21002_Eagle Island_HHRA_20170908

Geosyntec Consultants of NC, PC 2501 Blue Ridge Road, Suite 430 Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 PH 919.870.0576 www.geosyntec.com

GN6353\Eagle Island HHRA
Mr. Samuel P. Watson, P.G. Division of Waste Management – Brownfields North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
127 Cardinal Drive Ext. Wilmington, NC 28405 Subject: Human Health Risk Assessment Report Subject Site: Parcel No. 0390000901, 03900008, and 03900011 located on Battle Ship Road NE, Eagle Island, Leland, North Carolina Brownfields Project Number: 21002-17-010
Dear Mr. Watson:
Geosyntec Consultants of NC, PC (Geosyntec) is submitting this Human Health Risk Assessment
Report (HHRA) on behalf of our client, Burgess Group Consolidated, LLC (Burgess; the
Prospective Developer [PD] for the above-referenced Brownfields Site). Geosyntec is working on
behalf of Burgess to achieve a finalized Brownfields Agreement (BFA) for the multi-parcel
property located on Battleship Road, Leland, NC (Brunswick County Parcel numbers 0390000901,
03900008, and 0390000901) (“Site”) (Figure 1). This report serves as an addendum to two reports
submitted to the NCDEQ:
1. Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (Phase II ESA) submitted on 17 May 2017; and
2. Interim Removal Action Report (IRA Report) submitted on 30 August 2017.

BACKGROUND
The Phase II ESA summarized the results of soil and groundwater testing and excavation pit testing
completed at the Site in 2017. Several polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and metals in
were identified in soil above their respective NCDEQ Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB)
Residential and Industrial/Commercial Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs). In
anticipation of Site redevelopment and reuse, Geosyntec oversaw a targeted soil excavation, off-
Site soil disposal, and confirmation soil sampling as an interim soil remedy in an area of the Site
(“the remedial area”) where tar/resin and elevated PAH/metal impacts were identified. The results
and overall conclusions of interim remedy are discussed in detail in the IRA Report.
This HHRA is intended to evaluate the human health risk posed at the Site following the
completion of the Phase II ESA and interim remedy. The information obtained from this study is
meant to facilitate completion of the Site BFA. This HHRA outlines the risk assessment
methodology and associated results and recommendations.
Human Health Risk Assessment Eagle Island 8 September 2017
GN6353\Eagle Island HHRA Page | 2
RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Geosyntec completed this risk evaluation in accordance with the March 2017 NCDEQ Risk-Based
Environmental Remediation of Sites technical guidance (“Risk-Based Guidance” or “Guidance”).
The Risk-Based Guidance specifications are briefly summarized to more effectively support
Geosyntec’s rationale in conducting this HHRA.
NCDEQ Risk-Based Guidance Procedure
Geosyntec conducted this risk assessment in accordance with the Guidance (NCDEQ 2017). The
Risk Assessment is conducted in several steps, or “tiers” that are performed to satisfy the
requirements of a risk-based remedial alternative. The details pertinent to this risk evaluation are
summarized below:
• Tier 1 requires comparing the maximum detected contaminant concentrations to NCDEQ
screening values; specifically, the PSRGs in the case of soil exposure.
• If there are Tier 1 exceedances, then Tier 2A (and Tier 2B, if necessary) involve the use of
the NCDEQ Risk Calculator.
• The Tier 2A and Tier 2B steps apply an exposure point concentration (EPC) to the Risk
Calculator. An EPC is a representative concentration for a given constituent of potential
concern (COPC).
o In the Tier 2A step, the Guidance recommends the EPC is conservatively
represented by the maximum detected concentration for each COPC.
o In the instance that an unacceptable risk is estimated during the Tier 2A screening
step, the Risk-Based Guidance allows progressing to Tier 2B.
o In Tier 2B, NCDEQ allows EPCs to be estimated based on statistical processing,
such as averaging the contaminant concentrations.
• Following completion of the risk evaluation, the results should be submitted to NCDEQ
for review.
Exposure Scenarios
The Risk-Based Guidance identifies several exposure scenarios where a person could contact
contamination, including:
• Residential occupancy;
• Non-Residential occupancy;
• Construction Worker scenario; and
• Recreator and / or Trespasser scenario.
The Site is currently intended for redevelopment as residential use, in the form of apartment
buildings or equivalent. Thus, the primary objective of this evaluation is to characterize potential
human health risks to residential occupants from exposure to surficial soils within the Site
boundary. Supplemental evaluations were also performed to estimate the risk to the hypothetical
Human Health Risk Assessment Eagle Island 8 September 2017
GN6353\Eagle Island HHRA Page | 3
non-residential worker, construction worker, and recreator/trespasser. As indicated below,
groundwater exposure scenarios were not evaluated.
Exposure Units and Exposure Pathways
The Guidance allows practitioners to subdivide the Site among various exposure units (EUs) to
account for Site heterogeneity and complexity. If separate EUs are established, a risk assessment
should be performed for each Site EU.
Current and future pathways were evaluated for three (3) exposure units as indicated on Figure 2.
A brief description of each exposure unit is listed below:
1. Exposure Unit #1 (EU-1) consists of surficial soils in Parcel No. 0390000901 (located
west of Battleship Road NE).
2. Exposure Unit #2 (EU-2) consists of surficial soils in Parcel No. 0390000901 (located
east of Battleship Road NE).
3. Exposure Unit #3 (EU-3) consists of subsurface soils in Parcel No. 0390000901 (located
to the east of Battleship Road NE).
Each exposure unit was evaluated for soil “combined1” exposure pathways. Soil was the only
exposure medium considered when conducting this analysis. The majority of samples collected on
Site were collected from within 1 foot below land surface (ft BLS) and are therefore considered
surficial soil. The surficial soils were compared to various exposure scenarios, including
residential, non-residential (i.e., commercial/industrial workers), and the incidental
recreator/trespasser.
EU-1 and EU-2 account for surficial samples collected on the western and eastern portion of the
Site, respectively. A sub-set of soil samples were collected from the subsurface on the eastern
parcel and were screened against a theoretical construction worker exposure scenario; this is
accounted for in EU-3. Subsurface soils were not collected on the western Site Parcel; this area
does not represent a separate exposure unit.
A groundwater deed restriction is anticipated at the Site; therefore, groundwater impacts and the
groundwater-related risks (e.g., potential soil leaching to groundwater) were not accounted for in
the assessment. Surface water combined pathways were not considered since there are no surface
water bodies on Site. Vapor intrusion (VI) exposure pathways were not considered because volatile
organic compound (VOC) constituents were not detected in groundwater above applicable VI-
based groundwater screening levels.
Risk Assessment Sampling Data
Geosyntec collected soil samples during two discrete events in March and August 2017 as part of
the Phase II ESA and the interim remedy, consisting of a total of twenty-eight (28) soil samples

1 “Combined” pathways refer to the possible collective routes of exposure, including ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation.
Human Health Risk Assessment Eagle Island 8 September 2017
GN6353\Eagle Island HHRA Page | 4
(Table 1A and 1B). Both composite and discrete soil sample data were included in this HHRA.
Discrete soil sampling locations from the Phase II ESA and interim remedy are shown on Figure
3. The composite soil samples collected as part of the Phase II ESA were located within several
“zones” on Site; composite sampling zones are also labeled on Figure 3 (e.g., Z1, Z2, Z3, etc.).
Several samples collected during these Site investigations were excluded from the evaluation, as
follows:
• Surficial soil samples PS3, PS5, SS-MW5, Z13, SURF-BASE-1, SURF-BASE-2, SURF-
BASE-3, SURF-EDGE-1, and EI-EXC-N1 were not included in this HHRA because these
soils were excavated and disposed off-Site as part of the IRA.
Further, and in response to the interim measure, a backfill soil sample was collected and analyzed
for VOCs, semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and metals. NCDEQ authorized the use of
this backfill source in a 23 August 2017 notice (Attachment A). The backfill material was placed
to regrade the interim measure excavation area and provide at least 2’ of cover over the native soil.
Accordingly, the measured analytical sampling results for the backfill soil was included in the risk
assessment to represent the surface soils in the regraded areas.
Exposure Point Concentrations
Maximum concentrations of each COPC were compared with NCDEQ screening levels (Table
1A and Table 1B) for each exposure unit as the first step assessment in accordance with NCDEQ
Risk-Based Guidance Procedures (NCDEQ 2017). The Site COPCs include VOCs, SVOCs, and
metals. For this risk evaluation, the COPCs are defined as:
1) Constituents that were detected in one or more samples; and
2) Constituents that were not detected, but the highest laboratory method detection limit
(MDL) was greater than the respective NCDEQ Residential PSRG2.
In some cases, concentrations exceeded Unrestricted Use Heath-Based PSRGs. This initial
screening was followed by the Tier 2A Risk Assessment to evaluate the cumulative risk of multiple
COPCs.
For EU-1 and EU-3, the maximum detected concentrations of each COPC (highlighted in blue in
the attached tables) served as the EPCs. The EPCs for EU-2 were established in accordance with
the Tier 2B procedure. Metals in soil are naturally occurring and often at concentrations above
default screening levels. Further, the maximum detected concentration is an overly conservative
measure to represent each metal EPC. Thus, the EU-2 EPCs were calculated based on the 95%
Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) for each metal COPC. The UCL represents the estimated upper
boundary of the mean of a population of data. In comparison to using an average concentration,
the UCL is a more robust method for representing EPCs because it accounts for the distribution of
the data.

2 In this instance, the highest MDL was used as the EPC for the given COPC.
Human Health Risk Assessment Eagle Island 8 September 2017
GN6353\Eagle Island HHRA Page | 5
The statistical software package ProUCL (Version 5.1) was used to estimate goodness-of-fit
statistics and statistically significant UCL values. In the hypothetical instance that there were fewer
than eight (8) sample results for a given COPC, fewer than 25% laboratory detections, or if the
95% UCL was greater than the maximum detected concentration, the maximum detected
concentration would sever as the EPC (i.e., not the estimated UCL value).
RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS
The EPA (1990) and NCDEQ (2017) recognize a generally acceptable cumulative cancer risk of
1E-4 and a cumulative hazard index [HI; the sum of Hazard Quotients (HQs)] of 1 for non-
carcinogens affecting the same target organ or system. The default PSRGs (NCDEQ, 2016) for
soil are adjusted to correspond to an individual cancer risk of one in a million (1E-6) or an
individual HQ of 0.2. (Note that the NCDEQ PSRGs were updated in October 2016 to reflect the
US Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA] May 2016 Regional Screening Level [RSL]
Tables3). Remedial actions are generally not warranted when cumulative site risks or hazards are
below these levels. Further, the EPA has no consensus on reference dose or cancer slope factor
values for lead, which means that it is not possible to calculate cancer risk or hazard quotient for
lead.
Exposure Units #1 and #2
The EU-1 EPCs are included on Table 1A; the EU-2 EPCs are shown on Table 2. The ProUCL
output data associated with EU-2 is appended as Attachment B. The Tier 2 Risk Calculator results
for EU-1 and EU-2 are presented in Table 3.
The cumulative risks for EU-1 and EU-2 are below acceptable levels for the Resident, Non-
Residential Worker, and Recreator/Trespasser receptor scenarios. The cumulative results for the
EU-1 and EU-2 Residential scenarios are within acceptable limits and are summarized as follows:
Exposure
Unit Receptor Pathway Carcinogenic
Risk
Hazard
Index
Risk
exceeded?
EU-1 Resident Soil Combined Pathways
1.3E-05 4.7E-01 NO
EU-2 5.2E-05 9.3E-01 NO

3 The USEPA RSLs were more recently updated in June 2017; however, the NCDEQ PSRGs were most recently amended in October 2016 and were the basis for the initial screening step.
Human Health Risk Assessment Eagle Island 8 September 2017
GN6353\Eagle Island HHRA Page | 6
Attachment C shows the Risk Calculator Output Forms for each of the exposure scenarios.
Exposure Unit #3
The EU-3 EPCs are included on Table 1B; the Tier 2 Risk Calculator results for EU-3 are
presented in Table 3.
In accordance with the Guidance, the subsurface soils were evaluated for potential risks posed to
a hypothetical construction worker scenario. The cumulative non-carcinogenic risk for EU-3
(subsurface soils east of Battleship Road) exceed the acceptable levels for the Construction
Worker. The estimated non-carcinogenic HI is 1.3, above the acceptable level of 1. Arsenic and
manganese are the primary contributors to the non-cancer risk. The cumulative cancer risk remains
below 1E-4. The Construction Worker Scenario is summarized as follows:
Exposure Unit Receptor Pathway Carcinogenic Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
EU-3 Construction Worker
Soil Combined Pathways 2.1E-06 1.3E+00 YES
Attachment C shows the Risk Calculator Output Forms for the exposure scenario.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A risk assessment for soil combined exposure pathways was performed using soil samples
collected at the Site between March and August 2017. The Site was divided into three exposure
units. Exposure Units #1 and #2, which include surface soils across the entire Site, are within the
acceptable risk levels for Residential, Non-Residential, and the Recreator/Trespasser scenarios.
Exposure Unit #3, which includes only subsurface soils east of Battleship Road, exceed the non-
carcinogenic risks for the hypothetical Construction Worker. Geosyntec anticipates placing
institutional controls on the eastern parcel to protect Site workers from potential contact with the
contaminated sub-surface. This should include requiring construction personnel to undergo 40-
hour Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Hazardous Waste Operations and
Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training prior to conducting subsurface work at the Site.
A groundwater deed restriction is proposed for the Site to prevent access to Site groundwater. A
groundwater risk assessment was not completed.
Following the review of this HHRA, Geosyntec requests NCDEQ’s concurrence that the results of
this risk assessment conclude that surficial soils on Site have been sufficiently remediated and do
not pose an unacceptable risk for residential occupancy. The results of this HHRA should be
included in the Site BFA.
Human Health Risk Assessment Eagle Island 8 September 2017
GN6353\Eagle Island HHRA Page | 7
CLOSING
We look forward to NCDEQ’s review and approval of this Human Health Risk Assessment.
Please feel free to contact the undersigned with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,

Matthew Jenny, E.I. Kaitlyn S. Rhonehouse, P.E.
Senior Staff Engineer Senior Engineer

Human Health Risk Assessment Eagle Island 8 September 2017
GN6353\Eagle Island HHRA Page | 8
REFERENCES
NCDEQ (North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality). 2015. Inactive Hazardous Sites
Program Guidelines for Assessment and Cleanup. Available online at:
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/waste-management/waste-management-permit-
guidance/inactive-hazardous-sites-guidance-documents

NCDEQ. 2016. Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) Table. Inactive Hazardous Sites
Branch. March. http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wm/sf/ihs/ihsguide

NCDEQ. Technical Guidance for Risk-Based Environmental Remediation of Sites. For all
applicable sites according to NC General Statutes 130A-310.68 through 310.77 March 2017.
https://deq.nc.gov/permits-regulations/risk-based-remediation/technical-guidance

USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1990. National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. Final Rule. Federal Register March 8: 8670-8852.

