NC0003468_DRSS CAP Part I_Appx B_Final_20151112

Appendix B
Background Well
Analysis

This page intentionally left blank
1
Background Monitoring Well Determinations
DRSS is a former coal-fired electricity generating facility along the Dan River. The natural
topography at the DRSS site generally slopes from the northwest to the southeast and ranges
from approximately 606 feet above mean sea level (msl) near the northern property boundary to
approximately 482 feet msl at the interface with the Dan River.
In June and September 2015, groundwater elevations were collected from on-site NPDES
compliance wells, voluntary wells, and newly installed CSA monitoring wells. Groundwater flow
was measured into a shallow (S/D wells) flow layer and a fractured bedrock (BR wells) flow
layer, and groundwater flow direction was estimated by contouring elevations in each flow layer.
In general, groundwater within the shallow and the fractured bedrock flow layers flows from the
northern extent of the DRSS property boundary south and southeast toward the Dan River.
The CSA submitted to the NCDEQ in August 2015 identified the ash storage areas and the
Primary and Secondary Cells of the ash basin system at the DRSS as potential source areas for
groundwater contamination. The ground surface elevations of the Primary and Secondary Cells
are approximately 540 feet and 530 feet msl, respectively. The ground surface elevations of Ash
Storage Area 1 and 2 are approximately 648 and 580, respectively. Ash porewater elevations
within the Primary and Secondary Cells were measured at approximately 520 feet msl in
September 2015 and have ranged (2011 to 2015) from approximately 518 feet to 526 feet msl.
Ash porewater elevations within Ash Storage Areas 1 and 2 were measured at approximately
544 feet msl and 549 feet msl, respectively.
Wells were chosen to represent background groundwater quality based on their horizontal
distance from the source area or waste boundary, the relative topographic and groundwater
elevation difference compared to the nearest ash basin surface or porewater, and the
determined groundwater flow direction. A summary table of information regarding the well and
groundwater is provided below. Each well or well pair is then described in more detail.
2
Table B-1. Background Monitoring Well Information
Well ID
Distance and
Direction from Source
Area
Groundwater
Flow
Direction
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft msl)
Elevation
of
Screened
Interval
(ft msl)
Elevation of
Groundwater
(ft msl)
Elevation
of
Adjacent
Source
Area
(ft msl)
Ash Basin
(Primary/
Secondary
Cell)
Ash
Storage
Area
(Ash
Storage
1 & 2)
MW-23D 3,200 feet
NW
2,200
feet
W
SE 524 504-514 517
580
(Ash
Storage
Area 2)
MW-23BR 3,200 feet
NW
2,200
feet
W
SE 524 463-468 ~527
(artesian)
580
(Ash
Storage
Area)
GWA-9S 2,100 feet
NW
375 feet
N SE 608 561-576 581.5
580
(Ash
Storage
Area)
GWA-9D 2,100 feet
NW
375 feet
N S 608 536-541 580.37
580
(Ash
Storage
Area)
GWA-12S 2,300 feet
NW
1,000
feet
W
S 582 567-577 572.49
580
(Ash
Storage
Area)
GWA-12D 2,300 feet
NW
1,000
feet
W
S 582 550-555 564.31
580
(Ash
Storage
Area)
BG-5S 2,700 feet
NW
2,200
feet SW SW 512 491-501 507.29
580
(Ash
Storage
Area)
BG-5D 2,700 feet
NW
2,200
feet SW SW 512 478-483 507.17
580
(Ash
Storage
Area)
BG-1D 1,800 feet
SW
3,200
feet SW S 513 499-504 500.38
540
(Primary
Cell)

3
MW-23D and MW-23BR
Monitoring well MW-23D was installed as a compliance background well for the NPDES
groundwater monitoring program and is paired with deep well MW-23BR, installed as part of the
CSA.

 The ground surface elevation at the MW-23D and MW-23BR well pair is approximately
524 feet msl, which is approximately 56 feet lower than the ground surface elevation at
Ash Storage Area 2.
 The monitoring well pair is located approximately 2,200 feet northwest of Ash Storage
Area 2 and is located approximately 200 feet from the unnamed stream on the western
boundary of the site.
 MW-23D is screened from approximately 10 to 20 feet below ground surface in the
shallow flow layer.
 MW-23D well screen interval elevation is approximately 504.47 to 514.47 feet msl with a
mean water level elevation (2011 to 2015) of approximately 517 feet msl indicating that
groundwater at this location is approximately 27 lower than the ash basin porewater
elevation in Ash Storage Area 2.
 MW-23BR is screened from approximately 56 feet to 61 feet below ground surface in the
fractured bedrock flow layer.
 MW-23BR well screen interval elevation is approximately 468.46 to 463.46 feet. During
the CSA groundwater sampling event, MW-23BR was noted to be under artesian
conditions suggesting a strong positive vertical hydraulic gradient. The groundwater
elevation at MW-23BR was approximated above the top of casing elevation of 527.22
feet.
 Based on extrapolation of groundwater flow data from on-site wells and evaluation of
topographic data, groundwater in wells MW-23D and MW-23BR originates from off-site
properties north and northeast of the well pair. These properties are used for residential
and recreational purposes and are not expected to contribute site-specific COIs to
groundwater at this location.

Though topographically and hydraulically lower than the source area, monitoring wells MW-23D
and MW-23BR is considered to be representative of background water quality relative to the ash
disposal areas at the site based on the horizontal distance from the waste boundary to the
monitoring well, the relative distance from the unnamed stream on the western boundary of the
site (hydrogeologic discharge zone), and the determined groundwater flow direction.

4
GWA-9S and GWA-9D
Monitoring wells GWA-9S and GWA-9D were installed as a shallow and deep groundwater
assessment well pair to characterize soil and groundwater outside the waste boundary of the
ash basin and ash storage areas.

 The ground surface elevation at this monitoring well pair is approximately 608 feet,
which is approximately 64 feet higher than the ground surface elevation of Ash Storage
Area 2.
 The water elevation within Ash Storage Area 2 (measured in June 2015) was
approximately 544 feet.
 The monitoring well pair is located approximately 375 feet north of the northern end of
Ash Storage Area 2.
 GWA-9S is screened from approximately 32 feet to 47 feet below ground surface in the
shallow flow layer.
 GWA-9S well screen interval elevation is approximately 561.87 to 576.87 feet with a
groundwater elevation of approximately 581.50 feet in June 2015 indicating that
groundwater at this well is higher than the elevation of the nearest source area..
 GWA-9D is screened from approximately 67 to 72 feet below ground surface in the deep
(transition zone) flow layer.
 GWA-9D screen interval elevation is approximately 536.41 to 541.41 feet with a
groundwater elevation of 580.37 feet in June 2015 indicating that groundwater at this
well is higher than the elevation of the nearest source area.
 Based on extrapolation of groundwater flow data from on-site wells and evaluation of
topographic data, groundwater mounding is present in the shallow flow layer at well MW-
9D. Groundwater flow in the deep flow layer originates from off-site properties north of
the well pair. These properties are used for residential purposes and are not expected
to contribute site-specific COIs to groundwater at this location.

The horizontal distance from the waste boundary to the monitoring wells, the relative
topographic and groundwater elevations, measured elevation differences between the
monitoring wells and the nearest ash basin porewater, determined groundwater flow direction,
that GWA-9S and GWA-9D represent background water quality relative to the ash disposal
areas at DRSS.

GWA-12S and GWA-12D
Monitoring wells GWA-12S and GWA-12D were installed as a shallow and deep groundwater
assessment well pair to characterize soil and groundwater outside the waste boundary of the
ash basin and ash storage areas.

 The ground surface elevation at the GWA-12 well pair is approximately 582 feet msl,
which is approximately 42 feet higher than the ground surface elevation at Ash Storage
Area 2.
5
 The monitoring well pair is located approximately 1,000 feet west of Ash Storage Area 2.
 GWA-12S is screened from approximately 5.5 feet to 15.5 feet below ground surface in
the shallow flow layer.
 GWA-12S well screen interval elevation is approximately 567 to 577 feet with a water
elevation measurement of 572.49 in June 2015 indicating that groundwater at this well
location is at least 26 feet above the ash basin porewater elevation.
 GWA-12D is screened from approximately 27 feet to 32 feet below ground surface in the
shallow flow layer.
 GWA-12D well screen interval elevation is approximately 550 to 555 feet with a water
elevation measurement of 564.31 in June 2015 indicating that groundwater at this well
location is at least 16 feet above the ash basin porewater elevation.
 Based on extrapolation of groundwater flow data from on-site wells and evaluation of
topographic data, groundwater in wells MW-12S and MW-12D originates from off-site
properties north of the well pair. These properties are used for residential purposes and
are not expected to contribute site-specific COIs to groundwater at this location.

Based on the horizontal distance from the waste boundary to the monitoring wells, the relative
topographic and groundwater elevations measured elevation differences between the
monitoring wells and the nearest ash basin surface water, and the determined groundwater flow
direction, monitoring wells GWA-12S and GWA-12D represent background water quality relative
to the ash disposal areas at the site.

BG-5S and BG-5D
Monitoring wells BG-5S and BG-5D were installed a shallow and deep groundwater assessment
well pair to characterize soil and groundwater in areas determined to be topographically cross-
gradient of the DRSS ash basin and ash storage areas.

 The ground surface elevation at this monitoring well pair is approximately 512 feet.
The ground surface elevation at Ash Storage Area 2 is approximately 580 feet.
 The monitoring well pair is located approximately 2,200 feet west of Ash Storage Area 2.
 BG-5S is screened from approximately 10.5 feet to 20.5 feet below ground surface in the
shallow flow layer.
 BG-5S well screen interval elevation is approximately 491.76 to 501.76 feet with a
groundwater elevation of approximately 507.29 feet in June 2015, indicating that
groundwater at this location is 33 feet below ash basin porewater elevation.
 BG-5D is screened from approximately 28 to 33 feet below ground surface in the deep
(transition zone) flow layer.
 BG-5D screen interval elevation is approximately 478.94 to 483.94 feet with a
groundwater elevation of 507.17 feet in June 2015.
 Based on extrapolation of groundwater flow data from on-site wells and evaluation of
topographic data, groundwater in wells BG-5S and BG-5D originates from portions of the
DRSS site north and northeast of the well pair and upgradient of source areas. This
6
portion of the DRSS site has not been impacted by historical ash handling and is not
expected to contribute site-specific COIs to groundwater at this location.

Though topographically lower than the source area, monitoring wells BG-5S and BG-5D are
considered to be cross-gradient based on the direction of groundwater flow, the horizontal
distance from the nearest source area, and the proximity to the nearest hydrogeologic
discharge area (unnamed stream approximately 100 feet to the west).

BG-1D
Monitoring well BG-1D was installed in an area assumed to not be impacted by and
topographically cross gradient of the DRSS ash basin and ash storage areas.

 The ground surface elevation at BG-1D is approximately 513 feet msl, which is
approximately 27 feet lower than the ground surface elevation at the Primary Cell.
 The monitoring well is located approximately 3,700 feet west and cross-gradient of the
Primary Cell.
 The well is also located approximately 120 feet from the Dan River to the south.
 BG-1D is screened from approximately 9 to 14 feet below ground surface in the shallow
flow layer.
 BG-1D screen interval elevation is approximately 499.29 feet to 504.29 feet msl with a
groundwater elevation of 500.38 feet msl in June 2015 indicating that groundwater at
this location is approximately 20 feet lower that the ash basin porewater elevation.
 Based on extrapolation of groundwater flow data from on-site wells and evaluation of
topographic data, groundwater in well BG-1D originates from portions of the DRSS site
north and northeast of the well and upgradient of source areas. Further, this well is
separated from upgradient portions of the DRSS site by the western tributary. This
portion of the DRSS site has not been impacted by historical ash handling and is not
expected to contribute site-specific COIs to groundwater at this location.

