NC0000272_2005_Dioxin_Monitoring_Fish_Tissue_20060220

PPPXPPP`­
BLUE RIDGE
PAPER PRODUCTS INC.
20 February 2006 CERTIFIED MAIL
Return Receipt Requested
7099 3220 0007 03716136
D. Keith Haynes
Environmental Specialist
North Carolina Department of Environment __ - — - —
And Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality ( !
2090 US Highway 70 D
Swannanoa, NC 28778 l� L FEB 2 3 2006
V/4TEH QOVI I IT:' �EC-ION
Subject: NPDESNC0000272 o-= cE
2005 Dioxin Monitoring in Fish Tissue
Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc.
Canton, NC
Dear Mr. Haynes -
Enclosed is the final report documenting results from Blue Ridge Paper Products 16t6 annual
Fish Tissue Study. This study, required by our NPDES permit, consists of annual sampling of
fish at specific sites in the Pigeon River and analysis of those fish for dioxin. Fish collection for
2005 took place in August and September.
The University of Tennessee at Knoxville completed fish collection and the report. Fish
collection followed the December 2001 monitoring plan approved by DENR. Sevem Trent
Laboratories completed the dioxin analyses.
Sincerely,
Paul S. Dickens J. Glenn Rogers
Manager, Environmental Affairs Water Compliance Coordinator
828-646-6141 828-646-2874
[e-mail] [e-mail]
Enclosure: One copy of report (for DENR ARO)
175 Main Street PO Box 4000
Canton, North Carolina 28716. 828-646-2000
Raising Your Expectations

PPPFP-
Keith Haynes, NC DENR DWQ
20 February 2006, Page 2
Distribution with enclosures:
N. C.Division of Water Quality Certified Mail Receipt: 7099 3220 0007 0371 6136
Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
Bryn Tracy
Environmental Biologist
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1617
Coleen Sullins
Chief Water Quality Section
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1617
Mr.Marshall Hyatt
Water Management Branch
EPA Region IV
61 Forsyth Street SW
Atlanta, GA 30303-8960
John Cruchfield
Progress Energy
410 South Wilmington Street
PEB 4A
Raleigh,NC 27602-1551
Mr.Paul Davis-
TDEC-Water Pollution Control
401 Church Street
6�'Floor Annex
Nashville,TN 37243
Mr.Jonathan Burr
TDEC—Water Pollution Control
Knoxville EAC
2700 Middlebrook Pike,
State Plaza Building, Suite 220,
Knoxville,TN 37921
175 Main Street • PO Box 4000
Canton, North Carolina 28716 • 828-646-2000
Raising Your Expectations

ppp-
Keith Haynes, NC DENR DWQ
PP20
February 2006, Page 3
Ms.Luanne K.Williams
N.C. Department of Health and Human Services
Epidemiology Section
1902 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1902
Internal Distribution
C. File- Water
Engr File—River Studies
L. Cooper
J. Pryately
B. Shanahan
B. Williams
D. Brown
J. Clary
175 Main Street PO Box 4000
Canton, North Carolina 28716 • 828-646-2000
Raising Your Expectations

f
RESULTS OF 2005
DIOXIN MONITORING IN FISH TISSUE
Prepared for:
Blue Ridge Paper Products,Inc.
Canton Mill
Canton,North Carolina
Prepared by:
Theodore B. Henry, Ph.D.
Center for Environmental Biotechnology
J. Larry Wilson, Ph.D.
Departments of Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries
University of Tennessee
Knoxville,Tennessee
January 2006
M

pECE0V [
FEB 2 0 20DS
D
BLUE RIOGE PAPER PRODUCTS INC
BHS DEPARTMENT
RESULTS OF 2005
DIOXIN MONITORING IN FISH TISSUE
Prepared for
Blue Ridge Paper Products,Inc.
Canton Mill
Canton, North Carolina
l
Prepared by:
Theodore B. Henry,Ph.D.
Center for Environmental Biotechnology
J. Larry Wilson,PhA
Departments of Forestry,Wildlife and Fisheries
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee
January 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
List of Figures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . hi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. SAMPLING LOCATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. SAMPLING OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4. FISH COLLECTION TECHNIQUES AND LEVEL OF EFFORT . . . 11
5. SAMPLE PREPARATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6. ANALYTICAL RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
7. REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
8. APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
APPENDIX A: CHAIN OF CUSTODY FORMS
APPENDIX B: SEVERN TRENT LABORATORY-SACRAMENTO
ANALYTICAL REPORTS
APPENDIX C: BLUE RIDGE PAPER CANTON MILL FISH FILLET
TISSUE ANALYSIS RESULTS 1990-2004
s ,
i

LIST OF TABLES
Number Title Page
2-1 Pigeon river sampling station information . . . . . . . . . 3
4-1 Fish collection techniques and level of effort . . . . . . . . 12
4-2 Summary of fish composites collected in the Pigeon River,
August-September 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6-1 Summary of Pigeon River fish tissue analysis results-2005 . . . . 19
6-2 Toxicity equivalence factors for CDD/F isomers. . . . . . . . 20
6-3 Summary of CDD/F isomer analyses, toxicity equivalent
factors, and toxicity equivalent values for the 2005 Pigeon
River fish tissue composites . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6-4 Blue Ridge Paper Canton Mill fish fillet tissue analysis results
2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
l
ii

LIST OF FIGURES
Number Title Page
ES-1 TCDD concentrations in carp fillets collected from the Pigeon River,
1990-2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
2-1 Sampling Station locations on the Pigeon River . . . . . . . . 4
2-2 Sampling Station No. 1 on the Pigeon River . . . . . . . . . 5
2-3 Sampling Station No. 2 on the Pigeon River . . . . . . . . . 6
2-4 Sampling Station No. 3 on the Pigeon River . . . . . . . . . 7
2-5 Sampling Station No. 4A and 4B on the Pigeon River . . . . . . 8
2-7 Sampling Station No. 5 on the Pigeon River . . . . . . . . . 9
6-1 TCDD concentrations in carp fillets collected from the Pigeon River,
1990-2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6-2 TCDD concentrations in catfish fillets collected from Stations 4A
and 4B in Waterville Lake, 1997-2005. . . . . . . . 29
iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc., Canton Mill contracted the Department of Forestry,
Wildlife and Fisheries of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (UTK) to collect dioxin fish
tissue samples from the Pigeon River during the summer of 2005 in accordance with NPDPES
permit conditions. UTK field personnel followed the December 2001 Fish Tissue Sampling Plan
prepared by EA Engineering,. Science and Technology, Inc., (EA Engineering 2001a) of
Chicago, Illinois. UTK prepared this 2005 fish tissue sampling report using the template
developed by EA Engineering for prior reporting years.
Bottom feeding species were collected in 2005 from six locations in the Pigeon River and
analyzed for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD), 2,3,7,8-tetraehlorodibenzofuran
(TCDF), and other CDD and CDF isomers. TCDD and TCDF concentrations in fillet
composites from bottom feeders were very low(range=non-detect to 2.8 parts per trillion (ppt))
at all locations sampled. Fillets used for analyses were obtained from black redhorse, common
carp, and channel catfish. Chemical analyses were also conducted on a composite sample of
three common carp (whole body samples) collected from Station 4A and total TCDD and TCDF
concentrations were 2.1 and 1.3 ppt respectively. Percent lipid content of the tissues (fillets and
whole body)used for analysis ranged from a mean of 5.6% (fillets) to 13% (common carp whole
body). Tissue concentrations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD were consistent with values reported in 2004, and
the same conclusion drawn in 2004 can be applied to the 2005 results, i.e., that the concentration
of 2,3,7,8-TCDD in carp fillets from Waterville Lake has declined by 94-99 percent during the
period from 1990 through 2004 (Figure ES-1). Dioxin concentrations in fish tissue samples from
all sites sampled in 2005 were below the FDA dioxin health advisory limit and the toxicity
equivalent limit of the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services.
iv

Figure ES-1. TCDD Concentrations in Carp Fillets Collected from the Pigeon River, 1990-2005
(Stations 2 and 3).
20
15
o t,—Station 2
Station 3
v
a
10 -
A
_a
A
U
F
Y a a
��'-- b C c C C C C
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
YEAR
a) TCDD concentrations at Station 3 were not detected,therefore,the value plotted represents the detection limit for that sample.
b) TCDD concentrations at Station 2 were not detected,therefore,the value plotted represents the detectioni limit for that sample.
c) TCDD concentrations at Stations 2 and 3 were not detected from 2000 through 2005,therefore,the values plotted represent detection limits for those samples.
v

Figure ES-1 (Cont.). TCDD Concentrations in Carp Fillets Collected from the Pigeon River, 1990-2005
(Stations 4A and 4B).
70
t
60
50
t \ 0 Station 4A
c � \
O 1
— + Station 4B
40
i \
30
t
m t
o
U \
F \
20 > —
t
\
\
\
\ Ilk
•*---A--- r-- �\
0 ---
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
YEAR
vi

1.INTRODUCTION
The Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc., Canton Mill contracted the Department of Forestry,
Wildlife and Fisheries of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (UTK) to collect dioxin
fish tissue samples from the Pigeon River during the summer of 2005 in accordance with
NPDPES permit conditions. UTK field personnel followed the December 2001 Fish
Tissue Sampling Plan prepared by EA Engineering, Science and Technology, Inc., (EA
Engineering 2001a) of Chicago, Illinois.
This report details the results of a study conducted during 2005 to determine the
concentrations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD (dioxin) and 2,3,7,8-TCDF (furan) in bottom-feeding
fish collected from the Pigeon River near Canton,North Carolina. The report follows the
template developed by EA Engineering for prior reporting years. The 2005 fish tissue
study is number 16 in a series of fish tissue surveys designed and conducted to be
completely responsive to the requirements of A.(9.) Dioxin Monitoring Special Condition
in Blue Ridge Paper's current NPDES permit for the Canton Mill (Permit No.
NC0000272). Sampling locations, selection of target species, sampling methods, and
sample preparation/preservation techniques are in accordance with the study plan (EA
2001 a).
The approved study methods and scope detailed herein generally,follow those used since
1990 (EA 1990, 1991, 1992, 19993a, 1993b, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001b,
2001c, 2003, 2004 and 2005). However, selected project details were modified to be
responsive to the suggestions/recommendations of the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NC DNR), the Tennessee Wildlife Resources
Agency, U.S. EPA Region IV, and the North Carolina Department of Health and Human
Services (NC DHHS). The principal change in the program was that the collection and
analysis of sportfish composite samples have not been required since 2000.
The 2005 study was conducted during August— September, during which time biologists
from UTK collected and prepared fish tissue samples from six sampling locations on the
Pigeon River.
Details relevant to the location of Pigeon River sampling stations and fish tissue sampling
objectives follow in Sections 2 and 3, respectively. Fish collection techniques and level
of effort are detailed in Section 4; methods of sample preparation and shipment are
presented in Section 5. Analytical results are summarized in Section 6 and references are
provided in Section 7.
1

2. SAMPLING LOCATIONS
In accordance with the study plan (EA 2001a), fish were collected from six sampling
locations on the Pigeon River. Five monitoring stations were located downstream from
Canton Mill outfall (four in North Carolina and one in Tennessee) and one control or
background site was located upstream of it. Detailed sampling station information is
provided in Table 2-1 and Figure 2-1.
Station 1, the background site, is located at Pigeon River Mile (RM) 64.5, approximately
1.2 RM upstream from Canton Mill outfall (Figures 2-1 and 2-2). Fish were collected
from the river reach adjacent to the Canton municipal water intake facility (located
upstream from the city of Canton). Except under extremely high flows, the Canton Mill
dam blocks the movement of fishes and thereby prevents the interaction of control and
downstream monitoring station fishes. Monitoring Station 2 is located upstream from
Clyde, North Carolina at RM 59.0, approximately 4.3 RM downstream from the Canton
Mill outfall (Figures 2-1 and 2-3). Station 3 is 11.0 RM downstream from the outfall
(RM 52.3), in the vicinity of the old Rt. 209 Bridge (Figures 2-1 and 2-4). Monitoring
stations 4A and 4B are located in Waterville Lake at RM 41.5 and 39.0, respectively
(Figure 2-1). Station 4A is located approximately 21.8 RM downstream from the Mill
outfall, near the Messer Branch-Pigeon River confluence (Figure 2-5). Monitoring
Station 4B is in the vicinity of the Wilkins Creek-Pigeon River confluence,
approximately 24.3 RM downstream from the Canton Mill outfall (Figure 2-6). Station 5
is located near Bluffton, Tennessee, at RM 19.0, approximately 44.3 RM downstream
from the Mill outfall and about 6 miles downstream of the CP&L Hydro site (Figures 2-1
and 2-7). Sampling stations were separated by at least 5.5 RM (with the exception of the
Waterville Lake stations which are only 2.5 RM apart). Appropriate habitats were
sampled within each study reach in an effort to collect the desired complement of fishes.
Fish sampling was conducted in the vicinity of each location described above; however,
the distance or effort at each station depended on how difficult it was to collect fish at
that station. At Station 1, an approximate 0.1 RM reach was sampled which was centered
upstream of the bridge near the Canton municipal water intake facility. The Station 2
sample reach was approximately 0.2 RM in length and was adjacent to a sharp bend
along Old Thickety Road. The Station 3 sample reach extended approximately 0.2 RM,
just upstream of the old Rt. 209 Bridge. An approximate 0.4 RM reach of Waterville
Lake was sampled adjacent to and upstream of the Messer Branch-Pigeon River
confluence. The Station 4B study area consisted of an approximate 1.0 RM reach of
Waterville Lake located from the dam to the confluence of Wilkins Creek. Sampling at
Stations 4A and 4B included gillnetting near the shore along both the left and right banks
of Waterville Lake. A large pool just upstream of the I-40 Bridge was sampled at
Location 5.
2