USEPA. 2013. Statistical Software ProUCL 5.1.00 for Environmental Applications for Data Sets
with and without Nondetect Observations, Version 5.1.00. Office of Research and Development.
https://www.epa.gov/land-research/proucl-software

TABLES

Table 1A
Human Health Risk Assessment - Surficial Soil Analytical Results
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, North Carolina
Exposure UnitSample ID Z1-3617 Z2-3617 Z3-3617 Z4-3617 Z6-3617 Z7-3617 PS1-3817 PS1A-3817 SS-1-32217
Sample Date 3/6/2017 3/6/2017 3/6/2017 3/6/2017 3/6/2017 3/6/2017 3/8/2017 3/8/2017 3/22/2017
Sample Type Grab Grab Grab
Units
Metals by EPA Methods 6010D, 6020B and 7471B
Aluminum 15,400 100,000 mg/kg ---------------------------
Antimony 6.2 94 mg/kg <0.0864 <0.0947 <0.0881 <0.105 <0.110 0.116 J <0.197 <0.200 ˂0.0998Arsenic0.68 3 mg/kg 0.390 0.247 J 0.290 0.182 J 0.292 J 2.13 5.53 1.45 1.20Barium3,000 44,000 mg/kg ---------------------------
Beryllium 32 460 mg/kg 0.0354 J 0.0303 J 0.0480 0.0468 J 0.0419 J 0.104 <0.197 <0.200 0.0654
Boron 3,200 46,000 mg/kg ---------------------------
Cadmium 14.2 196 mg/kg <0.0130 <0.0142 <0.0132 <0.0158 <0.0165 0.138 <0.197 <0.200 0.0309 J
Chromium 24,000 100,000 mg/kg 0.948 0.713 J 1.37 1.60 1.23 10.1 2.80 B 0.884 B 3.31
Cobalt 4.6 70 mg/kg ---------------------------
Copper 620 9,400 mg/kg 4.49 0.589 0.557 0.576 0.382 J 0.857 3.28 0.867 1.07Iron11,000 100,000 mg/kg ---------------------------Lead 400 800 mg/kg 9.41 B 9.72 B 5.22 B 2.37 B 2.45 B 1.24 B 5.99 2.95 9.14MagnesiumNANAmg/kg ---------------------------
Manganese 360 5,200 mg/kg 6.44 2.86 4.12 3.40 5.06 90.3 6.21 3.93 13.6
Mercury 2.2 3.13 mg/kg <0.0308 <0.0338 <0.0310 <0.0365 <0.0373 <0.0317 <0.0302 <0.0303 ˂0.0340
Molybdenum 78 1,160 mg/kg ---------------------------
Nickel 300 4,400 mg/kg 0.508 J 0.454 J 0.499 J 0.765 J 0.565 J 5.45 0.603 0.543 1.47
Selenium 78 1,160 mg/kg <0.0864 <0.0947 <0.0881 <0.105 <0.110 0.319 JB 0.208 J <0.200 ˂0.0998Silver781,160 mg/kg <0.00864 <0.00947 <0.00881 <0.0105 <0.0110 <0.00933 <0.0985 <0.100 ˂0.00998Strontium9,400 100,000 mg/kg ---------------------------Thallium 0.156 2.4 mg/kg <0.0432 <0.0474 <0.0441 <0.0526 <0.0551 <0.0467 <0.197 <0.200 ˂0.0499
Vanadium 78 1,160 mg/kg ---------------------------
Zinc 4,600 70,000 mg/kg 3.81 2.27 2.95 4.47 2.10 J 9.02 16.6 2.90 J 5.90
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270D
Anthracene 3,600 46,000 mg/kg <0.0292 <0.0320 <0.0296 <0.0352 <0.0370 <0.0310 <0.0289 <0.0290 <0.0336
Benzo[a]anthracene 0.16 2.9 mg/kg <0.0302 <0.0331 <0.0306 <0.0364 <0.0383 <0.0321 <0.0299 <0.0300 <0.0347
Benzo[a]pyrene 0.016 0.29 mg/kg <0.0272 <0.0298 <0.0275 <0.0327 <0.0345 <0.0289 <0.0269 <0.0270 <0.0313Benzo[b]fluoranthene 0.16 2.9 mg/kg <0.0282 <0.0309 <0.0285 <0.0340 <0.0358 <0.0300 <0.0279 <0.0280 <0.0324Benzo[k]fluoranthene 1.6 29 mg/kg <0.0272 <0.0298 <0.0275 <0.0327 <0.0345 <0.0289 <0.0269 <0.0270 <0.0313Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 0.23 1 mg/kg ---------------------------
Chrysene 26 290 mg/kg <0.0373 <0.0408 <0.0377 <0.0449 <0.0473 <0.0396 <0.0369 <0.0370 <0.0428
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.016 0.29 mg/kg <0.0323 <0.0353 <0.0326 <0.0388 <0.0409 <0.0342 <0.0319 <0.0320 <0.0371
Fluoranthene 480 6,000 mg/kg <0.0343 <0.0375 <0.0347 <0.0412 <0.0434 <0.0364 <0.0339 <0.0340 <0.0394
Hexachlorobenzene 0.21 0.96 mg/kg ---------------------------
Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene 0.16 2.9 mg/kg <0.0292 <0.0320 <0.0296 <0.0352 <0.0370 <0.0310 <0.0289 <0.0290 <0.0336N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine 0.078 0.33 mg/kg ---------------------------Pyrene 360 4,600 mg/kg <0.0343 <0.0375 <0.0347 <0.0412 <0.0434 <0.0364 <0.0339 <0.0340 <0.0394
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260B
2-Butanone (MEK)5,400 28,400 mg/kg <0.00521 <0.00539 <0.00582 <0.00638 <0.00689 <0.00561 <0.00614 <0.00560 <0.00594
Acetone 12,200 100,000 mg/kg 0.0253 J <0.00888 0.0280 J 0.0278 J <0.0114 0.0381 J 0.0122 J 0.0389 J 0.0899
Benzene 1.2 5.1 mg/kg <0.000684 <0.000708 <0.000765 <0.000839 <0.000905 0.00137 J <0.000807 <0.000736 <0.000780
Bromomethane 1.36 6 mg/kg <0.00123 <0.00127 <0.00137 <0.00150 <0.00162 <0.00132 <0.00145 <0.00132 <0.00140
Ethylbenzene 5.8 25 mg/kg <0.000684 <0.000708 <0.000765 <0.000839 <0.000905 0.00217 J <0.000807 <0.000736 <0.000780
Isopropylbenzene 268 268 mg/kg <0.000419 <0.000433 <0.000468 <0.000513 <0.000554 <0.000451 0.00383 <0.000450 <0.000477Methylene Chloride 57 640 mg/kg 0.00161 J <0.000909 <0.000982 <0.00108 <0.00116 <0.000946 <0.00104 <0.000944 0.00343 JToluene818818mg/kg <0.000756 <0.000782 <0.000845 <0.000926 <0.00100 0.00156 J <0.000891 <0.000812 <0.000862Xylenes, Total 116 260 mg/kg <0.00126 <0.00130 <0.00140 <0.00154 <0.00166 <0.00135 <0.00148 <0.00135 <0.00143
Notes:(1) < indicates analyte was not detected above the method detection limit (14) J indicates an estimated value(2) Analyte detections (e.g., 5.53) are identified in bold (15) B indicates analyte detected in method blank(3) mg/kg indicates milligrams per kilogram (16) H indicates sample was prepped or analyzed beyond the specified holding time(4) --- indicates constituent not analyzed (17) Surficial soils indicate 0-1 feet below land surface(5) NA indicates no applicable standard (18) Subsurface soils indicate greater than 1 foot below ground surface(67) ^ indicates instrument related QC is outside acceptance limits
Residential PSRG Commercial /
Industrial
EPC
Analyte Residential PSRG
(mg/kg)
Commercial /
Industrial PSRG
(mg/kg)
Exposure Unit #1
Composite
(8) Concentrations exceeding PSRGs are highlighted in bold as shown:
(7) PSRG indicates North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Inactive Hazardous Sites Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal, amended October 2016.
(9) If multiple screening criteria are exceeded, the highlight corresponds to the highest value screening criteria exceedance.
(10) Analytes that were not detected (i.e. concentrations that were below the laboratory Method Detection Limit [MDL]), but exceeded a PSRG standard are identified in italics.
(11) Data not compared to the NCDEQ Protection of Groundwater PSRGs because a groundwater deed restriction is proposed for the Site.
(12) In the Case of Exposure Unit #1, the maximum concentrations were used as exposure point concentrations (EPCs) and are highlighted in blue as shown:
(13) A 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) was established and served as the EPC for the metals in Exposure Unit #2.
Page 1 of 2
Table 1A
Human Health Risk Assessment - Surficial Soil Analytical Results
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, North Carolina
Exposure UnitSample ID Z5-3717 Z8-3717 Z9-3717 Z10-3717 Z11-3717 Z12-3717 Z14-3717 Z15-3817 PS2-3817 PS4-3817 SURF-EDGE-2 SURF-EDGE-3 SURF-EDGE-4 Fill-01
Sample Date 3/7/2017 3/7/2017 3/7/2017 3/7/2017 3/7/2017 3/7/2017 3/7/2017 3/8/2017 3/8/2017 3/8/2017 8/4/2017 8/4/2017 8/17/2017 8/16/2017
Sample Type Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Composite
Units
Metals by EPA Methods 6010D, 6020B and 7471B
Aluminum 15,400 100,000 mg/kg ---------------------------------------3,810
Antimony 6.2 94 mg/kg 0.113 J 0.405 J 0.994 J 0.254 J 0.160 J 0.294 J <0.126 <0.249 <0.233 0.325 J 0.557 J 0.240 J <1.09 ^<0.271Arsenic0.68 3 mg/kg 1.62 13.4 9.08 4.24 1.48 5.97 2.91 1.23 4.28 5.21 5.10 2.03 <1.31 0.865Barium3,000 44,000 mg/kg ---------------------------------------4.31 J
Beryllium 32 460 mg/kg 0.145 0.847 0.471 0.303 0.110 0.362 0.487 0.280 J <0.233 0.426 J 0.355 J <0.230 <0.218 <0.0461
Boron 3,200 46,000 mg/kg ---------------------------------------<3.05
Cadmium 14.2 196 mg/kg 0.0994 0.198 0.474 0.233 0.255 0.604 0.163 <0.249 <0.233 0.891 <0.118 <0.115 <0.109 <0.0410
Chromium 24,000 100,000 mg/kg 6.83 49.6 24.0 17.2 8.07 18.5 17.6 8.70 B 4.02 B 21.1 B 11.3 3.45 <0.983 4.32
Cobalt 4.6 70 mg/kg ---------------------------------------0.234 J
Copper 620 9,400 mg/kg 3.38 161 233 52.5 14.9 81.5 18.2 7.82 3.60 223 23.000 34.2 <1.20 1.80 JIron11,000 100,000 mg/kg ---------------------------------------2,320Lead400800mg/kg 11.0 B 166 B 369 B 114 B 39.5 B 88.5 B 29.4 B 14.3 6.55 219 72.1 76.5 <0.546 1.03MagnesiumNANAmg/kg ---------------------------------------93.1 J
Manganese 360 5,200 mg/kg 141 506 308 157 79.2 168 121 113 28.1 118 185 94.5 3.69 5.87 J
Mercury 2.2 3.13 mg/kg 0.0893 J 5.68 1.16 <0.0351 0.0436 J 0.311 <0.0435 0.0785 J <0.0353 0.952 0.351 0.324 <0.0336 <0.00205
Molybdenum 78 1,160 mg/kg ---------------------------------------<1.02
Nickel 300 4,400 mg/kg 2.90 11.1 6.92 4.65 2.26 8.86 5.15 4.15 1.42 16.6 2.79 1.50 J <0.655 1.15
Selenium 78 1,160 mg/kg 0.280 JB 1.61 B 0.860 B 0.593 B 0.194 JB 0.516 JB 1.28 B 0.762 0.341 J 0.891 <1.30 <1.27 <1.20 0.611 JSilver781,160 mg/kg 0.0124 J 0.188 0.215 0.0699 J 0.0224 J 0.0562 J 0.0385 J <0.125 <0.116 0.242 J <0.229 <0.224 <0.437 <0.0549Strontium9,400 100,000 mg/kg ---------------------------------------<1.02Thallium0.156 2.4 mg/kg <0.0458 0.167 0.0793 J 0.0648 J <0.0467 0.0706 J 0.0953 J <0.249 <0.233 <0.316 0.615 J <0.460 <0.655 <0.0489
Vanadium 78 1,160 mg/kg ---------------------------------------6.67
Zinc 4,600 70,000 mg/kg 17.9 127 129 106 40.2 110 42.0 24.6 13.3 611 55.3 58.7 <5.46 1.88 J
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270D
Anthracene 3,600 46,000 mg/kg <0.0308 <0.0406 <0.0398 <0.0332 <0.0313 <0.0361 <0.0430 <0.0351 <0.0336 0.113 <0.0339 <0.0339 <0.0324 <0.025
Benzo[a]anthracene 0.16 2.9 mg/kg <0.0318 0.123 0.191 0.0588 J 0.254 <0.0374 0.0586 J <0.0363 <0.0347 0.526 0.0554 J <0.0351 <0.0336 <0.02
Benzo[a]pyrene 0.016 0.29 mg/kg <0.0287 0.142 0.218 0.0932 0.210 <0.0336 0.0487 J <0.0326 <0.0312 0.405 0.0915 0.0543 J <0.0302 <0.018
Benzo[b]fluoranthene 0.16 2.9 mg/kg <0.0297 0.183 0.330 0.188 0.327 <0.0349 0.0658 J <0.0339 0.0541 J 0.444 0.0877 0.0348 J <0.0313 <0.021Benzo[k]fluoranthene 1.6 29 mg/kg <0.0287 0.0785 J 0.138 0.0724 J 0.147 <0.0336 <0.0401 <0.0326 <0.0312 0.239 0.0437 J <0.0316 <0.0302 <0.024Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 0.23 1 mg/kg ------------------------------<0.249 <0.249 <0.238 <0.026
Chrysene 26 290 mg/kg <0.0393 0.119 0.236 0.0871 0.263 <0.0461 0.0559 J <0.0447 <0.0428 0.444 0.0538 J <0.0433 <0.0414 <0.023
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.016 0.29 mg/kg <0.0340 <0.0448 <0.0439 <0.0366 <0.0346 <0.0399 <0.0475 <0.0387 <0.0370 0.0792 J <0.0374 <0.0374 <0.0358 <0.018
Fluoranthene 480 6,000 mg/kg <0.0361 0.138 0.375 0.101 0.347 <0.0424 0.103 <0.0411 0.0481 J 0.534 0.0798 <0.0398 <0.0380 <0.021
Hexachlorobenzene 0.21 0.96 mg/kg ------------------------------<0.292 <0.292 <0.280 <0.021
Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene 0.16 2.9 mg/kg <0.0308 0.0865 J 0.150 0.134 0.125 <0.0361 <0.0430 <0.0351 <0.0336 0.163 0.0522 J <0.0339 <0.0324 <0.026
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine 0.078 0.33 mg/kg ------------------------------<0.227 <0.227 <0.217 <0.018Pyrene3604,600 mg/kg <0.0361 0.143 0.335 0.106 0.307 <0.0424 0.0935 J <0.0411 0.0550 J 0.582 0.0759 J <0.0398 <0.0380 <0.032
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260B
2-Butanone (MEK)5,400 28,400 mg/kg <0.00597 0.0147 J <0.00755 0.00865 J <0.00585 <0.00816 0.0478 J <0.00669 <0.00544 <0.00574 ---------<0.0080
Acetone 12,200 100,000 mg/kg 0.0359 J 0.377 0.0436 J 0.127 0.0224 J 0.346 0.620 0.0590 J 0.0132 J 0.0745 ---------<0.0090
Benzene 1.2 5.1 mg/kg <0.000784 <0.00108 <0.000992 <0.000901 <0.000768 <0.00107 <0.00185 <0.000879 0.00157 J <0.000754 ---------<0.0011
Bromomethane 1.36 6 mg/kg <0.00140 0.00282 J <0.00178 <0.00161 <0.00138 <0.00192 <0.00331 <0.00157 <0.00128 <0.00135 ---------<0.0011
Ethylbenzene 5.8 25 mg/kg <0.000784 <0.00108 <0.000992 <0.000901 <0.000768 <0.00107 <0.00185 <0.000879 0.00360 <0.000754 ---------<0.00096