Though topographically and hydraulically lower than the source area, monitoring well BG-1D is
considered to be representative of background water quality relative to the ash disposal areas at
the site based on the horizontal distance from the waste boundary to the monitoring well, the
relative distance from the Dan River (hydrogeologic discharge zone), and the determined
groundwater flow direction.

Turbidity and pH measurements were used to determine the whether data could be used to
develop proposed provisional background concentrations. Turbidity measurements greater than
10 NTUs and pH measurements greater than approximately 9 SUs were considered to be
above acceptable limits for use in statistical analysis.

 Turbidity measurements in well MW-23D in May and September 2013 ranged from 8.21
to 9.41. All other sampling events for this well showed turbidities greater than
10.Turbidity measurements in MW-23BR were 0.22 NTUs during the June 2015
7
sampling event. pH was measured in MW-23BR at 7.45 SUs in the June 2015 sampling
event. pH measurements from MW-23D ranged (January 2011 to June 2014) from 5.76
to 6.90.
 Turbidity measurements in GWA-9S and GWA-9D were higher than 10 NTU during the
June 2015 sampling event. Turbidity values at GWA-9S and GWA-9D were 235.9 and
16.28 respectively in June 2015. These wells were re-developed and resampled in
August 2015. Turbidities at that time were 7.2 and 0.9 NTUs respectively in the second
sampling round. pH values at GWA-9S and GWA-9D were 5.55 and 6.4 SU respectively
during the June sampling event.
 Turbidity measurements in GWA-12S and GWA-12D were 2.38 and 8.35 NTUs,
respectively during the June 2015 sampling event. pH measurements in GWA-12S and
GWA-12D were measured at 5.45 and 7.47 SUs in the June 2015 sampling event.
 Turbidity at BG-5S and BG-5Dwas lower than 10 NTU during the June 2015 sampling
event. pH at BG-5S and BG-5D was measured at 6.14 and 7.06 SU in June 2015.
 Turbidity measurements in BG-1D were 0.22 NTUs during the June 2015 sampling
event. pH measurements in BG-1D was measured at 7.45 SUs in the June 2015
sampling event.

In addition to looking at the pH and turbidity to assess the water quality, the data from the
proposed background wells was compared to the regional background concentrations of
constituents, where available, and the 2-10 Private Well data. These values are shown in Table
2-2 of the CAP Part I report. In general, the concentrations of COIs in the background wells are
within the range of both the regional background and the 2-10 data, with the following
exceptions:

 Cobalt concentrations match the regional background concentrations, but are slightly
higher than the 2-10 data.
 Iron concentrations match the wide range of the regional background concentrations but
are somewhat higher than the 2-10 data. Iron concentrations generally vary with
turbidity, and this could be the cause of this variation.
 Manganese generally matches the regional background concentration range, and is
higher than the 2-10 data.
 Sulfate concentrations in on-site background wells are higher than that measured in the
2-10 data. Sulfate concentrations have the same average as the regional data.
 Vanadium in site background wells is higher than the regional background
concentrations, but much lower (2-3 orders of magnitude) than the 2-10 data.

The water quality in the proposed background wells appears to be similar in many respects to
the regional published background concentrations for many constituents. Additional data being
collected in 2015 (for a total of four sampling rounds in 2015) will provide additional data for
decision-making.

Soil Background Statistics for Dan River

Steps for determining background threshold values (BTV) for soils:

Step 1: Collect an appropriate number of soil samples from the designated background or
reference areas. Assume same population. Conduct data validation on analytical data to
assess suitability of data for statistical analysis and decision making.

Step 2: Determine the data distribution. Depending upon the data distribution, uses parametric
or nonparametric methods to estimate BTVs.

Step 3: Check for outliers in data set. Remove outliers if it can be justified.

Step 4: Calculate BTVs
 Upper percentiles
 Upper prediction limits (UPLs)
 Upper tolerance limits (UTLs)
 Upper Simultaneous Limits (USLs) – New in ProUCL 5.0

Each BTV is described below (USEPA 2013):

 Upper Percentile, x0.95: Based upon an established background data set, a 95th
percentile represents that statistic such that 95% of the sampled data will be less than or
equal to (≤) x0.95 . It is expected that an observation coming from the background
population (or comparable to the background population) will be ≤ x0.95 with probability
0.95.

 Upper Tolerance Limit (UTL): Based upon an established background data set, a
UTL95-95 represents that statistic such that 95% observations (current and future) from
the target population (background, comparable to background) will be less than or equal
to the UTL95-95 with CC of 0.95. A UTL95-95 represents a 95% UCL of the 95th
percentile of the data distribution (population). A UTL95-95 is designed to
simultaneously provide coverage for 95% of all potential observations (current and
future) from the background population (or comparable to background) with a CC of
0.95. A UTL95-95 can be used when many (unknown) current or future onsite
observations need to be compared with a BTV. A parametric UTL95-95 takes the data
variability into account.

 Upper Prediction Limit (UPL): Based upon an established background data set, a 95%
UPL (UPL95) represents that statistic such that an independently collected new/future
observation from the target population (e.g., background, comparable to background)
will be less than or equal to the UPL95 with confidence coefficient (CC) of 0.95. We are
95% sure that a single future value from the background population will be less than the
UPL95 with CC= 0.95. A parametric UPL takes data variability into account.

 Upper Simultaneous Limit (USL): Based upon an established background data set free
of outliers and representing a single statistical population, a USL95 represents that
statistic such that all observations from the “established” background data set are less
than or equal to the USL95 with a CC of 0.95. A parametric USL takes the data
variability into account. It is expected that all current or future observations coming from
the background population (comparable to background population, unimpacted site
locations) will be less than or equal to the USL95 with CC, 0.95. The use of a USL as a
BTV estimate is suggested by the USEPA when a large number of onsite observations
(current or future) need to be compared with a BTV.

Approach:

 Attachment A presents the Dan River soil dataset. HDR completed a quality assurance
and quality control (QA/QC) data validation assessment (presented in separate
document) and has determined that the data meets project data quality objectives and is
suitable for statistical analysis and for establishing BTVs. Table 1 list the constituents
(23 samples and 30 constituents per sample)

 Next, HDR conducted Dixon’s outlier test for each constituent using ProUCL Version 5.0
software (USEPA 2013). Statically significant outliers were identified for 9 out of 30
constituents at the 5% significant level. Outliers can inflate background concentration
estimates (over estimate), where USEPA (2013) defines an outlier as Measurements
(usually larger or smaller than the majority of the data values in a sample) that are not
representative of the population from which they were drawn. The presence of outliers
distorts most statistics if used in any calculations. However, an outlier should only be
removed if there is justification for doing so (e.g., sample collected an area not
representative of background conditions). Dan River samples represent subsurface
soils collected from drilling operations. HDR has determined that samples meet data
quality objectives. As stated by the USEPA (2013), since the treatment and handling of
outliers is a controversial and subjective topic, it is suggested that the outliers be treated
on a site-specific basis using all existing knowledge about the site; and regional and site-
specific background areas. Because soil samples were collected at depths greater than
5 feet below ground surface, and there is no evidence of anthropogenic impacts at
depths greater than 5 feet below ground surface, the entire dataset was utilized for
establishing BTV (assumes no outliers).

 HDR used ProUCL Version 5.0, to calculate summary statistics, goodness of fit
(population distribution), and the BTV upper limits (UTL, UPL, and USL). Results are
summarized in Tables 1 and 2. The Kaplan Meier (KM) method was used for estimating
statistics with censored data (data with non-detections). ProUCL printouts are presented
in Appendix B.

Table 1. Summary Statistics for Subsurface Soils Dan River
Variable n1 Detect
Non-
Detects
KM
Mean
Detect
Mean
Detect
Median
KM
SD
Detect
SD
Detect
Min
Detect
Max
(mg/Kg)
Aluminum 23 23 0 21,380 21,380 19,800 8,149 8,149 7,360 38,900
Antimony 23 0 23 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
Arsenic 23 12 11 7.91 11.1 8.90 6.47 7.97 3.10 30.6
Barium 23 23 0 96.1 96.1 73.8 58.2 58.2 34.2 242
Beryllium 23 23 0 1.58 1.58 1.50 0.75 0.75 0.59 3.90
Boron 23 5 18 22.4 55.0 60.1 17.8 11.3 35.9 63.1
Cadmium 23 1 22 0.44 0.44 0.44 0 NS 0.44 0.44
Calcium 23 20 3 5,470 6,280 2,930 8,910 9,540 77.4 39,100
Chloride 23 1 22 168 168 168 0 NS 168 168
Chromium 23 23 0 36.2 36.2 27.1 39.0 39.0 6.40 187
Cobalt 23 23 0 18.1 18.1 16.7 7.71 7.71 7.50 42.6
Copper 23 23 0 46.2 46.2 57.0 23.9 23.9 2.80 79.5
Iron 23 23 0 43,309 43,309 42,700 19,433 19,433 12,200 95,900
Lead 23 23 0 17.3 17.3 17.5 5.40 5.40 8.20 31.3
Magnesium 23 23 0 7,077 7,077 5,090 5,289 5,289 924.0 19,400
Manganese 23 23 0 789 789 395 1,120 1,120 82.7 5,170
Mercury 23 17 6 0.012 0.014 0.009 0.010 0.012 0.005 0.040
Molybdenum 23 9 14 3.36 5.72 3.20 4.37 6.66 1.60 22.6
Nickel 23 23 0 28.2 28.2 27.5 13.5 13.5 6.70 52.2
Nitrate 23 0 23 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
pH (field) 23 23 0 6.34 6.34 6.00 1.29 1.29 4.50 8.60
Potassium 23 23 0 1,250 1,250 1,340 775 775 168 2,730
Selenium 23 2 21 4.07 5.85 5.85 0.80 2.76 3.90 7.80
Sodium 23 4 19 180 180 178 16.7 19.3 160 205
Strontium 23 23 0 46.0 46.0 21.8 58.6 58.6 1.90 257
Sulfate 23 3 20 189 189 179 40.63 49.76 145 243
Thallium 23 0 23 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
TOC 23 23 0 5,390 5,390 1,720 6,760 6,760 457 23,800
Vanadium 23 23 0 35.1 35.1 33.8 18.6 18.6 8.40 75.7
Zinc 23 23 0 99.3 99.3 91.4 50.4 50.4 23.5 203
1n = number of samples, KM = Kaplan Meier method (addresses data with non-detections, see USEPA 2013);
NS = No statistical analysis run due to too few detections; SD = standard deviation; TOC = total organic carbon

