Contaminants in the sediment underlying the channel are a primary pollution concern.
Contaminated sediments are ingested by bottom-dwelling benthic organisms as they feed
and can be toxic to many of the invertebrates inhabiting the sediment. In addition, the
chemical toxins are concentrated up the food chain as larger organisms consume the
smaller organisms. Contaminated sediments also have the potential to be resuspended by
storms and ship propellers, potentially contaminating other areas downstream.
Remediation of the contaminated sediments has been deemed necessary to lessen or
eliminate these pollution-associated risks.
The long-term goal of the Trenton Channel project is to develop the most appropriate
method applicable to remediate contaminated sediments within the boundaries of the
Trenton Channel site (Figure 1-1). Because previous investigations have characterized
downstream areas of the Trenton Channel (Section 2.3), this project focused on upstream
sediment characterization to further assess the nature and extent of contamination of the
Trenton Channel sediments. EPA GLNPO and MDEQ personnel managed sampling and
analysis in two study phases between December 2006 and July 2007. The objective of
Phase I was to collect representative samples to assess and evaluate the magnitude and
extent of contaminated sediments in upstream sections of the Trenton Channel site that
were not previously investigated for use in a remedial alternatives analysis. The
objective of Phase II was to further define the extent and nature of contamination at the
site.
My 2010
-------
INTRODUCTION
Trenton Channel Stuth Area
Trenton Channel
WyafKtotte. Ml
Figure 1-1 Trenton Channel Site Location Map
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
My 2010
-------
SITE BACKGROUND
2.0 SITE BACKGROUND
2.1 GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION
Trenton Channel is a 13-kilometer (approximately eight-mile) strait that flows from the
north to the south into the Detroit River. The Trenton Channel study site extends over
2.5 miles of continuous shoreline located along the western shore of the channel. A
series of islands are located across the channel and to the east of the site. Several cities
are located adjacent to and west of the Trenton Channel site including, from north to
south: Wyandotte, Riverview, and Trenton, Michigan. The Trenton Channel site lies
within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services' Detroit River International Wildlife Refuge,
the first international refuge designated in North America, and within the Detroit River
AOC. Figure 2-1 provides a complete visual of the Trenton Channel site and the project
sampling areas for each phase. The property boundaries illustrated in maps within this
report are estimated and may vary slightly from actual property boundaries. The
sampling areas for Phase I and Phase II are further defined in Section 5.2.
More specific information pertaining to site's demographics and land use, hydrology,
geology, and ecological assessment is provided in Section 3, Site Characteristics.
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Trenton Channel Study Area
Wyandotte, Michigan
Created by CSC
May 25, 2010
rty
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
BASF Southworks
Arkema
| | Firestone
BASF Riverview
McLouth Steel
Trenton Channel Site
GLNPO Study Area
Phase I
Phase II
Figure 2-1 Trenton Channel Site and Project Sampling Areas
My 2010
-------
SITE BACKGROUND
2.2 SITE HISTORY
The Detroit River is 51 kilometers (km) (about 32 miles) in length. The river's name is
derived from French Riviere du Detroit, which translates as "River of the Strait." The
Detroit River connects Lake Saint Clair to Lake Erie and serves as a part of the
international boundary between Canada and the United States. In the early twentieth
century, the river was used for transport of materials and goods supporting industrial
companies such as steel mills, chemical facilities, coal-generated power plants and others.
There are several channels, including the Livingston and Amhurstburg Channels, in the
southern portion of the river used by ships as navigational channels. Another major use
of the Detroit River is for industrial and drinking water supplies. The river provides
approximately 25 industries with process or cooling water and is one of the sources of
drinking water for more than five million people. The river is also used for recreational
purposes including fishing, boating, swimming, and hunting.
CSOs and municipal and industrial discharges have been the most significant and long-
term major sources of contaminants in the Trenton Channel. Stormwater runoff and
upstream inputs from Lake Saint Clair and Detroit River tributaries (e.g., Ecorse River)
are also sources of pollution within the channel. The known causes of impairments
include heavy metals such as cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, nickel
and zinc, organic contaminants consisting of PCBs, hexachlorobenzene, and a variety of
PAHs, bacteria, and oil and grease. Due to the nature and characteristics of the
pollutants, they are primarily found in the sediments and pore waters (water filling the
spaces between grains of sediment) of the channel. These contaminated sediments
severely and adversely impact the ecosystem in and around the channel and could
potentially affect the human population as well. In 2006, BASF Wyandotte Corporation
sponsored a dredging effort along the BASF Riverview site resulting in the removal of
approximately 30,000 cubic yards (EPA, 2010).
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
2.3 INVENTORY OF EXISTING DATA
Numerous environmental studies were conducted in the Trenton Channel and Detroit
River between 1985 and 2007, as listed in Appendix E. The results of these studies have
been instrumental in identifying contaminated sites and subsequent remediation efforts.
Studies have been conducted throughout the Trenton Channel to assess the level of
contamination, locate specific hot spots, identify the contaminants of concern, evaluate
physical characteristics of sediment and river hydrology (including velocity, bathymetry,
and bulk properties), and measure sediment depths. In 2000, EPA GLNPO and MDEQ
conducted a study to assess the Firestone site, BASF Riverview site, and downstream
past Monguagon Creek to the southernmost boundary of the Trenton Channel site (Figure
2-1). This study involved collection of 14 sediment cores, and the analytical results
confirmed elevated concentrations of mercury (up to 212 parts per million), heavy metals,
and PCBs. In addition, the approximate area and depth of the sediment contamination
were evaluated at multiple distinct locations along the Trenton Channel. Based on this
study, the total area along the shoreline in front of Firestone site, BASF Riverview site,
and upstream of Monguagon Creek was estimated to contain approximately 100,000
cubic yards of mercury- and PCB-contaminated sediments (MDEQ, June 2000).
The United States Army Corps of Engineers (US ACE) and EPA GLNPO collected
sediment samples from 26 distinct locations adjacent to Firestone site in 2004. The
analytical results showed elevated concentrations of mercury, PCBs, and various heavy
metals in the sediment. In addition, concentrations of mercury and PCBs were identified
in fish tissue samples from select fish species collected in the Trenton Channel
(Lakeshore Engineering Services, Inc., October 26, 2004).
In 2005, a sediment survey along the shoreline of BASF Riverview site was conducted by
BASF Wyandotte Corporation. This study included completing a bathymetric survey and
determining river velocities and sediment depths. Results identified water velocities
ranging between 0.01 to 2.4 feet per second (fps) with depth average velocities of 2.2 fps.
The water depth measurements ranged from 3 to 38 feet in this region of the channel and
the shoreline sediment depths ranged from less than 1 foot to 9.5 feet (STN
Environmental JV, December 12, 2006; STN Environmental JV, July 6, 2007). In
My 2010
-------
SITE BACKGROUND
addition, a portion of this site was remediated under Part 201 of the Natural Resources
and Environmental Protection Act. Contaminated groundwater was found to be
discharging mercury, PCBs, dioxin, and PAHs from the site into the river. As part of the
interim response activities required in a 2006 Consent Decree between the MDEQ and
BASF Wyandotte Corporation, BASF was required to remove up to 30,000 cubic yards
of sediment adjacent to their property. Removal was conducted to the top of river-bottom
clay. Sediments will be capped onsite under the final site cover (EPA, 2010).
Also in 2005, Arkema East Plant completed a sediment survey along the shoreline of the
Arkema site to assess specific contaminants of concern, bulk properties, and sediment
depth. The analytical results identified metals and several semivolatile organic
compounds (SVOC) including 2-chloronaphthalene and chlorinated benzenes in the
sediment samples. The sediment SVOC sample concentrations decreased from north to
south over the channel area being assessed. The grain size analysis demonstrated that
area sediment consisted primarily of sand and gravel with some debris. The study also
determined that as the channel depth increased, sand and gravel decreased and clay and
consolidated sediment increased. The thickness of the sediment in this region was found
to range from less than 0.5 feet to 9.5 feet (Jon, Andrade and Zwick Associates, Inc.,
November 2003; STN Environmental JV, July 6, 2007).
My 2010
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
10 My 2010
-------
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
3.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS
3.1 DEMOGRAPHICS AND LAND USE
The Trenton Channel encompasses a 13-kilometer (approximately eight-mile) stretch of
the lower Detroit River, which flows into Lake Erie. The channel is bound by Michigan
mainland on the western shore and a series of islands on the eastern shore. The exact
boundaries of Trenton Channel begin at a line running west-northwest from the head of
Fighting Island to the Michigan mainland, and continuing downstream to Celeron Island.
The northern portion of channel is primarily used as a navigational canal that the USAGE
dredges periodically for commercial shipping.
Several municipalities are located on the Michigan mainland along the Trenton Channel
including the cities of, from north to south, Ecorse, Wyandotte, Riverview, Trenton, and
the townships of Grosse He and Gibralter. The western shoreline of the channel has
historically been developed to support industries such as several steel mills, chemical
facilities, coal-generated power plants and landfill/disposal sites. Many of the facilities
that once operated with discharges to the river have been either abandoned or
demolished. Today, the land use along the western shore is primarily recreational and the
surrounding municipalities have provided public access points on the river, including
walkways, fishing piers, parks, and boat launching facilities. There are also numerous
private marinas, restaurants, apartment complexes and homes, and a public golf course
that line the channel.
3.2 HYDROLOGY
The Detroit River discharges water into Lake Erie with flow rates between 4,810 and
5,950 cubic meters per second (m3/s). Approximately 20-25% of this water discharge
flows directly through the Trenton Channel (Jon, Andrade and Zwick Associates, Inc.,
November 6, 2003; STN Environmental JV, July 6, 2007). In 2006, the flow through
Trenton Channel was estimated at 0.5 feet per second (MACTEC, June 2006). The
channel ranges from one to ten meters in depth in the main portion of the channel and
tracks inversely to depth, from 0.25 kilometer in the Hennepin Point area to 1.2 kilometer
My 2010 11
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
near the outlet of the channel (Jon, Andrade and Zwick Associates, Inc., November 6,
2003; STN Environmental JV, July 6, 2007).
3.3 GEOLOGY
The Trenton Channel contains a wide range of sediment types, organic carbon
concentrations, and heavy metal concentrations in the bulk sediment and pore waters.
Approximately 60% of the Trenton Channel is composed of 50% or more fine-grained
material (EPA Office of Research and Development, 1988).
The river sediments in the Phase I sampling area primarily consist of sandy silt, clayey
silt, silty sand, clay, and sand (STN Environmental JV, January 4, 2007). The river
sediments near BASF Southworks site are in agreement with the sediment types found in
the Phase I sampling area. Hardpan exists beneath the soft river sediments in the
channel. Because the Trenton Channel serves primarily as a navigational channel, the
middle of the channel has the thinnest sediment depths while the areas along the
shorelines contain the thickest sediment depths. Therefore, the soft sediments in the
Trenton Channel are estimated to range between 8 to 10 feet thick near the shoreline and
1 to 2 feet thick in the navigation channel, approximately 200 to 300 feet east of the
shoreline (STN Environmental JV, December 12, 2006; STN Environmental JV, July 6,
2007).
The total volume of soft sediments in the Trenton Channel site is estimated to be
approximately 463,000 cubic yards (STN Environmental JV, December 12, 2006; STN
Environmental JV, July 6, 2007). This estimate includes:
• 300,000 cubic yards between the northernmost section of the project area between
Bishop Park and the Municipal Power Plant and the northern property line of the
Arkema site (STN Environmental JV, July 6, 2007)
• 67,500 cubic yards in front of the Arkema site (STN Environmental JV, July 6,
2007)
• 97,800 cubic yards between the southern property line of Arkema site and the
southern extent of the Trenton Channel site (1,300 feet south of the Grosse He
Toll Bridge) (Fully Integrated Environmental Decision System Team, June 23,
2004)
12 My 2010
-------
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
3.4 ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
As stated in Section 2.3, numerous studies have been conducted to assess the ecological
state of the Trenton Channel and Detroit River. The Detroit River Canadian Cleanup
assessment entitled "2006 Status of Beneficial Use Impairments in the Detroit River"
(December 2006) and Friends of the Detroit River report entitled "Restoration Criteria
Review for the Detroit River Area of Concern" (December 2008) serve as excellent
resources in describing the ecological condition of the Detroit River and Trenton
Channel, along with the references listed in this report and in Appendix E. The following
information summarizes the findings published in the two aforementioned documents:
• Tainting of Fish and Wildlife Flavor - Walleye collected from Trenton Channel in
1992 and 1993 were found to have an impaired flavor; however, this finding was
contrasted by a 1996-1997 survey of shoreline anglers collected along the Detroit
River that were categorized as tasting good. The status of this BUI is currently
unknown.
• Fish Consumption Advisories - Models show that the high PCB concentrations in
fish are due to contamination of sediments, not water. In particular, contaminated
sediments in the lower U.S. reach of the Detroit River contribute most heavily to
restrictions on fish consumption in the Detroit River. The Trenton Channel and
the area directly downstream of the channel should be marked as areas of high
priority for remedial activities. The Michigan Division of Environmental Health
has issued several fish consumption advisories due to PCB contamination that are
categorized according to the fish species, fish length, and the human population.
• Fish Tumor and Deformities - Contaminants in the sediment such as mercury,
PCBs and PAHs in particular, can lead to tumors in fish.
• Toxicity of Sediments to Benthic Macroinvertebrates - Sediments from the
Trenton Channel in the Detroit River are highly contaminated, and adult mayflies
(Hexagenia) are not found in this area because of the toxicity of the sediments.
• Trends in Benthic Community Composition - Benthic taxonomic richness was
negatively correlated with the abundance of oligochaetes in sediments; i.e.,
oligochaete dominated areas (primarily the Trenton Channel) had low overall
taxonomic richness and high sediment contamination.
• Levels of PCBs in Sediments - Based on sediment sampling in 1999-2000, the
area downstream of the Trenton Channel showed PCB concentrations exceeding
the Ontario Ministry of Environment's lowest effect level (LEL=70 mg/kg dry
weight) (Persaud et a/., 1992). The ratio of percent PCB mass versus percent area
was 2.07 along the Trenton Channel.
• Levels of PAHs in Sediments - In a 1999 sediment study, the Trenton Channel
showed moderate PAH contamination.
My 2010 13
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
• Levels of other Organic Chemicals in Sediments -
o In a 1994 study of sediment contamination in the Detroit River,
concentrations of PCBs, PAHs, and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane in
sediments were highest at Zug Island near the outflow of the Rouge River,
at Elizabeth Park in the Trenton Channel, and at Celeron Island
downstream of the Trenton Channel.
o Contaminant levels were measured in suspended sediments from nine
sampling stations in the Detroit River in 1999-2000. Levels of dioxins
and furans, dioxin-like PCBs, and polychlorinated naphthalenes (PCN)
were dramatically elevated at Trenton Channel sites.
o In 1999-2000, the highest concentrations of PCNs (8,200 ug/g) in
suspended sediments were found at a site in the Trenton Channel. Toxic
equivalents for PCNs in the Trenton Channel ranged from 73 pg/g to
3,300 pg/g, meaning that PCNs contribute significantly to the dioxin-like
biological activity in Detroit River suspended sediments. The relatively
low PCN concentrations at upstream sampling sites indicate there are few
major sources of PCNs upstream of the Trenton Channel.
• Levels of Mercury in Sediments - Based on sediment studies conducted in 1999-
2000, 69 (of 150) sediment sampling sites (39 U.S. and 30 Canadian) had mercury
concentrations exceeding the LEL (0.2 mg/kg dry weight) (Persaud et al, 1992).
All sites downstream of the Trenton Channel had mercury concentrations above
the LEL, and one site downstream of Celeron Island had a mercury concentration
exceeding the severe effect level (2.0 mg/kg dry weight) (Persaud et al, 1992).
These data confirm that local sources of mercury exist in the Detroit River
watershed.
• It is clear that sediments in many areas of the Detroit River (particularly the
Trenton Channel) have concentrations of metals and/or organic contaminants
above the LEL (Persaud et al, 1992), which means that dredging restrictions are
necessary. Thus, it can be concluded this BUI is impaired.
3.5 FEATURES AND CHALLENGES UNIQUE TO THE PROJECT
The Trenton Channel RI has several interesting features and challenges, some of which
were unique to the site, while others were common for sediment assessment projects. A
common challenge of sediment assessment projects is obtaining representative data with
the available resources. To address this challenge the study was conducted using a
sequential sampling design including two phases: sampling the site in Phase I, assessing
the resulting data, and then developing a second sampling event that focused on specific
questions. Information collected about the site in Phase I was used to develop a cost
effective targeted statistical sampling design for the second phase.
14 My 2010
-------
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The sampling design and sampling locations for the Phase I study area was developed
using an approach based on sampling at regular intervals. Transects were oriented
perpendicular to the shore and followed a structure used in previous studies to maintain
consistency with previous study designs. Samples were collected from each grid node or
adjacent to it within that grid. The analytical data generated in Phase I were evaluated
through mapping of observed concentrations and geostatistical analysis of sediment depth
and several primary contaminants of concern, specifically, total PCBs and mercury.
Several kriging maps of the sediment contaminant data were generated and overlaid on
satellite imagery of the site. The specific data collected in Phase I were used to develop
several study questions that formed the basis of the sampling approach for Phase II.
The sampling designs for Phase II of the remedial investigation were developed in
accordance with EPA's seven-step, systematic planning process known as the Data
Quality Objective (DQO) process (U.S. EPA Guidance for the Data Quality Objective
Process [EPA G-4], February 2006). As part of the DQO process, decision statements
were developed that addressed three primary questions of concern (Section 5.2.2). Data
results from the Phase I sampling were used to provide site-specific estimates of
concentration ranges and expected variability at the site. Most often, sampling designs
are not statistically based, and if they are, must use estimates of variability from other
sites, or studies that are many years old. The specific data collected in Phase I was used
to develop the Phase II sampling design. This approach meant the sampling design was
optimized to answer the specific study questions, was cost effective, and resulted in the
ability to answer study questions with known power and confidence. These efforts
created a sound and scientific means for developing the sampling designs for the Phase II
study area.
Another challenge and feature of the project was that the study was designed to assess
sediment results down the entire length of the sediment core. Often, sediment sampling
studies focus on specific intervals of interest down the core and may not assess each
interval for the entire core. For both phases of this project, the entire length of the core
was sampled and analyzed. This resulted in a robust data set and allowed for a more
comprehensive assessment of the nature and extent of contamination at the project study
areas.
My 2010 15
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
16 My 2010
-------
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
4.1 PROJECT QUALITY DOCUMENTATION
The Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) was the primary quality document that
guided this study. Phase I sampling and analyses were conducted according to STN
Environmental JV (December 2006).
Based on review of the Phase I data, EPA GLNPO and MDEQ developed a series of
specific questions and DQOs that required additional sampling and analytical data from
the Trenton Channel site. The QAPP dated December 2006 was appended on July 3,
2007 through an approved QAPP addendum (STN Environmental JV, March 7, 2007).
The addendum addressed quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) issues and concerns
that arose during and after the Phase I sampling event was completed. The changes were
implemented and included updating sample extract holding times, changing laboratory
analytical procedures, revising quality assurance objectives for measurement of data, and
including the reporting of tentatively identified compounds as part of the laboratory final
data package.
4.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Phase I of the PJ was conducted to collect representative samples in order to assess and
evaluate the magnitude and extent of contaminated sediments in upstream sections of the
Trenton Channel site that had not previously been investigated for use in a remedial
alternatives analysis. Specific Phase I field sampling objectives included:
• Collecting representative samples within Transects A-K (Figure 4-1 displays the
sampling grid illustrating the use of transects) to assess and evaluate the
magnitude and extent of contaminated sediments
• Collecting toxicological samples to assess site-specific risks posed by the
contaminants
• Gathering critical chemical and geotechnical data for the PJ
• Sample areas not assessed in previous studies to further describe the extent and
nature of sediment contamination across the site
• Estimating contaminated sediment volumes requiring remediation
My 2010 17
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
• Generating a preliminary data set for use in developing detailed study questions
and DQOs
Phase II of the RI was conducted to generate data to answer several specific questions
regarding the distribution of contaminant of concerns (COC) at the site to further define
the extent and nature of contamination at the site. Specific Phase II field sampling
objectives included:
• Identifying and resolving the PCB hot spot identified in Transect C
• Providing contaminant concentrations in Transects D-F, to determine if
concentrations are below the Consensus-based Sediment Quality Guidelines
(CBSQG) probable effect concentrations (MacDonald, D.D., et al, 2000) or level
of interest as dictated by EPA and MDEQ
• Determining if there is an increasing trend in mercury concentrations moving
north from Transect F to Transect A
• Determining if there is a potential source of mercury within 1,000-feet upriver
from Transect A (Transect S)
The technical approach used to accomplish these activities in discussed in detail in
Section 5 of this report.
18 My 2010
-------
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
0 500 1.000
Feet
2.000
£EPA DCQ
Created by CSC
December 2. 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 4-1 Phase I and Phase II Sampling Grid Illustrating the Use of Transects
My 2010
19
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
4.3 PROJECT FUNDING
The Trenton Channel project proposal was submitted by MDEQ to conduct an
investigation for contaminated sediment in the upper Trenton Channel. EPA GLNPO
approved the proposal and entered into a Great Lakes Legacy Act Project Agreement
with MDEQ on September 19, 2006 to conduct the study.
The $500,000 RI of the Trenton Channel site was funded with $325,000 from EPA
GLNPO under the Great Lakes Legacy Act and $175,000 in non-federal matching funds
from MDEQ.
4.4 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Because the Trenton Channel project was a collaborative effort involving multiple
partners, a project management team was established to ensure effective communication,
clear understanding of responsibilities, and adherence to project requirements by all
parties. These project management strategies are summarized below.
4.4.1 Project Planning, Permits and Notifications
The Great Lakes Legacy Act Project Agreement documented the financial, technical, and
logistical obligations and responsibilities of EPA GLNPO and MDEQ, the non-federal
sponsor, and included the financial coordination process that would be used to jointly
fund the project. Through this agreement, EPA GLNPO and MDEQ developed a formal
strategy of commitment and communication to facilitate successful completion of the
project.
All specifications and quality documents that provided sampling and analysis support
were reviewed. Project planning meetings were conducted to discuss and finalize key
project activities (e.g., plans, permits, technical methods, quality control requirements
and procedures).
A suite of project plans were developed and included: a Project Work Plan, a QAPP, a
Field Sampling Plan for each phase, and a Site Safety and Health Plan. The Project Work
Plan documented the project goals, strategies, and implementation plans. The work plan
was approved by EPA GLNPO and was supplemented by a QAPP that documented the
20 My 2010
-------
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
management and quality systems implemented to achieve the objectives for the project
(Section 4.1). The Field Sampling Plan was site-specific and provided additional details
regarding the scope of the field investigation, field equipment and use, field and
laboratory analyses, and investigation-derived waste management. The Site Safety and
Health Plan specified known potential site hazards and the measures to be taken to
protect worker safety and health. Together, these documents provided a mechanism for
ensuring that all project objectives and strategies were clearly understood by all involved
parties and that project design and quality control procedures were in place to ensure that
data collected during the project would be reliable and of sufficient quantity and quality
to support EPA GLNPO decisions regarding the project.
Copies of all permits, licenses, agreements, and notifications were maintained at the
project site at all times.
4.4.2 Project Communication, Roles and Responsibilities
Communication procedures were defined in the QAPP and included regularly scheduled
conference calls, progress meetings, and project management team meetings. EPA
GLNPO and MDEQ also assembled a project management team composed of managers
and staff from all organizations involved in project planning and implementation. The
role of the project team managers (shown in Table 4-1) was to ensure communication
among all staff involved in the project, address technical and logistical issues as they
arose, and communicate problem resolution to all involved parties. The purpose and
details of the Project Agreement were clearly communicated to all members of the
project team management. EPA GLNPO was responsible for serving as EPA's lead
organization on the project. The roles and responsibilities of key project management
personnel are identified in Table 4-1.
My 2010 21
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Table 4-1 Roles and Responsibilities of Key Governmental Project Management Personnel
Key Person Organization/Role
Responsibility
Amy Mucha
(current)
Diana Mally and
David Wellington
(former)
EPA GLNPO
Project Officer
Primary GLNPO contact
Monitor financial and contractual obligations
Ensure that objectives are met at project completion
Coordinate with MDEQ and project contractor to
ensure effectiveness of sampling program
Communicate with MDEQ Project Manager
regarding sampling procedure and protocol
Monitor staff and contractor compliance with project
technical and quality requirements
MarcTuchman
EPA GLNPO
Secondary Project
Officer
Secondary GLNPO Project Officer contact
Assume responsibilities of GLNPO Project Officer
when on duty
Louis Blume
EPA GLNPO
QA Manager
Assist in the development of quality documentation
and identification of project quality objectives
Ensure that environmental collection activities
achieve appropriate quality documentation
Monitor and ensure quality requirements were met
Address issues affecting quality of information
collected
Michael
Alexander
MDEQ
Project Manager
Primary MDEQ contact for project contractor
Coordinate with GLNPO on project requirements
Monitor financial and contractual obligations
Ensure that project objectives are met at project
completion
Monitor performance of staff and contractors
regarding technical and quality requirements
Regularly scheduled conference calls were conducted during the course of the project to
provide progress updates and status reports to all team members. These meetings also
were used as a forum to communicate new issues and challenges that required resolution
or decisions. Urgent issues and challenges were communicated through ad hoc
conference calls, meetings, or onsite discussions. Decisions resulting from meetings and
conference calls were documented through meeting minutes and group electronic mail.
22
My 2010
-------
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
5.0 SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
5.1 SAMPLING DESIGN AND TECHNICAL APPROACH
In December 2006, EPA GLNPO and MDEQ initiated the sampling and analysis phases
of the RI to evaluate the goals of:
1) determining whether contaminated sediments were present in the upstream stretch
of the Trenton Channel,
2) accurately estimating contaminated sediment volume, and
3) guiding decisions regarding engineering and design in anticipation of remedial
activities.
Figure 5-1 includes the exact locations of the Phase I and Phase II sampling sites within
the area of interest and Figure 5-2 displays the Phase I and Phase II sampling sites
overlaid on the transects.
My 2010
23
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
- .*^i: »- ''rS'!:
r:rnW^. •' / Hr«
-^ — - 1 *
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
500 1.000 1.500 2,000
Feet
Sample Locations
O PhasG I
• Phase II
£EPA D€€,
Created by CSC
November 25. 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 5-1 Phase I and Phase II Sampling Locations
24
My 2010
-------
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
O Phase I
• Phase II
500
H=
Feet
1,000
li —
• -!' rf^
_y.>r:? "jjj.^.. -,«
-, -.''
'
^r/ri;-'
ODu
fr
Created by CSC
December 1,2009
Michigan State Plane Feel NAD 83
Figure 5-2 Phase I and Phase II Sampling Locations Overlaid on the Transects
My 2010
25
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
5.2 SAMPLING DESIGN
5.2.1 Phase I Sampling Design
The sampling design and procedures documented in the Field Sampling Plan and QAPP
and implemented during Phase I were based on the following considerations (STN
Environmental JV, December 12, 2006):
• Selection of sampling and coring sites in accordance with the project-specific
needs
• Frequency of sampling
• Methods of sampling to be employed
• Media to be sampled
• Number of samples
• Volume of sample required for analysis, including additional laboratory QC
analyses
• Types of field QC samples to be collected
• Analyses to be performed in the field laboratory
• Sample turnaround requirements
• Specific procedures and precautions to be followed during sampling
• Sample preservation methods
• Shipment procedures
To maintain consistency with previously conducted studies and to have adequate
coverage of the site, 11 transects (Transects A-K) were oriented perpendicular to the
shore of the channel. The transects began along the shoreline and were spaced 50 feet
apart moving east to 150 feet into the channel; thereby creating four transects running
parallel to the shoreline (e.g., Al, A2, A3, and A4, Bl, B2, B3, and B4, etc.). Transects
A and B (northernmost) and K (southernmost) were 500 feet from north to south while
the transects in the middle of the sampling region were spaced at 1,000-foot intervals
(Figure 4-1). After this grid of potential sampling stations was developed, a systematic
random stratified sampling approach was utilized to select sampling locations based on
sediment thickness, physical observations (e.g., odors, outfalls, etc.), and current and past
land usage.
26 My 2010
-------
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
Table 5-1 summarizes the Phase I sediment sampling sites which includes the collection
of 81 discrete samples.
Table 5-1 Sample Identifiers and Locational Information for Phase I Sediment Sampling
Station Latitude Longitude Number of Water Depth Sediment Depth
[!*• •l^MjXjMB •I^TJiBjMH i»JM27y2j2liniISBKGIa3UjElliaEJ« •Gi^aQjElImHjH
A1
A11
B1
B2
C1
C11
C12
C3
D2
D3
E1
E2
E21
F1
F12
F2
G1
G11
G12
G13
G3
H1
H11
H12
H13
H3
11
112
12
13
J1
K1
42.207944
42.207278
42.206694
42.206917
42.205778
42.205389
42.203833
42.204333
42.201917
42.201583
42.200528
42.199528
42.199111
42.197944
42.196889
42.196556
42.195444
42.194944
42.193667
42.19533
42.194139
42.192583
42.191083
42.190611
42.190861
42.190306
42.190056
42.188361
42.189583
42.188667
42.187361
42.186528
-83.144472
-83.144806
-83.145056
-83.144833
-83.145778
-83.145889
-83.146833
-83.14625
-83.147306
-83.147444
-83.148222
-83.148306
-83.148417
-83.149111
-83.149167
-83.149139
-83.149611
-83.149778
-83.150111
-83.14951
-83.149694
-83.150333
-83.150944
-83.151222
-83.151139
-83.150972
-83.151472
-83.152389
-83.151472
-83.151694
-83.152944
-83.153639
3
3
1
1
3
4
3
3
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
1
4
2
3
1
1
3
5
5
3
3
3
3
2
3
6
18.6
22.5
27.1
27.2
8.5
9.0
8.6
23.8
24.4
32.6
18.5
30.7
31.0
8.5
20.0
28.1
15.3
20.7
23.6
27.2
30.3
25.0
19.0
18.5
18.0
28.5
22.6
19.8
27.1
30.2
20.4
8.1
5.3
6.0
3.0
3.9
6.0
8.3
5.0
6.4
4.5
4.8
3.6
5.8
2.0
5.3
2.0
6.8
1.8
7.8
4.3
5.2
2.3
1.4
4.0
10.0
11.0
5.3
11.3
5.5
6.3
4.4
7.3
12.0
Number of discrete samples does not include field duplicates. Samplers collected and
prepared one field duplicate for every 20 routine field samples.
NAD - North American Datum
My 2010
27
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
5.2.2 Phase II Sampling Design
Based on review and analysis of the Phase I results, a series of specific questions were
developed that required additional data from the site. For the purposes of generating
statistical sampling designs for Phase II of the RI, mercury, total PCBs, and total PAHs
were considered the COCs for the site. These COCs were selected based on evaluations
of the results obtained from Phase I sampling and analytical efforts, data obtained from
previously conducted studies, and site expertise of the EPA and MDEQ. CBSQGs were
used to assess COCs and were set to the probable effects concentrations (PEC) of 1.06
parts per million (ppm), 676 parts per billion (ppb), and 22,800 ppb for mercury, total
PCBs (as Aroclors), and total PAHs, respectively (MacDonald, D.D., et al, 2000). The
Project Team selected PECs as the most appropriate screening levels at this stage of the
remedial investigation.
Phase II also focused on areas containing soft sediments. These areas were defined as:
• Depositional areas with at least one foot of sediment
• Areas that do not routinely experience high currents (not high energy areas)
• Areas in which sediment is not predominantly clay
To further define the nature and extent of contamination at the site, three specific
questions were proposed:
Question 1 - Are the contaminant concentrations in Transects D, E, and F, below the
CBSQGs?
Question 2 - Can the PCB hot spot identified in Transect C be further resolved?
Question 3 - Is there an increasing trend in mercury concentrations moving north from
Transect F to A? Further, is there a potential source of mercury within
1,000-feet upriver from Transect A (Transect S)?
The sampling designs for Phase II of the RI were driven by the DQO process and
documented in separate DQO Tables. Each Phase II sampling objective and
corresponding sampling design is summarized in the sections 5.2.2.1 - 5.2.2.4 which
follow. Section 5.2.2.5 provides the exact sampling locations for Phase II collection
efforts.
28 My 2010
-------
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
5.2.2.1 Distribution of Contaminants in Transects D, E, and F
The project question for Transects D, E and F was "Are the contaminant concentrations
in Transects D, E, and F, below the CBSQGs?" Sediment sampling and analysis was
conducted in accordance with the Field Sampling Plan and QAPP to determine if: 1) the
concentration of COCs within the sub areas is less than or equal to the associated
CBSQGs; or 2) the concentration of the COCs within the sub areas is greater than the
associated CBSQGs.
To address this project question, a power analysis was conducted using the existing data
from Phase I. To develop the sampling design, a power curve was utilized for the
sediment sampling and data analysis in the style recommended by EPA's DQO process
(EPA, February 2006). Based on the power curve, an estimated 12 sediment samples
were needed to assess site conditions and COC concentrations. The power curve also
allowed for evaluation and determination of limits on the decision error. A false positive
decision may cause an inappropriate rejection of the null hypothesis and the inappropriate
cost of potential remedial activities. For this decision, a false positive level of 20% for
each COC test was maintained. A false negative decision is inappropriately determining
that one or more COCs is below their CBSQG. This, in turn, may cause an inappropriate
risk to human health and the environment. Based on the needs of the project and
considerations of the consequences of the two types of errors, 80% confidence level/20%
false positive level was identified as the most appropriate level for the sampling design
and subsequent analyses.
In developing the power curve, the mean log-transformed COC concentrations were
compared to the CBSQGs using a one-sample t-test. The Phase I sampling design of four
samples per transition zone achieved an 80% power in detecting an exceedence of the
CBSQG (i.e., the PEC, equal to 1.06 ppm for mercury, 0.676 ppm for total PCBs, and
22.8 ppm for total PAHs) when the true average mercury concentration is equal to two
times the CBSQG (i.e., 2.12 ppm for mercury, 1.36 ppm for total PCBs, and 45.6 ppm for
total PAHs).
My 2010 29
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
5.2.2.2 Refined Horizontal Extent of PCBs in Transects B and C
The project questions for Transects B-C were: "What is the distribution of total PCBs
within Transects B and C?" and "Are the contaminant concentrations below the
CBSQGs?" Based on the evaluation of data generated in Phase I of the RI, an area of
sediment within Transect C appeared to be contaminated with PCBs. Additional
sampling was conducted in Phase II to further define this area, or hot spot, of PCB
contamination.
Kriged concentration maps for total PCBs and mercury were developed for Transect C.
Kriging is a spatial and variance interpolation method used to predict values across the
site in areas where samples were not collected (Cressie, 1990). After a review of the
maps and data analysis, the sampling design was extended into Transect B in order to
fully evaluate the distribution of total PCBs. The search ellipse method was applied
using Visual Sampling Plan (VSP, v 4.0, U.S. DOE, 2005) the "Locating a Hot Spot"
routine. A 150-foot square grid was applied to the 6.4-acre area to detect the defined hot
spot with 95 % probability. The resulting search ellipse had a target diameter of 150 feet
with 95% probability of detecting the hot spot. Phase I sample analysis of PCB
concentrations revealed a 300-foot smear of contamination down the coast line. This
determined the 150-foot diameter for the search ellipse in the hot spot detection
algorithm. With these criteria, 13 total samples were required. Six samples were
collected in Phase I of this project; therefore, seven additional samples were targeted for
collection in Phase II. Upon review and analysis, eight sample locations were randomly
generated in the grids without coverage for Transects B-C.
5.2.2.3 Distribution of Mercury Contamination in the Northernmost Section
The project question for Transects A-F and S was "Is there an increasing trend in
mercury concentrations as you move north from Transect F to A?" Sediment sampling
was conducted to determine if: 1) an increasing trend in the concentration of mercury in
sediment occurs moving North from Transect F to A; or 2) an increasing trend in the
concentration of mercury in sediment does not occur moving north from Transect F to A.
In order to address this objective, a linear regression analysis was conducted of the data
generated in Phase I. A regression line was fitted to the mercury concentration data
30 My 2010
-------
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
collected from Transects A through D against location along the shoreline. Prediction
intervals for the expected concentrations of samples collected upstream of the Al
Transect also were fit based on the regression curve. These prediction intervals were
used to form the basis of the sampling design. Based on the needs of the project and
considerations of the consequences of the two types of errors (i.e., concluding there is a
significant trend when in fact there is none, and concluding there is no trend when in fact
there is one), the Project Team identified the 80% confidence level as the most
appropriate level for the sampling design and subsequent analyses.
Statistical analysis was conducted to test the hypothesis that an increasing trend in the
concentration of mercury occurs moving north from Transects F through A. Mercury
was the focus of the sampling design; however, sample analyses also were conducted for
the other COCs (total PCBs and total PAHs) to describe the extent and nature of
contamination across the site. Statistical tests were conducted to evaluate the
concentrations of mercury across Transects A through F and to determine if an increasing
trend of mercury exists. A regression curve was fit to the data collected in Phase I.
Prediction intervals for the expected concentrations of samples collected upstream of the
Al Transect also were fit based on the regression curve. Phase II data were incorporated
into the regression curve and the slope of the line re-calculated, as presented in Section
7.2.3.2.
5.2.2.4 Source of Mercury Contamination in the Northernmost Section
The project question for Transects A-F and S was "Is there a potential source of mercury
within 1,000-feet upriver from A (Transect S)?"
Sediment sampling was conducted within each of the transects using a combination of
purposeful and stratified random sampling in accordance with the Field Sampling Plan.
The sampling focused on areas of interest that were defined based on Phase I results and
employed random selection within these areas of interest.
My 2010 31
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
5.2.2.5 Phase II Sampling Locations
After specific Phase II sampling sites were established (Figure 5-1), sediment sampling
(core and ponar samples) was conducted as described in Section 5.2. As shown in Table
5-2, 47 discrete samples were collected in Phase II of the RI.
Table 5-2 Sample Identifiers and Locational Information for Phase II Sediment Sampling
station Latitude Longitude Numoer or water ueptn
ID (NAD 83) (NAD 83) Discrete Samples* (decimal feet)
^£I*l|jjI:ljl*>I3ililH
B3
B4
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
D4
D5
D6
E3
E4
E5
E6
F4
F5
F6
SI
S2
42.20639
42.20601
42.20561
42.20503
42.2048
42.20443
42.20399
42.20357
42.20308
42.20295
42.20246
42.2011
-83.1452
-83.14534
-83.14555
-83.14589
-83.14635
-83.14658
-83.14655
-83.14683
-83.14677
-83.14724
-83.14716
-83.14789
2
2
3
3
5
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
26.3
26.0
23.3
25.9
6.0
5.9
20.2
17.6
30.1
17.5
11.0
29.3
1.8
2.5
4.7
6.2
9.5
3.3
3.5
1.4
2.0
3.5
1.5
3.2
No samples were collected due to hard clay sediments
No samples were collected due to hard clay sediments
42.19775
42.1962
42.19565
42.19569
42.21031
42.20899
-83.14895
-83.14926
-83.14952
-83.14938
-83.14327
-83.144
2
3
3
2
6
4
23.5
18.5
20.0
29.5
15.2
18.2
2.0
3.75
5.2
3.3
10.5
7.3
Number of discrete samples does not include field duplicates. Samplers collected and
prepared one field duplicate for every 20 routine field samples.
NAD - North American Datum
5.3 SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS METHODS
5.3.1 Sediment Core Sampling
Field sampling efforts were conducted onboard a barge. A Field Sampling Plan was
developed for each project phase where sampling methods were described in detail
including Final Field Sampling Plan for Remedial Investigation and Focused Feasibility
Study, Riverview - Trenton Channel, Wayne County, Michigan, dated December 12, 2006
for Phase I and Final Field Sampling Plan for Remedial Investigation and Focused
Feasibility Study, Riverview - Trenton Channel, Wayne County, Michigan, dated July 6,
32
My 2010
-------
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
2007 for Phase II. Coupled with the appropriate Field Sampling Plans, the Sediment
Sampling Standard Operating Procedures (Appendix A of the QAPP) provided
additional sampling method information and are presented in brief in this section.
Sediment core samples were collected for chemical analyses using a vibracore sampler
capable of collecting 20 feet of sediment. Depending on the conditions in the field,
vibracore samples were collected to refusal (from zero to eight feet depth or more) and
sectioned each core into four intervals including zero to one foot, one to three feet, three
to five feet, and above five feet in length. Samples above five feet in length were
sectioned at additional subsequent two-foot depth intervals.
Routine field samples (RFS) were collected at established sampling locations. Each
individual RFS was thoroughly homogenized per the appropriate standard operating
procedure (provided as appendices in the QAPP) until a uniform texture and color was
obtained and then filled the required sample containers with the homogenized sediment
sample. The sampling equipment and mixing utensils were cleaned and decontaminated
before and after collecting each sample, and whenever oil or grease was visible on the
sampling equipment. The cleaning and decontamination procedures are described in
detail in Sediment Sampling Standard Operating Procedures (Appendix A of the QAPP).
Sample location, sediment thickness, and sediment physical observations were recorded
in a field log notebook. Latitude and longitude coordinates for all sampling locations
were recorded during both sampling phases using a calibrated global positioning system
(GPS) unit. During Phase II sampling, a minimum of two GPS reference points were
collected to ensure consistent field location determinations between sampling events.
Reference points were used to document any variability in GPS readings between
sampling events. In the event an issue occurred preventing the collection of a sample, the
sampler moved five or more feet from the original sampling location. The sample was
then collected and the latitude and longitude coordinates of the adjusted location were
recorded. If an obstruction was encountered after adjusting their position or if
insufficient sediment volume was collected, the sampler took an offset near that pre-
determined location before relocating a sample location in the same grid. The field log
notebook was updated to note that an obstruction was encountered or not enough
My 2010 33
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
sediment was readily available to obtain a sample at that location and the original
sampling location was relocated. Sediment thickness, or depth, at which significant
changes or inclusions (e.g., wood debris, sand layers, etc.) occurred in the core was
recorded. Observations included the gross physical characteristics of the sediment, such
as obvious odor, oily sheen, texture, color, and the presence of debris.
Due to the importance of the sediment samples in determining the nature and extent of
sediment contamination, additional samples were collected for QC purposes. These QC
samples included:
• Field Duplicates (FDs): Field duplicates were prepared by using extra volume
from each composite created when preparing the RFSs. One FD was collected
and prepared for every 20 RFSs at sampling locations. FDs were placed in the
same type of sample containers used for collection of RFSs and labeled FDs so
that they appeared to the analytical laboratories to be routine samples which were
sent as "blind" QC samples (the laboratories did not know the samples were
splits). Laboratories analyzed the FDs for the same parameters for which the
RFSs were analyzed.
• Matrix Spikes/Matrix Spike Duplicates (MS/MSDs): MS/MSDs were prepared by
using extra volume of the final homogenized composite obtained when preparing
the RFSs. Unlike the FDs, the MS/MSD samples were sent to the laboratories
clearly designated as QC samples. MS/MSDs sampling locations were randomly
selected and a MS/MSD was collected for every 20 field samples or sample
delivery group, whichever was more frequent.
5.3.2 Surficial Sediment Sampling
A ponar dredge sampler was used to collect sediment samples for toxicity testing during
both phases of the project. During Phase I, surficial sediment samples (zero to two
inches deep) were collected from four locations (C3, Cl 1, Gl 1, and Kl) to assess
toxicological effects of contamination. During Phase II, four surface grab samples were
collected for toxicity analysis from four locations (S2, B3, E3 and F5).
5.3.3 Analytical Methods
Sediment samples were analyzed during both Phase I and Phase II of the project. The
specific analyses and methods differed slightly in each of the two phases of the project.
A full suite of analytes were assessed during Phase I of the project to help evaluate the
nature and extent of contamination. This list was refined for the Phase II sampling and
34 My 2010
-------
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
analytical effort based on results obtained during Phase I. Table 5-3 displays the classes
of analytes assessed during Phases I and II. The green dot signifies that class of analytes
was assessed for at least some of the samples while a red "x" indicates that class of
analytes was not assessed.
Table 5-3 Classes of Analytes Assessed in Sediment Samples During Phase I and Phase II
•MK M^jii?iMu
SVOCs
PCBs as Aroclors (1016, 1221, 1232, 1242, 1248, 1254, 1262, and
1268)
209 PCB Congeners
Metals, including arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead,
mercury, selenium, silver, and zinc
Simultaneously extracted metals including cadmium, copper, lead,
mercury, nickel and zinc- acid volatile sulfides (SEM-AVS), as a
measure of bioavailability of metals in the sediments
Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) metals including
arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury,
selenium, silver, and zinc
Volatile organic compounds (VOC)
Extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (EPH) in the oil and diesel ranges
Oil and grease
Total organic carbon
Grain size
Specific gravity
Moisture content
Atterberg limits
PH
Phase I Phase II
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
X
X
X
•
X
•
X
•
•
X
X
Samples were collected and analyzed in Phase I for volatile organics and selected metals
in leachates from sediment samples that were prepared using the toxicity characteristic
leaching procedure. The purpose of these analyses was to determine if sediments
removed from the site met the definition of a hazardous waste under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act and therefore were required to be disposed of as
hazardous.
My 2010
35
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Sediment samples were also subjected to toxicity tests to assess the impact of sediment
contamination on infaunal organisms for both phases.
The analytical methods used for sediment analyses are summarized in Table 5-4.
Table 5-4 Analytical Methods and Reporting Limits, by Laboratory
Chemistry
SVOCs/PAHs
PCBs as
Aroclors
PCBs as
congeners
Total
Metals
TCLP
Metals6
Aroclors
1016, 1221,
1232, 1242,
1248, 1254,
1260, 1262,
1268
Homologues
& congeners
(at 25% of
the sample
sites)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
VOCs
Diesel-range
EPH organics
Oil-range organics
MDEQ
MDEQ
Contracted
Lab
MDEQ
MDEQ
MDEQ
MDEQ
SW-846 8270C
SW-846 8082
Method 1668A
(modified)
SW-846 7060
SW-846
601 OB/6020
SW-846
601 OB/6020
SW-846
601 OB/6020
SW-846
601 OB/6020
SW-846
601 OB/6020
SW-846 7471
SW-846 6020
SW-846 6020
SW-846
601 OB/6020
SW-846 7760
SW-846 601 OB
SW-846 601 OB
SW-846 601 OB
SW-846 601 OB
SW-846 601 OB
SW-846 7470
SW-846 7740
SW-846 7761
SW-846 601 OB
SW-846
1311/8260B
SW-846 80 15
(Modified)
r Target
Reporting
i :™:I.,-A
100-500
ug/kg
100 ug/kg
200 pg/g
500 ug/kg
1,000 ug/kg
2,000 ug/kg
2,000 ug/kg
1,000 ug/kg
5,000 ug/kg
1 ,000 ug/kg
200 ug/kg
100 ug/kg
5,000 ug/kg
10 ug/L
10 ug/L
20 ug/L
50 ug/L
20 ug/L
100 ug/L
0.4 ug/L
10 ug/L
5 ug/L
20 ug/L
Not Available0
5,000 ppb
20,000 ppb
36
My 2010
-------
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
'ediment
laracteristics
Analytical
ethodi
Target
Reporting
LimitsA
Bulk Properties
Toxicity
SEM-AVS
Oil and grease
PH
Total organic carbon
Grain size
Moisture content
Atterberg limits
Specific gravity
Hyalella azteca at 25% of
the sample sites (28-day
-survival, growth, and
reproduction)
Chironomus dilutus at
25% of the sample sites
(20-day - survival and
growth)
Contracted
Lab
Contracted
Lab
Contracted
Lab
EPA 1629
SW-8469071B
DPA Method
9045C
ASTM D 2974
ASTM D 422
ASTM D 22 16
ASTM D4318
ASTM D 854
EPAMethod100.1
EPAMethod100.2
0.5 umole/g
500 mg/kg
0.1 pH units
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Target reporting limits are based on dry weight. Actual reporting limits may be sample
specific and incorporate adjustments for moisture, dilutions, etc.
TCLP analyses are reported in weight/volume units (e.g., ug/L), based on the total
volume of the leachate
Target reporting limits were not identified for this method, because VOC analyses were
not originally intended. See Section 6.3.1.1 for more details.
5.4 SEDIMENT DEPTH SURVEY
A bathymetric survey was conducted in June 2006 to delineate the channel and shoreline
areas and provide depth contours to assist in the development sample designs and
collection efforts. Sonar devices were used to quantify the volume of soft sediment in the
Trenton Channel site by conducting vertical and lateral surveys. The sediment volume
quantification when combined with sediment core data collected with a vibracore sampler
allowed for the assessment of sediment thickness.
The survey was performed in accordance with the USAGE Manual EM 1110-2-1003,
Hydrographic Surveying (January 1, 2002). The sounding data was collected from a 23-
foot Whaler Challenger using a calibrated Odom Echotrac™ MKIII precision recording
fathometer. The Trimble® DSM-132™ Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS)
equipped with a beacon receiver was utilized to ensure accurate horizontal positioning. A
laptop computer using the latest version of HYPACK® hydrographic surveying software
assisted in navigation guidance and data collection and processing. The Whaler
My 2010
37
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Challenger never exceeded 5 knots during survey data collection efforts to ensure the
highest quality of data (MACTEC, June 2006).
The results of the hydrographic survey were reviewed and used to assist in determining
the specific locations to collect sediment probe data. A vibracore sampler was used to
collect the samples at over 40 sampling locations and the locational data for each probing
was captured through the use of the same DGPS equipment and software used for the
hydrographic survey. General observations regarding the sediment types were
documented in a field log notebook (MACTEC, June 2006).
5.5 DATA MANAGEMENT AND DATA QUALITY
Data collected during Phase I and Phase II of the Trenton Channel project were managed
using procedures outlined in the project planning documents. These procedures included
using standard protocols for recording field data, defined electronic data deliverables
(EDD) for laboratory data, chain-of-custody forms for transferred samples, a data logging
system to track all field and laboratory data submitted for independent data verification,
and a standardized database to store all project data. More information regarding data
management and data quality is provided within this section.
5.5.1 Data Management
The field data, laboratory data, and other project information gathered during preparation
and implementation of the project included:
• Original planning documents developed for the project.
• All permits, licenses, and agreements. Copies of these were maintained at the
project site at all times throughout the RI activities.
• Site survey data, including pre-work survey data and surveys conducted
throughout and upon completion of RI activities.
• Standard forms used to document inspections and data quality verifications as
specified by EPA GLNPO and MDEQ.
• Field information recorded each day in daily logbooks. This included weather
conditions, personnel present, all field measurements and observations, and any
deviations from the original sampling plan. Entries into the logbooks were made
as activities occurred or samples were collected. Calibrations of any field
38 My 2010
-------
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
equipment were documented in the logbooks. Instrument readings taken during
the sample collection efforts were documented in boring logs, in the field
logbook, or both. Daily logbooks were stored at the project site.
• Field sampling records. Once samples were collected, a chain-of-custody record
was created for each sample. This record then accompanied the sample to the
laboratory.
• Laboratory data generated during analysis of sediment samples. These data were
reported electronically and in hard copy.
To ensure effective handling of such data, field-related work plans and quality control
procedures for technical data generated by field staff were developed and implemented.
Data management strategies for managing data associated with the sediment
contamination sampling activities after completion of each phase of sampling are
described below.
5.5.2 Laboratory Data Collection
The laboratory provided data for sediment contaminant results in the form of summary-
level data reports that included laboratory-applied data qualifiers and reporting limits.
All laboratory data and records were included in final analytical reports. Laboratories
delivered data in the form of EDDs, as well as in hard-copy data packages that included
the analytical results, quality control results, narratives from the analytical laboratory, and
the chain-of-custody forms. These data packages then underwent data verification,
validation and processing that included the application of validator-applied qualifiers.
5.5.3 Database
EPA GLNPO developed a sediment contaminant database used to maintain and archive
all sediment contaminant data from GLLA projects, referred to as the Great Lakes
Sediment Database (GLSED). This database contains sediment chemistry and toxicity
data for target analytes included in each project. Field observations, locational data, and
all relevant collection information also are stored in the database. Both the laboratory-
applied and validator-applied qualifiers are maintained in GLSED at the sample-specific
level. The data review narratives prepared by the data validator also are appended to the
project GLSED. The database is compatible with the Query Manager Data Management
My 2010 39
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
System administered by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. All Trenton
Channel sample results presented in this report are maintained in GLSED.
Data Quality
Due to the importance of the environmental samples in determining the nature and extent
of contamination at the project site, all data were reviewed as described in the project
QAPP. The analytical laboratories reviewed the analytical data sets internally to confirm
compliance with laboratory QC criteria. The data review identified any out-of control
data points and data omissions and the laboratories corrected these data deficiencies.
The data validator reviewed each data package from the participating laboratories to
verify the quality control requirements were met and to identify questionable data. The
data were evaluated using the U.S. EPA Contract Laboratory Program National
Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Data Review (EPA, February 1994) and U.S. EPA
Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review
(EPA, October 1999) and laboratory established quality control parameters. The data
were flagged with "usability" qualifiers as necessary for clarity. The data qualifiers
applied by the laboratories as well as the validator are maintained at the sample level in
the GLSED.
Efforts to assess the quality of the data identified a number of data quality concerns that
are typical of sediment sample analyses. Foremost among those concerns were issues
related to the bias and precision information available from the MS/MSD analyses. In
many instances, the amounts of the analytes of interest the analytical laboratories spiked
into the MS/MSD samples were well below the background concentrations in these
contaminated sediments. The end result was that the spiked sample results were not
appreciably different from those for the unspiked aliquot of the sample, and the
"recovery" of the spiked analytes will appear to be quite low.
In some instances, the matrix spike recoveries were only marginally outside of the
acceptance limits in the QAPP for this project (e.g., 74% recovery for acid volatile
sulfide versus a lower limit of 75%). Such minor deviations from the acceptance limits
are not a significant concern. However, in other instances, the apparent recoveries were
40 My 2010
-------
SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
well below reasonable expectations, and could suggest the analytical methods applied to
the sediment samples were not optimal choices. In other instances, the analytes that were
spiked into the MS/MSD samples did not represent the project-specific analytes of
interest, but were based on generic recommendations in the methods used.
Many of these concerns were addressed during the course of the project. For example,
one of the analytical laboratories during the Phase I analyses ensured the PAHs of interest
were spiked into the MS/MSD samples for the latter stages of Phase I and all of the Phase
II analyses, rather than using a generic spiking solution that contained only one PAH
compound.
Laboratories also worked to improve analytical sensitivities through the application of
specific cleanup procedures for the organics. By removing interferences from the sample
extracts, the laboratories were able to identify and quantify the target analytes at lower
concentrations, rather than resorting to diluting the extracts to remove the interferences
and reporting non-detects at high levels. The improved cleanup techniques also reduced
interferences with the surrogate compounds added to every sample analyzed for organics.
Thus, the surrogate recoveries, which are a sample-specific QC indicator of extraction
efficiency, provided more useful results than without the cleanup. These improvements
were documented in conference call summaries as well as an addendum to the project
QAPP (STN Environmental JV, March 7, 2007).
Although adaptive management techniques were used to address the issues over the
course of the project, the inherent difficulties in the analyses of the sediment samples
resulted in QC data that are less robust than originally planned (e.g., fewer meaningful
matrix spike recoveries). These data quality concerns and the qualifier flags applied to
the analytical results do not mean the results are invalid. Rather, the qualifiers are
intended to caution the user about an aspect of the data that does not meet the acceptance
criteria originally established for the project. Therefore, additional consideration should
be paid to the potential effects of uncertainty in using these results. As noted above, the
final data review narratives, as well as the sample-specific qualifiers applied by the
laboratory and validator, are stored in GLSED. During data validation, no results were
determined to be invalid for use in describing extent and nature of contamination for the
purposes of the remedial investigation and the data interpretation presented in this report.
My 2010 41
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
42 My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
6.0 PROJECT RESULTS
From December 2006 to July 2007, 128 discrete samples were collected and analyzed
from 50 sampling stations. A suite of target analytes were determined in each of the
sediment samples including, semivolatile organic compounds, metals, polychlorinated
biphenyls, simultaneously extracted metals-acid volatile sulfide, toxic characteristic
leaching procedure for volatile organic compounds and metals, extractable petroleum
hydrocarbons, and oil and grease. Additional sediment parameters included total organic
carbon, grain size, density, pH, moisture content and Atterberg limits and toxicity data in
sediments. Observed results for individual samples described in this report (location and
depth interval for each sample is specified in the sample ID) are provided in Appendix H.
Sections 6.1 through 6.6 present summary statistics of the various analytes included in
the Phase I and II data collection efforts. Data from both phases are combined for all
assessments; however, the results are summarized separately for each depth category, and
combined over all depth categories. For the purposes of data interpretation for this
report, non-detect results were handled as follows. In developing the summary statistics
for individual analytes, one-half the reporting limit was substituted for the analyte for any
non-detect values. When calculating aggregate analyte totals (e.g., total PAHs, total
Aroclors, total PCB congeners), the non-detect results for individual analytes was set to
zero. When all of the individual analytes comprising a total were non-detect values, the
value for the total was set to half the highest individual reporting limit. Because the
sample-specific reporting limits for individual analytes typically were less than two times
the target reporting limit presented in Table 5-4, and because non-detects were replaced
with one-half the sample specific reporting limit when descriptive statistics were
calculated, the minimum concentration for many of the analytes presented in the
following sections is below the target reporting limit.
6.1 SEDIMENT DEPTH
As detailed in Section 5.4, sediment depth data was selected based on sediment probe
measurements and observed sediment core lengths. Sediment depth measurements were
collected at 127 sampling locations during the 2006 sediment survey, Phase I, and Phase
My 2010 43
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
II sampling events. Fifty of the sediment depth measurements were based on the depth of
sediment cores taken to refusal and 77 were based on sediment probe measurements
(Figure 6-1). Sediment depth ranged from no soft sediment, or zero feet of sediment, to
19 feet (Table 6-1). Geostatistical analysis also was conducted on the sediment depth
results observed in the Phase I and Phase II study areas to generate a kriging map of
sediment depth as illustrated in Figure 6-2 (Appendix A provides the technical approach
for the geostatistical analysis). Based on the geostatistical analysis, sediment depth
estimates ranged from 0.5 feet to 18.2 feet.
Table 6-1 Descriptive statistics of Sediment Depth Measurements
Measure1
'umber
lesults
Core Depth
50
4.02
2.97
tandar
Deviation (ft)
2.60
0.99
10.9
Probe Depth
77
7.01
7.00
4.64
19
44
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
M.
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
N
<-gs^,
0 500 1.000
2.000
Feet
Sediment Depth (ft)
Core
• 1.4-2.5
2.51 - 45
4.51 - 6.5
6.51 - 8.5
• 8.51-12
Probe
A 0-2.5
i 2.51 - 4.5
4.51 - 6.5
- 6.51-8.5
A 8.51-12
A 12.01-19
f/EPA
Created by CSC
November 25. 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-1 Project Sediment Depth Results
My 2010
45
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Remedial Investigation i
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Sediment Depth (ft)
H 0.5 - 3
| 3.1 -5
| | 5.1 -7
| | 7.1 -9
9.1 - 12
12.1 -15
15.1 -18.2
0 500 1.000
2.000
Feet
The ranges of sediment depths displayed are
not the actual observed sediment depth
&EPA DC
Created by CSC
January 4, 2010
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-2 Kriged Sediment Depth at the Trenton Channel Site
46
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
6.2 SEDIMENT PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC
Sediment samples were collected for physical analysis of grain size distribution through
the length of the sediment core (Phase I samples only). Using the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil taxonomy (USDA, 1999), the grain size data was
classified into distinct soil textures. Figures 6-3 through 6-5 illustrate the soil texture
characterization for specific depth intervals for Phase I sampling locations. On average,
samples contained mostly silt (34.6%), clay (26.4%) and fine sand (19%) content. At
surface depths, samples contained a higher percentage of gravel and medium sand than
samples collected at deeper depths. Appendix H provides individual sample results for
the sediment physical characteristics including clay content, silt content, gravel content,
coarse sand content, fine sand content and medium sand content.
My 2010 47
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
0-1 ft
1-3 ft
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Soil Texture
• clay • sand
clay loam • loam
• sandy loam ^ silty clay
• silt loam _ silty clay loam
D sandy clay loam * gravel
'Sal texture is based on grain size using the USOA soil
classification system
0 500 1.000
2,000
Feet
xvEPA
Created by CSC
November 30, 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-3 Soil Texture Classification Results for 0-1 Foot and 1-3 Foot Depth Intervals
48
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
3-5 ft
5-7 ft
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Soil Texture
clay • sand
clay loam • loam
sandy loam A silty clay
silt loam _ silty clay loam
sandy clay loam * gravel
'Soil texture is based on grain size using the USDA soil
classification system
0 500 1.000
2,000
Feet
v>EPA
Created by CSC
November 30. 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-4 Soil Texture Classification Results for 3-5 Foot and 5-7 Foot Depth Intervals
My 2010
49
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
7-9 ft
9-11 ft
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Soit Texture
t day • &and
day loam • losrr
• sandy loam * sully cluy
• s* toaoi _ My Oay ioj"i
D sandy clay loam * grave]
l le ituic n baua on 7«ln aw u^ng Uw USOA Wl
^
0 500 1,000
2.000
Feet
SERA DCi
Created b/ CSC
Ncwisml** 30. 2009
Miehtgan State Plane Feet MAD 63
Figure 6-5 Soil Texture Classification Results for 7-9 Foot and 9-11 Foot Depth Intervals
50
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
6.3 SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY
Organics
6.3.1.1 Volatile and Semivolatile Organic Compounds
PAHs and other semi-volatile organic compounds were analyzed using Method 8270 for
all 128 samples. At least one individual PAH was detected in 95.3% of the Phase I and II
samples. Among individual PAHs, the percentage of samples yielding non-detect results
ranged from 4.7% (phenanthrene) to 95% (dibenz[a,h]anthracene). The largest
contribution to the total PAHs typically resulted from phenanthrene, fluoranthene, and
pyrene. The highest total PAH concentrations tended to be located in Transect K.
Descriptive statistics of the calculated total PAHs are presented in the Table 6-2.
Descriptive statistics of the 17 individual PAHs are presented in Appendix B and
individual PAH results are provided in Appendix H.
Table 6-2 Descriptive Statistics of Calculated Total PAH Results
UPPH
Total
PAH
Depth
iu\
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
results
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
f««U\
39,218
42,327
45,000
39,507
39,108
29,045
41,104
Median
f««U\
12,790
13,300
7,277
16,415
20,170
29,045
12,375
SD
f««U\
88,697
75,892
98,020
57,252
45,074
40,652
82,242
RSD
101 \
226
179
218
145
115
140
200
Min
f««U\
84
87
180
1,400
450
300
84
Max
f««U\
534,600
388,500
407,400
172,500
106,800
57,790
534,600
INUI1-
detect
(%)
2.0
5.1
8.3
0
0
50
4.7
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
Among the 45 additional SVOCs, only dibenzofuran and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate were
detected in more than 20% of the samples. Twenty-nine of the 45 additional SVOCs
were not detected in any of the 128 samples. Descriptive statistics of the 45 additional
SVOCs are presented in Appendix C.
The analyses of the Phase I samples for semivolatile organics indicated the presence of
some non-target compounds in relatively large amounts. Because there is some overlap
between the organic compounds that can be analyzed as semivolatiles and those that can
be analyzed as volatiles, a subset of samples from the site were analyzed for VOCs to
My 2010
51
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
determine if the non-target compounds observed during the semivolatile analyses might
be VOCs. If so, VOC analyses might be warranted during future sampling activities.
All of the VOC results on the Phase I samples were considered to be estimated
concentrations because the analyses were performed two months after the samples were
collected, well outside the nominal 14-day holding time for volatile analyses. In addition,
the samples were collected and stored in the screw-cap glass jars used for the semivolatile
samples, and not the septum-sealed 40-mL glass vials typically used for VOC samples.
Thus, one might expect to lose some of the lighter, more volatile components of the
samples, but the results could still be used as a screening tool for the less volatile
organics that overlap the semivolatile target analyte list.
Based on these screening results, it did not appear the non-target compounds found
during the original semivolatile analyses were VOCs, and thus, no further VOC analyses
were conducted.
6.3.1.2 Oil and Grease
Phase I samples were analyzed for oil and grease. Oil and grease was detected in 17% of
the 78 samples. Four of the 78 samples were additional and collected at site Gil for oil
and grease analysis only. The results of these additional four samples and analyses were
included in the statistical summary. Observed concentrations ranged between 115 and
12,100 ppm. The rate of detection, and the mean concentration, was highest at the
surface depths. The descriptive statistics of the oil and grease Phase I results are
presented in Table 6-3 and Appendix H provides the individual oil and grease results.
Table 6-3 Descriptive Statistics of Oil and Grease Results
31
711
162
2,178
306
119
12,100
77
1-3
22
351
164
511
145
120.5
1,950
82
3-5
16
172
151
76
44
115.5
435
94
5-7
244
193
157
64
120
518
80
7-9
188
191
13
173.5
199
100
9-11
171
171
N/A
N/A
171
171
100
All
78
442
166
1,405
318
115.5
12,100
83
N/A- Not Applicable
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
52
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
6.3.1.3 Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Oil and Diesel Range)
All Phase I and II samples were analyzed for oil range organics (ORO) and diesel range
organics (DRO). DRO and ORO were detected in all samples. DRO results ranged
between 27 and 26,000 ppb, with an overall mean of 1,436 ppb. ORO results ranged
between 52 ppb and 25,000 ppb, with an overall mean of 3,970 ppb. A strong pattern
between concentration and sampling depth was not observed for either analyte.
Descriptive statistics for these two analytes are presented in Table 6-4 and Appendix H
provides the individual DRO and ORO results.
Table 6-4 Descriptive Statistics of ORO and DRO Results
Diesel
Range
Organics
Oil Range
Organics
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
1,453
1,573
1,285
1,665
909
548
1,436
3,881
4,369
3,818
4,453
2,884
1,035
3,970
315
660
480
1,500
280
548
360
1,300
1,900
1,490
2,850
1,300
1,035
1,500
3,753
2,728
1,719
1,537
1,115
640
2,899
5,389
5,714
5,230
4,435
3,860
1,223
5,267
258
173
134
92
123
117
202
139
131
137
100
134
118
133
44
40
69
98
27
95
27
52
74
77
110
140
170
52
26,000
14,000
7,200
4,200
2,600
1,000
26,000
23,000
25,000
19,000
12,000
9,500
1,900
25,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
6.3.1.4 Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Total polychlorinated biphenyls were quantified as both Aroclors and as congeners. All
Phase I and II samples were analyzed for nine Aroclors. Calculated total Aroclors ranged
between 60 ppb and 460,000 ppb. None of the nine Aroclors were detected in 65% of the
analyzed samples. Among the nine individual Aroclors, only four (1242, 1248, 1254, and
1260) were detected in any of the samples. Of the other four, Aroclor 1242 was detected
My 2010
53
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
in only three samples, while Aroclors 1248, 1254, and 1260 were detected in 30, 28, and
26 samples, respectively. Total Aroclors tended to be highest at the 1-3 foot depth
interval. The maximum total Aroclor concentration (460,000 ppb) was found at Transect
K. At least one Aroclor was detected most frequently at Transects K (100% of samples)
and C (69% of samples). Appendix D provides descriptive statistics on individual
Aroclors and Appendix H presents individual Aroclor results for all samples. Descriptive
statistics of total Aroclors are presented in Table 6-5.
Table 6-5 Descriptive Statistics of Total Aroclor Results
Total
Aroclors
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
39
24
6,627
12,852
8125
5,724
911
810
128 8,434
203 35,361
160
150
188
175
810
73,543
26,791
11,761
1287
976
180 47,427 562
534
572
330
205
141
120
60 250,000
60
60
95
80
120
460,000
130,000
33,000
3,100
1,500
60 460,000
56
69
71
75
80
50
65
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
In addition to quantifying PCBs as Aroclors, 38 samples were analyzed for individual
PCB congeners. At least one PCB congener was detected in all 38 samples. Calculated
total PCB congeners ranged between 0.077 ppb and 503,484 ppb. Total PCB congener
concentrations tended to decrease with increasing sample depth.
Total Aroclor and congener concentrations tended to be fairly consistent. On average,
the total Aroclor concentration was approximately 10% greater than the total congener
concentration. The two totals correlated strongly based on Spearman's rank correlation
(r=0.92). Among samples for which both Aroclor and congener analyses were
performed, only two samples yielded discordant totals when compared to the CBSQG
(i.e., where one total exceeded the CBSQG and the other did not). Specifically, for
samples C4 1-3 and C8 1-3, the total PCB congeners exceeded the CBSQG of 676 ppb at
708 and 1,137 ppb, respectively, while the total Aroclors were below the CBSQG at 280
ppb. Descriptive statistics of total PCB congeners are presented in Table 6-6. Appendix
54
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
F presents descriptive statistics for each PCB congener combined over all depth
categories and Appendix H presents individual PCB congener results for all samples.
Table 6-6 Descriptive Statistics of Total PCB Congeners
Total PCB
Congeners
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
12
12
1
38
46,826
25,390
11,611
4,623
1,346
858
25,524
484
465
448
82
1,346
858
370
144,249
76,466
26,201
9,136
1,800
N/A
91,223
308
301
226
198
134
N/A
357
1.39
0.196
0.142
0.077
73.5
858
0.077
503,484
267,473
70,496
18,327
2,619
858
503,484
_p_
0
_0_
_0_
_0_
_0_
0
N/A- Not Applicable
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
6.3.2 Metals
6.3.2.1 Total Metals
Ten different metals were analyzed in all Phase I and II samples including arsenic,
barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, selenium, silver, and zinc. Among
the ten metals, only cadmium, mercury, selenium, and silver were not detected in all
samples. Cadmium was detected in 91% of the samples, while mercury, selenium, and
silver were each detected in approximately 75% of the samples. For most metals, the
concentrations tended to be highest at the surface and 1-3 foot depth interval. Descriptive
statistics for these metals are presented in Table 6-7 and individual sample results for
total metals are located in Appendix H.
Table 6-7 Descriptive Statistics of Total Metals
Arsenic
Depth
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Mean Median SD RSD Mm
' - ' -
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Analyte
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Depth
(ft)
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number
of
Results
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppm)
106.4
124.9
131.8
115.0
84.4
69.5
115.9
4.9
4.9
4.0
5.5
1.9
0.3
4.6
73.9
88.5
64.7
64.9
19.6
13.5
73.0
79.5
90.7
80.4
86.5
71.6
44.0
82.6
136.0
134.5
105.1
101.5
94.6
37.0
124.4
Median
(ppm)
88.5
91
89
86
64
69.5
83.5
1.5
1.2
0.78
0.525
0.47
0.335
0.885
28.5
24
16.5
14.5
10
13.5
20
47.5
46
44
66.5
27
44
46
80.5
83
58.5
56.5
18
36.95
67
SD
(ppm)
61.2
92.5
156.4
68.3
53.6
12.0
94.7
7.7
6.9
5.4
8.7
3.6
0.2
6.9
96.9
134.1
92.5
83.8
19.8
3.5
105.9
76.4
90.8
76.1
76.8
85.4
33.9
79.9
150.6
142.9
110.4
101.9
150.0
39.7
136.8
RSD
(%)
57.5
74.1
118.7
59.4
63.5
17.3
81.7
158.2
140.7
133.8
160.1
188.8
52.8
151.3
131.1
151.6
143.0
129.2
100.7
26.2
145.1
96.1
100.2
94.7
88.8
119.2
77.1
96.7
110.7
106.3
105.1
100.4
158.5
107.4
109.9
Min
(ppm)
42
22
33
52
56
61
22
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.21
0.1
8.4
4.4
5.1
6.8
7.2
11
4.4
17
12
14
19
20
20
12
7.5
7.9
8.6
9
14
8.9
7.5
Max
(ppm)
330
500
810
230
180
78
810
32
24
16
25
8.3
0.46
32
490
600
350
230
54
16
600
260
420
230
210
220
68
420
590
520
330
220
360
65
590
Non-
detects
(%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
13
4
25
40
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
Analyte
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Depth
(ft)
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number
of
Results
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppm)
2.5
3.2
1.4
0.9
1.0
0.4
2.3
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.5
1.1
1.3
1.1
1.3
1.6
0.2
1.2
257.7
255.2
242.8
276.5
298.8
96.0
254.4
Median
(ppm)
0.455
0.68
0.605
0.905
0.49
0.4025
0.545
0.415
0.5
0.305
0.565
0.1
0.165
0.39
0.405
0.37
0.325
0.32
0.15
0.2
0.36
145
120
145
125.5
57
96
125
SD
(ppm)
9.6
13.6
3.2
0.8
1.3
0.5
9.7
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.4
1.7
1.8
1.5
1.7
3.2
0.2
1.7
246.7
254.8
261.6
293.4
506.3
62.2
262.0
RSD
(%)
388.1
420.7
230.9
84.7
134.6
132.6
417.8
69.7
75.0
77.8
58.8
106.5
55.7
73.4
148.6
142.8
145.1
124.5
195.3
106.1
147.3
95.7
99.8
107.7
106.1
169.5
64.8
103.0
Min
(ppm)
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.08
0.025
0.025
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.1
0.13
0.05
0.05
44
24
38
36
32
52
24
Max
(ppm)
67
85
16
2.4
3.3
0.78
85
1.5
1.4
1.1
0.93
1
0.23
1.5
8.1
7.7
5.8
3.8
7.4
0.35
8.1
910
910
1,000
750
1,200
140
1,200
Non-
detects
(%)
22
26
25
25
0
50
23
18
28
25
13
60
50
24
24
31
25
0
0
50
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N/A- Not Applicable
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
6.3.2.2 TCLP Metals
Ten TCLP metals (in Phase I samples only) were analyzed including arsenic, barium,
cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, selenium, silver, and zinc. Zinc and barium
were the only TCLP metals detected in all samples. Among the other eight TCLP metals,
only arsenic, cadmium, and copper were detected in more than 5% of the samples. All
detected results were below the corresponding TCLP hazardous waste limits. Descriptive
My 2010
57
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
statistics of the ten TCLP metals are presented in Table 6-8 and individual total metal
results are presented in Appendix H.
Table 6-8 Descriptive Statistics of TCLP Metals
^B
Arsenic -
TCLP
Barium -
TCLP
Cadmium
-TCLP
Chromium
- TCLP
Copper -
TCLP
Depth
irt\
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Results
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
Mean
/««u\
11.5
16.3
12.1
9.6
5.0
5.0
12.5
1,012.6
1,030.9
1,031.9
808.0
510.0
980.0
988.9
9.4
13.7
14.9
13.8
5.0
5.0
11.8
25.0
26.6
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.5
12.5
13.3
13.4
13.8
16.7
10.0
13.1
Median
/««u\
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
930
1,000
1,050
790
320
980
980
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10.2
16.4
11.6
10.3
0.0
N/A
12.4
426.3
355.4
431.9
476.7
373.2
N/A
411.3
12.5
17.7
29.0
17.0
0.0
N/A
18.3
0.0
7.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
N/A
4.1
5.3
7.7
7.5
8.5
11.5
N/A
6.8
•Im
V/o;
89.2
101.0
95.6
107.1
0.0
N/A
99.3
42.1
34.5
41.9
59.0
73.2
N/A
41.6
133.0
128.9
195.2
123.3
0.0
N/A
154.8
0.0
28.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
N/A
16.0
42.1
58.3
56.0
61.6
69.3
N/A
51.8
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
300
440
280
280
270
980
270
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
38
53
42
28
5
5
53
1,800
1,600
1,700
1,500
940
980
1,800
60
81
120
44
5
5
120
25
61
25
25
25
25
61
26
40
31
29
30
10
40
m&m
65
59
63
80
100
100
65
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
84
68
81
80
100
100
79
100
95
100
100
100
100
99
81
82
81
80
67
100
81
58
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
Analyte
Lead -
TCLP
Mercury -
TCLP
Selenium
-TCLP
Silver -
TCLP
Zinc -
TCLP
Depth
(ft)
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number
of
Results
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
Mean
(ppb)
71.6
55.9
55.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
61.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
940.7
1,430.0
1,195.0
1,344.0
280.0
550.0
1,126.3
Median
(ppb)
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
330
520
320
250
190
550
355
SD
(ppb)
104.9
27.7
20.0
0.0
0.0
N/A
68.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
N/A
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
N/A
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
N/A
0.0
1173.2
1,949.1
2,649.3
2,329.3
182.5
N/A
1,816.3
RSD
(%)
146.5
49.6
36.4
0.0
0.0
N/A
111.2
17.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
N/A
11.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
N/A
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
N/A
0.0
124.7
136.3
221.7
173.3
65.2
N/A
161.3
Min
(ppb)
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
62
190
210
170
160
550
62
Max
(ppb)
630
180
130
50
50
50
630
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
4100
8200
11,000
5,500
490
550
11,000
Non-
detects
(%)
94
95
94
100
100
100
95
97
100
100
100
100
100
99
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N/A- Not Applicable
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
My 2010
59
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
6.3.2.3 Simultaneously Extracted Metals-Acid Volatile Sulfide
A subset of 22 samples from Phase I were analyzed for simultaneously extracted metals
including cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc. Among the six
simultaneously extracted metals, only cadmium and mercury were detected in the
majority of the 22 samples. Descriptive statistics of the six simultaneously extracted
metals are presented in Table 6-9 and individual results are presented in Appendix H.