Isopropylbenzene 268 268 mg/kg <0.000480 <0.000662 <0.000607 <0.000551 <0.000470 <0.000656 <0.00113 0.0272 <0.000437 <0.000461 ---------<0.0012Methylene Chloride 57 640 mg/kg <0.00101 <0.00139 <0.00127 <0.00116 <0.000986 <0.00138 <0.00237 <0.00113 <0.000917 <0.000967 ---------<0.0035Toluene818818mg/kg <0.000866 <0.00120 <0.00110 0.00119 J <0.000848 0.00134 J 0.00494 J 0.00419 0.00216 <0.000832 ---------<0.00099Xylenes, Total 116 260 mg/kg <0.00144 <0.00199 <0.00182 0.00179 J <0.00141 <0.00197 <0.00339 <0.00161 <0.00131 <0.00138 ---------<0.0015
Notes:(1) < indicates analyte was not detected above the method detection limit (14) J indicates an estimated value(2) Analyte detections (e.g., 5.53) are identified in bold (15) B indicates analyte detected in method blank(3) mg/kg indicates milligrams per kilogram (16) H indicates sample was prepped or analyzed beyond the specified holding time(4) --- indicates constituent not analyzed (17) Surficial soils indicate 0-1 feet below land surface(5) NA indicates no applicable standard (18) Subsurface soils indicate greater than 1 foot below ground surface(67) ^ indicates instrument related QC is outside acceptance limits
Residential PSRG Commercial /
Industrial
EPC(12) In the Case of Exposure Unit #1, the maximum concentrations were used as exposure point concentrations (EPCs) and are highlighted in blue as shown:
Exposure Unit #2
Composite
Analyte Residential PSRG
(mg/kg)
Commercial /
Industrial PSRG
(mg/kg)
(13) A 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) was established and served as the EPC for the metals in Exposure Unit #2.
(7) PSRG indicates North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Inactive Hazardous Sites Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal, amended October 2016.
(8) Concentrations exceeding PSRGs are highlighted in bold as shown:
(9) If multiple screening criteria are exceeded, the highlight corresponds to the highest value screening criteria exceedance.
(10) Analytes that were not detected (i.e. concentrations that were below the laboratory Method Detection Limit [MDL]), but exceeded a PSRG standard are identified in italics.
(11) Data not compared to the NCDEQ Protection of Groundwater PSRGs because a groundwater deed restriction is proposed for the Site.
Page 2 of 2
Table 1B
Human Health Risk Assessment - Subsurface Soil Analytical Results
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, North Carolina
Exposure Unit
Sample ID SS-TW1-3-4 SS-MW4-3.5-4 EI-EXC-E1 EI-EXC-S1 EI-EXC-W1
Sample Date 3/23/2017 3/23/2017 8/4/2017 8/3/2017 8/3/2017
Sample Type Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab
Units
Metals by EPA Methods 6010D, 6020B and 7471B
Aluminum 15,400 100,000 mg/kg ---------------
Antimony 6.2 94 mg/kg 0.161 J <0.102 ---------
Arsenic 0.68 3 mg/kg 4.87 33.7 ---------
Barium 3,000 44,000 mg/kg ---------------
Beryllium 32 460 mg/kg 0.497 0.0442 J ---------
Boron 3,200 46,000 mg/kg ---------------
Cadmium 14.2 196 mg/kg 0.0441 J 0.0218 J ---------
Chromium 24,000 100,000 mg/kg 22.1 2.63 ---------
Cobalt 4.6 70 mg/kg ---------------
Copper 620 9,400 mg/kg 8.58 0.388 J ---------
Iron 11,000 100,000 mg/kg ---------------
Lead 400 800 mg/kg 32.1 2.01 ---------
Magnesium NA NA mg/kg ---------------
Manganese 360 5,200 mg/kg 74.8 5.33 ---------
Mercury 2.2 3.13 mg/kg 0.122 J <0.0357 ---------
Molybdenum 78 1,160 mg/kg ---------------
Nickel 300 4,400 mg/kg 5.17 0.618 J ---------
Selenium 78 1,160 mg/kg 0.675 <0.102 ---------
Silver 78 1,160 mg/kg 0.0336 J <0.0102 ---------
Strontium 9,400 100,000 mg/kg ---------------
Thallium 0.156 2.4 mg/kg 0.0808 J <0.0508 ---------
Vanadium 78 1,160 mg/kg ---------------
Zinc 4,600 70,000 mg/kg 29.2 2.99 ---------
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270D
Acenaphthene 720 9,000 mg/kg <0.0451 <0.0386 <0.0396 <0.0378 <0.0418
Acenaphthylene NA NA mg/kg <0.0409 0.0470 J <0.0359 <0.0343 <0.0378
Anthracene 3,600 46,000 mg/kg <0.0409 0.0560 J <0.0359 <0.0343 <0.0378
Benzo[a]anthracene 0.16 2.9 mg/kg 0.0478 J 0.355 <0.0372 0.319 <0.0391
Benzo[a]pyrene 0.016 0.29 mg/kg 0.0527 J 0.349 0.0683 J 0.311 0.0518 J
Benzo[b]fluoranthene 0.16 2.9 mg/kg 0.0509 J 0.381 0.0478 J 0.416 <0.0365
Benzo[g,h,i]perylene NA NA mg/kg <0.0465 0.189 <0.0409 0.238 <0.0431
Benzo[k]fluoranthene 1.6 29 mg/kg 0.0387 J 0.181 <0.0334 0.220 <0.0352
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 0.23 1 mg/kg ------<0.264 <0.252 <0.278
Chrysene 26 290 mg/kg <0.0522 0.353 <0.0458 0.321 <0.0483
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.016 0.29 mg/kg <0.0451 0.0443 J <0.0396 0.0540 J <0.0418
Fluoranthene 480 6,000 mg/kg 0.100 0.508 0.0449 J 0.399 <0.0444
Fluorene 480 6,000 mg/kg <0.0409 <0.0350 <0.0359 <0.0343 <0.0378
Hexachlorobenzene 0.21 0.96 mg/kg ------<0.310 <0.296 <0.326
Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene 0.16 2.9 mg/kg <0.0409 0.163 <0.0359 0.176 <0.0378
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine 0.078 0.33 mg/kg ------<0.240 <0.229 <0.253
Phenanthrene NA NA mg/kg 0.0555 J 0.0756 J <0.0421 0.0596 J <0.0444
Pyrene 360 4,600 mg/kg 0.0938 J 0.506 0.0444 J 0.402 <0.0444
Exposure Unit #3
Analyte Residential PSRG
(mg/kg)
Commercial / Industrial
PSRG (mg/kg)
Page 1 of 2
Table 1B
Human Health Risk Assessment - Subsurface Soil Analytical Results
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, North Carolina
Exposure Unit
Sample ID SS-TW1-3-4 SS-MW4-3.5-4 EI-EXC-E1 EI-EXC-S1 EI-EXC-W1
Sample Date 3/23/2017 3/23/2017 8/4/2017 8/3/2017 8/3/2017
Sample Type Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab
Units
Exposure Unit #3
Analyte Residential PSRG
(mg/kg)
Commercial / Industrial
PSRG (mg/kg)
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260B
2-Butanone (MEK)5,400 28,400 mg/kg 0.0144 J <0.00506 ---------
Acetone 12,200 100,000 mg/kg 0.133 0.0222 J ---------
Benzene 1.2 5.1 mg/kg <0.00109 <0.000665 ---------
Bromomethane 1.36 6 mg/kg <0.00195 <0.00119 ---------
Chloromethane 22 92 mg/kg <0.00109 <0.000665 ---------
Ethylbenzene 5.8 25 mg/kg <0.00109 <0.000665 ---------
Isopropylbenzene 268 268 mg/kg <0.000665 <0.000407 ---------
Methylene Chloride 57 640 mg/kg 0.00309 J 0.00187 J ---------
p-Isopropyltoluene NA NA mg/kg ˂0.0709 <0.000665 ---------
Toluene 818 818 mg/kg <0.00120 <0.000735 ---------
Xylenes, Total 116 260 mg/kg <0.00199 <0.00122 ---------
Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons (VPH) by the MADEP Method
C5-C8 Aliphatics NA NA mg/kg ------<3.74 <3.42 <4.06
C9-C10 Aromatics NA NA mg/kg ------<4.32 <3.94 <4.69
C9-C12 Aliphatics NA NA mg/kg ------6.68 J 5.70 J 6.63 J
C9-C12 Aliphatics (North Carolina)NA NA mg/kg ------6.68 5.70 J 6.63
Total VPH NA NA mg/kg ------10.71 9.38 11.01
Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPH) by the MADEP Method
C11-C22 Aromatics NA NA mg/kg ------8.10 J <5.46 24.8
C19-C36 Aliphatics NA NA mg/kg ------<6.27 10.7 J <6.45
C9-C18 Aliphatics NA NA mg/kg ------<3.01 <2.67 <3.09
Total EPH NA NA mg/kg ------12.74 14.77 29.57
Notes:
(1) < indicates analyte was not detected above the method detection limit
(2) J indicates an estimated value
(3) Analyte detections (e.g., 5.53) are identified in bold
(4) mg/kg indicates milligrams per kilogram
(5) --- indicates constituent not analyzed
(6) NA indicates no applicable standard
(7) ^ indicates instrument related QC is outside acceptance limits
Residential PSRG Commercial / Industrial
PSRG
(12) B indicates analyte detected in method blank
(13) H indicates sample was prepped or analyzed beyond the specified holding time
EPC
(16) MADEP indicates Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.
(11) Analytes that were not detected (i.e. concentrations that were below the laboratory Method Detection Limit [MDL]), but
(14) Data not compared to the NCDEQ Protection of Groundwater PSRGs because a groundwater deed restriction is proposed
(15) Maximum concentrations were used as exposure point concentrations (EPCs) and are
highlighted in blue as shown:
(8) PSRG indicates North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Inactive Hazardous Sites
(9) Concentrations exceeding PSRGs are highlighted in bold as shown:
(10) If multiple screening criteria are exceeded, the highlight corresponds to the highest value screening criteria exceedance.
Page 2 of 2
Table 2
Exposure Point Concentrations for Exposure Unit #2
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, North Carolina
Metals Antimony 7440-36-0 mg/kg 9 /14 0.300 0.424 95% KM (t) UCL 0.994 0.424 UCL
Metals Arsenic 7440-38-2 mg/kg 13 /14 4.176 5.861 95% KM (t) UCL 13.4 5.861 UCL
Metals Beryllium 7440-41-7 mg/kg 10 /14 0.295 0.402 95% KM (t) UCL 0.847 0.402 UCL
Metals Cadmium 7440-43-9 mg/kg 8 /14 0.242 0.365 95% KM (t) UCL 0.891 0.365 UCL
Metals Total Chromium 18540-29-9 mg/kg 13 /14 13.98 19.95 95% KM (t) UCL 49.6 19.95 UCL
Metals Copper 7440-50-8 mg/kg 13 /14 61.36 122.2 95% KM Bootstrap (t) UCL 233 122.2 UCL
Metals Lead 7439-92-1 mg/kg 13 /14 86.24 135.9 95% KM (t) UCL 369 135.9 UCL
Metals Manganese 7439-96-5 mg/kg 14 /14 144.9 270 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 506 270 UCL
Metals Mercury 7439-97-6 mg/kg 9 /14 0.643 3.445 95% KM Bootstrap (t) UCL 5.68 3.445 UCL
Metals Nickel 7440-02-0 mg/kg 13 /14 5.008 7.158 95% KM (t) UCL 16.6 7.158 UCL
Metals Selenium 7782-49-2 mg/kg 11 /14 0.691 0.895 95% KM (t) UCL 1.61 0.895 UCL
Metals Silver 7440-22-4 mg/kg 9 /14 0.126 0.212 95% KM (t) UCL 0.615 0.212 UCL
Metals Thallium 7440-28-0 mg/kg 5 /14 0.0768 0.103 95% KM (t) UCL 0.167 0.103 UCL
Metals Zinc 7440-66-6 mg/kg 13 /14 95.63 303.2 95% KM Bootstrap (t) UCL 611 303.2 UCL
Notes:
(1) Constituents of potential concern (COPCs) for metal constituents in Exposure Unit #2 (EU-2). The full EU-2 COPC list is shown on Table 1.
(2) Summary statistics were calculated using USEPA's ProUCL 5.1 statistical software. ProUCL Outputs are provided in Attachment B.
[a] Mean concentrations are calculated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimated statistics for non-detect results.
[b] UCL is the ProUCL-recommended value.
[c] Maximum detected value.
(3) Exposure point concentrations (EPCs) are ProUCL-recommended UCLs unless there are fewer than 8 samples, fewer than 25% detects, or the recommended UCL exceeds the maximum detected concentration.
(4) The Boostrap statistical method for estimating nonparametric data distributions is an empirical estimatation; therefore, the estimated UCL may deviate slightly if multiple UCL tests are generated for a given
sample set. The UCL deviations for these test were less than 1%.
CASCOPC (1)Class (1)
Summary Statistics (2)Exposure Point
Concentration (3)
Units Detection Frequency BasisValueMaximum (2c)UCL Statistic (2b)UCL (2b)Mean (2a)
Table 3
NCDEQ Tier 2 Risk Calculator Results
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, North Carolina
Receptor Pathway Carcinogenic Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Resident 1.3E-05 4.7E-01 NO
Non-Residential Worker 2.1E-06 3.3E-02 NO
Construction Worker NC NC NA
User Defined 7.2E-06 2.6E-01 NO
Receptor Pathway Carcinogenic Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Resident 5.2E-05 9.3E-01 NO
Non-Residential Worker 5.2E-06 1.1E-01 NO
Construction Worker NC NC NA
User Defined 2.8E-05 3.7E-01 NO
Receptor Pathway Carcinogenic Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Resident NC NC NA
Non-Residential Worker NC NC NA
Construction Worker 2.1E-06 1.3E+00 YES
User Defined NC NC NA
Notes:
(1) NC indicates not calculated.
(2) NA indicates not applicable.
(3) Entries highlighted in red indicate that the cumulative risk exceeds recommended levels.
Soil Combined Pathways
Soil Combined Pathways
Soil Combined Pathways
Exposure Unit #1
Exposure Unit #2
Exposure Unit #3