Table 2. Subsurface Soil Background Concentration Estimates Dan River
Constituent Distribution
95%
Percentile 95% UTL 95% UPL 95% USL
(mg/Kg)
Aluminum Normal 33,200 40,400 35,700 42,800
Antimony NS1 NS NS NS NS
Arsenic Normal 19.5 23.0 19.3 24.9
Barium Log Normal 210 281 208 328
Beryllium Normal 2.65 3.33 2.89 3.55
Boron Normal 61.9 63.9 53.7 69.1
Cadmium NS NS NS NS NS
Calcium Log Normal 22,530 118,100 39,950 206,600
Chloride NS NS NS NS NS
Chromium Log Normal 105 144 95.0 178
Cobalt Normal 27.1 36.0 31.6 38.3
Copper Nonparametric 70.4 79.5 77.7 79.5
Iron Normal 63,220 88,550 77,400 94,300
Lead Normal 25.6 29.9 26.8 31.5
Magnesium Log Normal 17,500 38,120 23,360 49,070
Manganese Log Normal 2,670 4,150 2,440 5,460
Mercury Log Normal 0.037 0.041 0.029 0.049
Molybdenum Normal 7.22 13.5 8.96 13.5
Nickel Normal 47.8 59.7 51.9 63.7
Nitrate NS NS NS NS NS
pH (field) NS NS NS NS NS
Potassium Normal 2,190 3,060 2,610 3,290
Selenium NS 7.56 NS NS NS
Sodium Normal 355 2190 210 224
Strontium Log Normal 137 569 251 866
Sulfate NS NS NS NS NS
Thallium NS NS NS NS NS
TOC Log Normal 19,540 50,150 24,010 73,310
Vanadium Normal 67.0 78.3 67.6 83.7
Zinc Normal 188 217 188 232
1 NS = No statistical analysis run due to too few detections; UTL = upper tolerance limit; UPL = upper tolerance limit;
USL = upper simultaneous limit

References

U.S. EPA. ProUCL Version 5.0.00 Technical Guide, EPA/600/R-07/041

Attachment A

Dan River Dataset

Location ID Sample ID Sample Depth Aluminum D_Aluminum Antimony D_Antimony Arsenic D_Arsenic Barium D_Barium Beryllium D_Beryllium Boron D_Boron Cadmium D_Cadmium Calcium D_Calcium
GWA-9D GWA-9D(20-21.5)20-21.5 9620 1 5.4 0 5.4 0 34.2 1 0.64 1 13.4 0 0.64 0 77.4 1
GWA-9D GWA-9D(30-31.5)30-31.5 11700 1 6.0 0 6.0 0 58.7 1 1.70 1 14.9 0 0.71 0 109.0 1
GWA-9D GWA-9D(40-41.5)40-41.5 7360 1 5.8 0 5.8 0 40.5 1 0.93 1 14.6 0 0.70 0 289.0 1
GWA-9D GWA-9D(55-56.5)55-56.5 23900 1 6.3 0 4.6 1 101.0 1 2.00 1 15.8 0 0.76 0 39100.0 1
GWA-12D GWA-12D(10-11.5)10-11.5 38900 1 6.0 0 14.8 1 242.0 1 1.80 1 62.1 1 0.72 0 4810.0 1
GWA-12D GWA-12D(15-15.2)15-15.2 30500 1 5.7 0 15.0 1 193.0 1 1.70 1 53.8 1 0.68 0 5660.0 1
GWA-12D GWA-12D(20-21)20-21 25900 1 5.1 0 6.9 1 109.0 1 1.10 1 63.1 1 0.62 0 23900.0 1
GWA-12S GWA-12S(13-15)13-15 32900 1 7.6 0 30.6 1 200.0 1 2.00 1 60.1 1 0.91 0 4990.0 1
SB-1 SB-1(10-11.5)10-11.5 33200 1 5.6 0 4.6 1 59.6 1 3.90 1 14.0 0 0.67 0 140.0 0
SB-1 SB-1(15-16.5)15-16.5 23600 1 6.0 0 3.1 1 51.6 1 2.70 1 15.1 0 0.72 0 151.0 0
SB-1 SB-1(20-21.5)20-21.5 27600 1 5.9 0 5.3 1 74.8 1 2.20 1 14.8 0 0.71 0 269.0 1
SB-1 SB-1(25-26.5)25-26.5 18700 1 5.6 0 20.0 1 73.8 1 1.70 1 14.1 0 0.44 1 9480.0 1
SB-1 SB-1(35-35.5)35-35.5 16600 1 5.5 0 5.5 0 67.4 1 1.50 1 13.8 0 0.66 0 1020.0 1
SB-2 SB-2(10-11.5)10-11.5 27700 1 5.8 0 5.8 0 110.0 1 2.10 1 14.5 0 0.69 0 145.0 0
SB-2 SB-2(20-21.5)20-21.5 24300 1 5.9 0 10.6 1 211.0 1 1.90 1 14.8 0 0.71 0 1930.0 1
SB-2 SB-2(30-31.25)30-31.25 17400 1 5.9 0 9.2 1 71.3 1 1.00 1 14.7 0 0.71 0 4160.0 1
SB-2 SB-2(35-36)35-36 19800 1 5.4 0 5.4 0 61.9 1 0.59 1 13.5 0 0.65 0 9850.0 1
SB-2 SB-2(65-65.3)65-65.3 24600 1 6.1 0 8.6 1 74.4 1 0.86 1 15.2 0 0.73 0 10200.0 1
SB-3 SB-3(10-11)10-11 15000 1 6.4 0 6.4 0 104.0 1 1.20 1 16.0 0 0.77 0 1480.0 1
SB-3 SB-3(20-21.5)20-21.5 17700 1 5.8 0 5.8 0 63.0 1 1.50 1 14.5 0 0.70 0 433.0 1
SB-3 SB-3(35-36.5)35-36.5 12100 1 6.5 0 6.5 0 89.7 1 0.75 1 35.9 1 0.79 0 2010.0 1
SB-3 SB-3(40-40.3)40-40.3 15600 1 7.2 0 7.2 0 63.1 1 1.50 1 17.9 0 0.86 0 3110.0 1
SB-3 SB-3(45-45.2)45-45.2 17100 1 5.5 0 5.5 0 56.7 1 1.00 1 13.8 0 0.66 0 2740.0 1
Location ID
GWA-9D
GWA-9D
GWA-9D
GWA-9D
GWA-12D
GWA-12D
GWA-12D
GWA-12S
SB-1
SB-1
SB-1
SB-1
SB-1
SB-2
SB-2
SB-2
SB-2
SB-2
SB-3
SB-3
SB-3
SB-3
SB-3
Chloride D_Chloride Chromium D_Chromium Cobalt D_Cobalt Copper D_Copper Iron D_Iron Lead D_Lead Magnesium D_Magnesium Manganese D_Manganese Mercury D_Mercury Molybdenum
276 0 18.8 1 10.5 1 6.4 1 16500 1 11.6 1 930 1 267.0 1 0.0094 1 1.6
300 0 10.6 1 16.8 1 16.8 1 16900 1 14.0 1 1700 1 275.0 1 0.0068 1 3.0
294 0 6.4 1 9.3 1 2.8 1 12200 1 18.2 1 924 1 328.0 1 0.0091 0 2.9
323 0 28.1 1 16.7 1 70.3 1 55900 1 8.2 1 10700 1 5170.0 1 0.0110 1 3.2
303 0 46.2 1 27.2 1 70.4 1 63300 1 17.5 1 17900 1 916.0 1 0.0092 0 3.0
290 0 42.9 1 22.5 1 58.9 1 52200 1 16.1 1 12600 1 823.0 1 0.0092 0 2.2
258 0 187.0 1 21.5 1 69.6 1 62500 1 13.0 1 19400 1 1120.0 1 0.0088 0 22.6
372 0 48.7 1 23.9 1 67.5 1 58700 1 21.5 1 13900 1 698.0 1 0.0090 1 5.6
267 0 32.7 1 18.9 1 44.6 1 95900 1 25.9 1 6110 1 418.0 1 0.0069 1 2.8
287 0 19.9 1 16.2 1 25.1 1 54700 1 18.4 1 4050 1 202.0 1 0.0052 1 3.0
285 0 28.5 1 14.6 1 47.9 1 54800 1 14.9 1 4050 1 145.0 1 0.0400 1 3.0
293 0 17.0 1 26.2 1 79.5 1 39300 1 31.3 1 4690 1 328.0 1 0.0380 1 7.4
168 1 15.4 1 12.5 1 65.4 1 28500 1 13.8 1 5790 1 304.0 1 0.0047 1 2.8
284 0 30.9 1 12.0 1 57.0 1 49100 1 21.5 1 4490 1 256.0 1 0.0120 1 2.9
289 0 111.0 1 42.6 1 66.1 1 60300 1 18.9 1 4790 1 1150.0 1 0.0240 1 5.4
285 0 34.7 1 20.1 1 68.4 1 42700 1 18.2 1 8470 1 395.0 1 0.0086 1 3.2
279 0 27.1 1 12.0 1 30.2 1 37100 1 11.4 1 10800 1 837.0 1 0.0073 1 1.9
291 0 36.1 1 21.8 1 57.8 1 49200 1 16.5 1 12700 1 433.0 1 0.0110 1 1.6
322 0 19.3 1 16.1 1 23.3 1 27700 1 23.0 1 3060 1 601.0 1 0.0300 1 3.2
280 0 17.7 1 7.5 1 23.4 1 28800 1 17.8 1 2330 1 82.7 1 0.0052 1 2.9
339 0 12.8 1 22.6 1 15.6 1 34400 1 22.9 1 2430 1 2840.0 1 0.0110 0 3.3
345 0 19.1 1 12.8 1 64.3 1 26700 1 13.0 1 5090 1 289.0 1 0.0077 1 3.6
279 0 21.1 1 10.9 1 31.0 1 28700 1 10.3 1 5860 1 274.0 1 0.0093 0 2.8
Location ID
GWA-9D
GWA-9D
GWA-9D
GWA-9D
GWA-12D
GWA-12D
GWA-12D
GWA-12S
SB-1
SB-1
SB-1
SB-1
SB-1
SB-2
SB-2
SB-2
SB-2
SB-2
SB-3
SB-3
SB-3
SB-3
SB-3
D_Molybdenum Nickel D_Nickel Nitrate D_Nitrate
Percent
Moisture
D_Percent
Moisture pH (field)D_pH (field)Potassium D_Potassium Selenium D_Selenium Sodium D_Sodium Strontium D_Strontium Sulfate D_Sulfate
1 6.7 1 27.6 0 11.3 1 5.2 1 579 1 4.0 0 269 0 2.3 1 276 0
0 12.5 1 30.0 0 15.8 1 5.6 1 329 1 4.5 0 298 0 5.6 1 300 0
0 7.0 1 29.4 0 14.8 1 6.0 1 214 1 4.4 0 292 0 9.0 1 294 0
0 45.8 1 32.3 0 22.8 1 7.4 1 1700 1 7.8 1 315 0 144.0 1 323 0
0 48.0 1 30.3 0 17.2 1 5.6 1 1920 1 3.9 1 185 1 75.3 1 303 0
1 39.7 1 29.0 0 13.9 1 7.9 1 1740 1 5.7 0 172 1 70.5 1 290 0
1 45.3 1 25.8 0 5.7 1 7.7 1 1810 1 5.1 0 205 1 257.0 1 258 0
1 41.9 1 37.2 0 34.9 1 6.3 1 1800 1 7.6 0 378 0 72.5 1 372 0
0 52.2 1 26.7 0 6.5 1 4.9 1 168 1 5.6 0 280 0 1.9 1 267 0
0 27.5 1 28.7 0 14.4 1 5.3 1 247 1 6.0 0 301 0 3.2 1 287 0
0 17.1 1 28.5 0 12.5 1 5.4 1 605 1 5.9 0 297 0 21.8 1 285 0
1 38.9 1 29.3 0 14.8 1 4.5 1 1340 1 5.6 0 282 0 78.0 1 243 1
0 28.8 1 26.8 0 6.9 1 5.5 1 1190 1 5.5 0 275 0 12.1 1 268 0
0 19.1 1 28.4 0 12.3 1 5.5 1 2730 1 5.8 0 289 0 4.4 1 284 0
1 36.3 1 28.9 0 13.7 1 5.3 1 2100 1 5.9 0 297 0 73.9 1 289 0
1 32.4 1 28.5 0 6.5 1 2200 1 5.9 0 295 0 36.4 1 145 1
1 19.4 1 27.9 0 11.5 1 8.6 1 1800 1 5.4 0 269 0 52.8 1 279 0
1 31.9 1 29.1 0 14.8 1 8.6 1 1970 1 6.1 0 160 1 60.7 1 291 0
0 12.0 1 32.2 0 22.2 1 5.0 1 1700 1 6.4 0 320 0 13.0 1 322 0
0 16.9 1 28.0 0 11.5 1 6.0 1 308 1 5.8 0 290 0 2.5 1 280 0
0 21.9 1 33.9 0 27.0 1 7.1 1 313 1 6.5 0 327 0 24.2 1 339 0
0 24.4 1 34.5 0 27.5 1 7.6 1 1080 1 7.2 0 358 0 19.3 1 345 0
0 23.4 1 27.9 0 12.8 1 8.4 1 958 1 5.5 0 275 0 17.1 1 179 1
Location ID
GWA-9D
GWA-9D
GWA-9D
GWA-9D
GWA-12D
GWA-12D
GWA-12D
GWA-12S
SB-1
SB-1
SB-1
SB-1
SB-1
SB-2
SB-2
SB-2
SB-2
SB-2
SB-3
SB-3
SB-3
SB-3
SB-3
Thallium D_Thallium
Total
Organic
D_Total
Organic Carbon Vanadium D_Vanadium Zinc D_Zinc
5.4 0 490 1 15.5 1 23.5 1
6.0 0 570 1 14.9 1 57.0 1
5.8 0 457 1 8.4 1 26.0 1
6.3 0 23800 1 18.7 1 203.0 1
6.0 0 746 1 75.7 1 136.0 1
5.7 0 1650 1 65.1 1 106.0 1
5.1 0 3650 1 56.9 1 112.0 1
7.6 0 1530 1 67.2 1 119.0 1
5.6 0 1080 1 49.5 1 178.0 1
6.0 0 1280 1 38.7 1 107.0 1
5.9 0 12300 1 54.4 1 70.5 1
5.6 0 13500 1 19.1 1 178.0 1
5.5 0 4420 1 16.0 1 72.6 1
5.8 0 718 1 41.4 1 83.5 1
5.9 0 7430 1 33.8 1 104.0 1
5.9 0 14500 1 24.2 1 113.0 1
5.4 0 3680 1 26.2 1 74.1 1
6.1 0 20100 1 34.1 1 91.4 1
6.4 0 6120 1 35.0 1 46.5 1
5.8 0 583 1 34.3 1 61.1 1
6.5 0 862 1 21.5 1 47.8 1
7.2 0 2880 1 27.0 1 189.0 1
5.5 0 1720 1 28.6 1 83.8 1

