United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Data Report on Ecosystem
Monitoring for the Ashtabula River
Environmental Dredging Project
>sir ' -iktt* id&lK
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. f
Cincinnati, OH 4:
-------
EPA/600/R-11/102
September 2011
DATA REPORT ON ECOSYSTEM MONITORING
FOR THE ASHTABULA RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL
DREDGING PROJECT
by
Battelle
Columbus, Ohio 43201
Contract No. EP-C-05-057
Task Order 50
Co-Principal Investigators
Richard C. Brenner, Terrence M. Lyons, Marc A. Mills, and Joseph P. Schubauer-Berigan
Land Remediation and Pollution Control Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH 45268
and
James M. Lazorchak and John R. Meier (r)
Ecological Exposure Research Division
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH 45268
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
-------
NOTICE
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), through its Office of Research and Development
(ORD), funded and managed the research described herein under Contract No. EP-C-05-057. This report
has been subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review and has been approved for publication
as a U.S. EPA document.
-------
FOREWORD
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is charged by Congress with protecting the
Nation's land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency
strives to formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and
the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, U.S. EPA's research
program is providing data and technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a
science knowledge base necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how pollutants
affect our health, and prevent or reduce environmental risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) is the Agency's center for investigation
of technological and management approaches for preventing and reducing risks from pollution that
threaten human health and the environment. The focus of the Laboratory's research program is on
methods and their cost-effectiveness for prevention and control of pollution to air, land, water, and
subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public water systems; remediation of contaminated
sites, sediments, and ground water; prevention and control of indoor air pollution; and restoration of
ecosystems. NRMRL collaborates with both public and private sector partners to foster technologies that
reduce the cost of compliance and to anticipate emerging problems. NRMRL's research provides
solutions to environmental problems by: developing and promoting technologies that protect and improve
the environment; advancing scientific and engineering information to support regulatory and policy
decisions; and providing the technical support and information transfer to ensure implementation of
environmental regulations and strategies at the national, state, and community levels.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-term research plan. It is
published and made available by U.S. EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) to assist the
user community and to link researchers with their clients.
Sally C. Gutierrez, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
in
-------
This page intentionally left blank.
IV
-------
CONTENTS
NOTICE ii
FOREWORD iii
APPENDIX v
FIGURES v
TABLES viii
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS x
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xi
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND OBJECTIVES 1
1.1 Purpose 1
1.2 Site Description 2
1.3 Summary of Dredging Operations 4
1.4 Research Goals and Objectives 4
2.0 EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH AND RESULTS 8
2.1 General Approach 8
2.2 Study Design 8
2.3 Data Collection 8
2.3.1 Hester Dendy Deployment and Recovery of Macrobenthos 8
2.3.2 Semipermeable Membrane Device and Solid Phase Micro-Extraction System
Deployments, Retrieval, and Results 47
2.3.2.1 SPMDs 47
2.3.2.2 SPMEs 53
2.3.3 Corbicula Clams andLumbriculus variegates 61
2.3.4 Brown Bullhead Capture 61
2.3.5 Water Quality Monitoring During Dredging Activities 64
3.0 REFERENCES 98
APPENDIX
Appendix A. Cross-Section Views of Transect Runs Showing Turbidity A-l
FIGURES
Figure 1-1. Overview Map of the Ashtabula River and Project Study Site 3
Figure 1-2. Ashtabula River Dredging Site and ORD Study Area (River Stations 181+00 to
170+00) 3
Figure 1-3. Ashtabula River Dredge Site Transect Locations (River Stations 194+00 to
139+00) 5
Figure 1-4. Michael B. Dredge at Ashtabula River 6
Figure 1 -5. Ashtabula River Dredge Site Dredge Management Unit (DMU) Locations 7
Figure 2-1. Location of 25 Stations in the Ashtabula River for SPMD and SPME
Deployments and Four Stations for HS Deployments (Macrobenthos Collection)
in the GLNPO AOC, and Co-Locations of Surface Sediment and Water Column
Samples 9
-------
Figure 2-2. Hester Dendy Deployment System Used at Ashtabula River 11
Figure 2-3. Hester Dendy Deployment Locations in the Ashtabula River for 2006, 2007,
2008, 2009, and 2010 12
Figure 2-4. Hester Dendy Deployment Locations in the Conneaut Creek (Reference Site ) in
2009 and 2010 13
Figure 2-5. Average Total PCBs ((ig/g lipid) in Macrobenthos at Ashtabula River Prior to,
During, and Following Dredging 14
Figure 2-6. Average Total PCBs ((ig/g lipid) in Macrobenthos per Station Area at the
Ashtabula River and Reference Location (Conneaut Creek) Prior to, During, and
Following Dredging 14
Figure 2-7. Average Total PCBs (ng/g dry wt) for Surface Sediments Co-Located with
Macrobenthos in Ashtabula River and Reference Location (Conneaut Creek)
Prior to, During, and Following Dredging 15
Figure 2-8. Average Total PCBs (ng/L) for Water Co-Located with Macrobenthos in
Ashtabula River and Reference Location (Conneaut Creek) Prior to, During, and
Following Dredging 15
Figure 2-9. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (|ig/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in
Upstream Station (Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge) 16
Figure 2-10. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (|ig/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in
Fields Brook Station (Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge) 18
Figure 2-11. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (|ig/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in
Turning Basin (Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge) 20
Figure 2-12. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (|ig/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in
River Run (Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge) 22
Figure 2-13. 2009 and 2010 Congener Distribution (|ig/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in
Reference Location (Conneaut Creek) 24
Figure 2-14. Comparison of Total Average PCBs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Upstream Location per Each Sampling Event 25
Figure 2-15. Comparison of Total Average PCBs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in Fields
Brook per Each Sampling Event 25
Figure 2-16. Comparison of Total Average PCBs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in Turning
Basin per Each Sampling Event 26
Figure 2-17. Comparison of Total Average PCBs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the River
Bend per Each Sampling Event 26
Figure 2-18. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the Upstream Location in 2006 (Pre-Dredge) 27
Figure 2-19. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in Fields Brook in 2006 (Pre-Dredge) 28
Figure 2-20. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in Turning Basin in 2006 (Pre-Dredge) 29
Figure 2-21. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in River Bend in 2006 (Pre-Dredge) 30
Figure 2-22. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the Upstream Location in 2007 (During Dredging) 31
Figure 2-23. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in Fields Brook in 2007 (During Dredging) 32
Figure 2-24. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the Turning Basin in 2007 (During Dredging) 33
Figure 2-25. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the River Bend in 2007 (During Dredging) 34
VI
-------
Figure 2-26. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the Upstream Location in 2009 (1-Year Post
Dredging) 35
Figure 2-27. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the Turning Basin in 2009 (1-Year Post Dredging) 36
Figure 2-28. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the River Bend in 2009 (1-Year Post Dredging) 37
Figure 2-29. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the Reference Location (Conneaut Creek) in 2009
(1-Year Post Dredging) 38
Figure 2-30. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the Upstream Location in 2010 (2-Years Post
Dredging) 39
Figure 2-31. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in Fields Brook in 2010 (2-Years Post Dredging) 40
Figure 2-32. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the Turning Basin in 2010 (2-Years Post
Dredging) 41
Figure 2-33. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the River Bend in 2010 (2-Years Post Dredging) 42
Figure 2-34. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for
Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the Reference Locations (Conneaut Creek) in
2010 (2-Years Post Dredging) 43
Figure 2-35. Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos for Sampling Location for Each Sampling
Event 44
Figure 2-36. Average Total PAHs in Sediment at Macrobenthos Stations for Each Sampling
Event 44
Figure 2-37. Comparison of Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Upstream Location for Each Sampling Event 45
Figure 2-38. Comparison of Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in Fields
Brook for Each Sampling Event 45
Figure 2-39. Comparison of Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Turning Basin for Each Sampling Event 46
Figure 2-40. Comparison of Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the River
Bend for Each Sampling Event 46
Figure 2-41. Comparison of Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Reference Location (Conneaut Creek) for Each Sampling Event 47
Figure 2-42. Typical SPMD Rack Design for Deployment of SPMDs on the Surficial
Sediment 48
Figure 2-43a. Top View and Angle View of the SPMD Spider Carrier 49
Figure 2-43b. Full View and Cross-Sectional View of the Perforated Stainless Steel Carrier
with Five Spiders 50
Figure 2-44. Average Total PCBs in Water Column SPMDs for 2006 (Pre-Dredge) and 2008
(Post-Dredge) Monitoring Events 52
Figure 2-45. Average Total PCBs in Sediment Rack SPMDs for 2006 (Pre-Dredge) and 2008
(Post-Dredge) Monitoring Events 52
Figure 2-46. Comparison of the 2006 and 2008 PCB Congener Distributions in SPMD Racks
for Station 1 54
Figure 2-47. Comparison of the 2006 and 2008 PCB Congener Distributions in SPMD Racks
for Station 3 55
vn
-------
Figure 2-48. Comparison of the 2006 and 2008 PCB Congener Distributions in SPMD Racks
for Station 5 56
Figure 2-49. Comparison of the 2006 and 2008 PCB Congener Distributions in Water Column
SPMDs for Station 1 57
Figure 2-50. Comparison of the 2006 and 2008 PCB Congener Distributions in Water Column
SPMDs for Station 3 59
Figure 2-51. Comparison of the 2006 and 2008 PCB Congener Distributions in Water Column
SPMDs for Station 5 59
Figure 2-52. Average Total PCBs in Water Column SPMEs for 2006 and 2008 60
Figure 2-53. Average Total PCBs in Sediment SPMEs for 2006 and 2008 60
Figure 2-54. Average Total PCBs in Sediment Co-Located with SPMD and SPME
Deployments for 2006 and 2008 61
Figure 2-55. Comparison of the 2006 PCB Congener Distributions in Sediment SPMDs and
Sediment SPMEs for Station 3 62
Figure 2-56. Comparison of the 2006 PCB Congener Distributions in Sediment SPMDs and
Sediment SPMEs for Station 5 63
Figure 2-57. Average Total PCBs in Brown Bullhead Fish at Ashtabula River for 2006-2010 64
Figure 2-58. Comparison by Year of Congener Distribution in Ashtabula River Brown
Bullhead Fish 65
Figure 2-59. OBS/ADCP System Deployment 67
Figure 2-60. Battelle Research Vessel Showing MOWS Equipped with OBS and Water
Collection Capability 68
Figure 2-61. Cross-River Transect Locations Utilized for MOWS Water Column Sampling
and ADCP Water Column Monitoring During Dredging Activities 69
Figure 2-62. June 2007 Survey Whole Water Sample Locations and Dredge Positions 70
Figure 2-63. July 2007 Survey Whole Water Sample Locations and Dredge Positions 71
Figure 2-64. Dissolved-Phase PCBs in Water Samples Collected in the Reference Locations
During Dredging Activities 76
Figure 2-65. Particulate-Phase PCBs in Water Samples Collected in the Reference Locations
During Dredging Activities 77
Figure 2-66. Dissolved-Phase PCBs in Water Samples Collected in the Test Area Locations
During Dredging Activities 78
Figure 2-67. Particulate-Phase PCBs in Water Samples Collected in the Test Area Locations
During Dredging Activities 79
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities 80
TABLES
Table 2-1. Sample Deployment and Retrieval Schedule 10
Table 2-2. Location, Water Depth, Date, and Sample ID for Water Samples Collected During
Dredging Activities 72
Vlll
-------
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ADCP acoustic doppler current profiler
AOC area of concern
COC chemical of concern
DMU dredge management unit
EST Environmental Sampling Technologies, Inc.
GLLA Great Lakes Legacy Act
GLNPO Great Lakes National Program Office
MOWS Multi-Depth Water Sampler
NERL National Exposure Research Laboratory
NRMRL National Risk Management Research Laboratory
OBS optical backscatter system
ORD Office of Research and Development
PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
PCB polychlorinated biphenyl
PDMS polydimethylsiloxane
PRC permeability reference compound
QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan
SPMD semipermeable membrane device
SPME solid phase micro-extraction
TOC total organic carbon
TSS total suspended solid
U.S. EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
voc
volatile organic compound
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The support and participation of many researchers, administrators, and support staff were necessary to
carry out a multi-year project of this scope and magnitude. Funding provided by the National Risk
Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA)
and the U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) to enable this project to be conducted
is gratefully acknowledged. Collaborative efforts and mutual support between NRMRL, GLNPO, and
U.S. EPA's National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) provided a forum for exchanging ideas and
concepts and were vital to the success of this project. The partnership and cooperation engendered on this
study has already begun to pay dividends on other projects. The excellent service and attention to detail
of the project's contractor, Battelle, simplified and optimized the implementation of complex sampling
and analytical programs that generated the project's large and comprehensive dataset.
The authors of this report, Eric A. Foote and Heather Thurston from Battelle, and the Co-Principal
Investigators for this project, Richard C. Brenner, Terrence M. Lyons, Marc A. Mills, and Joseph P.
Schubauer-Berigan from U.S. EPA/NRMRL and James M. Lazorchak and John R. Meier* from U.S.
EPA/NERL wish to express their appreciation to the following individuals for their substantial and
valuable contributions to this research undertaking:
*Now retired from U.S. EPA/NERL and working as a Senior Environmental Employee for The National Council on
The Aging.
Battelle U.S. EPA/NRMRL U.S. EPA/GLNPO
Christina Blatsos Pat Clark Scott Cieniawski
Rhonda Copley Paul McCauley Amy Mucha
Matt Fitzpatrick Dennis Timberlake Marc Tuchman
John Hardin
Greg Headington
Jim Hicks
Lisa Lefkovitz
Bob Mandeville
Kelly Quigley
Shane Walton
U.S. EPA/NERL Michigan State University The McConnell Group
Ken Fritz Brandon Armstrong Herman Haring
Brent Johnson Paul Weaver
Paul Wernsing
U.S. Geological Survey Baylor University Cardno JFNew
Paul Baumann (retired) Jason Berninger Mark Berninger
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An interdisciplinary and collaborative research project to develop evaluation tools and methods for
environmental dredging was initiated in 2006 between the National Risk Management Research
Laboratory (NRMRL) and the National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA's) Office of Research and Development (ORD), hereafter
collectively referred to as ORD, and U.S. EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO).
GLNPO, through the Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA), is charged with undertaking and overseeing the
remediation of contaminated sediments in the Great Lakes Areas of Concern (AOCs). ORD, through its
research mission, is directed to evaluate the application and efficacy of contaminated sediment
remediation technologies, such as environmental dredging. Based on these mutual interests, the two U.S.
EPA organizations formed a partnership to comprehensively monitor and assess progress on the
Ashtabula River Environmental Dredging Project in Ashtabula, OH. Dredging was selected by GLNPO
as the remedy of choice for the Ashtabula River to remove sediment contaminated with polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs), the chemical of concern (COC) for this site.
Under this partnership, a series of environmental measurements were conducted on the Ashtabula River
beginning in the fall of 2006 to support the development of measures of remedy effectiveness. These
measurements were made to evaluate the efficacy of environmental dredging in removing a large quantity
of sediment contaminated with PCBs. Samples of sediment and overlying water were collected and
analyzed before, during, and after dredging. In addition, measurements were made to characterize the
river's ecosystem also before, during, and after dredging to determine the impact that dredging had on the
ecosystem. Bathymetry measurements before and after dredging using multi-beam and side-scan sonar
were also carried out.
Environmental dredging activities were performed on a 1.2-mile long reach of the Ashtabula River from
River Station 194-00 to River Station 139-00 near its confluence with Lake Erie beginning in the fall of
2006 and ending in the fall of 2007. Extensive pre-dredging characterization efforts were undertaken in
the summer of 2006. Numerous sediment resuspension, sediment mapping (bathymetry), and ecological
measurements were made during the dredging process in 2007. Immediate post-dredging characterization
of sediment residuals was conducted in the fall and early winter of 2007. Additional long-term
monitoring studies were implemented from 2008 to 2010. These studies evaluated remediation response
within indigenous food web and measures to determine the effect of sediment depositional processes on
the original residual sediment layer. Long-term monitoring is needed to understand the rate and extent to
which ongoing natural processes impact surface sediment and whether newly deposited sediment is
intermixing with the original residual sediment layer. Another ORD evaluation was conducted in the
summer of 2011 to continue the long-term investigation of sediment deposition following dredging and
the documentation of post-dredging ecosystem recovery. This investigation was coordinated with
GLNPO as part of its final post-dredging characterization of surface sediment to measure remedy
effectiveness.
A comprehensive and interpretive report was published by U.S. EPA in September 2010 (Battelle, 2010).
The 2010 report evaluated and summarized dredge residuals and dredge removal efficiency in support of
GLNPO' s obj ectives for this j oint proj ect. This 2011 report constitutes a non-interpretive field data report
that includes the results of immediate and long-term effects of dredging operations on ecosystem health
and restoration using biological indicator, food web, and surrogate sample data generated through 2010.
Data produced in the summer 2011 post-dredging study will be included in a final interpretive report to be
published in 2012 that will: 1) assess the overall effectiveness of environmental dredging as a long-term
remedy for removal of contaminated sediment from the Ashtabula River, 2) evaluate the immediate
XI
-------
impacts of contaminant removal on ecosystem measures of health, and 3) analyze long-term ecosystem
changes in response to environmental dredging.
