Document o973E1MRDoJGmRrO0N7pMgNK3

rtM >aiat I lKnwi *- Srn+t Tucker - PtJ) Uihr'r>fnr^c - V7nrt e..1n^ _ ' February 25, 1969 AROCLOR - WILDLIFE R* E Xeller So.- Second J. T. Garrett - GO P, B. Hodges - GO TO if. R. Richard/E. P. feeler 'General Offices ' - On 9-6-68 four samples, two sediment and two water, from Snow Creek were received for Aroclor analysis. The water and sediment were sampled on 8-27-68 at the plant out fall and approximately one block below the plant out fall. The results of the analysis are as follows: ' Amount Aroclor Found Sample Designation Sediment Water | .< . + . %I * Plant Out' fall - 0 20 0 02 58+2 ppb" :i Plant Out fall (1 blk) 1.64+0.04% _ - ' . `Sample broken in transit. "No less than this amount present. ' ' : j The amount of Aroclor found was calculated as Aroclor 1242. The EC/GC traces of the sediment were unmistakably Aroclor 1242. The water extracts appeared to contain only the lighter chlorin ated species along with a number of other electron.capture active , materials. For this reason a "no less than" value is stated, i> more quantitative results will have to await the development of more specific separation techniques. .' Bill, on the basis of this information, I think that if the PCS accusation turns out to be true and the government people become more active, we should plan on an extensive avaluation of the extent of contamination in this area.* For example, samples should be taken further down Snow Creek, down Choccolocco Creek tad tvmn from the-Coosa River if necessary. . You might ehack, but I think tha lab there has the necessary equipment end could carry out this study. E. Scott Tucker db HONS 097108 DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT / WATER PCB-SD0000054922