Table 6-9 Descriptive Statistics of Simultaneously Extracted Metals
Eareiffo
Hill
Cadmium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Depth
irt\
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
8
6
4
2
1
1
22
8
6
4
2
1
1
22
8
6
4
2
1
1
22
8
6
4
2
1
1
22
Mean
/ .„_ _\
0.0085
0.0183
0.0211
0.0008
0.0023
0.0009
0.0121
1.77
1.75
1.28
0.84
1.10
0.73
1.52
0.40
0.68
0.55
0.25
0.33
0.26
0.48
0.0016
0.0002
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0007
Median
/ .„_ _\
0.0009
0.0054
0.0018
0.0008
0.0023
0.0009
0.0011
0.35
1.15
1.32
0.84
1.10
0.73
0.55
0.20
0.45
0.46
0.25
0.33
0.26
0.29
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
SD
/ .„_ _\
0.0123
0.0249
0.0393
0.0003
N/A
N/A
0.0217
2.76
2.26
1.30
1.08
N/A
N/A
2.04
0.50
0.84
0.54
0.31
N/A
N/A
0.57
0.0042
0.0004
0.0000
0.0000
N/A
N/A
0.0025
RSD
101 \
145.5
135.7
186.7
38.6
N/A
N/A
179.3
155.7
128.8
101.1
128.1
N/A
N/A
134.9
126.3
122.5
98.2
120.8
N/A
N/A
117.7
265.8
152.5
27.7
37.2
N/A
N/A
374.1
Min
/ .„_ _\
0.00065
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0023
0.0009
0.0006
0.005
0.0048
0.0048
0.079
1.10
0.73
0.0048
0.027
0.00115
0.00115
0.037
0.33
0.26
0.00
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
0.00012
0.0001
0.00007
^IjjRpi^H
0.028
0.06
0.08
0.00105
0.0023
0.0009
0.08
7.1
5.8
2.5
1.6
1.10
0.73
7.1
1.4
2.1
1.3
0.47
0.33
0.26
2.1
0.012
0.001
0.000125
0.00012
0.00012
0.0001
0.012
detects
(%)
63
33
50
100
0
100
55
13
33
25
0
0
0
18
0
33
25
0
0
0
14
88
83
100
100
100
100
91
60
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
Analyte
Nickel
Zinc
Depth
(ft)
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number
of
Results
8
6
4
2
1
1
22
8
6
4
2
1
1
22
Mean
(umg)
0.26
0.51
0.62
0.13
0.12
0.12
0.37
2.14
3.33
3.71
1.69
2.40
1.60
2.70
Median
(umg)
0.25
0.19
0.14
0.13
0.12
0.12
0.17
1.30
2.63
2.15
1.69
2.40
1.60
1.65
SD
(Mmg)
0.13
0.75
1.06
0.04
N/A
N/A
0.58
2.88
3.32
4.48
1.99
N/A
N/A
3.00
RSD
(%)
49.5
148.1
169.9
33.3
N/A
N/A
156.1
134.2
99.5
120.5
118.0
N/A
N/A
111.2
Min
(Mmg)
0.12
0.00385
0.0035
0.099
0.12
0.12
0.0035
0.4
0.24
0.35
0.28
2.4
1.6
0.24
Max
(Mmg)
0.48
2
2.2
0.16
0.12
0.12
2.2
9
7.9
10.2
3.1
2.4
1.6
10.2
Non-
detects
(%)
0
17
25
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N/A- Not Applicable
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
Additionally, acid volatile sulfide (AVS) and the SEM/AVS ratio was analyzed in 22
samples. AVS was detected in only six of the 22 samples. Mean AVS concentration
ranged between 0.275 umole/g and 12.4 umole/g. SEM/AVS ratios ranged between 0
and 12.52. Descriptive statistics for these two analytes are presented in Table 6-10 and
individual AVS and SEM/AVS results are presented in Appendix H.
Table 6-10 Descriptive Statistics of AVS and SEM/AVS Ratio Results
Analyte | Jr. | of Mean Median SD ,„,. Min Max detects
Results (%)
Acid Volatile
Sulfide
(|jmole/g)
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
8
6
4
2
1
1
22
2.92
0.77
0.59
0.38
0.48
0.40
1.45
0.59
0.44
0.40
0.38
0.48
0.40
0.45
4.23
0.90
0.48
0.13
N/A
N/A
2.74
145
117
81
35
N/A
N/A
188
0.29
0.275
0.275
0.285
0.475
0.4
0.275
12.40
2.60
1.30
0.48
0.48
0.40
12.40
50
83
75
100
100
100
73
My 2010
61
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
'AI ifci ST3 i±^H
SEM/AVS
Ratio
Depth
(ft)
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number
of
Results
8
6
4
2
1
1
22
Mean
0.29
0.03
3.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.68
Median
0.16
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
SD
0.38
0.07
6.26
0.00
N/A
N/A
2.66
RSD
(%)
131
245
200
N/A
N/A
N/A
389
Min
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Max
1.06
0.17
12.52
0.00
0.00
0.00
12.52
Non-
detects
(%)
50
83
75
100
100
100
73
N/A- Not Applicable
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
6.4 PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY AND GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS
6.4.1 Total Organic Carbon
Total organic carbon (TOC) was measured in all 128 Phase I and II samples. Percent
TOC ranged between 0.4% and 20%, with an overall site mean of 5.19%. TOC tended to
be lowest at the 1-3 and 3-5 foot sampling depth intervals. Descriptive statistics of TOC
measurements are presented in Table 6-11 and individual results for TOC are presented
in Appendix H.
Table 6-11 Descriptive Statistics of Total Organic Carbon Results
0-1
50
5.34
4.85
3.73
69.9
0.4
15.5
1-3
39
5.01
3.80
3.73
74.6
0.5
17.1
3-5
24
4.79
3.90
4.31
89.9
0.9
20
5-7
6.21
6.65
3.88
62.4
0.9
12.2
7-£
6.82
5.60
3.19
46.8
3.7
11.8
9-11
1.80
1.80
1.41
78.6
0.8
2.8
All
128
5.19
4.60
3.80
73.3
0.4
20
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
62
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
6.4.2 pH
pH was analyzed in Phase I samples only. As indicated by the QAPP addendum (STN
Environmental JV, March 7, 2007),
"Informal measurements (including the observation of chemical deterioration of
aluminum pans) of several of the samples submitted to the contract laboratory
presented caustic properties, withpHs reporting around 12. Due to the
potentially hazardous nature of these samples, the decision was made to report
pH on all samples submitted for geotechnical analysis. This data is to be
considered screening level only and shall not be held to rigorous QA acceptance
criteria."
Overall, pH ranged between 6.9 and 12.5 for the Phase I samples, with a mean pH of
9.02. The highest pH values were observed in samples collected in Transect H.
Descriptive statistics of pH results are presented in Table 6-12. Figure 6-6 illustrates the
mean pH results across all depth intervals for each Phase I sampling location and
individual pH results are presented in Appendix H.
Table 6-12 Descriptive Statistics of pH Results
D(ftP)h NRe?u1trs°f Mean Median SD ' Min ' Max
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
8.84
8.86
8.98
9.78
11.17
8.30
9.02
8.30
8.20
8.45
8.50
12.10
8.30
8.35
1.53
1.50
1.55
2.13
1.62
N/A
1.59
6.9
7
7.3
8.1
9.3
8.3
6.9
12
12.3
12.5
12.3
12.1
8.3
12.5
N/A- Not Applicable
SD - Standard Deviation
My 2010
63
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Mean pH
• 7; - »o
O SOI -3.0
O a QI-TOO
O 10.01 110
• 1101-12,24
Property Boundary
Wyai *
BASF i
Aikema
500 1.000
2.000
Feet
ttoie Pssatt s** Mcbon 6.5.2 of tins report tot a
discussion gf the getieiobgn at the pH results lhal
thotikl be contidered when interpreting Itieto data
v»EPA
Civdtetl uy CSC
Hovsmb*r30 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet MAO K
Figure 6-6 Mean pH Results for all Depth Intervals for Each Phase I Sampling Location
64
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
6.4.3 Percent Solids
Percent solids and moisture content were analyzed independently for each sample in both
project phases. Percent solids ranged between 37.3% and 86.5%, with an overall mean of
67%. Generally, percent solids tended to be greater at shallower sampling depths.
Descriptive statistics of percent solids and moisture are presented in Table 6-13.
Moisture content ranged between 15.2% and 160.5%, with a mean of 54.9%, indicating
that on average the mass of the water removed from the sample when drying was slightly
greater than half of the mass of the dried sample.
The distinct analytical laboratories participating in the project measured percent solids
and moisture in study samples they received as a part of their analysis. These
measurements are available in the project GLSED. The data presented in Table 6-13
were determined from the data generated in the laboratories responsible for measuring
TOC and percent moisture.
Table 6-13 Descriptive Statistics of Total Solids
Analyte D^th "%££? Mean Median SD ^D Min Max de£™\0/)
Percent
Solids
Moisture
Content
(%)
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
67.9
68.4
66.9
60.5
56.6
69.2
67.0
53.0
52.9
50.7
79.0
74.8
47.6
54.9
68.7
68
64.6
54.3
57.8
69.2
64.6
44.3
51.2
44.3
90.7
77.3
47.6
51.0
13.4
12.7
12.8
14.4
7.4
20.2
13.1
34.6
27.8
30.9
39.7
20.3
37.8
32.2
19.8
18.6
19.1
23.7
13.1
29.2
19.6
65.2
52.6
61.0
50.3
27.1
79.6
58.6
37.3
47.3
46.3
49.5
48.4
54.9
37.3
17.7
17.8
15.2
18.6
51.5
20.8
15.2
85.4
85.8
86.5
84.6
66.1
83.5
86.5
160.5
116.5
117.6
132.6
101.3
74.3
160.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
My 2010
65
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
rberg Limits
Atterberg limits, which measures the nature of fine-grained soils, were analyzed in Phase
I samples only. Liquid limits varied between 0 and 71 while plastic limits varied between
0 and 45. Plasticity index, calculated as the difference between the liquid and plasticity
indices, ranged between 0.05 and 32. On average, the three Atterberg limits tended to be
slightly lower at surface depth. Descriptive statistics for the three different Atterberg
limits are presented in Table 6-14 and individual results are presented in Appendix H.
Table 6-14 Descriptive Statistics of Atterberg Limits
'•1 iTsi ro O^B iviHMi
^•lil^l
Liquid
Limit
Plastic
Limit
Plasticity
Index
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number of ..
DQO..I*O Mean
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
31
22
16
5
3
1
78
18.1
22.7
26.2
27.6
16.3
41.0
21.9
10.4
14.0
17.4
19.4
15.0
34.0
13.9
6.4
8.7
8.8
8.4
1.4
7.0
7.4
Median SD ^? Min Max _, iN°n" ,4
0
24
25.5
25
0
41
24.5
0
16
16
16
0
34
16
0.05
8.5
8.5
9
0.05
7
7
21.5
24.6
22.5
28.5
28.3
N/A
22.9
13.2
14.8
15.1
20.5
26.0
N/A
15.0
8.1
10.2
8.4
9.8
2.3
N/A
8.7
118.9
108.5
85.8
103.1
173.2
N/A
104.7
127.6
105.5
86.7
105.6
173.2
N/A
108.2
127.9
117.2
96.0
116.3
166.9
N/A
116.7
0
0
0
0
0
41
0
0
0
0
0
0
34
0
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
7
0.05
62
71
64
61
49
41
71
37
40
44
44
45
34
45
25
32
27
24
4
7
32
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
55
45
31
40
67
0
46
N/A- Not Applicable
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
66
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
6.4.5 Specific Gravity
Specific gravity was assessed for all Phase I and II samples. Specific gravity ratios
ranged between 2.136 and 2.752. The mean specific gravity ratio was 2.63, indicating
that samples were an average of 2.63 times denser than water at standard conditions for
temperature and pressure. Specific gravity ratios did not vary between sampling depths.
Descriptive statistics of specific gravity ratios are presented in Table 6-15 and individual
results for specific gravity are presented in Appendix H.
Table 6-15 Descriptive Statistics of Specific Gravity
Depth | IN"mue'ul | Mean Median | SD | RSD (%) | Min | Max
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
.
2.63
2.61
2.67
2.63
2.62
2.69
2.63
i
2.64
2.63
2.69
2.62
2.63
2.69
2.64
0.086
0.138
0.064
0.083
0.067
0.059
0.101
3.28
5.27
2.38
3.17
2.55
2.21
3.85
2.345
2.136
2.525
2.516
2.545
2.651
2.136
2.751
2.752
2.746
2.75
2.718
2.735
2.752
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
6.5 SEDIMENT TOXICITY
Surface sediment toxicity was assessed during Phase I at four locations (Stations C3,
Cl 1, Gl 1, and Kl). The results and analysis of these toxicity results are presented in
"Results of Hyalella azteca and Chironomus tentans Toxicity Tests with TN&A Whole
Sediment Samples Received December 21, 2006" (ASci Corporation, February 2007)
(Appendix I). For each sample, the Hyalella azteca endpoints were 28-day survival and
growth and the Chironomus dilutus (formerly known as Chironomus tentans) endpoints
were 20-day survival and growth. For Hyalella azteca, growth was quantified as
milligrams per organisms and mean length, while for Chironomus dilutus, growth was
quantified based on dried weight (DW) and ash-free dry weight (AFDW). The West
Bearskin control sample, prepared from samples collected at West Bearskin Lake located
in Cook County, Minnesota, was used as the control sample for all toxicity analyses. All
toxicity endpoints were compared to those measured in the West Bearskin sample to
My 2010
67
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
assess whether the survival and growth observed at each site were significantly reduced
from that of the control sample.
Chironomus dilutus survival and Hyalella azteca mean length were determined to be
significantly lower than the West Bearskin control sample for all four Trenton Channel
sampling locations. Additionally, Hyalella azteca growth by weight was found to be
significantly less at locations Cl 1 and Kl compared to the control. All other toxicity
endpoints were not significantly different from the control for any of the four locations.
Phase I toxicity results, as well as results of the West Bearskin control, are presented in
Table 6-16. Figures 6-7 and 6-8 display the survival results for Phase I and Phase II for
Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca, respectively.
Table 6-16 Toxicity Results, Phase I
T ........ I West Bearskin I Trenton Channel Station Sample Result
H. azteca survival (%)
H. azteca growth (mg/org)
H. azteca growth (mean length)
C. dilutus survival (%)
C. dilutus dried weight (mg/org)
C. dilutus AFDW (mg/org)
90
0.405
4.3
77.4
1.35
1.14
76.3
0.346
3.8
30.2
1.21
1.00
78.8
0.248
3.4
13.5
0.80
0.62
60.0
0.351
3.7
0
N/A
N/A
60.0
0.313
3.6
48.8
1.10
0.87
N/A- Not Applicable
Surface sediment toxicity was also assessed during Phase II at four additional locations
(Stations B3, E3, F5, and S2). The results and analysis of these toxicity results are
presented in "Results of Hyalella azteca and Chironomus tentans Toxicity Tests with
TN&A Whole Sediment Samples Received July 11, 2007" (ASci Corporation, August
2007) (Appendix I). The West Bearskin control sample also was reanalyzed along with
the Phase II toxicity samples. These four samples, as well as the West Bearskin control,
were assessed for the same toxicity endpoints as the Phase I toxicity data, and each
toxicity endpoint was statistically compared to that of the control.
Four of the toxicity endpoints, including Chironomus dilutus survival and AFDW,
Hyalella azteca mean length and growth, were determined to be significantly lower than
the control sample for all four Phase II Trenton Channel sampling locations.
Additionally, Hyalella azteca survival and Chironomus dilutus dry weight were found to
68
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
be significantly less than the control for only two of the sample locations (stations F5 and
S2).
Phase II toxicity results, as well as results of the West Bearskin control, are presented in
Table 6-17. Figures 6-7 and 6-8 display the survival results for Phase I and Phase II for
Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca, respectively.
Table 6-17 Toxicity Results, Phase II
West Bearskin Trenton Channel Station Sample Result
Toxidty Endpoint Result B3 I E3 I F5 I S2
H. azteca survival (%)
H. azteca growth (mg/org)
H. azteca growth (mean length)
C. dilutus survival (%)
C. dilutus dried weight (mg/org)
C. dilutus AFDW (mg/org)
96.3
0.424
4.2
80
2.1
1.8
85
0.225
3.8
28.8
1.84
1.31
85
0.202
3.7
45
1.79
1.3
51.3
0.125
3.8
0
N/A
N/A
3.8
0.005
0.6
0
N/A
N/A
N/A- Not Applicable
My 2010
69
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Remedial Investigation
Chironomus dilutus
Survival Data
Trenton Channel, Michigan
N
W
2,000
500 1.000
Feet
Study phase
Phase 1
Phase 2
Percent reduction in survival
<25
Q 25.1 - 50
<25
25.1 - 50
f)
50.1-75 ^ 50.1-75
75.1-100 /\ 75.1 -100
Property boundary
Wyandotte Power |
Bishop Park
Residential
Arkema
red - significant reduction in survival compared lo control
green - no significant reduction in survival compared to control
£EPA D£€i
Created by CSC
December 1. 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-7 Phase I and Phase II Survival Data for Chironomus dilutus
70
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
Remedial Investigation
Hyalella azteca
Survival Data
Trenton Channel, Michigan
N
0 500 1,000
Feet
2.000
Study phase
_ Phase 1
Phase 2
Percent reduction in survival
<25
25.1 - 50
O 50.1-75
Q
75.1-100
Property Boundary
Wyandotte Power C
Bishop Park
Residential
<25
25.1 -50
50.1 -75
75.1 -100
| BASF Soutrtwcirks
Arkema
red - significant reduction in survival compared lo control
green • no significant reduction in survival compared to control
Created by CSC
December 1, 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-8 Phase I and Phase II Survival Data for Hyalella azteca
My 2010
71
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
6.6 CORRELATION BETWEEN SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY AND TOXICITY
DATA
Because collocated chemistry samples were collected at each of the Phase I and II
sampling locations, associations between chemistry and toxicity results could be
assessed. For each toxicity endpoint, nonparametric Spearman rank correlations were
calculated for each analyte, and analytes were identified with strong negative correlations
(i.e., where low survival or growth occurred with high concentration).
Generally, associations between concentrations and toxicity endpoints were weak.
Among analytes that were included in both Phase I and Phase II analyses, correlations
less than -0.7 (a cutoff approximately at where the association is statistically significant at
the 95% confidence level and where half the variability of the toxicity endpoint would be
"in common" with the analyte concentration) were observed for five analytes, including
barium, chromium, lead, zinc, and total Aroclors. In addition, lead yielded correlations
below -0.7 for Hyalella azteca survival, and Chironomus dilutus DW and AFDW. No
other correlations below -0.7 were observed between any analyte concentration and
toxicity endpoint.
Among the four Phase I toxicity samples collected and analyzed, only one sample
exhibited high pH values (Kl, with a pH result of 9.4). While that location yielded
relatively low Hyalella azteca survival (60% - tied for the lowest among the four Phase 1
toxicity samples), it also exhibited the highest Chironomus dilutus survival (49%) among
those samples.
6.7 OBSERVED COG RESULTS IN SEDIMENT IN COMPARISON TO
CBSQGS
Final observed concentrations for the three COCs (mercury, total PCBs, and total PAHs)
were compared to the CBSQGs to assist in the assessment of the nature and extent of
contamination at the site. Results of the COCs for each sample were compared to the
corresponding CBSQG, and the results are summarized within three transect groups:
Transects A-C and S, Transects D-F, and Transects G-K. The transects were grouped
into these three categories per guidance from EPA GLNPO. Figures illustrating observed
72 My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
concentrations of mercury and total Aroclors at each specified depth interval are provided
within this section.
6.7.1 Mercury
Descriptive statistics for mercury results are provided in Section 6.3.2.1 and Appendix H
provides the individual sample results for each specified depth interval. The mercury
concentration is below the CBSQG for the majority of samples for each of the specified
transect groups as shown in Table 6-18. The percentage of samples exceeding the
CBSQG ranged between 10.3% for Transects D-F and 39.6% for Transects G-K. Figure
6-9 displays box plots of the observed mercury results for the specified transects.
Table 6-18 Observed Mercury Results in Sediments in Comparison to CBSQGs
Number Minimum Median Maximum "m e.ro „, .
CBSQG Transect of Concentration Concentration Concentration . /^^r.^/^
«om«i0o innm\ innm\ innm\ above CBSQG
•^^Ul^^k^jAH ^^^^^jU^^H ^^^^^jU^^H ^^^^^jU^^H ^H^iT^T^Tt^l
1.06
ppm
A-C, S
D-F
G-K
51
29
48
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.80
0.10
0.80
3.3
1.6
85
18
3
19
35.3%
10.3%
39.6%
My 2010
73
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
100
10=
I
I 1
1
01
C8SQG:
1,06 ppm
A.C.S
G-K
D-F
Transect
Figure 6-9 Box Plots of the Observed Mercury Results in the Specified Transects
Figures 6-10 through 6-12 display the observed mercury concentrations for the specific
depth intervals at Phase I and Phase II sampling locations.
74
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
0-1 ft
1-3 ft
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Mercury (ppm) Property Boundary
• 0.025-0.50 Vtyandotle Power
O 0,51-1.06 Bishop Park
O 1.061-2 Residential
O 2.01-5 ] BASF Southworks
5.01 -85
Arkema
0 500 1,000 2,000
Feet
&EPA DCi
Created by CSC
November 30, 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-10 Observed Mercury Results for 0-1 Foot and 1-3 Foot Depth Intervals
My 2010
75
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
3-5 ft
5-7 ft
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Mercury (ppm) Property Boundary
• 0.025-0.50 Vtyandotle Power
O 0,51-1.06 Bishop Park
O 1.061-2 Residential
O 2.01-5 ] BASF Southworks
5.01 -85
Arkema
0 500 1.000
2.000
Feet
Created by CSC
November 30, 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-11 Observed Mercury Results for 3-5 Foot and 5-7 Foot Depth Intervals
76
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
7-9 ft
9-11 ft
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Mercury (ppm) Property Boundary
• 0.025-0.50 Vtyandotle Power
O 0,51-1.06 Bishop Park
O 1.061-2 Residential
O 2.01-5 ] BASF Southworks
5.01 -85
Arkema
0 500 1.000
2.000
Feet
Created by CSC
November 30, 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-12 Observed Mercury Results for 7-9 Foot and 9-11 Foot Depth Intervals
My 2010
77
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
6.7.2 Total Aroclors
Descriptive statistics for total Aroclor results are provided in Section 6.3.1.4. The total
Aroclor concentration is below the CBSQG for the majority of the samples collected
within each of the specified transect groups as shown in Table 6-19. The percentage of
samples exceeding the CBSQG ranged between 3.5% for Transects D-F and 43.1% for
Transects A-C, S. Figure 6-13 displays box plots of the observed total Aroclor results for
the specified transects.
Table 6-19 Observed Total Aroclors Results in Sediments in Comparison to CBSQGs
Number
CBSQG Transect of
Samples
Minimum Median Maximum
Concentration Concentration Concentration
(ppb) (ppb) (ppb)
676
ppb
A-C, S
D-F
G-K
51
29
48
Samples % above
above CBSQG
CBSQG
120
115
60
280
120
183
21,600
1,210
460,000
22
11
43.1%
3.5%
22.9%
1000000 r,
100000
&
**
I
1
10000
iooo
100
10
AC.S
D-F
Transect
CBSQG: -
676 ppb
Figure 6-13 Box Plots of the Observed Total Aroclor Results in the Specified Transects
Figures 6-14 through 6-16 display the observed total Aroclor concentrations for the
specific depth intervals at Phase I and Phase II sampling locations.
78
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
0-1 ft
1-3 ft
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Total PCB (ppb) Property Boundary
• 60 - 200 Wyandotte Power
O 200.1-676 Bishop Park
Residential
] BASF Southworks
Arkema
O 676.1-2000
O 2000.1 -10000
• 10000.1-460000
\\
v.
0 500 1.000 2,000
Feet
x>EPA
Created by CSC
November 30, 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-14 Observed Total PCB Results (as Aroclors) for 0-1 Foot and 1-3 Foot Depth Intervals
My 2010
79
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
3-5 ft
5-7 ft
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Total PCB (ppb) Property Boundary
• 60 - 200 Vtyandotle power
O 200 1 - 676 Bishop Park
O 6761 - 2000 Residential
O 20001-10000 ] BASF Southworks
• 100001-460000 Arkema
\\
0 500 1.000 2.000
Feet
vvEPA DCQ,
Created by CSC
November 30, 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-15 Observed Total PCB Results (as Aroclors) for 3-5 Foot and 5-7 Foot Depth Intervals
80
My 2010
-------
PROJECT RESULTS
7-9 ft
9-11 ft
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Total PCB (ppb) Property Boundary
• 60-200 Wyandotte Power
O 200.1 -676
O 676,1-2000
O 2000.1-10000
• 10000.1-460000
Bishop Park
Residential
BASF Southworks
Arkema
0 500 1.000
2,000
Feet
vvEPA
Created by CSC
November 30, 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 6-16 Observed Total PCB Results for 7-9 Foot and 9-11 Foot Depth Intervals
My 2010
81
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
6.7.3 Total PAHs
Descriptive statistics for total PAH results are provided in Section 6.3.2.1. The total PAH
concentration is below the CBSQG for the majority of samples collected within each of
the specified transect groups as shown in Table 6-20. The percentage of samples
exceeding the CBSQG ranged between 31.0% for Transects D-F and 43.1% for Transects
A-C, S.
Table 6-20 Observed Total PAH Results in Sediments in Comparison to CBSQGs
ooor^ -r . Number of _ mlmmum iweaian maximum Samp|es % above
CBSQG Transect -, . Concentration Concentration Concentration . /^o^/-^
^ Samples ... ... ... above CBSQG
(ppb) | (ppb) (ppb) CBSQG
22,800
ppb
A-C, S
D-F
G-K
51
29
48
84
87
180
17,950
4,020
9,402
407,400
180,800
534,600
22
9
15
43.1%
31.0%
31.3%
82
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
7.0 NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
7.1 POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION SOURCES
The potential contaminant sources within the Trenton Channel project site include:
1) permitted and non-permitted point sources such as stormwater runoff and
combined sewer overflows,
2) bank sources for contaminated baseflow such as legacy industrial and active
properties, and
3) non-point sources such as industrial and commercial operations and
agricultural/landscaping operations.
These potential sources may release contaminants to the Detroit River and upstream
tributaries (e.g., Ecorse River) through direct discharge, baseflow flux, and runoff. These
primary contaminant release and transport mechanisms may contaminate river sediments
and surface water. Figure 7.1 displays the active CSOs and former industrial outfalls
along the Trenton Channel Phase I and Phase II sampling areas. Secondary release and
transport mechanisms (e.g., uptake through food webs) can result in potential
contamination of shoreline sediment along the river and of aquatic life (such as fish).
My 2010
83
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
N
W
0 500 1.000
2.000
Feet
Detroit River Combined Sewer Outfall
Historic Trenton Channel Outfall
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
BASF Southworks
Arkema
&EPA
Created by CSC
December 7. 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-1 Active Combined Sewer Outfalls and Former Industrial Outfalls Located along the
Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Site
84
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
7.2 VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL EXTENT OF CONTAMINANTS OF
CONCERN
Geostatistical analysis of sediment contaminant data was conducted using Stanford
Geostatistical Modeling Software (SGeMS; more information about SGeMS is available
at http://sgems.sourceforge.net/ffDownload) to estimate concentrations and describe the
horizontal and vertical contamination. Three COCs were selected for data interpretation
as primary contaminants of concern at the Trenton Channel site, specifically, mercury,
total PCBs and total PAHs. Based on the results of the geostatistical model, a series of
maps were generated that illustrate estimated contaminant concentrations across the site.
Model results were overlaid onto aerial photography to assist in visualization and
orientation at the site. The illustrations were exaggerated twenty-five times in the vertical
direction to better visualize the concentrations throughout the sediment. The contaminant
concentration scales for each map were selected to facilitate discrimination among
estimated concentrations and should be considered when evaluating these illustrations.
The geostatistical model is based on all data generated at the site for the three COCs as
presented in Section 6 and the model provides estimated concentrations for the site of
interest for this remedial investigation, as shown in the site boundary detailed in Figure 7-
2. All data collected at the site were used in the generation of the model in order to
develop the best estimates at the site based on all available information.
Geostatistical analysis of sediment data for the fourth contaminant of concern (pH) was
not conducted. Instead, an assessment of the pH results and contaminant concentrations
in associated samples was conducted to provide a better understanding of the horizontal
and vertical distribution of pH values across the site and the consequences for remedial
activity as detailed in Section 7.2.5. In addition, section 6.4.2 presents the results of the
analytical data for pH obtained during the Phase I sampling effort and Figure 6-6
provides a visual representation of the means at each sampling location.
My 2010 85
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
N
500 1.000 1.500 2.000
Feet
Sample Locations
O Phase I
• Phase II
| | Site Boundary
Property Boundary
VXfyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
3 BASF Southworks
Arhomo
£EPA DCa
Created by CSC
November 25. 2009
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-2 Trenton Channel Site Boundary Map
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
7.2.1 Distribution of Total PAHs
Estimated concentrations at the site for total PAHs in surficial sediments (0 to 1 foot) are
illustrated in Figure 7-3. Figure 7-4 displays the estimated total PAH concentrations in
the surficial sediments in relation to the location of the active combined sewer outfalls
and former industrial outfalls located along the Trenton Channel. Several three-
dimensional views of estimated concentrations are provided in Figures 7-5 through 7-7.
Estimated concentrations of total PAHs for all sediment depths throughout the site range
from 96.6 to 500,000 ppb. Distinct areas of the site have lower concentrations
throughout the sediment column whereas other areas of the site have higher
concentrations of total PAHs sometimes at depth. The highest concentrations estimated
at the site occur in the northern and southern sections of the site.
My 2010 87
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
N
Feet
Surface Concentration
TPAH (ppb)
[^B 10,000.1 -22,800
22,800.1 -50,000
50,000.1 -100,000
100,000.1 -481,039
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
BASF Southworks
Arkema
Note: The ranges of concentrations displayed are not
the actual observed sample concentrations.
4vEPA
Created by CSC
January 11. 2010
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-3 Sediment Surface Total PAH Concentrations at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling (0 to 1 foot)
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
->-£"» -~
'-{*-: ; -
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
500 1,000
Feet
2.000
^f Detroit River Combined Sewer Outfall
~fa Historic Trenton Channel Outfall
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
Z] BASF Southworks
Arkema
TPAH (ppb)
^11 98- 10.000
[ ^] 10,000.1 -22.800
| | 22,800.1 -50,000
| | 50,000.1 -100,000
•• 100.000.1 -481,039
Note' The ranges of concentrations displayed are not
the actual observed sample concentrations.
c/EPA
Created by CSC
January 11. 2010
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-4 Sediment Surface Total PAH Concentrations at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling (0 to 1 foot) in Relation to the Active Combined Sewer Outfalls and
Former Industrial Outfalls
My 2010
89
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Total PAH (ppb)
Study Area
• 96.6 - 10.000
• 10,000.1-22,800
22,800.1 - 50,000
50,000.1 - 100,000
• 100,000.1 - 500,000
Mole' The ranges of concentrations
displayed are not the actual
observed sample concentrations
Wyandotte Power
BishopPark
Residential
Created by CSC
January 11,2010
Ml State Plane Feel MAD 81
Figure 7-5 Estimated Total PAH Concentrations in Sediment at the Trenton Channel Site Based
on Geostatistical Modeling, View from Southeast of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical
direction)
90
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
Total PAH (ppb)
• 96.6-10.000
• 10,000.1-22,800
22,800.1 -50,000
50,000.1-100,000
• 100,000.1 - 500.000
Note The ranges of concentrations
displayed are not the actual
observed sample concentrations
Study Area
Wyandotte Power
Created by CSC
January 11, 2010
Ml State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-6 Total PAH Concentrations in Sediment at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling, View from Northwest of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical
direction)
My 2010
91
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Total PAH (ppb)
• 96.6-10,000
• 10,000.1-22,800
22,800.1 -50,000
50,000.1 - 100,000
• 100,000.1-500,000
Note: The ranges of concentrations
displayed are not the aclual
observed sample concentrations
Study Area
Wyandotte Power
Residential
I BASF Southwards
Arkema
Created by CSC
January 11.2010
Ml State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-7 Total PAH Concentrations in Sediment at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling, View from Northeast of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical
direction)
7.2.2 Distribution of Total RGBs
7.2.2.1 Distribution of Total PCBs throughout the Site
Estimated concentrations at the site for total PCBs in surficial sediments (0 to 1 foot) are
illustrated in Figure 7-8. Figure 7-9 displays the estimated total PAH concentrations in
the surficial sediments in relation to the location of the active combined sewer outfalls
and former industrial outfalls located along the Trenton Channel. Several three-
dimensional views of estimated concentrations are provided in Figures 7-10 through 7-
11. Estimated concentrations of total PCBs for all sediment depths throughout the site
range from 60 to 424,826 ppb. Elevated concentrations are estimated to occur at three
distinct areas of the site including areas at the northern and southern tips of the site and
an area surrounding Transects B and C.
92
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
N
W
s
500 1.000
Feet
2,000
Surface Concentration
Total PCB (ppb)
^•l 200.1 -676
676.1 -2,000
2,000.1 -10,000
10,000.1 -281,188
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
BASF Southworks
Arkema
Note The ranges of concentrations displayed are not
tne actual observed sample concentrations
s*EPA D6Q,
Created by CSC
January 11. 2010
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-8 Sediment Surface Total PCB Concentrations at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling (0 to 1 foot)
My 2010
93
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
500 1,000
Feet
2.000
• Detroit River Combined Sewer Outfall
•^ Historic Trenton Channel Outfall
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
3 BASF Southworks
Arkema
Total PCB (ppb)
^B 6° • 2°°
j ^ 200.1 -676
| | 676,1 - 2,000
| | 2,000.1 - 10.000
^B 10,000.1 -281.188
Note: The ranges of concentrations displayed are not
the actual observed sample concentrations.
£EPA
Created by CSC
January 11, 2010
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-9 Sediment Surface Total PCB Concentrations at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling (0 to 1 foot) in Relation to the Active Combined Sewer Outfalls and
Former Industrial Outfalls
94
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
Total PCB (ppb)
• 60-200
E3 200.1 - 676
676.1 -2000
2000.1 -10,000
• 10.000.1-424.826
Bishop Park
Residential
BASF Soulhworh
Mtacm
Note The ranges of concentrations
displayed are not the actual
Created by CSC
January 11. 2010
Ml Stile Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-10 Total PCB Concentrations in Sediment at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling, View from Southeast of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical
direction)
My 2010
95
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Total PCB (ppb)
• 60 - 200
• 200.1-676
676.1 -2000
• 2000.1-10,000
• 10,000.1-424,826
Note: The ranges of concentrations
displayed are not the actual
observed sample concentrations.
Study Area
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
^^^B BASF Southworks
Arfcema
Created by CSC
January 11, 2010
Ml Slate Plane Feel NAD 83
Figure 7-11 Total PCB Concentrations in Sediment at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling, View from Northwest of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical
direction)
96
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
Total PCB (ppb)
• 60 - 200
Q 200.1-676
• 676.1-2000
2000.1 -10,000
Study Area
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
BASF Soulhworfcs
10.000.1 -424.826
Note: The ranges or concenlralions
displayed are nol the actual
observed sample concentrations
Created by CSC
January 11. 2010
Ml Stale Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-12 Total PCB Concentrations in Sediment at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling, View from Northeast of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical
direction)
7.2.2.2 Refined Horizontal Extent of PCBs in Transects B and C
As detailed in Section 5.2.2, elevated PCB concentrations were observed in areas
surrounding Transects B and C. This area was selected for additional sampling in Phase
II of the study to further detail the vertical and horizontal extent of the PCB
contamination in this area. Figure 7-13 provides additional detail for the estimated
concentrations on this area based on the geostatistical model. Concentrations in this area
of the site are estimated to range from 60 to 255,540 ppb.
My 2010
97
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
Total PCB (ppb)
^H 60 - 200
200.1-676
676.1 -2,000
2,000.1 - 10,000
10,000.1 -255,540
Created by CSC
January 11, 2010
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Note. The ranges of concentrations displayed are not the actual >::U.'i. ..-.I ;..UT r .-• :•: rr. eir.rations.
Figure 7-13 Total PCB Concentrations in Sediment at the Trenton Channel Site in Transects B
and C Based on Geostatistical Modeling (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical direction)
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
7.2.3 Distribution of Mercury
7.2.3.1 Distribution of Mercury throughout the Site
Estimated concentrations at the site for mercury in surficial sediments (0 to 1 foot) are
illustrated in Figure 7-14. Figure 7-15 displays the estimated total PAH concentrations in
the surficial sediments in relation to the location of the active combined sewer outfalls
and former industrial outfalls located along the Trenton Channel. Several three-
dimensional views of estimated concentrations are provided in Figures 7-16 through 7-
18. Estimated concentrations of mercury for all sediment depths throughout the site
range from 0.19 to 80 ppm. The highest concentrations are estimated to occur at the
southern areas of the site.
My 2010 99
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
MP
IfllSS
E»»:f
W-iefe l/.y
fiigi^
SsT^F' ^*»
li^- j^ .- » ., _
•"ftS,
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
0 500 1.000
2,000
Feet
Surface Concentration
Mercury (ppm)
• • 0.50-1.06
1.061 -2.00
2.01-5.00
5.01 -64.8
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
BASF Southworks
Arkema
Note. The ranges of concentrations displayed are not
the actual observed sample concentrations.
&EPA DC©
Created by CSC
January 11. 2010
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-14 Sediment Surface Mercury Concentrations at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling (0 to 1 foot)
100
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
|jtii*,33w?-v: ^c I
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
500 1,000
Feet
2,000
"^ Detroit River Combined Sewer Outfall
yf" Historic Trenton Channel Outfall
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
Z] BASF Southworks
Arkema
Mercury (ppm)
Bl °-03 - °-50
f ^) 0.50- 1.06
| | 1.061 -2.00
| | 2.01 - 5.00
^H 5.01 - 64.8
Note: The ranges of concentrations displayed are not
the actual observed sample concentrations
Crested by CSC
January 11. 2010
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-15 Sediment Surface Mercury Concentrations at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling (0 to 1 foot) in Relation to the Active Combined Sewer Outfalls and
Former Industrial Outfalls
My 2010
101
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Mercury (ppm) Study Area
• 0.19-0.50 Wyandotte Power
0.51 -1.06
1.061 -2.00
2.01 -5.00
5.01 - 80.00
Bishop Park
Residential
BASF Southworks
Arkema
Note' The ranges of concentralions Created by CSC
displayed are not the actual January 11, 2010
observed sample concentrations, Ml State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-16 Mercury Concentrations in Sediment at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling, View from Southeast of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical
direction)
102
July 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
Mercury (ppm) Study Area
• 0.19-0.50 Wyandotte Power
0.51 -1.06
1.061 -2.00
2.01 -5.00
5.01 -80.00
Bishop Part
Residential
BASF Soulhworks
Arkema
Note: The ranges of concentrations Created by CSC
displayed are not the actual January 11. 2010
observed sample concenlrations MI State Plane Feet NAD B3
Figure 7-17 Mercury Concentrations in Sediment at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling, View from Northwest of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical
direction)
My 2010
103
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Mercury (ppm) Study Area
0.19-0.50
0.51 -1.06
1.061 -2.00
2.01 -5.00
5.01 -80.00
VUyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
BASF Southworks
Arkema
Note" The ranges of concentrations Created by CSC
displayed are nol (he actual January 11, 2010
observed sample concentrations Ml State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-18 Mercury Concentrations in Sediment at the Trenton Channel Site Based on
Geostatistical Modeling, View from Northeast of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical
direction)
7.2.3.2 Distribution of Mercury Contamination in the Northernmost Section
As discussed in Section 5.2.2.3, one of the project questions is whether there is an
increasing trend in mercury concentration moving north between Transects F and A.
Additional Phase II samples were collected north of Transect A (in Transect S) to help
answer this question. Per the study design, a regression model was fit between sample
location and observed mercury concentration.
To quantify location, the distance in feet between each sampling location to the
northernmost station in Transect A (station Al) was calculated. For stations south of Al,
the distance was negative. For the two stations north of Al, the distance was positive.
For station Al, the distance was set to zero.
104
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
While the study was designed based on the assumption of mercury results following a
normal distribution, graphical analyses and the D'Agostino omnibus normality test using
the Phase I and II results indicate that this assumption could not be met. The failure to
meet the assumed normal distribution was mainly due to the large number of "ties"
resulting from the high frequency of non-detects based on the same reporting limit. In
addition, the assumption of results following a lognormal distribution also could not be
met. Therefore, a nonparametric Sen regression model was fit to estimate the effect of
location on mercury concentration. The resulting regression model was:
Hg =0.59556 +0.000085 *X
where, Hg is the concentration of mercury in surficial sediments in ppm and
Xis the distance upstream in feet
From this model, it would be estimated that mercury would increase by 0.000085 ppm as
one moved north by one foot.
To assess the statistical significance of the estimated slope, a lower confidence limit for
the slope was determined using Bootstrap estimation. As described in Section 5.2.2.3,
the 80% was chosen as the most appropriate confidence level for the purposes of the
study, and as a result, the lower limit for the slope was calculated at the 80% confidence
level. The estimated lower limit was 0.00019 ppm; because this limit exceeded zero, it
could be concluded there is a statistically significant increasing trend in mercury
concentration as one moves north from Transect F to Transect S. The figures listed in
Section 7.2.3.1 also illustrate these results. This analysis is heavily affected by the lower
concentrations and higher frequency of non-detect results found in Transects D, E, and F.
Because of these lower concentrations and their strong impact on this analysis, the
analysis does not necessarily indicate there is a large decrease in concentration between
Transects S and A. Therefore, the impact of the non-detects in Transects D-F should be
considered when evaluating these results and additional samples may be warranted to
fully answer this question in the context of the remedial investigation.
My 2010 105
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
7.2.4 Distribution of Contaminants of Concern in Transects D, E, and F
As discussed in Section 5.2.2.1, one of the project questions for which Phase II samples
were collected is whether concentrations within Transects D, E, and F, were below the
CBSQGs for mercury, total Aroclors, and total PAHs. The Phase II sampling design was
designed to answer this question using one-sample t-tests at the 80% confidence level,
and as a result the statistical analyses described in this section were performed at that
confidence level. Graphical analyses and the D'Agostino omnibus test performed on the
final observed concentrations suggested the distribution of Phase I and Phase II
concentrations did not follow a normal or lognormal distribution, and therefore, the
nonparametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for this analysis. While the signed-
rank test is nonparametric, it assumes a symmetric distribution. Because graphical
assessments of the data revealed the natural log-transformation yielded a more symmetric
distribution, transformed results were used for this test.
Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for the three COCs are presented in Table 7-1
below, and are shown graphically in Figure 7-19.
Table 7-1 Results of CBSQG Comparison for Transects D-F (n=29)
coc
Mercury
Total PAH
Total Aroclor
CBSQG
1.06 ppm
22,800 ppb
676 ppb
Median
Concentration
0.10 ppm
4,020 ppb
120 ppb
Number of
Samples
above
CBSQG
3
9
1
EV
Hn0.999
>0.999
>0.999
The hypothesis that the median concentration is below the CBSQG could not be rejected
for any of the three COCs. The percentage of samples exceeding the CBSQG ranged
between 3.4% for total Aroclors and 31% for total PAHs. The majority of the samples
that exceeded the CBSQG were collected from Transect F. The kriging model results
presented in Sections 7.2.1 - 7.2.3 provide more specific information on the distribution
of concentrations within this area.
106
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
1HHJ
i •
- 10DO
•
fi
3
1 UUUUUU
tOMQO;
a
a.
" 10000
!
H
-| 5 1000
fj
100
I I
Total A/oetor*
Total PAH
10
CBSOG:
Total Aroclai 676 ppb
Total PAH: :;.MOppb
Mercury: 1.03 ppm
01
Mtrcuiy
Figure 7-19 Box Plots of the Results of the Wilcoxon Signed-rank Test for the Three COCs
7.2.5 Assessment of pH
A measurement of pH was performed on samples collected at multiple depths at 31
stations, resulting in a total of 78 pH results. pH values greater than 8.5 were considered
above the level of interest. Of these 31 stations, pH exceeded the value of 8.5 for at least
one sample at 13 stations; overall, 42% of these samples exceeded the level of interest.
An assessment of the pH results and contaminant concentrations in associated samples
was conducted to provide a better understanding of the horizontal and vertical
distribution of pH values across the site and the consequences for remedial activity.
Correlation analysis of the observed pH results and log-transformed concentrations for
the three COCs was conducted separately for each depth category. For all COCs and
depth categories, the calculated correlations were not statistically significant at the 95%
confidence level. An evaluation of the depth of contamination for pH and the three
COCs was conducted to evaluate whether a remedial focus on the three COCs was likely
My 2010
107
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
to address areas across the site with observed high pH values as presented in Table 7-2.
For seven of the thirteen stations with pH above 8.5, concentrations of at least one of the
COCs exceeded the CBSQG PEC at a depth equal to or greater than that of the highest
pH value. For the other six stations with a pH value greater than 8.5, concentrations of
the three COCs did not exceed CBSQG PEC or exceedances were observed at a lesser
depth (i.e., the pH value exceeding 8.5 was observed at a greater depth than results
exceeding TOCs for any of the three COCs) as indicated by the asterisks next to the
station IDs in Table 7-2. Additional monitoring and assessment of pH across the site may
be warranted to further understand the extent of pH contamination.
Table 7-2 Assessment of Depth of Contamination for Three COCs in Comparison to pH
Station
Max
Depth
Depth
Mercury
Max
Mercury
Result at
Depth Total Max Total Depth Total Max Total
PCBs PCB Result PAH PAH Result
Greatest
Depth
The pH value exceeding 8.5 was observed at a greater depth than results exceeding
CBSQGs for any of the three COCs.
7.3 SEDIMENT THICKNESS AND VOLUME
Based on the geostatistical modeling results presented in Section 6.1, the sediment
thickness at the site is estimated to range from 0.2 to 18.2 feet. The total sediment
volume also was calculated for the Phase I and Phase II study areas within the Trenton
Channel project site and was estimated at 275,851 cubic yards (Appendix A details how
the volume estimate was calculated).
MaxpH
Result
H12*
H13
G3*
H11*
H3
12*
11
112
K1
C12
13*
J1
D3*
Sampled Exceeds „. .. Exceeds at Station Exceeds at Station F H at
(feet) 1.06ppm ^™°n 676 ppb (ppb) 22,800 ppb (ppb) J^lStt Station
it t\ \W'"l it «.\ ii «.\ °'° li*s*si;
9
9
1
5
5
5
5
5
11
5
3
5
1
1
-
-
3
1
-
3
1
1
5
-
1
-
1.200
0.810
0.250
1.100
1.200
0.540
85.000
2.100
67.000
1.500
0.290
9.500
0.025
-
9
-
-
-
-
3
-
3
5
-
5
-
95
1,050
280
260
80
100
3,150
232
460,000
21,600
95
22,500
120
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
3
1
1
-
-
-
10,470
20,170
13,970
4,859
27,040
11,900
6,770
39,370
534,600
25,800
860
14,440
3,940
5
9
1
5
1
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
1
12.50
12.10
11.80
11.40
11.20
11.20
11.20
11.00
9.50
8.80
8.80
8.60
8.60
108
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
7.4 RELATIONSHIP OF CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN
CONCENTRATIONS TO SCREENING LEVELS
The Trenton Channel Phase I and Phase II project data included a total of 128 samples
collected at 50 stations. Mercury, PAH and PCB analyses were performed for all 128
samples. For each sample, the total PAH concentration was determined by calculating
the sum of 17 different individual PAH analytes, and the total PCB concentration was
determined by calculating the sum of nine different PCBs (as Aroclors). When an
individual PAH or PCB was not detected in that sample, the concentration was assumed
to be zero when calculating the sum. If no PAHs or no PCBs were detected for a given
sample, the concentration was set to one-half the highest individual analyte reporting
limit. For samples for which mercury was not detected, the concentration was set to one-
half the reporting limit for that sample. Overall descriptive statistics of the three COCs
are presented in Table 7-3.
Table 7-3 Overall Descriptive Statistics of Trenton Channel
COC
Mercury
(ppm)
Total PCBs
(ppb)
Total PAHs
(ppb)
Cumber
of
esults
128
128
128
2.3
8,434
41,104
0.55
180
12,375
.„
0.025
60
84
Max
85
460,000
534,600
SO
9.7
47,427
82,242
418
562
200
-Sr
23
65
5
Exceeding
CBSQG
31
27
36
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
The probability of exceeding at least one COC at the associated CBSQG also was
calculated based on the geostatistical analysis. Portions of the site have very low
probability of exceeding whereas other areas of the site have very high probabilities of
exceeding for at least one COC. This information can be used to determine the need for
additional sampling. Areas of the site with mid-range probabilities (interval 0.3 - 0.7)
may be considered for additional sampling depending on the next steps for the site
(Goovaerts, 1999). Figures 7-20 through 7-22 display the probability of exceeding at
least one COC at the associated CBSQG based on the geostatistical analysis.
My 2010
109
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Probability of Exceedence
• 0-0.10 0.51-0.60
• 0.11-0.20 0.61-0.70
• 0.21-0.30 0.71-0.80
0.31-040 • 081-090
0.41-050 • 0.91-1
Study Area
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
| BASF Southworks
Arkema
Created by CSC
January 11, 2010
Ml State Plane Feet NAD 83
Note The ranges of concentrations
displayed are not the actual
observed sample concentrations
Figure 7-20 Probability of Exceedence at the Trenton Channel Site Based on Geostatistical
Modeling, View from Southeast of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical direction)
no
My 2010
-------
NATURE AND EXTENT OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
Probability of Exceedence
• 0-0.10
• 0.11-0.20
• 0.21-0.30
0.31 -0.40
0.41-0.50
0.51 -0.60
0.61 - 0.70
0.71 -0.80
0.81 - 0.90
0.91 -1
Note: The ranges of concentrations
displayed are not the actual
observed sample concentrations.
Study Area
Wyandotte Power
Bishop Park
Residential
f BASF Southworks
Arkema
Created by CSC
January 11.2010
Ml Slate Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-21 Probability of Exceedence at the Trenton Channel Site Based on Geostatistical
Modeling, View from Northwest of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical direction)
My 2010
111
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Probability of Exceedence
• 0-0.10 0.51-0.60
• 011-0.20 0.61-0.70
• 021-030 3 0.71-0.80
« 0.31-040 • 0.81-090
0.41-0.50 • 0.91-1
Study Area
Wyandotle Power
Bishop Park
Residential
I BASF Southworks
Arkema
Note The ranges of concentrations
displayed are not the actual
observed sample concentrations
Created by CSC
January 11, 201(1
Ml State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 7-22 Probability of Exceedence at the Trenton Channel Site Based on Geostatistical
Modeling, View from Northeast of the Site (exaggerated 25 times in the vertical direction)
112
My 2010
-------
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
8.0 SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
8.1 ECOLOGICAL AND HUMAN HEALTH
A formal human health risk assessment evaluating potential human exposures to
contaminants present in fish tissue, sediment, and surface water in the Trenton Channel
Phase I and II study areas has not been completed but may be considered as a subsequent
step in the RI. Similarly, a formal ecological health risk assessment evaluating potential
benthic, avian, and mammalian exposures to contaminants present in fish tissue,
sediment, and surface water also has not been completed but may be a continued step in
the RI. EPA GLNPO and MDEQ will evaluate if formal ecological and human health
risk assessments should be conducted and assessed prior to the initiation of remedial
activities. Because concentrations observed during the remedial investigation exceed the
Consensus-based Sediment Quality Guidelines probable effect concentrations in some
areas of the site, this suggests the sediment could be a significant risk to the ecological
health of the benthic and macroinvertebrate communities and ultimately those fish and
wildlife that consume those organisms as well as other potential receptors.
8.2 CONSENSUS-BASED SEDIMENT QUALITY GUIDELINES
The CBSQGs were developed by MacDonald et al. in 2000 with the publication of
"Development and Evaluation of Consensus-Based Sediment Quality Guidelines for
Freshwater Ecosystems" in the Archives of Environmental Contamination and
Toxicology. These sediment quality guidelines use the effect-level concentrations from
several guidelines of similar narrative intent combined through averaging to yield
consensus-based lower and upper effect values for contaminants of concern (e.g.,
MacDonald, D.D., et al., 2000). The consensus-based values have been evaluated for
their reliability in predicting toxicity in sediments by using matching sediment chemistry
and toxicity data from field studies. The results of the reliability evaluation showed that
most of the consensus-based values for individual contaminants provide an accurate basis
for predicting the presence or absence of toxicity (MacDonald, D.D., et al., 2000). To
predict the toxicity for mixtures of various contaminants in sediments, the concentration
of each contaminant is divided by its corresponding probable effect concentration. The
My 2010 113
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
CBSQGs as developed only involve effects to benthic macroinvertebrate species. A large
amount of databases from toxicological research have established the cause and effect or
correlations of sediment contaminants to benthic organism and benthic community
assessment endpoints. The guidelines do not consider the potential for bioaccumulation
in aquatic organisms and subsequent food chain transfers and effects to humans or
wildlife that consume the upper food chain organisms. For the most part where
noncarcinogenic or nonbioaccumulative organic chemicals are involved, the guidelines
should be protective of human health and wildlife concerns. Where bioaccumulative
compounds such as PCBs and methyl mercury are involved, protection of human health
or wildlife-based endpoints could result in more restrictive sediment concentrations than
contained in the CBSQGs. Where these bioaccumulative compounds are involved, the
CBSQGs need to be used in conjunction with other tools, such as human health and
ecological risk assessments, bioaccumulation-based guidelines, bioaccumulation studies,
and tissue residue guidelines to evaluate the direct toxicity and upper food chain effects
of these compounds (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, December 2003).
8.3 EQUILIBRIUM SEDIMENT BENCHMARK TOXIC UNITS FOR PAHS IN
SEDIMENT SAMPLES
The Equilibrium Sediment Benchmark Toxic Units (ESBTU) for PAHs in sediment
samples from the Trenton Channel project site was calculated. The calculations were
based on the EPA reference "Procedures for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning
Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection of Benthic Organisms: PAH Mixtures"
(EPA, November 2003).
The goal of this effort was to assess the toxicity of PAHs in the sediments on the basis of
equilibrium partitioning of the contaminants between sediment particles and the
interstitial pore water to which benthic organisms living in the contaminated sediments
are exposed. The toxic effects of the PAHs on benthic organisms are believed to be the
result of narcosis, which is a state of stupor, unconsciousness, or arrested activity. The
extent of the narcotic effect differs for each PAH, based in part on its solubility and
ability to cross cell membranes. The toxicity is cumulative when the organisms are
exposed to mixtures of PAHs in sediments.
114 My 2010
-------
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
The results for sediment samples collected during Phase I and Phase II of the Trenton
Channel Remedial Investigation were examined and PAH results were determined to be
available for all 128 sediment samples. Results for 17 PAHs were available as part of the
broader suite of semivolatile organics and TOC results were available for these 128
sediment samples, as those data are required for the ESB calculations.
The 2003 EPA procedures document provides the data and example calculations needed
to derive a single measure of PAH toxicity for a given sediment sample. Ideally, the
calculation is based on the concentrations of 34 PAHs in each sediment sample (18 parent
PAHs and 16 alkylated PAHs). However, the document also provides a series of
uncertainty factors that can be used to estimate the toxicity of all 34 PAHs when
analytical data only are available for a subset of the 34 PAHs. The EPA document
advises against using the uncertainty factor "when important decisions are to be made
based on the ESB," which should be considered when evaluating the calculations
described below.
The two subsets of PAHs for which uncertainty factors are available are for 13 PAHs and
23 PAHs, and the uncertainty factors are significantly different for each subset. Although
the 2003 procedures document makes frequent references to the subset of 13 PAHs, and
occasionally describes it as the non-alkylated PAHs. Other documents, including
"Evaluating Ecological Risk to Invertebrate Receptors from PAHs in Sediments at
Hazardous Waste Sites" (EPA, 2009), state the 13 PAHs are those on EPA's Priority
Pollutant List (EPA, 2010). The four additional PAHs are shown at the right side of
Table 8-1 and were not used in any of the subsequent calculations.
Table 8-1 List of PAHs Used and Unused in ESBTU Calculations
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzo[a]anthracene
Benzo[a]pyrene
Benzo[b]fluoranthene
Benzo[k]fluoranthene
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzo[g,h,i]perylene
Dibenz[a,h]anthracene
lndeno(1 ,2,3-c,d)pyrene
2-Methylnaphthalene
My 2010 115
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
ESBTU Calculations
Based on the examples in the 2003 procedures document, the following steps were
performed:
1. Dry-weight sediment concentrations of PAHs were reported in units of ug/kg, so
these results were converted to ug/g (the units used in the ESBTU calculation) by
dividing the result by 1,000.
2. The PAH results were converted from ug/g of dry-weight sediment to ug/g
organic carbon, by dividing the PAH result by the TOC result in percent, which
itself is divided by 100 to express the TOC result as a decimal value (e.g., 1% =
0.01).
3. The data for Coc,pAHi,FCVi, the effect concentration of a PAH in sediment, was
transcribed from the 2003 document and the PAH results expressed on an organic
carbon basis were divided by the ESBTU for each PAH.
4. In cases where the sediment concentration of a PAH exceeds its water solubility,
the ESBTU procedure substitutes the maximum solubility for the observed
concentration of that PAH. The observed results were compared to the maximum
solubilities from the 2003 document, and where appropriate, substitutions were
made.
5. The ESBTUs for each PAH were added together to develop the value termed as
ESBTUis.
6. Because data were not available for all 34 PAHs, the ESBTU values derived from
the results for 13 PAHs were multiplied by the uncertainty factor defined in the
2003 document. For the purposes of this site, two factors were used including 1)
the 50th percentile uncertainty factor of 2.75 and 2) the 95th percentile
uncertainty factor of 11.5. The ESBTUpcv,TOT results were provided using the
two uncertainty factors in separate columns for each sample (Table 8-2).
Treatment of Non-Detects
No explicit discussion in the 2003 document was identified regarding the treatment of
PAHs that were not detected in a given sample. However, one of the example
calculations presented in Table 6-3 A of the 2003 document involves a sample where only
13 PAHs were measured and shows the results for one PAH, acenaphthene, as "0."
GLNPO requested the ESBTU calculations be performed in two ways: substituting zero
for any non-detects, and substituting one-half the sample-specific quantitation limit for
any non-detects. Both of these substitutions are fairly common. The data set included
the SSQL values for every PAH in every sample.
116 My 2010
-------
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
Evaluation of Toxicity
Although the acute and chronic toxic effects of PAHs vary by species, the 2003
procedures document states that any sediment sample with an ESBTUpcv,TOT greater than
1.0 may not be protective of benthic organisms. The frequencies at which samples from
the site exceeded the 1.0 threshold were examined, using both substitution schemes for
the non-detects, and using both of the uncertainty factors (50% and 95%). The results are
summarized in the Table 8-2 and Appendix G provides the individual results for all 128
samples.
Table 8-2 Results for Evaluation of Toxicity using ESBTU Calculations
Samples
Exceeding
Substituting V2 SSQL for No
I ESBTU tot I ESBTU tot
"•i using Upper using Upper
50% Lin
Substitu
Number of samples
exceeding 1.0
ESBTU tot ESBTU tot
3 | using Upper using Upper
50% Limit 95% Limit
41
78
123
31
59
99
Percent of samples
exceeding 1.0
32.03%
60.94%
96.09%
24.22%
46.09%
77.34%
Using the 95% uncertainty factor of 11.5, between 99 and 123 of the 128 samples
exceeded the 1.0 threshold, compared to 59 to 78 of the samples when the 50%
uncertainty factor is used. Even without the use of the uncertainty factors, 24% to 32%
of the samples exceeded the 1.0 threshold and may be toxic to benthic organisms.
LIMITED CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
A conceptual site model is a representation of the environmental system and the physical,
chemical, and biological processes that determine the transport of contaminants from
sources to receptors. For sediment sites, the conceptual site model can be an important
element for evaluating risk and risk reduction approaches. EPA GLNPO and MDEQ will
determine whether the development of one or more conceptual site models that highlight
different aspects of the site is warranted. EPA GLNPO and MDEQ will consider
developing a conceptual site model to assess:
1. sources, release, and media,
2. human health receptors, and
My 2010
117
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
3. ecological health receptors.
In addition, it may be necessary to develop separate models for contaminants or groups of
contaminants driving risks if these contaminants behave differently in the environment
(e.g., PCBs versus metals) (EPA, December 2005).
Contaminants in sediment have direct exposure to the benthic community and indirect
exposure to the biota that consume them. Some contaminants at the site, including
mercury, are known to bioaccumulate in the food chain and could pose risk to fish and
birds that prey on benthic macroinvertebrates or predators that consume them.
Contaminated sediments also can pose risk to humans that have direct contact with
associated water bodies. These issues and other factors may be assessed for further
development of a conceptual site model specific to the Trenton Channel site if deemed
necessary by EPA GLNPO and MDEQ.
118 My 2010
-------
PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVE
9.0 PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVE
9.1 DEVELOPMENT OF REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVES AND
PRELIMINARY REMEDIATION GOALS
9.1.1 Remedial Action Objectives
The remedial action objectives for the Trenton Channel project site will provide a general
description of the expected accomplishments of the remedial activities and will focus the
development of the remedial activities. The information presented in this report will be
considered during development of the remedial action objectives as well as the ecological
risks, human health risks, and contaminant transport mechanisms. Specific remedial
action objectives may be developed separately for different areas of the site based on
exposure pathways and receptors. Remedial options for the contaminated sediments of
the project site will be designed to address adverse human health and ecological impacts
at the site and to aid in eventual delisting of the site as an Area of Concern. The remedial
action objectives will also consider net environmental effects, including health, safety
and welfare, natural recovery rates, engineering feasibility, costs, and compliance with
applicable laws and regulations. All considerations will be evaluated prior to establishing
the remedial action objectives (EPA, December 2005).
9.1.2 Preliminary Remediation Goals
Preliminary remediation goals protective of human and environmental health and aimed
towards contributing to the delisting of BUIs will be developed. The analytical results
from the Trenton Channel Phase I and Phase II studies will be evaluated and the necessity
for collection and analysis of additional samples and analytes will be determined. With
an improved understanding of site conditions due to evaluation of the analytical results,
area-specific remediation goals will be developed. The preliminary remediation goals
will consider both human and ecological risks and will be selected to achieve
concentrations in sediment that will result in appropriate reductions in risks (EPA,
December 2005).
My 2010 119
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
9.2 ESTIMATION OF REMEDIAL AREA AND SEDIMENT VOLUMES
In support of the sediment investigation, geostatistical analysis of the sediment data
generated in the Phase I and Phase II studies was conducted to further detail site
conditions for the Trenton Channel site. The analyses produced estimates of the vertical
and horizontal extent of mercury, total PAH, and total PCB concentrations in sediments
across the site as illustrated through the three-dimensional maps presented in Section 7.2.
This section presents the results of the geostatistical analysis of Phase I and II Trenton
Channel sediment data. A summary of the technical approach used for this analysis is
also provided in Appendix A. The geostatistical models also were used to estimate
volumes of contaminated sediments where COC concentrations exceeded specific criteria
of interest for the site.
9.2.1 Remedial Area and Sediment Volume Estimates
To estimate the volume of sediment that could potentially be of concern, CBSQG PECs,
which are not remediation or cleanup goals, were compared to concentrations found in
the sediment. Both the area and volume estimates were calculated when mercury, total
PAH, or total PCB concentrations exceeded the CBSQGs at any point in the sediment
depth. The volume estimates include the volume of less contaminated sediment that
would be removed to reach more contaminated sediment. These following CBSQGs
were used as comparison points:
• Mercury > 1.06 ppm or
• Total PAH > 22,800 ppb or
• Total PCB > 676 ppb.
The sediment volume estimates range from 163,446 to 190,065 cubic yards to remove
sediments where contaminant concentrations of COCs exceeded the CBSQGs, as detailed
in Table 9-1. Mean estimates of the mass of contaminant removed for each COC and
remedial scenario also are included in Table 9-1. Total mass (mean) for mercury, total
PAH, and total PCB concentrations across the Trenton Channel site is 2,148 pounds,
32,933 pounds, and 5,576 pounds, respectively. It should be noted that sediment volumes
might be higher depending on core compaction.
120 My 2010
-------
PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVE
Table 9-1 Volume Estimates and Mass of Contaminant for the Sediment Exceeding the
CBSQGs per the Project Criteria
Mercury s 1.06 ppm or
Total PAH > 22,800 ppb
nr Tntol PPR > R7R nnh
Area
(square feet)
Volume
(cubic yards)
Mercury mass removed
(pounds)
Total PAH mass removed
(pounds)
Total PCB mass removed
(pounds)
1,034,077
176,821
2,092
(97%)
31,858
(97%)
5,540
(99%)
criteria
923,522
163,446
1,418
27,056
2,414
1,102,178
190,065
3,029
38,447
10,686
Percent of total mass removed provided in parentheses.
Table 9-2 displays the sediment area, volume, and mass estimates for each COC when
contamination occurred in the sediment column. Figure 9-1 displays the sediment depth
to dredge if one of the COCs exceeds the CBSQGs.
Table 9-2 Volume Estimates and Mass of Contaminant for the Sediment Exceeding the
CBSQGs per COC
^•Q^nMivi^^^^^
Estimates when sediment
exceeds criteria
Mercury > 1.06 ppm
Total PAH > 22.8 ppm
Total PCB > 0.676 ppm
Area
(square feet)
Volume
(cubic yards)
Mercury mass removed
(pounds)
Area
(square feet)
Volume
(cubic yards)
Total PAH mass removed
(pounds)
Area
(square feet)
Volume
(cubic yards)
Total PCB mass removed
(pounds)
828,209
136,503
2,039
(95%)
913,960
153,097
31,394
(96%)
693,526
112,073
5,508
(99%)
758,262
121,593
1,361
815,648
141,678
26,558
629,893
101,389
2,375
885,731
147,092
2,978
981,607
165,038
38,105
753,463
121,600
10,657
Percent of total mass removed provided in parentheses.
My 2010
121
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Remedial Investigation
Trenton Channel, Michigan
0 500 1.000
2,000
Feet
Depth to dredge (ft)
•• o
I I 0-1
I I 1.1 -3
I I 3.1 -5
H] 5.1 -9
• 9.1 -18.2
I I Boundary
The ranges of sediment depths displayed are
not the actual observed sediment depths
&EPA D6
Created by CSC
January 6, 2010
Michigan State Plane Feet NAD 83
Figure 9-1 Sediment Depth to Dredge Where COCs in Sediments Exceed the Consensus-based
Sediment Quality Guidelines Based on Geostatistical Modeling
122
My 2010
-------
PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVE
9.2.2 Uncertainty Analysis
Uncertainty in models usually results from the necessity for models to use equations that
are simplifications and approximations of complex processes, which can result in
uncertainty in just how well the equations represent the actual processes. Uncertainty in
models also exists due to uncertainty about how well the input data represent actual
conditions (EPA, December 2005). The level of uncertainty with the geostatistical
modeling of Phase I and Phase II Trenton Channel sediment data is presented in the
technical approach provided in Appendix A through the assessment of false positive and
false negative rates. Uncertainty also is addressed in the analysis conducted to estimate
the probability that contaminant concentrations across the site exceed CBSQGs detailed
in Section 7.4. Areas of the site with mid-range probabilities (interval 0.3 - 0.7) may be
considered for additional sampling depending on the next steps for the site.
My 2010 123
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
124 My 2010
-------
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
10.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1 SUMMARY
Sediment sampling activities at the Trenton Channel project site began in mid June 2006
and continued through July 2007. A full suite of chemical classes were analyzed over the
course of both project phases including semi-volatile organic compounds, metals,
polychlorinated biphenyls, simultaneously extracted metals-acid volatile sulfide, toxic
characteristic leaching procedure for volatile organic compounds and metals, extractable
petroleum hydrocarbons, and oil and grease. Additional sediment parameters include
total organic carbon, grain size, density, moisture content, Atterberg limits, and pH
(Phase I only) and toxicity data in sediments. The three contaminants of concern specific
to this project included mercury, total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and total
polychlorinated biphenyls.
The results of the analytical testing indicate the presence of a wide range of contaminants
within the sediments. Some areas of the site exceeded the contaminant levels provided in
the Consensus-based Sediment Quality Guidelines for several contaminants. Other areas
of the site were well below the contaminant levels provided in the Consensus-based
Sediment Quality Guidelines for several contaminants. Overall, 31%, 36%, and 27% of
samples for mercury, total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and total polychlorinated
biphenyls, respectively, exceeded the Consensus-based Sediment Quality Guidelines.
The results of the analytical testing also indicate the majority of the sediment samples
collected within Transects D through F contain contaminants well below the Consensus-
based Sediment Quality Guidelines, as the median concentrations for mercury, total
PAHs, and total PCBs are approximately 5-10 times below the corresponding CBSQG.
Based on the statistical sampling design and supported through the geostatistical models,
additional work by EPA GLNPO and MDEQ may be deemed necessary to further assess
the site conditions and determine the next course of action.
My 2010 125
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
10.2 NEXT STEPS
The project team will evaluate if the collection and analyses of additional data is
necessary in order to fully understand the nature and extent of contamination across the
project site. Formal human health and ecological health risk assessments may be
conducted if deemed necessary to evaluate potential human, benthic, avian, and
mammalian exposures to contaminants present in media within the project site.
ATA NEEDS
Evaluations of the collected sediment vibracore and probe depth data (see Section 6.1
Sediment Depth and Section 7.3 Sediment Thickness and Volume) illustrated high
variability in these measurements even though sampling locations were within close
range of each other. This high variability could be a result from differences in these
sampling methods, sampling techniques, sampling team members, etc. Regardless,
establishing more concrete sediment depth data would enhance the development of
remedial action objectives and preliminary remedial goals and refine sediment volume
and contaminant mass estimates. For areas of the site where probe data is deeper than
core data (Figure 6-2), additional sampling may be desired to better define the
contaminant concentrations at the depth that exceeds the collected cores.
As detailed in Section 6.5 Sediment Toxicity, surface sediment toxicity was assessed in
four samples collected during Phase I sampling efforts and four samples collected during
Phase II sampling efforts. Although the results were helpful in reviewing levels of
toxicity in surface sediments, eight samples does not typically provide enough
representation to make definitive statements. In addition, the number of organisms
analyzed could also be increased. However, more detailed analyses of previously
conducted toxicity testing and associated results along this section of the Trenton
Channel may negate the need for additional surface sediment toxicity analyses.
The project team will evaluate if the collection and analyses of additional data is
necessary after reviewing all project data and taking into consideration the next steps.
126 My 2010
-------
REFERENCES
11.0 REFERENCES
ASci Corporation. February 2007. Results o/Hyalella azteca and Chironomus tentans
Toxicity Tests with TN&A Whole Sediment Samples Received December 21, 2006.
Duluth, Minnesota.
ASci Corporation. August 2007. Results o/Hyalella azteca and Chironomus tentans
Toxicity Tests with TN&A Whole Sediment Samples Received July 11, 2007. Duluth,
Minnesota.
Besser, J.M., J.P. Giesy, J.A. Kubitz, D.A. Verbrugge, T.G. Coon, and W.E. Braselton.
1996. Assessment of Sediment Quality in Dredged and Undredged Areas of the Trenton
Channel of the Detroit River, Michigan USA, using the Sediment Quality Triad. Journal
of Great Lakes Research, 22:683-696.
Cressie, N. A. C. 1990. The Origins of Kriging. Mathematical Geology, 22:239-252.
Friends of the Detroit River and Detroit River AOC Public Advisory Council.
December 2008. Restoration Criteria Review for the Detroit River Area of Concern.
Fully Integrated Environmental Decision System Team. June 23, 2004. Report on
Trenton Channel Sediment Surveys.
Goovaerts, P. 1999. Geostatistics in soil science: state-of-the-art and perspectives.
Geoderma, 89:1-45.
Jon, Andrade and Zwick Associates, Inc. November 6, 2003. Report on Sediment
Contamination in the Trenton Channel.
http://www2.bren.ucsb.edu/~keller/courses/esm223/Case_study_example.pdf
Lakeshore Engineering Services, Inc. October 26, 2004. Trenton Channel, Detroit River,
Michigan, Sediment Sampling and Analysis Report (Final). Detroit, Michigan.
Leney, J. and H.G. Douglas. December 2006. 2006 Status of Beneficial Use Impairments
in the Detroit River. Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research (GLIER),
University of Windsor.
MacDonald, D.D., C.G. Ingersoll, and T.A. Berger. 2000. Development and evaluation of
consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 39:20-31.
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. June 2006. Sediment Probing and
Hydrographic Survey at the Riverview Project Site, Wyandotte, Michigan, Summary
Report. Novi, Michigan.
My 2010 127
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Metcalfe, Chris D., T.L. Metcalfe, G. Riddle, and G.D. Haffner. 1997. Aromatic
Hydrocarbons in Biota from the Detroit River and Western Lake Erie. Journal of Great
Lakes Research, 23:160-168.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. June 2000. Results of Sediment
Sampling on the Detroit River in the Vicinity of the Grosse Isle Toll Bridge, Trenton
Channel. MI/DEQ/SWQ-02/058.
Persaud, D., R. Jaagumagi, and A. Hayton. 1992. Guidelines for the Protection and
Management of Aquatic Sediment Quality in Ontario. Ontario Ministry of the
Environment, Queen's Printer for Ontario.
STN Environmental JV. December, 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan: Remedial
Investigation and Focused Feasibility Study, Riverview - Trenton Channel, Wayne
County, Michigan. Chicago, Illinois.
STN Environmental JV. December 12, 2006. Final Field Sampling Plan -Remedial
Investigation and Focused Feasibility Study, Riverview - Trenton Channel, Wayne
County, Michigan. Chicago, Illinois.
STN Environmental JV. January 4, 2007. Trip Report for Field Investigation and Data
Acquisition activities, Riverview - Trenton Channel RI/FFS, Wayne County, Michigan.
Chicago, Illinois.
STN Environmental JV. March 7, 2007. Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)
Addendum for Remedial Investigation and Focused Feasibility Study, Riverview -
Trenton Channel, Wayne County, Michigan. Chicago, Illinois.
STN Environmental JV. July 6, 2007. Final Field Sampling Plan - Remedial
Investigation and Focused Feasibility Study, Riverview - Trenton Channel, Wayne
County, Michigan. Chicago, Illinois.
USAGE. January 1, 2002. Engineering and Design - Hydrographic Surveying. EM 1110-
2-1003
USDA, 1999. Soil Taxonomy - A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and
Interpreting Soil Surveys. Number 436.
U.S. DOE (Hassig, N.L., J.E. Wilson, R.O. Gilbert, B.A. Pulsipher, and L.L. Nuffer),
2005. Visual Sample Plan Version 4.0 Software and User's Guide. PNNL-15247.
U.S. EPA. December 2005. Contaminated Sediment Remediation Guidance for
Hazardous Waste Sites. EPA-540-R-05-012.
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/health/conmedia/sediment/guidance.htm
128 My 2010
-------
REFERENCES
U.S. EPA. February 1994. Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines
for Inorganic Data Review. EPA 540/R-94/013
U.S. EPA. October 1999. Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines
for Organic Data Review. EPA540/R-99/008
U.S. EPA. February 2006. Guidance on Systematic Planning Using the Data Quality
Objectives Process. EPA/240/B-06/001.
U.S. EPA. 1988. Organic Contaminants in Sediments from the Trenton Channel of the
Detroit River, M. EPA/600/J-88/532
U.S. EPA. November 2003. Procedures for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning
Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs)for the Protection ofBenthic Organisms: PAH Mixtures.
EPA-600-R-02-013.
U.S. EPA. 2009. Evaluating Ecological Risk to Invertebrate Receptors from PAHs in
Sediments at Hazardous Waste Sites. EPA/600/R-06/162
U.S. EPA. Date Unknown. Clean Water Act Analytical Test Methods - Priority
Pollutants. Web page accessed July 26, 2010.
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/methods/pollutants.htm
U.S. EPA. Date Unknown. Great Lakes Monitoring- Sediment Remediation. Web page
accessed July 26, 2010. http://www.epa.gov/glindicators/sediments/remediateb.html
U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development. 1988. Integrated Study of Exposure and
Biological Effects ofln-Place Sediment Pollutant in the Detroit River, Michigan.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. December 2003. Consensus-Based
Sediment Quality Guideline, Recommendations for Use & Application, Interim Guidance.
WT-732 2003.
My 2010 129
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
130 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX A - TECHNICAL APPROACH FOR GEOSTATISTICAL
MODELING AND ESTIMATION OF SEDIMENT VOLUMES
The technical approach developed for the three-dimensional (3D) geostatistical models
and kriged concentration maps is described in this section. This technical description is
written to an audience with expertise in geostatistical modeling. The estimation of
contaminated sediment volumes was based on the following CBSQG for mercury
concentration of 1.06 ppm, total PAH concentration of 22,800 ppb, and total Aroclor
concentration of 676 ppb.
The analysis was conducted using a combination of three software that are all compatible
in terms of data file format:
1. Space-time Information System (STIS) that is commercialized by TerraSeer
(www.terraseer.com/products_stis.php) and offers two-dimensional (2D)
geostatistical methods,
2. Modified kriging and simulation codes of the Geostatistical Software Library
(GSLIB) described in Deutsch CV, Journal AG. GSLIB: Geostatistical Software
Library and Use's Guide, 2nd edition, Oxford University Press 1998, and
3. Stanford Geostatistical Modeling Software (SGeMS), described in Remy N,
Boucher Al, Wu J. Applied Geostatistics with SGeMS: A User's Guide.
Cambridge University Press 2009.
The last two software were developed at Stanford University and are public-domain. The
SGeMS software is available for free download (http://sgems.sourceforge.net/), while
GSLIB programs can be downloaded from
http://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/research/scrf/software/.
The 3D modeling of the spatial distribution of the three COC (mercury [Hg], total PAH
and total Aroclor) concentrations at the Trenton Channel site involved the following
steps:
1. A 10-foot spacing grid (13,804 nodes) was overlaid over a 31.7-acre zone bordered
by the location of samples.