Table 2-1. Pigeon River Sampling Stations.
Station Station Location and Site Description/Habitat Type Fish Community
Number RM Distance from Outfall
1 64.5 Pigeon River upstream Characterized by run and pool Relative abundance dominated by river chub, mirror
from Canton,NC,adjacent habitats. Maximum depth shiner, and central stoneroller. Rock bass,greenfin
to Canton City Water approximately 2.1 in. Substrate darter,greenside darter,black redhorse and mottled
Intake(1.2 RM upstream primarily cobble and boulders sculpin are common. Common carp are absent.
from Canton Mill outfall) interspersed with gravel and sand
2 59.0 Pigeon River upstream Characterized by run and pool Relative abundance dominated by central stoneroller
from Clyde,NC(4.3 RM habitats with canopy cover. and redbreast sunfish. Northern hogsucker,
downstream from the Maximum depth approximately 1.9 warpaint shiner,and greenside darter are common.
Canton Mill outfall) in. Substrate primarily
cobble/gravel/sand with some
boulders and bedrock.
31 52.3 Pigeon River in the vicinity Characterized by run and pool Relative abundance dominated by red breast
of the Rt.209 bridge(11.0 habitats with some canopy cover. sunfish,whitetail shiner, and central stoneroller.
RM downstream from the Maximum depth approximately 2.5 Warpaint shiner,greenside darter,northern hog
Canton Mill outfall) in. Substrate primarily bedrock and sucker,river chub,and bluegill are common
boulders with some cobble and
sand/gravel/fincs deposited in pool
areas.
4A 41.5 Upper Waterville Lake Characterized by deep-water lentic Relative abundance dominated by channel catfish.
(21.8 RM downstream from habitat with bedrock covered by Bluegill,black crappie,flathead catfish, small
the Canton Mill outfall) loose,unconsolidated bottom mouth bass, and largemouth bass are common.
sediments. Maximum depth Common carp are present but not common.
sampled approximately 3 in.
4B 39.0 Lower Waterville Lake Characterized by deep-water lentic There are no dominant species. Bluegill,black
from the dam to confluence habitat,bedrock, and soft crappie,channel catfish,flathead catfish,
with Wilkins Creek(24.3 sediments. Maximum depth smallmouth bass,and largemouth bass are common.
RM downstream from the sampled approximately 12 in. Very Common carp are present but not common.
Canton Mill outfall) steep banks with little cover.
5 19.3 Pigeon River near Buffton, A single deep pool is sampled. Relative abundance dominated by central
TN,just upstream of I40 Maximum depth approximately 2.6 stoneroller,banded sculpin,and redline darter.
(44.3 RM downstream from in. Substrate primarily boulder and Rock bass and smallmouth bass are common.
the Canton Mill outfall). cobble. Gizzard shad,buffalo,black redhorse,walleye,
rainbow trout, spotted gar,and freshwater drum
occur. Common carp are absent.
3

Figure 2-1. Stations(1, 2, 3, 4A, 413, and 5,circled in blue text) on the Pigeon River
where fish tissues were collected in 2005 for dioxin analyses. More precise geographical
locations of each site are presented in Figures 2-2-2-6.
stoma TN(It.3 Norgwtl.TN
5 �/War 8'...Image
(349J TENNESSEE
Na,r Groom"'
ra ag ^'.� N
Crwk .... 1
N 1W
;hCLIN\ ('n1p1ypl
CgROLINA
R tir1 NaTE: Riverm8es of maiastom c sampling loatian or
N>tln Planttributary mouth shown in par&nums,
$ tX Byp,aW
11 F A Fish.sn9 B.ohms Sampling Station
M;
1i
�i
W.h..Dam N(ham l bka
C,.Io ooa 4B
fiNk rl. w NC
4A N2.81
Ges9
CMIVee Croak
New Hapco BriAgs Ri,sna" (494)
Nepoa Dege (4"
Moee Crashes
�i1O<Y (523)
o kkn` 3 clms ry
(46.9) Below CNN. (SZ3) Is�d
Fe,.—anise (551) as CIYEs FlbsMge
159.81 Flbervgis 183'81
BNnw 2
WaYmswlloW Mal OW9 Cana,W
Ims) m (633
WaYryaysy Clyas,NC Canton
(64.8) r} (ea.$)
(51.9)
4

XNlap,� 4.5
/anla Ave
\ k
A id
Ar
ng 'Ga t � .
` �, �- r�1 U SE2;i0.1i r. ,-5 _=��, •r�r _
liTrtiI g •&S h
• > 12 96 ` is��i jj
dft
MI z
CD� -
1937
Data use subject to license.
fl
®2004 Del-orme.XMap®4.5.
0 400 600 1200 1600 2000 2400
www-delorme.com MN(5.6-W) Data Zoom 13-6
Figure 2-2. Sampling Station No. 1 (indicated by X) on the Pigeon River.
5

► • . - XMa"4.5
U
jf�• � 0 r
t� n
W
• U
R is 1 ° . �\ •
R _- r • w • r1
Data use subject to license.
n
912004 DeLorme XMap®4.5.
D 00p 2L
www.delorme.com MN(5.6"M Data Zoom 14-0
Figure 2-3. Sampling Station No. 2 (indicated by X)on the Pigeon River.
6

• ' XMapA-4.5
It
R
� e
24�7 ;
l� 11
kk
no L
4
Data use subject to license.
a
®2004 DeLorme.XMap®4.5.
D low 2M
www clelorme.com MN(5.5"W) Data Zoom 14-0
Figure 2-4. Sampling Station No. 3 (indicated by X) on the Pigeon River.
7

/ o•
OP
LA
9U Q
i4A7ERVllLE IiF. � Va=•p y
•=ry 0
R \\ VV
l' ('IGPIf O
3568 U
O
5"91
40.
1347
. ....
Figure 2-5. Sampling Station 4A(indicated by A) and Station 4B (indicated by B)on the Pigeon River.
8

XMap(f4.5
✓''- �l � _� is � ��- �� t�� YJ � �' '.
}},
/
Data use subject to license.
fl
0 2004 DeLorme.XMap®4.5.
0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000 3600
www.delotme-com MN(5 4.W) Data Zoom 13-0
Figure 2-6. Sampling Station No. 5 (indicated by X) on the Pigeon River.
9

3. SAMPLING OBJECTIVES
In accordance with the study plan (EA 2001a), the goal of the fish collection effort was to collect
one composite bottom feeder fillet sample at each of the six sampling stations. Each composite
consisted of 3 to 5 similarly sized (shortest specimen within 75% of the length of the longest)
adult individuals of the target species. Because of the difficulty in obtaining some species of
bottom feeding fish at specific sites, target species varied among sites. Black redhorse
(Moxostoma duquesne:) was the target species at Stations 1 and 5, common carp (Cyprinus
carpio) was the target at Station 3, and both common carp and channel catfish (Ictalurus
punctatus) were targeted at sites 2 and 4A and 4B. In addition to fillet samples, three whole
common carp were collected from Station 4A.
In summary fish were collected as follows:
• Bottom feeder fillet composite—one sample at all six locations
• Catfish fillet composite—one sample at Station 2, 4A, and 4B
• Common carp whole body composite—one sample from Station 4A
In addition to locations 2, 4A and 4B, the study plan called for the collection of a catfish fillet
composite sample at Station 3, if specimens were encountered. However, no specimens were
encountered at this location in 2005.
Every reasonable effort was made to collect the desired size, species and/or number of fish;
-_ - however, the outcome of the sampling effort each year is dependent on physical river conditions
and the natural diversity and abundance of target fishes at each sampling location. The 2005
Pigeon River collections yielded the desired species at each location. In addition, the number of
specimens collected made it possible to composite individuals of similar weight and length (with
larger/adult specimens preferred), and the 75 percent rule was met for all samples.
10

4. FISH COLLECTION TECHNIQUES AND LEVEL OF EFFORT
. 1
Sampling was conducted during 10 August — 4 September 2005. Notes were recorded at each
sampling station with regard to the type of sampling gear, level of effort (time), and habitat
(Table 4-1). Surface water temperature measurements are summarized below:
Station RM Date Temp °C
1 64.5 8/17 21.6
2 59.0 8/28 23.3
3 52.3 9/4 22.7
5 19.0 9/4 21.5
All fish submitted for tissue analysis were measured to the nearest millimeter (total length) and
weighed to the nearest gram (wet weight). These data are summarized in Table 4-2. For 2005,
the mean total length of carp was 634 mm and fish ranged from 551-736 nun. The mean for carp
total length was 618 mm for fish submitted for analysis between 1993 and 2003; thus, several
(three) of the fish analyzed in 2005 differed by more than one standard deviation ((i.e., 567-669
mm) compared to fish submitted for analysis in previous years.
The field investigators were equipped with an array of collecting gear, which enabled sampling
of all habitats regardless of river conditions. U.S. EPA recommends active methods of fish
collection in the Sampling Guidance Manual (Versar 1984), such as electrofishing, trawling,
angling, or seining. These are preferred over passive methods (e.g., gill nets, trap nets, trot lines)
because samples are collected from more defineable areas (Versar 1984). Electrofishing was
used at all stations. At stations 4A and 4B (Waterville Lake), gill nets were also necessary
because of water depth. A boat electrofishing unit(pulsed direct current) was used at all stations.
The boat electrofisher was equipped with a Smith Root Type VIA electrofisher, and powered by
a 240-volt, 5000 Watt generator. Electrofishing techniques followed those described in the
National Dioxin Study(Versar 1984).
Fish collection techniques and level of effort (time) expended at each of the six stations are
summarized in Table 4-1. Total study effort included a minimum of 40 minutes electrofishing at
Stations 1, 2, 3, and 5; fish for tissue analysis were obtained in a relatively brief period, i.e., 42,
40, 41, and 41 minutes respectively. For Stations 4A/4B, common carp were difficult to collect;
it took 460 gill-net hours and approximately six hours of electrofishing over a four-day period to
obtain the necessary specimens.
11

Table 4-1. Fish Collection Techniques and Level of Effort.
Station Sampling Sampling
Number RM Dates Techniques Level of Effort Comments
1 64.5 17 Aug 05 Boat 42 min. An approximate 0.1 RM reach of river was sampled;water level
electrofishing normal—visibility fair/poor due to construction at Canton City Water
Intake; station characterized by runs,and pools with primarily cobble
boulder substrates interspersed with gravel and sand along margins.
2 59.0 28 Aug 05 Boat 40 min. Less than 0.2 RM reach of river was sampled; water level normal—
electrofishing visibility fair; station characterized by run and pool habitats,with
substrate primarily cobble/gravel with some boulders and bedrock,
and with sand and silt deposits throughout, sand/gravel deposited
along the margins.
3 52.3 4 Sept 05 Boat 41 min. An approximate 0.1 RM reach of river was sampled;water level was
electrofishing above normal—visibility good,station characterized by runs and
pools with primary bedrock and boulder substrates,with
sand/gravel/fines deposited along margins.
4A 41.5 11-12 Aug 05 Gill nets 158 net-hrs An approximate 0.3 RM reach of river was sampled; lake level was
normal—visibility good; station characterized by deep water lentic
Boat 42 min. habitat with bedrock and soft, unconsolidated bottom substrates.
electrofishing Sampling involved gill net sets just off the left and right shores;
electrofished entire area.
4B 39.0 10 Aug 05 Gill nets 302 net-hrs An approximate 1.0 RM reach was sampled; lake level was above
normal—visibility good; station characterized by deep-water lentic
Boat 300 min. habitats with bedrock and soft bottom substrates. Sampling involved
electrofishing gill nets and electrofishing throughout the forebay. Nets were set off
banks as well as horizontal set at near surface, midwater and bottom
sets.
5 19.0 4 Sept 05 Boat 41 min. An approximate 0.1 RM reach of river was sampled;water level was
electrofishing normal—visibility good to excellent; station was a large pool and run
associated shoal habitat; substrate boulder and cobble.
12

Table 4-2. Summary of fish composites collected at six stations in the Pigeon River,August-
' September 2005.
Total Total
Length whole body
Date Station Species (mm) (9) Sample type Composite
17 Aug 05 1 Black redhorse 365 410 Fillet R'
(RM 64.5)Black redhorse 359 400
Blackredhorse 381 500
Black redhorse 380 460
Black redhorse 384 490
MEAN 374 452
28 Aug 05 2 Common carp 650 3742 Fillet R
(RM 59.0)Common carp 640 3901
Common carp 595 2676
Common carp 630 3729
MEAN 629 3512
Channel catfish 460 821 Fillet R
Channel catfish 446 748
Channel catfish 443 848
MEAN 450 806
4 Sept 05 3 Common carp 630 3850 Fillet R
(RM 52.3)Common carp 625 3405
Common carp 625 3340
Common carp 605 3315
MEAN 621 3478
11 Aug 05 4A Channel catfish 475 990 Fillet R
(RM 41.5)Channel catfish 508 1009
Channel catfish 467 900
Channel catfish 475 1140
Channel catfish 464 1050
MEAN 478 1018
4A Common carp 665 4450 Fillet R
(RM 41.5)Common carp 632 3940
Common carp 601 3180
MEAN 633 3857
12 Aug 05 4A Common carp 654 3900 Whole body WBb
(RM 41.5)Common carp 551 2688
Common carp 614 3840
MEAN 606 3476
13

Table 4-2. (continued) Summary of fish composites collected at six stations in the Pigeon River,
August-September 2005.
Total Total
Length whole body
Date Station Species (mm) (9) Sample type Composite
10 Aug 05 4B Channel catfish 524 1420 Fillet R
(RM 39.0)Channel catfish 513 1520
Channel catfish 552 2010
Channel catfish 603 2360
Channel catfish 530 1630
MEAN 544 1788
10 Aug 05 4B Common carp 595 2830 Fillet R
(RM 39.0)Common carp 660 4380
Common carp 716 5700
Common carp 736 5870
MEAN 677 4695
4 Sept 05 5 Black redhorse 478 1310 Fillet R
(RM 19.3)Black redhorse 440 1020
Blackredhorse 486 1670
Black redhorse 501 1740
MEAN 476 1435
� 1
. 1
Ra right fillet composite
WBb whole body composite
14

Target species were collected at all sampling stations in 2005. Common carp, the target bottom
feeder at stations 2, 3, 4A, and 4B, were collected (and prepared for fillet and/or whole body
analysis) at those stations. In addition, the preferred target bottom feeding species (black
redhorse) was collected from Stations 1 and 5. The physiography of the Waterville Lake
Stations 4A and 4B necessitated the use of gill nets for the collection of bottom feeding species.
All nets were pulled and examined on a regular basis to reduce stress or specimen mortality. All
specimens submitted for analysis appeared healthy and in good condition. Lengths and weights
for each fish making up each composite are provided in Table 4-2.
Bottom feeder fillet composites consisted of five black redhorse at Station 1, 4 black redhorse at
Station 5, four common carp at Stations 3 and 4B, and three common carp at Station 4A. In
addition, a second bottom feeder fillet composite consisting of 3, 5, and 5 channel catfish were
submitted for analysis from Stations 2, 4A, and 4B respectively. A single bottom feeder whole
body composite consisting of three common carp from Station 4A was submitted for analysis
(Table 4-2).
All ten composites submitted for analysis in 2005 met the US EPA Region IV recommendation
(Cunningham 1990) that the smallest specimen in each composite be equal to or greater than 75
percent of the total length of the largest specimen in that composite (Tables 4-2 and 6-4).
15

