Document B5m2qNqZxNzJDmKQjRr0nDg14

14 < S < 5 6 _ A H - O DRAFT REPORT DRY RUM CREEK WASHINGTON, WOOD COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA NOVEMBER 1997 RECEIVED PPT NCC 23MAR3I AH10:21 PREPARED BY: M a r k D. Sprenger, Ph.D. Environmental Response Team AND M i c h a e l T. Horne, Ph.D. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service/Environmental Response, Team IN CONJUNCTION WITH: Mark Huston REAC/ERT Environmental Response Team Center Office of Emergency & Remedial Response CONTAIN NO CBI 000003 USFW 0579 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TA B L E S........................................................................................................................................................ V1 LIST OF F IG U R E S ........................................... TM SECTION I. 1.0 2.0 3.0 TECHNICAL APPROACH, SUMMARY OF FIELD EFFORT RESULTS, AND PRELIMINARY RISK SC REEN ............................................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Objective .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Site Background............................................................................................................... 1 METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Soil S am p lin g .................................................................................................................. 1 2.2 Sediment Sam pling.......................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Surface Water Sampling ......................................................................................2 2.4 Drinking Water Well S am pling...................................................................................... 2 2.5 Biological S am p lin g ....................................................................................................... 3 2.5.1 Small Mammal Study........................................................................................ 3 2.5.2 Vegetation S am pling................................................................................ .. 3 2.5.3 Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Sam pling.............................................................. 4' 2.5.4 Fish Collection................................................................................................... 4 2.6 Toxicity Testing............................................................................................................... 4 2.6.1 Eisenia foetida (Earthworm) Toxicity T e sts.................................................... 4 2.6.2 Hyalella azteca (Amphipod) Toxicity T e s ts .................................................... 5 2.6.3 Pimephales promelas (Minnow) Toxicity Tests ............................................ 5 2.7 Sampling Equipment Decontamination........................................................................... 5 2.8 Standard Operating Procedures ...................................................................................... 5 2.8.1 Documentation................................................................................................... 5 2.8.2 Sample Packaging, Shipment, Storage, Preservation, and Handling ........... 5 2.8.3 Field Samplingand Analytical Techniques....................................................... 5 2.8.4 Health and S a fe ty ............................................................................................. 6 R E SU LT S.............................................................................................................................6 3.1 Water, Soil, and Sediment Analysis ............................................................................... 6 3.1.1 BNAs ................................................................................................ T. . . . 6 060004 USFW 0580 3.1.2 TAL M etals........................................................................................................ 7 3.1.3 Pesticides/PCBs................................................................................................ 8 3.1.4 VOCs ............................................................................................................... 8 3.1.5 Total Fluoride .................................................................................................. 9 3.1.6 Organofluorides................................................................................................ 9 3.1.7 Total Organic Carbonand Grain Size of Soil and Sediment..............................10 3.1.8 Water Quality Param eters.................................................................................. 10 3.1.9 Bovine Fecal Samples ....................................................................................... 10 3.2 Biotic Sampling and Tissue A nalysis..............................................................................10 3.2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrates................................................................................11 3.2.2 M am m al...............................................................................................................12 3.2.3 F is h .......................................................................................................................13 3.2.4 E arth w o rm ..........................................................................................................13 3.2.5 Vegetation............................................................................................................ 14 3.3 Histological assay of small mammal liver and k id n e y ....................................................14 3.4 Toxicity Testing................................................................................................................. 14 4.0 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT S C R E E N ..............15 5.0 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................. 15 SECTION II 1.0 2.0 ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT .............................................................................16 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................16 1.1 O bjective............................................................................................................................ 16 1.2 Site Background..................................................................................................................16 PROBLEM FORMULATION ............................... 16 2.1 Ecological Risk Assessment ............................................................................................. 16 2.2 Identification of the Contaminants of C oncern.................................................................17 2.3 Exposure Characterization................................................................................................ 17 2.4 Hazard Characterization/Toxicity Assessment................................................................. 17 2.4.1 F lu o rid e ............................................................................................................... 17 2.4.2 Organofluorides...................................................................................................18 2.4.3 Aluminum............................................................................................................. 18 2.4.4 Arsenic ............................................................................................................... 18 2.4.5 B eryllium ............................................................................................................. 19 000005 USFW 0581 2.4.6 Chromium............................................................................................................ 19 2.4.7 C o p p er.................................................................................................................20 2.4.8 I r o n ...................................................................................................................... 21 2.4.9 Lead ................................................................................................................... 21 2.4.10 Manganese ......................................................................................................... 21 2.4.11 Nickel ................................................................................................................. 22 2.4.12 V anadium ............................................................................................................ 22 2.4.13 Zinc ....................................................................................................................23 2.5 Selection of Assessment Endpoints.................................................................................. 23 2.6 Production of Testable H ypotheses.................................................................................. 24 2.7 Conceptual Model ............................................................................................................ 25 2.8 Selection of Measurement Endpoints................................................................... 26 2.9 Life History/Exposure Profile Inform ation......................................................................29 2.9.1 The amphipod (Hyallela azteca) as Representative of Benthic Invertebrates .......................................................................................................... 29 2.9.2 Earthworm (Eisenia foetida) as Representative of Terrestrial Invertebrates ............................................................................................................................ 30 2.9.3 FatheadMinnow (Pimephalespromelas) as Representative of FishCommunity 31 2.9.4 American Robin (Turdusmigraiorius) as Representative ofWorm-eating Birds ............................................................................................................................ 32 2.9.5 Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaciensis) as Representative of Carnivorous Birds. .......................................................................................................................... 33 2.9.6 Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) as Representative of Carnivorous Mammals . . . . 34 2.9.7 Mink (Mustela vison) as Representative of Carnivorous Mammals ............... 35 2.9.8 Raccoon (Procyon lotor) as Representative of Omnivorous Mammals . . . . 37 2.9.9 Short-tailed Shrew (Blarina brevicauda) as Representative of Insectivorous M am m als.............................................................................................................38 2.9.10 Meadow Vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus) as Representative of Herbivorous M am m als.............................................................................................................40 3.0 ASSUM PTIONS..............................................................................................................................42 4.0 EFFECTS P R O F IL E ......................................................................................................................43 4.1 F luoride............................................................................................................... 43 m GGOQOC *. USFW 0582 4.2 Organofluorides................................................................ 4.3 Aluminum ........................................................................ 4.4 Arsenic ............................................................................. 4.5 B eryllium ........................................................................... 4.6 Chromium ........................................................................ 4.7 Copper ............................................................................. 4.8 Iron ................................................................................... 4.9 Lead ................................................................................... 4.10 M anganese........................................................................ 4.11 N ic k e l................................................................................ 4.12 Vanadium........................................................................... 4.13 Z i n c ................................................................................... 5.0 RISK CHARACTERIZATION...................................................... 5.1 Benthic Invertebrate Community Structure and Function 5.2 Soil Invertebrate Community Structure and Function . . 5.3 Fish Communities ......................................................... 5.4 Worm-eating B ird s ........................................................... 5.5 Carnivorous Birds ........................................................... 5.6 Carnivorous Mammals (Terrestrially feeding)................ 5.7 Piscivorous M am m als...................................................... 5.8 Omnivorous Mammals ................................................... 5.9 Insectivorous M am m als................................................. .. 5.10 Herbivorous Mammals ................................................. 6.0 UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS .................................................... 7.0 CONCLUSIONS........................................................................... 7.1 Benthic Invertebrate Community Structure and Function 7.2 Soil Invertebrate Community Structure and Function . 7.3 Fish Communities ......................................................... 7.4 Worm-eating B ird s......................................................... 7.5 Carnivorous Birds .............................................. . . . . 7.6 . Carnivorous Mammals ................................................. 7.7 Piscivorous M am m als.................................................... 7.8 Omnivorous Mammals ................................................. IV 000007 43 43 44 44 44 45 45 45 46 46 46 47 47 47 48 48 48 48 48 48 49 , 49 . 49 . 49 . 50 . 50 . 50 . 51 . 51 . 51 . 51 7.9 Insectivorous M am m als.................................................................................................... 52 7.10 Herbivorous Mammals .....................................................................................................52 8.0 SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................... 52 LITERATURE C IT E D ................................................................................................................................................ 53 APPENDIX A Small Mammal Data Sheets............................................................................................................................60 APPENDIX B Analytical Reports .................................... 61 APPENDIX C Toxicity Testing R eports......................................... 62 APPENDIX D Field N o te s ......................................................................................................................................................63 APPENDIX E Statistical Analysis ......................................... 64 000008 USFW 0584 UST OF TABLES NUMBER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 TITLE Concentration of BNA's in Water Concentration of BNA's in Soil Concentration of BNA's in Sediment Concentrations of Metals in Water Results of Concentrations of Metals in Soil Results of Concentrations of Metals in Sediment Results of the Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Water Results of the Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Soil Results of the Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Sediment VOA Concentrations in Water VOA Concentrations in Soil VOA Concentrations in Sediment Concentrations of Fluoride in Water Concentrations of Fluoride in Soil Concentrations of Fluoride in Sediment Results of the Organo-fluoride Analysis in Sediment Concentrations of TOC in Soil Results of the Analysis for Grain Size in Soil Concentrations of TOC in Sediment Results of the Analysis for Grain Size in Sediment In Situ Water Quality Parameters Concentrations of Bromide, Chloride, Nitrate, Phosphorus, and Sulfate in Water '* i `*1,,v. -J*, t ^ vi 000009 USFW 0585 23 Concentrations of BNA's in Fecal Samples 24 Concentrations of Metals in Fecal Samples 25 Concentrations of Fluoride in Fecal Samples 26 Frequency and Abundance of Benthic Macroinvertebrates 27 Concentrations of Metals in Small Mammals 28 Concentrations of Fluoride in Small Mammals 29 Lipid Concentrations in Mammal Tissue 30 Concentrations of Metals in Fish Tissue 31 Concentrations of Fluoride in Fish Tissue 32 Lipid Concentrations in Fish Tissue 33 Results of the Analysis for TAL Metals in Earthworm Tissue 34 Results of the Analysis for Fluoride in Earthworm Tissue 35 Lipid Concentrations in Earthworm Tissue 36 Concentrations of Metals in Vegetation 37 Concentrations of Fluoride in Vegetation 38 Lipid Concentrations in Plant Tissue 39 Results of Histopathology for the (Meadow Vole, Short-tail shrew, Meadow jumping mouse, and White-footed mouse) 40 Summary of Toxicity Test Results 41 Summary of Initial Risk Screen 42 Risk Calculations Based on Wet Weight l *vU i vii 000010 USFW 0586 NUMBER I UST OF FIGURES HILE Sampling Site Map OOOOll USFW 0587 SECTION I. TECHNICAL APPROACH, SUMMARY OF FIELD EFFORT RESULTS, AND PRELIMINARY RISK SCREEN 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective The objective of this project was to provide technical support to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III Removal Program in conducting an evaluation of ecological risks from alleged contamination of soil, sediment, and water at a working beef production farm located down gradient of a landfill. The effort resulted in the collection of soil, sediment, surface water, and biota samples for contaminant analyses and soil, sediment, and surface water for laboratory toxicity testing. The primary goals of the project were to: 1) identify contaminants present, 2) determine the extent of contamination, and 3) produce an ecological risk assessment based on the collected data. 1.2 Site Background The site is a working beef production farm located in Washington, Wood County, WV. The owner of the farm has filed numerous complaints with the West Virginia Department of Natural Resources and the U. S. EPA alleging that contaminants are being discharged from an industrial landfill owned by the DuPont corporation, into Dry Run. Dry Run flows through the farmer's property and is a primary source of water for his cattle. The farmer maintains that numerous deaths, blindness, and other unusual illnesses observed in his herd are directly attributable to the contaminants that are discharged into Dry Run from the DuPont landfill. It has also been reported that fish and wildlife kills have also occurred in the area, which may be associated with the abnormalities observed in the cattle. 2.0 METHODOLOGY The approach used in this document followed current U.S. EPA guidance for designing and conducting ecological risk assessments (U.S. EPA 1997). Based on the problem formulation phase of the risk assessment design, the following field study was conducted to provide data needed to complete the assessment. A screening-level ERA was conducted after the field investigation, as little data on site contamination was available prior to the effort. Numerous fish and wildlife kills, in addition to problems in the cattle, had been reported prior to this activation. 2.1 Soil Sampling Surface soil samples were collected at 4 sample areas along Dry Run and in one reference sample area (Figure 1). Sample areas were selected based on distance from the landfill outfall in an attempt to identify a contaminant concentration gradient. Sampling was concentrated in the meadows along the stream bed. Three replicate samples were taken in each sampling area. Replicate sampling locations were determined by gridding the sampling area and randomly choosing three grid nodes for sampling through the use of a random numbers table. Sampling grid nodes were determined by using a random numbers table. Surface soil samples were collected using a decontaminated stainless steel trowel or spoon from the top 6 inches of the soil according to ERTC/REAC Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) #2012, Soil Sampling. All soil samples were analyzed for total organic carbon (TOC); grain size; target analyte ` ` 000012 USFW 0588 list (TAL) metals; TCL pesticides/PCBs; TCL Base, Neutral, and Acid Extractable (BNAs) compounds; TCL volatile organic compounds (VOCs), total fluoride, and organofluoride compounds. Additional soil was collected from the sample node closest to the stream bed for use in an earthworm toxicity test. A vegetation sample was also taken at each of the soil sampling nodes. Sediment Sampling Sediment samples were collected at 5 sample areas on site in Dry Run, one reference sample area, and one area in Lee Creek. Sample areas were selected based on distance from the landfill outfall in an attempt to identify a contaminant concentration gradient. Sampling was concentrated in the depositions! areas along the stream bed. All sediment sampling was conducted according to ERTC/REAC SOP #2016, Sediment Sampling. At each sample station, sediment was collected from the top 6 inches using a decontaminated trowel. The sample was composited into a decontaminated 5-gallon stainless steel bucket, homogenized, and divided into the appropriate sample containers for chemical analyses. Additional sediment was collected in the reference area. Tributary A, Tributary B, Area II, and Area IV, for use in a Hyalella azteca whole sediment bioassay. Surface Water Sampling Surface water samples were collected at locations which corresponded to each of the seven sediment sample stations. Surface water samples were collected directly into two 1-liter polypropylene bottles for metals analyses and into 1-liter glass bottles for organic (i.e.,' BNAs, Pesticide/PCBs, VOCs) analyses as per ERTC/REAC SOP #2013, Surface Water Sampling. Water samples were collected prior to collecting sediment samples and upstream of any stream disturbances caused by the sampler. One sample at each location was filtered through a 0.45 micron (pm) filter in the field prior to TAL metals analysis; all the remaining TAL metals samples and all the organic samples were analyzed unfiltered. All samples analyzed for metals were preserved by adding 40 percent nitric acid until a pH of less than 2 in the sample was obtained. The filtered sample submitted for TAL metal analysis was preserved after the sample was filtered. All surface water samples were submitted for TAL metals, TCL BNAs, TCL Pesticide/PCBs, TCL VOCs, chloride, fluoride, bromide, nitrate, sulfate, and phosphate analyses. Additional sample was taken in the reference area. Tributary A, Tributary B, Area II, and Area IV, for use in a Pimephales promelas aquaeous phase toxicity test. Water quality parameters were measured using a HoribaTM water quality meter. The meter was used to measure temperature in degrees Celsius (C), pH, dissolved oxygen [milligrams per liter (mg/L)], conductivity [millimhos per centimeter (mmhos/cm)], oxidation reduction potential [volts (V)]. The meter was calibrated prior to and after data collection. In-situ water quality data was transcribed from the digital display of the HoribaTM into a field logbook at the time of collection. The HoribaTM was used in accordance the manufacturer's operating manual. Drinking Water Well Sampling Water was sampled from a drinking water well on the Tennant farm. Parameters were analyzed as outlined above. Samples to be analyzed were taken from a tap that was located directly on the pump head after the well had been purged for a period of approximately five minutes. 2 000013 USFW 0589 Biological Sampling 2.5.1 Small Mammal Study Small mammals were collected from the site to determine body burden levels of TAL metals and total fluoride and to evaluate histopathological effects of exposure to site contaminants. Tissue burdens of small mammals trapped on site were compared to animals collected from the reference area. All field trapping activities were conducted in accordance with ERTC/REAC Draft Standard Operating Procedure SOP #2029, Small Mammal Sampling and Processing. Four trapping areas were established on site in areas corresponding to the soil sampling locations. A fifth grid was established on a reference area located just to the north of Dry Run in similar meadow habitat as that observed along the stream corridor (Figure 1). The reference area was chosen because the habitat present was similar to that in the meadows near Dry Run, and because it was outside the area that could be directly influenced by surface water from Dry Run. The length of the trapping period and the trapping effort varied among each of the trap areas and was based on the length of time and effort required to capture a sufficient number of mammals for statistical evaluation. Sampling was performed using Museum Special snap traps set in grids. All traps were spaced 10 feet apart and baited with a rolled oats and peanut butter mixture. The traps were checked twice daily, once in the morning and once in the evening. During trap checks, traps were rebaited and reset as necessary. Recovered animals were labeled with the trap area, trap number, species, and date of capture while in the field and then were transferred in coolers to the staging area for processing. For each animal, prior to performing the necropsy, data from the specimen label was transferred to a small mammal data sheet (Appendix A). Body metrics including total body weight, body length, tail length, ear length, liver weight, and kidney weight were measured and recorded on the data sheet. During the necropsy any abnormalities were noted and the contents of the gastrointestinal tract were removed from each specimen. Sections of the liver and kidney (approximately 0.5 g each) were removed for histopathological analyses. The sections were placed in a labeled 40-mL glass vial and preserved with 10 percent neutral buffered formalin. Preserved liver and kidney sections were submitted to Animal Reference Pathology (ARP) for histopathological evaluation. The remaining tissue was submitted for homogenization and TAL metal, total fluoride, percent moisture, and percent lipid analysis. 2.5.2 Vegetation Sampling Vegetation was collected by hand for residue analysis per ERTC/REAC SOP #2038 Vegetation Assessment Field Protocol. The most abundant grass taxa observed at all sampling locations was targeted for residue analysis. Grass samples were taken in each area at the same grid nodes as the soil samples were taken. The above ground portion of plants from the immediate vicinity of the soil sampling node were collected by cutting the stems at the soil surface with a decontaminated knife. All samples were analyzed for TAL metals, total fluoride, percent moisture, and percent lipids. 2.5.3 Aquatic Macroinvenebrate Sampling ^ 000014 USFW 0590 The infaunal macroinvenebrate community was sampled per Draft ERTC/REAC SOP #2032 Benthic Macroinvenebrate Sampling and U.S. EPA (1983, 1989, and 1990). Macroinvertebrate samples were collected for evaluation of community structure. In this investigation, macroinvertebrates were defined as organisms that impinged on a 0.5 millimeter (mm) sieve. A total of three replicates were collected from each of five sediment sampling locations (Figure 1). A long-handled, D-frame kick net, measuring approximately 45 centimeters wide and 20 centimeters tall, with 0.5 mm mesh was used. The net was used to disturb submerged vegetation and debris and collect dislodged invertebrates. Each replicate collection was performed over a uniform area at each sampling location. Benthic invertebrate samples were transferred to 500 ml polyethylene jars and preserved with a 70 percent 2-propanol solution. In the laboratory, the sample was rinsed in clean water and placed in a white 12 x 18-inch polyethylene pan with just enough water added to allow complete dispersion of the material within the pan. Large debris, stones, and other extraneous materials were removed from the tray and inspected for attached or clinging organisms. All organisms picked from the pan were identified to the lowest positively identified taxonomic level, enumerated, and recorded on a laboratory bench sheet. The size and life histoty stage of the organisms and state of taxonomic knowledge of the group determined the level of identification. The organisms were identified using appropriate taxonomic references and a representative subsample were identified by a second individual to meet the Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements of the taxonomic analysis. 2:5.4 Fish Collection Fish were collected from Dry Run to determine body burden levels of TAL metals and total fluoride. A CoffeltTM banery powered backpack electroshocker was used and operated as per the manufacturer's instructions. The sampling team consisted of one individual operating the electroshocker and one individual collecting stunned fish with a dip net. Stunned fish were placed in a 5-gallon bucket filled with site water. Following collection, fish were identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible in the field and live specimens were released. Voucher and dead specimens were preserved with a dilute formaldehyde solution and returned to the ERT/REAC biological laboratory for confirmation of field taxonomic analyses. Fish tissue was homogenized and submined to the laboratory for TAL metal, total fluoride, % lipid and % moisture analysis. Toxicity Testing 2.6.1 Eisenia foetida (Earthworm) Toxicity Tests Five soil samples were taken for evaluation in an earthworm toxicity test. Four of the samples were taken in the meadow sampling areas along Dry Run and one in the reference meadow area as outlined above. The test was run for a period of 28 days, at which time mortality and growth in each of the test soils was enumerated. Earthworm tissue resulting from each of the treatments was submitted for TAL metals, total fluoride, % lipid, and % moisture analysis. Figure 1 details the earthworm toxicity test soil sampling locations. 2.6.2 Hyalella azteca (Amphipod) Toxicity Tests 4 000015 USFW 0591 Five sediment samples were taken for evaluation in an amphipod toxicity test. Four of the samples were taken in Dry Run and one in a reference area stream. The test was run for a period of 10 days, at which time mortality and growth in each of the test sediments was enumerated. Figure 1 details the amphipod toxicity test sediment sampling locations. 2.6.3 Pimephales promelas (Minnow) Toxicity Tests Five surface water samples were taken for evaluation in a fathead minnow toxicity test. Four of the samples were taken in Dry Run and one in a reference area stream. The test was run for a period of 7 days, at which time mortality and growth in each of the test waters was enumerated. Figure 1 details the fathead minnow toxicity test water sampling locations. Sampling Equipment Decontamination The following sampling equipment decontamination procedure was employed prior to and subsequent to sampling in the following numerical sequence: 1. physical removal 2. nonphosphate detergent wash 3. potable water rinse 4. 10 percent nitric acid rinse 5. distilled water rinse 6. solvent rinse [acetone] 7. air dry Standard Operating Procedures 2.8.1 Documentation Documentation was conducted in accordance with the following SOPs: -ERTC/REAC SOP #2002, Sample Documentation -ERTC/REAC SOP #4001, Logbook Documentation -ERTC/REAC SOP #4005, Chain of Custody Procedures 2.8.2 Sample Packaging, Shipment, Storage, Preservation, and Handling Sample packaging, shipment, storage, preservation and handling were conducted in accordance with the following SOPs: -ERTC/REAC SOP #2003, Sample Storage, Preservation and Handling -ERTC/REAC SOP #2004, Sample Packaging and Shipment 2.8.3 Field Sampling and Analytical Techniques Field sampling activities and field analytics were conducted in accordance with the following SOPs: -ERTC/REAC SOP #2001, General Field Sampling Guidelines 5 000016 USFW 0592 -ERTC/REAC SOP #2005, Quality Assurance/Quality Control Samples -ERTC/REAC SOP #2006, Sampling Equipment Decontamination -ERTC/REAC SOP #2012, Soil Sampling -ERTC/REAC SOP #2013, Surface Water Sampling -ERTC/REAC SOP #2016, Sediment Sampling -REAC SOP #2029, Small Mammal Trapping and Processing -REAC SOP #2032, Benthic Sampling 2.8.4 Health and Safety Health and Safety was conducted in accordance with the following SOPs: -ERTC/REAC SOP #3001, REAC Health and Safety Program Policy and Implementation -ERTC/REAC SOP #3012, REAC Health and Safety Guidelines at Hazardous Waste Sites -ERTC/REAC SOP #3020, Inclement Weather, Heat Stress and Cold Stress RESULTS 3.1 Water, Soil, and Sediment Analysis 3.1.1 BNAs Surface Water Analysis of the surface water samples from Dry Run, the reference stream, and Lee Creek produced only one detection on the standard BNA scan. A sample taken in the Upper Tributary B location contained an estimated concentration of 2 ug/L of Bis(2Ethylhexyl)phthalate. In addition, numerous Tentatively Identified Compounds (TICs) including unknown alkane and alkene compounds were found in the surface water samples. Results for the BNA analysis of surface water samples taken in in Dry Run are presented in Table 1 and in Appendix B. Weil Water The sample taken at the Tennant Farm well produced no detections from the standard BNA list. Several TICs were identified, however only one of the detected compounds could be tentatively characterized and identified as an alkene. Results for the BNA analysis of the well water sample taken at the Tennant farm is presented in Table 1 and in Appendix B. Soil Analysis of the surface soil samples from the meadows adjacent to the streambed and the reference meadow area produced a few isolated hits from the standard BNA list. Fluoranthene was detected at an estimated concentration of 23 ug/Kg in one of the three reference samples. Carbazole was detected at an estimated concentration of 41 ug/Kg in one of the three Area 1 soils. Di-n-butylphthalate was detected at concentrations of 22, 27, 26, and 30 ug/kg in one sample from area II, one sample from area three, and two of the three samples from area IV, respectively. Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate was detected at estimated concentrations of 27 and 62 ug/Kg in one sample from Area III and one sample 000017 USFW 0593 from Area IV. Di-n-octylphthalate was detected at an estimated concentration of 180 ug/kg in one of the samples from area IV. In addition, numerous TICs including unknown alkane, cycloalkane, alkene, aldehyde, sterols, alcohols, PAH, acid, and other organic compounds were found in the surface soil samples. Results for the BNA analysis of soil samples is presented in Table 2 and in Appendix B. Sediment Analysis of the sediment samples from the five site and two off-site stream locations produced only a few isolated detections of BNA compounds. Di-n-butylphthalate was detected in the Area IV sediment sample at an estimated concentration of 30 ug/Kg. Bis(2Ethylhexyl)phthalate was detected in the Area III sediment sample at an estimated concentration of 52 ug/Kg. No other standard list compounds were found in any of the Lee Creek, reference stream, or Dry Run sediment samples. Numerous TICs including unknown alkane, cycloalkane, alkene, aldehyde, sterols, alcohols, PAH, acid, and other organic compounds were found in the Dry Run, Lee Creek, and reference sediment samples. Results for the BNA analysis of sediment samples is presented in Table 3 and in Appendix B. 3.1.2 TAL Metals Surface Water Analysis of the surface water samples from Dry Run, the reference stream, and Lee Creek included both filtered and unfiltered samples for TAL metals analysis. Antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and vanadium were not detected in any of the filtered or unfiltered water samples. Aluminum, barium, calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium, and zinc were detected in the filtered water samples. Of the list of detected metals in the filtered samples, it appears that aluminum, copper, and zinc are found in higher concentrations in the Dry Run Creek drainage, including the reference stream, than in Lee Creek. Aluminum, barium, calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium, and zinc were detected in the unfiltered samples. Of the list of detected metals in the unfiltered samples, concentrations of aluminum, iron, and zinc appear to be higher in Dry Run than those measured in Lee Creek. Detailed results of the TAL metals analysis in filtered and unfiltered water samples are presented in Table 4 and in Appendix B. Well .Water Well water sampled from the well on the Tennant farm was analyzed as an unfiltered sample. Antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and vanadium were not detected in the well sample. Concentrations measured for the remaining list of TAL metals are presented in Table 4 and in Appendix B. O O O O lfc USFW 0594 Soil Three replicate surface soil samples from the four Dry Run meadow areas and the reference meadow area were analyzed for TAL metals. Antimony, cadmium, mercury, selenium, silver, and thallium were not detected in any of the soil samples. One-way analysis of variance determined that soil manganese concentrations were significantly higher in Area II compared to the reference area, but the same as those noted in areas I, IE, and IV (p= 0.094). Area II had the highest mean manganese concentration with mean concentrations from the other areas ranging from 680 to 1310 mg/kg. Further results of the TAL metals analysis of site and reference soil samples are presented in Table 5 and Appendix B. Sediment Seven sediment samples were submined for TAL metals analysis. Five of the samples were taken in the streambed of Dry Run, one was taken in Lee Creek, and one was taken in the reference stream. Antimony, cadmium, mercury, selenium, silver, and thallium were not detected in any of the sediment samples. In comparison to the levels measured in the Lee Creek sample, it appears the Dry Run Creek reach may be enriched in aluminum, arsenic, barium, calcium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese, nickel, potassium, sodium, vanadium, and zinc. Based on the results of the aluminum, barium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, nickel, vanadium, and zinc analysis, there also appears to be a general trend that metal concentrations decrease with increasing distance from the landfill. Further results of the TAL metals analysis of site and reference sediment samples are presented in Table 6 and Appendix B. 3.1.3 Pesticides/PCBs Water No pesticides or PCBs were detected in the Dry Run samples, the Lee Creek sample, or in the reference stream sample (Table 7; Appendix B). Soil No pesticides or PCBs were detected in the Dry Run meadow samples, or in the reference meadow samples (Table 8; Appendix B). Sediment No pesticides or PCBs were detected in the Dry Run samples, the Lee Creek sample, or in the reference stream sample (Table 9, Appendix B). 3.1.4 VOCs Water No volatile organic carbon compounds were detected in the Dry Run samples, the Lee Creek sample, or in the reference stream sample (Table 10; Appendix B). 000019 USFW 0595 Sail Trichlorofluoromcthane was detected in eveiy soil sample taken in the meadows adjacent to Dry Run at concentrations ranging from 0.9 to 3.6 ug/Kg. In addition, tetrachloroethene was detected in one replicate Area III soil sample at a concentration of 4.4 ug/Kg. No other volatile organic carbon compounds were detected in the Dry Run samples, the Lee Creek sample, or in the reference stream sample. Results of the VOC analysis of site and reference soil samples are presented in Table 11 and Appendix B. Sediment Acetone was detected in the Area IV sample at a concentration of 7.2 ug/Kg. Chloroform was detected at a concentration of 0.5 ug/kg in the Area III sample. No other volatile organic carbon compounds were detected in the Dry Run samples, the Lee Creek sample, or in the reference stream sample. Results of the VOC analysis of site and reference sediment samples are presented in Table 12 and Appendix B. 3.1.5 Total Fluoride Water / Well Water Fluoride was not detected in the Dry Run samples, the Lee Creek sample, the reference stream sample, or in the well sample taken on the Tennant farm (Table 13; Appendix B). Soil Fluoride was detected in the Dry Run meadow and in the reference meadow samples. Soil fluoride concentrations ranged from a low of 180 mg/kg in Area IV to a high of 370 mg/kg in Area III. There appear to be no statistically significant differences in total soil fluoride concentration. Results of the soil fluoride analysis are presented in Table 14 and Appendix B. Sediment Fluoride was detected in the Dry Run creekbed and in the reference creekbed samples, but not in Lee Creek. Fluoride concentrations ranged from a low of 290 mg/kg in the Area IV sampling area to a high of 450 mg/kg in the Upper Tributary A'sampling area. Fluoride was not detected in Lee Creek. Overall, fluoride concentrations tend to decrease with increasing distance from the landfill. Sediments sampled in the Dry Run Creek reach appear to be enriched with fluoride, which is not found in Lee Creek. Results of the sediment fluoride analysis are presented in Table 15 and in Appendix B. 3.1.6 Organofluorides Sediment Because of methodology problems, specifically in obtaining appropriate standards, and the high volatility of some standards, only a limited suite of organofluoride compounds could be scanned for in the sediment samples. These compounds are presented in Table 16. Of the list that was analyzed for (Tetrafluoroethylene, hexafluoropropylene. 9 000020 USFW 0596 chlorodifluoromethane, perfluorocyclobutane, l-ChIoro-1,1,2,2, tetrafluoroethane, 2Chloro-l,l,l,2,3,3,-bexafluoropropane, and Perfluoroisobutylene), none of the organofluoride compounds were detected in site sediments. Results of the organofluoride analysis is reported in Table 16 and in Appendix B. 3.1.7 Total Organic Carbon and Grain Size of Soil and Sediment Summaries of total organic carbon and grain size analysis are presented in Tables 17-20 and in Appendix B. TOC in the soil ranged from an average low of 5.6% in Area III soils to an average high of 9.2 in Area IV soils. Soil grain size determinations are summarized in Table 18. TOC in the sediment ranged from a low of 1.9% in Lee Creek to a high of 4.5 % in Area IV. Sediment grain size determination is presented in Table 20. 3.1.8 Water Quality Parameters Water quality parameters including pH, conductivity, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, temperature, bromide, chloride, nitrate, phosphate, and sulfate was measured in the Dry Run Creek reach, the reference stream, and in Lee Creek. The most notable observations were that conductivity and sulfate concentration decreased with increasing distance from the landfill. Other parameters appeared to be in the expected range. Results of these measurements and analyses are presented in Tables 21 and 22. 3.1.9 Bovine Fecal Samples Six fecal samples were taken to determine if environmental contaminants were showing up in the digestive products of the affected cattle. Phenol was detected in all six fecal samples at concentrations ranging from 2.6 to 8.0 mg/kg. Additionally, 4-methylphenol was detected in all six samples in concentrations ranging from 45 to 110 mg/kg. Benzoic acid was detected in two of the samples at a concentration of 30 mg/kg. Additional information is presented in Table 23 and in Appendix B. TAL Metals Aluminum, barium, calcium, copper, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium, vanadium, and zinc were detected in the fecal samples. Additional information presented in Table 24 and in Appendix B. EluarMs Fluoride was not detected in any of the fecal samples (Table 25; Appendix B). Biotic Sampling and Tissue Analysis 3.2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrates 10 000021 USFW 0597 A total of 27 taxonomic groups were collected from the 5 locations sampled (Table 26). Of these, there was 1 Oligochaete, 1 Mollusc, 1 Turbellarian, 3 Crustaceans, and 21 Insect taxa. Of the latter, the dominant group, in terms of taxonomic diversity, were the Coleopteria which were represented by 7 taxa. The Dipteria were represented by 4 taxa and the Ephemeropteria were represented by 3 taxa. The Plecopteria, Hemipteria Tricopteria, and Megaloptera were the least diverse groups and were represented by one or two taxa. The greatest taxonomic diversity was observed at the reference location, where 19 taxa were collected. Fewer taxa were observed at locations I through IV, and the lowest diversity was observed at location IV where 11 taxa were collected. The difference in taxonomic diversity between the reference location and locations I, II, HI, and IV was primarily due to the presence of a greater number of rare taxa at the former location. The number of individuals collected per replicate ranged from 203 at the reference location (replicate A) to 24 at location IV (replicate C). The observed density of individuals throughout the study area is primarily the result of the numerical abundance of only several taxa (Table 26). The numerically dominant taxa collected from the study area includes Leucrocuta and Asellidae. When present, these taxa were typically the most numerically abundant organisms and were represented by 221 and 391 individuals, respectively. Other taxa, including Perlista, Chironomidae, Hyalella, the Turbellaria, and to a lesser extent, Lepiophlebia, Baetis, and Pseudolimnophilia, were present at most locations in consistently significant proportions. In general, most taxa collected were relatively rare and were represented by five or fewer individuals at most locations. For example, of the 129 total taxonomic observances, 54 were represented by one individual, 36 were represented by two to five individuals, 11 by six to 10 individuals, 15 by 11 to 20 individuals, and 13 by greater than 21 individuals. Several taxa were collected from all locations sampled including Leucotricia, Perlesta, Chironomidae, and Asellidae (Table 26). Several taxa were not collected from all locations but were broadly represented throughout the drainage including Lepiophlebia, Agabus, Hyalella, and Turbellaria. Of the nine taxa observed at only one location, four, including Elmidae, Scirtidae, Pseudolimnophila, and Stratiomyidae were collected only from the reference location. The most common distribution observed was one where a taxa was collected in relatively low numbers, and at few locations. For example, Elmidae, Hydropsyche, Limnophilidae, Nigronia, and Ceratoponidae were collected infrequently and in low numbers. Similarly, Lipogomphus, Dytiscidae, Curculidae, Elmidae, Scirtidae, Histeridae, Pseudolimnophila, Stratiomyidae, and Physa were collected in low numbers at only one location. Five functional feeding groups were collected from the Dry Run drainage (Table 26). Resulting from the presence of Asellidae and Hyalella, omnivores were the dominant functional group at most locations. Although less dominant, collector-gatherers and scrapers were consistently collected from all locations in the study area and included the mayflies Leucrocuta and Lepiophlebia. The dominant scraper was the mayfly Leucrocuta. Predators were dominant at locations II and III and were represented primarily by the stonefly Perlesta. The overall assessment of ecological condition first focuses on the evaluation of habitat quality, and secondly on the analysis of biological components in light of habitat. Habitat, ii 000022 USFW 0598 as the principal determinant of biological potential, sets the stage for interpreting biosurvey data and can be used as a general predictor of biological condition. High quality habitat will support high quality biological communities and responses to minor alterations will be subtle and of little consequence. However, as a habitat declines in quality, discemable biological impairment results. When habitat and biological data are systematically collected together, empirical relationships can be quantified and subsequently used for screening impact and discriminating water quality effects from habitat degradation. The watershed that drains the Dry Run study area has been modified as a result of past and present land use, particularly with respect to cattle grazing and other agricultural practices, as well as the siting of commercial and industrial facilities. The loss of riparian vegetation, through replacement by species resistant or adapted to grazing, or elimination by grazing has several consequences that should be considered when evaluating the distribution of benthic macroinvertebrates and macroinvertebrates in the current study. The attainable biological potential of a stream or river is primarily determined by the quality of the habitat at a particular location. The Dry Run study area is situated in a rural area utilized primarily for grazing cattle and, although historic indications of grazing are evident, significant portions of the riparian area remain vegetated, and there are few areas with a completely open canopy and exposed soil. Portions of the Dry Run drainage, though somewhat degraded, support a surprisingly diverse and apparently robust aquatic community. The taxonomic diversity and numerical abundance of the macroinvertebrate was relatively high at the reference area. In contrast, the diversity and abundance at locations I, II, III, and IV was reduced substantially. Since habitat considerations at all locations in Dry Run are similar, the presence of contamination at the latter locations may be significant. 3.2.2 Mammal Four species of small mammals (meadow voles, short-tailed shrews, white-footed mice, and meadow jumping mice) were caught during the trapping effort. Whole bodies were submitted for lipid, TAL metal and total fluoride analysis. The trapping effort revealed at least one important field observation, which was there was extremely low trapping success in Area I, the area nearest the landfill outfall, as compared to the other areas. This is highly irregular given the similar habitats present site-wide, and may indicate an ecological threat. Field necropsies identified several significant problems with the small mammals collected in the meadow areas adjacent to Dry Run. Short-tail shrews sampled from all areas showed blackened and degenerating teeth. Shrews commonly have what is known as chestnut tipped teeth, where the extreme points of the , dentitia are a light brown color. The black, mottled, and degenerating teeth observed in f this study are not normally observed in shrews. One meadow vole sampled from the area was missing the left kidney, and another appeared to have and extra kidney or an extra lobe on the right kidney, independent of the adrenals. f Sufficient numbers of meadow voles were caught from the Reference Area, Area II, Area III, and Area IV for statistical comparisons of tissue concentrations. Lipid concentration of meadow voles was significantly depressed in the Reference Area, Area II, and Area III, compared to that observed in Area IV (p<0.001). Barium concentration was significantly lower in the Reference Area, Area II, and Area III, compared to that observed in Area IV ; i ;<i . , . 12 000023 USFW 0599 (p=0.067). Sufficient numbers of short-tail shrews were caught from the Reference Area and Area III for statistical comparisons. There were no differences in body concentration of lipid, TAL metals, and fluoride in shrews taken from these two areas. Results of the trapping success, TAL metals, and fluoride analysis are presented in Tables 27-29, and in Appendix B. Results are presented by species and trapping location. 3.2.3 Fish Four species of fish were collected from Dry Run in Areas II, III, and IV. No fish were observed in Area I or the Reference Area. Creek chubs and fantail darters were collected in Area IV. Creek chubs and river chubs were collected in area III. Creek chubs, river chubs, fantail darters, central stone rollers, and black-nose dace were collected in Area II. Fish sampled during the electrofishing effort in Dry Run were submitted for whole body lipid, TAL metal and fluoride analysis. A composite sample that was taken during a historical fish kill in Dry Run was also analyzed. Since creek chubs were the only species common to all three sampling locations, statistical analysis concentrated on differentiating between tissue concentrations in this species. Aluminum, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cobalt, iron, lead, manganese, thallium, and vanadium were significantly higher in creek chubs from area II than those sample in Areas HI and IV. Likewise, concentrations of these metals in Area III creek chubs were higher than those in Area IV. Conversely, cadmium and silver concentrations showed the reverse trend, with tissue concentrations in Area IV significantly higher than those measure in Areas II or III. In spite of this result, it is clear that fish inhabiting upper reaches of Dry Run, nearer to the landfill are being dosed with a significantly higher amount of metals than those in the lower reaches. There were no difference in lipid or fluoride concentration. Results of the chemical analyses are presented in Tables 30-32 and in Appendix B. 3.2.4 Earthworm Three replicate earthworm samples were produced from each of the earthworm toxicity test soil samples. One-way analysis of variance was used to look for significant differences in tissue concentrations between earthworms exposed to each of the five soil treatments. Cadmium and thallium concentrations in the earthworm tissue was significantly higher in the Area 1exposures than those in Areas II, III, IV, or the Reference soils. Cobalt levels were lower in worms taken from the reference area, but tended to increase with increasing distance from the landfill. Copper and nickel concentrations were higher in worms taken from the reference soils than those observed in worm taken from the other soil area exposures. Further results of the earthworm tissue analyses for lipid, TAL metals and fluoride concentration are presented in Tables 33-35 and in Appendix B. 3.2.5 Vesetation 000024 USFW 0600 Three replicate samples of meadow grass were taken in each of the five soil sampling locations. One way analysis of variance was used to look for differences in plant tissue concentrations across the five sampling areas. Barium concentration was significantly higher in the Area I vegetation than in the Area III and IV vegetation, but similar to that observed in plants take in the Reference and in Area II. Manganese concentration was significantly higher in the Area I and reference vegetation than in the Area II, III and IV vegetation. Cobalt was significantly higher in Area IV vegetation than that taken in any of the other areas. There was no difference in the fluoride or lipid concentration. Results of the TAL metals and fluoride analysis are presented in Tables 36-38 and in Appendix B. Histological assay of small mammal liver and kidney Histological analysis of liver and kidney sections of meadow voles, short-tail shrews, meadow jumping mice, and white-footed mice trapped in each of the five trapping areas concluded that there were no substantive changes in liver or kidney morphology. The absence of a kidney in one animal, and the presence of an extra lobe on the right kidney of another provide anecdotal evidence of an effect, however we are unable to ascertain the importance of these observations. Full summaries of the histopathological work are presented in Table 39 and in Appendix B. Toxicity Testing Earthworm Based on the toxicity evaluation of soils, there is no evidence for growth or survival effects on earthworms tested in any of the soil samples collected at the Dry Run Creek site. Survival was 100% in all treatment replicates and growth ranged from 32.4 to 54.3%. Further results of the earthworm toxicity test are presented in Table 40 and in Appendix C. Fathead minnow Based on the toxicity evaluation of surface water samples to the fathead minnow, it appears that surface water taken in the Upper Tributary A location induced significant mortality. Survival in the Upper Tributary A sample was 58% while survival in all other samples, including the reference location, ranged from 87 to 100%. There appear to be no growth related effects water, on the minnows in any of the water samples taken from Dry Run Creek. Survival was negatively correlated potassium concentrations, however these correlations are not statistically significant at the 0.10 level. There was a significant positive correlation between fathead survival and iron concentrations in the filtered water samples. Further results of the fathead minnow toxicity test are presented in Table 40 and in Appendix C. Amphipad Based on the results of the 10 day solid phase whole sediment toxicity test with the amphipod, Hyalella azieca, growth of the organisms was inhibited in the sediment samples taken at the Upper Tributary A, and Area II locations. There were no effects observed on survival in any of the samples taken. The observed negative growth effect was significantly negatively correlated with 14 000025 USFW 0601 fluoride, aluminum, calcium, magnesium, nickel, potassium, and sodium. Further, there were strong negative associations between the growth endpoint and chromium, copper, lead, and zinc concentrations, although the relationships were not significant at the 0.10 level. Further results of the amphipod toxicity test are presented in Table 40 and in Appendix C. 4.0 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT SCREEN Sediment, soil and water concentrations were compared against Region III BTAG screening values (U.S. EPA 1995). Hazard quotients were generated by dividing the maximum site concentration measured in each matrix by the corresponding Region III benchmark values. All contaminants for which maximum concentrations exceeded benchmarks for sediment, soil, and water in the initial screening-level risk assessment are listed in the following sections. Contaminants that failed the initial screening process will be further evaluated in a final risk assessment for the site. Sediment Table 1 lists maximum concentrations, screening criteria, and quality criteria factors for sediment contaminants. The maximum concentration recorded at the site exceeded the benchmark values for the following compounds: arsenic, chromium, copper, manganese, and nickel. Because of the lack of a screening benchmark, the following compounds are still considered as risk factors as well: fluoride, aluminum, barium, beryllium, cobalt, iron, and vanadium. Water Table 1 lists maximum concentrations, benchmarks, and quality criteria factors for water contaminants. The maximum concentration recorded at the site exceeded the benchmark values for the following compounds: aluminum, copper, and iron. Because of the lack of a screening benchmark, fluoride is considered to be a potential risk factor. Soil Table 1 lists maximum concentrations, screening criteria, and quality criteria factors for soil contaminants. The maximum concentration recorded at the site exceeded the benchmark values for the following compounds: aluminum, beryllium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, vanadium, and zinc. Because of the lack of a screening benchmark, the following compounds are still considered as risk factors as well: fluoride and trichlorofluoromethane. 5.0 DISCUSSION The data generated during the field effort suggests that there are potential problems associated with conditions at the Dry Run Creek site. Minimally, the results of the sediment and water toxiciiy tests suggest potential problems in the stream. Some metals appear in higher tissue concentrations in biota sampled nearest the outfall of the landfill, with those levels progressively dropping with increasing distance from the landfill area. Likewise, sediments sampled in Diy Run near the landfill outfall appear to have higher fluoride and metals concentrations than those sampled further downstream. A preliminary screen of potential risk factors suggests that other problems, specifically elevated levels of fluorides, organofluorides, and some metals, may be present as well. Data gathered during the field effort will be further analyzed through a base-line ecological risk assessment for the Dry Run Creek site 15 0 0 0 0 2 6 USFW 0602 SECTION II ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective The objective of this risk assessment was to provide technical support to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III in conducting an evaluation of potential ecological threat due to existing contaminant levels in soil, sediment, and water at a working beef production farm located down gradient of a landfill. Soil, sediment, surface water, and biota samples were collected for contaminant analyses and soil, sediment, and surface water were collected for laboratory toxicity testing. The information gathered during this field effort was incorporated into in an ecological risk assessment for the Dry Run Creek site. 1.2 Site Background The site is a working beef production farm located in Washington, Wood County, WV. The owner of the farm has filed numerous complaints with the West Virginia Department of Natural Resources and the U. S. EPA alleging that contaminants are being discharged from an industrial landfill owned by the Dupont corporation, into Dry Run. Dry Run flows through the fanner's property and is a primary source of water for his cattle. The farmer maintains that numerous deaths, blindness, and other unusual illnesses observed in his herd are directly attributable to the contaminants that are discharged into Dry Run from the Dupont landfill. In addition to these abnormalities, numerous fish and wildlife kills have also been reported in Dry Run since the construction of the landfill. 2.0 PROBLEM FORMULATION This risk assessment was designed to evaluate the potential threats to ecological receptors from exposure to site contaminants. During the preliminary risk assessment, the problem formulation process included the identification of COCs and a comparison of the maximum concentration of COCs with accepted benchmarks. This information was then used to identify complete exposure pathways of compounds exceeding benchmarks to ecological receptors and their appropriate measurement endpoints. The first step of the preliminary risk assessment process compared all chemicals analyzed in soil, sediment, and water during the field with established toxicological benchmarks. Benchmarks for sediment and soil were used to identify potential contaminants of concern for the protection of aquatic biota (U.S. EPA 1995, Long and Morgan 1990, Long et al. 1995, Persuad et al. 1992, U.S. EPA 1992, Suter and Mabrey 1994). Compounds exceeding benchmarks were retained for further evaluation using ingestion-based exposure models for higher vertebrates, and direct exposure assays for fish, benthic and terrestrial invertebrates. 2.1 Ecological Risk Assessment This ecological risk assessment was written to determine the risk associated with the exposure of biota to site-related contaminants. The following steps were completed for this preliminary risk assessment: (1) A literature search was conducted to locate life history information for selected indicator species, to determine ecotoxicological effects of site contaminants, and to locate bioconcentration factors for site contaminants. (2) An evaluation of ecological receptors was prepared. This consisted of the following: 'si* i Exposure scenarios were determined based on site contaminant levels, the extent and magnitude of contamination, and the toxicological mechanisms of the 16 000027 USFW 0603 contaminants. Indicator species were selected based on species present and/or potentially present on site, the availability of toxicity information from the literature, and the potential for exposure to site contaminants based on habitat use or behavior. Exposure pathway(s) were determined for each indicator species. Exposure and effect profiles were written for each indicator species and each site contaminant. A risk characterization was conducted which involved the calculation of hazard quotients (HQs) for each species for a range of exposure scenarios. Based on the results of this evaluation, the COCs identified in the initial screen were further evaluated through the use of conservative risk models. 2.2 Identification of the Contaminants of Concern The contaminants of potential concern were identified using the initial contaminant screen. The COCs for this site that were retained through the preliminary screen include metals, fluoride, and organofluoride compounds. 2.3 Exposure Characterization The objective of the exposure assessment is to determine the pathways and media through which receptors may be exposed to site contaminants. Potential exposure pathways are dependant on habitats and receptors present on site, extent and magnitude of contamination, and environmental fate and transport of COCs. In this base-line ecological risk assessment, it will be concluded that "a potential risk" exists if the HQ calculated from the maximum site concentration and the No Observed Apparent Effect Level (NOAEL) equals or exceeds 1. Exposure to COCs present in forage and prey species via ingestion could cause toxicity in higher trophic level organisms. In addition to exposure via consumption of contaminated forage, ecological receptors may also be exposed through ingestion of water and incidental ingestion of soil/sediment. The exposure of benthic invertebrates, terrestrial invertebrates, and fish was determined by examining results of the toxicity tests. 2.4 Hazard Characterization/Toxicity Assessment To determine the effects of contaminants on biota, it is necessary to understand the mechanisms of toxicity of the chemicals and the systems that they affect. Knowledge of the fate, effects, and mode of action of the COCs allows for the selection of appropriate assessment endpoints. Next is a review of the general toxicological information for the COCs identified in Section 2.4. 2.4.1 Fluoride Inorganic fluoride compounds are ubiquitous in nature. However, industrial processes such as manufacturing and mining have contributed to the environmental load of fluoride, primarily through atmospheric deposition. In low doses, it is accepted that fluoride is 17 000023 USFW 0604 protective of teeth in humans as well as other animals. How* tn higher levels it is generally accepted that fluoride can be toxic to both plant and animal life. Dental and skeletal lesions, lameness, stiffness of gait, appetite impairment, decreased weight gain, decreased milk production, posture abnormalities, tremors, stillbirths, overgrowth of hooves, severe diarrhea, and death have been associated with mammalian fluoride toxicity (Suttie, 1977; Shupe et al, 1992). In addition to the effects known in mammals, birds are also susceptible to fluoride toxicity. Mortality, decreased growth rates, depressed appetite, and decreased eggshell quality have been reported as toxicological endpoints of fluoride exposure in birds (Fleming and Schuler 1988; Fleming et al. 1987; Guenter and Hahn 1986). 2.4.2 Organofluorides Organofluorides are used in a variety of industrial processes including the production of TeflonTM, propellants, and refrigerants. Available toxicological data generally concentrates on inhalation exposure and dermal absorption. Acute (10 day) exposure of rats to chlorodifluormethane produced decreased maternal and fetal weights, as well as an increased frequency of anopthalmia and subsequent blindness in newborn fetuses (IARC 1986). Hexafluoropropene exposure induced an increased incidence of hamster ovary cell aberrations and increased frequency grossly abnormal cells (HSDB 1997). 2.4.3 Aluminum Because of its strong reactivity, aluminum (Al) is not found as a free metal in nature. Aluminum has only one oxidation state (+3), thus its behavior in the environment depends on its ordination chemistry and the surrounding conditions. In soils, a low pH generally results in an increase in aluminum mobility. In water, an equilibrium with a solid phase is established that controls the extent of aluminum dissolution (ATSDR 1990). Plants vary in their ability to remove aluminum from soils, although bioconcentration factors for plants are generally less than one. Biomagnification of aluminum in terrestrial food chains does not appear to occur. There is no data on the biomagnification of aluminum in aquatic food chains (ATSDR 1990). The nervous system may be a target area for aluminum. Aluminum accumulates in neurofibrillary tangles in humans with Alzheimer's disease. Aluminum may also interact with neuronal DNA to alter gene expression and protein formation. Mammalian studies do not indicate that aluminum affects reproduction although some developmental effects have been reported in mammals (ATSDR 1990). Aluminum is known to interfere with gill transport of oxygen and carbon dioxide in fish, and has also been identified in ionoregulatory disruption. 2.4.4 Arsenic Several review articles are available which discuss the toxic effects of As (Eisler 1988a, Nriagu 1994). Arsenic tends to be widespread in the environment (Woolson 1975) and is constantly being oxidized, reduced, or mobilized (Eisler 1988a). Physical processes are important in determining As bioavailability in aquatic environments. For example, arsenates are readily adsorbed onto sediments with high organic matter, and arsenates are more strongly adsorbed onto sediments than other As forms. However, absorption depends on the As concentration, sediment characteristics, pH, and ionic concentration of other compounds 18 000029 USFW 0605 (Eisler 1988a; U.s. 1981'). The U.S. EPA (1981) noted that arsenate (pentavalent) is the predominant As form in o x y g e n ^ : water and that arsenite (trivalent) is the predominant As form in anaerobic conditions. Arsenic is not significantly concentrated in aquatic invertebrates; whole body concentration factors for invertebrates range from 3 to 17 for exposure to arsenic trioxide (trivalent) and from 0 to 7 for arsenic pentoxide (pentavalent). Arsenic may be bioconcentrated by organisms at the bottom of the food chain; however, data do not indicate that significant biomagnification occurs (U.S. EPA 1985). 2.4.5 Beryllium The majority of the beryllium (Be) in the environment is the result of coal and oil combustion. Beryllium naturally enters waterways through the weathering of rock and soil, and through deposition of atmospheric beryllium. Upon reaching water and soil, beryllium is most likely retained as an insoluble form that is generally immobile. However, beryllium chloride, fluoride, nitrate, phosphate, and sulfate (tetrahydrate) are all water-soluble forms (ATSDR 1993a). Due to its geochemical similarity to aluminum, beryllium may be expected to adsorb onto clay surfaces at low pHs, and it may remain precipitated as insoluble complexes at higher pHs. Therefore, beryllium is expected to have limited mobility in soil (ATSDR 1993a). Beryllium is not expected to bioconcentrate in aquatic animals and no evidence for significant biomagnification within food chains has been found. Beryllium is extremely toxic to warmwater fish in soft water. The degree of toxicity decreases with increasing hardness (ATSDR 1993a). Major exposure routes for aquatic ecological receptors include ingestion of contaminated soil and sediment. Although several studies point out the negative effects of beryllium in mammalian systems, no studies that evaluated the relationship between sediment beryllium concentration and observed toxicity to benthic organisms could be found (ATSDR 1993a). 2.4.6 Chromium Chromium (Cr) can exist in oxidation states ranging from -2 to +6, but is most frequently converted to the relatively stable trivalent (+3) and hexavalent (+6) oxidation states (Eisler 1986a). In both freshwater and marine systems, hydrolysis and precipitation are the most important processes that determine the fate and effects of Cr, whereas adsorption and bioaccumulation are relatively minor. Precipitated Cr*3hydroxides remain in sediments under aerobic conditions. However, under anoxic and low pH conditions, Cr*3hydroxides may solubilize and remain as ionic Cr*3unless oxidized to Cr*6through mixing and aeration (Eisler 1986a). In soils, the solubility and bioavailability of Cr are governed by soil pH and organic complexing substances, although organic complexes play a more significant role (James and Bartlett 1983a; James and Bartlett 1983b). Th tr.walent state is the form usually found in biological materials. This form functions as an essential element in mammals by maintaining efficient glucose, lipid, and protein metabolism (Stevens et al. 1976). Chromium is beneficial but not essential to higher plants (Eisler 1986a). The biomagnification and toxicity of Cr*3is low relative to Cr*6 because of 19 000030 USFW 0606 its low membrane permeability and its noncorrosivity. However, a large degree of accumulation by aquatic and terrestrial plants and animals in the lower trophic levels has been documented (Eisler 1986a), although, the mechanism of accumulation remains largely unknown. Chromium is mutagenic, carcinogenic, and teratogenic, with Cr*4 exhibiting the greatest toxicity; relatively less is known about the toxicity of Cr*3. At high concentrations, Cr** is associated with abnormal enzyme activity, altered blood chemistry, lowered resistance to pathogenic organisms, behavioral modifications, disrupted feeding, histopathology, osmoregulatory upset, alterations in population structure, and inhibition of photosynthesis. Rabbits fed dietary Cr accumulated hyaluronates, chondroitin sulfates, and neutral mucopolysaccharides in the soft tissues, causing pericapillary sclerosis (Kucher and Shabanov 1967). This accumulation blocked blood tissue barriers, which are permeable under normal conditions, preventing the normal transport of metabolites. One manifestation of this condition was the inhibition of insulin production in the pancreatic islets due to damage to the beta-cells contained therein. Chromium also leads to nephron damage via swelling and loss of microvilli, the formation of intracellular vacuoles, mitochondrial swelling, and cytoplasmic liquefication and loss of cells lining the nephron surface (Evan and Dail 1974). The preliminary step in Cr-induced respiratory cancer is speculated to be the scarring of alveolar tissue, followed by the elicitation of inflammatory reactions in lung tissue leading to bronchopneumonia, alveolar epithelial changes, atrophy, and benign tumor formation. Direct skin contact with highly corrosive chromic acid and its anhydride produces skin ulcers and necrosis by a mechanism independent of any allergic response (Steven et al. 1976). 2.4.7 Copper Copper (Cu) does not appear to have mutagenic properties GRIS 1990), but it is a teratogen (RTECS 1991) and a possible carcinogen (Venugopal and Luckey 1978). Copper is caustic, and acute toxicity is primarily related to this property (Hatch 1978). Copper is an essential element for animals and is a component of many metalloenzymes and respiratory pigments (Demayo et al. 1982). It is also essential to iron (Fe) utilization and functions in enzymes for energy production, connective tissue formation, and pigmentation (Venugopal and Luckey 1978). Excess Cu ingestion leads to accumulation in tissues, especially in the liver. High levels of Cu modify hepatic metabolism (Brooks 1988), which may lead to inability of the liver to store and excrete additional Cu. When liver concentration exceeds a certain level, the metal is released into the blood, causing hemolysis and jaundice. High Cu levels also inhibit essential metabolic enzymes (Demayo et al. 1982). Toxic symptoms appear when the liver accumulates 3 to 15 times the normal level of Cu (Demayo et al. 1982). Although the exact mechanism of toxicity is not known, the following mechanisms have been proposed: formation of stable inhibitory complexes with cytochrome P-450 (Wiebel et al. 1971); impairment of function of NADPH-cytochrome c reductase and alteration of mixed function oxidations (Reiners et al. 1986); and inhibition of heme biosynthesis (Martell 1981). Intranuclear inclusions may act as a detoxifying mechanism where Cu is complexed by 20 000031 USFW 0607 protein ligands, protecting cytoplasmic organelles (Demayo et al. 1982). Ruminants are the most sensitive mammal species to Cu toxicosis. Young animals retain more dietary Cu than older animals and are more sensitive to Cu toxicity (Venugopal and Luckey 1978). 2.4.8 Iron Iron (Fe) is commonly detected in concentrations of 5 percent or more in soil. It is used primarily in the production of steel and other alloys as well as a major source of hydrogen. Iron is a constituent of hemoglobin and is essential to plant and animal life as well as being an important component in cellular oxidative processes. The disposition of ingested iron is regulated by a complex mechanism to maintain homeostasis. Therefore, bioconcentration in biota is not expected to be a significant process for iron. Generally, about 2 to 15 percent of ingested iron is absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract, and elimination is approximately 0.01 percent of the body burden per day. Adverse effects of iron toxicity may include renal failure and hepatic cirrhosis. The mechanism of toxicity begins with acute mucosal cell damage and absorption of ferrous ions directly into circulation, resulting in capillary endothelial cell damage to the liver (Shacklette and Boemgen 1984). 2.4.9 Lead Lead does not biomagnify to a great extent in food chains, although accumulation by plants and animals has been extensively documented (Wixson and Davis 1993, Eisler 1988b). Older organisms typically contain the highest tissue Pb concentrations, with the majority of the accumulation in the bony tissue of vertebrates (Eisler 1988b). Predicting the accumulation and toxicity of Pb is difficult since its effects are influenced to a very large degree, relative to other metals, by interactions among physical, chemical, and biological variables. In general, organolead compounds are more toxic than inorganic Pb compounds, and young, immature organisms are most susceptible to its effects (Eisler 1988b). In plants, Pb inhibits growth by reducing photosynthetic activity, mitosis, and water absorption. The mechanism by which photosynthetic activity is reduced is attributed to the blocking of sulfhydryl groups, inhibiting the conversion of coproporphyrinogen to proporphyrinogen (Hoi! and Hampp 1975). The toxic effects of Pb on aquatic and terrestrial organisms are extremely varied and include mortality, reduced growth and reproductive output, blood chemistry alterations, lesions, and behavioral changes. However, many effects exhibit general trends in their toxic mechanism. Generally, Pb inhibits the formation of heme, adversely affects blood chemistry, and accumulates at hematopoietic organs (Eisler 1988b). At high concentrations near levels causing mortality, marked changes to the central nervous system occur prior to death (Eisler 1988b). Plants can uptake Pb through surface deposition in rain, dust, and soil, or by uptake through the roots. The ability of a plant to uptake Pb from soils is inversely related to soil pH and organic matter content. Lead can inhibit photosynthesis, plant growth, water absorption. 2.4.10 Manganese t .J- 21 000032 USFW 0608 Manganese (Mn) does not occur as a free metal in the environment but is a component of numerous minerals. Elemental manganese and inorganic manganese compounds have negligible vapor pressures, but may exist in air as suspended particulate matter derived from industrial emissions or the erosion of soil. Removal from the atmosphere is mostly through gravitational settling. The transport and partitioning of manganese in water is controlled by the solubility of the specific chemical form present. The metal may exist in water in any of four oxidation states (2+, 3+, 4+, or 7+). Divalent manganese (Mn+2) predominates in most waters (pH 4 to 7), but may become oxidized at a pH greater than 8 or 9. Manganese is often transported in moving water as suspended sediments. The tendency of soluble manganese compounds to adsorb to soils and sediments depends mainly on the cation exchange capacity and the organic composition of the soil. Manganese in water may be significantly bioconcentrated at lower trophic levels. However, biomagnification in the food chain may not be significant (ATSDR 1990). The amount of manganese absorbed across the gastrointestinal tract is variable. There does not appear to be a marked difference between manganese ingested in food or in water. One of the key determinants of absorption appears to be dietary iron intake, with low iron levels leading to increased manganese absorption. This is probably because both iron and manganese are absorbed by the same transport system in the gut (ATSDR 1990). 2.4.11 Nickel Pure nickel (Ni) is a hard, white metal that is usually used in the formation of alloys (such as stainless steel) and Ni combined with other elements is found in all soils. Nickel is the 24th most abundant element and is found in the environment as oxides or sulfides. Nickel may be released into the environment through mining, oil-buming power plants, coal-buming power plants, and incinerators. Nickel will anach to soil or sediment particles, especially those containing Fe or manganese (Mn). Under acidic conditions, Ni may become more mobile and seep into the groundwater. The typical Ni concentration reported in soils is from 4 - 8 0 milligrams per kilograms (mg/kg). The speciation and physicochemical state of Ni is important in considering its behavior in the environment and its availability to biota. The most probable exposure routes of Ni are through dermal contact, inhalation of dust, and ingestion of Ni-contaminated soil. The respiratory system is the primary target of Ni exposure following inhalation. Manifestations such as inflammation of the lungs, fibrosis, macrophage hyperplasia, and increased lung weight have been noted in animals exposed to Ni. Animals exposed to Ni through oral exposure were noted to have lethargy, ataxia, irregular breathing, salivation, and squinting (ATSDR 1996). 2.4.12 Vanadium Elemental vanadium does not occur naturally but it can exist in 50 different ores and fossil fuels. Other anthropogenic sources include acid-mine leachate, sewage sludge, and fertilizers. The principal use of vanadium is as an alloy constituent, especially in steel. The addition of vanadium to steel removes oxygen and nitrogen, which improves the strength. The average concentration of vanadium in the earths crust is 150 mg/kg and in the U.S. soils are 200 mg/kg (Byemum et al. 1974). The release of vanadium to water and soil occurs as a result of the weathering of rocks and from soil erosion. This process usually converts the less-soluble trivalent form to the more- 22 000033 USFW 0609 soluble pentavalent form. The mobility of vanadium in soil is affected by pH, redox potential, and the presence of particulates. Relative to other minerals, vanadium is mobile in neutral or alkaline soils and its mobility decreases in acidic soils (ATSDR 1991; Van Zinderen Bakker and Jaworski 1980). In the terrestrial systems, bioconcentration is more common in lower plant species. In addition, vanadium concentrations in plants are dependent on the amount of water-soluble vanadium, pH, and growing conditions. Vanadium appears to be present in all terrestrial mammals but the concentrations are usually below the detection limits. The highest concentration of vanadium is usually found in the liver and skeletal tissues (ATSDR 1991). Vanadium is very poorly absorbed into the gastrointestinal tract and the toxic mechanism of vanadium on the respiratory system is similar to other metals (Castronova et al. 1984). Vanadium damages the alveolar macrophages by decreasing the macrophage membrane integrity. Damaged macrophages inhibit the ability of the respiratory system to clear itself of other particles. In vitro experiments indicate that the mechanism of toxicity of vandium is by inhibiting sodium-potassium ATPase activity, which inhibits the sodium-potassium pump. This pump is necessary for the transport of material across cell membranes (Nechay and Saunders 1978). 2.4.13 Zinc Zinc (Zn) is essential for normal growth and reproduction in plants and animals and is regulated by metallothioneins. Metallothioneins act as temporary Zn storage sites and aid in reducing the toxicity ofZn to both vertebrates and invertebrates (Olsson et al. 1989). Zinc is not known to bioaccumulate in food chains, because it is regulated by the body and excess Zn is eliminated. Zinc has its primary metabolic effect on Zn-dependant enzymes that regulate the biosynthesis and catabolic rate of ribonucleic (RNA) acid and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). High levels of Zn induce Cu deficiency and interfere with metabolism of calcium (Ca) and Fe (Goyer 1986). The pancreas and bone seem to be the primary targets of Zn toxicity in birds and mammals. Pancreatic effects include cytoplasmic vacuolation, cellular atrophy, and cell death (Lu and Combs 1988, Kazacos and Van Vleet 1989). Zinc preferentially accumulates in bone, and induces osteomalacia (a softening of bone caused by a deficiency of Ca, phosphorus and other minerals) (Kaji et al. 1988). Gill epithelium is the primary target site in fish. Zinc toxicosis results in destruction of gill epithelium and tissue hypoxia (Spear 1981). 2.5 Selection of Assessment Endpoints The information gathered during a site reconnaissance and during the field work, and subsequent discussions with the U.S. EPA on-scene coordinator and the Region III Biological Technical Assistance Group, allowed for the selection of assessment endpoints that corresponded to the habitat types present at the Dry Run Creek site. The site is composed of a variety of habitats including forested and old-field uplands, grassy meadows, the creek, and associated riparian areas. A variety of birds, mammals, and fish may use the site for feeding and nesting. Likewise, terrestrial and benthic invertebrates are key elements in the functions of these systems. Therefore, the assessment endpoints focused toward these faunai groups. Viability of terrestrial, avian, and aquatic populations and organism survivability were selected as assessment endpoints for this risk assessment. Listed next are :f ' i i.t > 23 000024 USFW 0610 2.6 * V ' i \ } * '* ? / J the specific assessment endpoints selected for this ecological risk assessment. Ten assessment endpoints were chosen to evaluate the risk of contaminants at the Dry Run Creek site: 1) protection of benthic invertebrate community structure and function 2) protection of soil invertebrate community structure and function 3) protection of fish communities to ensure that direct exposure to contaminants does not have a potential negative impact on growth, survival, or reproductive success. 4) protection of worm-eating birds to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a potential negative impact on growth, survival, or reproductive success. 5) protection of carnivorous birds to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a potential negative impact on growth, survival, or reproductive success. 6) protection of carnivorous mammals to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a potential negative impact on growth, survival, or reproductive success. 7) protection of piscivorous mammals to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a potential negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success. 8) protection of omnivorous mammals to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a potential negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success. 9) protection of insectivorous mammals to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success. 10) protection of herbivorous mammals to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success. Production of Testable Hypotheses The testable hypotheses are specific risk questions that are based on the assessment endpoints. Based on the mechanism of contaminant toxicity, the number of exposure pathways that may exist for an assessment endpoint, or other factors, there may be more than one question for each assessment endpoint. Are levels of site contaminants sufficient to have negative effects on benthic invertebrate community structure and function? Are levels of site contaminants sufficient to have negative effects on soil invertebrate community structure and function? Are levels of site contaminants sufficient to cause direct toxicity to fish growth, survival, and reproductive success? Are levels of site contaminants sufficient to cause negative impacts on growth, survival, or reproductive success of worm-eating birds due to the ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water 24 000035 USFW 0611 on the site? Are levels of site contaminants sufficient to cause negative impacts on growth, survival, and reproductive success of carnivorous birds due to the ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water on the site? Are levels of site contaminants sufficient to cause negative impacts on growth, survival, and reproductive success of carnivorous mammals due to the ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water on the site? Are levels of site contaminants sufficient to cause negative impacts on growth, survival, and reproductive success of piscivorous mammals due to the ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water on the site? Are levels of site contaminants sufficient to cause negative impacts on growth, survival, and reproductive success of omnivorous mammals due to the ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water on the site? Are levels of site contaminants sufficient to cause negative impacts on growth, survival, and reproductive success of insectivorous mammals due to the ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water on the site? Are levels of site contaminants sufficient to cause negative impacts on growth, survival, and reproductive success of herbivorous mammals due to the ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water on the site? 7 Conceptual Model The conceptual model relies on contaminant and habitat characteristics to identify critical exposure pathways to the selected measurement endpoints. At the Dry Run Creek site, contaminants in the soil may come in contact with subsurface (earthworms) and above-ground terrestrial receptors (small mammals) inhabiting the wooded, wetland, and open field areas of the site. Subsurface terrestrial receptors in these areas may be exposed to site contaminants through direct contact with the soil, and in some cases, the intentional ingestion of soil. Above-ground terrestrial receptors may be exposed to contaminants through direct contact with the soil, the ingestion of subsurface terrestrial organisms, the ingestion of other above-ground terrestrial receptors, the incidental ingestion of soil adhered to food items, and the intentional ingestion of surface water from any of the on-site surface drainages. The wooded areas, riparian area, and meadow areas provide distinct habitat types that may support a variety of terrestrial and avian receptors. For example, a small omnivorous mammal may occupy one or all the habitat types, whereas, an individual carnivorous mammal may regularly traverse all three habitats daily in search of food items. Avian piscivores and carnivores may be exposed to site contaminants in much the same way as an above-ground terrestrial receptor. The consumption of contaminated prey, the incidental ingestion of soil/sediment, and the consumption of surface water may transfer contaminants to these receptors. The conceptual model relies on contaminant and habitat characteristics to identify critical exposure pathways to the selected measurement endpoints. The preliminary risk screen identified metals, fluoride, and trichlorofluoromethane as the primary contaminants exceeding benchmarks in site sediment, soil, and water. Benthic macroinvertebrates, fish, and terrestrial invertebrates may be 25 Jt 000036 USFW 0612 exposed to contaminated sediment, water, or soil through direct toxicity. For the purposes of this risk assessment, the concentration of the contaminants ofconcern found in the sediment, water, or soil were correlated with toxicity levels identified in the corresponding toxicity tests to determine if benthic invertebrates fish, or terrestrial invertebrates may be at risk. Terrestrial receptors may be exposed to contaminants by feeding on organisms which have accumulated COCs in their tissues. Higher trophic level receptors may also be exposed to contaminants from food ingestion and via incidental ingestion of soil/sediment and water. The pathway to the reference area meadow is unknown, however the pathway to the reference area stream may involve groundwater transport. The following pathways were evaluated in this risk assessment: I. Benthic invertebrates a) Direct exposure to sediment II. Soil invertebrates a) Direct exposure to soil III. Fish a) Direct exposure to water IV. Worm-eating bird a) Ingestion of earthworms b) Incidental ingestion of soil c) Incidental ingestion of water V. Carnivorous bird a) Ingestion of small mammals b) Incidental ingestion of soil c) Incidental ingestion of water VI. Carnivorous mammal a) Ingestion of small mammals b) Incidental ingestion of soil c) Incidental ingestion of water VII. Piscivorous mammal a) Ingestion of forage fish b) Incidental ingestion of sediment c) Incidental ingestion of water Vili. Omnivorous mammal a) Ingestion of forage fish b) Incidental ingestion of sediment c) Incidental ingestion of water IX. Insectivorous mammal a) Ingestion of earthworms b) Incidental ingestion of sediment c) Incidental ingestion of water X. Herbivorous mammal 000037 USFW 0613 a) Ingestion of vegetation b) Incidental ingestion of sediment c) Incidental ingestion of water Selection of Measurement Endpoints Measurement endpoints are measurable ecological characteristics that are related to the valued characteristics selected as assessment endpoints. Measurement endpoints should be linked to the assessment endpoints by the mechanism of toxicity and the route of exposure. Measurement endpoints are used to derive a quantitative estimate of potential effects, and form a basis for extrapolation to the assessment endpoints. Measurement endpoints were selected on the basis of potential presence of receptors on site, and the potential for exposure to contaminants of concern. The availability of the appropriate toxicity information on which risk calculations could be based was also an important consideration. Endpoints selected were determined to be representative of exposure pathways and assessment endpoints identified for the site. Next is a list of specific measurement endpoints that correspond to the assessment endpoints identified in Section 2.5. Measurement endpoints for assessment endpoint: protection of benthic invertebrate communities structure and function To evaluate the structure and function of the benthic community, benthic macroinvertebrates were collected from five locations in Dry Run. Existing community structure was evaluated at each of the five locations by determining taxonomic diversity and through an evaluation of functional feeding groups. Sediment was also collected in each of the five areas for toxicity testing using the amphipod, Hyallela azteca. The endpoints of these tests were survival and growth. Collocated sediment samples were also collected and analyzed for target analyte list (TAL) metals, BNA's, Pest/PCBs, VOCs, fluoride, grain size, and total organic carbon (TOC). The chemistry results were then correlated with observed adverse biotic responses in the toxicity tests in order to determine risk potential. Measurement endpoints for assessment endpoint: protection of soil invertebrate community structure and function To evaluate the structure and function of the benthic community, soil was collected from each of the meadow locations and tested using the earthworm, Eiseniafoetida in toxicity tests. The endpoints of these tests were survival and growth. Collocated soil samples were also collected and analyzed for target analyte list (TAL) metals, BNA's, Pest/PCBs, VOCs, fluoride, grain size, and total organic carbon (TOC). Measurement endpoints for assessment endpoint: protection of fish communities to ensure that direct exposure to contaminants does not have a negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success. 27 000038 USFW 0614 Fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas, toxicity tests were used to determine the toxicity of the water in Dry Run. The endpoints of these tests were survival and growth. Collocated water samples were also collected and analyzed for target analyte list (TAL) metals, BNA's, Pest/PCBs, VOCs, fluoride, grain size, and total organic carbon (TOC). The chemistry results were then correlated with observed adverse biotic responses in the toxicity tests in order to determine risk potential. Measurement endpoints for assessment endpoint: Protection of worm-eating birds to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success. Food chain accumulation studies were selected to evaluate risk to avian species which utilize the site as a feeding area. The selected measurement endpoint receptor species is the American robin, Turdus migratorius. Appropriate forage species (earthworms) were identified for the above receptor, and the dietary exposure of receptors to contaminants was quantified and compared to existing toxicity data for these, or other closely related species. Measurement endpoints for assessment endpoint: Protection of carnivorous birds to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success. Food chain accumulation studies were selected to evaluate risk to avian species which utilize the site as a feeding area. The selected measurement endpoint receptor species is the red-tailed hawk, Buteo jamactensis. Appropriate forage species (small mammals) were identified for the above receptor, and the dietary exposure of receptors to contaminants was quantified and compared to existing toxicity data for these, or other closely related species. Measurement endpoints for assessment endpoint: Protection of carnivorous mammals to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success. Food chain accumulation studies were selected to evaluate risk to mammalian species which utilize the site and adjacent areas. The selected measurement endpoint receptor species is the red fox, Vulpes vulpes. Appropriate forage species (small mammals) were identified for the above receptors and the dietary exposure of receptors to contaminants was quantified. Measurement endpoints for assessment endpoint: Protection of piscivorous mammals to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success. Food chain accumulation studies were selected to evaluate risk to mammalian species which utilize the site and adjacent areas. The selected measurement endpoint receptor species are the mink, Mustela vison. Appropriate forage species (fish) were identified for the above receptors and the dietary exposure of receptors to contaminants was quantified. Measurement endpoints for assessment endpoint: 28 0000G9 USFW 0615  Protection of omnivorous mammals to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success. Food chain accumulation studies were selected to evaluate risk to mammalian species which utilize the site and adjacent areas. The selected measurement endpoint receptor species is the raccoon, Procyon lotor, as a model for omnivorous mammalian species. Appropriate forage species (fish) were identified for the above receptors and the dietary exposure of receptors to contaminants was quantified. Measurement endpoints for assessment endpoint: Protection of insectivorous mammals to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success Food chain accumulation studies were selected to evaluate risk to mammalian species which utilize the site and adjacent areas. The selected measurement endpoint receptor species is the short-tail shrew, Blarina brevicauda, as a model for insectivorous mammalian species. Appropriate forage species (earthworms) were identified for the above receptors and the dietary exposure of receptors to contaminants was quantified. Measurement endpoints for assessment endpoint: Protection of herbivorous mammals to ensure that ingestion of contaminants in forage does not have a negative impact on growth, survival, and reproductive success Food chain accumulation studies were selected to evaluate risk to mammalian species which utilize the site and adjacent areas. The selected measurement endpoint receptor species is the meadow vole, Microtus pennsylvanicus, as a model for herbivorous mammalian species. Appropriate forage species (vegetation) was identified for the above receptors and the dietary exposure of receptors to contaminants was quantified. Life History/Exposure Profile Information Receptor species were selected from several trophic levels. Organisms which were likely to be exposed to contaminants because of specific behaviors, patterns of habitat use. or feeding habits were selected for evaluation in this risk assessment. The availability of appropriate toxicity information on which risk calculations could be based was also an important consideration. The terrestrial invertebrate receptor selected for this assessment is the earthworm. The terrestrial vertebrate receptor species selected for this risk assessment are: meadow vole, short-tail shrew, raccoon, mink, and red fox. The avian receptor species selected for this risk assessment are: American robin and red-tailed hawk. The aquatic vertebrate receptor species for this risk assessment is the fathead minnow. The aquatic invertebrate receptor is H. azteca. 2.9.1 The amphipod (Hyallela azteca) as Representative of Benthic Invertebrates Justification Hyallela azteca was selected as representative of benthic invertebrates due to their direct contact with sediment for a significant portion of their life cycle, ubiquitous distribution in aquatic systems, importance as a food item for aquatic-invertebrate consumers, and ease of 29 000040 USFW 0616 use in laboratory toxicity evaluations. These species are also likely to occur in the surface sediment at the Dry Run Creek site. Life History (Hvallela asteca') The amphipod, Hyalleia asteca, is commonly found in freshwater lakes, streams, ponds, and rivers throughout North and South America. In preferred habitats, they are known to reach densities in excess of 10,000 per square meter. They may also be found in sloughs, marshes, and ditches, but generally in lower numbers (U.S. EPA 1994). Hyalleia asteca are epibenthic detritivores that feed on coarse particulate organic material. They typically burrow into surface sediment, and avoid bright light. Because of their feeding and behavioral characteristics, they are ideal test organisms for toxicological evaluation of freshwater sediments. Avoidance of light by movement into the sediment keeps these organisms almost constantly in contact with sediment contaminants (U.S. EPA 1994). Reproduction in this crustacean is sexual. Males are larger than females and have larger front gnathopods that are presumably used for holding the female during amplexus and copulation. During amplexus, the male and female feed together for a period of up to one week. The pair separates temporarily while the female goes through a molting period. Immediately after the molt, the two rejoin and copulation begins. During copulation, the male releases sperm near the female's marsupium. The female sweeps the sperm into her marsupium, and simultaneously releases eggs from her oviducts, into the marsupium, where fertilization takes place. The average brood size for female Hyalleia asteca is 18 eggs per brood, but this number can vary with environmental conditions and physiological stress (U.S. EPA 1994). Developing embryos and hatched young are kept inside the female's marsupium until she undergoes a second molt. At that time, the juvenile Hyalleia asteca are released into the surrounding environment. Under favorable conditions, each female produces approximately one brood during every ten day time period (U.S. EPA 1994). Hyalleia asteca have a minimum of 9 instars, with 5 to 8 pre-reproductive stages. The first five stages are juvenile stages; instars 6 and 7 form the adolescent stages; and stages 8 and higher are considered adult (fully reproductive) stages (U.S. EPA 1994). Exposure Profile for Hvallela asteca Since direct contact with contaminated sediment in the toxicity evaluation is the primary route of exposure for Hyalleia asteca in this risk assessment, the results of the test will be used to indicate exposure. 2.9.2 Earthworm (Eiseniafoetida) as Representative of Terrestrial Invertebrates Justification Earthworms were selected as representative of terrestrial invertebrates due to their feeding habits, ubiquitous distribution throughout many habitats and soil conditions, and importance in providing a food base for many small- to medium-sized predators. A diet of detritus, microflora, and microfauna, combined with direct contact with the surrounding soil, presents a potential link between soil contaminants and soil-invertebrate consumers. In addition, 30 000041 USFW 0617 earthworms were observed in both the wooded and open field areas of the Dry Run Creek site. Life History Earthworms feed on dead and decaying plant and animal remains and on free-living soil microflora and microfauna. Their primary source of food is dead plant material, especially plant litter. Next to food, their most important requirement is adequate moisture. Water conservation mechanisms are poorly developed; respiration depends on diffusion of gases through the body wall which must be kept moist. Earthworms are generally absent or rare in soils with very coarse texture, in soils with high clay content in regions of high rainfall, and in soils with a pH of less than 4 (Lee 1985). Earthworms are hermaphroditic and most species reproduce by cross-fertilization, although many species can also produce cocoons parthenogenetically. Sexual reproduction cannot occur without a clitellum, ovaries, oviducts, and possibly the ovisacs, but male organs are not essential. The population of an earthworm species at any one time consists of young immature, well-grown immature (adolescent), mature, and senescent individuals (Edwards and Lofty 1977). Earthworms have several ways of surviving adverse environmental conditions such as soil desiccation and ambient cold and heat. In terms of population survival, the cocoons can resist desiccation and temperature extremes much more easily than mature individuals. Worms may also migrate to deeper soil or undergo states of inactivity until environmental conditions become favorable once again (Edwards and Lofty 1977). Some species of worms grow throughout their lives by continually adding segments proliferated from a growing zone located just in front of the anus. Other species, such as E. foetida, possess the adult number of segments upon hatching and increase in size without increasing the number of segments. The life span of Eisenia foetida was reported to be approximately 4.5 years under laboratory conditions (Edwards and Lofty 1977). Exposure Profile Direct contact with contaminated soil is the primary route of exposure for earthworms in this risk assessment. Survival and growth endpoints following exposure to site soils will be used to evaluate risk to these organisms. Tissue residue analysis will also be conducted on the worms to determine exposure to higher trophic level organisms. 2.9.3 Fathead Minnow (Pimephaiespromelas) as Representative of Fish Community Justification The fathead minnow was selected as representative of omnivorous fish due to its dietary composition, direct contact with water throughout the life cycle, ubiquitous distribution in aquatic systems, importance as a food item for fish-eating consumers, and ease of use in laboratory toxicity evaluations. Life History 000042 USFW 0618 The fathead minnow, P. promelas, is widely distributed in North America and is found in a variety of habitats such as small streams, ponds, and small lakes. It is uncommon or absent in streams of moderate and high gradients. It is tolerant of high temperature, high turbidity, and low oxygen concentrations (U.S. EPA 1985). The fathead minnow is primarily omnivorous. Young typically feed on detritus, algae, and zooplankton. Adults feed on aquatic insects, worms, small crustaceans, and other animals. This species is considered an important food source for other fish and birds (U.S. EPA 1985). Adult fathead minnows spawn in the spring and continue to spawn throughout most of the summer. The minimum spawning temperature appears to be approximately 16C. The ovaries of the females contain eggs in all stages of development, and they spawn repeatedly as the eggs mature. The average number of eggs per spawn per female is 100 to 150. Larger females may lay 400 to 500 eggs per spawn. Hatching times depend on temperature and average about six days. In warm water with an ample food supply, spawning may occur as early as the first year. In cooler water with a moderate food supply, spawning usually occurs during the second year. Survival to the third year is relatively uncommon (U.S. EPA 1985). Exposure Profile Since direct contact with contaminated water in the toxicity evaluation is the primary route of exposure for fathead minnows in this risk assessment, the results of the test will be used to indicate exposure. 2.9.4 American Robin (Turdus migratorius) as Representative of Worm-eating Birds Justification The American robin was selected as representative of omnivorous and carnivorous birds because of its ubiquitous distribution and dietary composition. The preference for soil invertebrates in its omnivorous diet allows this species to be used as both an omnivorous and carnivorous receptor in this risk assessment. This species is also likely to occur at the Dry Run Creek site. l ife History The American robin (Turdus migratorius) occurs throughout most of the continental U.S. and Canada, wintering in the southern half of the U.S., Mexico, and Central America. Given the increase in open habitat and lawns, the robin's breeding range has expanded in the recent times. Habitat requirements for breeding robins include access to fresh water, protected nesting sites, and productive foraging areas. These requirements are commonly met in moist forests, swamps, open woodlands, and other open areas. Non-breeding robins occupy similar habitats although proximity to fruit bearing trees is of more importance. The primary foraging technique for robins is to hop along the ground in search of ground dwelling invertebrates, although they commonly search for insects and fruit in tree branches as well. The robin's diet during the breeding season consists mainly of invertebrates and some fruit, but fruit is the primary food consumed outside of the breeding season. As robins exhibit a low digestive efficiency for fruit, they often consume more than their own body weight in fruit to meet their metabolic needs (U.S. EPA 1993). 32 000043 USFW 0619 Breeding territories are established by male robins. Most foraging occurs close to these territories during the breeding season; however, if densities of robins are high in a given area or if food resources are limited, adult robins will leave to temporarily forage elsewhere. Outside of the breeding period, robins typically return to the same foraging sites and roost within 1 to 3 kilometers (km) of these areas (U.S. EPA 1993). Exposure Profile Adult American robins are reported to weigh from 77.3 to 133.8 g (U.S. EPA 1993). Territory sizes vary from 0.3 to 1 acre, with foraging home ranges reported up to 2 acres (U.S. EPA 1993). The lowest reported body weight (77.3 g) and the smallest reported home range of (0.3 acres) were assumed for this risk assessment. A food ingestion rate of 0.89 to 1.52 g/g BW/day and a water ingestion rate of 0.14 g/g BW/day are reported for this species (U.S. EPA 1993). Assuming a 77.3 g body weight, an American robin can be expected to consume 117.5 g/day of food and 10.8 g/day of water. The diet of the American robin consists of seasonally variable proportions of invertebrates (e.g., earthworms, snails, beetles, caterpillars, spiders) and fruit (e.g., dogwood, cherry, sumac, hackberries, raspberries) (U.S. EPA 1993, Ehrlich et al. 1988). During spring, summer, and fall, the dietary composition is reported to change from 93 percent invertebrates and 7 percent fruit in the spring (nesting season) to 92 percent fruit and 8 percent invertebrates in fall (migratory season). The summer dietary proportion is reported as 68 percent fruit and 32 percent invertebrates (U.S. EPA 1993). For the purposes of this risk assessment, a diet of 100% earthworms will be assumed. An incidental soil ingestion rate for the American robin could not be found in the literature. However, a soil ingestion rate of 10.4 percent of the diet reported for the American woodcock will be used as a substitute ingestion rate for the American robin (Beyer et al. 1994). Assuming a food ingestion rate of 117.5 g/day, the soil ingestion rate for the American robin is 12.2 g/day. 2.9.5 Red-tailed Hawk (Buteojamaciensis) as Representative of Carnivorous Birds. Justification The red-tailed hawk was selected as representative of a carnivorous bird due to its dietary composition, relative abundant distribution, and likelihood of occurrence at the Dry Run Creek site. Its diet allows for the evaluation of contamination in site soils. In addition, the concentration of contaminants found in small mammal tissue will also provide an accurate dose to the red-tailed hawk which allows for the evaluation of contaminants in the food source. l.ife History Red-tailed hawks are the most common and widespread American Buteo (Bull and Farrand 1977). Their habitat is highly variable, but they are commonly found in wooded areas near open land. They also inhabit plains, prairie groves, and deserts in the western United States (NGS 1987). This species is absent, however, from tundra, and rare in extensive unbroken forest. An opportunistic feeder, the red-tailed hawk hunts from a perch or on the wing for 33 000044 USFW 0620 food items such as small mammals (e.g., mice, chipmunks, rabbits), birds (usually grounddwelling species), reptiles, insects, and occasionally, prey species that are too heavy to lift off the ground (Burton 1989). The breeding season starts with aerial courtship displays, commonly followed by mating on a perch and nest-building by both sexes. Nests are placed in tall trees, high rock ledges, or tall cacti and are often refurbished annually for use in consecutive years. Incubation of two to three eggs is carried out by both sexes and lasts for approximately 30 days. The young are able to feed themselves at 4 to 5 weeks and fledge in about 45 days (Bull and Farrand 1977; Burton 1989). Exposure Profile Adult male and female red-tailed hawks are reported to weigh 960 g and 1,235 g, respectively (DeGraaf and Rudis 1983; U.S. EPA 1993). Home ranges vary from 148.26 to 395.36 acres (Kirkwood 1980). The lowest reported body weight of 0.960 kg and the smallest reported home range of 148.26 acres were assumed for this risk assessment. The diet of a red-tailed hawk consists of mammals, birds, reptiles, and insects which vary in importance with season and availability (U.S. EPA 1993). For the purposes of this risk assessment, the hawk will be assumed to consume 100% small mammals. Food ingestion rates are reported to range from 136 to 400 g/day (Kirkwood 1980). The highest reported food ingestion rate o f400 g/day was assumed for this risk assessment. A water ingestion rate of approximately 0.059 g/g BW/day has been estimated for this species (U.S. EPA 1993). To express this value in units of g/day, the water ingestion rate was multiplied by the lowest reported body weight of 960 g to yield a water ingestion rate of 56.64 g/day (56.64 mL/day). A soil ingestion rate for the red-tailed hawk could not be found in the literature; therefore, the amount of soil predicted to be entrained in the digestive tract of a white-footed mouse was used to calculate this value. A soil ingestion rate of less than 2 percent of the total diet has been reported (Beyer et al. 1994) for the white-footed mouse. From this value, a conservative soil ingestion rate of 1.9 percent of the total diet was assumed for the white footed mouse. To express this value in units of g/day, the soil ingestion rate of 1.9 percent was multiplied by the food ingestion rate of the white-footed mouse (4.50 g/day) (U.S. EPA 1993) to yield a soil ingestion rate of 0.09 g/day. This value was assumed to represent the amount of soil entrained in the digestive tract of the white-footed mouse that remains constant over time. To express 0.09 g in units of grams of soil per gram of mouse body weight, this value was divided by the lowest reported body weight (13 g) of the white-footed mouse (Merritt 1987) to yield a value of 0.007 g/g BW. This value was then multiplied by the food ingestion rate of the red-tailed hawk (400 g/day) to yield a soil ingestion rate of 2.8 " May. 2.9.6 Red Fox ( Vulpes vulpes) as Representative of Carnivorous Mammals Justification The red fox was selected as representative of a carnivorous mammal due to its dietary composition, relative abundant distribution, and likelihood of occurrence at the Dry Run Creek site. Its diet allows for the evaluation of contamination in site soils. In addition, the concentration of contaminants found in small mammal tissue will also provide an accurate 34 0 0 0 0 4 5 USFW 0621 dose to the red fox which allows for the evaluation of contaminants in the food source. Life History Red fox inhabit open meadows, ditch banks, field and wood edges, fencerows, stream and lake borders, and farmlands (Hoffineister 1989; Jones and Bimey 1988; Merritt 1987). With the exception of the breeding season, red fox have no permanent home but sleep on the ground (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). A den, usually modified from an existing woodchuck or fox den, is dug during the breeding season and exceptionally cold winters (Barbour and Davis 1974). These scent-marked dens have multiple rooms, entrances, and trails leading to and from hunting areas (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). In addition to their dens, both males and females will defend their scent-marked hunting territory from intruders (Jones and Bimey 1988). The red fox is primarily an opportunistic carnivore, consuming food items such as rabbits, opossums, muskrats, skunks, rodents, birds, eggs, carrion, invertebrates, snakes, and frogs (Barbour and Davis 1974; Merritt 1987). Some vegetable matter such as fruits and nuts are also consumed when in season (Jones and Bimey 1988). During times of abundant food supply, the red fox will bury surplus food to return to for consumption at a later time (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Male and female foxes pair for life, remaining together from midwinter to summer. Females bear one litter per year usually between March and April (Merritt 1987). Gestation periods last from about 49 to 56 days, with most averaging 53 days (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). The pups are weaned at about 60 days, leave the den in the autumn, and are sexually mature by their first winter (Merritt 1987). Natural predators of the red fox are few but include large hawks and owls, and possibly coyotes (Merritt 1987; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Red fox may live from six to ten years in the wild (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Exposure Profile Adult red fox weigh from 2.7 to 7 kg (Barbour and Davis 1974; Jones and Bimey 1988). Home ranges vary from 245 to 1,235 acres (Merritt 1987). The food ingestion rates of the red fox range from 0.069 g/g BW/day for a nonbreeding adult, to 0.16 g/g BW/day for a juvenile (U.S. EPA 1993). The water ingestion rate for an adult red fox is estimated to be approximately 0.086 g/g BW/day (U.S. EPA 1993). To express these values in units of g/day, the highest reported food ingestion rate of 0.16 g/g BW/day and the water ingestion rate of 0.086 g/g BW/day were multiplied by the lowest reported body weight of 2.7 kg (2,700 g) to yield a food ingestion rate of 432 g/day and a water ingestion rate of 232.2 g/day (232.2 mL/day). For the purposes of this risk assessment, a diet of 100% small mammals will be assumed. A soil ingestion rate of 2.8 percent of the total diet has been reported (Beyer et al. 1994) for the red fox. To express this value in units of g/day, the soil ingestion rate of 2.8 percent was multiplied by the food ingestion rate o f432 g/day to yield a soil ingestion rate of 12.1 g/day. 2.9.7 Mink (Mustela vison) as Representative of Carnivorous Mammals Justification 000046 USFW 0622 The mink was selected as representative of a carnivorous mammal due to its dietary composition, relative abundant distribution, and likelihood of occurrence at the Dry Run Creek site. Its diet allows for the evaluation of contamination in site soils. In addition, the concentration of contaminants found in clams and fish tissue will also provide an accurate dose to the mink which allows for the evaluation of contaminants in the food source. Lift History Mink are distributed over much of boreal North America, southward throughout the eastern United States and in the west to California, New Mexico, and Texas (Jones and Bimey ] 988). They can be found in virtually any habitat containing permanent water thus, they are not commonly found in upland areas (Jones and Bimey 1988). Although primarily nocturnal, their activity often extends into midday (Hoffmeister 1989). Dens are always near water, and they are usually an old muskrat burrow or constructed by the mink itself (Jones and Bimey 1988). Males tend to live in their own burrows which are less elaborate than ones occupied by females (Barbour and Davis 1974). Home ranges tend to be linear since mink often follow a shoreline (Jones and Bimey 1988). Mink are solitary and mark their territories by spraying (Merritt 1987). Seasonal food availability governs the dietary composition (Barbour and Davis 1974). Their diets may consist of crayfish, frogs, fish, snakes, rodents, rabbits, and plants among other items (Jones and Bimey 1988; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Crayfish are a major portion of the summer diet in many regions of North America (Barbour and Davis 1981; Jones and Bimey 1988; Merritt 1987). Breeding occurs from January to early April with highly variable gestation periods ranging from 40 to 75 days (Merritt 1987; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). A highly variable single liner of 1 to 17 young may be produced (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Average litter sizes vary among regions (Barbour and Davis 1974; Hoffmeister 1989; Jones and Bimey 1988; Merritt 1987; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Young are weaned at about five to six weeks of age and are sexually mature by ten months (Merrin 1987; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Occasionally great homed owls, foxes, coyotes, bobcats, and dogs will prey on mink (Merrin 1987; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Although some individuals have lived up to six years, mink seldom exceed two years of age in the wild (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Effects Profile Adult mink weigh from 520 to 1,730 g (Merrin 1987; U.S. EPA 1993). Home ranges vary from 19 to 1,900 acres (U.S. EPA 1993). A year-round food ingestion rate of 0.22 g/g BW/day has been estimated for both male and female mink (U.S. EPA 1993). To express this value in units of g/day, the food ingestion rate was multiplied by the lowest reported body weight (520 g) to yield a food ingestion rate of 114 g/day. An estimated water ingestion rate of 0.11 g/g BW/day was reported for farmraised females (U.S. EPA 1993). To express this value in units of g/day, this water ingestion rate was multiplied by the lowest reported body weight of 520 g to yield a water ingestion rate of 57.2 g/day (57.2 mL/day). For the purposes of this risk assessment, a diet of 100% fish will be assumed. 