My 2010 131
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
2. The sediment depth was interpolated at each node of the 2D grid using ordinary
kriging and a dataset including 50 core data (data = end depth value for the deepest
sample of each core) and 77 probe samples.
Ordinary kriging is a spatial interpolation technique that estimates depth at each grid
node as a linear combination of the closest 64 depth data. The weight assigned to
each observation depends on the distance between observations and the grid node,
plus the spatial autocorrelation of the data as modeled using the variogram. The
experimental variogram of 127 depth data was fitted with an exponential model that
has no nugget effect and a longer range of autocorrelation (138 feet versus 90 feet) in
the direction of azimuth 75 degrees which is parallel to the shoreline. Cross-
validation (i.e., one depth sample is removed at a time and its value is estimated from
remaining data, "leave-one-out" approach) indicated a good correlation (0.60)
between observed and estimated depth values (Figure A-l), despite the fact that the
nature of the data (i.e., core versus probe) was ignored in the analysis. The scatterplot
of Figure A-l demonstrates the lack of bias in the estimation (i.e., the means of
observed and estimated depths are very close) although, as expected, large depth
values tend to be underestimated while small values are overestimated.
The sediment depth map displayed in Figure 6-2 of the report was used to create a 3D
grid (155,792 nodes) with 10-foot spacing in the lateral direction and 0.5-foot
resolution along the vertical direction. In doing so and in agreement with most
modeling studies of contaminated sediments, it was decided not to propagate the
uncertainty attached to sediment depth throughout the subsequent analysis. Figure A-
2 indicates that 90% of the sediments are located within five feet of the surface,
which means that estimation errors for large depth values should have a small impact
on the computation of the total volume of contaminated sediments. This graph also
suggests that the vertical distribution of samples (only 15 samples out of 128 were
taken at depths greater than five feet) is appropriate for this site. If further resolution
of the interpolation grid is needed then sensitivity analyses could be conducted.
132 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX A
Note: For areas of the site where probe data is deeper than core data (Figure 6-2),
additional sampling may be desired to better define the contaminant concentrations at
the depth that exceeds the collected cores.
3. The geostatistical analysis of each of the three COCs was conducted on 128 samples
collected for 50 cores. To attenuate the impact of extreme values in the analysis (in
particular for the estimation of experimental variograms), the COC concentrations
were first transformed into a set of normally distributed values with a zero mean and
unit variance. The method, known as "normal-score transform," is implemented into
all three aforementioned software and is described in details in Goovaerts (1997,
pages 266-271). Since this algorithm requires all data to be ordered from the smallest
to the largest, same-valued observations (e.g., data below the detection limit) were
ordered according to the mean of the eight closest neighbors.
The decision to conduct a normal-transform of the data was guided by the following
considerations: 1) multiGaussian kriging used in Step 4 requires the distribution of
the data to be normal, 2) other types of transform, such as log-transform or Box-Cox
transformation, typically reduce the asymmetry of the sample histogram, yet fail to
guarantee that the sample distribution is perfectly Gaussian after transform, and 3) a
cross-validation study was performed in Step 5 to ensure that the transform does not
create any bias in the estimation results.
4. A 3D variogram was computed for the normal scores of each COC and a model was
fitted using weighted least-square regression. Over the range of distances considered
for the interpolation in Step 5 (i.e., 1,500 feet), there was no evidence of anisotropic
(direction-dependent) variability in the horizontal plane; hence only two variograms
(lateral and vertical) were computed for each COC (Figure A-3). Each variogram is
bounded in that it reaches a sill for a given distance, known as the range of
autocorrelation. The existence of a sill indicates the lack of spatial trend in the data
for a distance up to 1,500 feet, which does not contradict the fact that a large-scale
trend was detected for mercury in Section 7.2.3.2 when moving from Transect F to
Transect S. Indeed the shortest distance between samples from these two transects is
My 2010 133
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
4,250 feet, so well beyond the distance used in the computation of the variograms and
the selection of neighbors for kriging.
The Hg model includes a 1% nugget effect, a spherical model with a vertical range of
6.91 feet, and two spherical models with lateral ranges of 182 and 1,201 feet. The
total PAH model includes a 5% nugget effect, a spherical model with a vertical range
of 6.14 feet, and two spherical models with lateral ranges of 327 and 1,034 feet. The
total Aroclor model includes a 5% nugget effect, a spherical model with a vertical
range of 5.70 feet, and two spherical models with lateral ranges of 200 and 1,342 feet.
For each COC, the vertical range and the two lateral ranges define the axis of an
ellipsoid that models the anisotropic variability of pollutant concentrations in a 3D
space (geometric anisotropy). In doing so, we make the implicit assumption that the
dip and plunge angles (Deutsch and Journel, 1998, page 28) are zero, which seems
reasonable for depositional environments. Furthermore, the number of data does not
suffice for a complex modeling of the directions of anisotropy. For all COCs, an
additional structure was included to account for the larger sill of the lateral variogram
(zonal anisotropy, Goovaerts, 1997, pages 93-95).
5. COC concentrations were estimated for 155,792 blocks of 50 cubic feet (10x 10x0.5)
or 1.852 cubic yards centered on each node of the 3D grid using multiGaussian block
kriging (i.e., kriging of normal score-transformed data; Goovaerts, 1997). The closest
12 normal score data within a radius of 1,500 feet were used in the estimation; to
reduce the screening effect a maximum of two samples per core was retained. Cross-
validation (i.e., one core is removed at a time and all its samples are estimated from
remaining cores) indicated a moderate correlation between observed and estimated
normal score values (0.47 for Hg, 0.36 for total PAH, and 0.53 for total Aroclor).
The magnitude of the correlation is smaller than what has been observed for the same
COCs on other sites (e.g., 0.70 for Hg and total PAH at Division Street Outfall site in
Muskegon, Michigan). The culprit is the elongated shape of the Trenton Channel site
which reduces the number of neighboring samples available for estimates: only
samples located North and South of the removed core are available, instead of
samples located in all directions for more spatially compact sites. For visualization
purposes, each COC was estimated using the p-quantile (e.g., median corresponds to
134 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX A
p=0.50) that ensures that the percentages of false positives (FP) and false negatives
computed during the cross-validation are the same: Hg: p=0.63 (FP=18.0%), total
PAH p=0.59 (FP=12.5%), and total Aroclor p=0.62 (FP=12.5%).
6. COC concentrations were simulated over the same 3D grid of 155,792 nodes using p-
field simulation with conditional probability fields (Goovaerts, 2002). P-field
simulation proceeds in two steps:
> The probability distribution of the average block concentration of each COC is
modeled for each of the 155,792 blocks. By theory, the multiGaussian kriging
estimate and standard deviation, ZMG and SMG, correspond to the mean and
standard deviation of the probability distribution of the COC that is Gaussian
within the framework of multiGaussian kriging (Goovaerts, 1997, pages 265-
266).
> The set of probability distributions is sampled by a set of spatially autocorrelated
probability values, known as p-field. In practice, because the probability
distributions are Gaussian the simulated COC concentrations are computed as:
ZMG + y® SMG , where y® is a normal score value generated by sequential
Gaussian simulation (Goovaerts, 1997, pages 380-393).
Fifty simulation models were generated by creating fifty sets of normal score values,
that is only Step 2 is repeated. To attenuate fluctuations between simulation models,
the sequential Gaussian simulation algorithm was adapted in the following manner: 1)
the random visit of simulation grid nodes was replaced by a path that visits first the
nodes with the smallest uncertainty as quantified by the multiGaussian kriging
variance (in other words, the first nodes to be simulated are the ones in the vicinity of
the observations), and 2) the set of simulated normal scores was conditioned to the
observations (sampled normal scores = 0; Goovaerts, 2002) instead of being
generated by non-conditional simulation (in other words, one tends to sample the
center of the probability distribution around the sampled locations). This modified
version of p-field simulation was accomplished using modified GSLIB codes.
7. The probability pcoc that the critical threshold (CBSQG) is exceeded by a COC for a
given block is simply computed by counting the proportion of 50 simulated block
My 2010 135
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
concentrations that exceeds this threshold. Because the COC concentrations are
weakly correlated, the probability that at least one of the COC exceeds its CBSQG
was computed as 1 - (l-pHg) x (!-PTPAH) x (1-pArocior).
8. For each COC, the maximum depth at which a simulated concentration is greater or
equal to its CBSQG was computed for each node of the 2D grid and multiplied by the
pixel size (100 square feet) to derive the volume of sediments to be dredged. The
operation was repeated for each of the 50 simulation models to account for the
uncertainty in the spatial distribution of COC concentrations, resulting in a histogram
of 50 volume estimates (Figure A-4). These histograms allow one to identify extreme
scenarios (i.e., minimum and maximum volumes that could be encountered given the
uncertainty attached to the model). These minimum and maximum volume estimates
are reported in Table 9-1 of the report, along with the mean of the set of 50 estimates.
Below each histogram in Figure A-4, there is the corresponding boxplot and a black
dot that represents the volume estimated from the average of 50 simulation models
(i.e., analogous to a kriging model). These graphs highlight the risk of overestimating
the total volume of contaminated sediments when the computation is based on
smoothed concentration estimates, such as the ones provided by kriging or inverse
distance methods, instead of simulated concentrations. This overestimation is caused
by the positive skewness of the histograms of 128 sampled concentrations.
9. Besides estimating the volume of sediment to be dredged for each COC considered
separately (Table 9-1), the volume associated with the joint remediation of all three
COCs was also computed: a block is contaminated if at least one COC exceeds its
CBSQG. Results are reported in Table 9-2.
References for Technical Approach for Geostatistical Modeling and Estimation of
Sediment Volumes
Goovaerts, P. 1997. Geostatistics for Natural Resources Evaluation. Oxford Univ. Press,
New-York, page 483.
Goovaerts, P. 2002. Geostatistical modeling of spatial uncertainty using p-field
simulation with conditional probability fields. InternationalJournal of Geographical
Systems, 16(2), 167-178.
136 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX A
•i
tL -
cu>
-a
-o 10 -
i . i . . i . . i . i i . . i i . i . . i
0 5 10 15 20
Observed depth
plotted data 127 Xvariable Yvariable
Coef. correl 0.601495 Number of data 127 Number of data 127
Mean 6.20866 Mean 6.31485
Figure A-1 Scatterplots of observed versus estimated depths values computed using ordinary
kriging and a cross-validation (leave-one-out) approach
My 2010
137
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
100 -
~o on
*•* oU
1 :
V)
i , en
ID b°
b)
D
co .in —
0
-------
APPENDIX A
Hg
1.60J
1.20_
0.40 -
0.00
l\
• 1
*^T7
M-
i
V ''
Lateral
Vertical (distance x 50)
0,
400. 800.
Distance (feet)
' i ' ' ' 1 ' ' ' 1
1200. 1600. 2000.
1.60
Total PAH
0.00
400. 800.
Distance (feet)
1200.
Total Aroclor
2.00 _
1.50_
Y
' 1.00_
0.50 _
0.00
Lateral
Vertical (distance x 50)
0. 400. 800. 1200. 1600.
Distance (feet)
2000.
Figure A-3 Experimental variograms for all three COCs, with the 3D model fitted
My 2010
139
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Hg
0.2n
h
Number of Date 50
mean 136503.
ulri rlou 577fi
maximum 147092.
upper quartile 141392.
med&n 135634.
lower quaniKf j j^two,
minimum 1 21 593.
~l
Total PAH
0.250_
0.200_
0.100_
Number ol Data 50
mean 183097.
«IH ripy R109
maximum 165038.
upper quartile 156663.
median 152559.
IUWBI quaruw I3OQ9Q.
minimum 141678.
121593.
131593.
141593.
151593.
141678.
151678.
161678.
171678.
•
Total Arocfor
o.sooJ
0.160 J!
m
S o.ioo
LJ_
o.osoj
o.oacJ
1 —
Number ol Data 50
mean 11S073.
sid. dev. J675.
maximum 121600.
ujifip; nuartife 115624.
median 111982.
lowet quartile 108964.
minimum 1010OO-
n
1O1OO3. 1OOOO3. 111QO3. 11OOO3. 1E13OO. tEGO03.
I I
Figure A-4 Histograms of volumes of sediments to be dredged according to each of the 50
simulation models. For each COC, dredging aims to remove any contaminated block (10x10x0.5
ft). The black dot in the box plot below each histogram is the volume estimate obtained from the
average of 50 simulation models. Five vertical lines are the 0.025 quantile, lower quartile, median,
upper quartile, and 0.975 quantile of the distribution.
140
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX B - DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF PAH RESULTS
H
2-Methylnaphthalene
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzo[a]anthracene
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number
of
results
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
1,616
1,608
1,871
1,164
1,520
900
1,618
870
897
724
819
1,087
260
846
839
675
720
818
832
355
757
1,755
1,941
2,462
1,856
2,286
1,760
1,971
4,371
3,120
4,026
2,201
2,840
1,910
3,691
Median
(ppb)
330
440
500
845
1,000
900
445
215
220
160
265
205
260
200
195
170
162.5
260
180
355
185
860
710
575
875
860
1,760
835
1,350
1,100
835
1,095
1,600
1,910
1,300
SD
(ppb)
2,236
1,929
3,546
1,108
1,599
849
2,346
1,314
1,314
1,376
913
1,338
198
1,280
1,322
763
1,373
914
957
332
1,129
2,680
2,838
5,969
2,229
2,624
2,319
3,498
11,350
4,558
8,605
2,383
3,076
2531
8,397
RSD
(%)
138
120
190
95
105
94
145
151
147
190
111
123
76
151
158
113
191
112
115
94
149
153
146
242
120
115
132
177
260
146
214
108
108
133
227
Min
(ppb)
89
150
79
130
320
300
79
60
60
54
60
80
120
54
60
60
60
60
80
120
60
60
60
60
94
150
120
60
54
60
60
140
150
120
54
Max
(ppb)
10,500
7,000
17,000
3,300
4,200
1,500
17,000
7,500
7,200
6,500
2,000
3,000
400
7,500
7,500
2,100
6,500
2,000
2,000
590
7,500
14,000
11,000
29,000
6,400
6,000
3,400
29,000
75,000
19,000
39,000
6,500
7,300
3,700
75,000
Non-
detect
(%)
52
56
46
13
20
50
48
64
69
63
88
80
50
67
72
74
67
88
80
50
73
42
31
33
13
20
50
34
22
26
29
0
20
50
23
My 2010
141
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
mm
Benzo[a]pyrene
Benzo[b]fluoranthene
Benzo[g,h,i]perylene
Benzo[k]fluoranthene
Chrysene
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number
of
results
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
6,254
4,436
4,704
6,538
2,389
1,720
5,205
6,519
4,667
4,264
6,494
2,577
1,920
5,304
5,246
3,407
3,487
6,293
1,717
1,945
4,232
5,282
3,345
3,461
6,268
1,698
1,770
4,217
4,431
3,262
4,178
2,290
2,786
1,910
3,790
Median
(ppb)
1,700
2,500
1,140
1,815
1,000
1,720
1,650
2,250
2,600
1,250
1,180
1,400
1,920
1,650
1,300
950
780
1,000
415
1,945
945
950
1,400
430
900
570
1,770
870
1,600
1,600
950
1,310
1,200
1,910
1,350
SD
(ppb)
21,329
7,883
9,715
13,815
2,653
2,093
14,942
21,386
7,977
8,322
13,838
2,982
2,376
14,846
21,176
7,611
7,514
13,903
1,952
2,411
14,584
21,189
7,589
7,502
13,913
1,866
2,164
14,590
11,209
4,656
8,902
2,412
3,433
2,531
8,401
RSD
(%)
341
178
207
211
111
122
287
328
171
195
213
116
124
280
404
223
215
221
114
124
345
401
227
217
222
110
122
346
253
143
213
105
123
133
222
Min
(ppb)
120
120
125
120
305
240
120
120
120
125
120
305
240
120
120
120
125
120
165
240
120
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
58
60
60
140
150
120
58
Max
(ppb)
150,000
37,500
35,500
40,500
6,400
3,200
150,000
150,000
37,500
35,500
40,500
7,500
3,600
150,000
150,000
37,500
35,500
40,500
4,000
3,650
150,000
150,000
37,500
35,500
40,500
4,000
3,300
150,000
75,000
19,000
41,000
6,400
8,400
3,700
75,000
Non-
detect
(%)
46
46
50
38
20
50
45
46
44
50
25
20
50
44
70
74
71
88
80
100
73
68
69
75
88
80
50
71
20
23
25
0
20
50
21
142
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX B
mm
Dibenz[a,h]anthracene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
lndeno(1,2,3-
c,d)pyrene
Naphthalene
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number
of
results
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
5,027
3,130
3,164
6,138
1,667
1,945
3,990
5,169
5,598
5,459
4,155
5,538
3,160
5,274
1,143
1,161
1,041
1,015
1,562
810
1,133
5,298
3,402
3,343
6,268
1,660
1,945
4,220
11,492
10,827
10,376
13,896
3,854
3,610
10,809
Median
(ppb)
300
310
292.5
382.5
415
1,945
317.5
2,500
2,200
1,500
2,550
2,600
3,160
2,200
555
480
375
490
480
810
480
1,200
1,500
525
900
380
1,945
1,045
720
570
555
2,000
3,900
3,610
705
SD
(ppb)
21,202
7,631
7,480
13,969
1,891
2,411
14,603
9,279
7,416
12,515
4,100
6,656
4,299
8,984
1,590
1,587
1,786
1,084
2,056
976
1,589
21,178
7,593
7,536
13,913
1,897
2,411
14,589
73,399
57,482
42,622
34,812
3,830
4,936
58,884
RSD
(%)
422
244
236
228
113
124
366
180
132
229
99
120
136
170
139
137
172
107
132
120
140
400
223
225
222
114
124
346
639
531
411
251
99
137
545
Min
(ppb)
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
60
60
100
250
180
120
60
60
60
60
72
80
120
60
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
60
60
90
120
150
120
60
Max
(ppb)
150,000
37,500
35,500
40,500
4,000
3,650
150,000
58,000
28,000
61,000
11,000
16,000
6,200
61,000
7,500
7,400
8,400
2,900
4,900
1,500
8,400
150,000
37,500
35,500
40,500
4,000
3,650
150,000
520,000
360,000
210,000
100,000
9,400
7,100
520,000
Non-
detect
(%)
96
92
92
100
100
100
95
12
15
13
0
0
50
13
50
51
46
38
40
50
48
66
72
79
88
80
100
73
44
36
33
13
20
50
37
My 2010
143
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
mm
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Total PAH
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number
of
results
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
4,402
5,638
5,413
5,231
6,910
4,360
5,117
6,266
5,626
6,346
4,966
5,644
5,560
5,969
39,218
42,327
45,000
39,507
39,108
29,045
41,104
Median
(ppb)
2,550
2,400
1,950
3,150
2,500
4,360
2,400
2,650
3,500
1,900
2,250
2,500
5,560
2,450
12,790
13,300
7,277
16,415
20,170
29,045
12,375
SD
(ppb)
7,121
8,457
11,323
6,037
8,267
5,996
8,310
12,471
7,718
12,698
6,142
6,459
7,693
10,538
88,697
75,892
98,020
57,252
45,074
40,652
82,242
RSD
(%)
162
150
209
115
120
138
162
199
137
200
124
114
138
177
226
179
218
145
115
140
200
Min
(ppb)
73
87
120
280
140
120
73
60
60
60
220
130
120
60
84
87
180
1,400
450
300
84
Max
(ppb)
40,000
37,000
54,000
18,000
19,000
8,600
54,000
75,000
36,000
60,000
18,000
15,000
11,000
75,000
534,600
388,500
407,400
172,500
106,800
57,790
534,600
Non-
detect
(%)
2.0
5.1
8.3
0
0
50
4.7
14
15
21
0
0
50
15
2.0
5.1
8.3
0
0
50
4.7
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
144
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX C
RESULTS
- DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF ADDITIONAL SVOC
tfiilB8fcHlriSlB^i§i
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
1,553
1,219
1,366
1,188
1,667
303
1,378
2,566
2,019
2,215
1,968
2,694
498
2,269
2,566
2,019
2,215
1,968
2,694
498
2,269
2,566
2,019
2,215
1,968
2,694
498
2,269
2,566
2,019
2,195
1,968
2,694
498
2,265
278
260
293
358
415
303
283
458
425
430
600
700
498
463
458
425
430
600
700
498
463
458
425
430
600
700
498
463
458
425
403
600
700
498
458
2,616
1,502
2,873
1,693
1,891
88
2,264
4,342
2,493
4,700
2,802
3,042
145
3,738
4,342
2,493
4,700
2,802
3,042
145
3,738
4,342
2,493
4,700
2,802
3,042
145
3,738
4,342
2,493
4,707
2,802
3,042
145
3,740
169
123
210
143
113
29
164
169
123
212
142
113
29
165
169
123
212
142
113
29
165
169
123
212
142
113
29
165
169
123
214
142
113
29
165
(DDbl MaX deteCt
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
195
200
200
200
270
395
195
195
200
200
200
270
395
195
195
200
200
200
270
395
195
195
200
200
200
270
395
195
15,000
4,250
13,500
4,050
4,000
365
15,000
25,000
7,000
22,000
6,500
6,500
600
25,000
25,000
7,000
22,000
6,500
6,500
600
25,000
25,000
7,000
22,000
6,500
6,500
600
25,000
25,000
7,000
22,000
6,500
6,500
600
25,000
100
100
96
100
100
100
99
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
96
100
100
100
99
My 2010
145
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
puiim immn
2,4-Dinitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
2-Chloronaphthalene
2-Chlorophenol
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
13,305
10,376
11,483
13,625
14,190
2,575
11,958
1,948
1,531
1,691
2,002
2,087
378
1,757
1,948
1,531
1,691
2,002
2,087
378
1,757
16,053
12,662
9,868
19,821
2,576
7,620
13,437
2,566
2,019
2,195
1,968
2,694
498
2,265
Median
(ppb)
2,350
2,200
2,225
3,200
3,500
2,575
2,375
348
325
325
470
500
378
350
348
325
325
470
500
378
350
278
260
293
293
360
7,620
280
458
425
403
600
700
498
458
SD
(ppb)
22,653
12,769
24,511
15,813
16,126
742
19,515
3,296
1,891
3,619
2,322
2,376
110
2,859
3,296
1,891
3,619
2,322
2,376
110
2,859
104,486
71,888
38,574
52,624
3,638
10,437
78,707
4,342
2,493
4,707
2,802
3,042
145
3,740
RSD
(%)
170
123
213
116
114
29
163
169
124
214
116
114
29
163
169
124
214
116
114
29
163
651
568
391
265
141
137
586
169
123
214
142
113
29
165
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,050
1,400
2,050
1,000
150
150
150
150
205
300
150
150
150
150
150
205
300
150
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
195
200
200
200
270
395
195
130,000
36,000
115,000
34,500
34,000
3,100
130,000
19,000
5,500
17,000
5,000
5,000
455
19,000
19,000
5,500
17,000
5,000
5,000
455
19,000
740,000
450,000
190,000
150,000
8,600
15,000
740,000
25,000
7,000
22,000
6,500
6,500
600
25,000
Non-
detect
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
98
97
92
75
60
50
93
100
100
96
100
100
100
99
146
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX C
puiim immn
2-Methyl-4,6-
dinitrophenol
2-Methylphenol
(o-Cresol)
2-Nitroaniline
2-Nitrophenol
3 & 4-Methylphenol
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
14,106
11,195
13,283
10,138
14,190
2,575
12,640
2,566
2,019
2,199
1,968
2,694
498
2,266
3,903
3,070
3,383
3,971
4,142
750
3,516
2,566
2,019
2,215
1,968
2,694
498
2,269
5,136
4,055
4,683
4,000
5,480
745
4,595
Median
(ppb)
2,525
2,200
2,475
3,050
3,500
2,575
2,475
458
425
403
600
700
498
458
700
650
650
950
1,050
750
700
458
425
430
600
700
498
463
975
950
900
1,250
1,350
745
975
SD
(ppb)
22,640
13,333
24,715
14,452
16,126
742
19,620
4,342
2,493
4,706
2,802
3,042
145
3,740
6,564
3,778
7,164
4,591
4,698
212
5,685
4,342
2,493
4,700
2,802
3,042
145
3,738
8,704
4,964
9,428
5,576
6,209
78
7,491
RSD
(%)
161
119
186
143
114
29
155
169
123
214
142
113
29
165
168
123
212
116
113
28
162
169
123
212
142
113
29
165
169
122
201
139
113
10
163
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,050
1,400
2,050
1,000
195
200
200
200
270
395
195
300
300
300
305
410
600
300
195
200
200
200
270
395
195
300
395
395
400
550
690
300
130,000
36,000
115,000
34,500
34,000
3,100
130,000
25,000
7,000
22,000
6,500
6,500
600
25,000
37,500
10,500
33,500
10,000
10,000
900
37,500
25,000
7,000
22,000
6,500
6,500
600
25,000
50,000
14,000
44,500
13,500
13,000
800
50,000
Non-
detect
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
96
100
100
100
99
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
94
92
71
88
100
50
88
My 2010
147
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
puiim immn
3-Nitroaniline
4-Bromophenyl phenyl
ether
4-Chloro-3-methyl-
phenol
4-Chlorodiphenylether
4-Nitroaniline
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
3,903
3,070
3,383
3,971
4,142
750
3,516
1,647
1,316
1,564
1,188
1,667
303
1,482
1,553
1,219
1,350
1,188
1,667
303
1,375
111
612
664
800
837
150
699
3,903
3,070
3,383
3,971
4,142
750
3,516
Median
(ppb)
700
650
650
950
1050
750
700
300
260
293
358
415
303
295
278
260
260
358
415
303
280
140
130
130
188
205
150
140
700
650
650
950
1050
750
700
SD
(ppb)
6,564
3,778
7,164
4,591
4,698
212
5,685
2,615
1,569
2,904
1,693
1,891
88
2,285
2,616
1,502
2,879
1,693
1,891
88
2,265
1,310
755
1,393
927
953
42
1,127
6,564
3,778
7,164
4,591
4,698
212
5,685
RSD
(%)
168
123
212
116
113
28
162
159
119
186
143
113
29
154
169
123
213
143
113
29
165
169
123
210
116
114
28
161
168
123
212
116
113
28
162
300
300
300
305
410
600
300
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
60
60
60
60
80
120
60
300
300
300
305
410
600
300
37,500
10,500
33,500
10,000
10,000
900
37,500
15,000
4,250
13,500
4,050
4,000
365
15,000
15,000
4,250
13,500
4,050
4,000
365
15,000
7,500
2,100
6,500
2,000
2,000
180
7,500
37,500
10,500
33,500
10,000
10,000
900
37,500
Non-
detect
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
148
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX C
puiim immn
4-Nitrophenol
Azobenzene
Benzyl Alcohol
Bis(2-
chloroethoxy)methane
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
13,305
10,376
11,483
13,625
14,190
2,575
11,958
1,647
1,316
1,564
1,188
1,667
303
1,482
19,483
15,305
16,913
14,844
20,870
3,775
17,247
1,553
1,219
1,350
1,188
1,667
303
1,375
111
612
664
592
837
150
686
Median
(ppb)
2,350
2,200
2,225
3,200
3,500
2,575
2,375
300
260
293
358
415
303
295
3,475
3,250
3,250
4,500
5,000
3,775
3,500
278
260
260
358
415
303
280
140
130
130
180
205
150
140
SD
(ppb)
22,653
12,769
24,511
15,813
16,126
742
19,515
2,615
1,569
2,904
1,693
1,891
88
2,285
32,955
18,911
36,190
21,122
23,760
1,096
28,504
2,616
1,502
2,879
1,693
1,891
88
2,265
1,310
755
1,393
840
953
42
1,124
RSD
(%)
170
123
213
116
114
29
163
159
119
186
143
113
29
154
169
124
214
142
114
29
165
169
123
213
143
113
29
165
169
123
210
142
114
28
164
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,050
1,400
2,050
1,000
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
1,500
1,500
1,500
1,500
2,050
3,000
1,500
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
60
60
60
60
80
120
60
130,000
36,000
115,000
34,500
34,000
3,100
130,000
15,000
4,250
13,500
4,050
4,000
365
15,000
190,000
55,000
170,000
50,000
50,000
4,550
190,000
15,000
4,250
13,500
4,050
4,000
365
15,000
7,500
2,100
6,500
2,000
2,000
180
7,500
Non-
detect
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
My 2010
149
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
puiim immn
Bis(2-
chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Carbazole
Dibenzofuran
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
2,859
994
666
592
837
150
1,617
7,691
4,715
4,566
2,367
2,087
378
5,532
5,936
2,731
3,626
1,979
2,087
378
4,042
2,066
1,622
1,955
1,484
2,049
240
1,845
1,835
1,497
1,689
1,977
2,085
355
1,700
Median
(ppb)
163
140
130
180
205
150
155
415
1,100
393
480
500
378
480
348
325
365
480
500
378
353
378
325
365
450
380
240
348
308
325
303
390
490
355
320
SD
(ppb)
8,203
2,456
1,392
840
953
42
5,404
27,381
9,947
9,900
2,930
2,376
110
18,466
26,903
7,519
9,425
2,289
2,376
110
17,757
3,294
1,930
3,650
2,112
2,409
85
2,869
3,250
1,838
3,621
2,342
2,378
78
2,829
RSD
(%)
287
247
209
142
114
28
334
356
211
217
124
114
29
334
453
275
260
116
114
29
439
159
119
187
142
118
35
156
177
123
214
118
114
22
166
60
60
60
60
80
120
60
140
150
150
150
205
300
140
150
150
150
150
205
300
150
150
150
150
150
205
180
150
68
72
110
150
205
300
68
41,000
15,000
6,500
2,000
2,000
180
41,000
190,000
47,000
44,500
7,500
5,000
455
190,000
190,000
47,000
44,500
5,000
5,000
455
190,000
19,000
5,500
17,000
5,000
5,000
300
19,000
19,000
5,500
17,000
5,000
5,000
410
19,000
Non-
detect
(%)
86
92
92
100
100
100
91
74
69
83
88
100
100
77
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
94
92
96
100
80
50
93
72
74
67
63
80
50
71
150
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX C
puiim immn
Diethylphthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Hexachlorobenzene
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
1,948
1,531
1,691
2,002
2,087
378
1,757
1,948
1,531
1,691
2,002
2,087
378
1,757
2,066
1,646
1,953
1,478
2,087
378
1,854
5,936
2,731
3,626
1,979
2,087
378
4,042
3,599
1,764
2,057
1,188
1,667
303
2,473
Median
(ppb)
348
325
325
470
500
378
350
348
325
325
470
500
378
350
375
325
365
425
500
378
368
348
325
365
480
500
378
353
323
285
313
358
415
303
323
SD
(ppb)
3,296
1,891
3,619
2,322
2,376
110
2,859
3,296
1,891
3,619
2,322
2,376
110
2,859
3,294
1,962
3,651
2,116
2,376
110
2,873
26,903
7,519
9,425
2,289
2,376
110
17,757
15,454
2,596
3,333
1,693
1,891
88
9,866
RSD
(%)
169
124
214
116
114
29
163
169
124
214
116
114
29
163
159
119
187
143
114
29
155
453
275
260
116
114
29
439
429
147
162
143
113
29
399
150
150
150
150
205
300
150
150
150
150
150
205
300
150
140
150
110
150
205
300
110
150
150
150
150
205
300
150
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
19,000
5,500
17,000
5,000
5,000
455
19,000
19,000
5,500
17,000
5,000
5,000
455
19,000
19,000
5,500
17,000
5,000
5,000
455
19,000
190,000
47,000
44,500
5,000
5,000
455
190,000
110,000
13,000
13,500
4,050
4,000
365
110,000
Non-
detect
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
98
100
96
88
100
100
98
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
94
92
83
100
100
100
92
My 2010
151
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
puiim immn
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclopenta
diene
Hexachloroethane
Isophorone
Nitrobenzene
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
1,444
3,246
4,842
654
837
150
2,537
7,769
6,122
6,638
5,919
8,370
1,500
6,865
1,797
621
67,330
592
837
150
13,588
111
612
664
592
837
150
686
1,553
1,219
1,350
1,188
1,667
303
1,375
Median
(ppb)
150
140
158
180
205
150
160
1,400
1,300
1,300
1,800
2,050
1,500
1,400
160
140
148
180
205
150
155
140
130
130
180
205
150
140
278
260
260
358
415
303
280
SD
(ppb)
5,493
1 1 ,542
17,493
969
953
42
10,443
13,102
7,548
13,928
8,400
9,527
424
11,236
8,158
750
326,460
840
953
42
141,418
1,310
755
1,393
840
953
42
1,124
2,616
1,502
2,879
1,693
1,891
88
2,265
RSD
(%)
380
356
361
148
114
28
412
169
123
210
142
114
28
164
454
121
485
142
114
28
1041
169
123
210
142
114
28
164
169
123
213
143
113
29
165
60
60
60
60
80
120
60
600
600
600
600
800
1,200
600
60
60
60
60
80
120
60
60
60
60
60
80
120
60
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
39,000
56,000
86,000
2,500
2,000
180
86,000
75,000
21,000
65,000
20,000
20,000
1,800
75,000
58,000
2,100
1,600,000
2,000
2,000
180
1,600,000
7,500
2,100
6,500
2,000
2,000
180
7,500
15,000
4,250
13,500
4,050
4,000
365
15,000
Non-
detect
(%)
94
92
83
88
100
100
91
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
94
95
92
100
100
100
95
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
152
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX C
puiim immn
N-
Nitrosodimethylamine
N-Nitrosodi-n-
propylamine
N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
1,948
1,531
1,691
1,484
2,087
378
1,725
1,553
1,219
1,350
1,188
1,667
303
1,375
1,647
1,316
1,564
1,188
1,667
303
1,482
14,106
11,195
13,260
10,138
14,190
2,575
12,635
2,584
1,984
2,468
1,762
2,014
448
2,272
Median
(ppb)
348
325
325
450
500
378
350
278
260
260
358
415
303
280
300
260
293
358
415
303
295
2,525
2,200
2,475
3,050
3,500
2,575
2,475
458
550
500
600
1,600
448
500
SD
(ppb)
3,296
1,891
3,619
2,112
2,376
110
2,850
2,616
1,502
2,879
1,693
1,891
88
2,265
2,615
1,569
2,904
1,693
1,891
88
2,285
22,640
13,333
24,728
14,452
16,126
742
19,622
4,336
2,373
4,661
2,305
2,103
74
3,667
RSD
(%)
169
124
214
142
114
29
165
169
123
213
143
113
29
165
159
119
186
143
113
29
154
161
119
186
143
114
29
155
168
120
189
131
104
17
161
150
150
150
150
205
300
150
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
120
120
120
120
165
240
120
1,000
1,000
480
1,050
1,400
2,050
480
195
200
200
200
270
395
195
19,000
5,500
17,000
5,000
5,000
455
19,000
15,000
4,250
13,500
4,050
4,000
365
15,000
15,000
4,250
13,500
4,050
4,000
365
15,000
130,000
36,000
115,000
34,500
34,000
3,100
130,000
25,000
7,000
22,000
6,500
5,500
500
25,000
Non-
detect
(%)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
96
100
100
100
99
94
87
83
75
60
50
87
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
My 2010
153
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
154 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX D - DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF INDIVIDUAL
AROCLOR RESULTS
... ueuin , mean meuiaii ou t\ou IVMM .. , ..* ... .
Analyte ,£ of ,__.. ... ,__.. ..... ... Max ppb) detect
Aroclor 1016
Aroclor 1221
Aroclor 1232
Aroclor 1242
Aroclor 1248
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
8,059
2,889
2,430
1,426
322
360
4,591
8,059
2,889
2,430
1,426
322
360
4,591
8,059
2,889
2,430
1,426
322
360
4,591
8,197
2,925
2,430
1,426
322
360
4,656
8,340
3,120
3,072
2,114
322
360
4,935
163
140
158
188
175
360
160
163
140
158
188
175
360
160
163
140
158
188
175
360
160
163
140
158
188
175
360
160
175
155
158
188
175
360
168
52,968
15,171
5,831
2,364
382
339
34,146
52,968
15,171
5,831
2,364
382
339
34,146
52,968
15,171
5,831
2,364
382
339
34,146
52,967
15,169
5,831
2,364
382
339
34,150
52,954
15,211
6,584
3,971
382
339
34,173
657
525
240
166
119
94
744
657
525
240
166
119
94
744
657
525
240
166
119
94
744
646
519
240
166
119
94
733
635
488
214
188
119
94
693
60
60
60
95
80
120
60
60
60
60
95
80
120
60
60
60
60
95
80
120
60
60
60
60
95
80
120
60
60
60
60
95
80
120
60
375,000
95,000
21,500
5,500
1,000
600
375,000
375,000
95,000
21,500
5,500
1,000
600
375,000
375,000
95,000
21,500
5,500
1,000
600
375,000
375,000
95,000
21,500
5,500
1,000
600
375,000
375,000
95,000
21,500
11,000
1,000
600
375,000
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
96
97
100
100
100
100
98
70
74
83
88
100
100
77
My 2010
155
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
... Depth
Analyte | (fP
Aroclor 1254
Aroclor 1260
Aroclor 1262
Aroclor 1268
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
0-1
1-3
3-5
5-7
7-9
9-11
All
Number
of
results
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
50
39
24
8
5
2
128
Mean
(ppb)
50,583
8,075
6,426
4,101
1,191
1,735
23,754
5,366
12,080
6,467
4,349
742
810
7,303
2,908
6,285
3,716
2,294
442
435
3,915
1,019
2,669
1,401
761
322
288
1,539
Median
(ppb)
183
155
150
188
175
1,735
168
155
140
158
188
175
810
155
145
140
155
188
175
435
153
143
140
155
180
175
288
148
SD
(ppb)
353,472
47,983
24,639
10,676
1,892
2,284
222,439
35,306
73,613
26,591
11,580
1,319
976
47,428
18,346
37,589
13,607
5,943
649
445
24,312
5,282
15,178
4,545
1,713
382
237
9,178
RSD
(%)
699
594
383
260
159
132
936
658
609
411
266
178
120
649
631
598
366
259
147
102
621
518
569
324
225
119
82
596
Min
(ppb)
60
60
60
95
80
120
60
60
60
60
95
80
120
60
60
60
60
95
80
120
60
60
60
60
95
80
120
60
Max (ppb)
2,500,000
300,000
120,000
30,500
4,500
3,350
2,500,000
250,000
460,000
130,000
33,000
3,100
1,500
460,000
130,000
235,000
65,000
17,000
1,600
750
235,000
37,500
95,000
21,500
5,000
1,000
455
95,000
Non-
detect
(%)
66
82
83
100
100
100
78
76
85
83
75
80
50
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Non-detects set to zero when calculating totals, but Vz reporting limit for individual Aroclors. Therefore,
individual Aroclor maximums may be higher than total Aroclor maximum.
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
156
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX E - REFERENCES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
CONDUCTED IN THE TRENTON CHANNEL BETWEEN 1985 AND
2007
Bedford, K.W., G. Koltun, O. Wai, C.M. Libicki, and R. Van Evra, III. September 1987.
A Stochastic/Deterministic Methodology for Estimating Resuspension Potential and
Risk and Its Application to the Trenton Channel of the Detroit River. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He,
Michigan. 75pp. (R005852 REP-514).
Bedford, K.W., C.M. Libicki, G. Koltun, and R. Van Evra, III. 1988. The Development
and Testing of a Stochastic/Deterministic Methodology for Estimating Resuspension
Potential and Risk. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr. (Ed.), Integrated Study of Exposure and
Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper Connecting Channels: Interim
Results, Appendix D, 50 pp. Final Report. Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels
Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities C, G, and H. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research
Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 1,200 pp.
(R005852 REP-624).
Bedford, K.W., G. Koltun, O. Wai, C.M. Libicki, and R. Van Evra, III. 1988. A
Stochastic/Deterministic Methodology for Estimating Resuspension Potential and Risk
and Its Application to the Trenton Channel of the Detroit River. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr.
(Ed.), Integrated Study of Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the
Upper Connecting Channels: Interim Results, Appendix H, 75 pp. Final Report.
Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in
Activities C, G, and H. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research
Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 1,200pp. (R005852 REP-624).
Bedford, K.W., C.M. Libicki, and J.F. Lynch. December 1990. The Interpretation and
Evaluation of 3 MHz Acoustic Backscatter Device for Measuring Benthic Boundary
Layer Sediment Dynamics. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr., K.R. Rygwelski, and V.E. Smith
(Eds.), Procedures for the Assessment of Contaminated Sediments in the Laurentian
Great Lakes as Developed in the Detroit River-Trenton Channel In-Place Pollutants
Study, 1985-1988, Appendix A, pp. A1-A41. Michigan Department of Natural
Resources, Surface Water Quality Division, Great Lakes Environmental Assessment
Section, Lansing, Michigan. 540pp. (R005852 ERS-3738).
Besser, J.M., J.P. Giesy, J.A. Kubitz, D.A. Verbrugge, T.G. Coon, and W.E. Braselton.
1996. Assessment of Sediment Quality in Dredged and Undredged Areas of the
Trenton Channel of the Detroit River, Michigan USA, using the Sediment Quality
Triad. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 22(3):683-696.
My 2010 157
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Carter, D.S., H. Shirashi, E.T. Furlong, and R.A. Kites. 1988. Organic contaminant
measurements in the Detroit River. U.S.EPA, Office of Research and Development,
ERL-Duluth MN and LLRS-Grosse lie, MI.32 pp.
Carter, D.S. and R.A. Kites. 1992. Unusual Alkylphenols and Their Transport in the
Trenton Channel of the Detroit River, Michigan. Journal of Great Lakes Research,
18(1):125-131. (813524 LE-71).
Carter, D.S. and R.A. Kites. July 1992. Fate and Transport of Detroit River Derived
Pollutants Throughout Lake Erie. Environmental Science and Technology, 26(7):1333-
1341. (813524 LE-69).
Caulfield, D.D. 1994. Final ReportPrecision Digital Hydroacoustic Sediment
Characterization/Analysis in the Trenton Channel of the Detroit River. Caulfield
Engineering. Oyama, British Columbia.
Caulfield, D.D. and J.C. Filkins. November 1997. Micro Survey-Acoustic Core and
Physical Core Inter-Relations With Spatial Variation, Trenton Channel of the Detroit
River, Volumes I, II, and III. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Research
Laboratory, Mid-Continent Ecology Division-Duluth, Large Lakes and Rivers
Forecasting Research Branch, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan.
468pp. (Inhouse ERS-4711).
Caulfield, D. and J.C. Filkins. March 1999. Micro Survey-Acoustic Core and Physical
Core Inter-Relations With Spatial Variation, Trenton Channel of the Detroit River,
Volumes I, II, and III. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National
Program Office, Chicago, Illinois. EPA-905/R-99/003, 464 pp. (Inhouse ERS-4773).
Caulfield, D.D. and J.C. Filkins. June 1999. Acoustic Techniques for the Mapping of the
Distribution of Contaminated Sediments. Northeastern Geology and Environmental
Sciences, 21(1/2): 130-135. (Inhouse RPT-1401).
Ciborowski, J. 2003. Lessons from sentinel invertebrates (mayflies and other species).
In: Hartig, J.H. (ed.) Honoring Our Detroit River: Caring for Our Home. Wayne State
University Press, Detroit, MI.
Ciborowski, J., 2007a. Indicator: Hexagenia density and distribution in the Detroit River.
In: Hartig, J.H., M.A. Zarull, J.J.H. Ciborowski, J.E. Gannon, E. Wilke, G. Norwood,
and A. Vincent, eds. 2007. State of the Strait: Status and Trends of Key Indicators.
Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research, Occasional Publication No. 5,
University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada. 12/29/07 at:
http://www.epa.gov/med/grosseile site/indicators/sos/sos-report.pdf
158 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX E
Ciborowski, J. 2007b. Chironomid Abundance and Deformities. In: Hartig, J.H., M.A.
Zarull, J.J.H. Ciborowski, J.E. Gannon, E. Wilke, G. Norwood, and A. Vincent, eds.
2007. State of the Strait: Status and Trends of Key Indicators.Great Lakes Institute for
Environmental Research, Occasional Publication No. 5, University of Windsor,
Ontario, Canada. 12/29/07 at: http://www.epa.gov/med/grosseile_site/indicators/sos/sos-
report.pdf
Ciborowski, J. 2007c. Oligochaete Densities and Distribution. In: Hartig, J.H., M.A.
Zarull, J.J.H. Ciborowski, J.E. Gannon, E. Wilke, G. Norwood, and A. Vincent, eds.
2007. State of the Strait: Status and Trends of Key Indicators. Great Lakes Institute for
Environmental Research, Occasional Publication No. 5, University of Windsor,
Ontario, Canada. 12/29/07 at: http://www.epa.gov/med/grosseile site/indicators/sos/sos-
report.pdf
Conestoga-Rovers and Associates. 1996. Final Design Report: Monguogon Creek Site,
Riverview, Michigan. October 1996. Romulus, MI.
Corkum, L.D., J.J.H. Ciborowski, and Z.E. Kovats. 1995. Adult insects as biomonitors
of ecosystem health in Great Lakes Areas of Concern. Pp. 31-44 In: Butterworth, F.
(ed.) Biomonitors and Biomarkers as Indicators of Environmental Change. Plenum
Proceedings, 1994 Conference of the International Association for Great Lakes
Research, Windsor, Ontario, June 1994.
DePinto, J.V., T.L. Theis, T.C. Young, D. Vanetti, M. Waltman, and S. Leach. April
1987. Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants: Sediment Exposure
Potential and Particle-Contaminant Interactions. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr. (Ed.), Integrated
Study of Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper
Connecting Channels: Interim Results, Appendix A, 119pp. Upper Great Lakes
Connecting Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities C, G, and H.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He,
Michigan. 700pp. (812570 ERS-2524).
DePinto, J.V., T.L. Theis, T.C. Young, D. Vanetti, M. Waltman, and S. Leach. 1988.
Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants: Sediment Exposure Potential
and Particle-Contaminant Interactions. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr. (Ed.), Integrated Study of
Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper Connecting
Channels: Interim Results, Appendix A, 125 pp. Final Report. Upper Great Lakes
Connecting Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities C, G, and H.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He,
Michigan. 1,200pp. (812570 REP-624).
My 2010 159
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
DePinto, J.V., T.L. Theis, T.C. Young, D. Vanetti, M. Waltman, and S. Leach.
December 1989. Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants: Sediment
Exposure Potential and Particle-Contaminant Interactions. Clarkson University,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Potsdam, New York. 160 pp.
(812570 ERS-2735).
DePinto, J.V., T.L. Theis, T.C. Young, D. Vanetti, M. Waltman, and S. Leach.
December 1990. Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants: Sediment
Exposure Potential and Particle-Contaminant Interactions. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr., K.R.
Rygwelski, and V.E. Smith (Eds.), Procedures for the Assessment of Contaminated
Sediments in the Laurentian Great Lakes as Developed in the Detroit River-Trenton
Channel In-Place Pollutants, 1985-1988, Appendix C, pp. C1-C31. Michigan
Department of Natural Resources, Surface Water Quality Division, Great Lakes
Environmental Assessment Section, Lansing, Michigan. 540pp. (812570 ERS-
3738).
Drouillard, K.G., S. Reitsma, M. Tomczak, and G.D. Haffner. 2003. Biomonitors,
surficial sediments, and food web datasets on the Detroit River. Appendix 20. In:
Heidtke, T.M., Hartig, J., and Yu, B. Evaluating Ecosystem Results of PCB Control
Measures Within the Detroit River-Western Lake Erie Basin, A Report Based on a
Canada-United States Workshop Held at University of Windsor's Great Lakes Institute,
June 18-19, 2002, Windsor, Ontario, Canada. Accessed 11/27/07 at:
http://www.tellusnews.com/epa/appn20. shtml
Drouillard, K. G., M. Tomczak, S. Reitsmsa, and G. D. Haffner. 2006. A river-wide
survey of poly chlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), poly cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs), and selected organochlorine pesticide residues in sediments of the Detroit
River-1999. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 32:209-226.
Detroit River Canadian Cleanup (DRCC) 2006. 2006 Status of Beneficial Use
Impairments in the Detroit River. Windsor, Ontario.
Ellison, Rose, USEPA, 2007. Personal communication.
Fallen M.E. and F.J. Horvath. 1985. Preliminary assessment of contaminants in the soft
sediments of the Detroit River. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 11:373-378.
Farara, D.G. and A.J. Burt. 1993. BEAK Consultants Report: Environmental
Assessment of Detroit River Sediments and Benthic Macroinvertebrate Communities-
1991. Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy. London, Ontario.
Fallen, M.E. and F.J. Horvath. 1985. Preliminary Assessment of Contaminants in Soft
Sediment of the Detroit River. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 11: 373-378.
160 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX E
Froese D.L., D.A. Verbrugge, S.A. Snyder, F. Tilton, and J.P. Giesy. 1996. PCBs in the
Detroit River Water Column. Pesticide Research Center, Department of Fisheries and
Wildlife, Institute for Environmental Toxicology, Michigan State University. East
Lansing, MI.
Furlong, E.T., D.S. Carter, and R.A. Kites. 1988. Organic Contaminants in Sediments
From the Trenton Channel of the Detroit River, Michigan. Journal of Great Lakes
Research, 14(4):489-501. (813524 LE-236).
Furlong, E.T., D.S. Carter, and R.A. Kites. 1988. Organic Contaminant Measurements
in Detroit River Sediments. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr. (Ed.), Integrated Study of Exposure and
Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper Connecting Channels: Interim
Results, Appendix E, 41 pp. Final Report. Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels
Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities C, G, and H. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research
Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 1,200 pp.
(813524 REP-624).
Furlong, E.T., M.H. Hermanson, D.S. Carter, and R.A. Kites. December 1990. Organic
Contaminant Measurements in Detroit River Sediments. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr., K.R.
Rygwelski, and V.E. Smith (Eds.), Procedures for the Assessment of Contaminated
Sediments in the Laurentian Great Lakes as Developed in the Detroit River-Trenton
Channel In-Place Pollutants Study, 1985-1988, Appendix D, pp. D1-D20. Michigan
Department of Natural Resources, Surface Water Quality Division, Great Lakes
Environmental Assessment Section, Lansing, Michigan. 540pp. (813524 ERS-
3738).
Giesy, J.P. December 1990. Bioassay: Photobacterium phosphoruem Bioluminescence
Inhibition (Microtox). In: R.G. Kreis, Jr., K.R. Rygwelski, and V.E. Smith (Eds.),
Procedures for the Assessment of Contaminated Sediments in the Laurentian Great
Lakes as Developed in the Detroit River-Trenton Channel In-Place Pollutants Study,
1985-1988, Appendix F, pp. F1-F37. Michigan Department of Natural Resources,
Surface Water Quality Division, Great Lakes Environmental Assessment Section,
Lansing, Michigan. 540pp. (812562 ERS-3738).
Giesy, J.P. December 1990. Bioassay: Daphnia magna Acute Lethality. In: R.G.
Kreis, Jr., K.R. Rygwelski, and V.E. Smith (Eds.), Procedures for the Assessment of
Contaminated Sediments in the Laurentian Great Lakes as Developed in the Detroit
River-Trenton Channel In-Place Pollutants Study, 1985-1988, Appendix L, pp. L1-L36.
Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Surface Water Quality Division, Great
Lakes Environmental Assessment Section, Lansing, Michigan. 540 pp. (812562
ERS-3738).
My 2010 161
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Giesy, J.P. December 1990. Bioassay: Chironomus tentans Growth Inhibition. In:
R.G. Kreis, Jr., K.R. Rygwelski, and V.E. Smith (Eds.), Procedures for the Assessment
of Contaminated Sediments in the Laurentian Great Lakes as Developed in the Detroit
River-Trenton Channel In-Place Pollutants Study, 1985-1988, Appendix O, pp. Ol-
O19. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Surface Water Quality Division,
Great Lakes Environmental Assessment Section, Lansing, Michigan. 540 pp. (812562
ERS-3738).
Giesy, J.P., R.L. Graney, J.L. Newsted, and C.J. Rosiu. April 1987. Toxicity of In-Place
Pollutants to Benthic Invertebrates. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr. (Ed.), Integrated Study of
Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper Connecting
Channels: Interim Results, Appendix E, 68 pp. Upper Great Lakes Connecting
Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities C, G, and H. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He,
Michigan. 700pp. (812562 ERS-2524).
Giesy, J.P., C.J. Rosiu, R.L. Graney, J.L. Newsted, and A. Benda. September 1987.
Detroit River Sediment Toxicity. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes
Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 45pp. (812562 REP-512).
Giesy, J.P., C.J. Rosiu, R.L. Graney, J.L. Newsted, A. Benda, R.G. Kreis, Jr., and F.J.
Horvath. 1988. Toxicity of Detroit River Sediment Interstitial Water to the Bacterium
Photobacterium phosphoreum. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 14(4):502-513.
(812562 LE-251).
Giesy, J.P., R.L. Graney, J.L. Newsted, C.J. Rosiu, and A. Benda. 1988. A Comparison
of Three Sediment Bioassay Methods for Detroit River Sediments. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr.
(Ed.), Integrated Study of Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the
Upper Connecting Channels: Interim Results, Appendix J, 67 pp. Final Report. Upper
Great Lakes Connecting Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities
C, G, and H. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research
Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 1,200pp. (812562 REP-624).
Giesy, J.P., C.J. Rosiu, R.L. Graney, J.L. Newsted, and A. Benda. 1988. Detroit River
Sediment Toxicity. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr. (Ed.), Integrated Study of Exposure and
Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper Connecting Channels: Interim
Results, Appendix I, 45 pp. Final Report. Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels
Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities C, G, and H. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research
Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 1,200 pp.
(812562 REP-624).
162 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX E
Giesy, J.P. and R.A. Hoke. May 1988. Sediment Toxicity Bioassessment: Rationale for
Species Selection and Test Design. Presented at the 31st Conference on Great Lakes
Research, International Association for Great Lakes Research (IAGLR), McMaster
University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. May 16-20, 1988. (812562 RPT-1337,
Abstract).
Giesy, J.P., R.L. Graney, J.L. Newsted, C.J. Rosiu, A. Benda, R.G. Kreis, Jr., and F.J.
Horvath. June 1988. A Comparison of Three Sediment Bioassay Methods for Detroit
River Sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 7(6):483-498. (812562
LE-248).
Giesy, J.P. and R.A. Hoke. 1989. Freshwater Sediment Toxicity Bioassessment:
Rationale for Species Selection and Test Design. Journal of Great Lakes Research,
15(4):539-569. (812562 RPT-1592).
Giesy, J.P., R.L. Graney, J.L. Newsted, and C.J. Rosiu. 1989. Toxicity of Sediments in
the Detroit River, Michigan: 1986. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes
Research Station, Grosse lie, Michigan. 174pp. (812562 REP-600).
Great Lakes Environmental Center (GLEC) & Limno-Tech, Inc., 2006. Great Lakes
Connecting Channels Data Evaluation and Trend Analysis Report, September 18, 2006.
Prepared for MDEQ Water Bureau, Contract Number: 07IB 1001643. Report #
MI/DEQ/WB-06/092.Great Lakes Environmental Center (GLEC). 2007. Great Lakes
Connecting Channels Data 2005 Annual Data Report, July 17, 2007. Prepared for
MDEQ Water Bureau, Contract Number: 07IB 1001643. Report # MI/DEQ/WB-
07/066.
Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research (GLIER), 2002. Detroit River
Modelling and Management Framework: Interpretive Report. Prepared for the Detroit
River Canadian Cleanup Committee by the Great Lakes Institute for Environmental
Research, University of Windsor. Windsor, ONT. Accessed online 18 December 2007
at:
http://athena.uwindsor.ca/units/glier/Detroit River Project/DetroitRiver.nsf/DatabaseS
et?OpenFrameSet&Frame=bodyView&Src=%2Funits%2Fglier%2FDetroit_River_Proj
ect%2FDetroitRiver.nsP/o2F46eb8a9b3alcdd6e85256a4100530e4e!ReadForm%26Tem
plateTvpe%3D2%26TargetUNID%3D70B574A32DCE373185256A41004F545C%26
AutoFramed
Hamdy, Y. L. and Post. 1985. Distribution of Mercury, Trace Organics and Other Heavy
Metals in Detroit River Sediments. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 11(3):353-365.
My 2010 163
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Hartig, J. 2003. Sediment remediation in the Detroit River-Western Lake Erie watershed.
Appendix 6. In: Heidtke, T.M., Hartig, J., and Yu, B. Evaluating Ecosystem Results of
PCB Control Measures Within the Detroit River-Western Lake Erie Basin, A Report
Based on a Canada-United States Workshop Held at University of Windsor's Great
Lakes Institute, June 18-19, 2002, Windsor, Ontario, Canada.
Hudson, L.A. and J.J.H. Ciborowski. 1996a. Spatial and taxonomic variation in
incidence of mouthpart deformities in midge larvae (Diptera: Chironomidae:
Chironomini). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 53: 297-304.
Hudson, L.A. and J.J.H. Ciborowski. 1996b. Teratogenic and genotoxic responses of
larval Chironomus salinaritus group (Diptera: Chironomidae) to contaminated
sediment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 15:1375-1381.
Kannan, K., J.L. Kober, Y-K. Kang, S. Masunaga, J. Nakanishi, A. Ostaszewski, and J.P.
Giesy. 2001. Polychlorinated naphthalenes, dibenzo-p-dioxins, and dibenzofurans as
well as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and alkylphenols in sediment from the
Detroit and Rouge Rivers, Michigan, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry,
20: 1878-1889.
Kenaga, D.E. 1986. Concentrations of PCBs in sediment depositional zones in the
Upper Detroit River along the United States shore, July 8 and 9, 1986, and the 18th
Street Sewer System, Detroit, Michigan, July 14 and 15, 1986. October 1986 Staff
Report. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Surface Water Quality Division,
Great Lakes and Environmental Assessment Section, 13pp.
Kenaga, D.E. and J. Crum. 1987. Sediment PCB concentrations along the U.S. shore of
the upper Detroit River, and sediment and water PCB concentrations in the two City of
Detroit combined sewers with overflows to the Detroit River, July and October, 1986
and January, 1987. March 1987 Staff Report. Michigan Department of Natural
Resources, Surface Water Quality Division, 16 pp.
Kovats, Z.E. and J.J.H. Ciborowski. 1989. Aquatic insect adults as indicators of
organochlorine contamination. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 15(4):623-634.
Kovats, Z.E. and J.J.H. Ciborowski. 1993. Organochlorine contaminant concentrations in
caddisfly adults (Trichoptera) collected from Great Lakes connecting channels.
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 27:135-1
Kreis, R.G., Jr. (Ed.). April 1987. Integrated Study of Exposure and Biological Effects
of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper Connecting Channels: Interim Results. Upper
Great Lakes Connecting Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities
C, G, and H. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research
Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 700 pp. (812562, 812569, 812570, 812575, 813524,
R005796, R005809, and R005852 ERS-2524).
164 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX E
Kreis, R.G., Jr. (Ed.). 1988. Integrated Study of Exposure and Biological Effects of In-
Place Pollutants in the Upper Connecting Channels: Interim Results. Final Report.
Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in
Activities C, G, and H. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research
Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 1,200 pp. (812562, 812569, 812570, 812575, 813524,
R005796, R005809, and R005852 REP-624).
Kreis, R.G., Jr. (Ed.). December 1988. Integrated Study of Exposure and Biological
Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Detroit River, Michigan: An Upper Great Lakes
Connecting Channel. Final Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great
Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, Illinois. 153 pp. (812562, 812569, 812570,
812575, 813524, R005796 and R005852 REP-584).
Kreis, R.G., Jr. August 1999. Trenton Channel/Detroit River Sediment Assessment and
Remediation. In: R. Krantzberg, J. Hartig, L. Maynard, K. Burch, and C. Ancheta
(Eds), Deciding When to Intervene Data Interpretation Tools for Making Sediment
Management Decisions Beyond Source Control, Appendix 10, pp. 57-59. Sediment
Priority Action Committee, International Joint Commission, Great Lakes Water Quality
Board, Windsor, Ontario, Canada. 87pp. (Inhouse IJC-1999.2).
Kreis, R.G., Jr. 2003. Beneficial Use Impairment #13 Degradation of Phytoplankton
and Zooplankton Populations. In: D. Dolan and P. Murray (Eds.), Proceedings of the
Workshop on Delisting Criteria From the Detroit River Area of Concern, pp. 64-72.
Detroit River Canadian Cleanup Committee, Windsor, Ontario, Canada. 10 pp.
(Inhouse No Copies Available).
Lick, W., J. McNeil, Y.J. Xu, C. Taylor. 1995. Measurements of the Resuspension and
Erosion of Sediments in Rivers. Department of Mechanical and Environmental
Engineering, University of California. Santa Barbara, CA.
Maccubbin, A.E. April 1987. Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants: Neoplasia in
Fish and Related Causal Factors in the Detroit River System. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr. (Ed.),
Integrated Study of Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper
Connecting Channels: Interim Results, Appendix H, 36 pp. Upper Great Lakes
Connecting Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities C, G, and H.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He,
Michigan. 700pp. (812575 ERS-2524).
My 2010 165
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Maccubbin, A.E. 1988. Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants: Neoplasia in Fish and
Related Causal Factors in the Detroit River System. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr. (Ed.),
Integrated Study of Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper
Connecting Channels: Interim Results, Appendix Q, 35 pp. Final Report. Upper Great
Lakes Connecting Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities C, G,
and H. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He,
Michigan. 1,200pp. (812575 REP-624).
Maccubbin, A.E. 1989. Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants: Neoplasia in Fish and
Related Causal Factors in the Detroit River System. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-
Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 49pp. (812575 REP-
588).
Maccubbin, A.E. December 1990. Bioassay: Ames Bacterial (Salmonella)
Mutagenicity. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr., K.R. Rygwelski, and V.E. Smith (Eds.), Procedures
for the Assessment of Contaminated Sediments in the Laurentian Great Lakes as
Developed in the Detroit River-Trenton Channel In-Place Pollutants Study, 1985-1988,
Appendix G, pp. G1-G5. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Surface Water
Quality Division, Great Lakes Environmental Assessment Section, Lansing, Michigan.
(812575 ERS-3738).
Maccubbin, A.E. December 1990. Bioassay: Rainbow Trout (Salmo gairdneri) Egg
Development. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr., K.R. Rygwelski, and V.E. Smith (Eds.), Procedures
for the Assessment of Contaminated Sediments in the Laurentian Great Lakes as
Developed in the Detroit River-Trenton Channel In-Place Pollutants Study, 1985-1988,
Appendix Q, pp. Q1-Q13. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Surface Water
Quality Division, Great Lakes Environmental Assessment Section, Lansing, Michigan.
(812575 ERS-3738).
Maccubbin, A.E. December 1990. Bioassay: Fish Tumor Incidence: Field Assessment
of Resident Fish. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr., K.R. Rygwelski, and V.E. Smith (Eds.),
Procedures for the Assessment of Contaminated Sediments in the Laurentian Great
Lakes as Developed in the Detroit River-Trenton Channel In-Place Pollutants Study,
1985-1988, Appendix R, pp. R1-R20. Michigan Department of Natural Resources,
Surface Water Quality Division, Great Lakes Environmental Assessment Section,
Lansing, Michigan. 540pp. (812575 ERS-3738).
Maccubbin, A.E., J.J. Black, and J.C. Harshbarger. July 1987. A Case Report for
Hepatocellular Neoplasia in Bowfin, Amia calva L. Journal of Fish Diseases,
10(4):329-331. (812575 LE-724).
166 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX E
Maccubbin, A.E., J.J. Black, and J.C. Harshbarger. April 1987. A Case Report of
Hepatocellular Neoplasia in Bowfin Amia calva, L. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr. (Ed.),
Integrated Study of Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper
Connecting Channels: Interim Results, Appendix I, 7 pp. Upper Great Lakes
Connecting Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities C, G, and H.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He,
Michigan. 700pp. (812575 ERS-2524).
Maccubbin, A.E., J. Black, and J.C. Harshbarger. 1988. A Case Report of
Hepatocellular Neoplasia in Bowfin, Amia calva L. In: R.G. Kreis, Jr. (Ed.),
Integrated Study of Exposure and Biological Effects of In-Place Pollutants in the Upper
Connecting Channels: Interim Results, Appendix R, 3 pp. Final Report. Upper Great
Lakes Connecting Channels Study Activities Workgroup for Tasks in Activities C, G,
and H. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He,
Michigan. 1,200pp. (812575 REP-624).
Maccubbin, A.E. and N. Ersing. May 1988. Tumors in Fish From the Detroit River.
Presented at the 31st Conference on Great Lakes Research, International Association
for Great Lakes Research (IAGLR), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
May 16-20, 1988. (812575 LE-728, Abstract).
Maccubbin, A.E., J.J. Black, and B.P. Dunn. February 1990. 32P-Postlabeling Detection
of DNA Adducts in Fish From Chemically Contaminated Waterways. Science of the
Total Environment, 94(l/2):89-104. (812575 LE-725).
Maccubbin, A.E. and N. Ersing. July 1991. Tumors in Fish From the Detroit River.
Hydrobiologia, 219(1):301-306. (812575 LE-730).
Maccubbin, A.E., N. Ersing, and M.E. Frank. 1991. Mutagenicity of Sediments From
the Detroit River. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 17(3):314-321. (812575 LE-
727).
Marvin, C., M.Alaee, S. Painter, M. Charlton, P. Kauss, P. Kolic, K. MacPherson, D.
Tekeuchi, and E. Reiner. 2002. Persistent organic pollutants in Detroit River suspended
sediments: polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans, dioxin-like
polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated naphthalenes. Chemosphere, 49: 111-
120.
Metcalfe, Chris D., T.L. Metcalfe, G. Riddle and G.D. Haffner. 1997. Aromatic
Hydrocarbons in Biota from the Detroit River and Western Lake Erie. Journal of Great
Lakes Research, 23(2): 160-168.
My 2010 167
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. 1991. Stage 1 Report: Remedial
Action Plan for Detroit River Area of Concern. MDEQ, Surface Water Quality
Division. Lansing, MI.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. 1993-1996. Identify sediment
depositional areas and delineate contaminated sediment zones in the Trenton Channel.
MDEQ, GLNPO, EPA Region 5, USACE, and EPA Large Lakes and Rivers Research
Station.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). 1996. 1996 Detroit River
Remedial Action Plan Report. Surface Water Quality Division, Lansing, Michigan.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), 2005. Qualitative Biological
and Habitat Survey Protocols for Wadable Streams and Rivers. Surface Water Quality
Division, Great Lakes and Environmental Assessment Section Procedure 51.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), 2006a. Water Quality and
Pollution Control in Michigan: 2006 Sections 303(d), 305(b) and 314 Integrated
Report. Prepared by: MDEQ Surface Water Division, Water Bureau, Lansing, MI.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), 2006b. Guidance for
Delisting Michigan's Great Lakes Areas of Concern.
Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), 1991. Detroit River Remedial
Action Plan, Stage 1. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Surface Water
Quality Division.
Ostaszewski, A. 1997. Results of the Trenton Channel Project Sediment Surveys 1993-
1996. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Surface Water Quality Division
- Staff Report 97/084. Page:71 Restoration Criteria Review for the Detroit River Area
of Concern
Rosiu, C.J., J.P. Giesy, and R.G. Kreis, Jr. 1989. Toxicity of Vertical Sediments in the
Trenton Channel, Detroit River, Michigan to Chironomus tentans
(Insecta:Chironomidae). Journal of Great Lakes Research, 15(4):570-580. (812562
LE-1136).
Rossmann, R., E. Meriwether, and J.A. Barres. December 1987. Data Report on Trace
Elements in Detroit River Sediments Collected in 1987. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-
Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 24 pp. (Inhouse REP-
709).
168 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX E
Rygwelski, K.R. and V.E. Smith (Eds.). 1987. Summary Report: An Integrated
Approach to a Study of Contaminants and Toxicity in Monroe Harbor (River Raisin),
Michigan, A Great Lakes Area of Concern. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth,
Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan. National Technical Information
Service Publication PB 88-126 008, 182 pp. (810232, 810775, 810776, 810079,
810808, 811578, 811731 and 68-01-7170 LE-1386).
Rygwelski, K.R., J.L. Martin, V.E. Smith, W.A. Frez, J.E. Rathbun, S.G. Rood, and J.A.
Schneider. March 1987. Input-Output Mass Balance Models of Toxic and
Conventional Pollutants in the Trenton Channel, Detroit River: Activities Cl and F.5
of the Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels Study (UGLCCS). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research
Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 82 pp.
(Inhouse LE-1161).
Schloesser, D.W., T.A. Edsall, B.A. Manny, and S.J. Nichols. 1991. Distribution of
Hexagenia nymphs and visible oil in sediments of the Upper Great Lakes Connecting
Channels. Hydrobiologia, 21 9:345- 352.
STS Consultants, 2007. Lower Rouge Sediment Investigation, Wayne County,
Michigan. Prepared for Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Water Bureau.
Surber, E. W. 1955. Results of a biological survey of the Detroit River. Michigan Water
Resources Commission.
Szalinska, E., Drouillard, K.G., Fryer, B. and Haffner, G.D. 2006. Distribution of Heavy
Metals in Sediments of the Detroit River. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 32:44-454.
Thornley, S. and V, Hamdy, 1983. An Assessment of the bottom fauna and sediments of
the Detroit River. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. ISBN 0-7743-8474-3.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), 2001. Revised Reconnaissance Study -
Section 905(b) (WRDA 86) Analysis: Environmental Dredging - Detroit River,
Michigan, 18 December 2001.
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth District v. City of Detroit, No. 01-1277,
2003. Electronic Citation: 2003 FED App. 0144P (6th Cir.) File Name: 03a0144p.06.
Accessed online 29 October 2007 at:
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/03a0144p-06.pdf
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. October 1987. Detroit River System Mass
Balance Study: An Interim Report on Input-Output Model Results for Toxic and
Conventional Pollutants (UGLCCS Activity C.I). U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-
Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 100pp. (Inhouse LE-
1382).
My 2010 169
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. November 1987. Input-Output Mass Loading
Studies of Toxic and Conventional Pollutants in Trenton Channel, Detroit River:
Activities C.I and F.5 in the Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels Study
(UGLCCS). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research
Station, Grosse He, Michigan. National Technical Information Service Publication PB
88-158 514, 310 pp. (26099 and 68-01-7176 REP-464).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. January 1988. Upper Great Lakes Connecting
Channels Study; Detroit River System Mass Budget (UGLCCS Activities C.I and F.4).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He,
Michigan. National Technical Information Service Publication PB 88-158 068, 235 pp.
(26099 and 68-01-7170 REP-580).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. September 1989. Contaminated Sediment
Studies of the Trenton Channel, Detroit River. Data Report. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research
Laboratory-Duluth, Large Lakes Research Station, Grosse He, Michigan. 79 pp. and 10
diskettes. (Inhouse REP-668).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. Fish Contaminant Monitoring in the
Trenton Channel. U.S. EPA Region 5. Unpublished.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environment Canada. 1988. Final Report:
Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels. Study Volume 2. December 1988. Pgs 447-
591.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2003. Elements of a State
Water Monitoring and Assessment Program.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2005. Factsheet: First
Legacy Act Cleanup Completed. November 2005 Trenton, MI.
UGLCCS (Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels Study). 1988. Final Report of the
Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels Study: Volume II. Chapter IX. Detroit River,
pp. 452-591, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environment Canada, Michigan
Department of Natural Resources, Ontario Ministry of the Environment.
Vaughan, R.D. and G.L. Harlow. 1965. Report on pollution of Detroit River, Michigan
waters of Lake Erie and their tributaries. U. S. Department of Health, Education and
Welfare, Public Health Service, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control.
341pp.
170 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX E
Wood, S. 2004. The use of benthic macro invertebrate community composition as a
measure of contaminant induced stress in the sediments of the Detroit River. MSc.
Thesis, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario.
My 2010 171
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
172 My 2010
-------
APPENDIX F
APPENDIX F - DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF PCB CONGENER
RESULTS
Appendix F provides descriptive statistics for PCB congener results from 16 samples
collected during Phase I and 22 samples collected during Phase II. Two distinct
laboratories analyzed the samples for PCB congeners and these laboratories did not
always use the same congener coelution scheme; as a result, there are fewer than 38
results for some congeners or coeluting groups of congeners.