5. SAMPLE PREPARATION
All fish tissue samples were prepared in accordance with U.S. EPA Region IV recommendations
(Cummingham 1990) as described in EA (2001a). To prevent cross-contamination between
sampling stations, all sampling equipment likely to come into contact with the fish was rinsed
extensively with site water between stations.
Specimens collected at each station were sorted by size and species, and target species were
identified. The objective was to obtain a 3 to 5-fish composite sample at each station (plus a
catfish composite for each station in Waterville Lake [and if present, from Stations 2 and/or 3] as
well as a common carp whole body composite from either station in Waterville Lake),which met
the species and size objectives discussed in Section 3. From the target fishes collected,
specimens of similar length and weight were selected for each composite sample. All specimens
retained were immediately placed on ice for later processing. For each fish retained, length and
weight data were recorded on the appropriate fisheries data sheet.
Following identification of target organisms, selection of composite samples, and collection of
length/weight data, each specimen was prepared for shipment and analysis. Bottom feeder fillet
samples consisted of epaxial muscle tissue and skin from one side of the fish. Bottom feeder
whole body samples consisted of the entire fish. Fillet samples were prepared by removing
scales (or removing the skin from catfishes) and then making an incision behind the opercula(on
both sides of the fish) from the base of the spine (behind the skull) to just below the pectoral fin.
Care was taken to cut through the epaxial muscle without puncturing the rib cage or gut lining.
A second incision was made along the length of the spine to the caudal fin on both sides of the
fish. The epaxial muscle was then gently cut away from the rib cage to obtain a fillet. In this
fashion, all flesh and skin was obtained from head to tail on both sides of the fish. Fillet knives
were solvent rinsed (hexane and acetone) between fish from different stations. Each composite
sample was wrapped in aluminum foil (dull side toward sample), labeled, and placed on dry ice.
Right side fillets were sent to Severn Trent Laboratory for analysis; left side fillets were retained
by Blue Ridge Paper Products as back-up fillets.
All individual specimens (fillets or whole bodies) composing a single composite sample were
placed together in a water-tight plastic bag labeled with the station name, sample number, and
the number of samples in that composite. All labels had the following information:
• sample identification number,
• sample location and station identification,
• . sampling team initials,
• date of collection,
• species name,
• sample type (i.e.,fillet or whole body)
A chain-of-custody form was filled out for each cooler of samples submitted for.analysis. Each
form included composite specific information and instructions. Copies of all chain-of-custody
records are provided in Appendix A.
16

All samples were frozen solid prior to shipment to the analytical laboratory. The frozen samples
were packed on dry ice, shipped via overnight delivery on 8/15/05 for the first batch and 9/8/05
for the second batch, and were received at Severn Trent Laboratory—Sacramento on 8/16/05 and
9/9/05, respectively. The back-up fillets were retained in a freezer at the Canton Mill until
laboratory analytical results for the right side fillets were received and verified. The backup
fillets were then destroyed.
17

6. ANALYTICAL RESULTS
The fish tissue samples were received in two shipments (8/16/05 and 9/9/05) at Severn Trent
Laboratory (STL) — Sacramento California under chain-of-custody protocol. Once received at
the laboratory, samples were compared to the chain-of-custody record to verify the content of
each shipping container. Each individual fish or fillet within a composite was homogenized
separately by STL personnel, and equal aliquots of the homogenate from each fish were removed
to constitute the composite. Dioxin and furan analyses were performed using high resolution
Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) as required by the U.S. EPA. Laboratory
documentation of all chemical extractions and analyses are provided in Appendix B. All
chemical analyses of the samples were conducted using EPA Method 8290 (U.S. EPA 1994) as
specified in the Fish Tissue Sampling Study Plan (EA 2001 a).
The quality of the analytical results was assured through reproducible calibration and testing of
the extractions and GC/MS systems. A laboratory method blank was prepared along with each
batch of samples. The laboratory also used precision and recovery standards for determination
of initial and ongoing precision and accuracy.
Laboratory reports for all 2005 Pigeon River fish tissue dioxin, furan, and lipid content analyses
are provided in Appendix B. Each laboratory analysis report form lists the concentration of
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD), 2,3,7,8,-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (TCDF), and all
other CDD/CDF isomers. Results of the dioxin, furan, and lipid content analyses are
summarized in Table 6-1. Detection limits are reported parenthetically on a sample-specific
basis. Only fillet results are discussed below because North Carolina Department of Health and
Human Services (NC DHHS) considers only fillet results when issuing health advisories.
Concentrations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD in bottom feeder composite fillet samples were below the level
of detection at Stations 1, 2, 3, 4A (channel catfish), 4B (channel catfish), and 5 (Table 6-1).
Concentrations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD were detectable only in common carp composite fillet samples
from Stations 4A (1.3 ppt) and 4B (2.8 ppt); and from the whole body composite sample
collected from Station 4A (2.1 ppt). Furan isomer (2,3,7,8-TCDF) analysis results indicated a
concentration range from non-detect [Stations 1, 2, 4A (channel catfish), 4B (channel catfish),
and 51 to 1.7 ppt(common carp) at Station 4B.
Examination of the data in Table 6-1 indicates that all fish collected during this study had body
burdens well below the FDA dioxin health advisory level (25 ppt) for fish tissue [as established
and presented in FDA(1981, 1983) and Cordle (1983)].
The NC DH14S recommends an average dioxin toxicity equivalent(TEQ) level of 3 ppt or less in
fish tissue fillets. The NC DHHS issues dioxin fish tissue advisories at an average toxicity
equivalent of 4 ppt or greater (e-mail correspondence with Dr. Luanne Williams 18 January
2005). The TEQ of each chlorodibenzodioxin and furan (CDD/F) isomer is based on the toxicity
equivalence factor (TEF) (WHO 1997 and Table 6-2) as described in the 2001 Study Plan (EA
2001b). The TEQ value is calculated assuming additivity of effects for the individual congeners
of dioxin and furans and is expressed as an "equivalent amount of 2,3,7,8-TCDD" (NC DEHNR
1991). The measured concentration of each CDD/F isomer, when multiplied by its appropriate
TEF, yields the TEQ of that isomer(the toxic concentration of that isomer relative to the toxicity
of 2,3,7,8-TCDD). In cases where concentrations were below the level of detection, a value of
zero was used in the TEQ calculation.
18

Table 6-1. Summary of the Pigeon River Fish Tissue Analysis Results 2005.
Station Percent
Number Sample ID Composite/Sample Tyke 2.3.7.8-TCDD(a) 2.3,7,8-TCDF(a) Linid
i SITE 1 black redhorse 5 fillet samples ND(DL=0.35) ND(DL=0.22) 1.4
2 SITE 2 common carp 4 fillet samples ND(DL=0.45) ND(DL=0.47) 2.7
SITE 2 channel catfish 3 fillet samples ND(DL=0.29) ND(DL=0.24) 4.7
3 SITE 3 common carp 4 fillet samples ND(DL=0.46) 0.591b) 3.2
4A SITE 4A channel catfish 5 fillet samples ND(DL=0.36) ND(DL=0.30) 5.4
SITE 4A common carp 3 fillet samples 1.3 1.1 9.0
SITE 4A common carp 3 whole body samples 2.1 1.3 13
4B SITE 4B channel catfish 5 fillet samples 0.76ro1 ND(DL=0.45) 9.8
SITE 4B common carp 4 fillet samples 2.8 1.7 10
- 5 SITE 5 black redhorse 4 fillet samples ND(DL=0.41) 0.69(b) 4.1
(a)Units=ppt(parts per trillion)or pg/g(picogram/gram)
(b)Estimated results. Result is less than the reporting limit
(ND)Not detected, concentrations below the instrument detection limit.
19

Table 6-2. Toxicity Equivalence Factors for CDD/F Isomers.
DIOXIN DIBENZOFURAN
Isomer(a) TEF(b) TEF(b)
2,3,7,8-TCDD 1 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.1 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.1
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.01
OCDD 0.0001 OCDF 0.0001
(a) In each homologous group, the relative toxicity factor for the isomers not listed is 1/100 of
the value listed for the other isomers in that homologous group.
- ,= (b) TEF=toxic equivalence factor=relative toxicity assigned.
20

The TEQ calculation and summarization schemes presented in Table 6-3 followed methods used
by NC DHHS (NC (DEHNR 1991). TEQ values in 2005 are very similar to those reported in
2004. Bottom feeder fillet TEQ values were below the NC DHHS advisory limit of 4 ppt at all
stations (Table 6-3).
Table 6-4 illustrates 2,3,7,8 TCDD concentrations in common carp fillet samples collected in
2005, and results for previous years (1990-2004) are in Appendix C (EA 2004). Since 1990,
2,3,7,8-TCDD concentrations in carp fillets have declined dramatically (94-99 percent) at all
sampling stations (Table 6-4, Appendix C, Figure 6-1). As in 2004, 2,3,7,8,-TCDD
concentrations in carp fillets in 2005 were detected only from Stations 4A and 4B in Waterville
Lake. The concentrations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD in carp fillets from Waterville Lake in 2005 were
consistent with the low values (<3 ppt) reported in 2004. Although the concentration of 2,3,7,8-
TCDD in common carp fillets collected from Station 4B was slightly higher in 2005 than 2004
(2.8 compared to 1.6 ppt) the amount detected is still lower than during any other year in which
analyses were conducted. The size of the specimens evaluated is likely correlated to
concentration of 2,3,7,8-TCDD in tissues because the fish may be older, which allows more time
for bioaccumulation of the contaminant to occur. In addition, percent lipid content may be
higher for larger specimens, and thus, higher concentrations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD may be found
because of their strong tendency to partition into lipids. The mean weight of common carp
collected from Stations 4A and 4B were larger (3.857 kg, Station 4A; 4.695 kg, Station 4B)than
carp collected in 2004 (2.673 kg, Station A; 3.207 kg, Station 4B), and those collected at Station
4A were greater than the mean weight of carp collected for the entire period of 1999-2003 (3.193
kg, Station 4A; 5.042 kg, Station 4B).
Despite the larger size of common carp submitted in 2005 relative to 2004, tissue concentrations
of 2,3,7,8-TCDD were consistent with values reported in 2004, and the same conclusion drawn
in 2004 can be applied to the 2005 results, i.e., that the concentration of 2,3,7,8-TCDD in carp
fillets from Waterville Lake has declined by 94-99 percent during the period from 1990 through
2004 (Figure 6-1). Concentrations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD in channel catfish fillets were found to be
below detection levels at all sites as been reported in annual analyses conducted since 2002.
21

Table 6-3. Summary of CDD/F Isomer Analyses, Toxicity Equivalent Factors and Toxicity Equivalent Values for the 2005 Pigeon
River Fish.
STATION I STATION 2
Black redhorse-fillet Common carp fillet Channel catfish fillet
CDD/F isomers TEFI`l Results(a) TE ro) Resulty) TEOro> Results(al TEOcb�
Dibenzodioxin
2,3,7,8-TCDD 1.0 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1.0 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 ND 0.000 5.4 0.054 ND 0.000
OCDD 0.0001 5.5(d) 0.001 40 0.004 5.9(d) 0.001
Dibenzofuran
2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.01 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
OCDF 0.0001 ND 0.000 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
Total TEQ 0.001 0.058 0.001
22

Table 6-3. (continued). Summary of CDD/F Isomer Analyses, Toxicity Equivalent Factors and Toxicity Equivalent Values for the
2005 Pigeon River Fish.
STATION 3 STATION 5
Common carp-fillet Black redhorse
CDD/F isomers TEF(`) Result p TEQT Resultsca) TEOro'
Dibenzodioxin
2,3,7,8-TCDD 1.0 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1.0 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,7,8,9-I-JxCDD 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 4.5(d) 0.045 ND 0.000
OCDD 0.0001 39 0.004 ND 0.000
Dibenzofuran
2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1 0.59(d) 0.059 0.69(d) 0.069
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.01 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
OCDF 0.0001 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
Total TEQ 0.108 0.069
23

S
N N W I J N w N W e D N lJ N N lJ W f D d
N
O AV7O. O\ AV 1V 700 � OAV 701A �70o G N. �• Q�
N
Cy��O co oo coQ C� m Cy�`p oow � C) CCD ^
� xx x x x dd � dxxOd
o00bUbd '7 �
�a
000000000 00000 -- -- .j
0 0
O
M
H d
O
p- � n
�Hy OdCy00ddOb Nzzzzz c
10 co ddddd o 0
CD
o Oo00oo000 000000o H �
000000000 0 00000
N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O N o 0 0 0 o m
rn o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 2 ti
N X
P
n'
K
trJ
.O
zzzzzzzz - zWzz 0
d d w a O V pCD
O i .J n e
P 0 �1
w z cwi
N o00000000 000C, CCl � -z y
O O O O O O O O O O .A CD O O
to OO OOOOO O to
H
0
x
0
o
zzzzzzzz - wiz wzzN
ddddddddw O dAdd h O
^ G C p CD
v N n M
m
C
7' (D
�O COOO COOO " OIJ0 O0 iJOO -- Ci7N
O CD O O O O ID O W 0 0 0 0 t'
w o0000000 w o 0o gd ,..
v~ 0 1

Table 6-3. (continued). Summary of CDD/F Isomer Analyses, Toxicity Equivalent Factors and Toxicity Equivalent Values for the
2005 Pigeon River Fish.
STATION 4B
Channel catfish—fillet Common carp fillet
CDD/F isomers TEF(`) Results(a) TE L Results(a) TE L
Dibenzodioxin
2,3,7,8-TCDD 1.0 0.76(d) 0.76 2.8 2.8
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1.0 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.1 ND 0.000 3.2(d) 0.32
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.01 8.8 0.088 29 0.29
OCDD 0.0001 48(e) 0.005 120(e) 0.012
Dibenzofuran
2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 1.7 0.17
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.05 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.5 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.1 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.01 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.01 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
OCDF 0.0001 ND 0.000 ND 0.000
Total TEQ 0.853 3.592
(a)Units=ppt(parts per trillion)or pg/g(pictogram per gram)
(b) Dioxin Equivalent Concentration using methodology from U.S. EPA(1989)
(c)Toxicity_Equivalent Factors from World Health Organization(WHO 1997)
(d) Estimated result. Result is less than reporting limit.
(e) Method blank contamination. The associated method blank contains the target analyte at a reportable level.
(ND) CDD/F isomer concentrations were not detected, therefore a value of zero was applied to the TEQ calculation.
25

Table 6-4. Results of dioxin concentrations in fish fillets from fish samples collected (August
and September 2005) at sites in the Pigeon River associated with Blue Ridge Paper Canton Mill
dioxin monitoring program.
Length Range
Station Species Number of fish (min) 2,3,7,8-TCDD(a b)
1 Black redhorse 5 359-384 ND (0.35)
RM 64.5
2 Common carp 4 595-650 ND (0.45)
RM 59.0 Channel catfish 3 443-460 ND (0.29)
3 Common carp 4 605-630 ND (0.46)
RM 52.3
4A Common carp 3 601-665 1.3
RM 41.5 Channel catfish 5 464-508 ND (0.36)
4B Common carp 4 595-736 2.8
RM 39.0 Channel catfish 5 513-603 0.76(°)
5 Black redhorse 4 440-501 ND (0.41)
RM 19.0
Total fish filleted= 33
(a)Dioxin analyses conducted by Severn Trent Laboratories.
(b) Units=ppt(parts per trillion) or pg/g (pictogram/gram)
(c) Estimated result. Result is less than the reporting limit.
ND =Non-detectable at the detection limit in parentheses.
26

