NCD991278540_20000414_Weyerhaeuser Company_FRBCERCLA SAP QAPP_Final Report - Toxicity and Bioaccumulation Testing-OCR

I
I
I
·1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Prepared by:
FINAL REPORT
ROANOKE RIVER SITE
TOXlCITY AND BIOACCUMULATION TESTING
PLYMOUTH, NORTH CAROLINA
APRIL2000
U.S. EPA Work Assignment No.: 0-024
Lockheed Martin Work Order No.: RlA00024
U.S. EPA Contract No.: 68-C99-223
Prepared for:
Lockheed Martin/REAC U.S. EPNERTC
Mark Sprenger, PhD
Work Assignment Manager
t.~-2
Program Manager
1024\DELIFRI000JIREPORT
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF ACRONYMS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
I. I Objective
1.2 Methods
1.2.1 Sediment Acute Toxicity Testing
1.2.2 Sediment Bioaccumulation Testing
1.2.3 Soil Bioaccumulation Testing
1.2.4 Tissue Analysis
2.0 RESULTS
2.1 Sediment Acute Toxicity Testing
2.2 Sediment Bioaccumulation Testing
2.3 Soil Bioaccumulation Testing
3.0 DISCUSSION
4.0 REFERENCES
lll
IV
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
I APPENDICES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
1024 \DEL\f RI000J IREPOR T
Roanoke Sediment Toxicity Test: Hyalella azieca
Roanoke Sediment Bioaccumulation Test: Lumbricu/11s variegatus
Roanoke Soil Bioaccumulation Test: Eiseniafoelida
Roanoke River Site: Analytical Report
ll
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table l
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table IO
Table 11
LIST OF TABLES
Results of the 14 Day Toxicity Test Using Hya/e/la azteca
Results of the 28 Day Bioaccumulation Test Using Lumbriculus variegatus
Results of the 28 Day Bioaccumulation Test Using Eisenia foetida
Results of the Analysis for BNAs in Lumbriculus variegatus Tissue
Results of the Analysis for BNAs in Eisenia foetida Tissue
Results of the Analysis for Pesticides/PCBs in Lumbriculus variegatus Tissue
Results of the Analysis for Pesticides/PCBs in Eisenia foetida Tissue
Results of the Analysis for T AL Metals in Lumbriculus variegatus Tissue
Results of the Analysis for T AL Metals in Eisenia foetida Tissue
Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Lumbriculus variegatus Tissue (Based on Dry
Weight)
Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Eiseniafoetida Tissue (Based on Dry Weight)
1024\DELIFRI000JIREPORT ll1
I
I LIST OF ACRONYMS
I ABS Aquatic BioSystems, Inc.
AAT American Aquatic Testing, Inc.
I BNA Base/Neutral/Acid Extractable Compounds
cm Centimeters
COPC Contaminants of Potential Concern
I EMPC Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration
ERTC Environmental Response Team Center
g Grams
I J Estimated value
kg Kilograms
MDL Method Detection Limit
I mg Milligrams
µg Micrograms
I
ng Nanograms
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls
REAC Response, Engineering and Analytical Contract
I SOP Standard Operating Procedure
TAL Target Analyte List
TOC Total Organic Carbon
I u Undetected
U.S. EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I \024\DEL\FR\0003\REPORT IV
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Objective
The objective of this report is to summarize the results of toxicity and bioaccumulation
testing performed on sediment and soil samples collected from the Roanoke River Site in
Plymouth, North Carolina, during August 1999. This report is only a summary of data, no
evaluation of the data is presented.
1.2 Methods
Sediment samples were collected from the Roanoke River site during the week of 25 August
I 999. Sample locations were designated US Ref-I (Upstream Reference #I), US-1
(Upstream# 1 ), DS-1 (Downstream# I), DS-2 (Downstream #2), and DS-3 (Downstream #3 ).
Upstream and downstream refer to sample location with reference to the Roanoke River Site.
Soil samples were collected along the banks of the Roanoke River during the week of 25
August 1999. Sample locations were designated US Ref-I (Upstream Reference#!), US-1
(Upstream #1 ), DS-1 (Downstream #I), DS-2 (Downstream #2), and DS-3 (Downstream #3).
Upstream and downstream refer to sample location with reference to the Roanoke River
Site.
All sampling was performed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(U.S. EPA) Environmental Response Team Center (ERTC)/Response Engineering and
Analytical Contract (REAC) Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) #2001 General Field
Sampling Guidelines. Sediment samples were collected in accordance with ERTC/REAC
SOP #2016 Sediment Sampling. Soil samples were collected in accordance with
ERTC/REAC SOP #2012 Soil Sampling. All samples were handled in accordance with
ERTC/REAC SOP #2003 Sample Storage, Preservation and Handling, and ERTC/REAC
SOP #2004 Sample Packaging and Shipment. Samples were documented in accordance with
ERTC/REAC SOP# 2002 Sample Documentation and ERTC/REAC SOP #4005 Chain of
Custody Procedures.
Sediment and soil samples were shipped to American Aquatic Testing, Inc. (AA T), in
Allentown, Pennsylvania for toxicity testing.
1.2.1 Sediment Acute Toxicity Testing
A fourteen day acute toxicity test was performed using the freshwater amphipod
Hyalella azteca, and the results are summarized in Table 1. The full toxicity test
report is appended to this report (Appendix A). All sediment samples collected at the
Roanoke River site were compared to both an upstream reference site (US Ref-I) and
a lab control sediment. Test endpoints included survival and growth (as dry weight).
1024\DELIFRI000JIREPORT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.2.2 Sediment Bioaccumulation Testing
A twenty-eight day bioaccumulation test was performed using the aquatic worm
Lumbricu/us variegatus, and the results are summarized in Table 2. The full
bioaccumulation test report is appended to this report (Appendix B). At bioassay
termination, the test worms were placed in clean water, and allowed to depurate for
approximately 24 hours. The wet weight of the tissue in each treatment was
recorded, and the tissues were frozen and shipped to Southwest Laboratories of
Oklahoma, in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, for chemical analysis.
Data from the L. variegatus bioassay should be viewed with caution. Testing did not
strictly adhere to standardized guidelines (ASTM 1995; ASTM 1997a; U.S. EPA
1994 ), and was performed with a very high sediment depth to surface area ratio.
1.2.3 Soil Bioaccumulation Testing
A twenty-eight day bioaccumulation study was performed using the earthworm
Eiseniafoetida, and the results are summarized in Table 3. The full bioaccumulation
test report is appended to this report (Appendix C). At bioassay termination, the test
worms were rinsed with deionized water, placed on clean, moist paper towels, and
allowed to depurate for approximately 24 hours. The wet weight of the tissue in each
treatment was recorded, and the tissues were frozen and shipped to Southwest
Laboratories of Oklahoma for chemical analysis.
Data from the E. foetida bioassay should be viewed with caution. Testing did not
strictly adhere to standardized guidelines (ASTM I 997b ), and was performed with
a control soil of low pH, and non-standard composition.
1.2.4 Tissue Analysis
The contaminants of potential concern (COPC) at the Roanoke River site include
base/neutral/acid extractable compounds (BNAs), pesticides, polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs), dioxin, and Target Analyte List (T AL) metals. Tissue analysis
data are summarized in Tables 4 through 11.
Tissues from both of the bioaccumulation assays were frozen and sent to Southwest
Laboratories of Oklahoma, in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma for analysis of the above
COPCs. The full analytical report is appended to this report (Appendix D).
Tissue analysis data should be viewed with caution solely because of the potential
bias introduced into the bioaccumulation assays. The representativeness of the tissue
analyses is based on the validity of the toxicity test from which the tissue was taken.
1024\DELIFRI000JIREPORT 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.0 RESULTS
2.1 Sediment Acute Toxicity Testing
Results of the fourteen day acute toxicity test using Hyalella azteca are summarized in Table
I. Test endpoints included survival and growth (as dry weight). Acute toxicity was observed
in the sediment sample collected at location #US-I; all of the organisms exposed to this
sediment sample were dead prior to test termination. Sediment samples from locations #OS-
I and #DS-3 were also shown to demonstrate a statistically significant ( ~=0.05) increase in
mortality when compared to the reference control (sample location #US-Ref-I). Sample
location #DS-2 was the only sediment sample that did not demonstrate acute toxicity.
2.2 Sediment Bioaccumulation Testing
The results of the twenty-eight day bioaccumulation study using Lumbriculus variega1us are
summarized in Table 2. All test treatments were initiated with the same weight of worm
tissue (112 g). However, there was weight loss in all exposures, including the laboratory
control.
Data from theL. variegatus bioassay should be viewed with caution. Testing did not strictly
adhere to standardized guidelines (ASTM 1995; ASTM 1997a; U.S. EPA 1994), and was
performed with a very high sediment depth to surface area ratio. L. variegatus breathe by
coming to the sediment surface and exposing their bodies to the oxygenated overlying water.
It is possible that test organisms were stressed by overcrowding at the sediment surface.
L. variegatus feed on the organic carbon content in the first five to eight centimeters ( cm;
two to three inches) of sediment depth. The sediment in each test chamber was over 15 cm
(6 inches) deep. It is possible that test organisms were stressed because they could not access
a significant portion of the test sediment. Therefore, the observed loss in tissue mass over
the course of the test may have been due, at least partially to starvation.
2.3 Soil Bioaccumulation Testing
Results of the twenty-eight day bioaccumulation study using Eisenia foetida are summarized
in Table 3. There was no toxicity (as measured by survival and final tissue weights) to£.
foetida associated with any of the soil samples.
Data from the E. foetida bioassay should be viewed with caution. Testing did not strictly
adhere to standardized guidelines (ASTM 1997b), and was performed with a control soil of
low pH. While field samples in a pH range of 4 to IO standard units are acceptable for
testing, the test guidelines state that the control soil should be pH adjusted to 6.5 to 7.5
standard units. The control soil used in this test had an initial pH of 4.8 standard units. In
addition, the recipe for control soil preparation was different than that proposed in the test
1024\DELIFR\0003\REPORT 3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
guideline. It is possible that the observed loss in tissue mass over the course of the test may
have been due, at least partially to the control soil used.
3.0 DISCUSSION
The results of the sediment acute toxicity test indicate that only the sediment from location DS-2 was
not acutely toxic, and that all of the other sample locations, particularly US-l exhibited acute toxicity
to H. azteca. However, the results of both sets ofbioaccurnulation analyses, and subsequently the
results of the tissue analyses should be viewed with caution because of irregularities noted with the
performance of the bioassays.
4.0 REFERENCES
ASTM. 1995. "Standard Test Methods for Measuring the Toxicity of Sediment-Associated
Contaminants with Fresh Water Invertebrates". ASTM El 706-95. American Society for Testing
and Materials, Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. 1997a. "Standard Guide for Determination of the Bioaccumulation of Sediment-Associated
Contaminants by Benthic Invertebrates". ASTM El688-97a. American Society for Testing and
Materials, Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. 1997b. "Standard Guide for Conducting Laboratory Soil Toxicity or Bioaccumulation Tests
With the Lumbricid Earthworm Eisenia Fetida". ASTM El676-97. American Society for Testing
and Materials, Conshohocken, PA.
U.S. EPA. 1994. Methods/or Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated
Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates. United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. EPN600/R-94/024.
ERTC/REAC SOP #2001 General Field Sampling Guidelines.
ERTC/REAC SOP #2016 Sediment Sampling.
ERTC/REAC SOP #2012 Soil Sampling.
ERTC/REAC SOP #2003 Sample Storage, Preservation and Handling.
ERTC/REAC SOP #2004 Sample Packaging and Shipment.
ERTC/REAC SOP# 2002 Sample Documentation.
ERTC/REAC SOP #4005 Chain of Custody Procedures.
1024\DELIFRI000JIREPORT 4
I
I
.I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Samole 1D
Lab Control
US Ref-I
US-I
DS-1
DS-2
DS-3
mg = milligrams
Table 1: Results of the 14 Day Toxicity Test Using Hyale/la azteca
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April, 2000
lnitial # Test Orvanisms 14 Dav Survival Mean DrvWeight (mg)
80 92.5 % 0.040
80 85.0 % 0.030
80 0% 0
80 48.8 % 0.028
80 72.5 % 0.040
80 62.5 % 0.021
US Ref-I = upstream reference # 1; US-I = upstream location # 1; DS-1 = downstream location # 1;
DS-2 = downstream location #2; DS-3 = downstream location #3.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 2: Results of the 28 Day Bioaccumulation Test Using lumbriculus variegatus
Roanoke River Site
Sample TOC
Sample ID I olko\
Lab Curnrol 7.9
US Ref-I 11.8
US-1 17.9
DS-1 21.0
DS-2 17.7
DS-3 16.1
g = grams
g/kg = grams per kilogram
TOC = total organic carbon
Plymouth, NC
April, 2000
Initial Wet Weight (g) of Final Wet Weight (g) of
l. varieoatus l. variegatus Weicht Loss
I 12 76.9 31.3 %
112 62.1 44.6%
112 48.9 56.3 %
112 55.3 50.6%
112 54.9 51.0 %
112 61.2 45.4 %
US Ref-I = upstream reference #!; US-I = upstream location#!: DS-1 = downstream location# I:
DS-2 = downstream location #2; DS-3 = downstream location #3.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 3: Results of the 28 Day Bioaccumulation Test Using Eiseniafoetida
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April, 2000
SampleTOC Initial# of 28 Day Initial Wet Weight (g) Final Wet Weight (g) of
Samn\e ID (o/ko) Qr9anisms Survival of E. roetida £. foetida
Lab Control 7.9
US Ref-I I 1.8
US-I 17.9
DS-1 21
DS-2 17.7
DS-3 16. I
g = grams
g/kg = grams per kilogram
TOC = total organic carbon
300 95.7% 90
300 99.0% 90
300 98.7% 90
300 92.7% 90
300 98.6 % 90
300 98.7 % 90
US Ref-I = upstream reference# I; US-I = upstream location #I; DS-1 = downstream location #I;
DS-2 = downstream location #2; DS-3 = downstream location #3.
56.2
79.9
88.4
108.1
87.1
119.2
Weight Loss
37.6%
11.2%
1.8%
0%
3.2%
0%
I
••
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SBLKl
Table 4: Results of the Analysis for BNAs in Lumbriculus variegatus Tissue
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April 2000
us
Lab Control USREF-1 US-I DS-1 DS-2 Sample II-Bad:ground
Sample Identillc11tion Method Blank I L \'ariegatus L variegatus L variegatus L variegatus L variegaws L variegatus
Date Collected
Percent Solids
0 ercent Linids
Cone
-~" ,,_, __
henol u
bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether u
2-Chlorophc:nol u
1,3-Dichlorobcnzene u
1,4-Dichlorobcnzene u
Benzyl alcohol u
1,2-Dichlorobenzc:ne u
2-Methylphenol u
lbis(2-Chloroisopropyl)ether u
µ.Methylphenol u
ln-Nitroso-di -n-propylamine u
tHexachlorocthane u
tNitrobenzene u
lsophorone u
b-Nitrophenol u
f:?,4-Dimethylphenol u
IBenzoic acid 210
lbis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane u
2, 4-Dichlorophenol u
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene u
Naphthalene u
µ.Chloroaniline u
IHexachlorobutadiene u
k-chloro-3-methylphenol u
~-Methylnaphthalene u
IHexachlor09·clopentadiene u
fi,4,6-Trichlorophenol u
lb, 4,5-Trichlorophenol u
-Chloronaphthalene u
i.,-Nitroaniline u
:Oimethylphthalate u
IAcenaphthylene u
2,6-Dinitrotoluene u
-Nitroaniline u
Acenaphthene u
'.!,4-Dinitrophenol u
4-Nitrophenol u
Dibenzofuran u
2, 4-Dinitroto!uene u
Diethylphthalate u
4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether u
luorene u
4-Nitroaniline u
4,6-Dinitro-2-methy!pheno\ u
n-Nitrosodiphenylamine u
4-Bromophenyl-phenylether u
Hexachlorobenzene u
Pentachlorophenol u
Phenanthrene u
!Anthracene u
lcarbazo\e u
loi-n-butylphthalate u
/i;Juoranthene u
!P}Tene u
lsutylbenzylphtha!ate u
3,3' -Dichlorobenzidine u
IBenzo( a)anthracene u
lchrysene u
is(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 96
bi-n-octylphthalate u
Benzo(b )fluoranthene u
lsenzo{k}fluoranthene u
lsenzo(a)pyrene u
Indeno( 1,2,3-c,d)pyrene u
!oibenzo( a,h)anthracene u
'P.en-·'-Li'-··· Jene u
/1,IDL = Method Detec1ion Limit
U = Undetected
J = Estimated
-
100
000
MDL ,,_, __
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
J 330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
830
330
830
330
330
330
830
330
830
830
330
330
330
330
330
830
830
330
330
330
830
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
J 330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
10/31199 11/29199
13.4 11.4
1.90 2.36
Cone. MDL C-Onc. MDL ,,_,,_ ,,_, __ .. -~-""'''° u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
710 J 11000 2100 J 6400
u 11000 u 6400 u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
750 J 11000 1900 J 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400 u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 6800 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 27000 u 16000
u 11000 u 6400
u 27000 u 16000
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 27000 u 16000
u 11000 u 6400
u 27000 u 16000
u 27000 u 16000
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 590 J 6400 u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 27000 u 16000
u 27000 u 16000
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 27000 u 161100
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
6400 J 11000 14000 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400
51000 11000 11000 6400
u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400 u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400 u 11000 u 6400
u 11000 u 6400 u 11000 u 6400
I J/29/99 11/30/99 11/30/99
12.1 13.9 12.1
1.36 2.32 2.39
Cone. MDL Cone. MDL Cone. MDL Cone.
··-•·-,,_, __ ""/k" .. -•·-11olh, ""~' -•·-
540 J 9200 960 J 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
1500 J 9200 u 14000 3600 J 9900 2400
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
1100 J 9200 940 J 14000 1400 J 9900 960
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 · u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
7300 J 9200 11000 J 14000 8300 J 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u mo u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9'>00 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 23000 u 35000 u 25000 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 23000 u 35000 u 25000 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 23000 u 35000 u 25(00 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 23000 u 35000 u 25(100 u
u 23000 u 35000 u 25(00 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
540 J 9200 1800 J 14000 1100 J 9900 960
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 23000 u 35000 u 25000 u
u 23000 u 35000 u 25000 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 23000 u 35000 u 25000 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
5200 J 9200 29000 14000 15000 9900 34000
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 lJ 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 1"'100 u 9900 u
7700 J 9200 32000 14000 14000 9900 12000
u 9200 u 1"'100 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
u 9200 u 14000 u 9900 u
µg.•l:g = micrograms per kilogram
SBLKI = Laboratory melhod blank sample; US Ref-] = upstream reference #I; US-I = upstream location #1; DS-1 = downstream location#]; DS-2 = downstream location #2, DS-3 = dovmslleam location #3.
Background = Contaminant concentrations in the test worms prior to toxicity test initiation
ABS= Aquatic Biosystems -additional background tissue utilized for Method Spikel1vfethod Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD)
11/30/99
11.9
1.57
tvIDL
•"•/kn
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
J 11000
11000
11000
11000
J 11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
28000
11000
28000
11000
11000
11000
28000
11000
28000
28000
11000
11000
J 11000
11000
11000
28000
28000
11000
11000
11000
28000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
I 1000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
11000
I 1000
11000
11000
(
DS-3 ABS
L variegatus L variegaws
11/30/99 -
11.0 2.6
2.2~ 1.48
Cone. MDL Cone . -1IDL
"·
,,_, __
""'kl! Ul!l\.:sI
u 10000 1600 J 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
2900 J 10000 u 20000 u 10000 ·U 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
960 J 10000 6400 J 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000 u 10000 u 20000
7500 J 10000 16000 J 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 25000 u 51000
u 10000 u 20000
u 25000 u 51000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 25000 u 51000
u 10000 u 20000
u 25000 . u 51000
u 25000 u 51000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
840 J 10000 2300 J 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 25000 u 51000
u 25000 u 51000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 25000 u 51000
u 10000 u 20000
u l\XJOO u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
10000 10000 74000 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
12000 10000 31000 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
u 10000 u 20000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sample# SBLK2
Sample Identification Method Blank 2
Date Collected -
nercent Solids JOO
nercent Lioids 0.00
Cone MDL
'Parameter
"'hen□!
bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether
2-Chlorophenol
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Dichlorobenzc:ne
Benzyl alcohol
1,2•Dichlorobenzc:ne
'2-Methylphenol
_Ibis{2-Chloroisopropyl)ether
}+.Methylphenol
iln-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
h-Iexachloroethane
INitrobenzene
!sophorone
2-Nitrophenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Benzoic acid
bis(2-Chloroethoxy )methane
2,4-Dichlorophenol
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Naphthalene
-1--Ch!oroaniline
fexachlorobutadiene
4-Chloro-3-methylpheno!
2-Methylnaphtha!ene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2-Chloronaphthalene
2-Nitroaniline
\Dimethylphthalate
IAcenaphthylene
2,6-Dinitroto!uene
3-Nitroaniline
IAcenaphthene
2,4-Dinitrophenol
k-Nitrophenol
lr:,ibenzcfuran
2,4-Dinitroto!uene
lr:,iethylphthalate
k--Chlorophenyl-phenylether
Wtuorene
!+Nitroaniline
~.6-Dinitro-2-methy!pheno!
ln-Nitrosodiphenylamine
fl--Bromophenyl-phenylether
IHexachlorobenzene
IPentachlorophenol
iPhenanthrene
Anthracene
Carbaz.ale
lJi-n-butylphthalate
luoranthene
if,Tene
IButylbenzylphthalate
3,3 '• Dichlorobenzidine
Benzo( a )anthracene
,...hrysene
is( 2-E thy lhexy! )phthalate
Di-n-octylphthalate
Benzc(b )fluonmthene
8 enzo(k )fluoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indeno( l ,2,3-c,d)p)Tene
Dibenzo( a,h)anthracene
Aenzo( n h i'"-"!ene
}..fl)L "'Method Detection Limit
U = Undetected
1 = Estimated
""'"" ""'"" u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 5000
u 2000
u 5000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 5000
u 2000
u 5000
u 5000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 5000
u 5000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 5000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000 u 2000
u 2000
330 J 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
u 2000
Background
E.foetida
l J/20/99
12.4
4.41
Cone MDL ...... ,,.-.,1.-.
3000 J 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
9200 J 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
1600 J 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 32000
u 13000
u 32000
u !3000
u 13000
u 13000
u 32000
u 13000
u 32000
u 32000
u 13000
u 13000
3000 I 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 32000
u 32000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 32000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
24000 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
7200 J 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
u 13000
Table 5: Results of the Analysis for BNAs in Eiseniafoetida Tissue
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April 2000
Lab Control USREF-1 US-1 DS-1
E.foetlda E.foetida E.foetida E.foetida
11125199 I J/25/99 I 1125199 I J/25/99
12.7 1\.3 8.8 10.7
2.79 3.32 -3.85 2.58
Cone MDL Cone. SIDL Cone. MDL Cone MDL
,,.,{kn ··-'"· .. _,... """' "'"k2 ... , ... ""'k" ··-•'·
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
.U 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
16000 15000 28000 17000 47000 20000 31000 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
840 J 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 37000 u 44000 u 51000 u -BOO0
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 37000 u 44000 u 51000 u -BODO
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 37000 u 44000 u 51000 u 43000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 37000 u 44000 u 51000 u 43000
u 37000 u 44(J()(J u 51000 u 43000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u !7000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
1600 J 15000 1800 J 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 37000 u 44000 u 51000 u 43000
u 37000 u 44000 u 51000 u 43000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 37000 u +!000 u 51000 u 43000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
17000 15000 32000 17000 13000 J 20000 11000 J 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
7800 J 15000 12000 J 17000 13000 J 20000 8800 J 17000
u 15000 u ]7000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
u 15000 u 17000 u 20000 u 17000
DS-2
E.foetida
l 1125/99
8.1
2.03
Cone 11DL
U!!lk!! uplk_,;,
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
32000 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 56000
u 22000
u 56000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 56000
u 22000
u 56000
u 56000
u 22000
u 22000
2000 J 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 56000
u 56000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 56000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
23000 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
8700 J 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
u 22000
µgikg = micrograms per kilogram
SBLK2 = Laboratory method blank sample; US Ref-I = upstream reference #l; US-I = upstream location #I; DS-1 = downstream location#\: DS-2 = do\\nstream location #2; DS-3 = dowmtream location #3.
Background = Contammant concentrations in the test worms prior to toxicity test initiation
ABS"' Aquatic Biosystems -additional background tissue utilized for Method Sp1ke/lvlethod Spike Duplicate (1\1Sflv1SD)
DS-3 ABS
E.foetida E.foetida
11/25199 -
11.2 18.4
2.34 1.57
Cone ldDL Cone. MDL
.... ,k,,. 11idk<> u2•kll u2/ki;,:
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u !5000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
8700 I 15000 4300 J 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u !5000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 37000 u 24000
u 15000 u 9700
u 37000 u 24000
u 15000 u 9700
u ]5000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 37000 u 24000
u 15000 u 9700
u 37000 u 24000
u 37000 u 24000
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
1400 J 15000 1200 I 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 37000 u 24000
u 37000 u 24000
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 37000 u 24000
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
360000 15000 14000 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
11000 J 15000 7200 J 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
u 15000 u 9700
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sample# SBLKI
Sample Identification Method Blallk I
Date Collected
Percent Solids
Percent Linids
Cone.
Parameter uo/ko
alpna-BHC u
beta-BHC u
delta-BHC u
gamma-BHC (Lindane) u
Heptachlor u
Aldrin u
Heptachlor epoxide u
Endosulfan I u
Dieldrin u
4,4'-DDE u
Endrin u
Endosulfan II u
4,4'-DDD u
En<losulfan sulfate u
4,4'-DDT u
Metho,·ychlor u
Endrin ketone u
Endrin aldehyde u
alpha-Chlordane u
gamma-Chlordane u
Toxaphene u
Aroclor-lO 16 u
Aroclor-1221 u
Aroclor-1232 u
Aroclor-1242 u
Aroclor-1248 u
Aroclor-1254 u
Aroclor-1260 u
tvIDL = Method Detection Limit
U = Undetected
.I = Estima tcJ
ug/kg = micrograms per kilogram
-
l00
0.00
MDL
uo/ko
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
13
2.5
2.5
1.3
1.3
83
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
Background
i. variegatus
l0/31/99
13.4
1.90
Cone. MDL
uo/ko uo/ko
u 80
u 80
u 80
u 80
u 80
u 80
u 80
u 80
u 150
u 150
u 150
u 150
u 150
u 150
u · 150
u 800
u 150
u 150
u 80
u 80
u 5l00
u 230
U· 230
u 230
u 230
u 230
u 230
u 230
Table 6: Results of the Analysis for Pesticides/PCBs in L11mbric11/11s variegatus Tissue
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April 2000
Lab Control US REF-I US-I DS-1
.
L. variegatus L. variegatus L. variegatus L. variegallls
11/29/99 I 1/29/99 11/30/99 11/30/99
114 12.1 13.9 12.1
2.36 1.36 2.32 2.39
Cone. MDL Cone. MDL Cone. MDL Cone. MDL
110/l-o Hoiko 110/1:-0 110Jl,,o HO/kQ Ho/l-o ""/kQ ulllka
u 230 u 360 u 560 u 390
u 230 u 360 u 560 u 390
u 230 u 360 u 560 u 390
u 230 u 360 u 560 u 390
u 230 u 360 u 560 u 390
u 230 u 360 u 560 u 390
u 230 u 360 u 560 u 390
u 230 u 360 u 560 u 390
u 450 u 680 u !l00 u 760
u 450 u 680 u !l00 u 760
u 450 u 680 u !l00 u 760
u 450 u 680 u !l00 u 760
u 450 u 680 u !l00 u 760
u 450 u 680 u 1l00 u 760
u 450 u 680 u I l00 u 760
u 2300 u 3600 u 5600 u 3900
u 450 u 680 u !l00 u 760
u 450 u 680 u 1!00 u 760
u 230 u 360 u 560 u 390
u 230 u 360 u 560 u 390
u 15000 u 23000 u 36000 u 25000
u 540 u 790 u 830 u ' 770
u 540 u 790 u 830 u 770
u 540 u 790 u 830 u 770
u 540 u 790 u 830 u 770
u 540 u 790 u 830 u 770
u 540 u 790 u 830 u 770
u 540 u 790 u 830 u 770
DS-2
L. variegatus
11/30/99
11.9
1.57
Cone. MDL
""/l·o uo/ko
u 440
u 440
u 440
u 440
u 440
u 440
u 440
u 440
u 860
u 860
u 860
u 860,
u 860
u 860
u 860 •
u 4400
u 860
u 860
u 440
u 440
u 28000
u 920
u 920
u 920
u 920
u 920
u 9201
u 920·
SBLK I = Laboratory method blank sample; US Ref-1 = upstream reference# I; US-I = upstream location# I; DS-1 = downstream location# I; DS-2 = downstream location #2; DS-3 = downstream location #3.
Background= Contaminant concentrations in the test wom1s prior to toxicity test initiation
ABS= Aquatic BioSystems -additional background tissue utilized for Method Spikc/rvJethod Spike Duplicate (MS/rvJSD)
DS-3
L. variegatus
11/30/99
I 1.0
2.24
Cone. MDL
.,o/ko Ho/ko
u 390
u 390
u 390
u 390
u 390
u 390
u 390
u 390
u 750
u 750
u 750
u 750
u 750
u 750
u 750
u 3900
u 750
u 750
u 390
u 390
u 25000
u 890
u 890
u 890
u 890
u 890
u 890
u 890
ABS
L. variegatus
-
2.6
1.48
Cone. MDL
""/kO uo/ko
u 800
u 800
u 800
u 800
u 800
u 800
u 800
u 800
u 1500
u 1500
u 1500
u 1500
u 1500
u 1500
u 1500
u 8000
u 1500
u 1500
u 800
u 800
u 51000
u 2 JOO
u 2l00
u 2 !00
u 2l00
u 2 !00
u 2 l00
u 2l00
I r
I
I
f I
I !,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sample# SBLK2
Sample Identification Method Blank 2
Date Collected
Percent Solids
Percent Lioids
Cone.
Parameter .,n/l-n
alpha-BHC u
beta-BHC u
delta-BHC u
gamma-BHC (Lindane) u
Heptachlor u
Aldrin ff
Heptachlor epoxide u
Endosu]fan I u
Dieldrin u
4,4'-DDE u
Endrin u
Endosulfan II u
4,4'-DDD u
Endosu]fan sulfate u
4,4'-DDT u
Methoxych]or u
Endrin ketone u
Endrin aldehyde u
alpha-Chlordane u
gamma-Chlordane u
Toxaphene u
Aroclor-1016 u
Aroclor-1221 u
Aroclor-1232 u
Aroclor-1242 u
Aroclor-1248 u
Aroclor-1254 u
Aroclor-1260 u
MDL = Method Detection Limit
U = Undetected
J = Estimated
ug/k:g = micrograms per kilogram
-
100
0.00
MDL
"n/l-n
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
78
15
15
7.8
7.8
500
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
Background
E.foetida
I 1/20/99
12.4
4.41
Cone. MDL Cone.
11n/kc,• · .,nfl.n uo/l-o
u 600 u
u 600 u
u 600 u
u 600 u
u 600 u
u 600 u
u . 600 u
u 600 u
u 1200 u
u 1200 u
u 1200 u
u 1200 u
u 1200 u
u 1200 u
u 1200 u
u 6000 u
u 1200 u
u 1200 u
u 600 u
u. 600 u
u 38000 u
u 1400 u
u 1400 u
u 1400 u
u 1400 u
u 1400 u
u 1400 u
u· 1400 u
.Table 7: Results of the Analysis for Pesticides/PCBs in Eiseniafoetida Tissue
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April 2000
Lab Control US REF-I US-I DS-1
E.foetida E.foetida E.foetida E. foetida
11/25/99 I 1/25/99 I 1/25/99 11/25/99
12.7 113 8.8 10.7
2.79 3.32 3.85 2.58
MDL Cone. MDL Cone. MDL Cone. MDL
o,o/l,o o,o/l-o .,n/l-o uo/l-o uo/l-n un/l-o 110/1.0
560 u 670 u 830 u 620 .
560 u 670 u 830 u 620
560 u 670 u 830 u 620
560 u 670 u 830 u 620
560 u 670 u 830 u 620
560 u 670 u 830 u 620
560 u 670 u 830 u 620
560 u 670 u 830 u 620
I 100 u 1300 u 1600 u 1200
1100 u 1300 u 1600 u 1200
1100 u 1300 u 1600 u 1200
1100 u 1300 u 1600 u 1200
1100 u 1300 u 1600 u 1200
1100 u 1300 u 1600 u 1200
1100 u 1300 u 1600 u 1200
5600 u 6700 u 8300 u 6200
I 100 u 1300 u 1600 u 1200
1100 u 1300 u 1600 u 1200
560 u 670 u 830 u 620
560 u 670 u 830 u 620
35000 u 43000 u 53000 u 40000
1400 u 1700 u 2200 u . 1700
1400 u 1700 u 2200 u 1700
1400 u 1700 u 2200 u 1700
1400 u 1700 u 2200 u 1700
1400 u 1700 u 2200 u 1700
1400 u 1700 u 2200 u 1700
1400 u 1700 u 2200 u 1700
DS-2
E.foetida
11/25/99
8.1
2.03
Cone. MDL
110/1.-0 uo/ko
u 920
u 920
u 920
u 920
u 920
u 920
u 920
u 920
u 1800
u ]800
u 1800
u ]800
u 1800
u 1800
u ]800
u 9200
u 1800
u 1800
u 920
u 920
u 59000
u 2400
u 2400
u 2400
u 2400
u 2400
u 2400
u 2400
SBLK2 = Laboratory method blank sample; US Ref--1 = upstream reference# 1; US-1 = upstream location# I; DS-1 = downstream location# 1; DS--2 = downstream location #2; DS-3 = downstream location #3.
Background = Contaminant concentrations in the test worms prior to toxicity test initiation
ABS= Aquatic BioSystems -additional background tissue utilized for Method Spike/Method Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD)
, ... ,.
. DS-3 ABS
E.foetida E.foetida
I 1/25/99 -
11.2 18.4
2.34 1.57
Cone. MDL Cone. MDL
uo/l-o ,,nA·n "n/ko uo/kp.
u 660 u 390
u 660 u 390
u 660 u 390
u 660 u 390
u 660 u 390 ;.i:
u 660 u 390
u 660 u 390
u 660 u 390
u 1300 u 740
u 1300 u 740
u 1300 u 740
u 1300 u 740
u 1300 u 740
u 1300 u 740
u 1300 u 740
u 6600 u 3900
u 1300 u 740
u 1300 u 740
u 660 u 390
u 660 u 390
u 42000 u 25000
u 1800 u 1000
u 1800 u 1000
u 1800 u 1000
u 1800 u 1000
u 1800 u 1000
u 1800 u IOOO
u 1800 u 1000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 8: Results of the Analysis for T AL Metals in Lumbricu/11s variegatus Tissue
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April 2000
Sample# PBS991209B 'Background Lab Control US REF-I US-I DS-1 DS-2 DS-3 Sample Identification Method Blank I L. variegatus L. variegatus L. variegatus L. variegatus L. variegf!lus L. ,,ariegatus ~ L. variegatus
ate Collected 10/31/99 11/29/99 11/29/99 I 1/30/99 11/30/99 11/30/99 11/30/99
JOO 13.4 11.4 12.1 13.9 I 2.1 11.9 11.0 0.00 1.90 2.36 1.36 2.32 2.39 1.57 2.24
Cone MDL Cone Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL MDL
m
u 0.27 u· 2.01 u 2.37 u 2.23 u 1.94 u 2.23 u 2.27 u 2.45 u 0.19 2.2 1.42 2.3 1.67 4.3 1.57 6.1 1.37 4.0 1.57 3.5 1.60 3.J 1.73 u 0.12 692 0.90 907 1.05 996 0.99 I 120 0.86 992 0.99 879 I.OJ 914 1.09 u 0.08 u 0.60 u 0.70 u 0.66 u 0.58 u 0.66 u 0.67 u 0.73 u 0.03 0.36 0.22 0.76 0.26 0.37 0.25 0.89 022 0.46 0.25 0.34 0.25 0.52 0.27 Calcium u 25.80 1720" 192.54 2140 226.32 1760 213.22 3110 185.6 I 2280 213.22 2090 216.81 1890 234.55 Chromium u 0.14 u 1.04 2.7 1.23 1.8 1.16 12.7 I.OJ 2.7 1.16 4.5 1.18 2.7 1.27 Cobalt u 0.08 2.3 0.60 4.5 0.70 3.8 0.66 3.4 0.58 4.2 0.66 4.8 0.67 2.J 0.73 Copper u 0.25 25.0 1.87 38.5 2.19 26.8 2.07 53.0 1.80 36.7 2.07 36.9 2.10 21.o 2.27 Iron u 3.30 2250 24.63 4380 28.95 4210 27.27 5290 23.74 4500 27.27 5100 27.73 3540 30.00 Lead u 0.22 1.9 1.64 5.4 1.93 u 1.82 77.2 1.58 2.2 1.82 4.0 1.85 4.! 2.00 Magnesium u 9.20 805 68.66 1360 80.70 1200 76.03 1430 66.19 1340 76 03 1180 77.31 1220 83.64 anganese u 0.06 10.5 0.45 53.4 0.53 23.8 0.50 54.6 0.43 36.2 0.50 36.2 0.50 25.t 0.55 ercmy u 0.03 u 0.22 u 0.26 u 0.25 0.22 0.22 0.26 0.25 0.31 0.25 0.30 0.27 ickel u 0.36 u 2.69 3.6 3.16 3.3 2.98 4.1 2.59 3.7 2.98 3.9 3.03 5.2 3.27 otassium u 15.20 8360 113.43 l0300 133.33 11100 125.62 l0900 109.35 11700 125.62 9160 127.73 11300 138.18 Selenium u 0.33 3.4 2.46 5.8 2.89 6.5 2.73 4.6 2.37 4.0 2.73 3.7 2.77 3.6 3.00 Silver u 0.12 u 0.90 u 1.05 u 0.99 u 0.86 u 0.99 u I.OJ u 1.09 Sodium u 50.20 80300 374.63 4980 440.35 5850 414.88 4980 361.15 6240 414.88 4500 421.85 6440 456.36 hallium u 0.34 u· 2.54 u 2.98 u 2.81 u 2.45 u 2.81 u 2.86 u 3.09 Vanadium u 0.07 u 0.52 2.9 0.61 3.8 0.58 6.9 0.50 4.6 0.58 10.5 0.59 3.4 0.64 inc u 0.38 26{ 2.84 341 3.33 313 3.14 421 2.73 328 3.14 288 3.19 290 3.45
MDL= Method Detection Limit
U = Undetected
J = Estimated
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
PBS991209B = Laboratory method blank sample: US R,f•l = upstream reference #I; US-I= upstream location #1: DS-1 = downstream location #I; DS-2 = downstream location #2; DS-3 = downstream loc1tion #3.
Background = Contaminant concentrations in the test worms prior to toxicity test initiation
ABS = Aquatic BioSystems · additional background tissue utilized for Method Spike/Method Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD) "\
ABS
L. variegatus
2.6
1.48
Cone MDL
u 10.38
21.2 7.31
4050 4.62
u 3.08
26.9 1.15
9300 992.31
6.1 5.38
13.3 3 08
170 9.62
13200 126.92
8.7 8.46
5820 353.85
90.9 2.31
u 1.15
u 13.85
57800 584.62
21.6 12.69
u 4.62
34200 1930. 77
u 13.08
u 2.69
1920 14.62
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sample# Background
Sample Identification
Date Collected
Percent Solids
Percent Lipids
Cone
Parameter mll/ke
Aluminum 334
Antimony 2.6
Arsenic 3.1
Barium 3.0
Beryllium u
Cadmium 0.45
Calcium 6010
Chromium u
Cobalt 1.0
Copper 8.5
Iron 419
L,cad 1.9
Magnesium 1080
Manganese 11.2
Mercury u
Nickel u
Potassium 12100
Selenium 2.9
Sil\'cr u
Sodium 6720
fhallium u
Vanadium 0.71
7inc 112
MDL= Method Detection Limit
U = Undetected
J = Estimated
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
E.foetida
11/20/99
12.4
4.41
MDL
mg/ke
22.58
2.18
1.53
0.97
0.65
0.24
208.06
1.13
0.65
2.02
26.61
I. 77
74.19
0.48
0.24
2.90
122.58
2.66
0.97
404.84
2.74
0.56
3.06
Control
E.foetida
11/25/99
12.7
2.79
Cone MDL
mllikg mg/ke
380 22.05
u 2.13
: 7.4 1.50
4.4 0.94
u 0.63
0.48 0.24
4430 203.15
u 1.10
2.3 0.63
8.1 1.97
655 25.98
u 1.73
954 72.44
6.7 0.47
u 0.24
u 2.83
9150 I I 9.69
5.1 2.60
u 0.94
6360 395.28
u 2.68
3.0 0.55
142 2.99
Table 9: Results of the Analysis for T AL Metals in Eisenia foetida Tissue
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April 2000
US REF-I US-I DS-1
E.foetida E.foetida E.foetida
11/25/99 11/25/99 11/25/99
11.3 8.8 10.7
3.32 3.85 2.58
Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL
mg/kg melke mll/ke mg/ke mg/ke mvlke
4290 24.78 892 31.82 1800 26.17
u 2.39 u :;_01 u 2.52
6.4 1.68 10.6 2.16 4.3 1.78
22.2 1.06 25 1.36 13.6 1.12
u 0.71 u 0.91 u 0.75
1.6 0.27 1.2 0.34 0.43 0.28
5170 228.32 5630 293.18 3690 241.12
5.9 1.24 2.0 1.59 2.8 1.31
5.1 0.71 2.3 0.91 2.4 0.75
14.0 2.21 19.4 2.84 8.4 2.34
3270 29.20 1100 37.50 2290 30.84
6.0 1.95 3.4 2.50 u 2.06
1460 81.42 1370 104.55 1120 85.98
43.0 0.53 15.1 0.68 52.3 0.56
0.39 0.27 0.28 0.34 0.27 0.28
u 3.19 u 4.09 u 3.36
11900 134.51 9950 172. 73 7460 142.06
8.2 2.92 5.5 3.75 4.7 3.08
u 1.06 u 1.36 u 1.12
7160 444.25 6620 570.45 4410 469. 16
u 3.01 u 3.86 u 3.18
8.0 0.62 2.2 0.80 4.6 0.65
152 3.36 159 4.32 94.2 3.55
Background = Contaminant concentrations in the test worms prior to toxicity test initiation
ABS = Aquatic BioSystems -additional background tissue utilized for Method Spike/Method Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD)
US Ref-I= upstream reference #1: US-I= upstream location #1: DS-1 = downstream location #1: DS-2 = downstream location #2:DS-3 = downstream location #3.
DS-2 DS-3 ABS
E.foetida E.foetida E. foetida
11/25/99 -11/25/99 -
8.1 11.2 18.4
2.03 2.34 1.57
Cone MDL Com: MDL Cone MDL
mv/ke melke mllike mvlke mll/ke melke
2330 34.57 1890 25.00 1920 15.22
u 3.33 u 2.41 u 1.47
4.7 2.35 u 1.70 3.8 1.03
16.5 1.48 12.8 1.07 16.0 0.65
u 0.99 u 0.71 u 0.43
1.4 0.37 0.83 0.27 0.40 0. 16
5710 318.52 2550 230.36 6880 140.22
3.5 1.73 3.2 1.25 2.7 0.76
6.3 0.99 3.5 0.71 1.4 0.43
10.0 3.09 5.7 2.23 13.7 1.36
3480 40.74 2930 29.46 574 17.93
5.2 2.72 3.3 1.96 2.8 1.20
1370 113.58 820 82.14 2000 50.00
93.5 0.74 95.7 0.54 50.7 0.33
0.46 0.37 0.41 0.27 u 0.16
u 4.44 U, 3.21 u 1.96
11300 187.65 5220 135.71 9920 82.61
u 4.07 u 2.95 2.3 1.79
u 1.48 u 1.07 u 0.65
7710 619. 75 3860 448.21 4400 272.83
u 4.20 u 3.04 u 1.85
5.2 0.86 5.3 0.63 1.7 0.38
133 4.69 53.7 3.39 169 2.07
. .,,
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table to: Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Lumbriculus 1'an·egat11s Tissue (Based on Dry Weight)
Roanoke River Site
Sample#
Sample Identification
)ate Collected
Percent Solich
Percent Lipids
Cone.
Parameter n2/kiz
2,3,7,8-TCDD u
1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD u
1,2,3,4.7,8-HxCDD u
1,2,3,6, 7,8-llxCDD u
1,2,3, 7 ,8,9-lh-CDD u
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 3.971
OCDD 30.646
2,3, 7 ,8-TCDF
1,2,3, 7 ,8-PeCDF
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF
1,2,3,4, 7 ,8-1 b.-CDF
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3, 7,8,9-ll:<CDF
2,3,4,6, 7,8-l-l:<CDF
1.2.3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF
OCDF
Total Tetra-Dioxins
Total Penta-Dioxins
Total Hexa-Dioxins
Total 11.-...ta-Dioxins
1otal Tetra-Furans
Total Penta-Furans
Total Hexa-Furans
Total Heola-Furans
l\IDL = Method Detection Limit
U = Undetected
ngil,;:g = nanograms per kilogram
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
1.593
u
u
u u
u
6.486
u
u
u
1.593
DFBLKI
r-.1ethod Blank I
12/03/99
100
0.0
EMPC = Estimated Ma.ximwn Possihk Concentration
Background
L. variegatus
10/31199
13.4
1.90
,IDL Cone. r-.IDL Cone.
nollco nufl·a ne.ik2 m1:ik2
1.214 u 6.393 u
2.217 u 15.983 u
2.864 u 14.299 u
1.928 u 9.627 u
2.210 u 11.036 u
19.470 E!\U'C 43.5
145.777 624.998
1.130 u S.451 u
0.962 u 5.355 u
0.973 u 5.414 u
1.289 u 8.361 u
0.967 u 6.271 u
1.530 u 9.927 u
1.130 u 7.332 u
u 6.559 u
1.104 u 9.237 u
7.200 u 7.869 u
u u
u u
u u
u u
u u
u u
u u
u u
Plymouth, NC
April 2000
Lab Control USREF-1 US-I
L. variegatw L. l'ariegatus L. vanegatus
11/29/99 11/29/99 11/30/99
I 1.4 12.1 13.9
2.36 1.36 2.32
'IDL Cone. ~IDL Cone. }.IDL
noll·a mvk2 ne.1k2 nt!ll.:11. n2rk11:
11.099 u 8.624 u 7.437
34.020 u 14.476 u 21.523
24.192 u 18.878 u 25.593
16.288 u 12.710 43.2 E~IPC
18.671 u 14.570 u 19.752
EMPC 29.451 1510. 120
285.237 l 5699.318
14.136 u 8.419 u 8.415
8.438 u 4.738 24.0 EMPC
8.53) u 4,791 u S.176
18.377 u 8.648 180.501 EMPC
13.782 u 13.300 37.6 El\lPC
21.818 u 10.267 u 18.780
16.1 IS u 7.584 u 13.876
11.337 u 4.490 727.777
15.966 u 6.324 u 110.763
24.600 15.565 5053.318
u u
u 25.45()
u 132.168
29.451 2630.694
u u
u u
u u
u 727.777
DFBLKI = Laboratory method blank sample; US Ref-I = upstream reference #1; US-I = upstream location #I; DS-1 = downstream location #L DS-2 = downstream location #2: DS-3 = downstream location #3.
Background= Contaminant concentrations in the test worms prior to toxicity test initiation
ABS= Aquatic BioSystems -additional backgr()und tissue utilized for l\lcthod Spikc:11\lethod Spike Duplicate (1\!Si!\ISD)
DS-t
L. i·ariegatus
11/30199
12.1
2.39
Cone. ~IDL
n21kll n2-1ke
u 11.399
u 32.437
u 30.913
u 20.813
u 23.858
59.024
622.996
u 11.284
u 15.282
u 15.451
u 60.41 I
u 45.307
u 71. 723
u 52.975
u 7.286
u 10.261
58.087
u
u
u
111.087
u
u u
u
DS-2
L. variegatus
l I/30/99
11.9
1.57
Cone. -~IDL Cone.
nuika mvk11 m2.ik2
33.973 , 28.628
u 23.171 u
u 29.869 u
u 20.110 u
u 23.053 u
68.487 E~iPC 56.398
965.298 634.839
460.6 183.2
u .10.599 u
u i0.716 u
u 16. 1 71 9.360
u 12.128 u
u i9.199 u
u ·;4_J8l u
u 5.918 u
u 8.335 u
20.369 El\iPC 15.759
33.973 28.628
u u
23.456 u
u 115.049
460.6 183.2
u u
u u
lJ u
.J
DS-3
L. t•unegatus
11/30/99
11.0
2.24
,IDL Cone.
n1!./k11 nR•k.e
u
14.632 Li
8.675 u
5.840 u
6.695 u
130
1290
u
3.151 u
3.185 u
EI\IPC u
6.151 u
9.737 u
7.192 u
6.217 u
8.756 u
E?\[PC 192
u
u
u
u
u u
u
u
ABS
L. ,·anegatus
-
2.6
1.-18
El\lPC
r-.[DL
111,!'ki;i
69.11s
98.l lO
121.057
81.504
93.430
H.092
40.717
41.167
79.084
59.361
93.893
69.349
41.741
58.786
I
r
' ,.
[
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table l l: Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Eiseniafoetida Tissue (Based on Dry Weight)
Roanoke River Site
Sample#
Sample Identification
Date Collected
Percent Solids
Percent Lioids
Cone.
Paramct~ nollco
2,3,7,8-TCDD u
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u
1,2,3,4, 7 ,8-HxCDD u
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u
1,2,3, 7 ,8,9-HxCDD u
1,2,3,4,6, 7 ,8-HpCDD u
OCDD u
2,3,7,8-TCDF u
1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDF u
2,3,4, 7 ,8-PeCDF u
1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF u
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF u
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-1 lpCDF u
1,2,3,4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u
OCDF u
Total Tetra-Dioxins u
Total Penta-Dioxiru u
Total Hexa-Dioxins u
Total Henta-Dioxins u
Total Tetra-Furans u
Total Penta-Fu.rans u
~otal Hexa-Furans u
fotal Henta-Furans u
~IDL = Method Detection Limit
U = Undetected
ngikg = nanograms per kilogram
DFBLK2
Method Blank 2
12/08/99
100
0.0
,IDL
nofl•a
1.10,
4.711
4.744
3.194
3.662
3.710
3.202
2.104
2.436
2.463
2.397
l.797
2.845
2.102
1.772
2.495
3.451
El\IPC = Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration
Background
E.foetida
11/20/99
124
4.41
Cone. ,IDL Cone.
nollco n•ilco nn/l-,.
u 17.100 u
u 29.693 u
u 30.045 u
u 20.229 u
u 23.188 u
u 25.0IO u
93.5 76.07
u 11.371 u
u 13.270 u
u 13.416 u
u 17.620 u
u 13.215 u
u 20.920 u
u 15.451 u
u 20.648 u
u 29.079 u
u 24.331 u
u u
u u
u u
u u
u u
u u
u u
u u
Plimouth, NC
April 2000
Lab Control USREF-1 US-1
E.foetida E.foetida E.foetida
11/25/99 11/25/99 11/25/99
12.7 11.3 8.8
2.79 3.32 3.85
~IDL Cone. }.IDL Cone. ,IDL
nollco n1Z1ka n"~" n<>ll•,. m1:!k1i:
12.927 u 25.433 u 18.136
25.861 u 41.125 u 27.172
24.693 u 33.120 u 43.125
16.625 u 22.299 u 29.035
19.058 u 25.562 u 33.283
7.108 u 28.778 49.3 El\lPC
929.786 525.835
10.951 u 19.515 u 15.877
13.765 u 20.300 u 10.358
13.918 u 20.524 u 10.473
12.214 u 18.204 u 21.673
9.161 u 13.652 u 16.254
14.502 u 21.612 u 25.732
l0.711 u 15.963 u 19.005
8.220 u 13.071 79.9 El\[PC
l l.576. u 18.408 u 22.032
14.697 u 30.200 154.739
u u
u u
u u
62.536 u
u u
u u
u u
u u
DFBLK2 = Laboratory method blank sample; US Ref-I = upstream reference #1; US-I = upstream location #I; DS-1 = downstream locBtion # I: DS-2 = downstream location #2; IJS-3 = downstream location #3.
Background= Contaminant concentrations in the test worms prior to toxicity test initiation
ABS= Aquatic BioSystems -additional background tissue utilized for l\lcthod Spike/Method Spike Duplicate (t,.•fS/}..ISD)
DS-1
E.foetida
11/25199
,10.7
2.58
Cone.
nsukl!
u
u
u
u
u
45.874
622.84
104.9
u
u
u
u
u
u u
u
u
u
u
u
45,875
104.9
u u
u
DS-2 DS-3 ABS
E.foetida E.foetida E.foetida
11/25199 11/25/99 I 1/25199
8.1 11.2 18.4
2.03 2.34 1.57
'IDL Cone. ~fiJL Cone. ,IDL Cone. }.IDL
t
I
I
m:uk'1 m1:1k11 R2!kl! m:rikR niziko-no•k2 mvl.:a
18.284 u 9,396 u 9.821 u 3.714
36.952 u 15.606 u 12.297 u 7.627
32.648 u 24. 724 u 18.627 u 9.642
21.981 u 16.546 u 12.541 u 6.492
2U98 u 19.081 u 14.376 u 7.442
23.0 El\lPC 33.343 u 2.864
507.473 · 536.511 40.073
u I 1.643 u 10.843 u 6.256
12.513 u 7.068 u 5.699 u 3.471
12.651 u 7.146 u 5.762 u 3.510
14.350 u l l.506 u 1 I.366 u 3.999
10.762 u 8.629 u 8.525 u 2.999
17.037 u 13.661 u 13.495 u 4.748
12.583 u 10.090 u 9.%7 u 3.507
14.717 u 8.364 u 5.835 u 2.607
20.727 u I 1.780 u 8.218 u 3.672
29.231 u 13.031 u 6.223 u 3.174
u u u
u u u
u u u
u 72.422 u
u u u
u u u
u u u
u u u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ~. -
1024\DELIFR\0003\REPORT
Appendix A
Roanoke Sediment Toxicity Test: Hyalella azteca
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April2000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.
REPORT CERTIFICATION
The following repon titled "LOCKHEED MARTIN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REAC
ROANOKE SEDIMENT TOXICITY TESTING -Hyalella azteca" is an accurate and truthful
representation of the toxicity testing which was performed by American Aquatic Testing, Inc., located at
I I 05 Union Blvd. Allentown, Pennsylvania. We fun her cenify that we have personally examined and are
familiar with the information submitted in this document and based on our inquiry of those individuals
immediately responsible for obtaining the information, we believe the submitted information is complete
as presented We are aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information.
. ...,___...
Chri ,· ally _/
President, Laborato irector v·
~ ~ I/ I J. / J.oo<.)
Tarmo Pallop
Vice-President, Laboratory Manager
1105 Union Blvd .. 2nd Floor • Allentown, PA 18103
[phone] • Fax [phone]
13
LOCKHEED MARTIN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REAC
ROANOKE SEDIMENT TOXICITY TESTING -Hyalella azteca
Contents
Section
Introduction
Sediment Samples
Materials and Methods; Hyalella azteca
Results
Tables
I. Summary of Conditions for Hyalella azteca Toxicity Test
II. Percent survival of H. azteca by replicate chamber and mean survival
using control sample
III. Percent survival of H. azteca by replicate chamber and mean survival
using US-Ref-Sd
IV. Mean dry weight ( mg) of H. azteca by replicate chamber and mean dry
weight using US-Ref-Sd
Appendices
A. Raw data for Hya/ella azteca I 0-day survival and growth test
2
6
5
7
7
8
B. Statistical data for Hyalella azteca 10-day survival and growth test using control
· sediment
C Statistical data for Hyalella azteca 10-day survival and growth test using reference
sediment
D. Chain of custody documentation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ROANOKE SEDIMENT & SOIL TOXICITY TESTING
INTRODUCTION
During the month of August 1999, samples of sediment and soil were collected from the Roanoke River
site located in Plymouth, North Carolina, by members of the Lockheed Martin Environmental Services
Group attached to the USEPA REAC Division in Edison, New Jersey. Now designated a Superfund site
by the USEPA. these sediment and soil samples were used to perform bioaccumulation tests to determine
if the tested matrices represent a significant threat to potential receptor organisms.
The sediment samples from the site were delivered to American Aquatic Testing, Inc. (AA T) and
evaluated for toxicity using a 10-day solid phase exposure with the amphipod Hyalella azteca [I].
Following the exposure period, surviving test organisms from the sediments collected at the site were
compared to a control set tested under similar conditions using sediment of known environmental quality
and to a reference· sample collected at the site. The endpoints used for determination of an impact in the
amphipod exposures were mortality, measured as mean survival, and growth, measured as mean dry
weight.
MATERIALS AND METHODS / SEDIMENT SAMPLES
Surface sediment samples were collected from the Roanoke River site in Plymouth, NC. Sites were
selected to represent an area of the site that may have been impacted by the facility's operations, and an
upstream site, which would likely not have been affected, was selected as a reference.
Preparation of sedime/11 samples.for testing
The sediment samples collected on August 25, 1999 were transported, via overnight earner, to the
laboratory in 5-gallon high-density polyethylene (HOPE) containers on ice. Upon arrival at AA T. the
samples were stored at 4.0 ° C until being screened on 25-26 October, 1999 using a #20 mesh screen (850
µm) to remove large debris and indigenous organisms that may have competed with or potentially preyed
upon the test organisms. The screened portion of ihe sediment was then transferred to new, clean 1 gallon
HOPE containers. sealed and stored at 4.0° C until used for testing on 30 October, 1999.
Control sediment used to assess the health of the test organisms used for testing was collected from the
Spruce Run Reservoir in Clinton, NJ on October 25, 1999 and was screened in the same manner as the
sediment samples from the Roanoke River site on 27 October. 1999.
Test organisms
Arnphipods (Hyale/la azteca) used for the study were obtained from stock cultures maintained by ABS,
Inc. of Fort Collins, CO. Due to shipping complications, the amphipods were received in-house on 30
October, 1999. Prior to testing, the organisms were held under conditions similar to that which they
would encounter during the test (see Table I). The amphipods were fed once daily a combination of yeast,
cereal leaves and digested trout pellets [I]. At the beginning of the I 0-day exposure, the test organisms
were 8-11 days old.
A reference toxicant test using potassium chloride was conducted concurrently with the 10-day exposure
to assess the sensitivity of the lot of organisms used in the sediment test. The 48 hr LC so of 318.8 ppm
falls within the acceptable range of a published round robin study conducted by USEPA in 1992 [I]. The.
mean of the study was 289.0 ppm with confidence limits from 101 to 395 ppm. AAT, Inc. is currently
developing an internal laboratory control chart for H. a:.teca. To date, all tests have fallen into the
acceptable range of the above-mentioned study.
Experimental procedures
The entire sediment exposure series for this project consisted of five sediment samples from the Roanoke
river site and one of control sediment from Spruce Run Reservoir. Test chambers (300 mL tall form
borosilicate glass beakers) were filled with I 00 mL of sediment. 175 mL of test water was poured over
the sediment gently so as to cause minimal disturbance. There were eight replicate chambers for each
sample treatment. Test chambers were allowed to settle for 24 hours prior to test initiation.
After the settling period, the overlying water was siphoned off and fresh water was introduced, using a
small, round HDPE disk suspended over the sediment to deflect the water flow and minimize disturbance
to the sediment. Water quality data including alkalinity, ammonia, conductivity, dissolved oxygen,
temperature, pH, and hardness were measured initially, prior to the introduction of test organisms, and at
the end of the IO day exposure for each sample location and the control. The dissolved oxygen, and
temperature were also measured initially and every 24 hours thereafter for the duration of the exposure for
each sample location and the control.
The exposure period began by placing IO randomly selected test organisms into each chamber. Care was
taken to ensure that the organisms were released beneath the surface of the overlying water to keep air
bubbles from forcing the organisms to the surface. Each test chamber was then fed 0. 5 mL of YCT
mixture previously cited and the test chambers were covered. Test conditions are summarized in Table I.
Observations were made and recorded for each chamber each day during the exposure period to assess
organism health. Observations included the number of organisms dead, swimming, on the surface of the
sediment or on the surface of the water. Dissolved oxygen and temperature were measured and recorded
each day from a new replicate chamber for each sample and the control. During the 10 days of the test,
each chamber would be used for recordings once and two chambers would be used twice. I 50 mL of the
overlying water was siphoned off twice a day and replaced using reconstituted water as a measure to
maintain sufficient dissolved oxygen levels. Care was taken to minimize disturbance of the sediment
during water renewal by using the small HDPE disc. If feeding was required, 0.5 mL was added after the
second water exchange each day.
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I .
At the end of the I 0-day exposure the final water quality data were collected, and the test chambers were
prepared for the removal of test organisms. Each chamber was gently stirred using a pipette to suspend
the sediment The slurry was then poured into a #60 mesh screen (250 µm) and rinsed in a shallow pan
of laboratory water to remove the finer grains of the sediment. Sediment remaining in the sieve was
placed into a second shallow pan of water over a light table, and carefully sorted to find the surviving test
organisms. All surviving organisms were transferred to a 30 mL scuffle cup for live count verification,
and preparation for dry weight analysis.
When all test chambers had been sorted and the number of survivors verified, 0.5 mL of ethanol was
added to each scuffle cup to dispatch the organisms. They were then transferred to a previously dried and
tared aluminum pan and placed into an oven to dry at I 05° C for six hours. Upon removal.from the oven,
the pans were placed into a dessicator to cool and then were measured to the nearest 0.01 mg.
Data analysis
Data analysis was performed following procedures published by the USEPA [I] using the Toxstat [2] data
analysis software. Survival data, in the form of proportion of survivors in each chamber, was transformed
by arcsine squareroot and then tested for normality using the Shapiro-Wilk's test for homogeneity of
variance using Bartlett's test. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Dunnett's a posteriori
pairwise comparisons to evaluate differences between site samples and the reference sample and the
· control sample. In the case of growth analysis using the reference sample, an F-Test was used to
determine the equality of variances followed by ANOVA and a two sample t-test to evaluate statistical
significance.
4
I
TABLE I: Summary of Conditions for Hyalel/a a:Jeca Toxicity Test
I. Test type; Whole sediment, static, daily renewal I
2. Temperature; 23.0 +!-1.0° C I 3. Light quality; Wide-spectrum fluorescent illumination
4. Light intensity; 50 -100 foot-candles I
5. Photoperiod; I 6 hours light, 08 hours dark I Test chamber size; 3 00 mL high form borosilicate glass beakers 6.
7. Sediment volume; I 00 mL / replicate I
8. Overlying water volume; 17 5 mL / replicate I
9. Renewal; 2 volume exchanges per day
I 0. Age of test organisms; 8 to 11 days I