The primary goals of this phase of the project were to: 1) collect baseline samples and determine the
chemical and biological conditions of the system prior to implementation of dredging, and 2) perform
biological monitoring studies to evaluate the immediate impacts of contaminant removal on ecosystem
measures of health and to evaluate the long-term ecosystem changes in response to dredging. These
objectives were accomplished by conducting field surveys prior to, during, and following dredging
operations. An array of biological and surrogate deployments and in-situ sample collections were made
during these surveys to determine PCB uptake in macrobenthos, brown bullheads, semipermeable
membrane devices (SPMDs), and solid phase micro-extraction (SPME) systems. Additionally, surface
sediment and water column samples were collected at the time of these deployments to determine
temporal and spatial PCB patterns in association with these specific deployment locations. Lastly, an
extensive water sampling program was implemented during dredging operations in an effort to ascertain
the potential for PCB mass redistribution by dredging via sediment resuspension.
Whereas the focus of estimating dredge residual and contaminant removal in the September 2010 report
was primarily within the ORD study area, defined by a 1,100-ft long stretch of the river from River
Station 181+00 to River Station 170+00, the biological deployments and related sampling described in
this report were conducted site-wide throughout the entire GLNPO AOC to better understand the broader
ecosystem recovery of the river. This area extended from south of the lower turning basis at River Station
194+00 to the Fifth Street Bridge at Station 139+00.
xn
-------
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND OBJECTIVES
1.1 Purpose
A joint dredging evaluation project was initiated in 2006 between the National Risk Management
Research Laboratory (NRMRL) and the National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) of the U.S
Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA's) Office of Research and Development (ORD), hereafter
collectively referred to as ORD, and U.S. EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO).
GLNPO, via its Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA) mandate, is charged with undertaking and overseeing
the cleanup/remediation of contaminated sediments in the Great Lakes Areas of Concern (AOCs). ORD,
through its research mission, is directed to evaluate the application and efficacy of environmental
dredging. Based on these mutual interests, the two U.S. EPA organizations entered into an agreement to
form a partnership to carry out a comprehensive effort to monitor progress on the Ashtabula River
Environmental Dredging Project in Ashtabula, OH. Dredging was selected by GLNPO as the remedy of
choice for the Ashtabula River to remove sediments contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
and other chemicals. PCBs constitute the chemicals of concern (COCs) for this project.
Environmental dredging activities were carried out on a 1-mile long reach of the Ashtabula River
beginning in the fall of 2006 and ending in the fall of 2007. Dredging was not performed during the
2006/2007 winter. Extensive pre-dredging characterization efforts were undertaken in the summer of
2006 (Phase 1). Numerous sediment resuspension, sediment mapping (bathymetry), and ecological
measurements were made during the dredging process in 2007 (Phase 2). Post-dredging characterization
of sediment residuals was conducted in the fall and early winter of 2007 (Phase 3). Particular emphasis
was given in Phase 3 to measuring the quantity and composition of sediment residuals and the fraction of
contaminated sediment removed by the dredging operation, i.e., estimating dredge removal efficiency.
The results from these investigations were summarized in a comprehensive interpretive report published
by U.S. EPA in September 2010 (Battelle, 2010).
In addition to the extensive physical and chemical characterization of sediment and water column quality
performed throughout the project, a comprehensive suite of companion biological studies was also carried
out. These studies were conducted for the purpose of evaluating ecosystem recovery brought about by the
removal of contaminated sediments in the affected portion of the Ashtabula River over the course of the
dredging operation and for an extended period following removal. Chemical and toxicity measurements
were made on tissue of brown bullheads, Corbicula clams, Lumbriculus variegates, and
macroinvertebrates. Measurements of PCB uptake by surrogate samplers known as semipermeable
membrane devices (SPMDs) and solid phase micro-extraction (SPME) systems in contact with surface
sediment and the water column were also performed.
A water sampling program was also implemented during dredging operations in an effort to ascertain the
potential for PCB mass redistribution by dredging via sediment resuspension. A series of water samples
was collected at various depths within the water column at locations immediately up and downriver of
active dredging. An acoustic doppler current profiler (ADCP) was used to record flow dynamics of the
system and to identify plumes of resuspended sediment during the period of multiple depth water sample
collection. In addition, stationary optical backscatter systems (OBSs) were deployed up and downriver of
dredging operations to monitor for the existence of turbidity plumes created by sediment resuspension
during dredging.
Additional ecosystem monitoring was conducted in 2008, 2009, and 2010 to evaluate the degree of
recovery achieved in indigenous food web 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years following dredging.
-------
This report constitutes a non-interpretive field data report that compiles the results to date (2006 through
2010) for the immediate and longer-term effects of dredging operations on ecosystem health and
restoration using the abovementioned biological and surrogate sampler deployments and analysis, brown
bullhead capture and analysis, and water column sampling and subsurface resuspension tracking.
Another ORD evaluation is being conducted in the summer of 2011 to continue the long-term
investigation of sediment deposition following dredging and the documentation of post-dredging
ecosystem recovery. This investigation was coordinated with GLNPO as it carried out a final post-
dredging characterization of surface sediment in 2011 to measure remedy effectiveness. The results from
these 2011 investigations will be presented in a final comprehensive interpretative report to be published
in 2012.
1.2 Site Description
The Ashtabula River lies in extreme northeast Ohio, flowing into Lake Erie's central basin at the City of
Ashtabula (Figure 1-1). Its drainage basin covers an area of 137 mi2, with 8.9 mi2 in western
Pennsylvania. Major tributaries include Fields Brook, Hubbard Run, and Ashtabula Creek. The City of
Ashtabula, with an estimated population of approximately 21,000 (Year 2000 census), is the only
significant urban center in the watershed, with the rest of the drainage basin being predominantly rural
and agricultural. Concentrated industrial development exists around Fields Brook (east of the Ashtabula
River) and east of the Ashtabula River mouth. Sediments in portions of the Ashtabula River are
contaminated with a variety of chemicals, including PCBs.
The PCBs were thought to have originated primarily from Fields Brook, a stream that drains into the
Ashtabula River in the area of the upper Turning Basin. Fields Brook and its five tributary streams that
drain the 5.6- mi2 watershed have been identified as the primary source of contamination to the Ashtabula
River. The eastern portion of the watershed drains Ashtabula Township, and the western portion drains
the eastern section of the City of Ashtabula. The 3.5-mile main channel of Fields Brook begins south of
U.S. Highway 20, about 1 mile east of State Highway 11. From this point, the stream flows
northwesterly, just under U.S. Highway 20 and Cook Road, to the north of Middle Road. The stream then
flows westerly to its confluence with the Ashtabula River near the Railroad Bridge and Turning Basin.
The industrial zone of Ashtabula is concentrated around the upstream reach of Fields Brook from Cook
Road downstream to State Highway 11.
Up to 20 separate industrial manufacturing activities, ranging from metal fabrication to chemical
production, have occurred in the area since the early 1940s. The decades of manufacturing activity and
waste management practices at industrial facilities resulted in the discharge or release of a variety of
hazardous substances to Fields Brook and its watershed, including the floodplain and wetlands area.
Sediments at the Fields Brook site were contaminated with PCBs, volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), heavy metals, phthalates, and low level radionuclides. VOCs
and heavy metals including mercury, lead, zinc, and cadmium have been detected in surface water from
Fields Brook and the Detrex tributary. Contaminants detected in fish include VOCs and PCBs. The site
posed a potential health risk to individuals who ingested or came into direct contact with contaminated
water from Fields Brook and with contaminated fish or sediments.
Fields Brook has been eliminated as a source of contamination (or recontamination) of the Ashtabula
River. A Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act cleanup of Fields
Brook was completed in 2003. Subsequently, a post-cleanup monitoring program was put in place to
protect against recontamination of Fields Brook as well as the Ashtabula River.
-------
Ashtabula River
Project Site
0 10 20
I I
SCALE IN MILES
Figure 1-1. Overview Map of the Ashtabula River and Project Study Site
Figure 1-2. Ashtabula River Dredging Site and ORD Study Area (River Stations 181+00 to 170+00)
-------
Approximately 600,000 yd3 of contaminated sediments were initially targeted for removal between the
Upper Turning Basin at the mouth of Fields Brook and the 5th Street Bridge (Figure 1-2). The COCs in
this stretch of the river included PCBs; PAHs; hexachlorobenzene; hexachlorobutadiene; metals; and the
radionuclides uranium, radium, and thorium. The radionuclides were above background levels but below
regulatory criteria. In Phase 1 of this dredge residuals research project, GLNPO, under its GLLA
mandate, conducted a baseline characterization of the river that included all of these COCs, while ORD
focused only on the PCBs in selected areas of the river (as indicated by the yellow shading in Figure 1-2).
In Phases 2 and 3, ORD continued to focus on only the PCB inventory in the study area and selected areas
of the river where biological collections and surrogate deployments were made.
1.3 Summary of Dredging Operations
A comprehensive summary of dredging operations was previously described in Battelle (2010). Dredging
in the Ashtabula River was performed by J.F. Brennan Company, Inc., a private marine contractor
headquartered in La Crosse, WI. Dredging operations were conducted in two stages. Stage I, which was
conducted as an environmental dredging project, included hydraulic removal of sediment from the upper
portion of the GLLA project area (River Station 194+00) down (south) to an area just above the
Ashtabula Harbor at the 5th Street Bridge (River Station 139+00), with U.S. EPA-GLNPO operating as
the lead agency (Figure 1-3). Stage II, which was carried out as a navigation maintenance dredging
project, included hydraulic removal of sediment from just south of the 5th Street Bridge northward into
the inner harbor (River Stations 139+00 to 120+00), with the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers operating as
the lead agency.
This report is focused on research carried out in conjunction with the GLLA dredging conducted during
Stage I, which began September 9, 2006 and was completed October 14, 2007. Stage I dredging
operations resulted in the removal, transport, and dewatering of approximately 491,711 yd3 of
contaminated sediment. Sediment removal was achieved within the project study area by using a 12-in.
hydraulic swinging-ladder cutter-head dredge shown in Figure 1-4.
The Ashtabula River dredge site was organized into 28 discrete areas called dredge management units
(DMUs). The DMU layout is shown in Figure 1-5 and was organized as follows:
The "Upper Turning Basin" - The Upper Turning Basin defined the upstream boundary of the dredge site
and is where Fields Brook converges with the Ashtabula River. DMUs 1 through 14 comprised the
dredge management plan in the Upper Turning Basin.
The "River Run" - The River Run made up an approximate 1,300 ft stretch of the Ashtabula River and
comprised parts of DMUs 13 and 14 at its southern boundary and continued northward encompassing
DMUs 15 through 24, and parts of DMUs 25 and 26. The ORD residuals research study occurred in
portions of DMUs 15 through 22.
The "River Bend" - The River Bend was defined by the area just south of the 5th Street Bridge where the
Ashtabula River 'bends' to the east. Parts of DMUs 25 and 26 and all of DMUs 27 and 28 were within
this area of the river.
1.4 Research Goals and Objectives
This research project was designed to: 1) provide an understanding of sediment residual formation during
dredging operations at the Ashtabula River and to develop methods to obtain more realistic
estimates/projections of post-dredging residuals mass/volume and contaminant concentrations based on
-------
AREA BOUNDARY
DMU BOUNDARY
STATION LINES
DREDGE CUTCENTERLINES
Figure 1-3. Ashtabula River Dredge Site Transect Locations (River Stations 194+00 to 139+00)
-------
Figure 1-4. Michael B. Dredge at Ashtabula River
pre-, during- and post-dredging information and data, and 2) evaluate the recovery of the associated
ecosystem following dredging at this site.
For the purposes of this report, which focuses on the data obtained from the ecosystem monitoring portion
of the project, the specific research goals were to perform biological studies to evaluate the immediate
impacts of contaminant removal on ecosystem measures of health and analyze long-term ecosystem
changes in response to dredging. To accomplish these goals, the project work plan was designed to:
1) generate reliable biological data on the Ashtabula River ecosystem before, during, and following
dredging, and 2) compare pre-, during-, and post-dredging biological data to define, if possible,
ecosystem response to the impacts of environmental dredging on the Ashtabula River.
The project was implemented in three discrete phases of work, hereafter referred to as Phase 1, Phase 2
and Phase 3, and defined as follows:
Phase 1 - Measurements conducted prior to dredging
Phase 2 - Measurements conducted during dredging
Phase 3 - Measurements conducted post-dredging.
This report provides a summary of the biological and surrogate samples collected and analyzed for PCBs
and PAHs during Phases 1 through 3, and also during post-dredging studies conducted in 2008, 2009, and
2010. This report also presents water quality data that were collected during dredging and are specifically
related to sediment resuspension and soluble releases.
-------
Figure 1-5. Ashtabula River Dredge Site Dredge Management Unit (DMU) Locations
-------
2.0 EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH AND RESULTS
2.1 General Approach
Field sampling activities carried out before, during, and after dredging consisted of a multi-faceted
approach to physical, chemical and biological characterization of the sediment inventory. During
dredging, sediment resuspension, sediment mapping, and contaminant release were measured using a
number ofin-situ and ex-situ analyses. After dredging was completed, physical, chemical and biological
characterization of the sediment residuals was implemented using similar techniques with an emphasis on
measuring the quantity of sediment residuals and the fraction removed by the dredging operation.
This report focuses on the biological and surrogate sampling that was used to monitor ecosystem
recovery. Specific reference to sediment collection will be discussed only as it pertains to the biological
component of this investigation. An estimation of sediment residual and contaminant removal were
previously reported (Battelle, 2010).
2.2 Study Design
The ORD sediment residual study area (Battelle, 2010) was bounded by River Stations 181+00 and
170+00 (Figure 2-1) of the "River Run". However, the biological component of the investigation more
broadly encompassed the entire GLNPO AOC, River Stations 194+00 to 139+00. Figure 2-1 shows the
25 stations where the surrogate samplers and the four stations where the Hester Dendy (HD) samplers
were deployed. In addition, Figure 2-1 provides a detailed summary of the stations at which co-located
surface sediment and water column samples were collected in conjunction with the deployments. This
sampling design, which consisted of 25 stations, was implemented in Phase 1 of the investigation and
repeated again for Phases 2 and 3; however, SPMDs and SPMEs were only deployed in Phase 1 (2006)
and Phase 3 (2008), whereas HDs were deployed in all of Phases 1 through 3 and in the out-year
investigations in 2008, 2009, and 2010.
Sediment core samples were collected in 2006, 2007, and 2009 at 30 stations (not shown in Figure 2-1) in
the blue-shaded ORD Study Area. The 30 stations were divided into 12 transects on 100-ft centers with
two, three, or four stations per transect depending on river width (Battelle, 2010).
A detailed deployment and retrieval schedule is shown in Table 2-1, and specific information regarding
the deployment and retrieval of each sampler type is presented in the following sections of this report.
2.3 Data Collection
The following sections describe how each of the samplers was deployed and retrieved and how sediment
and water samples were collected in association with these deployments. Additional details for this
sampling strategy can also be found in the EPA-approved Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs) for
Phase 1 and Phases 2 and 3 (Battelle, 2006; 2007, respectively).
2.3.1 Hester Dendy Deployment and Recovery of Macrobenthos. Artificial substrates called
HDs were used to collect benthic macroinvertebrate tissue. Each deployment system consisted of
individual units called HD "condos." Each condo consisted of nine individual 7.6-cm X 7.6-cm pieces
of tempered hardboard plate that were spaced from top to bottom at increasing intervals. The entire condo
was held together with an eyebolt and wing nut assembly. The plates and spacers were placed on the
eyebolt so that there were four single spaces and four double spaces between the plates. The total surface
area of the sampler, excluding the eyebolt, was approximately 1,040 cm2. A total of 20
-------
Ashtabula River ORD Sample
Identification for Each Station
Station ID
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Samcle IDs
SPMD Rack 1
SPME Rack 1
SPMD Water 11
SPME Water 11
SPMD Rack 2
SPME Rack 2
SPMD Rack 3
SPMD Rack 4
SPME Rack 3
SPMD Water 1
SPME Water 1
SPMD Rack 5
SPME Rack 4
Water 1
Sediment 1
SPMD Racks
SPME Rack 5
SPMD Water 2
SPME Water 2
SPMD Rack 7
SPME Rack 6
Water 2
Sediment 2
SPMD Rack 8
SPME Rack 7
SMPD Water 3
SPME Water 3
Water 3
Sediment 3
SPMD Rack 9
SPME Rack 8
SPMD Rack 10
SPME Rack 9
SPMD Rack 11
SPME Rack 10
SPMD Rack 12
SPME Rack 11
SPMD Water 4
SPME Water 4
Water 4
Sediment 4
SPMD Rack 13
SPMD Rack 14
SPME Rack 12
SPMD Rack 15
SPME Rack 13
SPMD Rack 16
SPMD Rack 14
SPMD Water 5
SPME Water 5
Water 5
Sediment 5
SPMD Rack 17
SPMD Rack 18
SPMD Rack 19
SPME Rack 15
SPMD Water 6
SPME Water 6
Water 6
Sediment 6
SPMD Rack 20
SPMD Rack 21
400 800
SCALE IN FEET
Explanation
© Station ID
ORD Study Area
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
M1
M2
M3
M4
SPMD Rack 22
SPMD Rack 23
SPMD Rack 24
SPMD Rack 25
SPMD Water 7
SPME Water 7
Water 7
Sediment 7
SPMD Water 8
SPME Water 8
Water 8
Sediments
SPMD Water 9
SPME Water 9
Water 9
Sediment 9
SPMD Water 10
SPME Water 10
Water 1 0
Sediment 10
M1-HD1
M1-HD2
Water 11
Sediment 11
M2-HD3
M2-HD4
Water 12
Sediment 12
M3-HD5
M3-HD6
Water 1 3
Sediment 13
M4-HD7
M4-HD8
Water 14
Sediment 14
Upstream point (M1) is projected 1,408 ft North of actual location
Upstream (M1)
Figure 2-1. Location of 25 Stations in the Ashtabula River for SPMD and SPME Deployments and
Four Stations for HS Deployments (Macrobenthos Collection) in the GLNPO AOC, and
Co-Locations of Surface Sediment and Water Column Samples
-------
Table 2-1. Sample Deployment and Retrieval Schedule
Phase
1
2
3
2009
2010
Description
Pre-Dredging
During Dredging
Post-Dredging (#1)
Post-Dredging (#2)
Post-Dredging (#3)
Sample Type/Event
SPMDs (Water Column and
Sediment)
SPME (Water Column and
Sediment)
HDs for Macrobenthos Harvesting
Surface Sediment Collection
Brown Bullhead Capture
HDs for Macrobenthos Harvesting
Surface Sediment Collection
Water quality, ADCP and MOWS
Brown Bullhead Capture
SPMDs (Water Column and
Sediment)
SPME (Water Column and
Sediment)
HDs for Macrobenthos Harvesting
Surface Sediment Collection
Corbicula Clams and Lumbriculus
variegates
Brown Bullhead Capture
HDs for Macrobenthos Harvesting
and Surface Sediment Collection
Brown Bullhead Capture
HDs for Macrobenthos Harvesting
and Surface Sediment Collection
Brown Bullhead Capture
Date
Deployment
July 24 - 27, 2006
July 24 - 27, 2006
July 24, 2006
July 24, 2006
Retrieval
August 24 - 28,
2006
August 24 - 28,
2006
August 21 -22,
2006
August 21 -22,
2006
August 28, 2006
July 23-24, 2007
July 23-24, 2007
August 20, 2007
August 20, 2007
July 23-29, 2007
May 22, 2007
August 12-14, 2008
August 12-14, 2008
August 8-12, 2008
August 8-12, 2008
August 12-14, 2008
June 10, 2008
July 22, 2009
September 9-11,
2008
September 9-11,
2008
September 8-9,
2008
September 8-9,
2009
September 9-11,
2008
August 17-18,
2009
May 2, 2009
July 28, 2010
August 25-26,
2010
June 8, 2010
individual condos were attached onto a wire mesh box that was approximately 1.2m x 0.9m x 0.6m in
size. Two each of the wire mesh boxes were deployed at each station for a total of 40 individual condos
per location. Each of the wire mesh boxes was weighted with a brick and positioned such that the condos
stretched from at the top of the box to within 0.3 m of the sediment surface. Each box was connected to a
metal chain that was secured to a shoreline feature, such as a tree, post or stake, for easy retrieval.