Figure 6-1. TCDD Concentrations in Carp Fillets Collected from the Pigeon River, 1990-2005
(Stations 2 and 3).
20
15 - --
e t Station 2
0
•� — a— Station 3
r 10 - —
m
_a
A
G
U
F
5
Y a a
b
C C
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
YEAR
a) TCDD concentrations at Station 3 were not detected,therefore,the value plotted represents the detection limit for that sample.
b) TCDD concentrations at Station 2 were not detected,therefore,the value plotted represents the detection[limit for that sample.
c) TCDD concentrations at Stations 2 and 3 were not detected from 2000 through 2005,therefore,the values plotted represent detection limits for those samples.
27

Figure 6-1 (Cont.). TCDD Concentrations in Carp Fillets Collected from the Pigeon River, 1990-2005
(Stations 4A and 4B).
70
\
60 —i
\
\
50 —
\ \ —�Station 4A
G \ /
Station 4B
40 1
m
a �
30
o
U �
F �
20 —
\
\
\
10
0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
YEAR
28

Figure 6-2. TCDD Concentrations in Catfish Fillets Collected from Stations 4A and 413 in Waterville
Lake, 1997-2004.
2.50 - -
2.00 • - -- - - -- — -
o • Station 4A ■ Station 4B
0
1.50 - --
a,
a
h i
m
•
G I
G 1.00 -
F • Is
■
•
■ b
0.50 -
■ a b a
e ■ • • a •
0.00
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
YEAR
a) TCDD concentrations at Stations 4A and 48 were not detected,therefore,the values plotted represent the detection limits for those samples.
b) TCDD concentrations at Station 48 were not detected,therefore,the value plotted represents the detection limit for that sample.
29

7. REFERENCES
Cordle, F. 1983. Use of epidemiology in the regulation of dioxins in the food supply, in
Accidental Exposure to Dioxins: Human Health Aspects (F. Coulston and F. Pocchiara,
eds.),pp 245-256. Academic Press,New York.
Cunningham, W.R. 1990. Letter to Paul Wiegand. 30 January.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 1990. Study Plan for the Monitoring of Dioxin
in Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 11370.01, prepared for Champion International
Corporation, Canton,North Carolina.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 1991. Results of the 1990 Dioxin Monitoring in
Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 11370.02, prepared for Champion International Corporation,
Canton,North Carolina.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 1992. Results of the 1991 Dioxin Monitoring in
Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 11370.03, prepared for Champion International Corporation,
Canton,North Carolina.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 1993a. Results of the 1992 Dioxin Monitoring
in Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 11370.05, prepared for Champion International
Corporation, Canton,North Carolina. April.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 1993b. Results of the 1993 Dioxin Monitoring
in Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 11370.06, prepared for Champion International
Corporation, Canton,North Carolina. December.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 1994. Results of the 1994 Dioxin Monitoring in
Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 11370.07, prepared for Champion International Corporation,
Canton,North Carolina. December.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 1995. Results of the 1995 Dioxin Monitoring in
Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 13043.01, prepared for Champion International Corporation,
Canton,North Carolina. December.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 1996. Results of the 1996 Dioxin Monitoring in
Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 13176.01, prepared for Champion International Corporation,
Canton,North Carolina. December.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 1997. Results of the 1997 Dioxin Monitoring in
Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 13353.01, prepared for Champion International Corporation,
Canton,North Carolina. November.
30

EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 1998. Results of the 1998 Dioxin Monitoring in
Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 13478.01, prepared for Champion International Corporation,
Canton,North Carolina. December.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 2000. Results of the 1999 Dioxin Monitoring in
Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 13478.01, prepared for Champion International Corporation,
Canton,North Carolina. January.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 2001a. Study Plan for Pigeon River Dioxin
Monitoring in Fish tissue. Prepared for Blue Ridge Paper Products, Canton, North
Carolina. November.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 2001b. Results of the 2000 Dioxin Monitoring
in Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 13745.01,prepared for Blue Ridge Paper Products, Canton,
North Carolina. December.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 2001c. Results of the 2001 Dioxin Monitoring
in Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 13900.01, prepared for Blue Ridge Paper Products, Canton,
North Carolina. December.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 2003. Results of the 2002 Dioxin Monitoring in
Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 13900.02, prepared for Blue Ridge Paper Products, Canton,
North Carolina. December.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology Inc. 2004. Results of the 2003 Dioxin Monitoring in
Fish Tissue. EA Report No. 13900.03, prepared for Blue Ridge Paper Products, Canton,
North Carolina. January.
Food and Drug Administration. 1981. FDA advises Great Lakes States to monitor dioxin-
contaminated fish. FDA Talk Paper dated 28 August, in Food Drug Cosmetic Law
Reports,paragraph 41, 321. Commerce Clearing House, hie. 8 September.
Food and Drug Administration. 1983. Statement by Stanford A. Miller, Director, Bureau of
Foods, FDA before the Subcommittee on Natural Resources, Agriculture Research and
Environment, U.S. House of Representatives. 30 June.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1991. Fish Tissue
Dioxin levels in North Carolina: 1990 update. Division of Environmental Management,
Water Quality Section.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1994. Analytical procedures and Quality
Assurance for Multimedia Analysis of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-para-dioxins and
Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans by High-Resolution Gas Chromatography/High-Resolution
Mass Spectrometry(Method 8290).
31

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1989. Interim Procedures for Estimating
Risk Associated with Exposures to Mixtures of Chlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and
Dibenzofurans (CDDs and CDFs) and 1989 Update Report No. EPA/625/3-89/016, U.S.
EPA, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, D.C.
Versar, Inc. 1984. Sampling Guidance Manual for the National Dioxin Study. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Contract 68-01-6160. Work Order Number 8.7.
Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Monitoring and Data Support Division,
Washington,D.C. Final Draft. July.
World Health Organization (WHO). 1997. Exposure and Human Health Reassessment of
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) and Related Compounds: Part II Health
Assessment of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin(TCDD) and Related Compounds.
32

APPENDIX A: CHAIN OF CUSTODY FORMS
APPENDIX B: SEVERN TRENT LABORATORY-SACRAMENTO
ANALYTICAL REPORTS
APPENDIX C: BLUE RIDGE PAPER CANTON MILL FISH FILLET
TISSUE ANALYSIS RESULTS 1990-2004
33

APPENDIX A
CHAIN OF CUSTODY FORMS
34

4
� STLa� � 3� S
Chain c
Custody Record Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc.
STL4124 (0901)
Client p L Project Manager 7 Date Chain of Custody Number
lwE Icy r1 per
rb40-S La. rr &Ud5e)A( 4 3
Address Telleepphonee M (Area Code)//Fax Number Lab N mber
1 -75 /AV a {ry 9 /4e 4 Z7 Z O — (Q Page of
City `0 State Zip?ode /� Site 2C ac I Lab Contact Analysis(Attach list it
v/C� 4� 7 1 �p mores ace is needed
Project Name and Location(State) CarderANaybill Number
' • eo Iii R I yg, 1-1 Gce— 5 d Special Instructions/
ContraGWurchase OrdedOuote No.
Matrix Containers& S Q 6 Conditions of Receipt
J Preservatives
Sample I.D. No.and Description I v o o x x O O
(Containers for each sample may be combined on one line) Date Time l_ a N Z C o k o /`
d F �n �i L� i x i 2 2
5'lYA C1jahndCdgSA REe S 8,011 .5' 1r73Y X X Co-hq s' (teals
tc4A CIA ava(, R 911d 3 e 1t 6'fs X x X Gin, S i 3 (ens
S4 4 a► i 4tA W 5 VIC'k 13o X X
at C, " S v s zr�o x sc 65� �s
R CENECTN GOOD CON0171ON
Possible Hazard Identification Sample Disposal
4eamay ea
Non-Hazard ❑ Flammable ❑ Skin Irritant ElPoison B ❑ Unknown ❑ Return To Client ❑ Disposal By Lab ❑Archive Far Months gthan I month)
Turn Around Time Required OC Requirements(Specify)
❑24Hours P 48 Hours ❑ 7 Days ❑ 14 Days ❑ 21 Days ❑ Other
1.Reli u y Date Time 1.Received y Date Time
/3 z/(O g
2.Roll d By - D to Time 2. eceive y Date Time
3.Re
>s os s
p ishetl By Daf Time 3.Re e y at Time
Comments
DISTRIBUTION: WHITE-Returned to Client with Report, CANARY-Stays with the Sample; PINK-Field Copy

� � ®®' STL 13' a
Chain o;
Custody Record Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc.
STL4124 (0901)
ClientI p p Project�Manager ] Date Chain of Custody Number
l IYiC. e GrO�i ' lAY)- �1 601 $� /3 as141738
Adtlress ,ram Telephone Numb r/(Area
/Code)lFFax Number Lab Number /
I��7 AQ.)K ' �l gZ8 !O (O Ito�T Page r of
City^- � State Zip Code rte Contact Lab Contact Analysis(Attach list if
�Li.ydzi'n C Z 71 ak( tens mores ace is needed
Project Name and Location(State) / ` CarderlWaybill Number
r, e� 1 w�5,5tte ^ $� /V C _ Special Instructions/
ContrVVPurchass OrdeNOuote No. Conditions of Receipt
Containers 8 SI P
Matrix � preservatives
Sample I.D. No.and Description Date Time
(Containers for each sample may be combined on one line) p
C�1s+trLa1 e /r' O 1Z ®S 5�
C�U Q �dLC ih7k> 612 C'O �i
f; (F a r•r.-...
tu_H cap;
2005
IN
Possible Hazard Identification Sample Disposal
(A fee may be assessed if samples are retained
Non-Hazard El Flammable El skin irritant El Poison B El Unknown ❑ Return To Client ❑ Disposal By lab ❑Archive For Months longer than 1 month)
Turn Around Time Required OC Requirements(Specify)
❑ 24 Ho rs 48 Hours ❑ 7 Days ❑ 14 Days ❑ 21 Days ❑ Other
1.Relin u he B 8d Date Time 1.Receive By Dafe Time
• !3 z1I0 13 0 ;110
2.Re nq Date Time 2111eveived By Date Time
is or 1� 23 1
3.Reinq shed By D e Time 3.Received y Date Time
Comments
DISTRIBUTION: WHITE-Returned to Client with Report. CANARY-Stays with the Sample; PINK-Field Copy

® � ®®' STL
Chain o
Custody Record Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc.
STL-4124 (0901)
Client Projec
t ct Manager Date Chain of Custody Number
u �{ -F Gf UG La �Ui lso n -6-0 ,1 d
Ad1dree/sFS / Teelleephonee Nu bar /rea Cod/e)/Fax Number Lab Number
ry ne e A O Z O (9 b 6 Page / of
City .rate Zip Code S' Contact Lab Conrad Analysis(Attach list if
yk �j. 2 / QN I I)Ic y-� 5 mores ace is needed
Project Name and Location(State) l^ II /^t�0,„ Camer/Wa{ybbiilll tN.ulmbberr
KICw Special Instructions/
Cont t/Purchase Order/Quote No. N Containers& S Conditions of Receipt
Matrix PreservativesVi
KI a _ J
Sample I.D. No.and Description Date Time $ 9
a
(Containers for each sample may be combined on one line)
I l
S1^1 4 8 1 2 �iw e �5l�lic�s�
Si e Co p a1r
C M g Z S 100 0
15(k 2, sl,
r) 9 7- 16-2.0
i 3 9 15 - X
C 4- ' l
i e 5 (AG 6vs�; do A,DOilk 11e7/s�
rs ih �ll�
Possible Hazard Identification Sample Disposal (A fee may be assessed if samples are retained
Non-Hazard ElFlammable [I Skin Irritant ❑ Poison B ElUnknown ❑ Return To Client ❑ Disposal By Lab ❑Archive For MQIon er than 1 month)
Turn Around Time Required OC Requirements(Specify) IN 0000 C0N01710N
❑ 24 Hours ❑ 48 Hours ❑ 7 Days ❑ 14 Days ❑ 21 Days ❑ Other r 6NL)Ef1 C0C
1.R linquished By 1, n n Date Ti/mge�L 1.Received By Da a Time
VV I{cJ® 16 GJ'W cY�f Jf ��t�
2.Relinquishe By D le I Time 2. ceiVote Dale I I Time
3.R linquished By If Date Time 3.Racal By r e Time
Comments
DISTRIBUTION: WHITE-Returned to Client with Report., CANARY-Stays with the Sample; PINK-Field Copy '

APPENDIX B
SEVERN TRENT LABORATORY-SACRAMENTO
ANALYTICAL REPORT
35

• STL
STL Sacramento
880 Riverside Parkway
West Sacramento,CA 95605
Tel:[phone] Fax: [phone]
www.sti-inc.com
September 7, 2005
STL SACRAMENTO PROJECT NUMBER: G5H160272
PO/CONTRACT: 303561
Glenn Rogers
Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
175 Main Street
P.O. Box 4000
Canton, NC 28716
Dear Mr. Rogers,
This report contains the analytical results for the samples received under chain of custody by
STL Sacramento on August 16, 2005. These samples are associated with your Pigeon River
Tissue-Fish,NC project.
The test results in this report meet all NELAC requirements for parameters that accreditation
is required or available. Any exceptions to NELAC requirements are noted in the case
narrative. The case narrative is an integral part of this report.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
W��c al .
Jill Kellmann
Project Manager
-.e- o o Severn Trent Laboratories,Inc.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STL SACRAMENTO PROJECT NUMBER G5H160272
Case Narrative
STL Sacramento Quality Assurance Program
Sample Description Information
Chain of Custody Documentation
BIOLOGIC, 8290,Dioxins/Furans
Samples: l.through 5
Sample Data Sheets
Method Blank Reports
Laboratory QC Reports
BIOLOGIC,Percent Lipids
Samples: 1 through 5
Sample Data Sheets
Raw Data Package

CASE NARRATIVE
STL SACRAMENTO PROJECT NUMBER G511160272
BIOLOGIC,8290,Dioxins/Furans.
Samples: 1 through 5
Elevated levels of OCDD were observed in the laboratory method blank at 25 pglg. OCDD
is ubiquitous in the environment and is considered a common laboratory contaminant. As a
result,our QA policy allows for up to 5X the lower calibration limit to be reported without
further corrective action, as is in this particular case. Please review for significance.
There were no other anomalies associated with this project.
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 1 of 459