PCB Congener
1
2
3
4
4+10
5
5+8
6
7
7+9
8
9
10
11
12+13
14
15
16
16+32
17
18
19
20+21+33
20+28
21+33
22
23
23+34
24
24+27
25
26
26+29
27
Nurrmer or
38
38
38
16
22
16
22
38
16
22
16
16
16
38
38
38
38
16
22
38
38
38
22
16
16
38
16
22
16
22
38
22
16
16
mean
/nnh\
(PPU)
66.3
4.0
47.3
25.8
54.2
2.0
401.8
26.4
5.1
24.1
102.0
7.1
1.7
4.0
6.9
3.9
106.0
71.2
67.0
65.8
164.9
10.1
82.7
249.3
142.7
60.2
0.6
6.3
3.1
6.8
10.8
15.8
37.3
11.1
rneaian
lnnh\
(PPU)
0.19
0.18
0.23
1.36
0.18
0.32
0.49
0.67
0.28
0.18
7.17
0.39
0.27
0.19
0.35
0.16
1.32
3.89
0.35
2.24
5.39
0.44
0.39
23.55
14.15
2.53
0.30
0.16
0.33
0.19
0.69
0.19
3.55
0.96
S>U
lnnh\
(PPU)
296.4
13.6
200.1
62.2
186.7
4.7
1229.3
80.6
12.7
77.9
239.8
17.7
4.0
13.6
16.9
13.6
381.7
136.5
195.5
154.4
381.9
23.3
227.6
478.4
276.0
137.0
0.9
17.6
6.6
17.5
24.5
42.1
74.0
21.3
•isjlfj
1 /Ol
447
341
423
241
345
240
306
305
250
324
235
249
228
343
245
353
360
192
292
235
232
231
275
192
193
227
146
278
209
256
228
267
198
191
mm
lnnh\
(PPU)
0.012
0.00977
0.0101
0.0393
0.0115
0.00718
0.078
0.0115
0.0127
0.0115
0.152
0.0104
0.02995
0.00782
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.157
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.509
0.3
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.00551
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0863
0.0216
max
/nnh\
(PPU)
1800
80
1200
247
860
19
5400
440
50.7
350
949
70.8
16
80
80
80
2200
509
870
655
1600
112
1000
1800
1040
595
3.43
80
25.9
80
122
190
281
79.5
detect
/o/ \
26.3
55.3
34.2
6.3
59.1
31.3
22.7
36.8
18.8
72.7
0.0
12.5
31.3
52.6
42.1
84.2
18.4
0.0
36.4
23.7
18.4
55.3
27.3
0.0
0.0
23.7
56.3
90.9
31.3
77.3
39.5
50.0
0.0
6.3
My 2010
173
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
28
29
30
31
32
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
40+71
41
41+64+68
42
42+59
43+49
43+73
44
44+47+65
45
45+51
46
47+48+75
48
49
50
50+53
51
52
52+73
53
54
55
56
56+60
57
58
59+62+75
60
61
61+74
62
63
64
22
22
38
38
16
16
38
38
38
38
38
22
16
16
22
16
22
22
16
22
16
22
16
38
22
16
16
22
16
22
16
22
22
38
38
16
22
38
38
16
16
16
22
22
38
16
Mean
(ppb)
173.5
6.3
4.2
171.4
55.0
1.6
4.8
3.9
52.1
3.9
4.4
17.9
107.9
23.4
92.0
69.3
32.4
130.9
12.4
141.5
236.9
19.2
55.5
13.0
56.1
69.4
164.0
6.4
38.6
7.8
279.4
304.6
21.4
4.0
6.3
112.4
98.0
4.4
5.7
23.1
60.3
1.4
106.2
6.3
8.8
105.9
Median
(ppb)
0.82
0.16
0.18
7.75
4.21
0.34
0.19
0.17
2.15
0.18
0.18
0.28
13.35
2.22
1.05
7.90
0.39
2.00
1.41
2.00
27.50
0.24
6.55
0.73
0.46
7.44
18.85
0.16
4.66
0.19
32.35
4.35
0.32
0.18
0.27
11.48
1.28
0.19
0.29
2.54
5.01
0.67
1.17
0.16
0.43
12.16
SD
(ppb)
501.6
17.6
13.6
383.1
101.1
2.9
13.8
13.6
135.2
13.6
13.6
42.6
175.0
37.9
247.3
121.2
81.0
373.8
22.2
415.9
408.4
48.1
97.9
26.4
156.1
122.9
284.7
17.6
66.9
18.0
477.8
991.7
56.2
13.6
14.8
193.8
253.3
13.6
14.3
41.7
106.3
1.7
290.4
17.6
17.9
176.1
RSD
(%)
289
278
320
223
184
175
289
349
259
344
307
238
162
162
269
175
250
286
180
294
172
250
177
204
278
177
174
277
173
230
171
326
263
339
237
172
259
310
252
180
176
118
274
282
203
166
Min
(ppb)
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.123
0.00526
0.0102
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.296
0.0496
0.0115
0.171
0.0115
0.0115
0.0278
0.0115
0.678
0.0115
0.136
0.0115
0.0115
0.155
0.465
0.0115
0.0906
0.0115
0.868
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.289
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0573
0.138
0.06
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.295
Max
(ppb)
2200
80
80
1610
371
11.2
80
80
700
80
80
180
570
109
1100
432
340
1700
80.8
1900
1450
210
353
121
700
442
1020
80
239
80
1690
4600
250
80
80
680
1100
80
80
153
359
4.2
1300
80
80
593
Non-
detect
(%)
22.7
90.9
100.0
13.2
0.0
37.5
57.9
97.4
26.3
94.7
71.1
54.5
0.0
0.0
31.8
0.0
50.0
27.3
6.3
27.3
0.0
54.5
0.0
44.7
45.5
0.0
0.0
90.9
0.0
68.2
0.0
27.3
54.5
86.8
60.5
0.0
31.8
73.7
63.2
0.0
0.0
100.0
31.8
100.0
44.7
0.0
174
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX F
65
66
66+76+80
67
68
69
70
70+74+76
71
72
77
78
79
80
81
82
83+108
83+99
84
85+116+117
85+120
86+87+97+109+119+125
86+87+97+111+117+125
88
88+121
89
89+90+101
90+101+113
91
92
93
93+95
94
95+100
96
98+102
99
100
103
104
105
106
107
107+109
108+124
110
22
16
22
38
16
38
22
16
22
38
38
38
38
16
38
38
22
16
38
16
22
16
22
16
22
16
22
16
38
38
16
22
38
16
38
38
22
22
38
38
38
38
16
22
16
22
Mean
(ppb)
6.3
222.4
111.6
7.6
1.1
3.9
188.9
407.6
27.7
4.4
12.5
3.9
4.4
0.7
1.6
29.2
7.5
112.5
63.5
39.2
37.7
129.6
184.1
0.7
6.3
5.2
408.2
167.1
32.1
46.7
3.0
432.8
4.4
136.2
5.0
8.4
121.4
6.3
4.4
3.9
83.1
118.6
11.5
8.9
5.7
249.4
Median
(ppb)
0.16
22.45
1.62
0.39
0.33
0.17
4.00
43.10
0.39
0.19
0.45
0.17
0.18
0.33
0.09
1.90
0.27
15.30
2.24
4.72
0.75
16.40
3.25
0.33
0.17
0.43
3.05
25.30
1.82
1.84
0.33
3.95
0.19
21.65
0.26
0.45
1.60
0.16
0.28
0.17
4.25
0.36
1.66
0.26
0.70
4.55
SD
(ppb)
17.6
387.5
294.1
16.4
1.8
13.6
497.9
705.9
70.1
13.6
26.7
13.6
13.6
0.8
4.6
68.5
17.7
199.1
171.9
67.5
119.3
226.2
548.3
0.8
17.6
9.1
1229.7
300.8
90.1
138.8
5.8
1352.4
13.6
239.3
13.7
17.3
389.7
17.6
13.6
13.6
242.7
492.6
21.6
19.6
10.4
717.7
RSD
(%)
282
174
264
215
169
346
264
173
253
310
214
346
311
118
293
235
236
177
271
172
317
175
298
118
278
173
301
180
281
297
193
312
307
176
273
206
321
279
306
346
292
415
189
219
183
288
Min
(ppb)
0.0115
0.586
0.0115
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.0115
1.2
0.0115
0.0115
0.00115
0.0115
0.00836
0.0115
0.00115
0.0115
0.0115
0.284
0.0115
0.112
0.0115
0.34
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.44
0.0115
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.0115
0.36
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.00115
0.0115
0.0286
0.0115
0.0188
0.0115
Max
(ppb)
80
1380
1300
80
7.11
80
2200
2500
300
80
124
80
80
2.1
27.5
350
80
722
980
234
550
802
2500
2.1
80
31.9
5400
1110
520
810
20.7
6100
80
870
80
80
1800
80
80
80
1400
2900
82.2
80
38.3
3200
Non-
detect
(%)
100.0
0.0
27.3
52.6
50.0
100.0
22.7
0.0
50.0
73.7
28.9
97.4
68.4
93.8
73.7
31.6
72.7
0.0
21.1
0.0
54.5
0.0
27.3
100.0
86.4
37.5
27.3
0.0
28.9
23.7
75.0
27.3
76.3
0.0
65.8
50.0
27.3
90.9
65.8
100.0
5.3
57.9
0.0
68.2
6.3
22.7
My 2010
175
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
110+115
111
112
113
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
126
127
128
129
129+138+160+163
130
131
131+142+165
132
132+168
133
134
134+143
135+144
135+151+154
136
137
138+163+164
139+140
139+149
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
147+149
148
150
151
152
16
16
38
22
38
22
38
22
16
16
38
38
22
38
38
38
22
16
38
16
22
16
22
38
22
16
22
16
38
38
22
16
22
22
38
16
22
16
38
38
22
16
38
38
22
38
Mean
(ppb)
188.6
0.7
4.1
7.1
6.5
6.3
176.0
6.8
0.6
0.7
4.9
13.6
9.1
2.5
58.7
41.8
31.9
138.7
19.8
2.3
8.4
51.0
205.0
5.4
30.3
9.3
266.0
48.5
149.9
7.3
977.2
2.9
1488.9
6.4
220.6
0.7
6.3
8.1
3.9
96.3
6.6
109.7
3.9
3.9
751.1
3.9
Median
(ppb)
28.30
0.33
0.22
0.17
0.25
0.16
9.15
0.19
0.33
0.33
0.22
0.24
0.19
0.13
0.33
1.73
0.19
19.90
0.87
0.36
0.19
6.81
0.52
0.36
0.19
1.48
0.51
5.77
1.57
0.59
2.65
0.45
2.45
0.16
2.42
0.33
0.16
1.32
0.17
1.38
0.19
16.20
0.17
0.18
0.70
0.18
SD
(ppb)
329.2
0.8
13.6
17.8
20.3
17.6
508.4
17.5
0.7
0.8
13.7
48.1
21.4
8.1
238.3
137.6
92.1
269.3
65.7
4.5
18.3
98.7
595.0
15.0
87.3
17.6
749.5
100.0
530.1
16.2
2857.1
5.4
4157.2
17.6
782.9
0.8
17.6
16.4
13.6
343.8
17.6
215.2
13.6
13.6
2105.5
13.6
RSD
(%)
175
118
334
251
312
282
289
259
117
118
279
353
236
318
406
329
289
194
332
194
217
193
290
277
288
189
282
206
354
221
292
184
279
276
355
118
280
202
346
357
264
196
345
345
280
345
Min
(ppb)
0.504
0.02995
0.0115
0.0115
0.00115
0.0115
0.0034
0.0115
0.02995
0.02995
0.0115
0.00115
0.0115
0.00115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.33
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.131
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0191
0.0115
0.113
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0155
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.231
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
Max
(ppb)
1190
2.1
80
80
120
80
2900
80
2.08
2.1
80
255
80
44
1400
800
390
1040
380
17.3
80
380
2500
80
370
67.7
3000
393
2700
80
12000
20.9
16000
80
4000
2.1
80
64.2
80
1900
80
838
80
80
8000
80
Non-
detect
(%)
0.0
100.0
92.1
95.5
34.2
100.0
2.6
77.3
68.8
100.0
60.5
63.2
72.7
50.0
47.4
31.6
63.6
0.0
39.5
31.3
68.2
0.0
31.8
52.6
63.6
18.8
31.8
0.0
18.4
47.4
22.7
25.0
22.7
86.4
15.8
100.0
95.5
25.0
100.0
21.1
77.3
0.0
94.7
97.4
27.3
97.4
176
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX F
153
153+168
154
155
156
156+157
157
158
158+160
159
161
162
164
165
166
167
169
170
171
171+173
172
172+192
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
180+193
181
182
182+187
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
22
16
22
38
22
16
22
16
22
38
38
38
16
16
38
38
38
38
22
16
16
22
22
38
38
38
38
38
38
22
16
38
16
22
38
38
38
38
16
38
38
38
38
16
22
38
Mean
(ppb)
1719.3
109.4
6.4
3.9
58.1
14.8
11.6
14.3
95.8
49.9
3.9
18.8
10.0
0.7
4.2
11.1
0.7
492.5
267.1
10.2
6.0
149.6
16.4
839.4
27.3
123.8
381.8
192.7
512.9
3404.8
68.5
4.0
0.7
2235.7
688.5
3.9
186.6
3.9
43.1
3.9
12.4
481.9
25.4
0.7
156.0
1586.9
Median
(ppb)
1.85
14.45
0.18
0.17
0.28
1.95
0.06
2.08
0.36
0.19
0.17
0.23
1.21
0.33
0.19
0.44
0.04
2.28
0.19
1.16
0.85
0.19
0.18
2.69
0.24
0.39
1.37
0.50
1.13
1.19
8.51
0.18
0.33
0.63
1.63
0.17
0.39
0.17
5.59
0.17
0.16
0.71
0.24
0.33
0.19
1.86
SD
(ppb)
4961.3
218.6
17.6
13.6
204.3
28.1
35.8
27.0
294.1
188.9
13.6
72.8
19.4
0.8
13.6
41.3
1.5
1957.8
792.7
20.6
12.3
438.7
48.4
3090.0
102.0
457.4
1414.5
711.8
1890.5
10070.3
140.7
13.6
0.8
6414.5
2649.7
13.6
701.7
13.6
89.7
13.6
57.5
1960.0
104.4
0.8
457.7
6866.9
RSD
(%)
289
200
273
346
352
190
309
190
307
378
346
386
194
115
321
373
218
398
297
202
203
293
295
368
373
369
370
369
369
296
205
342
118
287
385
346
376
346
208
346
464
407
411
118
293
433
Min
(ppb)
0.0115
0.254
0.0115
0.0115
0.00115
0.0314
0.00115
0.0403
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0185
0.02995
0.0097
0.00115
0.00115
0.0054
0.0115
0.02995
0.0245
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.00115
0.135
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0789
0.011
0.00115
0.0115
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.0115
Max
(ppb)
20000
853
80
80
950
107
160
103
1300
970
80
390
74.8
2.1
80
250
8
11000
3300
80.5
48.6
1800
200
15000
530
2200
7100
3500
9100
42000
552
80
2.1
25000
14000
80
3500
80
355
80
350
11000
600
2.1
1900
40000
Non-
detect
(%)
22.7
0.0
81.8
100.0
27.3
0.0
31.8
0.0
45.5
52.6
100.0
63.2
6.3
93.8
68.4
23.7
86.8
7.9
50.0
12.5
25.0
54.5
72.7
13.2
52.6
39.5
18.4
34.2
18.4
4.5
0.0
92.1
93.8
22.7
18.4
100.0
39.5
100.0
0.0
94.7
39.5
23.7
55.3
100.0
54.5
15.8
My 2010
177
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
195
196
196+203
197
198
198+199
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
38
16
22
38
22
16
22
38
38
38
16
38
38
38
38
38
38
Mean
(ppb)
317.5
8.6
3794.6
46.1
129.8
20.1
3309.3
209.9
205.8
320.7
11.4
3.9
68.6
1291.3
165.4
248.0
146.2
Median
(ppb)
0.49
1.05
0.43
0.19
0.18
3.04
0.38
0.33
0.37
0.69
1.52
0.17
0.23
1.85
0.30
0.55
0.90
SD
(ppb)
1316.2
17.8
11658.0
178.4
397.3
41.2
9977.0
816.5
789.4
1223.9
23.0
13.6
304.6
5644.5
698.3
1035.8
694.5
RSD
(%)
415
208
307
387
306
205
301
389
384
382
203
346
444
437
422
418
475
Min
(ppb)
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0287
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.02995
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
0.0115
Max
(ppb)
7500
70.6
50000
940
1700
163
42000
4300
4100
6400
90.3
80
1800
33000
4000
5900
4200
Non-
detect
(%)
39.5
12.5
27.3
55.3
59.1
0.0
31.8
39.5
36.8
39.5
6.3
100.0
55.3
18.4
52.6
34.2
28.9
SD - Standard Deviation
RSD - Relative Standard Deviation
178
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX G
APPENDIX G - PAH EQUILIBRIUM SEDIMENT BENCHMARK
TOXIC UNITS CALCULATED FOR SEDIMENT SAMPLES FROM
THE TRENTON CHANNEL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SITE
iiimmary or
Sample
Samples from the Trenton Channel Site
Substituting 1/2 SSQL for Non-detects
Substituting 0 for Non-detects
Upper 50%
Limits for
Upper 95%
Limit for
Upper 50%
Limits for
Upper 95%
Limit for
A1 0-1
A1 1-3
A1 3-5
A11 0-1
A11 1-3
A1 1 3-5
B1 0-1
B20-1
B30-1
B3 1-2
B40-1
B4 1-3
C1 0-1
C1 1-3
C1 3-5
C11 0-1
C11 1-3
C11 3-5
C11 5-7
C120-1
C12 1-3
C12 3-5
C30-1
C3 1-3
C33-5
C40-1
C4 1-3
3.38
4.04
3.06
2.05
3.39
0.40
0.11
0.13
0.17
0.56
1.27
0.24
0.32
0.26
0.56
0.61
0.42
0.42
0.46
1.25
1.56
2.33
2.57
1.44
22.20
0.40
0.35
9.30
11.11
8.42
5.63
9.32
1.10
0.30
0.36
0.48
1.53
3.49
0.65
0.88
0.71
1.54
1.67
1.16
1.16
1.27
3.45
4.29
6.40
7.07
3.96
61.04
1.10
0.96
38.90
46.45
35.19
23.55
38.96
4.62
1.26
1.51
2.00
6.39
14.58
2.72
3.66
2.98
6.45
7.00
4.87
4.85
5.30
14.43
17.93
26.75
29.55
16.55
255.24
4.61
4.00
3.38
4.04
2.94
2.05
3.39
0.38
0.04
0.01
0.01
0.03
1.25
0.15
0.13
0.11
0.34
0.22
0.23
0.26
0.38
0.89
0.30
0.09
2.57
1.35
22.09
0.40
0.33
9.30
11.11
8.08
5.63
9.32
1.04
0.10
0.04
0.03
0.09
3.45
0.43
0.37
0.30
0.93
0.61
0.64
0.72
1.03
2.45
0.82
0.26
7.07
3.71
60.75
1.10
0.91
38.90
46.45
33.81
23.55
38.96
4.35
0.44
0.15
0.13
0.39
14.41
1.78
1.55
1.26
3.87
2.54
2.66
3.00
4.33
10.26
3.44
1.08
29.55
15.53
254.03
4.61
3.80
My 2010
179
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Summary of the Equilibrium Sediment Benchmark Toxic Unit Calculations for Individual Sediment
Samples from the Trenton Channel Site
Substituting 1/2 SSQL for Non-detects
Upper 50% Upper 95%
Limits for Limit for
Substituting 0 for Non-detects
Upper 50%
Limits for
Upper 95%
Limit for
Sample ID
C43-5
C50-1
C5 1-3
C53-5
C60-1
C6 1-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C7 1-3
C80-1
C8 1-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D4 1-2
D50-1
D51-3
D60-1
E1 0-1
E1 1-3
E20-1
E2 1-3
E210-1
E30-1
E3 1-3
E60-1
E6 1-2
F1 0-1
ESBTU13
0.36
2.50
0.94
0.17
0.44
0.57
0.65
1.20
1.95
0.71
2.58
1.00
0.42
0.87
0.12
0.31
9.74
1.07
0.77
0.41
0.23
1.22
0.41
0.11
0.13
1.33
0.69
0.56
0.11
0.49
1.80
ESBTUtot
0.99
6.87
2.59
0.47
1.21
1.57
1.78
3.30
5.35
1.96
7.09
2.75
1.17
2.38
0.34
0.85
26.79
2.94
2.11
1.12
0.64
3.36
1.14
0.29
0.36
3.66
1.90
1.54
0.31
1.35
4.94
ESBTUtot
4.15
28.73
10.85
1.98
5.08
6.58
7.45
13.79
22.38
8.22
29.64
11.51
4.88
9.97
1.44
3.57
112.04
12.28
8.82
4.68
2.66
14.04
4.77
1.23
1.52
15.30
7.95
6.44
1.29
5.65
20.65
ESBTU13
0.12
2.50
0.78
0.10
0.09
0.21
0.42
1.04
1.85
0.32
2.57
0.39
0.30
0.87
0.04
0.27
9.74
0.81
0.53
0.39
0.08
1.04
0.34
0.03
0.01
1.31
0.04
0.00
0.03
0.44
0.11
ESBTUtot ESBTUtot
0.34
6.87
2.13
0.27
0.25
0.56
1.14
2.85
5.10
0.88
7.06
1.07
0.82
2.38
0.12
0.75
26.79
2.23
1.46
1.06
0.23
2.86
0.94
0.08
0.04
3.60
0.12
0.00
0.08
1.22
0.32
1.43
28.73
8.93
1.13
1.06
2.36
4.77
11.91
21.32
3.68
29.54
4.48
3.42
9.97
0.50
3.13
112.04
9.31
6.13
4.45
0.97
11.98
3.91
0.34
0.15
15.05
0.48
0.00
0.35
5.11
1.32
180
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX G
Summary of the Equilibrium Sediment Benchmark Toxic Unit Calculations for Individual Sediment
Samples from the Trenton Channel Site
Substituting 1/2 SSQL for Non-detects
Upper 50% Upper 95%
Limits for Limit for
Sample ID ESBTU13 ESBTUtf'
Substituting 0 for Non-detects
ESBTU13
Upper 50%
Limits for
ESB"'
Upper 95%
Limit for
F1 1-3
F120-1
F20-1
F21-3
F40-1
F41-3
F43-5
F50-1
F51-3
F53-5
F60-1
F6 1-3
G1 0-1
G11 0-1
G11 1-3
G11 3-5
G11 5-7
G120-1
G121-3
G130-1
G131-3
G133-5
G30-1
H1 0-1
H11 0-1
H11 1-3
H11 3-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H12 5-7
1.08
0.38
1.27
8.86
0.49
0.75
0.34
0.25
0.25
0.38
0.20
0.27
0.22
1.53
3.22
1.19
0.33
0.41
0.90
1.53
1.17
0.22
1.92
0.06
0.06
0.07
0.18
0.09
0.41
0.26
0.24
2.97
1.04
3.49
24.36
1.36
2.06
0.92
0.70
0.69
1.05
0.55
0.75
0.59
4.20
8.86
3.27
0.92
1.14
2.48
4.21
3.22
0.59
5.27
0.17
0.16
0.19
0.51
0.24
1.12
0.72
0.66
12.44
4.36
14.60
101.89
5.67
8.60
3.86
2.91
2.91
4.41
2.31
3.12
2.47
17.55
37.03
13.67
3.84
4.75
10.36
17.61
13.46
2.48
22.06
0.71
0.66
0.78
2.12
1.02
4.68
3.00
2.75
0.75
0.35
1.22
8.86
0.49
0.75
0.34
0.20
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.16
1.41
3.22
1.19
0.26
0.28
0.72
0.69
1.17
0.13
1.04
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.17
0.07
0.40
0.18
0.23
2.07
0.95
3.37
24.36
1.36
2.06
0.92
0.56
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.43
3.87
8.86
3.27
0.73
0.78
1.97
1.89
3.22
0.35
2.86
0.14
0.13
0.11
0.47
0.20
1.09
0.48
0.63
8.65
3.98
14.09
101.89
5.67
8.60
3.86
2.32
0.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.81
16.16
37.03
13.67
3.04
3.27
8.24
7.92
13.46
1.44
11.98
0.58
0.54
0.47
1.96
0.83
4.57
2.02
2.62
My 2010
181
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF TRENTON CHANNEL
Summary of the Equilibrium Sediment Benchmark Toxic Unit Calculations for Individual Sediment
Samples from the Trenton Channel Site
Substituting 1/2 SSQL for Non-detects
Upper 50% Upper 95%
Limits for Limit for
Substituting 0 for Non-detects
Upper 50%
Limits for
Upper 95%
Limit for
Sample ID
H127-9
H130-1
H13 1-3
H133-5
H135-7
H137-9
H30-1
H3 1-3
H33-5
11 0-1
11 1-3
11 3-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
I23-5
130-1
131-3
J1 0-1
J1 1-3
J1 3-5
K1 0-1
K1 1-3
K1 3-5
K1 5-7
K1 7-9
K1 9-11
S1 0-1
S1 1-3
ESBTU13
0.15
0.16
0.22
0.23
0.23
0.26
0.58
0.15
0.19
0.05
0.15
0.11
0.56
0.98
1.81
0.79
0.26
0.20
0.08
0.32
0.37
0.38
0.32
62.76
10.37
9.92
8.27
2.22
3.11
1.37
1.26
0.40
0.43
0.61
0.63
0.63
0.73
1.59
0.42
0.51
0.15
0.41
0.30
1.54
2.70
4.99
2.17
0.73
0.55
0.23
0.89
1.03
1.04
0.88
172.60
28.51
27.29
22.73
6.09
8.56
3.78
3.45
1.67
1.81
2.54
2.64
2.64
3.03
6.65
1.74
2.15
0.62
1.71
1.24
6.43
11.29
20.86
9.07
3.04
2.31
0.97
3.73
4.29
4.37
3.69
721.78
119.21
114.13
95.05
25.49
35.81
15.79
14.44
0.13
0.14
0.21
0.22
0.21
0.26
0.57
0.08
0.02
0.03
0.14
0.04
0.56
0.98
1.81
0.76
0.05
0.00
0.03
0.07
0.37
0.31
0.25
45.49
8.63
9.92
6.05
1.96
3.11
0.59
0.84
ESBTUtot ESBTUtot
0.37
0.37
0.58
0.60
0.58
0.72
1.58
0.23
0.06
0.09
0.39
0.12
1.54
2.70
4.99
2.08
0.14
0.00
0.09
0.20
1.02
0.84
0.68
125.09
23.74
27.29
16.63
5.40
8.56
1.63
2.32
1.54
1.56
2.41
2.52
2.42
2.99
6.59
0.94
0.23
0.37
1.63
0.51
6.43
11.29
20.86
8.70
0.58
0.00
0.36
0.83
4.25
3.52
2.83
523.09
99.28
114.13
69.54
22.59
35.81
6.83
9.69
182
My 2010
-------
APPENDIX G
Summary of the Equilibrium Sediment Benchmark Toxic Unit Calculations for Individual Sediment
Samples from the Trenton Channel Site
Substituting 1/2 SSQL for Non-detects
Upper 50% Upper 95%
Limits for Limit for
Sample ID ESBTU13 ESBTUtf'
Substituting 0 for Non-detects
Upper 50%
Limits for
ESBTUtot
Upper 95%
Limit for
S1 3-5
S1 5-7
S1 7-9
S1 9-11
S20-1
S2 1-3
S23-5
S25-7
0.74
0.58
0.10
0.35
0.35
0.60
1.22
0.34
2.05
1.60
0.26
0.97
0.97
1.66
3.34
0.92
8.56
6.67
1.10
4.04
4.06
6.95
13.98
3.86
0.58
0.49
0.02
0.00
0.21
0.44
1.22
0.19
1.59
1.34
0.05
0.00
0.57
1.20
3.34
0.51
6.64
5.61
0.21
0.00
2.39
5.02
13.98
2.15
Where:
ESBTU13 Equilibrium Sediment Benchmark Toxic Unit, based on 13 individual PAHs
ESBTUtot Equilibrium Sediment Benchmark Toxic Unit, based on the total of 34 individual PAHs
Upper 50% Refers to the use of a correction factor of 2.75 that is applied to the ESBTU 13 to derive an
Limit estimate for ESBTU from the total of 34 PAHs with 50% confidence in the corrected result
Upper 95% Refers to the use of a correction factor of 11.5 that is applied to the ESBTU 13 to derive an
Limit estimate for ESBTU from the total of 34 PAHs with 95% confidence in the corrected result
My 2010
183
-------
APPENDIX H - OBSERVED RESULTS FOR INDIVIDUAL SAMPLES
DESCRIBED IN THE TRENTON CHANNEL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
REPORT
(location and depth interval for each sample is specified in
the sample ID)
Notes for the tables provided within this appendix:
• J - Value is an estimate.
• U - Indicates that the compound was analyzed for, but not detected.
• NA - Not applicable
• PCT - percent
• PPB - parts per billion
• PPM - parts per million
• UMG - umole/gram
• Totals - Results are calculated totals rather than results reported by the laboratory, and
therefore were not directly flagged. "U" flag reflects that all individual analyses were
non-detect. The value reported with the U flag is the maximum individual reporting
limit.
184
July 2010
-------
Individual Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation, Analytes Measured in Phase I Only
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
Cll 0-1
Cll 1-3
Cll 3-5
Cll 5-7
C12 0-1
C12 1-3
C12 3-5
C30-1
C3 1-3
C33-5
D20-1
D30-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E21 0-1
F10-1
Fll-3
Sample Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20061221
20061221
Oil and
Grease
(PPM)
270U
314U
378U
372U
279U
244 U
261U
238U
324U
840
300U
398U
440 U
386U
380U
2780
1760
350U
361U
370U
303 U
244 U
252U
245 U
241U
244 U
243 U
255U
442 U
324U
PH
7.7J
8.1J
8.5J
8J
8.2J
8.1J
8.5J
8.3J
7J
7J
7.9J
6.9J
7.9J
7.3J
8.5J
8.8J
8.1J
8J
7.6J
7.4J
8.2J
8.2J
8.6J
8.3J
8.3J
8.3J
8.2J
8.2J
7.1J
7.7J
Atterberg Limits
Liquid Limit
0
45
48
54
0
25
26
27
44
0
0
62
71
61
61
0
66
64
0
0
0
26
25
26
24
27
26
28
59
43
Plasticity
Index
OU
13
15
17
OU
9
10
11
OU
OU
OU
25
31
25
24
OU
32
27
OU
OU
OU
10
9
9
9
11
9
11
25
16
Plastic
Limit
0
32
33
37
0
16
16
16
0
0
0
37
40
36
37
0
34
37
0
0
0
16
16
16
16
16
16
17
34
27
Sediment Physical Characteristics
Clay
Content
(PCT)
12.9
28.8
39.4
35.2
10.4
40.4
43.5
43.1
21.5
19.7
12.7
33.3
47.5
41.5
47.2
3.2
35.5
48.7
28.6
29.5
21.5
44.7
40.4
40.9
43.4
43.1
49.4
42
36.5
33.9
Silt
Content
(PCT)
32.8
33.8
39.4
43.1
21.4
31.5
31.5
31.5
38.8
29.4
22.6
53.2
48.7
52.3
43.2
8.1
27.5
37.2
35.2
34.7
21.8
25.2
31.2
29.1
31.6
23.7
23.1
28.6
41.4
40
Gravel
Content
(PCT)
1.2
0
0.7
0.3
3.2
3.1
2.7
3.1
2.8
4.2
8.6
0.4
0
0
0
63.8
11.3
0
0.2
0
2.6
6
3.2
6.3
2.6
7.7
6.9
6.6
0
1.6
Coarse
Sand
Content
(PCT)
3
0.8
0.8
2.9
1.4
3.4
3.1
3.1
1.1
3
5.4
0
0
0
0
7.6
9.4
0.8
0.6
0.9
2.9
4.1
4.1
4
3.1
4.6
3
2.7
0.5
2.5
Fine
Sand
Content
(PCT)
37.4
32.7
17.3
14.3
60.3
16
13.4
13.4
32.2
38.6
40.1
12.2
3.8
6.1
9.2
9.7
9.6
10.9
32.2
32.5
46.4
13.5
15.2
13.8
13.6
13.5
12.3
14.6
20.6
18
Medium
Sand
Content
(PCT)
12.7
3.9
2.3
4.2
3.2
5.6
5.8
5.8
3.6
5.1
10.6
0.8
0
0.1
0.4
7.5
6.7
2.4
3.2
2.5
4.8
6.5
5.8
6
5.6
7.5
5.3
5.4
1
4
July 2010
185
-------
Individual Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation, Analytes Measured in Phase I Only
Sample ID
F120-1
F20-1
F21-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hll 1-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H12 7-9
H13 0-1
H13 1-3
H13 3-5
H13 5-7
H13 7-9
H30-1
H3 1-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
Sample Date
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
Oil and
Grease
(PPM)
342U
1420
276U
249 U
359U
360U
285 U
240 U
326U
404 U
692
264U
280U
331U
382U
655
334U
379U
386U
347 U
388
358U
367U
518
381U
336U
248 U
231U
419
298U
PH
7.2J
7.6J
8J
8.2J
7.3J
7.6J
8J
8.1J
7.7J
7.8J
11.8J
8.5J
10. 1J
11.4J
11.4J
12J
12.3J
12.5J
12.3J
12. 1J
11.2J
11.7J
11.9J
11.9J
12. 1J
11.2J
9.3J
8.7J
10.8J
11.2J
Atterberg Limits
Liquid Limit
0
0
34
25
54
56
26
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
19
0
0
Plasticity
Index
OU
OU
12
10
23
23
9
9
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
8
5
OU
OU
Plastic
Limit
0
0
22
16
31
33
17
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18
14
0
0
Sediment Physical Characteristics
Clay
Content
(PCT)
9.9
6.2
34.1
38.4
31.4
38.4
27.6
35.3
7.1
12.5
0
1
2.7
14.4
18
19.9
21.2
24.7
27.2
22.8
7.8
15.2
16.2
12.4
15.1
22.2
22.9
27.3
3.9
10
Silt
Content
(PCT)
20.1
14.6
24.9
36
55.8
51.3
24
31
35.7
70.2
63.5
27.2
5.3
42.2
64.3
21.8
40.2
60.7
40.8
39.6
49.4
75.9
63.3
22.1
17.4
33
33.9
33.1
6.5
12.6
Gravel
Content
(PCT)
20.5
15.6
3.1
1
4.1
0.6
13.8
10.4
37
5
0
45.5
13.8
5.9
0
1.2
1.7
0
0
1.2
5.6
0
0.6
4.9
16
2.1
10.7
4.7
12.6
4.3
Coarse
Sand
Content
(PCT)
6.4
8
3.5
4.7
1.3
0.5
6.1
2.8
6
4
2.6
2.5
9.8
4.8
0.5
1.1
0.6
0.4
0.8
3.5
7.6
0.8
0.2
3.5
7.6
7.7
4.2
4.5
21.8
7.5
Fine
Sand
Content
(PCT)
31.4
38.1
26.4
14.1
5.9
7.1
20.1
14.5
9.2
4.5
17.3
9.6
17.8
10.7
11.8
40.7
26.4
10.4
21.7
19.5
12.9
5.6
14.2
36.2
23.7
20.1
18.7
21.1
23
28.4
Medium
Sand
Content
(PCT)
11.6
17.4
8
5.8
1.5
2.1
8.3
6
5.1
3.9
16.5
14.1
50.7
22.1
5.4
15.2
9.9
3.9
9.4
13.5
16.7
2.5
5.4
20.9
20.2
15
9.7
9.4
32.3
37.1
186
July 2010
-------
Individual Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation, Analytes Measured in Phase I Only
Sample ID
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
13 1-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
K19-11
Sample Date
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
Oil and
Grease
(PPM)
237U
274U
291U
251U
273 U
243 U
243 U
239U
241U
298U
385
292U
12100
1950
435
397U
398U
342U
PH
9.4J
11J
9.4J
8.5J
11.2J
9.1J
8.9J
8.8J
8.8J
8.6J
8J
8J
9.4J
9.5J
8.4J
8.1J
9.3J
8.3J
Atterberg Limits
Liquid Limit
23
0
0
31
0
24
27
25
27
53
57
44
0
0
51
52
49
41
Plasticity
Index
8
OU
OU
12
OU
9
10
9
10
16
18
13
OU
OU
7
9
4
7
Plastic
Limit
15
0
0
19
0
16
16
16
16
37
39
31
0
0
44
44
45
34
Sediment Physical Characteristics
Clay
Content
(PCT)
37.4
8.1
23.9
41.1
4.1
36.3
43.5
38.8
39.2
25.6
29.5
20.3
8.8
13.5
30.1
37
33
27.6
Silt
Content
(PCT)
31.1
8.2
28.6
30.8
46.3
34.9
33.7
26.7
26.1
23.2
25.2
13.6
11.1
36
51.9
56.5
60.7
46.7
Gravel
Content
(PCT)
2.9
31.4
7.4
3.5
12.5
2.5
2.5
4.5
6.8
14.6
12.2
28.3
20.4
1
0
0
0
0.7
Coarse
Sand
Content
(PCT)
4.6
18.6
6.3
2.7
2.7
5.2
2.1
4.9
5
7.9
6.3
10.2
9.6
3.2
0.9
0
0
1.3
Fine
Sand
Content
(PCT)
16.1
16.4
22.9
15.4
23.4
13.9
12.8
15.6
14.6
16.3
17.6
14.6
25.6
25.6
11.7
5.7
5.6
21
Medium
Sand
Content
(PCT)
7.9
17.4
11
6.5
11
7.2
5.5
9.5
8.3
12.5
9.2
13.1
24.5
20.7
5.4
0.8
0.7
2.7
July 2010
187
-------
Individual and Total PAHs Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping I
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B31-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
C110-1
Cll 1-3
C113-5
Cll 5-7
C120-1
C12 1-3
C123-5
C30-1
C3 1-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C5 1-3
C53-5
Sample
Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
Acenaph-
thene
1300
1700J
3700U
1800J
1100
54J
130U
120U
240U
240U
570
240U
140J
340U
180J
4200U
330J
330J
330J
2700U
3200U
3600U
2500J
3600U
13000U
410
130J
240U
2400J
2600U
240U
Acenaph-
thylene
1400
2100J
1700J
2300J
790
120U
130U
120U
240 U
240 U
250U
240 U
320U
340U
310U
4200U
420U
390U
320J
2700U
3200U
3600U
1800J
3600U
13000U
200J
250U
240 U
2500J
2600U
240 U
Anthracene
14000
11000
9000
7900
4900
200
130U
120U
240U
240U
860
130J
430
240J
470
4200U
4200U
3900U
1200
1400J
3200U
3600U
9000
4600
29000
1200
320
240U
4900
2300J
100J
Benzo[a]-
anthracene
29000
14000
13000
10000
6300
250
71J
120U
240U
240U
1300
180J
3200U
420
770
1800J
4200U
1600
1600
2100J
1500J
36000U
14000
7300
39000
2400
540
240 U
13000
3800
150J
Dibenz[a,h]-
anthracene
2500J
6200UJ
7500UJ
7900UJ
520J
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
500U
480U
6500UJ
6700UJ
6200UJ
8500U
8400 U
7800U
7000U
5400UJ
64000UJ
71000UJ
7400U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
Benzo[a]-
pyrene
23000
12000
11000
8800
6000
240
260U
240U
470U
480U
1100
480U
6500U
6700U
6200U
8500U
8400 U
7800U
7000U
1900J
64000U
71000U
13000
6800J
35000
2500
490J
480U
13000
3700J
480U
Benzo[b]-
fluoranthene
27000
14000
8700
9600
5700
220J
260U
240U
470U
480U
1400
480U
6500U
6700U
6200U
8500U
8400U
7800U
1700
2600J
64000U
71000U
12000
6900J
24000J
2900
640
480U
15000
3600J
480U
Benzo[g,h,i]-
perylene
6200J
3900J
4900J
2800J
1900U
1900
260U
240U
470U
480U
750J
480U
6500UJ
6700UJ
6200UJ
8500U
8400 U
7800U
7000U
5400UJ
64000UJ
71000UJ
5000J
3400J
15000J
1500
350J
480U
5500J
5100U
480U
Benzo[k]-
fluoranthene
9500
4600J
7500U
3600J
2100
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
550
480U
6500U
6700U
6200U
8500U
8400 U
7800U
7000U
5400U
64000U
71000U
4400J
2500J
13000J
980
510U
480U
5300J
5100U
480U
188
July 2010
-------
Individual and Total PAHs Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping I
Sample ID
C60-1
C61-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D5 1-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E210-1
E30-1
E3 1-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F12 0-1
F20-1
F21-3
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
Acenaph-
thene
3800U
3800U
3500U
3800UJ
3000J
3400U
1100
3400U
3500U
350
120U
240U
580
240U
2900U
260U
230U
240U
240U
120U
120U
160J
240U
240U
240U
260U
2200U
3200U
350
1500J
7200
Acenaph-
thylene
3800U
3800U
3500U
3800UJ
3500U
3400U
280U
3400U
3500U
230J
120U
240 U
280
240 U
2900U
260U
230U
140J
240 U
120U
120U
250U
240 U
240 U
240 U
260U
2200U
3200U
220J
2900U
1700J
Anthracene
3800U
3800U
1800J
3700J
6000
3400U
2700
3400U
3500U
1600J
120U
210J
1900
170J
2900U
250J
230U
520
170J
120U
120U
660
240U
240U
240U
380
2200U
1900J
1300
3300
9700
Benzo[a]-
anthracene
3800U
3800U
2700J
4400J
7300
1900J
4700
1400J
3600
3000
120U
380
2800
330
3200
680
130J
1300
440
54J
120U
1000
240 U
240 U
240 U
860
22000U
2900J
2200
5800
10000
Dibenz[a,h]-
anthracene
7600U
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
680U
240U
480UJ
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
4800U
480U
240U
240U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
44000U
6300UJ
6800UJ
5800UJ
5500U
Benzo[a]-
pyrene
7600U
7600U
7100U
3900J
6400
6700U
4300
6800U
3500J
3200
240U
380J
2800
360J
2900J
680
470U
1600
470J
240U
240U
990
470U
470U
480U
860
44000U
2500J
1700J
4800J
9600
Benzo[b]-
fluoranthene
7600U
7600U
7100U
4400J
7500J
6700U
5300
6800U
4600J
4100
240U
460J
2700
290J
4000J
840
470U
1800
43 OJ
240U
240U
1200
470U
470U
480U
1000
44000U
2800J
2200J
5800
12000
Benzo[g,h,i]-
perylene
7600U
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
3700J
6700U
2600
6800U
7000U
2000
240U
480UJ
1600
480U
5800U
520U
470U
4800U
170J
240U
240U
300J
470U
470U
480U
510
44000U
6300UJ
6800UJ
1900J
5500U
Benzo[k]-
fluoranthene
7600U
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
1800
6800U
7000U
1200
240U
170J
920
480U
5800U
330J
470U
4800U
150J
240U
240 U
440J
470U
470U
480U
430J
44000U
6300U
6800U
2300J
4200J
July 2010
189
-------
Individual and Total PAHs Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping I
Sample ID
F40-1
F41-3
F43-5
F50-1
F5 1-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G13 0-1
G13 1-3
G13 3-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hlll-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H127-9
H130-1
H13 1-3
H133-5
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
Acenaph-
thene
680
550
570
120J
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
1800U
3100J
230J
120U
3700U
4200U
8600U
950
240U
230J
260U
140U
160U
180U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
160U
170U
190U
Acenaph-
thylene
260J
260J
330
240 U
240 U
360U
240 U
230U
240 U
1800U
1600J
170J
120U
3700U
4200U
8600U
570
240 U
540U
260U
140 U
160U
180U
180U
240
150J
190U
160U
160U
120J
82J
Anthracene
1600
1800
2200
160J
240U
360U
240U
230U
110J
3100
11000
680
94J
2100J
3400J
8600U
3500
140J
730
210J
71J
81J
340
1800U
710
1800U
380
320
220
230
320
Benzo[a]-
anthracene
3000
3600
4300
180J
240 U
360U
240 U
230U
170J
6500
16000
1300
140
3500J
4600
6000
6100
250
1300
290
170
110J
380
500
660
1800U
520
450
240
280
420
Dibenz[a,h]-
anthracene
680U
680U
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490UJ
3600U
7100U
550UJ
240U
7500UJ
8500UJ
17000U
800U
490U
11000U
510U
280U
320U
370U
370U
340U
360U
370U
330U
330U
160J
370U
Benzo[a]-
pyrene
2700
3000
4200
130J
480U
720U
480U
470U
160J
5600
14000
830
240U
2800J
3800J
17000U
5100
490U
11000U
240J
180J
320U
240J
440
500
350J
530
440
330U
190J
350J
Benzo[b]-
fluoranthene
3800
4200
5300
15 OJ
480U
720U
480U
470U
170J
5200
14000
1200
240U
3300J
4300J
17000U
5600
490U
11000U
510U
23 OJ
320U
340J
510
590
370
660
480
220J
25 OJ
330J
Benzo[g,h,i]-
perylene
1300
820
2400
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490UJ
1300J
7200
490J
240U
7500UJ
8500UJ
17000U
2600
490U
11000U
510U
280U
320U
370U
370U
340U
360U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
Benzo[k]-
fluoranthene
1000
1400
2100
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
1700J
3900J
390J
240U
7500U
8500U
17000U
1700
490U
11000U
510U
280U
320U
370U
370U
340U
360U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
190
July 2010
-------
Individual and Total PAHs Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping I
Sample ID
H135-7
H 13 7-9
H30-1
H31-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
131-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
K19-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
Sample
Date
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
Acenaph-
thene
400U
410U
320U
240U
230U
130U
150U
120U
180
330
140
330U
230U
240U
250U
240U
200
220
95J
15000U
3800U
550
4000 U
4000 U
400
3600U
3800U
3400U
3700U
300U
240U
Acenaph-
thylene
400 U
180J
340
240 U
230U
130U
150U
120U
290
390
210
190J
230U
240 U
250U
240 U
150U
160U
150U
15000U
3800U
740
4000U
4000U
590
3600U
3800U
3400U
3700U
300U
240U
Anthracene
550
860
860
240U
230U
130U
240
120U
1700
2100
1100
810
230U
240U
250U
240U
730
520
99J
15000U
2000J
3600
6400
4100
3400
3600U
1700J
2100J
2400J
300U
240U
Benzo[a]-
anthracene
590
1600
2800
130J
230U
130U
390
120U
1900
3000
1400
860
230U
240 U
130J
240 U
820
1100
310
150000U
38000U
4700
6500
4700
3700
2300J
2900J
3100J
3700
300U
240 U
Dibenz[a,h]-
anthracene
800U
830UJ
260J
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
270U
310
210J
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
3200U
2900U
300000U
75000U
8600UJ
81000U
8000U
7300U
7100U
7500U
6800U
730U
610U
480U
Benzo[a]-
pyrene
510J
1000
1700
480U
460U
260U
260J
250U
1700
2800
1500
780
470U
480U
490U
480U
720
3200U
2900U
300000U
75000U
4300J
81000U
3800J
3200
7100U
7500U
2700J
3100J
610U
480U
Benzo[b]-
fluoranthene
610J
1400
2300
140J
460U
260U
390
250U
1600
2600
1300
820
470U
480U
490U
480U
920
3200U
2900U
3 00000 U
75000U
5000J
81000U
3200J
3600
7100U
7500U
2800J
3800J
610U
480U
Benzo[g,h,i]-
perylene
800U
830UJ
590J
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
710
1100
620
370J
470UJ
480UJ
490UJ
480UJ
290U
3200U
2900U
300000U
75000U
8600UJ
81000U
8000U
7300U
7100U
7500U
6800U
1600J
610U
480U
Benzo[k]-
fluoranthene
800U
570J
820J
480UJ
460UJ
260U
290U
250U
510
820
470
650UJ
470UJ
480UJ
490UJ
480UJ
320
3200U
2900U
300000UJ
75000UJ
9000J
81000UJ
8000UJ
3300
7100U
7500U
6800U
1400
610U
480U
July 2010
191
-------
Individual and Total PAHs Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping I
Sample ID
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample
Date
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
Acenaph-
thene
290J
410
510
240U
Acenaph-
thylene
190J
300J
730
240 U
Anthracene
680
1400
2700
240U
Benzo[a]-
anthracene
880
1500
3500
160J
Dibenz[a,h]-
anthracene
8100UJ
7400UJ
350J
470U
Benzo[a]-
pyrene
8100UJ
7400 UJ
3000
140J
Benzo[b]-
fluoranthene
8100UJ
7400UJ
3600
160J
Benzo[g,h,i]-
perylene
8100UJ
7400 UJ
940
470U
Benzo[k]-
fluoranthene
8100UJ
7400UJ
1100
470U
192
July 2010
-------
Individual and Total PAHs Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping II
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B31-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
Cll 0-1
Cll 1-3
Cll 3-5
Cll 5-7
C120-1
C12 1-3
C123-5
C30-1
C3 1-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C5 1-3
C53-5
Sample
Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
Chrysene
25000
14000
12000
10000
5900
250
86J
120U
240U
240U
1300
220J
3200U
550
1000
2700J
2200
2300
2100
2200J
2200J
36000U
15000
7400
41000
2600
680
150J
14000
3500
150J
Fluoranthene
58000
27000
18000
17000
10000
400
72J
120U
240U
240U
2800
380
1900
1000
1800
3400J
3300
3000
3700
5500
3700
2500J
24000
12000
61000
4700
1400
200J
23000
5200
470
Fluorene
3500
4500
3600J
5500
2100
100J
130U
120U
240U
240U
590
240U
250J
200J
520
4200U
610
600
720
2700U
3200U
3600U
4600
1700J
8400J
800
200J
240U
3900
2600U
240U
lndeno(l,2,3-c,d)-
pyrene
8200
4200J
7500U
2900J
1800
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
650J
480U
6500U
6700U
6200U
8500U
8400U
7800U
7000U
5400U
64000 U
71000U
4700J
3200J
15000J
1300
510U
480U
5800J
5100U
480U
2-Methyl-
naphthalene
820
2300J
3200J
4500J
1500
100J
320U
300U
590U
600U
290J
600U
290J
290J
370J
11000U
1200
1400
1100
6800U
1600J
8900U
1900J
8900U
34000U
560J
630U
600U
9000U
6400U
600U
Naphthalene
1400
6100
7800
6600
1500
100J
130U
120U
240U
240U
790
150J
550
460
590
4200U
1300
1300
1500
2700U
1400J
3600U
8800
9600
13000
1100
330
240U
2900J
1300J
240U
Phenanthrene
40000J
22000J
21000
21000J
12000J
540
73J
84J
110J
100J
2900
430
1400
1200
2000
2800J
3500
3800
4400
5500
4100J
2800J
21000
9700
54000
3800
1100
240
20000
5500
370
Pyrene
43000
22000
20000
19000
13000
510
110J
120U
240U
240U
2100
310
1700J
1100
2200
3500J
3500
3600
3200
4600
4300J
36000U
22000
10000
60000
4000
1000
180J
22000
6200
380
Total PAH
293820
165400
133900
133300
75210
4864
412
84
110
100
17950
1800
6660
5460
9900
14200
15940
17930
21870
25800
18800
5300
163700
85100
407400
30950
7180
770
153200
35100
1620
July 2010
193
-------
Individual and Total PAHs Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping II
Sample ID
C60-1
C61-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D5 1-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E210-1
E30-1
E3 1-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F12 0-1
F20-1
F21-3
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
Chrysene
3800U
3800U
2900J
4800J
8400
1900J
4400
1800J
4400
3200
81J
470
2700
350
2900
690
230U
1300
470
58J
120U
1000
240U
240U
240U
790
22000U
3100J
2600
6100
11000
Fluoranthene
2000J
4800
6200
8000J
16000
4600
14000
3400
7300
6900
84J
570
6000
460
7000
1800
230
1700
580
120U
120U
2100
240U
240U
250
1700
3000
5300
4300
11000
26000
Fluorene
3800U
3800U
3500U
2000J
4900
3400U
1800
3400U
3500U
640
120U
240U
770
240U
2900U
160J
230U
150J
240U
120U
120U
300
240U
240U
240U
260U
2200U
3200U
800
1800J
7400
lndeno(l,2,3-c,d)-
pyrene
7600U
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
2200
6800U
7000U
2000
240U
160J
1200
480U
5800U
520U
470U
4800U
160J
240U
240U
300J
470U
470U
480U
490J
44000U
6300U
6800U
1900J
5500U
2-Methyl-
naphthalene
9600U
9500U
8800U
2300J
4200J
8400U
410J
8500U
8700U
470J
300U
600U
250J
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
150J
590U
590U
600U
640 U
5500U
7900U
330J
7300U
7000
Naphthalene
3800U
3800U
2200J
2500J
5400
3400U
800
3400U
3500U
930
120U
200J
1700
240U
2900U
130J
230U
120J
240U
120U
120U
180J
240U
240U
240U
260U
2200U
3200U
780
1400J
19000
Phenanthrene
2200J
4600
4500
9300J
19000
4000
11000
2900J
7200
4700
120
390
4900
530
5300
950
230
1100J
380J
94J
87J
2000J
100J
240 U
340
770
2400
4900
3200
8400
34000J
Pyrene
2100J
3900
4800
8900J
15000
3500
10000
3100J
7400
6900
100J
550
5600
520
5500
1200
220J
2100
600
90J
120U
2200
240U
240U
240U
1400
22000U
5300
5500
10000
22000
Total PAH
6300
13300
25100
54200
106800
15900
67110
12600
38000
41420
385
3940
36700
3010
30800
7710
810
11830
4020
296
87
12980
100
590U
590
9190
5400
28700
25480
66000
180800
194
July 2010
-------
Individual and Total PAHs Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping II
Sample ID
F40-1
F41-3
F43-5
F50-1
F51-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G13 0-1
G13 1-3
G13 3-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hlll-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H127-9
H130-1
H13 1-3
H133-5
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
Chrysene
3600
4400
5000
200J
240U
360U
240U
230U
180J
6000
17000
1400
140
3800
5000
7300
6000
280
1600
320
170
120J
310
520
600
1800U
520
480
280
300
380
Fluoranthene
7200
8400
8800
390
240U
360U
240U
230U
270
8600
28000
2600
250
6100
8100
10000
12000
330
2900
570
320
200
1100
1300
2100
1200
1400
710
590
610
900
Fluorene
1100
990
1000
100J
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
990J
5700
590
72J
3700U
4200U
8600U
1500
240U
570
120J
140U
160U
180
180
440
290
260
160U
120J
190
190
lndeno(l,2,3-c,d)-
pyrene
1200
1500
1900
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
2400J
6200J
430J
240U
7500U
8500U
17000U
2300
490U
11000U
510U
280U
320U
370U
370U
340U
360U
370U
330U
330U
170J
370U
2-Methyl-
naphthalene
600J
850
600J
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
770J
5300J
790
130J
9300U
11000U
21000U
790J
610U
330J
290J
97J
400 U
79J
190J
440
360J
400J
320J
110J
190J
220J
Naphthalene
1300
1200
1200
240U
240U
360U
240U
230U
130J
1800U
2400J
690
130
3700U
1900J
8600U
1500
240U
710
270
120J
86J
170J
190
390
180U
820
420
98J
210
520
Phenanthrene
5000
5200
6100
390
100J
360U
240 U
230U
340
6900
37000
3200
370
5100
8000
8500
9600
370
2700J
600
230
180
810
1300
2100
1900
1400
910
620
1100
910
Pyrene
6300
7300
7600
410
240U
360U
240U
230U
310
9200
36000
2900
310
5900
7900
9500
9900
390
2900
630
310
170
910
1600
1700
1600
1100
890
550
620
870
Total PAH
40640
45470
53600
2230
100
900U
600U
590U
1840
58260
208400
17890
1636
32600
47000
41300
69710
1760
13970
3540
1898
947
4859
6730
10470
6220
7990
5420
3048
4620
5492
July 2010
195
-------
Individual and Total PAHs Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping II
Sample ID
H135-7
H 13 7-9
H30-1
H31-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
1121-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
131-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
K19-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
Sample
Date
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
Chrysene
510
1200
2900
170J
230U
110J
490
120U
1800
2800
1400
950
230U
240U
110J
240U
980
1600
780
150000U
38000U
5100
6400
3700J
3700
2300J
3300J
3000J
3700J
300U
240U
Fluoranthene
1300
2600
4700
310
230U
230
1500
100J
4100
6700
3200
1500
230U
240U
190J
130J
2200
2200
410
15000U
9900
7500
11000
8200
6200
4100
8500
6300
7300J
180J
240U
Fluorene
400U
480
160J
240U
230U
130U
190
120U
800
980
460
400
230U
240U
250U
240U
390
480
150U
15000U
1600J
1500
2900J
2200J
1500
3600U
3800U
3400U
3700U
300U
240U
lndeno(l,2,3-c,d)-
pyrene
800U
380J
810
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
670
1100
620
340J
470U
480U
490U
480U
270J
3200U
2900U
300000U
75000U
8600U
81000U
8000U
7300U
7100U
7500U
6800U
1400J
610U
480U
2-Methyl-
naphthalene
590J
1000
250J
600U
580U
89J
340J
310U
610
920
620
340J
580U
610U
620U
600U
570
520
550
6300J
3000J
3300
3300J
1700J
1500
8900U
9400U
8500U
1200
760U
600U
Naphthalene
3100
3900
850
240U
230U
130
570
120
370
520
370
340
230U
240U
250U
240U
730
700
3800
520000
360000
210000
100000
9400
7100
3600U
2900J
2500J
3000J
300U
240U
Phenanthrene
1900
2500
3400
440
180J
250
1100
180
4900
6400
3000
2200
220J
240U
210J
150J
1900
2400
1500
8300J
12000
11000
18000
12000
8600
3400J
5500
5400
6200J
140J
240 U
Pyrene
1300
2500
4300J
260
230U
160
1300
120U
3800
6500
3300
2000J
130J
240UJ
220J
150J
2900
4700
790
150000U
38000U
13000J
18000
9700
11000
3900
5700
4900
6700J
130J
240U
Total PAH
10960
20170
27040
1450
180
969
6770
400
25640
39370
19920
11900
350
610U
860
430
13650
14440
8334
534600
388500
279290
172500
62700
57790
16000
30500
32800
45500
450
600U
196
July 2010
-------
Individual and Total PAHs Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping II
Sample ID
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample
Date
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
Chrysene
1300
1900
3500
150J
Fluoranthene
1700
3100
4600
290
Fluorene
540
930
1400
240U
lndeno(l,2,3-c,d)-
pyrene
8100UJ
7400UJ
990
470U
2-Methyl-
naphthalene
800J
880J
1100
590U
Naphthalene
670
1300
2000
240U
Phenanthrene
2700
4100
5800
280
Pyrene
2400
3800
5900
220J
Total PAH
12150
19620
41720
1400
July 2010
197
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping I
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B31-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
C110-1
Cll 1-3
C113-5
Cll 5-7
C120-1
C12 1-3
C123-5
C30-1
C3 1-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C5 1-3
C53-5
C60-1
Sample
Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
2-Nitro-
phenol
920U
10000U
12000U
13000U
930U
400U
420U
400 U
780U
790U
820U
790U
1100U
1100U
1000U
14000U
1400U
1300U
1200U
8900U
11000U
12000U
12000U
12000U
44000U
910U
840 U
790U
12000U
8500U
790U
13000U
4-Nitro-
phenol
4700U
53000U
64000U
67000U
4800U
2000U
2200U
2000U
4000 U
4000 U
4200U
4100U
5500U
5700U
5200U
72000U
7100U
6600U
6000U
46000U
54000U
60000U
63000U
60000U
230000U
4700U
4300U
4100U
61000U
44000U
4100U
65000U
2,4-Dinitro-
toluene
700U
7800U
9300U
9900U
700U
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
620U
600U
810U
840U
770U
11000U
1000U
970U
880U
6800U
8000U
8900U
9200U
8900U
34000U
690U
630U
600U
9000U
6400U
600U
9600U
2,6-Dinitro-
toluene
700U
7800U
9300U
9900U
700U
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
620U
600U
810U
840U
770U
11000U
1000U
970U
880U
6800U
8000U
8900U
9200U
8900U
34000U
690U
630U
600U
9000U
6400U
600U
9600U
Hexachloro-
benzene
560U
6200U
7500U
7900U
560U
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
500U
480U
650U
670U
620U
8500U
8400 U
7800U
700U
5400U
6400 U
7100U
7400 U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
7600U
Hexachloro-
cyclopentadiene
2800UJ
31000UJ
37000UJ
39000UJ
2800UJ
1200U
1300U
1200U
2400U
2400U
2500U
2400U
3200U
3400U
3100U
42000U
4200U
3900U
3500U
27000U
32000UJ
36000UJ
37000U
36000U
130000U
2800U
2500U
2400U
36000U
26000U
2400U
38000U
Isophorone
280U
3100U
3700U
3900U
280U
120U
130U
120U
240U
240U
250U
240U
320U
340U
310U
4200U
420U
390U
350U
2700U
3200U
3600U
3700U
3600U
13000U
280U
250U
240U
3600U
2600U
240U
3800U
Azobenzene
560U
6200U
7500U
7900U
560U
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
500U
480U
650U
670U
620U
8500U
8400U
7800U
700U
5400U
6400U
7100U
7400U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
7600U
198
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping I
Sample ID
C61-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D5 1-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E210-1
E30-1
E3 1-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F12 0-1
F20-1
F21-3
F40-1
F41-3
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
2-Nitro-
phenol
13000U
12000U
13000UJ
11000U
11000U
940 U
11000U
12000U
1100U
390U
800U
790U
790U
9600U
850U
770U
800U
790U
400 U
400 U
810U
780U
780U
790U
850U
7300U
10000U
1100U
9600U
9100U
1100U
1100U
4-Nitro-
phenol
64000U
60000U
65000UJ
59000U
57000U
4800U
58000U
59000U
5800U
2000UJ
4100U
4100U
4100U
49000U
4400 U
4000 U
4100U
4100U
2100UJ
2000U
4200U
4000 U
4000 U
4100U
4400 U
38000U
54000U
5800U
49000U
47000U
5800U
5800U
2,4-Dinitro-
toluene
9500U
8800U
9600UJ
8700U
8400U
710U
8500U
8700U
850U
300U
600U
600U
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
620U
590U
590U
600U
640U
5500U
7900U
850U
7300U
6900U
850U
850U
2,6-Dinitro-
toluene
9500U
8800U
9600UJ
8700U
8400U
710U
8500U
8700U
850U
300U
600U
600U
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
620U
590U
590U
600U
640U
5500U
7900U
850U
7300U
6900U
850U
850U
Hexachloro-
benzene
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
6800U
240U
480U
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
480U
480U
240U
240U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
4400 U
6300U
680U
5800U
5500U
680U
680U
Hexachloro-
cyclopentadiene
38000U
35000U
38000UJ
35000U
34000U
2800U
34000U
35000U
3400U
1200U
2400U
2400U
2400U
29000U
2600U
2300U
2400UJ
2400UJ
1200U
1200U
2500UJ
2400U
2400U
2400U
2600U
22000U
32000U
3400U
29000U
27000UJ
3400U
3400U
Isophorone
3800U
3500U
3800UJ
3500U
3400U
280U
3400U
3500U
340U
120U
240U
240U
240U
2900U
260U
230U
240U
240U
120U
120U
250U
240U
240U
240U
260U
2200U
3200U
340U
2900U
2700U
340U
340U
Azobenzene
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
6800U
240U
480U
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
480U
480U
240U
240U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
4400U
6300U
680U
5800U
5500U
680U
680U
July 2010
199
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping I
Sample ID
F43-5
F50-1
F5 1-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G13 0-1
G13 1-3
G13 3-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hlll-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H127-9
H130-1
H13 1-3
H133-5
H135-7
H13 7-9
H30-1
Sample
Date
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
2-Nitro-
phenol
1000U
800U
790U
1200U
790U
770U
800U
5900U
12000U
910U
400 U
12000U
14000U
28000U
1300U
810U
1800U
850U
460U
520U
610UJ
610UJ
560UJ
590UJ
610UJ
540UJ
540U
560U
620U
1300U
1400U
1100U
4-Nitro-
phenol
5300U
4100U
4100U
6100U
4100U
4000 U
4100U
31000U
61000U
4700U
2100UJ
64000U
72000U
150000U
6800U
4200U
9100U
4400U
2400UJ
2700UJ
3100U
3100U
2900U
3000U
3100U
2800U
2800UJ
2900U
3200UJ
6800U
7000U
5400U
2,4-Dinitro-
toluene
780U
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
690U
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
1000U
610U
1300U
640U
350U
400U
460U
460U
420U
450U
460U
410U
410U
420U
470U
1000U
1000U
800U
2,6-Dinitro-
toluene
780U
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
690U
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
1000U
610U
1300U
640U
350U
400U
460U
460U
420U
450U
460U
410U
410U
420U
470U
1000U
1000U
800U
Hexachloro-
benzene
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
3600U
7100U
220J
240U
7500U
8500U
17000U
800U
490U
1600
510U
280U
320U
370U
3700U
340U
3600U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
800U
830U
640U
Hexachloro-
cyclopentadiene
3100U
2400U
2400U
3600U
2400U
2300U
2400U
18000U
36000U
2800U
1200UJ
37000U
42000U
86000U
4000U
2400U
5400UJ
2600U
1400U
1600U
1800U
1800UJ
1700UJ
1800UJ
1900UJ
1600UJ
1600U
1700U
1900UJ
4000U
4100U
3200U
Isophorone
310U
240U
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
1800U
3600U
280U
120U
3700U
4200U
8600U
400U
240U
540U
260U
140U
160U
180U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
160U
170U
190U
400U
410U
320U
Azobenzene
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
3600U
7100U
550U
240U
7500U
8500U
17000U
800U
490U
1100U
510U
280U
320U
370U
3700U
340U
3600U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
800U
830U
640U
200
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping I
Sample ID
H31-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
131-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
K19-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample
Date
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
2-Nitro-
phenol
800U
760U
430UJ
490UJ
410UJ
450UJ
480UJ
440 UJ
1100U
770U
800U
820U
790U
490UJ
530UJ
480UJ
50000U
12000U
1400U
13000U
13000U
1200U
12000U
12000U
11000U
1200U
1000U
790U
1300U
1200U
1000U
780U
4-Nitro-
phenol
4100U
3900U
2200U
2500U
2100U
2300U
2500U
2300U
5500U
4000 U
4100U
4200U
4100U
2500U
2800U
2500U
260000U
64000U
7300U
69000U
68000U
6200U
60000U
64000U
58000U
62000U
5100U
4100U
6900U
6300U
5400U
4000 U
2,4-Dinitro-
toluene
600U
580U
330U
370U
310U
340U
360U
330U
810U
580U
610U
620U
600U
370U
400U
360U
38000U
9400U
1100U
10000U
10000U
910U
8900U
9400U
8500U
9200U
760U
600U
1000U
930U
790U
590U
2,6-Dinitro-
toluene
600U
580U
330U
370U
310U
340U
360U
330U
810U
580U
610U
620U
600U
370U
400U
360U
38000U
9400U
1100U
10000U
10000U
910U
8900U
9400 U
8500U
9200U
760U
600U
1000U
930U
790U
590U
Hexachloro-
benzene
480U
460U
1700
7800
480
270U
290U
270U
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
730
10000
110000
13000
2100
8100U
8000U
730U
7100U
7500U
6800U
730U
610U
480U
810U
740U
630U
470U
Hexachloro-
cyclopentadiene
2400U
2300U
1300UJ
1500UJ
1200UJ
1400UJ
1400UJ
1300UJ
3300U
2300U
2400U
2500U
2400U
1500UJ
1600UJ
1500UJ
150000U
38000U
4300U
40000U
40000U
3600U
36000U
38000U
34000U
3700U
3000U
2400U
4100U
3700U
3200U
2400U
Isophorone
240U
230U
130U
150U
120U
140U
140U
130U
330U
230U
240U
250U
240U
150U
160U
150U
15000U
3800U
430U
4000U
4000U
360U
3600U
3800U
3400U
370U
300U
240U
410U
370U
320U
240U
Azobenzene
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
270U
290U
270U
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
320U
290U
30000U
7500U
860U
8100U
8000U
730U
7100U
7500U
6800U
730U
610U
480U
810U
740U
630U
470U
July 2010
201
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping II
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B3 1-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
C110-1
Cll 1-3
C113-5
Cll 5-7
C12 0-1
C12 1-3
C12 3-5
C30-1
C31-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C51-3
C53-5
C60-1
Sample
Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
Bis(2-chloroethyl)-
ether
280U
3100U
3700U
3900U
280U
120U
130U
120U
240U
240U
250U
240U
320U
340U
310U
4200U
420U
390U
350U
2700U
3200U
3600U
3700U
3600U
13000U
280U
250U
240U
3600U
2600U
240U
3800U
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)-
ether
280U
3100U
3700U
3900U
280UJ
120U
130U
120U
240U
240U
250U
240U
320U
340U
310U
4200U
420UJ
390UJ
350UJ
2700U
3200U
3600U
3700U
3600U
13000U
280U
250U
240U
3600U
2600U
240U
3800U
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)-
phthalate
1600
7800U
9300U
9900U
700U
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
620U
600U
9000
3900
2100
43000
34000
17000
7500
5900J
31000J
89000UJ
9200U
8900U
34000U
2100
1100
1400
9000U
6400U
600U
14000
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)-
methane
560U
6200U
7500U
7900U
560U
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
500U
480U
650U
670U
620U
8500U
840 U
780U
700U
5400U
6400 U
7100U
7400 U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
7600U
Benzyl
Alcohol
7000U
78000U
93000U
99000U
7000U
3000U
3200U
3000U
5900U
6000U
6200U
6000U
8100U
8400U
7700U
110000U
10000UJ
9700UJ
8800UJ
68000U
80000U
89000U
92000U
89000U
340000U
6900U
6300U
6000U
90000U
64000 U
6000U
96000U
4-Bromophenyl
phenyl ether
560U
6200U
7500U
7900U
560U
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
500U
480U
650U
670U
620U
8500U
8400U
7800U
700U
5400U
6400U
7100U
7400U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
7600U
202
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping II
Sample ID
C61-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D51-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E210-1
E30-1
E31-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F120-1
F20-1
F21-3
F40-1
F41-3
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
Bis(2-chloroethyl)-
ether
3800U
3500U
3800UJ
3500U
3400U
280U
3400U
3500U
340U
120U
240U
240U
240U
2900U
260U
230U
240U
240U
120U
120U
250U
240U
240U
240U
260U
2200U
3200U
340U
2900U
2700U
340U
340U
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)-
ether
3800U
3500U
3800UJ
3500U
3400U
280U
3400U
3500U
340U
120UJ
240U
240U
240U
2900U
260U
230U
240U
240U
120UJ
120U
250U
240U
240U
240U
260U
2200UJ
3200U
340U
2900U
2700U
340U
340U
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)-
phthalate
9500U
12000
9600UJ
8700U
14000
1100
8500U
8700U
7400
300U
600U
600U
2000
7300U
2700
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
620U
590U
7800
600U
640U
55000U
2000J
860
7300U
6900U
850U
850U
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)-
methane
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
680U
240 U
480U
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
480U
480U
240U
240U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
4400 U
6300U
680U
5800U
5500U
680U
680U
Benzyl
Alcohol
95000U
88000U
96000UJ
87000U
84000U
7100U
85000U
87000U
8500U
3000UJ
6000U
6000U
6000U
73000U
6500U
5900U
6000U
6000U
3000UJ
3000U
6200U
5900U
5900U
6000U
6400U
55000UJ
79000U
8500U
73000U
69000U
8500U
8500U
4-Bromophenyl
phenyl ether
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
6800U
240U
480U
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
480U
480U
240U
240U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
4400U
6300U
680U
5800U
5500U
680U
680U
July 2010
203
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping II
Sample ID
F43-5
F50-1
F5 1-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G13 0-1
G13 1-3
G13 3-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hlll-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H127-9
H130-1
H13 1-3
H133-5
H135-7
H137-9
H30-1
Sample
Date
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
Bis(2-chloroethyl)-
ether
310U
240U
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
1800U
3600U
280U
120U
3700U
4200U
8600U
400U
240U
540U
260U
140U
160U
180U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
160U
170U
190U
400U
410U
320UJ
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)-
ether
310U
240U
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
1800U
3600U
280U
120UJ
13000
15000
8600U
400U
240U
41000
24000
710J
180J
110J
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
160UJ
170U
190UJ
400U
410U
320UJ
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)-
phthalate
780U
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
690U
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
1000U
610U
1300U
310J
350U
400U
460U
460U
420U
4500U
460U
410U
410U
420U
470U
1000U
1000U
800UJ
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)-
methane
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
3600U
7100U
550U
240U
7500U
8500U
17000U
800U
490U
1100U
510U
280U
320U
370U
370U
340U
360U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
800U
830U
640U
Benzyl
Alcohol
7800U
6100U
6000U
9000U
6000U
5900U
6100U
45000U
89000U
6900U
3000UJ
93000U
110000U
210000U
10000U
6100U
13000U
6400U
3500UJ
4000UJ
4600UJ
4600U
4200U
4500U
4600U
4100U
4100UJ
4200U
4700UJ
10000U
10000U
8000UJ
4-Bromophenyl
phenyl ether
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
3600U
7100U
550U
240U
7500U
8500U
17000U
800U
490U
1100U
510U
280U
320U
370U
3700U
340U
3600U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
800U
830U
640 U
204
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping II
Sample ID
H3 1-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
131-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
Kl 9-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample
Date
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
Bis(2-chloroethyl)-
ether
240UJ
230UJ
130U
150U
120U
140U
140U
130U
330U
230U
240U
250U
240U
150U
160U
150U
15000U
3800U
430U
4000U
4000U
360UJ
3600U
3800U
3400U
370U
300U
240U
410U
370U
320U
240U
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)-
ether
240UJ
230UJ
150
150U
100J
140U
140U
130U
330UJ
230UJ
240UJ
260J
240UJ
150U
160U
150U
35000
3800
430UJ
4000U
4000U
360UJ
3600U
3800U
3400U
370U
300U
240U
410U
370U
320U
240U
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)-
phthalate
600UJ
580UJ
140J
700
310U
340U
360U
330U
810UJ
580UJ
610UJ
620UJ
600UJ
2100
1200
360U
380000U
94000U
1100UJ
10000U
10000U
910UJ
8900U
9400U
8500U
920U
760U
600U
12000
5700
790U
590U
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)-
methane
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
270U
290U
270U
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
320U
290U
30000U
7500U
860U
8100U
8000U
730U
7100U
7500U
6800U
730U
610U
480U
810U
740U
630U
470U
Benzyl
Alcohol
6000UJ
5800UJ
3300U
3700U
3100U
3400U
3600U
3300U
8100U
5800U
6100U
6200U
6000U
3700U
4000U
3600U
380000U
94000U
11000U
100000U
100000U
9100UJ
89000U
94000U
85000U
9200U
7600U
6000U
10000U
9300U
7900U
5900U
4-Bromophenyl
phenyl ether
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
270U
290U
270U
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
320U
290U
30000U
7500U
860U
8100U
8000U
730U
7100U
7500U
6800U
730U
610U
480U
810U
740U
630U
470U
July 2010
205
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping III
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B3 1-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
Cll 0-1
Cll 1-3
Cll 3-5
Cll 5-7
C12 0-1
C12 1-3
C12 3-5
C30-1
C31-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C51-3
C53-5
C60-1
Sample
Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
Butyl benzyl
phthalate
700U
7800U
9300U
9900U
700U
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
620U
600U
8100U
840U
770U
11000U
10000U
9700U
8800U
6800U
8000U
89000U
9200U
8900U
34000U
690U
630U
600U
9000U
6400U
600U
9600U
Carbazole
450J
7800U
9300U
9900U
340J
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
350J
600U
810U
840U
770U
11000U
10000U
9700U
880U
6800U
8000UJ
8900U
9200U
8900U
34000U
690U
630U
600U
9000U
6400U
600U
9600U
4-Chloro-3-
methyl-phenol
560U
6200U
7500U
7900U
560U
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
500U
480U
650U
670U
620U
8500U
840U
780U
700U
5400U
6400U
7100U
7400U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
7600U
1,2,4-Trichloro-
benzene
560U
6200U
7500U
7900U
560U
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
500U
480U
650U
670U
620U
8500U
840U
780U
700U
5400U
6400U
7100U
7400U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
7600U
Hexachloro-
butadiene
280U
3100U
3700U
3900U
280U
120U
130U
120U
240 U
240 U
250U
240 U
320U
340U
310U
4200U
420U
390U
350U
2700U
3200U
3600U
3700U
3600U
13000U
280U
250U
240 U
3600U
2600U
240 U
3800U
Hexachloro-
ethane
280U
3100U
3700U
3900U
280U
120U
130U
120U
240U
240U
250U
240U
320U
340U
310U
4200U
420U
390U
350U
2700U
3200U
3600U
3700U
3600U
13000U
280U
250U
240U
3600U
2600U
240U
3800U
2-Chloro-
naphthalene
560U
6200U
7500U
7900U
560U
240 U
260U
240 U
470U
480U
500U
480U
650U
670U
620U
8500U
840U
780U
700U
5400U
6400U
7100U
7400U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
7600U
206
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping III
Sample ID
C61-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D51-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E21 0-1
E30-1
E31-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F120-1
F20-1
F21-3
F40-1
F41-3
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
Butyl benzyl
phthalate
9500U
8800U
9600UJ
8700U
8400U
710U
8500U
8700U
850U
300U
600U
600U
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
620U
590U
590U
600U
640U
55000U
7900U
850U
7300U
6900U
850U
850U
Carbazole
9500U
8800U
9600UJ
8700U
8400U
1500
8500U
8700U
8500U
300U
600U
600U
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
620U
590U
590U
600U
640U
5500U
7900U
850U
7300U
1400J
850U
850U
4-Chloro-3-
methyl-phenol
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
680U
240U
480U
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
480U
480U
240U
240U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
4400U
6300U
680U
5800U
5500U
680U
680U
1,2,4-Trichloro-
benzene
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
680U
240U
480U
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
480U
480U
240U
240U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
4400U
6300U
680U
5800U
5500U
680U
680U
Hexachloro-
butadiene
3800U
3500U
3800UJ
3500U
3400U
280U
3400U
3500U
340U
120U
240 U
240 U
240 U
2900U
260U
230U
240 U
240 U
120U
120U
250U
240 U
240 U
240 U
260U
2200U
3200U
340U
2900U
2700U
340U
340U
Hexachloro-
ethane
3800U
3500U
3800UJ
3500U
3400U
280U
3400U
3500U
340U
120U
240U
240U
240U
2900U
260U
230U
240U
240U
120U
120U
250U
240U
240U
240U
260U
2200U
3200U
340U
2900U
2700U
340U
340U
2-Chloro-
naphthalene
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
680U
240 U
480U
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
480U
480U
240 U
240 U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
4400U
6300U
680U
5800U
5500U
680U
680U
July 2010
207
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping III
Sample ID
F43-5
F50-1
F5 1-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G13 0-1
G13 1-3
G13 3-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hll 1-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H127-9
H13 0-1
H13 1-3
H13 3-5
H13 5-7
H13 7-9
H30-1
Sample
Date
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
Butyl benzyl
phthalate
780U
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
690U
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
1000U
610U
1300U
640U
350U
400U
460U
460U
420U
4500U
460U
410U
410U
420U
470U
1000U
1000U
800U
Carbazole
780U
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