Attachment B

ProUCL 5.0.00 Printout 
Background Statistics for Data Sets with Non-Detects
User Selected Options
Date/Time of Computation 10/27/2015 8:50
From File REV01_ProUCL_data_Dan River - REVISED_20151026100912.xls
Full Precision OFF
Confidence Coefficient 95%
Coverage 95%
Different or Future K Observation 1
Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000
Aluminum
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Minimum 7360 First Quartile 16100
Second Largest 33200 Median 19800
Maximum 38900 Third Quartile 26750
Mean 21382 SD 8149
Coefficient of Variation 0.381 Skewness 0.287
Mean of logged Data 9.893 SD of logged Data 0.419
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.979 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.109 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 40352 90% Percentile (z)31825
95% UPL (t)35675 95% Percentile (z)34785
95% USL 42763 99% Percentile (z)40338
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.209 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.746 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.129 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)6.619 k star (bias corrected MLE)5.785
Theta hat (MLE)3230 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)3696
nu hat (MLE)304.5 nu star (bias corrected)266.1
MLE Mean (bias corrected)21382 MLE Sd (bias corrected)8890
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 38423 90% Percentile 33270
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 38993 95% Percentile 37787
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 46092 99% Percentile 47270
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 47326
95% WH USL 50416 95% HW USL 52110
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.966 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.141 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 52449 90% Percentile (z)33842
95% UPL (t)41245 95% Percentile (z)39402
95% USL 59367 99% Percentile (z)52413
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 38900
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 38900 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 38900
95% UPL 37760 90% Percentile 32420
90% Chebyshev UPL 46353 95% Percentile 33170
95% Chebyshev UPL 57665 99% Percentile 37646
95% USL 38900
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Antimony
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 23
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 14
Minimum Detect N/A Minimum Non-Detect 5.1
Maximum Detect N/A Maximum Non-Detect 7.6
Variance Detected N/A Percent Non-Detects 100%
Mean Detected N/A SD Detected N/A
Mean of Detected Logged Data N/A SD of Detected Logged Data N/A
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable Antimony was not processed!
Arsenic
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 18
Number of Detects 12 Number of Non-Detects 11
Number of Distinct Detects 11 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 7
Minimum Detect 3.1 Minimum Non-Detect 5.4
Maximum Detect 30.6 Maximum Non-Detect 7.2
Variance Detected 63.48 Percent Non-Detects 47.83%
Mean Detected 11.11 SD Detected 7.967
Mean of Detected Logged Data 2.194 SD of Detected Logged Data 0.678
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.859 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.859 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.192 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.256 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan Meier (KM) Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 7.907 SD 6.47
95% UTL95% Coverage 22.97 95% KM UPL (t)19.26
90% KM Percentile (z)16.2 95% KM Percentile (z)18.55
99% KM Percentile (z)22.96 95% KM USL 24.88
DL/2 Substitution Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 7.215 SD 7.004
95% UTL95% Coverage 23.52 95% UPL (t)19.5
90% Percentile (z)16.19 95% Percentile (z)18.74
99% Percentile (z)23.51 95% USL 25.59
DL/2 is not a recommended method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.254 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.74 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.127 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.248 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE)2.499 k star (bias corrected MLE)1.93
Theta hat (MLE)4.445 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)5.756
nu hat (MLE)59.98 nu star (bias corrected)46.32
MLE Mean (bias corrected)11.11
MLE Sd (bias corrected)7.996 95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)9.26
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 detected data is small such as < 0.1
For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.155 Mean 7.171
Maximum 30.6 Median 4.614
SD 7.118 CV 0.993
k hat (MLE)1.226 k star (bias corrected MLE)1.095
Theta hat (MLE)5.85 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)6.55
nu hat (MLE)56.38 nu star (bias corrected)50.36
MLE Mean (bias corrected)7.171 MLE Sd (bias corrected)6.853
95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)6.354 90% Percentile 16.15
95% Percentile 20.81 99% Percentile 31.56
The following statistics are computed using Gamma ROS Statistics on Imputed Data
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 30.02 32.98 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 21.35 22.49
95% Gamma USL 35.28 39.64
The following statistics are computed using gamma distribution and KM estimates
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
k hat (KM)1.494 nu hat (KM)68.71
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 24 24.38 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 18.4 18.37
95% Gamma USL 27.3 28.01
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.977 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.859 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.115 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.256 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Lognormal ROS Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 7.884 Mean in Log Scale 1.84
SD in Original Scale 6.633 SD in Log Scale 0.629
95% UTL95% Coverage 27.22 95% BCA UTL95% Coverage 30.6
95% Bootstrap (%) UTL95% Coverage 30.6 95% UPL (t)18.97
90% Percentile (z)14.09 95% Percentile (z)17.71
99% Percentile (z)27.2 95% USL 32.79
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean of Logged Data 1.846 95% KM UTL (Lognormal)95% Coverage 26.21
KM SD of Logged Data 0.61 95% KM UPL (Lognormal)18.47
95% KM Percentile Lognormal (z)17.28 95% KM USL (Lognormal)31.4
Background DL/2 Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution
Mean in Original Scale 7.215 Mean in Log Scale 1.663
SD in Original Scale 7.004 SD in Log Scale 0.745
95% UTL95% Coverage 29.92 95% UPL (t)19.51
90% Percentile (z)13.72 95% Percentile (z)17.98
99% Percentile (z)29.88 95% USL 37.3
DL/2 is not a Recommended Method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons.
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for BTVs(no distinction made between detects and nondetects)
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with95% Coverage 30.6
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% UPL 28.48 95% USL 30.6
95% KM Chebyshev UPL 36.72
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Barium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Minimum 34.2 First Quartile 60.75
Second Largest 211 Median 73.8
Maximum 242 Third Quartile 106.5
Mean 96.12 SD 58.22
Coefficient of Variation 0.606 Skewness 1.467
Mean of logged Data 4.424 SD of logged Data 0.522
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.787 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.252 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 231.6 90% Percentile (z)170.7
95% UPL (t)198.2 95% Percentile (z)191.9
95% USL 248.9 99% Percentile (z)231.5
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.171 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.749 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.22 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)3.678 k star (bias corrected MLE)3.228
Theta hat (MLE)26.13 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)29.78
nu hat (MLE)169.2 nu star (bias corrected)148.5
MLE Mean (bias corrected)96.12 MLE Sd (bias corrected)53.5
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 201.5 90% Percentile 167.9
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 202.7 95% Percentile 197.6
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 253.6 99% Percentile 261.7
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 258.8
95% WH USL 283.7 95% HW USL 291.9
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.924 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.191 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 281 90% Percentile (z)162.8
95% UPL (t)208.3 95% Percentile (z)196.7
95% USL 328 99% Percentile (z)280.8
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 242
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 242 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 238.9
95% UPL 235.8 90% Percentile 198.6
90% Chebyshev UPL 274.5 95% Percentile 209.9
95% Chebyshev UPL 355.3 99% Percentile 235.2
95% USL 242
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Beryllium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 17
Minimum 0.59 First Quartile 1
Second Largest 2.7 Median 1.5
Maximum 3.9 Third Quartile 1.95
Mean 1.577 SD 0.751
Coefficient of Variation 0.476 Skewness 1.295
Mean of logged Data 0.352 SD of logged Data 0.469
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.903 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.116 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 3.325 90% Percentile (z)2.539
95% UPL (t)2.894 95% Percentile (z)2.812
95% USL 3.547 99% Percentile (z)3.323
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.293 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.747 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.124 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)5.003 k star (bias corrected MLE)4.379
Theta hat (MLE)0.315 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)0.36
nu hat (MLE)230.1 nu star (bias corrected)201.4
MLE Mean (bias corrected)1.577 MLE Sd (bias corrected)0.754
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 3.041 90% Percentile 2.587
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 3.079 95% Percentile 2.985
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 3.728 99% Percentile 3.833
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 3.824
95% WH USL 4.119 95% HW USL 4.258
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.972 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.154 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 4.24 90% Percentile (z)2.595
95% UPL (t)3.239 95% Percentile (z)3.077
95% USL 4.872 99% Percentile (z)4.237
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 3.9
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 3.9 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 3.9
95% UPL 3.66 90% Percentile 2.18
90% Chebyshev UPL 3.878 95% Percentile 2.65
95% Chebyshev UPL 4.92 99% Percentile 3.636
95% USL 3.9
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Boron
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 20
Number of Detects 5 Number of Non-Detects 18
Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 15
Minimum Detect 35.9 Minimum Non-Detect 13.4
Maximum Detect 63.1 Maximum Non-Detect 17.9
Variance Detected 127.1 Percent Non-Detects 78.26%
Mean Detected 55 SD Detected 11.27
Mean of Detected Logged Data 3.987 SD of Detected Logged Data 0.236
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.793 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.275 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan Meier (KM) Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 22.44 SD 17.79
95% UTL95% Coverage 63.86 95% KM UPL (t)53.65
90% KM Percentile (z)45.24 95% KM Percentile (z)51.71
99% KM Percentile (z)63.83 95% KM USL 69.13
DL/2 Substitution Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 17.73 SD 20.66
95% UTL95% Coverage 65.82 95% UPL (t)53.96
90% Percentile (z)44.2 95% Percentile (z)51.71
99% Percentile (z)65.79 95% USL 71.93
DL/2 is not a recommended method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.672 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.679 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.297 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE)24.87 k star (bias corrected MLE)10.08
Theta hat (MLE)2.211 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)5.455
nu hat (MLE)248.7 nu star (bias corrected)100.8
MLE Mean (bias corrected)55
MLE Sd (bias corrected)17.32 95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)31.62
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 detected data is small such as < 0.1
For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 11.48 Mean 26.65
Maximum 63.1 Median 18.84
SD 16.45 CV 0.617
k hat (MLE)3.682 k star (bias corrected MLE)3.23
Theta hat (MLE)7.238 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)8.249
nu hat (MLE)169.4 nu star (bias corrected)148.6
MLE Mean (bias corrected)26.65 MLE Sd (bias corrected)14.83
95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)13.28 90% Percentile 46.53
95% Percentile 54.76 99% Percentile 72.53
The following statistics are computed using Gamma ROS Statistics on Imputed Data
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 70.25 71.45 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 55.82 56.01
95% Gamma USL 78.58 80.56
The following statistics are computed using gamma distribution and KM estimates
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
k hat (KM)1.591 nu hat (KM)73.2
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 67.17 67.83 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 51.64 51.34
95% Gamma USL 76.26 77.73
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.755 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.297 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Lognormal ROS Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 30.69 Mean in Log Scale 3.348
SD in Original Scale 14.13 SD in Log Scale 0.371
95% UTL95% Coverage 67.47 95% BCA UTL95% Coverage 63.1
95% Bootstrap (%) UTL95% Coverage 63.1 95% UPL (t)54.52
90% Percentile (z)45.75 95% Percentile (z)52.36