FIGURES

Site Location Map
Figure
1
Raleigh, NC April 2017
Legend
Subject Site Boundary
³
Notes:
1. 2013 topographic map obtained from USGS The National
Boundaries Dataset.
2. Site is within the Wilmington Quadrangle.
3. Site Boundary was estimated based on information provided by
Brunswick County, North Carolina GIS Website.
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
0390000901
03900011
03900008
Subject Site: Parcel No. 0390000901, 03900011,
and 03900008
Battle Ship Road NE
Eagle Island, North Carolina
N:\GN6146 Burgess Eagle Island\GIS\MXD\Phase I ESA\Figure 1.mxd
³Risk Assessment: Soil Exposure UnitsRaleigh, NC September 2017Figure20 100 200FeetN:\GN6353 Eagle Island Interim Measure\Risk Assessment\GIS\Exposure_units.mxdParcel No. 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008 Battle Ship Road NEEagle Island, North CarolinaExposure Unit #1Exposure Unit #2Exposure Unit #3: Eastern side subsurface soilsNotes:1. Site boundary was provided by Brunswick County Property Appraiser.2. 2013 Aerial Map was provided by ESRI Online Database.3. Wetland delineation based on March 2017 survey by Southern EnvironmentalGroup, Inc.4. Areas identified as wetlands were not sampled and not included in the riskassessment exposure units.5. Two areas immediatly adjacent to wetlands were inacceable for sampling andalso not included in the exposure units.Battle Ship RoadExposure Unit #2Exposure Unit #3: Eastern side subsurface soilsLegendApproximate WetlandsSubsurficial Exposure UnitSubject Site BoundarySurficial Exposure Unit
Z1Z2Z3Z4Z5Z6Z8Z9Z10Z11Z12Z14Z15Z7LegendSurface Soil SampleSubsurface Soil SampleExposure UnitsPhase II ESA Composite Soil Sample Zone BoundaryInterim Remedy Excavation FootprintSubject Site BoundaryApproximate Wetlands³Notes:1. Aerial imagery provided by ESRI online database.2. Wetland delineation based on March 2017 survey by Southern Environmental Group, Inc.3. Surface soils are defined as samples collected less than 1 foot below ground surface.4. Subsurface soils are defined as samples collected at least 1 foot below ground surface.5. Excavation was performed as detailed in Geosyntec's August 2017 Interim Removal Action Report.6. Numbers refer to zone IDs of composite soil sample zones.7. Composite soil samples are classified as surficial.N:\GN6353 Eagle Island Interim Measure\Risk Assessment\GIS\Sample locations.mxdRisk Assessment Soil Sample LocationsFigure3Raleigh, North CarolinaSeptember 2017Subject Site: Parcel No. 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008 Battle Ship Road NEEagle Island, North Carolina0 80 160FeetSURF-EDGE-3SURF-EDGE-4SURF-EDGE-2Excavation Footprint DetailPS4TW1PS2MW4TW1PS4EI-EXC-S1EI-EXC-E1EI-EXC-W1Exposure Unit #1Exposure Unit #2PS1/PS1ASS1Exposure Unit #3: Eastern side subsurface soils

ATTACHMENT A

From:Matthew Jenny
To:Matthew Jenny
Subject:RE: Eagle Island Backfill Source Memorandum
Date:Wednesday, August 30, 2017 2:21:39 PM
Attachments:image001.png
From: Watson, Samuel [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 2:44 PM
To: Matthew Jenny <[e-mail]>
Cc: Kaitlyn Rhonehouse <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Eagle Island Backfill Source Memorandum

Matt,

The Backfill Soil Authorization Memorandum, dated August 23, 2017, has been received and reviewed.

The Brownfields Program concurs with the conclusions presented in the memorandum. As such, the soil from
the potential backfill source may be used as backfill on the site.

Please let me know if there are any questions.

Thanks,

Samuel P. Watson, P.G.
Project Manager
Division of Waste Management - Brownfields
NC Department of Environmental Quality

910 796 7408 office
910 350 2004 fax
[e-mail]
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.Wilmington, NC 28405

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Matthew Jenny [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 12:53 PM
To: Watson, Samuel <[e-mail]>
Cc: Kaitlyn Rhonehouse <[e-mail]>
Subject: Eagle Island Backfill Source Memorandum

Sam,

Per your request, attached is an official memo requesting authorization to use the Sawmill Sand Mine
(Leland, NC) backfill source for the Eagle Island Brownfields Site.

Let us know if you have any questions.

-Matt

Matthew Jenny, E.I.
Senior Staff Engineer------------------------------------------------------Geosyntec Consultants of NC, PC2501 Blue Ridge RoadSuite 430Raleigh, NC 27607Phone: [phone]Mobile: [phone]www.Geosyntec.com This electronic mail message contains information that (a) is or may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL, PROPRIETARY INNATURE, OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) namedherein. If you are not the intended recipient, an addressee, or the person responsible for delivering this to an addressee, you arehereby notified that reading, using, copying, or distributing any part of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received thiselectronic mail message in error, please contact us immediately and take the steps necessary to delete the message completelyfrom your computer system.