STL
<
STL Sacramento Certifications/Accreditations
Certifidie4 Certifyjn�g�Sta:t:ej
Alaska UST-055 Oreeon- CA 200005
I
AT Penns 04-067-0 South Carolina 87014002
200A,
--a `Texas.
Colorado NA Utah* QUAN1
d 2�
A
Florida* E87570 Washington C087
6 0. 2
Hawaii NA Wisconsin 998204680
Michigan 9947 USACE NA
RWIAR A
New Jersey* CA005 USDA Foreign Soil 5-46613
*NELAP accredited. A more detailed parameter list is available upon request.'Update 1/27105
QC Parameter Definitions
QC Batch: The QC batch consists of a set of up to 20 field samples that behave similarly(i.e.,same matrix)
and are processed using the same procedures,reagents,and standards at the same time.
Method Blank: An analytical control consisting of all reagents,which may include internal standards and
surrogates,and is carried through the entire analytical procedure. The method blank is used to define the level
of laboratory background contamination.
Laboratory Control Sample and Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate(LCS/LCSD):
An aliquot of blank matrix spiked with known amounts of representative target analytes. The LCS(and LCSD
as required)is carried through the entire analytical process and is used to monitor the accuracy of the analytical
process independent of potential matrix effects. If an LCSD is performed,it may also used to evaluate the
precision of the process.
Duplicate Sample (DU):Different aliquots of the same sample are analyzed to evaluate the precision of an
analysis.
Surrogates: Organic compounds not expected to be detected in field samples, which behave similarly to
target analytes. These are added to every sample within a batch at a known concentration to determine the
efficiency of the sample preparation and analytical process.
Matrix Spike and Matrix Spike Duplicate(MS/MSD): An MS is an aliquot of a matrix fortified
with known quantities of specific compounds and subjected to an entire analytical procedure in order to indicate
the appropriateness of the method for a particular matrix. The percent recovery for the respective compound(s)
is then calculated. The MSD is a second aliquot of the same matrix as the matrix spike,also spiked,in order to
determine the precision of the method.
Isotope Dilution:For isotope dilution methods,isotopically labeled analogs(internal standards)of the
native target analytes are spiked into the sample at time of extraction. These internal standards are used for
quantitation,and monitor and correct for matrix effects. Since matrix effects on method performance can be
judged by the recovery of these analogs,there is little added benefit of performing MS/MSD for these methods.
MS/MSD are only performed for client or QAPP requirements.
Control Limits: The reported control limits are either based on laboratory historical data,method
requirements,or project data quality objectives. The control limits represent the estimated uncertainty of the
test results.
G3H1bUZfZ STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 2 of 459

SAMPLE SUMMARY
GSHIG0272
SAMPLED SAMP
WO # SAMPLE# CLIENT SAMPLE ID DATE TIME
HHLK1 001 SITE 4A CHANNEL CATFISH R FILLET(5) 08/11/OS 17:35
HHLK5 002 SITE 4A COMMON CARP R FILLET(3) 08/11/05 16:45
HHLK9 003 SITE 4B CHANNEL CATFISH R FILLET(5) 08/10/05 17:30
HHLLD 004 SITE 4B COMMON CARP R FILLET(4) 08/10/05 20:00
HHLLE 005 SITE 4A COMMON CARP (3) WHOLE BODY 08/12/05 17:15
NOTE(S)
-The analytiml results of the samples lisled above are presented on die following pages.
-All calculations are performed before rounding to avoid roundoff errors in calculated results.
-Results noted as'ND'were rot detected at or above the stated limit.
-This report must not be reproduced,except in full,without the written approval of the laboraory.
-Results for the following parameters are never reported on a dry weight basis:color,eorrosivity,density.Oasbpoint,ignilabiltty,layers,odor,
paint filter test,pH,porosity pressure,reactivity,redox potential,specific gravity,spot tests,solids,solubility,temperature,viscosity,and weight.
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 3 of 459

S r y3q p
;Chain of'
, E STL
NCustody Record Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc.
STL-4124 (0901)
Cllenl Project Manager Date Chain of Custody Number
lit � r��v� Cvils is 6s
Address Telephone Numb r(Area Code)/Fax Number Cab Number
IDS cc'i►2 5�f ea? -6 -60W I I Page 1 of _L—
City State 7ZIP Code Silo contactf I Lab Contact Analysis(AttacIt list if
(ardVIA I Alt 'z$71 G, haw( 1-j-vnS
mores ace is needed
Pro act Name and Location(State) j / , CarnarlWaybill Number
FI l ,w�55&e ^ t `Sl7 �1/C C _ Special Instructions/
Contr Purchase OrdedOvote No. Containers& 1 Conditions of Receipt
Matrix Preservatives y x N t
Sample I.D.No.and Description Dafe Time n oo IJ Q
(Containers for each sample may be combined on one line) 3 y h § _ = 2 2
(n p ll
I �u:l�alc. �lJLt 't1%ID Biu_ e0 list
N
d
n
m
3
m i
0
m
m
w
V
w
N
T
O
O
Passible Hazard Identification Sample Disposal
(A lee may be assessed if samples are retained
Non.Hazard ❑ Flammable ❑ Skinirritant ❑ Poison ❑ Unknown ❑ Return To Client ❑ Disposal By Lab ❑Archive For Months longer than I month)
Turn Around Time Required OC Requirements(Specily)
❑24 Ho trs 0,48 Hours ❑ 7 Days ❑ 14 Days ❑21 Days ❑ Other
1.Relin u he 8 p� Dafe Time I.Receive By Date Time
IBC/ , lk3o 2,/!�J - Ij o dt11u
2.Re nq d Date if rime 2. eceived ey Date Time
tS OS'1 1 1S 230
3.Rernq shed By D e Time 3.Received By V Date Time
+� Comments
o_
A
m DISTRIBUTION: WHITE-Returned to Client with Repon: CANARY-Stays with the Sample: PINK-Fteld Copy

437 508
oChain ofmmms STL
NCustody Record Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc.
$7LA124 (0901)
client nn Project Manager Date Chain of Custody Number
Iu.2 111 F �� �[��ZS Larr
Atldress Telephone No (Area Coos)
/Fax Number Lab IV mber
2
Z9 eO Page of
City State Zip coee Site Contac Lab Contact Analysis(Attach list it
A -0 -/3 r7// al `h f , mares ace is needed
Project Name and Location(State) 'V t7 < r0 CanierlWaybi.11l Number
-0 CCe-- 5' Speciallnstructionsl
Contra urchaseOrder/Ouofe No. V) Containers& s Q Conditions of Receipt
@@@Matrix y Preservatives IJ R N 1%f
Sample I.D.No.and Description Date Time g z o goo (� Oo �• �o
(Containers for each sample may be combined on one lino)
Cba s bi z S S' /( y' °735 X X
� IC �tH c�a.. ��]rL•� �' tt �d'�- X x X ant 5t)1P 3 tr](e'�S
N
m
a
ati 1 U 4-� (��+�1 5 S' to 1' 3v 1 IX Ix k
t( L-CIN '71 �2t le 5' ZQDO x /� lGl'x Os/l`� ']5
o+ ,
V
W
N
O
O
O
Passible Hazard Identification Sample Disposal .
(A fee may be asse d itsamples are retained
Non-Hazard El Flammable El Skin Irritant [I Poison B ❑ Unknown ❑ Return To Client ❑ Disposal By Lab ❑Archive For Months longer than t month)
rum Around Time Required CC Requirements(Specify)
024 Hours fD 46Hours ❑ 7Days 1-114 Days ❑21 Days ❑ other
1.Rolin u d y r Date Time I.Received y Date Time
2.Rell dBy Dire Time 2. eceive y Date Time
� iSns 13 � 7
3.Re' ished By Vati I Time 3.Re 'a YP Dat6 Time
0 Comments
_
A
N
1p DISTRIBUTION: WHITE-Returned to Client with Report; CANARY-Stays with the Sample; PINK-Field Copy

LOT RECEIPT CHECKLIST
} „ STL Sacramento
CLIENT f7
Via ? PM_:f&' LOG )Lft-6
LOT# (QUANTIMS ID) C7 QUOTE# LOCATION �aG
Initials Date
DATE RECEIVED - O TIME RECEIVED Aj--
DELIVERED BY ❑ FEDEX ❑ CA OVERNIGHT ❑ CLIENT
❑ AIRBORNE ❑ GOLDENSTATE J& DHL
❑ UPS ❑ BAX GLOBAL ❑ GO-GETTERS
❑ STL COURIER ❑ COURIERS ON DEMAND
❑ OTHER
CUSTODY SEAL STATUS }INTACT ❑ BROKEN ❑ N/A
CUSTODY SEAL #(S) [�-l� ���Y[22 5y
SHIPPPING CONTAINERS) STL ❑ CLIENT ❑ N/A
TEMPERTURE RECORD (IN °C) IR 12' 3 ❑ ❑ OTHER
CDC #(S) ?Zi R`f /q(7 1 01
EMPERATURE BLANK Observed: Pfa0f _ Corrected:
SAMPLE TEMPERATURE
Observed: v o z e Average: _ Corrected Average:
COLLECTORS NAME: t ❑Verified from CDC 0'90t on CDC
pH MEASURED ❑YES ❑ ANOMALY EfN/A
LABELEDBY..........................................................................................
LABELS CHECKED BY...........................................................................
PEER REVIEW QNA
SHORT HOLD TEST NOTIFICATION SAMPLE RECEIVING
WETCHEM ,-�N/A
VOA-ENCORES,Z'N/A
❑ METALS NOTIFIED OF FILTER/PRESERVE VIA VERBAL & EMAIL J�'N/A
P2IDMPLETE SHIPMENT RECEIVED IN GOOD CONDITION WITH ❑ N/A
APPROPRIATE TEMPERATURES, CONTAINERS, PRESERVATIVES
❑ Clouseau ❑TEMPERATURE EXCEEDED (2°C-6°C)'' erfNIA
r]WET ICE ❑ BLUE ICE ❑ GEL PACK ❑ NO COOLING AGENTS USED ❑ PM NOTIFIED
otes:
i Acceptable temperature range for State of Wisconsin samples is<4°c.
G51-176e27BVE NO SPACES BLANK. USE"N/A"IF NOT APF%VAP cHaht@IM0A7 6063 TMQL'NIA'ENTRIES. 0,A-565 5/05 EM, Pa%Rf 459

BIOLOGIC , 8290 ,
Dioxins/Furans
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 7 of 459

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID= SITE 4A C'HMU EL CATFISH R FILLET(5)
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #...: GSHIG0272-001 Work Order #. .. : HHLK11AC Matrix.. ... . . . . : BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled. . . : 08/11/05 Date Received.. : 08/16/05
Prep Date. . .. . .: 08/25/05 Analysis Date.-: 08/28/05
Prep Batch #. . .: 5237517
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD ND 0.36 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDD ND 0.36 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 0.66 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 0.66 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCl:b ND 0.78 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HXCDD ND 1.2 pg/g SW846 6290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0.69 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD ND 1.2 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 12 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD 17 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDD 58 B pg/g SW846 8290
_ 2,3,7,8-TCDF ND 0.30 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF ND 5.0 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.40 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.41 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF ND 5.0 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDF ND 0.54 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.50 Pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.54 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3, 7,8,9-HxCDF ND 0.58 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDF ND 4.6 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF ND 0.61 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HeCDF ND 0.73 Pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF ND 1.2 pg/g S11846 8290
OCDF ND 1.6 pg/g S11846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 96 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 74 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HXCDD 85 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 92 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 88 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,E-TCDF 100 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 84 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 88 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 95 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) :
B Method blank contamination.The anodahad method blank contains the target analyte at a reportable level.
GSH160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 8 of 459

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 4A COMMON CARP R FIL1.ET(3)
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #...: G5H160272-002 Work Order #-__: HHLKSIAC Matrix- . - -- . .. .: BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled. --: 08/11/05 Date Received- -: 08/16/05
Prep Date... . . .. 08/25/05 Analysis Date. .: 08/28/05
Prep Batch #--- : 5237517
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD 1.3 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDD 1.3 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 1.2 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD NO 1.2 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDD ND 0.69 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 3-4 J pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD NO 0.64 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD 3-4 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 29 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD 42 pg/g SW846 829D
OCDD 150 B Pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF 1-1 CON pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF 2.4 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.63 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 1.1 Pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF ND 2.4 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ND 1.1 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.74 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.52 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF ND 0.56 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDF NO 2.9 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF ND 1.9 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.46 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF ND 2.2 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 4.9 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 95 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 77 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 98 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 98 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 90 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 98 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 82 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 91 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 97 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) :
1 Estimated resWt.Result is less than the reporting limit.
8 Method blank contamination.The associated method blank contains the target analyte at a reportable level.
CON Con6tmation amlysis.
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 9 of 459

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 4B CHANNEL CATFISH R FILLET(5)
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #... : G5H160272-003 Work Order #.. .: HHLK91AC Matrix... .. ... . : BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled... : 08/10/05 Date Received. .: 08/16/05
Prep Date...... : 08/25/05 Analysis Date..: 08/28/05
Prep Batch #... : 5237517
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD 0-76 J pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDD 0.76 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 0.77 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 0.77 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDD ND 0.67 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD ND 1.9 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0.60 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD ND 1.9 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 8.8 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD 15 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDD 48 B pg/g SW846'8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF ND 0.45 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF 0.57 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.51 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.74 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF ND 1.9 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.70 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.49 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,B-HxCDF ND 0.53 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF ND 0.57 pg/g SPIS46 8290
Total HxCDF ND 2.0 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF ND 0.95 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.65 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF ND 1.3 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 2.4 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 96 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 80 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 91 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 86 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 79 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 100 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 82 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 84 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 93 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) :
7 Estimated result.Rewlt is less than the reporting limit.
B Method blank conramination.The associated method blank contains me mrget analyze at a reportable level.
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 10 of 459

'Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 4B COMMON CARP R FILLET(4)
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #.. .: GSHIG0272-004 Work Order #---: HHLLDIAC Matrix-- --- - - - - BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled. _ .: 08/10/05 Date Received-.: 08/16/05
Prep Date. .....: 08/25/05 Analysis Date-.: 08/28/05
Prep Batch #. ..: S237517
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD 2•8
Total TCDD pg/q SW846 8290
2.8 pq/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7, 8-PeCDD ND 0.92 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 0.92 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.89 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 3.2 r7 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3, 7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0.71 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HXCDD 6-2
pg/q SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 29 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD 44 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDD 120 B
pg/g SW846 6290
2,3,7,8-TCDF 1.7 CON pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF 3.6
pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.72 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 1.4 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF 2.9 pg/q SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.86 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 1.3 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.52 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF ND 0.56 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDF ND 6.9 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF NO 1.5 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.48 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF 2.7 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 3.4 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 98 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 82 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 95 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 92 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 81 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 96 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 84 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 86 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 96 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) -
1 Esinnated rewlt.Result is less than the reporting Iimit.
8 Method blank contamination.The associated method blank contains the target analyze at a reportable hovel.
CON Confirmation analysis.
GSH160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 11 of 459

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 4A COMMON CARP (3) WHOLE BODY
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #. ..: G5H160272-005 Work Order #. ..: HHLLEIAC Matrix- -- -- - --- BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled. .. : 08/12/05 Date Received..: 08/16/05
Prep Date. . .. . .: 08/25/05 Analysis Date..: 08/28/05
Prep Batch #. ..: 5237517
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD 2.1 pg/g SWB46 8290
Total TCDD 2.1 pg/g SW846 B290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 1.2 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 1.2 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD ND 1.1 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 3.8 J pg'/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0.88 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD 3.8 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-EpCDD 29 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD 42 pg/g SW846 B290
OCDD 130 B pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF 1.3 CON pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF 4.8 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 1.2 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 1.4 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF 4.1 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDF ND 1.2 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.59 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.61 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF ND 0.66 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDF ND 9.7 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF ND 2.0 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.55 pg/9 SW846 8290
Total HpCDF 3.6 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 4.6 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 99 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 83 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 100 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 99 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 83 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 98 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 85 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 88 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 100 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) :
J Estimated result.Reult is lem than the repotting limit.
B Method blank wmamination.The associated method blank Contains the target analyze at reportable level.
CON Confirmation analysis
G5H760272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 12 of 459