II. Number organisms I container; 10 I
12. Replicates; 8
13. Feeding; Yeast, cereal leaves and trout pellets 0.5 mL / day I
14. Aeration; None unless dissolved oxygen concentrations I S 40 % saturation, then -I 00 bubbles / min.
15. · Overlying water; Laboratory reconstituted water I
16. Test chamber cleaning; Only if necessary
17. Overlying water quality; D. 0., and temperature daily, alkalinity, I
ammonia, conductivity, hardness & pH at
beginning and end of test I
I 8. Test duration; 10 days I 19. Effects measured; Survival and growth (mean dry weight)
20. Test acceptability; Minimum control survival 80 % I
I
I
5 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RESULTS
Effects on Survival/ Control Sample
Raw d;ta are presented in Appendix A. Data were arcsine square root transformed. The data were found
to be normally distributed, were tested for homogeneity of variances using Bartlett's test, and found to be
homogeneous. It was therefore determined that parametric analyses were appropriate, and ANOV A
followed by Dunnett's pairwise comparisons were used to determine differences between survival of
organisms in all samples and the control sample.
Results from the analysis, which compared survival in all samples with survival of organisms exposed to
the control sample, are presented in Table II and Appendix B.
Of the five sampling locations at the Roanoke, River site. the sample from Locations US-I caused 100%
mortality, and was eliminated from analyses. Amphipods exposed to samples from Locations DS-1, DS-
2, and DS-3 had significantly less survival than those exposed to the control treatment Survival of
amphipods exposed to sediment from Location US Ref SD was not significantly different when compared
to the laboratory control.
Effects on Sun1ival / Reference Sample
Raw data are presented in Appendix A. Data were arcsine square root transformed. The data were found
to be normally distributed, were tested for homogeneity of variances using Bartlett's test, and found to be
homogeneous. It was therefore determined that parametric analyses were appropriate, and ANOV A
followed by Dunnett's pairwise comparisons were used to determine differences between survival of
organisms in all samples and the control sample.
Results from the analysis, which compared survival in all samples with survival of organisms exposed to
the control sample, are presented in Table III and Appendix C.
Of the four sampling locations at the Roanoke River site, the sample from Location US-I caused 100%
mortality, and was eliminated from analyses. Amphipods exposed to samples from Locations DS-1 and
DS-3 had significantly less survival than those exposed to the on-site reference sample, US-Ref-Sd.
Survival of amphipods exposed to sediment from Location DS-2 was not significantly different when
compared to the reference sample.
E,ffec1.1· on Growth I Control Sample
Raw data are presented in Appendix A. Survival analysis of the samples from the Roanoke River site
indicated significant differences from the in-house control sample and therefore any growth data analysis
of the remaining test organisms from those sites using the control sample is not relevant and could be
· potentially misleading.
6
Effects on Growth I Reference Sample
Raw data are presented in Appendix A. The data were found to be normally distributed, and were tested
for homogeneity of variances using an F-Test for the equality of two variances and found to be equal. It
was therefore determined that parametric analyses were appropriate, and ANOV A followed by a two
sample I-test was used to determine differences between the mean dry weight of organisms in all sample
DS-2 and the reference sample.
Results from the analysis that compared mean dry weight in sample DS-2 with mean dry weight of
organisms exposed to the reference sample, US-Ref-Sd, are presented in Table IV and Appendix D.
Using the reference site US-Ref-Sd for comparison, it was determined that there was no significant impact
on growth for the test organisms exposed to the sample from Location DS-2.
Table II. Percent survival of H. azteca bv renlicate chamber and mean survival usin!! control sample
Rep. Control US-Ref-Sd US-1 * DS-1 DS-2 DS-3
A 90 80 0 60 90 40
B 90 70 0 60 60 40
100 80 0 30 80 60
D 90 100 0 20 60 70 .
E 90 90 0 50 80 80
90 100 0 60 60 60
G 100 80 0 60 80 70
H 90 80 0 50 70 80
Mean 92.5 85.0 0.0 48.8 72.5 62.5
· Survival'
Statistically Different .. No Yes Yes Yes Yes
From Control :
• Sample not mcluded m ANOV A due to 100 % monahty
Table III. Percent survival of H. azteca bv renlicate chamber and mean survival usin11. US-Ref-Sd sample .. Sample Location
Rep. US-Ref-Sd US-I* DS-1 DS-2 DS-3
A 80 0 60 90 40
B 70 0 60 60 40
C 80 0 30 80 60
D 100 0 20 60 70
E 90 0 50 80 80
F 100 0 60 60 60
G 80 0 60 80 70
H 80 0 50 70 80
Mean 85.0 0.0 48.8 72.5 62.5 Sur\'ival
Statisticall~-Different Yes Yes No Yes
From Reference
• Sample not mcluded m ANOV A due to 100 % monahty
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Table IV. Mean drv weieht (me) of H. azJeca by reolicate chamber and mean drv weiPht usin" US-Ref-Sd
Reo US Ref SD DS-1 DS-2 DS-3
A 0.035 0.035 0.040 0.018
B 0.020 0.025 0.020 0.003
C 0.026 0.043 0.030 0.017
D 0.054 0.030 0.055 0.007
E 0.026 0.032 0.049 0.026
F 0.028 0.038 0.058 0.022
G 0.013 0.007 0.028 0.044
H 0.035 0.010 0.044 0.031
Mean 0.030 ·or~· 0.028 0.040 0.021
Wt.
· Statistically Different Yes No Yes
From Reference
, REFERENCES
[l] Ingersoll, C.G., G.T. Ankley, G.A. Burton, F.W. Dwyer, R.A. Hoke, T.J. Norberg-King,
and P.V. Winger 1994 Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-
associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates EPA 600/R-94/024. U.S. Environmental
Protection. Office of Science and Development, Duluth, MN
[2] Toxstat March, 1994 Version 3.4 data analysis software published by West, Inc. Western
Ecosystems Technology, Inc., Cheyenne, WY
8
APPENDIX A
RAW DAT A FOR Hyalella azteca 10-DA Y
SUR VIV AL AND GROWTH TEST
I
·I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
9 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
ClienVToxicant:. ____ 4.,_·~2 _____ _ Beginning Date & Time: 10--Jo--<i'z ,,,,~-
Ending Date & Time: , 1-<=; -"., , ;J"· Project Number: __ --'-1-'-~---"--'''-------
Species: --2-l«-" Hatch Date: ________ _
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.
Weight Data ...
A B (B-A)*1000-C D CID C/E
weight of weight of dry weight of # of mean dry IC2s & NOEC
Pan boat boat & org. organisms surviving weight calc. weight
Cone. Reo # In\ la\ {ma\ ora. lmn\ lmn\
A I -r,. cxJ l'Y)-;;W.S 31 o. 3'4(1 ' I 0 ({~5<
B .;) ''·"~ o-COJ-/ :::io 0 3..:;o <1 0 0..:>9
C,e,J
C ..,__ ,.. • JJ. ~ D Cl-'S L> 0 C) 33Q IC o OJ 3
D LI D.•-LJ'1D D0053D __ Q.c '.1 ()C, '1 _Q____Q_'i._':f._ _ ...
E ·-,...,_ ,...--....1xei ,, ___ ·-,,10 310 '1 O>'L. ':;:, 0 ·----0
F _ _k ___ tLOD'-/55_ .Q. ~ 9.1 --~'i.JQ. ----
.;I 0 _D~'t ........ --G-------•-•---·-·· -··-----------
-:i u.W.C:::,3) 0-DDS+w 0. '150 10 0, l)'i~ --·---
H <" n.zns1:=i-t),tx,,5 t,5. .. 0 3,)'fl) <L o. O'/J :, .. -.. .. --.. . ..
A 9 'lJ. Ol."• =~ ?{) /l,l(.)55~ .;, 'to ~ 0 \) ' -" CJ :,::,
B 1-------·· -----
\)~ L
/0 0.00':J LJ_i "· DD 'i5lo O. l'iO C. "'..:io -·-------------
C I I J ur: ,,r, '\ t.n.5..!:i.L ---__ C;_~---..-;, 0 C ;,._.
Q ,, (\~rl•'" ---..
D 1i V co L/'l L, -.. ,,::,50 () S'io ,o 0 .) ,.; '1
' l:,
.... -·-· ..... ...
E I ', ').L'{)'SID Oc_QO!S ~-·";, o . .:i30 ___ 'L ___ .. .0: C, .;)(,_ - ----·-·· ... --------.. ---------·-----
F _J.li__ LDW'i':1.JP_ ~....!i .. l.4-.. _ ___ o __ .) iso ... I-o o,)'ii --·-··-.. ------------
G 1'"') OJlJ D2 .. o.,_QD_L}.'}_3.. __ 0. luv ~ 0 0 I .. ) --... ----------·-·· . --r-·--· ------·---·---
H I I; D-oo:5-, S ... J)_,p0:5 5 3 _ C . .J \so 0 0-1.5 ---·· ... ··•• ·-··-.. --...
A ,. id c_QQ_ '-I ~' .. ,._ l.D!:L~ --2_J1.::, --+-(l. 035 --·---
B I I< n,DD ;;:_,. I T, 005 '::,I., c. t60 Q.o.:.>5 .. ---. C 1(j i2M.!.~i>... 0,Db 50 I . U_-l)o __ ' .. o. _Q_"i ~ ·-----· -----_,'.) _____ ...
\)'J , \ D ,)(., -(! QQ'-{_;;!,_'f, __ 0. DOY 3'-/ I.). Qi:,Q 2 .. o..QJ..O ... ---·-·--------· .. .. -·--·--·· .... -·---------····--· ...
E -·~I 1;, c_.{, ,10:2 1LPQ':/ 'in () 11,.Q ' o_._0.3~_ --···-···· -... .. . .. ·-.... __
F ...D o. c.o3:".jj__ QJJ2 ':/ .. L~-.. <2:.2)_g_ f. o. 03'!; '!' ----··· ----•··· --··-····-··-· ... -----·----··
G .J} ,?.[;{,-f'-/1.,_ ih.ill 'i SD 0 D'iu ~ _o,ool ___ ... -· ·-. ······---·-.. ---•·---. ··----.. -
.. ... H :.i.q 'J,{J(,Ji)'-i .. Q,{r) 3'}'1 0. uSD C, .Q~ C IQ. .. .. ·-·· ·---· . .. --· A .JS o r::c-':1-d 1-Q,ordL-1 o~}(,Q _ J o. 0'10 -·---•· ---·---· --· ---
B ;)./.;, D-DD3 -~1./ Q_J)()_.) s \; -..... 0 · 1,)0 ___ .... __ ( 6 . u.:io =-----··· -·---· .... ----·--------·
s,)-
C .:.n .... i2c~>':I.J2:1 __ QOD y_c1.3_ 0_,.)'1_Q ___ <j 0-0.SQ __ ~ --·----..
\) D ~3o -·c;, --------·------
),~~-.. 0-.CV'-f.D.J. _ 'f)S l) . 0-D55 -------D,QO . -· ---···---.... . ·7/·-···· ..
J!:,_';' J:Z...<2. ·--·· ..... --. ----
E :J"'t .. -r;.C>C'-55 D_ .D.0D51'L o 3'io __ "• ----·--. ---.. ·-----------·· ---····
F 'lD (•:U2:I !i ~-ll,C-Q..~.3':-\ u. 3::;o (µ __ ()_-l) .5 'is' --G-.... ··------·-·-. -·-· -···------
LJ..L_. ()~CD~/5.-! .... _Q _co':/ .. :I ''J C,. .).)0 ,;5 0. <)..,J~ ~--·--··-· -· .. ------·-. -----·------·-·-----~
--·-···• H ~ ... ,.,, r.:u.3~;:; t>,CQ!;J J.3 l>._,? ,., .. 1: u <.)'-4'-l .. . .. ···-···-. -·-.... .. -· ..
---·--·---------·-···-----· -··-----·-------------
Basi.:WT.wU
ClienVToxicant: _____ l,_/ ]"------
Project Number: ___ ___,i..:.~_-_v-'/'------
Species: ___ .s:;ldt..:•:...oc.a..2"'-'-'t"-"'<-"',:...~------
Beginning Date & Time: 10 -so -<t'f !'f,<
Ending Date & Time: '/ -'1-q,;· r .we
Hatch Date: ________ _
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.
h Wela t Data
A B (B-A)*1000=C D CID C/E
weight of weight of dry weight of # of mean dry IC21 & NOEC
Pan boat boat & erg. organisms surviving weight calc. weight
Cone. Reo # lol /al /mn\ era. (mol lmol
A 3, o. 1.:x.J/ ::i-1, CJ.oo,Jr. "-Cl. 0 J-1-1 ". o,._,
B "'cJ u .["r-' ,, ...,___ 0. 00 ..J =i-'--i <). (.)I,'> y o. oo.i.
C ';,5 Ir. ,,,-.,-)'(1-Fl ' r,r, "' r-, -:/ l).1 llQ (.,. 0 Dll -·----
\)')/) D "'' -').r✓' '1 t./ J, 1., VO <..J II -=i, e, r,50 I-0 on·1
E 3+ o. oo .=-.o:> I n,CfC>5'-f.) o . .;,,~ ~ D. c.> :)1,
F 3" ';. D[)<..J I I n, OD'-1.) LJ () , 3,., (p ". o...).:;>
G ·3'-1 "· oc,::;5,;s n,coc.·~a l). J. I 0 l-0 , /l '-l'i
H Ur. -~.co-/ ID .-o, rnL135 D. ),:C ,, '-5 o. 0.31
A
B
\ C -
D
E
F
G
H
A
B
\ C
D
E --•-
[ ____ ,_ -·---•-·-··-·---·····--·--------·· -... ---·-··------•--·-----------------------------···---
F ···--·--~
G
H
A -· B
'\ C
D
E
F
G
H -
Initials "'le> -fl..\ Vi)i rvYv0 ,::t) L-
Date I I i I,-1\ /i..; 111.:iJ l//i7'-,d,:u . . E = Ong1nal number of organisms at test InitIation, adJusted for losses .
Observations: -=-----------------------------------
B.uicWf.wk3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Client/foxicant: ___ .,_....:4---'?e,-___ _
I Project Number: __ --'-':l-'----""--'-----
Species: __ __.ft:z.,•'-"'<w7ut'=v'""'-----
Beginning Date & Time: lo-3., -<1 ~ Jifrt5: l"t•<
EndingDate&Time: 11-9-5,; ,~~"
Hatch Date· ___________ _
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Cone.
~ ,1 ,,.J
Qef
..
ll ·S -1
I
-----
I
Ren
A
B
C
D
~
F
G
H
Sediment Test
American Aquatic Tes ting, Inc. Da 10
Observations / Live Count Final
Dav 1 Dav2 Dav 3 Dav 4 Dav 5 Dav 6 Dav 7 Dav 8 Dav 9 Observ. ive Coun
N tJ
cv r,J
,.J /J
ti ,-J
,-.! (')
,v /J
.o/ N
rJ (Ii
I
I
I
-··--·---------
Key: O=dead, W=on water surface, M=swimming, F=on sedirrient slfrface~-N=no observations
-
Clienlff oxicant: ___ --,-,-.:u'------
ProJect Number: __ _____,i__,;)'-----"'-'------
Species· ___ _Ld~ .. ,!...L,!..!"'"'''-"'------
Sediment Test
Beginning Date & Time: Io··),;. -'i 5 ~ '"'""--,,..
Ending Date & Time:._--"'11_-_"IL....· _<f!..."'-'--'''-',.:..:":..:":.__
Hatch Date: ____________ _
American Aquatic Testing, Inc. -.--ba, 10
Observations/ Live Count -Final -
DS -J
\
\
Reo Dav 1 Dav 2 Dav 3 Dav 4 Dav 5 I Dav 6 I b-a-v7~-D-a-v8~-D~a-v9~ Observ. ive Coun
F
G
t-j
~ --------+-----------·-·•. -·-----------· . ------·-----·-\-----------------~
B
C -----..
D ---.. ---·-··-----
C--CE~,---1-----------. ----· --··· --+----+--------------
,i__!----+---1---+-----+-----------------+------------!----+--·---'
G --·-----•------·---------.
A ------·· --·---··--·
B
C ----------------· -----·-----
D 1----· -------------······ ---· --------·------
E --------------·-----·------------· --
F
_Q__ --·--+-
_H .
··-.. -------·-----·
\f-=-~!'-_-+_ -__ ---+---··· --------·----
......
--·
G
A -·-· -----------
\--i---· ----...
-·•----+----..
E -------·-----··---
-~t.1aIs ... ':" ~ _ .-1)-.>
_Qate __ 1.9])j_ ...JI./!.. ....
Comments· -----------·~-·
Key: D=dead, W=on water surface, M=swimming, F=on sediment surface, N=no observations ·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Client/Toxicant: __ ~'-/_,· _,3"-----
Job Number: __ ....:.;/ J:..._;-"::..:.I __ _
Beginning Date & Time: I<> -,v · •; '1 I '-fl f.
Ending Date & Time: Ii · 'i -q '1 1 } "·
1 Species: Ii.~ 'L ,,~ ... ~ Freshwater Sediment Test
American AquaUc TesUng, Inc.,
Physical/ Che_mical Parameters
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
---·-·---·
Pa,-;,;;;~c~;;z;;;-trationF"o=--,-----2--l-3 --··-4-__ Q?-6 . 7 8 \·g-·7· 10
Control _)s" )3.c, .d!:LO f3,D ~1:_ ___ .;e.s..h'3c.5 .. :2.Lt~_ 3.l.e ... ~)i!__.,1?,,CJ
T
E
_ _& ( .:.1. o .H ~ :.ALI . ..:> .J',.D 11,<J_ ,.)3,D ITTcS_ U_11.__ ___ )!_c_ ::C.~. ;l?,.c.-,_
_12.', · I .:u" ··-"-~~-2.'J.,e> f,.:, -~L~----J-".cf:i_ ol3,5-. .U I' .. ~_3y __ J__:' __ ~-___ ..22_'.',;"
___ 05,_~1 .... ).ly_ l.~--"'--.2~...Q. ~.J_.l)_]LS .. ed.~:?? l13~ . .;-=%-~ "'~" .,1::;~ }.'IC
M __ Q_S:.) ..l6 0 :'~_Q_-~12.. .J:J ~ }_s,:, ,:i.;i 5 __ ol3.:':} __ .,i.-J_)_ l} ,i cl.~-~ ,)'{ o
1
:
1
~ ~o ~,, aSh ~'-~ 1\y ?=2 ,"°'" ~'~ ,,,,.~ ""~'
---··-·· -··\ --· -
-.. -
Initials ML-__ _;N. qi,,.;). _ .(1,.L .. }tb ~.l '.? lW..; Y~i... "'L r,•c. ···1;i ..
11\Z -· ··,:re· -~•'f -~ '.'~ j Date J!,_1_}5) ... ! v I!..!. _ I t?l __ µja._. I\/~ .I -.• I /R
Freshwater Acute Test
Job#: 5 RT # /Lf
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.
Start Date & lime: /1-5'-'1 'i 1'0 a
Species: H. <j -z -Jc c.,.__
Dilution Water: ff t1 /1gd, fl,,.,j
EndDate&Time: II-r·'.11 /<,;"Jo
Test Type: 411,c. ~ t,i R
Concentration !Rep. [I -Live Count II TemQerature {Cl
,"M,.., 0 hr. 24 hr. 48 nr. onr. 24 hr. 48 hr.
C,, ,, r-.-r, I A I "' I • __J9 ___ __;),]. 0 .l 3 0 )-1 0
B /0 l,., ;o .:)..~,<.) J. 's -,, )"3 ..,
A /o I,_, lo :J_)_ ,u :} 3 .. .;q..,
I ;}-c;-B '" /<? /o ;}).. "' J-3. 0 ) 1 <J
A '" /o 8' ,_ 'J--). c:, 't?i·" .::i1.<>
d-5o B lo ;o t4 d-;;i.. <> J"3 ,, ;i. 1 "
A ,,.,, l-6c,'0 0 ;:;}--").. • 0 J:? 0 -~3 ..,
'yo B __ Jo ______ ________ /Ao '0
_ 0 d:;;i . .., _23 o ___ 13 C -------·-----·----
A /µ ____ 1..6 C' ,o 0 ~?,.o Jj. 0 J ':?.o
/<Jot)
.
B ·-(.:>_ ---·-1' "' 0 d;;i. . ., J) D .;i. 3 ., --· -~-.. ---
A ,~ ¢0 ,c 0 ~;;i. .,> ;:; :,.<, ;). ] .,
'J-ouo -·----
B '" f,,,,d"·'" t> ;} ;). . .., ,13 o ;n.., ..
I
Initials
II
'i1fr>
I ft: l It~ II
1Pf'
I '7!/z I
1~
Date ,,z,; "z,; ~ ,,z7
11 Concentration II Alkalinity {mglll II Hardness {mg[L} I
11 Control
II
to IL _ Cfo
I I 100% 60 q 0
I
Initials
I
,PO F-~ I Date "I,
Concentration I QH {std units} II Dissolved Oxygen{mgll} II Conductivi!Y {umhos}
nn.-. I 0 fir. I 48 fir. II 0 fir. I 48 fir. II 0 fir. I 48 fir.
f't:1 .... rr.-..l ·-1 I 7.t J?. ~ YV .:27) ·1:;;,,,
(;)., 7-6 7, f-3 /f.o 'i"i C) t,n,.
}<,u 7.c 7-'1 F l 7-'1 ro C 7-.,,,
<:"0(} f,6 7-'t )'.3 7't II C " /loc -----------
'"'"" 7,6 7J y.1 7-.q /qe-o /-ic;o
d"O"o 7-. 6 ·7) 6-,. -I ,, ) So .. <~"'"'
f--Initials I T/ f"/ ·r,v? 1--·-;.7& I
'Tl¥' I pp ·71¥'
Date hf< -(,-q··-1•lz 117c 11/7
Observations:
------------·------------------ACP48PAR.WK3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I H. azteca KCl Srt #14 11/07/99 48 hr LC50
File: c:\toxstat\kcha0141.c50 Transform: NO TRANSFORM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Spearman -Karber Estimate of LC50
Estimated LC50 = 318.7500 (Variance= 369.140625)
95% confidence interval: (281.093, 356.407)
GROUP IDENTIFICATION
OBS
PROP
SMOOTH
PROP DOSES --------------------------------------------------------------------
1 control 0.000 0.000 o.oo
2 125 0.000 0.000 125.00
3 250 0.300 0.300 250.00
4 500 1.000 1.000 500.00
5 1000 1.000 1.000 1000.00
6 2000 ppm 1.000 1.000 2000.00
. --- ---------------------------------------------------
1300 Blue Spruce Drive, Suite C
Fort Colllns, Colorado 80524
Toll Free: 800/331-5916
Tel: [phone] Fu:: 970/484-2514
ORGANISM HISTORY
DATE,
SPECIES,
AGE,
LIFE STAGE,
HATCH DATE,
10/29/99
Hyalella azteca
7-10 day
Juvenile
Variable
Immediately BEGAN FEEDING,
FOOD, Aspen leaves, Flake slurry
Water Chemistry Record:
TEMPERATURE,
SALINITY / CONDUCTIVITY,
. TOTAL HARDNESS (as CaCO,),
TOTAL ALKALINITY (as CaCO,),
pH,
Comments:
Mean
0
144 mg/I
JQQ mg/I
Faciliiy Supervisor
Range
90 llOm~II
-=----
Aquatic BioSystems, Inc. • Quality Research Organisms
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIXB
STATISTICAL DATA FOR Hyalella azteca 10-DAY
SUR VIV AL AND GROWTH TEST
USING CONTROL SEDIMENT
I
TITLE: Lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99 I
FILE: S:\TOXSTAT\481201HA.SUR
TRANSFORM: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y)) NUMBER OF GROUPS: 5 I ----------------------------------------------------------------------
GRP IDENTIFICATION REP VALUE TRANS VALUE I ------------------------------------------
1 Control 1 0.9000 1.2490
1 Control 2 0.9000 1.2490
1 Control 3. 1.0000 1.4120 I 1 Control 4 0.9000 1.2490
1 Control 5 0.9000 1.2490
1 Control 6 0.9000 1.2490 I 1 Control 7 1.0000 1.4120
1 Control 8 0.9000 1.2490
2 us Reference 1 0.8000 1.1071 I 2 us Reference 2 0.7000 0.9912
2 us Reference 3 0.8000 1.1071
2 us Reference 4 1.0000 1.4120
2 us Reference 5 0.9000 1.2490 I 2 us Reference 6 1.0000 1.4120
2 us Reference 7 0.8000 1.1071
2 us Reference 8 0.8000 1.1071 I 3 DS-1 1 0.6000 0.8861
3 DS-1 2 0.6000 0.8861
3 DS-1 3 0.3000 0.5796 I 3 DS-1 4 0.2000 0.4636
3 DS-1 5 0.5000 0.7854
3 DS-1 6 0.6000 0.8861
3 DS-1 7 0.6000 0.8861 I 3 DS-1 8 0.5000 0.7854
4 DS-2 1 0.9000 1.2490
4 DS-2 2 0.6000 0.8861 I 4 DS-2 3 0.8000 1. 1071
4 DS-2 4 0.6000 0.8861
4 DS-2 5 0.8000 1.1071 I 4 DS-2 6 0.'6000 0.8861
4 DS-2 7 0.8000 1.1071
4 DS-2 8 0.7000 0.9912
5 DS-3 1 0.4000 0.6847 I 5 DS-3 2 0.4000 0.6847
5 DS-3 3 0.6000 0.8861
5 DS-3 4 0.7000 0.9912 I 5 DS-3 5 0.8000 1.1071
5 DS-3 6 0.6000 0.8861
5 DS-3 7 0.7000 0.9912 I 5 DS-3 8 0.8000 1.1071 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
I
I
I
I
lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99
ile: S:\TOXSTAT\481201HA.SUR Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
-~:~~:~-=-~~=~~=-====-:~:-~~:~:=~=:-----------------------------~-------------
D = 0.716
I= 0.960
lritical W (P = 0.05) (n = 40) = 0.940
ritical W (P = o. 01) (n = 40) = 0.919 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------lata PASS normality test at P=0.01 level. Continue analysis.
lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99
File.: S: \TOXSTAT\481201HA.SUR Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
•-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
.artlett's test for homogeneity of variance
Calculated Bl statistic= 4.38 •----------------------------------------------------------------------------Table Chi-square value=
'able Chi-square value=
Data PASS Bl homogeneity
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
13.28 (alpha= 0.01, df = 4)
9.49 (alpha= 0.05, df = 4)
test at 0.01 level. Continue analysis.
Lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99
File: S:\TOXSTAT\481201HA.SUR Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
SUMMARY STATISTICS ON TRANSFORMED DATA TABLE 1 of 2
I
I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
GRP IDENTIFICATION N MIN MAX MEAN
----------------------------------------------
.1 control 8 1.249 1.412 1. 290
2 us Reference 8 0.991 1.412 1.187
3 DS-1 8 0. 464 0.886 0.770
4 OS-2 8 0.886 1.249 1. 027
5 05-3 8 0.685 1.107 0.917 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
I
1
Lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99
File: S:\TOXSTAT\481201HA.SUR Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y)) I
SUMMARY STATISTICS ON TRANSFORMED DATA TABLE 2 of 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
GRP IDENTIFICATION VARIANCE so SEM c.v. % ------------------------------------------------------------
1 Control 0.006 0.075 0.027 5.85
2 us Reference 0.024 0.155 0.055 13.09
3 OS-1 0.026 0.162 0.057 21.09
4 DS-2 0.018 0.136 0.048 13.23
5 DS-3 0.028 0.166 0.059 18.11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test
il~: S:\TOXSTAT\481201HA.SUR
date 10/30/99
Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
ANOVA TABLE
1-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOURCE DF SS MS F l;~:;;~-------------~---------------~~;;;------------~~;~~---------~;~;;~-----
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
'
ithin (Error) 35 . 0.716 0.020
ot~l · 39 2.093 . · ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I Critical F value =
Since F > Critical F
I
2.69 (0.05,4,30)
REJECT Ho: All equal
111ockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99
lile: S:\TOXSTAT\481201HA.SUR Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
DUNNETT'S TEST TABLE 1 OF 2 Ho:Control<Treatment 1-----------------------------;;;~;;;~;~----;;~~-;~~;~~;;~-~~-------------
GROUP IDENTIFICATION MEAN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG ,-~---------------------------------------------------------
Control 1. 290 0.925
2 us Reference 1. 187 0.850 1. 443
I 3 DS-1 0.770 0. 488 7.272 * 4 DS-2 1.027 0.725 3.668 * 5 DS-3 0.917 0.625 5.210 *
tunnett table value= 2.25 (1 Tailed Value, P=0.05, df=30,4)
lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99
File: S:\TOXSTAT\481201HA.SUR Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
I DUNNETT'S TEST -TABLE 2 OF 2 Ho:Control<Treatment ----------------------------------·-----------------------------------------
NUM OF Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE
IDENTIFICATION REPS (IN ORIG. UNITS) CONTROL FROM CONTROL
1 Control 8
I 2 US Reference 8 0.106 11.5 0.075
3 DS-1 8 0.106 11.5 0.437
4 DS-2 8 0.106 11.5 0.200
I-5· DS-3 8 0.106 11.5 0.300 --.--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
I
APPENDIXC
ST A TIS TI CAL DAT A FOR Hyalella azteca 10-DA Y
SUR VIV AL AND GROWTH TEST
USING REFERENCE SEDIMENT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II I
I
I
IITLE:
ILE:
TRANSFORM:
Lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test
s:\toxstat\481201re.sur
ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
date 10/30/99 using Ref
NUMBER OF GROUPS: .----------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANS VALUE GRP. IDENTIFICATION REP VALUE ,~-------------· -----------------------------
US-Ref-S 1 0.8000 1.1071
1 ' US-Ref-S 2 0.7000 0.9912
1 US-Ref-S 3 0.8000 1.1071
Ii US-Ref-S 4 1.0000 1.4120
us-Ref-s 5 0.9000 1.2490
1 US-Ref-S 6 1. 0000 1.4120
Ii US-Ref-S 7 0.8000 1.1071
US-Ref-S 8 0.8000 1.1071
2 DS-1 1 0.6000 0.8861
I; DS-1 2 0.6000 0.8861
DS-1 3 0.3000 0.5796
2 DS-1 4 0.2000 0.4636
2 DS-1 5 0.5000 0.7854 I; DS-1 6 0.6000 0.8861
DS-1 7 0.6000 0.8861
2 DS-1 8 0.5000 0.7854
1; DS-2 1 0.9000 1.2490
DS-2 2 0.6000 0.8861
3 DS-2 3 0.8000 1.1071
Ii DS-2 4 0.6000 0.8861
DS-2 5 0.8000 1.1071
DS-2 6 0.6000 0.8861
3 DS-2 7 0.8000 1.1071 ·~ DS-2 8 0.7000 0.9912
DS-3 1 0.4000 0.6847
4 DS-3 2 0.4000 0.6847
1: DS-3 3 0.6000 0.8861
DS-3 4 0.7000 0.9912
4 DS-3 5 0.8000 1. 1071
I: DS-3 6 0.6000 0.8861
DS-3 7 0.7000 0.9912
DS-3 8 0.8000 1.1071
4
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
Lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99 using Ref
File: s:\toxstat\481201re.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y)) I
SUMMARY STATISTICS ON TRANSFORMED DATA TABLE 1 of 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
GRP IDENTIFICATION N MIN MAX MEAN ---------------- ---------- --------------------
1 US-Ref-S 8 0.991 1.412 1.187
2 DS-1 8 0.464 0.886 0.770 I
3 DS-2 8 0.886 1.249 1.027
4 DS-3 8 0.685 1.107 0.917 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
Lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99 using Ref
File: s:\toxstat\481201re.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
SUMMARY STATISTICS ON TRANSFORMED DATA TABLE 2 of 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GRP IDENTIFICATION VARIANCE SD SEM c.v. % ------------------------------------------------------------1 US-Ref-S 0.024 0.155 0.055 13.09
2 DS-1 0.026 0.162 0.057 21.09
3 DS-2 0.018 0.136 0.048 13.23
I
I
I
I
4 DS··3 0.028 0.166 0.059 18.11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l ockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99 using Ref
ile: s:\toxstat\481201re.sur · Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
lllihapiro -Wilk's test for normality
■---------------------------------------------------------_-------------------
0 = 0.676
•= 0.954
l ritical W (P = 0.05) (n = 32) = 0.930
ritical w (P = 0.01) (n = 32) = 0.904 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tata PASS normality test at P=0.01 level. Continue analysis.
lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99 using Ref
File: s:\toxstat\481201re.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
1----------------------------------------------------------------------------
artlett's test for homogeneity of variance
Calculated Bl statistic= 0.30
•-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table Chi-square value=
'able Chi-square value=
Data PASS Bl homogeneity
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11.34
7.81
(alpha= 0.01, df =
(alpha= 0.05, df =
3)
3)
test at 0.01 level. Continue analysis.
I
Lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99 using Ref
File: s:\toxstat\48120lre.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y)) I
ANOVA TABLE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
SOURCE DF ss MS F ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between I 3 0.744 0.248 10.269
Within (Error) 28 0.676 0.024 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I Total 31 1.420 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical F value= 2.95 (0.05,3,28)
Since F > Critical F REJECT Ho: All equal
Lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99 using Ref
File: s:\toxstat\48120lre.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
DUNNETT'S TEST TABLE 1 OF 2 Ho:control<Treatment ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSFORMED MEAN CALCULATED IN
GROUP IDENTIFICATION MEAN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG ------------------------------------------------------------
1 US-Ref-S 1.187 0.850
2 DS-1 0.770 0.488 5.365 * 3 DS-2 1.027 0.725 2.048
4 DS-3 0.917 . 0. 625 3.467 * ----------------------------------------------------------------------------Dunnett table value= 2.17 (1 Tailed Value, P=0.05, df=24,3)
Lockheed Roanoke H. azteca test date 10/30/99 using Ref
File: s:\toxstat\48120lre.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
DUNNETT'S TEST TABLE 2 OF 2 Ho:Control<Treatment ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUM OF Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE
GROUP IDENTIFICATION REPS (IN ORIG. UNITS) CONTROL FROM CONTROL -------------------------------------------------------------------
1 US-Ref-S 8
2 DS-1 8 0.135 15.9 0. 362
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3 DS-2 8 0.135 15.9 0.125
4 DS-3 8 0.135 15.9 0.225 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I
I
I
I
'ITLE: Lockheed Roanoke H azteca growth w/Ref 10/30/99
i ILE: s:\toxstat\48120lha.rgr
RANSFORM: NO TRANSFORMATION NUMBER OF GROUPS: 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
IDENTIFICATION REP VALUE TRANS VALUE
US-Ref-S 1 0.0350 0.0350
US-Ref-S 2 0.0200 0.0200
US-Ref-S 3 0.0260 0.0260
US-Ref-S 4 0.0540 0.0540
US-Ref-S 5 0.0260 0.0260
US-Ref-S 6 0.0280 0.0280
US-Ref-S 7 0.0130 0.0130
US-Ref-S 8 0.0350 0.0350
DS-2 1 0.0400 0.0400
DS-2 2 0.0200 0.0200
DS-2 3 0.0300 0.0300
DS-2 4 0.0550 0.0550
DS-2 5 0.0490 0.0490
DS-2 6 0.0580 0.0580
2 DS-2 7 0.0280 0.0280
l~-------------~==~----~-----------~:~~~~------------~:~~~~-----------
•ockheed Roanoke H azteca growth w/Ref 10/30/99
~ile: s:\toxstat\48120lha.rgr Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION
l----------=~~:_::~:::::~=-~~-:~~=:~~=~-~~:~--:~~::_:_~:-~---------------
a;RP IDENTIFICATION N MIN MAX MEAN •--· --------------------------------------------------1 US-Ref-S 8 0.013 0.054 0.030
1-2 DS-2 8 0.020 0.058 0.040 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
w/Ref 10/30/99 lockheed Roanoke H azteca growth
File: s:\toxstat\48120lha.rgr Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION
I SUMMARY STATISTICS ON TRANSFORMED DATA TABLE 2 of 2
IDENTIFICATION VARIANCE SD SEM c.v. %
1 US-Ref-S 0.000 0.012 0.004 41.34 I 2 DS-2 0.000 0.014 0.005 33.49 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
I
Lockheed Roanoke H azteca growth w/Ref 10/30/99
File: s:\toxstat\481201ha.rgr Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION
I
I
Shapiro -Wilk's test for normality --------------------------------------.---------------------------------------I
D = 0.002
w = 0.982 I
Critical W (P = 0.05) (n = 16) = 0.887
Critical_w_ (P_=_0.01) _ln_=_16) _=_0.844 _______________________________________ I
Data PASS normality test at P=0.01 level. Continue analysis. I
Lockheed Roanoke H azteca growth w/Ref 10/30/99
File: s:\toxstat\481201ha.rgr Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION I
_:=:===-=~:-=~~:=~=:-~=-=~~-~::~:~===-----------------------------------------• GROUP IDENTIFICATION VARIANCE F
1
2
US-Ref-S
DS-2
0.000
0.000 1.227 I
Critical F = 8.89 (P=0.01, 7, 7) I
Since F <= Critical F, FAIL TO REJECT Ho: Equal Variances.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l ockheed Roanoke H azteca growth w/Ref 10/30/99
ile: s:\toxstat\48120lha.rgr Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION
ANOVA TABLE
1-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOURCE DF SS MS F 1;~:;;~-------~-----~---------------~~~~~------------~~~~~----------;~;;;-----
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------l ithin (Error) · 14 0.002 0.000
. otal 15 0.003 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I Critical F value=
Since F < Critical F
I
4.60 (0.05,1,14)
FAIL TO REJECT Ho: All equal
.tockheed Roanoke H azteca growth w/Ref 10/30/99
file: s:\toxstat\48120lha.rgr Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION
EQUAL VARIANCE t-TEST TABLE 1 OF 2 Ho:Control<Treatment
1--------------------------------------------------------------------------TRANSFORMED MEAN CALCULATED IN
GROUP IDENTIFICATION MEAN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG
r------------------------1 US-Ref-S
2 DS-2
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.040 -1.683 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------t Sample t table value= 1.76 (1 Tailed Value, P=0.05, df=14,l}
UNEQUAL VARIANCE t-TEST Ho:Control<Treatment r-----------------------------;;;~~;~;;;~----;;~-;~~;;~;;~-~~-------------
GROUP IDENTIFICATION MEAN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG
r-----.------------------
1 US-Ref-S
2 DS-2
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.040 -1. 683 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------t Sample t table value= 1.77 (1 Tailed Value, P=0.05, df=13,l}
lockheed Roanoke H azteca growth w/Ref 10/30/99
File: s:\toxstat\48120lha.rgr Transform: NO TRANSFORMATION I EQUAL VARIANCE t-TEST TABLE 2 OF 2 Ho:Control<Treatment ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
11:;ROUP IDENTIFICATION
~------------------------
NUM OF Minimum Sig Diff
REPS (IN ORIG. UNITS)
1 US-Ref-S 8
% of DIFFERENCE
CONTROL FROM CONTROL
.__2 ___________________ Ds-2 _____ 8 _____________ 0.011 _______ 38.4 ______ -0.011 ___ _
I-UNEQUAL VARIANCE t-TEST Ho:Control~Treatment
NUM OF
GROUP IDENTIFICATION REPS --------------------------------
1 US-Ref-S 8
2 DS-2 8
Minimum Sig Diff
(IN ORIG. UNITS) ----------------
0.011
% of
CONTROL -------
38.6
DIFFERENCE
FROM CONTROL ------------
-0.011
I
I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX D
CHAIN OF CUSTODY DOCUMENTATION
12
--- -
USEPA ERT
REAC, EdiSOll, NJ
Contact: John Johnson
732-321-4200
WO#: R1AooJ;k;
EPA Contract 68-C99-223
LAS#
Special Instructions:
(J'l:~
---- ----
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
Project Name: Roanoke River
Location:
Site Phone:
- -
REFERENCE COC: [.
---- -
coc # 024-0001
Page No.: _j__ of _L_
Cooler#
I Lab: American Aquatit
Contact: Chris Nally
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L
DA TE PERFORMED
12/02/97
02/24/98
05/15/98
05/28/98
06/11/98
10/14/98
11/10/98
01/08/99
02/11/99
04/02/99
08/26/99
09/01/99
10/19/99
11/04/99
11/05/99
12/22/99
DATE PERFORMED
05/13/98
10/22/98
01/14/99
08/25/99
11/23/99
DA TE PERFORMED
01/21/99
l l /23/99
American Aquatic Testi~. Inc.
SRT DATES AND VALUES
Hvalel/a azteca
48 HR LC5o -PPM
365.6
315.4
611. 1
3003
315.4
430.2
352.9
366.9
325.7
350.0
309.4
312.5
302.6
271.9
318.8
346.9
SRT DATES AND VALUES
Eisenia fetida
96 HR LC5o -mg/Kg
4200
2019.2
1825.7
4500
I 4000 I
SRT DATES. AND VALUES
L b I um ricu us variertatus
48 HR LC5o -PPM
457.3
609.6
CONFIDENCE LIMITS
347.7 -383.5
264.3 -366.6
510.0-712.2
249.3-351.4
264.2 -366.6
345.0-515.4
284.5 -421.3
347.5 -386.2
275.9 -375.4
322.9-377.4
270.2 -348.6
257.3 -367.7
249.9 -3553
231.0 -312.8
281.1 -356.4
317.5 -376.2
CONFIDENCE LIMITS ·
NIA
1774.5 -2264.0
982.3 -2669.0
3631.2 -5368.8
3302.9 -4697.1
CONFIDENCE LIMITS
435.0-479.7
515.5 -703.6
1105 Union Blvd.. 2nd floor • Allentown. PA 18103
[phone] • Fax [phone]
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Appendix B
Roanoke Sediment Bioaccumulation Test: Lumbriculus variegatus
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April2000
\024\DEL\FR\0003\REPORT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.
REPORT CERTIFICATION
The following report titled "LOCKHEED MARTfN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
REAC ROANOKE SEDIMENT BIOACCUMULATION TEST -L11mhric11/us
variegatus" is an accurate and truthful representation of the toxicity testing which was
performed by American Aquatic Testing, Inc., located at I I 05 Union Blvd. Allentown,
Pennsylvania. We further certify that we have personally examined and are familiar with
the information submitted in this document and based on our inquiry of those individuals
immediately responsible for obtaining the information, we believe the submitted
information is complete as presented. We are aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information.
/-IJ.-oo
Tarmo Pallop
Vice-President, Laboratory Manager
1105 Union Blvd .. 2nd Flbl,r • Allentown. PA 18103
[phone] • Fax [phone]
LOCKHEED MARTIN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REAC
ROANOKE SEDIMENT BIOACCUMULATION TEST -Lumbriculus variegatus
Section
Introduction
Sediment Samples
Contents
Materials and Methods; Lumbriculus variegatus
Results
Tables
Page
2
2
8
Summary of Conditions for Lumbriculus variegatus Screening Test 6
II. Summary of Conditions for L11mbric11/11s variegatus Bioaccumulation Test 7
Ill. Screening test survival rates for Roanoke river locations 8
IV. Total organic carbon (TOC) content and sediment exposure volumes 8
Appendices
A Raw data for Lumbriculus variegatus 28-day bioaccumulation test
B. Chain of custody documentation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ROANOKE SEDIMENT BIOACCUMULATION TEST -Lumbriculus variegatus
INTRODUCTION
During the month of August I 999, samples of sediment an.d soil were collected from the
Roanoke River site located in Plymouth, North Carolina, by members of the Lockheed
Martin Environmental Services Group attached to the USEPA REAC Division in Edison,
New Jersey. Now designated a Super Fund site by the USEPA, these sediment and soil
samples were used to perform bioaccumulation tests to determine if the tested matrices
represent a significant threat to potential receptor organisms.
The sediment samples from the site were delivered to American Aquatic Testing, Inc.
(AAT) and evaluated for the bioaccumulation of contaminants of concern using a 28-day
solid phase exposure with the oligochaete L11mbric11/11s variega111s [I]. Following the
exposure period, surviving test organisms from the sediments collected at the site, which
included a reference site, and a control set tested under similar conditions using sediment
of known environmental quality were collected and prepared for analytical analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS I SEDIMENT SAMPLES
Preparation of sedime/11 samples for testing
The sediment samples collected on August 25, 1999 were transported, via overnight
carrier, to the laboratory in 5-gallon high-density polyethylene (HDPE) containers on ice.
Upon arrival at AA T, the samples were stored at 4.0 ° C until being screened on 25-26
October, 1999 using a #20 mesh screen (850 µm) to remove large debris and indigenous
organisms that may have competed with or potentially preyed upon the test organisms.
The screened portion of the sediment was then transferred to new, clean I gallon HDPE
containers, sealed and stored at 4.0 ° C until used for testing on 30-3 I October, 1999.
Control sediment used to assess the health of the test organisms used for testing was
collected from the Spruce Run Reservoir in Clinton, NJ on October 25, 1999 and was
screened in the same manner as the sediment samples from the Roanoke River site on 27
October, 1999.
2
Test organisms
Study oligochaetes (L11mbric11/11s varie1<at11s) were obtained from stock cultures
maintained by ABS, Inc. of Fort Collins CO and arrived at AAT on October 21, 1999.
During the holding period prior to test initiation, the organisms were held under conditions
similar to those that they would encounter during the test (see Table II). At the beginning
of the 28-day exposure, the test organisms were fully mature adults.
A reference toxicant test using potassium chloride as the toxicant was conducted 'during
the 28-day exposure to evaluate the sensitivity of the lot of organisms used in the sediment
test. The 48 hr LC50 was 609.6 ppm. As no published reference toxicant data exists for
this test species, AA T is in the process of generating an internal database for use in
determining culture sensitivity and vigor. The raw data is presented in Appendix A.
Experimental proced11res -96 hour screening test
Prior to initiating the 28-day bioaccumulation exposure, all samples and the control were
used to conduct 96-hour acute toxicity screening tests to determine if any of the samples
were unusable due to excessive test organism mortality.
The entire sediment screening exposure consisted of the five sediment samples from the
Roanoke site and one of laboratory control sediment from Spruce run reservoir. Test
chambers (3 00 mL tall form borosilicate glass beakers) were filled with 100 mL of
sediment. Each then had the sediment layer covered with 200 mL oflaboratory water to a
final volume of 300 mL. Each treatment had four replicate chambers. All test chambers
were allowed 24 hours to settle prior to the introduction of test organisms.
After the settling period, the overlying water was siphoned off and fresh laboratory water
was introduced, using a round HOPE disk suspended over the sediment to deflect the
water flow and minimize disturbance to the sediment. At this time conductivity, dissolved
oxygen, pH and temperature were measured for the overlying water for a single test
chamber for each treatment and the control.
The exposure period began by placing 10 L. variegatus into each of the four replicate
chambers. Care was taken to ensure that the organisms were released beneath the surface
of the overlying water to keep air bubbles from forcing the organisms to the surface. Test
conditions are summarized in Table I.
Each day during the exposure period observations of each chamber were carried out to
determine and record the number live test organisms. Dissolved oxygen, pH and
temperature were also measured, then overlying water was siphoned once a day, and
replaced using laboratory water as a measure to maintain sufficient dissolved oxygen
levels. Care was taken to minimize disturbance of the sediment during water renewal.
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
At the end of the 96-hour exposure the final conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH and
temperature were measured, and a final count of surviving test organisms was performed.
Based on the results of the screening test that revealed that none of the sediment samples
from the Roanoke site was acutely toxic, all samples were used to conduct the 28-day
bioaccumulation exposure. Results of the screening tests are summarized in Table III.
Experimemal procedures -28-day bioaccumu/ation test
The entire sediment exposure series for this project consisted of five sediment samples
from the Roanoke River site and one of control sediment from Spruce Run Reservoir.
Levels of total organic carbon (TOC) were determined by ECM, Inc. of Somerville, NJ,
and test chambers ( 4 L tall form borosilicate glass beakers) were filled with variable
volumes of sediment based on the TOC present in each sample. Table IV contains the
TOC values and corresponding weights of sediment used to set up the exposure chambers.
The amount of sample needed from each sample was determined using the following
equation:
C = I!
A
Where: A is the grams of TOC present in sample sediment in g/Kg:
B is the grams of TOC needed to produce I 00 g of wet weight
worms at test completion;
C is the kilograms of sample required for the test exposure
Since each sediment sample contained a different amount of TOC, the final volumes of
sediment for each site varied. The final volume of sediment for each test chamber ranged
from 3000 to 3500 mL. Each then had the sediment layer covered with laboratory water
to a final volume of 4000 mL. Each treatment (six sediment samples and one control
sample) had eight replicate chambers. All of the test chambers were allowed to settle for
24 hours prior to test initiation.
After the settling period, the overlying water was siphoned off and fresh laboratory water
was introduced, using a round HDPE disk suspended over the sediment to deflect the
water flow and minimize disturbance to the sediment. At this time alkalinity, ammonia,
conductivity, hardness, dissolved oxygen, pH and temperature of the overlying water
were measured in one test chamber for each test sample and the control.
The exposure period began by placing approximately 14:0 g wet weight (with as much
water removed as possible) of L. variega111s into each of the eight replicate chambers.
This mass of test organisms was chosen in an attempt to allow a approximate dry weight
of test organism tissue to TOC of 50: l [ l) Care was taken to ensure that the organisms
were released beneath the surface of the overlying water to keep air bubbles from forcing
the organisms to the surface. Test conditions are summarized in Table IL
4
Each day during the exposure period observations of each chamber were carried out to
determine and record behavior of the test organisms. Approximately 80% of overlying
water was siphoned off twice per day and replaced using fresh laboratory water as a
measure to maintain sufficient dissolved oxygen levels. Sufficient dissolved oxygen could
not be maintained with water exchanges alone and aeration was started on day two of the
test. Dissolved oxygen and temperature were measured daily directly in the testing
chambers. During the 28 days of the test, each chamber would be used for recordings
three tinies and four chambers would be used four times. These readings were done in the
early afternoon, between the two water exchanges. Care was taken to minimize
disturbance of the sediment during water renewal.
· At the end of the 28-day exposure the final alkalinity, ammonia, conductivity, hardness,
dissolved oxygen, pH and temperature were measured, and the test chambers were
prepared for the removal of test organisms. With the overlying water present in each
chamber, the top 20% of sediment was gently stirred into suspension. This slurry was
then poured into a #60 mesh sieve (250 µm) and rinsed in a shallow pan of laboratory
water to remove the finer grains of the sediment. The remaining contents of the sieve
were placed into a second shallow pan of laboratory water, placed over a light table, and
carefully sorted to find the surviving test organisms in each of the eight replicates for each
site. Using additional laboratory water, this process was repeated four or five times for
each replicate until all the sediment had been inspected. All surviving organisms for each
chamber were transferred to a I 000 mL beaker containing fresh overlying water for a 24-
hour depuration period. Following depuration, the test organisms were placed into sample
containers labeled to identify the test sample location and were frozen prior to shipment to
Southwest Laboratory of Oklahoma for tissue analysis.
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
II.
12.
13.
14.
I 5.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
TABLE I: Summary of Conditions for Lumbricu/us variegatus Screening Test
Test type:
Temperature;
Light quality:
Light intensity:
Photoperiod:
Test chamber size:
Sediment volume:
Overlying water volume:
Renewal:
Age oftest organisms:
Loading of organisms / container:
Replicates:
Feeding:
Aeration:
Overlying water:
Test chamber cleaning:
Overlying water quality:
Test duration:
Endpoints measured:
Test acceptability:
Whole sediment, static, daily renewal
23.0 +!-1.0° C
Wide-spectrum fluorescent illumination
50 -100 foot-candles
I 6 hours light. 08 hours dark
300 mL high form borosilicate glass beakers
I 00 mL / replicate
200 mL (final volume 300 mL)
I volume exchanges per day
Adult
IO
4
None
None unless dissolved oxygen concentrations
::: 40 % saturation, then -I 00 bubbles / min.
Laboratorv Reconstituted Moderately Hard
Water
None
Dissolved oxygen. pH and temperature daily:
conductivity at beginning and end oftest
96 hours
Survival
Control survival >80%
6
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
IO.
II.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16
17.
18.
19.
20.
TABLE II: Summary of Conditions for Lumbriculus variegatus Bioaccumulation Test
Test type;
Temperature;
Light quality;
Light intensity;
Photoperiod;
Test chamber size;
Sediment volume;
Overlying water volume;
Renewal;
Age of test organisms;
Loading of organisms / container:
Replicates;
Feeding;
Aeration;
Overlying water;
Test chamber cleaning:
Overlying water quality;
Test duration:
Endpoints measured:
Test acceptability:
Whole sediment, static, daily renewal
23.0 +/-1.0° C
Wide-spectrum fluorescent illumination
5 0 -JOO foot-candles
16 hours light, 08 hours dark
4 L high form borosilicate glass beakers
3000 to 3500 mL / replicate
Up to !000 mL (final volume 4000 mL)
2 volume exchanges per day
Adult
Approximately 14.0 g wet weight
8
None
None unless dissolved oxygen concentrations
::: 40 % saturation, then -l 00 bubbles / min.
Laboratory Reconstituted Moderately Hard
Water
None
D . 0. and temperature daily: alkalinity,
ammonia. conductivity, hardness and pH at
beginning and end of test
28 days
Bioaccumulation
Test organisms should burrow in sediment,
hardness, alkalinity pH and ammonia should vary
by <50%
7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Table Ill . I : Screemn2 test surv1va rates or oano e 1ver oca ions k R' f
Sample Location • Test Date Mean % Survival . Continue w/ Analysis
.. Control 10/21-25/99 97.5 Yes
US Ref SD I 0/21-25/99 95.0 Yes
UScJ I 0/21-25/99 90.0 Yes
DS-1 l 0/21-25/99 97.5 Yes
DS-2 I 0/21-25/99 90.0 Yes
DS-3 I 0/21-25/99 90.0 Yes
Table IV: Total oreanic carbon (TOC) content and sediment exoosure volumes
Sample ID TOC present Wet Wt. of · ••Grams of.: Kg of sample · · Kgof
in sample worms TOC required required • sample/
.. G/K11.. reauired . reiilicate
Control . 7.9 100 500 63.9 8.1
US"Ref0Sd 11.8 100 500 42.4 5.3
US-I 17.9 100 500 27.9 3.5
.DS-1 21.0 100 500 23.8 3.0
DS-2 · 17.7 100 500 28.2 3.5
DS-3 16. l 100 500 31.1 3.9
RESULTS
As the endpoint for the L. variegatus 28-day exposure is the bioaccumulation of
contaminants contained in the sediment samples used for the exposure, a discussion of the
tissue analyses is unnecessary here.
The above conducted bioaccumulation exposure did not produce the anticipated volumes
of wet tissue weight for analytical chemistry. A review of the test design indicates that a
possible cause for this was the shape of the test vessel. The 4 L glass beakers which were
used may have restricted movement of the test organisms due to the depth of test material
in each chamber. Another possible cause may have been a lack of sufficient surface area in
each test chamber that may have also restricted movement for the test organisms.
All raw data sheets are located in Appendix A
REFERENCES
[I] Ingersoll, C.G., G.T. Ankley, G.A. Burton, F.W. Dwyer, R.A. Hoke, T.J.
Norberg-King, and P. V. Winger 1994 Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and
Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater
Invertebrates EPA 600/R-94/024. U.S. Environmental Protection, Office of
Science and Development, Duluth, MN
8
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A I
RAW DAT A FOR Lumbriculus variegatus I
28-DA Y BIOACCUMULATION TEST I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
9 I
Client[T oxicant:_~_'(-'-"F_· ___ _
Job Number: ___ 1,.,i:...--="'-'-------
Beginning Date & Time:_,.,_--=3cco_-=.,;....· ,;'---"/.-",h;o=,c_-
Ending Date & Time: _ _,.,11-'-'-',;,"-'7'---f'--'fr........--<,/J-4D=.,='--
Species: L . ""',: < 5'! lu~
on 0 • 1
Control i :H, . .o I 13. <>
"-e I ! .;i •. .::, I.U-c
T u 5-1 i )>•P !,1.~.o
E n <;-, : .2.l-o i..l.3. o
M D~.;). i..l.">,l> 1 ~3-c
p iK-'? : j 3-, l.2.:J. C
' I
(C) ' I
' I ...._ ; ! -i
Control I Ji. I : "I .,
n, I it.., I r.. 7
us-1 ' 7.-:1.i{, 'is
Dissolved j)~-/ ' I . G ; "· 1
I ? ' 'I
L,,, ~ , .,.., -
lol{.c:> !-~ "'
; 'lll-.o ::...:; ,-
ld-4.D :"'\-, . ,_
Freshwater Sediment Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Phisical/Chemical Parameters
Dav
! 4 5 I 6 7 8
"h -., :i..,:; I ✓-i..O ;l 3_ D 1.;>10 . ., '-:;:,. ::n . 0 iob<-"> ;i 3.0 .:n.o
-:::i . .c-I ~;;.O IJ,_< ;:)3.0 ,;,_ ;i. (.)
~a-~ .-,-, O 1,r.;i_.5 -2~-0 ';;,. ~ (\
' Q • 1n
1-i 1.0 I :J.J ,o
! .2 3. 0 I ,J.,}. b
!....23. <) i .lo). 0
'.23.o 1.,,, P
i "4-0 :--.--~.s ,.,, v 1·.1.J.5 .;l 5. D la1 <> 1.2Jvl.:i.-.o
lo,LI_o··=.--old. ..:; !t\,0 !J,u::: ::!.>-0 i .;>. 3 .\) : .) J. v I .J l o
! I i ' ' i ' I I
I ' I I I I i
I I I ! ' I
i I ' ' ' ' ' ' '~"' I L-1. I LJ_I ILi, v 'il ..::: 4.1. ( 6 : ~I): .a;' 3
: s~a. ';c-~ 5.~ •-. II I ~. cl S;. 4,/... i 'l,S I 4.J
!..;i,. 'r !r.1.,,, C..a.+ I.,_ a :....i.'-1 i./,5 ;;_..; . 5,'ii 'I ,S
.,, "l' -1 I_ I I ,! ! L/ 'i : ,; '' 'I·" 5.1 -1,4 .).Y
Oxygen 1'<-:i 1-'/ : ~ ·" ! a.19 ,.-_ 0 .:::--:;)._ '. ~-"'-'?. -..._ 5.o . '-l,b Lj . " 4,'i
n <-< ' 7.b '(., .0 •ad '-£:, d',' (r.01Ww ' ?., ,-., I I/. 3 . '-I ::, '4 ... ' '-/., I
(mg/L) I\. • i i ! : ! '
'-' I ' •
" i j ' I I '
" ' ; ! ' I •
'i i ' ! !
Initials , /<oL i NJL 1,,--,,_, ,,,,_, -,..: k.1• 1,-,1.,J f-OL : NL ' K.,( , mL
Date ; ,.oo i 10/.J i i II t. ! li / :::i_ iir-':i 'Ii t,] 'II 15 I,/(:, i 111? • " I -,, 11/ Ci ' ' .,.
1 1 1? I 1 'I
:H--0 J}-1) -;, ?-0
,J?. u .l3-., I ., -.. o .n.0 ll,o .:>:>.o
.h,e ;)).,. I ;i3.o
,)J~ ·"). 0 i ..l:3.o
.:,'l:.Q ;i_l. I) I ~30
1-j • I,) I .:: . 'i< '5:1
' K '1.1 ! ... .,
<J. I '3 'l I 3.(.
3., ,34 ' 3.,
i 3,, l-'1 7.:. t
?..o 11.f. l : <:,I.I
;
•
I
I !
N~ ! "" ( I lf,l
! r,1 Jr, ! oli• . ',11~
Cond. fumbos' Alkalinilu mnlL\ Hardness fmo/L) : Ammonia fm"" \ nH Comments: :f~'<-o<-{t-~
~ ln1Ti.,,.I ! t-11'-:lol ; 1niTi::111 : ~ ·-~·--:I 1niTi,:11 I ~1n,:1.1 l , ... ;,.;...,1: Fi,.."'1
Control .)'i1'1) I ~c;D I "7,> 1':tD I•<>. o,.-., •I (.),00 n.o,:; ; (. _., i I,. 11' I (j) 5, 'l
(I. " -f 1 .::io I· inro I 90 , larl "l" c:i-n O . .:in r\ L.J: I " s ! r ... , '-1 I
US-I "-D ' 'I,_", 100 ' '-D Rh ,,...,,...., <>.3't fl, I (. . ,s In, q
l'l<-/ ~5~ --g-5 ' t.. o , ...., r--"i5" II r, ;J., \, r'.l,I< fo,4 i ', 9
l\~-'.l. l 'i,; ?TI) 9 0 i =--7D "'"' ' 0. 'II,, o.i.: ,~ ,. __ ~ ! -::i-.o ' n<-1 J70 "l°~•~ qc ..,,.,...., ' D.;>S /). LJ q 5,, ,~ q
1, I I i
" ' I ' " I : I ' ., ! i
I '-! " ! I !i i 'I
' I I! i i :1 I
!1 Initials 10L ! ...-n.., 'i il'i[ . ,1v,) !' /(;)L 1-~ i i<D'--i f& · !!· .14>! .:1)J
Date , ./;i) I 11I,-,, ;, 's:{3o ! ll b~ ,I ,,pc ! \ -:i--•1 ,iuho I ~J-_Jt l Ul">l), d1a1: I
1.0.
:Z.?.5.
23:., .
~,:, ?2,.,,
'7?, .-!i !
2.?.I
;
l,.iJ .;,q
i/,,:,
¥.3
I t::.T,
;:; , 5
'
77 :7 i
1
""~1°1J3 '
11\,l.'n ('f,...,._)
.
-------------------·
-- - - - - -Client/T oxicant: _ ___;'-1"'8 _____ _
Job Number.. __ ·-1->~-~0~( _____ _
Species: /., ,a. c • f,&s½J
' 15 '" lf
Control ~; .o ,,.., ,::-a,;,....;;../1
i',, ,t-cl: ,v 1.1:J,0 .:,~,o
T {} -1 ;J ;j.5 :--i, D ~:i..c
E "h'. -I :i:s. Q :,--,_o A),I)
M 1) -::Z,, :e.o '.,, ,---, ~;>-D
p .-,: -~ :r~,v '"''. 0 JJ,O
(C)
Control /,i ,.I..__,, 4, ... I. "5
~('., /,,. 0 2 ;I. L/.1
u~-1 .-; (,, -5". [) :; I~
Dissolve< n;,-1 "f' JI .. 5,
Oxygen l):S-1 <I, r:-::, ll,
1\1·3 6.• 2 JJ 1,/ , ..
(mg/L)
m s {-✓ 1W ,..,,_
Date I, 1</1{; llt"'i i I 116
Comments: Cb
-
- - - - -
Freshwater Sediment Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Phisical/Cliernioaf Parameters
l av
"' l,. -~· ~·
,.l ;l,. ., cl:,."' .1,_c, "h.O "13." ~~., =D• ,1.;,,~ 1.:l3 n ~:>.,,
11 <;-3""\.,...,. ~"-l> .'.l'!,n '.) ~ . .,
.J.?. £ 'h~ d~,b <:>=> • ..::' !l~ . .,
1;i. . .;-7;:i,o -4,.~ i;n, 0 '.)~ . ..,
J. ;i. . .; ·11 _r:, ;., 'G 1_"'\:l, c;;;: ..... ) . ~
i ' .._,, b 5.'I '~ :i--r.. 0
... 1( 1,/ i,/ 4.9; l,J, .. 4,C
Cl ,-, ' 'I ., "'' < ,(.)
c; I.( 1-/, I '1,D .. 1 '<.)
4, '? ., . "i 'i'.1 j . -~ l1,4
4_<; ,, 'L '1 ~ 7',,..'-V
o=J ~-~-•~'L .,. I ·,ow
,,/ r1 "/, g I, 11 ~ 11 f!J/'"\ I(/;; I .
·,c·
1'f,o
:13,0
,;)3,0
.)~.{)
::p:..,)
H,,-
lo ,.J
4 " ,G. I
'-I. 0
l./.(,
L.J '!:)
,..., L,
I 11>.)
- - -Beginning Date & Time: IO -3o -(j ~ I /---oZ>
Ending Date & Tlme:_-'-'(l..;;;-.,.;'-'z'---.Lf.,_f_-!!;,J...60=.:::..._-- - -
94 '"' ·,n ZI ~~
..") -=t 0 lol"i'!,c; '/2. cc_ J3.<; 1"1. (')
.;i :s. 0 :o>-3-!:, '"-.< ~~-C, "-:i n
.::2 3-0 1')'2., <;'" ur ;}~. ') ,,,,.._c
.;i :1.o ·=>.·,(,!"J ?z. r 13.~ "'3:o
."13_<) i:.:J. ,g,.., ,, '.l-3, ') ,.,,,. r-,
.:}3~ ;.,,(,"-,-/I d-~-~ ..:,3 r--.
{',,,_ ;) L, :>--. ,_ '1 6,6 l r
'-1-'i? '•.~ s-.1 ~ ".) . , ~
4,/ ,,__ "2, C." 6, , ' 'j
.:> . li ,; C f',, 0 ~. l ~-"'.;
'-·L4 I .t. C. 9 ~-€ ~-s-
3,q ' . ' ~-"' c:. 7 Li,D
' (<DL , rv l . •-rov. --n. 1
1//.;,3 \ I /.:l'-1 \\ JV ",~t llt=. .
-
I
I
Job Number: '-l '15" -1) -o I
Beginning Date & Time: __ /_o--:·:--:3:=-u--:-,..,9;:;-'i_7/,)....--:::--oiJ __
Ending Date & Time : __ ..c•._t --a-~z_-..._9__,'f~-t~J-~"D~-
Species: L vM : , S9b >
F reshwater Sediment Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Observations/Live Count
Dav
3 4 :,_ 6 7 8 9 10 11
A .J ~ N •~ J N rJ r.J "1 v1I
8 N '" N --. :, ~ tJ N N IJ
C,1 r N 1 tJ iJ I" n1
DN ~ J:::'. IN rJ"' r',,
A N tJ N \)
B N 1'1.1 t-.J 1-1
CN rv_!':'. !'I \J
A/1/ r,_ N tv \J
Biv r __!':' N N
f-1
J
N
N
(V
(V
N
" ,{
rJ
rJ
N
Al
N
/V
V
.,
.,
N
N
.JI
.,
oJ
N
rJ
"' N
"
"L
N
/V
,I
N
12
,J
,J
" "
" ,t
N
_d_
rl
(V
A rv f\ , -" \:, '" w N " .,! ., ,; rJ
13
N
IV ,., ,.,
N
rv ..,.
,y
,J ..
II,
6 r/ k J }I lV \.-1 '" N N fV N ,v ,J rJ ·"'
Initials
Date
1 t, ., ,~J NI\-.._) o'IW •~.J f'./L. 1£ov ,lJ,l,
_J' c'.l \ii~ \\\~ '\I'', \\\6 ,lib 1117 1·\'i_
Key: D=dead, N~normal activity, A-abnormal activity, B
I:)~ /(j)t.,. 1CQ<--
l I I" 1,l1J h_l"
No Observations
Commen,!!ts~: _______________________________________________ _
------------------··
-------------------Job Number:-,-~_,_"67 -_\'.'-'l"---67\'-. ____ _
Species: __ ~/~ "-~v<>-~<•~i'-:~<-,--M ___ _
vonc . 14 15 I 16 1, 18
A Al· tJ l) .,J N
B ,11 ,J t-J " '-=-C(j~~ .. 1 C ,ii ,.f At ,., fJ
D ,v _,._,_ (\j N t-1
E ,-,.. I
A ,,; rl • l " ,.,
B ,J rJ rJ _i"!. e • .r .11
C ,I " rJ If /v
D ,J N Iv " /\J
E
A c/ , ': N /V
B Al r,J , ,, r,/
L{ ), / C \ rJ A ,. N
D ;/ /Y I N "' /V
E I I
A ,., _N l'V I " ,-.J
B N i ., tJ /V ,.
D~/ C II i rv r,f rJ ,.,
D II ,'( i /\) ,J I"
E
A N ,v It' tJ r-~, ,,_r /V B ,/ % p) . .:;, C ,,.; /I \V ('I f.J
D /.I rl I ll .} JJ
E I
I Initials VII {j.£,: _LI J,\ J (QL 711P
I Date •113 ·,!.l!..f._ JU/ 15 1,116 ;//t1
Beginning Date & Time:--'1--'-o--::--::Ji:o:;;-:;;-f~'i_t~~-PY:::----
Ending Date & Time:_~,~' -~;;~1~---'l~S--'-~---
Freshwater Sediment Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Ob lions/Live Count serva Da 28
~l!Y. Final
19 20 21 n 23 24 25 26 ',!.7 Obsen Count ,., "' •> AJ N N µ _N ,J
Iv ,v I\) µ N tJ I\) N ,-i
,J rl I\) µ J ., rLl Ill r-1
rJ N J\] µ ,J . IV I\.) N ,-J
"' fl IJ v Al I\) N rJ
rJ -'I /,.I .1 ,.; hl ,J tJ \
r' "' ,-; Ai ,.; . /\) f\} tJ I
,J r-1 J} ~I Al I\) N tJ
,., /II J. fU /\I N f0 N ,..,
I" rJ I l /J .1 /V (\} ,J IJ
.J ' N \.] tJ t( ,.; " I.I /J ,., 'V J.J ,,; ,.., Al t,l ,.,
i I
rv ' ,., A/ t,J .IV A tJ ' ,
" I
JJ ,, J.I 'II ,j V\I tJ tJ I
I' N /.J r/ ,.; ~ "' ,.., I \
rv (\/ fl "' rl ~.\ Al tJ I '
I I
I-' N A/ tv •• u N ,., I \
;.J w u ., "' ~ N µ I \
/J rJ JJ N ti ; /J I" f \
t' rl I ,., ,I N i\ N f-l I \
i \
·'f/11! i((L <Ji,_) "1/L ,_,,L -v.:.i vvJ IUf' I ,
11/,~ t •\I~ ,~ I {{)l 111~ f •I:>."', \ I 1,-l-j ll/7( "l,t. I
. . ..
Key. 0-dead, N-normal act1v1ty, A abnormal act1v1ty B n o observations
Commen~ts~: _____________________________________________ _
I
I
Job Number:.__,-..,,l-\,.:-'(;7 :-::-\.c.;)_c-.b-:-\'-------
Species : ___ C_-v_c._r_,'-',7'>-'~~---
:nnc 0 1 2 3 4
A
Cenllal B
C
D
E
A " N t-J d !'J
i-i N B rJ N V
p~-;, ~ C rJ "-l I-' V
D rJ ~ N tsJ t,J
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
Initials f'U'-i -11,-l ••-.l 10-> N\W
Date 101.3D 1\/'l J jilt I 1\,i. Ii L'i
Beginning Date & Time:_~/o'---::3--:o;--~'l;;-9,,.· ...,t~)-~"~x~-
Ending Date & Time:. __ _,_,~, -=;;i~z_-_?~S:~'1-a-~qg __
Freshwater Sediment Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Observations/Live Count
Day
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1.: 13
IJ .., N "' ,J ., " ,., 'II
t./ N ,., ., N ',) N ,, N
N iJ ., ,, N J N ,, N
\V I" ,-I ,./ N 1\1 .., ,., ({
"""---' MV FVL J(JIL ,~i,,_ /'t)l lo,( ,...,L. NL
\I '-\ ,,1..:; jll(, II I/ ii I 'l II l'i i,/1;) 11/11 I,// J
Key: D-dead, N-normal activity; A abnormal activity, B No Observations
Commen!§ts~: ____________________________________________
_
-------------------·
- ----