ATTACHMENT B

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Mean (detects) 0.371
Theta hat (MLE) 0.135 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.195
nu hat (MLE) 49.41 nu star (bias corrected) 34.27
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 2.745 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.904
K-S Test Statistic 0.171 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.282 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.271 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.728 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.738 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.998
95% KM (z) UCL 0.415 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.525
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.51 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.606
KM SD 0.237 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.429
95% KM (t) UCL 0.424 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.42
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.3 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0701
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.235 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.822 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -1.184 SD of Logged Detects 0.646
Median Detects 0.294 CV Detects 0.721
Skewness Detects 1.813 Kurtosis Detects 3.679
Variance Detects 0.0717 Percent Non-Detects 35.71%
Mean Detects 0.371 SD Detects 0.268
Minimum Detect 0.113 Minimum Non-Detect 0.126
Maximum Detect 0.994 Maximum Non-Detect 1.09
Number of Detects 9 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
Antimony
From File WorkSheet.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options
Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.18/31/2017 9:13:04 AM
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
A B C D E F G H I J K L
KM SD (logged) 0.651 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.281
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.197
KM SD (logged) 0.651 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.281
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.197 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.443
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -1.438 KM Geo Mean 0.237
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.436 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.513
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.439
SD in Original Scale 0.239 SD in Log Scale 0.657
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.405 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.408
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.292 Mean in Log Scale -1.456
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.131 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.983 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.462 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.491
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (36.58, α) 23.73 Adjusted Chi Square Value (36.58, β) 22.37
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.471 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.647
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.819 99% gamma percentile (KM) 1.211
nu hat (KM) 44.85 nu star (KM) 36.58
theta hat (KM) 0.187 theta star (KM) 0.23
Variance (KM) 0.0562 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0701
k hat (KM) 1.602 k star (KM) 1.306
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.3 SD (KM) 0.237
Approximate Chi Square Value (28.67, α) 17.45 Adjusted Chi Square Value (28.67, β) 16.3
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.448 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.479
nu hat (MLE) 34.79 nu star (bias corrected) 28.67
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 1.243 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.024
Theta hat (MLE) 0.219 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.266
Maximum 0.994 Median 0.235
SD 0.255 CV 0.937
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.273
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
A B C D E F G H I J K L
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 10.12 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 13.64
95% KM (z) UCL 5.741 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 6.635
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.03 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 8.324
KM SD 3.42 95% KM (BCA) UCL 5.747
95% KM (t) UCL 5.861 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 5.74
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 4.176 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.952
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.181 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.854 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 1.191 SD of Logged Detects 0.818
Median Detects 4.24 CV Detects 0.809
Skewness Detects 1.489 Kurtosis Detects 2.357
Variance Detects 12.77 Percent Non-Detects 7.143%
Mean Detects 4.417 SD Detects 3.573
Minimum Detect 0.865 Minimum Non-Detect 1.31
Maximum Detect 13.4 Maximum Non-Detect 1.31
Number of Detects 13 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 13 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Arsenic
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.424
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.252 SD in Log Scale 0.765
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.428 95% H-Stat UCL 0.528
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.309 Mean in Log Scale -1.447
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.16 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.969 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 6.547 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 6.964
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (34.13, α) 21.77 Adjusted Chi Square Value (34.13, β) 20.47
80% gamma percentile (KM) 6.602 90% gamma percentile (KM) 9.157
95% gamma percentile (KM) 11.67 99% gamma percentile (KM) 17.43
nu hat (KM) 41.74 nu star (KM) 34.13
theta hat (KM) 2.801 theta star (KM) 3.426
Variance (KM) 11.7 SE of Mean (KM) 0.952
k hat (KM) 1.491 k star (KM) 1.219
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 4.176 SD (KM) 3.42
Approximate Chi Square Value (27.58, α) 16.6 Adjusted Chi Square Value (27.58, β) 15.48
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 6.825 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 7.32
nu hat (MLE) 33.4 nu star (bias corrected) 27.58
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 1.193 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.985
Theta hat (MLE) 3.444 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.171
Maximum 13.4 Median 3.575
SD 3.622 CV 0.882
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.0963 Mean 4.108
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 4.417
Theta hat (MLE) 2.392 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.002
nu hat (MLE) 48 nu star (bias corrected) 38.25
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.846 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.471
K-S Test Statistic 0.135 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.24 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.262 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.745 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Mean of Logged Detects -1.115 SD of Logged Detects 0.593
Median Detects 0.359 CV Detects 0.546
Skewness Detects 1.121 Kurtosis Detects 2.422
Variance Detects 0.0428 Percent Non-Detects 28.57%
Mean Detects 0.379 SD Detects 0.207
Minimum Detect 0.11 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0461
Maximum Detect 0.847 Maximum Non-Detect 0.233
Number of Detects 10 Number of Non-Detects 4
Number of Distinct Detects 10 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 4
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Beryllium
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 5.861
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 3.577 SD in Log Scale 0.897
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 5.841 95% H-Stat UCL 8.42
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 4.148 Mean in Log Scale 1.075
KM SD (logged) 0.816 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.502
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.227
KM SD (logged) 0.816 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.502
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.227 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 7.439
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 1.108 KM Geo Mean 3.028
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.982 95% Bootstrap t UCL 6.811
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 7.956
SD in Original Scale 3.557 SD in Log Scale 0.855
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 5.851 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.842
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 4.168 Mean in Log Scale 1.101
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
A B C D E F G H I J K L
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.455 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.61
nu hat (KM) 53.77 nu star (KM) 43.58
theta hat (KM) 0.154 theta star (KM) 0.19
Variance (KM) 0.0454 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0605
k hat (KM) 1.92 k star (KM) 1.556
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.295 SD (KM) 0.213
Approximate Chi Square Value (30.88, α) 19.19 Adjusted Chi Square Value (30.88, β) 17.97
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.465 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.497
nu hat (MLE) 37.61 nu star (bias corrected) 30.88
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 1.343 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.103
Theta hat (MLE) 0.215 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.262
Maximum 0.847 Median 0.292
SD 0.227 CV 0.785
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.289
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.379
Theta hat (MLE) 0.104 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.145
nu hat (MLE) 72.8 nu star (bias corrected) 52.29
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 3.64 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.615
K-S Test Statistic 0.156 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.268 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.299 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.73 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.673 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.897
95% KM (z) UCL 0.395 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.425
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.477 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.559
KM SD 0.213 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.394
95% KM (t) UCL 0.402 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.4
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.295 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0605
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.2 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.262 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.91 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Number of Detects 8 Number of Non-Detects 6
Cadmium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 13
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.402
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.22 SD in Log Scale 0.927
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.4 95% H-Stat UCL 0.66
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.296 Mean in Log Scale -1.532
KM SD (logged) 0.857 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.565
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.258
KM SD (logged) 0.857 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.565
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.258 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.575
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -1.531 KM Geo Mean 0.216
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.417 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.434
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.507
SD in Original Scale 0.214 SD in Log Scale 0.736
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.403 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.392
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.302 Mean in Log Scale -1.438
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.195 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.262 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.94 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.437 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.461
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (43.58, α) 29.44 Adjusted Chi Square Value (43.58, β) 27.91
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.76 99% gamma percentile (KM) 1.097
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
A B C D E F G H I J K L
nu hat (MLE) 16.26 nu star (bias corrected) 14.11
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 0.581 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.504
Theta hat (MLE) 0.368 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.424
Maximum 0.891 Median 0.131
SD 0.269 CV 1.256
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.214
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.365
Theta hat (MLE) 0.158 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.24
nu hat (MLE) 36.83 nu star (bias corrected) 24.35
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 2.302 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.522
K-S Test Statistic 0.237 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.297 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.309 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.723 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.676 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.934
95% KM (z) UCL 0.356 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.421
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.451 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.545
KM SD 0.24 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.359
95% KM (t) UCL 0.365 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.362
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.242 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0695
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.282 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.867 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -1.241 SD of Logged Detects 0.73
Median Detects 0.244 CV Detects 0.743
Skewness Detects 1.202 Kurtosis Detects 0.685
Variance Detects 0.0735 Percent Non-Detects 42.86%
Mean Detects 0.365 SD Detects 0.271
Minimum Detect 0.0994 Minimum Non-Detect 0.041
Maximum Detect 0.891 Maximum Non-Detect 0.249
Number of Distinct Detects 8 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.365
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.251 SD in Log Scale 1.039
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.358 95% H-Stat UCL 0.583
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.239 Mean in Log Scale -1.903
KM SD (logged) 0.96 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.727
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.308
KM SD (logged) 0.96 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.727
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.308 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.505
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -1.87 KM Geo Mean 0.154
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.393 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.46
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.483
SD in Original Scale 0.25 SD in Log Scale 0.933
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.357 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.354
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.239 Mean in Log Scale -1.857
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.193 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.283 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.967 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.422 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.455
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (23.60, α) 13.55 Adjusted Chi Square Value (23.60, β) 12.54
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.394 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.581
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.77 99% gamma percentile (KM) 1.216
nu hat (KM) 28.34 nu star (KM) 23.6
theta hat (KM) 0.239 theta star (KM) 0.287
Variance (KM) 0.0578 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0695
k hat (KM) 1.012 k star (KM) 0.843
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.242 SD (KM) 0.24
Approximate Chi Square Value (14.11, α) 6.646 Adjusted Chi Square Value (14.11, β) 5.979
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.454 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.505
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
Mean (detects) 14.98
Theta hat (MLE) 7.917 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 9.942
nu hat (MLE) 49.18 nu star (bias corrected) 39.16
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.892 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.506
K-S Test Statistic 0.13 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.24 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.311 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.745 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 35.04 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 47.53
95% KM (z) UCL 19.52 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 23.85
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 24.09 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 28.68
KM SD 12.12 95% KM (BCA) UCL 19.65
95% KM (t) UCL 19.95 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 19.44
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 13.98 KM Standard Error of Mean 3.372
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.178 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.808 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 2.419 SD of Logged Detects 0.796
Median Detects 11.3 CV Detects 0.835
Skewness Detects 1.881 Kurtosis Detects 4.534
Variance Detects 156.3 Percent Non-Detects 7.143%
Mean Detects 14.98 SD Detects 12.5
Minimum Detect 3.45 Minimum Non-Detect 0.983
Maximum Detect 49.6 Maximum Non-Detect 0.983
Number of Detects 13 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 13 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
Chromium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
A B C D E F G H I J K L
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 13.94 Mean in Log Scale 2.196
KM SD (logged) 0.968 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.739
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.269
KM SD (logged) 0.968 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.739
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.269 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 31.46
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 2.245 KM Geo Mean 9.444
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 21.3 95% Bootstrap t UCL 23.36
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 29.77
SD in Original Scale 12.53 SD in Log Scale 0.925
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 19.95 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 19.77
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 14.02 Mean in Log Scale 2.28
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.165 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.958 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 22.56 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 24.09
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (30.58, α) 18.95 Adjusted Chi Square Value (30.58, β) 17.74
80% gamma percentile (KM) 22.33 90% gamma percentile (KM) 31.49
95% gamma percentile (KM) 40.59 99% gamma percentile (KM) 61.59
nu hat (KM) 37.22 nu star (KM) 30.58
theta hat (KM) 10.51 theta star (KM) 12.8
Variance (KM) 146.9 SE of Mean (KM) 3.372
k hat (KM) 1.329 k star (KM) 1.092
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 13.98 SD (KM) 12.12
Approximate Chi Square Value (19.52, α) 10.5 Adjusted Chi Square Value (19.52, β) 9.632
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 25.86 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 28.19
nu hat (MLE) 23.15 nu star (bias corrected) 19.52
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 0.827 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.697
Theta hat (MLE) 16.82 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 19.95
Maximum 49.6 Median 10
SD 12.66 CV 0.91
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 13.91
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.375 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.78 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 199.8 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 282
95% KM (z) UCL 97.84 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 122.2
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 127.9 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 158
KM SD 79.71 95% KM (BCA) UCL 96.7
95% KM (t) UCL 100.6 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 98.44
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 61.36 KM Standard Error of Mean 22.17
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.263 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.749 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 3.209 SD of Logged Detects 1.625
Median Detects 23 CV Detects 1.276
Skewness Detects 1.334 Kurtosis Detects 0.306
Variance Detects 7089 Percent Non-Detects 7.143%
Mean Detects 65.99 SD Detects 84.19
Minimum Detect 1.8 Minimum Non-Detect 1.2
Maximum Detect 233 Maximum Non-Detect 1.2
Number of Detects 13 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 13 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Copper
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 19.95
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 12.62 SD in Log Scale 1.133
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 19.91 95% H-Stat UCL 44.09
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
A B C D E F G H I J K L
SD in Original Scale 82.77 SD in Log Scale 1.892
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 100.5 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 99.27
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 61.31 Mean in Log Scale 2.923
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.113 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.95 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 129.2 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 143.4
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (14.37, α) 6.826 Adjusted Chi Square Value (14.37, β) 6.148
80% gamma percentile (KM) 100.9 90% gamma percentile (KM) 165.1
95% gamma percentile (KM) 233.5 99% gamma percentile (KM) 401.4
nu hat (KM) 16.59 nu star (KM) 14.37
theta hat (KM) 103.6 theta star (KM) 119.6
Variance (KM) 6354 SE of Mean (KM) 22.17
k hat (KM) 0.593 k star (KM) 0.513
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 61.36 SD (KM) 79.71
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.06, α) 4.614 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.06, β) 4.076
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 146.9 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 166.3
nu hat (MLE) 12.38 nu star (bias corrected) 11.06
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 0.442 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.395
Theta hat (MLE) 138.6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 155.1
Maximum 233 Median 20.6
SD 82.79 CV 1.351
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 61.28
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 65.99
Theta hat (MLE) 105.4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 123.8
nu hat (MLE) 16.28 nu star (bias corrected) 13.86
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.626 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.533
K-S Test Statistic 0.142 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.248 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.209 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.814 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 3.713 SD of Logged Detects 1.629
Median Detects 72.1 CV Detects 1.14
Skewness Detects 1.714 Kurtosis Detects 3.043
Variance Detects 11192 Percent Non-Detects 7.143%
Mean Detects 92.84 SD Detects 105.8
Minimum Detect 1.03 Minimum Non-Detect 0.546
Maximum Detect 369 Maximum Non-Detect 0.546
Number of Detects 13 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 13 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
Lead
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 122.2Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1) 143.4
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 82.76 SD in Log Scale 1.851
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 100.5 95% H-Stat UCL 994.9
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 61.32 Mean in Log Scale 2.943
KM SD (logged) 1.694 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.067
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.471
KM SD (logged) 1.694 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.067
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.471 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 566.5
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 2.993 KM Geo Mean 19.94
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 106.5 95% Bootstrap t UCL 124.7
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 1154
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 167.3 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 183.6
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (17.44, α) 8.989 Adjusted Chi Square Value (17.44, β) 8.194
80% gamma percentile (KM) 142.1 90% gamma percentile (KM) 222.4
95% gamma percentile (KM) 306.2 99% gamma percentile (KM) 508.1
nu hat (KM) 20.5 nu star (KM) 17.44
theta hat (KM) 117.8 theta star (KM) 138.4
Variance (KM) 10158 SE of Mean (KM) 28.04
k hat (KM) 0.732 k star (KM) 0.623
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 86.24 SD (KM) 100.8
Approximate Chi Square Value (11.85, α) 5.13 Adjusted Chi Square Value (11.85, β) 4.556
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 199.2 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 224.2
nu hat (MLE) 13.39 nu star (bias corrected) 11.85
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 0.478 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.423
Theta hat (MLE) 180.3 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 203.7
Maximum 369 Median 55.8
SD 104.6 CV 1.214
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 86.21
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 92.84
Theta hat (MLE) 126.4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 150.7
nu hat (MLE) 19.09 nu star (bias corrected) 16.02
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.734 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.616
K-S Test Statistic 0.115 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.246 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.117 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.772 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 261.3 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 365.2
95% KM (z) UCL 132.4 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 169.5
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 170.4 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 208.5
KM SD 100.8 95% KM (BCA) UCL 134.4
95% KM (t) UCL 135.9 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 132.6
KM Mean 86.24 KM Standard Error of Mean 28.04
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Maximum 506 Median 119.5
SD 130.5 Std. Error of Mean 34.88
Number of Missing Observations 0
Minimum 3.69 Mean 144.9
Manganese
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 135.9
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 104.6 SD in Log Scale 2.06
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 135.7 95% H-Stat UCL 3697
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 86.23 Mean in Log Scale 3.355
KM SD (logged) 1.874 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.421
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.521
KM SD (logged) 1.874 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 4.421
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.521 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 1732
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 3.405 KM Geo Mean 30.11
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 147.3 95% Bootstrap t UCL 169.6
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 1805
SD in Original Scale 104.6 SD in Log Scale 1.876
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 135.8 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 133.6