690U
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
1000U
610U
1300U
640U
350U
400U
460U
4600U
420U
4500U
460U
410U
410U
420U
470U
1000U
310J
270J
4-Chloro-3-
methyl-phenol
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
3600U
7100U
550U
240U
7500U
8500U
17000U
800U
490U
1100U
510U
280U
320U
370U
370U
340U
360U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
800U
830U
640U
1,2,4-Trichloro-
benzene
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
3600U
7100U
550U
240U
7500U
8500U
17000U
800U
490U
1100U
510U
280U
320U
370U
370U
340U
360U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
800U
830U
640U
Hexachloro-
butadiene
310U
240 U
240 U
360U
240 U
230U
240 U
1800U
3600U
370
120U
3700U
4200U
8600U
400 U
240 U
540U
260U
140 U
160U
180U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
160U
170U
190U
400 U
410U
320U
Hexachloro-
ethane
310U
240U
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
1800U
3600U
280U
120U
3700U
4200U
8600U
400U
240U
540U
260U
140U
160U
180U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
160U
170U
190U
400U
410U
320U
2-Chloro-
naphthalene
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
3600U
7100U
550U
240 U
7500U
8500U
17000U
800U
490U
1100U
510U
280U
320U
370U
370U
340U
360U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
230J
360J
640 U
208
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping III
Sample ID
H3 1-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
13 1-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
Kl 9-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample
Date
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
Butyl benzyl
phthalate
600U
580U
330U
370U
310U
340U
360U
330U
810UJ
580U
610U
620U
600UJ
370U
400U
360U
380000U
94000 U
1100U
10000U
10000U
910U
8900U
9400U
8500U
920U
760U
600U
1000U
930U
790U
590U
Carbazole
600U
580U
330U
370U
310U
340U
360U
330U
810U
580UJ
610UJ
620UJ
600UJ
370U
400U
360U
38000U
9400U
490J
10000U
10000U
180J
8900U
9400U
8500U
920U
760U
600U
1000U
930U
790U
590U
4-Chloro-3-
methyl-phenol
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
270U
290U
270U
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
320U
290U
30000U
7500U
860U
8100U
8000U
730U
7100U
7500U
6800U
730U
610U
480U
810U
740U
630U
470U
1,2,4-Trichloro-
benzene
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
270U
290U
270U
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
320U
520
30000U
7500U
860U
8100U
8000U
730U
7100U
7500U
6800U
730U
610U
480U
810U
740U
630U
470U
Hexachloro-
butadiene
240 U
230U
1900
56000
2400
140 U
140 U
130U
330U
230U
240 U
250U
240 U
77J
790
86000
39000
48000
12000
2500
4000U
360U
3600U
3800U
3400U
370U
300U
240 U
410U
370U
320U
240 U
Hexachloro-
ethane
240U
230U
330
420
120U
300
140U
130U
330U
230U
240U
250U
240U
150U
160U
1600000
58000
1900J
290J
4000 U
4000U
360U
3600U
3800U
3400U
370U
300U
240U
410U
370U
320U
240U
2-Chloro-
naphthalene
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
270U
290U
270U
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
320U
15000
740000
450000
190000
150000
8600
15000J
7100U
7500U
6800U
7300U
610U
480U
810U
740 U
630U
470U
July 2010
209
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping IV
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B3 1-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
Cll 0-1
Cll 1-3
Cll 3-5
Cll 5-7
C12 0-1
C12 1-3
C12 3-5
C30-1
C31-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C51-3
C53-5
C60-1
Sample
Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
2,4,5-Trichloro-
phenol
920U
10000U
12000U
13000U
930U
400U
420U
400U
780U
790U
820U
790U
1100U
1100U
1000U
14000 U
1400U
1300U
1200U
8900U
11000U
12000U
12000U
12000U
44000 U
910U
840U
790U
12000U
8500U
790U
13000U
2,4,6-Trichloro-
phenol
920U
10000U
12000U
13000U
930U
400U
420U
400U
780U
790U
820U
790U
1100U
1100U
1000U
14000U
1400U
1300U
1200U
8900U
11000U
12000U
12000U
12000U
44000U
910U
840U
790U
12000U
8500U
790U
13000U
2,4-Dichloro-
phenol
920U
10000U
12000U
13000U
930U
400U
420U
400U
780U
790U
820U
790U
1100U
1100U
1000U
14000 U
1400U
1300U
1200U
8900U
11000U
12000U
12000U
12000U
44000U
910U
840U
790U
12000U
8500U
790U
13000U
Penta-
chlorophenol
4700U
53000U
64000U
67000U
4800U
2000U
2200U
2000U
4000U
4000U
4200U
4100U
5500U
5700U
5200U
72000U
71000U
66000U
6000U
46000U
54000U
60000U
63000U
60000U
230000U
4700U
4300U
4100U
61000U
44000U
4100U
65000U
2-Chloro-
phenol
920U
10000U
12000U
13000U
930U
400U
420U
400U
780U
790U
820U
790U
1100U
1100U
1000U
14000U
1400 U
1300U
1200U
8900U
11000U
12000U
12000U
12000U
44000U
910U
840U
790U
12000U
8500U
790U
13000U
4-Chloro-
diphenylether
280U
3100U
3700U
3900U
280U
120U
130U
120U
240U
240U
250U
240U
320U
340U
310U
4200U
420U
390U
350U
2700U
3200U
3600U
3700U
3600U
13000U
280U
250U
240U
3600U
2600U
240U
3800U
Diethyl-
phthalate
700U
7800U
9300U
9900U
700U
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
620U
600U
810U
840U
770U
11000U
1000U
970U
880U
6800U
8000U
8900U
9200U
8900U
34000U
690U
630U
600U
9000U
6400U
600U
9600U
Dibenzo-
furan
1100
1700J
9300U
2500J
740
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
330J
600U
160J
840U
210J
11000U
1000U
970U
430J
6800U
8000U
8900U
1800J
8900U
34000U
430J
630U
600U
9000U
6400U
600U
9600U
210
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping IV
Sample ID
C61-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D51-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E21 0-1
E30-1
E31-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F120-1
F20-1
F21-3
F40-1
F41-3
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
2,4,5-Trichloro-
phenol
13000U
12000U
13000UJ
11000U
11000U
940U
11000U
12000U
1100U
390U
800U
790U
790U
9600U
850U
770U
800U
790U
400U
400U
810U
780U
780U
790U
850U
7300U
10000U
1100U
9600U
9100U
1100U
1100U
2,4,6-Trichloro-
phenol
13000U
12000U
13000UJ
11000U
11000U
940U
11000U
12000U
1100U
390U
800U
790U
790U
9600U
850U
770U
800U
790U
400U
400U
810U
780U
780U
790U
850U
7300U
10000U
1100U
9600U
9100U
1100U
1100U
2,4-Dichloro-
phenol
13000U
12000U
13000UJ
11000U
11000U
940U
11000U
12000U
1100U
390U
800U
790U
790U
9600U
850U
770U
800U
790U
400U
400U
810U
780U
780U
790U
850U
7300U
10000U
1100U
9600U
9100U
1100U
1100U
Penta-
chlorophenol
64000U
60000U
65000UJ
59000U
57000U
4800U
58000U
59000U
58000U
2000UJ
4100U
4100U
4100U
49000U
4400U
4000U
4100U
4100U
2100UJ
2000U
4200U
4000U
4000U
4100U
4400U
38000U
54000U
5800U
49000U
47000U
5800U
5800U
2-Chloro-
phenol
13000U
12000U
13000UJ
11000U
11000U
940U
11000U
12000U
1100U
390U
800U
790U
790U
9600U
850U
770U
800U
790U
400U
400U
810U
780U
780U
790U
850U
7300U
10000U
1100U
9600U
9100U
1100U
1100U
4-Chloro-
diphenylether
3800U
3500U
3800UJ
3500U
3400U
280U
3400U
3500U
340U
120U
240U
240U
240U
2900U
260U
230U
240U
240U
120U
120U
250U
240U
240U
240U
260U
2200U
3200U
340U
2900U
2700U
340U
340U
Diethyl-
phthalate
9500U
8800U
9600UJ
8700U
8400U
710U
8500U
8700U
850U
300U
600U
600U
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
620U
590U
590U
600U
640 U
5500U
7900U
850U
7300U
6900U
850U
850U
Dibenzo-
furan
9500U
8800U
9600UJ
8700U
8400U
850
8500U
8700U
850U
300U
600U
600U
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
110J
590U
590U
600U
640U
5500U
7900U
290J
7300U
3400J
470J
460J
July 2010
211
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping IV
Sample ID
F43-5
F50-1
F5 1-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G13 0-1
G13 1-3
G13 3-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hll 1-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H127-9
H13 0-1
H13 1-3
H13 3-5
H13 5-7
H13 7-9
H30-1
Sample
Date
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
2,4,5-Trichloro-
phenol
1000U
800U
790U
1200U
790U
770U
800U
5900U
12000U
910U
400U
12000U
14000 U
28000U
1300U
810U
1800U
850U
460U
520U
610U
610U
560UJ
590U
610U
540U
540U
560U
620U
1300U
1400U
1100U
2,4,6-Trichloro-
phenol
1000U
800U
790U
1200U
790U
770U
800U
5900U
12000U
910U
400U
12000U
14000U
28000U
1300U
810U
1800U
850U
460U
520U
610U
610U
560U
590U
610U
540U
540U
560U
620U
1300U
1400U
1100U
2,4-Dichloro-
phenol
1000U
800U
790U
1200U
790U
770U
800U
5900U
12000U
910U
400U
12000U
14000 U
28000U
1300U
810U
1800U
850U
460U
520U
610U
610U
560U
590U
610U
540U
540U
560U
620U
1300U
1400U
1100U
Penta-
chlorophenol
5300U
4100U
4100U
6100U
4100U
4000U
4100U
31000U
61000U
4700U
2100UJ
64000U
72000U
150000U
6800U
4200U
9100U
4400U
2400UJ
2700UJ
3100UJ
31000U
2900U
30000U
3100U
2800U
2800UJ
2900U
3200UJ
6800U
7000U
5400U
2-Chloro-
phenol
1000U
800U
790U
1200U
790U
770U
800U
5900U
12000U
910U
400U
12000U
14000U
28000U
1300U
810U
1800U
850U
460U
520U
610U
610UJ
560UJ
590UJ
610UJ
540UJ
540U
560U
620U
1300U
1400 U
1100U
4-Chloro-
diphenylether
310U
240U
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
1800U
3600U
280U
120U
3700U
4200U
8600U
400U
240U
540U
260U
140U
160U
180U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
160U
170U
190U
400U
410U
320UJ
Diethyl-
phthalate
780U
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
690U
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
1000U
610U
1300U
640 U
350U
400 U
460U
460U
420U
450U
460U
410U
410U
420U
470U
1000U
1000U
800UJ
Dibenzo-
furan
380J
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
210J
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
550J
610U
270J
640U
350U
400U
460U
460U
160J
450U
190J
410U
68J
72J
110J
350J
490J
150J
212
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping IV
Sample ID
H3 1-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
13 1-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
Kl 9-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample
Date
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
2,4,5-Trichloro-
phenol
800U
760U
430U
490U
410UJ
450U
480U
440U
1100U
770U
800U
820U
790U
490UJ
530UJ
480UJ
50000U
12000U
1400U
13000U
13000U
1200U
12000U
12000U
11000U
1200U
1000U
790U
1300U
1200U
1000U
780U
2,4,6-Trichloro-
phenol
800U
760U
430U
490U
410U
450U
480U
440U
1100U
770U
800U
820U
790U
490U
530U
480U
50000U
12000U
1400U
13000U
13000U
1200U
12000U
12000U
11000U
1200U
1000U
790U
1300U
1200U
1000U
780U
2,4-Dichloro-
phenol
800U
760U
430U
490U
410U
450U
480U
440U
1100U
770U
800U
820U
790U
490U
530U
480U
50000U
12000U
1400U
13000U
13000U
1200U
12000U
12000U
11000U
1200U
1000U
790U
1300U
1200U
1000U
780U
Penta-
chlorophenol
4100U
3900U
2200U
2500U
480J
2300U
2500U
2300U
5500U
4000U
4100U
4200U
4100U
2500U
2800U
2500U
260000U
64000U
7300U
69000U
68000U
6200U
60000U
64000U
58000U
6200U
5100U
4100U
6900U
6300U
5400U
4000U
2-Chloro-
phenol
800U
760U
430UJ
490UJ
410UJ
450UJ
480UJ
440UJ
1100U
770U
800U
820U
790U
490UJ
530UJ
480UJ
50000U
12000U
230J
13000U
13000U
1200U
12000U
12000U
11000U
1200U
1000U
790U
1300U
1200U
1000U
780U
4-Chloro-
diphenylether
240UJ
230UJ
130U
150U
120U
140U
140U
130U
330UJ
230UJ
240UJ
250UJ
240UJ
150U
160U
150U
15000UJ
3800UJ
430UJ
4000UJ
4000UJ
360U
3600U
3800U
3400U
3700U
300U
240U
410U
370U
320U
240U
Diethyl-
phthalate
600UJ
580UJ
330U
370U
310U
340U
360U
330U
810UJ
580UJ
610UJ
620UJ
600UJ
370U
400 U
360U
38000UJ
9400UJ
1100UJ
10000UJ
10000UJ
910U
8900U
9400U
8500U
9200U
760U
600U
1000U
930U
790U
590U
Dibenzo-
furan
600U
580U
330U
370U
310U
180J
300J
160J
810U
580U
610U
620U
600U
230J
230J
210J
38000U
9400U
740J
10000U
10000U
410J
8900U
9400U
8500U
9200U
760U
600U
1000U
930U
580J
590U
July 2010
213
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping V
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B31-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
Cll 0-1
Cll 1-3
Cll 3-5
Cll 5-7
C120-1
C12 1-3
C123-5
C30-1
C3 1-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C5 1-3
C53-5
C60-1
Sample
Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
Di-n-butyl
phthalate
700U
7800U
9300U
9900U
700U
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
620U
600U
810U
840 U
770U
11000U
10000U
9700U
390J
6800U
8000U
8900U
9200U
8900U
34000U
690U
630U
600U
9000U
6400 U
600U
9600U
2-Methyl-4,
6-dinitrophenol
4700U
53000U
64000U
67000U
4800U
2000U
2200U
2000U
4000 U
4000U
4200U
4100U
5500U
5700U
5200U
72000U
71000U
66000U
6000U
46000U
54000U
60000U
63000U
60000U
230000U
4700U
4300U
4100U
61000U
44000U
4100U
65000U
Dimethyl
phthalate
700U
7800U
9300U
9900U
700U
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
620U
600U
810U
840U
770U
11000U
1000U
970U
880U
6800U
8000U
8900U
9200U
8900U
34000U
690U
630U
600U
9000U
6400 U
600U
9600U
2,4-Dinitro-
phenol
4700UJ
53000UJ
64000U
67000UJ
4800UJ
2000U
2200U
2000U
4000 U
4000 U
4200U
4100U
5500U
5700U
5200U
72000U
7100U
6600U
6000U
46000U
54000UJ
60000UJ
63000U
60000U
230000U
4700U
4300U
4100U
61000U
44000 U
4100U
65000U
3&4-
Methylphenol
570J
21000U
25000U
26000U
1900U
790U
850U
790U
1600U
1600U
1600U
1600U
2100U
2200U
2000U
28000U
1200J
2400J
1700J
18000U
21000U
23000U
24000U
23000U
89000U
1800U
1700U
1600U
24000U
17000U
1600U
25000U
2-Methylphenol
(o-Cresol)
920U
10000U
12000U
13000U
930U
400U
420U
400U
780U
790U
820U
790U
1100U
1100U
1000U
14000U
1400U
1300U
1200U
8900U
11000U
12000U
12000U
12000U
44000U
910U
840 U
790U
12000U
8500U
790U
13000U
2,4-Dimethyl-
phenol
920U
10000U
12000U
13000U
930UJ
400U
420U
400U
780U
790U
820U
790U
1100U
1100U
1000U
14000U
1400U
1300U
1200U
8900U
11000U
12000U
12000U
12000U
44000U
910U
840 U
790U
12000U
8500U
790U
13000U
2-Nitro-
aniline
1400 U
16000U
19000U
20000U
1400 U
600U
640U
600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1600U
1700U
1500U
21000U
2100U
1900U
1800U
14000 U
16000U
18000U
18000U
18000U
67000U
1400U
1300U
1200U
18000U
13000U
1200U
19000U
214
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping V
Sample ID
C61-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D51-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E21 0-1
E30-1
E3 1-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F12 0-1
F20-1
F21-3
F40-1
F41-3
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
Di-n-butyl
phthalate
9500U
8800U
9600UJ
8700U
8400U
710U
8500U
8700U
8500U
300U
600U
600U
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
620U
590U
590U
600U
640 U
5500U
7900U
850U
7300U
6900U
850U
850U
2-Methyl-4,
6-dinitrophenol
64000 U
60000U
65000UJ
59000U
57000U
4800U
58000U
59000U
58000U
2000U
4100U
4100U
4100U
49000U
4400U
4000U
4100U
4100U
2100U
2000U
4200U
4000U
4000U
4100U
4400U
38000U
54000U
5800U
49000U
47000U
5800U
5800U
Dimethyl
phthalate
9500U
8800U
9600UJ
8700U
8400U
710U
8500U
8700U
850U
300U
600U
600U
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
620U
590U
590U
600U
640U
5500U
7900U
850U
7300U
6900U
850U
850U
2,4-Dinitro-
phenol
64000U
60000U
65000UJ
59000U
57000U
4800U
58000U
59000U
5800U
2000U
4100U
4100U
4100U
49000U
4400U
4000U
4100UJ
4100UJ
2100U
2000U
4200UJ
4000U
4000U
4100U
4400U
38000U
54000U
5800U
49000U
47000UJ
5800U
5800U
3&4-
Methylphenol
25000U
23000U
25000UJ
23000U
22000U
1900U
22000U
23000U
2200U
790U
1600U
1600U
1600U
19000U
1700U
1500U
1600U
1600U
800U
790U
1600U
1600U
1600U
1600U
1700U
15000U
21000U
2200U
19000U
18000U
2200U
2200U
2-Methylphenol
(o-Cresol)
13000U
12000U
13000UJ
11000U
11000U
940 U
11000U
12000U
1100U
390U
800U
790U
790U
9600U
850U
770U
800U
790U
400U
400U
810U
780U
780U
790U
850U
7300U
10000U
1100U
9600U
9100U
1100U
1100U
2,4-Dimethyl-
phenol
13000U
12000U
13000UJ
11000U
11000U
940 U
11000U
12000U
1100U
390U
800U
790U
790U
9600U
850U
770U
800U
790U
400U
400U
810U
780U
780U
790U
850U
7300U
10000U
1100U
9600U
9100U
1100U
1100U
2-Nitro-
aniline
19000U
18000U
19000UJ
17000U
17000U
1400U
17000U
17000U
1700U
600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
15000U
1300U
1200U
1200U
1200U
600U
600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1300U
11000U
16000U
1700U
15000U
14000U
1700U
1700U
July 2010
215
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping V
Sample ID
F43-5
F50-1
F51-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G130-1
G13 1-3
G133-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hlll-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H127-9
H130-1
H13 1-3
H13 3-5
H13 5-7
H13 7-9
H30-1
Sample
Date
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
Di-n-butyl
phthalate
780U
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
690U
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
1000U
610U
1300U
640 U
140J
400U
110J
4600U
420U
4500U
460U
410U
410U
420U
470U
1000U
1000U
800U
2-Methyl-4,
6-dinitrophenol
5300U
4100U
4100U
6100U
4100U
4000U
4100U
31000U
61000U
4700U
2100U
64000U
72000U
150000U
6800U
4200U
9100U
4400U
2400U
2700U
3100U
31000U
2900U
30000U
3100U
2800U
2800U
2900U
3200U
6800U
7000U
5400U
Dimethyl
phthalate
780U
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
690U
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
1000U
610U
1300U
640U
350U
400U
460U
460U
420U
450U
460U
410U
410U
420U
470U
1000U
1000U
800U
2,4-Dinitro-
phenol
5300U
4100U
4100U
6100U
4100U
4000U
4100U
31000U
61000U
4700U
2100U
64000 U
72000U
150000U
6800U
4200U
9100UJ
4400U
2400U
2700U
3100U
3100U
2900U
3000U
3100U
2800U
2800U
2900U
3200U
6800U
7000U
5400U
3&4-
Methylphenol
2000U
1600U
1600U
2400U
1600U
1500U
1600U
12000U
24000U
540J
800U
25000U
28000U
57000U
2700U
1600U
3500U
1700U
920U
1000U
1200U
1200U
1100U
1200U
1200U
1100U
1100U
1100U
490J
2600U
2700U
2100U
2-Methylphenol
(o-Cresol)
1000U
800U
790U
1200U
790U
770U
800U
5900U
12000U
910U
400 U
12000U
14000U
28000U
1300U
810U
1800U
850U
460U
520U
610U
610U
560U
590U
610U
540U
540U
560U
620U
1300U
1400 U
1100UJ
2,4-Dimethyl-
phenol
1000U
800U
790U
1200U
790U
770U
800U
5900U
12000U
910U
400 U
12000U
14000U
28000U
1300U
810U
1800U
850U
460U
520U
610U
610U
560U
590U
610U
540U
540U
560U
620U
1300U
1400 U
1100U
2-Nitro-
aniline
1600U
1200U
1200U
1800U
1200U
1200U
1200U
9000U
18000U
1400U
610U
19000U
21000U
43000U
2000U
1200U
2700U
1300U
700U
790U
920U
920U
840U
890U
930U
820U
820U
850U
930U
2000U
2100U
1600UJ
216
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping V
Sample ID
H31-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
13 1-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
K19-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample
Date
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
Di-n-butyl
phthalate
600U
580U
330U
370U
310U
340U
360U
330U
810U
580U
610U
620U
600U
370U
400U
360U
38000U
9400 U
1100U
10000U
10000U
910U
8900U
9400U
8500U
920U
760U
600U
1000U
930U
790U
590U
2-Methyl-4,
6-dinitrophenol
4100U
3900U
2200U
2500U
2100U
2300U
2500U
2300U
5500U
4000U
4100U
4200U
4100U
2500U
2800U
2500U
260000U
64000U
7300U
69000U
68000U
6200U
60000U
64000 U
58000U
6200U
5100U
4100U
6900U
6300U
5400U
4000U
Dimethyl
phthalate
600U
580U
330U
370U
310U
340U
360U
330U
810U
580U
610U
620U
600U
370U
400U
360U
38000U
9400U
1100U
10000U
10000U
910U
8900U
9400U
8500U
9200U
760U
600U
1000U
930U
790U
590U
2,4-Dinitro-
phenol
4100U
3900U
2200U
2500U
2100U
2300U
2500U
2300U
5500U
4000U
4100U
4200U
4100U
2500U
2800U
2500U
260000U
64000U
7300U
69000U
68000U
6200U
60000U
64000 U
58000U
62000U
5100U
4100U
6900U
6300U
5400U
4000U
3&4-
Methylphenol
1600U
1500U
870U
970U
470J
300J
710J
1400
2100U
1500U
1600U
1600U
1600U
1100
1100
690J
100000U
25000U
5600
27000U
26000U
690J
23000U
25000U
22000U
2400U
2000U
1600U
2700U
2500U
2100U
1600U
2-Methylphenol
(o-Cresol)
800UJ
760UJ
430U
490U
410U
450U
480U
440 U
1100U
770U
800U
820U
790U
490U
530U
480U
50000U
12000U
310J
13000U
13000U
1200UJ
12000U
12000U
11000U
1200U
1000U
790U
1300U
1200U
1000U
780U
2,4-Dimethyl-
phenol
800U
760U
430U
490U
410U
450U
480U
440 U
1100U
770U
800U
820U
790U
490U
530U
480U
50000U
12000U
230J
13000U
13000U
1200U
12000U
12000U
11000U
1200U
1000U
790U
1300U
1200U
1000U
780U
2-Nitro-
aniline
1200UJ
1200UJ
660U
740U
620U
680U
720U
670U
1600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1200U
740U
810U
730U
75000U
19000U
2200U
20000U
20000U
1800UJ
18000U
19000U
17000U
18000U
1500U
1200U
2000U
1900U
1600U
1200U
July 2010
217
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping VI
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B3 1-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
Cll 0-1
Cll 1-3
Cll 3-5
Cll 5-7
C12 0-1
C12 1-3
C12 3-5
C30-1
C3 1-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C5 1-3
C53-5
C60-1
Sample
Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
3-Nitro-
aniline
1400U
16000U
19000U
20000U
1400U
600U
640U
600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1600U
1700U
1500U
21000U
2100U
1900U
1800U
14000U
16000U
18000U
18000U
18000U
67000U
1400 U
1300U
1200U
18000U
13000U
1200U
19000U
4-Nitro-
aniline
1400U
16000U
19000U
20000U
1400UJ
600U
640U
600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1600UJ
1700UJ
1500U
21000U
2100U
1900U
1800U
14000 U
16000UJ
18000UJ
18000U
18000U
67000U
1400U
1300U
1200U
18000U
13000U
1200U
19000U
Nitro-
benzene
560U
6200U
7500U
7900U
560UJ
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
500U
480U
650U
670U
620U
8500U
840U
780U
700U
5400U
6400U
7100U
7400U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
7600U
N-Nitrosodi-n-
propylamine
560U
6200U
7500U
7900U
560U
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
500U
480U
650U
670U
620U
8500U
840U
780U
700U
5400U
6400 U
7100U
7400 U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
7600U
N-Nitrosodi-
methylamine
700U
7800U
9300U
9900U
700UJ
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
620U
600U
810U
840U
770U
11000U
1000U
970U
880U
6800U
8000U
8900U
9200U
8900U
34000U
690U
630U
600U
9000U
6400 U
600U
9600U
N-Nitrosodi-
phenylamine
560U
6200U
7500U
7900U
560U
240U
260U
240U
470U
480U
500U
480U
650U
670U
620U
8500U
8400U
7800U
700U
5400U
6400U
7100U
7400U
7100U
27000U
550U
510U
480U
7200U
5100U
480U
7600U
Di-n-octyl
phthalate
700U
7800U
9300U
9900U
700U
300U
320U
300U
590U
600U
620U
600U
8100U
840U
770U
11000U
10000U
9700U
8800U
6800U
8000UJ
89000U
9200U
8900U
34000U
690U
630U
600U
9000U
6400U
600U
9600U
Phenol
920U
10000U
12000U
13000U
930U
400U
420U
400U
780U
790U
820U
790U
1100U
1100U
1000U
14000U
1400U
1300U
1200U
8900U
11000U
12000U
12000U
12000U
44000U
910U
840U
790U
12000U
8500U
790U
13000U
218
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping VI
Sample ID
C61-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D51-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E21 0-1
E30-1
E3 1-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F12 0-1
F20-1
F21-3
F40-1
F41-3
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
3-Nitro-
aniline
19000U
18000U
19000UJ
17000U
17000U
1400 U
17000U
17000U
1700U
600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
15000U
1300U
1200U
1200U
1200U
600U
600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1300U
11000U
16000U
1700U
15000U
14000U
1700U
1700U
4-Nitro-
aniline
19000U
18000U
19000UJ
17000U
17000U
1400U
17000U
17000U
1700U
600U
1200UJ
1200U
1200U
15000U
1300U
1200U
1200U
1200U
600U
600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1300U
11000U
16000U
1700UJ
15000U
14000 U
1700U
1700U
Nitro-
benzene
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
680U
240UJ
480U
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
480U
480U
240UJ
240U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
4400U
6300U
680U
5800U
5500U
680U
680U
N-Nitrosodi-n-
propylamine
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
680U
240U
480U
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
480U
480U
240U
240U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
4400 U
6300U
680U
5800U
5500U
680U
680U
N-Nitrosodi-
methylamine
9500U
8800U
9600UJ
8700U
8400 U
710U
8500U
8700U
850U
300U
600U
600U
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600UJ
600UJ
300U
300U
620UJ
590U
590U
600U
640U
5500U
7900U
850U
7300U
6900U
850U
850U
N-Nitrosodi-
phenylamine
7600U
7100U
7600UJ
6900U
6700U
570U
6800U
7000U
6800U
240 U
480U
480U
480U
5800U
520U
470U
480U
480U
240 U
240 U
490U
470U
470U
480U
510U
4400U
6300U
680U
5800U
5500U
680U
680U
Di-n-octyl
phthalate
9500U
8800U
9600UJ
8700U
8400U
710U
8500U
8700U
850U
300U
600U
600U
600U
7300U
650U
590U
600U
600U
300U
300U
620U
590U
590U
600U
640 U
55000U
7900U
850U
7300U
6900U
850U
850U
Phenol
13000U
12000U
13000UJ
11000U
11000U
940U
11000U
12000U
1100U
390U
800U
790U
790U
9600U
850U
770U
800U
790U
400U
400U
810U
780U
780U
790U
850U
7300U
10000U
1100U
9600U
9100U
1100U
1100U
July 2010
219
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping VI
Sample ID
F43-5
F50-1
F51-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G130-1
G13 1-3
G133-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hlll-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H12 7-9
H13 0-1
H13 1-3
H13 3-5
H13 5-7
H13 7-9
H30-1
Sample
Date
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
3-Nitro-
aniline
1600U
1200U
1200U
1800U
1200U
1200U
1200U
9000U
18000U
1400 U
610U
19000U
21000U
43000U
2000U
1200U
2700U
1300U
700U
790U
920U
920U
840U
890U
930U
820U
820U
850U
930U
2000U
2100U
1600UJ
4-Nitro-
aniline
1600U
1200U
1200U
1800U
1200U
1200U
1200UJ
9000U
18000U
1400UJ
610U
19000U
21000U
43000U
2000U
1200U
2700U
1300U
700U
790U
920U
920U
840U
890U
930U
820U
820U
850U
930U
2000U
2100UJ
1600U
Nitro-
benzene
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
3600U
7100U
550U
240UJ
7500U
8500U
17000U
800U
490U
1100U
510U
280UJ
320UJ
370UJ
370U
340U
360U
370U
330U
330UJ
340U
370UJ
800U
830U
640U
N-Nitrosodi-n-
propylamine
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
3600U
7100U
550U
240U
7500U
8500U
17000U
800U
490U
1100U
510U
280U
320U
370U
370U
340U
360U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
800U
830U
640UJ
N-Nitrosodi-
methylamine
780U
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
690U
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
1000U
610U
1300U
640U
350U
400U
460U
460U
420U
450U
460U
410U
410U
420U
470U
1000U
1000U
800UJ
N-Nitrosodi-
phenylamine
620U
480U
480U
720U
480U
470U
490U
3600U
7100U
550U
240 U
7500U
8500U
17000U
800U
490U
1100U
510U
280U
320U
370U
3700U
340U
3600U
370U
330U
330U
340U
370U
800U
830U
640 U
Di-n-octyl
phthalate
780U
610U
600U
900U
600U
590U
610U
4500U
8900U
690U
300U
9300U
11000U
21000U
1000U
610U
1300U
640U
350U
400U
460U
460U
420U
4500U
460U
410U
410U
420U
470U
1000U
1000U
800U
Phenol
1000U
800U
790U
1200U
790U
770U
800U
5900U
12000U
910U
400U
12000U
14000U
28000U
1300U
810U
1600J
850U
460U
520U
610U
610U
560U
590U
610U
540U
570
950
1600
1400
1600
420
220
July 2010
-------
Individual SVOC Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Grouping VI
Sample ID
H3 1-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
13 1-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
K19-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample
Date
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
3-Nitro-
aniline
1200UJ
1200UJ
660U
740U
620U
680U
720U
670U
1600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1200U
740U
810U
730U
75000U
19000U
2200U
20000U
20000U
1800UJ
18000U
19000U
17000U
18000U
1500U
1200U
2000U
1900U
1600U
1200U
4-Nitro-
aniline
1200U
1200U
660U
740U
620U
680U
720U
670U
1600U
1200U
1200U
1200U
1200U
740U
810U
730U
75000U
19000U
2200U
20000U
20000U
1800U
18000U
19000U
17000U
18000U
1500U
1200U
2000U
1900U
1600U
1200U
Nitro-
benzene
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
270U
290U
270U
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
320U
290U
30000U
7500U
860U
8100U
8000U
730U
7100U
7500U
6800U
730U
610U
480U
810U
740U
630U
470U
N-Nitrosodi-n-
propylamine
480UJ
460UJ
260U
290U
250U
270U
290U
270U
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
320U
290U
30000U
7500U
860U
8100U
8000U
730UJ
7100U
7500U
6800U
730U
610U
480U
810U
740U
630U
470U
N-Nitrosodi-
methylamine
600UJ
580UJ
330U
370U
310U
340U
360U
330U
810U
580U
610U
620U
600U
370U
400U
360U
38000U
9400 U
1100U
10000U
10000U
910UJ
8900U
9400 U
8500U
920U
760U
600U
1000U
930U
790U
590U
N-Nitrosodi-
phenylamine
480U
460U
260U
290U
250U
270U
290U
270U
650U
470U
480U
490U
480U
290U
320U
290U
30000U
7500U
860U
8100U
8000U
730U
7100U
7500U
6800U
730U
610U
480U
810U
740 U
630U
470U
Di-n-octyl
phthalate
600U
580U
330U
370U
310U
340U
360U
330U
810U
580U
610U
620U
600U
370U
400 U
360U
380000U
94000U
1100U
10000U
10000U
910U
8900U
9400U
8500U
920U
760U
600U
1000UJ
930UJ
790U
590U
Phenol
820
760U
430U
490U
500
450U
640
1400
1100U
1200
800U
820U
790U
490U
530U
480U
50000U
2300J
4000
4100J
2200J
500J
12000U
12000U
11000U
1200U
1000U
790U
1300U
1200U
1000U
780U
July 2010
221
-------
Individual and Total Aroclor Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B31-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
Cll 0-1
Cll 1-3
Cll 3-5
Cll 5-7
C12 0-1
C12 1-3
C12 3-5
C30-1
C3 1-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C5 1-3
C53-5
C60-1
C61-3
Sample
Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
Aroclor
1016
2400 U
310U
370U
390U
280U
240U
260U
240U
240U
240U
250U
240U
600U
2300U
2500U
970U
2300U
13000U
11000U
300U
1800UJ
15000U
370U
360U
270U
550U
250U
240U
360U
260U
240U
12000U
11000U
Aroclor
1221
2400 U
310U
370U
390U
280U
240U
260U
240U
240U
240U
250U
240U
600U
2300U
2500U
970U
2300U
13000U
11000U
300U
1800UJ
15000U
370U
360U
270U
550U
250U
240U
360U
260U
240U
12000U
11000U
Aroclor
1232
2400U
310U
370U
390U
280U
240U
260U
240U
240U
240U
250U
240U
600U
2300U
2500U
970U
2300U
13000U
11000U
300U
1800UJ
15000U
370U
360U
270U
550U
250U
240U
360U
260U
240U
12000U
11000U
Aroclor
1242
2400U
310U
370U
390U
280U
240U
260U
240U
240U
240U
250U
240U
600U
2300U
2500U
970U
2300U
13000U
11000U
300U
1800UJ
15000U
370U
360U
270U
550U
250U
240U
360U
260U
240U
12000U
11000U
Aroclor
1248
2400
310U
370U
390U
280U
240U
260U
240U
240U
240U
200J
240U
590
2300
2400
970
2200
13000
11000
290
1600J
15000
370U
360U
270U
550J
170J
240U
360U
260U
240U
12000
11000J
Aroclor
1254
1100J
310U
370U
390U
280U
240 U
260U
240 U
240 U
240 U
150J
240 U
990U
1000
1200U
1600U
1400U
3300U
2800U
400
1100UJ
6600
700U
360U
270U
580J
110J
240 U
360U
260U
240 U
7200
5200J
Aroclor
1260
1400U
310U
370U
390U
280U
240 U
260U
240 U
240 U
240 U
250U
240 U
1300
540
280J
2300
1400
1500
880
450
1200J
3600U
370U
360U
270U
250J
250U
240 U
360U
260U
240 U
2100J
1200J
Aroclor
1262
1400U
310U
370U
390U
280U
240 U
260U
240 U
240 U
240 U
250U
240 U
1300U
550U
310U
2300U
1400U
1500U
890U
460U
1200UJ
3600U
370U
360U
270U
280U
250U
240 U
360U
260U
240 U
3800U
3800U
Aroclor
1268
1400 U
310U
370U
390U
280U
240U
260U
240U
240U
240U
250U
240U
320U
340U
310U
420U
420U
390U
350U
270U
320UJ
3600U
370U
360U
270U
280U
250U
240U
360U
260U
240U
3800U
3800U
Total Aroclors
3500
310U
370U
390U
280U
240U
260U
240U
240U
240U
350
240U
1890
3840
2680
3270
3600
14500
11880
1140
2800
21600
700U
360U
270U
1380
280
240U
360U
260U
240U
21300
17400
222
July 2010
-------
Individual and Total Aroclor Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Sample ID
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D51-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E21 0-1
E30-1
E3 1-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F120-1
F20-1
F21-3
F40-1
F41-3
F43-5
F50-1
Sample
Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
Aroclor
1016
530U
380U
350U
1800U
460U
1900U
350U
720U
240U
240U
240U
240U
320U
260U
230U
240U
240U
480U
240U
250U
240U
240U
240U
260U
440U
320U
430U
290U
270U
340U
340U
310U
240U
Aroclor
1221
530U
380U
350U
1800U
460U
1900U
350U
720U
240U
240U
240U
240U
320U
260U
230U
240U
240U
480U
240U
250U
240U
240U
240U
260U
440U
320U
430U
290U
270U
340U
340U
310U
240U
Aroclor
1232
530U
380U
350U
1800U
460U
1900U
350U
720U
240U
240U
240U
240U
320U
260U
230U
240U
240U
480U
240U
250U
240U
240U
240U
260U
440U
320U
430U
290U
270U
340U
340U
310U
240U
Aroclor
1242
530U
380U
350U
1800
460U
1900U
350U
720U
240U
240U
240U
240U
320U
260U
230U
240U
240U
480U
240U
250U
240U
240U
240U
260U
440U
320U
430U
290U
270U
340U
340U
310U
240U
Aroclor
1248
520J
380U
350U
1800U
450
1800
280J
700
240U
240U
240U
240U
320U
260U
230U
240U
240U
480U
240U
120J
240U
240U
240U
260U
370J
280J
420
290U
270U
340U
340U
310U
240U
Aroclor
1254
610J
380U
350U
870
370
850
350U
830
240 U
240 U
240 U
240 U
440 U
260U
230U
240 U
240 U
480U
240 U
250U
240 U
240 U
240 U
260U
440 U
320U
530
140J
270U
340U
340U
160J
240 U
Aroclor
1260
320J
380U
350U
700
280U
360
350U
650
240 U
240 U
240 U
240 U
290U
260U
230U
240 U
240 U
480U
240 U
250U
240 U
240 U
240 U
260U
270J
300J
260J
290U
270U
340U
340U
310U
240 U
Aroclor
1262
350U
380U
350U
710U
280U
370U
350U
660U
240 U
240 U
240 U
240 U
290U
260U
230U
240 U
240 U
480U
240 U
250U
240U
240 U
240 U
260U
440 U
320U
340U
290U
270U
340U
340U
310U
240 U
Aroclor
1268
350U
380U
350U
340U
280U
340U
350U
340U
240U
240U
240U
240U
290U
260U
230U
240U
240U
480U
240U
250U
240 U
240U
240U
260U
440U
320U
340U
290U
270U
340U
340U
310U
240U
Total Aroclors
1450
380U
350U
3370
820
3010
280
2180
240U
240U
240U
240U
440U
260U
230U
240U
240U
480U
240U
120
240U
240U
240U
260U
640
580
1210
140
270U
340U
340U
160
240U
July 2010
223
-------
Individual and Total Aroclor Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Sample ID
F51-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G130-1
G13 1-3
G133-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hll 1-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H12 7-9
H13 0-1
H13 1-3
H13 3-5
H13 5-7
H13 7-9
H30-1
H3 1-3
H33-5
110-1
Sample
Date
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
Aroclor
1016
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
360U
360U
280U
240U
370U
420U
430U
400U
240U
540U
260U
280U
320U
370U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
330U
340U
370U
400U
410U
160U
120U
120U
3800U
Aroclor
1221
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
360U
360U
280U
240U
370U
420U
430U
400U
240U
540U
260U
280U
320U
370U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
330U
340U
370U
400U
410U
160U
120U
120U
3800U
Aroclor
1232
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
360U
360U
280U
240U
370U
420U
430U
400U
240U
540U
260U
280U
320U
370U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
330U
340U
370U
400U
410U
160U
120U
120U
3800U
Aroclor
1242
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
360U
360U
280U
240U
370U
420U
430U
400U
240U
540U
260U
280U
320U
370U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
330U
340U
370U
400U
410U
160U
120U
120U
3800U
Aroclor
1248
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
360U
360U
280U
240U
370U
420U
430U
400U
240U
540U
260U
280U
320U
370U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
330U
340U
370U
400U
410U
160U
120U
120U
3800U
Aroclor
1254
240 U
360U
240 U
230U
240 U
360U
360U
280U
240 U
370U
420U
430U
400 U
240 U
280J
210J
260J
320U
370U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
330U
560U
370U
400 U
2100U
160U
120U
120U
1300U
Aroclor
1260
240 U
360U
240 U
230U
240 U
360U
360U
280U
240 U
370U
420U
430U
400 U
240 U
540U
260U
280U
320U
370U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
330U
340U
370U
400 U
410U
160U
120U
120U
1300U
Aroclor
1262
240 U
360U
240 U
230U
240 U
360U
360U
280U
240 U
370U
420U
430U
400 U
240 U
540U
260U
280U
320U
370U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
330U
340U
370U
400 U
410U
160U
120U
120U
1300U
Aroclor
1268
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
360U
360U
280U
240U
370U
420U
430U
400U
240U
540U
260U
280U
320U
370U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
330U
340U
370U
400U
410U
160U
120U
120U
1300U
Total Aroclors
240U
360U
240U
230U
240U
360U
360U
280U
240U
370U
420U
430U
400U
240U
280
210
260
320U
370U
180U
170U
180U
190U
160U
330U
560U
370U
400U
2100U
160U
120U
120U
3800U
224
July 2010
-------
Individual and Total Aroclor Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Sample ID
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
13 1-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
K19-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample
Date
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
Aroclor
1016
6300U
120U
140U
140U
130U
160U
120U
120U
120U
120U
660U
160U
38000U
750000U
190000U
43000U
10000U
2000U
1200U
7800U
380U
340U
370U
300U
240U
12000U
3000U
320U
240U
Aroclor
1221
6300U
120U
140U
140U
130U
160U
120U
120U
120U
120U
660U
160U
38000U
750000U
190000U
43000U
10000U
2000U
1200U
7800U
380U
340U
370U
300U
240U
12000U
3000U
320U
240U
Aroclor
1232
6300U
120U
140U
140U
130U
160U
120U
120U
120U
120U
660U
160U
38000U
750000U
190000U
43000U
10000U
2000U
1200U
7800U
380U
340U
370U
300U
240U
12000U
3000U
320U
240U
Aroclor
1242
6300U
120U
140U
140U
130U
160U
120U
120U
120U
120U
660U
160U
38000U
750000U
190000U
43000U
10000U
2000U
1200U
7800U
380U
340U
370U
300U
240U
12000
2900
320U
240U
Aroclor
1248
6300U
120U
92J
140U
130U
160U
120U
120U
120U
120U
650
15 OJ
38000U
750000U
190000U
43000U
10000U
2000U
1200U
7600J
210J
340U
370U
300U
240U
12000U
3000U
320U
240U
Aroclor
1254
2900U
120U
140
140 U
130U
200U
120U
120U
120U
190U
510
220
45000U
5000000U
600000U
240000U
61000U
9000U
6700U
4600J
170J
130J
370U
300U
240 U
4200
1300
320U
240 U
Aroclor
1260
2900U
120U
140 U
140 U
130U
160U
120U
120U
120U
120U
270U
160U
38000U
250000
460000
130000
33000
3100
1500
1400J
380U
340U
370U
300U
240 U
4100U
1900U
320U
240 U
Aroclor
1262
2900U
120U
140 U
140 U
130U
160U
120U
120U
120U
120U
270U
160U
38000U
260000U
470000U
130000U
34000U
3200U
1500U
3600U
380U
340U
370U
300U
240 U
4100U
1900U
320U
240 U
Aroclor
1268
2900U
120U
140U
140U
130U
160U
120U
120U
120U
120U
150U
160U
15000U
75000U
190000U
43000U
10000U
2000U
910U
3600U
380U
340U
370U
300U
240U
4100U
1900U
320U
240U
Total Aroclors
6300U
120U
232
140U
130U
200U
120U
120U
120U
190U
1160
370
45000U
250000
460000
130000
33000
3100
1500
13600
380
130
370U
300U
240U
16200
4200
320U
240U
July 2010
225
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping I
Congener
1
Sample ID
Sample Date
2
3
4
4+10
5
5+8
6
7
7+9
8
9
10
11
12+13
14
15
16
16+32
17
18
19
20+21+33
20+28
21+33
22
23
23+34
24
24+27
25
26
26+29
27
28
29
30
31
32
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
40+71
41
B41-3
2007071 1
0.101
0.0273
0.0579J
0.451
NA
0.0313J
NA
0.428
0.0799
NA
1.82
0.103
0.0465J
0.0424
0.148
0.0301 5U
0.664
1.79
NA
2.06
5.32
0.358
NA
5.13
2.71
1.76
0.0301 5U
NA
0.0607
NA
0.43
NA
0.797
0.289
NA
NA
0.0605U
4.79
1.51
0.0535J
0.0862
0.0301 5U
1.13
0.0301 5U
0.0302J
NA
2.3
0.306
C120-1
20061221
0.1 35U
0.135U
0.135U
NA
0.4
NA
5.8
0.78
NA
0.4
NA
NA
NA
0.135U
0.36
0.135U
2.3
NA
4.7
3.2
5.2
0.41
6.8
NA
NA
4
NA
0.1 35U
NA
0.54
0.9
2
NA
NA
10
0.1 35U
0.135U
11
NA
NA
0.135U
0.135U
3.7
0.135U
0.135U
2.4
NA
NA
C121-3
20061221
3.6J
1.3J
3.8J
NA
5.1
NA
68J
8.5
NA
4.9
NA
NA
NA
0.98
3.6
0.17U
24
NA
37J
27
44J
3.5
57J
NA
NA
32
NA
0.81
NA
4.3
6.7
15
NA
NA
78J
0.69
0.17U
93J
NA
NA
1.4
0.17U
29
0.17U
0.17U
21
NA
NA
C123-5
20061221
1.8J
1.2J
3.4J
NA
8.5
NA
160J
17
NA
6.4
NA
NA
NA
0.59
3.9
0.175U
46J
NA
75J
53J
93J
5.9
130J
NA
NA
70J
NA
0.95
NA
8
12
32
NA
NA
160J
1
0.175U
220J
NA
NA
1.8
0.175U
58J
0.84
0.175U
87J
NA
NA
C40-1
2007071 1
0.458J
0.1 52J
0.358J
2.24
NA
0.1 38J
NA
2.05
0.447J
NA
10.4
0.695
0.226J
0.21 9J
0.742
0.2655U
3.85
9.65
NA
12.6
30.3
1.51
NA
34.3
19.3
11.5
0.2655U
NA
0.279J
NA
2.41
NA
5.05
1.47
NA
NA
0.53U
31.8
7.79
0.336J
0.362J
0.2655U
7.79
0.2655U
0.238J
NA
16.3
2.29
C41-3
2007071 1
0.224
0.0698J
0.172
1.11
NA
0.053J
NA
1.34
0.213
NA
6.55
0.348
0.0695J
0.0793J
0.373
0.0296
1.92
4.02
NA
7.8
21.4
1.14
NA
23.9
14.4
8
0.0303J
NA
0.115
NA
1.43
NA
3.44
1
NA
NA
0.0745U
23.6
4.84
0.194
0.264
0.0372U
5.13
0.0372U
0.179
NA
18.1
2.75
C43-5
2007071 1
0.016
0.0302U
0.0148
0.0393
NA
0.0302U
NA
0.0277
0.0302U
NA
0.152
0.0104
0.0302U
0.0167
0.0118
0.0302U
0.0474J
0.157
NA
0.181
0.49
0.0306
NA
0.509
0.3
0.179
0.0302U
NA
0.00551
NA
0.041 6J
NA
0.0863
0.0216
NA
NA
0.0605U
0.503
0.123
0.00526
0.0302U
0.0302U
0.125
0.0302U
0.0302U
NA
0.296
0.0496J
226
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping I
Congener
1
Sample ID
Sample Date
2
3
4
4+10
5
5+8
6
7
7+9
8
9
10
11
12+13
14
15
16
16+32
17
18
19
20+21+33
20+28
21+33
22
23
23+34
24
24+27
25
26
26+29
27
28
29
30
31
32
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
40+71
41
C60-1
2007071 1
11.3
2.97J
7.32
54.5
NA
4.26
NA
49
13.5
NA
226
16.7
3.19J
1.58J
15.9
0.984J
89. U
166
NA
221
538
32.7
NA
537
290
176
1.1 7J
NA
7.6
NA
36.3
NA
79
26.7
NA
NA
4.035U
477
131
3.86J
6.13
2.02U
122J
2.02U
4.72
NA
237
56.5
C61-3
2007071 1
3.51J
0.702J
2.1J
39.1
NA
1.69J
NA
27.5
5.12
NA
144
8.39
2.06J
0.803J
6.45
0.24J
44.5
164
NA
207
576
32.2
NA
530
301
179
0.722J
NA
4.37
NA
28.6
NA
71.4
24.8
NA
NA
3.64U
542
137
2.46J
3.87
0.482J
112
1.82U
4.8
NA
328
66.3
C63-5
2007071 1
0.344J
0.223J
0.261J
0.799J
NA
0.3265U
NA
0.629J
0.1 98J
NA
3.49
0.296J
0.127J
0.21J
0.429J
0.1 54J
1.29
2.89
NA
4.42
9.82
0.475J
NA
13.8
7.84
4.66
0.3265U
NA
0.3265U
NA
0.876
NA
1.97
0.61 9J
NA
NA
0.655U
12.5
2.7
0.3265U
0.181J
0.3265U
3.18
0.3265U
0.3265U
NA
6.45
2.14
C65-7
2007071 1
0.0777
0.376U
0.376U
0.481J
NA
0.376U
NA
0.351J
0.128J
NA
1.41J
0.0892J
0.376U
0.75U
0.1 67J
0.376U
0.442J
1.42
NA
2.41
5.54
0.376U
NA
5.39
2.94
1.79
0.376U
NA
0.376U
NA
0.269J
NA
0.634J
0.1 92J
NA
NA
0.75U
5.24
1.1
0.376U
0.0669J
0.376U
1.03
0.376U
0.376U
NA
3.13
0.672J
C67-9
2007071 1
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.685U
NA
0.343U
NA
0.225J
0.343U
NA
0.822J
0.343U
0.343U
0.685U
0.145J
0.343U
0.273J
0.809
NA
0.797
2.66
0.343U
NA
3.25
1.75
1.07
0.343U
NA
0.343U
NA
0.1 37J
NA
0.388J
0.343U
NA
NA
0.685U
2.9
0.576J
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.511J
0.343U
0.343U
NA
1.53
0.1 75J
C80-1
2007071 1
0.903
0.37J
0.801
6.74
NA
0.308J
NA
6.16
0.939
NA
33.2
1.46
0.309J
0.346J
1.97
0.0731J
11.9
49.8
NA
66.4
192
9.48
NA
207
116
66.7
0.1 37J
NA
1.48
NA
11.1
NA
27.8
7.58
NA
NA
0.68U
209
47.8
1.39
1.44
0.341 U
36
0.341 U
1.83
NA
129
25.9
C81-3
2007071 1
1.66U
1.66U
1.66U
1.6J
NA
1.66U
NA
1.1 6J
1.66U
NA
8.74
1.66U
1.66U
0.624J
1.66U
1.66U
2.49J
13.4
NA
15.7
51
1.66U
NA
42.5
25.3
14.5
1.66U
NA
1.66U
NA
1.88J
NA
5.39
1.57J
NA
NA
3.325U
46.6
10.2
1.66U
1.66U
1.66U
8.57
1.66U
1.66U
NA
28.8
5.66
July 2010
227
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping I
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
1
2
3
4
4+10
5
5+8
6
7
7+9
8
9
10
11
12+13
14
15
16
16+32
17
18
19
20+21+33
20+28
21+33
22
23
23+34
24
24+27
25
26
26+29
27
28
29
30
31
32
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
40+71
41
D20-1
20061221
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.012U
NA
0.14
0.012U
NA
0.012U
NA
NA
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.077
NA
0.062
0.03
0.012U
0.012U
0.081
NA
NA
0.059
NA
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.027
NA
NA
0.15
0.012U
0.012U
0.15
NA
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
NA
NA
G11 0-1
20061220
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
NA
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
NA
G11 1-3
20061220
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19UJ
NA
0.19UJ
0.19UJ
NA
0.19UJ
NA
NA
NA
0.19UJ
0.19UJ
0.19UJ
0.19UJ
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
NA
G11 3-5
20061220
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
NA
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
NA
G11 5-7
20061220
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
NA
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
NA
G31-3
20070711
0.1 56J
0.112J
0.1 54J
0.764
NA
0.1 92J
NA
0.708
0.1 97J
NA
3.53
0.23
0.144J
0.148J
0.344
0.118J
1.34
1.71
NA
2.07
5.45
0.466
NA
6.3
3.37
2.16
0.1075U
NA
0.1075U
NA
0.51
NA
0.852
0.296
NA
NA
0.2145U
5.42
1.32
0.1075U
0.0973J
0.1075U
1.47
0.0399J
0.0583J
NA
2.4
0.413
228
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping I
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
1
2
3
4
4+10
5
5+8
6
7
7+9
8
9
10
11
12+13
14
15
16
16+32
17
18
19
20+21+33
20+28
21+33
22
23
23+34
24
24+27
25
26
26+29
27
28
29
30
31
32
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
40+71
41
G30-1
20061221
0.17
0.16
0.35
NA
0.029U
NA
0.55
0.065
NA
0.029U
NA
NA
NA
0.098
0.21
0.029U
0.25
NA
0.25
0.12
0.33
0.029U
0.38
NA
NA
0.23
NA
0.029U
NA
0.029U
0.029U
0.096
NA
NA
0.64
0.029U
0.029U
0.83
NA
NA
0.029U
0.029U
0.21
0.029U
0.14
0.29
NA
NA
H11 0-1
20061220
0.155U
0.155U
0.155U
NA
0.155U
NA
2.2
0.155U
NA
0.155U
NA
NA
NA
0.155U
0.155U
0.155U
0.82
NA
3.5
1.8
4.6
0.155U
4.8
NA
NA
2.9
NA
0.155U
NA
0.33
0.31
1
NA
NA
7.4
0.155U
0.155U
9.4
NA
NA
0.155U
0.155U
2.5
0.155U
0.155U
1.7
NA
NA
H11 1-3
20061220
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.165U
NA
NA
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.38
0.165U
0.165U
NA
NA
0.165U
NA
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
NA
0.53
0.165U
0.165U
0.65
NA
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
NA
H30-1
20061220
0.041
0.078
0.065
NA
0.0165U
NA
0.21
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
NA
NA
NA
0.0165U
0.055
0.0165U
0.12
NA
0.15
0.048
0.12
0.0165U
0.17
NA
NA
0.11
NA
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
0.052
0.063
NA
NA
0.3
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.28
NA
NA
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.14
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.055
NA
NA
H31-3
20061220
0.039J
0.013UJ
0.013UJ
NA
0.013UJ
NA
0.078J
0.013UJ
NA
0.013UJ
NA
NA
NA
0.013UJ
0.013UJ
0.013UJ
0.013UJ
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.029
NA
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
NA
0.046
0.013U
0.013U
0.046
NA
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
NA
H33-5
20061220
0.051J
0.01 15UJ
0.01 15UJ
NA
0.01 15UJ
NA
0.082J
0.01 15UJ
NA
0.01 15UJ
NA
NA
NA
0.01 15UJ
0.01 15UJ
0.01 15UJ
0.0115UJ
NA
0.0115U
0.0115U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
NA
NA
0.0115U
NA
0.01 15U
NA
0.0115U
0.0115U
0.0115U
NA
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
NA
NA
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
NA
NA
July 2010
229
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping I
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
1
2
3
4
4+10
5
5+8
6
7
7+9
8
9
10
11
12+13
14
15
16
16+32
17
18
19
20+21+33
20+28
21+33
22
23
23+34
24
24+27
25
26
26+29
27
28
29
30
31
32
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
40+71
41
130-1
20061220
0.11J
0.057J
0.096J
NA
0.063
NA
0.42
0.075
NA
0.031
NA
NA
NA
0.035
0.15
0.0125U
0.17
NA
0.45
0.16
0.42
0.088
0.4
NA
NA
0.27
NA
0.0125U
NA
0.068
0.22
0.14
NA
NA
1
0.0125U
0.0125U
0.96
NA
NA
0.038
0.0125U
0.23
0.0125U
0.0125U
0.27
NA
NA
131-3
20061220
0.14
0.012U
0.056
NA
0.051
NA
0.28
0.026
NA
0.012U
NA
NA
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.056
NA
0.1
0.042
0.089
0.012U
0.093
NA
NA
0.065
NA
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.027
0.026
NA
NA
0.19
0.012U
0.012U
0.17
NA
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.051
0.012U
0.012U
0.035
NA
NA
K1 0-1
20061220
1800J
80UJ
1200J
NA
860J
NA
5400J
440J
NA
350J
NA
NA
NA
80UJ
80UJ
80UJ
2200J
NA
870J
620J
1500J
80UJ
1000J
NA
NA
520J
NA
80UJ
NA
80UJ
80UJ
190J
NA
NA
2200J
80UJ
80UJ
1500J
NA
NA
80UJ
80UJ
700J
80UJ
80UJ
180J
NA
NA
K1 1-3
20061220
350J
20UJ
31 OJ
NA
230J
NA
2400J
170J
NA
130J
NA
NA
NA
20UJ
44J
20UJ
900J
NA
360J
250J
660J
20UJ
450J
NA
NA
250J
NA
20UJ
NA
20UJ
20UJ
69J
NA
NA
1000J
20UJ
20UJ
700J
NA
NA
20UJ
20UJ
220J
20UJ
20UJ
64J
NA
NA
K1 3-5
20061220
83J
22UJ
85J
NA
55J
NA
540J
22UJ
NA
22UJ
NA
NA
NA
22UJ
22UJ
22UJ
21 OJ
NA
84J
66J
160J
22UJ
120J
NA
NA
61J
NA
22UJ
NA
22UJ
22UJ
22UJ
NA
NA
260J
22UJ
22UJ
160J
NA
NA
22UJ
22UJ
58J
22UJ
22UJ
22UJ
NA
NA
K1 5-7
20061220
220J
10.5UJ
150J
NA
28J
NA
21 OJ
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
NA
NA
NA
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
79J
NA
30J
10.5UJ
34J
10.5UJ
37J
NA
NA
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
NA
NA
75J
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
57J
NA
NA
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
NA
NA
230
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping I
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
1
2
3
4
4+10
5
5+8
6
7
7+9
8
9
10
11
12+13
14
15
16
16+32
17
18
19
20+21+33
20+28
21+33
22
23
23+34
24
24+27
25
26
26+29
27
28
29
30
31
32
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
40+71
41
K1 7-9
20061220
6.4J
2.05UJ
6.6J
NA
2.05UJ
NA
34J
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
NA
NA
NA
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
10J
NA
6.3J
4.6J
7.7J
2.05UJ
7.6J
NA
NA
4.1J
NA
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
NA
16J
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
11J
NA
NA
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
4.7J
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
NA
K1 9-1 1
20061220
4.3J
1.8UJ
4.7J
NA
1.8UJ
NA
16J
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
NA
NA
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
6.2J
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
4.3J
1.8UJ
4.2J
NA
NA
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
NA
8.2J
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
6.1J
NA
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
NA
S20-1
20070710
24.2
2.66J
14.8
247
NA
19
NA
196
50.7
NA
949
70.8
16
4.67J
55.6
2.1U
317
509
NA
655
1600
112
NA
1800
1040
595
3.43J
NA
25.9
NA
122
NA
281
79.5
NA
NA
4.2U
1610
371
11.2
20
2.1U
420
2.1U
10.7
NA
570
109
S2-1-3
20070710
5.22
1.1 2J
2.6J
55.9
NA
2.83J
NA
41.7
7.66
NA
235
12.4
3.05J
0.988J
8.76
1.98U
72.9
210
NA
256
695
42.5
NA
755
444
259
1.1 6J
NA
7.59
NA
43.7
NA
115
32.8
NA
NA
3.955U
747
160
3.68J
5.72
1.98U
166
1.98U
4.73
NA
373
101
S2-3-5
20070710
0.158
0.141
0.162
1.64
NA
0.0979
NA
1.47
0.195
NA
7.78
0.426
0.129
0.0357J
0.413
0.04335U
1.99
3.76
NA
6.75
18.2
1.33
NA
23.2
13.9
8.52
0.0507J
NA
0.143
NA
1.52
NA
3.65
0.923
NA
NA
0.0865U
22.7
3.57
0.0964
0.281
0.04335U
5.24
0.04335U
0.139
NA
10.4
1.92
S2-5-7
20070710
0.0203
0.00977
0.0101
0.152
NA
0.00718
NA
0.0758
0.0127
NA
0.39
0.0289
0.02995U
0.00782
0.0174
0.02995U
0.0988
0.352
NA
0.404
1.01
0.0822
NA
0.886
0.554
0.317
0.02995U
NA
0.016
NA
0.0637
NA
0.137
0.0399J
NA
NA
0.06U
0.879
0.253
0.02995U
0.01 02J
0.02995U
0.206
0.02995U
0.02995U
NA
0.373
0.0956
July 2010
231
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping II
Congener
41+64+68
Sample ID
Sample Date
42
42+59
43+49
43+73
44
44+47+65
45
45+51
46
47+48+75
48
49
50
50+53
51
52
52+73
53
54
55
56
56+60
57
58
59+62+75
60
61
61+74
62
63
64
65
66
66+76+80
67
68
69
70
70+74+76
71
72
77
78
79
80
81
82
B41-3
2007071 1
NA
1.36
NA
NA
0.185
NA
4.71
NA
1.33
0.389
NA
1.03
3.17
NA
0.882
NA
4.96
NA
NA
0.0736
0.137
2.06
NA
0.033J
0.0894
0.473
0.901
0.0605U
NA
NA
0.186
1.98
NA
3.83
NA
0.159
0.0465J
0.0301 5U
NA
6.94
NA
0.0512J
0.402
0.0301 5U
0.0393J
0.0301 5U
0.0301 5U
0.671
C120-1
20061221
8.6
NA
4.3
11
NA
9.1
NA
2.1
NA
0.86
4.5
NA
NA
0.1 35U
NA
0.95
NA
13
2.2
0.135U
0.1 35U
NA
9.4
0.1 35U
0.135U
NA
NA
NA
7.5
0.1 35U
0.61
NA
0.1 35U
NA
9.9
0.4
NA
0.135U
18
NA
3.1
0.135U
1.4
0.135U
0.135U
NA
0.1UJ
2.1
C121-3
20061221
77J
NA
39J
100J
NA
81J
NA
20
NA
7.8
40J
NA
NA
0.58
NA
6.4
NA
110J
19
0.17U
1.3
NA
85J
0.72
0.36
NA
NA
NA
75J
0.17U
5.9
NA
0.17U
NA
93J
3.9
NA
0.17U
170J
NA
27
0.6
12
0.17U
0.17U
NA
0.6UJ
18
C123-5
20061221
350J
NA
170J
440J
NA
360J
NA
83J
NA
32
180J
NA
NA
1.9
NA
27
NA
470J
84J
0.49
9.6
NA
440J
2.9
0.175U
NA
NA
NA
350J
0.175U
25
NA
0.175U
NA
390J
17
NA
0.175U
770J
NA
120J
0.175U
43J
0.175U
0.175U
NA
3.25UJ
60J
C40-1
2007071 1
NA
9.78
NA
NA
1.55
NA
33.1
NA
7.06
2.57
NA
8.16
23
NA
5.1
NA
36.8
NA
NA
0.2655U
0.51 9J
15.8
NA
0.2655U
0.654
3.07
5.45
0.53U
NA
NA
1.19
15
NA
30.6
NA
0.998
0.209J
0.2655U
NA
53.5
NA
0.482J
2.64
0.2655U
0.22J
0.2655U
0.112J
5.09
C41-3
2007071 1
NA
9.9
NA
NA
1.87
NA
37.1
NA
8.25
3.01
NA
9.81
25.5
NA
6.1
NA
47
NA
NA
0.0706J
0.474
14.7
NA
0.174
0.789
3.29
5.53
0.0745U
NA
NA
1.06
16.1
NA
28.7
NA
0.933
0.111
0.0372U
NA
54.3
NA
0.25
2.04
0.0372U
0.184
0.0372U
0.0733J
3.47
C43-5
2007071 1
NA
0.171
NA
NA
0.0278J
NA
0.678
NA
0.136
0.051 5J
NA
0.155
0.465
NA
0.0906
NA
1
NA
NA
0.0302U
0.01 8J
0.289
NA
0.0302U
0.0191J
0.0573J
0.138
0.0605U
NA
NA
0.0251J
0.295
NA
0.586
NA
0.01 99J
0.0302U
0.0302U
NA
1.21
NA
0.0302U
0.051 7J
0.0302U
0.00836J
0.01 15J
0.0302U
0.18
232
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping II
Congener
41+64+68
Sample ID
Sample Date
42
42+59
43+49
43+73
44
44+47+65
45
45+51
46
47+48+75
48
49
50
50+53
51
52
52+73
53
54
55
56
56+60
57
58
59+62+75
60
61
61+74
62
63
64
65
66
66+76+80
67
68
69
70
70+74+76
71
72
77
78
79
80
81
82
C60-1
2007071 1
NA
144
NA
NA
25.8
NA
479
NA
113
40.6
NA
144
344
NA
78.7
NA
551
NA
NA
2.02U
8.09
237
NA
3.32J
11.2
51.1
93.9
4.035U
NA
NA
24.3
226
NA
471
NA
17.9
2.77J
2.02U
NA
850
NA
4.53
42.3
2.02U
4.05
2.02U
1.85J
111
C61-3
2007071 1
NA
185
NA
NA
30.1
NA
635
NA
142
51.7
NA
178
437
NA
103
NA
776
NA
NA
1.82U
14.9
320
NA
3.13J
12.9
57.3
185
3.64U
NA
NA
26.8
321
NA
610
NA
19.8
1.44J
1.82U
NA
1120
NA
4.1
51.1
1.82U
4.09
1.82U
2.96J
106
C63-5
2007071 1
NA
4.44
NA
NA
0.478J
NA
16.4
NA
2.97
1.12
NA
3.98
11
NA
2.27
NA
23.7
NA
NA
0.3265U
0.444J
7.28
NA
0.3265U
0.596J
1.28
4.53
0.655U
NA
NA
0.731
7.25
NA
15.3
NA
0.503J
0.3265U
0.3265U
NA
32.7
NA
0.3265U
1.64
0.3265U
0.21 9J
0.3265U
0.3265U
4.42
C65-7
2007071 1
NA
1.54
NA
NA
0.246J
NA
6.58
NA
1.35
0.494J
NA
1.79
4.28
NA
0.954
NA
7.81
NA
NA
0.376U
0.376U
3.41
NA
0.376U
0.376U
0.634J
1.77
0.75U
NA
NA
0.245J
3.13
NA
6.12
NA
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
NA
11.8
NA
0.376U
0.428J
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
0.91
C67-9
2007071 1
NA
0.775
NA
NA
0.343U
NA
3.33
NA
0.559J
0.343U
NA
0.906
2.36
NA
0.408J
NA
4.04
NA
NA
0.343U
0.343U
1.62
NA
0.343U
0.343U
0.254J
0.699
0.685U
NA
NA
0.149J
1.49
NA
3.3
NA
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
NA
6
NA
0.343U
0.1 99J
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.722
C80-1
2007071 1
NA
73.9
NA
NA
12.5
NA
274
NA
62.9
22
NA
73.1
186
NA
46.3
NA
335
NA
NA
0.593J
4.02
118
NA
1.28
6.17
22.9
59.3
0.68U
NA
NA
10
120
NA
237
NA
6.81
0.62J
0.341 U
NA
445
NA
1.47
18.4
0.209J
2.18
0.341 U
0.899
29.9
C81-3
2007071 1
NA
15.5
NA
NA
2.62J
NA
59.1
NA
10.3
2.92J
NA
15.8
39.8
NA
8.39
NA
68.2
NA
NA
1.66U
1.66U
27.8
NA
1.66U
0.899J
4.93
14
3.325U
NA
NA
1.91J
26.1
NA
54.9
NA
1.6J
1.66U
1.66U
NA
100
NA
1.66U
3.82
1.66U
1.66U
1.66U
1.66U
8.62
July 2010
233
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping II
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
41+64+68
42
42+59
43+49
43+73
44
44+47+65
45
45+51
46
47+48+75
48
49
50
50+53
51
52
52+73
53
54
55
56
56+60
57
58
59+62+75
60
61
61+74
62
63
64
65
66
66+76+80
67
68
69
70
70+74+76
71
72
77
78
79
80
81
82
D20-1
20061221
0.084
NA
0.036
0.098
NA
0.078
NA
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.045
NA
NA
0.012U
NA
0.012U
NA
0.1
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.095
0.012U
0.012U
NA
NA
NA
0.067
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.012U
NA
0.097
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.17
NA
0.036
0.012U
0.02
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.0012U
0.012U
G11 0-1
20061220
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
NA
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
NA
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.0185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.0185U
0.185U
G11 1-3
20061220
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
NA
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
NA
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.019U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.019U
0.19U
G11 3-5
20061220
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
NA
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
NA
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.0125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.041
0.125U
G11 5-7
20061220
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
NA
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
NA
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.012U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.012U
0.12U
G31-3
20070711
NA
1.31
NA
NA
0.24
NA
5.46
NA
1.36
0.327
NA
1.14
3.65
NA
0.954
NA
7.31
NA
NA
0.1075U
0.14J
2.49
NA
0.1075U
0.253
0.511
1.25
0.2145U
NA
NA
0.203J
2.51
NA
4.84
NA
0.1 54J
0.1075U
0.1075U
NA
9.83
NA
0.1075U
0.49
0.1075U
0.115J
0.1075U
0.0452J
1.47
234
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping II
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
41+64+68
42
42+59
43+49
43+73
44
44+47+65
45
45+51
46
47+48+75
48
49
50
50+53
51
52
52+73
53
54
55
56
56+60
57
58
59+62+75
60
61
61+74
62
63
64
65
66
66+76+80
67
68
69
70
70+74+76
71
72
77
78
79
80
81
82
G30-1
20061221
1.3J
NA
0.37
2.7
NA
3
NA
0.16
NA
0.067
0.54
NA
NA
0.029U
NA
0.063
NA
7.4J
0.27
0.029U
0.029U
NA
1.8
0.029U
0.029U
NA
NA
NA
2.3
0.029U
0.1
NA
0.029U
NA
2.3
0.029U
NA
0.029U
8.4J
NA
0.4
0.029U
0.23
0.029U
0.029U
NA
0.075UJ
2
H11 0-1
20061220
5.3
NA
2.5
6.1
NA
5.9
NA
1.5
NA
0.6
2.1
NA
NA
0.155U
NA
0.44
NA
7.8
1.5
0.155U
0.155U
NA
5.9
0.155U
0.155U
NA
NA
NA
3.9
0.155U
0.155U
NA
0.155U
NA
5.3
0.155U
NA
0.155U
9.8
NA
2.2
0.155U
0.355UJ
0.155U
0.155U
NA
0.05UJ
1.1
H11 1-3
20061220
0.65
NA
0.165U
0.81
NA
0.77
NA
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
NA
NA
0.165U
NA
0.165U
NA
1.2
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.71
0.165U
0.165U
NA
NA
NA
0.53
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.165U
NA
0.71
0.165U
NA
0.165U
1.4
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.06UJ
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.01 65U
0.165U
H30-1
20061220
0.17
NA
0.082
0.24
NA
0.18
NA
0.049
NA
0.0165U
0.094
NA
NA
0.0165U
NA
0.035
NA
0.28
0.067
0.0165U
0.0165U
NA
0.21
0.0165U
0.0165U
NA
NA
NA
0.14
0.0165U
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
NA
0.22
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
0.33
NA
0.073
0.0165U
0.044
0.0165U
0.0165U
NA
0.001 65U
0.051
H31-3
20061220
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
NA
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
NA
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.033
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.0031
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.0013U
0.013U
H33-5
20061220
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
0.0115U
NA
NA
0.01 15U
NA
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
NA
NA
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
NA
0.01 15U
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
NA
0.01 15U
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.001 15U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
NA
0.001 15U
0.0115U
July 2010
235
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping II
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
41+64+68
42
42+59
43+49
43+73
44
44+47+65
45
45+51
46
47+48+75
48
49
50
50+53
51
52
52+73
53
54
55
56
56+60
57
58
59+62+75
60
61
61+74
62
63
64
65
66
66+76+80
67
68
69
70
70+74+76
71
72
77
78
79
80
81
82
130-1
20061220
0.79
NA
0.4
1.3
NA
1
NA
0.28
NA
0.14
0.37
NA
NA
0.0125U
NA
0.12
NA
1.7
0.37
0.0125U
0.0125U
NA
0.75
0.0125U
0.0125U
NA
NA
NA
0.54
0.0125U
0.052
NA
0.0125U
NA
0.93
0.029
NA
0.0125U
1.5
NA
0.38
0.0125U
0.11
0.0125U
0.0125U
NA
0.0085UJ
0.29
131-3
20061220
0.098
NA
0.052
0.12
NA
0.11
NA
0.03
NA
0.012U
0.046
NA
NA
0.012U
NA
0.012U
NA
0.16
0.035
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.11
0.012U
0.012U
NA
NA
NA
0.067
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.012U
NA
0.12
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.18
NA
0.049
0.012U
0.01
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.00125U
0.041
K1 0-1
20061220
1100J
NA
340J
1700J
NA
1900J
NA
21 OJ
NA
80UJ
700J
NA
NA
80UJ
NA
80UJ
NA
4600J
250J
80UJ
80UJ
NA
1100J
80UJ
80UJ
NA
NA
NA
1300J
80UJ
80UJ
NA
80UJ
NA
1300J
80UJ
NA
80UJ
2200J
NA
300J
80UJ
75UJ
80UJ
80UJ
NA
27.5UJ
350J
K1 1-3
20061220
350J
NA
120J
450J
NA
550J
NA
69J
NA
20UJ
230J
NA
NA
20UJ
NA
20UJ
NA
1100J
76J
20UJ
20UJ
NA
370J
20UJ
20UJ
NA
NA
NA
430J
20UJ
20UJ
NA
20UJ
NA
470J
20UJ
NA
20UJ
700J
NA
120J
20UJ
19UJ
20UJ
20UJ
NA
7.5UJ
82J
K1 3-5
20061220
91J
NA
22UJ
120J
NA
150J
NA
22UJ
NA
22UJ
61J
NA
NA
22UJ
NA
22UJ
NA
290J
22UJ
22UJ
22UJ
NA
100J
22UJ
22UJ
NA
NA
NA
120J
22UJ
22UJ
NA
22UJ
NA
130J
22UJ
NA
22UJ
180J
NA
22UJ
22UJ
6UJ
22UJ
22UJ
NA
2.2UJ
22UJ
K1 5-7
20061220
31J
NA
10.5UJ
36J
NA
41J
NA
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
NA
NA
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
NA
80J
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
NA
33J
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
NA
NA
NA
37J
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
NA
41J
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
77J
NA
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
2.4J
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
NA
1.05UJ
10.5UJ
236
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping II
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
41+64+68
42
42+59
43+49
43+73
44
44+47+65
45
45+51
46
47+48+75
48
49
50
50+53
51
52
52+73
53
54
55
56
56+60
57
58
59+62+75
60
61
61+74
62
63
64
65
66
66+76+80
67
68
69
70
70+74+76
71
72
77
78
79
80
81
82
K1 7-9
20061220
5.7J
NA
2.05UJ
7J
NA
6.2J
NA
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
NA
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
NA
11J
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
6J
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
NA
NA
6.2J
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
NA
7J
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
11J
NA
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
0.47J
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
0.205UJ
2.05UJ
K1 9-1 1
20061220
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
3.9J
NA
3.8J
NA
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
NA
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
NA
7J
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
NA
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
NA
4.1J
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
6.5J
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
0.18UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
0.18UJ
1.8UJ
S20-1
20070710
NA
432
NA
NA
80.8
NA
1450
NA
353
121
NA
442
1020
NA
239
NA
1690
NA
NA
4.21
37.2
680
NA
9.59
29.3
153
359
4.2U
NA
NA
65
593
NA
1380
NA
54.4
7.11
2.1U
NA
2500
NA
10.3
124
2.1U
10.2
2.1U
5.7
204
S2-1-3
20070710
NA
223
NA
NA
39.7
NA
763
NA
177
64.8
NA
224
509
NA
121
NA
889
NA
NA
1.98U
21.3
360
NA
4.61
13.9
69.5
228
3.955U
NA
NA
32.3
351
NA
696
NA
26.4
1.86J
1.98U
NA
1300
NA
4.22
64.7
1.98U
4.32
1.98U
2.61J
110
S2-3-5
20070710
NA
6.02
NA
NA
1.26
NA
21.9
NA
6.03
2.13
NA
6.71
14.7
NA
4.22
NA
27.9
NA
NA
0.04335U
0.101
8.25
NA
0.151
0.325
2.01
4.57
0.0865U
NA
NA
0.639
9.31
NA
16.2
NA
0.609
0.04335U
0.04335U
NA
29.7
NA
0.121
1.56
0.04335U
0.116
0.04335U
0.079J
2.29
S2-5-7
20070710
NA
0.232
NA
NA
0.0352J
NA
0.748
NA
0.201
0.051J
NA
0.21
0.525
NA
0.136
NA
0.868
NA
NA
0.02995U
0.031 9J
0.322
NA
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.0679
0.217
0.06U
NA
NA
0.032J
0.362
NA
0.63
NA
0.0203J
0.02995U
0.02995U
NA
1.2
NA
0.02995U
0.061
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.113
July 2010
237
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping III
Congener
83+108
Sample ID
Sample Date
83+99
84
85+116+117
85+120
86+87+97+109+119+125
86+87+97+111+117+125
88
88+121
89
89+90+101
90+101+113
91
92
93
93+95
94
95+100
96
98+102
99
100
103
104
105
106
107
107+109
108+124
110
110+115
111
112
113
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
126
127
128
129
129+138+160+163
B41-3
2007071 1
NA
2.22
1.24
0.702
NA
2.45
NA
0.0301 5U
NA
0.0935
NA
3.87
0.732
0.897
0.0301 5U
NA
0.0934
3.32
0.0731
0.223
NA
NA
0.0863
0.0301 5U
0.938
0.0301 5U
0.216
NA
0.0906
NA
4.17
0.0301 5U
0.0301 5U
NA
0.0675
NA
2.36
NA
0.0301 5U
0.0301 5U
0.0492J
0.0637
NA
0.0283J
0.0301 5U
0.47
NA
3.77
C120-1
20061221
0.81
NA
4.6
NA
2.5
NA
13
NA
0.1 35U
NA
19
NA
2.6
4.8