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-
Job Number: l-\$ • \'1 ·0\
Species: I . lfc-<, "'->'"'""..,
_l,OnC. R,m 14 15
A ,J ,v
B t-J ✓
l) 5-J C fV ~/
D ,.; N'
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D .
E
I Initials w "",
I Date ''(,8 '1/;(
1t, 1 ( 18
IJ ti tJ
•> IV rJ
N ,r ,_;
I N )I /J
I
•
I
I
!
'
!
I
I
i
I
!
I
I
. 1--n., l<JI( TtP
11/1" I ii I lo 1,f,?
Beginning Date & Time:. _ _,_/o><-,:---;:J;=-o-;:;~-;;;'i_9_/J._o-=iu:---
En ding Date & Time :. __ ..,,,::1-c.,J.e..?.:_-_'1.._,5.__,..1 ~_.,6,)...,.._
Freshwater Sediment Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Ob ti /Li Count serva ens ve Da 28
Dav Final
1i, 20 21 £, .!3 ~4 25 2o 27 Obsen Count
I-' IJ j I. ,J ,; ~ ~ Al r-..
;.J fJ • f-., "' d ~1 rJ " ,., "' ~ "' ,., ,v IJ ,J AJ '
fJ ,/ IV ,J ,J ,J ~I I.J µ " '
!
I
i
I
1111' /<PL n,,.i "II>', /<fJ L ,.,, I --1>, > f'',A} ~ I
"/1 'l. td!G '\ l/;i.n 'If.~ I I ,/,,._ I IQ') \\~11 \\Ir' 'I/~( .. ,', ..
Key. D-dead, N-normal act1v1ty, A abnormal act1v1ty B no observations
Comments~:--------------------------------------------=--=
'-'-OIIC., Ren 14 15 ,· ., I'-'
C f' ., 11 J
~ol II\) a· ,J
u_ V VI l
E -
£, rl ni
rJ F· r,J f'ii4 IV l'i ,J
"' ' ,J fl)
E -
fY (\)
,J n J
Ci )-I .:: (V (\ \ ,,, N .f!.
E !
E I ,I ~'
f:· '{I) " ~-\ u r-J ,,
/.J " t\.)
E ~-N I'-) -, Ill I f\)
'.:,-J C<· (V I\.\
,1· r< tJ
E
I Initials I'll ( ' i >J
I Date ; /JJl-1 \\/IS
16 17 18
,v ,., ..,
" ,.,, ,-.;
V r_ ,-J .., ,-) I'-' --
~ /V {'J
" r-J /J
'V _ti__ I"
"' ,,., ,,.,
"' N Al ., fJ f,)
, ,.J /J
I " I (V /v
I ., I tJ rv
N ,._,I /V
rJ rJ ~
"' I /v /J
I ., /J V
I N _r,J_ ,.,
"' N ,V
,J I ,J fl
I
<II!/ « ~
1d1b "/1"1 11/,1
Beginning Date & Time: / ~ -3,-~-~
1
/.lqv
Ending Date & Time: ·---,//,--_;;.J._....,_ f'i'"P'!""-;~-;-::::----
Freshwater Sediment Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Ob ti ns/Uve Count serva o Da 28
Dav Final
19 ?0 21 22 23 24 2i; 26 27 Obser-Count
tJ ., I.J Al ., /,J •• /J ,
rv 1\ N _y • I ,.., rJ tJ " \
N /0 fV r.l ,J ['.J ,.J rJ ,, \
V I\J ,-I 'V ,,, rJ tJ t-i -' ' \
(\/ i I" N .N r\) I.I µ Al I
rJ 1J N (V Al ,J ;) I I
o) /v IV ,v rJ 10 . tJ ;.J \
"1 IV tJ ~ ✓ N 1-.) f"'. ~.1 \
I I
.,t/ II /V "' N i l ., IV , I
/1/ ~) N '\I N •J ,\ /J -I
IJ rJ ,J ,.j /1/ (V r-J /v ;,,, I -
'\I Iv ,., ,. .; /-' (V t,1 ./
I I
OJ A I f'1 N . , I IJ I 1\.1 IV JJ I I \
N ,, l ,., N N Al ., rJ ;;, \
N ~ /J IV /1/ 1 ) -~ N .J ' rv J iJ ' 'V /1, J ., tJ J l
\
Si A\ fJ .DI J.i " I kl ;.J J.. \
"' i /J /1/ M 1 .I tJ A, '
N .., IV ,J l N /'1_ "'· j_~
rl ,., N' rJ " ,\ /V ,v I \
I
IJ' I 1,..-n ) IJlf.l /V''-/fJL nJ0 I l'\•l ,nP tk1/ I
I "I~ I\ bfl •1/-,_ I I ' /,:l,3 "/.:iJ ll@'i \\l1< 11/ rl 11/,1..1
Ke : D=dead, N-normal activity, A y abnormal activity B nci observations
Commen~ts~: _____________________________________________
-::
-------------------■
-------------------Beginning Date & Time: __ ,o'--·3,,......,1-=-'f-'-'J.;-/...;.'.M> __ _
Ending Date & Time: __ .,..11-'--=-!-i~-W~~/.~~~--
Freshwater Sediment Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Observations/Live Count
Dav
r.onc ,on 0 , 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
~ N tJ N N N tJ ,, I N r,J JJ 'I /II 1\1
Control -t,.I l" ") tJ Iv l\} N • " " N • N N
C t-1 t,) "' IJ 1--.1 1\) /V ,., IV N 1\/ .. /V ,.,
IJ \-1 N N u l-' ('I ,v ,J " _,, " ('I ,.J ,, -----E ----
' I\) \J \\I IJ Iv t, 1J ., "' N /V ,., --Ii
I' . \'J tv \l tJ I"' tJ ., N ,., ,J nJ rv N ,J
~ rt: . \-J tJ Ii ~ l'1 N N ,., I\) N V N IV .J
.J!__ N w IJ tJ '" \V N rl ,.J /V ., r,/ r, ,J
E -------• N "' '" N IV N • I ., .. . ., ., N ., ,. ti "' I" t-.l "-I (J •• N ,J " Iv N N rv
L{)-( l:'" tJ I'" f'J I" tJ l'J fl rl ,, rJ (I/ rl r, "' u· I\] tJ t-J tJ {\I W (I/ ,I "' N N rv ,, IV
E ---~ ---, -
E: "' N t.J 1J tJ i,; •• N • M '1 r{ , ,J
F"' tJ "' \'I jJ !'I l\l N ,v IV "' (\/ N ., 1\/
~-I t. :· tJ I" \\J " I" I" "' ,., "' ,., IV 'V rl N
H \J \\J t.J ~· N ,v rv "' f'/ " ,I ,v N IV
E -------. ---
f:: I" N • tJ tJ "' N IV ., ., "I Ill l'I " l" N I N \.J (\I N ('{ ,J u ,J ✓ "' .,
\)J...J Z! Isl N I tJ ~ 1" N ,r ,,, "' " w " "' H "' N I" \J \\) I" N " <I ,y " ,., ('( N
E ---------
I Initials li'L M< ., fr .w NfJ.. ' l'<f-v,.J "' j I'll'-l'.Jll-,'I) L k'N r-n .. f'll kPl (!,V
I Date I ~ I ':I. • 1ol I u '.J. 11h "I~ "ti ,; pl\, I\ \7. "l't I ,I~ II I I" II/" I I I Id i,ln
' . . -.. -Key: D=dead, N_=normal activity, A-abnormal act1v1ty, B-No Observations
Comment!=sc.: ____________________________________________ _
~',e ad, \9 1-{'i,-IJ.·O\ Job Number: " =
Species :. _ _..1.I ___.,::1."-='°"'-'-'.!:' '-''=''r-J::c.CM"="'---
r..onc .. I Re• 0 1 2 3 4
A
C:'11Alt01 B
C
D
E
Lj~ " N tJ tJ N
ls) N tJ r.J I'-) 'J a, .. , I" N 1-l fv b.s.-~ 1\1 >.l \V IV r-J JJ.J
E
A
B ·c
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
I Initials ,,,,._ I'll,~ J lo,, 11\'t\,v ,r,,._,
I Date lnh, \\ I I ii\~ II\, l•h
Beginning Date & Time: ID -:,, -1 'i /)..o;:)
Ending Date & Time: 11.i:f:· 9S' /d>-OV
Freshwater Sediment Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Observations/Live Count
Dav
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
"-I N ,, ., IV ., Al .IV ,U
"I N N , rv N ~ ,., .,
N ~ ~ ,., ,., /1, ,v " N
r' ,,. "' ,J "'
,.,
N N ,.., , -------
I 1'<1...J J<'J( f'.J/l /«I(_ /JiL /d>L /q( l11L C ,i
\\\.:::, /I IL ,,11 ',I 'g 11Yi I ,/lo I I/ I I II// d-i,11)
' . Key: D=dead, N=normal act1v1ty, A=abnormal act1v1ty, B-No Observations
Commen~ts'.:..: ____________________________________________ _
-------------------·
--