Figure 2-2 shows atypical HD deployment setup.
From 2006-2008, HD systems were deployed during sampling events at four stations in the Ashtabula
River designated Upstream, Fields Brook, Turning Basin, and River Run. The actual deployment
locations are shown in Figure 2-3.
Upstream - located in the Ashtabula River approximately 1,000 m upriver above the confluence
of Fields Brook and the Ashtabula River.
Fields Brook - located in Fields Brook approximately 50m upstream from the mouth of the
brook.
10
-------
Figure 2-2. Hester Dendy Deployment System Used at Ashtabula River
(Left - Condos Hanging in Mesh Box; Right - Hester Dendy Condo)
Turning Basin - located along the north bulkhead of the Turning Basin; however, this station was
transferred from the Turning Basin to northwest side of the railroad bridge during dredging in the
Turning Basin.
River Run - located at the northern bulkhead of the River Bend. The during-dredge sampler
deployment was located approximately 100 m to the west of the bulkhead due to dredging in that
area.
In 2009 and 2010, two additional HD systems were deployed at the Conneaut Creek, which served as a
reference location. The Conneaut Creek is approximately 45 miles east of the Ashtabula River and also
flows into Lake Erie. The reference locations at the Conneaut Creek are shown in Figure 2-4.
After 28 days of exposure, the HD condos were recovered by Battelle and transferred to U.S. EPA field
staff for processing. U.S. EPA recorded community dynamics and then provided Battelle with
macrobenthos tissue for PCB and PAH analysis. A total of eight macrobenthos samples were processed
and analyzed during each event in 2006-2008, and atotal of 10 were processed in 2009 and 2010.
Co-located water column and surface sediment sample collection was performed in conjunction with the
HD deployments. Two sediment samples (approximately top 10 cm) were collected using a ponar grab
sampler or a hand push core and two water samples were collected at approximately 30 cm above the
sediment-water interface at the time of HD deployment and again at the time of HD retrieval, for a total of
four sediment and four water samples for each location per sampling event. The sediment and water
samples were also processed and analyzed for PCBs and PAHs.
The average total PCB concentrations ((ig/g lipid) in the macrobenthos for each year are shown in
Figure 2-5. This figure combines the average total PCBs for all deployment locations on a per year basis
to provide an overall estimation of PCB concentrations in the macrobenthos for 5 consecutive years of
monitoring (2006-2010). The total PCB and PAH values expressed in this report were calculated as the
sum of individual congeners (for PCBs) and the sum of the individual 16 priority PAHs plus naphthalene
(for total PAHs). When an individual congener or PAH was not detected, the method detection limit was
used to calculate the total PCB or PAH concentration. The average total PCB concentrations in the
macrobenthos at each station from 2006 to 2010 are presented in Figure 2-6. Figures 2-7 and 2-8 show
the relative change in PCB concentrations in sediment and water as ng/g-dry weight and ng/L,
respectively, on a per station basis from 2006-2010.
11
-------
Figures 2-9 through 2-13 consist of five PCB congener graphs each that depict a time series change of
PCB congener distribution in the macrobenthos at each of the five stations: Upstream, Turning Basin,
Fields Brook, River Run, and Conneaut Creek (in 2009 and 2010 only).
Explanation:
O Before Dredging (2006)
During Dredging (2007)
After Dredging (2008)
After Dredging (2009)
O After Dredging (2010)
1,000 500
Figure 2-3. Hester Dendy Deployment Locations in the Ashtabula River for 2006,
2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010
12
-------
Figure 2-4. Hester Dendy Deployment Locations in the Conneaut Creek
(Reference Site) in 2009 and 2010
13
-------
400
350
PRE-DREDGE DURING-DREDGE POST-DREDGE POST-DREDGE POST-DREDGE
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Figure 2-5. Average Total PCBs (ug/g lipid) in Macrobenthos at Ashtabula River Prior to, During,
and Following Dredging
450
400 -
PRE-DREDGE 2006
DURING-DREDGE 2007
POST-DREDGE 2008
POST-DREDGE 2009
POST-DREDGE 2010
Upstream
Fields Brook Turning Basin
River Bend
Reference
Figure 2-6. Average Total PCBs (jig/g lipid) in Macrobenthos per Station Area at the Ashtabula
River and Reference Location (Conneaut Creek) Prior to, During, and Following Dredging
14
-------
5000
400°
T3
00
j? 3000 -
m
u
Q.
"ro
1° 2000
ro
OJ
1000
PRE-DREDGE 2006
DURING-DREDGE 2007
POST-DREDGE 2008
POST-DREDGE 2009
POST-DREDGE 2010
Upstream Fields Brook Turning Basin River Bend Reference
Figure 2-7. Average Total PCBs (ng/g dry wt) for Surface Sediments Co-Located with
Macrobenthos in Ashtabula River and Reference Location (Conneaut Creek) Prior to, During, and
Following Dredging
u
Q.
250
200 -
150 -
8? 100
I
50 -
PRE-DREDGE 2006
DURING-DREDGE 2007
POST-DREDGE 2008
POST-DREDGE 2009
POST-DREDGE 2010
Upstream
Fields Brook
Turning Basin
River Bend
Reference
Figure 2-8. Average Total PCBs (ng/L) for Water Co-Located with Macrobenthos in Ashtabula
River and Reference Location (Conneaut Creek) Prior to, During, and Following Dredging
15
-------
2006 Macrobenthos Upstream
2.0
!§ 1.5
= 1.0
0.5
0.0
D
.IIIIIIIIIIIII.IIIMIIIIMIIIIIII..IIII.IIIIHII.II.IIIIIIMIII.IIIII.IIIII.I.IIIIIIIII.I.IIIMIIIIIMIIIIII.I
iH^toooiHLn^CTi^toooiHmofN^-toooiHmto^-o^iHrOLniHLnCTitHOLnmtooLn^iHtOiHtooo^^OfNtoooo^^o^CTiiHmtooo
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
2007 Macrobenthos Upstream
2.5
2.0
'£ 1.5
0.5 --
0.0 'rl^^^^'rl1 ^^l^^^^'i^l^^ll'^^^'l^lli'^^^l^'^^^llr^^'^
iiituuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
2008 Macrobenthos Upstream
2.5
2.0
!§ 1.5
= 1.0
0.5
00 [.,',^^^-,-,^l,l,l,-,lJ,^lJ,",l,^l,',l,l,llJ,l,l,l,l-,l,l,l,l,-,",^^',l,l,l,^l,^l,l,-,',l,l,^^",-,l,l,l,l,l,lJ,l/,l,",-,^l,',',",-,l,l,l,l,l,-,"/,',^l,l,",',l,',',-
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
Figure 2-9. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (ug/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in Upstream Station
(Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge)
-------
2009 Macrobenthos Upstream
111.
tO 00 iH
(J U CQ
tO 00 i-H rO
in I-H in C7i
Lnrotooi.nr--iHtoiHtooo^r--OfNtoooo^r--o^c7iiHroto
t-it-itHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHtHfNfNfN
2010 Macrobenthos Upstream
^1.0
OOOOOOCTiCTiCTiOiH
in in in ID
Figure 2-9. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (ug/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in Upstream Station
(Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge) (continued)
-------
2006 Macrobenthos Fields Brook
Q.
a 15-°
0.0 -
..!_ _l l.._ll_
tH^-toooiHLnr-CTi^toc
CQCQCQCQtHtHtHtHfs'fs'('
uuuuggggggt
. .
SCO CO
u u
1,
3 F
3 £
I
Q CO CO
3
1
CO CO CO
n F
dhl 1
,11111
-.OOOOOOCTiCTiCTlOv
3333333cac
H tH
H iH
Q CO
1 I...I.L. . .!.__.
rNirNiMMro^-^-LnLnLnt£)t£)r--r--r--r--ooooooc7iC7iC7ioooo
iHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHiHfNrMrMrM
2007 Macrobenthos Fields Brook
Q.
~^&
...LI
££££33333333333i
. lilllil. i.nii.hl h __! L..I.I
£££££££££££33333333333333333333333333333
2008 Macrobenthos Fields Brook
Q.
a
0.0 -
1 _!...._! _l._l.l_l__ I.I 1 !.!___ |.|_I.I__I i .
££££33333333333333333333333333£££££££££££££££££££££££££2222
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
Figure 2-10. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (jig/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in Fields Brook Station
(Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge)
-------
2010 Macrobenthos Fields Brook
;g 20.0
Q.
« 15.0
...,-,.,-,-,- I I,-,-,- I I- l-l I. I I I. I .-...--I.I I.I I
^^W^IJ^r^Cl^^WiHrOOrNl^^WiHrO^^O^iHrOLniHLnCTiiHOLno^^OLnr^iH^iH^W
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
Figure 2-10. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (jig/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in Fields Brook Station
(Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge) (continued)
-------
2006 MacrobenthosTurning Basin
to
o
3 8.0
.9-
4.0
2.0
0.0 |lJ^-J^-i-lLiviJ-r-iil.ir'Jvi4^^^^^
^^^^uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
2007 Macrobenthos Turning Basin
12.0
10.0
3 8.0
Q.
| 6'°
4.0
2.0 4
0.0 l-r.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.^^.-.^-.^.-.^-.^v.^^v.^^v.^^^^^-.^v.^MJ.v.MJJlMJJl-J^
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
2008 Macrobenthos Turning Basin
12.0
10.0
3 8.0
Q.
1 6'°
2
4.0
2.0
0.0
tttttttt^^^^^^^WW^^^^^^^^W^^<&<&<&<^<^<^O^^^^WWW^^\A\A\A^
Figure 2-11. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (ug/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in Turning Basin
(Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge)
-------
2009 MacrobenthosTurning Basin
3 8.0
<~ O.U
eS
._._.._!_! _____ I Li. II i.l I I.I
OOOOOOCTiCTiCTiOiH
tN ro ro ro
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
2010 Macrobenthos Turning Basin
Q.
a
0.0 -
I.I. 1 1. I.I . l.ll ll I.I I.I 1. 1. .1.1. .. 1... ..1. 1
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
Figure 2-11. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (ug/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in Turning Basin
(Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge) (continued)
-------
2006 Macrobenthos River Bend
to
to
Q.
a 3'°
Q.
a 3'°
Q.
. 1 1 .__!_. ..
SSSSmmmmmm!
, II
SSSSmmmmSSJ
..1 . .,
iillssssss:
O t
M f
Q
M f
Q
1
O t
M f
Q
a 2
III
H 'ro'
O ro
a CQ
H m
O ro
a CQ
O f
CO C
l_
11 'f
CO C
,
O r
CO C
M
d-
Q
d-
Q
M
d-
Q
.1.
d- to oo
d- ^- ^~
a CQ CQ
1
I.I,
a CQ CQ
i.l.
d- to oo
d- ^- ^~
a CQ CQ
CO
'^
in
CO
in
CO
. -
1 1 1 1 1
..i.iil.i. ._ .1. In 1,1 i. . ,, h. III. .1. .I..LI..II .1 ..,_i. .,_ .
mmmmmSSSSSS3rfrfrfrf33333rfrf333rfrfrfrf222333SSSS
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
2007 Macrobenthos River Bend
1 II. .lllllllll III ll . l_ .1.1 _. . ._ i. ,
££S££SSSSSSS33333333333333SSSS«,oooo333SSSS
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
2008 Macrobenthos River Bend
l.lllll Ill I.I 1. . 1 .1.1 . i
Illgggllgllllllllllilllllllillllllllllll
Figure 2-12. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (jig/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in River Run (Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge)
-------
2009 Macrobenthos River Bend
4.0
.
3'0
. I \
III..
OOOOOOCTiCTiCTiOiH
in in to to
to
OJ
2010 Macrobenthos River Bend
Q.
a 3-°
0.0 -
. l.lll.l 1.. I.I 1 1. .1.1 . ... 1. I
tO 00 iH
in in to
tN to 00
OO OO OO C7i C7i C7i
Figure 2-12. Time Series of PCB Congener Distribution (jig/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in River Run
(Pre-, During-, and Post-Dredge) (continued)
-------
2009 Macrobenthos Conneaut Creek
^
0.00 -
1 .
l-l.
-1 1
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
2010 Macrobenthos Conneaut Creek
^
°- o Qg
0 .00 -
Figure 2-13. 2009 and 2010 Congener Distribution (jig/g of lipid) in Macrobenthos in Reference Location (Conneaut Creek)
-------
Figures 2-14 through 2-17 compare the average total PCB concentration in macrobenthos to that in the
sediment sample that was co-located with each deployment. Figure 2-14 shows the results for 5 years of
monitoring in the Upstream Location. The same relationship for Fields Brook, the Turning Basin, and the
River Bend is shown in Figures 2-15, 2-16, and 2-17, respectively. Note that there are no
macroinvertebrate data for the Fields Brook location in 2009 (Figure 2-15) as each of the two samplers
were found out of the water and on the bank of the river when the field staff went to retrieve them.
s
>.
i_
-a
01
PRE-DREDGE
2006
DURING-DREDGE
2007
POST-DREDGE
2008
POST-DREDGE
2009
POST-DREDGE
2010
Figure 2-14. Comparison of Total Average PCBs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
the Upstream Location per Each Sampling Event
450
No Macrobenthos data for Fields
Brook in 2009
PRE-DREDGE
2006
DURING-DREDGE
2007
POST-DREDGE
2008
POST-DREDGE
2009
POST-DREDGE
2010
Figure 2-15. Comparison of Total Average PCBs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
Fields Brook per Each Sampling Event
25
-------
6000
160
PRE-DREDGE
2006
DURING-DREDGE
2007
POST-DREDGE
2008
POST-DREDGE
2009
POST-DREDGE
2010
Figure 2-16. Comparison of Total Average PCBs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
Turning Basin per Each Sampling Event
700
- 20
- 10
PRE-DREDGE
2006
DURING-DREDGE
2007
POST-DREDGE
2008
POST-DREDGE
2009
POST-DREDGE
2010
c
01
.a
o
Figure 2-17. Comparison of Total Average PCBs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
the River Bend per Each Sampling Event
Figures 2-18 through 2-34 show the relative PCB congener profile for macrobenthos and co-located
sediment at each station for 2006 (pre-dredging), 2007 (during dredging), 2009 (1 year following
dredging), and 2010 (2 years following dredging).
26
-------
2006 Macrobenthos Upstream
n
1.
ll
III
,li llllllillll.il II llllllilillil,,illl,lillnl II ill Mini .Mill 1 1 lillllllill.l,
^^^^^^^^r^r^r^MrO^^^^^LnLnin^r^r^
-------
2006 Macrobenthos Fields Brook
...
0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-
l.ll
0-0-0-0-0-
0.
.
II
0. 0. 0.
Q. C
1
Jill 1
1 III II
^OOOOOOCTlCTlCTlOr
..ll- - .. I...I.I. . ... . . .1. . - . -.
3333333333333333333333333333
to
oo
2006 Sediment Fields Brook
3 b
S A
O
II
^ ^ ^ oo ^ ^ r^
U U U U CD CD CD
,1,1,1.