36 000047 USFW 0623 An incidental sediment ingestion rate was not available from the literature; therefore, a predicted incidental ingestion rate for sediment that may be entrained in the digestive system of the prey item (fish) was used for this risk assessment Consumption of this prey item was assumed to be the primary mechanism by which mink may incidentally ingest sediment. The derivation of the predicted level of incidental sediment ingestion via consumption of fish is described next. Life history information for the bluegill (Lepomis machrochirus) was used to predict the amount of sediment that may be ingested by mink via consumption of fish. Adult bluegills range in size from 100 to 230 mm (Pflieger 1975; Smith 1985). In keeping with the conservative approach of this risk assessment, the amount of sediment entrained in the lowest body size of 100 mm in length was predicted. The weight of a 100 mm bluegill was calculated to be 18.11 g based on the following algorithm relating length to weight (Hillman 1982): log Weight (g) = -5.374 + 3.316 log Length (mm) A daily food ingestion rate of 1.75 percent BW/day has been reported for the bluegill (Kolehmainen 1974). This provides a predicted intake rate of 0.32 g of food per day for a 18.11 g fish. A study evaluating the stomach contents of 153 bluegills reported an average content of detritus and sediment to be 9.6 percent of the total diet (Kolehmainen 1974). If a conservative assumption is made that 9.6 percent of the food ingested is entirely sediment, it can be predicted that a fish of this size may contain 0.03 g of sediment in its digestive system. For the purpose of this model, it was assumed that the level of sediment contained in the digestive system of a fish remains constant over time. This value (0.03 g) was divided by the predicted fish body weight (18.11 g) to express sediment entrained in fish digestive systems in units of grams of sediment per gram of fish body weight. This provided a value of 0.0017 g sediment/g body weight. When this value is multiplied by the food ingestion rate of the mink (114 g/day), the predicted sediment ingestion rate for the mink through consumption of fish is 0.2 g/day. 2.9.8 Raccoon (Procyon lotor) as Representative of Omnivorous Mammals Justification The raccoon was selected as representative of a omnivorous mammal due to its dietary composition, relative abundant distribution, and likelihood of occurrence at the Dry Run Creek site. Its diet allows for the evaluation of contamination in site sediment. In addition, the concentration of contaminants found in forage fish tissue and clams will also provide an accurate dose to the raccoon which allows for the evaluation of contaminants in the food source. Life History Raccoons are medium-sized omnivores and are abundant throughout North America. Raccoons prefer aquatic habitats, particularly hardwood swamps, flood plains, freshwater wetlands, and salt marshes (Kaufmann 1982). Raccoons have also adapted well to residential areas and farmlands. Raccoons rely heavily on surface waters for foraging and as a source 31 000048 USFW 0624 of drinking water (Stuewer 1943). Raccoons are active primarily from dusk to dawn (Stuewer 1943) but will alter their activities to opportunistically feed on whatever is available (Sanderson 1987). For example, raccoons living near a salt marsh may become active during die day to take advantage of feeding opportunities during low tide (Ivey 1948). Raccoons feed primarily on fruits, nuts, acoms, grains, insects, frogs, crayfish, and eggs (Palmer and Fowler 1975). Raccoons in the southern regions of the United States are active year round (Goldman 1950). Adult raccoons are normally solitary but will come together for short periods of time during mating (Kaufman 1982). Mating occurs from March to June in southern areas and each male may mate with several females during each season (Sanderson 1987; Kaufman 1982). Young males are normally not sexually mature in the first breeding season but mature later in the summer, while females mature in the first year (Sanderson 1951). The home range of a raccoon depends on the animal's age, habitat, food resources, and season (Sanderson 1987). Home ranges are typically a few hundred hectares (ha) but ranges as large as a few thousand ha have been reported (Sanderson 1987). Population densities also depend strongly on the amount of resources in the area. Numbers of 0.1 to 0.2 animals per ha are common (Hoffman and Gottschang 1977). Raccoons are found near every aquatic habitat. During the last 50 years raccoon populations have increased greatly (Sanderson 1987). In Alabama, adult male raccoons weighed up to 8.8 kilograms (kg) (mean 4.31 kg) while adult females can weigh up to 5.9 kg (mean 3.67 kg) (Johnson 1970). Adult raccoons weigh between 2 and 12 kg (Nowak 1991), and consume 0.5 kg of food per day (Newell et al. 1987). Raccoons feed primarily on fruits, nuts, acoms, grains, insects, frogs, crayfish, eggs (Palmer and Fowler 1975). In a Maryland forested bottom land, the dietary composition of raccoons during the summer was principly made up of insects (39 percent), wild cherry (17 percent), blackberries (16 percent), crayfish (8 percent), snails (5 percent), herptiles (5 percent), fish (2 percent), rodents (2 percent), com (1 percent), and trace amounts of Smilax, acoms and pokeberry (Llewellyn and Uhler 1952). At Washington state tidewater area raccoons displayed the following dietary composition: molluscs, mussels and oyster (44 percent), Crustacea, shrimp and crabs (25 percent), fish (9 percent), marine worms (20 percent), and Echiurida worms (1 percent) (Tyson 1950). The home range of a raccoon depends on the animal's age, habitat, food resources, and season (Sanderson 1987). Home ranges are typically a few hundred hectares but ranges as large as a few thousand hectares have been reported (Sanderson 1987). The home range for adult male raccoon found in coastal Georgia raccoons is approximately 65 ha (+ 18 SE) while the home range for adult females in the same area is approximately 39 ha ( 16 SE) (Lotze 1979). Population densities also depend strongly on the amount of resources in the area. Numbers of 0.1 to 02 animals per hectare is common (Hoffman and Gottschang 1977). Exposure Profile For the purposes of this risk assessment, a body weight of 2 kg, an ingestion rate of 0.5 kg'day, and a diet of 80 percent forage fish and 20 percent clams were assumed. A soil ingestion rate of 9.4 percent of the diet has been reported for raccoons (Beyer et al. 1991). Multiplying the ingestion rate by 9.4 percent yields a sediment ingestion rate of 0.047 kg/day. 38 000049 USFW 0625 A daily water ingestion rate of 0.18 Liters per day (L/day) was calculated using an allometric equation derived by Calder and Braun (1983). A diet of 100% fish will be assumed. <^y?rt-tailed Shrew (Blarina brevicauda) as Representative o f Insectivorous Mammals Justification The short-tailed shrew was selected as representative of insectivorous mammals because of its dietary composition, relative abundant distribution in both moist and dry habitats, and likelihood of occurrence at the Dry Run Creek site. Although their diets may consist of plants as well as insects, they tend to favor soil invertebrates when they are in abundance. Hence, by assuming that their dietary composition comprises solely invertebrates in this risk assessment, this species may represent an insectivorous mammal. Life History The short-tailed shrew is an extremely active, large, and heavy-bodied shrew common within its range (Jones and Bimey 1988). It occupies a variety of moist and dry habitats such as marshes, bogs, moist forest floors with ample decaying matter, brushland, fencerows, weedfields, and pastures (Barbour and Davis 1974; Jones and Bimey 1988). Short-tailed shrews are active both day and night throughout the year, although most of this activity is subnivean (Merritt 1987). During harsh winters, this species may undergo a period of torpor (Hoffmeister 1989). The home range of this species varies with their dramatic population cycles. In peak years, animal density may be greater than 25 individuals per acre (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). In other years, this species may have an animal density of one individual per acre (Merritt 1987). Although short-tailed shrews strongly prefer animal matter, they are opportunistic omnivores and will voraciously consume whatever food items are in ample supply (Barbour and Davis 1974). These food items include earthworms, slugs, snails, insects, arthropods, fungi, vegetable matter, seeds, snakes, salamanders, small mammals, and young birds (Barbour and Davis 1974; Jones and Bimey 1988; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Plant matter is generally consumed to a greater extent in winter (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). In some regions, plant matter may constitute up to 20 percent of the shrew's diet (Barbour and Davis 1974). Submaxillary glands p.oduce a venom that quickly immobilizes their prey (Merritt 1987). Prey items that are not consumed immediately are stored in a cache (Merritt 1987). Using echolocation and scent-marking, short-tailed shrew rely heavily on their hearing and sense of smell to locate food and to move about (Hoffmeister 1989). An elaborate system of runways and tunnels are constructed usually just a few inches below the ground surface (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Two types of nests are built by this species, a breeding nest and a resting nest. Both nests are built underground beneath a log, rock, or other cover, and have multiple entrances. The breeding nest is typically larger than the resting nest (Merritt 1987). Breeding appears to commence in early spring and extend into the fall, although in some regions, breeding may subside in early and midsummer but peak again in early fall (Hoffmeister 1989; Jones and Bimey 1988). Gestation periods are approximately 21 to 22 39 000050 USFW 0626 days with litter sizes of approximately four to ten young (Jones and Bimey 1988; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). The young are fully mature from one to three months of age (Barbour and Davis 1974; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Both sexes may breed their first spring (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Natural predators of the short-tailed shrew include fish, snakes, owls, hawks, shrikes, opossums, raccoons, foxes, weasels, bobcats, skunks, and feral cats, although most of these predators do not consume the shrew (or at least all of the shrew) because of their distasteful musk glands (Barbour and Davis 1974; Jones and Bimey 1988; Merritt 1987; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). The life expectancy of a short-tailed shrew in the wild is approximately one year (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Exposure Profile Adult short-tailed shrews weigh from 12 to 30 grams (g) (Jones and Bimey 1988; Merritt 1987). Home ranges vary from 0.5 to 1 acre (Memtt 1987). Therefore, it was assumed that a short-tailed shrew could obtain 100 percent of its diet from the contaminated area (area use factor of 1), since the area comprising the on-site sampling locations was approximately 20 acres. Food ingestion rates ranging from 0.49 to 0.62 gram per gram of body weight per day (g/g BW/day ) have been reported (U.S. EPA 1993). An average food ingestion rate of 7.95 g'dav has also been reported (U.S. EPA 1993). To express the former food ingestion rates in units of g/day for comparison to the latter ingestion rate, the former ingestion rates were multiplied by the lowest reported body weight of 12 grams to yield food ingestion rates of 5.88 to 7.44 g/day. Of these values, the highest food ingestion rate of 7.95 g'dav will be used for the purposes of this risk assessment. A water ingestion rate o f0.223 g/g BW/day has been reported (U.S. EPA 1993). To express this value in units of g/day, the water ingestion rate was multiplied by the lowest reported body weight of 12 g to yield a water ingestion rate of 2.7 g/day (2.7 milliliters per day [mL/day]). A soil ingestion rate for the short-tailed shrew was not available from the literature, therefore, the soil ingestion rate of the opossum was used. The opossum's diet is similar to that of the short-tailed shrew since they are both opportunistic omnivores with a strong preference for animal matter (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). A soil ingestion rate of 9.4 percent of the diet was reported for the opossum (Beyer et al. 1994). This value was multiplied by the highest food ingestion rate of the short-tailed shrew (7.95 g^day) to yield a soil ingestion rate of 0.74 g'dav. For the purposes of the food chain model in this risk assessment, it was assumed that 100 percent of the diet of the short-tailed shrew was comprised of earthworms. 2.9.10 Meadow Vole (Microtuspennsylvanicus) as Representative of Herbivorous Mammals Justification The meadow vole was selected as representative of herbivorous mammals because of its dietary composition, abundance in North America, preference for moist areas, and likelihood of occurrence at the Dry Run Creek site. 40 000051 USFW 0627 Life History The meadow vole is one of the largest and most abundant voles in North America (Jones and Bimey 1988; Merritt 1987). Although they are more commonly found in habitats such as moist meadows, bogs, swamps, stream banks, and lakeshores, they have also been known to inhabit cultivated fields, roadside ditches, and fencerows (Barbour and Davis 1974; Jones and Bimey 1988; Merritt 1987; Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Dense vegetative cover appears to be one of the major prerequisites for habitation (Hoffineister 1989; Jones and Bimey 1988). The home range of the meadow vole varies in size with season, habitat, and population size (Jones and Bimey 1988). Populations tend to fluctuate drastically every two to five years, with peak population density levels exceeding 100 voles per acre (Barbour and Davis 1974; Jones and Bimey 1988). Activity occurs during both day and night, and throughout the year, although it is greatest at dawn and dusk (Barbour and Davis 1974). Well-worn intersecting runways under vegetative cover are distinctive of meadow vole inhabitation (Jones and Bimey 1988). Elaborate spherical nests are commonly built aboveground in the center of a tussock of grass, although underground nests are also built in drier areas (Barbour and Davis 1974; Jones and Bimey 1988). The meadow vole is herbivorous, feeding primarily on grasses, sedges, legumes, tubers, and roots (Merritt 1987); however, insectivory and cannibalism have been reported in some individuals (Barbour and Davis 1974; Hoffineister 1989). Bluegrass (Poa sp.) is a major component of the diet in some regions (Jones and Bimey 1988; Hoffineister 1989). This species hoards food for the winter in above- and below-ground caches (Merritt 1987). The meadow vole is one of the most prolific mammals, producing litter after litter in rapid succession (Barbour and Davis 1974). Breeding occurs during the warmer months of the year (Jones and Bimey 1988). The gestation period is about 21 days with litter sizes ranging from 1 to 11 young (averaging four to seven) (Barbour and Davis 1974; Jones and Bimey 1988). The helpless young mature rapidly and may breed by 25 days of age (Barbour and Davis 1974). Meadow voles are preyed upon by nearly all species of predatory birds and mammals (Barbour and Davis 1974). These predators include owls, hawks, shrikes, bluejays, crows, foxes, weasels, mink, cats, raccoons, skunks, opossums, shrews, and snakes (Barbour and Davis 1974; Merritt 1987). Due to heavy predation, only a small proportion of the population exceeds sixty days of age (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Exposure Profile Adult meadow voles weigh from 20 to 65 grams (Merritt 1987; U.S. EPA 1993). The home range of this species varies from less than one acre to 3.2 acres (Merritt 1987). Therefore, it was assumed that a meadow vole could obtain 100 percent of its diet from the contaminated area (area use factor of 1), since the area comprising the on-site sampling locations was approximately 20 acres. A food ingestion rate ranging from 0.30 to 0.35 g/g BW/day, and a mean water ingestion rate of 0.21 g'g BW/day is reported for this species (U.S. EPA 1993). To express these values in units of g'day, the highest reported food ingestion rate of 0.35 g/g BW/day and the water 41 000052 USFW 0628 ingestion rate of 0.21 g/g BW/day were multiplied by the lowest reported body weight of 20 g to yield a food ingestion rate of 7.0 g/day and a water ingestion rate of 4 2 g/day (4.2 ml/day). A soil ineestion rate of 2.4 percent of the total Hi*u-- --n re '-" " et al. 1994) for the meadow voie. 10 express this aiue in units of g/day, the soil ingestion rate of 2.4 percent was multiplied by the food ingestion rate of 7.0 e/dav to vi<*,d *:i mgesuon rate of 0.17 g/day. For the purposes of the food chain model in this risk assessment, it was assumed that 100 percent of the diet was comprised of plants. ASSUMPTIONS This risk assessment evaluates exposure to contaminants through food and incidental sediment/soil ingestion. The following conservative assumptions were made to conduct this risk assessment in the absence of sitespecific data: The maximum of the contaminant levels measured in sediment, soil, or water collected on site was used in risk calculations. The maximum concentrations of COCs reported in sediment, soil, water, and biota were assumed to be present site-wide. An area use factor (AUF) of 1 was assumed for all species using the site for feeding. Contaminants were assumed to be 100 percent bioavailable. Dietary composition information was obtained from the literature for the receptor species. However, simplifications of complex diets were performed for the receptors. A literature search was conducted to determine the chronic toxicity of the contaminants of concern when ingested by the indicator species. If no toxicity values could be located for the receptor species, values reported for a closely related species were used. All studies were critically reviewed to determine whether study design and methods were appropriate. When values for chronic toxicity were not available, LDS0(median lethal dose) values were used. For purposes of this risk assessment, a factor of 100 was used to convert the reported LDS0 to a No Observed Apparent Effect Level (NOAEL). A factor of 10 was used to convert a reported Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) to a NOAEL, and a factor of 10 was used to convert a reported LDJ0to a LOAEL. If several toxicity values were reported for a receptor species, the most conservative value was used in the risk calculations regardless of toxic mechanism. Toxicity values obtained from long-term feeding studies were used in preference to those obtained from single dose oral studies. No other safety factors were incorporated into this risk assessment. In some cases, contaminant doses were reported as part per million contaminant in diet. These were converted to daily intake (in milligrams per kilogram body weight per day; mg/kg-day) by using the formula: Intake (mg/kg/day)=Contaminant Dose (mg/kg diet) x Ingestion Rate (kg/day) x 1/Bodyweight (kg) 42 0 0 0 0 5 3 USFW 0629 This conversion allows dietary toxicity levels cited for one species to be converted to a daily dose for a different species based on body weight. For the purposes of this risk assessment, incidental cnil/sediment ingestion was also included in the calculation to determine the total daily intake for the receptor - r - ,; e s -t v .-- dose may then be used to evaluate the risk to other species if no specific toxicity data are available for a recepioi. Some contamina;, o f csrxce^" (e.g. aluminum) are not food chain accumulators, but instead are direct toxins when ingested at the presen-.J levels. EFFECTS PROFILE Many contaminants detected at the Dry Run Creek site do not have benchmarks. This excluded them from further consideration in this risk assessment, but does not exclude them as potential contaminants of concern. Based on the results of the preliminary risk assessment, the following compounds were considered COCs and their toxic effects are presented next: fluoride, trichlorofluoromethane, aluminum, arsenic, beryllium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, nickel, vanadium, and zinc. Based on the chemistry results, these compounds will be further evaluated using food chain accumulation models. Contaminants exceeding their respective benchmarks are assumed to be affecting receptor species and negatively impacting species, populations, and communities in th aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems at the Dry Run Creek site. 4.1 Fluoride Maurer et al (1990) identified skeletal and dental abnormalities in rats that were exposed to sodium fluoride for a period of 99 weeks. The LOAEL identified in this study was 4 mg Fl/kg BW/day. A NOAEL was calculated from the LOAEL using an accepted conversion factor of 10. Based on these results, a LOAEL of 4mg/kg BW/day and an estimated NOAEL of 0.4/kg BW/dav will be used to evaluate the risk posed by fluoride mammalian receptors Fleming et al. (1987) found significant growth rate reduction in European starling fed a diet containing as low as 13 mg Fl/kg BW/day. No effects were observed at 10 mg Fl/kg BW/day. As such, this risk assessment will estimate fluoride related risk using a LOAEL of 13 mg/kg BW/day and a NOAEL of 10 mgkg BW/day. 4.2 Organofluorides No studies pertaining to the dietary toxicity of trichlorofluoromethane or any other fluorinated organic compound was found in the literature. 4.3 Aluminum Dixon et al. (1979) conducted a study that evaluated the reproductive success of rats exposed to aluminum in drinking water for 90 days prior to breeding. The highest dose administered was 77.5 milligrams per kilogram body weight per day (mg/kg BW/day) and did not result in reproductive abnormalities. Lai et al. (1993) conducted a 180-day drinking water study in which rats were exposed to 55 mgkg BW/day of aluminum. At this dose, behavioral effects were observed, including a significant reduction in spontaneous locomotor activity and significant deficits in acquisition and retention of learned responses. Based on these results, a LOAEL of 55 mg/kg BW/day and an estimated NOAEL of 5.5 m gkg BW/day will be used to evaluate the risk posed by aluminum to mammalian receptors (Table 1). 000054 USFW 0630 No effects were observed when Japanese quail were fed a diet containing 0.05 percent (84 mg/kg BW/day) aluminum for four weeks (Hussein et al. 1988). When quail were fed a diet containing 0.1 percent (165 mg/kg BW/day) aluminum, a decrease in egg shell breaking strength was observed. Finally, when quail were fed a diet containing 0.15 percent (257 mg/kg BW/day) aluminum, a decrease in body weight, egg shell strength, and egg shell production was observed. A 48-dav feeding study using chickens concluded that dietary levels of 28.4 mg/kg BW/day aluminum resulted in a decrease in weight gain, feed intake, and plasma inorganic phosphorus, as well as an increase in plasma calcium (Hussein 1990). However, only the altered metabolism of calcium and phosphorus could be attributed to the direct effects of aluminum. The associated NOAEL for this effect is 22.8 mg/kg BW/day. Because a range of concentrations were used and the endpoints were ecologically significant and related to the dose, the study by Hussein et al. (1988) was used to the develop the NOAEL and LOAEL values. A NOAEL of 84 mg/kg BW/day and a LOAEL of 165 mg/kg BW/day will be used to evaluate the risk posed by aluminum to avian receptors (Table 1). 4.4 Arsenic Several studies were located which determined the effects of As to mammals. A study conducted on cats indicated that a chronic oral toxicity dose was 1.5 mg/kg BW/day (Pershagen and Vahter 1979). In addition, National Resources Council of Canada (1978) states that mammals in general have oral LDS0s that range from 10 to 50 mg/kg of lead arsenate. A study conducted on mice indicated an oral dose LD50of 39.4 mg/kg BW/day and an oral dose LD,, of 10.4 mg/kg BW/day after 96 hours (NAS 1977). For the purposes of this risk assessment, the chronic value for the cat was used to calculate HQs for mammals (1.5 mg/kg BW/day). This value was convened to a NOAEL by dividing by a factor of 10. Eisler (1988a) reviewed several studies in which the toxicity of inorganic arsenicals were measured. Inorganic As is more mobile than organic As and may pose greater risk by leaching into surface water. Studies were also described in which organoarsenical compounds were measured. Studies indicate that sensitive species include the California quail (single oral dose LDS0 of 47.6 mg/kg BW/day) (Hudson etal. 1984) and chicken (single oral dose LDjo of 33 mg/kg BW/day) (NAS 1977). For the purposes of this risk assessment, a value of 3.3 mg/kg BW/day was used to determine the HQ to birds. This value was convened to a NOAEL by dividing by a factor of 10. 4.5 Beryllium Two separate chronic dietary exposure studies using rats reported similar musculoskeletal effects. Guyaft et al. (1933) fed large amounts of beryllium carbonate to rats at concentrations of 10,20, 40, 80, 160, and 240 mg/kg BW/day. Rats from all exposure levels developed rickets, with the fragility of the bones varying directly with the exposure concentration. Similar results were reported by Jacobson (1933) who reported severely weakened bones in rats fed beryllium carbonate at dietary levels of 121 and 242 mg/kg BW/day. For this risk assessment, a dietary exposure level of 10 mg/kg BW/day was used to estimate risk of beryllium to the short-tailed shrew. A NOAEL of 0.10 mg/kg BW/day was derived from this LOAEL using an accepted conversion factor of 10. No studies pertaining to the dietary toxicity of beryllium to avian receptors were found in the literature. 4.6 Chromium 000055 USFW 0631 Heinz and Haseltine (1981) exposed 2- to 3-year old breeding pairs of black ducks (Anas rubripes) to a diet containing 0, 20, or 200 mg/kg, wet weight, (0.2.77, or 27.77 mg/kg BW/day) of Cr*3as chromium potassium sulfate [CrK (S O J j'^ ^ O ] for a period of approximately five months, until the onset of egg-laying by the females. Hatched ducklings were then fed a mash diet containing the same Cr concentrations that the parents were fed. Seven-day old chicks were tested for avoidance behavior in response to a fright stimulus. None of the Cr concentrations resulted in alteration of avoidance behavior. However, Haseltine et al. (1985), in an unpublished study reported by Eisler (1986a) notes that black duck ducklings suffered reduced survival and altered growth patterns when exposed to 10 mg/kg and 50 mg/kg of an unspecified Cr*3compound in their diets. The percent reduction in survival and a detailed explanation of the altered growth patterns were not available in this unpublished study. For the purposes of this risk assessment, dietary levels of 10 mg/kg (1 mg/kg BW/day) of Cr in prey was used as a LOAEL for the avian species. However, due to the conflicting results, a NOAEL was derived from the same study in which the LOAEL was selected to maintain a degree of consistency regarding the Cr species evaluated. A NOAEL of 0.1 mg/kg BW/day was derived from the LOAEL using a conversion factor of 10. A study conducted with dogs indicated that 2.5 mg/kg/day of Cr*4ingested in the diet caused death (Steven et al. 1976). For the purposes of this risk assessment, a LOAEL of 0.25 and a NOAEL of 0.025 were used for the red fox, raccoon, and mink. 4.7 Copper One study was located which determined the effects of ingestion of Cu to mammalia species. An oral dose of 100 mg/kg/day to a dog caused death (OHMD 1987). For the purposes of this risk assessment, a LOAEL of 10 mg/kg/day was used and a NOAEL of 1 mg/kg/day were used for the exposure of mammals. Several studies were located which determined the effects of Cu on chickens. A dose of 350 mg/kg (61.3 mg/kg/day) caused a significant decrease in growth and food consumption (Smith 1969). Another study found that a dose of 325 mg/kg (23.5 mg/kg/day) caused respiratory problems (Hatch 1978). Assuming that respiratory problems are an acute effect, a LOAEL of 2.35 mg/kg/day and a NOAEL of 0.235 mg/kg/day were used to determine risk to avian species. 4.8 Iron No studies pertaining to the dietary toxicity of iron to mammalian or avian receptors were found in the literature. 4.9 Lead The gastric motility of adult male and female red-tailed hawks fed 0.82 and 1.64 mg Pb/kg BW/day in a single oral dose was evaluated through the use of surgically implanted transducers for a period of three weeks following the dose. Neither concentration had any effect on gastric contractions or egestion of undigested material pellets (Lawler et al. 1991). A study conducted on red-tailed hawk found that 3 mg/kg/day of Pb caused the clinical symptoms of Pb poisoning (Reiser and Temple 1981). A similar study found that 3 mg/kg/day fed to starlings caused a reduction in muscle condition and altered their feeding activity (Osborne et al. 1983). For 45 000056 USFW 0632 the purposes of this risk assessment, a LOAEL of 3 mg/kg/day was used to determine risk to avian species and a NOAEL of 0.3 was used. Several studies were located which determined the effects of Pb ingestion to mammals. A study conducted on mice indicated that 1.5 mg/kg/day of Pb caused a reduction in success of implanted ova (Clark 1979). Another study found that 2 2 mg/kg/day caused a reduction in the frequency of pregnancy when the dose was administered 3 to 5 days following mating (Clark 1979). For the purposes of this risk assessment, a NOAEL of 0.15 mg/kg/day and a LOAEL of 1.5 mg/kg/day were used to determine risk to mammals. 4.10 Manganese The effects levels for manganese toxicity vary widely, most likely attributable to the form of manganese tested. Rats exposed to 13 mg/kg BW/day of manganese as Mn304 in their diet for 224 days exhibited reduced testosterone levels (Laskey et al. 1982). In mice, a dietary' level of 140 mg'hg BW/day, also of Mn304 for 90 days resulted in decreased activity (Gray and Laskey 1980). A much higher exposure concentration o f2,300 mg/kg BW/day of manganese as MnC12 resulted in reduced dopamine levels (Gianutsos and Murray 1982). In contrast, levels as high as 930 mg/kg BW/day of manganese as MnS04 for 103 weeks had no effect on the respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, hematological, musculoskeletal, hepatic, renal, dermal, and ocular systems of mice (Hejtmancik et al. 1987). For this risk assessment, a dietary exposure level of 13 mg/kg BW/day will be used as a LOAEL to estimate risk of manganese to the selected mammalian receptor. A NOAEL of 1.3 mg'kg BW/day was derived from this LOAEL using an accepted conversion factor of 10. No studies pertaining to the dietary toxicity of manganese to an avian receptor were found in the literature. 4.11 Nickel Several srudies were available which determined the effects ofNi ingestion to mammals. Wistar rats fed Ni sulfate indicated a NOAEL of 187.5 mg/kg/day to most systems except for body weight. This level of Ni sulfate caused a 27 to 29 percent decreased body weight (Ambrose et al. 1976). In a similar study with a beagle, a NOAEL of 62.5 mg/kg/day was noted (Ambrose et al. 1976). For the purposes of this risk assessment a NOAEL of 62.5 mg/kg/day was used to determine risk to mammals. .This value was converted to a LOAEL of 625.0 mg/kg/day by multiplying the NOAEL by a factor of 10 No studies were available that determined the dose of Ni to avian species. Therefore, the risk to avian species from ingested Ni will not be determined. 4.12 Vanadium Gavage studies in mice have found an LC50 of 31 mg Vn/Kg diet (Schroeder and Balassa 1967). This dose was convened to a LOAEL of 3.1 mg/kg and a NOAEL of 0.31 using an accepted factor of 10 conversion. This food dose was converted to a daily dose by multiplying the LOAEL or NOAEL concentration by an ingestion rate commonly observed in mice (0.003 kg of food/day) and then by the inverse of the body weight (0.025 kg)(RTECS 1985). This calculation resulted in a LOAEL of 0.372 46 000057 USFW 0633 mg V/kg BW/day and a NOAEL of 0.0372 mg V/kg BW/day. These values will be used to estimate risk to mammalian receptors in this risk assessment. Rosomer (1960) exposed chickens to varying concentrations of vanadium. The study involved feeding 4 replicates of 13 chickens varying concentrations of vanadium for a period of 21 days. The study found that a dietary level of 40 mg/kg in the diet resulted in a marked depression in weight gain and efficiency of food utilization. At levels of 200 mg/kg, mortality was noted in all test chickens. The authors reported that a dietary level of 20 mg/kg could be tolerated with no resultant toxic effects. This dietary level was converted to a daily dose as above by multiplying the dietary concentration by a representative chicken ingestion rate (0.140 kg/day) and then by the inverse of the body weight (0.800 kg)(RTECS 1985). This calculation resulted in LOAEL of 7 mg V/kg BW/day and a NOAEL of 3.5 mg V/kg BW/ day. These values will be used to estimate risk to avian receptors. 4.13 Zinc Several studies were available which determined the effects of ingested Zn to birds. A concentration of 144.5 mg/kg/day caused a decrease in growth and anemia in chickens (Stahl et al. 1989). In a similar study conducted on chickens, a concentration of 361 mg/kg/day caused a reduction in body weight (Dean et al. 1991). In a study conducted on Japanese quail, a concentration of 139 mg/kg/day caused 7 percent mortality in chicks and reduced food intake (Hill and Camardese 1986). For the purposes of this risk assessment, a LOAEL of 139 mg/kg/day was used to determine the effects to avian species. This value was converted to a NOAEL of 13.9 mg/kg/day by dividing the LOAEL by a factor of 10. A study conducted on dogs, indicated that 1,000 mg/kg (25 mg/kg/day) caused no effects after one year (NAS 1979). For the purposes of this risk assessment, a LOAEL of 250 and a NOAEL of 25 were used to determine risk to the fox and the mouse. In a study conducted on ferrets, a dose of 370 mg/kg day caused a decrease in food intake and weight loss. Because the ferret is similar to the mink, a LOAEL of 370 mg/kg/day was used and a NOAEL of 37 was used to determine risk to the mink. RISK CHARACTERIZATION The following method was used to calculate risk. To estimate the risk to wildlife in the model systems utilizing the Dry Run Creek site, implications of the exposure concentrations need to be determined. The HQ method (U.S. EPA 1989, Bamthouse et al. 1986) compares exposure concentrations to ecological endpoints such as reproductive failure or reduced growth. The comparisons are expressed as ratios of potential intake values to population effect levels, or: Hazard Quotient (HQ) = ______ Mean Exposure Concentration No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) A HQ greater than one indicates that exposure to the contaminant has the potential to cause adverse effects in the organism. A HQ less than one does not indicate a lack of risk. The HQ should be interpreted based on the severity of the effect reported. The results of the risk characterization are presented next. 5.1 Benthic Invertebrate Community Structure and Function The benthic invertebrate community in Dry Run appears to be at risk for two reasons. The benthic community' survey showed a decrease in community taxonomic diversity and abundance in Dry Run as compared to the Reference stream. Since land use and available habitat are the same along both 47 000058 USFW 0634 streams, the decrease in diversity and abundance in Dry Run may be attributed to contamination present in sediments in Dry Run. In addition, the amphipod toxicity test dearly demonstrates that acute exposure sub-lethal effects can be produced in the benthic community, especially under conditions present in Tributary A and in Area II. The observed negative growth effect was significantly negatively correlated with fluoride, aluminum, calcium, magnesium, nickel, potassium, and sodium. Further, there were strong negative associations between the growth endpoint and chromium, copper, lead, and zinc concentrations, although the relationships were not significant at the 0.10 level. Since the sediments closer the landfill along the whole Dry Run reach appear to be enriched with metals, the observed toxicity may represent a significant threat. Soil Invertebrate Community Structure and Function The soil invertebrate community does not appear to be at risk based on current soil conditions at Dry Run. The earthworm toxicity test identified no problems with survival or growth. Fish Communities The fish community at Dry Run may be at risk. Results of the fathead minnow toxicity bioassav show that water conditions in Upper Tributary A induce mortality to larval fish. This mortality could not directly be associated with a suite of contaminants as in the amphipod test, but survival was negatively correlated with potassium concentrations, however this correlation was not statistically significant at the 0.10 level. There was a significant positive correlation between fathead survival and iron concentrations in the filtered water samples. Low species diversity and abundance observed during the electroshocking effort may be reflected by the results of the toxicity test. Worm-eating Birds A conservative risk assessment model based on wet-weight concentrations of contaminants for the Dry' Run Creek site has determined that worm-eating birds may be at risk due to ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water. The model predicts that aluminum, chromium, copper, lead, vanadium, zinc, and fluoride are risk factors based on conservative inputs. By default, beryllium, iron, manganese, nickel, and trichlorofluoromethane are risk factors due to lack of toxicological benchmarks for these compounds. Food chain risk calculations and resultant hazard quotients are presented in Table 42. Carnivorous Birds A conservative risk assessment model based on wet-weight concentrations of contaminants for the Dry Run Creek site has determined that carnivorous birds may be at risk due to ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water. The model predicts that aluminum, chromium, copper, lead, zinc, and fluoride are risk factors based on conservative inputs. By default, beryllium, iron, manganese, nickel, vanadium, and trichlorofluoromethane are risk factors due to lack of toxicological benchmarks for these compounds. Food chain risk calculations and resultant hazard quotients are presented in Table 42. Carnivorous Mammals (Terrestrially feeding) A conservative risk assessment model based on wet-weight concentrations of contaminants for the Dry Run Creek site has determined that carnivorous mammals may be at risk due to ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water. The model predicts that aluminum, chromium, copper, lead. 48 000059 USFW 0635 manganese, vanadium, and fluoride are risk factors based on conservative inputs. By default, iron and trichlorofluoromethane are risk factors due to lack of toxicological benchmarks for these compounds. Food chain risk calculations and resultant hazard quotients are presented in Table 42. 5.7 Piscivorous Mammals A conservative risk assessment model based on wet-weight concentrations of contaminants for the Dry Run Creek site has determined that piscivorous mammals may be at risk due to ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water. The model predicts that chromium, manganese, and fluoride are risk factors based on conservative inputs. Trichlorofluoromethane is not considered a risk factor because it was not detected in site sediments. Food chain risk calculations and resultant hazard quotients are presented in Table 42. 5.8 Omnivorous Mammals A conservative risk assessment model based on wet-weight concentrations of contaminants for the Dry Run Creek site has determined that omnivorous mammals may be at risk due to ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water. The model predicts that arsenic, chromium, copper, manganese, vanadium, and fluoride are risk factors based on conservative inputs. Trichlorofluoromethane is not considered a risk factor because it was not detected in she sediments. Food chain risk calculations and resultant hazard quotients are presented in Table 42. 5.9 Insectivorous Mammals A conservative risk assessment model based on wet-weight concentrations of contaminants for the Dry Run Creek site has determined that insectivorous mammals may be at risk due to ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water. The model predicts that aluminum, chromium, copper, lead, manganese, vanadium and fluoride are risk factors based on conservative inputs. By default, iron, and trichlorofluoromethane are considered risk factors due to lack of toxicological benchmarks for these compounds. Food chain risk calculations and resultant hazard quotients are presented in Table 42. 5.10 Herbivorous Mammals A conservative risk assessment model based on wet-weight concentrations of contaminants for the Dry Run Creek site has determined that herbivorous mammals may be at risk due to ingestion of contaminated forage, soil, and water. The model predicts that aluminum, chromium, lead, manganese, and fluoride are risk factors based on conservative inputs. By default, iron, vanadium, and trichlorofluoromethane are considered risk factors due to lack of toxicological benchmarks for this compound. Food chain risk calculations and resultant hazard quotients are presented in Table 42. , UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS There are factors inherent in the risk assessment process which contribute to uncertainty and need to be considered when interpreting results. Major sources of uncertainty include natural variability, error, and insufficient knowledge. Error can be introduced by use of invalid assumptions in the conceptual model. Conservative assumptions were made in light of the uncertainty associated with the risk assessment process. This was done to minimize the possibility of concluding that no risk is present when a threat actually does exist (e.g., elimination of false negatives). Whenever possible, risk calculations were based on conservative values. For example, NOAELs 49 000060 USFW 0636 used to calculate HQs were the lowest values found in the literature, regardless of toxic mechanism. An important contributor to uncertainty is the incompleteness of the data or information upon which the risk assessment is based. Risk calculations are based on maximum COC levels in sediment, water, and soil samples. Literature values for the toxicity of COCs were not available for all receptor species. An attempt was made to identify studies using closely related species to make risk estimates for the selected receptors. Species respond differently to exposure to toxins; responses to COCs by the indicator species may be different from species for which the toxicity data are reported. Methodological problems were also apparent in several of the studies from which NOAELs were obtained. Unfortunately, studies which were more suitable for this assessment were not found for some of the selected receptors. A literature search was conducted to identify appropriate NOAELs and LOAELs for this risk assessment. The values used to calculate HQs were the lowest values found in the literature. In many of the studies reviewed, adverse effects were observed at the lowest exposure concentration. This made it impossible to identify appropriate NOAELs for some receptors. In these cases, a factor of 10 was used to convert the LOAEL to a NOAEL, which adds uncertainty to the NOAEL-based calculations. Doses in toxicological studies can be reported in units of mg contaminant/kg diet, or in units of mg contaminant/kg body weight/day. All doses reported as mg/kg in diet were converted to units of mg/kg BW/day. If body weights were reported for the test animals in a given study, these values were used for making this conversion. Otherwise, the body weight and ingestion rate for the species reported in other literature sources were used. Another source of uncertainty arises from the use of toxicity values reported in the literature which are derived from single-species, single-contaminant laboratory studies. Prediction of ecosystem effects from laboratory studies is difficult. Laboratory studies cannot take into account the effects of environmental factors which may add to the effects of contaminant stress. NOAELs were generally selected from studies using single contaminant exposure scenarios. Species utilizing the Dry Run Creek site are exposed to a variety of contaminants. There is very little information available in the literature regarding the rates of incidental soil/sediment ingestion for wildlife species. In this risk assessment, most of these values were based on estimates reported for species similar to the indicator species. Exposure concentrations were calculated for each target receptor species based on levels of contaminants detected in site media, daily food ingestion rates, incidental soil/sediment ingestion rates, and body weight reported in the literature. Tnis ecological risk assessment was conducted with the intent of completing a baseline risk assessment. In this risk evaluation it is concluded that a "potential ecological risk" exists if the HQ calculated from the maximum area concentration and the NOAEL equals or exceeds one. Within the calculation spreadsheets, alternate calculations were made using LOAEL toxicity benchmarks. CONCLUSIONS 7.1 Benthic Invertebrate Community Structure and Function Data from both the benthic survey and the toxicity tests indicate that fluoride and metal contamination may be a significant problem in Dry Run. Numerous fish kills historically reported in Dry Run also 50 000061 USFW 0637 provide evidence for potential effects on the benthic community. 7.2 Soil Invertebrate Community Structure and Function The structure and function of the soil invertebrate community does not appear to be at risk under current conditions found at the Dry Run Creek site. However, since earthworms comprise a significant amount of the forage base of some organisms (e.g. American robins, short-tail shrews, etc.), food chain problems may result from contaminants being tied up in the earthworm tissue. Based on our food chain models, it appears that this may be the case. 7.3 Fish Communities It was shown through the results of the fathead minnow bioassay, that larval fish were susceptible to contamination currently present near the landfill outfall at Dry Run. This finding is further supported by the results of the benthic invertebrate toxicity tests, where toxicity was observed at the same location. Negative effects of contaminants on the benthic community may directly affect fish communities, in that a portion of the fish food base in Dry Run (i.e. benthic invertebrates) may also be removed from the system. Reports of historical fish kills are also an important piece of evidence that suggests an ecological risk. In addition, high levels of metals were noted in the fish, which may present problems to upper level consumers due to dietary toxicity. 7.4 Worm-eating Birds Results of the food chain model for worm-eating birds such as the American robin indicate a potential risk due to metals, fluoride, and trichiorofluoromethane. This risk is associated with these contaminants in the soil and/or in earthworm tissue. Reports of historical wildlife kills also suggest ecological risk to avian receptors. 7.5 Carnivorous Birds Results of the food chain model for carnivorous birds such as the red-tail hawk indicate a potential risk due to metals, fluoride, and trichiorofluoromethane. This risk is associated with these contaminants in the soil and-'or in small mammal tissue. Reports of historical wildlife kills also suggest ecological risk to avian receptors. 7.6 Carnivorous Mammals Results of the food chain model for terrestrially feeding carnivorous mammals such as the red fox indicate a potential risk due to metals, fluoride, and trichiorofluoromethane. This risk is associated with these contaminants in the soil and/or in small mammal tissue. Reports of historical wildlife kills also suggest ecological risk to mammalian receptors. 7.7 Piscivorous Mammals Results of the food chain mode! for piscivorous mammals such as the mink indicate a potential risk due to metals, fluoride, and trichiorofluoromethane. This risk is associated with these contaminants in the soil and/or in fish tissue. Repons of historical wildlife kills also suggest ecological risk to mammalian receptors. 7.8 Omnivorous Mammals 51 000062 USFW 0638 Results of the food chain model for omnivorous mammals such as the raccoon indicate a potential risk due to metals, fluoride, and trichlorofluoromethane. This risk is associated with these contaminants in the soil and/or in fish tissue. Reports of historical wildlife kills also suggest ecological risk to mammalian receptors. 7.9 Insectivorous Mammals Results of the food chain model for insectivorous mammals such as the short-tail shrew indicate a potential risk due to metals, fluoride, and trichlorofluoromethane. This risk is associated with these contaminants in the soil and/or in earthworm tissue. Physiological abnormalities, specifically the tooth structure of the shrews taken on site, further suggest ecological risk. In addition to the direct potential risk for the shrews, some of these animals had high concentrations of metals and fluoride in their tissues. This could present problems to organisms that feed on shrews and other small mammals on the site due to dietary toxicity. Reports of historical wildlife kills also suggest ecological risk to mammalian receptors. 7.10 Herbivorous Mammals Results of the food chain model for herbivorous mammals such as the meadow vole indicate a potential risk due to metals, fluoride, and trichlorofluoromethane. This risk is associated with these contaminants in the soil and/or in plant tissue. In addition to the direct potential risk for the voles, some of these animals had high concentrations of metals and fluoride in their tissues. This could present problems to organisms that feed on voles and other small mammals on the site due to dietary toxicity. Reports of historical wildlife kills also suggest ecological risk to mammalian receptors. SUMMARY During the past several years, a farmer who grazes his cattle along the reach of Dry Run Creek, has reported severe abnormalities in his herd. These abnormalities have included an increased incidence of stillborn calves, blindness in newborn and adult cattle, erratic behavior, stiffness of gait in adult cattle, abnormal posture, mottled teeth, and a high mortality rate across all age classes of his herd. In addition to problems with his herd, the farmer and others have also reported numerous fish kills in Dry Run, and wildlife kills (e.g. deer) for animals drinking from Dry Run. The results of this risk assessment support his assertion that effluent from the Dry Run Creek landfill may be having adverse effects on the ecological communities that inhabit the old field, deciduous forest, meadow, stream, and riparian habitats that are present on the site. These effects may be related to enriched levels of metals, fluoride, and trichlorofluoromethane that appear to be resultant of the landfill drainage. At a minimum, the symptoms manifest by the herd are characteristic of fluoride toxicity, and consistent with the conclusions of the risk assessment. In addition to the compounds that were studied in this risk assessment, numerous other compounds were present in Dry Run (specifically those identified as TICs or Tentatively Identified Compounds in the BNA scan) that could not be accurately identified. These compounds may also present a threat to the system, an certainly merit further investigation. The DuPont landfill that drains into Dry Run is the only apparent source of trichlorofluoromethane in soils adjacent to the stream. 000063 USFW 0639 LITERATURE CITED Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1990. Toxicological Profilefo r Aluminum. Prepared by Sciences International Inc. Under U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Contract No. 205-93-0606. Research Triangle Park, NC. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1990. Toxicological Profilefor Manganese. Prepared by Sciences International Inc. Under U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Contract No. 205-93-0606. Research Triangle Park, NC. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1991. Toxicological Profilefor Vanadium. Prepared by Sciences International Inc. Under U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Contract No. 205-93-0606. Research Triangle Park, NC. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1993. Toxicological Profilefo r Beryllium. Prepared by Sciences International Inc. Under U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Contract No. 205-93-0606. Research Triangle Park, NC. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1996. Toxicological Profilefor Nickel. Prepared by Sciences International Inc. Under U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Contract No. 205-93-0606. Research Triangle Park, NC. Ambrose, A.M., P.S. Larson, and J.F. Borzelleca. 1976. "Long-term toxicological assessment of nickel in rats and dogs." J. Food. Sci. Techno!,. 13:181-187. Barbour, R.W. and W.H. Davis. 1974. Mammals o f Kentucky. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press. 322p. Bamthouse, L.W., G.W. Suter, S.M. Bartell, J.J. Beauchamp, R.H. Gardner, E. Linder, R.V. O'Neill and A.E. Rosen. 1986. Users Manualfor Ecological Risk Assessment. Publication Number 2679, ORNL-6251. Environmental Services Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. Beyer, W.N., E.E. Conner, and S. Gerould. 1994. "Estimates of Soil Ingestion by Wildlife." J. Wild!. Manage., 58(2):375-382. Brooks, L. 1988. "Inhibition of NADPH-cytochrome c reductase and attenuation of acute diethylnitrosamine hepatotoxicity by copper." Ph.D. Dissertation, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J Bull, J. And J. Farrand, Jr. 1977. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Birds, Eastern Region. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Burton, P. 1989. Birds o f Prey o f the World. New York, NY: W.H. Smith Publishers. Byerrum, R.U., R.E. Eckardt, L.L. Hopkins. 1974. Vanadium. Washington, D.C. National Academy of Sciences. *. - i * ' 7 i, 53 000064 USFW 0640 Calder, W.A., and E.J. Braun. 1983. "Scaling of osmotic regulation in mammals and birds." American Journal o f Physiology, 244: R601-R606. Castranova, V., L. Bowman, and J.R. Wright. 1984. "Toxicity of Metallic Ions in the Lung: Effects on Alveolar Macrophages and Alveolar Type II Cells." J. Toxicol. Environ. Health 13:845-856. Clark, D.R. Jr. 1979. "Lead Concentrations: Bats vs. Terrestrial Mammals Collected near a Major Highway." Environ. Sci. Tech., 13:338-341. Dean, C.E., B.M. Hargis and P.S. Hargis. 1991. "Effects ofZinc Toxicity on Thyroid Function and Histology in Broiler Chicks." Toxicol. Letters, 57:309-318. DeGraaf, R.M. and D.D. Rudis. 1983. New England Wildlife: Habitat, Natural History, and Distribution. Amherst, MA. The University of Massachusetts Press. DeMayo, A., M.C. Taylor and K.W. Taylor. 1982. "Effects of Copper on Humans, Laboratory and Farm Animals, Terrestrial Plants and Aquatic Life." CRC Critical Reviews in Environmental Control, 12(3): 183-255. Dixon, R.L., R.J. Sherins, and I.P. Lee. 1979. "Assessment of Environmental Factors Affecting Male Fertility." Environmental Health Perspectives. 30:53-68. Edwards, C.A. and J.R. Lofty. 1977. The Biology o f Earthworms. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY. Ehrlich, P.R., D.S. Dobkin, and D. Wheve. 1988. The Birders Handbook. Simon and Schuster, Fireside. New York. 785 pp. Eisler, R. 1986. "Chromium Hazards to Fish, Wildlife, and Invertebrates: a Synoptic Review." U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report, 85(1.86). 60p. Eisler, R. 1988a. "Arsenic Hazards to Fish, Wildlife, and Invertebrates: A Synoptic Review." U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(1.12). Eisler, R. 1988b. "Lead Hazards to Fish, Wildlife, and Invertebrates: A Synoptic Review." United States Fish and Wildlife Biological Report. 85(1.14). Evan, A.P. and W.G. Dail. 1974. "The Effects of Sodium Chromate on the Proximal Tubules of the Rat Kidney." Lab. Invest., 30:704-715 In: Steven, J.D., L.J. Davies, E.K. Stanley, R.A. Abbott, M. Inhat, L. Bidstrup, and J.F. Jaworski. 1976. "Effects of Chromium in the Canadian Environment." Nat. Res. Counc. Can., NRCC No. 15017. 168p. Fleming, W.J. and C.A. Schuler. 1988. "Influence of the Method of Fluoride Administration on Toxicity and Fluoride Concentrations in Japanese Quail." Environmental Toxicology and Chemistr. 7(10):841-846. Fleming, W.J., C.E. Grue, C.A. Schuler, and C.M. Bunck. 1987. "Effects of Oral Doses of Fluoride on Nestling European Starlings." Arch. Env. Coni. Toxicol. 16(4): 483-490. Gianutsos, G. and M.T. Murray. 1982. "Alterations in Brain Dopamine and GABA Following Inorganic or Organic Manganese Administration." Neurotoxicol. 3:75-81. Goldman, E.A. 1950. Raccoons o f North and Middle America. Washington, DC: U.S. Fish and Wildl. Service. 000065 USFW 0641 Effects on Aquatic Biota: 1994 Revision. ES/ER/TM-96/RI, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. Suttie, J.W. 1977. "Effects of Fluoride on Livestock? Journal o f Occupational Medicine. 19(l):40-48. Tyson, E.L. 1950. "Summer Food Habits of ibe Raccoon in Southwest Washington." J. Mammal, 31:448-449. U .S . Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1981. An exposure and risk assessmentfor arsenic. Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Criteria and Standards Division, Washington, D.C. EPA-440/4-85-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1985. Ambient water quality criteriafo r arsenic. Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Criteria and Standards Division, Washington, D.C. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1985. Methodsfo r Measuring the Acute Toxicity o f Effluents to Freshwater and Marine Organisms. United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/4-85/013. ' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance fo r Superfund. Volume 1. Washington, D.C. EPA/540/1-89/002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1992. Ambient Water Quality Criteriafo r the Protection o fAquatic Life. Federal Register. Volume 57. No. 246. December 22. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1993. Wildlife Exposure Factors Handbook, Volume 1 o f11. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C. EPA/600/R-93/187a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), 1994. Methodsfor Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation o fSediment-Associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates. United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/R-94/024. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1995. Revised Region 111 BTAG Benchmark Values. U.S. EPA Region III BTAG. Technical Support Section. Philadelphia, PA. Van Zinderen Bakker and J.F. Jaworski. 1980. Effects o f Vanadium in the Canadian Environment. Ottawa, Canada: National Research Council of Canada, Associate Committee Scientific Criteria for Environmental Quality. Venugopal, B. and T.D. Luckey. 1978. Metal Toxicity in Mammals: 2. Chemical Toxicity o f Metals andMetalloids. Plenum Press, New York, NY. Wiebel, F.J., J.C. Leutz, L.Diamond and H.V. Gelboin. 1971. "Aryl Hydrocarbon (Benzo(a)pyrene) Hydroxylase in Microsomes from Rat Tissues: Differential Inhibition and Stimulation by Benzoflavones and Organic Solvents." Arch. Biochem. Biophys., 144:78-86. Wixson, B.G. and B.E. Davis. 1993. "Lead in Soil." Lead in Soil Task Force, Science Reviews, Northwood. 132 pp. Woolson, E.A. 1975. Arsenical pesticides. ACS Ser 7:1 - 176 (as cited in Eisler, 994). 000066 USFW 0642 USFW 0643 I 000067 APPENDIX A Small Mammal Data Sheets Dry Run Creek site Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 000068 USFW 0644 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name /.i Location No. T i J " ^ _ Sample No. Collector K f vI C Processor . . . V-v^ Date Collected C / /> / c <"7 Dale Processed /V / / / / c? ~j Gcnus/Spccies"R fc. ' f </) c. UrYD*>f is- ulcL v?Trap Type Sp^~ Total(mm) U Tail (mml X? ?> Hind Foot (mml J \ Ear (mm). Weight(g)____Ui :______________________ Partial (ftTioio1 [circle one) (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y(_N^______________________ Endoparasites: Y N ________________ _______ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) rMale Testicle Wt (g): I______ R. L Testicle (mm): L u R Testicle (mm): L W *2-- W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Ovary Weight (g): L______ R_______ Left Ovary (mm): L______ W______ Right Ovary (mm): L W Ak Placental Scars L_____ R Embryos (no.) L_______R________ Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)_____ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) I Z. COMMENTS l /4 Dorsal Pelage Color 4 ! I' ^ j Ventral Pelage Color (_f ' y Sidc Pelage Color_ t n I n JHC < / ' Age Based on Sex Organs: juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: fJuycnilte Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: JtTvenik Subadult Adult (circle one) Comments: 000069 USFW 0645 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING &\25 < Small Minimal Data Sheet Sit??Namg Location No. C - Tj, - ^ Sample No---------------------- Collector H ^ \ YN*-___________________ __ Processor t-ltW .C.-_____________________ Date Collected--fr/t t ------DateProcessed fc ( t l (SL'7----- nm ,,t /!r iw 7 p p ! aS W a . o uCtt Tmp Tvoe M Use m^ S p i d J Live (edMcirclc one) Total(m m )_ Si__ Tail (mm) ~7tT . Hind Foot (mml '3- Ear(mra)_------- Weiphupi jfr , M-____________________ _ - Partial (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y (fTL______________________ Endoparasites: Y N _______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): 1. R 1. Testicle (mml: L R Testicle, (mml: L W W Semina] Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) (Female^/ Ovary Weight (g): L_ R Left Ovary (mm): L_ Right Ovary (mm): L. W_ , W Placenta] Scars L Embryos (no.) L R .......... R Mammaries: (Small /Large Lactaring (circle one) Vagina: macSveXfomified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. StageTnulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g) w/o Ovaries (g) _ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) O' ^____ ?: f L____ R____ L () : 1 R O > ___________ COMMENTS ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ Dorsal Pelage Color '/<! ^>'\i Ventral Pelage Color Age Based on Sex Organs: Ouvenil; Subadult Adult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile' Subadult Adult Age Based on Pelage: iuveme Subadult Adult Side Pelage Color ( vR- (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000070 USFW 0646 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet 2#Site Name. f i u M Location No. f t L ~ C- " l & Sample No. < 3 c)'7 3 ~ Q Q l & y Collector fovC / /*s Cf Processor /V c` / /V' rL Date Collected ^ f *) f 5 7 Date Processed (e f *1j *7 7 fienus/Species -nh (i Ci C t KJ A h fY \.` r * t i f f s g TVPC _______ Live (bead^ (circle one) Tntaltmml / c c Tail (mm) 3 V Hind Foot (mm) /2_ EarUnmLjZ___ _ W e i g h t ( g ) ^ ______________________ Partial Whole (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y __________________ ____ Endoparasites: Y frb Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male^ Testicle Wt (g): L R I. Testicle (mm): L s H -W ,2> R Testicle (mm): L 2. _w_j>___ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L_ R Left Ovary (mm): L_ Right Ovary (mm): L W, W Placental Scars L___ R Embryos (no.) L R Mammaries: Small Large Lactaring (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Coraified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (e) w/o Ovaries (e) ORCAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus / C.A' V ' WEIGHT (g) o . c/______ O /______ L_____ R____ L O- 1 R r> / ___________ ___________ COMMENTS ''?>< -n i , / Dorsal Pelage Color 4 Ventral Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult<Adult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult Adult Age Based on Pelage. Juvenile Subadult AcTult. Side Pelage Color. (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000071 USFW 0647 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mtnunal Data Sheet Site Name (/' < . j Location No. JU --L - ________ Sample No.w-?~f Collector i^ r <'v('____________________ _ Processor / v l _____________________ Date Collected A h r i&~> _ ^ Date Processed___ t a r <0 ~___ frenus/Species l ,r r i-.'i Trap Type_____________________ Live Dead (circle one) T otai(m m )_fil___ Tail (mm) 9- . Hind Foot Imml / f Ear (mm) 6 Weightfel h .- ___________________________ Partial Whole (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y N________________________ Endoparasites: Y N Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L R L Testicle (mm): L ^ W_ -- R Testicle (mm): L W Seminal Vesicle: v-SniaiLi Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Conv^circle one) Female Ovary Weight ie): L . R _ _ Left Ovarv (mm): L _ . W Right Ovary (mm): L W_ _ _ Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R R............... Mammaries: Small Large Lactaring (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulii Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/Ovaries (e) w/o Ovaries (e) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) > f:______ * >_____ L____ R____ L i J __ R__J_ ___________ COMMENTS ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ S ? Dorsal Pelage Color________ Ventral Pelage Color_________ Side Pelage Color Age Basedon Sex Organs. Age Basedon Body Size: Age Basedon Pelage: Juvenile (SubadiHi Adult (circle one) Juvenile 'SttbstfulETicTult' (circle one) Juvenile Subadult^cduTt (circleone) Comments: i ' ', i j v< 000072 USFW 0648 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name. W u C W a Location No.~ 0 \ ` C ^ Sample No.. Collector f i x rX Processor Date Collected (s - t ' `j 7 Date Processed 6 / / ^ b r tr c i C*v<-u.L <.-- Genus/Species^Z.'g / ' ^ Trap Type fiL i tu s* S p f c Total(mm) / o' l Tail (mm) 1 Z Hind Foot (mm) t 5 Ear (mm) Weight(g)_ Partial (Whole (circle one) ---- Live Qcad~ (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y (N Endoparasites: Y N __ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L______R_______ L Testicle (mm): L W (r R Testicle (mm): L ^ W Seminal Vesicle;_Small (l^irge (circle one) Epididymis: .Lonv: Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L______ R_______ Left Ovary (mm): L______W_______ Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W______ Placental Scars L_____ R______ Embryos (no.) L_______R________ Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)______ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (e) r. i ~ L____ R____ L_e_. R_L_^L COMMENTS ~ ___________ ___________ hic.si-. Dorsal Pelage Color X~'f- __ Ventral Pelage Color & Side Pelage Color. C i r t -i, Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circleone) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult(Adult (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult^Xdult (circle one) Comments: 000073 USFW 0649 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Dam Sheet Or^ III " CSite Name K-vV Location No Sample No.___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Collector_JW Ci__________________ _ _ _ Processor ______________________ Dale Collected (~J11^.2.---- M l Date Processed__ fj(U (6 7 . r,en,.Species Tnuifmm) IQS Weiphiie'> h r t rr .. A . Trap Type ifto U.VI S p c 1 L ix e < ;^ > (circle one) Tail (mm) J r Hind Foot (mm) /j~ Ear (mm)___ t ---- ________________________ Partial (Whofe (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y Endoparasites: Y N _ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Ti-oicle Wt igV L R I Testicle (mm): L tj R Testicle (mml: L W> W \_ Seminal Vesicle: CsmaU^-J-arge (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. (Not Conv./circle one) Female Ovarv Weight (g): L R ___ Left Ovarv (mm): L , W Right Ovary (mm): L . , W , _ Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R , R__ Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (e) w/o Ovaries (e) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) '. I____ C. .? L____ R L t -i R i _____________ COMMENTS ___________ _____________ ___________ ___________ _____________ Dorsal Pelage Color 6 ; Ventral Pelage Color Age Based on Sex Organs: JuvcnilerSubadidf. Adult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile CguBaSuip Adult Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile (ubadultJAdult Side Pelage Color, U (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments 000074 USFW 0650 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name D t n (*?a Location No. 1U_ ~ ^ I Collector VAC > r c ^ k t Processor ", .' r. K ~^ ' Sample No---------------------- Date Collected (r ~ ) I ' / Date Processed (r ` I I *7 ~V r.enn<^Speeie<; S\ (( u>f n c, lu -n ^Trap Type fl \ -M**v-->v^ S ^ C t g j Livc/l^Dcad` (circle one) Total!mmll 1C Tail Imml -)g| Hind Foot Imml -----M e Ear imml t % '-- " Weight(g)__2_S__U_______________________ Partialf^Whole (circle one) Ectoparasites: N_______________________ Endoparasites: Y N _______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male LR :L W :L W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) (Female ^ Ovary Weight (g): L R Left Ovary (mm): L Right Ovary (mm): L W w Placental Scars L_____ R______ Embryos (no.) L t R /_____ Mammaries: Small Large Lactatmg_4circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified TurgidQPluggeil (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle~dne) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g) organ w e ig h t (g) CQMMEMIS Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus ZZ :. I____ L_____ R____ LC1. I R C -- ___________ ZZZIII ___________________ ___________________ ___________________ ___________________ ___________________ ...\\i.rrt. ,C: *. i . f. Dorsal Pelage Color t ~ Ventral Pelage Color`d _____ Side Pelage Color 1^ TC- >n c V Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult^Adult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult (Adult Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 00007S USFW 0651 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name 2u i'V'J -Location No. ITU - Cl - S ______ Sample NotX ?-?3 ~COi V Collector -- _________________ _ Pmeegtnr ----r __________________ Date Collected Ce U C ) ^ Dale Processed /.--7ic ''f_____ CemK/Speciec . -'TrapTvne .<<->- < r t f 9^ Live/beady (circle one) TotaUmm'i Tail (mml :-? Hind Foot (mm) M Ear(nun)__ IJ__ Weight(g)___________Z l.- `r >_____________ Partial vWhotfc^ (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y / N _ _ _ __________________ Endoparasites: Y / N _ _ ____________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male) _^ Testicle Wt (g): L R L Testicle (mm): L. v .' W ^ R Testicle (mm): L W^ Seminal Vesicle: 1Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weieht (e): L R Left Ovary imml: L Rieht Ovarv imm): L W __ W Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R R ____ Mammaries: Small Large Lactaring (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Rcpr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovanes (e) w/o Ovaries (e) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) '^ ' ;______ L____ R____ L R' ^ ___________ COMMENTS ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ Dorsal Pelage Color________ Ventral Pelage Color Side Pelage Color Age Based on Sex Organs. Juvenile SubadultfAdujT (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult (circleone) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult X3ult/ (circle one) Comments: 000076 USFW 0652  - /Z 2 . SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Dam Sheet SiteNameTMiA LocationNoHV -C ~ Collector Ur\\ tWS Wv_________ Processor i -t a m - _______________________ Sample No., Date Collected H u>| D ale Processed (l> | W I a! 7 ftenus/Snecies V\ ir t ft Trap Type TV>V^gu ^ 1 ---- Live >ead^ (circle one) HH? Totalfmmt DA-u- tt-P Tail (mml St T Hind Foot (mm) Ear(mm)_ J2___ T----- W e i g h t ( g ) ^ _________________ Partial (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y Endoparasites: Y Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Testicle Wt (g): L R L Testicle (mm): L i 0 W (R Testicle (mm): L *7 W % Seminal Vesicle: Small ^argSH(circle one) Epididymis: (UonV;> Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L R_ Left Ovary (mm): L______ W. Right Ovary (mm): L W. Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R R Mammaries: Small Large 1aerating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g) _____ w/o Ovaries (g) _____ ORGAN Liver Spleen 5 Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) C . s ____ _ Q _ J _____ L____ R____ LC-.L. Rj L-2- COMMENIS J' Dorsal Pelage Color ys'Ki Ventral Pelage Colori ^ -Side Pelage Color t vi C r rH f d > Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile SubadulC^duh' (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult ,Aauu (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult (circle one) Comments: 000077 / USFIV 0653 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name. 'iZL! Location No. ^ 7 7 ^ * ^_ Sample No. Co1lector____ Prncessor rhJ^,~r f?A~ Date Collected_ C J r Z K Pe pate Processed 7 f / 2 |/ fr' 7 r.fmic/Sperie<; A/, . ^ n - - V/J >a, ^ iTrapTypc 5 ^ > g c Li ve g e ic p (circle one) Tntal(mm) /<-y Tail (mm) Hind Foot (mm) _ ~ Ear (mm) Weight(g)________ 4 -? 3 _________________ Partial /frhol^ [circle one) Ectoparasites: Y Endoparasites: Y / N / Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (gl: L R 1. Testicle (mml: L R Testicle (mm): L W W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female J Ovarv Weight fg): L ---- ft-- Left Ovarvimm): L -----W-- Right Ovarv (mm): L - -~w Placental Scars L_____ R______ , Embryos (no.) L._ J 2 _ R ----- 4 - 4 - -------- Mammaries: Small (Carge) Lactaiing^jCcktf one) Vagina: Inactive Comifted Turgid Plugge<ly(circie one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus WEIGHT (g) r,,! LR COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color________ Ventral Pelage Color_________ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Age Based on Body Size: Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult Adult Juvenile Subadult Adult Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) (circleone) (circleone) Comments: 000078 USFW 0654 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING 3= f Z ? Snudi Mamma] Data Sheet Site Name ~bCM 0 iO Location No. ~ Sample No._ Collector_ Processor Date Collected Date Processed o h i Q T fenus/Snecies iU c - o i r> P i A ^ y ^ . T r n t e T v p c ___S P tc iK , Liyc( ) a d ) (circle one) TotaKmml IDPd Tail (mmi 2 I Hind Foot imm ita Earfmmi U Weight(g)___________ "Z-D 'tj Wholey(circle one) Ectoparasites: {) N ,, Endoparasites: Y N _________ Savc^ Discarded ^(circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L______ R______ L Testicle (mm): L______ W______ R Testicle (mm): L______ W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L. Left Ovary (mm): L______W. Right Ovary (mm): L W. \ Placental Scars L R_ Embryos (no.) L______ R. Mammaries: Small Large 1actaring (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one)^ Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g) _____ w/o Ovaries (g) JcW & ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) 0-1# nI L____ R____ L C-I R D1 ___________ COMMENTS ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ Dorsal Pelage Color________ Ventral Pelage Color_________ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circleone) Comments: ? *t * 000079 USFW 0655 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal p m Sheet Site N amr F)r*i Location N o 7H ~ t ~ 12~___________ Sample No. Collector Processor I fD j.j'S U r r v * ._________ !_________________ D alcC oU ected f c - . V f i ? . ------ Date Processed H - 3. ~ ^ -- fiwM.s/Species R L s.~>c. Trap Type /^ w y w iV l Sfli't-m l Live ^ S ^ J c i r c l e one) Tntairm ml 9 7 Tail (m in') -2> Hind Foot Imtnl M E a r(m m )_ i2 ______ W cipht/pi . A ________________________ P artial W hole (circleo n e ) E ctoparasites: Y ( N j _____________________________ E ndoparasites: Y ( F r ;_____________________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) M aleJ Testicle Wt (g): L___ R_____ X Testicle (mm): L_3_ W__ R Testicle (mm): L_Jx W__ i Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary W eight (g): L R_ L eft O vary (mm): L_______ W. R ight O vary (mm): L_______ W. Placental Scars L_______R _____ E m bryos (no.) L________ R M ammaries: Small Large Lactaring (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Cornified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi M ulti (circle one) U terus w / O varies ( g ) _______ w /o O varies ( g ) ________ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus TY-e /A >YE]HIig) C* 0 r. i L____ R____ LE. i R M f ^ COMMENTS -- ' ! o c k -tv t VA. Dorsal Pelage Color E lllJU -- Ventral Pelage Color ^ *7 Side Pelage Color ^ ^ y Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult sAdult' (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult <A3u)I (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile SubadukrAcfult (circleone) Comments: 000080 USFW 0656 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Daa Sheet Site Name D r,- Location No fTf - F - / 1 Sample NojO?793 " OO U Collector Processor _____________________ _________________ _ Dale Collected__ ( I tf i s J .---- d / 1 Date Processed__ Cxiif.lSLJ.-------- r,m ,.s/Snecies M a r t i n h r r s , f c .rU Trap Type Sf,-Cla ( Live Totakmml Tail (mml d Hind Foot (mml Ear (mm)---- ----- WeiphtiPl /(.. 1 _______________________ Partial (W hde^circle one) (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y $ _______________________ Endoparasites: Y N _______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) "Male Testicle Wt (g): L______R_______ L Testicle (mm): L J R Testicle (mm): L a W 9___ Seminal Vesicle: CsmaiP Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. T^pt Cony, (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L______ R_ Left Ovary (mm): L______ W. Right Ovary (mm): L W, Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R R Mammaries: Small Large locating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) RepT. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g) _ _ _ w/o Ovaries (g) _____ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) COMMENTS k J 4<=rA Dorsal Pelage Color _ _ _ _ _ Ventral Pelage Color Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: JuvcnilriQSubadujtjAdult (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile QSubadulTyAdult (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile SubadulT(Adulp (circle one) Comments: ''if .w.; 000081 USFW 0657 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name J)i Location No. 'i ' ~ A Sample No. Collector 1 ' n ,-T^ ~ C ^ C.O_______ Prncmnr - /-A fJ_______________ Dale Collected & ' " ? ? Date Processed C~ / < 9 7 ... r>mit/Spf.rif<i e3 p u s V\ uvi S eVl u \ S Trap Tvpc IVm Ljj,e cad (circle one) Tntalimm) r Tail (mm) ~7C Hind Foot (mm) Z / Ear (mm) / ? Weight(g)__Ul__2________________ _______ Partial /Whole (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y \ N __________ ,____________ Endoparasites: Y N _______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Trstir.le Wt (p,V I. R. . ,,, L Testicle (mm): L R Testicle (mm): L W W Seminal Vesicle: . Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L , . R Left Ovarv (mm): L , W , Right Ovary (mm): L , W Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R . . R, _ . _ _ Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovanes (g) w/o Ovaries (p) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) L____ R____ L___- R C 1 COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color!; i Ventral Pelage Color ' (*f< Side Pelage Color 1 Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circleone) , >MX<f Comments: 000082 USFW 0658 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Namel y ..-I P-t-\ Location No. V C I Collector ^ P ' C T c- t "______________ Processor H e > K U-__________________ ' I Z- _ Sample No. Date Collected L' <1 ^ 7 Date Processed 11 c) / C.enus/Species f l u L f r . p < ! W.<v,tuTrap Type_____________________ Live Totalimml Tail (mini Hind Foot (mm) Ear (nun)_ Weightier /J *> ________________________ Partial AvKoft^circle one) (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y (2. Endoparasites: Y N _ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt igl: L ' R 1. Testicle (ram): L ^__W _ R Testicle immt: L > W "t Frminal Vesicle- (Sm 5\. Large (circle onel Epididymis: Conv. (Not Conv,'(circle one) Female Ovary Weight (e): L ,, R Left Ovarv (mm): L , . W Right Ovary (mml: L W Placental Scars L _R_ Embryos (no.) L R Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (el w/o Ovaries (el ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus w e ig h t (g) !i U- 1 L R____ L 0 ~ R0 l ___________ COMMENTS _____________ _____________ _____________ _____________ ___________ Dorsal Pelage Color -,vf-,%.ycntral Pelage Color ^ Side Pelage Color T rjT s r /IV// ,c. i"*' Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile ubadult Adult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile puhhduU' Adult Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile SubaruIt Adult (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000083 USFW OfWa SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name /)-/ Location Nn. lP " & " ) Q _ Sample No. Collector 4 A Processor <-,#^>ArZ Date Collected Date Processed L>/ / Z. !cl f r.rnnc/^prrir ^ ^ ^ * '' ^jiC-c.OTV'b ^ ? - Trap Tvpe Mi'~> *5V<'*><*Live (5cad) (circle one) Tntai/mmi Vc Tail (mm) ! *> Hind Foot ( n u n ) _ J s v Ear(mm)__J_ Weight(g)__________ Cefi ` Partial' /Wih-o-.l-e) (/circIleone)' Ectoparasites: Y < |/_ Endoparasites: Y Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male T estic le Wt (g): 1. R_ _ ------ \ /Fem ale J '''"'^OvSrvWeight <g): L __ R 1. Testicle imm): L, __ W R Testicle (mm): L W_____ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Left Ovarv (mm): L . W Right Ovarv (mm): L ____ W__ Placental Scars L R Embrvos (no.) L _____ R ___ Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries fe) w/o Ovaries (e) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Ridnev Thvmus WEIGHT (g) r. . 9 S-. 1 LR Lc.' I R C ! COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color____ __ Ventral Pelage Color_ _____ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult Adult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult Adult Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000084 USFW 0660 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Snudi Mammal Dam Sheet Site Name. 0 ^ Location No. ^~ Sample No._______ Collector 'S /lfik Z Processor_ TQSJ ________ Date Collected Date Processed // Z Cienus/Soecies f i t -i-1// _ Trap Tvne S P f g # ' - ' Live ^catT)(circle one) TotaUmm) / 3 - Taili mm1 Hind Fflfinmml -rrS~ 2 0 Ear (mml t S __ Weight(g)_ _____ / 3 --Z-______ frhoje) (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y Endoparasites: Y ^ N ^ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt igl: L R L Testicle (ram): L .... ......W _ R Testicle fmml: L W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) ^Female j Ovary Weight (g): L_ R Left Ovary (mm): L_ Right Ovary (mm): L, W W / / / ) i y n ~fo /y n & J M C - Placental Scars L Embrvos ino.l L R_ R Mammaries: Small Large Lactating Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g). w/o Ovaries (g). organ Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus w e ig h t ig) /0 > L_____ R_____ LA i RO I _____________ COMMENTS _____________ _____________ _____________ _____________ _____________ Dorsal Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Age Based on Body Size: Age Based on Pelage: Ventral Pelage Color_ Side Pelage Color, ubadult Adult Subadult Adult Subadult Adult (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000085 USFW 0661 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Namely >J 'R Li v \ Location No. R e i - A Gr Sample No. Collector T l c. <- j - V _______________________ Processor i-u .. _________________ D ate Collected 11 C' 3 Date Processed ' i l cl~'i C.emis/Species"P>\ ^ iils h , v Trap Type fV: a Spec Totalimm) f ' f\ Tail fmm) I t Hind Foot (mm) f Ear (mm). Weipht(p) t S /_________ ______________ Partial (Whole* (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y Q j_______________________ Endoparasites: Y _______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L_ R L Testicle (mm): L. R Testicle (mm): L W W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L_ R,, Left Ovary (mm): L_ Right Ovarv (mm): L W W Placental Scars L Embrvos(no.) L R R Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g) w/o Ovaries (g) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT <e) . C L___ R______ LJ__ R_____ / ___________ COMMENTS ~ V t t, ____________ t f t X ( ______________________ Dorsal Pelage Coloni / t Ventral Pelage Color Side Pelage Color r t 1/ Age Based on Sex Organs: . Juvenile Subadult Adult Age Based on Body Size: (TuvenHe Subadult Adult Age Based on Pelage: /Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000086 USFW 0662 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Snudi Mammal Data Sheet Site Name fZOd Location No. (2. - A - 11 Sample No. Collector Processor bl ______________ rfOi* i fi-j___________' Date Collected. b l i s i f l . Date Processed /., `fi fr?? ji Q9 1l r.enuq/Speciec ^Ctfv/.CVPc'V^rap Type A/ddsfct/A/ f i P t C</feivc D eai^circle one) TotaKmm)_L2l _ Tail (mml Hind Foot (mm) ! p Eartmml L V Weight(g)__________/ y ________________ Partial yfiole)(circle one) Ectoparasites: Endoparasites: Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) "" Male Testicle Wt (g): L______R_______ L Testicle (mm): L______W______ R Testicle (mm): L______W______ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Femalp' Ovary Weight (g): L______ R_ Left Ovary (mm): L______ W. Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W. Placental Scars L_____ R____ Embryos (no.) L_______R___ MammariesJ^ m a j p Large Lactaring (circle one) Vagina: /inacmje Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. StkgC"Nulli Semi Multi (circleone) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)_____ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (El O 9___ /" L____ R____ L j__ / R C- I ___________ COMMENTS _______ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ Dorsal Peiage Color________ Ventral Pelage Color________ Side Pelage Color Age Based on Sex Organs: . "Juvenile. Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: ]ittveitlje Subadult Adult (circle one) Comments: 00008"? USFW 0663 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name. CLt-W Location No. Q .& f ~ ( ' tD Sample No.. Collector_ Processor P{--"i t rtV T, t.ChJ Date Collected is> b2-) `b Date Processed / ^ / ^ f r.^ni.c/^p^rifc Q t w 'i1'- , ^ M L Trap Type Live i5ead) (circle one) Total!mm) /V. 3 Tail Him) Hind Foot (mm> "Zy--> Ear (mm)__L^l Weight(g)__________ Ht?- h?________________ Partial Whole Acircle one) Ectoparasites: Y ______________________ Endoparasites: Y>N^______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Testicle Wt (g): L______ R_______ L Testicle (mm): L R Testicle (mm): L WS W Seminal Vesicle: / "Sinai!; Large (circle one) Epididymis: C ontr-N ot Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L_______R_ Left Ovary (mm): L______ W. Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W. Placental Scars L_____ R____ Embryos (no.) L______ R___ Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)_____ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidnev Thvmus WEIGHT jg) r .9 LR L <l 1 R O 1 COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color_____ Ventral Pelage Color_ _____ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvcnily^SufeoduU Adult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile PSTjJawk Adult Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile SaoadultjAdult (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000088 USFW 0664 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING * Small M ammal Data Sheet Site Name. O r i -- Location No.. n e f - D - / S 7 'CO P . M Samnle No. rnlleetnr Pmemnr 1 _________________ Date Collected__ { IQ f f 7-- Date Processed__ 6 U l ,,/jj 7 ___ fiemn/Species L - .^<Trap Type / r f v s . - - < ^ r , T / Live ( 6 5 ^ (circle one) Totalimmi /V> Tail (mm) Hind Foot tmml t a r (mm)___ ____ W e igh t(g)_ i2 i_ _ i^ ______________________ Partial^W holejXcircle one) Ectoparasites: Y $ 2 _______________ _ Endoparasites: Y N ________________ _____ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Testicle Wt (g): L , R : L Testicle imml:L,<^ W 7 R Testicle imml: L jji_ w y Seminal Vesicle: Small (rgelftircle one) Epididymis: ^onvT^Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (el: L _ R __ Left Ovary (mml: L Right Ovary (mm): L W W, . Placental Scars L Embrvosino.l L R R Mammaries: Small Large 1.aerating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (el w/o Ovaries (el ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (el ______ C ' I______ L____ R____ L Q. L R ( ? ! ___________ COMMENTS ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ a. Dorsal Pelage Color&<~> Ventral Pelage Color ^ ^-j Side Pelage Colora r - \or hJ / M f /- rne Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subaduit (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000083 USFW 0665 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small M am m al D ata Sheet Site Name. D ry Location No. Q E F - E ~ 1 ------------ Sample N o i 2 2 ^ 2 2 H ^ _ Collector Processor U c r f J 4-__________________ __ ______________________ Date Collected___ ,,rfrf Date Processed__ U jc 'J Z ^ -------- flenus/Species f i k s t v : - Trap Type______ ____________ Live Dead (circle one) Total(mm)__9tL-- Tail (mml -3 9 Hind Foot (mm) ' > Ear (mm) 5 Weight(g)__AL_3__________________ _______ Partial ffitoTc)[circle one) Ectoparasites: Y __________ --___________ Endoparasites: Y N __________________ . Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt ipi: L R L Testicle (mm): L R Testicle (mm): L W W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L R Left Ovary (mm): L_ $ w A Right Ovary (mm): L <7 W 3 Placental Scars L Embrvosino.) L R R MaramanescLSmall) Large Lactaiwg (circle one) Vagina: hiacuvVComified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g) w/o Ovaries (g) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney i WEIGHT izl C.f 0 L____ R____ L/ ROi CQMMEffIS In -rly Dorsal Pelage Color __ Ventral Pelage Color__ _____ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile. SuhaduiyAdult (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult Adult? (circle one) Age Based on Pelage:* Juvenile Subadult/Adutr - (circle one) Comments: *, 000090 USFW 0666 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name Location No. ^ ^ *~ Sample N o.o Collector_ U>C ^ Processor, Daie Collected r / / ' * Date Processed " fimiK^W-rirc u >-f.-.TL--, A/o'-J-w^v aL ^t-iTran Type Livc^Ucad (circle one) Totai(mm)_LiXi---- Tail fmm) Hind Foot (mm) i Eartmmt > Z V-- Weight(g)_______ 3________________________ Partial ^Whoky' (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y /^ i, Endoparasites: Y^N. Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) ''"Male Testicle Wt (g): L______R. ; L Testicle (mm): L W _j R Testicle (mm): L Lr W *4 Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. NotConv. (circle one) Fem ale Ovary Weight (g): L_______ R_ Left Ovary (mm): L______ W. Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W. Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R R___ Mammaries: Small Large Lamting (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Muld (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)______ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT li) ' - ^_____ " 1______ L____ R____ LR ___________ COMMENTS ________ _ ___________ _________ _ ___________ Dorsal Pelage Color________ Ventral Pelage Color_____ _ _ Side Pelage Color, Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult AduK (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult X3ujt (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadull^tSdit; (circle one) Comments: Q00091 USFW 0667 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name Q.t Location No. (2.0. - G. ~ '2. _ Sample No. Collector fT ___________________ Processor rhJt^iCf-____________________ Date Collected ( I l C i t f ? Date Processed r.ennc/Species " 7 i v'<C /^u'^^rap Type P f c. </todve TotaUmml / O S _ Tail (mm)__2L__ Hind Foot (mm)..jL fc z z - E" (mm)--3 -- WeiphttPi /A V _____________ Partial /wholp/ (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y .^ ) ______________________ _ Endoparasites: Y /N 1_______________________ Saved Discarded (circleone) Saved Discarded (circle one) (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L_______R_______ L Testicle (mm): L______ W_______ R Testicle (mm): I-----------W_______ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Teraale J Dvary Weight (g): L_ Left Ovary (mm): L_ Right Ovary (mm): L. W_ W Placental Scars L_ Embryos (no.) L_ W d jb L Mammaries: grpsiY Large Lactaring (circle one) Vagina: ^nacjive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g). w/o Ovaries (g). ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus WEIGHT (cl c C 'J- LR L r R C l C.QMMEMS Dorsal Pelage C olor_____ ___ Ventral Pelage Color_ _____ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs. Subadult Adult Age Based on Body Size: Age Based on Pelage: fSubadult Adult Subadult Adult Comments: (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) 000092 USFW 0668 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name D ry Location No. R* P - ~ *1------------ Sample No------------- Collector Processor f _______________________ _____________________ Date Collected 6 h I A? 1 Date Processed__ / / j /j,Q ____ fienus/Snecies b r t* \ t Trap Type ... Z /P fttG 1 Live ( ^ 2 Totalimm) /O S Tail (mm) S)< IS Hind Foot (mm) / J Ear (mm) / 0 Weight(g)__j5ZS--_______________________ Partial ^VhoIeN (circle one) (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y (N. Endoparasites: Y N Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt ip): L R L Testicle (mm): L h W ^ R Testicle (mm): L W .? Seminal Vesicle: \SmglLi--ijarge (circle one) Epididymis: Conv (Not Cony (circle one) Female Ovarv Weight (g):L ....... R,,,. . Left Ovarv (mm): L... Right Ovary (mm): L W W Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R R Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (e) w/o Ovaries (g) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus WEIGHT (g) ' rr g . J _____ L____ R____ L O R'. ; CQMM EKIS Dorsal Pelage Color ^ T * -f Ventral Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile (SubaduB Adult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile 'Adult Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile >ubadultY\duli Side Pelage Color. (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) T Comments 000093 USFW 0669 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Ms=!nal Data Sheet Site Name TC.A < 2 Location No. ~ Sample No.. Collector__ ^ Processor_ ' j : ; ! o A-J Date Collected Date Processed i o W Z - N l r.ennc/isneries -Totalimml l-O-- 3- Weight(g). 3.2* w c.*u>.4 Trap Type uvl Tail (mm). ^ Hind Foot (mm). TtJ .1 .Z -J L - Partial c. , l Live to d ) (circle one) Ear (mm1 v---- Ectoparasites: Y7 Endoparasites: Y / Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) ' Male Testicle Wt (g): L______R_______ L Testicle (mm): L______W______ R Testicle (mm): L______W______ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) 'Temale Ovary Weight (g): L_______R_ Left Ovary (mm): L______ W. Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W. 's> A .i.v n i A Placental Scars L_____ R____ Embryos (no.) L_______R___ Mammaries: Small Large Laetating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)_____ ORGAN Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) ^ L____ R____ L /** >R Cj I ___________ COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color Z i- V ^ / v entrai Pelage Colori. Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile SubaduR-Adultv (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subaduli"A35t' (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult>tauTt' (circleone) Comments. 000094 USFW 0670 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Dam Sheet illSite Name. \ , Location No I T ? S r Sample No., Collector r v> f--' Processor -PV 1. J N ~v-\ Date Collected ( ! C - Date Processed (r ( f S ~~7 Ctenus/SpeciesT ^ g I' (..' TV) VA C (-*0 ^iiq?-'j rrapTvoe O lu s f l\w spec Live (Dead" (circle one) Totalim m ) i l? C~ Tail (mm) A ?? ___ Hind Foot (mm) -- Ear (mm). x z T - Wcight(g), -? C l f -------------------------- _________ Partial (Whole" (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y (N _______________________ Endoparasites: Y^Nj Saved Discarded (circleone) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt(g): L______R_______ L Testicle (mm): l----------W'______ R Testicle (mm): L_____ W______ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Ovary Weight (g): L. R. Left Ovary (mm): L W. Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W. Placental Scan L_____ R______ Embryos (no.) L______ R _ ______ MammarwR-^Small (Large Lactaring (circle one) Vagina:<inaciiye' Cornlited Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)______ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (e) ! iJ / rv L/ COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color (1 ft- Ventral Pelage Color ( t. W- Side Pelage Color 1A "K. * >KAl u i ST - -k*- Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile 'Subaduli Adult (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile rSubaduIT'Aduli (circle one) Age Based on Pelage. Juvenile/Subadult vVdult (circle one) Comments:' 000095 USFW 0671 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small M ammal D ata Sheet Silt Name r W Location No i- ~ ~ 0- --------- Sample No r niiym.. j-i' , .. - _ . ________________ _ Date Collected C } )c ) ' 5 t ----Date Processed Cg 1 Ie1~> Genus/Specis_/ Total!mm) 11 Weight(g)____ Tail (pm). LuLL. , TwP'Tvoe A- Cf-i-C >Pc. ir7<Live /tSeatT (circle one) Hind Foot (mm)__ Ear ( r am) _j j -- ' Partial ^ h o le ^ (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y/>T_________________ Endoparasitcs: Y "N ____________________ _ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L______ R_______ L Testicle (mm): 1______ W______ R Testicle (mm;: L______W______ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Ovary Weight (g): L. R Left Ovary (mm): L 'O W__f Right Ovary (nun): L -- W i Placental Scars L_____ R Embiyos(no.) L 1 / R / J Mammaries: Small Large Lactanng (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)______ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) ^ ; L -- - RL____ R : i i : > ___________ COMMENTS ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ Dorsal Pelage Color________ Ventral Pelage Color_________ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subaduh Adult, (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult Adult ` (circle one) Ago Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult Adult; (circle one) Comments: A 'fV 000096 USFW 0672 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name D f < Collector H e r v e Processor Location No. 31- A ~ / - ? Sample No. Date Collected AA Date Processed / ///? / g 7 fienus/Snecies r O P / * ,/A-.*Av/v.-TranType r f Live Total(mra)_ZaLL__ Tail (mm)___Z __ Hind Foot (mm). Ear (mm)-- 2 ------ W eight(g)__2JL2________________________ Partial (Whole (circle one) (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y ($1_______________________ Endoparasites: Y N _________________ _ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L R L Testicle (mm): L R Testicle (mm): L W W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (e): L R, Left Ovarv (mm): L W3 Right Ovary (mm): L /j- _ W V Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R _R Mammaries:(SmalL Large 1tearing (circleone) Vagina: Inactive tamifisE'Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (e) w/o Ovaries (e) QEGM Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) /y C J ______ L_____R____ L 0 2 R >7 COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color____ _ Ventral Pelage Color__ _____ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult ^dT N (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile tiubadu[t^AdtflT^ (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult(Aduir^ (circle one) Comments: 000097 USFW 0673 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small M ammal Data Sheet Site Namel y ^ LLocation No ! ^ ' A*~__ Sample No.. Collector ^ / ' ; <^ r~ Processor I-' / . Date Collected ( ' / ' ~ f f ^ Date Processed ' / / 1 V Cennc/<;pecies c > i'ln e te.m * - Tntalimml / ~1l Tail Imml '7 `--i WriphttPt X? C~ . '?_____________ Ectoparasites: Y\ K _ Endoparasites: Y NL Tran Tvoe Hi O SC.> i s p c C Live Dead Hind Foot (mm) 2 C Ear (mm) f (r Partial Whole.- (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L______R_______ L Testicle (mm): L______W______ R Testicle (mm): 1----------W______ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Ovary Weight (g): L______ R______ Left Ovary (mm): L______ W______ Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W_______ Placental Scars L_____ R______ Embryos (no.) L_______R Mammaries: Small Large Iaerating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)_____ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus WEIGHT (g) . R_ LT R. COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color (j * Ventral Pelage Color '+Sidc Pelage Color / >1 ^ --aV . / Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: (Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: (Juvenile Subadult Adult (circleone) Comments: *: , 000098 USFW 0674 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal D ata Sheet Site Nam^ H Location No. U S -.T T - l \ - Sample N o . J ^ r ? ' Q O i Q O Collector h i u ) t o U ___________________ Processor w n r V _______________ _ Date Collected / 9 / ^ 7 Date Processed (s f 4 / 9 7 ------ r.CTiit/SpMiesVVvrLr^iA.s ? t a/ u a y( oc^.o-g-rap Type Live ('Dcatf' (circle one) Total/mm) I A. S~ Tail (mml 5 'T Hind Foot (mm) f <S E a i(m m )_ _ L ti___ Weight(g)__2_51x_2i_______________________ Partial Whole (circle one) Ectoparasites: y ( n ^>______________________ Endoparasites: y K;_______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L______ R. L Testicle (mm): L______W. R Testicle (mm): L______ W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Ovary Weight (g): L t**b R. Left Ovary (mm): L / A W *2-- Right Ovary (mm): L / 2 - W 3> Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R R Mammarit5 ^ S n ali Large Lacraring (circle one) Vaginayjrucpvr^jmoifted Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: NulU^emiyMulti (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g) _____ w/o Ovaries (g)_____ organ WEIGHT (g) Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus / 7 cT J .____ L___ R LC .A R P . i y /c **y{*> C V COMMENTS 2- s e t * . / l l C t'riin i / <i J j W l c ' j-f / - U t /% S o f -f Dorsal Pelage C o l o r i 1- *1 Ventral Pelage Color `"^ ide Pelage Color / ^ h-fs- fU{ - e d , Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult 'Aduip (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult $duB (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult A^uTh (circleone) ^^ Comments: 1. 000099 USFW 0675 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Dr~/Site Name 7 Collector fteftJl-- Processor. 4 ta r t'J -- Location No._ Small Mammal Data Sheet ________ Sample No, Date Collected. Date Processed. "OQ\C5 V fienns/Snecies f f l . r r t T s z fiTKtu Trap Type /tfu-c?.-# Live (6c*S) (circle one) TntaKmm) t'lO Tail (mini 3 5 Hind Foot (mm) 2 2 Ear imm) / 3 Weipht(g) VC 4____________________ __ Partial (Wholg) (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y ( W __________________ __ Endoparasites: Y n Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) " Male Testicle Wt (g): L ' . . R______ L Testicle (mm): L_JS-- w --l-- R Testicle (mm): L (( W ? Seminal Vesicle: Small (Larg(circle one) Epididymis: (''Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L_______R_ Left Ovary (mm): L______ W. Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W. Placental Scars L R Embryos (no.) L_______ R Mammaries: Small Large Lactaring (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)______ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus WEIGHT (g) 5$ t- 7 LR L. C s R C *{ COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color________ Ventral Pelage Color_________ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile SubadultC^duTl* (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult (AdulL (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult ^dujT; (circle one) Comments: i o o o io o USFW 0676 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING O r Y QvrJ Site Name Location No. Collector Processor f-f e s tv f Genus/SDCcies _ A a.-l Cf Totalim m 1 iOC ' Tail (mm)___/-} C W eight(g) / f S_____ Ectoparasites: Y Endoparasites: Y N. Snudi Mammal Data Sheet - - i s ______ S-ople N o O ^ '? - ' C O 'O ^ Date Collected / A 7 Date Processed Ch r fa -i TranTvne / f l u t-.v| S r * , /L lv a 'D e ad ) (circleonel H ind F oot (mm!I _ t2 _____ E a rim m l ------- " Partial ( Whoife icircle onel Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) "Male Testicle Wt (g): L______ R_______ L Testicle (mm): L ,-9 W $ R Testicle (mm): L _ 3 _ W Seminal Vesicle: (Small ,,Laote (circle one) Epididymis: Conv? (NotConvT^circle one) Female Ovary W eight (g): L_________R_ Left Ovary (mm): L Right Ovary (mm): L W. W, Placental Scars L R E m bryos (no.) L________ R Mammaries: Small Large Lactanng (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Com ified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) U terus w / O varies (g) _ _ _ _ _ w /o O varies ( g ) _______ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (el P. k_____ p !______ L____ R____ L .3 R () ___________ COMMENTS ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ Dorsal Pelage Color .. far 7 Ventral Pelage C o l o r P e l a g e Color 7 ~ - c r r d . ^ Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult &dult' (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult (Adult- (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult Adult- (circle one) Comments: OOOlOi USFW 0677 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING *= 1 2 8 Small Mammal Data Sheet Site N a m e L o c a t i o n No. )\ ^ Sample No.. Collector ,S p fC ^ Processor t-lu Date Collected. Date Tiocessed. G m iis/S pceies K\\ C--> tf'pfilihfiVv'tUJ iJtjttD Type i>PiCi L Ljve ^ cd ) (circle one) TntaJimmi / 7 .0 Tail (mmi ?>r>_ Hind Foot Ear(mm)_ Weight(g)_________ J?<g -O _______________ Partial Whole (circle one) Ectoparasites: (y) N lAbC~f^______________ Endoparasites: Y N _ ______________________ Saved (Disopted (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L______R_______ L Testicle (mm): L______W______ R Testicle (mm): L______ W______ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Left Ovary (mm): L > W Right Ovary (mm): L f t W -L> Placental Scars L_____ R Embiyos(no-) L - R - Mammaries/$mali Large Lactaring (circle one) Vagina: Inafcnvr'Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovanes (g) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal . Kidnev Thymus WEIGHT (g) t.O 0- 1 L____ R____ LI.! R 0.1 COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color____ __ Ventral Pelage Color_________ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult /Adult) (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult iWE ) (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult/Adutt) (circleone) Comments: 000102 USFW 0678 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site MamfT Ki.| Location No! U - C ~ J__________ Sample No.______________ Collector ^ i vt c t / Date Collccicd Cr if ^1^7 Processor y-\ u ^ </>') Date Processed L" ,, 11 S - J . -- ncnns/Spccies k) i c r r + n. m i k ^I ,^ >-TrapType Tl) u u m sPX Live ^Dead Total(mm) (( .3 Tail Imini *t Hind Foot (mm)j2.U___ Ear(mm)_i_2---- Weipht(g) 'J-< . C-_______________________ Partial^Whole (circle one) (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y (N _______________________ Endoparasites: Y ''TT_______________________ Saved Discarded (circleone) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L . .R L Testicle (mm): L R Testicle (mm): L W W .__ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) (^Female Ovarv Weight (g): L __R____ A tC Left Ovarv (mm): L E-C W_^> Right Ovarv (mm): L 9 W (s Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L R R Mammaries^Smal] Large Lamting (circle one) Vagina:(lnactive ^omified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (e) w/o Ovaries (c) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT Is) '______ * '______ L____ R____ LC- R ? ___________ COMMENTS ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ .A.Ll : / -T r-U Dorsal Pelage Color t i t ' >*Central Pelage Color i r~v- ; Side Pelage Color / n f- /u, , J Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult Adulf (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) Comments: 000103 USFW 0679 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet sitrName Or^ Location No. H ~ C. ~ S __________ Sample (X j^ 3 Collector ///> r v _________________ _ Processor U c r u t ____________________ Date Collected b l i o l q 7 A M. Date Processed & / / * ) * - ! C.enus/Spccies flltc r i T ^ i f>CrJSy / i/r,A//<Znp Type S per ic ( Live (f>ead) (circle one) Total(mm) U S Tail (mini TC!' Hind Foot (nun) / / _ Ear (m m )_ 3 _ _ _ ---- Weight!g) -pU I_________________________ Partial (WhoTe^Xcircle one) Ectoparasites: Y Endoparasites: Y N . Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L R L Testicle (mm): L R Testicle (mm): L W W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovarv Weight (e): L R Left Ovarv imml: L l 3 W 3 Right Ovarv (mini: L tu W 2, Placental Scars L Embrvos (no.) L R R Mammaries: (SmafT)Large Lactaxing (circle one) Vaeina: Inactive ComifiedNTurgid Plugged fcircle one! Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (gl w/o Ovaries (pi ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) l 3 ______ f\. /______ L____ R___ ___________ COMMENTS ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ Dorsal Pelage Color i Age Based on Sex Organs: Age Based on Body Size: Age Based on Pelage: Ventral Pelage Color C r . Side Pelage Color ' Juvenile Subadult Adult' (circle one) Juvenile Subadult dull/ (circle one) Juvenile Subadult IaHuK-' (circle one) G <-e. t / Comments: 000104 USFW 0680 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Dam Sheet Site Name Drj P Location No. T l ' C - 1 ___________ Sample No Collector Hr,s*>e_______________________ Processor __________________ ___ Date Collected Date Processed f ho fc, -7______ Genus/Species fO /VA/vgj/ Trap Type .ti Si/7f Ci.L Live (5 d ^ (circle one) TotaKmml /<?f Tail (mm )__JLL_ Hind Foot Imnl }# _ Ear (mm)___ Weighti'g^ !? V'_________________________ Partial Whole (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y Endoparasites: Y N _______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L______R_______ L Testicle (mm): L *7 W W R Testicle (mm): L *7 W H Seminal Vesicle: Small Cargg>(circlc one) Epididymis^Conv/,- Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L_______R_ Left Ovary (mm): L______W. Right Ovary (mm): L W, Placenta] Scars L_____ R____ Embryos (no.) L R Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)_____ ORGAN Liver spleen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus WEIGHT (g) c ___________ L fy. J R r n COMMENTS J' * Dorsal Pelage Color R fJ !& C entra] Pelage Color Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile yfk'LSHte Pelage Color. (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: OOOIOS USFW 0681 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING & t Z L p -C Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name >W P Location No. ~ & ~ Sample No._ Collector Processor _____________ _ _ Date Collected (b /tP /* ? ? DateProcrrari (e>h> Cmnt/Spe^ie; L i t e vt P / J . J s ^ A j J . i C rap Type Live T ntaU m m i Tail (mm) Hind Foot Imm) Ear (mmi Weight(g)_______ { 2 - . [ _____________________ ^ ^ ^ l ^ ^ l c l f c l e one) Ectoparasites: Endoparasites: Saved Disdaftm (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) (circle one) Testicle Wt (g): L_ L Testicle (nun): L_ R Testicle (mm): L. W_ W /jfi Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L_ Left Ovary (mm): L_ Right Ovary (mm): L_ W_ W~ Placental Scars L_____ R Embryos (no.) L_______R Mammaries: Small Large 1aerating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Coraified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus WEI.GHI.igl A LR lo / r n . COMMENTS - Dorsal Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Age Based on Body Size: Age Based on Pelage: Ventral Pelage Color, Subadult Adult Subadult Adult Subadult Adult Side Pelage Color, (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000106 USFW 0682 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Dam Sheet Site Name ^ ^ V R l)4 Location No._ T T - b - l s ______ Sample No. Collector Processor a>G.t2. > h JT 4 Date Collected >!! ! ^ 7 Date Processed >7*//<? f r.min/Sneries M)fioTUi> P f i t t e d rah Type MtJSfctJM >Pt<iy<K* Live ( D a d ) (circle one) Total(mm)__jJ24L-- Tail fmml 3 b Hind Foot (mml / T ~ Eartmml f t Weight(g)________ *?S>*4___________________ Partial (Whole^circle one) Testicle Wt (g): L______R_______ L Testicle (mm): L_____ W______ R Testicle (mm): L_____ W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididvmis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Ovary Weight (g): L R Left Ovary (mm): L ~ W Right Ovary (mm): L__^r~W : Placental Scars L . R Embiyos (no.) L 4 R 41 J------ ------- 4 j z> Mamraaries:/SmaH) Large Lactatmg (circle one) Vagina: InanrvrXomified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g) organ Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus W EIGHT (E) 9.0 ____ O J ____ LR R_l COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color Ventral Pelage Color W Side Pelage Color. PAtCTfiLr Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult/ Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult) (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments:. 000107 USFW 0683 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet site NamcPf v> ^ ^ ^ Location No.^XL* s - _ Sample No. Colleaor________ Processor VAr. i \\ i Date Collected tr ife' P Date Processed Ip i VI O n W S p c c ie s fV\ 1C- ^ tpC * r\SM Vo e v i - Trap Tvne EVvASCv-i^ S g C i i J Live /dead ' (circle one) Tniait mm 1 11 f t Tail (mm) 2 5 Hind Foot (mm)__ Ear (mm)_3___^~-- W eight/g 1 M-~l , ~1____________________ Partial Whole (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y N W\gA\c;tf1.>_________ Endoparasites: Y N _______________________ Saved Discarded (circleone) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L R L Testicle (mm): L. R Testicle (mm): L W W Sem inal V esicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Ovary Weight (g): L R Left Ovary (mm): L_ Right Ovary (ram): L W W Placental Scars L Embryos (no.) L , ^ R_ rJ L _ Mammaries: Small Large ( L a g a n ( c ir c le one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid flluggeft (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (e) w/o Ovaries (g) ORGAN Liver bpieen Adrenal Kidnev Thvmus W EIGHTS 3 2 -____ LR LO .2 R n . L COMMENTS /[Jo o 5 AtG S h e e l Dorsal Pelage Color____ __ Ventral Pelage Color_ _____ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult Adjd^ (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadull (Adult (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult (QduTt (circle one) Comments: 000108 USFW 0684 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site N am e T)r2.^ (2.0A* Location No. Sample No. Cniiertnr < Prneecsnr d __________ ____ ~ Date Collected 11c |Q-f Date Processed 6 > ln |q ? Gcnus/Spccics _______________ ______ Trap Type__ Total(mm) Tail (mm) .3% Hind Foot (mm). W'eight(g)____________ ____________________ Partial ________ Live /Dead) (circle one) Ear (mm) / / ole icirclconc) Ectoparasites: \Y J N jAPlaO i 6>. Endoparasites: Y N ___________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (e): L . R L Testicle (mm): L R Testicle (mm): L W W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) f Female i 's--viryWeight (a): L _ R ^ Left Ovary (mm): L.W > Right Ovary (mm): 1. ^ W * C Placental Scars L *7" R <3 Embrvos(no ) L ------- R Mammaries:(SnaQ) Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulii Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus wi Ovaries (e) w/o Ovaries (e) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus W EIG H ,1(g) --<7d-LjJ_____ 0 -io L_____ R_____ Lj 2 3 r COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color fD i*V Ventral Pelage Color tP /W Side Pelage Color P ^/ZD fi l-- Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadul Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult' Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult, (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000109 USFW 0685 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name ' u *RuC\ Location NoJA XZ ________ Sample No.______________ Collector H / ~ N <7 _______ Processor / - f. * vn __________ Date Collected t~ ' / ( * 7 7 Date Processed (- /- f ~z r.enns/^pecies *,i i * 0 ; / t A. :>*''/. /vuTrao Type ^ ^ <' *< />"1 Live D catP (circle one) TmaKmml / ? ' Tail imml ^ 2 - Hind Foot (mm) J .w Eartmmi If Weight(g)__2_S_________________________ Partial 'Whole (circle one) Ectoparasites: Y (n '_______________________ Endoparasites: Y (N _______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circleone) Male Testicle Wt (g): L_______R________ L Testicle (mm): L 71' W ~7 R Testicle (mm): L _ L k _ _ W ( Seminal Vesicle: __Small ^Large (circle one) Epididymis: ^Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female Ovary Weight (g): L_______R_ Left Ovary (mm): L______ W. Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W. Placenta] Scars L_____ R____ Embryos (no.) L______ R___ Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)_____ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (gl COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color_____ __ Ventral Pelage Color_ ______ Side Pelage Color Age Based on Sex Organs: Age Based on Body Size: Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult Adult' Juvenile Subadult (Adult Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: 000110 USFW 0686 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Data Sheet Site Name O r * Location No. Sample Collector Processor At> < a/ ___________________ U r ' u J ___________ ___ Date Collected A/ / o 7__ [fX Date Processed / / //>/ f 7____ Cienus/Snecies f/r .n ~ .\___ A r t s c. T n p T y p e ^ j^ L a ----- - Live/1Sct >(circleone) Total(mm)_______ _ Tail (mm)_______ _ Weight(g)____IS .------------------------------ Hind Foot (mm)____ Partial Wh-o-l-e---(cir*cl"e o<n"e) ------------ 4 & ta J^ V- Ectoparasites: Y N Endoparasites: Y N Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) //* T ' / U ' ^ / f /o A k. "Male fPQ./-I !&' f' Testicle Wt (g): L__ Female Ovary Weight (g): L______ R, L Testicle (mm): L______W. R Testicle (mm): L______W, Left Ovary (mm): L______W. Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W, Seminal Vesicie: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Placental Scars L R Embryos (no.) L_______R________ Mammaries: Small Large Lactanng (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g) _____ w/o Ovaries (g) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (el ___________ ___________ L____ R____ L____ R____ ____________ COMMENTS ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ____________ /i/~ / /C / ? C .//rtc u S Dorsal Pelage Color____ __ Ventral Pelage Color_ _____ Side Pelage Color Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult Adult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult Adult Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: O O O J J .1 USFW 0687 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING #.I2) Small Mammal Data Sheet Site N am e^LlkpJ& i2 Location No t t f H ________ Sample No---------------------- Collector Processor U ,->C VA______________ ___ ___________________ Date Collected (? f ------- Date Processed In {>' { i l l ------- fienns/Species 7 ^ s oA ulr Trap Type W w ^ t Total(mm)_JL5_S_ Tail (mm) ~7o Hind FootAwm^ Weight)e) f L.. <_________________________ {Partial , j p f c tfiJj, , Live d ) (circle one) Ear (mm) NfW.a~ (circle one) p CL-r-t^U^ f c/t<*0 Ectoparasites: Y N rr\ trV -s_________ Endoparasites: Y N _______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L______R_______ L Testicle (mm): L______W______ R Testicle (mm): L;_____ W______ Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis: Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Ovary Weight (g): rM Left Ovary (mm): L . W_ Right Ovary (mm): L_____ W___ Placental Scars L_____ R______ Embryos (no.) L______ R________ Mammarjss^Sm alh Large Lactating (circle one) VaginaOnacuve'^Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nufii Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g)_____ w/o Ovaries (g)______ ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (g) C V1_____ KM-______ L____ R____ Lt - i R ft I ___________ COMMENTS ___________ ________ ___________ ___________ ___________ Dorsal Pelage Color b ' h*Central Pelage Color^^y Side Pelage Color Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile (Subadult Adult Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile rSjihaO^PAdult Age Based on Pelage: JuvenilerSttbedim Adult (circle one) (circle one) (circle one) Comments: / 000112 USFW 0688 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small Mammal Dam Sheet Site Name -j Location No/1 L ' S ? __ Sam ple No..__________ Collector \ ^ t vC C- Processor r-\ Date Collected i I i ( c> Date Processed /- ^ i ! \ ^ ~7 Genus/Species "?