99% Percentile (z)67.43 95% USL 75.3
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean of Logged Data 2.898 95% KM UTL (Lognormal)95% Coverage 70.37
KM SD of Logged Data 0.582 95% KM UPL (Lognormal)50.37
95% KM Percentile Lognormal (z)47.27 95% KM USL (Lognormal)83.6
Background DL/2 Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution
Mean in Original Scale 17.73 Mean in Log Scale 2.428
SD in Original Scale 20.66 SD in Log Scale 0.848
95% UTL95% Coverage 81.69 95% UPL (t)50.2
90% Percentile (z)33.63 95% Percentile (z)45.76
99% Percentile (z)81.57 95% USL 105
DL/2 is not a Recommended Method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons.
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for BTVs(no distinction made between detects and nondetects)
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with95% Coverage 63.1
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% UPL 62.9 95% USL 63.1
95% KM Chebyshev UPL 101.7
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Cadmium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 17
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 22
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 16
Minimum Detect 0.44 Minimum Non-Detect 0.62
Maximum Detect 0.44 Maximum Non-Detect 0.91
Variance Detected N/A Percent Non-Detects 95.65%
Mean Detected 0.44 SD Detected N/A
Mean of Detected Logged Data -0.821 SD of Detected Logged Data N/A
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable Cadmium was not processed!
Calcium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 23
Number of Detects 20 Number of Non-Detects 3
Number of Distinct Detects 20 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 3
Minimum Detect 77.4 Minimum Non-Detect 140
Maximum Detect 39100 Maximum Non-Detect 151
Variance Detected 90941078 Percent Non-Detects 13.04%
Mean Detected 6281 SD Detected 9536
Mean of Detected Logged Data 7.697 SD of Detected Logged Data 1.711
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.648 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.905 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.276 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.198 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan Meier (KM) Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 5474 SD 8914
95% UTL95% Coverage 26227 95% KM UPL (t)21110
90% KM Percentile (z)16898 95% KM Percentile (z)20137
99% KM Percentile (z)26212 95% KM USL 28865
DL/2 Substitution Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 5471 SD 9116
95% UTL95% Coverage 26694 95% UPL (t)21462
90% Percentile (z)17154 95% Percentile (z)20466
99% Percentile (z)26679 95% USL 29392
DL/2 is not a recommended method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.267 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.794 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.109 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.204 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE)0.591 k star (bias corrected MLE)0.535
Theta hat (MLE)10634 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)11731
nu hat (MLE)23.63 nu star (bias corrected)21.42
MLE Mean (bias corrected)6281
MLE Sd (bias corrected)8584 95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)4.014
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 detected data is small such as < 0.1
For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 5462
Maximum 39100 Median 2010
SD 9122 CV 1.67
k hat (MLE)0.278 k star (bias corrected MLE)0.271
Theta hat (MLE)19659 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)20186
nu hat (MLE)12.78 nu star (bias corrected)12.45
MLE Mean (bias corrected)5462 MLE Sd (bias corrected)10500
95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)2.557 90% Percentile 16287
95% Percentile 25810 99% Percentile 50890
The following statistics are computed using Gamma ROS Statistics on Imputed Data
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 38255 51592 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 23412 28201
95% Gamma USL 47903 68201
The following statistics are computed using gamma distribution and KM estimates
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
k hat (KM)0.377 nu hat (KM)17.34
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 33002 38231 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 20856 22361
95% Gamma USL 40786 49126
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.962 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.905 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.119 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.198 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Lognormal ROS Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 5477 Mean in Log Scale 7.314
SD in Original Scale 9113 SD in Log Scale 1.884
95% UTL95% Coverage 120576 95% BCA UTL95% Coverage 39100
95% Bootstrap (%) UTL95% Coverage 39100 95% UPL (t)40895
90% Percentile (z)16790 95% Percentile (z)33289
99% Percentile (z)120201 95% USL 210562
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean of Logged Data 7.282 95% KM UTL (Lognormal)95% Coverage 118117
KM SD of Logged Data 1.889 95% KM UPL (Lognormal)39952
95% KM Percentile Lognormal (z)32505 95% KM USL (Lognormal)206560
Background DL/2 Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution
Mean in Original Scale 5471 Mean in Log Scale 7.252
SD in Original Scale 9116 SD in Log Scale 1.977
95% UTL95% Coverage 140726 95% UPL (t)45245
90% Percentile (z)17776 95% Percentile (z)36457
99% Percentile (z)140267 95% USL 252618
DL/2 is not a Recommended Method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons.
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for BTVs(no distinction made between detects and nondetects)
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with95% Coverage 39100
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% UPL 36060 95% USL 39100
95% KM Chebyshev UPL 45167
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Chloride
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 21
Number of Detects 1 Number of Non-Detects 22
Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 20
Minimum Detect 168 Minimum Non-Detect 258
Maximum Detect 168 Maximum Non-Detect 372
Variance Detected N/A Percent Non-Detects 95.65%
Mean Detected 168 SD Detected N/A
Mean of Detected Logged Data 5.124 SD of Detected Logged Data N/A
Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set!
It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable Chloride was not processed!
Chromium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Minimum 6.4 First Quartile 18.25
Second Largest 111 Median 27.1
Maximum 187 Third Quartile 35.4
Mean 36.17 SD 39.02
Coefficient of Variation 1.079 Skewness 3.143
Mean of logged Data 3.285 SD of logged Data 0.724
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.594 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.287 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 127 90% Percentile (z)86.18
95% UPL (t)104.6 95% Percentile (z)100.4
95% USL 138.6 99% Percentile (z)126.9
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.213 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.757 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.184 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.184 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)1.795 k star (bias corrected MLE)1.59
Theta hat (MLE)20.15 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)22.75
nu hat (MLE)82.56 nu star (bias corrected)73.13
MLE Mean (bias corrected)36.17 MLE Sd (bias corrected)28.69
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 93.4 90% Percentile 74.32
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 93.05 95% Percentile 92.43
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 126.1 99% Percentile 133.2
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 128.4
95% WH USL 145.6 95% HW USL 150.1
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.942 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.121 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 144 90% Percentile (z)67.51
95% UPL (t)95.04 95% Percentile (z)87.81
95% USL 178.4 99% Percentile (z)143.8
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 187
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 187 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 187
95% UPL 171.8 90% Percentile 48.2
90% Chebyshev UPL 155.8 95% Percentile 104.8
95% Chebyshev UPL 209.9 99% Percentile 170.3
95% USL 187
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Cobalt
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 22
Minimum 7.5 First Quartile 12.25
Second Largest 27.2 Median 16.7
Maximum 42.6 Third Quartile 22.15
Mean 18.05 SD 7.712
Coefficient of Variation 0.427 Skewness 1.424
Mean of logged Data 2.814 SD of logged Data 0.404
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.897 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.13 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 36.01 90% Percentile (z)27.94
95% UPL (t)31.58 95% Percentile (z)30.74
95% USL 38.29 99% Percentile (z)35.99
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.236 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.746 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.104 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)6.49 k star (bias corrected MLE)5.672
Theta hat (MLE)2.782 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)3.183
nu hat (MLE)298.5 nu star (bias corrected)260.9
MLE Mean (bias corrected)18.05 MLE Sd (bias corrected)7.58
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 32.55 90% Percentile 28.19
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 32.81 95% Percentile 32.05
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 39.1 99% Percentile 40.17
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 39.81
95% WH USL 42.8 95% HW USL 43.83
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.985 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.0919 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 42.69 90% Percentile (z)27.98
95% UPL (t)33.86 95% Percentile (z)32.4
95% USL 48.11 99% Percentile (z)42.67
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 42.6
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 42.6 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 42.6
95% UPL 39.52 90% Percentile 25.74
90% Chebyshev UPL 41.69 95% Percentile 27.1
95% Chebyshev UPL 52.39 99% Percentile 39.21
95% USL 42.6
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Copper
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Minimum 2.8 First Quartile 24.25
Second Largest 70.4 Median 57
Maximum 79.5 Third Quartile 66.8
Mean 46.19 SD 23.86
Coefficient of Variation 0.517 Skewness -0.421
Mean of logged Data 3.598 SD of logged Data 0.852
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.9 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.197 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 101.7 90% Percentile (z)76.76
95% UPL (t)88.04 95% Percentile (z)85.43
95% USL 108.8 99% Percentile (z)101.7
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.287 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.753 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.23 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.184 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)2.286 k star (bias corrected MLE)2.017
Theta hat (MLE)20.2 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)22.9
nu hat (MLE)105.2 nu star (bias corrected)92.78
MLE Mean (bias corrected)46.19 MLE Sd (bias corrected)32.52
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 112.8 90% Percentile 89.65
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 120.1 95% Percentile 109.3
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 148 99% Percentile 152.7
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 163.1
95% WH USL 168.7 95% HW USL 189.3
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.796 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.221 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 265.6 90% Percentile (z)108.9
95% UPL (t)162.9 95% Percentile (z)148.4
95% USL 341.8 99% Percentile (z)265.2
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 79.5
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 79.5 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 79.5
95% UPL 77.68 90% Percentile 70.16
90% Chebyshev UPL 119.3 95% Percentile 70.39
95% Chebyshev UPL 152.4 99% Percentile 77.5
95% USL 79.5
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Iron
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Minimum 12200 First Quartile 28600
Second Largest 63300 Median 42700
Maximum 95900 Third Quartile 55350
Mean 43309 SD 19433
Coefficient of Variation 0.449 Skewness 0.601
Mean of logged Data 10.57 SD of logged Data 0.502
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.947 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.12 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 88548 90% Percentile (z)68213
95% UPL (t)77395 95% Percentile (z)75273
95% USL 94299 99% Percentile (z)88516
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.432 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.747 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.145 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)4.765 k star (bias corrected MLE)4.172
Theta hat (MLE)9089 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)10380
nu hat (MLE)219.2 nu star (bias corrected)191.9
MLE Mean (bias corrected)43309 MLE Sd (bias corrected)21202
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 84729 90% Percentile 71723
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 86440 95% Percentile 83023
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 104263 99% Percentile 107108
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 108028
95% WH USL 115414 95% HW USL 120622
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.943 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.158 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 124910 90% Percentile (z)73895
95% UPL (t)93662 95% Percentile (z)88668
95% USL 144900 99% Percentile (z)124807
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 95900
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 95900 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 95900