33333333'
0 CD CD
CD
ll
CD CD CD
1 1 II ll
, l.llll.lll II
33333333cac
_____ _ I _ 1 .-.I . I
Dun^^OLnr^i-itDi-itDoo'^r^orNitDooO'^r^O'^cjii-irntDoo
H^HrNirNi^^^^-^iniriiritDtDr^r^r^r^oooooocncncnoOOO
Trnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrn
Figure 2-19. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
Fields Brook in 2006 (Pre-Dredge)
-------
2006 Macrobenthos Turning Basin
J'
n -
i ... ill
..,.il.i..i.i ..,,1 I..I.I.L .il. l.i.l.l,. l,..i ..i.
.,
1i i
nl.l.,
! -
in ^ *H to
OO OO OO C7i C7i C7i
C7i i-H fO to OO
to
^O
2006 Sediment Turning Basin
0 5
~ A
o 1
S *
i I
L}L}L}L}rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\rr\*
-
1
.1 1 ...II II 1
Dt-it-irNrMmmm<3-<3-
ommmmmmmmm
m
M
UDOO^I^OrslUDOOC
mmmmmmmmc
i .1, ll...l .
OOOOOOIOiaiOOOO
^mmmmmmmmm
Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_
Figure 2-20. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
Turning Basin in 2006 (Pre-Dredge)
-------
2006 Macrobenthos River Bend
. I 1 ___! _ _
iiituuuuuuuuu
. .1. ,!..! I.,
"""""""""""""""""3333333333333333333t
... 1. ...
D^rr-o^rCTii-Hrotooo
OOOOOCTiCTiCTiOOOO
OJ
o
2006 Sediment River Bend
X
ro
0
o
n -
!.,.._!
1
,.!,!.
HI 1 1 1
ll ...I.. I.I 1 - .. ll .ll
I..I.I-.
_..l.l___l
rf^rf^rf^rf^THTHTHTHrsirsirsirnrn^^^^^L/iL/iL/i^i^S-ooooooo^o^o^OTHTHrsi^
[^[^[^[^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^
Q_Q_Q_Q_UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDm
Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_
Figure 2-21. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
River Bend in 2006 (Pre-Dredge)
-------
2007 Macrobenthos Upstream
II
H 7-1
H 7-1
0 03
1
Inl.iiii .nli
mmmmmmmm
1 1
Ill llllllllllllllllll.il
HI || HI || || || || ||
2007 Sediment Upstream
m
o 4 -
ro
"o -, .
s 2
0 -
Illllllllll l,,.llllll
lllllllllll.llllllllll
||
.1
ll,
||
Illllllll
III
1
II 1
l.l.ll.ll.l.l
I.I ll.llllll..llll
OunrnUDOun
tHtH
'H'H'H'H'H'H'H'H'H'H'H^
CDCDCDCDCDCDm
Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_
Figure 2-22. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Upstream Location in 2007 (During Dredging)
-------
2007 Macrobenthos Fields Brook
7i
ca 6.
£ 5
15
* 2
11
.
1, 1
l.nl.l
££££33333333333?
1
Q 03 03
e a a
rt
CQ
kl
I
§ § §
1 ,1 ll
II. Illlllllll
££££££££?
H C
Q Q
;
1 I...I.I .. . !._.. .
2333333333333333333333333333
2007 Sediment Fields Brook
to
n -
.
. nil..
,
,
1
JU
U_i
,1
.1.. i.i.i. .. ..
tH^UDW*HLjni^a^^UDWtHrnorsi^UDWtHrnuD^o^tHrnuntHuna^tHOunm
mmmm^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ww^^^^o^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^rf^
Q_Q_Q_Q_UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDm
Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_
Figure 2-23. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
Fields Brook in 2007 (During Dredging)
-------
2007 Macrobenthos Turning Basin
jl
''
1
Bll
1 II
Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. C
0 r
L C
~
L Q. Q. Q. C
,
L Q. Q.
-
Q_
4,
Q. Q. Q.
1 1
ll 1. .1.1 1. ,
OJ
OJ
2007 Sediment Turning Basin
J
;
(j U U U CD CD CD
ll.
CD CD CD C
0 r-
D D
|
H f
Q C
,
D CD CD C
D CO CO
;H
CD
1
CD CD CD
1 III
, ..III. -Ill ll 1 . 1 I.I . ... 1. ... 1
O^'HrnL/iiHL/ioiiHOLnrnkDOLni*^iHkDiHkDoo^"i*^OfNi'^ooo^"i*^O^"0i'HrnkDoo
i^i^oooooooioioiOTHTHrsirsirnrnrn^^u-iu-iLnuDUDi^i^i^i^oooooooioioioooo
Q_Q_Q_Q_
Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_
Figure 2-24. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Turning Basin in 2007 (During Dredging)
-------
2007 Macrobenthos River Bend
U g _
o 4
o 3 -
1
11
~
UUUUCQCQCQCQCQCQCQi
Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. 1
~
H ro O IN *
i- Q. Q. Q. C
,',
± LD CO
Q 03 03
L Q. Q.
7-1
m
Q.
;
m io t a
en en en i
a. a. a. c
1
! i.i.l .. .
^^^^^^^^33333333333333333333333333333
2007 Sediment River Bend
U c -
Q. b
?
1
1 1
1 ll 1 ll
uuuummmmmmc
I
ll
Q CD CD CD C
J U U U (.
M ^
D D
J L
Q CD CD
s
CD
1,
1 ll
CD CD CD
CD C
,hl
^ 00 00 00 O1 C
D CD CD CD CD C
J U U U U t.
.1 ll
ll II
h O1 O r
0 CD ^ r
_ _ . 1 _!! !_ _ . . .1. i _ _ _l
DunrOUDOu-il^iHUDiHUDOO^I^OrslUDOOO^I^O^CTlTHrnUDOO
H^rsirsirnrnrn^^u-iu-iu-iuDUDi^i^i^i^ooooooaiaiaioooo
^rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\rf\m
Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_Q_
Figure 2-25. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
River Bend in 2007 (During Dredging)
-------
2009 Macrobenthos Upstream
n -
..li.lliiiil.
iiiiiiiii
,
i . i
Ill^lllllllll!.!
l.lllllllllll^lllll
2009 Sediment Upstream
rfq-iDoo^Lnr-cnTriDoo^morMTriDoo^miDTr
mcOCOcacacacacaS^
-
|
... .... L , .il
i^i^i^i^UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Figure 2-26. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Upstream Location in 2009 (1-Year Post Dredging)
-------
2009 Macrobenthos Turning Basin
.
Ill 1
1 II 1
UUUUCQCQCQCQCQCQCQO
ll.l 1
Q CQ CQ CQ D
-
1 _ ll
3 CQ CQ
CQ
1
. 1.
CQ CQ 0
Q
1 1 1
. .. ill. Ill
I
Q C
1
DLnm^OLnr-^i^^i^co^-r-orsi^coo^-r-o^-cn^im^co
2009 Sediment Turning Basin
a
°- 5 -
3 4 -
o 4
°
;
2 S S ?
0 r
,
llll,
M *
, 1
llll
1
Hi
1 , .1.1 . 1
Figure 2-27. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Turning Basin in 2009 (1-Year Post Dredging)
-------
2009 Macrobenthos River Bend
CO 7
u '
°- P.
To fa"
** A
° !
s? d-
. II
I
1
i.l,
.
di .
. nlilh
i
ill 1
. _ .. iiiiii-.i i..ii_.ii i _ i . .. ,
o^^rNirNirnrnrn^^ununun^^r^r^r^r^cococooioicrioooo
2009 Sediment River Bend
0.
(0
0
^
N=
1 1
II 1 1
1 II 1 1 1 1
1 II 1 Illll 1.
1
J U3 OO
m
T-H
M
m kO ^
i ill
ll i i 1 i 1 1 1 i
II. i.hlnlll III 1 l___l.l i 1
Figure 2-28. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
River Bend in 2009 (1-Year Post Dredging)
-------
2009 Macrobenthos Conneaut
,
*-i^j-iaoo*-iLnr--
-------
2010 Macrobenthos Upstream
u ,
s 2-5
*6 2'
ill
ill
CO CO
u u
to
CO
u
00
CO
u
1 Illllll 1
Illllllllllllllll
III lllll
Illllllllll
O tN ^- to OO iH
III 1
lllllll
ro to ^- O
m in to [--
CO CO CO CO
1 i i 1 n
ih II Mil Ih II li h
lllll
1 il
Inl hlil ii Iliiiih i
llll
h 1
lllll
O ^ C7i iH rO
C7i C7i C7i O O
II
llll
to oo
o o
CO CO
U 3.5
2010 Sediment Upstream
h l.ll.lllllllllllllll
1
I
ll !
Him
mi n
,11 ..i.ll
. i
.
llll llll
Llll
JL
III ll 1 III ill
llll. II, Illllllllll
^^^^SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmcaca
Figure 2-30. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Upstream Location in 2010 (2-Years Post Dredging)
-------
2010 Macrobenthos Fields Brook
£ 7'
U c
3.
3 7
ro
0 5
+- 4
o
* :
.,i i n
.
in
JUUUCQCQCQCQCQCQ
O V
M r
Q C
10 V
1 r
a c
1"
0 ro ^- ^- ^
Q CO CO CO Q
~
H ro O fN r
0 ro ^- ^- ^
Q CO CO CO Q
|.
r to
r ^r
D CO
1.
r to
r ^r
D CO
|
00
^r
CQ
1
PCB48
iH
in
CO
in
CO
|
m L
CO Q
1 1
m L
CO Q
3 ^r
D CO
II
3 ^r
i to
D CO
(I
1 I . 1. .1.1 _. ... 1. 1
mmSSSSSS°^^^^222^^^^^^^^^^^233222°°°°
Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q.
2010 Sediment Fields Brook
1 l.llllllll 1 __._.! __ __ 1
Figure 2-31. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
Fields Brook in 2010 (2-Years Post Dredging)
-------
2010 Macrobenthos Turning Basin
1 ll
.ll 1 II
uuuucacacacacacac
Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. C
1_ C
ll, .
i ca ca
1. Q. Q.
1. C
,
1. Q- Q.
Q.
|
, 1,
ca ca i
Q. Q. C
.
d, ,
. ,, nil. Ill
I
il 1. . -
3 S S S S S S S
1
l.lll
^- ^- in
333
.,.1 i . i
LnSStS°SrSSMMM§CTiCTloOOO
333333333333333333
2010 Sediment Turning Basin
2 4
,
tH ^" tO OO iH LO ["-.
3 3 3 3 m m m
.
i-H IN IN t-
ca ca ca c
0 i-
-I n
a D
. 1
il.l.l
H ro O fN r
1 ro ^- ^- r
D ca ca ca a
l.ll
D ca ca
PCB51
,
ro to ^r
m in to
CQ CQ CQ
Ul 1 i 1
. ulilillll L .1. .. _ .1.1 . .... .1 . . . i .1
l'y liy y y y y y iy y y y y lllllllll
Figure 2-32. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Turning Basin in 2010 (2-Years Post Dredging)
-------
2010 Macrobenthos River Bend
. ll
uuuucacacacacaca
I,, 1
3 CQ CQ CQ
1
1 1.
1
, 1,
CQ CQ
. ..Illll
3 3 3 3 3 3 t
n en c
3 CQ T
1-
1
1. ....
QCQCQCQCQCQCQCQ
I.I
CQ CQ
1
in
CQ
.1.1 .1 . i
CQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQ
to
2010 Sediment River Bend
.
1 1 1
ill- 1 II-
Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. C
L C
~
L Q. Q. Q. C
. 1
Illl
L Q. Q.
Q.
1
Q. Q. Q.
U,
II III .1 I...I.I 1 1
££££££££33333333333333333333333333333
Figure 2-33. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
River Bend in 2010 (2-Years Post Dredging)
-------
2010 Macrobenthos Conneaut
I-H ^r to oo
u u u u
tHLnP->C7i^tOOOiHrOOfN^-tOOOiHrOtO^O^iHrOLniHLnC7i
tN to 00
CO to 00
2010 Sediment Conneaut
m
u
U
1L
CO CO CO CO
in in to
oo oo oo C7i C7i
Figure 2-34. Comparison of PCB Congener Distribution as Percent of Total PCBs for Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in the
Reference Location (Conneaut Creek) in 2010 (2-Years Post Dredging)
-------
Figure 2-35 shows the average total PAHs in macrobenthos for each station over the 5 years of
monitoring. Figure 2-36 depicts the average total PAHs in the co-located sediment samples for the same
time series. Note, however, that the sediment was not analyzed for PAHs in 2006.
Figure 2-35. Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos per Sampling Location for Each
Sampling Event
£
a
1200
1000
800 -
< 600
Q_
15
s
01
M
TO
400 -
200
IDURING-DREDGE 2007
I POST-DREDGE 2008
POST-DREDGE 2009
I POST-DREDGE 2010
Upstream
Fields Brook Turning Basin River Bend
Reference
Figure 2-36. Average Total PAHs in Sediment at Macrobenthos Stations for Each Sampling Event
44
-------
In Figures 2-37 through 2-40, a comparison of the average total PAHs for macrobenthos and the co-
located sediment for each station over the 5 years of monitoring is presented. Figure 2-41 shows this
same relationship for the 2009 and 2010 monitoring studies in the Conneaut Creek.
Upstream-Average PAHs
700
Cud
_3_
i/l
O
.E
4-1
I
O
b
CD
PRE- DURING- POST- POST- POST-
DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Figure 2-37. Comparison of Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
the Upstream Location for Each Sampling Event
Fields Brook - Average PAHs
180
TJ
'a.
c
01
.a
o
PRE- DURING- POST- POST- POST-
DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Figure 2-38. Comparison of Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
Fields Brook for Each Sampling Event
45
-------
Turning Basin - Average PAHs
600
00
"S3
c
01
.a
§
TO
PRE- DURING- POST- POST- POST-
DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Figure 2-39. Comparison of Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
the Turning Basin for Each Sampling Event
River Bend - Average PAHs
PRE- DURING- POST- POST- POST-
DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE DREDGE
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Figure 2-40. Comparison of Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
the River Bend for Each Sampling Event
46
-------
120
OJ
-Q
o
POST-DREDGE 2009 POST-DREDGE 2010
2.3.2
Figure 2-41. Comparison of Average Total PAHs in Macrobenthos vs. Sediment in
the Reference Location (Conneaut Creek) for Each Sampling Event
Semipermeable Membrane Device and Solid Phase Micro-Extraction System
Deployments, Retrieval, and Results
2.3.2.1 SPMDs. The SPMDs utilized for this investigation were purchased from Environmental
Sampling Technologies, Inc. (EST), St. Joseph, MO, and were composed of flat, low-density
polyethylene tubing containing a thin film of a pure, high-molecular-weight lipid (triolein). The triolein
oil was spiked with a surrogate or permeability reference compound (PRC) that was prepared by Battelle.
Although not calculated herein, the PRC was intended to be used to estimate the sampled water volume
using a formula developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) that takes into account portioning
coefficients and the concentration of remaining PRC at the time of retrieval. The PRC matrix consisted of
PCB congeners 38 and 186 in hexane. PRC was spiked into the triolein oil batch at a rate of 50 ng per
SPMD sample. These PCB congeners were selected as the field surrogates because they were expected to
exhibit similar chemical behavior to that of the target analytes.
SPMDs were deployed at Ashtabula River to measure PCBs in two matrices: sediment and water. To
measure PCBs in surficial sediments, SPMDs were deployed using a device developed by U.S. EPA ORD
called an "SPMD rack". Figure 2-42 shows a typical SPMD rack design.
47
-------
Rod
Rod Access
Opening
Metal Screen
Covering Bottom
(Shown Partially
Removed)
Cotter Pin
Capped Ends
Brass Screw
NOT TO SCALE
SPMD Rack
Design 1 (Original)
Center Eye Bolt
(Welded On)
PLAN VIEW
FROM BELOW
- 1 3/4"
r I
iifni rfNi
PLAN VIEW
FROM ABOVE
ELEVATION VIEW
END VIEW
Figure 2-42. Typical SPMD Rack Design for Deployment of SPMDs on the Surficial Sediment
Upon deployment, SPMD racks were loaded with five individual SPMD ribbons that were extended the
full length of the rack and fixed to two rods on each end of the unit by slipping the rod through each
looped end of the SPMD. Nitrile gloves were worn during SPMD handling to prevent contamination of
the ribbons. After loading, a protective stainless steel mesh screen was attached to the bottom of the rack,
and the rack was lowered into the water column and set on top of the sediment surface. A chain tag line
was attached to the eye hook on the top of the rack and extended away from the unit and used to aid in
recovery of the rack after the 28-day deployment period.
SPMDs were also deployed in the water column using large canisters that were supplied by EST. Water
column SPMDs were shipped to the field on a device called a "Spider Carrier" (see Figure 2-43a). Each
Spider Carrier contained one full-length SPMD ribbon that was "woven" through spindles on the Spider
Carrier to maximize surface area for exposure and uptake. For each water column deployment, a total of
five loaded Spider Carriers were stacked onto a central post within a perforated stainless steel Carrier
Canister (Figure 2-43b). The spiders were secured inside the canister with a screw-top lid. The canister
contained enough holes for ample movement and circulation of water through the device once it was
deployed into the water column.
48
-------
Tension '"
Spring
SPIDER CARRIER
TOP VIEW
"" SPMD
x~ Stainless Steel
Roller Teflon Coated
Center Post
(Tube) ""
Teflon Covered
Stainless Roll er
- Metal (S.S.) Plate
ANGLE VIEW
Total VXfeight
Loaded Spider
Carrier -268 grans
36" Sd. SPMD with Mounting
Loops; ~5 grams
Figure 2-43a. Top View and Angle View of the SPMD Spider Carrier
49
-------
Tether Ring
Tether Ring
( °
0
0
0
0
0
0
V n
uuuuuoouou
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
Threaded
Screw-On Cap
Total Weight
Empty: - 1,150 grams
304 Stainless Steel Construction
FIVE CARRIER CANISTER
SIDE VIEW
Removable End Cap
Perforated Shell
Stacked Carriers
CROSS-SECTION OF FIVE CARRIER CANISTER
SIDE VIEW
Figure 2-43b. Full View and Cross-Sectional View of the Perforated Stainless Steel
Carrier with Five Spiders
Water column SPMD deployments were attached to the eyelet of the SPMD rack, with the rack serving to
anchor the water deployment in place. Each water column canister was fitted with a buoy so that the
canister was allowed to float approximately 1 m above the sediment surface.