-C i ) u - () U Cfv Tran Tvue ^ 1 Totalimm) lU | Tail (mm) (c o Hind Foot (mm). Weieht(e) r Lr Partial . Live (Dead \ (circle one) Ear <mnil M Ectoparasites: y (5 _ Endoparasites: Y (N2 Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (pi: L R L Testicle (mm): L R Testicle (mm): L W W Seminal Vesicle: Small Large (circle one) Epididymis. Conv. Not Conv. (circle one) Female p a.h< - b (~ j j f Ovary Weight (g): L R Left Ovary (mm): L__ . W Right Ovary (mm): L W Placenta] Scars L Embrvos (no.) L R R - Mammaries: Small Large Lacuting (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (g) ... w/o Ovaries (e) ORGAN Liver Spleen Adrenal Kidney Thymus WEIGHT (0) C _____ >-/ ' L_____ R____ L' . / R C t ___________ COMMENTS Dorsal Pelage Color >t y Ventral Pelage Color Qtt.'--; Side Pelage Color / /) Vi > Age Based on Sex Organs: (Juvenile1Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult Adult (circle one) Age Based on Pelage: (Juvenile Subadult Adult (circleone) J Comments: 000113 USFW 0689 SMALL MAMMAL SAMPLING AND PROCESSING Small M am mal Data Sheet Site Name. O r j f i s S Location No. HL ' ft ' /*?________ Sample Nog Q P 3 ~ 0 p ) l i Collector bir r t Processor U .- r ^ t______________________ Date Collected b f i c f a l O ftDate Processed f h o M 7 Oenus/Species Tntalfmml / T J Tail (mm) W eight! e l -? I 1 rr^ ; Trap Type__ $ UM___ S p ^ lfC w e jD c v i (circle one) Pfi _ Hind Foot ( m m ) _ J j ^ _ Earfmml Partial ^hole~~(circle one) Ectoparasites: Y ^ _______________________ Endoparasites: Y N _______________________ Saved Discarded (circle one) Saved Discarded (circle one) Male Testicle Wt (g): L R L Testicle (mm): L._ JL _ . w _ I _ R Testicle (mm): L u _ W _ J ___ Seminal Vesicle: QSmall Jl-arge(circle one) Epididymis: Conv .TNot ^-- Conv. (circle _" one) Female Ovarv Weieht (e): L R Left Ovarv (mm): L Rieht Ovarv (mm): L W W Placental Scars L Embrvos(no.) L R R Mammaries: Small Large Lactating (circle one) Vagina: Inactive Comified Turgid Plugged (circle one) Repr. Stage: Nulli Semi Multi (circle one) Uterus w/ Ovaries (e) w/o Ovaries (g) ORGAN Liver spieen Adrenal Kidney Thvmus W ElGffllg) - L I _____ v _____ LR L -V R 0 J COMMENTS -- Dorsal Pelage Color________ Ventral Pelage Color_________ Side Pelage Color. Age Based on Sex Organs: Juvenile Subadult (AdulP (circle one) Age Based on Body Size: Juvenile Subadult (circleone) Age Based on Pelage: Juvenile Subadult (Adult (circle one) Comments: 000114 USFW 0690 APPENDIX B Analytical Reports Dry Run Creek site Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 000115 USFW 0691 Roy F. WMton, Inc. GSA Raritan Dapot Bldg. 209 Annax (Bay F) 2890Woodbridga Avanue Edison. NawJarsay 08837-3679 732-3214200Fax 732-494-4021 DATE: 30 July 1997 TO: R. Singhvi, EPA/ERTC Project Officer FROM: V. Kansal, Analytical Section Leader SUBJECT: DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL UNDER WORK ASSIGNMENT # 2-273 Attached please find the following document prepared under this work assignment: Dry Run Creek Site - Analytical Report Central File WA # 2-273 M. Sprenger M. Home M. Barkley (w/attachment) Work Assignment Manager (w/attachment) Task Leader (w/attachment) Data Validation and Report Writing Group Leader (w/o attachment) 2273\DEIAAR\970S\DR YRUNAR o o o iis USFW 0692 ANALYTICAL REPORT Prepared by Roy F. Weston, Inc. Dry Run Creek Site Washington, Wood County, WV August, 1997 EPA Work Assignment No. 2-273 WESTON Work Order No. 03347-142-001-2273-01 EPA Contract No. 68-C4-0022 Submined to M. Sprenger EPA-ERTC M. Home 1 ito lo Date Analysis by: REAC Prepared by: M. Bemick Reviewed by: M. Barkley ::75\D E t\A |l\70rj3R Y R U N A R 000117 USFW 0693 Topic Table of Contents Introduction Case Narrative Summary of Abbreviations Section I A n aly tical Procedure for VOC in Water A n a ly tic a l Procedure for VOC in Soil A n aly tical Procedure for BNA in Water A n a ly tic a l Procedure for BNA in Soil A n aly tical Procedure for Pesticide/PCB in Water A n a ly tic a l Procedure for Pesticide/PCB in Soil A n aly tica l Procedure for TAL Metals in Water R esu lts o f the Analysis for VOC in Water R esu lts o f the Tentatively Identified Compounds for VOC in Water R e su lts o f the Analysis for VOC in Soil R e su lts o f the Tentatively Identified Compounds for VOC in Soil R e su lts o f the Analysis for BNA in Water R e su lts o f the Tentatively Identified Compounds for BNA in Water R e su lts o f the Analysis for BNA in Soil R e s u lts o f the Tentatively Identified Compounds for BNA in Soil R esu lts o f the Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Water R e su lts o f the Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Soil R e su lts o f the Analysis for TAL Metals in Water Section II QA/QC for VOC Results of the Internal Standard Areas and Surrogate Recoveries for VOC in Water Results of the Internal Standard Areas and Surrogate Recoveries for VOC in Soil Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for VOC in Water Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for VOC in Soil Results of the Initial Calibrations for VOC Results of the Continuing Calibrations for VOC QA/QC for BNA Results of the Internal Standard Areas and Surrogate Recoveries for BNA in Water Results of the Internal Standard Areas and Surrogate Recoveries for BNA in Soil Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for BNA in Water Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for BNA in Soil Results of the Initial Calibrations for BNA Results of the Continuing Calibrations for BNA P ag e NnmVwr Page 1 Page 2 Page 5 Table 1.1 Table 1.2 Table 1.3 Table 1.4 Table 1.5 Table 1.6 Table 1.7 Table 1.8 Table 1.9 Table 1.10 Table 1.11 Page 6 Page 8 Page 10 Page 12 Page 14 Page 16 Page 18 Page 19 Page 23 Page 37 Page 45 Page 77 Page 80 Page 90 Page 96 P a g e 120 P a g e 122 P a g e 127 Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 2.3 Table 2.4 Table 2.5 Table 2.6 Table 2.7 Table 2.8 Table 2.9 Table 2.10 Table 2.11 Table 2.12 P a g e 130 Pagel31 PageI32 P a g e 134 P a g e 136 P a g e 139 P a g e 141 P a g e 147 P a g e 148 P a g e 149 Pagel51 P age152 Pagel53 P a g e 154 ^rT^DEUARvrWvDRYRUNAR 000118 USFW 0694 Table of Contents (Corn) Tonic QA/QC for Pesticide/PCB Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Water Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Soil Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Water Results o f the MS/MSD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Soil QA/QC for TAL Metals Results of the QC Standard Analysis for TAL Metals in Water Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for TAL Metals in Water Results of the Blank Spike Analysis for TAL Metals in Water Section III Chains of Custody Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G Data for VOC Analysis-Water Data for VOC Analysis-Soil Data for BNA Analysis-Water Data for BNA Analysis-Water & Soil Data for Pesticide/PCB Analysis-Water Data for Pesticide/PCB Analysis-Soil Data for TAL Metals Analysis-Water Table 2.13 Table 2.14 Table 2.15 Table 2.16 Table 2.17 Table 2.18 Table 2.19 Page Number Page 159 Page 160 Page 161 Page 162 Page 163 Page 164 Page 165 Page 166 Page 167 Page 169 Page G252001 Page G253001 Page G272001 Page G300001 Page G280001 Page G299001 Page G279001 Appendices will be furnished on request. .2IT3'vDEL\ARW?OS\DR YRUNAR o o o xxs USFW 0695 Introduction REAC in response to WA #2-273, provided analytical support for environmental samples collected ft jm the Dry Run C ti. . Site located in Washington, Wood County, WV as described in the following table. The support also included QA/QC, d 1 review, and preparation of an analytical report containing a summary of analytical methods, results, and QA/QC results. The samples were treated with procedures consistent with those specified in SOP #1008. Chain of Custody 07302 07304 07717 07706 07707 07708 07709 07716 07741 07750 07751 07752 07753 Number of Samples 4 4 6 1 1 3 3 8 1 1 1 4 2 1 2 2 Sampling Date 6/10/97 6/10/97 6/10/97. 6/11/97 6/10/97 6/11/97 6/12/97 Date Received 6/11/97 6/12/97 6/12/97 6/13/97 Matrix W ater Soil 6/12/97 W ater 6/16/97 6/13/97 Soil Bovine Fecal Matter Soil Water Soil 1 07754 1 07755 4 07756 1 07759 1 3 Sampie table continued on follow ing page. Soil Analysis BNA, Pest/PCB, TAL VOA, BNA, Pest/PCB VOA VOA, BNA, Pest/PCB VOA VOA VOA VOA. BNA, Pest/PCB VOA VOA. BNA, TAL VOA, BNA, Pest/PCB VOA , VOA, BNA. Pest/PCB VOA VOA, BNA, Pest/PCB Laboratory || IREAC l i J li I I 1 1 1 I ::\Dei\A*\7TO*\D'RY1<UNAR 00012 00001 USFW 0696 Sample Table Continued Chain of Custody 07302 07304 07717 07706 07708 07709 07741 07750 07751 ' 07752 07753 07755 07759 Number of Samples 2 2 3 1 3 3 7 4 1 2 2 4 3 Sampling Date 6/10/97 6/10/97 6/10/97 6/11/97 6/12/97 Date Received 6/11/97 6/12/97 6/12/97 6/13/97 Matrix Water Soil Analysis Laboratory Fluoride TAL, Fluoride, TOC, Grain Size Samples were written up on new chain of custodies and subcontracted out for analysis 6/16/97 6/13/97 Bovine Fecal Matter Soil Water Soil BNA, TAL TAL, TOC, Grain Size Floride TAL, Floride, Grain Size TAL, TOC, Grain Size Soil CASE NARRATIVE Data Package G252 - VOC Analysis - Water The data were examined and found to be acceptable. Data Package G253 - VOC Analysis - Soil Sample 808 is bovine fecal matter and is reported in Tables 1.3 and 1.4 along with the soil samples. Data Package G272 - BNA Analysis - Water In the continuing calibration from 6/20/97, the percent difference for di-n-octylphthalate (27%), exceeded acceptable QC limits. This compound was not detected in the associated samples; the data are not affected. 2273\DEL\AR\9TO\DRYRUNAR 00002 OOOX2t USFW 0697 CASE NARRATIVE (Com) Data Package G300 - BNA Analysis - Water & Soil Water The warn- method blank contained 2 pg/L di-n-butylphthalate. All associated sample concentrations are greater than tentimes the blank concentration; the data are not affected. Sample 216A MS had one acid and/or one base-neutral surrogate recovery exceeding the QC limits; the data are not affected. Sample 216A MSD had two acid surrogates recoveries exceeding the QC limits; all acid compounds are considered estimated. Soil In the continuing calibration from 6/24/97, the percent difference for benzo(g,h,i)perylene (27%) and diethlyphthalate (26%), exceeded acceptable QC limits. This compound was not detected in the associated samples; the data are not affet d In the continuing calibration from 6/25/97, the percent difference for di-n-octylphthalate (32%), exceeded acceptable QC limits. This compound was not detected in the associated samples; the data are not affected. Sample 51 IB SI 12 had no surrogates recovered in the intial analysis. It was suspected that the sample was not spiked w>h surrogates prior to extraction. The sample was extracted 14 days after collection and analysis recovered all surrogates within QC limits. The original data is reported and all results considered estimated. Data Package G280 - Pesticide/PCB Analysis - Water In the end of sequence calibration check from 6/24/97,the percent difference for a-BHC (31%), g-BHC (29%), b-BHC (31%). heptachlor (34%), d-BHC (32%), aldrin (33%), heptachlor-epoxide (29%), g-chlordane (26%), endosulfan I (29% p,p-DDE (38%), dieldrin (34%), endrin (51%), DDD (49%), endosulfan II (31%), DDT (35%), endrin aldehyde (32%), endosulfan sulfate (29%), methoxychlor (41%), and endrin ketone (35%) exceeded acceptable QC limits. Since this was an end of sequence calibration check, no samples were quantitated, and the data are not affected. Th,e following samples had one surrogate recovery exceeding the QC limits: WBLK061497, 00201F, 00206F, 00204F, 00203! Ou'202F, 00201F MS, and 0020F MSD ; the data are not affected. Data Package G299 - Pesticide/PCB - Soil In the end of sequence calibration check from 6/24/97,the percent difference for a-BHC (31%), g-BHC (29%), b-BHC (31%). heptachlor (34%), d-BHC (32%), aldrin (33%), heptachlor-epoxide (29%). g-chlordane (26%), endosulfan I (29% \ p,p-DDE (38%), dieldrin (34%), endrin (51%), DDD (49%), endosulfan II (31%), DDT (35%), endrin aldehyde (32%), endosulfan sulfate (29%), methoxychlor (41%), and endrin ketone (35%) exceeded acceptable QC limits. Since this wa>; end of sequence calibration check, no samples were quantitated, and the data are not affected. In the end of sequence calibration check from 6/27/97,the percent difference for p,p'-DDD (33%), DDT (79%), methoxychlor (78%) and endrin ketone (35%) exceeded acceptable QC limits. Since this was an end of sequence calibrati check, no samples were quantitated, and the data are not affected. 2rn\D EL \A R \9'X*'>RYRUNAR 000122 00003 USFW 0698 CASE NARRATIVE (Cont) In the end of sequence calibration check from 7/01/97,the percent difference for d-BHC (33%), DDT (78%), endrin aldehyde (33%), endosulfan sulfate (43%), methoxychlor (77%), endrin ketone (57%), and DCBP (54%) exceeded acceptable QC limits. Since this was an end of sequence calibration check, no samples were quantitated, and the data are not affected. The following samples had one surrogate recovery exceeding the QC limits: SBLK061797, 501B, 503B, 503B MSD, 306E, 508B, 509B, 510B, 51 IB, 506B, 507B, 504B, 505B, 300E, 301E, 302E, and 303E MS; the data are not affected. Data Package G279 - TAL Metals - Water The method blank2 contained aluminum (130 pg/L). The aluminum results for sample 216B should be considered estimate since the aluminum concentration is less than five times the blank concentration. * 5333\DEUAR\9TW,DRYRUNAR 00004 00XZ3 USFW 0699 AA B BFB BPQL BS BSD C D CLP COC CONC CRDL CRQL DFTPP DL E EMPC J ICAP IDL ISTD MDL MQL Ml MS MSD MW NA NC NR NS %D % REC PQL PPBV PPPA QL RPD RSD SIM U m3 L dL mL mL T)\DEUAR\9T0*\DRYRIJNAR Sum m ary of Abbreviations Atomic Absorption The analyte was found in the blank Bromofluorobenzene Below the Practical Quantitation Limit Blank Spike Blank Spike Duplicate Centigrade (Surrogate Table) this value is from a diluted sample and was not calculated (Result Table) this result was obtained from a diluted sample Contract Laboratory Protocol Chain of Custody Concentration Contract Required Detection Limit Contract Required Quantitation Limit Decafluorotriphenylphosphine Detection Limit The value is greater than the highest linear standard and is estimated Estimated maximum possible concentration The value is below the method detection limit and is estimated Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma Instrument Detection Limit Internal Standard Method Detection Limit Method Quantitation Limit Matrix Interference Matrix Spike Matrix Spike Duplicate Molecular Weight either Not Applicable or Not Available Not Calculated Not Requested Not Spiked Percent Difference Percent Recovery Practical Quantitation Limit Pans per billion by volume Pans per billion in air Quantitation Limit Relative Percent Difference Relative Standard Deviation Selected Ion Mode Denotes not detected cubic meter liter deciliter kg g eg kilogram gram centigram milliliter mg milligram microliter #*g microgram ng nanogram Pg picogram denotes a value that exceeds the acceptable QC limit Abbreviations that are specific to a panicular table are explained in footnotes on that table Revision 10/21/96 000124 00005 USFW 0700 Section 1 000125 USFW 0701 Analytical Procedure for VOC in Water A modified 524.2 method was used for the analysis of Volatile Organic Compounds in water. Samples were purged, trapped, and desorbed to a GC/MS system. Prior to purging, the samples were spiked with a three component surrogate mixture consisting of toluene-d, , 4-bromofluorobenzene and 1,2dichloroethane-d4 and a three component internal standard mixture consisting o f bromochloromethane, 1,4-difluorobenzene, and chlorobenzene-dj . The following conditions and parameters were utilized: The purge and trap unit consisted of: A Tekmar concentrator (3000 series) equipped with an autosampler (Dynatech) and a trap consisting of a VOCARB 4000 (Supelco), which itself contained o f four adsorbent beds: Carbopack B (graphitized carbon 60/80 mesh), Caibopack C (graphitized carbon 60/80 mesh), Carboxen-1000 (60/80 mesh), and Carboxen-1001 (60/80 mesh). The purge and trap instrument conditions were: Purge Dry Purge Desorb Preheat Desorb Purge Flow Rate Bake 10 min at 25 C 2 min at 25 C 230 C 4 min at 230 C 40 mL/min 8 min at 250 C A Hewlett Packard 5970 GC/MSD equipped with an RTE-A data system was used to analyze the data. The instrument conditions were: Column: Temperature: Flow Rate GC/MS Interface 30 meter x 0.53mm ID, RTx-Volatiles (Restek Corp.) column with 3.0pm thickness. 5 min at 10 C 6 C/min to 140 C 0.1 min at 140 C 12 C/min to 160 C 5 min at 160 C Helium at 10 mL/min Glass jet separator with 30 mL/min helium make-up gas at 250 C. GC/MS Interface: Glass jet separator with 30 mL make-up gas at 250 C. Mass Spectrometer: Electron Impact Ionization at a nominal electron energy of 70 electron volts, scanning from 35-300 amu at one scan/sec. Computer: Preprogrammed to plot Extracted Ion Current Profile (E1CP); capable of integrating ions and plotting abundances vs time or scan number. A library search (NBS-Wiley) for tentatively identified compounds was performed on samples. The GC/MS system was calibrated using 6 VOC standards at 5, 20,50, 100,150, and 200 pg/L. Before analysis each day, the system was tuned with 50 ng BFB and passed a continuing calibration check when analyzing a 50 pg/L standard mixture in which the responses were evaluated by comparison to the average response of the calibration curve. 3m\pEJ^A\T0*DRYRUNAR 00006 000126 USFW 0702 The results are in Table 1.1;the tentatively identified compounds (TIC) are listed in Table 1.2. The concentrations of the analytes were calculated using the following equation: A ,x Ij, A . x RF (or R F .J x V , where C,, A, I,, A, RF RF,, V0 = Concentration of target analyte (pg/L) = Area of the target analyte = mass of specific internal standard (ng) = Area of the specific internal standard = Response Factor = average Response Factor = Volume of sample purged (mL), taking into account dilutions The average Response Factor is used when a sample is associated with an initial calibration curve. The Response Factor is used when a sample is associated with a continuing calibration curve. Response Factor calculation: The response factor (RF) for each specific analyte is quantitated based on the area response from the continuing calibration check as follows: A cxl ,,' RF = _ _ _ _ _ A,, x Ic where, RF = Response factor for a specific analyte A ? = Area of the analyte in the standard 1,, = Mass of the specific internal standard A 0 = Area of the specific internal standard I c = Mass of the analyte in the standard RF, = RF ,+ ...+RF. n and n = number of Samples Revision of 1/27/97 2T?3\DEL\AR\970i\DRYRUNAR 00007 000127 USFW 0703 Analytical Procedure for VOC in Soil A modified 524.2 method was used for the analysis of Volatile Organic Compounds in soil. Samples were purged, trapped, and desorbed to a GC/MS system. Prior to purging, the samples were spiked with a three component surrogate mixture consisting of toluene-d * 4-bromofluorobenzene and 1,2-dichloroethane-d <and a three component internal standard mixture consisting of bromochloromethane, 1,4-difluorobenzene, and chlorobenzene-d ? The following conditions and parameters were utilized: The purge and trap unit consisted of: A Tekmar concentrator (3000 series) equipped with an autosampler (Dynatech) and a trap consisting of a VOCARB 4000 (Supelco), which itself contained of four adsorbent beds: Carbopack B (graphitized carbon 60/80 mesh), Carbopack C (graphitized carbon 60/80 mesh), Carboxen-1000 (60/80 mesh), and Carboxen-1001 (60/80 mesh). The purge and trap instrument conditions were: Purge Dry Purge Desorb Preheat Desorb Purge Flow Rate Bake 10 min at 25 C 2 min at 25 C 230 C 4 min at 230 C 40 tnL/min 8 min at 250 C A Hewlett Packard 5970 GC/MSD equipped with an RTE-A data system was used to analyze the data. The instrument conditions were: Column: Temperature: Flow Rate GC/MS Interface 30 meter x 0.53mm ID, RTx-Volatiles (Restek Cotp.) column with 3.0pm thickness. 5 min at 10C 6 C/min to 140" C 0.1 min at 140 C 12" C/min to 160C 5 min at 160C Helium at 10 mL/min Glass jet separator with 30 mL/min helium make-up gas at 250 C. GC/MS Interface: Glass jet separator with 30 mL make-up gas at 250 C. Mass Spectrometer: Electron Impact Ionization at a nominal electron energy of 70 electron volts, scanning from 35-300 amu at one scan/sec. Computer: Preprogrammed to plot Extracted Ion Current Profile (EICP); capable of integrating ions and plotting abundances vs time or scan number. A library search (NBS-Wiley) for tentatively identified compounds was performed on samples. The GC/MS system was calibrated using 6 VOC standards at 5 ,2 0 ,5 0 ,1 0 0 ,1 5 0 , and 200 pg/L. Before analysis each day. the system was tuned with 50 ng BFB and passed a continuing calibration check when analyzing a 50 pg/L standard mixture in which the responses were evaluated by comparison to the average response of the calibration curve. 271\DEUAR*9T0rDRYRUNAR oooos 000128 USFW 0704 The medium level soil extracts were analyzed by extracting 5 .0 g soil with 5 mL methanol, diluting an aliquot w>th 5 mi water and analyzing the solution by the purge and trap method. The results are in Table 1.3; the tentatively identified compounds are listed in Table 1.4. The concentrations o f the analytes were calculated using the following equation: Cu= DF x A ,x I --------------------------------------A , x RF (or RF iM) x W , x D where Cu DF A, Ia A, RF RF 1VT W, D = Concentration of target analyte (pg/kg) on a dry weight basis = Dilution Factor = Area of the target analyte = mass of specific internal standard (ng) = Area of the specific internal standard = Response Factor = average Response Factor = Weight of sample (g) = Decimal percent solids The average Response Factor is used when a sample is associated with an initial calibration curve. The Response Factor is used when a sample is associated with a continuing calibration curve. Response Factor calculation: The response factor (RF) for each specific analyte is quantitated based on the area response from the continuing calibration check as follows: Acx l 0 RF = _______ Aa xle where, R F 1>r = RF = Response factor for a specific analyte A t = Area of the analyte in the standard I,, = Mass of the specific internalstandard A 0 = Area of the specific internal standard I c = Mass of the analyte in the standard RF .+ + RF. and n = number of Samples Revision of 1/27/97 Tl\0ELVAR:R70t\DR YRUNAR 00009 000129 USFW 0705 Analytical Procedure for BNA in Water Extraction Procedure Prior to extraction, each sample was spiked with a six component surrogate mixture consisting of nitrobenzene-d > 2fluorobiphenyl, terphenyl-d ,, phenol-d* 2-fluorophenol, and 2,4,6-tribromophenol. One liter of sample was extracted according to Method 625, Section 10, as outlined in the Federal Register Voi. 49, #209, Friday, Oct. 26,1984. After the extracts were combined and concentrated to 1.0 mL, they were spiked with an internal standards mixture consisting of 1,4-dichlorobenzene-d naphthalene-d acenaphthene-d ^ phenanthrene-d lt>chrysene-d 12, and peTylened 1? Following this preparation, the extracts were analyzed. Analytical Procedure An HP 5995C Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer (GC/MS), equipped with a 7673A autosampler and controlled by an HP-1000 RTE-6/VM computer was used to analyze the samples. The instrument conditions were: Column Injection Temperature Transfer Temperature Source Temperature Analyzer Temperature Temperature Program Splitless Injection Injection Volume Restek Rtx-5 (crossbonded SE-54) 30 meter x 0.32mm ID, 0.50 pm film thickness 290 C 290 'C 240 'C 240 *C 40 `C for 3 min 8 `C/min to 295 C hold for 12 min Split time = 1.00 min 1 pL The GC/MS system was calibrated using 5 BNA standards at 20,50,80,120, and 160 pg/mL. Before analysis each day, the system was tuned with 50 ng decafluorotriphenylphosphine (DFTPP) and passed a continuing calibration check when analysing a 50 pg/mL standard mixture in which the responses were evaluated by comparison to the average response of the calibration curve. The BNA results are listed in Table 1.5; the Tentatively Identified Compounds are listed in Table 1.6. The concentration of the detected compounds was calculated using the following equation: E273VDEL\AR\9?0I\DRYRUNAR OOOIO 000130 USFW 0706 DFxAt xIkxVt C. AuxRF(orJtFam)xV lx V ' where wu DF Au I, V, Ab RF RF. V, V. Concentration of target analyte (pg/L) Dilution Factor Area of target analyte Mass of specific internal standard (ng) Volume of extract (pL) Area of specific internal standard Response Factor (unitless) average Response Factor Volume of extract injected (pL) Volume of sample (mL) The R F tve is used when a sample is associated with an initial calibration curve. The RF is used when a sample is associated with a continuing calibration curve. Response Factor calculation: The RF for each specific analyte is quantitated based on the area response from the continuing calibration check as follows: A f x 1^ RF A* X lC where RF Ac lu A,, lc = Response factor for a specific analyte = Area of the analyte in the standard = Mass of the specific internal standard = Area of the specific internal standard = Mass of the analyte in the standard RF. Rev. 7/11/94 and n = number of Samples n ;Ptj.del\a*svwo*vrunar 00011 000131 USFW 0707 Analytical Procedure for BNA in Soil Extraction Procedure Prior to extraction ch sample was spiked with a six component surrogate mixture consisting o f nitrobenzene-d 2fluorobiphenyl, terphenyl-d phenol-d ,, 2-fluorophenol, and 2,4,6-tribromophenol. Thirty grams of sample was mixed with 3 0 g anhydrous sodium sulfate, and Soxhlet extracted for 16 hours with 3 0 0 mL o f 1:1 acetone:methylene chloride. After the extracts were concentrated to 1.0 mL., they were spiked with an internal standard mixture consisting of 1,4-dichlorobenzene-d * naphthalene-d , acenaphthene-d ,,> phenanthrene-d IO chrysene-d and perylened r Following this preparation, the extracts were analyzed. Analysis Procedure An H P 5995C Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer (GC/MS), equipped with a 7673A autosampler and controlled by an H P - 1000 RTE-6/VM computer was used to analyze the sam ples. The instrument conditions were: Column Injection Temperature Transfer Temperature Source Temperature Analyzer Temperature Temperature Program Splitless Injection Injection Volume Restek Rtx-5 (crossbonded SE-54) 30 meter x 0.32mm ID, 0.50 pm film thickness 290 C 290 C 240 C 240 C 4 0 ^ for 3 min 8 C/min to 295 C hold for 12 min Split time = 1.00 min 1 pL The GC/MS system was calibrated using 5 BNA standard mixtures at 2 0 ,5 0 ,8 0 ,1 2 0 , and 160 pg/m L. Before analysis each day, the system was tuned with 50 ng decafluorotriphenylphosphine (DFTPP) passed a continuing calibration check when analyzing a 50 pg/mL standard mixture in which the responses were evaluated by comparison to the average response of the calibration curve. - The BNA results, based on dry weight, are listed in Table 1.7; the tentatively identified compounds are listed in Table 1.8 . I Z r> .D E U A R\*708\DR y r u n Ar 00012 000132 USFW 0708 The concentration of the detected compounds was calculated using the following equation: DFxAt xIvzVt c . A,,xRFi orRFaJ x V txW xD where C,, DF Au I,, V, A, RF RFm V, W D = Concentration of target analyte (pg/kg) = Dilution Factor = Area of target analyte = Mass of specific internal standard (ng) = Volume of extract (pL) = Area of specific internal standard = Response Factor (unitless) = average Response Factor = Volume of extract injected (pL) = Weight o f sample (g) - Decimal per cent solids The R F tvt is used when a sample is associated with an initial calibration curve. The RF is used when a sample is associated with a continuing calibration. Response Factor calculation: The RF for each specific analyte is quantitated based on the area response from the continuing calibration check as follows: RF A t x l a Aa Xlc where RF Ac 1A,, lc Response factor for a specific analyte Area of the analyte in the standard Mass of the specific internal standard Area of the specific internal standard Mass of the analyte in the standard RFt *...*RFx RF. and n = number of Samples Revision of 7/08/94 3in\D El\A R \97W \D !lYR U N A il 00013 000133 USFW 0709 Analytical Procedure for Pesticide/PCB in Water Extraction Procedure One liter of sample was spiked with a surrogate solution consisting of tetrachloro-m-xylene and decachlorobiphenyl, and was extracted three times with 60 mL portions of methylene chloride. The combined extracts were filtered, concentrated to 10 mL, solvent exchanged with 60 mL hexane, and the hexane concentrated to 1.0 mL. Gas Chromatographic Analysis The extract was analyzed for pesticides using simultaneous dual column injections. The analysis was done on an HP 5890 GC/ECD system, equipped with an HP 7673A automatic sampler, and controlled with an HP-ChemStation. The following conditions were employed: First Column Injector Temperature Detector Temperature DB-608, 30 meter, 0.32mm fused silica capillary, 0.50 pm film thickness 200 C 325 C Second Column Injector Temperature Detector Temperature Rtx-CLPesticides, 30 meter, 0.53mm fused silica capillary, 0.50 pm film thickness 200 C 325 C Temperature Program-(both columns) 70 0 C for 1 minute 30 C/min to 150*C, 0.5 min at 150C 8 `C/min to 275C , 10 min at 275*C The gas chromatographs were calibrated using 5 pesticide standards at 20,50, 100,200, and 500 pg/L . The responses from each mixture were used to calculate the response factors (RF) of each analyte. The average RF was used to calculate the concentrations of the pesticides in the samples. Quantification was based on the DB-608 column (signal 1), and identity of the analyte was confirmed using the Rtx-CLPesticides column (signal 2). A fingerprint gas chromatogram was run using each of the seven Aroclor mixtures and toxaphene; calibration curves were run only if a particular Aroclor, or toxaphene was found in the sample. : : t 3'.d e l \a r \77o \d r y r u n a r 00014 000134 USFW 0710 The Pesticide/PCB results, listed in Table 1.9, were calculated from the following formula: DFxAkx Vt ` R F ,, xV txVt where c. DF Au v, R F , V, V, = Concentration of analyte (pg/L) = Dilution Factor = Area or peak height Volume of sample (mL) = Average response factor 5= Volume of extract injected (pL ) Sample volume (mL) Response Factor calculation: The RF for each specific analyte is quantitated based on the area response from the continuing calibration check as follows: RF A, total pg injected where A, and = Area or peak height RF, *RF. RF. where n = number of samples Revision 7/23/97 : : n 'D L R DRYRUNAR 00015 000135 USFW 0711 Analytical Procedure for Pesticide/PCB in Soil Extraction Procedure The soil samples were extracted by the Soxhlet method. A thirty gram aliquot was spiked with a surrogate solution consisting of tetrachloro-m-xylene and decachlorobiphenyl, mixed with 30 g anhydrous sodium sulfate and Soxhlet extracted for 16 hours with 300 mL 1:1 hexane: acetone. The extract was concentrated to S mL. Gas Chromatographic Analysis The extract was analyzed for pesticides and PCBs using simultaneous dual column injections. The analysis was done on an Varian 3600, equipped with an automatic sampler, and controlled with an Varian Star Chem-Station. The following conditions were employed: First Column Injector Temperature Detector Temperature DB-608, 30 meter, 0.32mm fused silica capillary, 0.50 pm film thickness 200 C 325 C Second Column Injector Temperature Detector Temperature Rtx-CLPesticides, 30 meter, 0.53mm fused silica capillaiy, 0.50 pm film thickness 200 C 325 C Temperature Program-(both columns) 70 C for 1 minute 30 C/min to LSO'C, 0.5 min at ISO'C 8 'C/min to 275C , 10 min at 2 7 5 ^ The gas chromatographs were calibrated using 5 pesticide standards at 2 0 , 5 0 ,1 0 0 , 2 0 0 , and 5 0 0 p g/L . The results from each mixture were used to calculate the response factor (RF) of each analyte and the average Response Factor was used to calculate the concentration of pesticide in the sample. Quantification was based on the D B -6 0 8 column (signal 1) and the identity of the analyte was confirmed using the Rtx-CLPesticides c o lu m n (signal 2 ). A fingerprint chromatogram was run using each of the seven Aroclor mixtures and toxaphene; calibration curves were run only if a particular Aroclor or toxaphene was found in the sample. rT)\DEL\Alf\970*\DR Y R U N A R 00016 000136 USFW 0712 The pesticide/PCB results, listed in Table 1.10,are calculated by using the following formula: DFxAxV C - ----------- !-- -- " JiF^xVfXWxD where c,, DF A. v, R F ,. V, w D = Concentration of analyte ( pg/kg) = Dilution Factor = Area or peak height =s Volume o f sample (mL) = Average response factor = Volume of extract injected (pL) = Weight of sample (g) = Decimal percent solids Response Factor calculation: The RF for each specific analyte is quantitated based on the area response from the continuing calibration check as follows: RF* _____ 4______ total pg injected where A,, and = Area or peak height RFl *...*RFn RF. where n = number of samples Revision 7/23/97 ^73X>EUAR1770riDRYRUNAR 00017 000137 USFW 0713 Analytical Procedure for TAL Metals in Water Sample Preparation A representative 45 m L aliquot of each sample was mixed with 5.0m L concentrated nitric acid, placed in an acid rinsed Teflon container, capped with a Teflon lined cap, and digested according to SW-846, Method 3015 in a C E M M DS-2100 microwave oven, which was programmed to bring the samples to 160 + /- 4 Z in 10 minutes (first stage) and slowly rise to 165-170TT in the second 10 minutes (second stage). After digestion, samples were allowed to cool to room temperature and were transferee to polyethylene bottles. Samples were analyzed for all metal*, e x c e p t m e r c u ry , b y U S E P A SW-846, Method 7000 Atomic Absorption (A A ) or Method 6010 In d u c tiv e ly Coupled Argon Plasma (IC A P ) procedures. A 100 m L aliquot of each sample was transfered to a 300-mL B O D bottle and prepared according to SW-846, Method 7470. The samples were heated for 2 hours on a hot plate at 95 C , cooled to room temperature, and reduced with Hydroxylamine hydrochloride (N H p H :H C l). Mercuty was then analyzed separately on a Varian SpectrAA-300 Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer equipped with a Varian VG A-76 vapor gas analyzer by SW-846, Method 7470. A reagent blank and a blank spike sample were carried through the sample preparation procedure for each analytical batch of samples processed. One matrix spike (M S ) and one matrix spike duplicate (M S D ) sample were also processed for each analytical batch or every 10 samples. Analysis and Calculations The A A and IC A P instruments were calibrated and operated according to SW-846, Method 7000/7470/6010 and the manufacturer's operating instructions. After calibration, initial calibration verification (IC V ), initial calibration blank (IC B ), and Q C check standards were run to verifyproper calibration. The continuing calibration verification (C C V ) and continuing calibration blank (CCB) standards were run after every 10 samples to verifyproper operation during sample analysis. The metal concentrations in solution, in micrograms per liter (p g/L) were read directly from the read-out systems of the instruments. IC A P and Mercury results were taken directly from instrument read-outs. The IC A P results were corrected for digestion volume (45 m L sample + 5 m L nitric acid) prior to instrument read-out; A A read-outs (excluding Mercury) were externally corrected for digestion volume (1.1111 * A A read-out). For samples that required dilution to fall within the instrument calibration range; p g/L metal in sample = A [ (C + B ) / C ] where: A = direct read-out (IC A P and Mercury) A = corrected read-out (A A ) B = acid blank matrix used for dilution, mL C = sample aliquot, m L Results of the analyses are listed in Table 1.11. ZZ7Y.DEL'AR\9?0R\DR YRUNAR 00018 000138 USFW 0714 SAMPLE # LOCATION COLLECTED ANALYZED INJECTED FILE * OIL. FACT.: UNIT COMPOUND D iehlorodif luorcwciiisne Chloraaethane Vinyl Chloride Bromomethane Chloroethane l rith lo ro f luorcmethane Acetone 1,1-Dichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e Methylene Chloride Methyl- te r t i ary-butylether tra n s-1 ,2 -D ic h lo ro e th e n e 1 , 1 -D i c h l o r o e th a n e 2-Butanone 2 t 2-Dichloropropane cis-1 ,2 -O ich lo ro eth en e Chloroforjn 1,1 - Di c h 1o rop ro p en e 1,2-Dichloroethane 1 ,1 ,1-T richloroethane Carbon T etrach lo rid e Benzene Trichloroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane Di bromomethane Bromodichloromethane c i s - 1 ,3 - Di ch l o r opropene trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1 ,1 ,2-T richloroethane 1,3-Dichloropropane Dibromochloromethane 1 ,2-Dibromoethane 6B-roMmeotfhoynl-t 2 -Pent anone To l u e n e 2-Hexanone Tetrachloroethene Chlorobenzene 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrachloroethane Ethylbenzene p & m-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene Isopropylbenzene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1 ,2 ,3 - Trichloropropane Bromobenzene n-Propytbenzene 2-Chlorotoluene 4-Chlorotoluene 1 ,3 ,5 -Trimethylbenzene tert-Butylbenzene 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene sec-Butylbenzene 1,3-D i chlorobenzene p-Isopropyl toluene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1,2-Dichiorobenzene n-Butylbenzene 1 , 2 -Dibromo-3-Chioropropane 1 ,2 ,4 - Tr i chlorobenzene Naphthalene Hexachlorobutadiene 1 . 2 . 3 - Tr i ch lo ro b e n z e n e RV0758 T able 1.1 Results of the A n aly sis for VOC in Water WA # 2-273 Dry R ir Creek S ite LAB BLANK 06/12/97 19:4B *A2545 1 A8/L COMC. U 1.0 uVu uu uu u uu 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 11..00 u uu u uu u uuu u u u u u uuu 1.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 u u uu uu u uu u 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 uu u 1.0 1.0 1.0 uuu u uu uu u uu uu uu u u u uu 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 20B TB 06/11/97 06/12/97 20:32 *A2546 1 m /i 207 FB 06/10/97 06/12/97 21:16 *A12547 M /l UA'-. MDL . CONC. MDL u uuuuuuuuuu u uuu uu u u u u u u u u u u u V u uu uuu u u uu uu u uu u u u u uu uuu u 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 11..00 uuuuuuuuu uu 1.0 1.0 6.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 uu uu u uu u 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 uu u u u u u u u u u 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 uu uuu 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 uu uu u 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 uu uu u u u 1.0 1.0 1.0 uu u 1.0 1.0 1.0 u uu 1.0 V 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 11..00 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 u uu u uu u Vu u 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 uuu u u 1.0 u 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 uuuu 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 200 LEE CREEK 06/10/97 06/12/97 21:59 *A1254S A9/1 CONC. u uu u u u uuu u u u uu u u u u u uu u u u u u u u uu u u u u uu u u u u uu u u u u u u u u u uu u u u V u u Vu uu u MDL 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 61..00 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 201 AREA IV 06/10/97 06/12/97 22:66 -A2569 M /l CONC. u uij uu u u uu u u u uu u u u u u uu u u u u u -u u u u u u u uuu uu u u u u u u u u u u u u u , uu u u uu u u uu u u u MIL 1.0 1.0 21 .. 00 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 11.. 00 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ::73VDELVUt\9T0i\DJtY<tUNAR 00013 CG01C9 USFW 0715 I octcc; c C~On o *N l O) i a b o ---*0 - (ft n-fw-fhoe-o---*rtn3x ar 3 _* r\j 3 CD------</ioT rn- fVJX"Of\Jr\jCD ft - ft- *1 * (Art i r** ft0 * ' M f" --wn Wn Wn o t V u 5 c `1 Xi| n o o o ow ti -*iwn r*o -*O O o o cd r ' 3- 3 *1 KP -- -- o rv-0>< X fo j 3ft -rt X 0 -- '-1 3t Q * * T3 1 < < O 3 ft C ft 3 I - "I -- M - 3 -f --Qj - CT-- 000133h -*-*. -- t t 3 3 n- -n--<ot o C * CD ' O -* -- C --1 o OO i< y 330 -% r - o o -- ft ---- rt H rrOODft O 3 o -i o -i < -- Tff3O'SO-- Oftft --3 3 z?---- OW f3t o o ** yO *3 *3-f3t 3*-* Cft C ft N ft ft 04fM-1 ft o 3 -f rvru ft " I *< O ft O' 7 n it --- 3 O B) N -- 3 -- . ft 3 ft X >< o '* ft r 3 )(JT 3 ft*--O `3 0 3 ft ft < n t h 3 3 - ft o ft ft 3 ft ft r-t ft-< O 0 - 0 O r-T T n 3 T * * 3 0 3 * -- -- O IO ro 3 -- o n -- o o t 3 *0 n *0 I t T o -- -- 3 " ft rtn - Q O n r- O V -I ft S? oa on 3 3C f3t <*-- Nft -r<- 3 ft 3 ft 3 ft 5U JfZ NN(| #3 5f T>--*ft ft 3 n O ft 0 3" 3 1O 3 O 3"-* t3"-l l3o'-Io *"Ito3-o0I r i 1 t o n ft o3 3 N3 O"1 3 3 ft ft ft O1 TJ O T ft o 0) ft 3TJ 3 rt ft 3 *D Of 3 . rt x x n - > *--*tian rf tt ff lii -*fot o533<'3<'oTorot O--3---*-fV*U--rft f--3ftt 30--7rO-- O3 O'r-*t WO OC I 8 o^HkS 8r wCOflJ *h-***-ntm"k-mo-rNJ- :nrmV--8itm5r Srn?tfc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc s ^.sSS s2n I o U-rl*fO*B-N OB S' ^^ 5 sS nX n 5" CSg8 *S * *UKIKN.WO5:~ O 'O'O-- mK~U-Cf5t s so 3-* *NQ*-*UjfU-ViflIg-*NNs--W*ss--SO*smtfD;lt ooz NNn 5? 3*31 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc booboboooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo s I5??P S 55"UNl^ V- I-O 3 CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ooooooooooooooooooo bbbbbbboooooooooooooooooooooobooooooooooooooo >OOOHM I " -5 UIOOIO w *: s NN I T able 1.1 (C o nti R e s u l t s o f t h e A n a ly s is f o r VOC i n Water UA 0 2-273 Dry Rut Creek S i t e SAMPLE * LOCATION COLLECTED ANALTZED INJECTED FILE # OIL. FACT. UNIT COMPOUND Diehlorodi fluoromethane Chloromethane Vinyl Chloride Bromomethane Chloroethane Tr i chlorofluorom ethane Acetone 1 , 1 -Di c h lo r o e th e n e Carbon D isulfide Methylene Chloride Methyl - t e r t i a r y - b u ty le th e r tra n s-1 ,2 -D ic h lo ro e th e n e 1 ,1-Dichloroethane 2-Butanone 2 , 2 -Di e h lo r o p ro p a n e x is-1 ,2 -D ich lo ro eth en e Chloroform 1,1 - Di c h lo r o p ro p e n e 1,2-Dichloroethane 1 ,1 ,1 -T richloroethane Carbon T etrachloride Benzene Trichloroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane Dl bromomethane Bromodichloromethane cis-1 ,3 -D ich lo ro p ro p en e trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1 ,1 ,2-T richloroethane 1,3-OichloroDropane Di bromocht oromethane 1,2-Dibromoethane Bromoform 4 -Methyl-2-Pentanone Toluene 2-Hexanone Tetrachloroethene Chlorobenzene 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrachloroethane Ethylbenzene p & m-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene Isopropylbenzene 1 ,1 ,2 ,2 - T etrachloroethene 1,2,3-Trichloropropane Bromobenzene n-Propylbenzene 2-Chlorotoluene 4-Chlorotoluene 1 ,3 ,5-Trimethyl benzene tert-B utyl benzene 1 ,2,4-Trim ethylbenzene sec-Butylbenzene 1,3-Dichlorobenzene p- Isopropyl toluene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1 ,2 - 0 ichlorobenzene n-Butylbenzene 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane 1, 2 ,4 - T r i e h lo r o b e n z e n e Naphthalene Hexachlorobutadiene 1.2.3-Tr ichlorobenzene LAB BLANK 06/12/97 19:48 "A2545 1 pg/L 206 TRIB B 06/10/97 06/13/97 02:24 *A2554 1 pg/L CONC. MDL CONC. MDL U 1.0 u 1.0 U 1.0 u 1.0 U 1.0 u 1.0 U 2.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 4.0 u 4.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u u 1.0 1.0 uu 1.0 1.0 u 1.0 II 1 .0 u 1.0 u 1.0 uu 1.0 1.0 u u 1.0 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 uu 1.0 1.0 u u 1.0 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 uu 1.0 2.0 u u 1.0 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 uu 1.0 1.0 u u 1.0 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u u 1.0 1.0 uu 1.0 1.0 u 1 .0 u 1.0 V 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 V 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 CONC. MIL CONC. M RV0760 CONC. MDL IIT3\DEUARW>0*lD>!YI!UNAI 000141 000131 USFW 0717 SAMPLE # LOCATION COLLECTED ANALYZED INJECTED FILE # DIL. FACT. UNIT COMPOUND Dichlorodifluorcmethane Chioromethane Vinyl C hloride Bromomethane Chloroethane Tr i chlo ro flu o ro m eth an e Acetone 1,1-Dichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e Methylene Chloride Methyl- t e r t i ary-butylether trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 1,1-Dichloroethane 2-Butanone 2 , 2 -Di c h lo r o p ro p a n e cis-1 ,2-D ichloroethene C1 ,h1to-Droifcohrlnoiro p ro p en e 1 ,2-D i c h lo r o e th a n e 1 ,1 ,1 -T richloroethane Carbon T e tra c h lo rid e Benzene Trichloroethene 1f 2-D i ch lo ro p ro p an e Dlbromomethane Bromodichioromethane c i s - 1 , 3 -D i ch lo r o p ro p e n e trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 1,3-Dichioropropane Di bromochloromethane 1,2-Dibromoethane Bromoform 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone Toluene 2-Hexanone Tetrachloroethene Chlorobenzene 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrach lo ro eth an e Ethylbenzene p & m-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene Isopropylbenzene 1 ,1 ,2 ,2 - T etrachloroethane 1,2,3-Trichloropropane Bromo b e n z e n e n-Propyl benzene 2-Chlorotoluene 4-Chlorotoluene 1 ,3 ,5 -Trimethyl benzene tert-B utyl benzene 1,2,4-Trim ethylbenzene sec-Butyl benzene 1 ,3-Di chlorobenzene p- Isopropyl to luene 1 ,4 -Dichlorobenzene 1,2-Dichlorobenzene n-Butylbenzene 1 1 ,2,2, D 4 -i bTrroimc hol-o3r-oCbhelnozreonper o p an e Naphthalene Hexachlorobutadiene 1 ,2 .3 -Trichiorobenzene RV0761 Table 1.1 (Cont) Results of the A n alysis fo r VOC in Water UA # 2*273 Dry Run Xreelc S ite LAB BLANK 06/13/97 12:46 *A2561 1 M /L CONC. U U U U U uuUuuu u u u u u u uu u u uu u u uuu u u u uu uuu u u uuu u u u u u u u u u u u uu u uuuu u uu u u MDL 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 11..00 250 TB 06/12/97 06/13/97 14:09 *42562 1 ag/L CONC. uu uuu uuu u uu uu u uu 0 .4uu J u u u u u u u u u u u uu uu u u uu u uu u u uu u u u u uu u uu u u u u u u u u u u MOL l.U 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2160 ENNANT WELL 06/12/97 06/13/97 14:53 *A2563 1 ag/L CONC. uu uu uuuu uu u uu u u uu uuu u uu u uuu uuu uu uuu uuuu u u u u u u uu uu uu uuu u uu u u u u uu u MDL 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 253 FB 06/12/97 06/13/97 15:37 *A2564 1 as/L CONC. U Uuu Uu u Uu uu u u u u u u u u u u u u uu u uu uu u u uu uu uuu u u uu uuu u u uu uuu uu u u u uu u u uu MDL 1.0 1.0 1.0 ?1-.S0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 11..00 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ,t:T)\DELVARWOS\DRYRUNAR If 000142 n0022 Table i. 2 Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# *-=bFile# Lab Blank 6/12/97 A2545 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Unit Pg/L Con. Factor -- '-- 9 **r XV a Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\S708\DRYVOCWT 00023 000143 USFW 0719 Table 1. 2 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 208 A2546 Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 J 6 7 S 9 10 1) 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCWT 000C4 000144 USFW 0720 Table 1. 2 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 207 A2547 Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Esumiled Concentratjon (Response Factor * 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCWT 000^5 000145 USFW 0721 Table 1. 2 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 200 A2548 Unit fig/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCWT 00026 000146 USFW 0722 Table 1.2 (Cent) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 201 A2549 Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 A i 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hitirruled Concentra! ion (Response Factor - 10) 2273\DEL1AR\9708\DRYVOCWT 000^7 000147 USFW 0723 Table 1.2 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 202 A2550 Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND Q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEl\AR)9708\DRYVOCWT oooes 000148 USFW 0724 Table 1. 2 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 205 A2553 Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Esumateci Concentration (Response Factor = 1.0) 2273\DEUAR\S708\DRYVOCWT 00031 000149 USFW 0725 Table 1. 2 (Coni) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 206 A2554 Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor 1.0) 2273\DEl\AR\9708\DRYVOCWT 00032 OOOlSo USFW 0726 Table 1. 2 (Cent) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# Lab Blank 6/13/97 A2561 Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 n 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Fictor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCWT 00033 0001S1 USFW 0727 Table 1. 2 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 250 A2562 Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCWT 00034 000152 USFW 0728 Table 1. 2 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 216D A2563 Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 3 3 4 i 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Esiimiled Concentration (Response Finer - ].0) 2273\DEl\AR\9708\DRYVOCWT 00035 000153 USFW 0729 Table 1. 2 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 253 A2564 Unit jig/L Con. Factor 1 CAS# 1 UNKNOWN 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound Q RT Con e 6.32 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCWT 00026 000154 USFW 0730 SAMPLE 0 LOCATION COLLECTED ANALYZED INJECTED FILE 0 OIL. FACT. X SOLID UNIT COMPOUND Di c h lo r o d i flu o rc m e th a n e Vinyl c m o r im Bromomethane Chloroethane Trichlorofluorcmethane Acetone 1 , 1 -D i eh Loroethene Carbon D isulfide Methylene Chloride Methyl- te r t i ary*butylether tra n s-1.2-Dichioroethene 1,1-Dicfiloroethane '2-Butanone 2 ,2-Dichioropropane cis-1 ,2 -D ich lo ro eth en e Chloroform 1,1 -D i c h lo r o p ro p e n e 1, 2-D i chi o r o e t h e n e 1 ,1 ,1-Trichloroethene Cerbon T etrechloride Benzene Trichioroethene 011, 2D-rDori^cmh leoxrhoepnreo p a n e Bromodichloromethane cis-1,3-Dichloropropene trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 1,3-Dichioropropane Dlbromochloromethane 1,2-Dibromoethane Bromoform 4-Hethyl-2-Pentanone Toluene 2-Hexanone Te t r a c h l o r o e t h e n e Chlorobenzene 1 ,1 ,1 ,2 - T etrachloroethene Ethylbenzene p & m-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene IsopropyIbenzene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1,2,3-Trichloropropane Bromooenzene n-PropyIbenzene 2-Chlorotoluene 4-Chlorotoluene 1,3,5-TrimethyIbenzene tert-B utyl benzene 1 ,2 ,4 -Trimethylbenzene sec-Butyl benzene 1,3-Dichlorobenzene p-Isopropyltoluene 1,4-Di chlorobenzene 1 ,2-Di chlorobenzene n-Butylbenzene 1 , 2 - Dibromo-3- Ch l o ropropane 1 ,2 ,4 -Tri chlorobenzene Naphthalene Hexachlorooutad i ene 1 .2 ,3-T r i chlorobenzene RV0762 Table 1.3 R e s u l t s of t h e A n a ly s is f o r VOC i n UA 0 2-273 Dry Rvi Creak S i t e Soil Based on Dry Weight SAND BLANK 06/13/97 12:54 *83484 1 100 pg/kg 550C FB 06/12/97 06/13/97 13:43 *B3485 1 100 pg/kg 512D REF A 06/12/97 06/13/97 14:31 *B3486 1 79 PB/kg 5130 REF B 06/12/97 06/13/97 15:18 *83457 1 71 pg/kg CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. U 1.0 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 v 1.3 u u 2.0 u 2.0 u 2.5 u b u 1.0 u l.e u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.3 u u 2.0 V 2.0 u 2.5 u u 1.0 V 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 4.0 u 4.0 u 5.1 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 V 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 2.0 u 2.0 u 2.5 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 2.0 u 2.0 u 2.5 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1 .3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.3 u MDL 1.4 1*4 1.4 2.1 1.4 1.4 2.8 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 5.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 2.B 1.4 2.8 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 5150 REF C 06/12/97 06/13/97 16:06 *83488 1 73 pg/kg CONC. MDL u 1.4 u ^.4 u 1.4 u 2.7 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 2.7 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 5.5 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 2.7 u 1.4 u 2.7 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 2r73\DELAAR\970JVDRYRUNAR 000:155 00037 USFW 0731 SAMPLE # LOCATION COLLECTED ANALYZED INJECTED FILE # OIL. FACT. X SOLID UNIT COMPOUND Di e h lo r o d i flu o rom eth an e Chloremethane Vinyl Chloride Bromomethane Chloroethane Tr i chlorofluorom ethane Acetone 1,1-Diehloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e Methylene Chloride M ethyl-tertiary-butylether trans-1.2-Dichloroethene 1,1-Dicnloroethane -2-Butanone 2 , 2 - Di ch lo ro p ro p a n e c i s - 1 , 2 -Di c h l o r o e th e n e Chloroform 1 , 1 -Di ch lo ro p ro p e n e 1,2-Dichloroethane T,1,1*Trichloroethane Carbon T etrachloride Benzene Trichioroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane Di bromomethane Bromodichloromethane c i s - 1 , 3 -D i c h l oropropene trans-1, 3-Dichioropropene 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 1,3-Dichloropropane Dt bromochloromethane 1,2-Dibromoethane Bromoform 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone Toluene 2-Hexanone Tetrachloroethene Chlorobenzene 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrachloroethane Ethylbenzene p & m-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene Isopropylbenzene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1 ,2 ,3 - Tr i ch lo ro p ro p a n e Bromobenzene n-Propylbenzene 2-Chlorotoluene 4-Chlorotoluene 1 ,3,5-Trim ethylbenzene tert-Butylbenzene 1, 2 ,4 -T ri m e t h y lb e n z e n e sec-Butylbenzene 1,3-Dichlorobenzene p- Isopropyl toluene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1,2-Dichlorobenzene n-Butylbenzene 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane 1 ,2 ,4 - Tr ic h lo r o b e n z e n e Naphthalene Hexachlorobutadiene 1.2 ,3-Trichlorobenzene RV0763 Table 1.3 (Com) Results of the Analysis for VOC in Soil UA # 2*273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weisht SAND BLANK 06/13/97 12:54 "83454 1 100 AB/ks 5000 AREA I A 06/12/97 06/13/97 16:53 "B3489 1 70 AS/kg 501D _ AREA I B 06/12/97 06/13/97 17:39 *B3490 1 80 Afl/kfl 502E AREA I C 06/12/97 06/13/97 18:25 *B3491 1 77 Afl/kg 5030 AREA II 06/12/97 06/13/97 19:12 *83492 1 80 AS/kg CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. U 1.0 u U 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 2.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 2.6 u 2.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 4.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 2.0 u u 1.0 u u 2.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u . 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u u 1.0 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 2.9 u 1.4 u 1.4 1.0 J 2.9 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 5.7 u 1.4 1.4 1.4 uuu 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 2.9 1.4 uu 2.9 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 1.4 1.4 uu u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1 .4 u 1.3 U 1.3 u 1.3 u 2.5 u 1.3 u 1.3 2.6 2.5 U 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 5.0 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 ` u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 2.5 u 1.3 u 2.5 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 LI 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 2.6 U 1.3 U 1.3 0.9 J 2.6 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 1.3 1.3 5.2 1.3 Uu u u u 1.3 1.3 uu 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 uuuu 1.3 u 1.3 1.3 uu 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 uu u u u uu 1.3 1.3 2.6 1.3 2.6 uu u u u 1.3 1.3 1.3 uu u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 uu u u uu u u u 'u u u u u u u u 1.3 u 1.3 1.3 uu 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 1.3 1.3 2.5 1.3 1.3 2.5 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 5.0 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 2.5 1.3 2.5 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 r:73\DEL\A R\97W\DR YRUNAR 000JL56 00038 USFW 0732 SAMPLE * LOCATION COLLECTED ANALYZED INJECTED FILE DIL. FACT. X SOLID UNIT COMPOUND Diehlorodi fluoromethane Chloromethane Vinyl Chloride Brontcrneth an e Chloroethane Tr i c h lo r o flu o r o m e t h a n e Acetone 1 ,1-Dichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e Methytene Chloride M ethyl-tertiary-butylether tra n s-1 ,2 -D ic h lo ro e th e n e 1,1-Dicnloroethane -2-Butanone 2 , 2 -D i c h lo r o p ro p a n e cis-1,2-D ichloroethene Chloroform 1,1-Dichloropropene 1 , 2 -D i c h l o r o e t h a n e 1 ,1 ,1 -T richioroethane Carbon T etrachloride Benzene Trichloroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane Dlbromomethane Bromodi chlorom ethane cis-1,3-D ichioropropene t r a n s - 1 , 3 -Di c h lo r o p ro p e n e 1 ,1 ,2 -T rich lo ro eth an e 1,3-0 ichloropropane 0 i brocnoch l oromethane 1,2-Dibromoethane Bromoform 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone To l u e n e 2 - Hexanone Tetrachloroethene Chlorobenzene 1 ,1 ,1 ,2 -T etrachloroethane Ethylbenzene p & m-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene 1so p ro p y lb en zen e 1 .1 ,2 ,2 -T etrachloroethene 1,2,3-1 r ichloi-ooropane Bromobenzene n-Propyl benzene 2-Chlorotoluene .-Chlorotoluene 1 ,3 ,5-T rlm ethylbenzene tert-Butylbenzene 1 ,2 , 4 - Tr i m e t h y l benzene sec-Butylbenzene 1,3-D ichlorobenzene v 1s o p r o p y l t o l u e n e 1,A-Dichiorobenzene 1 ,2 -D iehlorobenzene n-Butylbenzene 1 , 2 -DiPromo-3 -C hioropropane 1 ,2 ,4 - Tr i c h l o r o b e n z e n e Napnthalene Hexachlorobutadiene 1.2.3-Trichlorobenzene RV0764 Table 1.3 (Cc*rt> R asults of the A n alysis for VOC in S o il UA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek S ite Based on Dry Weight SAND BLANK 06/13/97 12:54 *83484 1 100 AS/kg S04F UPPER YRIB B 06/11/97 06/13/97 19:58 *83493 1 78 SB/kg 305F AREA II 06/11/97 06/13/97 20:45 *83494 1 69 A9/kg 306F AREA IV 06/11/97 06/13/97 21 -12 *8349: 1 67 A9/kg CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MIL CONC. MDL U 1.0 u 1.3 U 1.4 U 1.5 U u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 U 1.3 u 1.4 U 1.4 U 1.5 1.5 u 2.0 u 2.6 u 2.9 u 3.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 2.0 u 2.6 u 2.9 7.2 3.0 U 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1*5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 4.0 u 5.1 u 5 .8 u 6.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 2.0 u 2.6 u 2.9 u 3.0 u u u 1.0 2.0 1.0 u u u 1.3 u 2.6 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 2.9 u 1.4 u 1.5 3.0 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.5 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 1.3 uu 1.4 1.4 u u 1.5 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 uu 1.0 1.0 uu 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.5 1.5 uu 1.0 1.0 u u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.5 1.5 u u u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.4 1.4 1.4 uu u 1.5 1.5 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.5 uu 1.0 1.0 u u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.5 1.5 uu 1.0 1.0 u u u 1.0 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.5 1.5 1.5 307J FB 06/11/97 06/13/97 22:18 *83n496 100 sg/kg CONC. U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 4.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 ZZn.bEllARWWDRYRUNAR 000157 00039 USFW 0733 T ab le 1 .3 (Cont) R e s u l t s o f t h e A n a ly s is f o r VOC i n S o il WA 0 2-273 Dry Run Creeic S i t e Based on Dry Weight SAMPLE 0 : LOCATION : COLLECTED : ANALYZED : INJECTED : FILE 0 : DIL. FACT.: X SOLID : UNIT : SAND BLANK 0 6 /H /9 7 01:22 *83500 1 100 ag/kg S50A FB 06/12/97 06/14/97 02:09 *63501 1 100 ag/kg 504D AREA II B 06/12/97 06/14/97 02:56 *83502 1 82 ag/kg 5050 AREA 11 C 06/12/97 06/14/97 03:42 *83503 1 77 M/kg 506D AREA I I I A 06/12/97 06/14/97 04:29 *83504 1 85 ag/kg COMPOUND CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL Diehlorodi fluoromethine Chioromethane Vinyl Chloride Bromomethane Chloroethane Tr i ch lo r o flu o r o m e th a n e Acetone 1,1-Dichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e Methylene Chloride Methyl-t e r t i a ry - b u ty le th e r tr a n s - 1 .2 - 0 ichioroethene 1,1-Dichloroethane 2-Butanone 2 , Z-D i ch lo ro p ro p a n e c is -1 ,2 'D ic h lo ro e th e n e Chloroform 1,1-Dichloropropene 1j 2 -Di c h lo r o e th a n e 1,1,1-Tri chloroethane Carbon T etrach lo rid e Benzene Trichloroethene 1 ,2 - Dichloropropane Dibromomethane Bromodichloromethane cis-1,3-Dichioropropene t r a n s - 1 , 3 - Di ch lo ro p ro p en e 1 , 1 , 2 - Tr i c h lo ro e th a n e 1,3-Dichloropropane Dt bromochloromethane 1,2-Dibromoethane Bromoform -Methyl-2-Pentanone To l u e n e 2-Hexanone Tetrachloroethene Chlorobenzene 1 ,1 ,1 ,2 - T etrachloroethane Ethylbenzene p & m-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene Isopropylbenzene 1 ,1 ,2 ,2 -Tetrachloroethane 1,2,3-Trichloropropane Bromobenzene n-Propylbenzene 2-Chlorotoluene -Chlorotoluene 1 ,3 ,5 - 1 rimethylbenzene tert-B utyl benzene 1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene sec-Butvlbenzene 1,3-Dicnlorobenzene p- Iso p ropyltoluene 1.-Dichlorobenzene 1,2-D\chlorobenzene n-Butylbenzene 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane 1 ,2 ,4 - Trichlorobenzene Naphthalene Hexachlorobutad i ene 1 .2 .3 -1 richlorobenzene U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.3 U 1.2 U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.3 U 1.2 U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.3 U 1.2 U 2.0 u 2.0 u 2.4 U 2.6 U 2.4 U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.3 U 1.2 U 1.0 u 1.0 2.7 1.2 0.9 J 1.3 3 .6 1.2 U 2.0 u 2.0 u 2.4 U 2.6 U 2.4 U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.3 U 1.2 U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 U 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 4.0 u 4.0 u 4.9 u 5.2 u 4.7 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1,0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 2.0 u 2.0 u 2.4 u 2.6 u 2.4 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 2.0 u 2.0 u 2.4 u 2.6 u 2.4 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3' u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 RV0765 :rn\DEDAtt97W\DRYftUNAR 000158 00040 USFW 0734 SAMPLE # LOCATION COLLECTED ANALYZED INJECTED FILE DIL. FACT. X SOLID UNIT COMPOUND Dichlorodifluoremethane Chloromethane Vinyl Chloride Bromomethane Chloroethane Tr i c h lo r o flu o r o m e th a n e Acetone 1 ,1-Dichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e Methylene Chloride M ethyl-tertiary-butylether tran s-1 .2 -D ieh lo ro eth en e 1 , 1 -Di c n l o r o e t h a n e 2-Butanone 2,2-Dichloropropane c i s - 1,2-Dichloroethene Chloroform 1 , 1 -D i c h lo r o p ro p e n e 1( 2 -D ic h i o r o e t h a n e 1,1,1-Trichloroethane Carbon T etrach lo rid e Benzene Trichloroethene 1(2-Dichloropropane Dibromomethane Bromodichioromethane cis-1,3-Dichloropropene t r a n s - 1 , 3 - Di ch lo r o p ro p e n e 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 1,3-Dichloropropane Dlbromochloromethane 1,2-Dibromoethane Bromoform 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone Toluene 2 - Hexanone Tetrachloroethene Chlorobenzene 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrachloroethane Ethylbenzene p i m-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene Isopropylbenzene 1 ,1 ,2 ,2 -T etrachloroethane 1,2,3-Trichloropropane Bromobenzene n-Propylbenzene 2-Chcorotoluene 4-Chlorotoluene 1,3,5-Trimethyl benzene tert-Butylbenzene 1 ,2 ,4 -Tnmethyl benzene sec-Butylbenzene 1,3-Dichlorobenzene p-1sopropyltoluene 1,-01 chlorobenzene 1,2-Dtchlorot>enzene n-Butyl benzene 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane 1 ,2 ,4 - Trichlorobenzene Naphthalene Hexachlorobutadiene 1.2.3-Trichlorobenzene RV0766 Table 1.3 (Cont) Results of the A n alysis fo r VOC in S o il WA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek S ite Based on Dry Weight SAND BLANK 06/14/97 01:22 " B3500 1 100 M /kg 507D AREA I I I B 06/12/97 06/14/97 05:16 *B3505 1 61 M /kg 50BD AREA I I I C 06/12/97 06/14/97 06:03 *B3506 1 61 MB/kg 5090 AREA IV A 06/12/97 06/14/97 06:50 *83507 1 77 MB/kg 5100 AREA IV B 06/12/97 06/14/97 07:36 *63508 1 81 *9/kg CONC. KDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL U 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.3 u 1.2 U 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.3 u 1.2 U 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.3 U 1.2 U 2.0 u 2.5 U 2.5 u 2.6 U 2.5 U 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.2 u 1.3 U 1.2 U 1.0 3.4 1.2 1.5 1.2 1.5 1.3 1.6 1.2 U 2.0 u 2.5 U 2.5 u 2.6 u 2.5 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 U 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 4.0 u 4.9 u 4.9 u 5.2 u 4.9 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 2.0 u 2.5 u 2.5 u 2.6 u 2.5 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 2.0 u 2.5 u 2.5 u 2.6 u 2.5 u 1.0 4.4 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 u 1.0 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.3 u 1.2 :Z73\DEL\AR\970\ORYRUNAR 000159 00041 USFW 0735 ccc c CO o C^ O1 c> --* M-~--.4i O*oyT0OoTIT#0gra" y; 33 Ory3O*j--t NONO"--o%-^3-**M33z-0ooO1--a*C12SOyo3--<3DnyOOnO--O20-3-7T*j2yOOmOJ0o---"3--1I-T**OS^7-r*0WO----33O<3t OOIwO%OON373----TXvoMO00Oc3<3-iiD*%<*O3N--y*-fT*4*TMrCOO0a303iT>t*lu*3Ow--Ot<-3T*H*'tn*Oc03OrT_--rr<1 ICD---*- OTJ "I* * W r l I3*7OT3 y 3 *o--o3*-i3*<nor7x^t7xoi<mJInOT- Ton->ooorot -*n O3--Oi 1oOOj t <o 83SI-iI50----OO3T3- o O#3--- -- fu o i -- OO2 O O -- Or-It*Q--3 C*M-0"Oo --CO3 O3 --3 3O --* -Lile r=r--<3*"I O--Qr.t7 y 11g 3 I Oo*1IcTQ--o.O o3I sss ,*z*Mog>r-oOrffnclHW*>rNPz>Or npOc-2ri-ws%r>r ceccccccceeccccccccccecceeecccecccccceccceeeececcccccccccceeccce tso- -'2S 2 1-WmS s jor oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 3 o C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C O 'C C C C C 1I'rDs*e.*'Si >W *g* It NSSN3m5- <NoM<o< o *! Cm&mDICffoiuuJe1*7o* '3 S. cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc -- *- -----*r u--*fU--*- *-- --*-- . oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo SilDa fg - 5UO-l og*NNg.o*Nfgou\. * vooi sh MHo*1o--* cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc (jOr u T *wuiSvigs^ sg^ tSogt - NS S3 wo3 * W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWW W* U W-*J W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W - U W W * U W W W poo c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c foi . Jwo9f rPaCmWo *for * u-fui*w*-NN**Q---NS-*Onm7nff0lti 0 3 SAMPLE # LOCATION COLLECTED ANALYZED INJECTED FILE # D1L. FACT. X SOLID UNIT COMPOUND Dic h l o r o d i flu o ro m eth an e Chloromethane Vinyl Chloride Brofflomethane Chloroethane Tr i c h lo r o f lu o r e m e t h a n e Acetone 1 , 1 -Di c h l o r o e t h e n e Carbon D isulfide Methylene Chloride M ethyl-tertiary-butylether t r a n s - 1 , 2 -Di e h l o r o e t h e n e 1 , 1 - Di e h l o r o e t h a n e 2-Butanone 2 , 2 -D i c h lo r o p ro p a n e c is-1 ,2-Diehloroethene Chloroform 1,1 - Di c h lo r o p ro p e n e 1,2-Dichioroethane 1 ,1 ,1-Trichloroethane Carbon T etrachloride Benzene Trichloroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane Dl bromocnethane Bromodi chlorom ethane cis-1,3-0ichloropropene trans-1,3-0ichloropropene 1 1 , , 1 3 -, 2D-i Tri chl chloroethan oropropane e Di bromoch l oromethane 1,2-Oibromoethane AB-roMmeotfhoyrlm-2 -P e n t a n o n e To l u e n e 2-Hexanone Tetrachloroethene Chlorobenzene 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrachloroethane Ethylbenzene p & m-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene lsopropyIbenzene 1 ,1 ,2 ,2 - T etrachloroethane 1,2,3-Trichloropropane Bromobenzene n-Propylbenzene 2-Chlorotoluene A-Chlorotoluene 1 ,3 ,5 -TrimethyIbenzene tert-Butylbenzene 1 ,2 ,A-TrimethyIbenzene sec-Butylbenzene 1 ,3 -D ichlorobenzene p - 1s o p r o p y l t o l u e n e 1 ,A-Dichlorobenzene 1 ,2 -D ichlorobenzene n-Butylbenzene 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane 1 ,2 ,A -Trichlorobenzene Naphthalene Hexacblorobotadi ene 1 .2 .3-T richlorobenzene RV0768 Table 1.3 (Cent) Recules of the A n aly sis for VDC in S o il UA # 2-273 Dry Run Greet S ite Based on Dry Weight SAND BLANK 06/16/97 12:A2 -B3517 1 100 pg/kg 302F AREA I I I 06/11/97 06/16/97 13:38 -B3518 1 77 pg/kg 303F UPPER TRIB A 06/11/97 06/16/97 14:25 *63519 1 74 pg/kg 550B FB 06/12/97 06/16/97 15:11 *83520 1 100 PB/kg 808 BARN AREA 06/12/97 06/16/97 15:58 -B3521 1 79 pg/kg CQNC. U u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u uu u u u u u u u u uu u uu u u u u u uu u u u uu u u u u u u uu u u u u MOL CONC. 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u A.O u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 0.5 J 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 11..00 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 u uu u u u u uu u u u u u u u uu u uu u uu 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 11..00 uuuuu uu uu u u 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 u uu u MOL 1.3 1.3 1.3 2.6 1.3 1.3 2.6 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 5.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 2.6 1.3 2.6 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 CONC. u u uu uu u uu u u u u u u u u u u u u u uu u u u u u u u u u u uu u u uu u uu u uu u uu uu u uu u uu u u u u u uu MDL 1.4 1.4 1.4 2.7 1.4 1.4 2.7 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 5.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 2.7 1.4 2.7 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.A 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 CONC. U u u u u u uu u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u uu u u u u u u u uu u u uu u u u u V u u V uu u uu uu uu u u u u uuu u (CL 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 11..00 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 11..00 11..00 11..00 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 CONC. u u uu uu u uu u u u uu u uu u uu u u u uu u u u u u u u uu u uu u u u u u u u u u u uu u u u u u u uu u u u u u u u MDL 1.3 1.3 1.3 2.5 1.3 1.3 2.5 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 5.1 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 2.5 1.3 2.5 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1,3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 Z IW flE U A f t \970*\DR YRUNA R 000161 000A3 USFW 0737 SAMPLE 0 LOCATION COLLECTED ANALYZED INJECTED FILE 0 DIL. FACT X SOLID UNIT COMPOUND Diehl orodi f luoromethane Chloromethane Vinyl Chloride Bromomethane Chioroethane Tr 1c h lo r o flu o r o m e th a n e Acetone 1.1- Dichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e Methylene Chloride M ethyl-tertiary-butylether trans-1.2-Dichloroethene 1.1- Dichioroethane -2-Butanone 2 . 2 - Di ch lo r o p ro p a n e cis-1 ,2-D ichloroethene Chloroform 1 . 1 - Di c h lo r o p ro p e n e 1.2- Dichioroethane 1,1,1-Trichioroethane Carbon T etra ch lo rid e Benzene Trichloroethene 1 . 2 - Di ch lo r o p ro p a n e Dlbromomethane Bromodichloromethane cis-1,3-Dichioropropene trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 1.1.2- Trichioroethane 1.3- Dichioropropane Dlbromochloromethane 1.2- Dibromoethane Bromoform 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone Toluene 2-Hexanone Tet rachloroethene Chlorobenzene 1.1.1.2- Tetrachloroethane Ethylbenzene p & m-Xylene o-Xylene Styrene Isopropylbenzene 1.1.2.2- Tetrachloroethane 1.2.3- Trichloropropane Bromobenzene n-Propyl benzene 2-Chlorotoluene 4-Chlorotoluene 1,3,5-T rimethyl benzene tert-B utyl benzene 1 .2 .4 - Trimethyl benzene sec-Butylbenzene 1.3- Dichlorobenzene p - 1s o p r o p y l t o l u e n e 1.4- Dichlorobenzene 1.2- Dichlorobenzene n-ButyIbenzene 1.2 - Dibromo-3-Chloropropane 1 ,2 ,4 - Tr i e h lo ro b en zen e Naphthalene Mexachlorobutadi ene 1 , 2 ,3 -T ri ch lo ro b en zen e______ RV0769 Table 1.3 (Cont) Results of the A n alysis for VOC in S o il UA 0 2-273 Dry Run Creek S ite Based on Dry Weight SAND BLANK 06/16/97 12:42 *83517 1 100 pg/kg 899 FB 06/12/97 06/16/97 16:45 *83522 1 100 pg/kg CONC. MDL CONC. KDL CONC. KOL CONC. MDL u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 4.0 u 4.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 0.5 J 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 2.0 u 2.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u . 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.D u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 u 1.0 CONC. MDL ::p .D E L \A RV9TOZVDRYRUNAR 000162 00044 USFW 0738 Table 1. 4 Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Cieek Site Sample # LabFile# Sand Blank 6/13/97 B3484 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 li 16 17 18 19 20 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Responsi Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00045 00063 USFW 0739 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 550D B3485 Unit Hg/kg Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 13 16 17 18 19 20 Q RT -- -- Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00046 000164 USFW 0740 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results ofTIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 512D B3486 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.2658 CAS# Compound ] NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2273\DEl\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 000-17 000165 USFW 0741 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 513D B3487 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.4085 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00048 000166 USFW 0742 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 515D B3488 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.3699 CAS# Compound ! NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 Q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 000-19 000167 USFW 0743 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 500D B3489 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.4286 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Conccnlralion (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00050 000168 USFW 0744 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Diy Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 501D B3490 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.25 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 Q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEIAAR'97081DRWOCST 00051 000A 69 USFW 0745 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 502E B3491 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.2987 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 13 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor =1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00052 000170 USFW 0746 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil Y7A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 503D B3492 Unit |ig/kg Con. Factor 1.25 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00053 000171 USFW 0747 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of-TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 304F B3493 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.2821 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 .7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 13 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND 0 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimited Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYV0CST 00054 000172 USFW 0748 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Isry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 305F B3494 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.4493 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00055 000173 USFW 0749 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 306F B3495 Unit Hg/kg Con. Factor 1.4925 CAS# 1 2 3 4 J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEl\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 0005G 000174 USFW 0750 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 307J B3496 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00057 00017S USFW 0751 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# Sand Blank 6/14/97 B3500 Unit Hg/kg Con. Factor 1 CAS# 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound UNKNOWN SILOXANE 9 RT Cone 16.18 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\D E L\AR\9708\DR Y V O C ST 00058 000176 USFW 0752 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 505D B3503 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.2987 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor 1.0) 2273\DEL'AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00061 000177 USFW 0753 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 506D B3504 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.1765 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "hstimaied Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00062 000178 USFW 0754 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 550A B3501 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1 CAS# 1 2 3 4 J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound UNKNOWN SILOXANE Q RT Cone 16.18 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00059 000179 USFW 0755 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 504D B3502 Unit Pg/kg Con. Factor 1.2195 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 13 16 17 18 19 20 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DELV*R\9706\DRYVOCST 00000 000180 USFW 0756 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 507D B3505 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.2346 CAS# Compound 1 UNKNOWN SILOXANE 2 ALKANE C11H24 3 UNKNOWN SILOXANE 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 * Q RT Cone 16JO 6 24.68 148 23.25 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEl\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00063 000181 USFW 0757 Table 1.4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 508D B3506 Unit Pg/kg Con. Factor 1.2346 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor * 10) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00064 000182 USFW 0758 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 509D B3507 Unit ug/kg Con. Factor 1.2987 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 C om pound NO PEAKS FOUND 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 `Estimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00065 000183 USFW 0759 Table 1. 4 (C oat) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Diy Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 51 OD B3508 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.2346 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound UNKNOWN SILOXANE 9 RT Cone 16.20 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - I 0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00G6 000184 USFW 0760 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 51 ID B3509 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.3514 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 9 RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00067 000185 USFW 0761 Table 1 .4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creex Site Sample# LabFile# 550C B3510 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound UNKNOWN SILOXANE UNKNOWN SILOXANE Unit Hg/kg Con. Factor 1 P RT Cone 87.70 616.13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *Fsumated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2273\DEl\AR\9708\DRYVOCST OG 0001S6 USFW 0762 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 300F B3511 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.3333 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 n 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEl\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00063 000187 USFW 0763 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 30 IF B3512 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.3514 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound N O PEAKS FOUND Q -- RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00070 0001S8 USFW 0764 Table 1. 4 (Coot) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# Sand Blank 6/16/97 B3517 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00071 0001S9 USFW 0765 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 302F B3518 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 13 16 17 18 19 20 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.2987 q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\S708\DRYVOCST 00072 000190 USFW 0766 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 303F B3519 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.3514 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND 9 R T Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor = 1.0) 2273\DELVAR\9708\DRYVOCST 00073 000191 USFW 0767 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 550B B3520 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 i 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 9 R T Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ` Estimated Concentration {Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00074 000192 USFW 0768 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 808 B3521 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1.2658 CAS# 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound NO PEAKS FOUND q R T Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 00075 - I 93 USFW 0769 Table 1. 4 (Cont) Results of TIC for VOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 899 B3522 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 1 CAS# Compound 1 NO PEAKS FOUND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 q R T Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor = 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYVOCST 0007b 000194 USFW 0770 SAMPLE 0 FILE LOCATION COLLECTED EXTRACTED ANALYZED INJECTED MATRIX OIL. FACT. UNITS COMPOUND Phenol bi st-2-ChloroethylJEther 2-Chlorophenol 1,3 -D ic h io ro b e n z e n e 1,4 -Di ch l oro benzene Benzyl alcohol 1, 2 -D ichlorobenzene 2-Methylphenol b is(2 -C h lo ro iso p ro p y l)eth er 4-Methylphenol N-Nitroso-Di-n-propylemine Hexachloroethane Nitrobenzene Isophorone 2-Nitrophenol 2,4-Dimethylphenol i>is(2-Chloroethoxy)fJiethane 2,4-Dichlorophenol 1 ,2 ,4 -T richiorobenzene Naphthalene 4-Chloroaniline Hexachlorobutadi ene 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 2-Hethylnaphthalene Hexachlorocyclopentadi ene 2 ,4 ,6 - Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 2-Chloronaphthalene 2*Ni t r o a n i l i n e Dimethylphthalate Acenaphthylene 3-Ni tro an i tin e Acenaphthene 2,4-Dinitrophenol 4-Ni trophenol Dibenzofuran 2,6-Dini trotoluene 2 ,4-D initrotoluene D ieth y lp h th alate 4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether Fluorene 4-Ni tro a n ilin e 4 ,6-Dinitro-2-methyl phenol N-Nitrosodiphenyl amine 4 -Bromophenyl-phenyl ether Hexachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenanthrene Anthracene Carbazole D i-n-butylphthalate Fluoranthene Pyrene Butylbenzylphthalate 3 ,3 `-Dichlorobenzidine Benzol alanthracene BisC2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate Chrysene D i-n-octylphthalate Benzolb)fluoranthene BenzollOf luoranthene Benzol aIpyrene lndenol1,2,3-cd)pyrene Dibenzol a,h)anthracene Benzolg.h,i Jperylene Table 1.5 Resulta of the A n a ly s is 'fo r BNA in Water WA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek S ite WBLK061397 "OR002 --06/13/97 06/20/97 10:55 WATER 1.0 a b /l 2Q3E 769 "OR003 REFERENCE 06/10/97 06/13/97 06/20/97 11:50 WATER 1.0 AB/L 202D 770 "DR004 AREA III 06/10/97 06/13/97 06/20/97 12:44 WATER 1.0 AB/L 002010 804 "OROOS AREA IV 06/10/97 06/13/97 06/20/97 13:50 WATER 1.0 M/L CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL U 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 50 u u 10 u u 50 u u 10 u u 10 u u 50 u u 10 u u 50 u u 50 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 50 u u 50 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 50 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 50 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 50 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 ' u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 50 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 10 50 10 10 50 10 50 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 50 10 10 10 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 002000 805 "OROOS LEE CREEK 06/10/97 06/13/97 06/20/97 17:20 WATER 1.0 AB/L CONC. MDL u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 10 50 10 10 50 10 50 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 50 10 10 10 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 2273\OELVAROTOI\DRYRUN*R 00077 0 0 0 .1 3 3 USFW 0771 T able 1.5 (Cant) Results of the Analysis for BNA UA # 2*273 Dry Run Creek Site SAMPLE * FILE LOCATION COLLECTED EXTRACTED ANALT2ZD INJECTED MATRIX OIL. FACT. UNITS 2060 806 *OR009 UPPER TRIP 06/10/97 06/13/97 06/20/97 18: H UATER 1.0 M /L 2040 807 "DR010 AREA 11 06/10/97 06/13/97 06/20/97 19:08 UATER 1.0 M/L 205D 808 T)R011 UPPER TRIP 06/10/97 06/13/97 06/20/97 20:02 UATER 1.0 M /L COMPOUND CONC. HDL CONC. MOL CMC. HDL Phenol bis(-2-Chloroethyl)Ether 2-Chlorophenol 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Benzyl alcohol 1 , 2-D i chlorobenzene 2-Methylphenol bis(2-Chloroisopropyl)ether 4-Methylphenol N-Nitroso-Di-n-propylaffline Hexachloroethane Nitrobenzene Isophorone 2-Nitrophenol 2.4-Dimethylphenol bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 2,4-Dichlorophenol 1 ,2 ,4-Trichlorobenzene Naphthalene 4-Chloroaniline Hexachlorobutad i ene 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 2-Methylnaphthalene Hexachlorocyclopentadi ene 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 2 -C h lo ro n a p h th a le n e 2 -N itroanilin e Dimethytphthalate Acenaphthylene 3 -N itroanilin e Acenaphthene 2,4 -D in itro p h en o l 4-Nitrophenol Dibenzofuran 2 ,6 -D in itro to lu en e 2,4-Dini trotoluene Diethylphthalate 4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether Fluorene 4-Ni tro a n ilin e 4 ,6-Dini tr o - 2-methyl phenol N-Ni tr o s o d ip h e n y l amine 4-Bromophenyl-phenylether Hexachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenanthrene Anthracene Carbazole D i-n -b u ty lp h th a la te Fluorantfiene Pyrene Butylbenzylphthat a te 3 , 3 '-Di chlorobenzidine Benzol a)anthracene B isl2 -E th y lh e x y l)p h th a la te Chrysene O i-n-octylphthalate BenzolbJfluoranthene Benzolk)fluoranthene Benzol aIpyrene lndenol1,2,3-cd)pyrene Dibenzola,h)anthracene Benzolg.h,i jperytene U U U U U U u U u u u u u u u u u u u .u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 2lJ) u u u u u u u V 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 10 50 10 10 50 10 50 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 50 10 10 10 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 U U U U U V U U u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 10 U 10 U 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 50 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 50 u 10 u 10 , u 10 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 1to0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 10 50 10 10 50 10 50 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 50 10 10 10 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 2T73\DEL\AR\970i\DRYRUNAR 00078 000196 USFW 0772 Tabic 1.5 (Cent) Results of the Analysis for IHA in Uator UA 0 2-273 Dry Run Crook S ite COMPOUND SAMPLE * FILE LOCATION COLLECTED EXTRACTED ANALYZED INJECTED MATRIX OIL. FACT. UNITS UBLHJ61B9701 *DR013 --- 06/18/97 06/23/97 11: WATER . 1.0 mb/ l 216A U121 *DR014 TENNANT UELL 06/12/97 06/18/97 06/23/97 12:39 UATER 1.0 ab /l CONC. MDL CONC. MDL Phenol bi*(-2-Chloroethyl)Ether 2-Chlorophenot 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Benzyl alcohol 1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene 2-Methylphenol b is(2 -C h lo ro iso p ro p y l)eth er 4-Methylphenol N-Nitroso-Di-n-propylamine Hexachloroethane Ni tro b e n z e n e Isophorone 2-Nitrophenol 2 ,4 -Dimethylphenol ,bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methBne 2,4-Dichlorophenol 1,2,4-Trictilorobenzene Naphthalene 4-Chloroaniline Hexachlorobutadi ene L-Chloro-3-methylphenol 2-Methylnaphthalene Hexachlorocyclopentadi ene 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 2-Chloronaphthalene 2-Ni t r o a n i l i n e Dimethylphthalate Acenaphthylene 3-Ni tr o a n ilin e Acenaphthene 2,4-Dini trophenol 4 -Hi tro p h en o l Dibenzofuran 2,6 -D in itro to lu en e 2,4 -D in itro to lu en e D ieth y lp h th alate 4-Chlorophenyl-phenyl ether Fluorene 4 -Ni t r o a n i l i n e 4,6-Dini tro-2-m ethyl phenol N-Nitrosodiphenyl amine 4-Bromophenyl- phenylether Hexachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenanthrene Anthracene Carbazole D i-n -b u ty lp h th alate Fl u o ra n th e n e Pyrene Butylbenzylphtha late 3 ,3 `-Dichlorobenzidine Benzol a)anthracene B>s(2-Ethylhexyl)pnthalate Chrysene D '-n-octylpnthalate Benzo(b)fluorantnene Benzolk)fluoranthene Benzo(a)pyrene 1n a e n o l1 , 2 , 3 - c d ) p y r e n e Dibenzol a , h)anthracene Benzolg.h,i)perylene u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u V 2<J) u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 10 50 10 10 50 10 50 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 50 10 10 10 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u K 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 70 14 70 14 14 70 14 70 70 14 14 14 14 14 14 70 70 14 14 14 70 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 70 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 2273\DEL\AR\9TOVDRYRUNAR 00079 00019 7 USFW 0773 Table 1. 6 Results of TIC for BNA in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# WBLK061397 DR002 CAS# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Unknown Unknown Unknown Com pound Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1.0 9 RT Cone 6.64 3 28.73 8 30.92 IS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Responsi Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEl\AR\9706\BNAWTIC OJObO 000198 USFW 0774 Table 1. 6 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Sample # LabFile# 203E 769 DR003 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown 3 Unknown 4 Unknown 3 Unknown 6 Alkane 7 Alkane 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1.0 q RT Cone 6.31 4 6.69 6 10.00 4 28.74 6 30.93 16 34.00 4 34.93 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor 1.0) 2273\DE L\AR\9708\BNAWTIC 00081 000199 USFW 0775 Table 1. 6 (Corn) Results of TIC for BNA in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Sample# LabFile# 202D 770 DR004 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown 3 Unknown 4 Unknown 5 Alkene 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound Unit pg/L Con Factor 1.0 9 RT Cone 6.30 4 6.67 6 9.97 5 28.73 4 30.92 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\D EL\AR\970B\BNAWT1C 00082 000200 USFW 0776 Table 1. 6 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Sample# LabFile# 0020ID 804 DR005 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown 3 Unknown 4 Unknown 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1.0 q RT Cone 6.69 5 9.98 7 28.74 7 30.92 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Esumaled Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\BNAWTIC 00083 000201 USFW 0777 Table 1. 6 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Sample# LabFile# 00200D 805 DR008 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown 3 Unknown 4 Alkene 5 Unknown Acid 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound Unit pg/L Con. Factor 1.0 9 RT Cone 6.29 4 6.66 6 9.95 7 28.70 8 30.89 15 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2273\DEL'AR\9708\BNAWT1C 00084 000202 USFW 0778 Table 1. 6 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Sample # LabFile# 206D 806 DR009 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown 3 Unknown 4 Unknown 5 Unknown Acid 6 Alkane 7 Alkane 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound Unit pg/L Con. Factor 10 Q RT Cone 6.28 5 6.66 6 9.9J 11 28.71 7 30.89 13 33.95 4 34.88 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ksnmaied Conccnualion (Response Faclor - 10) 2273\DEL\AR\9708\BNAWTIC 00085 000203 USFW 0779 COMPOUND SAMPLE # FILE LOCATION COLLECTED EXTRACTED ANALYZED INJECTED MATRIX D IL . FACT. X SOLID AMT. USED FINAL VOL UNITS bis(-2-ChloroethylJEther 2-Chlorophenol 1,3-D i chlorobenzene 1 \ 4 -D i e h lo ro b e n z e n e Benzyl alcohol 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 2-Methylphenol bis(2-Chloroisopropyl)ether 4-Methylphenol N-Nitroso-Di-n-propylamine Hexachloroethane Nitrobenzene lsophorone 2-Nitrophenol 2,4-Dimethylphenol bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 2,4-Dichlorophenol 1,2 ,6 - T ric h lo r o b e n z e n e Naphthalene 6-Chloroaniline Hexachlorobutadi ene 6-Chloro-3-methyl phenol 2-Methyl naphtha lene Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2 ,6 ,6-Tri chiorophenol 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 2 -Chloronaph thalene 2-N itroanl ine Oimethylphthalate Acenaphthylene 3-N i t r o a n i l i n e Acenaphthene 2,4-Dinitrophenol 4-Ni trophenol Dibenzofuran 2 , 6 - Di ni t r o t ottiene 2 ,6 -Dini tr o t o luene Dierhylphthalate 6 -Cbloropflenyl-phenyl ether Ftuorene 4 -N itro a n iline 6 , 6 - Di n i t r o - 2 -methyl phenol N-N i t r o s o d ip h e n y l ami ne 4-Bromophenyl-phenylether Hexachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenanthrene Anthracene CarDazole Di-n-butylphthalate Ftucranthene Pyrene Butylbenzylphthalate 3 , 3 ' -D ichtorobenzidi ne Benzol a)anthracene Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate Chrysene O i-n-octylphthalate Benzolb)fluoranthene BenzoOOl luoranthene Benzo(a)pyrene Indenoll ,2,3-cd)pyrene Dibenzol a ,h)anthracene Benzolg.h,i Jperytene Table 1.7 (Co r e ) Results of the Analysis for BUA in Soil HA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weisht 306E S107 5088 S109 509B S110 5108 s i n "DR032 AREA IV 06/11/97 06/16/97 06/26/97 *DR033 AREA III c 06/12/97 06/16/97 06/24/97 *DR034 AREA IV A 06/12/97 06/16/97 06/24/97 "DRQ35 AREA IV 8 06/12/97 06/16/97 06/24/97 19:05 20:14 21:12 22:09 SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 63 80 79 81 30 31 30 30 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ag/kg ag/kg AS/kg ag/kg CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL U U u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u V u u u u u u u 301J) u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 2600 530 2600 530 530 2600 530 2600 2600 530 530 530 530 530 530 2600 2600 530 530 530 2600 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 2600 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 27(J) u u u u V 27C J) u u u u u u u u 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 600 400 400 600 400 600 600 600 600 600 600 400 400 400 2000 400 2000 400 400 2000 400 2000 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 2000 2000 400 400 400 2000 400 400 400 400 400 600 400 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 U U U U U U u u u u u u u u u u u u uu u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 26(J) u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 2100 420 2100 420 420 2100 420 2100 2100 420 420 420 420 420 420 2100 2100 420 420 420 2100 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 2100 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u LI u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 30(J> u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 2100 410 2100 410 410 2100 410 2100 2100 410 410 410 410 410 410 2100 2100 410 410 410 2100 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 2100 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 5068 S124 "0 8 0 3 7 AREA I I I A 0 6 / 1 Z/97 06/16/97 06/25/97 00:02 SOIL 1.0 88 31 1.0 ag/kg CONC. MDL u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 1800 u 370 u 1800 u 370 u 370 u 1800 u 370 u 1800 u 1800 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 1800 u 1800 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 1800 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 1800 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 u 370 ^TJ\DEL\AR\970\DRYRUNAR OOO32 000204 USFW 0780 COMPOUND SAMPLE * FILE LOCATION COLLECTED EXTRACTED ANALYZED INJECTED MATRIX DIL. FACT. X SOLID AMT. USED FINAL VOL UNITS Phenol bisl-2-Chloroethyl)Ether 2-Chlorophenol 1,3-Diehlorobenzerte 1 , 4 - Di ch t orobenzene Benzyl alcohol 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 2-Methylphenol bi*(2-Chloroisopropyl>ether 4-Hethylphenol N-Nitroso-Di-n-propylamine Hexachloroethane Nitrobenzene 1s o p h o r o n e 2-Nitrophenol 2,4-Dimethylphenol bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 2,4-Dichlorophenol 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene Naphthalene 4-Chloroaniline He x a c h lo ro b u ta d i ene 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 2-Methylnaphthalene Hexach l orocyc l opent ad i ene 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 2-Chloronaphthalene 2-N itro an ilin e Dimethylphthalate Acenaphthylene 3-Ni tro a n ilin e Acenaphthene 2,4-Dinitrophenol 4-Ni trophenol Dibenzofuran 2,6-Dini trotoluene 2 ,4 -Dini trotoluene D ieth y lp h th alate 4-Chlorophenyl-phenyl ether Fluorene 4-N itroaniline 4 ,6-Dini tro-2-methyl phenol N- Ni tr o so d ip h e n y la m in e 4 -Bromophenyl-phenyl ether Hexachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenanthrene Anthracene Carbazole D i-n-butylphthalate Fluoranthene Pyrene Butylbenzylphthalate 3 ,3 '- 0 i ehlorobenz i d i ne Benzol a>anthracene Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate Chrysene D i-n-octylphthalate Benzolblfluoranthene BenzoOOf luoranthene Benzol a )pyrene Indenoll,2,3-cd)pyrene Dibenzol a,h)anthracene Benzolg,h,i)perylene Tabla 1.7 (Cant) Rasutta of tho Analytic for M A In Soil UA # 2-273 Dry Run Crook SI to Bacod on Dry Uoight 51IB 5112 507B S125 5048 S126 505B S127 *OR036 "DR041 *08042 "DR043 AREA IV C AREA IM B AREA IIB AREA IIC 06/12/97 06/12/97 06/12/97 06/12/97 06/16/97 06/16/97 06/16/97 06/16/97 06/24/97 06/25/97 06/25/97 06/25/97 23:05 13:50 14:45 15:40 SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 75 81 84 78 31 31 30 30 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 A9/kg Afl/kfl AB/kfl AB/kB CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL CONC. MDL 300E S135 *DR044 REFERENCE 06/11/97 06/16/97 06/25/97 16:35 SOIL 1.0 80 31 1.0 AB/kg CONC. MDL U 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u . 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 2200 u 430 u 2200 u 430 u 430 u 2200 u 430 u 2200 u 2200 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 2200 u 2200 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 2200 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 2200 u 430 621J) 430 u 430 18u0 1 J ) 430 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u 430 u u U U U U U U U U U U U u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 2000 400 2000 400 400 2000 400 2000 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 2000 2000 400 400 400 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 U 400 U 400 U 400 U 400 U 400 U 400 U 400 U 400 u 400 u 400 u 400 u u 400 400 u 400 u u 400 400 u 400 u 400 u u 400 400 uu 400 400 u 400 u 400 u 400 u 400 u 2000 u 400 u 2000 u 400 u 400 u u 2000 400 u u u 2000 2000 400 u 400 u 400 u 400 u 400 u 400 u 2000 uu 2000 400 u u 400 400 uu 2000 400 u 400 u 400 u 400 u 400 u 400 u 400 uuu 2000 400 400 u 400 u u 400 400 uu 400 400 u u 400 400 u 400 U U U U U U U U U U U U U u U u U u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 221J ) u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 2100 430 2100 430 430 2100 430 2100 2100 430 430 430 430 430 430 2100 2100 430 430 430 2100 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 2100 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 ' U U U U U U U U U u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u uu u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 2000 400 2000 400 400 2000 400 2000 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 2000 2000 400 400 400 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 000205 2373\DEL\AR\97DI\DRYRUNAR 00093 USFW 0781 J-c>7ZjO<o0 C Oc o c ) n o -vi ar>o 3 S3 c g sO ^io0n5f33fxtZ5f1O0a2W3-9t.s--iM3O1%t--NtAK0rfO3^3f3-f1-Dttlc/ --KNAOV33ff3t-3O*-ttr.oOr3oAr0--70<*1*1t-*rfify13ttti **--^owmf--fX--r--y7<<*ttou"V--on3C30nfrA033"Vr>#t)IDf'*WW?O-5Na3Oo3-3----*55<cDfM0r03--n<-->tt)O*Tft<>t CSVff5-33--tnt>?f*fOC?<--tfN?nfOf3ttff>rfn3*3-tttIt-hff3f373371ttt))*07fOfOr3M3"ttt-noXfXf7I3--Oi-3t1ttITH3<*>OiC3Of--3irf3f33J<ttttDi"-5T-ftraWffO--OT337--3JttCt.1OM*>-rOtO-Ot737f--3O<**tt'r3"fO-3--2t-tttT'i--Ctf3TOlrt\S-*<nro7*3-IZf3<1tt*-)"r*i*o--ar730rtf"<tttt-0?roff3Ct--t0o*t-- VrC3rOr--3Ocf3ttoOMQ3Co33il'Tr3zo-f373ttrmorJO5fO03i--fvtLj*n3>Q3if7ritttl33wzr'i--f----t"t*u"n><A33rr*t.-rQ?orA3--ytyt--t fra-o--3-f3MittDcfoy33yo?for3Iu*tt--U*-fO---Oof1O33--\trJU**I*O---o-OO*fMr33M<It"-*f>--OO3yoo-3r1--QtIct:.-3IfXfr3yrf3M7--tt:ttt ofTOio**yofyfyO3---tJt|-IZOfht7O30?aia3f--itttio0"tnyrOf33t'-IlXx*yAIj--3it -M-HM1oy3o--r1>r)'Ofi2J*3Oof3m0itt'W2frX2e--fw3oyonfoya3<>tt)r5O*3*0MyI--f3--<itN*^orr--3roiotzt3.Tot73fiJt f--XX0yo1lfXa*--o3t>Cffy--<TttW--yfn--yt)>tyiry--<tt\j.'r0--O"--o*<nfC3A--tB-o0y--^o--W0yPyooo--3UO---orft\"i)>73yao--J 3ft Oe? ryA5f*t-O33--0ii fo3--*t "?Oof33--o0t)*fo3--t oo533Nfooy2o-3o3No5o33NrTstA3r*igo3ry-t 55 15 yA n r- o CJC3--) VIf- Cinro.fxfX*---mnfN-m<n-yfn-r*f.Q-'. r- 8 3 d t 8 8 * m % c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c rc c c c c c c c c c c c c W'OWOW'OW'OWOW'OW'OW'OW'OW'O^WOWOOW'WOOW'WOOWO'OOWOW'OWOOO'OOW'OW'OW'OW'WO'WO''OO^OJWOwvODOWOWO-OOl/OJ'OOWOU'OIW'OW'OWOW'OWOWOWO'WOW'OW'OW'OU'OIWOW'OW'OWOWOO'OW'OWOW'OW'OU'OIW'O ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo CCCCCCCCNCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC im rvi Mro iMro r\j im n lUMMIMNfMNNNNONMNMNMNONNMOOMMMMMfMOOMONMOMOlVJNNMNNMNIMNMroiMMNNfMNNNIONNNMM ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooaoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c rc c rc c c c c c c c c c c c c c fM N toro fvjrvj N MN o_o o.J o^ o^ ^o o_^o o _o1Oo^o^o o^oIo.J o o Qo o o oOoOo o o -o--oAo*o>oOOo o oOo-*o-*Oo o"*oOo o o o o o o-Ao^ o--oo*--oo oAo*oto o o o o o o o o^o 2o a* woi*- M--o nSSs.N?sSN.vmmm3o^u s o - w o r w w - * - p ifl OK* owNfNDS'-XnUXl>ftl <o<w)m -t u X 6 e3 o 2 n ID 9 *SooSo\*-"*-*IO5 o** WJ y so ^ 5J f f Ow Nir*OmOoWa*- oBrwK iRw-uisO"^Mv'--"s3mtQSAfMp>JIrgAk S 'Sl, 5 3 n ? 9 o Ci SAMPLE # FILE LOCATION COLLECTED EXTRACTED ANALYZED INJECTED MATRIX O IL. FACT. X SOLID AMT. USED FINAL VOL UNITS COMPOUND Phenol bisl-2-Chloroethyl}Ether 2-Chlorophenol 1 , 3 - Di ch loro ben zen e 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Benzyl alcohol 1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene 2-Methylphenol bis(2-Chloroisopropyl)ether 4-Methylphenol N-Ni tr o s o -D i- n -p ro p y l a m i n e Hexachloroethane Nitrobenzene Isophorone 2-Nitrophenol 2 ,4 -Dimethylphenol bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 2,4-Dichloropnenol 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene Naphthalene 4-Chloroaniline Hexachlorobutadi ene 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 2-Methylnaphthalene Hexachlorocyclopentad iene 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 2 - Chloronaphthalene 2 -N itro an ilin e Dimethylphthalate Acenaphthylene 3 -N itro an ilin e Acenaphthene 2,4-Dinitrophenol 4 - Ni tro p h en o l Dibenzofuran 2 ,6 -D in itro to lu en e 2,4-D initro to lu ene Diethylphthalate 4 -C hlorophenyl-phenylether Fluorene 4-Ni t r o a n i l i n e 4 ,6 -D initro-2-methyl phenol N-Nitrosodiphenyl amine 4-Bromophenyl-phenylether Hexachlorobenzene P entachl orophenol Phenanthrene Anthracene Carbazole D i-n-butylp hth alate Fluoranthene Pyrene ButylbenzyIphthalate 3 ,3 '-Dichlorobenzidine Benzol aJanthracene Bi s l 2 - E t h y l h e x y l I p h t h a l a t e Chrysene D i-n -o cty lp h th alate Benzo(b)fluoranthene Benzolluoranthene Benzol a )pyrene Indenoll,2,3-ed)pyrene D ibenzol a,hjanthracene Benzolg.h,i)perylene Table 1.7 (Cent) Result of the Analysis for SNA in Soil UA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight SBLK062697 *CR003 06/26/97 06/30/97 13:15 SOIL 1.0 100 30 M1.O0/kg CONC. MDL U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 1700 u 330 u 1700 u 330 u 330 u 1700 u 330 u 1700 u 1700 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 1700 u 1700 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 1700 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 1700 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 00020? 2?73\DLAARN970f\DRYRUNAR 00005 USFW 0783 Table 1.8 Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# SBLK061697 DR017 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 33.3 CAS# 1 No TICs Found 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 Compound q RT Cone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 0 0 0 1 )6 000208 USFW 0784 Table 1.8 (Corn) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 512B 058 DR018 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 40.3 CAS# Compound 1 57103 Hcxadccanoic add 2 Unknown Add 3 Unknown 4 Unknown Add 5 Alkane 6 Alkane/Cvcloalkane 7 Unknown 8 Aldehyde 9 Alkane 10 Unknown 11 Aldehyde 12 Alkane 13 Unknown 14 Aldehyde 15 Unknown 16 Alkane 17 Unknown 18 Unknown 19 Unknown 20 Aldehvde Q RT Cone 95 26.04 730 28.19 770 32.03 600 32.74 480 33.97 520 34.01 560 34.67 400 35.32 2400 35.87 1300 35.96 3400 37.62 1400 3832 2100 38.52 1000 40.84 1900 41.46 640 41.75 930 42.10 1600 42.39 1200 43.35 1700 45.37 890 hsnmaled Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEl\AR\9708\BNASTIC U00i)7 000209 USFW 0785 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 513 B 059 DR019 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 44.4 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 57103 Hexadccanoic acid 3 Unknown 4 Alcohol 5 Aldchvde 6 Alkane 7 Unknown 8 Aldehyde 9 Alkane 10 Unknown 11 Unknown 12 Aldehyde 13 Unknown 14 Alkane 15 Unknown 16 Unknown 17 Unknown 18 83476 Sitosterol 19 Unknown 20 Unknown Compound Q RT Cone 25.91 670 95 26.03 1300 32.01 760 33.97 1200 35.30 3200 35.86 1600 35.95 5300 37.59 2000 38.29 3300 38.47 1500 39.49 620 40.77 1800 41.42 1200 41.70 1400 41.81 1300 42.04 1600 42.35 1600 80 43.30 2200 44.40 670 45.32 1000 *hsiimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 000138 000210 USFW 0786 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 514B060 DR020 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 45.5 CAS# Compound 1 Unknown 2 2091294 9-Hexadeceaoic add 3 57103 Hexadccanoic add 4 Unknown 5 Unknown 6 Unknown add 7 Unknown 8 Aldehyde 9 Alkane 10 Unknown 11 Aldehyde 12 Alkane 13 Alcohol 14 Aldehyde 15 Unknown 16 Alkane 17 Unknown 18 PAH compound 19 83476 .gamma.-Sitosterol 20 AJdehvde 9 RT Cone 25.82 680 61 25.92 820 96 26.05 1900 28.24 680 31.99 770 32.73 730 34.00 1500 35.31 3700 35.87 1900 35.96 5900 37.60 2300 38.32 4000 38.48 1800 40.81 2300 41.43 1100 41.72 1900 42.06 1900 42.38 2400 68 43.35 3000 45.33 1100 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 0001)9 000211 USFW 0787 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 500B 100 DR021 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 45.0 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown Acid 3 Unknown 4 Unknown Acid 3 Unknown 6 Alkene 7 Aldehyde 8 Alkane 9 Unknown 10 Aldehyde 11 Alkane 12 Alcohol 13 Unknown 14 Aldehyde 15 Unknown 16 Alkane 17 Unknown 18 Unknown 19 83476 .gimmjL-Sitosterol 20 Aldehyde Compound 9 RT Cone 26.02 540 2813 270 30.99 360 32.73 320 33.71 270 33.99 1300 3531 1800 35.86 1500 35.95 2300 37.59 1200 38.29 1800 38.47 1200 38.72 270 40.81 1200 41.43 270 41.72 720 42.06 990 42.40 410 93 43.33 1400 45.33 770 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00100 000212 USFW 0788 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 501B 101 DR022 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 42.3 CAS# 1 J7103 Hexadecanoic acid 2 Unknown 3 Unknown acid 4 Unknown 5 Unknown 6 Unknown 7 Aldehyde 8 Alkane 9 Unknown 10 Aldehyde 11 Alkane 12 Alcohol 13 Aldehyde 14 Unknown 15 Alkane 16 Unknown 17 PAH compound 18 PAH compound 19 83476 .gamma.-Shosterol 20 AJdehvde Compound 9 RT Cone 96 26.04 1400 32.00 800 32.72 720 33.70 850 33.99 1500 34.66 1100 35.30 1700 35.85 1200 35.94 2400 37.59 1200 38.29 1900 38.48 930 40.81 1600 41.43 1000 41.72 800 42.06 1900 42.22 800 42.38 2400 86 43.35 2400 45.35 630 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor 1.0) 2270\DEl\AR\9708\BNASTIC U0101 000213 USFW 0789 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 502B 102 DR023 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 41.3 CAS# Compound 1 Naptahalenedione. hydroxy 2 Unknown 3 Unknown 4 37103 Hexadecanoic acid 3 Unknown 6 Unknown 7 Aldehyde 8 Alkane 9 Unknown 10 Aldehyde 11 Alkane 12 Alcohol 13 Unknown 14 Aldehyde 13 Unknown 16 Alkane 17 Unknown 18 Unknown 19 83476 .gamma. -Sitosterol 20 Aldehvde Q RT Cone 19.91 380 23.76 660 25.79 450 96 26.03 1200 33.71 740 33.99 1400 3331 2400 35.86 1700 35.95 3800 37.58 2000 3838 2800 38.46 1900 38.69 500 40.76 1700 41.39 780 41.70 1600 42.04 1600 42.36 1000 97 43.29 2700 45.33 1100 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00102 000214 USFW 0790 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Rur Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 503B 103 DR027 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 44.5 CAS# Compound 1 Unknown acid 2 Unknown 3 57103 Hexadecanoic acid 4 Unknown 5 2091294 9-Hexadecanoic acid 6 Unknown acid 7 Alkene 8 Aldehyde 9 Alkane 10 Unnown 11 Aldehyde 12 Alkane 13 Unknown 14 Unknown 15 AJdehvde 16 Unknown 17 Alkane 18 Unknown 19 83476 .(amma.-Sitoslerol 20 Unknown 9 95 86 93 RT 2113 26.01 26.16 26.59 28.32 28.55 34.12 35.44 35.99 36.08 37.78 38.50 38.69 39.75 41.07 41.73 42.02 42J 8 43.68 45.29 Cone 2300 1000 3400 670 4500 1700 1400 1700 1900 3000 1500 4200 1300 800 1200 1000 2800 1600 3200 850 hnimaied Concentration (Resporue Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00103 00021S USFW 0791 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results o f TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 304E 105 DR030 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 42.7 CAS# 1 10544500 Sulfur, mol. 2 Unknown 3 Unknown 4 Unknown J Unknown 6 Unknown 7 Unknown 8 9 10 u 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound 9 RT Cone 76 27.76 300 32.04 170 33.22 340 34.13 380 34.27 2600 35.43 170 43.69 730 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 fcjntmued Concentration (Response Factor 1.0) 2270\DEl\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00104 00021G USFW 0792 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of H C for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 305E 106 DR031 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 45.2 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown 3 10544500 Sulfur, mol. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1J 16 17 18 19 20 Compound Q RT Cone 6.41 230 6.63 450 89 27.77 270 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00103 o o o zx v USFW 0793 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 3 0 6 E 107 DR032 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 52.7 CAS# Compound 1 Unknown acid 2 57103 Hcxidccanoic acid 3 10544500 Sulfur, mol. 4 Unknown 5 Unknown acid 6 57114 Pemadecanoic Acid 7 Unknown 8 Unknown 9 Aldehyde 10 Alkane 11 Unknown 12 Aldehyde 13 Alkane 14 Unknown 15 Aldehyde 16 Alkane 17 Unknown 18 83476 .gamma.-Silosterol 19 Unknown 20 Unknown 9 RT Cone 25.98 1600 95 26.23 3300 88 27.91 2700 28.37 2000 28.43 1500 89 28.60 790 32.18 110O 34.18 3100 35.51 1800 36.06 2100 36.17 2700 37.85 2500 38.57 2100 38.74 1700 41.16 3200 42.09 900 42.45 2000 91 43.81 5100 44.53 1600 45.73 1800 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 227CHDEL\AR\9708\B NASTIC OOlOt 00023-8 USFW 0794 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 508B 109 DR033 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 40.9 CAS# 1 Unknown acid 2 Unknown 3 Unknown 4 Unknown 5 Aldehyde 6 Alkane 7 Unknown 8 Aldehyde 9 Alkane 10 Unknown 11 Aldehyde 12 Unknown 13 Unknown 14 Unknown 15 Unknown 16 Unknown 17 83476 .gamma.-Srtosterol 18 Unknown 19 Unknown 20 Unknown Compound q RT Cone 26.20 1200 2*16 1800 28.68 610 34.17 780 33.47 330 36.02 330 36.11 1000 37.81 530 38.33 1000 40.14 330 41.12 820 41.78 330 42.45 980 42.61 1100 42.77 2300 43.36 570 94 43.73 1200 4518 490 45.74 490 45.88 740 'Em mated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEl\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00107 000219 USFW 0795 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 509B 110 DR034 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 41.8 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown 3 37103 Hexadecanoic acid 4 Unknown 3 Unknown 6 Unknown acid 7 Unknown 8 Alkane 9 AJdehvde JO Alkane 11 Alcohol 12 Aldehyde 13 Alkane 14 Unknown 15 Aldehyde 16 Unknown 17 Alkane 18 Unknown 19 83476 gamma.-Sitosterol 20 Unknown Compound 9 RT Cone 23.92 380 26.03 460 94 26.15 1100 27.72 330 28.31 210 28.35 210 34.12 1000 35.01 330 35.46 1000 36.01 730 36.12 1300 37.80 960 38.52 1000 38.71 670 41.09 630 41.75 290 42.02 540 42.39 840 86 43.68 1400 45.65 380 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2270MDEL\AR\9708\B NASTI C 00108 000220 USFW 0796 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 51OB 111 DR035 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 40.7 CAS# 1 Unknown acid 2 57103 Hexadecanoic acid 3 Unknown 4 AJdehvde S Alkane 6 Unknown 7 Aldchvde 8 Alkane 9 Alcohol 10 Aldchvde 11 Unknown 12 Alkane 13 Unknown 14 Unknown 15 Unknown 16 Unknown 17 83476 .gamma.-Silosterol 18 Unknown 19 Unknown 20 Unknown Compound q RT Cone 26.03 860 92 26.17 1600 34.12 1300 35.45 1100 36.03 1100 36.12 1800 37.83 980 38.55 1600 38.75 770 41.14 1300 41.79 860 42.09 810 42.47 1500 42.63 1800 42.79 3200 43.60 1100 67 43.78 1900 4430 730 45.37 980 45.85 730 "hstimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2270\D El\A R\9708\B NAST1C 00109 000221 USFW 0797 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of-TIC for SNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 51 IB 112 DR036 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 43.6 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 57103 Hrxaricmnoic seid 3 Unknown 4 Unknown 5 Aldehyde 6 Alkene 7 Unknown 8 AJdehvde 9 Alkane 10 Unknown 11 Aldehyde 12 Unknown 13 Alkane 14 Unknown 15 Unknown 16 83476 gamma.-Sitosterol 17 Unknown 18 Unknown 19 Aldehyde 20 Unknown Compound Q RT Cono 26.04 570 97 26.17 1100 34.13 2300 34.29 2300 35.47 2100 36.04 1500 36.13 3700 37.83 1900 38.55 3100 38.72 1800 41.10 1500 41.76 650 42.05 1700 42.41 1300 42.75 650 73 43.75 3500 44.84 480 45.34 1200 45.67 830 45.83 780 Usnmated Concentrinoli (Response Factor * 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\S708\BNASTIC 00110 000222 USFW 0798 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 506B 124 DR037 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 37.3 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown 3 57103 Hexadecanoic acid 4 Unknown 5 Unknown 6 Unknown 7 Unknown Acid 8 Aldehyde 9 Alkane 10 Unknown 11 Aldehyde 12 Alkane 13 Unknown 14 Unknown 15 Aldehyde 16 .Alkane 17 Unknown 18 Unknown 19 83476 .gamma.-Sitosterol 20 Aldehvde Compound q RT Cone 20.84 300 26.09 490 95 26.20 520 27.88 370 2839 260 28.63 490 34.16 820 35.49 1300 36.04 860 36.13 2300 37.83 1000 38.54 1500 38.72 820 39.79 340 41.10 1000 42.06 710 42.42 600 42.76 300 95 43.73 1200 45.73 780 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEl\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00111 000223 l I.QF\A/ n 7 n n Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 507B 125 DR041 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 40.2 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 57103 Hexadecanoic acid 3 Unknown 4 Alkane 5 Unknown 6 Aldehvde 7 Alkane g Unknown 9 Aldehyde 10 Alkane 11 Alcohol 12 Aldehyde 13 Unknown 14 Alkane 15 Unknown 16 Unknown 17 83476 .gamma.-Sitonerol lg PAH Compound 19 Unknown 20 Unknown Compound 9 RT Cone 26.03 320 92 26.14 880 32.13 320 34.07 280 34.13 440 35.44 1200 35.97 760 36.08 2000 37.76 880 38.47 1400 38.69 720 41.03 800 41.71 680 41.97 640 42.38 920 42.65 640 79 43.65 1000 44.14 280 45.26 560 45.57 400 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2270\DEl\AR\9708\BNASTIC 0011- 000224 USFW 0800 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 504B 126 DR042 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 39.5 CAS# I Unknown 2 Unknown 3 37103 Hexadecanoic acid 4 Alkane 5 Aldehyde 6 Alkane 7 Unknown 8 Aldehvde 9 Alkane 10 Unknown 11 Aldehyde 12 Unknown 13 Alkane 14 Unknown 15 Unknown 16 83476 gamma-Sitosterol 17 Unknown 18 Unknown 19 Unknown 20 Unknown Compound 9 RT Cone 25.90 550 26.01 630 99 26.13 1300 34.04 510 35.42 1400 36.00 990 36.10 2300 37.80 1000 38.52 1500 38.70 750 41.05 750 41.72 870 41.98 670 42.36 870 42.66 470 20 43.67 1900 44.17 470 44.35 470 44.76 510 45.28 550 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00113 000225 USFW 0801 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results ofH C for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 505B 127 DR043 Unit fig/kg Con. Factor 42.5 CAS# Compound 1 2091294 9\Hexadecenoic acid 2 Unknown 3 37103 Hexadecanoic acid 4 Unknown 5 Unknown 6 Unknown 7 Unknown 8 Aldehyde 9 Alkane 10 Alcohol 11 Aldehyde 12 Alkane 13 Unknown 14 Aldehyde 15 Unknown 16 Alkane 17 Unknown 18 83476 .gamma_-Sitosterol 19 Unknown 20 Unknown 9 RT Cone 96 23.91 830 26.01 940 94 26.16 1900 28.28 600 28.33 600 32.10 600 34.09 1300 33.42 1800 33.98 1300 36.09 2600 37.77 1300 38.48 2200 38.66 1200 41.02 1100 41.69 940 41.95 1100 42.33 1200 47 43.64 2200 45.25 470 45.37 470 ' Esumited Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 227D1DE L\AR\9708\B NASTIC 00114 000226 USFW 0802 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 300E 135 DR044 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 40.9 CAS# I 57103 Hexadecanoic acid 2 10J44500 Sulfur, mol. 3 Unknown 4 Unknown J Unknown 6 Unknown 7 Aldehyde 8 Alkane 9 Unknown 10 Aldehyde 11 Alkane 12 Unknown 13 Aldehyde 14 Alkane 15 Unknown 16 Unknown 17 Unknown 18 19 20 Compound 9 RT Cone 99 26.11 160 78 27.75 250 31.79 160 3X10 290 34.08 860 34.20 200 3537 490 35.92 450 36.03 410 37.69 530 38.39 450 38.58 290 40.94 740 41.87 160 42.25 160 43.54 330 45.54 330 0 0 0 KstirTuied Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00115 00022*? USFW 0803 Table 1.8 (Coni) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 301E 136 DR045 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 39.3 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown 3 37103 Hcxadccanoic acid 4 10544500 Sulfur, mol. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound 9 RT Cone 6.72 200 20.23 240 89 26.11 160 89 27.77 630 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fsiimaied Concentration (Response Factor * 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00116 000228 USFW 0804 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# 302E 137 DR046 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 42.2 CAS# 1 10544300 Sulfur. mol. 2 Unknown 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 li 16 17 18 19 20 Compound 9 RT Cone 71 27.86 420 36.20 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00117 000229 USFW 0805 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample# LabFile# 3 0 3 E 138 DR047 Unit pg/kg Con. Factor 40.5 CAS# Compound 1 84651 9,10>Anlhncenedione 2 10544500 Sulfur, mol 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 q RT Cone 93 26.94 200 88 28.01 890 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 001S 000230 USFW 0806 Table 1.8 (Cont) Results of TIC for BNA in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample # LabFile# SBLK062697 CR003 Unit gg/kg Con. Factor 33.3 CAS# 1 Unknown 2 Unknown 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Compound 9 RT Cone 6 48 200 6.75 370 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Concentration (Response Factor - 1.0) 2270\DEL\AR\9708\BNASTIC 00113 000231 USFW 0807 Table 1.9 R esults o f the A nalysis for Pesdcides/PC B in Water W AM 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Client ID Location Analyte a-BHC g-BHC b-BHC Heptachlor d-BHC Aldrin Heptachlor Epoxide g-Chlordane a-Chlordane Endosulfan (I) p,p'-D D E Dieldrin Endnn p,p'-D D D Endosulfan (II) p,p'*D D T Endrin Aldehyde Endosulfan Sulfate Methoxvchlor Endnn Ketone Toxaphene Aroclor 1016 Aroclor 1221 Aroclor 1232 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1248 Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 W B L K 0614197 -- 00201F Area 4 00200F Lee Crede 00206 F Upper Trib B 00204 F Area2 MDL MDL MDL MDL MDL (Pg/L) (PgA-) (Pg/L) (Hg/L) (pg/L) (Hg/L) (Mg^L) (Mg-) (Mg/L) U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 Z273\DEL\AR\9708'erypestw 00120 000232 USFW 0808 Table 1.9 (Cant) R esults o f the A nalysis for Pesticides/PC B in Water WAM 2-273 D ry Run Creek Site Client ID Location Analyte 00205 F Upper Trib A 00203 F Reference 00202 F Area 3 MDL MDL MDL (Pg/L) (Pg/L) (Pg/L) (Pg/L) (Pg/L) (pg/L) a-BHC g-BHC b-BHC Heptachlor d-BHC Aldrin Heptachlor Epoxide g-Chlordane a-Chlordane Endosulfan (I) p,p'-D D E Dieldrin Endrin p,p'-D D D Endosulfan (II) p,p'-D D T Endrin Aldehyde Endosulfan Sulfate Methoxvchlor Endrin Ketone Toxaphene Aroclor 1016 Aroclor 1221 Aroclor 1232 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1248 Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 2273\DEl\AR\9708\rYptw OOl.'