QC DATA ASSOCIATION SUMMARY
GSH160272
Sample Preparation and Analysis Control Numbers
ANALYTICAL LEACH PREP
SAMPLE# MATRIX METHOD BATCH # BATCH # MS RUN#
001 BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5237517
BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5237519
002 BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5237517
BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5237519
003 BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5237517
BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5237519
004 BIOLOGIC SPIS46 8290 5237517
BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5237519
005 BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5237517
BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5237519
GSH160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 13 of 459

METHOD BLANK REPORT
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Client Lot #.- - : G5H160272 Work Order #-- -: HH9TAIAA Matrix...... .- - : BIOLOGIC
ME Lot-Sample #: G5H250000-517
Prep Date.. .... : 08/25/OS
Analysis Date.. : 08/28/05 Prep Batch #. ..: 5237517
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD NO 0.30 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDD ND 0.30 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDD ND 0.61 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 0.61
pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4, 7,8-HXCDD ND 0.65 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.55 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0.57 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD ND 0.65 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD ND 2.2 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpC➢D ND 2.2 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDD 25 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF ND 0.21 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF ND 0.21 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.35 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.36 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF ND 0.36 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDF ND 0.51 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HXCDF ND 0.47 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HXCDF ND 0.51 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HXCDF ND 0.55 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HXCDF ND 0.55 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF ND 0.60 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0-44 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF ND 0.91 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 2.2 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 98 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 79 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 98 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 102 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 94 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 106 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 85 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDF 97 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 104 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) -
Calculations are performod before rounding to avoid round-off errors in calculated resulu.
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 14 of 459

LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE EVALUATION REPORT
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Client Lot It. .. : G5H160272 Work Order #_ .. : HH9TAIAC Matrix.. .. .. .. . BIOLOGIC
LCS Lot-Sample#: GSH250000-517
Prep Date. .....: 08/25/05 Analysis Date_.: 08/28/05
Prep Batch #...: 5237517
Dilution Factor: 1
PERCENT RECOVERY
PARAMETER RECOVERY LIMITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD 97 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 105 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDD 105 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 103 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 106 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 104 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
OCDD 113 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF 110 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 104 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 103 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 111 (50 - 3.50) SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 112 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 109 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HXCDP 107 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 99 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCD17 99 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
OCDF 106 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARD RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 99 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 81 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 95 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 105 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 97 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 105 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 87 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDF 95 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 106 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) •
Calculations are performed before rounding to avoid round-off mom in calculated results.
Bold print denotes control parameters
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 15 of 459

LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE DATA REPORT
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Client Lot #.. .: G5H160272 Work Order #.. . : HH9TAIAC Matrix. . .. ... . .: BIOLOGIC
LCS Lot-Sample#: GSH250000-517
Prep Date. . ... . : 08/25/05 Analysis Date. . : 08/28/05
Prep Batch #. ..: 5237517
Dilution Factor: 1
SPIKE MEASURED PERCENT
PARAMETER AMOUNT AMOUNT UNITS RECOVERY METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD 20.0 19.3 Pg/g 97 SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 100 105 Pg/g 105 SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 100 105 pg/g 105 SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HXCDD 100 103 Pg/g 103 SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 100 106 Pg/g 106 SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 100 104 Pg/g 104 SW846 8290
OCDD 200 225 pg/g 113 SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF 20.0 22.0 Pg/g 110 SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,E-PeCDF 100 104 pg/g 104 SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 100 103 pg/g 103 SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDF 100 111 pg/g 111 SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 100 112 Pg/g 13.2 SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 100 109 Pg/g 109 SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxC3)F 100 107 pg/g 107 SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 100 99.0 Pg/g 99 SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 100 98.8 Pg/g 99 SW846 8290
OCDF 200 213 pg/g 106 SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARD RECOVERY LIMITS _
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 99 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 81 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 95 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 105 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 97 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 105 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 87 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 95 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 106 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) -
Calmlations arc performed before munding to avoid round-off errors in almlated maalts.
Bold print denotes control parameters
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 16 of 459

BIOLOGIC ,
Percent Lipids
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 17 of 459

Slue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 4A CHANNEL CATFISH R F12.LET(5)
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #---: G5H160272-001 Work Order #.. .: HHLKIIAA Matrix. . .. ... ..: BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled.. .: 08/11/05 Date Received. .: 08/16/05
Prep Date.. .. . . : 08/25/05 Analysis Date. . : 08/30/05
Prep Batch #- - - : 5237519
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
Percent Lipids 5.4 "s SW846 8290
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 18 of 459

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 4A COMMON CARP R FILLET(3)
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #-- - : G5H160272-002 Work Order #._ _: HHLK51AA Matrix.. ..... .. BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled.. _ : 08/11/05 Date Received_. : 08/16/05
Prep Date- --- - - : 08/25/05 Analysis Date.. : 08/30/05
Prep Batch #. ..: 5237519
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
Percent Lipids 9.0 % SW846 8290
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 19 of 459

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 4B CHANNEL CATFISH R FILLET(5)
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #. . . : GBH160272-003 Work Order #... : HHLK91AA Matrix.. . .. . . . . : BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled... : 08/10/05 Date Received. . : 08/16/05
Prep Date. . . .. .: 08/25/05 Analysis Date. .: 08/30/05
Prep Batch #.. .: 5237519
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
Percent Lipids 9.8 SW846 8290
G5H760272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 20 of 459

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 4B COMMON CARP R FILLET(4)
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #._-: G5H160272-004 Work Order #. . .: HHLLDIAA Matrix-- - - -- - - - BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled_. . : 08/10/05 Date Received__: 08/16/05
Prep Date..... .: 08/25/05 Analysis Date.. : 08/30/05
Prep Batch #...: 5237519
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
Percent Lipids 10 's SW846 8290
4
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 21 of 459

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 4A COMMON CARP (3) WHOLE BODY
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #__.: G5H160272-005 Work Order #.. .: HHLLEIAA Matrix. ... . . . .. BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled.. .: 08/12/05 Date Received_ . : 08/16/05
Prep Date......: 08/25/05 Analysis Date.. : 08/30/05
Prep Batch #.. . . 5237519
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
Percent Lipids 13 $ SW846 8290
l
t
G5H160272 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 22 of 459

e
STL
STL Sacramento
880 Riverside Parkway
West Sacramento,CA 95605
Tel:[phone] Fax: [phone]
www.sU-inc.com
September 29, 2005
STL SACRAMENTO PROJECT NUMBER: G5I090336
PO/CONTRACT: 7605001
Glenn Rogers
Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
175 Main Street
P.O. Box 4000
Canton,NC 28716
Dear Mr. Rogers,
This report contains the analytical results for the samples received under chain of custody by
STL Sacramento on September 9, 2005. These samples are associated with your Pigeon
River Tissue-Fish project.
The test results in this report meet all NELAC requirements for parameters that accreditation
is required or available. Any exceptions to NELAC requirements are noted in the case
narrative. The case narrative is an integral part of this report.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at [phone].
Sine ly,
l�lJl liter
Jill Kellmann
Project Manager
Legdersfn Environmental • Swam Trent Laboratories,Inc.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
STL SACRAMENTO PROJECT NUMBER G5I090336
Case Narrative
STL Sacramento Quality Assurance Program
Sample Description Information
Chain of Custody Documentation
BIOLOGIC, 8290, Dioxins/Furans
Samples: 1 through 5
Sample Data Sheets
Method Blank Reports
Laboratory QC Reports
BIOLOGIC, 8290,Lipids, Percent (8290)
Samples: 1 through 5
Sample Data Sheets
Raw Data Package

CASE NARRATIVE
STL SACRAMENTO PROJECT NUMBER G5I090336
There were no anomalies associated with this project.
G51090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-560D 1 of 470

1N ACCpq
TU t!
STL Sacramento Certifications/Aecreditations
Alaska UST-055 Ore on* CA 200005
:�(;P. 'i r�Fr ip.,"'yrN� M:Mrir r r I! ri�1j i u��rr r, e yIr ra t�i �. r��i@ tj!0
Ili4 ,f"ilrEWAkt7+Vl.���e,.r Ir.I,.,A
Arkansas 04-067-0 South Carolina 87014002
[+'-�-pryp t "-r j rFr} IfF Y F I' !0�¢r o w�j-. .
�tradiai AkAlsl�u`. :..r,! ..:'1tir..�..,.,.� ll �t`.Aflll!rKarih`!i�1 o,.�: e:,T . a`f� �'� i i
Colorado , NA Utah* UANI
Florida* E87570 Washington C087
Hawaii NA Wisconsin 998204680
�r�71�Va�h�1,��.FA]llStBilar�i f ..r3t �i�.. ,.
Michi an 9947
,4+/r}o..M°!:,iT !.PX 31$r„7•.1G t :... �n4 � ,a p"N Ih' USA,(C E ..syv�y TRIP ,NA
aFPrA h $
" ,-New Jersey* C,tt AFF0LL05 USDA Fore' n Soil S-46613
,.t, MIe 44,`�.';W4� xi!idWi'i,.,i:� �i;.`n .�:M�wh4`tiryda .!�y.i�il r.
*NELAP accredited. A more detailed parameter list is available upon request.Update 1127/05
QC Parameter Definitions
QC Batch: The QC batch consists of a set of up to 20 field samples that behave similarly(i.e.,same matrix)
and are processed using the same procedures,reagents,and standards at the same time.
Method Blank: An analytical control consisting of all reagents,which may include internal standards and
surrogates,and is carried through the entire analytical procedure. The method blank is used to define the level
of laboratory background contamination.
Laboratory Control Sample and Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate(LCS/LCSD):
An aliquot of blank matrix spiked with known amounts of representative target analytes. The LCS(and LCSD
as required)is carried through the entire analytical process and is used to monitor the accuracy ofthe analytical
process independent of potential matrix effects. If an LCSD is performed,it may also used to evaluate the
precision of the process.
Duplicate Sample(DU): Different aliquots of the same sample are analyzed to evaluate the precision of an
analysis.
Surrogates: Organic compounds not expected to be detected infield samples,which behave similarly to
target analytes. These are added to every sample within a batch at a known concentration to determine the
efficiency of the sample preparation and analytical process.
Matrix Spike and Matrix Spike Duplicate(MS/MSD): An MS is an aliquot of a matrix fortified
with known quantities of specific compounds and subjected to an entire analytical procedure in order to indicate
the appropriateness of the method for a particular matrix. The percent recovery for the respective compound(s)
is then calculated. The MSD is a second aliquot of the same matrix as the matrix spike;also spiked,in order to
determine the precision of the method.
Isotope Dilution: For isotope dilution methods,isotopically labeled analogs(internal standards)of the
native target analytes are spiked into the sample at time of extraction. These internal standards are used for
quantitation,and monitor and correct for matrix effects. Since matrix effects on method performance can be
judged by the recovery of these analogs,there is little added benefit of performing MS/MSD for these methods.
MS/MSD are only performed for client or QAPP requirements.
Control Limits:The reported control limits are either based on laboratory historical data,method
requirements,or project data quality objectives. The control limits represent the estimated uncertainty of the
test results.
G5i090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 2 of 470
t

GSI090336
SAMPLED SAMP
WO # SAMPLE# CLIENT SAMPLE ID DATE TIME
HJ9X4 001 SITE 1 BLACK REDHORSE O8/17/05 15:25
HJ90F 002 SITE 2 COMMON CARP 08/28/05 16:30
HJ90K 003 SITE 2 CHANNEL CATFISH 08/28/05 15:20
HJ90L 004 SITE 3 COMMON CARP 09/04/05 19:55
HJ90M 005 SITE 5 BLACK REDHORSE 09/04/05 18:35
NOTE(S) -
--fhe analytical results of the samples listed above are prezmed on the fallowing pages.
-All calculations are performed before rounding to avoid round-off errors in calculated results.
-Results noted as'ND"were not detected at or above the stated limit.
-This report must not be reproduced,except in full,without the written approval of the laboratory.
-Results for the following parameters are never reported on a dry weight basis:color,mrrosivity,density,fashpuiny igniubility,layers,odor,
paint filter test,pH,porosity pressure,reactivity,redox potential,specific gravity,spot tests,solids,solubility,temperature.viscosity,and weight.
G5i090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 3 of 470

® ® 5TL 5 ` who t3
a Chain
w Custody Record Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc.
m
STL•4124 (0e01)
Client Project Manager Date Chain of Custodv Number
u -10-p
TeipchoneeN764416
ber rea Code)/Fax Number Lab Number
city YD Zone / 0ZO 6 �6 I
Page � of
State Zp Code Si Contact Lab ContaG Analysis(Attach list if
c— Z ) 6 Qµ t 1)rjd.n s mores ace is needed
Project Name and Location(State) fV (( 1�/� CameoWaybitt Number
I e-- $VI l� awl Special Instructions/
Cowl3blIPurchase ordedOuote No. 03 Containers$ S 4 Conditions of Receipt
Matrix .� Preservatives 341 v N , J
Sample I.D.No.and Description Date Time
(Containers for each sample may be combined on one line) y y j i = x 2 2 Q
to
i �
5 i el l Z CoM e 65 �ltels�
( ,e2 �o Ca'r
S' s�
00160 eslC� ll4
o 6i 3 X Win. os�fe(UTA �s
ti X X
Possible Hazard Identification Sample Disposal
(A lee may be assessed if samples are retained
Non•Hazard ❑ Flammabte ❑Skin Irritant ❑ Poison 8 ❑Unknown ❑ Return To Client ❑Disposal By Lab ❑Archive For Ion er than 1 month)
Turn Around Time Required OC Requirements(Specify) (JT1 GOAD CDNDITI(3N
❑ 24 Hours ❑48 Hours El7Days ❑ 14 Days El 21 Days ❑Other WYUEH CUC
1.R linquished B n/ Oate Tiim�e,` 1.Received ByDa e / Time
y✓V 1 Ycn�1� Y GJ�W c a�F y .N Sr iJ b
2.Relinquishe By Ore Time 2. eiv d By Time
9 � oS moo Da a / 6
3.R linquished By Date Time 3.Race i By a Time
Comments
A
O
c DISTRIBUTION: WHITE-Returned to Client with Report: CANARY-Stays with the Sample; PINK•Field Copy

n ' LOT RECEIPT CHECKLIST
STL Sacramento
CLIENT 1J L-e-- _PgqM5 LOG #
LOT# (QUANTIMS ID)� ( � QUOTE# o� O�QT_LOCATION
Initials Date
DATE RECEIVED TIME RECEIVED
DELIVERED BY ❑ FEDEX ❑CA OVERNIGHT ❑ CLIENT
❑ AIRBORNE ❑ GOLDENSTATE DHL
❑ UPS ❑ BAX GLOBAL GO-GETTERS
❑ STL COURIER ❑ COURIERS ON DEMAND
❑OTHER
CUSTODY SEAL STATUS INTACT ❑ BROKEN ❑ N/A
CUSTODY SEAL #(S) 4'L 6(3 a
SHIPPPING CONTAINERS) ❑ STL CLIENT ❑ N/A
TEMPERTURE RECORD (IN°C) IR 1[ 3 ❑ ❑ OTHER
COC #(S) 46
'EMPERATURE BLANK observed: Corrected:
SAMPLE TEMPERATURE
Observed: —13 "ILAverage: 1 S CorrectedAverage'�t
COLLECTOR'S NAME: ❑Verified from COC I Not on COC
pH MEASURED ❑YES ❑ ANOMALY 1] N/A
LABELEDBY.............................................................................:............
LABELSCHECKED BY.:....................I...... ....... .... ............................... .
PEER REVIEW NA
SHORT HOLD TEST NOTIFICATION SAMPLE RECEIVING
WETCHEM N/A
VOA-ENCORES/A
❑ METALS NOTIFIED OF FILTER/PRESERVE VIA VERBAL &EMAIL Z'WA
COMPLETE SHIPMENT RECEIVED IN GOOD CONDITION WITH ❑ N/A
APPROPRIATE TEMPERATURES, CONTAINERS, PRESERVATIVES
❑Clouseau ❑TEMPERATURE EXCEEDED (2 'C—6 00 ' N/A
❑WET ICE ❑ BLUE ICE ❑ GEL PACK ❑ NO COOLINGlAGENTS USED ❑.PM NOTIFIED
Notes:
•1 Acceptable temperature range for State of Wisconsin samples Is<46C. '
LEAVE NO SPACES BLANK. USE"WA"IF NOT APPLICABLE. INITIAL AND DATE ALL"NW ENTRIES. OA-185,3105 EM, Page 1
G5i090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 5 of 470