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 86.27 Mean in Log Scale 3.437
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.174 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.945 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 548.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 701.2
99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1002
Assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% H-UCL 836.2 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 438.1
Maximum of Logged Data 6.227 SD of logged Data 1.389
Lognormal Statistics
Minimum of Logged Data 1.306 Mean of logged Data 4.424
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.271 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.835 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50) 250.4 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 270
Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0312 Adjusted Chi Square Value 13
MLE Mean (bias corrected) 144.9 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 155.8
Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 14.02
Theta hat (MLE) 139.3 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 167.5
nu hat (MLE) 29.13 nu star (bias corrected) 24.22
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE) 1.04 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.865
5% K-S Critical Value 0.235 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
5% A-D Critical Value 0.759 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.2 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Gamma GOF Test
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.576 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
95% Student's-t UCL 206.6 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 219.9
95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 209.4
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Assuming Normal Distribution
95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness)
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.236 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.226 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.829 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.874 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Coefficient of Variation 0.901 Skewness 1.774
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
A B C D E F G H I J K L
K-S Test Statistic 0.253 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.564 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.764 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.194 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 4.707
95% KM (z) UCL 1.315 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 3.445
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.868 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.423
KM SD 1.441 95% KM (BCA) UCL 1.428
95% KM (t) UCL 1.366 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 1.406
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.643 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.408
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.353 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.571 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -1.067 SD of Logged Detects 1.527
Median Detects 0.324 CV Detects 1.801
Skewness Detects 2.743 Kurtosis Detects 7.795
Variance Detects 3.235 Percent Non-Detects 35.71%
Mean Detects 0.999 SD Detects 1.798
Minimum Detect 0.0436 Minimum Non-Detect 0.00205
Maximum Detect 5.68 Maximum Non-Detect 0.0435
Number of Detects 9 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Mercury
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 270
90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 249.5 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 296.9
97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 362.7 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 491.9
95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 555.7 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 205
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 220
95% CLT UCL 202.2 95% Jackknife UCL 206.6
95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 200.5 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 244.3
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
A B C D E F G H I J K L
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.842 95% Bootstrap t UCL 3.412
SD in Original Scale 1.495 SD in Log Scale 2.266
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1.352 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.376
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.645 Mean in Log Scale -2.448
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.162 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.954 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 2.457 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 2.989
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (5.71, α) 1.494 Adjusted Chi Square Value (5.71, β) 1.229
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.856 90% gamma percentile (KM) 1.944
95% gamma percentile (KM) 3.295 99% gamma percentile (KM) 7.002
nu hat (KM) 5.572 nu star (KM) 5.712
theta hat (KM) 3.23 theta star (KM) 3.151
Variance (KM) 2.076 SE of Mean (KM) 0.408
k hat (KM) 0.199 k star (KM) 0.204
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.643 SD (KM) 1.441
Approximate Chi Square Value (9.13, α) 3.407 Adjusted Chi Square Value (9.13, β) 2.959
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 1.731 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 1.993
nu hat (MLE) 9.926 nu star (bias corrected) 9.132
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 0.355 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.326
Theta hat (MLE) 1.821 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.98
Maximum 5.68 Median 0.0839
SD 1.494 CV 2.314
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.646
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.999
Theta hat (MLE) 1.715 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.16
nu hat (MLE) 10.49 nu star (bias corrected) 8.324
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.583 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.462
5% K-S Critical Value 0.292 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 5.008 KM Standard Error of Mean 1.214
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.209 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.844 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 1.364 SD of Logged Detects 0.828
Median Detects 4.15 CV Detects 0.848
Skewness Detects 1.494 Kurtosis Detects 2.043
Variance Detects 20.53 Percent Non-Detects 7.143%
Mean Detects 5.342 SD Detects 4.531
Minimum Detect 1.15 Minimum Non-Detect 0.655
Maximum Detect 16.6 Maximum Non-Detect 0.655
Number of Detects 13 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 13 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
Nickel
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 3.445Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1) 2.989
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 1.493 SD in Log Scale 2.235
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1.354 95% H-Stat UCL 29.1
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.647 Mean in Log Scale -2.32
KM SD (logged) 2.713 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 6.14
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.769
KM SD (logged) 2.713 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 6.14
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.769 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 222.1
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -2.896 KM Geo Mean 0.0552
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 29.89
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.971 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 8.103 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 8.657
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (30.28, α) 18.71 Adjusted Chi Square Value (30.28, β) 17.52
80% gamma percentile (KM) 8.006 90% gamma percentile (KM) 11.31
95% gamma percentile (KM) 14.59 99% gamma percentile (KM) 22.17
nu hat (KM) 36.84 nu star (KM) 30.28
theta hat (KM) 3.806 theta star (KM) 4.63
Variance (KM) 19.06 SE of Mean (KM) 1.214
k hat (KM) 1.316 k star (KM) 1.081
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 5.008 SD (KM) 4.365
Approximate Chi Square Value (20.75, α) 11.41 Adjusted Chi Square Value (20.75, β) 10.5
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 9.026 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 9.808
nu hat (MLE) 24.71 nu star (bias corrected) 20.75
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 0.883 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.741
Theta hat (MLE) 5.621 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 6.695
Maximum 16.6 Median 3.525
SD 4.581 CV 0.923
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 4.961
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 5.342
Theta hat (MLE) 3.047 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.817
nu hat (MLE) 45.58 nu star (bias corrected) 36.39
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 1.753 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.4
K-S Test Statistic 0.142 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.24 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.253 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.747 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 12.59 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 17.09
95% KM (z) UCL 7.005 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 8.325
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 8.651 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 10.3
KM SD 4.365 95% KM (BCA) UCL 7.135
95% KM (t) UCL 7.158 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 7.091
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Variance Detects 0.184 Percent Non-Detects 21.43%
Mean Detects 0.722 SD Detects 0.429
Minimum Detect 0.194 Minimum Non-Detect 1.2
Maximum Detect 1.61 Maximum Non-Detect 1.3
Number of Detects 11 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 11 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Selenium
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 7.158
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 4.555 SD in Log Scale 1.036
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 7.14 95% H-Stat UCL 12.71
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 4.984 Mean in Log Scale 1.187
KM SD (logged) 0.894 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.622
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.249
KM SD (logged) 0.894 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.622
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.249 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 9.841
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 1.236 KM Geo Mean 3.443
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 7.462 95% Bootstrap t UCL 8.403
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 11.23
SD in Original Scale 4.542 SD in Log Scale 0.967
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 7.146 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 7.057
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 4.996 Mean in Log Scale 1.217
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.107 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.691 SD (KM) 0.387
Approximate Chi Square Value (83.17, α) 63.15 Adjusted Chi Square Value (83.17, β) 60.84
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.905 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.939
nu hat (MLE) 104.2 nu star (bias corrected) 83.17
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 3.72 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.97
Theta hat (MLE) 0.185 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.231
Maximum 1.61 Median 0.589
SD 0.383 CV 0.557
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.194 Mean 0.687
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.722
Theta hat (MLE) 0.236 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.315
nu hat (MLE) 67.4 nu star (bias corrected) 50.35
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 3.064 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.289
K-S Test Statistic 0.106 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.257 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.156 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.733 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.409 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.835
95% KM (z) UCL 0.88 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.925
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.036 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.192
KM SD 0.387 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.875
95% KM (t) UCL 0.895 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.871
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.691 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.115
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.165 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.251 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.932 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -0.498 SD of Logged Detects 0.639
Median Detects 0.611 CV Detects 0.594
Skewness Detects 0.902 Kurtosis Detects 0.491
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.895
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.378 SD in Log Scale 0.561
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.881 95% H-Stat UCL 0.994
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.702 Mean in Log Scale -0.491
KM SD (logged) 0.595 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.192
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.183
KM SD (logged) 0.595 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 2.192
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.183 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 1.005
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -0.534 KM Geo Mean 0.586
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.896 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.939
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.96
SD in Original Scale 0.386 SD in Log Scale 0.565
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.861 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.848
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.678 Mean in Log Scale -0.532
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.126 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.251 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.975 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.932 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.97
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (71.71, α) 53.21 Adjusted Chi Square Value (71.71, β) 51.1
80% gamma percentile (KM) 1.005 90% gamma percentile (KM) 1.27
95% gamma percentile (KM) 1.52 99% gamma percentile (KM) 2.066
nu hat (KM) 89.57 nu star (KM) 71.71
theta hat (KM) 0.216 theta star (KM) 0.27
Variance (KM) 0.149 SE of Mean (KM) 0.115
k hat (KM) 3.199 k star (KM) 2.561
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Maximum 0.615 Median 0.0567
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.117
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.162
Theta hat (MLE) 0.177 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.237
nu hat (MLE) 16.5 nu star (bias corrected) 12.33
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.917 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.685
K-S Test Statistic 0.188 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.288 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.288 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.746 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.427 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.605
95% KM (z) UCL 0.206 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.292
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.271 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.336
KM SD 0.161 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.212
95% KM (t) UCL 0.212 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.207
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.126 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.0481
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.241 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.768 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -2.455 SD of Logged Detects 1.266
Median Detects 0.0699 CV Detects 1.178
Skewness Detects 1.927 Kurtosis Detects 4.165
Variance Detects 0.0365 Percent Non-Detects 35.71%
Mean Detects 0.162 SD Detects 0.191
Minimum Detect 0.0124 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0549
Maximum Detect 0.615 Maximum Non-Detect 0.655
Number of Detects 9 Number of Non-Detects 5
Number of Distinct Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Silver
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
A B C D E F G H I J K L
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
SD in Original Scale 0.167 SD in Log Scale 1.148
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.234 95% H-Stat UCL 0.452
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.155 Mean in Log Scale -2.421
KM SD (logged) 1.171 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.083
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.372
KM SD (logged) 1.171 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.083
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.372 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.344
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -2.753 KM Geo Mean 0.0637
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.225 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.273
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.286
SD in Original Scale 0.162 SD in Log Scale 1.089
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.196 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.195
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.119 Mean in Log Scale -2.734
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.177 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.274 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.969 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.263 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.291
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (14.83, α) 7.143 Adjusted Chi Square Value (14.83, β) 6.447
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.208 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.338
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.476 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.813
nu hat (KM) 17.18 nu star (KM) 14.83
theta hat (KM) 0.206 theta star (KM) 0.239
Variance (KM) 0.0261 SE of Mean (KM) 0.0481
k hat (KM) 0.613 k star (KM) 0.53
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.126 SD (KM) 0.161
Approximate Chi Square Value (19.47, α) 10.46 Adjusted Chi Square Value (19.47, β) 9.593
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.218 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.237
nu hat (MLE) 23.08 nu star (bias corrected) 19.47
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 0.824 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.695
Theta hat (MLE) 0.142 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.168
SD 0.163 CV 1.397
1301
1302
1303
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
K-S Test Statistic 0.255 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.358 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.498 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.68 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.171 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.226
95% KM (z) UCL 0.102 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.119
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.122 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.142
KM SD 0.038 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.104
95% KM (t) UCL 0.103 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.102
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 0.0768 KM Standard Error of Mean 0.015
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.301 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.787 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects -2.412 SD of Logged Detects 0.377
Median Detects 0.0793 CV Detects 0.437
Skewness Detects 1.84 Kurtosis Detects 3.472
Variance Detects 0.00173 Percent Non-Detects 64.29%
Mean Detects 0.0954 SD Detects 0.0416
Minimum Detect 0.0648 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0458
Maximum Detect 0.167 Maximum Non-Detect 0.437
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 9
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 9
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Thallium
When a data set follows an approximate (e.g., normal) distribution passing one of the GOF test
When applicable, it is suggested to use a UCL based upon a distribution (e.g., gamma) passing both GOF tests in ProUCL
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.212
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) -2.664 KM Geo Mean 0.0697
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0877 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0934
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.0858
SD in Original Scale 0.0336 SD in Log Scale 0.436
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0832 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0824
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0673 Mean in Log Scale -2.792
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.235 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.343 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.866 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0998 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.103
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (91.21, α) 70.19 Adjusted Chi Square Value (91.21, β) 67.75
80% gamma percentile (KM) 0.108 90% gamma percentile (KM) 0.134
95% gamma percentile (KM) 0.157 99% gamma percentile (KM) 0.208
nu hat (KM) 114.4 nu star (KM) 91.21
theta hat (KM) 0.0188 theta star (KM) 0.0236
Variance (KM) 0.00144 SE of Mean (KM) 0.015
k hat (KM) 4.085 k star (KM) 3.258
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 0.0768 SD (KM) 0.038
Approximate Chi Square Value (44.76, α) 30.42 Adjusted Chi Square Value (44.76, β) 28.85
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 0.0883 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0931
nu hat (MLE) 55.27 nu star (bias corrected) 44.76
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 1.974 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.599
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0304 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0375
Maximum 0.167 Median 0.0555
SD 0.04 CV 0.667
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.06
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 0.0954
Theta hat (MLE) 0.0117 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0282
nu hat (MLE) 81.3 nu star (bias corrected) 33.85
k hat (MLE) 8.13 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.385
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
1448
1449
1450
A B C D E F G H I J K L
95% KM (z) UCL 164 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 303.2
90% KM Chebyshev UCL 220.3 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 276.8
KM SD 149.4 95% KM (BCA) UCL 183.1
95% KM (t) UCL 169.2 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 173.7
Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs
KM Mean 95.63 KM Standard Error of Mean 41.55
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.358 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.566 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Mean of Logged Detects 3.87 SD of Logged Detects 1.396
Median Detects 55.3 CV Detects 1.545
Skewness Detects 3.137 Kurtosis Detects 10.56
Variance Detects 25245 Percent Non-Detects 7.143%
Mean Detects 102.8 SD Detects 158.9
Minimum Detect 1.88 Minimum Non-Detect 5.46
Maximum Detect 611 Maximum Non-Detect 5.46
Number of Detects 13 Number of Non-Detects 1
Number of Distinct Detects 13 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 1
Zinc
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 14 Number of Distinct Observations 14
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM (t) UCL 0.103
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 0.0576 SD in Log Scale 0.743
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.127 95% H-Stat UCL 0.174
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 0.0994 Mean in Log Scale -2.519
KM SD (logged) 0.42 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 1.994
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.166
KM SD (logged) 0.42 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 1.994
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.166 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 0.096
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.162 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.234 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.948 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n>=50) 237.8 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 270.8
Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics
Approximate Chi Square Value (10.35, α) 4.161 Adjusted Chi Square Value (10.35, β) 3.655
80% gamma percentile (KM) 152.7 90% gamma percentile (KM) 273.8
95% gamma percentile (KM) 408.2 99% gamma percentile (KM) 749.3
nu hat (KM) 11.47 nu star (KM) 10.35
theta hat (KM) 233.4 theta star (KM) 258.7
Variance (KM) 22314 SE of Mean (KM) 41.55
k hat (KM) 0.41 k star (KM) 0.37
Estimates of Gamma Parameters using KM Estimates
Mean (KM) 95.63 SD (KM) 149.4
Approximate Chi Square Value (12.15, α) 5.329 Adjusted Chi Square Value (12.15, β) 4.742
95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n>=50) 217.8 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 244.7
nu hat (MLE) 13.77 nu star (bias corrected) 12.15
Adjusted Level of Significance (β) 0.0312
k hat (MLE) 0.492 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.434
Theta hat (MLE) 194.1 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 220
Maximum 611 Median 48.65
SD 155.1 CV 1.624
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 95.49
Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non-Detects
GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs
GROS may not be used when kstar of detects is small such as <1.0, especially when the sample size is small (e.g., <15-20)
For such situations, GROS method may yield incorrect values of UCLs and BTVs
This is especially true when the sample size is small.
Mean (detects) 102.8
Theta hat (MLE) 131.8 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 157.9
nu hat (MLE) 20.28 nu star (bias corrected) 16.93
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE) 0.78 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.651
K-S Test Statistic 0.203 Kolmogorov-Smirnov GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.246 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.452 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.769 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 355.1 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 509.1
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL.
Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.
These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).
However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician.
Suggested UCL to Use
95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 303.2Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when k<=1 and 15 < n < 50 but k<=1) 270.8
DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics
Detected Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
SD in Original Scale 155 SD in Log Scale 1.544
95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 169 95% H-Stat UCL 648.7
DL/2 Statistics
DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed
Mean in Original Scale 95.69 Mean in Log Scale 3.665
KM SD (logged) 1.538 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.764
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.428
KM SD (logged) 1.538 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) 3.764
KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.428 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) 618.3
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean (logged) 3.638 KM Geo Mean 38.03
95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 210.9 95% Bootstrap t UCL 291.3
95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 583.9
SD in Original Scale 154.9 SD in Log Scale 1.507
95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 169.1 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 172
Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 95.75 Mean in Log Scale 3.686