50
-------
Surface sediment and water samples were collected at each SPMD location once at either the time of
deployment or the time of retrieval. Each water and sediment sample was processed and analyzed for
PCBs.
During retrieval, each unit was brought to the surface via the chain tag line that was attached to the SPMD
rack. Once on deck of the research vessel, the SPMDs were harvested. For the SPMD racks, the
protective screen was removed and the SPMDs were removed from the unit. Each SPMD was lightly
rinsed using site water to remove excess sediment that adhered to the ribbon, and then all five ribbons
were transferred into a common hexane-rinsed can for shipment to EST for processing and dialysis
(extraction).
Water column deployments were also harvested immediately upon retrieval. Each Carrier Canister was
brought to the surface and the top of the canister was removed. Each of the five Spider Carriers was
removed from the canister and transferred into a hexane-rinsed can for shipment to EST. Each can held a
total of three Spider Carriers. Therefore, for each water column retrieval site, two cans were required
with three Spider Carriers loaded into one can and two into the other. The cans were received at EST and
processed as a unit of five SPMDs.
Figure 2-44 shows the average total PCBs that accumulated in SPMDs that were deployed in the water
column prior to and after dredging activities. Water column deployments occurred at a total of 11
stations, representing collection points in that were mostly focused in the River Run, with some occurring
in the River Bend and one in the Upstream Location as follows:
Station 1 - Upstream
Station 3 - River Run (ORD Research Area)
Station 4 - River Run (North)
Station 5 - River Bend
Station 8 - River Run (North)
Station 12 - River Run (ORD Research Area)
Station 15 -River Run (ORD Research Area)
Station 22 - River Bend
Station 23 - River Run (ORD Research Area)
Station 24 - River Run (North)
Station 25 - River Run (ORD Research Area)
A total of 25 SPMD racks were deployed at Stations 1 through 21 (see Figure 2-1) for the 2006 and 2008
sampling events. Additionally, a 26th SPMD rack was deployed at Station 22 (not shown in Figure 2-1)
for the 2008 post-dredge sampling event only. The average total PCB accumulations in SPMDs deployed
on the sediment surface for 2006 and 2008 are summarized in Figure 2-45.
51
-------
25000
IPRE-DREDGE 2006
I POST-DREDGE 2008
Figure 2-44. Average Total PCBs in Water Column SPMDs for 2006 (Pre-Dredge)
and 2008 (Post-Dredge) Monitoring Events
a
a.
in
re
s
I
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
ISPMD-PRE-DREDGE 2006
ISPMD-POST-DREDGE 2008
illlh
Q
Figure 2-45. Average Total PCBs in Sediment Rack SPMDs for 2006 (Pre-Dredge)
and 2008 (Post-Dredge) Monitoring Events
52
-------
Figures 2-46 through 2-48 present a comparison of the 2006 and 2008 PCB congener distributions in
SPMD racks for select Stations 1, 3 and 5. These represent stations in the Upstream Area, in the River
Run ORD Research Area, and in the River Bend. The approximate depth to sediment surface is shown in
each figure.
Figures 2-49 through 2-51 show a comparison of the 2006 and 2008 PCB congener distributions in
SPMD water column deployments for the same Stations 1,3, and 5.
2.3.2.2 SPMEs. In 2006, an experimental device was developed and used for the deployment of
SPMEs. SPME fibers were purchased from Supelco and affixed inside a 6-in. stainless steel mesh
Geoprobe well screen that was modified with a removable screw cap. Each mesh "container" was
fixed with a thin gauge steel wire to the outside of either an SPMD water column deployment or the
inside of the protective screening of the SPMD rack.
At retrieval, it was found that the wire tie used to fix the SPMEs to the SPMD deployments corroded
considerably over the 28-day deployment period and most of the SPMEs that were attached to the outside
of the water column SPMD carriers were lost, as well as most of those that were attached to the SPMD
racks.
In 2008, an alternative deployment approach and SPME material were used. SPMEs were derived from a
fiber optic material provided by U.S. EPA ORD and cut to length in the laboratory. The fibers consisted
of a polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) coating. This material was demonstrated to be equivalent to
commercially available SPME devices as an extraction phase for a wide range of hydrophobic analytes.
For field sampling, the disposable fibers provide a significant reduction in cost over the commercially
available SPME devices.
The disposable SPME fiber used in 2008 was supplied by Fiberguide, Inc. (Sterling, NJ). The fiber was
cut into 3-cm long pieces. The specifications of each fiber piece were as follows:
Fiber piece length: 3 cm;
PDMS coating thickness: 10 um;
Diameter of silica core: 210 um;
Diameter of fiber piece (PDMS coating + silica core): 230 um
Volume of PDMS coating: 0.207 uL;
Density of PDMS coating: 1.05 ug/uL;
Weight of PDMS coating: 0.22 ug
These SPMEs were transferred into a stainless steel mesh pouch provided by U.S. EPA ORD. Each
pouch was pre-cleaned and wrapped in aluminum foil for transfer to the site for deployment. The
stainless steel pouch was fixed inside the water column SPMD carriers and inside the mesh screen of the
SPMD racks. For each location, two SPME samplers were deployed. The duplicate SPME sample
served as a backup sample in the event the primary sample was compromised during the sampling. The
SPMEs were retrieved after the 28-day deployment period. All SPMEs including the duplicates were
retrieved from each location and shipped to the laboratory for processing, extraction, and analysis.
Figure 2-52 shows the total average PCB accumulations in water column SPMEs deployed in 2006 and
2008. As mentioned above, virtually all samples were lost in 2006.
53
-------
Station 1, Sediment SPIN/ID, 2006
Q
5
Q.
(/)
CO
u
^^^oo^^r^G^^^oo^oioo^oiL/ii^G^^oi^^O^^oiL/i^L/iG^^OL/ioi^^
cOcOcOcO^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Q_a_a_a_UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUaDaDaDtf
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
Station 1, Sediment SPIN/ID, 2008
Q
5
Q.
1/1
CO
u
-SSS^S^SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSftSSSSSSaSPSSSSSSSSSSSS
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
Figure 2-46. Comparison of the 2006 and 2008 PCB Congener Distributions in SPMD Racks for Station 1
-------
Station 3, Sediment SPIN/ID, 2006
2
in 40°-
ao
V)
CO
ij
,.. .11
CD CD CD CD ^ ^ ^
-------
Station 5, Sediment SPIN/ID, 2006
2
in 40°-
ao
V)
CO
ij
SCD CD CD ^ ^ ^
Q. Q. 0. 0. U U U
1
,lll.
t-H rsi rsi r
U U <,
si r
^ t
,11,
n m m ^t
U U U
|
3-
B
1
xT !
B t
I
t ^
t_
|
1- in
i B
,
ID ID tJD
U U
ll ilhi
r-- r-- oo oo oo 01 c
u u u u u u <,
II
n 01 c
U c
1
D r-
D 0
1 ,..ll ll ,
HiHrsirsimmm^t^j-
1
1
ID
CD
1 . ..I.I 1
L/iL/iuDuDr^r^r^r^ooooooinininoooo
gggggggggggggggggg
Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-Q-
Station 5, Sediment SPIN/ID, 2008
a
a_
to
-------
Station 1, Water Column SPIN/ID, 2006
Q
5
0.
>,
c^
-------
Station 3, Water Column SPIN/ID, 2006
a
5
a.
ca
u
a.
1,200.
1,000.
800.
600.
400.
200.
in ^ tu oo t-i LD r-
c
CD CD C
y y i
||
31 tH
D CD
J U
1,
m to =
CD CD C
y y i
1
* C
D C
-> i
. J.lll
D * tH m i_n tH L
D CD CD CD CD CD C
j y y y y y i
II
n en r
ri en c
J U c
|
3 S
D D
1. ...ll
D in m to o in r-
H tH rsi rsi m m m
1,
tH 1JD
* <*
CD CD
1
tH
in
m
1 .1 .
uDoo^r^-orsitjDooO'^-r-O'^-G'it-imtjDoo
LnLntutur-.r-.r-.r--ooooooaiaiaioooo
SSCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCD
Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
Station 3, Water Column SPIN/ID, 2008
a
5
a.
in
ca
u
D.
1,200.
1,000.
800.
600.
400.
200.
II
-------
Figure 2-50. Comparison of the 2006 and 2008 PCB Congener Distributions in Water Column SPMDs for Station 3
Station 5, Water Column SPIN/ID, 2006
a
5
a.
ca
u
a.
1,200.
1,000.
800.
600.
400.
200.
,., .11
CD CD CD CD ^ ^ ^
-------
Water Column SPME
Q.
in
CO
u
Q.
16
14
12
10
* 4
01
00
IPRE-DREDGE2006
i
I POST-DREDGE 2008
Figure 2-52. Average Total PCBs in Water Column SPMEs for 2006 and 2008
(there was significant sample loss in 2006 due to deployment method)
Figure 2-53 shows the total average PCB accumulations in sediment SPMEs deployed in 2006 and 2008,
while the total average PCB concentrations in sediment samples that were co-located with the SPMD and
SPME deployments in 2006 and 2008 are depicted in Figure 2-54.
go
oP*
Figure 2-53. Average Total PCBs in Sediment SPMEs for 2006 and 2008
60
-------
700
Figure 2-54. Average Total PCBs in Sediment Co-Located with SPMD and SPME
Deployments for 2006 and 2008
Comparisons of 2006 (pre-dredge) PCB congener distributions and concentrations for the SPMD
and SPME deployments co-located at Stations 3 and 5 are presented in Figures 2-55 and 2-56,
respectively.
2.3.3 Corbicula Clams and Lumbriculus variegates. The deployment and retrieval of live
Corbicula clams and Lumbriculus variegates at Ashtabula River was unsuccessful, resulting in no PCB
bioaccumulation data for these organisms. Corbicula clams obtained from Alum Creek, Alum Creek
State Park, OH, were captured and transported to the site for deployment. The clams appeared to be
healthy upon arrival at the project site but showed signs of stress prior to deployment the following day.
Nonetheless, live clams were deployed in cages in the water column at Stations 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 12, 15, 22,
23, 24, and 25 as planned under a permit issued by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.
In addition, Lumbriculus variegates were deployed in polyethylene mesh cages and co-located with clam
deployments, but positioned on the sediment surface. Stock Lumbriculus variegates were obtained from
the Great Lakes Environmental Center in Traverse City, MI. Approximately 4 g of Lumbriculus
variegates were weighed out, recorded, and transferred into each mesh cage for deployment.
After 28 days of deployment, the clam and worm cages were retrieved. Upon retrieval it was found that
the clam shells were all open and there were no Lumbriculus variegates in any of the cages.
2.3.4 Brown Bullhead Capture. Brown bullheads of varying size and sex were captured in the
Ashtabula River by staff of U.S. EPA NERL. The brown bullheads were captured using an electro-
shocking technique in all areas of the remediation footprint to provide sufficient mass for processing and
analysis. Brown bullheads were also captured in the Conneaut Creek and provided to Battelle for
homogenization. Homogenate samples from the Conneaut Creek were shipped back to U.S. EPA NERL
for internal analysis. Whole fish homogenates from the Ashtabula River were analyzed by Battelle for
PCBs and PAHs. Figure 2-57 shows the average total PCBs in brown bullhead fish captured in the
Ashtabula River for 2006-2010. PCB congener distributions in Ashtabula River brown bullhead fish
tissue are compared for Years 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Figure 2-58.
61
-------
Station 3, Sediment SPIN/ID, 2006
2
in 40°-
ao
V)
CO
ij
,.. .11
CD CD CD CD ^ ^ ^
-------
Station 5, Sediment SPIN/ID, 2006
2
O- /inn
CUD
-------
Figure 2-57. Average Total PCBs in Brown Bullhead Fish at Ashtabula River for 2006-2010
2.3.5 Water Quality Monitoring During Dredging Activities. Water column quality and flow
characteristics were monitored during dredging activities using in-place monitoring systems and by
conducting two in-field surveys with Battelle's research vessel. In-place monitoring systems were placed
upstream and downstream of the dredge activity. Each unit consisted of two Optical Backscatter Systems
(OBSs), one near the water surface and one near the sediment surface. An Acoustic Doppler Current
Profiler (ADCP) unit was also deployed at each of the upstream and downstream locations so that current
velocity and direction could be monitored. Figure 2-59 shows how the OBS/ADCP monitoring systems
were deployed.
The downstream OBS was removed when the dredge advanced within 200 ft of the instrumentation. OBS
measurements were recorded in turbidity units and converted to total suspended solids (TSS) units
through calibration with actual TSS measurements performed on co-located water column samples.
64
-------
_ 12
;o
'.B- 10
s:
00 8
u
Q.
Fish - lipid normalized- 2006
. I- ..I I ..il.-i ....I.. I.. III I. -.II 11.1
. ll. . ll. I.
Fish - lipid normalized - 2007
u
'a. 12
1 -
« 8
OD
U
0- 6
£ 4
kill
.1. . ll. I.I.I
1 ,
..I.I...I .
Fish - lipid normalized - 2008
'5. 10
00
Vt c-
00 b
U
2
a
00
.1.1 ..ll..i i.i.ilii Ll 1. I..I..I I.I
l
h
,i
1,
-I.U...I..
Figure 2-58. Comparison by Year of Congener Distribution in Ashtabula River Brown Bullhead Fish
(average total PCBs used for distribution)
-------
Fish - lipid normalized - 2009
"ao 10
*& 8
u
^ 6
5
& 4
HI
Fish - lipid normalized- 2010
T3
'a.
BO
60
3
&
U
Q.
"m
?
2
(U
n -
Figure 2-58. Comparison by Year of Congener Distribution in Ashtabula River Fish (average total PCBs used for
distribution) (continued)
-------
60 Flash/Win Red Blinking Light
Sub Surface Marker Float
Turbidity Probe
Surface Marker Float
Turbidity Probe
Pick Up Buoy
ADCP Current Meter
Recovery Drag Line
Clump Weights
Figure 2-59. OBS/ADCP System Deployment
Two in-field surveys were conducted using Battelle's research boat outfitted with a Multi-Depth Water
Sampler (MOWS) and a vessel-mounted ADCP. The MOWS was equipped with depth and turbidity
sensors at 4 discrete depth intervals so that depth specific turbidity could be measured and recorded as
transects were run from bank-to-bank on the river at both up- and downstream locations of dredging
activities. The MOWS is shown in Figure 2-60.
The generation of real-time turbidity data allowed the simultaneous collection of whole water samples at
selected depth intervals. These water samples were sent to the laboratory and separated into liquid and
particulate fractions. Each fraction was analyzed for PCBs to determine the dissolved- and particulate-
phase PCB concentrations. The MWDS was deployed in the field for two discrete surveys. Survey No. 1
was conducted June 1-9, 2007 and produced turbidity data for 260 transect runs. Survey No. 2 was
conducted July 23-25, 2007 and produced turbidity data for 70 additional transect runs. Figure 2-61
shows the actual transects lines generated for the two combined surveys.
Each of the cross-river transect runs was conducted at specified distances upstream and downstream of
the dredging operation to measure spatial variability. The exact transect spacing was determined in the
field, but was sufficient to spatially (horizontally and vertically) characterize the dredge plume. Surveys
of this type occurred frequently (e.g., several times per day), though the exact frequency of surveys was
subject to change after initial dredge plume assessment.
In all, a total of 37 whole water samples were collected and analyzed for turbidity, TSS, and particle size
analysis. Samples were filtered to collect dissolved and particulate (solid) fractions. The solid suspended
fraction of the water sample was analyzed for PCBs and TOC. The liquid (dissolved) fraction was also
analyzed for PCBs and TOC.
67
-------
Real-lime Image from NavSam
Figure 2-60. Battelle Research Vessel Showing MOWS Equipped with OBS and
Water Collection Capability
The ADCP was used to measure surface water velocities for future application of sediment transport
models to estimate particle and contaminant flux in the water column. The boat-mounted ADCP was
securely attached to the boat hull in a downward-looking position from the water surface. Surveys with
the ADCP occurred concurrently with collection of water samples using the boat-mounted MOWS to
determine the water column flux (mass transport rate) of sediments and contaminants and quantify the
amount of suspended material in the water column.
Figures 2-62 and 2-63 show the locations where whole water samples were collected and the proximity of
the dredge location to the collection area for the June and July surveys, respectively. Table 2-2
summarizes the date and time that each station was sampled so that the reader can determine where the
dredge was in relation to the sampling activity.