-

-

-
-

-
''""'-0-o\ Job Number:.~--"'-o-,--------
Species: I_, u~,,~\"'M
1.,o_nc. Rec
~ ,:
\)5 -3 a
JJ
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C !
DI
E !
A I
B
C
D
E I
Ai
B
C
D
E
I Initials '
I Date
14 15
..J l\.',
,v II.'
V n
~ l)
l·1D
I' ;,'i \ \ '1-
16 17
Al /V
tv fV
,J ' 1-' ' I ,v ,-J
!
I
I I
I I
18
/V
r-'
t-1
f-1
---------

-

-
Beginning Date & Time:__:l:,.::D:....,...,-,,_>.:..,l-.,.q.,--'--1 ---'I,;~_.:;_ __
Ending Date & Time :_-'-'1/_--=.J.J-=--·-?rJ-'----'l~d--60--=..c __
Freshwater Sediment Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Observations/Live Count
Dav
19 20 21 _;:2
.I\J /v Al ,./
/'I ;, I /\J ,v
rl/ "I /.J ,./
/v I\} /V ✓
I
I
'
i I
I I
I ! I
I I
i
I
I
I
I
!
23 I 24 ., kJ
,v 1-)
J Yu
Iv I . Iv
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
i
I
I
!
I
25 ' 26
"' /J
N ,.,
N ,.,
i N ,-
' I
I
' I
i
!
i '
! I i
: !
I
I I I
I I
' I '
i I
! ! I
; I I
' ' I
T"i' I
•1/x
27
,J
iJ,
;..;
,J
u
-,,/.;. 7
I Da
I
1 Obsen
i" I " i '
I
i
I
I
!
I
' '
I
!
:
i
.
i
!
i
i
I
i
I
;
I
'
I
I
'
i
!
28
Final
Count
Key: D-dead, N-normal activil), A abnormal activity B no observations
Comments:
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
Acute Test
/ American Aquatic TesJing, Inc.
Job# -j/;j // -0 / ---'C--"-----
Start Date:_---'-,Z_1_U_'-_1/-'-,0-'f __ _
Start Time:
End Date: __ j 6049
End Time: ____ _L330
Test Type: :;'vi!._
Hatch Date:_./J)p__m=--'----'---. ___ _
0 bservations: ------·---··
-_ _Q .l:.~-&--;;_@ ,zi_~rf-.!Jz, ··---·-
.. .. /1,::x,,c.:; Ii/£ {r',,(. /7,/1/11/1 /.. j _
ro,-6u: o,./ · /e Al"'<" r1f-
_ . (j) ;lC:,, i,J,c' L1vE r_;,,,vTS' # /'v,1/1,, __
lo/J,-lfl
f!jj/lfl!/JEt S12£ -300111 l
8;0,mtNT Voe.. -100 '" L_ i/.;,o_t~c -;;ia::, "'-b--
ACFWLCPA
Concentration [Rep.li~=-~L=iv~e=C=o-~un=@~s===]r.'I,_ L __ J o hr. 24 hr. 48 hr. 72 hr. 96 hr. l2J
A /0 y ';;' _1-_ JO ___
(l B IU (() 5 . -t lo
ot--) C lo 0 [., (.s:/ /0 ---
D !O '-I -:i-'t 'I ~----·
--···· --------~ ---· ·------·-····. ---..
ClienVT oxicent: 48 ·----c,-~----Job Number: l:Z·DI
Species: J.. vf?NcJ7,Z,~
-·, /7--.a-?/" Beginning Date & Time: ,,<.'/ <--</·Z-z// t:?u
Ending Date & Time: .;ztr:::: t>lf 11 I 1'10
Freshwater Sediment Test
American AquaUc Testing, Inc.,
PhysicaI·1 Chemical Parameters
Parameter Concentration
----·----0
--------------------
--1--1···· 2 . 3 ---4 __ T_o;y_-r s I 7 . I a s -10
T
E
M
p
( C)
Dissolved
Oxygen
(mg/L)
L..:...:..._,:c·-
f"WSE\JPAR wkl
.. --·-· ... -· .. .:..
··-----·---.
----+-----. --------·
I ---I
••----•-•I-•--·· .... ·---·•·-···-··-···--·-·•--·•--·····-··
-----+---·--·---·-·---· ··-----·--···-·
-----If---------------------<t
1---11-----1----11-------···----------·-----------
---~-ti----------1---11·-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Freshwater Acute Test
Job #: S f-1 • .J
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.
Start Date & lime: I!-;) s ·-'i<J I 7; IS
Species: L Va ( : '.5 d~~
Dilution Water: [Pt1 f\;,J H,\f ,j
-~oncentrationll RepJ~ 0 fir.
C A __ 10_. __
On'!r o/ ·-----
B _ _JQ. ---------·-·---·------------
5 7 A -l()_ --I -----· --.
B ··--IQ --···-... -·--------.. .. ·--·-·
A 10 5 /~ --·-------------------
B JO --------.... --------.. . -·-·-
l,) .'.5 A __ J_(_J -··--
B lo ···-. -·-----·--·--.. .. ·-·
/,JSO A IQ
B I CJ ...... .
,) 50\) A 10 -··· .. -· .. ...
B J(.)
Live Count
I 24 fir. I
_JO .. .......
10 ·-·----···--·--··-
_ID ---·---·
... 10 ........
_ 10 ..........
IC) -. ·---
··-' r) .... ··-·.
I i) -
.10.
10 .. j. 7
·-~ .. ..
EndDate&Time: Ii IJ.r/P9 t7!1D
Test Type: 'If JK. &'ls
II Tem11erature ffil
48 fir. I 07ir. 24 hr. 48 hr.
·--1.() --. _JJ D --_;)3, '5 -.. ZH,O_. -
/u ;J.). D .,;;3.'.5___ _ _2t\.0 ---·--·
.. _10 _ _ );i .l) .. __ o)3.,S.. ___ . -2..l\~Q_ ___
10 .),J.~ --~3-5 .... -2-.LQ__ ----------
10 .l,J.o __ do?,.'"' . Z<-1.:._Q __ ... --------· ·----····--···--·
IO .J.).o ;13,5_ 2.':\._Q -. .... ------·····--•--. .....•. 2..~ ),J., C, ;;;1!,L, 0 -;,4 -0~
4~-... ;u.u . .;tLkD ... .. 2.l\o __ ·-----·----... ...
Q'O -.),;>. __ i> .. ----;;i.LJ.o_ . ___ .2':\.o_ -----.. --I(' _Jcl. () .. d!-i.-D. .. ... 24.0 .. .. o ..... .. .. ... .... . .. -... . .
9'~ ,.l.,;>.I) _dlJ o. .... _ _z. L\. 0 . -. . .. -····· -----· .. , ______ .,_
() I(! ;),:l. C) ... 2.. ---QIJ..(2 [I.\.C,
E· l~!:~s ... __ ·· 1[ ;;1] ;.,~l~]J·f. ···11 tr,l 1-~g--\ fw
I 1)JJ ii /-l.5: _ __I_/_ . ___ _ . L L .. __ . -· z..5 _
---··-----·
ACl148PAR.WKJ
I
l
p;tK Jd--/. o 9/
b~ ;J3.;}.d-f
7tf /d.O· Lj./p I
;5 / ;J_/. 4.,I~/
Di/ I I 9. 7o'f
!:>S 2 ;.f.£J. (pJ:J
])~ 3 ;d-o. I.;[~
L. va,it-;(i/c.,5 /7A/-#<--w "'"";,;cv cs --o ..
c1 77. ;<IU
c:200. Io I
;fJ.-. 57;1_,
I 7D. 3S'S
/ 7~. 91PS-
/ ?5'. 523
I 6'I. $Jf
I
'
' i
I
W:Uflr--<71
I
/5~ ./J~,
?t. f?7a)
&2.' /I I LeJ
1/ fl. 9 D 9 v.f-;I
5S-. c).6J/ j)J-.
~~fo )J-~
&/. ,2S"Co »s=--t
I
I
11/£/if I
1)/.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L. variegatus 48 hr LC50 test date 11/23/99 I File: c:\toxstat\kclv0021.c Transform: NO TRANSFORM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ..
Spearman -Karber Estimate of LC50
Estimated LC50 ~ 609.55001• (Variance= 2304.668625)
I, 95% confidence interval: (515.458, 703.642)
GROUP IDENTIFICATION
OBS
PROP
SMOOTH
PROP DOSES --------------------------------------------------------------------
1 control 0.000 0.000 o.oo
2 157 0.000 0.000 157.00
3 313 0.000 0.000 313.00
4 625 0.700 0.700 625.00
5 1250 1.000 1. 000 1250.00
6 2500 ppm 1.000 1.000 2500.00 --------------------------------------------------------------------
SINGLE ANALYTE ANALYSIS REPORT -WATER MATRIX
Laboratory Job/Lot #: 2092/4265 Date Extracted: N/A
Date Sampled: 10/14/99 --~~----Date/Time Analyzed: 10/20/99; 1435
Date Received 10/19/99 ~==-"-----NJDEP Lab Cert.#: 18630
Parameter: Percent Organic Carbon
Client ID:
Lab American Aguatic MDL Analytical Result Analytical Result
Sample# Testing Method#* /% wet wt.) (% wet wt.) /% dry wt.}
21150 #001; Control 6A1a 0.02 0.79 1.2
21151 #002; Reference! 6A1a 0.02 1.18 9.1
21152 #003; US-1 6A1a 0.02 1.79 7.2
21153 #004; DS-1 6A1a 0.02 2.11 7.5
21154 #005; Ds-2·· 6A1a 0.02 1.77 6.6
21155 #006; DS-3 6A1a 0.02 1.61 16.2
• Soil Survey Laboratory Methods and Procedures for Collecting Soil Samples, Soil Conservation
Service/USDA, April, 1972
.. The sample container for sample #005 DS-2 was received broken. Sufficient sample was recovered
from the cooler to perform analysis. Results may be considered estimates.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
environmental compliance monitoring, lnc. ________________________ ECM I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SINGLE ANALYTE ANALYSIS REPORT -WATER MATRIX
Laboratory Job/Lot#: 2092/4265 Date Extracted:
Date Sampled:
Date Received
Lab
Sample#
21150
21151
21152
21153
21154
21155
10/14/99 Date/Time Analyzed:
10/19/99 NJDEP Lab Cert.#:
Parameter: Percent Solids
Client ID:
American Aguatic
Testing
#001; Control
#002; Reference(
#003; US-1
#004; DS-1
#005; Ds-2•
#006; DS-3
MDL
(%.)
1
1
1
NIA
10/19/99; 1615
18630
Analytical Result
00
68
13
25
28
27
9.9
• The sample container for sample #005 DS-2 was received broken. Sufficient sample was recovered
from the cooler to perform analysis. Results may be considered estimates.
I environmental compliance monitoring, Inc.
•
ECM
I
I
I
I
QA Report -Duplicate and Matrix Spike Recovery
ANAL YTE: Percent Organic Carbon
I
I
I
:=-----:---::---,------;c--;;-------,-------~~--------;:;~----,----,~-: I REPLICATE
Lab Sample# I Result I Replicate Result I RPO I QC Limits
21155 I 1.61 I 1.57 I 2.5 I N/E
~~,----------r--~~~----.------,-,--=---~~ '
MATRIX SPIKE
Lab Sample# I Result I Spike Addition I Spike Result I % Recovery I QC Limits
21155 I 1.61 I
ANAL YTE: Percent Solids
REPLICATE
Lab Sam le# Result
21155 9.9
MATRIX SPIKE
Lab Sam le# Result
N/A
0.12 I 1.64 I
Re licate Result
9.9
S ike Addition S ike Result
94 I
RPO
0
% Recove
N/E
QC Limits
-34 to 34
QC Limits
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
environmental compliance monitoring, lnc. _______________________ £CM I
I
I
I
I
I
I APPENDIX B
I CHAIN -OF -CUSTODY
I DOCUMENTATION
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I 10
----
USEPAERT
REAC, Edison, NJ
Contact: John Johnson
732-321-4200
WO#:R1A~
EPA Contract 66-C99-223
·······················-•->-: A : 0024-001
·:,;,· : 0024-002
: A : 0024-003 .... .. .. ... .. .. . . .... A 0024-00i
' A 0024-005
' A : 0024-006
: A : 0024-007
' A .. : 002;j:ooa·
: A . .. : 0024-0)9
: A : 0024-010
Special Instructions:
{./l:~
----- - --
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
Project Name: Roanoke River
Location:
Site Phone:
-
REFERENCE COC;
------
CCC # 024-0001
Page No.: _L of _L
Cooler#
Lab: American Aquatic
Contact Chris Nal~
···---······· ............................ .
ttemsiReiiS·or1·· ·····rReffriciillSheCfBY-... •• .. ·:·o;ie·· ]""ffei:efVeti"B·y··· : Date : Time "iierris/Reason· ·············:··ReilriqUISheCi·ey ············:·oaii····:··-ec·
r,tif,~·· fy ''.' TJ~"/f4~ ,tJ1lrT1 ~ ....... 6/ll~Boo JI~~ , ............ , ...... =· .. ,...,
-"-~IERIC . .\~ . .\Ql-. .\ TIC TESTL'iG, I:.'-i"C.
1105 l.iNION BL VD
ALL.El'•iTOWN, PA 18103
610 434 9015
Job it: ¥8'·12 ·v I
<llM .r,,7, 11)
Client:
Address:
Phone1.!: &10 $4" g,1, Sample Return to client [ I
. ;;ft;& 0 I o,.C 0 ~,J ~,$ o;.I @ We:d-)) /d#.ui,., l 6 7JJ._ 1,i:;,J.M. o· I 1soosa : a IS Dosal L b ct· f'xf: ,
Lo,ual Cb<mis<ry SAMPLE INFOR.'1ATION Toxicity Testing Requested
,a t...abon.Ja"v
I Sample, Temp. Diss. Sample [denti.fic:ioon I Sample I Sample / Sample . .\cute Chronic I Sediment I Eluaiat.e I Pure ~r Other
·c 0, ?H volume Date . Time Como.
I I
I
I
811cJt,l!ll -~ l!I L . ,1,· L .. ~ -f;ss,✓ I 15(p, I 1rJ5,Joql 1J rv, i I I )(' 'TrSSI/€ I
/1,..,JW>L
V I '71'1 I 11 I:,_ qJ,;f'i J</<Jn I I I ',(
f?FF-1 I t,2., I ,.), ~ "': I 1llr><i I I I V
1,."-I ILJ(j I ,i1s.o qf I,~ I I I I ')( I
1)8-1 155 I n/ao/~[ ,Koo ' I i I }(
'
~-7 I 5 5, nHo kfl 11«:J I I I I '')(
l'l'?--1 I ' / /(.p/ q 11/t,o/<7q I !Roo i i I I I 'y . , !
I I . .., I i I I I i I ' '
' I
I I I I i ! I I I I
I
I I I I I I I I I
Samples we,,:.
I. CoUec-.ed by AA T perso[lllel P4 2. Transported on ic.e 0 J. R:c.eived with in :iold.ing time' 4 Sample :nauix is: Liquid [ J Sediment [ ]
Client oersonnel Yes M No f l Yes r l No f l Soil f l Other M
CUSTODY INFOR.\1A TION
Lab Use 1
Sample# Reliriauished bv.· I Received bv: I Date Time I Relinouishec ;iv: i Received for Lab: I Date I Time ISTN# I
Q,.ubn ,.'; L' ) I ,i./01./9<?) /'Joo I I I I !
f?~--·l t -, -' I I I . I I I i
. .
f?tf-• , ' ./ I I I I I I
<.. '-
U8-I 's--rs. I I I I I ' '
l)S-1 --u I I I I I -i
"j\q,.z ,_ I ! I I I
.,
1:>3-3 ' I ,1, ~/ I I I I
/ / J I I I I
I I i I I
I I I I I I
: Soccial Instructions: (, l roR. ,;,I1J1,;S/8 r ~ .rr11rr fou;J fou u. 1 (GV 7?,2 ·,,,-71 l.f).'/'lS { Loc/-,1/EE'o l17AR:ri.i\ ---Q, fi;ft} . ' -r,,~Ji-=-/JJ f•lo (@] \ P=:qj(jFtS ... ~ ----------I
-------------------Al"V!ERIC."-~ ."-Qu.-\ TIC TESTL'iG, I~C. ; CHAI~ OF CUSTOD"\'."
1105 UNION BL VD. Jobi#: ½f-l.J-o5 Client: L:ex11.;t2:>~/&A;.Clienc Contact: CIIRl-6 J/41.i,/
ALLENTOWN, PA 18103 (/lltr:Tor,#. Address: C/olhzf81C9;.J/J,Q4&1Je. '
610 434 9015 ~ Phone#: IP10-.t/349o16' Sample Return to client [ I
~t 02, 0 ~ O~ :r;;, Di o sal· Lab d's I rXl
lnuw Cbculi=y
,a L-oborwwv
: Sample, Temp. Diss.
•c 0,
fy-•nn ':..
lt--l
US p>'~-1
,i/1._/
~~-/
uS-Z
1)8-3 I
I I
I I
I
Samples were:
!Cll:ed' "-AT 0 ect DY. personnc
,H
Client oersonnel
Sample# Relinouished bv: -,,, ~ /
tl .. ri..L \_ ...... (
11<? l<&-1 ...___
" US-I c------;,,
f'IS° _, ' /
l:)3.1 -
l:>3-.3 .....
l_..../ ~
I
I
I
{:,;µ,1 oJJ,/:Jn./ 6J , ';:,;, .,v/_ '\ S 0 1 posa I
S~¼PLE INFORl\1.A TION Toxicity Testing Requested
Sample ldentification I Sample Sample / Sample . .\cut.: I Chronic I Sediment I Eluaiat.: I Pure Other Other
volume Da1c . Time Como. {,)
,c -Po ef, da., +-,3,9,i;:-l1ol. q I 11/Lo/P'JI ti,, oo I I I I y' -(,,..: 1/£
I 5&~q I 11/.zs-ml 1000 I I I I y
I ioa I I I I I I 'I-
I f{l1 I I I I I I I " 1108' ( I I I I i I ✓
I I
I 8? ( I I I I I I X.
, IJl'fa ,/ I •/ I I I I I I X J
I .., i I I i I
I I
i i I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
_. rans54rr on 1c:. J. e~1v W1 lil · 0 :.ime. amp e :nat.-ix 1s: 1qm ent
r 1 Yes f No r l Yes r 1 No f l Soil f 1 Other .vr ed ? • R . ed th . b !ding . 0 ➔ S L d [ J Sedim [ ]
' CUSTODY INFOR,\1A TION Lab Use
Received bv: I Date Time I Relinouished bv: I Received for Lab I Date Time ISTN#
I , 2 /42!9<i 1'700 I I I
I I . I I . .
I I I I I I
I I I I I
I I ! I
I I I I
I \} ' I I I
I I I I
I I I I
! I I i '
I S~ial !nslrucuons: [i) ~£ lt.df.i'iJ.Jf;_j {1,.,,17J<!.T :r-;, Ii. ;J :f"o&1110,i (ii) k cJCIIE£TJ (1&e17 ;.1 '132 321 .dl_dJ?
A.:VIERIC . .\N . .\QUA TIC TESTING, INC.
1105 UNION BL VD
ALLENTOWN, PA 18103
610 434 9015
loitial Cb<mi,uy
•iii L..,bonlo<v
Job#: Yf-tJ •01 Client:
Address:
Phone#:
SAMPLE INFORMATION
&-fl11i
MEL/C',1,/ tif~C
/it,Lt'l(li-,./µ fJ}
.,
.->u Cll.\lN OF CUSTODY
Client Contact: CdK'r8 ;/4'.i./_f'
7
Sample
Disposal:
Return to client
Lab disposal
Toxicity Testing Requested
IX! .
f I
Sample,, Temp, Diss, Sample Identification Sample Sample Sample Acute Chronic Sediment Eluaiate Pure Other Other
·c 0, pH volume Da1e Time Como,
,,,_' I f.nPTl'nL-ivOMl 10/,;,,,,tq1 ,~ I 'f rsc
' Pt kt.,;,~,3
. I I -/ 1Z>C QJ;J...
"".i. u.'? -I I 'x. rvc
rot/-v3-I I V /i),,-0
,.... .,f" ///J .<.L-< ,.I"✓ .... ·1> Df:-Z i 1/ 78r .
,.,._, ( 0 '''';v-D&-3 I • J J /C ~
I I
I I
I I
I I
Samples wen::
l. Collected by AA T personnel ~ 2. Transported on ice? 3. Received witb in holding time? 4, Sample matrix is: Liquid [ ) Sedimenl}f
Client ner;onnel Yes [X[ No f l Yes IX.I No f 1 Soil r 1 Other l
,# CUSTODY INFOR.\1A TION Lab Use
Sample# /!¼linai.risl . Received bv: Date Time Relinouished bv: Rec¢'ived f.d'r Lab: Date Time ISTN# ..
1· ~ V ;:;, .I £~ /:,/ii/9.s? 152.f;:J / ~ .... _ I , /<} /,,, ,/,;., //Yf ,u"//,.v, J /·
./ , ,7 ... /
/
-
-·.
,.
S""'ial In.st.ructions: ~-S -,;l. ?-.rz,c,.. /W-·~I
---,·· • •. y .lllllll!IIIJ,£11111-A-.
, ,1., • / 7 ec ,,.,, ,,,.,. (,.,.,, / J;..,,, /4..,/£,, df .o,r h.,,,:; "'ii._
''" ... °"':-,.-- - - - ----
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.
SRI DATES AND VALVES
H I fl •va e a azteca
DA TE PERFORMED 48 HR LC5o -PPM CONFIDENCE LIMITS
12/02/97 365.6 347.7-383.5
02/24/98 315.4 264.3 -366.6
05/15/98 611.1 510.0 -712.2
05/28/98 300.3 249.3-351.4
06/11/98 315.4 264.2 -366.6
I 0/14/98 430.2 345.0-515.4
11/10/98 352.9 284.5 -421.3
01/08/99 366.9 347.5 -386.2
02/11/99 325.7 275.9 -375.4
04/02/99 350.0 322.9 -377.4
08/26/99 309.4 270.2 -348.6
09/01199 312.5 257.3 -367. 7
10/19/99 302.6 249.9-355.3
11/04/99 271.9 231.0 -312.8
11/05/99 318.8 281.1 -356.4
12/22/99 346.9 317.5 -376.2
SRI DATES AND VALUES
Eisenia fetida
DA TE PERFORMED 96 HR LC5o -mllfKo CONFIDENCE LIMITS
05/13/98 4200 NIA
I 0/22/98 20 I 9.2 1774.5 -2264.0
01/14/99 I 825. 7 982.3 -2669.0
08/25/99 4500 3631.2 -5368.8
11/23/99 i 4000 3302. 9 -4697.1
SRI DATES AND VALUES
L b I 11m ric11 us varier?al11s
DATE PERFORMED 48 HR LC5o -PPM CONFIDENCE LIMITS
01/21/99 457.3 435.0-479.7
11/23/99 609.6 515.5-'-703.6
1105 Union Blvd., 2nd Floor • Allentown. PA 18103
[phone] • fax [phone]
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1024\DEL iFR\0003\REPORT
Appendix C
Roanoke Soil Bioaccumulation Test: Eise11iafoe1ido
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April 2000
ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.
REPORT CERTIFICATION
The following report titled "LOCKHEED MARTIN ENYIROJ\'MENT AL SERVICES
REAC ROANOKE SOIL TOXICITY AND BIOACCUMULA TION TESTING -
Eise11ia fetida" is an accurate and truthful representation of the toxicity testing which was
performed by American Aquatic Testing. Inc .• located at 1105 Union Blvd. Allentown.
Pennsylvania. We further certify that we have personally examined and are familiar with
the information submitted in this document and based on our inquiry of those individuals
immediately responsible for obtaining the information, we believe the submitted
information is complete as presented. We are aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information.
' // \._./
~~L'...---,~c:./' /-1?-~ouo
Tarn10 Pallop
Vice-President, Laboratory Manager
1105 Union Blvd .. 2nd FloqrJ • AllentOwn. PA 18103
[phone] • Fax [phone]
LOCKHEED MARTIN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REAC
ROANOKE SOIL TOXICITY AND BIOACCUMULATION
TESTING -Eiseniafetida
Contents
Section
Introduction
Page
2
Soil Samples
Materials and Methods / Soil Exposures Eisenia jetida
Results
2
6
I.
11.
Ill.
IV.
A.
B
C.
D.
Tables
Summary of Conditions for Eiseniafetida Toxicitv Test 5
Percent survival of E. fctida bv replicate chamber and mean survival at 14 days 7
Percent survival of E. fetida by replicate chamber and mean survival at 28 days
using control 7
Percent survival of E. fctida by replicate chamber and mean survival at 28 days
using US-Ref-S 8
Appendices
Raw data for Eiseniafetida 28-day toxicity and bioaccumulation test
Statistical data for Eiseniafetida 28-day toxicity test using control soil
Statistical data for Eise11iafetida 28-day toxicity test using reference soil
Chain of custody documentation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
■
ROANOKE SOIL TOXICITY AND BIOACCUMULATION TESTING
T:,ise111afetida
INTRODUCTION
During the month of August 1999, samples of surface soils were collected from the
Roanoke River site in Plymouth, North Carolina, by members of the Lockheed Martin
Environmental Services Group attached to the USEPA REAC Division in Edism1, New
Jersey. · Now designated a Superfund by the USEPA, these soil samples were used to
perform bioaccumulation tests to determine if the tested matrices represent a significant
threat to potential receptor organisms.
The soil samples from the site were delivered to American Aquatic Testing, Inc. (AAT)
and evaluated for the bioaccumulation of contaminants of concern using a 28-day solid
phase exposure with the annelid Eise11ia fetida [!]. Following the exposure period,
surviving test organisms from the soils collected at the site were compared to a control set
tested under similar conditions using an artificial soil of known environmental quality, and
then all organisms were prepared for analytical analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS / SOIL EXPOSURES -l:iseniafe1ida
Prepora1io11 of samples for testing
The soil samples collected on August 25 and 26 1999 were transported, via overnight
carrier, to the laboratory in 5-gallon high-density polyethylene (HOPE) buckets on ice.
Upon arrival at AA T, the samples were stored under refrigerated conditions until being
inspected for removal of indigenous organisms, large debris, and living plant material on
October 26, 1999. The inspected portion of the soil was then transferred to clean 2-gallon
HOPE containers. sealed, and refrigerated until used for testing on October 27, 1999.
Artificial control soil was prepared in the laboratory on October 26, l 999 in accordance
with existing AAT, Inc. Standard Operating Procedures. The artificial soil composition
consisted of 20 percent (by wet weight) screened (2 mm) Canadian sphagnum peat moss,
produced by Premier Horticulture Redhill, PA; 20 percent (by dry weight) Snowtex®
kaolinite (97% <40µm) clay and 60 percent (by dry weight) Grade 70 (97% between 0.05
and 0.3 mm) silica sand. both produced by Landers-Segal Color Company of Passaic, NJ.
2
Test or~anisms
Earthworms (Eisenia fetida) for this study were obtained from stock cultures maintained
by ARO, Inc of Hampton, NH At the beginning of the 28-day exposure, the test
organisms were 60-90 days old and were fully mature adults.
A reference toxicant test using spiked artificial soil with potassium chloride as the toxicant
was conducted during the 28-day exposure to evaluate the sensitivity and vigor of the
organisms used in the soil test. The 96 hr LC 50 of 4000 mg/kg falls within the range of
published data from a study conducted by USEPA in 1995 [2]. AAT, Inc. is currently
developing an internal laboratory control chart for E fetida. To date, all tests have fallen
into the acceptable range of the above-mentioned study.
Experimental procedures
The entire soil exposure series for this project consisted of eight soil samples from the
Roanoke River site and one of artificial control soil generated at AA T, Inc. Test chambers
(]-gallon HOPE containers) were filled with 1500 g of soil The control soil was hydrated
to 45% of its dry weight. The samples from the Roanoke River site were initially near
saturation. These samples did not require any additional water until very late in exposure.
At this time, the samples were hydrated to a level approximating the appearance of the
control soil The initial pH was measured on the soil samples at the beginning of the
exposure period [I].
The exposure period began by placing 75 randomly selected test organisms into each of
four replicate chambers for each sample location, and the control This number of
organisms was necessary as the average weight of the organisms used for this study was
0.3 g each. The average weight of the organisms was determined prior to testing by
weighing a subsample of the lot used for testing, in order to produce sufficient biomass
( I 00 g) for chemical analysis of tissue. Care was taken to ensure that the organisms were
carefully handled to avoid physical damage. The test chambers were covered with fine
mesh nylon screening and placed in area of the testing laboratory with continuous light.
The temperature was maintained at 25 "C +/. 1.0 °C using the continuous lighting as the
heat source. Test conditions are summarized in Table I.
Each day during the exposure period observations of each chamber were carried out to
determine the number of organisms either on the surface of the soil, on the walls of the
test chamber, or dead. Deionized water was used to maintain the hydration level of the
test chambers to the approximate appearance of the control chambers. Care was taken to
minimize disturbance of the test chambers during observations.
After 14 days all exposure chambers were inspected for actual live counts by emptying
each into a HDPE pan and counting the surviving test organisms A summary of mortality
data is presented in Table IL
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
After 28 days all exposure chambers were again inspected for actual live counts by
emptving each into a HOPE pan and counting the surviving test organisms. A summary of
mortality data is presented in Table II I. The test organisms from each replicate were
cleaned to remove test material, transferred to clean. I -liter beakers with moist paper
towels. returned to the testing laboratory. and allowed to depurate for 24 hours.
Following depuration, the test organisms were placed into sample containers labeled to
identifi,, the test sample location and were frozen prior to shipment to Southwest
Laboratory of Oklahoma for analysis.
/)a/a m1al1'sis
Data analysis was performed following procedures published by the USEPA [3] using the
Toxstat [4] data analysis software Data was tested for normality using the Shapiro-
Wilk · s test or the Chi-Square test. as appropriate, and tested for homogeneity of variances
using Bartlett's test. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Dunnet(s a J>osteriori
pairwise comparisons or Steel's Many-one Rank test. as appropriate. to evaluate
ditTerences between site samples and the control sample.
4
l.
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
I 0.
II.
12.
I 3.
14.
15.
TABLE I: Summary of Conditions for Eisenia fetida Toxicity Test
Test type:
Temperature:
Light quality:
Light intensity:
Photoperiod:
Test chamber size:
Sediment volume:
Age of test organisms:
Number organisms / container:
Replicates:
Feeding:
Test chamber cleaning:
Test duration:
Endpoints measured:
Test acceptability:
Whole soil, static
25.0 +I-1.0° C
Wide-spectrum fluorescent illumination, and
incandescent
50 -I 00 foot-candles
continuous
I-gallon HOPE containers
1500 g / replicate
60 -90 days
4
None
None
28 days
Survival and bioaccumulation
Minimum control survival 90%
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RESULTS
Effects m1 S111Tfral / Comrol Sample
Raw data are presented in Appendix A. Data were arcsine square root transformed The
data were found to be normally distributed, were tested for homogeneity of variances
using Bartlett's test, and found to be homogeneous. It was therefore determined that
parametric analyses were appropriate, and ANOVA followed by Dunnett's pairwise
comparisons were used for the analysis.
Results from the analysis, which compared survival in all samples with survival of
organisms exposed to the control sample. are presented in Table 111 and Appendix B. All
locations were found not to be statistically significant when compared to the control
sample.
Effects 011 Survival! R~fere11ce Sample
Raw data are presented in Appendix A. Data were arcsine square root transformed. The
data were found to be normally distributed, were tested for homogeneity of variances
using Bartlett's test, and found to be homogeneous. It was therefore determined that
parametric analyses were appropriate, and ANOV A followed by Dun nett' s pairwise
comparisons were used for the analysis.
Results from the analysis, which compared survival in all samples with survival of
organisms exposed to the reference sample. are presented in Table IV and Appendix C
Of the four samples from the Roanoke River site, only location DS-1 was found to be
statistically significant when compared with the on-site reference sample.
Effects 011 (,mwth . Control Sample
Raw data are presented in Appendix A. Growth analysis, using wet weights. was
unnecessary as all sample locations generated weights greater than the control sample
during this analysis.
The above conducted bioaccumulation exposure did not produce the anticipated volumes
of wet weight tissue for analytical chemistry. A review of the test design indicates that in
the case of the control organisms, using artificial soil at an unadjusted pH of 4.8, while
within acceptable limits, may not have presented the most favorable conditions for the test
organisms. The cited ASTM document [I] does allow for the adjustment of soil pH to 7.0
+/. 0.5 standard units using calcium carbonate. It was decided that the control soil would
not be altered, as none of the samples collected on-site would have any pH adjustments.
As for the volumes of tissue generated by the samples collected at the Roanoke site, two
of the five generated more than expected, while three did not. A possible reason for this is
the total organic carbon (TOC) present in the samples from locations US-Ref-S, US-I,
6
and DS-2 may not have been available to the test organisms as a food source. Another
possibility is that the eating habits of the test organisms were affected by low levels of
contaminants, either those which were analyzed for, or perhaps contaminants which were
unanticipated.
Effects 011 Growth/ Refere11ce Sample
Raw data are presented in Appendix A. Growth analysis, using wet weights, was
unnecessary as all sample locations generated weights greater than the reference sample
during this analysis.
Table II: Percent survival of£. (etida bv reolicate chamber and mean survival at 14 davs
Sample Location
Rep Control US Ref SD US-I DS-1 DS-2 DS-3
A 100 100 100 100 100 100
B 100 100 100 100 100 100
C 100 100 100 100 100 100
D 100 100 100 100 100 100
Mean 100 100 100 100 100 100
Survival
Tahle III: Percent sun·i\'al of E. (etida hv renlicate chamber and mean sun·i\'al at 28 davs usinl! Control
Sample Location
Rep Control US Ref SD US-I DS-1 DS-2 DS-3
A 93.3 98.7 100 89.3 100 100
B 97.3 97.3 96.0 97.3 92.0 97.3
C 96.0 100 98.7 89.3 96.0 100
D 96.0 100 100 94.7 98.7 96.0
Mean 95.7 99.0 98.7 92.7 98.6 98.7
Survival
Statistically different No No No No No
from the Control
7
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Tahle IV: Percent sun·h·al of£. fetida hv rcolicatc chamhcr and mean ~un·h:al at 28 da'\'S usinP US-Ref-S
Sample Location
Rep US Ref SD US-I DS-1 DS-2 DS-3
A 98.7 100 89.3 100 100
B 97.3 96.0 97.3 92.0 97.3
C 100 98.7 89.3 96.0 100
D 100 100 94.7 98.7 96.0
Mean 99.0 98.7 92.7 98.6 98.7
Survival
Statistically different from No Yes No No
the Reference
REFERENCES
111 ASTM. 1999 Standards on Biological Effects and Environmental Fate Second Edition:
Designation E 16 76-97 Standard Guide for Conducting Laboratory Soil ToxicitY or
Bioaccumulation Tests with the Lumbricid Eanhworm Eiseniafctida.
12] Yeardley, Jr. Roger 8., James M. Lazorchak, Michael A. Pence. 1995. Evaluation of
alternative toxicants for use in the canhworm toxicity test. Environmental Trmcology and
Chemistrv 14:l 189-1194.
!3] Ingersoll, C.G., G.T. Ankley, G.A. Burton, F.W. Dwyer, R.A. Hoke, T.J. Norberg-King,
and P. V. Winger 1994 Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of
Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater lnvenebrates EPA 600/R-94/024. U.S.
Environmental Protection. Office of Science and Development. Duluth. MN
I 4 I Toxstat March. 1994 Version 3 A data anaksis software published by West. Inc. Western
EcoSYstems Technolog,. Inc .. C:hc,·ennc. WY
8
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A I
RAW DAT A FOR Eiseniafetida I
28-DA Y TOXICITY AND BJOACCUMULATION TEST I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
9 I
-
Cl1ent;Toxicant: __ ~'-/~1._· ___ _
Job Number:_~~~'-"-'-------
Beginning Date & Time: 1?· -;i._ 7 -'-/ c 1 'Z'fS-
Ending Date & Time: II -?-'1 -74 150 °
Species: , .. ,
Soil Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Observations/Live Count Da 14
'TT71 J Day I I Live ,
---c,-o-n_c __ -, n~~t "Fre-o.1-----◊ , 1 1 2 3 , 4 --7 5 ~. -~5--"=~7~---,-------,a~.--,,g---.10"'---.1·1-;-,1,,2-:--,1s3.--i1 Obser' Count-'
A ; ,v /'1 1 µ ; /1.i I /Y j-.1 ! N ,...: ! Y'-: rJ Iv ,,,, 1 ,v i IV i i\J : ·J.C. i
B I /v' ' rJ : rJ ' 1" -;'_:_'✓'------1.l(\.l::_ __ LI' _r::__,J __ _!_iv:_____;_•_!1'-.::_·_+_j":'..___.,-, --'':-=:-',---,--= "--"'"':----i'-~::_'_,lr-;1~ V--;---c"'; __ '::'_~,
C ~ ;J ! ;v i P I ,-..; ! r-.1 (\J I r.J Jv ! ,-v ! j...:.i 1 ') rv : ""·/ \ rJ I N I f ~ '
[)----;:;7-p~•----',-~jJ.--.-1 --,v-c----;--1 -rv·-,-+.;_,v.::;.---+,--',J-,---,,:.v__.:_-+, -".:'..J __ :--1,::_'",.---,:-:,v'.--,--'"rv,---/V"----;-,--:.-,l-,~v--,~·'::-,,._~--.----;I
A j ,v : rJ , rJ /J I 1J \V I r-l ,-J tJ ! r,.J ' , I ,1 : '\I I r.1 ; ,-,, , 1 C ;
7 [j C I AJ i /J I ,v I /J I rJ N ,..J ,v i iv N /v N /"< I ,J I ,'J 1-5
: , I ~~--+--S_.:_-s---!---':'..-~--+:-=--+----"';-------"-'-:-----t-'-''--i-, ~-i-'~. ,.--'-:-----':::;---'--t,---t,1ef-'· ~. -~
D I /V i rJ 1 ,'-'' i t!..__J N lv d____ /V ., 1 ~ l /v _ /V f'./ i /V . 1 v ; -=:-
8 ! rJ j t1 I r,J tJ i r,/ I'-' ,J fl N I rJ i rJ . M N i ,J ; \_i 1 ·:,C :
-

-

-

-
-

-

-
---

-
-

-

-
-

-
-

-
I
-------Cilent/Tox,cant: ___ 9_ '8'·_1~ ____ _
C
Job Number:~--~~-~o~•------
Species : __ i:;_____J=,_,::..1 e1.· If.._-'----
Cone. ··Ren. 15 16 17 I 18
I A N ,v I l 1 fJ
c,-\P \ I B ' N I I '1 fJ /V I
' C "1 I" I '' I" ! r--
' D ,J I" I /J I rJ
i A ., ! rv 1..J jV
Le•:L,'l.? ! B I t-1 rJ N I\/
I C rJ I IV /..J 1J
i D, N I ,y f..J i"
' A I ' tJ i IV f" /V
I B ~ I N IJ /J s . \ I C ' ,) I /II /J I 1...:
i D '1 I N /v rJ
i A i N i IV t-1 /J
ti ,v ' I B ;J ! i·../
'
;
(). I I C N N ' fJ ' /J ' D
I D tJ ' I\/ I t-' i"
I A ' N ' rl ! t" ,.,_,
B N ' C/ I /V i"
'::,-cl I I l'1 j)~ C .J I fv
! D I.' N I ;J ,-v
i A ,J ' ,'Y I IN ,~
\):i-) I B ,J I 1-1 '. I¥ ,~
I C " I 01 I /,J I,_,
I D /I I (V r..J I ,v
; lni1i..h f'.OL I )'{}L ·1f1:' rw;,
' D,,c ,,I,. i p/\J, I 1i/,_; I H/! '-, I
-