NA
22
0.135U
NA
0.135U
0.52
6.4
0.1 35U
0.31
0.135U
4.7
10
NA
1.1
NA
20
NA
NA
0.135U
0.1 35U
0.24
0.1 35U
10
0.59
NA
NA
0.135U
0.455UJ
0.51
0.056
4.7
2.8
1.1
NA
C121-3
20061221
6.2
NA
32
NA
19
NA
84J
NA
0.17U
NA
86J
NA
17
25
NA
94J
0.83
NA
1.4
3.9
45J
0.38
1.4
0.17U
29
58J
NA
8
NA
110J
NA
NA
4.2
0.17U
1.7
0.17U
58J
4.1
NA
NA
1
1.6UJ
3.6
0.36
29
15
5.4
NA
C123-5
20061221
20
NA
100J
NA
66J
NA
300J
NA
1.3
NA
21 OJ
NA
61J
59J
NA
250J
2.9
NA
5
14
150J
1
2.1
0.175U
110J
130J
NA
21
NA
320J
NA
NA
0.83
0.175U
12
0.175U
130J
6.7
NA
NA
4.1
4.5UJ
12
1.2
110J
44J
18
NA
C40-1
2007071 1
NA
19.7
9.98
5.37
NA
19.3
NA
0.2655U
NA
0.693
NA
30.8
4.99
8.07
0.2655U
NA
0.336J
24.4
0.402J
1.67
NA
NA
0.726
0.2655U
7.31
0.2655U
1.89
NA
0.633
NA
35.1
0.2655U
0.2655U
NA
0.5J
NA
20.1
NA
0.289J
0.2655U
0.333J
0.326J
NA
0.1 9J
0.2655U
3.32
NA
27.8
C41-3
2007071 1
NA
11.6
7.67
4.06
NA
13.5
NA
0.0372U
NA
0.477
NA
19.8
3.43
3.82
0.0372U
NA
0.16
18.9
0.326
1.26
NA
NA
0.245
0.0372U
8.04
0.0372U
1.68
NA
0.764
NA
21.5
0.0372U
0.0372U
NA
0.622
NA
20
NA
0.0582J
0.0372U
0.251
0.368
NA
0.125
0.0425J
3.03
NA
18.3
C43-5
2007071 1
NA
0.658
0.355
0.208
NA
0.775
NA
0.0302U
NA
0.0302U
NA
1.05
0.156
0.238
0.0302U
NA
0.0302U
0.863
0.0302U
0.0529J
NA
NA
0.0302U
0.0302U
0.325
0.0302U
0.0766
NA
0.041 5J
NA
1.33
0.0302U
0.0302U
NA
0.021 9J
NA
0.9
NA
0.0302U
0.0302U
0.01 57J
0.00847J
NA
0.0302U
0.0302U
0.171
NA
0.987
238
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping III
Congener
83+108
Sample ID
Sample Date
83+99
84
85+116+117
85+120
86+87+97+109+119+125
86+87+97+111+117+125
88
88+121
89
89+90+101
90+101+113
91
92
93
93+95
94
95+100
96
98+102
99
100
103
104
105
106
107
107+109
108+124
110
110+115
111
112
113
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
126
127
128
129
129+138+160+163
C60-1
2007071 1
NA
250
130
88.7
NA
280
NA
2.02U
NA
11.1
NA
362
62.8
75.5
2.02U
NA
2.02U
292
6.11
27.2
NA
NA
4.48
2.02U
102J
2.02U
22.4
NA
9.85
NA
415
2.02U
2.02U
NA
7.1
NA
256J
NA
1.67J
2.02U
4.34
5.94
NA
3.24J
2.02U
41.5
NA
253
C61-3
2007071 1
NA
319
183
122
NA
383
NA
1.82U
NA
15.2
NA
447
88.7
87.6
10.7
NA
4.45
373
9.51
30.8
NA
NA
3.18J
1.82U
179
1.82U
26.7
NA
15
NA
535
1.82U
1.82U
NA
14.6
NA
362
NA
1.82U
1.82U
7.55
8.14
NA
2.78J
1.82U
50.2
NA
275
C63-5
2007071 1
NA
19
7.61
6.09
NA
22.2
NA
0.3265U
NA
0.3265U
NA
32.1
3.59
5.81
0.3265U
NA
0.3265U
24.5
0.3265U
1.35
NA
NA
0.3265U
0.3265U
10.2J
0.3265U
1.92
NA
1.06J
NA
36.5
0.3265U
0.3265U
NA
0.666
NA
25.2
NA
0.3265U
0.3265U
0.454J
0.464J
NA
0.214J
0.3265U
4.75
NA
31.7
C65-7
2007071 1
NA
3.17
1.63
0.962
NA
3.8
NA
0.376U
NA
0.376U
NA
5.06
0.656J
0.867
0.376U
NA
0.376U
4.12
0.376U
0.376U
NA
NA
0.376U
0.376U
1.65
0.376U
0.21 7J
NA
0.14J
NA
5.93
0.376U
0.376U
NA
0.376U
NA
4.11
NA
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
NA
0.376U
0.376U
0.641J
NA
3.91
C67-9
2007071 1
NA
1.53
0.804
0.357J
NA
1.98
NA
0.343U
NA
0.343U
NA
2.38
0.383J
0.435J
0.343U
NA
0.343U
2.1
0.343U
0.343U
NA
NA
0.343U
0.343U
1.01
0.343U
0.149J
NA
0.343U
NA
2.86
0.343U
0.343U
NA
0.343U
NA
2.28
NA
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.07J
NA
0.343U
0.343U
0.0899J
NA
2.07
C80-1
2007071 1
NA
93.6
54.4
33.9
NA
108
NA
0.341 U
NA
4.69
NA
138
26.3
27.8
1.55
NA
1.69
121
2.96
8.65
NA
NA
1.33
0.341 U
58.6
0.341 U
10.8
NA
5.59
NA
161
0.341 U
0.341 U
NA
4.02
NA
125
NA
0.341 U
0.341 U
2.22
3.03
NA
0.773
0.1 3J
2.48
NA
130
C81-3
2007071 1
NA
27.9
13.4
7.54
NA
30.1
NA
1.66U
NA
1.63J
NA
36.3
6.36
4.98
1.66U
NA
1.66U
33.2
1.66U
1.97J
NA
NA
1.66U
1.66U
12
1.66U
1.63J
NA
0.817J
NA
51.2
1.66U
1.66U
NA
0.788J
NA
27.9
NA
1.66U
1.66U
1.66U
1.66U
NA
1.66U
1.66U
1.66U
NA
21.5
July 2010
239
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping III
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
83+108
83+99
84
85+116+117
85+120
86+87+97+109+119+125
86+87+97+111+117+125
88
88+121
89
89+90+101
90+101+113
91
92
93
93+95
94
95+100
96
98+102
99
100
103
104
105
106
107
107+109
108+124
110
110+115
111
112
113
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
126
127
128
129
129+138+160+163
D20-1
20061221
0.012U
NA
0.036
NA
0.012U
NA
0.088
NA
0.012U
NA
0.098
NA
0.025
0.026
NA
0.13
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.045
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.04
0.077
NA
0.012U
NA
0.15
NA
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.0012U
0.012U
0.077
0.012U
NA
NA
0.012U
0.0018UJ
0.012U
0.0012U
0.04
0.012U
0.012U
NA
G11 0-1
20061220
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.11
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.0185U
0.185U
0.24
0.185U
NA
NA
0.185U
0.0185U
0.185U
0.0185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
G11 1-3
20061220
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.042
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.019U
0.19U
0.071J
0.19U
NA
NA
0.19U
0.019U
0.19U
0.019U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
G11 3-5
20061220
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.56
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.14
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.0125U
0.125U
0.06
0.125U
NA
NA
0.125U
0.015UJ
0.125U
0.0125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
G11 5-7
20061220
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.012UJ
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.012U
0.12U
0.012UJ
0.12U
NA
NA
0.12U
0.012U
0.12U
0.012U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
G31-3
20070711
NA
5.39
2.27
1.85
NA
5.94
NA
0.1075U
NA
0.1075U
NA
8.15
1.1
1.45
0.1075U
NA
0.1075U
6.38
0.1075U
0.25
NA
NA
0.1075U
0.1075U
2.73
0.1075U
0.497
NA
0.222
NA
9.57
0.1075U
0.1075U
NA
0.207J
NA
6.91
NA
0.1075U
0.1075U
0.1 65J
0.161J
NA
0.0959J
0.061 5J
1.53
NA
8.12
240
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping III
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
83+108
83+99
84
85+116+117
85+120
86+87+97+109+119+125
86+87+97+111+117+125
88
88+121
89
89+90+101
90+101+113
91
92
93
93+95
94
95+100
96
98+102
99
100
103
104
105
106
107
107+109
108+124
110
110+115
111
112
113
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
126
127
128
129
129+138+160+163
G30-1
20061221
0.72
NA
4.4
NA
2.4
NA
14J
NA
0.061
NA
13J
NA
2.1
3
NA
14J
0.029U
NA
0.076
0.22
6.3J
0.029U
0.068
0.029U
5.5
12J
NA
1.1
NA
14J
NA
NA
0.25
18J
0.26
0.029U
12J
0.24
NA
NA
0.15
0.15UJ
0.66
0.042
5.5
2.9
0.91
NA
H11 0-1
20061220
0.34
NA
2.2
NA
1.2
NA
5.3
NA
0.155U
NA
4.7
NA
1
1.1
NA
5.6
0.155U
NA
0.155U
0.155U
2.5
0.155U
0.155U
0.155U
2.4
4.3
NA
0.33
NA
7
NA
NA
0.155U
0.155U
0.12
0.155U
4.3
0.155U
NA
NA
0.155U
0.07UJ
0.155U
0.0155U
2.4
0.65
0.155U
NA
H11 1-3
20061220
0.165U
NA
0.49
NA
0.165U
NA
1.5
NA
0.165U
NA
1.4
NA
0.165U
0.165U
NA
1.5
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.69
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.75
1.4
NA
0.165U
NA
2
NA
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.041
0.165U
1.4
0.165U
NA
NA
0.165U
0.0315UJ
0.165U
0.01 65U
0.75
0.165U
0.165U
NA
H30-1
20061220
0.0165U
NA
0.11
NA
0.051
NA
0.22
NA
0.0165U
NA
0.23
NA
0.072
0.066
NA
0.36
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.12
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.084
0.15
NA
0.0165U
NA
0.36
NA
NA
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.0036
0.0165U
0.15
0.0165U
NA
NA
0.0165U
0.00465U
0.0165U
0.001 65U
0.084
0.037
0.0165U
NA
H31-3
20061220
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.0074
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.027
NA
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.0013U
0.013U
0.014
0.013U
NA
NA
0.013U
0.0013U
0.013U
0.0013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
H33-5
20061220
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
NA
0.01 15U
NA
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
NA
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.001 15U
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
NA
NA
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.001 15U
0.01 15U
0.0034
0.01 15U
NA
NA
0.01 15U
0.001 15U
0.01 15U
0.001 15U
0.0115U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
NA
July 2010
241
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping III
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
83+108
83+99
84
85+116+117
85+120
86+87+97+109+119+125
86+87+97+111+117+125
88
88+121
89
89+90+101
90+101+113
91
92
93
93+95
94
95+100
96
98+102
99
100
103
104
105
106
107
107+109
108+124
110
110+115
111
112
113
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
126
127
128
129
129+138+160+163
130-1
20061220
0.12
NA
0.77
NA
0.29
NA
1.3
NA
0.0125U
NA
1.3
NA
0.37
0.43
NA
2.3
0.0125U
NA
0.028
0.083
0.67
0.0125U
0.026
0.0125U
0.32
0.72
NA
0.081
NA
2.1
NA
NA
0.0125U
0.0125U
0.012
0.0125U
0.72
0.054
NA
NA
0.0125U
0.022UJ
0.037
0.0033
0.32
0.17
0.058
NA
131-3
20061220
0.012U
NA
0.079
NA
0.039
NA
0.17
NA
0.012U
NA
0.16
NA
0.041
0.047
NA
0.25
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.082
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.053
0.11
NA
0.012U
NA
0.28
NA
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.0012U
0.012U
0.11
0.012U
NA
NA
0.012U
0.0032UJ
0.012U
0.0012U
0.053
0.029
0.012U
NA
K1 0-1
20061220
80UJ
NA
980J
NA
550J
NA
2500J
NA
80UJ
NA
5400J
NA
520J
81 OJ
NA
6100J
80UJ
NA
80UJ
80UJ
1800J
80UJ
80UJ
80UJ
1400J
2900J
NA
80UJ
NA
3200J
NA
NA
80UJ
80UJ
120J
80UJ
2900J
80UJ
NA
NA
80UJ
255UJ
80UJ
44J
1400J
800J
390J
NA
K1 1-3
20061220
20UJ
NA
230J
NA
150J
NA
81 OJ
NA
20UJ
NA
2400J
NA
120J
240J
NA
2200J
20UJ
NA
20UJ
20UJ
480J
20UJ
20UJ
20UJ
490J
1000J
NA
48J
NA
1300J
NA
NA
20UJ
20UJ
28J
20UJ
1000J
20UJ
NA
NA
20UJ
160UJ
65J
25J
490J
290J
21 OJ
NA
K1 3-5
20061220
22UJ
NA
68J
NA
22UJ
NA
220J
NA
22UJ
NA
650J
NA
22UJ
69J
NA
61 OJ
22UJ
NA
22UJ
22UJ
130J
22UJ
22UJ
22UJ
130J
270J
NA
22UJ
NA
350J
NA
NA
22UJ
22UJ
7.6J
22UJ
270J
22UJ
NA
NA
22UJ
39UJ
22UJ
5.9J
130J
73J
60J
NA
K1 5-7
20061220
10.5UJ
NA
27J
NA
10.5UJ
NA
82J
NA
10.5UJ
NA
160J
NA
10.5UJ
24J
NA
180J
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
38J
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
38J
85J
NA
10.5UJ
NA
130J
NA
NA
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
1.05UJ
10.5UJ
85J
10.5UJ
NA
NA
10.5UJ
7.5UJ
10.5UJ
1.05UJ
38J
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
NA
242
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping III
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
83+108
83+99
84
85+116+117
85+120
86+87+97+109+119+125
86+87+97+111+117+125
88
88+121
89
89+90+101
90+101+113
91
92
93
93+95
94
95+100
96
98+102
99
100
103
104
105
106
107
107+109
108+124
110
110+115
111
112
113
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
126
127
128
129
129+138+160+163
K1 7-9
20061220
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
NA
13J
NA
2.05UJ
NA
23J
NA
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
27J
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
6.9J
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
6.5J
13J
NA
2.05UJ
NA
19J
NA
NA
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
0.205UJ
2.05UJ
13J
2.05UJ
NA
NA
2.05UJ
1.35UJ
2.05UJ
0.205UJ
6.5J
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
K1 9-1 1
20061220
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
NA
5J
NA
1.8UJ
NA
11J
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
14J
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
4.3J
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
3.8J
8.3J
NA
1.8UJ
NA
12J
NA
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
0.18UJ
1.8UJ
8.3J
1.8UJ
NA
NA
1.8UJ
0.495UJ
1.8UJ
0.18UJ
3.8J
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
S20-1
20070710
NA
722
362
234
NA
802
NA
2.1U
NA
31.9
NA
1110
177
223
20.7
NA
9.72
870
16
59.2
NA
NA
11.1
2.1U
359
2.1U
82.2
NA
38.3
NA
1190
2.1U
2.1U
NA
28.8
NA
922
NA
2.08J
2.1U
16.6
15.9
NA
5.61
1.35J
161
NA
1040
S2-1-3
20070710
NA
318
180
119
NA
393
NA
1.98U
NA
16.4
NA
467
80.8
92.1
10.1
NA
5.17
396
8.06
30.1
NA
NA
3.26J
1.98U
188
1.98U
32.1
NA
17.5
NA
537
1.98U
1.98U
NA
16.7
NA
407
NA
0.954J
1.98U
9.35
11.1
NA
2.79J
1.98U
70.6
NA
393
S2-3-5
20070710
NA
6.16
3.91
2.4
NA
7.59
NA
0.04335U
NA
0.306
NA
9.66
1.83
1.87
0.04335U
NA
0.04335U
8.86
0.203
0.61
NA
NA
0.04335U
0.04335U
5.04
0.04335U
0.926
NA
0.545
NA
10.8
0.04335U
0.04335U
NA
0.41
NA
11.2
NA
0.04335U
0.04335U
0.191
0.0544J
NA
0.13
0.04335U
1.93
NA
9.32
S2-5-7
20070710
NA
0.284
0.179
0.112
NA
0.34
NA
0.02995U
NA
0.02995U
NA
0.44
0.0968
0.0803
0.02995U
NA
0.02995U
0.36
0.02995U
0.0338J
NA
NA
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.179
0.02995U
0.0286J
NA
0.0188J
NA
0.504
0.02995U
0.02995U
NA
0.0108J
NA
0.358
NA
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.0076J
NA
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.0599
NA
0.33
July 2010
243
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping VI
Congener
130
Sample ID
Sample Date
131
131+142+165
132
132+168
133
134
134+143
135+144
135+151+154
136
137
138+163+164
139+140
139+149
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
147+149
148
150
151
152
153
153+168
154
155
156
156+157
157
158
158+160
159
161
162
164
165
166
167
169
170
171
171+173
B41-3
2007071 1
0.254
0.0496J
NA
1.37
NA
0.127
NA
0.217
NA
1.59
0.583
0.111
NA
0.0648
NA
NA
0.818
0.0301 5U
NA
0.171
0.0301 5U
0.826
NA
3.51
0.0301 5U
0.0301 5U
NA
0.0301 5U
NA
3.24
NA
0.0301 5U
NA
0.312
NA
0.342
NA
0.0337J
0.0301 5U
0.0301 5U
0.302
0.0301 5U
0.0366J
0.102
0.0301 5U
0.993
NA
0.331
C120-1
20061221
1.9
NA
0.3
NA
11
0.63
2
NA
10
NA
8.2
0.44
36J
NA
47J
0.1 35U
11
NA
0.1 35U
NA
0.135U
6.9
0.38
NA
0.135U
0.135U
17
0.135U
36J
NA
0.34
0.135U
2.2
NA
0.26
NA
3.8
0.62
0.135U
0.3
NA
NA
0.135U
0.83
0.01 35U
15
4.3
NA
C121-3
20061221
10
NA
32
NA
38J
2.9
8.2
NA
36J
NA
28
3.2
130J
NA
160J
0.92
37J
NA
0.17U
NA
0.17U
29
1.7
NA
0.17U
0.17U
56J
0.17U
130J
NA
1.7
0.17U
9.5
NA
1.6
NA
15
1.9
0.17U
1.2
NA
NA
0.17U
3.6
0.017U
45J
13
NA
C123-5
20061221
21
NA
5.3
NA
79J
3.8
19
NA
52J
NA
41J
13
270J
NA
230J
1.7
57J
NA
0.71
NA
0.175U
38J
6.3
NA
0.175U
0.36
60J
0.42
190J
NA
2.3
0.175U
26
NA
6.1
NA
36J
1.5
0.175U
1.9
NA
NA
1.3
9.8
0.0175U
50J
14
NA
C40-1
2007071 1
2.4
0.297J
NA
10.7
NA
1.07
NA
2.12
NA
13.6
3.99
0.841
NA
0.732
NA
NA
5.1
0.2655U
NA
1.2
0.2655U
7.41
NA
28.2
0.2655U
0.2655U
NA
0.2655U
NA
24
NA
0.2655U
NA
2.19
NA
2.26
NA
0.214J
0.2655U
0.2655U
2.01
0.2655U
0.276J
0.76
0.2655U
5.59
NA
2.37
C41-3
2007071 1
1.21
0.345
NA
6.77
NA
0.596
NA
1.29
NA
5.61
2.28
0.871
NA
0.356
NA
NA
3.72
0.0372U
NA
1.65
0.0372U
3.06
NA
15.2
0.127
0.0372U
NA
0.0372U
NA
13.6
NA
0.0372U
NA
1.98
NA
1.89
NA
0.109
0.0372U
0.043J
1.21
0.0372U
0.188
0.658
0.049J
3.37
NA
1.2
C43-5
2007071 1
0.0609
0.0302U
NA
0.345
NA
0.0816
NA
0.0608
NA
0.375
0.128
0.054J
NA
0.01 55J
NA
NA
0.17
0.0302U
NA
0.0476J
0.0302U
0.2
NA
0.729
0.0375J
0.0302U
NA
0.0302U
NA
0.687
NA
0.0302U
NA
0.11
NA
0.0992
NA
0.0302U
0.0302U
0.0302U
0.0732
0.0302U
0.0097J
0.0326J
0.0302U
0.158
NA
0.0577J
244
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping VI
Congener
130
Sample ID
Sample Date
131
131+142+165
132
132+168
133
134
134+143
135+144
135+151+154
136
137
138+163+164
139+140
139+149
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
147+149
148
150
151
152
153
153+168
154
155
156
156+157
157
158
158+160
159
161
162
164
165
166
167
169
170
171
171+173
C60-1
2007071 1
18.4
1.1 8J
NA
95.1
NA
3.47J
NA
16.2
NA
93.3
38.7
11
NA
4.98
NA
NA
54.3
2.02U
NA
13.1
2.02U
39.5
NA
203
2.02U
2.02U
NA
2.02U
NA
206
NA
2.02U
NA
27
NA
24.8
NA
3.66J
2.02U
1.46J
18.7
2.02U
2.18J
8.67
2.02U
61.3
NA
20.5
C61-3
2007071 1
18.3
4.84
NA
102
NA
4.01
NA
18.8
NA
95.3
40.2
14.1
NA
4.72
NA
NA
57.3
1.82U
NA
15.9
1.82U
35.6
NA
203
1.82U
1.82U
NA
1.82U
NA
202
NA
1.82U
NA
32.5
NA
30.4
NA
2.97J
1.82U
1.42J
20.2
1.82U
2.45J
9.24
1.82U
56.5
NA
18.3
C63-5
2007071 1
1.71
0.401J
NA
10.6
NA
0.445J
NA
1.99
NA
10.6
4.28
1.36
NA
0.522J
NA
NA
6.85
0.3265U
NA
1.44
0.3265U
4.84
NA
22.5
0.3265U
0.3265U
NA
0.3265U
NA
24.9
NA
0.3265U
NA
3.82
NA
3.44
NA
0.1 92J
0.3265U
0.3265U
2.24
0.3265U
0.269J
1.25
0.3265U
7.33
NA
2.6
C65-7
2007071 1
0.1 68J
0.376U
NA
1.4
NA
0.376U
NA
0.376U
NA
0.93
0.303J
0.1 64J
NA
0.376U
NA
NA
0.768
0.376U
NA
0.376U
0.376U
0.362J
NA
2.8
0.376U
0.376U
NA
0.376U
NA
2.94
NA
0.376U
NA
0.433J
NA
0.452J
NA
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
0.22J
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
0.658J
NA
0.295J
C67-9
2007071 1
0.1 66J
0.343U
NA
0.647J
NA
0.343U
NA
0.343U
NA
0.662J
0.292J
0.343U
NA
0.343U
NA
NA
0.478J
0.343U
NA
0.343U
0.343U
0.281J
NA
1.4
0.343U
0.343U
NA
0.343U
NA
1.5
NA
0.343U
NA
0.1 95J
NA
0.227J
NA
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.343J
NA
0.343U
C80-1
2007071 1
8.44
2.19
NA
48.4
NA
2.17
NA
9.19
NA
33.1
15.4
6.55
NA
3.02
NA
NA
27.2
0.341 U
NA
6.18
0.341 U
17.6
NA
110
0.341 U
0.341 U
NA
0.341 U
NA
97.4
NA
0.341 U
NA
13.4
NA
13.8
NA
1.56
0.341 U
0.524J
9.31
0.566J
0.341 U
4.06
0.331J
26.2
NA
7.38
C81-3
2007071 1
1.33J
1.66U
NA
6.85
NA
1.66U
NA
1.66U
NA
5.93
2.66J
1.66U
NA
1.66U
NA
NA
3.51
1.66U
NA
1.66U
1.66U
2.49J
NA
17.2
1.66U
1.66U
NA
1.66U
NA
15.3
NA
1.66U
NA
1.91J
NA
2.4J
NA
1.66U
1.66U
1.66U
1.2J
1.66U
1.66U
0.623J
1.66U
3.77
NA
1.11J
July 2010
245
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping VI
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
130
131
131+142+165
132
132+168
133
134
134+143
135+144
135+151+154
136
137
138+163+164
139+140
139+149
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
147+149
148
150
151
152
153
153+168
154
155
156
156+157
157
158
158+160
159
161
162
164
165
166
167
169
170
171
171+173
D20-1
20061221
0.012U
NA
0.029
NA
0.04
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.031
NA
0.026
0.012U
0.13
NA
0.17
0.012U
0.032
NA
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.026
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.059
0.012U
0.12
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.0082
NA
0.0012U
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
NA
NA
0.012U
0.0033
0.0012U
0.049
0.012U
NA
G11 0-1
20061220
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.0185U
NA
0.0185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
NA
0.185U
0.0185U
0.0185U
0.0185U
0.185U
NA
G11 1-3
20061220
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.019U
NA
0.019U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
NA
0.19U
0.019U
0.019U
0.019U
0.19U
NA
G11 3-5
20061220
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.0125U
NA
0.044
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
NA
0.125U
0.0125U
0.0125U
0.033
0.125U
NA
G11 5-7
20061220
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.012U
NA
0.012U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
NA
0.12U
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.12U
NA
G31-3
20070711
0.586
0.283
NA
2.79
NA
0.1 66J
NA
1.02
NA
1.99
0.838
0.633
NA
0.224
NA
NA
1.35
0.1075U
NA
0.626
0.1075U
0.873
NA
5.35
0.1075U
0.1075U
NA
0.1075U
NA
5.62
NA
0.1075U
NA
1.12
NA
1.03
NA
0.1 39J
0.1075U
0.0701J
0.554
0.1075U
0.1 85J
0.376
0.21 3J
1.13
NA
0.399
246
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping VI
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
130
131
131+142+165
132
132+168
133
134
134+143
135+144
135+151+154
136
137
138+163+164
139+140
139+149
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
147+149
148
150
151
152
153
153+168
154
155
156
156+157
157
158
158+160
159
161
162
164
165
166
167
169
170
171
171+173
G30-1
20061221
1.1
NA
0.25
NA
0.029U
0.2
0.88
NA
2.6
NA
2.1
0.7
14J
NA
12J
0.059
2.9
NA
0.029U
NA
0.029U
2
0.31
NA
0.029U
0.029U
3.1
0.029U
13J
NA
0.11
0.029U
1.6
NA
0.34
NA
1.8
0.029U
0.029U
0.093
NA
NA
0.029U
0.55
0.01 15UJ
2.9
0.89
NA
H11 0-1
20061220
0.155U
NA
0.155U
NA
1.3
0.155U
0.155U
NA
0.66
NA
0.55
0.155U
3.7
NA
3.2
0.155U
0.8
NA
0.155U
NA
0.155U
0.51
0.155U
NA
0.155U
0.155U
0.82
0.155U
2.5
NA
0.155U
0.155U
0.38
NA
0.081
NA
0.53
0.155U
0.155U
0.155U
NA
NA
0.155U
0.13
0.0155U
0.77
0.155U
NA
H11 1-3
20061220
0.165U
NA
0.165U
NA
0.51
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
1.6
NA
1.4
0.165U
0.34
NA
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.34
0.165U
1.2
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.18
NA
0.045
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
NA
0.165U
0.063
0.01 65U
0.37
0.165U
NA
H30-1
20061220
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
NA
0.12
0.0165U
0.0165U
NA
0.088
NA
0.075
0.0165U
0.32
NA
0.44
0.0165U
0.088
NA
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
0.07
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.16
0.0165U
0.3
NA
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.018
NA
0.004
NA
0.04
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.0165U
NA
NA
0.0165U
0.0087
0.001 65U
0.11
0.0165U
NA
H31-3
20061220
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.032
NA
0.055
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.043
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.0013U
NA
0.0013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
NA
0.013U
0.0013U
0.0013U
0.02
0.013U
NA
H33-5
20061220
0.01 15U
NA
0.01 15U
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
NA
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
NA
0.01 15U
NA
0.01 15U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
NA
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
NA
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.001 15U
NA
0.001 15U
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
NA
NA
0.01 15U
0.001 15U
0.001 15U
0.0054
0.01 15U
NA
July 2010
247
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping VI
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
130
131
131+142+165
132
132+168
133
134
134+143
135+144
135+151+154
136
137
138+163+164
139+140
139+149
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
147+149
148
150
151
152
153
153+168
154
155
156
156+157
157
158
158+160
159
161
162
164
165
166
167
169
170
171
171+173
130-1
20061220
0.11
NA
0.0125U
NA
0.52
0.025
0.094
NA
0.36
NA
0.32
0.032
1.2
NA
1.7
0.0125U
0.27
NA
0.0125U
NA
0.0125U
0.26
0.031
NA
0.0125U
0.0125U
0.57
0.0125U
1
NA
0.0125U
0.0125U
0.059
NA
0.014
NA
0.13
0.0125U
0.0125U
0.0125U
NA
NA
0.0125U
0.027
0.00125U
0.3
0.088
NA
131-3
20061220
0.012U
NA
0.012U
NA
0.082
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.052
NA
0.047
0.012U
0.19
NA
0.25
0.012U
0.042
NA
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.04
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.088
0.012U
0.16
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.012
NA
0.0027
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
NA
NA
0.012U
0.0051
0.0012U
0.055
0.012U
NA
K1 0-1
20061220
380J
NA
80UJ
NA
2500J
80UJ
370J
NA
3000J
NA
2700J
80UJ
12000J
NA
16000J
80UJ
4000J
NA
80UJ
NA
80UJ
1900J
80UJ
NA
80UJ
80UJ
8000J
80UJ
20000J
NA
80UJ
80UJ
950J
NA
160J
NA
1300J
970J
80UJ
390J
NA
NA
80UJ
250J
8UJ
11000J
3300J
NA
K1 1-3
20061220
150J
NA
20UJ
NA
1400J
46J
200J
NA
2000J
NA
1900J
41J
6700J
NA
12000J
20UJ
2800J
NA
20UJ
NA
20UJ
1000J
20UJ
NA
20UJ
20UJ
6200J
20UJ
13000J
NA
20UJ
20UJ
21 OJ
NA
63J
NA
550J
660J
20UJ
230J
NA
NA
20UJ
60J
2UJ
5300J
1900J
NA
K1 3-5
20061220
22UJ
NA
22UJ
NA
360J
22UJ
52J
NA
570J
NA
550J
22UJ
1800J
NA
3300J
22UJ
760J
NA
22UJ
NA
22UJ
280J
22UJ
NA
22UJ
22UJ
1700J
22UJ
3500J
NA
22UJ
22UJ
55J
NA
17J
NA
150J
190J
22UJ
66J
NA
NA
22UJ
15J
2.2UJ
1300J
500J
NA
K1 5-7
20061220
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
NA
100J
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
NA
150J
NA
130J
10.5UJ
450J
NA
850J
10.5UJ
190J
NA
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
65J
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
41 OJ
10.5UJ
790J
NA
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
18J
NA
5.5J
NA
42J
40J
10.5UJ
10.5UJ
NA
NA
10.5UJ
6.7J
1.05UJ
420J
120J
NA
248
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping VI
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
130
131
131+142+165
132
132+168
133
134
134+143
135+144
135+151+154
136
137
138+163+164
139+140
139+149
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
147+149
148
150
151
152
153
153+168
154
155
156
156+157
157
158
158+160
159
161
162
164
165
166
167
169
170
171
171+173
K1 7-9
20061220
2.05UJ
NA
10J
NA
12J
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
21J
NA
17J
2.05UJ
65J
NA
110J
2.05UJ
27J
NA
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
9J
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
58J
2.05UJ
120J
NA
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
2.8J
NA
0.72J
NA
5.8J
6.3J
2.05UJ
2.05UJ
NA
NA
2.05UJ
0.98J
0.205UJ
60J
17J
NA
K1 9-1 1
20061220
1.8UJ
NA
3.7J
NA
6.1J
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
7.3J
NA
6.3J
1.8UJ
25J
NA
39J
1.8UJ
8.5J
NA
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
18J
1.8UJ
40J
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.5J
NA
0.18UJ
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
NA
1.8UJ
0.5J
0.18UJ
19J
5.1J
NA
S20-1
20070710
70.8
17.3
NA
380
NA
15
NA
67.7
NA
393
150
47.3
NA
20.9
NA
NA
230
2.1U
NA
64.2
2.1U
160
NA
838
2.1U
2.1U
NA
2.1U
NA
853
NA
2.1U
NA
107
NA
103
NA
10.7
2.1U
2.77J
74.8
2.1U
9.23
32.4
3.2J
249
NA
80.5
S2-1-3
20070710
26.4
7.6
NA
146
NA
5.39
NA
27.2
NA
118
50.5
16.8
NA
8.69
NA
NA
93.6
1.98U
NA
21.9
1.98U
50.2
NA
298
1.98U
1.98U
NA
1.98U
NA
293
NA
1.98U
NA
43.8
NA
42.8
NA
2.63J
1.98U
1.51J
28
1.98U
4.12
13.4
0.864J
84.4
NA
27.5
S2-3-5
20070710
0.636
0.167
NA
3.31
NA
0.149
NA
0.73
NA
2.35
1.04
0.55
NA
0.201
NA
NA
1.93
0.04335U
NA
0.697
0.04335U
0.966
NA
6.35
0.04335U
0.04335U
NA
0.04335U
NA
6.56
NA
0.04335U
NA
1.27
NA
1.11
NA
0.04335U
0.04335U
0.04335U
0.684
0.04335U
0.065J
0.334
0.04335U
1.65
NA
0.569
S2-5-7
20070710
0.0201J
0.02995U
NA
0.131
NA
0.02995U
NA
0.0191J
NA
0.113
0.0404J
0.0198J
NA
0.02995U
NA
NA
0.0676
0.02995U
NA
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.0453J
NA
0.231
0.02995U
0.02995U
NA
0.02995U
NA
0.254
NA
0.02995U
NA
0.0314J
NA
0.0403J
NA
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.0185J
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.0718
NA
0.02995U
July 2010
249
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping V
Congener
172
Sample ID
Sample Date
172+192
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
180+193
181
182
182+187
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
196+203
197
198
198+199
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
B41-3
2007071 1
0.179
NA
NA
1.17
0.0661
0.165
0.716
0.295
0.583
NA
2.07
0.0301 5U
0.0301 5U
NA
0.679
0.0301 5U
0.14
0.0301 5U
1.54
0.0301 5U
0.041 8J
0.215
0.0497J
0.0301 5U
NA
0.52
0.272
0.238
NA
0.0328J
NA
0.521
NA
0.104
0.0737
0.114
0.291
0.0301 5U
0.0508J
0.165
0.0301 5U
0.0434J
0.0907
C120-1
20061221
NA
2.5
0.36
19
0.69
2.2
10
3.3
7.6
32J
NA
0.135U
NA
13
9.9
0.135U
2.3
0.135U
NA
0.135U
0.52
15
0.64
NA
1.9
7.2
2.4
NA
9
0.32
0.43
NA
1.1
1.1
7.2
1.6
NA
0.135U
0.35
1.8
0.135U
0.45
0.4
C121-3
20061221
NA
8.6
1.1
64J
2.7
8
34J
12
27
100J
NA
0.17U
NA
47J
33
0.17U
7.2
0.17U
NA
0.17U
1.9
45J
2.1
NA
5.9
29
9.3
NA
35J
1.2
1.6
NA
34
4.2
4.3
5.9
NA
0.17U
1.4
7.5
1.2
1.8
2
C123-5
20061221
NA
9.2
1.3
59J
2.2
7.3
32
11
22
98J
NA
0.175U
NA
41J
32
0.175U
6.8
0.175U
NA
0.175U
2.3
50J
2.2
NA
5.2
27
7.9
NA
33
1.1
1.4
NA
4
3.7
34
6.2
NA
0.175U
1.2
12
1.8
3
2.6
C40-1
2007071 1
1.05
NA
NA
6.78
0.294J
1
4.81
2.14
3.95
NA
12
0.2655U
0.2655U
NA
3.89
0.2655U
0.836
0.2655U
10.7
0.2655U
0.26J
0.907
0.293J
0.2655U
NA
3.24
1.7
1.31
NA
0.146J
NA
3.02
NA
0.409J
0.437J
0.597
1.52
0.2655U
0.2655U
0.843
0.2655U
0.235J
0.2655U
C41-3
2007071 1
0.65
NA
NA
3.84
0.16
0.513
2.29
1.55
1.94
NA
8.09
0.0372U
0.044J
NA
2.17
0.0372U
0.394
0.0372U
6.05
0.0392J
0.127
0.842
0.17
0.0372U
NA
2.22
0.802
1.24
NA
0.081
NA
3.05
NA
0.319
0.366
0.774
1.52
0.0372U
0.0964
1.9
0.235
0.803
2.9
C43-5
2007071 1
0.0245J
NA
NA
0.178
0.0302U
0.01 82J
0.111
0.168
0.117
NA
0.365
0.0302U
0.0302U
NA
0.0819
0.0302U
0.0254J
0.0302U
0.385
0.011J
0.0302U
0.0295J
0.0302U
0.0302U
NA
0.151
0.048J
0.0584J
NA
0.0302U
NA
0.222
NA
0.01 25J
0.0334J
0.0826
0.133
0.0302U
0.0302U
0.187
0.0232J
0.065
0.13
250
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping V
Congener
172
Sample ID
Sample Date
172+192
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
180+193
181
182
182+187
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
196+203
197
198
198+199
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
C60-1
2007071 1
11.8
NA
NA
69.9
4.85
8.5
41.5
15.5
32.5
NA
134
2.02U
2.02U
NA
39.8
2.02U
8.44
2.02U
82.8
2.02U
1.67J
12.5
1.75J
2.02U
NA
32.6
13.5
14.1
NA
1.28J
NA
33
NA
4.46
4.63
7.47
19.1
2.02U
1.69J
10.7
1.89J
2.64J
1.75J
C61-3
2007071 1
11.4
NA
NA
62.5
3.64
8.35
35.1
11.9
27.3
NA
123
1.82U
1.82U
NA
38.5
1.82U
8.87
1.82U
74.8
1.82U
1.77J
10.3
2.94J
1.82U
NA
33.7
12.7
15.4
NA
1.2J
NA
34.3
NA
3.8
4.43
6.05
19.4
1.82U
1.07J
11.4
1.82U
1.59J
2.87J
C63-5
2007071 1
1.5
NA
NA
8.41
0.385J
1.14
4.95
1.91
3.31
NA
18.3
0.3265U
0.3265U
NA
5.35
0.3265U
1.01
0.3265U
11
0.3265U
0.292J
1.42
0.423J
0.3265U
NA
5.9
1.83
3.22
NA
0.3265U
NA
9.94
NA
0.729
0.739
2.63
5.27
0.3265U
0.261J
14.8
1.11J
5.53
15.2J
C65-7
2007071 1
0.376U
NA
NA
0.865
0.376U
0.376U
0.51 3J
0.376U
0.46J
NA
2.16
0.376U
0.376U
NA
0.524J
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
1.17
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
NA
0.533J
0.376U
0.308J
NA
0.376U
NA
0.645J
NA
0.376U
0.376U
0.376U
0.426J
0.376U
0.376U
0.816
0.376U
0.21 5J
0.438J
C67-9
2007071 1
0.343U
NA
NA
0.434J
0.343U
0.343U
0.2J
0.343U
0.224J
NA
1
0.343U
0.343U
NA
0.342J
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.732
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
NA
0.247J
0.343U
0.343U
NA
0.343U
NA
0.276J
NA
0.343U
0.343U
0.343U
0.21 8J
0.343U
0.343U
0.228J
0.343U
0.343U
0.131J
C80-1
2007071 1
4.48
NA
NA
27.1
1.11
4.18
14.6
6.09
13.3
NA
51.1
0.598J
0.341 U
NA
15.3
0.341 U
3.44
0.341 U
32.7
0.341 U
0.733
4.67
1.31
0.341 U
NA
14.2
6.37
6.38
NA
0.443J
NA
13.1
NA
1.79
1.56
2.97
7.24
0.341 U
1.02
5.17
0.659J
1.24
1.32
C81-3
2007071 1
1.66U
NA
NA
3.5
1.66U
1.66U
1.77J
1.02J
1.95J
NA
8.93
1.66U
1.66U
NA
2.52J
1.66U
1.66U
1.66U
5.12
1.66U
1.66U
0.654J
1.66U
1.66U
NA
2.54J
1.66U
0.682J
NA
1.66U
NA
2.99J
NA
1.66U
1.66U
1.66U
1.33J
1.66U
1.66U
3.01J
1.66U
0.646J
1.99J
July 2010
251
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping V
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
172
172+192
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
180+193
181
182
182+187
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
196+203
197
198
198+199
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
D20-1
20061221
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.064
0.012U
0.012U
0.032
0.012U
0.027
0.12
NA
0.012U
NA
0.046
0.032
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.0012U
0.049
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.032
0.012U
NA
0.044
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.027
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
G11 0-1
20061220
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.14
NA
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.0185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
0.185U
NA
0.185U
0.185U
0.43
0.185U
0.185U
0.47
G11 1-3
20061220
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.083
NA
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.019U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
NA
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
0.19U
G11 3-5
20061220
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.11
NA
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.0125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
NA
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
0.125U
G11 5-7
20061220
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.077
NA
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.012U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
NA
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
G31-3
20070711
0.307
NA
NA
1.42
0.1075U
0.24
0.857
0.395
0.708
NA
3.12
0.1075U
0.1075U
NA
1.05
0.1075U
0.1 64J
0.1075U
2.37
0.1075U
0.1 36J
0.386
0.1075U
0.1075U
NA
1.52
0.37
0.861
NA
0.1075U
NA
3.13
NA
0.1 5J
0.365
1.1
1.75
0.1075U
0.1075U
7.81
0.592
3.47
9.97
252
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping V
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
172
172+192
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
180+193
181
182
182+187
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
196+203
197
198
198+199
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
G30-1
20061221
NA
0.41
0.085
3.7
0.15
0.41
1.9
0.57
1.4
6.8J
NA
0.029U
NA
1.5J
2.3
0.029U
0.41
0.029U
NA
0.029U
0.13
2.9
0.16
NA
0.3
2.2
0.54
NA
3.1
0.13
0.13
NA
3.3
0.3
0.58
1.2
NA
0.029U
0.077
4.4
0.62
2.1
14J
H11 0-1
20061220
NA
0.155U
0.155U
0.83
0.155U
0.155U
0.43
0.155U
0.39
1.6
NA
0.155U
NA
0.84
0.46
0.155U
0.155U
0.155U
NA
0.155U
0.0155U
0.77
0.155U
NA
0.155U
0.38
0.155U
NA
0.51
0.155U
0.155U
NA
0.5
0.155U
0.155U
0.155U
NA
0.155U
0.155U
0.155U
0.155U
0.155U
0.155U
H11 1-3
20061220
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.39
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.77
NA
0.165U
NA
0.42
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.012
0.37
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
NA
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
0.165U
H30-1
20061220
NA
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.14
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.073
0.034
0.086
0.28
NA
0.0165U
NA
0.11
0.087
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
0.0042
0.11
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
0.11
0.0165U
NA
0.19
0.0165U
0.0165U
NA
0.12
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.0165U
NA
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.075
0.0165U
0.0165U
0.0165U
H31-3
20061220
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.034
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.081
NA
0.013U
NA
0.038
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.0013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.042
0.013U
NA
0.075
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.047
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
NA
0.013U
0.013U
0.033
0.013U
0.013U
0.013U
H33-5
20061220
NA
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.0115U
0.0115U
NA
0.01 15U
NA
0.0115U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
NA
0.01 15U
0.001 15U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
NA
0.01 15U
0.0115U
0.01 15U
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
NA
0.0115U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
NA
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
0.01 15U
July 2010
253
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping V
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
172
172+192
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
180+193
181
182
182+187
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
196+203
197
198
198+199
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
130-1
20061220
NA
0.047
0.0125U
0.4
0.0125U
0.063
0.22
0.093
0.24
0.74
NA
0.39
NA
0.35
0.24
0.0125U
0.058
0.0125U
NA
0.0125U
0.0095
0.3
0.0125U
NA
0.038
0.2
0.057
NA
0.35
0.0125U
0.0125U
NA
0.25
0.038
0.042
0.071
NA
0.0125U
0.0125U
0.13
0.0125U
0.036
0.037
131-3
20061220
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.079
0.012U
0.012U
0.041
0.012U
0.053
0.15
NA
0.012U
NA
0.075
0.05
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.0012U
0.055
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.054
0.012U
NA
0.087
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.062
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
NA
0.012U
0.012U
0.036
0.012U
0.012U
0.012U
K1 0-1
20061220
NA
1800J
200J
15000J
530J
2200J
7100J
3500J
9100J
42000J
NA
80UJ
NA
25000J
14000J
80UJ
3500J
80UJ
NA
80UJ
350J
11000J
600J
NA
1900J
40000J
7500J
NA
50000J
940J
1700J
NA
42000J
4300J
4100J
6400J
NA
80UJ
1800J
33000J
4000J
5900J
4200J
K1 1-3
20061220
NA
1100J
120J
12000J
350J
1800J
5200J
2700J
7400J
24000J
NA
20UJ
NA
18000J
8700J
20UJ
2600J
20UJ
NA
20UJ
73J
5300J
250J
NA
1100J
15000J
3300J
NA
25000J
590J
860J
NA
23000J
2700J
2700J
4100J
NA
20UJ
590J
12000J
1700J
2600J
980J
K1 3-5
20061220
NA
280J
22UJ
3200J
96J
480J
1400J
760J
2100J
6400J
NA
22UJ
NA
4900J
2400J
22UJ
71 OJ
22UJ
NA
22UJ
18J
1300J
69J
NA
330J
3800J
860J
NA
6600J
160J
230J
NA
6000J
730J
730J
1200J
NA
22UJ
150J
2900J
420J
650J
230J
K1 5-7
20061220
NA
77J
10.5UJ
830J
25J
110J
340J
180J
480J
1900J
NA
10.5UJ
NA
1000J
540J
10.5UJ
160J
10.5UJ
NA
10.5UJ
5.4J
420J
10.5UJ
NA
74J
950J
220J
NA
1500J
37J
52J
NA
1500J
160J
170J
340J
NA
10.5UJ
36J
870J
120J
200J
58J
254
July 2010
-------
Individual Congener Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases I/I I
Grouping V
_ Sample ID
Sample Date
172
172+192
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
180+193
181
182
182+187
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
196+203
197
198
198+199
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
K1 7-9
20061220
NA
11J
2.05UJ
110J
2.05UJ
15J
48J
25J
65J
280J
NA
2.05UJ
NA
140J
83J
2.05UJ
23J
2.05UJ
NA
2.05UJ
0.83J
60J
2.05UJ
NA
11J
140J
33J
NA
230J
5.9J
7.6J
NA
200J
24J
26J
52J
NA
2.05UJ
6J
120J
17J
26J
9.1J
K1 9-1 1
20061220
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
33J
1.8UJ
4.5J
14J
7.3J
20J
85J
NA
1.8UJ
NA
41J
25J
1.8UJ
6.4J
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
0.18UJ
19J
1.8UJ
NA
1.8UJ
43J
9.8J
NA
70J
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
NA
61J
7J
7.2J
15J
NA
1.8UJ
1.8UJ
39J
5.3J
8.3J
7.4J
S20-1
20070710
48.6
NA
NA
295
10.8
39.4
167
61.1
137
NA
552
2.92J
2.1U
NA
170
2.1U
36.9
2.1U
355
2.1U
7.89
48.4
11.8
2.1U
NA
153
60.5
70.6
NA
7.03
NA
163
NA
23.3
18.1
28.9
90.3
2.1U
7.93
37.6
4.65
8.02
6.56
S2-1-3
20070710
14
NA
NA
91.4
3.61J
11.4
50.7
17.6
42.4
NA
176
1.98U
1.98U
NA
54.9
1.98U
11.9
1.98U
103
1.98U
3.24J
15.5
4.81
1.98U
NA
48.8
20.4
21.5
NA
1.95J
NA
52.1
NA
6.2
6.15
9.38
32.1
1.98U
3.45J
16.9
2.5J
3.77J
4.21
S2-3-5
20070710
0.395
NA
NA
1.88
0.128
0.278
0.973
0.429
0.85
NA
3.95
0.04335U
0.04335U
NA
1.08
0.04335U
0.231
0.04335U
2.38
0.04335U
0.0936
0.426
0.119
0.04335U
NA
1.41
0.443
0.656
NA
0.04335U
NA
2.17
NA
0.194
0.249
0.532
1.13
0.04335U
0.04335U
1.98
0.182
0.842
2.38
S2-5-7
20070710
0.02995U
NA
NA
0.065
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.0332J
0.02995U
0.0306J
NA
0.135
0.02995U
0.02995U
NA
0.0344J
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.0789
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
NA
0.0378J
0.02995U
0.02995U
NA
0.02995U
NA
0.0287J
NA
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.0221
0.02995U
0.02995U
0.021 6J
July 2010
255
-------
Individual Metals Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPM)
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B31-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
C110-1
Cll 1-3
C113-5
Cll 5-7
C12 0-1
C12 1-3
C12 3-5
C30-1
C31-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C51-3
C53-5
C60-1
C61-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D51-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E21 0-1
Sample Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
Arsenic
9.3
8
9.4
8.7
4
6.1
7.4
6.7
6.5
6.5
6.7
6.8
6.3
6.4
5.5
8.5
10
10
8.7
6.2
11
10
8.5
7.4
6.4
6.5
6.9
7.1
10
6.5
5.7
11
10
12
10
9.8
9.3
8.2
8.7
11
7.8
6.5
6.2
6.9
6.8
6.7
7.4
6.2
6.9
6.6
6.7
6.4
7.1
Barium
110
92
130
110
37
62
48
51
56
52
48
69
140
160
120
190
300
260
230
110
230
180
140
130
92
77
82
69
150
62
55
260
210
160
170
180J
160
97
120
210
93
57
58
50
68
80
91
62
60
53
52
50
58
Cadmium
4.5
5.8
6.8
8.5
0.67
0.23
0.2U
0.26
0.24
0.22
0.38J
0.3
4.1
5.1
2.1
14
17
14
8.8
3.6
12
10
21
7.5
2.8
1.8
1.8
0.25
11
1.1
0.21
13
8.4
13
8.4
8.3
5.2
1.2
3.3
9.3
6.7
0.27
0.28
0.32
0.2U
1.2
0.78
0.22
1.1
0.38
0.26
0.26
0.37
Chromium
75
49
82
63
10
13
15
14
14
14
20
17
170
170
75
250
470
290
230
140
600
350
93
54
27
51
53
16
73
19
13
380
240
190
82
54
180
31
100
83
87J
14
14
17
16
34
25
16
15
15
14
14
19
Copper
89
140
180
260
46
18
18
17
19
18
22
19
78
86
44
140
200
150
120
46
220
220
140
170
73
60
36
21
150
33
17
180
160J
230
170
220
87
30
70
130
83
17
17
23
21
39
36
17
24
25
17
17
25
Lead
120
120
160
220
55
9.4
8
7.5
9.2
8.2
16J
9
130
150
100
250
330
310
220
150
390
280
170
160
75
92
33
9.9
490
65
8.6
330
220
300
220
360
190
520
110
290
150
8.1
17
16
11
140
88
18
590
20
9.7
8.3
15
Mercury
0.98
0.96
1.6
2.2
0.53
0.05U
0.05U
0.05U
0.05U
0.05U
0.06J
0.05U
0.52
0.54
0.32
0.98
1.2
1.3
1
0.17
0.68
1.5
1.5
1.5
0.64
0.32
0.45
0.05U
1.9
0.75
0.05U
1.7
0.98
0.96
2.4
3.3
0.8
0.39
0.45
1.5
0.77
0.05U
0.05U
0.1
0.05U
0.47
0.2
0.05U
0.12
0.1
0.05U
0.05U
0.18
Selenium
0.8
0.45
0.47
0.63
0.2U
0.21
0.29
0.28
0.24
0.32
0.33
0.32
0.64
0.67
0.44
0.91
1
0.95
0.74
0.42
1.1
1.1
0.76
0.5
0.32
0.5
0.52
0.28
0.92
0.36
0.29
1.2
1.2
1.1
0.75
1
1.4
0.9
0.97
1
0.91
0.2U
0.27
0.35
0.25
0.66
0.59
0.37
0.21
0.2U
0.24
0.2U
0.31
Silver
0.87
1
1.8
1.6
0.25
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.13
0.1U
1.9
2.4
1.4
6.3
7.7
5.8
3.8
1.2
5.7
4.6
1.7
1.7
0.76
0.73
0.52
0.1U
2.5
0.32
0.1U
6.1
3.2
3.2J
3.8
7.4
1.9
0.29
1.4
1.9
1.7J
0.1U
0.1U
0.1
0.1U
0.43
0.23
0.1U
0.16
0.1
0.1U
0.1U
0.13
Zinc
310
310
410
710
120
45
48
52
49
46
81
67
280
310
200
560
750
620
440
300
910
1000
460
370
230
280
120
70
470
91
49
750
540
610
750
1200
370
210
290
590
360J
53
55
68
54
190
120
46
61
59
46
49
72
256
July 2010
-------
Individual Metals Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPM)
Sample ID
E30-1
E31-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F12 0-1
F20-1
F21-3
F40-1
F41-3
F43-5
F50-1
F51-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G12 0-1
G12 1-3
G13 0-1
G13 1-3
G13 3-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hll 1-3
H113-5
H 12 0-1
H12 1-3
H 12 3-5
H 12 5-7
H 12 7-9
HIS 0-1
HIS 1-3
HIS 3-5
HIS 5-7
HIS 7-9
H30-1
H31-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
112 3-5
120-1
121-3
Sample Date
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
Arsenic
6.4
10
7.3
5.1
7.5
7.9
6.5
7.4
9.9
16
15
12
6.9
6
6.6
6.3
22
7.2
9.6
12
5.7
5.4
14
19
13
11
7.1
9.3
9.4
7.4
7.3
4
8.3
4.3
1.9
2.2
2.5
5.9
1.7
3.2
4.4
3.7
10
6.5
12
9.7
10
10
7.4
6.2
6.3
5.7
5.9
Barium
65
55
67
83
84
120
110
180
74
230
210
230
52
61
59
98
94
42
140
140
77
89
160
130
180
180
89
49
42
160
270
810
83
65
33
52
64
49
22
34
56
56
61
66
41
110
150
65
81
72
58
93
62
Cadmium
0.35
0.27
0.21
0.2U
2.2
3.4
4.6
3.1
1.7
32
22
14
0.47
0.3
0.24
0.26
0.24
0.34
4.6
1.4
0.89
0.24
24
24
31
19
0.34
3.4
0.47
0.34
0.32
0.45
2.1
0.88
0.21
0.2U
0.2U
0.35
0.2U
0.2U
0.2U
0.2U
0.27
0.2U
0.67
0.68
2
0.61
0.67
0.42
0.38
0.32
0.2U
Chromium
15
14
16
16
49
57
71
29
20
210
160
120
14
15
14
16
14
13
38
24
13
13
140
140
160
150
17
60
22
15
7
5.4
42
16
6.2
6.8
7.2
11
4.4
5.1
8.2
8
8.4
12
9.5
20
75
20
27
12
16
9.9
14
Copper
17
18
21
18
52
81
120
74
63
250
210
170
19
19
20
19
20
19J
230J
160J
48J
20J
190J
200J
250
210
25
48J
22
22
12
14
76
29
26
23
22
47
16
18
20
20
28
18
23
20
79
28
62
67
44
30
19
Lead
9.3
9.2
18
50
73
210
150
560
83
340
310
330
18
14
10
10
13
13
280
180
190
14
200
180
290
210J
21
55
88
28
12
21
58
33
17
16
18
28
8.1
22
18
15
22
7.9
9.9
57
200
37
68
63
42
24
8.4
Mercury
0.05U
0.05U
0.05U
0.09
0.33
0.99
0.42
0.55
0.58
1.1
1.6
1.4
0.11
0.05U
0.05U
0.05U
0.05U
0.05U
2.3
1.7
0.33
0.05U
2.5
1.7
1.8
2.6
0.05U
0.25
0.3
0.46J
1.1J
0.85J
1.2
0.83
0.44
0.52
0.49
0.68
0.26
0.57
0.81
0.26
1.2
0.05U
0.05U
15
85
16
2.1
0.96
0.2
0.37
0.05U
Selenium
0.33
0.52
0.26
0.39
0.69
0.59
0.67
0.45
0.2U
1.2
1.1
0.9
0.41
0.26
0.34
0.3
0.38
0.32
0.61
0.51
0.27
0.24
0.79
1.1
1
0.57
0.29
0.69
0.61
0.2U
0.2U
0.27
0.75U
0.56U
0.57U
0.42U
0.4U
0.25
0.2U
0.2U
0.28
0.2U
0.71U
0.5U
1.1
0.75U
0.86
0.64U
0.57U
0.74U
0.63U
0.6U
0.5U
Silver
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
1.3
1.5
1
0.51
0.37
2.8
2.5
1.8
0.12
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
1.9
1.5
0.38
0.11
1.9
2.1
2.2
2.2
0.1
0.73
0.21
0.2
0.11
0.12
0.58
0.21
0.12
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.1U
0.1U
0.13
0.13
0.35
0.1U
0.11
0.15
0.61
0.17
0.38
0.38
0.27
0.15
0.1U
Zinc
79
58
59
76
280
300
470
270
120
890
770
620
61
52
46
68
52
51J
590J
390J
180J
45J
470J
480J
730
580
64
120J
72
45
36
39
140
84
49
36
45
44
24
38
50
32
65
44
76
140
120
65
150
130
110
61
43
July 2010
257
-------
Individual Metals Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPM)
Sample ID
123-5
130-1
131-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
Kl 9-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample Date
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
Arsenic
6.2
7.1
6.7
11
9.1
8.6
7.7
9.7
6.8
7
4.8
6.7
9.8
20
12
13
2.2
7
11
12
7.5
5.9
Barium
59
76
58
130J
75J
89J
150J
500J
140J
83J
65J
61J
160
180
160
180
57
78
330
210
91
60
Cadmium
0.24
0.3
0.33
5.4
4.7
6
2.1
5.2
1.1
0.76
0.47
0.46
6.6
18J
16
25J
0.52
0.21
17
14
5.5
0.29
Chromium
14
14
13
130
93
48
28
64
16
14
10
11
180
320J
140
150J
19
16
490
330
53
15
Copper
18
18
17
92
83
63
250
420
170
110
69
68
140
210J
210
210J
27
20
220
180
100
19
Lead
8.6
16
15
190
92
100
270
520
110
95
66
65
240
230
230
220
14
8.9
440
320
120
9
Mercury
0.54
0.29
0.05U
9.5
3.7
1
67
12
2.5
1.6
0.78
0.78
1.1
0.97
1.7
1.2
0.08
0.05U
2
1.8
1.1
0.05U
Selenium
0.41U
0.63U
0.5U
0.97
0.86
0.92
0.75U
1
0.69U
0.93
0.76U
0.73U
0.81
1.4
0.61
0.8
0.66
0.23
1.5
1.4
0.6
0.39
Silver
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
1.5
1.3
0.7
0.34
0.9
0.47
0.51
0.43
0.35
2.5
4.6J
2.2
2.1J
0.15
0.1U
8.1
5
1.1
0.1
Zinc
46
59
49
340J
210J
180J
150J
250J
180J
200J
160J
140J
610
600J
590
640
57
52
910
770
310
51
258
July 2010
-------
Individual TCLP Metals Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
C110-1
Cll 1-3
C113-5
Cll 5-7
C120-1
C12 1-3
C123-5
C30-1
C3 1-3
C33-5
D20-1
D30-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E210-1
F10-1
Sample Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20061221
Silver -
TCLP
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
Arsenic -
TCLP
10U
24
26
26
10U
10U
10U
10U
16
10U
10U
32
51
42
28
12
53
32
31
31
13
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
14
Barium -
TCLP
860
1500
1100
1400
580
1700
640
1600
900
1000
990
950
1000
870
790
800
820
550
830
1100
1500
1800
1700
1800
1600
1600
1600
1400
930
Cadmium -
TCLP
14
35
10U
60
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
44
10U
81
120
49
20
21
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
Chromium -
TCLP
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
61
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
Copper -
TCLP
20U
23
20U
22
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
26
20U
20U
20U
20U
30
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
Mercury -
TCLP
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
Lead-
TCLP
100U
100U
100U
140
100U
100U
630
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
130
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
Selenium -
TCLP
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
Zinc -
TCLP
1100
970
310
4100
500
210
340
220
1000
1300
700
3800
3600
1400
5500
1400
8200
11000
1800
1400
1500
290
240
330
340
190
190
380
2100
July 2010
259
-------
Individual TCLP Metals Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Sample ID
Fll-3
F12 0-1
F20-1
F21-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hlll-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H127-9
H130-1
H13 1-3
H133-5
H135-7
H13 7-9
H30-1
H3 1-3
H33-5
Sample Date
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
Silver -
TCLP
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
Arsenic -
TCLP
17
10U
10U
16
17
28
39
14
10U
38
42
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
14
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
Barium -
TCLP
980
1200
1200
1500
1400
1000
1000
1100
1500
880
1000
470
542
1100
880
1700
300
510
280
280
270
680
440
460
470
320
390
1100
1200
Cadmium -
TCLP
31
20U
10U
20
10U
11
10U
10U
10U
10U
20
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
Chromium -
TCLP
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
Copper -
TCLP
26
20U
20U
20U
22
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
24
20U
24
20U
20U
20U
40
31
29
30
22
20U
20U
Mercury -
TCLP
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
Lead-
TCLP
100U
100U
100U
180
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
Selenium -
TCLP
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
Zinc -
TCLP
4700
470
600
1100
360
3400
2600
830
250
3200
2800
62
230
180
270
220
290
270
250
210
190
270
280
230
170
160
250
210
220
260
July 2010
-------
Individual TCLP Metals Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll (PPB)
Sample ID
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
131-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
K19-11
Sample Date
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
Silver -
TCLP
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
5U
Arsenic -
TCLP
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
27
20
17
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
Barium -
TCLP
720
630
1200
560
730
670
870
1200
1500
1400
1600
510
810
690
960
1100
1000
1000
940
980
Cadmium -
TCLP
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
17
10U
32
20U
20
10U
20U
10U
10U
Chromium -
TCLP
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
SOU
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
sou
Copper -
TCLP
20U
20U
20U
20U
23
20U
22
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
20U
Mercury -
TCLP
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
0.4U
Lead-
TCLP
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
100U
Selenium -
TCLP
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
10U
Zinc -
TCLP
230
360
320
140
450
210
280
350
320
270
260
1400
540
980
240
770
420
590
490
550
July 2010
261
-------
Individual AVS/SEM Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll
Sample ID
C120-1
C12 1-3
C123-5
D20-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G30-1
H110-1
Hlll-3
H30-1
H3 1-3
H33-5
130-1
13 1-3
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
K19-11
Sample
Date
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
SEM/AVSRatio
0.548567J
0.82UJ
12.52323J
0.58UJ
0.86UJ
0.89UJ
0.61UJ
0.57UJ
0.328895J
0.65UJ
0.86UJ
0.380865J
0.168865J
0.55UJ
1.061824J
0.55UJ
0.89UJ
0.9UJ
0.99UJ
0.95UJ
0.95UJ
0.8UJ
AcidVolatileSulfide
(UMG)
4.9J
0.82UJ
1.3J
0.58UJ
0.86UJ
0.89UJ
0.61UJ
0.57UJ
12.4J
0.65UJ
0.86UJ
3.8J
2.6J
0.55UJ
0.74J
0.55UJ
0.89UJ
0.9UJ
0.99UJ
0.95UJ
0.95UJ
0.8UJ
Cadmium
(UMG)
0.0078J
0.06
0.08
0.0013U
0.028J
0.0079J
0.0025J
0.0012UJ
0.028J
0.0014UJ
0.0029J
0.0021U
0.0019U
0.0029U
0.0036U
0.0015U
0.016U
0.038
0.0098U
0.0073U
0.0023J
0.0032U
Copper
(UMG)
0.37
2.1
2.5
0.1 1J
7.1J
2.4J
0.33J
0.079J
0.87J
0.21J
0.2J
0.32J
0.08U
0.05UJ
0.13U
0.1U
5.2J
5.8J
2.3J
1.6J
1.1J
0.73J
Lead
(UMG)
0.28J
1.1J
1.3J
0.027J
1.4J
0.81J
0.42J
0.037J
0.3J
0.1 1J
0.081J
0.085
0.02U
0.017U
0.042
0.026U
0.92
2.1
0.49
0.47
0.33J
0.26
Mercury
(UMG)
0.00018UJ
0.0002UJ
0.00021UJ
0.00014UJ
0.00021UJ
0.00022UJ
0.00015UJ
0.00014UJ
0.00031UJ
0.00016UJ
0.00021UJ
0.00019UJ
0.00015UJ
0.00014UJ
0.00015UJ
0.00014UJ
0.012J
0.001J
0.00025UJ
0.00024UJ
0.00024UJ
0.0002UJ
Nickel
(UMG)
0.33
2
2.2
0.12J
0.33J
0.23J
0.082J
0.099J
0.48J
0.17J
0.14J
0.14J
0.097U
0.085U
0.17J
0.15J
0.36
0.52
0.2J
0.16J
0.12J
0.12J
Zinc
(UMG)
1.7J
7.9J
10. 2J
0.4J
9J
6.3J
1.2J
0.28J
2.4J
0.4J
0.95J
0.9J
0.24J
0.35J
0.44J
0.31J
1.9J
4.3J
3.1J
3.1J
2.4J
1.6J
262
July 2010
-------
Additional Analyte Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll
Sample ID
A10-1
All-3
A13-5
All 0-1
All 1-3
All 3-5
B10-1
B20-1
B30-1
B31-2
B40-1
B41-3
C10-1
Cll-3
C13-5
C110-1
Cll 1-3
C113-5
Cll 5-7
C120-1
C12 1-3
C123-5
C30-1
C3 1-3
C33-5
C40-1
C41-3
C43-5
C50-1
C5 1-3
C53-5
C60-1
Sample Date
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20061222
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
Total Organic
Carbon (TOC)
(PCT)
11.1
5.5
6.3
8.9
3
1.1
1.5
1.1
1.6
0.5
1.9J
1.8
7.7
7.4
4.4
9
10.1
9.8
8.5
4
8.8
8.8
8.6
8.7
2.4
9.7
3
0.9
7.9
6.3
2.4
10.3
Percent Solids
(PCT)
71.9
64.1
53.5
50.7
71.2
83.2
77.7
83.3
85
84
80.5
83.5
61.9
59.7
64.8
47.3
47.8
51.3
57.1
74
62.5
56.2
54.2
56.3
74.2
72.2
78.9
83.8
55.4
78.1
83.6
52.3
Moisture Content
(PCT)
36.5
58.8
74.5
77.8
35.8
19.5
21.1
18.9
19.7
19.2
23.5
20.9
73.3
64.7
55.3
101.1
116.5
92.6
91.7
22.8
62.8
73.1
89
79.3
31.5
33.5
34.4
18.6
78.1
51.2
20.2
99.4
Diesel Range Organics
(PPB)
940000
1600000
2500000
2500000
700000
110000
120000
100000
100000
97000
170000
110000
1700000
2500000
1100000
5700000
9500000
7200000
3500000
670000
4700000
4200000
2400000
2000000
990000
220000
220000
90000
640000
230000
89000
4400000
Oil Range Organics
(PPB)
2900000
5200000
7400000
8400000
1900000
150000
130000
91000
140000
130000
570000
150000
5200000
7400000
3300000
19000000
25000000
19000000
12000000
1900000
13000000
14000000
9900000
7600000
2500000
790000
770000
230000
3700000
650000
120000
14000000
Specific Gravity
2.508
2.619
2.645
2.579
2.668
2.729
2.725
2.701
2.751
2.752
2.685
2.705
2.568
2.537
2.617
2.568
2.525
2.525
2.583
2.65
2.573
2.556
2.553
2.193
2.685
2.506
2.638
2.723
2.573
2.479
2.728
2.58
July 2010
263
-------
Additional Analyte Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll
Sample ID
C61-3
C63-5
C65-7
C67-9
C70-1
C71-3
C80-1
C81-3
C90-1
D20-1
D30-1
D40-1
D41-2
D50-1
D5 1-3
D60-1
El 0-1
El 1-3
E20-1
E21-3
E210-1
E30-1
E3 1-3
E60-1
E61-2
F10-1
Fll-3
F12 0-1
F20-1
F21-3
F40-1
F41-3
Sample Date
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20070710
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20061221
20061221
20061222
20061222
20061221
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
Total Organic
Carbon (TOC)
(PCT)
9.8
9.3
7.3
8
7.1
3.4
4.6
17.1
5.9
1.3
1.9
0.5
0.5
7.7
2.7
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.1
1.3
0.4
0.5
3
2.4
7.2
5.2
10.4
7.1
3.1
10.8
7.9
Percent Solids
(PCT)
52.8
56.7
52.3
57.8
59.5
70.2
58.9
57.3
58.7
83.6
82.9
83.6
83.8
68.7
77.3
85.4
82.7
83.9
82.8
83.4
81.2
84.7
85
83.9
78
45.3
63.3
58.8
68.7
72.8
59
58.7
Moisture Content
(PCT)
84.7
80.4
89.6
77.3
43.2
42.7
53.5
66.9
64.4
21.3
21.2
21.5
20.3
41.5
31.4
17.7
23.2
18.4
20.7
20.3
23.3
18.4
17.8
19.6
25.8
118.6
53.5
66.9
50.3
39.2
70.1
67.7
Diesel Range Organics
(PPB)
2500000
2200000
1800000
2600000
3300000
280000
1000000
1300000
730000
54000
45000
210000
110000
320000
93000
84000
160000
110000
100000
98000
180000
110000
95000
90000
48000
1200000
730000
1300000
970000
760000
2900000
2600000
Oil Range Organics
(PPB)
8900000
8700000
6900000
9500000
11000000
1500000
4500000
5700000
3300000
52000
54000
550000
160000
1500000
620000
120000
320000
160000
98000
88000
480000
150000
130000
160000
170000
4200000
2200000
5300000
4100000
1900000
16000000
14000000
Specific Gravity
2.553
2.618
2.624
2.545
2.579
2.64
2.668
2.631
2.647
2.712
2.719
2.734
2.74
2.563
2.728
2.715
2.71
2.719
2.715
2.327
2.705
2.746
2.74
2.742
2.719
2.625
2.634
2.545
2.634
2.708
2.58
2.587
264
July 2010
-------
Additional Analyte Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll
Sample ID
F43-5
F50-1
F5 1-3
F53-5
F60-1
F61-3
G10-1
Gil 0-1
Gil 1-3
Gil 3-5
Gil 5-7
G120-1
G12 1-3
G13 0-1
G13 1-3
G13 3-5
G30-1
HI 0-1
H110-1
Hlll-3
H113-5
H120-1
H12 1-3
H123-5
H125-7
H127-9
H130-1
H13 1-3
H133-5
H135-7
H13 7-9
H30-1
Sample Date
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061221
20061221
20070711
20070711
20070711
20061221
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061221
20061220
Total Organic
Carbon (TOC)
(PCT)
20
1.6
1.1
1.1
1.4
1
1.7
5.1
8.4
2
0.9
15.5
9.3
8.4
7.7
2
2
9.8
5.4
3.6
4.1
12.9
3.8
5
5.1
5.6
3.2
3
3.7
8.7
11.8
6.1
Percent Solids
(PCT)
64.4
82.6
83.1
55.5
83.5
85.2
82.2
55.6
56.1
72.6
82.3
53.5
47.3
46.7
49.7
81.7
37.3
77.7
71.7
63.1
54.4
54.1
59.2
56.1
54
60.8
61.2
59
53.6
50
48.4
62.8
Moisture Content
(PCT)
44.4
21.7
20.5
20.6
20.9
18.7
19.3
81.2
77.6
27.3
18.6
62.3
84.8
99.6
90.9
23.9
160.5
19.1
45.4
68
89.2
91.9
86.7
90.8
95.2
58.1
50.8
63.9
74.8
88.3
85.6
105.7
Diesel Range Organics
(PPB)
1800000
120000
98000
150000
100000
120000
100000
2700000
2300000
300000
98000
2200000
2600000
2400000
1700000
120000
1300000
110000
44000
40000
160000
910000
330000
310000
220000
140000
130000
180000
190000
300000
280000
71000
Oil Range Organics
(PPB)
10000000
250000
140000
200000
160000
160000
150000
8900000
7200000
750000
110000
8400000
9600000
12000000
8400000
240000
3100000
240000
220000
150000
760000
3300000
1000000
880000
610000
480000
460000
540000
730000
1100000
1300000
390000
Specific Gravity
2.577
2.701
2.739
2.746
2.742
2.734
2.711
2.641
2.634
2.726
2.75
2.519
2.591
2.533
2.579
2.732
2.525
2.345
2.612
2.657
2.66
2.63
2.674
2.69
2.568
2.718
2.679
2.678
2.696
2.649
2.575
2.671
July 2010
265
-------
Additional Analyte Results for Trenton Channel Remedial Investigation Phases l/ll
Sample ID
H31-3
H33-5
110-1
111-3
113-5
1120-1
112 1-3
1123-5
120-1
121-3
123-5
130-1
131-3
J10-1
Jll-3
J13-5
K10-1
Kll-3
K13-5
K15-7
K17-9
K19-11
SI 0-1
SI 1-3
SI 3-5
SI 5-7
SI 7-9
SI 9-11
S20-1
S21-3
S23-5
S25-7
Sample Date
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061219
20061219
20061219
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20061220
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070711
20070710
20070710
20070710
20070710
Total Organic
Carbon (TOC)
(PCT)
2.5
1.5
4.5
6.9
1.7
6.1
5.2
1.4
2.1
1.1
1.4
3.9
0.9
5.1
6.9
6.4
3
11.3
6.4
6
5
2.8
3.8
5.6J
8.3
12.2
3.7
0.8
8.6
6.8
4.6
1
Percent Solids
(PCT)
82.7
86.5
76.1
68
80.2
73.1
69
74.8
61.4
85.8
82.6
80.9
83.4
67.9
61.8
68.5
66.3
53.3
46.3
49.5
49.9
54.9
56.3
53.2
58.8
54.5
66.1
83.5
49.2
53.7
63.2
84.6
Moisture Content
(PCT)
42.2
15.2
27.7
48.4
19.6
33.6
45.2
23.8
66.3
19.3
21.2
22.2
20.4
47.4
64.7
44.2
101.7
89.6
117.6
96.9
101.3
74.3
81.3
100.6
75.5
132.6
51.5
20.8
100.2
87.8
62.1
19.1
Diesel Range Organics
(PPB)
59000
130000
130000
830000
120000
310000
660000
650000
160000
81000
69000
76000
79000
890000
1400000
1600000
26000000
14000000
3200000
4200000
1500000
1000000
2100000
4300000
2700000
2000000
27000
95000
390000
2200000
850000
1200000
Oil Range Organics
(PPB)
74000
120000
620000
2600000
170000
1300000
2100000
2100000
560000
110000
77000
87000
90000
2800000
4500000
2300000
23000000
11000000
2400000
3900000
3000000
1900000
8200000
17000000
12000000
9200000
140000
170000
1300000
8400000
3500000
1800000
Specific Gravity
2.704
2.696
2.622
2.55
2.712
2.65
2.136
2.726
2.638
2.719
2.726
2.712
2.732
2.605
2.57
2.603
2.445
2.537
2.609
2.609
2.625
2.651
2.623
2.595
2.617
2.516
2.645
2.735
2.623
2.633
2.692
2.75
266
July 2010
-------
Phase I Sediment Samples - December 21, 2006
Phase II Sediment Samples - July 11, 2007
July 2010 267
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted k> TN&A - 2/07
ASci-ETL Study ID #5010-246
Results of
Hyalella azteca and Chironomus ten tens
Toxicity Tests with TN&A Whole Sediment
Samples Received December 21, 2006
Prepared by
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
4444 Airpark Boulevard
Duluth, Minnesota 55811-5712
Submitted to
TN & Associates, Inc.
704 S. Illinois Ave., Suite C-104
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
Submitted February 2007
-------
T N & Associates, Inc.
Engineering and Science
February 26, 2007
To: RaghuNagam
Cc: Richard Baldino, Naren Babu
From: Arthur Stewart
Subject: Interpretation of results of sediment toxicity tests conducted by ASci, Inc.
I went through the ASci reports on the results of the Chironomus and Hyallela sediment
toxicity tests for the four Riverview sediment samples and offer the following comments.
1. Overall, the reports are well organized and properly reported. This outcome
suggests an appropriate level of QA/QC for the biological data.
2. I was unable to judge the quality of the chemical data presented because the report
did not contain methods statements for these analyses. However, the values that
were reported for conductivity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and ammonia
appeared reasonable, and the day-to-day variations in these data generally were
similar in magnitude to those I've encountered in other sediment toxicity tests.
3. As the report's author notes, the North Poker Creek reference sample was
problematic. But this does not invalidate the results for the four Riverview
samples, or the comparison of the samples to the West Bearskin sediment, or the
comparison of the results of the four samples to the EPA minimum criteria for test
acceptability.
4. Based on BPJ (best professional judgment) developed from many years of
toxicity testing and reporting of toxicity test results, I suggest that the statistically
significant effects on Hyalella azteca growth reductions for the Cl 1 0-1 and K-l
0-1 samples is not too much to worry about: the values for both of these test
samples are still above the EP minimum criterion, and survival values for H.
azteca in these two samples is not dramatically low.
5. Using BPJ again, the Chironomus tentans survival endpoint does suggest some
problems: the survival values are <48% across the board for the four test samples,
and this is well below their survival in the reference sample (West Bearskin) or
the EPA minimum criterion. However, Chironomus weight and AFDW endpoints
are not extremely low, so animals that survived were able to grow.
6. The number of samples tested is too small to draw definitive conclusions about
anything - but some of the chemistry data and ancillary information that was
provide may offer some clues. For example, a large odonate larva (baby
dragonfiies for the non-biologists) was found in one replicate of a sample from
July 2010 269
-------
Kl. Thus, it seems likely that other dragonfly larvae might be found at Kl the
sampling site. These organisms take several years to mature and are predatory -
so either it was one unusually hardy critter, or sediments at the Kl site are
extremely toxic. The original lab notes from ASci also state that ".. .all four test
sediments (contained) tubificidae worms.. .commonly found in polluted
sediments." This is true: tubificid worms favor highly enriched sediments and are
not notably sensitive to many pollutants. So, the four test sediments probably are
organically enriched, but not highly contaminanted.
7. The method for measuring ammonia is not specified, but the concentrations
reported are high for all four test sediments - especially for C3 and Cl 1. The
presence of moderately high levels of ammonia suggest serious organic
enrichment and potential toxicity. The C3 and Cl 1 test sediments also are the
two most "toxic" sediments, based on results of the Chironomus tentans tests, so
for N=2, there is some correspondence between elevated ammonia and
Chironomus mortality. .
8. Investigators conducting the tests noted that all organisms burrowed into all
sediments, even though somewhere in the report I read that some of the test
samples (C and G, as I recollect) had an odor of hydrocarbons and/or
naphthalenes. No sediment-avoidance behavior was reported - and most
organisms will try to avoid sediments that are strongly contaminated with
hydrocarbons. Human noses in general are good at detecting even low levels of
many types of hydrocarbons. Thus, the reported odor and the willingness of the
organisms to burrow into the sediments support the idea that although the
sediments probably contained hydrocarbons, their concentrations did not seem
high enough to be acutely toxic.
9. With only four samples tested, there is not enough information to reliably assess
site-to-site differences in biological quality of sediments within the study area.
Respectfully,
Arthur J. Stewart, PhD
Senior Ecotoxicologist
270 July 2010
-------
Associates, ittc
j 'if rj ^ - enCS
September 21,2007
To: Raghu Nagam
Cc: Richard Baldino, Naren Babu
From: Arthur Stewait, Senior Ecotoxicologist
Subject: Interpretation of results of sediment toxicity tests conducted by ASci, Inc.