68
-------
Figure 2-61. Cross-River Transect Locations Utilized for MOWS Water Column Sampling and
ADCP Water Column Monitoring During Dredging Activities (total of 330 transect runs conducted
during Survey Nos. 1 and 2)
69
-------
*Si S^Jtf ?'*
June 2007 Survey
June 2007 Dredge Location
Figure 2-62. June 2007 Survey Whole Water Sample Locations and Dredge Positions
70
-------
July 2007 Survey
July 2007 Dredge Location
Figure 2-63. July 2007 Survey Whole Water Sample Locations and Dredge Positions
71
-------
Table 2-2. Location, Water Depth, Date, and Sample ID for Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities
Date
l-Jun-07
l-Jun-07
l-Jun-07
l-Jun-07
l-Jun-07
l-Jun-07
l-Jun-07
l-Jun-07
3-Jun-07
3-Jun-07
3-Jun-07
3-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
4-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
Station
AR024
AR024
AR024
AR024
AR025
AR025
AR025
AR025
AR047
AR047
AR047
AR047
AR048
AR048
AR048
AR048
AR053
AR053
AR053
AR053
AR054
AR054
AR054
AR054
AR055
AR055
AR055
AR055
AR056
AR056
AR056
AR056
AR097
AR097
AR097
AR097
AR098
AR098
Time
1610
1610
1610
1610
1645
1645
1645
1645
1528
1528
1528
1528
855
855
855
855
932
932
932
932
951
951
951
951
1013
1013
1013
1013
1030
1030
1030
1030
1435
1435
1435
1435
1500
1500
Water
Depth (ft)
7
7
7
7
11
11
11
11
20
20
20
20
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
19
19
19
19
15
15
15
15
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
9
9
9
9
22
22
22
22
23
23
Sample
Depth (ft)
4.22
2.71
1.24
0.66
8.4
5.39
2.46
0.66
15.84
10.19
4.64
0.66
3.29
2.11
0.96
0.66
14.59
9.36
4.27
0.66
11.08
7.11
3.24
0.66
5.64
3.62
1.65
0.66
5.91
3.79
1.73
0.66
15.78
10.12
4.62
0.66
16.79
10.77
Sample ID
GAD-001
GAD-002
GAD-003
GAD-004
GAD-005
GAD-006
GAD-007
GAD-008
GAD-017
GAD-018
GAD-019
GAD-020
GAD-009
GAD-010
GAD-011
GAD-012
GAD-013
GAD-014
GAD-015
GAD-016
GAD-021
GAD-022
GAD-023
GAD-024
GAD-025
GAD-026
GAD-027
GAD-028
GAD-029
GAD-030
GAD-031
GAD-032
GAD-025
GAD-026
GAD-027
GAD-028
GAD-037
GAD-038
72
-------
Table 2-2. Location, Water Depth, Date, and Sample ID for Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
Date
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
5-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
6-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
Station
AR098
AR098
AR099
AR099
AR099
AR099
AR105
AR105
AR105
AR105
AR116
AR116
AR116
AR116
AR117
AR117
AR117
AR117
AR118
AR118
AR118
AR118
AR119
AR119
AR119
AR119
AR121
AR121
AR121
AR121
AR186
AR186
AR186
AR186
AR202
AR202
AR202
AR202
AR205
AR205
AR205
Time
1500
1500
1517
1517
1517
1517
1725
1725
1725
1725
1652
1652
1652
1652
1708
1708
1708
1708
1725
1725
1725
1725
1735
1735
1735
1735
1841
1841
1841
1841
859
859
859
859
1149
1149
1149
1149
1220
1220
1220
Water
Depth (ft)
23
23
12
12
12
12
8
8
8
8
22
22
22
22
13
13
13
13
12
12
12
12
8
8
8
8
10
10
10
10
7
7
7
7
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
20
20
20
Sample
Depth (ft)
4.91
0.66
7.26
4.65
2.12
0.66
2.91
1.87
0.85
0.66
16.42
10.53
4.8
0.66
8.5
5.45
2.49
0.66
9.7
6.22
2.84
0.66
6.72
4.31
1.96
0.66
7.08
4.54
2.07
0.66
4.19
2.69
1.22
0.66
9.05
5.81
2.65
0.66
15.65
10.04
4.58
Sample ID
GAD-039
GAD-040
GAD-041
GAD-042
GAD-043
GAD-044
GAD-045
GAD-046
GAD-047
GAD-048
GAD-049
GAD-050
GAD-051
GAD-052
GAD-053
GAD-054
GAD-055
GAD-056
GAD-057
GAD-058
GAD-059
GAD-060
GAD-061
GAD-062
GAD-063
GAD-064
GAD-065
GAD-066
GAD-067
GAD-068
GAD-069
GAD-070
GAD-071
GAD-072
GAD-073
GAD-074
GAD-075
GAD-076
GAD-077
GAD-078
GAD-079
73
-------
Table 2-2. Location, Water Depth, Date, and Sample ID for Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
Date
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
8-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
9-Jun-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
Station
AR205
AR207
AR207
AR207
AR207
AR208
AR208
AR208
AR208
AR209
AR209
AR209
AR209
AR210
AR210
AR210
AR210
AR233
AR233
AR233
AR233
AR254
AR254
AR254
AR254
AR306
AR306
AR306
AR306
AR309
AR309
AR309
AR309
AR311
AR311
AR311
AR311
AR312
AR312
AR312
AR312
Time
1220
1242
1242
1242
1242
1331
1331
1331
1331
836
836
836
836
929
929
929
929
1225
1225
1225
1225
1649
1649
1649
1649
844
844
844
844
921
921
921
921
942
942
942
942
1000
1000
1000
1000
Water
Depth (ft)
20
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
23
23
23
23
21.3
21.3
21.3
21.3
23
23
23
23
Sample
Depth (ft)
0.66
14.02
8.99
4.1
0.66
16.89
10.84
4.94
0.66
5.61
3.6
1.64
0.66
4.69
3.01
1.37
0.66
6.91
4.43
2.02
0.66
4.26
2.73
1.25
0.66
5.4
3.4
1.6
0.66
17.4
11.2
5.1
0.66
16.4
10.5
4.8
0.66
17.8
11.4
5.2
0.66
Sample ID
GAD-080
GAD-081
GAD-082
GAD-083
GAD-084
GAD-085
GAD-086
GAD-087
GAD-088
GAD-089
GAD-090
GAD-091
GAD-092
GAD-093
GAD-094
GAD-095
GAD-096
GAD-097
GAD-098
GAD-099
GAD-100
GAD-101
GAD-102
GAD-103
GAD-104
GAD-301
GAD-302
GAD-303
GAD-304
GAD-305
GAD-306
GAD-307
GAD-308
GAD-309
GAD-310
GAD-311
GAD-312
GAD-313
GAD-314
GAD-315
GAD-316
74
-------
Table 2-2. Location, Water Depth, Date, and Sample ID for Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
Date
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
23-M-07
Station
AR331
AR331
AR331
AR331
AR333
AR333
AR333
AR333
AR334
AR334
AR334
AR334
AR335
AR335
AR335
AR335
AR336
AR336
AR336
AR336
AR337
AR337
AR337
AR337
AR338
AR338
AR338
AR338
Time
1522
1522
1522
1522
1550
1550
1550
1550
1607
1607
1607
1607
1622
1622
1622
1622
1643
1643
1643
1643
1659
1659
1659
1659
1717
1717
1717
1717
Water
Depth (ft)
21.6
21.6
21.6
21.6
20.3
20.3
20.3
20.3
22.3
22.3
22.3
22.3
22.6
22.6
22.6
22.6
22.6
22.6
22.6
22.6
23
23
23
23
21.3
21.3
21.3
21.3
Sample
Depth (ft)
18.3
11.7
5.3
0.66
17.5
11.2
5.1
0.66
16.5
10.6
4.8
0.66
18
11.5
5.3
0.66
18
11.6
5.3
0.66
18.5
11.9
5.4
0.66
17.6
11.3
5.1
0.66
Sample ID
GAD-317
GAD-318
GAD-319
GAD-320
GAD-321
GAD-322
GAD-323
GAD-324
GAD-325
GAD-326
GAD-327
GAD-328
GAD-329
GAD-330
GAD-331
GAD-332
GAD-333
GAD-334
GAD-335
GAD-336
GAD-337
GAD-338
GAD-339
GAD-340
GAD-341
GAD-342
GAD-343
GAD-344
Figures 2-64 and 2-65 depict the total PCB concentrations in the dissolved and particulate fractions,
respectively, of water samples collected in the reference areas (Downstream, Upstream, and Jack's
Marine). Figures 2-66 and 2-67 show the total PCB concentrations in the dissolved and particulate
fraction, respectively, of water samples collected in the test area near the operating dredge.
When possible, three transects were run while: 1) the dredge was operating at a single location,
2) turbidity was visually present, and 3) river flow was in one direction. One transect was performed
close to the dredge, one mid-plume, and one far-plume. Due to dredge operations, vessel traffic, and river
flow conditions, it was not always possible to collect data along the three target transects relatively
coincidental. Following are descriptions of near-dredge, mid-plume, and far-plume.
Near-dredge refers to the transect location being performed as close as safely possible to the
dredge. This distance was estimated as typically <50 ft.
75
-------
Mid-plume was in a location approximately midway between the dredge and where evidence
of the plume was not distinguishable based on visual observations. This distance was
typically between 100 and 200 ft.
Far-plume was at the edge of the visible plume. This distance was typically between 200 and
400ft.
Unless noted, the transect data portrayed in Figures 2-64 to 2-67 were run such that the sampling vessel
moved progressively away from dredging activity. The legend in each figure depicts the probe (and thus
the sample) position or depth relative to the surface of the water. The following nomenclature shown in
the legend is described as follows:
S = near surface
MS = mid/surface
MB = mid/bottom
B = bottom
W = water fraction
F = filtrate fraction (solid or sediment fraction of the sample)
Figure 2-68 shows the particulate-phase and dissolved-phase total PCBs per depth for all water column
samples collected during dredging activities. Turbidity values for all transect runs are presented in
Appendix A.
Total PCBs - Dissolved - Reference Areas
Location
Upstream Reference (1st
event)
Upstream Reference (2nd
event)
Upstream Reference (3rd
event)
Upstream Reference (4th
event)
Downstream Reference (1st
event)
Downstream Reference (2nd
event)
Downstream Reference (3rd
event)
Downstream Reference (4th
event)
Jack's Marine (1st event)
Jacks Marine (2nd event)
100 200 300
Total PCBs ((jg/L)
400
500
Figure 2-64. Dissolved-Phase PCBs in Water Samples Collected in the Reference Locations
During Dredging Activities
76
-------
Location
Upstream Reference (1st
event)
Upstream Reference (2nd
event)
Upstream Reference (3rd
event)
Upstream Reference (4th
event)
Downstream Reference (1st
event)
Downstream Reference (2nd
event)
Downstream Reference (3rd
event)
Downstream Reference (4th
event)
Jack's Marine (1 st event)
Jack's Marine (2nd event)
Total PCBs - on Particulates - Reference Areas
100 200 300 400
Total PCBs ((jg/L)
500
600
700
Figure 2-65. Particulate-Phase PCBs in Water Samples Collected in the Reference Locations
During Dredging Activities
77
-------
Total PCBs, Dissolved, in Test Area
Location
Near Dredge at 176 (1st event)
Near Dredge at 178 (2nd event)
Mid Plume at 175 (2nd event)
Far Plume at 169 (2nd event)
Near Dredge at 176 (3rd event)
Mid Plume at 175 (3rd event)
Far Plume at 174 (3rd event)
Near Dredge (Upstream) at 176..
Near Dredge at 175 (4th event
Mid Plume at 174 (4th event)
Far Plume at 171 (4th event)
Near Dredge at 172 (5th event)
Near Dredge at 174 (6th event)
Mid Plume at 176 (6th event)
Far Plume at 178 (6th event)
Near Dredge at 172 (7th event)
Total PCBs (jjg/L)
Figure 2-66. Dissolved-Phase PCBs in Water Samples Collected in the Test Area Locations
During Dredging Activities
^^ -.
^=
'
I
i
'
b
1 1
'
1
' 1
I
i
^ i
^^
H
i
D 100 200 3C
1
)0
fatal for
^
78 - 71 7
PCBW-S
dPCBW-MS
PCBW-MB
PCBW-B
4C
)0 5C
78
-------
Total PCBs, on Participates, in Test Area
Location
Near Dredge at 176 (1st event)
Near Dredge at 178 (2nd event)
Mid Plume at 175 (2nd event)
Far Plume at 169 (2nd event)
Near Dredge at 176 (3rd event)
Mid Plume at 175 (3rd event)
Far Plume at 174 (3rd event)
Near Dredge (Upstream) at 176..
Near Dredge at 175 (4th event
Mid Plume at 174 (4th event)
Far Plume at 171 (4th event)
Near Dredge at 172 (5th event)
Near Dredge at 174 (6th event)
Mid Plume at 176 (6th event)
Far Plume at 178 (6th event)
Near Dredge at 172 (7th event)
Total PCBs (jjg/L)
Figure 2-67. Particulate-Phase PCBs in Water Samples Collected in the Test Area Locations
During Dredging Activities
1 1
= ' .
=^J^
1
L
' ,
1 , i
1 | '
1
1
' i
, !i
PCBF-S
DPCBF-MS
PCBF-MB
PCBF-B
To
X
talfor175
i i i
3 100 200 300 400
500 6C
if
-931
)0 7C
79
-------
CO
u
Q.
1
/u
60
50
40
30
20
10
n
Station AR024
* Participate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
0 0.5
1.5 2 2.5 3
Sample Depth (ft)
3.5
4.5
ou
cr\
V)
CO
u
°- 30
re
*
1 n
n
Station AR025
.
*
^
*Particulate(ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
34567
Sample Depth (ft)
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities
80
-------
l/»
CO
u
0.
"ro
4-1
.2
ouu
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
n
Station AR047
*
* +Particulate(ng/g)
*
* Dissolved (ng/L)
6 8 10 12
Sample Depth (ft)
14
16
18
±zu
100
80
V)
CO
u
± 60
re
4-1
* ,0
20
n
Station AR048
*
» *
^
m
* Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
0.5
1.5 2 2.5
Sample Depth (ft)
3.5
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
81
-------
ZDU
(/>
mi ^n
u
Q.
"ro
+j
7^ 1 nn
O 1UU
CO
n
Station AR053 *
*
Dissolved (ng/L)
4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Sample Depth (ft)
Z3U
200
00 150
U
0.
"ro
jo 100
50
n
Station AR054
+
+
Dissolved (ng/L)
4 6
Sample Depth (ft)
10
12
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
82
-------
l/>
OQ
U
Q.
"?5
f
^uu
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
n
Station AR056
* Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
*
V"
3 4
Sample Depth (ft)
1ZUU
1 nnn
oUU
l/»
CO
A
finn
re
5
/inn
9nn
n
Station AR098
X
^Particu late (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
»
6 8 10 12
Sample Depth (ft)
14
16
18
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
83
-------
J5DU
3nn
~> <^n
vt
JR 9nn
0.
JS isn
|2
1 nn
CO
n
Station AR099
* Particulate (ng/g)
*
Dissolved (ng/L)
345
Sample Depth (ft)
140
100
w»
CO
u
M 60
,O
40
20
Station AR105
Particu late (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Sample Depth (ft)
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
84
-------
l/»
CO
u
Q.
"ro
4-1
.2
3UU
250
200
150
100
50
n
Station AR116 H
*
^ * Particu late (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
6 8 10 12 14 16
Sample Depth (ft)
18
1000
Station AR117
V)
CO
u
0.
"ro
4-1
.2
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
n
* Particulate(ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
+
*
3456
Sample Depth (ft)
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
85
-------
l/»
CO
u
0.
"ro
4-1
.2
HUU
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
n
Station AR118
*
*
* Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
4 6
Sample Depth (ft)
10
12
CO
u
"ro
£
3UU
250
200
150
100
50
n
Station AR119
,
*
* Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
345
Sample Depth (ft)
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
86
-------
CO
u
Q.
"ro
4->
.2
IfU
120
100
80
60
40
20
n
Station AR121
^
* *
* Particu late (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
345
Sample Depth (ft)
CO
u
0.
"ro
4->
.2
/u
60
50
40
30
20
10
n
Station AR186
* Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
0.5
1.5 2 2.5 3
Sample Depth (ft)
3.5
4.5
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
87
-------
Z3U
200
CO 150
u
Q.
re
jo 100
50
n
Station AR202
.
*
Dissolved (ng/L)
4 6
Sample Depth (ft)
10
V)
CO
u
0.
"ro
4-1
.2
3UU
250
200
150
100
50
n
Station AR205
,
* Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Sample Depth (ft)
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
-------
l/»
CO
u
Q.
"ro
4-1
.2
/uu
600
500
400
300
200
100
n
Station AR207
* * Particulate(ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
6 8 10
Sample Depth (ft)
12
14
16
OUU
500
400
l/»
CO
u
^ 300
re
.0
200
100
n
Station AR208 ^
*
^ * Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
6 8 10 12
Sample Depth (ft)
14
16
18
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
89
-------
l/»
CO
u
0.
"ro
4-1
.2
33U
300
250
200
150
100
50
n
Station AR209
* Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
234
Sample Depth (ft)
u
"ro
ou
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Station AR210 .
* *
* Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
2 3
Sample Depth (ft)
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
90
-------
CO
u
Q.
"ro
M
,O
uu
90
SO
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Station AR233
*
B
f
* Partial]
Dissolv
ate (ng/g)
ed (ng/L )
3 4 5
Sample Depth (ft)
uu
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Station AR233
*
+ Particul
Dissolve
ate (ng/g)
Jd(ng/L)
345
Sample Depth (ft)
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
91
-------
l/»
CO
u
Q.
"ro
4-1
.2
ouu
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
n
Station AR254
*
+
*
* Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
0 0.5
1.5 2 2.5 3
Sample Depth (ft)
3.5
4.5
50
40
V)
CO
u
± 30
re
4-1
* 20
10
n
Station AR306 *Particulate(ng/g)
.
234
Sample Depth (ft)
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
92
-------
l/»
CO
u
Q.
"ro
4-1
.2
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
n
Station AR309 *Particulate(ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
*
*
5 10
Sample Depth (ft)
15
20
3UU
250
200
V)
CO
u
^ 150
re
4-1
*~ 100
50
Station AR311
+
+
* Particulate (ng/g)
^ Dissolved (ng/L)
6 8 10 12
Sample Depth (ft)
14
16
18
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
93
-------
3DU
300
250
l/»
3 200
Q.