-
-

-
I 19
I IV
Ill
I f\)
N
•l
I\:
(0
N
I\)
I\)
(0
: (\) .,
I Iv
(\J
I N
I IJ
i (\J
i N
i " I ~'
i D
i\)
I N
l .17""'·;
J I I /, c·
Soil Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Observations/Live Count
Dav
' 20 I 21 22 ' 23 24
I (..} N. ' ('J I I\J " i .. /.J tJ I N yv
,'J
I . ; IJ ; /v I IV YI)
' i 'J I ,v /V i IV I\)
I ; fV CV I N ~l
I ; ;v /'J ! N 0)
I ,; jv' f'J I A' • I
I J ' /J iJ I 'V lJ
I . ' f J : I" ! N N J
I i ,v ;J ' I\/ ~1 I
I :J 1v ' /Ii i Iv " ' i fv ;v i'-' I I✓ 1\/
I '; I ;v· ,v I N al
' IJ I /V N N tj ,, I ;v· l'1 Iv '{I.\
'' ,"-' .,J ' '. ) ,'V r,
'' . I ;J L" Iv t' ·,,
' \',/ I 1J N "' ·,V
;J ;,J 1r0 ;., I ~ ' ,"' I ,J iJ rV 1\ I ,, '
I ,v {'' I, ti
' I }.J ,/\I /,.J re I
),, I ,v 1\• i '" N I
! ;J I" '" \'J I '"
'/' ! r,,/' ',7}: J-',1,. ,.,,..., ) ,. ,, /
I!! " ' i//,' :,J,z "jl'l ,Ua,D '
Key: D=dead, A=on soil sur1ace, B=on test chamber wall,
25 I 26 27 Observ' Count oH I
Day 28 I · Final Final
I r--,' ' (\/ ' IJ ,-) =t-D i
i ,-J ,.., f\/ . µ 73 I
' t-r. 6: ' ,v .-y' ' ,.; ' rJ ,, 1
' ,v /V 'I) fl.) I J
'
! ,'-' ,.., : N (cl . ,, '-i
I ,v IV ' J\) 7~ I N : l/. 7; I I" I ,v i /\I I\) ;-..,
! ;v N I N I rJ 7.., !
I N ' 11} : ,v ' rv .,,.., I !
i ,.✓ ,, "' h) 1) 7-3 I ,J ' /\) N 1\) 1'1 I
I N. ,,/ f'-' 7~ I
,✓ . '
I ,v ,v' : .N fJ 6 / I
I ,J n/ ,y ~I 7-.., . ' / ~
I r" ·1/ ,.., r, I l1 I b. ,'.,:
' ~I : rJ V N 2LJ
\ JV nl IV u 77-I ' i fJ o/ ' OJ w 0'-f I
i \ ('J N ! tJ 7::, 1 5'.6 I
"i. '
! ,v ,.J ' rl u i . I '-(
I ;\I ,., "' r1l I '> J :
I ,-.J ' f•J w -· N 7-,,;--f r,J '1 ' " -" ':,I .')1
i ,v ,J ;
V ; I· 7 'J_ j
! ~" t<JL l.YL Y71. l --TAJ 77P:
I ·;1)~, ,J,a I 1).).3 111/:,.w "h,., ///~'ti
N = no observations
Comments: =-------------------------------------------------
-
ClienVToxicant: '.:, (;.,/.::.Ci
Job Number:.~-,----:-"'73_' ______ _
Species: fc, I~, 1 ·,1~ Soil Test
American Aquatic Testing, Inc.,
Observations/Live Count
96 hr
' Initial h~-----oc-=----,------,,-24"'h-;-r.---,,---,4LFBf7h;;",r,---_ ----,----77'227'h1rr:---. ----:---coiEb,ss~ei';rvisa,!ihQTIOn~s'.I·=rLiYiv'ge]C~oiiuiinil:t:::
C"o::cn:::cc=-_--c, _!! H A eo: 0 hr. ' /v t-' I" : /o
P..: (\.I I µ I : .
I r_.~B__!_'------:-·~✓----Jl __ ___,:~~-----+1 ____ ,_µ ____ :---'----'-~-----,'---'~---T-~i_O __ I
C.,1rol ! ~ 6 wg~---~~-.'-_ ---;-: ----}!~'±,------;:---------'--------t: ----ii ___ l
Ci ";,. I M ! ! I
DI '-'. I ,✓, I i
J /\j /v i A i -\._: I • i i
B : , i f\.: I ~v ,J I
C "'-~ i !
D, ~ i V
;....) ,o
C '-, \Ki
I D "'-J,e;
: A \, l f-1 /v
I B ; , 1 r0
i C "':-s I M
•/ !
D ""-' v,, ::,
Initials I ~ ! xxx:
Date I ',P.> i xxx:
\0i V.._J 1 ,,,.. l l"-.) ! / 1'11" 'l"C\° JI
!\Ii,:._ : ~Ql\ I i//;:,C ,,;;,-t
Key, O=deact, A-on soil surface, B-on test chamber wall N no observations
Comments;.:.: _______________________________________________ _
-------------------■
E. foetida 48 hr SRT LC50 test date 11/23/99
File: C:\TOXSTAT\KCEF003L.C Transform: NO TRANSFORM
I
I
__ :~=~=~-~~=::~:~-=-~::~:: ________ :~:-~~-~=~~-------~~~---------:~=-=~=~---•
10% insufficient body counts
20% insufficient body counts
HIGH CALC 30.00% 4000.000 126500.000 (3302.90,46971
LOW CALC 30.00% 4000.000 126500.000 (3302.90,4697.
GROUP IDENTIFICATION
OBS
PROP
SMOOTH
PROP DOSES I -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1
2
3
4
5
6
control
330
625
1250
2500
5000 mg/Kg
0.000
0.000
0.050
0.000
0.200
0.700
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.200
0.700
0.00
330.00
625.00
1250.00
2500.00
5000.00
1
I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
rWx J•~F, 1,.,,.,Q ... ,..,~ .. 802377021697
' _10.!.26L.:.(9z:.'l'---i'.
1, "~"h stut .. 1d
l\rp 1;i t l ~ na.,~~ r.cl l 1'lro~n 1_ ~m'1, Tnc.
1-, I -,r,nq 1n ~11
n,
71r -----
To
T'I r7!Y) "'J. llOn
I\,"" r . 1\ri "'' ti. c 1'<'" U n"
I ... ,.-~ 1-~~ .''.::.~.: ... :~.'" l.
, j [hr~• 1,,,,.,
\ · 111Midrn(P
"'"'''"''"'"'"' , .. , .... ,., .... , .... ,
I\ 1. ! ~,, t•un
I
Pl\ 11r 1_fl_1 Ql
For S;iturday Delivery chr.ck here
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
0200 Recipient's Copy
?lJ Express Package Service Pach~Hml'lrr15DltM
D r~rlE• Primny Ovr.rniQht
I ,,,_,.,. • .,~-.•••ol (XlI.!'.~,~}~:.~~~;~~v,rrn,ol,: !.J ;<~~!~: ~.~!:;:, "·
,'7 f~rlh t.Jr,irs\S~,•r•'
Specia
Dor! thi~ ~hirment i:t1nll1in ri1mqerous onods?
L.....I"""''"'"
. ' •.. ,' ',.,., ~.,. ""' .... , ... ,,,.,.m,, .• ,,, ,,..,,,., ••
1 · l ~~r>i;.1:-~ .... , .. , ,., ____ . ____ '" ....
'"""V"'""' r,,,.,,, ,,,.,,,,,, , I>••,,..,.,..,""'''"'"'°"'
Tr,t~I Weight
_ __/_ __ _ I/
-~---1---
lll!·l:,•,.ll,•·,1•"''1
I , ,,.11 • A,·,.,,.,,, '
· \\l••• '•"'""I••••••,.,,., U·•• l1tl'lo•• ,,-•-•"' ,,.,,,, •• ,.,.,...,,L,1 .. ,., <•• 1f0Vlf!
rn~r>u,n~< n•n ••• n """'. •"1:11,.,., 01 ''""""' , • ., ". ,-. , ,..,.,,. [rrrl11 Cn!!I Aull,
a Reh~R~e SignRhlfP,
------------···--•-----
'""' "~"""" ,.,,1,n,.,,, f "''" ,1 f •r'"'' tn ~.,..,, "•" ""'"
••••• ,,,,1t,n"• nM,,,.,,.~, '"Q"""•• ,.,,i •~'"'' 10 '""""'""" .... , .• , .. ······•···I, .... ,,,,, ..... , .... ""''""'"'"",, •. ,..
011estions?
Call 1·800·Go·Fec1h !ROOl463-333~
[287\
•:11,,,,.
/.2 -/J Dom. t-';<
/JJq I ;?_o. 07;
l'o/t/lµi ;J._/. ;7S-6
/{f(,.-;,Zo. ?o(p
u<J~I 11:?. 553
J))-/ 1,l.1. 7f/7
J> r -2 1c20. ~!PI
)f-3 ;,:ZI. f'c(g
~t_()
d~-Jf&
I 77. ~ I
~ -053 =~,::_;;7.::;
c:210. 900
2;29. 91 ~
-> -7. ,---J-L ---0 . _:,
;)'1/v,ct73
6/f/:a{__ I
~t'I; I
I /.:J&,, 3/1
5~.2o!c I
79S:tl I
!!s->0l I
lo/'. 113
cf? oCt,/ I __,
I 1 9 ;)..).( I //~07
I &'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
■
APPENDIX B
ST A TIS TI CAL DAT A FOR Eisenia fetid a
28-DA Y TOXICITY TEST USING CONTROL SOIL
10
TITLE:
FILE:
Lockheed Roanoke E. foetida bioaccurn. test datel0/27/99
s:\toxstat\48120lef.sur
TRANSFORM: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y)) NUMBER OF GROUPS: 6 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
GRP IDENTIFICATION REP
1 Control 1
1 Control 2
1 Control 3
1 Control 4
2 US Reference 1
2 us Reference 2
2 us Reference 3
2 US Reference 4
3 DS-1 1
3 DS-1 2
3 DS-1 3
3 DS-1 4
4 DS-2 1
4 DS-2 2
4 DS-2 3
4 DS-2 4
5 DS-3 1
5 DS-3 2
5 DS-3 3
5 DS-3 4
6 US-1 1
6 US-1 2
6 US-1 3
6 US-1 4
VALUE
0.9333
0.9733
0.9600
0.9600
0.9867
0.9733
1. 0000
1.0000
0.8933
0.9733
0.8933
0.9467
1.0000
0.9200
0.9600
0.9867
1.0000
0.9733
1.0000
0.9600
1.0000
0.9600
0.9867
1.0000
TRANS VALUE
1. 3096
1.4067
1.3694
1. 3694
1. 4552
1. 4067
1.5130
1.5130
1.2380
1.4067
1. 2380
1. 3378
1. 5130
1.2840
1. 3694
1.4552
1.5130
1.4067
1.5130
1. 3694
1.5130
1. 3694
1.4552
1. 5130 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
j Lockheed Roanoke E. foetida bioaccum. test datel0/27/99
'File: s:\toxstat\48120lef.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
I SUMMARY STATISTICS ON TRANSFORMED DATA TABLE 1 of 2
I------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/ 'c;RP IDENTIFICATION
I
I
1
2
3
4
5
·6
us
N
Control 4
Reference 4
DS-1 4
DS-2 4
DS-3 4
US-1 4
MIN
1. 310
1.407
1. 238
1.284
1. 369
1.369
MAX
1. 407
1.513
1. 407
1.513
1. 513
1.513
MEAN
1.364
1. 4 72
1. 305
1. 405
1. 451
1.463
I------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Lockheed Roanoke E. foetida bioaccum. test datel0/27/99
File: s:\toxstat\481201ef.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
I-----------=~~:-==~=======-~~-=~~=~~~~:~-~~=~--=~~~:-~-~:-~---------------
1 GRP IDENTIFICATION VARIANCE SD SEM c.v. !le 0
------------------------------------------------------------
1 Control 0.002 0.040 0.020 2.95
I 2 us Reference 0.003 0.051 0.026 3.49
3 DS-1 0.007 0.082 0.041 6.32
4 DS-2 0.010 0.100 0.050 7.13
I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 DS-3 0.005 0.074 0.037 5.08
6 US-1 0.005 0.068 0.034 4.64
1
11
I
I
I
I
I
B
n
Lockheed Roanoke E. foetida bioaccum. test datel0/27/99
File: s:\toxstat\481201ef.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
Chi-square test for normality: actual and expected frequencies
I~
1:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
INTERVAL <-1.5 -1.5 to <-0.5 -0.5 to 0.5 >0.5 to 1.5 >1.5
1.608
0
5.808
8
9. 168
7
5.808
9
1.608
0
I EXPECTED
OBSERVED
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------•
Calculated Chi-Square goodness of fit test statistic=
Table Chi-Square value (alpha= 0.01) = 13.277
Data PASS normality test. Continue analysis.
Lockheed Roanoke E. foetida bioaccum. test datel0/27/99
6.3102
File: s:\toxstat\481201ef.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bartlett's test for homogeneity of variance
Calculated Bl statistic= 2.62
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table Chi-square value=
Table Chi-square value=
15.09
11.07
(alpha= 0.01, df =
(alpha= 0.05, df =
5)
5)
Data PASS Bl homogeneity test at 0.01 level. Continue analysis.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
•
Lockheed Roanoke E. foetida bioaccum. test datel0/27/99
File: s:\toxstat\48120lef.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
ANOVA TABLE •-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOURCE DF SS MS F
I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------Between 5 0.086 0.017 3.303
•
Within (Error) 18 . 0.093 0.005 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total · 23 0.179
I
I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical F value= 2.77 (0.05,5,18)
Since F > Critical F REJECT Ho: All equal
•
Lockheed Roanoke E. foetida bioaccum. test datel0/27/99
File: s:\toxstat\481201ef.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
1. 364 0.957
2 us Reference 1. 472 0.990 -2.125
I 3 DS-1 1. 305 0.927 1.151
4 DS-2 1. 405 0.967 -0.818
5 DS-3 1. 451 0.983 -1.704
US-1 1. 463 0.987 -1.942 6 I----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunnett table value= 2.41 (1 Tailed Value, P=0.05, df=18,5)
1
Lockheed Roanoke E. foetida bioaccum. test datel0/27/99
DUNNETT'S TEST
I File: s:\toxstat\481201ef.sur Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
TABLE 2 OF 2 Ho:Control<Treatment
I
I
I
1
I
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUM OF Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE
GROUP IDENTIFICATION REPS (IN ORIG. UNITS) CONTROL FROM CONTROL
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Control 4
2 us Reference 4 0.063 6.5 -0.033
3 DS-1 4 0.063 6.5 0.030
4 DS-2 4 0.063 6.5 -0.010
5 DS-3 4 0.063 6.5 -0.027
6 US-1 4 0.063 6.5 -0.030 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX C I
STATISTICAL DAT A FOR Eiseniafetida I
28-DA Y TOXICITY TEST USING REFERENCE SOIL I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11 I
I
I TITLE: surv. w/US-Ref-S 10/27/99
FILE:
Lockheed Roanoke E. fetida
s:\toxstat\481201ef.ref
ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y)) NUMBER OF GROUPS: 5 I TRANSFORM: ----------------------------------------------------------------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
GRP
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
IDENTIFICATION
US-Ref-S
US-Ref-S
US-Ref-S
US-Ref-S
US-1
US-1
US-1
US-1
DS-1
DS-1
DS-1
DS-1
DS-2
DS-2
DS-2
DS-2
DS-3
DS-3
DS-3
DS-3
REP
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
VALUE
0.9867
0.9733
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.9600
0.9867
1.0000
0.8933
0.9733
0.8933
0.9467
1.0000
0.9200
0.9600
0.9867
1.0000
0.9733
1.0000
0.9600
TRANS VALUE
1.4552
1.4067
1.5130
1.5130
1. 5130
1. 3694
1.4552
1. 5130
1.2380
1.4067
1. 2380
1.3378
1. 5130
1.2840
1. 3 694
1. 4552
1. 5130
1.4067
1.5130
1. 3694 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
I
Lockheed Roanoke E. fetida surv. w/US-Ref-S 10/27/99
File: s:\toxstat\48120lef.ref Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y)) I
SUMMARY STATISTICS ON TRANSFORMED DATA TABLE 1 of 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------1
GRP
1
2
3
4
5
IDENTIFICATION
US-Ref-S
US-1
DS-1
DS-2
DS-3
N
4
4
4
4
4
MIN _J _______ _
1.407
1.369
1. 238
1.284
1. 369
MAX
1.513
1.513
1.407
1.513
1. 513
MEAN
1.472
1.463
1. 305
1.405
1.451
I
I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
Lockheed Roanoke E. fetida surv. w/US-Ref-S 10/27/99 I
File: s:\toxstat\48120lef.ref Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
SUMMARY STATISTICS ON TRANSFORMED DATA TABLE 2 of 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------1
GRP IDENTIFICATION VARIANCE SD SEM c.v. % ------------------------------------------------------------I 1 US-Ref-S 0.003 0.051 0.026 3.49
2 US-1 0.005 0.068 0.034 4.64
3 DS-1 0.007 0.082 0.041 6.32 I 4 DS-2 0.010 0.100 0.050 7. 13
5 DS-3 0.005 0.074 0.037 5.08 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Lockheed Roanoke E. fetida surv. w/US-Ref-S 10/27/99
File: s:\toxstat\48120lef.ref Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
1 Shapiro -Wilk's test for normality ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D = 0.089
0.937
Critical W (P = 0.05)
Critical W (P = 0.01)
(n = 20) = 0.905
(n = 20) = 0.868 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------I Data PASS normality test at P=0.01 level. Continue analysis.
I Lockheed Roanoke E. fetida surv. w/US-Ref-S 10/27/99
File: s:\toxstat\48120lef.ref Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
I------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bartlett's test for homogeneity of variance
Calculated Bl statistic= 1.23
I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13.28
9.49
(alpha= 0.01, df =
(alpha= 0.05, df =
4)
4)
Table Chi-square value= I Table Chi-square value=
Data PASS Bl homogeneity test at 0.01 level. Continue analysis.
I
I
I
I
a
I
0
I
Lockheed Roanoke E. fetida surv. w/US-Ref-S 10/27/99
File: s:\toxstat\481201ef.ref Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y)) I
ANOVA --------------------------'--------------------------------------------------,
SOURCE OF SS MS F I
Between 4 0.075 0.019 3.196 I
Within (Error) 15 0.089 . 0.006
-----------------------'-----------------------------------------------------1
Total 19 0.164. ----------------------)-------------------------------------------------------
Critical F value= 3.06 (0.05,4,15)
Since F > Critical F REJECT Ho: All equal
Lockheed Roanoke E. fetida surv. w/US-Ref-S 10/27/99
File: s:\toxstat\481201ef.ref Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
DUNNETT'S TEST TABLE 1 OF 2 Ho:Control<Treatment
I
I
I
----------------------------------------------------------------------------I TRANSFORMED MEAN CALCULATED IN
GROUP IDENTIFICATION MEAN ORIGINAL UNITS T STAT SIG
------------------------------------------------------------
1 US-Ref-S 1.472 0.990
2 US-1 1.463 0.987 0.171
3 DS-1 1.305 0.927 3.071 *
4 DS-2 1.405 0.967 1.225
5 DS-3 1.451 0.983 0.395 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunnett table value= 2.36 (1 Tailed Value, P=0.05, df=15,4)
I
I
I
Lockheed Roanoke E. fetida surv. w/US-Ref-S 10/27/99 I
File: s:\toxstat\481201ef.ref Transform: ARC SINE(SQUARE ROOT(Y))
------~~~~:::~~-::~:---=---:~~~=-~-~~-~-------------~~:=~~~~~=~:~=~~~=~~----I
NUM OF Minimum Sig Diff % of DIFFERENCE
~~~~: ---=~=~:=~==~:=~~---~=:~---~=~-~~=~:-~~=:~~ =~~:~~~ FROM_CONTROL I
1 US-Ref-S 4
2 US-1 4 0.041 4.1 0.003 I
3 DS-1 4 0.041 4.1 0.063
4 DS-2 4 0.041 4.1 0.023
5 DS-3 4 0.041 4.1 0.007
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I APPENDIX D
I CHAIN -OF -CUSTODY
I DOCUMENTATION
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
m
I m
D
D 12
-- --USEPA ERT
REAC, Edison. NJ
Contact: John Johnson
732-321-4200 1<1 _
WO#: R1A~
EPA Contract 68-C99-223
- --- --- -
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
Project Name: Roanoke River
Location:
Site Phone:
--
-w, -'~ ----....... =·"1~ -..... ,,......,, , ...... , ... ,7j!f;~J.
--- - -
coc # 024-0001
Page No.: _L___ of _j_
Cooter#
Lab: American Aq!-1ati<
Contact: Chris Nau,
···Ms···· ······-·c·omments···
MSD
• : • :~::: ..... ~t~:~-sd·····•·.·.•·.·.(/ ... 9.17£t,:.:: .. •·.?;;·················· :::::~: • ~:: ~ ~:: :~:::~:~ ~ 'i: ~::~:~:::~~:::::~::;:::
··A 002~·00:f ················ ·os~f:·sa··· riiP1? ·sec11m·ent : OB12sm ~ 2 Ga1. ·suckeU4C ):::::;•:f!?:;;!:~~~~~:~i:~::~::~:~f~if~::~~~::~~~~:~::···
.... ; :,;.-· ... T00:24-004 ................ ·os·:;r·sd ·····:::::9~c~f;·:· 'SedlrTlerif ·ooasi99·-j-2·GaCBUC"i(eti4C. 1 iD i Hexagenia & Hyalella Tox Tests
................. A . • 0024-005. . .. os:j:sd .... q/&5"1. Sediment • 08/25199 j 2 Gal. BuckeU4C I' ,~[Hexagenfa&HyafeilaTo,t••ls
.. A • 0024-006 .. us:REF:·s ~it Soil ...... i08!26i99 : 5 gal. buckeU4C / J_ • Earthwonm To,iclty Test
· : ;;: • 0024-001 ·········· ····· us:i:s ·· ijtft,'55'. soil oiii:isioo I s iia1 tiuckeif.it 1 .1-Earthworm to,icify tesi · :: :~= ~::~:r ~zl .:;i: :E :::: :~;::~:~ : ; ::~~2::~:;;~~t:
REFERENCE COG:.
. ······· ............... .. . . .... . · ·· ····;·oate· ··: ... ec
••H••;••••••••••. :••••., . .
I
. .\.:.vfERIC.-\.~ A .. QC.-\ TIC TESTI~G, I~C. -; . Cl-1-\l~ OF Cl~ST0D1·
1105 UNION BL VD Job.:¢• ff-/J-oi Client: .i~llet'z>"'~ Client Contact: C/l.k!l-6 ;/,4,a,y'
ALLENTOWN, PA. l 8 l 03 ( ,4.ltr :Io?,#. Address: C/o /hc1?1Cltt,I lltxl!&r"k.. '
6l0 434 90l5 /,), Pbone ;;; &J101/349o16" Sample Return to client [ J
~t 02 or2 02...., :r:;;, Dis s I Lab d' oo I rXT
{:r,;µ,1 o}l,.;/3~,/ ,6) , ~ • .,,:':, ,,;I. ,\ QO a: IS sa
!nmaJ Ch<nns<ry
,a t-.bonl.(X"V
SA.'1PLE INFOR,\1A TIOl'i Toxiciry Testing Requested
Sample~ Temp. Diss. I Sample [dentificatioo I Sample I Sample ) Sample .-\c:.ite I C:-uonic / Sediment I Elumate I PtHe I Other I Other
'C 0, ?rl ! volume Date: . Time I Como. (i)
13,,,.~,,. a ... :O I I ,C: f'od, da., i-•88vt' /Jo& q I 11/J:.o/??J tl,,oo I I I I I y I -r;,,.,~
()._ ...,.l I I .c;&~q I 11!:u:ml 16'00 I I I ! I )( I
u3 fJJ~. I I I I fo; I I I I I I I 'I-
tJS-1 I I I Xx~ I I I I i I I 'I
, ...._<1 . I I 1108 i I ' I i i I ✓
i I
u3-Z I I 8?, I I I I i I I \!.
1)8-3 I I 1119";; I I I I ' I I I X I
/
! I
I I I ~ I i I I I i i I
'
! I I I ' I I I I ' I I
I I '
I I I I I I I I i I I
Samples were:
ICII :edb A.AT o ec· :,'. persoone 2. rans>frt on ice. ). :!~tvec. Wl tn no :..u-ne. amp e :naL--:..'< is: ,qu, ent
Client oer;oanel r 1 y~ r ?'-io f 1 Yes r 1 No f l Soil f l Other .-i./f T ed 7 -R th . ' !ding L d [ l Se<lim [ l
' CUSTODY INFOR.'vfATIOl'i
Lab Use
! Sample~ Relinouished bv• I Received bv· i Date I Time I Relinauished bv i Receivec for Lab ! Date I TLITie ISTN# I
1"2· .. norµ) /" ~ I I ,?loz./071 1700 I i I i
! ft Tt.ol " -1 I I I . -I I I
/J'l j &-1 ------
71 I I I I I
"
'
U'. -I c:--_ ....... /I I I I I I
l:>S'-1 / I I I I I I
1)3-7 '--" I I I I i I
DS-3 '--I I \ I I ', I I I I
L/ ------.i I I I i i I
I I I I ! I I
I I I I ' i ! I
Spee ial lnstruwo ns: (i') r; £. l}_,J d.t.'i.J.J ~. C,"71/CT ::r;;ll;1 ::l';,ti,..go,J ~ LC)!:1/€:tQ /11,#!17;.1 '132 3ZI 4l_t/-'o
1105 UNION BL VD
ALLfl.fTOWN, PA 18103
610 434 9015
;ii:}r/0 I o,.C 0 6 ~1-l_:J,1/,$,:,,J @
!w!Ul Cb<mistry SA.\1.PLE INFOR.\1A TION
,a Lationtof"V
Sample# Temp. Diss. Sample ldemific:1tion I Sample Sample I Sample
oc 0, pH volume Date . Time
#6'Ei) p/;f',uJ ;.1) 1s oosa : a 1s nosal M ,
Sample
o· I
Return to client
L b ct·
[ l
Toxicity Testing Requested I I
.-\C:Jte I C~onic I Sediment I Elucriate I Pure ~r Other i
Como. I I
I 811d'," n \
.. , . L . vi'• · ' ,<t -tss,~ I 15~, I l/¥3,/4fl ,1 rY) I i I I I 'x -riSSI/€ I
11'-. C/ I 77-i I 111.l.<?/?fi l'iun I I I y I
~L
l<FF-I I I c',, 2..; I 1111<1 ~ I ,11= I I I y
11,'?-/ 14'1 I I r/3._o '</I/ I '~ I I I I ,)(
uS-/ 155< I 11/30/~1 ,sao I I I ·v
I
l'R-Z 1552 11/;oki'/ /loO I I I V
N-~ I ' / 1/.p/ Q 11/Jol<N I I 9~0 I i I 'v • I
I I J I i I I I I .
I
I I I I . I I I I
I
I I I I I I I
Samples wt:re:
I. Collec-..ed by AA T personnel P4 2. Transported an ice? 3. R:coived with in holding ume? 4. Sample mamx 1s: Liquid [ ] Se<liment [ ]
Client oersonnel Yes l'x'f No f l Yes f l No f l Soil r l Other M
I CUSTODY INFOR.\1ATION
Lab Use 1
~le# Relinauished bv: I Received bv: I Date Time I Relinauished bv: I Received for Lab I Date I Time ISTN#
8/IC)i,C.I),.,,,.', ,.... ) .I ,i.loJ..l<?t?I , 'loo I I I ! I
f',,."'4.l ( ~r -\ I . -I I I
/frr:, -I ' / I I I I
' '--
ug-1 '-.-.. -r,.__ I I I I
oS-1 -..u I I I I I
u~-:z ,~ I I I I I I I
.,
I
1:>3·3 ~ " I ,v I I I I I
u
r / _JI I I I I
I I I I '
I I I I I I I
: Sne,-iaJ lnstruc:.ions: (1 J foR, 1(,1111 v8/.'I (';..-J771,-.r fo Iiµ fan " I~ 7,:".l 7 -,,, 7 I '/-). ','1S' ( Locl<,1/Elr::, ,r//lR:17.,\
,'X>-r'i/lCX/: /) ,;,-,.8,~Ut /;.} , w" ( o ;._ \ <' _.f11J ' a,<1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
! I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.• @
I
I
DA TE PERFORMED
l 2/02/97
02/24/98
05/l 5/98
05/28/98
06/l l/98
10/\4/98
11/\0/98
01/08/99
02/l l/99
04/02/99
08/26/99
09/01/99
IO/l 9/99
I 1/04/99
1 l/05/99
12/22/99
DA TE PERFORMED
05/l 3/98
I 0/22/98
Ol/14/99
08/25/99
I 1/23/99
DA TE PERFORMED
0 l /2 l /99
I l /23/99
American Aquatic Testinl!, Inc.
I
i
I
I
I
i
i
SRT DATES M'D VALUES
Hvalella az1eca
48 HR LCso -PPM
365.6
31 \4
611.l
300.3
315.4
430.2
352.9
366.9
325.7
350.0
3094
3 12.5
302.6
271.9
318.8
346.9
;
·' i
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
SRT DATES AND VALUES
Eisenia ferida
96 HR LCio -mg/Kg
4200
2019.2
I 825 7
4500
4000
SRT DATES AND VALUES
L11mbricu/11s mrie£GIIIS
48 HR LCio -PPM
457.3
609.6
CONFIDENCE LIMITS
347.7 -383.5
264.3 -366.6
510.0-7122
249.3 -3514
264.2 -366.6
3450-5154
284.5 -421.3
347.5 -386.2
275.9 -375.4
322.9-3774
270.2 -348.6
1 57.3 -367.7
249.9 -355.3
2310-3128
2811-356.4
317.5 -376.2
CONFIDENCE LIMITS
NIA
1774.5-2264.0
982.3 -2669.0
3631.' -5368.8
3302.9 -4697.1
CONFIDENCE LIMITS
435.0 -479.7
515.5-703.6
1105 Union Blvd., 2nd Floor • Allentown. PA 18103
[phone] • fax [phone]
[
!
' '
'
i
'
' I
I [
I i
I ' ' I
1
I
I ' I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
1024\DELIFR\0003\REPORT
Appendix D
Roanoke River Site: Analytical Report
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth, NC
April 2000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ANALYTICAL REPORT
Prepared by
Lockheed Manin
Roanoke River Site
Plymouth. Nonh Carolina
February. 2000
EPA Work Assignment No. 0-024
LOCKHEED-MARTIN Work Order No. Rl,-\00024
EPA Contract No. 68-C99-223
];z;n1tJdu·
. HarosWi
Task Leader
G ·, ------~, ii IZ~ I \.......,,,
D. Miller
Analytical Section Leader i)~~ i1{ctL, k
S. Clapp
Program Manager
1(HJ24\D£L1AR\OOJ2\ROANOKAR
Submitted to
M. Sprenger
EPA-ERTC
l §.ce
Date
Analysis by:
Southwest Laboratories of Oklahoma
Prepared by:
D. Laviska
Reviewed by:
D. Killeen
Topic
Introduction
Case Narrative
Summary of Abbreviations
Section I
Analytical Procedure for BN A in Tissue
Analytical Procedure for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
Analytical Procedure for Metals in Tissue
Analytical Procedure for Dioxin in Tissue
Results of the Analysis for BNA in Tissue
Results of the Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
Results of the Analysis for Metals in Tissue
Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
Section II
QA/QC for BNA in Tissue
Table of Contents
Results of the Surrogate Percent Recoveries for BNA in Tissue
Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for BNA in Tissue
Results of the LCS/LCSD Analysis for BNA in Tissue
QA/QC for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
Results of the Surrogate Percent Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
Results of the LCS/LCSD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
QA/QC for Metals in Tissue
Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Metals in Tissue
Results of the LCS/LCSD Analysis for Metals in Tissue
QA/QC for Dioxin in Tissue
Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
Results of the LCS Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
\OOJ24\DEL \AR IOOJ2\R OANOK AR
'
Table I.I
Table 1.2
Table 1.3
Table 1.4
Table 1.5
Table 2.1
Table 2.2
Table 2.3
Table 2.4
Table 2.5
Table 2.6
Table 2.7
Table 2.8
Table 2.9
Table 2.10 .
Table 2.11
Page Number
Page
Page 2
Page 5
Page 6
Page 6
Page 6
Page 6
Page 7
Page 15
Page 19
Page 22
Page 40
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 62
Page 64
Page 65
Page 67
Page 69
Page 71
Page 72
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 100
Page 102
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Table of Contents (cont.)
Topic
Section Ill
Chains of Custody
Communications
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Data for BNA (Southwest Laboratories of Oklahoma)
Data for Pesticide/PCB (Southwest Laboratories of Oklahoma)
Data for Metals and Lipids (Southwest Laboratories of Oklahoma)
Data for Dioxin (Southwest Laboratories of Oklahoma)
The appendices will be furnished on request.
1(00~4\DEL\AR\OOJ2\ROAN0!.AR
Page Number
Page
Page
104
106
Page J009001
Page JO 1700 I
Page J00800 I
Page J00700 I
I
Introduction I
REAC. in response to WA# 0-024, provided analytical suppon for environmental samples collected from the Roanoke
River Site located in Plymouth, Nonh Carolina as described in the following table. The suppon also included QA/QC. I
data review. and preparation of an analytical repon containing a summary of the analytical methods. the results. and the
QA/QC results.
Chain Number Sampling
of of Date
Custody Samples
Analvzed
48-12-01 1 10/31/99
01 of 02 2 l l /29/99
4 11/30/99
48-12-01 l 11/20/99
02 of 02
6 11/25/99
1{(X)241DELIAR\OOJ21ROAN0t-AR
Date Matrix Analysis
Received
12/03/99 Tissue BNA,
Pesticide/PCB.
TAL Metals.
Dioxin.
Percent Lipids
Laboratory
Southwest
Laboratories
of
Oklahoma
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
CASE NARRATIVE
The data in this analytical repon have been validated to two significant figures. Any other interpretation of the data is the
responsibility of the user.
In addition to the founeen samples (seven Lumbriculus variegarus tissue and seven Eisenia foetida tissue) submitted to the
subcontracted laboratory for analysis, one additional sample was analyzed for each type of tissue. These additional
samples were submitted independently from outside sources, and were treated as "control" blanks by the subcontracted
laboratory.
Data Package 1009 -BN A Analysis
The extraction holding time was exceeded by greater than twenty-one days from the date of collection for the sample
Background (L. variegatus). All positive results for this sample should be considered estimated. All non-detected results
for this sample should be considered unusable.
Benzoic acid (210 µg/kg) and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (96 µg/kg) were detected in the first method blank (SBLKI).
Benzoic acid and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate should be considered nondetected in the associated samples Control (L.
variegatus). REF-I (L. variegatus). US-I (L. variegatus), DS-1 (L. variegarus). DS-3 (L. variegarus). and ABS (L.
variegatus). Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate should be considered nondetected in the associated sample DS-2 (L. variegatus).
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (350 µg/kg) was detected in the second method blank (SBLK2). This compound should be
considered nondetected in the associated samples Background (E. foetida), Control (E. foetida). US REF-I (E. foetida).
US-I (E. foetida), DS-1 (E. foetida). DS-2 (E. foetida), DS-3 (E. foetida), and ABS (E. foetida).
Phenol (1600 µg/kg), 4-methylphenol (6400 µg/kg), benzoic acid (16000 µg/kg), diethylphthalate (2300 µg/kg), di-n-
butylphthalate (74000 µg/kg), and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (31000 µg/kg) were detected in the control blank for the
species lumbriculus variegatus (ABS -L. variegarus).
Benzoic acid (4300 µg/kg), diethylphthalate (1200 µg/kg), di-n-butylphthalate (14000 µg/kg), and bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate (7200 µg/kg) were detected in the control blank for the species eisenia foetida (ABS -E. foetida).
·In the initial calibration of 12/02/99 on the instrument "P". the values for percent relative standard deviation (%RSD) for
2.4-dinitrophenol (32 % ). 4,6-dinitro-2-methylphenol (18% ), carbazole (16% ). and 3,3' -dichlorobenzidine (17 % ) exceeded
the acceptable QC limits. None of these compounds was detected in the associated samples; the data are not affected.
In the initial calibration of 12/10/99 on the instrument "P", the values for percent relative standard deviation (%RSD) for
hexachlorocyclopentadiene (16%) and 2,4-dinitrophenol (19%) exceeded the acceptable QC limits. Neither of these
compounds was detected in the associated samples; the data are not affected.
In the initial calibration of 12/10/99 on the instrument "H", the value for percent relative standard deviation (%RSD) for
2.4-dinitrophenol (28%) exceeded the acceptable QC limits. This compound was not detected in the associated samples;
the data are not affected.
One or more internal standards failed to meet the acceptable QC criteria for the samples Control (L. variegatus), REF-I
(L. variegatus). US-I (L. variegatus). DS-1 (L. variegatus). DS-2 (L. variegatus). DS-3 (L. variegatus), and ABS (L.
variegatus) and for the QC samples ABS-MS (L. variegatus) and ABS-MSD (L. variegatus). All compounds quantified by
these internal standards should be considered estimated.
\(XX}241 DEL IA R IOCQ21ROA NOt.: AR
Data Package JOI 7 -Pesticide/PCB Analysis
The extraction holding time was exceeded by greater than twenty-one days from the date of collection for the sample
Background (L. variegatus). All results for this sample should be considered unusable.
In the continuing calibration of 12/10/99 for pesticides, the values for percent difference (%D) for 4,4 '-DDT on both the
primary (15 .3 % ) and the secondary (19%) columns exceeded the acceptable QC limit. This compound was not detected in
the associated samples; the data are not affected.
I
I
I
I
In the continuing calibration of 12/15/99 for pesticides. the values for percent difference (%D) for endrin (25 % ) and 4.4 · -· I
DDD (18%) on the primary column and for endrin (17%). 4,4'-DDD (15.4%), and the surrogate decachlorobiphenyl
(16%) on the secondary column exceeded the acceptable QC limit. Neither endrin nor 4,4'-DDD was detected in the
associated samples; the data for these analytes are not affected. The results for the surrogate decachlorobiphenyl taken 1 from the secondary column should be considered estimated!
The percent recoveries of the surrogate decachlorobiphenyl for pesticides analysis on the secondary column were
considered to be estimated due to continuing calibration QC criteria, and therefore are considered outside the acceptable I
QC limits for the method blank SBLK-2. the samples Background (E. foetida), Control (E. foetida), DS-3 (E. foetida). and
ABS (E. foetida). and the QC samples LCS-2. LCSD-2. ABS-MS (E. foetida), and ABS-MSD (E. foetida); the data are
not affected.
The percent recoveries of one, two, or three of the surrogates decachlorobiphenyl and tetrachloro-m-xylene on the primary
and secondary columns for PCB analysis were outside the acceptable QC limits for the method blank SBLK-2, the samples
DS-1 (L. variegatus). ABS (L. variegatus). Background (E. foetida), Control (E. foetida), US REF-I (E. foetida). US-1
(E. foetida), DS-1 (E. foetida), DS-2 (E. foetida). and DS-3 (E. foetida), and the QC samples LCS-1, ABS-MS (L.
variegatus), ABS-MSD (L. variegatus), and LCSD-2; the data are not affected.
The percent recoveries of all four of the surrogates decachlorobiphenyl and tetrachloro-m-xylene on the primary and
secondary columns for PCB analysis were outside the acceptable QC limits for the QC sample LCS-2; the data are not
I
I
I
affected. I
The recovery of the LCSD-1 (32%) for delta-BHC was outside the acceptable QC limits. The results for this compound in
the associated samples Background (L. variegatus). Control (L. variegatus). REF-I (L. variegatus). US-I (L. variegatus).
DS-1 (L. variegatus). DS-2 (L. variegatus). DS-3 (L. variegatus), and ABS (L. variegatus) should be considered
estimated.
Data Package JOOS -Metals and Lipids Analysis
The recoveries of the matrix spike (165 % ) and matrix spike duplicate (I 66%) for mercury in the sample ABS -L.
variegatus were outside the acceptable QC limits. The results for mercury in the associated samples US-I (L. variegatus).
DS-1 (L. variegatus). DS-2 (L. variegatus). and DS-3 (L. variegatus) should be considered estimated.
The recoveries of the matrix spike (66%) and matrix spike duplicate (8%) for aluminum, the matrix spike duplicate (69%)
for iron. and the matrix spike (166%) and the matrix spike duplicate (163%) for mercury in the sample ABS -E. foetida
were outside the acceptable QC limits. The results for aluminum and iron in the associated samples Background (E.
I
I
I
I
I
foetida). Control (E. foetida). US REF-I (E. foetida). US-I (E. foetida), DS-1 (E. foetida), DS-2 (E. foetida), DS-3 (E.
foetida). and ABS (E. foetida) should be considered estimated. The results for mercury in the associated samples US REF-1 I (E. foetida). US-1 (E. foetida). DS-1 IE. foetida), DS-2 (E. foetida), and DS-3 (E. foetida) should be considered
estimated.
\{XX)!4\DEL\AR100l21ROANOKAR
U :.JOU_:,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The recovered concentrations of silver in LCS-1 (3.996 mg/kg) and in LCS-2 (3.934 mg/kg) were outside the acceptable
QC limits. The results for silver in the associated samples Background (L. variegatus), Control (L. variegarus), REF· I (L.
variegatus), US-I (L. variegatus), DS-1 (L. variegarus), DS-2 (L. variegatus), DS-3 (L. variegatus), ABS (L. variegatus).
Background (E. foetida), Control (E. foetida), US REF-I (E. foetida), US-I (E. foetida), DS-1 (E. foetida), DS-2 (E.
foetida). DS-3 (E. foetida), and ABS (E. foetida) should be considered estimated.
The percent difference for the serial dilution of zinc (10.7%) in the sample ABS (E. foetida) was outside the acceptable QC
limit. The results for zinc in the associated samples-Background (L. variegarus). Control (L. variegatus). REF-I (L.
variegatus), US-I (L. variegatus), DS-1 (L. variegarus), DS-2 (L. variegatus), DS-3 (L. variegatus), ABS (L. variegatus),
US-I (E. foetida). and ABS (E. foetida) were greater than fifty times the IDL value and should be considered estimated.
Data Package 1007 · Dioxin Analysis
The reponed detection limits for dioxin compounds were estimated based on the noise level at or near the retention time of
the analyte.
The extraction holding_ time was exceeded by three days for the sample Background (L. variegatus). All results for this
sample should be considered estimated.
1.2.3.4.6.7.8-HpCDD (3.97 ng/kg). OCDD (30.6 ng/kg), and 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF (1.59 ng/kg) were detected in the
method blank of 12/03199 (DFBLKI). The result for OCDD in the sample Background (L. variegatus) should be
considered estimated.
The results for the compound 2,3,7,8-TCDF in the samples DS-1 (E. foetida), DS-2 (L. variegatus), and DS-3 (L.
variegatus) were confinned by analysis on a secondary column.
The recovery of the matrix spike ( 182 % ) for OCDD in the sample ABS (L. variegatus) was outside the acceptable QC
limits; the data are not affected.
\(()0241D1:LV,R\CXXJ2\ROANOKAR
AA
B
BFB
C
D
Dioxin·
CLP coc
CONC:.
CRDL
CRQL
DFTPP
DL
E
EMPC
ICAP
!STD
J
LCS
LCSD
MDL
Ml
MS
MSD
MW
NA
NC
NR
NS
%D
% REC
PQL
PPBV
QL
RPD
RSD
SIM
TCLP
u
w
m'
L
mL
uL
IC002410EL\ARICXXT.!IROAN0KAR
Summary of Abbreviations
Atomic Absorption
The analyte was found in the blank
Bromofluorobenzene
Centigrade
(Surrogate Table) this value is from a diluted sample and was not calculated
(Result Table) this result was obtained from a diluted sample
denotes Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans and/or PCDD
and PCDF
Contract Laboratory Protocol
·Chain of Custody
Concentration
Contract Required Detection Limit
Contract Required Quantitation Limit
Decafluorotriphenylphosphine
Detection Limit
The value is greater than the highest linear standard and is estimated
Estimated maximum possible concentration
Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma
Internal Standard
The value is below the method detection limit and is estimated
Laboratory Control Sample
Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate
Method Detection Limit
Matrix Interference
Matrix Spike
Matrix Spike Duplicate
Molecular Weight
either Not Applicable or Not Available
Not Calculated
Not Requested
Not Spiked
Percent Difference
Percent Recovery
Practical Quantitation Limit
Pans per billion by volume
Quantitation Limit
Relative Percent Difference
Relative Standard Deviation
Selected Ion Mode
Toxic Characteristics Leaching Procedure
Denotes not detected
Weathered analyte: the results should be regarded as estimated
cubic meter kg kilogram ug
liter g gram pg
milliliter mg milligram
microliter
denotes a value that exceeds the acceptable QC limit
microgram
picogram
Abbreviations that are specific to a panicular table are explained in footnotes on that
table
Revision 07 /09/98
n'•(•'. -u ... J '\..,' .. ,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Analytical Procedure for BNA in Tissue
The subcontracted laboratory determined the concentrations of BN A in tissue samples by following the SW-846 series
method 8270D. The results of the analyses are listed in Table I. I.
Analytical Procedure for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
The subcontracted laboratory determined the concentrations of pesticide/PCB in tissue samples by following the SW-846
series methods 8081B and 8082A. The results of the analyses are listed in Table 1.2.
Analytical Procedure for Metals in Tissue
The subcontracted laboratory determined the concentrations of metals in tissue samples by following the SW-846 series
methods 6010. The results of the analyses are listed in Table 1.3.
Analytical Procedure for Dioxin in Tissue
The subcontracted laboratory determined the concentrations of dioxin in tissue samples by following the SW-846 series
method 8290A. The results of the analyses are listed in Tables 1.4 and 1.5.
<I~ m-110( LIAR 1cxm1RQANOK AR
I
Table I.I (cant.) Ruuits of the Analysu for BNA m TLISUC
WA II 0-024 Roanoke River Sitt I
Based on Dry Weight
Sample" os.:: DS-3 ABS
,.Sample Jdcntif1cat1on L vmcpna L Vll'1CpnlS L. vancptW I
Date Collected 11/30/99 11/30199
Percent Solids 11.9 11,0 2.6
Percent Lipids 1.57 2.24 I••
Con, MDL Con, MDL Cone MDL I
Parmnctcr """' """' """' µg/kg """' ,.,..
Phenol C 11000 C 10000 1600 J 20000 I
bis( :-Chlorocthy I )cUlc~ L" 11000 C 10000 l' 20000
::-Chlorophcnol C 11000 t· 10000 L 20000
l .3-Dich!orobcnzcnc L 11000 L 10000 C 20000
l .4-D1chlorobcnzcnc L 11000 L 10000 t· 20000
Bcnzyl alcohol 2400 J 11000 2900 J 10000 l' 20000 I
1,:-D1chlorobc:nzcnc C 11000 L 10000 L 20000
:-Mcthylpiicnol C 1100(1 C 10000 t· 20000
b1s( :-Chloro1sopropyl 1c!hcr t· 110011 t· 10000 ,. 20000
4-Mcthylphenol 960 J 11""" 960 J 10000 6400 J 20000
n-N1troso-di-n-propylaminc C 11000 C 10000 t· 20000 I
Hcxachlorocthanc C l ,cxx, L' 10000 L 20000
N1trobcnzcnc C 11000 L 10000 L 20000
lsophoronc C 11000 t· 10000 C 20000
::.:-.:11rophcnol c· llOOO L 10000 L 20000
:.4-Dimcthylphcnol 1· l\000 C 10000 L 20000 I
Bcnzo1c ac1ci C 11000 7500 J 10000 16000 J 20000
b1 s( :-Chlorocthoxy Jm ethane ,. 1 \00(1 L 10000 c· 20000
:.4-D1chloroohcnol C 11000 1· 10000 c· 20000
1.:.4-T nchlorobcnzcnc C )\{)()(_) c· 10000 c· 20000
7'-aphthalcnc L 1100(1 C 10000 t· 20000 I
_.,Chioroan1hnc t· 1\()()(1 C 10000 L 20000
H cxachlorobutad1cnc C ]!00(1 t· 10000 l" 20000
~-Ch!oro-J-methylohenol t· \}()(XI t· 10000 L 20000
::-~cthylnaphthalenc L. 1 )()()(: C 10000 t· 20000 I
Hc:uchiorocyclopentad1enc t· \]00(1 C 10000 L 20000
:.4.6-T nth!orophenol t· 11000 t· 10000 L" 20000
:.4.~-T nch!orophenol C l8()(J(1 t· 25000 L 51000
: -Chloronaphthaienc L" 110()() L 10000 C 20000
:-S1uoan1hne t· 2S()()(1 t· :sooo t· 51000 I
D1mcthylphthalalc L 110011 L 10000 t· 20000
Accnaphthyienc L. 11 O()(J C 10000 1· 20000
:.G-Umiuotoiuenr 1\00: C 10000 t· 20000 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Table J.! (cont.) Results of the Analysis for BNA m Tmuc
WA Ill 0-024 Roanott lover Sue
Bw:d on Dry Weight
I Sample 1t SBLKI """"'°""" Con,rol REF-1 US-1 DS-1
I
