Document 92g3B3wnB62B2NEvoVdYgGBp

hcnssRlo -> J> }' ;r, E> s. Tucker R&D Laboratories - South Second Street IwlilCI t May 28, 1970 PCB ANALYSIS OP WATER SAMPLES, CENTRAL FOUNDRY PLANT - BEDFORD, INDIANA ___________________ cc W. B. Papngeorge - GO ....... P, Wheeler/J. T. Garrett R. E. Keller - Res. 1 W. R. Richard - GO TO ; N. T. Johnson General Offices GO The EC/GC analysis of this second set of settling pond water samples confirmed our earlier results (Memo, NTJ, 2-2-70). The EC chromatogram, of the effluent samples from Pond #5 . (GA, B), as before, were not identical to either Aroclor 1242 or 1248 but rather like a mixture of the two. This alteration can probably be attributed to some biological or physical phenomenon occurring in the ponds. The EC chror..*\tograms of all other samples (from Ponds 1-4) were equivalent to that of production Aroclor 1242 in every respect. The variable results obtained for the duplicate (?) samples is not readily explainable. I have included selected chromato grams for your reference. OR Log Number Sample Number Sampling Point ppm PCB's as Aroclor 1242 235 1-A Pond fl 3.90 236 1-B Pond 11 630 237 2-A Pond 12 24.2 238 2-B Pond 12 19.3 239 3-A Pond 3 14.3 ( 240 3-B Pond 13 ` 6.6 241 4-A Pond 14 2.6 242 4-B Pond #4 2.0 243 5-A Pond #4 Effluent 4.7 244 5-B Pond #4 Effluent 2.8 245 6-A Pond #5 Effluent 1.1 246 6-B P-ond 15 Effluent 1.9 db Attachment E. S. Tucker I ( V deposition exhibit &--2L J-2/ -92. TRAM 008718 HARTOLDMON0041492