BIOLOGIC , 8290 ,
Dioxins/Furans
GM090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 6 of 470

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 1 BLACK REDHORSE
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #... : G51090336-001 Work Order #.. .: HJ9X41AC Matrix. . . . . . . . . : BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled...: 08/17/05 Date Received. .: 09/09/05
Prep Date. . ....: 09/19/05 Analysis Date. .: 09/21/05
Prep Batch #... : 5262318
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD ND 0.35 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDD ND 0.35 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 0.54 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 0.54 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.47 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.37 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0.41 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD ND 0.47 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD ND 0.54 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD ND 0.58 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDD 5.5 J pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF ND 0.22 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF ND 0.24 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.37 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.36 pg/g SP7846 8290
Total PeCDF ND 0.37 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.29 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.26 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.29 Pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF ND 0.34 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDF ND 0.43 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF ND 0".27 pg/q SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.34 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF ND 0.34 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 0.50 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 84 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 95 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 84 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 93 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 93 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 88 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 94 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 85 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 89 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) •
1 Estima[al result.Result is less than the reporting limit.
G5i090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 7 of 470

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 2 COMMON CARP
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #.. . : G5I090336-002 Work Order #-- - : HJ90FIAC Matrix. . .. . . . .. : BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled. .. : 08/28/05 Date Received.. : 09/09/05
Prep Date... . ..: 09/19/05 Analysis Date. .: 09/21/05
Prep Batch #...: 5262318 ,
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD ND 0.45 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDD ND 0.45 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 0.76 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 0.76 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.62 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.57 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0.54 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD ND 2.0 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 5.4 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD 10 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDD 40 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF ND 0.47 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF 0.94 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.45 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.43 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF ND 0.99 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.42 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.38 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.42 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF ND 0.48 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDF ND 1.4 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF ND 0.38 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.49 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF ND 0.49 Pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 0.71 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 87 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 96 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 89 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 98 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 101 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3, 7,8-TCDF 90 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 97 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 85 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 8B (40 - 135)
G51090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 8 of 470

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 2 CHANNEL CATFISH
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #. __: GSIO90336-003 Work Order #. ..: HU90KIAC Matrix.. . . . .. ..: BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled... : 08/28/05 Date Received.. : 09/09/05
Prep Date.... .. : 09/19/05 Analysis Date__: 09/21/05
Prep Batch #. . .. 5262318 `
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD ND. 0.29 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDD ND 0.29 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 0.56 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 0.56 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDD ND 0.47 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.64 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0.40 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD ND 0.64 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD ND 1.4 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD ND 1.4 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDD 5.9 U pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF ND 0.24 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF ND 0.55 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3, 7,8-PeCDF ND 0.41 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.39 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF ND 0.56 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.33 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.29 pg/q SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.32 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF ND 0.37 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDF ND 0.74 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF ND 0.50 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.64 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF ND 0.64 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 0.68 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 100 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 101 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 90 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 92 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 89 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 96 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 101 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 86 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 89 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) :
1 Estimated rensIL Result is less than the reporting limit.
G5i090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 9 of 470

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 3 COMMON CARP
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #. .. : G5I090336-004 Work Order #.. . : HJ90LIAC Matrix. . . . . . . .. : EIOLOGIC
Date Sampled. . .: 09/04/05 Date Received. . : 09/09/05
Prep Date. . .. ..: 09/19/05 Analysis Date. .: 09/21/05
Prep Batch #. .. : 5262318
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD ND 0.46 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDD
ND 0.46 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 1.0 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 1.0 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.76 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.92 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0,66 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD ND 1.6 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 4.5 J pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD 9.0 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDD 39 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.59 J,CON pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF 0.63 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.49 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.47 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF ND 1.5 pg/g SWB46 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.49 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3, 6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.44 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.49 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF ND 0.57 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDF ND 1.5 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF ND 0.49 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.62 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF ND 0.62 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 0.77 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 88 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 94 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 90 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 97 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 95 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 93 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 95 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 86 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 88 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) :
! Estimated result.Re tit is less than the reporting limit.
CON Confirmation analysis.
G5i090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 10 of 470

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 5 BLACK REDHORSE
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample,#. ..: G5I090336-005 Work Order #.. . : HU90MIAC Matrix. . . . . . ... : BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled. ..: 09/04/05 Date Received. . : 09/09/05
Prep Date. .. . ..: 09/19/05 Analysis Date..: 09/21/05
Prep Batch #- --: 5262318
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD ND
0.41 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDD ND 0.41 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 0.65 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 0.70 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.66 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD ND 0.53 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0.57 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD ND 0.66 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD ND 0.57 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD ND 0.57 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDD ND 2.6 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.69 ,T,CON pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF 0.69 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.42 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.41 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF ND 0.42 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.34 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.31 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.34 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF NO 0.39 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDF- NO 0.39 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF NO 0.39 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.50 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF ND 0.50 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 0.76 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 93 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 99 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 91 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 100 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 94 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 97 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 103 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 94 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 94 (40 - 135)
NOTE(s) :
J Estimated result.Remit is less than the reposing limit.
CON Confirmation analysis.
G5i090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 11 o1470

QC DATA ASSOCYATION SUMMARY
G5I090336
Sample Preparation and Analysis Control Numbers
ANALYTICAL LEACH PREP
SAMPLE# MATRIX METHOD BATCH # BATCH # MS RUN#
001 BIOLOGIC SWB46 8290 5262318
BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5269438
002 BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5262318
BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5269438
003 BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5262318
BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5269438
004 BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5262318
BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5269438
005 BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5262318
BIOLOGIC SW846 8290 5269438
G5i09O336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 12 of 470

METHOD BLANK. REPORT
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Client Lot #- - • = G5I090336 Work Order #. . . : HKWGRIAA Matrix. . . .. .. . . . BIOLOGIC
MB Lot-Sample #: G51190000-318
Prep Date.. .... : 09/19/05
Analysis Date.. : 09/21/05 Prep Batch #. .. : 5262318
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD ND 0.27 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDD ND 0.27 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 0.43 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDD ND 0.43 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDD ND 1.0 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-RXCDD ND 0.81 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDO NO 0.87 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDD NO 1.0 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-14pCDD ND 0.37 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDD ND 0.37 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDD ND 0.93 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF ND 0.17 pg/g SW846 8290
Total TCDF ND 0.17 pg/g SW846 8290
L,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.32 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ND 0.31 pg/g SW846 8290
Total PeCDF ND 0.32 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.72 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.65 pg/g SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND 0.72 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF ND 0.83 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HxCDF ND 0.83 pg/g SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF ND 0.26 pg/g SW846 8290
1,.2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.34 pg/g SW846 8290
Total HpCDF ND 0.34 pg/g SW846 8290
OCDF ND 0.50 pg/g SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARDS RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 88 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 100 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 89 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 100 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 90 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 91 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 98 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7, 8-HxCDF 77 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6, 7, 8-HpCDF 90 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) -
]alculations are performed before weeding to avoid round-off errors in calculated results.
G51090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 13 of 470

LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE EVALUATION REPORT
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Client Lot #_. . : G51090336 Work Order #. ..: HKWGRIAC Matrix.. . .. . . . . : BIOLOGIC
LCS Lot-Sample#: G5I190000-318
Prep Date. . . ...: 09/19/05 Analysis Date. . : 09/21/05
Prep Batch #.. .: 5262318
Dilution Factor: 1
PERCENT RECOVERY
PARAMETER RECOVERY LIMITS METHOD
2,3,7,8-TCDD 101 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 100 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 88 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxMD 90 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxMD 98 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 91 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
OCDD 92 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF 98 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 97 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 97 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 93 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 100 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HXCDF 106 (SO - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HXCDF 107 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 90 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 90 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
OCDF 89 (50 - 150) SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARD RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 91 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 103 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HXCDD 92 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 96 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 88 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 94 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 102 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDF 77 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 88 (40 - 135)
NOTB(S) :
Calculations are performed before rounding to avoid roandaff errors in calculated results.
Bold print denotes control parameters
G51090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 14 of 470

LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE DATA REPORT
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Client Lot #. . .: G5I090336 Work Order if. .. : HKWGRIAC Matrix. ..... .. .: BIOLOGIC
LCS Lot-Sample#: G5I190000-318
Prep Date. . . ... : 09/19/05 Analysis. Date.. : 09/21/05
Prep Batch #.. . : 5262318
Dilution Factor: 1
SPIKE MEASURED PERCENT
PARAMETER AMOUNT AMOUNT UNITS RECOVERY METHOD
2;3,7,8-TCDD 20.0 20.2 pg/g 101 SW846 8290
I,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 100 99.7 pg/g 100 SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDD 10088.5 Pg/g 88 SW846 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HXCDD 100 90.0 pg/g 90 SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD' 100 97.6 pg/g 98 SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 100 91.2 pg/g 91 SWB46 8290
OCDD 200 184 pg/g 92 SW046 8290
2,3,7,8-TCDF 20.0 19.6 pg/g 98 SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 100 97.4 pg/g 97 SW846 8290
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 100 96.7 pg/g 97 SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 100 93.5 pg/g 93 SW646 8290
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 100 100 pg/g 100 SW846 8290
2,3,4,6,7,8-HXCDF 100 106 pg/g 106 SW846 8290
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDP 100 107 pg/g 107 SW846 B290
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpMF 100 90.3 pg/g 90 SW846 8290
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 100 89.8 pg/g 90 SWS46 8290
OCDF 200 178 pg/g 89 SW846 8290
PERCENT RECOVERY
INTERNAL STANDARD RECOVERY LIMITS
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDD 91 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 103 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,6,7,8-HXCDD 92 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 96 (40 - 135)
13C-OCDD 88 (40 - 135)
13C-2,3,7,8-TCDF 94 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 102 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,7,8-HXCDF 77 (40 - 135)
13C-1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 88 (40 - 135)
NOTE(S) :
Calculations are performed before rounding to avoid round- ff errors in alculated results.
Bold print denotes control parameters
GSW90336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 15 of 470

BIOLOGIC , 8290 , Lipids ,
Percent (8290) ,
G5090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 16 of 470

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 1 BLACK REDHORSE
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #.._: G51090336-001 Work Order #. . .: HJ9X41AA Matrix.. . . .. . . . : BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled... : 08/17/05 Date Received_ . : 09/09/05
Prep Date... . .. : 09/20/05 Analysis Date. .: 09/21/05
Prep Batch #. .. : 5269438
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
Percent Lipids 1.4 SW046 8290
G5i090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 17 of 470

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 2 COMMON CARP
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #.. .: G5I090336-002 Work Order #.. . : HJ90FIAA Matrix- -..- --. . : BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled. ..: 08/28/05 Date Received. . : 09/09/05
Prep Date. ... ..: 09/20/05 Analysis Date..: 09/21/05
Prep Batch #. .. : 5269438
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
Percent Lipids 2-7 %; SW846 8290
G5i090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 18 of 470

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 2 CHANNEL CATFISH
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #-.. : G51090336-003 Work Order #-- -: HJ90K1AA Matrix... .. .. ..: BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled...: 08/28/05 Date Received..: 09/09/05
Prep Date... . .. : 09/20/05 Analysis Date..: 09/21/05
Prep Batch #. .. : 5269438
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
Percent Lipids 4.7 & SW846 8290
M090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 19 of 470

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
Client Sample ID: SITE 3 COMMON CARP
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #.. .. G5I090336-004 Work Order #. ..: HJ90L1AA Matrix. . . . .. . . . : BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled.. .: 09/04/05 Date Received..: 09/09/05
Prep Date. . . .. . : 09/20/05 Analysis Date.. : 09/21/05
Prep Batch #...: 5269438
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
Percent Lipids 3.2 SW846 8290
i
GM090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 20 of 470

Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc
.Client Sample ID: SITE 5 BLACK REMORSE .
Trace Level Organic Compounds
Lot-Sample #- - - : G5I050336-005 Work Order #.. .: HJ90M1AA Matrix..... ....: BIOLOGIC
Date Sampled.. . : 09/04/05 Date Received. -: 09/09/05
Prep Date.. .... : 09/20/05 Analysis Date. .e 09/21/05
Prep Batch #... : 5269438
Dilution Factor: 1
DETECTION
PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT UNITS METHOD
Percent Lipids 4.1 SW846 8290
G51090336 STL Sacramento(916)373-5600 21 of 470

APPENDIX C
Table 6-4. Blue Ridge Paper Canton Mill Fish Fillet Tissue Results.
1990-2004
From: EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc.
December 2004
36