Sample ldentif1cauon Mcthcxl Blank ! L vancplUS L. VlnCgllUS L.vanc~ L uncpi:w, L. wa,cpiw
Date Collc~d 10/31199 11/29/99 11/29199 l l.'30199 I J/30'90
Percent Solids 100 13' l l.4 12.1 13.9 1::1
Percent Lipids 000 190 2.36 1.36 :J: :.JC
Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Con, MDL
I l'anmcu:r """" """" """" """" """" """" """" """" """" µJ!lq; ""'"' µJ!lq;
J-N11roarulmc l" 830 t· 27000 L 16000 L 23000 t· 35000 t· 25000 Accnaphthcnc l" 330 t· 11000 l" 6400 l" 0200 L 1,000 t· 9900
I :.◄-D1rutrophcnol L 830 l" :rnxx.1 L 16000 t· 23000 l" 35000 l 'IOOO 4-Nitrophcnol l 830 l" :rn:100 l" 16000 l" 23000 t· 3IOOO l ::sooo D1bcnzofuran l" )3[1 l" 11000 L 6400 l" 9200 l" 14000 C 9900 2.4-Dmnrotolucnc L 330 L 11000 L 6400 L 0200 t· 1,000 l" 9900 D1clhylphlhalaie l" 330 l 11000 590 J 6400 540 J 0200 1800 J 1'000 1100 J 9900
I .:. Chlorophcnyl-phc:nylcthcr L 330 ,-11000 l" 6'00 l" 0200 L 1,000 t· 9900 Fluorcnc t· 330 t· 11000 l" 6400 l" 9200 t· 1,000 ,-9900 '"-N1troanihne l" 83(1 l" 27000 t· 16000 l 23000 t· 35000 l 25000 4.6-Dmn.ro-2-mcthylphcnol l" 830 t· :1000 l" 16000 t· 23000 t· 35000 ,-:sooo n-1',; 1trosod1phcnylammc l" 330 t· 11000 l" 6400 L 0200 l" 1,000 t· 9900 I
I
I
I
I
4-Brom ophcnyl-phcnylcthcr L 330 l" 11000 l" 6400 l" 9200 l' 1,000 L 9900 Hcxachlorobc:nzcnc C · 330 ,-11000 l 6400 l 9200 t· 1,000 l' 9900 Pcn1.achlorophcnoi l" 830 l" 27000 c· 16000 l' 23000 l' 35000 l' :!5000 Pncnanthrcne l" 330 l 11000 L 6'(1() l' 9200 t· 14000 l' 9900 Antnraccnc l' 330 l" 11000 l 6'00 l 0200 l' 14000 l' 9900 Carriazole t· 33(1 l" JJ()(J() t· 6400 l 9200 l' 14000 t· 9900 D1-n-butylphthalatc l' 330 6'00 J JI 000 1'000 6400 5200 J 9200 ,0000 1,000 llOOO 9900 Fiuoranthcne t· 3)(1 ,-11000 L" 6400 L 0200 L 1,000 l' 9900 h-rcnc l" 33(: l 11000 t· 6400 t· 0200 l' 14000 l 9900 Hut y li>enzylphthalatc l' 33(, t· 11000 l' 6400 C 9200 l' 14000 l' 9900 } . J'-Diehl orobcnz1dmc l" 3}fl l" 11000 l" 6400 u 9200 u 1'000 l' 9900 bcnzola iantnraccnc l" 331: l" 11000 l 6400 l" 0200 u 14000 l' 9900 Otr~·scnc l )JP ,. 11000 l 6'00 l" 0200 l' 1,000 t: 9900 b 1sr 2-E ti,y lhcxy l )phthala1c 96 ; 33(1 51000 11000 11000 6'00 noo J -9200 32000 1,000 14000 9900 D 1-n-oc1ylphthala1c t· 330 t· 11000 l' 6400 l' 9200 l' 14000 l' 9900 B enzo( b) n uonanthcnc l' 330 l' 11000 l' 6400 L 0200 u 1,000 u 9900 be nzo/'k )nuoranthcnc t· 3](1 l" 11000 l' 6400 l' 0200 u 14000 u 9900 licnzo(aJpyrcnc t· 33(1 l 11000 l' 6400 u 0200 u 1,000 u 9900 lnocno( 1.:::.3-c,d)p~-rcnc ,-)];l l" 11000 l' 6'00 L 9200 L' 14000 l' 9900 D1ricnzo1 a,h)anthr.iccnc t· ]]O l' II 000 L 6'00 l' 9200 li 1,000 u 9900 i1cnzo1i;.il,1Jpcry1cm 331, ,-1100() l" 6'00 L' 9200 l' 1,000 l' 9900
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .-,~., . ...........,.,__,,
O :iOL-6
I
Table I.I (cont.) Results of the ADliysis £arBNA m Ttmx I WA " 0-024 Roanoke RI.er Sue:
Based on Dry Weigh!
Sample 11 DS-:: os.J ABS I Sample lticntificauon E. foctuia E. focuda E. (oetida
Date Collcct.c:d 11/25199 11/25199
Pcrec:nt Solids 81 11.: 184
Percent Lipids 2 03 2.34 1.57 I Con, MDL Con, MDL = MDL
Paramctu . .,.. . .,.. . .,.. ,.,.. •A •A
Phenol L" 220()() l" 15000 L" 9700 I
bis( :-Chlorocthy])cthcr t· ::::ooo L" 15000 L" 9700
2-Chlorophcnol C 22000 L" ISOOO u 9700
l.3-D1chlorobcnzcnc L" 22000 L" 15000 C 9700 I 1.4-D1chlorobcnzcnc L" 22000 L 15000 l 9700
Bcnzyl alcohol L" 2200(1 L" 15000 l' 9700
1.:-D1chlorobcnzcnc L" 2200<> L ISOOO l" 9700
2-Methylphcnol L" 22000 l" 15000 t· 9700
im(:-Chloro1sopropyllcther L" :20oc, L" 15000 L" 9700 I 4-Mcthylphcnol L" :2()()(1 L 15000 l 9700
n-1\ 1lloso-ci1-n-propylam inc L" ::2000 L 1,000 l" 9700
H cxachloroelhanc L" 220()(1 L" 15000 L" 9700
N 1trobcnzcnc L 22000 L 15000 l" 9700
lsophoronc L" :2000 l 150()() L" 9700 I :-Nurophcnol L 2200(\ L" 15000 l" 9700
: . .:-D1mcthylphcnol L" ::2ro, c· 15000 L" 9700
Bcnzo1c acid 32000 ::2000 8700 ,I 1500(1 4300 J 9700
i:11~( :-Chlorocthoxy Jm ethane L" :::CXK: L 15000 L" 9700
: . .:-D1chloroplicnol L" ::2cx~1 15000 L" 9700 I ! .:: . .:-Tr1chlorobcnzcnc L ::001 ,. 15000 L" 9700
}.;aphthalcnc L" :::oo,: L" 15000 L" 9700
4-Chloroanihnc L" :200 1 t· 15000 L 9700
Hcxachlorobuwl1cnc L" ::::oo, L" 15000 L' 9700 I 4-Chioro-3-mcthylphcnol L" ::oo L" 15000 L" 9700
: -:---1 c thvlnaphthalcnc L" ::ex~, L" 15000 L" 9700
Hcxachi orocyclopcntad1cnc L :2001 l" 150()() L" 9700
:.-1.6-T nchiorophcnoi L" ::oo·, L" 15000 L" 9700
:.-1.)-T nchlorophcnol L" "'""' c· ]7000 L" 24000 I :-Chioronaphthalc nc L" :200., L 15000 L" 9700
2->:itroaniimc l." ''""" L" 37000 C 24000
D1m c thy!phthalatc L" ::!JI•' L 15000 L 9700
,\ccnaphthylcnc L" :200,• c· !SOOJ L" 9700
:.G-Dmaro1olucnc L :200,' 15000 L" 9700 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..,., .. .....,.,..,,.... ..... U :)0:...0 I
I
I Table I. 1 (cont.) R.esul.11 of\hc Analys11 for BNA 111 Tmuc
WA # 0.024 Roanoke Rn-er Stt.c
Based. on Dry Weight
I
I
Sample II SB~ """""""' Caurol US REF-1 US-I DS-l
:Sample ldentifu:auon Method Blaru:: E. iocuci.a E. foetida E. focuda E. focuda E. focuda
Dale Collected 11/20/99 11/25/99 11/25199 1 l.'25199 I 1.'::5'9C
Percent Sobin 100 '" 127 11.3 " 10 7
Percent Lipids 0 00 .. , 2.79 3.3: 3.8~ :.SF
Cone MDL Cone MDL C=, MDL Ca:it MDL C=, MDL Cone MD!..
Panmct.cr """"' """"' """"' ,w-.. ,w-.. """"' """"' """"' """"' """"' ,w-.. ,w-..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J-N111oan1hnc l. 5000 l" 32000 u 37000 l. ..000 r 51000 l" 43000
AccrniphthCnc l' 2000 r 13000 l 15000 l 17000 l' 20000 r 17000
:.4-Dimuophcnol T 5000 l 32000 l 37000 l. ..000 l. 51000 t· 43000
-t-Nmophenol l 5()()(l t· 32000 l 37000 l' ..000 l 51000 ,. 43000
Dibcnzofuran l 2()()(1 r 13()()(1 t· JSOOO l [7000 l 20000 ,. 17()()(1
:::,4-D1rutrotolucnc l 2000 t· 13000 L' JSOOO l' 17000 ,. 20000 l' 17000
D1Clhylphthalate c· 2000 3000 J 13000 1600 J JSOOO 1800 J 17000 l 20000 l' 17000
4-Chlorophcnyl-phcnylcthcr C 2()()(1 13000 t· JSOOO r 17000 l' 20000 ,. 17000
Fiuorcne l' 2000 t· 13000 l JSOOO l' 17()()(1 l 20000 t· 17000
.a.Nmoarnlinc r 500{: t· 32000 l 37()()(1 t· ..000 c· 51000 l 43000
-l.6-D1nnro-2-mcthylphcno1 l 5000 t· 32000 L 37000 l' ..000 L 51000 t· 43000
n-N1trosod1phcnylamlflc C 2000 t· 13000 L 15000 C 17000 t· 20000 L 17()()(1
-l-Bromophcnyl-phcnylcthcr C 2000 t· 13000 t· JS()()() C 17000 C 20000 l' 17000
Hcx.achlorobcnzcnc t· 20<X."I l 13000 c· JSOOO l' 17000 l 20000 l' 17000
Pcntachlorophcnol L 5000 c· 32000 L 37000 l ..000 l' 51000 l' 43000
Phcnanthrcnc L' 200.1 13000 t· JS()()() l' 17000 L 20000 l' 17000
Anthtaccne l 20()(1 l 13000 L JSOOO L 17000 l 20000 l' 17000
Carbazolc c· 200' l 13000 L JSOOO l' 17000 l 20000 L 17000
D1-n-butylphthalate l :::oc~ 240()(• 1300(1 17000 JS()()() 32000 17000 13000 J 20000 11000 J 17000
Fluoranthcnc L ::oo,, l 13000 L. 15000 L' 17000 l' 20000 C 17000
P:,Tcnc l. :::001 13000 l' JSOOO u 17000 l' 20000 l' 17000
Butyl bcnzylphlhalatc l :::001 c· 13000 L 15000 u 17000 L 20000 L 17000
3.3'-Dichlorobcnzidmc l :::cx~. l 13000 l' 15000 l 17000 l' 20000 L' 17000
Bcnzo( a)anthDccnc c· ::oo,, c· 13000 l JSOOO c· 17000 L 20000 l' 17000
Chryscnc c· :::o;1, l 13000 c· 15000 l' 17000 l' 20000 C 17000
b1s(::: .E thylhcxyl)phlhalatc 330 J 20()(: 7:::00 J 13000 7800 J JS()()() 12000 J 17000 13000 J 20000 8800J 17000
I) I• n-oc1ylphlhalatc c· :::ro, c· lJ()()(l L 15000 l' 17000 C 20000 l' 17000
h cnzo(b) nuoranthcnc l ,000 l' 13000 t· 15000 l' 17000 C 20000 u 17000
Bcnzo(l.:)fluoranthcnc l :::oo,_; c· l 300'.I l' 15000 l 17000 l' 20000 l' 17000
bcnzo(aJpyrcnc l' ::ro, c· 13000 L; 15000 C 17000 u 20000 u 17000
lntlcno( 1.:::.3-c.dJpyrcnc L ::or~, l 13000 l 15000 C 17000 u 20000 L 17000
J)1bcnzo( a.h/ll:"thraccnc l' :::001· ,. 13000 l' 15000 l' 17000 l 20000 u 17000
ilcnzo(g.ii..1Jpcrylcnc ,. ::0().• l 1300.• L JS()()() c· 17000 L. 20000 l' 17000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 1.2 RcsultsoftheAnalysuforPesucidc/PCBmTJDUe
WA t1 0-024 Roanoke R.lvc S11.c I
Sued on Dry Weight
Sample• SBLKI B_., Con1rnl REF-1 US-I DS-l
Sample ldentif11:~1.1on Method Blank I L vanegaws L. vanepws L.wncpws L vancpw:s L= ......
Date Collcclcd 10/31199 11/29$ 11129/99 11/30/99 11/30.-99
Pcn:cnl Sohd.s 100 134 11.4 12.1 13.9 1:.1
Fiereent L1p1d.s 0.00 1.90 2.36 1.36 :.3: :.39
I
I
Cane MDL C= MDL Cone MDL Cane MDL Cone MDL Con, MDL
Parameter -µg/kg --µg/kg -----...,.., -
alpha-BHC L IJ L 80 t: 230 L 360 L 560 L 390
bcu.-BHC u IJ L 80 t: 230 L 360 i: 560 L 390
dcli.a-BHC u 1.3 u 80 t: 230 u 360 u 560 c· 390
gamma-BHC (Lmdanc) L IJ L 80 L 230 C 360 u 560 L 390
Hc:pw:hlor L u L 80 L 230 L 360 L 560 L 390
Aldnn L 1.3 u 80 L .230 L 360 L 560 L 390
Hepw:hlor cpo:ude L 1.3 L 80 L 230 u 360 u 560 L 390
Endosulfan I L l .3 L 80 L 230 c· 360 L 560 c· 390
Diclcinn L :.:-L 150 L 450 u 680 L 1100 L 760
4.4'-DDE L :.s L 150 L 450 L 680 t: 1100 L 760
Endrm L :.5 L 150 L 450 L 680 t: 1100 L 760
Endosulfan l ! t: :.5 L 150 L 450 L 680 L 1100 u 760
4.4'-DDD u :,5 L 150 L 450 u 680 t: 1100 u 760
Endosulfan sulfate: L :,5 L 150 L 450 C 680 L' 1100 L 760
44"-DDT L 25 L llO L 450 C 680 L 1100 L 760
!\1cthoxvchlor c· 13 L ,oo L 2300 L 3600 L 5600 u 3900
Endnn ketone L' 25 L 150 L 450 u 680 L 1100 L 760
Eminn aldehyde L :.s L 150 L 450 L 680 u 1100 u 760
alph;,-_Chlordane L 1.3 L 80 L 230 t: 360 C 560 t: 390
gamm.1-Chlonianc L I 3 L 80 t: 230 u 360 L 560 u 390
To"aphenc: L 83 c· 5100 C 15000 u 23000 u 36000 C 25000
Aroc!or-1016 L 33 L 230 u 540 u 790 u 830 L 770
Arocior-1:21 L 3:, L 230 L 540 u 790 L 830 u 770
Arodor-123: ,: 33 L 230 C 540 u 790 u 830 C 770
Arocior-124:: c· 33 L 230 L 540 u 790 t: 830 u 770
I
I
I
I
I
I
Aroclor-124li L 33 L 23() L 540 t,: •• 790 u 830 u 770
Aroclor-1254 L 3:, L 230 u 540 u 790 u 830 C 770
Arocior-1260 L 33 L :?JO L 540 u 790 L 830 u 770 ----------'------'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Table I.I (an) Results o£thc Analyw for BNA in T mut
WA • 0-024 Rmnakc River Sue
Based on Dry Weight
I Sample 11 DS-2 DS-3 ABS
Sample ldcnLificauon E. foctida E. foctida E. foetida
Date Collected 11/25199 11/25199
I Percent Solids 8.1 11.: 184
Percent Lipids 2.03 '" 1.57
Cone. MDL = MDL Cone MDL
I
Panuncu::r ".,.. ,.,.. ,.,.. """" """" """"
3-N111oanihnc l. 56000 l' 37000 u 24000
Accnaphr.hcnc l 22000 l 15000 u 9700
I
2,4-Dimtrophcnol l 56000 l 37000 u 24000
4-N1trophcnol l 56000 l 37000 u 24000
Dibcnzofuran l. :2000 l. 15000 u 9700
:.4-Dtmtrotolucnc l. 22000 l. 15000 l' 9700
D1cr.hylphthal111c 2000 J ::2000 1400; 15000 1200 J 9700
I 4-Ch!orophcny !-phenyl ether ,. :2000 ,. 15000 L 9700
Fluorcnc L 2200(1 l 15000 L 9700
.l-N1troanilmc l. 56000 l 37000 l 24000
4.(,.Dmitro.2-mcthy!phcnol L 56000 l. 37000 c· 24000
n-N 1trosod1phcnyiam me c· 22000 l. 15000 l 9700
I 4-Bromophcnyl-phcnylcthcr l :2000 l 15000 u 9700
Hcxach!otobcnzcnc l. :20(\(1 l 15000 c· 9700
Pcnu,.chlorophcnol c· 5600(> l. 37000 l 24000
Phcnanlhrcnc ,. 2200(1 l. 15000 ,. 9700
Antruaccnc l ::ro: l. 15000 l 9700
I Carbazolc l. 220()(1 ,. 15000 l' 9700
D1-n-butylphthalau 23000 :200(, 36000(1 15000 14000 9700
Fiuoranr.hcnc l 2200(: l. 15000 l' 9700
Pyrcnc c· 220()(: l 15000 L 9700
I
Bu1ylbcnzylphtha!atc ,. :200(1 l 15000 u 9700
3,3'-D1chlorobenz1cime t· :2001, ,· 15000 L 9700
Benzo(a1anthncene l :200: ,. 15000 L 9700
Chrysenc l ::?2()(J(: ,. 15000 l 9700
im(2-Elhylhe11ylJphtha!ate 8700 J 220()(1 11000 J 15000 7200 J 9700
I D 1-n-octylphlhalatc ,· :200:1 ,. 15000 l 9700
Be nzo(b )f1uoranthcnc l :200'1 ,. 15000 L 9700
Bcnzo(k )fluoranthcnc l ::200:1 l. 15000 L" 9700
Bcnzo(a)pyrcnc l ::200., ,. 15000 L 9700
I ncicno( 1.2.3-c:,d)pyrcnc l ::wcx, ,. 15000 l' 9700
I Ditlcnzo( ah lanthraccnc :200'• ,. 15000 t: 9700
b cnz01,g.h.1 )pcry ienc ,. :::00( 15000 l 9700
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Sample i=
Sample ldentifu:auon
Dale Collected
Percent Sohds
Percent Lipids
P111111T1ctc:r
alph.a-BHC
bcu-BHC
delta-BHC
pmma-BHC (Lmdanc)
Hcpuchlor
Aldnn
Hcpt.achlor cpo,udc
Endosulfan l
D1cldnn
J .. r-DDE
Endnn
Endosu]fan ll
4,4'-DDD
Endosulfan sulfate
J.J'-DDT
:,,.1cthoxychlo:
Endnn ketone
Endnn aldehyde
alpha-Chlordane
gamma-Chlordane
T ox.aphcnc
Aroclor-1016
Aroclor-1::1
Arocior-1:23:
A.1oc1or-l:::.;:
Aroclor-124~
Aroclor-1 :5.;
Arocior-1 :6(,
SBLK:
Method Blank:
= µglkg
JOO
0.00
MDL . ., ..
7.8
" 78
7.8
1.,
7.8
7.8
" 15
15
I<
" 15
" 15
" 15
I'
" " 501:
:uu
:('):
:(),;·
:xy,
2()(1
:()(, ::{)I,
Table 1.2 (cont.) Rcswts ohhc Analym for Pesticide/PCB in Tmue
WA • 0-024 Roanoke RJnr S1tc:
Rued on Dry WcJSht
B.....-,d
E. focuda
11/20199
Con,
µglkg
L
L c·
l"
t·
c·
L
r
L
L
t·
c·
L
l"
t·
t·
L
t·
l" ,·
t·
L
t·
t·
l"
r
l"
l"
12.4
"'
MDL ..,..
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
1200
1200
llOO
llOO
1200
1200
llOO
6000
120(1
1:00
600
600
38000
1400
1400
\4(XJ
1400
1400
I 400
1400
Caurol
E. foctida
11/25199
12.7
2.79
Con, MDL
µglkg . .,..
L' 560
C 560
L' 560
C 560
L 560
l" 560
L" 560
L" 560
t· ll00
L ll00 c· ll00
L ll00
r ll00
l" ll00
L" ll00
L 5600
l" ll00
t· ll00
C 560
L" 560
L 35000
L 1400 c· 1400
l" 1400
l" 1400
L' 1400
l" 1400
r 1400
USREF-1
E. foctida
I lr.?5199
11.3
3J:
Con, MDL
. µsf<& . .,. ..
C 670
L 670
t· 670
L 670
c· 670 c· 670
r 670
t· ~70
l 1300 c· 1300
t· 1300
r 1300
L" 1300
L 1300
r 1300
l" 6700
t• 1300
l" 1300
l" 670
l" 670
L' 43000
L 1700
l' 1700
l' 1700
t· 1700
t· 1700
l" 1700 ,. 1700
I
I
US-I 0S-1
E. focuda E. focuda I
JJ,~5199 l !.~5'9Q .., 10 7
3.8.'-:.5~
Con, MD:. Cone MDL I . ., .. ""'" µg.,q og/kg
t· 830 t· 620 I t· 830 r 620
c· 830 l" 620
l" 830 l" 620 I l" 830 l" 620
c· 830 L 620
r 830 t· 620
L 830 l" 620
t· 1600 l" 1200 I c· 1600 ,-1200
l" 1600 l" 1200
L 1600 l" 1200
l" 1600 t· 1200
l" 1600 l" 1200 I L 1600 L" 1200
t· 8300 ,-6200
L" 1600 L 1200
r 1600 l" 1200
L 830 l" 620 I L" 830 c· 620
L' 53000 c· 40000
L 2200 r 1700
C 2200 l" 1700 I L ::200 l' 1700
L" ::200 L 1700
L 2200 l" 1700
L• 2200 l 1700 u :200 l 1700 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Table 1.2 (cont) Results of the Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in TSDUe
WA # 0.024 Rmnok.e River Site
Based on Dry We¢1
I Sample t DS-:: DS-3 ABS
Sample ldcntif1cauon L. vancpw.5 L. vancp:atw L. vancptu5
Date Collcrnd I l/'30199 11130/99
I Percent Sohds 11.9 11.0 26
Percent L1p1ds 1.57 2.24 1.48
C= MDL c~, MDL c~, MDL
Pllrafflctcr ,.,.. ,.,.. ,.,.. ,.,.. ,.,.. ,.,..
I alpha-BHC L 440 t· 390 u 800
beta-BHC L 440 t· 390 l" 800
I
dclta-BHC L 440 l" 390 L 800
gamma-BHC (Lindanc) l" 440 l" 390 C ,oo
Hcptaehlor t· 440 l" 390 L 800
Aldnn L 440 l" 390 l' 800
Hcptac:hlor cpox1dc l" 440 l" 390 l" 800
I Endosul!an I l" 44(1 l" 390 l" 800
D1cldnn L 860 l" 75(J l" 1500
4.4'-DDE l" 860 l" 750 l" 1500
Endnn L 860 l" 750 l" 1500
Endosu!fan II l 860 l" 750 l 1S00
I 4.J'-DDD C 860 l" 7S0 l' 1500
Endosulfan sulfate L 860 l" 750 L 1500
4.4'-DDT L 860 t· 750 l" 1S00
Mclhoxychlor l' 4400 t· 3900 l" 8000
Endnn Ketone L 860 l" 750 l" 1500
I Endnn aldehyde t· 860 l" 750 L 1500
alpha-Chlordane l 440 l 390 l 800
gamma-Chlordane L 44ll l" 390 u 800
T oxaphcnc u 28000 L 250CXl L 51000
Aroclor-1016 C 9:0 l 890 C 2100
I Arodor-12'.21 t· 9:W l" 890 l' 2100
Aroclor-123:: L 9:0 l" 890 l 2100
1\roclor-124: l" 9W l" 89(> L 2100
Arocior-1248 l 920 L 890 L 2100
I
Atoclor-1254 L 9;;0 l 890 l 2100
Arodor-1260 l" 9:0 L 890 l 2100
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ..,.,....,._,... .....
•
I
Table 1.3 Results of the Analysis for Metals in Tinuc I
WA# 0.024 Roanoke River Site
Based on Dry Weight I
Sample::: PBS99!209B Badtground Con!rol REF-I US-! DS-1
Sample Identification Method Blank I L. varicgaws L vuicgatus L. variqarus L. varicganas L. varicg.ani.s
Date Collected 10/31199 I 1/29199 I 1/29199 I 1130199 11/30199
Percent Solids !00 13.4 I 1.4 12.1 13.9 12.1
Percent Lipids 0.00 1.90 2.36 . 1.36 2.32 2.39 I
Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL
Parameter mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg I
Aluminum C 2.8 C 20.9 883 24.6 536 23.1 1460 20.1 921 23.1
Antimony l' 0.27 L. 2.0 l' 2.4 l' 2.2 l.' 1.9 l" 2.2
Arsenic l" 0.19 2.2 1.4 2.3 1.7 4.3 1.6 6.1 1.4 4.0 1.6 I
Barium l" 0.1: 692 0.90 907 I. I 996 0.99 1120 0.86 992 0.99
Hcrylhum l. 0.08 L: 0.60 l' 0.70 l" 0.66 l" 0.58 t· 0.66
Cadmium l' 0.03 0.36 0.2: 0.76 0.26 0.37 0.25 0.89 0.22 0.46 0.25
Calcium C 25.8 1720 193 2140 226 1760 213 3110 186 2280 213 I
Chromium C 0.14 C 1.0 2.7 1.2 1.8 1.2 12.7 1.0 2.7 1.2
Cobalt L 0.08 2.3 0.60 4.5 0.70 3.8 0.66 3.4 0.58 4.2 0.66
Copper L 0.25 25.0 1.9 38.5 2.2 26.8 2.1 53.0 1.8 36.7 2.1
Iron l" 3.3 2250 24.6 4380 28.9 4210 27.3 5290 23.i 4500 27.3 I
Lead L: 0.22 1.9 1.6 5.4 1.9 l: 1.8 77.2 1.6 2.2 1.8
Magnesium L 9.2 805 68.7 1360 80.7 1200 76.0 1430 66.2 1340 76.0
Manganese t· 0.06 10.5 0.45 53.4 0.53 23.8 0.50 54.6 0.43 36.2 0.50
~tercury C 0.03 l' 0.22 t· 0.26 u 0.25 0.22 0.22 0.26 0.2l
~ick.el l' 0.36 L 2.7 3.6 3.2 3.3 3.0 4.1 2.6 3.7 3.0
I
Potassium l' I 5.2 8360 I 13 10300 133 11100 126 10900 109 I 1700 126
Selenium L 0.33 J.4 2.5 5.8 2.9 6.5 2.7 4.6· 2.4 4.0 2.7
Silver L 0.12 L 0.90 l' I.I C 0.99 C 0.86 1: 0.99 I
Sodium l. 50.: 80300 375 4980 440 5850 415 4980 361 6240 415
Thallium C 0.34 L 2.5 l' 3.0 l'. 2.8 l' 2.4 l." 2.8
Vanadium t· 0.07 l' 0.52 2.9 0.61 3.8 0.58 6.9 0.50 4.6 0.58
Zinc L 0.38 263 2.8 341 3.3 313 3.1 421 2.7 328 3.1 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I T Ible 1.2 (cent) Results ofUX: Analysis forPcsucide/PCB IJl Tmuc
WA • 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on Dry Wci.¢11
I Sample tt DS-:: DS-3 ABS
Sample Jdcntif1ca11on E. focuda E. foeud.a E. foctida
Date Collected I l,'25199 l l/2Sl99
I Percent Sohd5 8.1 l 1.: 18'
PtTCCnl L1p1ds 203 2,34 1.57
Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL
I Panunc1cr """"' """"' """"' """"' µglkg µglkg
alpha-BHC u 920 r 6flJ V 390
bcu-BHC l' 920 r 6flJ l' 390
I dcJta-BHC T 920 t· 6flJ l' 390
gamma-BHC (L1ndanc) t· 920 l' 6flJ r 390
Hcpi.achlor t· 920 L 6flJ l' 390
Aldnn l' 920 r 6flJ l' 390
Hcpt.achlor cpoXJdc \.' 920 t· 6flJ t· 390
I Endosulfan ! r 9::(1 t· 66D t· 390
D1cJdnn r 1800 r 1300 t· 740
J,.:'.DDE l' 1800 t· 1300 l' 740
Endrm t· 1800 l' 1300 l' 740
Endosulfa., II L 1800 c· 1300 r 740
I 4.J',DDD L 1800 l' 1300 r . 740
Endosu!fan sulfate r 1800 c· 1300 r 740
4.-"'-DDT t.: 1800 r 1300 l' 740
~1cthoxychlor t· 9200 t· 6flJO c· 3900
Endnn lr:ctonc r 1800 t· 1300 r 740
I .Endnn aldehyde r 180(1 l' 1300 t· 740
alpha-Chlordane t· 9:c, L 660 r 390
~amma-Chlordanc l' 9::0 l 66(1 l 390
1 oxacncnc t· 5900(1 c· '2000 c· 2'000
I
Aroclor-10!6 l' 24(1\1 c· ! 80..1 l' 1000
Arcx:1or-l::1 r 24()() l' 1800 t· lOOO
Aroc101-123: l 24()(1 t· 1800 l lOOO
Arodor • 12 4:: t· 24()11 c· 1800 l' 1000
Arocior-1248 l' 24()(1 c· 1800 l' lOOO
I Aroclor-1 ::!54 l 2400 l' 1800 l' lOOO
Aroclor-1260 l' 24()() l' 1800 l' lOOO
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Sample t US-I
Sample Identification E. foctida
Dale Collecu,d 11/25199
Percent Solids 8.8
Percent Lipids 3.85
Cone MDL
Param'eter mg/kg mg/kg
A1uminum 892 31.8
Antimony L 3.1
Arsenic 10.6 2.2
Barium 25 1.4
Bery-·llium L 0.91
Cadmium 1.2 0.34
Calcium 5630 293
Chromium 2.0 1.6
Cobalt 2.3 0.91
Copper 19.4 2.8
iron 1100 37.5
Lead 3.4 2.5
Magnesium 1370 104.5
Manganese 15.1 0.68
Mercury 0.28 0.34
Sickel l' 4.1
Potassium 9950 173
Selenium 5.5 3.8
Silver l' 1.4
Sodium 6620 l70
Thallium C 3.9
Vanadium 2.2 0.80
Zinc Il9 4.3
£JC>JJ•~H<-,
T&bic 1.3 (cont.) Rcsuhs of the ~15 for Meu.l.s in Tismc
WA # 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on Dry Weight
DS.l DS-2 DS-3
E. foctida E. foctida E. foetid,
11/25199 11/25199 11/25199
10.7 8.1 11.2
2.58 2.03 2.34
Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL.
mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg . mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
1800 26.2 2330 34.6 1890 2l.O
L 2.5 l' 3.3 u 2.4
4.3 1.8 4.7 2.3 l' 1.7
13.6 I.I 16.5 l.5 12.8 I.I
l' 0.7l l' 0.99 l' 0.71
0.43 0.28 1.4 0.37 0.83 0.27
3690 241 5710 319 2550 230
2.8 J.3 3.5 1.7 3.2 1.3
2.4 0.75 6.3 0.99 3.5 0.71
8.4 2.3 10.0 3.1 5.7 2.2
2290 30.8 3480 40.7 2930 29.5
l' 2.1 5.2 2.7 3.3 2.0
1120 86.0 1370 I 14 820 82.1
52.3 0.56 93.5 0.74 95.7 O.l4
0.27 0.28 0.46 0.37 0.41 0.27
L 3.4 L' 4.4 u 3.2
7460 142 11300 188 5220 136
4.7 3.1 l' 4.1 L' 2.9
t.: I.I L' 1.l C I.I
4410 469 7710 1930 3860 448
L 3.2 u 4.2 l' 3.0
4.6 0.6l 5.2 0.86 l.3 0.63
94.2 3.6 133 4.7 l3.7 3.4
ABS
'E. foctida
18.4
1.57
Cone MDL
mg/kg mg/kg
1920 ll.2
L !.l
3.8 1.0
16.0 0.6l
l" 0.43
0.40 0.16
6880 140
2.7 0.76
1.4 0.43
13.7 1.4
574 17.9
2.8 1.2
2000 50.0
50.7 0.33
u 0.16
u 2.0
9920 82.6
2.3 1.8
u 0.65
4400 273 u 1.8
1.7 0.38
169 2.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Table 1.3 (cont) Results of the Ana.lysis for Metals in Tissue
WA # 0-024 Roanoke River Site
I Based on Dry Weight
Sampler; DS-2 DS-3 ABS Background Con!l'Ol US REF-I
I Sample Identification L. variegatus L. variegaIUS L. variegaDlS E. foctida E. foctida E. foctida
Date Collected 11/30199 11/30/99 11/20199 11/25.199 I L'15!99
Percent Solids 11.9 11.0 2.6 12.4 12.7 11.3
Percent Lipids 1.57 2.24 1.48 4.41 2.79 3.32
I Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL Cone MDL
Parameter mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mgtkg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg,kg mg,kg mefkg
I Aluminum 1490 23.5 826 25.5 515 108 334 22.6 380 22.0 4290 24.8
Antimony l' 2.3 l' 2.5 u 10.4 2.6 2.2 l' 2.1 t · 24
Arsemc 3.5 1.6 3.3 1.7 21.2 7.3 3.1 1.5 7.4 1.5 6.4 1.7
I Barium 879 1.0 914 I.I 4050 4.6 3.0 0.97 4.4 0.94 2:.: I.I
Beryllium l' 0.6i t· 0.73 L. 3.1 l' 0.65 t· 0.63 t· 0.71
Cadmium 0.34 0.25 0.52 0.2i 26.9 1.2 0.45 0.24 0.48 0.24 J.(, 0.2i
Calcium 2090 217 1890 235 9300 992 60IO 208 4430 203 5170 22,
I Chromium 4.5 1.2 2.7 1.3 6.1 5.4 u I.I l' I.I 5.9 1.2
Cobalt 4.8 0.67 2.3 0.73 13.3 3.1 1.0 0.65 2.3 0.63 5.1 0.71
Copper 36.9 2.1 27.0 2.3 170 9.6 8.5 2.0 8.1 2.0 14.0 2.2
Iron 5100 27.7 3540 30.0 13200 127 419 26.6 655 26.0 3270 29.2
I
Lead 4.0 1.8 4.1 2.0 8.7 8.5 1.9 1.8 l' 1.7 6.0 1.9
~tagnesium l 180 77.3 1220 83.6 5820 354 1080 74.2 954 72.4 1460 81.4
Manganese 36.2 0.50 25.4 0.55 90.9 2.3 11.2 0.48 6.7 0.47 43.0 0.53
i\iercury 0.31 0.25 0.30 0.27 u 1.2 u 0.24 C 0.24 0.39 0.27
i\icke! 3.9 3.0 5.2 3.3 u 13.8 u 2.9 u 2.8 l' 3.2
I Potassium 9160 128 11300 138 57800 585 12100 123 9150 120 11900 135
Selenium 3.7 2.8 3.6 3.0 21.6 12.7 2.9 2.7 5.1 2.6 8.2 2.9
Silver t· 1.0 l' I. I C -4.6 C 0.97 l' 0.94 l' I.I
Sodium 4500 422 6440 456 34200 1930 6720 405 6360 39~ 7160 444
I Thallium C 2.9 l' 3.1 C 13.1 u 2.7 u 2.7 u 3.0
Vanadium 10.5 0.59 3.4 0.64 C 2.7 0.71 0.56 3.0 0.55 8.0 0.62
Zinc 288 3.:? 290 3.l 1920 14.6 112 3.1 142 3.0 152 3.4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
I
I
Table 1.4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue I WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
·Detection I
Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(ng/kg) (ng/kg) I
Background 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 6.393 I
L variegatus 1,2,3, 7, 8-PeCDD u 15.983
10/31/99 1,2,3.4, 7,8-HxCDD u 14.299 I (% Solid 13.4) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 9.627
(% Lipid 1. 90) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 11.036
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 19.470 EMPC I OCDD 145.777
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 5.451
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 5.355 I
2,3,4,7.8-PeCDF u 5.414
1,2,3,4. 7,8-HxCDF u 8.361 I 1,2,3.6,7,8-HxCDF u 6.271
1,2,3, 7,8, 9-HxCDF u 9.927
2,3,4.6,7,8-HxCDF u 7.332 I 1,2,3 .4.6, 7,8-HpCDF u 6.559
1,2,3.4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u 9.237
OCDF u 7.869 I
Total Tetra-Dioxins u I
Total Penta-Dioxins u
Total Hexa-Dioxins u I Total Hepta-Dioxins u
Total Tetra-Furans u I
Total Penta-Furans u
Total Hexa-Furans u I Total Hepta-Furans u
I
I
100024\Qel\AT'\0002\RHUlts I (j ()(J;. u
I
I
I Table I 4 Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
I
Based on dry weight
Detection
I Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(ng/kg) (ng/kg)
I DFBLKI 2,3, 7,8-TCDD u 1.214
12/03/99 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 2.217
I (% Solid: 100) 1.2.3,4,7.8-HxCDD u 2.864
(% Lipid O 0) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 1.928
I 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 2.210
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 3 971
OCDD 30.646
I 2,3,7,8-TCDF u 1.130
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.962
2,3,4, 7,8-PeCDF u 0.973
I 1,2,3,4.7,8-HxCDF u 1.289
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.967
I 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 1.530
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 1.130
1,2.3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF 1.593
I 1,2.3.4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u 1.104
OCDF u 7.200
I Total Tetra-Dioxins u
I
Total Penta-Dioxins u
Total Hexa-Dioxins u
Total Hepta-Dioxins 6486
I Total Tetra-Furans u
Total Penta-Furans u
I Total Hexa-Furans u
Total Hepta-Furans 1.593
I
I
I \00024\Del\Ar\0002\Resutts 0 J (J ;_ ;;;
•
Table 1.4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Sample ID
REF-1
L variegatus
11/29/99
(% Solid 12.1)
(% Lipid 1.36)
\00024\Del\Ar\0002\Re~vrts
Based on dry weight
Compound
2,3,7,8-TCDD
1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD
1,2,3,4,7.8-HxCDD
1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
OCDD
2,3,7,8-TCDF
1,2,3,7.8-PeCDF
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF
1,2,3.4.7.8-HxCDF
1,2,3.6, 7,8-HxCDF
1.2,3,7,8.9-HxCDF
2,3,4.6.7.8-HxCDF
1.2.3.4.6. 7.8-HpCDF
1,2.3,4, 7.8.9-HpCDF
OCDF
Total Tetra-Dioxins
Total Penta-Dioxins
Total Hexa-Dioxins
Total Hepta-Dioxins
Total Tetra-Furans
Total Penta-F urans
Total Hexa-Furans
Total Hepta-Furans
Results
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
29.451
285.237
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
15.565
u
u
u
29.451
u
u
u
u
Detection
Limit
(ng/kg)
8.624
14.476
18.878
12.710
14.570
8.419
4.738
4.791
8.648
13.300
10.267
7.584
4.490
6.324
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Table 1 .4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
I Detection
I Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(ng/kg) (ng/kg)
I Control 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 11.099
L variegatus 1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD u 34.020
I 11/29/99 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 24: 192
(% Solid 1 I .4) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 16.288
I (% Lipid: 2.36) 1,2,3, 7,8,9-HxCDD u 18.671
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 43.5 EMPC
OCDD 624.998
I 2,3,7,8-TCDF u 14.136
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 8.438
2,3,4,7.8-PeCDF u 8.531
I 1,2,3,4.7,8-HxCDF u 18.377
1.2,3.6.7,8-HxCDF u 13.782
1,2.3,7.8,9-HxCDF u 21.818
I 2,3,4.6,7,8-HxCDF u 16.115
1,2,3.4.6, 7,8-HpCDF u 11.337
I 1,2,3,4. 7,8,9-HpCDF u 15.966
OCDF u 24.600
I I Total Tetra-Dioxins u
Total Penta-Dioxins u
i I Total Hexa-Dioxins u
Total Hepta-Dioxins u
I Total Tetra-F urans u
Total Penta-Furans u
I Total Hexa-Furans u
Total Hepta-Furans u
I
I
I 100024\Del\Ar\0002\Rnurts
u:Hi:...-t
•
I
I
Table 1.4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site I Based on dry weight
Detection I
Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(ng/kg) (ng/kg) I
DS-1 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 11.399 I L variegatus 1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD u 32.437
11/30/99 1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD u 30.913
(% Solid 12.1) 1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD u 20.813 I
(% Lipid: 2.39) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 23.858
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 59.024 I OCDD 622.996
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 11.284
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 15:282 I 2,3,4, 7,8-PeCDF u 15.451
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF u 60.411
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF u 45.307 I
1,2,3, 7,8,9-HxCDF u 71.723
2,3,4,6, 7,8-HxCDF u 52.975 I 1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF u 7.286
1,2,3,4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u 10.261
OCDF 58.087 I
Total Tetra-Dioxins u I
Total Penta-Dioxins u
Total Hexa-Dioxins u I Total Hepta-Dioxins 111.087
Total Tetra-Furans u I Total Penta-Furans u
Total Hexa-Furans u
Total Hepta-F urans u I
I
I
\00024\DeAAr\0002\Rnuns
UOH~7 I
~J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Table 14 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Sample ID
US-I
L. variegatus
l 1/30/99
(% Solid 13 9)
(% Lipid 2.32)
100024\0el\Ar'OXl2\Rnutts
Based on dry weight
Compound
2,3, 7,8-TCDD
1.2.3. 7.8-PeCDD
1.2,3,4.7,8-HxCDD
1.2.3.6,7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
1,2,3,4,6, 7.8-HpCDD
OCDD
2.3. 7.8-TCDF
1,2,3,7.8-PeCDF
2,3,4, 7.8-PeCDF
1,2.3,4.7.8-HxCDF
1,2,3.6. 7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,7,8.9-HxCDF
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF
1,2.3.4,6, 7,8-HpCDF
1.2,3.4. 7.8.9-HpCDF
OCDF
Total Tetra-Dioxins
Total Penta-Dioxins
Total Hexa-Dioxins
Total Hepta-Dioxins
Total Tetra-Furans
Total Penta-Furans
Total Hexa-Furans
Total Hepta-F urans
Results
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
43.2 EMPC
u
1510 120
15699.32
u
24.0 EMPC
u
180.501 EMPC
37.6 EMPC
u
u
727.777
u
5053.318
u
25450
132.168
2630.694
u
u
u
727.777
000~!6 ·.
Detection
Limit
(ng/kg)
7437
21.523
25.593
19. 752
8415
5 176
18.780
13.876
110.763
Table 1. 4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Sample ID
DS-3
L. variegatus
11/30/99
(% Solid 11.0)
(% Lipid 2.24)
\00024\0el\An0002\Reswns
Based on dry weight
Compound
2,3,7,8-TCDD
1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD
1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
OCDD
2,3,7,8-TCDF
1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDF
2,3,4, 7,8-PeCDF
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF
2,3,4,6, 7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF
OCDF
Total Tetra-Dioxins
Total Penta-Dioxins
Total Hexa-Dioxins
Total Hepta-Dioxins
Total Tetra-Furans
Total Penta-Furans
Total Hexa-Furans
Total Hepta-Furans
Results
(ng/kg}
28.628
u
u
u
u
56.398
634.839
183.2
u
u
9.360 EMPC
u
u
u
u
u
15.759 EMPC
28.628
u
u
115.049
183.2
u
u
u
oo0:..!9 .
Detection
Limit
(ng/kg)
14.632
8.675
5.840
6.695
3.151
3.185
6.151
9.737
7.192
6.217
8.756
[
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Table 1.4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
I Detection
Sample ID Compound Results Limit
I (ng/kg) (ng/kg)
I DS-2 2,3,7,8-TCDD 33.973
L. variegatus 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 23.171
I 11/30/99 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 29.869
(% Solid: 11.9) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 20.110
(% Lipid 1.57) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 23.053
I 1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 68.487 EMPC
OCDD 965.298
2,3, 7,8-TCDF 460.6
I 1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDF u 10.599
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF u 10.716
I 1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF u 16.171
1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDF u 12.128
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 19.199
I 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 14.181
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF u 5.918
I
1.2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF u 8.335
OCDF 20.369 EMPC
I Total Tetra-Dioxins 33.973
Total Penta-Dioxins u
I Total Hexa-Dioxins 23.456
Total Hepta-Dioxins u
I Total Tetra-Furans 460.6
Total Penta-Furans u
I Total Hexa-Furans u
Total Hepta-F urans u
I
I
I \00024\0el\Ar\0002\RnultS
i.J OO;.!o
■
I
I
Table 1.4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue I WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Detection I
Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(ng/kg) (ng/kg) I
DFBLK2 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 1.705 I
12/08/99 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 4.711
(% Solid 100) 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 4.744 I (% Lipid 0.0) 1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD u 3.194
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 3.662
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD u 3 710 I OCDD u 3.202
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 2.104
1,2,3,7.8-PeCDF u 2.436 I
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF u 2.463
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF u 2.397 I 1,2,3,6.7,8-HxCDF u 1.797
1,2,3, 7,8,9-HxCDF u 2.845
2,3,4,6,7.8-HxCDF u 2.102 I 1,2,3,4.6. 7,8-HpCDF u 1.772
1,2,3,4. 7,8.9-HpCDF u 2.495
OCDF u 3.451 I
Total Tetra-Dioxins u I
Total Penta-Dioxins u
Total Hexa-Dioxins u I Total Hepta-Dioxins u
Total Tetra-F urans u I Total Penta-Furans u
Total Hexa-Furans u I Total Hepta-Furans u
I
I
\00024\0el\At\0002\Rnulb, 00031. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Table l .4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Sample ID
ABS
L. variegatus
(% Solid 2 6)
(% Lipid I .48)
100024\Del\Ar\0002\Resurtt
Based on dry weight
Compound
2,3,7,8-TCDD
J,2,3,7,8-PeCDD
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD
l ,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
OCDD
2,3,7,8-TCDF
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF
2,3,4, 7,8-PeCDF
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDF
1,2,3.4, 7,8,9-HpCDF
OCDF
Total Tetra-Dioxins
Total Penta-Dioxins
Total Hexa-Dioxins
Total Hepta-Dioxins
Total Tetra-Furans
Total Penta-F urans
Total Hexa-Furans
Total Hepta-Furans
Results
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
130 EMPC
1290
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
192
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
00030
Detection
Limit
(ng/kg)
69.JJ3 .
98. l JO
121.057
81.504
93.430
43.092
40.717
41. 167
79.084
59.36 l
93.893
69.349
41.741
58.786
I
I
Table 1.4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue I WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Detection I
Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(ng/kg) (ng/kg) I
Control 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 12.927 I
E. foetida 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 25.861
11/25/99 1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD u 24.693 I (% Solid: 12.7) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 16.625
(% Lipid: 2.79) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u I 9.058
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD u 7.108 I OCDD 76.07
2,3,7,8-TCDF u I 0.951 I 1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDF u 13.765
2,3,4, 7,8-PeCDF u 13.918
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF u 12.214 I 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF u 9.161
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 14.502
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 10.711 I 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF u 8.220
1,2,3.4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u 11.576 I OCDF u 14.697
Total Tetra-Dioxins u I
Total Penta-Dioxins u
Total Hexa-Dioxins u I Total Hepta-Dioxins u
Total T etra-F urans u I
Total Penta-Furans u
Total Hexa-Furans u I Total Hepta-F urans u
I
I
\00024\De-l\Ar\0002\Resuin 0()033 I
I
I
I Table 1. 4 (cont) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0.:024 Roanoke River Site
I
Based on dry weight
Detection
I Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(ng/kg) (ng/kg)
I Background 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 17.100
E. foetida 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 29.693
I 1 1 /20/99 1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD u 30.045
(% Solid 12.4) l.2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD u 20.229
I (% Lipid 4.41) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 23.188
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD u 25.010
OCDD 93.5
I 2,3,7,8-TCDF u 11.371
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 13.270
2,3,4, 7,8-PeCDF u 13.416
I 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF u 17.620
1,2,3,6, 7.8-HxCDF u 13 .215
I
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 20.920
2,3,4,6, 7,8-HxCDF u 15.451
1,2,3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDF u 20.648
I l.2.3.4.7,8.9-HpCDF u 29.079
OCDF u 24.331
I Total Tetra-Dioxins u
Total Penta-Dioxins u
I Total Hexa-Dioxins u
Total Hepta-Dioxins u
I Total Tetra-Furans u
Total Penta-F urans u
I Total Hexa-Furans u
Total Hepta-Furans u
I
I
I I0002•1Del\.A.r\0002\Rnu~ 0003:.!
•
I
I
Table 1. 4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue I WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Detection I
Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(ng/kg) (ng/kg) I
US-1 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 18.136 I
E. foetida 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 27. 172
11/25/99 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 43.125 I (% Solid 8 8) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 29.035
(% Lipid 3 85) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 33.283
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 49.3 EMPC I OCDD 525.835
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 15.877
1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDF u 10358 I
2.3,4,7,8-PeCDF u 10.473
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF u 21.673 I 1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDF u 16.254
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 25.732
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 19.005 I 1,2,3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDF 79.9 EMPC
1.2,3.4. 7.8,9-HpCDF u 22032
OCDF 154. 739 I
Total Tetra-Dioxins u I
Total Penta-Dioxins u
Total Hexa-Dioxins u I Total Hepta-Dioxins u
Total Tetra-Furans u I
Total Penta-Furans u
Total Hexa-F urans u I Total Hepta-Furans u
I
I
100024\Dell.Ar\0002\Rnvlts 00035 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 1.4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Sample ID
US REF-I
E. foetida
1 l /25/99
(% Solid 11.3)
(% Lipid 3.32)
\00024\Del\Ar\0002\Rnvlt1
Based on dry weight
Compound
2,3,7,8-TCDD
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
OCDD
2,3,7,8-TCDF
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF
2,3,4, 7,8-PeCDF
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF
2,3,4,6, 7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
1.2,3,4,7.8,9-HpCDF
OCDF.
Total Tetra-Dioxins
Total Penta-Dioxins
Total Hexa-Dioxins
Total Hepta-Dioxins
Total Tetra-Furans
Total Penta-Furans
Total Hexa-Furans
Total Hepta-Furans
Results
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
u
929.786
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
62.536
u
u
u
u
Detection
Limit
(ng/kg)
25.433
41.125
33 .120
22.299
25.562
28.778
19.515
20.300
20.524
18.204
13.652
21.612
15.963
13.071
18.408
30.200
I
I
Table 1.4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue I WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Detection I
Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(ng/kg) (ng/kg) I
DS-2 2,3, 7,8-TCDD u 9.396 I
E. foetida 1.2,3, 7,8-PeCDD u 15.606
11/25/99 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 24.724 I (% Solid: 8 1) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 16.646
(% Lipid 2.03) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 19.081
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 23.0 EMPC I OCDD 507.473
2,3, 7,8-TCDF u 11.643
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 7.068 I
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF u 7.146
1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF u 11.506 I 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF u 8.629
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 13.661
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 10.090 I 1,2,3.4,6,7,8-HpCDF u 8.364