95% UPL 89380 90% Percentile 62060
90% Chebyshev UPL 102861 95% Percentile 63220
95% Chebyshev UPL 129836 99% Percentile 88728
95% USL 95900
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Lead
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 20
Minimum 8.2 First Quartile 13.4
Second Largest 25.9 Median 17.5
Maximum 31.3 Third Quartile 20.2
Mean 17.3 SD 5.401
Coefficient of Variation 0.312 Skewness 0.681
Mean of logged Data 2.804 SD of logged Data 0.315
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.967 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.123 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 29.87 90% Percentile (z)24.22
95% UPL (t)26.77 95% Percentile (z)26.18
95% USL 31.47 99% Percentile (z)29.87
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.146 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.744 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.0849 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)10.89 k star (bias corrected MLE)9.501
Theta hat (MLE)1.588 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)1.821
nu hat (MLE)501.1 nu star (bias corrected)437.1
MLE Mean (bias corrected)17.3 MLE Sd (bias corrected)5.612
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 27.77 90% Percentile 24.77
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 27.97 95% Percentile 27.45
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 32.21 99% Percentile 32.95
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 32.66
95% WH USL 34.67 95% HW USL 35.3
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.99 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.0949 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 34.39 90% Percentile (z)24.73
95% UPL (t)28.7 95% Percentile (z)27.73
95% USL 37.75 99% Percentile (z)34.37
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 31.3
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 31.3 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 31.3
95% UPL 30.22 90% Percentile 22.98
90% Chebyshev UPL 33.85 95% Percentile 25.61
95% Chebyshev UPL 41.35 99% Percentile 30.11
95% USL 31.3
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Magnesium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 22
Minimum 924 First Quartile 3555
Second Largest 17900 Median 5090
Maximum 19400 Third Quartile 10750
Mean 7077 SD 5289
Coefficient of Variation 0.747 Skewness 0.976
Mean of logged Data 8.562 SD of logged Data 0.853
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.89 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.225 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 19389 90% Percentile (z)13855
95% UPL (t)16354 95% Percentile (z)15776
95% USL 20954 99% Percentile (z)19380
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.285 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.757 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.128 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.184 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)1.801 k star (bias corrected MLE)1.595
Theta hat (MLE)3929 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)4436
nu hat (MLE)82.86 nu star (bias corrected)73.38
MLE Mean (bias corrected)7077 MLE Sd (bias corrected)5603
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 18685 90% Percentile 14527
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 19419 95% Percentile 18060
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 25217 99% Percentile 26007
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 27059
95% WH USL 29111 95% HW USL 31781
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.955 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.121 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 38121 90% Percentile (z)15608
95% UPL (t)23360 95% Percentile (z)21281
95% USL 49071 99% Percentile (z)38067
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 19400
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 19400 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 19400
95% UPL 19100 90% Percentile 13660
90% Chebyshev UPL 23285 95% Percentile 17500
95% Chebyshev UPL 30626 99% Percentile 19070
95% USL 19400
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Manganese
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 22
Minimum 82.7 First Quartile 274.5
Second Largest 2840 Median 395
Maximum 5170 Third Quartile 830
Mean 789.2 SD 1116
Coefficient of Variation 1.413 Skewness 3.256
Mean of logged Data 6.169 SD of logged Data 0.928
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.559 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.286 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 3386 90% Percentile (z)2219
95% UPL (t)2746 95% Percentile (z)2624
95% USL 3716 99% Percentile (z)3384
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.336 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.767 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.209 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.186 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)1.135 k star (bias corrected MLE)1.016
Theta hat (MLE)695.6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)777.1
nu hat (MLE)52.19 nu star (bias corrected)46.71
MLE Mean (bias corrected)789.2 MLE Sd (bias corrected)783.1
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 2351 90% Percentile 1810
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 2340 95% Percentile 2351
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 3348 99% Percentile 3606
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 3440
95% WH USL 3958 95% HW USL 4140
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.946 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.151 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 4149 90% Percentile (z)1571
95% UPL (t)2435 95% Percentile (z)2201
95% USL 5461 99% Percentile (z)4143
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 5170
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 5170 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 5170
95% UPL 4704 90% Percentile 1144
90% Chebyshev UPL 4208 95% Percentile 2671
95% Chebyshev UPL 5756 99% Percentile 4657
95% USL 5170
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Mercury
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 19
Number of Detects 17 Number of Non-Detects 6
Number of Distinct Detects 15 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 5
Minimum Detect 0.0047 Minimum Non-Detect 0.0088
Maximum Detect 0.04 Maximum Non-Detect 0.011
Variance Detected 1.33E-04 Percent Non-Detects 26.09%
Mean Detected 0.0139 SD Detected 0.0115
Mean of Detected Logged Data -4.525 SD of Detected Logged Data 0.686
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.729 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.331 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.215 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan Meier (KM) Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 0.0121 SD 0.0102
95% UTL95% Coverage 0.0357 95% KM UPL (t)0.0299
90% KM Percentile (z)0.0251 95% KM Percentile (z)0.0288
99% KM Percentile (z)0.0357 95% KM USL 0.0387
DL/2 Substitution Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 0.0115 SD 0.0107
95% UTL95% Coverage 0.0364 95% UPL (t)0.0303
90% Percentile (z)0.0252 95% Percentile (z)0.0291
99% Percentile (z)0.0364 95% USL 0.0396
DL/2 is not a recommended method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 1.273 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.749 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.257 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.212 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE)2.138 k star (bias corrected MLE)1.8
Theta hat (MLE)0.00652 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)0.00774
nu hat (MLE)72.69 nu star (bias corrected)61.2
MLE Mean (bias corrected)0.0139
MLE Sd (bias corrected)0.0104 95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)8.831
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 detected data is small such as < 0.1
For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.0047 Mean 0.0129
Maximum 0.04 Median 0.01
SD 0.01 CV 0.775
k hat (MLE)2.705 k star (bias corrected MLE)2.381
Theta hat (MLE)0.00477 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)0.00542
nu hat (MLE)124.4 nu star (bias corrected)109.5
MLE Mean (bias corrected)0.0129 MLE Sd (bias corrected)0.00836
95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)10.7 90% Percentile 0.0241
95% Percentile 0.029 99% Percentile 0.0397
The following statistics are computed using Gamma ROS Statistics on Imputed Data
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 0.0382 0.0388 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 0.0295 0.0295
95% Gamma USL 0.0433 0.0444
The following statistics are computed using gamma distribution and KM estimates
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
k hat (KM)1.411 nu hat (KM)64.92
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 0.0375 0.038 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 0.0286 0.0285
95% Gamma USL 0.0428 0.0438
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.876 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.892 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.205 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.215 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Lognormal ROS Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 0.0121 Mean in Log Scale -4.644
SD in Original Scale 0.0103 SD in Log Scale 0.624
95% UTL95% Coverage 0.0411 95% BCA UTL95% Coverage 0.04
95% Bootstrap (%) UTL95% Coverage 0.04 95% UPL (t)0.0287
90% Percentile (z)0.0214 95% Percentile (z)0.0268
99% Percentile (z)0.041 95% USL 0.0494
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean of Logged Data -4.654 95% KM UTL (Lognormal)95% Coverage 0.0405
KM SD of Logged Data 0.622 95% KM UPL (Lognormal)0.0284
95% KM Percentile Lognormal (z)0.0265 95% KM USL (Lognormal)0.0487
Background DL/2 Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution
Mean in Original Scale 0.0115 Mean in Log Scale -4.743
SD in Original Scale 0.0107 SD in Log Scale 0.696
95% UTL95% Coverage 0.044 95% UPL (t)0.0295
90% Percentile (z)0.0213 95% Percentile (z)0.0274
99% Percentile (z)0.044 95% USL 0.0541
DL/2 is not a Recommended Method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons.
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for BTVs(no distinction made between detects and nondetects)
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with95% Coverage 0.04
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% UPL 0.0396 95% USL 0.04
95% KM Chebyshev UPL 0.0573
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Molybdenum
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 13
Number of Detects 9 Number of Non-Detects 14
Number of Distinct Detects 8 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 6
Minimum Detect 1.6 Minimum Non-Detect 2.8
Maximum Detect 22.6 Maximum Non-Detect 3.6
Variance Detected 44.39 Percent Non-Detects 60.87%
Mean Detected 5.722 SD Detected 6.663
Mean of Detected Logged Data 1.34 SD of Detected Logged Data 0.88
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.657 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.289 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan Meier (KM) Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 3.357 SD 4.369
95% UTL95% Coverage 13.53 95% KM UPL (t)11.02
90% KM Percentile (z)8.956 95% KM Percentile (z)10.54
99% KM Percentile (z)13.52 95% KM USL 14.82
DL/2 Substitution Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 3.161 SD 4.534
95% UTL95% Coverage 13.72 95% UPL (t)11.11
90% Percentile (z)8.972 95% Percentile (z)10.62
99% Percentile (z)13.71 95% USL 15.06
DL/2 is not a recommended method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.626 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.737 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.192 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.285 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE)1.38 k star (bias corrected MLE)0.994
Theta hat (MLE)4.146 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)5.756
nu hat (MLE)24.84 nu star (bias corrected)17.9
MLE Mean (bias corrected)5.722
MLE Sd (bias corrected)5.739 95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)5.969
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 detected data is small such as < 0.1
For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 0.01 Mean 2.845
Maximum 22.6 Median 1.6
SD 4.733 CV 1.664
k hat (MLE)0.451 k star (bias corrected MLE)0.421
Theta hat (MLE)6.31 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)6.757
nu hat (MLE)20.74 nu star (bias corrected)19.36
MLE Mean (bias corrected)2.845 MLE Sd (bias corrected)4.384
95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)3.437 90% Percentile 7.961
95% Percentile 11.61 99% Percentile 20.74
The following statistics are computed using Gamma ROS Statistics on Imputed Data
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 18.06 22.63 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 11.42 13.08
95% Gamma USL 22.31 29.23
The following statistics are computed using gamma distribution and KM estimates
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
k hat (KM)0.591 nu hat (KM)27.16
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 11.46 11.27 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 8.479 8.211
95% Gamma USL 13.24 13.14
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.894 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.179 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Lognormal ROS Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 3.423 Mean in Log Scale 0.895
SD in Original Scale 4.467 SD in Log Scale 0.7
95% UTL95% Coverage 12.49 95% BCA UTL95% Coverage 21.08
95% Bootstrap (%) UTL95% Coverage 22.6 95% UPL (t)8.355
90% Percentile (z)6.002 95% Percentile (z)7.74
99% Percentile (z)12.47 95% USL 15.36
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean of Logged Data 0.888 95% KM UTL (Lognormal)95% Coverage 10.86
KM SD of Logged Data 0.643 95% KM UPL (Lognormal)7.507
95% KM Percentile Lognormal (z)6.998 95% KM USL (Lognormal)13.13
Background DL/2 Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution
Mean in Original Scale 3.161 Mean in Log Scale 0.776