-J- 000233 USFW 0809 Table 1.10 R esults o f the A nalysis for Pesticide/PC B in Soil WAM 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based an dry weight Client ID Location Percent Solid Analyte SBLK061797 N/A 100 Cone MDL P&fcg Pgfcg 512B Ref A 80.6 Cone MDL Pg/kg Pgfcg 513B RefB 74.8 Cone MDL Pgfcg P&fcg SUB RefC 72.6 Cone MDL Pgfcg Pg/kg 500B Area 1 A 72.1 Cone MDL Pgfr Pgfcg a-BHC g-BHC b-BHC Heptachlor d-BHC Aldrin Heptachlor Epoxide g-Chlordane a-Chlordane Endosulfan (I) p,p'-D D E Dieldrin Endrrn p,p'-D D D Endosulfan (II) p,p'-D D T Endnn Aldehvde Endosulfan Sulfate Methoxvchlor Endnn Ketone Toxaphene Aroclor 1016 Aroclor 1221 Aroclor 1232 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1248 Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 U 3.3 U 4.1 U 4.5 U 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 U 4.1 U 4.5 U 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 U 4.1 U 4.5 U 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 U 4.1 U 4.5 U 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 U 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 U 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 U 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 U 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5. u 4.5 u 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 3.3 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 4.5 u 83 u 100 u 110 u no u no u 42 u 51 u 56 u 56 u 56 u 83 u 100 u 110 u no u no u 42 u 51 u 56 u 56 u 56 u 42 u 51 u 56 u 56 u 56 u 42 u 51 'U 56 u 56 u 56 u 42 u 51 u 56 u 56 u 56 u 42 u 51 u 56 u 56 u 56 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYFESTS 000234 001 USFW 0810 Table 1.10 (Cant) R esults o f the A nalysis for Pesticidc/PC B in Soil WAM 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on dry weight Client ID Location Percent Solid Analyte 501B Area 1 B 78.6 Cone MDL Pg/kg Pg/kg S02B Area 1 C 80 Cone MDL pg/kg Pg/kg 503B Area 2 A 74.9 Cone MDL Pg/kg Pg/kg 304E Upper Trib B 78 Cone MDL pg/kg Pg/kg 305E AREA2 73.5 Cone MDL Pg/kg Pg/kg a-BHC g-BHC b-BHC Heptachlor d-BHC Aldrin Heptachlor Epoxide g-Chlordane a-Chlordane Endosulfan (I) p,p'-D D E Dieldrin Endrin p,p'-D D D Endosulfan (II) p,p'-D D T Endrin Aldehyde Endosulfan Sulfate Methoxychlor Endrin Ketone Toxaphene Aroclor 1016 Aroclor 1221 Aroclor 1232 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1248 Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 U 4.2 U 4.1 U 4.5 U 4.3 U 4.5 U 4.2 U 4.1 U 4.5 U 4.3 U 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 U 4.5 U 4.3 U 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 U 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 U 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 U 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 U 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 U 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 U 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 U 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 U 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 4.2 u 4.1 u 4.5 u 4.3 u 4.5 u 100 u 100 u 110 u 110 u 110 u 52 u 52 u 56 u 53 u 57 u 100 u 100 u 110 u 110 u n o u 52 u 52 u 56 u 53 u 57 u 52 u 52 u 56 u 53 u 57 u 52 u 52 u 56 u 53 u 57 u 52 u 52 u 56 u 53 u *57 u 52 u 52 u 56 u 53 u 57 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRYPESTS 001-3 000235 USFW 0811 Table 1.10 (Cont) Results o f the A nalysis for Pesticide/PC B in Soil W A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on dry weight Client ID Location Percent Solid Analyte 506B AREA 3 A 87.5 Cone MDL M&Ag Pg/kg 507B AREA3B 81 Cone MDL Pg/kg Pg/kg 504B AREA2B 84.1 Cone MDL Pg/kg Pg/kg 505B AREA2C 77.6 Cone MDL Pg/kg Pg/kg 300E Reference 80.1 Cone MDL Pg/kg Pg/kg a-BHC g-BHC b-BHC Heptachlor d-BHC Aldrin Heptachlor Epoxide g-Chlordane a-Chlordane Endosulfan (I) p,p'-D D E Dieldnn Endnn p,p'-D D D Endosulfan (II) p,p'-D D T Endrin Aldehyde Endosulfan Sulfate Methoxvchlor Endnn Ketone Toxaphene Aroclor 1016 Aroclor 1221 Aroclor 1232 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1248 Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 U 3.8 U 4U 3.9 U 4.3 U 4.1 U 3.8 U 4U 3.9 U 4.3 U 4.1 U 3.8 U 4u 3.9 U 4.3 U 4.1 U 3.8 U 4u 3.9 U 4.3 U 4.1 U 3.8 U 4u 3.9 U 4.3 U 4.1 U 3.8 U 4u 3.9 U 4.3 U 4.1 U 3.8 U 4u 3.9 U 4.3 U 4.1 U 3.8 U 4u 3.9 U 4.3 U 4.1 U 3.8 U 4u 3.9 U 4.3 U 4.1 u 3.8 U 4u 3.9 U 4.3 U 4.1 u 3.8 u 4u 3.9 u 4.3 U 4.1 u 3.8 u 4u 3.9 u 4.3 u 4.1 u 3.8 u 4u 3.9 u 4.3 u 4.1 u 3.8 u 4u 3.9 u 4.3 u 4.1 u 3.8 u 4u 3.9 u 4.3 u 4.1 u 3.8 u 4u 3.9 u 4.3 u 4.1 u 3.8 u 4u 3.9 u 4.3 u 4.1 u 3.8 u 4u 3.9 u 4.3 u 4.1 u 3.8 u 4u 3.9 u 4.3 u 4.1 u 3.8 u 4u 3.9 u 4.3 u 4.1 u 95 u 100 u 98 u 110 u 100 u 47 u 51 u 49 u 54 u 51 u 95 u 100 u 98 u 110 u 100 u 47 u 51 u 49 u 54 u 51 u 47 u 51 u 49 u 54 u 51 u 47 u 51 u 49 u 54 u 51 u 47 u 51 u 49 u 54 u 51 u 47 u 51 u 49 u 54 u 51 Z273\DEl\AR\9708\DYPESTS 00115 000236 USFVV 0812 Sample ID: 512D Compound Name 1.1-Dichioroethcnc Trichloroethene Benzene Toluene Chlorobenzene Table 2.4 (C ent) R esults ofM S/M SD A nalysis far VOC in Soil WA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek (Based on Dry Weight) Sample Cone. (pg/kg) MS Spike Added (Mg/kg) MSD Spike Added (Mg/kg) MS Cone (Mg*) MSD Cone. (Mg/kg) MS 34 Ree. MSD QC lim its 34 Ree. RPD RPD 34 Ree. U 63.3 633 31 4S.9 81 77 4 22 39 - 172 U 633 633 49.S 47.7 79 73 4 24 62 - 137 u 633 633 35.7 533 88 84 5 21 66 142 u 633 633 53.9 3X9 88 84 6 21 59 - 139 u 63.3 633 52.S 30.7 83 80 4 21 60 - 133 2273\DEL\AR\9708WOCSMS o o i- y 000237 USFW 0813 Table 2.5 R esults of the I n i t i a l C alibration * fo r VOC UA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek S ite Calibration Date: 6/11/97, Instrunent ID: CCMSD-1C3004A12505) Minimus RF for SPCC is 0.30, Maximal) X RSD for CCC is 30.OX L a b o ra to ry ID: >A2502 A2503 A2504 A2505 A2506 >A2507 RF RF RF RF RF RF Compound 5 .0 0 2 0 .0 0 5 0 .0 0 100.00 .150.00 200.00 S5T RF X RSD CCC SPCC Di c h lo ro d i flu o ro m e th a n e Chi orcnethane 3.67888 3.40167 3.24147 3.24283 3.16038 3.22081 1.20901 1.25983 1.19732 1.18028 1.15022 1.14256 .225 3.32434 5.752 .259 1.18987 3.609 Vinyl C hloride Bromomethane C h lo ro e th a n e Tr i c h lo ro flu o ro m e th a n e 1.42163 1.43141 1.36195 1.33625 1.29741 1.33050 1.76200 1.75998 1.66259 1.66071 1.62110 1.66763 .91414 .91310 B9289 .87932 .84201 .85646 5.55223 5.21527 4.95416 5.01003 4.89250 5.01340 .276 1.36319 .344 1.68900 .367 .88299 .429 5.10627 3.908 3.445 3.349 4.777 A cetone 1 ,1 -D i c h lo ro e th e n e .63371 .63022 .61162 .60491 .58066 .56033 1.79438 1.70153 1.64298 1.64158 1.61206 1.64720 .535 .60358 4.732 .562 1.67329 3.947 Carbon D isu lfid e 4.14787 4.10083 4.14950 4.23627 4.16905 4.27385 .636 4.17956 1.525 Methylene C hloride 1.95516 1.77280 1.74529 1.71502 1.67732 1.68602 .667 1.75860 5.843 tra n s-1 ,2 -D iehloroethene 1.91535 1.86262 1.81532 1.79755 1.73837 1.76511 .741 1.81572 3 .569 M ethyl-tertiary-butylether 5.50541 5.12695 5.02728 5.01708 4.94315 4.98210 .741 5.10033 4.073 1 ,1-D ichloroethane 3.95669 3.63531 3.58046 3.54686 3.46251 3.53957 .827 3.62023 4.813 2-B u tan o n e 2 ,2 -D i ch lo ro p ro p a n e .73914 .78743 .76748 .76823 .74957 .72406 3.80182 3.71253 3.65686 3.68849 3.67886 3.75714 .927 .75599 3.025 .949 3.71595 1.459 cis-1,2-D ichloroethene 2.14437 2.08383 2.01325 1.97071 1.90709 1.91894 .948 2.00637 4.668 C h lo ro fo rm 5.81253 5.27084 5.09223 4.97871 4.86398 4.91990 .982 5.15637 6.833 1 ,1 -D i ch lo ro p ro p e n e 3.34748 3.15931 3.03305 3.01965 2.92759 2.98299 1.098 3.07835 4.954 1,2-D ichloroethane 3.91075 3.58502 3.49346 3.41209 3.32153 3.36972 1.130 3.51543 6.116 1,2 -D ic h lo ro e th a n e -d 4 (SURR) 2.50800 2.58307 2.56432 2.45736 2.39758 2.40033 1.113 2.48511 3 .2 2 0 1 ,1 ,1 - Tr i c h lo ro e th a n e .79295 .77746 .77196 7B070 .76155 .76487 .880 .77492 1.475 Carbon T e tra c h lo rid e .59644 .63914 .65426 .67104 .66205 .67475 .919 .64961 4.464 Benzene .94658 .86819 .85788 .83308 .81184 .80801 .939 .85426 5.996 T richloroethene .45389 .45171 .44002 .43354 .42515 .42613 1.044 .43841 2.830 1,2-D ichioropropane .38678 .37264 .37049 .35819 .35418 .35019 1.067 .36541 3.762 Dibromomethane .49077 .47800 .46972 .45019 .43897 .43433 1.095 .46033 4.918 B rom odichlorom ethane .87610 .87528 .87623 .85860 .83797 .82421 1.097 .85B07 2.607 c is - 1 ,3 -D ichloropropene .56163 .58389 .59573 .59621 .59180 .59152 1.193 .58680 2.232 tr a n s - 1,3-D ichloropropene .50669 .52856 .55549 .56440 .56296 .56674 1.274 .54747 4.461 1,1,2-T riehloroethane .37074 .34004 .33235 .32520 .31836 .31704 1.294 .33395 5.987 1,3-D ichloropropane .63893 .60819 .59404 .58003 .57223 .56481 1.335 .59304 4.609 0 ibromochloromethane .64139 .69261 .72627 .73524 .73428 .73201 1.364 .71030 5.262 1 ,2-D ibrom oethane .61810 .61407 .60666 .59867 .58659 .57884 1.396 .60049 2.577 Bromoform .47110 .52292 .54163 .54351 .54712 .54616 1.616 .52874 5.598 4-M ethyl-2-Pentanone .37857 .38733 .38271 .37996 .37674 .36328 .801 .37810 2.154 T oluene-dfi (SURR) .92651 .91922 .92906 .91306 .92086 .92601 .838 .92245 .639 To lu en e .65676 .61892 .61427 .59510 .58326 .58792 .847 .60937 4.468 2-Hexanone .26379 .27948 .28063 .27401 .27011 .25984 .896 .27131 3 .087 T e tra c h lo ro e th e n e .59350 .53816 .52451 .50823 .49959 .50188 .919 .52765 6.719 C h lo ro b en ze n e .92788 .86346 .83974 .81638 .79869 .79920 1.004 .84089 5.874 1 ,1 ,1 ,2 -T etrachloroethane .48468 .47610 .48075 .47450 .47112 .47086 1.012 .47633 1.149 E th y lb e n z e n e 1.59068 1.49385 1.44203 1.38936 1.38886 1.36151 1.019 1.44438 5.942 p & m-Xylene 1.30525 1.21935 1.21318 1.17221 1.02284 .87455 1.029 1.13456 13.881 o-X y len e 1.35028 1.26168 1.24620 1.19485 1.16248 1.14660 1.075 1.22702 6.146 S ty re n e .62152 .59658 .59436 .56925 .55430 .54592 1.078 .58032 4.960 IsopropyIbenzene 1.46664 1.38644 1.36816 1.32917 1.29708 1.29035 1.123 1.35631 4.870 1 ,1 ,2 ,2 -Tetrachloroethane .62356 .60710 .58935 .57919 .57168 .55593 1.133 .58780 4.170 p-B rom ofluorobenzene (SURR) 1 ,2 ,3 - Tric h lo ro p ro p a n e .65564 .65621 .65790 .65307 .65656 .66124 1.141 .65677 .412 .18173 .17939 .17568 .16826 .16796 .16314 1.148 .17269 4 .2 4 6 Bromobenzene .56905 .53427 .52432 .50831 .49395 .49182 1.156 .52029 5.595 n -P ro p y lD en zen e .37500 .36055 .35672 .34844 .33522 .33158 1.170 .35125 4 .6 4 7 2 -C hlorotoluene .39525 .36187 -37B40 .35095 .33993 .33527 1.180 .36028 6 .4 2 6 * Ch l o r o to l uene .37778 .36492 .32932 .33801 .32721 .32352 1.168 .34346 6.549 1 ,3 ,5 - Trim e th y Ib e n z e n e 1.41782 1.34115 1.30379 1.24837 1.19994 1.17991 1.191 1.281B3 7.039 tert-B utylbenzene 1.37689 1.28280 1.26473 1.21266 1.16734 1.15858 1.232 1.24383 6.605 1 ,2 ,4 - Tr i m ethyl benzene 1.42221 1.35026 1.31936 1.24614 1.20068 1.18045 1.234 1.28652 7.275 sec-B u ty lb en zen e 1.84984 1.74595 1.72749 1.66218 1.61573 1.54309 1.258 1.69071 6.368 1 ,3 -Dich toroDenzene .93863 .87354 .86234 .82748 .80360 .79553 1.271 .85019 6.266 p - 1s o p ro p y lto lu e n e 1.49018 1.41868 1.40178 1.33792 1.30259 1.26423 1.277 1.36923 6.074 1 ,4 -O ichlorobenzene 1 ,2-D ichiorobenzene .97109 .92347 .89721 .85858 .83889 .82975 1.284 .88650 6.158 .90186 .85563 .82219 .78209 .75B79 .74765 1.323 .81137 7.384 n -B u ty lb en zen e 1.54159 1.46179 1.43522 1.37807 1.30681 1.25253 1.326 1.39600 7 .576 1 ,2 -Di brom o-3 - C hloropropane .11506 .14217 .15121 .15380 .15643 .15677 1.414 .14591 10.987 1 ,2 .4 -tric h lo ro b e n z e n e N aphthalene H exachlorobutadi ene 1 ,2 ,3 -Tri chiorobenzene .70220 .71239 .70999 .69041 .67891 .67365 1.01920 1.10218 1.10289 1.09494 1.07922 1.05862 .47852 .44646 .44613 .43228 .42424 .42377 .63027 .65928 .64711 .64373 .62995 .63105 1.519 .69459 1.537 1.07618 1.544 .44190 1.569 .64023 2.333 3.027 4.652 1.863 RF Response Factor (Subscript is amount in ppb), XRSD - Percent Relative Standard Deviation, Ff Average Response Factor, RRT - Average Relative Retention Time (RT Std/RT Istd), CCC Calibration Check Compounds (*), SPCC - System Performance Check Compounds * * * i : n .OEOA R inor.D R y * u n ar 001C3 USFW 0814 QA/QC for VOC * Results of the Internal Standard Areas and Surrogate Recoveries for VOC in Water Prior to purging, the samples were spiked with a three component surrogate mixture consisting of toluene-d,, 4 bromofluorobenzene and 1,2-dichloroethane-d4 and a three component internal standard mixture consisting o bromochloromethane, 1,4-difluorobenzene, and chlorobenzene-d,. The internal standard areas are listed in Table 2.1. All 54 internal standard areas were within QC criteria. The surrogate percent recoveries, also listed in Table 2.1, ranged from 92 to 104. All 54 recoveries were within QC limits. Results o f the Internal Standard Areas and Surrogate Recoveries for VOC in Soil Prior to purging, the samples were spiked with a three component surrogate mixture consisting of toluene-d,. 4bromofluorobenzene and l,2-dichloroethane-d4 and a three component internal standard mixture consisting oi bromochloromethane, 1,4-difluorobenzene, and chlorobenzene-dj. The internal standard areas are listed in Table 2.2. All 117 internal standard areas were within QC criteria. The surrogate percent recoveries, also listed in Table 2.2, ranged from 83 to 109. All 117 recoveries were within QC limits. Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for VOC in Water Sample 201 and 216D were chosen for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.3, ranged from 93 to 107. All 20 recoveries were within QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.3, ranged from 0 to 9. All 10 RPD values were within QC limits. Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for VOC in Soil Samples 504D, 302F and 512D were chosen for the matrix spike/manix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.4. ranged from 75 to 106. All 30 recoveries were within QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.4, ranged from 3 to 14. All 15 RPD values were within QC limits. Results of the Initial Calibrations are listed in Table 2.5. Results of the Continuing Calibrations are listed in Table 2.6. ::7 3 \d e u a r \9tw v d ry ru n a r 00130 000239 tI USFW 0815 Tabic 2.1 R esults of the Internal Standard Areas and Surrogate Recoveries fo r VOC in Hater UA i 2-273 Dry Run Creek S ite Sample # D ata F ile CAL CHECK 50 PPB VOC >A2543 LAB BLANK >A2545 208 >A2546 207 >A2547 200 A2548 201 A2549 202 >A2550 203 >A2551 204 A2552 205 >A2553 206 >A2554 201MS >A2555 201HSD >A2556 CAL CHECK 50 PPB VOC >A2559 LAB BLAHK A2561 250 >A2562 2160 A2563 253 A2564 2160 MS >A2565 2160 MSD A2566 Internal Standards 12 3 area area area 51154 291832 295725 52659 307642 309876 54973 312940 317050 55473 56792 320759 326852 322950 330264 51669 304056 311493 52626 298065 292441 55193 314768 319156 50262 298408 304433 49151 276570 280112 55403 308552 300914 53012 303269 309390 48860 275422 292793 55517 308487 315043 53401 305B81 313702 57656 331090 331422 56078 320051 327512 56197 321166 328392 57998 325335 327785 58301 324753 327543 SURROGATE ItMITS ST (D IO = 1,2 -D ic h lo ro e th a n e -d A 52 (TOD = T olu en e-d 53 (BRO) = B rom ofluorobenzene Water (76-114) (BB-110) (86-115) Surrogates DIC TOL BRO XX X NA NA NA 96 101 100 92 101 100 93 101 101 92 102 102 93 100 100 92 103 98 93 101 100 95 101 100 93 100 100 92 104 98 97 101 101 97 100 101 NA NA NA 98 99 98 95 100 99 97 101 98 96 100 98 95 102 101 98 101 101 2 2 7 3 \D E L \A R \970f\D R Y R U N A R 00131 000240 USFW 0816 Table 2.2 Results o f the Internal Standard Areaa and Surrogate Recoveries fo r VOC in S o il UR # 2-273 Dry Run Creek S ite Sample # D ata F ile Internal Standards 12 3 rea area area Surrogates DIC TOL BRO XXX CAL CHECK 50 PPB VOC >P3482 43570 286245 256458 HA NA NA SAMO BLANK >B3484 40605 273077 248932 98 98 100 5500 >B3485 44726 288021 265472 97 97 99 5120 >B3486 40619 268458 229946 97 103 91 513D >83487 39877 253559 198062 94 108 84 5150 >63488 33873 222388 181467 96 106 88 500D B3489 37732 240228 189971 95 109 83 5010 502E >B3490 >B3491 43427 42441 276730 268282 237257 222227 95 103 95 107 91 89 503D >83492 39737 260712 223866 96 104 92 304F >B3493 43191 281245 248628 97 100 94 305 F >B3494 42038 284209 258296 96 99 101 306F >B3495 38856 266702 241839 99 99 95 307J >B3496 43872 279591 253538 96 99 96 CAL CHECK 50 PPB VO C >B3498 37485 256222 234362 NA NA NA SANO BLANK >B3500 40976 279093 258162 94 98 99 550A >B3501 41112 274581 256682 98 98 100 504D B3502 41668 267961 243944 96 98 98 505D >B3503 41807 266574 230373 95 102 94 5060 >B3504 42004 279631 256181 95 99 97 5070 >83505 39754 269029 246426 97 99 97 5080 >B3506 38885 262008 242527 97 99 97 5090 >B3507 42087 278438 244319 96 101 92 5100 B3508 40436 266978 237224 96 100 94 51 ID >83509 40218 265841 219311 94 107 89 550C >B3510 44600 291255 272514 93 97 101 300F 301F >B3511 >B3512 43898 42872 288151 284390 267487 263563 93 98 98 94 99 99 SURROGATE LIMITS 51 (01C ) = 1,2-Dichloroethane-c*4 52 (TOL) = To luene-d8 53 CBRO) Bromofluorobenzene (70-121) (81-117) (74-121) 2 m \D E L A A R \970S \D R Y R U N A R 001C2 000241 USFW 0817 Tabla 2.2 (Cont) Rsulte of the Internat Standard Areas and Surrogate Recoveriss fo r VOC in So it MA f 2*273 Dry I t o Creefc S ite Sanple # D ata F ile CAL CHECK SO PPB VOC >63515 SANO BLANK >B3517 302F >83518 303F >B3519 550B >B3520 808 >B3521 899 >83522 S04D MS >B3523 504D MSD >83524 3 0 2 F MS >83525 302F MSD >B3526 CAL CHECK 50 PPB VOC >B3531 SAND BLANK >B3533 512D MS >83534 512D MSD >83535 In te rn a i Standards 12 3 area area area 40109 272570 248833 38597 262338 238443 42560 281827 257165 40640 270441 253637 39412 267199 249439 37409 249593 228450 39975 269180 251326 42468 272774 233833 40150 268649 251889 38667 257083 242163 38526 253965 220928 38761 265216 244154 37603 262341 241936 39791 261571 221174 40708 270808 234118 S u rro g a te s DIC TOL BRO XXX NA NA NA 98 100 97 98 100 98 99 98 97 99 99 97 99 99 92 100 98 98 96 105 94 102 99 100 100 99 99 100 105 91 NA NA NA 99 100 98 97 108 94 98 105 95 SURROGATE LIMITS 51 (D IO =1 ,2 -0 ic h lo ro e th a n e -d 4 52 (TOD =T olu en e-d 8 53 (BRO) =B rom ofluorobenzene (70-121) (81-117) (74-121) --73\DEL\AR\97Dt\DR YRUNAR 001-3 000242 USFW 0818 Sample ID: 201 Compound Name 1.1-Dichloroethene Trichloroethene Benzene Toluene Chlorobenzene Table 2.3 R esults o f M S/M SD A nalysis for VOC in Water W A # 2-273 Dry Run Creek Sample Cone. (Mg/L) MS Spike Added 0g/L) MSD Spike Added (Fg'T-) MS Cone. (Ug/L) MSD Cone. (Mg^-) MS % Rec. MSD QC Limits V. Rec. RPD RPD % Rec. U 50 50 49.1 53.6 98 107 9 14 61 145 u 50 50 50 52.3 100 105 5 14 71 - 120 u 50 50 48.8 50.9 98 102 4 11 76 - 127 u 50 50 49.3 50 99 100 1 13 76 - 125 u 50 50 50.4 50.4 101 101 0 13 75 - 130 2273\DL\AR\9708\VOCW M S 001C4 000243 USFW 0819 Sample ID: 216D Compound Name 1.1-Dichloroethene Trichloroethene Benzene Toluene Chlorobenzene Table 2.3 (Cant) R esults o f M S / M S D A nalysis far VOC in Water W A * 2-273 DRY RUN CREEK Sample Cone. (Pg/L) MS Spike Added (P&'L) MSD Spike Added (Pgfl-) MS Cone. (pg/L) MSD Cone. (pg/L) MS V. Rec. J MSD QC limits % Rec. RPD RPD VRec. U 50 50 49.3 47.4 99 95 4 14 61 - 145 U 50 50 48.5 47 97 94 3 14 71 - 12 u 50 50 47.9 46.6 96 93 3 11 76 - i ; u 50 50 48.7 473 97 95 3 13 76 - 125 u 50 50 48.9 48.1 98 96 2 13 75 - 12^ 22 73\DEL\AR\9 70 8YVOCWMS 001C3 000244 USFW 0820 Staple ID: 504D Compound Name l.l-Dicfaloroethene Trichloroethene Benzene Toluene Chlorobenzene Table 2.4 Results ofMS/MSD Analysis for VOC ia Soil WA # 2-273 Dry Run Crede (Bated ao Dry Weigh) Sample Cone. (Mg**) MS Spike Added (Mg*g) MSD Spike Added (Mg*g) MS Cone (Mg/kg) MSD Cone. (Mg*g) MS % Ree. MSD QC Limite * Ree. RPD RPD 46Ree. U 6! 61 53.5 60.3 88 9 12 22 59 - 172 u 61 61 53.7 60.7 88 100 12 24 62 - 137 u 61 61 56.2 64.7 92 106 14 21 66 142 u 61 61 54.5 61.3 89 100 12 21 59 - 139 u 61 61 52.8 59.9 87 98 13 21 60 133 2273\DEL\AR\9708WOCSMS 001C6 000245 USFW 0821 Sample ID: 302F Compound Name 1,1-Dichloroethene Trichloroethene Benzene Toluene Chlorobenzene Table 2.4 (C oat) R esults ofM S/M SD A nalysis fir VOC is Soil W A # 2-273 Dry Run Creek (Baaed ao Dry Weight) Sample Cone. (Mgfcg) MS Spike Added MSD Spike Added (pg/kg) MS Cone. (Pgfcg) MSD Cone. (**) MS 54 Rec. MSD QC limits | % Rec. RPD RPD 54Rec U 64.9 64.9 62.3 58.5 96 90 6 22 59 - 172 U 64.9 64.9 61J 56J 94 87 9 24 62 137. u 64.9 64.9 65.5 62.2 101 96 5 21 66 - 142 u 64.9 64.9 61.4 60 95 92 2 21 59 - 139 V 64.9 64.9 60.2 55.2 93 85 9 21 60 - 133 1 2 2 7 3 'D E L \A R \9 7 0 8 \V O C S M S 001; 000246 USFW 0822 Section 2 000247 USFW 0823 Table 2.S (Cent) Results of the In i t i a l C alib ra tio n s for VOC UA # 2-273 Dry Run.Creek S ite C a lib r a tio n D a te : 6 /1 1 /9 7 , 1nstrL inent ID: GCMSD-2(3034A12982) M inisun Rf f o r SPCC i s 0 .3 0 , Maximus X RSD f o r CCC i s 3 0 .OX L a b o ra to ry ID: >B3454 >B3455 >B3456 >B3457 >B3458 >83459 RF RF RF RF RF RF Compound 5.00 20.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 55T IF X RSD CCC SPCC Di c h lo ro d i flu o ro m eth an e 5.55597 4.79596 4.91320 4.99641 4.99736 4.94964 .242 5.03476 5.282 C hlorom ethane 1.84280 1.58735 1.57854 1.58705 2.02270 2.01796 .268 1.77273 12.205 Vinyl C hloride 1.73805 1.62697 1.68324 1.67975 1.67689 1.67656 .284 1.68024 2.098 Bromomethane C h lo ro e th a n e Tr i ch lo ro flu o ro m e th a n e 1.53332 1.31594 1.36125 1.48216 1.51939 1.45535 .97669 1.05124 1.09277 1.08531 1.09767 1.08308 8.68785 7.35417 7.59636 7.61054 7.63751 7.47930 .352 1.44457 .370 1.06446 .429 7.72762 6.074 4.318 6.239 Acetone 1,1-D ichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e Methylene C hloride trans-1,2-D ichloroethene M ethyl-tertiary-butylether 1 ,1-D ichloroethane 2 -B u tan o n e 1.30340 .92626 .90127 .90073 .83570 .82245 2.09632 1.96940 2.02164 2.08627 2.08772 2.11098 4.56071 4.35205 4.63286 4.89343 4.97670 5.05911 2.23766 1.98327 1.96686 1.95956 1.95417 1.96143 2.41269 2.19753 2.24134 2.24152 2.24806 2.25154 7.60429 6.07102 6.24574 6.32933 6.31503 6.23264 4.70630 4.27214 4.25913 4.30202 4.29521 4.30012 1.35803 1.24366 1.21143 1.23706 1.16175 1.13895 .528 .94830 .557 2.06205 .630 4.74581 .660 2.01049 .735 2.26545 .732 6.46634 .823 4.35582 .923 1.22515 18.839 2.659 5.773 5.558 3.300 8.738 3.961 6.299 2 , 2-D i ch lo ro p ro p a n e cis-1,2-D ichloroethene Chloroform 4.55329 4.33154 4.59674 4.79482 4.88567 4.95084 2.53494 2.31010 2.34368 2.37586 2.33241 2.34194 7.03174 6.10593 6.00851 5.95630 5.84960 5.83214 .947 4.68548 .947 2.37316 .982 6.13071 4.988 3.457 7.389 1 ,1 -D i c h lo ro p ro p e n e 4.19794 3.73961 3.85460 3.87107 3.84227 3.83479 1.102 3.89005 4.054 1,2-D ichloroethane 4.22870 3.74977 3.76525 3.70332 3.66381 3.60249 1.136 3.78556 5.944 1,2 -D ic h lo ro e th a n e -d 4 (SURR) 2.72675 2.75712 2.86732 2.67389 2.65770 2.55234 1 .1 1 7 2.70585 3 .9 1 3 1 ,1 ,1 -T richloroethane .945B0 .88449 .90063 .94811 .94480 .97134 .875 .93253 3.524 Carbon T e tra c h lo rid e .79612 .78044 .83245 .89662 .89149 .91384 .915 .85183 6.641 Benzene T ric h lo ro e th e n e 1 ,2-D ichioropropane 1.04572 .95064 .94186 .95622 .93085 .95369 .54884 .48808 .49061 .50391 .49780 .50902 .40349 .34905 .34936 .35773 .35499 .35920 .936 .96316 1.046 .50638 1.069 .36231 4.308 4.392 5.688 Dibromomethane .42422 .39458 .39259 .39699 .38070 .38875 1.098 .39631 3 .7 3 8 B rom odichlorom ethane cis-1,3-D ichloropropene trans-1,3-D ichloropropene .82266 .80828 .83613 .86612 .86342 .87018 .48341 .49164 .52723 .55708 .56121 .57914 .40353 .42464 .46111 .50312 .51078 .52708 1.100 .84447 3.062 1.201 .53329 7.363 1.285 .47171 10.623 1 ,1 ,2-T richloroethane 1,3-D ichloropropane .33200 .29708 .29749 .31102 .30363 .30699 1.305 .30804 4.195 .60823 .55609 .55575 .57063 .55673 .56386 1.348 .56855 3.569 D ibrom ochtorom ethane .56661 .59780 .62073 .65065 .63814 .70635 1.377 .63005 7.600 1 ,2-D ibrom o eth an e Bromoform -M ethyl-2-Pentanone T oluene-dS (SURR) .55530 .36897 .45207 .98274 .51224 .39972 .41763 .99428 .52172 .54414 .53270 .54607 .44940 .49019 .48717 .50875 .43720 .48736 .47483 .48039 .99435 1.00934 1.01391 1.00328 1.410 1.637 .796 .834 .53536 .45070 .45825 .99965 3.032 12.369 5.971 1.144 Toluene 2-Hexanone T etra c h lo ro e th e n e C h lo ro b en ze n e 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrachloroethane E th y lb e n z e n e p & m-Xylene o-X y len e S ty re n e Isopropylbenzene 1 ,1 ,2,2-T etrachloroethane p-B rom ofluorobenzene (SURR) 1 ,2 ,3-Trichloropropane Bromobenzene n-Propylbenzene 2-C hlorotoluene 4-C hlorotoluene 1,3,5-lrim ethylbenzene tert-B utylbenzene 1,2,4-T rim ethyl benzene sec-B u ty lb en zen e 1,3-D ichlorobenzene p -1sopropy11oluene 1 ,4 -D ichlorobenzene 1 ,2-D ichlorobenzene n -B u ty lb en zen e 1 ,2 -Dibromo-3 -Chioropropane 1,2,4-T richlorobenzene N aphthalene H exachlorobutadiene 1 . 2 . 3 - Tr i ch lo ro b e n z e n e .89693 .78403 .75405 .78089 .75882 .76619 .37933 .33040 .33999 .37332 .35183 .35789 .72623 .65545 .63776 .65494 .62831 .62688 1.11304 1.00737 .99753 1.01841 .99678 1.00591 .55007 .51921 .53739 .55898 .55280 .55606 1.95164 1.76901 1.7B114 1.79545 1.76605 1.70735 1.70579 1.52809 1.48314 1.49943 1.39950 1.26606 1.71387 1.52833 1.50037 1.50782 1.47339 1.47365 .74354 .68838 .69606 .70336 .68914 .68586 1.97233 1.75868 1.74996 1.79822 1.76868 1.75663 .59509 .53802 .54259 .57278 .54901 .55164 .63092 .62825 .62861 .62624 .62017 .60662 .22866 .21044 .20686 .22517 .21659 .21594 .61408 .55666 .55237 .56272 .55146 .54672 .49633 .46724 .46345 .47428 .46735 .46609 .46790 .43093 .43098 .44398 .42655 .39768 .49153 .42476 .42076 .41511 .40788 .44660 1.88265 1.68278 1.65865 1.66306 1.61383 1.60659 1.86721 1.68069 1.68382 1.71374 1.66586 1.66626 1.82019 1.63169 1.61010 1.62445 1.56970 1.55468 2.54050 2.20243 2.21503 2.28062 2.22019 2.18736 1.07603 .95639 .94174 .93940 .91535 .91606 2.03354 1.78370 1.83817 1.86658 1.80920 1.80723 1.19899 1.00441 1.01856 .99681 .97837 .96278 1.05788 .91942 .90874 .90048 .89337 .86309 1.96677 1.78644 1.81070 1.80886 1.74058 1.71582 .14591 .16038 .18305 .21149 .20747 .21635 .76667 .69227 .73881 .72706 .70548 .68967 1.16500 1.02742 1.12193 1.17256 1.15411 1.14998 .78144 .64666 .65574 .66580 .62728 .61423 .72926 .64267 .68432 .67902 .63592 .62414 .843 .79015 .894 .35546 .917 .65493 1.004 1.02317 1.012 .54575 1.020 1.79511 1.031 1.48033 1.078 1.53290 1.080 .70106 1.127 1.80075 1.137 .55819 1.145 .62347 1.153 .21728 1.161 .56400 1.175 .47246 1.185 .43300 1.193 .43444 1.196 1.68459 1.238 1.71293 1.241 1.63513 1.265 2.27436 1.278 .95750 1.285 1.85640 1.291 1.02665 1.332 .92383 1.335 1.80486 1.426 .18744 1.538 .71999 1.556 1.13183 1.563 .66519 1.587 .66589 6.788 5.301 5.662 4.371 2.747 4.589 9.833 5.944 3.105 4.762 3.886 1.448 3 .B 4 7 4.454 2.589 5.303 7.107 6.022 4.528 5.850 5.901 6.287 4.922 8.442 7.402 4.872 15.630 4.158 4.772 9.015 5.896 R - Response Factor (Suoscnpt is_amount in p p b ) , X R S : Percent Relative Standard Deviation RF - Average Response Factor, RRT - Average Relative Retention Time <RT Std/RT lstel) CCC - Calibration Check Compounds (*), SPCC - System Performance Check Conpounds (*) ' * * * * ** ** * * 2273VDLVARV97QI\PRYRUNAR 000248 00140 USFW 0824 Table 2.6 Results ef the Continuing C alib ra tio n s fo r VOC UA # 2*273 Dry Run -Creek S ite Initial Calibration Date: 6/11/97, Calibration Date: 6/12/97, Tie: 18:20 Instruaent ID: GCMSD-1(3004A12505), Laboratory ID: A2543, Mininun RF for SPCC is 0.30, Maximum X Diff for CCC is 25.OX Coneound D ichlorodi fluorom ethane C hlorom ethane Vinyl C hloride Bromomethane C h lo roethane Trichlorofluorom ethane A ceto n e 1,1-D ichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e M ethylene C hloride t r a n s - 1 ,2-D i c h lo ro e th e n e M ethyl-tertiary-butyl ether 1,1-D ichloroethane 2-B u tan o n e 2 ,2 - Di c h lo ro p ro p an e c i s - 1,2-D ichloroethene C h lo ro fo rm 1 ,1 -D i c h lo ro p ro p e n e 1,2-D ichloroethane 1 ,2 -D ic h lo ro e th a n e -d A (SURR) 1,1,1-T richloroethane Carbon T e tra c h lo rid e Benzene T richioroethene 1 ,2 -Di chloropropane Di bromomethane Bromodi chlorom ethane c i s - 1 ,3-D i ch lo ro p ro p en e t rans-1,3-D ichloropropene 1 ,1 ,2-T richloroethane 1,3-D ichloropropane Dibrom ochlorom ethane 1 ,2-D ibrom oethane Bromoform 4-M ethyl-2-Pentanone T otuene-d 8 (SURR) To lu en e 2-Hexanone Te t r a c h lo ro e th e n e C h lo ro b en ze n e 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrachloroethane E th y lb e n z e n e p & m-Xylene o-X ylene S ty re n e Isopropylbenzene 1,1,2,2-T etrachloroethane p-B rom ofluorobenzene (SURR) 1,2,3-T richloropropane Bromobenzene n-Propyl benzene 2-C hlorotoluene 4-C hlorotoluene 1,3,5-Trim ethylbenzene tert-B u ty l benzene 1 ,2 ,4 -7 rlm e th y 1benzene se c -B u ty lb en zen e 1,3-D ichlorobenzene p -Is o p ro p y lto lu e n e 1,4 - Di c h lo ro b e n z e n e 1 ,2-D ichiorobenzene n -B u ty lb en zen e 1,2-D ibrom o-3-Chloropropane 1 ,2 ,4 - Tr i c h lo ro b e n z e n e N aphthalen e H exachlorobutadi ene 1 .2 .3 - Tr i ch lo ro b e n z e n e IFF RF 3.32434 3.04170 1.18987 1.23330 1.36319 1.39254 1.68900 1.60423 .88299 .92048 5.10627 4.73298 .60358 .67387 1.67329 1.67668 4.17956 4.13809 1.75860 1.79065 1.81572 1.87604 5.10033 5.00587 3.62023 3.60507 .75599 .80461 3.71595 3.57818 2.00637 2.05069 5.15637 4.98661 3.07835 3.04094 3.51543 3.30946 2.48511 2.48340 .77492 .71711 .64961 .61842 .85426 .86446 .43841 .43773 .36541 .36520 .46033 .45567 .85807 .81985 .58680 .57477 .54747 .52130 .33395 .32764 .59304 .58369 .71030 .68278 .60049 .58647 .52874 .50300 .37810 .37260 .92245 .90906 .60937 .59728 .27131 .26640 .52765 .50475 .84089 .81991 .47633 .45513 1.44438 1.38559 1.13456 1.14946 1.22702 1.17230 .58032 .54733 1.35631 1.30150 .58780 .57397 .65677 .64549 .17269 .16383 .52029 .50158 .35125 .34506 .36028 .36626 .34346 .32584 1.28183 1.23255 1.24383 1.18903 1.28652 1.23757 1.69071 1.62448 .85019 .81323 1.36923 1.30902 .88650 .85248 .81137 .78226 1.39600 1.35289 .14591 .13780 .69459 .65675 1.07618 1.02773 .44190 .39472 .64023 .60126 i f f CCC SPCC 8.50 3.65 * 2.15 * 5.02 4.25 7.31 11.65 .20 * .99 1.82 3.32 1.85 .42 ** 6.43 3.71 2.21 3.29 * 1.22 5.86 .07 7.46 4.80 1.19 .15 .06 1.01 4.45 2.05 (C o n c= 5 0 .0 0 ) 4.78 (C o n c= 5 0 .0 0 ) 1.89 1.58 3 .8 7 2.33 4.87 ** 1.46 1.45 1.98 * 1.81 4.34 2.49 ** 4.45 4.07 1.31 (Cone=100.00) 4.46 5.69 4.04 2.35 1.72 5.13 3.60 1.76 1.66 5.13 3.84 4.41 3.80 3.92 4.35 4.40 3.84 3.59 3.09 5.56 5.45 4.50 10.68 6.09 rf - R esponse F a c to r from d a i l y s ta n d a rd f i l e a t 5 0 .0 0 ppb, X D tff - X D if f e r e n c e from o r i g i n a l a v e ra g e o r c u rv e RF * A verage R esponse F a c to r from i n i t i a l C a li b r a ti o n , CCC - C a l i b r a t i o n Check Compounds ( * ) , SPCC - System P erfo rm an ce Check Compounds (**) ^ 7 3 \D E l .\A R \y ?oevDRYAUNAR O0^1"a1e 000249USFW 0825 Table 2.6 CCont) Result* of the Continuing C alib ra tion * fo r VOC UA * 2*273 Dry Run Creek S ite I n i t i a l C a lib ra tio n D ate: 6 /1 1 /9 7 , C a lib ra tio n D ate: 6 /1 3 /9 7 , Time: 11:17 I m m i n e n t ID: GCMSD-K3004A12505), L a b o ra to ry ID: >A2559, H in in m RF f o r SPCC i* 0 .3 0 , M axim a X D iff f o r CCC i t 25.0X Concound D iehlorod i fluorom ethane C hlorom ethane Vinyl C hloride Bromomethane C h lo ro et harte Tr i c h lo ro flu o ro m e th a n e A cetone 1,1-D ichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e M ethylene C hloride tr a n s - 1,2-D i ch loroethene M ethyl-tertiary-butyl ether 1,1-D ichloroethene 2 -B u tan o n e 2,2-D ichloropropane c i s - 1 , 2-D i c h lo ro e th e n e C h lo ro fo rm 1 ,1 - Di c h lo ro p ro p e n e 1,2-D ichloroethane 1,2 -D ic h lo ro e th a n e -d 4 (SURR) 1 ,1 ,1 - Tr i c h lo ro e th a n e Carbon T e tra c h lo rid e Benzene T richloroethene 1,2-D ichloropropane Dibromomethane B rom odichlorom ethane c is -1 ,3 -D iehloropropene trans-1,3-D ichloropropene 1 ,1 ,2 -Tr ic h loroethene 1,3-D ichloropropane Di brom ochlorom ethane 1,2-D ibrom oethane Bromoform 4-H ethyl-2-Pentanone T oluene-d8 (SURR) Toluene 2-Hexanone T e tra c h lo ro e th e n e C h lo ro b en ze n e 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrachloroethane EthyIbenzene p & m-Xylene o-X y len e S ty re n e Isopropylbenzene 1,1 ,2,2-T etrachloroethane p-B rom ofluorobenzene (SURR) 1,2,3-T richloropropane Bromobenzene n-Propylbenzene 2-C hlorotoluene 4-C hlorotoluene 1 , 3 , 5 - Trim eth y Ib en zen e tert-B utylbenzene 1 ,2,4-T n methyl benzene sec-B u ty lb en zen e 1,3-D ichlorobenzene p - 1s o p ro p y lto lu e n e 1 ,4 -0 ich torobenzene 1 ,2-D t ch lo ro b e n z e n e n -B u ty lb en zen e 1,2-D ibrom o-3-Chloropropane 1,2,4-T rtchlorooenzene N aphthalene H exachlorobutadi ene 1 .2 .3 -Trichiorobenzene Rf RF 3.32454 3.11798 1.18987 1.27862 1.36319 1.47193 1.68900 1.67484 .88299 .97001 5.10627 4.81418 .60358 .64726 1.67329 1.75499 4.17956 4.3S77 1.75860 1.80937 1.81572 1.93887 5.10033 4.59313 3.62023 3.68547 .75599 .74397 3.71595 3.44630 2.00637 2.11840 5.15637 5.01823 3.07835 3.18157 3.51543 3.32514 2.48511 2.33656 .77492 .74243 .64961 .61853 .85426 .89847 .43841 .47891 .36541 .38190 .46033 .46882 .85807 .85221 .58680 .56886 .54747 .47561 .33395 .33160 .59304 .59237 .71030 .70614 .60049 .58385 .52874 .48783 .37810 .33057 .92245 .92250 .60937 .62420 .27131 .23880 .52765 .54611 .84089 .87807 .47633 .46252 1.44438 1.44319 1.13456 1.19274 1.22702 1.21589 .58032 .55805 1.35631 1.36854 .58780 .54002 .65677 .65743 .17269 .15688 .52029 .52737 .35125 .37039 .36028 .38422 .34346 .33478 1.28183 1.29773 1.24383 1.26915 1.28652 1.30121 1.69071 1.72871 .85019 .86461 1.36923 1.39604 .88650 .90834 .81137 .82256 1.39600 1.39731 .14591 .12201 .69459 .66374 1.07618 .96343 .44190 .42080 .64023 .58837 i f f CCC SPCC 6.51 7.46 7.98 * .84 9.86 5.72 7.24 4.88 * 4.98 2.89 6.78 9.94 1.80 ** 1.59 7.26 5.58 2.68 3.35 5.41 5.98 4.19 4.79 5.17 9.24 4.51 * 1.84 .68 3.06 (C onc'50.00) 13.13 (Conc=50.00) .71 .11 .59 2.77 7.74 * 12.57 .00 2.43 * 11.98 3.50 4.42 2.90 .08 5.13 (C one*1 0 0 .0 0 ) .91 3.84 .90 8.13 .10 9.16 1.36 5.45 6.65 2.53 1.24 2.04 1.14 2.25 1.70 1.96 2.46 1.38 .09 16.38 4.44 10.48 4.77 8.10 RF - R esponse F a c to r from d a i l y s ta n d a rd f i l e a t 5 0 .0 0 ppb, RF - A verage R esponse F a c to r from I n i t i a l C a li b r a ti o n , SPCC - System Performance Check Compounds (**) ::73\D EL ^R \970*\D R Y R U N A R XDiff - X D ifferen ce from o rig in a l average or curve CCC - C a li b r a ti o n Check Compounds ( * ) , 0002S0 001 USFW 0826 Table 2.6 (Cont) Results of the Continuing C alib ra tio n s for VOC UA # 2-273 Dry Rut Creek S ite initial Calibration Date: 6/11/97, Calibration Date: 6/13/97, Time: 11:21 I n s t rim en t ID: CCMSO-2C3034A12982), L a b o ra to ry ID: >83482, Minimum RF for SPCC is 0.30, Maxinua X Diff for CCC is 25.0% Coaoeund D iehlorod i fluorom ethane C hlorom ethane Vinyl C hloride Bromomethane C h to roethane Tr i chlorofluorom ethane Aceton 1 l-D ichloro^heTK D isulfide M ethylene C hloride tran * -1 ,2 -D ichloroethene M ethyl-tertiary-butylether 1 ,1 -Di c h lo r o e th a n e 2 -B u tan o n e 2,2-D ichloropropane cis-1,2-D ichloroethene C h lo ro fo rm 1 ,1 -D i c h lo ro p ro p e n e '1 ,2-D ichloroethane 1 ,2 -D ic h lo ro e th a n e -d 4 (SURR) 1,1 ,1-T richloroethane Carbon T e tra c h lo rid e Benzene T richloroethene 1,2-D ichloropropane Dibromomethane B rom odichtorom ethane cis-1,3-D ichloropropene trans-1,3-D ichloropropene 1,1,2-T richloroethane 1 ,3 -D i ch lo ro p ro p a n e Di brom ochlorom ethane 1,2-D ibrom oethane Bromoform 4-M ethyl-2-Pentanone T o luene-d8 (SURR) Toluene 2-Hexanone T e tra c h lo ro e th e n e C h lo ro b en ze n e 1 ,1 ,1 ,2 -T etrachioroethane E th y lb en zen e p & m-Xylene o-X y len e S ty re n e 1so p ro p y lb e n z e n e 1 ,1 ,2 ,2 - Te t r a c h lo ro e th a n e p-B rom ofluo ro b en zen e (SURR) 1,2,3-T richloropropane Bromobenzene n-Propyl benzene 2-C hlorotoluene 4-C hlorotoluene 1,3,5-T rlm ethyl benzene i r r t -Butyl benzene 1,2,4-T nm ethyIpenzene sec -Butylbenzene 1,3-D lchloroD enzene p- Iso o ro p y lto lu en e 1,4-D ichlorobenzene 1 ,2 -D i c h lo ro b e n z e n e n -B u ty lb en zen e 1,2-0ibrom o-3-Chloropropane 1 ,2 ,4 -Trichlorobenzene N aphthalene H exachlorobutadiene 1 .2 ,3-T ri chlorobenzene S ? RF " 5.0*476 4.7365 1.77273 1.52274 1.68024 1.62890 1.44457 1.59272 1.06446 1.07833 7.72762 7.23856 .94830 .96794 Z.OOC03 ZVj*1c 4.74581 4.78965 2.01049 2.02339 2.26545 2.25848 6.46634 6.32605 4.35582 4.23578 1.22515 1.22619 4.68546 4.70927 2.37316 2.42369 6.13071 6.03172 3.89005 3.80546 3.78556 3.71811 2.70585 2.74019 .93253 .91841 .85183 .83864 .96316 .95100 .50638 .50543 .36231 .35312 .39631 .41709 .84447 .86218 .53329 .54108 .47171 .47875 .30804 .31071 .56855 .56384 .63005 .63269 .53536 .53835 .45070 .47996 .45825 .42827 .99965 .98911 .79015 .77846 .35546 .34736 .65493 .66508 1.02317 1.01899 .54575 .56201 1.79511 1.80641 1.48033 1.48814 1.53290 1.51147 .70106 .69117 1.80075 1.76493 .55819 .55065 .62347 .64586 .21728 .21418 .56400 .58002 .47246 .46539 .43300 .40570 .43444 .46023 1.68459 1.66469 1.71293 1.67222 1.63513 2.27436 21..26127r6'c5b .95750 .97136 1.85640 1.82598 1.02665 1.04036 .92383 .93289 1.80486 1.75226 . 1B744 .18261 .71999 .75591 1.13183 1.08040 .66519 .66327 .66589 .69817 i f f CCC SPCC 5.92 14.10 3.06 10.26 1.30 6.33 2.07 .o * .92 .64 .31 2.17 2.76 .08 .51 2.13 1.61 * 2.17 1.78 1.27 1.51 1.55 1.26 .19 2.54 * 5.24 2.10 1.46 (C onc= 50.00) 1.49 (C onc= 50.0 0 ) .87 .83 .42 .56 6.49 ** 6.54 1.05 1.46 * 2.28 1.55 .41 * 2.98 .63 * .53 (Conc=100.00) 1.40 1.41 1.99 1.35 ** 3.59 1.42 2.84 1.50 6.30 5.94 1.18 2.38 .46 2.51 1.45 1.64 1.34 .98 2.91 2.58 4.99 4.54 .29 4.85 RF - Response Factor from daily standard file at 50.00 ppb, i f f - X Difference from o r i g i n a l a v e ra g e o r c u rv e RF - Average Response Factor from initial Calibration, SPCC - System Performance Check Compounds (**) CCC - Calibration Check Compounds ( * ) , 2273\DEL\AR\VTOZ\DRYRUNAR 091*'3 U S F W 0827 000251 Table 2.6 (Cont) Results of the Continuing C alib ra tio n s for VOC UA f 2-273 Dry Run Creek S ite Initial Calibration Date: 6/11/97, Calibration Date: 6/13/97, Time: 23:68 Instrument ID: GCMSO-2(3036A12982), Laboratory ID: >83698, Minimus RF for SPCC is 0.30, Maximum X Diff for CCC is 25.OX Compound 57 RF D ichlorodifluorom ethane " 5.76 5-17716 C hlorom ethane 1.77273 1.56315 Vinyl C hloride 1.68026 1.77766 Bromomethane 1.66657 1.56532 C h lo ro eth a n e 1.06666 1.16166 Trichlorofluorom ethane 7.72762 7.78282 Acetone .96830 .89006 1,1-D ichloroethene 2.06205 2.12907 Carbon D isu lfid e 6.76581 6.75027 Methylene C hloride 2.01069 2.10980 t r a n s - 1 , 2-D i c h lo ro e th e n e 2.26565 2.36391 M ethyl-tertiary-butylether 6.66636 6.37626 1,1-D ichloroethane 6.35582 6.65816 2 -B u tan o n e 1.22515 1.16066 2 ,2 - Di ch lo ro p ro p a n e 6.68568 6.60899 cis-1,2-D ichloroethene 2.37316 2.69166 Chloroform 6.13071 6.21867 1,1 -D i ch l o ropropene 3.89005 3.96871 1,2-D ichloroethane 3.78556 3.96809 1,2 -D ic h lo ro e th a n e -d 6 (SURR) 2.70585 2.85362 1,1,1-T richloroethane .93253 .89366 Carbon T e tra c h lo rid e .85183 .83015 Benzene .96316 .95559 Tr ic h loroethene .50638 .50552 1 ,2 -D ichloropropane .36231 .36262 Dibromomethane .39631 .61699 B rom odichlorom ethane .86667 .85670 cis-1,3-D ichloropropene .53329 .52961 trans-1,3-D ichloropropene .67171 .66596 1 ,1 ,2-T richloroethane .30806 .31623 1 ,3-D ichloropropane .56855 .57357 D ibrom ochlorom ethane .63005 .68125 1,2-Dibrom oethane .53536 .56898 Bromoform .65070 .67065 6-M ethyl-2-Pentanone .65825 .60926 T oluene-d8 (SURR) .99965 .98092 Toluene .79015 .76901 2-Hexanone .35566 .30080 Tetrach loroethene .65693 .65635 Chlorobenzene 1.02317 1.00878 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrachloroethane .56575 .56803 E th y lb en zen e 1.79511 1.73065 p & m-Xylene 1.68033 1.51632 o-X ylene 1.53290 1.52502 S ty re n e .70106 .70065 Isopropylbenzene 1.80075 1.78860 1 ,1 ,2 ,2 -Tetrachloroethane .55819 .56626 p-B rom ofluorobenzene (SURR) .62367 .66865 1,2,3-T richioropropane .21728 .21135 Bromobenzene .56600 .58713 n-Propyl benzene .67266 .66960 2-C hlorotoluene .63300 .61266 6-C hlorotoluene .63666 .65713 1,3,5-T nm etnylbenzene 1.68659 1.66618 tert-B utylbenzene 1.71293 1.72666 1,2,6-T rim ethyl benzene 1.63513 1.63027 sec-Butyl benzene 2.27636 2.27561 1,3 - Di ch lo ro b e n z e n e .95750 .97601 p-Isopropyl toluene 1.85660 1.86671 1,6-D ichlorobenzene 1.02665 1.03832 1,2-D ichlorobcnzene .92383 .96519 n-Butyl benzene 1.80686 1.72862 1 ,2-Dibromo-3 -Chloropropane .18766 .17825 1,2,6-T M ehl orobenzene .71999 .73212 N aphthalene 1.13183 1.11623 H exachlorobutadi ene .66519 .70307 1 .2.3-T richlorobenzene .66589 .70076 XDiff CCC SPCC 2.43 12.95 5.79 * * 8.36 7.23 .71 6.16 3.25 .09 6.96 6.35 1.62 2.35 * 5.28 1.63 6.99 1.63 2.02 6.82 5.66 6.17 2.56 .79 .17 .03 6.71 1.21 .73 (Conc=50.00) 1.22 (C onc*50.00) 2.66 .88 8.13 2.56 6.63 * 10.69 1.87 2.68 * 15.38 .09 1.61 .62 3.59 2.63 (C o n c= 1 0 0 .0 0 ) .51 .09 .67 2.50 6.01 2.73 6.10 .61 6.75 5.22 1.09 .67 .30 .05 1.93 .63 1.16 6.68 6.22 6.91 1.68 1.38 5.69 5.23 RF - R esponse F a c to r from d a i l y s ta n d a rd f i l e a t 5 0 .0 0 ppb, XDiff RF - A verage R esponse F a c to r from I n i t i a l C a li b r a ti o n , CCC SPCC - System P erform ance Check Compounds (**) 2Z73\DEL\AR\970S\DRYRUNAR X D ifferen ce from o rig in a l average or curve C a lib ra tio n Check Compounds ( * ) , 000252 0 0 1 'A USFW 0828 Table 2.6 (Cont) Resulta of the Continuing Calibrations for VOC UA I 2-273 Dry Run-Creek Site Initial Calibration Date: 6/11/97, Calibration Date: 6/16/97, Time: 11:09 Instrunent ID: GCMSD-2(3034A12982>, Laboratory ID: >B3515, M inim jn RF for SPCC i s 0.30, Maximum X Diff for CCC is 25.OX Compound D iehlorodifluorom ethane C hlorom ethane Vinyl C h lo rid e Bromomethane C h lo ro eth an e Tr i ch lo ro flu o ro m eth an e A cetone 1,1-D ichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e M ethylene C hloride t r a n s - 1 ,2-D i c h lo ro e th e n e M ethyl-tertiary-butylether 1 ,1-D ichloroethane 2 -B u tan o n e 2 ,2-D ichioropropane c is -1 ,2-0ichioroethene C h lo ro fo rm 1,1-D ichloropropene 1,2-D iehloroethane 1,2 -D ic h lo ro e th a n e -d 4 (SURR) 1 ,1 ,1 - Tr i c h lo ro e th a n e Carbon T e tra c h lo rid e Benzene T ric h lo ro e th e n e 1,2-D ichloropropane Dibromomethane B rom odichlorom ethane cis-1,3-D ichloropropene tr a n s - 1,3-D ichloropropene 1 ,1 ,2-T richloroethane 1,3-D ichloropropane Di brom ochlorom ethane 1 ,2 -D ibrom o eth an e Bromoform A-M ethyl-2-Pent anone T oluene-d8 CSURR) Toluene 2-Hexanone T e tra c h lo ro e th e n e ChloroDenzene 1 ,1 ,1 ,2 -T etrachloroethane E th y lb en z en e p & m-Xylene o-X ylene S ty re n e 1so p ro p y lb en zen e 1 ,1 ,2 ,2-T etrachloroethane p-B rom ofluorobenzene (SURR) 1 ,2 ,3 - Tr i c h lo ro p ro p a n e Bromobenzene n-Propyl benzene 2-C hlorotoluene 4 C hlorotoluene 1 ,3 ,5 1 r i methyl benzene tert-B utyIPenzene 1,2.4 - T rimethyl benzene sec-Butyl benzene 1 ,3-D)chlorobenzene p- Isopropyl toluene l , 4-DichloroDenzene 1 ,2 -0 )chlorobenzene n -B u ty lb en zen e 1 ,2 -D ibrom o-3 - Ch lo ro p ro p a n e 1 ,2 ,4 -Trichlorobenzene N aphthalene H ex ach lo ro b u tad )en e 1.2.3-T richlorobenzene 5 f RF 5.03476 4.68271 1.77273 1.65347 1.68024 1.63225 1.44457 1.37919 1.06446 1.07058 7.72762 7.28941 .94830 .93493 2.06205 2.00292 4.74581 4.73026 2.01049 1.97557 2.26545 2.21379 6.46634 6.04757 4.35582 4.21095 1.22515 1.14618 4.68548 4.51739 2.37316 2.34012 6.13071 5.97896 3.89005 3.72984 3.78556 3.74766 2.70585 2.80426 .93253 .86457 .85183 .81435 .96316 .90171 .50638 .47130 .36231 .34156 .39631 .39599 .84447 .82563 .53329 .51185 .47171 .45659 .30804 .30064 .56855 .54849 .63005 .65540 .53536 .51526 .45070 .46239 .45825 .38058 .99965 .97234 .79015 .72712 .35546 .31241 .65493 .63930 1.02317 .96735 .54575 .52940 1.79511 1.65408 1.48033 1.45020 1.53290 1.44480 .70106 .67016 1.80075 1.70050 .55819 .53359 .62347 .65304 .21728 .19996 .56400 .56537 .47246 .45389 .43300 .40082 .43444 .43245 1.68459 1.62470 1.71293 1.62782 1.63513 1.56667 2.27436 2.17321 .95750 .95524 1.85640 1.78801 1.02665 1.01283 .92383 .91732 1.80486 1.76373 .18744 .16926 .71999 .74861 1.13183 1.06694 .66519 .67726 .66589 .66415 XDiff CCC SPCC 6.9^ 6.73 * 2.86 4.53 .58 5.67 1.41 2.87 * .33 1.74 2.28 6.48 3.33 ** 6.45 3 .5 9 1.39 2.48 * 4.12 1.00 3.64 7.29 4.40 6.38 6.93 5.73 .08 2.23 4.02 (C one 5 0 .0 0 ) 3.20 (C o n c* 5 0 .0 0 ) 2.40 3.53 4.02 3.75 2.59 16.95 2.73 7.98 12.11 2.39 5.46 ** 3.00 7.86 * 2.04 (Cones100.00) 5.75 4.41 5.57 4.41 * 4.74 7.97 .24 3.93 7.43 .46 3.56 4.97 4.19 4.45 .24 3.68 1.35 .70 2.28 9.70 3.98 5.73 1.81 .26 000253 51 - Response Factor from daily standard file at 50.00 ppb, i f f - X Difference from original average or c u rv e RF - Average Response Factor from Initial Calibration, CCC - Calibration Check Compounds (*), SPCC - System Performance Check Compounds (*> '' 2m \D EL\A R\970f\D RY R U N A R USFW 0829 Table 2.6 (Cont) Results of the Continuing C alib ra tion s for VOC UA # 2*273 Dry Kin Creek S ite Initial Calibration Date: 6/11/97, Calibration Date: 6/17/97, Time: 11:12 Instrument ID: GCMSD-2(3034A129S2), Laboratory ID: >83531, Mininun RF for SPCC is 0.30, Maximum X Diff for CCC is 25.OX Compound Di c h lo ro d iflu o ra m e th a n e C hlorom ethane Vinyl C hloride Bromomethane C h lo ro eth an e Tr i c h lo ro flu o ra m e th a n e A cetone 1,1-D ichloroethene Carbon D isu lfid e Methylene C hloride t nans-1,2-0 i chloroethene Methyl - t e r t i a ry -b u ty le th e r 1 ,1 -D ic h lo ro e th a n e 2 -B u tan o n e 2 ,2 - Di ch lo ro p ro p a n e cis-1,2-D ichloroethene Chloroform 1 ,1 -D i ch lo ro p ro p e n e 1,2-D ichloroethane 1,2 -D ic h lo ro e th a n e -d 4 (SURR) 1 ,1 ,1 -Tri chloroethane Carbon T e tra c h lo rid e Benzene T richloroethene 1 ,2 - Di ch lo ro p ro p a n e Dibromomethane Bromodi chlorom ethane cis-1,3-D ichloropropene tr a n s -1,3-D ichloropropene 1 , 1 ,2 - Tr i c h lo ro e th a n e 1,3-D ichloropropane D ibrom ochlorom ethane 1 ,2-D ibrom oeth a n e Bromoform 4-M ethyl-2-Pentanone T oluene-d8 (SURR) Toluene 2-Hexanone T e tra c h lo ro e th e n e C h lo ro b en zen e 1 ,1 ,1 ,2-T etrachloroethane E th y lb en ze n e p & m-Xylene o-X y len e S ty re n e 1so p ro p y lb en zen e 1 ,1 ,2 ,2 -Tetrachloroethane p-B rom ofluorobenzene (SURR) 1,2,3-T richioropropane Bromobenzene n-Propylbenzene 2-C htorotoluene 4-C hlorotoluene 1 ,3 ,5 - Tr i m ethylbenzene tert-B u ty l benzene 1 ,2 ,A-Tr im ethyl benzene sec-Butyl benzene 1 ,3-D)chlorobenzene p -Iso p ro p y lto lu e n e 1, 4-D ichlorobenzene 1,2-D ichlorobenzene n -B u ty lb en zen e 1,2-D ibrom o-3 -Chioropropane 1 , 2 , 4 - Tr ic h lo ro o e n z e n e N aphthalene H exachlorobutadiene 1 .2 .3 - Tr ich lo ro b en zen e EF RF 5.03476 5.U 339 1.77273 1.74046 1.68024 1.83458 1.44457 1.66366 1.06446 1.18851 7.72762 7.97967 .94830 .99365 2.06205 2.25895 4.74581 5.18673 2.01049 2.18890 2.26545 2.49256 6.46634 6.66629 4.35582 4.68357 1.22515 4.68548 5.06886 2.37316 2.68084 6.13071 6.60422 3.89005 4.24876 3.78556 4.07987 2.70585 2.80387 .93253 .96974 .85183 .89901 .96316 1.01248 .50638 .54355 .36231 .37242 .39631 .43850 .84447 .89970 .53329 .56496 .47171 .50128 .30804 .32300 .56855 .59042 .63005 .67721 .53536 .56582 .45070 .50917 .45825 .42408 .99965 .96231 .79015 .81434 .35546 .34058 .65493 .71129 1.02317 1.06308 .54575 .57975 1.79511 1.88408 1.48033 1.56291 1.53290 1.58334 .70106 .72528 1.80075 1.88250 .55819 .55491 .62347 .65367 .21728 .21986 .56400 .61801 .47246 .50577 .43300 .47360 .43444 .44450 1.68459 1.75706 1.71293 1.79914 1.63513 1.71115 2.27436 2.37272 .95 750 1.02680 1.85640 1.97066 1.02665 1.11727 .92383 1.01134 1.80486 1.90243 .18744 .18662 .71999 .81737 1.13183 1.16103 .66519 .75822 .66589 .74680 moo3 i f f . CCC SPCC 2 .6 1.82 * 9.19 15.17 11.65 3.26 4.78 9.55 * 9.29 8.87 10.02 3.09 7.52 ** 6.16 8.18 12.97 7.72 9.22 7.77 3.62 3.99 5.54 5.12 7.34 2.79 * 10.65 6.54 5.94 (Cone>50.00) 6.27 4.86 (C onc*50.00) 3.85 7.49 5.69 12.97 7.46 3.74 3.06 * 4.19 8.61 3.90 6.23 4.96 * 5.58 (Conc*100.00) 3.29 3.45 4.54 .59 * 4.84 1.19 9.58 7.05 9.38 2.32 4.30 5.03 4.65 4.32 7.24 6.15 8.83 9.47 5.41 .44 13.52 2.58 13.98 12.15 -- 000254 R - Response Factor from daily standard file at 50.00 ppb, XDiff - X Difference from original average or curve RF - Average Response Factor from Initial Calibration, CCC - Calibration Check Compounds (*), SPCC - System Performance Check Compounds (**) 2 2 7 3 \D E L \A R \9 7 0 I\D R Y R U N A R O O l'6 USFW 0830 QA/QC for BNA Results of the Internal Standard Areas and Surroeate Recoveries for BNA in Water Prior to extraction, c h sample was spiked with a six component surrogate mixture consisting of nitrobenzene-d,, 2fluorobiphenyl, terphenyl-d)4, phenol-d,, 2-fluorophenol, and 2,4,6-tribromopbenol. After the extracts were combined anc concentrated, they were spiked with an internal standards mixture consisting of 1,4-dichlorobenzene-d, naphthalene-d,, acenaphthene-d10, phenanthrene-dl0, chrysene-d12, and perylene-d,j. The internal standard areas are listed in Table 2.7. All 84 internal standard areas were within QC criteria. The surrogate percent recoveries, also listed in Table 2.7, ranged from 32 to 127. Eighty-one out of 84 percent recoveries were within QC limits. Results of the Internal Standard Areas and Surroeate Recoveries for BNA in Soil Prior to extraction, each sample was spiked with a six component surrogate mixture consisting of nitrobenzene-d,, 2fluorobiphenyl, terphenyl-dM, phenol-d,, 2-fluorophenol, and 2,4,6-tribromophenol. After the extracts were combined ar* concentrated, they were spiked with an internal standards mixture consisting of 1,4-dichlorobenzene-d4, naphthalene-d,, acenaphthene-dl0, phenanthrene-d,0. chrysene-d13, and perylene-dl2. The internal standard areas are listed in Table 2.8. All 174 internal standard areas were within QC criteria. The reported surrogate percent recoveries, also listed in Table 2.8, ranged from zero(O) to 102. One hundred and sixty-eigl out of 174 percent recoveries were within QC limits. Results of the MS/MSD Analvsis for BNA in Water -- -- -- ' - I - -- -- l-- i ... II..I ' ' vi Samples 0020ID and 216A were chosen for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.9, ranged from 36 to 107. Fourty-three out of 44 recoveries were within QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.9, ranged from 2 to 24. All 22 RPD values were within QC -.=* limits. Results of the M S / M S D Analvsis for B N A in Soil Samples 503B and 303E were chosen for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.10, ranged from 67 to 108. Fourty-two out of 44 recoveries were within QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.10, ranged from 1 to 24. All 22 RPD values were within QC~ limits. Results of the Initial Calibrations are listed in Table 2.11. Results of the Continuing Calibrations are listed in Table 2.12. 73VDELVAR\9708\DR YRUNAR 000255 Tabi* 2.7 R esults of the In fa m a i Standard Areas and Surrogate Recoveries for SNA in Water MA # 2*273 Dry Run Creek S ite Sample # Data F ile Internal Standards 12 45 area area 3 6 area Surrogates NB2 FBP TPH PHL 2FP TBP XXX CAL CHECK 50 PPM BNA >DR001 61846 348189 320396 324262 207919 326978 NA NA NA NA NA NA WBLK061397 >DR002 44819 274934 200044 261381 143238 304587 84 81 102 38 50 91 203E 769 DR0Q3 48065 287282 234050 306373 163365 323001 86 87 91 43 55 90 202D 770 >DR004 57807 355174 258418 354658 185175 409050 94 84 97 38 48 89 00201D S04 >DR005 50201 308273 248352 318245 172613 357889 92 90 100 32 45 90 00201D MS >DR006 47750 330807 234622 318844 168483 342292 99 89 103 45 56 87 00201D MSO >DR007 49178 294098 230249 316848 166327 346295 99 93 99 47 57 110 00200D 805 >0R008 47680 296736 227053 2B1531 160904 314624 96 87 104 40 47 88 2060 806 >DR009 48254 317587 246910 312897 168849 352052 92 92 103 46 55 90 2040 807 >DR010 46407 283592 225744 305744 160537 350418 98 85 111 50 58 110 2050 808 >DR011 62970 395128 302847 426086 203087 418631 88 87 93 44 55 97 CAt CHECK 50 PPM BNA >DR012 74730 400200 351673 338560 222905 355566 NA NA NA NA NA NA UBLK061897 DR013 55737 288631 255055 300528 175877 357404 63 73 77 37 45 89 216A U121 >DR014 54146 306728 272317 322266 175638 388498 78 81 89 55 57 90 216A MS W121>DR015 61042 369905 280002 387163 197772 421899 113 121* 122 80 90 126* 216A MSD U121>DR016 65091 362704 302250 402236 207416 417647 107 101 109 77 78 127* SURROGATE LIMITS 51 (NBZ) = N i trobenzene-d5 52 (FBP) = 2 - F lu o ro D ip h e n yl 53 (TPH) = T e rp h e n y l-d H 54 (P H D = Phenol -d5 55 (2FP) = 2 - F luorophenol S6 (TBP) = 2,4,6-Tribrom ophenol WATER (35-114) (43-116) (33-141) (10-110) (21-110) (10-123) :m \DEL\A R\970rvD RYRUN AR o o l'y 000256 USFW 0832 Table 2.8 Results o f the In te rn a l Standard Areas snd Surrogate Recoveries f o r SNA in S o il UA * 2-273 Dry R ir Creek S ite D ata Sample 0 F ile Internal seendards 12 4 re 5 ores 3 6 area S u rro g a te s NBZ FBP PHL 2FP XX TPH TBP X CAL CHE'K 50 PPM BNA >DR012 74730 400200 35H673 33*560 222905 355566 NA NA NA NA NA NA SBLK061697 DR017 49427 312712 246381 313162 168008 345533 81 86 94 101 82 99 512B S058 >DR018 57309 358452 273755 338407 187246 305129 63 73 74 82 61 77 5138 S059 DR019 54329 320439 229561 312152 174332 300066 83 81 82 90 70 90 514B S060 >DR020 64719 391587 297051 408112 212912 349466 80 83 61 91 68 100 500B S100 >DR021 51560 317118 252989 300440 166541 308776 79 95 86 90 72 77 501B S101 >DR022 50049 315904 243040 314822 162449 291644 77 89 81 83 69 79 502B S102 >DR023 55869 335170 261387 320985 174285 309146 71 89 85 83 67 98 CAL CHECK 50 PPM BNA >DR026 72896 425025 346989 367438 231291 349767 NA NA NA NA NA NA 503B SI 03 >DR027 59843 320888 268325 297093 177623 288634 71 73 82 69 58 77 503B S103MS >DR02S 62476 345437 292075 333816 202798 319715 67 66 77 74 67 84 503B S103MSD>DR029 61730 335796 275625 306193 196903 319606 80 79 97 77 64 92 304E S105 >OR030 64238 391713 303436 369768 200091 397701 71 79 95 72 56 65 305E S106 >DR031 57832 370939 277617 350989 1B9929 349648 72 71 85 79 70 73 306E S107 >DR032 65422 378656 315249 336708 203905 328118 75 79 87 81 73 81 508B S109 >OR033 75942 414028 357073 388314 242219 386524 81 75 88 74 54 74 509B S110 >DR034 62981 376064 302795 328939 209140 330245 76 76 93 69 50 56 510B S111 DR035 79943 448132 382636 397399 244698 380955 76 60 82 76 64 67 ' 5118 S112 DR036 62654 307755 192589 0* 0* 0* 328499 344649 323825 0* 0* 0* 506B S124 >DR037 60299 340168 318930 337718 209014 315124 77 81 98 54 67 86 SURROGATE L IM IT S 51 (NBZ) = N1 1robenzene-d5 52 (FBP) = 2 - FluorobiD henyl 53 (TPH) = T erp nenyl-d14 (23-120) (30-115) (18-137) 54 (PHL) 55 (2FP) 56 (TBP) Phenol-d5 (24-113) 2-Fluorophenol (25-121) 2,4,6-Tribrom ophenol (19-122) 2273\DL\ARi97DrDR VRUNAR 0 0 1 * '9 000257 USFW 0833 Tbit 2.8 (Cant) Raoul ta of the Irrtarm I standard Araaa arid Surrogate Raeovarias fo r SNA (n S o li UA # 2*273 Dry Riai Croak S it a Sample # D ata F ile In tern al Standards 12 A5 area area 3 6 area S u rro g a te s N8Z FBP PML 2FP XX TPH TBP X CAL CHECK 50 PPM BNA >DR040 68334 435125 353248 375984 235673 412831 NA NA NA NA NA NA 507B S125 >DR041 52810 334407 265923 317778 173166 329591 79 81 76 71 52 55 504B S126 >DR042 67306 403751 308295 390898 216770 415327 91 82 83 74 57 61 505B S127 >DR043 65236 425383 307S30 399452 203441 396834 86 89 79 82 65 65 300E S135 DR044 56038 337791 274871 350568 181379 359078 77 91 . 85 85 65 75 301E S136 >DR045 54240 396747 295403 434430 209474 456939 83 88 76 98 75 71 302E S137 >DR046 54377 344967 273974 379805 182256 378374 82 91 76 89 72 75 303E S138 DR047 56188 374405 301666 398292 207454 404333 81 77 78 91 75 72 303E S138MS >DR048 55613 344489 273937 366319 189361 389267 91 92 86 95 77 86 303E S138MSD>DR049 53914 373266 287083 382298 200423 406680 98 93 84 102 85 85 CAL CHECK 50 PPM BNA >CR000 71873 440672 359421 388353 256141 415998 NA NA NA NA NA NA SBLK062697 >CR003 68008 405838 321831 428584 222042 474401 74 81 83 76 63 76 51 IB S112 >CR00A 59811 435639 325927 431019 222786 431149 60 68 58 70 56 57 SURROGATE LIMITS 51 (NBZ) = Ni t robenz e n e d5 52 (FBP) = 2 -F lu o ro b ip h e n y l 53 (TPH) = T e rp h e n y l-d H (23*120) (30-115) (18-137) SA (PHD * P hen o l-d 5 (24-113) 55 (2FP) = 2 -F lu o ro p h en o l (25-121) 56 (TBP) = 2 ,4 ,6 -T rib ro m o p h e n o l (1 9 -1 2 2 ) r73\D E L \A R N 9 ? C \D R Y R U N A R 00150 000258 USFW 0834 S aople N o.: 00201D Table 2.9 KaaoUJMlt0e2f *2th73 NS/MSD Analysis for Dry I t n Creek S ite MA in Uater " SPIKE----T---- SOTPtE r----- HS------- f U S" COMPOUND R n sn m m m m n s ADDED lU8S HA K) tr lONCENTRWTION concentration! }t a n (M/LX tasM M eT C i| (A0/L) X REC Phenol __________ 100.00 cuco! 37.76 37 2-Chloroohenoi 100.00 auoo 92.67 92 1.4- D ichlorobenzene 50.00 (0400 39.38 78 N H itroso-di-n-propTTTT 50.00 auso 47.84 95 1.2.4- Tri chtorobenzene 5 0 .0 0 aun 40.71 81 4-Chloro-3-methylphenoT 100.00 aun 8 4.07 84 Aeenaphthene _________ 50.00 uno 44.54 89 4 -N itrophenolT 100.00 auso 30.76 30 2 ,4-D in itro to lu e n e 50.00 c,_oo 4 6 .6 6 93 P e n ta c h lo ro p h e n o l_ ^ 100.00 aun 50.60 50 Pvrene 50.00 aun 40.26 80 T 'OC--} LIMITS C . mss 12-110 27-123 36- 97 41-116 39- 98 23- 97 46-118 10- 80 24- 96 ( 9-103! 26-127 I I" SPIKE----ADDED ------- HSC--------T CONCENTRAHI ON! RS0-- X X j COMPOUND j USA) U s/U REC RPO SSSS3S888 s s s s s s m o w s s * SSSSSS x s s s s s Phenol 2-C h lo ro p h e n o l ! 1,4 -D ic h lo ro b e n z e n e j 100.00 100.00 : 50.00 4 2 . 54> 42 W . 3 4 ; 99 42.43 84 12 7 7 N -N itro so -d i-n -p ro p T T T T 1,2 4 - T r i c h l o r o b e n z e n e 50.00 50.00 5 T -64 103 * 7-09 94 8 14 4 - C n l o r o - 3 - m e t h y l p h e n o T 100.00 * 9.73 90 6 ! A eenaphthene ! 50.00 4.7SJ 97 8 4 -N itro p h e n o r 100.00 36- 15, 18 2 ,4 - D im t r o t o l'u e n e 50.00 5 2 - 6 9 105 * 12 P e n ta c h lo ro p h e n o l P vrene 100.00 50.00 64- 77) 64 4 2 U 83 65 24 6 i_____________________ . *- i Sample N o .: 216 A OC LIMITS ! RPO i REC. a n s jm m 42 12-110 40 27-123 28 38 t3JO6-~ 9rl7 i 41-116 28 39- 98 42 23- 97 31 46-118 50 MO- 80 38 24- 96 50 9-103 31 26-127 COMPOUND Ph eno l ________ __________ 2-Chloropncnol 1,4 -D ic h iorobenzene N-N i t r o s o - d i-n-propTTTT 1,2 4-Trichlorobenzene 4 - C h lo ro -3 -methylphenoT Aeenaphthene 4-NitrophenoT 2,4-Dm itrotoluene Pentachloropnenol_^ P y r e n e ______________ SPIKE------T------ S'AHPIE------T R5 TU 5 -- ADDED CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION X T LIMITS O ig/L ) U g/L > U s/U ! REC REC. { !8888888888888}S8S88SSS s s s s s s s s s m s x ISS8SS 8SS8SS 142.86 0-00 84.63 59 12-110 142.86 0-00 123.39 86 27-123 7 t . 43 o .o o ) 59.81 83 36- 97 71.43) 0 .0 0 7 6 .5 0 107 41-116 71.43! 0 .0 0 5 7 .8 6 81 39- 98 142.86 o.oo ! 119.73 83 23- 97 71.43) 0-00 62.39 87 46-118 142.86 0.00 7 2 .9 4 ) 51 10- 80 71.431 142.86! 71.43 o .o o ) 0.00 0 .0 0 62.80) 87 89.63) 62 58.64 82 24- 96 9-103 26-127 l "5PTK------r------- HST3---------T ADDED CONCENTRATION M5~ X 1 X -- r-- QC LIM IT S COMPOUND Phenol ~i y(N9/L) ) Ctg/L > REC j 1 4 2 ?8 6 ....... * ~ 7 8 . 61 j 55 RPD RPD REC. ~ i- 2-ChloroDhenoi 142.86 112.35 78 9 40 27-123 1,<*-D ich loroDehzrie N- N1 1 r o s o - a i- n * p r o p . (1 ) 1 .2 ,4 T rich lo ro D e n ze n e -Crloro-3-m etnytpnenoT 71.43 71.43 71.43 ! 142.86 55.66 71.05) 53.71 109.43 77 99 75 76 1 1 1 7 7 7 8 28 36- 97 38 41-116 ?8 39- 98 42 23- 97 Acenaprtnene *. -N 1 1ropneno" 2 , -D in itro to lu e n e 71.43) , 142.86 71.43) . 58.13 65.34 61.34 81 45 85 1 1 7 12 2 31 46-118 50 10- 80 38 24- 96 Pen-acMoropnenol Hyrene *~ir. L 'i 142.86 71.43 j 11 94.55 52.48 66 73 1 _ 11. 6 11 50 9-103 31 26-127 ::7 3 \D E L \A \9 7 0 S \D R Y R U N A R 00151 000259 USFW 0835 Sample N o.: 503 B Tabic 2.10 Result* of the MS/MSO Analysis for UIA in Soil UA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Height COMPOUND n in n asi Phenol 2 -C hloropnenoi 1 .4 -D ic h lo ro b e n z e n e N-Ni tr o s o - d i -n -p ro p T H T 1 ,2 .4 -Tr i eh lorobenzene 4 - Cn lo r o - 5 -m ethyl phenoT A cenaphthene 4-N itro p h en o T 2,4 -0 in itro toiuene Pentachloropheno lJ P y r e n e ____________~ r-sptce-- SOTPTE----- -------- ns---------- r ns-- 0C ! ADDED ! CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION X UMITS (ag/kg) 1 (ag/kg) EtSSSSISI! (ag/kg) j REC REC. { ALLyiLyiL4 _Lui. 1! 0.00 ~ 0.00 3093.42 69 26-*50! 3 5 5 9 .8 7 80 2 5 - 102 2222.22! 0.00, 1505.56 67 28-104 2222.22 0.00 1849.02 83 41-126 2222.22 0 .0 0 1 1838.98 82 38-107 4444.44 0.00 3 3 6 0 .B4 75 2 6 - 103 2222.22 0.00, 1791.11 80 31-137 4444.44 0.00 2979.65 67 11-114 i2J2JJ2*2.2L2L 1 0.00 0.00 1773.20 79 28- 89 3547.02 79 17-109 2222. 2 2 { 0.00 1590.13 71 35-142 I I IIc I I COMPOUND ssssssssss Phenol 2 -C h lo ro p h 1.4 - D ichlo sssss enol roben ssz s zene s s n SPICE-----1-------- USD---------r ADDED CONCENTRATION X (ag/kg) (ag/kg) REC BS8 SSSSSE {MSBSWSS8ZSI }i s t s s a 44444444 . 4L4L 3347.56 75 3897.38 87 2222.22 1915.51 86 N-Nitroso-di-n-propTTTT 2222.22 2123.24 95 1.2 .4 - T ric h lorobenzene 2222.22 2101.29! 94 -4-Cnloro-3-m ethylphenoT 4444.44 4059.60 91 A cenaphthene 2222.22 1933.42 87 4 - Ni t rooheno l **** 4444.44 3379.51 76 2 .4- D initrotoiucnc 2222.22 ! 1885.69! 84 P e n ta c h lo ro p h e n o l______ 4444.44 4262.76 95 II Pyrene__________________ 2222.22 1938.44 87 Sample No.: 303 E X RPD E int: 8 8 24 13 13 19 8 12 6 18 20 J QC LIMITS RPD E ins i C . I 35 26- 90! 50 25-102 27 28-104 38 41-126 23 38-107 33 26-103 19 31-137 50 11-114 47 28- 89 47 17-109 36 35-142 ) COMPOUND 1TAPDTDCEED----- 1 CONC5ENWTURAET-I-O--N- ---------ns CONCENTRATION " F5-- X T " TC" LIMITS (a9/kg) (ag/kg) (ag/kg) REC REC. SSSSSSSSESSSSSSSSSSSSS8S1SSSSSSXSS SSS8SSSUISSS S S S m n R S M }888BCS Phenol C h io roph eno l 1.4-D ichioroberi'zene N -N itro s o -d i-n -p ro p .(1) 1,2.4-T richlorobenzene 4-Cnloro-3-m ethylphenoT A cenaphthene ! 4-Ni trophenol 2.4-D initrotoluene Pentachlorophenol Pyrene 4065.04 4065.04 ! 2032.52 ! 2032.52 ! 2032.52 ! 4065.04 I 2032.52 ! 4065.04 ! 2032.52 ! 4065.04 ! 2032.52 j 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3421.10 3305.81 1608.33 1979.59 1904.23 3340.04 2078.50 3257.80 1864.51 3219.84 1617.36 84 26- 90 81 25-102 79 28-104 97 41-126 93 38-107 82 26-103 102 31-137 80 11-114 91 * 28- 89 79 17-109 79 35-142 1 rs p T C E -------- use r "H S0 ADDED C O N C EN T R A T IO N X COMPOUND (ag/kg) (ag/kg) REC BSSSSSSSS j s s x s x x s s s s s s s | s x x x s x Phenol 4 06 5 .0 4 ! 3 627.52 89 2-Chlorophenol 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 4 06 5 .0 4 ! 2 032.52! 3 5 9 0 .5 3 1 9 0 9 .5 9 ! 88 93 N-Ni tro so -d i-n -p ro p . ( 1) 1,2 .4 - T ric h toroDenzene 2 0 3 2 .5 2 2 032.52! 2 21 0 .7 3 ! 108 200 2 .2 4 ! 98 4 -C n lo ro -3 - methylphenoT 4 0 6 5 . 0 4 ) 3 3 1 9 .7 1 ! 81 Acenaphthene 4 -Nitrophenol 203 2 .5 2 ! ! 4065.04 .2173.37! 106 3 6 0 2 .8 5 88 2,4-Dim trotoluene 2 032.52! 1 966.67 96 * Pentachlorophenol 4 065.04) 3 37 9 .1 5 ! 83 pyrene 2 0 3 2 .5 2 1 647.07 81 11 ^l) N -N itroso-oi-n-propylam ine * QC L IM IT S RPD RPD REC. s x x x x x { BXBXXX2SXXXSX 5 i 35 26- 90 8 ! 50 2 5 -1 0 2 16 ! 27 2 8 -1 0 4 10 38 4 1 -1 2 6 5 23 3 8 -1 0 7 1 33 2 6-103 3 ! 19 3 1 -1 3 7 9 50 1 1 -1 1 4 5 47 28- 89 4 47 17-109 2 36 35-142 Z273\DEL\AR\97C\DRYRUNAR 00152 000260 USFW 0836 Table Z.11 R esults of the I n i t i a l C alib ra tion s fo r BNA UA R 2-273 Ory Run Creek S ite C a li b r a ti o n D a te : 3 /1 9 /9 7 . I n s tr u n e n t ID: 888632 . Mini nun TTF f o r SPCC i s 0 .0 5 , Maxiuun X RSD f o r CCC i s 3 0 . L a b o ra to ry ID: V U 0 0 4 RF Compound 2 0 .0 0 >VU000 RF 5 0 .0 0 >VU 003 RF 8 0 .0 0 >VW 002 RF 1 20.00 >VU001 RF 1 6 0 .0 0 2-Fluorophenol Phenol-CD Phenol bis(-2-C hloroethyl)Ether 2-Chlorophenol 1.3- Dichlorobenzene 1, 4 -D i ch l orobenzene Benzyl alcohol 1,2-6 i chlo robenzene 2 -M e thylp he n o l bis(2-C hloroisopropyl)ether 4-Methylphenol N -N itroso-D i-n-propylam ine H exachloroethane Mi trobenzere-d5 N itro b e n ze n e lsophorone 2-Ni trophenol 2 .4 - Dimethylphenol bis(2-Chloroethoxy>m ethane 2 .4 - Dichlorophenol 1.2.4- Trichlorobenzene Naphthalene 4 -C h lo ro a n ilin e --Hexachlorobut ad i ene 4-Chloro-3-m ethylphenol 2 -M e th y ln ap h th a le n e Hexach l o rocyclopent ad i ene 2 .4 .6 - Trichlorophenol 2 .4 .5 - Trichlorophenol 2 -Cnloronaphthalene 2 -F lu o ro b ip h e n y l 2- N itroanitine Dim ethylphthalate Acenapntnylene 3 - N itroam l ine Acenaphthene 2 .4 - Dinitrophenol 4 - Mitrophenol D ib e n zo fu ra n 2 .6 - D ini trotoluene 2 .4- Dinitrotoluene D ie th y lp h th a la t e 4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether Fluorene 4 -N itro a n ilin e 4 .6- D i ni t r o - 2 -methyl phenol N-N i t r o s o d i p h e n y l ami ne 2 . 4 .6 - Tr i bromopnenot 4-Bromophenyl -pfienylether Hexachlorobenzene Pentacni oropneno l Phenanthrene Anthracene Carbazole D i-n -b u ty lo h th a la te Fluorantnene Pyrene Terphenyl-dH Butylbenzylphthat ate 3 , 3 ' -D ichi o ro b e n zi dine Benzol a )anthracene Bi st2-Ethyl hexylJphthalate Chrysene D i-n -o c ty lp h th a la te Benzo(b)f tuoranthene Benzot k )f luoranthene Benzot alpyrene Inaenot1 ,2 ,3 -cd)pyrene 0 i benzot a ,h )anthracene Benzot c .h . i)p e r v le n e _________ 1 .2 2 3 8 1 1.9 75 0 6 1.9 62 5 7 1 .6 85 6 8 1 .6 0 6 9 0 1 .6 3 9 3 8 1 .55728 1 .6 6 5 0 6 1.5 50 0 5 1 .4 4 9 4 8 3 .55762 1.5 42 5 7 1 .8 5 2 8 5 .5 1 5 9 4 .4 1 9 7 3 .6 4 2 3 2 .8 6 7 8 8 .2 1 1 3 7 .2 9 3 0 8 .4 7 1 5 0 .2 8 8 6 4 .3 0 4 5 0 1 .0 1 0 6 9 .4 9 3 7 6 .1 7 8 0 8 .4 2 4 0 1 .6 6 87 7 .2 7 6 3 4 .3 9 1 4 6 .3 8 6 4 2 1 .1 5 8 3 9 1 .24700 .5 4 13 7 1 .5 8 4 8 9 2 .3 83 9 6 .6 9 6 8 6 1.8 86 0 4 .2 1 7 1 2 .4 0 6 0 2 1.8 07 1 5 .3 7 4 5 1 .5 5 1 9 6 1 .9 9 5 1 5 .9 4 2 3 0 1 .43980 .4 9 7 5 2 .2 3 0 1 0 .7 5 8 2 5 .1 1 2 6 5 .2 3 3 2 9 .2 7 1 1 0 .1 8 4 8 4 1.2 55 5 3 1 .19326 1 .3 4 2 5 1 1 .8 4 4 3 1 1 .4 9 2 9 1 1 .47518 1.0 46 6 3 .8 1 7 4 1 .4 3 1 7 1 1 .3 2 8 5 9 1.1 55 2 0 1.2 85 4 4 2.0 18 5 2 1.2 34 2 3 1 .1 2 4 0 6 1.0 76 4 2 .9 3 1 5 9 .9 6 3 3 3 .9 0 9 4 8 1 .1 6 0 1 4 1 .8 1 9 3 2 1 .8 5 3 9 3 1.5 56 6 6 1 .43770 1 .54179 1 .5 4 7 3 7 1 .56486 1 .30867 1 .41463 3 .3 7 4 9 6 1 .2 4 1 1 8 1 .6 7 4 7 3 .4 3 7 0 6 .4 2 4 0 3 .4 1 7 3 8 .8 8 9 8 6 .2 3 4 9 4 .3 1 1 7 4 .4 7 7 5 0 .2 7 7 6 2 .2 7 9 2 9 .9 7 6 3 7 .4 6 7 5 9 .1 6 0 4 6 .4 1 9 1 2 .6 3 2 0 3 .3 2 8 1 2 .3 8 2 6 9 .3 9 8 0 4 .9 7 8 9 2 1 .1 4 1 8 3 .5 2 4 4 5 1 .45657 2 .07415 .7 0 3 2 5 1 .6 0 7 9 1 .2 7 8 0 2 .4 6 0 2 8 1 .6 1 6 9 7 .3 6 2 5 8 .5 8 5 1 2 1 .7 9 8 1 1 .8 1 6 6 1 1 .1 9 5 2 2 .5 4 1 2 3 .2 5 4 9 7 .6 8 5 5 7 .1 1 8 2 6 .2 1 8 7 4 .2 3 8 4 8 .2 0 0 3 2 1 .0 8 7 1 1 1 .0 6 4 8 3 1.1 11 0 7 1 .6 7 2 1 1 1 .2 7 8 4 6 1 .62233 1 .1 3 4 8 3 .8 9 3 0 0 .4 8 9 3 4 1 .4 4 4 6 2 1 .3 2 9 9 2 1 .35732 2 .2 6 6 6 7 1 .4 3 1 3 4 1 .2 8 2 5 5 1 .2 4 1 1 2 1 .2 2 5 9 4 1 .1 3 4 1 1 1 .1 0 4 1 9 1.2 64 4 2 1 .7 8 2 9 2 2 .0 9 8 2 4 1 .4 5 4 4 4 1 .2 9 6 0 1 1 .4 74 9 7 1 .49303 1.4 93 4 9 1 .1 4 8 4 9 1 .3 9 1 0 2 3 .5 16 4 2 1 .1 1 3 2 6 1 .7 4 5 5 8 .4 1 0 2 4 .4 3 8 0 1 .3 9 6 1 4 .8 5 1 8 5 .2 3 0 6 2 .2 9 21 7 .4 4 8 1 2 .2 8 64 0 .2 8 0 1 3 .9 4 1 6 2 .4 4 3 7 2 .1 6 9 1 2 .4 2 3 3 5 .5 9 0 7 2 .3 0 8 5 3 .3 6 2 7 2 .3 9 2 7 5 .9 4 03 6 1.1 41 2 7 .5 4 9 9 3 1 .2 9 1 5 5 1 .9 0 0 5 8 .7 0 01 7 1 .50584 .3 0 15 7 .4 5 3 0 3 1 .53165 .3 7 4 8 6 .5 6 1 2 0 1 .5 8 4 2 2 .7 7 7 4 5 1 .10286 .5 3 3 6 1 .2 6 93 7 .6 3 9 5 5 .13281 .2 1 6 9 2 .2 3 0 4 2 .1 8 8 7 5 .9 9 94 7 1 .0 2 6 7 3 1 .0 5 3 3 4 1.4 92 9 8 1 .1 6 6 1 7 1.6 65 5 4 1 .0 7 0 0 6 .9 3 39 9 .4 5 4 1 7 1 .4 4 0 5 8 1 .21755 1 .2 9 3 4 2 1.7 89 0 4 1 .2 3 7 5 8 .9 7 5 9 4 1 .0 0 2 2 5 1.1 59 2 6 .9 6 1 7 6 .9 3 6 3 9 1.2 76 7 2 1 .8 4 7 8 0 2 .0 8 4 9 7 1 .2 8 8 4 7 1 .2 6 6 6 6 1 .4 1 2 7 5 1 .3 5 7 5 3 1 .5 6 1 7 0 1 .17253 1 .29525 3 .5 32 3 9 1 .1 3 3 2 1 1.6 91 6 6 .4 6 8 4 2 .4 3 6 6 5 .4 0 7 1 3 .89 42 6 .2 1 9 7 3 .2 9 9 2 5 .4 8 3 2 7 .28 90 0 .2 6 3 9 6 .8 8 9 7 8 .4 1 8 5 6 .1 6 1 5 4 .40 23 8 .5 4 9 8 6 .2 8 7 8 2 .3 5 9 7 3 .35 12 6 .8 6 7 1 8 1.0 29 1 6 .5 1 40 8 1 .1 5 7 7 9 1 .5 1 7 9 2 .61 65 4 1 .33239 .27 91 0 .4 3 4 6 4 1.3 88 9 9 .3 7 6 1 5 .5 5 5 5 6 1 .2 7 0 0 0 .66 78 7 .9 5 54 6 .5 3 4 5 1 .2 5 6 2 5 .5 6 78 7 .1 2 1 0 0 .1 9 77 8 .2 1 4 9 0 .1 7 7 3 0 .8 9 7 7 1 .9 2 4 0 5 1 .0 2 4 7 4 1 .31874 1 .10923 1.67B 52 1 .1 4 1 1 7 .9 3 9 9 0 .4 7 7 7 2 1 .51540 1 .26305 1 .2 9 0 9 8 1.6 23 7 0 1 .2 8 2 4 0 .9 3 8 7 7 1 .0 6 3 9 9 .9 6 4 8 1 .9 2 9 4 5 .8 8 03 9 1.1 23 6 6 1 .59783 1 .6 7 2 5 1 1 .1 5 2 7 5 1 .1 5 6 7 0 1 .1 7 8 1 6 1.1 54 4 0 1 .4 9 7 9 9 .9 7 68 9 1.1 42 2 3 2 .9 8 1 7 9 1 .15489 1 .6 6 6 6 9 .4 5 1 7 6 .4 0 8 3 5 .3 9 3 6 8 .8 9 9 7 8 .2 0 0 3 3 .2 9 37 9 .4 2 4 7 8 .2 5 5 8 2 .2 2 8 5 9 .8 0 6 2 4 .4 1 8 9 3 .1 4 3 9 0 .3 4 74 0 .5 0 1 7 8 .2 4 5 3 8 .3 1 8 1 1 .3 1 1 8 7 .7 1 8 6 7 .8 7 5 9 8 .4 5 7 6 3 .9 0 2 0 7 1 .1 9 6 4 6 .5 0 6 2 3 1 .0 2 8 3 1 .2 7 9 0 5 .3 9 2 4 4 1 .10962 .3 2 4 0 1 .4 6 1 3 9 .9 1 9 6 5 .4 8 0 7 0 .7 7 9 4 5 .4 8 2 0 7 .2 3 0 6 0 .4 1 1 9 8 .1 0 8 0 3 .1 5 8 2 8 .19614 .1 5 9 5 3 .7 9 8 4 0 .7 6 1 7 5 .8 5 3 8 8 1.1 60 3 4 .9 3 42 7 1 .7 5 2 7 2 1.2 14 6 4 .9 5 9 8 3 .4 6 9 0 0 1 .5 1 5 1 9 1 .2 1 9 6 2 1 .3 1 4 7 7 1 .4 4 4 8 9 1.3 70 5 2 .6 9 7 6 7 .9 7 6 3 5 .8 2 83 7 .7 7 53 9 .7 1 0 5 6 m rr ST X RSD CCC .682 1 .2 09 7 5 .934 1 .8 0 4 5 9 .9 3 7 1.93444 .9 5 0 1 .4 27 5 2 .953 1 .3 12 3 9 .989 1.44941 1 .005 1.42192 1 .0 5 7 1.55262 1.055 1 .2 31 3 3 1 .098 1.33852 1 .102 3 .3 92 6 4 1 .143 1 .145 1.1 40 .8 5 3 .8 5 7 1.2 37 0 2 1 .76630 .4 5 6 6 9 .4 2 5 3 5 .4 1 1 3 3 .9 0 9 .9 2 5 .9 4 4 .9 6 5 .9 7 7 .9 9 3 1.0 04 1 .028 .8 8 0 7 3 .2 1 94 0 .2 9 80 0 .4 6 10 4 .2 7 94 6 .2 7 12 9 .9 2 49 0 .4 4 8 5 1 1 .0 48 .1 6 26 2 1 .1 43 .40325 1 .1 5 9 .58863 .8 6 9 .8 8 4 .2 8 9 2 4 .3 6 2 9 4 .889 .36807 .9 0 9 .9 3 27 0 .8 9 7 1 .08705 .936 .5 1 74 9 .974 1 .2 7 8 5 7 .975 1.81461 1 .0 03 .64501 1 .0 06 1.4 72 1 0 1 .020 .2 7097 1 .0 36 .4 2 92 8 1.031 1 .4 9 0 8 8 .984 .3 6 24 2 1 .045 .54305 1 .0 88 1.5 13 4 2 1 .0 90 .73698 1 .086 1 .0 94 5 6 1 .1 03 .5 1 77 9 .900 .2 4 82 6 .903 .61264 .915 .1 1 8 5 5 .946 .20500 .962 .23 02 1 .9 8 7 .18215 1.003 1 .00764 1 .0 0 9 .99413 1 .0 3 3 1.07711 1 .0 90 1.4 97 6 9 1 .1 5 6 1.19621 .8 8 2 1 .6 38 8 6 .902 1 .1 21 4 7 .955 .90883 1 .0 00 .46439 .998 1 .4 48 8 8 1.012 1 .2 37 0 7 1.003 1.30838 .940 1.82856 .9 6 6 1.31121 .9 6 9 1 .0 03 8 0 .995 1 .0 7 2 0 3 1.1 22 1.0 21 9 9 1.1 26 1.1 59 .95281 .9 0 8 2 0 5 .4 75 7 .5 56 9 .1 52 1 4 .8 0 7 8 .5 92 1 1 .9 6 0 1 1 .9 1 6 4 .4 70 1 7 .3 5 3 9 .2 46 7 .0 86 1 4 .3 6 0 5 .7 97 6 .6 32 2 .904 4 .7 96 2 .2 9 1 6 .4 28 2 .7 38 5 .265 5 .0 03 1 0 .2 9 7 8 .6 44 7 .231 7 .764 8 .0 42 1 1 .1 9 1 1 0 .9 0 0 7 .8 2 1 9 .8 76 1 7 .2 2 4 1 2 .9 6 3 7 .0 1 1 2 0.768 2 5.687 1 3 .2 2 0 2 1 .6 7 9 1 1 .6 9 4 6 .6 43 1 7 .5 3 3 6 .1 15 8 .7 3 6 2 8.226 2 3.560 2 2 .7 5 1 5 .0 79 6 .9 65 2 1.518 7 .9 48 1 4 .1 5 1 1 2 .1 6 2 8 .3 08 1 7 .4 5 2 1 6 .2 6 9 1 6 .3 9 4 1 8 .1 7 6 1 7 .3 2 9 6 .2 76 5 .8 97 6 .2 26 4 .8 07 5 .2 76 5 .2 2 1 2 .2 57 1 7 .6 9 5 6 .6 19 2 1 .7 6 3 9 .6 38 1 6 .1 8 0 1 3 .3 8 8 1 5 .4 7 8 * * * * RF - Response Facto r From d a i l y sta n d a rd f i l e at 5 0.0 0 g/m l, X D if f - D iffe re n c e from o r i g i n a l a ve ra ge o r cu rve RT - Average Response Factor from I n i t i a l C a lib r a t io n , CCC - C a lib r a t io n Check Compounds ( * ) SPCC - System Performance Check Compounds ( * * ) ' 2T73U5ELVAR\9?0S\DR YR UNAR 00153 000261 USFW 0837 T ab i 2 .1 2 Results of the Continuing Calibration* for SNA UA 2-273 Dry Run Creek Sit* I n i ti a l C a lib ra tio n D ate: 3 /1 9 /9 7 , C a lib ra tio n D ate: 6 /20/97, T il :: 09:31 In s tru n e n t ID: 888632, L a b o ra to ry ID: >DR001, M in iu m RF f o r SPCC i s 0 .0 5 , Maximm X D iff f o r CCC i s 2 5 .OX Compound RT RF i f f CCC 2-Fluorqchenol Phenol-d5 Phenol b ist-2 -C h lo ro e th y lJEther 2 -C hlorophenol 1 ,3 - Di eh lo ro b e n z e n e 1,4-D ichlorobenzene Benzyl alcohol 1,2-D ichlorobenzene 2-M ethylphenol bis(2-C hloroisopropyl)ether 4 -M ethylphenol N -N itroso-D i-n-propylam ine H exachloroethane N itrobenzene-d5 N itro b en zen e lsophorone 2-N itrophenol 2,4-D im ethylphenol bis(2-C hloroethoxy)m ethane 2,4-D ichlorophenol 1,2.4-T richlorobenzene N aphthalene 4-C hloroaniline Hexachlorobutad i ene 4-Chloro-3-m ethylphenol 2-Methyl naphthalene H exachlorocyclopentadi ene 2 , 4 , 6 - Tr i chlo ro p h en o t 2,4.5-T richlorophenol 2 -C n lo ro n ap h th alen e 2 -F lu o ro b ip h e n y l 2-N itroaniline D im ethylphthalate A cenapntnylene 3-N itroam lin e Acenaphthene 2,4-D ini trophenol 4-N itrophenol D ib en zo fu ran 2,6-D ini tro to lu en e 2,4-D initrotoluene D iethylphthalate 4 -Chlorophenyl-phenyl ether Fluorene 4-Ni tr o a n ilin e 4 ,6-D in i tro-2-m ethyl phenol N-Ni tro so d ip h e n yl amine 2 ,4 ,6-Tribromophenol 4-Bromopnenyl-pnenylether Hexachlorobenzene Pentachtoropnenol Phenanthrene A nthracene Carbazole Di-n-butylphthalate F lu o ra n th e n e Pyrene Terphenyl-d14 B utylbenzylphthalate 3 , 3 '-Dichlorobenzidine Benzol a )anthracene Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate Chrysene Di-n-octylphthalate Benzo(b)f l uoranthene Benzo(k)fluoranthene BenzoCaJpyrene InaenoC1,2.3-cd)pyrene Dibenzo(a,n)anthracene Benzo(Q.h . t)pexylene 1.20975 1.26474 1.80459 1.78476 1.93444 1.93451 1.42752 1.52327 1.31239 1.30190 1.44941 1.48934 1.42192 1.56612 1.55262 1.43764 1.23133 1.31651 1.33852 1.36376 3.39264 3.30776 1.23702 1.35412 1.76630 1.68110 .45669 .46298 .42535 .40403 .41133 .41468 .88073 .78056 .21940 .20407 .29800 .28682 .46104 .47328 .27946 .26614 .27129 .27202 .92490 .93459 .44851 .44341 .16262 .13113 .40325 .38008 .58863 .60758 .28924 .24300 .36294 .36241 .36807 .35458 .93270 1.05119 1.08705 1.16993 .51749 .54292 1.27857 1.44040 1.81461 2.00940 .64501 .73771 1.47210 1.63893 .27097 .24946 .42928 .44613 1.49088 1.61001 .36242 .35333 .54305 .50357 1.51342 1.66369 .73698 .70320 1.09456 1.25333 .51779 .51413 .24826 .25373 .61264 .74697 .11855 .09282 .20500 .18707 .23021 .20722 .18215 .16030 1.00764 1.19907 .99413 1.10005 1.07711 1.16788 1.49769 1.83948 1.19621 1.30490 1.63886 1.49147 1.12147 .92936 .90883 .95122 .46439 .41980 1.44888 1.31451 1.23707 1.22885 1.30838 1.19038 1.82856 2.33101 1.31121 1.34520 1.00380 1.10309 1.07203 1.16331 1.02199 1.15597 .95281 1.09807 .90820 1.06202 4.55 1.10 .00 6.71 .80 2.75 10.14 7.41 6.92 1.89 2.50 9.47 4.82 1.38 5.01 .81 11.37 6.99 3.75 2.66 4.77 .27 1.05 1.14 19.36 5.75 3.22 15.99 .15 3.66 12.70 7.62 4.91 12.66 10.73 14.37 11.33 7.94 3.93 7.99 2.51 7.27 9.93 4.58 14.51 .71 2.21 21.92 21.71 8.75 9.98 11.99 19.00 10.66 8.43 22.82 9.09 8.99 17.13 4.67 9.60 9.27 .66 9.02 27.48 2.59 9.89 8.51 13.11 15.25 16.94 * * * * RF R esponse F a c to r from d a i l y s ta n d a rd f i l e a t 5 0 .0 0 iig/mL, XDiff - X D iffe re n c e from o r i g i n a l a v e ra g e o r c u rv e PTF - A verage R esponse F a c to r from I n i t i a l C a li b r a ti o n , CCC - C a li b r a ti o n Check Compounds ( * ) , SPCC - System P erform ance Check Compounds ( * ) ::T3\DEL\ R\?708\DRYRUNAR 001E4 000262 USFW 0838 Tabi (Conti 2.12 Bosult of tho Continuing C alibrotien c for BUA IIA * 2*273 Dry Bui Crook S ito I n itia l C a lib ra tio n D ate: Instrum ent ID: 888632, Minimum RF f o r SPCC i s 0 . Compound 3/19/97, Calibration Date: 6/23/97, Laboratory ID: >0*012 TF RF i f f CCC Til 09:56 2-Fluorophenol Phenol*d5 Phenol bisC-2-Chloroethyl)Ether 2-Chlorophenol 1.3- Diehlorobenzene 1.4- Dichlorobenzene Benzyl alcohol 1,2-0 i ehlorobenzene 2-M ethylphenol b is (2-C h\oroisopropyl)ether 4-M ethylphenol N -N itroso-D i-n-propylamine H exach lo ro eth an e N itrobenzene-d5 N itrobenzene Isophorone 2-N itrophenol 2 .4 - Dimethylphenol b is (2 -Chloroethoxyjm ethane 2 .4 - D ichtorophenol 1 .2 .6 - Trichlorobenzene N ap h th alen e 4-C hloroaniline Hexachlorobutadi ene --4-Chtoro-3-inethyt phenol 2-M ethyInaphthalene H exachlorocyclopentad iene 2 .4 .6 - Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-T richlorophenol 2-C nloronaphthaiene 2 -Fluorobiphenyl 2- N itroaniline D iniethylphthalate A cenaphthylene 3- N itroaniline A cen ap h th en e 2 .4 - D initrophenol 4 - N itrophenol D ibenzofuran 2 .6 - D initrotoluene 2.4- D initrotoluene D iethylphthalate 4 -Chlorophenyl-phenyl eth er Fluorene 4-Nitroaniline 4.6- Dinitro-2-methylphenol N-Ni trosodi phenylamine 2.4.6- Tribromophenol 4-Bromophenyl-phenytether Hexachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenanthrene Anthracene C arb azo le D i-n -b u ty lp h th alate F lu o ra n th e n e Pyrene Terphenyl-d14 B utyibenzylphthalate 3 , 3 1-D i c h io ro b e n z i d in e Benzolalanthracene BisC2-EthyIhexylIphthalate Chrysene D i-n-octytphthalate Benzol b )flu o ran th en e Benzolk) flu o ran th en e Benzol aJpyrene Indeno1 1 ,2 .3 -cd)pyrene D ibenzola,h)anthracene Benzol q . h . i ) p e r y lene________ 1.20975 1.22963 1.80459 1.68707 1.93444 1.73808 1.42752 1.44079 1.31239 1.28532 1.44941 1.36572 1.42192 1.30422 1.55262 1.38678 1.23133 1.28610 1.33852 1.38525 3.39264 2.94554 1.23702 1.23338 1.76630 1.45815 .45669 .44436 .42535 .44544 .41133 .38070 .88073 .81283 .21940 .21293 .29800 .28576 .46104 .44764 .27946 .26215 .27129 .28877 .92490 .92432 .44851 .44109 .16262 .15055 .40325 .39649 .58863 .64473 .28924 .27340 .36294 .40439 .36807 .39379 .93270 1.16838 1.08705 1.21505 .51749 .61099 1.27857 1.49617 1.81461 2.21132 .64501 .72648 1.47210 1.76356 .27097 .28342 .42928 .45032 1.49088 1.78813 .36242 .40207 .54305 .56554 1.51342 1.80005 .73698 .81018 1.09456 1.33913 .51779 .55196 .24826 .27212 .61264 .75572 .11855 .09798 .20500 .19763 .23021 .21141 .18215 .15280 1.00764 1.14260 .99413 1.13920 1.07711 1.27368 1.49769 1.64525 1.19621 1.26268 1.63886 1.63842 1.12147 1.06789 .90883 1.01518 .46439 .45770 1.44888 1.53973 1.23707 1.39734 1.30838 1.35093 1.82856 2.28173 1.31121 1.55105 1.00380 1.10526 1.07203 1.17627 1.02199 1.23337 .95281 1.07207 .90820 1.12462 1.64 6.51 10.15 .93 2.06 5.77 8.28 10.68 4.45 3.49 13.18 .29 17.45 2.70 4.72 7.45 7.71 2.95 4.11 2.91 6.19 6.44 .06 1.65 7.42 1.68 9.53 5.47 11.42 6.99 25.27 11.78 18.07 17.02 21.86 12.63 19.80 4.60 4.90 19.94 10.94 4.14 18.94 9.93 22.34 6.60 9.61 23.35 17.35 3.60 8.16 16.11 13.39 14.59 18.25 9.85 5.56 .03 4.78 11.70 1.44 6.27 12.96 3.25 24.78 18.29 10.11 9.72 20.68 12.52 23.83 * * * * * RF - R esponse F a c to r f r om d a i l y a ta n d a rd f i l e a t 5 0 .0 0 jtg/mL, X D iff - ^ D iff e re n c e from o r i g i n a l a v e ra g e o r c u rv e ET - A verage R esponse F a c to r from I n i t i a l C a li b r a ti o n , CCC - C a li b r a ti o n Check Compounds ( ) , SPCC System P erfo rm an ce Check Compounds 1**1 r73\D EL \A R \9?0f\D R YRUNAR OOICj 000263 USFW 0839 Table (Cont) 2.12 Result* of the Continuing C alib ra tion s for SNA UA # 2*273 Dry Run Creole S ite I n itia l C a lib ra tio n Date: 3/1 9 /9 7 , C a lib ra tio n Date: 6/24/97, Tia In t t rim ent ID: 888632, L a b o ra to ry ID: rDR026, M inisun RF f o r SPCC is 0 .0 5 Maximum X D iff f o r CCC i s 2 5 .OX 12:28 Compound TTF RF XDiff CCC SPCC 2-Fluorophenol Phenol-d5 Phenol bi*(-2-C hloro*thyl)E ther 2-C h lo ro p h en o l 1.3- Diehlorobenzene 1.4- Di eh l orobenzene Benzyl alcohol 1,2 *6i ehlorobenzene 2-Methylphenol bisC 2-C hloroisopropyl)ether 4-M ethylphenol N -N itroso-D i-n-propylam ine H exachloroeth an e N itrobenzene-^ N itrobenzene lsophorone 2-N itrophenol 2 .4 - Dimethylphenol bis(2-ChloroethoxY )m ethane 2 .4 - Dichlorophenol 1 ,2 .4 - Tr i eh lo ro b en zen e N aphthalene 4-C hloroaniline Hexachlorobutad iene -4- Ch t o r o- 3 -m ethy l pheno l 2-M ethylnaphthalene Hexach l orocyc l opent ad i ene 2 .4 .6 - Trichlorophenol 2,4.5-T richlorophenol 2- Ch loronaph th a l ene 2 -F lu o ro b ip h e n y l 2- N itroaniline D im ethylphthalate A cen ap h th y len e 3 - N itroam line A cenaphthene 2 .4 - D initrophenol 4 - N itrophenol D ibenzofuran 2 .6 - Din itro to lu e n e 2 .4 - D initrotoluene D iethylphthalate 4-C hlorophenyl-phenylether Fluorene 4 -Ni t r o a n i l i n e 4 .6 - Dini tr o - 2-m ethylphenol N -Nitrosodiphenylam ine 2 .4 .6 - Tribromophenol 4-Brom ophenyl-phenylether H ex achlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenanthrene A nthracene C arb azo le Di-n -b u ty lp h th alate Fluoranthene Pyrene Terphenyl-d14 B utylbenzylphthalate 3 ,3 '-D ichlorobenzidine Benzol alan th racen e Bi s ( 2 - E th y lh e x y l) p h th a la te Chrysene D i-n -o cty lp h th alate B enzolblfluoranlhene B en zo lk )flu o ran th en e Benzol aIpyrene In o e n o l1,2 .3 -c d )p y re n e Dibenzol a,rO antnracene B e n z o lq .h . iI p e ry le n e ________ 1.20975 1.27444 1.80459 1.80980 1.93444 1.89915 1.42752 1.50455 1.31239 1.33825 1.44941 1.39527 1.42192 1.47277 1.55262 1.48055 1.23133 1.35409 1.33852 1.37011 3.39264 3.11004 1.23702 1.31663 1.76630 1.58900 .45669 .45729 .42535 .44323 .41133 .41795 .88073 .78872 .21940 .24384 .29800 .32598 .46104 .46863 .27946 .27692 .27129 .28484 .92490 .93824 .44851 .45801 .16262 .15271 .40325 .39249 .58863 .63020 .28924 .26530 .36294 .41459 .36807 .38320 .93270 1.11291 1.08705 1.29001 .51749 .57242 1.27857 1.48175 1.81461 2.08742 .64501 .68109 1.47210 1.77332 .27097 .33669 .42928 .45798 1.49088 1.70648 .36242 .40774 .54305 .57179 1.51342 1.91338 .73698 .78153 1.09456 1.25267 .51779 .55295 .24826 .27072 .61264 .71161 .11855 .10056 .20500 .18784 .23021 .20292 .18215 .15840 1.00764 1.14538 .99413 1.121B3 1.07711 1.17950 1.49769 1.62965 1.19621 1.22143 1.63886 1.55073 1.12147 .95866 .90883 .95902 .46439 .43915 1.44888 1.38408 1.23707 1.25115 1.30838 1.30669 1.82856 2.22931 1.31121 1.38994 1.00380 1.22970 1.07203 1.20923 1.02199 1.26954 .95281 1.12602 .90820 1.15663 5.35 .29 1.82 5.40 1.97 3.74 3.58 4.64 9.97 2.36 8.33 6.44 10.04 .13 4,20 1.61 10.45 11.14 9.39 1.65 .91 4.99 1.44 2.12 6.10 2.67 7.06 8.27 14.23 4.11 19.32 18.67 10.61 15.89 15.03 5.59 20.46 24.25 6.69 14.46 12.50 5.29 26.43 6.04 14.45 6.79 9.05 16.15 15.18 8.37 11.85 13.04 13.67 12.85 9.51 8.81 2.11 5.38 14.52 5.52 5.44 4.47 1.14 .13 21.92 6.00 22.50 12.80 24.22 18.18 27.35 * * * * ** * * * RF - R esponse F a c to r from d a il y s ta n d a rd f i l e a t 5 0 .0 0 jig /m l, XDiff - X D iffe re n c e from o r i g i n a l a v e ra g e o r c u rv e R7 - Average R esponse F a c to r from I n i t i a l C a li b r a ti o n , CCC - C a li b r a ti o n Check Compounds {*) SPCC - System P erform ance Check Compounds (**) ` 2 2 7 3 \D E L \A R \9 70 H D R Y R U N A R U 1C 000264 USFW 0840 Table (Cent) 2.12 Results of the Continuing Calibrations fo r BNA UA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site I n it ia l Calibration Date: 3/19/97, C alibration Date: 6/25/97, Tine: 11:3* 1 nstrlinent ID: 866632, Laboratory ID: *>8040, . Minisun RF for SPCC is 0.05, Maxisun X D iff for CCC is 25.0% Compound r t RF i f f CCC 2-Fluorophenol Phenol-CD Phenol bi s(-2-ChloroethylJEther 2-Chlorophenol 1.3- Dich1orobenzene 1, *-Dichlorobenzene Benzyl alcohol 1,2-Di chlorobenzene b2-isM(et2h-yClhplhoernooislopropyl)ether 4-Methylphenol N-Nitroso-Di-n-propylamine Hexachloroethane Nitrobenzene-d5 Nitrobenzene Isophorone 2-Nitrophenol 2, *-Dimethylphenol bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 2,*-Dichlorophenol 1,2,*-Trichlorobenzene Naphthalene *-Chloroaniline Hexachlorobutadiene 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol - 2-Methylnaphthalene Hexachlorocyclopentadi ene 2.4.6- Trichlorophenol 2,4.5-Trichlorophenol 2-Chloronaphthalene 2-Fluorobiphenyl 2-Nitroaniiine Dimethvlphthalate Acenaphthylene 3- Nitroam line Acenaphthene 2.4-Dinitrophenol *-Nitrophenol Dibenzofuran 2.6- Dini trotoluene 2.4-Oim'trotoluene Diethylphthalate *-Chlorophenyl-phenyl ether Fluorene 4- Nitroaniline * ,6-Dini tro-2-methyl phenol N-Ni trosodiphenyl amine 2.4.6- 1ribromophenol 4-Bromophenyl-phenylether Hexachloropenzene Pentachloropheno t Phenanthrene Anthracene Carba2 ole Di -n-butvlphthalate F lu o ra n th e n e Pyrene Terphenyl -dl4 Butylbenzylphthalate 3,3'-Oichlorobenzidine Benzol a)anthracene Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate Chrysene Di-n-octylohthalate Benzoic)fluorantnene Benzolx)fluorantnene Benzola)pyrene lnoenol1,2,3 -cd)pyrene D tbenzol a,h)anthracene Benzolq.h .l)perylene_______ 1.20975 1.35891 1.80659 1.81203 1.93*** 1.93910 1.62752 1.61307 1.31239 1.50103 1.669*1 1.48655 1.62192 1.55821 1.55262 1.55371 1.23133 1.31410 1.33852 1.41009 3.39266 3.23293 1.23702 1.39811 1.76630 1.57433 .65669 .46959 .62535 .39912 .61133 .40632 .88073 .80418 .21960 .20647 .29800 .29327 .66106 .46986 .27966 .27858 .27129 .27275 .92690 .97834 .66851 .44226 .16262 .13106 .40325 .41625 .58863 .62945 .28924 .25613 .36294 .34177 .36807 .37652 .93270 1.04607 1.08705 1.15452 .51749 .57722 1.27857 1.38036 1.81461 1.97436 .64501 .71851 1.47210 1.58181 .27097 .30081 .42928 .44487 1.49088 1.57357 .36242 .38558 .54305 .53526 1.51342 1.81225 .73698 .71849 1.09456 1.16631 .51779 .51694 .24826 .27051 .61264 .69299 .11855 .10690 .20500 .19066 .23021 .17794 .18215 .15736 1.00764 1.13873 .99413 1.10774 1.07711 1.23120 1.49769 1.66991 1.19621 1.27349 1.63886 1.59363 1.12147 1.01051 .90883 .99728 .46439 .46492 1.44888 1.38837 1.23707 1.40332 1.30838 1.34932 1.82856 2.41020 1.31121 1.44829 1.00380 1.04394 1.07203 1.17285 1.02199 1.12060 .95281 1.08018 .90820 1.09607 12.33 .41 .24 13.00 14.37 2.56 9.58 .07 6.72 5.35 4.71 13.02 10.87 2.83 6 .1 7 1.22 8.69 5.89 1.59 1.91 .31 .54 5.78 1.39 19.41 3.22 6.93 11.45 5.83 2.30 12.15 6.21 11.54 7.96 8.80 11.39 7.45 11.01 3.63 5.55 6.39 1.43 19.74 2.51 6.56 .16 8.96 13.11 9.83 7.00 22.70 13.61 13.01 11.43 14.31 11.50 6.46 2.76 9.89 9.73 .11 4.18 13.44 3.13 31.81 10.45 4.00 9.41 9.65 13.37 20.69 * * RF - R esponse F a c to r from o a i l y s ta n d a r d f i l e a t 5 0 .0 0 RT - A verage R esponse F a c to r from I n i t i a l C a li b r a ti o n , SPCC - System Performance Check Compounds (**) i f f - i f f e r e n e e from o r ig in a l average o r curve CCC - C a li b r a ti o n Check Conoounds (* ) * Z 2T 3 \D E L \A R \9 70 i\O R Y R U N A R 001C7 000265 USFW 0841 Table (Coot) Z.12 Raaults of the Continuing Calibrations fo r SNA UA i 2*273 Dry Run Creek Site I n it ia l Calibration Oate: 3/19/97, Calibration Date: 6/30/97, Time: 09:31 Instrument ID: 888632, Laboratory ID: >CR0Q0, Minisun RF for SPCC is 0.05, Maximum X Di f f for CCC is 25.OX Compound TT RF XDiff CCC 2-Fluorophenol 1.20975 1.33574 Phenol*d5 1.80459 1.90706 Phenol 1.93444 2.02916 bi s(*2*Chloroethyl)Ether 1.42752 1.58016 2-Chlorophenol 1.31239 1.47170 1.3- Diehlorobeniene 1.44941 1.52598 1.4-Dichlorobenzene 1.42192 1.61652 Benzyl alcohol 1.55262 1.51544 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1.23133 1.38754 2-M ethylphenol 1.33852 1.44233 bis(2-Chioroisopropyl)ether 3.39264 3.04168 4-Hethylphenol 1.23702 1.35204 N-Ni trpso-Di - n - propyl online 1.76630 1.53881 Hexachl oroethane .45669 .49279 Ni trobenzene-d5 .42535 .42638 Nitrobenzene .41133 .40631 Isophorone .88073 .79132 2-Nitrophenol .21940 .23328 2 .4 - Dimethylphenol .29800 .30833 bis(2-Chloroethoxy)m ethane .46104 .48563 2 .4 - Dichlorophenol .27946 .28161 1 .2 .4 - Trichlorobenzene .27129 .29072 N aphthalene .92490 .99725 4-C hloroaniline .44851 .45969 Hexachlorobutadi ene .16262 .14203 4-Chloro-3-m ethylphenol ' .40325 .41642 -2-M ethylnaphthalene .58863 .63663 H exachlorocyclopentadi ene .28924 .22456 2 .4 .6 - Trichlorophenol .36294 .34031 2 .4 .5 - Trichlorophenol .36807 .37893 2 -C n to ro n ap h th alen e .93270 .98555 2-Fluorobiphenyl 1.08705 1.12286 2-N itroanilir>e .51749 .54738 D im ethylphthalate 1.27857 1.39845 A cenaphthylene 1.81461 2.00246 3 - N itroam l ine .64501 .65897 A cen ap h th en e 1.47210 1.51617 2.4- Dinitrophenol .27097 .26065 4- Nitrophenol .42928 .41935 Dibenzofuran 1.49088 1.55756 2.6- Dinitrotoluene .36242 .37400 2.4-Dinitrotoluene .54305 .51631 Diethylphthalate 1.51342 1.73292 4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether .73698 .74983 Fluorene 1.09456 1.19738 4-Nitroaniline .51779 .53444 4.6- D ini tro-2-methyl phenol .24826 .26120 N-Ni trosodi phenyl amine .61264 .73905 2.4.6- Tribromophenol .11855 .10353 4 -Bromophenyl-phenylether .20500 .17728 Hexachiorobenzene .23021 .21075 Pentachlorophenol .18215 .14803 Phenanthrene 1.00764 1.05987 Anthracene .99413 1.16777 Carbazole 1.07711 1.26796 Di-n-butylphthalate 1.49769 1.68780 Fluoranthene 1.19621 1.39232 Pyrene 1.63886 1.48143 Terphenyl-d14 1.12147 1.02003 Butylbenzylphthalate .90883 .99259 3,3`-Dichlorobenzidine .46439 .42637 Benzof a)anthracene 1.44888 1.44059 Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 1.23707 1.42330 Chrysene 1.30838 1.27781 Di-n-octylphthalate 1.82856 2.18130 Benzolblfluoranthene 1.31121 1.26492 Benz oik)f luoranthene 1.00380 1.23298 Benzol a )pyrene 1.07203 1.17754 Inaenol1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1.02199 1.11373 0 ibenzol a,h)anthracene .95281 1.04929 Benzolc,h .i)pervlene_______ .90820 1.02209 10.41 5.68 4.90 10.69 12.14 5.28 13.69 2.39 12.69 7.76 10.34 9.30 12.88 7.91 .24 1.22 10.15 6.33 3.47 5.33 .77 7.16 7.82 2.49 12.66 3.27 8.15 22.36 6.24 2.95 5.67 3.29 5.78 9.38 10.35 2.16 2.99 3.81 2.31 4.47 3.20 4.92 14.50 1.74 9.39 3.22 5.21 20.63 12.67 13.52 8.45 18.73 5.18 17.47 17.72 12.69 16.39 9.61 9.05 9.22 8.19 .57 15.05 2.34 19.29 3.53 22.83 9.84 8.98 10.13 12.54 * * * * * RF - R esponse F a c to r from d a il y s ta n d a rd f i l e a t 5 0 .0 0 M9/mL, XDiff - X D iffe re n c e from o r i g i n a l a v e ra g e o r c u rv e RT A verage R esponse F a c to r from i n i t i a l C a li b r a ti o n , CCC - C a li b r a ti o n Check Compounds ( * ) , SPCC System Performance Check Compounds (*) 2273\DEL\AR\970i\DR YRUNAR 00158 000266 USFW 0842 QA/QC for Pesddde/PCB Results o f the Surrogate Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Water The Surrogate percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.13, ranged from 42 to 16?. Twelve out o f 20 recoveries are within limits. Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in boil The surrogate percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.14, ranged from 27 to 98. Thirty-seven out of 54 recoveries are with-' QC limits. Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Water Water sample 00201F was chosen for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analysis. The percent recoverii . listed in Table 2.15, ranged from 98 to 160. Seven out o f 12 recoveries are within QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.15, ranged from six to 17. All 6 RPD values are within QC limits. Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Soil Soil samples 503B and 303E were chosen for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analyses. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.16, ranged from 5 to 104. Nineteen out of 24 recoveries are within QC limits. The relativ percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.16, ranged from zero (0) to 85. Ten out o f 12 RPD values are within QC limits. 2Z73\DEL\AR\97W\DR YRUNAR 00133 000267 USFW 0843 Table 2.13 Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Water WA#2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample ID WBLK 061497 00201 F 00200 F 00206 F 00204 F 00205 F 00203 F 00202 F 00201 F MS 00201 F MSD Percent Recovery TCMX DCBP 93 42 * 86 160 * 80 138 90 157 * 88 169 * 82 146 88 166 * 81 152 * 80 154 * 84 156 * Tetrachloro-m-xylene (TCMX) Decachlorobiphenyl (DCBP) ADVISORY QC Limits 60-150 60-150 2273\DEL\AR\9708\drypestw 00160 000268 USFW 0844 Table 2.14 Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Soil WA#2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample ID Percent Recovery TCMX DCBP SBLK 061797 512 B 513 B 514 B 500 B 501 B 502 B 503 B 503 B MS 503 B MSD 304 E 305 E 306 E 508 B 509 B 510 B 511 B 506 B 507 B 504 B 505 B 300 E 301 E 302 E 303 E 303 E MS 303 E MSD 98 59 * 93 72 84 64 82 64 85 67 79 54 * 92 67 84 55 * 88 60 86 55 * 95 60 83 63 88 49 * 84 44 * 83 36 * 78 34 * 83 33 * 93 42 * 84 88 37 * 83 27 * 82 31 * 82 34 * 81 38 * 94 61 98 59 95 62 Tetrachloro-m-xylene (TCMX) Decachlorobiphenyl (DCBP) ADVISORY QC Lim its 60-150 60-150 * m00 000269 Z273\DELWR\S708\DRYPESTS 09161 USFW 0845 Table 2.15 Results of the M S/M SD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Water WA#2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample ID: 00201 F Compound Sample Cone (mq/l ) MS Spike Added (M9/L) MS Cone (pg/L) MS % Ree MSD Spike Added (M9/L) MSD Cone (p g /L ) MSD % Ree RPD Advisory Q C Limits % Ree RPD g-BHC Heptachlor Aldrin Dieldrin Endrin . p.p'-DDT U 0.125 0.131 U 0.125 0.126 u 0.125 0.123 u 0.250 0.302 u 0.250 0.380 u 0.250 0.331 105 101 98 121 152 * 132 * 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.139 0.147 0.146 0.319 0.400 0.352 111 118 117 128 * 160 * 141 * 6 56-123 15 40-131 17 40-120 5 52-126 5 56-121 6 38-127 15 20 22 18 21 27 2273\D E L \A R \9 7 0 8 \t;y p es!w o o ig .<: 000270 USFW 0846 Table 2.16 Results of the M S/M SD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Soil WA#2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry-Weight Sam ple ID: 503 B Compound Sample Cone (pg/kg) MS Spike Added (jjg/kg) MS Cone (pg/kg) MS % Ree MSD Spike Added (pg/kg) MSD Cone (pg/kg) MSD % Ree RPD Advisory Q C Limits % Ree R PD g-BHC Heptachlor Aldrin Dieldrin Endrin p,p'-DDT U 27.814 7.400 U 27.814 21.000 U 27.814 19.000 U 55.629 36.000 U 55.629 47.000 U 55.629 7.200 27 * 76 68 65 84 13 * 27.814 27.814 27.814 55.629 55.629 55.629 5.800 22.000 22.000 39.000 51.000 2.900 21 * 79 79 70 92 5* 24 5 15 8 8 85 * 46-127 35-130 34-132 31-134 42-139 23-134 50 31 43 38 45 50 " Sam ple ID: 303 E Compound Sample Cone (pg/kg) MS Spike Added (pg/kg) MS Cone (pg/kg) MS % Ree MSD Spike Added (pg/kg) MSD Cone (pg/kg) MSD % Ree RPD Advisory Q C Limits % Ree RPD g-BHC Heptachlor Aldrin Dieldrin Endrin p.p'-DDT U 25.393 21.000 U 25.393 23.000 U 25.393 20.000 U 50.786 41.000 U 50.786 51.000 U 50.786 5.900 83 91 79 81 100 12 * 25.393 25.393 25.393 50.786 50.786 50.786 21.000 23.000 20.000 42.000 53.000 13.000 83 91 79 83 104 26 0 46-127 0 35-130 0 34-132 2 31-134 4 42-139 75 23-134 50 31 43 38 45 50 2273\OEL\AR\970B\DRYPESTS 00163 000271 USFW 0847 QA/QC for TAL Metals Results of the QC Standard Analysis for TAL Metals in Water The QC standards ERA-431, QC-7xl00, QC-21xlOO, TMWS, TMMA#1 and TMMA#2 were used to check the accuracy ol the calibration curves. The percent recoveries for the compounds found in the QC standards listed in Table 2.17, ranged from 87 to 104. There are 95% confidence interval limits available for 25 o f the 42 concentration recoveries. All 25 concentration recoveries are within the limits. There are no 95% confidence interval limits available for the remaining seventeen recoveries. Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for TAL Metals in Water Samples 00201B, 00201A, and 216B were chosen for matrix spike/manix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.18, ranged from 80 to 104. All 114 recoveries were within the QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.19, ranged from 0 to 22. Fifty-six out of 57 RPDs were within the QC limits. Results of the Blank Spike Analysis for TAL Metals in Water The percent recoveries for the blank spike compounds, listed in Table 2.19, ranged from 81 to 109. All 46 recoveries wen within the QC limits. 6 :: 7 3 \D E U A R \9 7 0 T .D R Y R U N A R 01G4 000272 USFW 0848 Tabla 2.17 Results ef the Q C Standard Analysis fer T A L Melis kt W ah r W A S 2-273 Dry Run Creek Sits Matal Data Analyzed Quality Control Standard Cone. Recovered MOIf- Aluminum Antimony Artanic Barium Baryllium Cadmium Calcium 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/16/97 06/25/97 06/16/97 06/19/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 Chromium Cobalt Coppar Iron Laad Magnesium 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/19/97 06/17/97 Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/13/97 06/18/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 Selenium Silver Sodium 06/16/97 06/19/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 Thallium Vanadium Zinc 06/16/97 06/20/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 06/17/97 007x100 ERA-431 TMAAS2 TMAAS2 TMAAS1 TMAAS1 007x100 ERA-431 0 0 2 1 X100 ERA-431 0 0 2 1 x100 ERA-431 0 0 2 1 x100 0 0 2 1 xlOO ERA-431 0 0 2 1 xlOO ERA-431 0 0 2 1 x100 ERA-431 0 0 2 1 xlOO ERA-431 TMAAS1 TMAAA1 QC-21 x100 QC-21 x100 ERA-431 TMWS TMWS QC-21 x100 ERA-431 QC-7 x100 TMAA #1 TMAA #1 007x100 ERA-431 QC-7 x100 TMAA *2 TMAA#2 0 0 2 1 x100 ERA-431 QC-21 x100 ERA-431 992 443 91.51 95.8 50.5 51.4 1002 405 1015 105 1005 82 1017 1028 540 1023 464 1011 211 1024 693 49.5 48.8 973 1026 522 2.7 2.6 1044 96 9191 48.9 50.5 1003 64 979 47 50.2 1007 339 1006 432 Certified Vala P9/L 1000 441 100 100 50 50 1000 406 1000 103 1000 82 1000 1000 529 1000 447 1000 208 1000 676 50 50 1000 1000 518 3.00 3.00 1000 94 10000 50 50 1000 65 1000 50 50 1000 338 1000 424 95% Confidence Interval NA 362 - 520 81.65-125.67 61.65-125.67 41.9-55.9 41.9-55.9 NA 333-479 NA 85-122 NA 67-97 NA NA 434 - 624 NA 367 - 527 NA 171 -245 NA 554 - 798 43.4 - 56.3 43.4 - 56.3 NA NA 425 - 611 2.21 - 3.65 2.21 -3.65 NA 77-111 NA 39.4-57.4 39.4-57.4 NA 53-76 NA 39.9-57.97 39.9-57.97 NA 277 - 399 NA 348 - 500 % Recovery 99 100 92 96 101 103 100 100 102 102 101 100 102 103 102 102 104 101 101 102 103 69 98 97 103 101 90 87 104 102 92 98 101 100 98 98 94 100 101 100 101 102 2273\DELVAR\9708\DRYTALW 0015 000273 USFW Tabi* 2.18 R am iti althe M S/M SD A ra fy tor TAL Metals in W b W A# 2-273 Dry Run Crack S ili Metal Client# Aluminum 00201B 00201A 2168 Sample Original Cone. Cone. Spike Dup. (iBfl- van. van. 26.7 4444 299 4444 116 4444 4444 4444 4444 Recovered Cene. Spike Dup. van. van. 4241 4481 4250 4218 4563 4203 % Recovery -Spike Dup. 95 94 94 96 93 92 Antimony Arsenic Barium 00201B 00201A 216B 00201B 00201A 216B 00201B 00201A 216B 0.41 55.6 0.9 55.6 1.6 55.6 0.3 55.6 0.3 55.6 0.7 55.6 45.7 556 51.7 556 110 556 55.6 55.6 55.6 55.6 55.6 55.6 556 556 556 50.8 502 51.7 505 53.1 53.1 57.7 572 58.3 582 55.4 55.6 576 574 560 571 633 621 91 90 91 89 93 93 103 102 104 104 98 99 96 95 91 93 94 92 Baryllium 00201B 00201A 216B U 222 U 222 0.1 222 222 222 222 219 219 210 215 217 214 99 99 95 97 98 96 Cadmium 00201B 00201A 216B U 222 u 222 u 222 222 222 222 211 212 206 210 211 208 95 95 94 95 95 94 Chromium 00201B 00201A 216B 3.3 222 2.8 222 U 222 222 222 222 219 219 215 221 219 216 97 97 95 98 99 97 Cobalt 00201B 00201A 216B 1.8 222 1.9 222 U 222 222 222 222 217 217 215 220 218 216 97 97 96 98 98 97 Copper 00201B 00201A 216B 20.2 222 6.3 222 25.2 222 222 222 222 232 230 207 212 235 232 95 94 90 93 94 93 Iron 00201B 18.7 4444 4444 4359 4340 00201A 433 4444 4444 4764 4610 216B 77 4444 4369 4307 98 97 97 98 97 95 Lead 00201B 00201A 216B 0.9 55.6 U 55 6 2.6 55.6 55.6 556 55.6 562 57.1 54.9 544 54 8 56.8 100 101 99 98 94 98 Manganese 00201B 00201A 216B 252 222 51 4 222 13 1 222 222 222 222 240 240 262 267 229 225 97 97 95 97 97 95 Mercury 00201B 00201A 216B 0 1 2.00 0 1 2.00 U 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.0 2.0 1.7 2.1 2.0 1.9 95 95 80 100 100 95 Nickel 0020IB 00201A 216B 5.6 222 U 222 U 222 222 222 222 219 218 216 219 220 217 96 96 97 99 99 98 Selenium 00201B 00201A 216B 0 1 556 0 9 55 6 0 8 556 55.6 55.6 55.6 51 51.8 50.3 49.3 50.9 51.7 92 93 89 87 90 92 Silve' 0C20IB 00201A 216B U 222 11 222 U 222 222 222 222 206 207 200 206 204 203 93 93 90 92 92 91 Tnailium Vanadium 00201B 00201A 216B 00201B 00201A 216B 0 3 55 6 0 9 55 6 0 6 55 6 0 9 556 1.3 556 U 556 55 6 55 6 55.6 556 556 556 56 8 566 57 1 569 50.6 52.2 536 537 521 534 533 525 102 101 101 101 90 93 97 96 94 96 96 95 Zinc 00201B 00201A 216B I273\DEL\AR\9708\DRrTALW 53 4 222 18.3 222 38 2 222 222 222 222 251 251 209 211 232 228 00106 89 86 87 89 87 85 RPD Recommended Limit R e e RPD 1 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 3 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 4 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 0 22 * 5 75-125 75-125 75-125 20 20 20 0 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 3 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 3 75-125 20 0 75-125 20 2 75-125 2 75-125 2 S 0 0 0 2 7 4 0 75-125 20 1 75-125 20 2 75-125 20 USFW 0850 Mats! Tabi* 2.IB Result* of the B la i* Space A naiyto far T A L M a lto in W ater W A 1 2-273 Dry Run Croak Ska Spiked Cane. pg/L Recovered Cone. pg/L % Recovery Rtcomnwndtd Limit Aluminum Antimony Araenic Barium Baryilium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Coppar Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassiu m Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 4444 55.6 55.6 556 222 222 4444 222 222 222 4444 55.6 4444 222 2.00 222 4444 55.6 222 m j\ 55.6 556 222 4200 56.7 57.1 529 219 211 4253 218 219 216 4336 57.0 4224 217 2.00 218 3936 60.8 209 4143 57.6 539 211 95 102 103 95 99 95 96 98 99 98 96 103 95 98 100 98 89 109 94 93 104 97 95 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 2273\DEl\AR\9708\DRYTALW 00167 000275 USFW 0851 M atai Tabla 2.19 (Ceri) R n u its of tha Blank Spika Analysis lor TAL M atait in Water W A S 2-273 Dry Run Creek Ska Spiked Cone. W/L Recovered Cone. mb/ l % Recovery Recom m ended Lim it Alum inum Antim ony A rse n ic Barium Baryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 4444 55.6 55.6 556 222 222 4444 222 222 222 55.6 4444 222 2.00 222 4444 55.6 222 4444 55,6 556 222 4074 52.9 56.3 513 213 210 4230 216 219 208 4285 52.3 4090 214 2.00 216 3591 56.3 202 3976 56.0 528 218 92 95 101 92 96 95 95 97 99 94 96 94 92 96 100 97 61 101 91 69 101 95 98 75-125 75-125 r e -125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75-125 75125 75125 22?3\DEL\AR\9708\DRYT ALW 00168 000276 USFW 0852 Section 3 000277 USFW 0853 REAC, Edison, NJ CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD U S F W 08b^ (008) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 Project Name: friCU Project Number R FW Contact: UittfL O A o t ___ Phone: 3 2 1 - 4 v d & No: 0732 SH E E T NO. ( OF / O h l* -V Sample Identification Analyses Requested SampteNo. Sampling Location Matrix Data Collactad 0 of Bottiaa Contalnar/Praaarvativa # : l iLC nrM Q O A lA Q fl2 lfl. Q30I ft oaaot fide* t C ui k \ i m oJ I d L1112[9 l t)| g)3 1 l(nL. JL IS fitted 35! 4*C~ . IS 2Q1 OQPQl ra a a l.W < i22 X 2L=_ _M a. A g*A & e .M ' M & A fiS k. J J&L JL M. j llf ie lio ) Ig.jia.lA M im l jZ . latterr.&cL. Ifrvrrtfr YC ISom htr /4* Sivrnft*s~l 4 JC - )4 r IJ L . -- Ml X_ m ano <2CJ Lte c i E tC * L ti.C & ifc . i z.c e .e e iiL iM . M. io W_ b | io | Q ^ k j | Q jAA- b \ o\<lr alio]*}!- A. l i '( U n b t^ l*}"'0- JL. JL XL C&LQQr. Lr t e C . t . L a L A fle a M. 4 L3l IJPfAdj \X Matita: SODS OL X- Sediment DrumSolid DrumLiquid Olhar PJLKM*- 7 )0 ^ PW- GWSW - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water S- WO- Soil Water Oil Special Instructions: TEC ^J-\ f t ~ T LiH rU H f 1 ' SL - Sludge A - Air H 5 ) l M S b 0J M - ^JUfiAtcL L Jr __ u n i f ) 3L4te^iA#2- n T ^ -dL--^o o y SM f 3 frjjkd pid/u>*'t- FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY Ff(6m CHAIN OF i f CUSTODY # 1 Itonii/Rcuon Relinquished By Data ii f!V i!ft W M ilfzE l!M i,S y Received By rtfC X u to e Date AVp * fffu lU k /Wf7 ftq /yu ------- r r n Time I Items/Reason U to I ftLC diM-yl'S 31HD I _ _ l_ 7 Relinquished By M ilt- Dale W '/</; Heceived By Dale Time 00021 3 -- 8/94 REA C, Edison, NJ (008) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 fcriAIN U rr UCLrroarvruOmDV niJCC.W Project Name:__________ Project Number______ _______ R F W Contact Phone: Samle Identification USFW 0855 No: 07708 SHEET NoS^OF_2L A\naalljyses Requested ^ RQ SO OS OL X- Sediment DrumSolide DrumLiquids Other ERM CHAIN OF CUSTODY U > i Jy s , Mems/Reason Rellnquiehe^By M vm t S yaL V ^ X i Y\U 3 V 0/f ' a ir ( f 3 fa/itifsfi h O f ! Date Received By Date Time j UpmsSReason /UM? 6/m i Ch Mft \, f i v \ i U k________ mn t (,(;{, //'*> d:So JT J )8fl .iro c if'< Relinquished By )' c y ' the 11 L vL lV ith-./i v Dale Received By Date Time ?L illi: 'Wit r.. V 'jfe T ^ ~ L t'l ~ X~ T-------------- / '/, i: . / (. U ''-LL Z' H/V4 REAC, Edison, NJ (008) 321-4200 EP A Contract 88-C4-0022 CH^IN OF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name:, 'toy P>Jf\ USFW 0856 Project Number ~z)_____________ _________ No: Ci RFWContact: ~ L lo *Jr>Cr4- _ Phon*? & ? & / Ou SHEET NO. / U * REAC Sample No. E L -Sampling Location Matrix Date Collected #of Bottles Contalner/Preeervatlve 6f&f\ 7C TPU. dOA mv t o g 3noA *-- r D - 0 2 g D <2 r ---- */ r l? (ft V o lA ?>/ / . *r>/ 3 D I 3ol E ^nl *JOl ,r r ? o '2 _ 6 f ' 3o1_7> f ?P%E i _____ ^ Ti Xk>/UjCoyrtO ??>> TV C . TVC t>Y> TVC *QjfC / t'AOjkjj> o G s* a k . 'I fc 15D t>T) tr> t>7) r>o 5> / ^ C aj2a i d v $Y!Z>Fl l i l I / / 7^ // L_________ / d i- U ^ 6* ^ -- 11 6 2 -1 v-3:* 'il'V I -s/^ l C a -n -K 1 / / _/ _ j : _______ \ \ \ ... t \ t 1 / / X t o M BC 4 0 ?-/ 4 _ 4-o2r / ir / 4 c. t o /-*r .3 2 o -2 t o '/ c iV 4 o z , u c ^ M V f t *c ii & S P M e r u it 12o?r M V he* U * c V 4 u A 4 X __ X J> _ uL jL X X X XX J* L JS Li { T V a V * x; X X a i __ tx''__ XX _X SO DS* DL- X Sediment DrumSolide DrumLiquide Other PW- GW- SW- SL - SKI Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge S- w- o- A- SoH Water Oil Air FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY CHAIN OF M U CUSTODY # ' ' NameJReaaoir Relinqulehed By HfSSflS U7i*^2n 3t * l H l!ODILi LHJk ' ' L ( L ' j f M i ' i S ' Date (tit-y* Received By V khhlt 1*11 XUHte^ift A -^ '; Date Time I Items/Reason 6 /r;/n //lr u | ^ I 3M /j 3 : ClIH <2L1A. 1i r o o P \bAcHtH Relinquished By V i t u f't c tt ( ( U t / t/ 1/ t> t ' C ii t ' Ujlu Heceived By Date Time tt. / (/,:< V i r u K ' J n h 7 /S>6> II ! 1 n i M Ci'-r^ w t ~T 1:.------------------ >-'<1. ><,) 1 ' If, . _____ -tri o o o zso > R EA C, Edison, NJ (008) 321-4200 E P A Contract 6B-C4-0022 vi iAIK.VI C L , . JD\ . :cc -- Project Name: D W A d __________________ Project Number: RFWContact: fJn6 WfZAlG. ,___ P h o n e : >`3 2 H 2 0 0 USFW 0857 No: 07716 I IS H E E T NO. OF f l rH O O 80DSDL- X- Sedfmaiil DrumSolid DrumLiquids Othar PWGWsw SL - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge SwoA- Soil Waler Oil Air FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # NemefReason nlLpmdip TItTWVj'jTm'Hf. t .ft. mp t1 Received By Date Time Items/Reason Relinquished By (Ii<? Il C rti-L tW/UyS'S Y i ukh n e- Date Received By Date Time (h/L\{ huf'/o do!?} //0 rORMM J- 1> 0 0 2 8 1 ----- K/<J4 6 II*) I,1) I#*!* JM! Il 1`i r- - 091 1 Kams/Raason Relinquished By m tm r r x & w m m Q ,V a# v.L` Y ojlv^ M c Dala t\7~*>7 Racelvad By ~)LAAto^ t ^AJa Lt X^/ij Data l'tW U ifn Tima /.SO /.1S Itams/Reason Relinquished By Date Received By LITI . 000282 Data Time ,f'Q :jb 1015 REA C, Edison, n j (808) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 Project Number. R F W Contact: ____________ Phone. USFW 0859 No: 07750 SH E E T NO.1 < * X i _ REACf Sample No. ... - . . . . i -- Sampling Location Matrix Date Collected S of Bottiee Container/Preeervatlve _ m ________________ * ^ V fci7 / ' T o C M L XL 0 r' " I f ' ) / i L- En i *> a J . / no r .5 0 0 / 3 cce>. ^Q ") * 5CX>F *nt A Ak T A A csA J T A (Xc^rrpy --rtx id1 2 ___ / f 1 ____ -- V o 2YA ^ C _ U r n / A 'C M Z /a - A c rt/ 4 *C _ _ X _________________ -X ________________ & t / A C ___ XL 3 44JL rm n ntr n? Yt t 777 i n 1A G ol b P ,b t B A> (V /jv r FS A o a-cP > F c c ^ lT C y V c M *_ V X-\______________ JL Tv 'V z r \_ j 5Z j-y -J cV i 9 P> c,rJ2 ! A r* a :rC _ A o T <2 b w ^g rr^ A ? t - _________ z x AC % > .k ~ C 4 *fci*r f 4 C /^ 4 C V X /d S n sf yn/MT> EllJ-- * A " "I W fff A A ^ncA 1 1_________ A to a rA __________________________________________ ZZ \ L 11------------- -- ______C__n__e__r_*__l<_1In**ii/--_ll__-_k___\_a______ Pr* . / A C 0 -iF 1 4 <- Kk/ V %z & / 4 C 1. ^ o X / A ^ _________ K * .X X 80 DS DL X- Sediment DrumSolide DrumLiquide Oilier PW- Potable Water S- Soil GW Groundwater W- Water SW - SurfaceWater o- Oil SL - Sludge A Air 3 d o L pA ^ (fl l (j. FOp SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY l_RM CHAIN OF ec. CUSTODY# , - 00 ' H O O Nema/Reaaon Rellnqulahed By Date __________ M. __ __ A___ *____ Received By m m fia m m m m m ' vimL> ' Y bK*m^ M*/97 y ^ f QDPs'k- mo# n 1/ (//' i/iilW HG+AiYSiLt uxm _ (( U (ft/ U n \i ! // // / ' u m 1, U Vrv vV-Lttr-'v o Date Time 1 Iteme/Raaeon c {tn \ nA H im 01^0 L/lhft] NU 61*7wi !!< " t'fnfr {t tr . Relinquished By fr h e r Dale Received By bhijf) 111 m * y ^ ^ L - _ Date Time 1 /uhi }Ju u s (jj'u iyy<i JHs015 REAC, Edison, NJ (008) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN QF CUSTODY RECORD USFW 0860 Project Name: -- Q r y / Z a r \ . Project Number: ;E 2 2 2 - RFW Contact: A d le * Phone:^ j - % ? ! No: SHEET N09k O Fi REAC Sample No. tzi zfo A V ira fa / 2 it* 211*0 I V L z LfO IL\ 2 S Z Sampling Location Matrix Date Collected ~7>nnanikii 3 U> "Xsnnantlclrll u\ fa te c i7 >-/2-*}9 (a -12 -c* -12 ft eU \sJ ~ 6 - H " 9 7 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / _/ y I SO OS DLX- Sediment DrumSolida DrumLiquid Other PW- Potable Waler S - Soil GW Groundwater W - Water SW- Surface Water O- Oil SL Sludge A- Air #of Bottles 7I y _? a "i Contalner/Preservativo //AnbenM C. /Jbnhssi/ u c *h ! / h<*1Dn.f / * r y' y / / C O U r W f) * Oi ----- ^ ________3 L ___ - J E L . t/>4 X ~x * X -Y * CD {rH O o X \ \ \ X \ --V ---------- A 4k>_______ ^7--------- 1 FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY n Mems/Rsason Relinquished By Date Received By Date r7fZW/F&E 3 1 ______ l{/2k, V a K K M.tr 1 \TftL, TNnfi V 0X U M t7 6/ikH/ yfr l M W [fZ ``W f t _____ LU _____ ^v\; -- ertesi ss Time Items/Reason )/'o\> trCfitr+rfS i > 1 S Relinquished By 'i r K u ^c Date i^eeejv^d By 6 /tiw lUn'L l&'y/ijo A Y aA IA Date Time //^ /7 C/i*l91 V -- O t r 0 2 S 4 --------------- 8/94 R EA C , Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN OF CUSTODY KtCO KU Project Name:_____ ____________________________ Project Numbeerr___ ZZ .l" R F W Contact t i t s UnrTU. Phone: USFW 0861 ~ 3 ? / - 4 2 cjo No: 07752 SH E E T NO. / OF % REAC 17M V < -- Sample No. **)C/a A /*iCt0 fh I^ ClO Wo fz n -A 5c & > -*70*9 C > S rj> O * rs)~ S Sampling Location Matrix 3 ^ T /T A rsflT T T A Ar-< &1A Ar-^rx n r A{ \fs 7i n r t b _ zzr /9 R> AtCSATZZ 3 n r& Date Collected V 1 # ol Bottles ContalnerfPieservatlve ___L___ TM VC . ... p rJ u ^>2 7 ^ - c 5=5 2 p ^ M X f k * / 4 *C . . . __ X___ ..... >c '*7 ^ / A * ' ------- T cZ L .. M - *3*\ iL X Y, 1C X. < \ V \ A\ X. soosDL- X- Sediment OrumSolids DrumLiquids Other PWGWSWSL - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge SwoA- s' s' X Soil Water Oil Air Special Instructions: c o m ic s * _X \ \ \------- s \ V FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROfM CHAIN OF 'hi ^ " A 'W 3 CUSTODY # 1 NempIReason ^Relinquished By n m w m w w M im m T cj) Date Received By V TCm K ^ Date Time Items/Reason /X 2-A/fl E r^ T -To c Relinquished By Dale Received By Date Time Y c X u M tr ;// V f ' f /''**n C\:iS<S> tJ> `J l lUi/O (f ( f t ' >' o // 1/ t ' / ' ( /<).*/ / /{I j X. X ^/?J_ |l<7c l ~ w P/X LH V)i a / // ---- :--------------- A L<------i-'i-.-i-r-**-- ijo. . i.i -.i - i n i K. 8/94 ill ooisi H im s/R taton , x 4U /A n& j? /' Rellmmlahed By 41 WSdtiLockxi Dal* 4/O p R*c*iv*d By y}ibjcft Y* tdU*1yi' Date Tim* I! Itoms/Reason ^ jn A M Uf //CTO * ~3TrTC 6 //V * l h '( ( - N / i^ / c * tro c Relinquished By /t\u h c U (f / tt t* f 1 M, C Dale Received By Date Time ~/i V/ 7 / ( A u u f p ' ^ '-> (,M i jilnhi muo ~~Yt o (ht ht? Lcln C c im i i\ , . j m ____..-_____________ 1 < 000286 ; R EA C, Edison, NJ (008) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHIAAIINNUOKf'.QCUfsrIODV wcCOrtL? Project N am e:_ Project Number. R F W Contact: 'V P j f ^ X - ~- L tits * U n rrx * Phone:' # # - 3 USFW 0863 No: 07754 SH E E T NO. 2 d F '2 - 'N! RTOO Mama/Reason 4////to *{ Relinquish#.! By Data Received By 1 y& nhr r cAbI Al Data Tima I Itama/Raason / / . ' tTO Relinquished By Y ' cTV U n C Date R j c ^ d B y Data Tima h i/n /X ^ ylJu ' iSUl Ji in; t>1Aff, } * ---------- J 0 0 2 8 7 ----------- 1 V SV V V V V * 00183 REAC. Edison, NJ (008) 321-4200 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name: D o t 'n USFW 0864 % E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 M VProject Number:. RFWContact: K a tW ru? Phone: * No: ; V SHEET N O ./O F. n fi Sample Identification Analyses Requested REAC* Sample No. Sampling Location Matrix Data Collected * of Bottles Contalner/Preservativa m . T r W W * 1/ T & 6(3^ zn. Vr T s 3 . Pfco U T C O " / ? '*?3- 1 >< 1 J___ & 7 :2 - c .. / /t : /_ / Vi__ l S L f t y ftesA TV A R e * /^ -< r VL w K K ^ - A i / a VL VL *~ fi 7> % 7 -- L. te ~ C .r H JT ^ 704 *5/0 A ^ /oc i 5/o> Z 3 L- Z i -- $ lt A fflr A - l . L . $ I C ____l -- 1 1 % . ! / / -- / r^ A lfC ^ J ____ i_______ / ____ / _________ -- IL - SO DS- 0L- X- Sediment Drum Solids DrumLiquid Other PW- GW- SW- SL - Potable Waler Groundwater Surface Water Sludge ___ S- wo- A- 1 ---- Soil Water Oil Air - iSpecial Instructions: F in ir / 4 CV_ y * c * 'M * c A&b / 4 o C SO - ' fcxL. ve ie ------- ^ FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY fr!o m CHAIN OF CUSTODY # Nsma/Reason Relinquished By Date Received By U L - .I".5f iTfliT/731 b W - L 1 1 V cfX u fc / r if f e l d i r . ... y . - w i y f o// 0 > *4*^,Y F ix tM ty * ' FORM 14 Date Time I Items/Reason Relinquished By ^ V f //Arp T T Z ru c--- tr ' 7 p ^ / t o / r ^ r - If b ljtlf I U -TL r o cVti/f/ H (JT \l+G-8iSi7- *^ I/f/ (1 Date Received By Date Time </>iff' /fv}A\C ctsVt/o h h f h // (J 'Zr'L'>r n ft `ff t o{tip. \fsMA b//& ~ 4 ... x -----J I h, > 0 4 ) ^ 8 8 ------- ^-v A io __It_a_mtt_/_fU_M_o_n__ ___R_t_ll_n_qu*lt_h_td__B_y-_ m a v m iit iiJ im m Data Racalvad By J ___A f 1 Date Tima W fc . Items/Reason #t/ 4 Relinquished By (*- U (f f ' Dale Received By /df/ / //m ( '~(lA<do Hl^ lU a Data Tima U b t i l >i/.7 _ O O *">o f t 1 8/94 t-ST O O R EA C, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name: Project Number. ______ RFW Contact: L - d f r * Q \Q _P h o n e :<l Q g > - c b2 \ M z o ri USFW 0866 No: SHEET NO. 00185 REAC# Sample No. h stv ,/ )y f * o to rr/7 A 5/2 ^2 O * / o r y r< w m 5T/2. K 5 ^ /0& - $ i? p ^ ,h > i. 7u r s-a r _ s//6 - "^ T J * s m *1r * o le ? ^ 5 0 1 ) Sampling Location Matrix "???/ A ^ .... 53?W 1 ]P5>//4 -Iq4T V ! Data Collected #of Botllea ____ ____ Contalner/Pmervatlve l O O t . 3^ M c TAL. 'S < J^.i r ....... ! -- / i J L \ V T = u ?k (fto d . < W Z - < ? a __ / / 4 . C 'S ? C r /44 C & & MC JZ & M -c p^gjM < fS ^ C 'S P c ^ / 4 t jc y -n f - W i? a v f e t "re r. vC Sru. a t v H e2- K, K VL X X v< bV i-------- IT ____ ____ / / \ \ SO DSDL- X- Sediment DrumSolid Drum Liquid Other PW- GWSWSL - s' \ \ "------- - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge S- W- o- A- Soil Water Oil Air \ t>__:- V " --------- --- ^e---- ^V \ X Q d' * 7^V 25C( i k. 7 a FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY C U StTMOCDHYAUIN OF -I V -VV 'I'JJC j Mama/Reason datiM i Relinquished By Date ^ m l v L____ ___ :/(if) ? ORMI4 Received By rV TL .ivjnJ w 't ' Date Time I Items/Reason 6f[i \ *r T r r I min i'&1orti H S /ih " n `40 T/fL YiG-k<uf>:>il 1 ^~To C Relinquished By Date Received By Date Tlrqe fcfr? 7)1 let y-n // h I l i l / t i ( V/ 'X^c/ ' litio // li, . U Q O O Z ,-------- 5 0 -- 1... I'., '________ V/tlh ~ r *+ } 4 wT Umo 93d ! ti Roy F. WMton, Inc. G SA Raritan Depot Bldg. 209 Annex (Bay F) 2890 Woodbridge Avenue Edison, New Jersey 08837-36 ~9 732-321-4200 Fax 732-494-4021 DATE: 29 September 1997 TO: FROM: R. Singhvi, EPA/ERTC Project Officer / V. Kansal, Analytical Section Leader /y ' T t l ' u * i - C / SUBJECT: DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL UNDER WORK ASSIGNMENT # 2-273 Attached please find the following document prepared under this work assignment: Dry Run Creek Site - Analytical Repon Central File WA # 2-273 M. Sprenger M. Huston M. Barkley M. Horne (w/artachment) Work Assignment Manager (w/artachment) Task Leader (w/auachment) Data Validation and Repon Writing Group Leader (w/o attachment) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (w/attachment) r73\DEL\AR\970W)RYRUN/O 000291 USFW 0867 Section 1 000232 USFW 0869 Table o f Contents (Coot) QA/QC for TAL Metals Results of the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil Table 2.7 Results of the MS Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil Table 2.8 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil Table 2.9 Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Bovine Fecal M atter Table 2.10 Results of the MS Analysis for TAL Metals in Bovine Fecal Matter Table 2.11 Results o f the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Bovine Fecal Matter Table 2.12 Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna Table 2.13 Results of the MS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna Table 2.14 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna Table 2.15 Results of the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals (Flora) Table 2.16 Results of the MS Analysis for TAL Metals in Flora Table 2.17 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Flora Table 2.18 QA/QC for Cyanide Results of the LCS Analysis for Cyanide in Soil Table 2.19 Results of the MS Analysis for Cyanide in Soil Table 2.20 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Cyanide in Soil Table 2.21 QA/QC for Fluoride Results of the LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Water Table 2.22 Results of the MS Analysis for Fluoride in Water Table 2.23 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Water Table 2.24 Results of the LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Soil/Bovine Fecal Matter Table 2.25 Results of the MS Analysis for Fluoride in Soil/Bovine FecalMatter Table 2.26 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Soil/Bovine FecalMatterTable 2.27 Results of the LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Fauna Table 2.28 Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Fluoride in Fauna Table 2.29 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Fauna Table 2.30 Results of the LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Flora Table 2.31 Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Fluoride in Flora Table 2.32 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Flora Table 2.33 QA/QC for Anions Results of the LCS Analysis for Anions in Water Table 2.34 Results of the MS Analysis for Anions in Water Table 2.35 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Anions in Water Table 2.36 QA/QC for TOC Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TOC in Soil Table 2.37 QA/QC for Organo Fluorides Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for Organo Fluorides inSoil Table 2.38 Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Organo Fluorides inSoil Table 2.39 QA/QC for G rain Size Results o f the Duplicate Analysis for Grain Size Table 2.40 Section III Communications Chains of Custody Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix A B C D E F G H I J K L Data for BNA, Pest/PCB - Soil (Core) Data for TAL Metals - Bovine Fecal Matter (Columbia) Data for TAL Metals, Fluoride, Cyanide * Soil (Core) Data for TAL Metals - Soil (Columbia) Data for Organo Flouride - Soil (SWR) Data for Fluoride, Anions & TOC Analysis-Water & Soil (Columbia) Data for TAL Metals, F, % Lipids & % Solids-Fauna (Columbia) Data for BNA - Bovine Fecal Matter (Columbia) Data for Fluoride-Soil & Bovine Fecal Matter Columbia) Data for TAL Metals-Flora (Columbia) Data for TAL Metals-Grain Size (Columbia) Data for TAL Metals, F, % Lipids & % Solids-Fauna (Columbia) Page Number Page 58 Page 60 Page 63 Page 65 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 84 Page 89 Page 94 Page 95 Page 96 Page 97 Page 98 Page 99 Page 100 Page 101' Page 103 Page 104 Page 105 Page 106 Page 107 Page 108 Page 109 Page 110 Page 111 Page 112 Page 113 Page 114 Page 115 Page 116 Page 117 Page 118 Page 119 Page 120 Page 121 Page 122 Page 123 Page 124 Page 125 Page 126 Page 129 Page G247001 Page G400001 Page G248001 Page G306001 Page G284001 Page G302001 Page G452001 Page G402001 Page G401001 Page G42700I Page G304001 Page G 4 15001 Appendices will be furnished on request. m \D E U A R \9T 09\D R Y R U N A 2 000293 USFW 0868 Introduction REAC in response to WA #2-273, provided analytical support for environmental samples collected from the D iy Run Creek Site located in Washington, Wood County, WV as described in the following table- Tbe support also included subcontracting, QA/QC, dam review, and preparation of an analytical rep o rt containing a summary o f analytical methods, results, and QA/QC results. Chain of Custody Number of Samples Sampling Date Date Received Matrix Analysis Laboratory 00616 2 4/30/97 5/29/97 Soil BNA, Pesticide/PCB, TAL Metals. F , CN' Core 07295 10 6/10/97 6/18/97 4 6/11/97 Mammals TAL Metals, F , %Lipids, %Solids Columbia 6 6/12/97 07296 3 6/09/97 6/18/97 8 6/10/97 8 6/11/97 1 6/12/97 07297 6 6/10/97 6/18/97 10 6/12/97 Fish 1 5/95 Fish 07298 15 6/12/97 6/18/97 Flora 07300 7 6/11/97 6/18/97 07305 2 6/11/97 6/18/97 6 6/12/97 Soil Soil Organo Fluorides Grain Size SWRI Columbia 07735 8 6/10/97 6/18/97 1 6/12/97 Water Fluoride, Anions NOJt P 0 4, S 0 4. Cl, Br 7 6/11/97 07721 1 6/12/97 6/18/97 Soil TOC 07722 7 6/12/97 6/18/97 Soil Fluoride 2 Bovine Fecal Matter 7 TAL & BNA `As requested by R E A C . 2273VDEUAR\970W>RYRUNA2 000U1 000294 USFW 0870 Introduction (C on i) P la in of Custody 07723 07725 07736 07737 07738 05360A - 05360B Number of Samples 7 13 5 9 20 2 7 9 4 18 3 Sampling Date 6/11/97 6/12/97 6/11/97 6/12/97 6/12/97 6/11/97 6/11/97 6/12/97 6/12/97 7/16/97 Date ReceirH 6/18/97 6/18/97 Matrix Soil 6/18/97 6/18/97 6/18/97 Soil 7/17/97 Bovine Fecal Matter Earthworm Tissue Analysis TOC Grain Size TAL Metals Fluoride Fluoride, TAL Metals, % Lipids, %Solids Laboratory || Columbia Columbia CASE NARRATIVE At the request o f REAC, TAL metals, %lipids and %solids was added to the tissue fluoride analysis in the award letter to Columbia Labs. Data Package G247 At the request of the W ork Assignment Manager, samples 1A and 2A were held at REAC for 29 days prior shipment fo ' subcontracted analyses while a potential conflict of interest was resolved. Both samples were extracted, 26 days for BNA and 27 days for Pesticide/PCB, out of hold time. All results are considered estimated. BNA Analysis - Soil In the continuing calibration check standard of 6/3/97, the percent difference for bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether(34%), exceeded acceptable QC limits. This compound was not detected in the associated samples; the data are not affected. Pesticide/PCB Analysis - Soil The data was reviewed and found to be acceptable. Data Package G402 - BNA Analysis Bovine Fecal M atter In the initial calibration from 6/13/97 (instrument MS08), the percent difference for , 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether (31), and diethyl phthlate (32) exceeded acceptable QC limits. This calibration was not used to quantify any compounds; the data . : not affected. In the continuing calibration check standard of 7/1/97 (instrument MS08), the percent difference for , aniline (55), benzl alcohol (37), bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether (78), nitrobenzene (25.2), benzoic acid (47), 4-chloroaniline (27), 2- methylnaphthalene (25.4), 2-nitroaniline (65), 3-nitroaniline (43), 4-nitrophenol (25.7), and carbazol (32) exceeded acceptable QC limits. The benzoic acid result for sample 805, the aniline, bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether, and 2-nitroanilinc results for samples 801,802, 803, 804, 805, 806, and 807, are considered estimated. The balance o f compounds were not detected in the associated samples; the data are not affected. In the continuing calibration check standard of 7/3/97 (instrument MS10), the percent difference for aniline (53) 1 2dichlorobenzene (40), bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether (43), hexachloroethane (26), and benzoic acid (68) exceeded acceptable QC limits. This check standard was used to determine the 2-methylphenol concentration in samples 801 803 804 and 8n* the data are not affected. Sample 807 chrysene-dl2 and samples 807, 801,802, 804, and 803 perylene-dl2 internal standard areas exceeded acceptaf QC limits; all compounds quantitated using the respective internal standard are considered estimated. OTVDEUARWJWDRYRUNA: 00002 00029S USFW 0871 CASE N A R R A T IV I (Com ) D ata Package G306 T A L M etals - Soil The data was reviewed and found to be acceptable. D ata Package G248 TAL M etals, Fluoride, Cyanide - Soil At the request o f the Work A ssig n m en t Manager, samples 1A and 2A were held at REAC for 29 days prior shipment for subcontracted analyses w hile a potential conflict of interest was s o lv e d . Samples were analyzed for mercury, cyanide and fluoride out of hold time. All positive results are considered estimated and all not detected results are considered unusable. Selenium was detected in the TAL metal initial i-uioration blanks of 6/4/97 (8.1 ug/L.) and 6/5/97 (9.3 ug/L). in the continuing calibration blanks of 6/4/97 21:23 <-6 ug/L) and 22:10(8.5 pg/L), and 6/5/9 7 1 2 :3 0 (1 2 .3 pg/L ) and 12:43(11.5 pg/L). S elin iu m results for samples 1A and 2 A are considered estimated. Data Package G400 TAL Metals - Bovine Fecal M atter The data was reviewed and found to be acceptable. D ata Package G452 TAL Metals, Fluoride, %SoIids, % Lipids - Fauna Fluoride analysis was performed by a modified EPA Method 340.1 with the permission o f REAC and not by 340.2 as indicated in the award letter. Method Blankl contained Ca (17 mg/kg) and Mg (10 mg/kg), samples Control 1A, Control IB, Control 1C, Control 2A, Control 2B, Control 2C, 900A, 900B, 900C, and 901A, Ca and Mg concentrations were 5X greater than the blank concentrations, the data are not affected. Method Blank2 contained Ca (11 mg/kg) and Mg (15 mg/kg), samples 901B, 901C, 902A, 902B, 902C, 903A, 903B, 903C, 904A, 904B, and 904C, Ca and Mg concentrations were 5X greater than the blank concentrations, the data are not affected. Data Package G415 TAL M etals, Fluoride, %Solids, % Lipids Fauna Fluoride analysis was performed by a modified EPA Method 340.1 with the permission o f REAC and not by 340.2 as indicated in the award letter. The data was reviewed and found to be acceptable. Data Package G427 TAL Metals, Fluoride, % Lipids& %Solids - Flora Fluoride analysis used EPA Method 340.1 for digestion and 340.2 for analysis with the permission o f REAC. The blank contained barium (0.36 mg/kg). the results are not affected because all associated samples had more than five times the concentration found in the blank. D ata Package G302 Fluoride, TO C , Anions (N 03, P 0 4 , S 0 4 , Cl & Br) - W ater & Soil Chloride and bromide anion analysis were not requested on the COC and were added later at the request of the Work Assignment Manager. Chloride was performed by EPA method 332.5 and fluoride were performed, with the permission o f REAC, by EPA Methods 304.1 (soil) and 340.2 (water) due to severe matrix interference from other target analytes (especially sulfate), instead of EPA Method 300.0 as indicated in the award letter. Samples 701.702. 