5 150
£
100
50
n
Station AR312
* Partial late (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
5 10
Sample Depth (ft)
15
20
250
200
V)
CO
u
^ 150
re
5
100
50
n
Station AR331 *
*
*
B
^ rarcicuiate ^ng/gj
Dissolved (ng/L)
5 10
Sample Depth (ft)
15
20
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
94
-------
CO
u
Q.
HDU
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
n
Station AR333 .
V
* Participate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
10
15
20
Sample Depth (ft)
200
00 150
U
0.
re
jo 100
50
n
Station AR334 «,
+
*
* Participate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
6 8 10 12
Sample Depth (ft)
14
16
18
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
95
-------
l/»
CO
u
Q.
"ro
4-1
.2
OUU
500
400
300
200
100
n
Station AR335
^
* Particulate(ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
*
*
10 15
Sample Depth (ft)
20
V)
CO
u
0.
"ro
4-1
.2
IfU
120
100
80
60
40
20
n
Station AR336
,
^ *
* Particulate (ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
5 10
Sample Depth (ft)
15
20
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved-Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
96
-------
3UU
250
200
CO
u
A
re
£
100
50
n
Station AR337 *
,
+
+ Particulate(ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
10
15
20
Sample Depth (ft)
±zu
100
80
V)
CO
u
^ 60
re
4->
*~ 40
20
n
Station AR338
*
* Particulate(ng/g)
Dissolved (ng/L)
5 10
Sample Depth (ft)
15
20
Figure 2-68. Particulate-Phase and Dissolved - Phase Total PCBs per Depth in Water Samples
Collected During Dredging Activities (continued)
97
-------
3.0 REFERENCES
Battelle. 2010. "Field Study on Environmental Dredging Residuals: Ashtabula River, Volume 1. Final
Report." EPA/600/R-10/126. September.
Battelle. 2007. QAPP ID # 163-Q16-0. Final Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for "Joint U.S. EPA
GLNPO/NRMRL/NERL Project for Evaluation of Environmental Dredging for Remediating
Contaminated Sediments in the Ashtabula River - Phases 2 and 3."
Battelle. 2006. QAPP ID # 163-Q14-0. Final Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for "Joint U.S. EPA
GLNPO/NRMRL/NERL Project for Evaluation of Environmental Dredging for Remediating
Contaminated Sediments in the Ashtabula River."
98
-------
APPENDIX A
CROSS-SECTION VIEWS OF TRANSECT RUNS SHOWING TURBIDITY
-------
Horizontal Transects 31may07
June 2007 Dredge Location
A-l
-------
Transect 001 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 3:27:54 PM
E -3
1
Q
-6
6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
190
Iso
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
llO
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 002 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 3:33:07 PM
45
50 Turbidity (NTU)
30
Distance (m)
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 003 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 3:38:32 PM
30
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
A-2
-------
Transect 004 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 3:51:45 PM
10
15
20
25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 005 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 4:01:12 PM
30
Distance (m)
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 006 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 4:08:20 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
Turbidity (NTU)
A-3
-------
Transect 007 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 4:28:44 PM
E -3
1
Q
-6
6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
ho
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 008 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 4:49:14 PM
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 009 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 5:11:29 PM
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
A-4
-------
Transect 011 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 5:27:28 PM
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
30
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 012 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 5:39:50 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 013 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 5:45:47 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
A-5
-------
Transect 014 - Turbidity 5/31/2007 5:53:03 PM
100
200
300
Distance (m)
400
500
600
Turbidity (NTU)
A-6
-------
Horizontal Transects 01jun07
June 2007 Dredge Location
July 2007 Dredge Location
A-7
-------
Transect 015-Turbidity 6/1/2007 11:44:58 AM
.§ -3
f
Q
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Transect 016-Turbidity 6/1/2007 11:49:28 AM
E,-3
"5.
s *
-5
-7,
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
ho
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
SOrurbidity (NTU)
Transect 017 - Turbidity 6/1/2007 12:07:03 PM
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
70
Turbidity (NTU)
A-8
-------
Transect 018 - Turbidity 6/1/2007 12:17:32 PM
10
20
30
40 50
Distance (m)
60
70
80 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 019-Turbidity 6/1/200712:29:11 PM
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 020 - Turbidity 6/1/2007 12:43:34 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
A-9
-------
Transect 021 - Turbidity 6/1/2007 12:53:32 PM
0,
-1
-2
-3
4
-5
-6
-7,
10 20 30 40 50
Distance (m)
Transect 022 - Turbidity 6/1/2007 1:09:26 PM
60 Turbidity (NTU)
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
Turbidity (NTU)
A-10
-------
Transect 023 - Turbidity 6/1/2007 1:13:18 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
Transect 024 - Turbidity 6/1/2007 4:01:22 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Transect 025 - Turbidity 6/1/2007 4:56:20 PM
Turbidity (NTU)
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-ll
-------
Transect 026 - Turbidity 6/1/2007 5:24:36 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
A-12
-------
Horizontal Transects 02jun07
June 2007 Dredge Location
July 2007 Dredge Location
A-13
-------
Transect 027 - Turbidity 6/2/2007 9:27:38 AM
.§ -3
f
Q
-6
6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 028 - Turbidity 6/2/2007 9:36:41 AM
45
|100
J90
Iso
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
50rurbidi1y (NTU)
30
Distance (m)
Turbidity (NTU)
A-14
-------
Transect 029 - Turbidity 6/2/2007 9:46:29 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 033 - Turbidity 6/2/2007 10:11:54 AM
30
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 034 - Turbidity 6/2/2007 10:25:36 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-15
-------
Transect 035 - Turbidity 6/2/2007 10:34:18 AM
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (m)
Transect 036 - Turbidity 6/2/2007 10:43:37 AM
50 Turbidity (NTU)
100 200 300 400 500
Distance (m)
Transect 037 - Turbidity 6/2/2007 11:19:32 AM
600 Turbidity (NTU)
15
Distance (m)
25
30
Turbidity (NTU)
A-16
-------
A-17
-------
Transect 038 - Turbidity 6/3/2007 1:29:30 PM
10 20 30 40
Distance (m)
Transect 039 - Turbidity 6/3/2007 1:52:31 PM
50
Turbidity (NTU)
10 20 30 40 50
Distance (m)
Transect 040 - Turbidity 6/3/2007 2:03:32 PM
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45 50
Turbidity (NTU)
A-18
-------
Transect 041 - Turbidity 6/3/2007 2:12:58 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 042 - Turbidity 6/3/2007 2:23:56 PM
10 20 30 40 50
Distance (m)
Transect 043 - Turbidity 6/3/2007 2:34:00 PM
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
A-19
-------
Transect 044 - Turbidity 6/3/2007 2:42:32 PM
10
15
20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 045 - Turbidity 6/3/2007 2:51:31 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
10
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 046 - Turbidity 6/3/2007 3:03:29 PM
10
15
20
25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Turbidity (NTU)
A-20
-------
Transect 047 - Turbidity 6/3/2007 3:19:19 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Turbidity (NTU)
A-21
-------
Horizontal Transects 04jun07
= June 2007 Dredge Location
A-22
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q *
-6
-6
-7
Transect 048 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 8:48:22 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 049 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 9:07:30 AM
45
|100
|90
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
30
Distance (m)
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
0
-1
-2
"§ -3
f
-6
-7
Transect 050 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 9:14:33 AM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
110
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
A-23
-------
Transect 052 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 9:22:23 AM
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 053 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 9:29:16 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40 Turbidity (NTU)
0
-1
-2
T -3
4
-5
-6
-7
Transect 054 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 9:42:34 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
J90
Iso
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
Jso
120
110
10 15 20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40rurbidity (NTU)
A-24
-------
Transect 055 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 10:03:05 AM
E -3
1
Q
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 056 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 10:22:06 AM
30
Distance (m)
Transect 057 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 11:24:41 AM
100
ho
180
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Turbidity (NTU)
-7
10
15
20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
40 Turbidity (NTU)
A-25
-------
Transect 058 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 11:31:51 AM
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (m)
Transect 059 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 11:44:30 AM
40
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 060 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 11:54:23 AM
-2
E -3
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
Jso
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-26
-------
Transect 061 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 12:04:22 PM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50rurbidi1y (NTU)
Transect 062 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 12:12:09 PM
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60
0
-1
-2
"§ -3
f
5 -*
-5
-6
-7
Transect 063 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 12:22:17 PM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
IsO
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
Jso
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-27
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q
-6
6
-7
Transect 064 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 2:19:24 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottopi
|100
190
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 065 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 2:24:48 PM
10
15
20
25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
55rurbidity (NTU)
Transect 067 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 2:33:24 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
A-28
-------
Transect 068 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 2:40:14 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 069 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 2:49:30 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 070 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 2:56:27 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
A-29
-------
Transect 071 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 3:04:01 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
40rurbidi1y (NTU)
Transect 072 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 3:14:07 PM
30
Distance (m)
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 073 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 3:24:11 PM
-7
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40 Turbidity (NTU)
A-30
-------
Transect 074 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 3:30:50 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 075 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 3:56:47 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 076 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 4:05:03 PM
10
15
20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
40rurbidity (NTU)
A-31
-------
Transect 078 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 4:15:33 PM
5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
Transect 079 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 4:21:57 PM
35
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40 45
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 080 - Turbidity 6/4/2007 4:27:44 PM
F
50
100
150 200
Distance (m)
250
300
350 Turbidity (NTU)
A-32
-------
Transect 081 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 10:22:46 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-33
-------
I 088, 098, 099
K
>^4
Horizontal Transects 04jun07
= June 2007 Dredge Location
A-34
-------
Transect 083 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 10:35:10 AM
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 084 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 10:42:21 AM
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
50 Turbidity (NTU)
Or
-1
-2
T -3
4
-5
-6
-7
Transect 086 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 10:52:12 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60
|100
ho
IsO
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
lid
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-35
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q
-5
-6
-7
Transect 087 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 11:01:06 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottpm
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45rUrbidi1y (NTU)
f
0
-1
-2
R -3
4
-5
-6
-7c
0
-1
-2
Transect 088 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 11:08:06 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
35
40 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 090 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 11:33:52 AM
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35 Turbidity (NTU)
A-36
-------
Transect 091 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 11:42:08 AM
.§ "3
f
Q *
-7
,__ /
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
|100
ho
480
I70
J60
J50
J40
\30
120
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Transect 092 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 11:51:29 AM
50rurbidi1y (NTU)
100
10 20 30 40
Distance (m)
Transect 093 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 12:04:27 PM
50
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35 Turbidity (NTU)
A-37
-------
Transect 094 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 1:47:50 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35rUrbidi1y (NTU)
E -3
f
-5
-6
-7c
0
-1
-2
Transect 095 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 1:58:41 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
|100
J90
\30
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 096 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 2:18:39 PM
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-38
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Transect 097 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 2:26:41 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
f
Transect 098 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 2:51:34 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
0
-1
-2
1" -3
I
2
-5
-6
-7
5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
Transect 099 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 3:08:13 PM
35
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
|go
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
J30
120
Il0
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-39
-------
Transect 0100 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 3:27:14 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 101 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 3:32:51 PM
10 20 30 40 50
Distance (m)
Transect 103 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 3:43:08 PM
"§ -3
I
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
r
r
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-40
-------
Or
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q
-6
6
-7
Transect 104 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 4:01:28 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom ,
|100
|90
180
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
30 Turbidity (NTU)
E -3
f
-6
-7.
Transect 105 - Turbidity 6/5/2007 5:15:06 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35rurbidity (NTU)
A-41
-------
Horizontal Transects 06jun07
= June 2007 Dredge Location
A-42
-------
Transect 106 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 10:18:17 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 107 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 10:29:37 AM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 108 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 10:35:46 AM
u
-1
-2
"§ -3
f
g-*
-5
-6
_7
!<^^::rr7;;;;:;;:v;:-y:^^'v::::\\-::;':,v;':
~~ ~~ . ".
""""----
"~ -s, __^
""^ ^'
-
Sensor Positions
-River Bottom ,,,,,,,,
IIUU
80
60
40
30
20
10
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-43
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Transect 109 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 10:43:39 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottpm
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
|so
120
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 110 -Turbidity 6/6/2007 10:53: 12 AM
30
Distance (m)
Transect 111 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 3:58:15 PM
-2
E -3
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
20
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-44
-------
Transect 112 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 4:06:41 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
SOrurbidily (NTU)
Transect 113- Turbidity 6/6/2007 4:14:33 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 114 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 4:24:55 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
SOrurbidity (NTU)
A-45
-------
Transect 115 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 4:33:53 PM
0
-1
-2
-4
-5
-7,
5 10 15 20
Distance (m)
Transect 116 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 4:41:17 PM
Turbidity (NTU)
Sensor Positions
River Bottprn
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40 45
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 118 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 5:15:52 PM
10
15
20
25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45 50 55rurbidity (NTU)
A-46
-------
Transect 119 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 5:30:55 PM
.§ -3
f
Q
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
190
Iso
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
llO
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (m)
Transect 120 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 6:18:13 PM
50 Turbidity (NTU)
E,-3
.c
"5.
5 *
-5
-7,
Sensor Positions
River Botlpm
70
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45rurbidity (NTU)
Transect 121 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 6:30:38 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Turbidity (NTU)
A-47
-------
Transect 122 - Turbidity 6/6/2007 6:56:02 PM
50
100
150
200 250 300
Distance (m)
350
400
450
Turbidity (NTU)
A-48
-------
Horizontal Transects 07jun07
= June 2007 Dredge Location
A-49
-------
£ "3
f
Q *
-6
6
-7
Transect 123 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 8:57:27 AM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 124 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 9:07:15 AM
10
15
20
25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50 55rurbidity (NTU)
Transect 125 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 9:15:52 AM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50rUrbidity (NTU)
A-50
-------
Transect 126 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 9:23:33 AM
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 127 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 9:32:01 AM
0
-1
-2
"§ -3
I
-6
-7
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (m)
Transect 128 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 9:38:18 AM
40
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
IsO
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
|30
120
110
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45rurbidity (NTU)
A-51
-------
Transect 130 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 9:52:37 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 131 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 9:59:34 AM
Turbidity (NTU)
100
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (m)
Transect 132 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 10:05:23 AM
40
Turbidity (NTU)
100
10
15 20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
A-52
-------
Transect 133 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 10:12:17 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 134-Turbidity 6/7/2007 10:18:43 AM
10
15 20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 135 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 10:23:52 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
A-53
-------
Transect 136 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 10:28:47 AM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 137 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 10:34:38 AM
10
15
20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
Transect 138 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 10:40:18 AM
40rurbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
A-54
-------
Transect 139 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 10:45:57 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 140 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 10:53:08 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 141 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 10:58:43 AM
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40 Turbidity (NTU)
A-55
-------
Transect 142 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 11:07:18 AM
£ -3
f
Q *
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottorn
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
10 15 20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40rurbidi1y (NTU)
Transect 143-Turbidity 6/7/2007 11:13:06 AM
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (m)
Transect 144 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 11:31:49 AM
40 Turbidity (NTU)
-7
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Turbidity (NTU)
A-56
-------
Transect 145 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 11:38:38 AM
.§ "3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
"§ -3
f
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
|100
190
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Transect 146 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 11:44:35 AM
Sensor Positions
- River Bottom
10 20 30 40 50
Distance (m)
Transect 147 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 11:51:24 AM
60
SOrurbidily (NTU)
1100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
llO
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
SOrurbidity (NTU)
A-57
-------
Transect 148 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 11:59:31 AM
.§ "3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Transect 149 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 12:05:46 PM
E -3
f
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
\30
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 150 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 12:12:53 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
SOrurbidity (NTU)
A-58
-------
Transect 151 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 12:20:21 PM
.§ "3
f
Q *
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
|100
190
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 152 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 12:26:41 PM
10 20 30 40 50
Distance (m)
Transect 153 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 12:32:57 PM
60
Turbidity (NTU)
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
A-59
-------
Transect 154 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 12:39:08 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Transect 155 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 12:44:55 PM
E -3
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 20 30 40 50
Distance (m)
Transect 156 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 2:23:31 PM
E -3
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35 40 45 50
Turbidity (NTU)
1100
J90
\30
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
ho
IsO
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
J10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-60
-------
Transect 157 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 2:29:15 PM
E -3
1
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Transect 158 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 2:34:02 PM
E -3
f
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Transect 159 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 2:40:41 PM
E -3
f
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
|100
ISO
180
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
Iso
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
J20
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
J10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-61
-------
.§ "3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Transect 160 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 2:45:21 PM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
|100
J90
Iso
I70
J60
J50
J40
\30
120
50rurbidi1y (NTU)
0
-1
-2
"§ -3
f
-4
-5
-6
Transect 161 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 2:50:50 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
0
-1
-2
1" -3
f
-4
-5
-6
-7
Transect 162 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 2:55:51 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
|30
120
110
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
SOrurbidity (NTU)
A-62
-------
Transect 163 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 3:01:01 PM
.§ "3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
|100
ISO
180
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 164 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 3:05:10 PM
f
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 165 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 3:11:15 PM
45
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
-mo
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
lid
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50 Turbidity (NTU)
A-63
-------
Transect 166 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 3:17:37 PM
E -3
1
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
|100
ISO
180
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 167 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 3:23:06 PM
E -3
f
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 169 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 3:36:40 PM
45
|100
|go
Iso
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
J20
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
A-64
-------
Transect 170 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 3:42:32 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 171 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 3:48:02 PM
-7
Sensor Positions ^
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 172 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 4:05:38 PM
-1
-2
"§ -3
I
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
100
90
r
J60
J50
J40
|30
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-65
-------
Transect 173 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 4:12:38 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 174 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 4:19:56 PM
10 20 30 40 50
Distance (m)
Transect 175 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 4:29:04 PM
60
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-66
-------
Transect 176 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 4:35:48 PM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 177 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 4:44:27 PM
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 178 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 4:50:36 PM
45 Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-67
-------
E -3
1
Q
-5
-6
-7
Transect 179 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 4:55:19 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50rurbidi1y (NTU)
0
-1
-2
"§ -3
f
-4
-5
-6
-7
Transect 180 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 5:01:15 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 181 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 5:06:23 PM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-68
-------
Transect 182 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 5:42:45 PM
E -3
s.