I reviewed the ASci Corporation reports on the results of the Chironomus and Hyallela
sediment toxicity tests for' four Rivervrew sediment samples (B3 0-1, E3 0-1, F5 0-1 and
S2 0-1), submitted August 2007, offer the following comments.
1 Overall, the reports are well organized and properly reported This outcome
suggests an appropriate level of QA/QC for the biological data
2,. The report authors note on page 11 that "Assessment of the effects of'ammonia
toxicity are contained in the Discussion." This seems to me to be an important
point, because (a) ammonia levels were conspicuously elevated for sample S2 0-1
(see Tables 14, 15), and (b) this sample also was lethal to both test species (pages
31, 35) Unfortunately, the authors of the report apparently forgot to discuss the
possibility of'ammonia as a toxicant in the Discussion section I will ask the ASci
Corporation Environmental Testing Laboratory director to comment on this point
Parameters such as dissolved oxygen, pH, conductivity, alkalinity and hardness
all were biologically suitable for the tested species and these parameters did not
provide clues as to the nature of the toxicant(s)
3 The authors correctly note that the secondary laboratory control sediment was not
suitable as a test medium for either species This situation, though, does not
affect the test's interpretation: sediment samples F5 01- and S2 0-1 would be
considered to be toxic even relative to samples E3 01- and B3 0-1 Since
ammonia levels in T5 0-1 were NOT elevated, factors other than ammonia must
account for the toxicity of F5 0-1
4 In an attempt to identify substances that might account for the toxicity of samples
F5 0-1 and S2 0-1,1 reviewed data on the concentrations of'organic and metallic
pollutants in the four sediment samples Neither Hyalella nor Chironomus
seemed to enjoy sediment samples B3 0-1 or E.3 0-1 much, compared to the West
Bearskin control sediment, but both species at least did better in B3 0-1 and E3 0-
1 sediment than they did in F5 0-1 and S2 0-1 sediment Thus, a comparison of
July 2010 271
-------
chemicals in the four sediment samples was deemed worthwhile. Table 1, below,
summarizes the results of this comparison. Values for measured constituents that
"stood out" foi the F5 0-1 and S2 0-1 samples, relative to the B3 0-1 and E3 0-1
samples, are identified in bold font in Table 1. These materials may contribute to
the toxicity of F5 0-1 and S2 0-1 However, constituents not measured may cause
or contribute to the toxicity of P5 0-1 and S2 0-1, as well. It is important to
remember that, with fom samples only, it is not possible to more rigorously assess
possible site-to-site differences in the biological quality of sediments at the
Riverview/Trenton Channel
Table I Comparison of measured constituents in the four sediment samples (units are
ug/Kg dry weight for the organic compounds and mg/kg dry weight for the metals)
Values indicated in bold font are those that seem conspicuously elevated, and which
might contribute to toxicity. ND refers to "not detected."
Constituent
Anthracene
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Chiysene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Arochlor 1242
Arochlor 1254
Mercury
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Silver1
Zinc
F50-1
160
180
130
150
200
390
100
390
4120
ND
ND
0.11
52
0.47
14
19
18
0.12
61
S20-1
680
880
ND
ND
1300
1700
540
2700
2400
12000
4200
2.0
330
17
490
220
440
8.1
910
E.3 0-1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
100
ND
ND
ND
ND
65
0.35
15
17
9.3
ND
79
B3 0-1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
110
ND
ND
ND
ND
56
0.24
14
19
9.2
ND
49
272
July 2010
-------
_
mm mm. Corporation
«
Environmental Testing Laboratory
September 21, 2007
Art Stewart
Senior Ecotoxicologist
TN & Associates, Inc.
704 S. Illinois Ave., Suite C-104
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
Addendum to Hyalella azteca and Chironomus ten tans
Toxicity Report from Samples Received July 11, 2007
The measured ammonia levels in the overlaying water recorded throughout each test
sediment would not have been acutely toxic to the test organisms, The highest
ammonia amount measured was recorded on the initial test day of the overlaying water
in sediment S2 (7,55 mg/L), This level of ammonia most likely would not have caused
significant mortality to Chironomus or Hyalella, Also, the ammonia levels measured in
S2 dropped significantly by test day 1 and continued to drop throughout the test period.
OKI Oily iigned by Cle^taii Afiei
/•"I . All DN'cn=CtoyW «Ited o;AStrCo
Clayton Allen «!™™z^ss;;
Clayton Allen
Operations Manager
Laboratory Testing & Environmental Services
NELAP Certification #E87636
4444 Airpark Blvd • Duluth, Minnesota 55811 • Phone (218) 722-4040 • Fax (218) 722-2592
• EMAIL callsn = 'a ascico) p com • WEBSITE }±yiW'.(ttMwr
July 2010 273
-------
AC,
ASei Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TN&A - 2/07
ASei-ETL Study ID #5010-246
Name (signed):.
Name (typed):_
Title:
REPORT APPROVAL
Date:
Kurt Anderson
Operations Manager
*****
Name (signed):.
Name (typed):_
Title:
Date:
Clayton Allen
Senior Biologist
-1 -
•BBP
-------
ASci Corporation
g Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TN&A - 2/07
ASui-RTL Study ID #5010-246
*
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
STUDY SUMMARY 1
METHODS AND MATERIALS 2
General Test Methods 2
Test Organism Culturing, Holding, and Acclimation 2
Overlying Water Characteristics 3
Exposure System 3
Test Performance 4
Treatment of Results 6
RESULTS 7
Overlying Water Characteristics 7
Biological Exposure Results 9
DISCUSSION 11
REFERENCES 12
TABLE 1. Flow Rates (ml/min) of Overlying Water and Daily Turnover Rates to TN&A Sediments Test
Chambers During Hyalella and Chironomus Exposures
TABLE 2. Overlying Water Temperature Values (°C) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella
Exposures
TABLE 3. Overlying Water Temperature Values (°C) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day Chironomus
Exposures
TABLE 4. Overlying Water Dissolved Oxygen Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella
Exposures
- n -
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TN&A - 2/07
ASci-ETL Study 113 #5010-246
Table of Contents (cent.)
TABLE 5. Overlying Water Dissolved Oxygen Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day
Chironomus Exposures
TABLE 6, Overlying Water pH Values for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella Exposures
TABLE 7. Overlying Water pH Values for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day Chironomus Exposures
TABLE 8, Overlying Water Conductivity Values {".mhos/cm) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella
Exposures
TABLE 9. Overlying Water Conductivity Values (umhos/cm) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day
Chironomus Exposures
TABLE 10. Overlying Water Alkalinity Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella
Exposures
TABLE 11. Overlying Water Alkalinity Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day Chironomus
Exposures
TABLE 12. Overlying Water Hardness Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella
Exposures
TABLE 13. Overlying Water Hardness Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day Chirotwmus
Exposures
TABLE 14. Overlying Water Ammonia Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella
Exposures
TABLE 15. Overlying Water Ammonia Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Chironomus
Exposures
TABLE 16. Precision of Hyalella 96-Hour NaCI Reference Toxicant Testing
TABLE 17. Precision of Chironomus 96-Hour NaCI Reference Toxicant Testing
APPENDIX A -- Chain of Custody Forms
APPENDIX B - Hyalella azteca Results and Statistical Analyses
APPENDIX C - Chironomus tentans Results and Statistical Analyses
- Ill -
-------
ASei Corporation
Environmental testing Laboratory
Suhtniried to TN&A - 2/07
ASd-ETL Study ID #5010-246
INTRODUCTION
Al ihe request of TN&A Associates, ASci-Environmental Testing Laboratory {ASci-KTL) performed
toxicity tests with hulk sediment samples collected by TN&A personnel on December 19-20.2006.
The toxicity tests were performed to measure the toxicity of selected sediment samples to Hyaleila
aztera(amphipod) and larval Chironomas-tentans (midge). The Hyaleila test endpoints were 28-day
survival, length, and weight. The Chironomus endpoints were 20-day survival and growth (dried and
ash-free dried weight (AFDW)}. Test dates were January 4-February 1. 2007.
STUDY SUMMARY
The table below summarizes survival and growth for each TN&A sediment and the West Bearskin
and North Poker Creek controls. The secondary control. North Poker Creek (NPC}. had poor
survival due to a high number of indigenous, predaeeous Chironomid larvae1. As such, no
comparisons were made using NPC as a statistical reference.
// ozwro Growth (mean
fat*)
C. tenfoni Dned Wcighl
{tna/orgi
I TtuQvpodinae ehironwnid (piercers and engulfere).
2 Secondary control.
-1-
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TN&A - 2/07
ASci-KTL Studv ID #5010-246
METHODS AND MATERIALS
General Test Methods
Exposures to determine the toxicity of whole sediment samples from TN&A were performed
following abbreviated United States Environmental Protection chronic methods (USEPA 2000).
Twenty-eight and twenty-day tests exposing Hyalella and Chironomus were conducted in a manner
to determine the effect of each test sediment on organism survival and growth, with tests terminated
before emergence and egg production (C. tentans) and water-only reproductive measurements (//.
azteca). Effect was determined by comparison to organism performance following exposure to the
selected reference control sediment. Exposure conditions were maintained using an intermittent flow
system for renewal of overlying water. Following are detailed descriptions of test performance, test
results, data reduction, and results interpretation.
Test Organism Culturiog, Holding, and Acclimation
Hyalella and Chironomus were obtained from Environmental Consulting and Testing (ECT),
Superior, Wisconsin. Culture conditions were maintained according to suggested EPA methods
(EPA 2000). The Hyalella were cultured in a static-renewal system with overlying water renewed
twice per week, and the Chironomus were cultured in a recirculating system. Culture temperature is
maintained near the test temperature of 23°C.
The batches of test organisms were hand delivered to ASci-ETL. Upon arrival at ASci-ETL, the
batches of organisms were logged in and quarantined in glass containers. Diets during holding were
the same as used during the toxicity exposures. The organisms were not crowded or subjected to
daily temperature changes greater than 3°C per day during holding. The holding tanks were lightly
aerated during the pre-test period. At test initiation the Hyalella were 7 to 8 days old. The
Chironomus were 4-24 hours old.
-2-
-------
ASci Corporation
f environmental Testing Laborator>'
Submitted to TN&A - 2/07
Overlying Water Characteristics
Overlying water supplied to the test chambers was dechlorinated City of Duluth tap water. The City
draws its water from Lake Superior. The tap water was dechlorinated and metals were removed with
treatment through two, 1 .5 cubic-foot activated carbon beds.
Exposure System
Sediment from each site tested included eight replicates for each species. Exposure chambers were
300-ml Berzilius® glass beakers with 1.5 cm diameter side-wall ports screened with a stainless steel
mesh. The ports were located approximately 8 cm above the base of the beaker. The screens were
fixed to the beakers using aquarium-grade silicone adhesive. The replicate test chambers (eight for
each species) were held in a single all glass 1 2-L aquariums constructed with silicone adhesive. The
12-L aquaria were fitted with a self-starting siphon drain positioned 10 cm above the base of the tank
and provided a water volume of 8 L.
Dechlorinated tap water was fed to a 5-gallon stainless steel headbox where the water was heated and
then aerated to reduce supersaturated levels of dissolved gasses. The water was gravity fed to an
intermediate polyethylene delivery tank. The intermediate tank contained a submersible pump
controlled by a timer. The timer was set to activate the pump at 4-hour intervals (6 times per day).
The pump was activated for 5 minutes to deliver an appropriate volume of overlying water to the test
system. This volume was rapidly pumped to splitter tubes that delivered fresh overlying water to
each holding aquarium. The configuration resulted in two turnovers of overlying water per day. Test
temperature (23° ± 1 °C) was maintained using a constant temperature water bath. Test photoperiod
was maintained at 16 hours light and 8 hours darkness per day. Light was supplied by cool-white
fluorescent bulbs at an intensity of 50 to 100 ft-candles.
Test Performance
Sediment samples were collected by TN&A personnel from December 1 9-20, 2006. The samples
were delivered to ASci-ETL by express courier on December 2 1 , 2006. The samples were labeled as
C3 0-1 , Cl 1 0-1 , Gil 0-1 , and Kl 0-1 . The Chain of Custody forms were completed upon sample
-3-
-------
ASd Corporation
Knvironmcnta! Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TN&A - 2/07
arrival. Sample log-in included visual inspection of the shipping coolers, sample container integrity,
sediment temperature and appearance. Following log-in procedures, the samples were stored in
darkness at 1-4°C until use. Appendix A contains a copy of the Chain of Custody forms.
The primary laboratory control sediment was collected on May 17,2006, from West Bearskin Lake,
located in Cook County, Minnesota. The sediment sample (5-galIon) was placed in two new
polyethylene containers and cooled immediately. Upon arrival at the laboratory, the sample was
logged-in and stored under refrigeration (1-4°C) until use. Before use in the tests, the laboratory
control sediment was thoroughly homogenized, then sieved through a 2-mm screen to remove
indigenous organisms. A secondary control, North Poker Creek sediment was collected January 2,
2007, from a remote stream in St. Louis County, Minnesota.
The toxicity exposures with both test species were originally performed simultaneously. Twenty-
four hours before toxicity test initiation each sample was thoroughly homogenized with a stainless
steel auger, and 100-ml portions were transferred to each of the eight designated replicate exposure
chambers. Each set of replicate test chambers were then placed into an assigned 12-L holding
chamber containing 8 L of overlying water, and the Chironomus replicate exposures were fed 1.5
mL Tetrafin slurry. The toxicity tests were initiated approximately 24 hours later, after the sediments
were allowed to settle. The organisms were introduced into the test system on January 4, 2007.
To start the tests, ten Hyalella (7 to 8 days old), and twelve Chironomus (4-24 hours old) were
impartially distributed to random test replicates for each treatment. Chironomus replicates were
allowed to settle four hours before re-introduction into the test chambers.
At test initiation and each daily observation, head flow rate was measured, and any flows found to be
outside the range of ± 10% from target flow were adjusted. Measurements of overlying water pH,
conductivity, and dissolved oxygen were measured three times per week. Temperature was
measured daily. The total residual chlorine concentration of the post-carbon water was measured
periodically during the test to check for breakthrough. Hardness and alkalinity were measured at test
i nitiation and termination. Per the Statement of Work language, ammonia measurements were made
for five replicates/treatment on test day 1, 6, and 13.
-4-
--July 2010"
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to ITM&A-- 2/07
Hie test organisms were fed a diet based on EPA methods and recommendations from the culturing
laboratory (Aquatic Biosystems). The Hyalella were fed a mixture of yeast, Cerophyl®. and
fermented trout chow (YCT) prepared to contain 1,800 mg/L total solids. Chironomus test chambers
received a Tetrafin® slurry. The slurry was prepared to contain 4 g/L total solids. Each test replicate
received 1.5 ml of the respective dietary component daily.
The tests were terminated following 20 days of exposure (C. tentans) and 2 8-days (Hyalella). Any
organisms in the overlying water were removed first. The sediments were then removed from the
test chambers in a layered fashion using a gentle stream of post-carbon treated water. The sediments
were collected in a US Standard #40 sieve. The contents retained on the sieve were rinsed into a
white polyethylene pan, placed on a light source, and the sieved contents were searched for test
organisms. Numbers of live organisms and dead organisms found were counted and recorded.
Organisms not found were recorded as dead. These organisms were assumed to have died early in
the exposures and the remains had decayed.
The live Chironomus from each replicate were pooled, rinsed, and placed in pre-ashed, pre-weighed
aluminum weigh boats. The organisms pooled from each individual test replicate were then dried at
89°C for 24 hours. The dried, pooled organisms were then weighed to the nearest 0.01 mg to
determine mean dried weights. Organisms were then ashed at 550°C for two hours, and then
weighed to determine ash-free dry weight (AFD W). AFDW equals the weight of dried larvae minus
weight of ashed larvae.
Any pupae that were recovered were included in survival measurements but not growth
measurements. For replicates found to contain pupae, the mean weight was calculated by dividing
the pooled dry weight of the replicate by the number of organisms exposed less the number of pupae
recovered.
At test termination the Hyalella were pooled, rinsed, and preserved in 10% formalin. Length was
determined under a dissecting microscope via a calibrated eyepiece micrometer. Hyalella were then
placed in pre-weighed pans and dried at 86°C for 22 hours to determine mean dried weight.
-5-
-------
ASci Corporation
Environments! Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TN&A - 2/0?
ASci-ETl, Study ID #5010-246
Treatment of Results
The cumulative number of surviving organisms for each test sediment exposure was compared to
cumulative survival of organisms exposed to the selected reference site sediment exposure to
measure effect. The survival data were analyzed using Toxcalc Version 5.0.23, Tidepool Scientific
Software. The survival data were arc-sine transformed before analysis, and then checked for
normality and equality of variance. The appropriate parametric or non-parametric test was then
performed to determine significant effect (p=0.05) as compared to the reference site results.
The growth data was not transformed before analysis. Mean dry weights and/or lengths were
checked for normality and equality of variance. The growth data were then analyzed for significant
effect (p=0.05) using the appropriate parametric or non-parametric test. Mean growth at each test
site was compared to the reference site result to determine effect.
RESULTS
Overlying Water Characteristics
Headbox flow rates were measured daily. The daily values, calculated test chamber flow rates, and
volume exchanges are in Table 1. The overall mean flow rate for each of the holding tanks during
the test period was 5.5 ml/minute. The mean flow rate shows overlying water was renewed at a rate
that averaged 2.0 tank volumes per day.
Tables 2 and 3 summarize the overlying water temperature values measured daily from the Hyalella
and Chironomus exposure chambers. The range of individual temperature values was from 22.4°C
to 22.8"C. All the individual values were within the proposed range of 23°C ± 1°C. Mean test
temperatures were maintained at 22.4-22.5°C.
Overlying water dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations in the Hyalella and Chironomus test
chambers are in Tables 4 and 5. DO values ranged from 2.9 to 8.2 mg/L during the Hyalella
exposures. DO values ranged from 3.8 to 7.8 mg/L during the Chironomus exposures. At no time
was feeding suspended for either exposure.
-6-
JulyzOrtP
-------
ASci Corporation
J R n v i ronmen la I Test! n g I .aboratory
• Submitted to TN&A - 2/07
J ASci-r,TI, Study ID #5010-246
*
Overlying water pHs for the Hyalella and Chironomits test chambers are in Tables 6 and 7. The pH
of overlying water in the Hyalella and Chironomus exposures ranged from 6.51 -7.48. None of the
pH values were outside of the organisms' physiologically tolerable range.
Tables 8 and 9 contain the overlying water conductivity values for the Hyalella and Chironomus
exposures. The overall range of conductivity values for both exposures was from 128 to 424
|j.mhos/cm. None of the values indicated that a biologically significant amount of ionized material
was released from the test sediments.
Tables 10 and 11 contain overlying water alkalinity values for the Hyalella and Chironomm
exposures, respectively. Concentrations ranged from 36-114 mg/L as CaCOj.
Tables 12 and 13 contain the overlying total hardness values for the exposures. Concentrations
ranged from 42-100 mg/L as CaCO3.
Tables 14 and 15 contain the results of total ammonia measurements for the exposures. Ammonia
concentrations for the control sediments and Gil 0-1 and Kl 0-1 ranged were slightly elevated,
ranging from 0.13-4.10. Ammonia values for C3 0-1 and C11 0-1 were recorded at moderately high
levels, ranging from 1.13-12.20 mg/L, with averages of 4.63 and 7.07, respectively
The routine chemistry values indicated the test system maintained suitable water quality to allow
assessment of sediment toxicity for both test species. Assessment of the effects of ammonia toxicity
are contained in the Discussion.
Biological Exposure Results
All organisms were observed to burrow into all test sediments. At test termination, the secondary
control. North Poker Creek, was found to contain large numbers of Tanyopadinae chironomids,
which are classified as predaceous larvae (piercers and engulfers). The resulting survival data for
North Poker Creek was both low (50% for Hyalella and 29.3% for Chironomm') and sporadic.
Growth data indicated surviving organisms were healthy and larger than EPA minimum control
growth criteria.
-7-
-------
ASci Corporation
• Environmental Testing Laboratory
f Submitted to TN&A - 2/07
- ASci-ETL Study ID #5010-246
*
Replicate F for the West Bearskin Chironomus exposure had a large Ephemeroptera (mayfly) larvae
present at test termination, and data from replicate F were excluded from statistical analysis.
Replicate H for the Kl 0-1 Chironomus exposure had a large Odonata (dragonfly) larvae present at
test termination, and data from replicate F were excluded from statistical analysis.
For the Hyalella exposure, several replicates for West Bearskin had young present, and adult poking
was noted in most West Bearskin and some North Poker Creek replicates. Replicate F from Kl 0-1
had large amounts of microbiological growth present in the sieved sediment. Since no other
replicates in Kl 0-1 had high levels of microbiological growth, it was assumed that the growth was
due to a clump of organic material unrelated to actual sediment characteristics, and the data from
replicate F in Kl 0-1 was excluded from data analysis.
Petroleum- and naphthalene-like odors were present in all test sediments, but not the West Bearskin
or North Poker Creek controls. The naphthalene-like odor was strongest in test sediments C11 0-1
and Gil 0-1. Surface films were also present in all four test sediments throughout the tests, and
screens were cleaned regularly to prevent build-up.
Hyalella azteca Survival -
Appendix B summarizes the Hyalella survival results for the 28-day exposures. The laboratory
control sediment (West Bearskin) supported acceptable 28-day mean survival of 90%. The
secondary control, North Poker Creek, had survival of 50%. The test sediments had survival rates
from 60-78.8%. Statistical analysis showed the data were normal, with equal variances, and unequal
replicate size (due to Kl 0-1 replicate exclusion). Results of the Bonferroni t-test showed G11 0-1
and Kl 0-1 survival results were significantly lower than the West Bearskin control results. C3 0-1
and Cl 1 0-1 survival rates were not significantly lower than the West Bearskin control results.
Hyalella azteca Mean Dried Weight -
Appendix B also summarizes the Hyalella mean dried weight results for the 28-day exposures. The
laboratory control sediment (West Bearskin) supported acceptable 28-day mean organism weights of
0.405 mg/organism. The secondary control, North Poker Creek, had a mean organism weight of
-8-
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TN&A - 2/07
ASci-E IL Study ID #5010-246
0.421 mg/organism. The test sediments had mean dry weights from 0.248-0.351 mg/organism.
Statistical analysis showed the data were normal, with equal variances, and unequal replicate size
(due to Kl 0-1 replicate exclusion). Results of the Bonferroni t-test showed Cl 1 0-1 and Kl 0-1
dry weight results were significantly lower than the West Bearskin control results. C3 0-1 and Gl 1
0-1 weights were not significantly lower than the West Bearskin control results.
Hyalel/a a&eca Length -
Appendix B also summarizes the Hyalella length results for the 28-day exposures. The laboratory
control sediment (West Bearskin) supported acceptable 28-day mean length rate of 4.3 millimeter per
organism. The secondary control, North Poker Creek, had mean length rate of 4.2 millimeter per
organism. The test sediments had mean length rates of 3.4-3.8 millimeter per organism. Statistical
analysis showed the data were normal, with equal variances, and unequal replicate size (due to Kl 0-
1 replicate exclusion). Results of the Bonferroni t-test showed all test sediment organism lengths
were significantly lower than the West Bearskin control results.
Chironomus tentans Survival and Growth Results -
Appendix C summarizes the Chironomus survival results for the 20-day exposures. The laboratory
control sediment (West Bearskin) supported acceptable 28-day mean survival of 77%. The
secondary control, North Poker Creek, had survival of 23%. The test sediments had survival rates
from 0-49%. Statistical analysis showed the data were normal, with unequal variances, and unequal
replicate size (due to West Bearskin and K1 0-1 replicate exclusion). Results of the Wilcoxin Rank
Sum Test indicate all test sediment survival results were significantly lower than the West Bearskin
control results.
Appendix C also summarizes the Chironomus mean dried weight results for the 20-day exposures.
The laboratory control sediment (West Bearskin) supported an acceptable 20-day mean organism
dried weight of 1.36 mg/organism. The secondary control, North Poker Creek, had a mean organism
weight of 2.05 mg/organism. The test sediments had mean dry weights from 0.80-1.21 mg/organism.
Statistical analysis showed the data were non-normal, with equal variances, and unequal replicate
size (due to West Bearskin and Kl 0-1 replicate exclusion). Results of the Wilcoxin Rank Sum
.9.
-------
ASoi Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted lo TN&A - 2/07
ASci-ETL Study ID #5010-246
Test indicate none of the sediments had significantly lower dried weights than the West Bearskin
control results.
Appendix C also summarizes the Chironomus mean ash-free dried weight results for the 20-day
exposures. The laboratory control sediment (West Bearskin) supported an acceptable 20-day mean
organism ash-free dried weight of 1.14 mg/organism. The secondary control, North Poker Creek,
had a mean ash-free dried weight of 1,81 mg/organism. The test sediments had mean ash-free dry
weights from 0.62-0.99 mg/organism. Statistical analysis showed the data were non-normal, with
equal variances, and unequal replicate size (due to West Bearskin and Kl 0-1 replicate exclusion).
Results of the Wilcoxin Rank Sum Test indicate none of the sediments had significantly lower ash-
free dried weights than the West Bearskin control results.
The following conclusions can be drawn from the study results.
The primary laboratory control sediment used for this study, West Bearskin,
supported acceptable organism survival and growth for both test species.
The secondary laboratory control sediment used for this study, North Poker Creek,
did not support acceptable organism survival due to the presence of predaceous
Chironomid larvae. North Poker Creek did support acceptable growth for both test
species.
Sediment C3 0-1 caused significant mortality to Chironomus and significantly
affected Hyaldla length when compared to the primary laboratory control. West
Bearskin.
Sediment Cll 0-1 caused significant mortality to Chironomus and significantly
affected Hyaieiia length and weight when compared to the primary laboratory
control, West Bearskin.
Sediment Gil 0-1 caused significant mortality to Chironomus and significantly
affected Hyalella length when compared to the primary laboratory control, West
Bearskin.
Sediment Kl 0-1 caused significant mortality to Chironomus and significantly
affected Hyalella length and weight when compared to the primary laboratory
control, West Bearskin.
-10-
July20TO"
-------
ASci Corporation
Knv iron mental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TN&A - 2/07
ASci-ETL Study ID #5010-246
DISCUSSION
The four sediment samples collected by TN&A showed significant effect to Chironomus tentam
survival, but only moderately affected Hyalella azteca growth (weight and/or length) and did not
significantly affect Hyalella azteca survival. The measured ammonia levels throughout each
exposure may have contributed to Hyalella growth impairment, but did probably not cause C
tenlans lethality at the corresponding measured pH levels. The ammonia levels recorded
throughout the test would not have been acutely toxic to most invertebrate species unless pH
levels were >7.5 S.U.: the highest recorded pH level for C3 0-1 and Cl 1 0-1 was 7.3. Ammonia
levels in the test sediments were generally higher in the Hyalella exposures, which may have
been caused by YCT food addition, or the smaller diameter screen necessary for Hyalella
exposures. Unlike C. tentans, Hyalella move freely throughout the water column, especially
during low light periods. The smaller diameter screen effectively restrains 7-8 day Hyalella.
keeping the organisms inside the test beakers, but may not facilitate water exchange as readily as
the larger diameter C. tentans screens when surface films develop. The development of surface
films was noted for all test sediments throughout the exposures.
Without supporting analytical data it is impossible to ascertain the reason for the discrepancy in
organism response, but a possible cause of response differences are the relative ages of the two
test species. Chironomus tentans are more sensitive to both organic and inorganic toxicants in
first instar life stage. C. tentans that survived into subsequent life-stages (i.e. until test
terminations) may have been relatively unaffected by the same levels of toxicant(s) that were
toxic at first instar stages.
The low organism survival in the secondary control did not affect the validity of the test. Low
survival rates were due to indigenous larvae, and the relatively small test sample size (n=4) and
relatively similar sediment characteristics (silt/clay) meant that a West Bearskin-only comparison
is an accurate and fair statistical and quality-control reference for the test sediments.
- 11 -
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TN&A-2/07
ASci-I-TL Study ID #5010-246
REFERENCES
USEPA. 2000. Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated
Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates.
USEP A/US ACE. 1998. Great Lakes Dredged Material Testing and Evaluation Manual. Final Draft,
Benoit, D.A., G. Phipps, and G.T. Ankley. 1993. A Sediment Testing Intermittent Renewal System
for the Automated Renewal of Overlying Water in Toxicity Tests with Contaminated Sediments.
Water Research 27:1403-1412.
G.T. Ankley, M.K. Schubauer-Berigan, and P.D. Monson. Influence of pH and hardness on
toxicity of ammonia to the amphipod Hyalella azleca. Reprinted from Canadian Journal of
FishLorains and Aquatic Sciences. Volume 52/Number 10/1995.
Mary K. Shubauer-Berigan, Philip D. Monson, Corlis W. West, and Gerald T. Ankley. Influence
of pH on the Toxicity of Ammonia to Chironomus tentans and Lumbriculus variezatus.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 14, No. 4,pp.713-717, 1995.
TOXCALC Version 5.0.23, Tidepool Scientific Software
- 12-
July'ZOTD ~
-------
AScI
AScI Corporation
Ettvvrciwncnla] Testing Laboruory
Submitted to TNSheetl
AScL-ETL Sludv ID SSOLO-146
Table 1. Flow Rates (ml/min) of Overlying Water and Dally Turnover Rates to TN&A Sediments
During 20-day Chironomus tentans and 28-day Hyalelia azteca Exposures
»*r
Head Flow Rale
Tot dumber Flow RaM
Volume Exchanges
V
MO
Si
20
1
348
56
2.0
2
3*0
55
JO
" £
542
5.5
2.0
3
346
56
20
5
342
5 5
20
6
342
55
Z.l>
t
344
56
2. a
V
342
$5
2.0
; »
-143
5.5
2.0
1f>
342
5.5
2.0
It
350
5.6
2.0
' 'n
.146
56
2.0
• 13
,142
5 5
2.0
-14-'
,150
)6
20
M
350
56
J.O
16
546
56
20
1?
JJ6
56
ZO
IS
342
55
2.0
Vt
350
56
20
»
J42
S5
20
Mean
.14!
;s
20
few
340
55
3.0
*'fr
J50
56
2,0
Cay
Head Flow R«te
Test Chamber Flow Rait
Vohune Exchanges
0
340
55
20
f
.148
5.6
20
J
340
5.?
20
3
342
5.5
2.0
it
346
5.6
2.0
5
342
5.5
2.0
6
342
5.5
2«
t
346
56
20
V
342
55
10
!)
342
55
20
\(!
342
55
20
•13
350
5.6
2.0
ia
346
5.6
20
13
342
5S
20
14
350
S.
-------
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetl 2-07
5010-246
Table 2. Overlaying Water Temperature Values for TN&A Associate Hyalella Sediment Test
1/4/2007
1/5/2007
1/6/2007
1/7/2007
1/8/2007
1/9/2007
1/10/2007
1/11/2007
1/12/2007
1/13/2007
1/14/2007
1/15/2007
1/16/2007
1/17/2007
1/18/2007
1/19/2007
1/20/2007
1/21/2007
1/22/2007
1/23/2007
1/24/2007
1/25/2007
1/26/2007
1/27/2007
1/28/2007
1/29/2007
1/30/2007
1/31/2007
2/1/2007
^MMi
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
iP^iiii!
22.7
22.5
22.6
22.6
22.8
22.6
22.5
22.4
22.4
22.8
225
22,6
22.3
22.4
22.2
22.5
22.2
22.3
22.4
22.5
22.3
22.5
22.5
22.3
22.4
22.3
22.8
22.4
22.4
22,8
22.2
22.5
WimGims
22,8
22,7
22.5
22.4
22.7
22.7
22.4
22.5
22.4
226
22.5
22.5
22.2
22.3
22.2
22.5
22.1
22,1
22,3
224
22.3
22.3
22.5
22.1
22.1
22.5
22.5
22.3
22.3
22.8
22.1
22,4
22.7
22.6
22.5
22.5
22.8
22.7
22.5
22.5
22.3
22,3
22.6
22.6
22.1
224
22,3
22.3
22.1
22.2
22.3
22.4
22.3
22.3
22.5
22.1
22.0
22.4
22.6
224
22.3
22.8
22.0
22.4
i^S$t£i;K-:
228
22.8
22.8
22.7
22.7
22.6
22.5
22.6
22.2
224
22.7
22.8
22.3
223
22.3
22.4
22.2
22.3
22.4
22.3
22,5
22.5
22.6
22.2
22.4
22.5
22.5
22.4
22.5
22.8
222
22.5
iGUfttf:;
22.9
22.6
22.7
225
22.8
22.5
22.5
22.7
22.4
22.4
22.6
22.7
22.1
22.3
22.3
224
22.3
22.5
22.4
22.6
22.5
22.6
22.5
22.4
22.5
22.5
22.6
22.4
22.5
22.9
22.1
225
r^mjQHil-ii^
228
22.7
22.7
22.6
22.7
22.4
22.5
22.5
22.6
22.5
22.5
22.6
22.3
22.3
22.4
22.5
22.3
22.5
22.4
22.5
22.6
22.6
22.7
22.4
22.5
22.4
22.6
22.3
22.4
22.8
22.3
22.5
290
July 2010
-------
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetl 2-07
5010-246
Table 3. Overlaying Water Temperature Values for TN&A Associate Chironomus Sediment Test
1/4/2007
1/5/2007
1/6/2007
1/7/2007
1/8/2007
1/9/2007
1/10/2007
1/11/2007
1/12/2007
1/13/2007
1/14/2007
1/15/2007
1/16/2007
1/17/2007
1/18/2007
1/19/2007
1/20/2007
1/21 G007
1/22/2007
1/23/2007
1/24/2007
s~lf*$Kifi8&5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
jgj^pgjjiMft
22.6
22,5
22.5
22.5
22.8
22.8
22.6
22.7
22.6
22,6
226
22.7
22.3
22.4
22.3
22.1
22.1
22.1
22.4
22.5
22.2
22,8
22.1
22.5
ft^erCwek
22.7
22.6
22.6
22.6
22.7
22.7
22.5
22.6
22.6
22.7
22.7
22.7
22.2
22,3
22.4
22.4
22,1
22.2
22.3
22.4
22.2
227
22,1
22,5
^iC&iJRI ?:-:•
22.6
22.6
22.7
22.5
22.8
22.5
22.4
22.5
22.6
22.5
22.2
22.6
22.3
22.4
22.3
22.2
22.0
22.0
223
22.4
22,2
22,8
220
22.4
^:::St1;0^t'.'-:i.
22.7
22.7
22.7
22.5
228
22.7
22.5
22.4
22,5
22.3
22.4
225
22.2
22.3
22.2
22.3
22.1
22.2
22.1
22.3
22.3
22,8
22.1
22.4
:sSiT;1-Q^ :.:
22.0
22.8
22.7
22.7
22.7
22.6
22.4
22.4
224
22.4
22.5
22.6
22.3
22.3
22.3
22.5
22.4
22.4
223
22.1
22.6
22.8
22.0
22.4
K1 0^1
22.6
22.6
22.8
22.7
22.8
22.6
22.5
22.5
22.6
22.7
22.6
22.5
22.1
22.3
223
22,5
22.3
22.4
22.4
22.3
22.6
22,8
22.1
22.5
July 2010
291
-------
Table 4. Overlaying Water DO Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetf 2-07
5010-246
1/4/2007
1/5/2007
1/8/2007
1/10/2007
1/12/2007
1/15/2007
1/17/2007
1/19/2007
1/22/2007
1/24/2007
1/26/2007
1/29/2007
1/31/2007
2/1/2007
0
1
4
6
6
15
13
15
18
20
22
25
27
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
7.8
8,2
6.2
6.4
6.6
5.5
6.4
7.4
6,6
6.0
6.3
6.5
5.7
6.6
8.2
5.5
6.6
imm^fsm^:
7.4
8,0
3.1
5.4
4.6
5.5
6.0
6.0
5.3
4.8
4.3
5.1
5,5
6.3
8,0
3.1
5.5
L-L . -. . f^-9 J- >~~£ = -:
• •'•"•• " v?V -""'•'-'— :-=
7.1
8.0
3.9
5.8
5.0
4.8
5.2
5.3
4.7
4,5
4.4
5.1
5.1
5.5
8.0
3.9
5.3
^^Clt; . \
7,2
6,4
2.9
5.1
5.1
4.5
5.1
4.2
4.4
4.5
4.8
48
5.3
5.2
7.2
2.9
5.0
..X •,P?,i:i:
7.4
7.0
4.1
5.2
5.6
4.1
5.0
4.5
4.2
4,8
4.9
4.2
4.5
4.9
7.4
4.1
5.0
:M:iM^.
7.0
7.3
5.7
5.0
5.7
4.1
52
5.0
5.0
49
49
52
5.4
5.1
7.3
4.1
5.4
292
July 2010
-------
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetl 2-07
5010-246
Table 5. Overlaying Water DO Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
1/4/2007
1/5/2007
1/8/2007
1/10/2007
1/12/2007
1/15/2007
1/17/2007
1/19/2007
1/22/2007
1/24/2007
SPB&SSfe:
0
1
4
6
8
11
13
15
18
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
VVest^Mwith
7.65
7.84
6.10
6.4
5.3
5.8
4.6
5.2
48
6.0
7.8
4.6
6.0
RSK!*e*!ik
7.21
7.00
5.00
5.7
5.1
4.8
4.8
6.2
41
6.3
7,2
41
5.6
^J^oUC^
7.40
7.51
4.40
5.0
5.7
4.7
5.2
6.6
4.0
5.6
7.5
4.0
5.6
:....::• •G1.1..-. •.
7.50
6.95
4.80
5.4
5.0
4J
5.4
6.9
5.5
5.9
7.5
4.7
5.8
Q11
7.10
6.09
4.70
5.3
6.0
4.3
5.4
6.8
5.9
5.9
7.1
4.3
5.7
K1
7.80
562
3.80
5,1
4.9
43
5.5
68
4.6
5.4
7,8
3.8
5.4
July 2010
293
-------
Table 6. Overlaying Water pH Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetl 2-07
5010-246
1/4/2007
1/5/2007
1/8/2007
1/10/2007
1/12/2007
1/15/2007
1/17/2007
1/19/2007
1/22/2007
1/24/2007
1/26/2007
1/29/2007
1/31/2007
2/1/2007
. test day
0
1
4
6
8
15
13
15
18
20
22
25
27
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
MH9MK
7.28
7.30
7.48
6.84
6.85
6.93
6.89
7.03
7.05
6.82
6.72
6.97
6.84
6.67
7,48
6.67
6.98
IliKiii&igKi:
7.18
7.04
7.40
6,72
6.66
6.71
6.65
6.90
6.92
6.72
6.60
6.95
6.70
6.51
7.40
6.51
683
'4u. ,:$&£$•
7.29
7.20
7,29
7.07
7.24
6.91
6.80
6.98
7.05
6,83
6,74
7.09
7,06
6.85
7.29
6.74
7,03
Y^vCJJ -;.....
7.23
7.13
7.19
6.89
7.02
7.01
6.80
7,12
7.10
7.06
6.75
7.14
6.96
6.85
7.23
6.75
7.02
.V§Jl .:-,
7.31
727
7.18
7.23
7.19
7.23
6.95
7.12
7.20
7.07
6,89
7.25
7.15
7.00
7.31
6.89
7.15
.; .;. „ K1 :Y^
7.08
7.03
7.21
690
6.98
6.95
6.79
7.09
7.10
7.00
6.82
7.23
7.06
6.92
r 7.23
6.79
7.01
294
July 2010
-------
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetl 2-07
5010-246
Table 7. Overlaying Water pH Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
Illlllllf
1/4/2007
1/5/2007
1/8/2007
1/10/2007
1/12/2007
1/15/2007
1/17/2007
1/19/2007
1/22/2007
1/24/2007
iii&ssi^
0
1
4
6
8
11
13
15
18
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
gM'ffiBi&K
7.36
7.42
7.18
6.80
6.78
6.71
6.61
6.83
6.91
6.96
7.42
6.61
6.96
$$i&lii$ilto
7.10
7.02
7.20
6.74
6.80
6.89
6.68
6.84
6.96
685
7.20
6.68
6.91
K; ;-:;3@a^m:
7.12
7.06
7.04
6.90
6.93
6.94
6.78
6.94
7,10
7.09
7,12
6.78
6.99
.-,fe$11,,-J--
7.15
7.06
7.02
684
6.89
6.81
6 82
6,99
7.12
7,11
7.15
6.81
6.98
<311
723
7.16
7.13
7.12
7.15
7.13
7.02
7.11
7,20
7.18
7.23
7.02
7.14
K1
7,10
7,04
7,06
6,91
6.92
6,95
7.04
7.03
7,10
7.10
7.10
6.91
7.03
July 2010
295
-------
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetl 2-07
5010-246
Table 8. Overlaying Water Conductivity Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
1/4/2007
1/10/2007
1/17/2007
1/24/2007
0
6
13
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
130
140
160
128
160
128
140
240
167
153
155
240
153
179
••.^•;:,^iS*^ :^£^^
302
187
182
161
302
161
208
-:mx&Mm.
204
162
189
153
204
153
177
:!;:;;::; llall.'..,..
424
230
231
130
424
130
254
K1
199
180
216
173
216
173
192
Table 9. Overlaying Water Conductivity Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
1/4/2007
1/10/2007
1/17/2007
1/24/2007
2/1/2007
0 ] 135
6
13
20
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
135
130
156
143
156
130
140
gRMKMKJ
217
182
155
140
135
217
135
166
M!";LiS.:.®.'!
254
219
212
201
193
254
193
216
^jpl..:;^
272
247
282
250
200
282
200
250
^L^SilLiL^
383
332
289
316
210
383
210
306
,:.i, .:Ki „_,
200
240
203
214
187
240
187
209
296
July 2010
-------
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetl 2-07
5010-246
Table 10. Overlaying Water Alkalinity Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
1/4/2007
1/24/2007
,..T«srt;Oay
0
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
'^ip|:i|^p!
66,0
37.0
66.0
37,0
51,5
Poksr Greek
112.0
58.0
112,0
58.0
85,0
:r ':!i'i''::($|: £ V
114.2
40.0
114.2
40.0
77.1
~V"C~TV
96.0
57.0
96.0
57.0
76.5
/-•..Vg1£.;;::
86.6
61.0
86.0
61.0
73.5
' : -'-::^Ki-:-r:--:-
93.6
63.6
93.6
63.6
78.6
Table 11. Overlaying Water Alkalinity Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
114,2
01.1
96.0
86.0
K1;
93.6
36.0
45.0
74.4
80.0
84.2
64.0
Maximum
66.0
112.0
114.2
96.0
86.0
93.6
Minimum
36.0
45,0
74.4
80.0
84.2
64.0
Mean
51.0
78.5
94.3
88.0
85.1
78.8
July 2010
297
-------
Table 12. Overlaying Water Hardness Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetl 2-07
5010-246
^^J^^^^a^^^^P^:
^^sss^s^^j^sHKa^ii^SSj^i
1/4/2007
1/24/2007
iltetei
0
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
50.0
42.0
50.0
42.0
46.0
mmmmmi
100.0
53.0
100.0
53.0
76.5
: '.fEgR!jM!:
96.0
59.8
96.0
59.8
77.9
-: -;::CM:: "
79.8
50.0
79.8
50.0
64.9
Gil
88.0
55.0
88.0
55.0
71.5
K1
84.0
59.8
84.0
59.8
71.9
Table 13. Overlaying Water Hardness Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
C11
011
K1
50.0
100.0
960
798
88.0
84.0
74.2
50.0
75.0
73.8
81.8
72.0
Maximum
74.2
100.0
96.0
79.8
Minimum
50.0
50.0
75.0
73.8
Mean
62.1
75.0
85.5
76.8
88.0
81.8
84.9
84.0
72.0
78.0
298
July 2010
-------
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetf 2-07
5010-246
Table 14. Overlaying Water Ammonia Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
1/4/2007
1/10/2007
1/17/2007
2/12007
0
6
13
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
ib«isiii)(Si
1.14
1.41
1.40
1.20
1.31
0,450
0.725
0.449
0.642
0.500
1.48
2.02
1.91
0.22
0.27
0.129
2.02
0.13
0.95
*>ofc#f:Srs*M<
2.64
2.32
3.14
3.17
2.75
1.19
0.976
0.688
0.809
1.43
0.515
0.546
0.745
0.682
0.727
0.174
3,17
0.17
1.41
6.76
7.29
7.09
8.49
8.06
7.29
4.04
6.21
4.65
4.44
2.52
1.80
1.55
1.47
1.30
1.13
8.49
1.13
4.63
SKV.G1-1 •
9.88
9.12
12.20
9.30
8.16
5.83
6.08
5.67
4.44
7.82
4.77
6.34
6.80
5.89
7.83
2.96
r 12.20
2.96
7.07
01.1
2.73
2.12
3.10
3.29
2.28
2.40
2.36
2.33
1,95
2.15
0,15
0.30
0.41
0.57
1.19
0.14
3.29
0.14
1.72
K1
2.49
2.55
2.27
2.62
2.56
3.24
2.03
3.66
1.47
3.26
2,60
4.10
1.13
0.931
2.28
1.47
4.10
0.93
2.42
July 2010
299
-------
ASci Corporation
Submitted to TNSheetl 2-07
5010-246
Table 15. Overlaying Water Ammonia Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
I^VbMESjiSfesiS^^^^^-^f^jj^
1/4/2007
1/10/2007
1/17/2007
mfWnffnrfnM^HfiS
0
6
13
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
IWSSIBSffi&ISS!
0.745
0.658
0.460
0.581
0.569
0.453
0.459
0.353
0.345
0.358
0.730
1.68
1.66
1.02
1.21
1.68
0.35
0.75
ispafcAfgfttsK
2.38
2,47
2.88
2.23
2.59
0.445
0.437
0.457
0.498
0.590
0,754
0,649
1,220
1,010
0,976
2.88
0.44
1.31
Li::*:*r..^ppss*i
8.29
9.72
8.12
10.90
8.35
2.44
3.80
2.67
2.49
2.21
1,01
1.10
1.23
0.921
0.727
10.90
0.73
4.27
3*S Sllfi** >"::.•-
3.58
3.99
4.50
3.71
4.55
2.85
2.10
4.10
4,18
4.04
1,72
1.04
1.51
1.11
1.54
4.55
1.04
2.97
: ~: '(Sit"-1:-::".
2.44
2.55
2.78
2.49
2.30
1.26
1.22
1.20
1.20
1.50
0.714
0.625
0.537
0.727
0.803
2.78
0.54
1.49
^SS^Ki ":-?':;!
1.69
1.57
2.20
1.76
2.26
2,01
2.55
2.55
2.62
2.80
1.97
1.78
1.98
2.020
220
2.80
1.57
2.13
300
July 2010
-------
Date
ASci Corporation Environmental Testing Laboratory
Precision of H. azteca NaCl Reference Toxicant Testing
LC50
+2SD
-2SD
MEAN
Jul-02
Aug-02
Sep-02
Oct-02
rVkr> 09
lxCL~U*.
Ditt-03
1 f\*l
Jan-03
Apr-03
Jul-03
Aug-03
Jan-04
Apr-04
Jun-04
Sep-04
Oct-04
Jul-04
Aug-04
Oct-05
Aug-06
Jan-07
sd
cv
sd
cv
2.83
2,83
2.46
2.83
2 29
^.^?
2.46
2 A £.
.46
2.83
2.14
2.83
2.14
2.83
2.83
3.25
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.83
2.72
0.28
10%
0.28
10%
3.13
3.13
3.13
3,13
i n
3.13
31 *5
,13
3.13
3,13
3.13
3.13
3.13
3.15
3.15
3.15
3.28
3.15
3.28
3,28
3.25
2.07
2.07
2.07
2.07
2 07
ft i\J t
2.07
2m
.07
2.07
2.07
2.07
2.07
2.07
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.03
2.01
2.03
2.03
2.14
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2 60
At iVJU
2.60
2£/l
.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.58
2.58
2.58
2.66
2.58
2.66
2.66
2.69
3 en
-DU -
3.00 -
<
2.50
<0 2.00
J 1.50
o>
1.00
0.50
c
~.
Hyalella azteca 96hr LCSO Data
* ^+^^——
L-» » ^ \ * » • *L
^^ ^/^_ _fi\. _A_ / ^^
Test Date
»
3
.
I
July 2010
301
-------
ASci Corporation Environmental Testing Laboratory
Precision of Chirononuis ten tans NaCl Reference Toxicant Testing
Date
Aug-03
Apr-04
Apr-04
Jun-04
Jul-04
Aue-04
nUg^VT
Sep-04
Sep-04
Oct-04
Oct-04
Jul-05
Aug-05
Nov-05
Dec-05
May-06
May-06
Jun-06
Aug-06
Aug-06
Jan-07
sd
cv
LC50
5.66
9.85
5.66
7.46
5.66
6 50
Vr+J V
6.50
6.50
6.06
6.50
5.66
5.66
6.06
6.06
8.57
6.73
6.96
5.66
7.21
4.29
1.19
18%
+2SD
9.15
9.15
9.15
9.15
9.15
9 15
s * I if
9.15
9.15
9.15
9.15
9.15
9.15
8.87
8.87
8.87
8.98
8.87
8.98
8.98
8.84
-2SD
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
.12
.12
.12
.12
,12
.12
.12
.12
.12
.12
.12
.12
.07
.07
.07
.14
.07
.14
.14
.08
MEAN
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
64 Chironomus tentans 96nr LC50 Data
.64
.64
.64
.64
12.00
10.00
.64
-** 8.00
.64
.64 V8
.64
.64
.64
.47
.47
"Z. 600
_l '
^
w
4,00
2.00 -
.47 !
6-56 onn
~
A
l\ A
/ \ A I \ n
T ~\7\~Jf^*^*<^*i • — -/ — *-^\-TT '
\/ \ ./^ ^^^ ^v ^^ — ^ \_y \
V W 9 — 1r * \
\
\
4
»
UTUU i — ; • • i :
6yi *r e^l ^ ^ ^ ^ ^' ^ "^" ^~ ^" lO lO tf5 tf) ^P (O (O (O ^0 f*-
-^/ oooooooooooooooooooo
6
6
6
SA 3&^I3^3<1>1U^^\-^ 3O(UtDOJ 333SJ
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to R&E/USACE-Buffalo - 8/05
ASci-ETL Study ID #3600-006
APPENDIX A
Chain of Custody Form
303
-------
^ 4pA USE PA Contract Laboratory Program
— •" Generic Chain of Custody
, Date Shipped:
• Carrier Name:
Airbill:
Shipped to:
SAMPLE No.
C30-1
12/20/2006
FedEx
859930212490
ASCI-ETL
4444 AIRPARK BLVD
DULUTH Ml 6581 1
(218)722-4040
Chain of Custody Record
Relinquished By
(Date /Time)
2 ' fl
3
4
MATRIX/ CONCI ANALYSIS
SAMPLER TYPE TUFMAROUNO
Nadia Silvestri
Sediment/ UG Hyalella a (21)
8f|pitun:
Received By (Date / Time)
&E#^?&dj/L l%2^rf&,
^^
Reference Cave
Client No:
SDGNo:
L
For Lab Use Only
Lab Contract No:
Unit Price:
Transfer To:
Lab Contract No:
Unit Price:
TAG HoJ STATION SAMPLE COLLECT
PRESERVATIVE/ BoltM LOCATION DAIE/TWE
204(1) C30-1 S: 12/20/2006 14:55
FOR LAB USE ONLY
Simple Condtlon On Racefrt
Nadla Silvestri
Shipment for Case
Complete ?N
Analysis Key:
Cooler Temperature
Upon Receipt;
Concentration: L - Low, M = Low/Medium, H = High Type/Designate: Composite = C, Grab - G
Chain of Custody Seal Number:
Custody Seal Intact? /
Hyalella a - Hyalella azteca, Chironomus
Shipment Iced? j/_
PR provides preliminary results. Request* for preliminary results will Increase analytical costs.
Send Copy to: Sample Management Office, 2000 Edmund Halley Or, Rsston, VA. 20191-3400 Phone 703/264-9348 Fax 703/264-9222
F2VS.1.043 Page 1 of 1
-------
*itKA U5tKA toniraa uaooratory program
^ "™rrn Generic Chain of Custody
Region: 5
Project Code:
Account Code:
CERCLJS ID:
Spill O:
Site Name/State: Rh/eiview Trenton Channel/Ml
Project Leader: Karen Campbell
Acton:
Sampling Co: STN
Date Shipped:
Carrier Name:
Alitaill:
Shipped to:
I Reference Case: O
I Client No: FX
12/19/2006
FedEx
851895341429
ASCI-ETL
4444 AIRPARK BLVD
DULUTH Ml 5581 1
(218)722-4040
Chain of Custody Record
Relinquished By (Dato/71^)
1 f fr/fl !{&*?[; if t&jffi*g^
2 • I
3
4
SSL /^^^ ^/
tecrtnaBy l (rW/ Time)
fe^^'feml '^S^
MATRIX; cone; ANALYSIS TAG NO./ STATION SAMPLE COLLECT ' „ '
SAM RLE No. SAMPUiR TYPE TURNAROUND PRiSERVATIVE/ Bottle* LOCATION DATE/TIME
G11 0-1 Sediment/ LJG Hyalella a (21) 108(1)
Karen Campbell
K1 0-1 Sediment/ L/G Hyalella a (21) 107(1)
Karen Campbell
K1 0-1 S: 12/19/2006 9:19
StiipmantfofCssa
Complete? N
Analysis Key:
Sampte(8) to b« u«ed for laboratory QC:
Concentration:
Hyalella a = Hyalella azteca, unironomus
A*
L = Low. M = Low/Medium, H = High Ty
Additional Sampler Stgn«ture(s):
Typa/Dwlflnato: CompoBite = C, Grab = G
ClMlit of Custody Seal Number:
TR Number: 5-071926195-121906-0002
PR provides preliminary results. Requests for preliminary results will Increase analytical costs.
Send Copy to: Sample Management Office, 20DO Edmund Halley Or, Reston, VA. 20191^3400 Phone 703/264-9348 Fax 703/264-9222
REGION C
F2V&1.043 Pafl91of1
-------
AC,
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to t&E/USAC R- Buffalo -8/05
ASci-KTL Study ID #3600-006
APPENDIX B
Hyalella azteca Results and Statistical
Analysis
JuTy 20T\r
-------
Hyalella Growth and Survival Test-28 Day Survival
Start Date: 1/4/2007
End Date: 2/1/2007
Sample Date:
Comments:
Conc-
(Atest Bearksin
h Poker Creek
C3
C11
G11
K1
1
1.0000
0.8000
1 .0000
0.6000
0.7000
0.9000
Test ID: TN&A
Lab ID: 5010
Protocol: EPA 2000
2
0.9000
0.4000
0.7000
0.6000
0.8000
0.6000
0
0
0.
1,
0,
0.
3
8000
.1000
.8000
.0000
.5000
7000
4
0.9000
0.8000
0.6000
1.0000
0.4000
0.4000
5
0.9000
0.6000
0.9000
0.6000
0.5000
0.3000
0
0.
0.
1,
0,
0,
Sample ID: FIRST SET
Sample Type: SEDIMENTS
Test Species: H. azteca
6
8000
.5000
.6000
,0000
,5000
,6000
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0,
7
.9000
.5000
.7000
.0000
,8000
,7000
8
1 .0000
0.3000
0.8000
0.5000
0.6000
Transform: Arcsin Square Root
Conc-
iWest Bearksin
h Poker Creek
C3
C11
*G11
*K1
Mean
0.9000
0.5000
0.7625
0.7875
0.6000
0.6000
N-Mean
1
1
1
1
1
1
.8000
.0000
.5250
.5750
.2000
.2000
Mean
1.2543
0.7822
1.0787
1.1365
0.8916
0.8954
Min
1.1071
0.3218
0.8861
0.7854
0.6847
0.5796
Max
1.4120
1.1071
1.4120
1.4120
1.1071
1.2490
cv%
9.198
33.637
16.850
26.082
17.961
24.454
N
8
8
8
8
8
7
1 -Tailed
t-Stat Critical
*
1,726
1.159
3.567
3.409
2345
2345
2.345
2.345
MSD
0.2385
0.2385
0.2385
0.2469
Auxiliary Tests
Statistic
Critical
Skew
Kurt
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates normal distribution (p > 0.01)
Bartletf s Test indicates equal variances (p = 0.18)
The control means are significantly different (p = 3.76E-04)
0.9561
6.33097
4.64862
0,917
13.2767
2.14479
0.13592 -0.944
Hypothesis Test (1-tail, 0.05)
MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob
df
Bonferronr t Test indicates significant differences
Treatments vs West Bearksin
0.18831 0.20851 0.19185 0.04137 0.00427 4,34
Dose-Response Plot
1-tail, 0.05 level
of significance
a9fuly2010
ToxCalcv5.0.23
Reviewed by:
307
-------
Hyalella azteca Growth
Start Date:
End Date:
Sample Date:
Comments:
1/4/2007
2/1/2007
Test ID: TN&A Sample ID:
Lab ID: 5010 Sample Type:
Protocol: EPAF 94-EPA/600/4-91/002 Test Species:
FIRST SET
SEDIMENTS
PP-Pimephales promelas
Conc-
1
i/Vest Bearksin
h Poker Creek
C3
C11
G11
K1
0.3740
0.3825
0.2560
0.2583
0.2957
0.2644
0.3878 0.4075 0.4933 0.3233 0.4137
0.5925 0.1300 0.1475 0,5867 0.5200
0.3071 0.3525 0.4500 0.3056 0.4083
0.1767 0.1780 0.1970 0.3417 0.3320
0.3350 0.3760 0.2750 0.3420 0.3360
0.3811 0.4590
0.5380 0.4700
0.3843 0,3050
0,1950 0.3080
0.4800 0.3650
0.2217 0.2486 0.3625 0.3100 0,4333 0,3486
Transform: Untransformed
Cortc-
i/Vest Bearksin
h Poker Creek
C3
*C11
G11
•K1
Mean
0.4050
0.4209
0.3461
0.2483
0.3506
0.3127
N-Mean
0.9622
1.0000
0.8223
0.5900
0.8330
0.7430
Mean
0.4050
0.4209
0.3461
0.2483
0.3506
0.3127
Min
0.3233
0.1300
0.2560
0.1767
0.2750
0.2217
Max
0.4933
0.5925
0.4500
0.3417
0.4800
0.4333
CV%
12.966
44.332
18,641
28.447
17.667
23.734
N
8
8
8
8
8
7
1
-Tailed
t-Stat Critical
1.814
4.826
1.676
2746
2
2
2
2
.345
.345
.345
.345
MSD
0.0761
0.0761
0.0761
0.0788
Auxiliary Tests
Statistic
Critical
Skew
Kurt
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates normal distribution (p > 0.01)
Bartlett's Test indicates equal variances (p = 0 93)
The control means are not significantly different (p = 0.82)
0.94792
0.87066
0,2323
0.917
13.2767
2.14479
0.44694 -0.7389
Hypothesis Test (1 -tail, 0.05)
MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob
df
Bonferroni t Test indicates significant differences
Treatments vs West Bearksin
0.07879 0.19455 0.02638 000421 6.9E-04 4,34
Dose-Response Plot
1-tail, 0.05 level
of significance
ToxCalc v5.0,23
Reviewed by:_
July 2010
-------
Hyalella azteca 28-day length
Start Date: 1/4/2007
End Date: 2/1/2007
Sample Date:
Comments:
Conc-%
A/Est
Bearskin
North Poker
C3
C11
G11
K1
1
4.0800
3.8750
3.5900
3.6167
3.7286
3.2400
Test ID: TN&A Sample ID: 5010-246
Lab ID: 5010-246 Sample Type: Sediments
Protocol: EPAF34-EPA/600/4-91/002 Test Species: H. azteca
2
4.0444
4.6250
3.6857
3.2333
3.6250
3.2833
3
4.0625
3.8000
3.9000
2.8900
3.9600
3.5429
4
4.5889
4.3750
3.9333
3.4300
3.6250
3.4250
5
4.3556
4.3667
3.7556
3.6500
3.4400
3.9667
4.
4,
3,
3,
3,
3
6
.5857
,0400
,6667
,5400
,7400
,9333
4
4.
3.
3.
3,
3,
7
3222
.0800
.9429
.1300
.8625
,5857
8
4.3700
4.2667
3.7375
3.7600
3.3500
Conc-%
/VEst Bearskin
North Poker
*C3
*C11
*G11
*K1
Mean
4.3012
4.1785
3,8140
3.4063
3.6664
3.5681
N-Mean
1.0000
0.9715
0.8867
0.7919
0.8524
0.8296
Mean
4
4
3
3
3
3
.3012
.1785
.8140
.4063
.6664
,5681
Transform
Min
4.0444
3.8000
3.5900
2.8900
3.3500
3.2400
: Untransformed
Max
4.5889
4.6250
3.9857
3.7600
3.9600
3.9667
CV%
5.152
6.680
3.824
8.737
5.539
8.110
N
8
8
8
8
8
7
t-Stat
1.003
3.987
7.323
5.194
5.795
1 -Tailed
Critical
2.421
2.421
2.421
2.421
2.421
MSD
0.2958
0.2958
0.2958
0.2958
0.3062
Auxiliary Tests
Statistic
Critical
Skew Kurt
Snapiro-Wilk's Test indicates normal distribution (p > 0.01)
Bartlett's Test indicates equal variances (p = 0.51)
0.97576
4.30432
0.928
15.0863
-0.063 -0.7393
Hypothesis Test (1 -tall, O.OS)
MSDu MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob
df
Bonferroni t Test indicates significant differences
Treatments vs WEst Bearskin
0.30621 0.07119 0.97607 0.05973 7.5E-09 5,41
Dose-Response Plot
1-tail, 0.05 level
of significance
y2010
ToxCalc v5.0.23
Reviewed by:_
309
-------
Hyalella azteca 28-day Growth Data
Site ID # NPC
Length (mm)
Organism^
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Means
Rep.A
4.0
3.9
3.9
3.4
4.0
3.8
4.1
3.9
3.9
Average of Means
Rep. B
4.5
4.5
4.5
5.0
4.6
4.2
Rep. C
3.8
3.8
RepD.
4.3
4.5
4.8
4.4
3.8
4,5
4,3
4.4
4.4
Rep. E
4.6
4.1
5.1
5.2
3.5
3.7
4.4
Rep. F | Rep. G
3.7
3.8
3.9
4.6
4.2
4.0
4.4
3.9
3.2
4.4
4.5
4.1
Rep. H
4.9
4.3
3.6
4.3
SitelD#C3 Length (mm)
Organism*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Means
Rep.A
2.7
4.2
3.7
3.4
3.6
3.8
4.3
3.6
4.0
2.6
3.6
Rep. B | Rep. C
3.7
4.4
3.9
4.3
2.9
4.3
4.4
4.4
4.2
4.6
4.2
3.0
3.8
3.9
3.1
4.0 | 3.9
Rep D.
3.9
3.5
4.6
4.1
4.0
3.5
3.9
Rep. E J^ Rep. F
3.9
3.5
3.9
3.7
5.1
2.6
3.9
3.4
3.8
4.4
3.7
2.4
3.0
4.5
4.0
3.8 | 3.7
Rep. G
3.6
4.0
4.6
4.3
3.9
3.8
3.4
3.9
Rep. H
3.1
3.3
3.9
49
4.1
4.1
3.2
3.3
3.7
Average of Means [I 3.8 |
Site ID # West Bearskin Length (mm)
jorganismffjl Rep.A
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Means
4.4
3.5
4.2
4.0
4.1
3.6
4.3
4,2
4.4
4.1
4.1
Average of Means
Rep. 8
3.4
4.5
3.6
4.1
4.6
4.1
2.6
4.5
5.0
4.0
Rep. C
4.1
3.3
5.0
4.1
4.2
4.3
3.6
3.9
4.1
Rep D.
5.3
5.2
4.7
4.3
4.6
4.6
4,2
4.4
4.0
4.6
Rep. E
5.5
4.4
3.0
3.9
5.0
4,4
4.3
4.3
4.4
4.4
Rep. F
4.5
4.4
4.3
5.5
4.9
4.6
3.9
4.6
Rep. G
5.5
4.8
4.4
3.9
3.9
4.6
4.9
3.7
3.2
4.3
Rep. H
3.5
4.5
3.4
4.6
3.6
4.4
4.5
4.5
5.5
5.2
4.4
43 1
310
July 2010
-------
SitelD#C11
Length (mm)
Organism#
1
2
3
A
5
6
7
8
9
10
Means
Rep.A
3.8
4.1
3.4
3.1
4.3
3.0
3.6
Average of Means
Rep. B
3.4
3.0
3.0
3.6
3.0
3.4
3.2
Rep. C
5.8
2.5
3.6
3.4
3.8
2.9
3.5
1.9
2.5
2.0
2.9
RepD.
4.0
3.5
3.6
2.3
2.9
3.8
3.4
2,4
2.5
2.9
3.1
Rep. E
2.8
2.3
4.3
4.2
4.6
3.7
3.7
Rep.F
3.6
3.6
3.5
3.7
4.3
3.3
4.3
3.9
2.9
2.3
3,5
Rep. G
3.9
3.4
3.2
3.3
3.3
3.3
2.4
3.3
2.7
2.5
3.1
Rep. H
4.4
3.8
3.4
3.4
3.8
3.8
,3.4 ||
SitelD#K1 Length (mm)
|Organism#|[ Rep.A
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Means
3.4
3.3
3.0
2.0
2.9
3.4
3.5
4.0
3.5
3.4
3.2
Rep. B
3.4
3.9
3,9
2.7
2.8
3.0
3.3
Rep. C
3.8
3.2
3,0
3.7
3.8
3.6
3.7
3.5
RepD.
3.3
3.8
4,1
2.5
3.4
Rep. E
3.2
3.5
5.2
4.0
Rep.F
Rep. G
4.0
4.0
4.3
3.7
4.1
3.5
3.9
Rep. H j
3.3
3.4
3.7
2.9
3.9
3,9
4.0
3.6
Average of Means |j 3.6 ||
SitelD#G11
Length (mm)
|0rqanism#|| Rep.A
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 n ir
Means
3.8
3.2
4.6
3.5
3.6
3.6
3.8
3.7
Rep. B
3.4
4.1
2.7
4.2
3.4
3.4
3,8
4.0
3.6
Rep. C
4.8
4.0
3.3
3.3
4.4
4.0
RepD.
4.0
3.6
3.9
3.0
3.6
Rep. E
4.0
3.0
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
Rep. F
4.0
4.1
3.0
3.6
4.0
3.7
Rep. G
3,5
3.7
4,4
4.3
4.0
4.1
4.4
2.5
3.9
Rep. H
4.1
4.0
2.9
3.1
2.7
3.3
3.4
Average of Means || 3.7 ||
July 2010
311
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TN&A
ASci-KTL Study ID #5010-246
APPENDIX C
Chironomus tentans Results and
Statistical Analysis
-------
C. tentans 20-day Survival
Start Date: 1/4/2007
End Date: 1/24/2007
Sample Date:
Comments:
Cone-
lA/est Bearksin
h
Poker Creek
C3
C11
G11
K1
1
0.7500
0.0000
0.5000
0.0000
0.0000
0.5833
Test ID: TN&Actafdw
Lab ID: 5010
Protocol: EPA 2000
2
0.9167
0.4167
0.4167
0.0833
0.0000
0.7500
3
0.5833
0.5833
0.3333
0.0000
0.0000
0.3333
4
0.9167
0.1667
0.0833
0.2500
0.0000
0.4167
0,
0,
0,
0.
o.
0
5
.5833
.0000
0000
.0000
,0000
,3333
1,
0,
0.
0.
0.
0,
Sample ID: FIRST SET
Sample Type: SEDIMENTS
Test Species: C. tentans
6
,0000
5000
3333
1667
0000
5000
7
0.6667
0.0833
0,2500
0.1667
0.0000
0.5000
8
0.0833
0.5000
0.4167
0.0000
Transform: Arcsin Square Root
Cone-
West Bearksin
h Poker Creek
*C3
•C11
G11
*K1
Mean
0.7738
0.2292
0.3021
0.1354
0.0000
0.4881
N-Mean
3.3766
1.0000
1.3182
0.5909
0.0000
2.1299
Mean
1.1032
0.4565
0.5581
0.3492
0.1448
0.7742
Min
0.8691
0.1448
0.1448
0.1448
0,1448
0.6155
Max
1.4260
0.8691
0.7854
0.7017
0.1448
1.0472
cv%
20.263
63.469
41.354
58.615
0.000
19.689
N
7
8
8
8
8
7
Rank 1 -Tailed
Sum Critical
36.00
36.00
32.50
45
45
35
.00
.00
.00
Auxiliary Tests
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates normal distribution (p > 0.01)
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
The control means are significantly different (p = 3.58E-04)
Hypothesis Test (1-tail, 0.05)
Statistic
0.97162
4.78246
Critical
0.9
2.16037
Skew
-0.0517
Kurt
-0.7772
Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test indicates significant differences
Treatments vs West Bearksin
Dose-Response Plot
ToxCalc V5.0.23
Reviewed by
-------
Start Date: 1/4/2007
End Date: 1/24/2007
Sample Date:
Comments:
Cone-
West Bearksin
h Poker Creek
C3
C11
K1
1
1.5422
2.1500
1.4300
2.0800
1.2343
1
1
0
0
1
C.
tenatna Dried Weights
Test ID: TN&Actafdw
Lab ID: 5010
Protocol: EPA 2000
2
.4782
.8700
.8920
.7167
.1067
1.
1.
0.
0.
1.
3
1000
3650
7650
1200
2550
4
1,1745
1.5150
1.4500
0.6450
0.8640
1.
3
0
0
0
5
5257
3100
8675
.4480
.7725
Sample ID: TN&A
Sample Type: SEDIMENTS
Test Species: C. tentans
6
1 .0808
20800
2,3267
1.5650
7
1.6050
0.7667
0.8800
Transform: Untransformed
Cone-
West Bearksin
h Poker Creek
C3
C11
K1
Mean
1.3581
2.0483
1.2140
0.8019
1.0968
N-Mean
0,6630
1,0000
0.5927
0.3915
0.5354
Mean
1.3581
2.0483
1.2140
0.8019
1.0968
Min
1.0808
1.3650
0.7650
0.1200
0.7725
Max
1.6050
3.3100
2,3267
2.0800
1.5650
CV%
16.860
33.727
47.151
93.641
25.508
N
7
6
7
5
7
Rank
Sum
41.00
22.00
42,00
1 -Tailed
Critical
35.00
19.00
35.00
Auxiliary Tests
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates non-normal distribution (p <= 0.01)
Bartlett's Test indicates equal variances (p = 0.03)
The control means are significantly different (p - 0.03)
Hypothesis Test (1-tail, 0.05)
Statistic
0.87275
8.70996
250386
Critical
0.891
11.3449
2.20099
Skew
1.40404
Kurt
2.47472
Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test indicates no significant differences
Treatments vs West Bearksin
Dose-Response Plot
ToxCalc v5 0.23
Reviewed by:_
July 2010
-------
C. tentans 20-day
Start Date: 1/4/2007
End Date; 1/24/2007
Sample Date:
Comments:
Conc-
A/est Bearksirt
h Poker Creek
C3
C11
K1
1
1.2733
1 .9580
1.1867
1.6300
0.9843
Test ID: 5010-246
Lab ID: 5010
Protocol: EPA 2000
2
1 .2336
1.6214
0.7260
0.5933
0.8522
3
0.9600
1.2500
0.6225
0.0450
1 .0350
4
0.9836
1 .3350
1.1500
0.4500
0.7200
5
1 .2586
2.8900
0,7350
0.3740
0.5775
AFDW
Sample ID: TN&A
Sample Type: SEDIMENTS
Test Species: C. tentans
6
0.8975
1 .8000
1 .9500
1.2300
7
1.3700
0.6183
0.7117
Transform: Untransformed
Cone-
West Bearksin
h Poker Creek
C3
C11
K1
Mean
1,1395
1.8091
0.9984
0.6185
0.8730
N-Mean
0.6299
1.0000
0.5519
0.3419
0.4825
Mean
1.1395
1,8091
0.9984
0.6185
0.8730
Min
0.8975
1.2500
0.6183
0.0450
0.5775
Max
1.3700
2.8900
1.9500
1.6300
1.2300
cv%
16,385
32,825
48.268
97.042
25.754
N
7
6
7
5
7
Rank
Sum
41,00
22.00
37.00
1 -Tailed
Critical
35.00
19.00
35.00
Auxiliary Tests
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates non-normal distribution (p <= 0.01 )
Bartlett's Test indicates equal variances (p = 0.03)
The control means are significantly different (p = 0.02)
Hypothesis Test (1-tail, 0.05)
Statistic
0.87252
8.77724
2,8421
Critical
0.891
1 1 .3449
2.20099
Skew
1 .38338
Kurt
2.47099
Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test indicates no significant differences
Treatments vs West Bearksin
Dose-Response Plot
ToxCalc v5.0.23
Reviewed by:
51J
-------
ASci Corporation
r'mironmental Testing Laboratory
Submitted to TO&A
ASci-ETL Study ID #5010-246
APPENDIX D
Raw Data
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
TN&A 5010-246
Revised 1/07
Page JL°f_13_
ASci Corporation
TEST TNaA Associates Sediment Toxiclty Test
DATE 174/07
STUDY DIRECTOR Clayton Allen
TECHNICIAN(S) Brown. Wormer, Ehlers, Nordmever
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
TN&A 5010-246
Revised 1/07
BIOLOGICAL TESTING INFORMATION FORM
Page 3 of J3.
TEST INFORMATION
Date: 1/4/07
Sediment(s): Gl 1 0-1, K1 0-1, C11 0-1, C3 0-1
Template #: Standard Randomization
Test Type:
28-day Hyaella (survival and Growth) and 20-day C. tentans
Test Dates: January 4-February 2,2007
Renewal Frequency: Two renewals of overlaying water/day
Dilution Water: Post-carbon treated tap water
Test Site:
Bio VII
Temperature: 23°C ± 1°C
TEST ORGANISM INFORMATION
Organism
Age
Food
Culture
Medium
Test Chamber
Source
Hyalella azteca
7-8 days old
1.0 ml YCT/day
ECT Culture Water
300 mL glass Berzelius Beakers
Environmental Consulting and
Testing
C. tentans
< 24hours
1.5 ml Tetrafin Slurry/day
ECT Culture Water
300 mL glass Berzelius Beakers
Environmental Consulting and
Testing
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
TN&A 5010-246
Revised 1/07
HYALELLAAZTECA DAILY OBSERVATION AND FEEDING FORM
Test Day
Flow
Rate
Exposure
Fed(Y/N)
.....
Observations/ Activities
'
i
_±_
X
i
^L
_±
6
V.
.X
"19.
V
V
21
22:
Jl
23
24
25
^
26
27
Y
28
29
-------
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
TN&A 5010-246
Revised 1/07
C. tentans DAILY OBSERVATION AND FEEDING FORM
Jest Day
Exposure:
Fed (Y/NY
..
Observations/Activities
-1
0
o.
tt&t$? <^psc*r o^T-w^c-U?
y
Jt
-X
Y
X
10
12
13
r
14
y
15
Y
V
17:
18
JL
19
y
..20
-------
Overlaying Water Temperature Values for TN&A Associates Hyatetia Sediment Test
1/4/200?
1/5/2007
77_. 7
1/6/2007
^^.
1/7/2M17
!/8/2007
1/9/2007
. >
. 5"
1/10/2007
1/11/2007
, W
1/12/2007
2-7- V
. c-
1/13/2007
. 3
7-2,
1/14/2007
10
27.5
22.-
1/15/2007
1/16/2007
12
i
22
1/23/2007
19
s-Z-.M
1/24/2007
20
TZ.3
1/25/2007
21
,3
1 /26/2007
22
-Zl-6
1/27/2007
23
ZZ-- i
1/28/2007
24
t 2.0
1/29/2007
25
22., 3
1/30/2007
26
9.1, r
z. •>'
1/31/2007
27
i-T,
2/1/2007
28
July 2010
321
-------
! Cirip«stio
Overlaying Water Temperature Values for TN&A Associates Chironomus Sediment Test
I/4/2C07
1/5/2007
1/6/2007
. 7-
1/7/2007
21-6
6"
1/8/2007
1/9/2007
1/10/2007
. OX
1/11/2007
2-x.f
7.0. .
•2.2.X
1/12/2007
- fc
. H
1/13/2007
2.Z.?-
Z-7.. 3
1/14/2007
10
.7.
1/15/2007
11
1/16/2007
12
1/17/2007
13
1/18/2007
14
Z 2-2-
1/19/2007
15
Z2.6"
1/20/2007
16
7.1. d
1/21/2007
•z z.t
1/22/2007
18
-2,7.7
•71-
1/23/2007
19
1/24/2007
20
1/25/2007
21
i /26/2007
22
1/27/2007
23
1/28/2007
24
1/29/2007
25
1/30/2007
26
4±
1/31/2007
27
\.
2/1/2007
28
322
July 2010
-------
Overlaying Water DO Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
1/4/2007
Jfa-L
J^L
1/5/2007
6?
"7 .
1/8/2007
1/10/2007
1/12/2007
s.u
1/15/2007
11
1/17/2006
13
5.0
1/19/2007
15
7-4
1/22/2007
18
1/24/2007
20
PS
1/26/2007
22
. 3
HA
1/29/2007
25
Ok
1/31/2007
27
5-9-
•5-.H
2/1/2007
28
5".
Overlaying Water pH Values for ff. azteca Sediment Test
i
Initials
1/4/2007
7.
1/5/2007
7-30
7.
&=>
1/8/2007
7^0
1/10/2007
1/12/2007
7.0
1/15/2007
11
TOI
7-33
1/17/2006
13
1/19/2007
15
]_03_
7-iZ.