1,2,3,4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u 11. 780
OCDF u 13.031 I
Total Tetra-Dioxins u I
Total Penta-Dioxins u
Total Hexa-Dioxins u I Total Hepta-Dioxins u
Total Tetra-Furans u I
Total Penta-Furans u
Total Hexa-Furans u I Total Hepta-Furans u
I
I
\00024\0el\Ar\0002\Re~ults I 00037
I
I
I Table 1.4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
I
Based on dry weight
Detection
I Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(ng/kg) (ng/kg)
I DS-1 2,3,7,8-TCDD u I 8.284
E. foetida 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 36.952
I I I /25/99 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 32.648
(% Solid IO 7) 1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD u 21981
I
(% Lipid: 2.58) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 25. 198
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 45.874
OCDD 622.84
I 2,3,7,8-TCDF 104.9
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 12.513
2,3,4. 7.8-PeCDF u 12.651
I 1,2,3,4.7,8-HxCDF u 14.350
1,2.3.6.7,8-HxCDF u 10.762
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u I 7.037
I 2,3,4,6.7,8-HxCDF u 12.583
1,2,3.4.6. 7,8-HpCDF u 14.717
I 1,2,3.4. 7,8,9-HpCDF u 20.727
OCDF u 29.23 I
I Total Tetra-Dioxins u
Total Penta-Dioxins u
I Total Hexa-Dioxms u
Total Hepta-Dioxins 45.875
I Total Tetra-Furans 104 9
Total Penta-Furans u
I Total Hexa-Furans u
Total Hepta-Furans u
I
I
I \00024\Del\Ar\0002\R■aults
-00036
■
I
I
Table 14 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue I WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Detection I
Sample ID Compound Results Limit
(nfllkg) (ng/kg) I
ABS 2,3, 7,8-TCDD u 3.714 I
E. foetida 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 7.627
11/25/99 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 9.642 I (% Solid 184) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 6492
(% Lipid I. 57) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 7442
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD u 2.864 I OCDD 40.073
2,3, 7,8-TCDF u 6.256 I 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 3471
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF u 3 510
1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF u 3.999 I 1,2,3,6.7,8-HxCDF u 2.999
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 4.748
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 3.507 I 1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF u 2.607
1.2,3,4. 7,8.9-HpCDF u 3.672 I OCDF u 3.174
Total Tetra-Dioxins u I
Total Penta-Dioxins u
Total Hexa-Dioxins u I Total Hepta-Dioxins u
Total Tetra-Furans u I
Total Penta-Furans u
Total Hexa-Furans u I Total Hepta-Furans u
I
I
\OOC24\0el\A!\0002\Res.ull$ I 00039
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Table 1.4 (cont.) Results of the Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Sample ID
DS-3
E. foetida
l l /25/99
(% Solid 11.2)
(% Lipid: 2.34)
\000:Z410el\Ar\0002\Resu~
Based on dry weight
Compound
2,3, 7,8-TCDD
1,2.3, 7.8-PeCDD
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
OCDD
2,3.7,8-TCDF
1,2.3.7.8-PeCDF
2,3,4, 7.8-PeCDF
1.2,3,4.7,8-HxCDF
1.2,3.6. 7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,7,8.9-HxCDF
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
1.2,3.4. 7.8, 9-HpCDF
OCDF
Total T etra-Diox.ins
Total Penta-Dioxins
Total Hexa-Dioxins
Total Hepta-Diox.ins
Total T etra-F urans
Total Penta-Furans
Total Hexa-Furans
Total Hepta-Furans
Results
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
33.343
536511
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
72.422
u
u
u
u
00038
Detection
Limit
(ng/kg)
9.821
12.297
18.627
12.541
14.376
10.843
5.699
5.762
11.366
8.525
13.495
9.967
5.835
8.218
6.223
Table 1. 5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
Background 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 1
L. variegatus 1,2,3, 7 ,8-PeCDD u 0.5
10/31/99 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid: 13.4) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid 190) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD u 0.01
OCDD 145.78 0.001
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 0.1
1.2,3, 7,8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4,7.8-PeCDF u 0.5
1.2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3.6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2,3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1,2,3.4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
\0002'4\0el\.A.r\O'Xl2\Resu~ 00041
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
u
0. 146
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.146
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
·1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
■
Table 1.5 Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
DFBLKl 2,3,7,8-TCDD u
12/03/99 1.2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 0.5
(% Solid 100) 1.2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid O 0) 1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 3.97 0.01
OCDD 30.65 0.001
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4, 7,8-PeCDF u 0.5
1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4,6, 7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF 1.59 0.01
1.2,3,4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
100024\0el\.A.r\0002\Rnu~
00040
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
0.040
0.031
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.016
u
u
0.087
... -
I
I
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue I WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Adjusted I
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF Concentration
(ng/kg) (ng/kg) I
REF-1 2,3,7,8-TCDD u u I
L variegatus 1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD u 0.5 u
11/29/99 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1 u I (% Solid 12 1) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1 u
(% Lipid 1 36) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1 u
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 29.45 0.01 0.29 I OCDD 285.24 0 001 0.29
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 0.1 u I 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05 u
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF u 0.5 u
1,2,3,4.7,8-HxCDF u 0.1 u I 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1 u
1.2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1 u
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1 u 1·
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01 u
1,2,3,4, 7,8.9-HpCDF u 0.01 u
OCDF 15.57 0.001 0.016 I
Total 0.60 I
I
I
I
I
I
\00024\Del\Ar\0002\Rnul13. I 0004.J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1:
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
Control 2,3,7,8-TCDD u I
L. variegatus 1,2,3,7.8-PeCDD u 0.5
l I /29/99 1,2.3.4,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid II 4) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid 2 36) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6. 7,8-HpCDD u 0.01
OCDD 625.00 0.001
2,3, 7.8-TCDF u 0.1
1.2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4, 7.8-PeCDF u 0.5
1,2,3.4.7.8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,6.7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0. I
2,3,4,6.7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3.4.6. 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1.2,3.4. 7,8,9-HpCDF u I 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
100024\0el\Ar\0002\RMult:s.
00042
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
lJ
u
u
u
0.63
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.63
I
I
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue I WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Adjusted I
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF Concentration
(ng/kg) (ng/kg) I
DS-1 2,3,7,8-TCDD u u I
L variegatus 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 0.5 u
11/30/99 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 0. 1 u I (% Solid 12 1) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1 u
(% Lipid 2 39) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1 u
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 59.02 0.01 0.59 I OCDD 623.00 0.001 0.62
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 0.1 u I 1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDF u 0.05 u
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF u 0.5 u
1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF u 0. 1 u I 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1 u
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1 u
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1 u I 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF u 0.01 u
1,2,3,4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u 0.01 u
OCDF 58.09 0.001 0.058 I
Total 1.3 I
I
I
I
I
I
1000"24\Del\Ar\0002\RHU~ I 000~15
1:
I
I Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
I Adjusted
I Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF Concentration
(ng/kg) (ng/kg)
I US-1 2,3, 7,8-TCDD u 1 u
L. variegatus 1,2.3,7,8-PeCDD u 0.5 u
I l I /30/99 1.2,3,4,7.8-HxCDD u 0.1 u
(% Solid I 3 9) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1 u
I (% Lipid 2.32) 1,2,3,7.8,9-HxCDD u 0.1 u
1,2,3,4,6, 7.8-HpCDD 1510.12 0.01 I 5 .1
OCDD 15699.32 0.001 15.7
I 2,3,7,8-TCDF u 0.1 u
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05 u
2,3,4, 7.8-PeCDF u 0.5 u
I 1,2.3,4,7.8-HxCDF u 0.1 u
1,2,3.6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1 u
I 1.2,3.7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1 u
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1 u
1.2,3.4,6. 7,8-HpCDF 727.78 0.01 7.3
I 1.2.3.4. 7.8.9-HpCDF u 0.01 u
OCDF 5053.32 0.001 5.1
1·: Total 43.2
I
I
I
I
I
I \00024\0el\Ar\DCX)2\Resurts 000•14
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
DS-3 2,3, 7,8-TCDD 28.63 1
L. variegatus 1,2,3.7,8-PeCDD u 0.5
l 1 /30/99 1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid 1 IO) 1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid 2.24) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 56.40 0.01
OCDD 634.84 0.001
2,3, 7,8-TCDF 183.2 0.1
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4.7,8-PeCDF u 0.5
1,2,3,4.7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,6, 7.8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1.2.3,4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
\00024\0el\A,r\0002\Resutts
00047
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
28.6
LT
u
u
u
0.56
0.63
18.3
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
48.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
••
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
•
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
DS-2 2,3,7,8-TCDD 33.97
L. variegatus i,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD u 0.5
1 1 /30/99 1,2,3.4.7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid 119) 1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid 1.57) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD u 0.01
OCDD 965.30 0.001
2,3,7,8-TCDF 460.6 0.1
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4, 7,8-PeCDF u 0.5
1.2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
l.2.3,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4.6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1,2.3.4, 7,8.9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
\00024\Del\Ar\0002\Res;u~
00046
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
34
u
u
u
u
u
0.97
46.1
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
81.1
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
DFBLK2 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 1
12/08/99 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 0.5
(% Solid 100) 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid O 0) 1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD u 0. l
1,2,3, 7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD u 0.01
OCDD u 0.001
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4,7.8-PeCDF u 0.5
1,2,3.4.7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0. l
1,2,3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1,2,3,4, 7,8,9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
100024\Del\Ar\0002\Resuns
00049
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration· TEF
(ng/kg)
ABS 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 1
L. variegatus 1,2.3, 7,8-PeCDD u 0.5
1.2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid: 2.6) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid 148) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD u 0.01
OCDD 1290 0.001
2,3,7.8-TCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7.8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4, 7. 8-PeCDF u 0.5
1,2,3.4.7.8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3.6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2.3,7.8,9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4.6.7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2.3.4.6. 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1.2.3.4. 7.8.9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF 192 0.001
Total
\00024\Delv.r\0002\Rnu~
0004~
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
u
1.29
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.192
1.5
. -

-
.
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
. (ng/kg)
Control 2,3,7,8-TCDD u
E. foetida 1,2.3.7,8-PeCDD u 0.5
I 1 /25/99 1,2,3,4. 7.8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid 12 7) 1.2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid 2 79) 1.2,3, 7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1.2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD u 0.01
OCDD 76.07 0.001
2.3.7.8-TCDF u 0.1
1.2.3.7.8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4,7.8-PeCDF u 0.5
1,2,3,4.7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2,3. 7,8,9-HxCDF u .. 0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF · u 0.1
1.2,3.4.6, 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1.2.3.4. 7,8.9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
100024\Dell.Ar\0002\Re!!iUl'ts. 00051
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.076
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.076
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
Background 2.3,7,8-TCDD u 1
E. foetida 1,2,3,7.8-PeCDD u 0.5
11/20/99 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid 124) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0. 1
(% Lipid 441) 1,2,3, 7,8, 9-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD u 0.01
OCDD 93.5 0.001
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4, 7.8-PeCDF u 0.5
1,2.3,4,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,6.7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4,6.7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3.4,6. 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1.2.3.4. 7,8.9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
\0002A\Dl!L\A.r\0002\Rnu~ 00050
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.093
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.093
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence ·summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
US-1 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 1
E. foetida 1.2,3, 7,8-PeCDD u 0.5
11/25/99 1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid 8 8) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid 3 85) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD u 0.01
OCDD 525.83 0.001
2,3. 7,8-TCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF u 0.5
1.2,3,4.7.8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3.4.6, 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1.2,3.4.7,8,9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF 154. 74 0.001
Total
\00024\Del\Ar\0002\Resu~
00053
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.53
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.15
0.68
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1•
I
I
I
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
US REF-1 2.3,7,8-TCDD u
E. foetida 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 0.5
11/25/99 1.2.3.4,7.8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid 113) 1.2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(°/4 L .. d O 01) o 1p1 : J.J-1,2,3, 7,8, 9-HxCDD u 0. 1
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD u 0.01
OCDD 929.79 0.001
2,3,7.8-TCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05
2.3,4.7,8-PeCDF u 0.5
1.2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2.3.6.7.8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2.3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2,3,4.6, 7.8-HpCDF u 0.01
1,2,3.4, 7.8.9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
100024\Del\Ar\0002\Resu~
0005:..!
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.93
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.93
Table I . 5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
ABS 2,3.7,8-TCDD u
E. foetida 1.2.3.7.8-PeCDD u 0.5
I 1/25/99 1.2,3,4, 7.8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid 184) 1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid 1 5 7) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD u 0.01
OCDD 40.07 0.001
2.3, 7.8-TCDF u 0.1
1.2.3, 7.8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4, 7.8-PeCDF u 0.5
1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2,3.6.7.8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,7,8.9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2.3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1,2,3.4. 7.8.9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
\00024\Del\Ar\0002\Results 0005,
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.04
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
0.04
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF
(ng/kg)
DS-1 2,3, 7,8-TCDD u
E. foetida 1.2,3.7,8-PeCDD u 0.5
11/25/99 1.2,3,4.7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Solid 10 7) 1.2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1
(% Lipid 2 58) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1
1.2.3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 45.87 0.01
OCDD 622.84 0.001
2,3, 7,8-TCDF 104.9 0.1
1,2,3,7.8-PeCDF u 0.05
2,3,4,7.8-PeCDF u 0.5
1,2,3.4. 7.8-HxCDF u 0.1
1.2,3.6. 7.8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2.3.7,8.9-HxCDF u 0.1
2,3,4,6.7.8-HxCDF u 0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF u 0.01
1.2.3,4. 7.8.9-HpCDF u 0.01
OCDF u 0.001
Total
\00024\0el\Ar\0002\Re,utts
0005-1-
Adjusted
Concentration
(ng/kg)
u
u
u
u
u
0.46
0.62
10.5
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
11.6
I
I
Table 1.5 (cont.) Toxicity Equivalence Summary for Dioxin in Tissue I WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based·on dry weight
Adjusted I
Sample ID Compound Concentration TEF Concentration
(ng/kg) (ng/kg) I
DS-2 2,3,7,8-TCDD u 1 u I
E. foetida 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD u 0.5 u
11/25/99 1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD u 0.1 u I (% Solid 8 1) 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD u 0.1 u
(% Lipid 2 03) 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD u 0.1 u
1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD u 0.01 u I OCDD 507.47 0.001 0.51
2,3,7,8-TCDF u 0.1 u I 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF u 0.05 u
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF u 0.5 u
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1 u I 1,2,3,6.7,8-HxCDF u 0.1 u
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF u 0.1 u
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF u 0.1 u I 1,2,3,4.6. 7.8-HpCDF u 0.01 u
1,2,3,4, 7,8.9-HpCDF u 0.01 u I OCDF u 0.001 u
Total 0.51 I
I
I
I
I
I
\000241.Del\Ar\0002\Resutts 00055 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
QA/QC for BNA in Tissue
Results of the Surrogate Recoveries for BNA in Tissue
Prior to extraction, each sample was spiked with an eight component surrogate mixrure consisting of nitrobenzene-d,, 2-
fluorobiphenyl. terphenyl-d,., phenol-ct;, 2-fluorophenol. 2.4,6-tribromophenol. 2-chlorophenol-d4, and l.2-
dichlorobenzene-d4. The surrogate percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.1, ranged from 23 to 134. All 216 surrogate
recoveries were within acceptable QC limits. ·
Results of the MS/MSD Analvsis for BNA in Tissue
The samples ABS-L. Variegatus and ABS -E. foetida were chosen for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSDl
analyses. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.2, ranged from 31 to 125. Fony-one out of 44 percent recoveries were
within the acceptable QC limits. The RPD values, also listed in Table 2.2, ranged from 2 to 68. Eighteen out of 22 RPD
values were within the acceptable QC limits.
Results of the LCS/LCSD Analvsis for BNA in Tissue
The percent recoveries for the LCS/LCSD analyses, listed in Table 2.3, ranged from 59 to 96. Forry-three out of 44
percent recoveries were within the acceptable QC limits. The RPD values also listed in Table 2.3, ranged from O (zero) to
I 8. Eighteen out of 22 RPD values were within the acceptable QC limits.
•(l'()Z.I\D(L;A RIOOJ~IROANOJ.: AR
00058
I
Table 2.1 Results of the Surrogate Percent Recoveries for BNA in Tissue I
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
I
Sample No. Surr. l Surr. 2 Surr. 3 Surr. 4 Surr. 5 Surr.6 Surr. 7 Surr. 8 I SBLK.2 74 84 97 73 66 64 70 72
SBLKI 62 70 76 70 65 81 68 65
LCS2 75 91 102 77 71 75 74 76 I LCSD2 72 83 96 69 64 70 66 69
Background -E. Foetida 82 95 97 74 69 88 74 80
Control -E. Foetida 80 99 103 70 66 95 71 75
US REF-I -E. Foetida 78 92 96 66 63 88 67 76 I US-I -E. Foetida 79 97 97 61 58 88 64 72
DS-1 -E. Foetida 75 89 82 54 51 78 56 70
DS-2 -E. Foetida 65 77 72 47 50 70 51 62 I ABS -E. Foetida 69 80 96 54 47 80 54 62
ABS -E. Foetida (MS) 84 99 87 61 57 84 63 77
ABS -E. Foetida (MSD) 73 81 72 56 57 71 56 64
DS-3 -E Foetida (Dil.) 60 86 86 62 59 59 61 70 I DS-3 -E Foetida 79 96 104 76 72 86 71 80
LCSI 58 66 76 62 58 74 61 61
LCSDI 56 66 82 63 55 80 60 58 I ABS-L. Variegatis (MS) 68 77 96 70 63 94 67 63
ABS-L. Variegatis (MSD) Tl 96 90 58 58 78 60 69
Control -L. Variegatis 37 68 111 51 32 99 41 26
REF -I -L. V ariegatis 34 67 118 54 33 96 44 23 I l/S-1 -L. Variegatis 78 90 128 77 74 IOI 75 70
DS-1 -L. V anegaus 68 81 I 16 68 .62 94 66 62
Ds-:, -L. V ariegatis -l2 70 109 52 37 85 46 29
ABS -L. Variegatis T: .. 88 98 59 58 80 60 64 I Background -L. Variegatis 42 61 81 53 39 79 44 28
DS-2 -L. Vanegaus ..i:, 68 134 56 44 70 49 30
Surrogate Limits I
Soil
Surr I • NI trobcnzcnc-d5 (23 -120) I Surr 2 = 2-Fluorobiphenyl (30-115)
Surr > = lc-rphenvl-d I 4 (18-137)
Sun -l = Phcnol-d5 (24-113) I Surr 5 = 2 -Fl uorophcnol (25 -121)
Surr t, = :'. .-t _(,-Tnbromophenol (19 -122)
Sun 7 = 2-Chlorophenol-d4 (20 -130)
Surr X • l .2-D1chlorobenzene-d4 (20 -130) I
I
I
I
'DOC2•\DeJIAl'OOO:Nle-I OOOS~l
I
I Table 2.2 RCIW~ of lhc MS/MSD Analysis for BNA in Tissue
WA # 0-024 Roanoke River Si~
I Based on Dry Wci{tht
I Sample ID: ABS -L. varic8arus
MS MSD
I Sample Spike MS MS Spike MSO MSD QC Limits
Con,. Added Cone. %, Addod Coao. %,
Compound'Namc •!lilts •!lilts µ.~kg R". •!lilts "g/kg Rec. RPO %Rec. RPO
I Phenol 1600 160000 110000 68 150000 82000 14 23 26 • 9() 35
2-Chlorophcnol l. 160000 110000 69 150000 94000 63 9 21 10::! 10
I 1.4-Dichlorobcnzcnc C 110000 72000 61 99000 74000 71 13 28 104 27
n-NitrosCKii-n-propylaminc l. 110000 85000 77 99000 80000 81 4 41 126 38
l .2.4-Trichlorobcnzcne l. 110000 77000 70 99000 80000 81 14 38 -107 23
I 4-Chloro-3-mcthylphcnol l. 160000 120000 75 150000 67000 41 II 26 · 103 33
Accnaphthcnc l. 110000 74000 67 99000 76000 77 13 31 -137 19
4-Nitrophcno! ,. 160000 100000 63 150000 46000 31 68 II - I 14 10
2.4-Dinitrotolucnc ,. 110000 79000 72 99000 70000 71 2 28 • 89 47
I Pcn1.achlorophcno! 1· 160000 140000 88 150000 77000 11 12 17 -109 47
Py-rcnc ,. 110000 92000 84 99000 77000 78 7 31 -142 36
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I .:«;•..:-,,,00:Hl .... ,
00060
I
Table 2.2 (oon.L) Rcmlta of the~ Analysis for BNA in Tiauc I
WA # <Ml24 Roanoke River Sile
Bacd on Dry Weight I
Sample ID: ABS· E. foetida I
MS MSD
Sample Spike MS MS Spik, MSD MSD QCLimita
Cone. Added Con<. o✓il Added Con,. o✓o
Compowid Name µg!k, µg/k.g µg!k, Rec. µg/kg µg/kg Rec. RPD %Rec. RPD I
Phenol l' 63000 37000 59 73000 39000 5l 9 26 . 90 35 I
2-Chlorophcnol t· 63000 44000 70 73000 45000 62 12 25 -102 lO
1.4-Dich.lorobcnzcnc: C 42000 33000 . 79 49000 34000 69 12 28 -104
n-Nilroso-di-n-propylaminc: l' 42000 38000 90 49000 35000 71 24 41 • 126
l .:!.4-Trichlorobcnzcnc: C 42000 37000 88 49000 36000 7, 18 38 • 107
27 I 38
23
4-Chloro-3-mcthylphcnol l' 63000 54000 86 73000 91000 125 37 26 · 103
Accnaphthcnc: C 42000 40000 95 49000 39000 80 18 31 • 137
4-l\"ilrophcnol L. 63000 77000 12:i. 73000 82000 112 8 11 -114
3l
191
50
:!.4-Dinilrotolucnc: t· 42000 4l000 98 49000 39000 80 20 28 • 89 47
Pcntachlorophcnol l. 63000 68000 108 73000 62000 Bl 24 17 • 109
Pyrcnc t· 42000 30000 71 49000 30000 61 ll 35 -142 471 36
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0006.1 I
I Table 2.3 Results of the LCSILCSD Aml}'UI for BNA in Tiaue
WA it 0-024 Ro&nokc ~ Sitt:
I
Sued on Dry Weight
LCS-1 LCS LCS LCS LCSD ·Leso LCSD
Known Found % Known Found % R=xnmcndod
I Cone. Con,. Rec. Cone. Con,. R«. RPD QCLimiu
Compound Name -~ ..,.. (%) -~ . .,.. (%) (%) Cone.(%) RPD
I Phenol 2500 1500 60 2500 ·1500 60 0 3? -95 14
2-Chlorophcnol 2500 1600 64 2500 1500 60 6 ... -96 14
1.4-Dichlorobcn:zcnc 1700 l)OO 6l . )700 1000 l9 10 54 -90 1"
n-NitrosCM!i-n-propylaminc 1700 1100 6l 1700 1200 71 9 44 -110 9
I
1,2.4-T richlorobenzcnc 1700 1100 65 1700 1000 59 10 so -98 13
4-Chloro-3-mcthylphcnol 2500 1700 68 2500 2000 80 16 • 40 -101 15
Accnaphthenc 1700 l l00 6l 1700 IIOO 6l 0 49 -99 16
4-Nitrophcnol 2500 1800 72 2500 2000 80 11 45 -_ 96 14
2.4-Dinitrotolucnc 1700 1200 71 1700 1400 82 ll 36 -I I~ 17
I Pcnuchlorophcnol 2500 1900 76 2500 2000 80 l 34 -117 14
Pyrcnc 1100 1200 71 1700 1100 6l 9 37 -95 14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 0006~ -
Table 2.3 (cont.) RcsuJ11 of the LCS/LCSD Analysis for BNA in Tiauc
WA # 0-024 Roanoke R,jvcr Site I
Rued on Dry Weight
LCS·2 LCS LCS LCS LCSO LCSO LCSO
Known Found % """"" Fom,d %
I
Rccammcncled
Con,. Cano. Roo. Cano. Con,. Roo.
CompoW!.d Name •J!lk• •J!lk• (%) •J!lk• •J!lkE (%)
RPO QC Limi.u
(%) Cone.(%) RPO I
Phenol 15000 . 12000 80 15000 l0000 67
2-Chlorophenol 15000 12000 80 15000 11000 73
1.4-Dichlorobcnzc:pc: 10000 8200 82 l0000 7200 72
n-Niiroso-di-n-propylamine 10000 6900 69 10000 6100 61
l.2.4• T richlorobcnzcne 10000 8000 80 10000 7800 78
18 • 37 -95 14
9 44 -96 14 I 1:.:: • 54 -90 12
12 • 44 -110 9
50 -98 13
4-Chloro-:;-methylphenol 15000 12000 80 15000 1l000 73
Acc:naphthene 10000 8700 87 10000 8100 81
4-Nitrophenol 15000 11000 73 15000 1l000 73
2.4•Dinitrotoluene l0000 7700 77 10000 7300 73
9 40 -101 11 I 7 49 -99 16
0 45 -96 14
36 -115 17
Penuchiorophcno! 15000 12000 80 15000 11000 1:,
P~TCne 10000 9600 96 • l0000 8900 89
9 34 -117 14 I 8 3'7 -95 14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
00063 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
QA/QC for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
Results of the Surrogate Percent Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
Prior to extraction. each sample was spiked with the surrogates tetrachloro-m-xylene and decachlorobiphenyl. The
surrogate percent recoveries from the primary and secondary columns, listed in Table 2.4. ranged from 47 to 157. One
hundred fifty-sjx out of 177 surrogate percent recoveries were within acceptable QC limits. Thirry-one surrogate
recoveries were diluted out.
Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
The samples ABS -L. Yariegatus and ABS -E. foetida were used for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSDl
analyses. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2.5, ranged from 60 to 156. All 38 reponed percent recoveries were
within the acceptable QC limits. The RPD values, also listed in Table 2.5, ranged from O (zero) to 47. Fifteen out of
sixteen reponed RPD values were within the acceptable QC limits. Fifty percent recoveries and 28 RPD values were not
calculated due to dilutions of the QC samples.
Results of the LCS/LCSD Analvsis for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
The percent recoveries for the LCS/LCSD analyses, listed in Table 2.6, ranged from 32 to 138. Eighty-seven out of 88
percent recoveries were within the acceptable QC limits. The RPD values also listed in Table 2.6. ranged from O (zero) to
28. All 44 RPD values were within the acceptable QC limits.
'ff01-IIDE L \AR \OOJ~IR OA NOi-: AR
0006--l
Table 2.4 Results of the Surrogate Percent Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Percent Recovery (%) for Pesticides Analysis
Sample ID TCMX-1 TCMX-2 DCB-I DCB-2
SBLK-1
LCS-1
LCSD-1
Background (L. variegarus)
Control(L. variegarus)
REF-I (L variegarus)
US-I (L. variegarus)
DS-1 (L. vanegarus)
DS-2 (L. variegatus)
DS-3 (L. vanegatus)
ABS (L. variegatus)
ABS-MS (L. variegarus) .
ABS-MSD (L. vanegatus)
T etrachloro-m-xvlene (TCMX)
Decachlorobiphenvl (DCB)
Sample ID.
SBLK-1
LCS-1
LCSD-1
Hackg:round (L variegatus)
Control (L vanegatus)
REF-I (L. vanegatus)
lJS-1 (I.. vancgatus)
DS-1 ( L vanegatus l
llS-2 (L vanegatus)
DS-> (L vanegatus)
/\JJS (L. vanegatus)
ABS-MS (L vanegatus)
i\lJS-MSD (L. vanegatus)
Tctrachloro-m-xvlene rTCMX)
Decachlorobiphenvl (DCB)
80 76 89 93
86 80 !05 !08
84 69 104 102
D 71 I 13 D
89 47 !08 D
D 62 88 D
95 59 90 D
99 83 89 D
D 78 130 D
D 72 97 D
D 108 97 D
D !08 98 136
D I 17 83 132
ADVISORY
QC
Limits
(47-118)
(57 -143)
Percent Recovery (%) for PCB Analysis
TCMX - I TCMX - 2 DCB - I DCB - 2
90 102 94 104
9=-112 I 13 102
Jl)(I 108 99 102
8~ 10~ 69 69
8'J 99 79 91
x,, 102 79 89
7' 98 83 109
111: 119 • 81 90
91< 86 78 89
8-109 76 90
92 1211 • 81 91
911 112 68 89
I 1111 121 • 84 97
ADVISORY
QC
L1m1ts
(49 -109)
(55 -125)
00065
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Table 2.4 (cont.) Results of the Surrogate Pen:ent Recoveries for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
WA # 0-024 Roanoke River Site
·sample ID
SBLK-2
LCS-2
LCSD-2
Background (E. foetida)
Control (E. foetida)
US REF-I (E. foetida)
US-I (E. foetida)
DS-1 (E. foetida)
DS-2 (E. foetida)
DS-3 (E. foetida)
ABS (E foellda)
ABS-MS (E. foetida)
ABS-MSD (E. foetida) ·
Tetrachloro-m-xvlene (TCMX)
Decachlorob1phenvl (DCB)
Sample ID
SBLK-2
LCS-2
LCSD-2
Background (E. foeuda)
Control (E. foetida)
US REF-I CE. foetidal
US-I (E. foctidaj
JlS-1 (E. foeudal
llS-2 (E. foctida J
DS-3 /E. foctida)
i\!JS ([. foetida J
ABS-MS (E foetida)
ABS-MSD (E. ioetida)
Tctrachloro-rn-xylene (TCtvfX)
Dccachlorob1phcnvl (DCB)
'00024~7111.•-
Percent Recovery (%)
TCMX -I TCMX-2 DCB-I DCB-2
75 74 94 67
77 76 98 70
84 83 104 75
98 73 100 100
D D 86 123
D 83 113 D
D D 109 D
D 95 115 D
D 81 135 D
D 67 125 111
106 56 86 97
D D 99 90
D D 96 89
ADVISORY
QC
Lmuts
(47-118)
(52 -143)
Percent Recovery(%) for PCB Analysis
TCMX -

I

TCMX -2 DCB -I DCB -2
92 108 124 148 '
I l (1 • 119 ' 128 • 128'
I l ~ • l l 9 • 123 133'
109 I,' ,_ 113 120
1 11. • )45 • 114 122
IOI 1~::. 103 109
I0' 157 • 100 110
](/(, 121. • 108 111
I {)l) l 2X • 108 113
1()8 127 • 106 I 18
9S 106 108 120
9(1 105 96 98
100 106 95 123
ADVISORY
QC
L1m1ts
(49 -109)
(55-125)
00066
Sample JD: ABS -L. variegatis
Sample
Cone.
Compound Name µg,kg
alpha-BHC L"
beta-BHC L"
gamma-BHC (Lindane) L"
delta-BHC L"
Heptachlot L"
Aldrin L"
Heptachlor epoxide L.
Endosulfan l L"
4.4'-DDE t·
Dicldrin L"
Encino L.
Endosulfan II L.
4.4'-DDD C
Endosulfan sulfate t·
4.4'-DDT l.
Endrm aldeh:vde L"
~1ethoxychlor C
alpha-Chlordane L.
gamma-Chlordane t·
Endrin ketone t·
Arodor-1016 L.
Aroc!or-1260 L.
Table 2.5 Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
WA # 0.024 Roanoke River Site
Based on Dry Weight
MS MSD
Spike MS MS Spike MSD -MSD
Added Cone % Added Cone. %,
µg,kg µg,kg Rec. µg,kg µg,kg Rec.
ll2 207 NC 508 t.: NC
55: L" NC 508 1550 NC
552 L" NC 508 t.: NC
552 L. NC 508 L' NC
55: t.: NC 508 u NC
ll2 1030 1'C 508 1120 NC
ll: 1080 NC 508 2120 NC
552 87.8 NC 508 71.8 NC
55: 400 72 508 479 94
55: 1220 NC l08 716 NC
55: 3190 ~c 508 1320 NC
55: t.: NC 508 u NC
552 L. NC 508 Li NC
55:: l7l 104 508 882 r,;c
ss: 8l9 1 l6 508 490 96
ss: t.: ~c 508 C NC
2210 22l0 102 2030 C NC
55: t.: NC l08 t.: NC
552 379 69 508 310 61
5 5: 1260 ~c 508 1280 NC
lk400 14600 79 19700 17100 87
\k400 11800 64 19700 14200 72
00067
I
I
I
I
QC Limits I ·RPD %Rec. RPD
NC 47 -122 29 I
NC 37 -125 32
NC 42 -129 31 I NC 42 -140 31
NC 10 · 170 29
NC 33 · 119 30 I NC 40 -124 29
r-:c 20 -119 30
26 4l -128 31
NC 42 -134 30 I NC 23 -170 30
NC 23 • 134 26
NC 30 • 168 29 I NC II • 170 3
47 44 -157 29
NC 10 -170 30 I NC 59 • 156 29
NC 43 -13l 28
12 2l · ll6 29 I NC 37 -170 28
9 l3 -100 23
12 50 -107 24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Table 2.5 (cont) Rcsuhs of the MS/MSO Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Tissue
WA # 0-024 Roanoke River Sitt
I Based on Dry Weight
I' Sample ID: ABS -E. foetida
MS MSO
I Sample Spike" MS MS Spike MSO MSO QC Limits
Cone. Adaed Cone. % Adaed Cone. •,,
Compound Name µg,kg µg,kg µg,kg Rec. µg,kg µg,kg Rec. . RPO' %Rec. RPO
I alpha-BHC l' 267 291 109 239 194 81 29 47 . 1:::::: 29
I bci.a-BHC l' 267 l' 1'C 239 l' NC NC 37 -125 3,
gamma-BHC {Lindanc) l' 267 246 92 239 172 72 2l 42 · 129 31
delta-BHC l' 267 159 60 239 l' NC NC 42 -140 31
Heptachlor l' 267 253 9l 239 242 IOI 7 10 -170 29
I Aldrin l' 267 213 80 239 172 72 JO 33 -I 19 30
Hcptachlor cpoxide l' 267 256 96 239 223 93 3 40 · 124 29
Endosulfan l l' 267 l' NC 239 L NC NC 20 · 119 30
I 4.4'-DDE l. 267 l. SC 239 t.: NC NC 4l · 128 31
Dicldrin l' 26{ 217 81 239 u NC NC 42 -134 30
Endrin l' 267 t· NC 239 u NC NC 23 -170 30
Endosulfan II l' 267 215 81 239 202 u 5 23 134 26
I 4.4'-DDD l' 261 t· NC 239 266 ill NC 30 -168 29
Endosulfan sulfate l' 26' 263 99 239 232 97 I II · 170 31
4.4'-DDT t· 267 ,-t<C 239 l' NC NC 44 -\l7 29
I Endnn aldehyde t· 26i t· r-::c 239 l' NC NC 10 . 170 30
:-...lcthoxychlor 1· 1070 1400 131 938 I 160 124 6 l9 -156 29
alpha-Chlordane l' 267 IOI SC 239 89.2 NC NC 43 -13~ 28
I gamma-Chlordane 1· 267 290 109 239 226 95 14 25 -156 29
Endrin ketone t· 26' 79.H 1':C 239 21l 90 NC 37 . 170 28
Aroclor-1016 l' 9620 7080 74 7580 5830 77 4 53 -100 23
I Aroclor-1260 t· 9620 8020 83 7580 6320 83 0 50 -107 24
I
I
I
I
I
-"«1•.:-,ooc,-.. .......
uuo~ -
I
Table 2.6 Rcsu.lts of the LCSJI...CSD Ana.lyais for Pcaticick/PCB in Timk
WA # 0-024 R.oa:rtoke River Site I
Bucd on Dry Wei@ht
LCS·l LCS LCS LCS LCSD LCSD LCSD
Known Found % Known Found •,o
I
Rec c d d
Con,. Con,. Rec. =· =· Roe. RPD
Compound Name sg/kg sg/kg (%) sgiks sg/kg (%) (%)
QC Limiu I Cone.(%) RPD
alpha•BHC 8.33 7.05 85 8.33 6.85 82
bct.a-BHC 8.33 7.38 89 8.33 7.34 88 I
gamma•BHC (Lin°dane) 8.33 7.49 90 8.33 7.04 85 6 ..
delt.a-BHC 8.33 3.52 42 8.33 2.66 3:' • 28
47 -121 29 I 37 -125 32
42 -129 31
4:! -140 31
HcptACh1or 8.33 7.68 92 8.33 7.4:' 89
Aldrin 8.33 7.63 92 8.33 5.90 71 26
HcptAChlor epoxidc 8.33 6.95 83 8.33 6.48 78 7
Endosulfan l 8.33 5.06 61 8.33 4.99 60
10 -170 29 I 33 -119 30
40 -124 29
20 -119 30
4.4'-DDE 8.33 7.24 87 8.33 7.09 85 2
Dic:ldrin 8.33 7.45 89 8.33 7.38 89
Endrin 8.33 8.1 I 97 8.33 8.50 102
45 -128 31 I 42 -13J 30
23 -170 30
Endosulfan II 8.33 7.11 85 8.33 6.92 83 23 -134 26
4.4'-DDD 8.33 9.29 II:! 8.33 10.7 128 14
Endosulfan sulfate 8.33 8.28 99 8.33 7.90 95 5
4.4"•DDT 8.33 10.1 121 8.33 9.39 113 7
30 -168 29
II -170 31 I 44 -157 29
Endrin aldehyde 8.33 7.92 95 8.33 6.57 79 19 10 -170 30
!\.1cthoxychlor 33 . .:-45.8 138 33.3 45.0 135 2
alpha-Chlordane 8.3::i. 7.39 89 8.33 7.09 85 4
gamma•Chlordane 8.33 7.34 88 8.33 7.28 87
Endrin ketone 8.33 8.05 97 8.33 7.75 93 4
59 -156 29
43 -135 28 I 25 -156 29
37 -170 28
Aroclor• 1016 300 236 79 300 237 79 0 l3 -100 23
Aroclor-1260 300 287 96 300 266 89 8 50 -107 24 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0006~➔ I
I Table 2.6 (cont.) Rcsulu of the LCS/LCSD Analysis for Pesticide/PCB in Tiauc
WA ,i 0-024 Roanoke R.;vcr Site
Baaed on Dry Wci¢it
I
I
LCS-1 LCS LCS LCS LCSD LCSD LCSD
Mown Found %, Mown Found o,o R,oommondcd
Cone. Cone. Rec. Con,. Cano. Rco. RPD QC Limiu
Compo1D1d Name ,gilts •gilts (%) •g/kg .glkg (o/·) (%,) Cone.(%) RPD
I
I
alpha-BHC so.o 42.3 " so.o 48.2 96 1, 47 -I" 29
bcta-BHC ·so.o 46.6 93 50.0 51.9 104 II 37 -l:?~ 32
~amma-BHC (Lindanc) 50.0 43.l 86 50.0 48.2 96 II 42 -129 31
dcha-BHC 50.0 48.5 97 50.0 53.3 107 9 42 -140 31
Heptachlor 50.0 48.5 97 so.o 53.3 107 9 10 -1'70 29
Aldrin 50.0 42.8 86 so.a 46.9 94 9 33 -119 30
Hcptachlor cpox.idc so.a 45.3 91 50.0 49.5 99 9 40 -124 29
Endosulfan I 50.0 33.0 66 50.0 36.0 72 9 20 -119 30
I 4.4'-DDE 50.0 45.9 92 50.0 48.8 98 6 45 -128 JI
Dicldrin 50.0 44.8 90 50.0 48.6 97 s 42 -134 30
Endrin 50.0 49.3 99 50.0 54.4 109 10 ,. 170 JO __ , -
Endosulfan II 50.0 40.4 81 50.0 43.8 88 8 23 -134 26
I
I
4.4'-DDD 50.0 47.6 95 50.0 52.0 104 9 30 -168 29
Endosulfan sulfate 50.0 50.4 IOI 50.0 55.0 110 9 II -170 31
4.4'-DDT 50.0 48.8 98 50.0 54.4 109 11 4-l -157 29
Endrin aldehyde 50.0 46.3 93 50.0 50.4 IOI 8 10 -170 30
~tetho~chlor 200 234 117 200 258 129 10 59 -156 29
alpha-Chlordane 50.0 50.3 IOI 50.0 54.8 110 Q 43 -135 28
gamma-Chlordane 50.0 47.1 94 50.0 51.6 103 Q 25 -I 56 29
Endrin ketone 50.0 54.6 109 50.0 19.0 ll8 8 37 -170 28
Aroclor-1016 1800 1660 92 1800 1640 91 53 -100 23
I Aroclor-1260 1800 1900 106 1800 1840 102 50 -107 24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 00070
-
QA/QC for Metals in Tissue
I
I
I
Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Metals in Tissue I
The samples ABS -L. variegatus and ABS -E. foetida were used for the MS/MSD analyses. The percent recoveries.
listed in Table 2. 7. ranged from 8 to 166. Eigbty-five out of 92 percent recoveries were within acceptable QC limits. The 1 RPO-values also listed in Table 2.7, ranged from O (zero) to 27. Forty-five out of 46 RPD values were within the ·
acceptable QC limits.
Results of tr<e LCS/LCSD Analysis for Metals in Tissue
The percent recoveries for the LCS/LCSD analyses. listed in Table 2.8. ranged from 79 to 104. Fony-four out of 46
recovered concentrations were within the acceptable QC limits. The RPD values also listed in Table 2.8. ranged from 0
1zero) to 2. All 23 RPD values were within the acceptable QC limits.
lU'J~JIOCL ;ARICXXT.!IROANOK AR
00071
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Table 2.7 Rc:sultJ oflhc MS/MSO Amlysil for Mctah in Tiauc
WA" 0-024 Roanoke River Site
I
Rued on Dry Weight
Sample ID: ABS • L. varicgatus
MS MSD
Sample: Spike MS MS Spik:c MSD ~iSD Rccommcndod
I = Addod Con, ·~ Added = .,, QC Lunill
Mcul mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg R<C mg/kg mg/kg Re:: RPO %Rec RPO
I Aluminum 514.6500 7692.31 8669.1615 106 7692.31 8650.5308 106 0 75-125 20
Anlimony t: 1923.08 1696.9538 88 1923.08 1779.0192 93 75-125 20
Ancnic 21.1846 7692.31 7663.6923 99 7692.31 7220.1615 94 6 75-125 20
Barium 4046.4577 7692.31 11628.7269 99 7692..31 11484.5923 97 75-125 20
B~llium L' 192.31 188.9923 98 192.31 1&4.7885 96 ' 75-125 20
I Cadmium 26.9077 192.31 213.6115 97 19231 208.0962 94 3 75-125 20
Calcium 9300.4769 76923.08 83992.3962 97 76923.08 82512.9346 95 ' 75-125 20
Chromium 6. 1346 769.23 777.1846 100 769.23 763.4500 98 ' '75-125 20
Cob.alt 13.2962 1923.08 1938.1346 100 1923.08 1888.9154 98 75-125 20
I Copper 169.6923 961.54 1050.6115 9, 961.54 1043.2231 91 75-125 20
l,o, 13197.3885 3846.15 16209.3962 78 3846.15 16302.8038 81 75-125 20
Lc.1.d 8.7423 1923.08 1888.0923 98 1923.08 1814.2423 94 • 75-125 20
M.1.gncsium 5815.0731 76923.08 82288.3692 99 76923.08 79515.5192 96 75-125 20
M.1.ng.1.ncse 90.9077 1923.08 2010.0923 100 1923.08 1971.8500 98 2 75-125 20