Q
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
|so
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 183 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 5:49:12 PM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Transect 184 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 5:55:44 PM
E -3
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
50rurbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
IsO
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
|30
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-69
-------
Transect 185 - Turbidity 6/7/2007 6:00:47 PM
100
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-70
-------
I ,* '
6/1 -;-
. 188,196JjF
8&idk~. TBWP-'^ »*-:^
r, 192,193,194,195^!
Horizontal Transects 08jun07
= June 2007 Dredge Location
A-71
-------
Transect 186 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 8:45:26 AM
£ -3
f
Q
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 187 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 9:10:46 AM
45
|100
ho
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20
25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Transect 188 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 9:18:06 AM
10
55rurbidity (NTU)
100
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50rurbidity (NTU)
A-72
-------
Transect 190 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 9:32:01 AM
100
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 192 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 10:09:11 AM
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Distance (m)
Transect 193-Turbidity 6/8/2007 10:11:50 AM
20
15
Distance (m)
25
45rUrbidi1y (NTU)
22rUrbidity (NTU)
Turbidity (NTU)
A-73
-------
Transect 194 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 10:15:20 AM
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
Transect 195 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 10:23:01 AM
15
Distance (m)
20
25
Transect 196 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 10:31:54 AM
15
Distance (m)
25
Turbidity (NTU)
Turbidity (NTU)
Turbidity (NTU)
A-74
-------
Transect 197 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 10:45:02 AM
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
30rUrbidi1y (NTU)
Transect 198 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 10:54:40 AM
15
Distance (m)
20
25
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 199-Turbidity 6/8/2007 11:13:36 AM
10 15
Distance (m)
20
25 Turbidity (NTU)
A-75
-------
Transect 200 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 11:24:19 AM
.§ -3
f
Q
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
190
Sao
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
I-IO
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 201 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 11:33:13 AM
45
50 Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 202 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 11:38:15 AM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50 Turbidity (NTU)
A-76
-------
Transect 205 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 12:11:04 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-77
-------
Horizontal Transects 09jun07
= June 2007 Dredge Location
A-78
-------
Transect 207 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 12:31:13 PM
5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
Transect 208 - Turbidity 6/8/2007 1:20:29 PM
35
Turbidity (NTU)
Sensor Positions
River Bottom -~^_
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Transect 209 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 8:18:01 AM
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
J30
120
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
30rurbidity (NTU)
A-79
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Transect 210 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 9:18:12 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
|100
ho
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 211 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 9:34:46 AM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
SOrurbidity (NTU)
0
-1
-2
"§ -3
f
-6
-7
Transect 212 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 9:40:56 AM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
Jso
120
110
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50rurbidity (NTU)
A-80
-------
Transect 214 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 9:52:30 AM
.§ "3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 215 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 9:58:33 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 216 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 10:03:58 AM
E -3
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
45rurbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
Jso
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-81
-------
Transect 217 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 10:08:42 AM
.§ "3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
i
0
-1
-2
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Transect 218 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 10:14:01 AM
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
ho
Iso
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
j 20
llO
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 220 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 10:28:22 AM
-2
E -3
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
45 Turbidity (NTU)
|100
Iso
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
Jso
120
110
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45rurbidity (NTU)
A-82
-------
Transect 221 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 10:33:33 AM
.§ -3
f
Q
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
|100
|90
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 222 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 10:42:43 AM
8 10
Distance (m)
12
14
16
18
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 223 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 10:46:53 AM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
A-83
-------
Transect 224 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 10:54:06 AM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 225 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 11:00:27 AM
10 15
Distance (m)
20
25 Turbidity (NTU)
E -3
f
-6
-7
Transect 227 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 11:41:40 AM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
|100
J90
IsO
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
|30
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-84
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
i
0
-1
-2
Transect 228 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 11:46:52 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Transect 229 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 11:51:58 AM
-7
0
-1
-2
"§ -3
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
|so
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
j 20
llO
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
SOrurbidity (NTU)
Transect 230 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 11:58:22 AM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
|30
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-85
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q
-5
-6
Transect 231 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 12:03:56 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
\30
120
1
-2
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 232 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 12:09:57 PM
45
50rurbidi1y (NTU)
Q.
Q
-5
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
100
bo
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
j 20
llO
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 233 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 12:17:58 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Turbidity (NTU)
A-86
-------
E -3
1
Q
-5
-6
-7
Transect 234 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 2:14:26 PM
Sensor Positions
- River Bottom
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Transect 235 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 2:21:53 PM
50
100
150
200 250
Distance (m)
300
350
Transect 236 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 2:39:02 PM
|100
|90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
100
400 Turbidity (NTU)
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
A-87
-------
Transect 237 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 2:47:52 PM
50
100
150 200 250
Distance (m)
300
350
400
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 239 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 3:20:55 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
Or
-1
-2
T -3
4
-5
-6
-7
Transect 240 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 3:27:09 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
|100
J90
IsO
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
Jso
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-8
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Transect 241 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 3:32:44 PM
w
f
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
190
Iso
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
llO
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (m)
Transect 242 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 3:36:20 PM
50 Turbidity (NTU)
E,-3
.c
"5.
g.4
-5
-6
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
J20
llO
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
0
-1
-2
"§ -3
f
-6
-7
Transect 244 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 3:46:33 PM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
llO
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
A-89
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
i
0
-1
-2
Transect 245 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 3:51:37 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 246 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 3:56:37 PM
45
-7
0
-1
-2
"§ -3
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
|100
|90
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
190
-mo
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
j 20
llO
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 247 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 4:03:57 PM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
110
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50rurbidity (NTU)
A-90
-------
Transect 251 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 4:24:40 PM
u
-1
-2
g -3
£
-4
-5
-6
y
"... . . ' . . . l . . . ' . ' . . . ' . . ' . . . ! . . .
_ . ... _
' ^^^^
^ -_.____ "^^^^^.^^
^~~~~-^
\ _,
~~ .____/
-
-
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottpm i i i i i i i
1UU
|go
J80
J70
J60
J50
J40
\30
m20
10
In
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45rUrbidily (NTU)
Distance (m)
Transect 252 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 4:30:00 PM
OJ .__
-1
-2
I-3
.E
"5.
Q "*
-5
^
1 ' . . . . ' .....'. . . ' . . . ' . . . ' . . '. . . . '. . '. ...
_ . . -
^ '"''
'" ^ ^__ rmm^^^g^
--_ X
\ J,-'
XN /
\^ /
^ _/
_
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom i i i i i i i i
IUU
|go
\80
J70
J60
J50
-^40
-\3Q
M20
in
In
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50rUrbidity (NTU)
Distance (m)
Transect 253 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 4:34:38 PM
0J ..
-1
-2
. .
_£, -3
£
Q.
Q *
-5
-6
_7
" ' -' ' ' '.:'.'.: '. ' ;
' '
-~-~, ' -
^~~--^.__ ^t^^M^B^MF '
^ ~~^~ - ^ ~
" ~ ~- -~ ^ ^ /
^-- __ X
^ -^"
-
_
Sensor Positions
- River Bot^m ,,,,,,,,
1IUU
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
n
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-91
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q
-5
-6
Transect 254 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 4:40:23 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
0
-1
-2
.E
Q.
s *
-5
-7<
0
-1
-2
? -3
4
-5
-6
-7
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 255 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 5:29:11 PM
45
Sensor Positions
River Bottprn
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
|so
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
llO
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 256 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 5:36:41 PM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom ~~
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40 45
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
J30
120
llO
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-92
-------
Transect 257 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 5:40:59 PM
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
-4
-6
-6
_7
~ ; ;' v ; ;.' : ; ' : " " '- ''.'.". '. '. "
~. ' .
"~~^ - _ -
""*" "->
-"^ -"''
-
Sensor Positions
-River Bottom ,,,,,,,,
100
|go
Hso
70
60
[t
\30
20
10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (m)
Transect 258 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 5:46:14 PM
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35 40 45
Turbidity (NTU)
0
-1
-2
"§ -3
f
-6
-7
Transect 259 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 5:51:10 PM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
Il0
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-93
-------
Transect 260 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 5:55:17 PM
E -3
s.
Q
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottpm
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 261 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 5:59:32 PM
45
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
|so
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
50
100
150 200
Distance (m)
250
300
350
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 262 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 6:15:35 PM
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
30
Turbidity (NTU)
A-94
-------
Transect 263 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 6:24:18 PM
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
30 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 264 - Turbidity 6/9/2007 6:28:08 PM
30
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
-2
E -3
f
-6
-7
Transect 265 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 8:30:58 AM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
|100
J90
IsO
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
Jso
120
110
50rurbidity (NTU)
A-95
-------
Horizontal Transects 10jun07
= June 2007 Dredge Location
A-96
-------
Transect 266 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 8:37:52 AM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 267 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 8:44:58 AM
10 12
Distance (m)
14
16
18
20
22rurbidity (NTU)
Transect 268 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 8:49:37 AM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
A-97
-------
Transect 269 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 8:56:19 AM
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
Transect 270 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 9:01:59 AM
Turbidity (NTU)
100
E -3-
50
100
150 200
Distance (m)
250
300
350
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 271 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 9:19:54 AM
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
J30
120
Il0
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-98
-------
0
-1
-2
g -3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
Transect 272 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 9:26:25 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
|so
120
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 273 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 9:31:45 AM
45
50 Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
-2
E -3
f
-6
-7
Transect 274 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 9:39:18 AM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
Jso
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-99
-------
Transect 275 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 9:45:11 AM
100 200 300 400 500
Distance (m)
Transect 276 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 10:07:47 AM
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20
25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 278 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 10:19:15 AM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
A-100
-------
Transect 279 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 10:36:11 AM
-4
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 280 - Turbidity 6/1 0/2007 1 0:43:06 AM
E,-3
.E
"5.
Q -*
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottpm
|100
|90
180
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
t
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
j 20
110
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 281 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 10:48:37 AM
-2
E -3
-6
-7
\
Sensor Positions ~"
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
J30
120
Il0
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-101
-------
Transect 282 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 10:56:12 AM
.§ "3
f
Q *
-5
-6
-7
i
0
-1
-2
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 283 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 11:01:41 AM
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 284 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 11:08:03 AM
f
-6
-7
45
|100
ho
Iso
I70
J60
J50
J40
|so
120
|10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
bo
Iso
I70
J60
J50
J40
|30
j 20
llO
45 Turbidity (NTU)
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
|100
Iso
J80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
|30
120
110
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45rurbidity (NTU)
A-102
-------
Transect 285 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 11:15:07 AM
s.
Q
Sensor Positions
River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
|so
120
J10
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 286 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 11:21:23 AM
U
-1
-2
j
4
-5
*
7
1 . . . ' . .'..'. j . p . . ' .
- ' ; '- '- '. ; ; ; ; ' % . '. ^ ' ' '-
~~--~ ^ A *
"~~~~~- --- - ^
^~~,^
^^"~ -.
~ . __ J
-
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom i i i i i i i
IUU
|go
r
J70
J60
I60
-^40
J30
120
lio
In
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Turbidity (NTU)
Distance (m)
Transect 287 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 11:29:30 AM
50
100
150
Distance (m)
200
250
300
Turbidity (NTU)
A-103
-------
E -3
s.
Q
-7
Transect 288 - Turbidity 6/10/2007 11:49:53 AM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
|100
190
^80
I70
J60
J50
J40
Jso
120
10
15
20
25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
55rUrbidi1y (NTU)
A-104
-------
Horizontal Transects 22jul07
July 2007 Dredge Location
A-105
-------
Transect 303 - Turbidity 7/22/2007 2:09:59 PM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 304 - Turbidity 7/22/2007 3:44:06 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
Transect 305 - Turbidity 7/22/2007 3:54:30 PM
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
Turbidity (NTU)
A-106
-------
337, 339, 340,
, 341,342,343
Horizontal Transects 23jul07
July 2007 Dredge Location
A-107
-------
E -3
1
Q *
-6
6
-7
Transect 306 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 8:32:35 AM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
|100
J90
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
50rurbidi1y (NTU)
Transect 307 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 8:58:01 AM
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
Transect 308 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 9:05:03 AM
30 Turbidity (NTU)
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
A-108
-------
Transect 309 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 9:12:53 AM
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 311 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 9:33:00 AM
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 312 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 9:50:45 AM
45rUrbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40 Turbidity (NTU)
A-109
-------
Transect 313 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 10:07:19 AM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
Transect 315 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 10:29:21 AM
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (m)
Transect 316 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 10:42:13 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
50rurbidity (NTU)
45rurbidity (NTU)
A-110
-------
Transect 317 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 10:50:55 AM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 317 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 10:50:55 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Transect 319 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 11:03:56 AM
45
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
A-lll
-------
Transect 320 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 11:10:55 AM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 321 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 11:26:16 AM
10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance (m)
Transect 322 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 11:34:45 AM
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
30 Turbidity (NTU)
A-112
-------
Transect 323 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 11:40:07 AM
E -3
f
-6
-7
10 15
Distance (m)
20
25
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 324 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 11:46:24 AM
5 10 15 20 25
Distance (m)
Transect 325 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 2:06:00 PM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
J90
?80
I70
J60
J50
-Uo
J30
120
Il0
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
A-113
-------
Transect 326 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 2:15:23 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 328 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 2:23:28 PM
50
100
150
200 250
Distance (m)
300
350
400
Transect 329 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 2:44:40 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
450 Turbidity (NTU)
45rurbidity (NTU)
A-114
-------
Transect 330 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 3:02:14 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 331 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 3:12:12 PM
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (m)
Transect 332 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 3:32:14 PM
40 Turbidity (NTU)
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
TOrurbidity (NTU)
A-115
-------
Transect 333 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 3:39:30 PM
10
15
20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 334 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 3:56:21 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35rUrbidity (NTU)
Transect 335 - Turbidity 7/23/20074:14:11 PM
10
15
20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
40rurbidity (NTU)
A-116
-------
Transect 336 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 4:30:58 PM
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 337 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 4:50:45 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
35
Transect 338 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 5:07:24 PM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
Turbidity (NTU)
A-117
-------
Transect 339 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 5:34:23 PM
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
30rUrbidity (NTU)
Transect 340 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 5:39:48 PM
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (m)
Transect 341 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 5:45:40 PM
40
Turbidity (NTU)
10 15
Distance (m)
20
25 Turbidity (NTU)
A-118
-------
Transect 342 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 5:53:10 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 343 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 5:58:40 PM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 344 - Turbidity 7/23/2007 6:08:41 PM
10
15
Distance (m)
20
25
Turbidity (NTU)
A-119
-------
Horizontal Transects 24jul07
July 2007 Dredge Location
A-120
-------
Transect 345 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 9:28:48 AM
.§ "3
f
Q *
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
|100
ho
J80
I70
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50rurbidi1y (NTU)
Transect 346 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 9:42:28 AM
5 10 15 20 25
Distance (m)
Transect 347 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 9:49:43 AM
Turbidity (NTU)
10
20
30 40
Distance (m)
50
60
70 Turbidity (NTU)
A-121
-------
Transect 348 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 10:12:47 AM
10
15 20
Distance (m)
25
30
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 349 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 10:21:12 AM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 350 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 10:45:38 AM
10
15
20
25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Turbidity (NTU)
A-122
-------
Transect 351 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 10:56:33 AM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 353 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 11:10:08 AM
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (m)
Transect 354 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 11:25:52 AM
50
Turbidity (NTU)
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Turbidity (NTU)
A-123
-------
Transect 355 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 11:32:56 AM
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 356 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 11:39:13 AM
-6
-7
Sensor Posithene- _
River Bottom
10 20 30 40 50
Distance (m)
Transect 357 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 11:45:38 AM
Turbidity (NTU)
10
20
30
Distance (m)
40
50
60 Turbidity (NTU)
A-124
-------
Transect 358 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 1:16:48 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 359 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 1:24:22 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45rurbidity (NTU)
Transect 360 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 1:45:09 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
A-125
-------
Transect 361 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 1:52:37 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
Transect 363 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 1:59:33 PM
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 367 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 2:45:04 PM
45
Turbidity (NTU)
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45 Turbidity (NTU)
A-126
-------
Transect 368 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 2:57:57 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Transect 370 - Turbidity 7/24/20073:14:11 PM
E -3
f
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (m)
Transect 371 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 3:19:50 PM
45
-2
-6
-7
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
Turbidity (NTU)
1100
r
r
J60
J50
J40
J30
120
110
lo
Turbidity (NTU)
|100
t
:
:
J40
J30
20
r
Turbidity (NTU)
A-127
-------
Transect 372 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 3:26:20 PM
10
15
20 25
Distance (m)
30
35
40
45
Turbidity (NTU)
E -3
f
-6
-7
Transect 373 - Turbidity 7/24/2007 3:43:43 PM
Sensor Positions
-- River Bottom
10 15 20 25 30
Distance (m)
35
40
45
50rurbidity (NTU)
A-128
------- |