ATTACHMENT C

NCDEQ Tier 2 Risk Calculator Output Forms
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, NC
Exposure Unit #1
Resident Soil Combined Pathways Output Form
CAS #Chemical Name:
Ingestion
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Dermal
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Inhalation
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Ingestion
Carcinogenic
Risk
Dermal
Carcinogenic
Risk
Inhalation
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Ingestion Hazard
Quotient
Dermal Hazard
Quotient
Inhalation Hazard
Quotient
Calculated Non-
Carcinogenic Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 0.0899 0.0899 0.0899 1.3E-06 1.9E-07 1.5E-06
7440-36-0 Antimony (metallic)0.116 0.116 0.116 3.7E-03 3.7E-03
7440-38-2 Arsenic, Inorganic 5.53 5.53 5.53 7.2E-06 1.0E-06 2.3E-11 8.2E-06 1.4E-01 1.7E-02 9.6E-07 1.6E-01
71-43-2 Benzene 0.00137 0.00137 0.00137 1.1E-10 9.9E-10 1.1E-09 4.4E-06 1.1E-05 1.6E-05
7440-41-7 Beryllium and compounds 0.104 0.104 0.104 2.4E-13 2.4E-13 6.6E-04 1.4E-08 6.6E-04
74-83-9 Bromomethane 0.00162 0.00162 0.00162 1.5E-05 9.7E-05 1.1E-04
7440-43-9 Cadmium (Diet)0.138 0.138 0.138 2.4E-13 2.4E-13 1.8E-03 1.7E-04 3.6E-08 1.9E-03
7440-47-3 Chromium, Total 10.1 10.1 10.1
7440-50-8 Copper 4.49 4.49 4.49 1.4E-03 1.4E-03
98-82-8 Cumene 0.00383 0.00383 0.00383 4.9E-07 1.4E-06 1.9E-06
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 0.00217 0.00217 0.00217 3.4E-11 3.1E-10 3.5E-10 2.8E-07 3.4E-07 6.2E-07
7439-92-1 ~Lead and Compounds 9.72 9.72 9.72 <SL <SL <SL
7439-96-5 Manganese (Non-diet)90.3 90.3 90.3 4.8E-02 4.7E-06 4.8E-02
75-09-2 Methylene Chloride 0.00343 0.00343 0.00343 4.5E-11 1.1E-11 5.5E-11 7.3E-06 1.7E-06 9.0E-06
7440-02-0 Nickel Soluble Salts 5.45 5.45 5.45 1.4E-12 1.4E-12 3.5E-03 1.6E-07 3.5E-03
50-32-8 ~Benzo[a]pyrene 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 1.6E-06 5.5E-07 1.0E-13 2.2E-06
53-70-3 ~Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 0.0409 0.0409 0.0409 1.9E-06 6.5E-07 1.3E-13 2.6E-06
7782-49-2 Selenium 0.319 0.319 0.319 8.2E-04 4.2E-11 8.2E-04
7440-28-0 Thallium (Soluble Salts)0.2 0.2 0.2 2.6E-01 2.6E-01
108-88-3 Toluene 0.00156 0.00156 0.00156 2.5E-07 6.4E-08 3.1E-07
1330-20-7 Xylenes 0.00166 0.00166 0.00166 1.1E-07 2.6E-06 2.7E-06
7440-66-6 Zinc and Compounds 16.6 16.6 16.6 7.1E-04 7.1E-04
Cumulative:1.3E-05 4.7E-01
Notes:
(1) <SL indicates that lead concentrations are compared to the EPA screening level of 400 mg/kg for residential soil
Page 1 of 7
NCDEQ Tier 2 Risk Calculator Output Forms
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, NC
Exposure Unit #1
Non-Residential Worker Soil Combined Pathways Output Form
CAS #Chemical Name:
Ingestion
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Dermal
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Inhalation
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Ingestion
Carcinogenic
Risk
Dermal
Carcinogenic
Risk
Inhalation
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Ingestion Hazard
Quotient
Dermal Hazard
Quotient
Inhalation Hazard
Quotient
Calculated Non-
Carcinogenic Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 0.0899 0.0899 0.0899 8.6E-08 4.5E-08 1.3E-07
7440-36-0 Antimony (metallic)0.116 0.116 0.116 2.5E-04 2.5E-04
7440-38-2 Arsenic, Inorganic 5.53 5.53 5.53 1.5E-06 3.2E-07 5.3E-12 1.8E-06 9.5E-03 2.0E-03 2.3E-07 1.1E-02
71-43-2 Benzene 0.00137 0.00137 0.00137 2.3E-11 2.3E-10 2.5E-10 2.9E-07 2.7E-06 3.0E-06
7440-41-7 Beryllium and compounds 0.104 0.104 0.104 5.5E-14 5.5E-14 4.5E-05 3.2E-09 4.5E-05
74-83-9 Bromomethane 0.00162 0.00162 0.00162 9.9E-07 2.3E-05 2.4E-05
7440-43-9 Cadmium (Diet)0.138 0.138 0.138 5.5E-14 5.5E-14 1.2E-04 2.0E-05 8.6E-09 1.4E-04
7440-47-3 Chromium, Total 10.1 10.1 10.1
7440-50-8 Copper 4.49 4.49 4.49 9.6E-05 9.6E-05
98-82-8 Cumene 0.00383 0.00383 0.00383 3.3E-08 3.3E-07 3.6E-07
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 0.00217 0.00217 0.00217 7.3E-12 7.2E-11 7.9E-11 1.9E-08 8.1E-08 9.9E-08
7439-92-1 ~Lead and Compounds 9.72 9.72 9.72 <SL <SL <SL
7439-96-5 Manganese (Non-diet)90.3 90.3 90.3 3.2E-03 1.1E-06 3.2E-03
75-09-2 Methylene Chloride 0.00343 0.00343 0.00343 2.1E-12 8.8E-13 3.0E-12 4.9E-07 4.1E-07 9.0E-07
7440-02-0 Nickel Soluble Salts 5.45 5.45 5.45 3.1E-13 3.1E-13 2.3E-04 3.8E-08 2.3E-04
50-32-8 ~Benzo[a]pyrene 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 7.7E-08 4.2E-08 8.4E-15 1.2E-07
53-70-3 ~Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 0.0409 0.0409 0.0409 9.1E-08 5.0E-08 1.1E-14 1.4E-07
7782-49-2 Selenium 0.319 0.319 0.319 5.5E-05 9.9E-12 5.5E-05
7440-28-0 Thallium (Soluble Salts)0.2 0.2 0.2 1.7E-02 1.7E-02
108-88-3 Toluene 0.00156 0.00156 0.00156 1.7E-08 1.5E-08 3.2E-08
1330-20-7 Xylenes 0.00166 0.00166 0.00166 7.1E-09 6.1E-07 6.2E-07
7440-66-6 Zinc and Compounds 16.6 16.6 16.6 4.7E-05 4.7E-05
Cumulative:2.1E-06 3.3E-02
Notes:
(1) <SL indicates that lead concentrations are compared to the EPA screening level of 800 mg/kg for commerical/industrial soil
Page 2 of 7
NCDEQ Tier 2 Risk Calculator Output Forms
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, NC
Exposure Unit #1
User-defined (Recreator/Trespasser) Soil Combined Pathways Output Form
CAS #Chemical Name:
Ingestion
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Dermal
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Inhalation
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Ingestion
Carcinogenic
Risk
Dermal
Carcinogenic
Risk
Inhalation
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Ingestion Hazard
Quotient
Dermal Hazard
Quotient
Inhalation Hazard
Quotient
Calculated Non-
Carcinogenic Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 0.0899 0.0899 0.0899 7.1E-07 8.7E-09 7.2E-07
7440-36-0 Antimony (metallic)0.116 0.116 0.116 2.1E-03 2.1E-03
7440-38-2 Arsenic, Inorganic 5.53 5.53 5.53 4.0E-06 5.6E-07 1.1E-12 4.5E-06 7.9E-02 9.3E-03 4.5E-08 8.8E-02
71-43-2 Benzene 0.00137 0.00137 0.00137 6.0E-11 4.6E-11 1.1E-10 2.4E-06 5.3E-07 3.0E-06
7440-41-7 Beryllium and compounds 0.104 0.104 0.104 1.1E-14 1.1E-14 3.7E-04 6.3E-10 3.7E-04
74-83-9 Bromomethane 0.00162 0.00162 0.00162 8.2E-06 4.5E-06 1.3E-05
7440-43-9 Cadmium (Diet)0.138 0.138 0.138 1.1E-14 1.1E-14 9.8E-04 9.3E-05 1.7E-09 1.1E-03
7440-47-3 Chromium, Total 10.1 10.1 10.1
7440-50-8 Copper 4.49 4.49 4.49 8.0E-04 8.0E-04
98-82-8 Cumene 0.00383 0.00383 0.00383 2.7E-07 6.3E-08 3.4E-07
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 0.00217 0.00217 0.00217 1.9E-11 1.5E-11 3.4E-11 1.5E-07 1.6E-08 1.7E-07
7439-92-1 ~Lead and Compounds 9.72 9.72 9.72 <SL <SL <SL
7439-96-5 Manganese (Non-diet)90.3 90.3 90.3 2.7E-02 2.2E-07 2.7E-02
75-09-2 Methylene Chloride 0.00343 0.00343 0.00343 2.5E-11 4.9E-13 2.5E-11 4.1E-06 8.0E-08 4.2E-06
7440-02-0 Nickel Soluble Salts 5.45 5.45 5.45 6.4E-14 6.4E-14 1.9E-03 7.3E-09 1.9E-03
50-32-8 ~Benzo[a]pyrene 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 9.2E-07 3.1E-07 4.7E-15 1.2E-06
53-70-3 ~Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 0.0409 0.0409 0.0409 1.1E-06 3.6E-07 6.1E-15 1.4E-06
7782-49-2 Selenium 0.319 0.319 0.319 4.5E-04 1.9E-12 4.5E-04
7440-28-0 Thallium (Soluble Salts)0.2 0.2 0.2 1.4E-01 1.4E-01
108-88-3 Toluene 0.00156 0.00156 0.00156 1.4E-07 3.0E-09 1.4E-07
1330-20-7 Xylenes 0.00166 0.00166 0.00166 5.9E-08 1.2E-07 1.8E-07
7440-66-6 Zinc and Compounds 16.6 16.6 16.6 3.9E-04 3.9E-04
Cumulative:7.2E-06 2.6E-01
Notes:
(1) <SL indicates that lead concentrations are compared to the EPA screening level of 400 mg/kg for residential soil
Page 3 of 7
NCDEQ Tier 2 Risk Calculator Output Forms
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, NC
Exposure Unit #2
Resident Soil Combined Pathways Output Form
CAS #Chemical Name:
Ingestion
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Dermal
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Inhalation
Concentration
(mg/kg)*
Ingestion
Carcinogenic
Risk
Dermal
Carcinogenic
Risk
Inhalation
Carcinogenic
Risk*
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Ingestion Hazard
Quotient
Dermal Hazard
Quotient
Inhalation Hazard
Quotient*
Calculated Non-
Carcinogenic Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 0.62 0.62 0.62 8.8E-06 1.3E-06 1.0E-05
7429-90-5 Aluminum 3810 3810 3810 4.9E-02 2.0E-06 4.9E-02
7440-36-0 Antimony (metallic)0.424 0.424 0.424 1.4E-02 1.4E-02
7440-38-2 Arsenic, Inorganic 5.861 5.861 5.861 7.6E-06 1.1E-06 2.4E-11 8.7E-06 1.5E-01 1.8E-02 1.0E-06 1.7E-01
7440-39-3 Barium 4.31 4.31 4.31 2.8E-04 2.2E-08 2.8E-04
71-43-2 Benzene 0.00157 0.00157 0.00157 1.2E-10 1.1E-09 1.3E-09 5.0E-06 1.3E-05 1.8E-05
7440-41-7 Beryllium and compounds 0.402 0.402 0.402 9.3E-13 9.3E-13 2.6E-03 5.2E-08 2.6E-03
111-44-4 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 0.249 0.249 0.249 3.9E-07 6.4E-07 1.0E-06
74-83-9 Bromomethane 0.00282 0.00282 0.00282 2.6E-05 1.7E-04 2.0E-04
7440-43-9 Cadmium (Diet)0.365 0.365 0.365 6.4E-13 6.4E-13 4.7E-03 4.4E-04 9.5E-08 5.1E-03
7440-47-3 Chromium, Total 19.95 19.95 19.95
7440-50-8 Copper 122.2 122.2 122.2 3.9E-02 3.9E-02
98-82-8 Cumene 0.0272 0.0272 0.0272 3.5E-06 9.7E-06 1.3E-05
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 0.0036 0.0036 0.0036 5.7E-11 5.2E-10 5.8E-10 4.6E-07 5.6E-07 1.0E-06
132-64-9 ~Dibenzofuran 0.246 0.246 0.246 3.1E-03 2.2E-04 3.4E-03
118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene 0.292 0.292 0.292 6.7E-07 6.5E-07 1.3E-06 4.7E-03 4.7E-03
7439-89-6 Iron 2320 2320 2320 4.2E-02 4.2E-02
7439-92-1 ~Lead and Compounds 135.9 135.9 135.9 <SL**<SL**<SL**
7439-96-5 Manganese (Non-diet)270 270 270 1.4E-01 1.4E-05 1.4E-01
7439-97-6 ~Mercury (elemental)3.445 3.445 3.445 2.9E-01 2.9E-01
78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)0.0478 0.0478 0.0478 1.0E-06 6.9E-07 1.7E-06
7440-02-0 Nickel Soluble Salts 7.158 7.158 7.158 1.8E-12 1.8E-12 4.6E-03 2.1E-07 4.6E-03
621-64-7 Nitroso-di-N-propylamine, N-0.227 0.227 0.227 2.3E-06 6.4E-07 4.4E-13 2.9E-06
120-12-7 ~Anthracene 0.113 0.113 0.113 4.8E-06 1.5E-06 6.3E-06
56-55-3 ~Benz[a]anthracene 0.526 0.526 0.526 2.5E-06 8.4E-07 1.2E-08 3.4E-06
50-32-8 ~Benzo[a]pyrene 0.405 0.405 0.405 1.9E-05 6.4E-06 1.2E-12 2.6E-05
205-99-2 ~Benzo[b]fluoranthene 0.444 0.444 0.444 2.1E-06 7.1E-07 1.3E-13 2.8E-06
207-08-9 ~Benzo[k]fluoranthene 0.239 0.239 0.239 1.1E-07 3.8E-08 7.0E-14 1.5E-07
218-01-9 ~Chrysene 0.444 0.444 0.444 2.1E-08 7.1E-09 1.3E-14 2.8E-08
53-70-3 ~Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 0.0792 0.0792 0.0792 3.8E-06 1.3E-06 2.5E-13 5.0E-06
206-44-0 ~Fluoranthene 0.534 0.534 0.534 1.7E-04 5.3E-05 2.2E-04
193-39-5 ~Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene 0.163 0.163 0.163 7.8E-07 2.6E-07 4.8E-14 1.0E-06
129-00-0 ~Pyrene 0.582 0.582 0.582 2.5E-04 7.7E-05 3.2E-04
7782-49-2 Selenium 0.895 0.895 0.895 2.3E-03 1.2E-10 2.3E-03
7440-22-4 Silver 0.212 0.212 0.212 5.4E-04 5.4E-04
7440-28-0 Thallium (Soluble Salts)0.103 0.103 0.103 1.3E-01 1.3E-01