703, and 705 are bovine fecal matter and are reported in the soil results table. Samples 2 0 9 .2 1 0 .2 1 1 .2 1 2 .2 1 3 ,2 1 4 ,2 1 5 were received past the recommended hold time for Ortho-phosphate and nitrate, the results are considered estimated. : : t o d e l \a r \9w d r y r u n a 2 00003 000296 USFW 0872 C A SE N A R R A TIV E (C oni) D ata Package C401 F luoride - Soil Fluoride analysis wrs performed by a modified indicated in the award letter. \fethod 340.1 with the permission o f REAC and not by 340.2 as Samples 704 and 706 are bovine facal m&usr and ar* reported in the soil results table. The data was reviewed and found to be acceptable. D ata Package. G284 Organ* Fluorides - Soil Samples 300G, 301G, 302G, 303G, 304G, 303G, and 306G were analyzed qg day outside o f their hold time; all results a: considered estimated. D ata Package G304 G rain Size The data was reviewed and found to be acceptable. ET)\DEL\AR\*70W3RYRUNA2 00004 000297 USFW 0873 AA B BFB BPQL BS BSD C D CLP COC CONC CRDL CRQL DFTPP DL E EMPC J ICAP IDL ISTD MDL MQL MI MRL MS MSD MW NA NC NR NS %D 7c REC PQL PPBV PPPA QL RPD RSD SIM U m3 L dL mL ML. Summary of Abbreviations Atomic Absorption The analyte was found in the blank Bromofluorobenzene Below the Practical Quantitation Limit Blank Spike Blank Spike Duplicate Centigrade (Surrogate Table) this value is from a diluted sample and was not calculated (Result Table) this result was obtained from a diluted sample Contract Laboratory Protocol Chain of Custody Concentration Contract Required Detection Limit Contract Required Quantitation Limit Decafluorotriphenylphosphine Detection Limit The value is greater than the highest linear standard and is estimated Estimated maximum possible concentration The value is below the method detection limit and is estimated Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma Instrument Detection Limit Internal Standard Method Detection Limit Method Quantitation Limit Matrix Interference Method Reporting Limit Matrix Spike Mairix Spike Duplicate Molecular Weight either Not Applicable or Not Available Not Calculated Not Requested Not Spiked Percent Difference Percent Recovety Practical Quantitation Limit Parts per billion by volume Parts per billion in air Quantitation Limit Relative Percent Difference Relative StandardDeviation Selected Ion Mode Denotes not detected cubic meter kg kilogram liter g gram deciliter eg centigram milliliter mg milligram microliter Mg microgram ng nanogram Pg picogram denotes a value that exceeds the acceptable QC limit Abbreviations that are specific to a particular table are explained in footnotes on that table Revision 9/19/97 r73\DEUAR\9TWO>RYRUNA2 00005 000298 USFW 0874 A nalytical Procedure for B N A is S oil All samples were analyzed according to SW-846, Method 8270B. The results axe listed in Table 1.1. Analytical Procedure for BNA in Bovine Fecal Matter All samples were analyzed according to SW-846, Metbod 8270B. The results ate listed in Table 1.2. Analytical Procedure for Pesticide/PCB in Soil All samples were analyzed according to SW-846, Method 8080. The results are listed in Table 1.3. Analytical Procedure for TAL Metals in Soil (Core) All samples were digested and analyzed according to SW-846, Method 7470 for mercury, Metbod 7610 for potassium. Method 7770 for sodium, and Method 6010 for all other analytes. The results are listed in Table 1.4. Analytical Procedure for TAL Metals in Soil (Columbia) All samples were digested and analyzed according to SW-846, Method 7471A for mercury, Method 7060A for arsenic. Method 7740 for selenium. Method 7841 for thallium, and Method 6010A for ail other analytes. The results are listed in Table 1.4. Analytical Procedure for TAL Metals in Bovine Fecal Matter All samples were digested and analyzed according to SW-846, Method 7471A for mercury, Method 7060A for arsenic, 7421 for lead, Method 7740 for selenium. Method 7841 for thallium, and Method 6010A for all other analy t e The results ar listed in Table 1.5. Analytical Procedure for TAL Metals in Fauna All samples were digested and analyzed according to SW-846, Method 7471A for mercury. Method 7740 for selenium, Method 6010A for aluminum, calcium, iron, magnesium, potassium, and sodium; and U.S. EPA method 200.8 for all other analytes. The results are listed in Table 1.6. Analytical Procedure for TAL Metals in Flora All samples were digested and analyzed according to SW-846, Method 7471A for mercury, Method 7740 for selenium, Method 6010A for aluminum, calcium, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, and sodium; and U.S. EPA method 200.8 for all other analytes. The results are listed in Table 1.7. Analytical Method For Cyanide in Soil All samples were analyzed according to SW-846 Method 9012. The results are listed in Table 1.8. Analytical Procedure for Fluoride in Water All samples were analyzed according to EPA Method 340.2. The results are listed in Table 1.9. Analytical Procedure for Fluoride in Soil/Bovine Fecal Matter (Core) All samples were analyzed according to EPA Method 300 by ion chromatography. The results are listed in Table 1.10. 2273\DEL\AR\9'TOW5RYRUNA2 0000 000299 USFW 0875 A nalytical Procedure for Fluoride in S o il/B o v in e F ecal M atter (C olum bia) All samples were analyzed according to modified EPA Method 340.1. The results are listed in Table 1.10. Analytical Procedure for Fluoride in Fauna All samples were analyzed according to modified EPA Method 340.1. The results are listed in Table 1.11. Analytical Procedure for Fluoride in Flora All samples were analyzed according to modified EPA Method 340.1. The results are listed in Table 1.12. Analytical Procedure for Anions (N 03, PCM, S 04, Cl & Br) in Water All samples were analyzed according to EPA Method 300 by ion chromatography. The results are listed in Table 1.13. Analytical Procedure for TOC in Soil All ,,samples were analyzed according to Method LOI AASHTO T 267-86. The results are listed in Table 1.14. Analytical Procedure for Organo Fluorides in Soil All samples were analyzed according to SW-846 Method 8260 modified to achieve a lower detection limit of 2 ppb. Tctrafluoroethylene, hexafluoropropylene, and chlorodifluoromethane was analyzed as target analytes. Perfluorocyclobutane, l-chloro-1.1.2.2-tetrafluoroethane, 2-chloro-l, 1, 1,2 ,3 ,3,-hexafluoropropane, and perfluoroisobutylene were analyzed as tentatively identified compounds due to a lack of standards. The results are listed in Table 1.15. Analytical Procedure for Percent Lipids in Fauna All samples were analyzed by drying 2 mLs of sample extract to dryness in a pre-weighed pan on a hot plate @ <70C . Th pans are placed in an oven at 70C for 1 hour, cooled in a desiccator and weighed to 0.0001 gram accuracy. The percent lipids (wet weight) was calculated as follows: % L ip id (wet weight) < * ' * BUmk) * 5 x 100 g Sam ple The results are listed in Table 1.6. Analytical Procedure for Percent Lipids in Flora All samples were analyzed by drying 2 mLs of sample extract to dryness in a pre-weighed pan on a hot plate <70C . T t pans are placed in an oven af 70C for 1 hour, cooled in a desiccator and weighed to 0.0001 gram accuracy. The percent lipids (wet weight) was calculated as follows: % U p id (wet weight) L-L U E * " * g Sam ple x 5 x JOO The results are listed in Table 1.7. 2273\DEL\AR\970W>RYRUNA2 00007 O O O ^O O USFW 0876 A n alytical Procedure for P ercent S olid s in Fauna All samples were analyzed gravimetrically by freeze drying the sample. The results are listed in Table 1.6. Analytical Procedure for Percent Solids in Flora All samples were analyzed gravimetrically by oven drying the sample at 60C. The results are listed in T a b le 1.7. Analytical Procedure for Grain Size All samples were analyzed according to ASTM Method D 422. The results are listed in Table 1.16. 2m\DEL\AR\970*DRYRUNA2 00008 000301 USFW 0877 Table 1.1 Results of the A n alysis for bna in S o il UA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek S ite Based on Dry Weight COMPOUND SAMPLE * LOCATION COLLECTED EXTRACTED ANALYZED MATRIX DIL. FACT. X SOLID AMT. USED FINAL VOL UNITS Phenol bi s ( -2 -ChloroethylJEther 2-Chlorophenol 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Benzyl alcohol 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 2-Methylphenol bi s(2-Chloroi sopropylJether 4-Methylphenol N-N i tro so -D i-n -p ro p y la m in e Hexachloroethane Nitrobenzene Isophorone 2-Nitrophenol Benzoic Acid 2 ,4-D im ethylp henol bisl2-Chloroethoxy)m ethane 2 ,4 -D ic h lo ro p h e n o i 1 ,2 ,4 -T ric h lo ro b e n ze n e Naphthalene 4 -C h lo ro a n ilin e Hexachlorobutad i ene 4-Chloro-3-m ethyl phenol 2-Methylnaphthalene H e xa ch lo ro cyclo pe n ta di ene 2 ,4 ,6 -T ric h lo ro p h e n o l 2 ,4 ,5 -T ric h lo ro p h e n o l 2-Chloronaphthalene 2-N itroaniline Dim ethylphthalate Acenaphthylene 3-Ni troan ilin e Acenaphthene 2 ,4 -D in itro p h e n o l 4-Ni trophenol Dibenzofuran 2 ,6 -D in itro to lu e n e 2 ,4 -D in itro to lu e n e D ie th y lp h th a la te 4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether Fluorene 4-Ni tro a n ilin e 4 ,6 -D in itro-2-m ethylphenol N-Ni trosodiphenylam ine 4-Brom op he nyl-p henylethe r Hexachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenanthrene Anthracene Carbazole D i-n -b u ty lp h th a la te Fluoranthene Pyrene Butylbenzylphthalate 3 , 3 '-Diehlorobenzidine Benzol alanthracene B is(2 -E th y lh e x y lIp h th a la te Chrysene D i-n -o c ty lp h th a la te Benzol b)fluoranthene Benzolk)ftuoranthene Benzolalpyrene In d e n o ll,2 ,3 -c d )p y re n e Dibenzol a,h)anthracene Benzolg.h,i Jperylene SBLK .... 06/02/97 06/04/97 SOIL 1.0 100 30 1.0 ag/kg CONC. MDL U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 U 330 u 330 u 1600 u 330 u 330 u . 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 1600 u 330 u 1600 u 330 u 330 u 1600 u 330 u 1600 u 1600 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 1600 u 1600 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 1600 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 660 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 U 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 u 330 1A 2A Dry Run Upstream. Lee Creek 04/30/97 04/30/97 06/02/97 06/02/97 06/04/97 06/04/97 SOIL SOIL 1.0 1.0 65 74 30 30 1.0 1.0 ag/kg CONC. MOL ag/kg CONC. MDL U 510 U 450 U 510 U 450 U 510 U 450 U 510 U 450 U 510 U 450 U 510 U 450 U 510 U 450 u 510 U 450 u 510 U 450 u 510 U 450 u 510 U 450 u 510 U 450 u 510 U 450 u 510 U 450 u 510 u 450 u 2500 u 510 u 510 u 2200 u 450 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 2500 u 2200 u 510 u 2500 u 450 u 2200 u 510 190 J 450 u 510 u 450 u 2500 u 510 u 2200 u 450 u 2500 u 2500 u 510 u 2200 u 2200 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 2500 u 2200 u 2500 u 2200 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 2500 u 2200 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 1000 u 900 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 u 510 u 450 'Can not be seperated from Diphenylam ine. 2273\DEL\AR\970S\DRYRUNAR 00009 000302 USFW 0878 rvnnAaa\it6\>!v\n3a\ar; I Occ o cO 0) TI o oo coo 00 co -4 CD t'/NODOo*-DNDIOO--ffDOO2--O3Nf00'p3' *3DINOx*-**3UO/N~r9rDo3r-->'Of^m--Ou-<DIrT33rvt -y-3*-fM*T-<Ji v-y*-w*.H< r3i c c ji I) <WTO^3r3*wQO0*4.Ir3vNO63ll Or 31 t333X" <-r- J TOI V 333 =3O* O2I? 5T(V 3IV H rtT) rt 3ir3t- BJWOT)-nO> f3f -OlrCt -<i C------- 3 rt ON OO*--f--<T- I3O* Ort g3- (3rBt 3w01 n- IV rt rt A *0r3t O7--N--< 3- T TI rt O 3 0O1 O?V'r3t (13 0* Z O..Zrt r3--v IV 3rO3r3f3T31V*tJ/nVO--rO--0o3r33TTuvtJn/M0fr--O03rX3gXVVv>t-*IrmOr--I3II33t3rQVVV*ittV3IriOWzO--3Q0--E--XVtA.TO3O03O3r--r--rT33vJtt,' #3Oo--zT2---"r-r.<To30ro--rD--Itv1JtI^<ooII33O3--r*r<VVit- (cOI3VI fOOrcrr--3O3(rVvstt-jrzro3O--ivt- rorC0--3r3ttt.f*mrOrO0--3--3rvt^t5rr00--ro3--vtSt "ToOor333rvJt"irOrr3rO--CIVvttt Tr33--r00rv>1IttX5rr--33vv zrrO0--r3r--3*tjVtrroO3o--K0z3r3jt1t3rOv'nm3--OrOrurt*tnvtrO-5--Or--Oo(r\Totin'jtn3O3x--0xoor--O0t1*ri3-rr3s3rO--3rO<uv*ttr**noO3--(Ir3JitVtl-0O30rioX3x--nortt.-33OO--r2--IfVt.3-3rI0-V1t-^--rNr-vt oI3N--o>aOoVd--oor3o^OrOvu^XwwtIo0o03^<MrO-r33--rO3--*vu3irzorr--rvtutftToO3rt--J> n5rO3Vt fIr5--3OVtS?o--r3o*tI.>XrXO3--rO353v<^X3rr3--rr5-vvto-M*0er3-2I--O3-orroMo-trtt-0o**N^-3--ro<vOy'0-M--o30r*tOy03O-0--ortOj03W-0n--r*ft30rD3o--rr3MvtD3--03T--<j--rOeIor3------(g>Va-#3<I!-- -- -- O-IV. O3-- 3 3 , 'r>-v 5SK335m 8 W8 B * * cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccrcccccc o o o o o o o o o o ro o o o o o o ro o o o ro ro o o o o ro o ro ro o o o o ro o o o o o o o o o o ro o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o -* fo UMUIOlUMUarariOI UIUUIMMOI 040404 04040404 04 04040404 0404 0404040404040404 040404 0404 0404OI040404 W04 04040404 04 8f.Ji,O- W 3V 8S ^ oS2K. 33 &r-- I rt & w-- l f\ ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc i . gssrgfS ^ |B 8 S 8 g 3 -* a j O OO OO OO OO OrM OOOOOOrvJOOOfM fM OOOOrM OrM rM OOOOrM OOOOOOOOOOfM OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO-M 040I0404040404040404 040104040404 040404 04040404 04 04040401 0404 0404OIOI 0404 04OI 040404040404040404040404040404W0404 gr rtomm-- r c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c o c c c c c c S c c c c c c c :c<xeec V* U OI 0404OI04OIOI 0404roo 040404OI04044OM040404IoMrOvOI 0404OIrO\J OIMO OM0404040404OI04040404OI 040404OIVoM04040404040404OI0404040404OIOIOI0404o^ Mo 8 i;* P -,g 3 p s 5 IS Sn- 04. O -OtlMxru- 93 ccceeccecccccccccccccceccceccccccccceccecceccccceccecocceccecccp^ccc \b o O o O O O O o o oOI OI OI 04 OI 04 OI OI 04 OI M OI 04 OI 04 04 OI rsi OI 04 04 N WJ OI OI OI 04 M OI M IO 04 OI OI 04 04 OI OI 04 OI 04 04 04 04 OI 04 r o 04 04 04 OI OI OI 04 OI OI OI OI 04 OI OI OI 04 OI OI ^ M Xm i cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccuTcccccccccw ccc o o o o o o o o o oW U W W W U W W W W N W W U U W W N W W W N N W W W U M W N M W W U W W W U W W W U M U W W N W U U U W W W U W W W W W W U W W U j N g JaS.. rot,OW5O-S5*NNW~8SM*2 8- ;1 NoN*So Table 1.2 (Cant) Reeutts of the Anelyait for IMA In Revine Fecal Matter UA # 2*273 Dry K in Crttk Site Based on Dry Height COMPOUND SAMPLE # LOCATION COLLECTED EXTRACTED ANALYZED AMT. USED X SOLID UNITS 802 D2 06/12/97 06/25/97 07/01/97 30 9.1 mg/kg CONC. MRL 804 04 06/12/97 06/25/97 07/01/97 30 11 0/kg CONC. MRL 803 03 06/12/97 06/25/97 07/01/97 30 10 B/kg CONC. M L N- N itroaod im ethylam ine A n ilin e b is(-2-C hloroethyl)Ether Phenol 2-Chlorophenol 1,3 -D i ch l orobenzene 1,2-D i chlorobenzene 1,4-D i chlorobenzene Benzyl alcohol b i% (2 -Chloroisopropyl)ether 2-Methylphenol Hexachloroethane N-Nitroso-Di-n-propylam ine 4-Methylphenol Nitrobenzene Isophorone 2-Nitrophenol 2,4-Dim ethylphenol bfst2-Chloroethoxy)m ethane 2 ,4 -D ic h lo ro p h e n o l Benzoic Acid 1 ,2 ,4 -T ric h lo ro b e n ze n e Naphthalene 4 -C h lo ro a n ilin e Nexachl orobutadi ene 4-Ch loro-3-m e thylphe nol 2-Methyl naphthalene H exachlorocyclopentadi ene 2 ,4 ,6 -T ric h lo ro p h e n o l 2 ,4 ,5 -T ric h lo ro p h e n o l 2-Chloronaphthalene 2-N itroaniline Acenaphthylene Dim etnylphthalate 2 ,6 -D in itro to lu e n e Acenaphthene 3-N itroaniline 2 ,4 -D in itro p h e n o l Dibenzofuran 4-Nitrophenol 2 ,4 -D in itro to lu e n e Fluorene 4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether D ie th y lp h th a la te 4-N itroaniline 4 ,6 -D in itro-2-m ethylphenol N-Ni tro so d ip h e n y l amine 4 -Bromophenyl- phenylether Hexachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenanthrene Anthracene D i-n -b u ty lp h th a la te Fluoranthene Pyrene Butylbenzylphthalate 3 ,3 '-D ic h lo ro b e n zid in e Benzol a)anthracene Chrysene B is(2 -E th y lh e x y lJ p h th a la te D i-n -o c ty lp h th a la te Benzolb)fluoranthene Benzolk )f luoranthene Benzol a)pyrene Indenol1,2,3-cd)pyrene Dibenzol a,h)anthracene B enzolg,h,i Jperylene U2 u2 U1 u1 U 0.3 u 0.3 3.4 0.3 4.6 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.5 U 0.3 u 0.3 50 0.3 110 0 .3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U 0.3 u 0.3 U2 u2 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 V 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u2 u2 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u2 u2 u2 u2 u 0.3 u 0.3 u2 u2 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u2 u2 u2 u2 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u2 u2 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u2 u2 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0 .3 u 0.3 u 0.3 U u u 2.6 U u u u u u u u u 45 U U u u u u 30 U u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 20 10 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 20 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 20 20 3 20 3 3 3 3 20 20 3 3 3 20 3 3 3 3 3 3 20 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ::tj\d e u a r \97ow)ryrun2 00011 000304 USFW 0880 Table 1.3 R esults o f the A nalysis far P esticide/PCB in Soil W A# 2-273 Dry Run Crede Site Based on Dry W eight Client ID Location Percent Solid Analyte a -B H C g-B H C b-BH C Heptachlor d-BH C A ld rin Heptachlor Epoxide g-Chlordane a-Chlordane Endosulfan (I) p,p'-D D E D ie ld rin Endnn p,p'-D D D Endosulfan (II) P,p'-D D T Endnn Aldehyde Endosulfan Sulfate M ethoxychlor Endrin Ketone Toxaphene Aroclor 1016 Aroclor 1221 Aroclor 1232 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1248 Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 Chlordane SBLK WA 100 Cone MDL Pg/kg Pg/kg 1A D ry R un Upstream 65 Cone MDL Pgfcg Pg^kg 2A Lee Creek 73 Cone MDL Pg/kg Pg/kg U 1.7 U 5.2 U 4.6 U 1.7 U 5.2 U 4.6 U 1.7 U 5.2 U 4.6 U 1.7 U 5.2 U 4.6 U 1.7 U 5.2 u 4.6 U 1.7 U 5.2 u 4.6 U 1.7 U 5.2 u 4.6 U 3.3 U 10 u 9.0 u 3.3 U 10 u 9.0 u 1.7 U 5.2 u 4.6 u 3.3 u 10 u 9.0 u 3.3 u 10 u 9.0 u 3.3 u 10 u 9.0 u 3.3 u 10 u 9.0 u 3.3 u 10 u 9.0 u 3.3 u 10 u 9.0 u 3.3 u 10 u 9.0 u 3.3 u 10 u 9.0 u 17 u 52 u 46 u 3.3 u 10 u 9.0 u 170 u 490 u 440 u 33 u 100 u 90 u 33 u 100 u 90 u 33 u 100 u 90 u 33 u 100 u 90 u 33 u 100 u 90 u 33 u 100 u 90 u 33 u 100 u 90 u 3.3 u 10 u 9.0 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRY2PSTS 00013 000305 USFW 0881 Client ID Location /. Solids Parameter Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium ..Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Maneanese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc Method Blank 100 Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Table 1.4 Results o f the Analysis for TAL M etals in Soil WA* 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight 508A Area IDC 79 511A Area IV C 72 514A Ref C 74 507A Area III B 81 Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cane MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cane MDL mg/kg mg/kg 513A Ref B Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg U 10 U 10 U1 U1 U1 U1 U 10 U2 U2 U2 U4 U 20 U2 u1 u 0.2 u 10 u 400 u1 u2 u 20 u1 u2 u2 9600 U 4 130 1 U 2200 26 16 17 23000 24 2600 1300 U 20 950 U U 32 U 29 49 13 13 1 1 1 1 13 3 3 3 5 30 3 1 0.3 13 500 1 3 30 1 3 3 11000 U 5.0 150 1 U 3200 21 18 20 28000 120 3000 1200 U 20 1500 U U 36 U 34 59 14 14 1 1 1 1 14 3 3 3 6 28 3 1 0.3 14 560 1 3 28 1 3 3 12000 U 5 120 1 U 1800 20 14 17 26000 22 3400 570 U 20 1400 U u 40 U 32 65 14 14 1 1 1 1 14 3 3 3 5 27 3 1 0.3 14 540 1 3 27 1 3 3 10000 U 5 130 1 U 2200 20 18 19 25000 30 2800 1300 U 22 1200 U u 29 U 30 56 12 12 1 1 1 1 12 2 2 2 5 25 2 1 0.2 12 490 1 2 25 1 2 2 11000 U 6.0 130 1 U 3700 21 12 22 25000 27 3100 710 U 24 1400 U U 53 U 32 79 14 14 1 1 1 1 14 3 3 3 6 28 3 1 0.3 14 560 1 3 28 1 3 3 2273\DEL\AR\97081DRY2TALS 00013 000306 USFW 0882 Client ID Location % Solids Parameter Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 506A Areali! A 88 Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Table 1.4 (Coot) Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil WA* 2-273 Dry Run Creek She Baaed an Dry Weight 510A Area IV B 82 512A RefA 76 509A Area IV A 78 505A AreallC 76 Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cooc MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg 504A Area IIB 81 Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg 12000 U 5 140 1 U 4400 24 20 24 35000 20 3300 1400 U 28 1900 U u 44 u 34 62 11 11 1 1 1 1 11 2 2 2 5 23 2 1 0.2 11 460 1 2 23 1 2 2 9400 U 5 140 1 U 2300 17 16 16 23000 U 2800 970 U 18 980 U u 27 U 27 51 12 12 1 1 1 1 12 2 2 2 5 24 2 1 02 12 490 1 2 24 1 2 2 15000 U 4 150 1 U 2300 29 17 30 36000 28 3800 770 U 30 2300 U U 44 U 42 82 13 13 1 1 1 1 13 3 3 3 5 26 3 1 0.3 13 530 1 3 26 1 3 3 10000 u 7 160 1 U 1700 18 17 18 25000 U 2700 920 U 20 1200 U U 28 U 28 51 13 13 1 1 1 1 13 3 3 3 5 26 3 1 0.3 13 510 1 3 26 1 3 3 10000 13 U 13 41 130 I 11 U1 3200 13 19 3 17 3 20 3 25000 5 22 26 3100 ' 3 1200 1 U 03 22 13 1200 530 U1 U3 39 26 U1 32 3 56 3 16000 U 5 220 2 U 3400 31 35 31 44000 33 4820 2600 U 34 2200 U U 44 U 51 83 12 12 1 1 1 1 12 2 2 2 5 25 2 1 0.2 12 490 1 2 25 1 2 2 22731DEL\AR\9708\DRY2TALS 00014 000307 USFW 0883 Client ID Location / Solids Parameter Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc Table 1.4 (Coot) Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil WA# 2*273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight 503A Area 11A SI 502A Area I C 76 501A Area 1B 81 SOOA Areal A 70 300D Ref 76 Cone MDL mg/kg mg/lcg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg 303D Upper Trib A 78 Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg 12000 U 4 140 1 U 2800 23 20 19 30000 22 3300 1400 U 23 1600 U u 39 U 38 59 13 13 1 1 1 1 13 3 3 3 5 26 3 1 0.3 13 530 1 3 26 1 3 3 9700 U 4 97 U U 2000 16 13 16 21000 22 2500 640 U 17 1200 U U 22 U 25 56 13 13 1 1 1 1 13 3 3 3 5 26 3 1 03 13 530 1 3 26 1 3 3 11000 u 4 130 1 U 1700 19 17 19 23000 25 2600 1100 U 19 1000 u u 36 V 30 56 12 12 1 1 1 1 12 2 2 2 5 25 2 1 0/2 12 490 1 2 25 1 2 2 11000 u 6 160 1 U 3800 20 20 23 25000 32 3100 1600 U 22 1400 U U 29 U 31 72 14 14 1 1 1 1 14 3 3 3 6 29 3 1 0.3 14 570 1 3 29 1 3 3 14000 U 10 160 2 U 2500 26 26 26 39000 24 42001500 U 33 1800 U u 79 U 40 74 13 13 1 1 1 1 13 3 3 3 5 26 3 1 0.3 13 530 1 3 26 1 3 3 18000 U 8 180 2 U 6100 33 37 35 52000 40 5100 2000 U 39 2000 U U 110 u 52 84 13 13 1 1 1 1 13 3 3 3 5 26 3 1 0J 13 510 1 3 26 1 3 3 2273\DELAR\9708ORY2TALS 00015 000308 USFW 0884 Client ID Location % Solids Parameter Aluminum Antimonv Arsenic Barium -Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc Table 1.4 (Coot) Results of the Analysis for TAL Metals m Soil WA# 2*273 Dry Run Creek Site Baaed on Dry Weight 304D UpperTribB 74 305D Area II 72 302D Area ID 78 306D Area IV 64 30ID Lee Creek 83 Cone MDL rog/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg 17000 U 14 210 2 U 2300 32 49 30 57000 40 4400 3300 U 35 1600 U U 80 V 57 84 14 14 1 1 1 1 14 3 3 3 5 27 3 1 0.3 14 540 1 3 27 1 3 3 18000 U 21 200 2 U 3300 32 42 30 55000 41 5000 2500 U 37 1900 u u 88 U 51 85 14 14 1 1 1 1 14 3 3 3 6 28 3 1 0.3 14 560 1 3 28 1 3 3 15000 U 8 170 2 U 3300 30 29 29 53000 30 4000 1600 U 32 2000 U U 74 U 48 76 13 13 1 1 1 1 13 3 3 3 5 26 3 1 0.3 13 510 1 3 26 1 3 3 11000 u 8 150 1 U 2200 20 22 19 32000 23 3000 1200 V 22 1300 U U 61 U 34 52 16 16 2 2 2 2 16 3 3 3 6 31 3 2 0.3 16 630 2 3 31 2 3 3 7100 12 U 12 71 91 1 U1 u1 970 12 14 2 14 2 11 2 22000 5 U 24 2100 ' 2 450 1 U 02 16 12 900 480 U1 U2 33 24 U1 20 2 39 2 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRY2TALS 00016 000309 USFW 0885 Client ID Location % Solids Parameter Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Bervllium Cadmium Calcium -Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc Table 1.4 (Cant) Remits o f the Analysis for TAL Metals m Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Method Blank 100 1A 2A Dry Run Upstream Lee Creek 65 74 Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MDL mg/kg mg/kg Cane MDL mg/kg mg/kg 8.4 0.20 U 0.06 U 0.01 U 0.20 0.02 0.005 0.04 0.005 7.4 5.00 0.08 0.01 U 0.05 0.13 0.03 16.1 0.10 0.21 0.003 U 5.00 1.27 0.02 0.05 0.0002 U 0.04 U 5.00 0.75 0.005 0.2 0.01 U 5.00 U 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.95 0.02 14000 93 12 150 1.4 3.4 3300 24 25 26 39000 32 3700 1600 U 28 1700 U u 130 U 54 70 31 9.3 1.5 31 0.8 0.8 770 1.5 7.7 3.9 15 0.46 770 23 0.08 62 770 1.2 1.5 770 1.5 7.7 3.1 6000 U 5.1 74 U 1.4 1200 9.9 11 11 15000 12 1600 510 U 13 U U U 57 U 21 34 27 82 1.4 27 0.7 0.7 680 1.4 6.8 3.4 14 0.4 680 2.0 0.07 5.4 680 2.3 1.4 680 1.4 6.8 2.7 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRY2TALS 00017 000310 USFW 0886 Client ID Location % Solids Parameter Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium -Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc Table 1.5 Results o f the Analysis forTA L Metals in Bovine Fecal M atter WA# 2-273 Dry Rim Creek She Based on Dry W eight Method Blank 7/1/97 100 807 Bare Area 82 805 D5 73 806 D6 8.2 801 D1 7.9 Cone MRL mg/kg tng/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cane MRL tng/kg mg/kg 802 D2 9.1 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg U 10 U TO u1 u1 u1 u1 u 10 u2 u2 u2 u4 u1 u2 u1 u 0.2 u 10 u 400 u1 u2 u 20 u1 u2 u2 14000 U 4.0 180 13 U 1900 21 16 17 26000 14 3000 1300 U 23 1300 U U 96 U 33 53 10 10 2 1 1 1 10 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 03 10 400 2 2 20 1 2 2 820 U U no u u 12000 u u 19 1400 3.0 4600 540 U u 17000 u u 5700 U 2.0 70 10 10 2 1 1 1 10 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 03 10 400 2 2 20 1 2 2 1100 u u no u u 12000 u u 20 2200 12 4800 610 U U 12000 U U 2500 U 3.0 76 10 10 2 1 1 1 10 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 03 10 400 2 2 20 1 2 2 1000 10 U 10 U2 120 1 U1 U1 13000 10 u2 u2 22 2 1800 4 5.0 2 5900 2 590 ' 1 U 03 U 10 15000 400 U2 U2 2800 20 U1 2.0 2 84 2 410 U U 93 U u 11000 u u 17 840 u 4500 520 U U 12000 U U 5100 u u 72 10 10 2 1 1 1 10 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 03 10 400 2 2 20 1 2 2 2273\DEUAR\9709\Df?r2TALS 00018 000311 USFW 0887 Client ID Location % Solids Parameter Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium .Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc Table 1.5 (Cent) Results of the Analysis for TAL Metals in Bovine Fetal M atter WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight 804 803 D4 D3 11 10 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg 760 U u 91 U u 13000 u u 23 1400 U 5300 480 U U 8800 U u 1600 U u 93 -10 10 2 1 1 1 10 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 0.2 10 400 2 2 20 1 2 2 350 U u 100 u u 13000 U u 18 650 3 4200 510 U U 10000 U U 1400 U U 72 10 10 2 1 1 1 10 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 02 10 400 2 2 20 1 2 2 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00019 000312 USFW 0888 Client ID Location /o Solids "/ Lipids'* Parameter Method Blank 1 100 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Table 1.6 R erihs o f the Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Rased on Dry Weight Control 1A Lab 11 0.49 Control IB Lab 8.6 035 Control 1C Lab . 12 0.69 Control 2A Lab 12 0.60 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cooc MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Control 2B Lab 10 0.66 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium -Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc U 5 U 0.02 U 0.5 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 17 5 U 02 U 0.02 U 0.1 U2 U 0.02 10 1 u 0.1 u 03 u 02 u 200 u1 u 0.02 u 10 u 0.02 u 0.2 u 0.5 ** - %Lipids are based on wet weight 1900 U 3.7 3.6 0.04 1.8 4200 42 5.0 19 630 0.84 950 19 U 3.3 8900 2 0.03 5400 0.03 1.1 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 2200 U 4 43 0.05 1.8 4200 3.5 5.1 16 640 0.98 890 17 U 2.5 8100 2 0.03 4900 0.03 1.2 110 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 03 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 2400 U 42 43 0.06 1.9 3700 3.6 5.8 15 420 12 850 13 U 1.7 8400 1 0.02 4900 0.03 1.4 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 2500 5 U 0.02 5.8 0.5 4.6 0.02 0.06 0.02 1.8 0.02 3600 5 3.9 02 4.9 0.02 11 0.1 310 2 12 0.02 890 ' 1 11 0.1 U 02 2.4 02 8700 200 21 0.03 0.02 5000 10 0.03 0.02 1.4 02 110 0.5 990 U 4.5 3.5 0.03 16 4500 2 5.5 16.0 350 0.43 930 9.4 U 1.8 7700 2 0.03 4600 0.02 0.6 110 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 22 73\DEL\AR19709^RY2TALS 00030 000313 U SFW 0889 Client ID Location '/ Solids '/ Lipids" Parameter Table 1.6 (Cont) Rewit* o f the Analysis for TAL Metal* in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Baaed on Dry Weight Control 2C Lab 11 0.87 900 A Areal 11 0.58 900 B Area I 12 0.22 900 C Areal 15 0.26 901A Area 11 11 0.37 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cane MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cooc MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Anttmony Arsenic Barium - Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 2400 5 U 0.02 4.7 0.5 4.4 0.02 0.06 0.02 18 0.02 3700 5 2.5 0.2 5.7 0.02 14 0.1 310 2 1.1 0.02 890 1 14 0.1 U 0.2 1.4 02 8800 200 21 0.03 0.02 5100 10 0.03 0.02 1.3 02 110 0.5 ** - '/Lipids are based on wet weight 1900 U 22 17 0.11 3.4 4000 3.4 6.9 12 1800 1.3 1000 100 U 3.7 10000 2 0.05 5200 0.06 3.9 110 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 540 U 3.9 10 0.06 3.4 3900 2.0 7 16 680 0.50 830 61 U 6.6 8000 2 0.04 4300 0.05 1.6 130 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 1800 U 4.4 18 0.12 32 4100 3.5 82 15 1800 1.5 970 140 U 42 8300 2 0.05 4200 0.06 4.4 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 800 5 U 0.02 2.6 0.5 11 0.02 0.06 0.02 2.1 0.02 3900 5 1.7 02 8.5 0.02 14 0.1 960 2 0.59 0.02 940 ' 1 87 0.1 U 02 3.0 02 8500 200 21 0.02 0.02 4600 10 0.03 0.02 2 02 120 0.5 22 73\DELVAR\9709\DRY2TALS 000.21 000314 USFW 0890 Client ID Location '/ Solids % Lipids** Parameter Table 1.6 (C a t) Results o f the Anuysis for TAL Metals m Fauna WA# 2*273 Dry Run Crock She Baaed an Dry Weight Method Blank 2 100 901 B Areali 12 027 901 C Area O 12 0.28 902 A Area IH 12 0.15 902 B Area ID 9.7 0.62 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cane MRL mg/kg mg/kg CoQC MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg 902 C Arealll 12 0.07 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Mamzanese Mercurv Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc U5 u 0.02 u 0.5 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 11 5 u 02 u 0.02 u 0.1 u2 u 0.02 15 1 u 0.1 u 02 u 02 u 200 uI V 0.02 u 10 u 0.02 u 02 u 0.5 ** - '/Lipids are based on wet weight 770 U 8.8 10 0.07 2.4 4000 1.9 10 17 1000 0.66 920 88 U 2.5 8300 3 0.05 4600 0.03 22 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 1200 5 u 0.02 3.7 0.5 13 0.02 0.09 0.02 2.1 0.02 4100 5 2.5 02 8.9 0.02 14 0.1 1300 2 0.8 0.02 950 1 97 0.1 U 02 4.0 02 8400 200 31 0.05 0.02 4600 10 0.03 0.02 3.1 02 120 0.5 870 U 8.4 12 0.07 2.3 3900 1.9 9.5 14 990 0.53 900 85 U 3.1 8500 3 0.04 4300 0.02 2.3 130 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 1800 5 0.02 0.02 3.5 0.5 18 0.02 0.13 0.02 2.5 0.02 4500 5 43 02 9.1 0.02 14 0.1 1900 2 1.1 0.02 1000 " 1 98 0.1 U 02 4.7 02 9300 200 31 0.04 0.02 4500 10 0.03 0.02 4.6 02 130 0.5 1000 u 3.7 12 0.09 1.8 3900 2.4 7.5 14.0 1300 0.73 890 97 U 3.1 7800 2 0.05 4100 U 2.7 110 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 000^2 000315 USFW 0891 Client ID Location % Solids /. Lipids** Parameter Table 1.6 (Coat) Results o f die Analysis for TAL Metals m Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based an Dry Weight 903 A Area IV 13 0.85 903 B Area IV 11 028 903 C Area IV 12 024 904 A Reference 11 0.61 904 B Reference 11 026 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg 904 C Reference 11 0.48 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 520 U 4.8 12 0.04 2.1 3800 12 8.7 14 800 0.50 950 51 U 2.3 8000 3 0.07 4100 0.02 1.5 110 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 ** - "/Lipids are based on wet weight 1600 u 4.6 20 0.13 2.4 3800 32 11 15 1700 1.1 1100 87 U 3.4 8000 3 0.05 4200 0.03 3.7 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 1800 u 32 20 0.13 22 3500 3.4 11 17 1900 12 1000 92 U 4.0 7600 3 0.05 4100 0.03 4.3 110 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 970 U 3.9 13 0.08 2.3 4400 2.1 7.9 23 1300 0.65 1000 43 U 6.0 8600 2 0.04 4900 0.03 22 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 1100 5 U 0.02 43 0.5 15 0.02 0.10 0.02 2.1 0.02 4400 5 23 02 7 0.02 15 0.1 1200 2 0.81 0.02 960' 1 58 0.1 U 02 7.8 02 7500 200 11 0.04 0.02 4200 10 0.03 0.02 2.6 02 110 0.5 3200 U 3.6 26 0.18 2.5 4400 62 8.0 20 2600 1.6 1200 130 U 11 8700 3 0.03 4600 0.05 63 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.1 02 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 2273\DEl\AR\970S\DRY2TALS 0003.1 000316 USFW 0892 Client ID Location /c Solids % Lipids** Parameter Table 1.6 (Coot) Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals m Fauna WA# 2*273 Dry Run Creek She Based on Dry Weight Method Blank 3 - 100 - 120 II-D-6 29 1.5 121 m-B-4 30 0.40 122 m-C-25 . 27 032 123 Ref-D-15 29 0.05 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg 124 n-D-24 26 0.45 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium -Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc U5 U 0.02 U 0.5 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u5 u 0.2 u 0.02 u 0.1 u2 u 0.02 u1 u 0.02 u 0.05 u 0.2 u 200 uI u 0.02 u 10 u 0.02 u 02 u 0.5 * - "/Lipids are based on wet weight 260 U U 16 U 0.09 18000 82 034 12 390 0.98 1300 20 U 32 10000 u 0.02 3800 U 0.4 79 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 550 U U 26 U 0.09 37000 7.5 0.34 7.8 580 12 1300 22 U 4.4 9300 2 U 4300 U 0.7 93 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 560 U u 26 U 0.07 21000 2.1 0.53 6.7 530 0.53 1400 26 U 1.6 13000 U U 3900 U 0.8 86 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 38 5 U 0.02 u 0.5 15 0.02 U 0.02 0.07 0.02 27000 5 2.9 02 03 0.02 4.9 0.1 150 2 029 0.02 1300 " 1 11 0.02 U 0.05 1.5 02 11000 200 U1 U 0.02 3900 10 U 0.02 U 02 74 0.5 270 U u 20 U 0.16 32000 1.8 037 6.7 420 0.79 1400 50 U 1.4 10000 U 0.03 4800 U 0.4 100 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 2273\DEUAR\9709tDRY2TALS 000^4 000317 USFW 0893 Client ID Location /o Solids / Lipids** Parameter Table 1.6 (Coot) Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals m Fauna WA* 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based oo Dry Weight 125 m-B-25 34 0.79 126 U-C-22 29 0.65 127 m-E-6 30 0.93 128 D-C-l 29 0.59 129 II-E-6 27 0.44 Cone MRL mg/kg mg^cg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cane MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg 034 Ref-F-10 30 0.56 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium -Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 600 U u 22 0.02 022 27000 3.2 0.41 7.5 730 0.64 1100 28 U 7.4 9200 1 U 3900 U 0.9 75 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 I 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 ** - '/Ltptds are based on wet weight 260 U U 15 U 0.06 22000 23 0.38 72 340 0.69 1400 26 U 13 12000 U U 3800 u 0.4 76 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 0.2 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 0J2 200 I 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 970 U U 41 0.04 0.15 37000 3.6 0.57 8 810 1.5 1500 39 U 10 10000 u u 3300 U 1.5 94 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 0.2 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 0J2 0.5 210 U U 19 U 0.03 26000 2 037 9.1 300 0.56 1400 18 U 4.1 12000 U U 3600 U 0.4 82 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 0.2 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 150 5 U 0.02 U 0.5 19 0.02 U 0.02 0.03 0.02 21000 5 2 02 0.26 0.02 7.1 0.1 300 2 035 0.02 1200 - 1 92 0.02 U 0.05 3.0 0.2 12000 200 U1 U 0.02 4100 10 U 0.02 02 02 83 0.5 420 U U 83 U 0.52 30000 42 032 9.7 540 0.76 1100 11 0.17 52 8800 U U 3800 0.03 0.5 110 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 2273'DEL\AR'3709'DRY2TALS 0001:5 000318 USFW 0894 Client ID Location Solids / Lipids** Parameter Tabie 1.6 (Cent) Remits o f the Analysis for TAL Metals m Fauna WAit 2*273 Dry Run Creek Site Based an Dry Weight 035 Ref-E-2 29 12 036 IV-E-22 28 1.5 037 Ref-B-10 30 0.62 038 Ref-A-U 31 1.7 039 IV-E-10 32 2 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/lcg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cooc MRL mg/kg mg/kg 040 Ref-E-7 33 1.6 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium -'Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 420 U U 7.1 U 0.22 33000 17 0.27 7.6 670 0.74 1100 7.5 0.06 4.8 9800 2 U 4400 u 0.5 93 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 ** - %Ltpids are based on wet weight 330 U u 13 U 0.1 28000 53 024 82 410 2 1400 15 0.07 3.9 10000 1 U 4800 0.03 0.5 86 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 75 U U 12 U 0.1 31000 22 0.13 8 230 036 1500 26 U 23 11000 3 U 4200 U U 96 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 170 U u 72 U 038 30000 1.4 0.17 7.5 390 0.87 1100 15 0.11 22 7800 2 U 3900 U 02 100 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 490 5 U 0.02 U 0.5 25 0.02 U 0.02 0.05 0.02 22000 5 22 02 0.42 0.02 6.7 0.1 560 2 0.55 0.02 1200 ' 1 15 0.02 U 0.05 11.0 02 9700 200 U1 u 0.02 3500 10 U 0.02 0.5 02 67 0.5 660 U U 84 0.02 1.1 23000 2.7 0.54 82 710 1.1 920 13 0.07 32 8200 3 U 3700 U 1.1 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS OOOi' 6 000319 USFW 0895 Client ID Location "/ Solids */ Lipids** Parameter Table 1.6 (Cent) Results o the Analysis for TAL Metals m Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight 041 IV-C-12 33 33 042 IV-A-15 37 0.97 043 n-c-i 28 0.7 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimonv Arsenic Barium - Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium -Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 370 U U 67 U 0.04 42000 2.9 0.36 5.9 480 0.9 1400 18 U 4.4 8900 U U 3900 U 0.5 100 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 ** - %Lipids are based on wet weight 170 U u 11 u 0.06 20000 11 021 8.1 280 0.55 1200 11 U 7.0 8500 U u 3500 U U 71 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 110 u u 17 U 0.06 23000 2.9 0.3 6.5 220 028 1300 15 U 2.6 11000 U U 4100 u u 74 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 ~* 2273DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 000*'7 000320 USFW 0896 Client ID Location /o Solids */Lipids'* Parameter Table 1.6 (Cost) Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Rim Creek Site Based an Dry Weight Method Blank 4 - 100 - 111 m-B-19 33 1.6 112 Ref-E-2 32 0.50 113 Ref-E-1 4.4 1.0 114 m-C-25 5.7 0.15 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cooc MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cooc MRL mg/kg mg/kg 115 m-c-15 30 1.6 Cooc MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium 'Bervllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc U5 U 0.02 u 0.5 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u5 u 02 u 0.02 u 0.1 u2 u 0.02 u1 u 0.02 u 0.05 u 02 u 200 u2 u 0.02 u 10 u 0.02 u 02 u1 ** - "/Lipids are based on wet weight 270 U U 34 U 0.12 32000 4.4 024 72 340 021 1100 13 U 1.0 9600 U U 4000 U 0.4 85 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 02 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 41 U U 7 U 0.06 18000 29 027 7.6 290 0.14 1100 22 U 14 12000 U U 3000 u u 78 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 588 U u 92 U 026 34000 6.3 0.4 8.5 740 22 1100 13 0.6 1.6 10000 U U 4200 U 1 99 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 02 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 1 170 5 U 0.02 U 0.5 25 0.02 U 0.02 0.06 0.02 27000 5 66 02 0.72 0.02 7.5 0.1 540 2 021 0.02 1200 ' 1 20 0.02 U 02 29.1 02 14000 200 U2 U 0.02 3800 10 U 0.02 U 02 87 I 52 U U 6.6 U 0.06 33000 6.6 0.14 14 410 027 1100 5 0.05 1.1 9600 U U 4400 U V 90 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 000^8 000321 USFW 0897 Client ID Location */o Solids % Lipids'* Parameter Table 1.6 (Cant) Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna WAW2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Baaed on Dry Weight 1000 AREA IV 24 23 1001 AREA IV 19 3.2 1002 AREA IV 26 3.5 1003 AREAIQ 23 3.8 1004 AREA IH 23 0.92 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cooc MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cooc MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg 1005 a r e a id 21 12 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium - Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 250 U U 11 U 0.45 33000 8.7 0.31 5.7 310 0.19 1400 20 U 2.8 14000 U 0.04 3800 U 0.5 130 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 0.2 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.3 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 " - VoLipids are based on wet weight 120 U U 4.4 U 034 8700 0.8 024 4.3 130 0.11 690 8.1 U 0.4 16000 U 0.02 4300 U 02 88 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 02 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 600 U 0.6 14 0.03 0.42 25000 3 0.48 52 460 0.3 1200 44 U 1 13000 U 0.03 3300 U 1 no 5 0.02 03 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 03 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 1600 U 1.4 33 0.06 0.16 27000 3.6 0.7 7 1100 0.66 1400 110 U 2.1 13000 U U 3600 0.03 2.5 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 03 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 1 2500 5 U 0.02 1.8 0.5 39 0.02 0.09 0.02 0.15 0.02 25000 5 42 02 0.97 0.02 63 0.1 1600 2 0.92 0.02 1400 ' 1 110 0.02 0.17 0.06 23 02 13000 200 U2 U 0.02 3800 10 0.04 0.02 3.7 02 150 1 320 U 12 24 U 0.16 34000 31 0.47 7.7 390 7.6 1300 46 U 12 14000 4 0.03 5000 u 0.8 140 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 02 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS ooo::9 000322 USFW 0898 Client ID Location */ Solids */ Lipids** Parameter Table 1.6 (Coot) Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Baaed on Dry Weight 1006 AREA 11 20 0.73 1007 AREA 11 22 23 1008 AREA 11 23 1009 AREAI1 . 22 0.86 1010 Dry Run 22 1.6 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg 033 m-C-17 31 2.0 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium -Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 560 U U 33 0.02 0.15 39000 8.8 0.43 8.5 470 0.29 1500 40 U 4.5 13000 2 0.02 4900 U 12 140 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.3 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 I * - "/Lipids are based on wet weight 820 U 1.1 29 0.03 0.18 33000 11 0.49 4.6 660 0.41 1500 39 U 1.8 13000 3 U 4600 0.02 1.6 130 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 0.2 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 02 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 3900 U 1.9 50 0.15 0.19 24000 6.7 1.6 5.4 2400 1.4 1600 120 U 3.9 14000 2 U 3900 0.05 5.6 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.1 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 4900 U 2 57 0.19 028 23000 24 1.9 72 3100 1.8 1700 130 U 11 14000 3 U 4100 0.06 72 130 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 02 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 1 ***-InsufTicient Sample Volume 160 0.03 0.7 28 U 0.09 31000 23 027 3.9 170 024 1400 140 028 1.7 6000 U 0.04 2600 U 0.4 160 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 800 U U 11 0.03 0.95 34000 62 0.62 92 740 0.86 1400 23 0.07 2 8800 2 U 4000 U 1.1 120 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 1 2273tDEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00000 000323 USFW 0899 Client ID Location /o Solids / Lipids Parameter Table 1.6 (Coot) Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals m Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Method Blank S 100 - 044 D-E-7 32 0.91 045 I-D-8 32 23 046 Ref-A-6 32 047 m-C-24 27 02 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg 048 m-B-io 33 1.9 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium 'Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium .Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc U5 U 0.02 U 0.5 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U5 U 0.2 U 0.02 U 0.1 u2 u 0.02 u1 u 0.02 u 0.05 u 02 u 200 u2 u 0.02 u 10 u 0.02 u 0.2 u 0.5 * - `/Lipids are based on wet weight 760 U U 13 0.03 0.07 10500 1.6 0.47 7.5 540 2 1200 26 U 4.9 10000 U U 3700 U 0.9 69 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 0.2 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 820 U U 23 0.03 0J 20000 5.1 0.41 9 910 1J 1300 27 U 2.8 9500 U 0.02 4200 U 12 76 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 0.2 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 110 U U 6.5 U 0.4 25000 12 0.14 9.3 390 0.76 1000 42 0.08 1.5 10000 4 U 4500 U U 100 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 - 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 -Insufficient Sample Volume 110 U U 16 u 0.05 54000 22 024 5.6 270 0.51 1900 ' 12 0.07 1.7 12000 U U 4500 U U 110 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 330 U U 8.6 U 0.15 34000 3.9 023 6.7 540 0.5 1200 7.4 0.11 1.4 9300 2 U 3800 U 0.5 83 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 02 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 2273\DEUAR\9709'Of!Y2TALS 00031 000324 USFW 0900 Client ID Location / Solids / Lipids** Parameter Table 1.6 (Cant) Results o f the Analysis forTAL Metals in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Baaed on Dty Weight 108 II-E-10 27 0.14 109 n-A-25 33 039 110 ra-E-i2 30 0.57 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cane MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cane MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium -Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 160 U U 22 U 0.02 36000 41 0.72 5.7 440 0.36 1900 14 U 20 13000 U U 4800 U u 77 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 03 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 03 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 ** - "/Lipids are based on wet weight 490 U U 18 U 0.06 39000 5.4 0.35 9.8 580 0.93 1500 24 U 1.4 10000 U U 3900 U 0.7 110 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 03 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 03 0.5 620 U U 11 0.02 032 45000 32 0.67 10 830 0.71 1400 22 0.07 15 11000 U u 5400 0.02 0.8 110 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 03 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.05 03 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 2273\DELtARt9709\DRY2TALS 00034 000325 USFW 0901 Client ID Location */o Solids % Lipids" Parameter Method Blank (7/10/97) 100 - Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Table 1.7 Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals in Flora WA* 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based an Dry Weight 600 Area DA 29 0.54 601 Area B 27 0.61 602 Area DC 29 0.26 603 Area IQA 25 0.51 604 Area IEOB 28 0.39 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium -Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc U 10 U 10 U2 0.36 0.02 U1 u1 u 10 u2 u2 u2 u4 u2 u2 u1 u 02 u 10 u 400 u2 u2 u 20 u1 u2 u2 * - "/Lipids are based on wet weight 120 U u 17 U U 3200 1.8 0.07 42 no 0.18 1400 65 025 1.1 18000 U U 51 U 02 14 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 90 U U 15 U 0.03 3300 1.6 0.06 4.4 86 0.16 1600 95 021 12 20000 U U 57 U U 16 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 189 U U 15 U 023 2800 2.9 0.10 5.6 150 021 1300 66 0.11 2.0 16000 u u 71 U 0.3 37 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 175 U U 14 U u 2400 5.9 0.11 42 180 0.17 1500 43 0.11 2.8 21000 U U 90 U 02 17 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 '1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 62 U U 11 U 0.03 3500 2.1 0.06 3.4 73 0.09 1800 87 0.06 12.0 19000 U U 35 U U 13 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00035 000326 USFW 0902 Client ID Location % Solids % Lipids** Parameter Table 1.7 (Coot) Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals m Flora WA# 2-273 Dry Rim Creek Site Baaed on Dry Weight 60S Area QIC 32 0.38 606 Area IVA 25 13 607 Area rVB 30 0.43 608 ArearVC 28 3.1 609 Area 1A 24 0.53 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium 'Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 920 U U 72 U U 1900 2.1 0.10 4.1 150 0.18 1200 39 0.08 42 14000 U U 59 U 0.3 13 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 310 U U 16 U 0.02 2500 3.5 022 52 280 024 1800 90 0.07 2.4 25000 U U 84 U 0.4 20 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 ** - %Lipids are based on wet weight 210 U U 8.6 U u 2000 1.5 0.33 3.5 180 0.15 1600 48 U 245 17000 U U 55 U 0.36 15 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 700 U u 13 U 0.02 2500 12 038 3.8 570 037 1500 60 U 6.4 19000 U U 85 U 0.9 14 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 130 5 U 0.02 U 0.5 22 0.02 U 0.02 0.08 0.02 3500 5 2.4 02 0.09 0.02 5.4 0.1 140 2 0.19 0.02 1700 " 1 160 0.5 U 0.05 1.9 02 26000 200 U1 U 0.02 78 10 U 0.02 U 02 20 0.5 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 0003 000327 USFW 0903 Client ID Location Solids /. Lipids** Parameter Table 1.7 (Cant) Results o f the Analysis for TAL Metals m Flora WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight 610 Area IB 30 0.36 611 Atm It. 29 0.48 012 RefA 30 0.58 613 Ref B 34 0.67 614 Ref C 34 0.40 Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cone MRL mg/kg mg/kg Cane MRL mDa/"kTa9 m9a/"kOa Cane MRL mg/kg mg/kg Aluminum Antimonv Arsenic Barium Bervllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 240 U U 15 U 0.08 2000 1.1 0.18 4.7 220 0.24 1100 220 U 1.4 16000 U U 78 U 04 21 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 * - %Lipids are based on wet weight 62 U u 22 U 0.11 2600 5.0 0.07 4.0 90 0.18 1500 110 U 222 18000 u u 50 U 0.08 16 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 0.2 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 0.5 50 U U 20 U 0.11 3200 2.5 0.07 4.0 66 0.16 1700 230 U 2.9 19000 U U 29 U U 17 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 0.2 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 0.2 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 64 U U 11 u 0.06 3200 3.0 0.06 3.5 79 0.12 1600 150 U 1.3 17000 U U 42 U U 13 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 02 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.5 0.05 02 200 1 0.02 10 0.02 02 0.5 350 5 U 0.02 U 0.5 13 0.02 U 0.02 0.05 0.02 2400 5 2.5 02 0.14 0.02 3.0 0.1 300 2 032 0.02 1600 ' 1 120 0.5 035 0.05 1.7 02 15000 200 U1 U 0.02 41 10 U 0.02 0.5 02 14 0.5 2273\DELAR\9709\DRY2TALS 00037 000328 U SFW 0904 Saitple ID location X Sol Tfl Table 1.8 Re*ult* of the Anatyeii for Cyanide in Soil WA a 2*273 Dry Rut Creek Site BA*ed on Dry Weight Method Blank -1-0-0------BBT mg/ &g ng/kg U 0.05 1A Dry Run Up*tream iS__ ng/kg TBT- si." -? u 0.08 2A Lee Creek 74 TBT ng/kg ng/kg 0.07 :: 7 3 lD E U A R \9 7 tW U 5 R y R U N A ' 00008 000329 USFW 0905 Table 1.9 Results of the Analysis for Fluoride in Water W A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample ID Location Cone m g/L MDL m g/L Method Blank 216C 201 204C 205C 206C 203 202 200 201 Tennant Well Area IV Area II Upper Trib A Upper Trib B Reference Area III Lee Creek Area IV U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 u 0.2 u 0.2 u 0.2 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00033 000330 USFVV 0906 Table 1.10 Results of the Analysis for Fluoride in Soil/Bovine Fecal Matter WA> 2-273 Dry Run Creek She Based or Dry Weight Sample ID Location Cane mg/kg MDL mg/kg Method Blank1 1A 2A Method Blank2 300A 303A 304A 302A 306A 301A 305A 705 702 703 510F 500F 506F 513F 508F 514F 707 51 IF 701 505F Method Blank3 Method Blank4 503F 502F 507F 501F 504F 509F 512F 704 706 Dry Run Upstream Lee Creek Reference Upper Trib A Upper TribB Area HI Area IV Lee Creek Area II D-5 D-2 D-3 Area IV B Area IA Area HI A Ref B Area HI C Ref C Bam Area Area IV C D1 Area II C Area ILA Area IC Area IIIB Area IB Area IIB Area IVA Ret A D4 D6 U 0.50 0.85 0.77 U 0.68 U 50 400 120 450 130 300 140 390 140 290 180 U 130 410 140 U 1400 U 1000 U 800 290 130 330 150 370 130 290 70 240 130 200 70 270 130 180 70 U 1300 230 70 U 50 U 50 200 80 240 70 240 70 230 70 200 70 250 70 300 70 U 600 U 600 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00040 000331 USFW 0907 T able 1.11 R esu lts o f the A n alysis for F luoride in-Fauna W A # 2-273 D iy Run Creek Site B ased on D iy W eight Sample ID Location Cone mg/kg MDL mg/kg Method Blankl Control 1A Control IB Control 1C Control 2A Control 2B Control 2C 900A 900B 900C 901A 90 IB 901C 902A 902B 902C 903 A 903B 903C 904A 904B 904C i irah Lab Lab Lab Lab Lab Area 1 Areal Area I Area H Area II Area II Area HI Area III Area HI Area IV Area IV Area IV Reference Reference Reference U 50 U 380 u 560 u 400 u 370 u 500 u 460 u 350 u 220 u 170 u 220 u 190 u 170 380 180 u 250 u 210 u 200 u 210 u 210 u 250 u 230 u 240 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00041 000332 USFW 0908 T able 1.11 (C ont) R esu lts o f the A n alysis for F luoride in Fauna W A# 2-273 D ry R un Creek Site B ased on D ry W eight Sample ID Location Cone mg/kg MDL mg/kg Method Blank2 Method Blank3 111 112 113 114 115 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 053 . m -B -19 Ref-E-2 Ref-E-1 m -C -25 m -C -15 AREA IV AREA IV AREA IV AREA HI AREA HI AREA IH AREAH AREAE AREAE AREAE Dry Run n i-C -I7 U U U 200 1200 U U U U 160 U 470 530 510 U 470 U 230 290 50 50 160 130 1100 800 110 210 250 150 210 200 200 230 230 210 230 220 150 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00041! 000333 USFW 0909 T able 1.11 (Corn) R esults o f th e A nalysis for Fluoride in Fauna W A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site B ased on D ty W eight Sample ED Location Cone mg/kg MDL xng/kg Method Blank4 Method Blank5 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 . - II-E-7 I-D-8 Ref-A-6 m -C-24 ni-B-io m -C-22 m -B-7 n -A -19 m -D-8 m-c-io m -E-12 n -A -20 n -c-5 n -c-7 n-A -24 II-A-13 I-E-8 II-E-10 II-A-25 III-E-12 U 50 U 50 u 75 450 160 U 130 U 100 U 140 u 160 u 160 u 160 u 99 u 150 u 150 u 170 u 160 220 170 U 190 U 170 U 180 210 180 160 150 160 160 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2 ANON 00043 000334 USFW 0910 T able 1.11 (C ont) R esu lts o f the A nalysis for F lu o iid e-in Fauna W A # 2-273 D ry Run Creek Site B ased on D iy W eight Sample ID Location Cone mg/kg MDL mg/kg Method Blank6 Method Blank7 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 . n-D-6 m-B-4 m-C-25 Ref-D-15 n-D-24 m-B-25 n-C-22 m-E-6 U-C-l II-E-6 Ref-F-10 Ref-E-2 IV-E-22 Ref-B-10 Ref-A-11 rv-E -io Ref-E-7 IV-C-12 IV-A-15 II-C-1 U 50 U 50 u 170 u 140 u 150 u 170 u 150 u 140 u 170 u 140 u 160 u 180 210 140 u 160 200 180 U 160 310 130 U 150 190 100 190 130 84 82 U 99 2273\DEL14R\9709\DRY2ANON 00044 000335 USFW 0911 T able 1.12 R esu lts o f the A nalysis for F luoride in Flora W A # 2-273 D iy Run Creek Site B ased on D ry W eight Sample ID Location Cone mg/kg MDL mg/kg Method Blanki Method Blank2 609 610 611 612 613 614 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 Area LA Area IB ArealC Ref A Ref B RefC Area HA Area IIB Area EC Area EHA Area IHB Area IHC Area IVA Area IVB Area IVC U 0.5 U .J 280 180 U 170 U 170 170 160 U 140 U 150 240 170 U 160 u 160 u 200 190 180 U 160 U 190 U 170 U 180 2273\DELAAR\9709\DRY2ANON 00045 000336 USFW 0912 SnaplclD Method Binde 215 210 213 2\2 a* T.1 Location Rxiamcr Loe Crack UpperTnb A Are SI U si? Areali Tibie 1.13 Rewiuofthc Aariyu for Amara (N03. P04,504, CI A Br) W * W A^JTO O rvRinC nckSat Brcnue Cene MDL ag/L difende Cene MDL m f L of/L NttfBiNiBBeen Cene MDL m n . ag/L OlllmplMphv Flnpfean Cane M DL mfl u 1.0 u 1.0 u 10 u 1.0 u 1.0 V \ 0 so V 0.2 30 0.2 45 0.2 4.5 02 2.9 02 ti 3.1 0.2 SS u 1.0 u 1.0 u 10 u 1.0 u 10 uu 1.0 T! 1.0 V 001 V 0.01 0.03 001 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.01 Sf-iu 0.01 u 0.01 u 001 Sulbu Cane MDL m/L a*a. V 1000 770 1200 *70 770 990 1000 0.2 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2T T\D n.V A *\JTW JR Y lA N 0N 000-16 000337 USFW 0913 T able 1.14 R esults o f the A n alysis for TOC in S oil W A # 2-273 D ry Run Creek Site B ased on D ry W eight Sample ID Location Cone Percent 302C 300C 303C 301C 304C 306C 305C 505C 504C 503C 500C 501C 502C 500C 507C 508C 509C 5IOC 511C 512C 513B Area III Reference Upper Trib A Lee Creek Upper TribB Area IV Area II Area EC Area IIB Area HA Areal A Area IB Area I C Area III A Area III B Area m C Area IV A Area IV B Area IV C Ref A Ref B 3.5 3.6 3.3 1.9 3.5 4.5 3.1 7.8 5.1 6.1 7.7 7 8.5 5.2 5.8 5.7 6 6.3 9.2 6.5 11.6 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00047 000338 USFW 0914 ScnplelD MethodBlank 30OG J01G 302G 3030 304G 305G 306G Loason Reference Lee Creek Ana IQ UpperTnb A Upper TribB Ana H Area IV Table 1.15 Rcauhaefthc AnahnufarOeganoFbtcndeab Sail WAD2-273 DryKoi Cntk Sue Baled an DryWogh Tcnflueraethylcne HBoflucroprepylac Cone MDL Cone MDL M*g pg/kg W*g 4 CUcndiihKraHttaBtt Cone MDL HB'kg pgritg TIC Sewedfar M hnoojrdofaiaane 1-Ghfaro-l.l.ZZimihnoedwne PerQucrouodegyioie U2 U4 u3 u3 u3 u3 u3 u4 u2 u4 u3 u3 V3 V3 V3 u4 V NoncFowd V 4 None Fond V 3 NoicFowd V 3 NoneFound V 3 NmFowd u 3 Kane Found u 3 NaneFowd V 4 NoneFound irTrDEUAJW7D\ORY2ANON 00048 000339 USFW 0915 Table 1.16 Results o f the Analysis for Grain Size WA 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample ID Location 501E 500E 502E 303B 304B 506E 507E 508E 51 IE 503E 504E Area IB Area IA AiealC UpperTrihA UppTribB Area RIA Area luti Area IHC Area IVC Area HA Area DB Sieve Size-mm 19.0 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.850 CPT" 100.0 100.0 97.9 97.1 96.3 CPT** 100.0 97.6 93.6 88-2 84.6 CPT** 100.0 100.0 963 923 88.9 CPT** 100.0 98.6 852 62.1 46.6 CPT** 100.0 97.5 89.1 62.9 37.3 CPT" 100.0 98.1 82.6 66.9 54.4 CPT" 100.0 100.0 992 98.7 97.5 CPT" 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.6 99.1 CPT** 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.7 993 CPT" 100.0 100.0 99.5 993 99.1 CPT" 100.0 100.0 95.5 89.7 82.5 0.425 95.1 81.9 86.5 37.8 27.1 463 94.6 98.0 96.7 98.4 77.9 0.250 93.1 79.9 84.9 34.6 23.7 40.0 90.1 96.4 91.8 96.7 75.3 0.106 85.4 71.6 792 30.9 19.8 30.7 76.7 87.9 76.6 843 64.8 0.0750 80.8 67.5 75.4 29.8 18.7 28.6 70.3 81.9 70.7 76.0 59.1 Particle Diameter-mm PD*** PD*** PD*** PD*** PD*** PD*** PD*** PD*** PD*" PD*" PD*** 0.074 75.5 672 70.5 29.8 20.6 31.5 713 78.0 70.5 753 60.3 0.005 39.3 35.5 38.0 14.6 8.9 15.8 353 40.8 41.5 38.5 29.6 0.001 17.7 8.4 18.6 5.6 1.8 5.4 13.8 18.7 24.3 16.5 8.0 Sample ID Location 302B 512E Area in RefA 513E RefB 514E RefC 300B 301B 509E 510E 505E 306B 305B Reference Lee Creek Area IVA Area IVB Area IIC AreaTV Areali Sieve Size-mm 19.0 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.850 0.425 0.250 0.106 0.0750 Particle CPT** 100.0 98.5 96.1 88.1 73.6 53.0 41.7 31.3 29.6 CPT** 100.0 97.1 96.0 90.3 85.2 81.4 79.1 74.9 72.9 CPT** 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.3 97.8 95.6 93.9 88.0 85.1 CPT** 100.0 98.4 95.9 93.5 91.8 91.6 902 89.6 85.7 CPT" 100.0 88.1 82.7 65.3 54.1 46.7 41.0 32.1 30.0 CPT" 100.0 88.8 81.0 74.3 71.4 63.7 42.5 15.3 12.8 CPT" 100.0 100.0 99.0 98.6 97.3 93.7 87.9 71.8 672 CPT" 100.0 100.0 98.6 98.0 96.9 93.7 87.9 69.6 62.7 CPT" 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.8 99.4 98.8 972 862 79.9 CPT" 100.0 99.6 98.5 96.5 91.1 75.9 613 41.1 35.9 CPT" 100.0 952 88.8 85.0 73.1 512 41.0 34.0 32.6 Diameter-mm PD*** PD*** PD*** PD*** PD*" PD" * PD*" PD*" PD" * PD" * PD*" 0.074 30.7 72.8 81.3 76.8 34.0 15.1 702 63.9 78.8 33.9 39.8 0.005 16.6 54.6 49.3 43.8 16.4 92 442 32.3 42.7 16.0 16.1 0.001 8.2 42.5 302 24.1 5.9 5.6 26.4 13.5 21.1 5.4 2.0 * * Denotes Cumulative Percent Through 'Particle Diameter-Hvrometer Analysis 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2GRAN 00049 000340 USFW 0916 Section 2 000341 USFW 0917 QA/QC for UNA Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for BNA in Soil Prior to extraction, each sample was spiked with a six component surrogate mixture consisting of nitrobenzene-dj, 2fluorobiphenyl, terphenyl-dM, phenol-d*. 2-fluorophenol, and 2,4,6-mbromophenol. The surrogate percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.1, ranged from 54 to 138. Twenty-eight out of 30 percent recoveries were within QC limits. Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for BNA in Soil Samples 1A was chosen for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.2, ranged from 86 to 127. Sixteen out of 22 recoveries were within QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.2, ranged from zero (0) to 10. All 11 RPD values were within QC limits. Results of the Sunroeate Recoveries for BNA in Bovine Fecal Matter Prior to extraction, each sample was spiked with a six component surrogate mixture consisting of n itro b en zen e^, 2fluorobiphenyl, terphenyl-du , phenol-d*, 2-fluorophenol, and 2,4,6-tribromophenol. The reported surrogate percent recoveries, also listed in Table 2.3, ranged from 32 to 96. All 66 percent recoveries were within QC limits. Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for BNA in Bovine Fecal Matter Sample 807 was chosen for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.4, ranged from 32 to 96. All 22 recoveries were within QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.4, ranged from 4 to 35. No QC limits are available for the RPDs. Results of the LCS Analysis for BNA in Bovine Fecal Matter The LCS percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.4, ranged from 42 to 80. Ten out of 11 recoveries were within QC limits. tC73\DEL\AR\9709\DRYRUNA2 00050 000342 USFW 0918 Table 2.3 Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for SNA in Bovine Fecal Matter UA # 2-273 Dry Rwi Creek Site SanpLe # S u rro g a te s N82 FBP TPH PHL 2FP TBP XXX 807 62 52 54 64 58 50 805 72 63 63 82 85 46 806 75 66 66 94 96 49 801 74 63 60 93 87 48 802 61 49 45 72 73 40 804 73 56 48 96 81 53 803 46 40 35 57 55 32 807MS 54 47 59 56 55 48 807MS0 48 52 81 51 67 44 LCS 52 48 60 56 65 49 Method Blank 50 44 58 58 47 47 SURROGATE LIMITS 51 (NBZ) = N itro b e n z e n e -d 5 52 (FBP) = 2 -F lu o ro b ip h e n y l 53 (TPH) = T erp h en y t-d 1 4 (28-106) (34-113) (30-133) 54 (PHD = P h e n o l-5 (29-111) 55 (2FP) = 2-F luorop henol (23-121) 56 (TBP) = 2 ,4 .6 -T rib rc m o p h e n o t (2 2 -9 7 ) 2273\DEL\AR\970W)RYRUNA2 00053 000343 USFW 0919 Table 2.4 Results of the HS/MSD and LCS for BNA in Bovine Fecal Natter UA * 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight MS/MSD R e s u lts Sample Ho.: 807 !------------------------------------ Spike Sample -- n s---------- r US T Be Added C o n c e n tra t i on C o n c e n tra t i on X [L im its COMPOUND (m g/kg) (mg/kg) j (mg/kg) te c Rec. 2B tB S H C * B I * tS S n tI s n IBBBBSBSt IBBBBBBBBtBBl}1 t HHUBBt Phenol 6 .0 U 2 .7 45 21-100 2 -C h lo ro p h en o t 6.0 U 2 .6 43 20-105 1.-P i chlorobenzene j 4.0 U 1.6 ! 40 23-102 N -N itro so -d i-n -p ro p .d ) 4.0 1 .2 .4 - Trichlorobenzene 4.0 4-Chloro-3-methylphenoT 6.0 A cenaphthen e___________ 4 .0 4-N itrophcnol 6.0 2 .4 - D initrotolucne 4.0 P e n ta c h lo ro p h e n o l______ 6 .0 Pvrene 4.0 !__ ___________ 1-------- U 2.3 u 1.6 ! u 3.2 u 1.9 u 4.0 ! u 2.2 u 4.0 u 2.1 -------------------------- 1__________________ 58 30-111 40 27-109 53 23-108 48 43-117 94 11-114 55 32-108 67 18-112 53 24-143 - 4 I Sdi tee Added MSD MSD C oncentration X J QC L im its COMPOUND (m g/kg) (mg/kg) Rec RPD RPD Rec. SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS2KSSSSSSB {sssssacxsaessLSS BI1M BSSCSS BSSSSS !t r a m 2 i Phenol 6.0 ! 2.5 42 8 NA 2 1 - 10 0! 2-C h lo ro isn en o l 6 .0 2 .3 38 12 NA 20-105! 1,4-D ichlorobenzene 4.0 1.3 32 21 NA 23-102! N -N itro so -d i-n -p ro p .d ) 4.0 2 .2 55 4 NA 30-111! 1,2,4-T richlorobenzene 4.0 1.5 38 6 NA 27-109! 4-C hloro-3-m ethylphenoI 6.0 3 .6 60 12 NA 23-108! A cenaphthene 4 .0 2 .2 55 15 NA 43-117! 4-N itrophenot 6 .0 5 .0 83 22 NA 22-113! 2.4-D initrotoluene 4.0 2 .6 65 17 NA 32-108! Pentachlorophenol 6.0 4 .2 70 5 NA 18-112! Pvrene 4.0 3 .0 75 35 NA 24-143 1_________________ ' 1 ________ ' ' LCS R e s u lts COMPOUND C ertifiec LCS T LCS ,QC Cone. C oncentration X Lim its j ( m g / k g ) j (mg/kg) Rec X Rec Phenol ! 2 -C h lo ro p h en o t 1,4-D ichlorobenzene ! N -N itroso-di-n-prop.d) ! 1,2,4-T richlorobenzene 4-C hloro-3 -m ethylphenol ! A cenaphthene 4-N itrophenol 2.4-D initrotoT 'uene ! P e n ta c h lo ro p h e n o l Pvrene 5.0 5.0 3.3 3.3 3.3 5.0 3.3 5.0 3.3 5.0 3.3 t -------------------------------------------- ------------ i -- ! ! 2.4 48 32-96' 2 .2 44 34-102 1.4 42 39-98 1 .8 55 39-104 1.4 42* 43-99 3.1 62 36-102 1 .7 52 44-122 4 .0 80 23-113 1 .8 55 39-106 3 .7 74 31-113 1 .9 58 44-126 1 -- - (1) N -N itroso-di-n-propylam ine r73\OEL\AR\9709\DRYRUNA2 00054 000344 USFW 0920 QA/QC for Pesticide/PCB Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Soil The surrogate percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.5, ranged from 50 to 102. All 10 recoveries are within QC limits. Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Soil Soil sample 1A was chosen for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analyses. The percent recoveries, list in Table 2.6, ranged from 99 to 136. All 12 recoveries are within QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.6, ranged from zero (0) to 7. All 6 RPD values are within QC limits. 2273\DEL\AR\970\DRYRUNA2 00055 000345 USFW 0921 Table 2.5 Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Soil WA#2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample ID Percent Recovery TCMX DCBP SBLK 1A 2A 1A MS 1AMSD 102 50 98 51 98 51 98 50 98 50 Tetrachloro-m-xylene (TCMX) Decachlorobiphenyl (DCBP) ADVISORY QC Limits 30-150 30-150 2273\DEL\AR\9708\DRY2PSTS 00056 000346 USFW 0922 Table 2.6 Results of the M S/M SD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Soil WA#2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry W eight Sample ID: 1A Compound SCamonpele (PQ/kg) (ApSdMgpd/iSkkeged) CMonSe (pg/kg) RM%eSe SMpSikDe (Apdgd/kegd) (pCMgoS/nkDeg) MR%SeeD RPD % RQAeCdevLisimoRriytsPD AgH-ledBpnHtnaCchlor Dieldhn Endnn p,p'-DDT U U 51.28 51.28 53.22 56.28 104 110 51.28 53.04 51.28 56.68 103 111 u u 51.28 102.56 50.97 104.38 u u 110022..5566 110356..5086 99 102 113033 51.28 51.10 102.56 104.62 110022..5566 111339..6680 100 102 111316 1 46-127 11 073 35-130 3341--113342 4223--113394 50 31 43 38 45 50 2273\DEL'AR\970a\DRY2PSTS 00057 000347 USFW 0923 QA/QC for TAL Metals Results of the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil The LCS analysis was used to check the accuracy of the calibration curves. All 69 recovered concentrations were within QC limits. The percent recoveries for the compounds found in the LCS are listed in Table 2.7, ranged from 33 to 194. Results of the MS Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil Samples 508A. 301D and 1A were chosen for matrix spike (MS) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.8, ranged from 19 to 130. Forty-two out of 49 reported recoveries were within the QC limits. The percent recoveries were not'calculated for aluminum and iron for samples 508A and 3010, and for manganese for samples 301D and 1A, because the sample concentration of the analytes was greater than or equal to four times the spike concentration. Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil Samples 508A, 30ID and 1A were selected for duplicate analysis. The reported relative percent differences (RPDs) for the duplicate analysis, listed in Table 2.9, ranged from zero (0) to 49. Forty-one out of 46 reported recoveries were within the QC limits. QC limits are not available for 4 reported recoveries. Antimony, m erouy, selenium, silver, and thallium in samples 508A, 301D and 1A, cadmium in samples 508A and 301D, beryllium and nickel in sample 301D the RPDs were not calculated because one or both of the results for the analyte were not detected. Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Bovine Fecal Matter The LCS analysis was used to check the accuracy o f the calibration curves. All 23 reported concentrations for the compounds found in the LCS are within QC limits and are listed in Table 2.10. Results of the MS Analysis for TAL Metals in Bovine Fecal Matter Sample 807 was chosen for matrix spike (MS) analysis. The reported percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.11, ranged from 34 to 120. All reported recoveries were within the QC limits. The percent recoveries were not calculated for aluminum, manganese and iron because the sample concentration of the analytes was greater than four times the spike concentration. Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Bovine Fecal Matter Sample 807 was selected for duplicate analysis. The reported relative percent differences (RPDs) for the duplicate analysis, listed in Table 2.12. ranged from zero (0) to 18. No QC limits are available. Antimony, cadmium, mercury, selenium, silver, and thallium RPDs were not calculated because one or both of the results for the analyte were not detected. Results of the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna The LCS analysis was used to check the accuracy of the calibration curves. LCS 7, LCS 10, and LCS 13 had all 54 percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.13, within QC limits. The balance of the LCSs had recovered concentration QC limns instead of percent recovery QC limits. Seventy-two out of 100 recovered concentrations, also listed in Table 2.13, for compounds found in the LCSs which were within QC Limits, percent recoveries were calculated by REAC for these LCSs and are also listed in Table 2.13. The percent recoveries ranged from 75 to 132 for the entire set o f LCSs. Results of the MS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna Samples 901A. IB, 904C, 124. 1010. and 045 were chosen for matrix spike (MS) analysis. The reported percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.14, ranged from 14 to 141. Eighty-seven out of 89 reported recoveries were within the QC limits. The percent recoveries were not calculated for aluminum (901A and 904C), manganese (904C) and iron (901A, 124 and 045) because the sample concentration of the analytes was greater than four times the spike concentration. 000348 ~73\DEL\AR\9709\DRYRUNA2 00058 USFW 0924 QAJQC for TAL Metals (Cont) Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna Samples 901A, 1A, 904B, 902A, 124,1010, and 045 were selected for duplicate 'analysis. The reported relative percent differences (RPDs) for the duplicate analysis, listed in Table 2.15, ranged from zero (0) to 106. No QC limits are available. Twenty RPDs were not calculated because one or both of the results for the analyte were not detected. Results of the LCS A nalysis for TAL Metals (Flora) The LCS analysis was used to check the accuracy of the calibration curves. The percent recoveries for the compounds found in the LCS are listed in Table 2.16, ranged from 89 to 110. All 18 recoveries were within the QC limits. Results of the MS Analysis for TAL Metals in Flora Sample 609 was chosen for matrix spike (MS) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.17, ranged from 66 to 123. All 19 recoveries were within the QC limits. Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Flora Sample 609 was selected for duplicate analysis. The reported relative percent differences (RPDs) for the duplicate analysis, listed in Table 2.18, ranged from zero (0) to 12. No QC limits are available. Antimony, arsenic, beryllium, mercury, selenium, silver, vanadium, and thallium RPDs were not calculated because one or both o f the results for the analyte were not detected. 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRYRUNA2 00059 000349 USFW 0925 LCS I Metal Table 2.7 Result* of the LCS Analysts for TAL Metals m Soil WA* 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg 54 Recovery Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Banum Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 6210 51.2 62.7 260 87.2 77.4 2760 76.9 101 58.2 15300 122 1800 232 2.51 163 2020 91.7 69.6 474 50.5 142 114 7230 16.8 63.8 285 91.2 77 2770 76.3 107 59.4 13200 115 1870 249 2.36 168 2340 84.0 78.3 444 58.0 114 112 3870-8570 12.2-90.1 43.9-81.5 190-330 67-107 51.4-103 1770-3750 59.4-94.6 76.8-125 45.9-70.4 8840-21700 82.7-160 1440-2160 178-285 1.60-3.41 122-204 1410-2630 65.5-118 51.4-87.7 305-645 24.0-76.8 89.2-195 84.1-144 116 33 102 110 105 99 100 99 106 102 86 94 104 107 94 103 116 92 113 94 115 80 98 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS OOOGO 000350 USFW 0926 LCS2 Metal Table 2.7 (Coot) Rewhs of ihe LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil WAX 2-273 Dry Run Creek Si* Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg %Recovery Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 3740 98.9 349.0 111 34.7 46.9 2970 115.0 191 88.1 7890 52.4 2850 151 13.1 89.7 2790 185.0 154.0 1220 49.9 44.4 101 2896.1 '192.2 367.8 103.4 37.1 503 3005.8 130.1 216.5 98.4 6382.2 54.5 2900 163.5 10.1 101.4 3014 177.9 177.7 1286 45.5 45.5 98.5 1660-5800 29.7-394 171-520 18.9-205 22.2-48.6 24.4-67.6 1870-4190 62.3-163 115-272 50.2-128 2887-11700 27.6-74.4 1710-4100 101-204 6.3-20.5 49.3-131 1730-3680 96.3-276 69.4-225 683-1770 24.9-74.8 24.9-74.8 52.5-150 77 194 105 93 107 107 101 113 113 112 81 104 102 108 77 113 108 96 115 105 91 102 98 2273\DEL\AR\97D9\DRY2TALS 00061 000351 USFW 0927 LCS3 Metal Table 2.7 (Cont) Results of the LCS Analysis fiorTAL Metals in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg % Recovery Aluminum 6210 6280 3870-8570 101 Antimony 512 66.1 12.2-90.1 129 Arsenic 62.7 65.6 43.9-81.5 105 Barium 260 276 190-330 106 Beryllium 87.2 88.8 67-107 102 Cadmium It A 73 51.4-103 94 Calcium 2760 2550 1770-3750 92 Chromium 76.9 75.4 59.4-94.6 98 Cobalt 101 102 76.8-125 101 Copper 58.2 57.3 45.9-70.4 98 Iron 15300 15300 8840-21700 100 Lead 122 112 82.7-160 92 Magnesium 1800 1730 1440-2160 96 Manganese 232 239 178-285 103 Mercury 2.51 2.26 1.60-3.41 90 Nickel 163 161 122-204 99 Potassium 2020 2110 1410-2630 104 Selenium 91.7 99.0 65.5-118 108 Silver 69.6 74.3 51.4-87.7 107 Sodium 474 419 305-645 88 Thallium 50.5 58.8 24.0-76.8 116 Vanadium 142 148 89.2-195 104 Zinc 114 107 84.1-144 94 -- --------------------------------------------------------- ------ 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 000G2 000352 USFW 0928 Meta) Aluminum Aluminum Antimony Antimony Anenic Araenic Barium Barium Beryllium Beryllium Cadmium Cadmium Chromium Chromium Cobalt Cobalt Copper Copper Iron Iron Lead Lead Manganese Manganese Mercury Mercury Nickel Nickel Selenium Selenium Silver Silver Thallium Thallium Vanadium Vanadium Zinc Zinc Client * 508A 301D 508A 30 ID 50SA 30 ID S08A 301D 508A 301D 508A 301D 508A 301D S08A 301D 508A 301D 508A 30 ID 508A 301D 508A 30 ID 508A 30 ID 508A 301D 508A 301D 508A 301D 508A 301D 508A 301D 508A 301D Table 2.8 R aulti of the MS Analyte far TAL Metali m Soil WAX 2-273 Dry Ron Crack Site Baaed on Dry Weight Sample Original Cooc. Cone. Spike mg/ke me/kr Recovered Cooc. 66Recovery Spike Spike me* QC Limit 66 Recovery 9640 500 7080 480 9590 6880 NC 60-130 NC 60-130 V 130.0 55 42 30-120 U 120.0 23 19 30-120 4 10.00 10 60 60-130 7 10.00 13 60 60-130 126 500 91 480 629 546 101 60-130 95 60-130 1 13.0 U 1Z0 14 100 60-130 12 100 60-130 V 13.0 V 12.0 12 92 60-130 12 100 60-130 26 50.0 14 48.0 74 96 60-130 63 102 60-130 16 130.0 144 98 60-130 14 120.0 134 100 60-130 17 6Z0 11 60.0 79 100 60-130 66 92 60-130 22600 250.0 22000 250.0 20300 21400 NC 60-130 NC 60-130 24 130.0 144 92 60-1$0 V 120.0 126 105 60-130 1300 130.0 450 120.0 1370 725 54 * NC 60-130 60-130 V 0.500 0.5 100 60-130 V 0.500 0.5 100 60-130 20 130.0 16 120.0 141 129 93 60-130 94 60-130 U 2.00 c ZOO 1 50 * 60-130 1 50 60-130 u 13.0 V 12.0 14 108 60-130 12 100 60-130 V 13.00 V 12.00 11 85 60-130 12 100 60-130 29 130 20 120 149 134 92 60-130 95 60-130 49 130.0 39 120.0 167 147.0 91 60-130 90 60-130 2273VDELtARi9709\DRY2TAi.S 000G3 000353 USFW 0929 Metal Antimony Table 2 8 (Cool) Reaulli of the MS A&alyni for TAL Metals in Soil WAX 2-273 Dry Ron Creek Site Baaed on Dry Weight Client# 1A Sample Original Cone. Cone. Spike me/ka me/ki 1.0 77.2 Recovered Cone. %Recovoy Spike Spike nsfr______ 43.8 35 QC Limit % Recovery 75-125 Arsenic 1A 11.9 308.60 336.4 105 75-125 Barium 1A 147.9 308.6 )48.5 130 75-125 Beryllium 1A 1.4 7.7 104 117 75-125 Cadmium 1A 3.4 7.7 11.6 106 75-125 Chromium 1A 23.5 30.9 57.5 110 75-125 Cobalt 1A 24.6 77.2 125.2 130 75-125 Copper 1A 26.2 38.6 74.5 125 75-125 Lead 1A 32.3 77.2 118.9 112 75-125 Manganese 1A 1601 77.2 2403 NC 75-125 Mercury 1A C 0.770 0.7924 103 75-125 Nickel 1A 27.9 77.2 123.9 124 75-125 Selenium 1A 1.16 308.64 267.4 86 75-125 Silver 1A 0.3 15.4 15.5 99 75-125 Thallium IA 0 49 308.64 323.8 105 75-125 Vanadium 1A 53.6 77 135.6 106 75-125 Zinc 1A 70 4 77.2 166 124 75-125 2273\DEl\AR\9709\DRY2T ALS 000G4 000354 USFW 0930 Table 2.9 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Baaed on Dry Weight Sample: 508A Metal Sample Result mg/kg Duplicate Sample Result mg/ke Relative Percent Difference QC Limits Relative Percent Difference Aluminum 9640 10500 9 20 Antimony U U NC 20 Arsenic 4 3 29 NA Banum 126 129 2 20 Beryllium 1 1 0 20 Cadmium U U NC 20 Calcium 2190 2290 4 20 Chromium 26 43 49 * 20 Cobalt 16 16 0 20 Copper 17 17 0 20 Iron 22600 21700 4 20 Lead 24 22 9 20 Magnesium 2580 2730 6 20 Manganese 1300 1310 1 20 Mercury U U NC NA Nickel 20 21 5 20 Potassium 950 1100 15 20 Selenium U U NC NA Silver U U NC 20 Sodium 32 35 9 20 Thallium U U NC NA Vanadium 29 29 0 20 Zinc 49 51 4 20 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TAL5 00065 000355 USFW 0931 Table 2.9 (Cont) Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample: 30ID Metal Sample Result mo/ke Duplicate Sample Result ma/kg Relative Percent Difference QC Limits Relative Percent Difference Aluminum Antimony 7080 U 6380 U 10 NC 20 20 Arsenic 7 5 33 NA Barium Beryllium Cadmium 91 U U 67 30 20 U NC 20 U NC 20 Calcium 970 874 10 20 Chromium 14 12 15 20 Cobalt 14 11 24 20 Copper 11 8 32 20 Iron 22000 18600 17 20 Lead U U NC 20 Magnesium 2050 1620 23 * 20 Manganese 450 429 5 20 Mercury U U NC NA Nickel 16 u NC 20 Potassium 904 948 5 20 Selenium U U NC NA Silver U U NC 20 Sodium 33 32 3 20 Thallium 13 8 48 NA Vanadium 20 20 0 20 Zinc 39 35 1! 20 2273\DELtARtS709\DRY2TALS OOOtjU 000356 USFW 0932 Table 2.9 (Com) Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Soil WA* 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample: 1A Metal Sample Result me/ks Duplicate Sample Result ma/k Relative Percent Difference QC Limits Relative Percent Difference Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium 13595 U 12 148 1.4 3.4 3272 24 .11247 U 10 142 1.3 3.0 3157 20 19 NC 17 4 7 12 4 15 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Cobalt 25 24 2 20 Copper 26 24 8 20 Iron 38534 32891 16 20 Lead 32 32 0 20 Magnesium 3714 3388 9 20 Manganese 1601 1657 3 20 Mercury U U NC NA Nickel 28 25 11 20 Potassium 1659 1347 21 NA Selenium U 1.3 NC 20 Silver U U NC 20 Sodium 103 105 2 20 Thallium u U NC 20 Vanadium 54 46 16 20 Zinc 70 65 7 20 2273\DELVAR\9709\DRY2TA1.S 00067 000357 \jSFNN 9933 LCS1 Metal Table 2.10 Results of the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Bovine Fecal Matter WAP 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Recovered Cone mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium ' Beryllium Cadmium 'Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 7520 46.8 65.0 286 89.9 77.6 2730 77.9 105 59.8 15600 108 1870 241 2.36 168 2310 82 76.5 456 47.6 148 114 3870-8570 12.2-90.1 43.9-81.5 190-330 67-107 51.4-103 1770-3750 59 4-94.6 76.8-125 45.9-70.4 8840-21700 82.7-160 1440-2160 178-285 1.60-3.41 122-204 1410-2630 65.5-118 51.4-87.7 305-645 24.0-76.8 89.2-195 84.1-144 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS Gb0 0 0 000358 USFW 0934 Metal Aluminum Table 2 .11 Reaulti of the MS A aaiyn for TA1. M euli is Bovine Fecal Matter WAH 2-273 Dry R at Creek Sne Baaed ao Dry Weight Client * *07 Sample Original Cone. Caie. Spike make make 13700 490 Recovered Cone. Spike ms/kg 14200 % Recovery Spike NC QC Linda % Recovery 60-130 Antimony 107 U 120 41 34 30-120 Ancnic *07 4.0 10 12 to 60-130 Barium *07 1*0 490 685 103 60-130 .Beryllium *07 1J 12 14 106 60-130 Cadmium 807 U 12 12 100 60-130 Chromium *07 21 50 68 94 60-130 Cobalt *07 16 120 145 10* 60-130 Copper *07 17 60 77 100 60-130 Iron *07 25700 240 25100 NC 60-130 Lead *07 14 5 20 120 60-130 Manganese *07 1340 120 1430 NC 60-130 Mercury *07 V 0.5 0.5 100 60-130 Nickel *07 23 120 146 103 60-130 Selenium *07 U 2 1.2 60 60-130 Silver *07 V 12 12 100 60-130 Thallium *07 U 12 *5 71 60-130 Vanadium *07 33 120 154 101 60-130 Zinc *07 53 120 173 100 60-130 2273VDEL\AR\9709\DRY2TAJ.S 00069 000359 USFW 0935 Table 2.12 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TAL Metals in Bovine Fecal Matter WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample: 807 Metal Sample Result mg/kg Duplicate Sample Result ma/ks Relative Percent Difference Aluminum 13700 13600 1 Antimony U U NC Arsenic 4.0 4.8 18 Barium 180 177 2 Beryllium 1.3 1.3 0 Cadmium Calcium U 1930 U 1860 NC 4 Chromium 21 20 4 Cobalt 16 15 6 Copper 17 16 6 Iron 25700 24900 3 Lead 14 16 13 Magnesium 3000 2940 2 Manganese 1340 1220 9 Mercury U U NC Nickel 23 22 4 Potassium 1300 1300 0 Selenium U U NC Silver U u NC Sodium 96 98 2 Thallium U U NC Vanadium 33 32 3 Zinc 53 52 2 2273\DEL\ARS709\DRY2TALS 00070 000360 USFW 0936 LCS1 Metal Table 2.13 Results uf the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals infauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg % Recovery Aluminum Arsenic .Chromium Copper Iron Manganese Mercury Nickel Zinc 10.9 18.0 34.7 2.34 142 3.66 4.64 19.4 25.6 8.8 * 17.9 33.8 2.29 142.0 3.68 4.8 17.5 22.9 9.2-12.6 16.9-19.1 29.2-40.2 2.18-2.5 132-152 3.32-4.00 4.38-4.9 16.3-22.5 23.3-27.9 81 99 97 98 100 101 103 90 89 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00071 000361 USFW 0937 LCS 2 M eial Table 2.13 (Coni) Results of the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg Q C Lim its mg/kg % Recovery o Alum inum A rse n ic Chrom ium Copper Iron M anganese M ercury N ic k e l Zinc 10.9 18.0 34.7 2.34 142 3.66 4.64 19.4 25.6 17.6 33.5 2.24 145.0 3.67 4.6 17.0 23.3 9.2-12.6 16.9-19.1 29.2-40.2 2.18-2.5 132-152 3.32-4.00 4.38-4.9 16.3-22.5 23.3-27.9 83 98 97 96 102 100 99 88 91 2273\DEl\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00072 000362 USFW 0938 LCS 3 Metal Table 2.13 (Coni) Results of the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg % Recovery Aluminum Arsenic Cadmium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Selenium Silver Zmc 25.2 16.6 20.8 0.24 25.8 1103 0.22 6.88 6.06 0.608 85.8 22.9 16.1 21.6 * 0.20 28.4 * 1020.0 * 0.21 6.73 4.7 * 0.597 97.7 * 22.8-27.6 15.5-17.7 20.3-21.3 0.19-0.29 24.7-26.9 1056-1150 0.20-0.24 6.32-7.44 5.50-6.62 0.576-0.64 83.3-88.3 91 97 104 83 110 92 ' 95 98 78 98 114 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00073 000363 USFW 0939 LCS 4 Metal Table 2.13 (Corn) Results of the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna WAM2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg % Recovery Aluminum Arsenic Cadmium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Selenium Silver Zinc 25.2 16.6 20.8 0.24 25.8 1103 0.22 6.88 6.06 0.608 85.8 24.1 15.7 21.3 0.20 27.8 1080 0.23 6.58 6.0 0.606 94.9 22.8-27.6 15.5-17.7 20.3-21.3 0.19-0.29 24.7-26.9 1056-1150 0.20-0.24 6.32-7.44 5.50-6.62 0.576-0.64 83.3-88.3 96 95 102 83 108 98 105 96 99 100 111 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00074 000364 USFW 0940 LCS 5 Metal Table 2.13 (Cont) Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna WAU 2-273 Diy Run Creek Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg % Recovery Aluminum Arsenic Cadmium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Selenium Silver Zinc 25.2 16.6 20.8 0.24 25.8 1103 0.22 6.88 6.06 0.608 85.8 26.0 14.5 * 19.5 * 0.19 25.2 1060 0.24 5.81 * 5.35 * 0.558 * 86.0 22.8-27.6 15.5-17.7 20.3-21.3 0.19-0.29 24.7-26.9 1056-1150 0.20-0.24 6.32-7.44 5.50-6.62 0.576-0.64 83.3-88.3 103 87 94 79 98 96 109 84 88 92 100 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00075 000365 USFW 0941 LCS 6 Metal Table 2.13 (C ost) Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna W A# 2-273 D iy Run Crede Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg % Recovery Aluminum Arsenic -Chromium Copper Iron Manganese Mercury Nickel Zinc 10.9 18.0 34.7 2.34 142 3.66 4.64 19.4 25.6 11.8 17.9 33.2 2.23 148.0 3.65 4.9 17.1 25.5 9.2-12.6 16.9-19.1 29.2-40.2 2.18-2.5 132-152 3.32-4.00 4.38-4.9 16.3-22.5 23.3-27.9 108 99 % 95 104 100 106 88 100 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TAIS OOOT6 000366 USFW 0942 LCS7 Metal Table 2.13 (Cont) Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna W A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. pg/L Recovered Cone. \i& L QC Limits % Recovery % Recovery Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Banum Beryllium Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Nickel Selenium Silver Thallium Vanadium Zinc 2000 500 500 2000 50 50 200 500 250 1000 500 500 500 250 50 . 100 500 500 2080 487 469 1990 50.1 49.0 203 522 249 1050 507 505 510 248 53.0 99.0 515 484 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 . 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 104 97 94 100 100 98 102 104 100 105 101 101 102 99 106 99 103 97 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00077 000367 USFW 0943 LCS 8 Metal Table 2.13 (Cont) Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals m Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg % Recovery Aluminum Arsenic Cadmium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Selenium Silver Zinc 25.2 16.6 20.8 0.24 25.8 1103 0.22 6.88 6.06 0.608 85.8 25.7 14.9 19.9 0.20 26.4 1070 0.20 6.19 * 5.1 * 0.561 93.4 22.8-27.6 15.5-17.7 20.3-21.3 0.19-0.29 24.7-26.9 1056-1150 0.20-0.24 6.32-7.44 5.50-6.62 0.576-0.64 83.3-88.3 102 90 96 83 102 97 91 90 84 92 109 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TAtS O O O Tb 000368 USFW 0944 LCS 9 Metal Table 2.13 (Cent) Results of the LCS Analysis for TAL Meuls in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Ron Creek Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg % Recovery Aluminum Arsenic Chromium ,Copper Iron Manganese Mercury Nickel Zinc 10.9 18.0 34.7 2.34 142 3.66 4.64 19.4 25.6 13.0 172 32.9 224 146 3.60 4.71 172 24.7 92-12.6 16.9-19.1 292-402 2.18-2.5 132-152 3.32-4.00 4.38-4.9 163-22.5 233-27.9 119 96 95 96 103 98 102 89 96 2273\DE L\AR\9709\DR Y2TALS 00079 000369 USFW 0945 LCS 10 Metal Table 2.13 (Cant) Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna W A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. Recovered Cone. pg/L QC Limits % Recovery % Recovery Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Nickel Selenium Silver Thallium Vanadium Zinc 2000 500 333 2000 50 50 200 500 250 ' 1000 500 500 500 167 50. 100 500 500 1990 462 287 1940 48.1 46.0 201 514 244 998 497 497 500 172 43.4 96.8 506 508 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 100 92 86 97 96 92 101 103 98 100 99 99 100 103 87 97 101 102 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00080 000370 USFW 0946 LC S 11 Metal Table 2.13 (Coot) Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL M etals is Fauna W A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. m g/kg Q C Lim its m g/kg % Recovery Aluminum Arsenic Cadmium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Selenium Silver Zinc 25.2 16.6 20.8 0.24 25.8 1103 0.22 6.88 6.06 0.608 85.8 26.0 14.4 * 19.5 * 0.20 26.0 1110 0.26 * 5.85 * 5.8 0.580 90.4 * 22.8-27.6 15.5-17.7 20.3-21.3 0.19-0.29 24.7-26.9 1056-1150 0.20-0.24 6.32-7.44 5.50-6.62 0.576-0.64 83.3-88.3 103 87 94 83 101 101 118 85 96 95 105 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 000S1 000371 USFW 0947 LCS 12 Metal Table 2.13 (Cont) Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Crede Site Certified Cone. mg/kg Recovered Cone. mg/kg QC Limits mg/kg % Recovery Aluminum Arsenic Chromium Copper Iron Manganese Mercury Nickel Zinc 10.9 18.0 34.7 2.34 142 3.66 4.64 19.4 25.6 14.4 17.5 32.9 2.17 152 3.62 4.43 17.3 26.6 9.2-12.6 16.9-19.1 29.2-40.2 2.18-2.5 132-152 3.32-4.00 4.38-4.9 16.3-22.5 23.3-27.9 132 97 95 93 107 99 95 89 104 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00082 000372 USFW 0948 LCS 13 Metal Table 2.13 (Coat) Results oftheL C S Analysis for TAL Metals in Fauna W A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. Recovered Cone. Hg/L QC Limits % Recovery % Recovery Aluminum 2000 2000 80-120 100 Antimony 500 467 80-120 93 -Arsenic 333 296 80-120 89 Barium 2000 1900 80-120 95 Beryllium 50 48.8 80-120 98 Cadmium 50 47.4 80-120 95 Chromium 200 1% 80-120 98 Cobalt 500 514 80-120 103 Copper 250 244 80-120 98 Iron 1000 996 80-120 100 Lead 500 517 80-120 103 Manganese 500 491 80-120 , 98 Nickel 500 497 80-120 99 Selenium 167 172 80-120 103 Silver 50 . 52.6 80-120 105 Thallium 500 517 80-120 103 Vanadium 500 496 80-120 99 Zinc 500 488 80-120 98 _____ __________________________________ 000373 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00083 USFW 0949 Metal Aluminum Table 2.14 Reuhi of the MS Aaalyw for TALMetals in Faana WA# 2-273 D ry & Creak Site Baaed on Dry Weight Client 4 901 A Sample Original Cooc Cane. Spike mg/Vt me/ki 797 200 Recovered Cone. Spike me/k* 1510 % Recovery Spike NC QC Limits % Recovery 60-130 Antimony 901 A U SO 36.4 73 30-120 Anemc 901 A 2.6 33 37.4 105 60-130 Barium 901 A i n 200 225 107 60-130 Beryllium 901 A 0.06 S.O 6.14 122 60-130 Cadmium 901 A 2.11 5.0 7.53 108 60-130 Chromium 901 A 1.7 20 27.7 130 60-130 Cobalt 901 A 8 45 50 71.2 126 60-130 Copper 901 A 13.6 25 41.6 112 60-130 Iron 901 A 964 100 1450 NC 60-130 Lead 901 A 0.59 50 51.9 103 60-130 Manganese 901 A 87.2 50 151 128 60-130 Mercury IB V 1.7 1.7 100 60-130 Nickel 901 A 3.0 50 620 118 60-130 Selenium 901 A 2 17 14 71 60-130 Silver 901 A 0.02 5.0 5.06 101 60-130 Thallium 901 A Vanadium 901 A 0.03 9.9 - 50 10.0 61.1 101 60-130 118 60-130 Zinc 901 A 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 116 50 168 104 60-130 00084 000374 USFW 0950 Metal AJummum Table 1 1 4 (Cool) R m lu o f the MS AnaJy* far TAL M aala a Fmmt WA# 2-273 Dry Rim Creek Sue Baaed oo Dry Weight Client# 904 C Sample Original Cone. Cone. Spike 3240 200 Recovered Cone. Spike tna/ks 3870 %Reeovcxy Spike NC Q C Limrti % Recovery 60-130 Antimony 904 C U 49 23.6 48 30-120 Anenic 904 C 3.6 33 36.3 100 60-130 Barium 904 C Beryllium 904 C 26.1 200 0.18 4.9 233 6.04 103 60-130 120 60-130 Parffmtwn 904 C 2.49 4.9 7.55 103 60-130 Chromium 904 C 6.2 20 30.8 123 60-130 Cobalt 904 C 8.0 49 66.8 120 60-130 Copper 904 C 20.0 23 45.5 102 60-130 Iron 904 C 2630 100 3330 NC 60-130 Lead 904 C 1.63 49 51.5 102 60-130 Manganese 904 C 132 49 139 14 60-130 Mercury 904 C V 0.9 0.97 108 60-130 Nickel 904 C 11.4 49 67.6 115 60-130 Selenium 904 C Silver 904 C Thallium 904 C Vanadium 904 C Zinc 904 C 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 3 16 0.03 4.9 0.03 9.9 6.3 49 115 49 18 4.97 10.1 70.0 162 94 60-130 101 60-130 102 60-130 130 60-130 96 60-130 00085 000375 USFW 0951 Metal Aluminum Table 2.14 (Coni) Roulu ofthe MS Analysis for TAL Melali in Fano* WAD 2-273 Dry Ron Creek Site Baaed on Dry Weight Client a 124 Sample Original Cone. Cone. Spike mc/kc mo/Ve 267 200 Recovered Cone. % Recovery Spike Spike *_______ 411 72 QC Units % Recovery 60-130 Antimony 124 V 49 49.1 100 30-120 Arsenic 124 V 49 58.8 120 60-130 Btrium 124 19.7 200 216 98 60-130 Beryllium 124 U 4.9 4.91 100 60-130 Cadmium 124 0.16 4.9 5.21 103 60-130 Chromium 124 1.8 20 22 101 60-130 Cobalt 124 0.37 49 52.2 106 60-130 Copper 124 6.7 23 31 97 60-130 Iron 124 418 100 442 NC 60-130 Lead 124 0.79 49 51.3 103 60-130 Manganese 124 49.7 49 79.3 60 60-130 Mercury 124 U 0.65 0.66 102 60-130 Nickel 124 1.4 49 50.5 100 60-130 Selenium 124 U 25 26 104 60-130 Silver 124 0.03 4.9 5.17 105 60-130 Thallium 124 C 9.1 10.0 102 60-130 Vanadium 124 0.4 49 52.9 107 60-130 Zinc 124 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 100 49 135 71 60-130 000S6 000376 USFW 0952 Metal Aluminum Table 2.14 (Cool) R auta of the MS Aaaly for TAL Maialata Fauna WA* 2-273 Dry Ron Creek Site Breed on Dry Weight Client * 1010 Sample Original Cone. Cone. Spike 164 194 Recovered Cooc. Spike me/ke 369 54 Recovery Spike 106 QC Limit 54 Recovery 60-130 Antimony >010 0.03 48 47.7 99 30-120 Ancnic 1010 0.7 32 31.9 98 60-130 Bchum 1010 28.4 190 222 102 60-130 Beryllium 1010 U 4.8 4.93 103 60-130 /***aAwilflll 1010 0.09 4.8 4.76 97 60-130 Chromium 1010 2.3 19 23.5 112 60-130 Cobalt 1010 0.27 48 51 106 60-130 Copper 1010 3.9 24 26.8 95 60-130 Iron 1010 167 97 273 109 60-130 Lead 1010 0.24 48 47.7 99 60-130 Manganese 1010 143 48 202 123 60-130 Mercury 1010 Nickel 1010 Selenium 1010 Silver 1010 Thallium 1010 Vanadium 1010 Zinc 1010 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS 0.28 0.5 1.7 48 U 16 0.04 4.8 u 9.7 04 48 156 48 0.61 50.0 15 4.1 9.6 50.8 203 66 60-130 101 60-130 94 60-130 85 60-130 99 60-130 105 60-130 98 60-130 00087 000377 USFW 0953 Mclal Aluminum Table 2.14 (Cool) RWcaAu*lta2o-2f7th3eDMrySRAibnaClyrieisekfoSriTteAL Mctala ia F n fieri on Dry Weight Client * 043 Sample Original Cone. Cone. Spike melee ma/kr 760 200 Recovered Cone Spike me/ke 966 ^Recovery Spike 103 QC Limits % Recovery 60-130 Anlisony 043 U 50 43.6 87 30-120 Aneiuc 043 U 33 30.7 93 60-130 Binum 043 23.3 200 211 94 60-130 Beryllium 045 0.03 5.0 4.73 94 60-130 Cadmium 045 0.3 5.0 4.92 92 60-130 Chromium 045 5.1 20 33.3 141 60-130 Cobalt 045 0.41 50 49.9 99 60-130 Copper 045 9.0 25 32 92 60-130 Iron 045 542 100 961 NC 60-130 Lead 045 1.25 50 523 102 60-130 Mangarme 045 26.9 50 73.3 93 60-130 Mercury 045 U 0.88 1.1 125 60-130 Nickel 045 2.8 50 48.7 92 60-130 Selenium 045 U 17 17 100 60-130 Silver 045 0.02 5.0 5 100 60-130 Thallium 045 U 9.9 9.97 101 60-130 Vanadium 045 1.2 50 49.8 97 60-130 Zinc 045 2273\DEl\AR\97Q9\DRY2TALS 75 7 50 126 101 60-130 00088 000378 USFW 0954 Table 2.15 Results o f the D uplicate A nalysis for M etals in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Rug Creek Site Baaed on D ry W eight Sample: 901 A Metal Sample Result me/ks Aluminum 797 Antimony U Arsenic 2.6 Barium 11.3 Beryllium 0.06 Duplicate Sample Result ma/ke 1100 U 2.8 13.2 0.08 Relative Percent Difference 32 NC 7 16 29 Cadmium 2.11 2.31 9 Calcium Chromium 3900 1.7 3840 2.3 2 30 Coball 8.45 9.18 8 Copper Iron 13.6 964 13.5 1140 1 17 Lead 0.59 0.74 23 Magnesium 940 955 0 Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc -Sample 1A 87.2 U 3.0 8500 2 0.02 4570 0.03 2.0 116 95.0 U 3.6 8700 2 0.02 4670 0.03 2.7 118 8 NC 18 2 0 0 2 0 29 2 22731DEUARI97091DRY2TA1.S 00083 000379 USFW 0955 Table 2.15 (Cont) Results ofthe DuplicateAnalysis for Metals in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample: 902 A Metal Sample Result me/kg Duplicate Sample Result mg/kg Relative Percent Difference Aluminum 867 1270 38 Antimony U U NC Arsenic 8.4 83 1 Barium 11.5 13.1 33 Beryllium 0.07 0.08 12 Cadmium 2.27 2.29 1 Calcium 3900 4170 7 Chromium 1.9 2.4 23 Cobalt 9.46 9.08 4 Copper 14.2 13.5 5 Iron 987 1440 37 Lead 0.53 0.75 34 Magnesium 899 970 8 Manganese 85.1 964 12 Mercury U U NC Nickel 3.1 3.3 6 Potassium 8500 9000 7 Selenium 3 3 0 Silver 0.04 0.03 25 Sodium 4330 4570 5 Thallium 0.02 0.02 0 Vanadium 2.3 3.0 27 Zinc 130 120.0 8 -Sample 904B 2273\DEL\AR\S709\DRY2TALS 00090 000380 USFW 0956 Table 2.15 (Cent) Results o f the Duplicate Analysis for Metals in Fsum WA# 2-273 Dry Rar C rart SH* Based on Dry Weight Sample: 124 Metal Sample Result males Duplicate Sample Result me/ke Relative Percent Difference Aluminum 267 270 1 Antimony U U NC Arsenic U U NC ,Barium 19.7 13.9 35 Beryllium U U NC Cadmium 0.16 0.16 0 Calcium 31900 17700 57 Chromium l.S 1.9 5 Cobalt 0.37 0.36 3 Copper 6.7 12 7 Iron 418 397 5 Lead 0.79 0.71 11 Magnesium 1370 1140 18 Manganese 49.7 39.8 22 Mercury U U NC Nickel 14 1.4 0 Potassium 10400 10600 2 Selenium U U NC Silver 0.03 U NC Sodium 4810 4700 2 Thallium U U NC Vanadium 04 04 0 _Zi_nc__ ______1_00________8_4.0_________17______________ 2273\DL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS oocm 000381 USFW 0957 Table 2.IS (Coat) Results of ibe Duplicate Analysis for Metals in Fauna WA* 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample: 1010 Metal Sample Resuli me/ke Aluminum 164 Antimony 0.03 .Arsenic 0.7 Barium 28.4 "Beryllium U Cadmium 0.09 Calcium 31200 Chromium 2.3 Cobalt 0.27 Copper 3.9 Iron 167 Lead 0.24 Magnesium 1360 Manganese 143 Mercury 0.28 Nickel 1.7 Potassium 5950 Selenium U Silver 0.04 Sodium 2640 Thallium U Vanadium 0.4 Zinc 156 Duplicate Sample Result mz/ke 189 0.03 0.8 29.4 U 0.08 32100 7.5 034 6.2 239 0.22 1360 151 0.27 5.5 5820 U 0.03 2590 U 0.5 164.0 Relative Percent Difference 14 0 13 3 NC 12 3 106 23 46 35 9 0 5 4 106 2 NC 29 2 NC 22 5 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2TALS oooyL ' 000382 iq f W 0958 Table 2.15 (Cant) Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Metals in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample: 045 Metal Sample Result mg/kg Aluminum 820 Antimony U Arsenic U Barium 23.3 Beryllium 0.03 Cadmium 0.3 Duplicate Sample Result mg/kg 785 U u 26.1 0.04 0.29 Relative Percent Difference 4 NC NC 11 29 3 Calcium 20100 21200 5 Chromium Cobalt 5.1 0.41 2.5 0.43 68 5 Copper 9 8.9 1 Iron 912 805 12 Lead 1.25 1.26 1 Magnesium 1320 1320 0 Manganese 26.9 28.3 5 Mercury U U NC Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 2.8 9480 U 0.02 4230 U 1.2 75.7 1.9 9470 U U 4220 U 1.1 82.4 38 0 NC NC 0 NC 9 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2273\DEL'AR\9709\DRY2TALS 00033 000383 USFW 0959 LCS1 Metal Table 2.16 Results o f the LCS Analysis for TAL Metals (Flora) WA# 2-273 Diy Run Creek Site Certified Cone. pg/L Recovered Cone. pg/L QC Limits pg/L % Recovery Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Nickel Selenium Silver Thallium Vanadium Zinc 2000 500 333 2000 50 50 200 500 250 1000 500 500 500 167 50 100 500 500 2170 487 297 1980 49.4 48.5 207 528 247 1100 501 544 514 157 54.4 97.8 523 454 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 . 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 80-120 109 97 89 99 99 97 104 106 99 110 100 109 103 94 109 98 105 91 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DR Y2TALS oooa-i 000384 USFW 0960 Metal Aluminum Table 2.17 Remits oftbe MS Analysis for TAL Metals in Flan WA# 2-273 Dry Rim Credc Site Baaed on Dry Weight Client a 609 Sample Original Cone. Cone. Spike me/lu ma/ka 133 180 Recovered Cone. Spike oa/kg 308 % Reoovery Spike 97 QC Limits % Recovery 60-130 Antimony 609 U 44 37.5 85 30-120 Arsenic 609 u 29 35.7 123 60-130 Benum 609 21.7 180 19 98 60-130 Beryllium 609 V 4.4 4.25 97 60-130 Cadmium 609 0.0* 4.4 4.51 101 60-130 Chromium 609 2.4 18 20 98 60-130 Cobalt 609 0.09 44 45.2 103 60-130 Copper 609 5.4 22 26.4 95 60-130 Iron 609 141 88 225 95 60-130 Lead 609 0.19 44 44.5 101 60-130 .Manganese 609 162 44 191 66 60-130 Mercury 609 C 2.4 2.5 104 60-130 Nickel 609 1.9 44 45.7 100 60-130 Selenium Stiver 609 V 15 609 U 4.4 14 4.65 93 60-130 106 60-130 Thallium 609 f 8.8 Vanadium 609 V 44 Zinc 609 2273\DEL\ARt9709\DRY2TALS 19 S 44 8.89 46.7 61.9 101 60-130 106 60-130 96 60-130 00035 000385 USFW 0961 Table 2.18 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Metals in Flora WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample: 609 Metal Sample Result me/ke Duplicate Sample Result ma/kg Relative Percent Difference Aluminum 133 144 8 Antimony U U NC Arsenic U U NC Barium 21.7 22.1 2 Beryllium U U NC Cadmium 0.08 0.09 12 Calcium 3460 3260 6 Chromium 2.4 22 9 Cobalt 0.09 0.09 0 Copper 5.4 5.3 2 Iron 141 147 4 Lead 0 19 0.21 10 Magnesium 1710 1610 6 Manganese 162 154 5 Mercury U U NC Nickel 1.9 1.9 0 Potassium 25900 25200 3 Selenium U U NC Silver U U NC Sodium 78 84 7 Thallium U U NC Vanadium u 0.2 NC Zinc 19.8 20.3 2 ----------------------------------------------- 2273tDEUAR\9709\DRY2TALS 000S6 000386 USFW 0962 QA/QC for Cyanide Results o f the LCS Analysis for Cyanide is Soil The L C S analysis was used to check the accuracy of the calibration curve. The percent recovery for cyanide found in t L C S was 12S and is listed in Table 2.19. There are no Q C limits available for the recoveries. Results of the M S Analysis for Cyanide in Soil Sample 1A was chosen for matrix spike (M S) analysis. The percent recovery, listed in Table 2.20, was 97 and within tht Q C limits. Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Cvanidc in Soil Sample 1A was selected for the duplicate analysis. The relative percent difference (R P D s) for the duplicate analysis, listed in Table 2.21, was not calculated because both of the cyanide results were not detected. i 2273\DEUARl?709\DRYSl/NA2 00097 0003S7 USFW 0963 LCS1 Table 2.19 R esu ltsofth e LCS Analysis for Cyanide in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. m g/kg 38 Recovered Cone. m g/kg 48 Q C Limits m g/kg NA % Recovery 125 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00096 000388 USFW 0964 Client n Table 2 20 Results o f the MS Analysis for Cyanide m Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based an Dry Weight Sample Original Coat. Cooc. Spike mg/kg mg/kg Recovered Cooc. Spike mg/kg */ Recovery Spike QC Limits */Recovery 1A U 39 38 97 75-125 ::73\DEUAR\9709\DRYZANON oooyy 0003S9 USFW 0965 Sample: 1A Table 2.21 Results o f the Duplicate Analysis for Cyanide in Soil W A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample Result mg/kg Duplicate Sample Result m g/kg Relative Percent Difference Q C Lim its Relative Percent Difference U U NC 20 2273,DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00100 000390 USFW 0966 QAJQC for Fluoride Results o f the LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Water The LCS analysis was used to check the accuracy of the calibration curve. The percent recovery for fluoride found in L LCS was 113 and is listed in Table 2.22. There are no QC limits available for the recoveries. Results of the MS A n aly sis for Fluoride in Water Sample 216C was chosen for matrix spike (MS) analysis. The percent recovery, listed in Table 2.23, was 102 and within the QC limits. Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Water Sample 216C were selected for duplicate analysis. The relative percent difference (RPDs) for the duplicate analysis, listed in Table 2.24, was not calculated because both of the fluoride results were not detected. Results of the LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Soil/Bovine Fecal Matter The LCS analysis was used to check the accuracy of the calibration curve. The percent recovery for fluoride found in tl LCSs, listed in Table 2.25, ranged from 92 to 115. There are no QC limits available for the recoveries. Results of the MS Analysis for Fluoride in Soil/Bovine Fecal Matter Samples 1A, 300A and 503F were chosen for matrix spike (MS) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.26, ranged from 45 to 99. Two out of three recoveries were within the QC limits. Sample 503F MS re-analysis produced results outside QC limits indicating matrix interference. Only the original results are reported. Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Soil/Bovine Fecal Matter Samples 1A, 300A and 503F were selected for duplicate analysis. The relative percent difference (RPDs) for the duplicate analysis, listed in Table 2.27, ranged from 8 to 18. All sample RPDs were within QC Limits. Results of the LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Fauna The LCS analysis was used to check the accuracy of the calibration curve. The percent recovery for fluoride found in t LCSs, listed in Table 2.28, ranged from 97 to 111. There are no QC limits available for the recoveries. Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Fluoride in Fauna Samples Control 1A, 1003, 052 and 128 were chosen for matrix spike/ matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.29, ranged from 64 to 91. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.29, ranged from 3 to 22. There are no QC limits available for the recoveries and RPDs. Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Fauna Samples Control 1A, 1003, 052 and 128 were selected for duplicate analysis. The relative percent differences (RPDs) for the duplicate analyses, listed in Table 2.30, were not calculated for all samples because one or both of the results for e ^ h sample were not detected. Sample 128 was analyzed in triplicate. No QC limits are available for RPDs. r*nD EL\AR\9709\D RYR U N A: OOlOi 000391 USFW 0967 QA/QC for Fluoride (Cout) Results of the LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Flora H ie L C S analysis was used to check the accuracy of the calibration curve. The percent recoveries for fluoride fo u n d in the LCSs, listed in Table 2.31, were 98 and 111. There are no Q C limits available for the recoveries. Results of the M S /M S D Analysis for Fluoride in Flora Sample 605 was chosen for matrix spike/ matrix spike duplicate (M S /M S D ) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.32, were 64 and 72. The relative percent difference (RPD), also listed in Table 2.29, was 12. There are no Q C limits available for the recoveries and RPD. Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Flora Sample 605 was selected for duplicate analysis. The relative percent difference (R P D ) for the duplicate analysis, listed in Table 2.33, was not calculated because both results were not detected. No Q C limits are available for the RPD . ::?3\DEL\AR197W(DRYRUNA2 00102 000392 USFW 0968 LCS I Table 2.22 Results of the LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. Hg/L 6.2 Recovered Cone. jig/L 7.0 Q C Lim its fig/L NA % Recovery 113 2 2 73\DEL\AR'S709\DR Y2ANON 00103 000393 USFW 0969 Table 223 Results o f the MS Analysis for Fluoride in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek She Client # Sample Original Cone. Cone. Spike Pg/L Pg/L Recovered Cone. Spike pg/L / Recovery Spike QC Limits Recovery 216C U 4.0 4.1 102 75-125 r73\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00104 000394 USFW 0970 Table 2.24 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample: 216C Sample Result pg/L Duplicate Sample Result pg/L Relative Percent Difference Q C Lim its Relative Percent Difference Uu NC 20 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00105 000395 USFW 0971 Table 2.25 Results o f the LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Soil/Bovine Fecal Matter WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone mg/kg LCSl (6/2/97) LCS2 (6/20/97) LCS3 (6/26/97) LCS4 (6/28/97) LCS5 (7/1/97) 120 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 Recovered Cone. mg/kg 110 6.3 7.1 6.0 6.0 QC Limits mg/kg NA NA NA NA NA % Recovery 92 102 115 97 97 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00106 000396 USFW 0972 Client # 1A 300A 503F Table 2.26 Results o f the MS Analysis for Fluoride m Soil/Bovme Fecal Manet WA# 2-273 Dry Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample Original Cone. Cone. Spike mg/kg mg/kg Recovered Cone. Spike mg/kg / Recovery Spike QC Limits */ Recovery 0.85 154 400 16000 200 14000 153 13000 6500 99 80-120 79 75-125 45 60-130 2273'JDEL\AR \9?09\DR V2AKON 00107 000397 USFW 0973 Table 221 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Soil/Bovine Fecal Matter WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Baaed on Dry Weight Sample Sample Result mg/lcg Duplicate Sample Result mg/kg Relative Percent Difference QC Limits Relative Percent Difference 1A 0.85 0.75 12 20 300A 400 370 8 20 503F 200 240 18 20 ::73\DEL\AR\9709ORY2ANON 0010 000398 USFW 0974 LCS1 LCS2 LCS3 LCS4 LCS5 LCS6 " LCS7 Table 2.28 R esults o f the LCS A nalysis for Fluoride in Fauns W A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site C ertified Cone. mg/kg 8.8 8.8 8.8 6.2 8.8 6.2 6.2 Recovered Cone. m g/kg 9.1 8.6 9.8 6.2 8.6 6.0 6.2 QC Limits m g/kg NA NA NA NA NA NA NA % Recovery 103 98 111 100 98 97 100 2273'DE1AAR\9709'DRY2ANON 00109 000399 USFW 0975 Client # Control 1A 1003 052 128 Table 229 Results of tbe MS/MSD Analysis for Fluoride in Fauna WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Baaed on Dry Weight Sample Cone. mg/kg MS Spike mg/kg MSD Spike mg/kg MS MSD Recovered Recovered Cone Cone Spike Spike mg/kg mg/kg MS*/. Recovery MSD V* Recovery U 75000 120000 48000 91000 64 76 U 43000 59000 39000 43000 91 73 U 37000 54000 28000 42000 76 78 U 25000 46000 20000 32000 80 70 RPD 17 22 3 13 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00110 000400 USFW 0976 Table 2.30 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Fauna W / # 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample Sample Result mg/kg Control 1A 1003 052 128 U U u u Duplicate Sample Result mg/kg u u u 240 Triplicate Sample Result mg/kg NA NA NA U Relative Percent Diffre NC NC NC NC 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON O O lii 000401 USFW 0977 LCS1 LCS2 Table 2 3 1 Results of tbc LCS Analysis for Fluoride in Flora WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Certified Cone. mg/kg 8.8 8.8 Recovered Cone. mg/kg 9.8 8.6 QC Limits mg/kg NA NA % Recovery 111 98 ::73'OEL'AR\9709'DRY2ANON 00112 000402 USFW 0978 Client a 605 Table 2 3 2 Results o f the MS/MSD Analysis for Fluoride in Flora WA* 2-273 Dry Run Crack Site Baser* on Dry Weight Sample Cone. mg/kg MS Spike mg/kg MSD Spike mg/kg MS MSD Recovered Recovered Cooc Cooc MS V. Spike Spike Recovery mg/kg mg/kg MSD / Recovery U 31000 44000 22000 28000 72 64 RPD ::73\DEL\AR\9TO9\DR Y2ANON 00113 000403 USFW 0979 Table 2.33 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Flora WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample 605 Sample Result mg/kg U Duplicate Sample Result mg/kg U Relative Percent Difference NC 2273VDELAAR\9709vDRY2ANON 00114 000404 USFW 0980 QA/QC for Anions Results of the LCS Analysis for Anions in Water The LCS analyses was used to check the accuracy of the calibration curves. The percent recovery for Anions found in LCS ranged from 92 to 113 and are listed in Table 2.34. There are no QC limits available for the recoveries. Results of the MS Analysis for Anions in Water Sample 21S was chosen for matrix spike (MS) analysis. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.35, ranged from 90 to 115. All five recoveries were within the QC lim its Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Fluoride in Water Sample 215 were selected for duplicate analysis. The reported relative percent differences (RPDs) for the duplicate analysis, listed in Table 2.36, ranged from zero (0) to 10. Both reported RPDs were within the QC limits. Percent recoveries was not calculated for bromide, nitrate as nitrogen, and orthophosphate as phosphorus because these analyte: were not detected. :rm D E L \A R \*70S \D R Y R U N A : 00115 000405 USFW 0981 LCSl LCS1 LCS1 Table 2.34 Results of the LCS Analysis for Anions in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Bromide Certified Recovered Cone. Cone. mg/L mg/L % Recovery Chloride Certified Recovered % Recovery Cone. Cone. mg/L mg/L 4.0 3.9 98 146 150 103 Nitrate as Nitrogen Certified Recovered % Recovery Cone. Cone. mg/L mg/L 8.1 7.9 98 Orthophosphate as Phosphorus Certified Recovered % Recovery Cone. Cone. mg/L mg/L 6.1 6.9 113 Sulfate Certified Recovered % Recovery Cone. Cone. mg/L mg/L 25 23 92 2273'>EL\AR\9709\DRY2ANON 00116 000406 USFW 0982 Analyte Cheat# Table 2-35 Results of the MS Analysis for Anions in Water WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample Original Cone. Cone. Spike mg/L mg/L Recovered Cooc. Spike mg/L 54 Recovery Spike QC Limits 54 Recovery Bromide 215 U 10 10 100 80-120 Chloride 215 3.0 10.0 13.1 101 75-125 Nitrate as Nitrogen 215 U 10 11 110 75-125 Orthophosphate as Phosphorus 215 U 020 0.23 115 75-125 Sulfate 215 1000 1000 1900 90 80-120 ::B \D E L \A R \9 7 0 9 \D R Y 2 A N O N 00117 000407 VJSFW 0983 Table 2.36 Results o f the Duplicate Analysis for Anions in Water W A# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Sample: 215 Analyte Sample Result mg/L Duplicate Sample Result mg/L Relative Percent Difference QC Limits Relative Percent Difference Bromide Chloride Nitrate as Nitrogen Orthophosphate as Phosphorus Sulfate U 3.0 U U 1000 U 3.0 U U 1100 NC 0 NC NC 10 20 20 20 20 20 --73\DEL\AR\9708\DRY2ANON 00118 000408 USFW 0984 Q/QC for TOC Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TOC in Soil Sample 302C was selected for duplicate analysis. The relative percent difference (RPDs) for the duplicate analysis, list in Table 2.37, was 6. There are no QC Limits available for this analysis. Z273\DEL\AR\97D8\DR YR UNA2 O O l'l 3 000409 USFW 0985 Sample 302C Table 2.37 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for TOC in Soil WA# 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Based on Dry Weight Sample Result Percent Duplicate Sample Result Percent Relative Percent Difference QC Limits Relative Percent Difference 3.5 3.7 6 NA ::73\DEL\AR\9708>RY2ANON o o i;:o 000410 USFW 0986 QA/QC for Organo Fluorides Pentafluorobenzene and 1,2-dichloroethane-d were used as the internal standard and surrogate, respectively. Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for Oreano Fluorides in Soil The surrogate percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.38, ranged from 83 to 100. All 10 recoveries are within QC limits. Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Oreano Fluorides in Soil Soil sample 300G was chosen for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analyses. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.39, ranged from 84 to 94. All 6 recoveries are within QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs), also listed in Table 2.39, ranged from 3 to 8. All 3 RPD values are within QC limits. r73'XlEL\AR\97M\DRYRUNA: o o ir.l 000411 USFW 0987 Table 2.38 Results o f the Surrogate Recoveries for Organo Fluorides in Soil WA # 2-273 Dry Run Creek Site Santole SBLK 300G 300GMS 300GMSD 301G 302G 303G 304G 305G 306G Surrogate % Recovery DCE 90 83 91 84 84 88 87 86 88 100 SURROGATE LIMITS (DCE) = 1,2-Dichloroethane-d* (70-130) H73\DEL\AR\97DS\DRYRUNA2 001*^2 000412 USFW 0988 Table 2.39 Results af the MS/HSD Analysis for Organo fluorides in Soil WA * 2-273 Dry ftin Creek Site Based on Dry Ueight Sample No.: 300G Tetrafluoreethylene__ Hexafluorooropylene Chlorodi fluoromethane rm or 0 * 2 ---- !-------B5-------- TST" - S T " ! ADDED |CONCENTRATIONCONCtMTRATlun X LIK!TS (AS/kg) (CflAy) ! (SS/kg) REC REC. 17.56 ! 17.56 17.56 U! u uj 16.63 15.91 15.82 96 70-130! 91 70-130! 90 70-130 COMPOUND ! SSSSXSSSSSSSS3SSSSSCSSSS T e t r a f l u o r o e t h y l e n e ____ hexafluoropropytene____ Chlorodi fluoromethane S P I K E r use r NSD ADDED CONCENTRATION X * (ng/kg) (ug/kg) REC RPD J }t s c s s s s s s *c s s s s e s s z s e s : BSSSXt n s s s s 17.56 ! 15.58 89 6 17.56 ! 16.82 86 ! 8 17.56 15.29 87 3 QC L IM IT S ! RPD sn x zs !Js Rs sECs s- s } 30 70-130! 30 70-130; 30 70-130 --7T',DEL\AR\770i\DRYRUNA2 001L'3 000413 USFW 0989 QA/QC for Grain Size Results of the Duplicate Analytic drain Size Simples 507E and S09E were selected for duplicate analysis. The relative percent difference (RPDs) for the duplicate analysis, listed in Table 2.3X, ranged from zero (0) to 27. There are no QC Limits available for this analysis. ::73\DLVAR\9`70TDRYRUNA2 001*4 000414 USFW 0990 Table 2.40 Results of the Duplicate Analysis for Grain Size WA # 2-273 Diy Rim Creek Site Sample ID Location 507E 507E-DUP Area m B Area mB RPD Sie\'e Size-mm CPT** CPT** 19.0 100.0 100.0 9.50 100.0 100.0 4.75 99.2 99.7 2.00 98.7 99.3 0.850 97.5 98.5 0.425 94.6 95.7 0.250 90.1 91.7 0.106 76.7 77.8 0.0750 70.3 71.6 Particle Diameter-mm PD*** PD*** 0.074 71.3 73.2 0.005 35.3 38.7 0.001 13.8 18.1 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 9 27 Sample ID Location 509E 509E Area IVA Area IVA RPD Sieve Size-mm CPT** CPT** 19.0 100.0 100.0 9.50 100.0 100.0 4.75 99.0 99.5 2.00 98.6 99.1 0.850 97.3 97.9 0.425 93.7 94.1 0.250 87.9 88.0 0.106 71.8 71.4 0.0750 67.2 66.5 Particle Diameter-mm PD*** PD*** 0.074 70.2 74.6 0.005 44.2 44.6 0001 26.4 26.6 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 6 1 1 * * Denotes Cumulative Percent Through Particle Diameter-Hyrometer Analysis 2273\DEL\AR\9709\DRY2GRAN ooi;'5 000415 USFW 0991 Section 3 000416 USFW 0992 Diun USI Dfur Roy F. Weston, Inc. 6 S A Raman Depot Building 209 Annex (Bay F) 2690 Woodbridga Avenue Edison, New Jersey 08837-3679 908-321-4200 Fax 908494-4021 Columbia Analytical Services, Inc. PO Box 479,1317 South 13th Ave Kelso, Washington, 98626 Atm: Abbie Spielman 18 June 1997 Project # 03347-142-001-2273 Dry Run Creek Pan 2 As per Weston REAC Purchase Order number 81453. please analyze sam ples according to the following parameters: I Analysis/Method Matrix #of samples LOI/ AASHTO T267-86 Anions Fl. N03. P04. S04. CI. Br /EPA 300.0 Total Fluoride/ EPA 340.2 TAL Metals/ SW-846- 6010 or Series 7000 Grain Size/ASTM D422 Data package: see attached Deliverables Reouirements Soil Water Soil Tissue Soil Water Soil 12 6 12 85* 12 6 12 Samples air expected to arrive at your laboratory on June 18, 1997. All applicable QA/QC (MS/MSD) analysis as per method, will be performed on our sample matrix. The complete data package is due 10 business days from sample receipt except for the tissue samples which is 20 business days from sample receipt. The complete data package must include all items on the deliverables checklist. Please submit all reports and technical questions concerning this project to John Johnson at (908) 321-4248 or fax to (908) 494-4020. Any contractual question, please call Cynthia Davison at (908) 321-4296. Thank you Sincerely Misty BarHJe5 Data Validation and Report Writing Group Leader Roy F. Weston. Inc. / REAC Project MB:jj Attachments cc. R. Singhvi M. Sprenger 2273\nommem\9706\sub\2273Con3 V. Kansal Subcontracting File Y. Exume C. Davison M. Home M. Barkley 000417 1 USFW 0993 Click to WEST0N On The Web htto://wwv/. rfweston.com R o y F. W *ton, Inc. G S A Raman Dapot Buikhng 209 Annex (Bay F) <t. 2890 Woodbnctge Avenue Edaon, New Jaraay 08837-3679 908-321-4200 Fa* 908-494-4021 Southwest Research Institute PO Box 28510, 6220 Culebra Road San Antonio, TX 78228-0510 Atm: Jo Ann Boyd 19 June 1997 Project # 03347-142-001-2273 Dry Run Creek Pan 2 As per Weston REAC Purchase Order number 81456, please analyze samples according to the following parameters: Analysis/Method Oreanofluoride/Modified 8260 (See attached list) 4 Inoreanic fluorides (See attached list) Data packaee: see attached Deliverables Reouirements Matrix Soil Soil #of samples 7 7 Samples arrived at your laboratory on June 18, 1997. All applicable QA/QC (MS/MSD) analysis as p er method, will be performed on our sample matrix. The complete data package is due 10 business days after receipt of the samples. The complete data package must include all items on the deliverables checklist. Please submit all reports and technical questions concerning this project to John Johnson at (908) 321-4248 or fax to (908) 494-4020. Any contractual question, please call Cynthia Davison at (908) 321-4296. Thank vou Sincerely., r Misty Barkley Data Validation and Report Writing Group Leader Roy F. Weston. Inc. / REAC Project MB:jj Attachments cc R. Singhvi M Sprenger 2273\non\mem\9706\sub\2273Con4 V. Kansal Subcontracting File Y. Exume C. Davison M. Home M. Barkley O O l--a Click to WESTON On The Web htto://www. rfweston.com 000418 USFW 0995 Roy F. Woston, Inc. GSA Raman Depot Building 209 Annex (Bay F) 2890 Woodbndge Avenue Edison. NewJersey 08837*3679 908-321-4200Fax 908-494-4021 Core Laborrories 280 Raritan Center Parkway Edison. NJ 08818 Ann: Marie Meidhof Project 3347-041-001-1273 Dry Run Creek Pan 1 30 May 1997 As per Weston REAC Purchase Order number 80673. please analyze samples according to the following parameter*- Anaiysis/Method BNA/SW-846-8270 Pest/PCB/S W -846-8080 TAL Metals/6010 or Series 7000 Fluoride/EPA 300 Cvanide/ SW-846-9010 Data package: see attached Deliverables Requirements Matrix SoU Soil Soil Soil Soil #of samples 6 6 6 6 6 Samples are expected to arrive at your laboratory on May 30, 1997. All applicable QA/QC analysis as per m ethod, will be performed on our sample matrix. Preliminary sample result tables plus a signed copy o f our Chain of Custody must be faxed to W ESTON/REAC by June 4. 1997. The complete data package is due June 13, 1997. The complete data package must include all items on the deliverables checklist. ALL ORGANIC EXTRACTIONS ON SOLIDS IE: BNA,PEST/PCB MUST BE BY SOXHLET EXTRACTION Please submit all reports and technical questions concerning this project to John Johnson at (908) 321-4248 or fax to (908) 494-4020. Any contractual question, please call Cynthia Davison at (908) 321-4296. Thank you Sincerely, Mistv Barkfcy Data Validation and Report Writing Group Leader Roy F. Weston. Inc. / REAC Project MB:jj Attachments cc. R. Singhvi M. Sprenger 1273\non\mem\9705\sub\ 1273Con V. Kansal Subcontracting File B. Lewan o o i; Click to WESTON On The Web http://www.rfweston.com C. Davison M. Home M. Barkley 000419 USFW 0994 S D - Sediment D S - Dfum Solids D L - Drum Liquids X - Other PW GWSW SL - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge SWOA- Soil Water Oil Air Items/Reason Relinquished By 711 Date lin k Received By Un /L. Date w ru TTlime l<>io Items/Reason FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF 7 ?S \ 7 CUSTODY # 7 ?c r& 7 Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time USFW 0996 REAC, Euison, NJ CHAIN Oh CUSTODY RECO RD (908) 321-4200 Project Name:______ _______________ E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 Project Number:____ ^ 3 RFW Contact: La IVla vyoVfl- ____ _________________ Phone, -4 ZL.O No: 07721 SH E E T N O 'Z O F Z. Sample Identification Analyses Requested REAC # f e - b - If t Sample No. Sam pling Location a rsff z s: Matrix <X_ Date Collected # of Bottles Contalner/Preservatlve ~ T C C P < A A tC ~ T USFW 0997 c c Matrix: SDDSDLX- Sediment Drum Solids Drum Liquids Other PWGWSW SL - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge Swo- A- Soil Water Oil Air Special Instructions: --. Items/Reason Relinquished By Date TT--- r a t e o o Received By % Date Time 1 Items/Reason OHBVt \W 1 1 1 1 I :X r FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time ` 0004^1 , REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name:______ Fv-3tQ______________ Project Number: ~Z~2 r-^ RFW Contact: K-A,V ttoryv.CL USFW 0998 G no. 0772 SHEET NO. I OF I R E A C 0 Sample No. 3T -4-ZZ 5XF- r - A - o M T -d ''2 x -R -Z t *5 o v P X - -C a c-G . -ft i I2 -A - = i< r eos a . p \ z Sampling Location ArcaciE IX G B A w a i0 A r^ -a z R is" At fW -A r ' 5 (o ^ riA rrlfV ic O D 'S XXo ~nt *7 )2 , T )4 "W , Matrix Si X >< S * V y S -s; X 'x Mafrtx: SO DS DL X. - Sediment Drum Solids Drum Liquids Other V PW GWSWSL - ''' _____ Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge \ SWOA- Date Collected A of Bottles ___ \ n -L \l Soil Water Oil Air Special Instructions Contalner/Preservative PrS A ^ C ~ / / R * k * be' k k k \ \ -T A t/P U A L IL lU tf,^ _Z___=_ZLL______ Z _ A J _______ _____ L J \_______ L-- . \ k V X X X_ V rx /\ i/ ^ _________ : a __ 71 T -- aJ FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # Items/Reason , - Relinquished By M/XbXlifi : Date -*x? - FORM 4 Received By firn | loDate Time Items/Reason 0 Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time e*00422' -- ----------- USFW 0999 R E A C , Eu.oon, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAlu Oh CUSTODY RECO RD Project Name:____ _______________________ Project Nrnberg RFW Contact: W .l\> MtjCTVJL- P honei^ fc jiA -iV v -- REAC# Sample Identification Sample No. ? D -2 .C ^ cp r. ?o?