7.12,
1/22/2007
18
_!_
'- IQ
1/24/2007
20
07-
T-. oo
1/26/2007
22
1/29/2007
25
7. -23
1/31/2007
27
2/1/2007
28
7 DO
July 2010
P»IB or
323
-------
Overlaying Water Conductivity Values for C, tentans Sediment Test
1/4/2007
ten,
1/10/2007
1/17/2007
13
1/24/2007
20
lie \
2/1/2007
28
Overlaying Water Alkalinity Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
Test.Da.yi
Pol^r
Creek
C3
cu
Gil
Initials
1/4/2007
0
1/24/2007
20
37.0
l. O
Overlaying Water Hardness Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
West
Bearskin
Poker
Creek
en
Kl
1/4/2007
1/24/2007
20
-o
53-0
.0
324
July 2010
-------
Overlaying Water Conductivity Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
f-_nvironmcntat Testing Laboratory
A^T-ETt. Siudv ID f50}0-I?3
Test Day
Poker
Creek
C3
en
1/4/2007
0
too
1/10/2007
-me)
1/17/2007
13
•Zc-3*
C/v
1/24/2007
20
Z50
2/1/2007
28
14
13 W
Overlaying Water Alkalinity Values for H, azteca Sediment Test
Kl
1/4/2007
IW- "2.
2/1/2007
28
O
O
?c?.o
Overlaying Water Hardness Values for //. azteca Sediment Test
•• ' '"Wealt" -
Bearskm:
Creek
Cll
1/4/2007
ICO
s^.o
2/1/2007
28
O
July 2010
325
-------
Overlaying Water DO Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
Q| Testing Laboratory
AScl-£TL SlwMD £?«I0-I?3
Day
West
Bearskin
Poker
Initials
1/4/2007
7.31
JM.
1/5/2007
7.5
1/8/2007
1/10/2007
5-7"
5.0
5.
1/12/2007
SM
CA
1/15/2007
11
SC.fr
1/17/2006
13
S-f
<=*.
1/19/2007
15
&. z
1/22/2007
IS
1/24/2007
20
. o
Overlaying Water pH Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
Polser
Creek
C3
Gil
Kl
Initials
1/4/2007
0
1/5/2007
7-06?
7.1k?
1/8/2007
7.CU
1/10/2007
6
1/12/2007
6 to
4..
CA
1/15/2007
11
7- '3
1/17/2006
13
6-7?
7,-H
C4
1/19/2007
15
1/22/2007
18
T.
CA
1/24/2007
20
7- 1/
326
July 2010
-------
Overlaying Water Ammonia Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
Test Day
West
Bearskin
Pok^r
Creek
C3
CIl
Oil
K1
Initials
1/4/2007
0
fi
-
D- t
£-2.11
F-
Jl- IZ,
e-z.
.
A- i. * o
H-3.I7-
a -3-
6- i.
a - z.
H -
1/10/2006
/}
H- l.i
- "?•.
y\ - M .
C - Z.
£*-
B-
C-
1/17/2007
13
C -
4-6-SfS
-7 5"i
A - *f
8-2-cdb
B" 2
C "
-
0 • i 7M
0
'I
-------
* » *
Overlaying Water Ammonia Values for C tentans Sediment Test
Dale
TestDsfy-
West
Bearskin
•Creek
C3
Cll
pl.i
Kl
1/4/2007
0
21
8-
H- 1
A -
5 -
4 - Z.30
1/10/2006
£-0^57-
0
P -
- M.iO
c -i-zo
F
- 1.
-0.555-
c -
-1.50
A- '
1/1 7/2007
13
fi -\.J-1
CJ -0.--MH
CA
A
A- i,
- MO
•ft. I V
0*
a,
C - o . 1 X|
t>- Ml
cv
B '
F - O.UD'l
06
1/24/2007
20
o
0 -
-------
Chironomus tentans 20-day Survival and Growth Data
AScl-ETl
Study 1.0. # 5010-216
Site ID # WBS
Pan#
Rep
A
# Organisms
Alive
ii.
i
Q
Dead
*
Weighed
Ashed Pan Wt (4W
Pan +
rftj.
Dried Org. Wt Jgf
Site ID # NPC
Pan#
C .<*
-K7
Rep
S Organisms
Alive
o
Dead
i
n
Weighed
O
o
Ashed Pan Wt.
. (flu*
Pan
Dried Org
/-U*J<*c
Pan-t-
Ashed Org. W
Q> 3 , Of
Pan *
rod
Ashed Org. Wt Jgf
01
J3&&. 2 3
July 2010
329
-------
Chironomus tentans 20-day Survival and Growth Data
ASCI-ETL
Study I. D #5010-216
Site ID # C3
Pan*
Rep
# Organisms
Alive
Dead
Weighed
Ashed Pan Wt,
, (f^
Pan
Dried Org, Wt-fejf
Pan-1-
Ashfd Org. Wt. (g)
. to
C
0
O
ta 11.
Site ID# Cll
Pan*
Rep
S Organisms
Alive
Dead
Weighed
Ashed Pan Wt
ifel
l>an
l>ried Org.
Pan +
Ashed Org Wt (g)
, 3?
0
/a
1
.6-5"
0
330
July 2010
-------
AScl-ETL
Study I.D. #5010-216
Site ID # Gil
Pan*
A
B
C
I)
E
K
G
M
Rep
4
6
(L
tf
£
t
G>
tf
% Organisms
Alive
G
n
fl
0
o
o
0
D
Dead
tt
t^
H
ir
ti
a
to
it
Weighed
6
O
0
0
0
C)
£>
t>
M
Ashed Pan Wt (g)
'I31Z.1
i y*& >o
t^>D^
f asa.f
^.3l
lA'VS. '
i^w-f
Pan +
Dried Org. Wt (g)
Pan +
Ashed Org Wi (g)
SiUJlD# Kl
Van it
Rep
# Organisms
Alive
Dead
Weighed
iTUj
Ashed Pan WU^T
/"i
ried Org. Wt.^ff
Pan +
Ashed Org.
3
c
. (ffl
JL
/%3
12
-**
Au/Uee jU&L+U
4M
MS&LS^
July 2010
331
-------
Hya/eWa azteca 28-day Survival and Growth Data
SScl-ETL
SftKty I.D. #5<31€l-1BS
Site ID # NPC
s
5
a.
1,
05'
. 03
Length
M.S"
3
H.i
M.3
3 .
2-
H.o
H-Z-
?
H.I
332
July 2010
-------
Hyalella azteca 28-day Survival and Growth Data
ASci-ETX
StuOflO I50KM69
SitelD#C3
-H.
]>ioJ tig. Wt.-(fH^
-p-
>, a j
. 02
7-
Length
3.1
3.?
3 r
3 °l
5
3.7
5" 1
H.&
ia.
^ -V
July 2010
333
-------
Hyatetla azteca 28-day Survival and Growth Data
Site ID # West Bearskin
Rep
8
(9
A)
s
/396.JJ
"1
dft^ WHJT*
. •** Z.
, ft
Length f.
MX
H.I
5". 5
3.S
4.5-
^4-
M.H
M.7
±L±L
H 3
5". 5*
3
_O.
'I. 1
JrL
H.M
2.0?
"t S
H <
334
July 2010
-------
Hyatella azteca 28-day Survival and Growth Data
AScl-ETL
*&Gt£M63
SiteTD#CH
Dried Oig.. VfyJfff
0
/C
JO
i?
*3& 3,, Sf-S"
to
0
10
Length
Otgonsunf
ttcp A
Rigi.D
Ltcp. U
3H
3.
1. 6
Z.3
3.60
•5 •
5
3 H
3.?
S.3
3.0
3
3
3-5
3 F
3,5
3-5"
3
z.o
July 2010
335
-------
Hyalella azteca 28-day Survival and Growth Data
ASd-ETL
Study I.D.# 561 D-1&3
Site JD # Kl
Kef
J2.
0*
O
/o
10
.1
3
C
u
lAietl l.>«.
t*Lt*Uf&t
Length
Rip B
Kcp L
2A.
33
o ,
3 &
3-
2.0
•Z-7-
3
3.?
2-*?
3.0
3. 1
35
336
July 2010
-------
Hyalella azteca 28-day Survival and Growth Data
ASd-ETl
SfcDdyJ.D.» 5610-158
Site ID # Gil
a
JL
r
Length
Ktf l>
4.D
3.
H.I
2>^L
3.0
M.I
7-
i
3 &
H.4
4-5
. 5
M.-6
July 2010
337
-------
Results of
Hyalella azteca and Chironomus tentans
Toxicity Tests with TN&A Whole Sediment
Samples Received July 11, 2007
Prepared by
ASci Corporation
Environmental Testing Laboratory
4444 Airpark Boulevard
Duluth, Minnesota 55811-5712
Submitted to
TN & Associates, Inc.
704 S. Illinois Ave., Suite C-104
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
Submitted August 2007
338 July 2010
-------
Name (signed):.
Name (typed):_
Title:
REPORT APPROVAL
Clayton Allen
Operations Manager
*****
Name (signed):.
Name (typed):_
Title:
Kelly LaFortune
Quality Assurance Officer
July 2010
339
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 5
STUDY SUMMARY 5
METHODS AND MATERIALS 6
General Test Methods 6
Test Organism Culturing, Holding, and Acclimation 6
Overlying Water Characteristics 7
Exposure System 7
Test Performance 7
Treatment of Results 10
RESULTS 10
Overlying Water Characteristics 10
Biological Exposure Results 11
DISCUSSION 14
REFERENCES 15
The following tables are located on pages 16-27 of this report.
TABLE 1. Flow Rates (ml/min) of Overlying Water and Daily Turnover Rates to TN&A Sediments
Test Chambers During Hyalella and Chironomus Exposures
TABLE 2. Overlying Water Temperature Values (°C) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella
Exposures
TABLE 3. Overlying Water Temperature Values (°C) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day
Chironomus Exposures
TABLE 4. Overlying Water Dissolved Oxygen Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day
Hyalella Exposures
340 July 2010
-------
Table of Contents (cont.)
TABLE 5. Overlying Water Dissolved Oxygen Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day
Chironomus Exposures
TABLE 6. Overlying Water pH Values for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella Exposures
TABLE 7. Overlying Water pH Values for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day Chironomus Exposures
TABLE 8. Overlying Water Conductivity Values (umhos/cm) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day
Chironomus Exposures
TABLE 9. Overlying Water Conductivity Values (umhos/cm) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day
Hyalella Exposures
TABLE 10. Overlying Water Alkalinity Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day Chironomus
Exposures
TABLE 11. Overlying Water Alkalinity Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella
Exposures
TABLE 12. Overlying Water Hardness Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day
Chironomus Exposures
TABLE 13. Overlying Water Hardness Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella
Exposures
TABLE 14. Overlying Water Ammonia Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 28-Day Hyalella
Exposures
TABLE 15. Overlying Water Ammonia Values (mg/L) for TN&A Sediments During 20-Day
Chironomus Exposures
APPENDIX A - Chain of Custody Forms
APPENDIX B - Hyalella azteca Results and Statistical Analyses
APPENDIX C - Chironomus tentans Results and Statistical Analyses
APPENDIX D - Raw Data
APPENDIX E - Precision of Hyalella and Chironomus 96-Hour NaCI Reference Toxicant Testing
July 2010
341
-------
INTRODUCTION
At the request of TN & Associates, ASci-Environmental Testing Laboratory (ASci-ETL)
performed toxicity tests with bulk sediment samples collected by TN&A personnel on July
10, 2007. The toxicity tests were performed to measure the toxicity of selected sediment
samples to Hyalella azteca (amphipod) and larval Chironomus tentans (midge). The
Hyalella test endpoints were 28-day survival, length, and weight. The Chironomus
endpoints were 20-day survival and growth (dried and ash-free dried weight (AFDW)). Test
dates were July 13 to August 10, 2007.
STUDY SUMMARY
The table below summarizes survival and growth for each TN & A sediment and the West
Bearskin (WBS) and artificial sediment controls. CaribSea Live Aragonite Substrate (Ref
2), the secondary control, was chosen for its contrast to the silt/clay characteristics of the
WBS control. It did not meet acceptable survival criteria for Hyalella or Chironomus and in
future studies should not be used as a control sediment.
Endpoint
H. azteca Survival (%)
H. azteca Growth
(mg/organisms)
H. azteca Growth (mean
length)
C. tentans Survival (%)
C. tentans Dried Weight
(mg/org)
C. tentans AFDW
(mg/org)
EPA 2000
minimum
criteria
>80
>0.15
>3.2
>70
>0.60
>0.48
West
Bearskin
96.3
0.424
4.2
80.0
2.10
1.80
Reference
2
72.5
0.214
3.5
25.0
1.64
1.32
B30-1
85.0
0.225
3.8
28.8
1.84
1.31
E30-1
85.0
0.202
3.7
45.0
1.79
1.30
F50-1
51.3
0.125
3.8
0
NA
NA
S20-1
0.04
0.005
0.6
0
NA
NA
342
July 2010
-------
METHODS AND MATERIALS
General Test Methods
Exposures to determine the toxicity of whole sediment samples from TN&A were performed
following abbreviated United States Environmental Protection chronic methods (USEPA
2000). Twenty-eight and twenty-day tests exposing Hyalella azteca and Chironomus
tentans were conducted in a manner to determine the effect of each test sediment on
organism survival and growth, with tests terminated before emergence and egg production
(C. tentans) and water-only reproductive measurements (H. azteca}. Effect was
determined by comparison to organism performance following exposure to the selected
reference control sediment. Exposure conditions were maintained using an intermittent
flow system for renewal of overlying water. Following are detailed descriptions of test
performance, test results, data reduction, and results interpretation.
Test Organism Culturing, Holding, and Acclimation
Hyalella azteca and Chironomus tentans (also known as C. dilutus) were obtained from
Environmental Consulting and Testing (ECT), Superior, Wisconsin. Culture conditions
were maintained according to suggested EPA methods (EPA 2000). The Hyalella were
cultured in a static-renewal system with overlying water renewed twice per week, and the
Chironomus were cultured in a recirculating system. Culture temperature is maintained
near the test temperature of 23°C.
The batches of test organisms were hand delivered to ASci-ETL. Upon arrival at ASci-ETL,
the batches of organisms were logged in and quarantined in glass containers. Diets during
holding were the same as used during the toxicity exposures. The organisms were not
crowded or subjected to daily temperature changes greater than 3°C per day during
holding. The holding tanks were lightly aerated during the pre-test period. At test initiation
the Hyalella were 7 to 8 days old. The Chironomus were 4-24 hours old.
July 2010 343
-------
Overlying Water Characteristics
Overlying water supplied to the test chambers was dechlorinated City of Duluth tap water.
The City draws its water from Lake Superior. The tap water was dechlorinated and metals
were removed with treatment through two, 1.5 cubic-foot activated carbon beds.
Exposure System
Sediment from each site tested included eight replicates for each species. Exposure
chambers were 300-ml Berzilius® glass beakers with 1.5 cm diameter side-wall ports
screened with a stainless steel mesh. The ports were located approximately 8 cm above
the base of the beaker. The screens were fixed to the beakers using aquarium-grade
silicone adhesive. The replicate test chambers (eight for each species) were held in a
single all glass 12-L aquarium constructed with silicone adhesive. The 12-L aquaria were
fitted with a self-starting siphon drain positioned 10 cm above the base of the tank and
provided a water volume of 8 L.
Dechlorinated tap water was fed to a 5-gallon stainless steel headbox where the water was
heated and then aerated to reduce supersaturated levels of dissolved gasses. The water
was gravity fed to an intermediate polyethylene delivery tank. The intermediate tank
contained a submersible pump controlled by a timer. The timer was set to activate the
pump at 4-hour intervals (6 times per day). The pump was activated for 5 minutes to
deliver an appropriate volume of overlying water to the test system. This volume was
rapidly pumped to splitter tubes that delivered fresh overlying water to each holding
aquarium. The configuration resulted in two turnovers of overlying water per day. Test
temperature (23° ± 1 ° C) was maintained using a constant temperature water bath. Test
photoperiod was maintained at 16 hours light and 8 hours darkness per day. Light was
supplied by cool-white fluorescent bulbs at an intensity of 50 to 100 ft-candles.
Test Performance
Sediment samples were collected by TN&A personnel on July 10,2007. The samples were
delivered to ASci-ETL by express courier on July 11, 2007. The samples were labeled as
344 July 2010
-------
B3 0-1, E3 0-1, F5 0-1, and S2 0-1. The Chain of Custody forms were completed upon
sample arrival. Sample log-in included visual inspection of the shipping coolers, sample
container integrity, sediment temperature and appearance. Following log-in procedures,
the samples were stored in darkness at 1 -4°C until use. Appendix A contains a copy of the
Chain of Custody forms.
The primary laboratory control sediment was collected on June 23, 2007, from West
Bearskin Lake, located in Cook County, Minnesota. The sediment sample (5-gallon) was
placed in two new polyethylene containers and cooled immediately. Upon arrival at the
laboratory, the sample was logged-in and stored under refrigeration (1-4°C) until use.
Before use in the tests, the laboratory control sediment was thoroughly homogenized, then
sieved through a 2-mm screen to remove indigenous organisms. A secondary control,
CaribSea Live Aragonite Substrate (Ref 2), was rinsed before use.
The toxicity exposures with both test species were originally performed simultaneously.
Twenty-four hours before toxicity test initiation each sample was thoroughly homogenized
with a stainless steel auger, and 100-ml portions were transferred to each of the eight
designated replicate exposure chambers. Each set of replicate test chambers were then
placed into an assigned 12-L holding chamber containing 8 L of overlying water, and the
Chironomus replicate exposures were fed 1.5 mL Tetrafin slurry. The toxicity tests were
initiated approximately 24 hours later, after the sediments were allowed to settle. The
organisms were introduced into the test system on July 13, 2007.
To start the tests, ten Hyalella (7 to 8 days old), and ten Chironomus (4-24 hours old) were
impartially distributed to random test replicates for each treatment. Chironomus replicates
were allowed to settle four hours before re-introduction into the test chambers.
At test initiation and each daily observation, head flow rate was measured, and any flows
found to be outside the range of ± 10% from target flow were adjusted. Measurements of
overlying water pH, conductivity, and dissolved oxygen were measured three times per
week. Temperature was measured daily. The total residual chlorine concentration of the
post-carbon water was measured periodically during the test to check for breakthrough.
Hardness and alkalinity were measured at test initiation and termination. Per the
July 2010 345
-------
Statement of Work language, ammonia measurements were made for five
replicates/treatment on test days 1, 6, and 13.
The test organisms were fed a diet based on EPA methods and recommendations from the
culturing laboratory (Aquatic BioSystems). The Hyalella were fed a mixture of yeast,
Cerophyl®, and fermented trout chow (YCT) prepared to contain 1,800 mg/L total solids.
Chironomus test chambers received a Tetrafin® slurry. The slurry was prepared to contain
4 g/L total solids. Each test replicate received 1.5 ml of the respective dietary component
daily.
The tests were terminated following 20 days of exposure (C. tentans) and 28-days
(Hyalella). Any organisms in the overlying water were removed first. The sediments were
then removed from the test chambers in a layered fashion using a gentle stream of post-
carbon treated water. The sediments were collected in a US Standard #40 sieve. The
contents retained on the sieve were rinsed into a white polyethylene pan, placed on a light
source, and the sieved contents were searched for test organisms. Numbers of live
organisms and dead organisms found were counted and recorded. Organisms not found
were recorded as dead. These organisms were assumed to have died early in the
exposures and the remains had decayed.
The live Chironomus from each replicate were pooled, rinsed, and placed in pre-ashed,
pre-weighed aluminum weigh boats. The organisms pooled from each individual test
replicate were then dried at 60°C for 24 hours. The dried, pooled organisms were then
weighed to the nearest 0.01 mg to determine mean dried weights. Organisms were then
ashed at 550°C for two hours, and then weighed to determine ash-free dry weight (AFDW).
AFDW equals the weight of dried larvae minus weight of ashed larvae.
Any pupae that were recovered were included in survival measurements but not growth
measurements. For replicates found to contain pupae, the mean weight was calculated by
dividing the pooled dry weight of the replicate by the number of organisms exposed less the
number of pupae recovered.
At test termination the Hyalella were pooled, rinsed, and preserved in 10% formalin.
Length was determined under a dissecting microscope via a calibrated eyepiece
346 July 2010
-------
micrometer. Hyalella were then placed in pre-weighed pans and dried at 60°C for 22 hours
to determine mean dried weight.
Treatment of Results
The cumulative number of surviving organisms for each test sediment exposure was
compared to cumulative survival of organisms exposed to the selected reference site
sediment exposure to measure effect. The survival data were analyzed using ToxCalc
Version 5.0.23, Tidepool Scientific Software. The survival data were arc-sine transformed
before analysis, and then checked for normality and equality of variance. The appropriate
parametric or non-parametric test was then performed to determine significant effect
(p=0.05) as compared to the reference site results.
The growth data was not transformed before analysis. Mean dry weights and/or lengths
were checked for normality and equality of variance. The growth data were then analyzed
for significant effect (p=0.05) using the appropriate parametric or non-parametric test.
Mean growth at each test site was compared to the reference site result to determine
effect.
RESULTS
Overlying Water Characteristics
Headbox flow rates were measured daily. The daily values, calculated test chamber flow
rates, and volume exchanges are in Table 1. The overall mean flow rate for each of the
holding tanks during the test period was 5.2 ml/minute. The mean flow rate shows
overlying water was renewed at a rate that averaged 2.0 tank volumes per day.
Tables 2 and 3 summarize the overlying water temperature values measured daily from the
Hyalella and Chironomus exposure chambers. The range of individual temperature values
was from 23.1°C to 23.6°C. All the individual values were within the proposed range of 23°
C ± 1°C. Mean test temperatures were maintained at 23.4°C.
Overlying water dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations in the Hyalella and Chironomus test
chambers are in Tables 4 and 5. DO values ranged from 4.1 to 8.3 mg/L during the
July 2010 347
-------
Hyalella exposures. DO values ranged from 3.9 to 8.3 mg/L during the Chironomus
exposures. At no time was feeding suspended for either exposure.
Overlying water pHs for the Hyalella and Chironomus test chambers are in Tables 6 and 7.
The pH of overlying water in the Hyalella and Chironomus exposures ranged from 6.51-
8.04. None of the pH values were outside of the organisms' physiologically tolerable range.
Tables 8 and 9 contain the overlying water conductivity values for the Hyalella and
Chironomus exposures. The overall range of conductivity values for both exposures was
from 122 to 239 umhos/cm. None of the values indicated that a biologically significant
amount of ionized material was released from the test sediments.
Tables 10 and 11 contain overlying water alkalinity values for the Hyalella and Chironomus
exposures, respectively. Concentrations ranged from 37-99 mg/L as CaCOs.
Tables 12 and 13 contain the overlying total hardness values for the exposures.
Concentrations ranged from 38-90 mg/L as CaCO3.
Tables 14 and 15 contain the results of total ammonia measurements for the exposures.
Ammonia concentrations for the S2 0-1 were slightly elevated, ranging from 0.17-7.55.
Ammonia values for B3 0-1, E3 0-1, and F5 0-1 were recorded at low levels with averages
all below 1 mg/L.
The routine chemistry values indicated the test system maintained suitable water quality to
allow assessment of sediment toxicity for both test species. Assessment of the effects of
ammonia toxicity are contained in the Discussion.
Biological Exposure Results
All organisms were observed to burrow into all test sediments. CaribSea® Live Aragonite
Substrate (Ref 2), the secondary control, was chosen for its similar grain size to the test
sediments. Growth data indicated surviving organisms were healthy and larger than EPA
minimum control growth criteria. The resulting survival data for Reference 2 was both low
(73% for Hyalella and 25% for Chironomus) and sporadic, indicating that this substrate may
not be an acceptable choice for an artificial sediment.
348 July 2010
-------
The weighing pan for replicate H of the Reference 2 Chironomus exposure was lost due to
a technician error. The data from replicate H were excluded from growth statistical
analysis.
Hyalella azteca Survival -
Appendix B summarizes the Hyalella survival results for the 28-day exposures. The
laboratory control sediment (West Bearskin) supported acceptable 28-day mean survival of
96%. The secondary control, Reference 2, had survival of 73%. The test sediments had
survival rates from 3.8 to 85.0%. Statistical analysis showed the data were normal with
equal variances. Results of the Dunnett's Test showed F5 0-1 and S2 0-1 survival results
were significantly lower than the West Bearskin control results. B3 0-1 and E3 0-1 survival
rates were not significantly lower than the West Bearskin control results.
Hyalella azteca Mean Dried Weight -
Appendix B also summarizes the Hyalella mean dried weight results for the 28-day
exposures. The laboratory control sediment (West Bearskin) supported acceptable 28-day
mean organism weights of 0.424 mg/organism. The secondary control, Reference 2, had a
mean organism weight of 0.214 mg/organism. The test sediments had mean dry weights
from 0.005-0.225 mg/organism. Statistical analysis showed the data were non-normal with
unequal variances. Results of the Steel's Many-One Rank Test showed all test sediment
dry weight results were significantly lower than the West Bearskin control results.
Hyalella azteca Length -
Appendix B also summarizes the Hyalella length results for the 28-day exposures. The
laboratory control sediment (West Bearskin) supported acceptable 28-day mean length rate
of 4.2 millimeter per organism. The secondary control, Reference 2, had mean length rate
of 3.5 millimeter per organism. The test sediments had mean length rates of 0.6-3.8
millimeter per organism. Statistical analysis showed the data were non-normal, with
unequal variances. Results of the Steel's Many-One Rank Test showed all test sediment
organism lengths were significantly lower than the West Bearskin control results.
July 2010 349
-------
Chironomus tentans Survival and Growth Results -
Appendix C summarizes the Chironomus survival results for the 20-day exposures. The
laboratory control sediment (West Bearskin) supported acceptable 28-day mean survival of
80%. The secondary control, Reference 2, had survival of 25%. The test sediments had
survival rates from 0-45%. Statistical analysis showed the data were normal, with unequal
variances. Results of the Steel's Many-One Rank Test indicate all test sediment survival
results were significantly lower than the West Bearskin control results.
Appendix C also summarizes the Chironomus mean dried weight results for the 20-day
exposures. The laboratory control sediment (West Bearskin) supported an acceptable 20-
day mean organism dried weight of 2.10 mg/organism. The secondary control, Reference
2, had a mean organism weight of 1.64 mg/organism. The test sediments with surviving
Chironomus had mean dry weights from 1.79-1.84 mg/organism. Statistical analysis
showed the data were normal, with equal variances. Results of the Bonferroni t Test
indicate none of the sediments with surviving Chironomus had significantly lower dried
weights than the West Bearskin control results.
Appendix C also summarizes the Chironomus mean ash-free dried weight results for the
20-day exposures. The laboratory control sediment (West Bearskin) supported an
acceptable 20-day mean organism ash-free dried weight of 1.80 mg/organism. The
secondary control, Reference 2, had a mean ash-free dried weight of 1.32 mg/organism.
The test sediments with surviving Chironomus had mean ash-free dry weights from 1.30-
1.31 mg/organism. Statistical analysis showed the data were non-normal, with equal
variances. Results of the Bonferroni t Test indicate that all of the sediments had
significantly lower ash-free dried weights than the West Bearskin control results.
350 July 2010
-------
DISCUSSION
The four sediment samples collected by TN&A showed significant effect to Chironomus
tentans survival and growth. B3 0-1 and E3 0-1 did not significantly affect Hyalella azteca
survival, but did affect Hyalella growth (weight/length). The Hyalella exposed to F5 0-1
and S2 0-1 sediments were significantly affected in survival and growth.
The following conclusions can be drawn from the study results.
The primary laboratory control sediment used for this study, West Bearskin,
supported acceptable organism survival and growth for both test species.
The secondary laboratory control sediment used for this study, Reference 2,
did not support acceptable organism survival. Reference 2 did support
acceptable growth for both test species.
Sediment B3 0-1 caused significant mortality and significantly affected growth
(AFDW) to Chironomus. B3 0-1 also significantly affected Hyalella growth, in
weight and length, when compared to the primary laboratory control, West
Bearskin.
Sediment E3 0-1 caused significant mortality and significantly affected growth
(AFDW) to Chironomus. E3 0-1 also significantly affected Hyalella growth, in
weight and length, when compared to the primary laboratory control, West
Bearskin.
Sediment F5 0-1 caused complete mortality to Chironomus and caused
significant mortality to Hyalella. F5 0-1 significantly affected Hyalella growth,
in weight and length, when compared to the primary laboratory control, West
Bearskin.
Sediment S2 0-1 caused complete mortality to Chironomus and caused
significant mortality to Hyalella. S2 0-1 significantly affected Hyalella growth,
in weight and length, when compared to the primary laboratory control, West
Bearskin.
The low organism survival in the secondary control did not affect the validity of the test.
The Ref 2 artificial substrate consisted of a large grain size, which was not similar to the
test sediments. The relatively similar sediment characteristics of the West Bearskin
control to the test sediments, meant that a West Bearskin-only comparison is an
accurate and fair statistical and quality-control reference for the test sediments.
July 2010 351
-------
REFERENCES
USEPA. 2000. Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-
associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates.
USEPA/USACE. 1998. Great Lakes Dredged Material Testing and Evaluation Manual.
Final Draft.
Benoit, D.A., G. Phipps, and G.T. Ankley. 1993. A Sediment Testing Intermittent Renewal
System for the Automated Renewal of Overlying Water in Toxicity Tests with Contaminated
Sediments. Water Research 27:1403-1412.
G.T. Ankley, M.K. Schubauer-Berigan, and P.D. Monson. Influence of pH and
hardness on toxicity of ammonia to the amphipod Hyalella azteca. Reprinted from
Canadian Journal of FishLorains and Aquatic Sciences. Volume 52/Number 10/1995.
Mary K. Shubauer-Berigan, Philip D. Monson, Corlis W. West, and Gerald T. Ankley.
Influence of pH on the Toxicity of Ammonia to Chironomus tentans and Lumbriculus
variegatus. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp.713-717,
1995.
TOXCALC, Version 5.0.23, Tidepool Scientific Software, McKinleyville, CA.
352 July 2010
-------
Table 1. Flow Rates (ml/min) of Overlying Water and Daily Turnover Rates to TN&A Sediments
During 20-day Chironomus tentans and 28-day Hyalella azteca Exposures
Day
Head Flow Rate
Test Chamber Flow
Rate
Volume Exchanges
0
320
5.2
1.9
1
320
5.2
1.9
2
320
5.2
1.9
3
320
5.2
1.9
4
324
5.2
1.9
5
320
5.2
1.9
6
326
5.3
1.9
7
324
5.2
1.9
8
324
5.2
1.9
9
324
5.2
1.9
10
320
5.2
1.9
11
320
5.2
1.9
12
320
5.2
1.9
13
322
5.2
1.9
14
320
5.2
1.9
15
320
5.2
1.9
16
320
5.2
1.9
17
326
5.3
1.9
18
320
5.2
1.9
19
320
5.2
1.9
20
322
5.2
1.9
Mean
322
5.2
1.9
Low
320
5.2
1.9
High
326
5.3
1.9
Day
Head Flow Rate
Test Chamber Flow
Rate
0
320
5.2
1 9
1
320
5.2
1 9
2
320
5.2
1 9
3
320
5.2
1 9
4
324
5.2
1 9
5
320
5.2
1 9
6
326
5.3
1 9
7
324
5.2
1 9
8
324
5.2
1 9
9
324
5.2
1 9
10
320
5.2
1 9
11
320
5.2
1 9
12
320
5.2
1 9
13
322
5.2
1 9
14
320
5.2
1 9
15
320
5.2
1 9
16
320
5.2
1 9
17
326
5.3
1 9
18
320
5.2
1 9
19
320
5.2
1 9
20
322
5.2
1 9
21
320
5.2
1 9
22
320
5.2
1 9
23
320
5.2
1 9
24
322
5.2
1 9
25
320
5.2
1 9
26
322
5.2
1 9
27
322
5.2
1 9
28
324
5.2
1 9
Mean
321
5.2
1 9
Low
320
5.2
1 9
High
326
5.3
1 9
-------
Table 2. Overlaying Water Temperature Values for TN & Associate Hyalella Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
7/14/2007
7/15/2007
7/16/2007
7/17/2007
7/18/2007
7/19/2007
7/20/2007
7/21/2007
7/22/2007
7/23/2007
7/24/2007
7/25/2007
7/26/2007
7/27/2007
7/28/2007
7/29/2007
7/30/2007
7/31/2007
8/1/2007
8/2/2007
8/3/2007
8/4/2007
8/5/2007
8/6/2007
8/7/2007
8/8/2007
8/9/2007
8/10/2007
Test Day
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
Mean
Temperature
23.1
23.1
23.6
23.5
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.4
23.4
23.5
23.4
23.4
23.3
23.4
23.2
23.3
23.6
23.3
23.6
23.1
23.4
354
July 2010
-------
Table 3. Overlaying Water Temperature Values for TN & Associate Chironomus Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
7/14/2007
7/15/2007
7/16/2007
7/17/2007
7/18/2007
7/19/2007
7/20/2007
7/21/2007
7/22/2007
7/23/2007
7/24/2007
7/25/2007
7/26/2007
7/27/2007
7/28/2007
7/29/2007
7/30/2007
7/31/2007
8/1/2007
8/2/2007
Test Day
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
Mean
Temperature
23.1
23.1
23.6
23.5
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.4
23.4
23.5
23.6
23.1
23.4
July 2010
355
-------
Table 4. Overlaying Water DO Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
7/14/2007
7/17/2007
7/19/2007
7/21/2007
7/24/2007
7/26/2007
7/28/2007
7/31/2007
8/2/2007
8/4/2007
8/7/2007
8/9/2007
8/10/2007
Test Day
0
1
4
6
8
15
13
15
18
20
22
25
27
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
8.3
7.2
5.9
5.4
6.1
5.2
6.1
5.1
5.3
5.2
5.8
7.0
4.8
5.2
8.3
4.8
5.9
Ref2
8.3
7.6
5.6
5.3
6.5
5.4
6.2
5.2
4.8
4.7
5.3
7.2
5.4
6.4
8.3
4.7
6.0
B3
8.3
7.2
5.5
5.7
6.5
5.2
5.4
5.7
5.2
5.1
5.2
6.6
5.3
6.8
8.3
5.1
6.0
E3
8.3
6.5
5.5
5.9
6.0
5.2
5.0
5.6
5.1
5.0
5.4
7.2
4.5
6.4
8.3
4.5
5.8
F5
8.3
6.3
5.1
5.9
5.4
5.4
5.4
5.2
5.4
5.3
5.3
6.2
4.1
5.7
8.3
4.1
5.6
S2
8.3
6.1
4.9
5.4
5.4
5.4
4.9
5.4
5.4
5.3
5.4
6.4
4.2
5.6
8.3
4.2
5.6
356
July 2010
-------
Table 5. Overlaying Water DO Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
Date
| Test Day | West Bearskin | Ref 2 | B3 | E3 |
F5
S2
7/13/2007
7/14/2007
7/17/2007
7/19/2007
7/21/2007
7/24/2007
7/26/2007
7/28/2007
7/31/2007
8/2/2007
0
1
4
6
8
11
13
15
18
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
8.3
6.8
7.2
4.9
6.1
6.0
4.5
4.8
4.1
3.9
8.3
3.9
5.7
8.3
7.2
6.9
4.9
6.3
5.9
4.9
5.1
4.8
4.8
8.3
4.8
5.9
8.3
7.3
6.8
5.3
6.3
5.9
5.3
5.9
4.8
4.8
8.3
4.8
6.1
8.3
6.5
6.2
5.6
5.2
5.8
5.4
5.0
4.6
4.6
8.3
4.6
5.7
8.3
6.4
5.9
5.8
5.3
5.8
5.1
4.8
4.3
4.3
8.3
4.3
5.6
8.3
6.7
5.5
5.8
5.2
5.8
4.3
4.8
4.6
4.5
8.3
4.3
5.6
July 2010
357
-------
Table 6. Overlaying Water pH Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
7/14/2007
7/17/2007
7/19/2007
7/21/2007
7/24/2007
7/26/2007
7/28/2007
7/31/2007
8/2/2007
8/4/2007
8/7/2007
8/9/2007
8/10/2007
Test Day
0
1
4
6
8
15
13
15
18
20
22
25
27
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
6.51
6.65
6.91
6.82
6.79
6.97
6.97
6.79
7.16
7.69
7.60
7.33
7.12
7.35
7.69
6.51
7.05
Ref2
7.42
7.56
7.53
7.37
7.27
7.36
7.23
7.10
7.35
8.04
7.81
7.53
7.38
7.48
8.04
7.10
7.46
B3
7.40
7.27
7.07
7.34
7.16
7.25
7.23
7.08
7.35
8.01
7.83
7.48
7.26
7.44
8.01
7.07
7.37
E3
7.34
7.25
7.03
7.12
7.11
7.28
7.25
7.11
7.37
7.92
7.79
7.48
7.26
7.47
7.92
7.03
7.34
F5
7.55
7.39
7.12
7.40
7.24
7.34
7.28
7.17
7.39
7.88
7.65
7.50
7.27
7.50
7.88
7.12
7.41
S2
7.31
7.12
7.10
7.12
6.97
7.10
7.03
6.92
7.35
7.45
7.69
7.43
7.12
7.30
7.69
6.92
7.22
358
July 2010
-------
Table 7. Overlaying Water pH Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
7/14/2007
7/17/2007
7/19/2007
7/21/2007
7/24/2007
7/26/2007
7/28/2007
7/31/2007
8/2/2007
Test Day
0
1
4
6
8
11
13
15
18
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
6.51
6.73
6.82
6.93
6.81
6.80
6.95
6.60
6.86
7.28
7.28
6.51
6.83
Ref2
7.42
7.48
7.11
7.15
7.11
7.08
7.22
7.19
7.36
7.55
7.55
7.08
7.27
B3
7.40
7.23
7.19
6.97
7.04
7.13
7.23
6.95
7.27
7.56
7.56
6.95
7.20
E3
7.34
7.15
7.12
6.93
7.14
7.17
7.13
6.97
7.24
7.54
7.54
6.93
7.17
F5
7.55
7.36
7.25
7.02
7.06
7.12
7.11
6.92
7.25
7.55
7.55
6.92
7.22
S2
7.31
7.05
7.14
6.96
6.93
7.10
7.02
6.93
7.26
7.50
7.50
6.93
7.12
July 2010
359
-------
Table 8. Overlaying Water Conductivity Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
7/19/2007
7/26/2007
8/2/2007
Test Day
0
6
13
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
122
148
147
153
153
122
143
Ref2
234
177
174
157
234
157
186
B3
172
163
161
173
173
161
167
E3
146
158
187
179
187
146
168
F5
183
166
206
165
206
165
180
S2
239
165
166
151
239
151
180
Table 9. Overlaying Water Conductivity Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
7/19/2007
7/26/2007
8/2/2007
8/10/2007
Test Day
0
6
13
20
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
122
133
140
160
140
160
122
139
Ref2
234
191
179
157
168
234
157
186
B3
171
195
178
144
222
222
144
182
E3
146
170
190
161
193
193
146
172
F5
183
226
177
159
216
226
159
192
S2
239
170
166
151
170
239
151
179
360
July 2010
-------
Table 10. Overlaying Water Alkalinity Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
8/10/2007
Test Day
0
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
36.8
78.0
78.0
36.8
57.4
Ref2
55.8
56.0
56.0
55.8
55.9
B3
70.0
58.0
70.0
58.0
64.0
E3
78.0
66.0
78.0
66.0
72.0
F5
74.2
42.0
74.2
42.0
58.1
S2
99.0
58.0
99.0
58.0
78.5
Table 11. Overlaying Water Alkalinity Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
8/10/2007
Test Day
0
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
36.8
44.0
44.0
36.8
40.4
Ref2
55.8
70.0
70.0
55.8
62.9
B3
70.0
76.0
76.0
70.0
73.0
E3
78.0
82.0
82.0
78.0
80.0
F5
74.2
58.0
74.2
58.0
66.1
S2
99.0
84.0
99.0
84.0
91.5
July 2010
361
-------
Table 12. Overlaying Water Hardness Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
8/2/2007
Test Day
0
20
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
38.0
52.0
52.0
38.0
45.0
Ref2
55.8
58.2
58.2
55.8
57.0
B3
82.0
71.0
82.0
71.0
76.5
E3
78.4
74.0
78.4
74.0
76.2
F5
74.2
58.0
74.2
58.0
66.1
S2
72.2
52.2
72.2
52.2
62.2
Table 13. Overlaying Water Hardness Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
8/10/2007
Test Day
0
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
38.0
46.0
46.0
38.0
42.0
Ref2
55.8
90.0
90.0
55.8
72.9
B3
82.0
73.0
82.0
73.0
77.5
E3
78.4
76.0
78.4
76.0
77.2
F5
74.2
56.0
74.2
56.0
65.1
S2
72.2
82.0
82.0
72.2
77.1
362
July 2010
-------
Table 14. Overlaying Water Ammonia Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
7/14/2007
7/19/2007
7/26/2007
8/10/2007
Test Day
0
1
6
13
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
0.557
0.187
0.346
0.175
0.164
0.169
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.116
0.085
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.160
Ref2
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.037
0.56 | 0.04
0.00 I 0.00
0.12 | 0.00
B3
0.000
0.009
0.000
0.032
0.381
0.010
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.106
E3
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.044
F5
0.498
0.000
0.069
0.056
0.036
0.010
0.083
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.226
S2
7.550
3.410
4.080
5.140
3.530
3.860
1.230
1.620
1.530
1.620
1.480
0.184
0.305
0.289
0.169
0.227
0.289
0.38 | 0.04 | 0.50 | 7.55
0.00 I 0.00 I 0.00 I 0.17
0.03 | 0.00 | 0.06 | 2.15
July 2010
363
-------
Table 15. Overlaying Water Ammonia Values for C. tentans Sediment Test
Date
7/13/2007
7/14/2007
7/19/2007
7/16/2007
8/2/2007
Test Day
0
1
6
13
28
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
West Bearskin
0.557
0.300
0.080
0.030
0.000
0.000
0.384
0.267
0.274
0.259
0.200
0.516
0.617
0.547
0.556
0.676
2.23
2.23
0.00
0.44
Ref2
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.050
0.135
0.064
0.078
0.061
0.116
0.021
0.075
0.059
0.073
0.041
0.14
0.00
0.05
B3
0.000
0.000
0.038
0.000
0.026
0.000
0.449
0.769
0.466
0.682
0.512
0.032
0.074
0.015
0.013
0.044
0.103
0.77
0.00
0.19
E3
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.434
0.296
0.424
0.143
0.125
0.012
0.018
0.010
0.169
0.147
0.256
0.43
0.00
0.12
F5
0.498
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.158
0.189
0.181
0.178
0.176
0.206
0.482
0.000
0.339
0.054
0.046
0.50
0.00
0.15
S2
7.55
2.91
3.12
3.49
3.21
3.14
1.97
1.97
2.03
2.11
1.77
0.288
0.774
0.567
0.644
0.547
0.182
7.55
0.18
2.13
364
July 2010
-------
APPENDIX A
Chain of Custody Form
July 2010 365
-------
** CDA USEPA Contract Laboratory
WCifn Generic Chain of Custody
u Date Shipped:
o> Carrier Name;
Airbill:
Shipped to:
SAMPLE No.
E30-1
FSO-1
S2 0-1
7/10/2007
FedEx
ASCI-ETL
4444 AIRPARK BLVD
DULUTH Mi 5581 1
(218) 722-4040
MATODU
SAMPLER
Narert Babu
Sediment/
Naren Babu
Sediment/
Naren Bab-ti
Sediment/
Naren Babu
Program
Chain of Custody Record
Relinquished By
(Dale ,' Time)
LJ
2
3
4
CCNO AWtYSfST
TWE TUfWARQUND
M/G Hyallella/(21J
M/G Hyillella/(21)
M/G Hyalleila/(21J
5SL'. , ^ -
ReceivofJ By |Datc / Time)
JL ,UT? -™!1 "
---.-:•/ '-.">*
Reference Case
Client No:
SOGNo:
L
for Lab Use Only
Lab Contract No:
Untt Prtcs:
Transfer To:
Lab Contract No
UnftPri**-
TAGfteJ STATION SAMFtE OOU.ECT
PRfSBlVATB®B«ltf LOCATK3N DATEO1*E
FOR LAB USE ONLY
474(1) B30-1 S: 7/10/2007 12:35
471(1) E30-1 8:7/10/2007 11:4S
467(15 F50-1 ' S: 7/10/2007 10:45
477(1) 32 0-1 S: 7/10/2007 13:19
Snipm «i 1 for CHt
c
9in«ly*ls K*y:
o
HyaltelW = Hyaielia azte
Sample^,) to be u««4 tor laboratory QC:
AcfdWonat Sampltr Sigrwtur«|»}:
Co-Olw Tfmpc rSure
UpinRecepI
Conetntratlion: t - Low, M •= lowiWetlium. H = H^h Tjfpe/Deslgniat»: Composite = C, Grab = G
Chain of Custody Sf •! Nyniber:
Custody S*ai Intact? Shipment le&d?
ca/Chlronomus dtlutus
PR provides preliminary resutts. Requests (or preliminary rwuB* wtH Inertase analytical costs.
Send Copy to: Sampte Management Office. 2000 Edmund Halley Dr., Reston, VA, 20191-3400 Phone 703/264-9348 Fax 703/264-9222
FJVS.1. 043 Page 1 Of 1
-------
APPENDIX B
Hyalella azteca Results and Statistical
Analysis
July 2010 367
-------
Hyalella
Start Date: 7/13/2007
End Date: 8/10/2007
Sample Date:
Comments:
Conc-%
WBS
REF2
B3
E3
F5
S2
1
1.0000
0,7000
1.0000
1.0000
0.4000
0.2000
Survival Test-28 Day Survival
Test ID: TN&A
Lab ID: 5010-246
Protocol: -EPA 2000
2
1.0000
0.6000
0.8000
1 .0000
0.9000
0.0000
3
1.0000
0.6000
0.9000
0.7000
0.7000
0.0000
1.
0.
0
0
0.
0.
4
.0000
.6000
.9000
,7000
,3000
.0000
1
0
0
0
0
0,
5
.0000
.8000
.6000
,9000
.6000
,0000
Sample ID: Riverview - Trenton
Sample Type: Sediment
Test Species: HA-Hyalella azteca
6
0.9000
1 .0000
0.8000
0.8000
0.3000
0.0000
0
0,
0.
0.
0.
0,
7
,9000
7000
.9000
.9000
7000
0000
8
0.9000
0.8000
0.9000
0.8000
0.2000
0.1000
Transform: Arcsin Square Root
Conc-%
WBS
REF2
B3
E3
*F5
*S2
Mean
0.9625
0.7250
0.8500
0.8500
0.5125
0.0375
N-Mean
1.3276
1.0000
1.1724
1.1724
0.7069
0.0517
Mean
1 .3509
1 .0334
1,1886
1.1898
0.8031
0.2173
Min
1.2490
0.8861
0.8861
0.9912
0.4636
0.1588
Max
1.4120
1.4120
1.4120
1.4120
1.2490
0.4636
CV%
6.244
17.269
13.085
14.148
33.463
52.809
N
8
8
8
8
8
8
1 -Tailed
t-Stat Critical
1
1
6
13
*
.906
,891
.433
.313
2.239
2.239
2.239
2.239
MSD
0.1906
0.1906
0.1906
0.1906
Auxiliary Tests
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates normal distribution (p > 0.01}
Bartlett's Test indicates equal variances (p = 0.04)
The control means are significantly different (p = 4.53E-04)
Hypothesis Test (1-tail, 0.05}
Dunnett's Test indicates significant differences
Treatments vs WBS
Statistic
0.96393
9.85395
4.55041
MSDu MSDp
0.11169 0.11727
Critical
0.919
13.2767
2.14479
MSB MSE
1.66728 0.02901
Skew
0.2641
F-Prob
6.7E-15
Kurt
0.45927
df
4,35
Dose-Response Plot
1-tail, 0.05 level
of significance
PageSfS
ToxCalc v5.0.23
-------
Hyalella Survival Test-Dry Wgt
Start Date; 5/4/2007
End Date: 5/8/2007
Sample Date:
Comments:
Conc-mg/L
WBS
REF2
B3
E3
F5
S2
1
0.3660
0.1910
0.3050
0.2380
0.1030
0.0410
Test ID: b07b5 Men Sample ID: Riverview - Trenton
Lab ID: 5010 Sample Type: Sediment
Protocol: EPAA 91 -EPA/600/4-90/027F Test Species: HA-Hyalella azteca
2
0.6340
0,1280
0.2290
0.2770
0.1240
0.0000
3
0.7060
0.1410
0.2220
0.2090
0.1660
0.0000
4
0.4060
0.2370
0.3400
0.0760
0.1040
0.0000
0
0
0
0
0
0.
5
.3060
.1600
.0930
,1580
,1710
.0000
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
.4080
.5290
.1840
.1770
.0680
,0000
0,
0,
0,
0,
0.
0.
7
2680
.1580
2270
1820
1950
0000
8
0.2950
0.1670
0.1980
0.3000
0.0650
0.0010
Transform: Untransformed
Conc-mg/L
WBS
REF2
*B3
*E3
*F5
*S2
Mean
0.4236
0.2139
0.2247
0.2021
0.1245
0.0052
N-Mean
1.9807
1 .0000
1 .0508
0.9451
0.5821
0.0245
Mean
0.4236
0.2139
0.2247
0.2021
0.1245
0.0052
Min
0.2680
0.1280
0.0930
0.0760
0.0650
0.0000
Max
0
0
0
o
0
0,
.7060
.5290
.3400
,3000
.1950
.0410
CV%
38,
61
33.
35.
38,
275,
.112
,541
.418
188
.961
227
N
8
8
8
8
8
8
Rank 1 -Tailed
Sum Critical
*
41.00
39.00
36.00
36.00
47.00
47.00
47.00
47.00
Auxiliary Tests
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates non-normal distribution (p <= 0.01)
Bartlett's Test indicates unequal variances (p = 7.08E-06)
The control means are significantly different (p = 0.01)
Statistic
0.90521
29.2113
2.84805
Critical
0.919
13.2767
2.14479
Skew Kurt
1.05674 2.96174
Hypothesis Test (1-taii, 0.05)
Steel's Many-One Rank Test indicates significant differences
Treatments vs WBS
Dose-Response Plot
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
*, 0.6
O)
I"
Q0,4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
OJ
U.
LLJ
m
m
u.
01
W
2010
ToxCalc V5.0.23
Reviewed by:369
-------
Hyalella Survival Test-Length
Start Date:
End Date:
Sample Date:
Comments:
5/4/2007
5/8/2007
Test ID: b07b5 Men Sample ID:
Lab ID: 5010 Sample Type:
Protocol: EPAA 91-EPA/600/4-90/027F Test Species:
Riverview - Trenton
Sediment
HA-Hyalella azteca
Conc-mg/L 1
2
3
8
WBS
REF2
B3
E3
F5
S2
4.1700
3.7000
3.8700
3,8500
3.5500
3.3000
3.9700 4.3100 4.3900 4.0700 4.4200
3.5800 3.6700 3.6000 3.2500 3.3900
4.0400 3.5800 3.8900 3.5700 3.7900
3.8600 3.8400 3.2300 3.6400 3.7400
4.2000 3.9900
3.5400 3.4300
3.8900 3.8000
3.7200 4.0000
3.4000 3.6100 3.7300 3.6300 3.8700 4.0000 4.5500
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.6000
Transform: Untransformed
Conc-mg/L
WBS
REF2
*B3
*E3
*F5
*S2
Mean
4.1900
3.5200
3.8038
3.7350
3.7925
0,6125
N-Mean
1.1903
1.0000
1.0806
1.0611
1 .0774
0.1740
Mean
4.1900
3.5200
3.8038
3.7350
3.7925
0.6125
Wlin
3.9700
3.2500
3.5700
3.2300
3.4000
0.0000
Max
4.4200
3.7000
4.0400
4.0000
4.5500
3.3000
CV%
4.140
4.338
4.216
6.192
9.451
199.470
N
8
8
8
8
8
8
Rank 1 -Tailed
Sum Critical
38,
38.
46,
36,
*
.00
,00
00
00
47,
47,
47,
47.
.00
,00
00
,00
Auxiliary Tests
Shapiro- Wilk's Test indicates non-normal distribution (p <= 0.01)
Bartlett's Test indicates unequal variances (p = 1 .23E-08)
The control means are significantly different (p = 1 .03E-06)
Statistic
0.72287
42.6362
8.20067
Critical
0.919
13.2767
2.14479
Skew Kurt
3.00003 13.6239
Hypothesis Test (1-tail, 0.05)
Steel's Many-One Rank Test indicates significant differences
Treatments vs WBS
Dose-Response Plot
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
1,5
1
0,5
0
f
LL
111
o:
CO
m
ID
w
PageSTO
ToxCalc v5.0.23
-------
APPENDIX C
Chironomus tentans Results and
Statistical Analysis
July 2010 371
-------
Chirononmus Survival and Growth-20 Day Survival
Start Date: 7/13/2007
End Date: 8/8/2007
Sample Date:
Comments:
Cone-
s/Vest
Bearskin
REF2
B3(0-1)
E3(0-1)
F5 (0-1)
S2 (0-1)
1
0.8000
0.4000
0.2000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Test ID: TNA
Lab ID: 5010-246
Protocol: -EPA 2000
2
0.6000
0.2000
0.5000
0.4000
0.0000
0.0000
3
0.9000
0.0000
0.2000
0.4000
0.0000
0.0000
4
0.9000
0.6000
0.5000
0.2000
0.0000
0.0000
1
0
0
0.
0
0.
5
.0000
.1000
,2000
,5000
,0000
.0000
Sample ID: Riverview-Trenton Channel
Sample Type: SEDIMENT
Test Species: CT-Chironomus tentans
6
0.5000
0.2000
0.6000
0.5000
0.0000
0.0000
0
0,
0.
1,
0,
0.
7
,7000
.3000
.1000
,0000
0000
0000
8
1.0000
0.2000
0.0000
0.6000
0.0000
0.0000
Transform: Untransformed
Conc-
vVest Bearskin
*
*
*
*
*REF2
B3 (0-1)
E3 (0-1)
F5(0-1)
S2(0-1)
Mean
0.8000
0.2500
0.2875
0.4500
0.0000
0.0000
N-Mean
1.0000
0.3125
0.3594
0.5625
0.0000
0.0000
Mean
0.8000
0.2500
0.2875
0.4500
0.0000
0.0000
Min
0,5000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Max
1.0000
0.6000
0.6000
1.0000
0.0000
0.0000
cv%
23.146
74.066
75.378
65.060
0.000
0.000
N
8
8
8
8
8
8
Rank 1 -Tailed
Sum Critical
37.50
38.50
45.50
36.00
36.00
46
46,
46,
46,
46,
.00
.00
,00
00
00
Auxiliary Tests
Statistic
Critical
Skew Kurt
Shapiro-Wiik's Test indicates normal distribution (p > 0.01)
Equality of variance cannot be confirmed
0.9424
0.929
0.38225 1.96396
Hypothesis Test (1-tail, 0.05)
Steel's Many-One Rank Test indicates significant differences
Treatments vs West Bearskin
Dose-Response Plot
Pagesl72
ToxCatc vS.0.23
-------
Chirononmus Survival and Growth-20-day DW
Start Date: 7/13/2007
End Date: 8/8/2007
Sample Date:
Comments:
Test ID: TNA
Lab ID: 5010-246
Protocol: -EPA 2000
Sample ID:
Sample Type:
Test Species:
Riverview-Trenton Channel
SEDIMENT
CT-Chironomus tentans
Conc-
1
8
\A/est Bearskin
REF2
B3(0-1)
E3(0-1)
1.9388
1,5125
2.4950
1.5625
2.4167
1.5000
1.9460
1.9075
1.7911
0.8317
2.3100
2.4300
2.0222
2.7100
1.5340
1.6980
1.8960
2.2550
2.0700
1.6460
3.0380
1.0767
1.4600
1.0910
2,3957
1.5850
1.0200
2.1633
1.2940
Transform ; Untransformed
Cortc-
t/Vest
Bearskin
REF2
B3 (0-1)
E3 (0-1)
Mean
2.0991
1,6387
1.8336
1.7855
N-Mean
1.0000
0.7807
0.8735
0.8506
Mean
2.0991
1.6387
1.8336
1.7855
Min
1.2940
0.8317
1 .0200
1.0910
Max
3.0380
2.7100
2.4950
2.4300
CV%
24.730
39.648
28.376
24.329
N
8
7
7
7
t-Stat
1.660
0.957
1.131
1 -Tailed
Critical
2.252
2.252
2.252
MSD
0.6245
0.6245
0.6245
Auxiliary Tests
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates normal distribution (p > 0
Bartlett's Test indicates equal variances (p = 0.82)
Hypothesis Test (1-tail, 0.05)
Bonferroni t Test indicates no significant differences
Treatments vs West Bearskin
Statistic
.01) 0.96384
0.93212
MSDu
0.62449
Critical Skew
0.898 0.25028
11.3449
MSDp MSB MSE F-Prob
0.29751 0.27991 0.28702 0.4201
Kurt
-0.4165
df
3,25
Dose-Response Plot
1-tail, 0.05 level
of significance
PageJdiy20io
ToxCalc v5.0.23
Reviewed by:373
-------
Chirononmus Survival and Growth-20-day AFDW
Start Date: 7/13/2007
End Date: 8/8/2007
Sample Date:
Comments:
Test ID: TNA
Lab ID: 5010
Protocol: -EPA 2000
Sample ID:
Sample Type:
Test Species:
RIVERVIEW
SEDIMENT
CT-Chironomus tentans
Conc-
1
8
WBS 1.6538
REF2 1.2125
B3 1.9050
E3 1.1050
2.1533
11750
1.3540
1.3400
1.5467
0.6583
1.6450
1.9100
1.7156
2.4300
0.9660
1.3380
1.5800
1.5000
1.4750
1.1060
2.6480
0.9733
1.1200
0.7450
2.0400 1.1020
0.7000
1.5633
Transform; Untransformed
Conc-
WBS
REF2
*B3
*E3
Mean
1.8049
1,3249
1 .3093
1.3010
N-Mean
1 .3623
1 .0000
0.9882
0.9820
Mean
1.8049
1.3249
1,3093
1.3010
Min
1.1020
0.6583
0.7000
0.7450
Max
2.6480
2.4300
1 .9050
1.9100
CV%
25.900
45.973
31.521
28.556
N
8
6
7
7
t-Stat
*
2.271
2.308
1 -Tailed
Critical
2.093
2.093
MSD
0.4569
0.4569
Auxiliary Tests
Shapiro-Wilk's Test indicates normal distribution (p > 0
Bartlett's Test indicates equal variances (p = 0.85)
The control means are not significantly different (p = 0.
Hypothesis Test (1-tail, 0.05)
Bonferroni t Test indicates significant differences
Treatments vs WBS
.01)
12)
Statistic
0.97678
0.31961
1 .67372
MSOu
0.45687
MSDp
0.25313
Critical
0.878
9.21035
2.17881
MSB
0.63584
Skew
0.25315
WISE F-Prob
0.17788 0.04812
Kurt
-0.2799
df
2, 19
Dose-Response Plot
2.5
Q
1.5
•o
o
CM
0.5
1-tail, 0.05 level
of significance
CM
LL
LU
CO
ffl
LU
ToxCalc V5.0.23
-------
APPENDIX D
Raw Data
July 2010 375
-------
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 1 of 16
ASci Corporation
SEDIMENT TOXICITY TEST
TEST SPONSOR TN & ASSOCIATES. INC.
ASci STUDY !D# 5010-246
PROJECT NAME Riverview - Trenton Channel Site
TEST DATES, 7/13/2007-8/10/2007
ASci STUDY DIRECTOR Clayton Allen
ASci TECHNICIANS K. Brown. K. LaFortune. K. Wormer rf
376 July 2010
-------
ASci-ETL
Study ID* 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 2 of 16
WHOLE-SEDIMENT TOXICITY TESTING INFORMATION
TEST INFORMATION
Project: Sediment Toxicity Assessments for the Riverview - Trenton Channel Site in Riverview, Michigan
Client: TN and Associates
Test Dates: July 1 3 to August 1 0, 2007
Sample No,: West Bearskin (WBS), Reference Sed. 2 (REF 2), B3 (0-1), E3 (0-1),
Test Type: 28-day Hyalella azteca (Survival and Growth) and 20-day Chironomus
F5(0-1),andS2(0-1)
dilutes (Survival and Growth)
Renewal Frequency: Two renewals of overlaying water daily
Overlaying Water: PC
Template #: Standard Randomization
Test Site: Bio VII
Light Intensity: 50-100 Foot Candles Photo Period: 16 Hour Light/8 Hour Dark
Temperature: 23°C ± 1°C
TEST ORGANISM INFORMATION
Organism
Source
Age
ASci Log No.
Food
Test Chamber
Sediment Volume
Number of Replicates
Organisms Per Chamber
Hyalella azteca
ECT {Superior, Wl)
7 day
071307-1
1 .0 mL YCT/Day
300 mL glass Berzelius Beakers
100 mL
8
s<> /^ PE
-------
Exposure System Observations/Activities Sheet for Sediments (PAGE 1 of 2)
ASci-ETL
Study 1D# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 3 of 16
HAF«d
1 Oml
VCT?
y
Au.
uU^Pu*ViM t",
t./v.F«
V
- \\a.rt o,\t <~if>-< t <
i> o v mix--(l
y
y
Tes-V
V
One,
3 - )
V
y
Y
r\ C>Y
Y
y
520
y
^:< / '-/"/ 0 /
V
/ 7
378
July 2010
-------
Exposure System Observations/Activities Sheet for Sediments (PAGE 2 of 2)
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 4 of 16
X
V
r>oe
y
f " <
July 2010
379
-------
Overlaying Water DO Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 5 of 16
DATE
TEST DAY
WBS
CONTROL
REF2
63(0-1)
E3{0-1)
F5(0-1)
S2(0-1)
INITIALS
7/13/2007
'b
7/14/2007
T-.
(ff.'f
7/17/2007
5
7/19/2007
7/21/2007
7/21/2007
7/26/2007
13
6 , z.
c
7/28/2007
15
,
7/31/2007
18
.5
fx
8/2/2007
20
5. 2.
H.T-
S . i
5. 3
8/4/2007
22
5".
5
8/7/2007
25
G -
8/9/2007
27
S.H
8/10/2007
28
w
(p' If
Overlaying Water pH Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
DATE
TEST DAY
WBS
CONTROL
REF2
B3(0-1)
E3 (0-1)
F5(0-1)
S2(0-1)
INITIALS
7/13/2007
-• ^ o
?.
7/14/2007
7-.30?
7/17/2007
cn
7/19/2007
7/21/2007
7:
?.
?.
7.
7/24/2007
T-,/6
7/26/2007
13
7 .^-
03
7/28/2007
15
7/31/2007
18
8/2/2007
20
IMUV
8/4/2007
22
"?".
8/7/2007
25
8/9/2007
27
, ?• Vs
8/10/2007
28
380
July 2010
-------
Overlaying Water DO Values for C. dilutus Sediment Test
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 6 of 16
DATE
TEST DAY
WBS
CONTROL
REF2
B3 (0-1)
E3(0-1)
F5(0-1)
S2(0-1)
INITIALS
7/13/2007
7/14/2007
(*.<£
7.Z
Li
7/17/2007
,,5-
7/19/2007
7/21/2007
.
5, Z.
7/24/2007
7/26/2007
13
7/28/2007
15
7/31/2007
18
c- 5?
» 0*
8/2/2007
20
§.'!
4, f
H-s-
M.3
Overlaying Water pH Values for-Wr-azteea-Sedlment Test
DATE
TEST DAY
WBS
CONTROL
REF2
63(0-1)
£3(0-1)
FS(0-1)
82(0-1}
INITIALS
7/13/2007
O
7-34
7/14/2007
•7.15-
7-3^
7/17/2007
•Kt
7/19/2007
7/21/2007
7/24/2007
6..2TO
>. rf
7/26/2007
13
ioz
7/28/2007
15
7,
7/31/2007
18
"7-.-5C,
8/2/2007
20
T,
. SO
July 2010
381
-------
AScl-ETL
Study ID* 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 7 of 16
Overlaying Water Conductivity Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
DATE
TEST DAY
WBS
CONTROL
RBF2
63(0-1)
E3 (0-1)
FS(0-1)
82(0-1)
INITIALS
7/13/2007
2-3 <1
7/19/2007
5.-0
i^o.o
7/26/2007
13
I*?.?
, 2.
8/2/2007
20
/ST.?
!(*>£>• S"
t 1
8/10/2007
28
Overlaying Water Alkalinity Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
DATE
7/13/2007
8/10/2007
TEST DAY
0
28
WBS
CONTROL
36-?. X*
I-M<0
REF2
^^T
'^5, o
B3(0-1)
7O. O
•^u.o
E3(0-1)
7S?.0
O,0
F5(0-1)
>^.z
siTo
32(0-1)
°/9.0
?"V,0
INITIALS
Huv/
^co
Overlaying Water Hardness Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
DATE
7/13/2007
8/10/2007
TEST DAY
0
28 |
WBS
CONTROL
3?0
JJM^O
REF2
^ &'•'%'
'-Jo , o
83(0-1)
^2-O
73.0
£3(0-1)
T-Xtj
^-U.o
F5(0-1)
W-^.
5(^ . o
S2{0-1)
9-Z.Z
V3.0
INITIALS
H^W
^'CA-J
382
July 2010
-------
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 8 of 16
Overlaying Water Conductivity Values for C, dilutus Sediment Test
DATE
TEST DAY
WBS
CONTROL
REF2
B3(0-1)
E3(0-1)
F5(0-1)
S2(0-1)
INITIALS
7/13/2007
Z.V/
7/19/2007
II-
7/26/2007
13
8/2/2007
20
123 4
I S i . e.
MM-t/
Overlaying Water Alkalinity Values for C. dilutus Sediment Test
DATE
7/13/2007
8/2/2007
TEST DAY
0
20
WBS
CONTROL
56- ^
1-g. o
REF2
5.'f,,y
^••e
83(0-1)
70.0
6S.o
E3{0-1)
7%.o
6 It -t-
FS(0-1)
7»/. Z-
H2.C
82(0-1)
^-70
5? • £>
INITIALS
HUt/
(11 L W
Overlaying Water Hardness Values for C. dilutus Sediment Test
DATE
7/13/2007
6/2/2007
TEST DAY
0
20
WBS
CONTROL
$X-o
$z.&
REF2
5ff. S7
~*5M
83 (0-1)
SZ-0
Tl.O
E3{0-1)
?V.'4
-f.t|.0
F5{0-1)
7^- Z
S«^ o
82(0-1)
FZ.Z
6'1. 2
INITIALS
Mu,t/
(HUlVl
July 2010
383
-------
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 9 of 16
Overlaying Water Ammonia Values for H. azteca Sediment Test
DATE
TEST
DAY
WBS
REF2
B3(0-1)
E3(0-1)
F5(0-1)
S2(0-1)
INITIALS
7/13/2007 | 0
7/14/2007
o.
0 oo D
O •
o-ooO
0.
o. ooo
. oo Q>
0- oo o
• (!)
c?.
OOO
0- COO
Q.
u-
7/19/2007
O . OO
c? ,
0 >. C & o
O , c:'M
O , OC
o , c c, fto
O
oc
t DO
0.
O
. ot><">
0,00 or.
O , GC.OO
7/26/2007
13
G.llUC
,0000
O .(-VYV",
o.ooor*
0 ,
O .00 Of)
0 > OOOO
0 .
c> , cc.cn
C"J ,
0. Z'X'lD
o.oooo
o .
C-, C'tCxTJ
O ,
0 .
0, OCOO
O,
O ,
o,
o . af)
8/10/2007 I 28 I Q,
384
July 2010
-------
ASci-ETL
Study IDS 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 10 of 16
Overlaying Water Ammonia Values for C. dilutus Sediment Test
DATE
TEST
DAY
WBS
REF2
B3(0-1)
E3(0-1)
F5(0-1)
S2 (0-1)
INITIALS
7/13/2007
0
H--VI/
7/14/2007
0 . Gr>b
o.o O
o OGO
0-doo
0.05,?
3. IT
' . CO D
c>. oo O
o
0 •
Q , O O
0 OUo
0- C
0 * Do 0
6
O.CC)O
o . D DO
'!>. H
7/19/2007
0
c
0 .
O-Ob.Tl
0
o , o
0 , (c "i
a .
D
0
•KuJ
7/26/2007
13
0 . 0 J/
oj&.iia
o ,
0.02-01-
o.
0 , 0593
0 .(
o , o
OCOO
o,
, D to/
8/2/2007 20
•Z.-7.3
o- 105
/ 4- 3
1 $2.
July 2010
385
-------
Chironomus tentans 20-day Survival and Growth Data
ASci-ETL
Study IDS 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 11 of 16
Site ID # West Bearskin
Rep
Weighed
Ashed Pan Wl. (mg)
Pan + Dried Org Wl. (mg;
Pan* Ashed Org Wt
6
1
3
ID
ID
Site ID # REF 2
Rep
# Organisms
Dead
Weighed
Ashed Pan Wt (mg)
Pan + Dried Orj. Wl. (mg)
Pan + Ashed Org Wt
(mg)
0
•s
3
5
P
386
July 2010
-------
Chironomus tertians 20-day Survival and Growth Data
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 12 of 16
Site ID If 83 (0-1)
Rep
it Organisms
Alive
Dead
Weighed
Ashed Pan Wl. (mg)
Pan * Dried Org Wt. (rag)
Pan » Ashed Org Wt.
(mg)
z
2.
. T-S
o
5
6
s
5
(0
H
I*, t 5 , 4 !
/
Site ID#E3 (0-1)
Rep
# Organisms
Weighed
Ashed Pan Wl (mg)
Pan * Dried Org Wl (mg
Pan * Ashed Org Wt.
(mg)
f)
/Q b 1 • 53
LJ,
(n
-2
-2.
S
/a s^ 3
lo
0
t-H
H
July 2010
387
-------
Chironomus tentans 20-day Survival and Growth Data
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 13 of 16
Site ID #F5 (0-1)
Rep
A
B
C
D
E
F*
G
H
# Organisms
Alive
0
0
0
0
C7
6
<9
O
Dead
\0
\o
|0
\o
(0
15
ID
10
Weghea
0
I
?
^
Ashed Pan Wt, (mg)
/«* «
/^q.^
/ifcl 13
/z-fcs.19
• its-w
Ut-2.. i<^
Ml.-H
1265. »,
Pan * Dried Org. Wl. (mg)
—
-
—
-
-
—
—
—
Pan * Asned Org Wt.
(mg)
_..
~v^
«_.
—.
^«-~,..
r
i—pj^j-
Site ID #32(0-1)
Rep
A
B
C
0
E
p
G
H
# Organisms
Alive
(P
D
c
(0
0
'{.')
ID
\6
u)
Weighed
n
c
^
1
y
Ashed Pan Wl. (mg)
/ i.t-3 (,?£>
li&*.4c
'2-5-S.^Z
't^nai
jz?^, 7-5-
12.5^ >2
JiS
-------
H. azteca 28-day Survival and Growth
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 14 of 16
Sitel.D.: WBS
Weight
Rep
Number of Organisms
Weired
Dried Pan Weight
(mg)
Dreed Pan + Dried H,
azteca $mg}
10
/O
Oil.
16
/AV-fe •
id
10
Length (mm)
4-v
ORGANISM
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
.-1
REP1
'1, '<-
'/.I.
'f.»
jJ-7
/,/, 2
fM
^
REPJ
•&.*»
«•/. (
'/ L
4.0
-"'>,7f
M. 2.
i>. ")
tf.|
'A -<
•3 c?
REP 3
^.'^
'-/.O
L/.C'
H. ?-
'V. 3
H. H
H.-J-
It, 7,
H.I
H. 3
P
REP 4
''.';
lrto
M- 3
'7 '.'>
'1 h
q.to
'1.3
^ <
4-2.
'•/.o
REP 5
4. ' 1
H. >
'f- "2-
;*>.•?
A3
4-3
3 ?
,^/1
,*i r
4. t
R|PS
-t.\
'1.
--
H
REPS
?-
-------
H. azteca 28-day Survival and Growth
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 15 of 16
Site I.D.: B3(0-1)
Weight
Rep
Number of Organisms
Dried Pan Weight
Dri&d Pan + Dried H.
sztecs (mg)
\o
/a 6
T
7
/-JT?
M 1 t i-J.
Length (mm)
ORGANKM
NUMBER
REP1
REP 2
sps
REP 4
REPS
REPS
REPS
REP 10
'f, £.
6
i>j_
±u_
4. i-
5
3-L.
q.. -z,
3. Z
.TT
3.U-
Site I.D.: E3(0-1)
Rep
Weight
Number of Organisms
1C
Washed
T,
fi
Dried Pan Weight
(mg}
13 1-4 .Me
1 37,1,
Dried Pan + Dried H.
azleea (mg)
Length (mm)
ORGANSM
NUMBER
-A
REP1
R6P2
REPS
0
REP 4
REPS
R^EP
61
REP 7
ti
REP8
REP 10
3 T
3,5-
^LJL
2/f
JL
^TzT
1.Z
•3-H
3 -Cry
H.o
"3 '
i/.ty
7.1
390
July 2010
-------
H. azteca 28-day Survival and Growth
Site I.D.: F5(0-1)
Rep
Weight
Number of Organisms
3
T
Dried Pan Weight
Dried Pan + Dried H,
azteca (mg)
QTS-
ASci-ETL
Study ID# 5010-246
Test Dates: 7/13/07-8/10/07
Bench Sheet Page 16 of 16
Length (mm)
ORGANISM
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
6
9
10
4,
3.1
*/.«/
3.1
1.~g
-.
••~~~
—
—
~~
^
R»2
^^
3,5?
3. y^
t/,1
z.j
5^3
?.?*
—
„
^'
REP 3
H.H
^, 1
3.^
3.?f
<<.z.
3.3
7.?
^~
—
fe4
^.<
t/.z,
?.^r
— -
_
-.
_
^^
~.
—
REPS
^/ £
3^
3/9-
H,L*y
Z.L*
3.f
— - -
—
__.
_
p;
REPe
3.0^
3.£f
4. i
_
—
^,
«_
__
—
G
R6P?
"f.u?
.TjC
^.&
5. to
^..^
3,3
3 0
_
_
—
H
REP8
.^5
3^u?
-,
, —
_
_
—
_
->
REP 9
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
^
REP 10
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
Site I.D.: S2(0-1)
We
Rep
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Number of Organisms
Al
ve
a
C)
*•
^
(
Dead
£
in
=>
Weighed
^
o
.
/
I
ght
Ofied Pan Weight
(mg)
/^y». fet
—
v_
__
,
-
/j/«^.ft^
Dried Pan + Dried H.
azteca (mg)
/3T-7-. »0
-
_
_
;,3fcJ S4
Length (mm)
ORGANISM
MUM8ER
1
2
3
<(
5
6
7
8
9
10
~±
RH>1
5,5"
~3'\
— .
—
,
_
—
**~
—
^-
R
n
\
&
/
«S
-tr
I
%
T>3
>
/
X
£
T^j
^
r4
1C
/
i
T^
1
\
PS
H«
/
£
t*
1
\
= 8
y
<&
-s
\
EPT
)
,
REP8
I.U?
-,
_
^~
*-„„-
-^'
__
„
-—
REPS
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
REP 10
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
July 2010
391
-------
APPENDIX E
Precision of NaCI Reference
Toxicant Testing
392 July 2010
-------
ASci Corporation Environmental Testing Laboratory
Precision of Hyalella azteca 96-Hour NaCI Reference Toxicant Testing
Date LC50 +2SD -2SD MEAN
Aug-06
Jan-07
Feb-07
Apr-07
May-07
Jun-07
Jul-07
2.83
2.83
2.65
2.50
3.50
3.13
3.13
3.02
3.63
3.63
3.02
3.63
3.62
3.62
2.38
2.10
2.10
2.38
2.10
2.19
2.26
2.70
2.86
2.86
2.70
2.86
2.91
2.94
sd
cv
0.34
12%
H. azteca 96hr LC50 Data
4.00
Test Date
July 2010
393
-------
ASci Corporation Environmental Testing Laboratory
Precision of Chironomus tentans NaCI Reference Toxicant Testing
Date LC50 +2SD -2SD MEAN
Jul-03
Aug-03
Apr-04
Apr-04
Jun-04
Jul-04
Aug-04
Sep-04
Sep-04
Oct-04
Oct-04
Jul-05
Aug-05
Nov-05
Dec-05
May-06
May-06
Jun-06
Aug-06
Aug-06
Sep-06
Jan-07
Feb-07
Apr-07
Jun-07
Jul-07
7.46
5.66
9.85
5.66
7.46
5.66
6.50
6.50
6.50
6.06
6.50
5.66
5.66
6.06
6.06
8.57
6.73
6.96
5.66
7.21
8.21
2.83
2.65
3.65
5.60
6.06
9.15
9.15
9.06
10.22
9.64
10.30
9.78
9.70
9.48
9.30
9.11
9.03
9.03
8.80
8.70
8.99
8.93
8.88
8.81
8.80
8.96
9.26
9.47
9.49
9.40
9.33
4.31
3.64
4.22
4.75
3.51
3.62
3.64
3.99
4.13
4.16
4.27
4.22
4.26
4.23
4.27
4.23
4.31
4.40
4.36
4.44
4.46
3.78
3.23
2.99
3.02
3.08
6.71
6.71
6.62
7.16
6.96
6.96
6.71
6.84
6.81
6.73
6.71
6.62
6.62
6.51
6.48
6.61
6.62
6.64
6.59
6.62
6.69
6.52
6.35
6.24
6.21
6.21
Chironomus tentans 96hr LC50 Data
O
re
12.00
10.00 --
8.00 --
6.00 --
u>
4.00 --
2.00 -
0.00
Test Date
sd
cv
1.56
25%
394
July 2010
------- |