108-88-3 Toluene 0.00494 0.00494 0.00494 7.9E-07 2.0E-07 9.9E-07
7440-62-2 Vanadium and Compounds 6.67 6.67 6.67 1.7E-02 1.7E-07 1.7E-02
1330-20-7 Xylenes 0.00179 0.00179 0.00179 1.1E-07 2.8E-06 2.9E-06
7440-66-6 Zinc and Compounds 303.2 303.2 303.2 1.3E-02 1.3E-02
Cumulative:5.2E-05 9.3E-01
Page 4 of 7
NCDEQ Tier 2 Risk Calculator Output Forms
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, NC
Exposure Unit #2
Non-Residential Worker Soil Combined Pathways Output Form
CAS #Chemical Name:
Ingestion
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Dermal
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Inhalation
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Ingestion
Carcinogenic
Risk
Dermal
Carcinogenic
Risk
Inhalation
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Ingestion Hazard
Quotient
Dermal Hazard
Quotient
Inhalation Hazard
Quotient
Calculated Non-
Carcinogenic Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 0.62 0.62 0.62 5.9E-07 3.1E-07 9.0E-07
7429-90-5 Aluminum 3810 3810 3810 3.3E-03 4.7E-07 3.3E-03
7440-36-0 Antimony (metallic)0.424 0.424 0.424 9.1E-04 9.1E-04
7440-38-2 Arsenic, Inorganic 5.861 5.861 5.861 1.6E-06 3.4E-07 5.6E-12 2.0E-06 1.0E-02 2.1E-03 2.4E-07 1.2E-02
7440-39-3 Barium 4.31 4.31 4.31 1.8E-05 5.3E-09 1.8E-05
71-43-2 Benzene 0.00157 0.00157 0.00157 2.6E-11 2.6E-10 2.9E-10 3.4E-07 3.1E-06 3.5E-06
7440-41-7 Beryllium and compounds 0.402 0.402 0.402 2.1E-13 2.1E-13 1.7E-04 1.2E-08 1.7E-04
111-44-4 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 0.249 0.249 0.249 8.4E-08 1.5E-07 2.3E-07
74-83-9 Bromomethane 0.00282 0.00282 0.00282 1.7E-06 4.0E-05 4.2E-05
7440-43-9 Cadmium (Diet)0.365 0.365 0.365 1.5E-13 1.5E-13 3.1E-04 5.3E-05 2.3E-08 3.7E-04
7440-47-3 Chromium, Total 19.95 19.95 19.95
7440-50-8 Copper 122.2 122.2 122.2 2.6E-03 2.6E-03
98-82-8 Cumene 0.0272 0.0272 0.0272 2.3E-07 2.3E-06 2.5E-06
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 0.0036 0.0036 0.0036 1.2E-11 1.2E-10 1.3E-10 3.1E-08 1.3E-07 1.6E-07
132-64-9 ~Dibenzofuran 0.246 0.246 0.246 2.1E-04 2.7E-05 2.4E-04
118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene 0.292 0.292 0.292 1.4E-07 1.5E-07 2.9E-07 3.1E-04 3.1E-04
7439-89-6 Iron 2320 2320 2320 2.8E-03 2.8E-03
7439-92-1 ~Lead and Compounds 135.9 135.9 135.9 <SL <SL <SL
7439-96-5 Manganese (Non-diet)270 270 270 9.6E-03 3.3E-06 9.6E-03
7439-97-6 ~Mercury (elemental)3.445 3.445 3.445 7.0E-02 7.0E-02
78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)0.0478 0.0478 0.0478 6.8E-08 1.7E-07 2.3E-07
7440-02-0 Nickel Soluble Salts 7.158 7.158 7.158 4.1E-13 4.1E-13 3.1E-04 4.9E-08 3.1E-04
621-64-7 Nitroso-di-N-propylamine, N-0.227 0.227 0.227 4.9E-07 2.1E-07 1.0E-13 6.9E-07
120-12-7 ~Anthracene 0.113 0.113 0.113 3.2E-07 1.8E-07 5.0E-07
56-55-3 ~Benz[a]anthracene 0.526 0.526 0.526 1.2E-07 6.5E-08 9.9E-10 1.8E-07
50-32-8 ~Benzo[a]pyrene 0.405 0.405 0.405 9.0E-07 5.0E-07 9.9E-14 1.4E-06
205-99-2 ~Benzo[b]fluoranthene 0.444 0.444 0.444 9.9E-08 5.5E-08 1.1E-14 1.5E-07
207-08-9 ~Benzo[k]fluoranthene 0.239 0.239 0.239 5.3E-09 2.9E-09 5.8E-15 8.3E-09
218-01-9 ~Chrysene 0.444 0.444 0.444 9.9E-10 5.5E-10 1.1E-15 1.5E-09
53-70-3 ~Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 0.0792 0.0792 0.0792 1.8E-07 9.7E-08 2.1E-14 2.7E-07
206-44-0 ~Fluoranthene 0.534 0.534 0.534 1.1E-05 6.3E-06 1.8E-05
193-39-5 ~Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene 0.163 0.163 0.163 3.6E-08 2.0E-08 4.0E-15 5.6E-08
129-00-0 ~Pyrene 0.582 0.582 0.582 1.7E-05 9.1E-06 2.6E-05
7782-49-2 Selenium 0.895 0.895 0.895 1.5E-04 2.8E-11 1.5E-04
7440-22-4 Silver 0.212 0.212 0.212 3.6E-05 3.6E-05
7440-28-0 Thallium (Soluble Salts)0.103 0.103 0.103 8.8E-03 8.8E-03
108-88-3 Toluene 0.00494 0.00494 0.00494 5.3E-08 4.9E-08 1.0E-07
7440-62-2 Vanadium and Compounds 6.67 6.67 6.67 1.1E-03 4.1E-08 1.1E-03
1330-20-7 Xylenes 0.00179 0.00179 0.00179 7.7E-09 6.6E-07 6.7E-07
7440-66-6 Zinc and Compounds 303.2 303.2 303.2 8.7E-04 8.7E-04
Cumulative:5.2E-06 1.1E-01
Page 5 of 7
NCDEQ Tier 2 Risk Calculator Output Forms
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, NC
Exposure Unit #2
User-defined (Recreator/Trespasser) Soil Combined Pathways Output Form
CAS #Chemical Name:
Ingestion
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Dermal
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Inhalation
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Ingestion
Carcinogenic
Risk
Dermal
Carcinogenic
Risk
Inhalation
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Ingestion Hazard
Quotient
Dermal Hazard
Quotient
Inhalation Hazard
Quotient
Calculated Non-
Carcinogenic Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 0.62 0.62 0.62 4.9E-06 6.0E-08 5.0E-06
7429-90-5 Aluminum 3810 3810 3810 2.7E-02 9.2E-08 2.7E-02
7440-36-0 Antimony (metallic)0.424 0.424 0.424 7.6E-03 7.6E-03
7440-38-2 Arsenic, Inorganic 5.861 5.861 5.861 4.2E-06 5.9E-07 1.1E-12 4.8E-06 8.3E-02 9.9E-03 4.7E-08 9.3E-02
7440-39-3 Barium 4.31 4.31 4.31 1.5E-04 1.0E-09 1.5E-04
71-43-2 Benzene 0.00157 0.00157 0.00157 6.9E-11 5.3E-11 1.2E-10 2.8E-06 6.1E-07 3.4E-06
7440-41-7 Beryllium and compounds 0.402 0.402 0.402 4.3E-14 4.3E-14 1.4E-03 2.4E-09 1.4E-03
111-44-4 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 0.249 0.249 0.249 2.2E-07 3.0E-08 2.5E-07
74-83-9 Bromomethane 0.00282 0.00282 0.00282 1.4E-05 7.9E-06 2.2E-05
7440-43-9 Cadmium (Diet)0.365 0.365 0.365 3.0E-14 3.0E-14 2.6E-03 2.5E-04 4.4E-09 2.8E-03
7440-47-3 Chromium, Total 19.95 19.95 19.95
7440-50-8 Copper 122.2 122.2 122.2 2.2E-02 2.2E-02
98-82-8 Cumene 0.0272 0.0272 0.0272 1.9E-06 4.5E-07 2.4E-06
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 0.0036 0.0036 0.0036 3.2E-11 2.4E-11 5.6E-11 2.6E-07 2.6E-08 2.8E-07
132-64-9 ~Dibenzofuran 0.246 0.246 0.246 1.8E-03 1.2E-04 1.9E-03
118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene 0.292 0.292 0.292 3.7E-07 3.0E-08 4.0E-07 2.6E-03 2.6E-03
7439-89-6 Iron 2320 2320 2320 2.4E-02 2.4E-02
7439-92-1 ~Lead and Compounds 135.9 135.9 135.9 <SL <SL <SL
7439-96-5 Manganese (Non-diet)270 270 270 8.0E-02 6.5E-07 8.0E-02
7439-97-6 ~Mercury (elemental)3.445 3.445 3.445 1.4E-02 1.4E-02
78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)0.0478 0.0478 0.0478 5.7E-07 3.2E-08 6.0E-07
7440-02-0 Nickel Soluble Salts 7.158 7.158 7.158 8.4E-14 8.4E-14 2.5E-03 9.6E-09 2.5E-03
621-64-7 Nitroso-di-N-propylamine, N-0.227 0.227 0.227 1.3E-06 3.6E-07 2.0E-14 1.6E-06
120-12-7 ~Anthracene 0.113 0.113 0.113 2.7E-06 8.3E-07 3.5E-06
56-55-3 ~Benz[a]anthracene 0.526 0.526 0.526 1.4E-06 4.7E-07 5.6E-10 1.9E-06
50-32-8 ~Benzo[a]pyrene 0.405 0.405 0.405 1.1E-05 3.6E-06 5.5E-14 1.4E-05
205-99-2 ~Benzo[b]fluoranthene 0.444 0.444 0.444 1.2E-06 3.9E-07 6.1E-15 1.6E-06
207-08-9 ~Benzo[k]fluoranthene 0.239 0.239 0.239 6.3E-08 2.1E-08 3.3E-15 8.5E-08
218-01-9 ~Chrysene 0.444 0.444 0.444 1.2E-08 3.9E-09 6.1E-16 1.6E-08
53-70-3 ~Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 0.0792 0.0792 0.0792 2.1E-06 7.0E-07 1.2E-14 2.8E-06
206-44-0 ~Fluoranthene 0.534 0.534 0.534 9.5E-05 2.9E-05 1.2E-04
193-39-5 ~Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene 0.163 0.163 0.163 4.3E-07 1.4E-07 2.2E-15 5.8E-07
129-00-0 ~Pyrene 0.582 0.582 0.582 1.4E-04 4.3E-05 1.8E-04
7782-49-2 Selenium 0.895 0.895 0.895 1.3E-03 5.4E-12 1.3E-03
7440-22-4 Silver 0.212 0.212 0.212 3.0E-04 3.0E-04
7440-28-0 Thallium (Soluble Salts)0.103 0.103 0.103 7.3E-02 7.3E-02
108-88-3 Toluene 0.00494 0.00494 0.00494 4.4E-07 9.5E-09 4.5E-07
7440-62-2 Vanadium and Compounds 6.67 6.67 6.67 9.5E-03 8.1E-09 9.5E-03
1330-20-7 Xylenes 0.00179 0.00179 0.00179 6.4E-08 1.3E-07 1.9E-07
7440-66-6 Zinc and Compounds 303.2 303.2 303.2 7.2E-03 7.2E-03
Cumulative:2.8E-05 3.7E-01
Page 6 of 7
NCDEQ Tier 2 Risk Calculator Output Forms
Parcels 0390000901, 03900011, and 03900008
Battle Ship Rd NE, Leland, NC
Exposure Unit #3
Construction Worker Combined Soil Pathways Output Form
CAS #Chemical Name:
Ingestion
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Dermal
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Inhalation
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Ingestion
Carcinogenic
Risk
Dermal
Carcinogenic
Risk
Inhalation
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Ingestion Hazard
Quotient
Dermal Hazard
Quotient
Inhalation Hazard
Quotient
Calculated Non-
Carcinogenic Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 0.133 0.133 0.133 2.0E-07 3.3E-07 5.3E-07
7440-36-0 Antimony (metallic)0.161 0.161 0.161 1.2E-03 1.2E-03
7440-38-2 Arsenic, Inorganic 33.7 33.7 33.7 1.2E-06 2.0E-07 4.5E-07 1.9E-06 2.0E-01 3.2E-02 5.0E-01 7.4E-01
7440-41-7 Beryllium and compounds 0.497 0.497 0.497 3.7E-09 3.7E-09 2.9E-04 5.6E-03 5.9E-03
7440-43-9 Cadmium (Diet)0.0441 0.0441 0.0441 2.4E-10 2.4E-10 1.3E-04 1.7E-05 9.9E-04 1.1E-03
7440-47-3 Chromium, Total 22.1 22.1 22.1
7440-50-8 Copper 8.58 8.58 8.58 2.5E-03 2.5E-03
118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene 0.326 0.326 0.326 2.1E-08 3.2E-08 5.4E-08 9.6E-02 9.6E-02
7439-92-1 ~Lead and Compounds 32.1 32.1 32.1 <SL <SL <SL
7439-96-5 Manganese (Non-diet)74.8 74.8 74.8 9.2E-03 3.4E-01 3.5E-01
7439-97-6 ~Mercury (elemental)0.122 0.122 0.122 1.3E-02 1.3E-02
78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)0.0144 0.0144 0.0144 2.1E-08 1.3E-06 1.3E-06
75-09-2 Methylene Chloride 0.00309 0.00309 0.00309 2.5E-13 2.0E-13 4.5E-13 1.5E-07 1.4E-06 1.6E-06
7440-02-0 Nickel Soluble Salts 5.17 5.17 5.17 4.1E-09 4.1E-09 7.6E-04 5.8E-03 6.6E-03
120-12-7 ~Anthracene 0.056 0.056 0.056 1.7E-07 6.9E-08 2.3E-07
56-55-3 ~Benz[a]anthracene 0.355 0.355 0.355 1.0E-08 4.4E-09 2.5E-10 1.5E-08
50-32-8 ~Benzo[a]pyrene 0.349 0.349 0.349 1.0E-07 4.3E-08 1.2E-09 1.5E-07
205-99-2 ~Benzo[b]fluoranthene 0.416 0.416 0.416 1.2E-08 5.1E-09 1.4E-10 1.8E-08
207-08-9 ~Benzo[k]fluoranthene 0.22 0.22 0.22 6.5E-10 2.7E-10 7.4E-11 9.9E-10
218-01-9 ~Chrysene 0.353 0.353 0.353 1.0E-10 4.3E-11 1.2E-11 1.6E-10
53-70-3 ~Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 0.054 0.054 0.054 1.6E-08 6.6E-09 2.0E-10 2.3E-08
206-44-0 ~Fluoranthene 0.508 0.508 0.508 1.5E-05 6.2E-06 2.1E-05
193-39-5 ~Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene 0.176 0.176 0.176 5.2E-09 2.2E-09 6.0E-11 7.4E-09
129-00-0 ~Pyrene 0.506 0.506 0.506 5.0E-06 2.1E-06 7.0E-06
7782-49-2 Selenium 0.675 0.675 0.675 4.0E-04 7.6E-06 4.1E-04
7440-22-4 Silver 0.0336 0.0336 0.0336 2.0E-05 2.0E-05
7440-28-0 Thallium (Soluble Salts)0.0808 0.0808 0.0808 6.0E-03 6.0E-03
NA Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Aliphatic
High)10.7 10.7 10.7 1.1E-06 1.1E-06
NA Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Aliphatic
Medium)6.68 6.68 6.68 2.0E-04 6.8E-02 6.8E-02
NA Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Aromatic
High)24.8 24.8 24.8 1.8E-04 5.9E-05 2.4E-04
7440-66-6 Zinc and Compounds 29.2 29.2 29.2 2.9E-04 2.9E-04
Cumulative:2.1E-06 1.3E+00
Page 7 of 7