> C sen a r^ tx L C Sampling Location Vg s a I S T O w S d S fe L U 2i3.v^ -V L J tpc/STr.'o. f t Matrix Date Collected ( -U -B q . #of Bottles \ Container/Preservatlve -T O C V VV? XV y No: 7723 SH E E T NO. \O F ? ~'------------ r \-- t " T -------- -------- / 7 ------~ f--------- u r-E -^ tr-C -k . r - A - Z 2. ^ c fS C `S n A C L ft z a lir G W ? a 3C A f t 6? ft rC -2 S o d C A ta a x A *t o \ C to f\ x e > r ? a - \ o > Z C .. A tr ^ '-X C ___K _____ L ------ rr n M V & 'S n tn C A tv ja lir A 'r P C W o^ vnr B A tz^ t j c C l K7--^ 9 Aa< ?T A ^ to C tza?czr& - Q - A - & TU <2 , V W - r^ T T C z -a - z c ^ ;\ z_ c Matrix: SD- Sediment DS- Drum Solids DL- DrumLiquids X - Other ci PWGWSWSL - Potable Waler Groundwater Surface Water Sludge Sw- oA- Soil Water Oil Air Special Instructions / L_ -- x-- ^ FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF /Q C H vr^ CUSTODY # ............ OOOr I jItems/Reason Relinquished By Date OltJ'Q Cs- I Received By L^L4i-- Date Time | Items/Reason [K O K Q IE IB H H H i 1 1 ___ I------------ Relinquished By Date Received By Date [100423---1____L_________ 1 Time 1/94 00032 U S F W 1000 REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 P\ors____________CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name: Project Number: ~? ~ ________________ ______ No: 07736 R F W Contact: fc U lC o Phone:^ ^ ^ - ^ ~-A ? n r \ SH E E T NO. I O F < ^ Sample Identification Analyses Requested REACI Sample No. Sampling Location Matrix Date Collected of Bottles n r - E - t ^ b c / fe Ar Acr72\IH d C o -tZ -^ T - V - r f.A - ts r r t\ A 1W D -2 ? ftv A A- n t - C - "b I k ffr ii fto a FV U tC . C. ( V e ^ T W P> e> (X i^ ^ n rA I___ \ 'S t O A 5\2A A A tU -E- S IT -G -^ K '^ .'C rr-tA -Z? ^ > C P iA *5t=ttCV Sd4 a (A^/oa'TO A A cc./ \ -3 rC A t t A AA r3 aA Tt I T - A 't C i *=CiZA- r-A -Z \ I >~2jC 'f W f ;o \ A F O D FS Acla m a p L'jhp>j\Tcv\D A v ^ rv T irtti f t ^ cfoT) A ^ P iT T k* f t o p a T s : ____ _____^ /_____ z u z z Container/Preservatlve t W l _ / A U L _____ * rii ___ / L x V/ \/ \_____ L f / ___ L *T rH O O *a L ____b .J .___ w ----- --------- --------- 1 so . DSDL - X Sediment Drum Solids Drum Liquids Other PW GWSWSL Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge SW- OA- (S lO -- r T ^ V '-A' Soil Water Oil Air FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF ??of; 7 1C i ?7Si, ? >Sc> CUSTODY# 7 ?ir ? 7 Sf Itams/Reason Relinquished By Date r ' ------- ?Aa% Receiver/ By Date Time M i f f Uto Items/Reason Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time FfDU #4 -- ------ 0 `6 0 4 2 4 --------- -O X k.l 00033 REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN OF CUS TODY RECORD Project Nam e:_ _____________________ Project Number: RF W Contact: 7 [b n u j PhoneS D ^ r l ^ l - - ^ ? ^ / ^ USFW 1001 No: 07737 SHEET N Q 2 -0 F 'Z Hems/Reaaon kv|Avvjj/^>' ftRelinquished By Data Received By Date Time fo im 10*V Items/Reason Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time FORM 4 -------:-- e # 5----------------- B/4 REAC, Edison, NJ CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD (908) 321-4200 Project Name:_ E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 Project Number RFW Contact Phone:<rtotgJ-'52 07738 SHEET NO \ OF I Sample Identification Analyses Requested_____ EAC 0 Sample No. Sam pling Location Matrix Date Collected 0 of Bottles Container/Preservative L L OpQf aT a o A A- : \ ^ S b )A C ~ t USFW 1002 3cs .a . _3c5_ 7 0 ? - U ? ^ C ao^V .A n c E & JIL ^D . <> - u -*} i fc r|3.-ci.7. o Atsa3g> R c j q v - ftru? a ^ A , O M R ,-^ ^ toaam. B_ f a b 6 i 6 ,S i b c.: ^# a fx f - ^2Z| & c ^ r i ^ r s A vC t^i Q -A -1 5 S .W -E . go\ * n-~3 razfsF ^ w o a ig Matrix S D - Sediment P W - Potable Water D S - Drum Solids G W - Groundwater D L - Drum Liquids S W - Surface Water X - Other SL - Sludge V. Ua\l<3tr jS . _ s_ _s _S. SW0A- Soil Water Oil Air Special Instructions: s I IItems/Reason Relinquished By o o o Date Received By HfrrP li^LfU---- Date Time I Items/Reason 1010 1______ 1 ---- 1---------- FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF 77<X>, 777?/ CUSTODY# '7 ? ? / '7>VO Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time 000426 REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name: T)fl ^ Project Number: -14? - C& Z - 2 - RFW Contact: Phone: Sample Identification___________________________ / | No: 0 7 7 3 5 . SHEET NO. \ OF \ Analyses Requested REAC Sample No. Z tS 710 Z .i^ > 7 .1 * 2 Z.l> 4 7 -1 1 Z-ttoC ta l 2o4d Tj & X L Z C A C- 7o2 ^ cO 7n\ Sampling Location '^*CXltCsCjL L v it a u x 1IrY V n T r i to A A rL?a H L O p p riT r o f A vxP A W Wr>A I T ". X ^ n rriM u ^ W Av^r% Ttf* A y^ T T t Y p r W " ' A<3> '^ rX A O -'O O A - Matrix LO -T> \ jJ o C k o a -K. (Aic p n T 2 Oala Collected #of Bottles t 11 Contalner/Preservatlve \L iU \ ^ \ / *C \u A i^ b e A JA m c TM, X X` x V X vL X V X- L U ~ ?G -* X _ J * ______ A X < a Y X X X K > XH XO <O X /' / \ \ J - _____ _______ X S! SD- Sediment DS- DrumSolids 0L- DrumLiquids X - Other / / X ^ ---- ^ PW- Potable Waler GW- Groundwater S1N- SurfaceWater SL - Sludge / \v / S "**' Special Instructions: S- Soil W- Water 0 - Oil A- Air _________X ... y / / X V/ X ____ FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # ? S o 'r, ? ? /? 7Jop USFW 1003 o  : 0 I Jo. S T T IT USFW 1004 REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 EPA Contract 68-C4-0022 C H A I N ;OF CUSTODY RECORD Project N a m e : D r - R L r e t k _______________ P roject N u m b e r R F W C o n ta ct P U T , Phone: yp/3 3Jt ^JOP REACI Sam p lin g Location M atrix D ate C o ftactad t 4 B o tlW s Contalnar/Praaarvathra m _ Ft A11 W R t lo r t M O * - A T l i t h T 4 *02. a k W . --V 1 ^ ft \- 1 1 l ^c i x \ V < ' No: 053 6 OB Z. SHEET NO sTOF * ---- -4 CO o o CP *i I tfiJ < i l * r- * --- i/ 00 n r4 O O so- Sadkranl PW Ptatebte W ater S- Sol os- Om d S a id s G W - O n o d tn lii W- W ater o-i 0LX- O n xn U q u kfc O ttiw SW SL - Suifaca W ater Stedga A- Ol Air * < r rk MO/ A* T . S S * < - 1 2 FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE O N L Y FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # temifltrwan Ratnqutelw dBy Date R a c a iv a d B y A O O"0C" O" lOUSU^f k. i'MVI i s M Data 1Tim a ttH n a lR n m n RcUnqubhed By D a ta R atalvad By D a ta T im a 000428 U S f . f D IfrIM .1 A J < ) l i O' USFW 1005 REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 EPA Contract 68-C4-0022 REAC a am pio Mo- 1 C oM T H ot-LA z_ * t i c H* c * n K o l . A V wB 1. W O 3 R i A Sr v & R o l R o l A _J|_______ l* . 'B C -- t* R o i A J l ______ s' Jit___ |T ^B c. Ro b a ^ B Sam p lin g Location L Ab A rc a I A v A .H / A V a - ID >/ A y t A .lv / lU trix X 11 c h a i n OF CUSTODY RECORD Pioject Name: D/--< R L i t i c i ----------------------- Project Number J ? j.T 3 No: 053 6 0 /) R F W C on tact: f iV . f r P1*>ne:y o f l 3 J \ 'O O P SHEET NO /O F F p Analyses Requested Ml P a la C o P a rta d f qI B oIU m Con tainarff'rMm rvxthr* TAL F ! * I tp iJ V+F+ , %T~-~` 7 -1 ^ 7 1 ^ o l q I m , - to * - ____ X ________ ______ ________ - k _____ > \ 1 '1 -- 1 -----V1 > > 7--------------/> o o o 7) rj H O o so- D S01X- Sodknart Dnon So ld a Onxn Liquida O tta PW GW SW SL - PDLabla W ater Gtom dw aUl Sutfaoa W ater SLdge S- WOA- Sol W ater Ol A if 7^ ^ tn /fk iu # //* ^ SS FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE O N L Y FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # Mam M ltoaa on R afagu ith ad By Date R eceived By D a te I t m | ItM u /R a M O T R e X n q u b lte d B y O ste A ia t e * 1 v m i B B S Et I I W i w R jj V> ` o-, i s R eceived By D a ta T im o 6062827875 rotM M 000429 ----------- --------S/94 U ; I . I U I M M .itA t i n s gflOOOP REAC, E jn, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAI Project Name: Project Number: RFW Contact: A l, JF C U S T O D Y R E C O R D --------------------- . Phone: 3~? 3o9c No: Q616 SHEET N O j.O F .J_ OM OO REAC, Edison, NJ (90S) 321-4200 E P A Contract 08-C4-OO22 REACi Sample No. Sampling Location Matrix 701 ia o t- o -c X in ) i )i TTL - B - l 121 ni n r -c - j _ i.H p>F - 0 - ia T I.1M /T-D -3M . 7a 7 l.) f 1.?/. HE - E O S ' K - C -,3i 133 1*9 11 V/L - / f- 2T - / - YiD 11 1 K.-E-L _ O H R'P-f'iO _ niC / RtP-E-l /*)3 C / n -e-n Oi 7 / /?* T -lb 033 Ct\<l i! M -A -lt BL- lf-/ 0 OW fj i 7 : f- 7 . ov/ OHX Q'd 1 Matrix: / // fi/. - C - i 2 TU -A -_/5 . SO- Sediment PW- Potable Waler OS- DrumSolids GW- Groundwater DLX- DiumLiquids Other SW- Sutlaco Waler SL - ^.Sludge SWOA- CHAIN OF C U STO D Y R E C O R D l '- Project Name: Project Number: RFW Contact: - C * J _____________ Phone: 9P 3 1 / V ic e. o7::Dg o SHEET N O ./O F /* Analyses Requested Data Collected c ltoh i of Bottles 1 Contalner/Preservallve a . , "t ta l y. F ^ lx-uL 'f.'JxP.&k.. `lLiiLki ____ _____ ____a ___ AL o o 5 LL CO 3 VV <>li\l(n i \ Soil Waler Oil Air Special Instructions: V 1i 1 j .1 j ____^____ FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY X = fV'o. .v\rvv.v V /-\ I. IA. c <( .7 rt T Is^e FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY# Q7')t'i/ 06J>JQ o >7 / < * Items/Reason ' R e V q u U ^ y . .41 1 Oate Received By r7 Dale Time llems/Reason Relinquished By Oate Received By Dale Time C i v v i V . REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN OF CU STO DY R E C O R D Project Name: P )^ Ci*e.Y_____________ Project Number. D - J 1 ? _______________________________ RFWContact: /*} >te H n s Phone: 3.A w j q /) No: 07296 SHEET NO l OF I Sample Identification R EA C # Sample No. Sampling Location OHU . tr-tf- 1 OuS O'H 0*1 0 H !.. OHi OS 0 OS 1 OST. 7HI *7H? T| o J \ to \ n M3 m S-) S W 7HI tht TH m, \ fI k 6 \\ 1 \& 5 tC(o \ [ \o 4 7TWS90 fi IO |C^ ODA* X 'D -2 R e - A - L-C -2 W M - a-io mL -C -22 2 L ' -7 rr - A ' h UL - D - 2 SSL'C - to jfl_- B - n JL -A -lu Jt-C -5 zr-c-~> JXl -L-E-AA' %--Itf jJ3r^L---AeE ' l ip T soDSDL- X- Sedir Drum Solidi Drum Liquid* Other GWSWSL Groundwater Surface Water Sludge bX * / h U tl Matrix X Dala Collaclad # of Bottlaa f e r i l r O __ _____ k -Q -'P 6 - <i - Q "> jL 6- /O-i 7 i.A A J WOA- Ki Water Oil Air / - > S r* ^ ~f~ ><i S\j * Conlalnar/Praaaivatlva J j L L _______ . QZ / Q * L ______ ____ . * ' \i FLi nt irli X` t -/ I'fiidi- y / _____ ____ t * . - i * 9 0 i 'L-l------ i t '> +* H J 1 i20 o - O_ 5 LJCO 3- FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY < FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY# 0 7 ooV 0 7 ? o ! Hema/Reaaon 1H IA^I-ji / Rallnqulsfiedfiy J W iu x / 'A 1^ Data 7^ Received By Date Time 1 llems/Reaton 1 I A 1 Relinquished By fr AAAA U U U 4d Date Received By Dale Time tm R L m C, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 EPA Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name: Dr.. ft, J __________ ,__________ Project Number J - 1 ____ ____________ RFW Contact: NW U Vton>/<_________Phone: lo p 3JM H D oo N0 07300 SH EET NO. ( OF ( r n RM #4 KfcAC, tdison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECO RD Project Name: r*-< K________ Project Number. RFW Contact ^ r a i . _______ P h o n e : ___f l g f l - 3 ?l ~ ^ j o o 07298 SHEET NO.__OF. Sample Identification REAC0 130 31 3 <3 i .* `>'r MV i''l ' .i 0*2 , t 064 $ lS : OLL ' obn OA Qt><i O 70 SampiNo. 4 P4 X 10 L ll 3 A/V OD A ni A ol xo3 nk LO L LOI 08 Sampling Location X >1 U JTC A.A 4 l.t B /e./' c Matita X Data Collactad 6-0-41 #of Botti ! Contalner/Preservativa 3!) 0-3 / ^r___ TIE A 1 A ^ ftL. "ffl C *u- J i] TA L * 11 1 1/ 111 1I 1 Jl. F/uonJ* _____ X___ % \0teJ % /tl.iT. X ____ X___ J 1j 1 il / 1/ ... *T *- J7 o ->* - 47 ^ o ----- --------------- ---- ------- ------ . --. -- > u. (1 . M SO DSDLX Sediment Drum Solid DrumLiquid* Otiwr PWGWSWSL - Potable Walar Groundwater Surfaca Water Sludge SWOA Sod Water OH Air x- 'a k jT >r*\J t/^c. T f FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # 0 / 7 / 9 , 0 7 7 ^ 7 Mema/Reaaon /^R^lnqul^y >MZ AMivsis /l'K-Z'Vr^- Data Received By 7^1 'XrfirU*. 6//;/e ; uFORM 4 Date Time I Items/Raason 1 16 */ 7A 00 Ift/ W I Relinquished By . - - Date ' --------------- 0 0 4 3 4 - J Received By Date Time _ omi dZOOO REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4 0022 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name: Dr.. P.w f r t______ -flliEtProject Number R F W Contact: Mac m Phone:_^QB REAC# 1*2 ' 7ffV 754 * 755 nsL m " IVO IV iVl m\ /V -745 -r /vt - IV7 /va -m Sample No. ti\ IH i l\4 \f\ fooo tool /n m /O n? 1 OOM / 5 /O C too 7 /o n l noti tato Sample Identification Sampling Location m -B-n R .t-E-2 J-E -l -C -2$ nr - c - i i A k c A XL AtPA SL Area M A tea m A t F A 72L Arca HL 4A F4 ic a l * a JT A R fA C A # t A 1L Dry T S T -C -rh Matrix Data Collected X- 6 - 1 0 - 4 7 r- L a ' i fc -u -'P \ ..S ili X # of Bottle 1 / JrL 1 Contalner/PreaarvaUve /f t..? b C >V 7 7 /^ l o'* l- tal X * J HDCO 07297 SH EET NO. I OF ) ^ / >^or Je X V- /H rii^rr X >' r7 -* _ _ Hg _ '+J Ji J L -- --Stf--zuUSi SD DS OL X- i * 1- " Sdimani Dram Solid DramLiquid* Otter PWGW SWSL PotableWater x Groundwater ' Surface Water ' Sludge S,W OA- a e -'i* Soil Waler Oil Air X -- Srrv. Vt rrrrce a tt\tk V T issue 2 =PrsL ktimo^wATr FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF 0 7 j o I 0 7 > i CUSTODY # ' MamaTRaaton A nItulyH l Date Received By Z Jrflr, Date Time I Itema/Reason ME K>io Rallnqulahed By Data Received By Dale Time RMH 000435 uot Mdsn */9t MAME/SPECIES: 03347142001ZZ7301. UNK REQUESTING OR: UNKNOWN ANIMAL ID: DRY RUN CREEK UNK WESTON/REAC PROJECT 2890 WOODBRIDGE AVE #209 EDISON. NJ 08837-3679 1376508 ARP ID#: (06727)000-2 RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 092 PAGE: 1 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY INFORMATION CASE#: VR-97-001030 Animal Reference Pathology 500 Chipeta Way Salt Lake City. Utah 84108 800-426-2099 5 LtU fl r H uW V 5 AT. Y \ RESEARCH VR- 9 7 -1 0 3 0 WESTON-REAC PROJECT 03347-142-001-2273-01 DRY RUN CREEK A. REF-D-15: LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested, supporting acute death. There is very mild lymphocytic plasmacytic infiltration in the portal triad areas with no evidence of toxicity or other specific inflammation in the liver. KIDNEY- This section of tissue is well preserved with acute congestion. There is no evidence of significant toxicity or infection or degeneration of any of the renal parenchymal tissues. B. III-C-25: LIVER- This tissue demonstrates slight autolysis with acute congestion, there is one small collection of lymphocytes and plasma cells in the interstitial areas. A very few collections of lymphocytes and plasma cells are present around vascular elements. There is no evidence of any specific other change in the liver. KIDNEY- This tissue is very mildly autolyzed with no evidence of toxic change or inflammation. C. III-C-15: : LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested with some fragmentation of the liver tissue. This very likely is the result of trauma. There is acute congestion and scattered eosinophils along the portal triad areas. KIDNEY- This tissue is acutely congested with a focal area of hemorrhage over the capsule. This hemorrhage includes neutrophils and clot formation. No bacteria or evidence of toxicity is identified in the renal tissue. D . I I I - C- 1 0 : . 13347142001227301, UNK 000436 Continued on Next Page.. WESTON/REAC PROJECT USFW 1012 NAME/SPECIES: 03347142001227301. UNK REQUESTING DR: UNKNOWN ANIMAL ID: DRY RUN CREEK UNK WESTON/REAC PROJECT 2890 WOODBRITGE AVE #209 EDISON, NJ 08837-3679 13765086 ARP ID#: (06727)000- RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 0928 PAGE: 2 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY CASE#: VR-97-001030 RESEARCH LIVER- The sections of liver in this slide include well preserved sections with acute congestion. Mild vacuolization of hepatocytes has occurred throughout the liver tissue which is very likely a normal appearance. KIDNEY- The section of renal tissue is well preserved with acute congestion. No evidence of toxicity or inflammation is identified in this section. E. REF-E-1: ,. . LIVER- This section of liver is well preserved. There is acute congestion in the tissue with some separation of the hepatocytes. Scattered neutrophils and eosinophils are present in the portal triad areas. The remainder of the liver tissue is histologically normal. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with no evidence of toxicity or inflammation in the tubules or glomeruli. The pelvis is dilated. Tubules appear to be secondarily dilated as the result of this hydronephrosis. F. II-C-5: LIVER- This tissue is fragmenting and demonstrates some separation as if the tissue had been frozen. There is acute congestion of this liver tissue. KIDNEY- This tissue is separated as if it had been frozen. There is acute congestion of the parenchyma. Inflammation or toxic changes of the tubules are not identified. G. .TI-B-4: " ' v LIVER- This tissue is slightly autolyzed with acute congestion. Specific inflannation or degeneration of the hepatic tissue is not identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with areas of moderate autolysis. Inflamnation is not identified. Specific tubular change is not identified, but this could be altered by the autolytic process. H. III-E-12: ;~ LIVER- This tissue demonstrates freezing artifact with acute congestion. Eosinophils are collecting in and around portal triad areas. KIDNEY- This tissue demonstrates separation, supporting freezing artifact. Acute congestion is present. No evidence of any specific toxicity or degeneration is identified. 03347142001227301, UNK Continued on Next Page... 000437 USFW 1013 AME/SPECIES: 03347142001227301. UNK REQUESTING OR: UNKNOWN ANIMAL 10: DRY RUN CREEK JNK WESTON/REAC PROJECT2890 WOOOBRIDGE AVE #209 EDISON, NJ 08837-3679 13765081 ARP ID#: (06727)000-2; RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 092( PAGE: 3 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY CASE#: VR-97-001030 RESEARCH I. REF-E-7: LIVER- This tissue is mildly autolyzed with acute congestion. There is acute congestion with scattered eosinophils in and around the portal triad areas. The autolytic change is more severe around the gall bladder than in other sites. KIDNEY- This tissue is slightly autolyzed and acutely congested. Specific change of infection or toxicity is not identified. J. II-A-20: : LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested. The tissue is well preserved and not autolyzed. There is some hemorrhage over the capsule. No degeneration or inflammation is otherwise identified. KIDNEY- This tissue is acutely congested. The renal tissue is well preserved, with no evidence of tubular degeneration or specific other inflammatory process. There is hemorrhage in the medullary tissue. K. II-D-24: LIVER- The liver tissue demonstrates freezing artifact with some separation and splitting of the hepatocytes. Mild autolysis has occurred in the liver parenchyma. Acute congestion is part of this reaction. ' KIDNEY- The renal tissue is mildly autolyzed with acute congestion. No specific tubular degeneration or inflammation is identified. Any toxic change is not identified, but this may be due to problems with autolysis as well. L. II-C-7: ' LIVER- The liver tissue demonstrates freezing artifact and acute congestion. There are scattered focal collections of neutrophils in the liver tissue with fibrinous exudation. The inflammatory process is very severe in focal sites and is varied in size and shape. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is autolyzed with evidence of freezing artifact. Specific tubular or glomerular degeneration is not identified. M. III-B-19: -LIVER- This liver tissue demonstrates areas of freezing artifact with mild autolysis and acute congestion. There are collections of lymphoid tissue and 13347142001227301, UNK 000438 Continued on Next Page... USFW 1014 NAME/SPECIES: 03347142001227301, UNK REQUESTING DR: UNKNOWN ANIMAL 10: DRY RUN CREEK UNK WESTON/REAC PROJECT 2890 WOODBRIDGE AVE #209 EDISON, NJ 08837-3679 13765086 ARP ID#: (06727)000-1 - RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 0928 PAGE: 4 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY CASE#: VR-97-001030 RESEARCH eosinophils in focal areas of the portal triad collection. KIDNEY- The renal tissue demonstrates some separation of tubular elements with acute congestion. The separation supports freezing artifact. There is acute congestion and hemorrhage over the capsular surface with congestion throughout the parenchyma. Specific other change or tubular degeneration is not identified. N. II-A-24: LIVER- This tissue demonstrates separation of the parenchyma as the result of freezing artifact with acute congestion. There are focal areas of hemorrhage in the liver parenchyma. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with definite freezing artifact. Specific other inflammation or change is not identified. Tubular toxicity is not identified. O. II-A-13: ; LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested with freezing artifact. There are scattered inflammatory cells in the portal triad areas. These inflammatory cells include lymphocytes and some eosinophils. Acute congestion is present. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested. There is mild freezing artifact in this renal tissue. Significant tubular or glomerular change is not identified. P. III-B-25: LIVER- This section of tissue is mildly autolyzed with acute congestion throughout the parenchyma. There are collections of lymphoid tissue in one focus. Scattered eosinophils are present. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested. There is mild autolysis in the renal tissue. Q. IV-C-12: LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested. There is bile retention and some apparent deposition of pigment in hepatocytes. The pigment may be bile or iron. 03347142001227301, UNK 000439 Continued on Next Page... U S F W 1015 AME/SPECIE5: 03347142001227301. UNK REQUESTING DR: UNKNOWN NIMAL ID: DRY RUN CREEK NK WESTON/REAC PROJECT 2890 WOODBRIDGE AVE #209 EDISON, NJ 08837-3679 13765086 ARP ID#: (06727)000-22- RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 0928 PAGE: 5 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY CASE*; VR_O7-OOJn30 RESEARCH KIDNEY- This tissue is acutely congested with focal areas of hemorrhage in the surrounding parenchyma. Specific other inflanmatlon is not identified. R. II-A-25: LIVER- This tissue has clefts, supporting freezing artifact. There is acute congestion in the tissue. Specific inflammation or degeneration is not identified. KIDNEY- Not present. HEART- Heart tissue is replacing kidney. There is acute congestion in the heart tissue. S. III-C-22: A LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. There are a few collections of eosinophils and mononuclear cells in the portal triad areas. Specific other change is not present in the liver. KIDNEY- This tissue is acutely congested with no evidence of specific tubular or glomerular damage. T. III-E-12: . LIVER- This tissue is mildly autolyzed with acute congestion. Eosinophils are prominent in the portal triad areas. Specific other change is not present in the liver. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with no evidence of tubular or glomerular damage. Specific toxicity is not identified. U. REF-A-11: . . LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested with an increased numbers of lymphocytes and eosinophils in the portal triad areas. The eosinophils are scattered throughout the hepatic tissue. The hepatocytes themselves are in extremely good condition. There is some fracturing of the liver, suggesting trauma, but no other specific change is present in the liver tissue. KIDNEY- This tissue is acutely congested. No evidence of specific tubular degeneration or inflanmation is identified in the sections of kidney. V. II-C-1: 3347142001227301, UNK 000440 Continued on Next Page... \jSF\N NAME/SPECIES: 03347142001227301. UNK REQUESTING DR: UNKNOWN ANIMAL ID: DRV RUN CREEK UNK WESTON/REAC PROJECT 2890 WOODBRIDGE AVE #209 EDISON. NJ 08837-3679 1376508 ARP ID#; (06727)000- RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 092E PAGE: 6 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY CASE#: V*-*7-00ioac RESEARCH u v t K - f m s tissue is very ai idly autolyzed with acute congestion. There is some fracturing of the tissue which may be due to frtazing artifact. Specific other change is not identified. KIDNEY- Renal tissue was not identified in this section. W. III-B-10: . LIVER- The liver tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. Eosinophilic infiltration has occurred in the portal triad areas. Mild autolysis is present. There is some suggestion of freezing artifact in the tissue. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is slightly autolyzed with acute congestion and no other specific inflammation. X. IV-A-15: ' LIVER- This tissue is very mildly autolyzed with acute congestion. Scattered eosinophils and lymphocytes are present in portal triad areas. Specific other inflammation is not identified. KIDNEY- This tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. There are focal areas of hemorrhage, suggesting a potential of trauma. Specific inflammation or degeneration is not identified in the renal parenchyma. Y. REF E-2: LIVER- The liver tissue is acutely congested. There is almost no autolysis in this liver tissue. Scattered eosinophils and lymphocytes are present in the portal triad areas. Specific infection or change is not identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. Specific other infection or degeneration is not identified. Z. I-E-8: LIVER- This section of liver tissue is mildly autolyzed with minimal congestion. There ore very few eosii.up.Mls and lymphocytes in the portal triad areas. Specific other change is not identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is mildly autolyzed. Specific inflammation is not identified in this renal parenchyma. 03347142001227301, UNK 000441 Continued on Next Page... USFW 1017 IAME/SPECIES: 03347142001227301. UNK REQUESTING DR: UNKNOWN VilMAL ID: DRY RUN CREEK INK WESTON/REAC PROJECT 2890 WOODBRIDGE AVE #209 EDISON. NJ 08837-3679 1376508 ARP ID#: (06727)000-2; RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 0921 PAGE: 7 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY CASE#: VR-97-001030 RESEARCH AA. III-C-17: ' LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested with no evidence of autolysis. There are eosinophils and lymphoid cells in the portal triad areas. Some separation of the hepatocytes has occurred. Acute congestion is part of the reaction. Specific toxicity or infection is not identified in the liver tissue. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. Specific tubular changes are not present. BB. II-D-6: LIVER- This liver tissue demonstrates evidence of freezing artifact with mild autolysis of the hepatocytes and acute congestion. Scattered eosinophils are present in the portal triad areas, but they are minimal in number. KIDNEY- The renal tissue demonstrates tissue separation consistent with freezing artifact and mild autolysis. Minimal inflammation and no evidence of tubular degeneration is identified in this kidney. CC. IV-E-10: LIVER- This section of liver is acutely congested with mild autolysis. There are a few collections of lymphocytes, plasma cells and eosinophils in the collection. Epithelioid cells are part of the collected material. There are a few scattered inflammatory cells in the sinusoids throughout the liver tissue. Specific other change is not identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. The tubular elements in the kidney are in extremely good condition with no evidence of specific autolysis. DO. II-C-22: ' ' LIVER- The liver tissue is mildly to moderately autolyzed with some pigment in the liver parenchyma. Specific cellular infiltration is not identified. In some areas, the liver tissue is severely autolyzed. Specific degenerative change is not present. KIDNEY- This tissue is moderately autolyzed and acutely congested. Specific inflammation is not otherwise identified in the renal tissue. Degeneration is secondary. E E . I I - A- 1 9 : 13347142001227301, UNK 000442 Continued on Next Page. USFW 1018 NAME/SPECIES: 03347142001227301. UNK REQUESTING DR: UNKNOWN ANIMAL 10: DRY RUN CREEK UNK WE5T0N/REAC PROJECT 2890 WOODBRIDGE AVE #209 EDISON, NJ 08837-3679 13765086 ARP ID#: (06727)000-; RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 0928 PAGE: 8 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY CASE#: VR-97-001030 RESEARCH LIVER- The liver sections are slightly autolyzed with acute congestion. Eosinophils and lymphocytes are part of the inflammatory process in the portal triad areas. Other specific change is not identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is autolyzed with acute congestion. Specific tubular degeneration or interstitial inflaimation is not identified. FF. 4II-C-24: ;* . LIVER- The liver tissue is mildly autolyzed with multifocal areas of inflammation in the parenchyma. These inflammatory elements include neutrophils, lymphocytes, and irregular mononuclear cells. This supports some type of inflammation. Minimal portal triad inflammation is identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is autolyzed with acute congestion. No specific tubular degeneration or inflammation is identified. GG. III-B-7: LIVER- The liver tissue is acutely congested with mild to moderate autolysis. Moderate autolysis is part of the collection in several sites. There are scattered inflammatory cells in the sinusoids of this hepatic tissue. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is moderately autolyzed with some separation of this tissue. There is acute congestion of this tissue as well. The degenerative change is occurring secondarily. In some areas, the autolysis is quite severe. HH. REF-F-10: . . LIVER- This section of liver tissue is very mildly autolyzed with acute congestion and good collections of hepatic tissue with normal cells. Scattered eosinophils are present in portal triad regions. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested. There is mild autolysis in the renal tissue as well. II. III-E-6: LIVER- This tissue is mildly autolyzed with some evidence of freezing artifact. There are collections of eosinophils and a few lymphocytes in the portal triad areas. Specific hepatocellular degeneration is not identified. 03347142001227301. UNK 000443 Continued on Next Page... USFW 1019 IAME/SPECIES: 03347142001227301. UNK REQUESTING DR: UNKNOWN NIHAL ID: DRY RUN CREEK INK WESTON/REAC PROJECT 2890 WOODBRIDGE AVE #209 EDISON, NJ 08837-3679 13765086 ARP ID#: (06727)000-22- RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 0928 PAGE: 9 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY CASE#: VR-97-001030 RESEARCH KIDNEY- The renal tissue is slightly autolyzed with no other specific change. JJ. III-C-25: LIVER- The liver tissue is acutely congested with freezing artifact and mild autolysis. Almost no inflammation was identified in the liver. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with some separation of the parenchyma. Tubular degeneration or interstitial inflammation is not identified. KK. I-D-8: .. LIVER- The liver tissue is acutely congested with mild to moderate autolysis. Hepatocellular vacuolization and granulation of the hepatocytes has occurred in the tissue. There is some vacuolization. Specific inflammation is not identified. The granularity of the hepatocytes and the congestion appears to be metabolically normal. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. Specific inflammation is not identified. LL. II-E-7: LIVER- The liver tissue is demonstrating granulated cells with vacuolization. There is mild autolysis and acute congestion in the liver tissue. Some eosinophils and lymphocytes are present in the portal triad areas. Degeneration is occurring secondarily. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is slightly autolyzed with acute congestion and no evidence of any other specific tubular or degenerative change. MM. II-C-1: LIVER- The liver tissue is acutely congested with mild to moderate autolysis. A few collections of lymphocytes and eosinophils are present in the portal triad areas with small granulomata. These lesions appear to be specific parasite reactions. Specific other inflammation is not identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. Other specific inflammation is not identified. NN. IV-E-22: 3347142001227301. UNK 000444 Continued on Next Page... USFW 1020 ME/SPECIES: 03347142001227301, UNK NESTING DR: UNKNOWN .IMAL ID: DRY RUN CREEK NK WE5T0N/REAC PROJECT 2890 W00DBRID6E AVE #209 EDISON. NJ 08837-3679 13765086 ARP I W : (06727)000-2. RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 0928 PAGE: 10 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY CASE#: VR-97-001030 RESEARCH LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested with rare eosinophils and lymphocytes in the portal triad areas. Degeneration is occurring minimally. Other specific inflammation is not identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with no specific degeneration of tubules or interstitial areas. 00. II-E-6: LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested with collections of eosinophils and some lymphocytes in the portal triad areas. Mild to moderate autolysis has occurred in this liver tissue. Specific other change is not identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue demonstrates acute congestion with mild to moderate autolysis. There are focal collections of inspissated protein in some tubules. No other specific reaction or change is identified. PP. REF-B-10: ' . LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested and very mildly autolyzed. There are some collections of lymphocytes and eosinophils in the portal triad areas. Mild fibrosis is part of the collection. There is more severe autolysis over the capsule with some foreign material in the capsule as well. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested with no specific degeneration of tubules. QQ. III-D-8: LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested. Lymphocytes, eosinophils, and a few other inflammatory cells are present in and around portal triad areas. Specific inflammation or toxicity is not identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is slightly autolyzed. No evidence of infection or degeneration of tubules can be identified. RR. REF-A-6: LIVER- This tissue is acutely congested with moderate autolysis. Eosinophils, lymphocytes, and plasma cells are present in the portal triad areas. Specific degeneration of the liver tissue is not identified. The cellular infiltration in the portal triad areas is moderate. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is autolyzed and acutely congested. Specific 03347142001227301, UNK Continued on Next Page... 000445 USFW 1021 NAME/SPECIES: 03347142001227301. UNK REQUESTING DR: UNKNOWN -ANIMAL ID: DRY RUN CREEK UNK WESTON/REAC PROJECT 2890 WOODBRIDGE AVE #209 EDISON. NJ 08837-3679 13765086 ARP ID#: (06727)000-22 RECEIVED: 19JUN97 PRINTED: 17JUL97 0928 PAGE: 11 VETERINARY PATHOLOGY CASE#: VR-97-001030 RESEARCH tubular degeneration is not identified in the kidney. SS. REF-E-2: LIVER- The liver tissue is acutely congested with some vacuolization or granularity of hepatocytes. Scattered eosinophils and lymphocytes are present in the portal triad areas. Specific other degeneration or inflammation is not identified. KIDNEY- The renal tissue is acutely congested. Mild autolysis is present. There is mild dilatation of the tubular elements, but this may be from freezing artifact. COMMENTS: The eosinophilic infiltration with other cells and epithelioid cells in several parts of the portal triad areas supports a parasitic infestation which would be a common occurrence in wild rodents. There very likely is parasitic migration through the liver tissue in these animals (27/45 liver samples). The acute congestion supports an acute death. The autolysis is varied between the animals, and this suggests a variation between collection of tissue and the time of death. Freezing artifact suggests that some of the tissues were frozen. The hydronephrosis in one kidney appears to be an acquired disease, and many animals live a long time with these changes. This lesion was incidental. There were three liver sections that demonstrated some type of bacterial infection with suppurative and necrotizing process. This could be bacterial infection from the environment or nonspecific infection. The areas of hemorrhage in the kidney or liver suggested the possibility of trauma as a facter in the cause of death. 07/16/97 (LDM/mdp) Verified by: L. D. McGill, D.V.M., Ph.D., DACVP Veterinary Pathologist electronic signature 13347142001227301. UNK For Histopathology Consultation Call: 1-800-426-2099 000446 END OF CHART USFW 1022 ) ` -4 ? ^ E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 Prr-- ` N arr- ^ . ___ -- -- Project Number. 033H1- / / - o o i - _________ No: RFW Contact: /V?. K, Ho,*<_________ Phone: ft? fl I?| gjo p U I I OL SHEET NO./ OF g, SamplQ, Identification______ ________ _____________ Analyses Requested REACf Sample No. aef-D'15 IB.-C-/6 ' t - io RSf-e- l-c-s trir- BC--MIX \ere-i t-A-ao Sampling Location % r-c-i Ii -- AA '-Mn TZ--aS' nn ---ACc---/in2i U LiL-Jl-- Matrix: SD - Sediment PW- DS - Drum Solidi GW- DL- Drum Liquidi SW- X Other SL - Potable Waler Groundwater Surface Water Sludge Matrix Tt. DahtaoCohllnected aIhiloI *h"l>_, hf rolh' nn #ol Bottlas / / / /1 c hIhnoohhhn1l In h i einhhh ii h hi oohhll hohl Lhnl hi o h i1 hitin ltohn J6iILnUl<sn.1 . - 1 / / / /. y. / / j1 1 1 1 / 1 Special Instruction!: SW- Soil Water TJ = T t S W ' 0 - Oil * Air Contalner/PresarVatlve z !/ Air //# / 1 Ij .3 0-2 / !aj ____ x:____ ___ kl____ * >' FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # 1 Items/Reason | Relinquished By w m m tm 's m m m m Data FORM#4 Received By Date Time I Items/Reason H I 1 H Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time 000447 201 MdSn %m * US GPO. 1994 383 Olf. (908) 321-4200 EPA Contract 6B-C4-0022 Project Name: Z)/^ Project Number RFWContact /A>Y, __ C ( <d L-___________________ -o o l - J J l J - n l _______ ____ _________ P h o n e : , ? / UJao REAC# 1 Sample No. WF-A-ll 1T-C-I nr- h r ib Sample Identification Sampling Location Matrix n Data Collected -- A -ll-9 7 A -II-4 1 6 - II-9T #of Bottle Contalner/Preservatlve jjS tt JJnrv /______ ____ * ____ ____ ____ '- No: 07733 SHEET NO.) OF 7 T -e- g -c - n zr-o-6 IT L ' E - l 0 L-C-2-L fc'A- i (T-C-Dv K -B -l Ff' P- TL-E-L TL - C - D f t - 0-8 to-tr - T VL-L- 1 l-E -h SO Sediment DS- DrumSolid DL- DrumUqti'dt X - Other PWGWSW- SL - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge A - it n -- 1 A - 11 -<? T A? u - a n -- A-ir - c l 4 - /0-91 - -9 7 6'//-4-7 \ S- Soil W- Water O- ON A- Air > 1 1 J V > 1 FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # RemafReaaon Relinquished By flitlft.. h it '* - Date FORM14 Received By i Date Time 1 Itema/Reason 1 1 1 1 1 Relinquished By Date 000448 Received By Date Time 8/94 SO Sdiment DS- DrumSolids DL- DrumLiquids X Other PW- Potable Water GW- Groundwater SW- Surface Water SL - Sludge S- W. O- A- Soll Water Oil Air T l - *T>iivt FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # Items/Reason Relinquished By Date V I/ A n * I'/ft* m ~ in z 7 ~ \ U y el ' Received By Oate Time Items/Reason Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time ` FORM4 V 1 8/94 000449 S20I. M dSfl * US OPO 1994 303 015 A P P E N D IX C Toxicity Testing Reports D ry Run Creek site Washington, W ood County, West Virginia November 1997 000450 USFW 1026 tilSAL REPORT; TOXICITY ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENTS FROM THE DRY RUN CREEK SITE WITH THE FRESHWATER INVERTEBRATE, HYALEUA AZTECA TEST GUIDELINE: EPA 600/R-94/024 PREPARED FOR: Roy F. W eston, Inc. GSA Raritan Depot Building 209 Annex (Bay F) 2890 W oodbridge Avenue Edison, New Jersey 08837-3879 Phone: (908) 3 2 M 2 0 0 EEKEQBMIN.fi LABORATORY: QST Environmental Inc. 404 SW 140th Terrace Newberry, Florida 32669-3000 Phone: (352) 332-3318 STUDY IP: Roy F W eston Project No. 3347-142-001-2273 QST Project No. 3197232-0100-3100 July 1997 000451 U S F W 1027 ROY F. WESTON. INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYA1.EI.LA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY W hole sediment toxicity tests were conducted at QST Environm ental Inc., in N ew berry, Florida, with the freshw ater invertebrate, Hyalella azieca, on samples collected from the D ry R un C reek Site. The effect criteria for the tests were survival and growth. A total of 4 site sedim ents, one field reference sedim ent, and one laboratory control sedim ent w ere used in the toxicity tests. A fter 10 days of exposure, there were no significant differences (P = 0 .0 5 ) in the survival and grow th of Hyalella azteca between the laboratory control sedim ent and the field reference sedim ent (300). There w ere no significant differences (P = 0 .0 5 ) in the survival o f Hyalella azieca betw een the laboratory control sediment, the field reference sedim ent (300), and any of the sedim ents samples collected from the D ry Run C reek Site. G row th, m easured as dry w eight o f Hyalella azieca, in the laboratory control and field reference sedim ents, was significantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from growth in sedim ents from sample stations 303 (U pper Tributary A) and 305 (A rea II). G row th, m easured as length of Hyalella azteca, in the laboratory control and field reference sedim ents, was significantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from growth in sediment from sample station 305 (Area II). 000452 2 USFW 1028 ROY F. WESTON. INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYALELLA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF APPENDICES 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 M ATERIALS AND METHODS 2.1 TEST SAM PLES 2.2 OVERLYING W ATER 2.3 TEST ORGANISMS 2.4 TEST DESIGN 2.5 REFERENCE TOXICANT TEST 3.0 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 W HOLE SEDIM ENT TOXICITY TEST 4.2 REFERENCE TOXICANT TEST 5.0 CONCLUSION 6.0 REFERENCES Page 2 3 4 4 5 5 8 9 10 H 000453 3 USFW 1029 ROY F. WESTON. INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYALELLA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 inform ation for the samples are presented in Appendix A. All samples w ere stored in a refrigerator at 4 2 C during the testing period. 2.2 O V ERLY IN G W A TER The w ater used as overlying or dilution w ater was hard reconstituted freshw ater with a hardness of 130 m g /L as C a C 0 3 and an alkalinity o f 116 m g /L as C a C 0 3. T he w a te r w as obtained fro m a deep well located at the test site and was diluted with deionized water to achieve the desired hardness. 2.3 T E ST O RG A N ISM S The tests w ere conducted using juvenile (second or third instar, 2-3.2 m m long and weighing app roxim ately 0 .2 4 m g each) H . azteca obtained from C hesapeake C u ltu res, H ay es, V A . T h e su p p lie r's breed in g and holding conditions, such as tem perature and w a te r h ard n ess, w e re sim ilar to those of the testing conditions. Therefore, organism s were held < 2 4 hours prior to test initiation. Test organism s w ere acclimated to any differences in w ater chem istry by diluting the receiving w a te r w ith test dilution w ater to 50 percen t o f receiving w ater. A ll H . azteca used in the tests appeared to be norm al and healthy at test initiation. 2.4 T EST DESIGN Prior to use in testing, the sedim ent samples w ere thoroughly hom ogenized in their original containers and in a glass sorting pan, and then press-sieved through a 2 m m mesh N ytex screen to rem ove stones, plant debris, and indigenous organism s. No additional w ater was added during sifting. Any observations m ade were recorded on a daily log sheet. The test vessels used for the bioassays were 470 m L glass jars (13 cm height and 7 cm diam eter). Approxim ately 100 gram s of test, reference, or laboratory control sedim ent w ere introduced into the test cham bers and uniform ly leveled. O ne-hundred and seventy-five milliliters (175 m L) of overlying w ater were added to each test cham ber to provide a ratio of 1 part sediment to 1.75 parts overlying w ater. The test cham bers w ere then allowed to settle overnight without aeration. A fter the settling period, the initial w ater quality m easurem ents were taken and the test organism s w ere randomly added to the individual test cham bers, loading only one replicate at a time until loading was com plete. The 6 000454 U S F W 1030 ROY F. WESTON. INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYALELLA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0i00-3100 whole sediment tests were conducted using eight replicates of ten organisms per replicate for a total o f 80 H . azteca p e r sam ple. T he test vessels w ere labeled with the site sam ple nu m b er an d the replicate num ber (A through H ), and the test area was identified by the project m anager, project num ber, test type and schedule. The duration of the static-renewal test was 10 days during which the overlying w ater in each replicate exposure chamber was renewed twice daily. During renewals, approxim ately 75 percent o f the overlying w ater w as siphoned through a 0.1 m m m esh sieve. Any test organism s trapped in the sieve were pipetted back into the appropriate test chamber. New overlying water was then slowly siphoned back into the test chamber while diverting the flow onto the side o f the test ch am ber to m inim ize resuspension o f the sedim ents. H yalella azteca w ere fed 1.5 m L algae, yeast/trout chow /cereal leaves mixture (Aquatic Biosystems, Fort Collins, Colorado) p er replicate, supplemented with 0.1 g of an aged, ground rabbit chow (Jonesville Feed Seed Store, N ew berry, Florida), and Tetram in (That Fish Place, Lancaster, Pennsylvania) daily following renew als of overlying water. The tests were conducted in a w aterbath adjusted to m aintain a tem perature of 23 1 C under am bient laboratory illum ination with a daily photoperiod o f 16 hours of light (710 Lux) and 8 hours of darkness. Test chambers were not aerated at any time during the test. Tem perature, pH , and dissolved oxygen concentrations (DO) were m easured daily, and ammonia, conductivity, hardness and alkalinity were m easured at the beginning and end of the test. W ater quality param eters (tem perature, pH , D O, and conductivity) w ere m easured prior to and immediately following renewal of overlying water. W ater quality measurem ents were taken with the following instruments: tem perature-Fisher Scientific digital thermocouple; p H -S A 290A O rion pH m eter with an O rion 91-57 triode; dissolved oxygen-Y SI, Model 57 DO m eter; conductivity-Y SI, M odel 33 SCT conductivity m eter; am m onia- O rion M odel 290A am m onia m eter equipped w ith a M odel 95-12 am m onia electrode; alkalinity and hardness-E D T A titration m ethod. All instrum ents used to perform the w ater quality m easurem ents w ere calibrated prior to use. 0004SS 7 USFW 1031 ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYALELLA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 control and field reference sedim ents, was significantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from grow th in sedim ents from sample stations 303 (U pper Tributary A) and 305 (Area D). Grow th, m easured as m ean length o f H. azteca, ranged from 2 .8 m m p e r organism (303 and 305) to 2 .9 m m /o rg an ism (rem ainder of the samples). The lengths of all surviving organisms were within the ranges of organisms used to initiate the test. There w ere no significant differences (P = 0 .0 5 ) in grow th, m easured as m ean length o f H . azteca betw een the laboratory control sedim ent and the field reference sedim ent. G row th, m easured as m ean length o f H . azteca in the laboratory con tro l and field reference sediments, was significantly different (P = 0.05) from grow th in sedim ent from sample station 305. No adverse behavioral observations were recorded during the test. All of the tests organism s in the test, reference, and laboratory control sediments appeared healthy and norm al at test term ination. 4.2 R E FE R E N C E T O X IC A N T T E ST T he 96-hour L C J0 fo r the H. azteca reference toxicant test w as calculated to b e 21.1 /g C d C l2/L with 95 percent confidence limits of 18.51 to 24.08 ,ug/L. The LCjo value falls w ithin the norm al sensitivity ranges of the test organism s used at QST. Copies of the reference toxicant test raw data and statistical reports are provided in Appendix C. 5.0 CONCLUSION U nder the conditions of the study, there were no significant differences (P = 0 .0 5 ) in survival and gro w th o f H. azteca betw een the laboratory control sedim ent and field reference sedim en t. S urvival o f H. azteca in the lab o rato ry control and field reference sedim ents w as not significantly d ifferen t (P = 0 .0 5 ) from survival in any of the D ry R un C reek Site sedim ents. G row th, m easured as m ean d ry w eight o f H . azteca in th e field reference and laboratory control sedim ents w as significantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from grow th in sedim ents from sam ple stations 303 and 305. Finally, grow th, m easu red as m ean length o f H . azteca in the laboratory control and field reference sedim en ts w as significantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from grow th in sediment from sample station 305. 10 000456 U S F W 1032 6.0 R EFER EN C ES ROY F. WESTON. INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYALELLA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 G ulley, D .D ., A .M . B oelter, and H .L . B ergm an. 1991. Toxstat 3.4. D epartm ent o f Z o o lo g y and Physiology, University o f W yoming. April 1991. H am ilton, M .A ., R .C . R usso, and R .V . T hurston. 1977. Trimmed Spearman-Karber Methodfo r Estim ating Median Lethal Concentrations in Toxicity Bioassays. E nvironm ental S cience and Technology. 11(7):714-719; C orrection 12(4):417 (1978). Snedecor, G.W . and W .G . Cochran, 1980. Statistical M ethods. 7th Edition. The Iow a State University Press, Ames, Iowa. U .S . E nvironm ental P rotection A gency (E PA ). 1994. Methods fo r M easuring the Toxicity and Bioaccum ulation o f Sediment-Associated Contaminants With Freshwater Invertebrates.EPAJGOOfR94/02. June 1994. U .S . E nvironm ental P rotection A gency (E PA ). 1988. Computer Program and Users Guide fo r Probit and Dunnett's Analysis o f Data from Acute and Short Term Chronic Toxicity Tests with Aquatic Organisms. P repared by Statistical S upport Staff, C om puter S ciences C orp o ratio n . Prepared for the Biological M ethods Branch, Environm ental M onitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, 1988. 000457 USFW ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK HYALELLA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 T able 1. W ater Quality M easurem ent Ranges* of Overlying W ater During a 10-Day Toxicity Test Using W hole Sediments From The D ry Run Site W ith llya le lla azteca Sample 11) Control 300 303 304 305 306 Location n o 1' (mg/L) Lab control 7.6-8 .2 Reference 6 .6 -8.0 Upper Tributary A 6 .8-8.0 Upper Tributary B 6.5-8.0 Area H 6 .5-8.0 Area IV 6 . 0 - 7 .8 T em perature (C) 22.7-23.4 22.7-23.4 22.6-23.3 22.6-23.3 22.5-23.4 22.5-23.6 pH (s.u.)c 7.6-8.0 7.3-7.9 7.4-7.9 7.4-7.9 7.4-7.9 7.5-7.9 Hardness mg/L Alkalinity mg/L Conductivity Ammonia as CaCOj as CaCOj (fimhos/cm) (ppm as Nd) 120-132 101-119 220-260 < 0.10 115-128 103-123 220-275 < 0.10 126-144 102-138 240-300 < 0.10 120-130 100-128 220-280 < 0.10 122-133 98-123 225-275 < 0.10 140-149 126-145 280-305 < 0.10 'R ange o f 11 m easurem ents for D O , p H , and tem perature. H ardness, alkalinity, conductivity and am m onia m easured at beginning and end o f test. kDO = dissolved oxygen; cs.u . = standard units; dN = nitrogen. USFW 1034 000458 Table 2. ROY F. WESTON. INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYALELLA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Survival and G row th o f H yalella azteca Exposed to W hole Sedim ents F ro m T h e D ry Run C reek Site D uring a 10-Day Toxicity Test (Page 1 of 2) Sample ID Site ID REP1 CONTROL NA A B C D E F G H 300 Reference A B C D E F G H 303 Upper Tributary A A B C D E F G H 304 Upper Tributary B A B C D E F G H No. Alive (% Survival) 10 10 10 10 9 9 10 IQ 78 (98) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 IQ 80 (100) 9 10 10 10 10 8 10 IQ 77 (96) 10 10 10 10 9 10 9 IQ 78 (98) Mean Length (mm) 2.8 2.9 3.0 2.8 3.1 3.0 2.9 2*2 2.9 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.9 3.0 2J 2.9 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2*2 2.8 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.8 3.0 3.1 2.9 2*1 2.9 Mean Dry W eight (mg) 0.18 0.21 0.22 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.21 0.19 0.21 0.18 0.21 0.21 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.18 0.19 0.14 0.16 0.15 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.15 QJS 0.15b 0.18 0.16 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.21 0.21 QxIS 0.19 13 000459 U S F W 1035 Table 2. ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYALELLA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 S urvival and G ro w th o f H yalella azteca E xposed to W hole Sedim ents F ro m T h e D ry Rim C reek Site D uring a 10-Day Toxicity Test (Page 2 o f 2) Sample ID Site ID 305 Area II 306 Area IV REP* A B C D E F G H A B C D E F G H No. Alive (% Survival) 10 10 9 10 10 10 9 3. 77 (96) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 IQ 80(100) Mean Length (nun) 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.9 2L2 2.8b 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.8 L2 2.9 M ean Dry W eight (mg) 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.13 0.16 0.20 Q J 0.15" 0.23 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.20 0.20 <L2Q 0.19 1 Ten organism s exposed per replicate (REP) bS ignificantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from laboratory control and field referen ce sedim ent 000460 14 USBN 1036 ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYALELLA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Appendix A: Chain-of-Custody and Traffic Information 000461 USFW 1037 Items/Reason Relinquished By Date 4/1 iffo titlti A 7&2$b?j *W `ft> r* J e* ' Received By Date Time (Jufr> Itlfc Items/Reason Relinquished By Date Received By tl U U I O * Date Time ROY F. WESTON. INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYALHI.LA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Appendix B: Hyalea azteca Sediment Toxicity Test Raw Data 000463 USFW 1039 Environmental Science fc Engineering/ Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Project: 3 ^ 7 2 3 -2.-0 (o o - 3 ___________ DAILY LOG Page: ESE QA Form Number: 018 Effective: APR 1993 >h*hi -- w rti! f P ^ CL uJfc-S if 0 .A . IU , X o ____ <r>Q C .q y > s --1S ' Ls <-a<sJ*r- . 0& 3e>U xJ -4<W-s. / 2tcV y--\ C - r r v \ --~^ r~-e>--A s *7S~ P ^ ''2-H - T^e-sV- 6 1" 20 fa ~) 1^ j=> c\ 4 & -L A i 1 --o r \ ca^ g_J) -e-- f r - g j t 1 p<'~>r- 4~e> 3 H * 3 ~ 0 - i o 77. s: .r^J L. --L a s X e L t - 5W -C e| < L srr*N -g r - g ^ S c . k i h ' ) fv\=> 0\r**<Li.vj v-> s .a ^ J - e P ', 4 * 9 i - . r^Ps A o r __ s: 4o *+-*Il. ( cow^r-*o \ ***) -- ^ a^oP -S7 ^ P 3e>C?) 4 o >l~2-?lf7 .TV i^ rJ5> Tt^ftofJL,. 4 ^ L > r 'vW ch iye^ ft>Jl -ksevuej . or^ - g re^\jL^w r jb 6(-, K)t> a-cy^-h(m. > fc j YTc Q j'L ih n -- CX ra^- l^ iV g c o -^ ie v ' --To ^ /~ e r\< j-g jP ? oT-S-<^*->-^ -f- C sT T ^-^ ~ 7 S ~ ar^= ' T V O ^ 4 -a ______________ v ^ x -S S .S T ^ /C . / C c i j ^ h l N v o -- 0^^fW/Vj: '^-rv-Wv' ' jesV a tya^r-eP *f~ t^vJv-N^Og-- > CXTftp--y 7 'S '*>f rv-^> 4 -- ( z S ' f ^ ' l t - v Q '-- O u**-t>-p>v V r-^^,a_^_r-fcfp ^ > t o 4- A ^-Jov'JT V ex-gp , O TtV \ --*jf (a lzio h l S ns~f-. C*=> p w 4o J-\ 3 . 0 ^ >lL { 3 o C o l q>_f <A-(~), < X ^ U ( 'K ^ iJc-,W to r e ^ e ^ > t J ^ 4e;4- et>C ^vTj<-^ 4- . CTYr\-^ jo ^ ^.> II, / 000464 USFW 1040 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida P a g e : ____ ESE QA Form Number: 018 Effective: APR 1993 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida SUBJECT: TOXICITY TEST DATA SHEET Page: ESE QA Form: 097A Effective: August 1994 Client: Test [2^n Q-eulc Material Project Number: 3 jq-? 2.3 z.-o -3 loo Test Conditions z i3 See Page ____ o tf sSaamm pplle Rk e c e i p t L o g Test Material Information Test Animal History t ] Preliminary [ ] Definitive -/J Screening Dilution Water: (t>) Static [ ) Flow-through Duration : I O t>evJLfS ^ Species : __ Ce. Batch Number : _______ Age / Life Stage : z-'S s W ' _________ Date Acclimation / Maintenance Began : See Page l3 of cuU.Vq for raw data. Mortality (%) 48 Hrs prior to testing: o . Log J Test Area Used Temperature (C) Salinity (ppt) 2 1 + /- l Protocol Followed: fJA + / - Lighting : (/] Fluorescent [ ] Incandescent Photoperiod : IU hr Light : g hr Dark Test Container Dimensions: Test Solution Height Test Containers Test Container Volume Diluent Volume LX [ ]0pen Q d 2 . Reps / Concentration Animals / Replicate S JL2_ WX Covered ___ Liters Liters Concentrations Based on: [ ] A.I. foc) W.M. Container Composition: foe) Glass [ ) Plastic T e st C o n c e n tra tio n s: (U n its * % A m o u n t R e f e r e n c e . J f c r P t A d d e d ( rv>U) : A m ount T ee-R A dded OvKvLwik* Additional Observations: : ) : C o n tro l 3crO lo o lo o pvo 4A#|rf(,^> \ n s " 3o3 \o o i-iS " 3o^ (V 30 n sr JO 100 30C, lo o I-7 S " Data By: FORM: SO194 Date: ( . / n h USFW 1042 000466 QST Environmental Toxicology Lab: Gainesville, FL QA FORM NO: 108B EFFECTIVE: JUNE 1997 SUBJECT: SEDIMENT TOXICITY DATA SHEET - WATER QUALITY SPONSOR: SAMPLE ID: / 0*4 <2u Ci-eaU. C o tJT to l_ PROJECT NUMBER: 3 1 e?"? 2 3 2 ' o !o * - 3 TEST SPECIES: Vf. C.2CCJK. DATE-DAY REP TEMP HARD/ c o ALK NH, pH DO COND FEEDING (ppm) (S.U.) (mg/L) (pmhos/cm) IN IT IA L /nM E 0* I32fu1 U t* J en 1 b lr th i 2 c. T i.[ 2 2 . S' J z o k i 3 > r m t / * 2 i h "i 4 fo\7Jz{i(n 5 E P 23 M 2.V 2- ---- -- -- -- -- d - z . l k ' 7 6 <S t>hili-> 7 te h sh n 8 (el-zichn 9 10 W A C 2 3 .3 2 3 ,1 23 3 23,3 -- -- -- -- !2o/lo\ 0 ,1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0,) 7 .1 7 -7 nA 77 7 ,7 7^ 7 -7 7 -1 9 .o ?.o 7-<o 1 .O .\ fr. o 7 .% 7*7 Svo fc o 7-U Z (p O --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 'Z 'Z O Y rc V T c / AUS 7 rc 7TZL -- V ro W tc. H ttl -- VTC. -- N \o ISToo Nv. 133= M o h it N^-O 1IRs r^ o nM f ury in s ' K o 0*1MS' f^O IM S" K O ||3o M o o^'2e=> OBSERV DATE-DAY A B C REPLICATE D EF G H Initial t> \rth n duhi 0 1 |OA (/ ^ 1^7 2 7 ( J i d ' n 3 M mC. l I'M V 'i 4 S b li-U q i 5 5 l I z t /s d 6 (? 75 l /t s /'h 8 S 97 ( e l z i h l 1 Id A Comments: l o A IO A 1o A IO A IO A io A to A K O IS'IS" 7 C, Le ^ r n . "7 nr\(2 Ce w L 5" C, V-J2L K 1315" 6? Cf^C-- *7 7 "7 E w L 7 iWZ_ G o -J L (*> G - s . K O |voO S 6^-v/2. 5 ,-- n ( o * * $ - 7 C M F^v/2. < U ~ 4 2 ^ K = u t < r G M f i S > v j2_ s e -- Co V~. C, W 2_ K O |(3o S fcX S - 7 5 Al (p 24 - 1 a v il l e u # - 77 m r 5 W 2- (o r-%/2_ 3 e w 2 S ' f H L G *"J2_ C, k A . S K u > OT3c 63 -Ns/Z. r-\j2 (o v \iL M r*jZ. 7 S**^SL W L M W 2- S (3 k / L 4 N \ Ase iM oo Oj E--- - S w . 7 W L G k H - K a II O G ft-v/Z. lo A lo A 7 lo A 7 tW L 9A 7 6 ^ 2. S' 1 A 7 lo -A k o m r 000467 USFW 1043 KEY: AS = AT SURFACE N= NONE EMR = EMERGENCE A = A LIV E D = D EA D NF = N O T FO UND REP = R EP LIC A T E C O N D = C O N D U C T IV IT Y A L K = A L K A L IN IT Y A M P = A M P L E X U S TEMP = TEMPERATURE H A RD = H A RD N ESS YTC = YEAST/ TROUT CHOW /CEROPHYLL QST Environmental Toxicology Lab: Gainesville, FL QA FORM NO: I0SB EFFECTIVE: JUNE 1997 SUBJECT: SEDIMENT TOXICITY DATA SHEET - WATER QUALITY SPO N SO R : u > r s - i / i v v e -v - Ci- m V. S A M P L E ID : ________3 0 0 ____ D A T E -D A Y R EP TE M P H A R D / (C ) A L K NH, (p p m ) PRO JEC T N U M B ER : 3 l T ? z 3 2 " T E S T S P E C IE S : LL a x 4*c c . pH DO COND F E E D IN G (s.u .) (m g /L ) (p m h o s/c m ) IN T T L A L /T IM E L | -7)en n lq n 0 l 2 3 4 5 c^hzkn 6 7 (o h s h -> fc lz tfa o S 9 <J t - f b n 10 A f \ 2 -2- ? c 2 2 .7 27 n 2 3 .H p 2,V l G 7 .2 .- 2 , U 23.0 A 23-1 2 3 / 2- C 2-3.0 u W iz 3 -- ___ -- --- -- __ -- -' -- u s/ io s 0,1 -- -- -- -- -- -- __ -- -- <co,\ 7 S ' - 7."? 7-7 7 ,F 7 # *7.7 7 .? 7 7 -i 7 .3 73 7 ? .o -o ?.< = > 6.-2 7.7 7 .< i 7 /^ <2,0 PYS" -- -- -- -- -- ___ -- -- 2-2-0 S 'T C V t c /aog. N TC 7 tc -- y - ic Wt c -- -- S^_f> 1 $ 7 3 0 f^ v o 1 3 3 s l^ = > 111 S " t~ - 0 l ( 2 o S v U *i S j y iih r JCf 3 <= Ka U3o Nsa O l2 o OBSERV REPLICATE DATE-DAY A B C D E F G H Initial <olnk~> 0 toA c(<?|*n 1 t-J (cl^hl 2 s-^ 3 si \W7- <*(21 h~> 4 fcfz-T^T- 5 fc|23fo 6 Si J r t k l 1 1EW^ d&h~> 8 dial'll 9 1 ewi 101 toA Comments: ^ ,^v=> |C*A toA loA IOA si 2-Em/L rJ r-> t--i si - -P tCmfl- sJ rJ sJ r-i -O2,G+Sr-sjL. S- 1C^U7_ sJ 1d NI 1e^ifL s-i t s-J 2-WI 2-WL 1**vJ2_ s3 3 ~n_ 2-ewz- 2loA IOA IEML loA lo-A loA S> t6WHsi si r-- ) >-S- tCvnR H rs2.e^s. 3 EWL. *0 ( (oA 10 A IOA N^=>fSVS" i3IT si TM^O(vo-o 1 M(S' ro SO 1(3=. s-J Swa. 0*;?=. l *>-. s-o iWe 1 Svs 1(00 0 A MO MIS" M O (XT> 000468 KEY: AS = AT SURFACE N - NONE EMR = EMERGENCE A = ALIVE D = DEAD NF = NOT FOUND REP = REPLICATE COND - CONDUCTIVITY ALK = ALKALINITY AMP = AMPLEXUS TEMP = TEMPERATURE HARD = HARDNESS YTC = YEAST/ TROUT CHOW/CEROPHYLL USFW 1044 QST Environmental Toxicology Lab: Gainesville, FL QA FORM NO: 108B EFFECTIVE: JUNE 1997 SUBJECT: SEDIMENT TOXICITY DATA SHEET - WATER QUALITY SPO N SO R: V O ^ / e u , i U O m V, S A M P L E ID: 303 PROJECT N U M I3ER: 3 l cr ? 3 - 3 7 - - o < = > ... .TEST SPECIES: _ .t\* a-g?4<ca. DATE-DAY REP TEMP HARD/ (8C) A L K NHj (ppm) t e i n f c n 0 A - Z*rO H 1/ / 138 .< 0 .1 cJi&fc-i 1 ih 'ik ') 2 E c 30 ii/tls-) 4 5 e F 7 7 .1 vm 77 S '2- ( e j z z h n 6 G _ . 7 2 . TL. k/zHfo- 7 A Z3^=> Ad z h i 8 72. \ (olz^fq-) 9 2 3 . \ c27/n > c 77.0 -- -- -- __ -- --- ---- m. ---- ---- ---- ---- <C0,| pH (s.u.) n>7 n .< \ iX - j.* IX iX 1 <% ! * l.\ DO (mg/L) "7 ' t 7^ "7.^ < ?.o -1 .1 m 'in u? COND (pmhos/cm) 3 ero -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- F E E D IN G VTC "'IT C Y IT . --- . YtC. '+T T Z - H rc -- v/Tt-- IN ITIA LTIM E 1W=> 1y e o m o in s ' NnCS M 3 o (W < II i f y^- o'? y y m oo rvsjcs h i y i^o 11 M-o 0e?3d OBSERV D A T E -D A Y A B C R EPLIC A T E D EF G H Initial t/ n K o 0 IO A /A IO A lo A 10 - A loY S lo A lo A t-o tsMsr cJish ") 1 rJ P r~* H M H M * ewvjs ts u r 6 / * - i h n 2 F r-J r J I- r-J r - 3 H H f-v> H o tlztK -i kMv 3 r-f 4 2 eW L 5 r-i F (O 1 ^ C L ItF X tf tJ 1 * vnJ L kJ r-* 2 - k . /J H ZM . aJ iJ M Nvcs M t C ( G n v IJ. f o 3=. n / 3*y i n f c J z j / cn 6 1 E i* \C l U Nt 7 7- M l J zs7t 7 8 2- M/2- t|c.ln 9 ( E M l ( J z ? l n io ^ A i -Tp Z E m L 1H J. 3 M/2 2H I 3 ---f_ I M I />A 16A . lo A 2- fM l 3PM I 2PM L 2 - * S pMZ_. 1 E M L lO 1e M L . ^ C^np-JZ-- "2-- 'W L M CsvJL. 1 n *JL_ 2. o v A (o A IO A 7- W ?A ,2*JF lO 1A 1 Er-v-fL NJ (M L t^ lo A Nvo o T3 A^o iV o o llo o M IS" f>/vOf o ? Comments: 000469 KEY: AS = AT SURFACE N= NONE EMR = EMERGENCE A = ALIVE D = DEAD NF = NOT FOUND REP = REPLICATE COND = CONDUCTIVITY ALK = ALKALINITY AMP = AMPLEXUS TEMP = TEMPERATURE HARD = HARDNESS YTC = YEAST/ TROUT CHOW /r' c p ^PH Y i.L USFW 1045 USFW 1046 _ J KJ QST Environmental Toxicology Lab: Gainesville, FL QA FORM NO: 10*B EFFECTIVE: JUNE 1997 SUBJECT: SEDIMENT TOXICITY DATA SHEET - WATER QUALITY SPONSOR: SAMPLE ID: VjiicAo-n / 3 0 -4 - C r*lc DATE-DAY REP TEMP HARD/ (C) ALK NHj (ppm ) PROJECT NUMBER: 2 1 * 1 7 7 3 2 - 0 1 0 0 TEST SPECIES: U. e itro . PH DO COND FEEDING (S.U.) (mg/L) (ftmhos/cm) INITIAL/TIME (o ln M 0 h IZojizS Z O .J & 2 2-7 __ ---- c _ 2 Z Co -- -- 3 D 2-2. C? 4 "23.3. fc|a1f7- 5 p Z 32 -- _x-- -- --- -- -- icU z 'k n 6 Q> 2 3 ,1 --- h o 7 w 22-) -- 8 A 2 3 -0 -- leiste fa*"} 22*1 -- (* lv if c l 10 C Z 2 ^ [Zo( |d O -- -- -- -- 7 .7 -7,8 -7 ,2 7c -7 . 7. S' 7 .^ 7$ 7^ 7 -4 " 7.% 7 .| *7* Co >7 77 7 .T G .7 RSO -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- * ^T C V'TC./a o G H -rc. Vt c -- Y -rc _ Y nc __ VTTI -- 1S^x=> M=> I'S 'i Nvjs H S ' M O M3o Nv=> )** S ' 3 V IU<T -V C i `i S ' N v O 1MX=> M >S" M -O 113 o 05*2i=> O BSERV D A T E -D A Y A 0 ID A l p) 4, j I ' l K l 2 pU 3V /ziU n 4 f-J iA -iA ^\n 5 (Jaalr? 6 i'k n h n 7 2 e^. 8 1 C~-f2. fe /W r? 9 U z x h i 10 zew L lo A v Comments: BC R EP LIC A T E D EF G H Initial IO A \ lo A t IO f\ lo is ID A tO A IO A r**=> j-Hff rJ t3 Is- 1 rJ nJ t- J tJ 1 m (L K) 1 ELt*~/2- si A-> le w - nJ r-J I Gn-\(t_ n) H rO M = > *315" P riv e ra N o |H$" 1 C -M 1 -- fJ 2~J2 /O 2 1NL V G 1 /O 2 O v-JL 2 ftw z. AJ H 3W l aJ rO M H3=, / J Z T V i/fS" 3 fcV^v/2 M o 0S3=> JfW L 3 Ovvtz. EW lo fs W . M & *J _ 3 e>-- 2 C W - 3 r-U2. Z . nrJ2- 3 <W IO A <4 E ^ p lo A M EW 9A !CW H e w i. 2 *sL lo A 7A M o tM 0 0 2 C ^ R . M O lltrO 2 i o /\ M d ill S ' f^o Ili?0 000470 KEY: AS = AT SURFACE N= NONE EMR = EMERGENCE A = ALIVE D = DEAD NF = NOT FOUND REP = REPLICATE COND = CONDUCTIVITY ALK = ALKALINITY AMP = AMPLEXUS TEMP = TEMPERATURE HARD = HARDNESS YTC = YEAST/ TROUT CHOW/CEROPHYLL QST Environmental Toxicology Lab: Gainesville, FL QA FORM NO: 108B EFFECTIVE: JUNE 1997 SUBJECT: SEDIMENT TOXICITY DATA SHEET - WATER QUALITY SPONSOR: SAMPLE ID: 3 0 S" G--~ PROJECT NUMIBER: 3 (4*7 "2 3 2 _ - 0 < C 30 TEST SPECIES: V-V> et4--cx DATE-DAY REP TEMP HARD/ (C) ALK NHj pH DO COND FEEDING (ppm) (S.U.) (mg/L) (pmhos/cm) INITIAL/TIME dTho 0 ( o h f h -1 1 uM hi 2 t/zo/'V T 3 u/zifcn 4 5 C,ll3k~> 6 <0 /2 4 h o 7 d z t,l n 9 l * h i k i 10 At 2 2 .- | 133/123 4 0 .| 7*5" -z% S' C . M .S " D 2 2 . L -- -- -- 7 `* -- *7.7 --- * 7 . ? 2 2 .4 P 7V3 -- '7 ,1 -- -- 7 .? &> 2 3 . \ ---- H 2 2 -5 -- A 2 2 .0 22,^ --- C 2 2 . 0 iV t *\i -- 77 -- 7 -2 -- -- 7^ 0A 7*A Svo ,o 7 .S n . [ ( ftif 7 .(0 77? 7 .S 0.7 sv r -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 72^" V re V rc /A tG vh T L Ytc -- y-rc Ym Sto -- YTC-- (n' v 1S " to Nvo l*iV> Nvo m i N \ M3 < p f^J=> MHS" 3 V H te" nv=> o ^ w a r M o H3o A n o US" An o 1(3 0 Ano o 'l'k ) O BSERV R EP LIC A T E D A T E -D A Y A BC D E F G H Initial Jn|<n 0 |OA c J is / 'n 1 "6 , f ic|*r> 2 tl-zoh") 3 rJ r-^ i h i h t 4 1AN/L fhzW T - 5 M t / h i 6 2 Ef^lL (J-z h It ) 1 1 e*-e_ - z s f c 1 8 Z- 1-- (L- U 'z d 'n 9 O - M t / io z * -a ~ l= Y v Comments: O M s r-l mJ i W L M to A S s nJ m2 AJ 1-oA s rJ to Kl 1 >m z ze^ n tO 3 2_>nJ T - r-- 1 CnU*l-- ( Cr/2_ 2Zr>^ <7-- 3 & * 4 Z _ AA (0 A, I0 A1 1 s lO /J 2 G an^ 3 & -J2. 3 W L (o /\ to A tCHA ic>A\ IH Me-fWZ-. f S ^ J L r~> Nn=n tStS" r r rO lO H (M is |\<O * 0 1-*= ( It S' 11L Z - W L f~=> 113=> aJ hJ fij T V l(K " 2 O wnC ( N \ o cfl3=> Z - / * n/L. 3 R wn/2_ *2 . 7 - C ^ Nv=> 1 4 * 2- fT h n J^ K-o (l o M (Siv^. Io A 3 CfrrCL. 4A Z-ersN. SA pom s f^O \\% 9 000471 USFW 1047 KEY: AS = AT SU RFACE N= NO NE EM R = EM ERG EN C E A = A L IV E D = D EA D NF = NOT FOUND REP = R EPLIC A T E CO N D = C O N D U C T IV IT Y A L K * A L K A L IN IT Y A M P = A M P L E X U S TEMP = TEMPERATURE HARD = HARDNESS YTC = YEAST/ TROUT CHOW /CEROPHYLL QST Environmental Toxicology Lab: Gainesville, FL QA FORM NO: 108B EFFECTIVE: JUNE 1997 SUBJECT: SEDIMENT TOXICITY DATA SHEET - WATER QUALITY SPONSOR: v-oecl*- / A-_i SAMPLE ID: o t, Cr--e\K PROJECTNUMBER: 3 1 ^ 2 2 3 2 - 0 1 0 0 TESTSPECIES: H< e-2--ecct. DATE-DAY REP TEMP HARD/ NHj pH DO COND FEEDING (*C) ALK (ppm) (S.U.) (mg/L) (pmhos/cm) INTTLAL/TIME 6,1(7h ') 0 (o ltjf'n 1 2 <J-z-h~> 3 L,h\i>i 4 5 (Ju k i 6 7 UzsAn 8 9 c o ln h i io /V N i / n r o .\ & ^2.? c 22. r -- -- - -- D 22- r ____ -- e 22 --- F-- G> 23-<= -- -- M 22- ? A 'Z 'L C\ -- - ---- & 22-? -- -- C 23/( lMo/|ZC <o.\ *7n 7.0 7.^7 1-7 1 '% 1 ,] "7*1 74 n .n n .% -- -- 7.V -- n S' -- (?' s-- -- "7. (o n , ~ n .u -- -- -- nn (p , o ytt: 'i- rrU ^ U k Yt t . --y hl YTO YTC-- --- NLO IS"* n o 133s f~NX> 111S K o 1( 3-0 fK<= i m r v\C K-O (Mio nko ms~ K o ifXo iw a o e!'3o OBSERV DATE-DAY A t>\nh~) 0 1oA 1 1>9 I n izth i 2 3 4 5 6 pJ nJ hJ 6>J-z7/<n 7 t 8 1r--/!_ 9 S' r~010 lo A Comments: REPLICATE B C D E F G H Initial IOA Y kJ N-) kJ /J nJ / WZ. 1C K \ lo-A (<=-<A (O to A rJ to A {Y M N> kS 'Ck /L kJ kJ 1 er-NfL h/ rj aJ rw l 1o -e_ 3 2 16>YI_ 2W - 2 3 1 &vJL l A lo A I &WL l oA io A l-J hJ fO 1e^vvaJ rO 1 2 2- KR_ toA l o A to A rv-c lots- P i m J2- No rsiT Nl tJ /* \0 ||o O to fO K - o l t l V - 1 C-Kvfi. )| Jo t J r J 7??l/|r rJ Z-w/T. 092,> rO 1 C n*sJ 2 ^ K o l^fcc tO N O MOO l *--SL^ ko m r t o A Io A 000472 USFW 1048 KEY: AS = AT SURFACE N= NONE EMR = EMERGENCE A = ALIVE D = DEAD NF = NOT FOUND REP = REPLICATE COND = CONDUCTIVITY ALK = ALKALINITY AMP = AMPLEXUS TEMP = TEMPERATURE HARD = HARDNESS YTC = YEAST/ TROUT CHOW/CEROPHYLL QST Environmental Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida QA FORM: JJ EFFECTIVE:______ SUBJECT: TEST ORGANISM GROW TH SPONSOR: L x S'\trr) j )r^ U.or, C r** P R O JE C T N U M B E R : J i <'n 2 3 `L - o i o - '3 l e r o SAM PLE ID: C o n d r o f 0 2 ^ 0 .TEST SPECIES: |4 > # #ORG REP Length ORG RE (mm) P 1 A z 1 B zZ 2 .S 33 H ZA H 5 s2*2 (o 3 .0 Co 1 13 1 S Z% s zr (<=> 3 .0 (O AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE 1E 2. 3 H $ G n 5o-Ha-Zu-3 11 AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE <F 2,3 2 3 .| 3 H 3S S 3 .0 < ZI ? Z l ? l.o -- AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE -- 3-1 0^3 -- AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE Length (mm) 3,1 ZH JZ- zn 32. ze 3/0 3.1 3 .0 2O.O^S ZS SS- ZS" 3.1 3 ,o 3,3 3,1 3 /0 2-0 UORG REP lC z 3 M S C, l \ io AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE 1G Length (mm) 3 .0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.0 zn ZA z<\ So 3.2. 2>-D o-t*-f 3,3 #ORG R EP D z 3 H s Co *7 IO AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE (H Length (mm) Z-7 2 .2 Z.Z- 3 .1 ?.S~ z ,e 3,S ' 3*1 3.2 22-3.**-+93oS zn Z Z . Z zz 3 23 3 X i H 2? S 2 ,U S L(o z n 1 3.<j 1 2 zi ? X2 2 ,2 2 e? 3 .2. 3 .0 1Z T 2</ i o 3 / 0 ( O 2 e) AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE o-aS AVERAGE STD. DEV. M 'V H RANGE Z - 0! DOS Measuring Device: Calculator: Data By: f v \P Date: ^|3o|<^J Reviewed By: v 3 i- . Date: 000473 USFW 1049 QST Environmental Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida QA FORM: 017C EFFECTIVE:______ SUBJECT: TEST ORGANISM GROW TH SPONSOR: fD ry (2+m 6~ ae.li SAM PLE ID: 2 O O PROJECT NUM BER: 3 f* l7 2 .3 'O (0 c K 3 (.e c ? TEST SPECIES: H ORG # REP Length (m m ) ORG # RE P Length (m m ) ORG # REP Length (m m ) ORG REP if Length (m m ) \A 'L 3-\ 3rJ 1B 7. 3 ,0 3.0 C 2. 32. 3 .0 \D -2. 2 ,7 3 ,o l 4 ,S *1 2 ,S 3.Z 3 H 5 (o 2, S ' ( 7 3,f 7 S 3.0 * 7 lo AVERAG E STD. DEV. RANGE 2 ,4 2 *1 o -il 1.0 AVERAG E STD. D EV. RANGE tE 2- 3 3rZ 2.M 3.0 F 1 l l H Z- 7 ; _ . M S 3 ,0 Co 2 * 7 io 7 lo n 9 2.2 S 7 3.0 4 IO t o 2 .7 AV ERAG E STD. DEV. RANGE a *1 0.^4 2.4- v 3 AV ERAG E STD, D EV. RANGE Measuring Device: 2 ,7 3 3 (0 27 3> 3 M 5 G 2 ,( _ zn 7 % 1 2 ,7 2 ,r 7 10 * 7 -itf AV ERAG E STD. D EV . RANGE 2,7 lG 2 ,7 30 2 .S 2 .6 Zf 31 3 ,o 3 'l ^.0 0 -lS a A -3 -a 3.3 3 H S G 7 ? 7 to AV ERAG E STD. D EV. RANGE H 2 ,^ J.-o 2 3 2, S ' 3 ,( 3 2 ,7 M 3 ,-0 4 2 .C , 3 .0 2.Z 2.Z 3,0 3 ,2 . M D-(L S 2 .1 5 (0 3.0 io 7 3 ,0 n 9 3 ./ 9 7 10 AV ERAG E STD. D EV. RANGE 3. ! 3 ,2 - *0 0O | a -s-?> 3 Calculator: (2.Sr- Q-ft 7 lO AVERAG E STD. D EV . RANGE J .t> 2/3 3J 3 ,/ 3 ,o J ,o 3 ,0 3 o .^ 1 a -s-M - 3, ; 2,0 So S2- 3 ,0 32 Z.H 3c O 2 .T 2 ,7 a -s D -H o Data By: fv\> Date Reviewed By: 0 QJVQjU H t v j Da t e : ^ 000474 USFW 1050 QST Environmental Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida QA FORM: Q17C EFFECTIVE:______ SUBJECT: TEST ORGANISM GROWTH SPONSOR: Uses4>i / D<*/ (Z>r\ Cr9sk- PROJECT NUMBER: 3 ft 1 Z 3 Z -ofoo-tfi* SAMPLE ID: 3 o 3 TEST SPECIES: 2^0^ ORG # REP !A Z 3 H 5 4 7 % -- AV ERAG E STD. D EV . RANGE 1E Z 3 H S n * 1 AV ERAG E STD. D EV . RANGE L e n g th (mm) 2,8 X( 2,1 Z.M Z ,L ? 2.1 Z.3 3,1 3 ,o -- 0-31 P-V3-I 2.S" 2,7 2-1 Z4 3,o 2.G 2 .1 3,0 2, S' D? .-2g3 ORG # t RE P B z 3 M s 4 7 S 1 AV ERAG E STD. D EV . RANGE IF Z 3 M S G 7 - AVERAG E STD. D EV. RANGE Length (mm) 3.0 2.) 3 3 ,0 2.7 2.4 3. S ' zr 3 ,3 2,/ 2-1 ()**> 2.4 2,3 Z7 3. 2.? 7 ,0 2,1 2/8 -- SZ 2-V3. ORG # REP L e n g th (mm) ORG # REP IC 1 3 M S Co 7 9* to 2. 2.7 3 ,! 2.1 Z ST 3 ./ 2.3 2,8 3 ,Z \D Z 1 4 S G> 7 to AV ERAG E STD. DEV. RANGE lG Z 3 H s Cd 7 0-30 3-W L AV ERAG E STD. D EV. RANGE 3 ,0 \ H 2.8 Z 2.8 3 2*4 H 2,7 S 2,7 G 2,4 7 3.0 8 l 1J , f v O 2,3 t o AV ERAG E STD. D EV . RANGE 7 '4 0->V AV ERAG E STD. DEV. RANGE Length (mm) 3 ,o 2.7 2.4, 2.2 2.4 2.G 3,1 2,,r 2,2 3 ,o 3 -^ B-7\ 3-5-2.- z .8 3 ,0 3 ,0 7, G 3 ,0 2 .S ~ z ,7 3-0 3 ,o 7^ .n ? `T - , . M e a su rin g D evice: Data By: ( w o fv G o -c H vfc 4 -*'' Date: fc jjo fc ^ C a lc u la to r: i i S - D A "- R e vie w e d By: 33&L COMMUA Date:Vk 1? 000475 USFW 1051 QST Environmental Toxicology Department Gainesville, Fionda QA FORM: ...P17C. EFFECTIVE:_____ SUBJECT: TESTORGANISMGROWTH SPONSOR: {esjrm f 0^ G-oeUPROJECTNUMBER: jn'/TZZ-otoo-Juo SAMPLEID: 3 o < J TEST SPECIES: <*- ORG REP Length ORG RE # (mm) # P I A 3.2 1 B 2 2,r 2 3S M 5 G 1 % 4 AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE 1E 3.1 2? 2X 2,2 3/0 3<3 27 o-HL 2't-34 3.1 5 G -7 ? 4 VO AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE 1F 'L 2 ? 1 3 3,0 3 H 2, S' 1 S 3,3 io 3 . r to 1 3.Z n ?? AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE 2-7 .___ t o 31 o AVERAGE c>3) STD. DEV. 2---V- RANGE Measuring Device: Length (mm) Z7 33 2,3 as: 2,? 2,7 2,7 2/(3 2,7 2 .6 SU* <5-2.2- 3,3 2W 3W 3 ,o 3,6 2.7 3.3 2,3 2,4 3,0 3-\ Olio 3-4-Vt ORG REP Length O R G REP # (mm) a 1C v\ lD z 3`1 z 3 22 3 H 3 ,o -f 5 2-1 s c, 2,2. G 7 ZST 7 ? * 3-0 ? 45 to lo AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE \G aa-V t 3,1 AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE lH 1 Z ? 2. 1 2,4 3 1 3.1 2,5* f- 3 . 0 C, 7 2.7 7 ? 2,4 S 3*0 -- --- IP AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE AVERAGE o a t STD. DEV. 'Z---H- RANGE Calculator: 5- p Length (mm) Z. 1 3 .0 3 .0 2 .1 zsr 2 ,6 2,7 2 .? 3 ,o 2*2 o-iB 2.5-^-D 3 .6 3.Z 3 ,1 3.3 2.4 3.2_ 3 .2 3 ,0 3 .0 3 -\ 0-3, a>4-- Data By: jv\o Date: ~j\t,fo") Reviewed By: J h k OuIUaL M/Ha D ate: 7 1?.Y7 USFW 1052 000476 QST Environmental Toxicology Depanment Gainesville, Florida QA FORM: 017C EFFECTIVE:______ SUBJECT: TEST ORGANISM GROW TH SPONSOR: Cr-o*U. SAMPLE ID: 3 o PR O JEC T NU M BER: Jm z,3Z-oren>-.3too TEST SPECIES: ORG REP Length ORG RE Length ORG REP Length ORG REP Length # # a n(m m ) P (m m ) (m m ) (m m ) IA 2 2 1 s fc n 9 *1 1o AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE ZU \ B X z% 3 Z6 M zt 5 3.0 (0 1) 1 z*- 9 -3'! (0 2-2 AVERAGE 0-33 STD. DEV. >1-3-x RANGE 2*7 Zie ZI zi S\ 3,0 lo Z? zr 2-9 00 7 2-3-3.1 \C Z 3 q s 6 7 9* -- AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE ZS~ 1 D 3/2 7 3.Z 2 27 q 2,9 5 z z . < Z? 7 2.<i 9 23 i -- te 3-"7 AVERAGE 35 STD. DEV. RANGE 2/7 Zi (0 2A z.q 3 ,0 2/6 2/6 2q zn 26> ^7 *4-3-0 1E 2. 3 H 5 Co 3.2 1 F I 3. 3 Zl q 2.7 s 2s~ t Z7 2. G 50 3// 3/0 1 G 3.0 1H l 3,1 X 3 S3 3 M a<? q 5 Z(o S' > Z S L 3 ,o 24 2S 2-6 2 e) n ? 9 26 3/0 to Z,2 AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE a-5-3-1 Measuring Device: 7 9 r* AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE ZS ZB 2*7 2* i 3-8 0 -3>o n 9 s AVERAGE STD. DEV. RANGE Calculator: 3,0 7 2.7 9 2*7 q -- AVERAGE o.is STD. DEV. *5-3.3 RANGE DA. 3 ,o 3 ,2 ^7 -- Data By: Date: -j Reviewed By: 3HZ (OuAmlUW^j Date:7|7/^7 000477 USFW 1053 QST Environmental Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida OAFORM: Q17C EFFECTIVE:______ SUBJECT: TEST ORGANISM GROWTH SPONSOR: [les^vri / fLCrttU. PROJECT NUMBER: 3m Z 3Z -e> tao'3oo SAMPLE ID: 3 o G TEST SPECIES: Vf> ORG # REP Length (mm) ORG # RE P Length (mm) ORG U REP L e n g th (mm) ORG # REP L e n g th (mm) IA r 3 H $ ip 1 ? AV ERAG E STD. D EV . RANGE IS 1 B 3.*i z 3.1 3 3,1 zn <3,2 M 5 Cp 7 3 ,1 2 2 ,? 1 S o (P Z-o T -5-if AV ERAG E STD. DEV. RANGE 2 ,k \ C Z(o 2 2,S ' 3 21 H 2? 3to 7 22 9 * 3>2 2 ,3 to * D -VO 2.2.-*-2 . AV ERAG E STD. D EV . RANGE ^7 . 1 3,\ z Z 3 D V\ H 2S" s 2F 2G lo 2. g 3 & 7 9 1 ip AVERAG E STD. D EV. RANGE 2,0, 27 2 ,7 3. 0 21 3Uo Z* 21 2 ,? . 2 ,7 z?.2 0 .I4 a< fc--z o <E 2. 3 M (o 7 S {O AVERAG E STD. D EV . RANGE 3Z 3 ,0 ZST 2 C, 5,3 3 .2 2.1 2-? ZG oai^ 1F l 3 M S t> 0 * *1 (4? AV ERAG E STD. DEV. RANGE 3 ,o 21 zn ZL 21 24> 27 3,2. 27 o-i) 1G 1 3 S' n S 1 UP AV ERAG E STD. D EV. RANGE 2 ,7 3.0 ^7 2.3 2G 3 ,0 5 '/ 2o 3` l Z*? 2-8 0-L FH Z 3 M if (0 7 2 1 P AV ERAG E STD. D EV . RANGE zH . 22 3,1 2? 2? 27 3.0 3 .2 3 ,1 3 ,3 3.1 0-2,1 a-M- 3 4 M e a su rin g D evice: C a lc u la to r: f2_S - D A D a ta By: fv^o Date: *7 7, V7 R e v ie w e d By: O 7'/ 000478 D a t e t i fl (.^7 USFW 1054 QST Environmental Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida QA FORM: Q17A__________ EFFECTIVE:_________________ PROJECT NO: 3 1 ^ 7 2 J Z - O l C r o SPONSOR: Sample ID CHEW'D I 300 303 SUBJECT: TEST ORGANISM SURVIVAL AND WEIGHTS o n C r u k SPECIES: a-24cc\. Boat Rep No. Alive Tare Wt (g) Gross Wt (g) Net Wt (mg) Average 1 Z 3 1 S U 7 ? % 10 n 1Z- i3 li (S' l<n ( >1 n 2.3 7^ A B C D E F G H A B C D E F G H A B C D E F G H \o IO IO IO l lO IO IO IO IO IO IO IO IO IO q 10 10 10 \o 8 10 IO o .^ n s 0.^ 18^ 0 .% 2oZ o/U feS 0.^1311 oA on3 0 .9 0 S 7 0.^070 o .R o sz 0.%t2 o>% \2$ 0 .^ 2 .^ o rtzsi O .% 3o 0 .^ 2 ^ 0,%2 S% 0.^2 0 ,< i2 3 (o 0 .9 2 ^ 0 .^ 2 2 3 0 .9 1 5 G 0 / W 0 .9 1 (t>\ OA\ ^3 O ^Z IO o , a r o.% l?<* o .< \ t s s 0,^ O 7(* O .^ io o O .W < * 0 .1 1 4 1 0 .1 2 0 7 0 , ^ 3 U* 0 .q 3 ^ 7 0 .9 2S o 0 .% 2 7 7 0,% 3 0 S O .iZ Sfe2' Ko-jt-lr 0 . 1 3 IH 0 ,^ 2 3 0 .^ 2 3 2 . 0 .1|> 6> O .llO H 0^17^ 0, 1% o . tA orV L o .2 \ 0 ,2 2 . 0 ,2 3 0,2 J o .iS o .z | 0 ,1% 0 ,2 ] 0,21 0, 12 o ,(7 0,0 M =?rfU 0 ,21 o .tg 0 .1 % o ,H 0/l(o 0,1 ST 0 ,120 ,1 3 0 ,(3 * 0 .1 5 " a IS" 0,12 Balance Used: Calculator Used: _____ By: Date : **? | tal fa 1") 000479 USFW1055 QST Environmental Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Q A F O R M :__ QUA,___________ EFFECTIV E:____________________ PROJECT NO: 3 *Q (oo SPONSOR: Sam ple ID 3 oS" 30C SUBJECT: TEST ORGANISM SURVIVAL AND W EIGHTS Cn SPECIES: Boat Rep N o . A liv e Tare W t (g) G ross W t (g) Net W t (m g) VS A lo 0.4 m 0,9l9n 0,1 B IO 0.9121 0.9i97 V) C 1 0.9!ko 0.9l?t O . Z ) 2.8 D IO 0.4104 0.9129 0 , 2o 24 3<=> E F 5 10 0.412 0.9137 0.9143 0.4 iti o.\4 0.2.1 3f G H 4 \o 0.9017 o . ^ l (o 3 O.[03U 0.41?1 o ,z-\ 0 .1? A 35 10 0.9257 .427H o,n 3H B lo 0.4234 0/92-S2- 0,13 C 3L D 9 10 0.9232 0,9299 0,959 0.9H o 0,\3 o,i\ 3? E IO 0 A \n 0.92\o 0,13 3S F to 0.9179 0.9!9o 0 . 1C? 34 G H H \ 0.431S 0.9333 0,20 0,424fc> 0,93i?_ 0,12 M( A 10 0.927s- 0.929$ 0,7.3 HZ B lO 0.9IZI 0.9139 0,(2 m3 C 10 0.4113 0,9129 O , (lo MH D 10 0.4095 0 .9 o 9o 0,1$ MST E lO 0.4014 O ,9o 3o O.I(o He F (O 0411SS 0.9\7S 0,2-0 Ml G H? H (O to 0.92S! 0.9 HH O.9 2 7 I 0,913H O ,2 o 0 ,2 o Average o .ti O . IS " 0 ,1 4 Balance Used: Calculator Used: Bv: r--\ o D a te : " 7(3 f a o 000480 USFW 1056 Dry Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca Weight wile: a:dry.w2 Transform: NO TRANSFORM ANOVA TABLE SOURCE "letween Within (Error) 'o t a l DF 2 21 23 SS 0.009 0.012 0.021 Critical F value = 3.47 (0.05,2,21) Since F > Critical F REJECT Ho: All equal MS 0.004 0.001 F 8.126 000481 USFW 1057 Dry Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca Weight File: a:dry.w2 Transform: NO TRANSFORM DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 1 OF 2 Ho:Control<Treatment GROUP IDENTIFICATION TRANSFORMED MEAN MEAN CALCULATED IN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG 1 300 (Ref) 0.189 0.189 2 103 0.145 0.145 3.727 * 3 305 0.151 0.151 3.195 * Dunnett table value 2.03 (1 T a i l e d Value, P = 0 .05, df=20, 2) Dry Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca Weight File: a:dry.w2 Transform: NO TRANSFORM DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 2 OF 2 H o :C o n t r o l c T r e a t m e n t GROUP IDENTIFICATION NUM OF REPS Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE (IN ORIG. UNITS) CONTROL FROM CONTROL 1 300 (Ref) 8 2 103 8 0.024 12.6 0.044 3 305 8 0.024 12.6 0.038 U S F W 1058 000482 nry Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca Weight '-le: a :dry.wl Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION ANOVA TABLE SOURCE etween within (Error) ^otal DF 5 42 47 SS 0.025 0.021 0.046 MS 0.005 0.001 Critical F value = 2.45 (0.05,5,40) Since F > Critical F REJECT Ho: All equal F 9.988 .0 0 4 8 3 USFW 1059 Dry Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca Weight "ile: a :dry.wl Transform: EK5 TRANSFORMATION DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 1 OF 2 H o :C o n t r o l c T r e a t m e n t ROUP IDENTIFICATION TRANSFORMED MEAN MEAN CALCULATED IN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG 1 Control 0.209 0.209 2 3 300 (Ref) 303 0.189 0.145 0.189 0.145 1.788 5.700 * 4 304 0.193 0.193 1.453 5 305 0.151 0.151 5.141 * 6 306 0.185 0.185 2.124 .innett t able v a l u e = 2.31 (1 T a i l e d Value, P = 0 .05, df=40, 5) Dry Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca Weight 'ile: a f d r y . w l Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 2 OF 2 H o :C o n t r o l < T r e a t m e n t ROUP IDENTIFICATION NUM OF REPS Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE (IN ORIG. UNITS) C O N TROL FROM CONTROL 1 Control 8 *> 300 (Ref) 8 0.026 12.4 0.020 3 303 8 0.026 12.4 0.064 4 3 04 8 0.026 12.4 0.016 5 305 8 0.026 12.4 0.058 6 306 8 0.026 12.4 0.024 USFW 1060 000484 Dry Run Creek Tox Teste--H. azteca Length * i l e : a:dry.11 Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION ANOVA TABLE lOURCE ~etween Within (Error) otal DF 5 42 47 SS 0.109 0.356 0.465 MS 0.022 0.008 Critical F value 2.45 (0.05,5,40) Since F > Critical F REJECT Ho: All equal F 2.559 - 000485 USFW 1061 Dry Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca Length File: a:dry.11 Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 1 OF 2 H o :C o n t r o l T r e a t m e n t 3ROUP IDENTIFICATION TRANSFORMED MEAN MEAN CALCULATED IN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG 1 Control 2.925 2.925 2 300 (Ref) 2.925 2.925 0.000 3 303 2.837 2.837 1.900 4 304 2.913 2.913 0.271 5 305 2.800 2.800 2.714 * 6 306 2.862 2.862 1.357 lunnett table value = 2.31 (1 T a i l e d Value, P = 0 .05, d f =40, 5) Ory Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca Length File: a :d r y . 11 Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 2 OF 2 H o :C o n t r o l T r e a t m e n t ;r o u p IDENTIFICATION NUM OF REPS Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE (IN ORIG. UNITS) CONTROL F R O M CONTROL 1 Control 8 3 300 (Ref) 303 8 8 0.106 3.6 0.000 0.106 3.6 0.088 4 304 8 0.106 3.6 0.013 5 305 8 0.106 3.6 0.125 6 306 8 0.106 3.6 0.063 5 000486 USFW 1062 Dry Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca survival le: a:dry.si Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION ANOVA TABLE SOURCE between Within (Error) .Total DF 5 42 47 SS 1.167 8.750 9.917 MS 0.233 0.208 Critical F value = 2.45 (0.05,5,40) Since F < Critical F FAIL TO REJECT Ho: All equal F 1.120 000487 U S F W 1063 Dry Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca survival ^ile: a:dry.si Transform: HD TRANSFORMATION DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 1 OF 2 H o :C o n t r o l T r e a t m e n t iROUP IDENTIFICATION TRANSFORMED MEAN MEAN CALCULATED IN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG 1 Control 9.750 9.750 2 300 (Ref) 10.000 10.000 -1.095 3 303 9.625 9.625 0.548 4 304 9.750 9.750 0.000 5 305 9.625 9.625 0.548 6 306 10.000 10.000 -1.095 annett table value = 2.31 (1 T a i l e d Value, P = 0 .05, d f =40, 5) Jry Run Creek Tox Tests--H. azteca survival rile: a.-dry. si Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 2 OF 2 Ho :C o n t r o l < T r e a t m e n t jR O U P IDENTIFICATION NUM OF REPS Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE (IN ORIG. UNITS) CONTROL FROM CONTROL 1 Control 8 -> 300 (Ref) 8 0.527 5.4 -0.250 3 303 8 0.527 5.4 0.125 4 304 8 0.527 5.4 0.000 5 305 8 0.527 5.4 0.125 6 306 8 0.527 5.4 -0.250 usFW 164 000488 ROY F. WESTON. INC. DRY RUN CREEK HYALELLA TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Appendix C: Reference Toxicant Test Raw Data 000489 USFW 1065 Environmencal Selene & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Paget ESE QA FORM: 097SDS Effective: January 1993 SUBJECT: REFERENCE TOXICANT TEST DATA SHEET Client: Project Number: q JL Test Material Test Conditions Amount 0.0 Volume of Milli-Q Water: _ I O O P Date Prepared: _____ (,, Inh"? 9 ck(cr*^ U Definitive [ ] Screening Static Duration : j, Test Animal History Dilution Water: Species : M/ Batch Number : Age / Life Stage : -2-M ^ ______ Date Acclimation / Maintenance Began : o ln h n See Page t%3 of __________ Log for raw dia^a. Mortality (%) 48 Hrs prior to testing: Q % Test Area Used Temperature (C ) Salinity (ppt) [ ^ 0 ^ 0 / (aAiftv $ 2 3 +/" \ KJYV + / ~ Lighting : |X] Fluorescent [ ] Incandescent Photoperiod : fk> hr Light : g hr Dark Test Container Dimensions' iqq L x -- > W x Sb H Test Solution Height : ________ M ________cm Test Containers :[ ]Open (yQCovered Test Container Volume : o, 3-/_____ Liters Diluent Volume : g z * r ____ Liters Reps / Concentration Animals / Replicate io Protocol Followed: S c r f - A "O cM Concentrations Based on: [ ] A.I. [K] W.M. container Composition: [yO Glass [ ] Plastic Test Concentrations: (Units )* Control ? l(o 32- )Zg Amount Dilution Water Added ( *<*-): cJcu Amount SB s Stock Added ( ^ )j z r o 2^. y zMq,z. zvP-7 N/A 0,2- o,H gir (' (o 3,2. Additional Observations: I Data By: FORM: SDS93 Date: USFW1066 000490 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology LaboratoryGainesville, Florida Paqet ESE QA Form No.: 09T*SDS Effective: APR 1993 USFW 1067 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Paget ____ ESE QA Form Ho.: 097 SDS Effective: APR 1993 REFERENCE TOXICANT TEST DATA: DAY 0 and 1 Client: Mije. Nominal Concentration Date: Time: ^ 7A h o \i-o ~ o t Alive Obs. Project Number: (2c-A 'Ti'K 1 Species: Day: ff Analyst: /Wcj Temp.(C) S a l .(ppt D.O. (mg/L) PH Control * 27- \n Nominal Concentration |o IO I-1 tJ 4 \ o' Date: Time: StwJ1 1 DcJ[ 3 (,l - i n / Alive Obs. -- -- -- --- -- Temp.(C) ^-- -- . .-- -- --- -- -- .-- -- n -l 1 Day: J 1 Analyst: Sal.(ppt) D.O. (mg/L) -7-^ , -- -- to PH Control ? N 3.-Z- 12% USFW 1068 ID |o |0 O O -- \ LF 4 Hu -- zzn --- -- -- -- ---- .-- -- --- -- -- v-- .___ -- r. .-- -- -- -- ,-- -- - -- - 000492 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aguatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Page: ESE QA Form No.: 097 SDS Effective: APR 1993 REFERENCE TOXICANT TEST DATA: FINAL DAY C lie n t: jvv o Date: ( J \'L 3 \ n Project Number: *7 ^3^ Day: 2 Species: Nominal Concentration Time: |fo o # Alive Obs. Temp.(C) Analyst: tvs^o Sal.(ppt) D.O.(mg/L) pH Control |(o 32(oH \Z % I O b3 I O r-3 I -- --- -- - -- -- 1 --- ---- --- ---- -7.? . 7. --- -- --- - -- ^t --- Nominal Concentration Control 9 'i<o 3Z \2% USFW 1069 Number Dead O O l \o \o (0 000493 RIMMED SPEARMAN-KARBER METHOD. VERSION 1 .5 DATE: 6/23/97 TOXICANT : CdCl2 SPECIES: H. a z teca TEST NUMBER: 1 DURATION RAW DATA: -------- ---------------- Concentration (ug/L) .00 8.00 16.00 32.00 64.00 128.00 Number Exposed 10 10 10 10 10 10 Mortalities 0 0 1 10 10 10 SPEARMAN -KARBER TRIM: .00% SPEARMAN -KARBER ESTIMATES : LC50: 95% LOWER CONFIDENCE : 95% UPPER CONFIDENCE: 21.11 18.51 24.08 96 h DATE: 6/23/97 TOXICANT : CdCl2 SPECIES: H. a z t e c a TEST NUMBER: 1 DURATION RAW DATA: --- ---- Concentration (ug/L) . 00 8.00 16.00 32.00 64.00 128.00 Number Exposed 10 10 10 10 10 10 Mortalities 0 0 1 10 10 10 SPEARMAN-KARBER TRIM: 00 SPEARMAN-KARBER ESTIMATES : LC50 95% LOWER CONFIDENCE 95% UPPER CONFIDENCE 21.11 18.51 24.08 WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE A COPY SENT TO THE PRINTER(Y/N)? WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE (Y/N)? 96 h 000494 USFW 1070 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Project: DAILY LOG Page: ESE QA Form Number: 018 Effective: APR 1993 ,h zh n Cr-fee U- ryjto-4\~^Nr iD A 3 V --t-- ^ (a P 3 o o / J5c>3 ,, I 3 b > ~ / ci-- (Z ^s . 0>(ltefc~> t ^<=>-- -Ls_ x\o-*S o-- S ijtCP -h -i^o ^ U XO-TT < r\-(-Le-< "z-c-^ ---cj Tl--e i ^ 3 <w^ 4-q r-e-~vQj~g. p-eU(pCfl-r ^ r o c L c 4 - p(&^--X - C S < ^ . U-cX^-*A^ S*-X- 3 oo O U&e-r~l-r-tx-i'^y>v 5 R U b U -r, ro cV f i ro o 4 ~ 3o 3 P e - k L i c J f ro < r t-r 3& M ptX > [oies , r t s c U . 3oS" 3oVo p -< -o p t - ' .l .U . ; -- ( e s S P<Z>--> CPCt>~S LC~s\- C o a . r w dlgla-o%i s\*>UA- o-Lo-i-. * * ' V a S t x -fv ^ V s L j er<S>%, tw <'H--p _g>j v-- .& ^ ( s s t ) D o L _ C c J ~ a V 5 1 I Xf\ <Vr>. f~7S~ 1--rg-^ P(c.Ca-<P ^ 4 -xj fxci> A<-s 4-- L =- &-vTe-^ V o -r- --j-c_S o - e ( < /j L s i L n Io 4o 1-- g c-d - vrt^S^l > AiH -U<r^- l o c . 'V ^ _______ \ r N-^ -T V< 4 -0 ___________ jw vr^S5-cl C s^)c^-e. i g - r r p g . y ^ 'g - A v a . ^ - p(g ^eJP G-~V "Z-3> |0C . Kr~g^ Ley iVj^ r ^ v . Q \ir^ JV *^1--r A~ \^ z S Sl.gU-VW c ~ h * a X j-{. Mt. g-r~^ ,N^ < M V m c \ t i C y JJV ^ err> . |Q VV. ^ z i< - c ^ i-x-w-g. a ,< l X * J l rfo < a o k 4 g s V ^ - S V g J -- r v o oJU ^ vc^ y^ oJ L , L o-^a V ~ - erjp-t-t^rcJ) . < j|u 0 4 9 5 D>C? V. --g e ^ ~ ,S 7~g > 4 . 0 - ^ 4 f o 4"* '-W -rv. nC- -le g -4 - e-rCM^ i~ S " 7 f O (q - ^ / T . X - ' O fyg>V Ua^'Va <^- USFW 1071 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Page: ________ ESE QA Form Number: 020 Effective: MAR 1993 " a a - I. -- -- agaM gg j ,, ; l a g g a s a s s a s B SUBJECT: WATER ALKALINITY WORKSHEET Sponsor: Test Substance: ,, , i - - -- . Data By: _____________ Project Number: J H 7 ^ 3 Z ^ o ( o o Test Species: ____ g4<^e._______ --'- aB -B B M g B S B m S=gSSBSgSg-i I m- - = = ' - '- - 1 1 11 ________ Date: fJnfqn Time: Normality of H2SQ4 (Sulfuric A c i d ) : o , o z i Q ________________________ Correction Factor (based on standardization of H2S04 titrant) : >.o~2- Test 1 Concns K (define units) Sample Volume (mL) Dilute To (mL) fi Initial | Buret I Reading [ (mL) Final Buret Readiiig (mL) To PH 4.5 4.2 Titrant Used (mL) Total Alkalinity (mg/L as CaC03) Q'jt^ iVj C 0v^v"0 I 3^0 303 3=4 3 os' 3og? 1DO 1OO |oo> 1 \x>o {OO lo o -- r-- .-- ___ ____ -- -- o . o \\M o ,0> 1 \\n J0 .0 1Z.{ o . o I) i3.r" 0 ,0 0 ,0 r' ,__ -- -- -- ---- 0 . 0 IH.2^ ,,-- ii."7 (~L.. \ '3. S' \z. r \z.\ IM.Z- - -UCa |Z3 \3S 12^ \V h iMr 1 J ! - Calculation of Total Alkalinities > 20 mg/L as CaC03: B x N X 50,000 Total Alkalinity = ----------------------- where B = m L titrated mL ssimple , N = normality of acid Total Alkalinity x Correction Factor *= [corrected] Total Alkalinity Calculation of Total Alkalinities < 20 mg/L as CaCQ3: Total Alkalinity 000496 (2B-C) x N X 50,000 mL sample USFW 1072 where B C N total mL titrant to pH 4.5 total mL titrant to pH 4.2 normality of acid i 1 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Page: ESE QA Form No.: 021 Effective: FEB 1993 L Sponsor: SUBJECT: WATER HARDNESS WORKSHEET / G W Cr~ezU. Project Number: J 2 Test Substance: SeJLk*\ec\\~ fD\r*'U)t^ Test Species: . -- i 14/ -- -* Data By: fA O Normality of EDTA Titrant: Date: o 01 r^\______ Time: l^ LST Correction Factor (based on standardization of EDTA Titrant): Q> 4^ Test C o n e 'n (units; Sample Dilute Volume to (mL) I (mL) Initial Buret Reading (mL) I Final Buret Reading (mL) Total Titrant Used (mL) TOTAL HARDNESS (mg/L) (corrected] >wL.i | V ^ |o o -- CT'O 13,1 13, | 13 o C ov-i4t-0) 3c-o |o o ICTO -- -- 0,0 0-0 \3 ,S (3,3. n.*\ 13*2^ 12,% 3=3 le o -- O-o iH.r 1HH 3H (o o } o- o 13,| (3.1 l3cr> 3 ob3o(o (crO 1O O j 0-0 -- o -o 13,M IS.I (30 rS-1 133 IH9 Calculation of Total Hardness (mg/L as CaC03): A x B x 1,000 / mL Sample There A = mL of Titrant, and B = mg CaC03 quivalent to 1.00 mL EDTA Titrant (1 mg CaC03 = l m L EDTA Titrant) 00497 Total Hardness x Correction Factor = (corrected] Total Hardness USFW 1073 FINAL REPORT; CHRONIC TOXICITY OF SURFACE WATER SAMPLES FROM THE DRY RUN CREEK SITE WITH THE FATHEAD MINNOW, Pimephales promelas PREPARED FOR: Roy F. W eston Inc. GSA R aritan D epot B uilding 209 A nnex (Bay F) 2890 W oodbridge Avenue Edison, N J 08837-3679 Phone: (908) 321 ^ 2 0 0 Fax: (908) 321-4021 PREPARED BY; QST E nvironm ental, Inc. 404 SW 140th T errace N ew berry, Florida 32669-3000 Phone: (352) 332-3318 Fax: (352) 333-6622 STUDY.ID; R oy F. W eston N o. 3347-142-001-2273 Q ST N o. 3197232-0100-3100 July 1997 (3 0 0 4 9 8 USFW 1074 ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT /3 197232-0100-3100 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Short-term chronic toxicity tests w ere conducted at QST Environmental Inc. (form erly Environm ental Science & E ngineering, Inc.) w ith the fathead m innow , Pimephales promelas, o n surface w ater sam ples collected from the D ry Run Creek Site. The effect criteria for the chronic toxicity tests w ere survival and growth. A total of 4 site surface w ater samples, one field reference sample, and one laboratory control sam ple, w ere used in the chronic toxicity tests. After 7 days of exposure, there w ere no significant ' differences (P = 0 .0 5 ) in the survival and grow th o f Pimephalespromelas betw een the laboratory control w ater and the reference w ater from sam ple station 2273-00203. Survival o f Pimephales promelas in the laboratory control and field reference water was significantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from survival of Pimephales promelas in surface w ater from sam ple station 205J (U pper T ributary A ). T here w ere no significant differences (P = 0 .0 5 ) in the grow th o f Pimephalespromelas betw een the field referen ce w ater and any of the surface w ater sam ples collected from the D ry Run C reek Site. The chronic no-observed- effect concentration (NO EC) values for Pimephales promelas survival w ere 100 percent w ater fo r sam ples from sample stations 2273-201 (Area IV), 204J (Area II), and 206J (Upper Tributary B). The NO EC value was less than 100 percent water for surface water from sample station 205J (U pper T ributary A). The NO EC for Pimephalespromelas grow th was 100 percent for all o f the surface w ater sam ples collected from the Dry Run C reek Site. 000499 U S F W 1075 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST O F TABLES 1.0 IN TRO D U C TIO N 2.0 M A TERIA LS AND M ETH O D S 2.1 Test Samples 2.2 Test Organisms 2.3 Control W ater 2.4 Test Methods 2.5 Reference Toxicant Tests 2.6 Statistical Analyses 3.0 RESU LTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 Chronic Toxicity Tests 3.2 Reference Toxicant Tests 4.0 CON CLU SIO N 5.0 R EFER EN C ES ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 EAGE 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 000500 3 USFW 1076 ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT 3197232-0100-3100 Table 1 Table 2 LIST OF TABLES W ater Quality M easurem ent Ranges During Chronic Toxicity Tests with Pimephales promelas on Surface W ater Sam ples C ollected from the D ry Run C reek Site Survival and G row th o f Pimephales promelas D uring a 7-D ay C hronic Exposure to Surface W ater Samples F rom the D ry R un C reek Site Conducted From June 12 through 19, 1997 10 11 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Chain-of-Custody and Traffic Information Pimephales promelas T est Data Reference Toxicant Test Data 000501 4 U SF W 1077 ROY F. WESTON. INC. DRY RUN CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 1.0 IN T R O D U C TIO N QST Environm ental Inc. (form erly Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc.) conducted short-term chronic toxicity tests with surface w ater samples from the Dry Run C reek Site. The tests w ere conducted from June 12 through 19, 1997, using the fathead m innow , Pimephales promelas. T he criteria for effect were survival and growth (measured as dry weight). All of the original raw data pertaining to the chronic toxicity tests are maintained at QST Environmental Inc. 404 SW 140th Terrace, N ew berry, Florida 326693000. 2.1 TEST SAMPLES 2.0 M A TERIA LS AND M ETHOD S Five grab samples of surface w ater were collected by Roy F. W eston, Inc. personnel on June 10, 1997 and shipped to QST on ice at 4 j f 2 C. The samples, identified as 2273-00201, 2273-00203, 204J, 205J and 206J, were collected from Area IV, Reference area, Area II, Upper Tributary A , and U pper Tributary B, respectively. A cross reference of the sample identification and sampling location is presented in Tables 1 and 2. All o f the sam ples w ere received on June 12, 1997 and w ere stored in a refrig erato r at 4 _ 2 C during the testing period. P rior to use in the chronic tests, samples were allowed to equilibrate to test tem perature. The toxicity tests w ere initiated on June 12, 1997, within 12 hours o f sam ple receip t. Sam ple chain-of-custody and other traffic information are provided in Appendix A. 2.2 T E ST O RGAN ISM S Pimephales promelas w ere obtained from Florida Bioassay Supply, G ainesville, F lorida, and w ere less than 24 hours old at test initiation. All the test organism s appeared to be in norm al condition and w ere acclimated to dilution water and test tem perature prior to testing. 2.3 C O N TR O L W A TER C o n tro l w ater used for holding and sam ple dilutions for the P. promelas tests w as m o d erately h ard reconstituted freshw ater with a hardness of 76 m g/L as C aC 0 3 and an alkalinity of 64 m g/L as C a C 0 3 000502 5 USFW 1078 ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 2.4 TEST M ETHOD S All tests were perform ed according to the guidelines provided in "Short-Term M ethods for Estim ating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving W aters to Freshwater O rganism s," E PA /600/4-91/002 (EPA 1994). The tests were conducted in 340 m L crystallizing glass dishes containing 250 m L o f site, field reference, or co n tro l w ater. F ifteen P. promelas w ere tested p e r replicate, and three replicates w ere tested per concentration. P. promelas w ere fed 0.15 m L o f brine shrim p nauplii (Anem ia salina) p e r replicate tw ice daily. The concentrations of surface w ater selected for the chronic toxicity tests were 0 (dilution w ater control) and 100 percent site or field reference water. The tests w ere conducted from June 12 through 19, 1997 and the test solutions were renewed daily during the test. During each renewal approximately 75 percent of the P. prom elas test or control solutions w ere renew ed w ith freshly p rep ared test solutions. T ests w ere conducted at a temperature of 25 1C under fluorescent lighting (ambient laboratory illum ination) with a daily ph o toperiod o f 16 hours light (855 Lux) and 8 hours darkness. T est tem perature w as m aintained with the aid of a recirculating waterbath. The tests were monitored at test initiation and daily thereafter for m ortality, tem perature, dissolved oxygen, and pH . At the conclusion of the chronic exposures, ammonia concentrations w ere m easured on pooled samples from the 3 replicates of each sample using an Orion 290A ammonia m eter equipped with an Orion 95-12 am m onia probe. At the conclusion o f the tests, the m ean dry w eights o f surviving P. promelas w ere determ in ed by transferring the fish in each replicate into pre-w eighed alum inum pans, rinsing with deionized w ater to rem ove excess food, and drying the pans and fish at 100 C for 18 hours. A fter drying, the pans w ere allowed to cool in a desiccator at room tem perature and then each pan was weighed. The group dry weight of each replicate was then determined by difference. 000503 USFW 1079 ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 2.5 R EFER EN C E TO X ICA N T TESTS M onthly reference toxicant tests using potassium chloride (KC1) w ere conducted to evaluate the sensitivity of the test organisms. The reference toxicant test concentrations used were 0 (control), 250, 500, 1,000, 2.000 and 4,000 mg KC1/L. The reference toxicant test exposures and conditions w ere the sam e as those of the chronic toxicity tests. 2.6 STA TISTIC A L ANALYSES Statistical analyses of the chronic data on survival and growth (measured as dry weight) w ere evaluated using the TOXSTAT com puter program (W EST, Inc. and Gulley, 1994). The no-observed-effect concentration (NOEC) values for the reference toxicant and each of the test samples were determ ined using the TO X ST A T com puter program . The N O EC is defined as the highest concentration o f reference toxicant o r test sam ple w hich is not significantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from the control fo r a given endpoint (e.g. survival), under the specified conditions of exposure. 3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 C H R O N IC T O X IC IT Y T E ST Test conditions remained within acceptable limits for the duration of the chronic toxicity tests. A sum m ary o f the w ater quality m easurem ents is presented in Table 1. D issolved oxygen levels rem ained above 60 percent saturation, pH ranged from 7.4 to 8.3 and test temperatures remained in the range o f 24.1 to 25.8 C for the duration o f the tests (Table 1). Sample conductivities ranged from 270 to 350 /xm hos/cm (Table 1). At the end o f the exposure period am m onia concentrations in the P. promelas exposures w ere m easured to determine if some of the observed mortality was due to ammonia. Am m onia was detected in all of the sam ples at concentrations ranging from 0.27 m g/L (control) to 0.35 m g/L (204J) (Table 1). A m m onia w as ruled out as a causative agent since the measured total ammonia concentrations would not result in enough unionized amm onia to result in the observed mortality. Survival and grow th data for the P. promelas chronic toxicity tests are presented in T able 2. A fter 7 days o f ex p o su re, survival o f P. promelas in the dilution w ater control and field reference exposures w as 93 p ercen t and 87 percent, respectively. Survival o f P. promelas in the site w ater sam ples ran g ed from 58 7 000504 U S F W 1080 ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRQYSTRPURNOJCECRTE#E31K97C23H2-R01O00N-I3C10S0 p ercen t (205J) to iOt* percent <"'04J and 206J). T h ere w ere no significant differences ( P = 0 .0 5 ) in the survival o f P. promelas betw een the laboratory control w ater a r J survival in the field reference w ater from sam ple station 2273-00203. Survival o f P. promelas in the laboratory control and field reference w ater was significantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from survival in surface water from sample station 205J (Table 2). G row th data fo r P . prom elas, m easured as m ean d ry w eight in m illigram s, is p resen ted in T ab le 2. T he m ean dry w eight o f surviving P . promelas in the laboratory control and field reference sam ples after 7 days of exposure were 0.37 mg per organism and 0.42 mg per organism, respectively. Both values w ere within ' the acceptable limits (>.0.25 m g/organism in the control exposures) for this test. The m ean dry weight of P. promelas in the site w ater sam ples ranged from 0.39 m g p er organism (2273-201 and 205J) to 0 .4 2 m g p er organism (203J and 204J). T h ere w ere no significant differences (P = 0 .0 5 ) in grow th o f P . promelas between laboratory control, field reference, and any o f the site w ater samples. Copies o f the relevant raw data pertaining to the chronic toxicity tests are provided in A ppendix B. 3.2 R E FE R E N C E TO X ICA N T TEST The chronic N O E C for P. promelas survival and grow th w ere both determ ined to b e 500 m g KC1/L. T he reference toxicant results were within control limits of reference toxicant tests perform ed at QST. The results of the reference toxicant test dem onstrated that the test organisms were within their expected sensitivity ranges. Copies of the reference toxicant raw data are provided in Appendix C. 4.0 CO N CLU SIO N U nder the conditions o f the toxicity tests, survival and grow th o f Pimephales promelas in the lab o rato ry control water was not significantly different (P = 0.05) from survival and growth in the field reference w ater. S u rvival o f Pimephales promelas in the laboratory control w ater and field referen ce w a te r w as significantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from survival o f Pimephales promelas in w ater sam ple from sam ple station 205J (U p p er T rib u tary A). T here w ere no significant differences ( P = 0 .0 5 ) in the grow th o f Pim ephales promelas betw een the laboratory control w ater and any o f the surface w ater sam ples collected from the D ry R un C reek Site. T he chronic no-observed-effect concentration (N O E C ) values for Pim ephales promelas 8 U SF W 1081 000505 ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 survival were all 100 percent water for samples from sample stations 2273-201 (Area IV), 204J (A rea II), and 206J (U pper Tributary B). The NOEC value for survival was less than 100 percent w ater for surface w ater from sam ple station 205J (U pper T ributary A). The N O EC for Pimephalespromelas grow th was 100 percent for all of the surface w ater samples collected from the D ry R un C reek Site. 5.0 REFEREN CES 1. U nited States E nvironm ental Protection A gency. 1994. Short-Term Methods fo r Estim ating the Chronic Toxicity o f Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms, 4th E dition, EPA7600/4-91/002. Environm ental M onitoring and Support L aboratory. C incinnati, Ohio. A pril 1994. 2. W EST, Inc. and Gulley, D. 1994. TOXSTAT. Version 3.4. Copyright License Granted to W EST, Inc. 1402 S. Greeley H W Y, Cheyenne, W Y 82007. 000506 9 USFW 1082 Table 1 ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 W ater Q uality M easurem ent Ranges* D uring C hronic T oxicity Tests w ith Pimephales promelas on S urface W ater Sam ples C ollected from the D ry R u n C reek Site Sample ID Control 2273-00201 2273-00203 204J 205J 206J Location Ammonia Temperature (mg/L)b (C ) NA 0.27 24.2-25.6 Area IV 0.31 24.1-25.7 Reference 0.31 24.2-25.8 Area II 0.35 24.1-25.8 Upper Tributary A 0 .28 24.2-25.8 Upper Tributary B 0.33 24.3-25.7 DO (m g/L )c 6.7-8.2 6.5-8.6 6.4-8.7 6.5-8.7 6.3-8.6 6.2-8.7 pH (s.u.)d 7.7-8.0 7.5-8.1 7.4-8.1 7.6-8.2 7.6-8.2 7.6-8.3 Conductivity (/mhos/cm) 275-300 280-295 270-280 305-310 340-350 310-320 'R an g e o f 14 m easurem ents (tem perature, pH and dissolved oxygen) and 2 m easurem ents (conductivity) bAm m onia was m easured on pooled sam ples from the 3 replicates (day 7) using an O rion 290A am m onia m eter equipped with an Orion 95-12 am m onia probe. 'D issolved oxygen S tandard units 000507 10 USFW 1083 Table 2 ROY F. WESTON. INC. DRY RUN CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT 3197232-0100-3100 S urvival and G row th o f Pimephales promelas D uring a 7-D ay C hronic E xposure to Surface W ater Sam ples F rom the D ry R un C reek Site C onducted F rom June 12 through 19. 1997 Sam ple ID L o c a tio n P ercent Survival* C ontrol 2273-00201 2273-00203 204J 205J 206J NA A rea IV Reference A rea II Upper Tributary A Upper Tributary B 93 96 87 100 58b 100 'Forty-five organism s were exposed per concentration. bSignificantly different (P = 0.05) from control and reference. M ean W eight per O rganism (mg) 0.37 0.39 0.42 0.42 0.39 0.41 000508 USFW 1084 ROY F. WESTON, INC. D R ' R U N CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Appendix A: Chain-of-Custody and Traffic Information 000509 USF\N 1085 REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 C H A IN OF CUSTOQ DP Y RECO RD Project Name: P f L j K u ^ d f j ^ Project Number: 3 9 3 ___________________ ______ RFW Contact: m i f j Y l f . l H O f fig. Phone: 3 t I - M 9 D Q REAC* SampleNo. AOhJ Sample Identification SamplingLocation Matrix DateCollected 4opjrTr\he> Vv/ 1J7TW -W -- *ofBottles Contalner/Preservativo ~TnX I 5jW- CihklwlHaC y Gir -- ry- ^ No: 07715 SHEET NO. 1 OF / y r^ - ---- \ // 5 i, )> - S D - Sediment D S - Drum Solids DL - Drum Liquids X - Other Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge S- w- o- A- U(p4e - ( k f L a c l m ; TM o ^ x . Soll Water Oil Air C o o 0 -r# % 3 l ^-- \ FOR SUBCONTRACTING U SE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # Items/Reason RelinquishedBy Date /?//! f \ r a h & (1 ,,Ja/sAtriinujf/'h rf&r--f*C--i P#e* '2/vt ReceivedBy Date Time 1 Items/Reason H <o|&hl H3rO H RelinquishedBy Date ---- il---------- ReceivedBy Date Time UVU31 REAC, ^ s o n , NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 AC H A IN O F C U S T O D Y R E C O R D Project Name: t V q (U Q g K _____________ Project Number: rO - <3~?~ 3 RFW Contact: rr{,C)rxpJ) H nr r\JL Phone: ^ I - <-l Z o o REAC# SampleNo. 'D O S '^T Sample Identification SamplingLocation Matrix DateCollected A Tf -W.., U i o m typt/-r/,b. -A -Vn/_- u / o m #ofBottles Contalner/Preservativo Toy Tc^f I S d .C th ik ju r/HC' _ Y i fyd.aJxnlfli/JT C A No: 0 7 3 0 3 SHEET NO. I OF I V. L_ UJ Tl ou*^ol /-- . -> ---------- ^V Matrix: SDDSDLX Sediment Drum Solids Drum Liquids Other PWGWSW SL - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge SWOA- Soil Water Oil Air e s te s i33 FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # rv/v''__ J I TM'il /.a*----------------I Items/Reason I RelinquishedBy Date ReceivedBy Date Tims I Items/Reason RelinquishedBy Date ReceivedBy Date Time h/nrrultA 1-.-.-.-.--n---";--r T- t - C *V * i* h o fo f*-X C./izJn 1'! Uxhi I V.|iifn I__________ H ____ ____1.___! __i_1J _____ !_____,1 ' -- -i1-1 000511 )! ' R E A C , Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 E P A Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECO RD Project Name: Dp. ^Utp __________ Project Number: O eb A Lf ? 2 . **O O / 3 wO / RFW Contact. f Y h 'r J v i / R n 7 fH Phone: Sample Identification REAC# SampleNo. SamplingLocation Matrix DateCollected Area jy w (cho{qq. - 3 3 7 3 - 0 C 2 &&inc-L, S----- ---__ W //o/<?3 #ofBottles Contalner/Preservatlve ( 5 ^1 -O b fh ^ trl yC } cikfa// 7qc Tzs+ A X (Z <Cc~On 0uu0 _.-- --' __ --' No: 07703 SHEET NO./ OF / -- SD DS DL X- Sediment Dnim Solids Drum Liquids Other PW GW SW SL - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge A/ote,: fo .4 h i*d S - Soil W - Water O - Oil A - Air FOR SUBCONTRACTING U SE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # Items/Reason RelinquishedBy Date tn/ A rw J u i s . j f f f l A J L '& H C C 7 ^ It ReceivedBy Date Time 1 Items/Reason | Nvcu/DoLmva^ doto P 3 RelinquishedBy Date ReceivedBy Date Time JQQ >5-143------ ROY F. WESTON, INC. DRY RUN CREEK CHRONICS QST PROJECT *3197232-0100-3100 Appendix B: Pimephales promelas Test Data 000513 USFW 1089 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Page: ESE QA Form No.; 021 Effective: FEB 1993 SUBJECT: WATER HARDNESS WORKSHEET Sponsor: RoV F. l/O&ST&rO Test Substance: <"^tnf^(SL V'ftQY' Project Number: PTest Species: -0|(^o-^gP ____ _ Data By: ___ C, izW") >v\o Date: Time: /<*3< Normality of EDTA Titrant: O, o\ ro______ Correction Factor (based on standardization of EDTA Titrant): Test Sample C o n c 'n Volume (units) (mL) Dilute to (mL) Initial Buret Reading (mL) Final Buret Reading (mL) I Total Titrant Used (mL) TOTAL HARDNESS (mg/L) [corrected] CvAr^| -Zo\ 2o3 2o 20^3" 1 I'D ers |crc=> f& o leo feo -- ! O .o t! . -- 0-0 -- 0-0 -- - 0,0 -- O-o -- O-o In lo, B to. \ 12-0 13. \ ll.C n .n lo. (o. 1 l'ZvO 3.1 IV ^ 7k I0-7 1o o 11e) 13.^ ur 1 . Calculation of Total Hardness (mg/L as CaC03): A x B x 1,000 / mL Sample *here A = mL of Titrant, and B = mg CaC03 quivalent to 1.00 mL EDTA Titrant (1 mg CaC03 = 1 m L EDTA Titrant) U SF W 1090 Total Hardness x Correction Factor *= (corrected] Total Hardness ^ 0 0 5 1 4 Environmental Science & Engineering, Xnc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Page: ESE QA Form Number: 020 Effective: MAR 1993 j SUBJECT: WATER ALKALINITY WORKSHEET | Sponsor: RjV | Test Substance: F \\JtrSTtf7\J ia /O y' Project Number: S 1^7 Z -C H u u Test Species: P. p\roiy\4**4_-> | | Data By: NO Date: Time: IkMC 8 Normalitv of H2S04 (Sulfuric Acid) : Correction Factor (based on standardization of H2S04 titrant): 1/otL- i Test Concns | (define fl units) Sample Volume (mL) Dilute To (mL) | Initial | Buret | Reading | (mL) Final Buret Readiig (mL) To pH 4.5 4.2 Titrant Used (mL) I Total I Alkalinity (mg/L as CaC03) 1 2o J -2o 3 2o4 zr !o O l& O !*=> ( CrO \crO foo _-- _____ -- -- I 0-0 o*<=> I O .o O,o O- o o -o U3 H.3> VCX3, V7..-J -- -- ---- -- -- n.3> (H.3 rz.. s " w M S' io r 1 | IH U , (Z? 1 I1! 1 1l Calculation of Total Alkalinities > 20 mg/L as CaC03: B x N x 50,000 Total Alkalinity = --------------------------------------- where B = m L titrated mL sample , N = normality of acid Total Alkalinity x Correction Factor = [corrected) Total Alkalinity Calculation of Total Alkalinities < 20 mg/L as CaC03: 0 0 0 5 1 .5 (2B-C) X N X 50,000 Total Alkalinity = --------------------------------------- where B = total mL titrant to mL sample , pH 4.5 C = total mL titrant to USFW 1091 N *= normality of acid | , | * |i 1 .. " Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc. Page: ___________ Aquatic Toxicology Department ESE QA Form Number: 106 Gainesville, Florida Effective: August 1990 SUBJECT: DAILY FEEDING OF TEST ORGANISMS Test SDecies: Puu-plAfi \ra t>Vuh<\-lA-d-- Sponsor: R^V Test Substance: Proiect Number: SI0D Day Date Time Initials Food Type Quantity Comments O bf iz hn isir ! LIts h i OS'I" I l I* fan f Z O^CrO Z }Z\S~ NO fAO r^o r^ss> B^iW skHVv^> (SS 6s s fcs o.is"~<_ 0 .15" r~. O, (S' O, *S"r~A_ o,)S^ <v\L- r-tp(rt-4c. /2o-r r-tp^ (2a ^ r-cp 3 bits-fan to 3d a s O.IS 3 &lrs h i ) 1loo r-- \S> as o. (c'\ f s 0./5- ff pc-r- .-- -P^ ^ ' i a s Oi( r>ep.- 5 (*fn/`n 0-730 S 0,1 S pSj^- s' C'lnlcfi (li<oO NO_P as o.<5" r~c_ (X-r r^>. 6 biwk'i 0^<T 6S C- (" -~c f*" r*f>- u (-jtvhn x^o &s fx-r" FORM: TESTFEED O O S 1 G ------ USFW 1092 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Project: 31 | -7. 32.- c m 00- 3 v DAILY LOG Page: ____ ESE QA Form Number: 018 Effective: APR 1993 Cs/\~ zj\ 1 N-VC? -- P p 5 s a-r--^ e>- S^PV-apo^je <-- .r.-<)< e<_--pCS v-r-ej-C uia-PT'--t i 4c> 4e<;A- 1-e-f^^rEkA-iX- r k r t -i-os<V-r ( "Z-S-1 \ "* C .\ e - $ tTS-C-iQ jLo t>--V>^A- S l_ev'V ' -V t--. P p ro t> .\cH ,, 'TU-o 5,t_A--p Vi <; --? r \tr i- o-e-t-'aA-e-il oV Xni e j -- e_V * P. Ar^-p--c . / ^ w^-a-e. cc ^ c 4- -W sV JU^w<>e-r-<.V->^~'; 4- g o/ * i 5 V-rC-r-< V-v rvcv-^OE- ) t*. DPp3->"t>r-*v Ck.4-- t-WsA /VJT^-T^-At^f-v . } iu\Ar' ' ' 1 u ? t i S-C.V i^V5' -4o L-^eA^r- C s l i z h i (V\_0 '-- -le -s j- =>\.A lfor^S T . fctl 4- Ws ^ -tntJ J - W ^ s. 1 f-- ^ ^ l i *. . w V i `2-'~l`~ l , rvvpjc. 5 2 -ST. (o C . . e4ue.A-- b H / n r v \jo -- (2-o tvTVjsJV ^ \ r^c_ c^5 4-i ;-P 5 o 10 Vt^J'tv'S /* i--. i"A-C>-<--*--A' -V- Olo n \ jV \ > 2 H -1 , *C s *2-6^ 3 C - V^_"W "W sfc- ^ l r K~i f~ -^ ___ , P ^ ^ sl^_><_JQ -W s-V s l o i v ^ s /r. _V 4- s ^ H p o t *--- - j 2 ^ 2- . P<j J--i. V*-w -pc ) _ u l i f o f q i ( W d -- (2cl^-* e ^ x -S ^ , 4-<s4 - ^ I ^ - V t^N v * P-v^volpcs^-sA) 4 - "4^y^S_ : rv \M - I h'ojf > Ox-' s of 1 * 2 ^ , 3 1 >-- *- Cg/*fe 1 t 2 $ ~ i'Z l>C fl -^ 4 --, X=, a JjrO i'y 14^ :? <7, o /ci. s - t o fQ Q l Do , h h T MCS ' L&~*tix_j-e-Q T : P- C C-g-ro-g-^7 S-W. . A -4*x o f ~ r> ,co- c^y re ^ / < r-- 'W 5 Z ^ Caft^/^T A^vza -- (n r ^ je J ^ 2 . S -- S T C . c *_4~~ $ o lo i< t> -O ^ - y g j y i g / ' g o - Q c 7 trc m s rr2*1.1 [ K ^ X f ~Z<$T 3 ^ Q*Sr( \ -- ________ USFW 1093 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Agnatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Page: ____ ESE QA Form Number: 018 Effective: APR 1993 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Page: QA FORM: Of EFFECTIVE: JAN 19S SUBJECT: FATHEAD MINNOW SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST SPONSOR: R o y TEST EFFLUENT: VvHrSTD'\)______ (&_ W PROJECT NUMBER: ^ 1 ^ 2 2 3 2 ^ CjOD TEST SPECIES: Pimephales promeZ SOURCE OF LARVAE: LARVAE LOT N O .: SEE PAGE NO.: 11 SEE PAGE NO.: |^| ANIMAL HISTORY p~| p y l' rick. rP a.C ov^| DATE OF HATCH: Ul~Z-h^7 n ~ q - 2 , _____________ CONDITION OF LARVAE: tOw OF ANIMAL RECEIPT LOG OF FISH HOLDING LOG FOR RAW DATA ON LARVAE HISTOJ TEST CONDITIONS TEST CONTAINER DIAMETER: 100 mm HEIGHT: 50 mm PROTOCOL: DILUTION WATER: TEST SOLUTION TEST CHAMBER TEST SOLUTION TEST c o n t ; HEIGHT: VOLUME: VOLUME: COMPOSITIC ~ <-\c __ 3^0 'ZS' o GLASS TYPE LIGHTING :p/uorfScl^+- ______ |\~ A PHOTOPERIOD: y >tv EFFLUENT DATA FOUND ON PAGE NO.: __ OF EFFLUENT LOG TEST SOLUTIONS SPLIT INTO 3 TEST CONCENTRATION (% effluent) VOLUME OF EPRLUENT ADDED ( m c ) CON TROL NA |Oo7-Zo\ (ocV, 2o3 "TSo VOLUME OF DILUTION WATER ( ) ISO -- -- EQUAL AMOUNTS Iot>7> y 1c o V> ( c r o 'ir ZOS3 2 0 4. 3" 1 ^ 0 V S ' o "7STO -- ---- ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: 9 DATA RECORDED BY: FORM : FHMCHR1 DATE: USFW 1095 000519 Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida P a g e : __________ _ QA Form: 053 Effective: October 19 89 yeoi. Mdsn Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: ______________ _ Form: 053 Effective: October 1989 SUBJECT: 'D P, T' SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST ! Sponsor: InJc CTDtJ Test Substance: 2^X'TCt2 Day: \ Project Number: - Pitt) "^ICTo Rep * pH DO (mg/L) Cond (umhos) Tem P (C) I Treatment * Alive Observ New Old New Old New New Oid J C>^fiv| 5> I T A IS B (S C IS A IS B IS C iS n,\ 1,9 %.Z- T S 't-> -- __ . t- -- -- -- --- r> 1 ,7 *1 'I tJ -- -- rJ -- ____ -- - --- ---- -- 2ff.i --- __ I-- -- zs.<- I-- -- \ 0D % A tS B iS r-> -7,5 9-1 -7.U fJ -- - -- -- -- --- 2S,<. S" -- --- __IJ I M u \ b o (f/oI clOo^J C IS' rJ A lS rJ B IS' C IS r-> rJ A 15 BN i C IS r~J A IS r-J B IS r-J C (S -- -- - -- - - -- .-- ---- 1 .1 9.2. -- ----- -).S --- ---- n.^s --- __ -- -- * . r 1 .3 ' .--. -- -- -- -- -- -- - ____ .-- -- -- --- --- ____ -- -- -- -- H Ub.Ko -- -- __- Il -- 2 S 0 ?M'i -- --- - ?.s.<____ --- -- -- A B1 C Comments : Recorded by: Meter: Meter: 000S 21 Date: uliihn Recorded Ioy: frime: IMO Date C?|i3 Meter: Time: Meter: r^r l3Hr U SF W 1097 Agua-tic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: ____________ QA Fora: 053 ' Effective: October 1989 SUBJECT: ' SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST Sponsor: \0>V T- T e s t Substanc e: UKkv' Day: *Z- Project N umbe r: 2 3 3 -- 0IC7Z>-- Rep I PH DO (m g / L ) Cond (umbos) TernP (C) Treatment # Alive Observ New Old New Old New New Old A iS r-J ?,o 1 , <2.2- n . o B IS kJ - ____ -- C IS I'J -- ---- -- -- -- z h S 2*3 -- -- .it^ A 14 1 l ' % o S .5 -7,2- B \5 r~> -- .--- _- -- 3e|J" C iS rS -- -- --- -- ' A IS B IS I ~&D> C iS r-' 7 0 * . o %, (o X<( t-J -- ---- r-> ---- -- - --- _ ____-- -- -- IH .S' V \.1- _ -- --- z m .3 --- -- -- A IS I B IS C IS I" 6D0 A i S B i4 ' -^ C T T C IS n .\ f j -- 7,0 ---- f j -- -- -- -- i . 2 -Z ? , r -7,3 rJ -- __ -- -- -- --- -- --- --- -- -- --- -- -- 2H.U _ -- 2-M,3 ---- n ,s --- 7 M .Z-- -- N V toII A IS B 6 C iS 1 ss ---- -- .__ ---- ---- -- ---- 7M -S -- ___ --- -- A B 1 C flcomments : I000522 U Recorded by: iDate: tlnhi 1rime: Meter: 3^-z_s=/\ Meter: D=>-H Reco.rded ']o y : nV ? Date : m \< n Meter: Meter: P S -S ' T i m e : 1I V y USFW 1098 Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida P a g e : _______ _ QA Form: 053 ' Effective: October 1989 | SUBJECT: p ( v ^ c . W i--------------:---------*----------- - Sponsor: ]2oY Wt'STfc/O SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST -------- Test Substance: (. Dav: 3 Project Number: Rep Treatment # Alive Observ C6')\^| A (5 B IS C \S r-- 1 r- PH New Old ---- DO (mg/L) New Old %-\ ------ Cond (imhos) TernP (C) New New Old 4s -- 2 S J 7H7 _ .___ _ -- -- -- <?>U A r> B IS C (S' J 7.? *! -- -- -- n-( ---- -- -- -- -- -- "ZS.io T>\.% .--- - -- -- |C7D% o'CST' ^Hr A B C A B C |S (S IS i t (S rJ 1 r'-J - _ _ rJ - -- - -- -- r-J I'.' *1 r-- 1 1 "-- J-- -- < n '7 ^ 7 -- --- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- 2ST,<o ZM.S -- -- -- zS.S' __ --- -- Ic d X o ^ o E>j l O D 6/0 -- -s ( ~~7~ A B C A B C [ O s !><>-$ 7,? * .Z - G.5 IM -- .--. ___ IS ( L'/VV\ ------ IS H IS r 7,-7 *.3 % n -- --- -- iS r~> -- --- -- -- - zsr.S" --- -- ___ -- -- -- in n _ __ _-- -- -- -- AI B1 C Comments : Recorded by: Date: g TisI v-i rrime: \2^ o Meter: SV\ZloA Meter: VO' | R e c o r d e d 1ay: *^c> Date : tj t ^ h n Meter: Time: Meter: FS'^r MMi r W D523 USFW 1 " Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: QA Form: 053 Effective: October 1989 | SUBJECT: 'ft SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST Sponsor: o y T 7- \/^$=r2>/0 Test Substance: Day: __________^ _______________ Project Number: --O ) /Q~Q Rep # PH DO (mg/L) Cond (umbos) T e m P (C) Treatment Alive Observ New Old New Old New New Old C w hvf . lK>% > * IT ICn.% ot>cr tC^fo >^-3- S io 5 T ICDg ^C7^OvtUTJ " A iS BN C fS A B \S C 15 A I3 B IS C iS A IS B ' (S C f A |o B (3 C IS A 1$ B IS C IS A 1 rwJ? f"-J r-l IP P S.o 7.S 8.D " M -- --- ---- ---- _ia__ s s "1 ,0 --- -- ---- ---- 2 b * ~ k "7-1 P fc.o _____ "7/ O -- rJ __ -- -- --- r--f % p fri nJ -- r-J -- -- "M -- ---- |J 1 d ^J5 i^ -7.1 %.Z -- -- --- -- -- 7.| -- H I 7 - 0 ' r-J -- -- P -- --- -- --- ---- -- -- -- -- -- -- ------ -- -- -- -- --- -- -- 2~.(o 2 * 1 ___ -- -- -- ? z n 7 S .\ - -z s . 25- -- ---- 'iS .'i 25-0 -- ------ 2sr.f "IS. 1 ---- ---- 3ST.7 I S . ' L ' ---- --- -- B1 C Comments : Recorded by: 000524 ;Driamtee:: cJ/fcl'P? Meter: Meter: Sa CE>-\ R e c o r d e d ay: <^\c=> Date: uftfh n Meter: Time: ! MOetZe' Sr: U c3-0 USFW 1100 Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: QA Form: 053 Effective: October 1989 SUBJECT: p. SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST Sponsor: V s>y V , W & g T g T p Test Substance: Day: Rep Treatment # Alive Observ Project Number: PH DO (mg/L) Cond (umhos) New Old New Old New Temp (C) New Old Cbcho] ( B I d -7 * %/D - 7 . 2 - 7 S ,\ T i-'L ..I<n>& itr I*/ B IS IS 12- B SoST iS H r-> r-* 0 tJ % 7.0 .1 k i I?. iS B iS S&4J- IS 74 en k l {* t> f0 10 B I 2- '7.9' I (H I c,>Vt~ |S B (S T n n V tJ (S r J 1.\a n . "7.1 2^.(0 tM .I 2M O 2H 2. n r w. 2H-3 2-4. 3 B VOW N^Si^ Comments : Recorded by: Date : of 1 i m e : or n>e> Meter: SA 2<^ Recorded Date: Meter: Co-I s y : r n o dn Meter: Meter: Time: 0 9 o O 00525 Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: QA Form: 053 ` Effective: October 1989 SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST Sponsor: & . y - U / g g m l Test Substance: AJ ^ J c y ' Day: Project Number: -Q(0D-- RRep < pH jT r e a t m e n t | # Alive O b s e r v N e w Old |A Ccvch^f B H H t r o 7'% h-J -- -- C IS" tJ --- -- A lO 1.% S/0 >o(T B IS C |S r-J -- -- r-J -- -- DO (mg/L) New Old %o __ -- __ ---- ---- Cond (umhos) New -- Ternp (C) New Old 4 * 2S-.0 21,2- - -- _ _ *-- -- - I S . 2. 2H,H --_ " ---- loo% A ll BM C IS 1 1Cw - rO -- % -o &>,8 --- -- -- -- ---- 28^3 -- - --- -- \0 T > % A (S B i5 C 15 H pJ %<> `l.So -- --- ---- ---- --- -- __-- 2s:i 2 H `S ---- ---- t o 0/ , SoST A B ll C ll 1b-d) 1P>J -- -- %<c> .-- -- %< ----- 6 ,r -- -- -- __ 2^*1 -ZH ---- ---- M o A IS B (S rJ %<=> ? . r --- -- -- ZiT3 2 * S ' -- ---- -- c<U\DJ C (S ' r-i -- -- -- -- --- -- A B1 C Comments : 000526 Recorded by: KP Date: fcTrKT rrime: i-4*3 Meter: SA-Z'ic'Ov Meter: t>=- \ R e c o r d e d 1ay: iw= Date : Meter: Time: Meter: FS-<r- UH S ' Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page : ____________ QA Form: 053 Effective: October 1989 SUBJECT: p. 0rcnv\e,{*- SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST S p o n so r: D a y : _____________[ I ____________ T e st S u b stan ce: Project Number: cc V j n W ' 23>^_~CjO D 1&V> Rep i PH DO ( m g/L ) C ond (u m h o s) Tern P (C) T r e a tm e n t # A l i v e O b s e r v New O ld New O ld New New O ld Q?vchr^[ AH B I3 n 3 ^-- -7. t/i ---- -- C I S ' r-3 -- -- -- -- 2 o iX AH B is C iS r-l 1 -- 79 ---- *-- - -- -- {p, ---- -- -- \oi> % A it BH CH k) -- 7 % -- rJ -- -- -- ____ I - -- - - -- 1^9 A I kJ -- -7.| -- u> B 15 r J - -- -- .____ C IS ! - --- -- __ \o v % A l t J -- n.\ (p-3 B I0 1D-***-^ -- -- -- C1 Lj -- ------ l>% , A \S rJ -- (p,V B IS -- -- -- .__ ' S . d j j C IS -- --- -- A 3oo .