Table 6-4. Blue Ridge Paper Canton Mill Fish Fillet Tissue Analysis Results, 1990-2004(°).
1990 Resultst°t
1991 Results@/ '
Number of Length Number of Length
Station Species Fish .Range(ram) 2,3,7,8-TCDDt°t Station Species Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDDt°t
1 Rock bass 5 151-197 ND(0.15) 1 Rock bass 10 151-190 ND(0:40)
RM 64.5 Rock bass 5 153-213 ND(0.15) RM 64.5 Redbreast sunfish 10 106-178 ND(0.33)
Black redhorse 2 380-383 ND(0.20) Black redhorse 5 358-471 ND(0.35)
2 Redbreast sunfish 5 185-196 1.4 2 Redbreast sunfish 8 154-189 0.87
RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 5 148-201 3.4 RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 8 154-202 0.93
Common carp 1 517 19.7 Common carp 10 491-570 9.7
3 Redbreast sunfish 5 188-203 0.79 3 Redbreast sunfish 10 176-209 ND(0.89)
RM 52.3 Redbreast sunfish 5 191-198 2.6 RM 52.3 Bluegill 6 164-197 ND(0.83)
Common carp 2 489-555 4.2 Common carp 10 408-463 2.4
4A Bluegill 5 178-192 ND(1.2) 4A Largemouth bass 7 313-468 3.0
RM 41.5 Bluegill 5 153-174 ND(0.63) RM 41.5 Black crappie 10 173-216 ND(0.63)
Common carp 1 574 27 Common carp 10 502-688 23
4B Bluegill 5 183-196 0.76 4B Bluegill 5 186-212 ND(0.34)
RM 39.0 Largemouth bass 2 279-400 ND(1.8) RM 39.0 Bluegill 5 190-208 ND(0.62)
Common carp 4 551-638 66 Common carp 10 532-605 40
5 Redbreast sunfish 10 143-223 0.98
RM 16.5 Spotted bass 2 266-368 ND(0.35)
Common carp 2 511-539- 1.7
Total Fish Filleted 57
138

0
Table 6-4 (cont.).
1992 Resultsrol 1993 Resultst°1
Number of Length Number of Length
Station Species Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDDt°t Station Species Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDDW
1 Rock bass 10 147-194 ND(0.085) 1 Rock bass 10 185-208 ND(0.10)
RM 64.5 Redbreast sunfish 10 147-182 ND(0.075 RM 64.5 Redbreast sunfish 5 148-203 ND(0.12)
Black redhorse 6 365-441 1.4 Black redhorse 10 365-410 ND(0.80)
2 Redbreast sunfish 10 180-220 0.72 2 Redbreast sunfish 10 168-206 ND(0.27)
RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 10 178-220 ND(0.38) RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 10 140-191 ND(0.15)
Common carp 10 486-581 9.3 Common carp 10 462620 3.1
3 Redbreast sunfish 10 175-200 ND(0.34) 3 Redbreast sunfish 10 155-210 ND(0.27)
RM 52.3 Redbreast sunfish 10 183-200 ND(0.29) RM 52.3 Redbreast sunfish 7 180-213 ND(0.36)
Common carp 10 438-600 4 Common carp 10 440-576 3.4
4A Black crappie 10 153-232 ND(0.094) 4A Black crappie 10 178-201 ND(0.15)
RM 41.5 Black crappie 10 177-224 ND(0.10) RM 41.5 Black crappie 10 182-204 ND(0.089)
Common carp 10 492-622 29 Common carp 10 525611 19
413 Bluegill 10 182-212 ND(0.23) 4B Largemouth bass 10' 190-310 ND(0.12)
RM 39.0 Largemouth bass 5 215-332 ND(0.19) RM 39.0 Bluegill 10 185-210 ND(0.20)
Common carp 10 558-640 51 Common carp 10 530-644 28
5 Redbreast sunfish 10 175-245 ND(0,38) 5 Redbreast sunfish 6 180-231 ND(0.17)
RM 19.0 Spotted bass 2 256-355 ND(0.30) RM 19.0 Smallmouth bass 9 212-281 ND(0.13)
Smalhnonth buffalo 5 428-510 0.61 Smallmouth buffalo 5 450-550 ND(0.41
Total Fish Filleted 158 162

r`
Table 6-4 (cont.).
1994 Resultsult 1995 Results(c)
Number of Length Number of Length
Station Species Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDD(`) Station Species Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDDt°>
1 Rock bass 6 156-185 ND(0.083) 1 Rock bass 10 162-205 ND(0.10)
RM 64.5 Redbreast sunfish 10 155-197 ND(0.10) RM 64.5 Rock bass 10 150-220 ND(0.26)
Black redhorse 3 367-435 ND(0.096) Black redhorse 7 375-464 ND(0.21)
2 Redbreast sunfish 10 176-206 ND(0.073) 2 Redbreast sunfish 10 152-194 ND(0.20)
RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 10 160-210 ND(0.092) RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 10 161-188 ND(0.16)
Common carp 10 490-590 0.99 Comon carp 10 435-664 1.7
3 Redbreast sunfish 10 148-196 ND(0.15) 3 Redbreast sunfish 10 170-206 ND(0.18)
RM 52.3 Redbreast sunfish 10 158-210 ND(0.074) RM 52.3 Redbreast sunfish 10 154-202 ND(0.20)
Common carp 10 456-565 0.74 Common carp 10 391-571 . 1.2
4A Black crappie 10 203-231 ND(0.085) 4A Largemouth bass 5 281-439 2.0
RM 41.5 Bluegill 10 185-205 ND(0.084) RM 41.5 Bluegill 10 167-199 ND(0.26)
Common carp 10 465-591 3.4 Common carp 10 520-615 5.8
4B Black crappie 10 200-215 ND(0.084) 4B Largemouth bass 9 248-391 0.68
RM 39.0 Black crappie 10 195-220 ND(0.062) RM 39.0 Bluegill 8 158-216 ND(0,34)
Common carp 10 520-635 6.6 Common carp 4 532-626 11.0
5 Redbreast sunfish 6 129-289 ND(0.075) 5 Smallmouth bass 9 280-423 ND(0.11)
RM 19.0 Smallmouth bass 9 234-442 ND(0.11) RM 19.0 Redbreast sunfish 7 163-192 ND(0.15)
Smallmouth buffalo 9 440-520 ND 0.089 Black redhorse 7 440-481 ND(0.45)
Total Fish Filleted 163 156

Table 6-4 (cont.).
1996 Resultst^h 1997 Resultsa)
Number of Length Number of Length
Station Species Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDDt'1 Station Species Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDDW
1 Redbreast sunfish 5 154-185 ND(0.13). 1 Redbreast sunfish 5 144-161 ND(0.11)
RM 64.5 Rack bass 5 160-208 ND(0.085) RM 64.5 Rock bass 5 162-194 ND(0.23)
Black redhorse 5 401-440 ND(0.089) Black redhorse 4 291-424 ND(0.22)
2 Redbreast sunfish 5 179-187 ND(0.10) 2 Redbreast sunfish 5 183-200 ND(0.26)
RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 5 183-191 ND(0.12) RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 5 160-181 ND(0.12)
Common carp 5 543-580 1.5 Common carp 5 506-615 1A
3 Redbreast sunfish 5 184-190 ND(0.13) 3 Redbreast sunfish 5 187-202 ND(0.18)
RM 52.3 Redbreast sunfish 5 165-185 ND(0.13) RM 52.3 Redbreast sunfish 5 164-195 ND(0.18)
Common carp 5 516-630 0.87 Common carp 5 450-505 ND(0.33)
4A Black crappie 5 216-233 ND(0.15) 4A Black crapppie 5 215-231 ND(0.27)
RM.41.5 Black crappie 5 215-229 ND(0.18) RM 41.5 Black crappie 5 220-230 ND(0.10)
Common carp 5 562-632 4.2 Common carp 5 570-655 2.3
Channel catfish 5 418-482 2.0
4B Black crappie 5 223-258 ND(0.11) 4B Black crappie 5 226-241 ND(0.17)
RM 39.0 Largemouth bass 5 278-310 ND(0.13) RM 39.0 Largemouth bass 5 270-360 ND(0.21)
Common carp 5 470-623 4.0 Common carp 5 605-690 11.0
Flathead catfish 5 430-540 0.62
5 Rock bass 4 169-186 ND(0.077) 5 Rock bass 5 143-214 ND(0.15)
RM 19.0 Smallmouth bass 5 315-454 ND(0.12) RM 19.0 Smallmouth bass 5 278-367 ND(0.27)
Smalhnouth buffalo 5 451-555 ND 0.12 Smallmouth buffalo 5 406-525 ND 0.22
Total Fish Filleted 89 Total Fish Filleted 99

r'
Table 6-4 (cont.).
1998 Results(b) 1999 Resultsj°t
Number of Length Number of Length
Station Species Fish Range(ram) 2,3,7,8-TCDDt°l Station Species Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDDW
1 Redbreast sunfish 5 145-176 ND(0.19) 1 Redbreast sunfish 5 141-177 ND(0.21)
RM 64.5 Rock bass 5 158-179 ND(0.29) RM 64.5 Rock bass 5 164-180 ND(0.37)
Black redhorse 5 340-396 ND(0.18) Black redhorse 5 352-427 ND(0.33)
2 Redbreast sunfish 5 164-177 ND(0.20) 2 Redbreast sunfish 5 167-190 ND(0.37)
RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 5 166-193 ND(0.28) RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 5 158-178 ND(0.29)
Common carp 5 551-661 1.3 Common carp 5 544-615 ND(0.27)
3 Redbreast sunfish 5 168-193 ND(0.34) 3 Redbreast sunfish 5 169-189 ND(0.36)
RM 52.3 Redbreast sunfish 5 167-200 ND(0.22) RM 52.3 Redbreast sunfish 5 162-176 ND(037)
Common carp 5 449-550 ND(0.38) Common carp 5 500-591 0.57
4A Black crappie 5 220-240 ND(0.49) 4A Black crappie 5 220-268 ND(0.18)
RM 41.5 Largemouth bass 5 227-330 ND(0.15)- RM 41.5 Black crappie 5 219-244 ND(0.08)
Common carp 5 585-621 1.6 Common carp 5 574-645 0.58
Channel catfish 5 416-458 ND(0.28) Channel catfish 5 425-482 0.83
413 Black crappie 5 233-252 ND(0.15) 4B Black crappie 5 233-244 ND(0.27)
RM 39.0 Largemouth bass 5 259-330 ND(0.17) RM 39.0 Largemouth bass 5 276-305 ND(0.32)
Common carp 5 563-686 9.1 Common carp 5 621-680 4.7
Flathead catfish 5 414-523 ND(0.20) Flathead catfish 5 372-513 ND(0.46)
5 Rock bass 4 155-190 ND(0.11) 5 Rock bass 5 170-203 ND(0.29)
RM 19.0 Smallmouth bass 5 295-365 ND(0.21) RM 19.0 Smallmouth bass 5 297-430 ND(0.19)
Smallmouth buffalo 5 464-537 ND 0.31 Smallmouth buffalo 5 476-565 ND(0.31
Total Fish Filleted 99 Total Fish Filleted 100

Table 6-4 (cont.).
2000 Results("[ 2001 Results[')
Number of Length Number of Length
Station Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDD(°) Station Species Fish Range(nun) 2,3,7,8-TCDD(0
1 Redbreast sunfish 5 137-148 ND(0.48) 1 Black redhorse 5 312-407 ND(0.25)
RM 64.5 Rock bass 5 162-186 ND(0.45) RM 64.5
Black redhorse 5 357-396 ND(0.38)
2 Redbreast sunfish 5 169-176 ND(0.31) 2 Common carp 5 456-555 ND(0.27)
RM 59.0 Redbreast sunfish 5 164-181 ND(0.43) RM 59.0
Common carp 5 505-582 ND(0.42)
3 Redbreast sunfish 5 169-181 ND(0.43) 3 Common carp 5 504-615 ND(0.35)
RM 52.3 Redbreast sunfish 5 196-199 ND(0.32) RM 52.3
Common carp 5 514-569 ND(0.53)
4A Black crappie 5 212-241 ND(0.29) 4A Channel catfish 5 476-612 1.2
RM 41.5 Black crappie 5 220-241 ND(0.24) RM 41.5 Common carp 5 528-668 1.3
Common carp 4 559-604 1.1
Channel catfish 5 435-487 ND(0.70)
4B Black crappie 5 213-231 ND(0.41) 4B Flathead catfish 5 405463 ND(0.29)RM 39.0 Black crappie 5 220-230 ND(0.37) RM 39.0 Common carp 5 654-723 5.6
Common carp 4 593-712 4.4
Flathead catfish 5 407-450 ND(0.42)
5 Rock bass 5 171-198 ND(0.45) 5 Black redhorse 5 437-497 ND(0.26)
RM 19.0 Smallmouth bass 5 209-238 ND(0.31) RM 19.0
Black redhorse 5 427476 ND 0.35
Total Fish Filleted 98 Total Fish Filleted 40

� f �
Table 6-4 (cont.).
2002 Resultst'a 20D3 Results(b)
Number of Length Number of Len Station Species Fish Range(nnn) 2gth
,3,7,8-TCDDt`) Station Species Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDDW
RM 64.5 Black redhorse 5 372-431 ND(0.14) 1 Black redhorse 5 343420 ND(0.20)
RM 64.5
2 Common carp 5 517-548 ND(0.28) 2 Common carp 5 RM 59.0 RM 59.0 512-584 ND(0.18)
RM 52.3 Common carp 5 575-632 ND(0.22) 3 Common carp 5 545-605 ND(0.31)
RM 52.3
4A Common carp 5 523-648 2.2 4A Common carp 5 655-717 3.4
RM 41.5 Channel catfish 5 425475 ND(0.31) RM 41.5 Flathead catfish 5 521-575 ND(DL=0.35)
4B Common carp 5 647-670 6.6 4B Common carp 5 602-745 12.0
RM 39.0 Flathead catfish 5 418-505 ND(0.22) RM 39.0 Flathead catfish 5 511-533
ND(DL=0.20)
5 Black redhorse 5 430489 ND(0.14) 5 Black redhorse
RM 19.0 RM 19.0 5 445-524 ND(DL=0.19)
Total Fish Filleted 40 Total Fish Filleted 40

Table 6-4 (cont.).
2004 Results(O
Number of Length
Station Species Fish Range(mm) 2,3,7,8-TCDDt`)
RM
1 64.5 Black redhorse 5 352-440 ND(0.11)
2 Common carp 5 545-668 ND(0.19)
RM 59.0 Channel catfish 5 369453 ND(0.17)
3 Common carp 5 587-609 ND(0.27)
RM 52.3
4A .Common carp 5 598-655 1.7
RM 41.5 Flathead catfish 5 508-565 ND(0.30)
4B Common carp 5 570-660 1.6
RM 39.0 Channel catfish 5 485-542 ND(0.31)
RM
5 19.0 Black redhorse 5 420480 ND(0.13)
Total Fish Filleted 40
(a) Survey conducted by EA Engineering,Science,and Technology. Analyses conducted by ENSECO Laboratories 1990-1994,Quanterra Laboratories 1995-1999,Severn Trent Laboratories in 2000-
2003.
(b) Survey conducted in August.
(c) Survey conducted in August and September.
(d) Survey conducted in September.
(e) Units =ppt(parts per trillion)or pg/g(picogram per gram)
ND = Non-detectable at the detection limit in parentheses.