I Mercury L' 10.07 16.6209 165 • 10.07 16.7216 166 • 75-125 20
\:ickel L" 1923.08 1912.8038 99 1923.08 1864.9692 97 75-125 20
Potassium 57831.6654 76923.08 121097.0462 " 76923.08 123057.3538 8l ' 75-125 20
Selenium 21.6192 7692.31 7736.4615 !DO 7692.31 6985.0346 91 10 75-125 20
I Silver t: 19:'.3 \ 153.9615 80 192.31 146.4538 76 5 75-125 20
Sodium 34195.1692 76923.01! 96615.3846 81 76923.08 I 07076.9231 9l 10 75-125 20
Thallium l. 7692.31 7636.7885 99 7692.31 7312.7192 95 4 75-125 20
Vanadium t: 1923.08 1899.719'..'! 99 1923.08 1864.7731 97 2 75-125 20
I Zinc 1915.3346 192?-.0I! 373 J .0462 94 1923.08 3621.9846 89 ' 75-125 20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .c:;,..-,.., ... , 0007~
I
Table 2. 7 (conL) Rcaulta of tbc MS/MSD Ana1yaia for Metals in Tiaut
W Ali ()..()24 Roanoke River Site I
Sued on Dry Weight
Sample ID: ABS -E. foetida
MS MSD I
Sample Spike MS MS Spil<, MSD MSD
Cone Add«! Cone % Add«! Conc ,.
Meal mg/kg mglk, mg/kg R« mg/kg mg/kg R" -QCl.mu1'
RPD %R« RPD I
Aluminum 1918.9842 1086.96 2637.5880 66 • 1086.96 2007.2152 8 •
Antimony V 271.74 231.8473 85 271.74 242.6810 89
Ancnic 3.7837 1086.96 1035.4918 95 1086.96 1061.0440 97
Barium 15.9842 1086.96 1076.9440 9g· 1086.96 1108.1696 100
Beryllium i.; 27.17 26.2880 97 27.17 27.0408 100·
Cadmium 0.4000 27.17 26.0739 94 27.17 26.8962 98
Calcium 6881.6277 10869.57 16460.7940 88 10869.57 15447.3391 79
Chromium 2.6913 108.70 108.6217 97 108.70 111.5375 100
Cobalt 1.4446 271.74 266.5375 98 271.74 273.8913 100
27 • 75-125 20
5 75-125 20 I 2 75-125 20
) 75-125 20
) 75-125 20
75-125 20
6 75-125 20 I 75-125 20
) 75-125 20
Col'P" 13.6668 135.87 138.2603 92 135.87 139.3348 92
Iron 573.7533 543.48 988.4821 76 543.48 949.3185 69 •
Lead 2.7837 271.74 257.9000 94 271.74 265.1098 97
Ma~euum 1996.4435 10869.57 12475.9391 96 10869.57 12450.7962 96
Manganese 50.7011 271.74 313.1810 97 271.74 303.6489 93
Mcrcu1"\· t: 1.20 1.9967 166 • 1.20 1.9609 163 •
l'-.ickcl l" 271.74 259.8609 96 271.74 267.8060 99
PotaS51um 9923.5679 10869.57 19426.3418 87 10869.57 19063.2239 84
75-125 20
4 75-125 20 I 75-125 20
0 75-125 20
3 75-125 20
2 75-125 20 I ) 75-125 20
2 75-125 20
Selenium 2.3337 1086.% 1010.3647 93 1086.96 1032.6429 95 2 75-125 20
Silver l. 27. 17 20.5810 76 27.17 21.3875 79
Sodium 4399.8005 10869.57 13902.1739 87 10869.57 14097.8261 89
Thallium t: 1086.96 1040.9380 96 1086.96 1071.3304 99
Vanadium 1.Ml6 271.7J 264.3299 97 271.74 272.0679 100
4 75-125 20
I 75-125 20 I 3 75-125 20
3 75-125 20
Zinc 168.8549 27J.7J 419.6027 92 271.74 399.9185 85 75-125 20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
<<'<lJO'L-«ll,..., .. , 0007.3 I
I
I Table 2.8 Results of the LCS/LCSD AnaJvsis for Metals in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
I Bued on dry weight
LCS LCS LCS LCSD LCSD LCSD
I Known Found %, Kno"11 Found % Recommended
Cone. Cone. Rec. Cone. Cone. Rec. RPD QC Limits
Metal mg/kg mg/kg (%) mg/kg mg/kg (%) (%) Cone. (mg/kg) RPD
I Alumrnum 200.000 197.507 99 200.000 196.819 98 0 160.0 -240.0 20
Antimony 50.000 47.080 94 50.000 46.452 93 40.0 -60.0 20
Arsenic 8.000 7.607 95 8.000 7.737 97 2· 6.4 -9.6 20
I Barium 25.000 24.358 97 25.000 24.180 97 20.0 -30.0 20
Beryllium 5.000 4.878 98 5.000 4.852 97 4.0 -6.0 20
Cadmium 5.000 4.914 98 5.000 4.881 98 4.0 -6.0 20
Calcium 500.000 484.270 97 500.000 480.191 96 400.0 -600.0 20
I Chromium 20.000 19.936 100 20.000 19.833 99 16.0 -24.0 20
Cahall 50.000 49.232 98 50.000 48.992 98 0 40.0 -60.0 20
Copper 25.000 22.155 89 25.000 22.020 88 20.0 -30.0 20
Iron 100.000 100.584 101 100.000 101.309 IOI 80.0 -120.0 20
I Lead 8.000 7.954 99 8.000 7.864 98 6.4 -9.6 20
~fagnesium 500.000 477.864 96 500.000 475.358 95 400.0 -600.0 20
~tanganese 50.000 49.088 98 50.000 48.805 98 40.0 -60.0 20
'.\tercury 0.280 0.289 103 0.280 0.292 104 0.22 -0.35 20
I :\'icke! 50.000 49.650 99 50.000 49.580 99 0 40.0 -60.0 20
Potassium 1000.000 970.176 n 1000.000 963.880 96 800.0 -1200.0 20
Selenium 8.000 7.231 90 8.000 7.306 91 6.4 -9.6 20
Silver 5.000 3.996 ,. 80 5.000 3.934 • 79 2 4.0 -6.0 20
I Sodium 1000.000 999.170 100 1000.000 991.707 99 800.0 -1200.0 20
Thallium 8.000 7.516 94 8.000 7.547 94 0 6.4 -9.6 20
Vanadium 50.000 48.707 97 50.000 48.447 97 40.0 -60.0 20
Zinc 50.000 49.623 99 50.000 49.324 99 40.0 -60.0 20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ::x1•~......,...;oJ,.., ..... , 00074
QA/QC for Dioxin in Tissue
I
I
I
Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Recoveries for Dioxin in Tissue I
Before analysis, each sample was spiked with the PCDD/PCDF labeled compounds "C-2.3,7.8-TCDD, 13C-l.2,3,7.8-
PeCDD, "C-1,2,3.6.7,8-HxCDD, 13C'l,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD, "C-OCDD, "C-2,3,7.8-TCDF, "C-1.2,3,7,8-PeCDF, "C-.
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF. "C-1.2.3,4.6,7.8-HpCDF, and 37Cl-2.3.7.8-TCDD. Toe percent recoveries of the labeled
compounds ranged from 41 to 121. The results of the analysis are listed in Table 2. 9. All 240 percent recoveries were
within the acceptable QC limits.
I
Results of the MS/MSD Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue
The samples ABS (L. variegarus) and ABS (E. foetida) were used for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) I
analyses. The percent recoveries, listed in Table 2. JO, ranged from 53 to 182. Sixty-seven out of 68 percent recoveries
were within the acceptable QC limits. The relative percent differences (RPDs). also listed in Table 2.10. ranged from O 1 (zero) to 84. Thirty-three out of 34 RPO values were within the acceptable QC limits.
Results of the LCS Analvsis for Dioxin in Tissue
The percent recoveries for the LCS analyses, listed in Table 2.11, ranged from 81 to 130. All thirty-four percent
recoveries were within the acceptable QC limits.
100J24\DELIARIOO'.)~\ROANOKAR
00075
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Table 2.9 Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
DFBLKI
12/03/99
(% Solid I 00)
(% Lipid 0.0)
100024\Del\Ar\0002\RHUlts
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site .
Labeled Compound
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD
13C-l,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
13 C-L2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2.3, 7,8-TCDF
13 C-1.2,3, 7,8-PeCDF
13C-l ,2,3,4. 7,8-HxCDF
13C-1.2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2.3,7,8-TCDD
Percent
Recovery
76
72
70
99
87
62
67
69
84
69
00076
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
Background
L variegatus
I 0/31/99
(% Solid 134)
(% Lipid 190)
\00024l0el\Ar\0002\Rnutts
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD
13C-l,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD
13C-l,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
13C-l ,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13 C-2.3, 7,8-TCDF
13 C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF
13 C-1.2.3.4, 7,8-HxCDF
13 C-1.2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF
J1Cl-2,3,7,8-TCDD
Percent
Recovery
77
76
74
95
84
65
71
70
83
62
00077
QC
limits
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Sample ID Labeled Compound
Control 13 C-2.3.7.8-TCDD
L. variegatus 13C-l ,2.3,7.8-PeCDD
I I /29/99 13C-l.2,3.6. 7.8-HxCDD
(% Solid: 114) 13C-l .2.3.4.6.7,8-HpCDD
(% Lipid 2.36) 13C-OCDD
13 C-2,3. 7 .8-TCDF
13C-l .2,3. 7,8-PeCDF
13C-I .2,3.4.7,8-HxCDF
13 (-1.2,3.4.6. 7.8-HpCDF
37Cl-2.3.7.8-TCDD
\00074\0e!\Ar\0002\Rnuta.
Percent
Recovery
57
60
60
78
66
50
58
57
67
50
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Sample ID Labeled Compound
REF-I 13C-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
L variegatus 13C-l.2,3,7,8-PeCDD
11/29/99 13C-l ,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
(% Solid 12 I) 13C-l ,2.3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
(% Lipid 1.36) 13C-OCDD
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF
13C-l.2,3, 7,8-PeCDF
13C-l.2.3,4, 7,8-HxCDF
13C-l ,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2,3.7,8-TCDD
100024\Dell.Al'\0002\Results
Percent
Recovery
74
77
76
100
88
63
74
75
88
69
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
US-1
L variegatus
l l /30/99
(% Solid 13.9)
(% Lipid 2.32)
\00074\Dei\.Air.0002\Re:.1,11ts
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
_ Labeled Compound
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD
13C-1.2,3, 7,8-PeCDD
13(-1.2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
13 C-l ,2,3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF
13C-l.2.3, 7.8-PeCDF
13C-l.2,3A.7,8-HxCDF
13 C-l.2,3,4,6, 7.8-HpCDF
37Cl-2,3,7.8-TCDD
Percent.
Recovery
74
79
77
102
94
63
73
73
93
65
00080
QC
limits
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
DS-1
L. variegatus
11/30/99
(% Solid 12.1)
(% Lipid 2.39)
\00024\Del\.Ar\0002\Results
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD
13C-l,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD
13C-1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
13C-l.2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF
13C-l ,2,3, 7,8-PeCDF
13C-!,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF
13C-1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF
37 Cl-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
Percent
Recovery
51
50
60
96
97
43
54
51
91
48
00081
QC
limits
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Table 2.9 (cont) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
DS-2
L. variegatus
11/30/99
(% Solid 11.9)
(% Lipid 1.57)
100024\0el\Ar'.0002\RHUlt!.
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
13C-l,2,3. 7,8-PeCDD
13C-l,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
13C-l.2,3.4.6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13 ~ .. C-2,J, 7.8-TCDF
13C-l,2.3, 7,8-PeCDF
13C-1,2,3.4, 7,8-HxCDF
13C-1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
Percent
Recovery
63
65
66
86
76
83
65
64
80
57
0008~
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
I
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis I for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
I
Sample ID Labeled Compound Percent QC
Recovery limits I
DS-3 13C-2,3, 7,8-TCDD 75 40 -135 I
L variegatus 13C-l .2,3, 7,8-PeCDD 96 40 -135
11/30/99 13C-1,2.3,6, 7,8-HxCDD 74 40 -135 I (% Solid: 11.0) 13 C-l,2.3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD 85 40 -135
(% Lipid 2.24) 13 C-OCDD 83 40 -135
13C-2.3. 7,8-TCDF 66 40 -135 I
13C-l.2.3,7,8-PeCDF 93 40 -135
13C-l.2.3,4, 7.8-HxCDF 68 40 -135 I 13C-l .2.3,4.6, 7.8-HpCDF 84 40 -135
37Cl-2,3, 7,8-TCDD 65 40 -135 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\00024\0el\Ar\0002\Rnutts. I OOOS.3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
ABS
L variegatus
(% Solid 2.6)
(% Lipid 1.48)
100024\0el\Ar\0002\Res.u~
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2.3, 7,8-TCDD
13C-l.2.3, 7,8-PeCDD
13C-l,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
13 C-!,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2.3,7,8-TCDF
13C-l.2.3. 7,8-PeCDF
13C-l.2.3.4.7.8-HxCDF
13 C-l.2.3,4.6. 7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
•
Percent
Recovery
69
78
79
102
90
68
76
76
90
68
OOOS-1-
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
DFBLK2
12/08/99
(% Solid: 100)
(% Lipid 0.0)
\00024\Del\Ar\0002\Resutts
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2.3,7,8-TCDD
13C-l.2.3, 7,8-PeCDD
13C-l .2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
13C-l .2,3 .4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2.3, 7,8-TCDF
13C-l.2.3.7,8-PeCDF
13C-l .2.3.4. 7.8-HxCDF
13C-l .2.3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2.3.7,:S-TCDD
Percent.
Recovery
65
48
69
72
84
68
57
86
73
59
00085
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
Background
E. foetida
11/20/99
(% Solid 12.4)
(% Lipid: 4.41)
1000:24\0el\Al'\0002\Result!.
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD
13C-l ,2,3,7,8-PeCDD
13C-1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
13C-l ,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13 C-2,3, 7,8-TCDF
13C-1.2.3,7,8-PeCDF
13 C-1,2,3.4. 7,8-HxCDF
13C-L2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2,3,7,8-TCDD
Percent .
Recovery
52
44
51
51
so
54
46
62
58
46
00086
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
Control
E. foetida
11 /25/99
(% Solid. 12.7)
(% Lipid 2.79)
100024\0el\Ar\0002\Re.ults
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
13 C-l.2,3, 7,8-PeCDD
13C-l,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
13 C-1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF
13C-1.2,3, 7.8-PeCDF
13C-l .2,3,4. 7,8-HxCDF
13C-l ,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
Percent
Recovery
65
62
64
65
62
71
62
73
70
65
00087
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I ,,
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
•
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
US REF-1
E. foetida
l l /25/99
(% Solid 11.3)
(% Lipid 3 32)
\00024\0el\Ar\0002\Re,ults
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
13C-l.2,3, 7,8-PeCDD
13 C-l .2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
13C-l .2.3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13 C-2.3,7.8-TCDF
13 C-l.2.3, 7,8-PeCDF
13C-l.2.3.4, 7.8-HxCDF
13C-l .2.3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2.3, 7,8-TCDD
Percent
Recovery
54
51
60
56
58
59
51
72
66
55
0008t;
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
US-1
E. foetida
11/25/99
(% Solid 8 8)
(% Lipid 3.85)
\00024\De!\Ar\0002\Rnutts.
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
13C-l ,2.3, 7,8-PeCDD
13C-l,2.3.6. 7.8-HxCDD
13C-l.2,3.4,6, 7.8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2.3.7.8-TCDF
13C-l.2,3.7,8-PeCDF
13C-l .2.3.4. 7.8-HxCDF
13C-l .2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
3iCJ-2.3, 7,8-TCDD
Percent
Recovery
65
62
72
65
65
67
64
82
73
59
00089
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ,.
I
I
I
I
•
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
DS-1
E. foetida
11/25/99
(% Solid 10. 7)
(% Lipid 2.58)
\00024\Del\Ar\0002\RHU!e
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2.3.7.8-TCDD
13C-J .2,3,7,8-PeCDD
13C-L2,3,6.7,8-HxCDD
13C-1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2.3.7,8-TCDF
13C-l,2.3.7,8-PeCDF
13C-l.2.3,4,7,8-HxCDF
13 C -1.2.3, 4. 6, 7. 8-HpCDF
37Ci-2.3. 7,8-TCDD
I
I
I
Percent
Recovery
61
65
74
73
74
97
65
85
79
62
00090
I
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
DS-2
E. foetida
1 I /25/99
(% Solid 8. I)
(% Lipid 2.03)
100024\Del\A/\0002\Rnurts
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD
13C-1.2.3. 7.8-PeCDD
13C-l .2.3.6, 7,8-HxCDD
13C-l .2.3,4,6. 7.8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2,3.7.8-TCDF
13C-1.2.3, 7,8-PeCDF
13C-l.2,3.4,7,8-HxCDF
13 C-I .2,3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2.3, 7,8-TCDD
Percent.
Recovery
68
78
75
I 14
101
41
76
71
105
48
00091
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
•
I
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Ill
I
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in TisJue
Sample ID
DS-3
E. foetida
l l /25/99
(% Solid 11.2)
(% Lipid 2 .34)
\!?0024\Del\A~2\RHUlb.
I
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
I
I I
Labeled Compolnd
13(-2,3,7.8-TCDD I
13C-1,2,3. 7.8-PeCDD
13(-1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
I 13C-I.2.3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13 C-2.3,7.8-TCDF
13C-l.2.3. 7.8-PeCDF;
13 C-l .2.3.4.7.8-HxCDF . I
13C-l.2.3.4,6, 7.8-Hp(DF
I
,;Cl-2.3. 7.8-TCDD I
I
Percent
Recovery
79
92
78
116
114
54
90
70
104
67
I -(1)00!)..!
I
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
ABS
E. foetida
11/25/99
(% Solid 184)
(% Lipid I. 5 7)
\00024\0el\Ar\0002\Re.uns
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
. Labeled Compound
13C-2,3. 7.8-TCDD
13C-l.2.3, 7,8-PeCDD
13C-l,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
13C-I .2,3,4,6. 7.8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2.3, 7.8-TCDF
13C-l ,2.3, 7.8-PeCDF
13C-l.2.3,4.7,8-HxCDF
13C-l .2,3.4.6,7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
Percent
Recovery
78
91
72
121
111
51
92
68
111
61
OOO~J.3
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1 1
I
I I
II
•
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF\ Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue I
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Sample ID Labeled Compound Percent QC
I Recovery limits
LCS-1 13C-2.3.7.8-TCDD 71 40 -135
12/03/99 13C-l.2.3. 7.8-PeCDD 79 40 -135
13C-l .2.3.6, 7,8-HxCDD 84 40 -13 5
I 13 C-1.2.3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDD 106 40 -135
13C-OCDD
1 97 40 -135
13C-2.3,7,8-TCDF 59 40 -135
13C-l.2.3.7.8-PeCDF 73 40 -135
13C-l.2,3,4, 7,8-HxCD~ 83 40 -135
13C-l.2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCfF 96 40 -135
37 Cl-2.3,7,8-TCDD 64 40 -135
\0002-4\0elV,r\0002\ReSu!t!.
000~)..\
I
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Sample ID Labeled Compound
LCS-2 13C-2.3,7,8-TCDD
12/08/99 13C-l.2,3, 7,8-PeCDD
13C-l.2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD
13C-l,2,3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2,3, 7.8-TCDF
13C-l .2,3, 7,8-PeCDF
13 C-l.2.3,4, 7,8-HxCDF
13 C-l .2,3,4.6, 7,8-HpCDF
37 Cl-2,3.7,8-TCDD
100024\Del\Ar\0002\Resuru.
Percent
Recovery
50
56
67
72
75
63
57
78
76
57
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
••
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
II
I
-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tisshe
Sample ID
ABS-MS
L. variegatus
12/03/99
1000:241Del1Ar\0002\Ret.u!B
WA# 0-024 Roanoke ~ver Site
I
!
I Labeled Compound I
I I
I
13C-2.3,7.8-TCDD I
13C-l,2.3.7.8-PeCDDI
13C-l .2,3,6, 7.8-HxC[)D
13C-l.2.3.4.6. 7.8-HpCDD
13 C-OCDD
13C-2.3.7,8-TCDF
13C-l.2.3, 7,8-PeCDF
13C-l .2.3.4.7.8-HxCDF
I 13 (-1.2.3.4.6, 7.8-HpCDF
I
I
37 Cl-2.3. 7,8-TCDD I
Percent
Recovery
69
68
67
84
75
58
64
65
75
66
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
I
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis I for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
I
Sample ID Labeled Compound Percent QC
Recovery limits I
ABS-MSD 13C-2.3.7,8-TCDD 64 40 -135 I
L. variegatus 13C-l.2,3. 7,8-PeCDD 70 40 -135
12/03/99 13 C-l,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 69 40 -135 I 13 C-l.2.3,4.6. 7,8-HpCDD 87 40 -135
13C-OCDD 75 40 -135
13C-2.3.7,8-TCDF 61 40 -135 I
13C-I .2.3. 7.8-PeCDF 66 40 -135 I 13C-l.2.3.4. 7,8-HxCDF 68 40 -135
13C-l .2.3.4.6,7,8-HpCDF 79 40-135
37Cl-2,3, 7,8-TCDD 62 40 -135 I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
\000'24\Del\Ar\0002'RHulT:!, I ooo~r.
I
I
1:
I
•·
I
I
••
I
I
I
I
I
"I
I
I
I
I ,,
I
I
Table 2.9 (cont) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tiss~e
Sample ID
ABS-MS
E. foetida
I 2/08/99
100024 \Det\Ar\0002\R es.ultS
I
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound --I -
!
13C-2.3.7.8-TCDD I
13C-l .2.3, 7.8-PeCDD:
13C-I.2.3,6, 7,8-HxCJ:?D
13C-I .2,3.4.6. 7.8-Hp0:DD
13C-OCDD I
I
13 C-2.3.7.8-TCDF I
13C-I.::.3.7.8-PeCDF I
13C-I.::.3.4.7.8-HxCDF
I 13C-l.2.3.4.6, 7.8-HpCDF
I
37Cl-2.3.7.8-TCDD
Percent
Recovery
66
69
66
92
84
43
75
57
84
48
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -I 35
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40-135
40 -135
Table 2.9 (cont.) Results of the PCDD/PCDF Labeled Compound Analysis
for Dioxin in Tissue
Sample ID
ABS-MSD
E. foetida
12/08/99
100024\Del\Ar\0001\Re,urts.
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Labeled Compound
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD
13C-L2,3,7.8-PeCDD
13C-1,2,3,6. 7,8-HxCDD
13C-1.2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDD
13C-OCDD
13C-2.3,7,8-TCDF
13C-l.2,3,7,8-PeCDF
13C-1.2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDF
13C-1.2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF
37Cl-2,3, 7,8-TCDD
Percent
Recovery
73
87
76
109
99
55
87
71
95
63
OOO~J9
QC
limits
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
40 -135
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Sample ID:
:2.3.7.8-TCDD
1.:.3.7.8-PcCDD
l.2.3.4.7.8-HxCDD
1,:2.3.6.7.8-HxCDD
1,:2.3.7.8.9-HxCDD
1.2.3.4.6.7.8-HpCDD
OCDD
2.3.7.8-TCDF
1.:2.3.7.8-PcCDF
2.3.4.7.8-PeCDF
1.:::.3.4.7.8-HxCDF
!.:::.3.6,7,B-HxCDF
1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDF
2.3.4.6.7.8-HxCDF
1,2.3.4.6.7.8-HpCDF
1.:::.3.4.7.8.9-HpCDf
OCDF
I
' ' I
I
Table 2.10 Re1ult1 of the MS/MSD Ana.lwll for Dioxin in Tiamc ' .
WM 0-024 Roanoke River Sik
aascd on Dry Weight
ABS • L. varice-atlli
MS MSD
Sample Spike MS MS Spil<c MSD
Con, Add,d Con, % Added Cone
n,;kg n,;kg n,;kg Rec nglq nglq
L. 1532.57 1136 74 1456.8 1228
L. 3831.4:? 3746 98 3642.0 3535
L' 3831.42 3412 89 3642.0 3008
l' 3831.42 3950 1103 3642.0 3608
C 3831.42 3460 1~ 3642.0 3293
130 3831.41 3829 3642.0 2885
1290 7662.84 15203 182 • 7284.1 6685
C 1531. 57 123:2 \: 1456.8 1098
C 3831.42 3784 3642.0 3515
C 3831.42 4076 106 3642.0 3721
l. 3831..i: 3731 I~ 3642.0 3355
L. 3831.42 3662 3642.0 3636
L 3831.42 3903 102 3642.0 3745
C 3831.42 3977 io4 3642.0 3641
L. 3831.42 3456 I~ 3642.0 293:!
L' 3831.42 J491 3642.0 312..:!
192 7662.84 7932 101 7284.1 7271
I
I
I
00100
I
MSD Rccommcnded
%, QCLuniu
Rec RPD %Jlcc RPD
84 D 50 • 150 so
97 50 -150 50
8; 8 50 -150 50
99 4 50-150 so
90 0 lO-llO lO
76 24 50-150 lO
7' 84 • 50 -150 lO
7< 6 50 -150 lO
9' ' 50 -

l

50 50
10: 4 50 -150 lO
90 6 50 -150 so
100 4 50 -150 50
10, 1 50 -150 50
100 4 50-150 lO
81 II 50-150 lO
86 6 50 • 150 so
97 4 50 -150 50
I
Table 2.10 (conL) Results of the MS/MSD Allafysil for Dioxin in Tilmc
WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site I
Bucci on Dry WciJl,t
Sample ID· ABS • E. foctida
MS MSD I
Sample Spik, MS MS Splke MSD MSD Rccommcndcd
Cone Added Cone % Added Con< •,,
Metal nglkg nsik8 ng/1<8 Rec ng/l<g nglkg R« RPD
QC Limita I O,.oR,cc RPD
2.3.7.8-TCDD u 205.47 121.88 59 205.47 ·138.18 67 13
1.2.3.7.8-PeCDD u 513.68 525.23 102 513.68 509.59 99 3
1.2.3.4. 7 .8-HxCDD u 513.68 498.76 97 513.68 453.96 88 9
50 -150 so I 50 • 150 ,o
so -150 50
1.2.3.6.7.8-HxCDD u 513.68 447.31 87 513.68 465.05 91 4 50-150 50
1,2.3.7.8.9-HxCDD u 513.68 441.30 86 513.68 505.41 98 14
1.2.3.4.6.7.8-HpCDD u 513.68 379.15 74 513.68 389.02 76
OCDD 40.073 1027.37 931.39 87 1027.37 948.22 88 2
50 -150 so
50 • 150 so I so -150 so
2.3.7.8-TCDF C 205.47 109.70 53 205.47 125.47 61 D 50 • 150 50
1.2.3. 7 .8-PeCDf t· 513.68 415.45 81 513.68 441.17 86 6
2.3.4.7.8-PcCDf t· 513.68 417.58 81 513.68 433.57 " 4
l.2.3.4.7.8-HxCDf l' 513.68 405.37 79 513.68 429.55 " 6
1.2.3.6.7.8-HxCDF t· 513.68 441.30 86 513.68 428.68 83
50 -150 ,o
50 -150 50 I 50 -150 so
so -150 ,o
1.2.3. 7.8.9-HxCDF t· 513.68 423.74 82 513.68 436.61 ., 3 50-150 l0
2.3 .4.6. 7 .8-HxCDf C lll.68 432.44 84 513.68 453.70 88
1.2.3.4.6.7.8-HpCDF l' 513.68 383.34 71 513.68 387.29 71
1.2.3.4.7.8.9-HpCDF t· 513.68 401.76 78 513.68 419.66 82 4
50-150 50 I 50 • 150 50
50-150 ,o
OCDF l' 1027.Ji 998.44 97 1027.37 1001.44 97 0 50-150 50
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ooio1 -... ·f,
I
••
I
I ,.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 2.11
LCS-1
Metal
2.3.7.8-TCDD
1.:.3. 7.8-PeCDD
1.2.3.4,7.8-HxCDD
1.2.3.6. 7.8-HxCDD
1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDD
1.2.3.4.6. 7,8-HpCDD
OCDD
2.3.7,8-TCDF
1.2,3,7,8-PeCDF
2.3.4.7.8-PeCDF
l.::'..3.4. 7,8-HxCDF
1.2.3.6.7.8-HxCDF
1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDF
2.3.4.6.7,8-HxCDF
1.2.3.4.6.7.8-HpCDF
1.2.3.4.7.8.9-HpCDF
OCDF
100024\Del\Ar\0002\Rl!!I.UIIS
Results of the LCS An1alvsis for Dioxin in Tissue
WA# 0-024 Roanoke ·River Site
I . h Based on dry we1g t
LCS LCS LCS
Spike I Found % Recommended
Added I Cone. Rec. QC Limits
I ng/kg nmg (%) (%) -I
I
40 33 161 83 50 -150
I
100 100.171 100 50 -150
I
100 92 103 92 50 -150
I
100 100.129 JOO 50 -150
I
100 93 .589 94 50 -150 I
100 85.228 85 50 -150 I 200 180.344 90 50 -150
40 34\ 1 17 85 50 -150
100 981860 99 50 -150
100 1031238 103 50 -150
100 97171 1 98 50 -150
100 97.555 98 50 -150
100 1041350 104 50 -150
100 1021964 103 50 -150
100 85 .!252 85 50 -150
100 95 1953 96 50 -150
200 ] 99 1606 100 50 -150
I
0010~
I
I
I
Table 2.11 (cont.) Results of the LCS Analysis for Dioxin in Tissue I WA# 0-024 Roanoke River Site
Based on dry weight
I
LCS-2 LCS LCS LCS
Spike Found % Recommended I Added Cone Rec. QC Limits
Metal ng/kg ng/kg (%) (%) I
2.3.7.8-TCDD 40 51.986 130 50 -150 I 1.2.3.7.8-PeCDD 100 89.178 89 50 -150
1.2.3,4, 7,8-HxCDD 100 90.898 91 50 -150
1.2.3.6. 7,8-HxCDD 100 103.701 104 50 -150 I 1.2.3.7,8.9-HxCDD 100 81.250 81 50 -150
1.2.3.4.6,7.8-HpCDD 100 91.962 92 50 -150 I OCDD 200 178.266 89 50 -150
2.3,7,8-TCDF 40 36.285 91 50 -150
1.2,3,7,8-PeCDF 100 113.868 114 50 -ISO I 2.3.4.7,8-PeCDF 100 100.810 101 50 -150
1,2.3.4. 7.8-HxCDF 100 87.224 87 50 -150
1.2.3.6.7,8-HxCDF 100 98.122 98 50 -150 I 1.2.3.7,8,9-HxCDF 100 83 .951 84 50 -150
2.3.4.6.7.8-HxCDF 100 90.102 90 50 -150 I 1.2.3.4.6, 7.8-HpCDF 100 90.528 91 50 -150
1.2.3.4.7.8.9-HpCDF 100 102.514 103 50 -150
OCDF 200 209.164 105 50 -150 I
I
I
I
I
I
100024\Del\Ar\0002\Res.1,11?$ I 0010.l
I ---------

-
.. -

-
--·---
A.i.\i!ERICAN AQUA TIC TESTING, lNC. CR.\.IN OF CUSTODY
1105 UNION BL VD. Job ii: L/J'-12 -o I Client: ~lient Contact: {!/,/,e,,5 ~,l(y'
ALLENTOWN. PA 18103 <11,4.,-.ro-i, If) Address: c,
610434 9015
Phone~: &10 ,¢3,;I -,,1r
7Jl. 7-:!,J,J.M.
;iii;/r:/0 o;:' 0 ~,,_J .:Jol,I ,$ ON @ W6i)) Jtt.#,ta "'J 1S00S3 : a isoosal r-.&" .
I 6
Sample
o· I
Return to client [ I
L b d
lmtial Cb<mi,iry SA..\,f!'LE INFOR.\iA TION Toxicity Testing Requested
,a t.,bonla,,
Sample' Temp. Diss. Sample ldentific:ition Sample Sample I Sample . .\cute I Chronic I Sediment Eluaiate Pure ~ Other
·c 0, pH volume Date Time Como.
811 • A;, ' i-J L . .,,A. 'AA~-1-.." -1;.~s,ll-' 15/o, ,,'3,Jaqj 11fYl I I )( '1iS.f/JI
I?.• ,-n?At...
Cl 77~ 111J.'iN~ 1•hn I v
~,:F-I
1,2.: 11/!i.Qi "/'f I 1lln<> I ',(
I ,~-/
14q I ,,1~.o. 11' I I~ I I 'x
u~-1. 156• 11/3. Its-I ;5'ao I I y
"'i'R-1 . IGS 1 11l.~old1 11o0 I I V·
l'\'?-~.
. ,/ l&JI J 11/s,,/qq I /~rlO
.
I I I 'y .
., I I I I .
I I I I
I I I I I I
Samples were:
I. Collcc:ted by AA T pcrsoaoel F4 2. Traosported on ice' ' 3 Received with in holding time' 4. Sample matrix is: Liquid ( J Scdirneot ( ]
Client ""fSOanel Yes M Nor I Yes [ I No ( ) Soil ( ) Other M
. CUSTODY INFOR.\iATION
Lab Use
Sample• Relinauished bv: Received bv: Date Time Relinauished bv: Received for Lab: Date Time ISTN#
811d'tl! a.,,;, ,,, ) ,t.l01.l9~ 1'/00 /, . A~ .P" 0-J·}'f CJ'?)'O
11,,. _,l l _,( -'
' -// .
l?~t -I ' .J •
~ ~
11~-1
..._. ,......_
7)~-1 ~ -u
v..~-l ~ .
'M·J '
' ,. 1/
i
,,.. ./ . I
i
..
··~ ... ' -,, l '-'-t, Jt,llf/ol.'("'l,q r;.,.rf'//CT 2o~,J .:Jol/·18~•/ ctJ/ ?:'-~-': .-, "LI cf). 'rri ( LocK//tlb IIIA/l1i,i)
en
fY')
'<j'
.~1'-1ERICAN AQUATIC TESTING, INC. ; CH.-\IN OF CUSTODY
1105 UNION BL VD. Job ;t• %-!J-0$ Client: ./a'.?}(//ea>4,,,~client Contact: (l#R/6 J/4.Ll_(
ALLENTOWN, PA 18103 0Ar-:Ior,#. Address: <!/ofhff?1C9t,1/t,;µ,4rx::. · '
610 434 9015 /.J. 7 Phone#: IP104349o,6' Sample Return to client I )
~t OJ., o{J OA-...J :r;;;, D' I L b d" I [)Cl
Lauw Cb<muuy
,a Labonurv
Sample# Temp. Dis,.
'C 0, pH
6······ '
/! -l
113 p.,~-1
vS-1
-,,.q -1
--iis-z '
1>&-3
Samples wm::
I. Collected by AA T personnel
Client oersonnel
Sample# Relinouished bv:
c.--
{:r.;p,1 oJJJl{J-,l t!iJ ' ··-~i} , l 1S1!0S3 : a ISl!OSa
SA<\.-lPLE INFORMATION Toxicity Testing Requested
Sample ldentific::ition I Sample Sample I Sample Acuu: I Chronic I Sediment Eluaiau: Pure Other Other
volume Da1e Time Como. {i)
,C -fad, da.., t,3,q,y:: /o~q 11/;l,o/M'i 1/.00 I I "-11,.( Ill!
S~q 11l.ts-JW I 1600 I )(
fo ,-I I y..
I Ki, I I I I 'I.
1108 q i I I " I 8? q I I I )(
lu'/a I I I; I I X II -I I I I
I I I
I I I I I I
2. Transiz9rted on ice?· 3. Received with in holding time' -1. Sample matri.'< is: Liquid I I Sediment [ I
Soil [ I Other . .iA
Yes [ Jq No I I Yes r I No f 1
. CUSTODY INFOR.'1A TION Lab Use
Received bv: Date Time Relinouished bv: Received for Lab• Date Time ISTN#
,2/41./?1 1 'loo ~ .... ~ ,:z,.c'""-,,,-,;? r:1• 3 ·9"1 o -1 /0 .. .
•
I ZI ''' -
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
1..«kherrd M ■rtin Ttcbnoloe M"ica Croup
Environnt•l•I Servins REAC
2890 \\loodbrid~ Avmuc. Building 209 Annex Edison, NJ 08837-3679
Telephone 732-321--tlOO Facsimilt 732--'94-iOll
LOCKHEED MARTIN*
Southwest Labs of Oklahoma
1700 W. Albany Suite A
Broken Arrow. OK 74012
Attn: Dave LeMaster
I
Project # RIA-00024 Roanoke River I
2 December 1999
As per Lockheed Manin/ REAC Purchase Order GA91975J73, please analyze samples according to the following
I
parameters: \
Analysis/Method I Matrix #of
I samoles
% Moisrure I ASTM-D2216 I Tissue• 14
%Linids I I Tissue• 14
BNAI SW-846-8270D I Tissue• 14
Pesticides\ SW-846-8081B I Tissue• 14
PCB\ SW-846-8082A I Tissue• 14
Dioxin I SW-846-8290A I Tissue• 14
TAL Metals\ SW-846-6010 or Series 7000 I Tissue• 14
Data ~cvoo•: ' with Diskette Deliverable I
I
• Tissue samples are eanhworm and aquatic worms tissues. Samples are to analyzed in the following priority,
dioxin(30g).% lipids.% moisrure. pesticides. PCB's. BNA. and metals including mercury. Both tissue and lipid
results are to be reponed on dry weight basis. \ ·
I
Dioxin is the main priority. and should get all of the tissue necekarr for the lowest detection limits possible. After
dioxin. all of the other paranteters are necessary. and in cases ihere we are restricted by tissue mass. they can be
performed with higher detection limits. Your laboratory shoulirnake every effort to get the lowest detection limits
with the smallest amount of tissue. The MS/MSD analysis will be performed on control tissue sent to you by the
animal supplier.
00106
Samples are expe<."!ed to arrive at your laboratory the~ ofNowmber 29, 1999. All applicable QA/QC(MS/MSD)
analysis as per method. will be performed on oor sample matrix. Preliminary sample and OC result tables plus
a signed copy of the Chain of Custody must be faxed to REAC 10 business days after receipt of the last samples. The
complete data package is due 21 business days after receipt of the samples. The complete data package must include
all items on the deliverables checklist Expect all samples to be difficult matrix and all raw data must
be included in final analytical report.
ALL ORGANIC EXTRACTIONS ON SOLIDS IE: BNA,PEST/PCB MUST BE BY SOXHLET EXTRACTION
All sample and QC results(ie: MS\MSD, LCS, Duplicates, and Blanks) must be swnrnariz.ed in a ExCel diskette
deliverable.
Please submit all repons and technical questions concerning this project to John Johnson at [phone] or fu
to [phone].
U,,-(.... .11:.. .,..-,, ~-t
De wll n
Data Validation and Repon Writing Group Leader
Lockheed Manin I REAC Project
DK:jj Attachments
cc. R Singhvi
M Sprenger
0024\non\mem\9912\sub\0024Con2
D. Miller
Subcontracting File
D. Angwenyi
C. Lentini
D. Haroski
D. Killeen
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0010, I
'
I
I
I
1·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
1300 Blue Spruce Drive, Suite C
.. Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
DATE:
SPECIES:
AGE:
LIFE STAGE:
HATCH DATE:
BEGAN FEEDING:
FOOD:
\Vater Chemistry Record:
TEMPERATURE:
SALINITY/CONDUCTIVITY:
TOTAL HARDNESS (as CaCO,):
TOT AL ALKALINin· (as CaCO,):
pH:
Comments:
.----
· ORGANISM IBSTORY
12/2/99
Lumbriculus varierams
Variable
Juvenjje/Adult
V .
Immediatelv
Tetramin, Flake Slurrv
Mean
22•c
I 21 rora
65 rora
8 )8
Facility Supervisor
Toll Free: 800/331-5916
Tel: [phone] Fax:[phone]
Range
20-24"C
70.95 mgJI
8 08-8 28
Aquatic BioSystems, Inc • · Quality Research Organisms 976
0010s
01/~7/2000 17:57
TO
CONTACT
John:
6104342510
[phone]
AMER AGI.IATIC TESTING
AMERICAN AQUATIC
TESTING, INC.
• NJ--DCS Cump11enc-e Btomuniaurtng
• Co11sullil"l1,; Scr\'lc:'C':ii
• Customiz.cd StuUlcs
• NJ Certlltcd Lal, U77682
Far I 105 tJ,uon Blvd
A,h:111nn11 VI', IMI01 1610) 434-2510
[)-\TE January 27. 2000
Lockheed -REAC FROM
John Johns.in RL
Total number u!· pa!!C> 1rdudin~ this co,er page
Chm 1',;ally
E. fctida shipping info
For Roanoke
02
PAGE 01
l' n',im,1n,, i; the invoice fwm Aq;1a1ic Research Organisms tor the additional earthworms
thal were sent to Soutrmcst Labs oi' Oklahoma in December. 1999. The~e are th• additional eanhwl'rm; senr ru, bac,g.round tissue for the Roanoke job, :\/1 TU 4S-12-0 I. l.uckhccd \lanm ProJ~C, " r)0(!24-0~ I, Ruanokc Rive: Let me know if there is anything el;c I car, cio to help.
·11,c 1;,11.""""j -~ ,;<. .. ,.;,1~•,:d C•'1\li1Mn1,l\t 1n1~n11111....,, un&r~~\1 )I"' ,.,oc 1'1'11) t")' lho l(hlh . ....,,H ■hnvc:. lf_Y'UII , .. ,: '"" 1.h• i111eud1.-d r ... -,,,icul. rlii:11-v for1\.trd 10_ U1a1 u1J1v1J11t1I 11-:v,1eJ1■tcl;, ... ,1hr)1.11 an; .l1u.111inal'Ol"I. corying 11, di!11r1hu11,m vfthi• 11"'°11,e 10 .,1~ cllh.:r p;tl'9(n\ P,11:~~ uw11.1ct UII mtn~-C~•-~lt:h d ~-1,111 li1vr; re,;~:~.•d 1h11 n,cs.a•gt in~!!'-"~"'■ ,.,II ""•nf:-. _ltw ~he ,._,.v,... nl'ln.! ,.f'iffi~IAl ,,fdi,■ ••->1.-c 1t·t111:i; or Any vther µage is illt::ijiblc, pli:ax cc:mtitt.Ct C,J0-4~'4-901·~ ··
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
A ATIC RESEARCH ORGANISMS 1 LAFAYETTE ROAD, BLDG. C P.o.aox,:m
HAMPTON, NH 03843-1271
(803) 112&-1850
DILL 10
AMBIUCAN AQUATIC 'l"l!S11HO
1111 UNIONIILVD
ALLBNTOWN PA. 18103
lnvoicE
1~ ll'N42
SHIP TO , \
AMIIUCAN AQUATICB
90lllVWBS'I' LAB OF Ola.AltONA.
1'700 W AUlAHY ST
BROICl!N AJIKOW OK 74012
P.O NUMBER I TERMS REP SHIP ' VIA F O A \ ~fWJE('T
NctJO
QUANTITY ITEM CODE
'71)() BFJ
P9C
loo-.\0
SP8 12/7/1999 HAMPl'ONNH
DESCRIPllON PRICE EACH \ /\MOUNT
IIIENIA FQI I :o,.
PACIC.INO BOX OIAR.Cli!
nBl<JIITaL9CJRS
:1 .• •
001i.O.
I.S
W)O
aoo
TOTAL
•••• 15,00 ....
f
Lockheed Martin TKhnology Mn'ica Group
Enviroameat■I Services REAC
2890 Woodbrid,i:r Awenue. Building 209 Annr1 Edison. NJ 08837-3679
Trlrphonr 732-321--4200 Facsimile 732..494-4021
LOCKHEED MARTIN*
Southwest Laboratory of Oklahoma, Inc.
1700 West Albany
Broken Arrow, OK 74012
Attn: Jayant Shringapure, Ph.D.
Dear Dr Shringapure:
12 January 2000
Upon review of your analytical report from Roanoke River Site WA# 0024, your reference
number SWLO: 41305.01 -41305.17, 41354.01 -41354.03 TAL metals and Lipids in tissue
analysis. the following questions need to be answered.
1.) Please provide the methodology summary for the percent lipid determination.
2.) The percent lipids results: are the results reported on as is basis or air dried?
3.) Numerous B flags appear in the summary tables for the T AL metals reported. Since the
ICBs and CCBs blanks show NDs for these metals, please explain why these B flags are
associated with the samples ..
We would appreciate a response to these questions within twenty-four hours of receiving this
letter, as our deadline for reporting to our client is rapidly approaching. If you have any
questions please call Dr. Antonio Lo Surdo at (732) 494 -4012, or fax response to (732) 494
-4020
Kil en
Data Va idauon and Report Writing Group Leader
Lockheed Martin Technology Services Group/REAC Project
00111
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
I ·-
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I' ' ,
I
I I
I
I I
'
I
I
I
I
I -.... . .,-
I
I -
SOUTHWEST LABORATORY OF QKI.AHQMA, INC.
1700 West AlbMy / Broken Arrow, Oklahoma 74011 / Office [phone] / Fax (918) 2Sl•2S99
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
January 13, 2000
Dr. Jayant J9
Deborah J. lnmaP-$-:,"'1
Lockheed Martin
In response to the fax received from Lockheed Martin dated 12 January, 2000
concerning the 'B" flags on the metals results. I have included with this memo a
copy of the pertinent pages from ILM04.0 which discuss the flagging of the results
on Form l's in the metals CLP packages.
For M11l«I~ CLP packages, the ·e• fl:ig it for results that are leM than the CRDL but
greater than or equal to the IDUMDL. I understand that the ·e· flag has a different
meaninfl in the Orianic CLP packages. I hope that this clears up this issue. If you
have any further questions or issues, please let me know.
00112
( ~--/ ,, ,__,/ \. a. b. C. d. R, f • Q. h. i. ; . k • l. L.!F'IO TEST FOR FISH_, WeiQn 4-5 Q samole in a taraa thimole cover with Qlass wool {record weight of samolei./ Extract with acatone,(s0Mhlet)c10 hours). Ol"iv• eff acetor,,.. Lu ,..,pr0,cJ.ma,:e1v 1u-1:, o,Js (~ platv. Transfer to 100 ml tared beaker (record weight of oeaker) rinsing well with fre~h acetone. R11r11., C' c bath. blitilker tiour. ,.,olu,.0 ,,i.'1111 eu.-.-e"t wl ... , 111 .l, u..-n2LJ s,:.eam When no H~O or acetone can ba observed olace in vo~. oven at ol-o4°C for aoproximately one Transfer to desiccator, cool and reweigh. R_ecord w~g~. Transfer fisn residue from thimble to 150 ml beaker. Remove anv remaining solvent by heatinQ surface (hot plate) then add bO m_l 4 M. for one hour ~~~rr~ng o~~~•ionRlly w;th adding H:0 as needed to maintain volume Ql"I • warm HCL and digest olaa11 rod in beak.,~. NOTE: Complete removal cf Acetone i"s necessary prior to digestion otherwise vaporization of solv~t will carry fisn oarticles over side of vessel onto hot elate. Filter e,ctract through 12,S cm filter oacer. Wash residue with ~ater. Place filter and sample in 150 ml beaker and dry fer aooro,cimately one hour at 30-3S•C~ Transfer filter and contents of thimble and extract with acetone for lb nou~s. R•~ov@ 50lvent, reduce volume A& be1ore. add the sum o1 waignts of v•tracts = total fats (lipids). 07/27/93 0011,3
' I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Lockheed Mortin Te<hnolo&Y S.mces Group
Environmental ~nittS REAC
2890 Woodbridgt Annu~ Building 209 Anne. Edison. NJ 088J7.J679
Ttlephone 732~321-4200 Fanimilt 732-494,...tGl I
Southwest Laboratory of Oklahoma, Inc.
1700 West Albany
Broken Arrow, OK 74012
Attn: Jayant Shringapure, Ph.D.
Dear Dr Shringapure:
LOCKHEED MARTINfr
24 January 2000
Upon review of your analytical report from Roanoke River Site WA# 0024, your reference
number SWLO: 4 I 305.01 - 4 I 305.17. 4 I 354.01 - 4 I 354.03 T AL metals and Lipids in tissue
analysis. the following additional questions need to be answered.
l .) The ICP serial dilution for sample# ABS-EFTL indicates that for zinc the QC exceeds
acceptable limits. For this sample a postspike sample analysis should have been
analyzed. Please provide the post spike results for the above sample.
We would appreciate a response to these questions within twenty-four hours of receiving this
letter. as our deadline for reporting to our client is rapidly approaching. If you have any
questions please call Dr. Antonio Lo Surdo at (732) 494 -4012, or fax response to (732) 494
-4020
--
Data Validation and Report Writing Group Leader
Lockheed Martin Technology Services Group/REAC Project
0011-.1-
Lockheed Martin Ttthnology Senica Group
Environmmlal Senica REAC
2890 Woodbridie Avenue, Building 209 AnnH Edison, NJ 08837-3679
Telephone 7Jl-3214200 Facsimile 732-494-4021
/
Southwest Laboratory of Oklahoma, Inc.
1700 West Albany
Broken Arrow, OK 74012
Attn: Jayant Shringapure, Ph.D.
Dear Dr Shringapure:
LOCKHEED II/IARTIN:17
27 January 2000
Upon review of your analytical report from Roanoke River Site WA# 0024, your reference
number SWLO: 41305.0l -41305.17. 41354.01 -41354.03 TAL metals and Lipids in tissue
analysis. the following additional questions need to be answered.
I.) The Laboratory Control Sample (LDS991209B) on page 48 has incorrect upper/lower
limits or true values for antimony and mercury. Please provide the correct limits ,ir :rue
values for these elements.
We would appreciate a response to these questions within twenty-four hours of receiving this
letter. as our deadline for reporting to our client is rapidly approaching. If you have any
questions please call Dr. Antonio Lo Surdo at (732) 494 -4012, or fax response to (732) 494
-4020
Thank VOU. /
i \i1.,l\L,..,'~ !1 ~
Debor KillPn'
Data Validatibn and Report Writing Group Leader
Lockheed Martin Technology Services Group/REAC Project
''''1-" r-.. '. -·· •· ...
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.I
I
I