____ -- 215' -- -- 290 -- --- 2 lo -- -- 3 So -- -- -- ___ ___ " 2 s; r ---- ---- _ 2-.S~ ---- ---- - 7Z.L, -- -- ,_ 2S'-<---- ---- ____ 2S",-| -- ____ ---- -- -- -- ---- Bt C Comments : R ecorded b y : 3 ate: uM hn rr i m e : 13^ M eter: A-2Aj~4\ R ecorded D ate: M eter: Tto-| ]^y : M eter: sc Tim e : M eter: S 'S " 1S3 a 00527 USFW 1103 ESE IC0L0GY DEPARTMENT GAINc.oVILLE, FLORIDA * ui 06 PAGE: ESE QA FORM: 052 EFFECTIVE: March 1986 SUBJECT: .FATHEAD MINNOW (PIMEPHALES PROMELAS) SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST-- WEIGHT DATA SPONSOR: W / OrM \' TEST SUBSTANCE: sSA u* S lU s DATE: fojiy Tol ^ n ____ PROJECT NUMBER: 3im32-o'"-ii- DATA BY: _______ TYPE/MODEL OF DRYING OVEN: OVEN TEMPERATURE (*C): DRYING DURATION (HOURS): ftUrt-ro |oo TREATMENT LEVEL REP A WEIGHT OF OVEN-DRIED PANS (mg^ 5 B WEIGHT OF PAN AND FRY (mg) ______ 2 .............. B-A TOTAL DRY FRY WEIGHT (mg) C NUMBER OF FRY WEIGHED B-A/C AVERAGE DRY FRY WEIGHT (mg) OBSERVATIONS r ii 1OOY, Zo\ 1oo'/, Z<=>[ A\ sV cs AM 6S C tf 0#^3\(o 0A3S3 0,^233 0.^3 2^ 0.^33\ O .^ o io o.m4 b.44o2- o .^ n 0.42 0.43^8 W 4,4 G .o S,$ sn S,2_ 1M 13 14 is t4 0.34 0,3 0.4 0,4) 0,3 o .zn ------^----~-----0---3--"-7----h- <\ j i( -- O* 34 m\ J [oo'/< 2o3 \ooi< 2x>'b> 1ooT, 20*-) 3 An 6? C A r<> o .^ z sM o .^ z o .^ a io O .^ Z Z '? 0.4Z44 o /te s t- O A U el 0.<\7S\\ H .r G .o ST."7 G<4 n '4 14 15 0.4| o ,M 3 0,4 ( 0,43 If-------o .--H--Z----<-vv^ . ( c>ot, 60 CT .0 .4 o .^ 3 7 l G* 15 0,43 vi --- 0 iM 2 . C it 0.4323 0 .^ * 2 . s ,^ \S o . 3 4 000528 USFW 1104 , -1 > >H * HV 1, >*, 11 1 .1 ------------------- - nr i r BSE ICOLOGY DEPARTMENT GAIN&oVILLE, FLORIDA O' 8 6 PAGE : ___ ESE QA FORM: 052 EFFECTIVE: March 1986 SUBJECT: SPONSOR: TEST SUBSTANCE: PROJECT NUMBER: .FATHEAD MINNOW (PIMEPHALES PROMELAS) SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST-- WEIGHT DATA O^W. swipo, 3 n 7?3z-oioo .. DATE: U| 2 c | < n DATA BY: TYPE/MODEL OF DRYING OVEN: OVEN TEMPERATURE (*C): DRYING DURATION (HOURS): 6W"(Vn TREATMENT LEVEL REP. A WEIGHT OF OVEN-DRIED PANS (m*) 5 B WEIGHT OF PAN AND FRY (mg) 5 B-A TOTAL DRY FRY WEIGHT (mg) c NUMBER OF FRY WEIGHED B-A/C AVERAGE DRY FRY WEIGHT (mg) OBSERVATIONS 1 (- Z o CT [ O O '(, 2 jo5T J~ (oo 1, i x>(* y (oo/. Z ^ y A l? & IM C 9 A G> H C it 0 .(]Z 3 (0 O . ^ Z 0! 0.111 1} D.W7 O . A 2 1 3 o.i^yo .^Z lV _M H.2_ 0.I2 0 I O ^z^l 0^3Mo zA $n 6.o U"7 0,31 1o O.M2- K - J n oM [ \S 0 . 3 % j \S o.Mo 7 - o.M( J \ QMS' USFW 1105 j 000529 . Weston/Dry Run Creek - P. promelas survival 7ile: wpps Transform: NO TRANSFORM ANOVA TABLE f v u ? (o f ^ h i SOURCE between W i t h i n 1[Error) 'o t a l DF 1 4 5 SS 0.007 0.036 0.043 MS 0.007 0.009 F 0.731 Critical F value = 7.71 (0.05,1,4) Since F < Critical F FAIL TO REJECT Ho: All equal W e s t o n / D r y Run Creek - P. p r o m e l a s survival Pile: wpps Transform: NO TRANSFORM EQUAL VARIANCE t-TEST TABLE 1 OF 2 Ho :C o n t r o l c T r e a t m e n t .ROUP IDENTIFICATION TRANSFORMED MEAN MEAN CALCULATED IN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG Control 0.930 2 203 (reference) 0.863 0.930 0.863 0.855 2 Sample t table v a l u e = 2..13 (1 T a i l e d Value, P = 0 .05, df<=4,1) UNEQUAL VARIANCE t-TEST Ho :C o n t r o l < T r e a t m e n t ROUP IDENTIFICATION TRANSFORMED MEAN MEAN CALCULATED IN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG 1 11 11 H CN Control 203 (reference) 0.930 0.863 0.930 0.863 0.855 2 Sample t table v a l u e = 2. 35 (1 T a iled Value, P = 0 .05, df*=3,1) e s t o n / D r y Run Creek - P. p r o m e l a s survival ile: wpps Transform: NO TRANSFORM EQUAL VARIANCE t-TEST TABLE 2 OF 2 H o :C o n t r o l c T r e a t m e n t 3ROUP IDENTIFICATION NUM OF REPS Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE (IN ORIG. UNITS) CONTROL F R O M CONTROL 1 Control 3 2 203 (reference) 3 0.166 17.9 0.067 UNEQUAL VARIANCE t-TEST U S F W 1106 H o :C o n t r o l c T r e a t m e n t 53 ;OUP 21 IDENTIFICATION Control 203 (reference) NUM OF REPS 3 3 Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE (IN ORIG. UNITS) CONTROL FROM CONTROL 0.183 19.7 0.067 000531 USFW 1107 Weston/Dry Run Creek - P. promelas survival "ile: wpps Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y)) ANOVA TABLE -OURCE etween Within (Error) otal DF 4 10 14 SS 0.692 0.086 0.778 MS 0.173 0.009 Critical F v a l u e = 3.48 (0.,05,4,10) Since F > Critical F REJECT Ho : All equal F 20.182 W e s t o n / D r y R u n C r e e k - P. p r o m e l a s survival File: wpps Transform: A R C S I N E ( S Q U A R E R O O T (Y )) DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 1 OF 2 Ho :C o n t r o l c T r e a t m e n t *OUP IDENTIFICATION TRANSFORMED MEAN MEAN CALCULATED IN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG R e f e r e n c e (203) 1.210 2 201 1.349 3 204 1.441 4 205 0.867 5 206 1.441 0.863 0.953 1.000 0.580 1.000 -1.838 -3.057 4.541 -3.057 * Dunnett table value = 2 . 4 7 (1 T a i l e d Value, P=0.05, df=10,4) '^eston/Dry Run Creek - P. p r o m e l a s survival Lie: wpps Transform: ARC SINEiSQUARE ROOT(Y)) DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 2 OF 2 H o :C o n t r o l c T r e a t m e n t ROUP 1 2 3 4 5 IDENTIFICATION NUM OF REPS Reference (203) 201 204 205 206 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE (IN ORIG. UNITS) CONTROL F R O M CONTROL 0.146 0.146 0.146 0.146 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 -0.090 -0.137 0.283 -0.137 000532 USFW 1108 ieston/Dry Run Creek - P. promelas dry weight -'ile: wppg Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION upiro - Wilk's test for normality D = 0.009 4 = 0.970 Critical W (P = 0.05) (n = 15) = 0.881 Critical W (P = 0.01) (n = 15) = 0.835 Data PASS normality test at P=0.01 level. Continue analysis. 4 e s t o n/Dry R u n Creek - P. p r o m e l a s d ry w e i g h t 7ile: w p p g Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION .artlett's test for h o m o g e n e i t y of vari a n c e Valculated B1 statistic = 3.04 .able C h i - s q u a r e value = 13.28 (alpha = 0.01, df = able Chi-square value = 9.49 (alpha = 0.05, df = 4) 4) ya.za PASS B1 homogeneity test at 0.01 level. Continue analysis. 000533 USFW 1109 Weston/Dry Run Creek - P. promelas dry weight "ile: wppg Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION ANOVA TABLE _0URCE etween Within (Error) otal DF 4 10 14 ss 0.003 0.009 0 .Oil MS 0.001 0.001 Critical F value = 3.48 (0.05,4,10) Since F < Critical F FAIL TO REJECT Ho: All equal F 0.744 w e s t o n / D r y R u n C reek - P. p r o m e l a s d r y w e i g h t File: wppg Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 1 OF 2 H o :C o n t r o l T r e a t m e n t ROUP IDENTIFICATION TRANSFORMED MEAN MEAN CALCULATED IN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG 1 R e f e r e n c e (203) 0.417 " 2 201 0.387 3 204 0.417 4 205 0.390 5 206 0.410 0.417 0.387 0.417 0.390 0.410 1 .253 0 .000 1 .114 0 .278 Dunnett table value = 2.47 (1 T a i l e d Value, P = 0 .05, df=10,4) Je s t o n / D r y R u n C r e e k - P. p r o m e l a s d ry weig h t Lie: w p p g Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION DUNNETT'S TEST - TABLE 2 OF 2 Ho :C o n t r o l < T r e a t m e n t ROUP 1 2 3 4 5 IDENTIFICATION Reference (203) 201 204 205 206 NUM OF REPS 3 3 3 3 3 Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE (IN ORIG. UNITS) CONTROL FROM CONTROL 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 0.030 0.000 0.027 0.007 000534 USFW 111 ROY F . W ESTON , IN C . D RY RU N C R EEK CHRONICS Appendix C: Reference Toxicant Test Raw Data 000535 USFW 1111 EArnqeuvfeiarroteicnnmcTeeonxTitocaoxl ilScoagcniyetnLCcaoebno&trraoEtlonCrgyinCeHeRrinOgN, IICnc. Reference Toxicant: Potassium chloride (KCI) Species: Pimephales promelas Run by: Date: Survival Growth Test No.__________ NOEC (mg/L) NOEC (mg/L) Date 2109 1178 16 15 14 13 1119102 8 7 65 4 3 21 550000 555000000 500 500 500 500 555000000 500 500 500 555000000 Jun97 JMaanr9977 550000 500 500 500 500 500 Dec96 AJJMOSuupecal!rp9t9r9999666666 550000 500 500 500 Feb96 JJODuaecln9tc9995565 500 550000 500 500 550000 500 500 500 Apr95 Feb95 Oct94 Sep94 Aug94 Average NOEC(Surv): Two x Standard Dev. (SURV.) Average NOEC(Growth): Two x Standard Dev.(GROW. 55000000 mmmmgggg////LLLL Note: Control chart is not available due to no deviations from average. / 000536 USFW 1112 Environmental Science & Engineering/ Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Page: QA FORM: 051 EFFECTIVE: JAN 1993 SUBJECT: FATHEAD MINNOW SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST SPONSOR: (Wgc, PROJECT NUMBER: T*>K. T E S T EFFLUENT: Ptd* sy.v-m CXO0 TEST SPECIES: Pimephales promelas ____________ ___________ __________.. ANIMAL HISTORY SOURCE OF LARVAE: DATE OF HATCH: LARVAE LOT NO. : _____________ CONDITION OF LARVAE: SEE PAGE NO.: ~T~7 O F A N I M A L R E C E I P T LOG SEE PAGE NO.: \1[ OF FISH HOLDING LOG FOR RAW DATA ON LARVAE HISTORY TEST CONDITIONS TEST CONTAINER DIAMETER: 100 mm HEIGHT: 50 mm PROTOCOL: TEST SOLUTION TEST CHAMBER TEST SOLUTION TEST CONTAINER HEIGHT: VOLUME: VOLUME: COMPOSITION: 31>=> e. G L A S S TYPE LIGHTING: p ltsvreZ u L rk PHOTOPERIOD: DILUTION HATER: _______________ E F F L U E N T DATA FOUND ON PAGE N O .: --- OF E F F L U E N T L O G / 3T E S T S O L U TIONS SPLIT INTO __ E Q U A L A M O U N T S TEST CONCENTRATION (%--fkevfo-i-tuant-} VVCCI "/) VOLUME OF EFFLUENT- ADDED ( ) klCf CON TROL .N A 5 ^ (crcrO 'IP -S ' 76 c|cxro 3 o-o VOLUME OF DILUTION WATER ( ^ ) U P S ' CpCXG ^ S r O ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: V~C{ S b c S 5 f O - jg fcX/ rh (CrOQ op ________________C ^ C ty y -x ^________________________ | * DATA RECORDED BY: FORM : FHMCHR1 NVC?________ ^ DATE: 00053*7 \JSFW Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: ______ QA Form: 053 ` Effective: October 1989 USFW 1114 Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: ____________ Form: 053 Effective: October 1989 SUBJECT: /VOrve^ SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST Sponsor: Test Substance: ICC ( Dav: I C^fc) Treatment Rep # i Alive Observ Project Number: PH DO (3ng/L) Cond (umhos) New Old New Old New Tern]? (C) New old G *k> \ Scro L (C W A (S B IS C (S A IS B i5 C (S A B I5 C <s A \7~ B1 C? A B 'L C \ AO BO CO A fJ ~> n * 1 ! < pJ rJ -- -- 7,^ n . U %>1 7,1 r-> --- _ .__ rJ -- - - -- pJ "7 > n.r __ ----- - --- . J 3 % -o "7, f *1 7,^ -- 7 XeJj -- ___ -- ---- -- -- I3 r>1 -7-1 13 -- ____ ___ --- -- -- -- lS' ----. lS' ^ __ O ^P -- _ ____ ' l l -- - Z7^ .-- . -- ____ -- i t /l s " -- --- 'IsK.&O -- ----- 37oo -- --- -- _____ I'i.'i Z l S ---- Zl-I 2V-C, -- ___. --- -- 3X.C* -- -- - -- V i. S ' 2*i4> --- . .-- -------- - -- Trt.S' __ --- .-- 7 H 7 ,------ -- 1 Bf C Comments : Recorded by: f/v? Date: (,H h i rime: HtfT Meter: SA2-*i=A Recorded Date: Meter: V o-'] by: t-- Meter: SOT. 3 Time : Meter: FS^r . 000535 M fS USFW 1115 Aquatic Toxicology Department G a i n e s v i l l e , Florida Page: ____ _______ Q A Form: 53 ~ Effective: October 1989 SUBJECT: SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST Sponsor: c '_____________ Day: ________Z _________________ Test Substance: Project Number: I Tb Cr^ i(~'') R ep t PH DO (1n g /L ) C ond (u m h o s) Temj3 (C) T r e a t m e n t i A l i v e O b s e r v New O ld New O ld New New O ld (forAvoi 7S*> Soo (c>oO UjCrO-0 A iS B (5 C iS A iS B C iS A B C An B3 CH AO Bo Co A-- B C-- 7, G 7P P --- tJ -- -- -- -- P "O 7-C -- --- -- P - -- - -- - -- P ]%& j.-r P- -- P _ ------ 3 u>v. k i Q>t x p f uAv, -- -- 2 C*P ___ Z !-- -- ---- -- -- --- % -0 -- -- -- -- --- --- -- 77 ___ --- ____ _ ---- ---- 7V -- -- ?0O .-- -- {2- --2- ^CrO -----___ ----_-- -- Z-H.C. 1M-3 ----- ___ -- -- 24-U 2H, 3 - .__ -- --- -- - - --- ZHG 2-H-1 --- --- --- -- --- 2H.O --- -- --- ---- -- '-- A B C Comments : 0005^0 R ecorded by: Date: ,,1^17 T im e : \<? M eter: Recorded Date: M eter: OoW t>y: , ___ b lrh n Meter: Sor- 3 Meter: Time: W 3 USFW 1116 Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: QA Form: 053 Effective: October 1989 SUBJECT: P- (^5 SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST S p o n so r: ^*\v5 C < T e st S ubstance: KC| D a y : ____ Rep I T reatm ent # A liv e O bserv P r o je c t Number: <Ttt. pH DO (m g /L ) C ond (u m h o s) New O ld New O ld New Temp (C) New O ld V5 B iS 3 A n n SiS. 7,3 W 2^ 7 * 0 f 2 4 /2 - zs f C>C& B t5 ILI 7 ,C 11 7 ,*r r --1 <5 ir B ir 4^ I5T 2- 2. S 2? B Z U<tv 3 ! U -H s 7 ,< * .1 - V 2 . 21 7 . B M M Z-H,2_ K 7 7 H .\ 2M /3 B USFW 1117 B Comments : 0)00541 R ecorded by: r^ o D a te: U l/rn T im e: mpO Meter: S V ^o -fr R ecorded D ate: M eter: O o' 1 M eter: S o r-3 M eter: FS- s~ . Tim e: W 3C Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: QA Form: 053 Effective: October 19s9 USFW 1118 Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida P a g e : _____ _______ QA Form: 053 Effective: October 1989 USFW 1119 Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: _______ QA Form: 053 Effective: October 1989 USFW 1120 0 ( 0544 Aquatic Toxicology Department Gainesville, Florida Page: ____________ QA Form. 053 Effective: October 1989 USFW 1121 ESF ICOLOGY DEPARTMENT G A lN iioV tLLE, FLORIDA 0< " ' 8 6 PAGE; ___ ESE QA FORM: 052 EFFECTIVE: March 1986 SUBJECT: .FATHEAD SPONSOR: M rec TEST SUBSTANCE: PROJECT NUMBER: KC\ MINNOW (PIM EPHALES PROMELAS) DATE: <o|io- u K n DATA BY: SHORT-TERM CHRONIC TOXICITY TEST-- WEIGHT DATA TYPE/M0DEl" OF DRYING OVEN: OVEN TEMPERATURE C c ) : DRYING DURATION (HOURS): - N-) JLSS2- F TREATMENT LEVEL REP. W EIGHT OF O VEN-DRIED PANS (m g) 3 B W EIGHT OF PAN AND FRY ( ) 3 B-A TOTAL DRY FRY WEIGHT ( m g) NUMBER OF FRY WEIGHED b-a /c AVERAGE DRY FRY WEIGHT ( m g) O B S E R V A T IO N S (S o rv \v ~ c?^ A_i 6 0 ,3 2 3 ^ 0 .3 z 3 2 _ 0.33 o$" 0 ,^ 3 ^ U\ (a \S IS 0,3 ( 0,33 7 - 0 .4 3 ZSo 2^o 5 oo 000 C A i A7 c 0 .3 2 1 3 0 .3 2 M O 0 .3 2 3 o O ,3 z 2 o 0 .3 2 1 0 o.3zS3> 0.3273 0,32.27- Q .3 3 H O 0,3311 O .3 3 0 3 07 3A. G>,3 0.33S7 0.33S3 0.3337 0 .3Z 2C > G>-7 !<=> G.* .3 15 IS IS 13 0,4^ 0 .4 0 0*42- 0,43 JS . o ,3 n o ,H l 0.4o 2So 7 -s. o>37 Se>x> g - oM ? A A riS n ro po O , 0546 FINAL REPORT: TOXICITY ASSESSMENT OF SOIL SAMPLES FROM THE DRY RUN CREEK SITE WITH THE LUMBRICID EARTHWORM, EISENIA FOETIDA TEST GUIDELINE: EPA-600/3-88/029 PREPARED FOR; R o y F. Weston Inc. G S A Raritan Depot P.O. Building 209 Annex (Bay F) 2890 Woodbridge Avenue Edison, NJ 08837-3679 Phone: (908) 321-4200 Fax: (908) 321-4021 PERFORMING LABORATORY: Q S T Environmental Inc. 404 S W 140th Terrace Newberry, Florida 32669-3000 Phone: (352) 332-3318 STUDY ID: R oy F. Weston No. 3347-142-001-2273 Q ST No. 3197232-0100-3100 July 1997 000547 USFW 1 1 2 3 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY W hole soil toxicity tests w ere conducted at QST Environm ental Inc. in Gainesville, Florida, with the lum bricid earthw orm , Eiseniafoetida, on sam ples collected from the D ry R un C reek Site. The effect criteria for the toxicity tests were survival and bioaccumulation potential. A total o f four site soils, one field reference soil, and two laboratory control soils were used in the toxicity tests. After 14 days o f exposure no sub-chronic toxicity was noted in any o f the sam ples. T here w ere no significant differences (P = 0 .0 5 ) in the survival o f Eiseniafoetida betw een the laboratory control soils and the field reference soil from sample station 904. There were no significant differences (P = 0 .0 5 ) in the survival o f Eiseniafoetida betw een the laboratory control soils and the referen ce soil when com pared with survival in the site samples. After the 14-day sub-chronic exposure period, the earthw orm s were held in the test sam ples for an additional 14 days to determ ine the bioaccumulation potential for selected site contaminants. No chronic toxicity was noted throughout the 28-day exposure period. Adequate mass of earthworm tissue was obtained for chemical analyses for all o f the sam ples. F rozen Eisenia foetida tissues w ere sent to C olum bia A nalytical Services for chemical analyses. 2 000548 USFW 1124 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST O F TABLES LIST O F APPENDICES 1.0 IN TRO D U CTIO N 2.0 M ATERIALS AND M ETHODS 2.1 TEST SAMPLES 2.2 TEST ORGANISMS 2.3 MOISTURE FRACTION DETERM INATION 2.4 W ATER HOLDING CAPACITY DETERMINATION 2.5 HYDRATION OF SOIL SAMPLES 2.6 TOXICITY TEST DESIGN 2.7 REFERENCE TOXICANT TEST 3.0 STA TISTICA L ANALYSIS 4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 W HOLE SOIL TOXICITY TEST 4.2 REFERENCE TOXICANT TEST 5.0 CONCLUSION 6.0 R EFEREN CES Page 2 3 4 4 5 5 9 9 H H 3 000549 USFVV 1125 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 pH Values of Soil Samples From the Dry Run C reek During a 28-Day Toxicity Test W ith the Lum bricid E arthw orm , Eisenia foetida Percent M oisture Content of Soils From the D ry Run C reek Site Used in the 28-Day Toxicity Tests Survival o f Eisenia foetida Exposed to Soil Sam ples F rom the D ry R un Creek Site During a 28-Day Toxicity Test G row th o f Eisenia foetida Exposed to Soil Sam ples F rom the D ry Run Creek Site During a 28-Day Toxicity Test LIST O F APPENDICES A ppendix A: Chain-of-Custody and Traffic Information A p p e n d ix B : Eisenia foetida Soil Toxicity Test R aw D ata A ppendix C: Reference Toxicant Test Raw Data Page 13 14 15 16 000550 USFW 1126 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 1.0 INTRODUCTION W hole soil toxicity tests w ere conducted at QST Environmental Inc. (Form erly Environm ental Science & Engineering, Inc.) with soil samples collected from the D ry Rim C reek Site to determine the relative toxicity and bioaccumulation potential of the constituents in the test samples. The test organism used for soil tests was the lum bricid earthw orm , Eiseniafoetida. The effect criteria for the toxicity tests were survival and bioaccumulation potential. Growth was also m easured as wet weight in m illigrams. The tests w ere conducted follow ing a m odified ASTM Guideline E 1676-95 entitled Standard Guide fo r Conducting a Laboratory Soil Toxicity Test With Lum bricid Earthworm Eiseniafoetida, a m odified EPA guideline E P A /600/3-88/029 entitled Protocols fo r Short Term Screening o f Hazardous Waste Sites, R oy F. W eston, Inc. protocols, and Q ST in-house standard operating procedures. All of the original raw data pertaining to this study are maintained at QST, 404 SW 140th Terrace, Newberry, Florida 32669-3000. 2.0 M ATERIALS AND M ETHODS 2.1 TEST SAM PLES Test soils were collected as grab samples from the Dry Run Creek Site by Roy F. W eston, Inc. personnel on June 12, 1997, and were received at the QST laboratory on June 13, 1997. The test samples, identified as 900, 901, 902, 903 and 904 (reference), were collected from A rea I, A rea II, Area III, Area IV and the reference area, respectively. Samples were received in quantities of approxim ately 5 gallons each in a five gallon pail. Upon receipt, the pails were opened and the contents checked against the chain-of-custody sheets to ensure that all the recorded samples were present. The tem perature of the samples was then measured. Any observations made during the sample receipt and log-in operations were recorded in the sample receipt logbook. Chain-ofcustody and other traffic information pertaining to the samples are presented in A ppendix A. 000551 USFW 1127 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Laboratory control soil for the earthworm bioassays was artificial soil com prising 10% sphagnum peat (Alachua County Feed and Seed Store, Gainesville, FL), 20% kaolinite clay, and 70% grade 70 silica sand (both from Feldspar Corporation, Edgar, FL). Two laboratory control soils were used in the toxicity tests. All samples were stored in a refrigerator at 4 2 C prior to use and during the testing period. The tests were initiated on June 16, 1997, within 3 days of sample receipt. 2.2 TEST ORGANISM S The earthw orm s, E.foend a, used in the toxicity tests w ere obtained from C arolina B iological Supply Company (Burlington, North Carolina). The test organisms were > 60 day old adults, weighing between 300 - 500 mg each, and fully clitellate at test initiation. All organism s w ere obtained from the same culture. The supplier's breeding and holding conditions w ere sim ilar to those of the testing conditions therefore, the earthworm s were held < 2 4 hours prior to use in the toxicity tests. 2.3 M O ISTU RE FRA CTIO N D ETERM IN A TIO N Upon receipt of the soil samples, a 20 gram sub-sample of each site, reference, and laboratory control soil was removed from the receiving container and placed in a dried, prew eighed, num bered alum inum pan. The sub-sample was dried in a Blue-M oven at 100 C for approxim ately 24 hours. The final dry weight (x) was subtracted from the initial wet weight (y) of the sub-sample and divided by the sub-sample weight (20 grams) to obtain the m oisture fraction o f the soil (equation: y-x grams/20 grams). 2.4 W A TER HOLDING CAPACITY DETERM IN ATION Sub-samples (10 grams) of the dry soils were placed in a 30 mL beaker, and an equal w eight of deionized water was added and mixed into a slurry. A crepe paper filter, folded into quarters, was placed in a plastic funnel and evenly hydrated with deionized water. The weight o f the funnel and hydrated paper was m easured (x grams). The funnel was then set on a beaker and the soil slurry poured into the funnel; a minimal amount of deionized water was used to lightly rinse any rem aining soil from the beaker and stir rod. Aluminum foil was placed over the funnel and the 6 USFW 1128 000552 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 system was allowed to drain for approximately 3 hours at room temperature. The final weight of the funnel was m easured (y grams) and the water holding capacity was determined (equation: x grams - y grams). 2.5 HYDRATION O F SOILS Test soils were hydrated to 75 percent of their water holding capacity with deionized water prior to use in the toxicity tests. The am ount of deionized water added to each individual test soil was determ ined according to the following equation: Hydration water to be added (mL/100 g) = THW - EHW THW (total hydration water desired, m L/100 g) = PHYD x [(PAS x W H C U + (PWS x W H C J] EHW (existing hydration water, mL/100 g) = [(PAS x M F ,,) + (PW S x M F U)] x 100 where PHYD = proportion of hydration required (e.g. 0.75) PAS = proportion o f artificial soil in test soil (e.g.. 0.5) W HC^ = water holding capacity of the artificial soil in m L/100 g PWS = proportion of waste sample (dilution) in the test soil W H CU = water holding capacity of the test sample in m L/100 g M F,, = m oisture fraction of the artificial soil M FU = moisture fraction of the test sample Soil sam ples with excess m oisture content were allowed to air-dry at room tem perature p rior to use in the toxicity tests. 2.6 TO X ICITY TEST DESIGN The Eisenia foetida tests w ere 14-day survival bioassays with an additional 14-day exposure for bioaccum ulation potential determ ination using test soils from the Dry R un C reek Site sample stations referenced above. The site, reference, and laboratory control soils were used without dilution. Approximately 2,500 grams of a thoroughly homogenized soil, hydrated to 75 percent of its w ater holding capacity, w ere placed into each of three replicate test cham bers (labeled replicate A, B and C). The test cham bers used were 3.78 L glass jars covered with a plastic sheet with air 7 000553 USFW 1129 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 holes on top to allow for air exchange. To initiate the tests, approximately 130 earthw orm s w ere randomly selected, weighed, and loaded on top of each replicate test, field reference, or laboratory control soil and allowed to burrow into the soil. The worms in each exposure ja r w ere then observed for 24 hours for any unusual behavior (e.g. lack of burrowing, inactive posture on surface) and pathological symptoms (e.g. hemorrhaging, swelling, elongation). The tests were conducted at room tem perature, 20 2 C, with a daily photoperiod of continuous laboratory illumination (520 Lux). Test temperature was measured continuously by placing the probe o f a Supco continuous tem perature m onitor into a tem perature control ja r containing 200 gram s of hydrated control soil. Soil pH was m easured on day 0 and day 28 by evenly m ixing 5 gram s o f test or control soil with 25 m L of deionized water for 30 m inutes. The pH was then m easured using an Orion SA 290 pH meter equipped with an Orion 91-57 triode. At 7-day intervals, the contenis of each replicate chamber were emptied onto a glass pan to observe and enumerate the test organisms. The worms were counted and observed for m ortality, hem orrhaging, swelling, and elongation. The presence of eggs and/or young in the tests soils was also noted. Earthworms were considered to be dead if they did not respond to a gentle m echanical stimulus (e.g. touch with a small spatula at the anterior end). The soils were rehydrated, when necessary, returned to the test cham bers, and the w orm s reloaded on top of the soil. T est organism s w ere not fed during the initial 13 days o f testing, how ever, on day 14 approxim ately 21 gram s o f aged, ground alfalfa pellets (Alachua County Feed and Seed Store, Gainesville, FL) w ere added to each replicate test, field reference, and laboratory control cham ber following organism observation. On day 28, all organisms were removed from the test chambers, observed, counted, and weighed. The organism s in each replicate were cleaned and kept on wet filter paper in Ziploc bags for approximately 24 hours to purge their gut contents. After depuration, the earthworm s were prepared for shipment to Columbia Analytical Services for chemical analyses. Test organism s from each replicate sample were cleaned and placed together in 8 ounce amber glass jars, labeled with the sample identification num ber, replicate num ber, date and sp o n so r's nam e, and frozen at -10 C. The frozen sam ples w ere then shipped on dry ice under 000554 8 USFNN 1130 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 chain-of-custody to Columbia Analytical Services, Kelso, W ashington, for chemical analyses. Chain-of-custody documentation and other traffic inform ation are provided in Appendix A. 2.7 R EFER EN C E TOXICA NT TEST A monthly reference toxicant test using 2-chloroacetamide as the reference toxicant was perform ed to determ ine the general condition of the earthworm s used in the toxicity tests. The concentrations o f 2-chloroacetam ide selected for the reference toxicant test were 0 (control), 8, 16, 32, 64 and 128 pig/L. A stock solution of reference toxicant was prepared in deionized w ater and m ixed with control soil to the desired concentrations. T en E . foerida w ere exposed p e r control or reference toxicant concentration for 7 days without any replication. The reference toxicant tests were perform ed under the same conditions as the toxicity tests. 3.0 STA TISTICA L ANALYSIS M ean survival and growth data were evaluated by a statistical comparison of the Dry Run Creek Site samples with the reference and laboratory control samples using appropriate statistical procedures. Analysis of variance followed by the D uncan's M ultiple Range Test (Snedecor and C ochran, 1980), and D unnett's t-test (EPA , 1988; G ulley and W EST, Inc. 1994) w ere used to determ ine statistical significance. The m edian lethal concentration (LCjo), the concentration o f reference toxicant which causes 50 percent mortality of the test organisms under the specified conditions of exposure, was calculated using the Trim m ed Spearman-Karber Statistical Com puter Program (Hamilton et. al., 1977). 4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 W H O L E SO IL T O X IC IT Y TEST D ebris, including small stones and plant m aterial, was removed from some of the soil sam ples prior to use in testing. Some indigenous earthworm s w ere found in the soil samples and w ere removed during the sorting process. Test conditions, including lighting, tem perature, and pH values rem ained at acceptable levels throughout the testing period. Test tem perature remained in the range o f 20 __ 2 C throughout the duration of the test. No pH adjustm ents w ere m ade for any o f the 9 000555 USFW 1131 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 samples used for testing. pH ranged from 4.2 (laboratory control) to 7.0 standard units (903) throughout the duration o f the test (Table 1). Light intensity over the test area was m easured to be 520 Lux. The percent m oisture of the soils used in the bioaccumulation tests are presented in Table 2. Percent moisture ranged from 12.0 (laboratory control) to 20.7 (site sample 900). Copies o f the relevant raw data pertaining to this test are provided in Appendix B. Survival data for E . foetida after the 14-day sub-chronic exposure period and subsequent 14-day bioaccum ulation phase are presented in Table 3. A fter 14 days o f exposure, survival o f E . foetida in the site, field reference, and laboratory control samples were all 100 percent. This indicated that the tests soils did not show any sub-chronic toxicity. The 14-day survival o f E . foetida in the laboratory control and field reference soils was not significantly different (P_< 0.05) from survival in any of the site soils (Table 3). The bioaccumulation phase was not meant to determine survivorship, but rather to obtain adequate earthw orm tissue for chemical analyses in all o f the replicates. The additional laboratory control exposures were used to obtain adequate earthw orm tissue to perform m atrix spike/m atrix spike duplicate analysis. No m ortality was observed in any of the samples after the 28-day exposure period. A fter the 28-day bioaccum ulation phase, survival o f E . foetida in the site, field reference, and laboratory control samples was 100 percent for all of the replicates. The 28-day survivorship of E . foetida in the laboratory control and field reference soils was not significantly different (P = 0 .0 5 ) from survivorship in any of the site soils. G row th o f E. foetida was m easured as wet w eight in m illigram s and converted to percent based on the initial w eights. A verage percentage grow th o f E . foetida in the D ry R un C reek Site soils ranged from 32.4 percent (902) to 54.3 percent (903). A verage laboratory control and field reference soil percentage growth were 38.0 and 43.9 percent, respectively (Table 4). Adequate mass of earthw orm tissue was available for chemical analyses for all of the site, field reference and laboratory control samples (Table 4). 000556 10 USFW 1132 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Behavioral observations recorded during the test included lethargy. At the end of the 28-day exposure period, there was egg and young production in several of the exposure chambers. Copies of the relevant raw data and statistical reports pertaining to this test are provided in A ppendix B. 4.2 R EFE R EN C E TO X ICA N T TEST T he LC 50 o f the reference toxicant test was determ ined to be 37.3 fig 2-chloroacetam ide/L w ith 95 p ercen t confidence limits o f 30.1 and 46.3 fig 2-chloroacetam ide/L , respectively. T he L C jq value fell within the control limits of reference toxicant tests perform ed at QST, indicating that the organism s were healthy and within their normal sensitivity ranges. Copies of the relevant raw data pertaining to the reference toxicant test are provided in Appendix C. 5.0 CONCLUSION Under the conditions of the study no sub-chronic toxicity was noted in any o f the site, field reference, or laboratory control soils. There were no significant differences (P_<0.05) in survival o f E. foetida betw een the laboratory control soil, the field reference soil, and any o f the site soils collected from the D ry Run C reek Site. A dequate m ass o f E. foetida tissue was available for chem ical analyses in all of the soil samples. Percent m oisture of the site soils used in the toxicity tests ranged from 12.0 to 20.7 percent. 6.0 REFEREN CES A m erican Society for Testing and M aterials. ASTM E 1676-95. Standard Guidefo r Conducting a Laboratory Soil Toxicity Test with Lum bricid Earthworm, Eisenia foetida. ASTM (11.05): 1995. Greene, J.C ., C.L. Bartels, W .J. W arren-Hicks, B.R. Parkhurst, G .L. Linder, S.A. Peterson and W .E. M iller. 1988. Protocols for Short Term Screening of Hazardous W aste Sites. EPA /600/388/029. G ulley, D .D . and W E ST , Inc. 1994. Toxstat 3.4. D epartm ent o f Z oology and Physiology, University of Wyoming. H am ilton, M .A ., R .C . R usso, and R .V . T hurston. 1977. Trimmed Spearman-Karber Methodfo r Estimating Median Lethal Concentrations in Toxicity Bioassays. Environm ental Science and T echnology. 11 (7 ):7 14-719; C orrection 12(4):417 (1978). 000557 li USFW 1133 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT 13197232-0100-3100 Snedecor, G .W . and W .G . Cochran, 1980. Statistical M ethods. 7th Edition. The Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa. U .S. Environm ental P rotection A gency (EPA ). 1988. Computer Program and Users Guidefo r Probit and Dunnett's Analysis o fData from Acute and Short Term Chronic Toxicity Tests with Aquatic Organisms. P repared by Statistical Support Staff, C om puter Sciences C orporation. Prepared for the Biological M ethods Branch, Environmental M onitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, 1988. 000558 12 USFW 1134 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST, PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Table 1. pH Values o f Soil Sam ples F rom the D ry Run C reek D uring a 28-D ay T oxicity Test W ith the Lum bricid E arthw orm , Eisenia foetida Sam ple ID L o c a tio n Control No. 1 Control No. 2 900 901 902 903 904 Lab Lab Area I A rea II A rea III Area IV Reference a pH m easured in standard units (su) Day 0 4.2 4.2 5.8 6.1 6.5 6.6 5.7 p H (su)* Day 28 6.1 5.8 6.0 6.7 6.6 7.0 6.2 000559 USFW 1135 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Table 2. Percent M oisture Content of Soils From the D ry Run Creek Site Used in the 28-Day Toxicity Tests Sam ple ID Control 900 901 902 903 904 L o ca tio n Lab Area I A rea II Area III Area IV Reference Percent M oisture 12.0 20.7 18.5 18.2 15.7 17.7 000560 14 USFW 1136 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT 197^32-0100-3100 Table 3. Survival o f E ise n ia fo c tid a Exposed to Soil Samples From the D ry Run C reek Site During a 28-Day Toxicity Test Sam ple ID L o c a tio n REP 7-DAY SURVIVAL (PERCENT)* 14-DAY 21-DAY 28-DAY Control No. 1 Lab A 130 130 130 130 B 130 130 130 130 C 130 130 130 130 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) Control No. 2 Lab A 130 130 130 130 B 130 130 130 130 Cm 13Q 130 130 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 900 Area I A 130 130 130 130 B 130 130 130 130 C 130 130 130 130 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 901 A rea II A 130 130 130 130 B 130 130 130 130 C 130 130 130 130 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 902 Area III A 130 130 130 130 B 130 130 130 130 C 130 130 130 130 390(100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 903 Area IV A 130 130 130 130 B 130 130 130 130 C 130 130 130 130 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 904 Reference A 130 130 130 130 B 130 130 130 130 C 130 130 130 130 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) 390 (100) aApproximately one-hundred and thirty organisms exposed per replicate 000561 15 USFW 1137 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Table 4. Grow th o f E ise n ia fo e tid a Exposed to Soil Samples From the D ry R un C reek Site During a 28-Day Toxicity Test Sample ID Location REP Initial Weight Final Weight (mg) (mg) Growth (% )- Control No. 1 Lab A 33.7 B 30.6 C 35.2 33.2 45.0 42.2 45.8 33.5 37.9 42.6 38.0 Control No. 2 Lab A 31.5 B 32.0 C 31.5 31.7 45.2 50.7 42J. 46.0 43.5 58.4 33.7 45.1 900 Area I A 35.2 44.5 26.4 B 30.2 47.5 57.3 C 34,6 4L1 36.1 33.3 46.4 39.3 901 A rea II A 36.1 49.2 36.3 B 35.3 50.8 43.9 C 25J 51.0 415 35.7 50.3 40.9 902 Area III A 31.5 44.6 41.6 B 31.0 35.6 14.8 C 2122 43.6 4 0 .6 31.2 41.3 32.4 903 Area IV A 32.0 45.5 42.2 B 30.7 52.4 70.7 C 35.0 53.2 52J) 32.6 50.3 54.3 904 Reference A 30.5 44.4 45.6 B 30.6 42.9 40.2 C 33.6 48.2 4 1 5 31.6 45.2 43.0 1A pprox imatelt 130 organism s exposed per replicate bPercent growth = (final weight - initial weight)/initial weight x 100 16 USFW 1138 000562 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Appendix A: Chain-of-Custody and Traffic Information USFW 1139 000563 Items/Reason Ail /fin d tfiC Relinquished By Date WR C-<3-<n Received By kA & t Date Time Items/Reason 4>/(3fn It 3 Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time ________ Q Q f I S 4 -- _ ... _____________ J ----------- 1---------- II-------- :------- :--------1-----:------------------------- -- R(9E0A8)C3, 2E1^-4o2n0,0 NJ EPA Contract 68-C4-0022 CHA^jOF CUSTODY RECORD -BnProject Name:_______ c f\ Project Number: RFW Contact: La J/S o f-nxo P h o n e : ^ f c 3 - ;:V Zl - u ^ v h p REAC# Sam ple Identification SampleNo. SamplingLocation Matrix DateCollected #ofBottles `frT V . /\tT0A1Z" n f0-12-73- ) / /___ _ A _______ / ______ ______________ V\ X _____ V _______ Contalner/Preservativo 7cx~fex6 7 ~ \ f&fl / "YAa 7 X / \Y / _______ \ \ ______ No 07745 SHEET NO. / OF f /\ r-- T " 7 T / r ___________ U SFW 1141 .... ______ . 1/ i/ LL\\ / / ___________ 7 / ______ / 7 y V7 V/ _ ,7 S D - Sediment D S - Drum Solids D L- Drum Liquids X - Other PWGWSW - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Waler Sludge sw0- A- ' P 13 . Soil Water Oil ^ l< & U bO ? h j^ o o rn i_ Air 7 \y J\ _____ i FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # I 1Items/Reason Relinquished By ' *TM/--*mrwmm ' r __ 7 > --' t^x Date :A7-1^3^-7 Received By Date Time Items/Reason L U fa fijo Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time __ JS65 REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 EPA Contract 68-C4-0022 Project Name: Project Number: RFW Contact:__ Phone: REAC# Sample No. Sample Identification Sampling Location Matrix Date Collected / t o g ~ jjr ___________________________ PfZJ ~et e <T No: 07744 SHEET NO. / OF I Analyses Requested -- Contalner/Preservativa 2 # / . * y { / / ^ 7 USFW f* ro 7 M a trlx f S D - Sediment D S - Drum Solids D L - Drum Liquids 50X - Other PWGWSW SL - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge S SW0A- Soil Water Oil Air Special Instructions: f z FOR SUBCONTRACTING U SE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY# Items/Reason Relinquished By Date C<rf\H\\\ ih fb iiA a v \}< U rt fy fs ' Received By cJlC*- i' Date Time 1 Items/Reason N HuK/vi <30 Relinquished By r ' ------r- II-'-;-----b----i------i' Date ) Received By Data Tima UU05I - ttams/Raason Au Rallngulshad By ^ ^ J &L Data v 11 Racalvad By r^ c -- Data Tlma Itama/Reason fcl'afo It3ca Rallnqulahad By Data Racalvad By Data Tlma ` ______ ( I f l A C f i i y ---------- REAC, E ^on, NJ (908) 321-4200 EPA Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN o f c u s t o d y r e c o r d Project Name. ^ R o r ) _______________ Project Number:, RFW Contact: r t v i Phone: j o g - ?>Z\ ?C n Sample Identification No: 07742v SHEET NO X O F ^ _ R EA C # Sam ple No. Sam pling Location M atrix Date Collected # o f Bottles C ontalner/P reservativo Cci r> SV IC T T t 3 c & > .--------- 73 Z r ! ? /*" trr i- -- Aft. --------------N : ----------- h tP . ..... \ \ \ 51 / / >[ 1 J r/ fJi o fU l X / / / / / / 7d ^ -------------------- \ VY \ _\ _\ \ \ \ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ / y 7/ V^ Matrix: SDDSDLX- Sediment Drum Solids Drum Liquids Other sc PWGWSW SL - Potable Water Groundwater Surface Water Sludge SWOA- ct Soil Water Oil Air r*fLS -P o S & d h u )iy r\ J oX \ \ \ 1\ ----------------------- FOR SUBCONTRACTING U SE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # Items/Reason Relinquished By A*nt\1/ i W it f1i M f r N- 1 "DVCWtAecf*l.i'^ Date A'l70(\ Received By r^Xe< ( Wv ----- Date Time t-'vm <ri1-D I l i o I Items/Reason II Relinquished By Date Received By Date Time _ 0 1 m s 8 ____ I ................. I USFW 1145 R EA C . Edison, NJ CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD (908) 321-4200 Project Name: U r-t K x/j f ^ r e t Y ________ ;__________ EPA Contract 6B-C4-0022 Project Num ber ________________________ _______________ No: 0 5 3 6 0 R F W C o n t a c t ____________P h o n e : ? 0 / S 3 J ) ' i J O O REACt \ L. Sample Identification SatnpteHo. SnpJlr>gLocation Matrix Dots Cofectod CcMTIt.ol-l.IV v/ 6 'S c. A 7-I& -A 7 o< Botile* 1 Confain*r/Pr***irtihr* T A L Bor. q Ims , - to*- ___ K A/ J<E SH E E T NO. ! O F / * * ___________ _ <* T^ xc 1 J X ____ CbMTRoU. /V sr * B U v- C \S s 7. Sr. S_ 1 1 \i- loo A v/ B> o ` o l A ^B o Ar<ft x v/ A rn^T I f t S o i A A v t r . IL) H* ^B > IS" 'S c- s/ \U cfDB A i> v/ ft *" 1 >1______ >1 >t_________ i _____ 1____ t \ L .j ' r/---------- Ntetrti: SOOS 0LX- Sodkmrt DnanSofds OnxnUqukJe Oth*r PWGWSW St - PoUbte Water GkouretaUi Surface Water Strige SWOA- Sol Water 01 Air -T ,S S ^ FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE O N L Y FROM CHAIN OF CUSTODY # 1 Mani(/Rsa*on I R*nqul*h*d By I Date I P.l P . ^ f 5 T M r W a W U ^ y r ? l f I f f ! ! * 7 1 ----------- 1 1 Rc*lvwlD)f I Date Time J termffteaaon ReXnqukheri By Date Racalvwf By Date T i m * __ . i l l 1 000569 R/9a USCPO I I M - M 3 0 I J 1r/r1 CD I ir CO o ro COD Cto7) CD to CBJ IT4 uir> ro CO CO CO <7J rOroo) a ro REAC, Edison, NJ (908) 321-4200 EPA Contract 60-C4-0022 `/I n Q I' J4 SM AIN QF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name: U/-- K*/j C ^ r e t V . _______ \__________ Project Number. o i ~ T i R F WC o n t a c t _ f l t Phone: ?Q /t 3 J j 'iJnO No; 0 5 3 0 0 USFW 1146 % Ramarti-- on RsCnqulstied By Otta X) ;D> nAtl d w1---J-q\-s-t-l-- -,3--3--e----O---i-o--u--i--u--^-1a--v il s> \i ***** RacahradBy Date Tfcna I Kw m fltw oa Relinquished By Dota RacatvedBy Data T lm o 000570 * U6PO t i M - ^ a o i s ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #3197232-0100-3100 Appendix B: Eisenia foetida Soil Toxicity Test Raw Data 000571 USFW 1147 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida ESE Project No: ^ ^ 7 -2 -2 2.- 0 1(TO ESE QA Form No: 1125 Effective Date: January, 1996 DATE TIME DATA BY SAMPLE ID l& ! WATER HOLDING CAPACITY DETERMINATION O ^tT O 3*/ DRY SAMPLE WT (10 g) [A) VOL WATER ADDED (mL) [B] ID -0 4 % ( \o 1 (0 lO -O I^K ) 10 \o \ *l \0 (ollL > hl | *2,3a Ko WT (g) FILTER PAPER + FUNNEL [C] FINAL WT (g) ID] WHC* (-.L iot> *i t=A Z & 'O r - 'Z Z 'I T T O 2 Z . .T H O -T S -.n ^ o 37,< i3< n ^rS er ^|ib|v7 S ".^ SW 3 S .S S 3 '7 s ,~ H 3% % ^ S,*7G 3 1 ^ o \ *U H COMMENTS: Water H oldin g Capacity (W H C ) = Final W eight - Initial W eight = Ery-Scmple Weight < ,K (n C IP ! - (FA1 + n fl) {Aj- M '- M 'n USF\N I 148 000572 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida ESE Project No:____________________ ESE QA Form No: 1124 Effective Date: January, 1996 I MOISTURE FRACTION DETERMINATION orr DATE TIME f io O >((3 I n k |i4 M 7 ta '' IT-3-0 SAMPLES PLACED IN BLUE-M OVEN AT: 12 | S T Hrs REMOVED AT: 15 ^ 5 " Hrs DATA BY || ts> 3V SAMPLE ID CI ^60 9o| C\v3 PAN WEIGHT (g> [A] 0,9Z?7 o .q ^ 3 S " OAZ H (o OAW I o .q z tfG PAN + SAMPLE WT (g) IB] \5 ,o o 2 0 ? \S .tm ? t$.0021 (S .o z s l (S00-71 15.0253 FINAL WEIGHT (g) IC] I3-3-II l- m?o |2 i2 `552> MOISTURE FRACTION* 0 .1*2-02^ o,ier3 O .5 -7 2 o .n k ? COMMENTS: 'M oisture Fraction = Initial W eight - Final W eight = Sample W eight FBI - fCI [B] - [A] 000573 USFW 1149 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Project: 3 DAILY LOG KrvJQ -- S Z p c jtJ S x il 5 s o H Page: ESE QA Form Humber: 018 Effective: APR 1993 *<i.V q e r o , q o j . q o 2 , j r-^-iO-- S o ' 1 ,S Ca_T r-p ^ rgjAAcyg-*-c.'4--*>'^ -4-C -Vo r^-gfcV otS-l-O--g -ftr-dC-A-fP^ -A- lOC'jg*-' 1^--pQ.C<^V^ w j p j ~+>S- r_C~cA~ S c-f--p ig \ -Vt-g S-o 7 l c-^iv-C'fc.ig.^ Crs7~t C_\'Q't> CMvAr-^\ -^r11 *Tl--g______ p -o ^ V ; 7 n V > V ^ g a l VvAf oV^-H , ~loY. < y*JU ~ ?o <nre*x ^ -^er'Vrj-^V, -io. k i n . )4m eLr-P^F oa-c.JUr -U S o --- Cv^f>ta^ '.CTO qol ^o7_ ^o3 - n A-rtcQ ^ m L / o o j ^ : ~ C f ^ g V ^ ^ c n - C ^ ^ ) Q oq) 3 ~Ti=> AJ j ^ V ~ L / ( & ) o ^ ~ S .z M - IM .Z 214*Z8 SoM ~ M .o s ~ ____ fr-- i G-d! tLxj^. - S>0***~*Q(jg So L DIA IQ-^-CjJ? pfc-Si1>5. c--I J? U or-vpy-r-M ^oJ? i o~t ^n_3 W*~f RogfLS . r>.4~ re-r^yyj-g-^ . Ayyrr> V^V-s^-lc t-f ^tt-3 2 . ~S~ -V iVyoC'& ^oJX rT pC*-C-g-^ lg r-e-vfiz^jre 4^g4- fp, Jor4-*zl. ua*+-r iVi ^ o-v\A'^>-y *=-A~ -kgV s-jp-K-f-. ^ |3o ^-ns-r,-^j /V 3 0 j^ u-*c--< (ubbJ. k> \etX- ^< r^J , Ari( i f - l v<g.5C-rv V -k^V ? v / t s ^ f c ^ 000574 (c-C B-D USFW 1150 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida Project: J j q 72.32 - 0>e*=s~3i DAILY LOG Page: ESE QA Form Number: 018 Effective: APR 1993 7r-e^J< * o " p O * tw * f S - S ~ r -- - i - r (oe] A ' r f : ( l U ~ C ) c j n >^v <>\ S ant- P-tV fVv .flg/^n C A o- < c-r-- I^CjuS S^ C o f o - 1^ r t t J k ~7o F f 2 i 0o V >|l^ (^1 < ^o --____ C-<Vs --^ g|,2o|gf-) -70 -F r ^ M ~ r-ea-t^S ~7oF z J c \ ih ' h 1 * 7 0 ^ 2.1- C b /2 2 /^7 ^/z-3 H n t^=> ^ r^a-jt-g 7 ^ - P ^ l c j . N O -- C -^ |Sn" C^ ~ 7Q F ^ 2 | C 3 fc. A l t e>lo tV\ f?lcx3S p<>-y\ r -- a. K A- sTVO o J e ^ A Ir^e^rT * * ' r^>/i^Li3.4ej d ^ h n N ^ P - Cyrrrv-^l r - a ^ s ( ^ 2 .( ^ 0 , A-1* J3-i U zs-h n M o Lgrv^-q r - r ^ s ~ 7 o * F V C N ^ - = s -- C-PN^--^ -- 7 0 --F L -Izn h n - C-rrvN-q r-e ^ i> F>Oc F- f21C -V M f ? 3*y ^ gtm-^ noF o Q (g^o|^7 c o m ~ ^ J h _ "w f -- CJM-^ *7o ' F Q j C ) . H a t s M w ' i t r t ' t J qw| ekseyv-i.^. Ail v^jivAjL^ QJ?'^e'\-e 'XQ/iua-P I G \,'d~ *d J i^ t Ve. ^ tfhjL jy -- o N -q Aril - jtiJ gvjiprcy ^ 4 y q v w a , ^ Y ^ d L ^ ~7ogP { > i0O ik iy j^ - 7 M 5 7 3*y - V -^ ip CHv^ ~ / l i (x i.i c ) ~7oeF ( V i ft<c ) 7 mU i 3A/ a ry - lIH V l JW - C T - 'q Y ^ g U "I I Q t^ O c m - 1' Y t u q ^ - ^ r f C TM -^ -< u a h - H f i . ~ 7 <' c ^ 0>< 0 `C ') 00057S USFW 1151 QST Environmental Inc. Toxicology Laboratory Gainsville, Florida Page: QST QA Form No. 0 IS Revised: June 1997 ProjectN o:^{ 3*7233--D((7P Client: f c y f . DAILY LOG Test Species: 3 V C T ^ - ^ -J t & c u ~ ? o DF ( ^ \ c (&>s?Yve A-fi >uj* C J t i4 <m J L iKcU^iiv^ <tfcT C ^K ffU , /J\ A / l r C V m j ^ ^ K v rjv teA d-faJjzx- ^ t y a X a j l a i - d Wtolui-- >r i ~ m n c d ^ 'Vv k ^ a t-A egy & W >^ 7 ($ ir7 -- J W c x ^ Y - e ^ c U - *"?) -)h [g p v i d "~)p 0 f 7 1 T7 - ;r<y c d a -S 1 ^ "7 11 o p _ - p y 1 ~~?oc F ) ( ~ > - t 0c ^ s) n |i^i~ 7 -.T V c t A a - S v t f l o b - ~ 7 o * F C ^ - t c >) t (i 3>\^~7 ~ 3 V c r^ M VEa s I ^ - -- C > l* c \ 7Khi 3 y CTM V -gL (U _ n o 0r ( > 1 c ) , 1 e ^ $ eimx Jbs^/NV. A i l fvgflW A \S A tom o d i- M ttflte . ciegftgj- irj_ i*cgJ3 ggfck*LS flvA iM-CJCjlteJl ' Mo v \w h v A h ? vVptc^, (,x>dl . (yY'p-flwgimf ~pl)w\ A c | \ Q V it~ Z k j i W l . \& *\ Kjit^T M-0\o>K p ^ ^ g Y ~ b ^ t X 2 _ . iU o iA > e ^ ~fe~ d b e ^ p u t a f e , c ^ h f)7[rM ~ ^ ^ e y ^ J j x S z , h ^ jp n -- z p s y i - ^ r G Y 0 c iu iim s V r c a c R - f ^ K r c C f c (/d-evc r p tv iff i/e A -yst\A ~1tCL ]X '^ U ~ c OwJl chtrte ~fc> rtlUoi/-- bc ) ClsA IXOjk. 0,^-eI bUoiA m t&o^ gift#? \ # y > - w 4 ~t* frW v ig * ^ t^ W x.1x 4> C<=J r w t o y X f l ^ o , y? i o -k x in a o f -{ ^ c 000576 USFW 1152 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida SUBJECT: TOXICITY TEST DATA SHEET Page: ESE QA Form: 097A Effective: August 1994 Client: ^ 5^ Test Material Project Number: 3>g7 23 Z - o loo - 3 M Test Conditions See Page ____ 0 f Sample Receipt Log Test Material Information [ ] Preliminary t ] Definitive [oO Screening [<3 Static [ ] Flow-through Duration : Z Test Animal History Dilution Water: Soit, A-fcTR C f A L - } Species E * f-r\ -pp e 1 Batch Number Age / Life Stage AtA\V~ ot*--'N* Date Acclimation / Maintenance Began : fTali nh'i See Page _________ of J-< yVa(Jjv^ Log for raw data. Mortality (%) 48 Hrs prior to testing: o Test Area Used Temperature (C) Salinity (ppt) 2^> + /" *2- Protocol Followed: + /- Lighting : [*<J Fluorescent [ ] Incandescent Photoperiod : Z M hr Light : O hr Dark Test Container Dimensions: LX Test Solution Height : Test Containers : [ ]Open Test Container Volume : 3s is ' Diluent Volume : --- Reps / Concentration Animals / Replicate WX H cm [<] Covered Liters Liters J Concentrations Based on: [ ] A.I. [>3 W.M. Container Composition: [><] Glass [ ] Plastic Test Concentrations: (Units % ): Control Amount Reference Soil Added (fcj ): Amount Test Soil Added ( ^ ): 2.4 N/A Additional Observations: ^00 --- 2- r --- |o22-sr --- -- 1 3T Data By: FORM: Soil94 Date: (O USFW 1153 000577 QST Environmental Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida QST Project No:_ QST QA Form Number: 1123 Effective Date: June 1997 SUBJECT: TOXICITY DATA SHEET SPECIES: Eisenia Foetida DAY DATE FEEDING TIME DATA BY 0 28 0 28 t> K 4 i tjitlV --- Doo K0 0 G|u>lY7 f j i> H x> Ko 7 ' H f i K lo 15"ot> KO 14 |7 t> 21 "7 *7 b \ 7 A 1 W V 14 <^ 28 /Q O n o r) 3*1 00057S SAMPLE ID REP pH (sit) WEIGHT (g) No. OBS No. OBS No. Initial Final Initial Final Alive Alive Alive OBS No. Alive OBS No. Alive OBS lw^nrt 2 TO A 4 <1 i 3 3 7 4 * 0 1 3 o IVo n) V nJ 1V fj IVo Y i t ^ i B C \/ D i l3o IV kJ 1/ 3 * 2 5i>a --- -- IV o | i IV\> --- -- -- ti __ 1>y= IV ri /i IV /i 1Vo / i IVO 11 IV& v , * a -- ___ --- -- A 4a B \\ Cj iV|.<T 4 < 2 IVo N 1 y i o % 7 1^0 (O 31-s 4 M IVo |Q IV) fi V k/ IV > rJ IV aJ i * > V 1 3 nJ IVo f i IVo V , V ri i W r i (Vo > /.& ? D -- ---- ---- -- -- .-- -- -- -- -- irA 7 B\ Cl (o,0 IS--L 4 4 -7 IVo N 1 417 IV 3 4 .U 4 1 . \ IVo rJ |tvj |v> 1V o txj IVo r i V IV 9 rJ IV) nJ IVfO fJ 1V o (Vo iVo D _ ---- ---- -- -- -- -- -- --- -- A lo i B C KEY: D LE = LETHARGIC !(o<1 V i 1 / 3*3 3S.& 44 a 9>/3 71-0 V V V Ni I*> IVo l i *i IV IV IVo r i !VfO -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ALF = ALPALFA D = DEAD NF = NOT FOUND N = NONE IV) IV 1V ? -- ji aJ aJ -- IVo IVo IV o Y. SU = STANDARD UNITS U S F W 1154 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Toxicology Laboratory Gainesville, Florida ESE Project No: ESE QA Form Number: 1123 Effective Date: January 1996 USFW 1155 V - 7(Wn C- 000579 ROY F. WESTON DRY RUN CREEK EARTHWORM TESTS QST PROJECT #31972J2-0100-3100 Appendix C: Reference Toxicant Test Raw Data 000580 USFW 1156 Environmental Science & Engineering, Irte. Toxicology Laboratory (Gainesville, FL) ESE QA Form Number 1127 Effective: September, 1996 Eisenia foetida Reference Toxicant Test Stock Preparation Amount of 2-chloroacetamide: l f C *-T ~ 0 Volume of Milli-Q Water: 1 1__ Date prepared: Test Organism History Batch number. 9 "7 ' ^ Life stage: Sexually mature adutts Date received: S J 1M See Paae \~ l~ ) of the Invertebrate Holdina Loa for raw data Test Conditions Duration: 7 days static test Lighting: Continuous fluorescent lighting Dilution material: Laboratory Prepared Artificial soil Test Container : Glass 1 pint jar (7.5 cm width, 15 cm height), covered with a lid containing two airholes Amount of test material per replicate: 200 grams Replicates per concentration: one Test organisms per replicate: ten Protocol followed: ^ ^ _ Test Concentrations (mg/L) Control 10 20 40 80 160 Amount of R E F T O X (mL) aririori rv>r 700 nram; nf soil 0 2 4 8 16 32 DATE TIM E TECH TEM P fC ) -DAY C O N C E N T R A T IO N ( mg/L) $ - 2 7 C T 7 16C C.<L 20 P cn 15C0 13 f r C V\_0 20 ______ V 20 z_ OBSERVATIONS CONTROL 10 20 40 80 160 l O l (0 o t c . 10 (0 \ 0 10 lO ( 10 <Q o rc\ O o AU^ |G 1 A e 0O- f T>FyW> lO iO o?--o> O --- 000581 S'-tl i.35b o o 3-0 3 *4 IO P l> (D IP 6 Al-'* H AV~< ~Z --- - USFW 1157 Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc. Toxicology Laboratory (Gainesville, FL) ESE QA Form Number 1127 Effective: September, 1996 Esenia foetida Reference Toxicant Test Stock Preparation Amount of 2-chloroacetamide: Volume of Milli-QWater Date prepared: Test Organism History Batch number: Life stage: Sexually mature adults Date received: See Paae of the Invertebrate Holding Loo for raw data Test Conditions Duration: 7 days static test Lighting: Continuous fluorescent lighting Dilution material: Laboratory Prepared Artificial soil Test Container : Glass 1 pint jar (7.5 cm width, 15 cm height), covered with a lid containing two airholes Amount of test material per replicate: 200 grams Replicates per concentration: one Test organisms per replicate: ten Protocol followed: Test Concentrations (mg/L) Control 10 20 40 80 160 Amount of REF TOX (mL) arlriod npr 700 nrama of soil 0 2 4 8 16 32 DATE TIME TECH TEMP PC) DAY CONCENTRATION ( mg/L) CONTROL 10 20 40 80 160 S -zn -^n r^ o S IO \0 [O ~L -- ------ - iip \D00 "2-0 (o zo _____ OBSERVATIONS to IO \0 oa , 'z r u J ___ -- \0 \0 [0 --- - -- 000582 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ x USFW 1158 '''RIMMED SPEARMAN-KARBER METHOD. VERSION 1.5 DATE : May 26, TEST NUMBER: 3 TOXICANT : 2-chloroacetamide SPECIES : E. foetida DURATION : RAW DATA : Concentration (mg/L) .00 10.00 20.00 40.00 80.00 160.00 Number Exposed 10 10 10 10 10 10 Mortalities 0 0 0 6 10 10 SPEARMAN-KARBER TRIM: 00% SPEARMAN-KARBER ESTIMATES: LC50: 95% LOWER CONFIDENCE: 95% UPPER CONFIDENCE: 37.32 30.11 46.26 7d 000583 USFW 1159 ENVIRONMENTAL June 24, 1997 Dr. Mike Hom e Roy F. W eston, Inc. GSA Raritan Depot Building 209, Annex (Bay F) 2890 W oodbridge Avenue Edison, NJ 08837-3679 RE: Toxicity Analysis of Sediment, Soil and Surface Water Samples from the Dry Run Creek Site, Project No. 3347-142-001-2273 Dear Mark: Please find enclosed, three reports for the above-referenced toxicity tests conducted by QST Environmental Inc. Tissues of the earthworm s used in the bioaccumulation tests have been sent to C olum bia Analytical Services per your request. Please review the reports and send me your comments for incorporation in the final report. Please contact me at (352) 333-2626 if you have any questions. Sincerely, QST ENVIRONM ENTAL INC. Joe Owusu-Yaw. Ph.D. Toxicology Lab M anager 0005S4 U S F W 1160 P-O. Box 1703, Gainesville. FL 32602-1703, Phone 352-332-3318, FAX 352-333-6622 A CILCORP COMPANY Formerly Environmental Science & Engineering Inc. ENVIRONMENTAL July 23, 1997 Dr. Mike Hom e Roy F. W eston, Inc. GSA Raritan Depot Building 209, Annex (Bay F) 2890 W oodbridge Avenue Edison, NJ 08837-3679 RE: Toxicity Analysis of Sediment, Soil and Surface Water Samples from the Dry Run Creek Site, Project No. 3347-142-001-2273 Dear Mike: Please find enclosed, the final reports for the above-referenced toxicity tests conducted by QST Environmental Inc. Your changes as well as those of our QA unit have been included in the reports. The m ean length o f H y a le lla azxeca in sample 303 was not significantly different as expected because the num ber was rounded off from 2.837 which was different from 2.80 (sample 305). Please contact me at (352) 333-2626 if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, QST ENVIRONM ENTAL INC. J o . kj w u o u - l a w , i u . a . Toxicology Lab M anager 000585 USFW 1 1 6 1 P.O. Box 1703. Gainesville. FL 32602-1703, Phone 352-332-3318, FAX 352-333-6622 A CILCORP COMPANY Formerlv Environmental Science & Eneineerins. Inc. APPENDIX D Field Notes Dry Run Creek site Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 0005S6 USFW 1162 * i* S 'S) ^ V) ^ S ci it fl \ ko ( Q) O  & l f ' d v L f o j. H M td ^ c h J yW I W . ft A z Z E - __________ --- . e -- ------------------ . b ------------------------------ . c . / y ^ Vm K cK . I5 & 0 - J b 0 0 = I y )C K go jv c& m l 'bouj?6> "" ----------------- m m ) c u t o c y i& o U J I ) lU io v0 4 U {] f a l t c u 'l p <% t b u c j : ./Utw*/r~ k -hujM q ctoeL~ - p m tfi uf j i M / ^ z . f . y v o t o c J /} r i^ r > /y v h / *---------- Z/oo -flcfa i/ r- )v Jio4eJ ----- Ai~ 000589 f#t-|3 S a m t e s 3 \lofl USFW1166 1 o o LO O O O I i (2 V 1*1 ^ hTMb- T6S000 ^ T W o J bv 2 0 IO U iflfl H^h f}i( sH - 9 ^ d )^ w t/r 0 q 0 7 .0 y\ 1O ZO /\ 1o0// <L \ o 2 o /* 3 \0ZQ P 3 \Q%0'r" r ji w v ^vrrQ \ ~ "T^&TWTMJQV vr>V 3fw p Vl9 ~3/\O o 2 O 03*/fc^ "A//*0O0O2Z 0 ^/7 - -7ttt s tf `rjprpi -)HL ifll^in -- n j W --- n j -~ "7^L <W nvLL -- nUL <3 y / \O Z0 / \OZO D y \o zo ? / 0 070 -? f \ O Z Q 9 V / / 1OZO 002 00 <3 / o o Z O O V / /QZOO - z M 'ipvQ'n'} ! ^7 j I y\/wp j. j^Zr'WKP I J ^ ' 9?-7 it ^ 1wa 'Tjmo ->>rf ^7719 Jj *,*/ -L < 3 l '.O lO S ty w USFW 1167 -- p o d u /vf s *l m ___ f P U s t A M T W / y p v w j 0 ) ! ~ ------------ j ' / ? t r p n c n w 5 v i f ^ n m p 7 ? l n f j r > w o t v *<7~ ~z >/ tm z w ^ P V U f t p '? J y J b tM iid 'f t / " ......................................... ... " ' ' ( / v .^ m m u / o f ) -------------------------- -- tb ld p f fv r ffO ? v p v w w v w v y y w w j/r r m j fc h iA / \ W M ff y f ~ O j - |? >0^1 /JTifJ - < ? 7 -i M'7^ ^ f y y j js& fP fiQ- 7 ?V p ^ m pH 8 fO ,$> T+- 0 0 OO ^< Q ' ^ " ~ L 1- r n v ' J ' ' Q ' ^ < 5 -- t ( - \ ,,< 0 p ^ -'S & ^1? ^ ^V r i Qf p } vj c . y-- p i -\ _ w pctzt S~ Q -rO fW .V ) ^ CO -. V ) \J) - * - \j) ^ ' * ^ 000592 USFW 1168 69 U M dsn C 6 S 000 Q --> --i O h <? < fcj fe) H O " c y ri r CTX> 4 ^ (T > ^ rrv o o c p ^ > Cl 1- - I4 .c sr r ^ -- ~ V ^ -q~- 'C? N? T^ ; ^ o rv ^ -0 c x ^ u ^ v i. V v a ^ h S U ^ U S_ " ' ^ '*' S -V f*>I O rs "-- ft 0 >c s - rr> e *? Ci LO O o o 3Q I '(7). o - c se ex r3 _ \/ ' t - h Q J ^ ^ O Q 'U J u .^ i^ S ^ ^ o c ^ cr <3: O O iiiiij) ri O f O r i d Q5 O0 O 0 0 0 no cd r ro m co -Q hc Q 0 '-' . n < <o Ie <2 ^ O O O OO 1 ^ CO rO co ro crj l USFW 1170 jQp l P a r n f i b x / } 4^ d^ u. ^ ^ ^^ & <j - - *' i 3= 000595 USFW 1171 r 31 5 V/> J S ^ cr- s . O t: , l l c liUlh;& V4 ^ ^u S G * ^ 0 R|\j V 1/ n -5o s. 4 fe S i! r t V ID O L0- C O O $ Hf> $& ^r *> o. 3 te (X t?> i \A V3 <r 0 - ^ 7 ? S\-^ ^ 3 \ H/ 1 ^o *<= kS ^ i^ I$ C 4*- <=y%I I< g k < 5 ^ OS -\c>. J< ( < S\ c to o o ^ ^ ^ -^ <S 0 O ^ % V ) \r> USFW 1172 ^ C <j r o >v) ro pp : vn Vi i De^ JC e m A A jsn ^ ^ i) ^ 0s O OG O ' ' ' v ^ feo ~ b 1 fe T'^O CO VOb fe I 000597 )^ ^ T ^ 4 iA C -C: - b < ; >_ " M b ^ j ^ Co - b ti^ -t *O ^ ^ ^ \ W C ^ o AV^ (ju 00 n> ^ ^ >1^. ^3 fQ /* vu o ^ c^> 3 o Q USFW 1174 rf 5 A ri P (-t$ t o cet 2 m .0 G h i C1 .0 - i l * -tT, u ce n. fifi* ' AA fr c r e4v A\ A /i rc JT > c> 7 A T, o - 2- Z - / V V, i / v / 'ti/L? r i yJ 'S o i I ^ i ; , -2Z7 !! !I 7J r ! ! : &t- y // Yj p"/ )/ ? f /P />j 7 \ y ,/ e ^ ' i/ i - i ? ! I - 6 . \ ^ J ; //-c i' /'/.i ; j / s / 5 ' (il , 7 -/1 fh tC : J ! S, ^ ' ! / , A ' / \ : / / `U t tc t> j! / ^ / ; S - '' c ' <V r Vui, , J - . < 7 7 , , C ;+ / d i c i / ^7? 3 1 / `i ? y / c r<x c L y 1 / M C 2-S //Vf P Jxiagpff& r- 1 ^ ^ f a h y '? LKxe F -- // \ \ f ^ \ t a . i9 3 *t- c ^ 'J i t f p / ' W L Si 00599 f 1! 1 1: : 1_______ ft X- ? v T r ^ \ > . ? ____ _ L ? f i __________ :____S T a : f r 5 ^ ; ^ l \^ Y ^ r^ -- V NG \\ l - ~ S 1 *,> "\4 hrU -r f t lV n j | 53 C ?\ ^ *> 1r * ~ - V A if c > .. ^ -.-S T o i y c . ^ ? --* ^ x - y x '\ v ^ < l_ [ ^ -(X r\ b^ ^ ^ :? s ^ i ? ^ ? _ S c ^ S CN ---------------------------- P ^ - '-g - -- ^^ -- ^ IL _ --^ ^ \ tr xa J $ ~ -- t-^-c? i - -- V ;s i? ? ,; - ' ^ > ^ ~ __________________ j ^ - . g ______ _____ --------- ^ :? ^ r ^' iHT ------------------------------------------------- -------- ^ ^ ---- -- -------------------^a r ^ s ---^---^ O^ V \ -------- VV - S r* > ^bL .v- ; ^ ^ Kr '* ^ ~ ' ^r T. s ^ i Vj 4 > v - l - W-V. tC ^ | > O <T * X -- - - ^ ^ z r r r nc - ^ Vn . i r H7 s C & *s^C p~ - V ?^' -c " ................... T S ---------------- .^ . 0006 ! USFW 1177 08 U M d s n ^ O O O  La Ki ) 000605 00 L Figure 5.1-1. Phylical Characteriratjon/Water Quality Field D ata Slieei loi m e m i h .il! lla p id Bioaiieiim eiit l'm io co li. / HABITAT ASSESSMENT FIELO OATA SHEET 1 . *Sot t OB s u b s t r a t j ^ v i 1b 1 cover I. (btddtdnnt^* 1 . 10.1) cat |)cfil * 'flow..it top. low flow ot >0.1) CB liciti Ve toc > t y / d e pt h * 4 . Channel iltirition**1 5 . l o t t O B flC0V [ | n 9 a n d deposition1 E ac 1 1 nt G r o a t a r than 10% rubble frsvel, t u baeryed loys, u n d e r c u t b a n k s , or thor table habitat. U-20 Oiivat, cobble, and boulder p e rti'le* are b e t w e e n B a n d 21 % s u r r o u n d e d by fine lediaent 10-20 Cold Wer a >B.01 >0.11 cat cat 12 c ( * l 1 1 c f sI 10-20 Slow (<0 .1 i / i | , deep |>0.1 a); slow, shallow ( < 0 1 a I ; (a*t |>0.) a/s), deep; fast, s h a l l o w h a b i t a t s all 10-20 a e n t of I s l a n d or point bare and/or n o c h a n n e 11 a a 1 1 o n . 12-11 L e a s t h a n 5% of bottoa affected courlaq and deposition. the by 12-15 Good 10-10% rubble, qravel oc other tabla habitat. Adquats habitat. 11-11 Gravai, cobble, and boulder p a r t i c l e s < b e t w e a n 21 e n d 10 % u n ounded by fine ediaent ll-ll 0.01-0.01 cas 0.01-0.11 cas |l-2 cfs) (2-1 cfs | 11-11 O n l y ) of the 4 h abitat catgories prsent ( a t s s i n q c l f f l s s et u n s reoive louer score than aissinq pools). .11-11 l e a e n e w I n c r e a s e in bar foraatlon, aostly fcea cearse prevel; and/or seae channe11satIon pcoaont. 0-11 1-10% affoctod. Scour at c e n s t r i c t 1ons and whora frades steepen. S o a o d a p o s l t i o n in pools. 1 - 11 Fai r Foot 10-10% rubble, qcavel Lass then 10% r ubbla or o t h e r s t a b l e habi t a t . irv # | or o t h e r t a b l e Habitat aval lability h a b i t a t . Lack of leas than da s i rab habitat b <> is o b v i o u s . 0-1 Gravel, cobble, end boulder p a r t i c l e s aie b e t w e e n 10 a n d 11 1 s u r r o u n d e d by fina Qtav e l , cobble, end b*ul<Ul Itici** by fine sedlaent Ci z i ^ -1 0.01-0.0) 0.01-0.01 cae cas (.1-1 cfs) 11-2 fs > F O n l y 2 of the 4 hsbitst categories present Ia i s s 1ny r i f f l e s / r u n s receive lower scoro). <0.01 cat (.1 cfs) < 0 . 0 1 C B S (1 c f s ) Doninstsd by one v# Io c l t y / d e p t h cets f o r y Iuse 1 1y pool). 0-1 b C^rr> 0-1 M o d o r a t o d e p o a l t l e n of Nesvy d e p osits af flae on old and new bars; pools partially filled w/s||ti and/or oabanh- davalapasnt; aost pools flllad w/sllt; and/or c CEP 0-1 10-10 affected. D e p o s i t a a n d s c o u r st obstructions, constrictions and bands. Soaa ftl l i n f of pools. CEP Mora than 10% of tha batten chanyiaf naarly yaar lanf. foals alaost sbsant due ta d e p o s i t i o n . Only Isrpa rocks - 1 1( a F r o a B a l l 1 * 0 2 . lb| F r o a F l a t t a at al. 191). Not: * Hbitt pareaeter* not currently tncorpora tad into BIOS 00060G U SFW 1182 Figure 5.2-1. Habitat A n eiim en t Field Data Sheet for ute with all Rapid Bioattenm enl Protocol. ! HABITAT ASSCSSMENT riCLO DATA SHCCT icont .1 Habitt firlMttt ( Bool/ritfta, run/band bnittwloian riUffliltoisncd*ivtdd by itiin width) 7. lnk atabl Hty*** fl . Osnk viqij^livi stability 9. Strnaiid covrIh| Coluan Totals Ccal 1ont 5-7. Virlity of hanadbiptaoto.l. Daip rifflas 12-15 bSoSaaftildnalyakbirloaf<a.i11ioi0o%p1n.uNaonoigL.avinttdatalran-ca ppcootbainatnia.l for futura 9-10 Oatvraaraa1b0a1nkofsuthrafacat covarad by vand9ctaotbbiolon. or bouldari 9-10 la shcub. Scora 9-10 -- Cltioory Good rnr Boor 7ino-1nd5pa.ooplsArdvaaniqdduaatrahifafdblaaipttat.ht. l-ll chr1oi5afn-bf7til5ota.uartoi.Ocpbrcoanvsdaid.laonBatolosiaton 5 <S> Gwhsr>tl2aaafr5btnfa.aiatirtorgaahtCo.ttrla.yssBsathoanroalatlrlialaoaflw.llyat a 0-1 Hodarataty atabla. ooIfpflnlfvOoofattroaraa.rodnqonstuai.aiaoSonnildnata,inabaaonlaioktaap.ltlyarlaanhaSauralaipagalhaatdto HHoSsaniiroodtoddoossaaoirroaoasanaltltoaapbpolyaa(rorsnotoukatqauinnuo.pstantinaaatcoblNlyliagCah.OatonIdas. Uo`lrlnaooswpdtoa*adsbolaro>o1r.0ao%saMt.cfarnoayaqaSwoadno#.nt aanlodngbanadtrsa.ight actions durlnq aitraaa high t-fl 50-19% of tho atraaabank vlaarqqaatratiaoant,arplaral.va! or S-fl Gisoaolnfantrtasvogfoartaa.tion (TP Mou 5 (D bbo2yar5n-4kvl9aa%rsgguaaortrffaatcitaohaanatt,aearsgtivarraaal.rsvaaad-l. Disoaginraasaat ovragfaotrabtiaosn. 0-2 Lots than 25% of tho cgocavatoavrraoild.a1.obry vlaorggootcatfton. 0-2 Oboaisnarsvndatkraotdoitnh&5iios0al,%ts*snt,naooronofitlccuvtIknhol,ogvgaaabottraat.toitraditiaaig.oailna- 0-2 -- ---- U S F W 1183 O O O' OE> O V- Figura 5.2-1. (Cont.). 000608 CXI Figure 5.1-1. Physical Characterization/Water Ckaality Field Data Sheet (or use with all Rapid Bioassenment Protocols USFW 1185 LLiAa Oo HABITAT ASSESSMENT M E L D DATA SHEET Habitat P i*t t 1. ' l o t t o * i u b i t r a | | / available cover r-^-j 2. E m b e d d e d n e s s ' -- 1 . 10.15 cat |Sct>) top. low (low OI 0 . 1 5 c a t 1 S c1 1 1 Valocity/dapth 4. C h a n n e l a l. t a r a t.i o n f a 1 5 . ottea coyfin? and dopos it ion E sc 1 l *n t Good C a t a<yu f y fair Poor Greater than 509 rubble, fraval, subaatfad loft, u n d a r c u t b a n k , 01 othav atabla habitat. 14-20 10-50% rubbla, qraval i t hat a t a b l a habitat. Adequate habitat. 11-15 G i a v l , cobble, and bouldai partirto* ai* b a l w a o n 9 and 25 t eutroundad by fin* a d 1nan t 14-20 Cravat, cabblo, and boulder p a t ticles ai* b e t w e e n 25 a n d 50 t itiiiotindad by fin* odinant 11-15 Cold Mara 005 >0.15 cos cas 12 Cf 1 1 (5 c f > 1 10-20 0.01-0.05 0.05-0.15 cat cas (1-2 cftl 12-5 cfs) 11-15 slow l < 0 ) /1. daap |>0.5 a); tow, shallow | <0.5 a); faat |>0.) a/f I , d a a p ; (ast , ha 1 tow habitat alt proant. 11-20 O n l y 1 af tha 4 habitat cataforiaa praaant ( a isainq ri((ls or runs rocoiva lawar tcora than ai s in? poo Is). .11-15 aanl of i s l a n d * or point bti, and/or no ch a n n a 1 11 a11 o n . Saaa naw laciaaaa in bar formation, aaatly fraa c o m m fraval; and/or on# channoltaation 12-15 L a s s t h a n 5% of bottom affactad scourin? and dapaalt io n . tha by -It 5-10% affoctad. Scaur at c o n a t c t c t l o a a and whara fiadaa ataapan. S o b * d a p a a i t i o n in pools. 12-15 9-11 10-101 rubbla, fraval or oth a r t t a b l a habitat. Habitat availability la than dasirabta* 6 <0P Lata than 10% rubbla fraval or athar a t a b l a habitat. Lack of h a b i t a t ia o b v i o u a . 0-5 Graval, cobhla, and bouldat paittclae aia b a t w a a n 50 a n d 25 t su i i o u n d a d by (ina Graval , hay Ida I a v a l 25 by f ina cobbla, and p a 1 1 1c 1aa ara sadtnant to 0 - 5 0.01-0.0) cas 0 . 0 1-0.05 cas 2 1 .5-1 cfst '-a t(ji & <0.01 cas <0.01 caa (.5 cftl (1 c f t l 0-5 O n l y 2 of tha 4 habitat cta?o<ias prasant 1ai s s in? cif f l a a / t u n s r a c a i v a 1owa t cor a 1 . Ooalnatad by ana va locI l y / d a p t h c a t a ? a <y l u i u i 11 y pool | . i ( $ > 0-5 M o d a r a t a d a p o a l t l a n of now fraval, caart# asnd o n o l d a n d no# b o r a ; pools partially filled /111; and/or oabanknanta on both banka c CB> Maavy dapoalta af flno aatailal, incraaaad bar davalopnant; oat pool* 1111*4 w/alltj and/or atanslvo cliannalltatlon. -) 10-50% affactad D e p o s i t s a n d s c a u r at b atructtana, canati tetions and b a n d s . Soma f i l l t n f of poo 1S 5 Mara than 50% of tha bottoa chanylay naarly yaat lanf. Pools alaaat abaant duo to dapaaition. Only larfa racks in c i f M a a a p a s a d . i- 1 (a) P ro Ball 1992. |b) f r o P l a t t at al. 199). Hot*: * * Habitat paiaaittri not currently Incocpontrd into BIOS Figure 5 2 1 Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet (or use with all Rapid Bioassessment Protocols. rv 5-6 000610 USFW 1186 Figur S. 2 1. (Cont i. n taicu c iiu a u iu tiM t n t t A i I Q M / l l l t H M riA taiaiCAL c i k l i C I l l l u n I A Hea jll C lM ff ( !! n i i i f o ii f 11IT Me** ) -u Z at44 C k * a M llii4 i lea a*4 lM fet 4 i n 4iaat O iln ( tiT Z T y > 11101 I4(ck Im IIm PbMl a lit cur >!*- 11 1.| 44-ISI-a* ( S . l - l l 1. | l-44-OO | * . 1-1.9 lo .| I.M-MI-aa Ifilttfl . M l - .*> 4. tali) C kaalcil V**4^ all TM G P .at Ciifatlt! ( lo aoollo Iraa I l a l i t i i t a fvM | ........ /0 3 0 | Hack- 30 If 1s | Mail 1 ! O liei l i c i t , Vaa4, Cecil* tla at Material lerOMI lack, f a i| riM Oifaalc <rOH| ie|. Mall Ceopealtlec lo taoillo Mac / to USFW 1187 O O o cn1 -> N U fin coooifioic 7 t~ a ,e I/O I II Y C I Figure 5.1*1. Physical Characteruation/Water Ckiality Field Data Sheet for use with all Rapid Bioassessment Protocols. ..i Lh la C C c 01N HABITAT ASSESSMENT M E L O DATA SHEET Habitat fataaetor 1 . Botto substrtjij available cover 1b 1 2 . Cbe ddedne s s I . 40.13 cs |3cft) * f l o y . a t rep. low flow'1 1 or >0.13 cos (3 c f t 1 * Ve 1o c 11 y / d a p th 4 . * C h a n n e l a 11 Ia * Ion ** * 3. B o t t o s c o y f j n g a n d dspos it ion 1 tie 1 1ant Good Category fn r foor Greater thtn 301 rubble. travel, subaerged lots, u n d e r c u t b a n k s , or ether stable habitat. 14-20 Gravel, cobble, and bou l d e r p a v t i r l a n are b e t w e e n a n d 23 3 surrounded by fine ad ioant 10-20 10-30% rubblo, travel or ether stable habitat. Adaqua t habitat. /a. O x^ y Gravel, cobble, and boulder p a r ticles ate b e t w e e n 23 e n d 30 % surrounded by fine sediaent rv /2_ cnZiX> Cold War >0.03 cs >0.13 cs 12 c f i l |3 cfsl 10-20 0.01-0.03 0.03-0.13 i cot cs |1-2 cfsl l2-3fXa4x 10-10% rubbla, gravel or other stab l e habitat. Habitat availability loss than desirable. 0-10 Less then 10% rubb l o gravel or ether a t a b l e hebi tat. Lack ef h a b i t a t is o b v i o u s 0-3 Gravel, cobble, and bowl dor p e i t l c l e a ere b o t w o o n 30 e n d 93 % surrou n d e d by fine % d inant 4-10 Gravel, cobble, end b e u Idei particles ate by fine sedlnent 0-3 0.01-0.0) cbs 0.01-0.03 cbs (.3-1 cfsl 11-2 cfsl (-10 (0.01 c b s (0.0) cas (.3 cfsl (1 c f s l 0-3 S l o w | < 0 . ) b / s 1. d e e p (>0.3 1; slow, shallow |<0.3 1; fast (> 0 . ) / s i , d e e p ; f a s t . s h a l l o w h a b i t a t s all present. 10-20 Little or no e nlargeant of Islands or point bars, and/or no channelisation. o n l y ) of the 4 habitat categories present receive lower score than it s ing p o o l s 1 . /S' S o o b o w I n c r o a s o 1 bat forsatlan, aoetly fro coataa gravel; end/er Be channelisation 12-13 Lott thtn 31 of botto affocted i c o u d n f tnd position. tho by _________________ 1 __________ 3-10% affacted. Scour t c o n i t i ictioni tnd whero gradas itMp o n . S o b o d e p o s i t i o n in p o o l s . (H D On l y 2 of the 4 habitat categories present ( m s s i n g riffles/runs receive lowei i c o n I. (-10 M o d e r a t e d e p o s i t i o n of on old and now bars; pools portlally filled w / s i l t ; a n d / o r eabanli- 4-9 10-50% affected. D e p o s i t s t n d s c o u r tt ebstructiens, con strictions tnd bends. Sooe f i lling of pools. Deainsted by one v e l o c i ty/dept h categoiy lu s u l l y pool). 0-3 Heavy d e p o s i t s of (Ina devalopasnt; Boat pools filled w/ellt; and/or 0-1 botton changing etcly yeti t o n y . Tools olnost tbsont due to d e p o s i t i o n . Only U r t e rocks in r i f f l e e a p o s e d . 0-) lt| f r o B a l l 1912. (b) f r o a f l o t t o et ti. 191). Note: * Habitat piiiatri not currently tncorpoioted into BIOS Figure 5.2 1. H eb iut Aiseum ent Field Dale Sheet for use with all Rapid Bioaiieum ent Protocol]. USFW 1188 000613 CO CD MtaicAJ. c i m a u m f i o a BlfABlAN BoaB/iBBTiBAH flA YBYflCAL CBABACTBBItATIOB/MATBB QUALITY riBLB BATA B*BIT U -*n?AJce. liluitrltl other Nil Ceaefy Cm i 0|a a l i t i s i U B I t t m Bifthi Bllfla . / Q w tecltf M i t l y opa Daa fraaaati ( tir !* ^ tafe* CkiaMlIuBi l i t fiBjBBBT/BUifTBAT|l ItBlatat Bata 1( l a i a i p l* 4 la * a t O lla i / J i m p lifb t chBUl l4laal Befealtat llJ|< Bait liyr h b t i ( Iia4 Ballet Sballa A m (hi a a 4 i i l B M il ats.ea w h i c h ace sat B a a f l f a a l i 4 4 a 4 Al ac k) & fuhatrate Traa iafiach Beelfcf CahBla level leaf III Hi? >IS4-ss Ilf I* 1 44<lSf-ae 1.9-1 la.1 1 - 4 4 - s s ( . 1 - S .9 I s . ) .4-l.ff-sa (fcittfl .fl',Bf-S ( .Bfl-sa lallcht cat Ceafeeltlea la f a a t l l a a A rea 10 30 30 If Nwch-NwB Nad ftlcha. Mae*, Caaiaa tlaat Natarla 1a ICTONI Black, fai| rise Or|aaic i r t O M l B9ir er, afa a fk at a a l l --- .c.l Casfaaltlaa la f a s i l l s A r e a to /D MATBB QUALITY JUL ' OlaaalvaB 0>yfa 2 3 n 2 t a * t t a a * a l( > ) B*a4 M n f lV > i------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- trees t f f t U a l 4it)i Matsvetar Malar odea(~Barsd) aaaa fetrelaua Cbaslcal Matav Bacface oflat filch ideas tleha Macho TwrbIBItr1 iiikttr T t k n mm J23A Otka Mata Cater MBATBBB COMDItlOBB 10' I he, ,r OBIIBVATIOBS ABD/OB IBBTCI Figure 5.1-1. Physical Cheracterization/Water Quality Field Data Sheet for use with all Rapid Bioassessment Protocols. 000614 LLia/i C CO TI CD O Heb 1. ' B o t t o i u b t ( i | | | available COvif 2. 1 (bt ). 1 0 . 1 5 cat ( S c i a i * f I <*|| | * t c o p . l o w >0.15 caa ( S d i i * Velocit y/dept h Channel alteration 5. B o t t o a s c o u r i n g a nd depot it ion * HABITAT AISCSSHIHT M E L O DATA SHEET E tc e 1 lent C r o a t o ! then SOI rubble gravel, submerged log*, g n d o r c u t b a n k s , or othor stable habitat. 14-20 Gravel, cobble, and boulder p a r tible* are b e t w e e n 0 a n d 25 t s u r r o u n d e d by fine aed 1non t 14-20 Cold Maro >0.05 >0.15 eoa eoa (2 c i t i 15 ei a) 10-20 Goo<4 r gj ry Boot 10-50% rubblo, fiovol or o t hor t a b i habitat. Adequat habitat. Il Gravel, cobble, and boulder p a r ticles aie b e t w e e n 25 e n d 50 % surrounded by fine sediment (( ( T T T T > 10-101 rubbio, gravel or othor atab l o habitat. Habitat availability loaa than doairablo. f-10 tota than 10% rubble yravol or othai a t a b l o h a b i t a t . Each of h a b i t a t la o b v i o u a . 0-5 boulder particles ere bet w e e n 50 e n d 75 % surrounded by fine Gravel, bow Idee ov er 75 by fine cobble, end s e d i nent 4-10 0-5 0. 0 1 - 0 . 0 5 eoa (1-2 citi 0. 0 5 - 0 . 1 5 cnt (2-5 (Uh 0.01-0.01 eoa 0.01-0.05 eoa 1.5-1 eia! (1-2 d a l 0-10 <0.01 eoa <0.01 eoa (.5 d a l <1 e i a ) 0-5 Slow (<0.1 /a I. daap (>0.5 I; alow, hallow (<0.5 !; (aat |>0.1 a/a), daap; fail, a h a l l o w h a b i t a t a all p ra aant . 11-20 Little er no onler' B e n t of I s l a n d a er point bara and/or no c h a n n e l 1 . at Ion. 12-15 Lets th a n 5% of bo 11 O B a f f e c t e d scouring and deposition. the "y 12-15 O nly 1 of tha^l habitat categoria praaent ( B i a s i n g r i fila oc runa receive lower score than a|a s l n g poo 1st. II Sene new Incceeae In bar forBatlen, neatly free c r a n e gravel; and/or eerae c h a n n o I I t e t i o n 10 ( ^ P S-10% affected. Scour at c o n s t r i c t i o n and where grade steepen. S o n o d e p o s i t i o n in pools. 0 ( t^ D O n l y 2 of tha habitat categories present (eitting rifflet/runa receive lower icore). Ooeinated by one veloci ty/dept h category luaially pool). 0-10 0-5 M o d e r a t e d e p o a i t l e n of new gravel, cearae tend on old and new bars; poeta partially filled w/allt; and/or enbanhnenta on both benha. 4-7 Heavy deposits of fine arteiial, Increased bar d e v e l o p n e n t ; Boat p o e t a filled v/e|)t; and/er ostenti ve e h anna I Ia e 11ea 0-1 10-51% affected. D e p o s i t a n d r c e u i at obstructions, constrictient and bends. So b s filling ef peels. 4-7 Here than SOI ef the bettoo changing nearly year long. Peel almost absent due to d e p o s i t i o n . Only large reels In r i f f l e e x p o s e d . 0-1 (el f r o n Hall 1912. Ibi r r o a P l a t t s et a|. 191 1. Mote: * Habitat parameters not currently incorporated into BIOS Figure 5.2 1. Habitat A n e n m e n t Field Data Sheet for ute with all Rapid Bioanetim ent Piotocoli l/> Cer\ HA6I TAT AS S t S SHEHT M E L O DATA SHCCT iconl l ( tool/riffle, run/bind ratio (distance between riffles divided by stceen width) 7 . Bank stability'** I. l i n k v# 9* t f % 1 ' stability' lb} St r e a . id* c o v e r Co 1u.n Totals Cucci lent 5-7. V a r i e t y of habitat. Deep riffles and poo 1s . 12-15 Stable. No evidence of e r o s i o n or bank failure. Side slopes gener* ally <)0%. Little potential for future p ro b 1e . . 9-10 Over 10% of the treebank surface* c o v e r e d by vegetation or boulders and cobble. 9-10 Do.inant vegetation ts shrub. 9-10 Good Citi^ory 7-15. Adeguate depth in pools and riffles. tends provide habitat. ? C JH P Moderately stable. Infreguent, s.all areas of ero s i o n .estly heeled ove r . tide elopes up to 10% on one bank. Slight p o t e n t i a l in estrone floods . 15-25. Occassional r i f f l e or bon d . P o tto. c ontours provide tone habitat . f- 7 >li. [ m n l tally straight attea.. C a n a r a 1 iy all M a t water or aha 1low riffle. for habitat. 0-1 Moderately unstable. Moderate frequency and alto of otosional areas. Side slopes up to 40% n soar banks. Nigh erosion potential during estrano high flow. 1-5 Unstable. Many eroded areas. Side slopes >40% co.non. "Daw* areas f r eguant along straight sactione and b e n d a . 0-2 50-99% of the strea.bank s urfaces c overed by v e g e t a t i o n , g r a v e l or 1 r i a l . e> So.inant vegetati is of t r e e foto. 25*49% of the strea.bank surfaces covered by v egetation, gravel, or l a r g e r . a l e n a i . 1-5 Do.inant vegetation is g r a s s or f o r b e e . 7 rs? 1-5 teat than 15% of the strea.bank surfaces covered by v egetation, g r a v e l , or larger .a t *rI a I . 0*2 O v e r 50% of the s t i v e . b a n k |i i i n o v e g e t a t i o n and do.inant materiel Is to il, reck, b r i d g e aterisls, culverts, or mine tailings . 0-1 Figuro 5.2 1. (Conf i. USFW 1192 Ut KJ o o o d Ci tiaic*L cant&cttatttTtoa/viYS Q u u i t i M I L O PATA m i r aVSICAJ.CIAAAaillUVIOl 11AttAM tOtl/1MITAIAH PdAfUltt Jrtiaalntl ucrcuadlcf LaadMec ) (jMcId/Peetuie^ L|tlcultuul addentici elei rill Lacci Hetereked IrnUa: Hederete i M v y Lecci Hetcrahed PS Vtllutlaai ^Ma^eddeac ^ via l(tictl atracaMUth /Q a Ictlaetcd atracaOa|tli) tittleJQ. m tua^ L m feci .S O , ll|tKatar Merk _________m Veteclty ___ OcaPraeeati lai_____ _L^ Ckeaaellaedt lai______ a CeaepyCavan Of PartlyOpea (tttIy tkeded L e<i C tedlaeat Odttti (a*a,T> lavila r(ilauc Ckeatcel Aaeereklc Kaaa Otter tedlaeat Olici ^t^) dllfkt Notant Preface tedlaeat Oapccltci dludye ieuduot Payer Piker (Im 4^) lallet tkallc Otker _ Ara tieuadercidea at ota..aiakiefceraaat deeply eataddedklack (E> wkatrate type laectaelc tekatrata Olcaatac Caayaaaata Paretai Ceayeeltlea la a a y l l a t A r e a Type1 t e k a t r a t a oricele tukatrata Caayaaanta Ckcractarlatlc Caayccltlce la teaplle| Arca ladreck laulda r Cckkla travel cad C ll iaty l S - a a 1 It l a .) H - l l l - a a U - S - l t la. | J-ll-aa (d.l-l.t la.) I . M - l . H - o a (rlttyl .4~atCa- a(aclick) zo x2c0> i iinii.i Nuck-Nu4 1 Marl dtlcka. Head, Caerte Pleat Matarais (CPON) ol,a.ck,!, cirny oMma c ray, tkall o 50 MATS! QUALITY Teaperature /1"] C Diasele#Ocyaa L D 3 m M k factraaeatla) Uaad /jo/i.fafl------------- ---tracaType: Caldate* (jrTreecTV?) Katar Odarat ^denjT) tcecfe Patrelaua Cimaioli Haterducface Olili flick tkaaa Olafca Placke Turkidltyi Clear (tTltfctlyTuruT) Tuckld Oyauc Caaduct1eItya i i L ' taaa Otfcar Haler Cater Otker HtATtKl COKOItloai f-^ ,f PMOfOOkAPd UHttt OkIftVATIOH! ttD/OI SCITCt Figure 5.1-1. Physical CharacterUation/Water Quality Field Data Sheet for use with att Rapid Bioassessment Protocols. HABITAT ASS CSSHCHT fltLD DATA SHCCT Hibitit Pa r a ae ta r 1 . 'lotto substra|j/ aval tibia cavti 1. tabtddadnait^* 1 . J O .15 c m 15 e f t 1 * *r 1o y , ka t rap. l o w >0.15 cai 15 c f t 1 < Vo l o c 11y/dapth i. 1a 1 * Choanal aitaration 5 . otto* scoygjay and deposition1 d e a l lant Good C a t a yj r y rai r foot f t a v a l ( subaetyad loys. u n d a i c u t b a n k s , oi that atabla habitat. 14-JO Ciaval, robbla, and b o u l d a t pail t r |ax aia b e t w e e n 6 a n d 25 t i u f l aundid by lina ladiaant 14-JO C o l d > 0 . 0 5 c b s 12 c t i l K a t a > 0 1 5 cat <5 c i * i (X t-it) 1" S l o w 1 ( 0 . 1 a / i 1, d a a p t>0 5 n|; slow, lhallow <<0.5 at; faat ( >0 .1 b / s | , daap; l a s t . h a l l o w h a b i t a t s all ) 0 - ) 9 l rubbls, ft aval or othsi atabla habitat. Adaquata habitat. /3 iiiiP G r a v a i , cobbla, and bouldat p a i t i c | s s ata b a t w a a n 25 and 5B % swcioundsd by fins sadinant 1 1 I 1 -7 1 ) 0.01-0.05 c m 0.05-0.11 car ||-2 cfsl 11-5 Ctrl 11-15 O n l y ) af tha 4 habitat csteyories pvaaant I n i s s i n y t l f f l s t ot tuns itcaivt lowai scota than i a a i n y p o o l 1 1. 10-109 rubble, yraval or othai s t s b l a habitat. Habitat availability last than daairabla. (-10 Lass than 10% rubble yraval ar othat s t a b l e h a b i t a t . Lack of h a b i t a t is o b v i o u s . 0-5 Giaval, bouldat batwaan cobbla, and p a c llclas aie 50 and M 9 tu i t o u n d e d by fine sa d i B a n t (-10 Gtaval, bouldat a v a t 25 by fine cobbla, and patticlas at# 1 surrounded sadinant 0-5 0.01-0.01 c m 0.01-0.05 cbs | .5-1 cfsl <1-2 cfsl 4-10 ( 0 0 1 CBS (0.01 CBS 1.5 cfsl 11 c f s l 0-5 O n l y 2 of tha 4 habitat citayotias p t aient (Biisiny rlfflas/runs (activa lowai i c o i a l . Ooainstsd by ano valocity/dapth c s t e y o t y luitil ly pool I . K Curi9 ant of I s l a n d s or point b a n , and/or no chains 111 a t l o n . 5 L o s s t h a n 51 of botton affactad coutiny m d d e p o s i t ion. tha by ii .11-15 Bo n a n o w ftnetaoso In bat formation, neatly frsn coarta yravel; and/or aaa channolltatlon -11 5-10% affactad. Scour at c o n s t r i c t i o n s and whata yrades stospsn. S o n s d s p o s i t i o n In pools. -11 (-10 H o d a t s t e d e p o s i t i o n af on old and naw bats; pools pattlally (Iliad w/a(lts and/or anbank- *-i 10-50% affactad. O a p o s i t s a n d a c o w t at obstructions, constrictions snd bonds. Sona tilling of pools. 4-1 0-5 Heavy deposit af flna davelopnsnt; Boat poala (Iliad w/allt; and/at astanslva channallaatlon. 0-1 Rota than SOI of the bottoa chanylny n.<ily r u lnf. Poets slaost sbisnt duo to d e p o s i t i o n . Only lilf. u c l l 0- 1 1 1 fr o * 6 i l 1 1502. Ibl f i O P l a t t a at al. 1911. Hoi: * Habitat p a i a a t u n not curtently Incotpontad into BIOS U S F W 1193 000617 Figure 5.2 1. Habitat Astetsment Field Data Sheet for ute with all Rapid Bioarseitment Protocols. f H A B I T A T A S S E S S M E N T M C L D OAT* SHEET (cost .i 4 Pool/riffle, run/bend ratio* Idlotonco bitwiin riffles divided by i t i w idt h 1 7 . Rank stability'"* a . Rank vepotative ta b i 1ity 1 *. S t i a i a i i d a c o v i r * bl Colunn Totola Cacai 1ant Good Category fair foo r 9- 7 . V a n i t y of habitat. Deep riffles and poo 1t . 7-19. Adequete depth in p o o l s a n d rlfflet. Rends prvida habitat. i^ ( T r r p 1-1 1 19-19. Occassional r i f f l e or bend. Rati o n contours provide soae habitat . 9-7 > 25 . C s s a n t l o l l y a straipht atrasa. G e n e r a l l y all flat w a t e r or aha 11 a w riffle. Roer habitat . 0- I Stablo. No ivldinca o( i r o n o n oi bank failure. Sida alopaa qanir* ally < 10% . Littla potential (or futura p ro b l e a . / o (HIS) Moderately stabla. Infrequent, soall oreas of ero s i n aostly healed ovar. Si d a slopes up to 90% on ona bank. slipht p o t e n t i e l in aitiesi f 1o o d s . il Moderately unstable. Moderate frequency and site of arosional areas. Side slopes, up to 10% on rose banks. Niqh erosion potential durinq estrone hiqh flow. )*) Unstable. Many eroded areas. Side slopes ><01 connon. "Raw* areas f r equent alonp etraipht tactions and b e n d s . 0-1 Ovai 101 of tha ttreaabenk lurficai covarad by vepetation or boulders and cobble. 9-10 Dominant vegetation Is s h r u b . 90-79% of tha straaabank s u r f a c a t c o v e r a d by v e p e t a t i o n , p r o v e or 1a rq e r otaria!. G 05) Doainant vepetation i s of trae fo r a . 19-49% of the s t r a a a bank surfaces covered by vepetatton, prove!, or latper n otorial. 1-5 Ooainant vepatation is p r e s s or f o r b o s . <=\ Score C fT Q _--- il _______ 1-9 _______ teas than 29% of the streaabank surfaces p r o vai or t a r p a r a s t e r la 1 . 0-1 O ver 50% of t h e s t r e a a b a n k |iai n e v e p a t a t i o n and doainant notarial is so il , ro c k , b r i d p e aterais, culverts, or alno t a i l i n p e . 0-1 -- 000618 Figur* 5.2-1. (Coni.). DRAFT 12/31/95 DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE Checklist for Ecological Assessment/Sampiing I. SITE DESCRIPTION 1. Site Name: H r u j 17 l j C\ jT o o \ < Locano" - ,,____________________ County: 1 ( c ,, t%___________ City:_______________________ State: (.. P e7~ 2. Latitude: Longitude: 3. What is the approximate area of the site? T '.rT 'J - , r ^ c r j >, , ^ STOP r , <v ^ 4. Is this the first site visit? Z yes l. no If no, attach trip report of previous site visit(s), if available. Date(s) of previous site visit(s):_________________________________________ . 5. Please attach to the checklist USGS topographic map(s) of the site, if available. 6. Are aerial or other site photographs availableO ^yes M u If yes, please anach any available photo(s) to the site map at the conclusion of this section. V. re ^ W r - - ' . 1"'i. i ` / - 000619 USFW 1195 35 DRAFT 12/31/95 DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 9. Do any potentially sensitive environmental areas exist adjacent to or in proximity to the site. e.g.. Federal and State parks. National and State monuments, wetlands, prairie potholes? Remember, flo o d plains and wetlands are not always obvious; do not answ er 'n o " without confirm ing inform ation. UN fc. n c w .'J 9a. Please provide the source(s) of information used to identify these sensitive areas, and indicate their general location on the site map. 10. What type of facility is located at the site? Chemical 5C Other (specify) Z Manufacturing ir Lc.^ 'J - J l _ Mixing Waste disposal 11. What are the suspected contaminants of concern at the site? If known, what are the maximum concentration levels? C v'r e I v, - vsr ^Vir < r J 12. Check any potential routes of off-site migration of contaminants observed at the site: Z Swales Z Depressions 3 "^rain ag e ditches -ZT Runoff Other (specify)_ Z Windblown particulates 4^ TM- Z Vehicular traffic 13. If known, what is the approximate depth to the water table? S t ' r r i p e l y - p R C 14. Is the direction of surface nmoff apparent from site observations? j z f yes no If yes, to which of the following does the surface runoff discharge? Indicate all that apply. JZL Surface water ^ /G ro u n d w a te r Z Sewer ^ Collection impoundment 15. Is there a navigable waterbody or tributary to a navigable waterbody? yes no 37 U S F W 11' 000620 DRAFT 12/31/95 DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 1A. SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS AND SITE SETTING J l U . --V. ^ I 1 0 ^ - x ^ J L z . A \ ^ - c_ c h -- e-/ C 1 \- p A t/i-^rY v c-^u -^y ~ 'Xcr A A . -'"'"- L j- . r - f / C\l (V _^W ,\/n\jr^Vy C-^j- Ua'2V-lij^r' -- iTV s i ^ A U r A c T - d ^ v --: Q ^ i u ^ - w v v ^ j* Jk _ tC X -^j'V`Vv*- zck-*-. -A fu r-^ ^ D /' a^ -^-v^ir -i^ _ cL v t\ 4 * - ^ A>S. tT % y wc t j I p x ' t v v . cv at= - W ^ C-- _vrv a U . ^ Z : - *= AA\X A ^ avtt'- j- 'V .t t a A X i . Completed by_ Additional Preparers_____ Site M anager / / / a^<? Date y / ih - , 1 Affiliation fA,A USFW 1197 39 0 0 0 6 2 1 * DRAFT 12/31/95 DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 5. Based on site observations, bow dense is the sciub/shrub vegetation? Dense ^P atcb y Sparse IIC . O PEN FIELD 1. Are there open (bare, barren) field areas present at the site? yes Hi no If yes, please indicate the type below: C PTairie/plains Savannah Oldfield Jr P..Other (specify) fd d . -vJ /v ,. 2. What percentage of the site is open field? ( V % .y 7'J acres). Indicate the open fields on the site map. 3. What is/are the dominant plant(s)? Provide a photograph, if available. Cj n i 4. What is the approximate average height of the dominam plant? 5. Describe the vegetation cover: ^ Dense C Sparse A/ ^ ____________ Patchy I ID. MISCELLANEOUS 1. Are other types of terrestrial habitats present at the site, other than woods, scnib/shrub, and open field? yes 3 ^ 0 if yes. identify and describe them below. 2. Describe the terrestrial miscellaneous habitat(s) and identify these area(s) on the site map. USFW 1198 000622  DRAFT 12/31/95 DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE * III. AQUATIC HABITAT CHECKLIST - NON-FLOWING SYSTEMS - fj k Note: A quatic systems are often associated with wetland habitats. Please refer to Section V. W etland H abitat Checklist. 1. What type of open-water, non-flowing system is present at the site? Natural (pond. lake) Artificially created (lagoon, reservoir, canal, impoundment) 2. If known, what is the name(s) of the waterbody(ies) on or adjacent to the site? 3. If a waterbody is present, what its known uses (e.g.: recreation, navigation, etc.)? 4. What is the approximate size of the waterbody(ies)? _____________ acre(s). 5. Is any aquatic vegetation present? yes no If yes, please identify the type of vegetation present if known. Emergent Submergent C Floating 6. If known, what is the depth of the water? 7. What is the general composition of the substrate? Check all that apply. Z Bedrock Z Sand (coarse) Z Muck (fine/black) Z Boulder (> 10 in.) Z Silt (fine) Z Debris Z Cobble (2.5-10 in.) Z Marl (shells) Detritus Z Gravel (0.1-2.5 in.) Z Clay (slick) Concrete Z Other (specify)___________________________________________________ 8. What is the source of water in the waterbody? Z River/Stream/Creck Z Groundwater Z Industrial discharge Z Surface runoff Other (specify)_ 000623 USFW 1199 43 * DRAFT 12/31/95 DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 14. What observations. if any, were made at the waterbody regarding the presence and/or absence of benthic macroinvenebrates, fish, birds, mammals, etc.? 000624 45 USFW 1200  DRAFT 12/31/95 DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 7. Is the flow intermittent? 3 yes no If yes, please note the information that was used in making this determination, ji- 5 vrftlA 0r c l r u d c ^ 8. Is there a discharge from the site to the waterbody?'^'yes no If yes, please describe die discharge and its Path' -- * Qa| -- =*" (Ykc R w i - / " 9. Is there a discharge from the waterbody? _j yes u no If yes. and the information is avaiiable, please identify what the waterbody discharges to and whether the discharge is on site or off site. 10. Identify any field measurements and observations of water quality that were made. For those parameters for which data were collected, provide the measurement and the units of measure in the appropriate space below: ~W Cr Width (ft.) / ` - 3' Depth (ft.) 0P Pro'(ft Velocity (specify units):________________________ )Temperature (depth of the water at which the reading was taken________________ Plv pH Dissolved oxygen P |\ ^ Salinity P>n Turbidity (clear, slightly turbid, turbid, opaque) (Secchi disk depth______________ ) JW " Other (specify) _______________________________ USFNN 1 2 0 1 47 0 0 0 6 2 5  DRAFT 12/31/95 DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE WETLAND HABITAT CHECKLIST Based on observations and/or available information, are designated or known wetlands definitely present at the site? yes ^ n o Please note the sources of observations and information used (e.g.. USGS Topographic Maps. National Wetland Inventory, Federal or State Agency, etc.) to make this determination. Based on the location of the site (e.g., along a waterbody, in a floodplain) and site conditions (e.g.. standing water; dark, wet soils; mud cracks; debris line; water marks), are wetland habitats suspected? yes no If yes, proceed with the remainder of the wetland habitat identification checklist. What type(s) of vegetation are present in the wetland? Z Submergent Scrub/Shrub Z Emergent Wooded Z Other (specify)___________________ Provide a general description of the vegetation present in and around the wetland (height, color, etc.). Provide a photograph of the known or suspected wetlands, if available. Is standing water present? Z yes no If yes. is this water: Z Fresh Brackish What is the approximate area of the water (sq. ft.)?___________________ Please complete questions 4, 11, 12 in Checklist III - Aquatic Habitat - Non-Flowing Systems. Is there evidence of flooding at the site? What observations were noted? Buttressing Water marks Z Mud cracks Debris line Other (describe below) U SF W 1202 49 0 0 0 6 2 6 ** D R A FT 12/31/95 DO N O T C IT E O R Q U O T E * APPENDIX C - EXAMPLE OF FLOW DIAGRAM FOR CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL M g m t t a ) ^oiift @ff iraftamitaaiJiift tomra irlgBm ft lKl@pft@ir ** Air Liquid ** Qas 8olid O tltfH lM tlM I o CO A t> SW AI o 8W 8W DnNkW t 0,0 0,0 N/A 0,0 0,0 0,0 1,0 x, N/A I.D I.D N/A 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 N/A 0,0 0,0 0,0 e o z v N V Jsn 57 CD GO OO 52 ** D R A FT 12/31/95 DO N O T C IT E O R Q U O T E ** 53 U SF W 1204 in t rea viva. . Met APPENDIX E Statistical Analysis Dry Run Creek site Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 uSF\N 1206 000630 I'e . i r s o n C m r e l d U t ' i i o f S u i . o . . i , . . t a i s i n F i l t e r e d W a t e r Dry Kim Creek Correlation Analysis /S p e a r m a n C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s / P r o b > | R | u n d e r l l o : R h o =0 H = 5 SURVIVAL IIA -0.28947 0.6366 'III - 0.0 7895 0.8996 o o o <r> co U SF W 1207 10 'WITH' Vj Iidl.ler 1 'VAK' Vdiidble; f'e.!i sun f.'ul LLUdtlOII i.'L JIHV.xdi' VS, ntSiaiS ii. o n lllttiT u Wdte. Dry Hun Creek C',i iclritiiTi Analysis Al. HA CA CU FE MG MH SURVIVAL ^ MA ZN Variable AL LA CA CU Fb MG MU K NA ZU SURVIVAL c CnD Sii| le Statistics M Mean Std Mev Med 1an Mini mum 5 153.600000 112.322304 80.000000 67.000000 5 49.200000 4.604346 50.000000 42.000000 5 24400 12137 28000 3000.000000 5 4.640000 2.029286 5.200000 2.500000 5 168.800000 5 9380.000000 1 3 5 7 9 0 ..10305619 1 1 8 0 86.000000 9300.000000 48.000000 9100.000000 5 18.100000 18.629010 8.400000 7.900000 5 2060.000000 990.999499 2400.000000 1000.000000 5 16000 1070.828693 16000 13000 5 12.600000 4.393177 11.000000 7.000000 5 0.882000 0.176975 0.960000 0.580000 Speaiman Correlation Coefficients / Prob > 1R | under llo: Rho=0 / M = 5 SURVIVAL AL 0.56429 0.3217 HA -0 . 3 5 9 0 9 0.5520 CA -0 . 5 2 6 3 2 0.3622 CU -0 .5 0. 0 3 0 9 0 1 0 0 FE 0.56429 0.3217 MG -0 . 1 0 5 2 6 0.8662 MM -0 . 1 5 3 9 0 0.8048 K -0 .5 0. 0 3 0 9 0 1 0 0 wa 2 7 3 \ 111v fisli.sas Maxi mum 300.000000 54.000000 33000 6.700000 430.000000 10000 51.000000 3100.000000 18000 18.000000 1.000000 000632 or o oo lX'iiN''ii .1 ie 1dt i..n of Survival vs. Metals in Unflltered Water Dry Run C reek C orrelation Analysis S p e a i m a n (,'ui r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s / P r o b > | R I u n d e r llo: Rho=0 / N = 5 SURVIVAL (lA -0.2 8947 0.6366 zn o.ooooo 1.0000 wa2 'J3 \ itivfish .sas <75 CO Co U SF W 1209 Worksheet size: 100000 cells One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 7.905 E rro r 17 3 .6 5 4 T o ta l 20 11.559 Level 0 2 3 4 N 2 12 5 2 Pooled StDev = Mean 0.6100 0.5892 0.4760 2.6450 0.4636 LIPID MS 2.635 0.215 F P^N 12.26 r 0.000 J V___ ^ StDev 0.7920 0.3948 0.3554 0.8980 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Me an Based on Pooled StDev - + ------------------ + ------------- ( ------------ * ------------ ) (-- *-- > ( --------* ------ ) - + --------------------1-------------- {---------- * -------------) 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 10042 E rro r 17 127087 T o ta l 20 137129 FLUORIDE MS 3347 7476 Level 0 2 3 4 N 2 12 5 2 Pooled StDev = Mean 142.50 89.17 129.00 132.50 86.46 StDev 81.32 44.25 151.92 81.32 F 0.45 P 0.722 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Me an Based on Pooled StDev --------------+----------------- +--------------- +------ ( -------------------------- *--------------------------- ) ( -(---------------*---------------*-----)------------- ) ----------------------------- * ------------------------------------------) ------ +----------------- +--------------- +------ 80 160 240 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 91752 E rro r 17 3 8 5 5 1 6 6 T o ta l 20 3946919 Aluminum MS 30584 226774 Level 0 2 3 4 N 2 12 5 2 Pooled StDev = Mean 231.0 419.7 483.6 429.5 476.2 StDev 272.9 545.4 354.0 87.0 F 0.13 P 0.938 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on P ooled StDev ( --------------( ------- ------------- ) {--------. ------- " ) ( ---------------- * - ------------- , 0 500 1000 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 1298 E r r o r 17 2568 T o ta l 20 3866 Barium MS 433 151 Level 0 2 N Mean 2 11.12 12 2 3 . 1 7 StDev 5.76 10.72 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Me an Based on Pooled StDev --------+ ------------------- + ------------------ + -- ( ----------------*-------------- j ( -----*" ) + USFVV 1210 000634 3 5 25.36 4 2 45.90 Pooled StDev = 1 2 . 2 9 9.75 29.84 ( ---------- * -------- ) ( ---------------- * ----------------- ) --------.---------------- +---------------- +---------------- +-- 0 20 40 60 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 3 0.000255 17 0 .0 0 4 6 1 2 20 0.004867 B erylliu MS 0.000085 0.000271 Level 0 2 3 4 N Mean 2 0.01000 12 0 . 0 1 9 1 7 5 0.01600 2 0.01000 Pooled StDev = 0.01647 StDev 0.00000 0.01881 0.01342 0.00000 F 0.31 P 0.816 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( -------<-------- ----------- ) ( ------------ * --------" ) ( ---------------------* ------------------- ) ----------- ) 0.000 0.015 0.030 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 0.01388 E rro r 17 0 .0 3 3 4 2 T o ta l 20 0 .0 4730 Cadmium MS 0.00463 0.00197 Level 0 2 3 4 N Mean 2 0.14500 12 0 . 0 6 0 0 0 5 0.07600 2 0.04500 Pooled StDev = 0.04434 StDev 0.10607 0.03693 0.04219 0.00707 F 2.35 P 0.108 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------ +--------------- +---------------- +---------------- +--. <----------------*-------------- j ( -----*-- ) ( --------------(*----------------*----------------)-) ------ +----------------4----------------- +---------------- + 0.000 0.070 0.140 0.210 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 162564262 E rro r 17 1 . 650E+09 T otal 20 1.813E+09 Calcium MS 54188087 97086304 Level 0 2 3 4 N Mean 2 29950 12 26208 5 32320 2 31850 StDev 4031 7834 13684 14496 F 0.56 P 0.650 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev <-------------------( ---------- * ----------) <~ ( --------------- Pooled StDev = 9853 20000 30000 40000 ---)----- + 50000 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 44 E rro r 17 7062 T o ta l 20 7107 Chromium MS 15 415 Level 0 N Mean 2 10.10 StDev 10.18 F 0.04 P 0.991 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( ------------------ i 000635 U S F W 1211 2 12 35 42 Pooled StDev 14.53 15.10 12.50 20.38 17.96 28.41 13.58 (-------- *--------- ) ( ----------------*-------------- ) ( -------------------------*------------------------- ) - + ----------------+---------------- +---------------- + - -20 0 20 40 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 0.0799 E rro r 17 1 .1 9 2 5 T o ta l 20 1.2723 C o b alt MS 0.0266 0.0701 Level 0 2 3 4 N 2 12 5 2 Pooled StDev = Mean 0.2850 0.4858 0.4760 0.3900 0.2648 StDev 0.0212 0.3073 0.1945 0.0424 0.38 0.769 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ----------+ ------------------+ -------------------+ --------------------+ _ <-------------------------------------- * ------------------------------------------) (------(------------------**----------------------)----- ) ---------+(---------------------------------I----------------------*----------+------------------------------------+- -) 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 16.21 E rro r 17 7 0 .5 6 T o ta l 20 86.77 Copper MS 5.40 4.15 Level 0 2 3 4 N 2 12 5 2 Pooled StDev = Mean 6.250 8.208 6.580 6.300 2.037 StDev 1.909 2.347 1.228 0.566 F 1.30 P 0.306 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ---------1--------------------- h--------------------(.------------------ +. ( -------------------------*------------------------- ) {-------- *---------) ( ----------------*---------------- j -(-----------+------------------------------------+--*-----------------------------+----------------------)---- +. 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 3 26460 17 1810721 20 1837182 Iron MS 8820 106513 Level 0 2 3 4 N 2 12 5 2 Pooled StDev = Mean 407.5 503.2 542.8 516.5 326.4 StDev 368.4 372.5 190.6 57.3 F 0.08 P 0.968 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------ .------------------- 1----------------+-----------------+----- (---------------------------- *--------------------------- ) ( ---(----------------------*--*----------------)-------- ) ( ---------------------------*--------------------------- ) -----+----------------- +--------------- +---------------- +---- 0 300 600 900 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 0.084 E rro r 17 3 .7 1 1 T o ta l 20 3 .7 9 5 Lead MS 0.028 0.218 Level N Mean StDev F 0.13 P 0.942 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ---------1-----------------+----------------- 1-----------------+ USFW 1212 000636 02 2 12 35 42 Pooled StDev = 0.5150 0.7158 0.6340 0.7250 0.4672 0.3182 0.4811 0.5004 0.2475 ( ----------------------- *----------------------- ) ( -------*---------) ( -----(-------------------------------*------*---------------------)------------) ------ +---------------- +---------------- -t----------------- +~ 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 3 132017 17 896812 20 1028829 M agnesiu MS 44006 52754 Level 0 2 3 4 N 2 12 5 2 Pooled StDev = Mean 1190.0 1434.2 1434.0 1290.0 229.7 StDev 169.7 201.7 318.0 127.3 F 0.83 P 0.493 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------------1----------------- 1------------------ .------------ ( -----------------------*----------------------) ( -------*--------- ) ( -------------------(--------*----------------*----------------------------) > ---------- +---------------- +---------------- +----------- 1000 1250 1500 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 3 608 17 3262 20 3870 Manganes MS 203 192 Level 0 2 3 4 N 2 12 5 2 Pooled StDev = Mean 9.05 26.33 21.80 16.65 13.85 StDev 2.19 15.79 11.27 2.33 F 1.06 P 0.394 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev -------------- +-----------------+---------------- +-------- ( ----------------------- *------------------------) ( -------- *------- ) ( ----------------(--------------*-------------*----------------------------)--- ) -------------- H------------------ K------------------1-------- 0 15 30 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T otal of V ariance for DF SS 3 0.001394 17 0 . 0 0 4 1 3 0 20 0.005524 M ercury MS 0.000465 0.000243 Level 0 2 3 4 N Mean 2 0.03500 12 0 . 0 1 0 0 0 5 0.02200 2 0.01000 StDev 0.03536 0.00000 0.02683 0.00000 F 1.91 P 0,.1 6 6 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r M e an Based on Pooled StDev ( ------------------ <--------' ' --------> ( ( ----------------------- ' ----- ) ") Pooled StDev = 0.01559 0.000 0.020 0.040 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 3 56.2 17 1 1 3 5 .0 20 1191.2 N ickel MS 18.7 66.8 F 0.28 P 0..839 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev 000637 USFVV 1213 Level N Mean StDev 0 2 3.150 2.333 2 12 8 . 6 5 0 7 . 0 1 9 3 5 8.860 11.921 4 2 7.500 4.384 Pooled StDev * 8.171 8 . 0----------y . ------------- y - -8 ,0 0 .0 16.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 11233600 E rro r 17 81692067 T o ta l 20 92925667 P o ta ssiu MS 3744533 4805416 Level 0 2 3 4 N 2 12 5 2 Pooled StDev = Mean 10225 10948 11920 9295 2192 StDev 672 2560 1482 587 F 0.78 P 0.522 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------------ + --- ( ------(--------------------------- + ---- ( ------( ----- ------) --------) 7500 10000 12500 -----------------y 15000 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 3 258334 E rro r 17 2395447 T o ta l 20 2653781 Sodium MS 86111 140909 Level 0 2 3 4 N 2 12 5 2 Pooled StDev = Mean 4170.0 4028.3 3928.0 3710.0 375.4 StDev 367.7 341.4 467.0 325.3 F 0.61 P 0.617 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ---------------- + ( (" ( --------------------- 3500 ( -------- ------------- y . 4000 -) --) - ) -------+- 4500 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Vanadium Source Sample E rro r T o ta l L DF 3 17 20 SS 0.169 6.982 7.151 MS 0.056 0.411 F 0.14 P 0.936 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level 0 2 3 4 N Mean 2 0.3000 12 0 .5 5 0 0 5 0.6400 2 0.5000 StDev 0.2828 0.7103 0.5814 0.0000 - + ------------------ + ------------- ( ------------------------------- ------- ) ( --------- * ------------ ) ( ----------( ------------------------------ ------- ) ------------- ) - + -------------------+ ------------- Pooled StDev = 0.6409 0.60 0.00 0.60 1.20 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Zinc Source DF SS MS Sample L 3 175 58 Error 17 3 0 2 8 178 Total 2 0 3 2 0 2 F 0.33 P 0.806 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean USFW 1214 000638 ro o Level N 2 12 5 2 PoolpH StDev = Mean 83.55 85.31 91.66 84.60 13.35 StDev 13.51 11.57 13.84 24.61 Based on Pooled StDev -------------- + ------------------- + ------------------- + --------------- <----------------------------------* -------------------------------- ) ( ------------ * -------------) {-------------------* ---------------- -- ) ( -------------------------------- ---------------------------------- ) ------------- 1-----------------+--------------1---------------- 72 84 96 000639 U S F W 1215 Worksheet size: 100000 cells One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance fo r Al Source DF SS MS lo c 1 29627 29627 E rro r 11 776565 70597 T o ta l 12 806192 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 331.7 427.4 265.7 StDev 260.8 269.7 F 0.42 P 0.530 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Me an Based on Pooled StDev ------ +--------------- +---------------- +---------------- + ( -------------------------*------------------------- ) ( ---------------------------------------------- j ------ +----------------+---------------- +---------------- + - 160 320 480 640 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 0.565 9 3.888 10 4 .4 5 3 lip id MS 0.565 0.432 Level 0 3 N 5 6 Pooled StDev = Mean 1.0780 1.5333 0.6572 StDev 0.5720 0.7182 F 1.31 P 0.282 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev -- +--------------- +---------------- +---------------- +------ ( -------------------(--------*------------------------------*------------)-------------- ) -- +----------------------- +-------------------------+-------------------------+--------- 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 222620 11 931188 12 1 1 53808 FL MS 222620 84653 Level 0 3 N Mean 6 342.5 7 80.0 StDev 429.7 36.7 F 2.63 P 0.133 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( ( ) Pooled StDev = 291.0 0 250 500 One-Way Analysis of Variance ) A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 3.49 11 2 7 . 1 0 12 3 0 . 5 9 Barium MS 3.49 2.46 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 7.785 8.824 1.570 StDev 1.072 1.887 F 1.42 P 0.259 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on P ooled StDev ------------ +----------------+---------------- +------- ( ------------------- *--------------------) ------------ +-----(---------------------+------------*-------------------+-------------)- 7.2 8.4 9.6 One-Way Analysis of Variance USFW 1216 000640 A nalysis Source loc E rro r T otal of V ariance for DF SS 1 3.49 11 2 7 .1 0 12 3 0 . 5 9 Barium MS 3.49 2.46 Level 0 N 0 7 Pooled s<?ev Mean '' . 7 8 5 8.824 1.570 StDev 1.072 1.887 F 1.42 P 0.259 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( ------------------- *-------------------- ) ( ------------------*---------------- ) ------------ +---------------- +---------------- +------- 7.2 8.4 9.6 One-Way Anaiystis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 0.139 11 1 .2 5 8 12 1 .3 9 7 Cadmium MS 0.139 0.114 Level 0' 3 N Mean 6 0.4600 7 0.2529 StDev 0.3677 0.3114 F 1.21 p 0.294 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev --- + ------------ ( ( -------------- ------* --------------------- ) --------- } Pooled StDev = 0.3382 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance fo r Calcium DF SS MS 1 114377308 114377308 11 418015000 38001364 12 532392308 Level 0 3 N Mean 6 26550 7 32500 StDev 5729 6505 F 3.01 P 0.111 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( -------------------- - * ---------------------) ( ------------------- Pooled StDev = 6165 25000 30000 35000 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 12 11 1190 12 1202 Chromium MS 12 108 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 7.45 9.37 10.40 StDev 10.68 10.17 F 0.11 P 0.746 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------------------------- H----------------- H------------------ 1- ( -------(-------------------------------------*------------*-------------------------------------------)---) --------h----------------+----------------- 1-----------------+ 0.0 6.0 12.0 18.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 0.0107 11 0 .3 7 2 1 12 0 . 3 8 2 8 C o b alt MS 0.0107 0.0338 F 0.32 P 0.585 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean 000641 u s f w 1217 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev * Mean 0.3067 0.3643 0.1839 StDev 0.1491 0.2086 Based on Pooled StDev --------------+---------------- +---------------- +----- {----------------------- * ----------------------) ( ------------------- *----------------------) -- '---------------- -- 0.24 0.36 0.48 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Copper Source DF SS MS loc 1 1.81 1.81 E rro r 11 3 2 .7 6 2.98 T o ta l 12 3 4 .5 7 Level 0 3 N Mean 6 8.467 7 9.214 StDev 0.891 2.190 F 0.61 P 0.453 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev l '- (" " - Pooled StDev = 1.726 7.2 8.4 9.6 ) CO o H One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 40183 11 296970 12 337153 Iron MS 40183 26997 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 508.3 619.9 164.3 StDev 184.9 144.9 F 1.49 P 0.248 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ----------------- +--------------- h-----------------+-----(------------------- *----------------------) ----------------- +(-------------------------------+------*--------------------------+----------)- 480 600 720 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Lead Source DF SS MS loc 1 0.480 0.480 E rro r 11 2 .8 9 6 0 .2 6 3 T o ta l 12 3 .3 7 6 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 0.9683 0.5829 0.5131 StDev 0.6901 0.2931 F 1.82 P 0.204 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based onPooled StDev ---------- +--------------- +------------------+--------------- + ( ----------------------- *----------------------) ( --------------------- *------------------- ) ---------- +--------------- +------------------+--------------- + 0.35 0.70 1.05 1.40 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 49753 11 190999 12 240752 M agnesiu MS 49753 17364 Level 0 3 N Mean 6 1062.3 7 1186.4 StDev 78.2 163.5 F 2.87 P 0.119 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev (' ( -------- --) Pooled StDev = 131.8 1000 1100 1200 ----- ) 1300 U SF W 1218 000642 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 136.6 11 1 0 0 3 .4 12 1 1 4 0 .0 Manganea MS 136.6 91.2 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 19.250 12.749 9.551 StDev 11.826 7.119 F 1.50 P 0.247 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on P ooled StDev --------+ ------- (( ------------- " * ----------------------- ) --+ ------ 7.0 14.0 21.0 ---------- ) 28.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 0.098 11 3 .4 2 9 12 3 . 5 2 6 M ercury MS 0.098 0.312 Level 0 3 N Mean 6 0.1733 7 0.3471 StDev 0.2155 0.7299 F 0.31 P 0.587 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( ------------(------------------------------*---------- ------------- ) Pooled StDev = 0.5583 0.00 0 .35 0.70 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 1.0 11 2 7 3 .2 12 2 7 4 .2 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 4.533 3.971 4.984 N ickel MS 1.0 24.8 F 0.04 P 0.843 StDev 4.602 5.281 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Based on Pooled StDev ------------- ( ------------( --------------- + - --- ------0.0 2.5 5.0 Mean ---------- ) 7.5 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 809232 11 46502676 12 4 7 3 1 1 9 0 8 P o tassiu MS 809232 4227516 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 9553 9053 2056 StDev 1674 2327 F 0.19 P 0.670 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( ------------( -------------------- ------ ) ------------- ) 8400 9600 10800 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 0.26 11 1 1 .4 3 12 1 1 . 6 9 Selenium MS 0.26 1.04 F 0.25 P 0.624 000643 USFW 1219 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 2.000 1.714 1.019 StDev 1.265 0.756 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I S F o r Mean Based on Pooled stD ev ------------ + ------------------- + -------------------+ ------------------- -- ( ------------------------------* -------------------------------- ) ( ------------------------------* ----------------------------) ---------- +---------------- ----------------- ----------------- + 1.20 1.80 2.40 3.00 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 9756 11 18754757 12 18764513 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 3862 3807 1306 Sodium MS 9756 1704978 F 0.01 P 0.941 StDev 520 1703 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Me an Based on Pooled StDev -- + ------------------+ --------------------+ ------------------ + -- <-----------------------------* ----------------------------- ) --(+---------------------------------+--------------*---------------------(------------------------------- )-- 2800 3500 4200 4900 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source loc E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 1 0.001 11 1 .6 6 9 12 1 .6 6 9 Vanadium MS 0.001 0.152 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 0.5000 0.4857 0.3895 StDev 0.4517 0.3288 F 0.00 P 0.949 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ---- 4---------------- + --------------- 4---------------- + ----- {------------------------------ *-------------------------------) ( -----------------------------------------* ------------------------------------------) ------1-----------------h---------------- 1----------------- 1------- 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Zinc Source DF SS MS loc 1 1772 1772 E rro r 11 8275 752 T o ta l 12 10047 Level 0 3 N 6 7 Pooled StDev = Mean 101.00 77.58 27.43 StDev 13.10 35.16 F 2.36 P 0.153 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Me an Based on Pooled StDev ( 60 ( _ -) 80 100 ) 120 U SF W 1220 000644 1-221- M d S D W orksheet s iz e : 100000 c e lls P U kT T TliSU tz One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 4 2.986 E rro r 10 3 .7 0 5 T o ta l 14 6 .6 9 2 % L ipid MS 0.747 0.371 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 0.5500 0.4567 0.4700 0.4267 1.5867 0.6087 StDev 0.1375 0.0874 0.1852 0.0723 1.3367 F 2.01 P 0.168 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Me an Based on Pooled StDev ( ------------ ( -------------- ( ----------- ( -------------- ------ ) ~) --) --) (--- 0.00 0.80 1.60 -------- ) 2.40 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 4 8367 10 52883 14 61250 F lu o rid e MS 2092 5288 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3- Pooled StDev = Mean 105.00 150.00 133.33 146.67 90.00 72.72 StDev 56.35 112.58 92.38 45.09 5.00 F 0.40 P 0.808 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean -B+a-s--e---d------o--n------P----o- +o -l--e--d------S---t--D----e--v--- + ------------------------- + ----------( --------------------------------- ----------------------------------) ( --------------------- *------------------------) ( --------------------- *----------------------) (--------------------- *----------------------) ( ----------------------------------- * ----------------------------------) ----------------- (.------------------ H------------------ 1------- 0 70 140 210 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 4 230671 E rro r 10 648677 T o ta l 14 879348 Aluminum MS 57668 64868 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 153.0 145.3 133.7 386.7 406.3 254.7 StDev 166.4 90.1 50.5 467.9 258.9 F 0.89 P 0.505 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ---------- ------------------4-------------------'+-------- ( -------------------------- * ----------------------------- ) ( ------------------ * -------------------- ) (----------------*------------------ ) ( ----------------- *------------------ , { --------------------------- --------------------------- ) ------------I------------------------------------- +------- 0 300 600 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance fo r/B arium / Source DF SS ---------- ""MS Sample L 4 136.1 34.0 E rro r 10 130.5 13.0 T o ta l 14 2 6 6 .6 F 2.61 P 0.100 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev 000645 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 14.800 19.633 15.433 10.707 12.567 3.612 StDev 4.804 3.931 1.115 3.308 3.811 \ \" ( 10.0 ( ) 15.0 1 o o CM One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Cadmium Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 0.02629 0.00657 E rro r 10 0 .0 6 7 2 7 0 .0 0 6 7 3 T o ta l 14 0 .0 9 3 5 6 Level 0 1 2 3 4- N Mean StDev 3 0.07333 0.03215 3 0.09000 0.01732 3 0.12333 0.17926 3 0.01667 0.01155 3 0.01667 0.00577 F 0.98 P 0.462 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( { /\ --) -- ) ) ) 1 1 O1 1 MH O1 1 Pooled StDev = 0.08202 0.00 0.20 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 4 1021893 10 3015400 14 4037293 Calcium MS 255473 301540 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean 3 2926.7 3 2690.0 3 3096.7 3 2583.3 3 2350.0 StDev 430.2 725.2 306.2 791.1 277.8 F 0. 85 P 0.527 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev -------1-- ( -----------------------. ------------------------, ( ~ ( ----------- * -----------------------) ( ----------( --------------------- , ----------------} Pooled StDev = 549.1 1800 2400 3000 3600 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Chromium Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 20.71 5.18 E rro r 10 7 4 .6 6 7.47 T o ta l 14 9 5 .3 7 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 2.667 2.833 2.100 3.367 5.500 2.732 StDev 0.289 1.986 0.700 2.194 5.292 F 0.69 P 0.613 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( ---------------( ------------- ( ----------{---------------------- --------- } --------- } ----------- ) ( -------------------- 0.0 3.0 6.0 9. One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Cobalt Source DF SS MS F P U SF W 1222 000646 Sample L 4 0.11563 Error 10 0 .0 2 6 3 3 Total 14 0 .1 4 1 9 6 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean 3 0.09000 3 0.11333 3 0.07667 3 0.09000 3 0.31000 Pooled StDev = 0.05132 0.02891 0.00263 S tD ev 0.04359 0.05859 0.02082 0.02646 0.08185 10.98 O.OOX I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Fooled StDev ( ---------------* ----------------- ) ( -------- *-----------) ( ---------- *---------) ( ----------*----------- ) ( 0.10 0.20 0.30 ) One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Copper Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 3.289 0.822 E rro r 10 4 .7 2 0 0 .4 7 2 T otal 14 8 .0 0 9 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean StDev 3 3.5000 0.5000 3 4.7000 0.7000 3 4.7333 0.7572 3 3.9333 0.4726 3 4.1667 0.9074 Pooled StDev 0.6870 One-Way Analysis of Variance F 1.74 P 0.217 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean B----a---s--e- +d ----o---n-----P----o--o---l--e--+d ----S---t-D----e---v----------+ ------------------------- +. ( -------------- *-------------- ) <------------- * -------( -------------*-------- ( ---------------- * --------------------- ) ( --------------------- * ---------------------- ) ------ +---------------- +---------------- + - 3.0 4.0 5.0 ) ) 6.0 A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T otal of V ariance for DF SS 4 103244 10 128405 14 231649 Iron MS 25811 12841 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean StDev 3 147.0 129.2 3 148.7 62.9 3 116.7 33.2 3 134.0 53.9 3 342.0 198.9 F 2.01 P 0.169 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Me an Based on Pooled StDev { ( -lm" ' ( ----- - ............. - ) .... ..... ) ^) \ 1,1" '' ------------ Pooled StDev = 113.3 One-Way Analysis of Variance 0 150 300 450 A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 4 0.01783 10 0.0 5 5 0 7 14 0.07289 Lead MS 0.00446 0.00551 Level 0 1 2 3 * N Mean 3 0.20000 3 0.20333 3 0.18333 3 0.14667 3 0.25333 ~ "7421 StDev 0.10583 0.03215 0.02517 0.04933 0.11060 F 0.81 P 0.547 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ---------h------------------+---------------- +----------------- +_ ( --------------- *----------------) <-------------------------------*-----------*--------------------------)-------) * 00064? ( -------------- *---------------- ) - +------------ -- + ---------- +----------------H-- 0.10 0-20 0.30 0.40 USF\N 12 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF s s 4 129827 10 409733 14 539560 Magnesiu MS 32457 40973 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean 3 1640.0 3 1440.0 3 1423.3 3 1486.7 3 1630.0 StDev 88.9 304.5 152.8 260.1 115.3 F 0.79 P 0.556 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev -- +----------------+---------------- +---------------- +------( --------------------- *----------------------) ( --------------------- *----------------------) ( ---------------------------------* --------------------------------- ) ( ---------------------------------* --------------------------------- ) ( ------------------------ * ----------------------- ) Pooled StDev = 202.4 1200 1400 1600 1800 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 4 34965 E rro r 10 15009 T o ta l 14 49974 Manganes MS 8741 1501 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean 3 164.67 3 162.67 3 75.33 3 56.33 3 66.00 StDev 57.73 52.00 17.04 26.63 21.63 F 5. 82 ^ P '1 / o.oiiy I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev <( -------- ( ------( ------"---*------------------)----- ) -------------- ) Pooled StDev = 38.74 60 120 180 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis Source Sample L E rro r T o ta l of V ariance for DF SS 4 0.05523 10 0 .0 9 9 2 3 14 0 .1 5 4 4 6 M ercury MS 0.01381 0.00992 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean 3 0.13333 3 0.02500 3 0.16167 3 0.02500 3 0.02500 Pooled StDev = 0.09962 StDev 0.18764 0.00000 0.12003 0.00000 0.00000 F 1.39 P 0.305 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ----------------H---------------- H----------------- 1--------- ( --------------------- * ---------------------- ) {-------------------*----------------- ) ( ---------------- * ) ( ------------------- *----------------- ) ( ----------------------------- * ---------------------------) ----------------+--------------- +---------------- +-------- 0.00 0.12 0.24 One-Way Analysis of Variance A nalysis of V ariance for Source DF SS Sample L 4 16080 E rro r 10 38646 T o ta l 14 54726 N ickel MS 4020 3865 Level 0 1 2 N Mean StDev 3 1.97 0.83 3 1.83 0.40 3 1.47 0.47 F 1.04 P 0.434 I n d i v i d u a l 95% C I s F o r Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( ----------------------( --------------- ( ------------------ --) --) --) U SF W 1224 000648 33 43 Pooled StDev = 6.17 84.60 62.17 4.67 138.92 (--------------* ------------ ) (----------- *------------- ) -- +-----------------b----------------+---------------- +------- -70 0 70 140 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Potassiu Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 25782667 6445667 Error 10 137226667 13722667 Total 14 163009333 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 17033 20000 18200 17900 20500 3704 StDev 2201 5237 2007 3686 4327 F 0. 47 P 0.757 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (--- ( (- ---) (------------- ----- j ----- ) (------------- *. 