SD in Original Scale 4.534 SD in Log Scale 0.707
95% UTL95% Coverage 11.25 95% UPL (t)7.501
90% Percentile (z)5.371 95% Percentile (z)6.943
99% Percentile (z)11.24 95% USL 13.87
DL/2 is not a Recommended Method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons.
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for BTVs(no distinction made between detects and nondetects)
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with95% Coverage 22.6
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% UPL 19.56 95% USL 22.6
95% KM Chebyshev UPL 22.81
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Nickel
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Minimum 6.7 First Quartile 18.1
Second Largest 48 Median 27.5
Maximum 52.2 Third Quartile 39.3
Mean 28.22 SD 13.5
Coefficient of Variation 0.478 Skewness 0.111
Mean of logged Data 3.201 SD of logged Data 0.583
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.963 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.091 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 59.66 90% Percentile (z)45.53
95% UPL (t)51.91 95% Percentile (z)50.43
95% USL 63.65 99% Percentile (z)59.63
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.322 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.749 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.0997 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)3.753 k star (bias corrected MLE)3.292
Theta hat (MLE)7.52 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)8.572
nu hat (MLE)172.6 nu star (bias corrected)151.4
MLE Mean (bias corrected)28.22 MLE Sd (bias corrected)15.55
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 59.12 90% Percentile 49.08
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 60.82 95% Percentile 57.69
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 74.23 99% Percentile 76.25
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 77.89
95% WH USL 82.95 95% HW USL 87.98
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.924 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.108 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 95.44 90% Percentile (z)51.85
95% UPL (t)68.3 95% Percentile (z)64.08
95% USL 113.4 99% Percentile (z)95.35
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 52.2
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 52.2 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 52.2
95% UPL 51.36 90% Percentile 45.7
90% Chebyshev UPL 69.6 95% Percentile 47.78
95% Chebyshev UPL 88.35 99% Percentile 51.28
95% USL 52.2
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Nitrate
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 21
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 23
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 21
Minimum Detect N/A Minimum Non-Detect 25.8
Maximum Detect N/A Maximum Non-Detect 37.2
Variance Detected N/A Percent Non-Detects 100%
Mean Detected N/A SD Detected N/A
Mean of Detected Logged Data N/A SD of Detected Logged Data N/A
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable Nitrate was not processed!
pH (field)
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 18
Minimum 4.5 First Quartile 5.35
Second Largest 8.6 Median 6
Maximum 8.6 Third Quartile 7.5
Mean 6.343 SD 1.286
Coefficient of Variation 0.203 Skewness 0.541
Mean of logged Data 1.828 SD of logged Data 0.198
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.905 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.197 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 9.338 90% Percentile (z)7.992
95% UPL (t)8.6 95% Percentile (z)8.459
95% USL 9.718 99% Percentile (z)9.336
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.778 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.742 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.191 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.181 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)26.47 k star (bias corrected MLE)23.05
Theta hat (MLE)0.24 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)0.275
nu hat (MLE)1218 nu star (bias corrected)1060
MLE Mean (bias corrected)6.343 MLE Sd (bias corrected)1.321
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 8.723 90% Percentile 8.085
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 8.742 95% Percentile 8.662
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 9.649 99% Percentile 9.815
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 9.698
95% WH USL 10.15 95% HW USL 10.22
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.927 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.182 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 9.863 90% Percentile (z)8.019
95% UPL (t)8.805 95% Percentile (z)8.617
95% USL 10.46 99% Percentile (z)9.86
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 8.6
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 8.6 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 8.6
95% UPL 8.6 90% Percentile 8.3
90% Chebyshev UPL 10.29 95% Percentile 8.58
95% Chebyshev UPL 12.07 99% Percentile 8.6
95% USL 8.6
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Potassium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 21
Minimum 168 First Quartile 454
Second Largest 2200 Median 1340
Maximum 2730 Third Quartile 1805
Mean 1252 SD 774.7
Coefficient of Variation 0.619 Skewness -0.0342
Mean of logged Data 6.844 SD of logged Data 0.88
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.915 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.197 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 3056 90% Percentile (z)2245
95% UPL (t)2611 95% Percentile (z)2526
95% USL 3285 99% Percentile (z)3054
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 1.186 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.756 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.23 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.184 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)1.88 k star (bias corrected MLE)1.663
Theta hat (MLE)666.2 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)752.8
nu hat (MLE)86.46 nu star (bias corrected)76.52
MLE Mean (bias corrected)1252 MLE Sd (bias corrected)970.9
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 3282 90% Percentile 2545
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 3464 95% Percentile 3152
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 4408 99% Percentile 4514
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 4817
95% WH USL 5077 95% HW USL 5652
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.859 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.229 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 7280 90% Percentile (z)2898
95% UPL (t)4393 95% Percentile (z)3990
95% USL 9446 99% Percentile (z)7269
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 2730
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 2730 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 2730
95% UPL 2624 90% Percentile 2074
90% Chebyshev UPL 3626 95% Percentile 2190
95% Chebyshev UPL 4701 99% Percentile 2613
95% USL 2730
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Selenium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 18
Number of Detects 2 Number of Non-Detects 21
Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 16
Minimum Detect 3.9 Minimum Non-Detect 4
Maximum Detect 7.8 Maximum Non-Detect 7.6
Variance Detected 7.605 Percent Non-Detects 91.30%
Mean Detected 5.85 SD Detected 2.758
Mean of Detected Logged Data 1.708 SD of Detected Logged Data 0.49
Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Kaplan Meier (KM) Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 4.07 SD 0.795
95% UTL95% Coverage 5.921 95% KM UPL (t)5.465
90% KM Percentile (z)5.089 95% KM Percentile (z)5.378
99% KM Percentile (z)5.92 95% KM USL 6.156
DL/2 Substitution Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 3.126 SD 1.115
95% UTL95% Coverage 5.721 95% UPL (t)5.081
90% Percentile (z)4.555 95% Percentile (z)4.96
99% Percentile (z)5.719 95% USL 6.051
DL/2 is not a recommended method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE)8.653 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
Theta hat (MLE)0.676 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE)34.61 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A
MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k) N/A
The following statistics are computed using gamma distribution and KM estimates
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
k hat (KM)26.18 nu hat (KM)1204
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 5.698 5.67 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 5.252 5.226
95% Gamma USL 5.937 5.909
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Background Lognormal ROS Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 4.084 Mean in Log Scale 1.39
SD in Original Scale 0.894 SD in Log Scale 0.174
95% UTL95% Coverage 6.023 95% BCA UTL95% Coverage 7.501
95% Bootstrap (%) UTL95% Coverage 7.8 95% UPL (t)5.45
90% Percentile (z)5.02 95% Percentile (z)5.347
99% Percentile (z)6.021 95% USL 6.341
Background DL/2 Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution
Mean in Original Scale 3.126 Mean in Log Scale 1.101
SD in Original Scale 1.115 SD in Log Scale 0.261
95% UTL95% Coverage 5.513 95% UPL (t)4.747
90% Percentile (z)4.197 95% Percentile (z)4.614
99% Percentile (z)5.51 95% USL 5.954
DL/2 is not a Recommended Method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons.
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05)
Nonparametric Upper Limits for BTVs(no distinction made between detects and nondetects)
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with95% Coverage 7.8
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% UPL 7.76 95% USL 7.8
95% KM Chebyshev UPL 7.611
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Sodium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 20
Number of Detects 4 Number of Non-Detects 19
Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 16
Minimum Detect 160 Minimum Non-Detect 269
Maximum Detect 205 Maximum Non-Detect 378
Variance Detected 371 Percent Non-Detects 82.61%
Mean Detected 180.5 SD Detected 19.26
Mean of Detected Logged Data 5.192 SD of Detected Logged Data 0.106
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.985 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.171 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.443 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan Meier (KM) Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 180.5 SD 16.68
95% UTL95% Coverage 219.3 95% KM UPL (t)209.8
90% KM Percentile (z)201.9 95% KM Percentile (z)207.9
99% KM Percentile (z)219.3 95% KM USL 224.3
DL/2 Substitution Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 155.5 SD 18.96
95% UTL95% Coverage 199.6 95% UPL (t)188.7
90% Percentile (z)179.8 95% Percentile (z)186.6
99% Percentile (z)199.6 95% USL 205.2
DL/2 is not a recommended method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
A-D Test Statistic 0.208 Anderson-Darling GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.657 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.188 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF
5% K-S Critical Value 0.394 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE)118.6 k star (bias corrected MLE)29.81
Theta hat (MLE)1.522 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)6.054
nu hat (MLE)948.7 nu star (bias corrected)238.5
MLE Mean (bias corrected)180.5
MLE Sd (bias corrected)33.06 95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)78.65
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 detected data is small such as < 0.1
For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 160 Mean 180.3
Maximum 205 Median 180.2
SD 9.308 CV 0.0516
k hat (MLE)395.3 k star (bias corrected MLE)343.7
Theta hat (MLE)0.456 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)0.524
nu hat (MLE)18182 nu star (bias corrected)15812
MLE Mean (bias corrected)180.3 MLE Sd (bias corrected)9.724
95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)749.6 90% Percentile 192.8
95% Percentile 196.6 99% Percentile 203.7
The following statistics are computed using Gamma ROS Statistics on Imputed Data
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 202.6 202.7 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 196.9 196.9
95% Gamma USL 205.6 205.7
The following statistics are computed using gamma distribution and KM estimates
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
k hat (KM)117.1 nu hat (KM)5386
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 221.3 221.6 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 210.6 210.7
95% Gamma USL 227 227.4
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.992 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.161 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.443 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Lognormal ROS Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 180 Mean in Log Scale 5.192
SD in Original Scale 9.275 SD in Log Scale 0.0512
95% UTL95% Coverage 202.5 95% BCA UTL95% Coverage 191.5
95% Bootstrap (%) UTL95% Coverage 205 95% UPL (t)196.6
90% Percentile (z)191.9 95% Percentile (z)195.5
99% Percentile (z)202.5 95% USL 205.6
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean of Logged Data 5.192 95% KM UTL (Lognormal)95% Coverage 222.5
KM SD of Logged Data 0.0916 95% KM UPL (Lognormal)211.1
95% KM Percentile Lognormal (z)209 95% KM USL (Lognormal)228.6
Background DL/2 Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution
Mean in Original Scale 155.5 Mean in Log Scale 5.04
SD in Original Scale 18.96 SD in Log Scale 0.116
95% UTL95% Coverage 202.2 95% UPL (t)189.2
90% Percentile (z)179.1 95% Percentile (z)186.8
99% Percentile (z)202.2 95% USL 209.3
DL/2 is not a Recommended Method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons.
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for BTVs(no distinction made between detects and nondetects)
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with95% Coverage 378
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% UPL 374 95% USL 378
95% KM Chebyshev UPL 254.8
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Strontium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Minimum 1.9 First Quartile 7.3
Second Largest 144 Median 21.8
Maximum 257 Third Quartile 71.5