16000 20000 24000 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Sample L Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 2416 10 2939 14 5355 Sodium MS 604 294 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean StDev 3 37.33 7.23 3 68.67 16.17 3 59.67 10.26 3 61.33 27.57 3 74.67 17.04 F 2.05 P 0.162 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ---- + -----------+ -----------+ ----------- +. ( -------------- *-------------- ) (---------*---------- ) (---------- *---------- ) ( -------------- *------------- ) ( -------------- *-------------- ) Pooled StDev = 17.14 25 50 75 100 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Vanadium Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 0.2914 0.0728 Error 10 0.3920 0.0392 Total 14 0.6834 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 0.2333 0.1933 0.2000 0.2000 0.5533 0.1980 StDev 0.2309 0.1793 0.1000 0.1000 0.3009 F 1.86 P 0.195 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (----------------*------------------ > ( --------------- *------------------) (-----------*------------- } ( ---------------*------------------j (----------- *------------ > ----I------------------ 1-----------------H----------------- +--- 0.00 0.25 0.500.75 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Sample L Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 127.4 10 379.1 14 506.6 Zinc MS 31.9 37.9 F 0.84 P 0.530 Individual 95% CIs For Mean 000649 USFW 1225 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 14.633 18.967 21.867 13.967 16.467 6.157 StDev 2.248 2.458 12.708 2.454 3.308 Based on Pooled StDev -- + ---------- + ----------- + -----------+ (------------*------------ ) (------------*------------ ) (----------- *------------- ) (------------ *------------) (------------- *------------ ) ----h----------------H-----------------+---------------- +----- 7.0 14.0 21.0 28.0 MTB > save 'a:\plant.mtw' Saving worksheet in file: a:\plant.mtw MTB > USFW 1226 00065q One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for % Lipids Source DF SS MS Location 4 0.0977 0.0244 Error 10 0.5247 0.0525 Total 14 0 . 6 2 2 4 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean StDev 3 0.4833 0.1250 3 0.3533 0.1973 3 0.3067 0.0551 3 0.2800 0.2972 3 0.4567 0.3412 F 0.47 P 0.760 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StOev -+ ----------------+----------------- K-------------- + - ( ----------(------------------*----------------*------------------------)-------- ) (-(--------------------------------*-*--------------------------------)- ) -+------ -(----------+----------------------*---+-----_--------------------- )+- Pooled StDev = 0.2291 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 1098440 10 5853133 14 6951573 Aluminum MS 274610 585313 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 1756.7 1413.3 923.3 1223.3 1306.7 765.1 StDev 1251.7 758.0 240.1 503.6 688.6 F 0.47 P 0.758 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StOev -H------------------1------------------1------------------y. (-------------- *---------------) ( --------------------- *-------------------- ) ( --------------------- *--------------------) ( ------------------- *----------------------) ( ------------------- *----------------------) - +----------------+----------------+---------------- +------0 800 1600 2400 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Arsenic Source DF SS MS Location 4 6.32 1.58 Error 10 41.69 4.17 Total 14 48.01 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 3.933 3.500 5.033 5.200 4.200 2.042 StDev 0.351 1.153 3.308 2.773 0.872 F 0.38 P 0.819 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ----------- (.--------------- H----------------- +---------------- + ( --------------------- *----------------------) (--------------- *----------------- ) ( --------------------- *---------------------- ) <--------------------- *---------------------- ) --------(----4----------------------------------+--*------------------------------1---------------)--------- + 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 86.4 10 207.3 14 293.7 Barium MS 21.6 20.7 Level 0 1 N Mean 3 18.000 3 15.000 StDev 7.000 4.359 F 1.04 P 0.433 Individual 95% CIs For Mean 000651 Based on Pooled StDev ------------ + -----------+ -----------+ ------- {* USF]/V 1227 2 3 11.333 1 .528 (------------- *------------ ) 3 3 14.000 3.464 (------------- *------------- ) 4 3 17.333 4.619 (------------- *------------ ) Pooled StDev = 4.553 10.0 15.0 20.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Beryllxu Source DF SS MS Location 4 0.00329 0.00082 Error 10 0.01540 0.001S4 Total 14 0.01869 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 0.12000 0.09667 0.07333 0.09667 0.10000 0.03924 StDev 0.05292 0.03215 0.01528 0.03055 0.05196 F 0.53 P 0.714 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------ +---------------- +---------------- +----------------+ - (------(-------------------*-----------------*---------------------)----------) ( ------------------- *----------------------) ((-----------------------------------*-*-------------------------------------) ) ------ +---------------- +----------------+----------------+ - 0.040 0.080 0.120 0.160 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total Level 0 1 2 3 4 of Variance for (^admiuiny DF SS HS F P 4 1027 0.7757 17 11 0.000 10 4533 0.0453 14 5560 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev N Mean StDev ----1------------------h----------------H--------- 3 .3000 0.2000 (-----*----- ) 3 .3667 0.0577 (' 3 .2000 0.1732 3 .2000 0.3606 ) 3 .2333 0.1528 ---- + -- Pooled StDev = 0.2129 2 .0 0 2.50 3.00 ----h-- 3.50 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF 4 756000 10 340000 14 1096000 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 4400.0 4000.0 4000.0 4100.0 3700.0 184.4 Calcium^ 189000 34000 StDev 0.0 100.0 100.0 346.4 173.2 5.56 0.013 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev --H------ (----- (---------- ) (----- * - ----- ) (-------- 1------ (-----*----- ) -*-------) 3500 3850 4200 -------+ 4550 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Chromium Source DF SS MS Location 4 3.59 0.90 Error 10 18.61 1.86 Total 14 22.20 F 0.48 P 0.748 USFW 1 2 2 8 000652 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev * Mean 3.533 2.967 2.033 2.867 2.600 1.364 StDev 2.312 0.839 0.416 1.266 1.217 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev -------------- +---------------+---------------- +<-------------- *--------- ( ------------------- *------------------ ) ( ------------------- *------------------ ) ( -(--------------------------------*------*----------------------------------)--- > --------------+---------------+---------------- + - 1.5 3.0 4.5 ) One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 16.004 10 8.800 14 24.804 Cobalt MS 4.001 0.880 Level 0 1 23 4 N Mean 3 7.633 3 7.400 3 9.133 3 8.700 3 10.233 StDev 0.551 0.781 0.777 1.058 1.328 F / - -------IS- 4.5S 0.024 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Pooled StDev = 0.938 7.5 9.0 10.5 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 55.60 10 52.00 14 107.60 Copper MS 13.90 5.20 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 19.333 14.333 15.000 14.000 15.333 2.280 StDev 4.041 2.082 1.732 0.000 1.528 2.67 '"S = P ) 0.094y Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------- + . 14.0 -------+ . 17.5 21.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 576507 10 3240067 14 3816573 Iron MS 144127 324007 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 1700.0 1426.7 1086.7 1396.7 1466.7 569.2 StDev 781.0 646.6 185.8 462.6 585.9 F 0.44 P 0.774 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( (-* - - - - - ( '' 600 1200 "*) 1800 ) `) 2400 One-Way Analysis of Variance 0006S3 USFW 1229 Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 0.346 10 1.554 14 1.900 Lead MS 0.086 0.155 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 1.0200 1.1000 0.6833 0.7867 0.9333 0.3942 StDev 0.5086 0.5292 0.1069 0.2892 0.3786 F 0.56 P 0.700 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StOev \' l' ( .. ...... ( \ 0.40 O00 o "' ) ) 1.20 ) ) ) 1.60 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 39293 10 69067 14 108360 Magnesiu MS 9823 6907 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 1053.3 933.3 936.7 930.0 1016.7 83.1 StDev 128.6 90.7 15.3 60.8 76.4 F 1.42 P 0.296 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( ----------------*------------------ ) ( ----------------- ---------------- ) ( ----------------(---*------------------------------*------)------------- j --------------+---------------- +--------------- +-- 900 1000 1100 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 1309 10 8613 14 9922 Manganea MS 327 861 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 77.00 100.33 90.67 93.33 76.67 29.35 StDev 46.51 39.50 5.51 7.23 22.37 F 0.38 P 0.818 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------------ +--------------- +---------------- +----------- ( ------------------------- * ------------------------- ) (------------------- *----------------------) (------------------- *----------------------) ( ------------------- *----------------------) -<----------------------+-------------------*------------y------------------------------)--H-----------60 90 120 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 55.10 10 21.87 14 76.97 Nickel MS 13.78 2.19 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean StDev 3 8.267 2.532 3 4.867 1.531 3 3.167 0.764 3 3.633 0.924 3 3.233 0.862 F 6.30 ^P} /f 0 . 0 0 8 / .___ Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (-------- *- ----- ) (-------(-------- *- *-------) -------) () USFW 1230 000654 Pooled StDev * 1.479 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 1346667 10 4466667 14 5813 3 3 3 Potassiu MS 336667 446667 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Kean 8266.7 8766.7 8400.0 8533.3 7866.7 668.3 StDev 665.8 1078.6 100.0 750.6 230.9 F 0. 75 P 0.578 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (---------- *-- ----- j (------(------------*- -----) ) (---------- -> (---- -- 4-- ) 7200 8000 8800 9600 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 2.400 10 3.333 14 5.733 Selenium MS 0.600 0.333 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 2.0000 2.0000 2.6667 2.6667 3.0000 0.5774 StDev 1.0000 0.0000 0.5774 0.5774 0.0000 F 1.80 P 0.205 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ((- 1. 40 ) ) (------------* (------------* (------- 2.10 2 .80 --- ) --- ) 3.50 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 0.000707 10 0.001067 14 0.001773 Silver MS 0.000177 0.000107 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 0.03667 0.04667 0.04000 0.04333 0.05667 0.01033 StDev 0.00577 0.00577 0.01732 0.00577 0.01155 F 1.66 P 0.236 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (-------- * (-----(---(----- 0.030 ) ---) --- ) -) (--- 0.045 0.060 0.' One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 513333 10 940000 14 1453333 Sodium MS 128333 94000 Level 0 N Mean 3 4566.7 StDev 351.2 F 1.37 P 0.313 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (----- 000655 USFW 1231 13 23 33 43 Pooled StDev = 4566.7 4600.0 4300.0 4133.3 306.6 550.8 0.0 200.0 57.7 (------------*------------- ) (------------*------------- ) (------------*------------ ) (------------*------------ ) ------- 1------------------1-----------------+---------------- H 3850 4200 4550 4900 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Thallium Source DF SS Location 4 0.0022267 0.0005567 Error 10 0.0005167 0.0000517 Total 14 0.0027433 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean 3 0.036667 3 0.056667 3 0.030000 3 0.021667 3 0.026667 Pooled StDev * 0.007188 StDev 0.011547 0.005774 0.000000 0.007638 0.005774 F 10.77 P 0.001 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev -- +----------------+---------------- +---------------- +------- ( --------*----------- ) ( -------- *---------) ( -------- *---------) ( ------(----*----------.--------)--- ) ----(.---------------- (.---------------- +---------------- H------- 0.015 0.030 0.045 0.060 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 2.52 10 22.73 14 25.26 Vanadium MS 0.63 2.27 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 3.700 3.300 2.433 3.200 3.167 1.508 StDev 2.261 1.493 0.586 1.229 1.474 F 0.28 P 0.886 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------------ +---------------- +---------------- +-------------- ( --------------------- *----------------------) ( --------------------- *----------------------) ( --------------------- *----------------------) <--------------------- *----------------------) ( --------------------- *----------------------) -- I-------------------- 1--------------------- 1.5 3.0 4.5 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Location Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 173.3 10 600.0 14 773.3 Zinc MS 43.3 60.0 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 116.67 120.00 120.00 123.33 113.33 . 7.75 StDev 5.77 10.00 0.00 11.55 5.77 F 0.72 P 0.596 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------------ H---------------- +---------------- H------- (----------- *------------) <------------ *----------- ) ( -----------------*----------------) (----------------------- ) ( ----------------*--------------- ) ------------ +--------------- +---------------- +------ 110 120 130 USFW 1232 000656 F tsw T ' >s u One-Way Analysis of Variance A M A L1S\S Analysis of Variance for % lipid Source DF SS MS loc 2 3.45 1.72 Error 3 5.02 1.67 Total 5 8.47 Level 2 3 4 N 1 2 3 Pooled StDev Mean 0.860 2.365 3.000 1.293 StDev 0.000 2.044 0.649 F 1.03 P 0.456 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------H-------------------- 1------------------- (.----------------+.-- ( -------------------(----------_--*----------------*--------------------------------) J ----- +------------------K--(----------------------------+---*------------------------------+--)-2.5 0.0 2.5 5.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for DF SS 2 43911 4 131175 6 175086 Fluoride MS 21955 32794 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 292.5 287.5 130.0 181.1 StDev 251.0 258.1 27.8 F 0.67 P 0.561 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StOev ----------- h---------------+---------------- +----------- ((-------------------------------------------**----------------------------------------- )) -<--------------------1---------------*---------------+--------------------------)--- H-----------0 250 500 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for (Aluminum DF SS -------a s 2 19751521 9875761 4 987396 246849 6 20738917 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 4380.0 2065.0 325.0 496.8 StDev 707.1 601.0 251.1 F 40.01 P 0.002 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (---- * " -- ) 0 1600 W-m. ' ) ( 3200 " - ") 4800 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for ^rsnic) DF SS 2 3.5226 1.7613 4 0.1667 0.0417 6 3.6893 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 1.9500 1.6000 0.3667 0.2041 StDev 0.0707 0.2828 0.2021 F 42.27 P 0.002 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ----------------- +----------------- +-------------- +------- <-------- *---------) ( -------- *---------) (-- *----- ) ------------------ 1------------------ +-------------- +------- 0.70 1.40 2.10 One-Way Analysis of Variance USFVV 1211 000657 Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for (Barium) D F SS v-- -- -- 'MS 2 2404.5 1202.2 4 88.2 22.1 6 2492.7 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 53.250 35.950 9.557 4.696 StDev 4.879 4.313 4.785 F 54.52 P 0.001 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (-----*----) ( ----------------) ) --+ --------------- + ----------------- + 20 40 60 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total Level 2 3 4 of Variance for (B eryllT ij^ DF SS M5 F P 2 0.028226 0.014113 37.22 0.003 4 0.001517 0.000379 6 0.029743 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev N Mean S t D e v --- + ---------- + -----------+ -----------+ -- 2 0.17000 0.02828 ( ------ *--------- ) 2 0.07500 0.02121 ( -------- *------- ) 3 0.01667 0. 0 1 1 5 5 ---(----H----*---------------)---- +-----------------h----------------- H Pooled StDev = 0.01947 0.000 0.070 0.140 0.210 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Cadmium Source DF SS MS loc 2 0.08080 0.04040 Error 4 0.01057 0.00264 Total 6 0.09137 Level 2 3 4 N Mean 2 0.23500 2 0.15500 3 0.40333 Pooled StDev = 0.05140 StDev 0.06364 0.00707 0.05686 F 15.29 r 0 . 0 1 3 ) Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev -------+ ---- ------ + --- ------- -J-- (-(-------- *- ------- ) ") (----- 0.12 0.24 0.36 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for DF SS 2 16765219 4 300228267 6 316993486 Calcium MS 8382610 75057067 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 23400 25900 22173 8664 StDev 283 1131 12224 F 0.11 P 0.897 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev --------1---------------- +---------------- 1------------------h-- ( ---------------------------- *----------------------------- ) ( ---------------------------- *----------------------------- ) -----(------1---------------------------------1-------*---------------------------+--------------------)------ h 10000 20000 30000 40000 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Chromium Source DF SS MS loc 2 180.6 90.3 F 1.99 P 0.251 U S F W 1234 000658 Error Total 4 181.3 6 361.9 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 15.300 3.900 4.167 6.733 45.3 StDev 12.152 0.424 4.077 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ----------------------- +----- {-----------------(-*----------------------------------*--)----------------- ) ----(-------------------4----------*------------------------+----)-------------- +------0 12 24 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for(Cobalt Source DF SS loc 2 2.3238 1.1619 Error 4 0.1255 0.0314 Total 6 2.4493 Level 2 3 4. N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev * Mean 1.7300 0.8350 0.3400 0.1771 StDev 0.2404 0.1909 0.1249 F 37.05 P 0.003 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ( -------- *---------) (------ , ---(----j------ *---------) ---------------- -1------------------H------------------- h--------- 0.60 1.20 1.80 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for DF SS 2 3.523 4 2.872 6 6.394 Copper MS 1.761 0.718 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 6.3000 6.6500 5.0667 C .34 /3 StDev 1.2728 0.4950 0.7095 F 2.45 P 0.202 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev -------- +--------------- +---------------- +---------------- + ( ----------------- *------------------ > ( ----------------- *------------------ ) -(----------------(-.-----------*------------------+----------)----------- +---------------- + 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for (iron j DF SS ----MS 2 7274403 3637202 4 403289 100822 6 7677692 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 2760.0 1340.0 298.7 317.5 StDev 480.8 339.4 168.7 F 36.08 P 0.003 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev {---0 (------ ) 1000 (-- ----- ) 2000 3000 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for(Lead ) DF SS ^ M S 2 2.4373 1.2187 4 0.1204 0.0301 6 2.5578 F 40.47 P 0.002 Individual 95% CIs For Mean USFVV 1235 000659 Level 5 3 4 N Mean 2 1.6250 o 0.7900 3 0.2000 StDev 0.2616 0.1838 0.0954 Based on Pooled StDev ( -----*-------()---- ) Pooled StDev = 0.1735 0.00 0.60 1.20 1.80 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for DF SS 2 381275 4 275653 6 656928 Magnesiu 190638 68913 F 2.77 P 0.176 Individual 95% C I s For Mean Based on Pooled StDev z2 o2 4 Pooled StDev = 1655.0 1102.3 262.5 63.6 ( ( 1000 l ----- - .> 1500 * ) 2000 ) One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total Level 2 3 4 of Variance for (Manganes DF SS ------- MS" 2 14718 7359 4 733 183 6 15451 N Mean 2 121.50 2 110.50 3 23.72 StDev 9.19 0.71 18.01 F 40.14 P 0.002 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (---- *-- -- ) (---(----- Pooled StDev = 13.54 40 80 120 ) ) One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for DF SS 2 44.87 4 26.19 6 71.05 Nickel MS 22.43 6.55 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 7.300 2.200 1.433 2.559 StDev 4.808 0.141 1.234 F 3.43 P 0.136 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev -------+ - (------- (-(----------------*-------- ) ---- -- + - 0.0 5.0 10.0 + 15.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for DF SS 2 1604286 4 5830000 6 7434286 Potassiu MS 802143 1457500 Level 2 N Mean StDev 2 13650 71 F 0.55 P 0.615 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev - + ---------- + -----------+ ------ (------------------ *----- U SFW 1236 000660 32 43 Pooled StDev = 12850 14000 1207 495 (------------------ *----------------- ) 1670 (-------------- *-------------- ) -------------- +---------- +-------------------------------- 10500 12000 13500 15000 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for DF SS 2 3.86 4 5.00 6 8.86 Selenium MS 1.93 1.25 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 2.500 2.500 1.000 1.118 StDev 0.707 2.121 0 .0 0 0 F 1.54 P 0.319 Indiv i d u a l 95% Cl's For Me a n Based on Pooled StDev -------+ -----------+ ---------- + -----------+ (------------------ *------------------) ( -------------------------*------------------------ ) ( ----------A------------------------*-----------1------------------------------)--1-----------------+ 0.0 1.5 3.0 4.5 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for Silver DF SS MS 2 0.0006857 0.0003429 4 0.0002000 0.0000500 6 0.0008857 Level 2 3 4 N Mean 2 0.010000 2 0.010000 3 0.030000 Pooled StDev = 0.007071 StDev 0.000000 0.000000 0.010000 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev --- +------------+------------ +-- <( ------------------------------ **---------------------------- )) (--------- -----+----------------- h----------------- +-- 0.000 0.015 0.030 -)--- H--0.045 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Sodium Source DF SS MS loc 2 72786 36393 Error 4 550300 137575 Total 6 623086 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 3995.0 3735.0 3810.0 370.9 StDev 148.5 134.4 505.1 F 0.26 P 0.780 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------------------ K-----------------1-----------------+------- <------------------------- *------------------------) ( ------(---------------------------------*-*------------------------------------)-) -- -------- 4*-- ----+ 3500 4000 4500 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance DF SS 2 0.0025000 4 0.0001000 6 0.0026000 ------ Ms 0.0012500 0.0000250 Level 2 3 4 N Mean StDev 2 0.055000 0.007071 2 0.035000 0.007071 3 0.010000 0.000000 F 50.00 P 0.001 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (--- *---(---- *--- ) +1111111 ++\111111111 *111111 1111111 1 000661 USFW 1237 Pooled StDev = 0.005000 0.020 0.040 0.060 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total Level 2 3 4 of V a r i a n c e for <v a n a d i u m DF SS 2 40.890 20.445 4 2.327 0.582 6 43.217 N Mean StDev 2 6.4000 1.1314 2 3.1000 0.8485 3 0.5667 0.4041 'F 35.15 P 0.003 Individual 95% CIs For Based on Pooled StDev --- + ----- (----- *------) (---- *--- ) Mean (---- Pooled StDev = 0.7627 0.0 2.5 5.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source loc Error Total of Variance for DF SS 2 671 4 1294 6 1965 Zinc MS 335 324 Level 2 3 4 N 2 2 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 129.00 130.50 110.00 17.99 StDev 7.07 20.51 20.30 F 1.04 P 0.434 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ---------------I---------------- +--------------- H------------ ( ------------------------------------------------ ) (----------------------- *----------------------- ) ( -------------------- * ---------------------) --------------+----------------+--------------- +----------- 100 125 150 000662 USFW 1238 W orksheet s iz e : 100000 c e lls 0v One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Fluoride Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 9693 2423 Error 10 30200 3020 Total 14 39893 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 263.33 266.67 210.00 283.33 240.00 54.95 StDev 55.08 55.08 17.32 75.06 55.68 F 0.80 P 0.551 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev --------------- 1-- (- ------------ ) ( ------------ ) (--------- -) (----------- ------------- ) (--- ------- ) 180 240 300 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Aluminum Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 21846027 5461507 Error 10 32856533 3285653 Total 14 54702560 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 12533 10480 12967 10480 10020 1813 StDev 2250 688 3089 1010 574 F 1.66 P 0.234 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev V ( (- () { ^) 10000 12500 ^) 15000 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Arsenic Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 3.067 0.767 Error 10 8.667 0.867 Total 14 11.733 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 5.0000 4.6667 4.3333 4.6667 5.6667 0.9309 StDev 1.0000 1.1547 0.5774 0.5774 1.1547 F 0.88 P 0.507 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ---- + ---------- + -----------+ -----------+. ( ----------------*---------------- j (---------------- . ---------------- ) ( ----------------*---------------- ) ( ---------------- *---------------- ) ( ----------------*---------------- ) --------+ ------------------ 1--------------------- 1--------------------- +. 3.6 4.8 6.07.2 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Barium Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 2696 674 Error 10 7319 732 Total 14 10016 F 0.92 P 0.489 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev 0006C.3 USF\/\/ 1239 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 130.00 127.33 162.00 133.00 150.33 27.05 StDev 14.53 29.54 48.59 9.64 11.06 ----------------+--------------- +----------------+----------(----------------- *--------------------) ( ----------------- *--------------------) (------------------- *--------------------) ( ----------------- *--------------------) ---------------(+--------------------------------+*--------------------------------+-------)-------- 120 150 180 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Sample L Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 0.2667 10 0.6667 14 0.9333 Berylliu MS 0.0667 0.0667 Level 0 1 2 3 4 .. N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 1 .0 0 0 0 1 .0 0 0 0 1.3333 1 .0 0 0 0 1 .0 0 0 0 0.2582 StDev 0 .0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0.5774 0.0000 0.0000 1.00 0.452 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev -------------------1--------------------- y--------------------1---------------- ((---------------------------------**------------------------------)) (------------- * ) <<--------------------------------- **------------------------------)) -------------------1--------------------- y--------------------y--------------- 0.90 1.20 1.50 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Calcium Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 1065400 266350 Error 10 8977133 897713 Total 14 10042533 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 2606.7 2533.3 3136.7 2903.3 2403.3 947.5 StDev 996.3 1124.3 280.4 1270.3 734.5 F 0.30 P 0.874 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------------------ y------------------- + -------------------- H---------- ( -(------------------------------------*- -*-----------------------------------------)) ( ------------------- *----------------------) (-------------- *-------------- ) -(--------------------------+------------*------------------+---------------------)------ +------- 2000 3000 4000 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Chromium Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 98.3 24.6 Error 10 159.3 15.9 Total 14 257.6 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 23.333 18.333 24.333 23.333 18.667 3.992 StDev 4.933 2.082 6.110 3.055 2.082 F 1.54 P 0.263 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ------ +----------------- +--------------- +---------------- + (------------ *------------) ( ------------------*---------------- ) ( ----------------- *---------------- ) ( ----------------- *---------------- ) {----------------*------------------ ) ------- 1------------------- H-----------------1---------------- + 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Cobalt Source DF SS MS F P USFW 1240 000664 Sample L Error Total 4 10 14 156.7 233.3 390.0 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 14.333 16.667 24.000 18.000 17.000 4.830 39.2 23.3 1.68 0.231 StDev 2.517 3.512 9.644 2.000 1.000 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StOev ---------- +---------------------------------- +---------------- ( -----{----------------------*------------*--------------------)------ ) (------------ *------------) ( ---------------- *---------------- ) --------(----+---------------------------*-----+-------------------------------)- +---------------- 12.0 18.0 24.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Copper Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 65.6 16.4 Error 10 233.3 23.3 Total 14 298.9 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 23.000 19.333 23.333 20.000 18.000 4.830 StDev 6.557 3.512 6.658 3.606 2.000 F 0.70 P 0.608 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StOev -------------- 1-------------------- -------------------- + --------------------- ( ------------------- *-------------------- ) ( --------------(-------------*----------------------*------------)--------- ) ( ------{--------------------------*------------*---------------------------)-------) ---------- +----------------+--------------- +----------------- 15.0 20.0 25.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Iron Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 173353333 43338333 Error 10 366146667 3 6614667 Total 14 5 3 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 28767 22633 32700 27267 25133 6051 StDev 6018 1904 9805 6429 2403 F 1.18 P 0.375 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ---------------------I-------------------- + -------------------- + ---------------- ( ----------------- *------------------ ) ( --------------------* -------------------- ) ( ------------------*------------------ ) ( ------------------ * ------------------- ) (------------------- *----------------- ) ----------------+--------------- +---------------- +------------- 21000 28000 35000 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Sample L Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 909 10 7555 14 8464 Lead MS 227 755 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 25.67 26.33 25.67 24.67 45.00 27.49 StDev 3.21 5.13 6.35 5.03 60.62 F 0.30 P 0.871 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ----- +--------------- +---------------- +---------------- 1-- {------------------------ *----------------------- ) {------------------------- * ------------------------) ( ------------------------ *----------------------- ) ( --------------(---------------------*----------------------------------------------)-------------) -------- +--------------- +---------------- +---------------- + - 0 25 50 75 000665 USFW 1241 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Magnesiu Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 2410707 602677 F 2.41 P 0.118 Error 10 2496133 249613 Total 14 4906840 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Level 0 1 2 3 4 N Mean 3 3460.0 3 2723.3 3 3750.0 3 2900.0 3 2826.7 StDev 330.5 310.7 932.6 386.9 151.4 Based on - + -- ---- (------(---- (-----+ ------- Pooled StDev (-------) (-- ---- ) --- ) -- ) ------- ) Pooled StDev = 499.6 2100 2800 3500 4200 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Manganes Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 1753888 438472 Error 10 1639196 163920 Total 14 3393084 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 679.7 1106.0 1716.7 1310.0 1022.7 404.9 StDev 103.5 471.0 751.4 55.7 138.9 F 2.67 P 0.094 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (-------- *- --- ) (" -- ) (---- (--- <----------- ) ~) 600 1200 1800 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Nickel Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 120.3 30.1 Error 10 189.3 18.9 Total 14 309.6 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 24.667 19.333 26.333 23.333 19.333 4.351 StDev 5.033 2.517 6.658 4.163 1.155 F 1.59 P 0.252 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ----1----- (-------- (------- ----- ) (---- (----------- (-------- ----- ) --- + 15.0 20.0 25.0 ------ ) -- ) 30.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Potassiu Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 688640 172160 Error 10 1747933 174793 Total 14 2436573 Level 0 1 2 N Mean 3 1700.0 3 1200.0 3 1666.7 StDev 519.6 200.0 503.3 F 0.98 P 0.458 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev -------- + - (--------- -- (------------*------- ---- *------------) ) (---------- *---------- - ) USFW 1242 000666 33 43 Pooled StDev = 1350.0 1226.7 418.1 492.4 261.0 (------------*------------ ) (------------* -----------) --------------Y---------------- H------------------+. 1000 - 1500 2000 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Sodium Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 591.7 147.9 Error 10 378.0 37.8 Total 14 969.7 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 45.667 29.000 40.667 35.000 30.333 6.148 StDev 6.658 7.000 2.887 7.937 4.933 F 3.91 P 0.036 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev (-------- (-------- * - ------ ) (-------- .-------(------(-----*-----------*-----)----- } 30 40 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis of Variance for Vanadium Source DF SS MS Sample L 4 279.3 69.8 Error 10 318.7 31.9 Total 14 598.0 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 35.333 28.667 40.333 31.000 29.667 5.645 StDev 5.774 3.215 9.713 2.646 3.786 F 2.19 P 0.143 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev ----- *---- <--------- *----- ---- ) (------- --------- ) (-------- (------(--+--------- ----- *---------- *--------- ) ) 24.0 32.0 40 .0 ---- ) 48.0 One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis Source Sample L Error Total of Variance for DF SS 4 908.9 10 900.7 14 1809.6 Zinc MS 227.2 90.1 Level 0 1 2 3 4 N 3 3 3 3 3 Pooled StDev = Mean 75.333 61.333 66.000 55.667 53.667 9.490 StDev 9.074 9.238 14.799 6.506 4.619 F 2.52 P 0.107 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev --- + --- <------- ( ~ (----- (-(-----------+ ----- --- ) --) ) --- ) 45 60 75 000667 USFW 1243 REAC, Edison, NJ (906) 321-4200 EPA Contract 68-C4-0022 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Project Name: ry __________ Project Nrnberg RFW Contact: - - 3 . 7 1 Phone: fog 7.31 H2Q a> 07297Oo O SHEET NO. (O F ) REAC* 162 ' 1* 7 iS H - ~ lS nSL 131 " / V O HL iH l * /Vi /vv " /VS -r /VI r - /V 7 /Vi ' /V* -C -I7 - Sample No. it \ \fZ IF X \\A tooo too 1 t not to m t onu ton 6 DO C / no 1 tont l cinti to to Sam pling Location m - -n R .P --E -2 R .l - E- nr nr - t - \ i AREA JL A i P A EL AfTA E l A t fa 1TL A t F A T IL A R E A T IL A R E A 1C a r FA 1T A R E A HI A k t ALL Dr*t k ' J t J n r- t - n - Matrix X Data Collected 6 -1 P - n r- L / El X 4 5hE * of Bottle 1 \ Contalrrer/P re se rv a t iv a % u 2 J b L ________ 1 TAL X /' E / t/Qf I J x X Nr L \ T T m I n L- 37*2r'/o*'c- J V ji- - ,-- X '' rf H O OC c c J _L -V----- -V-*srss --, SD- DS- OL- X- Sediment Drum Solid Drum Liquid Other BfO- j PW- GW- SW- SL - Potable Water v Groundwater Surface Waler Sludge S,W O- A- Soil Water Oil Air X - Sr*\t,vt rn u K \ \a\ T iS S '-'t wi i r ci ~2L - P r iL \\ o r*\ o j f &T{ FOR SUBCONTRACTING USE ONLY FROM CHAIN OF o i 3 o I / o 7739 CUSTODY # KemsJReason [/^ReXnqutsh^pil Atl 1Autl y t i l l --^ f Date Received By cJJWi L - 'f c / f / -- FORM 4 Date fl/M ? Time 1 Items/Reason IK H o HH U " Relinquished By Date Received By Date Tim rc TABLE l Cdncennttoa at'BNAi tn W*et 000669 fsi-11 U fi ts af r i ne t--rii oV-'LOJtOJ o Hxnooasi PPo 3 3 3 5 S o 5 S S o o o o o o o < S o o o S 3 o o o o o o S S o S o o S o S o S 3 5 o 5 3 3 o o 3 o S S 5 o o 3 o 5 o o r- g * :c c c *0 C i l i3 3 S 5 S 3 3 3 5 S 3 3 o o o o o < S o o < S 3 o o o o o o < $ S o S o S 3 S 3 o o 3 3 o o 3 3 a o o o o o o o o o o c CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ( I CCCCCCC^s n m 3 o o 3 3 o o o c .5o o o o o o o 3 o o o 3o o o o o o o S 3o 3o o 3o 3 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 5o o 3o o o 5ooi . * O *p cccrcrcrcccccrcrcccccccccci 5n M r 3oooo5oc5oooo33^oooSioooooo!SiS555oo(5515oo555Boo55555533o5oo55oo S rif iff c r , r ; r c c c n n r.f!r. c n r , r , n c c n c r i r , r 1r r ; c o c c i ccccncccci enne 3 3 5 c 5 o 5 S o o o o o c 3 o o o o i o o o o o o 5 (5 o S i 5 S3 S o o o o o o o o p o o o c o o o o o o o o o o o 0 5 r;eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeceeeeeceeee If o 5 o o o o o 3 3 5 S o o o 3 5 5 5 < 5 5 3 3 o o o o 3 o < S S o S o o 3 3 S o 5 o o o o o o 3 o o o o 3 S o 5 o o o o o o o o c r n CCCCCCCCCCCC _X nf 3 3 o 3 o o 3 o o o 3 5 3 5 o o (So o 5 3 ! S o o 3 o 1 S 3 5 5 3 ! 5 o 3 5 o o 3 o o 3 S o 5 o o 5 o 5 3 3 5 5 5 o o o c s r3 ;eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeecececeeeeeee leeecei nh M iC C C C C C C C C C C C r* r I TSB001005 1 j C ontam inant Phenol ta02-C hIarocthyO E (hcr 2-Chiaropbenai 1 ^ 'D ichlorobcnzene 1.-t-OKM orabananc B auyl alcohol l ^D tchlorobensene 2-Methy{pbenof ba<2 -Chloioioprop5rl)ether 4-M cihytpbenol N-Nitroao-Oi n propylene K etaddorocthaoe N itrobenane laophoroaa 2-Xim phanol 2.4>Dtmethy<phcno( b*a(2-Chiorothaxy)raetiunc 2.4-Dichlorophcnol l ^d-T nchlorobcasene N aphthaknt 4-ChJoromtIine H ecadt/arobucaduac *-ChIoro-3-ahytphcno( 2-M ctfaytM phthdcne Hcxachlarocyciopoatadicaa 2,4,6-Tridilorophenoi 2.4.5-Thchloropbeool 2-Chloranaphihalcnc 2>Nuroaittline D im cthylphihalatc Acenaphthylene 3>NitreemJm* Accnaphihcna 2.4-DinitrephcM l 4-Nttrophcnoi D tb au o fin a IS-D aum xolucn* 2.4Dinrirotoluen* DiethvIphthaUte -C hlorephcnyl-pbrnvlrtgr 4,6'DiMtro2mcthv(phcnol S'N ttrofodiphenvlaR uae 4-Bromophemrl-phemiedter Pent*chlorophcaol D i-o-butylphdulac Fluoranthene Pyrene Butyibenzytphthaljw Ij-D icfalorobeondin* B enioialanlhrieene B (2-Ethylhyl)phihaljt* Di-n-ocrylphthaUle Benzn(b)tluoranihene B eno(ktfuoitf> enc Benzo(a)p)Ttn* lndeno(l ,2 J -o llr'T{n* Dibemc(*.h)*ruhrcene O'p p ti Cm c /K * u u u U u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u V u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u LT u u u u u u u u V V u u O' u u u u u u u u u u u0' MDL m /k 4 i0 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 110 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 to 410 410 2000 410 2000 410 410 2000 410 2000 2000 410 410 410 410 410 410 2000 2000 410 410 410 2000 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 2000 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 V denote* compound not detected i d fn o trt compound detected below detection limit TABLE 3 Concentration ofSNA a a Sediment Dry Rim Creefc U'achmpoiv Wood Conroy. West V irpftu November 1997 Uppr Cane. MDL flic u V u U u u u u u u u u u u u u V u u u u u u u u u V V u u V u u u V V V c L IT u f u L' L* c c u v u U c u u V V u u ur V u V C u L' j s ! l . 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 2100 430 2100 430 430 2100 430 2100 2100 430 430 430 430 430 430 2100 2100 430 430 430 2100 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 2100 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 430 Arr a n Cane MDL uc/K c u u u u u u u u u u u V u u u u u u u LT U V V u u u V u u V u u u u u u u u V u c u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u V V u u u 4 j0 450 4 430 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 2300 450 2300 450 450 2300 450 2300 2300 450 450 450 450 450 450 2300 2300 450 450 450 2303 45*) 450 450 450 4S0 4?0 450 2300 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 45<1 Anm ilt C aw . MDL a tfK t U V U u u u L' U u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u LV u u u u u u u u u u u u U u u u L' U u L.1 L' U U C U u L: U U u 5^D U u u u u u u u uc/K c 42J 420 4 4 420 420 4 420 420 4 4 420 420 420 420 4 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 :to o 4 2100 420 420 2100 420 2100 2100 420 4 420 420 420 120 2100 2100 420 420 420 2100 420 420 4 :0 420 420 420 420 2100 430 420 420 420 4 420 420 420 420 420 A m [V C aw MDL * v U U u V u u u u u u u u u u u u u V u u u u u V u u u LT u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u l? .u u u u IWI) LT u U u u u u u u u LT u u u 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 330 2000 530 2600 530 530 2600 530 2600 2600 530 530 530 530 530 530 2600 00 530 530 530 2600 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 2600 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 530 R eference C ane MDL nr u u u u u u u u u Lf u u u u u u u u u V V u u u u u u u u u u u u u u L' V u u u u u u L u u u u u c u u u u c c u u u u u u u V 400 jm 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 2000 400 7000 400 400 2000 400 2000 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 2000 2000 400 400 400 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 2000 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 C aw L {2 12 \2 U tr V c C u tr c c c L* V LT L' U U U U U V u U u u u u c f u V V ta V u u IT u Li U u L L' f f u u L* U U u Li C u u u L NCDL 390 390 390 390 ton 390 390 390 390 390 390 393 390 390 1900 390 1900 390 390 1900 390 190C 190C 390 390 390 390 390 390 190 190 39t 39" 39 19 39 39 39 5 3 39 19 3r. y 3 3 3 3 i * EID097932 000671 oHo oao Co\ a Sample Numlaer Sample Ucalim Aluminum Antimony Arxmc iiariunt Ucryttium I'lJmitim Calcium Chromium Coball Copper II.rCoMni M^ncaium Manyymcsc Mercury Mickel FVuuium Selenium Silver Sodium lhallium fineVanadium 7ADLB 4 CoftcenlntleM of Metalin Wtftt Dry KunCreek WuhiruJon, WoolCounty, Wait VirpnM Noramhcr 1997 " T O T " -----IK B ----- -- i m -- " TEIW ~ " T S S fif ,mmn i r Upper Trlb A Upper Trlb B Area II Area III Area IV filtered HHtred filtered filtered filtered w . *4 60 22 it b ii-- Reference filtered .. --ran---- ran-- *~ TU A ` ' " ~ ia -- IJTa-- |-- ra n -- Irtt Creek UpperTrlb A Upper Trlb II Area II Area III Area IV Klllcrnl IMIHrrrd lln fllltm l llnnilered UnflHerrd Unflllered It . :354 : "~r w ~ W- ~ M T ff -- ra n -- -- m -- Tennant Well J?----- 1M J32 52 2 3946 46 36 46 40 60 .. 54 . 50 44 52 42 62 HO ) 100 32000 : 29000 : 29000 23000 21000 26000 24000 33000 5s 25402201J02J4202)000 10 104000 2600 17000 9274 5219 3) 20 69 76 6707 931.070 930,n30 151000 429500 446(310 741200 1010500 2200 2400 2200 1100 16000 15000 15000 13000 15000 11000 14000 fi * $S 22 21 16 n 51 21 14 n 30000 210 94200 17000 7 30000 24000 v, 2ooo : 24000 34.62 200 46130 4 943040 4900 20 91M00 97|0.90 2400 2400 I6W 16009 13000: 16000 16 14 II 2*000 520 771200 two 64 22000 720271630570 4900 1300 34 IUh Icipecc mimic conctnUalHUUhckna detection Imil o o om V2 3VoO vuUO>J 00I008SI  TAIllJi 1 Results ofConcentrations of Metals in Soil Dry KnnCreek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia Novcnilicr ivy7 Sample Number Sample location Aluminum Aiiliinooy Arsenic Maritim pcryllium Cadmium Ctilciuin Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel I'olassHini .Selenium Silver Sodium lliulliiiiii Vunadium ?.inc MKI. 10 10 2 1 1 1 10 2 2 2 4 20 2 1 02 10 400 2 2 20 2 2 500A Area IA moo 6 156 1 50IA 502A Area III Area 1C "i<W>6 9740 .;:.4:.s: r 4 129 97 :1 S03A Area IIA 12400 4 137 1 504A Area 1111 16300 5 218 2 505A Area IIC 10200 4 131 1 506A 507A S08A Area IIIA Area IHR Area IIIC 11600 10200 7 9<U6 '5 : 5 :v;:: ::... 4' 144 129 126 1 . 509A S10A Area IVA Area IV 10360 6366 .. 7 162 5 140 ;7 :: j S1IA 512A SI3A 5I4A Area 1VC Iter A Itrf II ItefC 10400 13100 t w s t T O T y -4 6 5 149 145 129 116 1 1 11 3X20 20 20 23 24600 32 3070 1580 1740 19 17 19 22500 25 2630 1100 2040 16 13 16 20800 22 2470 638 2830 23 20 19 29900 22 3320 1360 3380 31 35 31 43600 33 4820 2580 3200 19 17 20 24600 22 3110 1210 4370 24 20 24 34600 20 3330 1370 2150 20 18 19 24600 30 2790 1260 2190 1720 26 18 is16 17 17 :: : . 22600 25000 24 2580 2720 1300 917 2310 17 16 16 22800 2760 971 3180 21 ; : 20 27600 115 3000 1180 2260 29 17 30 35700 28 3800 766 3730 21 12 22 24900 27 3140 708 1830 20 14 17 25700 22 3440 565 22 19 17 23 34 22 28 22 20 1400 1000 1200 1600 2200 1200 1900 1200 950 20 18 1200 980 20 30 24 20 1500 2300 1400 1400 29 36 22 39 44 39 44 29 32 28 27 36 44 53 40 31 30 25 38 51 32 34 30 29 28 27 34 42 32 32 72 56 56 59 ' 83 56 62 56 49 51 51 59 82 79 | 65 Note: Ulank spaces indicate compound not delected o O CD Cj s o ~V-OJ VO 4^ 8001009SJL  pph t*--n4 Ooo- j UJ TABLE 6. Results of Concentrations o f Metals In Sediment Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sample Number Sample Location Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium / Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc 1 MRL I 10 10 2 l 1 1 10 2 2 2 4 20 2 1 0.2 10 <100 2 2 20 2 2 303D 304 D 305D Upper Trib A Upper Triti B Area II 17500 16600 17500 8 14 21 175 205 200 2 2 . 2 6090 33 37 35 50900 <10 5170 1970 2320 32 49 30 57200 40 4420 3340 3250 32 42 30 54900 41 4950 2490 39 35 37 2000 1600 1900 111 52 ; 84 80 57 84 88 51 85 302D Area III 14500 170 2 3260 30 29 29 52800 30 4010 1590 32 2000 48 76 306D Arca IV 11100 300D Ref 13800 : 8 ;-:;.;ri`: 10 152 161 =!:i :2 2180 ; 20 22 19 31500 23 3030 1150 2530 26 26 26 39300 ; 24 4180 1460 22 33 1300 1800 - 61 52 79 40 74 Note: Blank spaces indicate compound not detected 301D Lee Creek 7080 7 91 970 14 14 11 22000 : 2050 450 16 900 33 20 39 000674 6ooiooasx Client ID Locution Analyte ,i-BI 1C g-BlIC h-BIIC Heptachlor d-BIIC Aldrin 1Icptiiclilor Epoxide g-Chlordane a-Clilordane Endosulfnn (1) p.p'-D D E Dieldrin I'ndrin p.p'-D D D F.ndosullun (II) p.p'-D DT limimi Aldehyde 1-'lulosulliin Sulfate Mellioxycliliir 1indrin Ketone Toxuphcnc Aroclor IO16 Aroclor 1221 Aroclor 1232 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1248 Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 00205 Upper Trib A MDL (MR/L) U O-r/L) ol)2 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 002 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 002 U 002 U 002 u 0.02 1) 0.02 u 002 u 002 II 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 uu 0.50 0.30 uuu 0.30 030 0.30 u 0.30 U indicates compound not delected TAHI.I 7. Result o f (lie Analysis for Pesliciiks/PCD in W ater Dry Run Creek W ashington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 011206 F Upper Trib D IJ(HR/L) MDL (pr/L) 0.02 U 002 U 002 U 0.02 U 002 U 002 U 0.02 U 002 U 002 U 0.02 U 002 U 0.02 U 002 U 0.02 U 0.02 W 002 II 0.02 II 0.02 II 0.02 tl 002 IJ 0.50 (I 0.30 U 0.50 U 0.30 (J 0.30 IJ 0.30 U 0.30 u 0 30 110204 F Arca ll MDL (l'/L). Oir/L) u o.oi u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 002 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 tl 0.02 IJ 002 II 002 u 002 u 0.02 l) 0.50 IJ 0.30 uu 0.50 0.30 u 0.30 IJ 0.30 u 0.30 u 030 00202 F A m * III MDL W (l-tfL) l) i u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 IJ 0.02 IJ 0.02 l) 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 00201 F A rca IV MDL 0*r/M Ij U (HRfL) 0.02 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 002 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 IJ 0.02 IJ 0.02 u 0.02 (J 0.02 u 0.50 u 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 uu 0.30 0.30 u 0.30 u 0.30 Ut)203 P Reference 0 'r/L) U MDL (mr/L) 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 U 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 002 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 IJ 002 u 002 u 0.02 u 0.50 uuu 0.30 0.50 0.30 u 0.30 uu 0.30 0.30 u 0.30 002U0 f ] Lee Creek MDL (mr/L) (mr/L) I I 0*02 u 002 u 002 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u 0.02 u .02 IJ 002 IJ 0.02 I u 0 02 1 u 002 1 IJ 0.50 (J 0.30 u 0.50 u 0.30 uuu 0.30 0.30 0.30 u 0.30 0 0 0 6 7 5 EID097936 0I01008SI TAMII lH*iWeAw#rMl*iCSfcM| i l * SsXSSSJ asaasassssaftasaaaaassssaaaai :**;*3t**3 aaaiaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa: SU aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 53* I li' :X5*x*xx s.1* i" $ mmmmmmmmm J n aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaai L aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa f m ai U a !i -1 sassssssasaasassaasassasaai rfi S Ji aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa r w` f8 5 : *: :is*: aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa * HLi ? *t li- 4 Jd |J;JIIJJ aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaas il aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa: r ;ts |: * Ili l * - . aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaanasaaaa: . Il |* I5 -- rH ;:S*s i s : aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Ili. l,a= S |ij I " " , l l a , H * * * ****** E ID 097937 000676 TSB001011  Client ID Location Percent Solid Anulvtc 1-1111C g-HIIC Mine 1Icpluchlor d-llllC Aldrin 1leptachlor Epoxide g-Chlordanc a-Chlordanc Endosulfan (1) p,p'-D D l Dieldrin Endrin p.p'-D D D Endosulfan (II) p.p'-D D T Eiulrin Aldehyde Endosullan Sulfate Melhoxychlor Endrin Ketone Toxaphene Aroclor 1016 Aroclor 1221 Aroclor 1232 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1248 Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 ioiE U pper Trib A 81.5 Cone MDL Mfi/kfi J U U U U U U U U U U 11 II U U 1) tl U U U U U U U U U U U ME/kg 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 41 4.1 4.1 41 4.1 41 41 4.1 41 4.1 41 4.1 100 51 100 51 51 51 51 51 U denotes compound not delected TAIll.il 9. Results or the Analysis Tor Pcsticidc/PCfl in Sedimenl Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia Novemticr 1997 304 E Upper Trib B 78 Cone MDL ME/kE u ME/kg 4.3 U 43 U 43 U 4.3 U 43 U 4.3 U 43 U 4.3 U 4.3 U 4.3 U 4.3 U 4.3 U 43 IJ 4.3 IJ 4 3 IJ 4.3 II 4.3 (1 4 3 U 43 U 4.3 U no U 53 U 110 U 53 U 53 U 53 IJ 53 U 53 305E AREA II 73.5 Cone MDL _ Mfi/kfi. U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U t) II U u u U U U U U U u _ J*/kfi_ 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 45 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 45 4.5 45 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 110 57 no 57 57 57 57 57 02 Area HI 78.5 Cone MDL Pfi/kfi _ PE/kfi IT 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 l) 4.2 11 4.2 U 4.2 tl 4.2 11 4.2 11 4.2 U 4.2 U 4.2 U 100 U 52 U 100 U 52 U 52 U 52 U 52 IJ 52 306E AREA IV 63 Cone MDL Pfi/kE U PE/kfi ?.l 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 U 5.1 11 5.1 11 5.1 11 5.1 U 5.1 U 51 U 130 U 63 U 130 U 63 u 63 u 63 u 63 u 63 300E Reference 80.1 Cone MDL ME/kg U u u u u u u u u u u u 11 u 11 11 11 11 11 u u u IJ u u u u u _ ME/kg 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 100 51 100 51 SI SI 51 51 301E ! Lee Creek 82.8 Cone MDL ME/kE A \J ME/kfi 1 4I U4 U4 U4 u4 IJ 4 11 4 u4 U4 11 4 U4 U4 IJ 4 11 4 u4 11 4 11 4 IJ 4 IJ 4 IJ 4 I u 100 | II 50 I u 100 1 u 50 IJ 50 | IJ 50 | u 50 I IJ 50 | n o io o asi EID097938 000677 TABLE tO. VQA Concentration* n Water Dry Run Creek Washington. W en V irgin November 1997 B Indicate* compound u presem in blank i indicates below Method D etection V Indicates compound Not Detected E ID 097939 000678 H K> CD o o >o--* U> n n r * n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 nfi n n N jJ - n -- "T -- II11 I rM>i1111 MM 0 n m 0 n n a 0 0 0 n 0 f>Mf11 >M1 11 M111 0IffI>l inl nn n fni 0 M1 If n 0 nn0 n II fni n An A A Mn n M>II A nn A A A A A A n>i >M1 MI1 >11IM1111I11f111111 11 111I 1II1IIt II1 I1I1f 11 IIII IIII II 1II1II1 1M11 If IMMI 11 M A 1 , n,j -H- -- a-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A Art A A A AAA A An A AA A A A A A A A A A A A A H A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A _A -TT" ffffllll ffff1 fII1 T " A A AA AA AAA " T T 1 It mIt i It fl A IMI A A fffIlfI1 A AA A 1ri1 AA 11 A rMM11Il1 111 M A 1 11 A <fCIlf A A A >11 ri1 CfIfIfllffl1 A A A A A A >1lt Ui1f f1 A tl ffll A A Mf Cl A fCl1 A A Mrrii fl A 1 rni AA rt1 n AM nCcli nC1 AA AA A M1 >Mi Cf A 1 ftfl11 II fl A A A A A rnrMi 1 11 A ri n AM fi ccii A A A M11 nA ci A nA if11 it A if ci A f n A rt n A A A A A A A A AA AAAA A A A A A II H n n A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A AA A AA A A A A A A A A A A A A *t A A AAA l wm Urti aji* '.WWU m W N '.MAI Vflf y0m MA -TT- mmm m nIrtIt A A A A nil AA nA ccii A A A ctit ci A A A nctii M11 II AN AAAA ffl1 A A ffll A A ffll A A fIlI A A MA II n II n f1 A f(l1 AA IfHIl A A A fl A ffll A A nA nKl A A MA fIlI A A #i A nci AA nA A fi A fni AA nA Mfl A A ff A II 1 A fl A A --If-IlfiB-AA--_ Wirt '.WMV1 M"W (1 ci rtt# ri i cnnccnnii1 11 ccli trciii 11 ri CfMfl fCll 1II1 tf IrcCcItili il r11i et r1i1 ci Cill Cl felt (1 eftl cflf Cl felt Cl fl fl flf Crli ff ci A AA -rr~ InI A AAA A cntiii n AAAA A A A A A An ennt ci1l1t tncMttii M fl 0A ff11 A A A ItIlII n II A A tIlI A An IIIIfI A A A A A A A A A fIfIIIff IIII IIII II A II tl A II A II A A fnl A ci A A fni A ci A t A ci A A nri A il A A inl IAI te n A ci An A n n M " TT- A tl A tl A A IfIl AA IfIl A A AAA A A tl IffI1IIllII1 A A IIII A AA 11M11 MM A A f111 A ri A A 1fi1 A it A A 11 A il A A 1i1l A fi A tl An f11i A A 1t1l A fi A A ffli A tl A VI AM A ff A A fl A II A IIII 0 fl 0 A0 A II A II A -TT" A AA ffIllI AM AA IIII AAAA ItftIll1 A A A A A II1II1 1111 A 11 A I11I A 11 II A f11f 0 fl A A <111 A 11 11 A >t A A M A II A 11 A II AA IIII A II AM A tl A II A 11 A A tl A M A AA AA AA A A A A A A A A A IAI II AA A A A A A A A A A A A A A A il VWfA* *AI***V --"t r*-- MAm'vAMU -- "n r*-- -"r c-^ -- W'<-- j ___ U___ L m . . ___ m ___ M _______ ___ V H ___ ___ tm T*** ... ........... .... O) TSB001014 oo o W in U T t" p l" 1 t " T P AI "T P iHl "T P i A A A Cl AA Ccli A AA 11c1 AA A w f cHu"MC--HHI'ft*ffTi' A i A A1 nCC11 AA U ii AA A ---- -- HvtrIyHiI |(t A AA AA ccCii1 AAA AA Cl 11 A AA 11t A A ff11l1l1 fl A AAA A C1 A it>cliiiii i A AA AA AA A i O 11 A O II 11 A ni> n 11 1111 A A A H 11C11111 AAAII >>itii n AA A Millf l|| f1 * 1Wi|n(ii.W||H*|r(f<1 t inwiiyit H*-n*i n i HW'VI**`lM l' 11 11 (1 M 111111 A A A ft 111111 A A A 11 A n A 11 n 11 A 111I A A A A A II 11 A O A 11 A A 1111 tAi A 111111 n a rt 1111 11 An A CC11 ti nA A 1 A 11 A II (111 1f 1111 1 AAA AAA A AA Cf1flt1 I111I 1c1t n Ccli AA A A A A AA A A A 1111 C1 IAAI CCI1 A A II A C1 11 A A 11 A Iff1 AA 11 A CC1l11 A A A Cri1 AA 11i iii >i rii iti >iii ti A A A AA A AA A A AA A A A A A II A II A MA II A IIIIII <I1I A A AA A I1I1 AA IIII AA II A IIII AA II A I11I AA *(II1I *1 A ( A A 11I11I II II1II1 II II II II II I1I1 M 1H1 H II II >1 A AA A AA AAA AA AA A AAA A A A 1A1 A Cl CIlt AA A n nri Cl A i II <Cl A A A Cl Cl IfI1 II AA A AA crii nfCil CIl AA rici 11 C1 A A fc n Cl A ri Cl A n CCII I1I1 AA A III rCli Vf n 11 Cl A A ci c A A A A A A A A A A A AAA A A A A A A A AI A Cl A Cetl AA il A cCt1 A A ci A frii AA CI A ffii aA rci A A nA ri ri AA ci cr ii AAA et cfii Cl A IVAI A i 1i1 >i > > i i 1 > ii *i fi i Cl i i >i i v > ii > fii c A AA A A A A A A A AA A A A A A A AA A A1 A MU* -AS * --A**- * ir>ftA!i*m << --"H*11 -- A1 -- Tl H" --w*4y**ifr'mnrinn--i- -- y----Hi"r--v--HTm H**HIH r i --`'A"1 *-- *1 W ' AA,l|If Tll --"H-- i w *w frn n mi pM'H""ln H : * -- 11 -- A1 H A ' 1 w o n -- *HA<*A* * * * v--m -- VH "A--A v ih i n --H -- H 1 II 1 -- --H--" *A I1I1 AA _ l _ _ A I11I 11 A A A Cl C1 _ (1 ___ AA CCIl AA -- i l -- _a_ CCclli AA ftt1 AA U ___ Q___ ymi*A > "tl: -- ' M fini ------- I * f c Mnn.1 .TU*** T .1 UH ffl V VMO.I -------- n AAH VA AT -- t * ---------- HH .moi `.m o > AI A ly,M 'AH VftHOJ n "A *,j 1-- - , M U -- ______ m -- ______ K ---------- M , l 'f l -- -* -- -- , . r r - T K- i O O' ro-\ o Q--< W snple .Numoer j Sample Location Compound Cult , EScEZarodSIuoraima! CUorotncthane Vinyl Chloride BratnomethJoe ; Chloroedtane T nchlam iluoram edum Acetone , 1.1-Dicbioroethtn e Carbon Disulfide Methylene Chloride Meihyt-eertiaty-butyledier rans-lJ-D ichloroethesg L l'Dichloractheno 2*Bi i u m m 2.2- Dtchioropropone as-U -D ichloroethene Chloroform 1. l-D ichloropro pene ; U-Dichlorocthane . l.Ll-Trichloroeihano Carton Tetrachloride Benzene rrichlornetheno j 1,2-Dtchkjropropme Dibromotnediano Brotnodichloromethane ; de-l.I-P ichlutopeopene aans-I.J-D ichloropropene I. 1-2-Trichlorot thsnc 1.3- Dichloropropane Dibromochloromethane 1.2- Dibromoethane Bromoibrm 4-Mcthyl-2-Pcntanonc Toluene 2-Hexanoim Tetrachlotoethene Chlorobe nzene 1.1.1.2- Tctracbloraeihane Ethylbenzene p & tn-Xyknc s-Xylcne Styrene Isopropylbenzene U .22-Tetrachloroeihjne 1 JJ-T rich lo ro p ro p an e Btomobcnzenc n-Propylbenzcne 2-Cbloeotolueno a-Chloretoliiene , 1,3.5-Trimethy Ibenzeae ten-Butylbenzene ' 12,4-Trvnethylbenzene ec-Bun(benzene ' 1J-Diehlofobenzene p-Isopropy Uoluenc : 1.4-Dichlocobciizcne 1.2- Dichlorobcnzene n-Buty(benzene 1l.I-D rbrorao-J-C hloroteopa 1.14-Trichlotobcnzcne Naphthalene Hexachlorobutadiene 1.13-Trichlorubenztne TABLE IX VOA Concentrations in Sediment Dry Run Creek Washington. Wood County, W at Vagina November 1997 33 F -------- itTP-------- UppetrTrlbA Upp TribB CONC MDL CONC MDL Ufi/N'e U 1.4 ------Ur-S S Sis--I J . u 1.4 u u u 1.4 u u 17 27 17 2d 17 1.4 u u u 1.4 u 1.3 u 27 u 2 u 1.4 u 1.3 ---------s S T An'S ii CONC MDL U W s _1_.4___ 17 1.4 U 1.4 U 29 U 1.4 U 1.4 U 29 17 1.4 -------- K i r -- Ares III CO.VC MDL L W/K~_____ IJ L' 1.3 V IJ U 26 L' IJ L* IJ V 26 V IJ ---------K ff Ares IV CONC MDL C-- -- n -- V 1.3 u 1.5 V3 u 1.3 V 1.3 7.2 3 u u u u u 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 u u u u IJ 1.3 IJ IJ U 1.4 17 1.4 U 1.4 u 1.4 V IJ V 1.3 v IJ L* IJ u 1.3 u l.S t; 1.3 V u u 1.4 J.4 u 17 IJ J.1 u u 1.4 J.t v IJ V 3.2 u V 1.3 6 u 1.4 u I J u 1.4 V 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.4 u I J u 1.4 V 1.3 u u 1.4 u 1.3 u 1.4 0.3 7 IJ u 1.3 u u 1.4 u 1.4 u IJ IJ u u 1.4 U 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.3 u 1.5 u 1.4 u 1.3 u 1.4 V 1.2 17 1.5 u 1.4 u 1.3 u 1.4 V IJ u 1.5 -------- K g -------Rtftmct CONC MDL -- u 1 il-- 17 IJ u u L>37 uU u IJ u 2.7 V IJ u IJ uU u IJ u IJ u IJ u 5J V IJ uu uu u is uu uu 17 1.3 ~JIF L COiNC MD u L* u u L* u u V u u u u V 17 U u 1.4 u 1.3 u 1.4 17 IJ u 1.5 u IJ U u 17 1.4 1.4 u u 1.3 IJ u 1.4 V IJ 17 1.4 17 IJ 17 V IJ U u 1.5 u 1.3 V 17 1.4 17 1.3 17 1.4 V 1.3 17 17 IJ V V 1-4 u IJ 17 1.4 V 1.3 U 1.5 U IJ L* u 1.4 17 1.3 17 1.4 17 IJ U u IJ V 17 1.4 U 1.3 17 1.4 17 IJ U 17 IJ c. 17 1.4 U 1.3 17 1.4 U 1.3 U 1.5 17 IJ V V 1.4 U 1.3 U 1.4 u 1.3 U U IJ u V 1.4 u 1.3 u 1.4 V IJ u 1.3 17 IJ L* u 1.4 u 1.3 u 1.4 V 1.3 u 17 IJ V u 1.4 u IJ u 1.4 V 1.3 17 1.5 V 1.3 V u 2.7 u 2.6 u 29 V 26 U 3 17 27 u u 1.4 u 1.3 u 1.4 V 1.3 U 1.5 17 IJ u u 17 17 26 17 29 V 26 V 3 17 27 f u 1.4 17 1.3 U 1.4 V 1.3 V 1.5 17 IJ u u 1.4 u 1.3 u 1.4 u 1.3 V 1.5 17 1.3 u IT 1.4 u 1.3 17 1.4 L' 1.3 u 1.5 U IJ c u u V u u V V V V 17 V 17 u V u u u u V V 17 V V V u 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1-4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 u 17 u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 IJ 1.3 IJ 1.3 IJ IJ 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 13 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 17 1.4 U 1.4 17 1.4 17 1.4 17 1.4 U 1.4 17 14 U 1.4 17 1.4 V 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 17 1.4 V 1.4 17 1.4 17 1.4 U 1.4 U 1.4 U 14 V 1.3 V 1.3 u 1.3 V 1.3 V 1.3 c 1.3 u 1.3 L* IJ 17 1.3 L' IJ L* 1.3 L' 1.3 U 1.3 C 1.3 f 1.3 l: 1.3 u IJ f 1.3 V 1.3 V IJ u IJ V 1.3 V 1.3 V IJ L" IJ u u V u V u V V V V u u u u u u u u u u u u u u V 1.5 U 13 u 1.5 U IJ u l.J U u V 1.5 17 i j c 1.5 17 1.3 V 1.5 17 1.3 V 1.5 17 1.3 V 1.3 17 1.3 L' l.S U 1.3 c l.S U IJ L l.S V 1.3 f l.S U 1.3 u l.S U 1.3 c l.S 17 1.3 c l.S U 1.3 c uUc u IJ V 1.5 u IJ V l.S u IJ V 1.S u 1.3 V 17 1.3 V U IJ L' U IJ V 17 1.3 u 17 1.3 V B Indicates compound is present in blank ] Indicates below Method Detection 17 indicates compound Not Detected E ID 097941 0006S0 H 00 03 o O O cn TA B LE 13. C oncentrations o r Fluoride in W ater Dry Run Creek W ashington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sam ple N um ber Sam ple Location Fluoride 205C U pper T rib A ND 206C U pper Triti B ND 20-IC A rca II ND 202 A rea III ND 201 A rca IV ND 203 R eferen ce ND 200 Lee Creek ND ND indicates com pound not detected EID097942 9IOIOO0SI Sample Number Snmnle Locution Fluoride MRL TABU: 14. Concentrations of HuorkJc in Soil Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 500F Area IA 330 150 50IF Area IB 230 70 502# 503F Area 1C ^ r e ^ I ^ 240 200 70 80 504F Area IIB 200 70 SOSF Are IIC 230 70 506F Area IIIA 370 130 oH# Area IIIB 240 70 508# Area IIIC 240 130 509F Area IVA 250 70 ilOF " T l7 # Area IVB Area IVC 290 180 130 70 512# Ref A 300 70 IF "57T Ref B RefC 290 200 70 70 Cfl ao VO 'J VO UJ ioiooasi TA BLE IS. Concentrations o f Fluoride in Sediment Dry Run Creek W ashington, W ood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sam ple N um ber Sam nle Location Fluoride MRL 303A U niter T rib A 450 130 304A U ntier T rill B 300 140 30SA A rca II 410 140 302A A rea III 390 140 306A A rea IV 290 180 300A R eference 400 120 30IA Lee Creek ND 130 ND indicates com pound not detected 000683 W o vo vj fc. 810100SS1 T A D L E 16. R esults o f th e O rg a n o F luorides in S edim ent Dry Run Creek Site W ashington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sam ple ID 30G 301G 302G 303G 304G 305G 306G Location Reference Lee Creek Area III Upper Trib A Upper Trib B A rca II Arca IV T etraduor oclhylcnc Cone MDL U4 U3 U3 U3 U3 U3 U4 (ug/kg) Hcxnfluorr propylene Cone MDL U4 U3 U3 U3 U3 U3 U4 Chlorodiduo roinelhane Cone MDL U4 U3 U3 U3 U3 U3 U4 TIC S earch Tor: Pcrfluorocyclobutane 1-C h lo ro -1,1,2,2,tetrafluoroethane 2-C hloro-1,1,1,2,3,3-liexailuoFopropane Periluofoisobutylene None Found None Found None Found None Found None Found None Found None Found E ID 097945 o <7> 00 6I01009SI I Isiiiplc NuiiiIhi' ISiimnle Location lOriniiiic Content TAULE 17. Concentrations of TOC in Soil Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 500C soie 502C 503C 51MC 505C S06C 57C 508C 509C SIOC s u e s u e SI3B Area I A Area 1B Area 1C Aren II A Arra II B Area II C Area III A Area III B Area III C Area IV A Area IV B Area IV C Ref A Ref B 7.7 7 8.5 6 1 5 1 7.8 5 58 5.7 6 6.3 9.2 65 116 000685 *t--f lI soao "O SO 4s. Os ozoiooasi  Tabic 18. Results o f the Analysis for Grain Size in Soil Dry Run Creek Site Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 1,Sample ID Location Sieve Sizc-mm 19.0 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.850 0.425 0.250 0.106 0 0750 Particle Diiimctcr-mm 0074 0005 0 001 5001Area IA CPT** 100.0 97.6 93.6 88.2 84.6 81.9 79.9 71.6 67.5 P I)... 67.2 355 H.4 501l! Arca (B CPT** 100.0 100.0 97.9 97.1 96.3 95.1 93.1 85.4 80 8 PD*** >4.4 39.3 17.7 5021Area 1C CPT** I0.0 100.0 96.3 92.2 88.9 86.5 84.9 79.2 75.4 PD*** 70.4 380 18.6 5031Area 11A CPT** 100.0 100.0 99.5 99.3 99.1 98.4 967 84.3 760 5041 Area 110 CPT** 100.0 100.0 95.5 89.7 82.5 77.9 75.3 64.8 59.1 505E A rea IIC CPT** 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.8 99.4 98.8 97.2 86.2 79.9 1 4061-1 Area IRA CPT** I0" 98.1 82.6 66.9 54.4 46.3 400 30.7 286 50712 ArcalRD CPT* 100.0 100.0 99.2 98.7 97.5 94.6 90.1 76.7 70.3 508E Area m e CPT** 1.0 100 0 100.0 99.6 99.1 98.0 96.4 87.9 81.9 509E Arca IVA CPT** 100.0 100.0 99.0 98.6 97.3 93.7 87.9 71.8 67.2 Area IVO CPT** 100.0 100.0 98.6 98.0 96.9 93.7 87.9 69.6 62.7 51 IE ~ 4l2E Area IVC Ref A CPT** CPT** 100.0 I0.0 100.0 97.1 100.0 96.0 99.7 90.3 99.3 85.2 96.7 81.4 91.8 79.1 76,6 74.9 70.7 72.9 PD*** 75.3 38 5 16.5 PD*** 60 4 29.6 80 PD*** 78.8 42.7 21.1 PD*** 31.4 158 5.4 PD*** 71.4 35.3 13.8 PD** 78 0 40.8 18.7 PD*** 44.2 264 PD*** 4.4 32.3 13.5 PD*** 7.5 41.5 24.3 PD*** 72.8 54.6 42.5 * Denotes Cumulative Percent Through Particle Diameter-1 lyrometer Analysis 5131- T m K R em RefC CPT** CIT** I0.0 . -- 1(V>0 100.0 98 4 100.0 95 9 99.3 93.5 97.8 91 8 95.6 91.6 93.9 902 88.0 89 6 85.1 85.7 PD*** 87TTM 49.3 30.2 PD*** >6 8 43 8 24.1 w>--l oo o o o 00 IZ0100QSI [Sample Number iSamiilc Location iOrenmc onlenl T A B L E 19. C o n cen tratio n s o f T O C in S edim ent Diy Run Creek W ashington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 303C 30-1C 305C tinner Trib A Unper Trib B Arca II 3.3 3.5 3.1 302C Area HI 3.5 306C Area IV 4.5 300C Reference 3.6 30IC Lee Creek 1.9 E ID 097948 <7> 00 ^oiooasi 000688 --I o SO SO -PSO eeoiooesi Tabic 20. Results o f (lie A nalysis for G rain Size in Sedim ent Dry Run Creek Site W ashington, W ood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sample ID Location Sieve Size-nun 19.0 9.50 4.75 2.00 0.850 0.425 0.250 BO. 106 . i 0750 Particle Diam clcr-m m 0.074 0.005 0.001 300B Reference CPT** 100.0 88.1 82.7 65.3 54.1 46.7 41.0 32.1 30.0 PD*** 34.0 16.4 5.9 30IB Lee Creek CPT** 100.0 88.8 81.0 74.3 71.4 63.7 42.5 15.3 12.8 PD*** 15.1 9.2 5.6 302B A rea Ml CPT** 100.0 98.5 96.1 88.1 73.6 .5 3 .0 41.7 31.3 29.6 303B l/ppcrTribA CPT** 100.0 98.6 85.2 62.1 46.6 37.8 34.6 30.9 29.8 PD*** 30.7 16.6 8.2 PD*** 29.8 14.6 5.6 304B UppcrTribB CPT** 100.0 97.5 89.1 62.9 37.3 27.1 23.7 19.8 18.7 PD*** 20.6 8.9 1.8 305B A rca 11 CPT** 100.0 95.2 88.8 85.0 73.1 51.2 41.0 34.0 32.6 PD*** 39.8 16.1 2.0 306B A realV CPT** 100.0 99.6 98.5 96.5 91.1 75.9 61.3 4M 35.9 PD*** 33.9 16.0 5.4 D enotes C um ulative Percent Through Particle Diainctcr-Hyrom clcr Analysis T A B L E 2 1. In S ilu W aler Q u ality P aram eters Dry Run Creek W ashington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 HSu iiid Ic L o c u tio n |Ph [Conductivity DTubidity [d o [Tem perature ISnlinilv 1 Units Standard m S /cin NTU m g/L C % Uo ner T rill A 7.35 0.306 13 6.05 16.8 0.01 U pper T riti B 7.13 0.266 24 6.23 16.5 0 01 A reu II 7.49 0.263 3 8.42 17.7 0.01 A rea III 8.19 0.251 2 8.75 19.4 0 A rca IV 8.2 0.242 2 7.35 19.8 0 mS/cin = inilliSicmcns C = Celsius N TU Nephelometric Turbidity Units mg/L - inilligrnms/Lilcr R eferen ce 7.97 0.236 18 6.73 17.4 0 Lee Creek 8.16 0.215 6 6.79 19.7 0 N. Pork Lee C reek 8.32 0.212 9 6.35 I 197 1 _________ J L _________ 1 E ID 097950 ranooesi TA BLE 22. Concentrations o f Bromide, Chloride, Nitrate, Phosphorous and Sulfate in W ater Dry Run Creek W ashington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sam ple N um ber Sam ple Location B rom ide C h lo rid e N itrate Phosphorous Sulfate MRL 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.01 02 213 U pper Trill A 1D 4.5 1 D,H .03 H 1200 214 Upper T rib B 1D 4.1 1 D.H .02 H 770 211 A rea II 1b 3.8 1 D.H NDH 1000 212 A rea III 1D 2.9 1 D.H .02 H 970 209 A rca IV 1D 3.2 1 D,H NDH 990 215 R eferen ce 1D 3 1 D,H NDH 1000 210 Lee C reek ID 4.5 1 D.H .03 H 770 D = T he M RL is elevated because o f m atrix interferences and because llie sam ple required diluting H = T he sam ple w as received past the recommended hold lime M RL - M ethod Reporting Limit 000690 m--4 o VO vVyOi szoiooesi 9z o io o g s i ISamole Location N-Nitrosodimcthyitmine Aniline Bis(2-hloroethyl)Ether Phenol 2-Chlorophenol 1.3-Dichlorobenzene 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1.4-Dichlorobenzene Benzyl Alcohol Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)Ether 2-Methylphenol HexacMoroethane N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine 4-Methvlphenol Nitrobotzene Isophorone 2-Nitrophenol 2.4-Dimethylphenol Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 2,4-Dich)orophenol Benzoic Acid 1.2,4-Trichlorbenzene Naphthalene 4-Chloroaniline HeNachlorobutadiene 4-ClUoro-3-methylphenol 2-methyinaphthalene Hexachlorocvclopentadiene 2,4,6-Trichlorophenoi 2.4,5-Trichlorphenol 2-ChloronaphthaIene 2-Nitroaniline Acenapthylene Dimethvl Phthalate 2.6-Dinitrotoluene Acenaphthene 3-Nitroaniline 2,4-Dinilrophenol Dibenzofuran 4-Nitrophenol 2.4-Dinitrotoluene Fluorene 4-Chlorophenyl Plienyl Ether Diethvl Phthalate 4-Nitroaniline 2-Methv|-4.6-dinitropltenol N-Nitrosodiplienylainine 4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether Hexachlorobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenanthrene Anthracene Di-n-butvi Phthalate Fluoranthene Pyrene Buhl Benzvl Phthalate 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine Benz(a)antliracene Chrvsene Bis(2-ethliylhe\'yl)Pltthalate Di-n-octyl Phthalate Benzo(b)fluoranthene BenzoOi)fluoranthene Benzo(a)p>Tene lndeno( 1,2J-cd)pyrene Dibenz(a.lt)anthracene TABLE 13 Concentrations of BNA'j in Fecal Samples Dry Run Creek Washington. Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 SiftL *01 02 803 *04 *06 2 D-l 20 D-2 0 D-3 20 D-l 20 D-5 20 I 10 10 10 10 10 OJ 0.3 3 8 3 3.4 3 2.6 3 4.6 3 6.4 OJ 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 OJ 3 3 3 3 3 OJ 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 75 so 45 110 82 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 2 20 20 20 20 30 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 2 20 20 20 20 20 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 2 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 03 3 3 3 3 3 20 20 20 20 20 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 * 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 20 20 20 20 20 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 20 20 20 20 20 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 0.3 3 3 3 3 3 03 3 3 3 3 3 06 *07 D-6 20 ---- sT5---- 10 \'D 3 ND 6.6 ND . 3 ND 3 VD 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND to ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 20 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 20 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 20 ND 20 ND 3 ND 20 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 20 ND 20 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 20 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 20 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND 3 ND ND indicates compound not detected EID 097952 000631 TABLE 24. Concentrations of Metals in Fecal Samples Dry Run Creek Washington. Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sample Number (Sample Location Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium (Beryllium (Cadmium (Calcium. : Chromium: Cobalt Copper. Iron Lead:: ... .. Magnsium (Manganese Mercury Nickel [Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium [Thallium Vanadium iZinc MRL 10 10 2 1 1 1 10 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 0.2 10 400 2 2 20 1 2 2 801 802 803 804 805 D-l D-2 D-3 D-4 D-S 1040 409 345 758 821 118 93 100 91 106 13100 10500 12900 : 12700 11600 22 1800 5 5860 591 17 840 4460 520 18 646 3 4180 506 23 1360 5300 481 T9 1410 3 4580 539 14800 11500 10200 : 8800 16500 2810 5110 1360 1630 5670 22 84 72 72 93 70 Note: Blank spaces indicate compound not detected 806 D-6 Bam Area 1140 13700 4 114 180 I 12100 20 2230 12 4770 609 1930 21 16 17 25700 14 3000 1340 12100 23 1300 2450 3 76 . 96 : 33 53 TSB001027 E ID 097953 000692 TABLE 25. Concentrations of Fluoride in Fecal Samples Dry Run Creek Washington. Wood County. West Virginia November 1997 (Sample Number Sample Location Fluoride Bm r l 701 D-l Nb ' 1300 702 D-2 N 1000 703 D-3 ND 800 704 705 706 D-4 D-5 D-6 N ND ND 600 1400 600 ND indicates compound not detected 707 Barn Area 270 130 TSB001028 E ID 097954 000693 E ID 097955 6z:oiooesi TABLE 38 frequency end Abumiencc Teble of Benthic M eooinvttlebttlei DiyRunC'cck Wtohinglon, Wool CouMy, W at Vitgtnd Navembet 199? VIAI. IliaTex REF A REF D REF C | IA lit IC IIA IID IIC IIIA m e IVA IV 0 IVC U'l IEM EROPTERA iiA Itucrocvia leyiophlebta 41 32 31 M 6 13 3 12 132 4 O fliiefu 1 i4 II i i 24 3 s 2 164 2 2 PLECOPTERA K I'trlttla 1' l.tu clfti 1 1 1 4 II 10 17 12 9 1 2i IIEMIPTERA M l.tpt>\;omfthus (a) h ktwr*r%xh<t (a) COl.lXHMIiKA N J^il/wa (/; Nj (a) 1. t 'n u u in la : (a) I.I J (1)1) /.Vfo/oi.i (// 3 iiii m V lilniHhc (a) X Sculidac (a) Y 1listertdac (a) 1 2 1 ' 1 1 1 11 2 11 11 1 THKOITCKA / Aa I.Hiaki|l||llHilC (p) MEOAI.OPTERA W 11 i1 1 1 DIPTERA E (Duronrenulae sIt IScuJnlimnnphil* <'viiiln|iiU(lji: 1 Stuttomynbe 2 4 3 1 1 2 s 23 9 7 1) 1 i i 2 1 31 16 CKUSTACHA t* Aaclhdac 1 ItyaM tt a Decapods MOI.LUSCA i Hhysa A N N IIIO A 11 Oli^iklw ctl u IURIIEI.I.ARIA Salamander larva 21107 77 63 M 14 I I 2 1 2 22 1 10 1 32 1) 10 1i 22 12 11 21 1 11 116 5 1 21 4 21 IS I 12 1 2 22 (I) larvae, trnless indicated otherwise, all insect ta*a arc larval forms (a) adult ip) (*** TABLE 26 (cont'd). Frequency and Abundance Table of Benthic Macroinvertebrates Percent Composition of Functional Feeding Groups Present in the Dry Run Study Area Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sampling Location Reference I II III IV Functional Feeding Group Collector-Gatherer Collector-Filterer Shredder Scraper Predator Mise. Omnivore 15 0 1 13 1 70 22 0 4 16 4 54 18 0 l 9 52 20 21 1 2 20 27 29 27 2 2 15 63 / EID097956 000695 TSB001030 Snfcirt Sample Alumeium Antenoity Anetiic LWumti IkiyllNim Cedimum Ceknen Livorni*e* Cobalt Cupixt Iran I^ed Mepiettum Mmi^ kn Mticivy Nickel I'otMMom Selenium Silver Soliin llwllnen Venadee* T.w k Noie Dlik MMI. 5 002 03 002 002 002 3 02 002 01 2 002 1 002 002 02 200 2 002 10 002 02 05 IK 45 TAUB27 ConeeutxaliomofM eut in Smell M e m m e b in A t m * !and 0 Dry R u n Creek Wellington, W o o d Comity. Weet V o g M s November 1997 Il K-? iJi -------- n : IIC-U0431 11-124 MJ . l aa 207 hn-4 236 11-0-22 264 HAI# lie s 5* ll-A-24 ll-C-7 ll-A-l) J U : 07.0 m : ~W~7Pm J U m ' Il K-4* 11)8 15* ::*20.. Shert-telledShrew lt-E-18 ll-A-19 164 :. '" " v r -- II-A-2S " " U f-- >M 00 24900 24 on 7.2 0K 1200 596 12* 0.03 0.0? 10SOO 16 047 rs 542 2 1190 264 : 1) 0.06 2)400 29 0) 63 224 02* 1260 15 19? ' 016 51900 1t 037 67 41 0.79 1570 49? 009 I09O0 4* 9960 26 10600 14 10190 4760 37-X) 4140 003 4M10 742 09 69) 744 04 1 191 003 23600 2 037 91 302 056 1550 1? 41 IWO 3620 04 24 15 009 I82i)0 82 034 m 391 098 1290 P? 14 0.06 21*00 2) 05* 72 343 069 1410 255 43.9 20 0.03 35200 289 0)6 63 390 047 1310 996 003 23200 493 039 61 5*2 032 1500 111 295 0.04 37000 18 019 :7 ; 412 043 1*70 21 21.* 0.0? 0.06 29600 353; 1.36 132 1640 1.14 1690 *6,3 44* 006 34600 381 074 : 97: 494 038 1550 465 194 0.04 003 21300 2 026 71 300 033 |220 9T 33 10200 002 3830 126 I10U0 1 3X10 134 11200 192 12X00 15 13400 17.4 13090 1*5 12500 3740 4300 4110 3940 3930 3 3700 4070 04 793 04 759 647 05 8)1 0) 108 27 82 02 02 too 826 233 003 03 20100 31 041 9-i: : 912: -i'! 123 1320 269 21 . . . 180 002 . 4230 1.2 75? 219 0.02 : 36200 '. 403. ' 072 359 : 436 036 1900 13 19? 13200 4820 771 214 ; oil . 21200 14 032 7.9 430 0.73 |0*0 359 17 9660 3000 06 73 162 006 386i)0 34 0)3 98 575 09) 1460 ?3,9 14 10100 3910 07 105 elicete comjKMetd noi detected 969000 m H-H ooo -oLo/l lEoiooesi TADLE 27 (conrd) ConctrMtfioM of M elili io Small Mammal in Are III Dry Run Creek Wshington, Wood County. West Vilginit November 1997 S iH cirl Hamide | (a ii n Aluminum Antimony .Vseme lian um IWrylbum Cadmium L'akium 'bromium C o lte li Copper bon Lead MRgrMiiim Manganeic Mercury NieVcl i'ouuiian Selemun Silver Sodium llullium V anadium /.me M in. 5 002 05 002 002 002 5 02 002 01 2 002 1 002 002 2 200 2 002 10 002 02 05 IIIC -2 4 IS leadow Vale III-C-2S*(II4) IH-M 5*(I22) 171 ' 555 lit i 6|6 l 7 00J MOW 22 024 56 274 0.M IMO Il 1 07 17 I2nr 4490 114 35 7 006 36600 659 0.72 7.5 536 0.21 Ilio 196 291 mwi 3760 >7 262 007 20*017 21 0 53 67 531 0 53 1.150 256 16 im w 2 )<60 o* 59 117 005 229UO 17 0 32 51 561 0.42 1130 127 16 10700 4250 07 77 3 Note lllanLspaccaindicalecompoundnotdetected lll-K -6 97| 4i)9 004 015 37300 36 0 57 1 112 15 1520 393 in 3 10200 32*0 15 94 1 m ille 274 344 012 31600 44 0 24 72 3+4 0.21 1120 121 1 * 9570 3960 04 5 lll-IM 550 w Jtffttntaf M aut m i n II11I25 751 " > < " III-IM O 325 IIIC -1 .. 4 | SharM ard Shrew M 'O I S IIIC -17 m-C-22 " il " ' m " M " m - K I 2 ` (IO II III-E-I2`(4II '- ^ 3 3 ""' 25 5 009 37300 75 OH 7* 576 1.2 1311(1 22 44 9250 4JI0 0.7 92 5 12.5 00} 027 26700 31 0 49 : 9.4 6(4 159 1540 33 24 h 100 22 3 002 022 26500 32 041 75 732 064 1120 212 74 9240 4660 1 9 9 .6 3160 09 7J 161 015 34O00 39 O73 67 537 05 1160 743 o li 1.4 9320 2 3*00 05 926 7.79 6 5 9 01 23600 34 : 022 1 514 0.36 : 975 1.95 12 94(0 2 4|4Q 006 12100 66 OH 13.5 405 02T loto 499 005 II 9630 4400 07 24 90 105 003 095 33TOJ 62 062 9.3 735 016 1170 23 2 3990 1.) 117 101 002 0)6 21300 14 041 92 703 1.04 1250 144 013 31 10600 3 4510 09 _L L _ 6.7 : 0)3 30400 5 026 79 542 e 0.14 : 1060 117 006 57 915 2 42(10 0.3 Iti U4 002 0 22 44700 12 1 067 IO 133 0 71 1410 216 007 152 lim o 5410 002 09 0* 00069 w1-^ o o 'J La oo 301008S1 > TAUI.F. 27. (corn'd) Concentrations of Metals in Small Mammals in Aseas |V and die Referene Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, We Virginia August 1997 Spfi'iri Sample l.urutior Aluminum Antimony Arsenic llariuni lierylliimi Cadmium Calcium Clwuiniuni Coliall Copper Iron IjMtl Mai)|*acu Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium llullilllll Vanadium Zinc Mill. 5 002 0.5 002 002 0.02 5 0.2 0.02 0.1 2 0 02 1 0.02 002 02 200 2 002 10 0.02 0.2 05 Meadow Vole IVC-12 IV-K-10 UKF-I 15 KKF-K-2 *(035) 368 491 3X 424 67 0.04 42100 2.9 0.36 3.9 476 0.9 1380 18.3 4.4 8880 241 0.05 21600 22.1 0.42 6.7 557 055 1200 13 106 9710 15.2 0.07 27100 2.9 0.3 4.9 147 029 1310 10.6 1.5 10700 3940 3-1X0 0.5 05 102 672 3910 74 7.05 022 328(H) 173 0.27 7.6 668 0.74 1070 7.5 006 48 9750 2 4430 0.5 9J 1 IV-A-15 169 114 0.06 20000 106 0.21 81 275 0.55 1190 11.4 7 8480 3490 70 8 Short-tailed Shrew KKF-F-10 KKF-A-I1 KKF-K-2 *(1121 UKF-K-7 KKF-A-6 HKF-K-I 419 170 41 660 112 588 8.32 : 7.23 0.52 29700 4.2 0.32 9.7 342 0.76 1100 10.6 0.17 3.2 8780 0.38 30100 1.4 0.17 7.5 385 087 1050 14.7 Oil 2.2 7750 2 3840 3870 0.03 0.3 0.2 109 103 6.97 0.06 18200 28.9 0.27 76 283 0.14 1140 21.3 13.5 12300 2980 78 ! 39 0.02 1.14 22800 2.7 0.54 82 708 1.03 924 13 3 007 3.2 890 3 3740 1.1 117 6.47 04 24600 1.2 0.14 93 394 0.76 1040 422 0.08 1.3 10300 4 4520 100 9.33 026 33900 6.3 0.4 83 736 2.23 1120 13 2 0.6 1.6 10000 4220 1 99 Note: Iliant, spaces indicate compound nut detected IV-F..22 327 2.9 0.1 27600 5.3 0.24 8.2 4M 2.02 13X0 14.8 0.07 3.9 10300 1 4760 0.03 0.3 86.4 KF.F-ll-ltl 75 12.3 01 30800 2.2 0.13 8 223 0.36 1330 25.7 2.3 10700 | 31 4200 96 1 m o o ao VO -voo T ) VO 0? eeoiooesi TABLE 28. Concentrations of Fluoride in Small Mammals Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 ISamnle Location Meadow Vole I-E-8 n-A-13 II-A-20 II-A-24 n-c-i II-C-1* II-C-5 n-c-7 n-C-22 II-D-6 II-D-24 II-E-6* 1II-E-7 III-C-24 III-C-25 in-C-25* II1-D-8 m-E-6 IV-C-12 rv-E-io REF-D-15 REF-E-2*(112) Short-tailed Shrew II-E-10 III-B-10 I1I-C-10 III-C-15 III-C-17 III-C-22 III-E-12 III-E-12 *(110) REF-A-6 REF-A-11 REF-E-1 REF-E-2*(035) REF-E-7 REF-F-10 White Footed Mouse I-D-8 m-B-19 IV-E-22 REF-B-10 Meadow Jumping Mouse II-A-19 II-A-25 III-B-4 JlII-B-7 IIII-B-25 ilV-A-15 Result 220 190 200 210 160 310 1200 190 210 450 200 160 84 MRL 180 170 170 190 99 160 160 170 170 170 150 180 J 75 1 110500 1 800 g 99 140 130 150 170 130 180 140 150 110 150 100 150 160 130 130 1100 160 100 140 160 160 180 160 160 150 140 160 140 82 Note: Blank spaces indicate compound not detected 000699 EID097960 TSB001034 TABLE 29. Lipid Concentrations in Mammal Tissue Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sample Number 45 107 43 44 51 15032 103 104 105 106 108 109 120 124 126 128 129 47 48 49 50 52 100 101 110 111 114 115 121 122 125 127 36 39 41 42 34 35 37 38 40 46 112 113 123 Sample Location I-D-8 I-E-8 II-C-I II-E-7 II-A-19 II-C-17 II-A-20 n-c-5 Il-C-7 II-A-24 II-A-13 II-E-10 II-A-25 II-D-6 II-D-24 II-C-22 II-C-1 n-E-6 in-C-24 m-B-io III-C-22 III-B-7 III-D-S III-C-10 1I1-E-12 III-E-12 III-B-19 III-C-25 III-C-15 III-B-4 III-C-25 III-B-25 I1I-E-6 IV-E-22 IV-E-10 IV-C-12 IV-A-15 Ref-F-10 Ref-E-2 Ref-B-10 Ref-A-11 Ref-E-7 Ref-A-6 Ref-E-2 Ref-E-1 Ref-D-15 Lipid 2.25 3.09 0.7 0.91 0.53 2.02 0.82 0.41 0.12 0.03 0.41 0.14 0.39 1.54 0.45 0.65 0.59 0.44 0.2 1.94 0.72 119 0.78 2.08 2.25 0.57 1.57 0.15 1.64 0.4 0.32 0.79 0.93 1.47 2.01 3.28 0.97 0.56 1.17 0.62 1.7 1.62 1 1 Q 1 8 I I i IB fl 0.48 1.03 0.05 Note: Sample 46 no data found in report TSB001035 EID097961 000700 TABLE 30. Concentrations of Metals in Fisli Tissue Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sample Number Sample location Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc I MRL I 5 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 0.2 0.02 0.1 2 0.02 1 0.02 0.2 200 2 0.02 10 0.02 0.2 1 1006 Arca II 560 1 33.5 0.15 39-100 8.8 0.43 8.5 471 0.29 1480 40.3 4.5 13400 3 0.02 4900 1.2 138 1007 Area II 824 1.1 28.7 0.03 0.18 33200 114 0.49 4.6 658 0 41 1510 .39.1 1.8 13200 3 4550 0.02 1.6 132 1008 Arca II 3880 1.9 49.8 0.15 0.19 2.36(H) 6.7 1.56 5.4 2420 1.44 1610 115 .7.9 136(H) 2 3890 0.05 5.6 124 1009 Arca II 4880 2 56.7 0.19 0.28 2.72(H) 2.7.9 1.9 7.2 3 1(H) 1.81 1700 128 10 7 13700 3 4100 0.06 7.2 134 1003 Area III 1640 1.4 .72.9 0.06 0.16 267(H) .7 6 0.7 7 1100 0.66 1430 III 2.1 12500 3640 0.0.7 2.5 116 1004 Area III 2490 1.8 39 0.09 0.15 251(H) 4.2 0.97 6.3 1580 0.92 1420 110 2.3 13200 4 3830 0.04 3.7 145 1005 Area III 321 1.2 23.7 0.16 394(H) .70.6 0.47 7.7 471 7.59 1480 46.1 12.1 13400 2 0.03 4900 0.8 138 1000 Area IV 254 10.5 0.45 326(H) 8.7 .3 J 5.7 307 0.19 1390 19.7 2.8 13700 0.04 3800 0.5 128 1001 Arca IV 117 4.37 0..74 8720 0.8 0.24 4.3 126 0.11 687 8.07 0.4 15800 0.02 4320 0.2 88 1002 Arca IV 604 0.6 13.8 0.03 0.42 252(H) 3 0.48 5.2 463 0.3 1230 43.4 1.1 12500 0.0.7 3310 1 114 1010 Drv Run 164 0.03 0.7 28.4 0.09 312(H) 2.7 0.27 3.9 167 0.24 1360 143 1.7 5950 0.04 2640 0.4 156 Noie: Blank spaces indicate compound not detected EID097962 o h* 9 0 I0 0 S S 1 TABLE 31. Concentrations of Fluoride in Fisti Tissue Diy Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sample Number Sample Location Fluoride MRL 1006 Area II 4 io 230 1007 Arca II 230 1008 Arca II 470 210 1009 Arca II 230 1003 Area III 210 1004 Area III 470 200 1005 Area III 530 200 1000 Arca IV 210 1001 Area IV 250 1002 Area IV 160 150 1010 Pry Run 230 220 Note: Blank spaces indicate compound not delected EID097963 o -I o eoiooesi I TADLE 32. Lipid Conccnlrations in Fish Tissue Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Sample Number Sample Location 1(106 Arca II 0.73 1007 Arca II 2.3 1008 Arca II 1009 Arca II 0.86 1003 Arca III 3.81 1004 1005 Arca III Arca III 0.92 1.24 I04KI 1001 1002 1010 1 Arca IV Arca IV Arca IV Drv Run I 2.27 ' 3.22 3.51 161 1 Note: Sample 1008 not data round in report EID097964 o Co 8COIOO0S1 Table 33 Results ofthe Analysis forTAL Mclsli in RsrthwormTissue Dry RunCreekSite Wishing)on,WoodCounty, West Virginia November 1997 BasedonDry Weight Client ID Location " Sdtds l.lfHdl** Parameter Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium >'alcium (.'hrumuan Cobalt Copp Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Challium Vanadium me Control IA Lab II 049 Cone MRL mg/Vg I9U0 3 u 002 37 0 5 36 003 (MM 002 11 002 4MO 3 43 03 30 002 19 01 630 3 014 002 950 1 19 01 U 02 3) 02 `AM 200 21 0 03 003 5400 10 003 002 I I 02 130 05 Control IB Lab 16 033 Cone MRL -S& L. 2300 U 4 43 003 11 4MO 33 31 16 640 091 190 17 u 25 sino 2 003 4900 003 12 no "iftt 3 002 05 01)2 nn2 0.02 5 02 002 01 2 002 01 02 02 2ut 1 002 10 002 02 05 Control 1C Lab 12 069 Cone MKL ..re!*. 2400 u 42 43 0116 19 37110 36 51 15 420 12 150 13 u 17 1400 1 002 4900 003 I 1M20 5 002 05 0 02 002 0 02 5 02 002 01 2 002 1 01 02 02 2t*> 1 002 10 0 02 02 04 Cnnirol 2A lab 12 0 SO Cone MKL -JS& IL _!!Xg_ 250U 5 U 002 5 05 46 002 006 0 02 1S 0 02 Hast 5 19 0 2 4 9 U02 It 0 I 310 2 12 0 02 190 II 01 U 02 24 02 7**1 200 s1 0 03 0 02 5000 10 003 002 14 02 MO 05 Control 20 Lab 10 0 56 Cone MRL ral-g., 990 U 45 35 oo3 16 4VI0 2 55 160 350 043 930 94 U 11 7700 2 003 4600 002 06 no re*e 5 002 05 002 002 oo2 5 02 002 01 2 002 01 02 02 200 1 002 10 002 02 0.5 Control 2C 900 A Lab Areal II II 0 17 0 51 Cone MRL Cone MRL mc/kg ja ftL . JStQ *. _ret_ 2400 5 1900 } U 002 u 002 47 05 22 05 44 002 17 002 006 002 O il 002 11 002 34 002 3700 5 4000 5 25 U2 34 0 2 57 0 02 6 9 0 02 14 01 12 01 310 2 1100 2 1 1 002 13 002 90 1 1000 14 01 100 0 1 u 02 u 02 14 02 37 02 too 200 10000 200 2i 2 003 002 005 002 5100 10 5200 10 003 002 006 002 13 02 39 02 no 0 5 no 05 900 0 Areal 12 022 Cone MRL _ re it_ 540 5 U 002 39 05 10 002 006 002 34 002 39**1 5 20 0 2 7 o 02 16 01 610 2 050 002 30 1 61 0.1 u 02 66 02 1000 200 21 004 0 02 4300 10 005 002 16 02 130 05 900C Areal 15 0 26 Cone MRL mg/kg ItflO 5 u 002 44 05 it 002 0 12 002 3.1 tto2 411*1 5 35 02 3 002 15 01 ItOO 2 15 002 970 1 140 01 u 02 43 02 1300 200 21 005 002 4200 10 006 002 44 02 120 0] 901 A Arca II n 0 37 Cune MRL mg/kg m**g too 3 u 002 26 03 II 002 0 0 6 002 21 002 3900 3 17 02 13 002 14 01 960 2 0 59 002 940 | 17 01 u 02 30 02 500 200 21 002 002 4600 10 003 002 2 02 120 05 901 B Area II 12 027 Cone MRL mg/kj me/Lg 720 5 u nti2 IS 05 10 002 007 002 24 <HI2 41*10 5 19 0 2 10 002 17 0 1 1000 2 066 002 920 1 01 U 02 25 02 1)00 2**) 31 005 002 4600 10 003 0 03 22 02 120 0 5 901 C Area 11 y mftAft I2U0 U 37 13 0 09 21 4100 23 19 14 1300 OS 950 97 U 40 1400 3 005 4600 003 31 120 MKI s 002 o5 002 002 ou2 s 02 002 0) 2 002 I 01 02 02 200 1 002 10 002 02 05 . Hl.ipnb arcbasednnwetweight o EID097965 60I009SI i Tabk 3) (Continued)Renduofd* Analyst*feeTALMet* mEarthwormTimm Pry AunCieekSue Wastogton, WoodCounty, West Vagne November1997 Batedon Dry Weight Clienl IP luxation %Sobd* #1uwU** Piiaindn Antimony Afxtuc 1Union IkiyOnim I'^knnon i`ek'IUM 1`Ioiviomm rnnxi lion iced Mjgneshen Manganese Mercury Nickel ISttjaniun kkrawn sdver Stuhum IIuImm VjnwtMun /* 902A AreaIII 17 013 Com MRl AM/ll 170 jS tH3L. U 07 14 03 17 007 007 007 y7jo)o 007 3 19 07 91 007 4 01 990 7 0)) 007 900 3 01 u 07 31 07 700 700 31 004 007 4300 10 00) 007 73 07 no 0* 902 AreaIII 97 07 C(<M MRL *4 1000 M3*i- 007 007 33 03 IB 007 0)3 007 73 007 4100 3 43 07 91 007 14 01 1900 7 11 007 1000 90 01 U 07 47 07 9300 700 31 001 007 4100 to 003 00) 4a 07 no 01 902c 901B AreaIII AreaII 17 17 01i7 0 7 Cone MRL Cone MRL meAir 1000 3 _s7e7*0. _o23z- u 007 U 007 37 03 1 03 17 007 10 00) 009 007 007 007 10 007 74 007 3900 5 4000 1 74 07 19 07 73 00) 10 007 140 01 17 01 1300 1 1000 7 on 007 Odd 007 190 1 970 97 01 A 01 U 07 U 07 31 07 73 07 7000 700 300 700 713 003 007 003 007 4100 10 4600 10 U 007 007 007 77 07 77 07 no 01 170 O1 90 C 902A AreaII AreaIII 17 17 0II 0 3 Cone MRL Com ft _S2*C. Vi mMRlIln. U 3 70 3 00) U 007 37 03 4 03 11 007 17 007 out 007 007 007 71 007 7) 002 4100 3 3900 3 71 07 If 07 S9 00) 93 007 II 01 14 01 1300 ) 990 2 00 007 033 007 930 900 1 97 01 3 01 U 07 U 07 40 07 31 07 too 700 300 700 33 003 007 004 007 4oOQ 10 4300 10 00) 007 007 002 31 07 73 07 ITO 01 no 0' 90 B AreaIII 901C AreaIII 903A AreaIV 7 17 13 037 007 083 Com MRL Com MRL Com *4 jS g i. 3 J 1X00l0t jse3*L -3220i. 002 007 33 03 U 37 02 OS U 48 MRL *4 3 007 3 II 007 12 002 17 002 013 002 009 02 004 007 73 007 18 002 71 07 4100 3 3900 3 3000 3 43 4| 14 02 002 Ol 74 02 73 002 140 01 12 7 14 02 007 01 1900 2 1300 7 00 7 11 007 073 007 030 002 1000 1 90 1 930 1 90 01 97 01 51 01 U 02 U 02 U 02 47 02 31 02 73 07 9)00 700 7000 700 000 700 3 004 1 007 2 003 1 007 3 07 1 007 4300 10 4100 10 4100 10 003 002 U 007 002 007 40 02 17 02 13 02 no Ol III 1 no 01 903D AreaIV II 07> Cone MRL I* "*/Wi loOO 3 U 007 44 03 20 002 013 07 24 002 3000 3 37 02 II 007 13 01 1700 2 11 007 1100 1 7 01 U 0) 34 02 000 700 31 00) 007 4200 10 00) 002 37 02 1)0 01 MIC AreaIV 12 024 Cone MRL n*4l *4* IB00 3 u 007 37 03 70 001 013 002 22 002 3300 3 34 02 II 007 17 01 1900 2 12 007 1000 1 97 01 U 02 40 02 ?0Q 700 31 003 007 4100 10 00) 02 4) 0.2 no 01 -h IjH i erebatedonwetweight 904A Reference 904B 041 MRL Tow Cone mn/lfl ma/U u 07 0 39 03 I) 007 IS 000 007 010 007 2) 002 21 4400 3 4400 21 01 23 0J 79 007 7 02 0 7) 01 13 1 1)00 1 1700 043 002 on 007 |* 1000 1 43 01 9e0 1 30 01 1700 130 U 02 40 02 U 02 71 u M0 2 200 | 7300 200 0700 004 002 004 002 00) 4900 10 4700 10 003 002 003 002 003 22 02 170 3 24 no 02 01 4) 170 007 01 EID097966 0 01 0P0100QS1 Table 34. Results of the Analysis for Fluoride in Earthworm Tissue Dry Run Creek Site Washington. Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 (Based on Dry Weight, mg/kg) Sample ID Location Cone f T o r " Control 1A Control IB Control 1C Control 2A Control 2B Control 2C 900A 900B 900C 901A 90 IB 901C 902A J902B 902C 903A 903B 903C 904A 904B 904C Lab Lab Lab Lab Lab Lab Areal Area I Area I Area II Areali Area II Area III Area III Area III Area IV Area IV Area IV Reference Reference Reference U U U U U U U U U U U U 380 U U U U U U U U 3& 560 400 370 500 460 350 220 170 220 190 170 180 250 210 200 210 210 250 230 240 TSB001041 EID097967 000706 TSB001042 ni |wM|M3 w 3 * 9o K s 3 ` Xo X M< mESo 5 > *1 oR 9 * 5 Ro * 5 laO y f 2 <? oo e x =<E 3o <9 =* o *S g* <eno S*i <t rwO raO n Re IIo H9 o o |yst" s < iyto y y " s iUi t o < iyc t*" 9o 1w1c I%^2Iyi2 1 g2B EID097968 000707 Sample Number Sample Location Aluminum .Antimony Anenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Ctiromiuin Cohall Cupper Inm Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel ISiUtsium Selenium Silver Sodium Mtallmm Vaiuiltitm /iue " n u r " ~ 7 5 T ~ ZT5 Area 1A Area 11) j 153' ~ T 5 T " 0.02 0.5 0.02 21.7 IM 002 0.02 o o t 0.01 5 5460 2020 0.2 24 l.l 0.02 0 09 0.IX 0.1 5.4 4.7 2 141 215 0.02 0.19 0.24 1 1710 1110 0 5 162 215 0.05 0.2 1.9 14 200 25900 15900 1 002 10 71 7 0.02 0.2 04 0 5 l`>N 20 9 11 Area 1C 1 .... 22.1 O il 2590 5 0.07 4 00 0.11 1500 111 2.2 1X200 50 oot 16 2 dll Arra II A 16.7 5210 1* 0.07 4.2 112 0.IX IJ90 65 0.25 l.l iWNm 51 02 15 6 Note: Blank pace* indicate compound not delected m a oo o NO >Jo nO On NO o 05 ^oiooasi  TABI.li 36. Cunccnlraliuns ofMelali in Vegetation Uiy Run Creek Washington, Wood County, Wat Virginia November 1991 tb -- Arra II C l9 -- a n -- ---- TO---- T r Arra III A Area III B Area III C 175 62 923 -- m -- -- w -- -- as-- Arca IV A Area IV B Area IV C W 1 211 Wl -- m-- -- m-- Reference A Reference II : M " ." `" " E T " -- m-- Reference V. -------373------ 13 0.33 2750 2.9 0.1 3.6 152 0.21 1290 66 2 16300 13.1 2400 5.9 0.11 4.3 173 0.17 MHO 43 2. 20600 Ml 0.03 3450 2.1 0.06 3.4 73 0.09 1750 17 11.5 19400 7,22 1900 2.1 0.1 4.1 154 0.11 1230 : 39 4.2 13700 16.2 002 2530 3.5 0.22 5.2 271 0.24 1760 90 2.4 23300 1.6 2030 15 0.33 35 113 0.15 1390 41 245 16900 29 0.02 2490 11.3 0.3 3.1 563 0.37 1340 60 6.4 19300 20.2 0.11 3170 2.5 0.07 4 66 0.16 1740 V 22 ; 2.9 19200 u 0.06 3110 3 0 06 3.5 79 0.12 1570 151 1.3 17100 13.2 005 2430 2.3 0.14 3 396 0 32 1610 115 0.33 1.7 14800 71 90 33 59 14 53 5 29 42 41 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.36 0.9 36.5 16.8 12 6 12.5 20.2 15.3 139 17.1 12.7 03 14.1 I TAOLt- 37. Conccntraliora of Fluoride in Vejcution Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, Wcat Virginia November 1997 Snuiplr Nunilitr Stimplf I^KHtlon lluuridc SIHI. 609 Art* 1A 2H0 ito <10 Aree 1 li 170 <11 Area 1C 170 HI A iym Il A 240 170 tot Aree II II 160 <02 Aree II C 160 <03 Aree III A 200 <04 Aree III II 190 ito <05 Area III C IM I 160 606 Arra IV A 190 <07 600 Area IV II Area IV C ITO ito Note: Illank (pacca indicale compound not ddocted <12 Rrfrrrart A ito 160 <13 K tfm tK t IK 140 <14 Keferrnre C* ISO 000709 --4 o vO -J o W 0100SS1 * Sample Numlter ISiinipIr Location ll.iiad CiNilcnl TADLE 38. Lipid Concentrations in Plant Tissue Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 609 Arca IA 0.53 610 A rra IB 0.36 611 A rra IC 0.48 600 A tra HA 054 601 A rra IIB 0 61 602 Arra IIC 026 603 A rra IIIA OSI 604 A rra IIIB 039 60S 606 607 A rra IIIC A rra IVA A rra IVB 0.38 1.28 0.43 608 A rra IVC 3.05 612 Rei A 0.58 613 R rfB 0.67 614 I R rfC 1 I w oo o o vo o 'O -J o SP01008SI T able 39. R esults o f H istopathology for the M eadow Vole I D ry Run C reek W ashington, W ood C ounty, W est V irginia 0ATE L ocation II-C-1 " L iver K idney L ocation IE-8 L iver K idney L o catio n II-A -13 L iver K idney L ocation II-A-20 L iver K idney L ocation II-A-24 L iver K idney Location il-C -l L iver K idney ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICE This tissue is very mildly autolyzed with acute congestion. T here is som e fracturing o f the tissue which may be due to freezing artifact. Specific other change is not identified. Renal tissue w as not identified in this section. This section o f liver tissue is mildly autolyzed w ith minimal congestion. T here are very few eosinophils and lymphocytes in the portal triad areas. Specific o th er change is not identified. T he renal tissue is mildly autolyzed. Specific inflammation is not identified in this renal parenchym a. This tissue is acutely congested with freezing artifact. There are scattered inflam m atory cells in the portal triad areas. These inflammatory cells include lym phocytes and som e eosinophils. Acute congestion is present. The renal tissue is acutely congested. There is mild freezing artifact in this renal tissue. Significant tubular o r glom erular change is not identified. This tissue is acutely congested. T he tissue is well preserved and not autolyzed. T h ere is som e hem orrhage o v er the capsule. N o degeneration o r inflam m ation is otherw ise identified. This tissue is acutely congested. T he renal tissue is well preserved, with no evidence o f tubular degeneration or specific other inflammatory process. T here is no hem orrhage in the m edullary tissue. This tissue dem onstrates separation o f the parenchyma as the result o f freezing artifact with acute congestion. There are focal areas o f hemorrhage in the liver parenchym a. The renal tissue is acutely congested with definite freezing artifact. Specific o th er inflam m ation o r change is not identified. Tubular toxicitv :s not identified. This tissue is very mildly autolyzed with acute congestion. There is some fracturing o f the tissue which may be due to freezing artifact. Specific other change is not identified. Renal tissue w as not identified in this section. TSB000990 EID097916 000711 T able 39. R esults o f H istopathology for the M eadow Vole Dry Run C reek W ashington, W ood C ounty, W est V irginia N ovem ber 1997 Location II-C -5 L iver K idney L ocation II-C-7 L iver K idney L ocation II-C-22 L iver K idney L ocation II-D-6 L iver K idney Location II-D-24 L iver K idney Location II-E-6* L iver K idney This tissue is fragm enting and dem onstrates some separation as if the tissue had been frozen. There is acute congestion o f this liver tissue. This tissue is separated as if it had been frozen. There is acute congestion o f the parenchvm a. Inflammation o r toxic chances o f the tubules are not identified The liver tissue dem onstrates freezing artifact and acute congestion. There are scattered focal collections o f neutrophils in the liver tissue with fibrinous exudation. The inflam m atory process is very severe in focal sites and is varied in size and shape. T he renal tissue is autolyzed w ith evidence o f freezing artifact. Specific tubular o r glom erular degeneration is not identified. T he liver tissue is mildly to m oderately autolyzed with som e pigm ent in the liver parenchym a. Specific cellular infiltration is not identified. In some areas, the liver tissue is severely autolyzed. Specific degenerative change is not present. This tissue is m oderately autolyzed and acutely congested. Specific inflammation is not oth erw ise identified in the renal tissue. D egeneration is secondary. This liver tissue dem onstrate evidence o f freezing artifact with mild autolysis o f the hepatocytes and acute congestion. Scattered eosinophils are present in the portal triad areas, but they are minimal in number. The renal tissue dem onstrates tissue separation consistent with freezing artifact and mild autolysis. Minimal inflammation and no evidence o f tubular degeneration is identified in this kidnev. The liver tissue dem onstrates freezing artifact with some separation and splitting o f the hepatocytes. Mild autolysis has occurred in the liver parenchyma. A cute congestion is part o f this reaction. T he renal tissue is mildly autolyzed with acute congestion. N o specific tubular deg en eratio n o r inflam m ation is identified. Any toxic change is not identified, but this mav be due 3 problem s w ith autolysis as well. This tissue is acutely congested w ith collections o f eosinpohils and some lym phocytes in the portal triad areas. Mild to m oderate autolysis has occurred in this liver tissue. Specific other change is not identified. The renal tissue dem onstrates acute congestion w ith mild to m oderate autolysis. There are focal collections o f inspissated protein in some tubules. N o other specific reaction o r change is identified. E ID 097917 TSB000991 000712 T ab le 39. R esults o f H istopathology fo r the M eadow Vole Dry Run C reek W ashington, W ood C ounty, W est V irginia N ovem ber 1997 L ocation II-E-7 L iv e r The liver tissue is dem onstrating granulated ceils with vacuolization. There is mild autolysis and acute congestion in the liver tissue. Some eosinophils and lym phocytes are present in the portal triad areas. D egeneration is occurring secondarily. K idney L ocation III-C-24* T he renal tissue is slightly autolyzed with acute congestion and no evidence o f any o th e r specific tubular o r degenerative change._____________________ L iver T he liver tissue is mildly autolyzed w ith multifocal areas o f inflammation in the parenchyma. These inflammatory elements include neutrophils, lymphocytes, and irregular m ononuclear cells. This supports som e type o f inflammation. M inimal portal triad inflammation is identified. K idney L ocation IH-C-25 L iver K idney The renal tissue is autolyzed w ith acute congestion. N o specific tubular d egeneration o r inflam m ation is identified. This tissue d em o n strates slight autolysis w ith acu te congestion. T here is one small collection o f lym phocytes and plasma cells in the interstitial areas. A very few collections o f lymphocytes and plasma cells are presents around vascular elem ents. T here is no evidence o f any specific o th er change in the liver. This tissue is very mildly autolyzed with no evidence o f toxic change o r in fla m m a tio n .______________________________________________________________ L ocation UI-C-25 L iver The liver tissue is acutely congested with freezing artifact and mild autolysis. A lm ost no inflammation was identified in the liver. K idney T he renal tissue is acutely congested w ith some separation o f the parenchyma. ______________________ T u b u lar degeneration o r interstitial inflam m ation is no t identified. L ocation III-D -8 L iver This tissue is acutely congested. Lymphocytes, eosinophils, and a few other inflam m atory cells are present in and around portal triad areas. Specific K idney inflam m ation o r toxicity is not identified. T he renal tissue is slightly autolyzed. N o evidence o f infection or degeneration ______ o f tubules can b e identified. _ _________________________________ Location M -E -6 L iver K idney This tissue is mildly autolyzed with some evidence o f freezing artifact. There are collections o f eosinophils and a few lymphocytes in the portal triad areas. Specific hepatocellular degeneration is not identified. The renal tissue is slightly autolyzed with no other specific change. TSB000992 EID097918 000713 % T able 39. R esults o f H istopathology fo r the M eadow Vole Dry R un C reek W ashington, W ood C ounty, W est V irginia N ovem ber 1997 t y Location IV-C-12 L iver K idney This tissue is acutely congested. T he is bile retention and som e apparent deposition o f pigm ent in hepatocytes. The pigment may be bile or iron. This tissue is acutely congested w ith focal areas o f hem orrhage in the surrounding parenchym a. Specific other inflammation is not identified. Location IV-E-10 L iver This section o f liver is acutely congested w ith mild autolysis. T here are a few collections o f lym phocytes, plasm a cells and eosinophils in the collection. Epitheliod cells are part o f the collected material. There are a few scattered inflammatory cells in the sinusoids throughout the liver tissue. Specific other change is not identified. K idney T he renal tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. The tubular elem ents in the kidney are in extrem ely good condition with no evidence o f specific autolysis. L ocation R EF-D -15 L iver This tissue is acutely congested, supporting acute death. T here is very mild lym phocytic plasmacytic infiltration in the portal triad areas w ith K idney no evidence o f toxicity or o ther specific inflammation in the liver. This section o f tissue is well preserved with acute congestion. T here is no evidence o f significant toxicity or infection o r degeneration o f any o f the renal parenchymal tissues. L ocation REF-E-2 L iver The liver tissue is acutely congested. T here is alm ost no autolysis in this liver tissue. S cattered eosinophils and lymphocytes are present in the portal triad areas. Specific infection or change is not identified. K idney T he renal tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. Specific other infection o r degeneration is not identified. TSB000993 EID097919 000714 T ab le 39. (cont'd) R esults o f H istopathology for the Shot-tailed Shrew Dry Run C reek W ashington, W ood C ounty, W est V irginia N ovem ber 1997 L o c a tio n III-B -10 L iver K idney Location IU -C-10 L iver K idney L ocation 1U-C-15 L iver K idney Location 1II-C-17 L iver K idney Location III-C -22 L iver K idney Location IU -E-12 L iver K idney T he liver tissu e is acutely congested w ith mild autolysis. Eosinophilic infiltration has occurred in the portal triad areas. Mild autolysis is present. T here is som e suggestion o f freezing artifact in the tissue. The renal tissue is slightly autolyzed w ith acute congestion and no other specific inflammation. The sections o f liver in this slide include well preserved sections with acute congestion. Mild vacuolization o f hepatocytes has occurred throughout the liver tissue which is very likely a normal appearance. T h e section o f renal tissue is w ell preserved w ith acute congestion. N o evidence o f toxicity o r inflammation is identified in this section. This tissue is acutely congested w ith som e fragm entation o f the liver tissue. This very likely is the result o f traum a. T here is acute congestion and scattered eosinophils along the portal triad areas. This tissue is acutely congested w ith a focal area o f hem orrhage over the capsule. This hem orrhage includes neutrophils and clot formation. N o bacteria o r evidence o f toxicitv is identified in the renal tissue. This tissue is acutely congested w ith no evidence o f autolysis. There are eosinophils and lymphoid cells in the portal triad areas. Some separation o f the hepatocytes lias occurred. A cute congestion is part o f the reaction. Specific toxicity o r infection is not identified in the liver tissue. T he renal tissue is acutely congested with mild autolysis. Specific tubular chanses are not present. This tissue is acutely congested w ith mild autolysis. There are a few collections o f eosinophils and m ononuclear cells in the portal triad areas. Specific o th er change is not present in the liver. This tissue is acutely congested w ith no evidence o f specific tubular or glomerular damage. This tissue dem onstrates freezing artifact w ith acute congestion. Eosinophils are collecting in and around portal triad areas. This tissue dem onstrates separation, supporting freezing artifact. Acute congestion is present. N o evidence o f any specific toxicity o r degeneration is identified. TSB000994 EID097920 000715 Table 39. (cont'd) Results of Histopathology for the Shot-tailed Shrew Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 V Location HI-E-12 Liver This tissue is mildly autoiyzed w ith acute congestion. Eosinophils are prom inent in the portal triad areas. Specific other change is not present Kidney in the liver. The renal tissue is acutely congested w ith no evidence o f tubular o r Location REF-A-6 Liver glom erular dam age. Specific toxicity is not identified. This tissue is acutely congested with m oderate autolysis. Eosinophils, lym phocytes, and plasma cells are present in the portal triad areas. Specific degeneration o f the liver tissue is not identified. The cellular Kidney infiltration in the portal triad areas is m oderate. The renal tissue is autoiyzed and acutely congested. Specific tubular degeneration is not identified in the kidney. Location REF-A-11 Liver This tissue is acutely congested w ith an increased num bers o f lymphocyte's and eosinophils in the portal triad areas. T he eosinophils are scattered th ro u g h o u t th e hepatic tissue. T h e hepatocytes them selves are in extrem ely g o o d condition. T here is som e fracturing o f the liver, suggesting traum a, but no other specific change is present in the liver tissue. Kidney This tissue is acutely congested. N o evidence o f specific tubular degeneration or inflam m ation is identified in the sections o f kidnev. - Location REF-E-1 Liver This section o f liver is well preserved. T here is acute congestion in the tissue with some separation o f the hepatocytes. Scattered neutrophils and eosinophils are present in the p o rtal triad areas. T he rem ainder o f the liver tissue is histologically normal. Kidney The renal tissue is acutely congested w ith no evidence o f toxicity or inflam m ation in the tubules o r glom eruli. The pelvis is dilated. Tubules appear to be secondarily dilated as the result o f this hydronephrosis. TSB000995 EID097921 000716 Table 39. (coat'd) Results of Histopathology for the Shot-tailed Shrew Dry Run Creek W ashington, W ood C ounty, W est V irginia N ovem ber 1997 L ocation R EF-E-2 L iver K idney L ocation R EF-E-7 L iver K idney Location R EF-F-10 L iver K idney The liver tissue is acutely congested w ith some vacuolization o r granularity o f hepatocytes. S cattered eosinophils and lym phocytes are present in the portal triad areas. Specific o th er degeneration o r inflammation is not identified. T h e renal tissue is acutely congested. M ild autolysis is present. T here is mild dilatation o f the tubular elements, but this mav be from freezine artifact. This tissue is mildly autolyzed w ith acute congestion. T here is acute congestion w ith scattered eosinophils in and around the portal triad areas. The autolytic change is m ore severe around the gall bladder than in other sites. This tissue is slightly autolyzed and acutely congested. Specific change o f infection o r toxicity is not identified. This section o f liver tissue is very mildly autolyzed w ith acute congestion and good collections o f hepatic tissue with normal cells. Scattered eosinophils are present in portal triad areas. T he renal tissue is acutely congested. T here is mild autolysis in the renal tissue as well. TSB000996 EID097922 000717 T able 39. (co n t'd ) R esults o f H istopathology fo r the M eadow Ju m p in g M ouse Dry Run C reek W ashington, W ood C ounty, W est V irginia N ovem ber 1997 L o catio n II-A -19 L iver The liver sections are slightly autolyzed with acute congestion. Eosinophils and lym phocytes are part o f the inflam m atory process in the portal triad areas. O th er specific change is not identified. K idney T he renal tissue is autolyzed with acute congestion. Specific tubular ___________________ deg en eratio n o r interstitial inflam m ation is no t identified. L ocation II-A-25 L iver This tissue has clefts, supporting freezing artifact. There is acute congestion in the tissue. Specific inflammation o r degeneration is not identified. K idney N ot present Location III-B -4 L iver This tissue is slightly autolyzed w ith acute congestion. Specific inflammation K idney o r degeneration o f the hepatic tissue is not identified. T he renal tissue is acutely congested w ith areas o f m oderate autolysis. Inflam m ation is not identified. Specific tubular change is not identified but this could be altered by the autolvtic process. L ocation III-B-7 L iver T he liver tissue is acutely congested w ith mild to m oderate autolysis. M oderate autoiysis is part o f the collection in several sites. T here are K idney scattered inflam m atory cells in the sinusoids o f this hepatic tissue. The renal tissue is m oderately autolyzed w ith som e separation o f this tissue. T here is acute congestion o f this tissue as well. T he degenerative change is occurring secondarily. In som e areas, the autolysis is quite severe. Location III-B -25 L iv er This section o f tissue is mildly autolyzed with acute congestion throughout th e parenchym a. T here are collections o f lymphoid tissue in one focus. Scattered eosinophils are present. K idney The renal tissue is acutely congested. There is mild autolysis in the renal tissue. _____________________________________ _______ _____________ Location IV-A-15 L iv er This tissue is very mildly autolyzed with acute congestion. Scattered eosinophils and lym phocytes are present in portal :aad areas. Specific other inflam m ation is not identified. K idney This tissue is acutely congested w ith mild autolysis. T here are focal areas o f hem orrhage, suggesting a potential o f trauma. Specific inflammation o r degeneration is not identified in the renal parenchyma. TSB000997 EID097923 000718 T able 39. (cont'd) R esults of H istopathology for the M eadow Jum ping M ouse Dry R un C reek W ashington, W ood C ounty, W est V irginia N ovem ber 1997 L ocation II-A-19 L iver The liver sections are slightly autolyzed with acute congestion. Eosinophils and lym phocytes are part o f the inflammatory process in the portal triad areas. O ther specific change is not identified. K idney T he renal tissue is autolyzed with acute congestion. Specific tubular ___________________ d egeneration o r interstitial inflam m ation is not identified. L ocation II-A -25 L iver This tissue has clefts, supporting freezing artifact. There is acute congestion in the tissue. Specific inflammation o r degeneration is not identified. K idney N ot present L ocation I1I-B-4 L iver This tissue is slightly autolyzed w ith acute congestion. Specific inflammation o r degeneration o f the hepatic tissue is not identified. K idney The renal tissue is acutely congested with areas o f m oderate autolysis. Inflam m ation is not identified. Specific tubular change is not identified ___________________ bu t this could b e altered by the autolytic process. ________________________ L ocation III-B-7 L iver T he liver tissue is acutely congested w ith mild to m oderate autolysis. M oderate autolysis is part o f the collection in several sites. T here are scattered inflam m atory cells in the sinusoids o f this hepatic tissue. K idney The renal tissue is m oderately autolyzed with some separation o f this tissue. There is acute congestion o f this tissue as well. The degenerative cham ejs_ocurringj> econdaril^jin^som ^ Location III-B -25 L iver This section o f tissue is mildly autolyzed with acute congestion throughout the parenchym a. T here are collections o f lymphoid tissue in one focus. K idney ______ Scattered eosinophils are present. T he renal tissue is acutely congested. T here is mild autolysis in the renal tissue. Location IV-A-15 L iver This tissue is very mildly autolyzed w ith acute congestion. Scattered eosinophils and lym phocytes are present in p tal triad areas. Specific o th er inflam m ation is not identified. K idney This tissue is acutely congested w ith mild autolysis. There are focal areas o f hem orrhage, suggesting a potential o f traum a. Specific inflammation o r degeneration is not identified in the renal parenchyma. TSB000998 EID097924 000719 T able 39. (cont'd) R esults o f H istopathology for the W hite-footed M ouse D ry Run C reek W ashington, W ood C ounty, W est V irginia N ovem ber 1997 L ocation ID-8 L iver The liver tissue is acutely congested with mild to m oderate autolysis. H epatocellular vacuolization and granulation o f the hepatocytes has occurred in the tissue. There is some vacuolization. Specific inflam m ation is not identified. The granularity o f the hepatocytes and the congestion appears to be metabolically normal. K idney T he renal tissue is acutely congested w ith mild autolysis. Specific inflam m ation is not identified. Location HI-B-19 L iver This liver tissue dem onstrates areas o f freezing artifact w ith mild autolysis and acute congestion. There are collections o f lymphoid tissue and eosinophils in focal areas o f the portal triad collection. K idney The renal tissue dem onstrates some separation o f tubular elements w ith acu te congestion. T he separation supports freezing artifact. T here is acute congestion and hemorrhage over the capsular surface with congestion throughout the parenchyma. Specific other change o r tubular degeneration is not identified. Location IV-E-22 L iver This tissue is acutely congested w ith rare eosinophils and lymphocytes in the portal triad areas. D egeneration is occurring minimally. O ther specific inflam m ation is not identified. K idney The renal tissue is acutely congested with no specific degeneration o f tubules o f interstitial areas. L ocation REF-B-10 L iver This tissue is acutely congested and very mildly autolyzed. There are som e collections o f lymphocytes and eosinophils in the portal triad areas. M ild fibrosis is part o f the collection. T here is m ore severe autolysis over the capsule w ith som e foreign material in the capsule as well. K idney The renal tissue is acutely congested with no specific degeneration o f tubules. TSB000999 EID097925 000720 TABLE 40. Summary of Toxicity Test Results Dry Run Creek Washington, Wood County, West Virginia November 1997 Earthworm Fathead Minnow Location Control Area 1 Area II Area 111 Area IV Reference Su n ival (%) 100 KM) 100 100 100 100 Growth (%) 38 .193 40.9 32.4 54.3 43 Location Survival Control _(% ). _ 93 Upper Trih A 58* Upper Trib B 100 Area II 100 Area IV 96 Reference Ls M .gaaasssaaaBB d 87 Weight 0.37 0.39 0.41 0.42 0.39 0.42 Significantly different from Reference and Control Amphipod Location Control Upper Trib A Upper Trib B Area II Area IV Reference Survival (V.) 98 96 98 96 100 100 Length (mm) 2.9 2.8 2.9 2.8** 2.9 2.9 Weight (mg) 0.21 0.15** 0.19 0.15** 0.19 0.19 EID097926 M h* oooiooasi I A6L 41. Maximum ConUmfnanf Concentration* Dry Run Creek W ashington, W ood County, W e st Virginia Novem ber 199/ ianls in Sed Maxxnun Concentrations of Contaminants in soa Contaminant Maximum Sediment Concentration Total Benchmark Number ol Samples Reference Hazard Source Quotient Maximum Water Concentration Total Number of Samples Benchmark Reference Source Hazard Quotient Soil Maximum Concentration Number of Detections Benchmark Raferenca Source Hazard Quotient Metals Aluminum Antimony Arsenic (total) Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium (total) Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Nickel Potassium Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Vanadium Zinc mq/kg 17500 U 21 205 2 U 6090 33 49 35 57200 40 5170 3340 U 39 2000 U U 111 U 57 85 ugfl. 7 NB NB NB 300 7 150 x - fauna 00 U 7 8.2 x fauna 2.6 U 7 NB NB NB 54 7 NB NB NB U 7 1 2 x - fauna 0.0 U 7 NB NB NB 33000 7 50 x - flora 66 U 7 NB NB NB U 7 34 x - fauna 1.0 67 7 NB NB NB 430 7 467 x - fauna 0 9 U 7 NB NB NB 10000 7 460 c 7.3 51 7 0.15 x fauna 00 u 7 20.9 x - fauna 1.9 . u 7 NB NB NB 3100 7 NB HD NB U 7 1 0 x fauna NB U 7 NB NB NB 16000 7 NB NB NB U 7 NB NB NB U 7 150 x - fauna 0 6 IB mq/kg 7 25 X-launa 12.0 16300 7 30 x- fauna 0.0 U 7 874 x- fauna 0.0 7 7 10000 x - fauna 0.0 218 7 5 3 x fauna 00 2 7 053 x-launa o.o- U 7 116000 e* 0.3 4370 7 120 x- fauna 00 31 7 35000 x- fauna 0.0 35 7 6 5 x - fauna 1.0 31 7 320 x- fauna ::i:1.35;:r 43600 7 3 2 x fauna 0.0 115 7 82000 * 0.1 4820 7 14500 x - fauna 0.0 2580 7 0.012 x fauna 00 U 7 160 x- fauna 00 34 7 53000 e* 0 1 2300 7 5 0 x fauna 00 U 7 00001 x fauna 0.0 U 7 680000 e* 00 44 7 40 x-fauna 00 U 7 10000 x - fauna 00 51 7 110 x- fauna 02 82 15 J #* irUI1 1630Q.0 15 (X48 15 328 15 440 x - fauna a 5 15 0.02 x llora 1000 15 2 5 15 NB NB NB 15 0 0075 <: 4134.3 15 100 04 15 15 15 12 15 001 15 4400 15 330 .1:!: 1 1 ii-fi;:T m 15 0,058 15 2 i ;-! i ? a- 15 NB NB N 15 18 x launa 0 0 15 0.0000098 x llora 0 0 15 NB NB NB 15 0001 x - (lora 00 15 0 5 x - flora ! 102,0 15 10 x - flora : 8 2 NB * No benchmark M= undetected NA Not Applicable ug/L " microgram per liter ng/L nanogram per liter a * Long et al. 1995 (ER-L) mg/L * milligram per liter b = Long and Morgan 1990 (ER-L) HQ Hazard Quotient o c * Persuad et al. 1992 (LEL) d * USEPA AWQC 1992 (Chronic Criteria) o e Suter and Mabrey 1994 (SCV) e* Suter and Mabrey 1994 (LCV) x - fauna Region ill BTAG Screening Level for fauna (lowest of flora and fauna chosen) x - flora Region III BTAG Screening Level for flora (lowest of flora and fauna chosen) N K tn o VO "J VO KJ looiooasi tABLE 42 RitkCatcuWton* Based on W d W gN Dry Run Creek Waahmgton, Wood County. Wed Virginia Nmember 1997 Raccoon (baaed on maalmum aedlment and forage concentration! acroei whole alta) Chemical Maximum Cone, BAF (mg/kg) Cone. In FlaIt (mg/kg) Cone, from Inflection Rale Vl/alar Water AUR Body Weight Ooae LOAEL HQ NOAEL Hq Sediment (kg/day) Cone. Ingeatlon (1*g) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) baaed on (mg/kg/day) baaed on (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (kg/day) LOAEL NOAEL Araenic Chromium Copper Manganeae Nickel Fluoride 1575 24 75 26 25 2506 29 25 337.5 1 1 1 1 1 0.418 8.732 187 2816 2662 1188 15 23 25 2355 27 317 05 05 05 05 05 05 Mink (baaed on maalmum adimani and forage concentratlona acroaa whole alle) 0000 0000 0007 0072 0 0 0 18 0 16 018 0)6 016 : 0 16 1 1 1 1 1 05 05 ' 05 05 05 05 i.; : 0.47 ' -..- 15 .... 2.26 025 108 10 6591 13 1.35 625 :. 37.08 . 4' 032 906 011 507 000 927 f 0.13 0.023 1 : : 1.3 625 0.1 . 3.10 : . 9059 : 108 50 7Q 002 8270 Chemical Maalmum Cone, BAF (mg/kg) Araenic Chromium Copper Manganeae Nickel Fluoride 15 75 24 75 26 25 2505 29 25 3375 1 I 1 1 1 Cone. In Flail (mg/kg) 0 416 6732 167 28 16 2 662 1166 Cone, ffom Ingestion Rate Water Water AUF Body Valghi Dote LOAEL HQ NOAEL HQ Sediment (kg/day) Cone. Ingeatlon (1/kg) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) baaed on (mg/kg/day) bated on (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (kg/day) LOAEL NOAEL 00 0114 0000 00572 1 192 010 15 007 013 065 00 0114 0000 00572 . 1 - 1.92 148 : 025 593 '. 0025 5932 00 0114 0007 0 0572 1 192 0 42 10 004 1 0 42 44 0114 0072 00572 i 192 7.13 13 055 1.3 549 01 0 114 0 0 0572 1 192 059 623 000 62 5 001 06 0114 0 00572 1 192 25.65 4 64) 0.4 64.13 Fox (baaed on maximum eoli and forage concentratlona acroaa whole alte) Chemical Maalmum Cone. BAF Cone. In Small Mam Cone, from Ingeatlon Rale Water Water AUF Body Weight Doae LOAEL HQ NOAEL HQ (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Soil (kg/day) Cone. Inge&Uon (1/kg) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) baaed on (mg/kg/day) baatd on (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (kg/day) LOAEL NOAEL Aluminum 12714 1 621 356 0 0 432 0 300 0232 1 ' 037 15619: 55 2.84 V 58 28 40 Beryllium 156 1 0021 00 0 432 0000 0 232 1 037 0 01 10 000 1 001 Chromium 2416 1 19 77 07 0 432 0000 0232 ; 037 3.27 025 1307 0025 130 73 Copper 24 16 1 1077 07 0 432 00067 0 232 031 1.83 : .10 018 . : 1 83 Fm--< Iron 34008 1 492 Lead 697 1 0477 952 2 25 0 432 0 432 0 43 . 0232 0 0 232 : 0.3? 230 88 NB : ERR NB ERR 037 048 " 1.5 032 0.13 318 a o Manganeae Nickel 20124 26 52 1 1 1689 8 73 563 0 432 005) 0232 : 037 11.71 13 OSO 13 01 07 0 432 0 0 232 1 037 151 625 000 825 002 VO Vanadium 3976 1 061 11 0.432 0 0232 :: 037 031 037? 081 V"- 0.037? 827 vo to Zinc FkrorkM 6396 257.4 1 1 327 360 18 0 432 0016 0232 1 037 551 370 001 37 015 72 0432 0 0732 037 . 58,69 . 4 1467 : 04 14674 oo Meadow Vole (baaed on maximum aoll and forage concentratlona acroaa whole ette) oo Chemkal Maalmum Cone, OAF Cone. In Vegetation Cone, front Ingeatlon Rate Water Water AUF Body Welghf Ooae LOAEL H Q NOAEL H Q (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Soil (kg/day) Cone. Ingeatlon (1/kg) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) baatd on (mg/kg/day) baaed on o (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (kg/day) LOAEL NOAEL H 00 Wo Aluminum Beryllium Chromium 17714 156 24 16 1 1 1 267 67 0 3 335 3051 0007 0300 0 0042 1 SO 20055 53 365 33 36 46 00 0 007 0000 0 0042 1 50 0 01 10 000 001 06 0 007 orno 0 0042 50 1.37 0 75 548 0023 54 61 Co o Copper h-- * Mon 24 16 34006 1 1 1 624 163 65 06 0 007 0 0067 0 0042 1 so 0 77 10 006 0 77 616 2 0 007 0 43 0 0042 50 343 11 NO ERR NB ERR O o K) Lead Manganeae 697 20124 Nickel 26 52 Vanadium 39 78 6396 Fluoride 257,4 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1073 66 12 71 05 0 261 10 585 612 22 0 007 0 0 0042 1 . - :so : 079 13 053 0.13 327 48 3 0 007 0051 0 0042 1 ::: 50 4006 13 306 1.3 0 1 06 0007 0 0 0042 1 SO 2509 625 004 62 5 040 10 0007 0 0004?./ .1 0 42 0 372 1 14 00377 1144 15 0007 0016 0 0042 1 SO 4 25 370 001 37 011 62 0007 0 0004?; 1 n ,i:\ 30.58 4 765 0.4 76 46 TABLE 42 Risk CatcuMun* Bawd onWat Weight Dry Run Deck Wathmglon, Wood County. Wed Vkginia November 1987 Shrew (bated on minimum toll and forage concentration! acrott whole tlte) Chemical Maximum Cone. BAF Cone. In Earthworm! Cone, from Ingestion Rat Water Water AUF Body Weight Dote - LOAEL HQ NOAEL HQ (mg/kg| (mg/kg) Soil (kg/day) Cone. IngetUon <1Ag) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) bated on (mg/kg/day) bated on (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (kg/day) LOAEL NOAEL Aluminum Beiytium Chromium Copper Iron Lead Manganew Nickel Vanadium Zinc Fluoride 12714 156 24 IS 24 18 34009 89 7 2012 4 26 52 39 78 63 96 237.4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t t 384 00156 0 744 24 312 0192 168 1 32 0 756 156 45 6 1195 1 01 23 23 3196 6 84 1692 25 37 60 24 2 0 00795 0 00795 0 00795 0 00795 0 00795 0 00795 0 00795 000795 0 00795 0 00795 0 00795 0300 0000 0000 00067 0 43 0 0 051 0 0 0018 0 0 0027 00027 0 0027 0 0027 0 0027 0 0027 0 0027 0 0027 00027 0 0027 00027 1 1 1 f 1 1 | t 1 1 1 83 3 83 3 63 3 83 3 633 833 633 83 3 833 83 3 833 104561 011 200 310 2323 72 5 71 136 41 2 53 2.90 14 32 46 22 55 10 025 10 NB 1.3 13 625 0372 370 4 1901 001 799 031 ERR 381 1049 000 800 004 1156 55 1 0025 t NB 0.15 1.3 62 5 0.0372 37 04 190 13 011 79 92 310 ERR 38 07 104 93 004 8003 039 11555 Robin (bated on maximum toll and forage concentration! acrott whole tlte) Chemical Maximum Cone, BAP Cone. In Earthwormi Cone, from Ingttllon Rate Water Water AUF Body Weight Dote LOAEL HQ NOAEL HQ (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Soil (ag/day) Cone. IngetUon (1/hg) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) bated on (mg/kg/day) bated on (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (kg/day) LOAEL NOAEL Aluminum Beryllium Chtamum Copper Itun Lead Manganew Nickel Vanadium Zinc Fluoride 12714 1 56 24 18 24 18 34000 897 20124 26 52 39 78 63 96 257 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 384 00156 0 744 24 312 0192 166 1 32 0 756 156 456 1322 3 02 25 25 3536 6 93 209 3 28 41 67 268 01175 01175 01175 0 1175 01175 0 1175 0.1175 01175 01175 01175 01175 0300 0000 0000 00067 043 0 0 051 0 0 0018 0 0 0106 00106 00106 00106 00106 0 0108 00106 00106 00106 00108 00106 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 t 1 1294 12 94 1294 12 94 12 94 12 94 12 94 12.94 1294 12 94 12.84 2594.32 0 27 493 7 47 5852.02 14.48 343 77 620 7.44 33 84 11003 165 NB 1 235 NB 3 NB NB 7 139 13 1572 ERR 495 316 ERR 4 63 ERR ERR 106 024 846 84 NB 01 0235 NB 0.3 NB NB 3.3 13 9 10 30 88 ERR 49 55 3180 ERR 46 25 ERR ERR 2.13 2 43 1100 Red-tall Hawk (bated on maximum toll and forage concentration! acrott whole tlte) Chemical Maximum Cone. BAP Cone. In Small Mam Cone, from IngetUon Rate Water Water AUF Body Weight Dote LOAEL HQ NOAEL HQ (mg/kg) (mg/kg) SoH (mg/kg) (kg/day) Cone. IngetUon (mg/kg) (kg/day) (17kg) (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) bated on (mg/kg/day) bated on LOAEL NOAEL Aluminum De/ylkum Chromium Copper Iron Lead Manganew Nickel Vanadium Zinc Fluoride 12714 1.56 2418 2418 34006 897 20124 26 32 39 78 63 96 257 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 671 0 021 19 77 10 77 492 0 477 16 89 6 73 081 32 7 360 690 00 02 02 238.1 06 14 1 02 03 04 18 04 0300 005664 1 1042 29504 165 179 84 3 32 04 0000 005664 1 1042 001 NO ERR NO ERR 04 0000 005664 1 1042 631 1 6 31 0 1 63 If 0.4 00067 005664 1 1042 436 233 194 0235 19 40 04 0 4) 0 05664 1 1042 30431 NO ERR NO ERR 04 0 005G64 1 1042 046 3 015 03 154 04 0 051 005664 1 1042 12 91 NB ERR NB ERR 04 0 005664 1 1042 372 NB ERR NB ERR 04 0 005664 1 1042 0 43 7 006 33 013 04 0 018 005664 1 1042 13 82 139 oto 139 099 04 0 005664 1 : 1.042 ISO 80 13 11.60 10 1306 EID097929 A 001008SI