Mean 45.98 SD 58.62
Coefficient of Variation 1.275 Skewness 2.421
Mean of logged Data 3.034 SD of logged Data 1.421
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.718 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.226 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 182.4 90% Percentile (z)121.1
95% UPL (t)148.8 95% Percentile (z)142.4
95% USL 199.8 99% Percentile (z)182.4
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.414 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.782 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.105 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.189 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)0.754 k star (bias corrected MLE)0.684
Theta hat (MLE)61.02 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)67.2
nu hat (MLE)34.66 nu star (bias corrected)31.47
MLE Mean (bias corrected)45.98 MLE Sd (bias corrected)55.58
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 162 90% Percentile 116
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 172.2 95% Percentile 157.8
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 242.8 99% Percentile 257.7
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 273.6
95% WH USL 293.4 95% HW USL 340.6
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.95 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.135 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 568.5 90% Percentile (z)128.5
95% UPL (t)251.4 95% Percentile (z)215.3
95% USL 865.7 99% Percentile (z)567.1
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 257
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 257 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 245.7
95% UPL 234.4 90% Percentile 77.46
90% Chebyshev UPL 225.6 95% Percentile 137.4
95% Chebyshev UPL 307 99% Percentile 232.1
95% USL 257
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Sulfate
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 23
Number of Detects 3 Number of Non-Detects 20
Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 20
Minimum Detect 145 Minimum Non-Detect 258
Maximum Detect 243 Maximum Non-Detect 372
Variance Detected 2476 Percent Non-Detects 86.96%
Mean Detected 189 SD Detected 49.76
Mean of Detected Logged Data 5.219 SD of Detected Logged Data 0.26
Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values.
This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates.
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test on Detects Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.97 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.246 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Kaplan Meier (KM) Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 189 SD 40.63
95% UTL95% Coverage 283.6 95% KM UPL (t)260.3
90% KM Percentile (z)241.1 95% KM Percentile (z)255.8
99% KM Percentile (z)283.5 95% KM USL 295.6
DL/2 Substitution Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
Mean 154 SD 24.45
95% UTL95% Coverage 211 95% UPL (t)196.9
90% Percentile (z)185.4 95% Percentile (z)194.3
99% Percentile (z)210.9 95% USL 218.2
DL/2 is not a recommended method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons
Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only
Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test
Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only
k hat (MLE)22.2 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
Theta hat (MLE)8.512 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A
nu hat (MLE)133.2 nu star (bias corrected) N/A
MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A
MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k) N/A
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 detected data is small such as < 0.1
For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs
For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates
Minimum 145 Mean 187.6
Maximum 243 Median 187.4
SD 15.01 CV 0.08
k hat (MLE)168.9 k star (bias corrected MLE)146.9
Theta hat (MLE)1.111 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)1.277
nu hat (MLE)7770 nu star (bias corrected)6758
MLE Mean (bias corrected)187.6 MLE Sd (bias corrected)15.48
95% Percentile of Chisquare (2k)334.8 90% Percentile 207.7
95% Percentile 213.8 99% Percentile 225.5
The following statistics are computed using Gamma ROS Statistics on Imputed Data
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 223.7 223.9 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 214.3 214.4
95% Gamma USL 228.6 228.9
The following statistics are computed using gamma distribution and KM estimates
Upper Limits using Wilson Hilferty (WH) and Hawkins Wixley (HW) Methods
k hat (KM)21.64 nu hat (KM)995.5
WH HW WH HW
95% Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 294.8 296.6 95% Approx. Gamma UPL 264.9 265.6
95% Gamma USL 311.1 313.6
Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.989 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.215 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Lognormal ROS Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution Using Imputed Non-Detects
Mean in Original Scale 185.3 Mean in Log Scale 5.219
SD in Original Scale 15.07 SD in Log Scale 0.0783
95% UTL95% Coverage 221.7 95% BCA UTL95% Coverage 184.8
95% Bootstrap (%) UTL95% Coverage 243 95% UPL (t)212
90% Percentile (z)204.3 95% Percentile (z)210.1
99% Percentile (z)221.7 95% USL 226.9
Statistics using KM estimates on Logged Data and Assuming Lognormal Distribution
KM Mean of Logged Data 5.219 95% KM UTL (Lognormal)95% Coverage 302.6
KM SD of Logged Data 0.212 95% KM UPL (Lognormal)268
95% KM Percentile Lognormal (z)261.8 95% KM USL (Lognormal)322.2
Background DL/2 Statistics Assuming Lognormal Distribution
Mean in Original Scale 154 Mean in Log Scale 5.027
SD in Original Scale 24.45 SD in Log Scale 0.139
95% UTL95% Coverage 211 95% UPL (t)194.7
90% Percentile (z)182.3 95% Percentile (z)191.8
99% Percentile (z)210.9 95% USL 219.9
DL/2 is not a Recommended Method. DL/2 provided for comparisons and historical reasons.
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for BTVs(no distinction made between detects and nondetects)
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with95% Coverage 372
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% UPL 366.6 95% USL 372
95% KM Chebyshev UPL 369.9
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Thallium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Missing Observations 0
Number of Distinct Observations 14
Number of Detects 0 Number of Non-Detects 23
Number of Distinct Detects 0 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 14
Minimum Detect N/A Minimum Non-Detect 5.1
Maximum Detect N/A Maximum Non-Detect 7.6
Variance Detected N/A Percent Non-Detects 100%
Mean Detected N/A SD Detected N/A
Mean of Detected Logged Data N/A SD of Detected Logged Data N/A
Warning: All observations are Non-Detects (NDs), therefore all statistics and estimates should also be NDs!
Specifically, sample mean, UCLs, UPLs, and other statistics are also NDs lying below the largest detection limit!
The Project Team may decide to use alternative site specific values to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV).
The data set for variable Thallium was not processed!
Total Organic Carbon
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Minimum 457 First Quartile 804
Second Largest 20100 Median 1720
Maximum 23800 Third Quartile 6775
Mean 5394 SD 6763
Coefficient of Variation 1.254 Skewness 1.601
Mean of logged Data 7.835 SD of logged Data 1.283
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.744 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.253 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 21137 90% Percentile (z)14061
95% UPL (t)17256 95% Percentile (z)16518
95% USL 23139 99% Percentile (z)21126
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.912 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.78 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.195 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.188 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)0.785 k star (bias corrected MLE)0.712
Theta hat (MLE)6869 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)7578
nu hat (MLE)36.12 nu star (bias corrected)32.74
MLE Mean (bias corrected)5394 MLE Sd (bias corrected)6393
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 18697 90% Percentile 13487
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 19411 95% Percentile 18250
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 27956 99% Percentile 29603
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 30597
95% WH USL 33741 95% HW USL 37968
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.929 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.14 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 50148 90% Percentile (z)13094
95% UPL (t)24011 95% Percentile (z)20871
95% USL 73310 99% Percentile (z)50042
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 23800
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 23800 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 23800
95% UPL 23060 90% Percentile 14300
90% Chebyshev UPL 26118 95% Percentile 19540
95% Chebyshev UPL 35506 99% Percentile 22986
95% USL 23800
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Vanadium
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 23
Minimum 8.4 First Quartile 20.3
Second Largest 67.2 Median 33.8
Maximum 75.7 Third Quartile 45.45
Mean 35.05 SD 18.56
Coefficient of Variation 0.529 Skewness 0.727
Mean of logged Data 3.416 SD of logged Data 0.561
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.933 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.153 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 78.25 90% Percentile (z)58.83
95% UPL (t)67.6 95% Percentile (z)65.57
95% USL 83.74 99% Percentile (z)78.22
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.209 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.749 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.0841 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)3.7 k star (bias corrected MLE)3.246
Theta hat (MLE)9.474 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)10.8
nu hat (MLE)170.2 nu star (bias corrected)149.3
MLE Mean (bias corrected)35.05 MLE Sd (bias corrected)19.45
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 73.62 90% Percentile 61.14
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 75.07 95% Percentile 71.93
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 92.59 99% Percentile 95.22
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 96.1
95% WH USL 103.5 95% HW USL 108.5
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.976 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.0959 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 112.3 90% Percentile (z)62.44
95% UPL (t)81.38 95% Percentile (z)76.54
95% USL 132.5 99% Percentile (z)112.2
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 75.7
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 75.7 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 75.7
95% UPL 74 90% Percentile 63.46
90% Chebyshev UPL 91.92 95% Percentile 66.99
95% Chebyshev UPL 117.7 99% Percentile 73.83
95% USL 75.7
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.
Zinc
General Statistics
Total Number of Observations 23 Number of Distinct Observations 22
Minimum 23.5 First Quartile 65.8
Second Largest 189 Median 91.4
Maximum 203 Third Quartile 116
Mean 99.25 SD 50.42
Coefficient of Variation 0.508 Skewness 0.61
Mean of logged Data 4.458 SD of logged Data 0.573
Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)
Tolerance Factor K (For UTL)2.328 d2max (for USL)2.624
Normal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.94 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.132 Lilliefors GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 216.6 90% Percentile (z)163.9
95% UPL (t)187.7 95% Percentile (z)182.2
95% USL 231.6 99% Percentile (z)216.6
Gamma GOF Test
A-D Test Statistic 0.238 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test
5% A-D Critical Value 0.749 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
K-S Test Statistic 0.0953 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test
5% K-S Critical Value 0.182 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level
Gamma Statistics
k hat (MLE)3.732 k star (bias corrected MLE)3.275
Theta hat (MLE)26.59 Theta star (bias corrected MLE)30.31
nu hat (MLE)171.7 nu star (bias corrected)150.6
MLE Mean (bias corrected)99.25 MLE Sd (bias corrected)54.85
Background Statistics Assuming Gamma Distribution
95% Wilson Hilferty (WH) Approx. Gamma UPL 208 90% Percentile 172.8
95% Hawkins Wixley (HW) Approx. Gamma UPL 213.1 95% Percentile 203.2
95% WH Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 261.3 99% Percentile 268.7
95% HW Approx. Gamma UTL with 95% Coverage 272.7
95% WH USL 292 95% HW USL 308
Lognormal GOF Test
Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.949 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test
5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.914 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.106 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test
5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.185 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level
Background Statistics assuming Lognormal Distribution
95% UTL with 95% Coverage 327.5 90% Percentile (z)179.8
95% UPL (t)235.7 95% Percentile (z)221.4
95% USL 388 99% Percentile (z)327.2
Nonparametric Distribution Free Background Statistics
Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level
Nonparametric Upper Limits for Background Threshold Values
Order of Statistic, r 23 95% UTL with 95% Coverage 203
Approximate f 1.211 Confidence Coefficient (CC) achieved by UTL 0.693
95% Percentile Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 203 95% BCA Bootstrap UTL with 95% Coverage 201.6
95% UPL 200.2 90% Percentile 178
90% Chebyshev UPL 253.8 95% Percentile 187.9
95% Chebyshev UPL 323.8 99% Percentile 199.9
95% USL 203
Note: The use of USL to estimate a BTV is recommended only when the data set represents a background
data set free of outliers and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.
The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data
represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.